# **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)



## Bushmaster

*Re: RAW "ItBegins" Viewership (02/01/12) - no boost*

show was alright. Maybe ppl were pissed about how Jericho's return ended up happening and changed the channel. Punk and Ziggler was amazing, Bryan and Rhodes was very good. The last match sucked a ton though. Guess Cena closing the show doesnt help much does it.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

*Re: RAW "ItBegins" Viewership (02/01/12) - no boost*

those indy hacks cant draw shit
i mean whats that nerd daniel bryan doing on my screen and punk should gtfo *whine* *whine*


----------



## SatanX

*Re: RAW "ItBegins" Viewership (02/01/12) - no boost*

Here we go


----------



## WWE

*Re: RAW "ItBegins" Viewership (02/01/12) - no boost*

Lol and Punk was used in the beginning of the 2nd hour... hmm...

I guess this means....














PUNK AND JERICHO CANT DRAW


----------



## JingieBY

*Re: RAW "ItBegins" Viewership (02/01/12) - no boost*

Cena in a 3-on-3 extremely boring main event. And you wonder why there is a drop in the second hour?


----------



## LuckyCannon>SCSA

*Re: RAW "ItBegins" Viewership (02/01/12) - no boost*

I'd say people tuned out near the end of Jericho's segment and didn't come back for the throwaway mainevent.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

*Re: RAW "ItBegins" Viewership (02/01/12) - no boost*

Somebody please ban these threads. I mean nothing different. Plus this will turn into a 20+ "insert name" can't draw thread.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: RAW "ItBegins" Viewership (02/01/12) - no boost*

Looks at #'s sees they aren't much different from prior week, realizes Ratings Thread is Ratings Thread....


----------



## chronoxiong

*Re: RAW "ItBegins" Viewership (02/01/12) - no boost*

Get ready for another 20 page thread folks.


----------



## Mister Hands

*Re: RAW "ItBegins" Viewership (02/01/12) - no boost*

WWE has this many fans. Let's just accept it, folks.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: RAW "ItBegins" Viewership (02/01/12) - no boost*

What? 










I'm legit stunned here. That's a ridiculously horrible number for all that hype. These quarter hours are going to be interesting as hell when they eventually get here I'm telling you and will no doubt tell the tale of what really happened here because I sure as hell can't explain it. That's got to be disappointing for WWE all things considered.


----------



## JingieBY

*Re: RAW "ItBegins" Viewership (02/01/12) - no boost*

When we'll have the rating breakdowns - for the previous and for this Raw?


----------



## hazuki

*Re: RAW "ItBegins" Viewership (02/01/12) - no boost*


----------



## kokepepsi

*Re: RAW "ItBegins" Viewership (02/01/12) - no boost*

So what is this a 2.9?


----------



## MidlifeCrisis

*Re: RAW "ItBegins" Viewership (02/01/12) - no boost*



Mister Hands said:


> WWE has this many fans. Let's just accept it, folks.


That's the it of it right there. And apparently a good number of those fans are also fans of something else that comes on at 10pm on Monday nights. I honestly don't even know what is on other channels on Monday nights, other than Monday Night Football, which ended it's season on December 26th, so I have no idea what these people are tuning out to watch.


----------



## Brye

Made this the official ratings thread so that we don't need these threads every week.


----------



## Coffey

I'll be honest, I don't think it's the talent. WWE did this to themselves. For *YEARS* Vince McMahon has tried to make the name "WWF" (now WWE) the draw instead of the individuals. You go back and look at the territory days and you had posters with the headliners on them. THIS SATURDAY AT THE MURPHY WRECK, BOBO BRAZIL! Things of that nature. Nowadays it's all WWE Presents: and WWE Monday Night RAW feat. Superstars!

So now that people are losing interest in wrestling, they're losing interest in the WWE name, as a brand, and the whole company declines because of it. There's not a name in the company that can increase the ratings solely because in the end, it's just another SUPERSTAR in WWE.

Personally, I'm not enamored with the people at the top right now. I think Bryan Danielson is a great professional wrestlers but he doesn't fit to me in WWE. I like C.M. Punk as a talker but, much like Roddy Piper, I don't care to watch him wrestle. Give Punk a Piper's Pit and I might care. The Miz? Del Rio? Kane? Cena? I just don't care. So I'm not making this statement because I'm trying to make excuses for smark darlings or anything...I just think it's a different era. And I can't say that I'm sad about it. Put on bad TV you deserve the ratings to go down.

And let's not even talk about how antiquated the Nielson system is.


----------



## GreatKhaliFan666

*Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread***

Everything "cool" about cm punk went out the window once he became a face.

Now he comes across as a corny John cena who doesn't even have the looks to win fans over.

So basically, he's finished.


----------



## nukeinyourhair

1.) The majority of today's fans (little kids) don't stay up past 10PM.

2.) WWE seems to be more concerned with merchandise and PPV sales anyway.


----------



## The-Irish-Phenom11

*Steady numbers , I think this just proves the point that the WWE draws the viewer and not any specific superstar . That being said RAW was atrocious this week . I say better booking , better storylines will gradually pull in more viewers . My girlfriend watches soap operas here in Dublin , Ireland ,for some reason I was doing a Mick Foley impression typing that LOL , my point is she's watched them for years not for the charachters but for the storylines , as with wrestling the same as her soap operas charchters/superstars come and go , but it's the storylines that keep her and the viewers attracted to the show . I know the people in these shows play a huge part , but if your main commentator keeps telling the viewer how shit a person is that's a WORLD CHAMPION , maybe the viewer will start believing it . WWE'S main problem is not the superstars it's the people booking these superstars !!! AND THAT'S FACT *


----------



## A-C-P

Brye said:


> Made this the official ratings thread so that we don't need these threads every week.


Thank GOD!!!!!! Your my new favorite Mod!





Mister Hands said:


> WWE has this many fans. Let's just accept it, folks.


Agreed here, well this is the # of fans that the WWE has that actually watch Raw Live on TV anyways.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Did it really take this long for one ratings thread? Course I'd rather have them banned forever, but props to you Brye. You rock.

Anyway, yeah that's disappointing. But not surprising, these won't grow until after the Rumble. But of course this is all Punk's fault. They should stop showing him on screen for the entire two hours.


----------



## D.M.N.

Thinking about it - was it really a good idea for WWE to embed the links inside the Twitter thing for many weeks on RAW? Let's take a look at the YouTube hit count for each of the videos - this is normally reliable, so no reason why it wouldn't be here:

- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxGkXIphAHw <-- 443,186 views (November 21st - ItBegins2012)
- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KN9FWb0zKm8 <-- 258,083 views (November 28th - second2012)
- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJoZV7lgxL4 <-- 159,956 views (December 5th - lookwithin2012)
- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNdd9W5__TY <-- 121,417 views (December 12th - 2012control)
- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBonwAcDwmc <-- 207,743 views (December 19th - prophetless2012)

The very first, direct, video has 443k views - to put it another way, that's *10% of RAW's audience*. The December 12th video only has 121k, that's *3% of RAW's audience*. Can you create a buzz from 3 percent of your audience?

Also, outside of wrestling circles, Chris Jericho is not a 'buzz' figure. Okay, he has his music career, but Fozzy is not a big band by any stretch of the imagination outside of wrestling and was not a main figure during the Attitude Era, more of a mid-carder (although this is probably a controversial statement).

EDIT - thanks Brye, have edited my opening post slightly so it's clearer for future weeks.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

nukeinyourhair said:


> 1.) The majority of today's fans (little kids) don't stay up past 10PM.


I don't think this is the case. The trend of the 2nd hour being lower than the first only started several months ago. If what you said is true, then the downward rating trend would have started a few years ago.



The-Irish-Phenom11 said:


> *Steady numbers , I think this just proves the point that the WWE draws the viewer and not any specific superstar . That being said RAW was atrocious this week . I say better booking , better storylines will gradually pull in more viewers . My girlfriend watches soap operas here in Dublin , Ireland ,for some reason I was doing a Mick Foley impression typing that LOL , my point is she's watched them for years not for the charachters but for the storylines , as with wrestling the same as her soap operas charchters/superstars come and go , but it's the storylines that keep her and the viewers attracted to the show . I know the people in these shows play a huge part , but if your main commentator keeps telling the viewer how shit a person is that's a WORLD CHAMPION , maybe the viewer will start believing it . WWE'S main problem is not the superstars it's the people booking these superstars !!! AND THAT'S FACT *


Y iz ur post @ll bold? Me cant readz it.


----------



## Therapy

Ok... So who is left to blame? Almost the entire roster has been blamed at this point, Cole was blamed, Football was blamed, Holidays were blamed, uhhh... Is there anything else??? Next logical step is for WWE to realize their product overall sucks leaving their remaining audience looking in empty boxes for a fuck to give.


----------



## Rock316AE

Why you made a ratings thread when it's a different rating and breakdown every week, and then nobody talks about it until the next number comes? Punk fans here are desperate, mods or not.

to the subject, Punk/Ziggler was in the second hour, Jericho was not advertised, so you can say that the concept of the "it begins" was nothing in terms of buzz and interest outside of the internet. football is over next week if I'm not mistaken.


----------



## kokepepsi

The 2nd hour was all punk/ziggler, Itbegins and Kane/Henry/Swagger vs Ryder/Show/Cena.....

How did it drop?


----------



## D17

So they lost viewers in an hour which had a heavily hyped return, that was built for months ending up being Y2J, the WWE title match, and a main event involving Cena (as well as generally big names in Big Show and Henry, as well as Kane being initally promoted in the match). Considering how crap the first hour was too.

Not good...


----------



## Starbuck

Well this week there might actually be a legit claim to blaming it on Punk lol. He was responsible for pulling people in from hour 1 to hour 2. Who knows? Maybe he did and everybody left afterwards. We won't be long finding out when we get the quarter hours lol.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Rock316AE said:


> Why you made a ratings thread when it's a different rating and breakdown every week, and then nobody talks about it until the next number comes? Punk fans here are desperate, mods or not.
> 
> to the subject, Punk/Ziggler was in the second hour, Jericho was not advertised, so you can say that the concept of the "it begins" was nothing in terms of buzz and interest outside of the internet. football is over next week if I'm not mistaken.


:banplz:


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Rock316AE said:


> Why you made a ratings thread when it's a different rating and breakdown every week, and then nobody talks about it until the next number comes? Punk fans here are desperate, mods or not.
> 
> to the subject, Punk/Ziggler was in the second hour, Jericho was not advertised, so you can say that the concept of the "it begins" was nothing in terms of buzz and interest outside of the internet. football is over next week if I'm not mistaken.


What a poor ass excuse. Itbegins should've kept viewers around and you know it. And yes Punk/Ziggler was in the second hour, so was every other main eventer. Cena, Kane, Henry. How the second hour dropped I have no clue. Breakdown will tell more.


----------



## Brye

Rock316AE said:


> Why you made a ratings thread when it's a different rating and breakdown every week, and then nobody talks about it until the next number comes? Punk fans here are desperate, mods or not.
> 
> to the subject, Punk/Ziggler was in the second hour, Jericho was not advertised, so you can say that the concept of the "it begins" was nothing in terms of buzz and interest outside of the internet. football is over next week if I'm not mistaken.


:lmao at thinking this has anything to do with Punk and not the mindless chatter that goes on in these. Instead of a bunch of dreadful threads, now there's just one.


----------



## kokepepsi

To be honest, it's like having one thread to discuss every weekly raw only.
Whatever though.

Breakdowns for last week should come out later tonight


----------



## Rock316AE

Brye said:


> :lmao at thinking this has anything to do with Punk and not the mindless chatter that goes on in these. Instead of a bunch of dreadful threads, now there's just one.


There's one ratings thread anyway, every week, because it's a different number every week, that's like doing a RAW thread and not one for every week.


----------



## A-C-P

Rock316AE said:


> Why you made a ratings thread when it's a different rating and breakdown every week, and then nobody talks about it until the next number comes? Punk fans here are desperate, mods or not.
> 
> to the subject, Punk/Ziggler was in the second hour, Jericho was not advertised, so you can say that the concept of the "it begins" was nothing in terms of buzz and interest outside of the internet. football is over next week if I'm not mistaken.


You know I normally just ignore or just skim through your posts and take them with a grain of salt and move on but....

Seriously Your Blaming Punk fans for getting the Ratings Thread made into one general thread? Really?


----------



## Outlaw316

So last week Cena is in the main event, with Punk wrestling possibly 4 matches in the second hour = a higher rating = Cena is the only draw, screw CM punk
This week, Cena is in the main event, with Punk in a title match and the it begins reveal they hyped for 6 weeks in the second hour = a lower rating = Screw CM punk....????

Seriously though, it only proofs that ppl give more about a promo /segment at set times, then they do about the wrestling. and ppl were expecting the it begins would reveal itself at the END of raw, not somewhere halfway through the 2nd hour, just look at the Raw thread until Jericho's return.

I'm more intrested to see if there was a drop after / during the jericho return. Even i though it was brilliant, it went on too long. 
mainly because it took the crowd that long to boo him. I believe the segment would have been shorter if they started booing him earlier, 
causing littler of the audience at home to get less bored.

Well, just gonna wait till the breakdown, now waiting to see this thread turning into a war like every week.


----------



## Josh Parry

Now that ratings have their own official thread, I'm just popping in to say that since I value the remaining time on my life expectancy, you will _never_ see me post in this thread again, and I believe that anybody who does is just signing their own death (or severe headache) warrant. 

PS: I leave you all with this. Enjoy.


----------



## Belladonna29

Oh noes!
The ratings went down in the second hour and there's no clear scapegoat?
Overwrought ratings thread incoming!!


----------



## Starbuck

Belladonna29 said:


> Oh noes!
> The ratings went down in the second hour and there's no clear scapegoat?
> Overwrought ratings thread incoming!!


Didn't you know? The guy you don't like is the scapegoat lol.


----------



## kokepepsi

from observer


> We will update when the actual rating comes out, but Raw did 4.43 million viewers on Monday night. That is actually slightly down from the 4.47 million viewers the 12/26 show did, so the rating should again be in the 2.9 to 3.0 range.
> 
> The Fiesta Bowl game with Stanford vs. Oklahoma State that went head-to-head did a monster rating with 13.86 million viewers. This coming Monday's Alabama vs. LSU game is expected to beat that by a significant margin so it won't be until 1/16 when Raw will start to get the usual January football ratings bounceback.


----------



## jm99

Belladonna29 said:


> Oh noes!
> The ratings went down in the second hour and there's no clear scapegoat?
> Overwrought ratings thread incoming!!


Well tbh I can think of one clear scapegoat, as much as I like him, its Jericho. Despite the people on here going on about how clever and entertaining his segment was, its pretty easy to see why it could have pissed people off enough that it got them to change the channel, and not come back for the remainder of the show, both smarks who had watched the videos week after week and had expected more than that segment after all the hype, and casuals who in 2012 may not care about Jericho that much anyway and might have just found his segment irritating.


----------



## JingieBY

Is there a clear day for the rating breakdowns? We still don't have one from last week's RAW and they will both be very interesting with this weeks breakdown.


----------



## Starbuck

Well there you go. Somebody posted it above. Football hammered them.


----------



## Rock316AE

> The Fiesta Bowl game with Stanford vs. Oklahoma State that went head-to-head did a monster rating with 13.86 million viewers.


If I remember correctly, JR said on twitter that the Jericho segment was during halftime, so it's a good sign for him.


----------



## Starbuck

Rock316AE said:


> If I remember correctly, JR said on twitter that the Jericho segment was during halftime, so it's a good sign for him.


Maybe that's why they put him in that spot then, so that he would benefit from anybody switching over during the break? Meh. We won't know anything for sure until the quarter hours.


----------



## kokepepsi

Rhodes/Bryan 
Wade Barrett/Santino 
Miz/truth
Diva match
all probably lost combined over 1million viewers

Punk/Ziggler +100k
Jericho+200k
Cena/(no kane)+overrun which was like 5 min(which matters a lot) +500k


----------



## AZtheLegendKiller

Fuck this shit. My little sister can draw, does that make her a professional wrestler? It's the entire product that is reflected in the ratings. Not a couple of guys.


----------



## JingieBY

> 1/2 WWE Monday Night Raw drew a 3.1 cable rating with 4.43 million viewers.


Well, the rating is not that bad.


----------



## Rock316AE

Starbuck said:


> *Maybe that's why they put him in that spot then, so that he would benefit from anybody switching over during the break?* Meh. We won't know anything for sure until the quarter hours.


Likely, I was surprised that they just put him in the middle of the show on a random segment and not in a main slot, so maybe the halftime was the plan, after all the hype to throw him out there is ridiculous, but you don't know with this company anymore...


----------



## Belladonna29

Starbuck said:


> Well there you go. Somebody posted it above. Football hammered them.


No, no, no. As you said. It's the person that I hate. Blaming something or someone other than the person that I hate defeats the purpose of this thread.
So it's Micheal Cole.
Or Lady Gaga.
Or the repetitive judge on the Iron Chef!!
They can't draw! Only blind marks like them.
CM Punk sold out! Jericho didn't talk and his jacket was too shiny!
Ahhhhhhhhh!! :faint:


----------



## kokepepsi

lil update


> 3.1
> 
> Notable because viewership was actually very slightly down from last week's 2.9. What that means is more TVs were tuned to Raw, but less people per TV were watching.
> 
> The show also saw the pattern return where the second hour (3.0) did worse than the first (3.2).


----------



## Werb-Jericho

i watch live via stream and later on Youtube. 

Does anyone on here affect ratings or have a rating TV box?? 

pointless talking about it, sorry!! morons


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

kokepepsi said:


> lil update


How the hell do they know how many people are watching on one TV set? I thought ratings had to do with how many people are watching television as a whole that night.


----------



## SteenIsGod

Well Jericho's return was after the 1 million viewer losing divas match so... Yeah it was to be expected. Are divas matches always in Hour 2? Maybe that's why Hour two always does less now.


----------



## Starbuck

I actually think Jericho's segment will pull in a big number as that's probably what most people watching Raw were watching it for. I suspect the big dip might come after that.


----------



## PunkShoot

wow 3.111111.................................


----------



## Rock316AE

My prediction was 3.2 overall, 3.7 for the "it begins" segment. I was close overall, and if the halftime had a big impact and people were interested in that angle, 3.7 is possible.


----------



## Carcass

Ouch. People didn't seem to interested in It Begins.


----------



## kokepepsi

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> How the hell do they know how many people are watching on one TV set? I thought ratings had to do with how many people are watching television as a whole that night.



I think people with a nielsen box have to input how many people are watching,your age,sex etc when watching using the box/remote whatever.


----------



## Coffey

Honestly, at this point, which this is a huge statement that many will disagree with, but I think the TV shows would be better if they just did away with the wrestling entirely.

Hear me out!

Think about it, what are the weakest parts of the show? Other than bad comedy which does come to mind, I think of commercial breaks mid-match, bad commentary, Divas matches and over-exposure. If there aren't any matches on TV it will do a few different things: It'll help hide the weaknesses of the people that aren't stellar in the ring, especially the women like Kelly Kelly. Michael Cole won't have to do play-by-play. You can have more segments dedicated to getting an angle over. The Pay-Per-View matches would mean more and thus (I would think) more people would pay to watch them. Or, coming in a couple of months, need WWE Network to view them.

What exactly are free TV matches doing for us right now? Killing all the potential fresh matches before a PPV happens? Making us grow tired of our favorites wrestlers relying on the same tried and true spots? Sitting through bad commercial breaks mid-match to get back to bad commentating leading into a fuck finish because they won't change titles on TV?

Maybe I'm crazy but I would rather watch C.M. Punk have his own Piper's Pit style segment than watch him wrestle The Miz, Alberto Del Rio, Jack Swagger or Dolph Ziggler again. I would rather see Kelly Kelly in more segments like she had with The Big Show backstage than her wrestling and doing stinkfaces. I would rather see Michael Cole as a backstage interviewer again, trying to troll wrestlers to their face instead of trolling the entire listening audience for the entire duration of each and every program.

You could still have a main event. The paying audience will want something, for sure. But you can give them dark matches while showing stuff to the TV audience and then giving an actual, legit match at the end of the night that had real consequences and impact on the damn angles that they're trying to portray, instead of a last-minute six man slapped together for no goddamn reason. Old school NWA on TBS Ric Flair title matches like Clash of the Champions.


----------



## TN Punk

When Jericho showed up it was the #1 trending topic on twitter. People on my timeline who don't even watch raw tuned in and was tweeting about it.


----------



## Ray

1) Get some decent commentators. Keep Cole if you love him that much Vince, but for the love of god, EVERY FAN wants to hear Jim Ross on their television sets every Monday nights. The guy is a legend, he knows how to put talent over, he knows how to properly hype a show or a PPV, so why not have him on? Add to the fact that Cole and Lawler have ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE chemistry together, and babble on about things not related to wrestling or whats going on in the match. I'm sure I'm not the only one who changes the channel when Cole and Lawler start arguing about stupid things. Move Cole to SmackDown, honestly, he's decent with Booker and Josh, but terrible with King. Even a three way booth at RAW is fine, just add Ross to it. 

2) Get out of your own bubble Vince. Stop forcing terms like "WWE Universe", "WWE Championship", "Patented Punt", "The Viper". The terms are fine, and I get Wrestlers have their own little gimmicks and nick names that the WWE wants us to get behind, but everytime I watch WWE Programming, it just feels like Cole is reading out a custom made dictionary created by Vince for the sole purpose of forcing and annoying the viewers. It's a little thing, but I'm sure I'm not the only one bothered by it.

3) Book the Diva's better and get Diva's who can actually wrestle, and have the looks. They're honestly not that hard to find, ala Trish, Lita etc. To my knowledge, Kharma wasn't losing viewers when she came out, so you know WWE, it helps if you actually build up some diva's and help us give a shit about them. Keep Kelly on my TV screen if you really want, but please don't have her wrestling. Have her managing or something OTHER then wrestling. Just because Kelly made the Maxim magazine cover, don't spend the next 50 weeks pushing her down our throats.

4) Please have Cena ease of on some of his campy jokes. And have him show weakness like every other wrestler would. It's because of Cena dependency that WWE is failing right now. Now all the viewers don't really give a shit about ANY other wrestler other then him mainly because WWE has put over Cena at the expense of the entire roster. If anything, book him like Orton. The guy's still over, and yet when he has to, he loses clean like to Mark Henry. He shows weakness, and puts over talent like Rhodes and Barrett. Not saying Cena doesn't put over talent, he does in a more indirect way, but the way Orton does is definitely more effective. I've noticed lately Cody Rhodes is becoming a bigger of a threat in the eyes of the audience, with the crowd noticing him more and such, as opposed to lets say, 4 months ago. Cena being the superman has ruined the credibility of the rising star in Wade Barrett, not just Barrett but alot of other people as well. It's because of the audience being Cena dependent that the Cena get's fired angle didn't play out as it should have last year. It's because of Cena being the superman that no one will ever take anyone seriously until the guy retires. And even that's a stretch because if Cena doesn't put over the "next big thing" before he retires, or even gets a career ending injury, the WWE WILL lose tonnes of money. Get the Superhero quality out of Cena, and stop forcing him down our throats, and then the product will be guaranteed better. 

5) Get a decent tag division, and everything else will work itself out. When guys like Miz, Bryan, Show, Kane are out of a main-event feud, or just got out of a high profile one, team them up until it's their turn again to engage in a feud. I've noticed the WWE was noticeably better back whenever they DID have a good tag division rather then when they didn't. The reasoning being is that it keeps some of the main-event superstars busy without them losing any steam until they're ready to go into a high profile feud again. 

Follow these 5 steps, and WWE will be right back on track.


----------



## CP Munk

Y2NoDraw.


----------



## Rock316AE

CP Munk said:


> Y2NoDraw.


Why do you say that?


----------



## Demandred

O god this is an "official thread" now? More trolls in one place I guess.


----------



## CP Munk

Rock316AE said:


> Why do you say that?


Because like punk he's a talentless boring bland talentlesss indyriffic hyprocrit talentless boring bland bland boring boring bland boring boring bland indy hack no draw.


----------



## HHHbkDX

Rock316AE said:


> Why do you say that?


We should be asking you that question, every time you post


----------



## CamillePunk

psx71 said:


> 1) Get some decent commentators. Keep Cole if you love him that much Vince, but for the love of god, EVERY FAN wants to hear Jim Ross on their television sets every Monday nights. The guy is a legend, he knows how to put talent over, he knows how to properly hype a show or a PPV, so why not have him on? Add to the fact that Cole and Lawler have ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE chemistry together, and babble on about things not related to wrestling or whats going on in the match. I'm sure I'm not the only one who changes the channel when Cole and Lawler start arguing about stupid things. Move Cole to SmackDown, honestly, he's decent with Booker and Josh, but terrible with King. Even a three way booth at RAW is fine, just add Ross to it.
> 
> 2) Get out of your own bubble Vince. Stop forcing terms like "WWE Universe", "WWE Championship", "Patented Punt", "The Viper". The terms are fine, and I get Wrestlers have their own little gimmicks and nick names that the WWE wants us to get behind, but everytime I watch WWE Programming, it just feels like Cole is reading out a custom made dictionary created by Vince for the sole purpose of forcing and annoying the viewers. It's a little thing, but I'm sure I'm not the only one bothered by it.
> 
> 3) Book the Diva's better and get Diva's who can actually wrestle, and have the looks. They're honestly not that hard to find, ala Trish, Lita etc. To my knowledge, Kharma wasn't losing viewers when she came out, so you know WWE, it helps if you actually build up some diva's and help us give a shit about them. Keep Kelly on my TV screen if you really want, but please don't have her wrestling. Have her managing or something OTHER then wrestling. Just because Kelly made the Maxim magazine cover, don't spend the next 50 weeks pushing her down our throats.
> 
> 4) Please have Cena ease of on some of his campy jokes. And have him show weakness like every other wrestler would. It's because of Cena dependency that WWE is failing right now. Now all the viewers don't really give a shit about ANY other wrestler other then him mainly because WWE has put over Cena at the expense of the entire roster. If anything, book him like Orton. The guy's still over, and yet when he has to, he loses clean like to Mark Henry. He shows weakness, and puts over talent like Rhodes and Barrett. Not saying Cena doesn't put over talent, he does in a more indirect way, but the way Orton does is definitely more effective. I've noticed lately Cody Rhodes is becoming a bigger of a threat in the eyes of the audience, with the crowd noticing him more and such, as opposed to lets say, 4 months ago. Cena being the superman has ruined the credibility of the rising star in Wade Barrett, not just Barrett but alot of other people as well. It's because of the audience being Cena dependent that the Cena get's fired angle didn't play out as it should have last year. It's because of Cena being the superman that no one will ever take anyone seriously until the guy retires. And even that's a stretch because if Cena doesn't put over the "next big thing" before he retires, or even gets a career ending injury, the WWE WILL lose tonnes of money. Get the Superhero quality out of Cena, and stop forcing him down our throats, and then the product will be guaranteed better.
> 
> 5) Get a decent tag division, and everything else will work itself out. When guys like Miz, Bryan, Show, Kane are out of a main-event feud, or just got out of a high profile one, team them up until it's their turn again to engage in a feud. I've noticed the WWE was noticeably better back whenever they DID have a good tag division rather then when they didn't. The reasoning being is that it keeps some of the main-event superstars busy without them losing any steam until they're ready to go into a high profile feud again.
> 
> Follow these 5 steps, and WWE will be right back on track.


lol I love these posts. Why didn't they think of that?!


----------



## Mister Hands

Walk-In said:


> Honestly, at this point, which this is a huge statement that many will disagree with, but I think the TV shows would be better if they just did away with the wrestling entirely.
> 
> Hear me out!
> 
> Think about it, what are the weakest parts of the show? Other than bad comedy which does come to mind, I think of commercial breaks mid-match, bad commentary, Divas matches and over-exposure. If there aren't any matches on TV it will do a few different things: It'll help hide the weaknesses of the people that aren't stellar in the ring, especially the women like Kelly Kelly. Michael Cole won't have to do play-by-play. You can have more segments dedicated to getting an angle over. The Pay-Per-View matches would mean more and thus (I would think) more people would pay to watch them. Or, coming in a couple of months, need WWE Network to view them.
> 
> What exactly are free TV matches doing for us right now? Killing all the potential fresh matches before a PPV happens? Making us grow tired of our favorites wrestlers relying on the same tried and true spots? Sitting through bad commercial breaks mid-match to get back to bad commentating leading into a fuck finish because they won't change titles on TV?
> 
> Maybe I'm crazy but I would rather watch C.M. Punk have his own Piper's Pit style segment than watch him wrestle The Miz, Alberto Del Rio, Jack Swagger or Dolph Ziggler again. I would rather see Kelly Kelly in more segments like she had with The Big Show backstage than her wrestling and doing stinkfaces. I would rather see Michael Cole as a backstage interviewer again, trying to troll wrestlers to their face instead of trolling the entire listening audience for the entire duration of each and every program.
> 
> You could still have a main event. The paying audience will want something, for sure. But you can give them dark matches while showing stuff to the TV audience and then giving an actual, legit match at the end of the night that had real consequences and impact on the damn angles that they're trying to portray, instead of a last-minute six man slapped together for no goddamn reason. Old school NWA on TBS Ric Flair title matches like Clash of the Champions.


_Maybe_ you're crazy? If they gave the slightest thought to fixing the "commercial breaks mid-match, bad commentary, Divas matches and over-exposure", and nothing changed, then maybe you'd have a point. But jettisoning wrestling from a wrestling show to improve ratings is cutting off your nose to spite your face, and then eating the nose.


----------



## Rock316AE

CP Munk said:


> Because like punk he's a talentless boring bland talentlesss indyriffic hyprocrit talentless boring bland bland boring boring bland boring boring bland indy hack no draw.


But he's not, and he wasn't advertised. if you want to troll, do it in a believable way.


----------



## CP Munk

Rock316AE said:


> But he's not, and he wasn't advertised. if you want to troll, do it in a believable way.


Please. Sif you didnt know it was Jerischmo straightaway.


----------



## Stone Hot

once football season is over ratings will go back the way they were its no Jericho and Punks fault


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Rock316AE said:


> if you want to troll, do it in a believable way.


Listen to the master.


----------



## Astitude

Two things - 

1) Put Cena in a good storyline, he will draw. I think having him in a tag team match every week and the filler storyline with kane is hurting his drawing ability and thats not a good thing.

2) Chris jericho will never draw, forget it. Keep him away from punk.


----------



## Coffey

Mister Hands said:


> _Maybe_ you're crazy? If they gave the slightest thought to fixing the "commercial breaks mid-match, bad commentary, Divas matches and over-exposure", and nothing changed, then maybe you'd have a point. But jettisoning wrestling from a wrestling show to improve ratings is cutting off your nose to spite your face, and then eating the nose.


I'm not so sure, my good man. It's a different era and with WWE Network on the (very close) horizon, and ratings/PPV buys dwindling, they obviously need to take their product in a new direction.

What that direction should be, or will be, is anyone's guess...but I was trying to "think outside the box" so to speak and recommend a different take on things. Sure, we all love professional wrestling. That's why we're here. However, contrary to popular belief, a lot of people that watch wrestling on TV aren't professional wrestling fans. They're WWE fans. Just like they could be Madmen or Breaking Bad or Hawaii 5-0 fans. It's a television show to them. Just like when WWE comes to your city, you will get people that buy tickets solely because it's something "to do in town" not because everyone there reads about pro-wrestling on-line, or knows wrestlers real names, or reads the gossip about who Randy Orton is porking backstage or what pills RVD is on this week.

Also, not to downplay how drastic it would certainly be, but Vince McMahon himself doesn't think it's a "wrestling show." It's an ENTERTAINMENT show. And with his ego and wanting to be accepted into the mainstream as something other than a carny wrestling promoter, this is right up his alley.

And it wouldn't just be to improve ratings. It would be to improve ratings, increase PPV buys, hopefully open more people to WWE Network, stroke Vince's ego and give a new direction/feel to a stagnant product.

Which is to say, a helluva lot better of a discussion than "lol Punk/Jericho can't draw, you marks."


----------



## Astitude

What was last week's quarter hour breakdown?


----------



## Mr Eagles

*With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*

I thought PG was here to stay for a long ass time, but with ratings slowly, but gradually declining over long term, do you see them doing any drastic changes? Another 6 months and I bet ratings will be in the 2.6-2.7 range. Let me make it clear that I don't care at all about ratings because they don't affect the fans whatsoever, but they do affect WWE.


----------



## Tedious

> The first Raw SuperShow of 2012 garnered a 3.1 cable rating, with 4,438,000 viewers. Viewership, however, declined during the second hour for the eighth time in nine weeks as the first hour scored a 3.2 before dropping 6% to 3.02 in the second.


So it was 3.2 then 3.02


----------



## SportsFan4Life

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*

To quote Miz "REALLY!?!??!!?......"


----------



## Tedious

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*

no


----------



## Raven73

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*

Nope, cause WWE is making plenty of money in other ways

The number of corporate sponsors they turnover is wicked


----------



## Sids_chickenleg

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*

Thing is, you don't need to have the Attitude era back. You can still do PG and have good content. WCW was always PG and had great stuff.


----------



## lewisvee

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*

really its not a major effect on the WWE, they still make money off the kids, i would love and i mean love the attitude era back giving wrestlers more off a freedom on what they can say,do,blood etc but mcmahon is making alot off money, i dont even think he cares about us to be honest


----------



## Mr Eagles

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*



Sids_chickenleg said:


> Thing is, you don't need to have the Attitude era back. You can still do PG and have good content. WCW was always PG and had great stuff.


Obviously, but if they promote that the attitude era or something else is back, then they will get an immediate rise in ratings.


----------



## dissident

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*

attitude is still no good with lackluster storylines. Just having random hardcore matches or sex scenes for no reason with no thought given as to 'why' they are happening is just as irritating as the way they just throw together matches now.


----------



## lic05

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*

Why can't you guys let the past go? The Attitude Era was good, but it has been over from a very long time. *Move the ***k on.*


----------



## Dice Darwin

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*

I hope not. Attitude Era had terrible booking, and WWE doesn't have to talent to hide it like they did then. They would end up looking like TNA.


----------



## Marv95

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*

They've been declining since 2002 when Raw was getting the same ratings as it is now. Unless they reach a point lower or reach iMPACT levels ratings won't make them do anything drastic. Now record low attendance, more cancelled house shows and buyrates on top of 2.0 ratings might.


----------



## SteenIsGod

Has the Diva's match been in the 2nd hour recent weeks?


----------



## King_Kool-Aid™

They need to show some titties. That's whats keepin WWE from reaching that 4.0.


----------



## jonoaries

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*



lic05 said:


> *Why can't you guys let the past go?* The Attitude Era was good, but it has been over from a very long time. *Move the ***k on.*


^THIS.
*THE ATTITUDE ERA IS FUCKING OVER!!!!!*


----------



## SteenIsGod

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*

2010 was the most profitable year in WWE history. Guess that answers your question.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Walk-In said:


> I'm not so sure, my good man. It's a different era and with WWE Network on the (very close) horizon, and ratings/PPV buys dwindling, they obviously need to take their product in a new direction.
> 
> What that direction should be, or will be, is anyone's guess...but I was trying to "think outside the box" so to speak and recommend a different take on things. Sure, we all love professional wrestling. That's why we're here. However, contrary to popular belief, a lot of people that watch wrestling on TV aren't professional wrestling fans. They're WWE fans. Just like they could be Madmen or Breaking Bad or Hawaii 5-0 fans. It's a television show to them. Just like when WWE comes to your city, you will get people that buy tickets solely because it's something "to do in town" not because everyone there reads about pro-wrestling on-line, or knows wrestlers real names, or reads the gossip about who Randy Orton is porking backstage or what pills RVD is on this week.
> 
> Also, not to downplay how drastic it would certainly be, but Vince McMahon himself doesn't think it's a "wrestling show." It's an ENTERTAINMENT show. And with his ego and wanting to be accepted into the mainstream as something other than a carny wrestling promoter, this is right up his alley.
> 
> And it wouldn't just be to improve ratings. It would be to improve ratings, increase PPV buys, hopefully open more people to WWE Network, stroke Vince's ego and give a new direction/feel to a stagnant product.
> 
> Which is to say, a helluva lot better of a discussion than "lol Punk/Jericho can't draw, you marks."


All that entertainment stuff exists to sell matches. That's it. That's the sole reason it's there. To make you want to watch match X or PPV Y. WWE is absolutely awful at this. But just because they're awful at it doesn't mean you completely throw out TV matches. There's no reason to believe that today's audience won't care about TV matches that are built up properly. People don't care because the outcome of matches doesn't matter in today's product. There's no real logic to anything. Nobody's properly pushed or booked, so why watch matches? I'm baffled that, when faced with this, your answer is not that WWE should get better at booking, but that they should throw out TV matches altogether.

It's like being a coach and having a bad quarterback. Instead of trying to get a better quarterback, you just say "Fuck it, you obviously can't pass in this league anymore so let's just never throw the ball again"


----------



## SpeedStick

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*

WWE need to go back to Saturday morning, hell SpongeBod is getting solid 6 million views on saturday mornings


----------



## Marv95

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*



SteenIsGod said:


> 2010 was the most profitable year in WWE history. Guess that answers your question.


Actually it was 2000. And domestically 2010 was not as good as people think.


----------



## Apokolips

Stop saying CM Punk cant draw, Jericho cant draw etc the overall product just sucks, I find myself switching off half way threw, Not one person can affect the ratings it's VINCE & HIS BOOKING and guess what, Were gonna have the same convo every week because it's not getting better anytime soon.


----------



## Fabregas

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*

I see them attempting it out of desperation once ratings get even lower.


----------



## BreakTheWallsDown2

*Ratings DON'T matter to us*

Why are we all interested in ratings again? Do any of us work for WWE or benefit from these higher ratings? Do more people watching wrestling make or break your enjoyment of the product? Do high ratings while your favorite superstar is champion make him some sort of a better wrestler? I seriously don't see why ANYONE cares about this. If I liked watching two and a half men I sure as hell wouldn't be concerned about the ratings it gets every week, I would just care about the show itself. What people seem to be doing is drawing a correlation between the quality of the show in THEIR opinion, to the ratings. You think what makes a good show in a lot of your opinions is what will make more people watch? I bet not. 



Bottom line, *WRESTLING IS NOT "COOL" ANYMORE*. It has NOTHING to do with the characters or who is champion. Being champion doesn't mean a SINGLE thing to ratings. All it means is youre in the last match and you carry around your belt. The problem? WWE has gathered a strong following from kids and they are not a reliable demographic. These last few years have had so many childish story lines that new people wouldn't dare to tune into this "new era" simply because wrestling tarnished it's name. So where does that leave those old hardcore wrestling fans who want to see two men beat the crap out of each other in a serious environment? That answer is UFC. WWE lost that demographic to UFC and is now seen as a scripted, little brother to it. WWE claims it doesn't compete with UFC, of course it doesn't, it can't. But they wanted that, they wanted that "new younger demographic", and they got it. But they will sure as hell not be able to get back older fans for a very, VERY long time. 

Unfortunately, simply changing to an edgier product won't help things. In fact, it might hurt things. Children will stop watching because their parents won't let them, and wrestling will still be 2nd to UFC if they try to appeal to an older demographic. WWE is content with their loyal fanbase of 4 million and that 2-3% (50-100k) that buy the PPV's. 

WWE is more of a circus act than anything else now-a-days. But honestly that's what WWE wanted. More money is made off of merchandise. They can sell those silly Cena shirts for like 30 bucks each to every kid, plus an additional 60 or so for the ticket. Ratings and demographics are just a tool for what ads should be shown and how much the station makes off of them. Sure WWE would like to have more people watching their product, but this isn't really where the money comes from. WWE has a strong enough amount of viewers that jumping between a 3.0 and 4.0 is meaningless. And by any great miracle that WWE does pull in older and new fans, they won't be spending 40-60 bucks on these horrid makeshift PPV's. Watch the show and enjoy it for what it is. I'm sure WWE pays qualified people to look into these things, not us.

1)Ratings should not matter to us. Your favorite wrestler being a draw or not does not make you a better fan nor does it make the person you like better than other people's favorite wrestlers. People always try to battle other people to see whos favorite is better.

2)Ratings to the WWE matters somewhat, but little can be done to improve it. And what can be done doesn't involve storyline or character changes. Most of the money is made on Merch/PPV purchases/Tickets


----------



## Apokolips

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*

They do if they wanna stay on the network!


----------



## Raven73

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*

B/C men measure things by results. We want a measurable verification.

It's the same reason we watch other sports... we get an end score and we go home somewhat satisfied


Whether its merchandise or ratings we need objective evidence of something successful


----------



## Coffey

SarcasmoBlaster said:


> All that entertainment stuff exists to sell matches. That's it. That's the sole reason it's there. To make you want to watch match X or PPV Y. WWE is absolutely awful at this. But just because they're awful at it doesn't mean you completely throw out TV matches. There's no reason to believe that today's audience won't care about TV matches that are built up properly. People don't care because the outcome of matches doesn't matter in today's product. There's no real logic to anything. Nobody's properly pushed or booked, so why watch matches? I'm baffled that, when faced with this, your answer is not that WWE should get better at booking, but that they should throw out TV matches altogether.


It's more so I *know* WWE can't "fix it", so I'm suggesting an alternative, which might actually get people to care about more than 2 of their 13 Pay-Per-Views a year, too. When was the last time most of the people on this very wrestling forum, a forum dedicated to wrestling fans, actually paid for and watched a WWE PPV? Because if the PPV threads are any indication, it's a lot of people willing to watch if it's free and that's about it.

The key word is "sell." Trying to sell matches. Free TV matches don't need to be sold, because there's nothing to sell. Thus, WWE doesn't seem to care about them Hence why you get stuff like the slapped together 6-man tag on Monday. But had we not seen any of those guys wrestle on TV for awhile, and it was built-up over time with them all hating each other, or whatever, suddenly there's some interest, maybe some drama. That soap opera stuff definitely matters. It's why Austin Vs. McMahon and the nWo worked. It's why "This is your life" got such high ratings. It's not about the TV matches.


----------



## 777

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*

Better ratings equals more money from advertisers.


----------



## BreakTheWallsDown2

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*



Raven73 said:


> B/C men measure things by results. We want a measurable verification.
> 
> It's the same reason we watch other sports... we get an end score and we go home somewhat satisfied
> 
> 
> Whether its merchandise or ratings we need objective evidence of something successful


If you watch a sport, do you care more if your team wins, or what the ratings are?


----------



## Coffey

The SHOWDOWN matters, obviously. The culmination of the story. You build to that. You use the TV to get to that. That's my idea. Instead they use the TV to tread water and then the PPV comes and still nothing was built-up, there's no drama and wins and losses don't matter.

Basically do what UFC does. Because they're doing pro-wrestling better than wrestling is right now. And their 1 million buy PPVs back that up. UFC gets more interest from one push at a weigh-in than WWE gets from six months of TV.

*EDIT:* Every single match should matter. EVERY match. Even the curtain jerk should have a story. Two guys should never just be slapped together. Especially when it's just "well, this guy is a good guy and that guy is a bad guy, so fuck it, you got seven minutes." THAT is what they need to get away from. THAT is a big reason why they constantly break continuity and why WWE as a whole is filled with complete apathy.


----------



## Killswitch Stunner

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*

WWE should care, fans should not. Its so stupid when fans obsess over things like ratings.


----------



## Raven73

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*



BreakTheWallsDown2 said:


> If you watch a sport, do you care more if your team wins, or what the ratings are?


I personally prefer my team winning, but then again. I'm... sane

Wrestling isn't real so ratings/merchandise/gates are the best measurements for success


----------



## SpeedStick

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*

Rating don't matter right now but how is the USA network going to feel in 2014?


----------



## chronoxiong

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*










They need to care about the ratings in order to see if people are enjoying the product. Also, that way the networks would want them to stay on. Look what happened to WCW Monday Nitro. The ratings sucked balls and no one wanted to keep the show on the air and then it got bought out. I'm sure if RAW gets ratings that are in the low 2.0s, it will be mayhem and the WWE will have a tough time finding a network to be on.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*

People complaining about people complaining about ratings is silly.


----------



## Apokolips

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*

Exacally if they lose ratings, They potentially lose advertisers, May get thrown off the network you can argue the merchandise sales all you want but without good exposure merc sales will fall.


----------



## BreakTheWallsDown2

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*

I think a lot of people are missing the point

1)*Ratings should not matter to us. Your favorite wrestler being a draw or not does not make you a better fan nor does it make the person you like better than other people's favorite wrestlers. People always try to battle other people to see whos favorite is better.*

2)*Ratings to the WWE matters somewhat, but little can be done to improve it. And what can be done doesn't involve storyline or character changes. Most of the money is made on Merch/PPV purchases/Tickets*


----------



## Killswitch Stunner

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*

People complaining about people complaining about people complaining about ratings is even sillier.


----------



## kokepepsi

Last Week Segment Breakdown
Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> *Raw on 12/26 *did a 2.93 rating and 4.47 million viewers. The rating was almost identical with the prior week but there were 180,000 more viewers on a night when overall television viewership was down 7.7%, although that’s misleading because all the networks were in reruns. The show was 6th for the night on cable. The Atlanta Falcons vs. New Orleans Saints game where Drew Brees set the all-time single season passing yardage record did a 10.60 rating and 15.64 million viewers.
> 
> The big news is the curse of the second hour losing audience from the first hour ended. The reason is more that the first hour didn’t do well, then the second hour did well. In particular, Raw of late has been starting with a strong first quarter, but the C.M. Punk/John Laurinaitis first quarter did a only a 2.94, and the usual big drop didn’t happen. There were a significant amount of usual Raw viewers who either didn’t bother to watch the first quarter and turn it off like usual, or did watch it but turned it off in a minute.
> 
> The show did a 2.3 in Males 12-17 (down 18% from last week), 2.6 in Males 18-49 (up 4%), 1.1 in Females 12-17 (up 38%) and 1.2 in Females 18-49 (down 8%). Male viewership was 67.1% of total viewers.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, Booker T vs. Cody Rhodes lost 149,000 viewers. Backstage stuff with John Cena and Zack Ryder, Big Show and Kelly Kelly, Laurinaitis, Show and David Otunga and Jack Swagger, Dolph Ziggler, Vickie Guerrero and Mark Henry gained 78,000 viewers. Ryder & Eve Torres vs. Tyson Kidd & Natalya and a Cena interview lost 67,000 viewers. Cena vs. The Miz and post-match R-Truth attack gained 325,000 viewers, which is below usual but better than in some recent weeks. Big Show vs. David Otunga with one hand tied behind his back and an Alberto Del Rio interview with the Bellas gained 34,000 viewers. Punk vs. Swagger lost 367,000 viewers. Punk vs. Ziggler gained 172,000 viewers to a 2.91 main event average. The Cena/Kane overrun gained 543,000 viewers to a do a 3.26. As far as the demo changes with Cena and Kane out last, Male teens went from 2.8 to 3.1, Men 18-49 went from 2.8 to 3.2, Women teens went from 1.0 to 1.3 and Women 18-49 stayed at 1.0.


----------



## BlakeGriffinFan32

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*

I care more about being entertained than I care about the ratings.


----------



## Mr Premium

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*

Let's face it, this issue only gets brought up because of the IWC's ultra blind/deluded assessment of CM Punk. 

We never talk much about ratings before he got title.


----------



## Rock316AE

Punk did terrible as usual, So it was a good move to put the Kane promo in the main event segment.


----------



## Stax Classic

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*

Perceived penis size for their favorite wrestler. Ratings means he's better!


----------



## rkomarkorton

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*



Mr Premium said:


> Let's face it, this issue only gets brought up because of the IWC's ultra blind/deluded assessment of CM Punk.
> 
> We never talk much about ratings before he got title.


you're wrong..........the same people who bash cena and orton when the ratings are low are the same ones quick to defend punk

"we should judge the overall product not just one superstar"
"give punk more time it took austin two years"
"punk is feuding with heels nobody cares about"

shut up already......fact is the guy isnt a draw


----------



## Astitude

kokepepsi said:


> Last Week Segment Breakdown
> Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter


WTF? Punk/John Laurinaitis Opener did only a 2.94? Fuck somethings is not working with punk & the casual fans imo.


----------



## itssoeasy23

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*



BlakeGriffinFan32 said:


> I care more about being entertained than I care about the ratings.


Thank God I'm not the only one who makes sense.

On topic: Over the last few weeks the only thing ratings have been used for is to prove who is more over, or a draw. It's been mostly a fuel to use for people to bash CM Punk, which is stupid. 

The rating's have been in consistent 3's ever since the Benoit double murder/suicide, and they don't seem to going back up to 4's unless something big happens, or UFC end's. 

Merchandise, house show attendence, PPV numbers are still relatively strong, so the ratings may be lower than they were a decade ago, but WWE is still very profitable elsewhere. They there most profitable year in 2010, so it's not like their going out of business anytime soon. I think if the rating's ever get to consistent 2's, then there will probably be something done to raise rating,s but until then the ratings will probably remain in the mid-low 3's.


----------



## Astitude

Rock316AE said:


> Punk did terrible as usual, So it was a good move to put the Kane promo in the main event segment.


Why dont we talk about Survivor Series Domestic buyrate?


----------



## Coffey

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*



Apokolips said:


> They do if they wanna stay on the network!












I want to post an lengthy, in-depth reply to this thread, but I need to catch-up first. But basically, as it stands right now, the thing that seems to matter most to Vince McMahon is making Bonnie Hammer happy, so...


----------



## chronoxiong

I really don't understand why Punk's segments are losing viewers! There must be a logical reason instead of "Punk can't draw" responses.:cuss:


----------



## HitItLikeABongoDru

Astitude said:


> Why dont we talk about Survivor Series Domestic buyrate?


Probably because this is the Raw ratings thread


----------



## King_Kool-Aid™

I think he should just be shoved further down the casuals throats. They'll learn to love him eventually. Just like they did with Cena, HHH and Orton.


----------



## Azuran

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*



Mr Premium said:


> Let's face it, this issue only gets brought up because of the IWC's ultra blind/deluded assessment of CM Punk.
> 
> We never talk much about ratings before he got title.


Why are you surprised? It's a known fact that CM Punk fans are in denial. Hell, they keep buying his "best wrestler in the world" gig for some reason. If CM Punk sits in the ring and does nothing else, most people here would probably call it the best thing in the world.

Gotta love how rating don't matter when IWC darlings like Punk and Bryan are champions.


----------



## Rock316AE

PWTorch:


> WWE Raw on Monday, January 2, 2012 scored a 3.10 rating, up from a 2.93 rating the previous two weeks to close 2011. It was the first Raw above the 3.00 mark since the end of November.
> 
> Despite the encouraging rating, Raw's viewership was not as encouraging. Raw averaged 4.44 million viewers, down four percent from an average of 4.46 million viewers for the day-after-Christmas edition last week.
> 
> Most concerning was Raw's Fall 2011 problem resurfacing with viewership declining in the second hour despite a C.M. Punk WWE Title match, 1-2-12 reveal, and main event handicap match featuring John Cena.
> 
> The first hour averaged 4.53 million viewers and the second hour declined to an average of 4.34 million viewers, which was 250,000 viewers below the second hour average last week.
> 
> -- Looking at the demographic ratings, Raw saw week-to-week increases in every demographic except males 12-17, which scored the second-lowest rating of the last four months.
> 
> The key increases were in adult viewers. *Among males 18-49 & males 18-34, Raw scored its highest rating in six weeks.*
> 
> -- Last year, on Jan. 3, 2011 against ESPN's BCS bowl coverage, Raw averaged 4.49 million viewers with the reverse hourly pattern compared to this year's Week 1. Last year's first hour averaged 4.34 million viewers (identical to 2012 second hour) and the second hour averaged 4.66 million viewers.
> 
> Caldwell's Analysis: A mixed bag start to 2012 with the tough competition affecting viewership. It's not time hit the panic button yet, but WWE will probably start pushing for The Rock to become re-involved in the show somehow, even if he's not appearing in-person. Next week, Raw will be up against the BCS National Title game, so don't look for any viewership improvement until *potentially* two weeks from now depending on whether they can create momentum next week.


----------



## Azuran

kokepepsi said:


> Last Week Segment Breakdown
> Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter


LOL. I won't even bother saying the same thing over and over again. PUNK NEEDS TO LOSE THE BELT NOW!


----------



## Rock316AE

Azuran said:


> LOL. I won't even bother saying the same thing over and over again. PUNK NEEDS TO LOSE THE BELT NOW!


Nah, it's only a matter of time anyway, he's going to the B show after WM...hopefully Orton is coming back to RAW.


----------



## Art13

It's unusual how the opinions of the live audience seem to contradict those of the home audience...

While the 10,000+ people in the audience are giving Punk a huge pop, chanting his name and wearing his merch, the 10,000 watching at home don't seem all that interested in him. It would be interesting to see what would happen if they changed the participants of the Nielsen sample audience.


----------



## Yankees4Life

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*

No, I get pissed because there always dirtsheets about the WWE pissed about their ratings. Why ? They couldn't care less about them. I don't why would they get pissed, for. That's whats annoying.


----------



## Apokolips

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*



Mr Premium said:


> Let's face it, this issue only gets brought up because of the IWC's ultra blind/deluded assessment of CM Punk.
> 
> We never talk much about ratings before he got title.


Ummmmm people were talking about ratings way long before Punk's Rise, So dont play that card it's people like you who give us Punk fans a bad name.


----------



## HitItLikeABongoDru

Art13 said:


> It's unusual how the opinions of the live audience seem to contradict those of the home audience...
> 
> While the 10,000+ people in the audience are giving Punk a huge pop, chanting his name and wearing his merch, the 10,000 watching at home don't seem all that interested in him. It would be interesting to see what would happen if they changed the participants of the Nielsen sample audience.


The Nielsen sample is statistically significant so in theory it wouldn't make any difference


----------



## WWE

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*

well it does to the wwe and their network. A LOT.


----------



## Azuran

Rock316AE said:


> Nah, it's only a matter of time anyway, he's going to the B show after WM...hopefully Orton is coming back to RAW.


Punk and Daniel Bryan in the same show. Holy crap, for all we know, there probably won't be a B-show come next year.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*

Vince disagree, yes, hard to believe Punk marks.


777 said:


> Better ratings equals more money from advertisers.


This.


----------



## Raven73

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*

Cena and Merchandise

Rock and ratings and gates

Austin and ratings


Common theme? It's how they're measured. When arguments come up, the numbers don't lie.


----------



## Mr Premium

Art13 said:


> It's unusual how the opinions of the live audience seem to contradict those of the home audience...
> 
> While the 10,000+ people in the audience are giving Punk a huge pop, chanting his name and wearing his merch, the 10,000 watching at home don't seem all that interested in him. It would be interesting to see what would happen if they changed the participants of the Nielsen sample audience.


Cena and Orton still gets louder reactions than him whether its cheers or boos.


----------



## BreakTheWallsDown2

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*

Its amazing how many people don't read the post and just glanced at the title.

I used to think like a lot of you and thought ratings measured how good of a wrestler someone was. Well they've pretty much made the whole roster champion in the last 2 years and NOTHING has changed. Casuals dont just watch when specific people are on, they think "Oh hey wrestling on Im going to go watch", not "Hey John Cena is in the main event, Ill tune in tonight for sure". Its just a neverending storyline that you tune into when the current plot interests you or if you have time, but the characters are all interchangeable.


----------



## Striker

This thread has so much face palm. Ratings are bad because:

1. WWE has spent the better part of 5 years, only pushing Cena and Orton. All the main eventers in WWE now were barely known before 2010.

2. Booking is terrible.

3. Wrestling isn't as cool now and most kids find out wrestling is scripted at a MUCH younger age now.

4. Our WWE champion is feuding with Ziggler. A guy who just lost the US title to Ryder and gets barely any reaction. Before this Punk feuded with Del Rio. Even worse.

There is a ton of factors to ratings. Not just " LOL Punk sawks! Rock is betta!! Bring back blood and cursing!!!"


----------



## WWE

Lol wherever Punk is being put, ratings are droppin'


----------



## Brye

Good to know the breakdowns have come in to tell everyone what they enjoyed and disliked about last week.

Hopefully this explains why these are only getting one thread now.


----------



## Yankees4Life

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter to us*

THIS IS WHAT THIS GUY IS TALKING ABOUT http://a-listsports.blogspot.com/2011/12/wwe-doesnt-care-about-ratings.html


----------



## Boss P

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*

There's no good reason for people in their late teens or early 20s to be clamoring for the past. If anything, we should be the first ones with the best ideas. WF should be a forum where fans brainstorm to talk about what should be different going into the future. Discussions on the board should be inherently progressive (even if said progressive ideas suck), but for some reason, it's just not.

The Attitude era, as nice as it was, is over. That era was grown out of Paul Heyman's creative revolution in ECW - where modern counter-cultures and sub-cultures of the early to mid 90s found it's home. It was the only company at the time in an industry that historically found it hard to move out of the presentation and aesthetics that worked in previous decades/eras, and Paul, at the time was, you guessed it, in his 20s. WWF ran with the concept and made it commercial. Now the question is, what's next? That's the only question that matters, and when you answer that question, don't answer like a wrestling fan. Answer like an artist. Answer like a visionary. Answer like a marketer, and whatever answer springs out of that will be a lot more valuable than bringing back the Attitude Era.

The AE was gaudy, tawdry and classless. As popular as it was, it was dumb. Now it's time for wrestling to get smarter.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

They are getting one thread in an attempt to confine most of the shit-posting to one place. Works for me.


----------



## Apokolips

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*



jonoaries said:


> ^THIS.
> *THE ATTITUDE ERA IS FUCKING OVER!!!!!*


Same reason people watch old movies and music because what we got these days suck balls, I'm constantly watching Attitude Era clips on Youtube.


----------



## Art13

HitItLikeABongoDru said:


> The Nielsen sample is statistically significant so in theory it wouldn't make any difference


Well no, "in theory" of course it wouldn't, nonetheless, the situation with Punk and the rating does seem like an anomaly to me. 

He gets the biggest purely positive reaction in the company, he is over huge with all crowds, smarky or casual and he has had the number 1 mech item for months, everything points to him being massively popular with the fans, *except* the ratings.... I dunno, doesn't make sense to me, maybe I just don't understand the ratings system well enough.



Mr Premium said:


> Cena and Orton still gets louder reactions than him whether its cheers or boos.


Cena, yes. Orton, I disagree, it's arguable at best.


----------



## Mr Premium

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*



Apokolips said:


> Same reason people watch old movies and music because what we got these days suck balls, I'm constantly watching Attitude Era clips on Youtube.


Yeah, sadly this. It's WWE's job to make us forget about the Attitude Era the same way they made us forget about Rock n Wrestling (and it's reincarnation in WCW) with the Attitude Era.

Unfortunately, they're currently not doing a good job at it.

The product back in that era was just too superior.


----------



## Aots16

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*



lic05 said:


> Why can't you guys let the past go? The Attitude Era was good, but it has been over from a very long time. *Move the ***k on.*


Fucking. Repped. Seriously every time i come to this forum i think the EXACT same thing.


----------



## Olympus

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter to us*

BUT PUNK SAID BITCH ON RAW SO THE ATTITUDE ERA HAZ RETURNED!!1111!!11!!!


----------



## hou713

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*

Have people completely forgotten about the Ruthless Aggression era?


----------



## juvijuice

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*

Attitude Era was fine, but the current era has (much) longer matches. I'm fine with less swearing, but I wish they could do blood when it was really necessary, like during the blowoff to a feud.


----------



## HitItLikeABongoDru

Being over doesn't mean someone is a big draw, guys like Orton, Ryder, Sheamus etc. are all over with the crowds but that doesn't mean they are draws to those people who flip-flop between watching Raw or something else. I'm not saying anyone is or is not a draw btw just saying live crowd reactions and drawing power are not the same thing


----------



## Stone Hot

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

As noted before, the December 26th WWE RAW Supershow scored a 2.93 cable rating and 4.47 million viewers. This is the show where the trend stopped of RAW's second hour losing viewers from the first.

The CM Punk and John Laurinaitis segment drew a 2.94 quarter rating. Booker T vs. Cody Rhodes lost 149,000 viewers while Backstage segments with John Cena, Zack Ryder, Big Show, Kelly Kelly, John Laurinaitis and others gained 78,000 viewers. Ryder and Eve Torres vs. Natalya and Tyson Kidd with a John Cena interview lost 67,000 more viewers.

Cena vs. The Miz and the attack from R-Truth gained 325,000 viewers, which is below the average but better than recent weeks for that timeslot. Big Show vs. David Otunga with one of Show's arms behind his back and the Alberto Del Rio interview with The Bella Twins gained 34,000 viewers. CM Punk vs. Jack Swagger to kick off the Gauntlet match lost 367,000 viewers while Punk vs. Ziggler gained 172,000 back, doing a 2.91 average rating for the main event.

The overrun segment with John Cena and Kane gained 543,000 viewers for a 3.26 quarter rating. With Kane and Cena ending RAW, the rating for Male Teens went from a 2.8 to a 3.1, Males 18-49 went from a 2.8 to a 3.2, Female Teens went from a 1.0 to a 1.3 and Females 18-49 stayed at a 1.0 rating.


----------



## wacokid27

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*

Short answer: No.

Long answer: It's not reasonable or responsible to bring back the Attitude Era, since what made that era "great" in most of our memories were the performers and the risks that were taken, many of which didn't really pay off. SCSA, HBK, HHH, The Rock, Mankind, Kane (and the rest) made the WWE great in that era. You can't bring back those guys. All you can do is try and build a similar fan response/draw with what you have today.

wk


----------



## rkomarkorton

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*



Azuran said:


> Why are you surprised? It's a known fact that CM Punk fans are in denial. Hell, they keep buying his "best wrestler in the world" gig for some reason. If CM Punk sits in the ring and does nothing else, most people here would probably call it the best thing in the world.
> 
> *Gotta love how rating don't matter when IWC darlings like Punk and Bryan are champions.*


this.

if cena and orton were the champions omg constant bashing


----------



## Boss P

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*



Apokolips said:


> Same reason people watch old movies and music because what we got these days suck balls


But that's the problem. Movies and music today doesn't suck balls at all. It's the greatest music ever recorded.

You don't believe me?

Ask your 13 year old cousin.

What, you're opinions are more correct than his? Maybe today, yeah, but fast forward ten years and a bunch of his generation peers start writing for Pitchfork.com...

CM Punk, John Cena, Randy Orton...greatest era ever.


----------



## rkomarkorton

Art13 said:


> Well no, "in theory" of course it wouldn't, nonetheless, the situation with Punk and the rating does seem like an anomaly to me.
> 
> *He gets the biggest purely positive reaction in the company, he is over huge with all crowds, smarky or casual and he has had the number 1 mech item for months, everything points to him being massively popular with the fans, except the ratings.... I dunno, doesn't make sense to me, maybe I just don't understand the ratings system well enough.*
> 
> 
> 
> Cena, yes. Orton, I disagree, it's arguable at best.


this only pertains to cm punk right? let me guess if orton was champ it doesnt matter how over he is he just isnt a draw right? but punk on the otherhand is.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter to us*

Ratings do matter (to act like they don't is silly) but most people here have no fucking clue how to statistically measure one person's influence on a show so they just talk out their ass and use it a way to justify their pre-existing opinions and somehow "win" the internet. It's so fucking stupid and the fact that it was justified in this way already in this thread - without a hint of irony - is fucking I don't know what.


----------



## Mr White

WCW 2000 numbers......It Begins...


----------



## TAR

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*

I agree with the Attitude Era is gone and it wont come back stuff.
I mean smackdown, ever since it was created Smackdown! was pg, it doesn't matter about the ratings of a TV show. I bet you can make a kids movie than is better than an R-Rated movie? It's just WWE is just in a rebuilding stage at the moment. What they do need is decent crowds and I think that the WWE has put a belt on Ryder, Punk and Bryan to try and get a reaction from the fans. But no. The Crowds are dull. When Kane returned, I thought a tumbleweed rolling across as Kane made his way to the ring, when The road dogg Jesse James returned I swear to fuck I heard crickets.
Oh and what about Bryan Grandmaster Sexat Christopher? I'm not even going to mention that RAW.

Crowds need to stop sitting on their asses, folding their arms and just watching. WWE is more enjoyable when the crowd is fired up. I bet ya if The Rock returned with a shit reaction from the crowd... it wouldn't been a great comeback as it was. Y2J got a decent reaction when he returned aswell, CM punk chicago MITB was one of the loudest of 2011. But that was like a Mid-Card Pop in the Attitude era.

I think that's what the Attitude Era marks are missing, the pops, the noise and the chants. WWE doesn't need/want Attitude Era shenanigans. It just needs good crowds. That is my opinion anyway because I enjoy and I get excited for RAW when there is a really crowd on the show.


----------



## ohhudidntkno

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*

I stopped watching wrestling shortly after the invasion angle and started watching again this past year because my son is now into it.. I wouldnt say the attitude era was really that vulgar.. maybe some more swearing and blood.. the big difference is the booking.. The mcmahon family characters were more important to the attitude era than the wrestlers... the storylines were much better.. there were actually heels.. cole gets more heat than any wrestler does now... I think they need to bring back stables... every week on raw something new was happening people turning on each other. it is much harder to turn a individual heel when he stands alone as a face or vice versa..


----------



## Adramelech

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*

1) Ratings are not "gradually declining longterm". Broadcast television is a medium in decline and WWE ratings simply reflect what is going on in the rest of the industry. Viewership numbers are rock solid.

2) I don't think you understand how television ratings work or what they mean.

3) Reverting back to a product model that was successful nearly fifteen years ago is not in any way, shape or form a method by which one can increase modern interest in something.



Apokolips said:


> Same reason people watch old movies and music because what we got these days suck balls


:lmao

Please learn what nostalgia is.


----------



## Mr Eagles

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*



Boss P said:


> But that's the problem. Movies and music today doesn't suck balls at all. It's the greatest music ever recorded.
> 
> You don't believe me?
> 
> Ask your 13 year old cousin.
> 
> What, you're opinions are more correct than his? Maybe today, yeah, but fast forward ten years and a bunch of his generation peers start writing for Pitchfork.com...
> 
> CM Punk, John Cena, Randy Orton...greatest era ever.


Repped. Glad someone see's the light


----------



## Loopee

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*

You can't bring back an era without it seeming like a cheap knock off.

And you shouldn't be cloning eras. You should be creating new ones. The Ruthless Aggression one was pretty cool, imo.


----------



## CMojicaAce

Mr White said:


> WCW 2000 numbers......It Begins...


Except WWE has no competition.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

The last week show... it's interesting, but if people did tune out after the first minute or two, then that's all on Laurinaitis and nothing on Punk. People could have heard Punk's music, seen Mr. Executive Vice President of Talent Relations, and turned the channel. This is the first time that a Punk segment (not match) did pretty poorly in comparison to the usual, so I wonder if that has anything to do with it.

We'll never know without minute to minute breakdowns, but oh well. Even if that segment opened with a 4.5, people would still say Punk isn't/can't draw. :shrugs:


----------



## Azuran

CMojicaAce said:


> Except WWE has no competition.


Which makes the numbers even sadder.


----------



## Art13

HitItLikeABongoDru said:


> Being over doesn't mean someone is a big draw, guys like Orton, Ryder, Sheamus etc. are all over with the crowds but that doesn't mean they are draws to those people who flip-flop between watching Raw or something else. I'm not saying anyone is or is not a draw btw just saying live crowd reactions and drawing power are not the same thing


Yes, true, but with all things considered, I would think Punk would be doing a little better than he is ratings wise, I don't expect him to be a "huge draw", but I also wouldn't expect his segments to do terribly either and if I'm being honest, right now they are. 



rkomarkorton said:


> this only pertains to cm punk right? let me guess if orton was champ it doesnt matter how over he is he just isnt a draw right? but punk on the otherhand is.


LOL, where did this come from? I don't really give a shit who or who isn't a draw, all I care about is being entertained. The only reason I'm commenting on Punk's ratings is because I find it a little unusual and I'm certainly not the type to try and discredit a wrestler I don't like because HEZ NOT A DRAWWW!!, those people are pathetic. Did Orton's last WWE title reign do poor ratings? Great, I don't remember, probably because I don't really care, but it's good to know WWE isn't overly concerned about ratings, considering Orton's position.


----------



## HitItLikeABongoDru

I wouldn't look into it too much really, ratings and PPV numbers etc. are all interesting to discuss but there are so many different ways for people to interpret them, and in the end it makes no difference to us as fans


----------



## WWE

Put the title back on Cena and see what happens...


----------



## Brye

HitItLikeABongoDru said:


> I wouldn't look into it too much really, ratings and PPV numbers etc. are all interesting to discuss but there are so many different ways for people to interpret them, and in the end it makes no difference to us as fans


Most people think they can look at a few numbers and suddenly know how to run the company.


----------



## CMojicaAce

I really couldn't give a damn about ratings. I've been enjoying RAW a lot more these past couple of weeks.


----------



## Ray

CamillePunk said:


> lol I love these posts. Why didn't they think of that?!


It's not even a matter of "Why didn't they think of that?". It's a matter of "Why don't they do it?".


----------



## wwffans123

What a bad rating


----------



## Fargerov

Mr White said:


> WCW 2000 numbers......It Begins...


Yeah, because TNA is going to buy WWE, right?


----------



## TripleG

The main problem for me right now is that the show is going by the same format, the same cliches, & the same storylines that the Attitude Era used. Its fucking boring! 

- So Punk cuts this revolutionary promo over the Summer, takes the WWE in an exciting new direction, and all it amounted to was yet another Austin/McMahon rip off? The Evil Boss schtick has been DONE TO FUCKING DEATH! Its not exciting anymore. Its not cutting edge like it was 14-15 years ago. Its just so disappointing that this amazing spark they captured over the Summer amounted to nothing more than the same old shit we've seen dozens of times already. 

- Why is WWE (and TNA for that matter) under the impression that the process of match making makes for compelling television? Why do we have to dedicate the first 15-20 minutes of a show just to set up the main events for later in the night? Why are matches being made by the boss backstage while the show is in progress? Are you trying to make it look spontaneous because quite honestly, everything feels so forced & repetitive that it doesn't feel spontaneous at all. This element was developed, again, during the Attitude Era, specially as a way to combat WCW by keeping their show unpredictable. Well number one WCW is dead, and you don't need to do that anymore. Also when you try to be unpredictable all the time by using the same tricks over and over again, you aren't shocking anybody. I mean how many people amke fun of Teddy Long for making tag match main events on Smackdown all the time? In the Attitude Era it happened all the time because A) It fit the storyline of Vince trying to screw Austin which was a revolutionary idea, and B) To catch people's attention in case they were switching between them & WCW. Niether of those things are true now and its time stop dedicating so much time to useless fluff matches that have little to no value. 

And there are other problems with the writing & presentation as well. There are so many lapses in logic. Like OK, why is Ziggler celebrating winning over Punk via Count Out? Either he doesn't know the rules of the sport he performs in, which makes the character look stupid, or he's happy he won by Count Out and is OK with not winning the title,, which again, makes him look stupid. And then there are the "comedy" segments which are mostly painful to sit through and the bad acting that fills the show from top to bottom a lot of performers. Also you have Michael Cole being obnoxious as all hell on commentary for two straight hours and that makes me want to watch on Mute alot of the time. 

Annoying characters, bad writing, formulaic presentation, etc etc. Its the smae problems over and over again. The WWE needs a major jump start creatively.


----------



## Notmarkingforanyon

We need another summer of Punk storyline. Let's get ready for Y2J's shoot promo next week which will involve no words whatsoever.


----------



## The Tony

Holly shit....no NFL and the show was promoted a lot...very bad rating.


----------



## Hotdiggity11

Tony316 said:


> Holly shit....no NFL and the show was promoted a lot...very bad rating.




You act as if there wasn't still a big football game on Monday. Like say, the 2nd biggest bowl game of the year...


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

When will the breakdown for this weeks Raw be out?


----------



## mrmacman

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*



Azuran said:


> Why are you surprised? It's a known fact that CM Punk fans are in denial. Hell, they keep buying his "best wrestler in the world" gig for some reason. If CM Punk sits in the ring and does nothing else, most people here would probably call it the best thing in the world.
> 
> *Gotta love how rating don't matter when IWC darlings like Punk and Bryan are champions.*


(Y)


----------



## Brye

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*



Azuran said:


> Why are you surprised? It's a known fact that CM Punk fans are in denial. Hell, they keep buying his "best wrestler in the world" gig for some reason. If CM Punk sits in the ring and does nothing else, most people here would probably call it the best thing in the world.
> 
> Gotta love how rating don't matter when IWC darlings like Punk and Bryan are champions.


Why exactly does it matter to me what a guy that I like draws for ratings. From what I've heard, HBK didn't draw shit yet he's still one of the best all time. Ratings don't dictate whose good.

I don't understand when ratings became more important than enjoyment. Using them as a scapegoat is fucking lame. If you don't like it, say that. But if you have to try to bring ratings into it then you really don't have an excuse.

I don't care about the ratings because I don't happen to own stock in the company and there's no legitimate threat to the WWE. If they're doing what I like, why should I complain? They should know by now that if they change all their ideas around last minute they're not going anywhere.


----------



## GreatKhaliFan666

Daniel Bryan as world champ is absolutely laughable in a casual viewers eyes. The guys reaction to rolling up rhodes or whoever he faced was cringeworthy. Jumping around like a 5 year old girl? Embarrassing. Whoever wrote that can be blamed as well.

CM Punk will be jobbed out to Brodus Clay very soon. The guy is only likable by the IWC. Casual viewers probably don't even see why he is a face and why they should even like him. No good looks, Was an extremely hated heel who probably pissed off a lot of smokers/beer drinkers with his last role. He still acts like his arrogant character from the past but cornier except now he wants fans to like him, not working for casuals. 

The WWE needs Batista back, many casuals I know loved the guy.


----------



## Brye

GreatKhaliFan666 said:


> Daniel Bryan as world champ is absolutely laughable in a casual viewers eyes. The guys reaction to rolling up rhodes or whoever he faced was cringeworthy. Jumping around like a 5 year old girl? Embarrassing. Whoever wrote that can be blamed as well.
> 
> CM Punk will be jobbed out to Brodus Clay very soon. *The guy is only likable by the IWC. Casual viewers probably don't even see why he is a face and why they should even like him. No good looks, Was an extremely hated heel who probably pissed off a lot of smokers/beer drinkers with his last role. He still acts like his arrogant character from the past but cornier except now he wants fans to like him, not working for casuals. *
> 
> The WWE needs Batista back, many casuals I know loved the guy.


Listen to the live audience plz.

And no, Batista was horrible. Had about 10 high quality matches in his career and 5 of them came from a guy who wrestles once a year now.


----------



## GreatKhaliFan666

As far as the ratings drop, I think the stanford/oklahoma state game was heading into overtime or had about 5 minutes left. I remember switching the channel away from the gauntlet match as well. I also remember seeing the end of the show with kanes rape hole.

I may be on here but I'm pretty casual.


----------



## Coffey

I'm disappointed with the merging of the other ratings thread created because it completely destroyed my conversation.  C'est la vie.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Overall the 3.1 rating is a good rating taking the stiff competition on monday into consideration, especailly at 9.00 which with explains the drop in the second hour.


----------



## Brave Nash

Brye said:


> Listen to the live audience plz.
> 
> And no, Batista was horrible. Had about 10 high quality matches in his career and 5 of them came from a guy who wrestles once a year now.


Shut the fuck up I'm sick of people saying Batista was horrible he never was horrible I always enjoy his matches and I'm a punk fan too so don't bring up Batista because your arguments about him is irrelevant the casual loved him and he hold smackdown on his back and ratings were way better and higher than now. He had a great run when he was a heel, well if you dont like him than punk himself and others do respect him he have done alot for this business.


----------



## wb1899

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*



777 said:


> Better ratings equals more money from advertisers.


The advertisers look only at the C3 ratings (=how many people watched commercials up to 3 days after they air) and on that number dependents how much money the channel gets.

And once agian for all the household numbers are meaningless.


----------



## Brye

Brave Nash said:


> Shut the fuck up I'm sick of people saying Batista was horrible he never was horrible I always enjoy his matches and I'm a punk fan too so don't bring up Batista because your arguments about him is irrelevant the casual loved him and he hold smackdown on his back and ratings were way better and higher than now. He had a great run when he was a heel, well if you dont like him than punk himself and others do respect him he have done alot for this business.


Batista's good stuff came from Triple H (Vengeance), Cena (2 of their 4 matches), all the Taker ones, one of the Edge ones, the occasional Finlay match and he was in a few good multi man matches. Not saying he didn't improve at all during his time in the WWE because he did, but I still don't think he was good. And I'll admit, he had a good match with MVP in '08 and I believe one with Morrison too. Just didn't find the guy tolerable at all on the mic until 2010.

And also, have you seen what he looks like now?


----------



## Theproof

Whether the ratings are high or low, who gives a crap? All that matters is if you liked the show not if a bunch of other people did. Not saying that we shouldn't be looking at the ratings but people put way to much into this. Ratings go up and down all the time and unless there is a significant change I don't really see why there needs to be a 10 page long discussion about it. The ratings are always awkward. I'm not a big fan of Punks current work but I'm not stupid enough to believe that he is a ratings killer when there are a lot more boring characters on RAW. When CM Punk has a segment, people stop to listen whether you like him or not. There's so many factors that go into ratings spikes and dips that it's almost impossible for any of us to really pinpoint why and discuss this intelligently because none of us are qualified enough to understand this topic fully. It's always just a bunch of people talking out of there asses.


----------



## GreatKhaliFan666

Brye said:


> Listen to the live audience plz.
> 
> And no, Batista was horrible. Had about 10 high quality matches in his career and 5 of them came from a guy who wrestles once a year now.


Yes but he had that true bad ass look that made him easy to believe in. Casual fans really aren't paying attention to how many great wrestling matches he had. The WWE has actually compromised with hardcore wrestling fans by having daniel bryan/cm punk in the spotlight. I don't think that it's translating all that well with casuals. Why so many cowardly bad guys too? 

I'm not one that should judge punk as I'm pretty casual but he's just not that intriguing to me. He gets good reactions from audiences and meh reactions from others from what I've seen.

Loved umaga by the way!


----------



## Brye

Theproof said:


> Whether the ratings are high or low, who gives a crap? All that matters is if you liked the show not if a bunch of other people did. Not saying that we shouldn't be looking at the ratings but people put way to much into this. Ratings go up and down all the time and unless there is a significant change I don't really see why there needs to be a 10 page long discussion about it. The ratings are always awkward. I'm not a big fan of Punks current work but I'm not stupid enough to believe that he is a ratings killer when there are a lot more boring characters on RAW. When CM Punk has a segment, people stop to listen whether you like him or not. There's so many factors that go into ratings spikes and dips that it's almost impossible for any of us to really pinpoint why and discuss this intelligently because none of are qualified enough to understand this topic fully. It's always just a bunch of people talking out of there asses.


I don't think we always share the same opinion but I completely agree with that.



GreatKhaliFan666 said:


> Yes but he had that true bad ass look that made him easy to believe in. Casual fans really aren't paying attention to how many great wrestling matches he had. The WWE has actually compromised with hardcore wrestling fans by having daniel bryan/cm punk in the spotlight. I don't think that it's translating all that well with casuals. Why so many cowardly bad guys too?
> 
> I'm not one that should judge punk as I'm pretty casual but he's just not that intriguing to me. He gets good reactions from audiences and meh reactions from others from what I've seen.
> 
> Loved umaga by the way!


Completely agree on cowardly bad guys. It's a good gimmick for a few guys to have (worked awesome with JBL because he did everything he could to make the crowd hate him) but we see it far too much and even Henry lost some of his luster now.

And same, really wish he got a big title at one point but he had an awesome career.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*



Brye said:


> Why exactly does it matter to me what a guy that I like draws for ratings. From what I've heard, HBK didn't draw shit yet he's still one of the best all time. Ratings don't dictate whose good.
> 
> I don't understand when ratings became more important than enjoyment. Using them as a scapegoat is fucking lame. If you don't like it, say that. But if you have to try to bring ratings into it then you really don't have an excuse.
> 
> I don't care about the ratings because I don't happen to own stock in the company and there's no legitimate threat to the WWE. If they're doing what I like, why should I complain? They should know by now that if they change all their ideas around last minute they're not going anywhere.


I think the last part is what he was getting at, that doesn't necessarily mean it has to apply to you thou. If Swagger was champ, and ratings where going down and there was a CMpunk fan who would get on his case about how the title should be taken off him because he just isn't attracting viewers would be their comments most likely. But if the title is on your fave star even though they aren't bringing in viewers then just because it's your fave star it doesn't matter? 

I have noticed a lot of people say that the way Swagger won the world title has ruined it for them. And the fact that he jobbed prior to winning it and then all of a sudden wins the title out of nowhere, and is beating people like Orton and Jericho. Then I read DB fans saying that they don't care about how he won the title or how he was booked before he won the title as long as he has it, I am happy. Some people don't seem to understand what they are saying when they say it. They are pretty much saying if my fave star is at the top nothing else matters, but if it's someone I truly dislike, then it's all there fault the product is shit.


----------



## D.M.N.

*December 26th, 2011 - Breakdown*
Q1 - 4.42 million / 2.90 rating
Q2 - 4.27 million / 2.80 rating
Q3 - 4.35 million / 2.85 rating
Q4 - 4.28 million / 2.81 rating
Q5 - 4.61 million / 3.03 rating
Q6 - 4.64 million / 3.05 rating
Q7 - 4.27 million / 2.81 rating
Q8 - 4.45 million / 2.92 rating
OR - 4.99 million / 3.26 rating

Q7 would have been from 22:30 to 22:45, I'm not sure how many commercials that quarter had, but not good when it features the WWE Champion as it was the joint lowest of the night.


----------



## Brye

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*



swagger_ROCKS said:


> I think the last part is what he was getting at, that doesn't necessarily mean it has to apply to you thou. If Swagger was champ, and ratings where going down and there was a CMpunk fan who would get on his case about how the title should be taken off him because he just isn't attracting viewers would be their comments most likely. But if the title is on your fave star even though they aren't bringing in viewers then just because it's your fave star it doesn't matter?
> 
> I have noticed a lot of people say that the way Swagger won the world title has ruined it for them. And the fact that he jobbed prior to winning it and then all of a sudden wins the title out of nowhere, and is beating people like Orton and Jericho. Then I read DB fans saying that they don't care about how he won the title or how he was booked before he won the title as long as he has it, I am happy. Some people don't seem to understand what they are saying when they say it. They are pretty much saying if my fave star is at the top nothing else matters, but if it's someone I truly dislike, then it's all there fault the product is shit.


I just think people use the ratings as an excuse and it's a very poor one. As for the DB situation, I loved that he won the title but I'm still not a fan of how it happened. But it does suggest that it's leading to a heel turn which then might make us look back and think differently. Swagger's reign was unfortunately booked horribly from even before he won MITB. I get what you're getting at though but I still hardly think that in this day and age the top guy is responsible for the rating.

There have been people I dislike that have won the belt and occasionally it can actually end up being a good reign. I think people don't set their differences aside and look past their dislike for someone.

Sorry if that makes no sense, it's 4 AM. :argh:


----------



## Dub

Wow that is some horrible numbers but what can you expect when the writing is shit? The mentality in that place needs a huge overhaul.


----------



## Coffey

Batista was incredible. Pretty much the embodiment of what you want that sort of wrestler to be.


----------



## Brye

My apologies, I'd like to add that Batista/Rey as a team was pretty good too.

I just couldn't get into him on a regular basis. Like his feuds with Edge, Orton, Rey, etc just didn't click for me.

His matches with good stories to them were great though (Taker series, HIAC with Trips, Stretcher match with HBK).


----------



## Theproof

Batista's matches vs Edge on smackdown always put me to sleep. Especially considering the fact that it seemed like they faced each other every week for two months straight. They're styles didn't mix well together. Now that I think about it. I actually hated that whole period of Smackdown.


----------



## Mr Premium

So until when will the ratings thread be stickied? When Punk starts to consistently draw 3.0 and above?

Might as well cut the thread loose now 'cause I doubt that will ever happen.

Seriously.


----------



## Snothlisberger

Hotdiggity11 said:


> You act as if there wasn't still a big football game on Monday. Like say, the 2nd biggest bowl game of the year...


Rose Bowl says whats up. Fiesta Bowl? Please, that is the least prestigious of the BCS bowls. 

I'm not disagreeing with you at all about the first part tho. "OH NO NFL OMGZZZZ!! RATINGS BL00W!!" Well ya except for the 15 million watching the BCS...


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Ratings DON'T matter*



Brye said:


> I just think people use the ratings as an excuse and it's a very poor one. As for the DB situation, I loved that he won the title but I'm still not a fan of how it happened. But it does suggest that it's leading to a heel turn which then might make us look back and think differently. Swagger's reign was unfortunately booked horribly from even before he won MITB. I get what you're getting at though but I still hardly think that in this day and age the top guy is responsible for the rating.
> 
> There have been people I dislike that have won the belt and occasionally it can actually end up being a good reign. I think people don't set their differences aside and look past their dislike for someone.
> 
> Sorry if that makes no sense, it's 4 AM. :argh:


Well, personally, I don't bother with these threads at most times, because I know media has evolved so much since a long time ago, and there are much more ways to watch WWE now, you don't really have to watch it when it airs or even on Tv at all. I will watch on TV when ever I have the chance, but I know there are just some things in the WWE that just isn't going to force someone to wanna watch it when it airs. The "it begins" thing had me so hyped, but damn, the only thing that made that show, was the actual fact the the man returned in the first place.


----------



## Brye

Mr Premium said:


> So until when will the ratings thread be stickied? When Punk starts to consistently draw 3.0 and above?
> 
> Might as well cut the thread loose now 'cause I doubt that will ever happen.
> 
> Seriously.


I'd watch it with the smartass attitude.

And it'll be stickied here probably forever, or until caring about ratings stops being a popular thing.


----------



## rcc

Lol, the sticky is clearly a way for the fanboys (aka Mods) of this site to offload the fact that their hero is a failure. Nobody bothers to read stickied threads except the Raw thread.


----------



## The Haiti Kid

rcc said:


> Lol, the sticky is clearly a way for the fanboys (aka Mods) of this site to offload the fact that their hero is a failure. Nobody bothers to read stickied threads except the Raw thread.


You really like being a shit stirrer don't you.


----------



## rcc

Course. It's good fun.


----------



## paddyposh

Punk isnt why ratings are bad, it is because the product is consistently below average.


----------



## Starbuck

For the record, I don't think the ratings threads should be stickied. It's like having one big thread for Raw every week and is just going to mess everything up. Also, why people think this is the first time bitch fights have erupted over ratings is beyond me. They happen all the time and have happened in the past to this extreme, usually when somebody the IWC likes or dislikes draws or loses viewers yet somehow those threads didn't get stickied. Don't see why this should be any different tbh and it does whiff of the fact that it involves Punk and some of the mods are Punk marks. Pretty sure if these shitstorms were erupting about somebody else, see Orton in 2010 for example, that there would be no sticky thread. 

On the actual ratings front from last week, which we now have to go hunting back for which is why I don't like the idea of having one big ratings thread, there isn't much to say other than the same thing we've been saying for ages now. Cena draws on all fronts and that's about it really. The low start to the show is pretty shitty but there was no build for anything going into that show iirc so it shouldn't be surprising that nobody tuned in. The big news will come when we get this weeks rating breakdown because that's the interesting one.


----------



## Doublemint

> Raw on 12/26 did a 2.93 rating and 4.47 million viewers. The rating was almost identical with the prior week but there were 180,000 more viewers on a night when overall television viewership was down 7.7%, although that’s misleading because all the networks were in reruns. The show was 6th for the night on cable. The Atlanta Falcons vs. New Orleans Saints game where Drew Brees set the all-time single season passing yardage record did a 10.60 rating and 15.64 million viewers.
> 
> The big news is the curse of the second hour losing audience from the first hour ended. The reason is more that the first hour didn’t do well, then the second hour did well. In particular, Raw of late has been starting with a strong first quarter, but the C.M. Punk/John Laurinaitis first quarter did a only a 2.94, and the usual big drop didn’t happen. There were a significant amount of usual Raw viewers who either didn’t bother to watch the first quarter and turn it off like usual, or did watch it but turned it off in a minute.
> 
> The show did a 2.3 in Males 12-17 (down 18% from last week), 2.6 in Males 18-49 (up 4%), 1.1 in Females 12-17 (up 38%) and 1.2 in Females 18-49 (down 8%). Male viewership was 67.1% of total viewers.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, Booker T vs. Cody Rhodes lost 149,000 viewers. Backstage stuff with John Cena and Zack Ryder, Big Show and Kelly Kelly, Laurinaitis, Show and David Otunga and Jack Swagger, Dolph Ziggler, Vickie Guerrero and Mark Henry gained 78,000 viewers. Ryder & Eve Torres vs. Tyson Kidd & Natalya and a Cena interview lost 67,000 viewers. *Cena vs. The Miz and post-match R-Truth attack gained 325,000 viewers*, which is below usual but better than in some recent weeks. Big Show vs. David Otunga with one hand tied behind his back and an Alberto Del Rio interview with the Bellas gained 34,000 viewers.* Punk vs. Swagger lost 367,000 viewers. Punk vs. Ziggler gained 172,000 viewers to a 2.91 main event average*. The Cena/Kane overrun gained 543,000 viewers to a do a 3.26. As far as the demo changes with Cena and Kane out last, Male teens went from 2.8 to 3.1, Men 18-49 went from 2.8 to 3.2, Women teens went from 1.0 to 1.3 and Women 18-49 stayed at 1.0.


So, Cena is still a bigger draw than Punk?


----------



## Starbuck

Doublemint said:


> So, Cena is still a bigger draw than Punk?


Was there ever any doubt lol?


----------



## Notmarkingforanyon

HaHa if only ratings loved Punk as much as Cena, then them haters would have nothing to hate on, maybe except for those interviews where he mentions the rock :lmao


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Rock316AE said:


> Nah, it's only a matter of time anyway, he's going to the B show after WM...hopefully Orton is coming back to RAW.


since you are so obsessed with ratings
every time orton was champion on smackdown ratings fell


----------



## #1Peep4ever

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*



Apokolips said:


> Same reason people watch old movies and music because what we got these days suck balls, I'm constantly watching Attitude Era clips on Youtube.


ask a kid about todays music and movies... it will be the best thing ever done


----------



## #1Peep4ever

GreatKhaliFan666 said:


> Daniel Bryan as world champ is absolutely laughable in a casual viewers eyes. The guys reaction to rolling up rhodes or whoever he faced was cringeworthy. Jumping around like a 5 year old girl? Embarrassing. Whoever wrote that can be blamed as well.
> 
> CM Punk will be jobbed out to Brodus Clay very soon. *The guy is only likable by the IWC. Casual viewers probably don't even see why he is a face and why they should even like him. No good looks, Was an extremely hated heel who probably pissed off a lot of smokers/beer drinkers with his last role. He still acts like his arrogant character from the past but cornier except now he wants fans to like him, not working for casuals. *
> 
> The WWE needs Batista back, many casuals I know loved the guy.


pls ask them why they pop everytime they see him


> So, Cena is still a bigger draw than Punk?


so whats new about that


----------



## Romanista

rcc said:


> Lol, the sticky is clearly a way for the fanboys (aka Mods) of this site to offload the fact that their hero is a failure. Nobody bothers to read stickied threads except the Raw thread.


I wonder the same thing, why all of mods/admins are Punk fans?


----------



## D17

#1Peep4ever said:


> pls ask them why they pop everytime they see him


Tbh I wouldn't say every arena is pakced full of casuals every single week. It doesn't just go IWC-smrks....casuals. There are fans you know, which fill up most arenas. Casuals ae the ones that watch it on TV as with every other TV show. 

But it is clear that Puink gets clealy better pops reactions in smarky cities, though. And WWE aren't in smarky cities as much as regular ones, though.


----------



## Notmarkingforanyon

Romanista said:


> I wonder the same thing, why all of mods/admins are Punk fans?


It's a conspiracy between Punk and the IWC authority, don't let them know I said this!

:hmm:


----------



## mrmacman

Romanista said:


> I wonder the same thing, why all of mods/admins are Punk fans?


Good Question :hmm:


----------



## D17

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*



TheAussieRocket said:


> What they do need is decent crowds and *I think that the WWE has put a belt on Ryder, Punk and Bryan to try and get a reaction from the fans. But no. The Crowds are dull.* When Kane returned, I thought a tumbleweed rolling across as Kane made his way to the ring, when The road dogg Jesse James returned I swear to fuck I heard crickets.
> Oh and what about Bryan Grandmaster Sexat Christopher? I'm not even going to mention that RAW.
> 
> Crowds need to stop sitting on their asses, folding their arms and just watching. WWE is more enjoyable when the crowd is fired up. I bet ya if The Rock returned with a shit reaction from the crowd... it wouldn't been a great comeback as it was. Y2J got a decent reaction when he returned aswell, CM punk chicago MITB was one of the loudest of 2011. But that was like a Mid-Card Pop in the Attitude era.
> 
> I think that's what the Attitude Era marks are missing, the pops, the noise and the chants. WWE doesn't need/want Attitude Era shenanigans. It just needs good crowds. That is my opinion anyway because I enjoy and I get excited for RAW when there is a really crowd on the show.


Tbh I think you need good theme songs to get pumped up over. Austin and Rock got countless HUGE pops in the AE, I think alot of that is to do with their music. The sudden breaking of the glass and "IF YAH SMELLL!" always got the crowd pumped instantly.






I mean, how can you expect the general crowd to get pumped over crap like this?

Ryder, not over enough for the big pops yet. Punk gets okay pops, his music helps alot I think too. But it's the same situation with most faces, their music just doesn't warrant a reaction imo.


----------



## Fire at Heart

Punk really is the mid card wwe champion! will he ever end raw as champion again?! hurray the wwe title is a mid card belt temporarily!


----------



## Cliffy

The minute by minute breakdown of Jericho's segment would be interesting.


----------



## rkomarkorton

This sticky thread is a way to take the attention away from punk since he isnt a draw and will never be

My question is why wasnt this made when Orton or Cena was champ? There were countless threads on this forum "Orton cant draw, Orton doesnt bring in ratings, Take the title off Orton" but no no lets make it a sticky thread since our god is champ and members rarely take the time out to read them so in the end punk will look good. SMH.


----------



## JasonLives

The quarterhour for Chris Jericho´s return actually lost 80,000 viewers according to Meltzer. The highest watched was the opening promo with Cena.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

JasonLives said:


> The quarterhour for Chris Jericho´s return actually lost 80,000 viewers according to Meltzer. The highest watched was the opening promo with Cena.


Only 80,000. I thought it should be at least double considering how many people bitched and said they changed the channel.


----------



## Notmarkingforanyon

Man Jericho lost viewers, get that man off TV :hmm: We need less Y2J and Punk becos they are IWC gods and can't draw!!! More Cena/Kane PLEASE!! :lmao


----------



## Carcass

lol @ Jericho losing viewers. Not surprised since he was one of the original vanilla midgets. He needs to go to ROH where bland uncharismatic indy hacks like him belong.


----------



## TheVoiceless

Ratings will be bad next week too...They keep going up against really good Football games. After the 9th it will get alot better because the only competition left will be history channel


----------



## Loudness

Since I basically trolled my more serious concerns about the ratings in the threads in the last 3 weeks and nothing changed rating wise since, I'm not really going to elaborate seriously on my former thoughts as pretty much has already been said. 

I don't see how people are shocked his return didn't draw. Apart from the active IWC, most people didn't care about the It Begins promos. By active I mean posting a lot and reading a lot of dirtsheets etc. Even despite beeing a big Jericho fan, I didn't care for the buildup, or the promo at all, Jericho isn't a guy that transcends wrestling like the Rock, I knew he would eventually come back after DWDS, and he did. Basically, he's a sort of gem to already watching fans, but if he comes or goes, it won't really affect anybody nevertheless. He simply lacks the charisma for that.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

4 Million viewers is pretty good in my opinion.


----------



## The Tony

JasonLives said:


> The quarterhour for Chris Jericho´s return actually lost 80,000 viewers according to Meltzer. The highest watched was the opening promo with Cena.


:lmao Jericho is just like Punk. Only the IWC cares. Jericho never was a huge draw.


----------



## Rock316AE

Starbuck said:


> *For the record, I don't think the ratings threads should be stickied. It's like having one big thread for Raw every week and is just going to mess everything up.* Also, why people think this is the first time bitch fights have erupted over ratings is beyond me. They happen all the time and have happened in the past to this extreme, usually when somebody the IWC likes or dislikes draws or loses viewers yet somehow those threads didn't get stickied. Don't see why this should be any different tbh and it does whiff of the fact that it involves Punk and some of the mods are Punk marks. Pretty sure if these shitstorms were erupting about somebody else, see Orton in 2010 for example, that there would be no sticky thread.
> 
> On the actual ratings front from last week, which we now have to go hunting back for which is why I don't like the idea of having one big ratings thread, there isn't much to say other than the same thing we've been saying for ages now. Cena draws on all fronts and that's about it really. The low start to the show is pretty shitty but there was no build for anything going into that show iirc so it shouldn't be surprising that nobody tuned in. The big news will come when we get this weeks rating breakdown because that's the interesting one.





rcc said:


> *Lol, the sticky is clearly a way for the fanboys (aka Mods) of this site to offload the fact that their hero is a failure. Nobody bothers to read stickied threads except the Raw thread.*


That's exactly what I said, too obvious. and lol @ Punk in the lowest rated segment, when the hell that happened before? the WWE champion doing numbers like that, probably Nash or not even him. would be funny to see what happen after WM.


----------



## superuser1

rkomarkorton said:


> This sticky thread is a way to take the attention away from punk since he isnt a draw and will never be
> 
> My question is why wasnt this made when Orton or Cena was champ? There were countless threads on this forum "Orton cant draw, Orton doesnt bring in ratings, Take the title off Orton" but no no lets make it a sticky thread since our god is champ and members rarely take the time out to read them so in the end punk will look good. SMH.


This is sad but true


----------



## John Cena is God

The highest rated segment involves John Cena again. Not surprising because lots of people only watch Raw to see John Cena, nobody else.


----------



## BANKSY

Going to miss the weekly ratings threads, always good for a laugh.


----------



## rkomarkorton

Lil'Jimmy said:


> Going to miss the weekly ratings threads, always good for a laugh.


Yeah the mods trying their best to protect CM Punk but hey don't worry when Orton becomes champ again WEEKLY RATINGS THREADS ALLOWED!


----------



## 127.127

Seems like someone made a complaint in the Suggestion section 

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/suggestions-help/594917-why-ratings-thread-stickied-new-post.html


----------



## Rock316AE

rkomarkorton said:


> This sticky thread is a way to take the attention away from punk since he isnt a draw and will never be
> 
> My question is why wasnt this made when Orton or Cena was champ? There were countless threads on this forum "Orton cant draw, Orton doesnt bring in ratings, Take the title off Orton" but no no lets make it a sticky thread since our god is champ and members rarely take the time out to read them so in the end punk will look good. SMH.


I agree, what's next? after WM Punk is going to the B(irrelevant)show, make a ratings thread for SD now so it doesn't look so obvious when SD ratings bomb with Punk.

and about Jericho, they put him on a random time slot for some reason, stupid move after all the hype.


----------



## TankOfRate

Rock316AE said:


> I agree, what's next? after WM Punk is going to the B(irrelevant)show, make a ratings thread for SD now so it doesn't look so obvious when SD ratings bomb with Punk.


:hmm: This sounds familiar.


----------



## rkomarkorton

TankOfRate said:


> :hmm: This sounds familiar.


Yeah but the ratings have never been this bad with orton as the champ..........I mean punk had the lowest rated segment since 1997 what a shame


----------



## Carcass

I bet the mods were also protecting CM Punk when they banned ratings threads in the TNA section.


----------



## TankOfRate

rkomarkorton said:


> Yeah but the ratings have never been this bad with orton as the champ..........I mean punk had the lowest rated segment since 1997 what a shame


Excuses excuses excuses. Smackdown ratings say hey.


----------



## Carcass

TankOfRate said:


> Excuses excuses excuses. Smackdown ratings say hey.


They say "Hey, A boring uncharismatic indy hack as champ can get better ratings then a guy that's been pushed to the top for years"


----------



## TankOfRate

Carcass said:


> They say "Hey, A boring uncharismatic indy hack as champ can get better ratings then a guy that's been pushed to the top for years"


and "LOL at this jabroni killing the company. Back to the midcard, son."


----------



## Starbuck

Carcass said:


> They say "Hey, A boring uncharismatic indy hack as champ can get better ratings then a guy that's been pushed to the top for years"


The actually say, "Hey, a fresh angle with a fresh main event monster heel can draw some pretty darn good numbers," to be more accurate.


----------



## Kratosx23

rkomarkorton said:


> Yeah but the ratings have never been this bad with orton as the champ..........I mean punk had the lowest rated segment since 1997 what a shame


Orton is worse, all things considering. 

I guess we're just ignoring the fact that no one on this planet cares about Punk's competition. Nobody likes Del Rio and Ziggler. *Nobody*. I like Del Rio and I don't even like Del Rio, that's how unover he is, and Ziggler has no charisma at all, and less presence than Colin Delaney and Spike Dudley put together. Miz is a joke too, nobody takes him seriously at all (which is a shame, but it's at least understandable given his look). Not to mention, he had his momentum completely killed by Triple H's storyline, and by Kevin Nash, who he never got revenge on for Jackknifing him 40000 times, undermining his credibility. Not to mention, people are still trying to get over the fact that Punk was a jobber for 5 years, it takes time to get over a thing like that. Hell, Punk has been in the main event for 6 months, and he STILL lost about 4 PPV's in a row. Way to get people to care, job out the guy on the hot streak. Great business.

Orton gets protected like nobody else in the history of wrestling. He worked with Triple H and Cena as his competition constantly, he fought Taker at WrestleMania, he gets to do things nobody else would ever get away with like creepily kissing Vince's own fucking daughter after he DDT's her and saying that Eddie Guerrero is in Hell 4 months after he dies. He's a 9 time world champion, he's never been put into any situation that makes him look bad, and this has been going on since he got here. He's an inexcusably bad draw. Punk would be bigger than Hulk Hogan if you invested the time into him that they've put into Orton. (Not really, but he'd have the ratings on his side, at least)


----------



## Rock316AE

In 2011 Henry is the biggest draw in the company along with Cena, no doubt. after that you got Orton and Show(always in the main time slot on SD), and the rest are irrelevant. Orton proved in the past that he can a big draw...


----------



## just1988

I'd love to know what the rating was at the start of Jericho's segment and then at the end.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Rock316AE said:


> In 2011 Henry is the biggest draw in the company along with Cena, no doubt. after that you got Orton and Show(always in the main time slot on SD), and the rest are irrelevant. *Orton proved in the past that he can a big draw.*..


Once, In 2009, on the road to wrestlemania...

Henry's the biggest draw in the company? why is sd attendence so bad, why is his merch sales doing medicore? why was his well built WHC match with the Big Show do the worst buyrate of the year?

Big Shows a big draw? lol he's a novelty act and Daniel Bryan's shrit is selling more then his, and why hasnt SD ratings dropped becuase a vanilla midget (according to you) is champ?


----------



## hazuki

It is sad to see some wrestling fans on here rather care more about the ratings then the actual product of the show which has been pretty good as of lately to be honest. Especially the mainevent scene. I bet once football is over we'll see a good amount of people coming back to watch wrestling on a weekly basics. Stop worrying about the fucking ratings.


----------



## The Tony

hazuki said:


> It is sad to see some wrestling fans on here rather care more about the ratings then the actual product of the show which has been pretty good as of lately to be honest. Especially the mainevent scene.


No. In two hours, there might be 5 minutes of the show that's worth watching.


----------



## Starbuck

just1988 said:


> I'd love to know what the rating was at the start of Jericho's segment and then at the end.


Same. My little sister who is a HUGE Jericho mark and was seriously fucking dying for him to return asked me to forward through the segment after about 5 minutes because she was bored. While it was a great way to interact with the live audience, watching on TV it was just outright strange.


----------



## hazuki

Tony316 said:


> No. In two hours, there might be 5 minutes of the show that's worth watching.


I think the main event/uppercard scene is defiantly interesting.
The Miz/R Truth feud
CM Punk/John Laurninitis (spelling?)/others feud 
Kane/Cena storyline..

That can be one whole interesting hour..


----------



## Rock316AE

Orton did it for most of 2009, and even in 2010. Henry is a heel. and Show is always in the main slot, there's a reason why, even Meltzer said a few months ago after NOC, big guys draw people to TV, Bryan is not the main character on the show so he's irrelevant anyway, belt or not. Orton, Henry, Show, even Barrett are all more important than him, that's why they're keeping Henry on TV even if he's not wrestling. Punk needs to pray that Henry and Orton are going to RAW in the draft, if not, he would be irrelevant even on the B show like his indy friend, but fortunately for him, Vince needs Orton and Henry on RAW.


----------



## Carcass

I can't wait for DB to get drafted to RAW, and outdraw Orton's numbers like he's doing on SD. Henry and DB are lucky though, SD was on it's way to getting cancelled with the numbers Orton was pulling in as champ.


----------



## AoM93

I don't understand why some people here think that ratings means that the product is bad or good.I prefer Raw hell more than last year despite the fall of the ratings...Last year you had The WWE champion feuding with an announcer while now we have Cm Punk in a fued with an amazing wrestler like Dolph Ziggler and Chris Jericho is back


----------



## Brye

Rock316AE said:


> Orton did it for most of 2009, and even in 2010. Henry is a heel. and Show is always in the main slot, there's a reason why, even Meltzer said a few months ago after NOC, big guys draw people to TV, Bryan is not the main character on the show so he's irrelevant anyway, belt or not. Orton, Henry, Show, even Barrett are all more important than him, that's why they're keeping Henry on TV even if he's not wrestling. Punk needs to pray that Henry and Orton are going to RAW in the draft, if not, he would be irrelevant even on the B show like his indy friend, but fortunately for him, Vince needs Orton and Henry on RAW.


I'm convinced if we saw Big Daddy V/Mason Ryan in a 30 minute iron man match and it drew a 4.2, you'd enjoy it.


----------



## 127.127

Brye said:


> I'm convinced if we saw Big Daddy V/Mason Ryan in a 30 minute iron man match and it drew a 4.2, you'd enjoy it.


Dude you need to stop abusing your authority. 


WTF is this?


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Rock316AE said:


> Orton did it for most of 2009, and even in 2010. Henry is a heel. and Show is always in the main slot, there's a reason why, even Meltzer said a few months ago after NOC, big guys draw people to TV, Bryan is not the main character on the show so he's irrelevant anyway, belt or not. Orton, Henry, Show, even Barrett are all more important than him, that's why they're keeping Henry on TV even if he's not wrestling. Punk needs to pray that Henry and Orton are going to RAW in the draft, if not, he would be irrelevant even on the B show like his indy friend, but fortunately for him, Vince needs Orton and Henry on RAW.


Meltzer, unlike you I dont take every word he says as gospel, this is the same guy who has been predicting since 2003 that every year is Undertakers last.

It seems you are an Orton fan, so is he irrevelant because he is on the B show, and according to your logic people who cant draw go the SD so does that mean Vince knows Ortons incredible lack of drawing ability, which goes against your argument that Ortons IZ A STR!

Mark Henry's a heel, so is Miz but his shirt is in the top ten selling list, surely Mark Henry being the biggest draw of 2011 means he should be in there? and Big Show is in the main slot so he draws? Punks always in the main slot all the time and yet his drawing ability while in matches is alot to be desired. You are a moron, you logic makes no sense and you have the archaic wrestling mindset of the nineties on what factors dertirmine a star


----------



## Rock316AE

Brye said:


> I'm convinced if we saw Big Daddy V/Mason Ryan in a 30 minute iron man match and it drew a 4.2, you'd enjoy it.


Probably not unless they put on a miracle or something, BUT, if that happens and then they push Viscera and Ryan? I will not have a problem with that at all. I don't know why you thinks that I only enjoy watching someone who can draw, Henry is the best character in the company for months now IMO, and I don't like Punk or Bryan not because they can't draw shit...


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Slick Rock316AE ignoring my post.


----------



## 127.127

Tyrion Lannister said:


> Orton is worse, all things considering.
> 
> I guess we're just ignoring the fact that no one on this planet cares about Punk's competition. Nobody likes Del Rio and Ziggler. *Nobody*. I like Del Rio and I don't even like Del Rio, that's how unover he is, and Ziggler has no charisma at all, and less presence than Colin Delaney and Spike Dudley put together. Miz is a joke too, nobody takes him seriously at all (which is a shame, but it's at least understandable given his look). Not to mention, he had his momentum completely killed by Triple H's storyline, and by Kevin Nash, who he never got revenge on for Jackknifing him 40000 times, undermining his credibility. Not to mention, people are still trying to get over the fact that Punk was a jobber for 5 years, it takes time to get over a thing like that. Hell, Punk has been in the main event for 6 months, and he STILL lost about 4 PPV's in a row. Way to get people to care, job out the guy on the hot streak. Great business.
> 
> Orton gets protected like nobody else in the history of wrestling. He worked with Triple H and Cena as his competition constantly, he fought Taker at WrestleMania, he gets to do things nobody else would ever get away with like creepily kissing Vince's own fucking daughter after he DDT's her and saying that Eddie Guerrero is in Hell 4 months after he dies. He's a 9 time world champion, he's never been put into any situation that makes him look bad, and this has been going on since he got here. He's an inexcusably bad draw. Punk would be bigger than Hulk Hogan if you invested the time into him that they've put into Orton. (Not really, but he'd have the ratings on his side, at least)


Jobber for 5 years? WTF are you talking about? He was involved in Main event feuds with the likes of Jeff hardy, Undertaker, Edge on SD. Two time MITB winner, three time world champion, ECW champion. Not to mention WM feud with Orton & Summer of Punk angle with cena & HHH on raw. How can you even say punk was a jobber for 5 years?

He was jobbing the early part of 2011 only because he refused to Re-sign with WWE. He was leaving so obviously they had orton go over punk. 

Too much excuses.


----------



## 127.127

Orton was never a draw. 2009 ratings was all Triple h & Wrestlemania.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

2009 that storyline drew itself. It could've been HHH and Punk there, Orton and Miz, HHH and Miz, Punk and Orton... well, you get the idea. It would've drawn really well if it was executed as well as it was. I'm not going to join in and say Orton isn't a draw, but find me a time where he drew well and it wasn't because of a hot storyline.


----------



## Rock316AE

jblvdx said:


> Slick Rock316AE ignoring my post.


I already said everything based on facts, to ignore facts like the date of Henry's shirt and things like that and to bark like a kid? that's it for me.


----------



## Azuran

rkomarkorton said:


> This sticky thread is a way to take the attention away from punk since he isnt a draw and will never be
> 
> My question is why wasnt this made when Orton or Cena was champ? There were countless threads on this forum "Orton cant draw, Orton doesnt bring in ratings, Take the title off Orton" but no no lets make it a sticky thread since our god is champ and members rarely take the time out to read them so in the end punk will look good. SMH.


So true. The mods in this site are biased as hell.


----------



## 127.127

Obis said:


> 2009 that storyline drew itself. It could've been HHH and Punk there, *Orton and Miz*, HHH and Miz, *Punk and Orton*... well, you get the idea. It would've drawn really well if it was excuted as well as it was. I'm not going to join in and say Orton isn't a draw, but find me a time where he drew well and it wasn't because of a hot storyline.


fpalmfpalm

WTF are you smoking? lol 

There is a reason WWE has certain stars in the main event.


----------



## Rock316AE

127.127 said:


> Orton was never a draw. 2009 ratings was all Triple h & Wrestlemania.


Wrong, Orton/Vince/Shane drew big numbers long before HHH was involved, in fact, if I remember correctly, the highest number of the feud was the big overrun Orton/Vince segment in Chicago(or whatever it was).


----------



## A-C-P

Tyrion Lannister said:


> Orton is worse, all things considering.
> 
> I guess we're just ignoring the fact that no one on this planet cares about Punk's competition. Nobody likes Del Rio and Ziggler. *Nobody*. I like Del Rio and I don't even like Del Rio, that's how unover he is, and Ziggler has no charisma at all, and less presence than Colin Delaney and Spike Dudley put together. Miz is a joke too, nobody takes him seriously at all (which is a shame, but it's at least understandable given his look). Not to mention, he had his momentum completely killed by Triple H's storyline, and by Kevin Nash, who he never got revenge on for Jackknifing him 40000 times, undermining his credibility. Not to mention, people are still trying to get over the fact that Punk was a jobber for 5 years, it takes time to get over a thing like that. Hell, Punk has been in the main event for 6 months, and he STILL lost about 4 PPV's in a row. Way to get people to care, job out the guy on the hot streak. Great business.
> 
> Orton gets protected like nobody else in the history of wrestling. He worked with Triple H and Cena as his competition constantly, he fought Taker at WrestleMania, he gets to do things nobody else would ever get away with like creepily kissing Vince's own fucking daughter after he DDT's her and saying that Eddie Guerrero is in Hell 4 months after he dies. He's a 9 time world champion, he's never been put into any situation that makes him look bad, and this has been going on since he got here. He's an inexcusably bad draw. Punk would be bigger than Hulk Hogan if you invested the time into him that they've put into Orton. (Not really, but he'd have the ratings on his side, at least)


I know you are usually a little over-the-top in your "love" for Punk at times (in this post to calling him a jobber for 5 years is a bit of a stretch, but after his fued with Hardy he was booked very weak during his time as a heel)and I don't share the same opinions you do on Orton. But this is an exellent post and I hope Punk haters actually read it and don't just chalk it up to just a Punk Mark's stupid post. (Y) Great Post, repped.


----------



## 127.127

Rock316AE said:


> Wrong, Orton/Vince/Shane drew big numbers long before HHH was involved, in fact, if I remember correctly, the highest number of the feud was the big overrun Orton/Vince segment in Chicago(or whatever it was).


Fuck no. HHH was major part of the feud. 

This is like crediting austin/JBl/cole for the 4.6 rating their segment drew last year. Everyone knows the real reason was Wrestlemania & the rock returning.


----------



## Starbuck

Rock316AE said:


> Wrong, Orton/Vince/Shane drew big numbers long before HHH was involved, in fact, if I remember correctly, the highest number of the feud was the big overrun Orton/Vince segment in Chicago(or whatever it was).


I'm going to pull a you and hit you with some numbers lol. 

The Raw before the Rumble where Orton punted Vince drew a 3.87 and the Raw after a 3.6. The next two weeks got 3.59 and 3.42. The Feb 16th show where HHH got involved got a 4.1 and so did the next week. Then things stayed between 3.6 and 3.8 for the rest of the time until Mania. Don't have anything on any of the overruns but I'm pretty sure all the big segments (Orton punting Vince, HHH coming out, Orton handcuffing HHH and kissing Steph) drew big numbers iirc. That Orton/McMahons/HHH program did really good business for them it seems and was a _hot_ feud.


----------



## ywall2breakerj

Fucking ratings got their fucking sticky thread...


----------



## holycityzoo

Which wrestler's segment got the highest rating this week?? I need to know who my new favorite wrestler is....


----------



## Starbuck

holycityzoo said:


> Which wrestler's segment got the highest rating this week?? I need to know who my new favorite wrestler is....


John Cena most likely lol.


----------



## Rock316AE

Starbuck said:


> I'm going to pull a you and hit you with some numbers lol.
> 
> The Raw before the Rumble where Orton punted Vince drew a 3.87 and the Raw after a 3.6. The next two weeks got 3.59 and 3.42. The Feb 16th show where HHH got involved got a 4.1 and so did the next week. Then things stayed between 3.6 and 3.8 for the rest of the time until Mania. Don't have anything on any of the overruns but I'm pretty sure all the big segments (Orton punting Vince, HHH coming out, Orton handcuffing HHH and kissing Steph) drew big numbers iirc. That Orton/McMahons/HHH program did really good business for them it seems and was a _hot_ feud.


No problem man, I said it just from my memory, because this guy said it like Orton wasn't a factor when in fact, he was the main factor, with Vince, Shane and HHH. If I'm not mistaken, Orton/Vince did a huge number, HHH/Orton was hot in the start of the feud but then went down every week, again, If I remember correctly, the HHH/Steph/Orton did a terrible overrun number. I will try to find the overrun numbers(Orton/HHH was mostly in the main segment)


----------



## Starbuck

Rock316AE said:


> No problem man, I said it just from my memory, because this guy said it like Orton wasn't a factor when in fact, he was the main factor, with Vince, Shane and HHH. If I'm not mistaken, Orton/Vince did a huge number, HHH/Orton was hot in the start of the feud but then went down every week, again, If I remember correctly, the HHH/Steph/Orton did a terrible overrun number. I will try to find the overrun numbers(Orton/HHH was mostly in the main segment)


You don't have to find the overruns lol. Program was a hot one, nuff said.


----------



## Brye

While on the subject of Orton/Trips, I've gotta ask, what the fuck were they thinking with that three stages of hell match? :lmao

The heat from their feud was virtually dead at that point and it was such a poorly booked match.


----------



## Starbuck

That seemed to be during their fucked up mentality of letting them beat the shit out of each other at every opportunity except the one that everybody paid for and was expecting to see. **cough** Mania 25 **cough**


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> I'm going to pull a you and hit you with some numbers lol.
> 
> The Raw before the Rumble where Orton punted Vince drew a 3.87 and the Raw after a 3.6. The next two weeks got 3.59 and 3.42. The Feb 16th show where HHH got involved got a 4.1 and so did the next week. Then things stayed between 3.6 and 3.8 for the rest of the time until Mania. Don't have anything on any of the overruns but I'm pretty sure all the big segments (Orton punting Vince, HHH coming out, Orton handcuffing HHH and kissing Steph) drew big numbers iirc. *That Orton/McMahons/HHH program did really good business for them it seems and was a hot feud.*


This, and the bold part is the meat of it. It did really well because it was a "hot" angle. It was interesting, it had the McMahons (and those always draw well), it had HHH (who's a draw himself), and then it had Orton, who was the sun to all the planets (people) in the solar system (angle). But that angle didn't draw well because of Orton necessarily, but it was great booking, interesting stuff happening, and all the draws that were around him. 

Like I said, I'm not saying Orton isn't a draw, but using that angle isn't the best indicator of him being a draw. There were so many other factors to it outside of Orton himself.

Edit: That 3SOH match was just... ugh. There were so many things wrong with it. Orton came out looking so weak, even though he retained the WWE Title. The match itself was just trash from what I remember, and yeah, the fact they waited until then to let them beat the shit out of eachother when that should've been at Mania was just stupidity at it's finest.


----------



## Brye

Starbuck said:


> That seemed to be during their fucked up mentality of letting them beat the shit out of each other at every opportunity except the one that everybody paid for and was expecting to see. **cough** Mania 25 **cough**


God I know, it was just horrible execution of the feud. At least we got to see that LMS on Raw that summer though. (Y)


----------



## A-C-P

Brye said:


> God I know, it was just horrible execution of the feud. At least we got to see that LMS on Raw that summer though. (Y)


Thats was a great match (if it was the one that was on the Raw from Green Bay where Trump "bought" Raw you are talking about)

I was sitting in the first row at that show right in front of where that cameraman (legit) got his face bashed in by a ladder shot from Orton. One of the coolest (felt bad for the camera guy though) things I've ever seen at a live WWE event. Plus they actually did give everyone in the arena refunds for their tickets like Trump promised on the show.

Sorry for the sidetrack there, post just brought back good memories.

Back on topic (sorta) I agree that was a great fued and a hot angle for the WWE but, like Obis said, there was WAY more to than angle being such a "draw" other than Orton was involved in it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Orton/HHH should've just made all their matches LMS... that seems to be the only match they can do a great job in.


----------



## Starbuck

^^^^^ Snap :lmao.



Brye said:


> God I know, it was just horrible execution of the feud. At least we got to see that LMS on Raw that summer though. (Y)


They should always just have LMS matches together as they always have really good ones lol. Any other time they have a match they suck.


----------



## Brye

Obis said:


> Orton/HHH should've just made all their matches LMS... that seems to be the only match they can do a great job in.





Starbuck said:


> ^^^^^ Snap :lmao.
> 
> 
> 
> They should always just have LMS matches together as they always have really good ones lol. Any other time they have a match they suck.


:lmao

I completely agree with that though. Their chemistry is just off outside of them.


----------



## Starbuck

My favorite part of the 07 LMS is JR's commentary at the end though. Makes me :lmao.


----------



## Rock316AE

About the Orton/Vince/Shane/HHH feud, the highest rated segments were the Orton/Vince punt segment in Chicago, the Orton(Legacy)/HHH brawl backstage to the parking lot and Orton/Shane match with a punt angle on Shane after the match. HHH/Steph/Orton wasn't good for some reason:


> In the segment-by-segment, they opened strong at 3.53 for the Jericho/Flair angle. It is very rare that the first segment
> does better than the show average. It was a strategic mistake because in their wanting the angle early, they sacrificed
> audience that came to see Flair that may have tuned out at that point. Case in point, Jeff Hardy vs. Ziggler lost 401,000
> viewers, and that almost never happens that early in the show. The eight-man tag with the Money in the Bank guys lost
> 104,000 viewers. Actually, that doesn’t surprise me because the build to that match has been less than stellar. Stuff with
> Cena, Edge, Show and Vickie in the wheelchair gained 193,000 viewers. Edge vs. Show gained 400,000 viewers.
> Mysterio vs. Regal gained 208,000 viewers in a segment that usually drops. Marella vs Mickie James lost 297,000
> viewers. HHH vs. Orton & DiBiase gained 208,000 viewers. An amazing stat is the conclusion of the beatdown in the hot
> angle actually saw people turn off the show. I never would have expected this, and keep in mind the overrun is going to
> get a natural benefit from the people tuning in to see the next show, plus the Raw audience that tunes out that knows the
> show’s climax is the big point. That’s why the overrun always goes up. But they lost 89,000 viewers during the heat spot
> of that angle. Now, that doesn’t mean the angle wasn’t good, because I think it was effective as hell, but when it came to
> casual viewers, it did turn more people off than on. When it comes to potential buyers, I’m thinking the opposite would
> have been the reaction, but that can’t be proven.


But yeah, it was a hot program, the best feud of 2009 by far.


----------



## Ray

I didn't watch back then, but by watching all of the promo's lately, it seemed like a REALLY well built up and damn good feud. Too bad their match at Mania was a bit underwhelming. But those two do have good matches on occasion.

The only thing I can't figure out is why WrestleMania didn't break 1 Million buys despite all that great buildup....


----------



## Starbuck

Rock316AE said:


> About the Orton/Vince/Shane/HHH feud, the highest rated segments were the Orton/Vince punt segment in Chicago, the Orton(Legacy)/HHH brawl backstage to the parking lot and Orton/Shane match with a punt angle on Shane after the match. HHH/Steph/Orton wasn't good for some reason:
> 
> 
> But yeah, it was a hot program, the best feud of 2009 by far.


Was HHH vs. Orton/DiBiase when the handcuffing etc happened? If so then that's a bit odd. Really don't know why people would have tuned out at that point tbh. It is what it is though.


----------



## Rock316AE

Starbuck said:


> Was HHH vs. Orton/DiBiase when the handcuffing etc happened? If so then that's a bit odd. Really don't know why people would have tuned out at that point tbh. It is what it is though.


Yes, 



> HANDICAP NON (WWE) TITLE MATCH
> WWE champion Triple H vs. Randy Orton & Ted DiBiase Jr. ended in a No Contest: Randy Orton & Ted DiBiase double-teamed Triple H briefly. H went to get his sledge-hammer, but Cody Rhodes popped out from under the ring and made it a 3-on-1 assault. All three members of Legacy hand-cuffed Triple H to the top rope and continued to destroy him! Randy Orton grabbed the microphone and said there was only one person who could save Triple H now. Orton grabbed a sledge-hammer from under the ring, and threatened to bash HHH’s head in. Stephanie McMahon ran down with a frantic look on her face (not winning any Oscars). Stephanie begged Orton to “please don’t do it, Randy!” Stephanie was looking hot in jeans and t-shirt though. Orton looked at Stephanie, and she realized she was surrounded by Legacy. Orton pulled Stephanie into the ring with her ankles on the second rope and drove her head-first into the mat! Triple H stood there hand-cuffed to the ropes unable to save his wife, who was literally inches away from him. Orton rolled Stephanie on her back and pushed her further away from Triple H. Orton threatened to pound Stephanie’s head with the sledge-hammer. Orton got down on his knees and started kissing Stephanie, sending HHH into a fit of rage. Orton crawled over so that his face with an inch out of HHH’s reach to taunt him. Both men got to their feet as HHH reached out but could not make contact with the man he hates with a passion. Orton held up the sledge-hammer and suddenly bashed HHH in the jaw with it!!! Orton then surveyed the damage he caused in the ring, before retreating with a demonic look of satisfaction on his face!


Why? I don't know...


----------



## Starbuck

Rock316AE said:


> Yes,
> 
> 
> 
> Why? I don't know...


Maybe they just figured it was going to be a normal match or something else was on TV or whatever. I don't know. Just seems a bit random all things considered.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Rock316AE said:


> and about Jericho, they put him on a random time slot for some reason, stupid move after all the hype.


:lmao Didn't you predict like a 3.7 for his segment, and it being showed during halftime should've helped him out a good amount. If he lost viewers, that's bad. This is why nobody takes you seriously, you have poor biased excuses.

On the topic of Haitch/Orton, damn that was a good feud. I remember being so hyped for it and then being so disappointed in that shitty ass match at Wrestlemania.


----------



## Snothlisberger

I love this crusade against Punk and the ratings is like their kryptonite/Excalibur/WMD/Kool-Aid. Rock316AE is like the cult leader and then he has all these mindless followers. 

Rocke316AE, the fearless leader, and all his drones should be happy about the sticky thread, now they can collaborate their efforts to remove Punk, whom they view as an imperialistic, oppressive dictator.

Brye, commander, must rally his troops and hold off the onslaught. Seriously though, it reads like this and its hilarious. This should be a book.

I look forward to your continual assault, while Punk just doesn't give a shit and takes his WWE Title all the way to WM. Aka deal with it, he's staying Champion.

I'm stilling trying to come up with a name for this cult...Ideas?


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

That HHH V Orton match at WM was the most dissapointing match I have ever seen.

Oh that response you gave me Rock316whateverthefuckever screamed hypocrisy and wasnt an awnswer to any of my questions.


----------



## Carcass

WallofShame said:


> I love this crusade against Punk and the ratings is like their kryptonite/Excalibur/WMD/Kool-Aid. Rock316AE is like the cult leader and then he has all these mindless followers.
> 
> Rocke316AE, the fearless leader, and all his drones should be happy about the sticky thread, now they can collaborate their efforts to remove Punk, whom they view as an imperialistic, oppressive dictator.
> 
> Brye, commander, must rally his troops and hold off the onslaught. Seriously though, it reads like this and its hilarious. This should be a book.
> 
> I look forward to your continual assault, while Punk just doesn't give a shit and takes his WWE Title all the way to WM. Aka deal with it, he's staying Champion.
> 
> I'm stilling trying to come up with a name for this cult...Ideas?


I wonder if he's gonna force all his underlings to shave their heads, while he grows a beard and starts looking like Jesus.


----------



## Coffey

Carcass said:


> I wonder if he's gonna force all his underlings to shave their heads, while he grows a beard and starts looking like Jesus.


I always took it as Charles Manson, not Jesus.


----------



## Starbuck

WallofShame said:


> I love this crusade against Punk and the ratings is like their kryptonite/Excalibur/WMD/Kool-Aid. Rock316AE is like the cult leader and then he has all these mindless followers.
> 
> Rocke316AE, the fearless leader, and all his drones should be happy about the sticky thread, now they can collaborate their efforts to remove Punk, whom they view as an imperialistic, oppressive dictator.
> 
> Brye, commander, must rally his troops and hold off the onslaught. Seriously though, it reads like this and its hilarious. This should be a book.
> 
> I look forward to your continual assault, while Punk just doesn't give a shit and takes his WWE Title all the way to WM. Aka deal with it, he's staying Champion.
> 
> I'm stilling trying to come up with a name for this cult...Ideas?


How about we call them...one half of the problem? How's that? Because let me tell you, if it weren't for the extremists on the other side acting like Punk's shit don't stink, I don't think things would be so bad. Both sides are as bad as each other tbh.


----------



## kokepepsi

Saw it mentioned before
But here again are some Meltzer notes on THIS WEEKS(1/2/12) quarter ratings from the observer radio.



> Jericho segment lost viewers.
> No more than usual they would lose at that segment.
> About 80k viewers down.
> 
> First quarter with Cena was the highest rated quarter. Never good when the highest rated quarter is the first one.
> 
> Punk/Ziggler match did not do what it should have done, it gained viewers, but it should gain 500k, they gained close to 200k.
> 
> Punk does not move the ratings.


----------



## Snothlisberger

Starbuck said:


> How about we call them...one half of the problem? How's that? Because let me tell you, if it weren't for the extremists on the other side acting like Punk's shit don't stink, I don't think things would be so bad. Both sides are as bad as each other tbh.


Well that's not very creative at all. But thanks for telling me 

I just enjoy the Soap Opera. I've learned better


----------



## Rock316AE

I don't know why the hell they put the "it begins" segment on a random time slot after all the hype, what's the point...Punk/Ziggler did terrible for the top of the hour as usual with gain of 150k-180k, so why they don't put this on the segment before the main event? stupid booking, it's like they don't care about their own special angle.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

holycityzoo said:


> Which wrestler's segment got the highest rating this week?? I need to know who my new favorite wrestler is....


:lmao repped


----------



## Starbuck

The shouldn't have blown up the ring and then Jericho could have gone on last lol. I'm sure the It Begins reveal would done better in that slot than the one it was in.


----------



## Snothlisberger

Carcass said:


> I wonder if he's gonna force all his underlings to shave their heads, while he grows a beard and starts looking like Jesus.


I love your posts. I do this a lot when reading them:


----------



## NJ88

Have no idea why anyone even cares about the ratings. Do we work for the WWE? Do the ratings really effect us financially in any ways? No. I praise things I enjoy to watch no matter how well they rate on television, and I'll critisise what I dont like even if they rate highest on the show. It's not really my issue.

I dont think anyone in the WWE is a ratings killer, and I dont think anyone in the WWE increases ratings as an individual.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Rock316AE said:


> I don't know why the hell they put the "it begins" segment on a random time slot after all the hype, what's the point...Punk/Ziggler did terrible for the top of the hour as usual with gain of 150k-180k, so why they don't put this on the segment before the main event? stupid booking, it's like they don't care about their own special angle.


Shit, how come Punk and Ziggler last week in the same segment slot as the Jericho slot drew viewers unlike Jericho who lost veiwers?


----------



## Rock316AE

jblvdx said:


> Shit, how come Punk and Ziggler last week in the same segment slot as the Jericho slot drew viewers unlike Jericho who lost veiwers?





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


LOL, He lost 367k and gained 172k(probably viewers who wanted to check if he's still on TV), so he lost 195k overall.

Dave Meltzer:


> Punk does not move the ratings.


----------



## kokepepsi

Nevermind Rock316ae beat me too it.


----------



## A-C-P

Rock316AE said:


> LOL, He lost 367k and gained 172k(probably viewers who wanted to check if he's still on TV), so he lost 195k overall.


I think that says alot more about Swagger and Ziggler than Punk, but you go on beleiving whatever you want cause I really could not care any less about who "moves ratings".



Rock316AE said:


> Dave Meltzer:


Is a tool


Sorry just had to point out those 2 things, carry on with the Mark War.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Rock316AE said:


> I don't know why the hell they put the "it begins" segment on a random time slot after all the hype, what's the point...Punk/Ziggler did terrible for the top of the hour as usual with gain of 150k-180k, so why they don't put this on the segment before the main event? stupid booking, it's like they don't care about their own special angle.


You still haven't responded to my post where you clearly made yourself out to be completely biased. Punk/Ziggler gained 200k, while one of your beloved Attitude Gawds returning lost viewers. I don't care if it's in a random time slot, it LOST viewers. And you predicted a 3.7 or whatever, so don't give me that "it was bound to happen"

Let's say these Itbegins videos were for Punk returning. I would guess your response be something like:

"Stupid ugly unhygienic indy scumfuck, he lost 80k viewers after being gone for so long. Clearly nobody wants to see this asshole. And the football game was at halftime, so there was no reason for him to lose viewers. Blahblahblah where's Rocky."


----------



## kokepepsi

lol at jericho ever being a draw except on dancing with the stars


----------



## Rock316AE

I thought maybe the halftime had an impact, clearly wasn't the case, not during or before halftime...I predicted a 3.2 overall and 3.7 for the specific segment before RAW, I thought they are not THAT stupid to put this segment on a random time slot after all the hype. I was wrong.


----------



## D.M.N.

Regarding, Punk, in my opinion, people (ie - casuals) cared about him from late June to August when he was rebellious and basically "didn't give a crap". Since he dropped the title and re won it, casuals don't care. Punk is just another wrestler to them now, his character since them has changed. Another example of WWE going off someone temporarily by putting him in a feud with Kevin Nash of all people. Once they moved him from Cena to Nash, momentum went flying off the tracks.


----------



## Azuran

Dave Meltzer said:


> Punk does not move the ratings.





Dave Meltzer said:


> Punk does not move the ratings.





Dave Meltzer said:


> Punk does not move the ratings.


Since Meltzer's word is the gospel around here, I guess CM Punk not being a draw is finally a fact. Better close this topic because there's no point in debating anymore. The CM Punk marks are obviously in the wrong here.


----------



## Brye

Close the ratings threads? Sounds good to me.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

^nah they are funny


----------



## kokepepsi

I think azuran is confused and thinks this is the "punk can't draw" thread

Is this why all the punk marks are butt hurt about ratings?

LOL


----------



## Brye

kokepepsi said:


> I think azuran is confused and thinks this is the "punk can't draw" thread
> 
> Is this why all the punk marks are butt hurt about ratings?
> 
> LOL




No idea if that was directed at me but if there's anything I'm 'butthurt' about, it's that reading the numbers is apparently more important than watching the show these days. Just saddens me. Punk could draw a .01 in the 8th quarter on a week where every other TV station is off air and if I enjoyed it, I wouldn't give a fuck.


----------



## Azuran

kokepepsi said:


> I think azuran is confused and thinks this is the "punk can't draw" thread
> 
> Is this why all the punk marks are butt hurt about ratings?
> 
> LOL


Who says I'm confused? The only reason this topic was stickied was because Punk wasn't a draw and the mods didn't want anyone to see the truth with their own eyes. They basically turned this thread into that when they created this sticky.


----------



## Brye

Azuran said:


> Who says I'm confused? The only reason this topic was stickied was because Punk wasn't a draw and the mods didn't want anyone to see the truth with their own eyes. They basically turned this thread into that when they created this stickied.


That's where you got it all wrong brah. Don't talk about stuff you don't know.

Stickied this so we don't get 30 "-___ is a draw" "____ isn't a draw" "_____ only drew _____ this week, he should be fired" threads that were all over the place. It's mindless discussion that always leads to heated arguments and now instead of having them everywhere, it's compressed into one thread so that there's more room to discuss actual wrestling.


----------



## hazuki

Nobody cares for Jack Swagger right now. Of course they are going to change the channel. You failed to mention he gained some of the audience back which is good. seriously guys, do you care this much about the ratings?


----------



## Starbuck

Brye said:


> That's where you got it all wrong brah. Don't talk about stuff you don't know.
> 
> Stickied this so we don't get 30 "-___ is a draw" "____ isn't a draw" "_____ only drew _____ this week, he should be fired" threads that were all over the place. It's mindless discussion that always leads to heated arguments and now instead of having them everywhere, it's compressed into one thread *so that there's more room to discuss actual wrestling*.


He says in vain lol. This isn't going to stop those same people making their threads when they get the info from somewhere else and don't see the thread on one of the first few pages. In the same way that we always get a "Who is the GOAT?" or "What is the greatest match of all time?" or whatever else it is, people are always going to make the threads. Why don't we just have a general sticky thread for those topics too because they get posted practically everyday? While we're on it and since they also creep up all the time, why not have a general Cena heel turn discussion thread to stop 10 separate ones being made every week as well? I really don't see the need for a ratings sticky thread because the reasoning behind it can apply to everything tbh. Now we're going to be stuck with one big jumbled mess.


----------



## GillbergReturns

Jericho's return lost viewers. The question is did it draw bad from the start (not necessarily on him) or did people turn it off because he did absolutely nothing (obviously his fault).

I really think WWE is playing with fire with Jericho's new character. It's not entertaining. It's a type of comedy where everyone walks out and that's the punch line.


----------



## Azuran

Brye said:


> That's where you got it all wrong brah. Don't talk about stuff you don't know.
> 
> Stickied this so we don't get 30 "-___ is a draw" "____ isn't a draw" "_____ only drew _____ this week, he should be fired" threads that were all over the place.


Yeah right. 

We've always had those types of threads for years, and you guys never did anything about them. But now, since Punk has been proven to not be a draw, you guys probably couldn't take it anymore, and had to create this sticky to divert all the negative attention from him.

Seriously, we're not dumb. We can see what's actually going on.


----------



## Mister Hands

Starbuck said:


> He says in vain lol. This isn't going to stop those same people making their threads when they get the info from somewhere else and don't see the thread on one of the first few pages. In the same way that we always get a "Who is the GOAT?" or "What is the greatest match of all time?" or whatever else it is, people are always going to make the threads. Why don't we just have a general sticky thread for those topics too because they get posted practically everyday? While we're on it and since they also creep up all the time, why not have a general Cena heel turn discussion thread to stop 10 separate ones being made every week as well? I really don't see the need for a ratings sticky thread because the reasoning behind it can apply to everything tbh. Now we're going to be stuck with one big jumbled mess.


I think we just need a weekly stickied ratings thread. It'd be cleaner than a bunch of ratings threads, and also cleaner than trying to find the delineation between weeks in a single thread.


----------



## Rock316AE

Azuran said:


> Yeah right.
> 
> We've always had those types of threads for years, and you guys never did anything about them. But now, since Punk has been proven to not be a draw, you guys probably couldn't take it anymore, and had to create this sticky to divert all the negative attention from him.
> 
> Seriously, we're not dumb. We can see what's actually going on.


This guy told the truth about this thread:


> For the record, I don't think the ratings threads should be stickied. It's like having one big thread for Raw every week and is just going to mess everything up. Also, why people think this is the first time bitch fights have erupted over ratings is beyond me. They happen all the time and have happened in the past to this extreme, *usually when somebody the IWC likes or dislikes draws or loses viewers yet somehow those threads didn't get stickied. Don't see why this should be any different tbh and it does whiff of the fact that it involves Punk and some of the mods are Punk marks.* Pretty sure if these shitstorms were erupting about somebody else, see Orton in 2010 for example, that there would be no sticky thread.


7:35


----------



## Brye

Azuran said:


> Yeah right.
> 
> We've always had those types of threads for years, and you guys never did anything about them. But now, since Punk has been proven to not be a draw, you guys probably couldn't take it anymore, and had to create this sticky to divert all the negative attention from him.
> 
> Seriously, we're not dumb. We can see what's actually going on.


What you're saying is you think there's a CONSPIRACY?

And lol at "not being able to take it anymore" when I've explained in post after post that I couldn't give a fuck who gets what rating and I'm not one of those people that looks at the ratings and thinks I know how to run a company by doing so. I personally don't give a fuck. I saw the section cluttered, I made a decision, simple as that.

Feel free to lose as much as sleep as you want over this but there is no CONSPIRACY. Is there a bit of bias because I don't care for the ratings? Of course. Who the fuck isn't biased towards something these days, especially coming from some of the names in this thread.


----------



## holycityzoo

GillbergReturns said:


> Jericho's return lost viewers. The question is did it draw bad from the start (not necessarily on him) or did people turn it off because he did absolutely nothing (obviously his fault).
> 
> *I really think WWE is playing with fire with Jericho's new character. It's not entertaining. It's a type of comedy where everyone walks out and that's the punch line.*


*
*

I agree with you here, but for me, that's my favorite type of comedy. I love Andy Kaufman's skits where basically the whole joke, if you can call it that, was just pissing off the audience and making them feel awkward. I think that's where Jericho is going with this new character. He wants to annoy you and is that good business? Honestly, probably not. I mean, Andy Kaufman drew with it (sold out shows and got good ratings) but he also got A LOT of heat from directors, producers, and network heads to the point where they didn't want him on television because of how annoyed and pissed off everyone was at his actions.

But I really don't care if this Jericho character draws or sells merch or anything, I'm just really excited to see him make a run with it because it's entertaining as hell to me.


----------



## Ketamine

LOL @ CONSPIRACY POSTS. LMAO


----------



## RandomRage

This sticky has been a great read!


----------



## Starbuck

Mister Hands said:


> I think we just need a weekly stickied ratings thread. It'd be cleaner than a bunch of ratings threads, and also cleaner than trying to find the delineation between weeks in a single thread.


Agreed.



Ketamine said:


> LOL @ CONSPIRACY POSTS. LMAO


There are no lil jimmies in here I'm telling you. Everybody thinks they know DA TROOF. See what I did there? 8*D


----------



## Ketamine

Starbuck said:


> Agreed.
> 
> 
> 
> There are no lil jimmies in here I'm telling you. Everybody thinks they know DA TROOF. See what I did there? 8*D


Funny. Rep.


----------



## kokepepsi

We had a weekly thread, except it wasn't sticky.


----------



## Fabregas

Brye said:


> That's where you got it all wrong brah. Don't talk about stuff you don't know.
> 
> Stickied this so we don't get 30 "-___ is a draw" "____ isn't a draw" "_____ only drew _____ this week, he should be fired" threads that were all over the place. It's mindless discussion that always leads to heated arguments and now instead of having them everywhere, it's compressed into one thread so that there's more room to discuss actual wrestling.


Problem is, that won't actually work.

If something major happens in terms of ratings next week like RAW drawing a 4.0 rating, do you really think people won't make a thread about it?

And for the people who keep entering these rating threads making stupid comments like "u guyz care bout rating so much lolz!!"; Guess what, this is a wrestling forum for discussing things related to wrestling, so people are within their right to talk about whatever the fuck they want, including ratings. If you don't like talking about ratings because your not interested or because your favourite wrestler is a shit draw, stay the fuck out of these threads.


----------



## Brye

Fabregas said:


> Problem is, that won't actually work.
> 
> If something major happens in terms of ratings next week like RAW drawing a 4.0 rating, do you really think people won't make a thread about it?
> 
> And for the people who keep entering these rating threads making stupid comments like "u guyz care bout rating so much lolz!!"; Guess what, this is a wrestling forum for discussing things related to wrestling, so people are within their right to talk about whatever the fuck they want, including ratings. If you don't like talking about ratings because your not interested or because your favourite wrestler is a shit draw, stay the fuck out of these threads.


And then I press the close button.

And my gripe is that wrestling 'fans' have changed to the point where the actual product has come second to the numbers it makes and I just find that ridiculous and I'd love to hear why people care so much. Plus I have to come into these threads anyway.


----------



## Carcass

No longer allowing ratings (not even a sticky) in the TNA section seems to have worked fine, don't see how it's gonna be any different here.


----------



## Ketamine

Brye said:


> And then I press the close button.
> 
> And my gripe is that wrestling 'fans' have changed to the point where the actual product has come second to the numbers it makes and I just find that ridiculous and I'd love to hear why people care so much. Plus I have to come into these threads anyway.


This exactly.


----------



## Crona

I believe the best thing would be to no longer allow ratings threads. People don't discuss ratings in the ratings threads anyways.


----------



## Leechmaster

Holy hell, why have ratings become such a hot topic? I remember not too long ago the only time ratings were mentioned was to make a joke about Mark Henry. 

Honestly, the collective intelligence of this forum continues to wither with these banal discussions.


----------



## HitItLikeABongoDru

I don't really understand why all the people who complain about ratings threads continue to post in them? Surely the best thing for you to do would be simply avoid them, it's not that hard to do. For the most part people do actually discuss the ratings but then you get a swarm of the same people who just come in to point out those who are actually discussing the topic. Those are the ones who are trolling here since they do nothing but derail the discssuion.


----------



## RandomRage

Ketamine said:


> This exactly.


If anything gets banned around here, it needs to be people quoting posts with nothing else to add but "This."


----------



## Fabregas

Brye said:


> And then I press the close button.
> 
> And *my gripe is that wrestling 'fans' have changed to the point where the actual product has come second to the numbers it makes and I just find that ridiculous and I'd love to hear why people care so much*. Plus I have to come into these threads anyway.


Why do you think that is? It's because the product sucks so much these days that some of us actually enjoy discussing ratings more than the actual show. And I'm not joking, I'm being dead serious. In fact I'm willing to bet that most of the people who enjoy the ratings threads are the ones who absolutely hate the current product. The ratings are the only thing we can relate to because it backs up our view that the product is terrible.

For the people who do somehow enjoy the current product, of course you don't care about ratings, why would you? I'm sure if I was a smark during the attitude era I wouldn't have cared about ratings either, because I would of been enjoying the show too much, i'd rather discuss storylines and my favourite wrestlers, and thats exactly what I did back then. So you see, this trend of people talking about ratings isn't a case of them caring more about ratings, its more a case of them NOT caring about the show.


----------



## FITZ

Fabregas said:


> Why do you think that is? It's because the product sucks so much these days that some of us actually enjoy discussing ratings more than the actual show. And I'm not joking, I'm being dead serious. In fact I'm willing to bet that most of the people who enjoy the ratings threads are the ones who absolutely hate the current product. The ratings are the only thing we can relate to because it backs up our view that the product is terrible.
> 
> For the people who do somehow enjoy the current product, of course you don't care about ratings, why would you? I'm sure if I was a smark during the attitude era I wouldn't have cared about ratings either, because I would of been enjoying the show too much, i'd rather discuss storylines and my favourite wrestlers, and thats exactly what I did back then. So you see, this trend of people talking about ratings isn't a case of them caring more about ratings, its more a case of them NOT caring about the show.


So you use the fact that 4 million people watch Raw every week to back up your opinion that the show sucks? Seems kind of counter productive to me.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

hazuki said:


> Nobody cares for Jack Swagger right now. Of course they are going to change the channel. You failed to mention he gained some of the audience back which is good. seriously guys, do you care this much about the ratings?


That's like me saying I am not going to watch a match between Lance Storm vs Rock because I don't like Lance Storm. Are you saying that Ziggles is the reason those viewers came back?


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Seriously close and ban ratings threads. These threads gets filled with spam and just pure smart assery based on dirt sheet reports. How about only allow them when there is a major difference in the ratings. For example RAW has been averaging 2.9 - 3.1 for the past few months. Then when ratings increase significantly like between 3.4 - 4.0 or drop to 2.3 - 2.5 then allow only one thread. Wrestling fans should enjoy the product for what it is and only let WWE officials worry about ratings. It is pointless arguing over ratings that stay consistent IMO.


----------



## Expectnomercy316

*Re: RAW "ItBegins" Viewership (02/01/12) - no boost*



hazuki said:


>


How do you get this??? please help


----------



## Fabregas

TaylorFitz said:


> So you use the fact that 4 million people watch Raw every week to back up your opinion that the show sucks? Seems kind of counter productive to me.


The number is getting lower and lower, thats what supports my opinion.


----------



## Holyier

So jericho's return wasnt a success?


----------



## LastDamnation

"Jericho segment lost viewers.
No more than usual they would lose at that segment.
About 80k viewers down.

First quarter with Cena was the highest rated quarter. Never good when the highest rated quarter is the first one.

Punk/Ziggler match did not do what it should have done, it gained viewers, but it should gain 500k, they gained close to 200k.

Punk does not move the ratings."

This is mainly the WWEs fault - the match was built up as the main event before and during the first half of the show, until the break before the match when it said up next - many people probably expected this match to close the show.


----------



## Holyier

LastDamnation said:


> "Jericho segment lost viewers.
> No more than usual they would lose at that segment.
> About 80k viewers down.
> 
> First quarter with Cena was the highest rated quarter. Never good when the highest rated quarter is the first one.
> 
> Punk/Ziggler match did not do what it should have done, it gained viewers, but it should gain 500k, they gained close to 200k.
> 
> Punk does not move the ratings."
> 
> This is mainly the WWEs fault - the match was built up as the main event before and during the first half of the show, until the break before the match when it said up next - many people probably expected this match to close the show.


No it wasnt built as the main event. Laurinaitis announced The 6 man tag match half way through the show.


----------



## kokepepsi

Chicago Warrior said:


> Seriously close and ban ratings threads. These threads gets filled with spam and just pure smart assery based on dirt sheet reports. How about only allow them when there is a major difference in the ratings. For example RAW has been averaging 2.9 - 3.1 for the past few months. Then when ratings increase significantly like between 3.4 - 4.0 or drop to 2.3 - 2.5 then allow only one thread. Wrestling fans should enjoy the product for what it is and only let WWE officials worry about ratings. It is pointless arguing over ratings that stay consistent IMO.


STOP OPENING THE FUCKING RATINGS THREAD.

Seriously it's like some fucked up atheist that goes to church to bitch about god not existing.


----------



## Rock316AE

Chicago Warrior said:


> *Seriously close and ban ratings threads. These threads gets filled with spam and just pure smart assery based on dirt sheet reports. How about only allow them when there is a major difference in the ratings.* For example RAW has been averaging 2.9 - 3.1 for the past few months. Then when ratings increase significantly like between 3.4 - 4.0 or drop to 2.3 - 2.5 then allow only one thread. Wrestling fans should enjoy the product for what it is and only let WWE officials worry about ratings. It is pointless arguing over ratings that stay consistent IMO.


Who is there with a gun to your head forcing you to read it? seriously, half of this thread with people complaining about this thread, get out if you don't want to read it, and we need a new ratings thread every week to not create a mess in numbers...


----------



## 3ggyz

Why can't most of you guys admit that Jericho's segment sucked? After all the hype his return should have bring in viewers, not lose them!


----------



## holycityzoo

What was the story line behind the Ziggler/Punk match? Oh that's right, there was none. I'm not surprised it didn't gain 500k. I'm tired of wrestlers just wrestling one another for no reason or because someone cost some one a match. Be fucking creative, that's why the ratings don't move. It's not just what talent you have on your roster, it's what you do with that talent that grabs people's attention.


----------



## BrokenWater

No ricardo = no ratings


----------



## Chicago Warrior

kokepepsi said:


> STOP OPENING THE FUCKING RATINGS THREAD.
> 
> Seriously it's like some fucked up atheist that goes to church to bitch about god not existing.


Ratings threads have always been full of spam yes, and believe it or not I do like to discuss ratings but I never take them as seriously as some do here and I have tolerated the spam that constantly goes on for months now since being here but there seems to be a heck of a lot of new members now that spam is just increasing year after year, but it is about time they make one official thread. Makes thing cleaner around here IMO.


----------



## Notmarkingforanyon

BrokenWater said:


> No ricardo = no ratings


Dam right.



3ggyz said:


> Why can't most of you guys admit that Jericho's segment sucked? After all the hype his return should have bring in viewers, not lose them!


Haters gona hate :lmao you just got trolled by the best troll in the world :lmao


----------



## Starbuck

Notmarkingforanyon said:


> Dam right.
> 
> 
> 
> Haters gona hate :lmao you just got trolled by the best troll in the world :lmao


You mean Jericho got counter trolled by everybody tuning out during his trolling lol.


----------



## peejay

You guys worry about the ratings even more than the WWE does


----------



## deadmanwatching

Azuran said:


> So true. The mods in this site are biased as hell.


Also Admins It's a Conspiracy.


----------



## GR Choke

so the WWE is broadcasted in over 100 countries and only gets 4m viewers?


----------



## #1Peep4ever

GR Choke said:


> so the WWE is broadcasted in over 100 countries and only gets 4m viewers?


its only for the usa network


----------



## GR Choke

#1Peep4ever said:


> its only for the usa network


so the ratings are based on people in the USA alone? they don't count other countries?


----------



## #1Peep4ever

GR Choke said:


> so the ratings are based on people in the USA alone? they don't count other countries?


i guess so could be wrong too better wait for the experts


----------



## GR Choke

well w/e it is it's still a bad number


----------



## Demandred

GR Choke said:


> so the ratings are based on people in the USA alone? they don't count other countries?




Thats correct. The 4.3 million or however many viewers you see on a particular week comes from Nielsen ratings which comes from America. So that means 4.3 million Americans (with ratings boxes) are watching RAW per week.


----------



## Starbuck

No quarter hours then? That's 2 weeks in a row now lol.


----------



## GR Choke

TMPRKO said:


> Thats correct. The 4.3 million or however many viewers you see on a particular week comes from Nielsen ratings which comes from America. So that means 4.3 million Americans (with ratings boxes) are watching RAW per week.


Thanks for confirming. Is there a website that shows the viwership from all the other countries?


----------



## Chicago Warrior

TMPRKO said:


> Thats correct. The 4.3 million or however many viewers you see on a particular week comes from Nielsen ratings which comes from America. So that means 4.3 million Americans (with ratings boxes) are watching RAW per week.


Yup, but not every one has those boxes, I don't and I personally don't know anyone who own a neilsen ratings box .I would not take the ratings from Neilson owners as the correct estimate for all the WWE viewers in the USA. I have Comcast and I usually catch RAW on Youtube now adays, and I bet I am not the only one. Plus even if I don't watch it on Youtube, I watch it on cable which does not count my viewership either way.


----------



## HitItLikeABongoDru

I think some of you have slightly the wrong idea about the Nielsen system, it's not 4million or however many people with a nielsen box. They take a small (but large enough to be statistically significant) sample and then extrapolate the final number based on the viewership within the sample


----------



## Chicago Warrior

HitItLikeABongoDru said:


> I think some of you have slightly the wrong idea about the Nielsen system, it's not 4million or however many people with a nielsen box. They take a small (but large enough to be statistically significant) sample and then extrapolate the final number based on the viewership within the sample



IMO it is still an inaccurate measure of the whole US TV show viewing population. The ratings estimate is usually only for the shows producers and advertising companies to give them an idea if the show is good enough to be on the air IMO.


----------



## Brye

That's inaccurate as fuck then. :lmao


----------



## Demandred

Chicago Warrior said:


> Yup, but not every one has those boxes, I don't and I personally don't know anyone who own a neilsen ratings box .I would not take the ratings from Neilson owners as the correct estimate for all the WWE viewers in the USA. I have Comcast and I usually catch RAW on Youtube now adays, and I bet I am not the only one. Plus even if I don't watch it on Youtube, I watch it on cable which does not count my viewership either way.




Well you just pointed out the biggest weakness with the ratings system and why the trolls here are often so wrong. It doesn't account for DVR/Tivo, Youtube, other online sites, or WWE.com itself. That does keep the numbers from being completely accurate. 

One thing it does do is statistically show how many people, who are watching TV at that time, are watching WWE. That is useful as an indicator, but shouldn't be confused with representing everything about ratings or how angles and/or stars are doing.


----------



## kokepepsi

Starbuck said:


> No quarter hours then? That's 2 weeks in a row now lol.


Last week


> Raw on 12/26 did a 2.93 rating and 4.47 million viewers. The rating was almost identical with the prior week but there were 180,000 more viewers on a night when overall television viewership was down 7.7%, although that’s misleading because all the networks were in reruns. The show was 6th for the night on cable. The Atlanta Falcons vs. New Orleans Saints game where Drew Brees set the all-time single season passing yardage record did a 10.60 rating and 15.64 million viewers.
> 
> The big news is the curse of the second hour losing audience from the first hour ended. The reason is more that the first hour didn’t do well, then the second hour did well. In particular, Raw of late has been starting with a strong first quarter, but the C.M. Punk/John Laurinaitis first quarter did a only a 2.94, and the usual big drop didn’t happen. There were a significant amount of usual Raw viewers who either didn’t bother to watch the first quarter and turn it off like usual, or did watch it but turned it off in a minute.
> 
> The show did a 2.3 in Males 12-17 (down 18% from last week), 2.6 in Males 18-49 (up 4%), 1.1 in Females 12-17 (up 38%) and 1.2 in Females 18-49 (down 8%). Male viewership was 67.1% of total viewers.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, Booker T vs. Cody Rhodes lost 149,000 viewers. Backstage stuff with John Cena and Zack Ryder, Big Show and Kelly Kelly, Laurinaitis, Show and David Otunga and Jack Swagger, Dolph Ziggler, Vickie Guerrero and Mark Henry gained 78,000 viewers. Ryder & Eve Torres vs. Tyson Kidd & Natalya and a Cena interview lost 67,000 viewers. Cena vs. The Miz and post-match R-Truth attack gained 325,000 viewers, which is below usual but better than in some recent weeks. Big Show vs. David Otunga with one hand tied behind his back and an Alberto Del Rio interview with the Bellas gained 34,000 viewers. Punk vs. Swagger lost 367,000 viewers. Punk vs. Ziggler gained 172,000 viewers to a 2.91 main event average. The Cena/Kane overrun gained 543,000 viewers to a do a 3.26. As far as the demo changes with Cena and Kane out last, Male teens went from 2.8 to 3.1, Men 18-49 went from 2.8 to 3.2, Women teens went from 1.0 to 1.3 and Women 18-49 stayed at 1.0.


This week not available becasue of holiday but meltzer did say
that Jericho debut lost 80k, Punk vs Ziggler did about 200k+, Cena opener segment was the highest rated part of the show.


----------



## RKO299

punk cant draw by the look of these ratings, but we already knew that


----------



## rcc

TMPRKO said:


> Well you just pointed out the biggest weakness with the ratings system and why the trolls here are often so wrong. It doesn't account for DVR/Tivo, Youtube, other online sites, or WWE.com itself. That does keep the numbers from being completely accurate.
> /QUOTE]
> 
> Those numbers are irrelevant because they don't make WWE money (and if they do, it's a tiny amount). Why is that so difficult for people to comprehend?
> 
> And Nielsen does account for DVR. Nielsen has a measure called +7, a reviewed figure for any viewings made during the proceeding 7 days from the air date. Problem is advertisers don't really care about this figure because if you are using your DVR, you're going to skip the ads.
> 
> Do people just ignore posts they don't agree with? I've destroyed this whole Nielsen is inaccurate argument a 1000 times, yet I still see it posted.


----------



## kokepepsi

holy fuck that is a great explanation why the dvr stuff is never looked at.


----------



## Mr Premium

Now, why didn't we have a sticky thread when everybody was complaining about Orton's "lack" of drawing power?


----------



## Tedious

rcc said:


> TMPRKO said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well you just pointed out the biggest weakness with the ratings system and why the trolls here are often so wrong. It doesn't account for DVR/Tivo, Youtube, other online sites, or WWE.com itself. That does keep the numbers from being completely accurate.
> /QUOTE]
> 
> Those numbers are irrelevant because they don't make WWE money (and if they do, it's a tiny amount). Why is that so difficult for people to comprehend?
> 
> And Nielsen does account for DVR. Nielsen has a measure called +7, a reviewed figure for any viewings made during the proceeding 7 days from the air date. Problem is advertisers don't really care about this figure because if you are using your DVR, you're going to skip the ads.
> 
> Do people just ignore posts they don't agree with? I've destroyed this whole Nielsen is inaccurate argument a 1000 times, yet I still see it posted.
> 
> 
> 
> But WWE still get money from sponsers and advertising no matter how many people watch. The reason they want people watching is to heighten the chance they will buy PPV's/merch.
> 
> Or am I missing your point?
Click to expand...


----------



## D17

Mr Premium said:


> Now, why didn't we have a sticky thread when everybody was complaining about Orton's "lack" of drawing power?


Hmmmm, well with Randal Keith Orton, I don't know tbh, there must be a reasonable explanation.


----------



## Onyx

Why does it matter what the ratings are?


----------



## Dub

skyman101 said:


> Why does it matter what the ratings are?


Useless flame wars.


----------



## jacobdaniel

WHITE BOY said:


> Useless flame wars.


Repped!


----------



## jaybyrd18

BCS championship vs raw....ratings war? lol


----------



## WWE

kokepepsi said:


> Cena opener segment was the highest rated part of the show.


----------



## LarryCoon

Why are people still bitching about this? Its all been stickied to one thread. Is the talk of ratings really pushing people's buttons? If you don't like it then get the hell out of this thread.


----------



## ToddTheBod

Curt Hawkins = Ratings.


----------



## Wagg

ah, the good ol' days.


----------



## WWE

Wagg said:


> ah, the good ol' days.


Yeah, RAW sure does EAR ratings.. :flip


----------



## Wagg

Cycloneon said:


> Yeah, RAW sure does EAR ratings.. :flip


its *FEARS*.


----------



## D.M.N.

The numbers for the 9th January RAW will be out soon for anyone wondering.


----------



## WWE

Wagg said:


> its *FEARS*.


I know, brah.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

skyman101 said:


> Why does it matter what the ratings are?


Because they tell us if a raw was good or not.. and quarter hours tell you for which wrestler you have to mark


----------



## Brye

Yeah I'm waiting to formulate an opinion on last night until I get the quarterlies.

Regardless of the rating, last night's Raw was fun. And it'll probably be low considering it was up against the BCS game.


----------



## LarryCoon

D.M.N. said:


> The numbers for the 9th January RAW will be out soon for anyone wondering.


Can't wait for people to specifically come into this thread to complain about people discussing ratings


----------



## D.M.N.

*January 9th, 2012*
Hour 1 - 4.096m
Hour 2 - 3.920m

Source: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-liars-t-i-and-tiny-wwe-raw-much-more/116055/

Last Week
- Hour 1 - 1.8 18-49 rating
- Hour 2 - 1.7 18-49 rating

This Week
- Hour 1 - 1.6 18-49 rating
- Hour 2 - 1.6 18-49 rating

Horrible numbers in all honesty considering the time of year, very, very bad for the 'E. I don't like to put the blame on one person or angle, but I can't imagine Jericho 'trolling' the audience last week had the intended effect at all...

That will also be a 2.8 rating probably.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Hey WWE, people like storylines, more then just one too.


----------



## LVblizzard

I'll give this one a pass. The BCS championship game was on at the same time.


----------



## kokepepsi

Brye said:


> Yeah I'm waiting to formulate an opinion on last night until I get the quarterlies.
> 
> Regardless of the rating, last night's Raw was fun. And it'll probably be low considering it was up against the BCS game.


NO it wasn't

IMO obv

People who liked raw probably are huge adam sandler marks and loved Jack and Jill


----------



## Brye

kokepepsi said:


> NO it wasn't
> 
> IMO obv
> 
> People who liked raw probably are huge adam sandler marks and loved Jack and Jill


Only Sandler movie I care for is Happy Gilmore (which i love).

I don't see what's wrong with liking that Raw. While Brodus isn't what people expected, it was funny. Punk/Swagger was good other than the finish. I found the Kane stuff entertaining even if it wasn't top notch acting. And I got a good laugh out of the Jericho stuff. It was the first Raw I fully enjoyed in a while.


----------



## glenwo2

D.M.N. said:


> *January 9th, 2012*
> Hour 1 - 4.096m
> Hour 2 - 3.920m
> 
> Source: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-liars-t-i-and-tiny-wwe-raw-much-more/116055/
> 
> Last Week
> - Hour 1 - 1.8 18-49 rating
> - Hour 2 - 1.7 18-49 rating
> 
> This Week
> - Hour 1 - 1.6 18-49 rating
> - Hour 2 - 1.6 18-49 rating
> 
> Horrible numbers in all honesty considering the time of year, very, very bad for the 'E. I don't like to put the blame on one person or angle, but I can't imagine Jericho 'trolling' the audience last week had the intended effect at all...
> 
> That will also be a 2.8 rating probably.



Now that is a DISGUSTING rating. :no:

Was it the BCS or was it maybe the idea that perhaps not everyone thought RAW was "Fun" this week?


It wouldn't surprise me if viewers were lost the moment the "Pimp Hippo" made his debut.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

ok so the numbers tell me it was a VERY bad raw and i obviously dont like it 
now i need to know which wrestler i have to mark for and which one not

seriously now i found that raw pretty entertaining but i dont think i will be interested in jericho if trolls again but knowing wwe they will keep this trolling till after the rumble


----------



## D.M.N.

*January 9th, 2012 - clash with BCS Championship*
Hour 1 - 4.096m
Hour 2 - 3.920m

Source: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-liars-t-i-and-tiny-wwe-raw-much-more/116055/

*LAST YEAR - January 10th, 2012 - clash with BCS Championship*
Hour 1 - 4.549m (meaning a drop of 453k year-on-year)
Hour 2 - 4.651m (meaning a drop of 731k year-on-year)

Source: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...hore-the-game-top-weekly-cable-viewing/79301/

For anyone blaming it on the BCS Championship, last year held up well.


----------



## The Haiti Kid

I still don't give a crap.

Next week's rating will be the telling rating when Raw has no competition from Football.


----------



## Starbuck

D.M.N. said:


> *January 9th, 2012*
> Hour 1 - 4.096m
> Hour 2 - 3.920m


Fucking ouch. Regardless of the rating, dropping below 4 million viewers is a bit of a disaster. Given the time of year it's even worse. It's pretty unfortunate too because I thought Raw was overall very enjoyable this week. The football game obviously had an impact since hour 1 was barely over the 4 mil mark to start with. Not good news for the E.


----------



## kokepepsi

Punk wrestling Swagger in the 10pm slot, Ryder trying to change a tire and Jericho fake crying?

Of course the 2ndhour bombs.


----------



## xerxesXXI

Raw loses viewers as the show goes on.

I wonder what the reaction of the office is about this. Are they seriously admitting they are losing viewers and this is a problem or are they delusion and think the viewers don't know what they want. 

I wasn't a fan of Raw tonight. Why even have it live? Half the time it's so bland. Crowd sucked too but you can blame that on the show. They'd cheer if there was a reason.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

darn those numbers are pretty harsh 
hopefully the guy in the office finally wake up


----------



## Bushmaster

i guess we can all say the show was awful seeing that the ratings wont be good huh. 

The show was entertaining. The majority on here liked it. Isnt that the point; to enjoy the show


----------



## Mister Hands

Punk, Jericho, Kane and Cena all in a second hour that loses ratings. I don't _care_ that it lost ratings. I'm just wondering who WWE are internally blaming for it. I mean, I know it's asking a lot considering they're only now cottoning on to the fact that Cena's character could use some freshening up, but at some point, they have to realise that the problems run a bit deeper than "Oh no, the belt's on the wrong guy!" or "Hey, maybe we'll push that guy the internet likes! That'll shut them up." Maybe it's just that most things on Raw tend to be massively boring and ultimately trivial?

Question: wasn't Brodus' "controversial" debut right before the hour mark?


----------



## WWE

Yeah it was right before the 2nd hour, I'd know I just watched the replay lol


----------



## BTNH

Well it was a crap Raw so it isn't surprising.


----------



## Mister Excitement

Shame it got such a shit rating even though it was one of the most entertaining Raw's ever.


----------



## CMojicaAce

inb4takethetitleoffpunkposts


----------



## 1TheGreatOne1

WWE is getting worse it seems. 

Jericho's return is a fail.
Brodus Clay is a fail.
Kane vs Cena is BORING and is going nowhere. 
John Laurinitus (idc how you spell his name) is awful. Get him off TV please !!
Pointless jobber matches.
Punk is now in a match with....Jack Swagger? So he went from rebelling against WWE to wrestling Swagger???


----------



## Brye

lol at already thinking Jericho's return is a fail. As if it's even started.


----------



## Stad

Right on, the same 4 million people who tune in every week.

I don't get why anyone honestly gives a shit about this, lol.


----------



## Azuran

LOL at that rating. I swear they have to be trying to go out of business.


----------



## Brye

Azuran said:


> LOL at that rating. I swear they have to be trying to go out of business.


With give or take 4 million viewers a week? They're in such a bad position.


----------



## kokepepsi

Seems rating is a 2.9 
From The Observer


----------



## Marv95

They were in the 3s at _worst_ when they went head to head with the BCS in years past so to put the blame on that is almost grasping for straws. LOL, Nitro towards its end got better numbers than that.


----------



## Fanboi101

Cm Punk's title reign has to be the lowest rated since pre-attitude era days. I can't remember another champion having a string of ratings in the high 2s very low 3s...and that includes Alberto Del Rio's short reign


----------



## RKO299

punk cant draw


----------



## Y2Joe

Sigh. You 12-year-old idiots. It's not Punk. It's WWE not really investing in any talent besides John Cena the last 5 years or so.


----------



## GuruOfMarkness

Y2Joe said:


> Sigh. You 12-year-old idiots. It's not Punk. It's WWE not really investing in any talent besides John Cena the last 5 years or so.


I doubt analyzing Nielsen evidence about a professional wrestling program amounts to how stupid someone can be. Anyway this CM Punk thing is interesting. He can get the biggest pop of the night, he's arguably the face of the company, yet he loses viewers on a consistent basis. He's been put on every possible time slot on the show. You can like CM Punk, there is nothing wrong with that. But WWE is gonna have to consider pushing someone else if this continues. It's just business. Personally, Punk doesn't interest me enough to hate him as much as some folks do. The whole show sucks.


----------



## Y2Joe

GuruOfMarkness said:


> I doubt analyzing Nielsen evidence about a professional wrestling program amounts to how stupid someone can be. Anyway this CM Punk thing is interesting. He can get the biggest pop of the night, he's arguably the face of the company, yet he loses viewers on a consistent basis. He's been put on every possible time slot on the show. You can like CM Punk, there is nothing wrong with that. But WWE is gonna have to consider pushing someone else if this continues. It's just business. Personally, Punk doesn't interest me enough to hate him as much as some folks do. The whole show sucks.


CM Punk loses viewers on a consistent basis? Show me the quarter hours.


----------



## Killmonger

GuruOfMarkness said:


> I doubt analyzing Nielsen evidence about a professional wrestling program amounts to how stupid someone can be. Anyway this CM Punk thing is interesting. He can get the biggest pop of the night, he's arguably the face of the company, yet he loses viewers on a consistent basis. He's been put on every possible time slot on the show. You can like CM Punk, there is nothing wrong with that. But WWE is gonna have to consider pushing someone else if this continues. It's just business. Personally, Punk doesn't interest me enough to hate him as much as some folks do. The whole show sucks.


Be honest. CM Punk vs Jack Swagger? We know who's winning so why watch?


----------



## GuruOfMarkness

RiZE said:


> Be honest. CM Punk vs Jack Swagger? We know who's winning so why watch?


The problem is this apparently happens every week. Jack Swagger vs anyone is not worth watching I admit though. But I'm not saying they need to throw Punk on Superstars and take his push, wrestling is about making money and Punk does that. But WWE makes most of it's money from tv licensing. The fact of the matter is whatever time slot they put him in it either loses viewers by a large amount or by a medium amount. They put Cena in the main event for 3 weeks, and it went back up. They shouldn't have to protect the WWE champion from getting bad ratings. If he's not hot, they gotta pull him back a bit and get the steam back.


----------



## Theproof

HGF said:


> Shame it got such a shit rating even though it was one of the most entertaining Raw's ever.


I know it's just your opinion but I can't even imagine myself agreeing with this. They've done much, much, better than this before and it's not even close imo.


----------



## vague

Seems more like Cena's show these days than Punk's, honestly. His storyline with Kane is the main focus anyway. Punk's time gets cut more and more every week, so I don't see how you can pin this all on him. He's barely visible. Either way, I don't see how one guy can be blamed or praised for an entire rating. It just seems like RAW generally has a see-saw rating because it just isn't must see tv any more. It's casual viewing for many when nothing better is on. I think that says more about the product in general than anything. But whatever, a scapegoat is more convenient.


----------



## noobzeverywearz

Tim Tebow drew the highest wild card rating since 1994. He's a huge draw and the best professional athlete of our generation. Did Michael Jordan ever pull a 24.2 in the first round of the playoffs? How about Albert Pujols? No and no.

Hopefully the Packers have the good sense to trade Rodgers and half of their team...maybe then they'll get better ratings.


----------



## WWE

noobzeverywearz said:


> Tim Tebow drew the highest wild card rating since 1994. He's a huge draw and the best professional athlete of our generation. Did Michael Jordan ever pull a 24.2 in the first round of the playoffs? How about Albert Pujols? No and no.
> 
> Hopefully the Packers have the good sense to trade Rodgers and half of their team...maybe then they'll get better ratings.


----------



## Roler42

yeah... punk's fault

nothing to do with the MAIN EVENT AND IT'S BUILD UP being a 80's horror film storyline with Louis Ryder being haunted by Kane Luthor in order to lure SUPER CENA to rescue his damisel in distress

let's not forget our dear WWE champ faced WWE's second biggest heel jobber, the one that loses so much, no one even cares about


----------



## SpeedStick

Looks like all this Jericho stuff is for the Undertaker, So bring back Batista so CM Punk have a big name to fued with


----------



## starship.paint

2.81... who started the show? who ended the show? heh.

Punk isn't even getting main event time. Or even semi-main event time.


----------



## Roler42

starship.paint said:


> 2.81... who started the show? who ended the show? heh.


dont' forget who were in the middle segment aswell :lmao


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Roler42 said:


> dont' forget who were in the middle segment aswell :lmao


Jack Thwagger, Mr. Show-Off, 'scuse-me lady, Mr. Excitement, and Dr. Vanilla Midget.


----------



## noobzeverywearz

As far as I can tell:

Put CM Punk in the spotlight: ratings fall
Punt CM Punk to the midcard: ratings still fall
Put Cena back in the spotlight: ratings still fall
Put a diva into the final segment: ratings still fall
Just to the same thing over and over again: ratings still fall
Jericho returns: ratings still fall
Triple H as CEO: ratings still fall
Johnny Ace as CEO: ratings still fall
Dolph: ratings still fall
Swagger: ratings still fall
Masked Kane: ratings still fall
Night after MITB: ratings still fall

etc.
etc.
etc.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

noobzeverywearz said:


> As far as I can tell:
> 
> Put CM Punk in the spotlight: ratings fall
> Punt CM Punk to the midcard: ratings still fall
> Put Cena back in the spotlight: ratings still fall
> Put a diva into the final segment: ratings still fall
> Just to the same thing over and over again: ratings still fall
> Jericho returns: ratings still fall
> Triple H as CEO: ratings still fall
> Johnny Ace as CEO: ratings still fall
> Dolph: ratings still fall
> Swagger: ratings still fall
> Masked Kane: ratings still fall
> Night after MITB: ratings still fall
> 
> etc.
> etc.
> etc.


Although I question the delivery of this post, I agree with the overall message in it.


----------



## chronoxiong

Getting a 2.9 overall rating is not a good sign again. Of course, it went against the BCS Title game blowout so it was bound to be low but I'm sad to see at the drop in viewership.


----------



## Notmarkingforanyon

As if the ratings professionals on this forum are able to turn things around with their awesome suggestions 

WWE is just trolling us for now:

Brodus clay debut: troll
Zack ryder changing a tyre: troll
Y2J 2 weeks in a row: troll
Ref scripted botch in punk's match: troll
Ricardo getting TV time: awesome


----------



## Art13

[email protected] people blaming Punk when he's not even the main focus of the show, even the Truth\Miz feud got more attention than Punk\Ziggler. 

Do you all honestly think casuals decide whether or not to watch Raw based solely on who is WWE champion, even when said champion is not the focus of the show? 

Is Punk a ratings draw? No, quite the opposite in fact, but if anything these ratings suggest WWE in general is not drawing all that well at the moment, regardless of who the show is focussed on. With that being said, in 2012 ratings should really be taken with a grain of salt. As long as ratings aren't dipping to the point where they're affecting revenue, WWE should really consider live crowd reactions and merchandise sales as a more accurate measure of a talent's popularity.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Notmarkingforanyon said:


> As if the ratings professionals on this forum are able to turn things around with their awesome suggestions


I agree... let's get advice from a real professional:


----------



## Brye

All you gotta do is look at some numbers and you're qualified to book for the company.


----------



## Brodus Clay

In before people blame Punk, lets remember Zack Ryder appeared a fucking lot...Raw is Ryder!


----------



## HitItLikeABongoDru

Pretty poor rating again but regardless it was a very entertaining show imo. I don't see anyone (anyone reasonable) blaming Punk by the way, some of you need to stop being so sensitive


----------



## The Tony

Not surprise by the rating. The show was once again ridiculous and only entertaining for the IWC.


----------



## planetarydeadlock

Only WRESTLING fans watch Raw, hence the same old average ratings every week. Casual TV viewers are not going to watch unless they like wrestling or they see a star like the Rock hanging around.


----------



## Kewf1988

SoupMan Prime said:


> i guess we can all say the show was awful seeing that the ratings wont be good huh.
> 
> The show was entertaining. The majority on here liked it. Isnt that the point; to enjoy the show


Your last sentence is true, but on other forums the majority thought it was a bad show. Wrestling is supposed to be fun, true, but it's also supposed to be logical as well. Like I said in the Raw thread, this show was bizarre for the sake of being bizarre. Shows like Monday's are a reason why Vince is a millionaire when he should be a billionaire, like Punk said in his shoot promo.


----------



## just1988

I've put all my thought on this weeks Raw into this video, let me know what you think about Jeircho's silence, Brodus Clay's return, the "botch" and anything else...


----------



## The Tony

The MAJORITRY of people who watches wrestling is watching it to see something cool...something badass...NOT a guy crying in the ring for five minutes or a fat moron dancing.


----------



## Notmarkingforanyon

Tony316 said:


> The MAJORITRY of people who watches wrestling is watching it to *see something cool...something badass...*NOT a guy crying in the ring for five minutes or a fat moron dancing.


I think the era you're looking for is long over. Try to get used to the John Cena PG era


----------



## Brye

Tony316 said:


> The MAJORITRY of people who watches wrestling is watching it to see something cool...something badass...*NOT a guy crying in the ring for five minutes* or a fat moron dancing.


Jericho is trying to get people to hate him. Would you rather no development?


----------



## Heretic21

Fuck Jericho. He is the one turning viewers away with his supposed "Trolling" as is irrelevant IWC fans claim. This guy needs to realize none of the casual fans care about him as it is and then little stunt he is attempting is driving viewers away from the product.

This Jericho garbage needs to stop.


----------



## Mr Premium

LOL at Punk...fpalm

I guarantee you folks these guy will top everybody's Most Overrated lists come 5 years time.


----------



## The Tony

Brye said:


> Jericho is trying to get people to hate him. Would you rather no development?


I have no problem with development when atleast it's interesting.


----------



## taker328

Exactly thank you. And I love Jericho but please, no one wants to analyze how great his character depth is and how genius he is for trolling a paying live crowd just to get some heat for some storyline god knows where thats gonna go. I do wanna watch something cool, and I do wanna see some badasses do their thing. Has nothing to do with what "era" we're in. Every era had authentic real characters and badasses like Flair, Rhodes, Piper to guys like Razor, Michaels, Diesel, Taker, to the guys like Foley, Rock, Austin, HHH. HHH is 10x the heel Jericho will EVER be, and you don't see HHH or Flair over analyzing shit to make people boo them. They just had the crowd in the palm of their hand.

We are missing those upper echelon of icons from this era. Why, because I really believe its the worst of them all. And I really do hate the arguments between what era was better and what times were better because it doesn't matter that time is absolutely gone. But I really get pissed when I see shit like this on my TV week in and week out, when in this day and age there is potential for a shit load of great ideas and creativity to tap into, and they just decide to produce this contrived bullshit that obviously does not translate to a wide audience. They have to be more creative. Over the years its just steadily declining and its no coincidence that its all uncreative kids based shit. It really isn't a smart decision to keep going like this. I believe HHH knows this, Shane knows this (which is prob why he left), and others know. I just hope these young guys are given the outlet to really shine and show their true potential and help revolutionize the product again like their predecessors in the late 90's-00's.


----------



## Werb-Jericho

2 weeks in a row now Jericho has been the number one twitter trend when he has appeared, i know the WWE overuse the twitter reference but they have calmed it down recently and it is a pretty good indication that people are interested in him/the storyline. 

Stop saying the 'casuals' as if you have more of a grasp on what they like than someone whos been in the business for years


----------



## CNB

1. Cannot blame CM Punk. He's on in the middle of the show. Wasn't even advertised at the start of the show! So how can that rating be his fault?

2. Cannot blame Jericho. Jericho wasn't advertised whatsoever and only consumed 5 minutes of the show. Not the start, not the main event, somewhere near the end. So how can the ratings be his fault? Top trending superstar of the past two weeks and his return increased ratings from 2.9 to 3.1.

3. Cannot blame John Cena. Cena has been placed in the stupidest storyline I have seen OPEN & CLOSE the show for the past few years. It's ridiculously awful and the payoff is something every 7 year old kid can see coming...and doesn't want to happen (the heel turn) He is also a proven draw.

4. Cannot blame Zack Ryder. Ryder himself doesn't make people switch the channel, he only wrestles, he doesn't play a significant role on the show regarding storylines (unless you think his little fling with Eve is the top storyline of the show).

5. Cannot blame Ziggler, Shaemus, Bryan, the divas, the McMahons, Triple H, Brodus Clay, Undertaker, Basketball games, Football games, College games & History channels.


*BLAME KANE*

His involvement in the Cena storyline is atrocious. It's not compelling, its not entertaining, its repetitive and has barely produced much wrestling at all. People want to see Cena involved with The Rock, not with fucking Kane...but you know...keep blaming others who have no grasp on the ratings. It's fine, you guys need to always find shit to bitch about, right?


----------



## Notmarkingforanyon

^Can i blame Jerry Lawler? :lmao


----------



## Starbuck

Let's all just blame Cole, agreed? Seriously though, anybody putting this one on Punk is being silly. This show was all Cena/Kane/Ryder. That and the football game of course.


----------



## TheWFEffect

Fuck sake best RAW since the RAW before MITB and it gets a 2.9 so people don't like developing storylines anymore.


----------



## Marv95

Tony316 said:


> Not surprise by the rating. The show was once again ridiculous and only entertaining for the IWC.


BS. I doubt the IWC craves for skits featuring fat guys dancing, La Cucuracha with a mentally challenged wrestler, face SuperCena being a major player in the show and a Canadian guy going to the ring only to get stage fright 2 weeks in a row.


----------



## deadmanwatching

Tony316 said:


> The MAJORITRY of people who watches wrestling is watching it to see something cool...something badass...*NOT a guy crying in the ring for five minutes* or a fat moron dancing.


It was Entertaining,but not Entertaining Enough











> Posted by *ERIC BISCHOFF*
> Raw fears Ratings!


----------



## HHH is the GOAT

Things werent this bad when HHH was the COO. lol.


----------



## version 1

Some more ratings news:

Source: PWinsider
Link: http://www.pwinsider.com/article/64866/earth-well-america-to-vince-mcmahon-time-to-wake-up-raw-rating.html?p=1


> The 1/9 edition of Raw did a 2.9 rating with 4,008,000 viewers. That is down from last week's 3.1 rating and 4,438,000 viewers. Once again, viewership dropped as the show went on as hour one did a 2.96 and hour two did a 2.77, and lost 176,000 viewers.
> Before people point to the BCS Championship game on ESPN, while it did a 16.22 rating and 24,214,000 viewers, it was down about 15% from last year's game and by the end the game was a blowout so that would not explain people tuning out of Raw. Also, most of the broadcast networks ran repeats. So if Vince wants a reason as to why people left, let's try bad "horror" skits and having a guy unable to change a tire. It's a great place to start.


Source: PWTorch
Link: http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_56811.shtml


> By James Caldwell, PWTorch assistant editor
> 
> WWE Raw on Monday, January 9 scored a 2.87 rating, down from a 3.10 rating last week and the lowest rating since December 12. It was also the second-lowest rating since September when the fall season began.
> 
> Raw averaged 4.00 million viewers, down 10 percent compared to last week and the fewest overall viewers since September 12. The first hour averaged 4.096 million viewers and the second hour dropped to an average of 3.92 million viewers. It was the fewest first hour viewers since Sept. 12 and fewest second hour viewers since November 7.
> -- Raw was opposed by the BCS National Title game, which averaged 24.4 million viewers, and the regular slate of History Channel opposition during the second hour to negatively affect Raw viewership.
> 
> In the key male demographics, Raw did finish #2 behind the title game among males 18-34, but finished #3 among older adult males 18-49 behind the title game and "Pawn Stars" on History. In overall viewership on cable TV, Raw finished #7 on the night.Looking more at the m18-34 rating, which was one of the few bright spots on the night, Raw scored its second-highest rating in the demo since May 2, which covers 37 weeks. Following the pattern of big sporting events pulling away older male viewers from wrestling, Raw's male 18-49 rating dropped 6.1 percent compared to last week's show. Whereas, the strong m18-49 rating increased 6.6 percent compared to last week.
> 
> -- Last year's second Raw of 2011 up against the BCS Title game scored a 3.05 rating (2012 down 5.9 percent) and averaged 4.50 million viewers (2012 down 11 percent). Also, viewership increased from the first to second hour, unlike the recent pattern on Raw.


So that means that almost 500.000 people didn't watch compared to last year. That's pretty bad. Although I did enjoy last weeks raw.


----------



## A-C-P

LOL another week and the same stuff, at least its all contained into one thread now. It is a dissapointing # but the same 4 million that actually watch Raw live on TV watched Raw live on TV again this week a few less most likely due to the college football fans that watched the BCS Title game.

TV ratings are down across the board for just about everything on TV, even the BCS title game but that probably doesn't have any effect on Raw's ratings at all right? Television is a declining medium simple as that.

I am not saying Raw was great or anything (I found it entertaining though) but of course THE RATINGZ!!! are all that really matters right? I find it funny that there are people who think ratings still mean the same thing they did 10-15 years ago. I am not saying they are totally meaningless but the yare not the end all/be all anymore. And until I read a report that NBC Universal is upset about Raw's ratings then the ratings are being blown WAY out of proportion by alot of posters here.


----------



## RKO299

punk cant draw


----------



## D.M.N.

The quarter hour breakdown for the January 2nd RAW should be out within the next 12 hours, which should be interesting to see how the Jericho segment did. Meltzer said 80k tuned out I think it was, but I wasn't 100% sure if that was after the segment finished or people tuned out during the segment.


----------



## Woo-Woo-Woo

D.M.N. said:


> The quarter hour breakdown for the January 2nd RAW should be out within the next 12 hours, which should be interesting to see how the Jericho segment did. Meltzer said 80k tuned out I think it was, but I wasn't 100% sure if that was after the segment finished or people tuned out during the segment.


early stats show that it the first hour made 4.05 million viewers, 2nd hour had a decline to 3.92 million viwers ... a 2.90 rating ...NO HENRY NO RATINGS!!!


----------



## Mister Hands

Guys, it's not fair to blame the bad ratings on really bad Kane horror movie shenanigans. Not when the staggering success of See No Evil is so fresh in our minds.


----------



## Falkono

Ah got to love people on here trying to run damage control. It is down basically half a million in a week but people say it is the same....When you are down 20% how is that the same? When "Pawn Stars" beats you thats when you know your in trouble....

Just further evidence that WWE needs to shake things up or 2012 will be a very bad year for them.


----------



## Loudness

I think Raw should try to emulate SD. Smackdown gets less viewers, but the difference is not very big, you have to take in account the lack of stars, hype (no epic returns/debuts on SD) and the fact that it's on Friday and not live. Despite all of this they only get a million or so less viewers (at least during the Henry reign, not sure about the recent ratings since Bryan took over but I can't imagine them dropping too much). Imo Smackdown is just the better written show, if it was treated like the A show and was broadcasted during the week it would easily go toe to toe with Raw, and probably outdraw it. 

The storylines are more basic but also have twists that actually make sense (Bryan/Big Show/Henry situation, Drew Mac beeing back on SD etc), it's not a Russo like clusterfuck, everyone gets some sort of push there and the matches are FAR more entertaining due to having much more time. It isn't a perfect show, as I said it lacks the over the top storylines and big time feel, but given the ressources they have they make the best out of it. Raw on the other hand has all the ressources they have but the show seems like style over substance nowadays, they have the over the topness but lack most other things. There might be a good RAW once in a while but it's far from consistent and you can only grow a fanbase by putting on a consistent good product (see SD as a positive, or TNA as a negative example).


----------



## D17

I honestly believe a lot of it is to with the commentary (or in easier terms, simply Michael Cole). He has a genuinely annoying voice and it has only gotten worse since his heel turn 2 years ago. Surely that has to be some sort of a factor in turning away viewers. I know if I want to watch a TV show I don't want to have a helluva annoying sound in the background (I don't mind Cole as i'm use to him but i'm sure it could potentially draw away casuals).


----------



## Astitude

Punk is not a established main eventer yet. Its stupid to argue he should be the top draw, he cant be but he is trying, WWE is trying to make him that guy. 

The problem is the shit Storyline cena is involved in. As per the popular opinion John cena is carrying RAW with his starpower but the truth is he doesnt draw as he used to. 2011 his drawing ability has taken a huge hit because of status quo, saved only by the return of the ROCK. But they are damaging whatever left of his drawing power by putting him in these comedy crap with ryder and shit storyline with Kane. I dont know what moron is booking this crap. 

John cena needs to be in a better storyline that interests people, simple as that. I have no problem with punk dropping the title to cena again, if need be. Build punk to that level and then have him go over Cena clean. They did that with Orton before, why not do it with punk? Both these guys need to be protected, Punk shouldnt become irrelevant once he drops the title.


----------



## deadmanwatching

+







= Change

They both didn't Change things on there Respective shows , but they Changed Ratings Forever.


----------



## version 1

deadmanwatching said:


> +
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> = Change
> 
> They both didn't Change things on there Respective shows , but they Changed Ratings Forever.


:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao


----------



## Marv95

I like how people joke about Russo yet when he showed up in WCW to the moment he got fired a couple of months later, ratings jumped almost a point in that period.


----------



## Kamaria

You can't compare Russo to Punk.


----------



## GillbergReturns

Viewership was down 400,000 thru out. Which means alot of those people didn't even tune into the show, period.

Hard to blame Kane, Cena, Punk, Jericho or whoever if somebody never turned it on from the beginning.


----------



## deadmanwatching

Kamaria said:


> You can't compare Russo to Punk.


Why not They both Shoot.





Vince Russo is the voice of the one voice!(me).This man is truly a pipebomb.


----------



## GillbergReturns

Astitude said:


> Punk is not a established main eventer yet. Its stupid to argue he should be the top draw, he cant be but he is trying, WWE is trying to make him that guy.
> 
> The problem is the shit Storyline cena is involved in. As per the popular opinion John cena is carrying RAW with his starpower but the truth is he doesnt draw as he used to. 2011 his drawing ability has taken a huge hit because of status quo, saved only by the return of the ROCK. But they are damaging whatever left of his drawing power by putting him in these comedy crap with ryder and shit storyline with Kane. I dont know what moron is booking this crap.
> 
> John cena needs to be in a better storyline that interests people, simple as that. I have no problem with punk dropping the title to cena again, if need be. Build punk to that level and then have him go over Cena clean. They did that with Orton before, why not do it with punk? Both these guys need to be protected, Punk shouldnt become irrelevant once he drops the title.


Kane is by far and away the most interesting storyline for Cena right now.

Which is the saddest element in all of this. They really can't do much better right now.

There's nothing there. Punk's been feuding with young upcomers (ADR, Ziggler). That's boring as Hell. Cena's feuding with Kane. That's boring. Jericho returns. That's boring albeit intentially boring. They try pushing the IWC superheroes and it gets the lowest main event in 11 years.

I don't what kind of booking you think is going to overturn this but it's not going to happen. The interest in wrestling is fading, period.


----------



## Cliffy

Im assuming jericho's debut last week pissed alot of viewers off.


----------



## TripleG

I love how a low (or high rating for that matter) always falls squarely on the champion. I never understood that logic. Shawn Michaels was accused of not being a draw in 1996 when WCW took control of the ratings. But Good God! Look at both shows. On one show you had cartoon characters running around like Mantaur with a Shawn Michaels main event, and on the other, they were doing something revolutionary with the nWo. Which show would you watch? The champion can't be blamed for the entire show sucking. 

And I'll use TNA as an example. So is it AJ's fault that TNA got their ass kicked by the WWE while he was champion? But wait, I thought Hulk Hogan was going to be the one to change everything and bring in new audiences, so shouldn't the blame fall on him instead of AJ? 

Look at Monday's show. The main angle was the Kane/Cena storyline and it has been for the last few weeks, yet the low ratings are Punk's fault? Heck, they even switched Punk out of the main event segments & ratings are still basically the same. 

MAYBE, the real culprit falls on creative. The show's are bad and people are turning away. Doesn't matter if its Punk or Cena who is carrying the strap. The show is still going to suck. Where WWE botched it is that The Summer of Punk should have led to a creative high & change of personality for the show and it didn't at all. They are right back to doing what they doing before the Punk shoot pretty much. Yeah, Punk is on top, but its still the same show, same cliches, same stupidity, same presentation. Nothing really changed.


----------



## Romanista

I hope this happen next monday


----------



## Brodus Clay

Romanista said:


> I hope this happen next monday


Wth dude that's awful... but it would get some good ratings.


----------



## deadmanwatching

Romanista said:


> I hope this happen next monday


That was one hell of Fight.Can't Wait for Next Week Raw.


----------



## Brye

deadmanwatching said:


> Why not They both Shoot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vince Russo is the voice of the one voice!(me).This man is truly a pipebomb.


As if they're the only two people to ever 'shoot'. :lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

And I love how apparently that's the only thing Punk does, considering he hasn't 'shot' in four months.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

lulz so people still being butthurt because punk did a WORKED shoot my


----------



## A-C-P

RAW doesn't "Fear Ratings" as Eric Bischoff said....

(Alot OF) WF posters FEAR Ratings!!!!


----------



## Starbuck

Punk fears ratings. That's why he never gets any. DURRRR 8*D


----------



## BANKSY

Isn't there no football next week for Raw to compete against?

If so , should be really interesting to see if the the football actually effects the ratings to a large degree.


----------



## rkomarkorton

i find it funny how we always blame guys like orton,miz,del rio etc. when they have the belt and the ratings drop but never cm punk i wonder why


----------



## A-C-P

rkomarkorton said:


> i find it funny how *we* always blame guys like orton,miz,del rio etc. when they have the belt and the ratings drop but never cm punk i wonder why


Who are these "we" that blamed Orton Miz, Del Rio for anything? You complain about "butthurt" Punk marks maybe you should stop acting like a "butt hurt" Orton Mark.


----------



## Starbuck

A-C-P said:


> Who are these "we" that blamed Orton Miz, Del Rio for anything? You complain about "butthurt" Punk marks maybe you should stop acting like a "butt hurt" Orton Mark.


Orton got shit on just as bad as Punk has this year back in 2010 over the ratings and nothing was done about it. If you're implying that there isn't a double standard when it comes to IWC favorites you're deluded. It's staring you right in the face every time you come on this board tbh.


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> Orton got shit on just as bad as Punk has this year back in 2010 over the ratings and nothing was done about it. If you're implying that there isn't a double standard when it comes to IWC favorites you're deluded. It's staring you right in the face every time you come on this board tbh.


Well I wasn't really an active poster here until late 2010 early 2011 so I missed all that, I apologize. 

Not sure if its a double standard or the mods learning from past mistakes and doing now what they wished they would've done with the "Orton" hate that went one. Not saying which view is right, It could in fact be a double standard just trying to supply a different point of view.


----------



## Starbuck

A-C-P said:


> Well I wasn't really an active poster here until late 2010 early 2011 so I missed all that, I apologize.
> 
> Not sure if its a double standard or the mods learning from past mistakes and doing now what they wished they would've done with the "Orton" hate that went one. Not saying which view is right, It could in fact be a double standard just trying to supply a different point of view.


No need to apologize but surely you have to have encountered the double standards on this board and with the majority of the IWC in general. Rip into Cena or HHH and it's a party. Rip into Jericho or Christian and you get crucified. Punk, as much hate as he has attracted recently, still falls into the latter category imo. His uber marks are probably the same people that would slate anybody else for falling ratings and all the rest of it yet with Punk it's everybody's fault but his. Of course there are the more objective of them out there but they seem to be few and far between. Same can be said for his haters or those that dislike him actually.


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> No need to apologize but surely you have to have encountered the double standards on this board and with the majority of the IWC in general. Rip into Cena or HHH and it's a party. Rip into Jericho or Christian and you get crucified. Punk, as much hate as he has attracted recently, still falls into the latter category imo. His uber marks are probably the same people that would slate anybody else for falling ratings and all the rest of it yet with Punk it's everybody's fault but his. Of course there are the more objective of them out there but they seem to be few and far between. Same can be said for his haters or those that dislike him actually.


Oh i definitely see double standrads on these boards (and any other boards I have ever posted on) thats for sure. I was more referencing my post in here with the Orton hate stuff, b/c thats the stuff I obviously missed.


----------



## version 1

Starbuck said:


> No need to apologize but surely you have to have encountered the double standards on this board and with the majority of the IWC in general. Rip into Cena or HHH and it's a party. Rip into Jericho or Christian and you get crucified. Punk, as much hate as he has attracted recently, still falls into the latter category imo. His uber marks are probably the same people that would slate anybody else for falling ratings and all the rest of it yet with Punk it's everybody's fault but his. Of course there are the more objective of them out there but they seem to be few and far between. Same can be said for his haters or those that dislike him actually.


I agree with your post. I also think that a lot of 'hate' can be contributed to some CM Punk marks. I remembered a lot of treats during the summer saying that CM Punk is the next G.O.A.T, next Austin, bigger then The Rock, outdraws The Rock, new top guy, No1 face of the company, will make wrestling interesting again, save WWE, etc.... and now that the ratings aren't so good some people are gonna have some pay back. That's why the ratings tread where so huge (and bad) the last couple of months and why we have one ratings tread right now.


----------



## DesolationRow

The thing is, Orton and Punk just aren't equal cases. Orton had been given a superpush for literally years on end culminating in a massive babyface turn and subsequent world championship chase throughout the entire spring and summer. And yet, at his most white hot in his entire career, Orton's taking of the WWE Championship in September 2010 didn't merely not budge the ratings in the positive direction, it coincided with a few weeks of steep ratings drops, which in fairness was in large part also due to the explosion of the new Monday Night Football season that year. In recent years the only world champion who's been able to keep the ship going strong in terms of ratings during Monday Night Football has been Cena. Punk's push was going very well until the entire situation became an ungodly mess thanks to the bizarre booking and writing with Triple H and particularly the way Kevin Nash was employed.

I love Chris Jericho to death, I love CM Punk, but if WWE is truly looking to book a Road to Wrestlemania feud between those two for the WWE Championship, I foresee weak quarter hours for a feud that will be viewed as a distant, distant almost quasi-midcard match for Wrestlemania beneath The Rock and John Cena. The only way to cement Punk at this point due in large part to WWE's botching of the Summer of Punk as we entered autumn was to have the feud everyone wanted, with a newly heel-turned Triple H. That would stand up as a worthy WWE Championship match and would draw strong ratings and would manage to not be utterly overshadowed by Rock/Cena the way I guarantee Jericho/Punk will be. Oh well. Again, I love Punk, I love Jericho (and I _love_ Triple H!) but Jericho is _not_ suited to put Punk over the top as a firmly entrenched megastar who can actually draw on his own. Triple H _is_. 

Speaking of ratings, it was in no small part thanks to Triple H and, to give the devil his due, Kevin Nash (for a little while when his involvement had some novelty to it) along with John Cena and Vince McMahon before them that allowed Punk to enjoy very healthy quarter hour ratings during the Summer of Punk. Separate Punk from those guys and he didn't fare nearly as well. Naturally. Batista needed Triple H in the same way when they were about to turn the corner with him; The Miz (who's currently in fucking limbo in a go-nowhere "feud" with R-Truth) needed Cena and The Rock during last year's RTWM season before he could begin drawing well (actually better than babyface Punk--and that is partly because Miz received a righteous push through Wrestlemania season opposite Cena and Rock, whereas Punk is apparently destined to be locked in with Jericho) on his own as WWE Champion; even a guy who was about as close to becoming a draw on his absolute own, John Cena, back in 2005 when he was finally being given the ball, benefited from his onscreen relationship with JBL--and then, once more, with that symbiotic relationship he had with Edge by the time 2006 began. 

Punk isn't drawing because WWE short-circuited his push opposite the absolute top names in the game (Cena, Triple H) around October, then rushed the WWE Championship onto him at Survivor Series instead of building him back up from the ground up all the way to Wrestlemania as a newly crowned face WWE Champion _there_. Feuding with a directionless Miz, an Alberto Del Rio who is not, despite everything, firmly established and in need of a character modification after a mere year and a half run as an onscreen character and now midcard Dolph Ziggler who's being given another obvious lame duck Royal Rumble world championship program ala last year on Smackdown with Edge won't do Punk any favors. The Laurinaitis storyline is stuck in the mud, and aside from that one very well-executed moment on the Jan. 2 show with Punk's verbal threat/promise to him backstage, has netted an almost complete void of anything interesting or memorable (it's the _Jaws: The Revenge_-level version of an original instant classic in Austin vs. McMahon at best). And Jericho, again, just isn't cut out to "make" someone a top guy forever. Triple H, of course is.

And that's why it pains me most especially as an ancient huge fan of Triple H to say that where everything began to go off course was when he exited the entire Punk angle in favor of having a feud with his old friend Kevin Nash that no one on this planet ever wanted aside from Nash himself. Nothing was gained from any of that. Nothing. _Nothing._ Meanwhile, Triple H turning heel would have been a drastic shot in the arm to a promotion and program in Raw that truly needed it and instead we're stuck with Punk and J-Ace acting like they're characters from _Office Space_ or something. 

Of course, nothing is carved into stone aside from Rock/Cena (and ostensibly Cena's inevitable heel turn which they foreshadow every week now), and it's conceivable that Punk can still do all right and wait for Heel Cena to go after him perhaps around Summerslam time, but I must say that if Jericho vs. Punk is the game plan, they've made a rather major misstep as that program, despite probably having some brilliant promos and leading to some fantastic matches, is not going to catapult Punk into the strata WWE needs and wants him to be in.


----------



## Starbuck

DesolationRow said:


> The thing is, Orton and Punk just aren't equal cases. Orton had been given a superpush for literally years on end culminating in a massive babyface turn and subsequent world championship chase throughout the entire spring and summer. And yet, at his most white hot in his entire career, Orton's taking of the WWE Championship in September 2010 didn't merely not budge the ratings in the positive direction, it coincided with a few weeks of steep ratings drops, which in fairness was in large part also due to the explosion of the new Monday Night Football season that year. In recent years the only world champion who's been able to keep the ship going strong in terms of ratings during Monday Night Football has been Cena. Punk's push was going very well until the entire situation became an ungodly mess thanks to the bizarre booking and writing with Triple H and particularly the way Kevin Nash was employed.
> 
> I love Chris Jericho to death, I love CM Punk, but if WWE is truly looking to book a Road to Wrestlemania feud between those two for the WWE Championship, I foresee weak quarter hours for a feud that will be viewed as a distant, distant almost quasi-midcard match for Wrestlemania beneath The Rock and John Cena. The only way to cement Punk at this point due in large part to WWE's botching of the Summer of Punk as we entered autumn was to have the feud everyone wanted, with a newly heel-turned Triple H. That would stand up as a worthy WWE Championship match and would draw strong ratings and would manage to not be utterly overshadowed by Rock/Cena the way I guarantee Jericho/Punk will be. Oh well. Again, I love Punk, I love Jericho (and I _love_ Triple H!) but Jericho is _not_ suited to put Punk over the top as a firmly entrenched megastar who can actually draw on his own. Triple H _is_.
> 
> Speaking of ratings, it was in no small part thanks to Triple H and, to give the devil his due, Kevin Nash (for a little while when his involvement had some novelty to it) along with John Cena and Vince McMahon before them that allowed Punk to enjoy very healthy quarter hour ratings during the Summer of Punk. Separate Punk from those guys and he didn't fare nearly as well. Naturally. Batista needed Triple H in the same way when they were about to turn the corner with him; The Miz (who's currently in fucking limbo in a go-nowhere "feud" with R-Truth) needed Cena and The Rock during last year's RTWM season before he could begin drawing well (actually better than babyface Punk--and that is partly because Miz received a righteous push through Wrestlemania season opposite Cena and Rock, whereas Punk is apparently destined to be locked in with Jericho) on his own as WWE Champion; even a guy who was about as close to becoming a draw on his absolute own, John Cena, back in 2005 when he was finally being given the ball, benefited from his onscreen relationship with JBL--and then, once more, with that symbiotic relationship he had with Edge by the time 2006 began.
> 
> Punk isn't drawing because WWE short-circuited his push opposite the absolute top names in the game (Cena, Triple H) around October, then rushed the WWE Championship onto him at Survivor Series instead of building him back up from the ground up all the way to Wrestlemania as a newly crowned face WWE Champion _there_. Feuding with a directionless Miz, an Alberto Del Rio who is not, despite everything, firmly established and in need of a character modification after a mere year and a half run as an onscreen character and now midcard Dolph Ziggler who's being given another obvious lame duck Royal Rumble world championship program ala last year on Smackdown with Edge won't do Punk any favors. The Laurinaitis storyline is stuck in the mud, and aside from that one very well-executed moment on the Jan. 2 show with Punk's verbal threat/promise to him backstage, has netted an almost complete void of anything interesting or memorable (it's the _Jaws: The Revenge_-level version of an original instant classic in Austin vs. McMahon at best). And Jericho, again, just isn't cut out to "make" someone a top guy forever. Triple H, of course is.
> 
> And that's why it pains me most especially as an ancient huge fan of Triple H to say that where everything began to go off course was when he exited the entire Punk angle in favor of having a feud with his old friend Kevin Nash that no one on this planet ever wanted aside from Nash himself. Nothing was gained from any of that. Nothing. _Nothing._ Meanwhile, Triple H turning heel would have been a drastic shot in the arm to a promotion and program in Raw that truly needed it and instead we're stuck with Punk and J-Ace acting like they're characters from _Office Space_ or something.
> 
> Of course, nothing is carved into stone aside from Rock/Cena (and ostensibly Cena's inevitable heel turn which they foreshadow every week now), and it's conceivable that Punk can still do all right and wait for Heel Cena to go after him perhaps around Summerslam time, but I must say that if Jericho vs. Punk is the game plan, they've made a rather major misstep as that program, despite probably having some brilliant promos and leading to some fantastic matches, is not going to catapult Punk into the strata WWE needs and wants him to be in.


I'm weeping at the return of common sense, rationality and logic lol. Bravo.


----------



## kokepepsi

Segment Breakdown
From Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 1/9 got hammered by the second most watched television show in the history of cable television.
> 
> The Alabama vs. LSU BCS championship football game did a 16.22 rating and 24.21 million viewers. The only show in the history of cable to do more viewers was last year’s BCS championship game on January 10, 2011, with Oregon vs. Auburn that did a 17.76 rating and 27.32 million viewers. The third biggest would be an October 5, 2009, edition of Monday Night Football that did a 15.3 rating and 21.84 million viewers.
> 
> While Raw was a blah show, most people knew ahead of time it was a show where you shouldn’t throw too much out because any kind of big angle would be wasted and should be saved for 1/16, when the January ratings bounce back should start building for the next three weeks. If that doesn’t happen, then it’s something to worry about.
> 
> The show did a 2.86 rating and 4.00 million viewers. It was 9th for the night on cable, with four of the eight shows that beat them being related to coverage of the game in some form. Notable is that NCIS, the show at 8 p.m. on USA, did 4.18 million viewers (the game started at 8:30 p.m. but the pre-game show on ESPN did monster numbers as well). But NCIS doesn’t draw the heavy male demo that both football and pro wrestling do. NCIS beating Raw I think has only happened once.
> 
> The show did a 2.5 in Male teens (up 9%), a 2.7 in Males 18-49 (down 4%), 1.3 in Women teens (up 44%) and 1.1 in Women 18-49 (down 8%). The show did 68.7% male viewers.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, Sheamus & Santino Marella vs. Wade Barrett & Jinder Mahal lost 238,000 viewers. Edge Hall of Fame package, Zack Ryder and Eve Torres backstage and Daniel Bryan vs. Kofi Kingston gained 100,000 viewers. The debut of Brodus Clay vs. Curt Hawkins plus Miz trying to recruit Primo & Epico lost 82,000 viewers. C.M. Punk vs. Jack Swagger gained 128,000 viewers and did a 3.00 rating in the 10 p.m. slot, which is terrible for the slot. Backstage stuff with Bellas and Miz and Ricardo Rodriguez, Cena and Ryder and the Four Horsemen vignette lost 193,000 viewers, which is actually much better than that segment usually does. The segment with R-Truth beating on Rodriguez and the Miz/R-Truth brawl, plus the second appearance of the mute Chris Jericho lost 130,000 viewers. Okay, this is something that is noteworthy. Eve Torres in the ring, Kane’s music hitting, Ryder trying to save her, getting her in the car and trying to change the tire lost 544,000 viewers and did a 2.39 quarter. To lose that many viewers that late in the show before the main event is something significant. And John Cena vs. Dolph Ziggler and the conclusion of that segment gained 640,000 viewers, which is normal level, but it still was only a 2.84 overrun, which is the second lowest overrun figure (even the show that did a 2.71 in September hit 3.03 for the overrun), behind only the week they did Punk & Bryan & Ziggler in the trios match, dating back to 1997.
> 
> As far as growth for Cena vs. Ziggler, Male teens went from 2.4 to 2.6, Males 18-49 from 2.3 to 2.6, Teenage girls from 1.0 to 1.2 and Women 18-49 from 0.8 to 1.0.


*Last Week Breakdown*


> *Raw on Jan. 2 *did a 3.11 rating and 4.43 million viewers. It’s interesting to note that the prior week’s show did a 2.93 rating but that was 4.47 million viewers. What that means is that the 12/26 show had 1.53 viewers per home, while the Jan. 2 show had 1.44 viewers per home.
> 
> The show went head-to-head with the Tostitos Fiesta Bowl game with Oklahoma State vs. Stanford that did a 9.66 rating and 13.68 million viewers. Raw was the 6th highest rated show on cable for the night.
> 
> The show did 67.8% male viewers. In the major demos, it did a 2.3 in Male teens (even with last week), a 2.8 in Males 18-49 (up 8%), a 0.9 in Women teens (down 18%) and a 1.2 in Women 18-49 (even with last week).
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, it was the bad pattern where the highest rated segment was first quarter with the John Cena in-ring and Kane on the tron which did a 3.36 rating. Cody Rhodes vs. Daniel Bryan lost 332,000 viewers. Yep, World champ vs. IC champ and people tuned out. Wade Barrett vs. Santino Marella and the Sheamus/Miz brawl gained 240,000 viewers. A bunch of backstage stuff (Dolph Ziggler interview; Zack Ryder, Eve Torres, Jack Swagger, John Laurinaitis and C.M. Punk) lost 431,000 viewers. Punk vs. Ziggler for the WWE title in the 10 p.m. segment gained 180,000 viewers which is bad for that segment. The return of Chris Jericho lost 82,000 viewers. The Cena & Zack Ryder & Big Show vs. Mark Henry & Swagger 3-on-2 elimination match and show ending angle with Cena, Kane and Ryder gained 383,000 viewers, weak for the overrun, doing a 3.33 rating. Main event saw Male teens go from 2.5 to 2.8, Male 18-49 from 2.9 to 3.3, Women teens from 0.9 to 1.0 and Women 18-49 stayed at 1.1.


----------



## Aficionado

Starbuck said:


> *DesolationRow's Post*
> 
> I'm weeping at the return of common sense, rationality and logic lol. Bravo.


Another magnificent post from DesRow.


----------



## planetarydeadlock

Simple. Unless there's a 'big name' leading the show (the Rock, Cena) the casual TV viewer is not going to give a fuck about Raw. Only wrestling fans. Hence the low ratings.

Now WWE start making new stars, take the little ratings hit for a bit, and it will be for the long term good.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

> And John Cena vs. Dolph Ziggler and the conclusion of that segment gained 640,000 viewers, which is normal level, but it still was only a 2.84 overrun, which is the second lowest overrun figure (even the show that did a 2.71 in September hit 3.03 for the overrun), behind only the week they did Punk & Bryan & Ziggler in the trios match, dating back to 1997.


So Punk haters, this MUST mean Cena can't draw either right? Punk vs. Swagger even did better. Now please, enough of this horseshit about one person drawing. It's not up to one individual. These ratings aren't Punk's fault, they aren't Cena's, not Jericho's, Kane's, Miz's, Orton's, etc. Have you not seen the garbage storylines that they are airing? This is the problem. You've got a WWE championship situation with no story at all with a challenger nobody gives a flying fuck about. Then you have this Kane/Cena/Ryder stuff which may just be some of the worst TV I've seen WWE do. They want good ratings, they need good storylines. It's just a shame to see people put the blame one on man when it's an entire show's doing.


----------



## Usered

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> *So Punk haters, this MUST mean Cena can't draw either right?* Punk vs. Swagger even did better. Now please, enough of this horseshit about one person drawing. It's not up to one individual. These ratings aren't Punk's fault, they aren't Cena's, not Jericho's, Kane's, Miz's, Orton's, etc. Have you not seen the garbage storylines that they are airing? This is the problem. You've got a WWE championship situation with no story at all with a challenger nobody gives a flying fuck about. Then you have this Kane/Cena/Ryder stuff which may just be some of the worst TV I've seen WWE do. They want good ratings, they need good storylines. It's just a shame to see people put the blame one on man when it's an entire show's doing.


WTF are you talking about dumbass? It gained over half a million viewers. 

Did you not read this?



> Eve Torres in the ring, Kane’s music hitting, Ryder trying to save her, getting her in the car and trying to change the tire *lost 544,000 viewers and did a 2.39 quarter. To lose that many viewers that late in the show before the main event is something significant.*



I am no punk hater but Punk doesnt draw and cena does. FACT. Dont dispute it.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Usered said:


> WTF are you talking about dumbass? It gained over half a million viewers.
> 
> Did you not read this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am no punk hater but Punk doesnt draw and cena does. FACT. Dont dispute it.


Calm your titties. I obviously wasn't saying Cena doesn't draw. But going by most of the arguments here saying Punk doesn't draw, it can be used here too. Okay the match gained that much, but not as much as it should have because the rating was the second lowest since 1997. Let me say it again so you don't have to act like an idiot, Cena isn't a ratings killer, no one man is. Bad storylines are ratings killers.


----------



## Romanista

F4WOnline said:


> In what definitely hurt the RAW rating, the January 9th RAW Supershow did a 2.86 rating with 4 million viewers up against the Alabama vs. LSU BCS Championship football game which did a 16.22 rating and 24.21 million viewers.
> 
> In the segment breakdown, Sheamus and Santino Marella vs. Wade Barrett and Jinder Mahal lost 238,000 viewers from the opener. The Edge Hall of Fame announcement, a segment with Eve Torres and Zack Ryder plus Daniel Bryan vs. Kofi Kingston gained 100,000 viewers back.
> 
> Brodus Clay's debut vs. Curt Hawkins plus a segment with The Miz, Primo and Epico lost 82,000 viewers. In the 10pm timeslot, CM Punk vs. Jack Swagger did a 3.00 rating and gained 128,000 viewers - another bad number for 10pm.
> 
> Backstage segments with The Bellas, The Miz, Ricardo Rodriguez, John Cena and Zack Ryder plus the Four Horsemen Hall of Fame video lost 193,000 viewers. The segment with R-Truth & Rodriguez plus the brawl with The Miz and Chris Jericho's appearance lost 130,000 viewers.
> 
> The segment with Eve Torres in the ring, Kane coming out and Zack Ryder trying to save her by taking her to his car lost 544,000 viewers and did a 2.39 quarter rating. It's a bad sign when RAW loses over a half-million viewers before the main event. The main event of Cena vs. Dolph Ziggler and the end segment in the parking lot gained 640,000 viewers for a 2.84 overrun rating. This is about normal viewership for the overrun but the second-lowest rating going back to 1997.
> 
> During the Cena vs. Ziggler main event, Male Teens went from a 2.4 rating to a 2.6, Males 18-49 went from a 2.3 to a 2.6, Female Teens went from a 1.0 to a 1.2 and Females 18-49 went from a 0.8 to a 1.0 rating.
> 
> Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter


:lmao @ Zack Ryder! ...and CM Punk


----------



## Hollywood Hanoi

Falkono said:


> Ah got to love people on here trying to run damage control. It is down basically half a million in a week but people say it is the same....When you are down 20% how is that the same? When "Pawn Stars" beats you thats when you know your in trouble....
> 
> Just further evidence that WWE needs to shake things up or 2012 will be a very bad year for them.


Im not a fan of pawn stars at all but i find shows of its ilk (hardcore pawn, cash cowboys, american pickers, etc) strangely addictive, theyre all repetitive and happen in short segments so its no harm to tune in and out, which makes it a perfect show to run against raw because whenever raw starts to get boring (such when divas come out) you can just flip over and catch a segment without needing to see the whole show.
Im guessing part of the reason the ryder/eve segment bombed so much was viewers assumed the diva match was starting and tuned out. (shame for them, they missed that thrilling tyre changing action)


----------



## Bushmaster

they should just make a Tim Tebow appreciation raw. The TebowManiacs are driving me crazy and now he is supposedly everyones favorite athlete. Maybe he'd bring better numbers than the Rock


----------



## FITZ

SoupMan Prime said:


> they should just make a Tim Tebow appreciation raw. The TebowManiacs are driving me crazy and now he is supposedly everyones favorite athlete. Maybe he'd bring better numbers than the Rock


Too bad Tebow will be busy until after the Superbowl.


----------



## kokepepsi

Romanista said:


> :lmao @ Zack Ryder! ...and CM Punk


u fogot jeriko


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

Hate the ratings fad but damn at Jericho being apart of segments losing viewers for the second week.


----------



## WWE

Cant wait for the full blown WAR next week.


----------



## dxbender

SoupMan Prime said:


> they should just make a Tim Tebow appreciation raw. The TebowManiacs are driving me crazy and now he is supposedly everyones favorite athlete. Maybe he'd bring better numbers than the Rock


Raw is in KC on the 30th(night after RR), if Broncos are eliminated by then, imagine Tebow in KC(division rivals).

Raw is in San Deigo(home of the Chargers,another division rival for Tebows Broncos) on February 13th

Raw is in Massachusetts(home of New England Patriots) on March 5th. If the Broncos win this Sunday, regardless if they win the superbowl, imagine how much Tebow would be booed then.

3 potential nights if WWE was actually serious about that.

Though I think we might see Pats-49ers in the finals because those are 2 places WWE are going to in the next several weeks(remember last year how they just happened to be in green bay right after the packers won the superbowl)


----------



## spiraltap

TripleG said:


> I love how a low (or high rating for that matter) always falls squarely on the champion. I never understood that logic. Shawn Michaels was accused of not being a draw in 1996 when WCW took control of the ratings. But Good God! Look at both shows. On one show you had cartoon characters running around like Mantaur with a Shawn Michaels main event, and on the other, they were doing something revolutionary with the nWo. Which show would you watch? The champion can't be blamed for the entire show sucking.
> 
> And I'll use TNA as an example. So is it AJ's fault that TNA got their ass kicked by the WWE while he was champion? But wait, I thought Hulk Hogan was going to be the one to change everything and bring in new audiences, so shouldn't the blame fall on him instead of AJ?
> 
> Look at Monday's show. The main angle was the Kane/Cena storyline and it has been for the last few weeks, yet the low ratings are Punk's fault? Heck, they even switched Punk out of the main event segments & ratings are still basically the same.
> 
> MAYBE, the real culprit falls on creative. The show's are bad and people are turning away. Doesn't matter if its Punk or Cena who is carrying the strap. The show is still going to suck. Where WWE botched it is that The Summer of Punk should have led to a creative high & change of personality for the show and it didn't at all. They are right back to doing what they doing before the Punk shoot pretty much. Yeah, Punk is on top, but its still the same show, same cliches, same stupidity, same presentation. Nothing really changed.


I'll put it to you like this. Let's say Triple H and Zack Ryder appear in a segment together. Doesn't matter what the segment is whether they're cutting a promo, fighting, singing I'm Walking On Sunshine by Katrina and the Waves, whatever. If the segment rating is good Triple H will take all the credit. If the segment rating tanks Zack Ryder will take all the blame. You almost never see a wrestler say "Man that segment rating bombed because of me."


----------



## SteenIsGod

People aren't getting one thing about the 1st week of Jericho's return. Jericho's return was paired up with the Bella Twins Vs. Eve/Kelly. The divas match segment, normally losing 400,000-800,000 viewers only lost 80,000. Think about that for a second.


----------



## kokepepsi

> Randy Orton vs. Wade Barrett fell 721,000 viewers. Beth Phoenix vs. Alicia Fox gained 277,000


Think about that for a sec

Alicia Fox>Beth>Jericho>Orton>Barret


----------



## NWO3:16

RAW looked very poor, the backstage segments were awful. Ryder falling onto a mattress. Kane talking on the mic i hate it. Ryder trying to rescue eve trying to change a wheel on the car. and what a stupid looking car it was!

The daniel bryan kofi kingston match was quite decent but i think they should have had more time. 

And Jericho ooming in and not talking AGAIN! How stupid does he look, getting really boring. I actually think TNA is much better than RAW and thats the first i have said this in a long long time!

I rate mondays RAW as a 1 out of 10. Lowest score i have ever rated it!


----------



## Astitude

spiraltap said:


> I'll put it to you like this. Let's say Triple H and Zack Ryder appear in a segment together. Doesn't matter what the segment is whether they're cutting a promo, fighting, singing I'm Walking On Sunshine by Katrina and the Waves, whatever. If the segment rating is good Triple H will take all the credit. If the segment rating tanks Zack Ryder will take all the blame. You almost never see a wrestler say "Man that segment rating bombed because of me."


You are Wrong though. If you are talking about WWE management, then i am sure no one is going to question HHH if one segment tanked in ratings. Aside from the fact that he is basically a office guy now, HHH has made a loads of money for them in the past, so one segment isnt worth it. 

If you are talking about IWC, then HHH will be held responsible not ryder. HHH is the draw, he is suppose to bring in viewers, if he is not able to then he is responsible not ryder. I dont really get what was the point of your post anyways. 

as for all this ratings arguments go, i dont think WWE even cares about them so much as we do everyweek tbh. I mean if the main event bombs or the opening seg doesnt draw, that is obviously something to be concerned about but i dont think they even bother with the ratings of the rest of the show imo. 
Lets face it, After building up for the Jan 2 return of chris jericho, they actually flew him in public instead of using a private jet. Its like Vince knew jericho aint worth a shit for the ratings, so he just didnt bother with the private jet, the secret limo & shit lol.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

So obviously Punk's at fault for the rating this week despite only being a very minor part of the sho... hold on a sec...



DesolationRow said:


> The thing is, Orton and Punk just aren't equal cases. Orton had been given a superpush for literally years on end culminating in a massive babyface turn and subsequent world championship chase throughout the entire spring and summer. And yet, at his most white hot in his entire career, Orton's taking of the WWE Championship in September 2010 didn't merely not budge the ratings in the positive direction, it coincided with a few weeks of steep ratings drops, which in fairness was in large part also due to the explosion of the new Monday Night Football season that year. In recent years the only world champion who's been able to keep the ship going strong in terms of ratings during Monday Night Football has been Cena. Punk's push was going very well until the entire situation became an ungodly mess thanks to the bizarre booking and writing with Triple H and particularly the way Kevin Nash was employed.
> 
> I love Chris Jericho to death, I love CM Punk, but if WWE is truly looking to book a Road to Wrestlemania feud between those two for the WWE Championship, I foresee weak quarter hours for a feud that will be viewed as a distant, distant almost quasi-midcard match for Wrestlemania beneath The Rock and John Cena. The only way to cement Punk at this point due in large part to WWE's botching of the Summer of Punk as we entered autumn was to have the feud everyone wanted, with a newly heel-turned Triple H. That would stand up as a worthy WWE Championship match and would draw strong ratings and would manage to not be utterly overshadowed by Rock/Cena the way I guarantee Jericho/Punk will be. Oh well. Again, I love Punk, I love Jericho (and I _love_ Triple H!) but Jericho is _not_ suited to put Punk over the top as a firmly entrenched megastar who can actually draw on his own. Triple H _is_.
> 
> Speaking of ratings, it was in no small part thanks to Triple H and, to give the devil his due, Kevin Nash (for a little while when his involvement had some novelty to it) along with John Cena and Vince McMahon before them that allowed Punk to enjoy very healthy quarter hour ratings during the Summer of Punk. Separate Punk from those guys and he didn't fare nearly as well. Naturally. Batista needed Triple H in the same way when they were about to turn the corner with him; The Miz (who's currently in fucking limbo in a go-nowhere "feud" with R-Truth) needed Cena and The Rock during last year's RTWM season before he could begin drawing well (actually better than babyface Punk--and that is partly because Miz received a righteous push through Wrestlemania season opposite Cena and Rock, whereas Punk is apparently destined to be locked in with Jericho) on his own as WWE Champion; even a guy who was about as close to becoming a draw on his absolute own, John Cena, back in 2005 when he was finally being given the ball, benefited from his onscreen relationship with JBL--and then, once more, with that symbiotic relationship he had with Edge by the time 2006 began.
> 
> Punk isn't drawing because WWE short-circuited his push opposite the absolute top names in the game (Cena, Triple H) around October, then rushed the WWE Championship onto him at Survivor Series instead of building him back up from the ground up all the way to Wrestlemania as a newly crowned face WWE Champion _there_. Feuding with a directionless Miz, an Alberto Del Rio who is not, despite everything, firmly established and in need of a character modification after a mere year and a half run as an onscreen character and now midcard Dolph Ziggler who's being given another obvious lame duck Royal Rumble world championship program ala last year on Smackdown with Edge won't do Punk any favors. The Laurinaitis storyline is stuck in the mud, and aside from that one very well-executed moment on the Jan. 2 show with Punk's verbal threat/promise to him backstage, has netted an almost complete void of anything interesting or memorable (it's the _Jaws: The Revenge_-level version of an original instant classic in Austin vs. McMahon at best). And Jericho, again, just isn't cut out to "make" someone a top guy forever. Triple H, of course is.
> 
> And that's why it pains me most especially as an ancient huge fan of Triple H to say that where everything began to go off course was when he exited the entire Punk angle in favor of having a feud with his old friend Kevin Nash that no one on this planet ever wanted aside from Nash himself. Nothing was gained from any of that. Nothing. _Nothing._ Meanwhile, Triple H turning heel would have been a drastic shot in the arm to a promotion and program in Raw that truly needed it and instead we're stuck with Punk and J-Ace acting like they're characters from _Office Space_ or something.
> 
> Of course, nothing is carved into stone aside from Rock/Cena (and ostensibly Cena's inevitable heel turn which they foreshadow every week now), and it's conceivable that Punk can still do all right and wait for Heel Cena to go after him perhaps around Summerslam time, but I must say that if Jericho vs. Punk is the game plan, they've made a rather major misstep as that program, despite probably having some brilliant promos and leading to some fantastic matches, is not going to catapult Punk into the strata WWE needs and wants him to be in.


WHERE THE FUCK DID YOU COME BACK FROM?!


----------



## Mike`

SteenIsGod said:


> People aren't getting one thing about the 1st week of Jericho's return. Jericho's return was paired up with the Bella Twins Vs. Eve/Kelly. The divas match segment, normally losing 400,000-800,000 viewers only lost 80,000. Think about that for a second.


You're expecting too much from most of the people on this forum. They'll look at the numbers and immediately post "lololol he can't draw"


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Not one man is responsible for the ratings decline. A cena mainevent did a 2.8 overun, does this mean Cena doesnt draw? no its just the overall quality of the product.


----------



## King_Kool-Aid™

DesolationRow said:


> The thing is, Orton and Punk just aren't equal cases. Orton had been given a superpush for literally years on end culminating in a massive babyface turn and subsequent world championship chase throughout the entire spring and summer. And yet, at his most white hot in his entire career, Orton's taking of the WWE Championship in September 2010 didn't merely not budge the ratings in the positive direction, it coincided with a few weeks of steep ratings drops, which in fairness was in large part also due to the explosion of the new Monday Night Football season that year. In recent years the only world champion who's been able to keep the ship going strong in terms of ratings during Monday Night Football has been Cena. Punk's push was going very well until the entire situation became an ungodly mess thanks to the bizarre booking and writing with Triple H and particularly the way Kevin Nash was employed.
> 
> I love Chris Jericho to death, I love CM Punk, but if WWE is truly looking to book a Road to Wrestlemania feud between those two for the WWE Championship, I foresee weak quarter hours for a feud that will be viewed as a distant, distant almost quasi-midcard match for Wrestlemania beneath The Rock and John Cena. The only way to cement Punk at this point due in large part to WWE's botching of the Summer of Punk as we entered autumn was to have the feud everyone wanted, with a newly heel-turned Triple H. That would stand up as a worthy WWE Championship match and would draw strong ratings and would manage to not be utterly overshadowed by Rock/Cena the way I guarantee Jericho/Punk will be. Oh well. Again, I love Punk, I love Jericho (and I _love_ Triple H!) but Jericho is _not_ suited to put Punk over the top as a firmly entrenched megastar who can actually draw on his own. Triple H _is_.
> 
> Speaking of ratings, it was in no small part thanks to Triple H and, to give the devil his due, Kevin Nash (for a little while when his involvement had some novelty to it) along with John Cena and Vince McMahon before them that allowed Punk to enjoy very healthy quarter hour ratings during the Summer of Punk. Separate Punk from those guys and he didn't fare nearly as well. Naturally. Batista needed Triple H in the same way when they were about to turn the corner with him; The Miz (who's currently in fucking limbo in a go-nowhere "feud" with R-Truth) needed Cena and The Rock during last year's RTWM season before he could begin drawing well (actually better than babyface Punk--and that is partly because Miz received a righteous push through Wrestlemania season opposite Cena and Rock, whereas Punk is apparently destined to be locked in with Jericho) on his own as WWE Champion; even a guy who was about as close to becoming a draw on his absolute own, John Cena, back in 2005 when he was finally being given the ball, benefited from his onscreen relationship with JBL--and then, once more, with that symbiotic relationship he had with Edge by the time 2006 began.
> 
> Punk isn't drawing because WWE short-circuited his push opposite the absolute top names in the game (Cena, Triple H) around October, then rushed the WWE Championship onto him at Survivor Series instead of building him back up from the ground up all the way to Wrestlemania as a newly crowned face WWE Champion _there_. Feuding with a directionless Miz, an Alberto Del Rio who is not, despite everything, firmly established and in need of a character modification after a mere year and a half run as an onscreen character and now midcard Dolph Ziggler who's being given another obvious lame duck Royal Rumble world championship program ala last year on Smackdown with Edge won't do Punk any favors. The Laurinaitis storyline is stuck in the mud, and aside from that one very well-executed moment on the Jan. 2 show with Punk's verbal threat/promise to him backstage, has netted an almost complete void of anything interesting or memorable (it's the _Jaws: The Revenge_-level version of an original instant classic in Austin vs. McMahon at best). And Jericho, again, just isn't cut out to "make" someone a top guy forever. Triple H, of course is.
> 
> And that's why it pains me most especially as an ancient huge fan of Triple H to say that where everything began to go off course was when he exited the entire Punk angle in favor of having a feud with his old friend Kevin Nash that no one on this planet ever wanted aside from Nash himself. Nothing was gained from any of that. Nothing. _Nothing._ Meanwhile, Triple H turning heel would have been a drastic shot in the arm to a promotion and program in Raw that truly needed it and instead we're stuck with Punk and J-Ace acting like they're characters from _Office Space_ or something.
> 
> Of course, nothing is carved into stone aside from Rock/Cena (and ostensibly Cena's inevitable heel turn which they foreshadow every week now), and it's conceivable that Punk can still do all right and wait for Heel Cena to go after him perhaps around Summerslam time, but I must say that if Jericho vs. Punk is the game plan, they've made a rather major misstep as that program, despite probably having some brilliant promos and leading to some fantastic matches, is not going to catapult Punk into the strata WWE needs and wants him to be in.


You're buying into the WWE hype machine. Triple H is no more of a draw than HBK, Jericho or Orton. He isn't a bigger draw than either of those guys. Its just the way he's booked compared to them would have you believe so. Punk doesn't need a match with Jericho or Triple H he needs it with Undertaker or someone else of that star power that we can TRULY say draws. Triple H is no more of a draw than Jericho and having him feud with Punk would just give us another stale "hunter" feud that ends with no big payoff. So he beats Triple H finally? Big deal. Have him beat Undertaker and end his streak.

Now we'd be going somewhere.


----------



## yoseftigger

jblvdx said:


> Not one man is responsible for the ratings decline. A cena mainevent did a 2.8 overun, does this mean Cena doesnt draw? no its just the overall quality of the product.


Cena gained 600k. What has Punk gained?


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

yoseftigger said:


> Cena gained 600k. What has Punk gained?


More people watched Punk and Swagger then Ziggler vs Cena. But thats because the Ryder shit backstage did fucking awful, but still a Cena mainevent doing a 2.8 number is very bad. But its not Cena's fault, its the uneventful nature of the show itself.


----------



## p862011

^cena is all over the show punk had 1 match and left


----------



## deatawaits

The last two weeks breakdown is bit disturbing.This clarifies that punk is not drawing atm but_* NOT A SINGLE GUY NOT EVEN CENA IS DRAWING NOW*_


----------



## Geeve

Didn't read whole thread, just pointing out that the 18-49 and teen demos were all up while total viewership was down. Quarter hours are dumb because what if segments overrun into each other and what if one has more commercials?


----------



## Wagg

The ratings sucks because of the Hollywood writers and the weak roster that WWE have right now.


----------



## deadmanwatching

Cena Attract his Fans(girls or kids) like a magnet,don't Say Cena is not a Draw.


----------



## RKO299

punk cant draw


----------



## Green Light

This thread is boring without Rock316AE


----------



## kokepepsi

jblvdx said:


> More people watched Punk and Swagger then Ziggler vs Cena. But thats because the Ryder shit backstage did fucking awful, but still a Cena mainevent doing a 2.8 number is very bad. But its not Cena's fault, its the uneventful nature of the show itself.


Yeah but,

Looking at Punks ratings gain pattern, If Punk was in the last segment, no way that segment gains anywhere near 600k for the overrun.

If Cena was in the 10Pm slot vs Swagger, no way that does 128k


----------



## BlakeGriffinFan32

I love it how people say Punk can't draw and he's hardly been given a chance to draw.


----------



## A-C-P

kokepepsi said:


> Yeah but,
> 
> Looking at Punks ratings gain pattern, If Punk was in the last segment, no way that segment gains anywhere near 600k for the overrun.
> 
> If Cena was in the 10Pm slot vs Swagger, no way that does 128k


Are we really still debating if Cena or Punk is a bigger draw? I am a HUGE Punk fan but theres no argument here Cena is the biggest draw in the WWE hands down.

My point is though if the WWE ever wants to have any other draws besides Cena they need to actually let some of their other talent have the spotlight for an extended period (whether it be Punk or someone else) and not just keep throwing Cena back into all the main spots of the show after the "whatever new thing they are trying" has lowered ratings for a few weeks, b/c (and we are starting to see it now) just throwing Cena back as the main focus of the show is eventually going to stop working.



RKO299 said:


> punk cant draw


:lmao I think all of his other 47 posts are exact copies of this post.


----------



## Cliffy

That second hour is atrocious.


----------



## kokepepsi

A-C-P said:


> Are we really still debating if Cena or Punk is a bigger draw? I am a HUGE Punk fan but theres no argument here Cena is the biggest draw in the WWE hands down.
> 
> My point is though if the WWE ever wants to have any other draws besides Cena they need to actually let some of their other talent have the spotlight for an extended period (whether it be Punk or someone else) and not just keep throwing Cena back into all the main spots of the show after the "whatever new thing they are trying" has lowered ratings for a few weeks, b/c (and we are starting to see it now) just throwing Cena back as the main focus of the show is eventually going to stop working.



Nah that jblvdx dude made it seem like Cena can't bump up the rating so stop picking on Punk.

But if Punk had followed Zack Ryder, no way he gains anywhere near 600k


----------



## A-C-P

kokepepsi said:


> Nah that jblvdx dude made it seem like Cena can't bump up the rating so stop picking on Punk.
> 
> *But if Punk had followed Zack Ryder, no way he gains anywhere near 600k*


I am not just talking about jblvdx though there are plenty of other Punk Marks (I hate grouping them together like that, b/c I am a Punk Mark to) that will argue it.

You are 100% correct on the bolded part. But like I said in my earlier post the WWe can't just keep relying on throwing Cena into the main focus of the show b/c of a few weeks of lowered ratings b/c its going to eventually stop working. They need to build more stars than just Cena and to an extent Orton. I would think the WWE is smart enough to realize pushing new talent is going to result in a ratings drop at first, but they seem to not realize this and just keep going back to the Cena well (not that I blame them for that).


----------



## Hemen

kokepepsi said:


> Segment Breakdown
> From Observer Newsletter
> 
> 
> 
> *Last Week Breakdown*


Ah, that's good! The more the ratings fall the more WWE will doubt their PG product. If just the ratings fall even more the next months, then wwe might bring raw to tv 14 and we will get blood again 

And there is three stuff WWE need to get better ratings: Better storylines, better booking and blood.(which is needed to get younger fans since this generations kids play shotting games pretty and they also get more blood and violence than previous generations got). 


If WWE does these three things i will stop complaining and be happy with the product


----------



## Patrick Bateman

Do you guys know how many viewers the episode with the greater power reveling himselg achievd or where I could look it up?


----------



## admiremyclone

RevolverSnake said:


> Do you guys know how many viewers the episode with the greater power reveling himselg achievd or where I could look it up?


It got a 6.7 rating. The week before was the RAW IS OWEN episode and that had a 7.2 rating!

Even crazier, the May 10th episode did 8.1!


----------



## kokepepsi

admiremyclone said:


> It got a 6.7 rating. The week before was the RAW IS OWEN episode and that had a 7.2 rating!
> 
> Even crazier, the May 10th episode did 8.1!


Nitro did a 3.4

Raw can't even get a 3.0 13yrs later

8*D


----------



## A-C-P

Hemen said:


> Ah, that's good! The more the ratings fall the more WWE will doubt their PG product. If just the ratings fall even more the next months, then wwe might bring raw to tv 14 and we will get blood again
> 
> *And there is three stuff WWE need to get better ratings: Better storylines, better booking and blood.*(which is needed to get younger fans since this generations kids play shotting games pretty and they also get more blood and violence than previous generations got).
> 
> 
> If WWE does these three things i will stop complaining and be happy with the product


Definitely with you on the first 2, not sure blood has much to do with the ratings (although I liked involved in the product to a certain extent) But just changing to a TV 14 rating and not changing the booking or stroylines isn't really going to help anything.

But I do agree that hopefully the steadily declining ratings (although like i have said before there are some many other reasons for this just besides the state of the product) will eventually show them that the current way they are presenting their product is not working real well.


----------



## A-C-P

double post sorry


----------



## Brye

Better booking is a must, tbh.


----------



## D.M.N.

January 2nd, 2012 - Breakdown
Q1 - 3.36 rating / 4.77 million
Q2 - 3.13 rating / 4.44 million
Q3 - 3.30 rating / 4.68 million
Q4 - 3.00 rating / 4.25 million
Q5 + Q6 3.08 rating / 4.43 million
Q7 - 3.02 rating / 4.35 million
Q8 + OR - 3.33 rating / 4.73 million

Not an atrocious breakdown by any means, just disappointing with no bump at all for Jericho's segment. You can't blame his actions once he had come out, the audience didn't predict he was going to do that, so it's all a bit odd. But the numbers do not lie.

January 9th, 2012 - Breakdown
Q1 - 3.07 rating / 4.25 million
Q2 - 2.90 rating / 4.01 million
Q3 - 2.97 rating / 4.11 million
Q4 - 2.91 rating / 4.03 million
Q5 - 2.93 rating / 4.15 million
Q6 - 2.80 rating / 3.96 million
Q7 - 2.71 rating / 3.83 million
Q8 - 2.39 rating / 3.29 million
OR - 2.84 rating / 3.93 million

I think this is more alarming than atrocious. The first thing I'd point to is Chris Jericho's segment under 4 million viewers. It feels as if their work from the "It Begins" promos has been undone or they have gone in entirely the wrong direction. Jericho's angle doesn't get people talking about the angle in a positive light, it gets people talking in a negative light. His segment also doesn't bring old fans which may be concerning. Okay, he wasn't the biggest draw, but I think *some* boost must have been expected. But there was no twist from his angle last week, hell, some people may have just thought it was a one night appearance, which wouldn't surprise me.

The real concern, however, is Q8. RAW should never be recording quarter ratings of 3.3 million unless:

a) it is a holiday (it wasn't)
b) it is on a different channel or timeslot (it wasn't)
c) it is the first hour of a three hour RAW (it wasn't)

Q8 was on from 22:45 to 23:00 which was a Royal Rumble rebound, two commercials and the Kane/Ryder/Eve stuff. So there was only about 5 minutes of action in a 15-minute quarter. But that is no excuse for the extremely poor quarter hour, otherwise you may as well go through the other eight quarters and find the filler material.


----------



## Astitude

D.M.N. said:


> Q8 was on from 22:45 to 23:00 which was a Royal Rumble rebound, two commercials and the Kane/Ryder/Eve stuff. *So there was only about 5 minutes of action in a 15-minute quarter.* But that is no excuse for the extremely poor quarter hour, otherwise you may as well go through the other eight quarters and find the filler material.


Yes but the 5 minutes of action was suppose to be diva's match remember? I dont think we can blame ryder or kane on this. People probably tuned in after commercial, saw Eve torres make her entrance and thought its going to be Divas match, so decided to change channel or a "Piss break". 

WWE is stupid for running that Kane-Ryder injury/Brawl angle before the divas match.


----------



## Starbuck

Jericho losing viewers again is just horrible. There's no other way to describe it really. I understand that the overall show is shitty and that the quarter hours he's been given are also a bit odd but this is still a really bad reflection on him. Rock has appeared in Q2 and had a ridiculous gain in a segment that usually loses viewers. Yes I know he's the Rock but still. HHH has also appeared during a random quarter when the shows were also pretty shitty and it gained viewers too. The pattern that we all established a while back was that people were tuning in for the big stars to see what they were doing no matter what and then leaving again in the middle of the show before coming back at the end again. Nobody seems to be tuning in for Jericho at all, not even to see him and then leave when his part is done. After all that hype and.....nothing. It's just not good.

As for the overall breakdown, they flat out suck. But since MNF is done with I suspect that we'll see the viewership bump we were expecting for Jan 2nd next week. Maybe it's just going to come 2 weeks too late is all. If things haven't picked up by the end of the month, then it will be cause for concern; firstly because of the impact on Rumble buys and for obvious reasons also.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Jericho losing viewers again is just horrible. There's no other way to describe it really. I understand that the overall show is shitty and that the quarter hours he's been given are also a bit odd but this is still a really bad reflection on him. Rock has appeared in Q2 and had a ridiculous gain in a segment that usually loses viewers. Yes I know he's the Rock but still. HHH has also appeared during a random quarter when the shows were also pretty shitty and it gained viewers too. The pattern that we all established a while back was that people were tuning in for the big stars to see what they were doing no matter what and then leaving again in the middle of the show before coming back at the end again. Nobody seems to be tuning in for Jericho at all, not even to see him and then leave when his part is done. After all that hype and.....nothing. It's just not good.
> 
> As for the overall breakdown, they flat out suck. But since MNF is done with I suspect that we'll see the viewership bump we were expecting for Jan 2nd next week. Maybe it's just going to come 2 weeks too late is all. If things haven't picked up by the end of the month, then it will be cause for concern; firstly because of the impact on Rumble buys and for obvious reasons also.


I think if something like this happened in the opening slot, 10pm slot 9 (Q5), or last slot of the show, then the numbers we're seeing right now would be terrible. The thing is it hasn't been, and I personally think it's been a mistake not putting him there. HHH was at least always in one of those big slots (Q1, Q5, or Q8+OR) so of course it was going to do well (I wouldn't call it random either). Granted he did a lot better than Punk is now, and he's a bigger draw than Jericho, but I think if Jericho came out in one of the big three quarters, he would've at least gotten a good number for it. Stick him in the Q5 slot next week and see what happened. (I wouldn't expect an 800,000+ increase or something great like that, but maybe a good number like 400k-500k plus increase).

The only reason I can think of that they haven't done it yet and instead have put him in these normally losing timeslots is because they wanted people to really keep their eyes on the TV and stay tuned throughout the whole show for Jericho's return. They wanted to get those numbers to increase the last couple of weeks... but since it's been a surprise to see him in those timeslots and people don't want to see the rest of the shit that goes on, I don't think anyone could really get those numbers to increase at least decently nowadays besides a big draw like Rock, Cena, Taker, or HHH. 

I say he should be put in one of the big timeslots, a Cena segment should be put in one of those big timeslots, and then third one is up in the air between another Cena segment/match or a Punk segment (not a Punk match since those have been poor ratings wise). At least try that for next week and see what happens. If Jericho's slot does well then it does well and the angle isn't as much a failure ratings wise as it's appearing. If it doesn't do well... then guess it shows this whole "Jericho being silent" thing just isn't working with the casuals and maybe he should start talking again at least.


----------



## LarryCoon

Why are people surprised at Y2J losing viewers? There is absolutely nothing entertaining about him right now. You could argue that he is planting seeds for a heel turn and a future feud and I would agree with you. As far as entertainment right now regarding Y2J, as soon as I knew he was going to do same thing, I changed the channel.


----------



## kokepepsi

Starbuck you forgot the 3rd person who also gains in segments that lose viewers.

*Mason Ryan*


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

kokepepsi said:


> Starbuck you forgot the 3rd person who also gains in segments that lose viewers.
> 
> *Mason Ryan*


lol... but somehow it was true, and I still don't understand why or how to this very day that happened unless people really turned on the channel and thought he was Batista. :lmao


----------



## Starbuck

Obis said:


> I think if something like this happened in the opening slot, 10pm slot 9 (Q5), or last slot of the show, then the numbers we're seeing right now would be terrible. The thing is it hasn't been, and I personally think it's been a mistake not putting him there. HHH was at least always in one of those big slots (Q1, Q5, or Q8+OR) so of course it was going to do well (I wouldn't call it random either). Granted he did a lot better than Punk is now, and he's a bigger draw than Jericho, but I think if Jericho came out in one of the big three quarters, he would've at least gotten a good number for it. Stick him in the Q5 slot next week and see what happened. (I wouldn't expect an 800,000+ increase or something great like that, but maybe a good number like 400k-500k plus increase).
> 
> The only reason I can think of that they haven't done it yet and instead have put him in these normally losing timeslots is because they wanted people to really keep their eyes on the TV and stay tuned throughout the whole show for Jericho's return. They wanted to get those numbers to increase the last couple of weeks... but since it's been a surprise to see him in those timeslots and people don't want to see the rest of the shit that goes on, I don't think anyone could really get those numbers to increase at least decently nowadays besides a big draw like Rock, Cena, Taker, or HHH.
> 
> I say he should be put in one of the big timeslots, a Cena segment should be put in one of those big timeslots, and then third one is up in the air between another Cena segment/match or a Punk segment (not a Punk match since those have been poor ratings wise). At least try that for next week and see what happens. If Jericho's slot does well then it does well and the angle isn't as much a failure ratings wise as it's appearing. If it doesn't do well... then guess it shows this whole "Jericho being silent" thing just isn't working with the casuals and maybe he should start talking again at least.


I was referencing the time Trips came out during Q3 iirc and it gained. Yes he, and Rock, Cena etc for that matter are mostly in the quarter hours that usually do the best but that's because they _do_ actually draw. Look what happens when you put Punk in there. Most times he does about half of what those other guys are doing. That's because as well as the regular people who tune in at that time, other people are tuning in, seeing Rock/Cena/HHH on their TV and staying put until their segment is done. Then they're leaving again. Despite the fact that Jericho has been put in odd quarters, people aren't interested enough to keep checking back to see when he's there. At least that's what I'm getting from it. Either that or it's like what we've all said, that the silent thing just makes for bad TV. Then there's the fact that those guys, bar Cena who has had some weird quarter hours these past few months, have never lost viewers iirc, something that both Punk and now Jericho have. 

Whatever it is, I'm expecting a significant jump once football is over. I said this 2 weeks ago for It Begins and it didn't happen. If it doesn't happen again, then I'd start to worry if I were Vince and Co.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Don't remember HHH being in a Q3 segment unless it was that one time he did a small backstage segment with John L., and that (along with other stuff) lost viewers.

I'll admit though, I can understand this week, after last week why people may have tuned out when he was doing the same thing he did last week. They probably thought he wasn't going to speak... and they were right. Still it was only an 80k loss, so I don't think it's THAT bad. The other thing is Jericho has never been a draw anyway, so that's another reason why I don't think he's doing that badly considering how much those odd quarters can and have lost.

But yeah, it'll be interesting to see what happens this week as a whole.


----------



## Brye

kokepepsi said:


> Starbuck you forgot the 3rd person who also gains in segments that lose viewers.
> 
> *Mason Ryan*


I think WWE realized that if they kept putting him on TV he'd end up injuring the entire midcard.


----------



## WWE

Im sure im not the only one who thought Mason Ryan was Batista at first glance


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Cycloneon said:


> Im sure im not the only one who thought Mason Ryan was Batista at first glance


i really thought batista is back


----------



## greaz taker!

Main event rating was poor, if it was Punk in it people would be bitching non stop fpalm people need to face the fact wwe will not garner much ratings anymore, them days of high ratings are gone, wwe are now relying on advertisements and sponsorships and merchandise sales more than anything for money rather than ratings.


----------



## Starbuck

Brye said:


> I think WWE realized that if they kept putting him on TV he'd end up injuring the entire midcard.


But Mason brings TEH RATINGZ and he's big = TV time. For a while. They finally wised up and took him off lol.


----------



## Coffey

Watching the Legends of Wrestling Roundtable on "Renegades & Outlaws" & one thing that Jim Ross said really resonated with me. Paraphrasing because I can't remember the exact quote, but he made a comment about how the majority of professional wrestlers today in WWE are content with just doing what they're told & cashing their check because it's a good, high paying job. No one tries to go out & go the extra mile to climb the ladder of success. No one tries to cause any ripples in the water, or ruffle any feathers, because all they care about is keeping their job so they can get another paycheck next week.

There isn't any passion or emotion in the show. As a viewer, you can tell that the wrestlers are just going through the motions. It doesn't feel like entertainment anymore, it feels like watching people work their jobs. Wrestlers like Kofi Kingston come to mind.

That is a big reason why I would guess the ratings are going down. There's not excitement, intrigue, interest or drama anymore. Every week it feels like the week before. Nothing changes on the show. Outcomes of matches don't matter. The belts are all worthless. The feuds are just place-holders until the next Pay-Per-View.


----------



## Starbuck

Walk-In said:


> Watching the Legends of Wrestling Roundtable on "Renegades & Outlaws" & one thing that Jim Ross said really resonated with me. Paraphrasing because I can't remember the exact quote, but he made a comment about how the majority of professional wrestlers today in WWE are content with just doing what they're told & cashing their check because it's a good, high paying job. No one tries to go out & go the extra mile to climb the ladder of success. No one tries to cause any ripples in the water, or ruffle any feathers, because all they care about is keeping their job so they can get another paycheck next week.
> 
> There isn't any passion or emotion in the show. As a viewer, you can tell that the wrestlers are just going through the motions. It doesn't feel like entertainment anymore, it feels like watching people work their jobs. Wrestlers like Kofi Kingston come to mind.
> 
> That is a big reason why I would guess the ratings are going down. There's not excitement, intrigue, interest or drama anymore. Every week it feels like the week before. Nothing changes on the show. Outcomes of matches don't matter. The belts are all worthless. The feuds are just place-holders until the next Pay-Per-View.


The locker room has become too nice it seems lol. It isn't full of veterans with egos all vying for a spot. It's full of green as shit rookies who don't want to rock the boat. If you look at some of the people who have received pushes in the past year or so, they are guys who are reportedly going that extra mile and proving their dedication. Miz and Seamus are 2 names that spring to mind. I remember a quote from somebody, can't remember who, who said that when they broke into the WWF, or E lol, that the locker room was 80% vets and 20% rookies. Nowadays that has completely changed. It may not seem like something major but I think it's very significant. People just coming in for a paycheck will keep a company afloat but they are never going to take it to new heights. 

Random thought of the day lol.


----------



## 1TheGreatOne1

I'm so disappointed with the Jericho story line.. no one cares about him, seriously. He's actually losing viewers lol 

Those awesome Promos were all done for nothing. 
So fucking lacklustre.. it seems WWE are good for building up anticipation but they cannot execute the stories right.


----------



## Proph

Has the latest ratings arrived now? Since the mods moved this into one thread I can't be fucked going back page after page looking for them. Pathetic idea having one thread.


----------



## CNB

1TheGreatOne1 said:


> I'm so disappointed with the Jericho story line.. no one cares about him, seriously. He's actually losing viewers lol
> 
> Those awesome Promos were all done for nothing.
> So fucking lacklustre.. it seems WWE are good for building up anticipation but they cannot execute the stories right.



If he wins the rumble, will you tune in the next night to see what he will do?

Cause if it's a yes...then mission accomplished.


----------



## charmed1

CNB said:


> If he wins the rumble, will you tune in the next night to see what he will do?
> 
> Cause if it's a yes...then mission accomplished.


Maybe but honestly I turn the channel when he comes on. Turned it off the second I heard he was coming on this week. Up until he did I was enjoying the program.

I was a Jericho fan but his waste of time makes me turn the program off.


----------



## The Haiti Kid

charmed1 said:


> I was a Jericho fan but his waste of time makes me turn the program off.


Not a very loyal Jericho fan then.


----------



## Brye

Judging by the response to the Jericho stuff, I think it's working. :lmao


----------



## Olympus

Proph said:


> Has the latest ratings arrived now? Since the mods moved this into one thread I can't be fucked going back page after page looking for them. Pathetic idea having one thread.


Apparenty, NCIS before Raw outrated it and the second hour dipped into the 3 million range.


----------



## Nimbus

Lmao at Jericho losing viewers.

I also feel bad for Bryan........and no comments for Punk.


----------



## charmed1

The Haiti Kid said:


> Not a very loyal Jericho fan then.


I'm a fan not a mark. Considering the ratings its not really working either.

Jericho has been back two weeks and by the second week he has become a piss break. Jericho was way too good to be a piss break. His return was a fail but hopefully his first feud will make up for that.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

I love how people still bash Punk yet ignoring the fact that Cena/Ziggler did worse. It's not Punk, stop being so blind thinking one person changes the ratings. It's not Cena either, or Jericho or anyone. These storylines are some of the worst they've ever put out. It's hard to keep interest in the product. It's not up to one damn wrestler.


----------



## kokepepsi

Cena/ziggler did pretty well considering that the segment before went all the way down to a 2.39

Like I have stated before, Punk follows that segment with Ziggler, Holy shit would Rock316ae blow his load at seeing that overrun number.


----------



## Brye

kokepepsi said:


> Cena/ziggler did pretty well considering that the segment before went all the way down to a 2.39
> 
> Like I have stated before, Punk follows that segment with Ziggler, Holy shit would Rock316ae blow his load at seeing that overrun number.


If he hadn't already blown it on the Rock within the hour.

:argh:


----------



## Loudness

Ryder is somehow the biggest ratings killer it would appear, he's been constantly in the lowest, or one of the lowest rated segments, it's as if fans hate him. I can't see why (inb4Ryderhaters) since he's not THAT bad, even though his RAW character sucks compared to his youtube shows but compared to the rest of the show, the matches or segments with him seem to bomb bigtime.


----------



## charmed1

Its not just Ryder. Jericho's Epic fail promo proceeded it and thats when people tuned out.


----------



## Astitude

Brye said:


> Judging by the response to the Jericho stuff, I think it's working. :lmao


Its working? People are tuning out or people dont even tune in for his segments. Fans dont give a shit about jericho.

I wouldnt call that working. Its a shame, Punk needs a better opponent than this failed "Troll" Y2J.





Loudness said:


> Ryder is somehow the biggest ratings killer it would appear, he's been constantly in the lowest, or one of the lowest rated segments, *it's as if fans hate him.* I can't see why (inb4Ryderhaters) since he's not THAT bad, even though his RAW character sucks compared to his youtube shows but compared to the rest of the show, the matches or segments with him seem to bomb bigtime.


I think its because most of his fans watch raw on youtube lol.


----------



## LarryCoon

Brye said:


> Judging by the response to the Jericho stuff, I think it's working. :lmao


Oh its working alright. Its an intriguing move that plants a lot of seeds for a heel turn and a future feud at Wrestlemania.

The people here are arguing about how well its doing now, this week. They are right. It sucks. Its boring. It is losing ratings. I changed the channel the minute I saw it (which is why I missed the part about him crying). It was a gamble, an investment by WWE to let Jericho do his thing and reap the reward later. In that aspect, those people complaining are right.


----------



## Brye

I'm shocked that so many people tune in and tune out so often. If I plan on watching Raw, I plan on watching the whole thing.


----------



## mb1025

Brye said:


> Jericho is trying to get people to hate him. Would you rather no development?


I keep seeing this all over the internet. What do you see more when they talk about the Jericho segments? 

1. Man that Chris Jericho he is trolling me so hard and I can't wait to watch him get his ass kicked.

or

2. The WWE are fucking idiots for ruining this mans returns.

I will save you the time and answer it for you. The answer is number 2.

Lets use some logic here. You have one of the best talkers in the business return, not say anything, and leave. He can get the fans to hate him by talking. You know... something that every great heel does. Instead it leaves people uninterested and wondering what WWE, not Chris Jericho, is thinking.


----------



## Cliffy

What Jericho is doing atm is gunna inevitably make his Punk feud less beneficial for Punk.

I mean i hesitate to use the word self-burial but chris isn't helping with his current schtick.

Its bad enough Punks gunna be feuding with him in the first place but now's he gunna be feuding with someone the audience don't care about.


----------



## kingfunkel

Why are people on CM Punk's back. Saying stuff like he can't draw or it's all his fault for the slump in ratings. Reality check it's not Punk it's the product as a whole. The face is meant to sell merchandise, the story line draws the ratings and heel makes it interesting. It all blends and mixes to make an entertaining and fun to watch show. Let's not beat around the bush the storylines are awful and some backroom staff need sacked, I don't like people getting sacked but they've been so bad for too long they need to go. Vince needs to realise what people want and mix it up abit, you can cater to kids for so long they will grow up and think I'm not watching this shit and stop watching all together. As for the heels I enjoy watching ziggler in the ring but he just isn't interesting whatsoever, same with Alberto del rio. Miz is interesting but can't hold as the main heel. Stop blaming Punk, when they gave him something decent to work with you were all over his cock now the writing and storylines are horrible it's all his fault, he's bland, boring and it's his fault the ratings a low. It's a 2hour show not 15minutes! The people to blame are not the wrestlers but the writers!


----------



## Loudness

Cliffy Byro said:


> What Jericho is doing atm is gunna inevitably make his Punk feud less beneficial for Punk.
> 
> I mean i hesitate to use the word self-burial but chris isn't helping with his current schtick.
> 
> Its bad enough Punks gunna be feuding with him in the first place but now's he gunna be feuding with someone the audience don't care about.


This pretty much, Jericho simply isn't that much of a star that using such a formula can work, he does get big pops but I feel he wanted to get even more, plus the fact that the fans didn't turn on him yet when he was supposed to get heat the first night he returned. Let's not forget that he was mostly an upper midcarder in his last run, all of a sudden he does segments where it's all about the fans cheering him? I mean the feud COULD work, if they build it up properly, but if this report is true (I hope it's dirtsheet bs) then CM Punk is in for a nightmare for WM:



> WWE officials have suggested an idea that Jericho won't speak on RAW *until after the Royal Rumble*. There is talk to have Jericho win the Royal Rumble and then finally speak for the first time by giving a victory speech and maybe calling out WWE Champion CM Punk for Wrestlemania 28.
> 
> Source : lordsofpain.net


Although if he does win RR as suggested by this report, there will be no questions asked as far as credibillity goes, no doubt.


----------



## JasonLives

mb1025 said:


> Lets use some logic here. You have one of the best talkers in the business return, not say anything, and leave. He can get the fans to hate him by talking. You know... something that every great heel does. Instead it leaves people uninterested and wondering what WWE, not Chris Jericho, is thinking.


But Jericho doesnt wanna get cheap heel heat. Of course he can easily go out and trash the city he is on or the fans. Sure many in the crowd will boo him, but the rest will think he is an awesome heel and continue cheering him. He doesnt want that. He wants *everyone* to hate him.
So instead Jericho is going a different route.

Like Jericho once said, everyone can go out in New York and say "Yankees sucks!" and get booed. But the trick is to say "Yankees rules!" and STILL get booed.

He doesnt wanna come back and be the same old heel. Thats not a challenge for him.
I believe this will pay off in the long run.


----------



## eireace

Cliffy Byro said:


> What Jericho is doing atm is gunna inevitably make his Punk feud less beneficial for Punk.
> 
> I mean i hesitate to use the word self-burial but chris isn't helping with his current schtick.
> 
> Its bad enough Punks gunna be feuding with him in the first place but now's he gunna be feuding with someone the audience don't care about.



This is one of the most most laughable comments I've seen in a long time...

I don't usually criticise but either you are an idiot, or you know your talking absolute nonsense and just want to wind people up... 

'Self-burial'... 'feuding with someone the audience don't care about'

:lmao:bs: fpalm 

I'd reply with reasoning, but with posters like you it's not worth my time


----------



## LarryCoon

Brye said:


> I'm shocked that so many people tune in and tune out so often. If I plan on watching Raw, I plan on watching the whole thing.


Judging by the normal fluctuations of ratings in between segments and the fact that your biggest new star in Jericho lost a lot of viewers, it really shouldn't be a surprise. Most people never watch a whole raw.


----------



## Roler42

Loudness said:


> Ryder is somehow the biggest ratings killer it would appear, he's been constantly in the lowest, or one of the lowest rated segments, it's as if fans hate him. I can't see why (inb4Ryderhaters) since he's not THAT bad, even though his RAW character sucks compared to his youtube shows but compared to the rest of the show, the matches or segments with him seem to bomb bigtime.


maybe because for the past weeks they've been pairing him with the blandest diva since kelly kelly?

Eve has that talent Kelly has to suck out the interest of anything involved with a segment, every single segment where eve is loses ratings, and it's a proven fact


----------



## deadmanwatching

eireace said:


> This is one of the most most laughable comments I've seen in a long time...
> 
> *I don't usually criticise but either you are an idiot, or you know your talking absolute nonsense and just want to wind people up... *
> 
> 'Self-burial'... 'feuding with someone the audience don't care about'
> 
> :lmao:bs: fpalm
> 
> *I'd reply with reasoning, but with posters like you it's not worth my time*


----------



## Neutronic

Daniel 'Ratings" Bryan

Wade "No Heat No Ratings" Barrett


----------



## Arya Dark

Roler42 said:


> maybe because for the past weeks they've been pairing him with the blandest diva since kelly kelly?
> 
> Eve has that talent Kelly has to suck out the interest of anything involved with a segment, every single segment where eve is loses ratings, and it's a proven fact


*

You're quite delusional if you think people don't want to see Ryder because of Eve. I'm surprised someone would even suggest that. People don't want to see Ryder because the character absolutely sucks. 

Also I can't blame people for tuning out for that Jericho stuff. I'm a huge Jericho fan but there's simply nothing entertaining about that segment for the second straight week. *


----------



## Cliffy

eireace said:


> This is one of the most most laughable comments I've seen in a long time...
> 
> I don't usually criticise but either you are an idiot, or you know your talking absolute nonsense and just want to wind people up...
> 
> 'Self-burial'... 'feuding with someone the audience don't care about'
> 
> :lmao:bs: fpalm
> 
> I'd reply with reasoning, but with posters like you it's not worth my time


Butthurt Jericho mark ?


----------



## WWE

A bit too sensitive now aren't we


----------



## FingazMc

Only just managed to see Raw and I'm not usually a complainer, I don't remember me ever slagging off WWE like most people do. But this Raw was fucking awful if I'd of been watching it live I would of given up and gone to sleep. Even the Jericho thing is pissing me off now, I know I'm supposed to be pissed off but it's making me not care about him at all "Oh great Jericho not saying anything" why the fuck would I want to watch that. I can't remember a Raw being this bad tbh.

And the Brodus Clay debut wtf? I know it'll be some storyline of them punishing him or something and eventually he'll be a monster but it pretty much killed any momentum (even if it was just a small amount) he had of being a monster heel.
Anyway, Raw was poor.
Oh and for anyone who says "Don't watch if you don't like it" I probably won't watch alot of next week's show as I'll be skipping any segments/matches that are shit...

/rant


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

So this thread is pretty much going to match the atrocity of the "Rock/Cena Discussion" thread?

Yippie.

At least it gets its own thread, finally.


----------



## kokepepsi

Winning™ said:


> So this thread is pretty much going to match the atrocity of the "Rock/Cena Discussion" thread?
> 
> Yippie.
> 
> At least it gets its own thread, finally.


Gotta add some ratings stuff to legitimize this thread



> CM Punk vs. The Miz lost 200,000 viewers in the 10pm timeslot.


bama


----------



## Brye

Don't even know what match that is but it must have sucked then if it lost viewers.


----------



## kokepepsi

August 29th
Not a bad match, although I think it was the one where miz ended up doing like 20ddts and did the same stuff over and over


----------



## Brye

I feel like they had a bunch of matches from August to October. I remember really enjoying one of them more than the others but I have no idea on the date.


----------



## Natsuke

I stay away from WF for a good week and a half, and I return.

And my prayers have been answered. We finally have one thread for ratings. Finally, stupidity can be enclosed to one space.

Thank you Based Somebody.


----------



## D.M.N.

The viewership and rating for the January 16th episode of RAW are delayed until tomorrow due to the holidays in America yesterday.

I hope it's up on last week, it deserves to be, really. It'll probably be an early 4 million again, but I hope we don't see an hour under 4 million again.


----------



## Starbuck

The overrun should be interesting lol. Cena popping up in a random quarter hour should be interesting also.


----------



## kokepepsi

Segment Breakdown will then probably be delayed till next week like it happens for every holiday


----------



## Roler42

Cliffy Byro said:


> What Jericho is doing atm is gunna inevitably make his Punk feud less beneficial for Punk.
> 
> I mean i hesitate to use the word self-burial but chris isn't helping with his current schtick.
> 
> Its bad enough Punks gunna be feuding with him in the first place but now's he gunna be feuding with someone the audience don't care about.


3 weeks and it's already self-burial

no wonder they rush everything in wrestling, fans are so impatient they think the whole angle got ruined because they didn't pull the triger the second the guy's music hits :lmao


----------



## HHH is the GOAT

Are the ratings in for this week?


----------



## A-C-P

HHH is the GOAT said:


> Are the ratings in for this week?


They are delayed this week b/c monday was a holiday.


----------



## WWE

Aww :shaq


----------



## D.M.N.

*January 16th, 2012*
Hour 1 - 4.320m (last week 4.096m)
Hour 2 - 4.258m (last week 3.920m)

Source: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...e-liars-being-human-wwe-raw-much-more/116805/

Last Week
- Hour 1 - 1.6 18-49 rating
- Hour 2 - 1.6 18-49 rating

This Week
- Hour 1 - 1.7 18-49 rating
- Hour 2 - 1.7 18-49 rating

A collective sigh of relief goes around WWE HQ. Still not great numbers, but after last week, an increase and both hours above 4 million even if not comfortably above that mark.


----------



## dxbender

Both Raw and SD went up by .3M viewers from the week before.


Wonder how soon until people say the ratings are cause henry was in the main event(despite the fact that punk was there too,and ppl somehow thinks that he makes a difference in past weeks for ratings dropping)


----------



## Green Light

Am I right in thinking there was no football this week? People have been saying the last few weeks that ratings should start improving on the 16th since there isn't any football to compete with


----------



## Starbuck

Green Light said:


> Am I right in thinking there was no football this week? People have been saying the last few weeks that ratings should start improving on the 16th since there isn't any football to compete with


Yeah. I was expecting quite a bump since there was no football. I don't think these are good numbers at all tbh. I guess they are fine with coasting though since they can bank on Rock returning and boosting everything up pretty soon. The quarter hours should be interesting to say the least though. We got Cena in an unusual quarter hour, we got no powerhouse in the 10pm timeslot which was left to Truth/Barrett/Miz/Seamus and Punk finally got to go off on one again but it wasn't against a huge name like it was before. I'll be looking forward to those lol.


----------



## A-C-P

Same 4 - 4.3 million people that watch Raw live on TV in the USA as every week


----------



## Starbuck

A-C-P said:


> Same 4 - 4.3 million people that watch Raw live on TV in the USA as every week


True. But at this time of year they really ought to be experiencing growth from the casuals who tune in for the RTWM and those who watch now that football is over. So far, they haven't.


----------



## Airstyles77

"The January 16th episode of WWE's RAW Supershow scored a 3.0 cable rating with 4,279,000 viewers, up from last week. The first hour did a 3.0 rating while the second hour did a 3.03. The rating went up as hour two went on but viewership dropped by 62,000."

-Lordsofpain


----------



## version 1

Source: PWTorch
Link: http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_57120.shtml



> WWE Raw on Monday, January 16 scored a 3.01 rating, up five percent compared to a 2.87 rating last week, but below a 3.10 rating for the 1-2-12 episode two weeks ago.
> 
> Raw averaged 4.29 million viewers, up seven percent from 4.00 million viewers last Monday up against the BCS National Title game. The first Monday of 2012 averaged 4.48 million viewers, four percent more than this week's Raw.
> 
> Raw continued its pattern of losing viewers in the second hour. The first hour averaged 4.32 million viewers and the second hour decreased slightly to an average of 4.26 million viewers. It marks 12 out of the last 13 weeks that Raw has seen a second hour decline in viewership.
> 
> -- On cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #5 on cable behind History Channel programming and Fox's coverage of the Republican Party debate. Raw did rank #1 among males 18-34 & males 12-17 for the first time since Summer 2011 before pro and college football season began.
> 
> Raw ranked #2 among males 18-49, trailing "Pawn Stars" on History. Meanwhile, teen males continues to be on the decline. Raw ranked #6 in m12-17 and dropped to the lowest level since the Fall 2011 season premiere week. Raw's m12-17 rating was one full ratings point below the same week last year.
> 
> -- Last year's Raw this week on the Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday scored a 3.27 rating and averaged 5.02 million viewers. The first hour started at 4.80 million viewers and the second hour grew to an average of 5.25 million viewers. Raw has not reached that second hour viewership level since the April 11 episode when Edge announced his retirement.
> 
> Caldwell's Analysis: WWE continues to bleed viewers in the second hour and, even removing football competition from Raw for the first time in four months, the rating did not increase like it typically does in January. WWE is losing a grip on its future buyers - teen males 12-17 - and just trying to hold on to adult viewers, compared to History Channel, which is dominating the 10:00 p.m. EST hour.


It's a good thing the ratings increased. It should be since football is over I guess. But it's pretty weird to see that on average the WWE almost lost 1 million viewers compared to last year. The big question is what's the problem? Are people just not interested anymore? And if so what are the reasons for this?


----------



## Hollywood Hanoi

Its hilarious that Pawn Stars keepings beating them and stealing their target audiance, ever watched that show? its incredibly dull and repetitive yet oddly addictive.
I thought Raw was actually a pretty good show this week, far better than last week, their only chance of stopping this slide is strong enough booking in the period when Rock brings back a few viewers in the run to mania, make the whole show good enough that viewers will want to stick around. Easier said than done though.


----------



## Dub

version 1 said:


> Source: PWTorch
> Link: http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_57120.shtml
> 
> 
> 
> It's a good thing the ratings increased. It should be since football is over I guess. But it's pretty weird to see that on average the WWE almost lost 1 million viewers compared to last year. *The big question is what's the problem? Are people just not interested anymore? And if so what are the reasons for this?*


Because they spent a good amount of time of not building any stars and focusing everything on Cena. They've completely damage their product and now its biting them in the ass.


----------



## version 1

WHITE BOY said:


> Because they spent a good amount of time of not building any stars and focusing everything on Cena. They've completely damage their product and now its biting them in the ass.


I agree with you white boy :lmao sorry had to make that one :lmao

Although CM Punk is now in the main event instead of The Miz and Raw right now isn't that bad. Which other superstar(s) should they push and can CM Punk be the next top face if Cena turns heel???


----------



## The Tony

:lmao Another very bad rating. Raw sucks so I'm no surprised.


----------



## Werb-Jericho

A-C-P said:


> Same 4 - 4.3 million people that watch Raw live on TV in the USA as every week


the same 20 people withtv's that affect ratings watch tv every week


----------



## Fanboi101

version 1 said:


> Source: PWTorch
> Link: http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_57120.shtml
> 
> 
> 
> It's a good thing the ratings increased. It should be since football is over I guess. *But it's pretty weird to see that on average the WWE almost lost 1 million viewers compared to last year. *The big question is what's the problem? Are people just not interested anymore? And if so what are the reasons for this?




Miz > CM Punk at drawing


----------



## kennedy=god

Whoever didn't watch missed a great show so it's there loss i guess.

They've had 2 awesome shows in a row now (Well, apart from the Kane/Cena crap) so hopefully they're happy enough with the ratings and continue booking Raw the way they've been doing it the last couple of weeks. They can never seem to keep it consistent though, normally when they have 1 or 2 good shows they follow it up with a shit one


----------



## Old_Skool

I fully expect a crappy RAW next week due to Vince going ape shit over the consistent'drop off' of viewers throughout the program, which is a shame as I thought RAW has finally begun to turn the corner recently.


----------



## ellthom

Old_Skool said:


> I fully expect a crappy RAW next week due to Vince going ape shit over the consistent'drop off' of viewers throughout the program, which is a shame as I thought RAW has finally begun to turn the corner recently.


WWE is as better as its ever been, its just people are not interested in wrestling. Wrestling will never be as popular as it was.People think its something new it isnt.


----------



## Coffey

WWE is not as good as it's ever been. It's bad. It's a bad product. It's bad wrestling, bad TV, bad story-telling. Bad everything. I could talk about their terrible continuity all day. Zack Ryder loses his belt despite not being medically cleared. But like less than a month ago, Daniel Bryan wasn't allowed to cash-in his Money in the Bank on Mark Henry because he wasn't medically cleared? There's too many holes and none of it makes sense. It's not about little kids, or parents, or going head-to-head against football, or basketball or NCIS or whatever else. The show is just bad.


----------



## kennedy=god

Walk-In said:


> WWE is not as good as it's ever been. It's bad. It's a bad product. It's bad wrestling, bad TV, bad story-telling. Bad everything. I could talk about their terrible continuity all day. Zack Ryder loses his belt despite not being medically cleared. But like less than a month ago, Daniel Bryan wasn't allowed to cash-in his Money in the Bank on Mark Henry because he wasn't medically cleared? There's too many holes and none of it makes sense. It's not about little kids, or parents, or going head-to-head against football, or basketball or NCIS or whatever else. The show is just bad.


The one reason you give for it being worse now is that the logic is flawed and they contradict themselves when they've been doing that since the 90's. I don't know what show you've been watching in the past but WWE/F have always changed the rules to make things easier for themselves.


----------



## Marv95

> WWE is as better as its ever been


That's a good one. 

Though Raw was actually good this week they hardly give viewers reasons to watch. No matches announced a week beforehand to get excited about, no _huge_ angles to close the show. Whatever they did in the summer and early fall they need to do it here; and even then the product has been so watered down and awful since 2007 they need to keep producing consistently good shows to get viewership back to the mid 2000 levels(4.0s).

Or maybe they need to put the belt on an over heel. Shoulda been HHH/Punk feuding between now and Mania.


----------



## BTNH

Marv95 said:


> That's a good one.
> 
> Though Raw was actually good this week they hardly give viewers reasons to watch. No matches announced a week beforehand to get excited about, no _huge_ angles to close the show. Whatever they did in the summer and early fall they need to do it here; and even then the product has been so watered down and awful since 2007 they need to keep producing consistently good shows to get viewership back to the mid 2000 levels(4.0s).
> 
> Or maybe they need to put the belt on an over heel. Shoulda been HHH/Punk feuding between now and Mania.


I agree with all this apart from HHH. Fuck HHH. The last thing we need is an older guy carrying it again. WWE need to make new stars desperately, they cant keep relying on the past.


----------



## Coffey

kennedy=god said:


> The one reason you give for it being worse now is that the logic is flawed and they contradict themselves when they've been doing that since the 90's. I don't know what show you've been watching in the past but WWE/F have always changed the rules to make things easier for themselves.


The talent is worse, the show is stale, the writing is inconsistent, there's no emotional investment, outcomes don't matter & parity booking has ruined everyone. WWE also no longer attempts to cater to strengths and hide weaknesses, usually purposely shooting themselves in the foot (usually for petty reasons because they're afraid of being scorned). Better?

I mean, you can talk about how the show is great all you want, while sitting on the internet and talking about wrestling on days when the show ain't on. Bottom line is, most people when they turn on RAW don't give two fucks about a Brodus Clay squash match, a John Laurinaitis promo or Chris Jericho showing up to not do anything. Yeah, it all might lead to something better but in this era of instant gratification, people aren't going to wait for it to get better. They have like seventy other stations and will just find something else. Which is what they have been doing and will continue to do.

It's not compelling television, thus people aren't compelled to watch.


----------



## DesolationRow

I thought this latest Raw was the best they've produced in probably 3-1/2 months (since the first two weeks or so of October during the height of the Triple H Downfall angle), but that, sadly, is not saying very much. It's almost unfathomable how much the product began to sink--_especially_ on the Raw brand--coming off the heels of Vengeance. I can't help but speculate that much of this was down to the writers knowing The Rock was on his way back, so they didn't need to do any work. Survivor Series was a massive letdown from what it should/could have been. 

From around early December through the last week or so, I've been watching Raw and Smackdown strictly out of habit more than anything else.

I did, however, enjoy this latest episode of Raw, primarily because WWE gave at least _some_ focus to their storylines and created actual character motivations for once (Punk, Cena, Kane, Laurinaitis, etceteras). Job well done. For one week, in any case.

I also enjoyed going to the Oakland, CA house show the day before and was stunned when Primo and Epico won the Tag Team Championships at a house show! Found out about a day and a half later why, haha. Oh, Evan Bourne. John Cena, Triple H, CM Punk and Chris Jericho all go to bat for you at different times and this is how you pay them back? 

Time to give Kofi Kingston a healthy midcard push again.

*Starbuck* and *obis*, thanks for the welcome backs... Will send you an absurdly overdue PM soon, *Starbuck*! I'm sure you haven't forgotten about our "Axxess plot," haha!


----------



## Verdict123

BTNH said:


> I agree with all this apart from HHH. Fuck HHH. The last thing we need is an older guy carrying it again. WWE need to make new stars desperately, they cant keep relying on the past.


This coming from a taker mark. fpalm

how many stars had taker made in the past 7 years again? Not to mention, he refuses to retire and let the WM spot for two young up-and-coming superstars.

Overrated Streak is Overrated.


----------



## kokepepsi

Apparently the Rock this is your life segment is not the highest rated segment on Raw.

It actually was Undertaker vs Austin for the WWF title on 6/28/99 
which got a 9.5 rating

Just an FYI


----------



## Verdict123

kokepepsi said:


> Apparently the Rock this is your life segment is not the highest rated segment on Raw.
> 
> It actually was Undertaker vs Austin for the WWF title on 6/28/99
> which got a 9.5 rating
> 
> Just an FYI


Source? overrun numbers? 

Dont think this is true. I heard WWE officially regarded The Rock's this is your life segment as the highest rated seg ever.


----------



## deadmanwatching

kokepepsi said:


> Apparently the Rock this is your life segment is not the highest rated segment on Raw.
> 
> It actually was Undertaker vs Austin for the WWF title on 6/28/99
> which got a 9.5 rating
> 
> Just an FYI




Russo want you to kiss his feet.




So, bend down 













Verdict123 said:


> Source?


Nocturnal emission


----------



## LarryCoon

The talent is not worse, its been as abundant and as good as ever, how WWE is building stars and utilizing wrestlers in storylines and feuds however, is a different discussion.


----------



## kokepepsi

oh dem old school quarter breakdowns









Lowest segment was a 6.0
:cena


----------



## D.M.N.

I wonder how much Nitro's and RAW's fanbase overlapped back then, because Nitro only dropped 1.4 when RAW came on the air.

Although whoever was back in the comparative Q2 on that particular show would have been slaughtered as being 'unable to draw/insert other remarks in here'.

EDIT - http://www.onlineworldofwrestling.com/results/raw/_1999/



> June 28, 1999 – RAW in Charlotte: Corporate Ministry segment (The McMahons celebrate their victory over Steve Austin, and thus firing him as CEO! The Big Bossman came down with his old 80s Bossman music and rejoined the Corporate Ministry! Steve Austin came out and said he gave himself a new contract the night before. He can now assault Vince McMahon whenever he wants, and he signed a title match against Taker tonight!), *Ken Shamrock vs Steve Blackman ended in a No Contest in a Weapons match*, Billy Gunn Interview (Billy Gunn came out wearing the Tag Title belt claiming to be champion and then bragged about winning the King of the Ring. HHH & Chyna came out and said XPac & Roaddog are claiming all rights to DX. HHH tells Billy Gunn & Chyna to win back thr rights to DX so they can get the money. The Rock attacked HHH!), GTV spies on Test & Stephanie coming outr of a hotel, Chaz w/Marriana b Meat w/PMS, Terry Taylor interviewed Test (Shane McMahon & The Mean Street Posse attacked Test), Hardcore Holly b Kane (The Big Show interfered and chokeslammed Kane! After the match, Kane choke-slammed Holly four times in a row!), The Rock b Triple H w/Chyna by DQ when Billy Gunn whacked The Rock with a club, Backstage segment (Albert & Droz attacked Val Venis), Edge b The Godfather w/The Hos with help from Albert & Droz (After the match, Droz tried to peirce one of the Hos tongue but Edge made the save. Godfather offered his Hos to Edge in appreciation. Gangrel was spotted in the rafters watching Edge!), Bradshaw w/Farooq b Billy Gunn with help from X-Pac to reclaim posession of his Tag Title belt (Chyna attacked X-Pac after the match. Roaddog ran down to help X-Pac!), Ivory w/Nicole Bass segment (Ivory proclaimed no more barbie doll lipstick losers and issued an open challenge. A fan from the crowd, actually Malia Hosaka, got in the ring and had a catfight with Ivory until Nicole Bass powerbombed her! Ivory helped her up and knocked her back down!), Jeff Jarrett w/Debra b X-Pac with help from Billy Gunn to retain the Intercontinental title (Another DX vs DX brawl broke out after the match), Steve Austin b The Undertaker w/Paul Bearer to win the WWF title (Undertaker attacked and bloodied Steve Austin after the match)..


Bit in bold appears to be the bit in question, and I have no idea what a weapons match is...


----------



## kokepepsi

Well if you look up the show on youtube
The first 15min where the Austin/Taker/Vince talkfest

Ken Shamrock comes out next and cuts a promo and then has a match with Steve Blackman


----------



## Verdict123

Was "This is your life" segment promoted the previous week?


----------



## mrmacman

kokepepsi said:


> oh dem old school quarter breakdowns
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lowest segment was a 6.0
> :cena


Raw 6 /28/ 99 ratings
First hour-6.4
Second hour-7.2
Overall-6.8

hope it helps

http://www.tnastars.com/the-ratings-war/the-ratings-war-1999/

9.5 Lulz


----------



## kokepepsi

mrmacman said:


> Raw 6 /28/ 99 ratings
> First hour-6.4
> Second hour-7.2
> Overall-6.8
> 
> hope it helps
> 
> http://www.tnastars.com/the-ratings-war/the-ratings-war-1999/
> 
> 9.5 Lulz



LOL I post the breakdown(the 9.5 is for the overrun and is the highest number ever for a WWF segment) you post the averages
unk2


----------



## mrmacman

kokepepsi said:


> LOL I post the breakdown(the 9.5 is for the overrun and is the highest number ever for a WWF segment) you post the averages
> unk2


you posted a Photoshop image.

unk


----------



## kokepepsi

mrmacman said:


> you posted a Photoshop image.
> 
> unk












the-w.com/thread.php/id=22438


----------



## mrmacman

kokepepsi said:


> http://the-w.com/thread.php/id=22438


HTTP Error 403 Forbidden


kokepepsi said:


>


:stupid:


----------



## Rock316AE

What we had:


> In the segment-by-segment, Booker T vs. Cody Rhodes lost 149,000 viewers. Backstage stuff with John Cena and Zack Ryder, Big Show and Kelly Kelly, Laurinaitis, Show and David Otunga and Jack Swagger, Dolph Ziggler, Vickie Guerrero and Mark Henry gained 78,000 viewers. Ryder & Eve Torres vs. Tyson Kidd & Natalya and a Cena interview lost 67,000 viewers. Cena vs. The Miz and post-match R-Truth attack gained 325,000 viewers, which is below usual but better than in some recent weeks. Big Show vs. David Otunga with one hand tied behind his back and an Alberto Del Rio interview with the Bellas gained 34,000 viewers. Punk vs. Swagger lost 367,000 viewers. Punk vs. Ziggler gained 172,000 viewers to a 2.91 main event average. The Cena/Kane overrun gained 543,000 viewers to a do a 3.26. As far as the demo changes with Cena and Kane out last, Male teens went from 2.8 to 3.1, Men 18-49 went from 2.8 to 3.2, Women teens went from 1.0 to 1.3 and Women 18-49 stayed at 1.0.





> In the segment-by-segment, it was the bad pattern where the highest rated segment was first quarter with the John Cena in-ring and Kane on the tron which did a 3.36 rating. Cody Rhodes vs. Daniel Bryan lost 332,000 viewers. Yep, World champ vs. IC champ and people tuned out. Wade Barrett vs. Santino Marella and the Sheamus/Miz brawl gained 240,000 viewers. A bunch of backstage stuff (Dolph Ziggler interview; Zack Ryder, Eve Torres, Jack Swagger, John Laurinaitis and C.M. Punk) lost 431,000 viewers. Punk vs. Ziggler for the WWE title in the 10 p.m. segment gained 180,000 viewers which is bad for that segment. The return of Chris Jericho lost 82,000 viewers. The Cena & Zack Ryder & Big Show vs. Mark Henry & Swagger 3-on-2 elimination match and show ending angle with Cena, Kane and Ryder gained 383,000 viewers, weak for the overrun, doing a 3.33 rating. Main event saw Male teens go from 2.5 to 2.8, Male 18-49 from 2.9 to 3.3, Women teens from 0.9 to 1.0 and Women 18-49 stayed at 1.1.





> In the segment-by-segment, Sheamus & Santino Marella vs. Wade Barrett & Jinder Mahal lost 238,000 viewers. Edge Hall of Fame package, Zack Ryder and Eve Torres backstage and Daniel Bryan vs. Kofi Kingston gained 100,000 viewers. The debut of Brodus Clay vs. Curt Hawkins plus Miz trying to recruit Primo & Epico lost 82,000 viewers. C.M. Punk vs. Jack Swagger gained 128,000 viewers and did a 3.00 rating in the 10 p.m. slot, which is terrible for the slot. Backstage stuff with Bellas and Miz and Ricardo Rodriguez, Cena and Ryder and the Four Horsemen vignette lost 193,000 viewers, which is actually much better than that segment usually does. The segment with R-Truth beating on Rodriguez and the Miz/R-Truth brawl, plus the second appearance of the mute Chris Jericho lost 130,000 viewers. Okay, this is something that is noteworthy. Eve Torres in the ring, Kane’s music hitting, Ryder trying to save her, getting her in the car and trying to change the tire lost 544,000 viewers and did a 2.39 quarter. To lose that many viewers that late in the show before the main event is something significant. And John Cena vs. Dolph Ziggler and the conclusion of that segment gained 640,000 viewers, which is normal level, but it still was only a 2.84 overrun, which is the second lowest overrun figure (even the show that did a 2.71 in September hit 3.03 for the overrun), behind only the week they did Punk & Bryan & Ziggler in the trios match, dating back to 1997.


Not many people talk about this but Miz was a terrible drawing champion, always gained below average numbers in the main time slots and even lost there, but I don't think I saw something like Punk, listen to what Meltzer said, on this time last year, they had 800k more viewers! Dave tried to do the math on the spot and it's something like 16% of the audience, just scary that in one year they lost almost million viewers/20%, something needs to be done and the current direction is not the solution. it's all about the presentation in the wrestling business, and while I admit, Bryan is fine in his current role, he and Punk are not main event draws or game-changers, never were, never will be, even their most hardcore fan will admit it. 

Meltzer said that the demo for 12-17 was one of the lowest he has ever saw, he even talked to a teacher in school and she said that there was never less interest in wrestling among the kids/teens, what he said and was spot on, that this demo is always there to "look up" to the wrestlers, in a "I want to be like him" type of thing, but now that all the babyface are basically lame/uncool/geeks etc and nobody is larger than life, you got this number, including Cena, the top face that needs to bring this audience but he's considered lame and uncool even in this demo, and rightfully so. 

as a long time wrestling fan, the future looks horrendous and scary for them, I seriously don't know what they can do with the current talent roster, a miserable imitation of Austin/Vince for the million time is not going to change a damn thing, especially with this talents, another scary thing for them is the house show business, January is the time when business picks up, ratings, gates etc, this year according to Meltzer? absolutely nothing.

I personally don't like what they are doing with Jericho, I'm a huge fan but he kills all his "superstar aura" with this character. I know that he wants to change and be different every time and I like that about him, but he can't have both, what he's doing right now is not a superstar material.

Let's see what Foley does in the overrun on RAW and Cena in a random segment. last time he lost 400k in the second quarter.
This is the lowest rated January since 97 BTW, and if you don't count the split audience in the MNW, the only year that was lower than January 2012 is January 1995, the only year in RAW's 19 year history.



RevolverSnake said:


> Do you guys know how many viewers the episode with the greater power reveling himselg achievd or where I could look it up?


First hour - 6.4 
Second hour - 6.9 
Overall - 6.7(6.65)
They did the big segment in the second quarter, time slot that at that time was big in terms of gain. 
Breakdown:
Q1 - Vince promo - 5.0
Q2 - Greater power segment, Austin as CEO etc - 7.0
Q3 - Acolytes vs the Brood - 6.8
Q4 - Union segment/Test promo with Stephanie - 6.8
Q5 - Kane and X Pac vs Shane - 6.8
Q6 - Rock vs HHH in a cast match - 7.1
Q7 - Debra, Jarrett, Bass and Venis segment and Godfather vs Gunn - 6.8
Q8 - Snow vs Droz and Vince vs Shamrock in a Lion's Den match - 6.9 
OR - Taker vs Show for the WWF title - 7.3

BTW about this Austin/Taker match, it got 9.5 and it's the biggest overrun number in RAW history but it's not a segment, it's count as a overrun number, the highest rated segment in RAW history is Rock This is your life - 8.4, with the start of Rock vs Shane in cage second with 8.3


----------



## Fanboi101

Rock316AE said:


> What we had:
> 
> 
> BTW about this Austin/Taker match, it got 9.5 and it's the biggest overrun number in RAW history but it's not a segment, it's count as a overrun number, the highest rated segment in RAW history is Rock This is your life - 8.4, with the start of Rock vs Shane in cage second with 8.3


Yea, you can't count an overrun because, obviously, you have people tuning into see the following show. It's awesome to have Rock316AE back to set the facts straight for the rock haters


----------



## mrmacman

Fanboi101 said:


> Yea, you can't count an overrun because, obviously, you have people tuning into see the following show. *It's awesome to have Rock316AE back to set the facts straight for the rock haters*


Indeed

BTW Welcome Back Rock316AE


----------



## LarryCoon

:lmao Chris Jericho losing more viewers each week


----------



## kokepepsi

> BTW about this Austin/Taker match, it got 9.5 and it's the biggest overrun number in RAW history but it's not a segment, it's count as a overrun number, the highest rated segment in RAW history is Rock This is your life - 8.4, with the start of Rock vs Shane in cage second with 8.3



It's still the most viewed segment/part of the show/overrun in raw history.

Obv if it was the Rock you would be wetting your panties.

(good to have you back again btw)


----------



## Rock316AE

kokepepsi said:


> It's still the most viewed segment/part of the show/overrun in raw history.
> 
> Obv if it was the Rock you would be wetting your panties.
> 
> (good to have you back again btw)


Nah I have no problem with that, It's not like it's new to me or something, The Rock still has the two biggest segments and 2/3 biggest overrun numbers, if you want the top 3:

Austin/Taker 28/6/99 - 9.5 (good for this match because there was no overrun for Nitro that week...)
Rock/Shane 1/5/00 - 9.1
Rock/Austin/Vince vs Taker/HHH/Shane 10/5/99 - 9.1




LarryCoon said:


> :lmao Chris Jericho losing more viewers each week


Doesn't surprise me at all TBH, the random segments they put him in is one problem, but his character is ridiculous now, he got a superstar reaction/presentation when he came back, but he decided that he wants a different character instead of being a star, same thing happened with the merchandise when he was a heel, but that's his mentality, not good IMO but I'm still waiting to see him on RAW.


----------



## deatawaits

Rock316AE said:


> What we had:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not many people talk about this but Miz was a terrible drawing champion, always gained below average numbers in the main time slots and even lost there, but I don't think I saw something like Punk, listen to what Meltzer said, on this time last year, they had 800k more viewers! Dave tried to do the math on the spot and it's something like 16% of the audience, just scary that in one year they lost almost million viewers/20%, something needs to be done and the current direction is not the solution. it's all about the presentation in the wrestling business, and while I admit, Bryan is fine in his current role, he and Punk are not main event draws or game-changers, never were, never will be, even their most hardcore fan will admit it.
> 
> Meltzer said that the demo for 12-17 was one of the lowest he has ever saw, he even talked to a teacher in school and she said that there was never less interest in wrestling among the kids/teens, what he said and was spot on, that this demo is always there to "look up" to the wrestlers, in a "I want to be like him" type of thing, but now that all the babyface are basically lame/uncool/geeks etc and nobody is larger than life, you got this number, including Cena, the top face that needs to bring this audience but he's considered lame and uncool even in this demo, and rightfully so.
> 
> as a long time wrestling fan, the future looks horrendous and scary for them, I seriously don't know what they can do with the current talent roster, a miserable imitation of Austin/Vince for the million time is not going to change a damn thing, especially with this talents, another scary thing for them is the house show business, January is the time when business picks up, ratings, gates etc, this year according to Meltzer? absolutely nothing.
> 
> I personally don't like what they are doing with Jericho, I'm a huge fan but he kills all his "superstar aura" with this character. I know that he wants to change and be different every time and I like that about him, but he can't have both, what he's doing right now is not a superstar material.
> 
> Let's see what Foley does in the overrun on RAW and Cena in a random segment. last time he lost 400k in the second quarter.
> This is the lowest rated January since 97 BTW, and if you don't count the split audience in the MNW, the only year that was lower than January 2012 is January 1995, the only year in RAW's 19 year history.
> 
> 
> 
> First hour - 6.4
> Second hour - 6.9
> Overall - 6.7(6.65)
> They did the big segment in the second quarter, time slot that at that time was big in terms of gain.
> Breakdown:
> Q1 - Vince promo - 5.0
> Q2 - Greater power segment, Austin as CEO etc - 7.0
> Q3 - Acolytes vs the Brood - 6.8
> Q4 - Union segment/Test promo with Stephanie - 6.8
> Q5 - Kane and X Pac vs Shane - 6.8
> Q6 - Rock vs HHH in a cast match - 7.1
> Q7 - Debra, Jarrett, Bass and Venis segment and Godfather vs Gunn - 6.8
> Q8 - Snow vs Droz and Vince vs Shamrock in a Lion's Den match - 6.9
> OR - Taker vs Show for the WWF title - 7.3
> 
> BTW about this Austin/Taker match, it got 9.5 and it's the biggest overrun number in RAW history but it's not a segment, it's count as a overrun number, the highest rated segment in RAW history is Rock This is your life - 8.4, with the start of Rock vs Shane in cage second with 8.3


What ever people say This guy is the biggest draw atm in WF.


----------



## wb1899

Rock316AE said:


> First hour - 6.4
> Second hour - 6.9
> Overall - 6.7(6.65)
> They did the big segment in the second quarter, time slot that at that time was big in terms of gain.
> Breakdown:
> Q1 - Vince promo - 5.0
> Q2 - Greater power segment, Austin as CEO etc - 7.0
> Q3 - Acolytes vs the Brood - 6.8
> Q4 - Union segment/Test promo with Stephanie - 6.8
> Q5 - Kane and X Pac vs Shane - 6.8
> Q6 - Rock vs HHH in a cast match - 7.1
> Q7 - Debra, Jarrett, Bass and Venis segment and Godfather vs Gunn - 6.8
> Q8 - Snow vs Droz and Vince vs Shamrock in a Lion's Den match - 6.9
> OR - Taker vs Show for the WWF title - 7.3


Do you also have the viewership for the quarters?


----------



## Cliffy

I fucking knew this child pandering bullshit wouldn't work.

All these wannabe WWE spokespeople on here were so adamant that it would work.


----------



## D17

Cliffy Byro said:


> I fucking knew this child pandering bullshit wouldn't work.
> 
> All these *wannabe WWE spokespeople *on here were so adamant that it would work.


Ha.


----------



## Werb-Jericho

i think alot of you miss the point, i am here to try and explain it to you. no need to thank me. There are NO tv shows hitting the viewing figures of the early 2000's for the simple reason that there are many more channels + TV used to be the focal point of at home entertainment. This is no longer the case. As i've said before i watch online live, as do many, so WWE have to go on other measures like shirt sales, PPV sales which are harder to stream and there social network obsession. Every Monday they trend worldwide online which is dull to here but incredibly impressive. Any other tv show do this every episode?

You're welcome


----------



## Cliffy

Werb-Jericho said:


> i think alot of you miss the point, i am here to try and explain it to you. no need to thank me. There are NO tv shows hitting the viewing figures of the early 2000's for the simple reason that there are many more channels + TV used to be the focal point of at home entertainment. This is no longer the case. As i've said before i watch online live, as do many, so WWE have to go on other measures like shirt sales, PPV sales which are harder to stream and there social network obsession. Every Monday they trend worldwide online which is dull to here but incredibly impressive. Any other tv show do this every episode?
> 
> You're welcome


they're down 16% on this time last year.

that's a real problem.


----------



## Rock316AE

wb1899 said:


> Do you also have the viewership for the quarters?


No, but I have most of the rating breakdowns for 99-00.


----------



## kokepepsi

Werb-Jericho said:


> i think alot of you miss the point, i am here to try and explain it to you. no need to thank me. There are NO tv shows hitting the viewing figures of the early 2000's for the simple reason that there are many more channels + TV used to be the focal point of at home entertainment. This is no longer the case. As i've said before i watch online live, as do many, so WWE have to go on other measures like shirt sales, PPV sales which are harder to stream and there social network obsession. Every Monday they trend worldwide online which is dull to here but incredibly impressive. Any other tv show do this every episode?
> 
> You're welcome


Jude Judy gets 10million a day bro.


----------



## Werb-Jericho

kokepepsi said:


> Jude Judy gets 10million a day bro.


as it should


----------



## Fanboi101

Ratings matter. It's the primary basis that shows are renewed or cancelled on tv and it's the primary basis that companies use to decide where to place their tv adverstisements. I agree that what is considered a good rating now may not have been considered a good rating 15 or 20 years ago, mainly because of the wider range of options on tv due to cable. However, more options on tv, streaming or dvr doesn't explain the almost 20% drop in ratings on raw compared to last year. That technology was just as widespread last year. The ratings the last few months signal a loss of interest in the product


----------



## Werb-Jericho

Do you think it will be cancelled?? 

If you answer no - then why do you care how much money they get from advertising? 

If you answer yes - then this whole forum is pretty pointless


----------



## LarryCoon

Ratings have always and will always matter. Ratings are the best tools (even better than the misleading crowd reaction ala Santino) we have to indicate which stars are over or not. Ratings indicate which storylines and direction attract the majority of the viewers. Now, if people want to say that other factors are in effect to explain why Punk isn't drawing as much, they have a legitimate point but to say that ratings do not matter is completely idiotic and backwards especially in today's era wherein TV ratings have become much more vital and PPVs have been less important.


----------



## SteenIsGod

Daniel Bryan Draws more than Punk #FACT


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

LarryCoon said:


> Ratings have always and will always matter. Ratings are the best tools (even better than the misleading crowd reaction ala Santino) we have to indicate which stars are over or not. Ratings indicate which storylines and direction attract the majority of the viewers. Now, if people want to say that other factors are in effect to explain why Punk isn't drawing as much, they have a legitimate point but to say that ratings do not matter is completely idiotic and backwards especially in today's era wherein TV ratings have become much more vital and PPVs have been less important.


Ratings matter, but they shouldn't to fans. Most people just use ratings to justify they hate


----------



## Starbuck

No quarter hours yet?


----------



## Rock316AE

Starbuck said:


> No quarter hours yet?


Wednesday...


----------



## LarryCoon

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> Ratings matter, but they shouldn't to fans. Most people just use ratings to justify they hate


Depends, if you are arguing who you are a fan of, then it shouldn't, but if you are arguing which stars WWE should be pushing then it definitely does.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

LarryCoon said:


> Depends, if you are arguing who you are a fan of, then it shouldn't, but if you are arguing which stars WWE should be pushing then it definitely does.


No, it doesn't because you don't own the fucking company.


----------



## D.M.N.

*January 23rd, 2012*
Hour 1 - 4.667m (last week: 4.320m)
Hour 2 - 4.568m (last week: 4.258m)

Source: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...se-being-human-lost-girl-wwe-raw-more/117525/

Last Week
- Hour 1 - 1.7 18-49 rating
- Hour 2 - 1.7 18-49 rating

This Week
- Hour 1 - 1.8 18-49 rating
- Hour 2 - 1.7 18-49 rating

After not the greatest start to the year ratings rise, a nice number for the go home show to the 'Rumble. Well deserved as well.


----------



## A-C-P

Good to see the numbers going up, and even with Punk in the opening and closing segments again!


----------



## LarryCoon

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> No, it doesn't because you don't own the fucking company.


Not owning a fucking company should not stop anyone from going to a forum and hypothetically arguing what's right for a company. If wrestler X (taking into consideration outside factors) brings in a lot of ratings, it would only be logical for a person to argue that WWE should push wrestler X. There is nothing difficult to understand about that simple logic.


----------



## Mister Excitement

Good to see the ratings increased a bit for once.


----------



## Rock316AE

> January 23rd, 2012
> Hour 1 - 4.667m (last week: 4.320m)
> Hour 2 - 4.568m (last week: 4.258m)


Still way below last year's number, I can see the Rumble doing below 400k this year, I thought that last year that had no hype for the Rumble, but it was 99 compared to 2012.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Rock316AE said:


> Still way below last year's number, I can see the Rumble doing below 400k this year, I thought that last year that had no hype for the Rumble, but it was 99 compared to 2012.


What was the ratings for last years RR go home show?

Because Punk was all over that show


----------



## Verdict123

Post the viewership for last year's raw.


----------



## Starbuck

At least they went up by a couple hundred thousand. That's a good sign.


----------



## Rock316AE

Last year was close to 5 million and it was a "disappointment" and a big drop from the past 5 years for the RAW before the Rumble.


----------



## kokepepsi

Rock316AE said:


> Last year was close to 5 million and it was a "disappointment" and a big drop from the past 5 years for the RAW before the Rumble.


breakdown just becasue



> In the segment-by-segment, the end of the Nexus-Corre showdown and John Morrison & Mark Henry vs. King Sheamus & Alberto Del Rio lost 679,000 viewers. Melina vs. Natalya gained 76,000 viewers. Backstage interviews with Nexus and Cena lost 63,000 viewers. *Edge vs. Miz in a champion vs. champion match gained overall gained 42,000 viewers. As noted, that was a total disaster because it was the 10 p.m. segment that should gain close to 500,000 viewers.* Santino Marella & Vladimir Kozlov vs. Husky Harris & Michael McGillicutty lost 262,000 viewers. C.M. Punk vs. Wade Barrett with John Cena as referee gained 423,000 viewers, and gained to a 3.34. The brawl at the end of the show gained 798,000 viewers and finished with a 3.87 overrun.


:vince3


----------



## DesolationRow

Jeez. The second hour drop trend continues. It's safe to concede that the possibility of CM Punk vs. John Laurinaitis didn't represent the game-changer that the built-up match for the main event of the mid-April 1998 Raw between Steve Austin and Vince McMahon did. 

Not either one of their faults, really, lightning in a bottle and all that. At least it's a respectable number for the go-home show, if not a great one.


----------



## kokepepsi

Didn't the Kane/Ryder stuff go way into the 2nd hour?

Huge loss there.


----------



## Rock316AE

Rating was 3.18, 3.19 and 3.16.

Meltzer said that he saw the GM angle plenty of times when he finally wrestles and it always got a big reaction and all that when he finally gets the beatdown, but he said that the Punk/Ace angle got the "smallest" reaction he has ever seen for this, not the announcement for the match and not the GTS. naive WWE thinking that this is even close to Austin/Vince in every aspect, especially when they had more talent in their finger than these two has in two bodies. Punk fans, Ace fans, indy fans, all that BS aside, you all got to admit that this image of Ace, a guy who is twice the size Punk is, acting like he's scared was just ridiculous and not believable, for the same reason Nash/Punk was laughable and Miz and Cena drew one of the lowest numbers in wrestling history in May.

Regardless, I expect that this final segment and last week with Foley and Ace will do acceptable numbers because there was 10 minutes overrun with no competition. For those who wants to know, Austin vs Vince on RAW for the first time ever in 98 with the Foley angle after the match and all that got the biggest number in the history of RAW at that time, 6.0.


----------



## Starbuck

I just want to see the quarter hours for the past 2 weeks lol.


----------



## Ham and Egger

Rock316AE said:


> Rating was 3.18, 3.19 and 3.16.
> 
> Meltzer said that he saw the GM angle plenty of times when he finally wrestles and it always got a big reaction and all that when he finally gets the beatdown, but he said that the Punk/Ace angle got the "smallest" reaction he has ever seen for this, not the announcement for the match and not the GTS. naive WWE thinking that this is even close to Austin/Vince in every aspect, especially when they had more talent in their finger than these two has in two bodies. Punk fans, Ace fans, indy fans, all that BS aside, you all got to admit that this image of Ace, a guy who is twice the size Punk is, acting like he's scared was just ridiculous and not believable, for the same reason Nash/Punk was laughable and Miz and Cena drew one of the lowest numbers in wrestling history in May.
> 
> *Regardless, I expect that this final segment and last week with Foley and Ace will do acceptable numbers because there was 10 minutes overrun with no competition. For those who wants to know, Austin vs Vince on RAW for the first time ever in 98 with the Foley angle after the match and all that got the biggest number in the history of RAW at that time, 6.0.*


Does anyone ever get tired of these marks that are spouting off numbers that happened nearly 15 years ago?


----------



## Starbuck

Ass Invader said:


> Does anyone ever get tired of this guy spouting off shit that happened nearly 15 years ago?


I ain't even mad lol.


----------



## Kabraxal

Ass Invader said:


> Does anyone ever get tired of these marks that are spouting off numbers that happened nearly 15 years ago?


All the time... especially since he doesn't understand a damn thing about how the product overall is the primary force behind ratings, not one man or angle. But what can you do but simply laugh it off.


----------



## Rock316AE

With a strong angle, you can change the company, nWo, Austin and Vince, and plenty of storylines over the years but not major like this.


----------



## WWE

Ass Invader said:


> Does anyone ever get tired of these marks that are spouting off numbers that happened nearly 15 years ago?


Yes, HELL yes.


----------



## Verdict123

Entire punk/ace segment was in the 10 min overrun.


----------



## Rock316AE

Ace/Punk should gain like a million viewers with a big overrun like that after all the hype.


----------



## deatawaits

I have said this and this again.Even during the summmer of punk,let's take the night punk returned,the Q1 and Q2did 3.5 Q9 did 3.9 but the rest of the show bombed and averaged about 3.2s.The mid card is the problem not the mainevent scene.And rock316AE I hate to say this but this guy keeps the Mark for punk inside me alive.


----------



## Starbuck

Maybe it will.


----------



## kokepepsi

What hype? 

If Ace had screwed punk at the RR and then teased it in the opener for the main event on Raw, easy 1million gain.

The way they pulled it off.......pfff even if cena was in punks place you get no where near 1million


----------



## deatawaits

Starbuck said:


> Maybe it will.


It can cause the 10 pm slot had kane and ryder and That may have done abysmal no.s and then there was nothing else in the 2nd hour apart from punk/laurinitis which could actually gain viewers


----------



## Verdict123

Wont do a million.


----------



## Rock316AE

This Punk/Ace "feud" is going since November(or even before that), after all the promo time and segments, they finally announced a match, and it was already in the overrun which was longer than usual(with Foley/Ace, both 10 minutes)


----------



## deatawaits

Rock316AE said:


> This Punk/Ace "feud" is going since November(or even before that), after all the promo time and segments, they finally announced a match, and it was already in the overrun which was longer than usual(with Foley/Ace, both 10 minutes)


Well bring on the quarters then.I fully admit that punk can't draw big time but he will not be bombing either


----------



## kokepepsi

Well the feud sucked.
Again booking is irrelevant when it comes to punk for you Mr.AE

Ace has done nothing to get over as a heel authority figure.
Are we supposed to want Punk to beat up ace just becasue he cost him some matches with nothing at stake?........:Cornette

They had the kane/ryder horrible angle 
Then they had smackdown guys who always lose viewers on
Then they have Miz vs Truth

So much loss that Punk/Ace gained decent if they only lost 100k overrall in the 2nd hour


----------



## Starbuck

deatawaits said:


> Well bring on the quarters then.I fully admit that punk can't draw big time but he will not be bombing either


He has bombed in the past. Just saying. :kane


----------



## Rock316AE

deatawaits said:


> Well bring on the quarters then.I fully admit that punk can't draw big time but he will not be bombing either


Wednesday, although this is first time I expect him to do decent numbers because of the big overrun and because there was no competition.
@kokepepsi, I agree but that's Punk's smartass annoying character, always trying to talk and talk and talk, take the first promo on RAW, always trying to sound cool and just don't shuts his mouth even when others are talking, you have sympathy for a guy who acts like this? I don't think so.


----------



## deatawaits

Well not in a promo but yes,If he doesn't do average numbers in last two ME as they were promos then I don't think we will be seeing him near ME for sometime


----------



## Verdict123

RAW needs Russo. :russo

#BRINGBACKRUSSO


----------



## kokepepsi

Rock316AE said:


> Wednesday, although this is first time I expect him to do decent numbers because of the big overrun and because there was no competition.
> @kokepepsi, I agree but that's Punk's smartass annoying character, always trying to talk and talk and talk, take the first promo on RAW, always trying to sound cool and just don't shuts his mouth even when others are talking, you have sympathy for a guy who acts like this? I don't think so.


I agree on the punk thing


----------



## Rock316AE

I would love to see Russo working with Vince again, I got my favorite time as a wrestling fan under that team, besides that, I always loved Russo's style with the skits. Russo also knows how to create a character and I agree with his mindset about wrestling matches on TV and their effect on ratings if it's just random.


----------



## Olympus

Rock316AE said:


> I would love to see Russo working with Vince again, I got my favorite time as a wrestling fan under that team, besides that, I always loved Russo's style with the skits. Russo also knows how to create a character and I agree with his mindset about wrestling matches on TV and their effect on ratings if it's just random.


Holy shit.

Any argument you've ever had against being a massive troll is destroyed with this post.


----------



## Rock316AE

Yeah I know, you can't praise Russo on the internet. The guy is delusional and he was horrendous in WCW, but I give him credit for his work in the WWF. What I also like about his interviews is every time he talks about how he brought the Nitro ratings from 2.6 to 3.5 in a few months lol, of course everybody knows that this is bullshit but it's funny how he believes in that.


----------



## Verdict123

Scorpion said:


> Holy shit.
> 
> Any argument you've ever had against being a massive troll is destroyed with this post.


No actually he is right. Russo + Vince = Success. Proven formula.


----------



## Ray

Russo had both good and bad creativity, and Vince was there to filter out those bad ideas that Russo suggested. The good ones were great, but the bad ones were just horrendous. Just look at his time in WCW when he had complete creative control. The guy fucked the entire company up.


----------



## dissident

Rock316AE said:


> I would love to see Russo working with Vince again, I got my favorite time as a wrestling fan under that team, besides that, I always loved Russo's style with the skits. Russo also knows how to create a character and I agree with his mindset about wrestling matches on TV and their effect on ratings if it's just random.


Heymen yes, Russo no.. eek gads why don't we bring back Bischoff and Hogan while we are at it...


----------



## Brye

While we're at it, why not bring back D-Lo, Scotty, Rikishi, Godfather, Steven Richards, Kurgan, Hardcore Holly, Perry Saturn, Al Snow, Steve Blackman, Ken Shamrock, Val Venis and Road Dogg? If we're gonna live in the past, might as well go full force.

And honestly how can anyone think Russo still has any ability to create these days? Guy is a fucking mess.


----------



## GillbergReturns

Brye said:


> While we're at it, why not bring back D-Lo, Scotty, Rikishi, Godfather, Steven Richards, Kurgan, Hardcore Holly, Perry Saturn, Al Snow, Steve Blackman, Ken Shamrock, Val Venis and Road Dogg? If we're gonna live in the past, might as well go full force.
> 
> And honestly how can anyone think Russo still has any ability to create these days? Guy is a fucking mess.


There's a pretty big difference between bringing back a writer and a 45 year old washed up wrestler. 

I'm sure you wouldn't complain if they brought back Paul Heyman.


----------



## Marv95

If Russo wasn't given _complete_ control over the product and doesn't have the _final_ say then I dunno what's the harm in it. Would be better, less insulting and more entertaining than what we have now


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Brye said:


> While we're at it, why not bring back D-Lo, Scotty, Rikishi, Godfather, Steven Richards, Kurgan, Hardcore Holly, Perry Saturn, Al Snow, Steve Blackman, Ken Shamrock, Val Venis and Road Dogg? If we're gonna live in the past, might as well go full force.
> 
> And honestly how can anyone think Russo still has any ability to create these days? Guy is a fucking mess.


D-Lo and Al Snow should come back. They get some of the biggest pops in TNA and they don't even wrestle.


----------



## Coffey

Now I've fuckin' heard everything. People clamoring for the return of Vince fucking Russo. Jesus Christ. I guess what they say about opinions changing over time due to nostalgia, rose-colored glasses, and lowered expectations are true.

That guy might be the worst thing to happen to professional wrestling in modern history.


----------



## Gerdon

psx71 said:


> Russo had both good and bad creativity, and Vince was there to filter out those bad ideas that Russo suggested. The good ones were great, but the bad ones were just horrendous. Just look at his time in WCW when he had complete creative control. The guy fucked the entire company up.


WCW died because of ego-maniacs running the company, not russo. 

And i wouldnt mind russo back tbh. He is a creative genius, just needs the right filter.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

This thread has become of parody of itself. Russo = ratings, good lord.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

LOLrusso, give him control of the Divas. I would love to see what ideas he has to make that division better.


----------



## Olympus

Russo had the perfect environment. Some of the most moronic people on this forum couldn't fuck up the position he had in '97-98. He was coddled like a newborn baby. Russo, in no way shape or form, offers any benefit to any wrestling company today. The fact that he needs a filter to tell him to shut the fuck up and go sit in the corner like Vince should tell you that not to mention Vince is only getting older and he's starting to lose it and on top of that you no longer have the Rocks, the Austins, the HBKs, the Bret Harts, the HHHs, etc. to carry the shit Russo would produce.



Gerdon said:


> WCW died because of ego-maniacs running the company, not russo.
> 
> And i wouldnt mind russo back tbh. He is a creative genius, just needs the right filter.


No, Heyman is a creative genius. Russo is anything but.

Are you telling me the shit Russo has been putting on the last 13 years has been good? Russo was a catastrophically big part of the problem in WCW.


----------



## Coffey

He's a failed magazine writer. Why should anyone care about his wrestling ideas?


----------



## yoseftigger

Where are the ratings? This is why having one thread is stupid.


----------



## Olympus

Walk-In said:


> He's a failed magazine writer. Why should anyone care about his wrestling ideas?


Besides Dixie's dumbfuck self and the naive, brown nosing yes men around her, no one does.

Russo doesn't like wrestling, he doesn't like the fans, and he doesn't like the wrestlers. He likes fucking up a job he's in no way shape or form qualified to do. After a blogger proclaimed there was only 16 minutes of wrestling on Impact, Russo responded with,"Why would anyone care about how much fake wrestling there is on a fake wrestling show?"

I hope Cornette makes it long enough to actually piss on his grave and I hope he records it as well because I'd love to see it.


----------



## Rock316AE

Russo along with Vince was a big part in the direction of the company in 98-99, I always loved his style with the skits and that's what takes a feud to another level. I agree that the talents made it work but most of time they got great material. At that time you also got something for every wrestler on the roster, you don't have to like the style, but my favorite year in wrestling history is 99.


----------



## Olympus

Rock316AE said:


> Russo along with Vince was a big part in the direction of the company in 98-99, I always loved his style with the skits and that's what takes a feud to another level. I agree that the talents made it work but most of time they got great material. At that time you also got something for every wrestler on the roster, you don't have to like the style, but my favorite year in wrestling history is 99.


You can love whatever you want, I'm fine with that. All I'm saying is Russo is a piece of shit who shouldn't set foot within 1000 miles of a wrestling organization.


----------



## Rock316AE

Same thing, All I'm saying that with a clear direction he can be great for a wrestling company like he proved in the past, on his own? yes, he's a delusional piece of shit.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Rock316AE said:


> Russo along with Vince was a big part in the direction of the company in 98-99, I always loved his style with the skits and that's what takes a feud to another level. I agree that the talents made it work but most of time they got great material. At that time you also got something for every wrestler on the roster, you don't have to like the style, but my favorite year in wrestling history is 99.


And then he wanted more money from WWE and Vince said "fuck no" so he jumped to WCW, promised the world and soon (along with wrestling great Kevin nash) drove the company down to the ground thanks to the worst angles you could ever think off and exposed the wrestling industry with shitty worked shoots every single week.

And thanks to him the company that started the wrestling boom went out of buisness which in the long term hurt the industry in a big way :russo

For the damage he did to the wrestling buisness he should be never credited for anything posotive.


----------



## Rock316AE

Agreed, he was a big part in the death of WCW, but not the main part, the main part is still the TV deal with TNT. And they were going down long before him. WCW business was significantly down in every aspect since June-August 99.



> For the damage he did to the wrestling buisness he should be never credited for anything posotive.


But this is bullshit and you know it. That's like saying that Angle/Benoit is suddenly a terrible match because of what Benoit did.


----------



## Gerdon

Russo + Punk = Worked shoots all fucking day! Woooooooooooooooo


----------



## Olympus

Rock316AE said:


> Agreed, he was a big part in the death of WCW, *but not the main part, the main part is still the TV deal with TNT.* And they were going down long before him. WCW business was significantly down in every aspect since June-August 99.


Which was the result of not only lack of leadership and structure within the company but also the shit he and Ferrara wrote for the damned show. Notice how Russo joins the company late '99 and we get the infamous horseshit that we now know as "WCW 2000". He tried doing the same shit he did with WWE in WCW and it failed miserably.


----------



## kokepepsi

you all just a bunch of cornette marks who hate Russo becasue jim rants on him all the time.

Funny thing Russo in his shoots never badmouths anyone

He was good at making stories for the entire roster and at promo writing(get mad marks)

Vince Russo+the guy who is writing SD with Vince not in a bad mood = WWE gold


----------



## kokepepsi

Segment Breakdown
Wrestling Observer Newsletter
*
LASTWEEK
1/16/2012*


> *Raw on 1/16* drew what has to be considered the most disappointing rating in months, doing a 3.02 rating and 4.29 million viewers. This was the first weekend with no football competition, and while the rating was higher than the prior week, it's still in the same ratings range they were doing against football.
> 
> The show finished fourth for the night on cable. The leading sports competition was an NBA game on ESPN that did 2.36 million viewers. The show had a 65.3% male skew. They did a 2.1 in Males 12-17 (down 16% and the lowest I've ever heard in this demo), 2.8 in Males 18-49 (up 4%), 0.7 in Girls 12-17 (down 46%) and 1.2 in Women 18-49 (up 9%).
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, the opening segment with the return of Mick Foley, plus Dolph Ziggler and C.M. Punk did a 3.23.
> 
> Primo & Epico vs. Kofi Kingston & Evan Bourne lost 522,000 viewers.
> 
> The Jack Swagger U.S. title win over Zack Ryder gained 207,000 viewers so Ryder finally had a segment with a meaningful gain.
> 
> Kelly Kelly & Alicia Fox vs. Bella Twins with Perez Hilton lost 169,000 viewers.
> 
> The Miz, R-Truth, Wade Barrett and Sheamus Battle Royal gained 526,000 viewers at 10 p.m. which is solid for that slot, and better than I would have expected.
> 
> The John Cena/Jack Swagger brawl and Brodus Clay dancing and wrestling JTG lost 365,000 viewers. I'd have expected better with Cena.
> 
> The Daniel Bryan/A.J./Big Show angle and Bryan interview lost 372,000 viewers.
> 
> The main event with Punk & Bryan & Chris Jericho vs. Mark Henry & Ziggler & David Otunga, plus the ending with Punk, Laurinaitis and Foley gained 817,000 viewers, which is strong growth, and was the highest point of the show with a 3.32 overrun.


*
This week*


> *Raw on 1/23 *did a 3.17 rating and 4.61 million viewers, showing a little bit of signs of the usual January bounce back. The show was fourth for the night on cable and was the first Raw in months without any nationally televised sports competition.
> 
> That would explain the Male skew being 68.1%, the highest in months, and increases in the key demos with a 2.6 among Male teens (up 24% and being the highest rated show on TV that night in this demo which had been struggling), 2.9 in Males 18-49 (up 4%), 1.4 in Women 12-17 (double that of last week) and 1.1 in Women 18-49 (down 8%).
> 
> The show opened strong doing a 3.49 first quarter with the set up stuff with C.M. Punk, John Cena and John Laurinaitis.
> 
> However, Punk & Cena vs. Jack Swagger & Dolph Ziggler lost 528,000 viewers. That's not unusual for the time slot, but you would think with Punk & Cena that people would have stayed past the first quarter.
> 
> The Chris Jericho Highlight Reel segment lost 287,000 viewers.
> 
> Kane vs. Zack Ryder which ended with the big sell stretcher job gained 601,000 viewers, which did well for the strongly sold angle.
> 
> Sheamus vs. Jinder Mahal lost 490,000 viewers.
> 
> Brodus Clay vs. Heath Slater gained 35,000 viewers.
> 
> Miz vs. R-Truth lost 19,000 viewers.
> 
> The tease of Punk vs. Laurinaitis and ending angle gained 761,000 viewers to a 3.54 overrun. That's normal level overrun growth, but better than usual for a segment anchored by Punk.
> 
> As far as the overrun growth, Teenage Boys went from 2.7 to 3.0, Males 18-49 from 2.8 to 3.4 (so this Punk/Laurinaitis was very strong in this age group), Teenage girls went from 1.1 to 1.2 and Women 18-49 stayed at 1.2. Basically a strong Punk anchored final quarter only hit males and women didn't care, whereas with Cena you usually get across the board growth. Although with the two of them together wrestling you had drops across the board, with Teenage Boys dropping from 2.6 to 2.3, Men 18-49 from 3.0 to 2.8, Women teens from 2.0 to 1.9 and Women 18-49 from 1.4 to 1.2.


----------



## Mister Excitement

I'm glad Sheamus/Mahal lost almost a half a million viewers. Maybe they'll stop giving us the same match every week now.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Punk kant draw.

Those are good numbers. Happy to see the main angle do well.


----------



## Kabraxal

Hard to take anything from these numbers per wrestler... Punk gains but loses. Cena had a drastic drop off segment. Ryder was up and down. Does seem to be more about the audience not trusting the WWE to keep angles consistent on Raw than anything else... solid segments with different stars in multiple weeks yet the trend for losing or gaining viewers doesn't really change.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

People for some stupid reason seem to think individuals are to blame whenever ratings aren't good, but if that were the case then Punk doesn't draw, Cena doesn't draw, Jericho doesn't draw, etc. But that is not the case. You pull off a good show with good angles and storyline progression, you'll get good numbers.


----------



## LarryCoon

I'm surprised that Kane vs Ryder gained 601k viewers and :lmao at Y2J losing even more viewers each week.


----------



## Rock316AE

I expected Foley to gain a good number in the main event, unfortunately, the overall main event number was terrible for this time of the year with a 10 minutes overrun. Punk/Ace was not big like I thought it would be, after all the hype for their match, months of promo time, plenty of segments + no competition + 11-12 minutes overrun? but it's Punk after all so I guess it shouldn't be surprising. to end the final RAW before the Rumble with a 3.5 is terrible no matter what, I can see the Rumble doing the worst overall number since 97. Kane/Ryder did much better than expected and hopefully from next week, Jericho would be a real star character and not a clown running around the ring and he can be in the main time slots.

For next week, I can see a 3.5 overall, 4.0+ for the HHH segment and if it's on the show in a main slot, the Orton Rumble winner segment 3.6-3.7


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Rock316AE said:


> I expected Foley to gain a good number in the main event, unfortunately, the overall main event number was terrible for this time of the year with a 10 minutes overrun. Punk/Ace was not big like I thought it would be, after all the hype for their match, months of promo time, plenty of segments + no competition + 11-12 minutes overrun? but it's Punk after all so I guess it shouldn't be surprising. to end the final RAW before the Rumble with a 3.5 is terrible no matter what, I can see the Rumble doing the worst overall number since 97. Kane/Ryder did much better than expected and hopefully from next week, Jericho would be a real star character and not a clown running around the ring and he can be in the main time slots.
> 
> For next week, I can see a 3.5 overall, 4.0+ for the HHH segment and if it's on the show in a main slot, the Orton Rumble winner segment 3.6-3.7


fpalm Give credit where credit is due once in a while. You make excuses only when you're favorites are doing shit numbers. Let's see some examples, Survivor Series 2011 buyrate, we all know the great numbers Orton's segments get, and Jericho losing 300k viewers. Which wouldn't be that weird if he didn't just follow a segment that lost 500k viewers. I mean, holy shit we know you're a troll but at least admit when you're wrong. Punk's segments the past two weeks did great. He's actually one of the few bringing in good numbers. Cena did shitty, Miz did shitty, Jericho did fucking awful and has been doing so since he came back. That doesn't mean they aren't "draws." I'll say it again, it's the show as a whole.

And lol at your next week predictions. No wonder you're always so disappointed, you live in a fantasy world.


----------



## LarryCoon

Rock316AE said:


> I expected Foley to gain a good number in the main event, unfortunately, the overall main event number was terrible for this time of the year with a 10 minutes overrun. Punk/Ace was not big like I thought it would be, after all the hype for their match, months of promo time, plenty of segments + no competition + 11-12 minutes overrun? but it's Punk after all so I guess it shouldn't be surprising. to end the final RAW before the Rumble with a 3.5 is terrible no matter what, I can see the Rumble doing the worst overall number since 97. Kane/Ryder did much better than expected and hopefully from next week, Jericho would be a real star character and not a clown running around the ring and he can be in the main time slots.
> 
> For next week, I can see a 3.5 overall, 4.0+ for the HHH segment and if it's on the show in a main slot, the Orton Rumble winner segment 3.6-3.7


I never thought Punk/Ace would do good numbers. It wasn't properly promoted and I don't think the feud has much heat to it since Punk has been destroying and undressing Ace in the promos.


----------



## Rock316AE

Orton segments on RAW are always in random time slots(where Cena lost viewers two weeks in a row), read this thread, I predicted decent numbers for the main event segments because that's what happen when you got 10 minutes+ overrun with no competition. 

As for next week? they did 3.2 this week, next week is a show that usually gets a big jump after the Rumble, if this doesn't get 3.5 then it's terrible in all standards.


----------



## WWE

Gains viewers
loses viewers
Gains viewers
Loses viewers
Gains viewers
Loses viewers
Gains viewers

Why cant these people stick with one show instead of changing the channel half way through a segment/match, they tend to miss out on stuff :kobe2


----------



## SteenIsGod

Rock316AE said:


> Orton segments on RAW are always in random time slots(where Cena lost viewers two weeks in a row), read this thread, I predicted decent numbers for the main event segments because that's what happen when you got 10 minutes+ overrun with no competition.
> 
> As for next week? they did 3.2 this week, next week is a show that usually gets a big jump after the Rumble, if this doesn't get 3.5 then it's terrible in all standards.


Your standard is High. It got a 3.3 last year and this year does about 5% less every week. 3.1 IMO.


----------



## Rock316AE

Cycloneon said:


> Gains viewers
> loses viewers
> Gains viewers
> Loses viewers
> Gains viewers
> Loses viewers
> Gains viewers
> 
> Why cant these people stick with one show instead of changing the channel half way through a segment/match, they tend to miss out on stuff :kobe2


It was always like this so it's nothing new, but the huge drop in the second quarter for the last year is funny because years ago it was a huge segment in terms of gain.

And [email protected], same thing I said:



> Jumping back to the Triple H reference in closing. The “hype” for next Monday has the potential to be a move of unabashed genius. No one else has made any change to the ratings for the last few months, so by strapping his name to the post-Rumble Raw at the very last second, Hunter can on the surface still look like the biggest draw in WWE. That being said, they could have just as easily said “Brian Leahy will appear at next week’s Raw” and reaped the same, probable ratings bump.


----------



## Rock316AE

SteenIsGod said:


> Your standard is High. It got a 3.3 last year and this year does about 5% less every week. 3.1 IMO.


3.5 with 5.3 million viewers.



> *WWE News: Raw TV ratings are in for Monday's show - did Raw pop a rating after the Royal Rumble PPV? *
> 
> WWE Raw on Monday, January 31 scored a 3.5 rating and averaged 5.3 million viewers for the Raw after the Royal Rumble.
> 
> Raw scored its highest rating since August 30, which was also a 3.5 rating, before the start of the fall 2010 TV season.
> 
> Overall for the night, Raw was #3 on cable TV behind History Channel's "Pawn Stars" and "American Pickers." In the adult male demos, Raw was #2 behind "Pawn Stars."
> 
> In a week-to-week comparison, Raw's adult demo ratings were essentially flat with last week's Raw despite the ratings increase. It shows the strength of History Channel's adult male-oriented programming, which topped the highest-rated Raw episode in five months.
> 
> Looking beyond adult viewers, the ratings increase came from younger teen viewers.
> 
> -Raw scored one of its highest ratings among males 12-17 in over one year. - Raw's m12-17 rating was up 27 percent compared to last week and 41 percent vs. two weeks ago.
> 
> -Among males 12-34, Raw was up 9 percent compared to last week's show and 15 percent vs. two weeks ago.


+ You got HHH on the show...


----------



## Snothlisberger

Rock316AE said:


> 3.5 with 5.3 million viewers.
> 
> 
> 
> + You got HHH on the show...


That PwTorch quote that you posted has nothing to do with what you said. You said that they would get a ratings boost BECAUSE of HHH appearing. The Torch quote suggests that HHH is a huge egomaniac who attached his name to the after Rumble Raw so he can take all the credit for the ratings boost that would happen regardless of if he was promoted or not. Because, you know, it is the Raw after the Rumble and it will obviously receive a boost because people will tune in to the see the results. 

Therefore, HHH, a huge egomaniac, can still claim he is the biggest draw. They were making fun of him.


----------



## Rock316AE

I know, I post it because I said the same thing here:
http://www.wrestlingforum.com/10930369-post111.html
What I said in the post above you is that HHH is a big name and can bring more viewers.


----------



## LarryCoon

WallofShame said:


> That PwTorch quote that you posted has nothing to do with what you said. You said that they would get a ratings boost BECAUSE of HHH appearing. The Torch quote suggests that HHH is a huge egomaniac who attached his name to the after Rumble Raw so he can take all the credit for the ratings boost that would happen regardless of if he was promoted or not. Because, you know, it is the Raw after the Rumble and it will obviously receive a boost because people will tune in to the see the results.
> 
> Therefore, HHH, a huge egomaniac, can still claim he is the biggest draw. They were making fun of him.


I'm not really surprised if HHH did that. Its good leverage. I honestly thought that HHH vs Nash would've moved their match onto the Royal Rumble PPV to save their face and artificially increase the draw value of their match.


----------



## Snothlisberger

Rock316AE said:


> I know, I post it because I said the same thing here:
> http://www.wrestlingforum.com/10930369-post111.html
> What I said in the post above you is that HHH is a big name and can bring more viewers.


FAir enough, I missed that post.


----------



## Aficionado

It seems anything between 3.2 and 3.5 is the norm for WWE currently and nothing spectacular. Anything lower is considered a disappointment. I wonder what it would take for the ratings to get a whole point bump closer to 4.5 and about 6 million viewers, even if its just temporary.


----------



## deatawaits

> The main event with Punk & Bryan & Chris Jericho vs. Mark Henry & Ziggler & David Otunga, plus the ending with Punk, Laurinaitis and Foley gained 817,000 viewers, which is strong growth, and was the highest point of the show with a 3.32 overrun.
> 
> 
> The tease of Punk vs. Laurinaitis and ending angle gained 761,000 viewers to a 3.54 overrun. That's normal level overrun growth, but better than usual for a segment anchored by Punk
> 
> The show opened strong doing a 3.49 first quarter with the set up stuff with C.M. Punk, John Cena and John Laurinaitis.


Now these aren't terrific numbers but they are great and I mean very good cause I don't think anyone else than HHH,Cena pulls 800k+ or around that and though people say that's usual growth but that's usual cause Cena is always in ME.
And even if you deny that you can't deny that two ME numbers are pretty damn good considering it had Cm punk.And I will say if after gaining around 817k they do a 3.32 then it's really worrying.

Jericho losing viewers makes me feel really really bad though



> The John Cena/Jack Swagger brawl and Brodus Clay dancing and wrestling JTG lost 365,000 viewers. I'd have expected better with Cena.


That's not good

EDIT: Why this place is so uneventful today?


----------



## chronoxiong

I believe as long as the ratings for RAW are around 3.5 to 3.2 then that is considered a success. They just need to avoid being below 3.0 because that kind of rating is just too discouraging. I'm glad to hear about the decent rating for this week's show.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

deatawaits said:


> EDIT: Why this place is so uneventful today?


Because CM Punk drew good numbers. They've got nothing to troll about. I like Rock316 though, at least he's trying.


----------



## deatawaits

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Because CM Punk drew good numbers. *They've got nothing to troll about. I like Rock316 though, at least he's trying*


That actually makes me feel that this guy is not a troll but actually believe in everything he posts:no:

Well now PUNK is getting loudest pops,selling merchs and bringing the RATINGZZZ I don't know what will be left for them to troll.But don't worry Rock316ae will Rise Above Facts and Never give up.


----------



## Rock316AE

Of course I believe in everything, if you would understand how it works you will also believe in that. But it's mostly just people coming to find out if their favorite did a good number without understanding the time slots deal and what can affect the viewers, like Jericho for example, with a character like that and the type of segments he's doing, he can never be in the top of the hour which means he's going to lose, simple, it's not a open Heart Surgery.


----------



## kokepepsi

yeah but there have been segments outside of the Opener,10pm/overrun that have gained.
FFS sin cara and Mason ryan have pulled it off.

The fact that Jericho who was absent for some time and is a "star" losing viewers is something of a concern.


----------



## Rock316AE

I think that Jericho did a big damage to his star power when he started to act like a goof one minute after his big return. But let's see what he does in a main segment.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I am extremely surprised that main event with Punk/Jericho/Bryan teaming up gained 800k+ viewers. No proven draw in sight... so that's really really good... ESPECIALLY considering it was a Punk match, and those never have drawn well in the past. Could also be because afterwards they had the big thing going with Punk/Foley/Ace, and Punk promos usually do well at least, but yeah...

the Punk/Ace match did a good, not great number considering all the hype. Ryder also managed to gain good numbers the past couple of weeks, which shows that this angle with Kane/Cena/Ryder is indeed drawing. 

Well, next week will start the Road to Wrestlemania... not sure how big the number will be, but the HHH/Laurinitis stuff should draw in people at least. We'll see what happens...


----------



## D.M.N.

*January 23rd, 2012 - Breakdown*
Q1 - 3.49 rating / 5.06 million
Q2 - 3.09 rating / 4.53 million
Q3 - 2.89 rating / 4.24 million
Q4 - 3.30 rating / 4.84 million
Q5 - 3.01 rating / 4.35 million
Q6 - 3.04 rating / 4.39 million
Q7 - 3.02 rating / 4.37 million
Q8 + OR - 3.54 rating / 5.13 million

I think Q4 and Q5 need to be swapped around because Q5 wouldn't lose that much. Big gain for the last segment and more importantly over 5 million which is the good thing.


----------



## Brave Nash

D.M.N. said:


> *January 23rd, 2012 - Breakdown*
> Q1 - 3.49 rating / 5.06 million
> Q2 - 3.09 rating / 4.53 million
> Q3 - 2.89 rating / 4.24 million
> Q4 - 3.30 rating / 4.84 million
> Q5 - 3.01 rating / 4.35 million
> Q6 - 3.04 rating / 4.39 million
> Q7 - 3.02 rating / 4.37 million
> Q8 + OR - 3.54 rating / 5.13 million
> 
> I think Q4 and Q5 need to be swapped around because Q5 wouldn't lose that much. Big gain for the last segment and more importantly over 5 million which is the good thing.


Who said Punk cant draw. He always just needed somebody big or over to fued with.


----------



## Duke Silver

Expert analysts like myself know that CM Punk can't draw. We won't stop until our opinion [the only opinion that matters] is heard, acknowledged, announced daily through various news outlets, and written in the bible. I speak for everyone and know everything. I am the 1%.


----------



## Brye

GillbergReturns said:


> There's a pretty big difference between bringing back a writer and a 45 year old washed up wrestler.
> 
> I'm sure you wouldn't complain if they brought back Paul Heyman.


There is a huge difference between a guy like Heyman and and someone like Russo.


----------



## Mr Premium

World Wide said:


> Expert analysts like myself know that CM Punk can't draw. We won't stop until our opinion [the only opinion that matters] is heard, acknowledged, announced daily through various news outlets, and written in the bible. I speak for everyone and know everything. I am the 1%.


I'm sure about 70% of people who knows the guy including top analysts like Meltzer really do thinks he isn't a draw.


----------



## A-C-P

Holy Crap The 2 quarters with the most viewers were both segments Punk was in unk

Sidenote: yes I do know the beginning of the show and the final quater+overrn are 2 of the highest rated spots no matter what. But It definitely has been pretty uneventful in this thread considerring quarters were posted.


Hopefully from this and SD's current ratings the WWE is figuring out that if you have good storylines (plural), some actual character development, and some decent booking people will actually tune in to their shows.


----------



## version 1

deatawaits said:


> That actually makes me feel that this guy is not a troll but actually believe in everything he posts:no:
> 
> Well now PUNK is getting loudest pops,selling merchs *and bringing the RATINGZZZ *I don't know what will be left for them to troll.But don't worry Rock316ae will Rise Above Facts and Never give up.





Brave Nash said:


> *Who said Punk cant draw*. He always just needed somebody big or over to fued with.


:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao What happend to all the ´not one man is drawing it´s the whole show what draws´
Let me guess every time the ratings are low it´s not because of Punk but when it´s high it´s all because of Punk . 

Damn I truly believe that because of these kind of reactions CM Punk get´s hated so much by everyone who doesn´t like him 



Obis said:


> I am extremely surprised that main event with Punk/Jericho/Bryan teaming up gained 800k+ viewers. *No proven draw in sight*... so that's really really good... ESPECIALLY considering it was a Punk match, and those never have drawn well in the past. Could also be because afterwards they had the big thing going with Punk/Foley/Ace, and Punk promos usually do well at least, but yeah...


No proven draw in sight except for Mark ´the ratings machine´ Henry. 


I´ts good to see that there are still 5 million people watching this show. The RTWM is almost beginning so the ratings should be a lot higher in the next couple of weeks.


----------



## brian8448

CM Punk still isn't drawing I see.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

version 1 said:


> :lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao What happend to all the ´not one man is drawing it´s the whole show what draws´
> Let me guess every time the ratings are low it´s not because of Punk but when it´s high it´s all because of Punk .
> 
> Damn I truly believe that because of these kind of reactions CM Punk get´s hated so much by everyone who doesn´t like him


Are you blind? When the rating are low it's all:

"OMG PUNK IS A VANILLA MIDGET!"
"PUNK DOES NOT = DRAW!"
"JUST DE-PUSH PUNK ALREADY!"

And it's not that no one person is a draw in WWE, it's that no one person can draw in big numbers in this day and age without a hot angle, not Punk, not Orton, not HHH, etc. I suppose Cena can based on the fact he drew some good numbers for weeks in a row while doing basically nothing before the whole Kane angle started, but then again this week (or was it last week?) his match dropped 500,000 viewers when it wasn't in a big timeslot. Rock can as well but he's not actively on the show so he doesn't really count.

But that's why it was so surprising that they gained 800,000 viewers the 1/16 show for the final match/segment.



> No proven draw in sight except for Mark ´the ratings machine´ Henry.


Actually completely forgot about him since he didn't really do anything in the match besides ultimately chase Daniel Bryan. Thing is, if my memory serves me correctly, he never drew extremely well on Raw in the past in all honesty, but I'm not 100% sure on what the numbers are. 

I think the increase has to potentially do with Foley coming in, and the fact Punk was talking (when people are interested in him) and not wrestling (when people don't seem to be interested in him) and that it had the same vibe as the shoot he did back in June, albeit not quite as hard-hitting.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Jericho's segment being the only one going under 3.0 is something to worry about. So you can't really blame it on it being a random segment. How the hell could he lose 300k after a segment that lost 500k. 

Stupid indy vanilla midget hobo. /rage~


----------



## Green Light

version 1 said:


> :lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao What happend to all the ´not one man is drawing it´s the whole show what draws´
> Let me guess every time the ratings are low it´s not because of Punk but when it´s high it´s all because of Punk .


This is very much true tbh


----------



## #1Peep4ever

i used to mark for jericho but now he looses so much viewers that even though i want to keep on marking for him but the credo does not allow it


----------



## version 1

Obis said:


> Are you blind? When the rating are low it's all:
> 
> "OMG PUNK IS A VANILLA MIDGET!"
> "PUNK DOES NOT = DRAW!"
> "JUST DE-PUSH PUNK ALREADY!"
> 
> And it's not that no one person is a draw in WWE, it's that no one person can draw in big numbers in this day and age without a hot angle, not Punk, not Orton, not HHH, etc. I suppose Cena can based on the fact he drew some good numbers for weeks in a row while doing basically nothing before the whole Kane angle started, but then again this week (or was it last week?) his match dropped 500,000 viewers when it wasn't in a big timeslot. Rock can as well but he's not actively on the show so he doesn't really count.
> 
> But that's why it was so surprising that they gained 800,000 viewers the 1/16 show for the final match/segment.


I don´t actually disagree with you, but I´m getting tired of the CM Punk supporters making treats about ´why do people hate CM Punk´, ´at least admit CM Punk is a good wrestler´ and well you know what I mean. I´m just giving a reason why their is a lot of hate on CM Punk. I will quote a post I made earlier in this treat:


> I also think that a lot of 'hate' can be contributed to some CM Punk marks. I remembered a lot of treats during the summer saying that CM Punk is the next G.O.A.T, next Austin, bigger then The Rock, outdraws The Rock, new top guy, No1 face of the company, will make wrestling interesting again, save WWE, etc.... and now that the ratings aren't so good some people are gonna have some pay back. That's why the ratings tread where so huge (and bad) the last couple of months and why we have one ratings tread right now.


It's all about double standers. CM Punk supporters ran their mouth in the summer and everybody who doesn't like him are just biting back.

Ooh and about that blind part. Those are the people who are biting back :lmao


----------



## Brye

lol at the people with the philosophy of people being horrible draws trying to switch over when things don't go their way.

Where was "no one man makes the rating" a month ago?


----------



## Duke Silver

So I'm to understand that because a few people had excessively high hopes for CM Punk, there are posters on this forum that have made it their mission over the past couple of months to harp on about how CM Punk doesn't "bring the ratings", in an effort to "get even"?

Good job. 

:Cornette


----------



## Brye

World Wide said:


> So I'm to understand that because a few people had excessively high hopes for CM Punk, there are posters on this forum that *have made it their mission over the past couple of months to harp on about how CM Punk doesn't "bring the ratings", in an effort to "get even"?*
> 
> Good job.
> 
> :Cornette


A couple of months? Try since August. Why it's such a big deal is beyond me because it shouldn't dictate what you think of someone, but hell, who am I to think logically?


----------



## Green Light

Brye said:


> A couple of months? Try since August. Why it's such a big deal is beyond me because it shouldn't dictate what you think of someone, but hell, who am I to think logically?


Again, I don't know why people keep saying this. I have yet to see anyone say they like or dislike someone because they can or can't draw. 

I also don't get why over the last 5 months people have been coming into the ratings thread and complaining about people discussing ratings, I mean it's the exact same people every week making the same comment


----------



## LarryCoon

version 1 said:


> :lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao What happend to all the ´not one man is drawing it´s the whole show what draws´
> Let me guess every time the ratings are low it´s not because of Punk but when it´s high it´s all because of Punk .
> 
> Damn I truly believe that because of these kind of reactions CM Punk get´s hated so much by everyone who doesn´t like him


This just proves that both punk supporters and punk haters are a bit biased in their interpretations of the ratings. When Punk wasn't drawing, people were dismissing the ratings and blaming other factors such as the lack of credible opponents at the same time (which nullifies their argument for dismissing the ratings). Now that Punk is in the drawing segments, all of the sudden they bring the ratings up.


----------



## Brye

Green Light said:


> Again, I don't know why people keep saying this. I have yet to see anyone say they like or dislike someone because they can or can't draw.
> 
> I also don't get why over the last 5 months people have been coming into the ratings thread and complaining about people discussing ratings, I mean it's the exact same people every week making the same comment


I'm a mod so I technically have to come in here and then I'll post because I see quite a bit of ignorance.


----------



## Green Light

I didn't mean you specifically but people in general who make these comments every week


----------



## version 1

World Wide said:


> So I'm to understand that because a few people had excessively high hopes for CM Punk, there are posters on this forum that have made it their mission over the past couple of months to harp on about how CM Punk doesn't "bring the ratings", in an effort to "get even"?
> 
> Good job.
> 
> :Cornette


:lmao No that's what you believe. Did you seriously missed those 'CM Punk is the next G.O.A.T', "CM Punk is bigger than The Rock', "Cm Punk is the next Austin' treats? This has noting to do with 'a few people who had excessively high hopes for CM Punk' the whole damn forum was full of this crap. 

I also don't know why you are over-exaggerating the 'get even' part. Every time the ratings come out people are discussing who is a draw and who isn't. CM Punk is the WWE champion so he get's the most attention in this ratings tread. Same happened with John Cena, Randy Orton, Alberto Del Rio etc......

So Yeah :kane 


LarryCoon said:


> This just proves that both punk supporters and punk haters are a bit biased in their interpretations of the ratings. When Punk wasn't drawing, people were dismissing the ratings and blaming other factors such as the lack of credible opponents at the same time (which nullifies their argument for dismissing the ratings). Now that Punk is in the drawing segments, all of the sudden they bring the ratings up.


I agree it's a little bit biased of both sides.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Discussing ratings isn't really the problem... it's when posts are made like:

"Punk sucks he can't draw."

or

"Ryder's a fucking failure."

or even the other way around when that's all that's in the post. This thread isn't about Punk, Cena, Kane, Rock, HHH, or any of those guys, it's about RAW and the ratings. That should be the primary discussion, not whether one person is a draw or not. 

I'm fine with it being a side discussion, mentioned in posts that have to do with the overall ratings, etc., but when the majority of posts in this thread probably have to do with whether one guy is a draw or not, especially since ratings is only one part of being a draw, it gets kinda annoying to come here and try and discuss RAW' ratings when you get side-tracked by the Punk stuff.

I wish we'd see more posts in this thread like Starbuck's after the quarterly comes out. He does discuss based on the ratings a little bit if certain guys draw or not, but it's primarily about how well the whole show did.

Granted I do know there are SOME people who do come in here occasionally and try to dispel the ratings importance, while others try to over-blow it based on a number of factors. 

Edit: And there's not a little bias on both sides, there's a BIG bias on both sides for and against Punk. That's why these threads get as "heated" as they do.


----------



## WWE

You know, now that the Football season is over and they have no actual competition on Monday nights... I was sure the ratings would be around 3.3 - 3.6. But the fact that they seem to be increasing should be good enough


----------



## Verdict123

LarryCoon said:


> I'm not really surprised if HHH did that. Its good leverage. I honestly thought that HHH vs Nash would've moved their match onto the Royal Rumble PPV to save their face and artificially increase the draw value of their match.


Nash vs HHH was not even the biggest draw for TLC. The triple threat match was. Even if the match was moved to Rumble, who is going to credit HHH vs nash for the RR buyrate? Everyone knows rumble match is the draw. 




Rock316AE said:


> It was always like this so it's nothing new, but the huge drop in the second quarter for the last year is funny because years ago it was a huge segment in terms of gain.
> 
> And [email protected], same thing I said:


Wade keller proves to be just the moron i thought he was. I honestly dont understand why these people think HHH is suppose to be this ego-maniac spotlight hog when the guy is barely on Raw show. If he was such a spotlight hog why not be on raw every week, why not be the WWE champion, hell why not end the streak? He is basically the next heir to the throne, why would he even care about what the IWC thinks of him?

Torch is a fucking joke.



And how the hell did Cena lost viewers but Kane/Ryder gained over half a million viewers?


----------



## GillbergReturns

Brye said:


> There is a huge difference between a guy like Heyman and and someone like Russo.


That's a matter of opinion, but it doesn't surprise me to see the double standard.


----------



## GillbergReturns

Good numbers this week. Jericho losing viewers is a concern but I think everyone knows it was just more of him doing nothing so no need to watch.

Obviously this isn't his new character and at the Rumble he'll probally make his point and he can move on from the ratings killer.

If you're the WWE you have to like that Punk Lauranitis and Kane Ryder hit acceptable levels. Those are your 2 premiere storylines right now.


----------



## deadmanwatching

> I also think that a lot of 'hate' can be contributed to some CM Punk marks. I remembered a lot of treats during the summer saying that CM Punk is the next G.O.A.T, next Austin, bigger then The Rock, outdraws The Rock, new top guy, No1 face of the company, will make wrestling interesting again, save WWE, etc.... and now that the ratings aren't so good some people are gonna have some pay back. That's why the ratings tread where so huge (and bad) the last couple of months and why we have one ratings tread right now.


And threads like Attitude Era is overrated, Wm 17 overrated, Cm punk is funny , Cm punk brought me back to wrestling(How since you never left) ...... Just helping on some more points


----------



## Brye

deadmanwatching said:


> And threads like Attitude Era is overrated, Wm 17 overrated, Cm punk is funny , Cm punk brought me back to wrestling(How since you never left) ...... Just helping on some more points


I don't think WM X7 is overrated (not as good as 21, 22 or 24) but I do think the AE is, especially if you're more of a wrestling fan.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Wm 17 is certainly not overrated

but tbh the AE is 
i started watching when the AE started but yeah there were lots of embarrassing moments sure i loved them back then 
was a kid and i do think they are still funny but yeah not as great as everyone here thinks of them


----------



## Striker

#1Peep4ever said:


> Wm 17 is certainly not overrated
> 
> but tbh the AE is
> i started watching when the AE started but yeah there were lots of embarrassing moments sure i loved them back then
> was a kid and i do think they are still funny but yeah not as great as everyone here thinks of them


This so much. People talk about embarrassing moments now, I feel the AE was a lot worse.


----------



## Brye

It's because it's not fresh in their minds. The internet hated everything then too.


----------



## Mr Premium

Agreed with the above posts about AE being overrated. Wrestling was absolute sht. I mean every match was punch and kick, from start to finish. I did not see not even AT LEAST ONE wrestling hold back then, literally. Every finisher was punch or kick. The promos and segments were terrible and boring. Crowd was always dead. Storylines were horrible and it made people sleep. Every characters were too similar which made them look too generic and boring, I mean almost everyone was copy and paste of each other. Only Rock really had at least a decent mic skills, the rest sucked donkey balls esp Austin, Vince, HHH, Foley, Taker, Angle and Jericho.

PG Era >>>>>>>> Attitude Era


----------



## LarryCoon

Mr Premium said:


> Agreed with the above posts about AE being overrated. Wrestling was absolute sht. I mean every match was punch and kick, from start to finish. I did not see not even AT LEAST ONE wrestling hold back then, literally. Every finisher was punch or kick. The promos and segments were terrible and boring. Crowd was always dead. Storylines were horrible and it made people sleep. Every characters were too similar which made them look too generic and boring, I mean almost everyone was copy and paste of each other. Only Rock really had at least a decent mic skills, the rest sucked donkey balls esp Austin, Vince, HHH, Foley, Taker, Angle and Jericho.
> 
> PG Era >>>>>>>> Attitude Era


In terms of in-ring performance and skills? Yup


----------



## Verdict123

In terms of in-ring performance, Ruthless aggression era > PG Era > Attitude era


----------



## Rock316AE

AE was better in every aspect, AE is also 2000-2001, in a few months you got more memorable matches than all this mediocre era combined. + At that time, wrestling matches were not slow paced, boring channel changers with green uncharismatic rookies. In Jericho's debut promo he said everything the AE wasn't in a sarcastic way just to get heat, check this promo and you got the "PG era" or whatever you want to call it, for real. The greatest period in the history of the wrestling business by the fans and the company.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

LOL @ people thinking PG era > AE. fpalm


----------



## CM12Punk

It's not like the AE was as good as people said it was.


----------



## King_Kool-Aid™

Rock316AE said:


> AE was better in every aspect, AE is also 2000-2001, in a few months you got more memorable matches than all this mediocre era combined. + At that time, wrestling matches were not slow paced, boring channel changers with green uncharismatic rookies. In Jericho's debut promo he said everything the AE wasn't in a sarcastic way just to get heat, check this promo and you got the "PG era" or whatever you want to call it, for real. The greatest period in the history of the wrestling business by the fans and the company.


Yeah and i rather watch Triple H and Mankind have a mediocre but entertaining match than watch Ziggler and Daniel Bryan put on a 5 star classic.


----------



## Rock316AE

King_Kool-Aid™;10945273 said:


> Yeah and i rather watch Triple H and Mankind have a mediocre but entertaining match than watch Ziggler and Daniel Bryan put on a 5 star classic.


HHH/Foley was a 5* classic, Ziggler put on maybe 2 great matches in his career and Bryan is a mediocre WWE wrestler with a boring style that can't get a reaction in his matches to save his life. So you can stay with "IFs", HHH/Foley really happened and was a better overall program than everything in this era.


----------



## Mr Premium

King_Kool-Aid™ said:


> Yeah and i rather watch Triple H and Mankind have a mediocre but entertaining match than watch Ziggler and Daniel Bryan put on a 5 star classic.


Don't know if you're trying to be sarcastic but yeah most people would have rather watch a HHH-Mankind entertaining slugfest than an IWC- rated "5 star classic" between Ziggler and Bryan that everyone seems to have forgotten already.


----------



## SteenIsGod

LOL @AE having bad wrestling. Watch the Benoit/Jericho matches and tell me that.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Rock316AE said:


> AE was better in every aspect, AE is also 2000-2001, in a few months you got more memorable matches than all this mediocre era combined. + At that time, wrestling matches were not slow paced, boring channel changers with green uncharismatic rookies. In Jericho's debut promo he said everything the AE wasn't in a sarcastic way just to get heat, check this promo and you got the "PG era" or whatever you want to call it, for real. The greatest period in the history of the wrestling business by the fans and the company.


I don't normally agree with this guy, but this says it all. If the AE was only 1998-1999, you may have a point with the whole wrestling being better in today's era then back then, but because the AE also includes 2000 and 2001, with 2000 being one of the best years if not the best year in WWE history, and the wrestling being fantastic both years, that beats out today's era. It beats out the Ruthless Aggression Era (which I'd say gets overrated on here occasionally), and it overall was the most successful era for a reason.

It wasn't perfect, and not everything on the show back then was excellent (there were things... like the whole hand-birth shit, that were pretty fucking bad), but not anywhere near as much was bad as it is today.


----------



## Chrome

^Spot on. 98-99 was more about storyline advancement whereas 2000 and 2001(Although I consider WM 17 to be the unofficial end of the AE.) had the perfect balance of wrestling and exciting storylines.


----------



## SpeedStick

ring action 2003 & 2004 > now and Attitude era


----------



## Verdict123

King_Kool-Aid™;10945273 said:


> Yeah and i rather watch *Triple H and Mankind have a mediocre *but entertaining match than watch Ziggler and Daniel Bryan put on a 5 star classic.


fpalmfpalm 



How many 5 star classics has ziggler had compared to Rock,HHH,Foley,Kurt,Austin their prime? 

Dolph Ziggler = overrated piece of shit.


----------



## deadmanwatching

> January 4, 1999 5.7
> January 11, 1999 5.5
> January 18, 1999 5.6
> January 25, 1999 5.5
> February 1, 1999 5.9
> February 8, 1999 Not On
> February 15, 1999 5.9
> February 22, 1999 5.5
> February 29, 1999 6.3
> March 8, 1999 6.4
> March 15, 1999 5.8
> March 22, 1999 6.4
> March 29, 1999 6.5
> April 5, 1999 5.8
> April 12, 1999 6.3
> April 19, 1999 6.1
> April 26, 1999 6.0
> May 3, 1999 6.4
> May 10, 1999 8.1
> May 17, 1999 6.4
> May 24, 1999 7.2
> June 7, 1999 6.7
> June 14, 1999 6.7
> June 21, 1999 6.0
> June 28, 1999 6.8
> July 5, 1999 6.2
> July 12, 1999 5.97
> July 19, 1999 6.3
> July 26, 1999 7.1
> August 2, 1999 5.9
> August 9, 1999 6.4
> August 16, 1999 6.6
> August 23, 1999 5.9
> August 30, 1999 4.2
> September 6, 1999 4.4
> September 13, 1999 6.0
> September 20, 1999 6.1
> September 27, 1999 6.8
> October 4, 1999 5.9
> October 11, 1999 6.1
> October 18, 1999 5.4
> October 25, 1999 5.6
> November 1, 1999 5.9
> November 8, 1999 5.4
> November 15, 1999 6.3
> November 22, 1999 5.5
> November 29, 1999 6.5
> December 6, 1999 6.0
> December 13, 1999 6.1
> December 20, 1999 5.8
> December 27, 1999 5.8


Compare AE ratings with your Pg Era or Realty Era or Whatever the hell it is.

you get the idea which one is OVERRATED


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

^Looking at those dates, 2010 lines up to the exact same dates for Raw... anyone have those ratings for comparisons and lols?


----------



## Verdict123

I predict the opening seg to do *4+* and the main event + Overrun to do a *3.4* at best.


----------



## Rock316AE

Q1 - 4.0+ and Q8+OR - 3.4? that's a disaster breakdown.

Meltzer said that the HHH/Ace segment is the main event, as I said last week, 4.0 HHH/Ace segment, 3.6-3.7 for the Rumble winner(I said Orton so Sheamus)


----------



## deadmanwatching

I predict 3.2 overall rating.


----------



## Verdict123

Rock316AE said:


> Q1 - 4.0+ and Q8+OR - 3.4? that's a disaster breakdown.
> 
> Meltzer said that the HHH/Ace segment is the main event, as I said last week, *4.0 HHH/Ace segment*, 3.6-3.7 for the Rumble winner(I said Orton so Sheamus)


Nope not gonna happen. Unless the rock is involved i dont see a 4+ for the main event. 

I predicted 4+ for the opener because i think sheamus will open the show with a promo. probably Punk or D Bryan might be involved.


----------



## Brye

Shouldn't what actually happens in the segments have to do with who tunes in and out?


----------



## Green Light

Brye said:


> Shouldn't what actually happens in the segments have to do with who tunes in and out?


Well people will always tune in for the opening and closing segments since that is when the best stuff usually happens


----------



## Brye

That's true. I think content has alot to do with something standing out though.


----------



## Verdict123

Not the content, the stars involved.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

That's why Punk's been doing the best numbers for weeks now.

8*D


----------



## Verdict123

Same two weeks he also lost viewers in different seg. unk


----------



## Brye

Verdict123 said:


> Not the content, the stars involved.


Then essentially ratings don't tell you whether you're doing a good job or not.


----------



## Verdict123

It tells you if you're pushing the right guys to the main event.


----------



## Brye

So was Shawn Michaels a wrong decision to be a main eventer?

Edit: I'll answer it for you...no.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Verdict123 said:


> Same two weeks he also lost viewers in different seg. unk


You mean the same segment Cena was in? Admit it. It's the content and storyline, not the wrestlers.


----------



## Verdict123

Brye said:


> So was Shawn Michaels a wrong decision to be a main eventer?
> 
> Edit: I'll answer it for you...no.


Probably yes, considering he didnt draw shit even as a top guy. wcw was kicking vince's ass every week when shawn was THE MAN of the show. 





Wrestlinfan35 said:


> You mean the same segment Cena was in? Admit it. It's the content and storyline, not the wrestlers.



Right guys + right Storyline. Cena is practically being booed every arena these days, he is not going to draw being involved in a shit storyline with kane.

Put punk in his place, the ratings would be even worse.


----------



## Brye

Shawn Michaels is a talent that undoubtedly should've been a main eventer and to base your reasoning off a rating is laughable.


----------



## Verdict123

Brye said:


> Shawn Michaels is a talent that undoubtedly should've been a main eventer and to base your reasoning off a rating is laughable.


So is chris jericho. Talent isnt enough to be a main eventer. 


No point in disussing this now, forget it.


----------



## Starbuck

Brye said:


> Shouldn't what actually happens in the segments have to do with who tunes in and out?


Have an exciting segment with Zack Ryder and Jack Swagger and it has a good chance of drawing a decent quarter hour. Have the exact same segment with John Cena and Triple H and it's practically guaranteed to draw a big quarter hour number. It's a combination of storylines and the stars in them. When guys like Cena and HHH aren't really doing anything of note, they still draw based on their name alone. Put them into big time situations and they deliver big time numbers. The likes of Swagger and Ryder don't have that same attachment to the fans and familiarity with them either so they don't perform as well until they reach that level. It's common sense really and since you've been in many ratings threads and have seen the breakdowns, you should know the formula that works by now. 

Star A + Star B + Exciting Storyline = Success

Megastar A + Megastar B + Exciting Storyline = Big Success

Icon/Legend A + Icon/Legend B + Exciting Storyline = HUGE Success


----------



## Brye

This is why I don't even get into the ratings. I'd rather watch a Swagger/Ryder promo than some Goldberg or Hogan shit. Sure it'd draw better but it'd probably be dreadful.


----------



## b5586203

swagger can cut a good satisfying promo when given the chance. all i wanted to say.


----------



## Verdict123

Brye said:


> This is why I don't even get into the ratings. I'd rather watch a Swagger/Ryder promo than some Goldberg or Hogan shit. Sure it'd draw better but it'd probably be dreadful.


Ofcourse you would, we all would but is it good for business? Its not going to make money for the company. 

You have to understand vince mcmahon doesnt have a choice either. If the casual fans prefer swagger/ryder over goldberg or hogan, then vince would obviously give us swagger/ryder.


----------



## Ziggler Mark

derp...wrong thread


----------



## Snothlisberger

deadmanwatching said:


> Compare AE ratings with your Pg Era or Realty Era or Whatever the hell it is.
> 
> you get the idea which one is OVERRATED


Obvious ignorant mark is obvious. You can't compare ratings from different time periods. Just a completely weightless, stupid argument from someone who clearly knows nothing about ratingzzz.


----------



## deadmanwatching

WallofShame said:


> Obvious ignorant mark is obvious. You can't compare ratings from different time periods. Just a completely weightless, stupid argument from someone who clearly knows nothing about ratingzzz.


Obvious butthurt mark is obvious.


----------



## LarryCoon

Brye said:


> This is why I don't even get into the ratings. I'd rather watch a Swagger/Ryder promo than some Goldberg or Hogan shit. Sure it'd draw better but it'd probably be dreadful.


I think this is were the ratings come in. Even in the upmost hardcore 1% of the audience, there are people with vastly differing opinions on their favorite wrestlers. Who is to say what is right? Who is to say which wrestler should get pushed? Ratings, when taken into proper context, gives WWE and Vince the best idea of who majority of the audience likes.


----------



## Rock316AE

Brye said:


> Shouldn't what actually happens in the segments have to do with who tunes in and out?


No, because you can't affect the first quarter unless you promote something for that time slot, it's always just what happened before, like RAW this week, the Rumble winner. 
HHH/Taker/Ace got a huge overrun, almost 18 minutes if I'm not mistaken, so now it's not a prediction or something, that SHOULD do at least 4.0

And BTW, I will rather watch Hogan or Goldberg over these two clowns even if Ryder and Swagger were drawing 6.0 every segment.


----------



## Starbuck

Brye said:


> This is why I don't even get into the ratings. I'd rather watch a Swagger/Ryder promo than some Goldberg or Hogan shit. Sure it'd draw better but it'd probably be dreadful.


And for the casual audience, watching Goldberg in 2 minute squash matches was the highlight of their Monday nights for a while. I, nor many others for that matter, have said that people only watch the stars who draw and I don't know where you and the others got that from. I don't watch HHH because he draws, I watch him because he's my favorite wrestler of all time and he entertains me. We come in here to discuss what/who is pulling good quarter hours and who isn't and to speculate why. How that turned into the fallacy of people only watching and marking for the stars that draw, I don't know. The simple fact is and the numbers prove it, the guys who are legit stars when put into big time situations produce big time numbers. Everybody else doesn't. You want to watch Ryder and Swagger in a promo and that's fine. Other people would prefer to tune in to Raw and see The Rock every week and that's fine too.


----------



## JasonLives

I think its ridiculous to compare ratings from the Attitude Era to this era. For almost everyone, the AE was just a fling. 
Ratings started dropping the second the storylines started to end. The major players were still there in early 2000, but the viewers started leaving. That fling was over and they never went back again.
One thing that drew big in 1998 would barely have drawn half of the original rating if it would have been done in 2002 by the same wrestlers. The storylines helped a lot to make the wrestlers interesting, when storylines became weaker so did the wrestlers.

Just look at today, The Rock and Stone Cold can pop a rating for a short period of time. But for everytime they show up, the less viewers will care.


----------



## robertdeniro

JasonLives said:


> I think its ridiculous to compare ratings from the Attitude Era to this era. For almost everyone, the AE was just a fling.
> Ratings started dropping the second the storylines started to end. The major players were still there in early 2000, but the viewers started leaving. That fling was over and they never went back again.
> One thing that drew big in 1998 would barely have drawn half of the original rating if it would have been done in 2002 by the same wrestlers. The storylines helped a lot to make the wrestlers interesting, when storylines became weaker so did the wrestlers.
> 
> Just look at today, The Rock and Stone Cold can pop a rating for a short period of time. But for everytime they show up, the less viewers will care.


True.


----------



## Verdict123

I dont know about austin but The Rock sure pops the ratings huge these days.


----------



## deadmanwatching

Storylines don't mean shit if ppl can't relate to Wrestlers character/gimmick.


----------



## Green Light

Starbuck said:


> And for the casual audience, watching Goldberg in 2 minute squash matches was the highlight of their Monday nights for a while. I, nor many others for that matter, have said that people only watch the stars who draw and I don't know where you and the others got that from. I don't watch HHH because he draws, I watch him because he's my favorite wrestler of all time and he entertains me. We come in here to discuss what/who is pulling good quarter hours and who isn't and to speculate why. How that turned into the fallacy of people only watching and marking for the stars that draw, I don't know. The simple fact is and the numbers prove it, the guys who are legit stars when put into big time situations produce big time numbers. Everybody else doesn't. You want to watch Ryder and Swagger in a promo and that's fine. Other people would prefer to tune in to Raw and see The Rock every week and that's fine too.


I've been saying this for so long now but people will keep doing it, it's always the exact same posters aswell but obviously I'm not gonna name any names. Anyway should be interesting to see how the main event overrun does seeing as it went on 15+ minutes and involed HHH and Taker, expecting a good number


----------



## kokepepsi

Swagger/Ryder over a Goldberg/Hogan segment

And I thought Rock316AE was delusional

Overrun should be interesting considering that Undertaker was a surprise and it went way to fucking long(obv HHH strategy to tell vince "see I drew 1million viewers by myself")


----------



## Rock316AE

The historic Hogan/Goldberg match broke the MNW record at that time BTW with a 6.9, bigger than Austin/Vince. Hogan 98 in general is one of my favorite characters of all time.

The overrun was 18 minutes and it's the day after the Rumble. HHH got the perfect situation to draw a huge number.


----------



## Brye

:lmao at Hogan and Goldberg. Never saw talent in either one of them. Swagger on the other hand is one of the better workers in the company and Ryder is grossly underrated.

As for the "ratings saying who is doing a good job", I disagree. Shawn Michaels, considered the GOAT by WWE and by plenty of other people was never technically a draw. So honestly, what would people be thinking if HBK, Jericho, etc lived in the midcard?


----------



## Starbuck

^^^^ Ratings have nothing to do with being a great worker or wrestler. Of course it helps and when there's a big match promoted between 2 big stars who are also great workers, it will have an impact but nobody is saying it's a reflection of who is doing a good job. Doing a good job in what? That can mean so many things. At the end of the day WWE is a business and ratings are an integral part of their business. Shawn Michaels is one of the GOAT and is one of my favorite wrestlers of all time but he isn't a ratings powerhouse. You can disagree all you want and ratings may not matter to you at all. Like I said before, that's fine. But again, you seem to be pulling stuff out of thin air regarding most people's opinions on ratings. And I have to come out and say it, for somebody who supposedly doesn't care about ratings and doesn't see the point in discussing them, you sure do discuss them quite a bit. 

:lmao at all this HHH nonsense. Guess what folks, he _does_ actually draw viewers lol. His segment with Ace was going to do well no matter what. Throw Taker in there and it will do better. I love how this all comes down to HHH wanting to prove to Vince that he can draw. He has absolutely nothing to prove and Vince already knows it anyways lol. So silly.


----------



## Rock316AE

Swagger on the other hand: is just a goof who will never be a main eventer because he can't deliver a line to save his life and he probably got less charisma than curds, Ryder is your typical wrestling clown who got over for a month because he cried about how miserable his position in the company, people are falling quickly for this stuff so they gave him a sympathy run.

And about the HHH segment, I said it even last week that it's going to do 4.0+, the huge overrun is just another example why , I gave HHH full credit...


----------



## Starbuck

Yeah. But there's all this nonsense that HE picked to have the segment tonight because HE wanted to have the post Rumble boost so that HE could take all the credit so that HE could prove that HE is a big draw. Lol. It's such bullshit. At this stage the guy has absolutely nothing to prove to anybody.


----------



## Brye

Starbuck said:


> ^^^^ Ratings have nothing to do with being a great worker or wrestler. Of course it helps and when there's a big match promoted between 2 big stars who are also great workers, it will have an impact but nobody is saying it's a reflection of who is doing a good job. Doing a good job in what? That can mean so many things. At the end of the day WWE is a business and ratings are an integral part of their business. Shawn Michaels is one of the GOAT and is one of my favorite wrestlers of all time but he isn't a ratings powerhouse. You can disagree all you want and ratings may not matter to you at all. Like I said before, that's fine. But again, you seem to be pulling stuff out of thin air regarding most people's opinions on ratings. And I have to come out and say it, for somebody who supposedly doesn't care about ratings and doesn't see the point in discussing them, you sure do discuss them quite a bit.
> 
> :lmao at all this HHH nonsense. Guess what folks, he _does_ actually draw viewers lol. His segment with Ace was going to do well no matter what. Throw Taker in there and it will do better. I love how this all comes down to HHH wanting to prove to Vince that he can draw. He has absolutely nothing to prove and Vince already knows it anyways lol. So silly.


My confusion comes from how wrestling fans have changed the last from when I used to post on here. It was about what you wanted to see happen, not what the company should do. And I don't get that. Your own enjoyment should be more important, imo. But whatever, I'll leave you guys alone now and just monitor this place in case of flaming/etc.


----------



## kokepepsi

Starbuck said:


> Yeah. But there's all this nonsense that HE picked to have the segment tonight because HE wanted to have the post Rumble boost so that HE could take all the credit so that HE could prove that HE is a big draw. Lol. It's such bullshit. At this stage the guy has absolutely nothing to prove to anybody.


But himself
Egos are funny like that

Anyways lets not make this a HHH bash thread.


Ratings is gonna be a ..........3.5


----------



## Wagg

> Swagger/Ryder over a Goldberg/Hogan segment


Are these people seriously when they post shit like this?


----------



## Rock316AE

Starbuck said:


> Yeah. But there's all this nonsense that HE picked to have the segment tonight because HE wanted to have the post Rumble boost so that HE could take all the credit so that HE could prove that HE is a big draw. Lol. It's such bullshit. At this stage the guy has absolutely nothing to prove to anybody.


To prove that he's a draw? never said that and there's nothing for him to prove since the huge Batista program in 2005, but about the position? this is a different argument, who wouldn't do it TBH? If I had the power to choose when I want to come back to TV, I will choose the night when you got the most viewers on the product, And besides Rock, I don't remember a 18 minutes overrun on RAW so he got the privileges to do it and it's fine, I don't take it as "The evil HHH wants credit", it's just a smart move and I will do it if I was in his position...


----------



## Starbuck

Brye said:


> My confusion comes from how wrestling fans have changed the last from when I used to post on here. It was about what you wanted to see happen, not what the company should do. And I don't get that. Your own enjoyment should be more important, imo. But whatever, I'll leave you guys alone now and just monitor this place in case of flaming/etc.


Not all of them have changed though. This is the part I'm not understanding from you. Having a discussion about ratings and what would be the objective 'right' thing for the company to do doesn't mean that people aren't watching to see what they want. It doesn't mean that at all and I really don't understand where you're getting this from. As an example, many people want to see Jericho/Punk because they are huge fans of the guys and want them in a program. At the same time though, they recognize that Punk going over HHH in a proper Mania main event program will do more for him than a win over Jericho ever would. That's just an objective opinion and doesn't take away from the fact that said person still wants Jericho/Punk because they're a big fan of both of them and that's what they want to see. 

And I'm not saying that you have to leave the thread lol. I just don't get why you would post in it all the time if you don't want to talk about ratings. I hope you don't think I'm flaming you either because I'm not. Not at all. 



Rock316AE said:


> To prove that he's a draw? never said that and there's nothing for him to prove since the huge Batista program in 2005, but about the position? this is a different argument, who wouldn't do it TBH? If I had the power to choose when I want to come back to TV, I will choose the night when you got the most viewers on the product, And besides Rock, I don't remember a 18 minutes overrun on RAW so he got the privileges to do it and it's fine, I don't take it as "The evil HHH wants credit", it's just a smart move and I will do it if I was in his position...


Fair enough.


----------



## Brye

Wagg said:


> Are these people seriously when they post shit like this?


Dead serious. I like the first two guys and dislike the other two so why would I think differently?



Starbuck said:


> Not all of them have changed though. This is the part I'm not understanding from you. Having a discussion about ratings and what would be the objective 'right' thing for the company to do doesn't mean that people aren't watching to see what they want. It doesn't mean that at all and I really don't understand where you're getting this from. As an example, many people want to see Jericho/Punk because they are huge fans of the guys and want them in a program. At the same time though, they recognize that Punk going over HHH in a proper Mania main event program will do more for him than a win over Jericho ever would. That's just an objective opinion and doesn't take away from the fact that said person still wants Jericho/Punk because they're a big fan of both of them and that's what they want to see.
> 
> And I'm not saying that you have to leave the thread lol. I just don't get why you would post in it all the time if you don't want to talk about ratings. I hope you don't think I'm flaming you either because I'm not. Not at all.


I don't think you're flaming, it's all good. 

I completely agree on the Punk/Tripe H, Punk/Jericho thing. I actually wanted to see that more too. I just take some of the posts in here as people caring more about the ratings than the actual content. And considering that the ratings aren't going to just magically change overnight, I hate how people start berating things the week after they happen. It takes more than a segment to start to get someone over and people have such short attention spans these days. And then of course guys like Austin and Rock will do good for the company but you have to worry about when they're not around. They're the past and the present still needs focus.

While I've liked the individual shows recently and there's been some pretty good matches, I hate the way the writers are. (completely off topic :argh


----------



## Starbuck

Brye said:


> I don't think you're flaming, it's all good.
> 
> I completely agree on the Punk/Tripe H, Punk/Jericho thing. I actually wanted to see that more too. I just take some of the posts in here as people caring more about the ratings than the actual content. And considering that the ratings aren't going to just magically change overnight, I hate how people start berating things the week after they happen. It takes more than a segment to start to get someone over and people have such short attention spans these days. And then of course guys like Austin and Rock will do good for the company but you have to worry about when they're not around. They're the past and the present still needs focus.
> 
> While I've liked the individual shows recently and there's been some pretty good matches, I hate the way the writers are. (completely off topic :argh


Yeah, some people act like idiots and decide to troll. I seriously doubt anybody marks for just those who are huge draws and means it though. Some people just prefer big stars rather than _wrestlers_ if you know what I mean. It's not that common to see a lot of them on the net lol but they are there. That's the main difference between internet fans and casual fans. Net fans could watch a 30 minute match between William Regal and Tyson Kidd and think it's the best thing they've ever seen while the casuals would turn out in their droves. On the other hand, DX could come out and cut a 30 minute promo shilling merchandise and the casuals would lap it up while net fans would smark rage over it. That's the difference lol. 

Agreed on the time issue though. Nothing's going to change overnight but looking at the ratings over a period of time gives some sort of clue as to who and what is clicking. That's why I think they're useful and that's why I come in to talk about them.


----------



## Brye

Starbuck said:


> Yeah, some people act like idiots and decide to troll. I seriously doubt anybody marks for just those who are huge draws and means it though. Some people just prefer big stars rather than _wrestlers_ if you know what I mean. It's not that common to see a lot of them on the net lol but they are there. That's the main difference between internet fans and casual fans. Net fans could watch a 30 minute match between William Regal and Tyson Kidd and think it's the best thing they've ever seen while the casuals would turn out in their droves. On the other hand, DX could come out and cut a 30 minute promo shilling merchandise and the casuals would lap it up while net fans would smark rage over it. That's the difference lol.
> 
> Agreed on the time issue though. Nothing's going to change overnight but looking at the ratings over a period of time gives some sort of clue as to who and what is clicking. That's why I think they're useful and that's why I come in to talk about them.


That's true. I almost forget those people exist. :side: I've just always been more of a wrestling guy so I look at it that way, not that I don't enjoy a good promo though.

But something that pisses me off about WWE is that when they don't see some big increase within a month or so, a perfectly good midcarder can get depushed.


----------



## Starbuck

Brye said:


> That's true. I almost forget those people exist. :side: I've just always been more of a wrestling guy so I look at it that way, not that I don't enjoy a good promo though.
> 
> But something that pisses me off about WWE is that when they don't see some big increase within a month or so, a perfectly good midcarder can get depushed.


I'm more of a sports entertainment fan. I'll get into matches but only if I'm emotionally invested in the characters. That's why I don't give 2 fucks about what happens on Superstars because I don't give a crap about anybody on it. It's also why I have such a hard time getting into modern day WWE stuff outside the legends/vets because I really don't care about anybody else, something that is entirely WWE's fault because they haven't given me a reason to. I think that's a direct correlation as to why only the legends/vets are able to pop a big number too because most other people are the same. There is no connection between the general fanbase and the likes of Swagger or Ziggler or even Miz (who they have seemingly completely fucked up with). There is no investment in these guys as characters because they basically don't have one. It shows when people tune out when they're on or only tune in for the guys they are familiar with. Until WWE fix that, they'll be stuck with people tuning out all through the show until the end forever.


----------



## D.M.N.

One thing - I would hope that either hour 1 or 2 is 5m+ at least.


----------



## Starbuck

I think they might open strong and then take a dip. The 10pm slot I can't really call lol. Punk is hit or miss when in there. After that they'll probably take another dip before hitting a big surge for Q8 and the overrun I expect to be on the 5 million mark if not a lot more.


----------



## Rock316AE

That's what I said last week:


Rock316AE said:


> For next week, I can see a 3.5 overall, 4.0+ for the HHH segment and if it's on the show in a main slot, the Orton Rumble winner segment 3.6-3.7


Lol @ Orton. But the Rumble winner segment was the first, so maybe I was right...

Below 5 million for this show is not a disappointment, it's a panic mode for them.


----------



## Starbuck

Rock316AE said:


> That's what I said last week:
> 
> Lol @ Orton. But the Rumble winner segment was the first, so maybe I was right...
> 
> *Below 5 million for this show is not a disappointment, it's a panic mode for them*.


100% agreed. They had their time to stay below 5 million heading into the Rumble. That wasn't good at all but I think they'd let it slide all things considered. From here on out though they really ought to be pulling in those RTWM numbers otherwise panic mode would be an understatement imo.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Well, I've got my fingers crossed, that's for sure. I don't know though... some people may not tune in until after Elimination Chamber when that's where the strongest build up for Mania takes place. I'm not saying below 5 million is good, but I think it'd be somewhat excusable if they didn't break that until after EC.

However, with the whole Taker/HHH stuff that just went down, ratings should at the very least keep rising week after week until then and be at that 5 million plus mark come 2/20/12. If not then that is a really bad signs when the two biggest legends that will from the looks of it be active on the show until at least Mania every week can't draw in those big numbers. Especially since it seems like they'll actually try to string a storyline this time around it that has potential to be a hot one. 

And this is all not considering the fact as well that Rock and Cena's feud will more than likely be put into fourth gear going into Mania. Even if Rock is only live on Raw a couple of weeks, he should still at least do satellite promos to keep the feud hot instead of giving Cena all the work when he's not there.

I think the WM buyrate from the looks of things now has potential to be the biggest WM buyrate of all time (which I only assume would be the biggest for WWE of all time), but we'll see what happens. If Rock/Cena, Taker/HHH, and Punk/Jericho live up to their storyline/feud potentials, then there's no reason it shouldn't have over a million buys.


----------



## LarryCoon

Brye said:


> That's true. I almost forget those people exist. :side: I've just always been more of a wrestling guy so I look at it that way, not that I don't enjoy a good promo though.
> 
> But something that pisses me off about WWE is that when they don't see some big increase within a month or so, a perfectly good midcarder can get depushed.


Don't worry. You are not alone. I think everyone here feels and thinks that way sometimes. This is why ratings are important. WWE isn't booking a show to specifically suit you. They aim to book a show to appease the largest possible audience. Now you might say that is cause for the dumbing down of some aspects of it and you're right. It still doesn't change the fact that guys like Goldberg was able to captivate the hearts of more people than the ROH veterans we have today. Ratings, when used in proper context, are the best objective argument anyone could make when arguing about who WWE should push.


----------



## Rock316AE

Taker/HHH is obviously a bigger deal for wrestling fans, but the second most important match for the buyrate is Shaq/Show, with the right direction for the big 3(Rock/Cena, Shaq/Show, Taker/HHH)especially for Rock's match with Cena, this has the potential to do bigger than Trump/Vince.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Rock316AE said:


> Taker/HHH is obviously a bigger deal for wrestling fans, but the second most important match for the buyrate is Shaq/Show, with the right direction for the big 3(Rock/Cena, Shaq/Show, Taker/HHH)especially for Rock's match with Cena, this has the potential to do bigger than Trump/Vince.


I'm not considering Shaq/Show until something starts between them (not counting what they did a year or two ago). Shaq/Show would obviously be top 3 in big matches on the card... I don't know if I'd put it above Taker/HHH, but I can see why you would considering Shaq would draw in people not into wrestling, and get them to watch the show.

Edit: Although reading back your post, that's basically what you said. <_<


----------



## LarryCoon

I think Shaq/Show does have a great probability to outdraw HHH/Taker. Shaq working the late night shows, doing interviews on ESPN and dropping WWE plugs on NBA halftime show would spread the word of Wrestlemania. I'd honestly rather see Shaq/Barkley instead of Shaq/Show. Seeing them bicker and throw some jabs at each other during the show makes me believe there is legitimate heat between them


----------



## Snothlisberger

When do the ratings come out for this raw


----------



## Rock316AE

Shaq is huge name worldwide, He can bring a lot of fans and with Show, even if they had never heard of him, the image and their size is enough to sell the match. Of course you need to build this type of a match as a real fight or something like that, not the regular pro wrestling feud, gym segments etc, just like the Floyd feud which was the selling point of WM24 and a big success.


----------



## The Tony

If Raw didn't do better than a 3.3 rating last night with the return of HHH and Taker...Vince should be worried.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

probably the only time i am interested in the ratings
but i gotta agree if they dont make 3.5+ then they should be worried


----------



## ThePhenomRises

I don't know much about ratings, so I have to ask: would Undertaker's SURPRISE return have affected ratings? It was just 7 minutes long, how can that much time be enough to boost ratings? Sorry if that sounds stupid.


----------



## D.M.N.

*January 30th, 2012*
Hour 1 - 5.318m (last week: 4.667m)
* last year - 5.231m
Hour 2 - 5.124m (last week: 4.568m)
* last year - 5.338m

Source: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-lost-girl-wwe-raw-housewives-bh-more/118084/

Last Week
- Hour 1 - 1.8 18-49 rating
- Hour 2 - 1.7 18-49 rating

This Week
- Hour 1 - 2.1 18-49 rating
- Hour 2 - 2.1 18-49 rating

Obviously really good numbers for all concerned. Last year, the numbers went back under 5m, but with them bringing 'Taker back last night, one has to wonder if the ratings will increase next week.

Also, just because hour 2 is lower than hour 1, the overrun will probably still be near ~6m.


----------



## The Tony

Great numbers.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

ThePhenomRises said:


> I don't know much about ratings, so I have to ask: would Undertaker's SURPRISE return have affected ratings? It was just 7 minutes long, how can that much time be enough to boost ratings? Sorry if that sounds stupid.


dont know a lot about ratings but yes it should boost the ratings 
the overrun will have a high rating which then affects the average rating of the show


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

And Vince thows a party.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

So they are above 5mio 
still a decline in the second hour
quarter hours should be interesting


----------



## Mister Excitement

Damn good numbers. Too bad it still decreased in the 2nd hour.


----------



## A-C-P

Over 5 million no panic needed (not that there was any reason to panic anyways)


----------



## ThePhenomRises

#1Peep4ever said:


> dont know a lot about ratings but yes it should boost the ratings
> the overrun will have a high rating which then affects the average rating of the show


Ah... Thanks. 

Nice, an increase of 600,000 from last week.


----------



## Starbuck

D.M.N. said:


> *January 30th, 2012*
> Hour 1 - 5.318m (last week: 4.667m)
> * last year - 5.231m
> Hour 2 - 5.124m (last week: 4.568m)
> * last year - 5.338m
> 
> Source: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-lost-girl-wwe-raw-housewives-bh-more/118084/
> 
> Last Week
> - Hour 1 - 1.8 18-49 rating
> - Hour 2 - 1.7 18-49 rating
> 
> This Week
> - Hour 1 - 2.1 18-49 rating
> - Hour 2 - 2.1 18-49 rating
> 
> Obviously really good numbers for all concerned. Last year, the numbers went back under 5m, but with them bringing 'Taker back last night, one has to wonder if the ratings will increase next week.
> 
> Also, just because hour 2 is lower than hour 1, the overrun will probably still be near ~6m.


They can breath a sigh of relief from that then lol. They finally got over the 5 million mark. The drop in the second hour is once again alarming but as always, the quarter hours will tell the story.


----------



## Snothlisberger

2.1 in 18-49. Advertisers pay big money for that.

Also since WWE is so kid friendly and targeted towards them nowadays, then why is the show on at 9pm on the East Coast, where probably 90% of viewership is? Should be on earlier imo if that is the case


----------



## Rock316AE

Finally decent numbers, but why the hell the second hour drops again with a huge overrun? not only a drop but big number like 200k? maybe Punk/Bryan bombed which wouldn't surprise me. Anyway, They can take a deep breath in the HQ.



ThePhenomRises said:


> I don't know much about ratings, so I have to ask: would Undertaker's SURPRISE return have affected ratings? It was just 7 minutes long, how can that much time be enough to boost ratings? Sorry if that sounds stupid.


Not for this week because he wasn't advertised, but next week or even on SD, you should see big increase.


----------



## Green Light

Good numbers for a change! Vince should be happy enough with that


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Cool, they actually pulled in the big numbers.

I'm sure once Taker's gong hit people immediately started tuning in (along with people who were waiting for their next show to start) and I would think that would've helped out. Maybe the whole Taker/HHH/Laurinitis thing just bombed. Maybe the second hour as a whole went down to the mid 4.5 million and the whole Taker/HHH/Laurinitis (and yeah, I'm probably spelling his name wrong) brought in over a million viewers. 

Quarter hours will be interesting to see. But overall good numbers.

Edit: Also, does anyone know what the rating is? (Just for personal curiosity). It's not above 4.0, right?


----------



## D.M.N.

Interestingly, for the same show year-on-year:

- 2011 - 1.8 (5.2m) and 1.9 (5.3m) 18-49 rating
- 2012 - 2.1 (5.3m) and 2.1 (5.1m) 18-49 rating

The RAW before WrestleMania did a 2.1 (5.4m) and 2.5 (6.2m) 18-49 rating so the demos look very good year-on-year.


----------



## Starbuck

Triple H bringing in them 2.1's in the 18-49's 8*D. Coincidence? I think not lol.


----------



## Green Light

Looks like more of the older fans are watching this year than at the same time last year then, interesting


----------



## Shock

Very positive rating. Hopefully this is maintained through to WrestleMania.


----------



## Rock316AE

Last year:



> *WWE News: Raw TV ratings are in for Monday's show - did Raw pop a rating after the Royal Rumble PPV? *
> 
> WWE Raw on Monday, January 31 scored a 3.5 rating and averaged 5.3 million viewers for the Raw after the Royal Rumble.
> 
> Raw scored its highest rating since August 30, which was also a 3.5 rating, before the start of the fall 2010 TV season.
> 
> Overall for the night, Raw was #3 on cable TV behind History Channel's "Pawn Stars" and "American Pickers." In the adult male demos, Raw was #2 behind "Pawn Stars."
> 
> In a week-to-week comparison, Raw's adult demo ratings were essentially flat with last week's Raw despite the ratings increase. It shows the strength of History Channel's adult male-oriented programming, which topped the highest-rated Raw episode in five months.
> 
> Looking beyond adult viewers, the ratings increase came from younger teen viewers.
> 
> -Raw scored one of its highest ratings among males 12-17 in over one year. - Raw's m12-17 rating was up 27 percent compared to last week and 41 percent vs. two weeks ago.
> 
> -Among males 12-34, Raw was up 9 percent compared to last week's show and 15 percent vs. two weeks ago.


Breakdown:


> Raw on 1/31 did a 3.48 rating and 5.29 million viewers. It was the most viewers for an episode of Raw since 3/29 (the
> night after last yearâ€™s WrestleMania when Shawn Michaels did his farewell) and the highest rated episode of Raw since
> 8/30 (3.50 rating for the 900th episode celebration and also just before football season started). It was the fourth highest
> rated show on cable for the night, with 66% male viewers (back to normal skew after low women numbers last week).
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, they opened strong after the Rumble at a 3.81 quarter, and were doing the TNA pattern of
> not keeping the audience until a strong overrun. Santino Marella & Vladimir Kozlov defending the tag titles against
> Husky Harris & Michael McGillicutty lost 784,000 viewers, which is horrible. I mean, like among the worst numbers youâ€™ll
> ever see. The deal where Randy Orton punted Harris and the Jerry Lawler-Ted DiBiase confrontation gained 337,000
> viewers. Daniel Bryan vs. Tyson Kidd lost 304,000 viewers. Edge vs. Miz in the title vs. title, where they sent out John
> Cena at the end, gained 222,000 viewers, which is better than last week, but terrible for the 10 p.m. slot. There was no
> drop this week in Male teens as it was up 4.3 to 4.5, although again thatâ€™s less then the usual gain. Eve Torres & Natalya
> vs. LayCool plus the Great Khali-Mark Henry vs. Usos dance-off lost 129,000 viewers which is good for that time slot.
> The preview of â€oeThe Chaperoneâ€• lost 172,000 viewers, which Iâ€™d also consider good. The Raw Rumble match gained
> 1,198,000 viewers, which is excellent, and did a 4.04 final quarter, the first time an overrun has broken 4.0 in a while. I
> think we can count on a second Rumble on television the day after the Royal Rumble as an annual tradition based on
> those numbers.


Funny how Ace lied on RAW that the ratings are up from this time last year, when in reality, In January, there was a big drop from last year and a HUGE drop from every year since 98 #cheapheat ...


----------



## Starbuck

Last night's show sure as fuck isn't a 3.5 lol. I'd put it at 3.2 or 3.4, right?


----------



## Mister Excitement

Starbuck said:


> Last night's show sure as fuck isn't a 3.5 lol. I'd put it at 3.2 or 3.4, right?


It's probably a 3.4.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Last night's show sure as fuck isn't a 3.5 lol? It can't be based on the viewership. I'd put it at 3.2 or 3.4, right?


Wasn't last week's like a 3.2? I could see it being a 3.4 or 3.5.

All's good in da hood... for right now.


----------



## Starbuck

Last week was a 3.2? Maybe it is a 3.5 then. I'll go with 3.3 and a bit for now lol.


----------



## D.M.N.

Rock316AE said:


> Funny how Ace lied on RAW that the ratings are up from this time last year, when in reality, In January, there was a big drop from last year and a HUGE drop from every year since 98 #cheapheat ...


Was that RAW as horrible as it sounds in the breakdown?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Last week was a 3.2? Maybe it is a 3.5 then. I'll go with 3.3 and a bit for now lol.


The way I'm figuring it is like this...

two weeks ago Raw was a 3.0 and had 4.29 million viewers. Last week was a 3.2 with 4.62 million viewers (+330,000), and this week was like 5.22 million viewers (+600,000), so it could maybe even be a 3.6

I'm not sure though if that's the proper way to figure out ratings besides simply waiting for it, but that's what I'm using until otherwise corrected.


----------



## Starbuck

Obis said:


> The way I'm figuring it is like this...
> 
> two weeks ago Raw was a 3.0 and had 4.29 million viewers. Last week was a 3.2 with 4.62 million viewers (+330,000), and this week was like 5.22 million viewers (+600,000), so it could maybe even be a 3.6
> 
> I'm not sure though if that's the proper way to figure out ratings besides simply waiting for it, but that's what I'm using until otherwise corrected.


Depends on what else was on and what share of the viewing audience those other shows had. Sometimes a Raw has had lower viewership than the week before but ended up with a higher rating or vice versa, whatever way it is. But yeah, maybe they will hit 3.5 this week and if so, I imagine that the overrun will probably be on the 4.0 mark.


----------



## Rock316AE

D.M.N. said:


> Was that RAW as horrible as it sounds in the breakdown?


Probably, but the Rumble was a good match if I remember correctly.

Rating was 3.55(3.6, so I was almost there...). 3.6 and 3.5 with 5,221,000 viewers.


----------



## Green Light

Out of interest, anyone know what the highest rated segment was during last year?


----------



## Rock316AE

Green Light said:


> Out of interest, anyone know what the highest rated segment was during last year?


Rock in Chicago before WM, drew 4.8 with 7.3 million viewers.


----------



## JingieBY

> The post Royal Rumble edition of Monday Night Raw did a 3.6 rating, with 5,221,000 viewers. The first hour drew a 3.6, with the second hour drawing a 3.5.


A bump with over 600 000 people compared to last weeks edition. Truly excelent number.


----------



## Starbuck

3.6 is great. Quarter hours should be very interesting then lol.


----------



## TheF1BOB

Did the UK decided to watch Raw from their couch this time lol.


----------



## CC91

Excellent number, but it still dropped in the second hour. Also the Undertaker segment wouldn't have counted as I believe that counts towards the next show


----------



## Tony Tornado

TheF1BOB said:


> Did the UK decided to watch Raw from their couch this time lol.


I don't know if you're joking or not but the rating only concerns american viewers.

This good news for the WWE. Hopefully we get more quality matches like we did last night.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Real good number! They should be happy with that. Let's hope they keep the momentum going. They previewed Taker/HHH and Jericho/Punk so the viewership should stay the same. Breakdown should be fun.


----------



## JasonLives

Rock316AE said:


> Finally decent numbers, but why the hell the second hour drops again with a huge overrun? not only a drop but big number like 200k? maybe Punk/Bryan bombed which wouldn't surprise me. Anyway, They can take a deep breath in the HQ.


Overrun isnt counted into the overall rating, it stands by itself. 

The numbers will most likely be, big first quarter, then drop quarter by quarter until hour 2 starts when there is a small rise , then a small drop until the ME when people tune in again.


----------



## CNB

It goes to show people know when to tune in.

The road to Wrestlemania starts the night after the rumble and everyone wants to see whats in store for WrestleMania.

Very happy the episode was VERY good, that will greatly help next weeks ratings.


----------



## Rock316AE

It's not, it's counts with the overall number, there's a reason why they're doing it.


----------



## RatedR10

That's a tremendous number. Triple H being advertised obviously helped, but the biggest factor is obviously the Road to WrestleMania beginning. The entire show was a great one. I'm interested in seeing the breakdowns. 

Give the fans a great show and reason watch and they'll definitely watch. Great number.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

JasonLives said:


> Overrun isnt counted into the overall rating, it stands by itself.


Is this true? Never knew that, personally.


----------



## Algernon

The crackdown on internet piracy is helping the numbers. Far fewer people streamed the Rumble or were able to download the show and therefore tuned in to RAW to see the results. I wont be surprised at all if PPV buys go up. Hell that probably explains TLC's buys going up. 

So I don't think that many people were tuning out I believe more people were watching online than ever before. Now that they can't do that or are afraid that they'll get in trouble, ratings and buys will go up if they still want to watch.


----------



## Rock316AE

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Is this true? Never knew that, personally.


Good for you, because it's not true at all, overrun is not a segment on the show but it's part of the overall rating, That's why they're doing it, to gain viewers to your show from a different fanbase.


----------



## chronoxiong

Awesome number for this week's show! Glad to hear it and hope it continues to stay in that range. The show was entertaining too so I wonder how the segment ratings will do.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Rock316AE said:


> Good for you, because it's not true at all, overrun is not a segment on the show but it's part of the overall rating, That's why they're doing it, to gain viewers to your show from a different fanbase.


Ah okay, makes sense. Just wanted to know. Thanks for the info.


----------



## Ray

Good number. It'll be interesting to see the Quarter hour breakdown to see what lost viewers. Also really interested in what the overrun did.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

...

I am disappointed.

Not ONE single "BRYAN=RATINGS!" post in this thread. (Not that it's true or not true or that Bryan had anything to do with Raw ratings, but you'd expect it at least).


----------



## Carcass

Obviously it's thanks to DB. Everyone thought the match in the second hour was the ME so they tuned out after the match was over which explains the dip between hour 1 and hour 2. SD'll probably get great ratings too because everyone's excited to see what DB's gonna do following his epic victory over the current WWE champion.


----------



## Smith_Jensen

Carcass said:


> Obviously it's thanks to DB. Everyone thought the match in the second hour was the ME so they tuned out after the match was over which explains the dip between hour 1 and hour 2. SD'll probably get great ratings too because everyone's excited to see what DB's gonna do following his epic victory over the current WWE champion.


Don't get too excited yet, the quarter hour ratings are not out yet.


----------



## WashingtonD

Rock316AE said:


> Good for you, because it's not true at all, overrun is not a segment on the show but it's part of the overall rating, That's why they're doing it, to gain viewers to your show from a different fanbase.


The overrun is actually a habit developed from the Monday Night Wars era.. when WCW was live and Raw wasn't, they would do an overrun on Nitro to gain viewers tuning out from Raw, as Raw was taped and always finished in the alotted time. When Raw went live, they did the overrun too and it has always stayed like that since then


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Carcass said:


> Obviously it's thanks to DB. Everyone thought the match in the second hour was the ME so they tuned out after the match was over which explains the dip between hour 1 and hour 2. SD'll probably get great ratings too because everyone's excited to see what DB's gonna do following his epic victory over the current WWE champion.


Thank you sir, I am no longer disappointed.


----------



## Carcass

Smith_Jensen said:


> Don't get too excited yet, the quarter hour ratings are not out yet.


True. Not sure if DB's mega star power is enough to offset Jericho's involvement since he's been losing viewers every segment since his return.


----------



## Verdict123

Whats with the drop in the second hour? even after a 18 minute overrun?

Punk/Bryan match bombed or what? It would be a shame if World champion vs WWE champion lost viewers.


----------



## Ham and Egger

When Daniel Bryan graces the show the ratings go up. Pay attention WWE.


----------



## Green Light

Ass Invader said:


> When Daniel Bryan graces the show the ratings go up. Pay attention WWE.


Except when he's in the main event and it gets the worst overrun in 14 years :mark:


----------



## Ham and Egger

Green Light said:


> Except when he's in the main event and it gets the worst overrun in 14 years :mark:


Ahaha.... You're funny. Everyone has their ups and down and right now Bryan is making the ratings go up. Stop hating. :jay2


----------



## DesolationRow

Apparently Heel Bryan is a ratings magnet. Advertising Triple H's return, night after 'Rumble effect and Road to WM beginning all contributed as well, 'course.


----------



## Carcass

Green Light said:


> Except when he's in the main event and it gets the worst overrun in 14 years :mark:


Zack Ryder was in the match so the ratings where bound to tank. All the real wrestling fans refused to watch it in protest of a goofball like him being in the ME.



DesolationRow said:


> Apparently Heel Bryan is a ratings magnet. Advertising Triple H's return, night after 'Rumble effect and Road to WM beginning all contributed as well, 'course.


I bet they had Punk vs Bryan planned before the announcement so HHH decided to return so he could get credited with the post-Rumble, DB being on the show rating spike.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

See, this is what happends when you put D-BRY in two segments, ratings shoot up. Fuck Mark Henry, DAT SUPERHERO D-BRY!


----------



## LarryCoon

jblvdx said:


> See, this is what happends when you put D-BRY in two segments, ratings shoot up. Fuck Mark Henry, DAT SUPERHERO D-BRY!


Everyone knows Daniel Bryan > Mark Henry


----------



## THANOS

Does anyone know when the quarter ratings are released? Like will they be today?


----------



## D.M.N.

The rating and viewership numbers include over-run. Viewership numbers for Hour 2 will include the over-run as does the Hour 2 rating.


----------



## Rock316AE

RAW after the Rumble since 2007: () is the increase or decline from the week before.

1. 2007 - 4.17 rating (+3.2%), 5.45 million viewers (-3.1%)
2. 2008 - 3.87 rating (+9.4%), 5.71 million viewers (+16.7%)
3. 2010 - 3.63 rating (+1.1%), 5.29 million viewers (+2.9%)
4. 2009 - 3.60 rating (-6.9%), 5.17 million viewers (-9.9%)
5. 2012 - 3.55 rating (+11.6%), 5.22 million viewers (+13.1%)
6. 2011 - 3.48 rating (+5.8%), 5.28 million viewers (+7.8%)

2009 was down because of the big Vince/Orton segment from the week before which got a huge overrun number if I remember correctly.


----------



## wb1899

Nice List

But this said it all

Q: 
Are Household ratings irrelevant form of measurement when looking at ratings? No one seems to mention them anymore 


A [Ted Linhart (SVP of Research at USA Network)]: 

Good Q. Yes HH started being irrelevant in 90s.
Total viewers for bragging rights & 18-49 (rating or viewers)for revenue generation are it

-------

+The number of households a Show needs, for 1 rating point, changes every TV/Nielsen-Season.

HH-numbers for USA Network since the 07/08 season

Season - Households(000)
07/08 - 96442 
08/09 - 98438
09/10 - 99174
10/11 - 100172
11/12 - 100480


----------



## Rock316AE

Interesting quote from the Observer for the "RATINGS ARE NOT IMPORTANT!" people:



> There was no talk whatsoever about “Tough Enough,” which given they were talking about U.S. television
> future, would indicate USA Network has decided to pass on doing a second season. However, McMahon
> announced there is a plan in place to add a third live hour on Monday nights, starting at 8 p.m., that would
> essentially be a Raw pre-game show. No date was given for the start, nor much in the way of details of
> what the show would entail.
> 
> For the same reason, “Tough Enough” was a risk because even though the ratings were far stronger than
> Ultimate Fighter going on at the same time, that wasn’t good enough for the USA Network, the No. 1 cable
> network in prime time.
> *
> Any first-run show airing in prime time on the USA Network that has to do with pro wrestling, because pro
> wrestling shows draw far lower ad revenues than the network dramas, can’t be a drain on the company’s
> prime time average,* *which means anything below a 2.4 or a 2.5 rating is not going to last.*
> 
> NCIS reruns usually do in the 2.7 range in that hour. When WWE does a three hour Raw, the first hour
> usually does about the same 2.6 or 2.7. So they would have to maintain that level, and most likely there
> will be no wrestling in that first hour but simply a build for Raw. In addition, those 2.6 or 2.7's usually came
> with a big match in the first hour. They’d have to maintain a number like that weekly or the show would be
> in danger. “Tough Enough” was well received, but in the end, it drew well below USA Network’s prime time
> average.
> 
> Doing a show like that also indicates a lack of paying attention or ignoring of history at worst, or at best,
> pretending previous history of the industry doesn’t apply to them. Nitro did the same thing in the late 90s
> when it expanded to three hours and those in the company felt that was the kiss of death. And WCW had
> far more talent depth at the time.


Every year ratings is going down more, this year with the most "2.0s" since 97, And WWE today without USA will never do above 3.0, maybe just for March.


----------



## Starbuck

That is rather interesting actually. I guess all those reports about them panicking over 2.7's had something behind them after all lol. But if TE wasn't getting a 2.6/2.7 I don't know what makes them think that putting a pre-game type of show in it's place is going to do any better. 3 hour Raw's only work best when there's an actual reason for having them. If people aren't tuning in for Raw as a show on it's own, they're hardly going to tune in for a pre-game show on it beforehand.


----------



## A-C-P

It is intersting, but what I don't get is if the fact is that Pro wrestling shows draws less advertising revenue than network dramas, then why does USA want to put on 3-hrs of pro wrestling every monday night? That just makes no sense from a business standpoint, if true. Specially since a "pre-game" show for Raw is likely to draw less ratings than TE did. 

Not sure how much "faith" I really have in this Observer report, the report would carry alot more wait if it was coming directly from USA or NBC Universal for me. To me it jsut seems the Observer trying to add validity to their own report of the WWE panicking over ratings.


----------



## Rock316AE

Meltzer said that Vince wants to add another hour which would be stupid decision anyway, but can't do it unless he draw above average numbers for USA. And we all know that other than January-March, he's struggling to do above 3.0 for RAW so it's not going to happen. The point is the RAW average and the importance of the ratings to the company, without the TV deal, they're out of business.



> To me it jsut seems the Observer trying to add validity to their own report of the WWE panicking over ratings.


It's not, you can see that with the Cena/Del Rio title change right after a 2.7, Meltzer said before the NOC PPV that Del Rio is probably going to lose because Vince was in panic mode after RAW.


----------



## A-C-P

I definitely agree that without their current TV deal the company would be in major trouble (which is another reason I think they are going to do everything possible to make WWE network a sucess, just so they have a back-up for their current TV set-up in the unlikely event something would go wrong with it)

I don't think their current TV deal with NBC Universal is in that much trouble to be honest though, pretty sure it just got extended again either last year or the year before. I guess whats confusing to me is the most the reports I've seen or read said that USA wanted more 3-hour Raws and Vince didn't want to produce that much programming, but like any "dirtsheet" those reports could be false as well.


----------



## wesleyward24

_ As noted before, the January 30th RAW Supershow did a 3.55 cable rating and 5.21 million viewers. This was the most-watched RAW since May 23rd, 2011.

In the segment breakdown, the opener did a 3.90 quarter-rating. Randy Orton vs. Dolph Ziggler lost 580,000 viewers while Tyler Reks vs. Brodus Clay lost 166,000 viewers. CM Punk vs. Daniel Bryan gained 219,000 viewers to a 3.54 quarter-rating - which is actually a weak gain for that time slot.

The Miz vs. Kofi Kingston lost 231,000 viewers while The Rock's video lost 329,000. Eve Torres vs. Beth Phoenix and the Kane vs. John Cena brawl gained 325,000 viewers. The segment with Triple H, John Laurinaitis and The Undertaker gained 753,000 viewers._

Source - Wrestling Observer

I find it to be refreshing that a Wrestling Match actually gained viewers for once. The whole "this is actually weak" for this segment is irrelevant to me when it's a 3.54


----------



## Carcass

wesleyward24 said:


> _ As noted before, the January 30th RAW Supershow did a 3.55 cable rating and 5.21 million viewers. This was the most-watched RAW since May 23rd, 2011.
> 
> In the segment breakdown, the opener did a 3.90 quarter-rating. Randy Orton vs. Dolph Ziggler lost 580,000 viewers while Tyler Reks vs. Brodus Clay lost 166,000 viewers. CM Punk vs. Daniel Bryan gained 219,000 viewers to a 3.54 quarter-rating - which is actually a weak gain for that time slot.
> 
> The Miz vs. Kofi Kingston lost 231,000 viewers while The Rock's video lost 329,000. Eve Torres vs. Beth Phoenix and the Kane vs. John Cena brawl gained 325,000 viewers. The segment with Triple H, John Laurinaitis and The Undertaker gained 753,000 viewers._
> 
> Source - Wrestling Observer
> 
> I find it to be refreshing that a Wrestling Match actually gained viewers for once. The whole "this is actually weak" for this segment is irrelevant to me when it's a 3.54


Not surprised Daniel Bryan vs CM Punk was the third highest segment, second if you don't include the overrun.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Yeah I dont think the loses and gains mean that much as 5 million people consistently watched the show.

but the rock lost viewers, had to do it


----------



## StevenROH

It's like the events surrounding WrestleMania, the increased ratings are because of the buzz more so than the quality.


----------



## ecabney

Orton stay losing viewers, breh


----------



## Rock316AE

Big opening segment as expected to find out who won the Rumble match, Weak gain as usual for Punk, And a 4.0 + segment for HHH/Ace, I expected a bigger gain for the huge overrun. But not surprising. good number, let's see if HHH can continue this momentum for next week after Taker came back but with no Rumble buzz.


----------



## Green Light

> The Rock's video lost 329,000.


Tee hee


----------



## A-C-P

Since the Punk/Bryan was the only segment besides the last sgement/overrun to actually GAIN viewers I don't think calling it a weak gain is fair at all. That top of the hour slot is not an "automatic" huge gain like it has been in years past anymore.


----------



## Rock316AE

Video package is a ratings killer, back then, WWE or WCW never even promoted their PPV on TV because of the fear of losing viewers, Taker/HHH before WM lost something like 500k but that's irrelevant anyway, it was 4 minutes in a 15 minutes quarter.



A-C-P said:


> Since the Punk/Bryan was the only segment besides the last sgement/overrun to actually GAIN viewers I don't think calling it a weak gain is fair at all.


It was in the top of the hour segment, you can't lose viewers no matter what, If everything lost and they only gain 200k it's not a good thing, on the contrary...


----------



## LarryCoon

Lol Rock's video losing 329k viewers. Can't blame Rock for that one. His videos has been shit


----------



## SteenIsGod

Orton is Shit. His Return match to raw loses 1/2 a million viewers? How this man has been a top guy for 4 years still baffles me to this day.


----------



## D.M.N.

*January 30th, 2012 - Breakdown*
Q1 + Q2 - 3.90 rating / 5.65 million
Q3 - 3.43 rating / 5.07 million
Q4 - 3.32 rating / 4.90 million
Q5 - 3.54 rating / 5.12 million
Q6 - 3.34 rating / 4.89 million
Q7 - 3.12 rating / 4.56 million
Q8 - 3.34 rating / 4.89 million
Overrun - 3.85 rating / 5.64 million

If you bundled Q8 and the overrun together, like they have done in the past, you get about an average of 3.59 rating / 5.26 million, a gain of 700k on Q7.

Okay breakdown, as noted by Rock316AE in the breakdown a day ago, the RAW after Royal Rumble last year had an overrun above a 4.0 rating so the overrun rating may be slightly disappointing. Saying that (unlike last year!), they left RAW on a high with a big return which should keep viewers until next week and the numbers should well be similar for next week.


----------



## A-C-P

Rock316AE said:


> It was in the top of the hour segment, you can't lose viewers no matter what, If everything lost and they only gain 200k it's not a good thing, on the contrary...


1. Conveient how you skipped over the part of my post where I said that top of the hour segment isn't the automatic "huge" viewer gain that it used to be.

2. Lets totally ignore the fact that Orton/Ziggler & Brodus/Reks lost nearly 750,000 viewers combined (and In Orton's "return" match to Raw) and just say it was a weak gain for Punk b/c he couldn't bring enough of those lost viewers back.

Trolling at its finest right here, you do your best to hide it though I will give you kudos for that.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

3.5 not a bad rating. This rating is more worthy of discussion since it is a big difference than the 2.9-3.0 that was the average RAW for the past few months.


----------



## Rock316AE

I can't say that this is terrible but a big disappointment, HHH segment, day after the Rumble, with a huge 18 minutes overrun should do at least a 4.0, last year the Rumble RAW concept was a big success, I guess the big draw was and still is, the Rumble winner, that's why I said in the results that they should give Sheamus his own segment, maybe in the top of the hour. Next week Taker is not going to be there, so it's HHH and the Taker hype.



A-C-P said:


> 1. Conveient how you skipped over the part of my post where I said that top of the hour segment isn't the automatic "huge" viewer gain that it used to be.
> 
> 2. Lets totally ignore the fact that Orton/Ziggler & Brodus/Reks lost nearly 750,000 viewers combined (and In Orton's "return" match to Raw) and just say it was a weak gain for Punk b/c he couldn't bring enough of those lost viewers back.
> 
> Trolling at its finest right here, you do your best to hide it though I will give you kudos for that.


Not true at all, the top of the hour is still the second biggest segment, unless you want to change the entire concept. I'm not ignoring the fact that the matches on random segments were losing, you're just proving Meltzer's point that it was a weak gain after they lost so many viewers already.



WrestlingforEverII said:


> Plus it was a repeat. Hell, No one wants to see Rock on a video screen at all. Whether its via satellite, taped or a video package like that. They want Rock live and in person. Plus, that video was mostly about his outside life. I can see why that turns people off on a wrestling program.


Repeat and the content of the video package is irrelevant because it's always losing, no matter what. If you're talking about "live"(taped) Rock promos from last year? not true, he gained huge and was the highest rated segment even from his house.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

LarryCoon said:


> Lol Rock's video losing 329k viewers. Can't blame Rock for that one. His videos has been shit


Plus it was a repeat. Hell, No one wants to see Rock on a video screen at all. Whether its via satellite, taped or a video package like that. They want Rock live and in person. Plus, that video was mostly about his outside life. I can see why that turns people off on a wrestling program.


----------



## TheWFEffect

JingieBY said:


> A bump with over 600 000 people compared to last weeks edition. Truly excelent number.


----------



## Verdict123

Rock316AE said:


> I can't say that this is terrible but a big disappointment, HHH segment, day after the Rumble, with a huge 18 minutes overrun should do at least a 4.0, last year the Rumble RAW concept was a big success, I guess the big draw was and still is, the Rumble winner, that's why I said in the results that they should give Sheamus his own segment, maybe in the top of the hour. Next week Taker is not going to be there, so it's HHH and the Taker hype.


Its both HHH + Taker's return thats a disappointment which i predicted beforehand. Opening seg was the highest rated as i said. 

and BTW, both HHH and taker most likely wont be on next week's raw. They got plenty of time to build, they will take it slowly. Meltzer also said the same thing.


----------



## Starbuck

Interesting numbers lol. Obviously they opened big time with a high level of interest but I can't say I'm surprised that things followed the normal pattern of viewer gains and loses throughout the show as of late. Between the opening and 10pm slot they lost around 746,000 viewers with Punk/Bryan only being able to gain back 219,000 of those viewers. When you look at it that way, when you consider the fact that it's your 2 world champions and the 10pm time slot, it isn't good at all. On the plus side though, it did actually gain something. Then they lost a whole bunch of viewers until Cena/Kane which had a nice gain of 300k+. The end segment with HHH/Ace/Taker is good stuff considering it was promoted solely as 'Will HHH fire Johnny Ace?' and not the surprise return of the Undertaker lol. 

In the end, they ended up with almost exactly the same amount of viewers that they started with which again reinforces the fact that people tune in at the start, leave and then only come back for the end. They aren't really even coming back for the 10pm slot anymore. Had they had something really hot to put at 10pm they would have experienced a huge gain of like 600k or more and then been able to build upon that for the end segment which would have gained it's 750k. The overall rating probably would have been like a 3.7 or 3.8 then. Hopefully it reaches the stage pretty soon where they have more than just one point of interest or drawing angle so they can stretch them across the different times. That's what happened with Rock/Cena/Miz and HHH/Taker/HBK last year. Both segments had gains of over 1million iirc and so the overall rating was like a 3.9 or whatever it was. One went on at the 10pm slot and one went on at the end. 

That's my take on things anyways lol.


----------



## Verdict123

Surprise returns SHOULD gain viewers depending on the starpower, especially in the overrun, See: The Rock's Return feb 14 2011. 

and the opening seg should be considered a disappointment imo, not even 4.0.


----------



## WWE

IMO, the only reason the Rock's highlight package lost viewers was because it was shwon at the Royal Rumble, and by the time it aired on RAW it was all over Youtube.

But I'm surprised the divas match + aftermatch brawl gained viewers. Guess people know Kane/Cena was gonna be involved


----------



## Rock316AE

Verdict123 said:


> Its both HHH + Taker's return thats a disappointment which i predicted beforehand. Opening seg was the highest rated as i said.
> 
> and BTW, both HHH and taker most likely wont be on next week's raw. They got plenty of time to build, they will take it slowly. Meltzer also said the same thing.


HHH is going to be on every RAW until WM...Taker is going to be there from the EC PPV, and Rock coming back on the last RAW of February.

And I can see a 4.0 in March, if you got a big Rock segment and Shaq segment on the same show? + HHH/Taker/HBK? easily.


----------



## Verdict123

Rock316AE said:


> *HHH is going to be on every RAW until WM*...Taker is going to be there from the EC PPV, and Rock coming back on the last RAW of February.
> 
> And I can see a 4.0 in March, if you got a big Rock segment and Shaq segment on the same show? + HHH/Taker/HBK? easily.


I dont think he will be but we will find out next week i guess.


----------



## Starbuck

Verdict123 said:


> Surprise returns SHOULD gain viewers depending on the starpower, especially in the overrun, See: The Rock's Return feb 14 2011.
> 
> and the opening seg should be considered a disappointment imo, not even 4.0.


Some segments lately haven't even been able to gain a 3.0 and you're calling anything under a 4.0 a disappointment? I think that's setting expectations a little too high. The opener and the overrun were both 3.9. It's everything in between that let them down. Had they experienced a bigger gain in the middle, they would have been well into 4.0 territory. I don't see how it's a disappointment tbh. They got a big result from post-Rumble interest at the start. They advertised a HHH return and got a big result at the end too. If things aren't above 5 million next week, then I'd start to worry and call it a disappointment. 



Rock316AE said:


> HHH is going to be on every RAW until WM...Taker is going to be there from the EC PPV, and Rock coming back on the last RAW of February.
> 
> And I can see a 4.0 in March, if you got a big Rock segment and Shaq segment on the same show? + HHH/Taker/HBK? easily.


Agreed. Rock's going to give them quite a boost and HHH/Taker will maintain it. Shaq, if he's there, will give an extra boost and that's only 2/3 matches. Throw in general RTWM hype and everything else still to come and I think they'll definitely hit 4.0 at some point.


----------



## Verdict123

Plus John laurinaitis isnt fired yet remember? Big Johnny still runs the show, so i highly doubt hhh or taker are going to be on next week's show.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Bryan vs. Punk did really good, happy to see that. A 3.54 rating, and when you compare it to the Triple H/Johnny/Undertaker segment that did 3.59 (Q8+Overrun) that's pretty damn good. Punk and Bryan aren't draws? wat.

Also good news that the Kane/Cena thing drew when last time it was in a random segment it lost quite a bit.


----------



## Verdict123

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Bryan vs. Punk did really good, happy to see that. A 3.54 rating, and *when you compare it to the Triple H/Johnny/Undertaker segment that did 3.59 (Q8+Overrun)* that's pretty damn good. Punk and Bryan aren't draws? wat.
> 
> Also good news that the Kane/Cena thing drew when last time it was in a random segment it lost quite a bit.


Entire HHH/ACE/Taker segment was in the 18 mins Overrun. Overrun did 3.85 rating. 

Punk/bryan gain was weak considering the time slot.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

The top of the second hour almost always does bad comparatively to the top of the first and the bottom of the second, especially when you put matches there (because WWE has trained its audience to know that the outcomes of matches don't matter). In fact the opening and closing segments are not the problem anymore. It's everything else.


----------



## ecabney

Orton loses half a million viewers on his return match on Raw
Bryan da gawd's match with Punk gains about half of them back

no one cares about Orton, breh


----------



## superuser1

not surprised orton and ziggler lost viewers

that was their 500th time wrestling against each other


----------



## JasonLives

You have to also consider commercials, some quarters had only one and some had two. Im pretty sure Quarter 3 ( Orton/Ziggler ) had two. That always put a dent on things.

I think 5.7 million viewers is really good for the opening. Shouldnt just stare at the actual rating. Remember back in 2007 they did a overall 4.2 rating but "only" 5.5 million viewers. Its a different time now. This would have probably done a higher rating a few years back.


----------



## Verdict123

JasonLives said:


> You have to also consider commercials, some quarters had only one and some had two. Im pretty sure Quarter 3 ( Orton/Ziggler ) had two. That always put a dent on things.
> 
> I think 5.7 million viewers is really good for the opening. Shouldnt just stare at the actual rating. *Remember back in 2007 they did a overall 4.2 rating but "only" 5.5 million viewers. Its a different time now. This would have probably done a higher rating a few years back.*


You dont exactly understand the viewership concept, do you?


----------



## kokepepsi

Last WWE champ vs WHC champ Edge vs Miz at the 10pm slot gained 50k

So at least we know that Bryan/Punk are way more appealing that the Hall of fame joke and funny face


----------



## deatawaits

219K for 10pm slot is not great by any means but 3.54 is.So people should not stretch this.Last year a champion vs champion match on 10 pm slot just gained 50k.

But what about orton?I have never been a mark of his but it's really worrying that he loses viewers every time he is on raw.He lost 700k once and now 1/2 million.

Cena again showed that he is the only guy on active roster who can draw even after being in strange quarters.

The overrun should have gained more than that though.


----------



## whitty982000

Rock316AE, why can't you just get the sand out of your vagina? CM Punk is OVER. Deal with it. Oh, and don't go and brand me with being a "Punk mark" because I was and always have been a Rock fan even before I came across Punk.


----------



## Kabraxal

Orton/Ziggler lost viewers mostly because it was evident who was winning and it was just a thrown together match with no story for Ziggler. 

As for the three big segments... not surprised at the near equal viewers at the beginning and the end. The start of the show not only was the "who won from last night" bit, but it also had some decent tension between everyone involved. The end was of course HHH and hyped, Taker coming back only helped. Showing that good booking with an actual SURPRISE swerve can work. And the middle segment... not a bad gain for a pure wrestling match with no promos whatsoever. I think if they built more matches like that with a storyline on top of it they could only see the rating go higher. It does prove just a bit that people want to see Bryan and Punk in some capacity. They were practically the only thing in that segment save for 20 seconds of Jericho near the end.


----------



## Schrute_Farms

I change the channel every time Orton comes on my tv. I seriously have no interest in anything his lame ass is involved in.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Verdict123 said:


> Surprise returns SHOULD gain viewers depending on the starpower, especially in the overrun, See: The Rock's Return feb 14 2011.
> 
> and the opening seg should be considered a disappointment imo, not even 4.0.


lol, always trying to protect HHH... oh wait he's banned. :lmao

That being said, I remember there being a lot of buzz about Rock returning... at least on here. For Taker returning, maybe the odd person predicted it, but that came out of left field.

In any event, whether you count Taker as help or not (which I do for reasons I stated earlier), I do consider the increase a moderate disappointment, unlike the fact I didn't consider the Punk/Laurinitis match from last week a disappointment in ratings despite pulling in 700k+ viewers (roughly the same). Taker and HHH are both bigger draw than Punk, and while the segment may have drawn more (not sure on the exact numbers) it wouldn't of been that big of an increase over Punk's segment with Laurinitis. Not to mention Taker returning should've gotten viewers who were hearing about it to turn on the TV asap, which is how the whole surprise return thing works when it comes to ratings. It wasn't even the highest viewed part of the show. That being said, it still pulled back in the vast majority of people from the beginning of the show, so it may not be a completely bad number. But all things considered, it's not really that good (but it's not bad either).

Oh, and just a little fact (not sure if this has been posted), but this was the highest rated Raw since the night after WM27... shouldn't be much of a surprise, but yeah.


----------



## THANOS

D.M.N. said:


> *January 30th, 2012 - Breakdown*
> Q1 + Q2 - 3.90 rating / 5.65 million
> Q3 - 3.43 rating / 5.07 million
> Q4 - 3.32 rating / 4.90 million
> Q5 - 3.54 rating / 5.12 million
> Q6 - 3.34 rating / 4.89 million
> Q7 - 3.12 rating / 4.56 million
> Q8 - 3.34 rating / 4.89 million
> Overrun - 3.85 rating / 5.64 million
> 
> If you bundled Q8 and the overrun together, like they have done in the past, you get about an average of 3.59 rating / 5.26 million, a gain of 700k on Q7.
> 
> Okay breakdown, as noted by Rock316AE in the breakdown a day ago, the RAW after Royal Rumble last year had an overrun above a 4.0 rating so the overrun rating may be slightly disappointing. Saying that (unlike last year!), they left RAW on a high with a big return which should keep viewers until next week and the numbers should well be similar for next week.


So let's see Punk/Bryan/Johnny/Sheamus starts the show off and gets the highest rating, and the second highest rating other than the overrun was the punk/bryan match? Hmmmmm..


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

So a 6 man tag match with Jericho, Punk and DB V Otunga, henry and Dolph Ziggler gained more then Taker and Trips? wtf lol?

But really people should really stop looking and judging and peoples drawing ability strictly on how much they gained. DB and CM Punk only gained 250,000, but did a 3.5 rating, which (sadly) for a wrestling match with two truly unestablished stars, is great.


----------



## ItDoesntMatterWhat

Considering past Raw ratings and Smackdown's improvement or steadiness since Henry lost the belt, as hard as it will be for many to admit, there are a lot more Bryan marks then there are Punk's. Orton's ability to turn viewers off is very troubling though since many hope for him to return to Raw after WM.


----------



## DesolationRow

Have to chime in and say, several heavy-duty wrestling fans I know are tuning in religiously now rather than looking at YouTube vids of the shows because of Bryan's push. I always knew he'd be a very solid draw with hardcore wrestling fans if WWE opted to get behind him with all of their might (and because of what we know about the details regarding Vince McMahon actually calling him back up to re-hire him after the firing from Tiegate in summer 2010, I was rather optimistic they would). As difficult as it may be for some to admit, Bryan is proving to be a consistent ratings draw and WWE is not going to hurt one iota from pushing him. As a matter of fact, the opposite has quite plainly been proven to be true. 

On the other end of the spectrum, though, WWE needs to create a blueprint with which to work when it comes to Dolph Ziggler. The guy sweats talent in the ring, and can be one of the most reliable hands on the entire roster on any night, but their shoddy handling of him thus far has possibly damaged him with many fans, particularly more casual ones, for a long while. His segments almost never do well unless he's crowded in with guys like Punk, Foley, Johnny Ace, etceteras, etceteras. That half-a-million off-of-a-cliff free fall drop is alarming. 'Course, it's also the latest piece of evidence for why Orton, for all of _his_ abilities, is completely unable to pull anybody up. CM Punk, Mark Henry and Daniel Bryan sincerely seem more capable of that _right now_ than Orton does coming back after a month's absence from Raw. That hurts.

Strong rating and viewership number, regardless. And as far as the overrun goes, sure, Undertaker's return with his _looong_ entrance should have helped to spike that just a tad, but it's truthfully night and day to compare it with The Rock on Valentine's Day last year. Not only was there a week's worth of hype and buzz and speculation over who the host of Wrestlemania XXVII might be, with the most desired choice overall being The Rock by a wide margin, but The Rock--a certified movie star and worldwide-known celebrity--was appearing on Raw for the first time in _seven years_. Add to all of that that his overrun went on for the better part of half an hour and people honestly had ample time to find him there, unveiling the "Fruity Pebbles" moniker for Cena and creating an earthquake in Anaheim, CA with his presence. Taker's not Rock anyway, but it's very difficult to compare this to Rock's return. It's still a damned good overrun number, regardless.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

There should be a rule on the forum that when DesolationRaw makes his post on the subject matter, the thread should close. Great post.


----------



## youssefahmedaly

Taker's return, unlike any Rock appearance, wasn't advertised nor hyped.
When the Rock appears, people know he will so they tune in, but in Taker's case, no one had a clue he's coming back.


----------



## wb1899

JasonLives said:


> You have to also consider commercials, some quarters had only one and some had two. Im pretty sure Quarter 3 ( Orton/Ziggler ) had two. That always put a dent on things.
> 
> I think 5.7 million viewers is really good for the opening. Shouldnt just stare at the actual rating. Remember back in 2007 they did a overall 4.2 rating but "only" 5.5 million viewers. Its a different time now. This would have probably done a higher rating a few years back.


A HH rating stands for households and has nothing to do with the viewership.
4.17 in 2007 = 3.933.000 households. In 2012 Raw would need 4.190.000 households to get a 4.17 Rating.


----------



## Rock316AE

kokepepsi said:


> Last WWE champ vs WHC champ Edge vs Miz at the 10pm slot gained 50k
> 
> So at least we know that Bryan/Punk are way more appealing that the Hall of fame joke and funny face


If you want to be specific, Edge/Miz was two weeks in a row and in their second match they gained about 250k and Meltzer said it was terrible...You're trolling here or really think that Punk/Bryan are bigger draws than Edge? Wow. I'm not even going to explain why on Edge because it's too ridiculous, but even Miz who was a terrible drawing champion did much better than Punk, not even close. and Bryan? he's working with two proven TV draws on SD, when he's on RAW, we saw what he's doing, breaking records from 97 and losing on every show, proven draw? lol.

And the only reason Orton lost viewers because he is in the second quarter, no matter what he was doing, there's not one person who gained viewers in that time slot for over a year except The Rock. No reason to analyze it at all if you're looking at every RAW breakdown since 2011(talking in general to the people in this thread)

I agree on Miz BTW, I said it about his facial expressions even when everybody wanted him in the WM main event.


----------



## SinJackal

dabossb said:


> So let's see Punk/Bryan/Johnny/Sheamus starts the show off and gets the highest rating, and the second highest rating other than the overrun was the punk/bryan match? Hmmmmm..


The opening and overrun tend to be the highest rated segments regardless.




youssefahmedaly said:


> Taker's return, unlike any Rock appearance, wasn't advertised nor hyped.
> When the Rock appears, people know he will so they tune in, but in Taker's case, no one had a clue he's coming back.


That's a good point, Undertaker's return would've probably been more highly rated had people known he was going to appear. Returns seem better when they're unannounced, but fewer people will be watching to see it.


----------



## kokepepsi

Rock316AE said:


> If you want to be specific, Edge/Miz was two weeks in a row and in their second match they gained about 250k and Meltzer said it was terrible...You're trolling here or really think that Punk/Bryan are bigger draws than Edge? Wow. I'm not even going to explain why on Edge because it's too ridiculous, but even Miz who was a terrible drawing champion did much better than Punk, not even close. and Bryan? he's working with two proven TV draws on SD, when he's on RAW, we saw what he's doing, breaking records from 97 and losing on every show, proven draw? lol.
> 
> And the only reason Orton lost viewers because he is in the second quarter, no matter what he was doing, there's not one person who gained viewers in that time slot for over a year except The Rock. No reason to analyze it at all if you're looking at every RAW breakdown since 2011(talking in general to the people in this thread)
> 
> I agree on Miz BTW, I said it about his facial expressions even when everybody wanted him in the WM main event.


But the first match did only gain .......my bad it was 42k
2nd match got wait a minute........ 222k
A 3K DIFFERENCE YOU CARE ABOUT????????
So I am not trolling just stating facts
Didn't even say the are drawing more just more appealing
LOL at the anti punk/bryan tirade 
:austin


----------



## A-C-P

OK let me get this straight....

Punk/Bryan gain 210,000 viewers = weak gain for that timeslot, WWE should worry about that but;

Orton/Ziggler lose 580,000 viewers (in Orton's retrun to Raw) = No big deal that timeslot always loses viewers nothing to worry about.

Excuse me for having trouble understanding this :shaq

(Also please don't misinterpret this as Orton hate, b/c its not, I have no dislike for Orton just trying to get an understanding on the "logic" (or lack there of) here)


----------



## mpredrox

Do we know if Bryan/Punk gained viewers and if so how many?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

mpredrox said:


> Do we know if Bryan/Punk gained viewers and if so how many?


Yeah it gained about 220k and had over 5 million viewers. Which is great number and it would be silly to deny that.


----------



## Rock316AE

kokepepsi said:


> But the first match did only gain .......my bad it was 42k
> 2nd match got wait a minute........ 222k
> A 3K DIFFERENCE YOU CARE ABOUT????????
> So I am not trolling just stating facts
> Didn't even say the are drawing more just more appealing
> LOL at the anti punk/bryan tirade
> :austin


250, 222 whatever, Miz was terrible but still, if you put them side by side, Miz wins easily. I know you're not a fan of Edge but 2006-2007 he was a great TV draw, embarrassing to put him in a group with Miz, let alone the other two.

And for this thread in general, the RAW with :shaq drew a 4.0(3.95)with 5.76 million viewers.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35




----------



## A-C-P

Wrestlinfan35 said:


>


:lmao, you must spread rep around first, dammit, this SO deserves green rep


----------



## Starbuck

A-C-P said:


> OK let me get this straight....
> 
> Punk/Bryan gain 210,000 viewers = weak gain for that timeslot, WWE should worry about that but;
> 
> Orton/Ziggler lose 580,000 viewers (in Orton's retrun to Raw) = No big deal that timeslot always loses viewers nothing to worry about.
> 
> Excuse me for having trouble understanding this :shaq
> 
> (Also please don't misinterpret this as Orton hate, b/c its not, I have no dislike for Orton just trying to get an understanding on the "logic" (or lack there of) here)


It's not always about hating. Whether it was Orton or somebody else, Q2 always loses viewers. The 10pm time slot on the other hand is supposed to be a big gainer. Well, it used to be a big gainer. In recent months though without having a legit top drawing star to put in that spot, it has been hit or miss. Punk is hit or miss in general but especially in the 10pm slot where he's had some abysmal showings. He's also had some decent to good showings as well. It really depends on what he's doing. This time around, the match with Bryan gained 200k+ which is great but for that particular time slot, it's not so great. That's all people are saying.


----------



## LarryCoon

Why are people surprised or feel that it is an accomplishment for a WWE Champion vs World Heavyweight Champion to draw 210k viewers? Has the bar been set so low on Punk and Bryan? This is a match against (kayfabe) arguably the top two stars right now on WWE.


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> It's not always about hating. Whether it was Orton or somebody else, Q2 always loses viewers. The 10pm time slot on the other hand is supposed to be a big gainer. Well, it used to be a big gainer. In recent months though without having a legit top drawing star to put in that spot, it has been hit or miss. Punk is hit or miss in general but especially in the 10pm slot where he's had some abysmal showings. He's also had some decent to good showings as well. It really depends on what he's doing. This time around, the match with Bryan gained 200k+ which is great but for that particular time slot, it's not so great. That's all people are saying.


I am not trying to argue that the gain for Punk/Bryan match was great, its an ok gain but its not a GREAT gain by any stretch. My point here is I don't get why people are more worried about a 210,000 gain in viewers more so than a 588,000 viewer loss (regardless of timeslot) for who is supposedly their 2nd (or 3rd) biggest star?


----------



## GillbergReturns

A-C-P said:


> OK let me get this straight....
> 
> Punk/Bryan gain 210,000 viewers = weak gain for that timeslot, WWE should worry about that but;
> 
> Orton/Ziggler lose 580,000 viewers (in Orton's retrun to Raw) = No big deal that timeslot always loses viewers nothing to worry about.
> 
> Excuse me for having trouble understanding this :shaq
> 
> (Also please don't misinterpret this as Orton hate, b/c its not, I have no dislike for Orton just trying to get an understanding on the "logic" (or lack there of) here)


Certain timeslots do better than others. WWE understands this and that's why they book accordingly. They know there's a certain percentage of viewers that will leave after the opening segment and then come back to watch the conclusion of the show. They know that the 10 PM quarter will do better than the 9:45 quarter.

That's why you can't hate on the person in Q2 for losing those viewers, and it's why gaining 200,000 viewers can be misleading.

If the 10PM segment typically garners a 4.2 and it only got 3.9 rating then adding 250,000 viewers isn't saying much. 

That's why you should take internet poster's view of the ratings with a grain of salt unless they can back it up. Not intended to be a Punk/ Bryan bashing post either. The show averaged 5 mil and I'm sure WWE would take that.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

A-C-P said:


> I am not trying to argue that the gain for Punk/Bryan match was great, its an ok gai nbut its not a GREAT gain by any stretch. My point here is I don't get why people are more worried about a 210,000 gain in viewers more so than a 588,000 viewer loss (regardless of timeslot) for who is supposedly their 2nd (or 3rd) biggest star?


Orton is not a star, he's projected as one and he's very popular, but has never been a draw (which is mindblowing considering he's been given fucking everything ever) and yeah he's always put in segments that always lose viewers, why do you think that is?


----------



## Starbuck

LarryCoon said:


> Why are people surprised or feel that it is an accomplishment for a WWE Champion vs World Heavyweight Champion to draw 210k viewers? Has the bar been set so low on Punk and Bryan? This is a match against (kayfabe) arguably the top two stars right now on WWE.


I touched upon it in my other post but I think we've become so used to the 10pm slot doing so badly over the past year that any gain at all is praised lol. Given how utterly shit some segments/matches have done in recent months, a lot of them including Punk mind you, I think it's a positive sign that viewership went up, even if it wasn't some astronomical number. Were it WHC Batista vs. WWE Champ John Cena I think we'd all be expecting HUGE gains. But it wasn't. It was WHC Bryan vs. WWE Champ Punk. Both of them are making strides in terms of being legit drawing stars but they aren't there yet. 



A-C-P said:


> I am not trying to argue that the gain for Punk/Bryan match was great, its an ok gai nbut its not a GREAT gain by any stretch. My point here is I don't get why people are more worried about a 210,000 gain in viewers more so than a 588,000 viewer loss (regardless of timeslot) for who is supposedly their 2nd (or 3rd) biggest star?


Because Orton has never really been able to draw on his own without some form of help and because every single person in Q2 has lost viewers apart from Rock in the past year. Orton losing viewers isn't news or a big deal. In fact, I can't remember the last time he _gained_ viewers on Raw tbh. Granted, he hasn't had a storyline and has just been in random matches but still, he isn't a ratings powerhouse by any stretch of the imagination. Over as fuck? Absolutely. A legit draw? Not on your life and I say all that as a huge Orton mark. When he was white hot back in mid 2010 business didn't move at all.


----------



## GillbergReturns

Champion v champion match really isn't that special anyways. Nothing is ever at stake, it's only about bragging rights and usually ends in some kind of interference.


----------



## corfend

Orton isn't much of a draw. He doesn't have the big-name appeal of guys like Cena, HHH and 'Taker. Put him in an interesting storyline/angle, the fans will tune in. Put him in a random thrown-together match with no accompanying storyline, they won't. Just like the rest of the roster except for top stars like Cena.


----------



## GillbergReturns

Starbuck said:


> I touched upon it in my other post but I think we've become so used to the 10pm slot doing so badly over the past year that any gain at all is praised lol. Given how utterly shit some segments/matches have done in recent months, a lot of them including Punk mind you, I think it's a positive sign that viewership went up, even if it wasn't some astronomical number. Were it WHC Batista vs. WWE Champ John Cena I think we'd all be expecting HUGE gains. But it wasn't. It was WHC Bryan vs. WWE Champ Punk. Both of them are making strides in terms of being legit drawing stars but they aren't there yet.
> 
> 
> 
> Because Orton has never really been able to draw on his own without some form of help and because every single person in Q2 has lost viewers apart from Rock in the past year. Orton losing viewers isn't news or a big deal. In fact, I can't remember the last time he _gained_ viewers on Raw tbh. Granted, he hasn't had a storyline and has just been in random matches but still, he isn't a ratings powerhouse by any stretch of the imagination. Over as fuck? Absolutely. A legit draw? Not on your life and I say all that as a huge Orton mark. When he was white hot back in mid 2010 business didn't move at all.


I don't quite get Orton. When you listen to the crowd reaction during his matches only Cena rivals it. The crowd was 3x more alive for Ziggler Orton than Punk Bryan, but he's got no drawing power whatsoever.

He's the rare wrestler that engages the crowd and gets them to react but then gets nothing to show for it.


----------



## Starbuck

GillbergReturns said:


> I don't quite get Orton. When you listen to the crowd reaction during his matches only Cena rivals it. The crowd was 3x more alive for Ziggler Orton than Punk Bryan, but he's got no drawing power whatsoever.
> 
> He's the rare wrestler that engages the crowd and gets them to react but then gets nothing to show for it.


It is rather curious. I guess haters would start their speech on how he was force fed for years and didn't ascend to the top naturally [insert Pyro Orton rant here lol] and maybe that does play a role. I don't know. I guess maybe you can look at him like the Hardy Boys back in the AE. They were super over and sold a shit ton of merch but were people buying tickets to shows just to see them or paying money for PPVs just to see them? No, they were paying for Austin, Rock, HHH, Taker etc who did everything the Hardys did but to an even higher level. But I really don't know why Orton, being as over as he is and the investment that the fans have in him hasn't translated over to boat loads of $$$.


----------



## LarryCoon

GillbergReturns said:


> Champion v champion match really isn't that special anyways. Nothing is ever at stake, it's only about bragging rights and usually ends in some kind of interference.


No, but champion vs champion is similar to an allstar game where the two greatest (kayfabe) wrestlers right now perform and exhibition match against each other. This is supposed to be one of the greatest non-title match that is available for live television. And to Starbuck's point, Batista vs John Cena would be a whole different story in terms of the amount of ratings it would get.

And to the punk marks, not to take RockAE316's side but when you start to conjure up memes to celebrate a 210k viewership gain for a WWE Champion vs World Heavyweight Champion match, you really are only helping his argument.


----------



## Rock316AE

LarryCoon said:


> Why are people surprised or feel that it is an accomplishment for a WWE Champion vs World Heavyweight Champion to draw 210k viewers? Has the bar been set so low on Punk and Bryan? This is a match against (kayfabe) arguably the top two stars right now on WWE.


Nobody is saying that except their fans who can't accept reality, 200k for 10pm timeslot is a terrible gain like Meltzer said no matter what, it's not a WWE change, if you want to argue against it, you need to change the entire TV concept, And this shouldn't be a surprise because there was no drawing power in that segment.

Like I said, the only reason Orton lost because he was in the second quarter, Cena also lost there because it's stronger than the person, it's the show. the reason Orton is in random segments because he's a SD wrestler and gets his main timeslots there, When he comes back to RAW after the draft, you will see him in storylines and main slot every show because he's the second biggest full time star and name in the company.

When you put him in a storyline, he's a great TV draw like he proved in 2009 and even before that.


----------



## Brave Nash

Rock316AE said:


> Nobody is saying that except their fans who can't accept reality, 200k for 10pm timeslot is a terrible gain like Meltzer said no matter what, it's not a WWE change, if you want to argue against it, you need to change the entire TV concept, And this shouldn't be a surprise because there was no drawing power in that segment.
> 
> Like I said, the only reason Orton lost because he was in the second quarter, Cena also lost there because it's stronger than the person, it's the show. the reason Orton is in random segments because he's a SD wrestler and gets his main timeslots there, When he comes back to RAW after the draft, you will see him in storylines and main slot every show because he's the second biggest full time star and name in the company.
> 
> When you put him in a storyline, he's a great TV draw like he proved in 2009 and even before that.


So you give credit for orton when he draws and when Punk and DB gain viewers you don't. I see hmm!. 
Yeah go look for more excuses, Orton can't draw its not just now it mostly always have been like this.
Yeah like when Punk had the best feud in 2009.. He proved that he's a draw.


----------



## corfend

Brave Nash said:


> So you give credit for orton when he draws and when Punk and DB gain viewers you don't. I see hmm!.
> *Yeah go look for more excuses, Orton can't draw its not just now it mostly always have been like this.*
> Yeah like when Punk had the best feud in 2009.. He proved that he's a draw.


Orton didn't become a top guy until 2009, and he drew good ratings then. However, what matters is the here and now, and he hasn't been drawing well for quite some time.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

I'm not celebrating the fact that they gained 220k, because really that isn't relevant because what says more is the rating for the segment, 3.54 with 5 mil viewers. That's a good number. If the segments before it lost even more and Bryan/Punk brought back like 700k of the viewers but still had the same rating and viewership number, that would make no difference. The same amount of people would've still watched the match.


----------



## Starbuck

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I'm not celebrating the fact that they gained 220k, because really that isn't relevant because what says more is the rating for the segment, 3.54 with 5 mil viewers. That's a good number. If the segments before it lost even more and Bryan/Punk brought back like 700k of the viewers but still had the same rating and viewership number, that would make no difference. The same amount of people would've still watched the match.


Of course it's relevant. How can you say it isn't? Whatever many people were already watching Raw without Punk/Bryan being on. Only an extra 200k viewers tuned in to see their match. Of course that's relevant. If the segments before had lost even more and then 700k viewers came back for Punk/Bryan, what does that say about Punk/Bryan? That 700k people couldn't be fucked watching whatever was on before them but came back when their match was on to see it. It's what has been the main problem with Raw's ratings for ages now. People are tuning in at the start, not giving a fuck, leaving and then coming back at the end to varying degrees depending on who's there and what's happening. Of course it's relevant.


----------



## Rock316AE

Yeah, but they were irrelevant to this 3.54 and a different segment there would have probably done much better.



corfend said:


> Orton didn't become a top guy until 2009, and he drew good ratings then. However, what matters is the here and now, and he hasn't been drawing well for quite some time.


He never got the opportunity to do it in quite some time, he was on SD and when he makes RAW shows, it's just a filler match in random time slot because of the "supershow" concept...


----------



## corfend

Rock316AE said:


> Yeah, but they were irrelevant to this 3.54 and a different segment there would have probably done much better.
> 
> 
> 
> He never got the opportunity to do it in quite some time, he was on SD and when he makes RAW shows, it's just a filler match in random time slot because of the "supershow" concept...


I'm an Orton fan, but you can't ignore the fact that the SD ratings went up both times the WHC was taken off of him. I think people are tired of the friendly, predictable snake-man and I for one don't blame them. The only thing Orton's good for these days is putting on good matches and putting over other talent (Rhodes, Henry, Barrett etc). He doesn't even feel like a wrestler anymore, more like a caricature of one.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Starbuck said:


> Of course it's relevant. How can you say it isn't? Whatever many people were already watching Raw without Punk/Bryan being on. Only an extra 200k viewers tuned in to see their match. Of course that's relevant. If the segments before had lost even more and then 700k viewers came back for Punk/Bryan, what does that say about Punk/Bryan? That 700k people couldn't be fucked watching whatever was on before them but came back when their match was on to see it. It's what has been the main problem with Raw's ratings for ages now. People are tuning in at the start, not giving a fuck, leaving and then coming back at the end to varying degrees depending on who's there and what's happening. Of course it's relevant.


Wouldn't the issue then lie with all the segments that are in between. The fact that it's acceptable for the random quarters to lose that many viewers is iffy to me, especially when you have people like Orton in them. Come on, you can't expect Bryan/Punk to gain 700k back at the 10 spot this week, because that would mean it would've done better than both the opening segment and the Taker/HHH segment, and I doubt anybody thought that would happen. Bringing back 200k is reasonable. Like you said, they're not Cena and Batista, but they sure as hell are draws. Not major draws by any means, but this number, a fucking 3.54, is letting me know they're well on their way. Because if an 18 minute overrun with Triple H and a fucking returning Undertaker can only do a 3.8? I think that's pretty good indication that Punk and Bryan aren't in any trouble in terms of drawing.


----------



## Edgeheadpeeps

I just don't get it with Orton. He was by far the most over wrestler on this past Raw and the crowd was on fire for his match with Ziggler (even moreso than the Punk Vs Bryan match) but he didn't even have an effect on the ratings.


----------



## Rock316AE

corfend said:


> I'm an Orton fan, but you can't ignore the fact that the SD ratings went up both times the WHC was taken off of him. I think people are tired of the friendly, predictable snake-man and I for one don't blame them. The only thing Orton's good for these days is putting on good matches and putting over other talent (Rhodes, Henry, Barrett etc). He doesn't even feel like a wrestler anymore, more like a caricature of one.


We can't really talk about SD ratings because we don't have the breakdown, besides Cena full time, Henry and Show are probably the biggest TV draws they have got right now. I also don't see how his character is stale when he's getting pop of the night every time and has almost 100% of the crowds on his side in all the demos, I want to see him in a more human character but it's not like he can't continue to do what he's doing now. You just need to give him a storyline on RAW and you will see the results, he's a big name in every aspect, Hopefully in April after the draft.


----------



## JasonLives

Yeah there is absolutly no sign that Orton has been any type of a draw these last 2-3 years.

Last time he was champion on SmackDown I think the ratings average was like 1.8. And this was during the month he feuded with Mark Henry. One of the guys Rock316AE gives full credit to for the SmackDown ratings right now. So apparently Orton cant draw with Henry, but Bryan can draw with Henry.

Punk isnt a Great draw. But WWE has shown faith in him, while everyone says "Vince will panic and take the title from him" the WWE keeps putting him in the 10PM or ME slot. The slots that are reserved for the "major players". So they continue to have faith in him. The numbers seem good enough for WWE since they keep putting Punk in those spots week after week.

And in the end, WWE has the minute by minute ratings. We dont. Maybe they see something we cant see. They can see if a drop in ratings is because of a commercial break or not. We cant.


----------



## Starbuck

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Wouldn't the issue then lie with all the segments that are in between. The fact that it's acceptable for the random quarters to lose that many viewers is iffy to me, especially when you have people like Orton in them. Come on, you can't expect Bryan/Punk to gain 700k back at the 10 spot this week, because that would mean it would've done better than both the opening segment and the Taker/HHH segment, and I doubt anybody thought that would happen. Bringing back 200k is reasonable. Like you said, they're not Cena and Batista, but they sure as hell are draws. Not major draws by any means, but this number, a fucking 3.54, is letting me know they're well on their way. Because if an 18 minute overrun with Triple H and a fucking returning Undertaker can only do a 3.8? I think that's pretty good indication that Punk and Bryan aren't in any trouble in terms of drawing.


Nobody is saying that the issue doesn't lie with the segments in between or that it's acceptable for that to happen. Have you been reading the rating threads at all? This, other than the incessant bitching and trolling, is the thing that pops up the most and the only way to fix it is to put on an entertaining product across the board. Again, I wasn't expecting Bryan/Punk to gain 700k at all. I was expecting it do exactly what it did actually. Does that make them draws? Depends on your definition of what a draw is. Personally I'd say no. Selling t-shirts and a nice run of increased ratings on SD doesn't mean anything if you aren't moving live event gates or selling PPV's. Again that's an across the board problem but neither Punk or Bryan are doing anything to move business in that regard. Punk's a hell of a lot closer to Bryan is but he still isn't quite fully there yet. 

A 3.5 is a good number for them but look at it like this. Their match was announced at the start of the show which was a 3.9. So yeah, they gained back some viewers after people were tuning out throughout the show but did all the people who were watching at the start tune in again to see their match? No. And not even putting it that way, the 10pm slot is supposed to experience a higher gain than that. But for recent times I'd say that they did better than what has become normal now. Some of Punk's other outings in this spot have lost viewers or gained very marginally. Obviously the concept of champ vs. champ had a lot of people interested but a gain of 200k for that particular segment isn't something to go posting boastful memes about.


----------



## Brave Nash

Punk gained viewers this week and last week, so he's improving his draw power and people still bitch about it.
Last week he gained viewers in both appearance in that night and that was indeed the highlight of the show.
And this week again the same thing happened his appearance is the highlight of the show nothing agains DB but Punk 
was mostly the one responsible but that match was good because of both for sure.


----------



## DesolationRow

Guess this is where the reality check has to be reissued. And I'd say this if we were back in 2004-2007 talking about Orton or in late 1999 talking about Triple H. The fact that we're comparing CM Punk and _Daniel Bryan_ to Randy Orton, much less guys like Cena and Triple H and Undertaker, is hilarious. What's next, can Sheamus draw six million viewers by cutting his "Wrestlemania decision" promo? Punk's superpush began seven months ago. (And it had a very choppy, messed up midsection.) Daniel Bryan was dragged back into relevancy, as _Smackdown's Mr. Money in the Bank_... a mere _two or three months ago_.

Conversely, taking a look at what Miz did as WWE Champion one year ago in a match against his World Heavyweight Champion rival, Edge, which took place _two months_ after Miz was finally formally sanctioned as a main-eventer through winning the WWE Championship and declaring him "terrible" is likewise hilarious. 

Why not take a look at what kind of impact Miz made in his average quarter hour once he was firmly established at the top of the card through his "Rock Impersonation" star-making overrun segment on March 14 of last year? The following week he drew practically a million viewers all by his lonesome due to being hyped as "Making Miztory." (Sure, Cena did show up in the end, but by that point the overrun only had another couple of minutes left to go. And the audience had been told repeatedly that Cena was not at Raw that week, having sustained injuries from Miz's beatdown the week before. That quarter hour is almost solely down to The Miz and what he and they were able to do with his star status the previous week.)

We could also discuss how big Triple H became following the shotgun wedding with Stephanie. Or how Orton was able to finally flirt with being an actual significant ratings draw through feuding with the McMahon Family and Triple H in early 2009.

Funny thing about stars or "draws." They usually take at least some time and effort to create.


----------



## MoveMent

It's a shame Triple H feared Punk was getting too successful and beat him at Generic PPV #8 last year, stoppin' all his momentum in the process.


----------



## Gerdon

MoveMent said:


> It's a shame Triple H feared Punk was getting too successful and beat him at Generic PPV #8 last year, stoppin' all his momentum in the process.


fpalm 

Triple h should have stayed away and let cena-del rio be the main event at the "genric ppv #8" instead.


As for ratings, i like to see how much orton would draw if he were put in the 10 pm slot compared to punk and how punk would have done in the orton-ziggler segment. That would be quite interesting.


----------



## Kabraxal

DesolationRow said:


> Guess this is where the reality check has to be reissued. And I'd say this if we were back in 2004-2007 talking about Orton or in late 1999 talking about Triple H. The fact that we're comparing CM Punk and _Daniel Bryan_ to Randy Orton, much less guys like Cena and Triple H and Undertaker, is hilarious. What's next, can Sheamus draw six million viewers by cutting his "Wrestlemania decision" promo? Punk's superpush began seven months ago. (And it had a very choppy, messed up midsection.) Daniel Bryan was dragged back into relevancy, as _Smackdown's Mr. Money in the Bank_... a mere _two or three months ago_.
> 
> Conversely, taking a look at what Miz did as WWE Champion one year ago in a match against his World Heavyweight Champion rival, Edge, which took place _two months_ after Miz was finally formally sanctioned as a main-eventer through winning the WWE Championship and declaring him "terrible" is likewise hilarious.
> 
> Why not take a look at what kind of impact Miz made in his average quarter hour once he was firmly established at the top of the card through his "Rock Impersonation" star-making overrun segment on March 14 of last year? The following week he drew practically a million viewers all by his lonesome due to being hyped as "Making Miztory." (Sure, Cena did show up in the end, but by that point the overrun only had another couple of minutes left to go. And the audience had been told repeatedly that Cena was not at Raw that week, having sustained injuries from Miz's beatdown the week before. That quarter hour is almost solely down to The Miz and what he and they were able to do with his star status the previous week.)
> 
> We could also discuss how big Triple H became following the shotgun wedding with Stephanie. Or how Orton was able to finally flirt with being an actual significant ratings draw through feuding with the McMahon Family and Triple H in early 2009.
> 
> Funny thing about stars or "draws." They usually take at least some time and effort to create.


This argument will be ignored sadly... it has been stated before and even had the Austin era used as a prime example where it took a year for him to become the megadraw that we all now remember. Seriously, people seem to forget that 96 was a terrible year and most of 97 they still struggled. This was all after Austin's infamous KOTR promo. 

I suspect that if Raw is continually booked more coherently like the past month, Smackdown continues as is, and the PPVs start making better booking sense, the WWE will start seeing better returns. It will jsut take time for people to trust the WWE not to revert to the past 5 years of form... past decisions do haunt a company.


----------



## Cliffy

Nah that doesn't wash.

Austin was never put straight into the title scene like Punk was.


----------



## Rock316AE

The Austin 96-97 is a terrible argument because he wasn't a main eventer until 98, and that's when business went through the roof, You think that every example is a history lesson or something when it was a completely different situation, completely different era and most importantly completely different wrestler, one is not even main event material and will never be a real star because he's not even believable, the other is the definition of the word badass and the total package in every aspect of wrestling. If you live in a bubble, you will try to compare a meaningless fake shoot promo with the iconic "Austin 3:16", I will go with Heyman in 2001 or Styles in 2006. After all he got, If he can't do it? he will never be able do it, not every wrestler has that in him.

Miz was a terrible drawing champion and with every breakdown Meltzer posted he always talked about how weak Miz was as champion, The Miztory segment drew a nice quarter, but the overall show rating was down significantly, so that wasn't even close to a "star-making performance".


----------



## Gerdon

The Miz did actually drew better than punk, even after he got buried by Cena. 

And i agree Austin/Punk is a terrible comparison. When austin won the WWE championship, the ratings went up. Punk is what 3 time former world champion already?


----------



## Cliffy

what did clay's quarter get ?


----------



## Rock316AE

> The Miz did actually drew better than punk, even after he got buried by Cena.


I know, I said it.


Cliffy Byro said:


> what did clay's quarter get ?


Clay lost 166k.


----------



## Cliffy

Rock316AE said:


> I know, I said it.
> 
> 
> Clay lost 166k.


has clay gained any viewers since he returned ?


----------



## Rock316AE

Cliffy Byro said:


> has clay gained any viewers since he returned ?


35k one time with Slater, I think he lost in every segment.


----------



## Brave Nash

Rock316AE said:


> I know, I said it.
> 
> 
> Clay lost 166k.


Lol Punk/Cena had more viewers (ratings) than Miz/Cena.
Punk gained more viewers than anyone this week and last week too, but you still 
Bitch about it. And you forgot that Orton lost viewers again and you didn't bitch 
About that why? Because you're a hypocrite.


----------



## A-C-P

Brave Nash said:


> Lol Punk/Cena had more viewers (ratings) than Miz/Cena.
> Punk gained more viewers than anyone this week and last week too, but you still
> Bitch about it. And you forgot that Orton lost viewers again and you didn't bitch
> About that why? Because you're a hypocrite.


Orton's match was segment that ALWAYS loses viewers so its ok (i guess) that he lost viewers and Meltzer said that a 220 viewer gain in the segment Punk/Bryan was in is a weak gain, so we must take that as gospel.

And Obviously if the Punk/Bryan match would've been in the segement Orton/Ziggler was in that segment would;ve lost 750,000 viewers and the Orton/Ziggler match at the top of hour #2 would've gained 1,000,000 viewers.

This argument is just a never ending circle, but always tend to have some great reading.


----------



## deatawaits

does anybody has the rating and breakdown for the night after Wmm 17? just curious


----------



## Rock316AE

deatawaits said:


> does anybody has the rating and breakdown for the night after Wmm 17? just curious


RAW drew 5.7, great at that time it was against NCAA college basketball finals which did a 15.6 rating. Hours: 5.5 and 5.8, I don't have the full breakdown but the peak was for Rock/Austin in a cage which drew 6.4, the highest rated segment ever on TNN at that time.


----------



## SteenIsGod

Why is it, that 2 of the WWE's top stars are guys that can't draw shit in a bucket? Seriously get Orton and Punk out of the main event. More so to Orton but Punk too. Orton winning the world title and SD's ratings instantly getting 20% lower, and Punk drawing a 2.9 4 weeks in a row. Put Henry and Barrett on Raw to be the two main heels, and Cena and Christian(Who Drew 2.1's with Del Rio in April) to be the two top faces. Send Punk and ADR to SD, since SD has more of a "Wrestling" feel.


----------



## Hemen

Gerdon said:


> fpalm
> 
> Triple h should have stayed away and let cena-del rio be the main event at the "genric ppv #8" instead.
> 
> 
> As for ratings, i like to see how much orton would draw if he were put in the 10 pm slot compared to punk and how punk would have done in the orton-ziggler segment. That would be quite interesting.


No, Del Rio is even more stale and boring than Punk.


----------



## Gerdon

Rock316AE said:


> RAW drew 5.7, great at that time it was against NCAA college basketball finals which did a 15.6 rating. Hours: 5.5 and 5.8, I don't have the full breakdown but the peak was for Rock/Austin in a cage which drew 6.4, the highest rated segment ever on TNN at that time.


Do you have the breakdown for Raw March 27, 2000?


----------



## Rock316AE

Gerdon said:


> Do you have the breakdown for Raw March 27, 2000?


Rating - 6.6

Q1 - Vince and Linda promo with Stephanie and HHH - 6.1
Q2 - End of the promo, Jericho/Chyna vs Benoit/Eddie - 6.9
Q3 - Vince and Shane backstage, Holly vs Holly - 6.4
Q4 - Road Dogg vs Rikishi, Rock promo backstage, Saturn/Malenko vs Hardy boys - 6.5
Q5 - Kurt Angle promo, Kurt Angle vs Kane - 6.6
Q6 - Snow vs Test, Bossman/Buchanan vs APA - 6.5
Q7 - X-Pac vs D-Von - 6.6
Q8 - Rock/Vince vs Shane/Show - 6.9 
OR - Rock/Vince vs Shane/Show - 7.5


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Rock316AE said:


> Rating - 6.6
> 
> Q1 - Vince and Linda promo with Stephanie and HHH - 6.1
> Q2 - End of the promo, Jericho/Chyna vs Benoit/Eddie - 6.9
> Q3 - Vince and Shane backstage, Holly vs Holly - 6.4
> Q4 - Road Dogg vs Rikishi, Rock promo backstage, Saturn/Malenko vs Hardy boys - 6.5
> Q5 - Kurt Angle promo, Kurt Angle vs Kane - 6.6
> Q6 - Snow vs Test, Bossman/Buchanan vs APA - 6.5
> Q7 - X-Pac vs D-Von - 6.6
> Q8 - Rock/Vince vs Shane/Show - 6.9
> OR - Rock/Vince vs Shane/Show - 7.5


Where do you get these numbers?


----------



## Rock316AE

#1Peep4ever said:


> Where do you get these numbers?


http://www.wrestlingforum.com/10648736-post16.html


----------



## Gerdon

Rock316AE said:


> Rating - 6.6
> 
> Q1 - Vince and Linda promo with Stephanie and HHH - 6.1
> Q2 - End of the promo, Jericho/Chyna vs Benoit/Eddie - 6.9
> Q3 - Vince and Shane backstage, Holly vs Holly - 6.4
> Q4 - Road Dogg vs Rikishi, Rock promo backstage, Saturn/Malenko vs Hardy boys - 6.5
> Q5 - Kurt Angle promo, Kurt Angle vs Kane - 6.6
> Q6 - Snow vs Test, Bossman/Buchanan vs APA - 6.5
> Q7 - X-Pac vs D-Von - 6.6
> Q8 - Rock/Vince vs Shane/Show - 6.9
> OR - Rock/Vince vs Shane/Show - 7.5


Thanks!


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Rock316AE said:


> Rating - 6.6
> 
> Q1 - Vince and Linda promo with Stephanie and HHH - 6.1
> Q2 - End of the promo, Jericho/Chyna vs Benoit/Eddie - 6.9
> Q3 - Vince and Shane backstage, Holly vs Holly - 6.4
> Q4 - Road Dogg vs Rikishi, Rock promo backstage, Saturn/Malenko vs Hardy boys - 6.5
> Q5 - Kurt Angle promo, Kurt Angle vs Kane - 6.6
> Q6 - Snow vs Test, Bossman/Buchanan vs APA - 6.5
> Q7 - X-Pac vs D-Von - 6.6
> Q8 - Rock/Vince vs Shane/Show - 6.9
> OR - Rock/Vince vs Shane/Show - 7.5


Was it the average at the time for the opening segment to do the lowest of the night? Pretty odd looking at this when the opening segment nowadays is either the highest, or the second highest rated segment of the night usually.


----------



## Rock316AE

Obis said:


> Was it the average at the time for the opening segment to do the lowest of the night? Pretty odd looking at this when the opening segment nowadays is either the highest, or the second highest rated segment of the night usually.


Yes, not only that but the second quarter was always a huge segment in terms of gain, I don't remember the exact date but somewhere in 2010 this segment became a ratings killer because of the boring and repetitive concept of the show. RAW at that time increased the audience for the entire show and for good reason, At this point Nitro had little to no effect on them.


----------



## Starbuck

Rock316AE said:


> Rating - 6.6
> 
> Q1 - Vince and Linda promo with Stephanie and HHH - 6.1
> Q2 - End of the promo, Jericho/Chyna vs Benoit/Eddie - 6.9
> Q3 - Vince and Shane backstage, Holly vs Holly - 6.4
> Q4 - Road Dogg vs Rikishi, Rock promo backstage, Saturn/Malenko vs Hardy boys - 6.5
> Q5 - Kurt Angle promo, Kurt Angle vs Kane - 6.6
> Q6 - Snow vs Test, Bossman/Buchanan vs APA - 6.5
> Q7 - X-Pac vs D-Von - 6.6
> Q8 - Rock/Vince vs Shane/Show - 6.9
> OR - Rock/Vince vs Shane/Show - 7.5


This is interesting to look at. The rating actually grows as the show goes on. If only lol. Now we get big Q1, huge drop, sometimes 10pm brings them back, then a gain at the end. What a difference.


----------



## greaz taker!

thing is, people should really stop worrying about the ratings, we have modern day technology now, to the point where people can record it and then watch it next day! That is what i do, and so many others. OR People just decide to watch it online via streams or youtube now. Buyrates and ratings for shows on wwe will never be high again, people have other ways of watching them other than just on tv live.


----------



## Starbuck

Nobody is worrying about the ratings. We're just discussing them.


----------



## Carcass

I can't wait for this weeks breakdown to come out since DB's in the second quarter, which means it'll be the first time in years that the second quarter doesn't lose viewers. I wouldn't be surprised if it does lose viewers with Big Show being int he match.


----------



## Rock316AE

lol, And it would not be "in years", since May maybe, in all seriousness, Show is a proven TV draw and you as a Bryan fan, needs to be happy that he carries him like that(what a brutal promo he just cut BTW)


----------



## Carcass

LOL, good one.

Even when WM gets over a million this year, I bet DB's haters are gonna give someone else credit for the buyrate instead of finally admitting he's become the second biggest star behind Cena.


----------



## wwffans123

Sad Miz,he is nothing now.


----------



## Mr Premium

I get the feeling that this week's Raw will only get 2.8 at best due to the lack of Cena screen time.


----------



## Brave Nash

Mr Premium said:


> I get the feeling that this week's Raw will only get 2.8 at best due to the lack of Cena screen time.


Cena sucks balls he's boring, Both in the ring and on the mic.


----------



## mb1025

Obis said:


> Was it the average at the time for the opening segment to do the lowest of the night? Pretty odd looking at this when the opening segment nowadays is either the highest, or the second highest rated segment of the night usually.


WCW was still on then starting at 8pm. The viewers they took from WCW most likely didn't start coming over until 10pm when Nitro ended. 

Also I am not sure if they were still doing their 3 hour Nitro in 2000.


----------



## Mr Premium

Brave Nash said:


> Cena sucks balls he's boring, Both in the ring and on the mic.


Agree with you there, but he still draws way more than Punk.


----------



## D.M.N.

4.800m and 4.438m: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ost-girl-wwe-raw-housewives-bh-more-2/119040/


----------



## Rock316AE

WTF? 4.4 million for the second hour?


----------



## #1Peep4ever

ok loosing almost half a million viewers is bad
very bad


----------



## Evolution

It's a shame they would of (I assume) had a lot of people tuning in off the back of a great Raw last week only to be treated to one of the worst shows in a long time in terms of just about everything. Can't wait for the numbers to be down next week and Punk to solely get the blame for it.

Edit: Think about the second hour though, they had recap, ads, recap, more ads, Cena's Wrestlemania package, ads, divas match, ads.

Ridiculous.


----------



## Rock316AE

So the HHH/Taker segment did the biggest quarter, probably started big but not even close to the 3.90 after the Rumble.


----------



## A-C-P

Can't really say I am surprised. There wasn't really anything in the first hour (outside the Jericho promo/Punk confrontation) that I could see would cause anybody to stay tuned in for the rest of the show.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Recaps and Orton plagued the second hour so..

And the biggest draw in WWE, DAT SUPERHERO D-BRY WIT DA GRESTEST OF EASE!!! was in the first hour so...


----------



## DesolationRow

It was frontloaded with Triple H/Undertaker, was a rather lousy show overall, packed with tons of filler and promos and video packages, featuring a main event built around the midcard, and no John Cena in the flesh. I'm honestly not surprised by the steep drop in the second hour.


----------



## Coffey

The second hour of RAW drops because of that Bad Girls Club, son!


----------



## Carcass

Shocker, Hour with Daniel Bryan = highest hour of the show.


----------



## Rock316AE

Last year did 3.3 with 4.93 million viewers, 3.3(4.89) and 3.3(4.97).


----------



## kokepepsi

Taker returns and ratings go down
Causation or Correlation?
:austin


----------



## Starbuck

Holy second hour drop!! But really, is anybody that surprised? They started out with their biggest angle and then proceeded to play a million and one video packages until the main event lol. It's a pretty steep drop from last week too which isn't a good sign. Meh. They've only themselves to blame in the end.


----------



## TheBandisBack

Was a sick Taker promo though.


----------



## Rock316AE

Rating was 3.25, 3.34 and 3.17, they lost 362k from hour one. I agree that to give away the biggest angle with the two biggest stars on the first quarter was a huge mistake, you already lost viewers who were there just for Taker. the main event had no star power and the show was terrible with all the videos and filler matches, I hope that the Jericho promo in the 10pm slot did a good number because that was the only good thing about this RAW.


----------



## Starbuck

Rock316AE said:


> Rating was 3.25, 3.34 and 3.17, they lost 362k from hour one. I agree that to give away the biggest angle with the two biggest stars on the first quarter was a huge mistake, you already lost viewers who were there just for Taker. the main event had no star power and the show was terrible with all the videos and filler matches, I hope that the Jericho promo in the 10pm slot did a good number because that was the only good thing about this RAW.


I think Jericho should fare pretty well in the 10pm slot. Punk came out too which should help. If that segment doesn't do well I'd start to worry. But yeah, putting HHH/Taker on first, no Cena and then playing all those video packages was a bad call.


----------



## ThePhenomRises

kokepepsi said:


> Taker returns and ratings go down
> Causation or Correlation?
> :austin


He wasn't even on the show.  And any chance of him appearing was extinguished after the opening segment...


----------



## WWE

no Cena in the second hour = Annihilation


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

I'm surprised that only 1/2 a million people stopped watching.


----------



## Marv95

Cycloneon said:


> no Cena in the second hour = Annihilation


Second hour has been tanking for months now Cena or not.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Shitty second hour number, but what do they expect? People don't want to watch video packages non-stop. Hope it's a wake up call.


----------



## TheBandisBack

CM Punks is the worst draw since Sid Vicious.

Dayum.


----------



## Fabregas

They are lucky its the Road to WrestleMania otherwise ratings would have been a lot worse.


----------



## robertdeniro

What was the highest segment ?


----------



## The Ultimate Warrior

I'm not sure what the ratings were exactly but I'm sure they were very poor. Wasn't popular going by the Raw 1/6 RAW thread, which was far more entertaining than the show.


----------



## HHH is the GOAT

Are we right to assume that the HHH and Taker segment was the highest rated?


----------



## Power ranger

RAW was filled with video packages and promos and then their replays. No surprise here.


----------



## Starbuck

HHH is the GOAT said:


> Are we right to assume that the HHH and Taker segment was the highest rated?


If it wasn't it would have to be considered a pretty big disappointment. We'll find out soon enough although I do think that it was.


----------



## kokepepsi

Segment Breakdown
Source Wrestling Observer Newsletter


> Raw on 2/6 did a 3.25 rating and 4.61 million viewers, falling from the post-Rumble high the week before. When it comes to viewers on Raw, they are 13% down from what the show was doing at this time last year. It finished third for the night on cable.
> 
> The show did a 2.9 in Male teens (up 21% from the post-Rumble show), 3.0 in Males 18-49 (down 9%), 0.9 in female teens (down 36%), and 1.2 in Women 18-49 (down 20%). It was 69.4% males, higher than usual, so the drop in rating looks to be a combination of males being strong because of no sports competition, and women being way down, possibly due to "The Voice" and "Smash."
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, the opening segment with HHH doing a promo did a strong 3.62 open.
> 
> Daniel Bryan vs. Big Show lost 508,000 viewers.
> 
> Bryan's interview and the taped segment with John Cena and NASCAR driver Carl Edwards gained 43,000 viewers.
> 
> David Otunga vs. Sheamus lost 197,000 viewers.
> 
> The Chris Jericho interview and C.M. Punk coming out segment gained 94,000 viewers, which is another bad showing for the 10 p.m. segment.
> 
> Randy Orton & Great Khali vs. Cody Rhodes & Wade Barrett lost 22,000 viewers.
> 
> So what happened is that usually people tune in at 10 p.m. and leave at 10:15 p.m., and here either they tuned in and left immediately, or never tuned in, because you had virtually nobody leaving instead of the usual hundreds of thousands up and hundreds of thousands down.
> 
> The Divas eight-person match lost 139,000 viewers.
> 
> And the six-way with Jericho vs. Punk vs. R-Truth vs. Miz vs. Dolph Ziggler vs. Kofi Kingston gained 443,000 viewers, low for an overrun and finished at 3.42.
> 
> As far as the demo movement for the main event, Males 12-17 went from 2.3 to 3.0, Males 18-49 from 3.0 to 3.4, Females 12-17 from 1.1 to 1.0 and Women 18-49 from 1.0 to 1.2.


lol jericho


----------



## Carcass

Looks like I was right about Show bringing down the viewership in his match against DB. Feel sorry for DB.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Jesus Jericho just sucks at drawing people in doesn't he. Bryan and Punk did a shit ton better last week. Yeah, and he's supposed to elevate Punk, a guy who's already so much more of a draw than Jericho.

But you also gotta take into consideration that the segment ended at like 10:05, then moved on to a commercial and a shitty tag match nobody wants to see. It's probably a guarantee the number would be a lot better if Jericho/Punk went the full quarter or at least majority of it.


----------



## Starbuck

Holy crap at that 10pm slot. I mean, what the actual fuck? 94,000 viewers for Jericho/Punk? I seriously was expecting it to do a lot better than that. That's freaking horrible and a terrible sign going forward. It wasn't even a match! Ouch, ouch, ouch.


----------



## robertdeniro

The only Draws in WWE right now are Cena,Rock,Taker and HHH.


----------



## THANOS

kokepepsi said:


> Segment Breakdown
> Source Wrestling Observer Newsletter
> 
> Quote:
> Raw on 2/6 did a 3.25 rating and 4.61 million viewers, falling from the post-Rumble high the week before. When it comes to viewers on Raw, they are 13% down from what the show was doing at this time last year. It finished third for the night on cable.
> 
> The show did a 2.9 in Male teens (up 21% from the post-Rumble show), 3.0 in Males 18-49 (down 9%), 0.9 in female teens (down 36%), and 1.2 in Women 18-49 (down 20%). It was 69.4% males, higher than usual, so the drop in rating looks to be a combination of males being strong because of no sports competition, and women being way down, possibly due to "The Voice" and "Smash."
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, the opening segment with HHH doing a promo did a strong 3.62 open.
> 
> *Daniel Bryan vs. Big Show lost 508,000 viewers.
> 
> Bryan's interview and the taped segment with John Cena and NASCAR driver Carl Edwards gained 43,000 viewers.*
> 
> David Otunga vs. Sheamus lost 197,000 viewers.
> 
> *The Chris Jericho interview and C.M. Punk coming out segment gained 94,000 viewers, which is another bad showing for the 10 p.m. segment.*
> 
> Randy Orton & Great Khali vs. Cody Rhodes & Wade Barrett lost 22,000 viewers.
> 
> So what happened is that usually people tune in at 10 p.m. and leave at 10:15 p.m., and here either they tuned in and left immediately, or never tuned in, because you had virtually nobody leaving instead of the usual hundreds of thousands up and hundreds of thousands down.
> 
> The Divas eight-person match lost 139,000 viewers.
> 
> And the six-way with Jericho vs. Punk vs. R-Truth vs. Miz vs. Dolph Ziggler vs. Kofi Kingston gained 443,000 viewers, low for an overrun and finished at 3.42.
> 
> As far as the demo movement for the main event, Males 12-17 went from 2.3 to 3.0, Males 18-49 from 3.0 to 3.4, Females 12-17 from 1.1 to 1.0 and Women 18-49 from 1.0 to 1.2.


Yep Big "ratings no" Show limiting Bryan's wrestling ability took him down with him unfortunately, but at least Bryan's promo after brought them back in despite John Cena and "No charisma" nascar guy sending them back away again. 

Poor Jericho can't get anyone to care for him, which really makes me pissed that Punk is working a wrestlemania program with him and not Hunter fpalm.


----------



## kokepepsi

Don't think it's fair to shit on Bryan vs Show since the 2nd quarter seems to always lose viewers who just tuned in for the opener.

Orton has lost 700k in that segment fwiw
:cena2


----------



## DesolationRow

I think I predicted this for Jericho/Punk. 

"I love Chris Jericho to death, I love CM Punk, but if WWE is truly looking to book a Road to Wrestlemania feud between those two for the WWE Championship, I foresee weak quarter hours for a feud that will be viewed as a distant, distant almost quasi-midcard match for Wrestlemania beneath The Rock and John Cena. The only way to cement Punk at this point due in large part to WWE's botching of the Summer of Punk as we entered autumn was to have the feud everyone wanted, with a newly heel-turned Triple H. That would stand up as a worthy WWE Championship match and would draw strong ratings and would manage to not be utterly overshadowed by Rock/Cena the way I guarantee Jericho/Punk will be. Oh well. Again, I love Punk, I love Jericho (and I love Triple H!) but Jericho is _not_ suited to put Punk over the top as a firmly entrenched megastar who can actually draw on his own. Triple H _is_."

It has to be repeated. And made more clear.

Forget about elevating Punk. Forget about it. I'd sincerely just like to see a WWE Championship program that doesn't get blown away by Rock/Cena and Triple H/Undertaker in importance. Remember how Cena/Batista was a match that, even in the face of the Streak vs. Career match, could easily have headlined that year's Wrestlemania? (In fact, Cena and Batista did much better at drawing in their segments, as Michaels has never drawn especially well, necessarily and Taker can be hit and miss depending who he's working with.) 

So far the angle is better-written than Triple H/Jericho from ten years ago, but then, it'd be hard to match that in awfulness. But that doesn't mean it's going to draw that much better, or be anything but a glorified midcard match at Wrestlemania. It's sad. All of that build for Punk, and it's probably all going to add up to just about nothing in the end (at least as far as this Wrestlemania-to-Wrestlemania 2011-to-2012 year goes).

There's one band-aid they can use and they must. For the rest of the Road to Wrestlemania, or at least beginning after the Elimination Chamber pay-per-view, Jericho/Punk should open every Raw; Triple H/Undertaker should take the 10:00pm slot; Rock/Cena the final segment and overrun.


----------



## Locomotivelung

Wouldn't RAW do better with an earlier timeslot? Since they're shafting us with the PG bullshit, it doesn't need to be after 9 because it's aimed at children.


----------



## Rock316AE

Can't say I'm surprised with this terrible Jericho/Punk segment number because Jericho destroyed his star power for no reason for weeks with a stupid character and Punk never had a star power. Jericho needs a few weeks on main timeslots to get back the audience he lost after he acted like a clown just to make a simple point in a promo. Below average overrun gain because again, same case with Jericho and no star power in this segment. you can't open with fucking Taker after a year he wasn't on TV and HHH promo, then put a bunch of random wrestlers in the main event with no drawing power besides one guy who had it but ruined it for no fucking reason, I wonder who came up with this idea.

Show is going to be in the second biggest match on the WM28 card, you need to put him against main eventers in the main time slots so the audience will see him as a bigger deal than a big guy who wrestles mid carders in matches that nobody cares about. Show should be Orton's tag partner on RAW.

Boring and predictable breakdown overall.


----------



## Carcass

kokepepsi said:


> Don't think it's fair to shit on Bryan vs Show since the 2nd quarter seems to always lose viewers who just tuned in for the opener.
> 
> Orton has lost 700k in that segment fwiw
> :cena2


I think he's even lost a million before. More factual proof that DB's a bigger star then Mr. 1.4 will ever be.


----------



## King_Kool-Aid™

No one is tuning in to see Jericho anymore. Its 2012 not 2002. WWE should already have a new Jericho anyways. They are beyond slow with making a new batch of stars that they only have themselves to blame for the shitty ratings not Jericho. They fucked up Punk too so now they have to accept if he's not drawing as much as he would have had they kept pushing him as good as they were before Summerslam 2011.


----------



## Starbuck

:lmao at the Bryan marks in this thread. Just :lmao.


----------



## Rock316AE

According to the Observer Newsletter, if everything is going as planned, Shaq is going to be on RAW from Boston March 5, Rock is also going to be there so that show should do a great number, I imagine HHH or Taker/HHH in the opening segment, Shaq/Show in the 10pm slot and Rock or Rock/Cena in the main event, should be a great RAW, not just for ratings.


----------



## Starbuck

With HHH/Taker already set, Rock/Cena on the horizon and Shaq on the way too, Raw just might start hitting DEM ATTITUDE ERA NUMBAZ DURRRR.


----------



## Rock316AE

I think a 4.0 today is huge for RAW, this is the goal for WWE, they also need a segment with 7.3 million viewers just like last year, if they get this on the RTW? good sign for the buyrate.


----------



## Starbuck

With all that they seem to have planned, if they don't hit a couple of 4.0's I'd be worried lol.


----------



## Rock316AE

I'm trying to find the 5.0 segments they did since the Batista contract signing in February 2005, I know Edge/Lita did 5.2 and it was the first 5.0 since then, not including the Trump show with no commercials. Interesting because Rock in Chicago last year did 4.8, would be interesting to see if they did a 5.0 since Edge and Lita and if they can do it again this year(I don't think so...)


----------



## Starbuck

Well their obvious problem is the fact that they can't maintain a high level of viewership once the big names are off TV. I guess having interesting lower card program is the key. If people only tune in for those big 3 programs, yeah, overall viewership will be higher but not as high as it could be if they were able to sustain some of those people during the dips between the big segments.


----------



## ecabney

kokepepsi said:


> Don't think it's fair to shit on Bryan vs Show since the 2nd quarter seems to always lose viewers who just tuned in for the opener.
> 
> *Orton has lost 700k in that segment fwiw*
> :cena2


still winning


----------



## JasonLives

Wow, that 10PM slot did awful and that was all Jericho. There must just be something about him that puts viewers off. Since its a timeslot that no matter what you put on, should gain a little bit. Just not that little.

I honestly believe Khali would have drawn better in that timeslot.


----------



## Ziggler Mark

JasonLives said:


> Wow, that 10PM slot did awful and that was all Jericho. There must just be something about him that puts viewers off. Since its a timeslot that no matter what you put on, should gain a little bit. Just not that little.
> 
> I honestly believe Khali would have drawn better in that timeslot.


the 10PM slot probably did so fucking bad because after the first hour, viewers wanted to kill themselves...instead, they changed the channel.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

People for some reason just do not want to watch Chris Jericho.


----------



## ThePhenomRises

Well, I blame Jericho's introduction for that... He/whoever thought it up had no reason to do... nothing, for more than *1* Raw max. Not that Y2J was ever a huge draw, but he is good enough to be *made* to draw when booked and written correctly.


----------



## Rock316AE

Yeah, but at least they want to watch him more than Punk as he at least hasn't lost viewers in the top of the hour.:vince3


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Yeah, it's Punk. 

One week, gain 800k, the next 700k, then 3.5 with 200k gain and then... 90k. With a guy who's lost a shitload of viewers week after week.

I wonder what happened differently. Ah, I know. Laurinaitis, Otunga and Bryan are clearly just bigger draws than Jericho. 
I know I meant that as a sarcastic comment, but that might actually be right..


----------



## Rock316AE

No, Punk lost viewers in the 10pm slot, you said that people don't want to watch Jericho when he gains only 90k on that time slot, Punk lost there twice so at least people want to watch Jericho more. Simple logic according to you.

800k was the return match of Jericho and Foley. Ace might be a bigger TV draw than Punk(not saying much, I'm sure Ace can draw bigger than a 97 record), who knows why they put him in the main slots.


----------



## LarryCoon

- Fact: Daniel Bryan can't draw nothing (which is too bad as he's been one of my favorite wrestlers right now)

- Y2J hasn't given anyone a reason to watch him since his return. Not surprised about the low ratings

- Lack of Cena live was detrimental, but not as much as WWE or Vince would think. This program with Kane has damaged Cena. I'm pretty sure even his own loyal fanbase is bleeding right now

- Divas division losing viewers as usual. In fact, Kelly Kelly vs Bellas were much better times for everyone except wrestling junkies. Waiting for Kharma.

- Punk needs a segment to draw real soon. Else, I'm not sure how long his title reign will last after WM28


----------



## Power ranger

Jericho was never a draw on his own, so i dont get why people suddenly expect him to draw in the first place. 

But as someone said, atleast he didnt lose viewers at 10 pm slot unlike punk or orton.


----------



## kokepepsi

just found this 
From 2008


> 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


:jeff:Vincecena


----------



## Power ranger

kokepepsi said:


> just found this
> From 2008
> 
> :jeff:Vincecena


lol yes, i remember the IWC backlash over this segment. Internet fans were so ecstatic after this particular rating. Everyone wanted HHH/Cena to be de-pushed because of this lololololol


----------



## Rock316AE

kokepepsi, maybe you can help here, you know how many 5.0 segments WWE did (if at all) since the Batista contract signing in February 2005 and Edge/Lita 5.2 in January 2006? not including the Trump show with no commercials.


----------



## kokepepsi

Don't have any from 05-07 sorry


----------



## kokepepsi

Punk > HHH

6/16/08


> The absolute shocker was the HHH vs. Jericho main event *lost *205,000 viewers to a 3.13 overrun. The main event almost never goes down, let alone a match that hasn’t been done in years like that and I can’t give an explanation as to why.


8/18/08


> Jericho vs. Punk *gained *191,000 viewers to a 3.26 main event rating.


unk2


----------



## Carcass

kokepepsi said:


> Punk > HHH
> 
> 6/16/08
> 
> 
> 8/18/08
> 
> unk2


And he wasn't even breaking kayfabe in 08!



kokepepsi said:


> just found this
> From 2008
> 
> :jeff:Vincecena


Holy shit that's bad. I think that segment getting 2.99 is alot worst then that six man challenge getting 2.97.


----------



## Power ranger

Proabably because casual fans never recovered from the WM 18 main event lol.

I guess HHH/jericho, similar to Cena/Kane, is a program that simply can never work.


----------



## Rock316AE

Jericho/HHH is not a bad combination, their match on April 2000 started at 5.9 and ended with a 6.7(with the Hebner angle). That was when both guys were in their prime in every aspect, quality and popularity/drawing power.


----------



## Power ranger

Rock316AE said:


> kokepepsi, maybe you can help here, you know how many 5.0 segments WWE did (if at all) since the Batista contract signing in February 2005 and Edge/Lita 5.2 in January 2006? not including the Trump show with no commercials.





kokepepsi said:


> Don't have any from 05-07 sorry



Do you guys have the breakdown for Raw 13/06/11? Big fan of austin, just wondering how much he drew as the GM of raw.


----------



## rockymark94

Rock316AE said:


> I think a 4.0 today is huge for RAW, this is the goal for WWE, they also need a segment with 7.3 million viewers just like last year, if they get this on the RTW? good sign for the buyrate.


 Woah which segment had 7.3 million the rock return?


----------



## kokepepsi

Power ranger said:


> Do you guys have the breakdown for Raw 13/06/11? Big fan of austin, just wondering how much he drew as the GM of raw.


Here


> Raw on 6/13 did a 3.06 rating and 4.51 million viewers for the three-hour WWE All-Stars show hosted by Steve Austin. The show did a 3.26 and 4.84 million viewers in the usual two hours. Given the hype of the show with the tag, and Austin being all over the show, the number has to be a disappointment. It also didn’t have major competition, The Stanley Cup finals on NBC did a 3.18 rating and 5.48 million viewers, but with Vancouver vs. Boston being so much less marketable than last year’s Chicago vs. Philadelphia series, the Stanley Cup is way down this year (the same game six against Raw last year did 8.28 million viewers). It was the fourth highest rated show on cable for the night. It was the usual level 68% male audience.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, the show opened at a 2.72 with the interplay with The Miz and Steve Austin. The interplay with Austin and Alberto Del Rio, plus Kane vs. Del Rio lost 210,000 viewers which is very unusual for early in a three-hour Raw, as you usually get people turning in throughout hour one as they remember about it. Sin Cara & Daniel Bryan & Ezekiel Jackson vs. Wade Barrett & Ted DiBiase & Cody Rhodes only gained 65,000 viewers. The Sheamus vs. Santino Marella lost 10,000 viewers to a 2.62. That almost defies logic.
> 
> But they went from a 2.62 to 3.29 immediately at 9 p.m., which showed the number of people who, even with the push last week, forgot it was a three-hour show, which is 924,000 viewers for the interview back-and-forth with Randy Orton and Christian.
> 
> Rey Mysterio vs. Christian lost 154,000 viewers. That’s not good considering who was involved, which also included Punk and Nexus. R-Truth/John Morrison with the Morrison injury lost 131,000 viewers. Jack Swagger & Dolph Ziggler vs. Kofi Kingston & Evan Bourne gained 169,000 viewers. The Piper’s Pit with Miz and Alex Riley, plus Piper vs. Miz with Riley as ref, gained 342,000 viewers, which is below average for that segment. I’d have expected it to do a lot better due to Piper. The Price is Right footage and the seven vs. seven women’s match lost 306,000 viewers. Steve Austin in-ring promo where he destroyed the General Manager’s computer and another Obama press conference promo for Capitol Punishment gained 72,000 viewers. The John Cena vs. C.M. Punk main event gained 501,000 viewers, which is below average, finishing at a 3.62 overrun.


----------



## Rock316AE

rockymark94 said:


> Woah which segment had 7.3 million the rock return?


Rock in Chicago before WM.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Starbuck said:


> :lmao at the Bryan marks in this thread. Just :lmao.


i think they are doing it just for fun

especially carcass


----------



## wb1899

JasonLives said:


> Wow, that 10PM slot did awful and that was all Jericho. There must just be something about him that puts viewers off. Since its a timeslot that no matter what you put on, should gain a little bit. Just not that little.
> 
> I honestly believe Khali would have drawn better in that timeslot.


Smash on NBC had 14.124 million viewers (6.303 million adults 18-49) in the 10:00-10:15PM timeslot.


----------



## JasonLives

wb1899 said:


> Smash on NBC had 14.124 million viewers (6.303 million adults 18-49) in the 10:00-10:15PM timeslot.


Yeah but no matter what the competition you usually hang on to a good couple of channelsurfers. 

Kinda funny that CM Punk Vs. Daniel Bryan drew more then Jericho speaking for the first time since his return.


----------



## Loudness

Good rating overall. WWE should stop booking Big Show vs Daniel Bryan, D Bryan is the biggest draw in the WWE, but beeing the biggest draw doesn't equal beeing the biggest, tallest guy, nobody draws when you face someone so large that you can't even see the real star on the screen. I guarantee if you put Rock and Austin in a segment with the Big Show towering all over them the ratings would have tanked just as much. Once D Bryan took some distance so we could see him and cut his epic ***** promo, the ratings went back up. I mean imagine watching porn with some hot chick and all you see is some creepy guys flabby fatass , balls and anus from behind doing her hiding everything of her, would you still watch it? Point proven.

As for Jericho...ugh, I guess fans really consider him a midcarder despite his career achievements, no other way to explain the ratings tanking/not going up as expected everytime he's on. This is why I always disagreed with him beeing willing to put over anybody. If this guys isn't beeing made credible and gains some wins against other bigger stars, the feud against Punk will tank from a casual, and imo also smark perspective. No credibillity = no fucks given. Have him get a win over some huge star such as Cena or Triple H in a random RAW ME, sounds like a desperate, drastic meassure but I really can't think of any other way how to make him relevant, cutting great promos alone simply isn't cutting it, especially with his dumb trolling storyline beforehand that actually got the opposite of the desired effect with no conclusion whatsoever.

Also, by current standards, a 3.42 overrun is far from bad, isn't it one of the highest in the last two months?


----------



## Power ranger

Jericho is more of a main eventer than Daniel Bryan will ever be.


----------



## A-C-P

Even with the segment breakdown now, none of the #s are that surprising, after that first hour I can totally see why only 90K of those people tuned back in. Like Loudness said though for what was out on the air monday night it wasn;t that terrible a rating. Although I will still argue that that 10 PM slot is not the automatic "huge" increase in viewers slot that it used to be. And from the discussions of breakdowns from years past that went on in this thread over last week clearly showed the "norms" for certain slots do change and evolve.

Anyways plus the way the commercial breaks fell during some of the quarters were off than the normal commercial break times to me as well so that could've effected some segments as well.


----------



## Mr Premium

Loudness said:


> Good rating overall. WWE should stop booking Big Show vs Daniel Bryan, D Bryan is the biggest draw in the WWE, but beeing the biggest draw doesn't equal beeing the biggest, tallest guy, nobody draws when you face someone so large that you can't even see the real star on the screen. *I guarantee if you put Rock and Austin in a segment with the Big Show towering all over them the ratings would have tanked just as much*. Once D Bryan took some distance so we could see him and cut his epic ***** promo, the ratings went back up. I mean imagine watching porn with some hot chick and all you see is some creepy guys flabby fatass , balls and anus from behind doing her hiding everything of her, would you still watch it? Point proven.
> 
> As for Jericho...ugh, I guess fans really consider him a midcarder despite his career achievements, no other way to explain the ratings tanking/not going up as expected everytime he's on. This is why I always disagreed with him beeing willing to put over anybody. *If this guys isn't beeing made credible and gains some wins against other bigger stars, the feud against Punk will tank from a casual, and imo also smark perspective*. No credibillity = no fucks given. Have him get a win over some huge star such as Cena or Triple H in a random RAW ME, sounds like a desperate, drastic meassure but I really can't think of any other way how to make him relevant, cutting great promos alone simply isn't cutting it, especially with his dumb trolling storyline beforehand that actually got the opposite of the desired effect with no conclusion whatsoever.
> 
> Also, by current standards, a 3.42 overrun is far from bad, isn't it one of the highest in the last two months?


Rock's segments with Big Show were in the 6's and 7's.

And it's not like there's a CM Punk feud that didn't tank from a casual's perspective either.


----------



## Loudness

Mr Premium said:


> Rock's segments with Big Show were in the 6's and 7's.
> 
> And it's not like there's a CM Punk feud that didn't tank from a casual's perspective either.


1.)You could still see The Rock though, good camera angles etc plus Daniel Bryan is a smaller guy. And Big Show was slimmer, his flab didn't hide other superstars from appearing visibly on TV back then. YHBT

2.) Jeff Hardy, John Cena were hits, he was as over as anybody during those two feuds. He also started getting better and better numbers in the last months, so the casual fanbase is slowly starting to buy him as one of THE guys.


----------



## Cliffy

I bet Vince would kill to have a clean Jeff Hardy back.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Rock316AE said:


> No, Punk lost viewers in the 10pm slot, you said that people don't want to watch Jericho when he gains only 90k on that time slot, Punk lost there twice so at least people want to watch Jericho more. Simple logic according to you.
> 
> 800k was the return match of Jericho and Foley. Ace might be a bigger TV draw than Punk(not saying much, I'm sure Ace can draw bigger than a 97 record), who knows why they put him in the main slots.


Wow, Punk lost them a whole TWO times? They must fire his ass. Just like they should have when Triple H lost viewers in the main event. Same with Jeff Hardy. Same with John Cena when he got the second lowest overrun rating since 97. See my point? Punk's had MUCH more good ratings than he's had bad ones. Without a doubt. Punk's actually been drawing great numbers for a while now. Whereas Chris Jericho has been _consistently_ losing viewers. I mean for fucks sake this guy is making matters worse and God knows how, but he's doing it.


----------



## Fanboi101

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Wow, Punk lost them a whole TWO times? They must fire his ass. Just like they should have when Triple H lost viewers in the main event. Same with Jeff Hardy. Same with John Cena when he got the second lowest overrun rating since 97. See my point? Punk's had MUCH more good ratings than he's had bad ones. Without a doubt. Punk's actually been drawing great numbers for a while now. Whereas Chris Jericho has been _consistently_ losing viewers. I mean for fucks sake this guy is making matters worse and God knows how, but he's doing it.


I think everybody knew that Punk was going to interrupt Jericho at some point during his promo. Maybe that has something to do with the poor viewership.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Fanboi101 said:


> I think everybody knew that Punk was going to interrupt Jericho at some point during his promo. Maybe that has something to do with the poor viewership.


No. Did you completely miss my point? Yeah, the guy at fault is the one who has been getting a lot of good numbers recently. Not the guy who's been losing a shitton of viewers every week and been doing god awful since his comeback. 

Love Jericho just as much as anybody but I think we all have to admit the guy is one of the worst top guy draws in recent history. I hope WWE realize they fucked up having Punk/Jericho instead of Punk/Trips. (Still not over that )


----------



## A-C-P

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> No. Did you completely miss my point? Yeah, the guy at fault is the one who has been getting a lot of good numbers recently. Not the guy who's been losing a shitton of viewers every week and been doing god awful since his comeback.
> 
> Love Jericho just as much as anybody but I think we all have to admit the guy is one of the worst top guy draws in recent history. I hope WWE realize they fucked up having Punk/Jericho instead of Punk/Trips. (Still not over that )


In all honesty (i know its a very long shot) but they still could have Trips/Punk and Jericho/Taker. HHH could continue to turn down the Undertaker for a match. Jericho could lsoe at EC to Punk and decide since everyone is a "Wannabee" and copies him, Jericho will do the one thing at WM NOBODY has been able to, beat The Undertaker at WM. That story kinda writes itself actually now that I think about it. 

And HHH/Punk story would be easy enough to write in to I would think. Now please befoer all the flame comes I am very aware that this is most likely not happening and we are getting Punk/Jericho and HHH/Taker at WM just throwing out a thoguht I have that changing the planned storylines wouldn;t be that difficult.

Sorry to go off topic, please continue ratings discussion.


----------



## Rock316AE

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Wow, Punk lost them a whole TWO times? They must fire his ass. Just like they should have when Triple H lost viewers in the main event. Same with Jeff Hardy. Same with John Cena when he got the second lowest overrun rating since 97. See my point? Punk's had MUCH more good ratings than he's had bad ones. Without a doubt. Punk's actually been drawing great numbers for a while now. Whereas Chris Jericho has been _consistently_ losing viewers. I mean for fucks sake this guy is making matters worse and God knows how, but he's doing it.


Lol. no he's not, he's drawing below average numbers 90% of the time, like Meltzer said, he doesn't move numbers. Punk has been drawing the same numbers, it's just that his standards are so low that when he gets just a terrible number for the time slot and not a disaster, it's already improvement. Jericho lost when he's random slots, Punk lost there much more than him.


----------



## Da Silva

Rock316AE said:


> Lol. no he's not, he's drawing below average numbers 90% of the time, like Meltzer said, he doesn't move numbers. Punk has been drawing the same numbers, it's just that his standards are so low that when he gets just a terrible number for the time slot and not a disaster, it's already improvement. Jericho lost when he's random slots, Punk lost there much more than him.


Just out of curiosity, why do you care so much? Do you really despise Punk so much that it actually causes you pain? Does the fact that his merchandise is on fire mean absolutely nothing to you? Also,can you name one person whose full time on the roster who could take punks place and draw more? Because quite frankly, your shtick is old now, get the fuck over this obsession of yours. Punk is over and is a legitimate draw in his right. Punk is huge now, he's a main eventer for goodness sake, so what if he lost viewers a couple of times, who gives a shit, he's still making millions of dollars for Vince. Also, yes, we know, the Rock is a bigger star and a bigger draw thank Punk is, just because Punk has made a couple of comments there's no need for you to get hurt, I'm sure Rocky himself couldn't care less and there's certainly no reason for you to do so.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Rock316AE said:


> Lol. no he's not, he's drawing below average numbers 90% of the time, like Meltzer said, he doesn't move numbers. Punk has been drawing the same numbers, it's just that his standards are so low that when he gets just a terrible number for the time slot and not a disaster, it's already improvement. Jericho lost when he's random slots, Punk lost there much more than him.


lolMeltzer, I really could care less about what he thinks, since it's obvious WWE has more than enough fate in Punk. Below average? That's odd because the only people I've seen do any better are Cena and Triple H. Your favorites, Orton and Jericho, aren't doing any better whatsoever. That's why Punk's the new #2. Whether you like it or not, and clearly you do not, Punk is one of the very few top draws in the company. It's a tough pill for you to swallow because it kills you that an Attitude Era Gawd isn't a big draw. Jericho's amazing and I love him but if we're going by the numbers as everyone here always loves to do, then it's obvious Jericho is one shitty draw. He's always been one.


----------



## Rock316AE

It doesn't matter if you don't care, and it's not his opinion, facts, and he's the guy who gives you the breakdown every week. Not hard for me at all because it's not true, if he could draw shit and was in a bigger position? it is what it is and good for him, but he's not(You will see it when he's going to SD after WM). You are clearly the most delusional Punk fanboy here, Jericho is in his last run now, In his prime he drew and sold 20 times what Punk is doing now, and I'm saying it like it's accomplishment to Jericho but it's not impressive for him at all. Jericho was never a big draw, no doubt, but he was bigger than Punk, by far, again not saying much.


----------



## WWE

just finished reading the last couple of pages. just lol.


----------



## wb1899

The problem with the Meltzer breakdowns for me is, that the first number is always a HH-Rating and then he begins to tell us how many viewers the next segment lost. That makes no sense, because a HH-Rating stand for households and has nothing to do with the viewership.
What’s the problem to post the viewership for each quarter?


----------



## D.M.N.

Well I wasn't going to because Monday's RAW was 'miss-able' and boring to be quite honest, but if you insist:

Q1 - 3.62 rating / 5.21 million
Q2 - 3.27 rating / 4.70 million
Q3 - 3.30 rating / 4.75 million
Q4 - 3.16 rating / 4.55 million
Q5 - 3.32 rating / 4.64 million
Q6 - 3.30 rating / 4.62 million
Q7 - 3.20 rating / 4.48 million
Q8 - 3.42 rating / 4.92 million

The Q2 hour breakdown doesn't match up to what was reported for some reason, but ah well.

As for, from a ratings perspective 'how to book' RAW's after WrestleMania, it surely would be along the lines of:

Q1 - CM Punk and Chris Jericho
Q2 - MITB build
Q3 - SD! title build
Q4 - Kharma destroying someone
Q5 - Shaq and Show
Q6 - Undertaker and HHH
Q7 - MITB build
Q8 - Rock and Cena

Regardless of what this forum likes/dislikes, Cena will be in Q8 through the 'Chamber to 'Mania. If you're to look at the four key angles:

- Punk/Jericho
- Rock/Cena
- HHH/Taker
- Show/Shaq

*It makes sense from a viewership standpoint that Show/Shaq gets the nod for starting hour 2, that is likely to bring in non-WWE casuals compared to HHH/Taker, if Rock316AE has the breakdown for the RAW after No Way Out 2008, I believe the above is proven.* I think Punk/Jericho has to be in the starting quarter so it has a lot of viewers before a drop and a climb upwards. (alternatively, you put HHH/Taker in Q3 instead of Q6 so the big segments are spread out)

I wonder if WWE may tease Rock vs someone on a RAW leading up to WrestleMania (Rock vs Miz for arguments sake given their past 'history') only for the match not to begin to pop a big number? Would make sense and I don't think it would take away from Rock/Cena one bit.


----------



## Power ranger

D.M.N.;11007265
[B said:


> It makes sense from a viewership standpoint that Show/Shaq gets the nod for starting hour 2, that is likely to bring in non-WWE casuals compared to HHH/Taker, if Rock316AE has the breakdown for the RAW after No Way Out 2008, I believe the above is proven.[/B] I think Punk/Jericho has to be in the starting quarter so it has a lot of viewers before a drop and a climb upwards. (alternatively, you put HHH/Taker in Q3 instead of Q6 so the big segments are spread out)
> 
> I wonder if WWE may tease Rock vs someone on a RAW leading up to WrestleMania (Rock vs Miz for arguments sake given their past 'history') only for the match not to begin to pop a big number? Would make sense and I don't think it would take away from Rock/Cena one bit.


How can you tell "Non-WWE" casuals tune in at 10 pm? 


and no, i dont think the miz should be involved in Rock/cena build. Rock wont be working every raw between chamber through mania so teasing rock/miz is not going to work, It might even hurt the mania buyrate. 

Rock vs cena just keep it simple. And since cena is going to be heel anyway whether WWE likes it or not, i think cena should just go back to his "thuganomics" gimmick for this entire build until mania. That would make it interesting instead of the same old "I am here everyday working my ass off while the rock does satellite promos" crap imo.


----------



## Rock316AE

DMN, I don't have the quarter hour number but I think you're talking about the big Floyd/Show segment after NWO? that was probably the highest rated segment of 2008. It's a smart move to put Shaq/Show in the 10pm slot and that's what I said but no chance you can put two big stars and proven TV draws after a huge Shaq segment(especially for a guy who can't draw like Punk), no matter what you do you're going to lose a lot of viewers because Shaq brings a different fanbase, and he's not going to stay for something else. Rock and Rock/Cena in the main event, Shaq/Show top of the hour and Taker/HHH in the opening segment, that's the top matches and you need to promote them with the biggest audience, besides, HHH will never agree to be on a random segment and in this case, he's right.

As for Rock match, I don't think it's a smart move to hurt Rock's credibility with the fans after he promise something and then it's never happening, can draw a big quarter but it's not worth it in this situation.


----------



## D.M.N.

Power ranger said:


> How can you tell "Non-WWE" casuals tune in at 10 pm?


By promoting a big non-WWE star like Shaq who will attract the 18-49 male audience?



Power ranger said:


> and no, i dont think the miz should be involved in Rock/cena build. Rock wont be working every raw between chamber through mania so teasing rock/miz is not going to work, It might even hurt the mania buyrate.


I was giving an example, you never know with the 'E.



Rock316AE said:


> DMN, I don't have the quarter hour number but I think you're talking about the big Floyd/Show segment after NWO? that was probably the highest rated segment of 2008.


Correct.


----------



## WWE

I hear Floyd got $20 000 000 just to appear for Wrestlemania, bah gawd.


----------



## Power ranger

Lol no he didnt.


----------



## JingieBY

Actually, Mayweather got between 2 and 5 million dollars for his match at Wrestlemania 24. 

The fact is, that Wrestlemania with celebrities draws, especially today. Look at WM23 and WM24 when we got Trump and Mayweather - the cards weren't that good, the build wasn't something special too, but this two Wrestlemanias got most buys in history. Look at WM26 - amazing card - Taker/Shawn II, Cena-Batista, Edge-Y2J, Bret-Vince but it got only 880 000 buys. WM27 - extremely weak card with only one BIG match (Taker/HHH) but the appearance of The Rock made it 3rd or 4th most ordered in history. 

So, if Shaq competes in this year's WM, I am 100% sure that WM28 will be the most ordered and watched Wrestlemania of all time. The Rock in a match (against Cena, the biggest match ever) + Shaq as a celebrity (who'll also compete in a match) - I'm damn sure it will get minimum of 1 400 000 buys.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

JingieBY said:


> Actually, Mayweather got between 2 and 5 million dollars for his match at Wrestlemania 24.
> 
> The fact is, that Wrestlemania with celebrities draws, especially today. Look at WM23 and WM24 when we got Trump and Mayweather - the cards weren't that good, the build wasn't something special too, but this two Wrestlemanias got most buys in history. Look at WM26 - amazing card - Taker/Shawn II, Cena-Batista, Edge-Y2J, Bret-Vince but it got only 880 000 buys. WM27 - extremely weak card with only one BIG match (Taker/HHH) but the appearance of The Rock made it 3rd or 4th most ordered in history.
> 
> So, if Shaq competes in this year's WM, I am 100% sure that WM28 will be the most ordered and watched Wrestlemania of all time. The Rock in a match (against Cena, the biggest match ever) + Shaq as a celebrity (who'll also compete in a match) - I'm damn sure it will get minimum of 1 400 000 buys.


if this doesnt get 1 million buys the E is in big trouble


----------



## D.M.N.

http://www.pwinsider.com/article/65...y-that-is-the-case-taker-vs-hhh-and-more.html



> *Q - Just a quick question. Do you think it’s possible that the shift to younger viewers is related to the hour to hour losses? Surely, lots most kids are watching now and would it be possible that ten o’clock is the bedtime for 100,000 or so of their viewers? Doesn’t Smackdown air earlier, on a non-school night and not experience that loss? A thought.*
> 
> I have wondered that too so let's look at the numbers from the 2/6 Raw. The show lost 362,000 viewers from hour one to hour two. In the people *18 to 49 demo, they lost 79,000 viewers*. In the people *25-54 demo, they lost 108,000 people*. In the people *55+ demo, they lost 179,000 people*. So, it's just the opposite. They are turning off older people from hour one to hour two, not younger people.


----------



## NWO3:16

Just watched RAW from last Monday Night there. I think the most talked about incident backstage just now must be the R-Truth/ The Miz botched incident. 

R-Truth puts his hands onto the ropes, flips out of the ring towards The Miz, the Miz actaully shi*ts out from catching him. As much as i respect the Miz for being an awesome wrestler, The Miz made a BIG MISTAKE here. Thankfully R-Truth was not hurt bad.

But anyway Lance Storm and Georgary Helms have attacked MikeTheMIz on twitter, telling him hes a sh*t catcher, and he sh*t it from catching R-Truth.

RAW was quite a good show apart from this, 7/10


----------



## Striker

NWO3:16 said:


> Just watched RAW from last Monday Night there. I think the most talked about incident backstage just now must be the R-Truth/ The Miz botched incident.
> 
> R-Truth puts his hands onto the ropes, flips out of the ring towards The Miz, the Miz actaully shi*ts out from catching him. As much as i respect the Miz for being an awesome wrestler, The Miz made a BIG MISTAKE here. Thankfully R-Truth was not hurt bad.
> 
> But anyway Lance Storm and Georgary Helms have attacked MikeTheMIz on twitter, telling him hes a sh*t catcher, and he sh*t it from catching R-Truth.
> 
> RAW was quite a good show apart from this, 7/10


Miz is a good wrestler?


----------



## Leechmaster

I honestly cannot recall people dissecting ratings numbers like this prior to Punk getting his push. 

Most of you are as delusional and clueless as the TNA marks that argue over a .01 difference.


And believe it or not, this comes from someone who is actually in the advertising industry, unlike most (if not, all) here.


----------



## D.M.N.

Ah, look, we have some numbers: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...eing-human-wwe-raw-housewives-bh-more/119820/

3.932m and 4.305m..... ouch, ouch, ouch. Not sure how you can spin that as good, because you can't. Awful hour 1 number, quite possibly one of the lowest ever February numbers RAW has ever done.

*Monday 13th February 2012*
USA Network
17:00 - NCIS: 1.731m / 0.5 18-49 rating
18:00 - NCIS: 2.486m / 0.7 18-49 rating
19:00 - NCIS: 3.051m / 0.8 18-49 rating
20:00 - 136th Westminster Dog Show: 2.955m / 0.6 18-49 rating
*21:00 - WWE Raw: 3.932m / 1.5 18-49 rating
22:00 - WWE Raw: 4.305m / 1.7 18-49 rating*
23:12 - White Collar: 1.191m / 0.5 18-49 rating


----------



## Starbuck

Ouch, ouch, ouch indeed. That fucking sucks given the time of year tbh. Quarter hours will be mighty interesting that's for sure lol. The debate stuff opened, HHH/HBK was on at 10pm and Cena/Kane got a pretty big overrun iirc. I wonder what did the best, haha?


----------



## dxbender

Just stop caring about the ratings.....

Unless you work for wwe, or bought WWE stocks or something, these mean -0(yes -0)% to everyone else.


----------



## zkorejo

It has to be Triple H and HBK.. ^^.. Everything else sucked balls.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Ouch 
That sucks because this was a good raw

well when do the quarter hours come out?


----------



## A-C-P

I would assumeits definitely a dissapointing # for the WWE. But I think the poor first hour # is somewhat due to the "carry-over" from the poor show (in many peoples minds) they put on last monday.


----------



## D.M.N.

Also:

*Monday 30th January*
21:00 - WWE Raw: 5.318m / 2.1 18-49 rating
22:00 - WWE Raw: 5.124m / 2.1 18-49 rating

*Monday 13th February 2012*
21:00 - WWE Raw: 3.932m / 1.5 18-49 rating
- lowest of the year
22:00 - WWE Raw: 4.305m / 1.7 18-49 rating

How have they managed to _lose_ 1 million viewers in the last 2 weeks and nearly 700,000 in their key demographic? Someone's going to tell me that two weeks ago it was straight after the 'Rumble, but that is no excuse.


----------



## taset50

Cena/Kane main event + Overrun should have done extremely well. Should be over a million gain atleast.


----------



## Starbuck

They seem to have lost a couple hundred thousand viewers since the Rumble aftermath, maybe even more than that. They were over 5 mil then, they were over 5 mil for the opening segment last week and then there was a dip. I don't think anything is going to get over 5 mil this week going off those numbers though. The one interesting thing is that viewership went up in the second hour which goes against the recent trend of a drop and which also, most likely, has to be attributed to either HHH/HBK at 10pm or Cena/Kane etc at the end. I guess we'll find out when the quarter hours come out. Won't that be fun? Lol.

Edit - So they've lost a million viewers, not a couple hundred thousand lol. That's even worse!


----------



## taset50

A-C-P said:


> I would assumeits definitely a dissapointing # for the WWE. But I think the poor first hour # is somewhat due to the "carry-over" from the poor show (in many peoples minds) they put on last monday.


That doesnt make sense. They didnt tune in for the first hour coz of last week's show but they did tune in for the second hour?


----------



## A-C-P

taset50 said:


> That doesnt make sense. They didnt tune in for the first hour coz fo last week's show but they did tune in for the second hour?


How does that not make sense? If they thought Raw last week sucked they decided to not watch it this week and then changed their mind at some point and flipped over to Raw to check out what was going on at some point and stayed watching. Makes sense to me.

I meant that comment more so as a possible explanation to why the overall viewership was down this week compared to the 2 prior weeks, not to explain the jump in viewers from hour 1 to hour 2. Although it makes sense for that to.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

taset50 said:


> That doesnt make sense. They didnt tune in for the first hour coz of last week's show but they did tune in for the second hour?


HBK and Trips


----------



## Starbuck

#1Peep4ever said:


> HBK and Trips


Or Cena and Kane. Given how poorly the 10pm slot has been doing for months now, maybe they've hammered it home to enough people that they don't bother tuning in anymore and all come back at the end. Who knows. The quarter hours will tell the story though. I wouldn't be surprised if HHH/HBK underperformed. Based on those numbers I'd say a gain of 500,000+ would be successful lol. It's either going to be a big gain at 10pm/smaller overrun number, smaller gain at 10pm/big overrun number or maybe they'll draw even? I don't know. But these quarter hours are really going to be rather interesting this time around, as if they weren't before lol. Who knows, maybe they started the show with a big number and then lost a million people after the debate and didn't get them back again?


----------



## taset50

A-C-P said:


> How does that not make sense? If they thought Raw last week sucked they decided to not watch it this week and then changed their mind at some point and flipped over to Raw to check out what was going on at some point and stayed watching. Makes sense to me.
> 
> I meant that comment more so as a possible explanation to why the overall viewership was down this week compared to the 2 prior weeks, not to explain the jump in viewers from hour 1 to hour 2. Although it makes sense for that to.


"Changed their minds at some point" 

This is all just speculation. You can use that excuse for every raw show week after week actually.




#1Peep4ever said:


> HBK and Trips


and Cena + Kane. Still the same superstars drawing big numbers. 

Punk and jericho not drawing in the slightest.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Just a good indication of what the audience are intrested in. 

On Youtube the most viewed part of Raw is the second half of the debate.

The second most viewed part of Raw is Eve kissing Cena and Ryder doing his forever alone face.

The third most viewed part of Raw was the first half of the debate.


----------



## taset50

Youtube works based on hits. Its not the right indicator of what casuals like. See the build for jericho return for example. All those cryptic IT BEGINS promos and his return actually lost viewers on raw. 

On YT, if your video is a hit, you will get hourly views regardless of the content of the video. It has a lot to do with Facebook/Twitter sharing features.


----------



## A-C-P

taset50 said:


> "Changed their minds at some point"
> 
> This is all just speculation. You can use that excuse for every raw show week after week actually.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and Cena + Kane. Still the same superstars drawing big numbers.
> 
> Punk and jericho not drawing in the slightest.



I know its just speculation I offered that thought as a POSSIBLE explanation to the lower total viewers number compared to last week. And no you can;t use that "excuse" for every Raw b/c bnot every Raw has nearly a million less viewers than the Raws the prior 2 weeks.

I would LOVE to see your GRAND explanation to why they lost so many viewers from last week's Raw to this weeks Raw, but wait you haven't provided one just have told everybody else that their reasons are stupid.

Wait... looks at join date and post count, realizes your probably a rejoiner who will prolly be banned again soon enough.


----------



## kokepepsi

What doesn't make sense though is if Shawn was making an appearance why did a lot of viewers assume he would not open the show and didn't bother to tune in.


----------



## taset50

kokepepsi said:


> What doesn't make sense though is if Shawn was making an appearance why did a lot of viewers assume he would not open the show and didn't bother to tune in.


Exactly what i thinking. The entire show was promoted as shawn's return but no one bothered to tune in at hour one?

I know Shawn was never a big draw but this is weird.


----------



## Starbuck

No one person is enough to give a show a boost of 1 million viewers AND make them stick around unless they're Rock lol. Until we get the quarter hours, we don't know anything really. But going off what we do have, the only thing to take from this is that the build to EC isn't exactly getting anybody excited. They experienced a bump after the Rumble and have completely lost it again just 2 weeks later. Why? Because they've basically done fuck all to promote EC is my guess. Heading into the PPV before Wrestlemania and having hour 1 of your flagship show pull under 4 million viewers is alarming to say the least. Then again, I'm pretty sure they don't give a fuck because they're relying on Rock (again) to give them a boost when he finally comes back.


----------



## mb1025

BTW it equals a 2.99 rating.


----------



## ThePhenomRises

kokepepsi said:


> What doesn't make sense though is if Shawn was making an appearance why did a lot of viewers assume he would not open the show and didn't bother to tune in.


Maybe it doesn't count if they just tuned in for the start, realised it was a boring debate and switched the channel? I'm not a ratings guy though, so forgive me if I'm wrong.


----------



## Azuran

Man, I can't believe Jericho came back to be stuck in a feud no one really wants to see. He should be facing someone like Undertaker. Instead, the WWE is wasting his time by making feud with CM Punk.


----------



## Tony Tornado

Of course the rating is horrible. Last week's show was awful and then they decide to open this week's show with a freaking debate.


----------



## jonoaries

I thoroughly enjoyed the show this week
Ratings be damned.
I'm certain the 15+ min debate turned off a lot of people though.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

2.99 rating.

Show wasnt that bad tbh.


----------



## kokepepsi

quality of show has nothing to do with ratings
Plenty of shit shows have done 5.0+ ratings back in 2000

2.99
OH SHIT THE END IS HERE WWE DEADIN5YEARS


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

jonoaries said:


> I thoroughly enjoyed the show this week
> Ratings be damned.
> I'm certain the 15+ min debate turned off a lot of people though.


I doubt it. I'm betting the debate was the only part of the first hour actually doing any good. I mean let's see, we had Jericho, Orton, Big Show, among others in the first hour. When have these guys ever done shit for ratings? No surprise the first hour bombed because the second hour is where all the action was. I'm expecting HHH/HBK to pull a good number. Unlike last week, the segment went the whole quarter with no commercial interruptions. Last week's segment ended at 10:05 and went to commercial which then lead to a crappy tag match. And for some reason, I see the Kane/Cena/Ryder horseshit to pull the best numbers. Should be a fun breakdown.


----------



## Rock316AE

Azuran said:


> Man, I can't believe Jericho came back to be stuck in a feud no one really wants to see. He should be facing someone like Undertaker. Instead, the WWE is wasting his time by making feud with CM Punk.


I agree, I always wanted to see Jericho/Taker, even not at WM, just a PPV...

Horrendous number, this is the lowest rated RAW on this week since 97, to get a number like that on the RTW is panic mode for them. Punk is the lowest drawing champion without competition since 95, And if he loses the title on the PPV, I'm waiting for Meltzer to do math including the terrible house show business for this time of the year, would be interesting where he is but it's top 5 without a doubt. I expected something bigger from HBK on his return, before I saw the rating, I was going to say that I expecting a 4.0 for the HBK/HHH segment which was 20 minutes without commercials. I'm sure they still did the peak of the show because Cena/Kane/Ryder/Eve is horrific, 12 minutes overrun or not, and their segment was great.

PWTorch:


> -- Raw averaged 4.12 million viewers, down 11 percent compared to last week and down 21 percent compared to the post-Rumble Raw. Overall, *Raw was down 1.1 million viewers compared to the post-Rumble Raw.*
> 
> Raw's first hour averaged 3.92 million viewers, down *nearly one million viewers compared to last week's first hour* *and down 1.4 million viewers compared to the first hour post-Rumble.* *It was the fewest first hour viewers since September 12 (22 weeks).*
> 
> Raw then increased to an average of 4.31 million viewers in the second hour, *which was down 130,000 viewers compared to last week's** second hour* *and down 800,000 viewers compared to the post-Rumble second hour.*


First hour - *2.91* (Yes, you're still in February)
Second Hour - 3.09


----------



## Twistaeffect2005

Azuran said:


> Man, I can't believe Jericho came back to be stuck in a feud no one really wants to see. He should be facing someone like Undertaker. Instead, the WWE is wasting his time by making feud with CM Punk.



Yes, damn the WWE for pitting him with the most over wrestler in their company! What are they thinking!


----------



## The Tony

:lmao Horrible rating and I'm not surprised. The Kane/Cena storyline is ridiculous.


----------



## Coffey

I can't wait to hear the "well, the dog show was on" defense.


----------



## DesolationRow

Well, the dog show was on.

Hey, somebody said they couldn't wait to hear it.


----------



## Rock316AE

Lol @ the dog show, In 99 WCW drew to Nitro almost (or more I don't remember, but it's on the death of WCW book) 8 million people. If I remember correctly, RAW was on Saturday at that time from the GD with the biggest RAW crowd of all time.


----------



## AntMan

What's weird is this the first time the second hour went up in a long time.


----------



## linkintpark

That's a terrible rating for Wrestlemania season + no football.


----------



## taset50

Well apparently having jericho/Punk open the show is not going to work. They should have HHH/Taker open the show, Jericho/Punk at 10 pm and Rock/cena close the show.


----------



## D17

Tony316 said:


> :lmao Horrible rating and I'm not surprised. The Kane/Cena storyline is ridiculous.


But when it's a good rating, it's all about Punk, right?
(Oh, and I think the Kane/Cena storyline is one of the worst in the past decade btw)


----------



## roadkill_

I've been looking at RAW again recently because of Rocks brief return. I can't stand CM Punk. The HHH-Taker angle is horrific, its booked like HHH beat taker, not Taker beating him twice. Why would taker want to do this for a third time? I know I dont wanna see it again.

Worth watching only for the Cena heat.


----------



## Fabregas

linkintpark said:


> That's a terrible rating for Wrestlemania season + no football.


This.

Usually the WWE get good ratings from January to April because of the road to WrestleMania, but it doesn't appear to be helping much this year.


----------



## Rayfain

How long can they bury their heads in the sand before they acknowledge a change has to be made. In my opinion WM should be Cena's swan song as the company front man. 

Creative needs an overhaul, bring in fresh blood with radical ideas that will grab attention. Anything will suffice instead of flogging a dead horse week after week.

Today is the day to heed the old saying "Look to the past and you shall find the future". Vince needs to look at what made Attitude and Ruthless Aggression so popular and and mould them with the positives of now to freshen things up.

Here's hoping Wrestlemania 28 caps the PG/Cena Era and we enter April in a new era. The Pipebomb Era? The Indie Invasion Era?


----------



## the frenchise

I'm quite sad for the people who watched last week raw and not this one. Some classic moments this week.


----------



## BTNH

Is anyone surprised how bad the ratings were? Swear to God I knew this would happen. Don't wanna make myself sound psychic, but I fucking knew it. Swear to God, Raw was so bad last week for the first time I considered quitting wrestling all over again and not bothering. It was that bad for me. I guess others were more harder and decided not to tune in at all. You can't keep taking the fans for a ride any more. When you put out shit, no one gives a fuck. WWE desperately needs to change and a complete overhaul is needed. People can defend the product all they want, fact is every old fan I have spoken to laughs at the current state of the product and mocks its PG nature. Isn't a knock on PG, just pointing that out. WWE needs a massive change. That is all.


----------



## Theproof

I don't know about the rest of the show but the segment with the elimination debate was one of the best segments in a long time in my opinion. That was highly entertaining.


----------



## A-C-P

Theproof said:


> I don't know about the rest of the show but the segment with the elimination debate was one of the best segments in a long time in my opinion. That was highly entertaining.


Most of the show was entertaining this week thats why I beleive that last week's Raw not being very good is the biggest reason for the low viewership #'s this week.


----------



## JingieBY

Quarter 1: Show opened at a 2.9
Q2: Lost 49,000 viewers (Chris Jericho vs. Kofi Kingston)
Q3: Lost 24,000 viewers (Backstage shenanigans with John Cena and Zack Ryder; John Laurinaitis and David Otunga)
Q4: Gained 93,000 viewers (Big Show vs. Randy Orton)
Q5: Gained 822,000 (return of Michaels, Triple H, Undertaker video) to take the show to a 3.6
Q6: Lost 621,000 viewers (Dolph Ziggler vs. R-Truth)
Q7: Lost 320,000 viewers (Tamina Snuka vs. Brie Bella; Eve walking into the back of an ambulance & ensuing snog with Cena)
Q8: Lost 139,000 viewers (C.M. Punk vs. The Miz) to do a 2.8.
Over-run: Gained 505,000 (Kane zooming Ryder off a 3ft stage) viewers to close out on a 3.1.


----------



## Carcass

JingieBY said:


> Quarter 1: Show opened at a 2.9
> Q2: Lost 49,000 viewers (Chris Jericho vs. Kofi Kingston)
> Q3: Lost 24,000 viewers (Backstage shenanigans with John Cena and Zack Ryder; John Laurinaitis and David Otunga)
> *Q4: Gained 93,000 viewers (Daniel Bryan)*
> Q5: Gained 822,000 (return of Michaels, Triple H, Undertaker video) to take the show to a 3.6
> Q6: Lost 621,000 viewers (Dolph Ziggler vs. R-Truth)
> Q7: Lost 320,000 viewers (Tamina Snuka vs. Brie Bella; Eve walking into the back of an ambulance & ensuing snog with Cena)
> Q8: Lost 139,000 viewers (C.M. Punk vs. The Miz) to do a 2.8.
> Over-run: Gained 505,000 (Kane zooming Ryder off a 3ft stage) viewers to close out on a 3.1.


----------



## kokepepsi

opened too a 2.9THEFUCK?

So either everyone assumed that Shawn was gonna be at the 10pm or end of show which is a sick read. Or people saw the podiums and insta changed the channel


----------



## Azuran

JingieBY said:


> Quarter 1: Show opened at a 2.9
> Q2: Lost 49,000 viewers (Chris Jericho vs. Kofi Kingston)
> Q3: Lost 24,000 viewers (Backstage shenanigans with John Cena and Zack Ryder; John Laurinaitis and David Otunga)
> Q4: Gained 93,000 viewers (Big Show vs. Randy Orton)
> Q5: Gained 822,000 (return of Michaels, Triple H, Undertaker video) to take the show to a 3.6
> Q6: Lost 621,000 viewers (Dolph Ziggler vs. R-Truth)
> Q7: Lost 320,000 viewers (Tamina Snuka vs. Brie Bella; Eve walking into the back of an ambulance & ensuing snog with Cena)
> *Q8: Lost 139,000 viewers (C.M. Punk vs. The Miz) to do a 2.8.*
> Over-run: Gained 505,000 (Kane zooming Ryder off a 3ft stage) viewers to close out on a 3.1.


LOL

There are no words that can describe how sad that is.


----------



## rkomarkorton

JingieBY said:


> Quarter 1: Show opened at a 2.9
> Q2: Lost 49,000 viewers (Chris Jericho vs. Kofi Kingston)
> Q3: Lost 24,000 viewers (Backstage shenanigans with John Cena and Zack Ryder; John Laurinaitis and David Otunga)
> Q4: Gained 93,000 viewers (Big Show vs. Randy Orton)
> *Q5: Gained 822,000 (return of Michaels, Triple H, Undertaker video) to take the show to a 3.6*
> Q6: Lost 621,000 viewers (Dolph Ziggler vs. R-Truth)
> Q7: Lost 320,000 viewers (Tamina Snuka vs. Brie Bella; Eve walking into the back of an ambulance & ensuing snog with Cena)
> Q8: Lost 139,000 viewers (C.M. Punk vs. The Miz) to do a 2.8.
> Over-run: Gained 505,000 (Kane zooming Ryder off a 3ft stage) viewers to close out on a 3.1.


lol and people were speculating that it was HBK's fault for the low ratings


----------



## kokepepsi

Even Rock has lost viewers in that segment

However Punk vs Miz match in the overrun gains nowhere near 500k


----------



## Power ranger

JingieBY said:


> Quarter 1: Show opened at a 2.9
> Q2: Lost 49,000 viewers (Chris Jericho vs. Kofi Kingston)
> Q3: Lost 24,000 viewers (Backstage shenanigans with John Cena and Zack Ryder; John Laurinaitis and David Otunga)
> Q4: Gained 93,000 viewers (Big Show vs. Randy Orton)
> *Q5: Gained 822,000 (return of Michaels, Triple H, Undertaker video) to take the show to a 3.6*
> Q6: Lost 621,000 viewers (Dolph Ziggler vs. R-Truth)
> Q7: Lost 320,000 viewers (Tamina Snuka vs. Brie Bella; Eve walking into the back of an ambulance & ensuing snog with Cena)
> Q8: Lost 139,000 viewers (C.M. Punk vs. The Miz) to do a 2.8.
> Over-run: Gained 505,000 (Kane zooming Ryder off a 3ft stage) viewers to close out on a 3.1.


Good. I really liked HBK/HHH promo. 




kokepepsi said:


> opened too a 2.9THEFUCK?
> 
> So either everyone assumed that Shawn was gonna be at the 10pm or end of show which is a sick read. *Or people saw the podiums and insta changed the channel*


Most likely that one.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Wow, the only good number was the HBK/HHH thing. Everything else flat out sucked. Note to WWE, enough of the shit storylines.


----------



## Power ranger

kokepepsi said:


> *Even Rock has lost viewers in that segment*
> 
> However Punk vs Miz match in the overrun gains nowhere near 500k


When was that?


----------



## Green Light

HBK/HHH gained huge which is good to see since it was a great segment, but lol at all the rest. How can a show this close to Mania open at a 2.9?


----------



## Mr White

What a sad number. The Nitro where Russo won the WCW Championship got a 2.9 facing competition.

I don't see how people can continue to defend this crap every week. I watched about 5 mins of Raw and was already looking for something else and I know I wasn't alone.


----------



## Power ranger

^^ lol @ your avatar.


----------



## DesolationRow

Well, they were saved from oblivion by HBK/Triple H promo and Undertaker video segment. Not surprising. 



Green Light said:


> How can a show this close to Mania open at a 2.9?


I'm not sure, exactly, but I'm thinking a combination of the previous week's Raw being very uneventful combined with the image of the Elimination Chamber participants standing behind podiums somehow turned a lot of people off. Oh, and the dog show. 



Mr White said:


> What a sad number. The Nitro where Russo won the WCW Championship got a 2.9 facing competition.


Yes, but a 2.9 back then and a 2.9 now aren't exactly the same thing. There are a lot more choices in television viewing for people in the realm of cable today.

However, it's still not a good rating and it's particularly dispiriting, I imagine, for WWE considering the time of year. At this point, they just have to create the closest thing they can to a cliffhanger of a pay-per-view that gets people excited and wanting to tune in to Raw on Monday night, and just build from there for the rest of the way to Wrestlemania.


----------



## robertdeniro

It's looks like that Taker/HHH storyline is doing great,it's always the highest segment in last 3 weeks.
Punk can't draw.


----------



## Werb-Jericho

i thought it was mint, dont really care about ratings per se but this week should draw more after people see Ryders bump on youtube


----------



## Werb-Jericho

woooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooops


----------



## WWE

The main event losing viewers is just sad lol


----------



## Mister Hands

Mr White said:


> What a sad number. The Nitro where Russo won the WCW Championship got a 2.9 facing competition.
> 
> I don't see how people can continue to defend this crap every week. I watched about 5 mins of Raw and was already looking for something else and I know I wasn't alone.


This is such an erroneous comparison. It's like saying you bought a horse for a nickel in 1905.


----------



## derjanse

lets face it IWC

Punk cant draw, he lost viewers after two segments with big loses. I am a big fan of the guy, but he is apparently only appealing to hardcore wrestling fans, which is why he is selling so much merch. Suprised Cena did not gain more, but to be fair the story line is stupid, the need to step it up, but at least Rock is coming back so that would, help with both him and HHH, and Cena to draw people in.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Well, nice to see the whole Taker/HHH build up is drawing, as HBK/HHH's segment with the vid at the end proves. Unfortunately, the rest of the show didn't do so hot.

People need to keep in mind the Punk/Miz match was Q4, and didn't reach the overrun. Now considering it was a Punk match, I wouldn't expect it to draw well anyway, but just keep that in mind.


----------



## Marv95

Mister Hands said:


> This is such an erroneous comparison. It's like saying you bought a horse for a nickel in 1905.


Not really. This was WCW at arguably its _worst_ state and they had competition that night unlike Raw today.

Something needs to be done. Even when Rock shows up and ratings go around 4.0(which isn't guaranteed) towards Wrestlemania it won't help them long term.


----------



## version 1

JingieBY said:


> Quarter 1: Show opened at a 2.9
> Q2: Lost 49,000 viewers (Chris Jericho vs. Kofi Kingston)
> Q3: Lost 24,000 viewers (Backstage shenanigans with John Cena and Zack Ryder; John Laurinaitis and David Otunga)
> Q4: Gained 93,000 viewers (Big Show vs. Randy Orton)
> Q5: Gained 822,000 (return of Michaels, Triple H, Undertaker video) to take the show to a 3.6
> Q6: Lost 621,000 viewers (Dolph Ziggler vs. R-Truth)
> Q7: Lost 320,000 viewers (Tamina Snuka vs. Brie Bella; Eve walking into the back of an ambulance & ensuing snog with Cena)
> Q8: Lost 139,000 viewers (C.M. Punk vs. The Miz) *to do a 2.8.*
> Over-run: Gained 505,000 (Kane zooming Ryder off a 3ft stage) viewers to close out on a 3.1.


Eeeeeeeuuuh so did the main event really just got the lowest rating of the whole show or am I missing something 
That's horrible if this is true :no:


----------



## Striker

If you compare ratings, compare them to last year, and not AE. Ratings will NEVER be there again. To the younger generation wrestling is infinitely less cool now.


----------



## JasonLives

Seems like the big loss was the opener. People were either not interest enough to tune in from the beginning or most of the viewers changed the channel the first couple of minutes.
Other then that, the ratings breakout is basiclly the same as it is every week.


----------



## Mr.S

This is no surprise though. Punk is not a draw. HBK's return drew huge ratings. Lets see what the ratings are next week for HHH/Taker build-up without HBK.

Kane-Cena is drawing BIG too.


----------



## chronoxiong

I really wonder why Punk's segments get low ratings. I enjoy him as WWE Champ and find him entertaining. Unless it's all the Little Jimmies that don't feel the same way and they change the channel. This is not encouraging at all. At least Daniel "Ratings" Bryan didn't lose viewers.


----------



## Hallop

chronoxiong said:


> At least Daniel "Ratings" Bryan didn't lose viewers.


It was Big Show vs. Randy Orton


----------



## Stad

Punk is over with the casuals, listen to the pops/chants he gets every week. Still don't see why most of you give a shit about ratings.


----------



## Stad

Mr White said:


> What a sad number. The Nitro where Russo won the WCW Championship got a 2.9 facing competition.
> 
> I don't see how people can continue to defend this crap every week. I watched about 5 mins of Raw and was already looking for something else and I know I wasn't alone.


RAW was good on Monday. Maybe you should just quit watching then? i'm sure no one will care.


----------



## azhkz

LOL, HHH/HBK segment draw more than what Jeri'no draw'show and Punk even though their segment was not at the start. Infact HHH/Taker segments in the last 3 weeks out draw all other current feuds. Just shows that the casuals have much more interest in HHH/Taker III and these veterans than any other story unlike the IWC smarks who find their feud boring.


----------



## DesolationRow

Mr.S said:


> This is no surprise though. Punk is not a draw. HBK's return drew huge ratings. *Lets see what the ratings are next week for HHH/Taker build-up without HBK.*


Probably approximately the same, because the primary draws in this program, in descending order, are Triple H, then The Undertaker and then Michaels is a distant third, though he's obviously going to benefit by being a "special attraction" (though you could argue that Trips and Taker behoove from that general moniker, but to a considerably lesser extent--and especially in the case of Triple H who's been back, on and off, since midsummer). 

The writing to the angle is helping it a lot as well. Having Undertaker issue the challenge to Triple H? Brilliant twist. The new wrinkle of Triple H not wanting to destroy the Taker brand because it's good for business? Genius. The writers can't be coming up with this, it has to be all Triple H and Undertaker.


----------



## D.M.N.

Breakdown:

Q1 - 2.93 rating / 3.96 million
Q2 - 2.89 rating / 3.91 million
Q3 - 2.88 rating / 3.89 million
Q4 - 2.94 rating / 3.98 million
Q5 - 3.60 rating / 4.80 million
Q6 - 3.00 rating / 4.18 million
Q7 - 2.85 rating / 3.86 million
Q8 - 2.80 rating / 3.72 million
Overrun - 3.10 rating / 4.23 million

Yes, Punk vs Miz was the lowest rated segment on the entire show.


----------



## DesolationRow

D.M.N. said:


> Breakdown:
> 
> Q1 - 2.93 rating / 3.96 million
> Q2 - 2.89 rating / 3.91 million
> Q3 - 2.88 rating / 3.89 million
> Q4 - 2.94 rating / 3.98 million
> Q5 - 3.60 rating / 4.80 million
> Q6 - 3.00 rating / 4.18 million
> Q7 - 2.85 rating / 3.86 million
> Q8 - 2.80 rating / 3.72 million
> Overrun - 3.10 rating / 4.23 million
> 
> *Yes, Punk vs Miz was the lowest rated segment on the entire show.*


_Ouch._


----------



## MarkHenrysGString

cm punk's drawing power is at full force i see


----------



## Interceptor88

Undertaker/Triple H/Shawn Michaels and Cena/Kane saved the show while Punk, Miz and Ziggler lost viewers. Bright numbers for the youngsters...


----------



## Rock316AE

> Quarter 1: Show opened at a 2.9
> Q2: Lost 49,000 viewers (Chris Jericho vs. Kofi Kingston)
> Q3: Lost 24,000 viewers (Backstage shenanigans with John Cena and Zack Ryder; John Laurinaitis and David Otunga)
> Q4: Gained 93,000 viewers (Big Show vs. Randy Orton)
> Q5: Gained 822,000 (return of Michaels, Triple H, Undertaker video) to take the show to a 3.6
> Q6: Lost 621,000 viewers (Dolph Ziggler vs. R-Truth)
> Q7: Lost 320,000 viewers (Tamina Snuka vs. Brie Bella; Eve walking into the back of an ambulance & ensuing snog with Cena)
> Q8: Lost 139,000 viewers (C.M. Punk vs. The Miz) to do a 2.8.
> Over-run: Gained 505,000 (Kane zooming Ryder off a 3ft stage) viewers to close out on a 3.1.


What a sad breakdown in February, open at 2.9? horrendous. Jericho lost only 49k so that's great for this time slot, Show/Orton gained on a random slot is also great but not surprising, Show was always a decent TV draw like he proved on SD and Orton is the second biggest name and star in the business. Punk/Miz did the lowest rating of the night, abysmal, again this is the lowest rated champion on RAW without competition since 95 and I'm sure that even then, they were not so miserable as TV draws. Would be funny to see if Meltzer is doing a comparison and where Punk is, but like I said, it's top 5 for sure. After WM when the real stars are not busy, he will not be near this title, in fact he's probably going to SD. 

HBK/HHH was a great segment and good to see they gain, It's not a surprise because I was going to say a 4.0 for a HBK/HHH segment, 20 minutes without commercials for the first time in over a year but if you look at the show's average, it's a great gain, not a great number but a great gain. HBK was always a good attraction and he proved it here again. Probably the best segment of the year so far.


----------



## Brave Nash

I'm really not surprise who really wants to see Miz on the ring the guy is terrible. Punk/Christian, Punk/Bryan, Punk/Jericho Punk/Morrison even Punk/Tyson Kidd can draw. The Miz is the most talentless guy in the ring on this roster.

Edited: Shut up Rock316AE you said it before that this is the worst roster. So don't blame Punk when the roster is shit.


----------



## MarkHenrysGString

Brave Nash said:


> I'm really not surprise who really wants to see Miz on the ring the guy is terrible. Punk/Christian, Punk/Bryan, Punk/Jericho Punk/Morrison even Punk/Tyson Kidd can draw. The Miz is the most talentless guy in the ring on this roster.


punk cant draw, but i do agree with the miz bit' he is a ratings failure


----------



## rcc

A 2.8 main event during the Road to WM. 

:lmao CM PUNK, CM PUNK!


----------



## MarkHenrysGString

rcc said:


> A 2.8 main event during the Road to WM.
> 
> :lmao CM PUNK, CM PUNK!


i think when he ment, you will get left behind! he was refering to the ratings


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Thats bad


----------



## Rock316AE

MarkHenrysGString said:


> if you cant get behind this, you will be left behind





rcc said:


> A 2.8 main event during the Road to WM.
> 
> :lmao CM PUNK, CM PUNK!


2.77 if you want to be specific. Embarrassing no doubt. This is not going to last after WM.



> 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.


----------



## HBK15

I'm a Punk Mark and even I didn't watch the match against the Miz, the man sucks. No wonder why they got those horrible ratings.


----------



## Brave Nash

Rock316AE said:


> 2.77 if you want to be specific. Embarrassing no doubt. This is not going to last after WM.


So you forgot all the Good/Great numbers that Punk pulled out in the last 4 weeks. You're embarrassing yourself you know that Miz is a terrible Draw look for survivor series as an example Cena/Rock and Miz/Truth didn't draw that big. Even Jericho lost ratings do you know that?


----------



## MarkHenrysGString

Brave Nash said:


> So you forgot all the Good/Great numbers that Punk pulled out in the last 4 weeks. You're embarrassing yourself you know that Miz is a terrible Draw look for survivor series as an example Cena/Rock and Miz/Truth didn't draw that big. Even Jericho lost ratings do you know that?


stop fooling yourself, punk cant draw get over it


----------



## Brave Nash

MarkHenrysGString said:


> stop fooling yourself, punk cant draw get over it


Stop trying to increase your posts with nonsense, Punk can draw Idiot. You're fooling yourself of you don't think that.
ratings are not everything the show was boring thats why the ratings sucked when the show is good 
you will see Punk draw the most and thats a fact.


----------



## JasonLives

lol at a Jericho match/Segment dropping again. Im a fan of his, but its quite obvious the overall public just doesnt care for him.


----------



## taset50

It seems like John Laurinaitis draws more than the WWE champion lol. Punk must be one of the lowest drawing champions of all time.


----------



## MarkHenrysGString

Brave Nash said:


> Stop trying to increase your posts with nonsense, Punk can draw Idiot. You're fooling yourself of you don't think that.
> ratings are not everything the show was boring thats why the ratings sucked when the show is good
> you will see Punk draw the most and thats a fact.


really? isn't punk the superstar that wwe is having doubts over due to bad ratings? ahahaha
punk cant draw get over it, i'm simply stating the truth, plus what's the appeal with a skinny tatted up hobo who doesn't sleep and make's bad jokes


----------



## Kingleviathan

taset50 said:


> It seems like John Laurinaitis draws more than the WWE champion lol. Punk must be one of the lowest drawing champions of all time.


Lowest drawing WWE Champions in history.

1. Diesel
2. Shawn Michaels
3. Sid Vicious
4. Bret Hart
5. CM Punk

Punk made himself a draw last year and in a few months WWE managed to turn him into the fifth lowest drawing WWE Champion of all time.


----------



## Rock316AE

Kingleviathan said:


> Lowest drawing WWE Champions in history.
> 
> 1. Diesel
> 2. Shawn Michaels
> 3. Sid Vicious
> 4. Bret Hart
> 5. CM Punk
> 
> Punk made himself a draw last year and in a few months WWE managed to turn him into the fifth lowest drawing WWE Champion of all time.


JBL is the lowest drawing WWE champion of all time, and Bret and Michaels drew bigger, so he's there with Diesel and JBL somewhere.


----------



## MarkHenrysGString

Kingleviathan said:


> Lowest drawing WWE Champions in history.
> 
> 1. Diesel
> 2. Shawn Michaels
> 3. Sid Vicious
> 4. Bret Hart
> 5. CM Punk
> 
> Punk made himself a draw last year and in a few months WWE managed to turn him into the fifth lowest drawing WWE Champion of all time.


u cant count the 90's since competition was much higher, and wcw ruled! now wwe has no competition except for cm punk himself

plus looking at the ratings, you can see hbk is a much bigger drawn then punk will ever be


----------



## taset50

Kingleviathan said:


> Lowest drawing WWE Champions in history.
> 
> 1. Diesel
> 2. Shawn Michaels
> 3. Sid Vicious
> 4. Bret Hart
> 5. CM Punk
> 
> Punk made himself a draw last year and in a few months WWE managed to turn him into the fifth lowest drawing WWE Champion of all time.


Other than the MITB buyrate he didnt draw shit last year. He appeared to be a draw because of the guys he was working with, Cena, Vince and HHH. Once they were taken out of storyline, Punk bombed bad. 

Besides whatever success he has had is because of the shoot. Once the shock factor wore off, people didnt give a fuck.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Wow Punk and Miz did horrible. But the short term memory loss in this thread is staggering. Punk for the last few weeks has been drawing good to great numbers. For example last week's mainevent which had like a 5 min overrun scored a 3.4 rating which involved Punk. This weeks with the biggest star in the company whcih was like a 15 min overun scored a 3.14

The week before that the opening with CM Punk scored a staggering 3.9 and the match with Daniel Bryan in the same night scored a 3.54.

The Match with John Larinitus the week before gained the same amount of viewers as Undertakers return with Triple H scored (761'000)

And I love how all of these good to great numbers Punk has been pulling out for the last few weeks are all immediately discounted because of this weeks bad number. Fuckin Cena scored a 2.8 in the mainevent overrun a couple of weeks ago and i dont see anyone saying "LOL CENA DOSNT DRW!!"


----------



## taset50

jblvdx said:


> For example last week's mainevent which had like a 5 min overrun scored a 3.4 rating which involved Punk. This weeks with the biggest star in the company whcih was like a 15 min overun scored a 3.14
> 
> The week before that the opening with CM Punk scored a staggering 3.9 and the match with Daniel Bryan in the same night scored a 3.54.
> 
> The Match with John Larinitus the week before gained the same amount of viewers as Undertakers return with Triple H scored (761'000)





> The segment with CM Punk and Chris Jericho gained *just 94,000* viewers – another bad showing for the 10pm timeslot.





> The Six Pack Challenge with Jericho vs. Punk vs. The Miz vs. R-Truth vs. Dolph Ziggler vs. Kofi Kingston gained *443,000 viewers*.





> CM Punk vs. Daniel Bryan *gained 219,000 viewers which is actually a weak gain for that time slot.*



Opener 3.9 = previous night's Royal Rumble + the Winner Sheamus in the opening segment. 

The 700k gain is obviously Laurinaitis + overrun.



Punk wasnt pulling shit.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

taset50 said:


> Opener 3.9 = previous night's Royal Rumble + the Winner Sheamus in the opening segment.
> 
> The 700k gain is obviously Laurinaitis + overrun.
> 
> 
> 
> Punk wasnt pulling shit.


Thats your argument? really? come on now. I could get any Austin or Rock segments, twist it around and be economical with the truth to make it seem they didnt "pull shit" aswell. But your'e a twelver, most likely a rejoiner, and most certainly a troll with that illogical reply.

Oh and people please stop looking and the gain and losses and look at how many people actuelly watched it. Daniel Bryan v Punk was a weak gain for that timeslot, even though more people watched that match then everything except the HHH and HBK segment this week, and it was even close to having the same viewership figure as that.


----------



## A-C-P

:lmao yes the awfulness that is the Ratings thread is BACK!!!!! its a must read thread, like a car wreck you just can't look away.


----------



## Rock316AE

> Other than the MITB buyrate he didnt draw shit last year. He appeared to be a draw because of the guys he was working with, Cena, Vince and HHH. Once they were taken out of storyline, Punk bombed bad.
> 
> Besides whatever success he has had is because of the shoot. Once the shock factor wore off, people didnt give a fuck.





taset50 said:


> Opener 3.9 = previous night's Royal Rumble + the Winner Sheamus in the opening segment.
> 
> 
> 
> The segment with CM Punk and Chris Jericho gained just 94,000 viewers – another bad showing for the 10pm timeslot.
> 
> The Six Pack Challenge with Jericho vs. Punk vs. The Miz vs. R-Truth vs. Dolph Ziggler vs. Kofi Kingston gained 443,000 viewers.
> 
> CM Punk vs. Daniel Bryan gained 219,000 viewers which is actually a weak gain for that time slot.
> 
> 
> 
> The 700k gain is obviously Laurinaitis + overrun.
> 
> 
> 
> Punk wasnt pulling shit.
Click to expand...

Obviously this, lol @ fanboy posting his BS twice because nobody cares about this.


And a general question, who you think is going to finally draw a 4.0 on RAW? I was wrong two times on HHH/Ace and HBK/HHH but I think next week with Taker there, + a nice overrun, they can do a 4.0


----------



## D17

JingieBY said:


> Quarter 1: Show opened at a 2.9
> Q2: Lost 49,000 viewers (Chris Jericho vs. Kofi Kingston)
> Q3: Lost 24,000 viewers (Backstage shenanigans with John Cena and Zack Ryder; John Laurinaitis and David Otunga)
> Q4: Gained 93,000 viewers (Big Show vs. Randy Orton)
> Q5: Gained 822,000 (return of Michaels, Triple H, Undertaker video) to take the show to a 3.6
> Q6: Lost 621,000 viewers (Dolph Ziggler vs. R-Truth)
> Q7: Lost 320,000 viewers (Tamina Snuka vs. Brie Bella; Eve walking into the back of an ambulance & ensuing snog with Cena)
> *Q8: Lost 139,000 viewers (C.M. Punk vs. The Miz) to do a 2.8.*
> Over-run: Gained 505,000 (Kane zooming Ryder off a 3ft stage) viewers to close out on a 3.1.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

god i love this thread


----------



## The Host

jblvdx said:


> Thats your argument? really? come on now. I could get any Austin or Rock segments, twist it around and be economical with the truth to make it seem they didnt "pull shit" aswell. But your'e a twelver, most likely a rejoiner, and most certainly a troll with that illogical reply.
> 
> *Oh and people please stop looking and the gain and losses and look at how many people actuelly watched it. Daniel Bryan v Punk was a weak gain for that timeslot, even though more people watched that match then everything except the HHH and HBK segment this week, and it was even close to having the same viewership figure as that.*


You dont understand Viewership, do you?

Jan 30 RAW show's overall viewership was higher than this week's show. Unless you can prove punk is responsible for that, your post simply fails.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

The Host said:


> You dont understand Viewership, do you?
> 
> Jan 30 RAW show's overall viewership was higher than this week's show. Unless you can prove punk is responsible for that, your post simply fails.


The overrun mainevent of last weeks show drew a 3.4 which Punk was involved in and got top billing for.

The overrun segment of this weeks which had longer overun benefitting it only drew a 3.14 rating

So Punk is partly responsible for the higher rating last week. And yes he is partly responsible for the low rating this week. I just cant stand the short term memory loss peopel have on this thread where a man who cosistently drew good and healthy numbers for weeks has been immediately discounted because of the bad numbers he drew in one show.


----------



## A-C-P

jblvdx said:


> The overrun mainevent of last weeks show drew a 3.4 which Punk was involved in and got top billing for.
> 
> The overrun segment of this weeks which had longer overun benefitting it only drew a 3.14 rating
> 
> So Punk is partly responsible for the higher rating last week. And yes he is partly responsible for the low rating this week. *I just cant stand the short term memory loss peopel have on this thread where a man who cosistently drew good and healthy numbers for weeks has been immediately discounted because of the bad numbers he drew in one show*.



You have to ask yourself this question? Does it really surprise you, and when you get to the answer that no it doesn't surprise you, You will be better equipped to just ignore it and appreciate the entertainment value of reading this troll vs troll/mark vs mark completely awful (in a good way) thread.


----------



## HHHbkDX

:lmao :lmao :lmao this thread


----------



## lisa12000

Christ this thread hurts my brain!! It really is ridiculous that people attribute low segments to one person alone (especially if this is a person they dont like!) Punk is obviously not the best draw in the world atm, but he certainly isnt the worst by a long way! Lets face facts, who he is fighting is partly to blame for the low rating; Lets not forget that Miz has been buried over the last few weeks, he had a poor opening segment in the debate, he was the one that botched last week, he hasnt won a match for god knows how long - who would be overly interested in seeing a match with him at this present time esp when we consider that he was "apparently" responsible for low ratings and buy rates in the past!

If you look at it logically, Punk has been getting consistently decent (note i said decent not brilliant) figures over the last few weeks, and then all of a sudden he drops markedly this week? whats the difference? in previous weeks there has been a storyline, something to grab the interest of the viewer (champion vs champion, lauranitis, jericho etc) this week? a random pre EC match with someone who people seem to have little interest in!! He has been booked terribly, in my opinion, since he became champion again, there has been very few storylines to get interested in, although i am of the opinion he would be better dropping the title as he seems better when hes chasing rather than holding the title

Oh btw, for saying this is a pretty anti Cena forum, who do you think they will go with if they decide Punk isnt drawing therefore should drop the title? For those who think it will be Jericho youre living in a dreamworld! Hes leaving not long after WM so why will they give him the title in the long run? he will probably get it for the month run up to EM and thats it! Yep, it will go back to Mr "ratings" (this is partly sarcastic) John Cena! And lets see the forum explode with rage if that happens!!! 

Now i will get off this thread before my brain explodes with annoyance over some of the stupid, illogical posts on here


----------



## Forit

jblvdx said:


> The overrun mainevent of last weeks show drew a 3.4 which Punk was involved in and got top billing for.
> 
> The overrun segment of this weeks which had longer overun benefitting it only drew a 3.14 rating
> 
> So Punk is partly responsible for the higher rating last week. And yes he is partly responsible for the low rating this week. I just cant stand the short term memory loss peopel have on this thread where a man who cosistently drew good and healthy numbers for weeks has been immediately discounted because of the bad numbers he drew in one show.



This doesnt even make sense. If punk is responsible for the increase then how come the next week he loses viewers in two different segments the same night? 

Punk is not the rock, there is no way he can be responsible for viewership increase. It was probably because of no competition on that night.




lisa12000 said:


> Christ this thread hurts my brain!! It really is ridiculous that people attribute low segments to one person alone (especially if this is a person they dont like!) Punk is obviously not the best draw in the world atm, but he certainly isnt the worst by a long way! Lets face facts, who he is fighting is partly to blame for the low rating; Lets not forget that Miz has been buried over the last few weeks, he had a poor opening segment in the debate, he was the one that botched last week, he hasnt won a match for god knows how long - who would be overly interested in seeing a match with him at this present time esp when we consider that he was "apparently" responsible for low ratings and buy rates in the past!
> 
> If you look at it logically, Punk has been getting consistently decent (note i said decent not brilliant) figures over the last few weeks, and then all of a sudden he drops markedly this week? whats the difference? in previous weeks there has been a storyline, something to grab the interest of the viewer (champion vs champion, lauranitis, jericho etc) this week? a random pre EC match with someone who people seem to have little interest in!! He has been booked terribly, in my opinion, since he became champion again, there has been very few storylines to get interested in, although i am of the opinion he would be better dropping the title as he seems better when hes chasing rather than holding the title
> 
> Oh btw, for saying this is a pretty anti Cena forum, who do you think they will go with if they decide Punk isnt drawing therefore should drop the title? For those who think it will be Jericho youre living in a dreamworld! Hes leaving not long after WM so why will they give him the title in the long run? he will probably get it for the month run up to EM and thats it! Yep, it will go back to Mr "ratings" (this is partly sarcastic) John Cena! And lets see the forum explode with rage if that happens!!!
> 
> Now i will get off this thread before my brain explodes with annoyance over some of the stupid, illogical posts on here


Actually The Miz was drawing good numbers, better than WWE champion punk, until WWE creative mauled him. Even as part of awesome truth he drew around 400k in his segments while punk was still struggling to draw.


----------



## Brave Nash

Forit said:


> This doesnt even make sense. If punk is responsible for the increase then how come the next week he loses viewers in two different segments the same night?
> 
> Punk is not the rock, there is no way he can be responsible for viewership increase. It was probably because of no competition on that night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually The Miz was drawing good numbers, better than WWE champion punk, until WWE creative mauled him. Even as part of awesome truth he drew around 400k in his segments while punk was still struggling to draw.


Lol. Miz had Cena and than he had the rock, this is just stupid.
Punk was going against nobody's so it's easy for you to say that.


----------



## lisa12000

Forit said:


> Actually The Miz was drawing good numbers, better than WWE champion punk, until WWE creative mauled him. Even as part of awesome truth he drew around 400k in his segments while punk was still struggling to draw.


The fact is at this moment Miz has been buried by creative, hes not a person that i imagine the casual viewer would be that interested in seeing!! (remember i said atm) Im no Miz hater and ive stuck up for him in many a thread recently, but im just not interested in him atm, hes lost every match hes been in recently, his mic work is poor so the result of the match up with Punk was a foregone conclusion imo, i watched it with casual interest but thats all because i knew what was going to happen! In fact none of the in ring segments interested me this week, the best bits of raw were the promos and the drama of Cena et al and that is reflected in the main in the segment breakdown; The in ring stuff was treated as an afterthought this week imo

Also, as i said Punks segments have been drawing pretty well since the new year - until this week! and i reiterate this is down to the fact this was a random pairing, with no back story, with a guy who has been made to be irrelevant by creative, against a guy who everyone knows will feud with Jericho at the EC and post EC so why would i care about that match at all?

Edit: every in ring segment except Orton vs big show lost viewers this week

a) does this mean that Orton = Ratings? (despite what people say)
b) does this show that in ring stuff is becoming more and more irrelevant as time goes on


----------



## Brave Nash

MarkHenrysGString said:


> really? isn't punk the superstar that wwe is having doubts over due to bad ratings? ahahaha
> punk cant draw get over it, i'm simply stating the truth, plus what's the appeal with a skinny tatted up hobo who doesn't sleep and make's bad jokes


Than explain to me how did the ratings for the last 3 weeks increased in Punk segments. Why will I get over something when it's not true. 
The last segment for this week increased because it had a good storyline, and the HBK/Triple h increased because people thought undertaker will come plus it was a great segment no jobbers included. And who the hell wants to see Miz in the ring simple answer. Crappy jokes my ass the casual love those jokes here in the IWC are mad like if the jokes are necessarily for them it's not crappy to me I enjoy it, haters don't so even if it was a funny joke they will still hate on it because its from Punk when actually dwayne has the same corny jokes. Punk doesn't sleep so what is that an insult well hes the wwe champion he's always busy. Punk is 6'2 he's not small.


----------



## Starbuck

> Quarter 1: Show opened at a 2.9
> Q2: Lost 49,000 viewers (Chris Jericho vs. Kofi Kingston)
> Q3: Lost 24,000 viewers (Backstage shenanigans with John Cena and Zack Ryder; John Laurinaitis and David Otunga)
> Q4: Gained 93,000 viewers (Big Show vs. Randy Orton)
> Q5: Gained 822,000 (return of Michaels, Triple H, Undertaker video) to take the show to a 3.6
> Q6: Lost 621,000 viewers (Dolph Ziggler vs. R-Truth)
> Q7: Lost 320,000 viewers (Tamina Snuka vs. Brie Bella; Eve walking into the back of an ambulance & ensuing snog with Cena)
> Q8: Lost 139,000 viewers (C.M. Punk vs. The Miz) to do a 2.8.
> Over-run: Gained 505,000 (Kane zooming Ryder off a 3ft stage) viewers to close out on a 3.1.


:lmao I knew these quarter hours were going to be interesting and they haven't disappointed lol.

First of all, opening at 2.9 is just flat out bad no matter what way you spin it and doesn't show good signs of peoples interest in the PPV this Sunday at all. The fact that all 3 matches containing the EC participants lost viewers too and well, I don't think VKM is going to be too happy come the buyrates for EC. HHH/HBK was obviously the high point of the night with a pretty big fucking gain of 800k plus. That's great and better than I was expecting tbh, especially considering the terrible overall viewership for this show. For them to be able to pull that many in again is quite the feat. 

I think it has to be said that were the positions reversed, I have no doubt that HHH/HBK would have done just as well opening the show and the debate would have done just as bad in the 10pm slot for the simple reason that nobody in the EC match is capable of drawing big numbers on their own and HHH is no matter who he's with. I think this also shows the importance of having more than a handful of legit megastar level draws on the roster. Right now they're basically relying on HHH, Taker and Cena to carry the load. Just watch what happens, probably starting from next week, when Rock and possibly Shaq/Show starts etc. They will have enough star power to open the show, to put on at 10pm and to close the show with and therefore overall viewership will be a lot higher. Right now they're only able to score big in 1 out of the big 3 timeslots because they only have enough guys for one slot basically. 

As for all this Punk/Miz whining. Is anybody really that surprised? I mean come on. Neither of them are able to do good numbers without a bigger star and their matches over the past few months have done terrible. Granted, it's still pretty shitty that that many people would tune out at that particular time in the show but still. They've never done well together and they bombed here. 

I seriously do worry for WWE after Wrestlemania tbh. What are they going to do when Rock, Taker, HHH and whoever else are all gone? No new legit stars are going to be created at Mania this year. They're still going to be stuck relying on Cena's star power alone which is fading with every passing month it seems. They are seriously going to be fucked which is why I honestly don't get why they aren't doing HHH/Punk right now. I mean fucking hell. Can't they see how much trouble they're going to be in after Extreme Rules? Nobody gives a shit about anybody on that roster right now bar the people already named. It's all well and good for Punk to sell t-shirts. Hell, he can sell as many shirts as he wants but so long as that doesn't translate into ratings revenue, live gates at house shows and PPV buys, he'll never reach the next level and WWE will be forced to keep relying on the stars of the past to make money.


----------



## Mister Hands

Starbuck said:


> I seriously do worry for WWE after Wrestlemania tbh. What are they going to do when Rock, Taker, HHH and whoever else are all gone? No new legit stars are going to be created at Mania this year. They're still going to be stuck relying on Cena's star power alone which is fading with every passing month it seems. They are seriously going to be fucked which is why I honestly don't get why they aren't doing HHH/Punk right now. I mean fucking hell. Can't they see how much trouble they're going to be in after Extreme Rules? Nobody gives a shit about anybody on that roster right now bar the people already named. It's all well and good for Punk to sell t-shirts. Hell, he can sell as many shirts as he wants but so long as that doesn't translate into ratings revenue, live gates at house shows and PPV buys, he'll never reach the next level and WWE will be forced to keep relying on the stars of the past to make money.


What's really galling is that this "I'm gonna do what's right for business, fuck what the fans and the wrestlers themselves want" Triple H would have been the perfect heel for Punk.


----------



## Jelslot

Triple h-Punk should have been a MANIA program from the start. They hot-shotted the entire thing and ruined it.


----------



## DesolationRow

Starbuck said:


> As for all this Punk/Miz whining. Is anybody really that surprised? I mean come on. Neither of them are able to do good numbers without a bigger star and their matches over the past few months have done terrible. Granted, it's still pretty shitty that that many people would tune out at that particular time in the show but still. They've never done well together and they bombed here.
> 
> I seriously do worry for WWE after Wrestlemania tbh. What are they going to do when Rock, Taker, HHH and whoever else are all gone? No new legit stars are going to be created at Mania this year.


As is almost always the case, I agree; it is quite obvious that everyone watching Raw knew that these EC "preliminaries" carried absolutely no weight, no repercussions and fundamentally no point. They were the "filler" segments of the show, if we want to be blunt about it. Jericho/Kofi was at least a very decent match. Compared to almost everything else that happened on Raw this week (which is why, curiously enough, they sort of did deserve better numbers than what they received this week), I can barely remember Ziggler/Truth and Miz/Punk (I do remember Miz being given the jobber entrance, though). 

Miz used to draw well. Hell, he could bring a gain with a lame Subway segment in the third quarter a mere six months ago. But WWE has been in overdrive tearing down everything they created with him a mere eleven months ago. Unbelievable. 

I really don't know what they're going to do. I'm guessing they're hoping Sheamus can become the new cartoon hero babyface for kids on Smackdown and hopefully he can hold the fort there into spring, summer and beyond unlike Orton. Problem is, they aren't giving him a big star/draw to go over. But he seems to be over enough that he can at least potentially do well being Smackdown's top face this year, with persistent pushing.

Meanwhile, _if_ they turn Cena, they're going to be attempting to stoke fan interest through that primarily, and at some point they'll probably have him chase Punk's championship. The ratings tend to go into the tank around May every year for a couple of weeks anyway, and I doubt they care about that too much. 

Rock's supposed to return in the summer leading into Summerslam, so there's that. 

I agree with you, though. This was the time to go for broke and push the button for CM Punk vs. Triple H at Wrestlemania with Punk going over clean. 

With Miz and now with Punk, WWE has pushed guys right to the brink of becoming new legitimate stars, and then, just when they are about to start jumping over the final series of hurdles on their merry way, they trip them to send them flying headfirst into the ground.

I will say this. I'm kind of confident that if they turned Miz face later this year, he could become bigger in ratings revenue than Punk. He at least has a track record from the past of doing well in that realm of WWE's business, during the height of his heel days. 

Punk generally needs substantive storylines, big stars and bundles of hype to gain any considerable number of viewers. At this time, he's essentially another Orton that at least (for the last seven months) sells merchandise like Cena.


----------



## azhkz

I agree on this, HHH/Punk is 10 times more bigger and 10 times more important than Punk/Y2J. Y2J will put over Punk at WM and it still wont do anything for Punk's career. Period.


----------



## LarryCoon

Interesting point there. Look at the segments which gained incredible ratings. They are all storyline angles. Wrestling matches which feature the current WWE champion and World Heavyweight champion couldn't get the attention of fans.


----------



## A-C-P

DesolationRow said:


> As is almost always the case, I agree; it is quite obvious that everyone watching Raw knew that these EC "preliminaries" carried absolutely no weight, no repercussions and fundamentally no point. They were the "filler" segments of the show, if we want to be blunt about it. Jericho/Kofi was at least a very decent match. Compared to almost everything else that happened on Raw this week (which is why, curiously enough, they sort of did deserve better numbers than what they received this week), I can barely remember Ziggler/Truth and Miz/Punk (I do remember Miz being given the jobber entrance, though).
> 
> Miz used to draw well. Hell, he could bring a gain with a lame Subway segment in the third quarter a mere six months ago. But WWE has been in overdrive tearing down everything they created with him a mere eleven months ago. Unbelievable.
> 
> I really don't know what they're going to do. I'm guessing they're hoping Sheamus can become the new cartoon hero babyface for kids on Smackdown and hopefully he can hold the fort there into spring, summer and beyond unlike Orton. Problem is, they aren't giving him a big star/draw to go over. But he seems to be over enough that he can at least potentially do well being Smackdown's top face this year, with persistent pushing.
> 
> Meanwhile, _if_ they turn Cena, they're going to be attempting to stoke fan interest through that primarily, and at some point they'll probably have him chase Punk's championship. The ratings tend to go into the tank around May every year for a couple of weeks anyway, and I doubt they care about that too much.
> 
> Rock's supposed to return in the summer leading into Summerslam, so there's that.
> 
> I agree with you, though. This was the time to go for broke and push the button for CM Punk vs. Triple H at Wrestlemania with Punk going over clean.
> 
> With Miz and now with Punk, WWE has pushed guys right to the brink of becoming new legitimate stars, and then, just when they are about to start jumping over the final series of hurdles on their merry way, they trip them to send them flying headfirst into the ground.
> 
> I will say this. I'm kind of confident that if they turned Miz face later this year, he could become bigger in ratings revenue than Punk. He at least has a track record from the past of doing well in that realm of WWE's business, during the height of his heel days.
> 
> Punk generally needs substantive storylines, big stars and bundles of hype to gain any considerable number of viewers. At this time, he's essentially another Orton that at least (for the last seven months) sells merchandise like Cena.


LIke this post alot. And unless HHH is sticking around on TV as the new "corportate mega heel" after WM (and possibly a new heel Cena as HHH's choice for "corporate" champion) and they pick up the Punk/HHH program with Cena thrown in now to after Punk's done with Jericho I really don't see where they go after EC unless they are jsut figuring they will be fine putting Cena bac as the face that jsut wins and dominates the title scene again.

But the last few years the WWE has seemed sho short-sighted when it has come to their booking its really hard to imagine them even having any kind of plan for after WM.


----------



## Starbuck

They weren't expecting Punk to blow up like he did which explains the horrific booking he received after Summerslam. They didn't know what to do with him. HHH/Taker was always the plan for Mania 28, I think we can all see that now. They decided to stick with their original plan and not do HHH/Punk because then Taker would have been left without an opponent for his 20th streak match. Of all the times for WWE to actually stick with being consistent and stick with long term booking, they do it at the one time where they should have deviated lol. Fuck this company!


----------



## Forit

Considering the WM 27 match finish, it was pretty obvious HHH/Taker was always the plan.


----------



## Carcass

Starbuck said:


> They weren't expecting Punk to blow up like he did which explains the horrific booking he received after Summerslam. They didn't know what to do with him. HHH/Taker was always the plan for Mania 28, I think we can all see that now. They decided to stick with their original plan and not do HHH/Punk because then Taker would have been left without an opponent for his 20th streak match. Of all the times for WWE to actually stick with being consistent and stick with long term booking, they do it at the one time where they should have deviated lol. Fuck this company!


They could've easily went with Jericho vs Taker. Make it seem like the videos were about Taker, then have Jericho fool the fans by coming out as Taker and challenge the Streak.


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> They weren't expecting Punk to blow up like he did which explains the horrific booking he received after Summerslam. They didn't know what to do with him. HHH/Taker was always the plan for Mania 28, I think we can all see that now. They decided to stick with their original plan and not do HHH/Punk because then Taker would have been left without an opponent for his 20th streak match. Of all the times for WWE to actually stick with being consistent and stick with long term booking, they do it at the one time where they should have deviated lol. Fuck this company!


Well said here, Agree totally here that HHH/Taker 2 has been in the plans for the begininng and they only looked at the "Punk Shoot" as something to get them through the summer, its become clearly evident to me that they never expected Punk;s popularity to blow up like it did. But I seriously don't see why Jericho couldn't have been brought in to face Taker, hell he could've even used to same story/character as he is using in the Punk fued. Everyone is a Jericho wannabe/clone and he has returned to do the one thing that nobody has done/nobody will be able to copy, be the first man to beat Taker at WM.

But again, like I said before, its just the continuance of complete short-term thinking/booking by the WWE. They are hurting for new face stars, BAD and had a huge opportunity to possibly create one in Punk by having him go over HHH in a WM program but instead they go for the "bigger match" in HHH/Taker instead.


----------



## DesolationRow

Haha, true. Of course, the actual complex seedling of a storyline they had with Triple H as COO with the cryptic "Conspiracy" and Awesome Truth and Miz and Laurinaitis and who was pulling Johnny Ace's strings and who was really out to sabotage Punk and could Del Rio be the new Corporate Champion and when was Stephanie going to come back with a vengeance to derail Punk for what Punk did to her father and how he disrespected her and her husband and what was the Bigger Picture of Nexus and why did they bury The Undertaker and who the Anonymous GM was and how did that tie into Triple H as COO and why did Awesome Truth help both sides in the Triple H/Punk war at Night of Champions and why did they never develop the Punk/Trips relationship and why did Punk never get revenge on Nash and why did they have to have Nash and Triple H feud and did Nash _really_ text himself and who brought Nash in and what kind of alliance did Laurinaitis create with Vickie Guerrero and was Dolph Ziggler being groomed all along to overthrow Punk and why was Laurinaitis so wishy-washy with Awesome Truth and are we all supposed to forgive the roster, the announcers and the cameramen for bailing on Triple H and was that leading anywhere and was there ever a "Conspiracy" in the first place and what could have happened if Triple H turned heel at some point this late fall/early winter or thereabouts and who is the girl in the Jericho videos and what kind of relationship does he have with Johnny Ace and is Jericho being deployed to take out Punk for a Higher Power and is Vince going to return and what if Stephanie were back so I could look at her was kind of all thrown in the fireplace, or so it seems.


----------



## A-C-P

DesolationRow said:


> Haha, true. Of course, the actual complex seedling of a storyline they had with Triple H as COO with the cryptic "Conspiracy" and Awesome Truth and Miz and Laurinaitis and who was pulling Johnny Ace's strings and who was really out to sabotage Punk and could Del Rio be the new Corporate Champion and when was Stephanie going to come back with a vengeance to derail Punk for what Punk did to her father and how he disrespected her and her husband and what was the Bigger Picture of Nexus and why did they bury The Undertaker and who the Anonymous GM was and how did that tie into Triple H as COO and why did Awesome Truth help both sides in the Triple H/Punk war at Night of Champions and why did they never develop the Punk/Trips relationship and why did Punk never get revenge on Nash and why did they have to have Nash and Triple H feud and did Nash _really_ text himself and who brought Nash in and what kind of alliance did Laurinaitis create with Vickie Guerrero and was Dolph Ziggler being groomed all along to overthrow Punk and why was Laurinaitis so wishy-washy with Awesome Truth and are we all supposed to forgive the roster, the announcers and the cameramen for bailing on Triple H and was that leading anywhere and was there ever a "Conspiracy" in the first place and what could have happened if Triple H turned heel at some point this late fall/early winter or thereabouts and who is the girl in the Jericho videos and what kind of relationship does he have with Johnny Ace and is Jericho being deployed to take out Punk for a Higher Power and is Vince going to return and what if Stephanie were back so I could look at her was kind of all thrown in the fireplace, or so it seems.


I think I may be losing my mind because this post actually made sense to me :lmao


----------



## Forit

They went with HHH/Taker because HHH,cena are the only two who are believable to end the streak. Jericho vs Taker wont draw shit. Vince mcmahon desperately needs a million buys with all the mania promotion for an ENTIRE year, otherwise he would look like an idiot. 

Besides Rock,cena tag match survivor series buys were not that impressive, so mania needs HHH/taker imo.


----------



## Starbuck

DesolationRow said:


> Haha, true. Of course, the actual complex seedling of a storyline they had with Triple H as COO with the cryptic "Conspiracy" and Awesome Truth and Miz and Laurinaitis and who was pulling Johnny Ace's strings and who was really out to sabotage Punk and could Del Rio be the new Corporate Champion and when was Stephanie going to come back with a vengeance to derail Punk for what Punk did to her father and how he disrespected her and her husband and what was the Bigger Picture of Nexus and why did they bury The Undertaker and who the Anonymous GM was and how did that tie into Triple H as COO and why did Awesome Truth help both sides in the Triple H/Punk war at Night of Champions and why did they never develop the Punk/Trips relationship and why did Punk never get revenge on Nash and why did they have to have Nash and Triple H feud and did Nash _really_ text himself and who brought Nash in and what kind of alliance did Laurinaitis create with Vickie Guerrero and was Dolph Ziggler being groomed all along to overthrow Punk and why was Laurinaitis so wishy-washy with Awesome Truth and are we all supposed to forgive the roster, the announcers and the cameramen for bailing on Triple H and was that leading anywhere and was there ever a "Conspiracy" in the first place and what could have happened if Triple H turned heel at some point this late fall/early winter or thereabouts and who is the girl in the Jericho videos and what kind of relationship does he have with Johnny Ace and is Jericho being deployed to take out Punk for a Higher Power and is Vince going to return and what if Stephanie were back so I could look at her was kind of all thrown in the fireplace, or so it seems.


:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

Ouch. Just reading that hurts my head both from laughter and stupidity. I mean Jesus Christ. I'm amazed anybody in that company can ever walk out the door and make it to work in the morning they're all so damn aimless. fpalm Although to be fair to them, I guess half of that stuff was speculated by us lol.


----------



## A-C-P

Forit said:


> They went with HHH/Taker because HHH,cena are the only two who are believable to end the streak. Jericho vs Taker wont draw shit. Vince mcmahon desperately needs a million buys with all the mania promotion for an ENTIRE year, otherwise he would look like an idiot.
> 
> Besides Rock,cena tag match survivor series buys were not that impressive, so mania needs HHH/taker imo.


Vince McMahon needs to create some new stars and draws outside of Cena and HHH for the future of the company ALOT more than he NEEDS 1,000,000 buys for this year's Wrestlemania IMO. Plus with the Cena/Rock match it would get close to 1,000,000 buy anyways I would think. The SVS buyrate was not impressive for ALOT of reasons, but The Rock's drawing power being weaker than he thought was not one of them.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

If Taker/HHH was indeed the plan since last year, I wonder if they were considering changing it to Punk/HHH once Punk's popularity blew up. I mean, with the way their feud ended and the way they were going with it, it looked like that was the way they were going. I mean why else have HHH pointlessly beat CM Punk when it was Punk who really could've used the win unless they were saving it for Mania? I don't know how long it was planned for Jericho to come back but if it was after NoC, then WWE probably figured they could do a whole "Best in the World" storyline and tie it in with the WWE Title in hopes that would boost the WWE Title's credibility in some people's eyes. Then they decided to just put back on the plan for Taker/HHH.

The only question is then what would've happened with Taker? Would he have indeed faced Mark Henry like it was rumored? Would he have faced someone like Wade Barrett or Cody Rhodes and get them over majorly by having them challenge the streak? I mean there's so many possibilities to all ends. I think if they really stress the fact to the casuals that the title "Best in the World" is synonymous with the WWE Title and that is what the whole Punk/Jericho feud revolves around, it could help the WWE Title's credibility to the casuals. But then the problem is the feud won't even be in the three biggest matches on the card if Show/Shaq does happen. So that makes it hard enough to take it as "Two of the best fighting to see who the best in the world at wrestling is!" I think it's possible, but it'll be very difficult with three bigger matches on the card. Maybe if it was just Rock/Cena as the only bigger match it could work, but Taker/HHH and now possibly Show/Shaq just makes it seem like a middle of the card match.

Punk/HHH would've obviously helped Punk out a lot more than Punk/Jericho, and plus if they did that and went with Taker/Jericho, those two matches are about equal in starpower, drawing, and importance so neither of them would look like a "middle of the card" match. It would be like there were four big matches, rather than just three, and the WWE Title match would be one of those big matches.

This all being said, I suspect match quality wise Punk/Jericho is the best option of the bunch, and Taker/HHH they could make another "drama-filled" match like last year. I couldn't see Punk/HHH or Taker/Jericho being as good or dramatic as the two they put on. So at least that's one thing good that came out of all of this.

Edit:


> Haha, true. Of course, the actual complex seedling of a storyline they had with Triple H as COO with the cryptic "Conspiracy" and Awesome Truth and Miz and Laurinaitis and who was pulling Johnny Ace's strings and who was really out to sabotage Punk and could Del Rio be the new Corporate Champion and when was Stephanie going to come back with a vengeance to derail Punk for what Punk did to her father and how he disrespected her and her husband and what was the Bigger Picture of Nexus and why did they bury The Undertaker and who the Anonymous GM was and how did that tie into Triple H as COO and why did Awesome Truth help both sides in the Triple H/Punk war at Night of Champions and why did they never develop the Punk/Trips relationship and why did Punk never get revenge on Nash and why did they have to have Nash and Triple H feud and did Nash really text himself and who brought Nash in and what kind of alliance did Laurinaitis create with Vickie Guerrero and was Dolph Ziggler being groomed all along to overthrow Punk and why was Laurinaitis so wishy-washy with Awesome Truth and are we all supposed to forgive the roster, the announcers and the cameramen for bailing on Triple H and was that leading anywhere and was there ever a "Conspiracy" in the first place and what could have happened if Triple H turned heel at some point this late fall/early winter or thereabouts and who is the girl in the Jericho videos and what kind of relationship does he have with Johnny Ace and is Jericho being deployed to take out Punk for a Higher Power and is Vince going to return and what if Stephanie were back so I could look at her was kind of all thrown in the fireplace, or so it seems.


Ow... my head.


----------



## A-C-P

Obis;11030541
This all being said said:


> I get your point in this paragraph. But depending on how the story between Punk/HHH developed and what was on the line a Punk/HHH match could carry alot of dramtic appeal, as could a JEricho/Taker match depending again on how the story would've developed and how Jericho was made to look upon his return. With HHH/Taker though you do get the 2 biggest stars (outside Rock and Cena) in one match.


----------



## Forit

DesolationRow said:


> Haha, true. Of course, the actual complex seedling of a storyline they had with Triple H as COO with the cryptic "Conspiracy" and Awesome Truth and Miz and Laurinaitis and who was pulling Johnny Ace's strings and who was really out to sabotage Punk and could Del Rio be the new Corporate Champion and when was Stephanie going to come back with a vengeance to derail Punk for what Punk did to her father and how he disrespected her and her husband and what was the Bigger Picture of Nexus and why did they bury The Undertaker and who the Anonymous GM was and how did that tie into Triple H as COO and why did Awesome Truth help both sides in the Triple H/Punk war at Night of Champions and why did they never develop the Punk/Trips relationship and why did Punk never get revenge on Nash and why did they have to have Nash and Triple H feud and did Nash _really_ text himself and who brought Nash in and what kind of alliance did Laurinaitis create with Vickie Guerrero and was Dolph Ziggler being groomed all along to overthrow Punk and why was Laurinaitis so wishy-washy with Awesome Truth and are we all supposed to forgive the roster, the announcers and the cameramen for bailing on Triple H and was that leading anywhere and was there ever a "Conspiracy" in the first place and what could have happened if Triple H turned heel at some point this late fall/early winter or thereabouts and who is the girl in the Jericho videos and what kind of relationship does he have with Johnny Ace and is Jericho being deployed to take out Punk for a Higher Power and is Vince going to return and what if Stephanie were back so I could look at her was kind of all thrown in the fireplace, or so it seems.



lmao. The real "Summer or Punk".


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

A-C-P said:


> I get your point in this paragraph. But depending on how the story between Punk/HHH developed and what was on the line a Punk/HHH match could carry alot of dramtic appeal, as could a JEricho/Taker match depending again on how the story would've developed and how Jericho was made to look upon his return. With HHH/Taker though you do get the 2 biggest stars (outside Rock and Cena) in one match.


Perhaps Punk/HHH could've carried just as much dramatic appeal as Taker/HHH... don't know if I can see it being as good as Punk/Jericho. And Taker/Jericho is the same. 

But honestly, with how they booked the Taker/HHH match last year, and with the promos HHH has cut, there has to be some fear (or happiness for some) that HHH will end the streak. I didn't get that feeling last year besides the few seconds after HHH hit that tombstone on Taker, but this year with how HHH has said he'd have to finish the job and that he doesn't want to end the "brand" of the Undertaker because it's bad for business and how he'll likely be pushed eventually in some way to the point where he'll want to. It seems like they're really preparing us for Taker's streak ending and HHH being the man to do it.

Hopefully I'm wrong because it would be a terrible decision, but I have a somewhat strong feeling they're gonna have HHH end the streak. We'll see though...


----------



## Carcass

Honestly, if it leads to a huge Cena/HHH heel team with Punk being the top face fighting them, I'd have no problem with HHH ending the streak. I'd never thought I'd say that.


----------



## A-C-P

Carcass said:


> Honestly, if it leads to a huge Cena/HHH heel team with Punk being the top face fighting them, I'd have no problem with HHH ending the streak. I'd never thought I'd say that.


This is the ONLY way I would be ok with HHH ending the Streak, but you are 100% correct as I never thought I would say that either.


----------



## Starbuck

One promo and HHH has you all converted. The man is a legend lol.


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> One promo and HHH has you all converted. The man is a legend lol.


Converted to what? You don't have to try and sell me on the fact that HHH is a "legend" in the wrestling business.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I'm prepping myself for the worst...

... thing is, I still wouldn't be okay with HHH ending the streak. A Cena/HHH heel alliance can still happen and be just as effective whether HHH ends the streak or not. If it's a fear of whether HHH will get booed or not that would make them have him end the streak, just listen to the reaction the crowd gave him after he said "THIS WILL ALL BE MINE!" He's still capable of getting heat with the right lines, and that's all they'd need to do. 

Of course, I'm one of those few who's against anyone ending the streak who won't gain anything from it, not just HHH (and I mean that in relation to the whole debate "Should a younger guy end the streak who gain a lot from it, or should a legend end the streak which would be more fitting, but won't really do anything for that legend). Besides, if a Cena/HHH alliance did happen and they had Taker keep the streak this year, it would be the perfect set-up for Taker/Cena next year.


----------



## D.M.N.

Been updating the ratings I have as hadn't updated it since December. Some 2012 stats so far:

RAW
- 1 out of 7 episodes have averaged over 5 million (compared with 2 out of 7 for last year)
- No episodes have averaged under 4 million, although the January 9th episode was dangerously close with 4.002 million.
- RAW is currently averaging lower than this time last year - *4.47 million* for this year compared with *4.86 million* for the first 7 episodes last year an decrease of 0.39 million.
- Rather worrying though is when you compare the 4.47 million average with 2010, the first 7 episodes in 2010 averaged *5.31 million*, so they've lost nearly 1 million viewers in two years. And that was when they had TNA competition on Monday's...

SmackDown
- 5 out of 6 episodes have averaged over 3 million
- The only episode to average under 3 million was on January 6th with 2.59 million
- SmackDown is currently averaging higher than this time last year - *3.11 million* for this year compared with *2.99 million* for the first 6 episodes last year an increase of 0.12 million.

Ignoring RAW's drop for a second and looking at SmackDown's 0.12 million increase. Is that down to Daniel Bryan as champion _or_ the fact that SmackDown superstars are being featured on RAW? I think the latter, RAW is helping SmackDown.

*BUT* is that hurting RAW? Ignoring who is or who is not champion, is the overlap actually hurting RAW's viewership and hurting WWE's ability to develop new stars? If you don't like SmackDown then you may be put off watching RAW because SmackDown wrestlers on there (or if you are unable to receive Syfy for instance). This is a point beyond the weekly breakdowns but is SmackDown stars being on RAW hurting their ability to develop new stars for RAW and in the process hurting the ratings?


----------



## Starbuck

^^^^^^ That's actually a really good point about the supershows helping SD. I never thought of it like that and it really makes sense when you think about it. I don't think it's happening in reverse though where SD is hurting Raw. I think it's more down to the fact that Raw has become so formulaic and has little star power. For the _entertainment_ show of the company, merely having simple, basic storylines centered around wrestling like SD isn't going to cut it. They need stars and need them fast along with all the other over the top shit Raw is known for lol. 



A-C-P said:


> Converted to what? You don't have to try and sell me on the fact that HHH is a "legend" in the wrestling business.


It was a joke lol. So many people were freaking the fuck out over a third HHH/Taker match and feud for Mania this year, including myself, yet after the promo on Raw a lot of peoples opinions seem to have changed regarding the matter. 

For the record, I don't think or want HHH to end the streak. I don't think or want anybody to end the streak. But holy fuck if it happens when I'm there for it live and then later in the night we get a Cena heel turn on top of it you better know I'm going to mark out like I've never marked before lol.


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> ^^^^^^ That's actually a really good point about the supershows helping SD. I never thought of it like that and it really makes sense when you think about it. I don't think it's happening in reverse though where SD is hurting Raw. I think it's more down to the fact that Raw has become so formulaic and has little star power. For the _entertainment_ show of the company, merely having simple, basic storylines centered around wrestling like SD isn't going to cut it. They need stars and need them fast along with all the other over the top shit Raw is known for lol.
> 
> 
> 
> It was a joke lol. So many people were freaking the fuck out over a third HHH/Taker match and feud for Mania this year, including myself, yet after the promo on Raw a lot of peoples opinions seem to have changed regarding the matter.
> 
> For the record, I don't think or want HHH to end the streak. I don't think or want anybody to end the streak. But holy fuck if it happens when I'm there for it live and then later in the night we get a Cena heel turn on top of it you better know I'm going to mark out like I've never marked before lol.


I'll second that, ther ea few things that can cause me to "mark out" anymore but these would be 2 of them.


----------



## Forit

Is taker's streak is going to end, HHH is not the guy who is going to do it. HHH just respects him too much. Its one of the reasons he tapped out at mania despite being a top star.


----------



## Starbuck

HHH always taps out at Mania. He's a bitch lol.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> It was a joke lol. So many people were freaking the fuck out over a third HHH/Taker match and feud for Mania this year, including myself, yet after the promo on Raw a lot of peoples opinions seem to have changed regarding the matter.


Too true. My opinion changed after Taker returned, but then the week after with the "This is not over" promo, I was sold on it.



> HHH always taps out Mania. He's a bitch lol.


Either at Mania, to Cena, or he who must not be named.


----------



## Carcass

Starbuck said:


> One promo and HHH has you all converted. The man is a legend lol.



It's more the possibility of Punk taking feuding with a heel duo of Cena/HHH and maybe having a match teaming with The Rock to take them on at Summerslam. However, I better not get myself to excited for the possibility of a Punk/Rock vs Cena/HHH feud. Knowing the WWE they'll go in a completely different direction, keep both Cena and HHH face and have a Miz vs HHH match or something.


----------



## Rock316AE

HHH is not staying after WM, just like last year, Cena is not turning heel and there's no reason to end the streak no matter what, especially not HHH who doesn't need it at all. If you can make a clone with Rock's charisma, Rock's look, Hogan's marketability, Angle's wrestling, Austin's badassness? then MAYBE we can talk about it.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Starbuck said:


> HHH always taps out at Mania. He's a bitch lol.


this line with your sig just made me lol so fucking hard

i cant stop laughing...
damn you :lmao
:lmao
:lmao


----------



## A-C-P

Rock316AE said:


> HHH is not staying after WM, just like last year, Cena is not turning heel and there's no reason to end the streak no matter what, especially not HHH who doesn't need it at all. If you can make a clone with Rock's charisma, Rock's look, Hogan's marketability, Angle's wrestling, Austin's badassness? then MAYBE we can talk about it.


So let me get this straight you think the WWE's solution to the ratings is going to be to change absolutely NOTHING? Cause that would be a super idea, after WM having HHH go off TV again and go back to the same old sotryline of Cena "overcoming" random heel # 46598759867 they've been putting on TV for the past 6 years.


----------



## Rock316AE

A-C-P said:


> So let me get this straight you think the WWE's solution to the ratings is going to be to change absolutely NOTHING?


I'm talking about reality, what I KNOW they're going to do. I'm not going to write pointless fantasy storylines when I know 100% that it's not happening. HHH is going back to his backstage position, Cena is not turning. that's what happening, like it or not, don't see the point here.


----------



## A-C-P

Rock316AE said:


> I'm talking about reality, what I KNOW they're going to do. I'm not going to write pointless fantasy storylines when I know 100% that it's not happening. HHH is going back to his backstage position, Cena is not turning. that's what happening, like it or not, don't see the point here.


Do you work for the WWE? If not, then you don't KNOW whats going to happen your just guessing whats going to happen like the rest us us, you don't know more than anyone else here (eventhough you think you do) and neither do I for that matter. Even if what you think makes more sense still doesn't mean you KNOW for a FACT that its happening.

Anyways thats whats a forum is for to discuss whats happening and what you wish would've happened or what you would like to see happen. If I (and most other posters IMO) wanted to just know the "facts" and read what the dirtsheets and newsletters say we'd just go read the damn things.


----------



## Carcass

Rock316AE is right. As awesome as it would be, do you honestly think WWE would do some huge angle with Cena turning heel and possibly HHH too and teaming them up? 10 years ago? Sure. These days? No.


----------



## A-C-P

Carcass said:


> Rock316AE is right. As awesome as it would be, do you honestly think WWE would do some huge angle with Cena turning heel and possibly HHH too and teaming them up? 10 years ago? Sure. These days? No.


I agree that that is the most likely scenerio but my point is none of us KNOW for a FACT whats going to happen. And really to me the purpose of the forums is to discuss things like this that would be awesome to see, not to just post a repeat of what has already happened or what the newsletters and dirtsheets say, b/c IMO this place would be pretty boring if thats all it was.


----------



## Starbuck

Yep. WWE has no balls anymore. They haven't had them for a long time which is why they're in the situation they're currently in right now. I don't expect them to shake things up and shock me anymore because I'm 99% certain that they won't do it.


----------



## Carcass

We need to get Doc Brown to go back in time, clone Vince before he got castrated and bring the clone back to this tame and replace the current Vince with the clone.


----------



## A-C-P

Carcass said:


> We need to get Doc Brown to go back in time, clone Vince before he got castrated and bring the clone back to this tame and replace the current Vince with the clone.


Now theres an idea I can get behind :lmao


----------



## Starbuck

Don't even think you need to be that drastic. That company is dying for freshness and something new. It's pretty simple really. They need to shake shit up and have some new decision makers. Vince doesn't need to retire fully but I honest to God think we'd see such a difference from top to bottom if he started letting HHH or whoever the fuck is going to start running things _actually_ start running things.


----------



## Rock316AE

Back to ratings, who do you think is finally going to bring the "big 4.0"? I'm not even talking about overall after this horrendous rating, just a segment. Maybe Taker when he's there on RAW next week. They got crazy star power in March 5 from Boston, Rock, Taker, HBK, HHH and 99% Shaq, + Boston is usually a good crowd. I was going to predict a 4.0 overall for this but again, after this week's number? can't see that, WWE is too irrelevant now.


----------



## Snothlisberger

oops. double post


----------



## Snothlisberger

HHH is killing this company. Plain and simple.


----------



## Starbuck

They'll get there when they have more than HHH/Taker to work with. Right now they're suffering because they have nothing to bring the overall viewership higher. If they have HHH/Taker, Shaq and Rock/Cena, I have no doubt that maybe even all 3 could reach a 4.0 for their individual segments and obviously higher than that as the numbers in the past have proven. If the overall viewership for this weeks show had have been the same as last week, I think the HHH/HBK segment would have hit 4.0. Like I said, the overall shitty performance is hurting them. We seen it before with Rock. His appearance on his birthday show and the overall was only a 3.2 or whatever it was. It takes more than just one guy and one angle to pull big numbers like that.


----------



## A-C-P

IF they are going to pull a 4.0 at all its going to be the March 5th show from Boston, they will have all the star power available to them (minus Stone Cold) on that show. Other than that maybe the Raw's before Mania and after Mania could draw rating close to 4.0

I just hope the shows going forward are more like the show they put on TV this past monday (eventhoguh the ratings didn't reflect it the show was acutally pretty entertaining) rather then like the Raw the week before that was full of video packages and recaps.


----------



## Rock316AE

I just don't see it, Rock is coming back in the 27 RAW, if next week is a 3.1-3.2 or something like that, what he can do to bring this up to a 3.7-3.8? It's almost impossible today. The audience might not be there, they drove them away with their terrible roster and bland show concept, The last 4.0 was for Rock's segment in Boston, after that you need to go all the way back to the 4.1 on Rock's birthday(overall was 3.5 BTW). Shaq can be a big factor in this if he's even close to Floyd and his star power. If it's the same situation as last year with million viewers turn off after a big segment? it's impossible today. They did a 4.02 last year in the second hour of RAW in Chicago BTW.


----------



## Starbuck

Didn't they do a 3.8 last year with the show with HHH/Taker/HBK and Rock/Cena/Miz?


----------



## Rock316AE

Yes, overall, but they did 4.06(my mistake)for the second hour on that show. That was the first 4.0 in a long time.


----------



## Starbuck

Imagine they had Shaq on that show too? They would have been well over 4.0. They just need the sustain the viewership at a high level instead of all these massive gains and losses throughout which end up hurting the overall number.


----------



## ViolenceIsGolden

Wow this thread is unbelievable LOL.


----------



## Starbuck

ViolenceIsGolden said:


> Wow this thread is unbelievable LOL.


----------



## Rock316AE

Yes, if they had another big segment? easily a 4.0, because in the first hour they did 3.56, now if Taker/HBK/HHH was the opener then a big name in 10pm slot then Rock/Cena/Miz? 4.0-4.1. I wonder if Austin is going to be on RAW in March, he can do a promo on Taker's streak after his short segment with HHH last year WM. Austin is still huge as a TV draw. Or maybe a promo with Rock? Would be awesome to see them in a real segment again with a mic in the ring.


----------



## Starbuck

With all the star power they're going to have with Rock, Cena, HHH, Taker and Shaq, I hardly think they need Austin lol.


----------



## WWE

Nah Austin is always welcome xD


----------



## robertdeniro

Ending the streak at WM 28 will effect Rock/Cena match in a bad way since it's the main event 
i mean the crowd will be shocked..unless if Taker/HHH match is the main event and i don't see this happening.


----------



## Starbuck

For star power purposes I meant. I certainly won't say no to Stone Cold if he wants to show up on Raw. They really need to do another TE with him as host. He was a beast on that thing.


----------



## Carcass

Yeah, another Austin appearance is always welcomed. If they have him I would love to see him to some segments with CM Punk and the Rock.

If they do another season hopefully they get people who the fans aren't gonna forget about as soon as the show is over. It's sad that Austin was the only memorable thing from that show.


----------



## ViolenceIsGolden

Well one thing this rating proves is shitty tv generates shitty ratings. This really isn't a matter of star power because Cena was on the show and everybody else that can "draw raings" in this day were on the show. The problem is everything else about the show. Raw last night especially the Ryder/Kane/Cena/Eve segment is the type of thing that worst moments in pro wrestling history are made of. For a show right before Elimination Chamber ppv and Wrestlemania drawing closer and closer this was just about as bad as you can get. The one moment that was well executed and highly thought out was the HHH/HBK wrestlemania build up segment but that alone can't save the piss poor show.


----------



## Rock316AE

Austin's TE promos were money every week, And Austin can always bring a bigger audience, they can use him to do a special show or a promo on a main feud, will bring more interest. Maybe he will be the referee in Shaq/Show. In general, when you got The Rock in 2012 for 5 weeks in a row, Rock/Austin segment is a must.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Wow... to think of all the starpower there...

Get an Austin/Rock/Undertaker/Vince/HHH/HBK/Cena segment. That would be pretty fucking huge, even if combining the Taker/HHH feud with the Rock/Cena feud makes no sense at all, not to mention Vince being thrown in there randomly... hell forget Cena and HBK and get an Attitude Era roast going. With Rock ripping on Taker, HHH, Vince, Austin.. and even himself in classic Rock fashion. Maybe making fun of the way he used to talk in promos.


----------



## Brave Nash

I think Punk did 3.9 which it was close to 4.0 ratings, who knows maybe Punk/Jericho with a hot segment its not impossible and than maybe stone cold Steve Austin comes out saying that he wants to be the ref in the wm match. That will be fucking awesome.


----------



## The Host

robertdeniro said:


> Ending the streak at WM 28 will effect Rock/Cena match in a bad way since it's the main event
> i mean the crowd will be shocked..unless if Taker/HHH match is the main event and i don't see this happening.


Come on cut the crap guys, Streak is never going to end.


----------



## Mr.S

DesolationRow said:


> Probably approximately the same, because the primary draws in this program, in descending order, are Triple H, then The Undertaker and then Michaels is a distant third, though he's obviously going to benefit by being a "special attraction" (though you could argue that Trips and Taker behoove from that general moniker, but to a considerably lesser extent--and especially in the case of Triple H who's been back, on and off, since midsummer).
> 
> The writing to the angle is helping it a lot as well. Having Undertaker issue the challenge to Triple H? Brilliant twist. The new wrinkle of Triple H not wanting to destroy the Taker brand because it's good for business? Genius. The writers can't be coming up with this, it has to be all Triple H and Undertaker.


I doubt that. I doubt if people actually give a shit about HHH & Taker anymore. HHH vs Taker segment last day's Main-Event had a dissapointing rating & they went sky high this time. Lets be honest they advertised Shawn anyway & he started the promo.

Next week we'll give a clear idea. I expect a Steady Dive.


----------



## kokepepsi

Even though the hhh/taker/shawn segment did good.
What makes me think it's a little underwhelming is the fact that so few viewers tuned in at the start.
Can't you make the case that those who left at the start or didn't bother to tune in, showed up at the 10pm slot.
Maybe the real gain was just 500k-300k given the circumstances.

Either way if it legit got 800k due to shawn/hhh/taker then they fucked up and it should have ended the show since it would have done way more in the overrun. 1million+ easy


----------



## D.M.N.

Due to President's Day, Monday's cable ratings are *delayed until tomorrow*. So our weekly ratings argument is delayed by 24 hours. In the meantime, I think I should post how the comparative show did this time last years:

February 21st, 2011
Hour 1 - 5.892m
Hour 2 - 5.820m

Very obviously year-on-year, RAW is going to record a big decline because that February 21st show was coming off The Rock's return the previous week. I think it should be late 4m's/early 5m's even considering last week's poor rating. Hour 2 should be higher than Hour 1, but who knows.


----------



## Wagg

D.M.N. said:


> Due to President's Day, Monday's cable ratings are *delayed until tomorrow*. So our weekly ratings argument is delayed by 24 hours. In the meantime, I think I should post how the comparative show did this time last years:
> 
> February 21st, 2011
> Hour 1 - 5.892m
> Hour 2 - 5.820m
> 
> Very obviously year-on-year, *RAW is going to record a big decline because that February 21st show was coming off The Rock's return the previous week.* I think it should be late 4m's/early 5m's even considering last week's poor rating. Hour 2 should be higher than Hour 1, but who knows.


And because of the 2/21/11 Sting promos.


----------



## Starbuck

Shit! I have to wait a whole day before eating my popcorn and watching the shit hit the fan? Dammit!


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> Shit! I have to wait a whole day before eating my popcorn and watching the shit hit the fan? Dammit!


I know not sure what I will do for my entertainment tonight, well at least there is a live SD to watch.


----------



## deatawaits

Well looks like we will have to wait.Let's predict the numbers though,I think this raw should have done good as it was after a ppv,with two cena promos(one addressing his feud with the rock),And a huge taker/hhh segment.It has to do good and if doesn't I don't know what will.
about 3.5-6


----------



## Rock316AE

The rating is not going to be even close to last year, last year there was a huge buzz on the wrestling business everywhere because of The Rock's return. The opening segment on the show did a huge 4.2 rating after a a 3.1 the week before. and that was also the peak because people realized that Rock is not there.


----------



## DesolationRow

Yeah, but it wasn't solely because The Rock returned the week before. You had Rock coming back a week earlier, you had the Elimination Chamber PPV the night before and you had the Undertaker return videos hyping a lot of people up, all creating a perfect storm for gonzo ratings. 

It is amusing to consider that Mark Henry returned the job to Sheamus from one year ago the night after Elimination Chamber. Haha.


----------



## Rock316AE

Yes, it helped but the fact that the first quarter was the peak with a huge opening rating, says it all. I remember Meltzer even said it on his report back then and the 10pm slot didn't gain a lot. the rating would have been the same even without Taker's return or the PPV in that case.


----------



## Toplot

Rock316AE said:


> Yes, it helped but the fact that the first quarter was the peak with a huge opening rating, says it all. I remember Meltzer even said it on his report back then and the 10pm slot didn't gain a lot. the rating would have been the same even without Taker's return or the PPV in that case.


Do you have the breakdown for the raw you are talking about? Raw feb 21 2011?


----------



## wb1899

Toplot said:


> Do you have the breakdown for the raw you are talking about? Raw feb 21 2011?


In the segment-by-segment, John Morrison vs. C.M. Punk lost 507,000 viewers.
The Kofi Kingston attack on Alberto Del Rio and a Miz interview lost another 258,000 viewers. 
Eve Torres & Gail Kim vs. Bellas gained 35,000 viewers. 
Undertaker/HHH angle gained 439,000 viewers. 
Sheamus vs. Mark Henry and Hall of Fame announcement lost 324,000 viewers.
Michael Cole and Jerry Lawler in the ring 24,000 viewers. 
The first Justin Gabriel & Heath Slater vs. John Cena & Miz match gained 35,000 viewers. 
The rematch with the overrun gained 559,000.


----------



## D.M.N.

Here we go.... 4.662m and 4.596m.... http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ty-little-liars-being-human-much-more/121190/

Irrespective of demo's, I do find this slightly alarming:

USA Network
19:00 - NCIS: 3.279m / 0.8 18-49 rating
20:00 - NCIS: 4.628m / 0.9 18-49 rating
21:00 - WWE RAW: 4.662m / 1.7 18-49 rating
22:00 - WWE RAW: 4.596m / 1.8 18-49 rating

Ignoring the demo's, NCIS in the 20:00 hour very nearly beat both hours of RAW on the USA Network. I'm not sure if that was new or a repeat, but RAW should really be improving on its lead-in and should have been ~5m.

I guess compared to last week it's a relief, but they have to at the absolute minimum be over 5 million last week with Rock appearing from next week onwards.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

AAAAAAHHHHHH HERE WE GO!


----------



## kokepepsi

wtf at ncis


----------



## Starbuck

Well that's.....pretty meh. Pretty even for both hours but still not at that 5 million mark. Ah well. They won't be sweating it since Rock's back next week. If things don't pick up then they really will have to hit the panic button. Only thing is, what else can they do?


----------



## Jepo

Put the belt on the cast of NCIS.


----------



## TheWFEffect

One reason for the ratings.


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> Well that's.....pretty meh. Pretty even for both hours but still not at that 5 million mark. Ah well. They won't be sweating it since Rock's back next week. If things don't pick up then they really will have to hit the panic button. Only thing is, what else can they do?


My thoughts exactly. I guess these are just the new norm viewership #s for Raw live.

But like an above poster said (get your popcorn ready becuase) HERE WE GO!


----------



## reDREDD

Jepo said:


> Put the belt on the cast of NCIS.


:lmao :lmao

why not, NCIS = ratings!


----------



## Deakon

Starbuck said:


> Well that's.....pretty meh. Pretty even for both hours but still not at that 5 million mark. Ah well. They won't be sweating it since Rock's back next week. If things don't pick up then they really will have to hit the panic button. Only thing is, what else can they do?


The Rock is the panic button.


----------



## Rock316AE

> WWE Raw on Monday, February 20 scored a 3.24 rating the night after the Elimination Chamber PPV, up from a weak 2.99 rating last week. It was nearly identical to a 3.25 rating two weeks ago on Feb. 6.
> 
> Raw averaged 4.63 million viewers, nearly identical to an average of 4.62 million viewers on Feb. 6 prior to last week's show dropping to a near-year low.
> 
> Raw averaged 4.66 million first hour viewers, then declined one percent to an average of 4.59 million second hour viewers. It re-started Raw's pattern of the second hour declining in viewership from the first hour.
> 
> -- Compared to the President's Day Raw one year, this year's show was down from a 3.83 overall rating (half of a ratings point) and *down more than one million viewers* (5.86 million viewers last year).


Hours: 3.3 and 3.19.

I said that it's not going to be close but this is terrible. The roster is too irrelevant to do a big number, and I'm not even sure if Taker/HHH drew decent. Let's see what happens next week with Rock, although it's impossible to draw big numbers with such a terrible program and horrendous talent. Maybe Rock will FINALLY do the big 4.0, and he's also the last person who did it BTW.


----------



## linkintpark

I'm predicting below a 4.0 next week, I'd go as low as a 3.6 for the entire show.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Not good numbers at all considering it was the night after EC and we're on the road to WM. Not to mention with the advertised Taker/HHH segment... I wonder how that did? I'm sure the show had a good starting number, perhaps went way down after that, and picked back up at the 10pm timeslot. But then Cena was thrown in Q7, so it'll be interesting to see what happened with that.

Next week with Rock returning, the Taker/HHH feud now on the fast track, and Punk/Jericho 100% confirmed, if it doesn't hit 5 million or at least pretty damn close to that, it's not a good sign.


----------



## all in all...

Would you say its time to panic?


----------



## Shazayum

Good shows always score low, and the shit shows always score high.


----------



## Jairus Cain

you people do realize that ratings are irrelevant, right?


----------



## Mister Hands

A-C-P said:


> My thoughts exactly. I guess these are jsut the new norm viewership #s for Raw live.
> 
> But like an above poster said (get your popcorn ready becuase) HERE WE GO!


This is my general stance. Even if the Rock draws a big number next week, and through WM, eventually, we're gonna be right back here having this same discussion either before or just after Extreme Rules, as if WWE are the first TV show to have to deal with a diminishing audience. And when the combination of Cena, Punk/Jericho and HHH/Taker can't do much to alter the numbers in RTWM season, then you have to "start" to think that maybe it's nothing to do with the roster. Either WWE revamps itself creatively to boost interest (unlikely) or it revamps itself structurally to survive on dwindling numbers.


----------



## Rock316AE

linkintpark said:


> I'm predicting below a 4.0 next week, I'd go as low as a 3.6 for the entire show.


Who talked about a 4.0 overall? that's impossible today with the current roster. I'm talking about Rock's segment.


----------



## DesolationRow

SummerLove said:


> Good shows always score low, and the shit shows always score high.


The Force is strong with this one.


----------



## Green Light

Don't expect much of a bump next week, I'm sure Rock's segment will get a decent rating but those viewers usually don't stick around for the rest of the show


----------



## The Tony

Ouch.


----------



## Killswitch Stunner

The Miz loses ratings.


----------



## azhkz

HHH/Taker segment was in which quarter?


----------



## Toplot

azhkz said:


> HHH/Taker segment was in which quarter?


Q5, 10Pm slot. Would have done decent gain judging from the second hour drop, unlike last week HHH/HBK segment which was a huge gain close to million.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Well no fueds except HHH and Taker have actually started properly yet. Cena's cutting a promo on someone who isnt there, Punk and Jericho was just announced and they havent had a one on one promo exchange yet, and Sheamus and Daniel Bryan hasnt even become a feud yet. With Rock there it will jump next week.


----------



## Bushmaster

all in all... said:


> Would you say its time to panic?


For who to panic. The ppl on here who love breaking down ratings and blame person A or person B or you talking about Vince and the boys.


----------



## Green Light

Did anyone see that new CM Punk interview yet? When he mentioned people talking about ratings breakdowns, I couldn't help but think he meant this thread :lmao


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Green Light said:


> Did anyone see that new CM Punk interview yet? When he mentioned people talking about ratings breakdowns, I couldn't help but think he meant this thread :lmao


yeah, when he said are clueless about ratings and that there only there to please sponsers? which is true.

WWE is not just a T.V show. There are so many things like buyrates, Merchandise sales, DVD and media, ticket sales etc. Even Vince has stated that ratings arent a big deal to begin with, and he said that in fucking 1997 when WWE was not a puplic traded company.


----------



## zkorejo

jblvdx said:


> yeah, when he said are clueless about ratings and that there only there to please sponsers? which is true.
> 
> WWE is not just a T.V show. There are so many things like buyrates, Merchandise sales, DVD and media, ticket sales etc. Even Vince has stated that ratings arent a big deal to begin with, and he said that in fucking 1997 when WWE was not a puplic traded company.


Exactly! Ratings is just one of the 4 wheels for generating revenue in the wrestling business. Yet people conclude if one guy is a draw or not based on ratings only. Kinda stupid.


----------



## A-C-P

zkorejo said:


> Exactly! Ratings is just one of the 4 wheels for generating revenue in the wrestling business. Yet people conclude if one guy is a draw or not based on ratings only. Kinda stupid.


Stupid, Yes, but entertaining has hell to read!


----------



## deatawaits

Green Light said:


> Did anyone see that new CM Punk interview yet? When he mentioned people talking about ratings breakdowns, I couldn't help but think he meant this thread :lmao


They way he talked really made me feel that he does come to forum like these.Not only him but also it looks like Cena does the same.


----------



## Fanboi101

jblvdx said:


> yeah, when he said are clueless about ratings and that there only there to please sponsers? which is true.
> 
> WWE is not just a T.V show. There are so many things like buyrates, Merchandise sales, DVD and media, ticket sales etc. Even Vince has stated that ratings arent a big deal to begin with, and he said that in fucking 1997 when WWE was not a puplic traded company.


Yea, and that was also when WWF was getting killed by WCW. I bet he didn't have a 'ratings don't matter' attitude when WWF was killing WCW and ratings were sky high during the attitude era. In fact, the 'attitude era' itself was a response to the WWF losing the ratings war to WCW. It funny how ratings only matter when they are good.

Plus, if you don't think ratings are related to buyrates, ticket sales, dvds etc you are crazy. The more people that are watching your product the more people will buy dvds, merch, tickets, ppvs. It's simple logic


----------



## azhkz

Fanboi101 said:


> Yea, and that was also when WWF was getting killed by WCW. I bet he didn't have a 'ratings don't matter' attitude when WWF was killing WCW and ratings were sky high during the attitude era. In fact, the 'attitude era' itself was a response to the WWF losing the ratings war to WCW. It funny how ratings only matter when they are good.
> 
> Plus, if you don't think ratings are related to buyrates, ticket sales, dvds etc you are crazy. The more people that are watching your product the more people will buy dvds, merch, tickets, ppvs. It's simple logic


I agree with this person.


----------



## Rock316AE

Green Light said:


> Did anyone see that new CM Punk interview yet? When he mentioned people talking about ratings breakdowns, I couldn't help but think he meant this thread


I didn't hear his interview, but if he said that ratings don't matter, he's clueless(like 99% of the current WWE roster)with indy mentality and don't understand how business works, like he proved in the past so that's not surprising. it's a like an awkward dancer who blames the "curve floor" for his lack of talent. This is the TV business, ratings are everything, nothing is more important than ratings, especially in prime time on a channel like USA. The reason why you don't see another season of TE? ratings, because it was below the prime time average of USA. Meltzer wrote about it a few months ago(it's in this thread somewhere BTW)and said that no matter what on USA prime time below 2.6-2.7 is not going to last. And without USA, WWE today wouldn't do even 2.5 unless it's March, without TV, WWE is out of business. Simple as that.


----------



## wb1899

Here are the average numbers for USA Network (Primetime) and Raw

2012 average

USA Network
Viewers: 2,752,857
A18-49: 1,005,857

Raw
Viewers: 4,492,438
A18-49: 2,239,001

Raw numbers are still great. Especially the a18-49 number, which is the important number for ad revenue.


----------



## A-C-P

wb1899 said:


> Here are the average numbers for USA Network (Primetime) and Raw
> 
> 2012 average
> 
> USA Network
> Viewers: 2,752,857
> A18-49: 1,005,857
> 
> Raw
> Viewers: 4,492,438
> A18-49: 2,239,001
> 
> Raw numbers are still great. Especially the a18-49 number, which is the important number for ad revenue.


Exactly this, nobody is saying the ratings don't matter at all (ok maybe some people have said that but any half-way intelligent person wouldn't say ratings don't matter at all) 

And Punk didn't say ratings don't matter at all he said people put WAY to much emphasis on them.Just like this forum; the importance some people in this thread put on them is borderline ridiculous.

Plus that USA netowrk prime time average has also probably dropped as well over the last year b/c television as a whole is a declining media with the internet becoming more and more prevalent year after year. But sorry I really don't want to take away from the EPIC AWFULNESS this thread creates so please continue.

Now I don't want my post misunderstood this is directed more at the people who are trying to claim the WWE is going out of business b/c of the ratings. IF you want to discuss ratings from last year vs ratings from this year (or whatever somparison) I don't ahve an issue with that at all, thats what this thread is for.


----------



## SimplyIncredible

Of course ratings are important, but they are not nearly as important as the IWC likes to try and make out.

Ratings go up and down, they grow and drop. Thats TV.


----------



## JasonLives

Its really about what the USA Network is paying the WWE for each Raw show, and compare that to what kind of ad revenue the show brings into the USA Network. 
For the network its always "Is the show worth the price they are paying?".

Only USA Network knows that.

I dont think they would ever dump WWE Raw altogether but I could see them paying less for each show.


----------



## Green Light

Comparing Raw ratings to the network average is kinda pointless, nobody is saying USA is gonna drop them but it is fair and meaningful to compare them to previous Raw ratings. For some people anyway, if ratings aren't important to you then nobody is forced to discuss them. It's pretty easy to avoid now seeing as there is one sticky thread for it


----------



## FITZ

Rock316AE said:


> I didn't hear his interview, but if he said that ratings don't matter, he's clueless(like 99% of the current WWE roster)with indy mentality and don't understand how business works, like he proved in the past so that's not surprising. it's a like an awkward dancer who blames the "curve floor" for his lack of talent. This is the TV business, ratings are everything, nothing is more important than ratings, especially in prime time on a channel like USA. The reason why you don't see another season of TE? ratings, because it was below the prime time average of USA. Meltzer wrote about it a few months ago(it's in this thread somewhere BTW)and said that no matter what on USA prime time below 2.6-2.7 is not going to last. And without USA, WWE today wouldn't do even 2.5 unless it's March, without TV, WWE is out of business. Simple as that.


He didn't say that they didn't matter. Punk said they only matter to the sponsors, which is true. They are the only ones that care how many people watch a show because they want to spend their money on shows that a lot of people watch. The ratings only make WWE money because the sponsors pay for their commercials to air. 

I also don't understand what the "indy" mentality is and how that means Punk doesn't understand the business. 

I also think that WWE is a lot more than a TV business. Between ticket sales, PPV buys, and all sorts of merchandise sales they have a lot of other sources of income. You could almost make the argument that the WWE just uses TV to get people to buy their PPVs and tickets to their shows. TV is free for the viewer and the WWE uses that to get as many as possible to spend money directly on their product. 

And even if USA somehow went and dropped Raw WWE would still be on TV and I doubt they would have a hard time finding another channel to air Raw on. The fact that it's a show that gets millions of people to watch every single week makes it an appealing show for a network.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Rock316AE said:


> I didn't hear his interview, but if he said that ratings don't matter, he's clueless(like 99% of the current WWE roster)with indy mentality and don't understand how business works, like he proved in the past so that's not surprising. it's a like an awkward dancer who blames the "curve floor" for his lack of talent. *This is the TV business, ratings are everything*, nothing is more important than ratings, especially in prime time on a channel like USA. The reason why you don't see another season of TE? ratings, because it was below the prime time average of USA. Meltzer wrote about it a few months ago(it's in this thread somewhere BTW)and said that no matter what on USA prime time below 2.6-2.7 is not going to last. And without USA, WWE today wouldn't do even 2.5 unless it's March, without TV, WWE is out of business. Simple as that.


Sigh. WWE is not just a tv show. And even If it was ratings for Raw are consistently good for a non stop weeky tv program. The reason ratings have decreased over the years is because of two major reasons 1. the internet 2. DVR. Dont take a 50 year old, out of touch Meltzer as the gospel. For someone who studies Media at university, ratings dont nearly matter as much as they once did. Its not the 90's anymore, its 90's anymore in terms of TE ROCK DA GWESTEST OF ALL TIME, LGER DEN LIFE CHARATER!!. And its not the 90's in terms of ratings either.


----------



## kokepepsi

lol at meltzer out of touch.

Back in the 90s you had cable black boxes, illegal Dish hookups and VCR
OH SHIT RATINGS DON"T MATTER

LOL


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

kokepepsi said:


> lol at meltzer out of touch.
> 
> Back in the 90s you had cable black boxes, illegal Dish hookups and VCR
> OH SHIT RATINGS DON"T MATTER
> 
> LOL


This argument begins and ends with the development of the internet in the last ten years.


----------



## Rock316AE

Without the TV deal, you can't promote anything, there would be no merchandise, no PPVs and no house show because nobody can see them. The business is based on the TV shows. USA are a big reason that is still with the head above water, they will never do close on a network like Spike or something. That's proven from the 2000 move and the jump in 2006. 

To say that it's only sponsors is just plain wrong, and he obviously clueless and doesn't understand how this works in the company. WWE are booking the show from week to week based on ratings, everything they're doing in the show from the concept to the timeslots. Vince was in a panic mode for a month in October and gave the title to Cena because Del Rio did 2.7.

Ratings are everything, that's a fact. [email protected] out of touch, butthurt because he tells you the truth?


----------



## Brye

RockAE, I'm sure he knows more than you do.


----------



## Starbuck

Ratings and television are 1 piece of the puzzle. They aren't the be all end all but they sure as fuck do matter. Everything stems from the actual television show Raw because without it they can't promote the stars to sell the tickets to the live shows, the feuds to sell the PPV's and the characters to sell the merchandise. Anybody claiming otherwise is just being stupid. The fact is, while the current system being used may not be truly reflective of authentic viewing patterns, it's still the system being used where billions of dollars are changing hands every day. It is what it is and it's the system every show is measured by. Until the system changes, that's just the way it is. Besides, were things actually going well you can bet your ass everybody would be marking and giving so and so all the credit. WWE themselves would be putting it in their Did You Know's every week too. But they aren't so people get critical and start placing blame. That's where all the trolling begins and the retarded conversations start. But to say they don't matter is flat out wrong.


----------



## kokepepsi

jblvdx said:


> This argument begins and ends with the development of the internet in the last ten years.


whatever just saying shit that interfered with viewership has been around way before the internet.
As far as DVR is concerned those numbers are released by Meltzer. They take a while to come out so I never post them because of that and btw usually it's about 200k viewers overall that is lost due to DVR.


----------



## Rock316AE

Brye said:


> RockAE, I'm sure he knows more than you do.


Everything I say is based on the things Meltzer writes and facts in numbers. So no, he's not even close like he proved in the past.


----------



## PunkDrunk

If ratings didn't matter, raw would be taPed ala impact to save production costs and wouldn't need to rely on cena all year to attract the casuals etc. course It matters, falling ratings coinciding with falling buy rates isn't a freak business occurance


----------



## Brye

Rock316AE said:


> Everything I say is based on the things Meltzer writes and facts in numbers. So no, he's not even close like he proved in the past.


Jesus christ. :lmao

Good to know you can form your own opinion.

Raw will be on TV regardless of the rating. It's the only wrestling show people care about and it's still a household name regardless. Instead of caring about the ratings right now, they should try and develop actual feuds. That's their problem.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Rock316AE said:


> *Without the TV deal, you can't promote anything, there would be no merchandise, no PPVs and no house show because nobody can see them.* The business is based on the TV shows. USA are a big reason that is still with the head above water, they will never do close on a network like Spike or something. That's proven from the 2000 move and the jump in 2006.
> 
> To say that it's only sponsors is just plain wrong, and he obviously clueless and doesn't understand how this works in the company. WWE are booking the show from week to week based on ratings, everything they're doing in the show from the concept to the timeslots. Vince was in a panic mode for a month in October and gave the title to Cena because Del Rio did 2.7.
> 
> Ratings are everything, that's a fact. [email protected] out of touch, butthurt because he tells you the truth?


Yes, and Raw, like you ignored, consistently gets good ratings for a weekly broadcast for todays state of the T.V industry. Why do you think the USA network wants so many three hour Raws? And the almighty Melzter says Vince took the belt of Del Rio becuase of ratings? even though Del Rio was involved in the most watched segment of the night? Melzter knows a little more then you and I do, but you wont accept that as you piss away your money subscribing to his site.



> whatever just saying shit that interfered with viewership has been around way before the internet.


You cant just whatever that huge handicap on the T.V industry. Nothing has come close to interfering with viewership as the internet has.


----------



## Rock316AE

Brye said:


> Good to know you can form your own opinion.


Why I need an opinion on a factual subject like this? There's no "opinion" in this situation, it's right or wrong and Vince himself will tell you how wrong it is.

This is what I meant, from a few months ago:


> There was no talk whatsoever about “Tough Enough,” which given they were talking about U.S. television
> future, would indicate USA Network has decided to pass on doing a second season. However, McMahon
> announced there is a plan in place to add a third live hour on Monday nights, starting at 8 p.m., that would
> essentially be a Raw pre-game show. No date was given for the start, nor much in the way of details of
> what the show would entail.
> 
> For the same reason, “Tough Enough” was a risk because even though the ratings were far stronger than
> Ultimate Fighter going on at the same time, that wasn’t good enough for the USA Network, the No. 1 cable
> network in prime time.
> 
> Any first-run show airing in prime time on the USA Network that has to do with pro wrestling, because pro
> wrestling shows draw far lower ad revenues than the network dramas, can’t be a drain on the company’s
> prime time average, *which means anything below a 2.4 or a 2.5 rating is not going to last.*
> 
> NCIS reruns usually do in the 2.7 range in that hour. When WWE does a three hour Raw, the first hour
> usually does about the same 2.6 or 2.7. So they would have to maintain that level, and most likely there
> will be no wrestling in that first hour but simply a build for Raw. In addition, those 2.6 or 2.7's usually came
> with a big match in the first hour. They’d have to maintain a number like that weekly or the show would be
> in danger. “Tough Enough” was well received, *but in the end, it drew well below USA Network’s prime time
> average.*
> 
> Doing a show like that also indicates a lack of paying attention or ignoring of history at worst, or at best,
> pretending previous history of the industry doesn’t apply to them. Nitro did the same thing in the late 90s
> when it expanded to three hours and those in the company felt that was the kiss of death. And WCW had
> far more talent depth at the time.


----------



## A-C-P

^ And then a hole is thrown in your whole argument about ratings numbers being so horrible for RAW with that story b/c it says they are not doing a 2nd season of TE b/c of the ratings and plan to replace it with a 3rd hour of live WWE programming, which at best is only going to get ratings on par with Raw's if not lower than the 9 and 10 hrs or Raw. Why would USA want to put a 3rd hour of WWE programming on Monday nights if they were unhappy with Raw's current ratings? Nevermind I will just go ask Meltzer I usually find it better to just get the answer straight from the horses mouth.


----------



## Toplot

The DVR ratings are irrelevant anyway. Sponsors and advertisers dont care about DVR ratings because people watching on DVRs usually skip advertisements or fast forward through them. 

TV ratings presented are all that matters.


----------



## The Tony

Brye said:


> Jesus christ. :lmao
> 
> Good to know you can form your own opinion.
> 
> *Raw will be on TV regardless of the rating. It's the only wrestling show people care about and it's still a household name regardless.* Instead of caring about the ratings right now, they should try and develop actual feuds. That's their problem.


fpalm


----------



## kokepepsi

isn't that how Raw got kicked out of Spike
Contract was over and they asked for more money. Spike was like "lol ratings" and WWE had to go to USA for half the money.
*not really lol ratings but something happened


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Toplot said:


> The DVR ratings are irrelevant anyway. Sponsors and advertisers dont care about DVR ratings because people watching on DVRs usually skip advertisements or fast forward through them.
> 
> *TV ratings presented are all that matters*.


When it comes to WWE, its not all that matters, and if it was WWE would be just fine as Raw is doing a solid job in the ratings department. Anyway I'm done explaining.


----------



## wb1899

A typical Meltzer, the hh-ratings are meaningless today.
USA looks at the viewership (total and demos) and not at the household numbers.
-----
And after a season, they look at the Live+7 and C3 numbers from the shows and make then a decision if the show will get another season or will cancelled.


----------



## Irish Jet

Fanboi101 said:


> Plus, if you don't think ratings are related to buyrates, ticket sales, dvds etc you are crazy. The more people that are watching your product the more people will buy dvds, merch, tickets, ppvs. It's simple logic


Not necessarily true, when you consider how simple it is to access streams now. 

It's certainly concerning though.


----------



## Toplot

kokepepsi said:


> isn't that how Raw got kicked out of Spike
> Contract was over and they asked for more money. Spike was like "lol ratings" and WWE had to go to USA for half the money.
> *not really lol ratings but something happened


Not true. The ratings were actually up during the time, thats why they decided to make a wise move to go back to USA network.


----------



## Camoron

Only 200,000 viewers lost to DVR? :lmao who still watches live TV?


----------



## Fanboi101

I think the internet streaming thing is so overblown in respect to U.S. tv ratings. It impacts PPVs certainly, but I doubt it impacts tv ratings much at all. There are 100 million homes in the US that get the USA network. This is more than ever before. Why would these people be streaming it if they got it on tv?

I'd bet that most people that stream Raw are outside of the U.S. because Raw is either on pay tv (U.K.), or because Raw may not be available in the country they live in. Ratings don't include non-U.S. residents.

So, basically, most people that stream Raw on the internet probably do so because they couldn't watch it otherwise. They have no impact on the ratings because if they didnt stream it, they still couldn't watch it.


----------



## Toplot

Fanboi101 said:


> I think the internet streaming thing is so overblown in respect to U.S. tv ratings. It impacts PPVs certainly, but I doubt it impacts tv ratings much at all. There are 100 million homes in the US that get the USA network. This is more than ever before. Why would these people be streaming it if they got it on tv?
> 
> I'd bet that most people that stream Raw are outside of the U.S. because Raw is either on pay tv (U.K.), or because Raw may not be available in the country they live in. Ratings don't include non-U.S. residents.
> 
> So, basically, most people that stream Raw on the internet probably do so because they couldn't watch it otherwise. They have no impact on the ratings because if they didnt stream it, they still couldn't watch it.


Nailed it. (Y)


----------



## GillbergReturns

Rock Cena will not draw in big numbers on it's own. Survivor Series should tell you this feud has lost it's spark. WWE needs to get this Shaq storyline rolling, because he's the guy that will actually bring in the spark.

WWE has to pull out all of the stops too, because interest in the product is fading at an alarming level. It's not a CM Punk or a Daniel Bryan or a kid friendly John Cena thing the industry is just be taking out by MMA and increased competition on a cable level.

If I was the WWE I'd try to be as creative as possible with the Rock and Shaq. Don't put at your eggs into the Wrestlemania basket.

Rock v Miz is a match that can easily be made in the run up to Mania.


----------



## LarryCoon

I personally prefer Wade Keller and Bruce Mitchell anyways. They continually provide a much better analysis than anything Meltzer has done.


----------



## A-C-P

Fanboi101 said:


> I think the internet streaming thing is so overblown in respect to U.S. tv ratings. It impacts PPVs certainly, but I doubt it impacts tv ratings much at all. There are 100 million homes in the US that get the USA network. This is more than ever before. Why would these people be streaming it if they got it on tv?
> 
> I'd bet that most people that stream Raw are outside of the U.S. because Raw is either on pay tv (U.K.), or because Raw may not be available in the country they live in. Ratings don't include non-U.S. residents.
> 
> So, basically, most people that stream Raw on the internet probably do so because they couldn't watch it otherwise. They have no impact on the ratings because if they didnt stream it, they still couldn't watch it.



There are plenty of reasons people in the US stream Raw. They are not home when Raw is on live and have to stream it. Also, I know a few people that stream Raw b/c they don't want to watch it live b/c of commercials. So IMO I don't think that internet streaming thing is overblown at all and definitely has an effect on TV ratings. Internet streaming is having an effect on alot more TV shows' TV ratings than just RAW. Hell even myself I have other commitments on Monday evenings and have to DVR Raw and watch it after I get home on monday nights after Raw is finished on TV.

Thinking that internet streaming has no effect on the TV ratings is just as ignorant as thinking the TV ratings have no meaning at all.


----------



## Fanboi101

A-C-P said:


> There are plenty of reasons people in the US stream Raw. They are not home when Raw is on live and have to stream it. Also, I know a few people that stream Raw b/c they don't want to watch it live b/c of commercials. So IMO I don't think that internet streaming thing is overblown at all and definitely has an effect on TV ratings. Internet streaming is having an effect on alot more TV shows' TV ratings than just RAW.
> 
> Thinking that internet streaming has no effect on the TV ratings is just as ignorant as thinking the TV ratings have no meaning at all.


I didn't say that it had no effect, I said the effect was overblown. Also, the people you know that stream it because they aren't at home, guess what...they also wouldn't be watching it on tv otherwise, because they aren't at home. So them steraming it doesn't impact the ratings. 

You may know a few people that prefer to watch it later cause of commercials...I've never heard of that. Most people I know would want to watch it live.


----------



## LarryCoon

Fanboi101 said:


> I didn't say that it had no effect, I said the effect was overblown. Also, the people you know that stream it because they aren't at home, guess what...they also wouldn't be watching it on tv otherwise, because they aren't at home. So them steraming it doesn't impact the ratings.
> 
> You may know a few people that prefer to watch it later cause of commercials...I've never heard of that. Most people I know would want to watch it live.


I completely agree. You actually get the system. I've watched a couple of Raws on one of the most popular streaming site, JTV and they barely get 9,000 views. Most of those people also claim that they do not have access to TV and couldn't have watched Raw anyways. 

Internet TV streaming does affect the ratings a little bit, but you're right. It is pretty much overblown.


----------



## A-C-P

Fanboi101 said:


> I didn't say that it had no effect, I said the effect was overblown. Also, the people you know that stream it because they aren't at home, guess what...they also wouldn't be watching it on tv otherwise, because they aren't at home. So them steraming it doesn't impact the ratings.
> 
> You may know a few people that prefer to watch it later cause of commercials...I've never heard of that. Most people I know would want to watch it live.


These people aren't home (the ones I know) to watch it b/c they know they don't have to be to see Raw b/c internet streaming is available. Yes, the effect of internet streaming is overblown by some people (hell everything gets over blown by some people) I just think you are discounting it to much. You said in your first post that it had ZERO effect on ratings anyways, which IMO is wrong.



Fanboi101 said:


> So, basically, most people that stream Raw on the internet probably do so because they couldn't watch it otherwise. *They have no impact on the ratings *because if they didnt stream it, they still couldn't watch it.


The people who you say stream it b/c they aren;t home to watch it when its on live means they wouldn't have watched it TV anyways is also not really that correct IMO either. Alot of these people (like I said before) know they can go out and do other things rather than stay home and watch Raw live on TV b/c of the internet streams. the fact remains if the streams weren't available they would've stayed home and watched Raw.

But you'ce changed your tune anyways you've went from saying it had ZERO effect on ratings to saying it has a small effect on ratings, which was my argument anyways, is it a HUGE effect no, but it has an effect. Is it the total main reason for the large loss of veiwership numbers compared to prior years no, the WWE has many many issues that have caused that, but increasingly easy access to the internet by its fans is one of the factors.


----------



## Rock316AE

Fanboi101 said:


> I didn't say that it had no effect, I said the effect was overblown. Also, the people you know that stream it because they aren't at home, *guess what...they also wouldn't be watching it on tv otherwise,* because they aren't at home. So them steraming it doesn't impact the ratings.
> 
> You may know a few people that prefer to watch it later cause of commercials...I've never heard of that. Most people I know would want to watch it live.


Spot on, Common sense. The streams has maybe 0.01 affect on TV ratings. When people are talking about the negativity of streams and internet, it's on PPVs, not TV shows.


----------



## rcc

Brye said:


> RockAE, I'm sure he knows more than you do.


:lmao He's a bullshit artist, but no surprise you fell for it hook line and sinker.

WWE is primarily a TV business if the majority of their revenue comes from the TV business. Pretty simple equation. Anyone care to look at WWE's financial figures?



jblvdx said:


> yeah, when he said are clueless about ratings and that there only there to please sponsers? which is true.
> 
> WWE is not just a T.V show. There are so many things like buyrates, Merchandise sales, DVD and media, ticket sales etc. Even Vince has stated that ratings arent a big deal to begin with, *and he said that in fucking 1997 when WWE was not a puplic traded company.*


Relevance? You just threw that out to try and look intelligent. Whether it's publicly traded or not doesn't change how the business is run :lmao. 

And if you can't see how those other "things" are reliant on the TV business which is their core source of business (they even call TV their core business in the financial reports), then you are way too blinded by your messiah's stupidity.


----------



## Fanboi101

A-C-P said:


> These people aren't home (the ones I know) to watch it b/c they know they don't have to be to see Raw b/c internet streaming is available. Yes, the effect of internet streaming is overblown by some people (hell everything gets over blown by some people) I just think you are discounting it to much. You said in your first post that it had ZERO effect on ratings anyways, which IMO is wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> The people who you say stream it b/c they aren;t home to watch it when its on live means they wouldn't have watched it TV anyways is also not really that correct IMO either. Alot of these people (like I said before) know they can go out and do other things rather than stay home and watch Raw live on TV b/c of the internet streams. the fact remains if the streams weren't available they would've stayed home and watched Raw.
> 
> But you'ce changed your tune anyways you've went from saying it had ZERO effect on ratings to saying it has a small effect on ratings, which was my argument anyways, is it a HUGE effect no, but it has an effect. Is it the total main reason for the large loss of veiwership numbers compared to prior years no, the WWE has many many issues that have caused that, but increasingly easy access to the internet by its fans is one of the factors.



Where did I ever say it had ZERO effect? I said it was overblown and it didn't have much effect. Reread my post. I haven't changed my tune at all.


----------



## Fanboi101

A-C-P said:


> There are plenty of reasons people in the US stream Raw. They are not home when Raw is on live and have to stream it. Also, I know a few people that stream Raw b/c they don't want to watch it live b/c of commercials. So IMO I don't think that internet streaming thing is overblown at all and definitely has an effect on TV ratings. Internet streaming is having an effect on alot more TV shows' TV ratings than just RAW. *Hell even myself I have other commitments on Monday evenings and have to DVR Raw and watch it after I get home on monday nights after Raw is finished on TV.*
> Thinking that internet streaming has no effect on the TV ratings is just as ignorant as thinking the TV ratings have no meaning at all.


This quote itself tells me you have absolutely no clue about how ratings work. If you *have* to DVR Raw because *you have other commitments*, you wouldn't have been able to watch it anyways. All that DVR/streaming has done is allow you to watch something you were not able to watch before.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

rcc said:


> :lmao He's a bullshit artist, but no surprise you fell for it hook line and sinker.
> 
> WWE is primarily a TV business if the majority of their revenue comes from the TV business. Pretty simple equation. Anyone care to look at WWE's financial figures?
> 
> 
> 
> *Relevance? You just threw that out to try and look intelligent. Whether it's publicly traded or not doesn't change how the business is run :lmao.*
> 
> And if you can't see how those other "things" are reliant on the TV business which is their core source of business (they even call TV their core business in the financial reports), then you are way too blinded by your messiah's stupidity.


 Okay. I'm done.


----------



## A-C-P

Fanboi101 said:


> This quote itself tells me you have absolutely no clue about how ratings work. If you *have* to DVR Raw because *you have other commitments*, you wouldn't have been able to watch it anyways. All that DVR/streaming has done is allow you to watch something you were not able to watch before.


NO my point is I made those other commitments b/c I know I don't have to be home to watch Raw live when its on, so if that option wasn't avaiable to me I wouldn;t have made the commitments and I would be home on monday

nights watching Raw. So I am not watching Raw live on TV b/c I have other options. Its not that I couldn't watch it I choose not to watch it. People choosing not to watch Raw live on TV b/c they have other options effects the ratings.

Trust me I understand that the people who's absolutle only option is to stream Raw or watch it on DVR would not effect the ratings # anyways. But the people who choose to watch raw through these other avenues b/c they can and without them would be watching Raw on TV do effect ratings in a negative way.

But again we are arguing semantics here b/c we bot hagree its a small effect, and I think I jsut misunderstood you when I thought you said it had no effect on ratings (which is the issue I had)



Fanboi101 said:


> So, basically, most people that stream Raw on the internet probably do so because they couldn't watch it otherwise. They have no impact on the ratings because if they didnt stream it, they still couldn't watch it.


Oh and heres where you said the have NO affect on ratings but I think I misunderstood that paragraph and i apologize.


----------



## Fanboi101

I was refering to people that stream raw on the internet because they couldn't watch it otherwise. The people that do that have NO impact. 

I also said "So, basically, *most* people that stream Raw on the internet probably do so because they couldn't watch it otherwise". I never said that everyone that streams raw does so because they couldn't watch it otherwise. I realize that some do so because they might prefer it. I guess you are one of those that would rather stream it.


----------



## A-C-P

Fanboi101 said:


> I was refering to people that stream raw on the internet because they couldn't watch it otherwise. The people that do that have NO impact.
> 
> I also said "So, basically, *most* people that stream Raw on the internet probably do so because they couldn't watch it otherwise". I never said that everyone that streams raw does so because they couldn't watch it otherwise. I realize that some do so because they might prefer it. I guess you are one of those that would rather stream it.


Well i watch it on DVR so I would technically be counted in the ratings # if I had a neilsen box, but no need to continue this argument b/c I am the one you misunderstood ytour OP on the subject and we are basically arguing semantics on the same point.


----------



## Redrox

LarryCoon said:


> I personally prefer Wade Keller and Bruce Mitchell anyways. They continually provide a much better analysis than anything Meltzer has done.


Love Bruce Mitchell, he is just awesome.


----------



## Brye

I just find it funny that everyone acts like they know exactly how the WWE works inside and out.

And there's rarely ever a suggestion on how to improve it. Shit on it all you want, but at least try to come up with something. The ratings aren't the only thing that fucking matter.

Anyone here got a degree in business management or something? Because I'm pretty sure the people there have a good idea of what they're doing.


----------



## garjon

LarryCoon said:


> I personally prefer Wade Keller and Bruce Mitchell anyways. They continually provide a much better analysis than anything Meltzer has done.


PWtorch is filled with morons always speculating stuff. They have no source, just bullshit assumptions feeding off Internet posts which they report as "NEWS" later. Observer is much better and more reliable.


----------



## The Tourist

what were the quarterly breakdowns? has that been posted?


----------



## Simply Flawless

Yeaha big fuck you to those fucking disrespectful pricks that dared to fucking "what" Undertaker...seriously the ONE GUY you show respect to is him and you idiots dare to what him? Call yourselves wrestling fans? No each and every one of you that screeched what like a fucking duck are not fans so GTFO:no:


----------



## A-C-P

Simply Flawless said:


> Yeaha big fuck you to those fucking disrespectful pricks that dared to fucking "what" Undertaker...seriously the ONE GUY you show respect to is him and you idiots dare to what him? Call yourselves wrestling fans? No each and every one of you that screeched what like a fucking duck are not fans so GTFO:no:


Not sure this is the right thread for this post but i do agree. I mean the people at the show paid their money so they have the right to voice their opinion i guess but I do not agree with them "whating" Undertaker at all and was personally disgusted by it as well.


----------



## Simply Flawless

That what chant is the worst thing ever and the fact people use it on people like Undertaker disgusts me they arent wrestling fans, they are the same types that go to the HOF and act like idiots doing the same type of chant during HOF speeches i mean come on....as fans you have to realise there are places you DONT act like idiots


----------



## WWE

Brye said:


> *I just find it funny that everyone acts like they know exactly how the WWE works inside and out.*


FINALLY SOMEONE SAIS IT.


----------



## Camoron

Fanboi101 said:


> You may know a few people that prefer to watch it later cause of commercials...I've never heard of that. Most people I know would want to watch it live.


Really? So you've never heard of anyone watching it on DVR later? How can anyone even tolerate to watch live TV anymore? My DVR spoils me. I haven't watched Raw live in a long, long time. Occasionally I will start it while it's still recording and skip through the commercials and all of the bullshit matches I don't care about, (Diva's division, anything involving Kofi Kingston), and catch up to live TV towards the end, but I never start watching live right at 9 PM. I suppose it's pretty common on this forum to watch it live if only so you can join the Raw discussion thread and comment on stuff as it happens, but it just isn't worth it to me. DVR lets me watch Raw and Smackdown in like an hour as opposed to two hours, it's a big time saver.


----------



## Coffey

My answer is simple: I don't have DVR. Reason being that my cable company sucks and charges extra for everything, including a cable box, remote control and DVR. Which is funny because we don't even get FOX here unless you have the cable box because they removed it from the basic cable package. Which means you miss NFL playoff football, NASCAR, big baseball games and a lot of other important events. They pretty much have a monopoly on this city, so it's a joke.


----------



## Camoron

Walk-In said:


> My answer is simple: I don't have DVR. Reason being that my cable company sucks and charges extra for everything, including a cable box, remote control and DVR. Which is funny because we don't even get FOX here unless you have the cable box because they removed it from the basic cable package. Which means you miss NFL playoff football, NASCAR, big baseball games and a lot of other important events. They pretty much have a monopoly on this city, so it's a joke.


You can't get Dish or DirecTV where you live? I think they both offer free two-room DVR receivers.


----------



## Punked Up

I always watch about 1/2 hour late on DVR and catch up the show as it goes on...I usually can skip the diva's, jobbers and a few commercials.


----------



## Gresty

No Cena


----------



## Gresty

Shit wrong thread :fpalm


----------



## Tedious

Wrong thread...


----------



## D.M.N.

It's the day after RAW, which means, ratings!

Hour 1 = 4.701m
Hour 2 + a long overrun = 4.599m

Source: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ut-on-top-closely-followed-by-wwe-raw/122195/

Ouch. Daytona 500 must have dented it. Not really good numbers especially as Rock/Cena basically equates to 1/3rd of that 4.599m number.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Miz and Cena most likely pissed away all the views, but still, thats it for the second hour?

Whats your prediction of the raw rating based on these numbers?


----------



## JingieBY

I am not so sure but I think that the second hour doesn't include the overrun, which may draw more than 500 000 people.


----------



## D.M.N.

JingieBY said:


> I am not so sure but I think that the second hour doesn't include the overrun, which may draw more than 500 000 people.


It includes the overrun so 4.599m is from 10pm to about 11:20pm.


----------



## kokepepsi

CenavsMiz must have lost viewers in the 10pm slot
Miz 3rd time he does that OHSHITBURYHIM


----------



## Raged

WTF? Second hour lost viewers? The opening segment must have done big then? Punk-Jericho right?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Raged said:


> WTF? Second hour lost viewers? The opening segment must have done big then? Punk-Jericho right?


Impossible, CM Punk segments don't draw.


----------



## Raged

It must be the rock hype. People must have thought Rock or cena would open the show. Cena's video package did open the show right?

Punk is yet to prove that he can draw. Jericho never draws.


----------



## the fox

i guess the tag team title match then cody/show promo then the tag match must lost a lot of viewers


----------



## Ray

"OH LUK GUYZ.ITZ A 4.000000 RATING, ALL CUZ OF DA ROCK APPERENCE. JUST LYKE THE ATTITUDE ERA. ROCK == BIGGEST MOVIE STAR AND DRAW OF ALL TIME"



Also, with a 20 minute overrun, I expected A MUCH MUCH higher rating/viership.


----------



## Mister Hands

So, the exact same number of people as usual? Good lord.


----------



## Duberry

Lol at Punk out-drawing DWAYNE~!


----------



## kokepepsi

From PWINSIDER

The 2/27 edition of Raw did a hardly stellar 3.1 rating for the return of The Rock. The show did hours of 3.11 and 3.16 so the rating rose in hour two. Unfortunately, the show still lost viewers as hour one averaged 4.7 million of them while hour two averaged 4.6. Overall, the show averaged 4,650,000 viewers.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Well that's underwhelming.


----------



## Green Light

Honestly that is a terrible rating seeing as they pulled out their final ace with The Rock appearing.


----------



## WWE

Anything WWE should worry about for next week? Daytona was this week


----------



## Ray

Wait.... but Cena was in Hour 1....

Cena >>>>>>>> Dwayne 8*D


----------



## ecabney

The Rock failed


----------



## Coffey

TNA gets a 1.1 WWE gets a 3.1. This is apparently the new standard. You know what is to blame? The state of professional wrestling in the United States. I can still enjoy New Japan and CMLL, and they aren't even in English, but WWE, more specifically RAW, it's just mediocre every week. It doesn't matter if you advertise and deliver on The Rock returning to RAW if the two hours before he shows up still suck.

A two-hour and twenty minute *WRESTLING* show should not feature less than twenty minutes of total *WRESTLING*. When the highlight of your show is a video package and a one-liner, then you're doing something terribly wrong.


----------



## CNB

*Let's Get Something Clear About The WWE + Ratings*

Simple question. Do you believe wrestlers draw ratings, or do you believe the WWE brand and the quality of the show draws ratings?


Last night was clearly evident that the latter is correct. The WWE Brand is what reels in the ratings, the WWE brand is cold right now. Obviously having quality characters on the telecast helps a great deal, but I find it absurd how posters on WF continually drag wrestlers in the mud over their supposed 'failed' attempt at drawing a rating.


Its happened with Punk
Its happened with Cena
Its happened with Jericho
Its happened with Triple H 
Its happened with literally everyone except...

Dwayne. 

Until last night. 

Trolls who want to stir the pot will now claim that The Rock cannot draw. That's not entirely true. Do me a great favour and look at the quality of performers from 10 years ago, and look at the quality now.

*WWE 2002*

*Main Event Wrestlers*
The Rock
Hulk Hogan
Brock Lesnar
Kurt Angle
The Undertaker
Stone Cold Steve Austin
Triple H 
Shawn Michaels

*Upper Mid Card*
Eddie Guerrero
Chris Jericho
Chris Benoit
Edge
Booker T
Kane

*Mid Card*
RVD
Rey Mysterio 
Christian
The Hardys
The Dudleys


Compare that to today, and then you will truly understand why the ratings are average. You will also understand that technology has made it easier to access wrestling on the internet, through your iPhone or recording the programme on TiVo. Everything is different.

So tell me, do wrestlers draw, or does the wrestling brand draw? Let me know.


----------



## Stad

Inb4 Rock316 says the Daytona was on and that is why ratings were so low.

It's the same 4 million people who tune in every week.


----------



## pberry

*Re: Let's Get Something Clear About The WWE + Ratings*

You are absolutely right.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Let's Get Something Clear About The WWE + Ratings*

There are certain wrestlers like Rock, Cena, Undertaker, and HHH that draw above average numbers, but no one can bring the average number up.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Wrestling is in the deep shit right now.


----------



## iMiZFiT

However basing the success of a product of it's ratings is stupid, base it off its profits.

WWE has a loyal fanbase and gets millions if viewers every week in the US alone, i think its doing pretty fine.


----------



## dissident

*Re: Let's Get Something Clear About The WWE + Ratings*

sometimes I wonder if the people who post things about ratings actually believe what they are saying... but I remember how I acted at 18 years of age.. so it's not surprising some people post the things they do.


----------



## Therapy

*Re: Let's Get Something Clear About The WWE + Ratings*

I love when someone starts a new thread about a topic when there is a sticky at the top of the page specifically for said topic.


----------



## KO Bossy

3.1? Ouch...

Makes you wonder just what they're going to have to do to climb out of this ratings hole they've dug themselves into. Probably something really lame, like a "who's the father" angle with Truth, Kofi and Kelly Kelly, or giving the tag titles to 2 guys dressed up as Donatello and Leonardo from TMNT. Or fuck, why not have Big Show challenge Stephen Hawking? If we're going for full on tastelessness, look no further than a giant beating up a wheel-chair bound cripple in front 20000 fans.


----------



## kokepepsi

psx71 said:


> Wait.... but Cena was in Hour 1....
> 
> Cena >>>>>>>> Dwayne 8*D


He was in hour 2


----------



## Killswitch Stunner

*Re: Let's Get Something Clear About The WWE + Ratings*

It's both. The brand draws but so do wrestlers.


----------



## CNB

*Re: Let's Get Something Clear About The WWE + Ratings*



Therapy said:


> I love when someone starts a new thread about a topic when there is a sticky at the top of the page specifically for said topic.


I understand the sentiment. 

However there is a clear difference, this thread isn't discussing the current ratings - nor delving into troll arguments and lost points.

It's simply about what drives ratings, it's a thread that discusses the reasons behind ratings - not the ratings themselves.

I thank the moderators for not merging or deleting the topic.


----------



## Killswitch Stunner

Since when was having over 4 million viewers for your show deep shit? Seriously, that's better than most tv shows.


----------



## Green Light

*Re: Let's Get Something Clear About The WWE + Ratings*



Obis said:


> There are certain wrestlers like Rock, Cena, Undertaker, and HHH that draw above average numbers, but no one can bring the average number up.


Pretty much this, those guys usually do better numbers for their segments but the people clearly don't stick around to watch the rest of the show.


----------



## kokepepsi

Because it's the Rock and he is a huge movie star with a big following, Any Raw show he is on should be a ratings hit.

But just look at Survivor Series so yeah not surprised

(inb4 overrun did a 4.0+ and rock316ae starts burying everyone)


----------



## iMiZFiT

Killswitch Stunner said:


> Since when was having over 4 million viewers for your show deep shit? Seriously, that's better than most tv shows.


Yep, as i said and that is a constant figure.

And maybe people waiting for The Rock got bored during the CM Punk v Bryan match or the Cena beating Miz (-.-) match...

Stop hating on the Rock i think your jelly of him.


----------



## Coffey

Killswitch Stunner said:


> Since when was having over 4 million viewers for your show deep shit?


Since shows like Pawn Stars started getting over 5 million.


----------



## Raged

*Re: Let's Get Something Clear About The WWE + Ratings*

lolwat? Rock,Cena,HHH,taker all are proven draws. 

Even Punk is a proven draw (MITB) and occasionally has drawn good ratings. The only one thats miserable is Chris Jericho. The guy is absolute worst when it comes to being a draw. None of the casual fans care about him. It is evident from his return segment which lost viewers after all the hype. Sad really!


----------



## Coffey

*Re: Let's Get Something Clear About The WWE + Ratings*



CNB said:


> I understand the sentiment.
> 
> However there is a clear difference, this thread isn't discussing the current ratings - nor delving into troll arguments and lost points.
> 
> It's simply about what drives ratings, it's a thread that discusses the reasons behind ratings - not the ratings themselves.
> 
> I thank the moderators for not merging or deleting the topic.


It doesn't matter. There's like six-hundred mods here. It'll get locked or merged anyway, just because it says the word "ratings" in the thread. That's what they do. And you'll probably get a PM in your in-box telling you that you have an infraction and/or warning too, like that fucking matters.

Meanwhile, you can look forward to about a dozen threads asking about Kelly Kelly or if Kane should retire!


----------



## Killswitch Stunner

Reality tv is at its peak right now, so that is not a surprise. Plus it's completely different than wrestling, so the comparison is odd.


----------



## CNB

*Re: Let's Get Something Clear About The WWE + Ratings*



Walk-In said:


> It doesn't matter. There's like six-hundred mods here. It'll get locked or merged anyway, just because it says the word "ratings" in the thread. That's what they do. And you'll probably get a PM in your in-box telling you that you have an infraction and/or warning too, like that fucking matters.
> 
> Meanwhile, you can look forward to about a dozen threads asking about Kelly Kelly or if Kane should retire!



Haha, that was very amusing to read. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt, also its interesting to take note on how they referred to him as Glenn Jacobs in the title - to possible add more credibility to the question? Even though it was fucking stupid in the first place. 

Raged - You're just a very poor troll. You need a pretty signature or at least an avatar if your opinion is going to add spice to the discussion


----------



## Bushmaster

Man if it were a 3.7 or up I'm sure we'd have a lot more posts from certain ppl. Just like SS it shows you can't draw when all the focus is on Rock. I wonder if they'll blame someone again. The wrestling industry and tv have changed. If guys like Taker, Austin and Rock never aged and continued to wrestle I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be averaging 4.0's. There's so much tv and wrestling is looked down on so yeah less ppl watch. 

I don't care about ratings but I am kinda happy I see numbers like SS had or this past monday or Rocks bday bash. Talk about over rating Cena or Punk but damn Rock on here gets that. He comes out and gets a huge pop talks about his arms and gets a pop and everyone here blows him off. The guy is a legend and that's the kind of reactions Legends tend to get. All the talk about how it was Miz's fault or its always Punks fault it shows Rock can't do it either on his own. Everyone has to work at it. PPl talk about this is the most bland roster lol I laugh because this roster is actually amazing. You have main eventers that when given the time can get 4 or 5 star mnatches. You have a midcard that are loaded with talent. Even freaking jobbers are decent. The only issue is wwe booking. They bury talent and just do amazingly stupid things. Ppl aren't gonna tune in to watch Vince or HHH have Miz looked like a fool or watch Mark Henry who was the best heel of 2011 all of a sudden get buried by Sheamus and then lose a match in under 2 min. Creative simply sucks. Punk, Jericho, Rock and Cena are all that is interesting and in a 2 hour show that won't cut it.


----------



## Raged

*Re: Let's Get Something Clear About The WWE + Ratings*

LOl you just mad jericho dont draw. Thats the reason you even made this thread and you are calling me a troll?


Jericho has been a ratings disaster since returning to the WWE. Fans don’t want to watch him talk, so I can’t imagine that they’d be real excited to watch him wrestle.


----------



## FlyingElbow

kokepepsi said:


> Because it's the Rock and he is a huge movie star with a big following, Any Raw show he is on should be a ratings hit.
> 
> But just look at Survivor Series so yeah not surprised


2011 vs. 2010:
Hell in a Cell down 13.3%
Vengeance/Bragging Rights down 11.7%
TLC down 8.2%
Survivor Series *up 15.2%*


----------



## KO Bossy

Isn't it obvious? Its the Miz's fault.


----------



## EraOfAwesome

*Re: Let's Get Something Clear About The WWE + Ratings*

I've never understood the ratings hype.


It's not like WWE advertises a specific superstar to appear in a specific timeslot. If the 9:00 timeslot has amazing ratings and Jack Swagger just happens to be cutting a promo that doesn't mean he's doing a great job, it just means that's when people decided to turn the show on.

Add the facts that most people stream and DVR these days, and ratings don't mean shit.


----------



## CNB

*Re: Let's Get Something Clear About The WWE + Ratings*



Raged said:


> LOl you just mad jericho dont draw. Thats the reason you even made this thread and you are calling me a troll?


Not at all. I find it absurd people are claiming The Rock can't draw when his movies draw over 100 million dollars. 

Ratings and reputation have no bearing on Chris Jericho being my favourite wrestler, I thoroughly enjoy watching his antics on television, and I don't let the opinion of others sway my thoughts on him - or anything else for that matter. 

Plus, Chris Jericho CAN & HAS drawn before. I'm sure 1 person will buy WrestleMania to see Chris Jericho wrestle CM Punk, so technically he drew at least 1 sale, because I'm buying it to see him.


----------



## Raged

15.2? I thought according to official numbers, it was 12% increase. Anyways that is not even a success for a PPV promoted as The Rock's return match in 7 long years.


----------



## kokepepsi

FlyingElbow said:


> 2011 vs. 2010:
> Hell in a Cell down 13.3%
> Vengeance/Bragging Rights down 11.7%
> TLC down 8.2%
> Survivor Series *up 15.2%*











160 domestic is no bueno when people portray him as the greatest of all time, biggest draw and most over mainstream superstar ever.


----------



## jonoaries

*Re: Let's Get Something Clear About The WWE + Ratings*

Its the company. Vince has learned from Hogan, Austin & Rock taking walks when they get upset. He has spent his time making sure WWE itself is the draw and that all the characters within are replaceable. That shouldn't be too much of a surprise, its a similar idea to Marvel, DC Comics & Disney.

Some characters are more beloved and successful than others but ultimately those characters can't be mentioned without mentioning the world they exist in. WWF is to Hulk Hogan as Metropolis is to Superman, its the home of the character.


----------



## Killswitch Stunner

*Re: Let's Get Something Clear About The WWE + Ratings*

Punk and Jericho both have big fanbases, so this feud alone can draw a pretty good amount.


----------



## Killswitch Stunner

People always overestimate. Rock fans on here claimed a one million buy at Survivor Series. LOL


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

*Re: Let's Get Something Clear About The WWE + Ratings*

Wrestlers can draw, but no one on the current roster does so in any significant or measurable manner (whether or not this is a failure of booking or talent is a different discussion).


----------



## Raged

*Re: Let's Get Something Clear About The WWE + Ratings*



CNB said:


> Not at all. I find it absurd people are claiming The Rock can't draw when his movies draw over 100 million dollars.
> 
> Ratings and reputation have no bearing on Chris Jericho being my favourite wrestler, I thoroughly enjoy watching his antics on television, and I don't let the opinion of others sway my thoughts on him - or anything else for that matter.
> 
> Plus, Chris Jericho CAN & HAS drawn before. I'm sure 1 person will buy WrestleMania to see Chris Jericho wrestle CM Punk, so technically he drew at least 1 sale, because I'm buying it to see him.


If someone bought wrestlemania ppv for hornswoggle, does that mean hornswoggle is a draw? 

Jericho never drew in his entire career ever, he never will. As punk said he was never the man and punk has surpassed him completely.


----------



## FlyingElbow

Raged said:


> 15.2? I thought according to official numbers, it was 12% increase. Anyways that is not even a success for a PPV promoted as The Rock's return match in 7 long years.


15.2% based on the official numbers released in the shareholders report. If you take the losses by the surrounding PPVs as a 3 show average, SSeries would have been projected to drop 11.1% vs. 2010, so a 15.2% year-to-year gain is actually a 26.3% gain vs. projections.


----------



## Rock316AE

What do you expect? the hype is gone, last year Rock did a miracle and made wrestling cool for a few months, brought back a huge fanbase from the past and drew huge numbers in every aspect. This is not going to happen now after a year of terrible shows from WWE, all these people who were back, are not going to sit and watch all the shit WWE are doing with the worst roster of all time. This is not happening and Rock can't change that, that's like the WCW 1999-2000 affect that the audience lost so much faith in the brand that you could put on Austin vs Hogan and it wouldn't matter.

I don't know why they didn't talk about that Rock is going to be on RAW until WM? stupid move. I don't know about the Daytona thing but that's probably made an impact. We will see if that's the case for next week, wrestling is a dying industry.


----------



## Green Light

Killswitch Stunner said:


> People always overestimate. *Rock fans on here claimed a one million buy at Survivor Series*. LOL


That's bullshit, there was one guy who predicted a 500K buyrate and pretty much everyone agreed it was ludicrous. I followed the thread and actually most Rock fans were predicting somewhere between 275-350K. I'm not even debating whether or not it was a good number but the majority didn't expect it to do that well after the build up.

And another thing, it was hardly built up as The Rock's big return match. The hook they went with was the "most electrifying tag team/ never before never again" crap. If they wanted to sell it as Rock's big return they would have had him go out and do some talk shows or something to get the word out


----------



## BrosOfDestruction

lettuce be reality here, the only reason last night's ratings were low is because cena announced he wasn't missing the show. 
:troll


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Let's Get Something Clear About The WWE + Ratings*

It's WWEs overall show. With youtube,dvrs and stuff like that, if people want to watch only part of a show, they can easily do so(and many people do that).

WWE needs to keep people watching for the entire 2 hours! Who cares if 1 promo gets a 4 rating. Nothing else means anything if the rest of the show barely gets 3's.


----------



## Killswitch Stunner

Green Light said:


> That's bullshit, there was one guy who predicted a 500K buyrate and pretty much everyone agreed it was ludicrous. I followed the thread and actually most Rock fans were predicting somewhere between 275-350K. I'm not even debating whether or not it was a good number but the majority didn't expect it to do that well after the build up.
> 
> And another thing, it was hardly built up as The Rock's big return match. The hook they went with was the "most electrifying tag team/ never before never again" crap. If they wanted to sell it as Rock's big return they would have had him go out and do some talk shows or something to get the word out


Sorry you missed it, but a couple on here did say that. Not to mention several on other forums. Don't presume you see every post.


----------



## kokepepsi

not sure if legit...... from prowrestling net

"WWE Raw drew a 3.14 rating with the overrun segments included. The initial 15-minute overrun featuring The Rock and John Cena drew a 3.5 rating, and the additional six minutes that followed drew a 3.3 rating.

Powell's POV: The Rock drew the highest rating of the night with the 3.5 for the full 15-minute overrun, but it was only slightly higher than third quarter-hour's 3.4 rating for part of the C.M. Punk vs. Daniel Bryan match with Chris Jericho's post-match attack."


----------



## Theproof

Rock316AE said:


> What do you expect? the hype is gone, last year Rock did a miracle and made wrestling cool for a few months, brought back a huge fanbase from the past and drew huge numbers in every aspect. This is not going to happen now after a year of terrible shows from WWE, all these people who were back, are not going to sit and watch all the shit WWE are doing with the worst roster of all time. This is not happening and Rock can't change that, that's like the WCW 1999-2000 affect that the audience lost so much faith in the brand that you could put on Austin vs Hogan and it wouldn't matter.
> 
> I don't know why they didn't talk about that Rock is going to be on RAW until WM? stupid move. I don't know about the Daytona thing but that's probably made an impact. We will see if that's the case for next week, wrestling is a dying industry.


As usual you are 100% correct.


----------



## Killswitch Stunner

Meltzer and Alavarez both predicted a 3.4. I don't see it happening.


----------



## kokepepsi

Already posted
Show did a 3.1


----------



## Green Light

Yeah those guys were way off with their overall prediction, wonder what he'll have to say about it


----------



## Raged

Meltzer would probably kiss the rock's ass more. Thats what he does, kissing the rock's ass like no other.


----------



## kokepepsi

Green Light said:


> Yeah those guys were way off with their overall prediction, wonder what he'll have to say about it



Same thing Rock316ae said but they will correctly blame booking


----------



## Coffey

Rock316AE said:


> wrestling is a dying industry.


It certainly seems that way in the United States unless a drastic change takes place. Actually, from the Puro that I do watch, it's obvious that the crowds are a lot smaller in Japan now too. WWE pretty much dictates the wrestling world. If interest is waning in WWE land, it's usually a pretty good indicator that it is waning elsewhere too. Ring Ka King and wrestling in India seems to be hot now, just like wrestling was real hot a few years ago with Rikishi's fed in Italy. WWE have just over-saturated the market in the U.S.

RAW is two hours a week. Smackdown in two hours a week. A Pay-Per-View (which there's more than twelve of a year) is three-hours a week. That's up to seven hours of WWE in one week. That's just if you watch one company. If you try to throw in TNA or ROH or something else too...it's just way too much. Not to mention that after one week of watching all seven hours you realize it's about forty minutes worth of new material and the rest is replays, video packages and commercials.

They need to change the model of their TV. I don't know what the answer is but what they're doing right now is obviously not working. I would make fundamental changes. No more cameras backstage, no more breaking the fourth wall, no more on-air authority figures or commentators with heel/face alignments. I'm not saying make it into a half-assed MMA like ROH thinks they're doing, but WWE needs to change the game up and others will follow suit.


----------



## Raged

Rock316AE said:


> What do you expect? the hype is gone, last year Rock did a miracle and made wrestling cool for a few months, brought back a huge fanbase from the past and drew huge numbers in every aspect. This is not going to happen now after a year of terrible shows from WWE, all these people who were back, are not going to sit and watch all the shit WWE are doing with the worst roster of all time. This is not happening and Rock can't change that, that's like the WCW 1999-2000 affect that the audience lost so much faith in the brand that you could put on Austin vs Hogan and it wouldn't matter.
> 
> I don't know why they didn't talk about that Rock is going to be on RAW until WM? stupid move. I don't know about the Daytona thing but that's probably made an impact. We will see if that's the case for next week, wrestling is a dying industry.


If the rock cant change shit, why is even back? He can fuck back to hollywood.


----------



## Killswitch Stunner

Yeah, the industry is dying. Only 3-4 million people watch every week. Wow, how will they survive?


----------



## Coffey

Killswitch Stunner said:


> Yeah, the industry is dying. Only 3-4 million people watch every week. Wow, how will they survive?


You can make smart-ass jokes all you want, but WWE is the only show in town in the U.S. anymore. Vince McMahon just cut 100k from wrestlers house show money. They just had their first losing quarter. Their big guns can't get the numbers to go up. The majority of their roster, at least the guys at the top, are on their way out (Undertaker, Triple H, Chris Jericho, The Rock) and everyone under John Cena is not credible at all. Factor in that Vince McMahon is 66 years old, less people watch live television (DVR, internet, etc.)

Do you think that Vince McMahon is going to die and that The Miz and Kofi Kingston are going to carry WWE into the promised land while all the shareholders swim in their money Scrooge McDuck style?


----------



## Theproof

Raged said:


> If the rock cant change shit, why is even back? He can fuck back to hollywood.


Did you already forget that the guy came back because of Cena and the WWE wanted him back? Personally I don't see why he came back anyways seeing as how most of the WWE fanbase nowadays are a bunch of ungrateful morons. He should have just left guys like you to suffer through Punk's and Cena's garbage night after night like you deserve.


----------



## Killswitch Stunner

Walk-In said:


> Do you think that Vince McMahon is going to die and that The Miz and Kofi Kingston are going to carry WWE into the promised land while all the shareholders swim in their money Scrooge McDuck style?


Everytime someone disagrees with you, you call them a smartass. And you're forgetting about Cena, Orton, Punk, Ziggler, Rhodes, Del Rio and a few others. The fact that you even use Miz when hes just a jobber now means you are reaching. People like you never have faith, just like many back in the mid-90s, all I heard was that WWE is dead, but guess what, it's still around and the ratings then were worse than now.


----------



## Coffey

Killswitch Stunner said:


> Everytime someone disagrees with you, you call them a smartass. And you're forgetting about Cena, Orton, Punk, Ziggler, Rhodes, Del Rio and a few others. The fact that you even use Miz when hes just a jobber now means you are reaching. People like you never have faith, just like many back in the mid-90s, all I heard was that WWE is dead, but guess what, it's still around and the ratings then were worse than now.


And WWE *DID* almost die. *TWICE*. Once during the steroid trial bullshit (you can thank Afa) and once during the Monday Night Wars (you can thank Time Warner/AOL merger).

Vince isn't some genius promoter, he's a guy that first hit big with cable and then got lucky a couple of times but no wrestling promotion lives forever. WWE is no exception.

And how the fuck would you know anything about me at all, let alone my posting habits? I have no idea who you are and I've only been here for like two months or some shit. Don't give me that shit.

And fine, I won't use Miz. Do you think fuckin' Dolph Ziggler or Cody Rhodes or Alberto Del Rio are going to carry Stephanie McMahon/Triple H ran publicly-traded WWE into the promised land??? Because that might be even MORE delusional.

I'm sure all those FCW guys are huge mega draws just waiting in the weeds!!!! I mean, one of the biggest stars from the biggest era can't do it, but who boy, that jobber from the mid card just hasn't been given his fair shake!


----------



## Killswitch Stunner

Walk-In said:


> And WWE *DID* almost die. *TWICE*. Once during the steroid trial bullshit (you can thank Afa) and once during the Monday Night Wars (you can thank Time Warner/AOL merger).
> 
> Vince isn't some genius promoter, he's a guy that first hit big with cable and then got lucky a couple of times but no wrestling promotion lives forever. WWE is no exception.
> 
> And how the fuck would you know anything about me at all, let alone my posting habits? I have no idea who you are and I've only been here for like two months or some shit. Don't give me that shit.
> 
> And fine, I won't use Miz. Do you think fuckin' Dolph Ziggler or Cody Rhodes or Alberto Del Rio are going to carry Stephanie McMahon/Triple H ran publicly-traded WWE into the promised land??? Because that might be even MORE delusional.
> 
> I'm sure all those FCW guys are huge mega draws just waiting in the weeds!!!!


You never know. Austin was unemployed in 1995. Three years later, he was the biggest wrestler since Hogan. Wrestling is unpredictable. It's funner for some of us to be hopeful and just enjoy the show. But if you wanna be negative and whine about things we fans have no control over, go ahead.


----------



## KiNgoFKiNgS23

saw this "low" number and came in here for the hilarious overreaction to it and as usual i wasn't disappointed.


----------



## the fox

before saying dwayne failed just wait for the ratings breakdown


----------



## Ray

kokepepsi said:


> He was in hour 2


My bad. I guess I looked at the time when Cena/Miz started wrestling and it was at the end of hour one. Guess we'll have to wait for the Q by Q breakdown.


----------



## GillbergReturns

I said this would happen last week. Announcing the match a year in advance has killed all interest in this feud. Mania will still draw, but that's about it.

It's not like Rock came back and did a fresh promo on Cena. They've been having the same argument for what 10 months now. It's played out, nobody cares.

There's only 1 guy who can move the ratings right now.

SHAQ. If I was Vince I'd stop p*ssying around and get this guy on the television.


----------



## The Tony

Terrible rating.


----------



## the fox

> WWE Raw drew a 3.14 rating with the overrun segments included. The initial 15-minute overrun featuring The Rock and John Cena drew a 3.5 rating, and the additional six minutes that followed drew a 3.3 rating.
> 
> The Rock drew the highest rating of the night with the 3.5 for the full 15-minute overrun, but it was only slightly higher than third quarter-hour's 3.4 rating for part of the C.M. Punk vs. Daniel Bryan match with Chris Jericho's post-match attack.



some information from pw dot net


----------



## kokepepsi

the fox said:


> before saying dwayne failed just wait for the ratings breakdown


That prowrestling net thing I posted, although not sure how legit it is since it is the first time I have used that site:
"WWE Raw drew a 3.14 rating with the overrun segments included. The initial 15-minute overrun featuring The Rock and John Cena drew a 3.5 rating, and the additional six minutes that followed drew a 3.3 rating."

So the overrun lost viewers as it went on.
:cena2


----------



## the fox

GillbergReturns said:


> I said this would happen last week. Announcing the match a year in advance has killed all interest in this feud. Mania will still draw, but that's about it.
> 
> It's not like Rock came back and did a fresh promo on Cena. They've been having the same argument for what 10 months now. It's played out, nobody cares.
> 
> There's only 1 guy who can move the ratings right now.
> 
> SHAQ. If I was Vince I'd stop p*ssying around and get this guy on the television.


the rock did 3.5 the highest in the show and i am sure next weeks will be better


----------



## GillbergReturns

kokepepsi said:


> That prowrestling net thing I posted, although not sure how legit it is since it is the first time I have used that site:
> "WWE Raw drew a 3.14 rating with the overrun segments included. The initial 15-minute overrun featuring The Rock and John Cena drew a 3.5 rating, and the additional six minutes that followed drew a 3.3 rating."
> 
> So the overrun lost viewers as it went on.
> :cena2


Probally when Cena's music hit.


----------



## the fox

kokepepsi said:


> That prowrestling net thing I posted, although not sure how legit it is since it is the first time I have used that site:
> "WWE Raw drew a 3.14 rating with the overrun segments included. The initial 15-minute overrun featuring The Rock and John Cena drew a 3.5 rating, and the additional six minutes that followed drew a 3.3 rating."
> 
> So the overrun lost viewers as it went on.
> :cena2


still the highest in the show


----------



## Green Light

Obviously people turned over when Cena came out :troll


----------



## GillbergReturns

the fox said:


> the rock did 3.5 the highest in the show and i am sure next weeks will be better


It was standard ratings for the ending of the show. Rock's held to a higher level because he's the Rock.

Like I said though the feud is played and if WWE wants a spark it's going to have to come from Shaq because he's the only guy capable of giving it to them.

WWE needs to move away from the promo fests too. Cena Rock have what 4 promos a piece on each other now? It's played out move on and start building it in the ring. That sounds ridiculous but it's what you have to do if you actually want to keep people interested.


----------



## Ray

Is WWE going to die? Of course it's going to. It's not going to live forever. That's quite absurd. 

I can guarantee right now that if nothing majorly explosive happens in the wrestling industry the next couple of years, WWE, and wrestling might become extinct. It _*DESPERATELY*_ needs another Austin or Hogan, because those are the only two guys who got you to watch wrestling, who got you into it in the first place. Sure, guys like HBK, Undertaker, and the Rock were there as well, but those were the guys that _*KEPT*_ you watching, not got you started. Right now, guys like Punk, Miz, Orton, hell even Cena are in the same category as Rock and Taker and Hart were. They keep you watching, and that's exactly why the ratings aren't budging, and going down. As soon as the viewer gets tired of those guys he tunes out, and each year, it seems the interest in those guys is decreasing.

Face the fact that in the old days, there was so much stock put into one man, that viewers had no problem tuning in the entire 2 hours watch him do whatever. I don't see that in Cena (albeit he's the closest we've gotten) or Punk or Miz. At this point, the ONLY thing that can save WWE and bring them back up is one guy, and we don't even know who he is, he might not even be wrestling right now. Yes, history has proven that putting that much into one guy has been dangerous, but it's also proven to be quite effective overall in terms of bringing MAJOR popularity to the WWE. 

EVERYTHING in the WWE right now, from stocks, to buy rates, to website views, are down, and they're decreasing dramatically each year. They need another Austin or Hogan (NO OTHER EXCEPTIONS, JUST those two) that can bring them back from where they are.


----------



## Green Light

If you can't keep people interested in a feud between your two biggest stars then you may aswell give up


----------



## Twistaeffect2005

I gotta ask, why are people so consumed by ratings? I mean, in the grand scheme of things, what does it matter?


----------



## Ray

The fact that John Cena interrupted is a bullshit excuse for the ratings drop. Most Rock marks around here go around thinkin' that he's the greatest draw of all time, and that he gains ratings/viewers no matter what he's doing. If that was really true, regardless of Cena interference or not, the rating would have held at 3.5, not have dropped.

Well, there you go. Rock was in a segment that lost viewers. Accept that. Doesn't mean he's not a draw. Course he is. Just means, he's not as fucking great as most Rock marks make him out to be. Stop riding his dick, and come back to reality. This is 2012, not 1999. Even Rock loses viewers occasionally, so before spittin' fire about other people losing ratings, think of your precious little Rock losing viewers first.


----------



## GillbergReturns

psx71 said:


> The fact that John Cena interrupted is a bullshit excuse for the ratings drop. Most Rock marks around here go around thinkin' that he's the greatest draw of all time, and that he gains ratings/viewers no matter what he's doing. If that was really true, regardless of Cena interference or not, the rating would have held at 3.5, not have dropped.
> 
> Well, there you go. Rock was in a segment that lost viewers. Accept that.


That's more of a joke more than anything else. The truth is the promo went on for too long. People don't want 25 minute overruns.


----------



## Green Light

Lol someone getting a little mad, relax bro I was just messing if you couldn't tell by the trollface smilie


----------



## Ray

GillbergReturns said:


> That's more of a joke more than anything else. The truth is the promo went on for too long. People don't want 25 minute overruns.


Wait, but it doesn't matter right? It's the Rock. He's ALWAYS supposed to draw, no matter what. Doesn't matter if it's an overrun, people WANT to watch him, nevermind that it went on a 25 minute overrun. The more of the Rock on RAW, the better right? He's supposed to be this ultra mega movie star who's the biggest draw of all time. He's supposed to be the guy that takes the WWE back into the promised land of the "4.0" ratings right? 

Right, coming back to reality now? Back when Punk was losing viewers, people were praising him like a god, saying stuff like that. Just pissed me the fuck off. And now that Rock is revealed for a guy who's losing viewers, I get this shitty excuses that people slammed when Punk was losing.

Now, not dissin' on you if you didn't say it, but some people did, and that's the only reason I am. And I say this as a huge fan of the Rock, but some people just piss me the hell off on here with how far they take him. Slow it down. Again, it's fucking 2012, not 1999. Stay in the past all you want, but don't bring it's irrelevancy into ratings arguments when they're two completely different era's. 

/rant.


----------



## JasonLives

So The Rock part did a 3.5 followed by a 3.3? Actually lost viewers? Last time I checked there are only one guy to blame for that. Sure isnt CM Punk.
The logical reason is that his promo dragged on too long and people got bored.

Face it, the big stars from the Attitude Era cant draw on a longterm basis in todays wrestling. People tune in for nostaglia reason and when they have gotten their fix they dont care. It happens both in WWE and TNA. 
The Rock is not someone that will draw WAY more then the other guys. He will surely draw more, but not instantly spike the ratings close to 4.0.


----------



## kokepepsi

Rock lost viewer on his birthday episode
so this ain't that shocking


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Rock went from 3.5 to 3.3? :lmao Rock marks ain't gonna be happy about that. How legit is that news source, though?


----------



## GillbergReturns

psx71 said:


> Wait, but it doesn't matter right? It's the Rock. He's ALWAYS supposed to draw, no matter what. Doesn't matter if it's an overrun, people WANT to watch him, nevermind that it went on a 25 minute overrun. The more of the Rock on RAW, the better right? He's supposed to be this ultra mega movie star who's the biggest draw of all time. He's supposed to be the guy that takes the WWE back into the promised land of the "4.0" ratings right?
> 
> Right, coming back to reality now? Back when Punk was losing viewers, people were praising him like a god, saying stuff like that. Just pissed me the fuck off. And now that Rock is revealed for a guy who's losing viewers, I get this shitty excuses that people slammed when Punk was losing.
> 
> Now, not dissin' on you if you didn't say it, but some people did, and that's the only reason I am. And I say this as a huge fan of the Rock, but some people just piss me the hell off on here with how far they take him. Slow it down. Again, it's fucking 2012, not 1999. Stay in the past all you want, but don't bring it's irrelevancy into ratings arguments when they're two completely different era's.
> 
> /rant.


So basically you're saying everyone loses viewers and WWE is ******, because it's becoming increasingly irrelvant.

That's really what's happening here. They've lost a million viewers in 1 year. 1 million viewers. PPV's are down 10%. 

It's not a face/ heel Cena, Rock, Punk or anything else thing. WWE is fading away into obscurity.

Now I know you're talking about Rock fans in general but if you look what I myself predicted it was basically this. Rock's return was a spark and that spark fizzled because of the year in advance announcement of the match. Shaq or Lesnar are the only 2 people who can bring in a spark but make no mistake about it's a spark not the fire.

The fire is gone and not coming back. Competition is just better than what it was in the NWO/ Attitude era. MMA/ better cable competition. Get use to people b****ing about the ratings bc it's not changing anytime soon.


----------



## Rock316AE

Good to know Rock did the peak. I guess Daytona was a big factor and next week he can do a bigger segment. HBK/Taker/HHH should also do good number together. The problem I have is why they didn't say that Rock is going to be there next week? I don't get it, NOBODY know that he's going to be there except the live crowd in Boston, why the hell not say that? WWE are losing it, period.

And for the overrun, for all the clueless kids here, when you got 20 minutes overrun, it's not just the wrestling audience, it's also the people who come to see the show after RAW. That's why after a few minutes, it's a natural thing for them to change the channel and they did it exactly when Cena came out, good choice.


----------



## SteenIsGod

Damn, sucks for this. I was sure with Rock, Taker, HHH, Y2J, Punk, Cena and the mania momentum in general building up they would do upwards of a 4.

Maybe now that Rock was on for one show it'll get the Casuals to think "Oh Shit Rocky's back". A couple graphics for a return mean jack shit.


----------



## Ray

JasonLives said:


> So The Rock part did a 3.5 followed by a 3.3? Actually lost viewers? Last time I checked there are only one guy to blame for that. Sure isnt CM Punk.
> The logical reason is that his promo dragged on too long and people got bored.
> 
> Face it, the big stars from the Attitude Era cant draw on a longterm basis in todays wrestling. People tune in for nostaglia reason and when they have gotten their fix they dont care. It happens both in WWE and TNA.
> The Rock is not someone that will draw WAY more then the other guys. He will surely draw more, but not instantly spike the ratings close to 4.0.


Dead on. Of course he draws, you'd be foolish to think he doesn't. But some Rock marks on here need to realize that he's that huge draw that they make him out to be. And also, if Rock loses viewers, then don't fucking bash on other people not being a draw, cause shit happens.


----------



## kokepepsi

Rock316AE said:


> Good to know Rock did the peak. I guess Daytona was a big factor and next week he can do a bigger segment. HBK/Taker/HHH should also do good number together. The problem I have is why they didn't say that Rock is going to be there next week? I don't get it, NOBODY know that he's going to be there except the live crowd in Boston, why the hell not say that? WWE are losing it, period.
> 
> And for the overrun, for all the clueless kids here, when you got 20 minutes overrun, it's not just the wrestling audience, it's also the people who come to see the show after RAW. That's why after a few minutes, it's a natural thing for them to change the channel and they did it exactly when Cena came out, good choice.


Already making excuses for next weeks 2.9 and 3.3 segment with Rock?

Can't believe there are so many Nascar marks though


----------



## Ray

GillbergReturns said:


> *So basically you're saying everyone loses viewers and WWE is ******, because it's becoming increasingly irrelvant.
> *
> That's really what's happening here. They've lost a million viewers in 1 year. 1 million viewers. PPV's are down 10%.
> 
> It's not a face/ heel Cena, Rock, Punk or anything else thing. WWE is fading away into obscurity.
> 
> Now I know you're talking about Rock fans in general but if you look what I myself predicted it was basically this. Rock's return was a spark and that spark fizzled because of the year in advance announcement of the match. Shaq or Lesnar are the only 2 people who can bring in a spark but make no mistake about it's a spark not the fire.
> 
> The fire is gone and not coming back. Competition is just better than what it was in the NWO/ Attitude era. MMA/ better cable competition. Get use to people b****ing about the ratings bc it's not changing anytime soon.


First off, despite you being correct on that one, I NEVER said that in my argument. Don't know where you got that from, but your correct, and I 100% agree with you on your entire paragraph actually. 

Second of all, I have no problem with people who bitch, but they obviously need a reason too. And now that the whole logic of what their reason was based on is being dis-proven slowly as Rock is LOSING viewers, and is seemingly not "drawing" what the marks were saying he could compared to Punk etc, they get their all of a sudden shitting out bricks.

I just wanted to prove to them that they were wrong, and are wrong. About everything. About Punk, about Cena, about Orton about Rock, about Survivor Series.


----------



## LarryCoon

kokepepsi said:


> That prowrestling net thing I posted, although not sure how legit it is since it is the first time I have used that site:
> "WWE Raw drew a 3.14 rating with the overrun segments included. The initial 15-minute overrun featuring The Rock and John Cena drew a 3.5 rating, and the additional six minutes that followed drew a 3.3 rating."
> 
> So the overrun lost viewers as it went on.
> :cena2


Can't blame em. Rock was deep into the twitter crap as his promo went on and it dragged


----------



## GillbergReturns

kokepepsi said:


> Already making excuses for next weeks 2.9 and 3.3 segment with Rock?
> 
> Can't believe there are so many Nascar marks though


Viewership was much the same as last week. Television audience increased bc of Nascar and that's why the number was down.

Yes, the Rock is supposed to increase viewership and he hasn't since last year's Mania ended so in that regards his return has been a disappointment.

The one thing I will say though is Mania will draw and that's a guarantee. Ultimately that decides whether or not he was a success. He was brought in for that day more than anything else.


----------



## GillbergReturns

psx71 said:


> First off, despite you being correct on that one, I NEVER said that in my argument. Don't know where you got that from, but your correct, and I 100% agree with you on your entire paragraph actually.
> 
> Second of all, I have no problem with people who bitch, but they obviously need a reason too. And now that the whole logic of what their reason was based on is being dis-proven slowly as Rock is LOSING viewers, and is seemingly not "drawing" what the marks were saying he could compared to Punk etc, they get their all of a sudden shitting out bricks.
> 
> I just wanted to prove to them that they were wrong, and are wrong. About everything. About Punk, about Cena, about Orton about Rock, about Survivor Series.


They're not wrong about Survivor Series though.

Survivor Series was a 15% increase when all the surrounding PPV's decreased 10%.

Reallistically speaking Rock garnered an additional 50,000 on that PPV.

It's not world breaking numbers but no tag match will get you that.

I do agree with you that wrestling is diminshed market no matter whose in it. It's not a Punk or Cena thing. The interest in wrestling just isn't there anymore.


----------



## Rock316AE

kokepepsi said:


> Already making excuses for next weeks 2.9 and 3.3 segment with Rock?
> 
> Can't believe there are so many Nascar marks though


No need for that, Without Rock this show is doing below 3.0, same thing for next week. But without competition and with real star power on the show like HBK/Taker/HHH they should do bigger. Rock is not going to turn a dead product for two years in a row, he did it last year, single-handedly, they fucked it up. Meanwhile he's doing blockbusters, still nobody got more than him BTW, 4.0 in November, let's see if they can do bigger.


----------



## GillbergReturns

Rock316AE said:


> No need for that, Without Rock this show is doing below 3.0, same thing for next week. But without competition and with real star power on the show like HBK/Taker/HHH they should do bigger. Rock is not going to turn a dead product for two years in a row, he did it last year, single-handedly, they fucked it up. Meanwhile he's doing blockbusters, still nobody got more than him BTW, 4.0 in November, let's see if they can do bigger.


Hopefully the Daytona 500 did come into play. I do think's there's a signifant overlap between those 2 fanbases so I do that could be a possibility.


----------



## KilledAssassin

I guess it's safe to say that the rock is not a draw.


----------



## FlyingElbow

GillbergReturns said:


> Reallistically speaking Rock garnered an additional 50,000 on that PPV.


It can be realistically argued that Rock accounted for 64,000 additional buys depending on how much stock you want to put in year-to-year trends based on a relatively small statistical sample. As such, there's a decent margin of error, but 64K is within the ballpark.

EDIT: Regarding the Daytona 500/RAW connection... obviously there's a correlation between the two fanbases or John Cena would never have been named the honorary starter and Carl Edwards would never have shown up on RAW. I've never been a big believer in slavishly following (and reading too much into) week-to-week RAW ratings though. Doing that was one of the things that killed WCW.


----------



## kokepepsi

Rock316AE said:


> No need for that, Without Rock this show is doing below 3.0, same thing for next week. But without competition and with real star power on the show like HBK/Taker/HHH they should do bigger. Rock is not going to turn a dead product for two years in a row, he did it last year, single-handedly, they fucked it up. Meanwhile he's doing blockbusters, still nobody got more than him BTW, 4.0 in November, let's see if they can do bigger.


Yeah because they had so much trouble doing a 3.2 last week without The Rock

Rest of your post was alright


----------



## Ray

GillbergReturns said:


> They're not wrong about Survivor Series though.
> 
> Survivor Series was a 15% increase when all the surrounding PPV's decreased 10%.
> 
> Reallistically speaking Rock garnered an additional 50,000 on that PPV.
> 
> It's not world breaking numbers but no tag match will get you that.
> 
> I do agree with you that wrestling is diminshed market no matter whose in it. It's not a Punk or Cena thing. The interest in wrestling just isn't there anymore.


No, but they were wrong in assuming that it's going to bring in record buys, which it didn't. Racking in 30,000 buys compared to last year is impressive, no doubt. But Punk did that too for MITB.

My only problem with some marks on here is the fact that they ride his dick thinking he's the greatest of all time in terms of drawing, and if you make a claim like that, back it the fuck up. And again, don't bash guys like Punk without a reason, when the Rock is doing the same thing, and when Rock DOES it, don't say the stuff we did defending Punk and expect it to be passed when Rock marks denied it. 

Although, you've been great though. If only there were more Rock fans like you around here, who realize, that YES, Rock DOES have limits, and he's not the greatest when it comes to drawing power. 



Rock316AE said:


> No need for that, Without Rock this show is doing below 3.0, same thing for next week. But without competition and with real star power on the show like HBK/Taker/HHH they should do bigger. *Rock is not going to turn a dead product for two years in a row, he did it last year, single-handedly, they fucked it up.* Meanwhile he's doing blockbusters, still nobody got more than him BTW, 4.0 in November, let's see if they can do bigger.


Ohhhh, a 3.1 vs. a possible 2.9 rating that we would have gotten this week without him, you know 0.2 increase. That's a huge increase right Rocky? Nice drawing prowess 

Give me a fucking break. Loads of us said the EXACT same thing during the Summer of Punk last year. We told you to give it time (before they completely fucked it up with the HHH/Nash angle) but of course, you had Rock's semen all over on your face, so all you did was call bullshit. Was the dick sucking worth it now that Rock is losing viewers and not much greater then the average roster in terms of drawing power?


----------



## rockymark94

psx71 said:


> No, but they were wrong in assuming that it's going to bring in record buys, which it didn't. Racking in 30,000 buys compared to last year is impressive, no doubt. But Punk did that too for MITB.
> 
> My only problem with some marks on here is the fact that they ride his dick thinking he's the greatest of all time in terms of drawing, and if you make a claim like that, back it the fuck up. And again, don't bash guys like Punk without a reason, when the Rock is doing the same thing, and when Rock DOES it, don't say the stuff we did defending Punk and expect it to be passed when Rock marks denied it.
> 
> Although, you've been great though. If only there were more Rock fans like you around here, who realize, that YES, Rock DOES have limits, and he's not the greatest when it comes to drawing power.
> 
> 
> 
> Ohhhh, a 3.1 vs. a possible 2.9 rating that we would have gotten this week without him, you know 0.2 increase. That's a huge increase right Rocky? Nice drawing prowess
> 
> Give me a fucking break. Loads of us said the EXACT same thing during the Summer of Punk last year. We told you to give it time (before they completely fucked it up with the HHH/Nash angle) but of course, you had Rock's semen all over on your face, so all you did was call bullshit. Was the dick sucking worth it now that Rock is losing viewers and not much greater then the average roster in terms of drawing power?


A punk mark angry at a rock mark this is brilliant


----------



## Ray

rockymark94 said:


> A punk mark angry at a rock mark this is brilliant


:lmao

Difference is, I don't really give a fuck if Punk draws or not. I just enjoy him to hell. I just hate these Rock marks who put EVERYONE in the roster down, just for the Rock, thinking he's GOAT in the drawing game. And I say this as a big fan of his. 

But it does feel nice to get back at them for saying that kind of stuff about Punk in the summer


----------



## Doublemint

psx71 said:


> :lmao
> 
> Difference is, I don't really give a fuck if Punk draws or not. I just enjoy him to hell. I just hate these Rock marks who put EVERYONE in the roster down, just for the Rock, thinking he's GOAT in the drawing game.
> 
> But it does feel nice to get back at them for saying that kind of stuff about Punk in the summer


Actually, the main reason why some Rock marks put CM Punk down is because CM Punk been talking thrash and disrespect The Rock. That is why some Rock marks always bash CM Punk every time they got opportunity.


----------



## kokepepsi

This is the rockmark contradiction that is annoying

Creative can kill Rocks momentum and star power so it is not his fault stuff does not draw.

But somehow when it comes to the rest of the roster, they suck and it's not because of the booking/creative but because they can't get over themselves and suck.
(except for HHH/Taker one guy who books his own shit and one who only works once a year and is working with the guy who is booking his own stuff)

Why can't we all just hate Steph/Creative/Vince and their shit ideas together?


----------



## Rock316AE

kokepepsi said:


> Yeah because they had so much trouble doing a 3.2 last week without The Rock
> 
> Rest of your post was alright


I'm talking about this show, a show that was going to do below 3.0, the audience is not there now to do huge numbers, Rock can do it on a specific segment, Taker can do it and HBK/HHH can do it but not like last year when you had all the old school fanbase. 


GillbergReturns said:


> Hopefully the Daytona 500 did come into play. I do think's there's a signifant overlap between those 2 fanbases so I do that could be a possibility.


PWTorch:


> Worth factoring in is whether the Daytona 500 on Monday night drew adult males 18-49 and over 49 away from Raw, which typically occurs when Raw is opposite big sporting events.


It was a big factor but the number is still below last year because there's no hype or buzz. The Rock can't carry the worst roster of all time on his back all the time, that's not happening in the TV business. Just like with Rock, the Rumble concept gave them a boost but they drove all of them away again.


----------



## Ray

Doublemint said:


> Actually, the main reason why some Rock marks put CM Punk down is because CM Punk been talking thrash and disrespect The Rock. That is why some Rock marks always bash CM Punk every time they got opportunity.





> _CM Punk talks about the Rock's behavior backstage._
> You know, the thing about that is, he's not around. He's not around. *It doesn't help morale when the guy goes right from his limo to the dressing room to the dressing room to the ring*. He's very bourgeois Hollywood. A little hello would have been nice. He could have run by with his own entourage


Nothing he said was false. It's not really bashing.


----------



## cmp25

I know the 500 came into play for me. I watched Daytona first and then watched RAW after that.


----------



## Ray

Rock316AE said:


> I'm talking about this show, a show that was going to do below 3.0, the audience is not there now to do huge numbers, Rock can do it on a specific segment, Taker can do it and HBK/HHH can do it but not like last year when you had all the old school fanbase.
> 
> PWTorch:
> 
> *
> It was a big factor but the number is still below last year because there's no hype or buzz. The Rock can't carry the worst roster of all time on his back all the time, that's not happening in the TV business. Just like with Rock, the Rumble concept gave them a boost but they drove all of them away again.*


Wait, you indirectly, you're pretty much saying.....Daytona>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Rock? 

BUT....BUT, ROCK'S A MOVIE STAR! HE'S THE BEST! WHERE ARE THE 4.0's? :lmao

And yet, if Rock wasn't on the show last night, you'd be going around the forum saying, "Wish Rock was here. He'll kick all the jabroni's asses and get 1 million more people watching right away. Rock >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RAW ROSTER"

Also, I found it funny how you never factored that stuff that I bolded in when Punk was in the main-slot in the summer. Just always straight to the bashing


----------



## Camoron

Hulk Hogan is on TNA like every week and he doesn't help draw for shit. I am not sure why Rock marks think The Rock on his own is what draws ratings. It's about the PRODUCT more than anything. The Rock isn't drawing huge ratings on his own, his feud and promos with Cena is what draws the ratings. People aren't going to tune in in huge numbers just to see The Rock if he isn't involved in something good. Just look at the Survivor Series buy rates for evidence of that.


----------



## GillbergReturns

psx71 said:


> Nothing he said was false. It's not really bashing.


Punk needs to look at Rock's point of view on that one.

He's not one of the boys, and he's a busy guy. He's not necessarily blowing them off, but the guy has other things going on too.

I'm not seeking out a bunch of d bags who run to the media every time they feel they've been disrespected either.


----------



## Doublemint

psx71 said:


> Nothing he said was false. It's not really bashing.


Bashing or not, the fact remain he disrespect The Rock and whine over little matter just because he doesn't hello.

Agree with you GillbergReturns.


----------



## AntMan

The 1/30/12 show did a 3.5 with Punk vs Bryan, Cena/Kane/Ryder/Eve, and Undertaker's return. I expected a bigger rating for last night.


----------



## rahulcfc26

Camoron said:


> Hulk Hogan is on TNA like every week and he doesn't help draw for shit. I am not sure why Rock marks think The Rock on his own is what draws ratings. It's about the PRODUCT more than anything. The Rock isn't drawing huge ratings on his own, his feud and promos with Cena is what draws the ratings. People aren't going to tune in in huge numbers just to see The Rock if he isn't involved in something good. Just look at the Survivor Series buy rates for evidence of that.


this


----------



## rahulcfc26

GillbergReturns said:


> Punk needs to look at Rock's point of view on that one.
> 
> He's not one of the boys, and he's a busy guy. He's not necessarily blowing them off, but the guy has other things going on too.
> 
> I'm not seeking out a bunch of d bags who run to the media every time they feel they've been disrespected either.


i like punk but from what i hear, the dude is bitter and he's not a fan of the rock so i wouldn't be surprised if it's sour grapes, esepcially when fans pay more attention to the rock (even when he isn't near his best and trends most of the time)


----------



## LarryCoon

kokepepsi said:


> This is the rockmark contradiction that is annoying
> 
> Creative can kill Rocks momentum and star power so it is not his fault stuff does not draw.
> 
> But somehow when it comes to the rest of the roster, they suck and it's not because of the booking/creative but because they can't get over themselves and suck.


No idea why


----------



## rockymark94

psx71 said:


> Nothing he said was false. It's not really bashing.


 So how come other people backstage praise the rock?


----------



## Ray

GillbergReturns said:


> Punk needs to look at Rock's point of view on that one.
> 
> He's not one of the boys, and he's a busy guy. He's not necessarily blowing them off, but the guy has other things going on too.
> 
> I'm not seeking out a bunch of d bags who run to the media every time they feel they've been disrespected either.


Yeah, the guy who shows up to RAW on those few nights a year DESPERATELY needs to get back right to the movie set after RAW is over, right?

Bull fucking shit.

If he shows up one night on RAW, it's not like he doesn't have all the time in the world. He's backstage. He has just as much time as other guest hosts do, and probably ALOT more time then Cena does, and yet Cena still manages to stick backstage, and to my knowledge, actually HELPS talent backstage, instead of saying "Hey, I have no time. Sorry bout that. Catch you in about 6-7 months in my next appearance where I may or many not be able to answer your questions."



Doublemint said:


> Bashing or not, the fact remain he disrespect The Rock and whine over little matter just because he doesn't hello.
> 
> Agree with you GillbergReturns.


I doubt Punk has a problem with the Rock disrespecting him. But don't YOU think it's a bit disrespectful when Rock blows off a new guy, possibly the future of the business, WITHOUT giving him/her advice? I don't know about you, but that's why guys like Taker are considered leaders backstage. Cause they HELP out, no matter what. Rock? No, right to limo, right to ring.

Of course, all of this might have changed ever since Punk gave that interview, and if that's true, that's terrific. It's nice if Rock's giving young talent some personal experiences and advice.


----------



## rockymark94

psx71 said:


> Yeah, the guy who shows up to RAW on those few nights a year DESPERATELY needs to get back right to the movie set after RAW is over, right?
> 
> Bull fucking shit.
> 
> If he shows up one night on RAW, it's not like he doesn't have all the time in the world. He's backstage. He has just as much time as other guest hosts do, and probably ALOT more time then Cena does, and yet Cena still manages to stick backstage, and to my knowledge, actually HELPS talent backstage, instead of saying "Hey, I have no time. Sorry bout that. Catch you in about 6-7 months in my next appearance where I may or many not be able to answer your questions."
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt Punk has a problem with the Rock disrespecting him. But don't YOU think it's a bit disrespectful when Rock blows off a new guy, possibly the future of the business, WITHOUT giving him/her advice? I don't know about you, but that's why guys like Taker are considered leaders backstage. Cause they HELP out, no matter what. Rock? No, right to limo, right to ring.
> 
> Of course, all of this might have changed ever since Punk gave that interview, and if that's true, that's terrific. It's nice if Rock's giving young talent some personal experiences and talent.


 Why would the rock give advice to a bunch of guys who are insecure and jealous of him?


----------



## Ray

rockymark94 said:


> So how come other people backstage praise the rock?


Oh, you mean guys who worked with him in the attitude era like Triple H, Chris Jericho, Jim Ross, etc? Yeah, the guys who were part of the "boys" alongside the Rock in the locker room back when he was wrestling every week?

Yeah, I wonder why 

Maybe the newer talent would have a fonder opinion of him if, you know, he actually stuck around and talked to them?


----------



## Doublemint

psx71 said:


> Yeah, the guy who shows up to RAW on those few nights a year DESPERATELY needs to get back right to the movie set after RAW is over, right?
> 
> Bull fucking shit.
> 
> If he shows up one night on RAW, it's not like he doesn't have all the time in the world. He's backstage. He has just as much time as other guest hosts do, and probably ALOT more time then Cena does, and yet Cena still manages to stick backstage, and to my knowledge, actually HELPS talent backstage, instead of saying "Hey, I have no time. Sorry bout that. Catch you in about 6-7 months in my next appearance where I may or many not be able to answer your questions."
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt Punk has a problem with the Rock disrespecting him. But don't YOU think it's a bit disrespectful when Rock blows off a new guy, possibly the future of the business, WITHOUT giving him/her advice? I don't know about you, but that's why guys like Taker are considered leaders backstage. Cause they HELP out, no matter what. Rock? No, right to limo, right to ring.
> 
> Of course, all of this might have changed ever since Punk gave that interview, and if that's true, that's terrific. It's nice if Rock's giving young talent some personal experiences and talent.


You expect The Rock to be a full time wrestler and Hollywood movie actor at the same time? That is impossible. The Rock got less time than John Cena. For example, he have to travel around the world to promote his movie Journey 2. That is also what other actors does. The other guest hosts only got one appearance on Raw.

Just because The Rock doesn't talk means he is disrespectful? What kind of bullshit is that? If anyone really want advice then they should take the initiative and approach The Rock, not The Rock approaching them.


----------



## Ray

rockymark94 said:


> Why would the rock give advice to a bunch of guys who are insecure and jealous of him?


Alright, first off, I doubt EVERY SINGLE guy in that locker room is jealous of the Rock. Hell, some of them are probably major fans of his. Of course, some probably aren't, and actually ARE jealous of him, but don't help those douchebags out than. Help the guys out who actually want advice from you.

And you assume that there are none of these "jealous" types who are jealous of top guys like Cena and Punk? Of course there are, and yet THEY still probably help them out if the need it.

Jealousy is a stupid excuse. Try again.


----------



## rockymark94

psx71 said:


> Oh, you mean guys who worked with him in the attitude era like Triple H, Chris Jericho, Jim Ross, etc? Yeah, the guys who were part of the "boys" alongside the Rock in the locker room back when he was wrestling every week?
> 
> Yeah, I wonder why
> 
> Maybe the newer talent would have a fonder opinion of him if, you know, he actually stuck around and talked to them?


 Maybe there's the akwardness of them being outshined by a hollywood actor/legend that makes them feel insecure. If punk was so desperate for advice he would ask the rock for it instead of disrespecting his legacy and acting like his shit doesn't stink all because he's been over for less than a year. Fuck that The Rock has put over so many young guys over the years and has given years off service to help WWE, but in return he gets his loyalty questioned, and a bunch of guys who don't feel comfortable about him being in the main event at mania. I don't know about you but I rather stay away from envious people than to interact with them. Lets not forget young up comers in the wwe need to approach the vets not the other way around. I didn't hear any stories of Austin giving advice to the younger guys but since he's punk's favorite he would never mention that.


----------



## Ray

Doublemint said:


> You expect The Rock to be a full time wrestler and Hollywood movie actor at the same time? That is impossible. The Rock got less time than John Cena. For example, he have to travel around the world to promote his movie Journey 2. That is also what other actors does. The other guest hosts only got one appearance on Raw.
> 
> *Just because The Rock doesn't talk means he is disrespectful? What kind of bullshit is that? If anyone really want advice then they should take the initiative and approach The Rock, not The Rock approaching them.*


(A) Oh for fucks sake. READ before commenting. I DON'T expect him to come back to the ring full time and NEVER said he would, and neither did Cena or Punk. Yet, the days the Rock is in the city of where RAW is taking place doing nothing but probably tweeting and riding his limo's around the city, he doesn't have time to spare to talk to talent? Again, bullshit. It's manageable to wrestle (in Rock's case make a few appearances a year), and do media promotion and STILL be able to talk to talent. Hell, Cena does it with a full time wrestling schedule. 

(A) Yes, COME UP TO HIM. Don't expect for him to come up to you. But wait, how can they go up to him, he's kinda always gone and out sight....


----------



## Ray

rockymark94 said:


> Maybe there's the akwardness of them being outshined by a hollywood actor/legend that makes them feel insecure. If punk was so desperate for advice he would ask the rock for it instead of disrespecting his legacy and acting like his shit doesn't stink all because he's been over for less than a year. Fuck that The Rock has put over so many young guys over the years and has given years off service to help WWE, but in return he gets his loyalty questioned, and a bunch of guys who don't feel comfortable about him being in the main event at mania. I don't know about you but I rather stay away from envious people than to interact with them. Lets not forget young up comers in the wwe need to approach the vets not the other way around. I didn't hear any stories of Austin giving advice to the younger guys but since he's punk's favorite he would never mention that.


Then again, MAYBE, JUST MAYBE, there ARE wrestlers backstage who WANT to talk to the Rock, and you know what, he isn't there. Punk isn't desperate for advice, I don't know what type of advice he would want when he's already at the top. He was most likely referring to Rock and the younger talent. 

Oh yeah, cause you know, the Rock putting over other talent was because of him. Bullshit. It was because he was on his way out, and he HAD to. It's more of a tradition then it is Rock's will. He wanted to go over Lesnar because he let him go over clean at SummerSlam.

First off think of this guy who shows up, and then is automatically in the main spot at WrestleMania despite the fact that he only shows up a couple times a year. Wouldn't you be pissed if that happened? Of course there's a business reason behind it, but I sure as hell would still be pissed.

Again, the envious people won't come up to you. They're going to be talking behind your back without reason cause their pricks, but again, IF Rock DID actually stay backstage, maybe they would approach him....


----------



## Hladeit

There's no point in blaming The rock or Cena or even HHH/taker/hbk for poor ratings. You can only rely on these superstars of the past for so long before the nostalgia wears off and people dont care anymore. 

The real problem is Vince mcmahon being out of touch. Lack of long term planning. Mr.Mcmahon obviously prefers instant spike in ratings and buyrates which is why even after a whole year, there is not one single guy from the current roster that has been built up to draw on his own. The Miz & punk were the two guys last year, who came really close to making to the next level but were stopped dead on tracks instead, in favour of the absolute top names in the WWE. The Miz was fed to Cena and punk's whole push became a colossal clusterfuck because vince decided to stick with the original plan HHH-taker for mania, as a result of which HHH was not turned heel. So much wasted potential, damn shame!


----------



## LarryCoon

psx71 said:


> (A) Oh for fucks sake. READ before commenting. I DON'T expect him to come back to the ring full time and NEVER said he would, and neither did Cena or Punk. Yet, the days the Rock is in the city of where RAW is taking place doing nothing but probably tweeting and riding his limo's around the city, he doesn't have time to spare to talk to talent? Again, bullshit. It's manageable to wrestle (in Rock's case make a few appearances a year), and do media promotion and STILL be able to talk to talent. Hell, Cena does it with a full time wrestling schedule.
> 
> (A) Yes, COME UP TO HIM. Don't expect for him to come up to you. But wait, how can they go up to him, he's kinda always gone and out sight....


To add an interesting fact to this, which I brought up a week back, it is customary for any talent to shake the hands of all the other performers as a sign of unity. Jimmy Korderas confirmed this on his podcast and this wrestling tradition predates any of Rock's ancestors


----------



## Doublemint

psx71 said:


> (A) Oh for fucks sake. READ before commenting. I DON'T expect him to come back to the ring full time and NEVER said he would, and neither did Cena or Punk. Yet, the days the Rock is in the city of where RAW is taking place doing nothing but probably tweeting and riding his limo's around the city, he doesn't have time to spare to talk to talent? Again, bullshit. It's manageable to wrestle (in Rock's case make a few appearances a year), and do media promotion and STILL be able to talk to talent. Hell, Cena does it with a full time wrestling schedule.
> 
> (A) Yes, COME UP TO HIM. Don't expect for him to come up to you. But wait, how can they go up to him, he's kinda always gone and out sight....


Is there anything wrong with that? As someone already said, there are other people bitter with him, so why would he even bother talk to them or spend time with them in the first place. Might as well go hanging around the city.I would definitely avoid all those bitter and jealous people. The Rock is not WWE employee, he can go wherever he want. Who are you to tell him what to do. As long as he doesn't goes against the contract deal, everything is fine. Beside, before CM Punk comment about how The Rock being bourgeois Hollywood , during CM Punk shoot promo, he already accused of The Rock being an ass kisser and CM Punk admit the fact The Rock in Wrestlemania main event pissed him off. CM Punk real problem with The Rock is not because The Rock doesn't talk to the roster, but because The Rock is in the main event of Wrestlemania. CM Punk is the only wrestler who whine about every single minor thing about The Rock not talking to talent, other wrestler like Undertaker or Triple H don't give a shit about what The Rock does.



psx71 said:


> Then again, MAYBE, JUST MAYBE, there ARE wrestlers backstage who WANT to talk to the Rock, and you know what, he isn't there. Punk isn't desperate for advice, I don't know what type of advice he would want when he's already at the top. He was most likely referring to Rock and the younger talent.
> 
> Oh yeah, cause you know, the Rock putting over other talent was because of him. Bullshit. It was because he was on his way out, and he HAD to. It's more of a tradition then it is Rock's will. He wanted to go over Lesnar because he let him go over clean at SummerSlam.
> 
> First off think of this guy who shows up, and then is automatically in the main spot at WrestleMania despite the fact that he only shows up a couple times a year. Wouldn't you be pissed if that happened? Of course there's a business reason behind it, but I sure as hell would still be pissed.
> 
> Again, the envious people won't come up to you. They're going to be talking behind your back without reason cause their pricks, but again, IF Rock DID actually stay backstage, maybe they would approach him....


He already putting over talent like Jericho and Kurt Angle long time before he plan to left.Beside, Brock and The Rock are good friends in real life. There is a video in youtube where The Rock met and hug with Brock Lesnar in UFC, so whether The Rock plan to left or not, I won't be surprised if The Rock himself willingly lost to Brock Lesnar. Both of them are good friends in real life. Most people who have worked with The Rock hardly complain or talk thrash about The Rock. Only the younger generation will whine. 





As for him being main event instead of someone else who been there longer than him, well that is CM Punk own problem. Not The Rock fault. Nothing personal, it just good business.



> Again, the envious people won't come up to you. They're going to be talking behind your back without reason cause their pricks, but again, IF Rock DID actually stay backstage, maybe they would approach him....


Which is why I hope on the next few Raw where The Rock will stay, those younger generation superstars will be able to communicate and understand The Rock more. I don't see older generation superstar like Undertaker or Triple H complain about The Rock. Probably because they knew The Rock as an individual more and he is not the kind of person CM Punk describe him to be.


----------



## Duke Silver

Gotta love the excuses from the Rocky Strudel suckers. God knows Punk (a much lesser known star), has never been allowed such leeway. 

Hypocrites and dolts, the lot of you.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

psx71 said:


> Then again, MAYBE, JUST MAYBE, there ARE wrestlers backstage who WANT to talk to the Rock, and you know what, he isn't there. Punk isn't desperate for advice, I don't know what type of advice he would want when he's already at the top. He was most likely referring to Rock and the younger talent.
> 
> Oh yeah, cause you know, the Rock putting over other talent was because of him. Bullshit. It was because he was on his way out, and he HAD to. It's more of a tradition then it is Rock's will. He wanted to go over Lesnar because he let him go over clean at SummerSlam.
> 
> First off think of this guy who shows up, and then is automatically in the main spot at WrestleMania despite the fact that he only shows up a couple times a year. Wouldn't you be pissed if that happened? Of course there's a business reason behind it, but I sure as hell would still be pissed.
> 
> Again, the envious people won't come up to you. They're going to be talking behind your back without reason cause their pricks, but again, IF Rock DID actually stay backstage, maybe they would approach him....


Anyone whos anyone in WWE are on the card. The main money drawers outside of Rock are on the card.

He's taking no ones spot that deserves to be in one of the main events. 

Rock paid his dues a long time ago. He's a money drawer, so he's a main event guy. 

Get over it, WWE is his toy chest and he can come play with it anytime he wants. Some fans need to get over it as do the losers in the back.


----------



## Bushmaster

Lmao I love it. So now seeing as the Rock doesn't draw as much as they think I'm seeing stuff like the promo was too long that's why it lost viewers, or Wrestling is a dying business or blame NASCAR. Omfg I thought the Rock marks said he's the greatest, he's a huge movie star lol. So NASCAR > Rock right. I can pretty much fucking guarantee that if they got a 3.7 or even 4.0 u wouldn't here shit about wrestling being a dying industry. Yes wrestling isn't as huge as it was but wwe gets about 7 million viewers each week not even counting superstars. With so many channels and shows that's alright especially for pro wrestling these days. 

You'll get excuse after excuse and reason after reason to protect the rock. Some of u guys are idiots. Is this really the worst roster ever. Fuck no. I will neer understand what ppl see when they say that. All the top stars could put on classic matches easily the thing is I'm sure most of the ppl that complain want Bishoffs male soap opera instead of consistent good action. Roster is great the booking is what sucks. 

Lol last week got a better rating without the Rock. Gosh I think the rock marks are fuming. Or maybe it could be that Rock did get the highest rated segment at 3.5 but lost viewers, and "indie hacks" got a 3.4 for a match not promo.


----------



## SimplyIncredible

psx71 said:


> The fact that John Cena interrupted is a bullshit excuse for the ratings drop. Most Rock marks around here go around thinkin' that he's the greatest draw of all time, and that he gains ratings/viewers no matter what he's doing. If that was really true, regardless of Cena interference or not, the rating would have held at 3.5, not have dropped.
> 
> Well, there you go. Rock was in a segment that lost viewers. Accept that. Doesn't mean he's not a draw. Course he is. Just means, he's not as fucking great as most Rock marks make him out to be. Stop riding his dick, and come back to reality. This is 2012, not 1999. Even Rock loses viewers occasionally, so before spittin' fire about other people losing ratings, think of your precious little Rock losing viewers first.


Wow, you take this shit way too seriously.


----------



## SimplyIncredible

psx71 said:


> :lmao
> 
> Difference is, I don't really give a fuck if Punk draws or not. I just enjoy him to hell. I just hate these Rock marks who put EVERYONE in the roster down, just for the Rock, thinking he's GOAT in the drawing game. And I say this as a big fan of his.
> 
> But it does feel nice to get back at them for saying that kind of stuff about Punk in the summer


Why are you so obsessed with ratings?

Its the WM buyrate that matters, that is why he was brought back, and i'm sure it will be huge.


----------



## SimplyIncredible

SoupMan Prime said:


> Lmao I love it. So now seeing as the Rock doesn't draw as much as they think I'm seeing stuff like the promo was too long that's why it lost viewers, or Wrestling is a dying business or blame NASCAR. Omfg I thought the Rock marks said he's the greatest, he's a huge movie star lol. So NASCAR > Rock right. I can pretty much fucking guarantee that if they got a 3.7 or even 4.0 u wouldn't here shit about wrestling being a dying industry. Yes wrestling isn't as huge as it was but wwe gets about 7 million viewers each week not even counting superstars. With so many channels and shows that's alright especially for pro wrestling these days.
> 
> You'll get excuse after excuse and reason after reason to protect the rock. Some of u guys are idiots. Is this really the worst roster ever. Fuck no. I will neer understand what ppl see when they say that. All the top stars could put on classic matches easily the thing is I'm sure most of the ppl that complain* want Bishoffs male soap opera instead of consistent good action. * Roster is great the booking is what sucks.
> 
> Lol last week got a better rating without the Rock. Gosh I think the rock marks are fuming. Or maybe it could be that Rock did get the highest rated segment at 3.5 but lost viewers, and "indie hacks" got a 3.4 for a match not promo.


Pretty sure that Impact usually has much more wrestling than Raw does each week tbh...


----------



## Dub

SimplyIncredible said:


> Why are you so obsessed with ratings?
> 
> Its the WM buyrate that matters, that is why he was brought back, and i'm sure it will be huge.


Of course it will be huge, the 4 million plus who watch week in and week out are the ones who are more invested in the product and more incline to buy the ppv. Some just need to relax on over analyzing these ratings.


----------



## DesolationRow

kokepepsi said:


> This is the rockmark contradiction that is annoying
> 
> Creative can kill Rocks momentum and star power so it is not his fault stuff does not draw.
> 
> But somehow when it comes to the rest of the roster, they suck and it's not because of the booking/creative but because they can't get over themselves and suck.
> (except for HHH/Taker one guy who books his own shit and one who only works once a year and is working with the guy who is booking his own stuff)
> 
> Why can't we all just hate Steph/Creative/Vince and their shit ideas together?


Fucking amen. 

It's okay when Punk's white-hot storyline is turned into a complete circle jerk fiasco that breaks a hundred laws of pro wrestling, because he wasn't gonna ever draw anyway, eh? But if Rock doesn't draw viewers like trout to aquatic insects, it is down to creative, pure and simple. They dropped the ball. Never mind that Rock was gone for months on end, last time he was seen he kicked three guys' asses and every appearance of his is treated like the Second Coming, whereas, for the benefit of mere counter point, Punk had to wade deep into the mess of the entire late August-to-late October "Summer of Punk-Cum-Conspiracy-Cum-Utter Fuckery" angle, never really satisfactorily avenging his bedevilment at the varied hands of Nash and Awesome Truth, and then awkwardly thrown into an angle with Alberto Del Rio. 

And I have to say, *RockAE316* hasn't disappointed. Now not only is this the worst roster of all times~!, but apparently WWE is in the shape of WCW in the year 2000. Business is down across the board but WWE's not exactly at death's door quite yet. Hyperbole does not become thee. Doth protest too much.

Obviously Daytona 500 hurt Raw's rating. Obviously the 3.1 rating as a simple number is not something to get worked up over all by itself. Want proof? A mere year and a half ago, in August 2010, Raw drew two back-to-back viewership numbers of 4,660,000, roughly the same number for this week's viewership and each Raw had 3.3 ratings. February and March are much more arduous television months than August. And, yes, Daytona 500 doubtless had a deleterious effect on the rating. 

What _does_ sting, though, is that The Rock actually, actively, _lost viewers_. There's just no way around that and I dare anyone to try. The promo was honestly all over the place, and while parts of it were entertaining, the whole never quite equaled the sum of its parts. 

But enough about the week-to-week ratings. Sure, they matter. But this complete obsession over them at the expense of all else is ridiculous. WWE needs an overall hot product again. Rock did help a lot last year. The year before, they still had Batista and Michaels, Bret Hart was around for whatever that was worth, with a lot of great build-up consistently strewn throughout the product. Each of the last two years, the viewership average for Raw during the Road to Wrestlemania was 5.6 million viewers. 

I have to think the USA Network is going to be eyeing the numbers of the next few Raws with considerable interest. 

The real good news for WWE/USA is that I am sure that the upcoming Raws will be more balanced affairs. Triple H/Undertaker/Shawn Michaels build-up was utterly absent from this week's Raw and it hurt them. It hurt them rather badly, honestly. Put them at the top of the second hour and you probably have a significantly different picture. 

Oh yeah, but let's talk about how WWE is going to die inside of 30 months. Because this is surely the worst it's ever been for Vinnie Mac!


----------



## Starbuck

Well this is just disappointing tbh. I'm sure the Daytona race thing impacted upon them, as well as no HHH/Taker but still, neither hour was over 5 million and with an advertised Rock appearance, that simply isn't good. It seems as though the opener did pretty well which I'm happy with because it was a great segment and deserved eyeballs on it. The overrun number and the fact that it lost viewers is just plain bad though. But you know what? I think I know the reason why and it isn't some fantastical explanation. It's actually quite simple really. People were expecting Rock to respond to Cena the way he should have. Instead they got an obviously off Rock talking about twitter for 15 minutes. So they tuned out. I really think it's that simple. While I'm sure it was great for the fans in attendance, getting to chant along etc etc, as a TV viewer expecting shit to hit the fan, I was let down and I know most other people were too. It was just a bad promo and I wouldn't be surprised at all if that's the reason why people left/it didn't do as well as expected. He may be the Rock but bad TV is bad TV and that last segment was bad TV imo. 

The question is now where do we go from here? Next week I imagine we'll get the response from Rock that we should have got this week. Both Rock and Cena will be there. No more of this solo promo shit. Get them both in the ring and have them go at it. HHH/Taker/HBK will be there. Stick these guys on at 10pm and let them work their magic. Do whatever they have planned for Jericho/Punk and hopefully it does as well as this week. Start the fucking hype and kick shit into gear! It's the only way they're going to see an increase. Either that or the interest simply isn't there but I don't think that's the case. They just haven't effectively projected it yet. Needless to say, with no competition next week (I think, right?) and Rock, Cena, HHH, HBK, Taker all on the show, if this thing doesn't pull a good number then I really don't know what to tell you lol.


----------



## deatawaits

I would admit that I don't know shit about business,ratings but isn't it RTWM? Shouldn't it get really above 3.1s?And with the rock there is no excuse not even a single fucking excuse this time.I am a rock boy and that's why I can never be unbiased about him,and feel that the promo was long that's why it lost viewers.But you know it is worrying that for the biggest match in last 10 years your Second hour loses viewers.It's flat out simple: The WWE, sure as hell, isn't going to meet an end now it's still strong,But the WWE is ,sure as hell,becoming really irrelevant and I may be damn wrong but I feel MMA/UFC is the biggest reason


> *Posted by DESO*
> Fucking amen.
> 
> It's okay when Punk's white-hot storyline is turned into a complete circle jerk fiasco that breaks a hundred laws of pro wrestling, because he wasn't gonna ever draw anyway, eh? But if Rock doesn't draw viewers like trout to aquatic insects, it is down to creative, pure and simple. They dropped the ball. Never mind that Rock was gone for months on end, last time he was seen he kicked three guys' asses and every appearance of his is treated like the Second Coming, whereas, for the benefit of mere counter point, Punk had to wade deep into the mess of the entire late August-to-late October "Summer of Punk-Cum-Conspiracy-Cum-Utter Fuckery" angle, never really satisfactorily avenging his bedevilment at the varied hands of Nash and Awesome Truth, and then awkwardly thrown into an angle with Alberto Del Rio.
> 
> And I have to say, RockAE316 hasn't disappointed. Now not only is this the worst roster of all times~!, but apparently WWE is in the shape of WCW in the year 2000. Business is down across the board but WWE's not exactly at death's door quite yet. Hyperbole does not become thee. Doth protest too much.
> 
> Obviously Daytona 500 hurt Raw's rating. Obviously the 3.1 rating as a simple number is not something to get worked up over all by itself. Want proof? A mere year and a half ago, in August 2010, Raw drew two back-to-back viewership numbers of 4,660,000, roughly the same number for this week's viewership and each Raw had 3.3 ratings. February and March are much more arduous television months than August. And, yes, Daytona 500 doubtless had a deleterious effect on the rating.


this.
And I salute Rock316AE For his untouchable trolling skills


----------



## #1Peep4ever

If Rock is really that big of a draw for the WWE than the rating should have been more than 4.0 
his promo was bad no substance whatsoever and he didnt draw that much. 

If the Rock was not there and Taker/Trips where in the overrun that went for a very long time people would have said if the rock was in that timeslot the show would have gotten 4.0

at this point i dont even know if this Mania is going to do more than 1.2 mio buys. 


As for those extreme Rock marks... This is the worst roster of all time...REALLY?! or is it booking that fucks them over and over again. 

When SvS did a not so great buyrate people complained about the build up and booking and that it fucked the Rocks drawing power but when it comes to the current Roster its them who cant draw... They are perfectly booked but they just are shitty...? I dont think so 

Those excuses for the Rock are hilarious. Last year i saw little kids play wrestling games and collect the cards while kids of the same day nowadays dont give a fuck about wrestling... Oh yeah and the Rock did not make wrestling "cool" like you say. He just got them some attention since people were interested to see what a movie star would be doing in a wrestling ring and the older fans were excited to see the great one back in the ring. Now people dont care. At least the non wrestling fans. They know Dwayne Johnson will be in the ring at Wrestlemania but they are not eager to see it since they dont care about WRESTLING and if the Rock cant get new people to watch and older fans dont tune in again because they are not interested in a boring feud its not the fault of the fucking roster.

The E needs a direction change. Good booking to show the new guys to the audience. Good booking that makes them have a chance to get over
Add more worth to the title for fucks sake. Have Storylines for everyone and dont make those guys just have a series of matches for some title that does not have any worth. Dont treat us like we are stupid just dropping some storylines or contradict yourself because we probably have forgotten it already. 

I still do enjoy the show since i grew up with wrestling and i still love it. Guys like Ziggler Christian Punk Bryan Rhodes and hell even Cena make me want to watch Raw and Smackdown. 

Rock is no god. He wont revive the wrestling business. He will just add some lights on the E till he is gone again. In that period of time they need to book shit right and afterwards continue with good booking so people wont tune out again.

We have witnessed it. One bad Show makes people dont watch the next week. 
People kept tuning out during the Overrun which is HORRIBLE (or did i get something wrong here?) 
And the fact that the rock lost in the Overrun is even more horrible. Dont come at me with the material was shit and blabla. You were the ones saying the Rock can turn anything into gold. You said he was going to make this feud interesting but he had bad day thus not doing shit for the show and for the feud. Cena did. He was serious while Rock was making corny jokes. We will see next week.


----------



## GillbergReturns

#1Peep4ever said:


> If Rock is really that big of a draw for the WWE than the rating should have been more than 4.0
> his promo was bad no substance whatsoever and he didnt draw that much.
> 
> If the Rock was not there and Taker/Trips where in the overrun that went for a very long time people would have said if the rock was in that timeslot the show would have gotten 4.0
> 
> at this point i dont even know if this Mania is going to do more than 1.2 mio buys.
> 
> 
> As for those extreme Rock marks... This is the worst roster of all time...REALLY?! or is it booking that fucks them over and over again.
> 
> When SvS did a not so great buyrate people complained about the build up and booking and that it fucked the Rocks drawing power but when it comes to the current Roster its them who cant draw... They are perfectly booked but they just are shitty...? I dont think so
> 
> Those excuses for the Rock are hilarious. Last year i saw little kids play wrestling games and collect the cards while kids of the same day nowadays dont give a fuck about wrestling... Oh yeah and the Rock did not make wrestling "cool" like you say. He just got them some attention since people were interested to see what a movie star would be doing in a wrestling ring and the older fans were excited to see the great one back in the ring. Now people dont care. At least the non wrestling fans. They know Dwayne Johnson will be in the ring at Wrestlemania but they are not eager to see it since they dont care about WRESTLING and if the Rock cant get new people to watch and older fans dont tune in again because they are not interested in a boring feud its not the fault of the fucking roster.
> 
> The E needs a direction change. Good booking to show the new guys to the audience. Good booking that makes them have a chance to get over
> Add more worth to the title for fucks sake. Have Storylines for everyone and dont make those guys just have a series of matches for some title that does not have any worth. Dont treat us like we are stupid just dropping some storylines or contradict yourself because we probably have forgotten it already.
> 
> I still do enjoy the show since i grew up with wrestling and i still love it. Guys like Ziggler Christian Punk Bryan Rhodes and hell even Cena make me want to watch Raw and Smackdown.
> 
> Rock is no god. He wont revive the wrestling business. He will just add some lights on the E till he is gone again. In that period of time they need to book shit right and afterwards continue with good booking so people wont tune out again.
> 
> We have witnessed it. One bad Show makes people dont watch the next week.
> People kept tuning out during the Overrun which is HORRIBLE (or did i get something wrong here?)
> And the fact that the rock lost in the Overrun is even more horrible. Dont come at me with the material was shit and blabla. You were the ones saying the Rock can turn anything into gold. You said he was going to make this feud interesting but he had bad day thus not doing shit for the show and for the feud. Cena did. He was serious while Rock was making corny jokes. We will see next week.


If Mania does 1.2 million buys it's a smashing success. It did with 1.1 last year. 

Dieing and fading away into obscurity are 2 different things.

Numbers don't lie and it's a fact that they're down 10% across the board despite the Summer of Punk, and Rock Cena going on. It's a fact WWE got hammered last quarter with a 10 million deficit. I don't think the business is going to die, but I do think's it trending down and that's not changing anytime soon regardless of booking. Competition is better, and I'm not talking about another rasslin program. 

As far as ratings decreasing last week. Viewership was the same. NASCAR probally bumped overall television viewership knocking the rating down a little.

The only I do agree with is it's a concern that they lost viewers as the promo went along.


----------



## Marv95

> This is the worst roster of all time...REALLY?! or is it booking that fucks them over and over again.


It's not just the booking. When JR was the head of talent relations with OVW we got the likes of Lesnar, Orton, Cena, Batista, Shelton, etc. When Ace replaced him we got guys like Kozlov, Khali, the Bellas, Kelly Kelly and FCW top guys such as...


----------



## GillbergReturns

psx71 said:


> Then again, MAYBE, JUST MAYBE, there ARE wrestlers backstage who WANT to talk to the Rock, and you know what, he isn't there. Punk isn't desperate for advice, I don't know what type of advice he would want when he's already at the top. He was most likely referring to Rock and the younger talent.
> 
> Oh yeah, cause you know, the Rock putting over other talent was because of him. Bullshit. It was because he was on his way out, and he HAD to. It's more of a tradition then it is Rock's will. He wanted to go over Lesnar because he let him go over clean at SummerSlam.
> 
> First off think of this guy who shows up, and then is automatically in the main spot at WrestleMania despite the fact that he only shows up a couple times a year. Wouldn't you be pissed if that happened? Of course there's a business reason behind it, but I sure as hell would still be pissed.
> 
> Again, the envious people won't come up to you. They're going to be talking behind your back without reason cause their pricks, but again, IF Rock DID actually stay backstage, maybe they would approach him....


I'm sure there's guys who want to talk to Rock, but it's not like Rock doesn't have a life outside of the WWE. 

He comes back literally in between shooting a movie stays to himself for the short amount of time that he's there and all of the sudden you have bunch of guys crying that he didn't say hi to them.

Grow up and stop being so emotional. If the complaint stands past Mania I'll back off, because his schedule isn't quite as hectic right now.


----------



## D.M.N.

Full breakdown later when it comes, but assuming the information on the previous page was true:

3.4 rating / ~5.1 million - Q3 - conclusion of Punk/Bryan; Y2J's attack
-------------------------
3.5 rating / ~5.1 million - Overrun 1 - Rock promo beginning
3.3 rating / ~4.8 million - Overrun 2 - conclusion of Rock/Cena

While Rock's segment had the highest rating, it looks like the Punk/Jericho segment had the highest (or at least joint highest) viewership of the night. Quite astonishing if true, considering Jericho hasn't really drawn since he got back. Punk and Bryan though drawing well too it seems but that would be extremely surprising if it was indeed higher than Rock/Cena.

The in-depth quarter-by-quarter breakdowns later will tell us more. If we are to believe that the Daytona 500 had a effect, then the race was red-flagged at about 21:53, which is halfway through Q4, resuming at about ~00:00, _after_ RAW had ended. So hour 2 and the overrun should not have been affected by Daytona.


----------



## GillbergReturns

#1Peep4ever said:


> If Rock is really that big of a draw for the WWE than the rating should have been more than 4.0
> his promo was bad no substance whatsoever and he didnt draw that much.
> 
> If the Rock was not there and Taker/Trips where in the overrun that went for a very long time people would have said if the rock was in that timeslot the show would have gotten 4.0
> 
> at this point i dont even know if this Mania is going to do more than 1.2 mio buys.
> 
> 
> As for those extreme Rock marks... This is the worst roster of all time...REALLY?! or is it booking that fucks them over and over again.
> 
> When SvS did a not so great buyrate people complained about the build up and booking and that it fucked the Rocks drawing power but when it comes to the current Roster its them who cant draw... They are perfectly booked but they just are shitty...? I dont think so
> 
> Those excuses for the Rock are hilarious. Last year i saw little kids play wrestling games and collect the cards while kids of the same day nowadays dont give a fuck about wrestling... Oh yeah and the Rock did not make wrestling "cool" like you say. He just got them some attention since people were interested to see what a movie star would be doing in a wrestling ring and the older fans were excited to see the great one back in the ring. Now people dont care. At least the non wrestling fans. They know Dwayne Johnson will be in the ring at Wrestlemania but they are not eager to see it since they dont care about WRESTLING and if the Rock cant get new people to watch and older fans dont tune in again because they are not interested in a boring feud its not the fault of the fucking roster.
> 
> The E needs a direction change. Good booking to show the new guys to the audience. Good booking that makes them have a chance to get over
> Add more worth to the title for fucks sake. Have Storylines for everyone and dont make those guys just have a series of matches for some title that does not have any worth. Dont treat us like we are stupid just dropping some storylines or contradict yourself because we probably have forgotten it already.
> 
> I still do enjoy the show since i grew up with wrestling and i still love it. Guys like Ziggler Christian Punk Bryan Rhodes and hell even Cena make me want to watch Raw and Smackdown.
> 
> Rock is no god. He wont revive the wrestling business. He will just add some lights on the E till he is gone again. In that period of time they need to book shit right and afterwards continue with good booking so people wont tune out again.
> 
> We have witnessed it. One bad Show makes people dont watch the next week.
> People kept tuning out during the Overrun which is HORRIBLE (or did i get something wrong here?)
> And the fact that the rock lost in the Overrun is even more horrible. Dont come at me with the material was shit and blabla. You were the ones saying the Rock can turn anything into gold. You said he was going to make this feud interesting but he had bad day thus not doing shit for the show and for the feud. Cena did. He was serious while Rock was making corny jokes. We will see next week.


People tuned out as Cena was walking in. I don't think you can give him much credit on this one.

Not blaming Cena for the segment losing viewers, personally I just think it went on for 10 mintues too long, people don't want a 25 minute overrun.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

GillbergReturns said:


> If Mania does 1.2 million buys it's a smashing success. It did with 1.1 last year.
> 
> Dieing and fading away into obscurity are 2 different things.
> 
> Numbers don't lie and it's a fact that they're down 10% across the board despite the Summer of Punk, and Rock Cena going on. It's a fact WWE got hammered last quarter with a 10 million deficit. I don't think the business is going to die, but I do think's it trending down and that's not changing anytime soon regardless of booking. Competition is better, and I'm not talking about another rasslin program.
> 
> As far as ratings decreasing last week. Viewership was the same. NASCAR probally bumped overall television viewership knocking the rating down a little.
> 
> The only I do agree with is it's a concern that they lost viewers as the promo went along.


its the fact that they have the rock vs Cena 
anything below 1.2 mio is disappointment

never said its going to die i mean really DIE that might take like 20 years
but we might have to buy dvds to watch raw because no channel wants to air it (in 10 years) if things keep getting worse
who knows how many will watch next year 
They need to make interesting storylines so people keep on tuning. I mean the fucking US champion is hardly featured on tv
The smackdown MITB winner was wrestling on superstars and nxt and hardly made it to smackdown till they started the cash in angle
well as i said i enjoy the shows but i am hardcore wrestling fan and the casuals do matter more


----------



## #1Peep4ever

GillbergReturns said:


> People tuned out as Cena was walking in. I don't think you can give him much credit on this one.
> 
> Not blaming Cena for the segment losing viewers, personally I just think it went on for 10 mintues too long, people don't want a 25 minute overrun.


i wont comment on the cena till is see the quarter hours
and yeah the rock talking about twitter all the time and making corny jokes isnt going to keep anyone interested
hope next weeks will be better build up wise

a promo with both of them is needed now


----------



## A-C-P

God I am I sorry I missed all this as it happened (stupid work conference) but after seeing the number the shitstorm that followed was amazingly entertaining. Great posts from the usual suspects (DesRow, Starbuck, etc) and some GREAT trolling by Rock316AE.

My take on the numbers. Hey look its the same 4-4.5 million that watch Raw LIVE on TV every week. And considering it was going head to head with the Daytona 500 its not a terrible # (not saying its good but its not terrible). If the WWE wants long-term ratings increase then obviosuly the wil need to start and try different things b/c the bringing back stars for a few weeks short-term ratings boost is not working anymore (or at least not working as well anymore) I really do think (at least I am giving the WWE some benefit of the doubt) that they are realizing this and are looking to take some new directions with creative, booking, and the building of new stars after this year's WM. Even since June of 2011 I can see signs of them starting to move in a better direction creatively and booking wise but everytime they take a step forward they seem to then take at least 3/4 of a step backwards.


----------



## deatawaits

D.M.N. said:


> Full breakdown later when it comes, but assuming the information on the previous page was true:
> 
> *3.4 rating / ~5.1 million - Q3 - conclusion of Punk/Bryan; Y2J's attack
> -------------------------
> 3.5 rating / ~5.1 million - Overrun 1 - Rock promo beginning
> 3.3 rating / ~4.8 million - Overrun 2 - conclusion of Rock/Cena*
> 
> While Rock's segment had the highest rating, it looks like the Punk/Jericho segment had the highest (or at least joint highest) viewership of the night. Quite astonishing if true, considering Jericho hasn't really drawn since he got back. Punk and Bryan though drawing well too it seems but that would be extremely surprising if it was indeed higher than Rock/Cena.
> 
> The in-depth quarter-by-quarter breakdowns later will tell us more. If we are to believe that the Daytona 500 had a effect, then the race was red-flagged at about 21:53, which is halfway through Q4, resuming at about ~00:00, _after_ RAW had ended. So hour 2 and the overrun should not have been affected by Daytona.


Won't that unbalance the average?If Punk/Jericho had about 3.4s Q1/Q2 and Q3 was about the same so shouldn't Hour 1 average about 3.35 something? For overall ratings that means that there were several Below 3.0s rating which has to include 10 pm slot.So that report isn't true at all.


----------



## SimplyIncredible

Jesus Christ.

ITS THE WM BUYRATE THAT MATTERS, ITS THE WM BUYRATE VINCE CARES ABOUT. 

THAT is why Rock was brought back, and no doubt they will succeed in geting that big buyrate.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

SimplyIncredible said:


> Jesus Christ.
> 
> ITS THE WM BUYRATE THAT MATTERS, ITS THE WM BUYRATE VINCE CARES ABOUT.
> 
> THAT is why Rock was brought back, and no doubt they will succeed in geting that big buyrate.


but what afterwards?


----------



## What_A_Maneuver!

I hate this thread. I swear this is where all of the moaning bitches come and complain about the product and where the product is heading. This stupid complaint that there's no talent as well, do you think in 1997 people thought 'Rocky Maivia' was gonna be one of the biggest things in wrestling history? Talent needs to develop, gimmicks will be changed, some will work, some wont. It's not like you don't have any promise at all, you have talented workers with the likes of Dolph Ziggler etc. If the product is that good awful to you then fuck off and go watch something else.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

This thread is about as hilarious as the many of dolts who think they know the financial structure of the WWE.


----------



## SimplyIncredible

oh, and this certainly IS one of the worst rosters ever, look at it, a complete lack of star power.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

I love it how hypocritical the Rock marks are showing themselves to be now. Even though they always were. Show with Punk pulls a low rating, it's all his fault. Show with Rock pulls a low rating, oh it's the entire show's fault. The rest of the roster sucks. Daytona 500 and all that shit. It's what a ton of us have been saying all along, one guy is not a draw. The entire show with interesting storylines is the draw. Now that Dwayne "The Gawd" Johnson disappointed, Rock marks are looking for whatever excuses possible.

Wrestlemania is still going to do huge, so you can have that.


----------



## Coffey

Why do the people in this thread keep calling each other derogatory terms like "Rock marks" or "Punk marks" and the like? Are you all children? Jesus. It's a group effort here, not a one-man show. We should be addressing the problems as a whole, not looking for one guy to be a hot fix.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

We're all marks. And besides, that's the point many of us were trying to make all along, it's only until now when a certain someone didn't do as good as people were expecting, it's suddenly become the truth. It isn't a one-man show. It's a 2 hour show. We can't ever put the blame on one guy for a 2 hour show pulling a good or bad number. Not Rock, Punk, Cena, whoever.


----------



## Hladeit

D.M.N. said:


> Full breakdown later when it comes, but assuming the information on the previous page was true:
> 
> 3.4 rating / ~5.1 million - Q3 - conclusion of Punk/Bryan; Y2J's attack
> -------------------------
> 3.5 rating / ~5.1 million - Overrun 1 - Rock promo beginning
> 3.3 rating / ~4.8 million - Overrun 2 - conclusion of Rock/Cena
> 
> While Rock's segment had the highest rating, it looks like the Punk/Jericho segment had the highest (or at least joint highest) viewership of the night. Quite astonishing if true, considering Jericho hasn't really drawn since he got back. Punk and Bryan though drawing well too it seems but that would be extremely surprising if it was indeed higher than Rock/Cena.
> 
> The in-depth quarter-by-quarter breakdowns later will tell us more. *If we are to believe that the Daytona 500 had a effect, then the race was red-flagged at about 21:53, which is halfway through Q4, resuming at about ~00:00, after RAW had ended. So hour 2 and the overrun should not have been affected by Daytona.*


Is this true?


----------



## FlyingElbow

I'm curious if the fans outside the USA are really able to grasp what a _big_ deal the Daytona 500 is though.


----------



## Duke Silver

When the most well-known wrestler in the world returns after a long hiatus and the ratings actually drop from the previous week, you know there's a problem deeper than the roster. No matter what the state of the product, or how awful the roster is.. surely, The Rock's return should've added at least a few more viewers.

In all honestly, I don't think there's a single wrestler left that can consistently draw without good booking. If I was a betting man, I would say that the only reason The Rock drew such a good rating in his initial return was due to his long absence. Now that he's back semi-regularly, people don't care as much. The name and the presence was a treat at first, but now people have adjusted and want something more. Something well written and gripping.

You can remake Bucky Larson with Daniel Day Lewis as the lead, but at the end of the day it's still going to be the same horrendously written piece of shit that no one wants to watch.

If nothing else, I think we can finally put to bed the argument that any single wrestler should be held responsible for the rating. Unless of course that wrestler is CM Punk. That guy should be burned at the stake!


----------



## wb1899

Hladeit said:


> Is this true?


Viewership for the 2012 Daytona 500 grew gradually through the first two and a half hours, climbing to 14.2 million viewers in the 9:30 half-hour when the Montoya wreck occurred. Viewership grew further at 10:00 PM, peaking at 15.1 million viewers.


----------



## AnotherDamnAlias

you're all stupid, returning fans aint watching that shit through a tv screen, everyone was streaming it...wwe is shit now, why would attitude era fans actually sit down and tune in like its something special, they just wanna see the rock and thats it.

look at the two champions atm they are low level wrestlers rofl wth happened to wwf?


----------



## BTNH

World Wide said:


> When the most well-known wrestler in the world returns after a long hiatus and the ratings actually drop from the previous week, you know there's a problem deeper than the roster. No matter what the state of the product, or how awful the roster is.. surely, The Rock's return should've added at least a few more viewers.
> 
> In all honestly, I don't think there's a single wrestler left that can consistently draw without good booking. If I was a betting man, I would say that the only reason The Rock drew such a good rating in his initial return was due to his long absence. Now that he's back semi-regularly, people don't care as much. The name and the presence was a treat at first, but now people have adjusted and want something more. Something well written and gripping.
> 
> You can remake Bucky Larson with Daniel Day Lewis as the lead, but at the end of the day it's still going to be the same horrendously written piece of shit that no one wants to watch.
> 
> If nothing else, I think we can finally put to bed the argument that any single wrestler should be held responsible for the rating. Unless of course that wrestler is CM Punk. That guy should be burned at the stake!


This is a great post. The whole WWE need a complete overhaul, Rock or no Rock. Firstly the roster is so thin right now. The mid card is weak and the main events prior Rumble were not gripping or note worthy at all. In fact the only genuinely interesting main event excluding Rock/Cena is Punk/Jericho. There has been no proper build for Sheamus/Bryan which is pathetic really, this is supposed to be the Rumble winner. If Sheamus is actually going to win, then Bryan as the cowardly heel needs to dominate Sheamus till 'Mania where there is no way out. Piss of Sheamus to the brink when Bryan goes on the classic heel line "officers! arrest that man!" and pulls a fuming Sheamus out.

Secondly, the booking of the WWE is so lazy its embarrassing. The WWE once had mid card rivalries which were sometimes just as gripping, if not more gripping than the actual main event feuds. Who remembers the Eddie Guerrero - Rey Mysterio rivalry in 2005? That was an amazing, personal drawn out rivalry.. and these guys were not even in the main event. Fast forward to 2012 and we have Hunico - Dibiase in some mindless feud, having the same match each weak because.. Hunico wasn't invited to a party? Really WWE? If that isn't lazy, I don't know what is. Surely the writers have to look at things like that and just sigh and how bad things have gotten.

Thirdly, where are the epic promos? Those 3 minute promos before a match? The highlight of a rivalry merged into one big package to hype up the match? There is no care or passion in this business anymore, that is everything from the "creative" to the "talent"


----------



## krai999

I DON'T CARE WHO IS ON MY SCREEN IF I DON'T ENJOY THE SHOW I TURN OFF I'M THERE FOR THE STORYLINE AND ALOT OF PEOPLE WOULD AGREE WITH ME


----------



## Marv95

You could talk about the Daytona 500 until you're blue in the face--yes I know it's a huge racing event--but if this was 2005/2006 or a product similar to those years with the Rock returning, even against the 500, this rating does near 4.0.


----------



## Green Light

Lol but it isn't 2005/2006 it's 2012, everyone knows the ratings are way down from what they used to be


----------



## Loudness

Beeing a draw is beeing a bit more complicated than what people think. Some guys are natural draws, but their drawing power is depending on the BASE rating the show gets in addition to their presence, and booking also plays a big role.

I will go and use Mark Henry as an example. When he was the ECW champion ratings went up from 1.1-1.2 at best to consistent 1.3s and sometimes 1.4s. When he was on SD, ratings went up from 1.8 to 2-2.1. ECW was roughly half the size SD is now, so when Henry got his SD WHC reign, his increase was almost double as much as during his ECW reign, instead of 0.15 points it went up around 0.25 points in average. This is what I'm trying to explain by the correlation between a shows base audience + drawing power of an individual wrestler. Even when someone is an actual draw, he will not get 10 million people to suddenly tune into his show, the WWE brand is still the biggest factor in it.

However, what about the 3rd ingridient, the storylines? Well, the last time we got a legitimately major storyline (that I currently remember) was Nexus, a stable full of jobbers noone knew. Guess what happened? The show went from 3.2-3.4s to 3.6-3.7s consistently and some episode went even higher than that, why? Pretty easy, it was due to the storyline beeing cutting edge and exciting when it started, it was different from the generic storylines, and people wanted to see what would happen next. But make no mistake, the difference between a non drawing and drawing show was still only 0.3-0.4 points, which is proportionate to my example with Mark Henry beforehand since Raw is a third bigger than Smackdown.

My point is, Rock drew an expected number, but the problem is that WWE kept him off till the end, he was going to get better ratings anyways, but the problem is that when you literally cut off Rock/Cena into a dimension of their own, the additional fans that Rock draws in will only come at the end of the show, I am certain that the show would have drawn better if Rock was there from the beginning. On the other hand, as I said, the rating still depends on RAWs base rating, so you can't expect a show that often gets 2.9s nowadays suddenly to jump to 4s like that, even segment wise. WWE are pushing this feud purely on starpower, with no legit storyline whatsoever, and that's why the Nexus drew more ratings, a stable full of jobbers than Rock, the biggest star to ever come out of wrestling and John Cena, the current biggest star in wrestling do. 

Do you think Austin and Rock would have drawn as much as they did in their prime if they did generic storylines that would happen in the ring or backstage areas at best with generic brawling? What about Austin crashing Vinces limo, coming to the arena with a beertruck? Rock throwing the IC title under the brige? Those were storylines that actually got people talking, just like Nexus did when they destroyed the arena. You can't expect to go with the most generic storylines and hope to draw big, even the big draws will not reach their full potential this way.


----------



## Woo-Woo-Woo

*WWE falling apart?!*

We are almost a month away from Wrestlemania where the WWE should be at the top of there game with good weekly shows to hype and add heat to their biggest PPV of the year..

Comparing this year Road to Wrestle Mania to last year

-Except for Austin, everyone is here in addition to Jericho.This includes The Rock, The Undertaker, Triple H & Shawn Micheals. 

-This year we have the RAW Supershow which theoretically is better than last year's RAW.You get Randy Orton, big show, bryan etc.. everyweek!

-And over all, this years mania card is way way better than last year's

Now go take a look at last years ratings for 28 February 2011 RAW .. 5.6 million viewers .. a 3.9 that increased to 4.26 on the some RAW before mania

Last monday RAW with The rock on the show did a 3.09 rating .. the comments are yours


----------



## Scrotey Loads

*Re: WWE falling apart?!*

They're always this sloppy and disorganized. They'll be fine. They still have the awesome $30 Mattel ring that spins the action figures around and launches them from the turnbuckles that they'll sell to millions of kids, so they're making mad money, and that's all that matters to them. 

As for the product? Yeah, it's mostly not great.


----------



## sonicslash

*Re: WWE falling apart?!*

This should be in the ratings section but I get your point. I have no idea what the explanation is for this. I went back and watched last years road to Wrestlemania and it wasn't as good. Maybe word hasn't got out to the general public how good this Wrestlemania card is.


----------



## Apokolips

*Re: WWE falling apart?!*

Enjoy the product now because it's gonna be alot worse in 5 years.


----------



## Ryu Hayabusa

*Re: WWE falling apart?!*

IMO The RTWM this year is much better then last year. Last years Wrestlemania felt like it was thrown together at the last minute and with the addition of The Rock WWE knew it would draw massively so as a result they barely tried with the rest of the card. I know the card this year seems lackluster atm but atleast there's one match that everyone wants to see and is fresh and new. There wasn't match from last years Wrestlemania that we didnt see before in some fashion apart from Del Rio vs Edge.


----------



## Green Light

*Re: WWE falling apart?!*

I'll wait a few more weeks before I write-off this RTWM as a ratings failure but for sure if they only manage to do similar numbers going forward something is up


----------



## Woo-Woo-Woo

*Re: WWE falling apart?!*



Scrotey Loads said:


> They're always this sloppy and disorganized. They'll be fine. They still have the awesome $30 Mattel ring that spins the action figures around and launches them from the turnbuckles that they'll sell to millions of kids, so they're making mad money, and that's all that matters to them.
> 
> As for the product? Yeah, it's mostly not great.


That mattel rings draws in viewers as well?


----------



## Romanista

*Re: WWE falling apart?!*

I am the game! and this is my company!

good luck... If I am Vince I'll never rest in peace.


----------



## attitudEra

*Re: WWE falling apart?!*

and I should care about ratings because....?


----------



## sharkboy22

*Re: WWE falling apart?!*

Oh, it's this thread again.


----------



## BANKSY

*Re: WWE falling apart?!*

Since when did ratings reflect the quality of the show? . When there are numerous other factors which effect the rating.


----------



## kokepepsi

Segment Breakdown

*LASTWEEK*


> *Raw on 2/20* did a 3.24 rating and 4.63 million viewers, an increase that appears to have been fueled by coming the day after Elimination Chamber and the HHH/Undertaker confrontation.
> 
> The show did a 2.8 in Male teenagers (up 8%), 2.9 in Males 18-49 (up 7%), 1.2 in Female teenagers (up 100%) and 1.1 in Women 18-49 (even to the prior week). The audience was 68.1% male. The show was 5th for the night on cable, and for only the second time in modern history, the NCIS rerun, the show USA ran at 8 p.m. before Raw, drew a higher rating than Raw. The only major sports competition was an NBA game on TNT that did 1.53 million viewers. There was an hour-to-hour decline in viewing, although not big. Still, any decline at all would be amazing considering the Undertaker/HHH segment and the John Cena interview about Rock, along with the Battle Royal were all hour two.
> 
> The one thing notable the past two weeks is a different approach to television based on the changing patterns. The WWE’s usual m.o. for Raw has been to build to what in theory is the strongest segment and put it on last, when viewership would be the highest. I don’t think anyone expected the last two weeks that the Shawn Michaels/HHH and Undertaker/HHH segments wouldn’t be the ones that had the most interest. But both were put on at 10 p.m., clearly with the idea the audience would drop when the show went on, and even with the inherent advantage the overrun has, they seem to feel 10 p.m. is the strongest time slot.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, there was interest at the start, opening with a 3.58 first quarter which was the Cena/Eve Torres segment, but that’s probably more due to the fallout of the Chamber show. Sheamus vs. Mark Henry lost 486,000 viewers, which also included a backstage segment with John Laurinaitis, Teddy Long and David Otunga. R-Truth & Kofi Kingston vs. Primo & Epico and the Ron Simmons Hall of Fame announcement gained 71,000 viewers. Otunga vs. Ezekiel Jackson with Laurinaitis and Long in the corners lost 314,000 viewers. To show what carried the show, the Undertaker/HHH in-ring segment gained 1,122,000 viewers, the best 10 p.m. quarter gain in probably a year or more, doing a 3.85 quarter. Of course, when that segment was over, they were gone and Daniel Bryan vs. Santino Marella lost 932,000 viewers. Kelly Kelly & Aksana vs. Bella Twins and Cena promo on Rock lost another 480,000 viewers. So the great Cena promo only did a 2.86 quarter. The Battle Royal in the overrun gained 601,000 viewers to a 3.31 overrun.
> 
> In comparing the two key segments, and again, keep in mind the overrun has a huge advantage because people tuning in for the next show start coming in at 11 p.m. and had nine minutes to build, with Male teens, the Undertaker segment went from 2.7 to 3.5 while the Battle Royal went from 2.3 to 2.9. With Males 18-49, the Undertaker segment went from 2.7 to 3.5 and the Battle Royal went from 2.7 to 3.1 With teenage girls, the Undertaker segment went from 1.5 to 1.7 and the Battle Royal from 1.1 to 1.3, and with Women 18-49 the Undertaker segment went from 1.1 to 1.3 and the Battle Royal from 1.1 to 1.1.


*THISWEEK*


> *Raw on 2/27* featuring the return of The Rock did a disappointing 3.14 rating and 4.64 million viewers. The rating was actually down from the previous week, although viewers were basically identical.
> 
> In the demos, Teenage boys did a 2.7 (down 4% from last week), Males 18-49 did a 2.8 (down 3%), Teenage girls did a 1.1 (down 8%), and Women 18-49 did a 1.2 (up 9%). The show was third for the night on cable. The show did 67.3% male viewers.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, the C.M. Punk and Chris Jericho dueling promo did a 3.22 opening quarter. Punk vs. Daniel Bryan lost 289,000 viewers. The HHH/Undertaker video package gained 526,000 viewers and did a 3.38, which is excellent because video packages to build matches usually lose viewers and are considered more necessary evils to ratings. Kelly Kelly vs. Nikki Bella lost 816,000 viewers. John Cena vs. The Miz gained 388,000 viewers, which is weak for the top of the hour, doing only a 3.09. Primo & Epico vs. Jack Swagger & Dolph Ziggler vs. R-Truth & Kofi Kingston lost 221,000 viewers. The Eve Torres interview gained 225,000 viewers. Big Show & Sheamus vs. Cody Rhodes & Mark Henry and Rhodes showing the Floyd Mayweather-Show clips gained 3,000 viewers. And as noted before, the Rock’s promo pre-Cena gained 643,000 viewers to a to a 3.53, which is nothing remarkable for the overrun. And the Cena promo and him leaving and Rock finishing up lost 349,000 viewers and the show finished at a 3.30, which has to be considered a surprise.
> 
> Another interesting note regarding the rating is that on 2/20, NCIS that preceded Raw did 4.65 million viewers, and on 2/27 it did 3.30 million viewers. The Daytona race was the difference, so the idea it’s a non-factor wasn’t the case with NCIS. Historically, because major auto races aren’t on Monday nights, there is no history of a major race hurting prime time ratings. There was a correlation in the 80s when TBS wrestling followed races (ratings were up, sometimes a lot, but the theory always was that Southern style wrestling and NASCAR had the big crossover but WWF and NASCAR didn’t) and went against races (ratings were down).


----------



## LarryCoon

1. Undertaker draws huge back to back 

2. It was obvious people tuned out of the twitter chanting crap


----------



## Hladeit

> To show what carried the show, the Undertaker/HHH in-ring segment gained 1,122,000 viewers, the best 10 p.m. quarter gain in probably a year or more, doing a 3.85 quarter. Of course, when that segment was over, they were gone and Daniel Bryan vs. Santino Marella lost 932,000 viewers.


Lol Daniel Bryan = Ratings 



> In the segment-by-segment, the C.M. Punk and Chris Jericho dueling promo did a 3.22 opening quarter. Punk vs. Daniel Bryan lost 289,000 viewers. The HHH/Undertaker video package gained 526,000 viewers and did a 3.38, which is excellent because video packages to build matches usually lose viewers and are considered more necessary evils to ratings.


:lmao:lmao:lmao

Video Package > Punk/Jericho/DB






JK.


----------



## Starbuck

> _To show what carried the show, *the Undertaker/HHH in-ring segment gained 1,122,000 viewers, the best 10 p.m. quarter gain in probably a year or more, doing a 3.85 quarter*. Of course, when that segment was over, they were gone and Daniel Bryan vs. Santino Marella lost 932,000 viewers. *Kelly Kelly & Aksana vs. Bella Twins and Cena promo on Rock lost another 480,000 viewers.* So the great Cena promo only did a 2.86 quarter. The Battle Royal in the overrun gained 601,000 viewers to a 3.31 overrun._


Holy 10pm gain lol. Now you see, this is what myself and people like DesoRow are talking about when we speak of the importance of having a legitimate draw(s) to put in this all important holding spot. I can't remember the last time they had a gain this big for the 10pm time slot and it's all down to the fact that they haven't had anybody to put in it for so long. That's highly impressive and ever since this whole thing started, the HHH/Taker/HBK segments have been building viewers every week. However, practically everybody left when that segment was over which is the crux of WWE's problem right now and one I really don't see a solution for other than the real creation of true stars. The other thing to note here is that Cena's promo lost viewers and not just some but almost half a million. That's pretty shit and I don't know what the explanation for it is. Maybe the divas match beforehand is the cause, I don't know. 



> _In the segment-by-segment, the C.M. Punk and Chris Jericho dueling promo did a 3.22 opening quarter. Punk vs. Daniel Bryan lost 289,000 viewers. *The HHH/Undertaker video package gained 526,000 viewers and did a 3.38*, which is excellent because video packages to build matches usually lose viewers and are considered more necessary evils to ratings. Kelly Kelly vs. Nikki Bella lost 816,000 viewers. *John Cena vs. The Miz gained 388,000 viewers, which is weak for the top of the hour,* doing only a 3.09. Primo & Epico vs. Jack Swagger & Dolph Ziggler vs. R-Truth & Kofi Kingston lost 221,000 viewers. *The Eve Torres interview gained 225,000 viewers*. Big Show & Sheamus vs. Cody Rhodes & Mark Henry and Rhodes showing the Floyd Mayweather-Show clips gained 3,000 viewers. And as noted before, *the Rock’s promo pre-Cena gained 643,000 viewers to a to a 3.53, which is nothing remarkable for the overrun. And the Cena promo and him leaving and Rock finishing up lost 349,000 viewers* and the show finished at a 3.30, which has to be considered a surprise._


Here comes the goodies lol. So the opener didn't do as well as originally thought but that's still a good number considering those involved. I only see them building upon that from here. The HHH/Taker video packages gaining that many viewers is just fucking insane. It actually gained more viewers and had a higher quarter than the Punk/Jericho stuff, than Cena/Miz at the 10pm slot and is only behind Rock in terms numbers drawn. Throw on the fact that it wasn't even a new video lol and I really don't know how to explain it. Legit insane. Eve's promo gained viewers. I think the last time a Divas segment gained viewers involved Kharma. Note to WWE, KEEP FUCKING PUSHING THIS GIRL! People are clearly interested. And now to the all important overrun. I just don't really know what to say about this tbh. An overrun featuring Rock's return to Raw gained just 600,000k? Further than that, it actually lost over half of that gain as time went on. Fucking hell. These numbers are wack and I don't know what else to say other than people don't want to see him peddling twitter trends and chants. They want to see him actually doing something meaningful. From all accounts, if HHH/Taker were on this show I think it would have done a lot better. Having them on seems to be a guarantee of at least an extra 700,000 viewers. That would have added a nice bump to the shows overall.

Anyways, I expect the shit to hit the fan once people get wind of this lol. Incoming OMGZ DA ROCK CNT DRAW DURRRRR party in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.....


----------



## Hladeit

*Ratings.*


----------



## kokepepsi

So Monday we can expect video package galore

Recap the Rock promo at the 10pm slot .......2MILLIONGAIN!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Chicago Warrior

So should Undertaker vs HHH be "the" main event at Wrestlemania?


----------



## greaz taker!

Hladeit said:


> *Ratings.*


Imagine Taker coming out with his jacket now, and bandana on his head to this fucking tune at Wrestlemania! I would mark the fuck out!


----------



## Green Light

Rock can't draw, my childhood was a lie


----------



## Starbuck

Chicago Warrior said:


> So should Undertaker vs HHH be "the" main event at Wrestlemania?


No. Rock/Cena is the main event. You can't promote something for a year and then not put it on last. So far HHH/Taker is obviously the program with the most interest but Rock's only been back one week. We still have what? 4 more weeks to go here. It will pick up steam. It's fucking Rock and Cena lol. If it doesn't then I'll be legit shell shocked.


----------



## Hladeit

Next week should do great numbers HHH,Hbk,Taker,Rock,Cena everyone on the show.





Chicago Warrior said:


> So should Undertaker vs HHH be "the" main event at Wrestlemania?


No but Its worthy enough to replace Rock/cena for the Main event just like in 2010 when Cena/batista was doing really well and could have easily replaced HBK/Taker II for the main event.

As Starbuck said, Rock/cena should be the main event, its been promoted for an whole year.


----------



## Green Light

I said in another thread, I'll give it a few more weeks before I write it off as a ratings flop. But if the numbers don't improve you have to conclude that maybe people just aren't that interested in their feud


----------



## GillbergReturns

kokepepsi said:


> Segment Breakdown
> 
> *LASTWEEK*
> 
> 
> *THISWEEK*


So NCIS was down 1.2 million viewers. That's a pretty good indication of Daytona's possible effect on the night.

I do think there's a huge cross over between Nascar and wrestling fans. I know some were making jokes about how Rock should outdraw it if he was a huge star. LOL at that. That's the Super Bowl of races and outdraws wrestling on it's best day. 

We'll have to see how next week turns out. Raw is going to be in full effect with Punk-Jericho, Rock-Cena, and Taker-Triple H with Michaels being there as well.


----------



## Starbuck

Green Light said:


> I said in another thread, I'll give it a few more weeks before I write it off as a ratings flop.* But if the numbers don't improve you have to conclude that maybe people just aren't that interested in their feud*


I would find this shocking and hard to believe tbh. I guess it's possible but come on lol. How can people _not_ be interested? I know some folks here aren't but to casual fans it's got to be a HUGE deal. I have every faith that it will pick up from here on out because like I said before, if it doesn't I'll be legit stunned.


----------



## robertdeniro

Man Taker/HHH feud is kicking ass lol,so far the biggest feud right now even the video package drew big number lol.


----------



## JasonLives

I must say I find it weird that the HHH/Undertaker promo package got all credit for that quarter ( Quarter 3 ). Especially since the promo was only 4 minutes long :lmao


----------



## Carcass

JasonLives said:


> I must say I find it weird that the HHH/Undertaker promo package got all credit for that quarter ( Quarter 3 ). Especially since the promo was only 4 minutes long :lmao


That's what I was thinking. The DB/Punk/Long/Lauarinitis stuff didn't get done til like 40 minutes into the show, if I remember correctly. Which is more than half the 3rd quarter.


----------



## Fatcat

JasonLives said:


> I must say I find it weird that the HHH/Undertaker promo package got all credit for that quarter ( Quarter 3 ). Especially since the promo was only 4 minutes long :lmao


The Divas match was listed as the fourth quarter, even though Cena probably got more time. I wonder if that segment did well, they would have named it Cena Promo instead.


----------



## Bullydully

Taker/HHH don't even need to be there and they'll still draw... pure awesomeness.


----------



## deatawaits

Where is rock316AE?

Well I am legit shocked at rock losing viewers.

Edit: why is this place uneventful today?


----------



## Starbuck

Carcass said:


> That's what I was thinking. The DB/Punk/Long/Lauarinitis stuff didn't get done til like 40 minutes into the show, if I remember correctly. Which is more than half the 3rd quarter.


There's got to be something more to it because for a video package to gain such a huge bump like that is just ridiculous lol. Even if we do go ahead and attribute the gain to what went on beforehand, the fact that no viewers actually tuned out when the video came on is strange considering the fact that they always equate to a large chunk of people tuning out. Hell that's what was expected this week. They thought they could just give HHH/Taker a video package and not have them on because it would be offset by Rock. Look how that turned out!! Video packages gaining big time and Rocky losing viewers in the overrun. Bizarro land lol.


----------



## Rock316AE

> Raw on 2/20 did a 3.24 rating and 4.63 million viewers, an increase that appears to have been fueled by coming the day after Elimination Chamber and the HHH/Undertaker confrontation.
> 
> The show did a 2.8 in Male teenagers (up 8%), 2.9 in Males 18-49 (up 7%), 1.2 in Female teenagers (up 100%) and 1.1 in Women 18-49 (even to the prior week). The audience was 68.1% male. The show was 5th for the night on cable, and for only the second time in modern history, the NCIS rerun, the show USA ran at 8 p.m. before Raw, drew a higher rating than Raw. The only major sports competition was an NBA game on TNT that did 1.53 million viewers. There was an hour-to-hour decline in viewing, although not big. Still, any decline at all would be amazing considering the Undertaker/HHH segment and the John Cena interview about Rock, along with the Battle Royal were all hour two.
> 
> The one thing notable the past two weeks is a different approach to television based on the changing patterns. The WWE’s usual m.o. for Raw has been to build to what in theory is the strongest segment and put it on last, when viewership would be the highest. I don’t think anyone expected the last two weeks that the Shawn Michaels/HHH and Undertaker/HHH segments wouldn’t be the ones that had the most interest. But both were put on at 10 p.m., clearly with the idea the audience would drop when the show went on, and even with the inherent advantage the overrun has, they seem to feel 10 p.m. is the strongest time slot.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, there was interest at the start, opening with a 3.58 first quarter which was the Cena/Eve Torres segment, but that’s probably more due to the fallout of the Chamber show. Sheamus vs. Mark Henry lost 486,000 viewers, which also included a backstage segment with John Laurinaitis, Teddy Long and David Otunga. R-Truth & Kofi Kingston vs. Primo & Epico and the Ron Simmons Hall of Fame announcement gained 71,000 viewers. Otunga vs. Ezekiel Jackson with Laurinaitis and Long in the corners lost 314,000 viewers. To show what carried the show, the Undertaker/HHH in-ring segment gained 1,122,000 viewers, the best 10 p.m. quarter gain in probably a year or more, doing a 3.85 quarter. Of course, when that segment was over, they were gone and Daniel Bryan vs. Santino Marella lost 932,000 viewers. Kelly Kelly & Aksana vs. Bella Twins and Cena promo on Rock lost another 480,000 viewers. So the great Cena promo only did a 2.86 quarter. The Battle Royal in the overrun gained 601,000 viewers to a 3.31 overrun.
> 
> In comparing the two key segments, and again, keep in mind the overrun has a huge advantage because people tuning in for the next show start coming in at 11 p.m. and had nine minutes to build, with Male teens, the Undertaker segment went from 2.7 to 3.5 while the Battle Royal went from 2.3 to 2.9. With Males 18-49, the Undertaker segment went from 2.7 to 3.5 and the Battle Royal went from 2.7 to 3.1 With teenage girls, the Undertaker segment went from 1.5 to 1.7 and the Battle Royal from 1.1 to 1.3, and with Women 18-49 the Undertaker segment went from 1.1 to 1.3 and the Battle Royal from 1.1 to 1.1.





> Raw on 2/27 featuring the return of The Rock did a disappointing 3.14 rating and 4.64 million viewers. The rating was actually down from the previous week, although viewers were basically identical.
> 
> In the demos, Teenage boys did a 2.7 (down 4% from last week), Males 18-49 did a 2.8 (down 3%), Teenage girls did a 1.1 (down 8%), and Women 18-49 did a 1.2 (up 9%). The show was third for the night on cable. The show did 67.3% male viewers.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, the C.M. Punk and Chris Jericho dueling promo did a 3.22 opening quarter. Punk vs. Daniel Bryan lost 289,000 viewers. The HHH/Undertaker video package gained 526,000 viewers and did a 3.38, which is excellent because video packages to build matches usually lose viewers and are considered more necessary evils to ratings. Kelly Kelly vs. Nikki Bella lost 816,000 viewers. John Cena vs. The Miz gained 388,000 viewers, which is weak for the top of the hour, doing only a 3.09. Primo & Epico vs. Jack Swagger & Dolph Ziggler vs. R-Truth & Kofi Kingston lost 221,000 viewers. The Eve Torres interview gained 225,000 viewers. Big Show & Sheamus vs. Cody Rhodes & Mark Henry and Rhodes showing the Floyd Mayweather-Show clips gained 3,000 viewers. And as noted before, the Rock’s promo pre-Cena gained 643,000 viewers to a to a 3.53, which is nothing remarkable for the overrun. And the Cena promo and him leaving and Rock finishing up lost 349,000 viewers and the show finished at a 3.30, which has to be considered a surprise.
> 
> Another interesting note regarding the rating is that on 2/20, NCIS that preceded Raw did 4.65 million viewers, and on 2/27 it did 3.30 million viewers. The Daytona race was the difference, so the idea it’s a non-factor wasn’t the case with NCIS. Historically, because major auto races aren’t on Monday nights, there is no history of a major race hurting prime time ratings. There was a correlation in the 80s when TBS wrestling followed races (ratings were up, sometimes a lot, but the theory always was that Southern style wrestling and NASCAR had the big crossover but WWF and NASCAR didn’t) and went against races (ratings were down).


Not a lot to talk about here, the Cena promos lost viewers two weeks in a row(yes, the minute he came out, people changed the channel, that's a fact here according to Dave, until then they had fun with a great Rock promo), that's great. I gave the TV audience credit, but not that much until now. Nobody wants to see this clown cut lame hypocritical promos. Daytona made an impact on the ratings, that's for sure. Also good to know that they're putting the world champions on random timeslots now and Taker/HHH/HBK doing great numbers. Still if you think they're going to do crazy numbers like 4.4-4.8 this year, that's not happening, last year was all buzz from Rock's return, now WWE drove away every new/old school viewer he brought back.


----------



## kokepepsi

From the Observer Newsletter


> The latest on the WrestleMania build revolved around the end of the 2/27 Raw show in Portland, OR, and an in-ring confrontation between The Rock and John Cena.
> 
> It was a strong segment, that left the impression WrestleMania is going to be huge. And it probably will be, even though there were some disturbing business signs with a disappointing rating, and a segment that actually lost audience when Cena came out.
> 
> The show did a 3.14 rating, which on the surface sounds bad because it’s actually lower than the previous week (the actual number of viewers was almost identical). Last year, while his unadvertised return did an average number since it was pushed only on Twitter and Facebook, after he appeared, Raw leaped to a 3.85 and 3.82 rating the next two weeks. But this show did go against the Daytona 500, which due to rain delays, ended up taking place on a Monday night for the first time in history against Raw. The race was delayed at times during the show, but there was also a spectacular fire. How much this hurt is unclear but the race did a 8.00 rating and 13.67 million viewers.
> 
> But even so, the Rose Garden in Portland only drew 9,000 fans, and this was the first time Rock had ever appeared on a wrestling show in the city. When he was wrestling, WWF didn’t run in the state of Oregon because the athletic commission did independent drug testing. But backstage he was telling people he had fond memories of Portland because when he was 10 years old, he lived there when his father wrestled for Don Owen.
> 
> Because of having Rock and Cena do a verbal confrontation, the show ended at 11:21 p.m., roughly 16 minutes longer than usual. The lesson here is that people got tired of wrestling. While I found the segment one of the best things on Raw in a while and a great promotion for Mania, the first part of the segment gained 643,000 viewers to a 3.50 rating, mostly for Rock doing a promo. That is average overrun growth, a far cry from the 1 million plus that Undertaker and HHH brought it up for their segment the week before, and the kind of numbers Rock did for almost every segment he was on last year. Cena came out and did his own promo, with the most talked about aspect being when he pointed out that Rock had written notes on his forearm, which, in fact, he had, with shorthand reminders of different thing he was going to talk about. It’s hard to know whether in the big picture, bring this up mattered or was good or not. It got a lot of people talking for a few hours, but it seemed a day later, people moved on so it didn’t seem to have a lot of effect either way. What did happen is a sizeable number of people tuned out while Cena did the promo, about 349,000, for the last six minutes of the show. It wasn’t because of what he brought up, and I don’t think it was because of Cena or Rock, but simply people are creatures of habit and the show went longer than they expected and they moved on to whatever they switch to before it was over.
> 
> The thing that has to be realized is WWE of course wants Mania to do as much money as possible. But the world doesn’t end with that show. And when Rock leaves after the Raw the next night, it’s back to Cena being the top babyface in the company. So each week they are cleverly putting him in segments, whether it be blowing off hot user Eve Torres, or constantly bringing up that Rock doesn’t really love wrestling and is also a self-centered user and that he is the guy who will be there week in and week out. For two weeks, Cena has been booed out of the building like usual when he comes out, but has managed to somewhat quiet the boos with his promos. Whether that will work with the Mania crowd, and in Miami, is doubtful. But they are trying.
> 
> Cena mentioned Rock having interview notes on his forearm, and cut another strong promo saying that he grew up as a fan of The Rock, until he met Dwayne Johnson, calling him a self centered egotistical son of a bitch. One person close to Johnson noted to us he didn’t think Johnson would go for the latter line because of the son of a bitch implies something about his mother and he and his mother are very close. Cena said that come Mania day that Johnson will be afraid because Cena will beat the hell out of him. Cena left and Rock did seem slightly flustered the rest of the interview. Either something was said he wasn’t expecting, or he is a great actor and he wanted at least some people to think something was said that he wasn’t expecting. It had that tinge of reality that almost nothing in pro wrestling has these days. The ratings don’t indicate the biggest PPV show in history, but ratings usually don’t directly correlate to the next PPV number or house show numbers. Still, advertising Rock in a city he’s never been to should have sold out for Raw, particularly since the city is historically a strong wrestling market. And why people tuned out of the show when Cena came on and was doing his promo is not what you would expect.
> 
> Mania is going to be interesting, not just to see if the two of them can pull together and have a good match, which they likely will, but the crowd reaction to Cena, the crowd reaction to Rock in a long match as opposed to just coming in for short spots that he did at Survivor Series, and the finish. What they should do has been debated to death. The logical wrestling side is that Cena is staying, Rock isn’t, and Rock cost Cena the title at last year’s Mania and so it should be his turn to win. But how they are going to pull that off in front of a crowd that came to see Rock beat Cena and will largely hate Cena may mean distraction or interference, which may not be what they’ll want out of the “biggest match of all-time.”
> 
> As far as the live crowd went, they were still with Rock as a star far bigger than anyone else for every word he said. There was the attempts to get things like Kung Pao Bitch and other phrases trending on twitter, for whatever that is worth. It worked, but when the show was over in checking Google trends, which actually do have a fairly strong historical correlation to business where twitter trending has none, you find the real world was talking about NASCAR and there was nothing in WWE getting even a sniff. That’s also a far cry from a year ago when The Rock was at the top of the trends when he came back. Still, on Mania day, they’ll be strong. But WWE has to be prepared for after. It was also notable that for the second time in recent weeks, one of WWE’s main characters talked about something along the line of the company going down. I’ve never seen, even with companies that actually did go down, a wrestling company talking about itself in that manner. And while they could easily have problems if they go into more non-wrestling related fields, it is now easier than ever for the dominant wrestling company to make money, and loads of it, even if it’s not connecting well with its audience,
> 
> Officially at this point for Mania is Rock vs. Cena, Undertaker vs. HHH in a Hell in a Cell match with some involvement of Shawn Michaels, C.M. Punk vs. Chris Jericho for the WWE title, Daniel Bryan vs. Sheamus for the world title and Cody Rhodes vs. Big Show for the IC title. Based on a Smackdown angle, there looks to be Randy Orton vs. Kane, plus some sort of a multiple person match involving a team representing John Laurinaitis against a team representing Teddy Long, perhaps with the winner becoming the permanent General Manager of both Raw and Smackdown.
> 
> In looking at how the demos played, with Male teenagers, the segment went from 2.7 to 3.0, but fell all the way to 2.6 with Cena coming out to the end. With 18-49, it drew from 2.8 to 3.5, and then fell to 3.3. With female teens, it went from 1.1 to 1.0 to 1.2, and with Women 18-49, it went from 1.4 to 1.5 to 1.3.
> 
> There is also some behind-the-scenes tension going on regarding Rock, exactly how prevalent depends on who you talk with. It is not overt. I’d heard stuff after Mania last year and you had a few guys, notably Punk and Orton, say stuff publicly. Orton later apologized and Punk greatly modified what he said. But the interview Cena did last week, a great working interview to build a match, but a complete joke if you take it seriously as a shoot, did have at least some people in the locker room taking it far too seriously.
> 
> In response to former wrestlers Lance Storm and Shane Helms making comments about people were critical of Rock coming back to headline Mania, Rock agreed saying on twitter, “Incredible to me how many of the boys don’t get the business part of our business.”


tldr;
Read it, you ain't got nothing better to do


----------



## Astitude

Rock316AE said:


> Still if you think they're going to do crazy numbers like 4.4-4.8 this year, that's not happening, last year was all buzz from Rock's return, now WWE drove away every new/old school viewer he brought back.


Why am i not surprised with you giving all the credit to the rock alone. 

Rock returned feb,14, Raw overall rating never hit 4.0 

Feb. 14 3.14	
Feb. 21 3.9	
Feb. 28 3.8	
March 7 3.92	
March 14	3.65	
March 21 3.35	
March 28 3.84 

Even if you are talking about individual segments, there was a lot of other starpower and hype involved, the most important being ROCK VS CENA which was fresh/new unlike this year. Also the Wrestlemania hype. Feb 21 - John cena response to rock + Taker/HHH Return with the Promo 2.21.11 hype building for weeks. March 7 - the segment that drew 4.0+ had Austin return. March 28 the final segment which is the highest rated had ROCK + Cena. 

Point is, The real draw was Rock vs Cena, not the rock alone. So "the clown" should get equal credit for all the hype and success last year. 

Obviously this year Rock vs cena hype is gone, the lame ass Pro-wrestler vs Movie star storyline isnt helping either. They should just keep it simple and build for Rock vs Cena.





kokepepsi said:


> What did happen is a sizeable number of people tuned out while Cena did the promo, about 349,000, for the last six minutes of the show. It wasn’t because of what he brought up, and I don’t think it was because of Cena or Rock, but simply people are creatures of habit and the show went longer than they expected and they moved on to whatever they switch to before it was over.


Meltzer putting the rock over as usual. The obvious reason should be *The Rock's terrible promo* which dragged on for no fucking reason. Ladyparts, missing balls, kung pow bitch trending world wide ,1-2-3 chant rocky.... all that garbage turned people off the show. Infact cena saved that segment.



kokepepsi said:


> Cena mentioned Rock having interview notes on his forearm, and cut another strong promo saying that he grew up as a fan of The Rock, until he met Dwayne Johnson, calling him a self centered egotistical son of a bitch. One person close to Johnson noted to us he didn’t think Johnson would go for the latter line because of the son of a bitch implies something about his mother and he and his mother are very close.



Well the rock called him Motherfucker.







That "one person close to johnson" must be dwayne johnson himself considering how close Rock and Meltzer are.


----------



## kokepepsi

Surprised they didn't sell out Portland


----------



## Rock316AE

The buzz and hype was on Rock's return to the industry, simple. before him the numbers were terrible, after him you got a huge boost and big segments with star power because of the audience he brought, the most telling number is the opening segment for the RAW after his return, a huge 4.2 and that was the peak. after that he was the peak of the show even when they put him on random time slots with taped promos. Now? of course it's not fresh, they ruined the storyline with hypocritical Cena promos and the audience can see through that, the hype is gone and they drove away the audience Rock brought back. They can still do great numbers, no doubt about it, but a 4.6-4.8? can't see that.


----------



## Killswitch Stunner

I can't but feel Vince was behind all that. It seems real to me like Cena was not supposed to mention the notes. Vince has been known to throw fuel to the fire before with wrestlers.


----------



## Astitude

Rock316AE said:


> The buzz and hype was on Rock's return to the industry, simple. before him the numbers were terrible, after him you got a huge boost and big segments with star power because of the audience he brought, *the most telling number is the opening segment for the RAW after his return, a huge 4.2 and that was the peak.*


You are doing the same thing again. 

Feb 20, 2011 was the elimination chamber 2011 ppv. So the Raw you are talking about, Feb 21 2011 opening segment was the fall out of the previous night's PPV + John fucking Cena opened the show. Not to mention the "2.21.11 promos" hyping it up for weeks and weeks.


----------



## Rock316AE

It wasn't, do you really think they will suddenly out of nowhere draw a 4.2 opening segment because they had irrelevant PPV? That was the fallout of Rock's promo and you're trolling if you say otherwise. Cena had no affect, it could have been anyone on that slot. Again, if 21/2 was the reason, then that was the peak of the show, but it wasn't and after people realized Rock is not there, they left.



> Raw on 2/21 did a 3.85 rating and 5.86 million viewers. The rating was likely a combination of the
> promotion of 2/21 and a gain from the return of The Rock the week before. What is notable is that the
> audience dropped slightly in hour two, which is a rarity. The show did a whopping 3.57 in Males 18-49 and
> 5.2 with Males 12-17. It was Males 18-49 which was the audience that grew like crazy during the Rock
> promo the week earlier. It was 69% male viewers, but in the key age groups it was far more pronounced
> with 71% males in the 18-49 group and 79% males in the 12-17 group. The show benefitted for
> weakened television competition, and was the highest rated cable show of the night and was the highest
> rated show in Males 12-17 and 18-34 on television, including the networks.
> The number was likely more a fallout of The Rock appearing the week before. They probably would have
> done a 3.5 coming off the Chamber and with the hype of Undertaker’s return. The HHH return meant
> nothing since it wasn’t advertised. If you look at the viewership patterns, and the disappointing growth for
> the Undertaker return, and the huge number at 9 p.m., seems to indicate Rock meant far more to the
> growth over normal numbers than the 2-22-11 campaign and Undertaker’s return. To show that was the
> case, the opening segment with the Cena interview did a 4.19 rating, the highest rated segment of the
> show. That indicates had Rock been there, the show would have probably stayed at or beaten that
> number, and peaked considerably higher if he was on. When people realized he wasn’t on, the audience
> fell, but not enough to where it wasn’t the most watched episode of the show in 18 months. The
> HHH/Undertaker segment was not a blow away segment ratings wise, gaining 439,000 viewers, which is
> normal level for that time slot.
> It was the most-watched episode of Raw since the August 24, 2009, show with Floyd Mayweather as guest
> host that did 5.86 million viewers.


----------



## Astitude

Rock316AE said:


> It wasn't, do you really think they will suddenly out of nowhere draw a 4.2 opening segment because they had irrelevant PPV? That was the fallout of Rock's promo and you're trolling if you say otherwise. *Cena had no affect, it could have been anyone on that slot.* Again, if 21/2 was the reason, then that was the peak of the show, but it wasn't and after people realized Rock is not there, they left.


You just dont give up, do you?


----------



## wb1899

Why are so many Wrestling Fans and "experts" still so obsessed about the meaningless hh-ratings? 
I don't get it. 3.8 or 4.2 nobody cares about these numbers today. The nineties are over.
All other people have evolved and look today only at the important numbers(a18-49 for ad-revenue and viewership for bragging rights).


----------



## JasonLives

The Rock´s promo isnt the greatest thing ever? The Rock doesnt bring in those ratings??

PUT BLAME ON EVERYONE BUT HIM!

This was the best thing that could ever happen to this thread 

Of course The Rock pulled in some big numbers on his return last year. But so did Hogan when he first arrived in TNA. And for every appearance after that less and less people cared.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

So a battle royal, who everyone knew who the winner would be, got the same rating as the Rocks promo?

And a Cena promo about the Rock got a 2.8? damn, hopefully the buzz about this match hasnt fizzled out. The mass majority seemingly are more invested in the HHH V Taker fued, maybe because it has been so well done where as the Cena and Rock fued, aprart from a few gems here and there, has been a mess.


----------



## Suit Up

Heres the run down
CM PUNK CANT DRAW
DANIEL BRYAN CANT DRAW
THE DIVA DIVISON CANT DRAW
SHEAMUS IS 50/50
THE TAG TEAM DIVISON CANT DRAW
THE MIZ CANT DRAW

THE ROCK CAN DRAW
CENA CAN DRAW
MARK HENRY CAN DRAW
ORTON CAN DRAW

the end, you punk and bryan marks need to face the facts that they cant draw and just move on with you're life instead of denying it.


----------



## Shazayum

Suit Up said:


> Heres the run down
> CM PUNK CANT DRAW
> DANIEL BRYAN CANT DRAW
> THE DIVA DIVISON CANT DRAW
> SHEAMUS IS 50/50
> THE TAG TEAM DIVISON CANT DRAW
> THE MIZ CANT DRAW
> 
> THE ROCK CAN DRAW
> CENA CAN DRAW
> MARK HENRY CAN DRAW
> ORTON CAN DRAW
> 
> the end, you punk and bryan marks need to face the facts that they cant draw and just move on with you're life instead of denying it.


:lmao


----------



## Duke Silver




----------



## zkorejo

Starbuck said:


> No. Rock/Cena is the main event. You can't promote something for a year and then not put it on last. So far HHH/Taker is obviously the program with the most interest but Rock's only been back one week. We still have what? 4 more weeks to go here. It will pick up steam. It's fucking Rock and Cena lol. If it doesn't then I'll be legit shell shocked.


This!! Totally agreed.

No one can deny that at this point Triple H/Undertaker feud > Rock/Cena feud. It should change in the coming weeks though. If it doesnt.. that would be a shocker.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

I'm honestly shocked at how bad The Rock drew. Not bad exactly, just disappointing. The fucking battle royal the week before did the same rating. Odd how the Taker/HHH video package gets all the credit for that third quarter rating. Pretty sure that was more so Punk/Bryan/Jericho that segment.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Rock316AE said:


> Not a lot to talk about here, the Cena promos lost viewers two weeks in a row(yes, the minute he came out, people changed the channel, that's a fact here according to Dave, until then they had fun with a great Rock promo), that's great. I gave the TV audience credit, but not that much until now. Nobody wants to see this clown cut lame hypocritical promos. Daytona made an impact on the ratings, that's for sure. Also good to know that they're putting the world champions on random timeslots now and Taker/HHH/HBK doing great numbers. Still if you think they're going to do crazy numbers like 4.4-4.8 this year, that's not happening, last year was all buzz from Rock's return, now WWE drove away every new/old school viewer he brought back.


lulz so you are implying that people dont want to watch an in ring segment with rock and cena because of cena?

so i guess they dont want to see the mania match too


----------



## Suit Up

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I'm honestly shocked at how bad The Rock drew. Not bad exactly, just disappointing. The fucking battle royal the week before did the same rating. Odd how the Taker/HHH video package gets all the credit for that third quarter rating. Pretty sure that was more so Punk/Bryan/Jericho that segment.


dude are you trying to say punk and bryan should be credited for the ratings? did you see where punk vs bryan lost 380k viewers, neither of them can draw, so stop blaming the rock


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Didn't Rock just lose 350k viewers?


----------



## Suit Up

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Didn't Rock just lose 350k viewers?


nope, cena lost 350k viewers


----------



## A-C-P

Segment breakdown doesn't really "reveal" anything we already didn't know from just he base #s really. The Gain in viewers for the quarter with the HHH/Taker video package is a little deceiving IMO as the Punk/Jericho/Bryan stuff was still going on for half of that quarter. A :lmao at blaming Cena for the viewership drop during the overrun. The promo simply just dragged out to long and went 10 miunutes longer than the show usually does.

But when I saw the segement breakdown was posted I was hoping for some great entertainiment and you guys didn't dissapoint, please continue with the SUPER MARK, Troll wars...


----------



## nderq

So John Cena not only had to bail on the whole "flag waving" thing because of rain but also lost viewers in his segment on raw TWICE because of daytona? 

LoL talk about bad luck.


----------



## Padhlala

What is being deemed as the rocks worst promo since the rocky mavia days by many people, still drew the highest ratin of the night.

And then Cena came out, and people tuned out.


----------



## Carcass

Suit Up said:


> dude are you trying to say punk and bryan should be credited for the ratings? did you see where punk vs bryan lost 380k viewers, neither of them can draw, so stop blaming the rock


You mean in the second quarter, which always loses viewers regardless of who's in it? 

Both Punk/Jericho/Bryan/Teddy/John/etc and Taker/HHH should get the credit since both were involved in that quarter.


----------



## Mr Premium

Wow. Punk failed to draw again. Dude's seriously becoming the San Antonio Spurs of the WWE.


----------



## GillbergReturns

NCIS lost 1.2 million viewers compared to last week. WWE might be lucky to have kept the same viewership that they got last week.

People need to wait a week and see if this is a trend or aberration caused by Daytona. It is a concern though that the promo lost viewers at the end. I don't think the material was bad at all I just think Rock's pace was off. The promo went on for too long. That one really falls on the Rock and not Cena. I highly people turned the tv off as soon as Cena's music hit.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

So Undertaker gets advertised, and his segment gains a million+ viewers in the 10PM timeslot of all timeslots. This proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Taker is the biggest draw of all time. He's a bigger draw than Rock, Hogan, Austin, HHH, HBK, Flair, Nash, Vince McMahon, Hall, Goldberg, UFC Lesnar, WWE Lesnar, Kane, Big Show, Great Khali, Andre The Giant, Mean Mark Callus, Psycho Sid, Lex Luger, The Hukster, Macho Man Randy Savage, The Ringmaster, Rocky Balboa, Rocky Johnson, Rocky Maivia, Diesel, Razor Ramon, Doink the Clown, Daniel Bryan, Mark Henry, Mark "RATINGS" Henry, John Cena, Edge, Randy Orton, Cowboy Bob Orton, Roddy Piper, Arn Anderson, Jerry Lawler, The Miz, John Morrison, Joey Mercury, Johnny Nitro, Melina, Charlie Haas, Shelton Benjamin, Dwayne Johnson, RVD, Booker T, CM Punk, Bobby Lashley, D-Lo Brown, X-Pac, Billy Gunn, Dolph Ziggler, Mr. Perfect, Gillberg, R-Truth, Lil' Jimmy, Ted Dibiase, Jimmy Snuka, Polio, Jake Roberts, Giant Gonzales, King Kong Bundy, Kane, Big Boss Man, A-Train, The Giant, Batista, Jeff Hardy, Matt Hardy, Lita, Reverend D-von, Bubba Ray, Bruno Sammartino, Buddy Rogers, Bob Backlund, Brooklyn Brawler, Maven, Juan Cena, Hunter Hearst Helmsley, Marty Jeanetty, Zack Ryder, Curt Hawkins, Kurt Angle, Cody Rhodes, Dusty Rhodes, Ted Dibiase Jr., Goldust, Spike Dudley, Fu-"SMACKDOWN NUMBA 1 ANNOUNCER!"-naki, David Otunga, Spongebob, Michael Jackson, Elvis Presley, Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., The Pope, Barack Obama, and everyone else that has ever existed.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Looks like all the guys I like are draws and all the guys I don't aren't! Yay!


----------



## Starbuck

Obis said:


> So Undertaker gets advertised, and his *and HHH's* segment gains a million+ viewers in the 10PM timeslot of all timeslots. This proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Taker *and HHH* are the biggest draws of all time. They're bigger draws than Rock, Hogan, Austin, HBK, Flair, Nash, Vince McMahon, Hall, Goldberg, UFC Lesnar, WWE Lesnar, Kane, Big Show, Great Khali, Andre The Giant, Mean Mark Callus, Psycho Sid, Lex Luger, The Hukster, Macho Man Randy Savage, The Ringmaster, Rocky Balboa, Rocky Johnson, Rocky Maivia, Diesel, Razor Ramon, Doink the Clown, Daniel Bryan, Mark Henry, Mark "RATINGS" Henry, John Cena, Edge, Randy Orton, Cowboy Bob Orton, Roddy Piper, Arn Anderson, Jerry Lawler, The Miz, John Morrison, Joey Mercury, Johnny Nitro, Melina, Charlie Haas, Shelton Benjamin, Dwayne Johnson, RVD, Booker T, CM Punk, Bobby Lashley, D-Lo Brown, X-Pac, Billy Gunn, Dolph Ziggler, Mr. Perfect, Gillberg, R-Truth, Lil' Jimmy, Ted Dibiase, Jimmy Snuka, Polio, Jake Roberts, Giant Gonzales, King Kong Bundy, Kane, Big Boss Man, A-Train, The Giant, Batista, Jeff Hardy, Matt Hardy, Lita, Reverend D-von, Bubba Ray, Bruno Sammartino, Buddy Rogers, Bob Backlund, Brooklyn Brawler, Maven, Juan Cena, Hunter Hearst Helmsley, Marty Jeanetty, Zack Ryder, Curt Hawkins, Kurt Angle, Cody Rhodes, Dusty Rhodes, Ted Dibiase Jr., Goldust, Spike Dudley, Fu-"SMACKDOWN NUMBA 1 ANNOUNCER!"-naki, David Otunga, Spongebob, Michael Jackson, Elvis Presley, Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., The Pope, Barack Obama, and everyone else that has ever existed.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


>


HHH-who?


----------



## TheWFEffect

The ratings for great shows are shit and the episodes of RAW that should be kept locked away in connecticut to never been seen again get great ratings. Also just to note no matter what it seems the aura of the Undertaker will never die he does better than everyone when he is advertised or when he just springs himself and its not simply just because of him being legend but because their has never been one man who has been so consistent in his work and to his character.


----------



## Starbuck

Obis said:


> HHH-who?


This guy here, the one teabagging the Undertaker.


----------



## kokepepsi

Starbuck said:


>


"The absolute shocker was the* HHH *vs. Jericho main event *lost 205,000 viewers to a 3.13 overrun*. The main event almost never goes down, let alone a match that hasn’t been done in years like that and I can’t give an explanation as to why."


----------



## sharkboy22

Wait, The Rock lost viewers? The Rock is not a draw?

Punk and Jericho had 5.1 million viewers? Both guys are draws!!!

Just adding some good old fashioned IWC logic to this thread. Let's tune in next week to see who draws and who doesn't.


----------



## Starbuck

kokepepsi said:


> "The absolute shocker was the* HHH *vs. Jericho main event *lost 205,000 viewers to a 3.13 overrun*. The main event almost never goes down, let alone a match that hasn’t been done in years like that and I can’t give an explanation as to why."












lmao That was a good one lol.)


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

PWtorch 



> The over-run rating compares to a 3.22 rating for the opening segment featuring the promo exchange between Chris Jericho and C.M. Punk. *Raw then hit its first hour peak with a 3.38 rating during the third quarter-hour, which contained the second-half of Punk vs. Daniel Bryan and the Triple H-Undertaker video package.*


So, at one point, more people watched two indie hacks and a fucking video package then the Rocks return promo?

unk:hhh2unk2:hhh


----------



## BANKSY

Rock has certainly lost his luster now we are more use to seeing him on tv.

:vince3


----------



## Brye

I'm sure that the video package will supposedly be the reason for that.


----------



## D.M.N.

February 20th, 2012
Q1 - 3.58 rating / 5.07 million
Q2 - 3.24 rating / 4.58 million
Q3 - 3.29 rating / 4.65 million
Q4 - 3.07 rating / 4.34 million
Q5 - 3.85 rating / 5.46 million
Q6 - 3.14 rating / 4.53 million
Q7 - 2.86 rating / 4.05 million
Q8 + OR - 3.31 rating / 4.65 million

In my opinion the Triple H and Undertaker segment gaining 1.1 million viewers means very, very little when Q1 loses viewers throughout and no one benefits afterwards. Good to see it does make a big gain - and 5.5 million seems to be a big number when you see the February 27th numbers, but it doesn't really benefit anyone in the long run if the viewers tune straight back out. It was the same in last year's run in to WrestleMania if I recall correctly.

February 27th, 2012
Q1 - 3.22 rating / 4.86 million
Q2 - 3.02 rating / 4.57 million
Q3 - 3.38 rating / 5.10 million
Q4 - 2.83 rating / 4.28 million
Q5 - 3.09 rating / 4.67 million
Q6 - ~2.95 rating / 4.45 million
Q7 - 3.09 rating / 4.67 million
Q8 - 3.09 rating / 4.67 million
OR - 3.46 rating / 5.22 million*

* weighted average for entire overrun

An odd breakdown. Not much to say, unusual growth in Q3, little growth in Q5 along with a below average number for Rock's return. Should they start putting Rock in Q5 where more viewers are maybe available, with Taker/HHH ending the show?


----------



## Carcass

DB being in the second highest quarter last RAW. No surprise there. If anything should happen to Cena between now and WM, they could just have Rock face Daniel Bryan. He's got the required star power to do so.


----------



## Starbuck

D.M.N. said:


> In my opinion the Triple H and Undertaker segment gaining 1.1 million viewers means very, very little when Q1 loses viewers throughout and no one benefits afterwards. Good to see it does make a big gain - and 5.5 million seems to be a big number when you see the February 27th numbers, *but it doesn't really benefit anyone in the long run if the viewers tune straight back out. It was the same in last year's run in to WrestleMania if I recall correctly.*


It's been the same all year and for as long as I can remember now tbh. The only segments that can pull huge numbers like that are the ones involving names like Rock, HHH, Taker, Cena, Vince etc. They're the only ones that seem to be able to do it. People are tuning in to see these guys whenever they got something going on and then tuning out when their bit is up. Same problem that's only ever going to be fixed by involving the younger guys with the big guns and putting them over but yet here we're sitting with HHH/Taker and Jericho/Punk which does nobody any favors in the long run. They should have went with HHH/Punk to give Punk eyeballs and Jericho/Miz imo to give Miz eyeballs and a solid program. Instead, when Mania is over and Rock, Taker and HHH are gone again, nobody will have been elevated coming out of Mania therefore the shows still have no star power therefore nobody watches in big numbers like this because the younger guys aren't holding their interest. It's a vicious circle lol.


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> It's been the same all year and for as long as I can remember now tbh. The only segments that can pull huge numbers like that are the ones involving names like Rock, HHH, Taker, Cena, Vince etc. They're the only ones that seem to be able to do it. People are tuning in to see these guys whenever they got something going on and then tuning out when their bit is up. Same problem that's only ever going to be fixed by involving the younger guys with the big guns and putting them over but yet here we're sitting with HHH/Taker and Jericho/Punk which does nobody any favors in the long run. They should have went with HHH/Punk to give Punk eyeballs and Jericho/Miz imo to give Miz eyeballs and a solid program. Instead, when Mania is over and Rock, Taker and HHH are gone again, nobody will have been elevated coming out of Mania therefore the shows still have no star power therefore nobody watches in big numbers like this because the younger guys aren't holding their interest. It's a vicious circle lol.


OMG its a post in the Ratings thread that uses common sense and makes a very solid (and very valid) point. Sir what is the matter with you.

Agreed with your point here 100% btw, repped good sir. It is becoming a vicious circle BIGTIME, and one they are going to need to break. I see it happening to much (IMO) that Vince and the WWE sacrifices long-term building of "new stars" just for a short-term boost in ratings.


----------



## SteenIsGod

Carcass said:


> DB being in the second highest quarter last RAW. No surprise there. If anything should happen to Cena between now and WM, they could just have Rock face Daniel Bryan. He's got the required star power to do so.


Amen to that.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> It's been the same all year and for as long as I can remember now tbh. The only segments that can pull huge numbers like that are the ones involving names like Rock, HHH, Taker, Cena, Vince etc. They're the only ones that seem to be able to do it. People are tuning in to see these guys whenever they got something going on and then tuning out when their bit is up. Same problem that's only ever going to be fixed by involving the younger guys with the big guns and putting them over but yet here we're sitting with HHH/Taker and Jericho/Punk which does nobody any favors in the long run. They should have went with HHH/Punk to give Punk eyeballs and Jericho/Miz imo to give Miz eyeballs and a solid program. Instead, when Mania is over and Rock, Taker and HHH are gone again, nobody will have been elevated coming out of Mania therefore the shows still have no star power therefore nobody watches in big numbers like this because the younger guys aren't holding their interest. It's a vicious circle lol.


Indeed. 

I mean... HHH needs to stop the burying! If it wasern't for that, weed have more stars!


----------



## DesolationRow

Starbuck said:


> It's been the same all year and for as long as I can remember now tbh. The only segments that can pull huge numbers like that are the ones involving names like Rock, HHH, Taker, Cena, Vince etc. They're the only ones that seem to be able to do it. People are tuning in to see these guys whenever they got something going on and then tuning out when their bit is up. Same problem that's only ever going to be fixed by involving the younger guys with the big guns and putting them over but yet here we're sitting with HHH/Taker and Jericho/Punk which does nobody any favors in the long run. They should have went with HHH/Punk to give Punk eyeballs and Jericho/Miz imo to give Miz eyeballs and a solid program. Instead, when Mania is over and Rock, Taker and HHH are gone again, nobody will have been elevated coming out of Mania therefore the shows still have no star power therefore nobody watches in big numbers like this because the younger guys aren't holding their interest. It's a vicious circle lol.


Exactly. This Wrestlemania is going to do huge numbers, but guys like Punk and Miz and Sheamus are still not going to be completely "made" at it. At the absolute _best_, perhaps Punk going over Jericho can be roughly the equivalent of Cena going over JBL at Wrestlemania XXI (not in pure comparative terms, because as much as I like Punk he's not where Cena was then, but he's at least continually making strides), Sheamus going over Daniel Bryan can be like Edge becoming Mr. Money in the Bank and, well, Miz's storyline is that he has no match for Wrestlelmania, lol. Unless they pull a Mick Foley or something like that out of their ass, he's probably screwed this year, but we'll see. 

Ah well. Maybe next year we'll see guys like Punk and Sheamus and Miz and perhaps Zack Ryder (who it appears won't even be on the show?!, say it ain't so) taken to the next level. We *NEED*, or, I should say, *WWE NEEDS*, Punk vs. Triple H next year. With a huge sprawling angle. Punk is getting so close, and he may end up accruing more benefits from this Jericho feud than what I would have thought likely only a short week ago, but if they had just gone with Triple H turning leading to Punk/Trips at Wrestlemania, I'd be willing to bet the farm that he'd finally be seen as something roughly resembling Cena's equal. And that is what WWE needs most of all. That and closing the WWE Films division, which singlehandedly brutalized them in their fourth quarter of 2011, lol.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Starbuck said:


> It's been the same all year and for as long as I can remember now tbh. The only segments that can pull huge numbers like that are the ones involving names like Rock, HHH, Taker, Cena, Vince etc. They're the only ones that seem to be able to do it. People are tuning in to see these guys whenever they got something going on and then tuning out when their bit is up. Same problem that's only ever going to be fixed by involving the younger guys with the big guns and putting them over but yet here we're sitting with HHH/Taker and Jericho/Punk which does nobody any favors in the long run. They should have went with HHH/Punk to give Punk eyeballs and Jericho/Miz imo to give Miz eyeballs and a solid program. Instead, when Mania is over and Rock, Taker and HHH are gone again, nobody will have been elevated coming out of Mania therefore the shows still have no star power therefore nobody watches in big numbers like this because the younger guys aren't holding their interest. It's a vicious circle lol.


How dare you be reasonable?!!?!


----------



## nderq

Everytime Punk and bryan are in the ring together, viewership drops like crazy. The unusual Q3 gain is obviously Taker/HHH video package. 

Besides why would more number of people suddenly tune in to watch a match that they didnt care for the first two quarters anyway? 

PWtorch is garbage, full of speculative shit. Meltzer is much more reliable.


----------



## kokepepsi

marks only care about the finish


----------



## deatawaits

nderq said:


> Everytime Punk and bryan are in the ring together, viewership drops like crazy. The unusual Q3 gain is obviously Taker/HHH video package.
> 
> Besides why would more number of people suddenly tune in to watch a match that they didnt care for the first two quarters anyway?
> 
> PWtorch is garbage, full of speculative shit. Meltzer is much more reliable.


I know what you are trying to say but I don't know if there have been any video package do such a bump it has to do with punk/jericho/bryan.I don't know shit about ratings but nomatter how big a feud is the video package lose viewers and pwtorch is also credible website.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

nderq said:


> *Everytime Punk and bryan are in the ring together, viewership drops like crazy.* The unusual Q3 gain is obviously Taker/HHH video package.
> 
> Besides why would more number of people suddenly tune in to watch a match that they didnt care for the first two quarters anyway?
> 
> PWtorch is garbage, full of speculative shit. Meltzer is much more reliable.


No it doesn't. Bryan/Punk gained in their first match a few weeks ago. In fact, their match pulled a better rating than The Rock's return this week.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

jblvdx said:


> PWtorch
> 
> 
> 
> So, at one point, more people watched two indie hacks and a fucking video package then the Rocks return promo?
> 
> unk:hhh2unk2:hhh


Why don't we have any motherfucking Daniel Bryan smileys? WE NEED DANIEL BRYAN SMILEYS!


----------



## purple_gloves

TheWFEffect said:


> *The ratings for great shows are shit and the episodes of RAW that should be kept locked away in connecticut to never been seen again get great ratings*. Also just to note no matter what it seems the aura of the Undertaker will never die he does better than everyone when he is advertised or when he just springs himself and its not simply just because of him being legend but because their has never been one man who has been so consistent in his work and to his character.


Which goes to show that the most out of touch wrestling fans, in terms of knowing what draws, are so called "internet smarks".

I watched a guy on youtube recently. He was reviewing a TNA show and and was saying how good he, and most other people within the iwc, thought the shows have been recently. Yet he went onto to say he was shocked that the ratings had been lower than usual during those shows.

Smarks don't know what draws.


----------



## A-C-P

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> Why don't we have any motherfucking Daniel Bryan smileys? WE NEED DANIEL BRYAN SMILEYS!


YES! YES! YES! YES!


----------



## FITZ

So Raw draws pretty much the same number of viewers and people are going crazy? Last week did 4.63 million and this week did 4.64, literally the number of viewers didn't change. All of these stupid arguments are because there were more people watching TV on other channels last Monday Night than there were this Monday night. WWE can't control what's on other stations.


----------



## nderq

WWE can control viewership if they put out quality product everyweek. The Rock promoting twitter and getting his catchphrases over for 20+ mins wont help and is evident from the overrun losing viewers.



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> No it doesn't. Bryan/Punk gained in their first match a few weeks ago. In fact, their match pulled a better rating than The Rock's return this week.


It gained a mere 200,000 in the 10 pm slot.


----------



## bigdog40

The Neilson rating is really not under their control and they don't survey us to begin with. Raw's always in the top 10 or top 20. I don't care and I don't think WWE really cares if they are the #1 show on TV every week. They maybe #1 on a monday night, but there are other shows on cable TV other than Raw, or Impact on a weekly basis.


----------



## Killswitch Stunner

I hope Punk goes to Smackdown and we get Punk/Bryan all freaking summer long.


----------



## nderq

Punk's character wont work in smackdown. Its more fit for Live tv. I want Orton to move back to RAW.


----------



## Carcass

Killswitch Stunner said:


> I hope Punk goes to Smackdown and we get Punk/Bryan all freaking summer long.


Daniel Bryan should drop his belt to Sheamus, come to RAW and feud with Punk over the WWE title.


----------



## Killswitch Stunner

As long as I get my Punk/Bryan, doesn't matter to me. I would rather see it on Raw, just didn't think they would put Bryan on Raw, he seems more of a Smackdown guy.


----------



## Mr Premium

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> No it doesn't. Bryan/Punk gained in their first match a few weeks ago. In fact, their match pulled a better rating than The Rock's return this week.


Punk - Bryan drew 3.0

Rock segment drew a 3.5

Get your facts straight.

Not a lot of people like to watch 2 janitors slug it out. That's a fact.


----------



## Killswitch Stunner

Janitors? I suppose you would rather everybody look like Rock to be entertaining. *snore*


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Mr Premium said:


> Punk - Bryan drew 3.0
> 
> Rock segment drew a 3.5
> 
> Get your facts straight.
> 
> Not a lot of people like to watch 2 janitors slug it out. That's a fact.


I'm talking about their match a few weeks ago, one that was in the 10 spot and not a random spot. That got a 3.54. Rock's segment got a 3.46.


----------



## GillbergReturns

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I'm talking about their match a few weeks ago, one that was in the 10 spot and not a random spot. That got a 3.54. Rock's segment got a 3.46.


What was viewership? That's what really matters. Ratings can be down because there's another big event going on leading to increased television audience (hint, Daytona 500)


----------



## GillbergReturns

Killswitch Stunner said:


> As long as I get my Punk/Bryan, doesn't matter to me. I would rather see it on Raw, just didn't think they would put Bryan on Raw, he seems more of a Smackdown guy.


There was rumors awhile back that Bryan will be brought to Raw to feud with Cena.

I could definetily see a Summer of Bryan v Cena followed by Bryan v Punk come Rumble or Mania time.


----------



## The Ultimate Warrior

*Re: WWE falling apart?!*

I will say the WWE hasn't been that great for a while now but when VKM passes the future of WWE, in my opinion, looks bleak. Say what you will of VKM but he one of the best minds in wrestling ever; I'm not counting the lst few years.


----------



## septurum

*Re: WWE falling apart?!*

People worry too much. Just sit back and watch.


----------



## corfend

*Re: WWE falling apart?!*

The lower ratings are easily explained by the fact that Punk is WWE Champion going into 'Mania this year rather than the Miz. 8*D

In all seriousness though, I'm not sure why the ratings are so low this year.


----------



## purple_gloves

*Re: WWE falling apart?!*

Maybe people are under estimating the drawing power of Rey Mysterio and Edge.


----------



## icecreamsandstuff

*Re: WWE falling apart?!*

The ratings this time last year were artificially high because of the return of the Rock.

He came back just over a year ago today.


----------



## kokepepsi

*Re: WWE falling apart?!*

Rating don't matter, the buys do 

Look at WM19......better ratings FUCKING LOL buyrate


----------



## TheF1BOB

Yawn... The ratings have been the same for many years now.

Call me back when ratings are 2.3 - 2.5.... then we'll be talking!!!


----------



## DesolationRow

In WWE, The Rock draws.

Dwayne doesn't draw. 

8*D


----------



## Brye

*Re: WWE falling apart?!*



kokepepsi said:


> Rating don't matter, the buys do
> 
> Look at WM19......better ratings FUCKING LOL buyrate


And yet it ended up being one of the best Manias of all time.


----------



## Kaneniteforever

wwe's biggest problem is they spend more time dribbling horseshit then actually wrestling. Even the whole badass punk is gettin boring... and the storylines are lame...


----------



## D.M.N.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...etball-wives-pretty-little-liars-more/123275/

4.646m and 4.572m, it seems like ratings wise this might be a forgetful Road to WrestleMania... another big ouch. Any other time of the year, and that would be alright, but not when you're supposedly promoting a match where two era's collide.


----------



## Starbuck

Fuck. If this is what they're pulling now then I shudder to think of what happens on the road to Over The Limit lol. They can't even get over 5 million FFS. It's just strange.


----------



## A-C-P

Hey look its the same 4.5 million that watch every week on live TV, should the #'s be higher for this time of year maybe. But hey I am sure these #'s are going to lead to some GREAT posts like.... 

Its all Cena's fault for killing the fued with Rock with his stupid smiling

Its Punk's fault

Rock sucks now and can't draw anymore

There was someother sporting or special event that drew away ratings

Whatever the reasons posted are they will defintely lead to SUPER MARK wars and major trolling so....GET YOUR POPCORN READY!


----------



## BrosOfDestruction

D.M.N. said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...etball-wives-pretty-little-liars-more/123275/
> 
> *4.646m and 4.572m*, it seems like ratings wise this might be a forgetful Road to WrestleMania... another big ouch. Any other time of the year, and that would be alright, but not when you're supposedly promoting a match where two era's collide.


----------



## TheF1BOB

Ratings don't matter, as you long as we have this around, we have hope....



































_Smiling John_ :cena2


----------



## kokepepsi

There goes your WWE/Nascar crossover excuse


----------



## GillbergReturns

kokepepsi said:


> There goes your WWE/Nascar crossover excuse


And we're left with wrestling doesn't draw period.

Your boys the champ and he's doing sh** too.


----------



## the fox

i only watched the first and last segements + rock segements and i am sure a lot did the same
what else deserve to be watched on this show?
anyway what really matter now to vince and the company right now is wrestlemania buys


----------



## Brye

the fox said:


> i only watched the first and last segements + rock segements and i am sure a lot did the same
> *what else deserve to be watched on this show?*
> anyway what really matter now to vince and the company right now is wrestlemania buys


The big tag match and Santino's title victory.


----------



## DesolationRow

It is almost truly indescribable how much WWE, John Cena and to a lesser extent The Rock have all seemingly conspired to ruin what should have been the biggest, most important feud the WWE had seen since Batista/Triple H. I'm blaming The Rock some because of the Portland Promo. I'm blaming Cena for his typical bullshit. And I say typical bullshit because this isn't exactly the first time he's shrugged off an opponent going into what should have been a mega-match. The final Raw before Wrestlemania XXVI, he actually undid all of the build-up (which at that time was very, _very_ good) between he and Batista, saying he no longer saw the Animal but just Dave Batista and he knew he could beat Batista. Turned out, he more or less obliterated Batista in their feud, which wasn't by itself a bad booking decision since Batista was leaving but the feud was never quite the same. It became much worse after the duct tape incident at Extreme Rules. Then there was his shtick the week before TLC 2010, which demonstrated just how far the Nexus angle had sunk. Cena was sure he was going to win, he was going to crush Wade Barrett... and he did. Then there was last year's Wrestlemania build. For the first several weeks after Elimination Chamber, he made juvenile jokes about The Miz and Alex Riley. He and Rock continued their promo wars while Miz had to carry the actual present feud. Then there was the entire Survivor Series 2011 build-up fiasco, in which he singlehandedly crushed Awesome Truth like a couple of ants, belittled them and never took them remotely seriously. Now he's doing it with The Rock. I guess we can't overstate whatever CM Punk had to impress John Cena because he's essentially been the only individual as of late to escape this sort of treatment from Cena. (I'm not even counting Kane since it was filler but I'll be damned if that feud didn't have more depth to it at certain points than Rock/Cena does at this time.) But WWE deserves the most amount of blame. 

They built The Miz up one year ago, only to systematically destroy everything he and they worked on. They booked Rock vs. Cena one year in advance and allowed the intrigue and mystery of the build-up to be undercut by their Survivor Series build-up, which looking back on it was a colossal waste. However, the most devastating matter today is that I have no idea why Rock is fighting John Cena on April 1. Why are they so hesitant to allow Rock to bring back to the table what started all of this, Cena's badmouthing and calling out of The Rock years ago? That is where this all emerged from in the first place. Instead, he's supposedly fighting for the people but as the feud goes along the people are being driven into Cena's camp. The whole thing is a gigantic clusterfuck of a mess.

The other problem, which I would argue is an even more pressing problem for WWE in the realm of ratings is that they have utterly failed to make people care about anyone not named Triple H, John Cena, The Rock, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker and from time to time CM Punk. WWE's #1 problem is inflation. Star inflation. Championship inflation. Case in point--the two world championship matches feel like midcard bouts at Wrestlemania. They finally started something great with Chris Jericho and CM Punk last week, but this week was a standard, pedestrian tag team match (playa) right in the middle of the show. Sheamus and Daniel Bryan's feud is at emergency levels of needing some nourishment. This is terrible. Meanwhile, they've stripped last year's pet project, The Miz, bare to the point where seven months ago he was a ratings draw by himself in shitty quarter hours doing shitty things and now he's always in segments that lose dramatic levels of viewers. 

WWE is in trouble. Raw averaged 5.6 million viewers during the Road to Wrestlemania in 2010. Raw averaged 5.6 million viewers during the Road to Wrestlemania in 2011. Right now, they're one million viewers off. These are viewership numbers we could easily see in May. This is catastrophic. 

The Rock/Cena feud has become unexciting for most casuals. I was talking with a few friends last night--individuals who watch Raw on and off, knew about Rock vs. Cena eleven months ago, etceteras--and they were all unanimous that they just don't care anymore. Rock as an icon has actually gone down in all of their estimations. Between his patchy performances, Cena's interactions with him, what have you, WWE's actually damaged Rock's brand rather than he clearly improve theirs (in terms of quality product, obviously he was a major part of their business explosion a year ago right now, including much of the WM 27 buyrate). 

Last year during the early autumnal phase of what had been the Summer of Punk, I joked about WWE being able to fuck anything up. Well, it turns out that they are.


----------



## zkorejo

Good. I hope it gets much lower than that next week. WWE doesnt deserve over 5 mio viewers anyways.


----------



## Ron Paul 2012

DesolationRow said:


> It is almost truly indescribable how much WWE, John Cena and to a lesser extent The Rock have all seemingly conspired to ruin what should have been the biggest, most important feud the WWE had seen since Batista/Triple H. I'm blaming The Rock some because of the Portland Promo. I'm blaming Cena for his typical bullshit. And I say typical bullshit because this isn't exactly the first time he's shrugged off an opponent going into what should have been a mega-match. The final Raw before Wrestlemania XXVI, he actually undid all of the build-up (which at that time was very, _very_ good) between he and Batista, saying he no longer saw the Animal but just Dave Batista and he knew he could beat Batista. Turned out, he more or less obliterated Batista in their feud, which wasn't by itself a bad booking decision since Batista was leaving but the feud was never quite the same. It became much worse after the duct tape incident at Extreme Rules. Then there was his shtick the week before TLC 2010, which demonstrated just how far the Nexus angle had sunk. Cena was sure he was going to win, he was going to crush Wade Barrett... and he did. Then there was last year's Wrestlemania build. For the first several weeks after Elimination Chamber, he made juvenile jokes about The Miz and Alex Riley. He and Rock continued their promo wars while Miz had to carry the actual present feud. Then there was the entire Survivor Series 2011 build-up fiasco, in which he singlehandedly crushed Awesome Truth like a couple of ants, belittled them and never took them remotely seriously. Now he's doing it with The Rock. I guess we can't overstate whatever CM Punk had to impress John Cena because he's essentially been the only individual as of late to escape this sort of treatment from Cena. (I'm not even counting Kane since it was filler but I'll be damned if that feud didn't have more depth to it at certain points than Rock/Cena does at this time.) But WWE deserves the most amount of blame.
> 
> They built The Miz up one year ago, only to systematically destroy everything he and they worked on. They booked Rock vs. Cena one year in advance and allowed the intrigue and mystery of the build-up to be undercut by their Survivor Series build-up, which looking back on it was a colossal waste. However, the most devastating matter today is that I have no idea why Rock is fighting John Cena on April 1. Why are they so hesitant to allow Rock to bring back to the table what started all of this, Cena's badmouthing and calling out of The Rock years ago? That is where this all emerged from in the first place. Instead, he's supposedly fighting for the people but as the feud goes along the people are being driven into Cena's camp. The whole thing is a gigantic clusterfuck of a mess.
> 
> The other problem, which I would argue is an even more pressing problem for WWE in the realm of ratings is that they have utterly failed to make people care about anyone not named Triple H, John Cena, The Rock, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker and from time to time CM Punk. WWE's #1 problem is inflation. Star inflation. Championship inflation. Case in point--the two world championship matches feel like midcard bouts at Wrestlemania. They finally started something great with Chris Jericho and CM Punk last week, but this week was a standard, pedestrian tag team match (playa) right in the middle of the show. Sheamus and Daniel Bryan's feud is at emergency levels of needing some nourishment. This is terrible. Meanwhile, they've stripped last year's pet project, The Miz, bare to the point where seven months ago he was a ratings draw by himself in shitty quarter hours doing shitty things and now he's always in segments that lose dramatic levels of viewers.
> 
> WWE is in trouble. Raw averaged 5.6 million viewers during the Road to Wrestlemania in 2010. Raw averaged 5.6 million viewers during the Road to Wrestlemania in 2011. Right now, they're one million viewers off. These are viewership numbers we could easily see in May. This is catastrophic.
> 
> The Rock/Cena feud has become unexciting for most casuals. I was talking with a few friends last night--individuals who watch Raw on and off, knew about Rock vs. Cena eleven months ago, etceteras--and they were all unanimous that they just don't care anymore. Rock as an icon has actually gone down in all of their estimations. Between his patchy performances, Cena's interactions with him, what have you, WWE's actually damaged Rock's brand rather than he clearly improve theirs (in terms of quality product, obviously he was a major part of their business explosion a year ago right now, including much of the WM 27 buyrate).
> 
> Last year during the early autumnal phase of what had been the Summer of Punk, I joked about WWE being able to fuck anything up. Well, it turns out that they are.


Repped for this great post


----------



## Rock316AE

Awesome, fuck this company, these morons didn't even tell the audience that Rock is going to be there on their main show! I hope it gets lower every week until USA will throw their pathetic program from their network.


----------



## Starbuck

DesolationRow said:


> It is almost truly indescribable how much WWE, John Cena and to a lesser extent The Rock have all seemingly conspired to ruin what should have been the biggest, most important feud the WWE had seen since Batista/Triple H. I'm blaming The Rock some because of the Portland Promo. I'm blaming Cena for his typical bullshit. And I say typical bullshit because this isn't exactly the first time he's shrugged off an opponent going into what should have been a mega-match. The final Raw before Wrestlemania XXVI, he actually undid all of the build-up (which at that time was very, _very_ good) between he and Batista, saying he no longer saw the Animal but just Dave Batista and he knew he could beat Batista. Turned out, he more or less obliterated Batista in their feud, which wasn't by itself a bad booking decision since Batista was leaving but the feud was never quite the same. It became much worse after the duct tape incident at Extreme Rules. Then there was his shtick the week before TLC 2010, which demonstrated just how far the Nexus angle had sunk. Cena was sure he was going to win, he was going to crush Wade Barrett... and he did. Then there was last year's Wrestlemania build. For the first several weeks after Elimination Chamber, he made juvenile jokes about The Miz and Alex Riley. He and Rock continued their promo wars while Miz had to carry the actual present feud. Then there was the entire Survivor Series 2011 build-up fiasco, in which he singlehandedly crushed Awesome Truth like a couple of ants, belittled them and never took them remotely seriously. Now he's doing it with The Rock. I guess we can't overstate whatever CM Punk had to impress John Cena because he's essentially been the only individual as of late to escape this sort of treatment from Cena. (I'm not even counting Kane since it was filler but I'll be damned if that feud didn't have more depth to it at certain points than Rock/Cena does at this time.) But WWE deserves the most amount of blame.
> 
> They built The Miz up one year ago, only to systematically destroy everything he and they worked on. They booked Rock vs. Cena one year in advance and allowed the intrigue and mystery of the build-up to be undercut by their Survivor Series build-up, which looking back on it was a colossal waste. However, the most devastating matter today is that I have no idea why Rock is fighting John Cena on April 1. Why are they so hesitant to allow Rock to bring back to the table what started all of this, Cena's badmouthing and calling out of The Rock years ago? That is where this all emerged from in the first place. Instead, he's supposedly fighting for the people but as the feud goes along the people are being driven into Cena's camp. The whole thing is a gigantic clusterfuck of a mess.
> 
> The other problem, which I would argue is an even more pressing problem for WWE in the realm of ratings is that they have utterly failed to make people care about anyone not named Triple H, John Cena, The Rock, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker and from time to time CM Punk. WWE's #1 problem is inflation. Star inflation. Championship inflation. Case in point--the two world championship matches feel like midcard bouts at Wrestlemania. They finally started something great with Chris Jericho and CM Punk last week, but this week was a standard, pedestrian tag team match (playa) right in the middle of the show. Sheamus and Daniel Bryan's feud is at emergency levels of needing some nourishment. This is terrible. Meanwhile, they've stripped last year's pet project, The Miz, bare to the point where seven months ago he was a ratings draw by himself in shitty quarter hours doing shitty things and now he's always in segments that lose dramatic levels of viewers.
> 
> WWE is in trouble. Raw averaged 5.6 million viewers during the Road to Wrestlemania in 2010. Raw averaged 5.6 million viewers during the Road to Wrestlemania in 2011. Right now, they're one million viewers off. These are viewership numbers we could easily see in May. This is catastrophic.
> 
> The Rock/Cena feud has become unexciting for most casuals. I was talking with a few friends last night--individuals who watch Raw on and off, knew about Rock vs. Cena eleven months ago, etceteras--and they were all unanimous that they just don't care anymore. Rock as an icon has actually gone down in all of their estimations. Between his patchy performances, Cena's interactions with him, what have you, WWE's actually damaged Rock's brand rather than he clearly improve theirs (in terms of quality product, obviously he was a major part of their business explosion a year ago right now, including much of the WM 27 buyrate).
> 
> Last year during the early autumnal phase of what had been the Summer of Punk, I joked about WWE being able to fuck anything up. Well, it turns out that they are.


This seems to sum up a lot of stuff the both of us and some others have been flagging over the past few months. Panic mode doesn't even begin to describe where they are right now. If you can't average 5 million viewers for Raw in February with no competition and Rock, Cena, HHH, Taker, HBK on the show and Wrestlemania around the corner then how in God's name are you going to do it with Cena, Punk, Miz and Ryder heading into Over the Limit or whatever shitty PPV they have in May these days? I'm very curious as to whether Rock/Cena popped a big number at the end or if it was HHH/HBK at the start. I'm willing to be that 1 of the segments managed to get close to 5 mill+. I just wonder what one. Hell, maybe the 10pm slot will surprise us and the Punk/Jericho marks will go wild lol.


----------



## DesolationRow

Well, the first hour averaged almost 100,000 viewers more than the second hour, which leads me to believe that HBK/Trips was, not surprisingly, a beast coming out of the starting gate. I wouldn't be surprised if they started with a 3.5/3.6 rating or so for that. 

The real kicker to all of this is that WWE--from a ratings perspective, anyway--had a fairly solid game plan in having a bunch of Rock skits mapped out for the whole show, Cena's three-minute and change "empty arena" promo hitting at the very beginning of the fourth quarter, etceteras. I think what would really hurt is if they just had static ratings throughout the night, with only occasional major drops here and there, following the inevitable dropoff from HBK/Trips. Because that would indicate that the product/brand itself is not drawing very well at all, and that they're literally maxing out at a certain level of viewership.

Problem with that theory is that most of the Raw audience is so conditioned to knowing that QH1, QH5 and the final quarter hour-to-the-overrun are all that really matter, so all of WWE's maneuvers were very likely for naught.

One thing is obvious, the Streak rematch has many people's imaginations. Jericho/Punk, based on last week, anyway, seems to be capturing a lot of excitement. It's fairly evident that Rock/Cena is hemorrhaging excitement right now. There's only one thing to do, get three chairs and Jim Ross and have them cut the most realistic-but-not-kayfabe-breaking promo against one another, ala Austin/Rock with JR leading into WM X-7. JR could talk about how he signed both guys, etceteras. Give this damned thing some weight and depth. Oh well, guess we'll be having concerts instead.


----------



## Duke Silver

I don't think it's any surprise [at this point] that ratings aren't great. The WWE are in a transitional period, and they're not doing a very good job with it. The roster is weak, they've only just started rebuilding. 

The Rock hasn't done anything noteworthy since his return (other than the first pre-tape last night), the feud has been very underwhelming so far, and HBK has never been known as a ratings juggernaut [how awesome has HHH/HBK/Taker been though?].

Just gotta sit back and wait. In the mean time, we can all laugh at the morons who wasted six months of their free time solely blaming CM Punk.


----------



## zkorejo

World Wide said:


> I don't think it's any surprise [at this point] that ratings aren't great. The WWE are in a transitional period, and they're not doing a very good job with it. The roster is weak, they've only just started rebuilding. The Rock hasn't done anything noteworthy since his return (other than the first pre-tape last night), the feud has been very underwhelming so far, and HBK has never been known as a ratings juggernaut [how awesome has HHH/HBK/Taker been though?].
> 
> Just gotta sit back and wait. *In the mean time, we can all laugh at the morons who wasted six months of their free time solely blaming CM Punk*.


Lol.. I agree.


----------



## AthenaMark

Cena being Cena...doing what he does best. Kill ratings. It never fails. Never.


----------



## Starbuck

I think I've figured it out lol. This is Vince's ultimate revenge for Trips marrying Stephanie. He's doing everything in his power to ensure that he inherits a seemingly dying product lol. Then he'll look up from hell and watch as it all disintegrates with a great big smile on his face.


----------



## DesolationRow

World Wide said:


> Just gotta sit back and wait. In the mean time, we can all laugh at the morons who wasted six months of their free time solely blaming CM Punk.


Amen. 

Those idiots blaming Punk all of those months were like some repugnantly drunken and abusive stepdad kicking the seven-year-old stepson they've known for about six months around because he failed to assemble a cort of firewood in five minutes flat.

At a certain point in time, WWE had to give somebody not named Cena or Triple H or Undertaker or Orton "the ball"; it's just a shame they almost felt compelled to do so chiefly because of the sheer thinness of their roster, making the transitional phase all the more arduous for whoever that individual was going to be.


----------



## Mister Hands

Starbuck said:


> This seems to sum up a lot of stuff the both of us and some others have been flagging over the past few months. Panic mode doesn't even begin to describe where they are right now. *If you can't average 5 million viewers for Raw in February with no competition and Rock, Cena, HHH, Taker, HBK on the show and Wrestlemania around the corner then how in God's name are you going to do it with Cena, Punk, Miz and Ryder heading into Over the Limit or whatever shitty PPV they have in May these days?* I'm very curious as to whether Rock/Cena popped a big number at the end or if it was HHH/HBK at the start. I'm willing to be that 1 of the segments managed to get close to 5 mill+. I just wonder what one. Hell, maybe the 10pm slot will surprise us and the Punk/Jericho marks will go wild lol.


I agree with what you and DesolationRow are saying (Rock/Cena _should_ be drawing more, no matter whether you care about such things or not, and I stubbornly refuse to ), but you're phrasing that question wrong. Cena, Punk, Ryder, et al aren't expected to be drawing those numbers for Over The Limit; it'd be nice if they did, but no one's expecting it. Rocky, Trips/Taker, these are all desperate attempts to use _something_ to spike an obscene rating. A RTWM rating. Which they drew the last two years, as DesoRow said. They drew that in 2010 without Rock and without the grand returns of Trips and Taker. I don't have the numbers, and I don't care to look for them, but I assume that after WM, the ratings dropped right back down to normal, just like we'd be expecting Rocky, Trips, Taker and Shawn all toddle off post-WM.

Now they can't even get that temporary spike. Something is rotten in the state of WWE.

But if Rocky's return was an experiment, the conclusion is that WWE's problem isn't a lack of individual draws. It's something more systemic than that. He drew well enough last WM when his return was red fucking hot, but it's been a very literal case of diminishing returns - Survivor Series' buyrate was good, but not as good everyone perhaps hoped or expected, and we blamed it on the diastrous handling of the Awesome Truth feud. RTWM has been unflattering, to say the least, and the blame is being laid at the handling of the Rock/Cena feud.

Similarly, when Punk was red fucking hot, they spiked a buyrate for MITB. Then they brought him back waaayyyyy too soon to get interest for Summerslam. Then it just tails off, and we blame it on his getting lost in that Nash/Trips/Del Rio/Miz/whatever quagmire that no one could figure out.

I'm guessing the numbers would look similar for the Nexus' run in 2010 if I could be arsed looking for it.

They've been able to spike ratings before when they made things interesting. They've - somehow - made Rocky/Cena _uninteresting_ to the people it should be specifically capturing. So the most important question isn't why isn't Rocky drawing, or why isn't WM drawing, or why won't Punk, Cena and Ryder draw. It's how the fuck can _anyone_ be expected to draw consistently in such a creatively fucked company?


----------



## DesolationRow

Starbuck said:


> I think I've figured it out lol. This is Vince's ultimate revenge for Trips marrying Stephanie. He's doing everything in his power to ensure that he inherits a seemingly dying product lol. Then he'll look up from hell and watch as it all disintegrates with a great big smile on his face.


Ha... I wonder how much of this purported power struggle between Kevin Dunn and Triple H/Stephanie is actually true. It could be a reasonable explanation for why the company has seemed to be in a kind of state of constant turmoil these past, oh, eight months or so. 

The funny/sad thing is, Vince McMahon is absolutely batshit insane and seems to really think he's going to live forever, perpetually holding the power of running WWE. I legitimately wonder if he'll ever truly "let go" to Triple H and Stephanie.


----------



## GillbergReturns

DesolationRow said:


> Well, the first hour averaged almost 100,000 viewers more than the second hour, which leads me to believe that HBK/Trips was, not surprisingly, a beast coming out of the starting gate. I wouldn't be surprised if they started with a 3.5/3.6 rating or so for that.
> 
> The real kicker to all of this is that WWE--from a ratings perspective, anyway--had a fairly solid game plan in having a bunch of Rock skits mapped out for the whole show, Cena's three-minute and change "empty arena" promo hitting at the very beginning of the fourth quarter, etceteras. I think what would really hurt is if they just had static ratings throughout the night, with only occasional major drops here and there, following the inevitable dropoff from HBK/Trips. Because that would indicate that the product/brand itself is not drawing very well at all, and that they're literally maxing out at a certain level of viewership.
> 
> Problem with that theory is that most of the Raw audience is so conditioned to knowing that QH1, QH5 and the final quarter hour-to-the-overrun are all that really matter, so all of WWE's maneuvers were very likely for naught.
> 
> One thing is obvious, the Streak rematch has many people's imaginations. Jericho/Punk, based on last week, anyway, seems to be capturing a lot of excitement. It's fairly evident that Rock/Cena is hemorrhaging excitement right now. There's only one thing to do, get three chairs and Jim Ross and have them cut the most realistic-but-not-kayfabe-breaking promo against one another, ala Austin/Rock with JR leading into WM X-7. JR could talk about how he signed both guys, etceteras. Give this damned thing some weight and depth. Oh well, guess we'll be having concerts instead.


I actually think the reality to the feud is killing it because instead of working together to build interesting segments you have 2 guys looking to embarrass each other with points nobody really cares about anyways.

I don't think any sort of promo can save this feud. It's time to throw down because there's nothing left to talk about.

They need to ditch the reality stuff and focus on Cena needing the victory to secure his legacy as the future of the company. People want to see an aggressiveness out of Cena not more campiness.

Rock hurt himself with his promo at Mania and the whole birthday episode. The buzz from his return wore off and people are just waiting for him to back to Hollywood. It's sad but true.


----------



## DesolationRow

*Mister Hands* is right. Harrison Ford was a huge movie star but _The Fugitive_ became a big hit in large part because it was well-directed, well-acted and well-written. Tommy Lee Jones became a draw himself, in his own right, because he was so impeccably cast and he gave such a terrific performance. 

Like Triple H in late 2004/early 2005. He was a huge wrestling star but the Evolution Disintegration/Batista Rebellion Angle became a big hit in large part because it was well-presented, well-acted and well-written. Batista became a draw himself, because he was so impeccably cast and gave such a terrific performance. 

WWE needs more _Fugitives_.


----------



## Starbuck

DesolationRow said:


> Ha... I wonder how much of this purported power struggle between Kevin Dunn and Triple H/Stephanie is actually true. It could be a reasonable explanation for why the company has seemed to be in a kind of state of constant turmoil these past, oh, eight months or so.
> 
> The funny/sad thing is, Vince McMahon is absolutely batshit insane and seems to really think he's going to live forever, perpetually holding the power of running WWE. I legitimately wonder if he'll ever truly "let go" to Triple H and Stephanie.


There's a Dunn/Levesque power struggle? I don't know much about that.

What's even funnier is that Vince isn't the only one who believes that. I've heard both HHH and Steph say it it too lol.


----------



## Marv95

> There's only one thing to do, get three chairs and Jim Ross and have them cut the most realistic-but-not-kayfabe-breaking promo against one another, ala Austin/Rock with JR leading into WM X-7. JR could talk about how he signed both guys, etceteras. Give this damned thing some weight and depth.


Or just have an all-out brawl between the 2 sometime before Mania. For two guys who have legit beef towards one another a lack of physicality is lame an unrealistic.

Either have Rock lose his cool after being "shown up" week after week, or have Rock get personal with Cena and actually _bury_ him to the point where Cena finally gets fazed and you got a brawl. Screw being professional, time to get real.


----------



## ThePhenomRises

BTW who tells Cena to act like a retard? Creative?

If it's his own idea, he's got the most screwed up and stupid wrestling mind in history..... *history*.


----------



## Mister Hands

DesolationRow said:


> *Mister Hands* is right. Harrison Ford was a huge movie star but _The Fugitive_ became a big hit in large part because it was well-directed, well-acted and well-written. Tommy Lee Jones became a draw himself, in his own right, because he was so impeccably cast and he gave such a terrific performance.
> 
> Like Triple H in late 2004/early 2005. He was a huge wrestling star but the Evolution Disintegration/Batista Rebellion Angle became a big hit in large part because it was well-presented, well-acted and well-written. Batista became a draw himself, because he was so impeccably cast and gave such a terrific performance.
> 
> WWE needs more _Fugitives_.


And Wesley Snipes didn't benefit just becuase he was in _US Marshals_ (that was notionally a sequel, right?) with Tommy Lee Jones. I feel like that's significant, but I have no idea how or why.


----------



## DesolationRow

GillbergReturns said:


> I actually think the reality to the feud is killing it because instead of working together to build interesting segments you have 2 guys looking to embarrass each other with points nobody really cares about anyways.
> 
> I don't think any sort of promo can save this feud. It's time to throw down because there's nothing left to talk about.
> 
> They need to ditch the reality stuff and focus on Cena needing the victory to secure his legacy as the future of the company. People want to see an aggressiveness out of Cena not more campiness.
> 
> Rock hurt himself with his promo at Mania and the whole birthday episode. The buzz from his return wore off and people are just waiting for him to back to Hollywood. It's sad but true.


I understand what you're saying and I agree. As soon as I wrote "realistic" or whatever I realized I had utilized the wrong word. I just meant "realistic" in the way the Austin/Rock conversation was, and how, in a way, Cena's lone promo last night in an empty arena was. I agree with what you're saying about Cena, too. Enough with the laughing and smiling. I just wish they weren't doing this stupid concert crap next week, it's going to be more of the same. Maybe it'll end with a Rock Bottom somehow, but, eh. I do agree that Rock's luster has been worn down through this, that and the other.


----------



## DesolationRow

Mister Hands said:


> And Wesley Snipes didn't benefit just becuase he was in _US Marshals_ (that was notionally a sequel, right?) with Tommy Lee Jones. I feel like that's significant, but I have no idea how or why.


Wesley Snipes was too black to be given the right kind of push. 

And, yes, _US Marshals_ was quite the step down from _The Fugitive_.


----------



## Stad

Rock316AE said:


> Awesome, fuck this company, these morons didn't even tell the audience that Rock is going to be there on their main show! I hope it gets lower every week until USA will throw their pathetic program from their network.


:bron3


----------



## Starbuck

Mister Hands said:


> I agree with what you and DesolationRow are saying (Rock/Cena _should_ be drawing more, no matter whether you care about such things or not, and I stubbornly refuse to ), but you're phrasing that question wrong. Cena, Punk, Ryder, et al aren't expected to be drawing those numbers for Over The Limit; it'd be nice if they did, but no one's expecting it. Rocky, Trips/Taker, these are all desperate attempts to use _something_ to spike an obscene rating. A RTWM rating. Which they drew the last two years, as DesoRow said. They drew that in 2010 without Rock and without the grand returns of Trips and Taker. I don't have the numbers, and I don't care to look for them, but I assume that after WM, the ratings dropped right back down to normal, just like we'd be expecting Rocky, Trips, Taker and Shawn all toddle off post-WM.
> 
> Now they can't even get that temporary spike. Something is rotten in the state of WWE.
> 
> But if Rocky's return was an experiment, the conclusion is that WWE's problem isn't a lack of individual draws. It's something more systemic than that. He drew well enough last WM when his return was red fucking hot, but it's been a very literal case of diminishing returns - Survivor Series' buyrate was good, but not as good everyone perhaps hoped or expected, and we blamed it on the diastrous handling of the Awesome Truth feud. RTWM has been unflattering, to say the least, and the blame is being laid at the handling of the Rock/Cena feud.
> 
> Similarly, when Punk was red fucking hot, they spiked a buyrate for MITB. Then they brought him back waaayyyyy too soon to get interest for Summerslam. Then it just tails off, and we blame it on his getting lost in that Nash/Trips/Del Rio/Miz/whatever quagmire that no one could figure out.
> 
> I'm guessing the numbers would look similar for the Nexus' run in 2010 if I could be arsed looking for it.
> 
> They've been able to spike ratings before when they made things interesting. They've - somehow - made Rocky/Cena _uninteresting_ to the people it should be specifically capturing. So the most important question isn't why isn't Rocky drawing, or why isn't WM drawing, or why won't Punk, Cena and Ryder draw. It's how the fuck can _anyone_ be expected to draw consistently in such a creatively fucked company?


I agree with all of this. I was just making the point that if they can't hit 5 million with the star power they do have right now, what the hell are the numbers going to look like in 2/3 months time when all those names are gone? Nothings going to change overnight. WWE's problems are deeply rooted in creative, developmental, commentary, you name it. They need a complete overhaul. But you would think that they would at least have a band-aid in the likes of Rock/HHH/Taker/Cena etc appearing on the RTWM. Seems like they don't even have that anymore.


----------



## DesolationRow

Starbuck said:


> There's a Dunn/Levesque power struggle? I don't know much about that.


That's the rumor. Supposedly, Dunn disliked/distrusted Sheamus, and that was one reason Sheamus was jobbed out for a while a year ago. Triple H had endorsed Sheamus, but Dunn reportedly used pay-per-view buyrates with Sheamus headlining in 2010 as evidence for why they couldn't trust him with "the ball," and was instrumental behind jobbing him out. There was also talk of how Sheamus needed to re-sign with them, too. Anyway, the Dunn/Levesque power struggle _supposedly_ encompasses many matters in WWE today, with Dunn leading Vince more toward the "sports entertainment" avenue and Levesque emphasizing all-around solid talents, etceteras. I don't know how much truth, if any, there is in this but like I said, it could be a possible explanation for why WWE's product has been so largely shaky these past few months.



Marv95 said:


> Or just have an all-out brawl between the 2 sometime before Mania. For two guys who have legit beef towards one another a lack of physicality is lame an unrealistic.
> 
> Either have Rock lose his cool after being "shown up" week after week, or have Rock get personal with Cena and actually _bury_ him to the point where Cena finally gets fazed and you got a brawl. Screw being professional, time to get real.


They certainly need to "up" the intensity. The Hell in a Cell match is currently leaving Rock/Cena in the dust.


----------



## Starbuck

DesolationRow said:


> That's the rumor. Supposedly, Dunn disliked/distrusted Sheamus, and that was one reason Sheamus was jobbed out for a while a year ago. Triple H had endorsed Sheamus, but Dunn reportedly used pay-per-view buyrates with Sheamus headlining in 2010 as evidence for why they couldn't trust him with "the ball," and was instrumental behind jobbing him out. There was also talk of how Sheamus needed to re-sign with them, too. Anyway, the Dunn/Levesque power struggle _supposedly_ encompasses many matters in WWE today, with Dunn leading Vince more toward the "sports entertainment" avenue and Levesque emphasizing all-around solid talents, etceteras. I don't know how much truth, if any, there is in this but like I said, it could be a possible explanation for why WWE's product has been so largely shaky these past few months.


Hmmm. I've heard of the Seamus stuff but not to that extent. Didn't know it went deeper than that either. I guess when you look at the whole thing together it does provide a plausible reason for the utter shambles WWE has become as of late. Two opposing sides fighting for two different things with a damn lunatic in the middle lol. What we see on TV every week is the outcome.


----------



## Green Light

Is it fair to say that the interest in this Rock/Cena program is gone? It doesn't surprise me at all, the angle they have gone with it is fucking stupid. "Reality era" clearly is not resonating with fans, people want to see entertaining larger than life characters, not petty one-upping shoot promos


----------



## Carcass

Was the RAW after the Royal Rumble the only time they got over 5 million?


----------



## Starbuck

They've got over it for some individual segments but for the overall show? I don't know. You'll have to go look back through the thread and see.


----------



## DesolationRow

Starbuck said:


> Hmmm. I've heard of the Seamus stuff but not to that extent. Didn't know it went deeper than that either. I guess when you look at the whole thing together it does provide a plausible reason for the utter shambles WWE has become as of late. *Two opposing sides fighting for two different things with a damn lunatic in the middle lol. What we see on TV every week is the outcome.*


Haha, sounds like we get to see the outcome of a Shakespearean tragedy every week, LOL. 



Green Light said:


> Is it fair to say that the interest in this Rock/Cena program is gone? It doesn't surprise me at all, the angle they have gone with it is fucking stupid. "Reality era" clearly is not resonating with fans, people want to see entertaining larger than life characters, not petty one-upping shoot promos


Indeed. *Starbuck* and I have both frequently dismissed the whole concept of "owning" someone in a promo as the end-all of everything, like in that thread last week on the Jericho/Punk promo. Perhaps Cena actually subscribes to this terrible outlook? 



Carcass said:


> Was the RAW after the Royal Rumble the only time they got over 5 million?


Mmm... I think so. And of course that was because everyone wanted to see the aftermath of Daniel Bryan retaining in the cage match with the two giants.


----------



## Mister Hands

DesolationRow said:


> Mmm... I think so. And of course that was because everyone wanted to see the aftermath of Daniel Bryan retaining in the cage match with the two giants.


Speaking of whom, it might be interesting post-WM to compare ratings patterns of Rocky Raws with Starless Smackdown.


----------



## Starbuck

DesolationRow said:


> Haha, sounds like we get to see the outcome of a Shakespearean *tragedy* every week, LOL.


Now there's a nice descriptive term for current day WWE, no? Lol.


----------



## kokepepsi

3.2
According to f4wonline


----------



## GillbergReturns

Mister Hands said:


> Speaking of whom, it might be interesting post-WM to compare ratings patterns of Rocky Raws with Starless Smackdown.


Smackdown gets 60% the audience that Raw gets. Their rating might go up but they have the potential to do that because it's a smaller market compared to Raw.


----------



## sideon

Green Light said:


> Is it fair to say that the interest in this Rock/Cena program is gone? It doesn't surprise me at all, the angle they have gone with it is fucking stupid. "Reality era" clearly is not resonating with fans, people want to see entertaining larger than life characters, not petty one-upping shoot promos


*Yep they pretty much ruined the main angle for Mania, and it'll be interesting to see how the ratings look from now to Mania.*


----------



## WWE

I might be making assumptions, but didn't Rock316AE say Rock = ratings?

dafuq?


----------



## Nuski

Green Light said:


> Is it fair to say that the interest in this Rock/Cena program is gone? It doesn't surprise me at all, the angle they have gone with it is fucking stupid. "Reality era" clearly is not resonating with fans, people want to see entertaining larger than life characters, not petty one-upping shoot promos


Yup. No matter how much people on here love it, it's not what the company needs.


----------



## The Hardcore Show

Cycloneon said:


> I might be making assumptions, but didn't Rock316AE say Rock = ratings?
> 
> dafuq?


You have to blame both Rock & Cena here no one cares about this feud anymore it seems. If WWE can't get these ratings up to the upper threes the next few weeks this Wrestlemania may not get the million buys Vince is looking for and if that happens the egg will be on both The Rock & John Cena's faces.


----------



## Rock316AE

Cycloneon said:


> I might be making assumptions, but didn't Rock316AE say Rock = ratings?
> 
> dafuq?


Even a ratings god like Rock can't overcome the worst roster of all time in the coldest period in wrestling history with a top guy that doesn't understand the basic of this business. In fact, amazingly Rock did it last year but they drove away all of them as expected. Just like they did after the Rumble. I'm happy to see the numbers, maybe now Vince will think on more desperate attempts to get Cena over.


----------



## The Hardcore Show

Modern said:


> Yup. No matter how much people on here love it, it's not what the company needs.


Than what would do with Cena try to give the rub to someone like Cody Rhodes?


----------



## CNB

For a show so dedicated to Rock/Cena & Trips/Taker W/HBK. The rating was very shit.

Invest more time in your fucking title matches WWE. Or else I'll join the 2-3 million people that have already stopped watching your shit.

If the ratings are so low during WrestleMania season W/O football, get ready for the Summer when the product is plodding around. It will be 2.5-3.0. WCW territory. 

No Rock, Taker, HBK, Jericho, Triple H to help add star power on the brand. It will solely rely on Punk, Cena, Orton and Rey Mysterio *if he ever returns*.

WWE is screwed.


----------



## kokepepsi

Rock316AE said:


> Even a ratings god like Rock can't overcome the worst roster of all time in the coldest period in wrestling history with a top guy that doesn't understand the basic of this business. In fact, amazingly Rock did it last year but they drove away all of them as expected. Just like they did after the Rumble. I'm happy to see the numbers, maybe now Vince will think on more desperate attempts to get Cena over.


Why is it the worst roster?
Why is this period not doing so good?

Because Creative/booking sucks. Look what they did to your home boy in the few appearances he has made......the roster has to deal with that shit all year.


----------



## WFAfan4Life

oh their not completely screwed... BUT... SANTINO had the BIGGEST pop of the night. I was there live, and I just turned it on at home, and they piped DOWN the santino chants after he won the belt... the ground was shaking in the garden, and it did not come off like that on the tv... 
to my point.. 
Santino is a character.. 
John Cena is reality.. 
we need more santino's
and LESS John Cenas... 
Can't he be the Prototype again?
Hell, I'd take thugonomics Cena over this reality crap..


----------



## Mister Hands

Green Light said:


> Is it fair to say that the interest in this Rock/Cena program is gone? It doesn't surprise me at all, the angle they have gone with it is fucking stupid. "Reality era" clearly is not resonating with fans, people want to see entertaining larger than life characters, not petty one-upping shoot promos


I don't think it's fair to conflate "reality era" with "one-upping shoot promos" (as if anything we've seen so far really counts as a shoot promo). The Punk/Jericho promo from last week was as much a product of the Reality Era, and that was absolutely fine, in content, reaction on here, and in ratings. MITB was the very genesis of the Reality Era, and that was a huge interest spike, and one of the most creatively promising times in the last few years.

But you're absolutely right that it's the wrong angle for Cena/Rock, at least in this incarnation.


----------



## DesolationRow

There's only one thing WWE can do now. As you can see by those quarter hours from the early fall, Mason Ryan = RATINGZ!!!!!111

Give him a Lesnar push, make Cole his manager and have him destroy that indy janitor guy from the Waffle House at Summerslam. 

Who cares if he maims or kills a bunch of guys between April and August? WWE needs the RATINGSZ!!!!!111

:|


----------



## Brye

I just want to hear some honest ideas on how WWE can change the ratings within their power.


----------



## Carcass

They should move Daniel Bryan and Henry over to RAW, turn one face and have them feud over the title. They'll be back in the 5.0 area in not time. There's been reports that the reason they scrapped that match for WM is they didn't want them outshine the rest of the big matches.


----------



## Starbuck

Brye said:


> I just want to hear some honest ideas on how WWE can change the ratings within their power.


People have been giving ideas all along. I don't know how many times I and others have talked about WWE's need to involve the younger stars with the older ones to get them exposure. WWE's stop-start pushes, non existent storylines, non existent midcard, non existent charcters, formulaic and dry as fuck programming. All of that is talked about all the time and how things are never going to change so long as these things stay the way they are. Stuff like this is talked about all the time in here yet it gets lost in the multitude of retarded mark wars.


----------



## GillbergReturns

Brye said:


> I just want to hear some honest ideas on how WWE can change the ratings within their power.


They had a very big opportunity that they just flat up passed on.

Shaq. Granted it's a short term spark plug but there's nothing wrong with that especially if you actually had Cena Rock and Punk Jericho rolling.

The product hasn't been that bad the last few weeks you're just not going to grow unless you get people interested in the 1st place.


----------



## Brye

Starbuck said:


> People have been giving ideas all along. I don't know how many times I and others have talked about WWE's need to involve the younger stars with the older ones to get them exposure. WWE's stop-start pushes, non existent storylines, non existent midcard, non existent charcters, formulaic and dry as fuck programming. All of that is talked about all the time and how things are never going to change so long as these things stay the way they are. Stuff like this is talked about all the time in here yet it gets lost in the multitude of retarded mark wars.


I agree with what you're saying. But when people are claiming it's the worst roster every, I can't tell if they mean the talent or the booking. Because in my eyes the talent is there. It's just that the people at the top aren't losing to the people coming up. And when the lower guys do win, it's ridiculously underhanded. The stop start pushes for heels is fucking embarrassing and the lack of storylines on Smackdown is even worse.


----------



## Green Light

The ratings around MITB weren't even high though were they? My point is that was creative story telling at its best and if that doesn't generate ratings and neither does the big names then you what else can they do


----------



## Brye

Green Light said:


> The ratings around MITB weren't even high though were they? My point is that was creative story telling at its best and if that doesn't generate ratings and neither does the big names then you what else can they do


Creative story telling was good in parts then but the midcards were still fairly awkward. I think the midcard has a bigger effect on things than people think. Same with tag teams considering any of my friends that used to watch wrestling immediately talk about how they miss the Hardys, E&C and Dudleys.


----------



## Mister Hands

I'd suggest that what WWE's creative process truly needs is either the removal of Vince's veto power, or the introduction of a Veto Vince power.


----------



## Starbuck

Brye said:


> I agree with what you're saying. But when people are claiming it's the worst roster every, I can't tell if they mean the talent or the booking. Because in my eyes the talent is there. It's just that the people at the top aren't losing to the people coming up. And when the lower guys do win, it's ridiculously underhanded. The stop start pushes for heels is fucking embarrassing and the lack of storylines on Smackdown is even worse.


It's the booking, it's the talent, it's creative, it's having an aging Vince McMahon being the sole caller of shots, it's the fucking God awful commentary that destroys everybody else to put over Michael Cole, it's the developmental system, it's the effect of no competition, it's the residual effect of the death of the territories, it's everything. Nobody is going to prosper in that environment, at least not to the degree they need them to. All this change everybody keeps talking about, none of it is going to mean anything if the root of the problem isn't solved first. CM Punk can scream about being and brining change until he's blue in the face but if the rest of the company isn't prepared to move with him, it's all for nought.


----------



## The Hardcore Show

Starbuck said:


> It's the booking, it's the talent, it's creative, it's having an aging Vince McMahon being the sole caller of shots, it's the fucking God awful commentary that destroys everybody else to put over Michael Cole, it's the developmental system, it's the effect of no competition, it's the residual effect of the death of the territories, it's everything. Nobody is going to prosper in that environment, at least not to the degree they need them to. All this change everybody keeps talking about, none of it is going to mean anything if the root of the problem isn't solved first. CM Punk can scream about being and brining change until he's blue in the face but if the rest of the company isn't prepared to move with him, it's all for nought.


I think the best thing for WWE is for this Wrestlemania to flop and flop hard. If they only bring in say 300,000-450,000 buys it would wake Vince up big time.


----------



## Brye

Starbuck said:


> It's the booking, it's the talent, it's creative, it's having an aging Vince McMahon being the sole caller of shots, it's the fucking God awful commentary that destroys everybody else to put over Michael Cole, it's the developmental system, it's the effect of no competition, it's the residual effect of the death of the territories, it's everything. Nobody is going to prosper in that environment, at least not to the degree they need them to. All this change everybody keeps talking about, none of it is going to mean anything if the root of the problem isn't solved first. CM Punk can scream about being and brining change until he's blue in the face but if the rest of the company isn't prepared to move with him, it's all for nought.


Commentary is a big fucking problem. And it's even worse that Stanford and Striker are both great at their job and being left off for people with no chemistry together and no chemistry because of this Cole bullshit. They're purposely making the booth blow. I like the developmental system though. There's alot of promising guys down in FCW.

I still think the roster has the talent, but they need more bookers and less writers. Still needs some writers but less of them. Like whoever the fuck was that thought one of the more talented divas needed a farting gimmick should be axed.


----------



## KiNgoFKiNgS23

there is more people watching this show than the go home show for wm17 and that's one of the best buyrates they've ever done. people really need to stop overreacting to these numbers until they see what the buyrate is.


----------



## DesolationRow

They need JR back signing talent and they need Heyman back developing talent. Or at least suitable replacements for each guy. Vince needs to chill out and either decide to focus on white whales like the WWE Network and where the next Wrestlemania will be and leave the week-to-week, month-to-month product to those who aren't burned out and indecisive as hell or at least no longer hold such singular sway over everything. We'll probably never know how many potentially arresting angles, storylines, characters, etceteras, were about to be launched and/or continued strongly but were killed off in the crib by Vince McMahon. His obsession over ratings every single week is a long-term detriment. It's almost cruelly hilarious that after all of his massaging of the product, all of his moves, all of his big "gets" and realized dreams, he's staring at 4.6 million viewers tuning in for the first March Raw a month before Wrestlemania. Maybe it would have been better to stick it out with rough ratings six months ago rather than allow the Summer of Punk/"Conspiracy" arc to mutate into an unwieldy monster, or not opt to needlessly have ADR and Cena play hot potato with your most coveted prize back then. The writers are guilty, too, though. Not to brag but I could literally think up a dramatically better scenario for Rock involving himself in the Cena/Awesome Truth struggle in the fall standing on my head and given 30 seconds to pull it out of my ass than WWE creative did, and I know for a fact a number of posters here could, too. Of course, when you have a grievously flawed angle, it becomes difficult to branch out of that. Awesome Truth/Cena never made any sense because the former heel tag team was at the center of the "Conspiracy" which was never paid off. I can only guess how many wrestling fans felt burned by the entire storyline, and the awkward transition into Survivor Series with Punk meekly going back to the original post-Summerslam arc of Del Rio stealing the championship from him as Cena dealt with Awesome Truth (why? what was the connection between them, Laurinaitis and Del Rio?) leading to Rock returning doubtless hurt everything that grew out of it. 

But I agree with *Starbuck* and *Brye*. The commentary issue is continually underrated as a source of product devastation. I miss the Matt Striker on commentary on Smackdown who would do his best to get guys over. *Brye*'s right, WWE's announcing heirarchy is ass-backward, with the most unhelpful announcer placed as the irreplaceable pinnacle and the hungriest, best guys made into outcasts stationed on NXT and Superstars. All the while Josh Matthews--who once, long ago (about a year and a half ago or less), demonstrated a hunger, willingness to be enthusiastic and present his own attitude, characteristics and desire to put the talent over while having a natural chemistry with Michael Cole--has been quickly molded into boring, cog-in-the-machine Straight Man for Cole. Lawler's expiration date is very far back in the rear view mirror. Why he's still where he is remains a mystery to me. 

I also want to see the more notable talent in street clothes again. As with costuming in a film, the clothes can make the man; it's so easy to translate what a character is all about when you see them wear what they would wear away from the ring rather than their wrestling gear. That was a beautiful trademark of the Batista heel run, as he and WWE came up with some fabulous wardrobe choices that gave the audience an open window through which you could be instantly informed from where he was coming. Having your world champions show up in their street clothes, for instance, with the full knowledge that they aren't competing on Raw or Smackdown this week, sheds light on who they are, makes them appear to be important and does not overexpose them in wrestling matches every single week. CM Punk and especially Daniel Bryan could certainly use that sort of treatment going into Wrestlemania. Sheamus with that unique look away from the ring back around the time of his feud with Triple H allowed the audience to understand him better, too, and while that look would probably be rightly modified today as a face, it couldn't harm him any, either. 

There are a bunch of individuals on the roster who have more than enough talent. In many instances, it comes down to being treated like stars by WWE. Possessing a functional midcard would be an immense improvement, too. Take Wade Barrett on Smackdown in 2011. Rather than have him slowly climb up the ranks of the Smackdown midcard, he practically went from "jobber" one week to conveyor of the "Barrett Barrage" the next. Within three weeks, he was suddenly in a match with Smackdown's top face at the time, Randy Orton. And we were all supposed to take him seriously as a threat, even though all he'd done in the interim was defeat Justin Gabriel a week after taking a tag team loss to him, and Daniel Bryan, who at the time was rarely even on Smackdown to begin with. Why? No substantial midcard.


----------



## Brye

The street clothes thing is a really good point. It did sort of add to promos when guys like Trips, Orton, Batista, etc were in suits. It makes you feel like they're not just gonna be rushed into a match in 3 minutes.

Another great post Deso.


----------



## Marv95

KiNgoFKiNgS23 said:


> there is more people watching this show than the go home show for wm17 and that's one of the best buyrates they've ever done. people really need to stop overreacting to these numbers until they see what the buyrate is.


The go home show for X7 did a 4.7 against the final Nitro. Unless I'm mistaken(and I might be) a 4.7 is higher than a 3.2 against...


----------



## KiNgoFKiNgS23

Marv95 said:


> The go home show for X7 did a 4.7 against the final Nitro. Unless I'm mistaken(and I might be) a 4.7 is higher than a 3.2 against...


the show *after* WM17 averaged 4.58 million viewers(corporate.wwe.com has it as the *record* for tnn at that time) so therefore the go home show for WMX7 was less than that. raw last night averaged over 4.6 million people. IIRC 4.6 mill > 4.5 mill. correct me if the math is wrong tho.


----------



## The Hardcore Show

Brye said:


> The street clothes thing is a really good point. It did sort of add to promos when guys like Trips, Orton, Batista, etc were in suits. It makes you feel like they're not just gonna be rushed into a match in 3 minutes.
> 
> Another great post Deso.


I wonder why WWE stopped doing that.


----------



## DesolationRow

Brye said:


> The street clothes thing is a really good point. It did sort of add to promos when guys like Trips, Orton, Batista, etc were in suits. It makes you feel like they're not just gonna be rushed into a match in 3 minutes.
> 
> Another great post Deso.


Thanks.

To give them their due, I liked the way they had Miz rock his suits. While it's accurate that Miz _sort of_ took that template from Jericho, frankly it's always felt considerably different because whereas Jericho wears conservative suits in a conservative manner, Miz has had outlandish, colorful attire to highlight his "celebrity." 

I really hope they breathe some new life into him, perhaps as soon as this next Raw in his home city. Whether it be a face turn, a new aggression, whatever. Whatever you think of him, it just seems wrong to continuously undermine the most recent new kid on the block in the sphere of Wrestlemania main events. I'm sure they'll zap him back to life at one point or another but the principle of it is actually more irritating to me than anything else. It's like saying that Daniel Bryan could be in Miz's place one year from now--in fact, it's certainly saying that, since Bryan's push and overall treatment by WWE, while very generous, isn't close to what Miz had behind him going into last year's 'Mania.


----------



## Brye

The Hardcore Show said:


> I wonder why WWE stopped doing that.


I think WWE started liking the whole "just wear your own merch" idea.



DesolationRow said:


> Thanks.
> 
> To give them their due, I liked the way they had Miz rock his suits. While it's accurate that Miz _sort of_ took that template from Jericho, frankly it's always felt considerably different because whereas Jericho wears conservative suits in a conservative manner, Miz has had outlandish, colorful attire to highlight his "celebrity."
> 
> I really hope they breathe some new life into him, perhaps as soon as this next Raw in his home city. Whether it be a face turn, a new aggression, whatever. Whatever you think of him, it just seems wrong to continuously undermine the most recent new kid on the block in the sphere of Wrestlemania main events. I'm sure they'll zap him back to life at one point or another but the principle of it is actually more irritating to me than anything else. It's like saying that Daniel Bryan could be in Miz's place one year from now--in fact, it's certainly saying that, since Bryan's push and overall treatment by WWE, while very generous, isn't close to what Miz had behind him going into last year's 'Mania.


I don't mind Miz. He's never been a favorite of mine but I also didn't have a problem with his title reign and it was a fairly long one. I don't understand his treatment at the moment unless it's something to do with that R-Truth situation. I agree on his style though. He gave himself a good look.

Evolution was great with that. They need more 'high class' sort of heels that dress like that. Barrett or McIntyre could work.


----------



## The Tony

:lmao at the rating. Not surprised. The overall product is a joke.


----------



## Marv95

KiNgoFKiNgS23 said:


> the show *after* WM17 averaged 4.58 million viewers(corporate.wwe.com has it as the *record* for tnn at that time) so therefore the go home show for WMX7 was less than that. raw last night averaged over 4.6 million people. IIRC 4.6 mill > 4.5 mill. correct me if the math is wrong tho.


Strange, got my info from this: http://www.twnpnews.com/information/wweraw2001.shtmland this: http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2001-ratings/ So a 5.7=just over 4 and a half million viewers?


----------



## DesolationRow

I liked McIntyre's slacks and dress shirt phase back when we were supposed to take him seriously. It sucks how such a talented worker has become such a footnote.


----------



## Rock316AE

KiNgoFKiNgS23 said:


> the show *after* WM17 averaged 4.58 million viewers(corporate.wwe.com has it as the *record* for tnn at that time) so therefore the go home show for WMX7 was less than that. raw last night averaged over 4.6 million people. IIRC 4.6 mill > 4.5 mill. correct me if the math is wrong tho.


It's not, it's households, not actual viewers.


----------



## Brye

DesolationRow said:


> I liked McIntyre's slacks and dress shirt phase back when we were supposed to take him seriously. It sucks how such a talented worker has become such a footnote.


He was such a good worker. Took down the body parts, used everything to his advantage and I didn't think he was bad on the mic. Nothing mindblowing but watchable. I'm worried he'll ever make it back up at this point.


----------



## The Tony

Brye said:


> He was such a good worker. Took down the body parts, used everything to his advantage and I didn't think he was bad on the mic. *Nothing mindblowing but watchable*. I'm worried he'll ever make it back up at this point.


The entire WWE product right now is barely watchable wich is why the ratings sucks.


----------



## Brye

Tony316 said:


> The entire WWE product right now is barely watchable wich is why the ratings sucks.


Completely disagree but to each his own.


----------



## KiNgoFKiNgS23

> It's not, it's households, not actual viewers.


so what's the difference between how ratings are gathered between now and then?


----------



## Rock316AE

KiNgoFKiNgS23 said:


> so what's the difference between how ratings are gathered between now and then?


The overall number of households at that time and the availability of the network, for example, USA and TNN/Spike has different standards, that's why rating went down with the move in 2000 and went up with the move in 2005.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

They got the talent, they just need better material and direction IMO.


----------



## JasonLives

Im suprised the viewership was that low. I didnt expect any big number but not like that. 

The Rock is not the same draw he once was, people just has to understand that. I said it last week aswell, its the same when Hogan went to TNA. It did big at first but it fell after that. The Rock is nostalgia, and you can only go so far on that. None of the Attitude Era guys draw big these days, not in the long run.

And at this point I think people just want the actual match to take place. 
But the main problem with The Rock/Cena is that there is nothing major on the line. I still dont feel why the match is so important for both men.

If they wanna pop a rating the coming week, they need to make the next show feel like "must see". When Raw has ended for the last couple of weeks, there hasent been that feeling. So far the main feuds have been very respectfull, its a lot of talking. No sneakattacks, no brawls, no nothing.


----------



## InkL

DesolationRow said:


> It is almost truly indescribable how much WWE, John Cena and to a lesser extent The Rock have all seemingly conspired to ruin what should have been the biggest, most important feud the WWE had seen since Batista/Triple H. I'm blaming The Rock some because of the Portland Promo. I'm blaming Cena for his typical bullshit. And I say typical bullshit because this isn't exactly the first time he's shrugged off an opponent going into what should have been a mega-match. The final Raw before Wrestlemania XXVI, he actually undid all of the build-up (which at that time was very, _very_ good) between he and Batista, saying he no longer saw the Animal but just Dave Batista and he knew he could beat Batista. Turned out, he more or less obliterated Batista in their feud, which wasn't by itself a bad booking decision since Batista was leaving but the feud was never quite the same. It became much worse after the duct tape incident at Extreme Rules. Then there was his shtick the week before TLC 2010, which demonstrated just how far the Nexus angle had sunk. Cena was sure he was going to win, he was going to crush Wade Barrett... and he did. Then there was last year's Wrestlemania build. For the first several weeks after Elimination Chamber, he made juvenile jokes about The Miz and Alex Riley. He and Rock continued their promo wars while Miz had to carry the actual present feud. Then there was the entire Survivor Series 2011 build-up fiasco, in which he singlehandedly crushed Awesome Truth like a couple of ants, belittled them and never took them remotely seriously. Now he's doing it with The Rock. I guess we can't overstate whatever CM Punk had to impress John Cena because he's essentially been the only individual as of late to escape this sort of treatment from Cena. (I'm not even counting Kane since it was filler but I'll be damned if that feud didn't have more depth to it at certain points than Rock/Cena does at this time.) But WWE deserves the most amount of blame.


I dont understand Why people blame John cena for such things. He is the top babyface of the company, this is what top babyfaces do. What about hulk hogan in the 80s? HE ALWAYS WON. What about Steve austin? Most of austin's feuds were one sided infavour of austin and in the actual match, he pins them clean. 

All this hate on cena is unfair.(N)


----------



## The Hardcore Show

InkL said:


> I dont understand Why people blame John cena for such things. He is the top babyface of the company, this is what top babyfaces do. What about hulk hogan in the 80s? HE ALWAYS WON. What about Steve austin? Most of austin's feuds were one sided infavour of austin and in the actual match, he pins them clean.
> 
> All this hate on cena is unfair.(N)


It has nothing to do with winning Cena makes a joke out of everyone he faces. Hogan & Austin never did that. They actually understood the business.


----------



## DesolationRow

InkL said:


> I dont understand Why people blame John cena for such things. He is the top babyface of the company, this is what top babyfaces do. What about hulk hogan in the 80s? HE ALWAYS WON. What about Steve austin? Most of austin's feuds were one sided infavour of austin and in the actual match, he pins them clean.
> 
> All this hate on cena is unfair.(N)


Reading comprehension will help you in life.

Cena coming out on top and winning on a highly frequent basis has never annoyed me. (I think.) I've actually given him a lot of credit for putting guys over (much more liberally than either Hogan or Austin, for that matter). Recently treating 80-90% of his opponents like a joke, however, is simply harmful for everyone. For Cena, it means winning accrues him less, because, after all, the guy he went over didn't really pose much of a threat anyway, and for the other guy, it generally tends to make him look like crap with next to no credibility at the main event level.


----------



## Ray

Red rep me all you want for it not being related to the thread. I don't really care. But if you haven't already, you need to watch this.


----------



## PunkDrunk

rock is more popular than hes ever been, thats why hes in hollywood and not a full time wrestler. wrestling sucks right now, rock returns and we have no sellers and haters galore. This will only get worse, wrestling and its fans have lost the performance art aspect of wrestling to the point that 40 raws out of the year have a mundane, predictable tag match with zero intensity..,yet were arguing why nobody watches. if hhh v taker wasnt happening and rock stayed away (2 years ago youd have argued takers age, hollywood star etc) i wouldnt even watch mania. i never thought id say it but this roster holds no interest for me, too much ring work and not enough charisma is killing it. throwing the rock in when the horse has bolted aint solving anything. ho hum... cena v miz v adr v punk at over the limit sure sounds like fun.. again. as it will next year... again. maybe raw will draft orton so hell face cena... again. well at least rock was put in his place, well done haters in the back


----------



## wb1899

KiNgoFKiNgS23 said:


> so what's the difference between how ratings are gathered between now and then?


The number of household they need to get 1 point changes every Nielsen-Season (in August).
But these household ratings are irrelevant today. Only the viewership numbers (total, demos and C3) are important.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

So Cena V Rock to be regulated to opening dark match at WM which midway turns into a battle royal with The Great Khali winning due to dissapionting numbers for the feud. All the while Punk V Jericho to get 30 mins in the 2 hour piont on the show, and then the epic HIAC match to mainevent because clearly thats what people are invested in.


----------



## lisa12000

I think one of my huge problems with Rock and Cena is that their seemingly real life differences are being played out on camera; There are 2 many reports out there now suggesting real life beef so to me no smoke without fire; Now assumng this is the case (and if its not then Cena should go to hollywood as well)then i feel like this has got in the way of business; There is far too many personal feelings in these promos, too many times where the purpose is to embarrass on a personal level rather than just to advance the feud and the fact it is due to real life beef sometimes makes it really uncomfortable to watch; Its like they are working to purposely destroy and momentum they had, rather than working together to give us a great storyline; Its like watching 2 kids in a playground trading personal insults just to get at each other and ive got to the point where i dont want to hear them talk anymore, i just want them to punch each other and get it out their system

The reverse of this, is Taker/HHH/HBK; the intensity of the promos, the storyline, but mostly the fact theyre working together within the storyline to give us something we can invest in; This has had the reverse effect to Rock/Cena; Its taken something that no one was interested in seeing again, and made it for me the most anticipated match on the card!!!

All this to say, i am not surprised at all the ratings have remained static!! Rock/Cena has managed to lose all momentum, have destoryed this feud between them and i, for one, cant wait for it to be over and hopefully they move on to other things

OR it could all be a work, even if its a shit one, and i may look very very foolish thinking its got a base in personal feelings


----------



## D.M.N.

DesolationRow said:


> *Mister Hands* is right. Harrison Ford was a huge movie star but _The Fugitive_ became a big hit in large part because it was well-directed, well-acted and well-written. Tommy Lee Jones became a draw himself, in his own right, because he was so impeccably cast and he gave such a terrific performance.
> 
> Like Triple H in late 2004/early 2005. He was a huge wrestling star but the Evolution Disintegration/Batista Rebellion Angle became a big hit in large part because it was well-presented, well-acted and well-written. Batista became a draw himself, because he was so impeccably cast and gave such a terrific performance.
> 
> WWE needs more _Fugitives_.


And the good thing about that was you could have predicted it as far back as the previous August, once Orton left Evolution, you knew Batista was next as did the crowd, you then plant the seeds and bam, they got the big pay-off with big rating numbers. That was probably, what, road-mapped starting in late 2003. Okay, I doubt someone said back then "it's Batista/HHH main event in 2005" but you get my drift.

On the SmackDown side of things you had Cena vs JBL. JBL had been your champion for nearly a year, he had the presence on the brand. And obviously at the event Cena had his push culminate. That, again, were road-mapped back to early 2004 with Cena's US title win at the previous 'Mania.

Now fast-forward 7 years. We have Punk/Jericho and Sheamus/Bryan. Do those have the build of the above two? No. Punk _should_ have been the face of RAW since Money in the Bank holding the WWE title (obviously not on the show due to the 'firing' storyline) but he should have been holding the title, got through everyone - and then there's Jericho. Jericho wins the 'Rumble make intentions clear - and as you've built up Punk you have a great feud in the making. Yes, Punk is big now bit he is not as big as he should be.

Sheamus/Bryan. WrestleMania main event? Really? This should be Henry/Bryan, it really really should. They did _not_ need to make Henry drop the title when they did as his injury didn't keep him out for too long, that can easily be worked around with two promos. You have Bryan have a great 'Mania moment winning the title with Big Show's help and then you start the slow progression heel turn (as what happened in real life if they wanted to) as he would have been over as they wanted to see someone take down the big giant in Henry (David v Golliath) and it happened. Someone firmly over now. Sheamus should not be in the main event? Where was he 12 months ago? Ah, that's right going through a table. If anything it should be Cody more than Sheamus (who should have passed the IC title down to someone else to get a push in the same way Cena did all those years ago).

They can build stars, but then when they've been built, it's like "now what?"...


----------



## #1Peep4ever

I am disappointed. Brye, Starbuck and DesolationRow... What are you doing? I thought this was the RATINGZZ Thread..

RockAE360 delivers as usual. Rock suffers from bad booking and creative but the supposedly worst roster of all time does not... They are awful by default always screwing good storylines...

Well i cant say i am surprised by the rating, but i am interested to see the quarter hour breakdown


----------



## Hladeit

D.M.N. said:


> And the good thing about that was you could have predicted it as far back as the previous August, once Orton left Evolution, you knew Batista was next as did the crowd, you then plant the seeds and bam, they got the big pay-off with big rating numbers. That was probably, what, road-mapped starting in late 2003. Okay, I doubt someone said back then "it's Batista/HHH main event in 2005" but you get my drift.
> 
> On the SmackDown side of things you had Cena vs JBL. JBL had been your champion for nearly a year, he had the presence on the brand. And obviously at the event Cena had his push culminate. That, again, were road-mapped back to early 2004 with Cena's US title win at the previous 'Mania.
> 
> *Now fast-forward 7 years. We have Punk/Jericho and Sheamus/Bryan. Do those have the build of the above two? No. Punk should have been the face of RAW since Money in the Bank holding the WWE title (obviously not on the show due to the 'firing' storyline) but he should have been holding the title, got through everyone - and then there's Jericho. Jericho wins the 'Rumble make intentions clear - and as you've built up Punk you have a great feud in the making. Yes, Punk is big now bit he is not as big as he should be*.
> 
> Sheamus/Bryan. WrestleMania main event? Really? This should be Henry/Bryan, it really really should. They did _not_ need to make Henry drop the title when they did as his injury didn't keep him out for too long, that can easily be worked around with two promos. You have Bryan have a great 'Mania moment winning the title with Big Show's help and then you start the slow progression heel turn (as what happened in real life if they wanted to) as he would have been over as they wanted to see someone take down the big giant in Henry (David v Golliath) and it happened. Someone firmly over now. Sheamus should not be in the main event? Where was he 12 months ago? Ah, that's right going through a table. If anything it should be Cody more than Sheamus (who should have passed the IC title down to someone else to get a push in the same way Cena did all those years ago).
> 
> They can build stars, but then when they've been built, it's like "now what?"...


Disagree with that part. "Face" of show is not the top face at the time, its the superstar that draws the most viewers to the show. John Cena's immense popularity and his starpower, thanks to his intense 5 years of push, is something Punk simply can not match. Even if Cena turns heel at mania, he will remain the "face" of WWE. Besides you cant make someone the face of the show in just six months, surely not without a HUGE heel to put him over.

Agreed with Henry/Bryan, i would have loved to see Mark henry walk into mania as the world champion but i understand why they didnt go that route. Henry is pushing 40 but Sheamus is obviously the young talent being groomed, so its the right thing to do i guess. 

And Big [email protected] pushing Cody Rhodes instead of sheamus. He looks like a high school kid. 










Can anyone actually imagine this guy being the WORLD HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPION? 
Mid-card for life.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Hladeit said:


> Disagree with that part. "Face" of show is not the top face at the time, its the superstar that draws the most viewers to the show. John Cena's immense popularity and his starpower, thanks to his intense 5 years of push, is something Punk simply can not match. Even if Cena turns heel at mania, he will remain the "face" of WWE. Besides you cant make someone the face of the show in just six months, surely not without a HUGE heel to put him over.
> 
> Agreed with Henry/Bryan, i would have loved to see Mark henry walk into mania as the world champion but i understand why they didnt go that route. Henry is pushing 40 but Sheamus is obviously the young talent being groomed, so its the right thing to do i guess.
> 
> And Big [email protected] pushing Cody Rhodes instead of sheamus. He looks like a high school kid.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can anyone actually imagine this guy being the WORLD HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPION?
> Mid-card for life.


----------



## A-C-P

Ideas on improving the ratings? What a novel concept, any suggestions I would have have been covered (and covered very well) by DesRow, Starbuck and Brye. The only other thing I will add is hopefully this WM season is a wake-up call to the WWE that they need to move on from Cena as their top guy (at least only top guy that matters) and stop focusing so much on short-term ratings and focus more on long-term sucess.

Like DesRow, Starbuch, and Brye have all said its not one thing that is the BIG problem here its EVERYTHING. Creative, booking, promoting, commentray (a very underrated problem IMO as well), etc. They need a complete overhaul and "new direction" so to speak. I am hoping this RTWM has shown them this. They need a n new direaction (and I am not saying this alone will fix everything) but a great start to this drection is a MEGA HEEL TURN by John Cena.


----------



## The_Great_One21

Rating won't ever improve unless they change the product.

Does anyone honestly think The Rock could single handedly drag up rating that had been stagnent for 5 years?

The reason the attitude era got such epic ratings wasnt because of Austin, it wasnt because of Rock, it was because of how good everyone was and how they worked well together.


----------



## The_Great_One21

As for the question. Its quite clear the wrestlers draw.

If next week Rock and Austin turned up in TNA and they were main eventing, would you watch those two, or would you watch Cena vs Orton?


----------



## D.M.N.

Hladeit said:


> Disagree with that part. "Face" of show is not the top face at the time, its the superstar that draws the most viewers to the show. John Cena's immense popularity and his starpower, thanks to his intense 5 years of push, is something Punk simply can not match. Even if Cena turns heel at mania, he will remain the "face" of WWE. Besides you cant make someone the face of the show in just six months, surely not without a HUGE heel to put him over.
> 
> Agreed with Henry/Bryan, i would have loved to see Mark henry walk into mania as the world champion but i understand why they didnt go that route. Henry is pushing 40 but Sheamus is obviously the young talent being groomed, so its the right thing to do i guess.
> 
> And Big [email protected] pushing Cody Rhodes instead of sheamus. He looks like a high school kid.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can anyone actually imagine this guy being the WORLD HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPION?
> Mid-card for life.


No, but at least he has been pushed more consistently than what Sheamus has. Sheamus winning the title at WrestleMania? Doesn't really mean much, he's held it before.

As for your first bit, I was on about Cena/Batista in 2005 compared to Punk/Bryan now...


----------



## JasonLives

The_Great_One21 said:


> As for the question. Its quite clear the wrestlers draw.
> 
> If next week Rock and Austin turned up in TNA and they were main eventing, would you watch those two, or would you watch Cena vs Orton?


Well duh, but if Rock and Austin was put in the ME scene now. It wont be that long until they draw just as much as Orton, Cena etc.
Guys like Rock, Austin and Hogan are nostalgia. Just see how fast Hogan´s debut in TNA dropped, think he was up to 3 million viewers when he came out for the first time. Few weeks later the guy could barely get half of that.

Same with The Rock and Austin. They draw above the normal average now. But for them to become the MAJOR draws people are talking about, they need to be put in a good storyline.


What Raw is really lacking right now is "Must tune in TV". Wouldnt suprise me at all if this weeks Q1 isnt that impressive. Viewers werent there to begin with. Thats what they need to solve. They need to end the show on a high note. Imo end it on something other then just talking.


----------



## Brye

The_Great_One21 said:


> As for the question. Its quite clear the wrestlers draw.
> 
> If next week Rock and Austin turned up in TNA and they were main eventing, would you watch those two, or would you watch Cena vs Orton?


I would watch Raw still. TNA's booking is dreadful and if Rock/Austin was a main event in 2012, I can't imagine it being good.


----------



## InkL

The_Great_One21 said:


> As for the question. Its quite clear the wrestlers draw.
> 
> If next week Rock and Austin turned up in TNA and they were main eventing, would you watch those two, or would you watch Cena vs Orton?





JasonLives said:


> Well duh, but if Rock and Austin was put in the ME scene now. It wont be that long until they draw just as much as Orton, Cena etc.
> Guys like Rock, Austin and Hogan are nostalgia. Just see how fast Hogan´s debut in TNA dropped, think he was up to 3 million viewers when he came out for the first time. Few weeks later the guy could barely get half of that.
> 
> Same with The Rock and Austin. They draw above the normal average now. But for them to become the MAJOR draws people are talking about, they need to be put in a good storyline.
> 
> 
> What Raw is really lacking right now is "Must tune in TV". Wouldnt suprise me at all if this weeks Q1 isnt that impressive. Viewers werent there to begin with. Thats what they need to solve. They need to end the show on a high note. Imo end it on something other then just talking.



Austin is no longer a draw. He stopped being a draw in 2002. Rock has always been the bigger star and far far bigger draw.


----------



## LarryCoon

JasonLives said:


> Well duh, but if Rock and Austin was put in the ME scene now. It wont be that long until they draw just as much as Orton, Cena etc.
> Guys like Rock, Austin and Hogan are nostalgia. Just see how fast Hogan´s debut in TNA dropped, think he was up to 3 million viewers when he came out for the first time. Few weeks later the guy could barely get half of that.
> 
> Same with The Rock and Austin. They draw above the normal average now. But for them to become the MAJOR draws people are talking about, they need to be put in a good storyline.


I thought with the survivor series buyrate and recent ratings, this should've been obvious by now.


----------



## bc23

But the marks want The Rock to come back and put over a ''young star''......

[email protected] drawing


----------



## The Tony

Brye said:


> I would watch Raw still. *TNA's booking is dreadful* and if Rock/Austin was a main event in 2012, I can't imagine it being good.


There's no doubt you didn't watch the show recently.


----------



## Brye

Tony316 said:


> There's no doubt you didn't watch the show recently.


Well there should be some doubt because while I didn't watch the whole show, I watched most of it. :hb

But please, continue with your ignorance.


----------



## The Tony

Brye said:


> Well there should be some doubt because while I didn't watch the whole show, I watched most of it. :hb
> 
> But please, continue with your ignorance.


I forgot you were a WWE mark.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

3.2? Dear god thats bad. This time last year it did a 3.9. That was all tied into Rock returning after being gone for such a long time. I suppose Rock has been overexposed and his drawing power for RAW shows have wear off.

There is still 4m people watching, so they have to convince like 20% of them to buy Mania for it to draw over 1m....right?


----------



## xerxesXXI

I hope Miami voices their displeasure with the predictable outcome of the hyped-for-a-year-main-event.

Cena goes over clean and they shake hands and hug.


----------



## A-C-P

The-Rock-Says said:


> 3.2? Dear god thats bad. This time last year it did a 3.9. That was all tied into Rock returning after being gone for such a long time. I suppose Rock has been overexposed and his drawing power for RAW shows have wear off.
> 
> There is still 4m people watching, so they have to convince like 20% of them to buy Mania for it to draw over 1m....right?


Well the 4.5 million viewers is a domestic # so if they want 1,000,000 domestic US buys that would be 22% of these people.


----------



## Brye

Tony316 said:


> I forgot you were a WWE mark.


Look at the brain on Tony.

I didn't forget you're a TNA mark. And I'm actually just a mark of things I enjoy. I follow four different promotions. In 2006 and 2007, when TNA was doing it better, I liked them. And bits of '09 weren't bad.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

They'll never get 1m domestic buys. 

I don't even think they'll get 1m buys for this WM. I was right last year with the buyrate.


----------



## zkorejo

Good. I am really happy with the ratings. WWE is losing viewers because WWE is not really as exciting as it should be at this time of the year. I am really happy people are tuning out instead of eating all the shit WWE serves them.


----------



## D.M.N.

InkL said:


> Austin is no longer a draw. He stopped being a draw in 2002. Rock has always been the bigger star and far far bigger draw.


The same RAW last year, where Stone Cold (along with JBL I should add) made his return in Q4:



> As noted before, the March 7th RAW scored a 3.92 cable rating with 5.78 million viewers. This was the highest rated RAW since August 24th, 2009 when Floyd Mayweather hosted.
> 
> In a segment by segment breakdown, The Undertaker's interview opened the show with a 3.91 rating and the brawl with Nexus and Randy Orton plus Orton vs. David Otunga gained 71,000 viewers, which is good. Christian vs. Brodus Clay and Sunny's Hall of Fame announcement gained 219,000 more viewers. The increase in viewers is likely attributed to the Sunny video as this part in the show did a 5.2 rating among teenage boys, which beat everything else on the show except Steve Austin's return.
> 
> Following the "Original Diva" keeping viewers tuned in, the Divas Title match between Eve Torres and Nikki Bella lost 610,000 viewers. This match had a 4.2 rating among teenage boys and as noted, the Sunny segment did a 5.2.
> 
> *The segment with Steve Austin, JBL and Michael Cole gained 961,000 viewers to a 4.46 rating. This is the best RAW quarter-hour rating in a long time. In Males 12-17, the rating was up from a 4.2 to a 5.5.* The match with Daniel Bryan and Sheamus lost 1,102,000 viewers, which is the largest numbers of viewers lost during a segment of any WWE or TNA show in many years. This shows that many viewers tuned in to see Steve Austin and once he was done, they tuned out and returned at 11pm to see if anything else big was going to happen with the show in general.
> 
> The CM Punk vs. R-Truth match, the Shawn Michaels video and the segment with Vickie Guerrero lost 119,000 viewers while the Dolph Ziggler vs. John Morrison match lost 43,000 more. The end of RAW with John Cena's "final knockout" on The Rock and the attack from The Miz did good numbers, gaining 965,000 viewers and finishing with a 4.25 overrun.


:hmm:

(on a side note, it is quite sad seeing two segments with over 4.0 there and a year later the parallel show probably didn't break 3.5...)


----------



## The-Rock-Says

What about his two apperances after the RTWM? What were the ratings?


----------



## InkL

D.M.N. said:


> The same RAW last year, where Stone Cold (along with JBL I should add) made his return in Q4:
> 
> 
> 
> :hmm:
> 
> (on a side note, it is quite sad seeing two segments with over 4.0 there and a year later the parallel show probably didn't break 3.5...)


It was The Rock's return + Wrestlemania hype. GET FUCKING REAL. The Miz/Cena closed the show with 4.25, that doesnt mean Miz is a draw.


----------



## TheWFEffect

WWE has always fucked things up, even going as far back to the mockery of what they did with Mchmahon and Austin's year long feud mid and late 98. Its got to be a creative conspiracy and I have learnt to deal with it being a fan for so long. But still for Wrestlemania the rating is shit.


----------



## kokepepsi

Segment Breakdown
Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 3/5 did a 3.23 rating and 4.61 million viewers. The number of viewers was almost identical, actually down 35,000 from last week but there is no Daytona 500 to use as the reason. There were fewer people watching TV this week than any Monday night so far in 2012, but that only explains 3.2% (the drop from last week’s overall television viewing) and if you factor that in, would be equivalent to 4.76 million normalized viewers, still 1 million less than they were doing at this time last year.
> 
> The show was fourth for the night on cable. It did have the same second hour drop as in most weeks, even with everyone knowing a Rock-Cena confrontation was going to end the show.
> 
> The show did a 2.2 in teenage boys (down 19% from last week), a 3.1 in Males 18-49 (up 11%), a 1.0 in teenage girls (down 9%) and a 1.1 in Women 18-49 (down 8%). Overall, it was 69.5% male viewers.
> 
> In looking at the final segment with the Rock/Cena confrontation, teenage boys went from 2.5 to 2.8, Males 18-49 from 2.9 to 3.6, Teenage girls from 1.1 to 1.2 and Women 18-49 from 1.1 to 1.4.
> 
> The show opened at a 3.45 rating for the Michaels-HHH confrontation.
> 
> Jack Swagger vs. Santino Marella lost 443,000 viewers.
> 
> Rock’s first interview plus Alicia Fox vs. Eve Torres gained 338,000 viewers. That’s probably a ton for Rock and losing for the match.
> 
> The John Cena empty arena promo lost 382,000 viewers.
> 
> C.M. Punk & Sheamus vs. Chris Jericho & Daniel Bryan gained 205,000 viewers to a 3.25, weak for that point in the show.
> 
> Rock’s Paul Revere promo plus Show vs. Miz lost 121,000 viewers, far less of a drop than usual in that time slot.
> 
> Rock’s third promo about John Hancock plus Kane vs. R-Truth lost 187,000 viewers.
> 
> The Rock/Cena confrontation gained 763,000 viewers to a 3.57 overrun, which is slightly above normal levels. Part of that is because Cena had done one long promo and Rock had done three medium length promos already on the show.


----------



## InkL

So The rock's two of three history lessons crap didnt draw. Its a waste considering the sole purpose of those segments was to keep viewers watching.

The rock destroyed his own hype with his twitter promos. He has only himself to blame on that. Never built the feud, Cena did all the job.


----------



## robertdeniro

> The John Cena empty arena promo lost 382,000 viewers


lol..i don't know why WWE promote this match as the biggest match of all time..it's clearly isn't even close.


----------



## Rock316AE

Amazing how Rock had an impact on a random quarter with Divas match when he was on screen just for 3 minutes. Last week 3.5, This week 3.6 with only 4 minutes overrun, next week should be bigger and they should put Taker/HBK in the 10pm slot.


----------



## InkL

robertdeniro said:


> lol..i don't know why WWE promote this match as the biggest match of all time..it's clearly isn't even close.


Umm what? Cena is far bigger draw than The Undertaker.


----------



## Rock316AE

Cena is not bigger than Taker.


----------



## the fox

the rock promos didn't lost shit!!!
the matches actually is the one lost rock promos were 3 minutes or less and they count all the quarter 
the rock promos may gained a lot of viewrs and they left after he finished + other viewrs changed channels 
cena is the one who actually lost viewrs


----------



## InkL

Is the Toothfairy even advertised for next week?




Rock316AE said:


> Cena is not bigger than Taker.


I said bigger draw. Are you sure?


----------



## Ray

Seriously, post-Mania season, something has to happen in the WWE to get the viewers tuned it. Sheamus as champion on the blue brand, and Cena's 13th reign as champion won't cut it post mania. They have to basically take a gamble and let something run, or else, WWE is fucked.


----------



## InkL

the fox said:


> the rock promos didn't lot shit!!!
> the matches actually is the one lost rock promos were 3 minutes or less and they count all the quarter
> cena is the one who actually lost viewrs


Rock lost viewers in two segments. Cena lost only one.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Them final segments should be at least gaining a million people.

People are just not tuning in.


----------



## bc23

InkL said:


> So The rock's two of three history lessons crap didnt draw. Its a waste considering the sole purpose of those segments was to keep viewers watching.
> 
> The rock destroyed his own hype with his twitter promos. He has only himself to blame on that. Never built the feud, Cena did all the job.


The John Cena empty arena promo lost 382,000 viewers


----------



## Brye

The-Rock-Says said:


> Them final segments should be at least gaining a million people.
> 
> People are just not tuning in.


That can be said for quite a few things though. There's been plenty of high quality stuff that didn't get what it should've. That's why I don't put much merit into ratings.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Yeah, but Rock was getting 1 million people tuning into his final segments since his return last year. Before SS it did 1 million something.

But it's RTWM and Rock is on the shows and his segments aren't drawing big, when final segments norm do.


----------



## bc23

Cena lost more viewers doing a promo by himself wow, Rock plus the other matches after his promo only lost 308,000 views compared to Cena's 382,000. The WWE 50/50 split thing is failing big time. The face of your company is losing huge views like that is not good.


----------



## robertdeniro

InkL said:


> Umm what? Cena is far bigger draw than The Undertaker.


Yeah right..Taker's last segment gained more than 1 million viewers  
Cena should bring more viewers especially in his biggest match of his career.


----------



## InkL

robertdeniro said:


> Yeah right..Taker's last segment gained more than 1 million viewers
> Cena should bring more viewers especially in his biggest match of his career.


Nah.. this doesnt prove anything. Its the fucked booking + The Rock's twitter promos that destroyed the hype. 

Cena drew money facing R fucking Truth at Capitol punishment. Can Taker do that? Get real.

Cena is a bigger draw anyday.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

^^ Calm, down.


----------



## TelkEvolon

*Re: RAW "ItBegins" Viewership (02/01/12) - no boost*

WWE, if it had nothing to do with the brand, there would of been many years when WWE would of just died while everyone went to watch for supirior rosters elsewhere.


----------



## Rock316AE

Rock's segments were two minutes in a 15 minutes quarter, gained huge on a random slot and lost far less than usual on another, people saw Rock's gold work, then there's still 13 minutes in the quarter for usual RAW shit. Especially amazing gain in the divas match quarter. Great to see the Cena crap losing so much, what a brutal promo, it's great for WM that less people saw that phony garbage.

And for this troll, "capat" or whatever his name is, Taker is a bigger draw than Cena, in every aspect except merchandise.


----------



## SimplyIncredible

So they have lost a million viewers since this time last year WITH Rock/Cena build-up?

Wow.

Incredible to think how pro wrestling in general has fallen in the past decade.


----------



## InkL

LOL anyone who disagrees with a certain opinion is immediately regarded as a troll. 

Yeah right! Taker is bigger draw than cena and thats why Cena is promoted as the face of the company while taker is barely even on the show. Get real mark. Taker was never even "The Man" of WWE.


----------



## Rock316AE

No, you're a troll because this is your 128 account and you comes back every time with different opinions, at least try to do it less obvious.

Taker was always a bigger name and a draw in the industry, besides lame merchandise to kids, he drew bigger than Cena in every aspect of the business.


----------



## bc23

Rock316AE said:


> No, you're a troll because this is your 128 account and you comes back every time with different opinions, at least try to do it less obvious.
> 
> Taker was always a bigger name and a draw in the industry, besides lame merchandise to kids, he drew bigger than Cena in every aspect of the business.


He also thinks a mark is a bad thing lol


----------



## InkL

Even If i comes back, why would i have a different opinion? Atleast try to make sense. 

John cena has been selling out house shows, ppvs, wrestlemanias, merchandise... everything. You must be a insane taker mark to say he is a bigger draw. He is not. He is a supporting player like Shawn michaels.


----------



## zkorejo

*The John Cena empty arena promo lost 382,000 viewers. *









That picture is so fitting.


----------



## InkL

I dont even want to post a picture of that awful and cringe-worthy taped history lessons crap. Crowd was so dead at the last two. A lot them were even sleeping and this is your most "Electrifying" man of entertainment LOL. 

Rock is all catchphrases, no substance. FACT.


----------



## Ray

zkorejo said:


> *The John Cena empty arena promo lost 382,000 viewers. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That picture is so fitting.


Reppppppppppped :lmao


----------



## Green Light

Rock's segments did pretty well especially the second one, yeah the quarter overall lost viewers but much less than usual and not forgetting they were 3/4 minutes of a 15 minute quarter. Cena's promo obviously lost viewers because it was plain boring, simple as that. As for the overrun, well it's slightly better than last week but still low for having a confrontation between your two biggest names


----------



## DesolationRow

On one hand, at least the ratings/viewership were generally static with a hefty gain at the end, sort of how I pictured it except that isn't as big a gain as it probably should be considering everything. 

On the other hand, it's kind of brutal that the only segment to lose less viewers than a Jack Swagger match was John Cena's empty arena promo. 

Nevertheless, no huge losses, really... But people aren't tuning in overall... Good to see my prediction about the beginning being almost right, at 3.45 for Shawn/Trips.


----------



## Theproof

InkL said:


> I dont even want to post a picture of that awful and cringe-worthy taped history lessons crap. Crowd was so dead at the last two. A lot them were even sleeping and this is your most "Electrifying" man of entertainment LOL.
> 
> Rock is all catchphrases, no substance. FACT.




Keep telling yourself that. Meanwhile the guy you have in your avatar get's booed in his own fucking hometown.


----------



## robertdeniro

InkL said:


> Nah.. this doesnt prove anything. *Its the fucked booking *+ The Rock's twitter promos that destroyed the hype.
> 
> Cena drew money facing R fucking Truth at Capitol punishment. Can Taker do that? Get real.
> 
> Cena is a bigger draw anyday.


How about Cena can't make any feud interesting? , you can't blame the booking when your top face can't sell a feud and Smiles all the time and makes his opponent looks like a joke.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Why is Cena wearing knee pads in the afternoon? What am I talking about, this is the same guy that did his farewell speech, then the next week showed up and sat ring side with his gear on and knee pads. Even tho he was supposed to have been fired.

:xavi


----------



## SimplyIncredible

psx71 said:


> Red rep me all you want for it not being related to the thread. I don't really care. But if you haven't already, you need to watch this.


You really need to do some research into that group.

Kony and his group havent been active in Uganda in years now.

Liberal propaganda with hidden motives. So many falling for it.


----------



## Duke Silver

The-Rock-Says said:


> Why is Cena wearing knee pads in the afternoon? What am I talking about, this is the same guy that did his farewell speech, then the next week showed up and sat ring side with his gear on and knee pads. Even tho he was supposed to have been fired.
> 
> :xavi


You never know when knee pads are going to come in handy.


----------



## H316

InkL said:


> Austin is no longer a draw. He stopped being a draw in 2002. Rock has always been the bigger star and far far bigger draw.


:no::no:


----------



## DAT SHIT CRAY BRAH

its true.


----------



## The Tony

DAT SHIT CRAY BRAH said:


> its true.


Austin was always a bigger draw than Rock in the WWE.


----------



## KO Bossy

zkorejo said:


> *The John Cena empty arena promo lost 382,000 viewers. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That picture is so fitting.


Please, someone, I beg of you, superimpose a 'Forever Alone' meme face over Cena's head.


----------



## KO Bossy

Oh and to the shmuck saying Taker isn't as big a draw as Cena or that Rock has always been the bigger draw and star...have you, like, ever watched a fucking wrestling show in your life? Rock was fantastically popular, of that there is no doubt, but back from late 1997 until the end of 1999, you could not, repeat, could not TOUCH Steve Austin. Its preposterous to even think that anyone during that period could eclipse him, because they just didn't. The Attitude Era is by in large the most profitable period the WWF has ever had, and Steve Austin was the living embodiment of everything that Attitude was. 

As for Taker, the guy was a star for 12 years before John Cena even debuted as a rookie in the Fed. He's one of the most recognizable characters in pro wrestling history and one of the few that could take a gimmick and make it work for this long. He's had so many classic matches that its hard to keep count. The thing about Taker is that he was a dominant presence through numerous different eras. He was one of many extremely strong characters. Nowadays, the only reason Cena stands out is because what else is there around him, besides a handful of guys? I will guaran-fucking-tee you that were this 1998, Cena would be at BEST challenging for the European title against the likes of D'Lo Brown and X-Pac (who would still get way more of a pop than he would) and nowhere near the IC, let alone main event, picture. He can get the fuck out of here with his 10 meaningless title reigns of today, where he has TWO heavyweight championships he can win. 

To say Undertaker isn't as big a draw as Cena or that Rock has always been a bigger draw than Stone Cold clearly indicates that you're highly delusional, in extreme denial, a troll, or mentally retarded. In whichever of these 4 cases that might apply, my response will always be the same-please fuck off and leave.


----------



## Ray

KO Bossy said:


> Please, someone, I beg of you, superimpose a 'Forever Alone' meme face over Cena's head.


----------



## JasonLives

Quarter 4 is always a poor draw, especially since they jam a lot of ads and commercials into it. Same as this week, Cena´s promo didnt even take up 1/3 of that quarter.

And obviously Undertaker is a bigger draw then Cena, mostly due to the fact that he isnt around as much. You usually know its something special when he shows up.
But if he was there every single week he would draw the same as the rest. Same with The Rock.



> Rock’s first interview plus Alicia Fox vs. Eve Torres gained 338,000 viewers. That’s probably a ton for Rock and losing for the match.


Bullshit reporting. Its obviously because of Eva Torres. 225,000 viewers gained last week and now this. Rock should be lucky to share a quarter with a draw like that.

Just look what happend to the other history lessons when he didnt have Eve to back him up :busta


----------



## The Fifth McMahon

*I voted the wrestlers draw, but it's a bit of both. The brand didn't do shit back in the early 90s, the stars who were left kept the company alive. Not saying the brand doesn't draw, but let's face it, saying the wrestlers don't draw is just stupid. You're basically saying the Attitude Era could have been huge without Stone Cold and Rock, and that clearly isn't true at all.

Reading through the pages, I noticed some of the same posters who hate Cena for his "bad matches" and corny promos also hate Punk for his "bum look" and shoot promos. Seems there is no pleasing some of you, kinda wonder why you even watch in the first place.*


----------



## Jeffy

SimplyIncredible said:


> You really need to do some research into that group.
> 
> Kony and his group havent been active in Uganda in years now.
> 
> Liberal propaganda with hidden motives. So many falling for it.


Big part of money this group raises gives back to staff and top executives, so show some respect for job creators and don't dump this crap on us.


----------



## Jeffy

psx71 said:


>


now Cena with scumbag hat when he no-sells during final segment:lmao


----------



## Starbuck

Well, isn't that an interesting breakdown...not. The fact that *The Rock vs. John Cena* is underperforming like this is just mind boggling. WWE, as with everything, have fucked this thing up by letting the 2 of them go out there and try to embarrass each other in front of the world instead of having them work together to build a story and give this match the epic storyline it deserves. I'm simply stunned at just how badly this whole thing has turned out. I bet you don't have that retarded smile on your face now, John, because you're helping turn one of the legitimate biggest matches in wrestling history into this stinking pile of crap. I never thought I'd be feeling so indifferent to this match but after the past 2 weeks, first with Rock and his twitter shit and now Cena with his stupid ass smiling, I don't even know what the hell they're even fighting for anymore. fpalm 

The only thing that seems to be consistent is HHH/Taker/HBK. Over the past few weeks I don't think it's unfair to say that this is the program that really has people's interest. I wonder why? Oh, maybe it's because when one of them tries to get serious with the other, he didn't get fucking laughed at. Completely unfathomable for John Cena I guess. I digress here, that's a pretty strong opening for the show and I can't help but feel that had it gone on at 10pm it would have done ever better than that. Speaking of which, the tag match that did go on at 10pm did just alright but I don't think that's necessarily a good number considering the HUGE numbers the HIAC has been doing in that same spot. I'm not even going to bother getting into the video package stuff. I don't care. 

For next week with Taker/HBK I think that has to go on 10pm. Or maybe they will let either the concert or rap go first, then the next one at 10pm and then do Taker/HBK at the end because people will know that it's happening at the end and therefore should all tune in to see it. I don't know. I'm looking forward to Taker/HBK, I'm looking forward to Jericho/Punk (hopefully they get promo time although with such a promo heavy show already I doubt it) and I don't know what to feel about Cena/Rock. I have a feeling this is going to blow up in their faces tbh. This thing needs some substance and FAST.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

I think Starbuck is spot on.

They both of them are going out there to try and embarrass each other. It's not about a storyline or whatever. It's about trying to see who can out do the one another on the mic and by the numbers, people simply don't care about that. The RAW before SS when Rock was on the show, they gained over 1 million people for that final segment.

Ever since it's just gone down hill.


----------



## BTNH

There needs to be some violence added to the mix. They should have had Rock lay out Cena's dad or something, add some intensity, make it personal..


----------



## SimplyIncredible

Jeffy said:


> Big part of money this group raises gives back to staff and top executives, so show some respect for job creators and don't dump this crap on us.


Go and see how much they pay themselves in salaries and how much of the money actually goes to Uganda and then come back and say that.

Kony hasn't been active in Uganda for about 4 years, abductions are down by about 80-90%, so why are they doing this now?

They are using the new forms of communication to manipulate a young audience who know nothing about what is going on in Africa.

Emotional propaganda, nothing more.


----------



## Green Light

It doesn't surprise me people are being turned off the Rock-Cena program, I'm being turned off by it so no doubt more casual fans are too. It's just not that entertaining when these two cut promos together, simple as that.


----------



## zkorejo

3 more Raw's to go.. Next week will be Rock Concer/Cena Rap. I'm pretty sure they will get physical in the last 2 Raw shows. With Cena delivering AA to the Rock and Rock Rockbottoming Cena in those last 2 weeks. 

Its already so predictable.. I hope Cena doesnt fuck the physical interaction too. Like smiling after immediately recieving Rock Bottom or something like that.


----------



## Miccoli#10

If he does that, he will definitely kill this fued, i listened the observer radio and iam very surprised that both Meltzer and Alvarez didn t mention that Cena doesn t sell Rock's promo, Alvarez said Cena did an awesome job during this promo, this guy is crazy or simply a big mark, i don't understand their analyse of this last segment.


----------



## Kingleviathan

Brye said:


> I would watch Raw still. TNA's booking is dreadful and if Rock/Austin was a main event in 2012, I can't imagine it being good.


What booking would that be, it can't be Roode/Storm or Roode/Sting because they've both been booked great, there's no booking problems with Angle/Hardy, Styles/Kaz/Daniels, Crimson/Morgan and Aries Championship reign has been booked good, not to mention that the Garrett Bischoff storyline has been booked very good.

I don't have a problem with people saying something like TNA has bad booking but if someone says that then they should be able to explain why. For instance I think the Rock/Cena feud was booked great up until the Raw after Wrestlemania where Cena confronts Rock after being screwed out of the World Title and his first response to seeing Rock is to smile, that right there killed the feud and it didn't help that they then had Cena win the World Title a few weeks later meaning that Rock's actions didn't really have an effect on Cena.

Anyway Cena losing viewers for his promo just confirms what I already suspected, the Cena/Kane feud combined with Cena's actions during his feud with Rock have damaged his drawing power. I know the whole idea is that he's targeted at kids but even kids know that people get angry when they're pushed too far, I mean imagine if Hogan had responded to Andre's heel turn by smiling at him and acting like Andre's betrayal was an everyday thing that didn't affect him.


----------



## A-C-P

Thank God for the segment breakdown b/c this weeks ratings discuss before that got released was way to logical and and actual discussion on the wrestling (which was a nice change) and not the SUPER entertaing trainwreck it usually is. The breakdown has sparked a reurning of the completely entertaining awfulness that the Ratings thread should be.

As usual Starbuck and DesRow are spot on about the segment breakdown. I thought there was no way that the WWE could screw up Rock/Cena but low and behold they doing their best to screw it up and it appears that they may actually be screwing it up.


----------



## Stadhart

The-Rock-Says said:


> I think Starbuck is spot on.
> 
> They both of them are going out there to try and embarrass each other. It's not about a storyline or whatever. It's about trying to see who can out do the one another on the mic and by the numbers, people simply don't care about that. The RAW before SS when Rock was on the show, they gained over 1 million people for that final segment.
> 
> Ever since it's just gone down hill.


was that the one where Cena AA'd the Rock?

If it was that was fantastic TV I have to admit and it was just a shame that it was that crappy tag match at SS and not Rock vs Cena as that was perfect timing for it and now we are stuck with the current mess


----------



## KO Bossy

psx71 said:


>


I am eternally grateful, sir. That's absolutely hilarious!


----------



## #1Peep4ever

:lmao
now thats the ratings thread i know


----------



## Fabregas

Starbuck said:


> Well, isn't that an interesting breakdown...not. The fact that *The Rock vs. John Cena* is underperforming like this is just mind boggling. WWE, as with everything, have fucked this thing up by letting the 2 of them go out there and try to embarrass each other in front of the world instead of having them work together to build a story and give this match the epic storyline it deserves. I'm simply stunned at just how badly this whole thing has turned out. I bet you don't have that retarded smile on your face now, John, because you're helping turn one of the legitimate biggest matches in wrestling history into this stinking pile of crap. I never thought I'd be feeling so indifferent to this match but after the past 2 weeks, first with Rock and his twitter shit and now Cena with his stupid ass smiling, I don't even know what the hell they're even fighting for anymore. fpalm .


Exactly.

Instead of having a legitimate storyline to build up excitement and to get the viewers interested in RAW every week, they have allowed this to become a semi-shoot feud where the wrestlers are merely trying to win over the crowd every week.

As for the ratings, I'm really not surprised that people are not caring about this feud. People already know what to expect every week. Theres no feud development, no indication that we'll see any physicality between two, its just gonna be more silly promos every week.

Typical WWE though. They actually have The Rock back for several weeks and instead of using that time to make this a proper wrestling feud with both men playing their natural characters. They turn it into this worked shoot BS that nobody wants to see.


----------



## Booze

Problem is this fued has no purpose. It's being built as the loyal, WWE top guy vs the Hollywood movie star (who's a face). That doesn't work.

Likewise they're turning it into a shoot. By trying to make it seem realistic it's making it boring. There's no storyline there other than "I hate you".


----------



## kokepepsi

InkL said:


> Austin is no longer a draw. He stopped being a draw in 2002. Rock has always been the bigger star and far far bigger draw.







Vince says Austin made the most money than any other wrestler @2:44
:austin


----------



## D.M.N.

I think the year-on-year comparison to the exact show last year is more interesting, and actually quite alarming:

Q1 - 5.85 million vs 4.90 million
Q2 - 5.92 million vs 4.46 million
Q3 - 6.14 million vs 4.80 million
Q4 - 5.53 million vs 4.41 million
Q5 - 6.49 million vs 4.62 million
Q6 - 5.39 million vs 4.50 million
Q7 - 5.27 million vs 4.31 million
Q8 - 5.23 million vs 5.07 million
Overrun - 6.19 million vs n/a

Let me put it another way. Viewership wise, The Rock versus Cena segment beat nothing from the equivalent show last year. Last year, for those wondering, highest to lowest:

6.49 million - JBL and Michael Cole segment with Stone Cold's return
6.19 million - John Cena and The Miz closing segment
6.14 million - Christian vs Brodus Clay; Sunny's Hall of Fame announcement
5.92 million - Randy Orton vs David Otunga
5.85 million - The Undertaker promo
5.53 million - Eve Torres vs Nikki Bella
5.39 million - Daniel Bryan vs Sheamus
5.27 million - CM Punk vs R-Truth; Vickie Guerrero segment
5.23 million - Dolph Ziggler vs John Morrison

And then, from this year...

5.07 million - The Rock and John Cena closing segment

Is that not embarrassing?


----------



## Brye

Kingleviathan said:


> What booking would that be, it can't be Roode/Storm or Roode/Sting because they've both been booked great, there's no booking problems with Angle/Hardy, Styles/Kaz/Daniels, Crimson/Morgan and Aries Championship reign has been booked good, not to mention that the Garrett Bischoff storyline has been booked very good.
> 
> I don't have a problem with people saying something like TNA has bad booking but if someone says that then they should be able to explain why. For instance I think the Rock/Cena feud was booked great up until the Raw after Wrestlemania where Cena confronts Rock after being screwed out of the World Title and his first response to seeing Rock is to smile, that right there killed the feud and it didn't help that they then had Cena win the World Title a few weeks later meaning that Rock's actions didn't really have an effect on Cena.
> 
> Anyway Cena losing viewers for his promo just confirms what I already suspected, the Cena/Kane feud combined with Cena's actions during his feud with Rock have damaged his drawing power. I know the whole idea is that he's targeted at kids but even kids know that people get angry when they're pushed too far, I mean imagine if Hogan had responded to Andre's heel turn by smiling at him and acting like Andre's betrayal was an everyday thing that didn't affect him.


I'll admit, I've liked parts of the Roode/Storm stuff even since it started. Even with a horribly booked main event at BFG, Roode and Storm were really good after that show. Maybe it's because I've seen better stuff from them but Angle/Hardy and anything with Sting now don't interest me much. The story behind Angle/Hardy is okay but I just can't care for it. I love Aries and I'm actually pleased what they're doing with him. The Styles/Kaz/Daniels stuff puts out good matches but at this point I feel like I've seen all those guys can do. And I see nothing in Crimson or Morgan. Garrett Bischoff stuff has sucked, imo. Maybe I'm just not a fan of their roster but comparing that booking to their booking in '06 and I'm disappointed.


----------



## iarwain

I don't get all the "Cena is owning the Rock" comments.
It looks like expectations were so low on Cena that if he has any success at all on the mic, or if he gets a single chant or cheer, that translates into a victory for him.

One smart thing he is doing is the way he builds up the Rock in his promos, saying how great he is on the mic and all, which just builds expectations for the Rock even higher to a point where they can't be met. Which again works in his favor.


----------



## wb1899

D.M.N. said:


> .....
> 
> Is that not embarrassing?


No, last year there were less competition. 
No Pawn Stars (5.861/6.450 million viewers) American Pickers (5.801) and The Voice (16.850) only The Bachelor (10.023) and a repeat of Two and a Half Men (10.179) had good numbers and in cable Pretty Little Liars with 2.953 million viewers was #3 on Monday.


----------



## The Fifth McMahon

*Never really got into the ratings thing. So confusing and nothing to do with show quality.*


----------



## TheWFEffect

The thing that made Wresltemania special was that they always had at least one mega RAW where all the feuds intertwinted, for people to stay intrested WWE needs to get everyone in the big feuds in the ring together not just to talk aload of crap but fucking wrestle which is what I watch wrestling for not the same 25 min promo each week looking at you Cena,Rock,Triple H and Taker.


----------



## Starbuck

TheWFEffect said:


> The thing that made Wresltemania special was that they always had at least one mega RAW where all the feuds intertwinted, for people to stay intrested WWE needs to get everyone in the big feuds in the ring together not just to talk aload of crap but fucking wrestle which is what I watch wrestling for not the same 25 min promo each week looking at you Cena,Rock,Triple H and Taker.


I'm pretty confident in saying that if there's one thing that will make a particular segment skyrocket like fuck it's one that will get all these guys in the ring together at the same time. I refuse to believe that a promo involving Rock/Cena/HHH/Taker won't deliver the good lol.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Hell, throw all three of the main feuds in one promo. Rock, Cena, Trips, Taker, Punk and Jericho. Then have a match: Rock and Cena vs. Undertaker and Triple H vs. CM Punk and Chris Jericho. 

I'd mark.


----------



## Starbuck

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Hell, throw all three of the main feuds in one promo. Rock, Cena, Trips, Taker, Punk and Jericho. Then have a match: Rock and Cena vs. Undertaker and Triple H vs. CM Punk and Chris Jericho.
> 
> I'd mark.


Well I left the latter 2 out for obvious reasons lol. Talk about being overshadowed? I don't know if putting Punk and Jericho in the ring with the other 4 is a good idea. While it might project them as being on somewhat equal footing, it could also have the opposite effect too and only serve to emphasize the light years in star power/legend between the 2 of them and the other bunch. Besides, I don't think WWE has the ability to cope with a promo of such magnitude. No doubt they'd fuck it up and Punk/Jericho wouldn't even get to speak anyways.


----------



## Kingleviathan

Brye said:


> I'll admit, I've liked parts of the Roode/Storm stuff even since it started. *Even with a horribly booked main event at BFG, Roode and Storm were really good after that show.* Maybe it's because I've seen better stuff from them but Angle/Hardy and anything with Sting now don't interest me much. The story behind Angle/Hardy is okay but I just can't care for it. I love Aries and I'm actually pleased what they're doing with him. The Styles/Kaz/Daniels stuff puts out good matches but at this point I feel like I've seen all those guys can do. And I see nothing in Crimson or Morgan. Garrett Bischoff stuff has sucked, imo. Maybe I'm just not a fan of their roster but comparing that booking to their booking in '06 and I'm disappointed.


That's where you lost me, because if you've at least been following what's happened in TNA since BFG then you should be able to understand why it was a great booking decision.


----------



## zkorejo

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Hell, throw all three of the main feuds in one promo. Rock, Cena, Trips, Taker, Punk and Jericho. Then have a match: Rock and Cena vs. Undertaker and Triple H vs. CM Punk and Chris Jericho.
> 
> I'd mark.


Yea.. I would mark harder if Teddy Long makes that super duper tag team match!




Kingleviathan said:


> That's where you lost me, because if you've at least been following what's happened in TNA since BFG then you should be able to understand why it was a great booking decision.


It totally was a great long-term decision.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

I want to see some of these guys have matches on RAW. I think if Rock, HHH, and Undertaker where to have singles matches or tag team matches on RAW it would be awesome.


----------



## Garevt

wb1899 said:


> No, last year there were less competition.
> No Pawn Stars (5.861/6.450 million viewers) American Pickers (5.801) and The Voice (16.850) only The Bachelor (10.023) and a repeat of Two and a Half Men (10.179) had good numbers and in cable Pretty Little Liars with 2.953 million viewers was #3 on Monday.


Maybe this is the reason, they are unable to reach 5 million every week.


----------



## Ray

I'm gonna predict this right now:

Raw's ratings are gonna dip in the the mid-high 2.0's by the middle or end of the year causing a major shift in programming. Bank on it. Now I'm not saying that they are going to go full blown TV-14 or what not, but I AM saying there is going to a shift of programming, whether it be just that.


----------



## King_Kool-Aid™

InkL said:


> Nah.. this doesnt prove anything. Its the fucked booking + The Rock's twitter promos that destroyed the hype.
> 
> Cena drew money facing R fucking Truth at Capitol punishment. Can Taker do that? Get real.
> 
> Cena is a bigger draw anyday.


Taker probably could. Cena is just boring brah. Deal with it. He needs to either to change his character or fuck off and let someone else take his spot who can do it better.

Sadly there isn't anyone on the roster who can. I'd actually take a risk and job Cena to Santino. At least he's actually 100% over with the crowd.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

The show opened with a 3.45 quarter rating with the promo between Shawn Michaels and Triple H.

Santino Marella vs. Jack Swagger lost 443,000 viewers.

The Rock's first history lesson and Alicia Fox vs. Eve Torres gained 338,000 viewers.

John Cena's empty arena segment lost 382,000 viewers.

CM Punk and Sheamus vs. Daniel Bryan and Chris Jericho gained 205,000 viewers for a 3.25 quarter rating, which is another weak number for the transition into the second hour

The Rock's next history lesson and The Miz vs. Big Show lost 121,000 viewers, which is less of a drop than usual for that timeslot.

The Rock's third history lesson and R-Truth vs. Kane lost 187,000 viewers.

The closing segment with John Cena and The Rock gained 763,000 viewers for a 3.57 overrun - which is just slightly above the normal numbers. That segment saw the rating with Male Teens go from 2.5 to 2.8, Males 18-49 go from 2.9 to 3.6, Female Teens go from 1.1 to 1.2 and Women 18-49 go from 1.1 to 1.4.


----------



## Marv95

psx71 said:


> I'm gonna predict this right now:
> 
> Raw's ratings are gonna dip in the the mid-high 2.0's by the middle or end of the year causing a major shift in programming. Bank on it. Now I'm not saying that they are going to go full blown TV-14 or what not, but I AM saying there is going to a shift of programming, whether it be just that.


As long as things stay status quo after Mania with Cena remaining babyface, Punk still a champion in some random feud, more Twitter mentions that has nothing to do with wrestling, the big names leaving and poor acting and Cole on commentary, I can't argue with that prediction.


----------



## JingieBY

Well, the shows aren't hyped as much as they must be IMO. Everyone should know that The Rock is back, that The Undertaker and Triple H are going to have hell in a cell match. The shows are good, interesting, intesive, so that's not where the problem is. Hopefully next week thing will change.


----------



## Werb-Jericho

i dont know much about twitter trends etc but surely something that EVERY week without fail has something trending #1 in the world must be popular to some degree!!


----------



## FITZ

They really should do the older style of opening segments where it's just one big guy coming out after another. It could make for a really crazy opening segment. It's a shame that they couldn't use it all the make a huge tag match but I guess that's the drawback of having Rock and Undertaker only wrestle on the PPV. 

Actually that might be a really valid point there. None of the guys aside from Cena in the 2 biggest matches will wrestle on free TV.


----------



## rockymark94

WWE have all these stars present and can't even create a single segment involving all the participants in their 4 mania main events.


----------



## Christiangotcrewed

rockymark94 said:


> WWE have all these stars present and can't even create a single segment involving all the participants in their 4 mania main events.


You really want to see Sheamus and Bryan in the same ring as taker and rock.


----------



## rockymark94

Christiangotcrewed said:


> You really want to see Sheamus and Bryan in the same ring as taker and rock.


 Ok scratch those guys but taker,jericho,punk,triple h, hbk, rock,cena


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Nothing wrong with Daniel Bryan and Sheamus in a segment with Rock and Undertaker. I mean It would not make much sense either way to have all the main eventers in the ring at the same time. I would actually prefer matches between all of them. John Cena vs Daniel Bryan, Triple H vs Rock, Chris Jericho vs Sheamus, CM Punk vs Undertaker. All this before Wrestlemania.


----------



## rockymark94

Chicago Warrior said:


> Nothing wrong with Daniel Bryan and Sheamus in a segment with Rock and Undertaker. I mean It would not make much sense either way to have all the main eventers in the ring at the same time. I would actually prefer matches between all of them. John Cena vs Daniel Bryan, Triple H vs Rock, Chris Jericho vs Sheamus, CM Punk vs Undertaker. All this before Wrestlemania.


 I just want to see Punk and Rock interact in some fashion.


----------



## Green Light

Chicago Warrior said:


> Nothing wrong with Daniel Bryan and Sheamus in a segment with Rock and Undertaker. I mean It would not make much sense either way to have all the main eventers in the ring at the same time. I would actually prefer matches between all of them. John Cena vs Daniel Bryan, Triple H vs Rock, Chris Jericho vs Sheamus, CM Punk vs Undertaker. All this before Wrestlemania.


Lol at giving away Punk-Taker and Rock-HHH away for free on Raw, those are two of the biggest matches they could possibly do and are Mania main events in themselves. If there is gonna be any match combination it will probably be a 6-man tag team match. 

But I see no reason why these guys can't be crossing paths or doing promos together, maybe have them all come out and demand they be the main event match or something and then set up a 3 way tag team match to decide who gets it. That's probably a terrible example but you get the idea, just a way to have a cross over so it isn't so predictable of the same two guys doing promos with each other every week


----------



## D.M.N.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...wn-stars-american-chopper-ti-and-tiny/124191/

4.670m and 4.976m


----------



## Rock316AE

Nice, 5 million for the second hour, maybe we got the first 4.0 of the year on this show?


----------



## Starbuck

Finally some better numbers and almost at 5 million for hour 2. I imagine that the concert will have done very well based on that. Having Cena open, HBK/Taker at 10pm and then Rock at the end is actually a pretty good strategy when you think about it lol. The breakdowns should be interesting as always.


----------



## sharkboy22

Not to be a prick, but even without Rock during this time of year the WWE pulls those kind of numbers. It's a sad day for wrestling when even the Great One can't get viewership to be 5 million or more


----------



## sharkboy22

Be Straight said:


> Needs MOAR Henry


Seriously, it's the only reason why the ratings were so high this week.

lol at the people who thought Rock, Cena, Punk Jericho, HBK, HHH or Undertaker had anything to do with this. Mark Henry has been carrying the entire company on his back for the past 3 years.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Rock = ratingz


----------



## wwffans123

good news.i want to say if the rating down,it's not the rock's fault,its because the shitting product for past 5 years.

btw,2007 wwe is still great.(Y)


----------



## Starbuck

HHH in yellow tie = RATINGZ


----------



## God Movement

RATINGZ = RATINGZ


----------



## Mister Hands

A SERIES OF NUMBERS INDICATING VIEWERSHIP TOTALS BY THE HOUR = RATINGZ.


----------



## the fox

the second hour rating is very interesting
the rock and cena failed in the last couple of weeks toget a good rating for the second hour which was below the first one


----------



## TankOfRate

I'm sure the tittyfest that was the Ryder/Eve/Beth segment equaled ratings. Rock who?


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Eve = ratingz


----------



## Starbuck

the fox said:


> the second hour rating is very interesting
> the rock and cena failed in the last couple of weeks toget a good rating for the second hour which was below the first one


It's most likely going to be down to the fact that they had HBK/Taker on at 10pm which should give them a pretty big gain and I suspect that Rock will deliver the way we all expect him to this time, unlike last week where people actually tuned out.


----------



## Marv95

wwffans123 said:


> btw,2007 wwe is still great.(Y)


LOL No. Khali as WHC, all of the injuries/suspensions/leavings, SuperCena in full effect, Trump vs Rosie, Hornswoggle's push aren't what I call great. Yet ratings were in the 4s during this time...


----------



## Evolution

Is that the official Nielsen rating? It says it only has a sample of 100 viewers?


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Overall the show did a 3.3.

Way down on last year.


----------



## Starbuck

Yup. It's strange how a 3.3 has become something to celebrate over lol.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

WWE must fear what the numbers will be like after Mania is over.

Ratings norm go way down.


----------



## Starbuck

They'll be in the 2's by May at this rate lol.


----------



## WWE

Don't worry. Cena will return :troll


----------



## KO Bossy

3.3

A 3.3

Wow. I'm starting to think that they'll need a public crucifixion of Cena by strippers to finally break a 4.0


----------



## Bushmaster

With a That has HBK, HHH, Taker, Jericho and Rock to produce that rating wow huh must be Punks fault. Attitude era was awesome but even with all these legends and greats from that era they still can't get a great number. Atleast the numbers went up in the 2nd hour.


----------



## WTFdidIjustsee?

They subjected me to that torture FOR A FUCKING 3.3?


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Daniel Bryan and AJ in a skybox = ratings!


----------



## FITZ

I'm so confused reading the last page of this thread. When it was reported that the show had almost 5 million viewers in the second hour everyone was pretty happy. Then when it was reported as 3.3 everyone changed and started saying the rating was bad. The 3.3 just means the percentage of people that watched the show. That number isn't nearly as important as the total number of people that watched the show.


----------



## The Tony

Wrestling isn't popular anymore. There are some amazing TV series that people watch over wrestling.


----------



## itssoeasy23

The-Rock-Says said:


> WWE must fear what the numbers will be like after Mania is over.
> 
> Ratings norm go way down.


If their hourly viewership is still number 1 and 2 in cable every night, then there's nothing to worry about.


----------



## deatawaits

> With The Rock, John Cena, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, and Triple H on the same show, WWE Raw on Monday, March 12 scored a 3.27 rating, virtually even with a 3.25 rating last week.
> 
> The overall show averaged 4.82 million viewers, the most since the Raw after the Royal Rumble. The biggest positive coming out of this week's show is an increase in viewership in the second hour (which contained the HBK-Undertaker confrontation, C.M. Punk vs. The Miz match, and The Rock's concert).
> 
> The first hour averaged 4.67 million viewers, which has been standard the past four weeks. Instead of declining in the second hour, Raw's viewership increased to an average of 4.97 million viewers, the most second hour viewers since the night after the Rumble.
> 
> Other than the night-after-the-Rumble, it was the most second hour viewers since July 2011 during the Summer of Punk (33 weeks ago).
> 
> -- On cable TV Monday night, Raw was the #1 show on cable in terms of viewership and all key male demographics. Raw continued to struggle in the teen males demo, though, as Raw ranked #5 in m12-17.
> 
> Concerning Raw's demographic ratings, the numbers were nearly identical to last week's show, which had the nearly-identical overall rating. The only significant discrepancy was one-tenth of a ratings decline in males 18-34. This was offset by two-tenths of a ratings increase in m12-17, which accounts for a smaller portion of the overall audience.
> 
> It captures Raw's lost teen male audience, as the only demo that increased this week was m12-17, yet Raw still ranked #5 in m12-17 on cable TV. This time last year, the m12-17 rating was a 3.59 rating, compared to a 2.12 rating this week (a 40 percent decline).
> 
> Raw has also seen declines in every other demographic on a year-to-year comparison. The decline is nowhere near the m12-17 loss, but m12-34 is down five-tenths of a rating, m18-49 is down four-tenths of a rating, m18-34 is down two-tenths of a rating, and all adults 18-34 & 18-49 are down three-tenths of a rating.


3.27 for a show starting with cena, UT/micheals midway through with jericho/punk following and the rock ending.fucking lol


----------



## A-C-P

TaylorFitz said:


> I'm so confused reading the last page of this thread. When it was reported that the show had almost 5 million viewers in the second hour everyone was pretty happy. Then when it was reported as 3.3 everyone changed and started saying the rating was bad. The 3.3 just means the percentage of people that watched the show. That number isn't nearly as important as the total number of people that watched the show.


How dare you try to bring logical thinking to this ratings thread. In any case agree completely here. Almost 5 million people watched, good news for the WWE, great to see a bump up from the usual 4-4.5 million people that watch the show live on TV.


----------



## charmed1

It should have been much worse Raw was horrible this week.


----------



## FITZ

A-C-P said:


> How dare you try to bring logical thinking to this ratings thread. In any case agree completely here. Almost 5 million people watched, good news for the WWE, great to see a bump up from the usual 4-4.5 million people that watch the show live on TV.


I know what you mean. A lot of people were obviously watching TV on Monday night. That's why the rating stayed the same but second hour was the most watched second hour since July. It's pretty silly how much power people put into the the number that the show gets and don't really seem to care about how many people actually watched the show.


----------



## Starbuck

TaylorFitz said:


> I know what you mean. A lot of people were obviously watching TV on Monday night. That's why the rating stayed the same but second hour was the most watched second hour since July. It's pretty silly how much power people put into the the number that the show gets and don't really seem to care about how many people actually watched the show.


Or they're just making an observation on the overall and not doing anything you think they are. Of course I'm speaking for myself here. Everybody else...you could be right.


----------



## WWE

Jinder Mahal = Ratings


----------



## A-C-P

Cycloneon said:


> Jinder Mahal = Ratings


*Funkasaurus* SQUAHSING Jinder Mahal = Ratings


----------



## FITZ

Starbuck said:


> Or they're just making an observation on the overall and not doing anything you think they are. Of course I'm speaking for myself here. Everybody else...you could be right.


It was just this weird trend that I noticed a page or so back. When the viewership came in the posts were mostly positive. Then the 3.3 rating came in and they got very negative. That's the part that I just didn't understand really.


----------



## Starbuck

TaylorFitz said:


> It was just this weird trend that I noticed a page or so back. When the viewership came in the posts were mostly positive. Then the 3.3 rating came in and they got very negative. That's the part that I just didn't understand really.


For me the viewership has always been the more important figure. During WM season I, along with WWE themselves no doubt, expect Raw to be getting well over that 5 million mark. For them to finally hit that point is a good thing, albeit it really _really_ shouldn't have taken them so long to do it considering what's going on on the show atm, but at the same time, a 3.3 during the RTWM isn't good news at all, unless of course it somehow equates to over 5 million viewers lol.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

PWTorch



> USA Network issued a press release Wednesday claiming a 23rd consecutive quarterly victory on cable TV in First Quarter 2012. USA said about WWE Raw's performance: "Raw made USA the #1 network in all of television in its Monday 9:00-11:00 p.m. time period among M18-34, beating every network but NBC and FOX in P18-34. The sports entertainment franchise delivered 2.37 million in P25-54, 2.46 in million P18-49, 1.35 million in P18-34, 4.91 million total viewers and 3.42 million households in 1Q12." Actual first-run average viewership in Q1 is currently 4.58 million viewers, indicating USA is adding 7.2 percent from DVR viewing.


Summary = Raw's doing fine. What puzzles me is that Raw's main demographic is males 18-34 and that in recent years WWE 12-17 demogrpahic has been falling. Which asks the question, why the hell is WWE rated PG?. Yes recently WWE are doing more edgy stuff that wouldnt be found in WWE in 2010 for example The Rock and Cena calling each other bitches and chickenshits, and Jerichio inserting a dark underlying story about alcoholism which touches a raw nerve within society. But still, why have we yet to see blood, brawls and bitches? not to say that will improve everything, but still?


----------



## CP Munk

OMG Rocky cant draw.


----------



## the fox

CP Munk said:


> OMG Rocky cant draw.


actually he did in the second hour which was the highest since july and usa network is happy about it


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Teddy 'PLAYA' Long = ratingzzzzzzzzzzzz


----------



## kokepepsi

Segment Breakdown
Source Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 3/12 did a 3.29 rating and 4.84 million viewers. The increase may have been due to the lack of cable competition, as the usual History Channel shows that beat Raw were in reruns, although an NBA game on ESPN did 3.03 million viewers. Not only was Raw the highest rated program, but its NCIS rerun lead-in was No. 2 (3.79 million viewers).
> 
> The audience was 67.2% male. In the demos, Male teens did a 2.5 (Up 14% from last week), Men 18-49 did a 3.1 (identical to last week), Girl teens did a 1.3 (up 30%), and Women 18-49 did a 1.3 (up 18%). The show also did better in the second hour, which has been a rarity of late, largely due to the Undertaker-Michaels segment.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, Sheamus vs. Ziggler lost 6,000 viewers coming off a John Cena rap open. Usually the second segment of Raw loses several hundred thousand, so that’s a very good number.
> 
> Mark Henry & David Otunga vs. Santino Marella in a handicap match gained 225,000 viewers, which is a good sign for the Laurinaitis-Long program since that was the focus of the segment.
> 
> Brodus Clay vs. Jinder Mahal lost 276,000 viewers.
> 
> The Undertaker-Michaels in-ring segment gained 869,000 viewers to a 3.73 quarter, the best quarter on the show in several weeks.
> 
> C.M. Punk vs. Miz then lost 888,000 viewers, which is the biggest drop segment in a long time.
> 
> Randy Orton vs. Jack Swagger gained 58,000 viewers.
> 
> And the final segment with The Rock concert gained 509,000 viewers, which is below average gain for an overrun and did a 3.51 quarter.
> 
> The final segment was huge in Males 18-49, however, growing from a 3.1 to a 3.8. For teen males it went from 2.3 to 2.7. Teen girls for the Rock concert stayed at 1.1. Women 18-49 went from 1.3 to 1.4.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

The Undertaker-HHH feud seems to be hot with people that don't seem to watch much of Raw. The past few weeks it's been several hundred thousand people tuning in to see their segments, and then tuning out once those segments are finished. I don't know what the WWE can do to make them stay.


----------



## Carcass

"In the segment-by-segment, Sheamus vs. Ziggler lost 6,000 viewers coming off a John Cena rap open. Usually the second segment of Raw loses several hundred thousand, so that’s a very good number."

No surprise there since DB was in that segment.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

1) GREAT number for Taker/HBK. What makes it even better is the fact from the looks of it, they weren't even experiencing their usual losses in the first hour. I mean Sheamus/Ziggler losing only 6,000, followed by a 200,000 plus gain, despite the 200,000+ loss after that, really shows that Taker/HBK took the normally high start and added even more to that. So overall the angle is paying off, and as it should. It's a very well written angle and that alone would give it good bumps. Add in the fact that we're dealing with two very highly proven draws in that segment in Taker and HBK, and they're getting great numbers for it week after week. Doesn't matter if the combination is Taker/HBK, Taker/HHH, or HBK/HHH, the program is always pulling in the goods. Next week if I'm not mistaken will have all three of them together, so it will be interesting to see what happens then.

2) Punk/Miz losing 888,000 viewers, even after a nearly equal gain in the previous quarter is NEVER good under any circumstance. It's a terrible drop even in that spot, but especially bad considering the WWE Champ was in it and I assume that timeslot also has the Jericho portion. This all being said, the fact is it was in a random quarter hour, and CM Punk MATCHES have never drawn well. However if next week Punk and Jericho have a segment after what Jericho's promo on Raw, and it doesn't draw in viewers, then that will be a bad sign. 

3) Rock's concert gaining only 509,000 viewers is terrible by Rock standards. BUT, this proves a point. Taker and HBK certainly aren't the draws Rock is, but their segment soared while Rock's didn't have anywhere near the gain even in a better spot for gains on the show. What this shows is that rather than just solely relying on the drawing power of Rock (and Cena), they need to give the fans a reason to care about the feud, the segments, etc. I'm sure people knew Rock was just going to rip on Cena through song and figured there wasn't much a reason to watch. The feud has become predictable and uninteresting. Right now it literally is only on name value that the match is the main event, because the build up and numbers even have been underwhelming (though not necessarily "bad"). 

Overall there weren't as many drops as usual I believe which is a good sign. Don't know what the opening started with though.


----------



## Fighting Champion

Seems like 10 PM slot is doing really good. I dont know if its solely because of the starpower Taker/HHH/HBK involved or is it a new pattern in viewership. One way to find out would be to have Taker/HHH close the show once and put Rock/Cena at the top of the hour. 

If its truly because of the Starpower, then its a brilliant move by WWE to have Taker as a special attraction instead of appearing on every show, which is why i presume, the Rock is not drawing big numbers as he used to. He's become a everyday superstar now and the repetitive promos are not helping either.

And Big fucking LOL @ Punk/Miz. There's your future of WWE folks. 

Teddy Long = Ratingz.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Carcass said:


> "In the segment-by-segment, Sheamus vs. Ziggler lost 6,000 viewers coming off a John Cena rap open. Usually the second segment of Raw loses several hundred thousand, so that’s a very good number."
> 
> No surprise there since DB was in that segment.


From now on Daniel Bryan should only cut promos from the skybox.


----------



## Carcass

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> From now on Daniel Bryan should only cut promos from the skybox.


Especially during Sheamus' matches so at least something interesting would be happening.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

I'm glad Punk/Miz lost that many viewers. How is it not obvious to them by now that nobody wants to see this awful match? These two together never do good numbers. But the blame shouldn't be entirely put on them, to be fair. They weren't even the majority of the quarter. They had about five minutes of the quarter with the Jericho promo starting at 10:30. Jus' sayin'.

Once again the Rock promo does an incredibly underwhelming number and I really don't know why. It's as if nobody even cares about him. The Trips/Taker/HBK angle is clearly doing awesome. Great news.


----------



## GillbergReturns

Who would have thought Taker Triple H would be the only thing saving the show right now?

There's not a single person on this board that wanted to see this rematch, and it's really become the life of the show.

Hell in the Cell. Old school intensity. You have to love how it's being booked.

WWE should be taking note of this. Triple H Rock, Cena Taker at Mania next year.


----------



## Arm-Bar1004

Mark "Ratings" Henry and the Undertaker is what the people came for.


----------



## GillbergReturns

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I'm glad Punk/Miz lost that many viewers. How is it not obvious to them by now that nobody wants to see this awful match? These two together never do good numbers. But the blame shouldn't be entirely put on them, to be fair. They weren't even the majority of the quarter. They had about five minutes of the quarter with the Jericho promo starting at 10:30. Jus' sayin'.
> 
> Once again the Rock promo does an incredibly underwhelming number and I really don't know why. It's as if nobody even cares about him. The Trips/Taker/HBK angle is clearly doing awesome. Great news.


Following segment only gained 58,000. Break it down anyway you want Punk Jericho is failing to draw too.

I think the storyline is being booked well I just think Jericho lost so much steam between January and the Battle Royal that nobody cares about this match either.

Triple H Undertaker was the one build that was actually done right and no surprise that it's actually drawing unlike Rock-Cena and Jericho Punk.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

I don't think it's so much that Punk/Jericho is failing, but rather that no one on the roster, except for the Rock, is able to hold the interest of the hundred of thousands of people that only tune in to see HHH/Taker/HBK.


----------



## Fighting Champion

GillbergReturns said:


> Who would have thought Taker Triple H would be the only thing saving the show right now?
> 
> *There's not a single person on this board that wanted to see this rematch, and it's really become the life of the show.*
> 
> Hell in the Cell. Old school intensity. You have to love how it's being booked.
> 
> WWE should be taking note of this. Triple H Rock, Cena Taker at Mania next year.


True. :agree::agree:


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

GillbergReturns said:


> Following segment only gained 58,000. Break it down anyway you want Punk Jericho is failing to draw too.
> 
> I think the storyline is being booked well I just think Jericho lost so much steam between January and the Battle Royal that nobody cares about this match either.
> 
> Triple H Undertaker was the one build that was actually done right and no surprise that it's actually drawing unlike Rock-Cena and Jericho Punk.


Yeah but the Jericho promo was what, three minutes? Again not the majority. That's what the difference is between the numbers we get and the numbers WWE get. They have minute to minute viewership totals. We often forget something very critical when it comes to viewership count, commercials. Every quarter gets one or two commercials except for the first and overrun, and sometimes the 10 spot. Who sticks around during commercials? 

I'll agree with you that build is very important. Cena/Rock should be killing everything, but it's not. The program is absolute shit. Why should anybody care? All we've seen so far is corny virgin jokes, swear words and shitty promos. The Trips/Taker stuff is doing well because, well, the program is actually intriguing and entertaining. Hell, they only started something with Jericho/Punk this week. The WWE needs to get their shit together.


----------



## GillbergReturns

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Yeah but the Jericho promo was what, three minutes? Again not the majority. That's what the difference is between the numbers we get and the numbers WWE get. They have minute to minute viewership totals. We often forget something very critical when it comes to viewership count, commercials. Every quarter gets one or two commercials except for the first and overrun, and sometimes the 10 spot. Who sticks around during commercials?
> 
> I'll agree with you that build is very important. Cena/Rock should be killing everything, but it's not. The program is absolute shit. Why should anybody care? All we've seen so far is corny virgin jokes, swear words and shitty promos. The Trips/Taker stuff is doing well because, well, the program is actually intriguing and entertaining. Hell, they only started something with Jericho/Punk this week. The WWE needs to get their shit together.


I think what separates Taker Triple H from the rest is intensity.

Jericho returns and for 6 weeks is trolling the audience looking like a bigger joke than Santino. His segments lost viewers every single week because no one wants you to waste their time.

The interest between him and Punk just isn't there because fans never could connect to Jericho. They have the feud on the right track now but it might be too little too late.

The promo fest between Rock Cena got tiresome by the end of last Mania, and that's all this feud has been. 2 guys looking to embarrass one another. It's just not how wrestling works. You need intensity. Really this feud should be just how far Cena's willing to go to win this match but God forbid WWE try to push any envelope with John Cena.

Anyways despite the poor build I still think the match itself will draw.


----------



## Fabregas

Not sure how anyone can convince themselves the WWE is doing fine in terms of ratings.

This is the road to WrestleMania, the time of year where they usually get ratings constantly decent ratings between 3.5 to 4.0. This year even with The Rock on the show they are struggling to get above 3.2.

Just wait until after WrestleMania, ratings will plummet.


----------



## DesolationRow

It seems as though having Cena and Rock team up at Survivor Series managed to make Rock's status as a megastar whose visiting WWE necessitated dramatic increases in eyeballs to the product jump the shark. 500,000 gain for one of the most heavily advertised segments WWE's thrown at us in ages? Rather weak. Looking at the segment-by-segment breakdown, that means The Rock Concert didn't even come close to hitting the viewership total that Michaels/Undertaker/Triple H enjoyed at the top of Hour 2. 

Triple H/Undertaker/Michaels is blowing everything else away in build-up. 

It's sad that they still haven't been able to average five million viewers for an entire Raw during this year's Road to Wrestlemania season. 5.6 million was the new sweet spot for the last couple of years for the average viewership of Raw throughout the entire Road to Wrestlemania, and now five million seems like Mount Olympus. With The Rock vs. John Cena!

I said it last week and I'll say it again. You can't have a one-way feud when it's supposed to be the biggest match in history or whatever they're trying to hype this as. Why can't they simply revisit what angered Rock in the first place? His motivation for this match is completely blurred and almost nonexistent at this point. They _have_ to get their shit together with this damned angle in the last two weeks, but I know those words make up the sound of a broken record. 

I hope they have Punk kick off Raw next week with one of the most emotional promos he's ever cut. It's the perfect venue, Philadelphia, the home of ROH. It could be a lightly-WWEified version of his Raven promo in 2003 concerning his father, directed at Jericho. Punk/Jericho did very well in the opening segment a couple of weeks ago, and if they let Punk deliver the goods with a hot Philly crowd to kick off the show, it could perform exceptionally here and bring this feud home.


----------



## zkorejo

TBF I dont blame Rock, Cena, Punk or Jericho. I blame WWE. Nobody wants to watch big names, people want to watch storylines, build and some intensity.. And taker/HHH/HBK is proving that each week. 

Shame on WWE for wasting Rock/Cena feud which could have been huge. 

But I have a feeling the last 2 weeks of Raw will be more than intense and action packed, i really hope it is not just for 1 feud.. but all of them.


----------



## robertdeniro

It looks like that Taker/HHH is the biggest match not Rock/Cena and the sad thing is that if wrestlemania hit 1 million buys Rock/Cena will get the full credit for it.


----------



## Simplyrob

The writing for Cena vs Rock is awful. 

Cena is hurting the feud because he is bringing absolutely nothing new to the table, you think he would have learnt this after 6 years plus at the top, he doesn't make you feel like this feud is really a big deal, he still has the same moral video packages, that same cheesy grin and the same go to moves, it's all very safe, the rare rapper outing is stripped down to the same level as well now, while nice to see, added nothing to this feud. Would it have hurt Cena to have embraced the hate a little more, be if only for a few weeks a little more heel like in character, was heading the right way with the Ryder/Eve antics but since then it's back to Superhero Cena, I respect the guy but he appears to still know nothing about how to build a big time feud let alone at the biggest event of the year, we know this is a special match but the guy needs to sell that to us better especially the kids. 

Rock being a fan pandering good guy is also not really working, the cheap pops foley style is fine but it would have been better had he been allowed to look more confident, a bit more of that hollywood rock swagger without the heel tactics, the writing isn't allowing a proper feud to develop it's so week by week with the gimick's it's impossible to get invested in the storyline, while Rock can be cheesy, repetitive with the catchphrases, I feel like he does thrive in the storytelling side of things when a storyline is actually allowed to mature and develop as the weeks go by, that was the case when he faced the likes of DX, McMahon, Austin, HHH, Angle and the rest in the past. 

WWE should know by now that having ultimate faces is all good but the heel are more entertaining, Cena playing more of a heel in this feud would have generated more interest if well written, Rock as the face of the people and Cena being more obviously heel and even showing this embracing the hate side would have done a lot of favours for Cena in the long run, this face vs face feud is boring, the writers are to blame, Rock isn't being used properly or playing to his actual strengths and Cena has had such bad writing done for him year after year, he is off the pace when he is up against a true pro from a different era of wrestling, he does seem out of his depth up against the Rock.


----------



## Green Light

> As noted before, Monday's WWE RAW Supershow from Cleveland did a 3.29 cable rating with 4.84 million viewers. RAW was the #1 show on cable for the night and unlike recent trends, it did better in the second hour - largely due to the segment with Shawn Michaels and The Undertaker.
> 
> Sheamus vs. Dolph Ziggler lost 6,000 viewers coming out of the opener with John Cena rapping. That's a good loss as usually the second RAW segment loses several hundred thousand viewers. David Otunga & Mark Henry vs. Santino Marella gained 225,000 viewers - also a good number and a good sign for the Teddy Long vs. John Laurinaitis storyline.
> 
> Brodus Clay vs. Jinder Mahal lost 276,000 viewers while the segment with Michaels and Undertaker gained 869,000 viewers to a 3.73 quarter rating. This is the best quarter on RAW in several weeks. CM Punk vs. The Miz then lost 888,000 viewers - which is the biggest segment drop in a while.
> 
> Jack Swagger vs. Randy Orton gained 58,000 viewers. The final segment with The Rock singing gained 509,000 viewers, which is actually below average for an overrun. It did a 3.51 quarter rating. The final segment with The Rock went from a 3.1 to a 3.8 rating with Males 18-49, from a 2.3 to a 2.7 in Teen Males, from 1.3 to 1.4 in Women 18-49 and stayed at a 1.1 rating for Teen Females.


So it's pretty clear now that Taker/HHH is what casuals are most interested in. They managed to blow the Cena-Rock feud with the terrible direction they took it in the first few weeks and I'm not surprised people aren't interested in it anymore. Punk-Jericho was never gonna be a big ratings draw anyway so not much of interest there but that loss is huge for a match featuring the WWE champion


----------



## Starbuck

:lmao Seriously. All I can do is :lmao at that breakdown. Jesus Christ. Rock/Cena, year on year, must have lost about what, a million viewers? This time last year all their stuff was getting at least 3.5/well over 5 million viewers, even pushing into 6 iirc. And now look at them! I agree with DesoRow here. Involving Rock in Survivor Series was the jump the shark moment in terms of Rock's uber star power. The simple fact is, this thing is underperforming and pretty substantially at that. I just don't get how this has fucking happened. You take a legitimate biggest match of all time and people aren't tuning in to see it. It's mind boggling and if you ever needed proof that WWE can fuck up absolutely anything, here it is. I guess it all comes down to the fact that most folks, including myself, want some meat on the bones to this damn thing. Having 2 guys make fun of each other once is great, twice is still great, but a year later? Come on. And not only that, while the legit tension between may be a good thing as it brings an element of reality, the both of them trying to humiliate the other every week is turning people off. Since it was more light hearted this week I thought it would have done a lot better but no. The numbers this is getting would be great for anybody else but not Rock/Cena. It's just fucking unbelievable when you think about it.

Another thing that's unbelievable is the fact that the match that NOBODY wanted to see is absolutely killing it and everything else on the show, including Rock/Cena. HHH/Taker/HBK actually beat out Rock/Cena in terms of viewership this week. It fucking beat it. Think about that lol, it's crazy. Since it started, I think every HIAC segment has been well over 5 million viewers and has been a 3.6 at the very least. That is the mark of a program people want to see and it doesn't take 2 guesses to figure out why. The story behind this match is unreal and I honestly feel stupid for ever doubting them at this stage. Doesn't matter if it's Taker/HHH, HHH/HBK or HBK/Taker, any combination of the 3 of them produces the goods each week. They're leaving everything else in the dust tbh. Doesn't matter where on the show they are placed, at the start, 10pm or at the end. People are tuning in to see what happens in their droves. I can only wonder what they're going to do next week with the 3 of them in there lol. 

Unfortunately, people are tuning in to see HHH/Taker/HBK in their droves and then leaving in their droves as soon as their bit is up. Punk/Miz losing practically all the people who tuned in before is sad. I know we've seen the match before and it's never done well but Jesus, you'd think at least a few people would stick around to watch the fucking WWE Champion in a match. That means that most people missed Jericho's promo too which sucks. I think they strategically placed Punk/Jericho after HBK/Taker so that anybody thinking of leaving when the latter was over would stay. It obviously didn't work. But hey, we all knew that this thing wasn't exactly going to set the world on fire so is it really a big surprise?

The only other thing to mention I guess is that several quarters which usually experience a drop didn't. The GM stuff actually gained and Q2's loss was minimal. Orton/Swagger gained too which is always good to see. So yeah, Rock/Cena underperforms again, HHH/HBK/Taker takes a crap on everything else and Punk/Jericho, while most weren't expecting it to do all that well, I think you have to chalk that up to being a bit of a disappointment tbh. At this rate, I don't think Rock/Cena can be saved tbh and I'm just taking it for what it is now. I'm really looking forward to the 3 way confrontation between the HIAC guys next week though.


----------



## greaz taker!

so what happens to wwe if the ratings continue to drop?


----------



## Starbuck

greaz taker! said:


> so what happens to wwe if the ratings continue to drop?


THEY ALL DIE!!!!!!!!!!!!1


----------



## robertdeniro

Should Taker vs HHH be the main event of Wrestlemania ? lol


----------



## Starbuck

I think it needs to be said though, HHH/Taker are killing it in terms of ratings but on the ground, Rock is selling out the live events and most of the credit for that has to go to him. Without him I don't think they would have been so packed in Cleveland. People are paying money to go see him when he's there in their town. The rest of the viewing audience however, aren't as caught up in this feud as they should be.


----------



## Green Light

Starbuck said:


> I think it needs to be said though, HHH/Taker are killing it in terms of ratings but on the ground, Rock is selling out the live events and most of the credit for that has to go to him. Without him I don't think they would have been so packed in Cleveland. People are paying money to go see him when he's there in their town. The rest of the viewing audience however, aren't as caught up in this feud as they should be.


I think that makes sense when you consider what he's been doing so far, I'm sure if you were in Portland or Cleveland it was an amazing show because Rock's whole thing is about working the live audience and getting them involved. Sometimes though that just doesn't translate well to the TV audience, the last part of his Rock Concert is a perfect example of that. It was kinda painful to watch on TV but I'm sure the crowd enjoyed it


----------



## azhkz

HHH/Taker >>>>> Rock/Cena >>>>> Punk/Y2J

Nobody wanted to see HHH face Taker 3rd time in a row but guess what HHH along with Taker & HBK are crapping over all other programmes including Rock/Cena every fcuking week in any time slot you put them in. Gotta give props for HHH/Taker/HBK.


----------



## Green Light

By the way, the final segment before Mania last year with Rock, Cena and Miz (but more importantly the first face to face confrontation between Rock and Cena) drew a 4.77 rating with a gain of 1.5 million viewers for their segment and overall had more than 7 million viewers

Just to show you how much they've dropped the ball with this feud


----------



## Rock316AE

Not a good number by Rock standards, not a good number for the show overall for the RTW. The interest is not there, Cena blabbing for the entire year about how Rock is never there killed the aura of the program and his kayfabe breaking BS doesn't draw for the general audience like it has been proven in the past so many times. While HBK/Taker/HHH is doing big gains, the overall number is not impressive at all, I wasn't expecting the numbers of last year because that was all Rock's buzz and it's not going to be on that level after they drove away million viewers. LOL, the Punk/Miz series continue to break records everytime, Vince needs to put them on PPV just for the comedy.

Meltzer said that ratings are not good indicator for the buyrate but I don't buy it, last year Rock drew 7.3 million viewers for his segment in Chicago and the minute I saw that, I knew they're going to do big business. I still believe that if the card wasn't so embarrassing, they would have done the WM record last year in Atlanta because wrestling was hotter since the Trump angle and relevant since the Benoit tragedy.

Rock's star power is doing a great job with the gates so and WM28 is going to be the biggest gate in the history of the business so that's another record for his resume no matter what happens with the buyrate. The goal is obviously million buys.


----------



## AthenaMark

Taker and Michaels may be doing big gains but the people that bought those tickets are WM are NOT coming from around to world to see the same damn 3 guys interact with each other again. Guaranteed. And Michaels vs Taker was a boring segment that got WHAT chants....fans weren't even into it after Taker's original pop. No matter what the numbers were, the Rock had one of the best segments of the last 5 years.



> I think that makes sense when you consider what he's been doing so far, I'm sure if you were in Portland or Cleveland it was an amazing show because Rock's whole thing is about working the live audience and getting them involved. Sometimes though that just doesn't translate well to the TV audience, the last part of his Rock Concert is a perfect example of that. It was kinda painful to watch on TV but I'm sure the crowd enjoyed it


That's a bunch of BS. The Taker/Mihcaels/HHH segments have been disrespected big time...this was the only week they've had a good rating while the Rock was on the show.


----------



## Rock316AE

And once again these morons didn't tell the audience that Rock is going to be there next weekfpalm


----------



## #1Peep4ever

good to see punk/miz loosing that many viewers this week
they have to get it into their heads that punk/vs miz DOES NOT DRAW
and undertaker/trips programm is the biggest draw as of now


----------



## Brye

I don't think going into the show the writers wrote up the Punk/Miz match to DRAW TEH RATINGZ. It was more or less just a way to let Miz sink lower going into Mania and a way to escalate the Jericho/Punk feud.


----------



## Suit Up

CM Punk vs. The Miz then lost 888,000 viewers - which is the biggest segment drop in a while.

unk <----- the face of someone who cant draw


----------



## KO Bossy

Taker/Trips is by far the best thing they're building up. Coincidentally, it was the match so few people wanted to see. What's largely the reason for this? They're old school guys who know how to provide that psychology, emotion and intensity surrounding a match that takes it from being good to amazing. This is something Rock has evidently forgotten how to do and Cena has never known how to do.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

robertdeniro said:


> It looks like that Taker/HHH is the biggest match not Rock/Cena and the sad thing is that if wrestlemania hit 1 million buys Rock/Cena will get the full credit for it.


I agree
Taker-HHH is so much better than Rock-Cena 

Unless Rock-Cena produces something Big,on the long term this feud is a waste


----------



## BrahmaBuII

Notice how the only interesting parts of the show involve veterans.

*Taker*/*HHH*/*HBK*

3 veterans who know how to play out a storyline, cut promos and get the fans interested.

*Rock*/Cena

Rock - Veteran. Knows what he's doing, knows how to build anticipation and entertain the fans.

Cena - Being unprofessional, dragging the feud down by breaking kayfabe and trying to devalue his opponent. Cares more about trying to one up The Rock than entertaining the fans and putting on a good feud.

*Jericho*/Punk

Jericho - Veteran. Adds meaning to feud and tries to make it serious.

Punk - Has only just started selling the feud and treating Jericho seriously.

----

Seriously, these veterans are holding up their feuds and the show. They are literally the only interesting thing in the WWE. And Taker/HHH/HBK/Jericho/Rock are all either retired or no longer full time wrestlers. So WWE are definitely screwed once they leave again and they are left with the amateurs.

The entire roster is just full of rookies who don't know what they're doing.

It's no wonder the WWE just had its worst ratings year since 1997.


----------



## A-C-P

BrahmaBuII said:


> Notice how the only interesting parts of the show involve veterans.
> 
> *Taker*/*HHH*/*HBK*
> 
> 3 veterans who know how to play out a storyline, cut promos and get the fans interested.
> 
> *Rock*/Cena
> 
> Rock - Veteran. Knows what he's doing, knows how to build anticipation and entertain the fans.
> 
> Cena - Being unprofessional, dragging the feud down by breaking kayfabe and trying to devalue his opponent. Cares more about trying to one up The Rock than entertaining the fans and putting on a good feud.
> 
> *Jericho*/Punk
> 
> Jericho - Veteran. Adds meaning to feud and tries to make it serious.
> 
> Punk - Has only just started selling the feud and treating Jericho seriously.
> 
> ----
> 
> Seriously, these veterans are holding up their feuds and the show. They are literally the only interesting thing in the WWE. And Taker/HHH/HBK/Jericho/Rock are all either retired or no longer full time wrestlers. So WWE are definitely screwed once they leave again and they are left with the amateurs.
> 
> The entire roster is just full of rookies who don't know what they're doing.
> 
> It's no wonder the WWE just had its worst ratings year since 1997.


:lmao at Cena being a "rookie" hes been on WWE TV for 10 years now (and a full-time pro wrestler longer than The Rock was), but your points about him in this current fued do hold some merit.

Punk/Jericho have both been doing a good job with their fued just haven't gotten a whole lot of TV tiem to develop it after WC.

As for the segment breakdown nothing really surprising here except for the low viewer loss in the 2nd quarter and the only 500,000 gain for the lfinal segment + overrun


----------



## DesolationRow

I feel like I need to see a priest or take a long, hot shower, but in any case I have to admit I completely agree with *RockAE316* about WWE/Cena taking the entirely *dead wrong* course over the last year since Wrestlemania XXVII in the "light build-up" to this (Rock vs. Cena). (Also, every time I think of *RockAE316* saying Cody Rhodes looks like a stork, I laugh a little.) 

What's killing this is that there's no urgency to any of it, _especially_ with what they're either giving The Rock to do or casting him as in this program. That video package bit with Cena saying Rock has other options and WWE immediately flashing up him going to movie premieres and talk shows or whatever was absolutely the _wrong route to take_ in all of this. The last thing casual fans needed was constant reminders that Rock can go straight back to Hollywood (and will) when this is over. Psychology is an important part in any feud and psychologically, WWE/Cena/Rock (in that order, I guess) have obliterated the buzz and as *Rock316AE* put it, the "aura" of both Rock himself and the program in general. 

Triple H/Undertaker/Michaels is a textbook study in how to book a storyline. They're all fucking old as the hills and either can't or won't be put into physical altercations with one another, hell, they don't even have matches with other people on TV, but they are knocking this angle out of the park. Like *Starbuck*, I was originally rather vehemently opposed to this rematch happening but I'll be damned if they haven't performed masterfully in selling it to me. 

Rock's original, pressing and crucial motive for singling Cena out in his "return promo" 13 months and a day ago has been completely buried by WWE (buriedz forever!!!!``1).

Since we're evaluating these two disparate programs, here's a hypothetical image to think of. Imagine WWE finally pulls the trigger on Cena vs. Undertaker and when they're finally in the ring together, Cena smirks while Undertaker's cutting a promo about ripping his soul from his body. Heh.


----------



## D.M.N.

Another poor RAW breakdown:

Q1 - 3.17 rating / 4.63 million
Q2 - 3.17 rating / 4.63 million
Q3 - 3.32 rating / 4.85 million
Q4 - 3.13 rating / 4.57 million
Q5 - 3.73 rating / 5.44 million
Q6 - 3.07 rating / 4.56 million
Q7 - 3.11 rating / 4.61 million
Q8 + OR - 3.51 rating / 5.12 million

...with the WWE Champion in the lowest rated segment. Also a poor Q1 rating.


----------



## Starbuck

I still can't quite believe that Taker/HBK/HHH outdid the concert in terms of viewership. It's crazy lol.


----------



## Falkono

Acording to these guys the Punk segment lost 880k viewers making it one of the highest viewer drops in awhile
http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2012/0314/550643/shawn-michaels/

Time for him to drop the title for sure


----------



## Brave Nash

Falkono said:


> Acording to these guys the Punk segment lost 880k viewers making it one of the highest viewer drops in awhile
> http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2012/0314/550643/shawn-michaels/
> 
> Time for him to drop the title for sure


How is that punks fault, I think it's James Rodays fault hes a celebrity he should draw and there was a commercial break during the match people will obviously tune out. That's wwe fault they don't know when to take on commercials it's always on Punks matches.


----------



## Mister Hands

Falkono said:


> Acording to these guys the Punk segment lost 880k viewers making it one of the highest viewer drops in awhile
> http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2012/0314/550643/shawn-michaels/
> 
> Time for him to drop the title for sure


To whom, exactly?


----------



## The Tony

Honestly, no matter how good or bad the build up is, I just can't believe the Rock/Cena feud doesn't draw more than that.


----------



## A-C-P

Falkono said:


> Acording to these guys the Punk segment lost 880k viewers making it one of the highest viewer drops in awhile
> http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2012/0314/550643/shawn-michaels/
> 
> Time for him to drop the title for sure


Where as I am not defending the # at all the drop is bad but its also misleading b/c a large portion of that quarter were commercials. So yeh those commercials don't bring The Ratings so the WWE should probably just get rid of them :vince2



Mister Hands said:


> To whom, exactly?


This would be the question I would ask to. Should he drop it to Jericho one of the guys he shared the segment you are attacking?


----------



## Falkono

Mister Hands said:


> To whom, exactly?


To answer this question I think you need to ask another question first. Has the WWE championship meant much since Punk has had it?

My honest opinion is no. Heading in to WM and Punk is in possibly the third biggest feud at the moment. And that is only because Jericho has come back for a match. If there was no Jericho he would be defending against someone else lower down the card. Which isn't Punks fault it is the roster being weak. The main two feuds at Mania won't even involve a belt. Punks match will probably be third last. The only other time I can remember the WWE title not being in the last match was the Taker vs HBK match. 

My personal view is that the Cena vs Rock match should of had the title involved like it was supposed to. Cena should of gone into Mania with the belt. It would of meant so many possible changes could of happened. For example he could of cheated and retained the title turning him heel in the way HHH used to be. Saying that all that matters is the title, not what the fans think of him etc as he couldn't care less. Then on RAW Rock beats him in a no title match and Cena beats him down afterwards with a chair or something. It could make Cena the biggest heel since Hogan did it. 
Or Rock could win and become champion again until the next ppv. That would be awesome. 
Point is the title should mean something, and under Punk is has not meant much. He is supposed to be the top guy but is nowhere near the top. The title should always be in the main event in my opinion.

Punk's run has gone on so long that it has been difficult to bring others into the title picture and have them as a credible threat. But they need to start building up these guys fast because after Mania Taker,Rock,HHH,HBK,Jericho will probably all be gone for a longtime again. That is when we will see how weak the roster really is.


----------



## A-C-P

You had some valid points, didn't really agree with any of them for a few reasons....

#1 The Rock said himself he wasn't coming back to be WWE champion and he didn;t want the title involved in his fued.

#2 The Cena/Rock match did not need the title involved and even if the title was involved in the match, the WWE title istself wouldn't "gain" any importance b/c the fued itself is bigger than the title and it would be overshadowed anyways. so IMO it acutally is better for the WWE (from an importance standpoint) not being involved with Rock/Cena.

#3 The WWE itself made the WWE title lose alot of its importance by announcing the Rock/Cena fued a year ahead of time and treating it like almost the only thing that has mattered since pretty much after the Oct PPV.



Falkono said:


> Punk's run has gone on so long that it has been difficult to bring others into the title picture and have them as a credible threat. But they need to start building up these guys fast because after Mania Taker,Rock,HHH,HBK,Jericho will probably all be gone for a longtime again. That is when we will see how weak the roster really is.


Your last paragraph is what confused me though you say the title should be on Cena and involved in that match and say something like this? You think Punk's reign has gone on to long (Disagree here to, i guess you like WWE Title Hot Potato) And your argument against Punk keeping the title this long is its not bring others into the title picture, yet you want the title to be back on Cena?


----------



## Green Light

Based on the ratings HBK, Taker or Triple H should be champion. Maybe give the US title to Rock but only if he starts bringing in some better numbers


----------



## Clique

Green Light said:


> Based on the ratings HBK, Taker or Triple H should be champion. Maybe give the US title to Rock but only if he starts bringing in some better numbers


Na, they'll just headline the biggest show of the year (over any match for a championship. These matches bigger than that) as they should and WWE will continue going to them until they are done for good.


----------



## Vin Ghostal

Falkono said:


> My personal view is that the Cena vs Rock match should of had the title involved like it was supposed to.


Nahhhhh. In selling this event, WWE must make it appear that all of the matches are fantastically important, and that there are many different reasons to buy the event. Not one person would be more interested in Cena/Rock if the title were involved, since it's already being billed as the biggest match ever. Can't get much more hyped than that.

The flip side is that LOTS of people would consider the Punk/Jericho match less important without the title. So, if moving the title to Cena wouldn't make his match any MORE attractive to potential buyers, but would definitely make the Punk match LESS attractive, where's the upside?



Green Light said:


> Based on the ratings HBK, Taker or Triple H should be champion. Maybe give the US title to Rock but only if he starts bringing in some better numbers


You really think The Rock would stick around to hold a secondary title? He was far above the US/IC title in 2000, for heaven's sake. 



KO Bossy said:


> Taker/Trips is by far the best thing they're building up. Coincidentally, it was the match so few people wanted to see. What's largely the reason for this? They're old school guys who know how to provide that psychology, emotion and intensity surrounding a match that takes it from being good to amazing.


Oh yeah? Where was all that "old school" knowledge last year when they gave us a tepid, boring, directionless sorta-feud going into WrestleMania?


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Vin Ghostal said:


> Nahhhhh. In selling this event, WWE must make it appear that all of the matches are fantastically important, and that there are many different reasons to buy the event. Not one person would be more interested in Cena/Rock if the title were involved, since it's already being billed as the biggest match ever. Can't get much more hyped than that.
> 
> The flip side is that LOTS of people would consider the Punk/Jericho match less important without the title. So, if moving the title to Cena wouldn't make his match any MORE attractive to potential buyers, but would definitely make the Punk match LESS attractive, where's the upside?


Agreed



> You really think The Rock would stick around to hold a secondary title? He was far above the US/IC title in 2000, for heaven's sake.


I think it was sarcasm



> Oh yeah? Where was all that "old school" knowledge last year when they gave us a tepid, boring, directionless sorta-feud going into WrestleMania?


They thought that it would be enough that Taker retired HBK


----------



## Hladeit

A-C-P said:


> You had some valid points, didn;t really agree with any of them for a few reasons....
> 
> #1 The Rock said himself he wasnlt coming back to be WWE champion and he didn;t want the title involved in his fued.
> 
> #2 The Cena/Rock match did not need the title involved and* even if the title was involved in the match, the WWE title istself wouldn't "gain" any importance b/c the fued itself is bigger than the title and it would be overshadowed anyways. so IMO it acutally is better for the WWE (from an importance standpoint) not being involved with Rock/Cena.*
> 
> #3 The WWe itself made the WWE title lose alot of its importance by announcing the Rock/Cena fued a year ahead of time and treating it like almost the only thing that has mattered since pretty much after the Oct PPV.


Disagree with that part. Rock/Cena feud has no proper storyline at the moment. John cena has explained why he needs this match and a win against the rock at WM but no one knows why the rock is even back and wants cena in a match at mania. There is no reason given why Rock needs a match and especially why he needs to win. By adding the wwe title in this feud, they can make up for this. 

Remember The Rock always used to say "He is the best damn WWE champion of all time" ?? They can use that in this feud imo. 

And NO, the feud wont "overshadow" the WWE title. Thats ridiculous assumption. Stone cold vs The Rock WM 17 is the perfect example how this can work.

Anyways, pointless discussing this now. Its not happening. Besides Punk needs the WWE title badly. If they take the title off him or take him out of the feud, he becomes irrelevant again. 



> Your last paragraph is what confused me though you say the title should be on Cena and involved in that match and say something like this? You think Punk's reign has gone on to long (Disagree here to, i guess you like WWE Title Hot Potato) And your argument against Punk keeping the title this long is its not bring others into the title picture, yet you want the title to be back on Cena?


I think he meant, by having john cena as the WWE champion, you can build new stars. Punk hasnt done anything interesting with the title imo.







Vin Ghostal said:


> Oh yeah? Where was all that "old school" knowledge last year when they gave us a tepid, boring, directionless sorta-feud going into WrestleMania?


Consider last year's mania to be just a preview of this year's ultimate showdown, Mania 28.


----------



## A-C-P

Hladeit said:


> I think he meant, by having john cena as the WWE champion, you can build new stars. Punk hasnt done anything interesting with the title imo.


Still doesn't make any sense if thats the case. Cena has held the WWE title (almost exclusively for the last 5 years) outside of the Nexus stuff and the last 6 months. How many new stars were "created" in that time period and what "interesting stuff" did Cena do with the title, outside of his fued this summer with Punk? None (and almost nothing) thats why the WWE is where its at.. anyways not the thread for this discussion.


----------



## Hladeit

A-C-P said:


> Still doesn't make any sense if thats the case. Cena has held the WWE title (almost exclusively for the last 5 years) outside of the Nexus stuff and the last 6 months. How many new stars were "created" in that time period and what "interesting stuff" did Cena do with the title, outside of his fued this summer with Punk? None (and almost nothing) thats why the WWE is where its at.. anyways not the thread for this discussion.


Well you're forcing your personal opinion on this. Just because you dont like cena or that you're not a fan of his work, doesnt mean whatever he was involved in the last 5 years has been "Uninteresting". He drew money/ratings in those title programs/feuds, which is proof that the casual fans did find him entertaining. Unless you can prove CM Punk draws/drew as the WWE champion, you cant argue this.


----------



## Mister Hands

Falkono said:


> To answer this question I think you need to ask another question first. Has the WWE championship meant much since Punk has had it?
> 
> My honest opinion is no. Heading in to WM and Punk is in possibly the third biggest feud at the moment. And that is only because Jericho has come back for a match. If there was no Jericho he would be defending against someone else lower down the card. Which isn't Punks fault it is the roster being weak. The main two feuds at Mania won't even involve a belt. Punks match will probably be third last. The only other time I can remember the WWE title not being in the last match was the Taker vs HBK match.
> 
> My personal view is that the Cena vs Rock match should of had the title involved like it was supposed to. Cena should of gone into Mania with the belt. It would of meant so many possible changes could of happened. For example he could of cheated and retained the title turning him heel in the way HHH used to be. Saying that all that matters is the title, not what the fans think of him etc as he couldn't care less. Then on RAW Rock beats him in a no title match and Cena beats him down afterwards with a chair or something. It could make Cena the biggest heel since Hogan did it.
> Or Rock could win and become champion again until the next ppv. That would be awesome.
> Point is the title should mean something, and under Punk is has not meant much. He is supposed to be the top guy but is nowhere near the top. The title should always be in the main event in my opinion.
> 
> Punk's run has gone on so long that it has been difficult to bring others into the title picture and have them as a credible threat. But they need to start building up these guys fast because after Mania Taker,Rock,HHH,HBK,Jericho will probably all be gone for a longtime again. That is when we will see how weak the roster really is.


My honest opinion is that another Cena reign would be the very, very worst thing WWE could do. They can't fall back into that holding pattern all over again. Even if nothing hugely significant happens throughout Punk's title reign, and even if the WWE title match is a 3rd tier main event at WM, I feel like a 6 month plus WWE title reign for someone other than Cena or Orton is hugely significant in and of itself. Taking it off Punk going into WM would be shooting themselves in both feet and also the groin.


----------



## A-C-P

Hladeit said:


> Well you're forcing your personal opinion on this. Just because you dont like cena or that you're not a fan of his work, doesnt mean whatever he was involved in the last 5 years has been "Uninteresting". He drew money/ratings in those title programs/feuds, which is proof that the casual fans did find him entertaining. Unless you can prove CM Punk draws/drew as the WWE champion, you cant argue this.


I am not trying to argue anything against Cena or the fact he has held the title so much over the last 5 years (I agree that it was the right move for the WWE to have Cena as their top guy, I just disagree that he shouldn't have been the ONLY guy getting that kind of push) Whether I am a fan of Cena's work or not aside not even taking that into account, I can say the same thing about you forcing your personal opinion on CM Punk on this issue. My post here was about the statement that Cena carrying the title would be better for building new stars which IS debatable and my statement that Cena has not "created" any new stars over the last 5 as (almost) the exclusive WWE champion is valid. Now the "interesting stuff" is an opinion of course but honestly I don't see much of any difference from a show content aspect from the 5 years Cena carried the title from the last 6 months Punk has had it.

I am not trying to argue anything about drawing or ratings #'s or anything here b/c the reason you can't argue Cena vs Punk drawing/ratings/whatever is b/c you can't even compare it for a couple of reasons....

1. Ratings and buyrates and w/e other "drawing measure" have all been in decline for the past # of years and it has ALOT more to do with the product as a whole more so than just who is WWE champion.

2. Of course Cena is going to be a better "draw" right now than Punk, Cena has been a pushed as THE top guy for nearly 8 years and Punk has been pushed as A top guy for 8 months.

My problem originally here is the fact that Falkono's problem was that Punk carrying the title was preventing other guys from getting into the title picture and his "solution" to this was to have Cena be the champion again and defend it against The Rock? Thats the part I had an issue with. B/c Cena has spent the last 5 years preventing other people from being in the title picture. Thats all I had an issue with not whether or not Cena should have been carrying the title for the last 5 years or not.


But again the ratings thread is not the right place for this discussion.



Mister Hands said:


> My honest opinion is that another Cena reign would be the very, very worst thing WWE could do. They can't fall back into that holding pattern all over again. Even if nothing hugely significant happens throughout Punk's title reign, and even if the WWE title match is a 3rd tier main event at WM, I feel like a 6 month plus WWE title reign for someone other than Cena or Orton is hugely significant in and of itself. Taking it off Punk going into WM would be shooting themselves in both feet and also the groin.


Exactly this (Y)


----------



## DesolationRow

I understand that this topic within a topic is both "far afield" as they might say in an episode of _Perry Mason_ as well as apparently dead, but I feel so strongly about this I just felt compelled to chime in.

I would argue that, as *Vin Ghostal* noted, in having the WWE Championship added to the match between The Rock and John Cena, you've only added to something that does not need it and is not about it (anymore than Hogan vs. Rock a decade ago was) and taken it away from a match that truly does need it and almost demands that it have it in the match between Chris Jericho and CM Punk. Moreover, this line of thinking extends down through the top five matches. One match is a purported dream bout between The Rock and John Cena, a match many of us never believed would happen; one is a Hell in a Cell match between Triple H and The Undertaker promising to be violent and brutal, about an "End of an Era" between two legends in their own time and, one would have to imagine, the culmination of every particle of the saga between Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker and Triple H; one match is for the WWE Championship held by the hottest new main event star in WWE since at least Edge in 2006 (Jeff Hardy was probably more purely over but the impact he made was upon reflection not especially considerable, though he ironically helped to lay the foundation for CM Punk) defending it and his boastful claim that he is "The Best in the World" against a time-tested veteran specifically returning to take him out, a match between Chris Jericho and CM Punk; one is a match born out of the Royal Rumble, as Sheamus, who was on a major roll going into the January pay-per-view, won the match and was guaranteed a shot at the champion, Daniel Bryan, who opted to shortchange his own stated dream of waiting until Wrestlemania to cash in his Money in the Bank briefcase to hold the championship itself going into Wrestlemania instead, a match between Sheamus and Daniel Bryan; and a match involving twelve men who will do battle for "GM supremacy" and whichever GM's team wins, that GM will take over both "brands."

Above you see how this works. Many on here have argued that Jericho should have won The Royal Rumble but I would disagree with this. Jericho vs. Punk does not truly need Jericho be the winner of the Royal Rumble match (the question of whether or not there should ever have been a #1 contender's battle royale three weeks later to conclude Raw is an entirely other matter); Sheamus vs. Daniel Bryan _does_ need that, as it's effectively the only strong basis on which the match is happening at all. 

Beyond the issue of the Wrestlemania card, having the championship revert back to John Cena at this point in time would be something of a colossal step backward for WWE entirely. As *Mister Hands* noted, it would be falling back into a "holding pattern" which would do nothing less than almost assuredly cripple any genuine star-manufacturing they are undertaking as part of the Youth Movement and the recent pushes of fellows like The Miz and CM Punk. And as *A-C-P* stated--and it does not take a "John Cena-hater" to comprehend this--the track record for creating stars and actively drawing interest to the product under the hegemony Cena enjoyed at the top of WWE, as something like its default WWE Champion for several years, is not particularly inspiring. Cena was _finally_ utilized properly in that role last summer, however, so it's not outside of the realm of possibilities to believe that he could be again, but since the Summer of Punk was something of an aberration considering the special circumstances the company and Punk found themselves in with his contract expiring and him fundamentally holding Vince and co. hostage to either listen to his demands/wishes (kayfabe and real life alike) before he agree to sign to a new contract, it's doubtful WWE would go in that direction again. Cutting Punk's reign short because a segment in which he wrestled lost practically all the viewers that came aboard to see the Shawn Michaels/Undertaker/Triple H promo at the top of Hour 2 (the one Wrestlemania angle that is unquestionably drawing in the viewership/ratings department and robustly so at that, situated at a very advantageous time slot that WWE's audience has been conditioned to tune into and then out of because that is when important things happen) seems a highly questionable game plan at best. CM Punk vs. The Miz, furthermore, is an outrageously overexposed, bordering-on-utterly-pointless match-up at this juncture, and with the ever-widening gulf in the way each man is booked dictating either another easy Punk victory or some screwjob finish, the incentive to stay tuned was minimal. 

Point blank, though, as *Mister Hands* originally pointed out, who beyond old-timers who can't or won't work every week and every weekend and the John Cena Express would be the correct person to hold the championship, considering how anemically just about everyone apart from a select handful of guys at best consistently deliver an unmistakably positive impact on ratings? Punk has had his lows and he's had his highs and he's had a lot of in-betweens but considering what he's done since "The Shoot," in other quadrants of WWE's business model, how much he's earned this run and how few other realistic options remain for WWE at this time, I see no reason whatsoever to alter their current course and simply give up on him remaining WWE Champion for an extended period of time in the very practical and necessary effort to create a new top dog main event star because he happened to have a very poorly-rated and -viewed segment this past week (which, once we get past it being the lowest-rated segment of the night, wasn't that much worse than most segments on Raw this week and looks far worse than it actually is because of its adjacent placement to the white-hot segment with the white-hot angle in the advantageous quarter hour segment that the maximum number of people looked at this past week). It's been thinking like that, along with the subsequent refresh icon-hitting reflex of having the championship circle its way back to the status quo "safest choice" that has been instrumental in depriving WWE of the ability to fervently create new stars.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

DesolationRow said:


> I understand that this topic within a topic is both "far afield" as they might say in an episode of _Perry Mason_ as well as apparently dead, but I feel so strongly about this I just felt compelled to chime in.
> 
> I would argue that, as *Vin Ghostal* noted, in having the WWE Championship added to the match between The Rock and John Cena, you've only added to something that does not need it and is not about it (anymore than Hogan vs. Rock a decade ago was) and taken it away from a match that truly does need it and almost demands that it have it in the match between Chris Jericho and CM Punk. Moreover, this line of thinking extends down through the top five matches. One match is a purported dream bout between The Rock and John Cena, a match many of us never believed would happen; one is a Hell in a Cell match between Triple H and The Undertaker promising to be violent and brutal, about an "End of an Era" between two legends in their own time and, one would have to imagine, the culmination of every particle of the saga between Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker and Triple H; one match is for the WWE Championship held by the hottest new main event star in WWE since at least Edge in 2006 (Jeff Hardy was probably more purely over but the impact he made was upon reflection not especially considerable, though he ironically helped to lay the foundation for CM Punk) defending it and his boastful claim that he is "The Best in the World" against a time-tested veteran specifically returning to take him out, a match between Chris Jericho and CM Punk; one is a match born out of the Royal Rumble, as Sheamus, who was on a major roll going into the January pay-per-view, won the match and was guaranteed a shot at the champion, Daniel Bryan, who opted to shortchange his own stated dream of waiting until Wrestlemania to cash in his Money in the Bank briefcase to hold the championship itself going into Wrestlemania instead, a match between Sheamus and Daniel Bryan; and a match involving twelve men who will do battle for "GM supremacy" and whichever GM's team wins, that GM will take over both "brands."
> 
> Above you see how this works. Many on here have argued that Jericho should have won The Royal Rumble but I would disagree with this. Jericho vs. Punk does not truly need Jericho be the winner of the Royal Rumble match (the question of whether or not there should ever have been a #1 contender's battle royale three weeks later to conclude Raw is an entirely other matter); Sheamus vs. Daniel Bryan _does_ need that, as it's effectively the only strong basis on which the match is happening at all.
> 
> Beyond the issue of the Wrestlemania card, having the championship revert back to John Cena at this point in time would be something of a colossal step backward for WWE entirely. As *Mister Hands* noted, it would be falling back into a "holding pattern" which would do nothing less than almost assuredly cripple any genuine star-manufacturing they are undertaking as part of the Youth Movement and the recent pushes of fellows like The Miz and CM Punk. And as *A-C-P* stated--and it does not take a "John Cena-hater" to comprehend this--the track record for creating stars and actively drawing interest to the product under the hegemony Cena enjoyed at the top of WWE, as something like its default WWE Champion for several years, is not particularly inspiring. Cena was _finally_ utilized properly in that role last summer, however, so it's not outside of the realm of possibilities to believe that he could be again, but since the Summer of Punk was something of an aberration considering the special circumstances the company and Punk found themselves in with his contract expiring and him fundamentally holding Vince and co. hostage to either listen to his demands/wishes (kayfabe and real life alike) before he agree to sign to a new contract, it's doubtful WWE would go in that direction again. Cutting Punk's reign short because a segment in which he wrestled lost practically all the viewers that came aboard to see the Shawn Michaels/Undertaker/Triple H promo at the top of Hour 2 (the one Wrestlemania angle that is unquestionably drawing in the viewership/ratings department and robustly so at that, situated at a very advantageous time slot that WWE's audience has been conditioned to tune into and then out of because that is when important things happen) seems a highly questionable game plan at best. CM Punk vs. The Miz, furthermore, is an outrageously overexposed, bordering-on-utterly-pointless match-up at this juncture, and with the ever-widening gulf in the way each man is booked dictating either another easy Punk victory or some screwjob finish, the incentive to stay tuned was minimal.
> 
> Point blank, though, as *Mister Hands* originally pointed out, who beyond old-timers who can't or won't work every week and every weekend and the John Cena Express would be the correct person to hold the championship, considering how anemically just about everyone apart from a select handful of guys at best consistently deliver an unmistakably positive impact on ratings? Punk has had his lows and he's had his highs and he's had a lot of in-betweens but considering what he's done since "The Shoot," in other quadrants of WWE's business model, how much he's earned this run and how few other realistic options remain for WWE at this time, I see no reason whatsoever to alter their current course and simply give up on him remaining WWE Champion for an extended period of time in the very practical and necessary effort to create a new top dog main event star because he happened to have a very poorly-rated and -viewed segment this past week (which, once we get past it being the lowest-rated segment of the night, wasn't that much worse than most segments on Raw this week and looks far worse than it actually is because of its adjacent placement to the white-hot segment with the white-hot angle in the advantageous quarter hour segment that the maximum number of people looked at this past week). It's been thinking like that, along with the subsequent refresh icon-hitting reflex of having the championship circle its way back to the status quo "safest choice" that has been instrumental in depriving WWE of the ability to fervently create new stars.


----------



## corfend

LOL, Swagger's a bigger draw than Punk.

I kid, I kid.


----------



## Evolution

Can someone PM me each week when the ratings get posted so I can update the OP? 

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Walshy

Well, this week Punk opened the show so ratings are bound to have gone down from the ad break, amirite?


----------



## User ***

Hour 1 - 4.490m
Hour 2 - 4.274m


WWE Raw topped Monday cable, but the 1.7 & 1.6 adults 18-49 ratings were down from last week's 2.0 and 1.8. In its season finale, Pretty Little Liars was up a hefty six tenths from last week's penultimate episode to a 1.6 adults 18-49 rating.

Punk/Jericho > The Rock,cena,HHH,Taker,HBK.


----------



## D.M.N.

For the penultimate show before WrestleMania, that's very poor.


----------



## A-C-P

YES! its time for the weekly overreaction to the viewership numbers....


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Ouch, not good at all. Especially since they hyped the fuck outta Rock and Taker/HHH/HBK segment (and the latter they started advertising last week). I wonder how the big slots will do. I can see Punk/Jericho starting off the show strong, maybe Rock's segment, even though it's in Q4 (or was it Q3?), could still have an increase as they at the very least advertised it before going to commercial. Cena/Henry with Rock at the end should do well on paper, but we'll see what happens. And of course Taker/HBK/HHH, which has been gaining close to a million viewers each time two of them have interacted in the 10pm timeslot (and even once getting over a million) should do really well. 

We won't know how those turned out until quarters come out, but all in all a very bad number. Two weeks away from Mania and they aren't anywhere near the 5 million mark. It really does make you wonder how much WWE is going to struggle to pull in 4 million viewers for the rest of the year after Mania. I think during even the worst periods, we could see them potentially going under 3 million viewers for at least one of the hours. Hell, if everything lines up perfectly, SD may actually beat Raw in the ratings one of these months.


----------



## Brave Nash

Take that haters I told you don't put Punk matches during a commercial break, because it's long and its not the only show that airs in that time.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

This should be interesting.


----------



## A-C-P

Clearly, judging from all the threads on this topic popping up lately, and episode of Raw dedicated to the "hairstyles" of the superstars would draw in THE RATINGZ!!!!!


----------



## kokepepsi

Miz/sheamus + Orton interview = 2million loss

Bad rating for this time of year.

If mania does do 1.3million buys that they want, It will prove ratings don't mean shit, I doubt they hit 900k though


----------



## Carcass

Daniel Bryan was in the first hour so it's only logical that it has the higher number.


----------



## Starbuck

kokepepsi said:


> *Miz/sheamus + Orton interview = 2million loss*
> 
> Bad rating for this time of year.
> 
> If mania does do 1.3million buys that they want, It will prove ratings don't mean shit, I doubt they hit 900k though


Is that true lol?


----------



## kokepepsi

nah just guessing


----------



## Starbuck

kokepepsi said:


> nah just guessing


I thought so lol. As with every week, quarter hours will be mighty interesting but 2 weeks out from Wrestlemania, one of the biggest matches of all time and the 2 cornerstones of the WWE over the past decade in a HIAC and things still can't reach over 5 million overall? Just crazy. Going off the numbers of recent weeks I'll take the guess that the 10pm slot didn't do all that well this week and that people continued to tune out throughout the second hour until coming back for the end segment. That's my take going off the numbers we have now. You never know though.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

10% down from last week. Unbelievable. 

To think, this time last year off the red hot Rock return they where doing 4.0. Boy oh boy.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

The extra buys from last year came from the new/old viewers they got last year.

They better put on a hell of a final RAW next week to convince the norm to buy the ppv that don't norm buy it.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

kokepepsi said:


> nah just guessing


Oh, oh dear god, I really don't care about the rating, nice to pop in this thread once and a while, but that one would have sent the shit right back up my ass. that seemed ridiculous. lol.


----------



## Smith_Jensen

Guys, focus on the ranking, not the actual number. Raw was the #1 show on cable on Monday.


----------



## Ron Paul 2012

4.3 million viewers

To be honest the show was so bad that is should have got at most only 2 million viewers. 15 mins of wrestling is just sad imo.


----------



## kokepepsi

*rating was a 3.1*


----------



## User ***

They wont do a million buys. 
Rock/cena build has been pathetic. 
Taker/HHH HIAC wont draw big.
Only hardcore fans care about Punk/Jericho.
Bryan/Sheamus is irrelevant. 
Maria Menounos means nothing for PPV buys. 

This Mania will be the wake-up call for Vince Mcmahon. Should have invested in building a new star in punk using heel HHH, instead of pushing the overrated streak year after year. SUFFER BITCH!


----------



## The-Rock-Says

> Only hardcore fans care about Punk/Jericho.


Oh please. If you mean you, then ok.

But the most talked about match anywhere on the net, is Cena/Rock. Deal with it.


----------



## the fox

despite the bad rating they topped monday cable ratings?!!!


----------



## the fox

btw the first hour (rock promo) was 4.490 m
the second was down by 4.274 m


----------



## Duke Silver

The-Rock-Says said:


> Oh please. If you mean you, then ok.
> 
> But the most talked about match anywhere on the net, is Cena/Rock. Deal with it.


He said that hardcore fans are the only ones that care about Punk/Jericho, not that Punk/Jericho is the only match that hardcore fans care about.

All that strudel syrup you've been ingesting has clearly gone to your head.


----------



## xerxesXXI

They'll be pulling 2.5's next year at this rate.


----------



## thesukh03

I don't even want to imagine the ratings when Rock, Triple H and Undertaker are gone after Wrestlemania.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Must say WWE ads of the event on the net are good.

Popping up everywhere I go on the internet.


----------



## Bushmaster

how the hell do all these rock marks get all that green rep lol. But Raw was number 1 on monday so thats good. Yes the ratings arent that great but what can you do. Im just glad we arent getting the usual Punk cant draw stupid arguments. with a show with guys like Taker, HHH, HBK, Cena and the Rock theres noone you can really blame.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

User *** said:


> Hour 1 - 4.490m
> Hour 2 - 4.274m


An hour with Rock, Cena, Triple H, The Undertaker and Shawn Michaels only doing that much? Oh my God..

But Punk's still to blame.


----------



## Starbuck

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> An hour with Rock, Cena, Triple H, The Undertaker and Shawn Michaels only doing that much? Oh my God..
> 
> But Punk's still to blame.


Nobody is blaming Punk. In fact, nobody has been blaming Punk at all recently. His program isn't doing stellar numbers but nobody expected it to do stellar numbers. Most people are discussing Rock/Cena and HHH/Taker. Enough with all this belated, "Punk's still to blame," crap. Nobody is blaming him for anything. When Rock/Cena and HHH/Taker started, the responsibility shifted to them to produce the goods. So far that hasn't happened to the degree that it should and that is what people are discussing these days, not Punk.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

I was only kidding. I know nobody's blaming Punk, just having a bit of fun since this thread for a solid few months was filled with posts like that. I'm not blaming anyone, tbh. Not Rock, Cena, or anyone else. All this recent ratings news does is prove my original point that wrestlers don't draw, storylines draw. Even with a stacked hour like that, if it's not interesting TV nobody is going to watch it. The RTWM has been insanely underwhelming and it's translating pretty clearly.


----------



## Bushmaster

ok lets blame HHH then. since he came back ratings havent been great:busta


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

MANIA build has been lackluster tbh. Honestly, I think people are and for a while, have just just been waiting to bank on the actual matches themselves come mania.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

SoupMan Prime said:


> ok lets blame HHH then. since he came back ratings havent been great:busta


Honestly if it weren't for his storyline with Michaels and Taker, the numbers would be a whole lot worse.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Mostly the Cena/Rock feud isn't bringing the goods. HHH/Taker actually has had a really strong build, probably the most consistent out of the main events. Jericho/Punk has been ok, but no spectacular. As Starbuck pointed out though, that's really all anyone expected out of it and that's really all WWE needs it to be. Nobody was looking for Punk or Jericho to carry this show. Sheamus vs. Bryan build has been pretty much non-existent, which is unfortunately par for the course when it comes to WHC matches.

That leaves Cena Rock. The match that was supposed to carry ratings, Wrestlemania, and business in general. This feud has felt like these guys talking past each other for some time now. We get a segment about Cena putting his nuts in Rock's face, followed by Rock calling Cena some variation of a ****. Rinse and repeat. I think that creative expects the Rock to just carry this feud by virtue of being THE ROCK, but even he needs something to work with. Even the Rock can't carry a 30 minute meandering segment about Cena's lady parts. It feels like there is no real narrative to this feud (again, compare it to HHH/HBK/Taker) and just lots of segments.

That's not to say WM won't do well. I think it will. But god help this company if they can't even make Rock vs. Cena segments seem interesting.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

WM will draw a million buys

Raw ratings depends on how Cena's character is post WM


----------



## Starbuck

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I was only kidding. I know nobody's blaming Punk, just having a bit of fun since this thread for a solid few months was filled with posts like that. I'm not blaming anyone, tbh. Not Rock, Cena, or anyone else. All this recent ratings news does is prove my original point that wrestlers don't draw, storylines draw. Even with a stacked hour like that, if it's not interesting TV nobody is going to watch it. The RTWM has been insanely underwhelming and it's translating pretty clearly.


I get that it's a fad to do it now but really, nobody is blaming him or has been blaming him for anything for quite some time now. I think your point about wrestlers not drawing, only storylines doesn't fully explain things either. You can have the best angle in the world but if it's between Yoshi Tatsu and Tyson Kidd, nobody will give a fuck. The same storyline between John Cena and Triple H will produce far better results. You need the right people in the right angles. HHH/HBK/Taker is an example of having the right people in the right angle that is building a story and hyping a match. Rock/Cena up until last night really has been the right people in the wrong angle, an angle so far removed from what it was originally supposed to be and an angle that sought to put each guy over individually rather than put the storyline over and promote the match collectively. It has clearly been turning people off hence the low numbers. Jericho/Punk was never even in the discussion to pull any sorts of big numbers either. It's a B level PPV main event tbh. To have this match, Rock/Cena, and have it not do anything close to what it was doing a year ago is all the proof you need that something somewhere went very seriously wrong. Right people. Wrong angle. No results. 



SoupMan Prime said:


> ok lets blame HHH then. since he came back ratings havent been great:busta


Unlike Punk however, HHH can be blamed for anything. If a child dies in Africa it's somehow his fault lol.


----------



## GillbergReturns

One things for sure I don't think we'll ever see a match get announced a year in advance ever again.

I can see why WWE thought it would be a great idea, but it hasn't panned out.

Numbers suck right now but if Wrestlemania's buyrate delivers I'm sure Vince will take it.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Starbuck right again.

Tho, I thought they took the right direction with the Rock/Cena feud last night. Shame it's maybe to late.

They can still do a million buys. 4 million people in the USA watch each week and millions more around the world do too. They can still hit the 1 million mark.

I have already ordered the ppv. So there's 1 ppv buy for WWE already. lol.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

The-Rock-Says said:


> Starbuck right again.
> 
> Tho, I thought they took the right direction with the Rock/Cena feud last night. Shame it's maybe to late.
> 
> They can still do a million buys. 4 million people in the USA watch each week and millions more around the world do too. They can still hit the 1 million mark.
> 
> I have already ordered the ppv. So there's 1 ppv buy for WWE already. lol.


I feel like the feud came off the rails a little last week. We had two pretty heated exchanges with the "wrist" promo and then the one after it which lead up to what amounted to a comedy segment (even if it was a pretty good comedy segment) in the Rock vs. Cena concert. It feels like that's something that should've taken place much earlier. Now it feels like it's been 2 weeks and the feud really hasn't moved forward at all.


----------



## Starbuck

GillbergReturns said:


> *One things for sure I don't think we'll ever see a match get announced a year in advance ever again.*
> 
> I can see why WWE thought it would be a great idea, but it hasn't panned out.
> 
> Numbers suck right now but if Wrestlemania's buyrate delivers I'm sure Vince will take it.


I don't see why not. From a ratings standpoint thing haven't been up to par but they have nobody to blame but themselves for that. Mania 28 travel packages and general tickets sold out pretty damn fast. People wanted to see and still want to see the match. I have no doubt it will still do a big buyrate too. But something has happened along the line that has turned people off. Either that or all the initial hype surrounding Rock's return last year and his freshness has well and truly worn off at this stage. The simple fact is and I'll stand by this because I honestly believe it to be true, people don't want to see 2 guys legitimately trying to bury each other. That's not how wrestling works and it's never been how it works. Year on year they've lost a million or so viewers. I think that's a testament to that fact. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Most folks were expecting Rock vs. Cena. What we have got these past few weeks has been Dwayne vs. John. The former was pulling record numbers and had immense interest. The latter is struggling to break 5 million viewers every week. Take that for what you will.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

SarcasmoBlaster said:


> I feel like the feud came off the rails a little last week. We had two pretty heated exchanges with the "wrist" promo and then the one after it which lead up to what amounted to a comedy segment (even if it was a pretty good comedy segment) in the Rock vs. Cena concert. It feels like that's something that should've taken place much earlier. Now it feels like it's been 2 weeks and the feud really hasn't moved forward at all.


Well I think it went forward to an extent last night.

Rock finally give his reasons for wanting to face Cena and reasons why he needs to beat Cena. He also built Cena up and put him right beside Hogan and Austin. Made him into a huge deal. 

For weeks we've just had them try and tear down each other in crap shoot style promos.


----------



## DAT SHIT CRAY BRAH

theyve been the top show for the past couple weeks though. that's all that matters with those ratings


with buy rates theyll get 1-1.5m easily. it wont be that difficult especially with their marketing campaign


----------



## GillbergReturns

Starbuck said:


> I don't see why not. From a ratings standpoint thing haven't been up to par but they have nobody to blame but themselves for that. Mania 28 travel packages and general tickets sold out pretty damn fast. People wanted to see and still want to see the match. I have no doubt it will still do a big buyrate too. But something has happened along the line that has turned people off. Either that or all the initial hype surrounding Rock's return last year and his freshness has well and truly worn off at this stage. The simple fact is and I'll stand by this because I honestly believe it to be true, people don't want to see 2 guys legitimately trying to bury each other. That's not how wrestling works and it's never been how it works. Year on year they've lost a million or so viewers. I think that's a testament to that fact. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Most folks were expecting Rock vs. Cena. What we have got these past few weeks has been Dwayne vs. John. The former was pulling record numbers and had immense interest. The latter is struggling to break 5 million viewers every week. Take that for what you will.


You're right about how fast it sold out and ultimately the buyrate is what matters but I don't think it's possible to hold the public's interest over a year's period given the circumstances.

As much as we want to pick the fued apart I do think they're doing the best they possibly can do. They only way they can build this match is thru promos and finishers. There's only so much you can do with that and we're now on their 10th promo and 5th in ring confrontation. No matter what they do it's going to get old.

As for losing viewers. Wrestling has been losing viewers for quite some time now. That's whole different subject and involves multiple factors such as MMA's increasing popularity, and the rise of competition on cable television. They got a spark last year from Rock's return. They had the opportunity to provide a spark this year too with Shaq but weren't bright enough to pull it off.


----------



## CNB

The brand is cold, this is why they're not drawing.

Cena/Rock don't gel.

Punk/Jericho not getting enough airtime.

Taker/HHH garnering minimal interest. We all know the streak won't end. 

Predictable results, Punk, Cena and Taker all going to win. We could see it coming a mile away.


----------



## LINK

CNB said:


> The brand is cold, this is why they're not drawing.
> 
> Cena/Rock don't gel.
> 
> Punk/Jericho not getting enough airtime.
> 
> Taker/HHH garnering minimal interest. We all know the streak won't end.
> 
> Predictable results, Punk, Cena and Taker all going to win. We could see it coming a mile away.


Unfortunately, this is exactly right. I am praying for at least one of the three to go the opposite but it will probably be Jericho winning which will be stupid. But like I said, if just one of the three matches goes in favor of the opposite I guess I can live with that.


----------



## The Tony

:lmao such a bad rating!


----------



## Dark_Raiden

IMO this is due to not promoting/advertising Rock' appearances enough. My brothers and friends don't even know that he's on the show till they ask me, whereas last year, when he returned they heard about it and watched a few shows after his return, hoping to see him. I haven't seen a commercial advertising Rock's appearance besides the Rock concert tbh.


----------



## User ***

Dark_Raiden said:


> IMO this is due to not promoting/advertising Rock' appearances enough. My brothers and friends don't even know that he's on the show till they ask me, whereas last year, when he returned they heard about it and watched a few shows after his return, hoping to see him. I haven't seen a commercial advertising Rock's appearance besides the Rock concert tbh.


They advertised the Rock throughout the show from the start.


----------



## Fabregas

Rock/Cena = Storyline ruined

Jericho/Punk = Not enough star power

Triple H/Taker/Michaels = Too tame and predictable.

No other feuds are significant enough to actually effect the ratings.

One problem is that the WWE refuse to let big storylines play out in a physical manner these days. It seems whenever we have a highly anticipated match, they don't allow the two wrestlers to have any of physical contact until the actual WrestleMania match or the RAW prior. Fans catch on to this and realise nothing interesting is going to happen so they don't need to tune in.

Sad really.

Remember Austin/Rock before WrestleMania 17? Austin stuns The Rock twice, Rock gets his revenge, they brawl on Smackdown. Thats how you build up to a match. Even Rock/Hogan had physicality prior to their match. I know they can't give the fans too much prior to the match but they need to give them something. Promo after promo gets boring after a while.


----------



## kokepepsi

Lack of star power when everyone is booked like shit is the problem

Expecting 3 quarters to carry the entire show is crazy
They lose too many viewers in every single segment that does not have HHH,Taker,Shawn,Rock,Cena and is not in the 10pm/overrun slot

It used to be that Raw would start high lose few viewers and have big gains in the 10pm slot and overrun.

Now they start high lose a lot of viewers gain a few back in the 10pm slot lose almost all of them again and then gain some in the overrun.


----------



## RatedR IWC Star

imo, if i had to blame the ratings on one thing it would come down to the fact that people are bored of the same old wrestlers year after year hogging the spotlight. the majority of the fans want NEW stars and NEW feuds . thats what made the attitude era so great was there were so many new stars being developed to go along with exciting storylines and things felt fresh and interesting and keyword again...new ! 

the problem is the way wwe books the new stars these days is criminal . look at dolph ziggler for example. the guy was in a title match at the royal rumble on his way to winning the wwe championship . now hes stuck in a 6 on 6 tag match at wrestlemania where more focus is on the gms and vickie/aksana then the actual wrestlers in the match . you could go down the list with ryder, miz, barrett, sheamus ( before he was re-pushed )etc ...and all these guys have been de-pushed and had their credibility taken from them by wwe fucked up retarted booking.

so fans want new stars, new feuds, new matches but wwe either doesnt want to or just cant make stars anymore. so they rely on older wrestlers who ppl are just tired of . like rock for example, hes a huge star but his return last year meant a lot more then this year since he returned last year after a 7 year hiatus . and if look at most of the matches on the card , they feature older wrestlers who just arent as excting or in some cases just plain boring. kane, big show, orton, to name a few

the only match on the card which features 2 wrestlers who are relatively new is bryan vs sheamus and that feud has basically been given 0 hype . 

so thats my opinion. im sure some ppl will disagree with me but i know that this is def a reason why i am not too interested in the product right now and maybe others feel the same way


----------



## Mike_Hickeybottom

The Rock has been overexposed and doesn't wrestle on TV, so the non-PPV-buying fans have no reason to care about him. Taker-Triple H is unoriginal, predictable and the promos have dragged on. Undertaker should not be talking this much. He's trying to blend his cartoonish gimmick with his real-life personality and the results have been disastrous. Also, Randy Orton might be the most boring character anywhere on television.


----------



## mb1025

For the people saying they are the top show need to realize the reason they are the top show now is because the 2-3 shows that usually beat them all had their season finale's a few weeks ago.


----------



## BANKSY

This is proof WWE can ruin anything lol.


----------



## DesolationRow

Sad numbers. 

Quarter hours will be interesting, but I'd say the "brand" of The Rock has become worn out through all of this. Ultimately, though, he's helping a bit with live gates and as *Starbuck* mentioned, the early indicators for Wrestlemania were all extremely bullish, including the travel packages and the general sales of tickets. 

I'll give WWE credit in one regard, though. They've built up some matches at Wrestlemania this year that can't be recycled at the very next pay-per-view: Rock/Cena, HIAC, Ace/Teddy Tag and the divas match are all matches that still feel special to me in one way or another because I know WWE won't be able to simply, lazily rehash them for a couple of months and make me sick of them. I fully expect and even want Jericho/Punk to continue to Extreme Rules, and I imagine some form of Sheamus/Bryan will continue for at least another month or so, perhaps involving somebody else... Won't be surprised if Kane/Orton concludes at Extreme Rules, either. But it feels refreshing to have a good core bunch of matches, two of them being the two biggest matches on the card, that can't be sheepishly rehashed at the next PPV.

Wrestling on TV is going to experience some continued pressure, though. Almost every personal friend of mine who watches WWE regularly watches Raw, not to mention the "inferior" WWE programs, on YouTube these days. Wrestling is such a curio, such a niche product, even WWE's brand. People are enjoying the alternative means of seeing it in ways that feel inordinate for any TV program. Just something to consider, along with everything else.


----------



## rcc

I watched an entire episode of Raw in half an hour, that's how poorly entertained I was. Always glad to see a rating justify my hatred for this current product. When it's only the diehard fans left watching shitty feuds such as Dolph Ziggler vs Jack Swagger after WM, I'll be at peace knowing I got out before WWE became an absolute joke.


----------



## JasonLives

I just dont think there is enough action between the major feuds. Cena/Rock, TripleH/Undertaker, Jericho/Punk are all very talk heavy feuds. There are no cheap shots, brawls, no sneak attacks. 
Its the same formula week after week where they get a segment and just talk. At this point you dont expect anything to happen until they actually have the match.


----------



## User ***

JasonLives said:


> I just dont think there is enough action between the major feuds. Cena/Rock, TripleH/Undertaker, Jericho/Punk are all very talk heavy feuds. There are no cheap shots, brawls, no sneak attacks.
> Its the same formula week after week where they get a segment and just talk. At this point you dont expect anything to happen until they actually have the match.


Face Vs Face feuds generally dont involve brawls and cheap shots. You need a definitive heel for that.


----------



## deatawaits

Okay this is really really worrying.


----------



## Dark_Raiden

User *** said:


> They advertised the Rock throughout the show from the start.


Talking about commercials. New fans who watch just for the Rock(alot did last year) won't know by watching the show, only wrestling fans will. They didn't advertise enough IMO as it was hard to know he was going to be there any of the Raws if you didn't pay attention or go on one of these forums.


----------



## Marv95

User *** said:


> Face Vs Face feuds generally dont involve brawls and cheap shots. You need a definitive heel for that.


Austin/Rock for X7? 

And one of the face feuds involves 2 guys who have _openly _expressed their beefs with one another week after week.

A 3.1 is a horrible rating for the second to last Raw before Mania featuring major players, no matter how the apologists try to spin it.


----------



## Coffey

You know, The Rock is a mega-star. He truly is. But is there a chance that the reason the numbers aren't better is because people see him as a movie star now and not a wrestler anymore? Like, maybe to some people this is no different than any other celebrity coming in and wearing out their welcome. I mean, that is kind of ridiculous, but I could see someone making that argument.

When I run into a lot of ex-wrestling fans; the people that were all aboard the bandwagon during the Attitude Era, they never ask about The Rock. They always ask about or talk about or reminisce about Stone Cold Steve Austin.

C.M. Punk is the future, for sure, and I don't know how good of an idea it is to be having him take a back seat like this. How big would Austin's star have risen had he never beaten HBK in the main of Mania 14 with the Tyson involvement? Punk/Austin I think could be a mega-draw, more so than Rock/Cena, if for no other reason than because the non-physical parts, aka promos, are going to be SO much better. It's not going to be about Twitter and gay jokes..

I don't see any reason why WWE won't be able to get Sting next time around and run Sting/Taker if they want too.

It's not that WWE doesn't still have options, it's that the TV is so bad, people have stopped caring.


----------



## mrmacman

Punk can't draw, Rock can't draw.


----------



## deatawaits

mrmacman said:


> Punk can't draw, Rock can't draw.


FINALLY FUCKING FINALLY SOMEBODY GETS IT!11!


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Walk-In said:


> You know, The Rock is a mega-star. He truly is. But is there a chance that the reason the numbers aren't better is because people see him as a movie star now and not a wrestler anymore? Like, maybe to some people this is no different than any other celebrity coming in and wearing out their welcome. I mean, that is kind of ridiculous, but I could see someone making that argument.
> 
> When I run into a lot of ex-wrestling fans; the people that were all aboard the bandwagon during the Attitude Era, they never ask about The Rock. They always ask about or talk about or reminisce about Stone Cold Steve Austin.
> 
> C.M. Punk is the future, for sure, and I don't know how good of an idea it is to be having him take a back seat like this. How big would Austin's star have risen had he never beaten HBK in the main of Mania 14 with the Tyson involvement? Punk/Austin I think could be a mega-draw, more so than Rock/Cena, if for no other reason than because the non-physical parts, aka promos, are going to be SO much better. It's not going to be about Twitter and gay jokes..
> 
> I don't see any reason why WWE won't be able to get Sting next time around and run Sting/Taker if they want too.
> 
> It's not that WWE doesn't still have options, it's that the TV is so bad, people have stopped caring.


I think that, as Starbuck said, the way they are booking this feud has hurt it's appeal. Yes, they are indeed booking it as Dwayne Johnson vs. John Cena, not THE ROCK vs. John (SUPER) Cena. Instead of booking it as "What will happen when JOHN CENA - the man who overcomes everything, the man who has beaten everyone in his path - fights THE ROCK - a living legend?!" it is booked as "Watch John and Dwayane air their personal grevences against each other in segment after segment"

People are still going to buy the match, as interest has proven to be huge. But do people want to watch the build? Not really. Not anymore.


----------



## Miccoli#10

They really need a "shocking moment" to hype ratings post WM


----------



## GillbergReturns

mrmacman said:


> Punk can't draw, Rock can't draw.


Last years Mania begs to differ.

Here's the thing people have to remember. Rock Austin it doesn't matter they only bring a spark nowadays.

If Austin Punk started in February and the match finally occurred next April that spark would be long gone too.

Rock's return worked last year but it's not going to work this year because it is a year old and we have seen 14 promos out of the 2. 

WWE needed to bring in Shaq for the ratings but they didn't and now are paying the price of relying on a stale feud.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

The match will still draw huge.

Few of my friends that haven't watched a WWE event in about 10 years know about this match and are going buy the event.

Listen to wrestling observer latest pod cast with Bryan and that other guy. He talks about how he's talked to people that haven't watch wrestling in years know about this match.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

> As noted before, the March 20th WWE RAW Supershow did a 3.10 cable rating with 4.38 million viewers.
> 
> In the segment breakdown, Kane vs. Big Show lost 125,000 viewers from the opener which is less than usual for the second slot. Santino Marella vs. David Otunga and the interview with The Rock outside in Philadelphia gained 205,000 viewers. Daniel Bryan vs. Zack Ryder lost 418,000 viewers.
> 
> Mark Henry vs. John Cena with The Rock coming out gained 327,000 viewers for a 3.20 quarter rating at the top of the hour, which is a weak gain for that timeslot. The Miz vs. Sheamus lost 279,000 viewers while the Randy Orton interview and Kofi Kingston & R-Truth vs. Jack Swagger & Dolph Ziggler lost 151,000 viewers.
> 
> The final segment with Shawn Michaels, Triple H and The Undertaker gained 597,000 viewers, which is below average, but the 3.32 overrun rating was still the highest rated point of the show. The final segment saw the Male Teens rating go from 2.2 to 2.5, Males 18-49 go from 2.5 to 3.2, Female Teens drop from 0.6 to 0.5 and the rating with Women 18-49 go from 1.1 to 1.2.


Rock/Cena & HHH/HBK/Taker stuff are the only things getting gains.

Also, I agree that the build for Rock/Cena is gone now. The match however, is still huge.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

So what did the opener do? Seems like it did a 3.2, but I might be off on that. If that's the case that's actually pretty good considering how the show went as a whole. 10pm timeslot under-performed, even with Rock ensuring he would be there at some point during or after the Cena/Henry match. Taker/HHH/HBK gaining 600,000 viewers isn't good by their recent standards, but the fact it was the highest point in the show makes up for it. Oh, and Rock's segment gaining is very good as well.


----------



## Smith_Jensen

deatawaits said:


> Okay this is really really worrying.


What is there to be worried about, Raw was the #1 ranked show on cable on Monday.


----------



## Hladeit

Smith_Jensen said:


> What is there to be worried about, Raw was the #1 ranked show on cable on Monday.


Because of very less competition this monday. A 3.1 two weeks before mania is infact alarming. 


So Cena/Henry/Rock didnt gain much in 10pm huh? From the past weeks of massive gains for taker/HHH, I personally thought it was a new pattern in how casual fans tuned in at 10 PM. Guess i was wrong.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

10 spot did bad considering who was in it. Then again matches hardly ever do well in that spot. Still, not good at all. And the closing segment did pretty bad too. What the hell, these three do awesome in the 10 spots but don't do so well in the overrun. How did the opener do? Looks like it was the second best of the night behind the overrun.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

53 people tuned into the open segment Wrestlinfan35


----------



## Suit Up

i love how they put punk in the first segment, just to boost his confidence knowing there was no way he could loose viewers


----------



## kokepepsi

More on RATINGS


> Viewers were down 10% compared to last week and very slightly lower than the other shows of the past month. For whatever reason, the Mania build is not resulting in audience build this year. Again, I don’t believe that indicates a bad buy rate because we’ve seen over the years a lack of correlation between ratings and subsequent buy rates. But for a company that rests so much on ratings, this number two weeks out from Mania on a show so loaded with the old stars has to be frustrating. The same show two weeks out from Mania last year, where Rock wasn’t there live, did a 3.35 rating and 5.13 million viewers.


With the added Rock/Cena doc they will show all week I am bumping my prediction to 1.1million buys


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Some of the time slots are strange for that doc on other channels. E! has it one at 1am in the morning in the US.


----------



## the fox

> Santino Marella vs. David Otunga and the interview with The Rock outside in Philadelphia gained 205,000 viewers



this actually mean that the rock promo gained atleast 600,000 viewers because forsure santino vs otunga lost atleast 450,000 + what kane and show lost
but maybe i got it wrong


----------



## deatawaits

the fox said:


> this actually mean that the rock promo gained atleast 600,000 viewers because forsure santino vs otunga lost atleast 450,000 + what kane and show lost
> but maybe i got it wrong


Well it can be.But then again we can say that for any segment that loses viewers as we only have ratings for quarters and a there can be many segments in one Quarter.


----------



## Starbuck

Viewership dropping by 10% is just...I don't even know what it is tbh. I think this is just going to end up being one big anomaly. Ratings going in with so much star power doing horrible numbers yet the actual event probably breaking records. There's no other explanation for it other than WTF lol. Still the HIAC and Rock/Cena are the only things that are able to gain in viewers but it was nothing all too great this time around.


----------



## A-C-P

How many weeks in a row are these segments breakdown reports going to keep saying that the gain for the 10 PM slot was a weak gain for that slot (outside of the one week it gained 800,000 for the HHH/Taker/HBK stuff) before they jsut start to realize thats the new "norm" for that quater?

As for the segment breakdown, not really surprising that Rock/Cena and HHH/Taker/HBK stuf are the only quarters that gained b/c thats really the only programs the WWE has made seem matter.


----------



## Alco

Anyone know if DVR recordings get calculated into the viewership numbers?


----------



## wb1899

Alcoholic said:


> Anyone know if DVR recordings get calculated into the viewership numbers?


We see Live+SD (Live program viewing plus any DVR viewing that happens up until 3am the morning after the program airs) numbers every week.


----------



## SimplyIncredible

Damm...once Rock and the rest of the former attitude era stars are finished....WWE are going to be in a tad spot of trouble I think.


----------



## SimplyIncredible

But they will still get 1 million buys + for WM *EASILY.*

There are *SO* many WWE marks out there who will pay for whatever shit Vince throws at them just because it has a WWE logo on it, you could have a toad vs a badger for the main event and you would still get 500k+ buying it, just out of habit.

The only reason WWE is still making money is because of their legions of marks who will literally never stop watching, and never stop ordering PPVs, no matter how bad it gets, and see WWE *as* pro wrestling, not just a pro wrestling company.

The following the company gained during the attitude era has pretty much ensured they can put on any old shit and always make money, those people will always be there .

Ratings dont mean half as much for WWE as they used to when WCW was around.


----------



## LINK

GillbergReturns said:


> Last years Mania begs to differ.
> 
> Here's the thing people have to remember. Rock Austin it doesn't matter they only bring a spark nowadays.
> 
> If Austin Punk started in February and the match finally occurred next April that spark would be long gone too.
> 
> Rock's return worked last year but it's not going to work this year because it is a year old and we have seen 14 promos out of the 2.
> 
> WWE needed to bring in Shaq for the ratings but they didn't and now are paying the price of relying on a stale feud.


Last year's mania was terrible.

Rock and Austin don't matter anymore? Its how they are booked and who they are booked with that doesn't matter anymore.

Austin versus Punk has a lot more routes of entertainment then ROCK "You are a bowl of fruity pebbles with ***** Cena garden gnome fans!" CENA "I am? No I am not Mr. Hollywood sell out (disregard that I have made movies too). I am the NE Pats." 

The Rock has spiked the ratings when he is on so his return is working. The rest of the program is lacking though.

What will Shaq seriously do for the ratings? He doesn't even PLAY anymore. How about they bring in Jersey Shore's Situation to chat with Jericho about how Punk will end up like him? Or Rock brings in Eminem so they can both put Cena in his place? Peyton Manning can come with Rock and Eli with Cena and attest to how nobody cares that Eli won the Super Bowl just that Peyton is now in Denver.


----------



## Hladeit

I wonder if they can hit a 3.5 next week for the go-home show?

Although if its a 3 hr show, i understand its highly unlikely.


----------



## Ray

If WWE can't manage ATLEAST a 3.3 rating next week, they seriously need to be worried.


----------



## D.M.N.

Rock/Cena - 2.134m
9pm - 4.438m
10pm - 4.448m

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...the-american-teenager-pawn-stars-more/126127/

Ouch, big ouch. I think it's fair to say this Road to WrestleMania has been the worst viewership and ratings wise since before the Attitude Era...


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Rating did go up in the 2nd hour, which is good.


----------



## A-C-P

Well its time for the weekly over reaction to THE RATINGZ!!!! :vince3


----------



## Hladeit

WOW thats bad! 

I dont think they are going to do a million buys. Dave Meltzer keeps pushing this notion that Ratings do not reflect the PPV buyrates but i really dont agree with him on this. Poor ratings shows the lack of interest from the casual fans.


----------



## Green Light

Just for comparison, the last segment between Rock and Cena last year got 7.2million viewers


----------



## The-Rock-Says

> The Rock vs. Cena special did 2.13 million viewers. Shows of that type usually don't do giant numbers and it's more the idea of it swaying people to buy the show. It's roughly double what the best UFC shows of that type have done when it comes to ratings.


Wrestling Observer.


----------



## Josh Parry

Green Light said:


> Just for comparison, the last segment between Rock and Cena last year got 7.2million viewers


This year's probably did a million or so less than that if I had to guess.


----------



## Ray

What is that, like a 3.1?

WWE is goin' down after WrestleMania bro's :lmao

Shame too, I had money saved up for Mania 29 

EDIT: WOW, that's actually a monstrous viewership for the special. Even if the RAW viewership was less then spectacular, glad to see people are at least interested in Rock/Cena (Y)


----------



## D.M.N.

The-Rock-Says said:


> Rating did go up in the 2nd hour, which is good.


They went up by ten thousand viewers. For your go-home show to WrestleMania, that's alarmingly poor. And the year-on-year comparisons look embarrassing:

2009
Hour 1 - 4.999m
Hour 2 - 5.396m

2010
Hour 1 - 4.141m
Hour 2 - 4.869m
- previous weeks had over 5 million, I think this may have clashed with Impact

2011
Hour 1 - 5.445m
Hour 2 - 6.231m

2012
Hour 1 - 4.438m
Hour 2 - 4.448m


----------



## Green Light

The ratings have been terrible for this RTWM, no two ways about it. I know buyrates and ratings aren't always correlated but when you have more than one million less viewers than you had the year before it doesn't look good for this year's number. I honestly think they will do less than a million buys globablly, the interest in the product just isn't there it seems


----------



## Ray

D.M.N. said:


> They went up by ten thousand viewers. For your go-home show to WrestleMania, that's alarmingly poor. And the year-on-year comparisons look embarrassing:
> 
> 2009
> Hour 1 - 4.999m
> Hour 2 - 5.396m
> 
> 2010
> Hour 1 - 4.141m
> Hour 2 - 4.869m
> - previous weeks had over 5 million, I think this may have clashed with Impact
> 
> 2011
> Hour 1 - 5.445m
> Hour 2 - 6.231m
> 
> 2012
> Hour 1 - 4.438m
> Hour 2 - 4.448m


Weird how 2010 had better ratings WrestleMania season then 2009...And WOW, were those actually the numbers a year ago? That's really crazy.

Seriously, if that thing up there isn't a wake up call for Vince, I don't know what would be. Seriously, isn't this the worst viewership since the 90's?


----------



## Gang

Miz as a Champion = ratings.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

I think the ratings would of been way up if they held off announcing the Cena/Rock match for the year. Maybe announcing it with 6 weeks to go, that would of been a ratings spike.

But they have earned a ton of money off announcing it a year out, with record breaking ticket sales and a likely 1 million buys. So, they haven't lost.


----------



## kokepepsi

Hladeit said:


> WOW thats bad!
> 
> I dont think they are going to do a million buys. Dave Meltzer keeps pushing this notion that Ratings do not reflect the PPV buyrates but i really dont agree with him on this. Poor ratings shows the lack of interest from the casual fans.


They are banking on the youtube friday thing and the week long special.
No wonder they kept saying they were gonna hit 1.3million for this mania... Vince got some tricks up his sleeve

Don't forget UFC gets shit ratings and they get huge buys
WCW would get good ratings and do horrible buyrates


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Interesting numbers year by year. Last year of course had Rock when he was still red hot off his return, so the fact the second hour drew over 6 million shouldn't be surprising (also it was the Taker/HHH/HBK segment on that show that was great as well). I'm sure the 2010 show would've been a bit better without Impact being there, but this year there really is no excuse. I suppose the absence of Taker, HHH, and HBK hurt the overall rating a bit, but they didn't get anywhere near 5 million in either quarter. Though the Rock/Cena special doing well is a good sign, and perhaps they did over 5 million at the end, the overall number is definitely way too low for the final Raw before WM.


----------



## TheF1BOB

Remember, The Rock just came back plus the first Cena/Rock interaction took place as well. It was a big buzz.

12 months later, I literally don't give a shit about this feud like others have pointed out so I don't blame people seeing this as a turnoff.


----------



## metr0man

That was before WWE Creative had a chance to kill the angle.

WWE writers can suck the heat out of any angle.


----------



## RatedR IWC Star

like ive been saying for weeks ...this comes down the fact that wwe is going back to the older stars that fans like myself are sick of ...fans want newer faces at the top in main event matches and main event feuds ...not rock/cena which was basically last year wm main event anyway as miz was just a sideshow and tripleh /undertaker for the 3rd time at wrestlemania ....only 1 new star is in 3 of the top matches at wrestlemania 

and you combine that with just a terrible terrible build for wrestlemania and this is the ratings you end up with


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Really shitty numbers, but I still don't agree with people who are saying the numbers are going to be even worse after Mania. I think they'll be practically the same. A couple of months ago when Rock, Michaels, Haitch and Undertaker were nowhere to be seen, and closing shows with Punk and Johnny Ace, they were doing just as good and sometimes even better numbers than the go home show for Wreslte fucking Mania. I think they'll be fine after 'Mania. It's just weird how badly Rock/Cena is drawing.


----------



## SimplyIncredible

Ratings dont mean that much in this case, they will still get MASSIVE buys for WM just because its Cena/Rock.

The youtube thing on Friday should be good publicity.

Still, once WM is done and Rock is gone, and the rest of the AE guys are finished, WWE is pretty fucked unless they make new stars quickly.

Mid-90's hell here we come.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

What Youtube thing on Friday? If they're taking over the site with ads, then that's fucking genius.


----------



## Nodune

-The rating for Raw, which as previously reported was a 3.04 is the lowest since February 13th. The show ranked #1 in total viewers on cable TV last night and saw increases in most male demographics. It did take another hit among males 12 -0 17, scoring the lowest rating in that demo since January 16.

Last year's Raw before WrestleMania did a 3.81 rating with 5.84 million viewers, while two years ago it did a 3.24 rating and averaged 4.51 million viewers.

3.04 is fucking brutal for the go home show. But this is what happens when you have brodus freaking clay dancing on the Wrestlemania go home show. They deserve this.




Wrestlinfan35 said:


> What Youtube thing on Friday? If they're taking over the site with ads, then that's fucking genius.



They are taking over the Youtube homepage ads for a whole day. Good publicity.


----------



## kokepepsi

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> What Youtube thing on Friday? If they're taking over the site with ads, then that's fucking genius.


They said it on Raw
something about them being on the frontpage the enitre day 

lol at 3.04 for the go home show of the biggest wrestling PPV of the year


----------



## corfend

Gang said:


> Miz as a Champion = ratings.


This is true. Most must-see indeed. Well, more must-see than Punk at any rate.


----------



## Tony Tornado

Damn, this worries me. I'm praying for Wrestlemania to beat the all time record for PPV buys but sadly I'm not very confident. Let's hope the shows' quality picks up when Punk is back to full-time main-eventing.


----------



## GillbergReturns

No action, no suspense. Not surprised there's no ratings for the build.

Rock Cena, Taker Triple H had no physical interaction and Punk Jericho had very little physical interaction.

You do have to add some meat to the bones to get people to watch.


----------



## Hladeit

If this doesnt do a million buys, Vince would be embarrassed.


----------



## The Tony

Ouch! ouch! ouch!


----------



## ecabney

The people have spoken, and don't give a fukk about Rock/Cena.


----------



## sharkboy22

WWE allowed it to the reach the point where no one cares bout Cena/Rock. Just piss poor booking. 

So, I guess Miz=bigger draw than Triple H, Orton and Rock?

Rock didn't bring shit to ratings which shows how much that 1) The past stars only bring short run spike ratings and 2) The newer talent sucks and no one is interested in them or the product as a whole.

WWE wants to do a part 2 and 3? Part 1 is already turning out to be a damn flop. The Rock isn't gonna draw in 2012. The Rock isn't what the people want in 2012. What they want is REASON to watch wrestling. Good characters, good feuds.

RAW was complete shit last night. It felt more like the road to Capitol Punishment rather than the Road To Wrestlemania. Just no reason to look forward to the PPV at all.


----------



## The Tony

Wrestling is dying. No matter what are the feuds...no matter who is on the show...wrestling is dying.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

sharkboy22 said:


> *WWE allowed it to the reach the point where no one cares bout Cena/Rock. Just piss poor booking. *
> 
> So, I guess Miz=bigger draw than Triple H, Orton and Rock?
> 
> Rock didn't bring shit to ratings which shows how much that 1) The past stars only bring short run spike ratings and 2) The newer talent sucks and no one is interested in them or the product as a whole.
> 
> WWE wants to do a part 2 and 3? Part 1 is already turning out to be a damn flop. The Rock isn't gonna draw in 2012. The Rock isn't what the people want in 2012. What they want is REASON to watch wrestling. Good characters, good feuds.
> 
> RAW was complete shit last night. It felt more like the road to Capitol Punishment rather than the Road To Wrestlemania. Just no reason to look forward to the PPV at all.


Completely agree. I believe it was Scrilla that said the WWE doesn't know how to book for 4-6 weeks of build and he was right.


----------



## Clique

sharkboy22 said:


> WWE allowed it to the reach the point where no one cares bout Cena/Rock.


We'll see if this is true after the buyrate is released.


----------



## zkorejo

Good.. WWE deserves it. They are getting way too comfortable with their shitty product. I hope bad ratings and lost viewers would slap some sense into them soon.


----------



## Stadhart

sharkboy22 said:


> WWE allowed it to the reach the point where no one cares bout Cena/Rock. Just piss poor booking.
> 
> So, I guess Miz=bigger draw than Triple H, Orton and Rock?
> 
> Rock didn't bring shit to ratings which shows how much that 1) The past stars only bring short run spike ratings and 2) The newer talent sucks and no one is interested in them or the product as a whole.
> 
> WWE wants to do a part 2 and 3? Part 1 is already turning out to be a damn flop. The Rock isn't gonna draw in 2012. The Rock isn't what the people want in 2012. What they want is REASON to watch wrestling. Good characters, good feuds.
> 
> RAW was complete shit last night. It felt more like the road to Capitol Punishment rather than the Road To Wrestlemania. Just no reason to look forward to the PPV at all.


raw was awful this week - as it is on early in the morning in the uk i sky+ it and watch it tues night and i forwarded through the whole thing in about 10mins and sped through another one of rock's boring promos (he just doesnt seem to care) and then for some reason watched cena go through his boring rise above hate bit - awful

might not even bother with wrestlemania this year as i know ill get it and then regret spending the £15 afterwards - will just dig out some old dvds instead


----------



## rizzotherat

Hladeit said:


> WOW thats bad!
> 
> I dont think they are going to do a million buys. Dave Meltzer keeps pushing this notion that Ratings do not reflect the PPV buyrates but i really dont agree with him on this. Poor ratings shows the lack of interest from the casual fans.


It isnt an opinion it is a researched fact.


----------



## CrystalFissure

DA ROK IS A RATING DROR.

Nah seriously, this is a very surprising rating, quite honestly. I mean, it's the GO HOME show, no matter how shit it may be, a 3.04 is woeful. I'm sure the WWE brass are NOT happy with that shit..
I wonder why people weren't interested?


----------



## D.M.N.

I was checking the breakdowns and how they've progressed over the past year for Rock segments:

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

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


----------



## Izual_Rebirth

CrystalFissure said:


> DA ROK IS A RATING DROR.
> 
> Nah seriously, this is a very surprising rating, quite honestly. I mean, it's the GO HOME show, no matter how shit it may be, a 3.04 is woeful. I'm sure the WWE brass are NOT happy with that shit..
> I wonder why people weren't interested?


Because none of the feuds feel personal \ intense \ emotional.

It just feels like WWE is going through the motions.

Apart from maybe HHH vs Taker and even that was underwhelming and ended last week.


----------



## Rock316AE

Horrendous rating for the go home show. But you still don't know about the million buys because they're doing different promotion. The Rock/Cena special did 2 million viewers which is good, they need to sell 300k with their promotion on youtube and this special on different channels. The product is so cold, worst roster of all time but million buys is still possible.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

The roster needs a better direction. Rocks appearances currently have not been a ratings remedy to the mediocre storylines, so IMO it is that people are not interested in the material of the feuds.


----------



## Coffey

Rock316AE said:


> Horrendous rating for the go home show. But you still don't know about the million buys because they're doing different promotion. The Rock/Cena special did 2 million viewers which is good, they need to sell 300k with their promotion on youtube and this special on different channels. The product is so cold, worst roster of all time but million buys is still possible.


But aren't they shooting for 1.3 million buys? I seem to recall that being the number Meltzer said. If so, I don't know, maybe I guess, but I think they're going to be disappointed.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

When Rock came back last year he was a big special attraction. He was there twice before Mania.

But he almost like a regular guy now. He's been on RAW more times than the Undertaker has been in the last year than Taker has in 2.

The attraction wears off after a while him being there week in week out. Just a fact.

If Steve Austin was to get into a program with anyone and was there for like 6 weeks straight it would be the same. His special attraction would wear off.


----------



## Green Light

I don't know where Meltzer got the 1.3 million number from but there is no way they get that high, I'll be quite surprised if they even top 1 million


----------



## kokepepsi

WWE has stated they want this Mania to break the record for most buys which is 1.2 million from WM 23
So that is where the number comes from


----------



## Ray

Aside from Rock/Cena, I think you guys are forgetting Triple H/Taker/Shawn as well. Rock/Cena may not do 1 mill+ at this point, but with a Hell In A Cell on the card involving 3 of the biggest stars of all time? That's 1 mill+ easy.

And if WWE can't manage to get ATLEAST 1.1 mill+ with this card, then they're in some serious trouble for the future Mania's.


----------



## deatawaits

A 3.04 for go home show of WM featuring one of the biggest matches of all time.They are going to score buyrates but what after mania? the ratings will be in mid 2s.


----------



## kokepepsi

Segment Breakdown
Wrestling Observer Newsletter


> Raw on 3/26 did a 3.05 rating and 4.44 million viewers, numbers along the lines of most of the shows in the last few months, but a number that has to be disappointing as the final show leading into WrestleMania. Raw was the highest rated show on cable for the night. There was no other major sports competition and The History Channel shows that usually beat Raw were in reruns.
> 
> Last year’s WrestleMania go-home show which featured Rock and Cena in the key angle did a 3.84 rating and 5.89 million viewers, so a 21% decline in ratings and a 25% decline in total viewers.
> 
> The audience was 66.9% male. In the key demos, Male teens did a 2.3 (down 4% from last week), Males 18-49 did a 2.7 (same as last week), Female teens did a 0.9 (down 10%) and Women 18-49 did a 1.3 (up 18%).
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, Randy Orton & Sheamus vs. Daniel Bryan & Kane gained 239,000 viewers in a segment that usually doesn’t do well.
> 
> Santino Marella vs. David Otunga and the Undertaker/HHH/Shawn Michaels vignette lost 32,000 viewers.
> 
> Eve Torres vs. Kelly Kelly lost 246,000 viewers.
> 
> The C.M. Punk vs. Christian angle, Chris Jericho interview and Brodus Clay vs. Curt Hawkins in the top of the hour segment gained 132,000 viewers to a 2.96 rating which is terrible for the 10 p.m. quarter.
> 
> Big Show vs. Primo lost 104,000 viewers.
> 
> Mark Henry vs. Great Khali and the Team Teddy vs. Team Johnny complete teams angle gained 362,000 viewers which is very good.
> 
> The Rock/Cena show close gained 626,000 viewers which is again nothing special for the overrun, closing at a 3.57.
> 
> As far as the final segment growth, Teen boys went from 2.3 to 2.6, Teen girls from 1.1 to 1.0, Males 18-49 from 2.8 to 3.5 and Women 18-49 from 1.2 to 1.5


DVR NUMBERS WHY NOT


> The* 3/5 *episode of Raw did 477,000 homes watching on tape or DVR, or about 13% of total viewers. That was the second week of Rock’s return and it may have been the largest (and if not, was close to the largest) number of DVR viewers for an episode of Raw in history. Last year, Rock saw DVR/tape viewership nearly double when he came back, but ratings themselves also went way up. This is only one week and the show he returned at was at normal levels, so it will be interesting to see if this ends up being the case for the rest of the pre-Mania run


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

A minor angle like the Teddy/Johnny thing doing good is great news. Good for the opening tag match as well. The 10 quarter did pretty bad, but that quarter always does bad when there's a commercial in the middle of it. Punk/Christian angle had like what, 3 minutes of that quarter? With the rest being a commercial and useless Brodus Clay. And again, Cena/Rock does extremely underwhelming. Seriously, what the hell? I shouldn't be too surprised since the promos are complete trash every week, but the shock of the angle doing bad is still there.

Overall very meh numbers.


----------



## Nodune

Mark "Ratings" Henry does it again. The guy is a legit draw.




Wrestlinfan35 said:


> A minor angle like the Teddy/Johnny thing doing good is great news. Good for the opening tag match as well. The 10 quarter did pretty bad, but that quarter always does bad when there's a commercial in the middle of it. *Punk/Christian angle had like what, 3 minutes of that quarter? *With the rest being a commercial and useless Brodus Clay. And again, Cena/Rock does extremely underwhelming. Seriously, what the hell? I shouldn't be too surprised since the promos are complete trash every week, but the shock of the angle doing bad is still there.
> 
> Overall very meh numbers.


 what about Jericho's interview? Punk was present. He didnt increase ratings with him being present there, no matter how long the segment was.


----------



## Carcass

Kane and DB as a team = ratings.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Meh, Clay probably caused a big loss of whatever Punk/Christian/Jericho gained. 

Team Teddy/Team Johnny really seems to be hot with the casuals. If I'm not mistaken, they've gained every week in odd quarter hours haven't they? (note: I could be completely wrong on this).


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

sharkboy22 said:


> WWE allowed it to the reach the point where no one cares bout Cena/Rock. Just piss poor booking.
> 
> So, I guess Miz=bigger draw than Triple H, Orton and Rock?
> 
> Rock didn't bring shit to ratings which shows how much that 1) The past stars only bring short run spike ratings and 2) The newer talent sucks and no one is interested in them or the product as a whole.
> 
> WWE wants to do a part 2 and 3? Part 1 is already turning out to be a damn flop. The Rock isn't gonna draw in 2012. The Rock isn't what the people want in 2012. What they want is REASON to watch wrestling. Good characters, good feuds.
> 
> RAW was complete shit last night. It felt more like the road to Capitol Punishment rather than the Road To Wrestlemania. Just no reason to look forward to the PPV at all.


The Rock is fine, but if creatively it sucks, hes no use. Just like everyone else.


----------



## RatedR10

Looking at those breakdowns, I wonder how much Clay/Hawkins lost since it was put together with the Jericho/Punk/Christian angle.

Mark "Ratings" Henry continues to live up to the name!


----------



## Hladeit

Where in the breakdown does it say "Clay/Hawkins lost viewers"?? Am i missing something here?


----------



## Hollywood Hanoi

This threads gonna get VERY interesting in the next few weeks, probably even more so than pre-mania, how often can you say that.
one thing to note though - despite his huge ppv numbers, when Brock was a coach for a few weeks on The Ultimate Fighter a few years ago (before he pulled out with illness), the ratings were seen a big disappointment for a star of his calibre.
Doubt that matters now though, i know ill be watching.


----------



## Jeffy

I hope tonight's raw will deliver (anything above 3.3 would be fantastic), there wasn't anything that would cause a major drop or deserved. Whole show was action packed just like most of the shows back in the day. If they continue to book this way next few weeks and ratings deliver, than I think we will get major changes.


And WWE seriously needs to reconsider dropping stupid draft and just have 2 "supershows" - going from this to 15 min segment of Jinder Mhala taking off his turban? Fuck that. Raw looks goes much better when you have this big pool of wrestlers and you can mix them up however you want and they don't have to rely on same wrestlers every week.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

BROCK =DEM RATINGZ!!!!!!!111


----------



## Green Light

I don't know if Brock was out there for long enough to bring in a big overrun otherwise it would be huge I'm sure. I expect a lot of MMA fans will have tuned in to see him, the guy was a massive draw for UFC. I'm certain those fans won't be watching every week but I'm sure he got some eyes on him just to see what he did on his return


----------



## D.M.N.

Prediction:

Hour 1 - 5.2m
Hour 2 - 4.8m

Both hours may be over 5 million, but after mediocre ratings before WrestleMania I'm not so sure. Hour 1 definitely should be over 5 million.


----------



## tony265982

WELL, THE PRODUCT HAS CHANGED SINCE THE ATTITUDE ERA....


----------



## God Movement

2nd hour should be 10 million for that Brock return dammit


----------



## A-C-P

Well the Raw after WM is usally one of the most watched Raws of the year (with the #s pre-WM this year thoug who knows) so debuting Brock at this Raw was a good move IMO.


----------



## Marv95

The NCAA championship game was on at the same time, so keep that in mind if the ratings turn out to be "disappointing". Next week will paint a much bigger picture.


----------



## D.M.N.

Hall of Fame - 2.659m
Hour 1 - 4.957m
Hour 2 - 5.072m

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...fe-of-the-american-teenagerpawn-stars/127242/

Extremely surprised Hour 2 was _ahead_ of Hour 1.


----------



## A-C-P

Actually, going up against the NCAA championship game I think these are good #s but like an above poster said next weeks #s will be the big story IMO.


----------



## holt_hogan

Any idea how these numbers convert to the Nielsen rating?


----------



## D.M.N.

holt_hogan said:


> Any idea how these numbers convert to the Nielsen rating?


About a 3.3.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

hmm seems like brock got the people tuning in 
quarter hours will make things clear


----------



## the fox

not a bad rating at all yes not great but still better than the last 4 weeks
i don't think brock played a big part in the rating this week 
i think it was mostly because of how mania ended


----------



## OML

wat an amazing show.. the two nights made me so proud to be a wrestling fan


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

D.M.N. said:


> Hall of Fame - 2.659m
> Hour 1 - 4.957m
> Hour 2 - 5.072m
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...fe-of-the-american-teenagerpawn-stars/127242/
> 
> Extremely surprised Hour 2 was _ahead_ of Hour 1.


I was expecting bigger numbers honestly. The RAW after the Rumble did better. Next week should _really_ be telling, though.


----------



## Mike`

20 million people watched the NCAA game so a 2.0 is good imo. Next week it should increase even more.


----------



## GOON

Business dead.


----------



## SteenIsGod

3.4


----------



## holt_hogan

3.43 rating


----------



## Theproof

The next show should get a better rating.


----------



## holt_hogan

Raw post WM Historical analysis:

4/2/07 Raw - 4.29 rating, 5.86 million viewers
3/31/08 Raw - 3.92 rating, 5.49 million viewers
4/6/09 Raw - 3.92 rating, 5.95 million viewers
3/29/10 Raw - 3.66 rating, 5.50 million viewers
4/4/11 Raw - 3.82 rating, 5.60 million viewers
4/2/12 Raw - 3.43 rating, 5.01 million viewers

Source: http://www.411mania.com/wrestling/news/232372


----------



## Striker

People tend to record shows a lot more now so Im not suprised about ratings drops


----------



## holt_hogan

Striker said:


> People tend to record shows a lot more now so Im not suprised about ratings drops


They are factored in.


----------



## Brye

5 million people watching your show is a success regardless, imo. Especially considering the biggest NCAA game of the year was on.


----------



## 123bigdave

Striker said:


> People tend to record shows a lot more now so Im not suprised about ratings drops


It's been like this since 20005 . . . .Not a valid excuse anymore


----------



## Striker

holt_hogan said:


> They are factored in.


Ahh ok. Never knew that, thanks for the info.


----------



## English Dragon

The number of people watching on the internet increases every year. So ratings decline a little because of that. Also 5 million viewers is pretty good.


----------



## purple_gloves

I usually steer clear of this bullshit thread, but i was just wondering, is Lesnar a big enough draw to make the ratings spike in the next year?


----------



## Chrome

purple_gloves said:


> I usually steer clear of this bullshit thread, but i was just wondering, is Lesnar a big enough draw to make the ratings spike in the next year?


Absolutely, especially if he can draw in those UFC fans.


----------



## RatedR10

Honestly, I wasn't expecting a huge rating because of the basketball game on. This is still a good rating when you factor in other ways people watch it, whether they PVR it or stream it online instead. People are still watching. I'm interested in seeing these breakdowns though.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

5 million people watching is good.

They aren't ever going to go back to 8 or 9 million people watching every week. Because wrestling isn't hot anymore.

If they can get 5 million or near abouts every week, then if I was Vince I would be happy.


----------



## dxbender

Don't get why people expect huge numbers. Attitude Era only had like 7M viewers....

Look at tv ratings for Fox, shows like the simpsons barely even gets 5M viewers. Family Guy just barely passes 5M as well


----------



## The-Rock-Says

3.4.

Which is good.


----------



## The Tony

Good rating and WWE deserves it.


----------



## Jeffy

Give me a HELL YEAH! Please WWE try atleast a month of booking like this before going to PG shit again.


----------



## The Absolute

Last Monday was the first time in years that I watched Raw on TV from start to finish. What surprises me is that second hour went well beyond the average viewership. And this was while you're going up against Kentucky/Kansas on CBS. Kudos to the Miami crowd, WWE Creative and everyone who made that episode a massive success!


----------



## holt_hogan

Jeffy said:


> Give me a HELL YEAH! Please WWE try atleast a month of booking like this before going to PG shit again.


Raw bumped to TV-14 late 1999, during 97, 98 and most of 99 it was still PG. But good PG.


----------



## Rock316AE

Not a great rating but decent. The interesting thing about this is next week, to see if Lesnar is this rare game-changer to every aspect of business like Rock was in 2011. The show was awesome BTW.


----------



## chronoxiong

3.4 rating sounds good to me. I would be satisfied with that since it was contending with the NCAA College Basketball Title Game too. I hope it will stay in that range in the upcoming weeks. That's the big test.


----------



## Gang

Show was amazing so next week may be bigger rating.


----------



## wb1899

Next weeks numbers (against new episodes from American Pickers and Pawn Stars) will be interesting.


----------



## Marv95

ChromeMan said:


> Absolutely, especially if he can draw in those UFC fans.


Only if they cut down on the typical childish crap. The 3 Stooges hosting next week doesn't make it a promising start.


----------



## -Extra-

I think of myself as a huge wrestling fan but even for me it was tough choice to choose Raw over the NCAA final game. I'm pretty sure many people had to choose the same and went with college hoops. With that in mind the rating is pretty awesome. And taken in mind the strong reception this episode received, it could easily be taken into next weeks Raw. 
People love cliff-hangers and when they are left with more questions than answers after every Raw.


----------



## Dub

It a decent rating given the atrocious creative decisions that were made in the prior year. I hope WWE realizes that people need to be convince that they are not bullshitting anymore and things are going in the right direction. Personally the only thing that has me interested is Jericho/Punk and Brock/Cena, the rest I really dont care for.


----------



## Lvlgod

Overrun should do a 4.0


----------



## Shazayum

Great rating, and even better that it was a good show. Now people will tune in more next week instead of being repulsed by a shit show.


----------



## D.M.N.

Odd that there's no breakdown yet. Although if I had to guess, Q2 had a ~1 million drop from Q1; Q5 increased about ~300k from Q4 and the overrun increased about ~700k. I think that's about it.


----------



## kokepepsi

Segment Breakdown
Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 4/3 for the day after WrestleMania did a 3.42 rating and 5.02 million viewers. The number was up from most recent weeks and it did go against the NCAA basketball finals. But the Raw after Mania often goes against the NCAA finals and it was down 11% in both ratings and viewers from a 3.84 rating and 5.62 million viewers for the day after Mania show last year. It was the highest rated show on cable for the night. The NCAA finals with Kentucky vs. Kansas did a 12.29 rating and 20.87 million viewers, up from last year’s 11.70 rating and 20.06 million viewers.
> 
> The show did 70.1% male viewers, a higher than usual male skew.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, the Rock promo opened at a 3.6, which for the first segment after Mania is nothing that special.
> 
> Santino Marella vs. Dolph Ziggler vs. Jack Swagger lost 295,000 viewers, which is less than I’d have thought.
> 
> Lord Tensai vs. Alex Riley stayed even, which to me is a big success since it was a TV squash match the type that people are scared causes people to tune out, plus it involved someone who most fans don’t know.
> 
> C.M. Punk vs. Mark Henry gained 148,000 viewers which is again a poor top of the hour gain.
> 
> The Sheamus/Alberto Del Rio angle lost 297,000 viewers, which isn’t too bad for that period in the show.
> 
> Cody Rhodes vs. Kofi Kingston stayed even.
> 
> Zack Ryder vs. The Miz lost 150,000 viewers.
> 
> And the final segment, with John Cena and Brock Lesnar, gained 1,036,000 viewers to a 3.9 overrun, one of the best gain segments of the past few months.
> 
> The number next week is going to be very interesting because if Lesnar is going to be a ratings draw for the short-term, next week will tell the story.


----------



## A-C-P

Seriosuly how many weeks in a row are they going to put in that report "which is a weak gain for that timeslot" for the 10 PM slot before they just accept that it prolly jsut is the new norm for that slot?

Outside of the one week where HHH/Taker/HBK stuff did an 800,000 gain at 10 PM that slot has gained only 150-300 people roughly every week for the last few months.


----------



## Starbuck

Lesnar bringing dem gains DURRR. Tensai staying even is a great sign for him. Rhodes/Kingston staying even is great too. Punk/Henry is a shitty 10pm gain but that's expected now unless it's Rock/Cena/HHH/Taker in there. People actually staying put and not leaving is probably the best news they can take from this, especially when those segments involved midcarders. If they can keep that up then they just might be able to turn those stagnant segments into gaining segments. Overrun drew a monster number which is always nice to see. Next week shall be mighty interesting. Everybody knows Rock is gone, Taker/HHH didn't turn up here so we all know they're gone too. It's all about Lesnar/Cena. I fully expect things to go up next week. I wonder if it will happen.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

well not that bad and the segments that did loose viewers didnt loose as many as normally


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

10 spot doesn't do well whenever there is a commercial in the middle of it. Cena/Henry with Rock didn't do so hot either a couple of weeks ago. It's just obvious promos do a lot better than matches when it comes to the 10 spot. But this week's 10 spot segment with Henry/Punk was only about 100k down from the opening segment with the Rock, which did a 3.6, so that's a good number honestly.

Last segment is impressive. Lesnar's shocking return is obviously the big reason why. Let's see how long the spark will last.


----------



## Starbuck

400,000 - 500,000 used to be/still should be the norm for 10pm and is probably what they are aiming for every time. So anything below that is shitty. When they do a big angle in there it usually delivers numbers around that mark or does even better than that depending on what it is. So a 100,000 - 200,000 gain isn't very good at all, that's why they keep saying it.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

With the opener with The Rock doing a 3.6, the Punk and Henry match doing a 3.5, the ending with Lesner doing a big 3.9, and with the segments before and after them not losing much/staying even, how was this show not a 3.5?


----------



## Loudness

As much as I like Lesnar, the reason why the overrun did so great was mostly because of Cena and his storyline with The Rock, more precisely the resolve of their match. Lesnar appeared only in the last three out of fifteen minutes at the end, people were interested about the outcome at WM and how Cena would react, I doubt a million of extra viewers had some instinct that would magically tell them that Lesnar would be in the last three minutes, especially since unadvertised returns of huge stars are extremely rare nowadays.


----------



## Starbuck

Loudness said:


> As much as I like Lesnar, the reason why the overrun did so great was mostly because of Cena and his storyline with The Rock, more precisely the resolve of their match. Lesnar appeared only in the last three out of fifteen minutes at the end, people were interested about the outcome at WM and how Cena would react, I doubt a million of extra viewers had some instinct that would magically tell them that Lesnar would be in the last three minutes, especially since unadvertised returns of huge stars are extremely rare nowadays.


Cena potentially losing his shit = ratingz. I wonder what will happen when he eventually does lol. I'll say it before and I'll say it again, heel Cena is something that can truly reinvigorate the WWE and flip it on it's head.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Starbuck said:


> 400,000 - 500,000 used to be/still should be the norm for 10pm and is probably what they are aiming for every time. So anything below that is shitty. When they do a big angle in there it usually delivers numbers around that mark or does even better than that depending on what it is. So a 100,000 - 200,000 gain isn't very good at all, that's why they keep saying it.


Except this week it was only about 100k down from the opening segment with The Rock. So that's not a bad number. They're not going to magically find 200k other people who didn't already tune into the show before hand, to see Henry/Punk. This week's 10 spot did good. I don't think it's a shitty gain when realistically, the most it could've gained would be 200k. 

If Tensai's match lost viewers instead of staying even, and Henry/Punk gained the viewers that match lost, it would be considered a good number. Even though the same amount of people watched the Henry/Punk match. Makes no sense to me, tbh. Instead of calling the 10 spot a bad gain, we should be congratulating Tensai for keeping viewers interested and sticking around.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Starbuck said:


> 400,000 - 500,000 used to be/still should be the norm for 10pm and is probably what they are aiming for every time. So anything below that is shitty. When they do a big angle in there it usually delivers numbers around that mark or does even better than that depending on what it is. So a 100,000 - 200,000 gain isn't very good at all, that's why they keep saying it.


Not fair to say because the gain in viewership isnt really important as the overall viewership number. 

On the RTWM Rock and Cena were gaining 500'000 to 600'000 how ever the actual number they were hitting were 3.5's/3,6's. Considering Henry and Punk are no way near established as those to are and hitting numbers that are nearly the same/not that far behind as the numbers Rock and Cena were drawing is very good.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Yeah, most of the audience probably didn't know Lesnar signed or was going to debut Monday night. Most just wanted to see Cena's reaction and if the feud between him and the Rock would continue.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

jblvdx said:


> Not fair to say because the gain in viewership isnt really important as the overall viewership number.
> 
> On the RTWM Rock and Cena were gaining 500'000 to 600'000 how ever the actual number they were hitting were 3.5's/3,6's. Considering Henry and Punk are no way near established as those to are and hitting numbers that are nearly the same/not that far behind as the numbers Rock and Cena were drawing is very good.


The picture in your sig, holy shit. :mark:


----------



## Starbuck

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Except this week it was only about 100k down from the opening segment with The Rock. So that's not a bad number. They're not going to magically find 200k other people who didn't already tune into the show before hand, to see Henry/Punk. This week's 10 spot did good. You can't say it's a shitty gain when realistically, the most it could've gained would be 200k.
> 
> If Tensai's match lost viewers instead of staying even, and Henry/Punk gained the viewers that match lost, it would be considered a good number. Even though the same amount of people watched the Henry/Punk match. Makes no sense to me, tbh. Instead of calling the 10 spot a bad gain, we should be congratulating Tensai for keep viewers interested and sticking around.


It's a shitty gain. It doesn't matter how it holds up against the other segments on the show. 10pm is a time when people are flipping over from other shows and should be stopping, seeing whoever is on Raw at that time and staying put to watch them. That's why they tend to put a lot of big segments with the big stars on in that particular slot because other than the start and the end, it's one of the easiest places they can gain a huge number of viewers. If they're only able to get less than 200,000 people then it's a shitty gain, simple as that.


----------



## A-C-P

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Except this week it was only about 100k down from the opening segment with The Rock. So that's not a bad number. They're not going to magically find 200k other people who didn't already tune into the show before hand, to see Henry/Punk. This week's 10 spot did good. I don't think it's a shitty gain when realistically, the most it could've gained would be 200k.
> 
> If Tensai's match lost viewers instead of staying even, and Henry/Punk gained the viewers that match lost, it would be considered a good number. Even though the same amount of people watched the Henry/Punk match. Makes no sense to me, tbh. Instead of calling the 10 spot a bad gain, we should be congratulating Tensai for keeping viewers interested and sticking around.


I wanted to add this as well with my post, just didn't have the time to write it out like this, so thanks (Y).

The overall veiwership # is ALOT more important than the gain at the 10PM slot. so b/c the segment with Tensai managed to keep viewers tuned in, the resulting smaller gain for the 10PM slot is looked at as bad? Seems like bad logic to me. To me this means fewer people switchedd off Raw btw 9 and 10 so in turn fewwer of them had to tun back in at 10PM. By this logic if 5 million people were watching at the beginning of Raw and Raw lost no viewers throught stayed at 5 million the whole show for every segment (I know its not going to happen jsut an example) The focus would be the shitty no gain at the 10PM slot and not the fact that they were able to keep 5 million viewers tuned in for the whole show?

But honestly my biggest problem is not if its a shitty gain or not my issue is they've reported it that way the last 10-12 weeks as a shitty gain so does it really still need to be said? was my main issue.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Any way you spin it, whether it's a good gain or not, the normal gain for the 10pm timeslot the last several months is in the 100k-300k range when Taker/HBK/HHH aren't involved. It doesn't make the gain good, but it's not Punk or Henry's fault, it's just the way viewership patterns have changed. At the same time, the overall viewership number/rating for that slot seems to be one of the best of the night, so I'd consider the overall number good for Punk/Henry, even if the gain wasn't... if that makes any sense. 

Rock starting out with a 3.6 after Mania isn't great, but much like what I said above the overall number is still one of the strongest numbers of the show, so it's all good. As mentioned by (I believe) Starbuck, it's nice to see the drops not anything too dramatic and that people were sticking around. Cena's promo/Lesnar's return gaining a million viewers is excellent. Lets see what happens next week with the numbers.


----------



## D.M.N.

For anyone wondering, having done a quick bit of calculations, Brock Lesnar's return and the final segment with John Cena had *~5.7 million viewers*.


----------



## A-C-P

D.M.N. said:


> For anyone wondering, having done a quick bit of calculations, Brock Lesnar's return and the final segment with John Cena had *~5.7 million viewers*.


Like *Starbuck* and others have said Cena possibly losing his shit = RATINGS. And when (if) he finally snaps and goes full heel it could be the thing that thrwos the WWe on its head and gives it the "spark" it needs.


----------



## Hemen

A-C-P said:


> Like *Starbuck* and others have said Cena possibly losing his shit = RATINGS. And when (if) he finally snaps and goes full heel it could be the thing that thrwos the WWe on its head and gives it the "spark" it needs.


Cena won't turn heel. Vince gets alot of money from the merchandise sales he gets from the kids and the women. 

Do you really think Vince will risk losing money which he can if the heel turn won't be sucessfull?

In 2010 it was hundred and million something WWE earned by John Cena. 

And WWE has the spark it needs by Brock Lesnar, do you know how many viewers it got on youtube the john cena and Brock thing? It got many. 

Brock was in the mainevent in the highest grossing ufc ppv. 

If WWE used Brock in the right way, WWE will get more popular without a Cena heel turn.


----------



## Rock316AE

Last year the HHH promo in the opening segment did 3.7 in a show that did 3.8 overall so to open with a 3.6 in a show that did 3.4 is big, I'm sure they opened a lot less for the first quarter with the Ace and then gained huge during the Rock promo. Rock's promo was more than the 15 minutes quarter so he was probably responsible for the strong second quarter and the fact that they didn't lose 800k or something like that.

Henry/Punk was a terrible gain for the top of the hour but expected, Henry is a big TV draw but he needs to work with a star to do it, I hope to see him more on RAW, I don't know if there's a draft or not. 

Lesnar WASN'T a factor in that 3.9, nobody knew he was going to be there, they did big gain for the "Cena calling out The Rock" concept as a way to end the feud, same thing happened the night after SVS when they did the same thing with Cena's segment and teaser with Rock. Next week should be the test for Brock, to see if he's the big, rare game-changer like Rock was in 2011 to every aspect of business, from house show business to ratings.


----------



## Lvlgod

Rock316AE said:


> Last year the HHH promo in the opening segment did 3.7 in a show that did 3.8 overall so to open with a 3.6 in a show that did 3.4 is big,


Which RAW show are you talking about here?



> I'm sure they opened a lot less for the first quarter with the Ace and then gained huge during the Rock promo. Rock's promo was more than the 15 minutes quarter so he was probably responsible for the strong second quarter and the fact that they didn't lose 800k or something like that.


Ace opening the show was 2:20 minutes. I dont think that affected the opening seg with the rock.




> Henry/Punk was a terrible gain for the top of the hour but expected, Henry is a big TV draw but he needs to work with a star to do it, I hope to see him more on RAW, I don't know if there's a draft or not.


Agreed on Henry, The guy is legit.




> Lesnar WASN'T a factor in that 3.9, nobody knew he was going to be there, they did big gain for the "Cena calling out The Rock" concept as a way to end the feud,


Not sure if this right. Lesnar is a big name. Cena calling out the rock would have gained a good amount of viewers but Lesnar's return must have spiked the overrun numbers to a million.



> Next week should be the test for Brock, to see if he's the big, rare game-changer like Rock was in 2011 to every aspect of business, from house show business to ratings.


If its a test, then its an unfair one because The rock returned feb 2011, MANIA season. And every other week, they were bringing back the big names like taker,hhh,austin,jbl etc... not to mention John cena going back to his old gimmick for the first time in years.

The Rock vs Cena, a 10yr dream match, was the True game changer for 2011. Pretty sure Lesnar alone, post mania, wont be able to top that.


----------



## Rock316AE

I'm talking about the RAW after WM27.


----------



## Kabraxal

Considering the show was actually relatively stable... the 10 slot gain isn't horrible. Seriously, for a while RAW was all over the place with 700000 dips then 500000 gains all over the place. This stayed flat for the most part... those that tuned in didn't really leave. That is the power of a good show though. And if they can continue having shows like this, they'll start seeing not only stable numbers throughout the show, but growth from week to week as people start believing that the WWE might actually be consistent again.


----------



## Cliffy

Hemen said:


> Cena won't turn heel. Vince gets alot of money from the merchandise sales he gets from the kids and the women.
> 
> Do you really think Vince will risk losing money which he can if the heel turn won't be sucessfull?
> 
> In 2010 it was hundred and million something WWE earned by John Cena.
> 
> And WWE has the spark it needs by Brock Lesnar, do you know how many viewers it got on youtube the john cena and Brock thing? It got many.
> 
> Brock was in the mainevent in the highest grossing ufc ppv.
> 
> If WWE used Brock in the right way, WWE will get more popular without a Cena heel turn.


That estimate was a collective guess at how much Cena has drawn throughout his career, not for just one year.

And it was still exaggerated.


----------



## D.M.N.

Breakdown, note, the increase from Q4 to Q5 is bigger than in the breakdown, otherwise Hour 1 would not make any sense whatsoever. In any event:

Hour 1
Q1 - 3.60 rating / 5.18 million
Q2 - 3.34 rating / 4.88 million
Q3 - 3.34 rating / 4.88 million
Q4 - 3.34 rating / 4.88 million

Hour 2
Q5 - 3.50 rating / 5.16 million
Q6 - 3.30 rating / 4.87 million
Q7 - 3.30 rating / 4.87 million
Q8 - 3.20 rating / 4.72 million
Overrun - 3.90 rating / 5.75 million

I'm almost certain that 3.90 rating for a quarter is the highest since May 2nd last year.


----------



## Rock316AE

^ 
Rock in Boston before SVS drew a 4.0 with a 4 minutes overrun. After that you go back to May 2nd to the 4.1 Rock's segment in the second quarter.


----------



## D.M.N.

Rock316AE said:


> ^
> Rock in Boston before SVS drew a 4.0 with a 4 minutes overrun. After that you go back to May 2nd to the 4.1 Rock's segment in the second quarter.


Well the overrun was from 23:00 to 23:12. Lesnar came out at 23:09. I wouldn't be at all surprised if RAW broke 4.0 in the closing minutes as it went off the air.


----------



## Rock316AE

We're going to see next week how big Lesnar can be for WWE. I'm sure that he's going to do a 4.0+ segment.


----------



## Hladeit

3.9 Overrun is really good, considering the poor RTWM ratings. I think Rock-Cena final segment from the go home show gained like 630,000 viewers with overrun to close the show with a 3.57 right?


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

D.M.N. said:


> Breakdown, note, the increase from Q4 to Q5 is bigger than in the breakdown, otherwise Hour 1 would not make any sense whatsoever. In any event:
> 
> Hour 1
> Q1 - 3.60 rating / *5.18 million*
> Q2 - 3.34 rating / 4.88 million
> Q3 - 3.34 rating / 4.88 million
> Q4 - 3.34 rating / 4.88 million
> 
> Hour 2
> Q5 - 3.50 rating / *5.16 million*
> Q6 - 3.30 rating / 4.87 million
> Q7 - 3.30 rating / 4.87 million
> Q8 - 3.20 rating / 4.72 million
> Overrun - 3.90 rating / 5.75 million
> 
> I'm almost certain that 3.90 rating for a quarter is the highest since May 2nd last year.


Yeah, Mark Henry and Punk doing that close to The Rocks opening promo is very good. People need to stop looking at the views and gains and start looking at the actuel number. Anyone who is saying Punk nd Henry did bad is just hatin or blind.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

D.M.N. said:


> Breakdown, note, the increase from Q4 to Q5 is bigger than in the breakdown, otherwise Hour 1 would not make any sense whatsoever. In any event:
> 
> Hour 1
> Q1 - 3.60 rating / 5.18 million
> Q2 - 3.34 rating / 4.88 million
> Q3 - 3.34 rating / 4.88 million
> Q4 - 3.34 rating / 4.88 million
> 
> Hour 2
> Q5 - 3.50 rating / 5.16 million
> Q6 - 3.30 rating / 4.87 million
> Q7 - 3.30 rating / 4.87 million
> Q8 - 3.20 rating / 4.72 million
> Overrun - 3.90 rating / 5.75 million
> 
> I'm almost certain that 3.90 rating for a quarter is the highest since May 2nd last year.


So the Henry/Punk match gained 280k, and is only 20k below the opening Rock promo. Someone tell me again how that's a "shitty number"?

5.75, damn that's huge. Next week's numbers should be very interesting. Also, Q2-4 staying even like that is damn impressive, kudos to them.


----------



## A-C-P

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> So the Henry/Punk match gained 280k, and is only 20k below the opening Rock promo. Someone tell me again how that's a "shitty number"?
> 
> 5.75, damn that's huge. Next week's numbers should be very interesting. Also, Q2-4 staying even like that is damn impressive, kudos to them.


Completely agreed here, really great show "ratings-wise" all around IMO. ANd it was also a good show from a content standpoint as well with the "shock" return of LEsnar at the end so good chance these numbers could carry over to next week IMO.


----------



## Jerichosaurus

I think the amazing crowd kept the viewers because they were so creative and kept my interest throughout the show.


----------



## D.M.N.

Interesting poll on the Wrestling Observer website: http://www.f4wonline.com/component/poll/624-what-rating-do-you-expect-raw-to-do-on-monday

What rating do you expect Raw to do on Monday? - 167 voters
2.8 or less - 3.0%
2.9 - 1.2%
3.0 - 7.8%
3.1 - 18.0%
3.2 - 19.2%
3.3 - 16.2%
3.4 - 12.0%
3.5 - 12.0%
3.6 - 3.6%
3.7 - 3.6%
3.8 - 0.6%
3.9 or more - 3.0%

I personally went for a 3.6 rating. Would be surprised if it didn't see any boost - a 3.2 or 3.3 rating would be a _drop_ on last week.


----------



## Kennt 160711

3.7 average next week.


----------



## Green Light

I think you guys are being way too optimistic, I'm sure Brock's segment will do well but I don't expect those fans watching to stick around for anything else. I guess the first and last segment will do well enough to get them a 3.4 overall


----------



## Rock316AE

Predictions:

*3.5-3.6* overall 

*3.9* for the first segment, probably Cena because they would want the big draw in the first segment after the big angle just like after Rock came back

*4.2* for Brock's main event segment.

They should be happy with a 3.4 but I think Brock can bring a different fanbase even it's just for the first week.


----------



## Headliner

Someone do me a favor and get a list of the ratings since January 4th so I can edit the first page with the ratings history. It makes no sense that the current rating isn't on the first page.


----------



## Green Light

http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2012-tv-ratings/


----------



## Brave Nash

Green Light said:


> http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2012-tv-ratings/


Wow Impact gets more than UFC shocked.


----------



## JasonLives

Rock316AE said:


> Predictions:
> 
> *3.5-3.6* overall
> 
> *3.9* for the first segment, probably Cena because they would want the big draw in the first segment after the big angle just like after Rock came back
> 
> *4.2* for Brock's main event segment.



I can totally see the first segment doing big like that. But after watching this show. All the extra viewers they had would have left before the first hour was even over. And they wont be coming back. It was a bunch of "comedy" and squash matches. 
The ME will do good but nothing special ratings wise.

Rating will probably be 3.2-3.3.

Next week its back to 3.0-3.1.

Just like the weeks with The Rock, the major problem is the midcard. Its terrible. Nothing is going on, just random crap. Its been this for over a year now and for some reason WWE doesnt seem to bother with it.

Imagine if Raw didnt borrow any SmackDown superstars. It would be the ME guys + jobbers all around.

The rating pattern will be like its always is, the ME guys draw from good to great while the midcarders have the viewers change the channel.


----------



## Rock316AE

Rock316AE said:


> Predictions:
> 
> *3.5-3.6* overall
> 
> *3.9* for the first segment, probably Cena because they would want the big draw in the first segment after the big angle just like after Rock came back
> 
> *4.2* for Brock's main event segment.
> 
> They should be happy with a 3.4 but I think Brock can bring a different fanbase even it's just for the first week.


After watching this horrendous show it's definitely not 3.5-3.6. The only good thing about this RAW was the Lesnar/Cena brawl and the Lesnar backstage promo. The Cena/Otunga match is not doing 4.0+, I can see the first quarter doing something big, then drastic drop throughout the show. Instead of doing a Cena promo on the first quarter, then promote Lesnar for the main event, they gave it all away in 12 minutes.


----------



## charmed1

The episode deserves to tank. It was horrible.


----------



## Hollywood Hanoi

I'll be shocked of theres not a massive drop off during and after the first hour this week. The opening was so awesome i thought theyre determined to really hook the new viewers brock has brought and keep them there but holy crap the show just nosedived after that.


----------



## D.M.N.

Here we go....

Hour 1 - 4.230m
Hour 2 - 4.342m

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ican-teen-la-las-full-court-life-more/128247/

And on that note we say goodbye ratings gain and hello a few months of 2.9's...  Genuinely a bad, bad rating for the 'E. The poll on Wrestling Observer where most people voted for a 3.1 rating may well turn out to be spot on.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

D.M.N. said:


> Here we go....
> 
> Hour 1 - 4.230m
> Hour 2 - 4.342m
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ican-teen-la-las-full-court-life-more/128247/
> 
> And on that note we say goodbye ratings gain and hello a few months of 2.9's...


Ahah, that's what I was expecting.

Hopefully they will take note that bringing in a supposed "megastar" (something Lesnar is far from) once in a while will not help them in the long run. Hell it won't even help in the short term, if the product isn't intriguing. I feel like they're hotshotting what could be a huge feud between Cena and Lesnar. Not smart.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

D.M.N. said:


> Here we go....
> 
> Hour 1 - 4.230m
> Hour 2 - 4.342m
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ican-teen-la-las-full-court-life-more/128247/
> 
> And on that note we say goodbye ratings gain and hello a few months of 2.9's...  Genuinely a bad, bad rating for the 'E. The poll on Wrestling Observer where most people voted for a 3.1 rating may well turn out to be spot on.


Hey look adult audience! Lesners back!, however be sure to stay tuned to watch dancing fat man, Santino the man child, The Three Stooges....


----------



## deadmau

Wrestling is dying...


----------



## the fox

well after this week next week may be worse


----------



## A-C-P

#s are not surprising, Lesnar is not the MEGASTAR they think he is, and underwhelming show for the most part. But damn is this gonna be good bring on the "blame game" I can't wait....


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Without Rock = - demz ratinz go downz


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Yeah because they were doing so well when Rocky was there.


----------



## God Movement

What a pathetic rating. Even Lesnar can't save the WWE. Time to get rid of the stupid guest hosts and focus on putting on a good show every week.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Yeah because they were doing so well when Rocky was there.


Punk = ratinz fail unk


----------



## SimplyIncredible

Not surprising.

We will definitely be in the 2.0's come summer.

Wrestling really is just so flat in America today.


----------



## deadmau

Punk has no drawing power.


----------



## Green Light

Punk needs to be fired. This is all his fault. Obviously all the attitude era fans tuned in to see Brock this week but tuned out once they saw that ROHbot indyrific no draw talentless hack crying about his alcohol problems.


----------



## deadmau

he has that fucking belt for about 6 months and he can't draw. if he didn't draw until now then he'll never be a draw.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

deadmau said:


> he has that fucking belt for about 6 months and he can't draw. if he didn't draw until now then he'll never be a draw.


Uh..

:lmao



The-Rock-Says said:


> Punk = ratinz fail unk


Lesnar and Rock = "ratinz fail" unk2

Now onto actual, serious discussion. This shouldn't come as a shock to anyone. The night started off with potential but last night's show just went downhill until the halfway mark, then again downhill until the closing segment. The midcard is really dragging the show's potential down. The talent is there, too.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

The-Rock-Says said:


> Punk = ratinz fail unk


2nd hour had more people watching with Punk filling in 20 mins of that hour. While Lesnar filled 20 mins of the first hour and got less views. 

Lesnar is a flop lolz:austin


----------



## raz0rz

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Yeah because they were doing so well when Rocky was there.


Yes they were, you fool. Check the ratings from last year when The Rock returned.


----------



## raz0rz

Green Light said:


> Punk needs to be fired. This is all his fault. Obviously all the attitude era fans tuned in to see Brock this week but tuned out once they saw that ROHbot indyrific no draw talentless hack crying about his alcohol problems.


I agree.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Some people here, holy...


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Uh..
> 
> :lmao
> 
> 
> 
> Lesnar and Rock = "ratinz fail" unk2


Rock = biggest draw in WWE history :jordan2

Punk = Hutz


----------



## Brye

These ratings discussions are hilarious.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Much more entertaining than RAW every week. luv it.


----------



## GillbergReturns

I find it funny that the same people who blame the mid cards for the lack of draw in today's wrestling are the same guys who state how terrible the Attitude era's mid card scene was. 

This isn't about tag team, IC titles. The product just isn't enjoyable right now and unfortunately bringing in Rocky and Lesnar just draws them down to "x" wrestlers level. Although with Lesnar it's a little bit different than with the Rock. It just seems like he's crawling back to the WWE. 

As Bill Parcells would say. You can't make chicken salad with chicken sh**.


----------



## purple_gloves

Why can't people just stop talking bullshit in this pointless thread, and accept the fact that wrestling just isn't that popular nowadays. It really is as simple as that.

They can bring back as many old guys as they want. Put on as many combinations of matches between those guys as they want. It will not make a difference.

Wrestling needs a NEW crossover superstar. A new Hogan or Rock. Somebody new to capture the public's imagination and become a household name. Until then, the ratings are going fluctuate up and down, but without a doubt, will stay somewhere between 4.5 to 5.5 million people.

You only question is, is that guy in the WWE right now, or not?


----------



## kokepepsi

UFC audience don't even watch their own TV shows just buy the PPV's so I doubt many of them were gonna cross over 

Lesnar was never a big draw + he worked Smackdown so even the WWE audience he can attract back that wants to watch him is not that big

PPV should be interesting though. Might do about 300k


----------



## The-Rock-Says

If ER does 300k, they that would be great.


----------



## ben_fletch

*Following the return of Brock Lesnar, this past Monday's edition of WWE Raw scored a 3.1 cable rating. This is down from last week's 3.43 rating. The show did 4.29 million viewers, down from 5.01 million last week.

Read more: http://www.WrestlingInc.com/wi/news/2012/0410/551656/brock-lesnar/#ixzz1rgEE4PE5*


----------



## kokepepsi

Rating 3.1

Mark Henry new World HeavyWeight Champion next week(aka WWE champion)


----------



## Kamaria

The lot of you are FUCKING IDIOTS.

Drop by .1 = WWE is coming to an end, Punk can't draw, 2.0s by summer, etc.

No, not really, no. Ratings fluctuate like this all the time. You can't begin to draw conclusions unless there is a continuous, downward trend. There will always be 4 mil viewers who will always watch the show unless WWE does something to seriously alienate it's viewers. It's not Punk, Lesnar, Cena, or anything, it's the product as a whole that's gotten GENERALLY lower ratings, but they aren't quite in the disaster area some of you think they are. The more stuff there is on TV, the more ratings percentages will go down across the board naturally anyway, which is why RAW can't get 6s or 7s anymore.

I won't pretend the WWE doesn't have it's own problems, but it pisses me off whenever you people sit here and try to make conclusions about ratings draws over the change of .1. Now, if the ratings continue to downslide...


----------



## holt_hogan

I think Vince Russo was right in his interview last week with Wade Keller, something needs to fundamentally change and like he mentioned that doesn't mean going back to an attitude era type product. Although he didn't have the answer, and it seems neither do WWE right now - something does need to fundamentally change if they are to start attracting a respectable rating again.


----------



## kokepepsi

2011
Raw on 4/11 did a 3.45 rating and 5.46 million viewers
Cena vs. Truth in the gauntlet finals with the post-match run-in gained 1,021,000 viewers, doing a 3.91 overrun. 

LOL yeah downward trend does not exist


----------



## GillbergReturns

kokepepsi said:


> 2011
> Raw on 4/11 did a 3.45 rating and 5.46 million viewers
> Cena vs. Truth in the gauntlet finals with the post-match run-in gained 1,021,000 viewers, doing a 3.91 overrun.
> 
> LOL yeah downward trend does not exist


Well they've bent over backwards for the IWC this year and that hasn't helped at all. They've brought in huge stars like Rock and Brock and that hasn't helped at all.

As much as we want to point fingers and blame this that or the other the truth is wrestling is just a diminishing product.


----------



## Brye

There honestly isn't any logic to the ratings. As hard as you guys try, there isn't. It's just whether or not people feel like tuning in/what's on TV/etc.

You guys look far too deep into this stuff and considering that I assume at least most of you don't have marketing degree, you may just be talking out of your ass.


----------



## Brave Nash

Brock can't Draw bring back Batista. The Animal has more fans world wide.


----------



## Rock316AE

Wrestling is dying, that's a known fact. Too much TV time goes to nobodies that will never be real stars to the general public, then you got the mid carders and the main eventers which on this show, you got only two in Lesnar and Cena, are booked horribly. The show was horrendous in terms of position, instead of doing Lesnar on the first segment, they should have done the Lesnar interview in the ring with Cena coming out to end the show with this brawl. Then you close the show with the only thing worth watching on this circus. 

As for ER, Who knows? Lesnar is the biggest star in MMA history and one of the biggest stars in wrestling history, a legit megastar but they can ruin him until then, who knows, it's going to up from last year, 280k-300k.


----------



## Brye

Rock316AE said:


> Wrestling is dying, that's a known fact. Too much TV time goes to nobodies that will never be real stars to the general public, then you got the mid carders and the main eventers which on this show, you got only two in Lesnar and Cena, are booked horribly. The show was horrendous in terms of position, instead of doing Lesnar on the first segment, they should have done the Lesnar interview in the ring with Cena coming out to end the show with this brawl. Then you close the show with the only thing worth watching on this circus.
> 
> As for ER, Who knows? *Lesnar is the biggest star in MMA history* and one of the biggest stars in wrestling history, a legit megastar but they can ruin him until then, who knows, it's going to up from last year, 280k-300k.


:lmao

Dat 4-3 record.


----------



## uknoww

Brye said:


> :lmao
> 
> Dat 4-3 record.


well he is by far the biggest ufc draw


----------



## Rock316AE

No, but: Dat MONSTER PPV NUMBERS.


----------



## Brye

As far as MMA stars go, he's nowhere near the top. I guarantee you there are hundreds of fighters that have made more money for the UFC than Brock. And that's not even what makes you a star in that SPORT.


----------



## Hollywood Hanoi

Brye said:


> As far as MMA stars go, he's nowhere near the top. I guarantee you there are hundreds of fighters that have made more money for the UFC than Brock. And that's not even what makes you a star in that SPORT.


Lesnar is by far the biggest draw in ufc history, look up his ppv numbers, of the top 6 selling ppvs he main evented 4, the next biggest consistent draw is george st pierre and his numbers are waaaay behind brocks.

Brock was by miles the biggest star in the ufc while he was there, simple fact, not opinion.


----------



## Fanboi101

Brock was the biggest star in ufc history. I think he has like 4 of the top 5 buyrates ever. There is a difference between greatest and biggest star. Clearly he isn't the greatest.


----------



## Rock316AE

Maybe if you're counting long term careers(by this logic, Taker is a bigger star than Steve Austin), but nobody did it on his level in the history of the sport. Yes, win-loss record is a huge part in the position but if you can't draw for your big fights, can't promote them and sell PPVs, you're not a star. Brock could lose 10 fights in a row if he can still draw the biggest numbers and he did it with Overreem in December. It's all about drawing power in the PPV business and UFC is a PPV business.


----------



## WWE

A 3.1


..Lesnar, dafuq?


----------



## SimplyIncredible

Brye said:


> As far as MMA stars go, he's nowhere near the top. I guarantee you there are hundreds of fighters that have made more money for the UFC than Brock. And that's not even what makes you a star in that SPORT.


You know nothing.

4 out the top 6 PPV buyrates in UFC history were main evented by Lesnar, he is BY FAR the biggest draw they have EVER, and will EVER have.

Not opinion, fact.

He made the UFC an insane amount of money.


----------



## Supreme Clientele

Brye said:


> As far as MMA stars go, he's nowhere near the top. I guarantee you there are hundreds of fighters that have made more money for the UFC than Brock. And that's not even what makes you a star in that SPORT.


Please name the "Hundreds" that have outsold a Lesnar UFC Event. There's a reason why he was the cover athlete of the UFC game over the "Hundreds" as you say that have more mainstream appeal than Lesnar does.


----------



## Brye

Supreme Clientele said:


> Please name the "Hundreds" that have outsold a Lesnar UFC Event. There's a reason why he was the cover athlete of the UFC game over the "Hundreds" as you say that have more mainstream appeal than Lesnar does.


Chuck Liddell had about 25 fights in the UFC. I bet those added up to quite more than Lesnar did in his six fights. I said more money overall, not from just one event.

I understand that his PPVs drew well but this is a sport and talent factors into it as well. Not saying it's everything, but it has much to do with it.


----------



## Theproof

Like I said in the Raw thread. It doesn't matter how many stars you have on a show if the writing is complete ass. They need to make it so that the whole show from top to bottom is interesting not just when Rock, Brock, Cena or Punk is on.


----------



## Mr Premium

Top ten highest buy rates in UFC history.....

Position	Date	Event	Buyrate
*1	7/11/2009	UFC 100: Lesnar vs. Mir 2	1,600,000*
*2	7/3/2010	UFC 116: Lesnar vs. Carwin	1,160,000*
3	12/30/2006	UFC 66: Liddell vs. Ortiz 2	1,050,000
4	5/29/2010	UFC 114: Rampage vs. Evans	1,050,000
*5	10/23/2010	UFC 121: Lesnar vs. Velasquez	1,050,000*
*6	11/15/2008	UFC 91: Couture vs. Lesnar	1,010,000*
7	12/27/2008	UFC 92: The Ultimate 2008	1,000,000
8	1/31/2009	UFC 94: St-Pierre vs. Penn 2	920,000
9	8/8/2009	UFC 101: Declaration	850,000
10	3/27/2010	UFC 111: St-Pierre vs. Hardy	850,000


Ethered....


----------



## Starbuck

I think I've figured it out people. Last week was actually able to hold viewers for most of the show and then pop a huge gain at the end. Solution to falling ratings? DAT HOT CROWD DURR


----------



## Brye

Mr Premium said:


> Top ten highest buy rates in UFC history.....
> 
> Position Date Event Buyrate
> *1 7/11/2009 UFC 100: Lesnar vs. Mir 2 1,600,000*
> *2 7/3/2010 UFC 116: Lesnar vs. Carwin 1,160,000*
> 3 12/30/2006 UFC 66: Liddell vs. Ortiz 2 1,050,000
> 4 5/29/2010 UFC 114: Rampage vs. Evans 1,050,000
> *5 10/23/2010 UFC 121: Lesnar vs. Velasquez 1,050,000*
> *6 11/15/2008 UFC 91: Couture vs. Lesnar 1,010,000*
> 7 12/27/2008 UFC 92: The Ultimate 2008 1,000,000
> 8 1/31/2009 UFC 94: St-Pierre vs. Penn 2 920,000
> 9 8/8/2009 UFC 101: Declaration 850,000
> 10 3/27/2010 UFC 111: St-Pierre vs. Hardy 850,000
> 
> 
> Ethered....


THAT'S NOT WHAT THE UFC IS ABOUT.


----------



## Starbuck

Brye said:


> THAT'S NOT WHAT THE UFC IS ABOUT.


Doesn't change the fact that he draws big time for PPV. UFC PPV anyways. WWE, that remains to be seen of course.


----------



## Da Silva

No DB no ratings. #Yes!Yes!Yes!


----------



## Brye

Starbuck said:


> Doesn't change the fact that he draws big time for PPV. UFC PPV anyways. WWE, that remains to be seen of course.


Being an MMA fan I find it ridiculous for someone to say he's the biggest star in the sport's history considering his talent level compared to others and the fact that guys like Liddell, Couture, Silva, GSP, Griffin, Rampage, etc are/were all very popular.


----------



## Starbuck

Brye said:


> Being an MMA fan I find it ridiculous for someone to say he's the biggest star in the sport's history considering his talent level compared to others and the fact that guys like Liddell, Couture, Silva, GSP, Griffin, Rampage, etc are/were all very popular.


I don't know if he's the biggest star but he certainly made them a lot of money, that can't be denied. Besides, since when was talent the sole driver for success? Have you seen half the idiotic millionaire music artists there are out there who couldn't hold a note to save their lives lol? A star's ability to draw/make money isn't down to his talent, it's down to his ability to make people want to see him. That's why in the wrestling world, Hulk Hogan is the biggest star ever while much more talented guys like Bret Hart aren't.


----------



## Rock316AE

What do you mean it's not what the UFC is about? Of course it is, it's about making money and selling PPVs which is why Lesnar even got his world title fight so fast, because Dana saw the huge potential in him as a drawing card and he was right because he became the biggest of all time, Dana will take the 100 most boring fights in MMA history if he can find another Brock Lesnar type superstar. I never said he was "THE BEST", biggest/greatest and best are two completely different things. Hulk Hogan is the greatest, Kurt Angle is the best.


----------



## The Tony

Brye said:


> *There honestly isn't any logic to the ratings.* As hard as you guys try, there isn't. It's just whether or not people feel like tuning in/what's on TV/etc.
> 
> You guys look far too deep into this stuff and considering that I assume at least most of you don't have marketing degree, you may just be talking out of your ass.


fpalm How about people are fucking tired about the WWE? I think it's that simple.


----------



## Lvlgod

Rock316AE said:


> What do you mean it's not what the UFC is about? Of course it is, it's about making money and selling PPVs which is why Lesnar even got his world title fight so fast, because Dana saw the huge potential in him as a drawing card and he was right because he became the biggest of all time, Dana will take the 100 most boring fights in MMA history if he can find another Brock Lesnar type superstar. I never said he was "THE BEST", biggest/greatest and best are two completely different things. Hulk Hogan is the greatest, *Kurt Angle is the best[/U*].




Kurt angle is a spot monkey.


----------



## The Tony

Lvlgod said:


> Kurt angle is a spot monkey.


:lmao


----------



## Mr Premium

Lvlgod said:


> Kurt angle is a spot monkey.


How the hell did this idea that Kurt is a spot monkey started anyway? I haven't watched TNA for like 7 years already.


----------



## KrazyGreen

Tony316 said:


> fpalm How about people are fucking tired about the WWE? I think it's that simple.


4.3 million viewers is still A LOT and generally always top 5 in cable for Monday Night. 

In terms of sheer ratings, the WWE would be happy with those numbers even if it doesn't meet certain criteria. 

Top shows like Mad Men and Breaking Bad on AMC garner around 2-3 million viewers weekly, and they're talked about religiously amongst pundits. The Walking Dead is on another level, garnering attitude era-esque numbers ranging from 6-8 million weekly.


----------



## Dub

Im sure Cena/Lesnar segments drew, its just the utter creative garbage in between didnt.


----------



## LarryCoon

I really believe Brock was the biggest drawing star in UFC considering those buyrates. He could've stayed on top for a lot longer if it weren't for him rushing back from his injuries.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

i love this thread


----------



## The-Rock-Says

All of Brocks UFC fights add up to over 5 million in buyrates. Amazing numbers. There biggest draw ever no doubt.


----------



## purple_gloves

Brye said:


> THAT'S NOT WHAT THE UFC IS ABOUT.


That's exactly what UFC is about!

It's a business mate. Lesnar's the biggest star they have had by a mile.


----------



## SimplyIncredible

Lvlgod said:


> Kurt angle is a spot monkey.


:lmao:lmao

Yeah, and the moon is made of cheese.


----------



## Lvlgod

LOL TNA marks. Its a well known fact kurt angle lacks in-ring psychology, relies on big spots too much.


----------



## A-C-P

#1Peep4ever said:


> i love this thread


So do I :lmao it never fails to dissapoint

As for the Lesnar discussion there is no argument that he was a great draw (possibly the best draw) for the UFC but I think alot of you are missing the "why" he was a great draw for the UFC(well at least one of the main reasons)

WWE (and wrestling fans) who never had been WFC fans for purchased UFC PPVS bought UFC PPVS to see Lesnar. UFC fans that aren't (and won't ever be) WWE fans are NOT going to tune into WWE programming and buy WWE PPVs just to see Lesnar thats why his UFC "drawing power" is not going to translate as much for the WWE. B/c the wrestling fans that purchased UFC PPVs to see Lesnar are already watching WWE (well some of them are still anyways LOL)


----------



## Hladeit

I think they did the right thing by having Lesnar/Cena open the show while the hype from his return the previous week was still fresh. RAW was shitty with fucking santino getting the most TV time.


----------



## hhhfan474

Ouch, I imagine losing 700,000 viewers from last week was not what they expected.

On a side note, yes Angle is a spot monkey (most people that say otherwise don't understand what a spot monkey is) Hint...you don't need to be a high flyer. But this place is full of Angle marks so i wouldn't bother Lvlgod.


----------



## LastDamnation

Lvlgod said:


> Kurt angle is a spot monkey.


Not sure if serious...


----------



## Brye

Angle is hit or miss for me. When he isn't trying to do 9 finishers, 14 minutes of ankle locks and 77 german suplexes, he's pretty good. But most of his work the last 7 years or so has been ridiculous. Very little psychology in his wrestling.


----------



## Duke Silver

Interesting rating, but not all that surprising. It was a terribly disjointed show. 

Going from an intense Brock/Cena scrap to comedy jobbers, three stooges and two irrelevant squash matches just killed all momentum. 

Then things picked up for the Punk/Jericho segment (which wasn't that good), and right after that we've got another squash (with the guy that no one has ever cared about and the guy that WWE killed), another three stooges bit, and a main event involving DAVID OTUNGA.

I don't blame anyone for tuning out.



LastDamnation said:


> Not sure if serious...


He is and he is.


----------



## xhc

Angle has just kept the same match formula he had used since 02.


----------



## Rock316AE

Angle's "formula" is gold, doesn't need to change. Best of all time with Benoit behind him.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Angle's great to me, but I'd never call him the best wrestler ever in WWE. The spot monkey arguments I've seen are valid.


----------



## AthenaMark

Angle was good for what he was but he was never, ever better than Benoit, Eddie, or prime Mysterio. Not at any point. He basically copied Benoit's style BIG TIME by the end of 2000 and relied on spots with submission counters as his cover up to technical wrestling. The Rock did more technical body work at WM 19 on Austin than Angle has ever done his whole career.


----------



## Mr Premium

AthenaMark said:


> Angle was good for what he was but he was never, ever better than Benoit, Eddie, or prime Mysterio. Not at any point. He basically copied Benoit's style BIG TIME by the end of 2000 and relied on spots with submission counters as his cover up to technical wrestling.


Eddie, Benoit and Angle all copied from each other anyway. They all had similar chain wrestling.



AthenaMark said:


> *The Rock did more technical body work at WM 19 on Austin than Angle has ever done his whole career*.


:lmao Now you lost me there. Either you lost your PPV feed or your DVD player broke down just before the Brock - Angle match. Angle was working on Brock's injured ribs for about a fourth of the match.

I'm sure this "Kurt Angle is a spot monkey" fad was actually started by those stupid anorexic Punk marks when Punk and Angle had that twitter war last year.

Angle is 20 times the wrestler Punk is and will always be. And unlike Punk, Angle was never carried by Cena to his greatest match ever.


----------



## AthenaMark

> Eddie, Benoit and Angle all copied from each other anyway.


Kurt Angle was basically a kid compared to them...they were on another level back in the 90s. Eddie was having 5 star matches in 1997 when Kurt Angle was shitting on pro wrestling in interviews left and right.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Mr Premium said:


> Eddie, Benoit and Angle all copied from each other anyway. They all had similar chain wrestling.
> 
> 
> 
> :lmao Now you lost me there. Either you lost your PPV feed or your DVD player broke down just before the Brock - Angle match. Angle was working on Brock's injured ribs for about a fourth of the match.
> 
> I'm sure this "Kurt Angle is a spot monkey" fad was actually started by those stupid anorexic Punk marks when Punk and Angle had that twitter war last year.
> 
> Angle is 20 times the wrestler Punk is and will always be. And unlike Punk, Angle was never carried by Cena to his greatest match ever.


Angle was great no doubt about that but Benoit and Eddie were just better.


----------



## Mister Hands

Can you imagine if any "proper" TV show was as wildly uneven as this week's Raw? "In this episode of Game of Thrones, we start with Robb Stark having a brutal swordfight with some Lannister soldiers. Then we immediately cut to a Dothraki being shit on by a horse with comedy squeals cut in, and then Jon Snow has to find the social grace to do a dance routine with a Wildling. Then cut back to the City Watch chopping babies' heads off." Of course they're fucking haemorrhaging viewers.


----------



## Starbuck

I wonder how much better and structured Raw would be if WWE actually operated under a system similar to most other TV shows. Imagine if they had storylines planned out months in advance? Imagine if they actually carried them out, building story arcs and drawing viewers in every week? Imagine they had real characters to work with? HOLY FUCK JESUS!! That would be amazing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 8*D Pity it will never happen lol.


----------



## Mister Hands

I'd be happy if they'd just settle on a tone. :hmm: Storylines are a lot of effort, but fuck, at least decide if you're smashmouth or slapstick, y'know?


----------



## Starbuck

Personally I would kill for some direction and consistency. It legit amazes me that they don't seem to be able to say to themselves, right, we have a PPV at the end of the month. We have 6/7 spots to fill on that card. We have 2 major championships and a handful of minor championships to work around too. For match A, these are the characters and this is the story we want to tell. We have 4/5 weeks to tell this story. On week 1 blah blah happens. On week 2 blah blah happens etc etc until we hit the PPV. At the PPV, this is what we want to happen and this is what we want to happen afterward. Then repeat the cycle. It shouldn't be that fucking hard but clearly it is lol.


----------



## Ron Paul 2012

LOL at WWE marks calling Kurt Angle a spot monkey. Kurt is the best in the world all around. The dude could talk/sell/work/and market himself into a nice package like no one else seen before him imo. Kurt Angle had it all


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

WWE doenst know what it wants to be at the moment. They dont know if they want reality based characters and stroylines which are directed at a more mature audience (Brock V Cena, Punk V Jericho) or they want to be sqeaky clean, harmless family fun full of zany characters and segments (Santino and Brodus dancing, The Three Stooges) and judging by the audience reaction on monday, I think the audience want the former.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Starbuck said:


> Personally I would kill for some direction and consistency. It legit amazes me that they don't seem to be able to say to themselves, right, we have a PPV at the end of the month. We have 6/7 spots to fill on that card. We have 2 major championships and a handful of minor championships to work around too. For match A, these are the characters and this is the story we want to tell. We have 4/5 weeks to tell this story. On week 1 blah blah happens. On week 2 blah blah happens etc etc until we hit the PPV. At the PPV, this is what we want to happen and this is what we want to happen afterward. Then repeat the cycle. It shouldn't be that fucking hard but clearly it is lol.


Right. I dont know it seems like its really hard for them to do that. And the way in which order they show segments is horrible too. First we have some intense shit with Brock and Cena which was really fucking intense and then they switch to Santino searching for the stooges i mean really?


----------



## D.M.N.

The thing that's more funnier is that no one is going down with injuries at the moment. If this was early 2007 where the roster was in dire straits (SmackDown had a lot of people on the shelf) I would understand, but fact is that the majority of their main roster has not got injured. Only Del Rio, Henry and Barrett are the three people that had injures, one of them 3 worked through their injury so in reality there is no excuse.


----------



## TheWFEffect

Last week RAW was a show filled with fresh characters and fresh feuds WWE advances at the start of the show very well Brock Vs Cena next is the US title contention which at the moment has four faces who are all great but what do we get a tag team match Clay and Santino vs Swagger Ziggler now here you have too hugely over faces who can cut great promos if they were allowed and Swagger and Ziggler still have their own infighting storyline going on does WWE do anything intresting with the dymanic they setup last week? NO. Eve got some advancement but she needs a team to her bidding, A wild Miz appears, Del Rio buries the actually over Ryder who should be feuding for the US title, Punk Jericho was good but its the same thing as last week and the storyline fell flat when it got hot shotted into a personal feud instead of it being about the match they could have built it up to the personal side after Mania, Rhodes shouldn't have lost the IC title and should't be getting owned by Big Show instead Rhodes should have continued to show that fire he has attacking Big Show and actually beating him down showing he is a threat but of course its proven take someones momentium away and they will be just fine.


----------



## Lvlgod

Ron Paul 2012 said:


> LOL at WWE marks calling Kurt Angle a spot monkey. Kurt is the best in the world all around. The dude could talk/sell/work/and market himself into a *nice package like no one else seen before him imo.* Kurt Angle had it all



LOL no. :kurt


----------



## Mister Hands

Starbuck said:


> Personally I would kill for some direction and consistency. It legit amazes me that they don't seem to be able to say to themselves, right, we have a PPV at the end of the month. We have 6/7 spots to fill on that card. We have 2 major championships and a handful of minor championships to work around too. For match A, these are the characters and this is the story we want to tell. We have 4/5 weeks to tell this story. On week 1 blah blah happens. On week 2 blah blah happens etc etc until we hit the PPV. At the PPV, this is what we want to happen and this is what we want to happen afterward. Then repeat the cycle. It shouldn't be that fucking hard but clearly it is lol.


You'd think hiring TV writers would help rather than hinder process, too. Instead, it's been the exact opposite.

That's what makes a lot of this thread's discussion so infuriatingly pointless. Punk's a draw, Punk's not a draw, Brock's a draw, no he's not, Rocky, Cena, whoever. They're all saddled with the exact same baggage of trying to captain a rudderless ship.


----------



## Green Light

Raw is essentially a shit sandwich, the bread (opening and closing segments) is usually good but everything else leaves a bad taste in your mouth. They need to get interesting mid card characters and angles that give people a reason to keep watching between the good stuff


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Green Light said:


> Raw is essentially a shit sandwich, the bread (opening and closing segments) is usually good but everything else leaves a bad taste in your mouth. They need to get interesting mid card characters and angles that give people a reason to keep watching between the good stuff


I was watching old WWF ppv dvds from 00-01 last night. I couldn't believe when I seen the mid-card matches getting promos for their matches. I just forgot they used to actually have stories for these mid-carders.


----------



## kokepepsi

stop saying buyrates when you mean buys
Starting to get annoying

Angle is GOAT so Rock316ae got something right


----------



## A-C-P

kokepepsi said:


> stop saying buyrates when you mean buys
> Starting to get annoying
> 
> Angle is GOAT *so Rock316ae got something right*


Hard to beleive, but yes he did. Not sure if Angle is *THE* GOAT but he is one of them.


----------



## Green Light

Rock316AE is always right, bitches need to show some respect


----------



## TheWFEffect

The-Rock-Says said:


> I was watching old WWF ppv dvds from 00-01 last night. I couldn't believe when I seen the mid-card matches getting promos for their matches. I just forgot they used to actually have stories for these mid-carders.


This is so true during the golden era and new generations era the mid card titles were treated the same as world titles up all the way until 1997 when WWE made the change to attitude and all creative went into the main event scene and Stone Cold/Vince's feud 1998 RAW's are kind of the same as the RAW today no feuds in the midcard and lower card whilist they had unique roster of talent just like they do too today but they need to use it but the mid card titles were used as hand bags for two years and in 2000 Jericho, Angle, Benoit, Chyna, Eddie, Rikishi and even Val Venis made the titles legit again and that carried on until 2005 when all creative then went into the new faces of the company Cena and Batista and since then the only title reign to mean somthing was Miz's.


----------



## Rock316AE

Green Light said:


> Rock316AE is always right, bitches need to show some respect


People love to believe in their fantasy and refuse to accept reality, you know, understandable.



kokepepsi said:


> *stop saying buyrates when you mean buys
> Starting to get annoying*
> 
> Angle is GOAT so Rock316ae got something right


Agreed, took time until I understood what they're talking about. Angle is the GOAT in the ring, no doubt. By looking at the 2000 ratings, Angle was always a decent TV draw since March, maybe that's why he got the monster push. Also on the top draws of the decade list Meltzer did a few weeks ago, Angle is number 6 even with 4 years in TNA. Once in a lifetime talent.


----------



## Starbuck

Rock316AE said:


> People love to believe in their fantasy and refuse to accept reality, you know, understandable.
> 
> 
> Agreed, took time until I understood what they're talking about. Angle is the GOAT in the ring, no doubt. By looking at the 2000 ratings, Angle was always a decent TV draw since March, maybe that's why he got the monster push. *Also on the top draws of the decade list Meltzer did a few weeks ago*, Angle is number 6 even with 4 years in TNA. Once in a lifetime talent.


OMGZ OMGZ!! Meltzer did a top draws of the decade list? Why didn't you post that shit and start a super mark war lol?


----------



## Rock316AE

Starbuck said:


> OMGZ OMGZ!! Meltzer did a top draws of the decade list? Why didn't you post that shit and start a super mark war lol?


I'm sure you want this thread, HHH is number 1 :Vince


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Rock316AE said:


> I'm sure you want this thread, HHH is number 1 :Vince


----------



## BrosOfDestruction

Green Light said:


> Rock316AE is always right, bitches need to show some respect


I know right. Dude was the only one who predicted Rock was gonna win because they had to send the crowd home happy + Bryan was going to get squashed cause he's a clueless indy hack. :lmao

Rock316AE:Rock4


----------



## Starbuck

Rock316AE said:


> I'm sure you want this thread, HHH is number 1 :Vince


Of course he's number 1. HHH is the GOAT. :hhh2 

You need to make the thread, start a super mark war between everybody else and then I'l come in and own you all lol. DO IT!

EDIT - Fuck, give me the link and I'll post it lol.


----------



## Rock316AE

I can do it, but for you on the HHH team, all you need to do is go to the WM21 program, then brag about the huge buyrates HHH drew in 2000, the big ratings he did in his regular time slot at the second quarter almost every week in 2000. And you beat them automatically.


----------



## Starbuck

Rock316AE said:


> I can do it, but for you on the HHH team, all you need to do is go to the WM21 program, then brag about the huge buyrates HHH drew in 2000, the big ratings he did in his regular time slot at the second quarter almost every week in 2000. And you beat them automatically.


Lol. I gave up those fights a long time ago. The people who hate him are always going to hate him no matter what I or anybody else says. That's why it's so funny to me to see all the Punk marks freaking out over all the threads made about him lately. They're never going to go away. May as well get used to them lol. It's still fun to mix it up in a thread like that every now and then though. And I'd genuinely like to see the list for my own self interest. I had a feeling Trips would be close to the top but I wasn't sure if he would be 1 or not.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Interesting about HHH being number 1. On the last list a few years ago, he wasn't even in the top 5, and that was done in 08, wasn't it? I suppose he had a good 09 year with the feud with Orton, then the whole DX/Legacy stuff, but still hard to believe that would push him up to number 1.

Unless this list is completely different from that one. I'm interested in seeing it myself.

Edit: Just re-read the original post and it was top of the decade, not all-time.  That doesn't surprise me he would be number 1 considering he was main event what felt like every show for the first half of the decade minus when he was injured, and then in the latter half had that Hardy feud and Orton feud.


----------



## Starbuck

HHH = No.1 for the decade

HHH = No. 5 all time, HIGHER than Taker


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

HHH is only number 1 because bigger stars like Rock and Austin made enough money and wanted to do other shit while HHH hogged the mainevent slot for ten years because he couldnt crossover to the mainstream (the exception being his oscar worthy performence in Blade 3).:troll


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> HHH = No.1 for the decade
> 
> HHH = No. 5 all time, HIGHER than Taker


Yeah yeah, higher than Taker, Rock, Austin, Cena, yadayadayadayada. 

Where is the quarter hour breakdown?


----------



## Starbuck

^^^ U mad lol?



jblvdx said:


> HHH is only number 1 because bigger stars like Rock and Austin made enough money and wanted to do other shit while HHH hogged the mainevent slot for ten years because he couldnt crossover to the mainstream (the exception being his oscar worthy performence in Blade 3).:troll


CM PUNK IS A BASTARD AND FAIL CHAMPION WHO CANT DRAW BECAUSE HIS FATHER IS A DRUNK AND HIS SISTER IS A CRACK WHORE

#skinnyfat


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> ^^^ U mad lol?


Yes, I am very mad there still isn't any sign of the quarter hour breakdown for this week's Raw.


----------



## Rock316AE

Starbuck said:


> Lol. I gave up those fights a long time ago. The people who hate him are always going to hate him no matter what I or anybody else says. That's why it's so funny to me to see all the Punk marks freaking out over all the threads made about him lately. They're never going to go away. May as well get used to them lol. It's still fun to mix it up in a thread like that every now and then though. And I'd genuinely like to see the list for my own self interest. I had a feeling Trips would be close to the top but I wasn't sure if he would be 1 or not.


I will try to quote the explanation later but the list is 1.HHH, 2.Mistico, 3.Cena, 4.Rock, 5.Perro jr, 6.Angle, 7.Ultimo Guerrero, 8.Randy Orton, 9/10.Chris Benoit and Kenta Kobashi. In reality, Meltzer said that most of the list is most of the time the strong WWE machine they made since the Attitude Era and the only game changers he saw are Rock/Austin/Hogan/Inoki and that people like HHH/Cena/Orton/Angle/Benoit are there mostly because they were on top of WWE in hot periods or/and did many main events when the company was touring to new places etc.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Starbuck said:


> ^^^ U mad lol?
> 
> 
> 
> CM PUNK IS A BASTARD AND FAIL CHAMPION WHO CANT DRAW BECAUSE HIS FATHER IS A DRUNK AND HIS SISTER IS A CRACK WHORE
> 
> #skinnyfat


 TRIPLE H WRESTLES HIS MATCHES ALL THE SAME, BURIED RVD, BOOKER T, KANE, ORTON (TWICE) ETC. AND HHH IS A FLAIR WANNABE! U MAD!


----------



## Starbuck

Obis said:


> Yes, I am very mad there still isn't any sign of the quarter hour breakdown for this week's Raw.


Don't be. I'll tell you. Big opener, drop, drop, drop, something of a gain for 10pm, drop, drop, drop, gain for the overrun lol.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Don't be. I'll tell you. Big opener, drop, drop, drop, something of a gain for 10pm, drop, drop, drop, gain for the overrun lol.


I'm holding you to this.



> I will try to quote the explanation later but the list is 1.HHH, 2.Mistico, 3.Cena, 4.Rock, 5.Perro jr, 6.Angle, 7.Ultimo Guerrero, 8.Randy Orton, 9/10.Chris Benoit and Kenta Kobashi. In reality, Meltzer said that most of the list is most of the time the strong WWE machine they made since the Attitude Era and the only game changers he saw are Rock/Austin/Hogan/Inoki and that people like HHH/Cena/Orton/Angle/Benoit are there mostly because they were on top of WWE in hot periods or/and did many main events when the company was touring to new places etc.


Have to agree with Meltzer's explanation on the rankings.


----------



## Starbuck

jblvdx said:


> TRIPLE H WRESTLES HIS MATCHES ALL THE SAME, BURIED RVD, BOOKER T, KANE, ORTON (TWICE) ETC. AND HHH IS A FLAIR WANNABE! U MAD!


Why would I be mad? HHH > Punk. Fact lol. No need to be mad.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Starbuck said:


> Why would I be mad? HHH > Punk. Fact lol. No need to be mad.


That will change when evil corporate HHH will put over Punk sometime in the future in return of HHH going over Punk last September (Y)

(But if that doesnt happen...:cuss


----------



## kokepepsi

Segment Breakdown
Wrestling Observer Newsletter



> Raw on 4/9 did a 3.10 rating and 4.29 million viewers. The show was third for the night on cable. The show did a 2.4 in Males 12-17, 2.7 in Males 18-49, 1.0 in Girls 12-17 and 1.1 in Women 18-49 with a 69.3% male skew. It was down 21% from the 5.46 million viewers of the week after Mania show last year, and last year there was no bombshell along the lines of the Brock Lesnar return on the night after Mania show.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, Brodus Clay & Santino Marella vs. Dolph Ziggler & Jack Swagger lost 99,000 viewers.
> 
> Backstage with Laurinaitis with Miz an Cena, Marella looking for the Three Stooges and R-Truth vs. Cody Rhodes gained 255,000 viewers.
> 
> Lord Tensai vs. Yoshi Tatsu lost 415,000 viewers.
> 
> The mic work between C.M. Punk and Chris Jericho in the top of the hour segment gained 379,000 viewers to a 3.19.
> 
> Punk vs. Henry and the post-match with Jericho pouring beer all over Punk, as well as the quick Del Rio vs. Ryder match lost 169,000 viewers.
> 
> The Three Stooges in-ring segment lost 240,000 viewers and was the low point of the show at 2.90.
> 
> The Brock Lesnar interview gained 423,000 viewers.
> 
> And the Cena vs. Otunga match with Lesnar run-in gained 301,000 viewers, which is a very weak overrun number, finishing at 3.42.


----------



## Starbuck

jblvdx said:


> That will change when evil corporate HHH will put over Punk sometime in the future in return of HHH going over Punk last September (Y)
> 
> (But if that doesnt happen...:cuss


HHH put people over? pfft...:buried unk :hhh2 :vince2

@Obis - You agree with Meltzer that HHH is number 1? Well I guess that's sorted and we have it on the record now. Always knew you had it in you to admit defeat. By the way, I don't see Taker on that list. DURRRR


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> HHH put people over? pfft...:buried unk :hhh2 :vince2
> 
> @Obis - You agree with Meltzer that HHH is number 1? Well I guess that's sorted and we have it on the record now. Always knew you had it in you to admit defeat. By the way, I don't see Taker on that list. DURRRR


Edited the post for clarification of what I meant, just for you. 

And Taker's too good for that measly list, just like Austin.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

So, the 2nd quarter only loses 99'000. Cena and Lesnar didnt really do gangbusters did they?


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Rock316AE said:


> I will try to quote the explanation later but the list is 1.HHH, 2.Mistico, 3.Cena, 4.Rock, 5.Perro jr, 6.Angle, 7.Ultimo Guerrero, 8.Randy Orton, 9/10.Chris Benoit and Kenta Kobashi. In reality, Meltzer said that most of the list is most of the time the strong WWE machine they made since the Attitude Era and the only game changers he saw are Rock/Austin/Hogan/Inoki and that people like HHH/Cena/Orton/Angle/Benoit are there mostly because they were on top of WWE in hot periods or/and did many main events when the company was touring to new places etc.


I find it amazing that Rock is 4th on the list. He was gone from the business for a good 7 years. He must of drew crazy and I mean crazy before he left to be 4th on the list.


----------



## the fox

so the show opened at or less than 3.1?
i mean the lost 99,000 than gained 255,000 then lost 415,000 then again gained 379,000 to 3.19 rating which means since the first quarter untill punk jericho segement gain =634000 lose= 514000 = 120000 gain 
so the first segement did 3.10?


----------



## Rock316AE

> The Brock Lesnar interview gained 423,000 viewers.


This should tell everything on how stupid they're to waste everything with no promotion on the first 11 minutes. Cena should have open the show with a promo, saying how he's going to confront Lesnar when he shows up, then promote Brock for the main event segment with the brawl and you got 1 million gain. People only wanted to see Brock there. What a waste of a program to give away Lesnar/Cena on a random, irrelevant PPV when you can do a huge Summerslam buyrate for Brock's PPV return with 4 months of hype. Fucking stupid. So easy to book, yet they're always finding a way to screw everything, just hope that by WM29 for Rock vs Brock 2, Lesnar is still the megastar that he is and not a terrible WWE character, the fact that they even put him with Ace is already worrying.


----------



## robertdeniro

Rock316AE said:


> I will try to quote the explanation later but the list is 1.HHH, 2.Mistico, 3.Cena, 4.Rock, 5.Perro jr, 6.Angle, 7.Ultimo Guerrero, 8.Randy Orton, 9/10.Chris Benoit and Kenta Kobashi. In reality, Meltzer said that most of the list is most of the time the strong WWE machine they made since the Attitude Era and the only game changers he saw are Rock/Austin/Hogan/Inoki and that people like HHH/Cena/Orton/Angle/Benoit are there mostly because they were on top of WWE in hot periods or/and did many main events when the company was touring to new places etc.


I don't think that Angle,Orton and Benoit were bigger draws than Batista,Lesnar and Taker.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

If the WM 28 buys are to go by, ratings shouldn't matter much if you've got the right people and the right angle going into a PPV being able to make the 4 million people who watch most weeks to buy the ppv.


----------



## kokepepsi

Where does this list come from?

LOL at taker being a draw


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

the fox said:


> so the show opened at or less than 3.1?
> i mean the lost 99,000 than gained 255,000 then lost 415,000 then again gained 379,000 to 3.19 rating which means since the first quarter untill punk jericho segement gain =634000 lose= 514000 = 120000 gain
> so the first segement did 3.10?


Vanilla Midgets crying over alchohol draws more then two LRGER DEN LIFE CHARATERS fightin. On this night alone, Punk draws more then Lesnar. U MAD!. Men lie, women lie, NUMBERS DONT!.

(aware that these calculations could be wrong)


----------



## Rock316AE

You can't draw for the opening segment unless you tell your fanbase that something is going to open the show. That or if the segment is longer than the 15 minutes quarter.


kokepepsi said:


> Where does this list come from?
> 
> LOL at taker being a draw


February 27 WON.


----------



## Chrome

> The Three Stooges in-ring segment lost 240,000 viewers and was the *low point of the show at 2.90.*












As it should have been.

And lol at Lord Tensai losing 415,000 viewers. I blame that on the fact that no one really wants to watch squash matches anymore.


----------



## robertdeniro

kokepepsi said:


> Where does this list come from?
> 
> LOL at taker being a draw


Dave Meltzer has compiled a lost of the top 54 biggest draws in WWE history based on gates/ratings the wrestlers drew as main eventers. Undertaker comes in at number 6.

1. BRUNO SAMMARTINO

2. HULK HOGAN

3. BOB BACKLUND

4. ARGENTINA ROCCA

5. HHH

6. UNDERTAKER

and it's from the same Man..Dave Meltzer lol


----------



## The-Rock-Says

They booked the Lesnar segments wrong.

The first segment should of been the last segment. Going off the air with that segment would of been brilliant. But they went off the air with a Daivd Otunga Vs Cena match with an attack from behind from Lesnar. Poor.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

robertdeniro said:


> I don't think that Angle,Orton and Benoit were bigger draws than Batista,Lesnar and Taker.


They aren't, but overall they've drawn more for sure. Benoit though surprises me a bit, but I guess he was against Rock for a time in 2000, and had a strong 2003-2004. Those latter 3 are arguably bigger draws than the number 1 guy on the list.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

robertdeniro said:


> Dave Meltzer has compiled a lost of the top 54 biggest draws in WWE history based on gates/ratings the wrestlers drew as main eventers. Undertaker comes in at number 6.
> 
> 1. BRUNO SAMMARTINO
> 
> 2. HULK HOGAN
> 
> 3. BOB BACKLUND
> 
> 4. ARGENTINA ROCCA
> 
> 5. HHH
> 
> 6. UNDERTAKER
> 
> and it's from the same Man..Dave Meltzer lol


Only reason HHH is a biiger draw then Taker is because Taker wanted to help out young talent and help carry the B-show for the good of the buisness for nearly eight years when Triple H made Raw , the A-show relvolve around him and bury everyone ever for ten years or so.


----------



## Starbuck

Obis said:


> They aren't, but overall they've drawn more for sure. Benoit though surprises me a bit, but I guess he was against Rock for a time in 2000, and had a strong 2003-2004. Those latter 3 are arguably bigger draws than the number 1 guy on the list.


Don't kid yourself. If they were they would be ON the list. If HHH overall goes ahead of Rock and Austin then you can bet your ass that overall he goes ahead of Batista, Lesnar and Taker too. I know it's hard but you have the numbers staring you in the face here lol. Do the right thing, oh wait, you already admitted it a page back. No biggie.

EDIT - :lmao at all the reasons coming in now. Keep it up. Butthurt knows no bounds lol.


----------



## robertdeniro

jblvdx said:


> Only reason HHH is a biiger draw then Taker is because Taker wanted to help out young talent and help carry the B-show for the good of the buisness for nearly eight years when Triple H made Raw , the A-show relvolve around him and bury everyone ever for ten years or so.


Taker never had the same crazy push that HHH had from 2002-2005 
and if he did have the same push he would be easily ahead of HHH.


----------



## Mister Hands

ChromeMan said:


> And lol at Lord Tensai losing 415,000 viewers. I blame that on the fact that no one really wants to watch squash matches anymore.


Rebuttal:


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Lesnar fails. Good.

Good number for Jericho/Punk. Not much to say about the rest of the show. Same shit every week.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Don't kid yourself. If they were they would be ON the list. If *HHH overall goes ahead of Rock and Austin* then you can bet your ass that overall he goes ahead of Batista, Lesnar and Taker too. I know it's hard but you have the numbers staring you in the face here lol. Do the right thing, oh wait, you already admitted it a page back. No biggie.
> 
> EDIT - :lmao at all the reasons coming in now. Keep it up. Butthurt knows no bounds lol.


:lmao

Starbuck... can be one of the greatest trolls ever on this site when he wants to be.


----------



## robertdeniro

Obis said:


> They aren't, but overall they've drawn more for sure. Benoit though surprises me a bit, but I guess he was against Rock for a time in 2000, and had a strong 2003-2004. Those latter 3 are arguably bigger draws than the number 1 guy on the list.


lol
Benoit surprises me too..never thought that he was a draw.


----------



## Starbuck

Obis said:


> :lmao
> 
> Starbuck... can be one of the greatest trolls ever on this site when he wants to be.


I'm not even trolling lol. 

5. HHH 
6. UNDERTAKER
7. STEVE AUSTIN
8. THE ROCK 

That's the _overall_ list. Who sits above Rock and Austin? It isn't Taker, Lesnar or Batista...


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Rock in 2000 headlined 100 shows with most shows having crowds of 10,000. Simply amazing. Still the record to this very day.


----------



## Rock316AE

The-Rock-Says said:


> Rock in 2000 headlined 100 shows with most shows having crowds of 10,000. Simply amazing. Still the record to this very day.


And nobody will ever break it...tunga3


----------



## The-Rock-Says

> In looking at the biggest drawing cards in pro wrestling history, we decided to look at things on a decade-by-decade level. In the past we've done this looking at total shows drawing more than 10,000 on top during a decade (or added points for each multiple of 10,000). And while every system has flaws, this one can reward someone who may have had one great feud, or was a huge draw but not over a long period of time, over someone who was more consistently drawing.
> 
> In addition, a lot changes in society over a ten year period and that affects wrestling. There are ups and downs, based on economy, technology and other factors. By awarding ten points for the leading draw during a year, nine for second, etc., it rewards consistency at the top level. It takes out mitigating factors in the sense whoever was the big draw of a year where things weren't as good due to economic patterns, or over the last 60 years, based on how television has changed things, will somewhat be evened out.
> 
> The big flaw in this system is it rewards people whose prime years fit better within the framework of a decade. For example, if you were a big star from 1970 to 1979, you'll do well in that decade. But if you were a big star who hit your stride in 1976, through 1983, you'll not fare as well in either decade. But this system isn't looking at negating people who don't perfectly fit in as much as noting where people stood who did. We've already compiled all-time lists for wrestling history. When it comes to consistently drawing over a long period of time, the all-time top ten are Jim Londos, Bruno Sammartino, Lou Thesz, Wild Bill Longson, Hulk Hogan, Ed Strangler Lewis, Argentina Rocca, Ric Flair, Buddy Rogers and Joe Stecher. While Steve Austin at his peak was the biggest drawing card in pro wrestling history, his number of years at that peak were far shorter than those ranked above him.
> 
> 1900 - 1909: 1. Frank Gotch; 2. George Hackenschmidt
> 
> 1910 - 1919: 1. Joe Stecher; 2. Ed "Strangler" Lewis; 3. Frank Gotch; 4. Wladek Zbyszko; 5. Stanislaus Zbyszko; 6. Jim Londos; 7. Great Gama, George Hackenschmidt, George Lurich, Charlie Cutler
> 
> 1920 -1929: 1. Ed "Strangler" Lewis; 2. Jim Londos; 3. John Pesek; 4. Joe Stecher and Stanislaus Zbyszko; 6. Earl Caddock; 7. Gus Sonnenberg; 8. Ray Steele; 9. Dick Shikat; 10. Wayne Munn
> 
> 1930 - 1939: 1. Jim Londos; 2. Everett Marshall; 3. Dick Shikat and Ed Don George; 5. Ed "Strangler" Lewis and Vincent Lopez; 7. Gus Sonnenberg; 8. Man Mountain Dean; 9. Danno O'Mahoney; 10. Ray Steele
> 
> 1940 - 1949: 1. Bill Longson; 2. Lou Thesz; 3. Whipper Billy Watson; 4. Yvon Robert; 5. Gorgeous George; 6. Sandor Szabo and Wlasislow Talum; 8. Buddy Rogers; 9. Maurice "French Angel" Tillet; 10. Frank Sexton
> 
> 1950 - 1959: 1. Argentina Rocca; 2. Lou Thesz; 3. Killer Kowalski; 4. Buddy Rogers; 5. Whipper Billy Watson; 6. Rikidozan; 7. El Santo; 8. Verne Gagne and Edouard Carpentier; 10. Wilbur Snyder
> 
> 1960 - 1969: 1. Bruno Sammartino; 2. Gene Kiniski; 3. Dick the Bruiser; 4. Johnny Valentine; 5. Lou Thesz; 6. Buddy Rogers; 7. Giant Baba; 8. Ray Stevens; 9. Bobo Brazil; 10. Fritz Von Erich
> 
> 1970 - 1979: 1. Bruno Sammartino; 2. The Sheik; 3. Superstar Billy Graham; 4. Andre the Giant; 5. Pedro Morales; 6. Harley Race; 7. The Crusher; 8. Dory Funk Jr. and Ernie Ladd; 10. Dick the Bruiser
> 
> 1980 - 1989: 1. Hulk Hogan; 2. Ric Flair; 3. Andre the Giant; 4. Bob Backlund; 5. Randy Savage; 6. Road Warriors; 7. Antonio Inoki; 8. Roddy Piper; 9. Harley Race, Sgt. Slaughter, Paul Orndorff
> 
> 1990 - 1999: 1. Konnan; 2. Shinya Hashimoto; 3. Hulk Hogan and Ric Flair; 5. Perro Aguayo; 6. Keiji Muto; 7. Undertaker; 8. Bret Hart; 9. Steve Austin; 10. Nobuhiko Takada
> 
> 2000 - 2009: 1. HHH; 2. Mistico; 3. John Cena; 4. The Rock; 5. Perro Aguayo Jr.; 6. Kurt Angle; 7. Ultimo Guerrero; 8. Randy Orton; 9. Kenta Kobashi and Chris Benoit
> 
> In looking at this list, when it comes to the Hall of Fame, some names pop out, most notably The Great Gama, Gus Sonnenberg, Dick Shikat, Wlasislow Talum, Danno O'Mahoney, Man Mountain Dean (the first Haystacks Calhoun- like fat man attraction) and Vincent Lopez in the pre-television era who are not in. Sonnenberg was a big drawing card in the late 20s and early 30s, a college and pro football star recruited into pro wrestling and while he was not the first big football star recruited (Wayne Munn was), he was far more successful and was quickly given the world title and pushed as wrestling's biggest star.
> 
> O'Mahoney really was the 1930s equivalent of a Bill Goldberg or Ultimate Warrior, a short-term flash in the pan, other than he was more dominant in his era than they were as he was drawing baseball stadium crowds at a time when nobody else was. He was a track star from Ireland who turned Boston into pro wrestling's hottest city.
> 
> From the 1950s, the only name not already in is Wilbur Snyder, who is a borderline pick, as almost every metric and comparison from that era shows Snyder as someone in the hunt, but not with blow away credentials to where there is no question. In the 60s and 70s, everyone is in. From the 80s, Sgt. Slaughter and Paul Orndorff are not in, but like Snyder, they are at the bottom of the list although both of them should also be considered viable candidates. Both were very good workers who had successful careers. In both cases, you can argue that they were Hall of Fame caliber but the tenure is a question. Slaughter was a top level star for about six or seven years. Orndorff was excellent but his nerve issues took him from the top. Slaughter had a number of strong runs in different territories and Orndorff did headline some territories as a top star, but he wasn't a big draw, but had the great run with Hogan that put him on the list.
> 
> For the 90s, everyone is in.
> 
> What is notable is this decade. John Cena, Mistico and Randy Orton aren't eligible and all would be considered strong candidates. I wonder if Mistico not doing well in WWE will negate him in the eyes of voters after what he did in Mexico. Cena will have to overcome two things, one is it is far more difficult to get in because you don't have the benefit of nostalgia, and the other is he's not considered by some to be a great worker and while being the clear-cut biggest star in the game, some will hold the fact that it's the WWE machine that draws, even against the biggest star. Orton won't be eligible for several more years and while he is a candidate, and a better worker than Batista, I see the lack of support of people like Batista and even Edge to again show how difficult it's going to be for current wrestlers unless they have a breakthrough period like Chris Jericho had over two years as a talker.
> 
> Perro Aguayo Jr. is eligible and has not done well, nor has Ultimo Guerrero. This era is different from any other since it is the company drawing and not the individual, although Mistico is very much an exception to the rule. But Ultimo Guerrero and Randy Orton are not, in the sense I'm not sure how great drawing cards either is really, but they've been on top with the strongest drawing companies for many years and Orton has been used as the top star on the touring Smackdown brand (which, admittedly, has not drawn all that well domestically). Guerrero is a longer-length version of the Hogan opponents of the 80s, who fare well because Hogan was such a big draw, since Guerrero was Mistico's favorite opponent.
> 
> Even Cena is more the guy on top in WWE, and WWE as a novelty touring product draws well internationally and for Raw tapings and big PPV shows, and Cena more often than not is on top. You can't take away from the fact Cena is the top guy in the business and has been for a number of years, and by that standard ranks in the pack of the biggest drawing cards in history.
> 
> But as far as notable difference maker, he's not at the top level. HHH is like that as well, simply being a top guy in WWF/E during the Austin and Rock years, through the 90s when at times he was the big star of the promotion, and then still right there during the Cena/Batista years. Benoit and Angle to me were never top draws. Business was strong enough when they were headliners and they had enough years as headliners to break through. If you compare Benoit as a drawing card with previous No. 10s like Takada, Bruiser, Von Erich, etc. it's not there at all. Similarly, Angle at No. 6 would be in the same spot as Muto, who sold out the Tokyo Dome numerous times, the Road Warriors, Race, Buddy Rogers, and Rikidozan.
> 
> The obvious notes here is how this favors people who spent a lot of years on top during the decade ahead of those who actually drew more over a short period of time. The Rock and Steve Austin were obviously the two biggest draws of the past 20 years. Austin set the all-time record for most major shows drawing 10,000 on top in 1998, and Rock broke that record in 1999 and again in 2000, largely because Austin was injured for some of 1999 and almost all of 2000. Austin came back in 2001 for the top spot over Rock, but house show business fell from the peak in 2000 (PPV business actually peaked in 2001, although that was the year of the ratings fall).
> 
> But unlike people like Sammartino, Thesz, Londos, Hogan, Flair, Lewis, etc. who were top draws for 15 years, Austin's big years of drawing consisted of 1997 to 2002, and he was out most of 2000, so it was only five years. Rock broke through in 1998, was either No. 1 or No. 2 in 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002, also a five-year run, which was the last year he worked a full-time schedule.
> 
> Another thing to note regards who was world champion. Of the top decade draws, the ones who did so without a world title would be Rocca in the 50s, and to an extent Konnan in the 90s. Konnan held titles, but by that time titles in Mexico, particularly whatever heavyweight title he may have had at certain points), didn't mean a ton. I think in every era being part of a strong promotion that ran major cities made a big difference. When it comes to true elite draws of the past 30 years, Hogan, Austin, Rock and really Antonio Inoki to me come across as the top class, with Andre right underneath them and guys like Canek, Perro Aguayo, Carlos Colon and to an extent Konnan right under. Ric Flair was definitely there at times in a big way and had an incredibly long run as a major star. Ultimate Warrior (1989-1991) and Bill Goldberg (1998) had their flash in the pan runs, as did Vampiro (1992).
> 
> The longest tenure as a major drawing card, which would be the first year as being top ten to the last, were Londos (1917 to 1946), Thesz (1938 to 1968), Sammartino (1960 to 1980), Lewis (1916 to 1935), Flair (1976 to 2004), Hogan (1980 to 2003), Kowalski (1952 to 1974), The Sheik (1958 to 1977), Aguayo (1975 to 1995), Inoki (1976 to 1995) and The Crusher (1956 to 1975). In charting the ascension of records, as far as what would likely be most money/attendance drawn at house shows in a year, the first guy to really have a monster year was Londos in 1931. Keep in mind that the number of 10,000 seat arenas in the country at that time were few, and it wasn't really until the 70s where every major city had one, and the 90s where every city of any decent size had one. Londos broke his record in 1934. What is amazing is that Londos, coming before television, held the record until Buddy Rogers in 1961.
> 
> Rogers had the advantage of being both NWA world champion (the top worldwide title) and being the top star at Madison Square Garden top star (the biggest arena in the biggest city).
> 
> While Sammartino had his big years, he was WWWF champion which covered less territory, even though he was the biggest draw in wrestling for a long time. The Rogers record held until 1982 with Bob Backlund, who was WWF champion, but by that point more cities had larger arenas.
> 
> When WWF went national in 1984, Hulk Hogan, as the world champion, broke the record. The game changed because he was working most nights in big arenas. Hogan and the WWF drew well in 1985 and 1986, setting records both years. The Hogan record held until Austin in 1998, and then Rock broke it in 1999 and 2000, the latter year where he headlined more than 100 shows that drew in excess of 10,000 people. It would take the business catching fire to that extent to threaten that record.
> 
> It would be easy to say it's unapproachable, but in 1996, you would have thought Hogan's records would never be beaten.
> 
> Although stars from Mexico and Japan are on the list, records from Mexico are incomplete, although from 1990 on they are very complete. Japanese records are more complete, but in the heyday of people like Baba, Inoki and Rikidozan, and even later with Misawa, Hashimoto and Muto, when business was strong, the number of 10,000-seat arenas in Japan were still few. Plus, until the late 90s, ticket prices in Japan were much higher than anywhere else in the world. That limited the appeal of live events to a more higher class fan base. While U.S. tickets today are in the same ballpark as those in Japan, when you figure based on average wage, and frequency of coming, it's a different game. Japanese companies hit Tokyo dozens of times per year, and still do today, whereas New York or Los Angeles get nowhere near the number of big shows. Within their culture, Baba, Inoki, Rikidozan and El Santo are in a class above when it comes to significance and name recognition of anyone in the U.S. Santo is probably one of the five most famous cultural figures in Mexico. Baba, Inoki and Rikidozan are not at that level, but even that recent poll of the most popular athletes of the Showa era (1925 to 1989) saw the three wrestlers in the top seven.
> 
> In the U.S., I'd still have to say when it comes to pure mainstream fame, Hogan would be the biggest and would fall just under those guys. If you had a poll of the biggest figures in American pop culture history, it's possible Hogan would be top 100 but no way top 5 and I doubt top 50. If you had a poll of the most popular pro athletes from 1925 to 1989, Hogan isn't going to finish top 50. Hogan has the edge on the three Japanese in the sense his fame was worldwide while there's was limited to their country (and with Rikidozan, perhaps Korea as well). Santo would have the edge on all since his fame spread throughout the world as well and even 28 years after his death is a cultural icon in many parts of the world, which Hogan won't be 28 years after his death. Comparing eras is difficult. Certainly Gotch was among the biggest sports figures of his era. Lewis was ranked with the top sports stars of the 20s, but he was not at the top of the list. Londos, a bigger draw, was famous, but media was different. Gorgeous George, who as a drawing card fits more into the Warrior, Goldberg, O'Mahoney flash in the pan category than the Hogan, Rogers, Sammartino, Londos category, was a household name maybe more than anyone in the U.S. except Hogan and Rock.
> 
> The Rock is today, more than Steve Austin, but that's because of movies. Jesse Ventura is actually as far as being famous mainstream, more than all but a few wrestlers, but that's like Rock, because of non-wrestling activities. Andre the Giant, Randy Savage and Roddy Piper were also very big names because of both wrestling and Savage due to the Slim Jim commercials and Piper due to being Hogan's rival at a time when wrestling got a lot of mainstream coverage.
> 
> But the nature of the regional era is that from the 50s until 1984, there are some gigantic local stars. Certainly everyone in Memphis knows Jerry Lawler, and more so in the 70s and 80s, and due to being big stars on television, you could say the same for Sammartino and Rocca in the Northeast, Verne Gagne and Crusher in the Midwest, Bruiser in Indiana and Missouri, Ric Flair in the Carolinas, The Von Erichs in Dallas, Bill Watts in Oklahoma, Whipper Watson in Ontario, Bret Hart throughout Canada, Yvon Robert, Mad Dog Vachon and Edouard Carpentier in Quebec, and Dusty Rhodes and Eddie Graham in Florida. Thesz for his era was big, because he was a star on national TV in the U.S., and even bigger in Japan because of the Rikidozan matches.
> 
> Based on records available, largely the research work of Matt Farmer, the drawing power champion each year was: 1908 - Frank Gotch and George Hackenschmidt; 1909 - Frank Gotch (2); 1910 - Great Gama and Stanislaus Zbyszko; 1911 - Frank Gotch (3) and George Hackenschmidt (2); 1912 - Frank Gotch (4); 1913 - George Lurich and Stanislaus Zbyszko (2); 1914 - Unavailable; 1915 - Charley Cutler; 1916 - Joe Stecher; 1917 - Joe Stecher (2); 1918 - Joe Stecher (3), Ed "Strangler" Lewis and Wladek Zbyszko; 1919 - Ed "Strangler" Lewis (2); 1920 - Joe Stecher (4); 1921 - Ed "Strangler" Lewis (3); 1922 - Stanislaus Zbyszko (3); 1923 - Ed "Strangler" Lewis (4); 1924 - Ed "Stranger" Lewis (5) and Jim Londos; 1925 - Ed "Strangler" Lewis (6), Joe Stecher (5), Wayne Munn and Stanislaus Zbyszko (4); 1926 - Jim Londos (2); 1927 - Jim Londos (3) and John Pesek; 1928 - Jim Londos (4); 1929 - Gus Sonnenberg; 1930 - Jim Londos (5) and Dick Shikat; 1931 - Jim Londos (6); 1932 - Jim Londos (7); 1933 - Jim Londos (8); 1934 - Jim Londos (9); 1935 - Danno O'Mahoney; 1936 - Danno O'Mahoney (2); 1937 - Jim Londos (10); 1938 - Jim Londos (11) and Steve Casey; 1939 - Jim Londos (12), Vincent Lopez and Dave Levin; 1940 - Jim Londos (13); 1941 - Wild Bill Longson; 1942 - Wild Bill Longson (2); 1943 - Wild Bill Longson (3); 1944 - Wild Bill Longson (4); 1945 - Wild Bill Longson (5); 1946 - Wild Bill Longson (6); 1947 - Wild Bill Longson (7); 1948 - Gorgeous George; 1949 - Gorgeous George (2) and Whipper Billy Watson; 1950 - Lou Thesz and Argentina Rocca; 1951 - Lou Thesz (2); 1952 - Lou Thesz (3); 1953 - Lou Thesz (4) and Blue Demon; 1954 - Argentina Rocca (2); 1955 - Lou Thesz (5); 1956 - Argentina Rocca (3) and Whipper Billy Watson (2); 1957 - Lou Thesz (6); 1958 - Argentina Rocca (4) & Miguel Perez (tag team); 1959 - Argentina Rocca (5) & Miguel Perez (tag team); 1960 - Buddy Rogers; 1961 - Buddy Rogers (2); 1962 - Buddy Rogers (3); 1963 - Bruno Sammartino; 1964 - Bruno Sammartino (2); 1965 - Bruno Sammartino (3); 1966 - Lou Thesz (7); 1967 - Bruno Sammartino (4); 1968 - Bruno Sammartino (5); 1969 - The Sheik; 1970 - The Sheik (2); 1971 - The Sheik (3); 1972 - The Sheik (4); 1973 - The Sheik (5); 1974 - Bruno Sammartino (6); 1975 - Bruno Sammartino (7); 1976 - Bruno Sammartino (8); 1977 - Superstar Billy Graham; 1978 - Superstar Billy Graham (2); 1979 - Bob Backlund; 1980 - Bob Backlund (2); 1981 - Bob Backlund (3); 1982 - Bob Backlund (4); 1983 - Ric Flair; 1984 - Hulk Hogan; 1985 - Hulk Hogan (2); 1986 - Hulk Hogan (3); 1987 - Hulk Hogan (4); 1988 - Hulk Hogan (5); 1989 - Hulk Hogan (6); 1990 - Hulk Hogan (7); 1991 - Hulk Hogan (8); 1992 - Ric Flair (2); 1993 - Konnan; 1994 - Konnan (2); 1995 - Shinya Hashimoto; 1996 - Nobuhiko Takada; 1997 - Shinya Hashimoto (2); 1998 - Steve Austin; 1999 - The Rock; 2000 - The Rock (2); 2001 - Steve Austin (2); 2002 - The Rock (3); 2003 - Brock Lesnar; 2004 - HHH; 2005 - Kenta Kobashi; 2006 - Mistico; 2007 - John Cena; 2008 - Mistico (2); 2009 - John Cena (2); 2010 - John Cena (3); 2011 - John Cena (4)
> 
> MULTIPLE TIME LEADING BOX OFFICE CHAMPIONS:
> 
> 13 - Jim Londos
> 
> 8 - Bruno Sammartino, Hulk Hogan
> 
> 7 - Wild Bill Longson, Lou Thesz
> 
> 6 - Ed "Strangler" Lewis
> 
> 5 - Joe Stecher, Argentina Rocca, The Sheik
> 
> 4 - Frank Gotch, Stanislaus Zbyszko, Bob Backlund, John Cena
> 
> 3 - Buddy Rogers, The Rock
> 
> 2 - George Hackenschmidt, Danno O'Mahoney, Gorgeous George, Superstar Billy Graham, Ric Flair, Konnan, Shinya Hashimoto, Steve Austin, Mistico


The whole thing from the Observer if you want to read it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> I'm not even trolling lol.
> 
> 5. HHH
> 6. *UNDERTAKER*
> 7. STEVE AUSTIN
> 8. THE ROCK
> 
> That's the _overall_ list. Who sits above Rock and Austin? It isn't *Taker*, Lesnar or Batista...


----------



## Starbuck

The-Rock-Says said:


> Rock in 2000 headlined 100 shows with most shows having crowds of 10,000. Simply amazing. Still the record to this very day.


Who did he headline those shows with? 










It's all coming out now lol.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Rock316AE said:


> And nobody will ever break it...tunga3




As Dave says, he thought no one would ever break Hulks record in 1996........


----------



## robertdeniro

Taker and Bret were bigger draws than Austin in 90's..good stuff lol.


----------



## Green Light

So Lesnar actually drew pretty well in a segment that normally loses viewers no? Obviously Cena vs. David fucking Otunga was gonna do badly, I gotta wonder whose genius idea it was to put him in the main event


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Starbuck said:


> Who did he headline those shows with?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's all coming out now lol.


He headlined them with Gillberg. wo wo wo, you know it.


----------



## Mr Premium

Gotta love Punk marks Mathematical revisionism....

*The segment between CM Punk and Chris Jericho at 10pm gained 379,000 viewers* for a 3.19 quarter rating. Punk vs. Mark Henry and the post-match angle with Chris Jericho giving a beer bath to Punk as well as the Alberto Del Rio vs. Zack Ryder lost 169,000 viewers. The segment with The Three Stooges lost 240,000 viewers and was the low point of the show at a 2.90 quarter rating.

*The backstage interview with Brock Lesnar gained 423,000 viewers.* The main event with John Cena vs. David Otunga and the Lesnar run-in gained 301,000 viewers. This is considered a weak overrun rating at a 3.42

That means that Lesnar had 14,000 more viewers than them. Go relearn your math..........fpalm


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Green Light said:


> So Lesnar actually drew pretty well in a segment that normally loses viewers no? Obviously Cena vs. David fucking Otunga was gonna do badly, I gotta wonder whose genius idea it was to *put him in the main event*












:cool2


----------



## Starbuck

Obis said:


>


Yeah but who sits above Taker lol?



The-Rock-Says said:


> He headlined them with Gillberg. wo wo wo, you know it.


Gillberg? The fuck outta here. We all know it was the Brooklyn Brawler who also beat HHH on an episode of SD in 2000 due to interference from Jericho and completely infuriated me as a child lol.


----------



## kokepepsi

Starbuck said:


> Who did he headline those shows with?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's all coming out now lol.


That gif was meant for that comeback

Meltzer posted a huge rant on how HHH was a bigger draw than Bret that I posted here a long time ago.

People may hate the dude, may be a piece of shit.etc
But the guy drew

Biggest example was the Anhemime house show that sold out, huge traffic block with people having to get to the arena and was mainevented by HHH vs Rikishi or some crap like that. No austin/Rock advertised


----------



## Starbuck

The-Rock-Says said:


> :cool2














kokepepsi said:


> That gif was meant for that comeback
> 
> Meltzer posted a huge rant on how HHH was a bigger draw than Bret that I posted here a long time ago.
> 
> People may hate the dude, may be a piece of shit.etc
> But the guy drew
> 
> Biggest example was the Anhemime house show that sold out, huge traffic block with people having to get to the arena and was mainevented by HHH vs Rikishi or some crap like that. No austin/Rock advertised


See. Trips stopping traffic and shit. Beat that!


----------



## Rock316AE

Green Light said:


> So Lesnar actually drew pretty well in a segment that normally loses viewers no? Obviously Cena vs. David fucking Otunga was gonna do badly, I gotta wonder whose genius idea it was to put him in the main event


Lesnar drew big on a random segment. People only wanted to see him. The rest is just ridiculous booking, especially when you can promote Brock's promo and do a huge gain with the overrun.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Lesnar's interview was 15 minutes long?

Yeah, Lesnar fails.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Starbuck said:


> See. Trips stopping traffic and shit. Beat that!


That Vince gif is so boss.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Yeah but who sits above Taker lol?


Hogan... and that's nothing to be ashamed of.


----------



## robertdeniro

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Lesnar's interview was *15 minutes *long?
> 
> Yeah, Lesnar fails.


It was 5 minutes or less from what i remember.


----------



## Starbuck

The-Rock-Says said:


> That Vince gif is so boss.


Vince is the boss lol. Course his gifs are boss too. 



Obis said:


> Hogan... and that's nothing to be ashamed of.


:lmao You just can't come out and say it can you? Haha. Hilarious.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

It was 1.54 Lesnar's backstage interview. Backstage interview with Lesnar = DEM BIG RATINZZZZ


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Vince is the boss lol. Course his gifs are boss too.
> 
> 
> 
> :lmao You just can't come out and say it can you? Haha. Hilarious.


Say what? I answered the question.


----------



## Rock316AE

The-Rock-Says said:


> It was 1.54 Lesnar's backstage interview. Backstage interview with Lesnar = DEM BIG RATINZZZZ


2 minutes of Lesnar = bigger than WWE


----------



## Starbuck

Obis said:


> Say what? I answered the question.


That HHH is above Taker on the list. And that HHH is at the top of another list that Taker isn't even on. It can't be that hard lol. Come on. It might be therapeutic for you.

EDIT - Everybody stop fucking stealing my gifs (that aren't really mine) or you're all...


----------



## Mr Premium

robertdeniro said:


> It was 5 minutes or less from what i remember.


Got to love Punk marks excuses. :lmao

Brock >>>>>>>> Punk

In the ring, drawing power, intimidation factor, in a real fight, mainstream relevance, 5 star matches, never got his ass carried by Cena...

Nuff said...


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> That HHH is above Taker on the list. And that HHH is at the top of another list that Taker isn't even on. It can't be that hard lol. Come on. It might be therapeutic for you.


:lmao Why would you need me to say anything? You've been saying it what feels like a bagazillion times.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

robertdeniro said:


> It was 5 minutes or less from what i remember.


Exactly. It was well under 5 minutes. So how exactly is he credited for that quarter? This thread sometimes, can't help but love it.  Overall, yup, Lesnar is a fail.


----------



## Starbuck

Obis said:


> :lmao Why would you need me to say anything? You've been saying it what feels like a bagazillion times.


Because you actually physically don't seem to be capable to typing it out lol, that's why. I asked who was above Taker and you said Hogan. Who is directly above Taker then? Can you do it lol? Can you actually type out that HHH is a bigger draw than Taker?



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Exactly. It was well under 5 minutes. So how exactly is he credited for that quarter? This thread sometimes, can't help but love it.  Overall, yup, Lesnar is a fail.


Somehow I get the feeling that if it was a Punk interview instead of a Lesnar interview you'd be singing a different tune.


----------



## Rock316AE

Mr Premium said:


> Got to love Punk marks excuses. :lmao
> 
> Brock >>>>>>>> Punk
> 
> In the ring, drawing power, intimidation factor, in a real fight, mainstream relevance, 5 star matches, never got his ass carried by Cena...
> 
> Nuff said...


Jason Powell from pro wrestling/net talked about Lesnar's next program after Cena on the PWTorch livecast with Keller, he said that after Punk failed and they basically gave him the strap and he made it as important as the WCW hardcore title, you don't need to sacrifice Brock's drawing power in a meaningless Punk match. In other words, the 2 minutes squash is coming or Henry/Jericho is going over and Lesnar wins it from them. It's about time we have a believable champion that can actually close the show.


----------



## robertdeniro

Mr Premium said:


> Got to love Punk marks excuses. :lmao
> 
> Brock >>>>>>>> Punk
> 
> In the ring, drawing power, intimidation factor, in a real fight, mainstream relevance, 5 star matches, never got his ass carried by Cena...
> 
> Nuff said...


Are you talking to me ? 
I'm not even a Punk fan .. and i agree that Brock is bigger than Punk.


----------



## Chrome

> 1990 - 1999: 1. *Konnan*; 2. Shinya Hashimoto; 3. Hulk Hogan and Ric Flair; 5. Perro Aguayo; 6. Keiji Muto; 7. Undertaker; 8. Bret Hart; 9. Steve Austin; 10. Nobuhiko Takada


That's pretty damn cool to see. Grew up a big K-Dawg fan, especially when he joined the Wolfpac. I mean, I'm aware he wrestled that whole decade lol but still, not bad for a guy who didn't win a world title, at least not in the 90's.


----------



## Starbuck

#legitimacy


----------



## GillbergReturns

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Exactly. It was well under 5 minutes. So how exactly is he credited for that quarter? This thread sometimes, can't help but love it.  Overall, yup, Lesnar is a fail.


Really?

Interview with Henry, recap of fight between Lesnar and Cena, Lesnar interview is a recap of that quarter.

Needless to say Lesnar and Cena get the credit.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Because you actually physically don't seem to be capable to typing it out lol, that's why. I asked who was above Taker and you said Hogan. Who is directly above Taker then? Can you do it lol? Can you actually type out that HHH is a bigger draw than Taker?


Well, I won't type out something that isn't proven by the list like "HHH is a bigger draw than Taker." Now if you meant "HHH has drawn more than Taker over time", that may just be another story.

Since you seem to be DYING for me to state something you've been stating over and over again... 





... but what list are we talking about? The all-time list or the top of the decade list... because in case you didn't notice, it's not made clear who is directly above Taker in the latter one.


----------



## Starbuck

Obis said:


> Well, I won't type out something that isn't proven by the list like "HHH is a bigger draw than Taker." Now if you meant "HHH has drawn more than Taker over time", that may just be another story.
> 
> Since you seem to be DYING for me to state something you've been stating over and over again...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ... but what list are we talking about? The all-time list or the top of the decade list... because in case you didn't notice, it's not made clear who is directly above Taker in the latter one.


:lmao Stop splitting hairs and just fucking say it lol. HHH is above Taker in both lists. HHH > Taker.


----------



## Mr Premium

Rock316AE said:


> Jason Powell from pro wrestling/net talked about Lesnar's next program after Cena on the PWTorch livecast with Keller, he said that after Punk failed and they basically gave him the strap and he made it as important as the WCW hardcore title, you don't need to sacrifice Brock's drawing power in a meaningless Punk match. In other words, the 2 minutes squash is coming or Henry/Jericho is going over and Lesnar wins it from them. It's about time we have a believable champion that can actually close the show.


Yep. I think it's time for the little jimmies to get that "wooow" factor back whenever they see the WWE champion, not the "mom, that's the guy that delivered our pizza last night" reaction.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> :lmao Stop splitting hairs and just fucking say it lol. HHH is above Taker in both lists. HHH > Taker.


Can I have an answer to my question, please?


----------



## kokepepsi

Again 
LOL at taker being a draw

20yrs career to do what Rock did in 5yrs

LOLOLOLOLOL


----------



## robertdeniro

Starbuck said:


> :lmao Stop splitting hairs and just fucking say it lol. HHH is above Taker in both lists. HHH > Taker.


It doesn't work like this lol 
i would say that HBK > HHH and he wasn't even a bigger draw than HHH.


----------



## Starbuck

Obis said:


> Can I have an answer to my question, please?


What's your question? Who is above Taker in the decade list? Everybody lol. He isn't on it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

kokepepsi said:


> Again
> LOL at taker being a draw
> 
> 20yrs career to do what Rock did in 5yrs
> 
> LOLOLOLOLOL


Rock's a freak of nature though. Of course Taker is a draw, but he's no Rock, Austin, or Hogan. Nobody is. 



> What's your question? Who is above Taker in the decade list? Everybody lol. He isn't on it.


No, what list are we talking about that you want me to state HHH is directly above Taker in? All-time or Decade?


----------



## Starbuck

Obis said:


> Rock's a freak of nature though. Of course Taker is a draw, but he's no Rock, Austin, or Hogan. Nobody is.
> 
> 
> 
> No, what list are we talking about that you want me to state HHH is directly above Taker in? All-time or Decade?


Both. All time HHH is 5 and Taker is 6. Decade HHH is 1 and Taker isn't on it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Both. All time HHH is 5 and Taker is 6. Decade HHH is 1 and Taker isn't on it.


Well, by directly I thought you were implying one spot ahead. So is it the all-time list you want me to say that?


----------



## Starbuck

Obis said:


> Well, by directly I thought you were implying one spot ahead. So is it the all-time list you want me to say that?


:lmao :lmao :lmao Jesus Christ. You actually can't do it can you? This is great lol. Directly, indirectly, one spot ahead, ten spots ahead, doesn't matter. HHH is above Taker in both lists. HHH > Taker.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> :lmao :lmao :lmao Jesus Christ. You actually can't do it can you? This is great lol. Directly, indirectly, one spot ahead, ten spots ahead, doesn't matter. HHH is above Taker in both lists. HHH > Taker.


HHH > Taker at what? Having a better hairline? You got me there.

So I think we've settled it, right? Taker > HHH at 98% of everything else.


----------



## Starbuck

Obis said:


> HHH > Taker at what? Having a better hairline? You got me there.
> 
> So I think we've settled it, right? Taker > HHH at 98% of everything else.


Oh My God this is fucking priceless. You seriously can't do it, can you? I don't even care who is right and who is wrong here, as if I cared before. I was just having some fun. But I just wanted to see if you would come out and say it and you can't lol. Amazing. :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

EDIT I guess I should really commend you. That's a true mark right there lol.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Oh My God this is fucking priceless. You seriously can't do it, can you? I don't even care who is right and who is wrong here, as if I cared before. I was just having some fun. But I just wanted to see if you would come out and say it and you can't lol. Amazing. :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


If I say it, will you promise to change your avatar to a Daniel Bryan one stating "YES! YES! YES!" all on the bottom of the pic, and to change your usertitle to "I made Obis admit HHH>Taker." (Which for the record, I am not admitting in this post)?


----------



## Starbuck

Obis said:


> If I say it, will you promise to change your avatar to a Daniel Bryan one stating "YES! YES! YES!" all on the bottom of the pic, and to change your usertitle to "I made Obis admit HHH>Taker." (Which for the record, I am not admitting in this post)?


Alright, now this is getting ridiculous lol. You want me to remove bloody Cena and replace it with DB? Why would I do that? And don't you dare ask me to remove the John 'BIG JOHNNY' Laurinaitis from my sig. That man is a hero. For the record, you've already basically admitted it. All the dodging you did NOT to admit it is just as good as saying it anyways lol.


----------



## Sephiroth

WWE A-Listers gonna A-List


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Alright, now this is getting ridiculous lol. You want me to remove bloody Cena and replace it with DB? Why would I do that? And don't you dare ask me to remove the John 'BIG JOHNNY' Laurinaitis from my sig. That man is a hero. For the record, you've already basically admitted it. All the dodging you did NOT to admit it is just as good as saying it anyways lol.


What dodging? There's nothing to dodge. Okay, can you at least put it in your sig? I'll even state the sky is colored gold if you do that.


----------



## Starbuck

:lmao at the goofs in the chatbox who think any of this discussion has been real, at least on my part anyways. People need to lighten up and also ADMIT defeat in certain instances too.  Big Johnny stays lol.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> :lmao at the goofs in the chatbox who think any of this discussion has been real.


Yeah, they don't want us to have any fun. 




Starbuck said:


> People need to lighten up and also ADMIT defeat in certain instances too.


Well that's very noble of you. This is my grandest victory yet.


----------



## SteenIsGod

Put Barry Stevens on Raw and Have him squash lesnar.

GUARANTEED RATINGS


----------



## JasonLives

> Lord Tensai vs. Yoshi Tatsu lost 415,000 viewers.


Kinda unfair, the match was like 2 minutes and the rest of the quarter was 2 commercial breaks and ads. It doesnt matter if you put The Rock in there, it will lose viewers regardless.


----------



## Lady Eastwood

JasonLives said:


> Kinda unfair, the match was like 2 minutes and the rest of the quarter was 2 commercial breaks and ads. It doesnt matter if you put The Rock in there, it will lose viewers regardless.


Or maybe it's because Lord Tensai is lame and no one cares about Yoshi.


----------



## D.M.N.

Hour 1
Q1 - 3.11 rating / 4.28 million
Q2 - 3.04 rating / 4.18 million
Q3 - 3.22 rating / 4.44 million
Q4 - 2.92 rating / 4.02 million

Hour 2
Q5 - 3.19 rating / 4.44 million
Q6 - 3.07 rating / 4.27 million
Q7 - 2.90 rating / 4.03 million
Q8 - 3.20 rating / 4.45 million
Overrun - 3.42 rating / 4.75 million

Poor breakdown. Poor. Extremely surprised at how poor the Q1 rating is - it should have been at _least_ 5 million. Normally when TV shows have "cliffhangers", the following episode starts higher as viewers tune in to find out "why". So for Q1 to do 4.3 million is very poor. Q1 tends to show how many people were interested in the ending the previous week to bother to tune in, clearly not many of Raw's audience were interested...


----------



## uknoww

chris jericho=ratings


----------



## Brave Nash

Cm Punk/Jericho segment gained 379,000. And Jericho giving a beer bath to Punk lost 169,000.
So I see that Punk gained viewers because Jericho was in the segment in the last min.


----------



## Brave Nash

Mr Premium said:


> Got to love Punk marks excuses. :lmao
> 
> Brock >>>>>>>> Punk
> 
> In the ring, drawing power, *intimidation factor, in a real fight*, mainstream relevance, 5 star matches, never got his ass carried by Cena...
> 
> Nuff said...


Lol Rock got his ass carried not Punk, its impossible for Cena to make it a 5 star match by his own stop fooling yourself. They were both equel because Punk made it that way. Look at summerslam match Punk was way better. Brock In the ring wasn't anything special he almost kill somebody in the ring by botching his moves and atleast Punk will never be named as having the worst match In wm history lol. I only agree on these two in the bold part. Drawing power he didn't prove it as this raw ratings sucked.


----------



## uknoww

Brave Nash said:


> Lol Rock got his ass carried not Punk, its impossible for Cena to make it a 5 star match by his own stop fooling yourself. They were both equel because Punk made it that way. Look at summerslam match Punk was way better. Brock In the ring wasn't anything special he almost kill somebody in the ring by botching his moves and atleast Punk will never be named as having the worst match In wm history lol. I only agree on these two in the bold part. Drawing power he didn't prove it as this raw ratings sucked.


none of punk vs cena matches were 5 star matches


----------



## Brave Nash

uknoww said:


> none of punk vs cena matches were 5 star matches


It isn't your call as much as others who rated it that way. You can watch it again, everything was amazing in that match. Except some botches that was Cena's fault. It didn't take anything from that epic night tho.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Brave Nash said:


> It isn't your call as much as others who rated it that way. You can watch it again, everything was amazing in that match. Except some botches that was Cena's fault. It didn't take anything from that epic night tho.


those were actually punks faults


----------



## A-C-P

:lmao just when I though this thread couldn't get any better we introduce the "greatest draws of all-time" discussions.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

A-C-P said:


> :lmao just when I though this thread couldn't get any better we introduce the "greatest draws of all-time" discussions.


well right now they cant blame punk for the low viewers since brock didnt draw shit either


----------



## A-C-P

#1Peep4ever said:


> well right now they cant blame punk for the low viewers since brock didnt draw shit either


Come on I am sure they can find a way to blame Punk, we all know it his fault unk

My guess is since Punk is the WWE champion and looks liek a waffle house cook nobdy will watch Lesnar b/c its so obvious he just dominate the roster, or something like that :cena2


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

D.M.N. said:


> Hour 1
> *Q1 - 3.11 rating / 4.28 million*
> Q2 - 3.04 rating / 4.18 million
> Q3 - 3.22 rating / 4.44 million
> Q4 - 2.92 rating / 4.02 million
> 
> Hour 2
> *Q5 - 3.19 rating / 4.44 million*
> Q6 - 3.07 rating / 4.27 million
> Q7 - 2.90 rating / 4.03 million
> Q8 - 3.20 rating / 4.45 million
> Overrun - 3.42 rating / 4.75 million
> 
> Poor breakdown. Poor. Extremely surprised at how poor the Q1 rating is - it should have been at _least_ 5 million. Normally when TV shows have "cliffhangers", the following episode starts higher as viewers tune in to find out "why". So for Q1 to do 4.3 million is very poor. Q1 tends to show how many people were interested in the ending the previous week to bother to tune in, clearly not many of Raw's audience were interested...


That's hilariously awesome. Jericho/Punk > Lesnar/Cena brawl~


----------



## dxbender

Interesting topic about tv viewers overall.

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/611840-less-people-watch-tv-mondays-2012-a.html

Preview from that topic....1999 had more than 20M people watching(from the big 4 networks) than 2012 does on Monday from 9-11pm. Maybe Raw is affected as well?


----------



## A-C-P

dxbender said:


> Interesting topic about tv viewers overall.
> 
> http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/611840-less-people-watch-tv-mondays-2012-a.html
> 
> Preview from that topic....1999 had more than 20M people watching(from the big 4 networks) than 2012 does on Monday from 9-11pm. Maybe Raw is affected as well?


Yes, it is one of the logical reasons ratings and viewership #s are down but don't try and bring any logical arguments here they will be laughed at and there will be stupid excuses mae up for why it doesn't apply to WWE programming.

Plus we all know its Punk's fault


----------



## #1Peep4ever

A-C-P said:


> Come on I am sure they can find a way to blame Punk, we all know it his fault unk
> 
> My guess is since Punk is the WWE champion and looks liek a waffle house cook nobdy will watch Lesnar b/c its so obvious he just dominate the roster, or something like that :cena2


Punk destroyed Lesnars drawing ability.. so far this is obvious..i guess we will have to wait for the very intelligent excuses they make to make punk look bad


----------



## The-Rock-Says

dxbender said:


> Interesting topic about tv viewers overall.
> 
> http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/611840-less-people-watch-tv-mondays-2012-a.html
> 
> Preview from that topic....1999 had more than 20M people watching(from the big 4 networks) than 2012 does on Monday from 9-11pm. Maybe Raw is affected as well?


Or it could be that the product sucks and people don't wanna watch it?

Like look at Monday night.

They start off with a real great angle with Brock and Cena, it was great and it was exciting. Then for the rest of the show they had shit slapstick comedy and a bunch of jobber matches and then finish off the night with something interesting. (not the match, but the Brock attack) 

That is why people are not watching in there big numbers anymore. The whole show isn't interesting enough . Or even half of the show.


----------



## Starbuck

In all that craziness last night I forgot to actually comment on the breakdown lol. It's certainly an interesting one, aren't they all? DURRR The opening being so low is just flat out wrong tbh. It shouldn't be anywhere near those numbers and I find it confusing as hell that the closing segment last week featuring Brock/Cena could have such a huge number and then one week later have such a low number. I don't think it's because people aren't interested. If they weren't interested it wouldn't have done so well in the first place. If they weren't interested Lesnar's interview wouldn't have pulled so many people back either. Or maybe they aren't interested. I guess next week we'll know for sure because if it happens twice+ then there isn't really any other conclusion you can come to.

As for the rest, I'm glad the stooges were the low point of the show. They were fucking shit and nobody wanted to see them there. I hope their movie does shit as well just to spite them too. Jericho/Punk had a better gain than they usually do, which is good, but then lost half the people they pulled in in the next segment, which is bad lol. Both programs did just alright this week but nothing was exactly stellar. The highest gain of the night was Lesnar's interview and it didn't even top 500k. No segment was over the 5 million mark either which is really bad, especially for Cena/Lesnar. But the overrun was close I suppose.

I always say this but next week will be interesting for sure lol. While it wasn't exactly the awesome program it could have been both substance and ratings wise, at least Rock/Cena was doing the average or slightly above in the time slots they were in. So far, outside last weeks monster number, Cena/Lesnar hasn't exactly produced the goods. It's only been 2 weeks though so it's not really fair to judge yet. They really ought to be hitting around the 5 million mark from here on out though imo. Most of the top and hottest angles are at that mark and that's the standard I'm holding Cena/Lesnar too as well. Who knows, maybe this will turn out to be a case of lower viewing audience/higher PPV audience. We'll find that out come Extreme Rules. All I can say is, they have my buy, something that wasn't guaranteed before Brock Lesnar came back last week. After that, I really don't know. Depends how they handle it as always I suppose.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

The proof in the pudding will be PPV buys. That is the most important thing. There is still 4 million people tuining in every week. So you just have to convince them people to buy the PPV. Simple.


----------



## Starbuck

The-Rock-Says said:


> The proof in the pudding will be PPV buys. That is the most important thing. There is still 4 million people tuining in every week. So you just have to convince them people to buy the PPV. Simple.


Or not so simple lol. They've been failing hard at converting their television audience into their PPV audience for ages now and every year it gets worse. That's the thing that makes me chuckle about those who say the number of viewers in the AE is the same as today. That may be the case. But back then, the television viewers translated to all aspects of the business. They directly impacted upon live gates for house shows and buys for PPV's. That doesn't happen anymore. They may have retained their viewing audience, which they haven't if you break it all down, but even if they did, they haven't been able to convert that to the other 2 pillars of their business which is a pretty major problem if you ask me. People will watch on TV but won't be bothered to go see WWE if they come to their town or won't pay to watch (what should be but more often than not isn't in todays climate lol) the conclusion of the weekly TV shows on PPV.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Starbuck said:


> Or not so simple lol. They've been failing hard at converting their television audience into their PPV audience for ages now and every year it gets worse. That's the thing that makes me chuckle about those who say the number of viewers in the AE is the same as today. That may be the case. But back then, the television viewers translated to all aspects of the business. They directly impacted upon live gates for house shows and buys for PPV's. That doesn't happen anymore. They may have retained their viewing audience, which they haven't if you break it all down, but even if they did, they haven't been able to convert that to the other 2 pillars of their business which is a pretty major problem if you ask me. People will watch on TV but won't be bothered to go see WWE if they come to their town or won't pay to watch (what should be but more often than not isn't in todays climate lol) the conclusion of the weekly TV shows on PPV.


House show attendence is somewhat decent (made a massive 3 million in Abu Dhabi), and well the buyrate figures, illegal streams says "sup"


----------



## Starbuck

jblvdx said:


> House show attendence is somewhat decent (made a massive 3 million in Abu Dhabi), and well the buyrate figures, illegal streams says "sup"


I'd hardly call one house show in a place they've never been to before an indication of house show business being decent. No doubt streams and the current economy not to mention the frequency of PPV's these days has led to a decline but the main factor is simply down to people not wanting to buy them because they aren't worth it anymore.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Starbuck said:


> I'd hardly call one house show in a place they've never been to before an indication of house show business being decent. No doubt streams and the current economy not to mention the frequency of PPV's these days has led to a decline but the main factor is simply down to people not wanting to buy them because they aren't worth it anymore.


I know. Just you have to keep in mind that the digital evolution over the past five years have hit hard not only the WWE, but the whole entertainment industry as a whole (last year the Film industry made the least amount of money since the late eighties). Just wanted to point out that WWE is still very healthy.


----------



## SPCDRI

Its the same 3 and change with a 3.4 overrun that RAW has been doing for years.

Brock Lesnar hasn't brought viewers and I don't think he brings PPV buys.


----------



## D.M.N.

Starbuck said:


> I find it confusing as hell that the closing segment last week featuring Brock/Cena could have such a huge number and then one week later have such a low number. I don't think it's because people aren't interested. If they weren't interested it wouldn't have done so well in the first place.


But before the segment they were not promoting Brock/Cena. They were promoting Cena/Rock with Cena 'confronting' The Rock. The big overrun was for the WrestleMania fallout.

Although it may seem it, just because 99 percent of this forum liked Brock's return, it doesn't mean 99 percent of the WWE's audience liked Brock's return. If WWE's audience profile has changed drastically over the past ten years - ie not many people in their current audience nowadays know the name Brock Lesnar, that may have had an effect as well.

The current audience, clearly were not 'drawn' massively by Brock's return, hence the poor Q1 number.


----------



## Brave Nash

#1Peep4ever said:


> those were actually punks faults


Cena can't take a cross body how is it Punks fault, And Cena should push his back or his shoulders before Punk land in his ass. 
By the way I prefer the summerslam match.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-phlTlqcOKA&feature=fvwrel

That popped a rating - 15.0[/I]

DEM RATINZ


----------



## JasonLives

Starbuck said:


> I'd hardly call one house show in a place they've never been to before an indication of house show business being decent. No doubt streams and the current economy not to mention the frequency of PPV's these days has led to a decline but the main factor is simply down to people not wanting to buy them because they aren't worth it anymore.


House show business was actually much,much worse in 2004. 

Today WWE has an average attendance of about 5,000-6,000 people. Think the last quarter report said 6,000.

Back in 2004 the average number was actually 3,900 even though ticket prices were cheaper.

Look at these two newsbits from 2004 :



> House shows this weekend in Canada did business well below expected levels. According to Dave Scherer, Edmonton did about 1500 paid for $70,000 while Calgary did less than 1,200 paid for under $50,000.
> 
> These are very low attendances, but even lower considering they are in Canada, long considered a major stronghold for WWE.
> 
> Another poor sign of ticket sales was that the PPV in Portland was not sold out last night. Due to the restrictions of the Oregon Athletic Commission, WWE didn’t run in Oregon for many years, and the fact that even in Portalnd a PPV didn’t sell out was cause for concern.
> 
> Source: PWInsider 2004





> One of the biggest concerns in WWE right now is the alarmingly low level of recent attendance, mainly at house shows. Recent shows have often drawn less than 2000 fans and sometimes even below 1000 fans. Many shows have even been dropped completely due to low advance ticket sales.
> 
> The low attendance is also hurting wrestlers who are getting extremely low payoffs since most are paid based on gates. The Smackdown crew is especially down since they have been doing much worse than RAW. To make things worse, the feeling among Smackdown workers is that things will not improve.
> Source: Torch Newsletter 2004


Those were numbers even TNA can pull these days.


----------



## DesolationRow

*Starbuck* owns this thread. LMFAO. Grade-A trolling. :cool2 

(You'll be hearing from me in the next 24 hours or so, *S-buck*, lol.)

*** 

Agreed with the point by *JasonLives*, I believe it was, about the Lord Tensai match being saddled with that fairly sizable loss (which wasn't really _that_ huge considering how we were seeing nearly million-viewer drops only a few months back, at least things are much more stable overall now with even the midcard pulling its weight on a consistent basis, although some of that is because the top programs aren't drawing as well as they should be in the first place and right now that is namely Cena/Lesnar) isn't entirely fair, as it was ensconced between commercial breaks and fluffy backstage skits and video packages in a weak quarter hour anyway. Way too early to say that Lord Tensai is a bust or anything.

*** 

That Q1 number for this week's Raw is legitimately devastating. And what makes it suck even worse is that it was by far the best quarter hour of the entire show. The whole feel and vibe of that segment was unlike anything we've seen in WWE in a long, long time. It felt unpredictable and fresh. Cena and Lesnar both looked like intense badasses coming out of it. I can't believe WWE's booked this match for Extreme Rules but that's another matter, I guess. Wouldn't be surprised in the least if they don't actually go through with an actual match, but then again it's not like them in this era to reflexively cut to a bait-and-switch.

*** 

*JasonLives* making some good points backed up by facts regarding house show business in 2004. This segues nicely into Lesnar, because WWE in general was in much more dire straits back in 2004 than it's been ever since. The Cena/Batista "mini-boom" as we may like to call it spearheaded WWE into a much brighter era, overall, and its business model has changed to a significant degree in the subsequent years. If the picture of WWE's landscape seemed bleak roughly a year or so ago with HBK retiring, Batista retiring, Jericho taking another leave of absence and Edge being forced to retire, in terms of undeniably needing new stars, 2002-2004 was much, much worse. It really caught up with them in 2004, in spite of the Eddie Guerrero push which was arguably instrumental in at least keeping Smackdown viable throughout that otherwise dismal year for that brand in particular and WWE overall, and by the end of the year, in the wake of Orton's failed babyface push, the necessity of Batista and Cena becoming huge stars was irrefutable. 

Average house show in 2011 averaged about 6,000 or so, I've read. Obviously WWE reaching into new, relatively untapped markets recently gives their live gate numbers a major boost but the house show business for WWE is quite healthy these days. March is usually one of the strongest months for the entire year in house show business for WWE, and it's almost entirely because of The Road to Wrestlemania, naturally and most reports indicated that the crowds this year were almost always very large at just about every house show WWE ran in the month of March. Most workers in WWE should be pleased with their payoffs right now. The international tour in April will intrinsically buttress that month's house show business as well.


----------



## Mysterio fan

House show business was much worse and suffering from 2002 - 2004 because the boom was over. Smackdown attendance were way low at times in that period even with superstars like lesnar,taker,cena.. headlining.

A few reports i found from around those years...



> September 2003 -
> Low attendance at house shows continues to be a problem for WWE, since many wrestlers are paid based on how well WWE attendance is. In addition, a recent Smackdown house show (Monday) was cancelled, which meant talent had to be on the road but got no revenue off of it.





> -The WWE may have gotten an alarming signal last night at the Smackdown! tapings when the arena was quite empty. It is expected that on many house shows the WWE will have low attendance, but when it is so low for a television taping, it is bound to turn heads. There was said to be many sections of tarped off seats last night.





> May 2002-
> World Wrestling Entertainment is in the midst of the worst downturn in business that the company has seen in years. The promotions two premiere broadcasts have seen large inconsistencies in viewership for the past several months and have both seen record level low ratings in the past three weeks. This year's installment of Wrestlemania --despite having the added novelty of being a stadium show, boasting one of the biggest matches of all time, and using a record high advertising budget-- fell 500,000 buys short of projections and settled at third place in relation to the past four Wrestlemanias with 800,000 buys. Live attendance is down almost *35%* from one year ago, a number that is just frightening considering the fact that a large portion of the companies revenues come from live gates and the subsequent merchandise sales that occur once paying fans enter the arena. The fact that every house show is a split-crew show now and into the future really doesn't help matters much either.







JasonLives said:


> Today WWE has an average attendance of about 5,000-6,000 people. Think the last quarter report said 6,000.
> 
> Those were numbers even TNA can pull these days.


Are you sure about this? 

Found these 2011 house shows attendance figures in another forum quoting observer as source...



> *WWE*
> 
> * 5/6 in Dothan, Alabama: 2,500 fans.
> 
> * 5/7 in Macon, Georgia: 4,400 fans.
> 
> * 5/7 in Pensacola, Florida: 3,500 fans.
> 
> * 5/8 in Greenville, South Carolina: 5,500 fans.
> 
> * 5/8 in Tupelo, Mississippi: 3,600 fans.
> 
> * 5/10 in Highland Heights, Kentucky: 2,000 fans.
> 
> 
> *TNA:*
> 
> * 5/5 in Joplin, Missouri: 3,000 fans.
> 
> * 5/6 in Fort Smith, Arkansas: 690 fans.
> 
> * 5/7 in Hot Springs, Arkansas: 700 fans.





> *WWE:*
> 
> * 10/30 in Hartford, Connecticut (Fan Appreciation Day): sellout of 11,000 fans.
> 
> * 10/31 in Montreal, Quebec, Caanda: 5,900 fans.
> 
> * 10/31 in Boston, Massachusetts: 4,000 fans.
> 
> * 11/1 in Long Island, New York (Monday Night Raw): 9,000 fans.
> 
> 
> *TNA:*
> 
> * 10/28 in Sedalia, Missouri: 600 fans.
> 
> * 10/29 in Springfield, Missouri: 300 fans.
> 
> * 10/30 in West Plains, Missouri: 500 fans.


TNA numbers in particular look horrible.


----------



## Figure4Leglock

*Re: RAW "ItBegins" Viewership (02/01/12) - no boost*



Mister Hands said:


> WWE has this many fans. Let's just accept it, folks.


Pretty Much this, reality bites but thats what life is


----------



## robertdeniro

So i understand that 2003 was overall a bad year .. even Wrestlemania 19 had a low buyrate with only 560,000 buys.


----------



## Starbuck

JasonLives said:


> House show business was actually much,much worse in 2004.
> 
> Today WWE has an average attendance of about 5,000-6,000 people. Think the last quarter report said 6,000.
> 
> Back in 2004 the average number was actually 3,900 even though ticket prices were cheaper.
> 
> Look at these two newsbits from 2004 :
> 
> Those were numbers even TNA can pull these days.


Yup. House Show business wasn't great in 2004 either, especially for SD which did terrible numbers, kind of like SD today I guess lol. Doesn't change the fact that it isn't stellar today though. I was just making the observation. Same for PPV's too which are probably doing the worst of the lot. People simply aren't buying them although I don't see how this is a surprise to anybody considering how utterly poorly they are built heading in. You build a PPV and give people a reason to watch, you get a result. MITB is all that needs to be said really. 

For the record, I don't think WWE is dying. Far from it. Their current business model enables them to make a lot of money with seemingly minimal effort. They can make more money from lower PPV buys by hiking the price. Same with live events too. But the pre RTWM ratings were far from impressive, especially when you consider what was happening and who was appearing on those shows. Post WM seems like it's going to be more of the same.


----------



## Rock316AE

House Show business is terrible now, it's not all-time low because of the strong WWE machine but it's not far away from it, PPV business is at an all-time low, that's scary if you consider the availability of PPVs now compared to 15-20 years and it's STILL not even close. Domestically even the most dark eras were doing better. WWE lost money in the last quarter for the first time in more than 10 years. There's a reason why Vince is in panic mode to bring back real stars like Rock and Brock to save the biggest show of the year which is the biggest difference maker of their revenue, in 2011 they were supposed to lose a lot money but were almost where they were the year before because of the amazing game-changer Rock was in his WM program. This year? same thing if the WM buyrate is really 1.1 million which is going to be the highest grossing pro wrestling event of all time(it's already, but they need to wait till May to announce it officially). 

Anyway, you can't except something from a roster full of clueless geeks who think that this business is a school trip, including the champions(not Sheamus, he understands the business), last year Vince STOLE money from their pockets and these fools didn't even know about it! do you realize how pathetic it is? this is not the same industry of MEN, this is now a circus full of kids. This is the main reason why wrestling is going down every year, WWE are not dying tomorrow, it's a slow process but it's going to happen, that's inevitable with the sad state of the industry in terms of talent and mentality.


----------



## Starbuck

Don't worry. HHH will knock off Vince and save us all 8*D.


----------



## Rock316AE

Actually I don't know about HHH, I never saw him as a guy who can be all business, he's more of a wrestling guy than a businessman while Vince can do both. No problem with HHH as a big part in the company, he's a smart guy but I think Shane should be the man after Vince.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Rock316AE owning again. DAWG.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Rock316AE said:


> Actually I don't know about HHH, I never saw him as a guy who can be all business, he's more of a wrestling guy than a businessman while Vince can do both. No problem with HHH as a big part in the company, he's a smart guy but I think Shane should be the man after Vince.


Shane doesn't want the business. It's why he left in the first place. To do other things.

If he really wanted the business, he'd still be here.


----------



## Starbuck

Rock316AE said:


> Actually I don't know about HHH, I never saw him as a guy who can be all business, he's more of a wrestling guy than a businessman while Vince can do both. No problem with HHH as a big part in the company, he's a smart guy but I think Shane should be the man after Vince.


You're right. He's not a business guy, he's a wrestling guy. There's no way he'd be able to do what Vince does. He doesn't have the business background to be able to handle profit margins and revenues and all that shit. But nobody is asking him to be that guy and I don't think anybody expects him to be either. 

Here's the thing, HHH, Stephanie, and many others, most recently JJ Dillon I think it was actually, they've all come out and said that when Vince does actually die/hand over power (lol), the structure is going to have to change because no one person can take on Vince's full role. None of them can do what he does now. He has his hand in every department and makes decision for all them, that's why practically everybody that speaks about him speaks about how hard it is to get a few minutes. The guy's constantly doing something. Creative/TV is only a percentage of what he does and gets only a percentage of his attention. When the takeover/transition does happen, obviously there will be somebody at the top who gets the final _final_ say but I wouldn't be surprised at all to see HHH head up the main wrestling part because that's the bit he's good at and the bit where he'll be most productive. 

As for Shane, I've always liked him but the simple fact is, he left. Say what you want about Stephanie but she's still there. She stayed and she's in the trenches. Whatever the reason may be, Shane left to do his own thing. Maybe it's down to some sordid internal McMahon family war, I don't know lol but he left. Being the first born and Vince's son, you have to know it was all going to him but he obviously didn't want it or he'd still be there. I don't doubt that if he wants to come back a spot will be there waiting for him but so many things have been shuffled corporately since he left. Where do they fit him in, you know?

If there was one document I'd love to get a look at it would be Vince's will. Talk about getting the goods? That thing will reveal all lol.


----------



## Brye

Gotta give props to Shane. That guy put his body on the line nearly every time he wrestled.

I guess I can understand him leaving though. I think he's got his own business that's going well last time I checked.


----------



## DesolationRow

It's been long-documented that Stephanie was the "hungry" one of the two children from a very early age to "take over" from Vince one day. Shane never had that drive, not like Stephanie. I've always figured one of the key reasons he decided to leave was because he knew he'd be the perpetual "odd man out" in WWE, even if he had a huge position of power. He did leave a lasting legacy in a few areas of WWE, the website, the way WWE negotiates with cities regarding Wrestlemania, etceteras.


----------



## Cliffy

poor booking/stale product is 90% of the problem.

i'd only credit streaming for 10&.

MITB did a great buyrate considering it wasn't on ppv over here, it was on subscription digital tv.


----------



## kokepepsi

STOP SAYING BUYRATE FOR FUCKS SAKE
Anyways just realized, Don't most UFC fans (who don't watch their own shit anyways) hate lesnar?
They paid to see his ass get kicked but didn't he have a stigma for being a pro wrestler.

Doubt they are gonna pay/watch him do fake fighting now so maybe that explains the shit gain.

Gonna predict 250k now for the PPV


----------



## dxbender

UFC fans who don't like WWE aren't gonna pay to see the ppv. They might read up on what happened, or try to see a video online, but that's it.

Same goes for other things. Lets say some WWE star was gonna have a guest star in some random tv show you don't like. Would you really want to go out and watch that episode(or pay if you had to) or just watch the clip containing the person you wanted to see.


----------



## SteenIsGod

Watch this PPV due sub 220 K. It will be a complete fail if so.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Doesn't Shane have a cable company in China? Smart man.

Anyways Shane IMO did not want to take over WWE, if he did he would not have left. Seems like a tough job TBH.


----------



## DesolationRow

kokepepsi said:


> STOP SAYING BUYRATE FOR FUCKS SAKE
> Anyways just realized, Don't most UFC fans (who don't watch their own shit anyways) hate lesnar?
> They paid to see his ass get kicked but didn't he have a stigma for being a pro wrestler.
> 
> Doubt they are gonna pay/watch him do fake fighting now so maybe that explains the shit gain.
> 
> Gonna predict 250k now for the PPV


I think what one could term the UFC's "IWC" constituency more or less hates Lesnar, yes. I've been saying this for years, back when TNA was trying to make inroads on MMA fans. There's some unquestionable overlap between wrestling and MMA fans, but really not all that much anymore. And for most MMA purist fans, Lesnar was their top public enemy. Most of them are online shitting on him for returning to WWE and are happy he's gone, if anything. 

And considering he was never a significant draw in any area of WWE's business, and was something of an almost bust in WWE's pay-per-view business, I'm really not expecting any kind of big number for Extreme Rules. Throw on top of all of that WWE's usual half-assed hotshotting and you have the recipe to be underwhelmed. 

There will be _some_ people who buy the pay-per-view solely for Lesnar, though. Mostly older wrestling fans, and some of those will be MMA fans, too. It's almost impossible to say for sure how many buys that will get for WWE, though. 

If I were WWE, I'd be trying to attract the MMA's equivalent of the "casuals" who got into it primarily because of Lesnar, though. At least for the first few weeks. There are plenty of them out there for the picking but based on this last week's Raw rating and viewership numbers, I find it doubtful that WWE really captured many of 'em.


----------



## Rock316AE

Lesnar was becoming a bigger draw every year in his WWE run, in 2003 he had the most 10k+ gates in the industry as a SmackDown wrestler and like Vince said in his OTR interview, Brock was just becoming a box office draw, he was one of the biggest of the decade in his short time and would have been THE biggest of the decade if he was staying as the top star in the company for more than two years.

As for the ER buyrate, it's one month after WM28, the biggest money show in wrestling history, very hard position, especially when it's basically a one match PPV and nobody cares about the other mid card matches, Rock/Cena had HBK/Taker/HHH as another big attraction, this PPV has nothing. last year was around 200k overall, this year it's probably going to be 250k-300k with 300k being a great number. The big problem is the collapse of the international market and domestically WWE are doing their worst PPV business in history so that should tell you everything + people are not going to buy a random B show in this era, which is why it's a terrible decision to do Lesnar's return to PPV on this irrelevant show. Lesnar is going to carry ER on his back this year. That's obvious.


----------



## Mysterio fan

Lesnar did not draw in any meaningful way in his previous WWE run, WM 19 buyrate is simply the proof of that. Him leaving in 2004 did not hurt the company one bit. Facts prove Lesnar is huge draw as a fighter but not as a wrestling character. Dont think ER is going to do a big B-show buyrate.


----------



## Hemen

Rock316AE said:


> Lesnar was becoming a bigger draw every year in his WWE run, in 2003 he had the most 10k+ gates in the industry as a SmackDown wrestler and like Vince said in his OTR interview, Brock was just becoming a box office draw, he was one of the biggest of the decade in his short time and would have been THE biggest of the decade if he was staying as the top star in the company for more than two years.
> 
> As for the ER buyrate, it's one month after WM28, the biggest money show in wrestling history, very hard position, especially when it's basically a one match PPV and nobody cares about the other mid card matches, Rock/Cena had HBK/Taker/HHH as another big attraction, this PPV has nothing. last year was around 200k overall, this year it's probably going to be 250k-300k with 300k being a great number. The big problem is the collapse of the international market and domestically WWE are doing their worst PPV business in history so that should tell you everything + people are not going to buy a random B show in this era, which is why it's a terrible decision to do Lesnar's return to PPV on this irrelevant show. Lesnar is going to carry ER on his back this year. That's obvious.


(Y)


----------



## Loudness

I disagree with recent comments, looking back at older WWE PPVs they had something interesting going on on most shows, which also led to more people buying them. This still applies till today, see MITB last year, people want exciting matchups all the time, if there are no fights worth viewing then people certainly won't find the shows worth paying for either. When wrestling was still a hot topic, like when WCW and WWF fought against each other during the late 90s having a dull, filler PPV was not an option. Now obviously that's not the case anymore, WWE is not afraid of TNA and their 10k or less buyrates, but I don't see why from a fan, or a business perspective some people think that it's good having needless PPVs with uninteresting matches, especially since Lesnar is on a limited appearance sort of contract so Vince would want to make as much profit with Brock while he's in the WWE.


----------



## Mysterio fan

Vince does want to make as much profit as possible using Brock, thats why this match/feud should be built for Summerslam 2012 not ER.


----------



## The Hardcore Show

Mysterio fan said:


> Vince does want to make as much profit as possible using Brock, thats why this match/feud should be built for Summerslam 2012 not ER.


What do you do for 4 months then? Brock isn't leaving like The Rock had to. Have him destroy guys like Kofi Kingston & Zack Rider over and over?


----------



## Mysterio fan

In that case they made a mistake by bringing him back too soon. Should have saved his big return later towards summerslam. Besides, judging from the RAW opening seg rating, it doesnt seem like his return made a big difference anyway.


----------



## The Hardcore Show

Mysterio fan said:


> In that case they made a mistake by bringing him back too soon. Should have saved his big return later towards summerslam. Besides, judging from the RAW opening seg rating, it doesnt seem like his return made a big difference anyway.


So your feeling is Brock should of wrestled Summerslam & Wrestlemania and left because its bad business for him to wrestle at any other events?


----------



## Mysterio fan

Brock wrestling his first ever match in WWE = big money. Doing that at summerslam means a biggger profit. are you not getting it?


----------



## The Hardcore Show

Mysterio fan said:


> Brock wrestling his first ever match in WWE = big money. Doing that at summerslam means a biggger profit. are you not getting it?


I get it but I think WWE has bigger plans for him going into Summerslam. In the ideal world you would do this but WWE has 10 other PPV's a year that they need to make people care about. That is why they are having Lesnar wrestle at Extreme Rules.


----------



## D.M.N.

4.319m and 4.453m: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...asketball-wives-american-pickers-more/129433/


----------



## A-C-P

Same 4 million that watch every week live on TV <YAWN> but let the overanalyzation begin!

Although decent # for a taped show with available spoilers


----------



## Mysterio fan

Punk vs Henry opened right?


----------



## Green Light

Second hour gained? Lord Tensai = RATINGS


----------



## purple_gloves

Surely the WM buyrate proves that ratings don't mean shit. Is there any real need for this thread?


----------



## Mysterio fan

Wrestlemania proved, sure. What about B-show ppvs the rest of the year? 

Mania generally draws 800k atleast just because of its name Wrestlemania.


----------



## holt_hogan

Looks like the numbers are slightly up from last week.

Hour 1: 4.319m Hour 2: 4.453m

compared to 4.230m/4.342m last week.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

It's the same people watching every week.

It wont change, maybe wont change ever.

People just need to deal with that. Stop caring so much about ratings.


----------



## holt_hogan

This week's edition of WWE RAW drew a 3.1 cable rating, with 4,336,000 viewers. The show did hours of 3.05 (3.1) and 3.11 (3.1). It should be noted that viewership rose by 134,000 people from hour one to hour two.

Source: EWN


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Barely up from last week, and yet it was a taped show. 

Lesnar definitely can't draw. Dude's a waste of time.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Barely up from last week, and yet it was a taped show.
> 
> Lesnar definitely can't draw. Dude's a waste of time.


He'll be judged on PPV.

Not RAW ratings.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

So the people he's supposed to "draw" in are not going to watch him free on TV in his first WWE segment in 8 years, but will gladly pay 65 dollars to watch him "fight" John Cena.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

If he's in the right angle and with the right person, he will draw on PPV.

Which is why these guys are brought back for. To bring the $$$ in from PPV


----------



## Duke Silver

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> So the people he's supposed to "draw" in are not going to watch him free on TV in his first WWE segment in 8 years, but will gladly pay 65 dollars to watch him "fight" John Cena.


Not necessarily, but you have to remember that those aren't the only people buying the PPV. Whether it's drawing new viewers or not, it's an interesting angle with a fresh 'era legend'. I'd be surprised if Extreme Rules didn't pull in a few more of that four-mil faithful.


----------



## Clique

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> So the people he's supposed to "draw" in are not going to watch him free on TV in his first WWE segment in 8 years, but will gladly pay 65 dollars to watch him "fight" John Cena.


I'm thinking that type of casual fan looking just for Lesnar won't stick around to watch Three Stooges, Santino, Rtruth, Brodus Clay, and other no names on TV with a ton of commercials but they hopefully would be inclined to see Lesnar featured in a big main event match on ppv.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Clique said:


> I'm thinking that type of casual fan looking just for Lesnar won't stick around to watch Three Stooges, Santino, Rtruth, Brodus Clay, and other no names on TV with a ton of commercials but they hopefully would be inclined to see Lesnar featured in a big main event match on ppv.


That type of casual fan isn't even watching just for Lesnar. That opening segment last week, with that huge brawl, and Lesnar's first segment in 8 years, drew less than the Punk/Jericho segment later on in the show. For two guys who supposedly "can't draw", they sure did pretty good there. 

But yeah, I don't see Extreme Rules doing anything spectacular in terms of buys. Pretty much similar to last year's, slightly lower, in my opinion. This Lesnar/Cena feud is nothing special, and it appears the audience agrees. I guess we'll see come the Extreme Rules buy numbers.


----------



## Green Light

All that is important is how many of those viewers can be convinced to pay to watch Lesnar wrestle, I'm sure ER will bring in a solid number of extra buys solely because of him. Because without him there are no proven draws other than Cena, I keep repeating this but the fact that all PPVs since MITB have been down on the previous year except two (Survivor Series & Mania) tells you something about the current product and roster. Ratings were awful on the RTWM and it ended up breaking records, Brock is something different that I think people will pay to see


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

lol, a taped Raw drew more than the live one from the week prior.

Next week should have a good overall number (for at least the normal two hours) being that it's the final show before ER, and Lesnar/Cena contract signing is advertised... and contract signings always end in chaos of some sort. 

Guess we'll have to wait and see.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

The-Rock-Says said:


> If he's in the right angle and with the right person, he will draw on PPV.
> 
> Which is why these guys are brought back for. To bring the $$$ in from PPV


B PPVs mean squat shit. If this was one of the big three PPVs than maybe he could draw huge numbers, but this is a PPV that most people don't care about.


----------



## Carcass

Don't worry, DB's gonna get ER some huge buys just like he did with WM 28.


----------



## SimplyIncredible

Wrestlemania should have showed you that the correlation between ratings and ppv buys isn't a particularly strong one, UFC also proves this every month.

3.0, 3.1 etc, not a big deal. Think we care more on here than Vince actually does nowadays. Ratings are not as important as they were back in the MNW.


----------



## SimplyIncredible

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Barely up from last week, and yet it was a taped show.
> 
> Lesnar definitely can't draw. Dude's a waste of time.


A 'draw' is based on how much money they make the company, not on ratings. Its PPV buys and live attendance that make somebody a draw or not.


----------



## DesolationRow

SimplyIncredible said:


> Wrestlemania should have showed you that the correlation between ratings and ppv buys isn't a particularly strong one, UFC also proves this every month.
> 
> 3.0, 3.1 etc, not a big deal. Think we care more on here than Vince actually does nowadays. Ratings are not as important as they were back in the MNW.


Agreed with all of this.


----------



## kokepepsi

WCW proved that over 15 yrs ago
LOL


----------



## Mysterio fan

Come on people, WRESTLEMANIA is the one PPV event that casuals tend to buy just for the name value alone. Dont think Mania buys, especially with a Main event which was promoted for a whole year for the first time in WWE history, is an appropriate way to judge if ratings matter or not. Why dont we all wait for Extreme rules PPV Buys and then decide for sure?


----------



## JasonLives

But ratings are important for the USA Network though. They couldnt give a shit about what buys WWE pulls in.

In this case, too low ratings might make USA Network say "You are not worth the price you are asking for". So WWE will either move or have to ask for less money per show. Which in the end will hurt them financially.
However, Raw´s contract with the USA Network doesnt go out until 2014. So they have 2 years left.

As for this weeks ratings, I honestly expected something like 2.9. Considering last weeks show did 3.1 and this weeks was taped.


----------



## Mysterio fan

The last taped raw from Mexico, i think, roughly did the same rating as the previous week at the time.


----------



## Starbuck

Ratings...interdasting. So, it seems Lesnar isn't the ratings powerhouse I and a lot of others thought he would be. I can hold my hand up over that. You can lay it on the angle or whatever you want but I don't think that's it because for me and most others, the angle has actually been really good and has involved some high drama moments that you would think would pull great numbers. We've yet to see how he does in PPV which is where I suspect he will be most effective though so I'd hold off on calling him a failure. 

I think it will end up being the same scenario as Survivor Series and Mania where the ratings heading in are rubbish but the buys were up. Why? I think it's down to the fact that the older/other fans who are providing the extra PPV buys are either people who watch every week but don't buy the show and on this occasion _do_ buy the show, or the other scenario is people who don't watch every week, hear that Lesnar is fighting Cena and that's all they care about so they buy the PPV. That's where the extra buys, if there are any, will come from imo. I thought this Lesnar/Cena program would do big numbers across the board and so far that hasn't happened which has surprised me tbh. I'd be even more surprised if the ER buyrate doesn't go up to some degree as well.

The thing with the rest of the other PPVs is that it's the same audience watching every week, give or take, but they aren't buying the PPV at the end of it all. In fact, less people are buying than ever before. The only times they managed to make things go up was with a red hot angle(MITB), Rock's return to the ring(Survivor Series) and of course Rock/Cena and HIAC(Mania 28). 

Like I said, interdasting lol.


----------



## purple_gloves

Mysterio fan said:


> Come on people, WRESTLEMANIA is the one PPV event that casuals tend to buy just for the name value alone. *Dont think Mania buys, especially with a Main event which was promoted for a whole year for the first time in WWE history, is an appropriate way to judge if ratings matter or not.* Why dont we all wait for Extreme rules PPV Buys and then decide for sure?


You seem to be missing the basic point mate, that if you offer the audience something that they want to see on ppv, they will buy it, regardless of the previous ratings. It does indeed prove that there is no correlation between ratings and buyrates.

Look at last year. Punk's shoot didn't drive ratings up, but the storyline produced an improved buyrate for MITB.


----------



## Brodus Clay

Lesnar isn't going to get ratings talking.He fucking suck at the mic.The Rock didn't need wrestle because hes one of the best at the mic ever.Lesnar needs to bring the pain to get those ratings.


----------



## Mysterio fan

RAW go home show for Survivor series final segment with the rock drew 4+ ratins. Thats not "rubbish" starbuck.


----------



## Mysterio fan

purple_gloves said:


> You seem to be missing the basic point mate, that if you offer the audience something that they want to see on ppv, they will buy it, regardless of the previous ratings. It does indeed prove that there is no correlation between ratings and buyrates.
> 
> Look at last year. Punk's shoot didn't drive ratings up, but the storyline produced an improved buyrate for MITB.


Well the MITB increase was mere 20,000 but I see your point. I would still prefer to wait for ER buys and then decide this.


----------



## bigdog40

JasonLives said:


> But ratings are important for the USA Network though. They couldnt give a shit about what buys WWE pulls in.
> 
> In this case, too low ratings might make USA Network say "You are not worth the price you are asking for". So WWE will either move or have to ask for less money per show. Which in the end will hurt them financially.
> However, Raw´s contract with the USA Network doesnt go out until 2014. So they have 2 years left.
> 
> As for this weeks ratings, I honestly expected something like 2.9. Considering last weeks show did 3.1 and this weeks was taped.




Raw is USA's highest rated show by far and it's a top 5, top 10 on cable every week so USA would be dumb to get rid of it.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Starbuck said:


> Ratings...interdasting. So, it seems Lesnar isn't the ratings powerhouse I and a lot of others thought he would be. I can hold my hand up over that. You can lay it on the angle or whatever you want but I don't think that's it because for me and most others, the angle has actually been really good and has involved some high drama moments that you would think would pull great numbers. We've yet to see how he does in PPV which is where I suspect he will be most effective though so I'd hold off on calling him a failure.
> 
> I think it will end up being the same scenario as *Survivor Series* and Mania *where the ratings heading in are rubbish but the buys were up*. Why? I think it's down to the fact that the older/other fans who are providing the extra PPV buys are either people who watch every week but don't buy the show and on this occasion _do_ buy the show, or the other scenario is people who don't watch every week, hear that Lesnar is fighting Cena and that's all they care about so they buy the PPV. That's where the extra buys, if there are any, will come from imo. I thought this Lesnar/Cena program would do big numbers across the board and so far that hasn't happened which has surprised me tbh. I'd be even more surprised if the ER buyrate doesn't go up to some degree as well.
> 
> The thing with the rest of the other PPVs is that it's the same audience watching every week, give or take, but they aren't buying the PPV at the end of it all. In fact, less people are buying than ever before. The only times they managed to make things go up was with a red hot angle(MITB), Rock's return to the ring(Survivor Series) and of course Rock/Cena and HIAC(Mania 28).
> 
> Like I said, interdasting lol.





purple_gloves said:


> You seem to be missing the basic point mate, that if you offer the audience something that they want to see on ppv, they will buy it, regardless of the previous ratings. It does indeed prove that there is no correlation between ratings and buyrates.
> 
> Look at last year. Punk's shoot didn't drive ratings up, but the storyline produced *an improved buyrate for MITB*.


Survivor Series and MITB buyrate didn't go up that much. It doesn't matter how hot an angle or worker is, as long as the PPV isn't named Summerslam, Royal Rumble, or Wrestlemania not many people will buy it.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

If someone has the rating information and PPV buys you could pretty easily do an analysis to see if ratings are an adequate predictor of buys. I don't think they are, but I don't think that declining ratings are a good thing or "nothing to worry about" either.


----------



## Fabregas

I'm pretty sure if it wasn't for Lesnar returning, the average RAW ratings would be below 3.0 right now.


----------



## Starbuck

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> Survivor Series and MITB buyrate didn't go up that much. It doesn't matter how hot an angle or worker is, as long as the PPV isn't named Summerslam, Royal Rumble, or Wrestlemania not many people will buy it.


They didn't go up much but they went up at a time when every other PPV was going down. That's a success imo.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Mysterio fan said:


> Well the MITB increase was mere 20,000 but I see your point. I would still prefer to wait for ER buys and then decide this.


people who watched it on sky practically europe got it for free and i think they lost a lot of people in the uk who would have bought it


----------



## choosedoodle22

ratings stinky cause kids go beddy bie at 9 or later. wwe go tv14 again get better ratinz. dum dums for not doin it soner.


----------



## itssoeasy23

choosedoodle22 said:


> ratings stinky cause kids go beddy bie at 9 or later. wwe go tv14 again get better ratinz. dum dums for not doin it soner.


:lmao:lmao

unk2


----------



## Fargerov

:lol at the guy who said Lesnar is a waste of time because he can't draw.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Fargerov said:


> :lol at the guy who said Lesnar is a waste of time because he can't draw.


Right, why is that funny? It isn't, in fact it's pretty sad. He's a UFC draw, not a WWE draw. But that's judging by TV numbers. Can't say much until we know the ER number.


----------



## choosedoodle22

itssoeasy23 said:


> :lmao:lmao
> 
> unk2


wat so funny? do u think i a buffooon? its true


----------



## Fargerov

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Right, why is that funny? It isn't, in fact it's pretty sad. He's a UFC draw, not a WWE draw. But that's judging by TV numbers. Can't say much until we know the ER number.


He's not waste of time because he is a good wrestler and is entertaining. He may be a waste of money for WWE, but a waste of time, no.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Fargerov said:


> He's not waste of time because he is a good wrestler and is entertaining. He may be a waste of money for WWE, but a waste of time, no.


Good wrestler, yes. Entertaining, eh depends on who you ask. I don't think he's even a bit entertaining. Even so, he's a special attraction. If that was not the case and he became a full time guy, then I wouldn't consider it waste of time. Still a waste of money, though. Instead of focusing on making new stars, they rely on old ones to fight Cena. But so far, Lesnar's a special attraction that clearly isn't working too well. He's gained almost no publicity for returning to WWE, and his segments are trash in terms of ratings. The Rock was a successful special attraction, Lesnar not so much.


----------



## choosedoodle22

ratings would bottleroket if daren young was on raw. tru story.


----------



## Rock316AE

Fabregas said:


> I'm pretty sure if it wasn't for Lesnar returning, the average RAW ratings would be below 3.0 right now.


No doubt about it, Lesnar is the only reason to watch WWE now and the only reason to watch pro wrestling in general along with Roode and Bully Ray. Without Brock the shows were doing way below 3.0. It was amazing how he gained 400k in a filler segment last week. Vince should thank god that he got Brock to save him the business and the terrible product. The promo Lesnar did with the video package was a masterpiece, awesome money promo and the best WWE did in many years.


----------



## dxbender

Why do people seriously care so much about draw numbers?

Do sports teams care about who they should sign(or start) based on who can sell more tickets or merchandise? Do TV shows suddenly take away one of their main characters cause the fans aren't willing to pay for the season 1 dvd...

WWE is no different. Who cares if 1 star draws a 3.1 rating and one star draws a 3.2 rating. Why would you care about ratings when theres NO COMPETITION.


----------



## Snothlisberger

where are the quarters?


----------



## zkorejo

Rock316AE said:


> No doubt about it, Lesnar is the only reason to watch WWE now and the only reason to watch pro wrestling in general along with Roode and Bully Ray. Without Brock the shows were doing way below 3.0. It was amazing how he gained 400k in a filler segment last week. Vince should thank god that he got Brock to save him the business and the terrible product. *The promo Lesnar did with the video package was a masterpiece, awesome money promo and the best WWE did in many years*.


I liked it, but it was clearly a UFC video style package rip-off. I am pretty sure WWE will go on with UFC fighter gimmick for Brock Lesnar.

I hope atleast he wrestles in trunks and not shorts though.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

> Daniel Bryan stuff and how over he was on TV, his match with Kofi Kingston lost 603,000 viewers


He's the new Austin!!!!!1111 He's the next mega star!!!! He's going to create the next boom!!!!!

Yep.


> In the segment-by-segment, the show started unusually low (2.90) for the Punk vs. Henry title match. The match and Chris Jericho post show interview gained 308,000 viewers. Santino Marella vs. David Otunga and the Brock Lesnar interview gained 117,000 viewers. Kane vs. Zack Ryder lost 306,000 viewers. The John Cena in/ring with John Laurinaitis gained 400,000 viewers to a 3.26 quarter. This is what’s so crazy, with all the Daniel Bryan stuff and how over he was on TV, his match with Kofi Kingston lost 603,000 viewers to a 2.84 quarter. Brodus Clay vs. Dolph Ziggler gained 298,000 viewers. Great Khali & Big Show vs. Primo & Epico gained 205,000 viewers. And the John Cena vs. Lord Tensai main event gained 319,000 viewers, which is a poor overrun gain, but nobody cared about Tensai, to a 3.42.


----------



## JasonLives

*Brodus Clay vs. Dolph Ziggler gained 298,000 viewers*

Da fuck? The match wasent even 30 seconds? 

*Great Khali & Big Show vs. Primo & Epico gained 205,000 viewers*

This match wasent even 2 minutes.


Seems like the actual wrestling was the no draw of the show.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

The 2nd segment of the night gaining 300'000 is very good, not only does it show intrigue to the Punk/Jericho program but also because that slot *always* loses viewers, then again the show did start at a 2.9 which is not surprising since we got Punk V Henry for three weeks in a row.

Like the post above I dont know how matches that are that short can be counted for a whole segment but oh well.

And Tensia sucks and the people seem to know it. Does a poor overrun and lost half a million viewers last week.


----------



## Suit Up

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA

daniel bryan and punk and ryder cant draw for shit, this is why wwe took the title of bryan and they will soon with punk


----------



## Chicago Warrior

JasonLives said:


> *Brodus Clay vs. Dolph Ziggler gained 298,000 viewers*
> 
> Da fuck? The match wasent even 30 seconds?
> 
> *Great Khali & Big Show vs. Primo & Epico gained 205,000 viewers*
> 
> This match wasent even 2 minutes.
> 
> 
> Seems like the actual wrestling was the no draw of the show.


Well 2 minute matches draw more then 10 minute matches. Casuals can sit trough a 2 minute match, but they usually tune-out if the match is about 10 minutes.


----------



## Carcass

No surprise that Kofi Kingston match lost viewers. Even with DB's star power, people don't give a shit about Kofi's star power and probably changed the channel when he made his entrances not thinking he was gonna wrestle the GOAT DB.


----------



## A-C-P

Funkasaurus bringin in DEM RATINGZ!!!!!!


----------



## Heel

Ratings are interesting but if you base how much you like a show or wrestler based on the rating it/they draw then you're an idiot. That's for WWE to worry about and not us fans. If a wrestler is Champion and entertains you immensely for 6 months, would you stop liking them because they drew shitty ratings? Honestly, it's bizarre the fascination people have with 'drawing power' on here.

If you watch RAW and love it, would you call it a shitty show if it ended up getting a 2.9 rating?


----------



## NewJack's Shank

Do some of you have stock in WWE lmao.


----------



## NewJack's Shank

Factor in the fact that most people catch it on youtube, Torrents or DVR it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

While the show starting out low isn't good, the interest is there for the Punk/Jericho angle with a great gain in the second quarter hour. Plus hey, Punk matches never draw well anyway, while his segments do about 60% of the time. Marella/David clumped in with Lesnar probably actually resulted in a lower gain than it would have if Lesnar was on his own in that slot. Cena/Laurinitis gaining 400,000 is a great second hour gain considering there hasn't been one that high since the Taker/HBK segment from before Mania that did 800k+ plus... and hell since before the whole Taker/HHH/HBK feud started... can't remember the last time Q5 did that well. Bryan/Kofi losing 600,000 ain't good, but Clay/Ziggler and Khali/Show vs. Primo and Epico gaining is odd.

Overall a very odd breakdown imo in todays WWE.


----------



## Starbuck

I don't think I can remember the last time Raw had so many gains in 1 show. Wow. Like seriously, they gained 6 times!!! That's crazy. What's even crazier is that they gained 6 times and still ended up with a 3.1 lol. The opener did really shitty again. That's 2 times in a row now which is rather strange. Q2 experienced a nice bump but I don't know if that's more to do with all the missing people from Q1 just tuning in or Punk/Jericho. Probably both tbh. 10pm did better than recent weeks but still nothing spectacular. Slightly above what they've been averaging recently which is good though. Hmmm. Rather odd breakdown to say the least but I guess the good news is that they actually managed to gain viewers throughout the entire course of the show instead of just at the 2 normal spots.


----------



## DesolationRow

"This is what’s so crazy, with all the Daniel Bryan stuff and how over he was on TV, his match with Kofi Kingston lost 603,000 viewers to a 2.84 quarter. Brodus Clay vs. Dolph Ziggler gained 298,000 viewers. Great Khali & Big Show vs. Primo & Epico gained 205,000 viewers. And the John Cena vs. Lord Tensai main event gained 319,000 viewers, which is a poor overrun gain, but nobody cared about Tensai, to a 3.42."


Lulz guys nobuddy wants to C 2 midgets 1 vanilla 1 chocolot Bryans & kofi Sux! Gotta gets big guys like Funkasorassss andz Kalle and Big showz\!!!


----------



## Tony Tornado

These breakdowns are irrelevant and untrustworthy information. They're not even concrete facts let alone the truth.


----------



## DesolationRow

Tony Tornado said:


> These breakdowns are irrelevant and untrustworthy information. They're not even concrete facts let alone the truth.


Apocryphal Breakdowns!


----------



## The-Rock-Says

DesolationRow said:


> "This is what’s so crazy, with all the Daniel Bryan stuff and how over he was on TV, his match with Kofi Kingston lost 603,000 viewers to a 2.84 quarter. Brodus Clay vs. Dolph Ziggler gained 298,000 viewers. Great Khali & Big Show vs. Primo & Epico gained 205,000 viewers. And the John Cena vs. Lord Tensai main event gained 319,000 viewers, which is a poor overrun gain, but nobody cared about Tensai, to a 3.42."
> 
> 
> Lulz guys nobuddy wants to C 2 midgets 1 vanilla 1 chocolot Bryans & kofi Sux! Gotta gets big guys like Funkasorassss andz Kalle and Big showz\!!!


Next mega star!!! New Steve Austin!!! New boom here we come!!!!


----------



## Heel

Do people ever consider that people change channel for reasons other than who is on screen?


----------



## Starbuck

DesolationRow said:


> "This is what’s so crazy, with all the Daniel Bryan stuff and how over he was on TV, his match with Kofi Kingston lost 603,000 viewers to a 2.84 quarter. Brodus Clay vs. Dolph Ziggler gained 298,000 viewers. Great Khali & Big Show vs. Primo & Epico gained 205,000 viewers. And the John Cena vs. Lord Tensai main event gained 319,000 viewers, which is a poor overrun gain, but nobody cared about Tensai, to a 3.42."
> 
> 
> Lulz guys nobuddy wants to C 2 midgets *1 vanilla 1 chocolot* Bryans & kofi Sux! Gotta gets big guys like Funkasorassss andz Kalle and Big showz\!!!


:lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

DesolationRow said:


> "This is what’s so crazy, with all the Daniel Bryan stuff and how over he was on TV, his match with Kofi Kingston lost 603,000 viewers to a 2.84 quarter. Brodus Clay vs. Dolph Ziggler gained 298,000 viewers. Great Khali & Big Show vs. Primo & Epico gained 205,000 viewers. And the John Cena vs. Lord Tensai main event gained 319,000 viewers, which is a poor overrun gain, but nobody cared about Tensai, to a 3.42."
> 
> 
> Lulz guys nobuddy wants to C 2 midgets 1 vanilla 1 chocolot Bryans & kofi Sux! Gotta gets big guys like Funkasorassss andz Kalle and Big showz\!!!


I can't breathe.
:lmao

As for the breakdown, holy random gains.


----------



## LarryCoon

People are too busy chanting "Yes! Yes! Yes!" to be actually watching Bryan's matches I guess.

Daniel Bryan might've created a monster.


----------



## Green Light

> The Daniel Bryan vs. Kofi Kingston match lost 603,000 viewers for a 2.84 quarter rating


Vanilla Midgets like Daniel Bryan will never be draws, BRING BACK KEVIN NASH


----------



## Mysterio fan

How can anyone say "Nobody cared about Tensai" when the match was actually promoted as Cena vs Mystery opponent? 

Its more like people didnt give a shit about John Cena vs random heel RAW main event for the 325645433th time. 


John cena is the Justin bieber of Pro-wrestling. He is killing the industry one step at a time.


----------



## Loudness

There must have been some electricity or cable issues in the US during the Bryan/Kofi match that didn't get fixed until 15 minutes later so no one could watch TV during that time, but the loyal people have overcome the technical odds and fixed their electricity in record time so they could still witness D Bryan in all his greatness, which resulted in a 2.84 instead of 0.0 rating, so technically D Bryan bumped the quarter hour by 2.84 in his segment alone, that's unheard of since the Rock/Foley "This is your Life" segment, truly one of the greatest megastars the business has ever seen. Sad to see how far people will go to boycott the GOAT D Bryan though.


----------



## D.M.N.

Hour 1
Q1 - 2.90 rating / 4.11 million
Q2 - 3.12 rating / 4.41 million
Q3 - 3.20 rating / 4.53 million
Q4 - 2.98 rating / 4.23 million

Hour 2
Q5 - 3.26 rating / 4.67 million
Q6 - 2.84 rating / 4.07 million
Q7 - 3.05 rating / 4.36 million
Q8 - 3.19 rating / 4.57 million
Overrun - 3.42 rating / 4.89 million

A good breakdown, the only bad marks are Kane vs Ryder, which I think it is plainly obvious the fans do not want to see, and Daniel Bryan losing viewers against Kingston in Q6. The 5-minute overrun did well, with nearly 5 million viewers, although I am surprised at how poorly Q1 did, presumably because it started off with wrestling rather than an in-ring segment.


----------



## chronoxiong

So Zack Ryder's match with Kane was a huge ratings drop. I guess it relates to how he's being treated in the WWE right now so it shouldn't come as a shock anymore. Lol...


----------



## Fargerov

Mysterio fan said:


> How can anyone say "Nobody cared about Tensai" when the match was actually promoted as Cena vs Mystery opponent?
> 
> Its more like people didnt give a shit about John Cena vs random heel RAW main event for the 325645433th time.
> 
> 
> John cena is the Justin bieber of Pro-wrestling. He is killing the industry one step at a time.


Because nobody cares about Lord Tensai. Apart from you.


----------



## kokepepsi

chronoxiong said:


> So Zack Ryder's match with Kane was a huge ratings drop. I guess it relates to how he's being treated in the WWE right now so it shouldn't come as a shock anymore. Lol...


Ryder only gained like two times,,,,,,,,,,,,,in the main event/10pm slots.........and it wasn't event that strong of a gain...............and cena was involved.

Ryder=Bryan as in only smarks care and the casual viewers don't


----------



## Fargerov

kokepepsi said:


> Ryder only gained like two times,,,,,,,,,,,,,in the main event/10pm slots.........and it wasn't event that strong of a gain...............and cena was involved.
> 
> Ryder=Bryan as in only smarks care and the casual viewers don't


:Rock4

:agree:


----------



## Rock316AE

zkorejo said:


> I liked it, but it was clearly a UFC video style package rip-off. I am pretty sure WWE will go on with UFC fighter gimmick for Brock Lesnar.
> 
> I hope atleast he wrestles in trunks and not shorts though.


I know but it doesn't really matter, UFC stole their entire concept from pro wrestling. This style with Lesnar doing it in such a believable and natural way is pure money. That's what Brock needs to be, a dominant monster until WM29. According to Bryan Alvarez BTW, the guy who did the video package is a big UFC fan.


----------



## Suit Up

I bet you this comment draw's more viewers then a cm punk segment


----------



## The-Rock-Says

> clearly a UFC video style package rip-off


Good, keep doing it. 

It was an awesome video package that is going to sell tickets. It was a money promo.

Lesnar came across like he was just speaking as Brock Lesnar. Not some guy in character. It felt very real. Funny thing is, Brock does really think like that. He doesn't care about the fans or the business. He has no emotion to the business. He wasn't a fan growing up.

As he says, just strictly business.


----------



## Mr Premium

Mysterio fan said:


> How can anyone say "Nobody cared about Tensai" when the match was actually promoted as Cena vs Mystery opponent?
> 
> Its more like people didnt give a shit about John Cena vs random heel RAW main event for the 325645433th time.
> 
> 
> John cena is the Justin bieber of Pro-wrestling. He is killing the industry one step at a time.


Cena's been their only consistent draw. Dude gained 300,000 plus viewers twice.

:lol at Punk and Bryan tanking again like always. Punk matches are seriously replacing the divas as the bathroom breaks of the show.


----------



## sxsonar

Cena is the only non-has been big time draw they have. I dont think he's killing anything.


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner

fpalmunless your a stock holder you should care about Ratings i mean damm


----------



## Rock316AE

Just for the comment above and half of this thread with "WHY YOU CARE ABOUT RATINGZ!!?", things will never change...July 1998:


> *Ratings War*
> 
> Why does everybody care about the Ratngs so much? I figure that if your a true
> wrestling fan you should be stoked that there arer two such high caliber shows.
> USA and TnT use the ratings to sell advertising spots. I dont think the
> quality of a Fed is dependent on how many JVC kaboom box commercials there are.
> If you really give a shit about the ratings that much, than watch seifeld
> instead of wrestling. All of the people who care sooo much about ratings are
> probably the same ones who have every Steve Austin T-shirt sitting in there
> closet, because when you boil down to it you're all just Ted Turner's/McMahon's
> tools.
> 
> Thats my opinion and if you don't like it I dont give a damn





> You're right. Most people seem to think ratings = better show. And
> while I won't deny that RAW has been a better show the past month or
> so, doesn't mean much. And it doesn't mean much that WCW won the
> ratings war practically all of last year. I think the McMahon/Bischoff
> pot shots got everyone riled up in the ratings fiasco... and I wonder if
> they realize how many wrestlingholics' minds they've poisoned with that
> crap.


February 99:


> *Why the ratings really mean so much... *
> 
> Why do the ratings really mean so much to the WWF and WCW? Simple... The more
> fans you have, then the more people there will be buying the PPV's. The WWF's
> recent domination of the ratings says something. WWF.com reports that early
> numbers for the Royal Rumble have it being the at least the 2nd most ordered
> pro wrestling PPV of all time. WrestleMania 5 holds the record with 719,000
> buys. The WWF Royal Rumble will end up with somewhere around 700,000. It's only
> a matter of time before we find out if the PPV you WCW fans are calling a
> "flop" is really the most sucsessful wrestling PPV ever. Even if it's not, it
> still beats out anything WCW has EVER aired on PPV. It must be noted that the
> Royal Rumble got more than DOUBLE the buys than Starcade '98 did (WCW's biggest
> PPV). One can only imagine the monsterous buy rate Wrestlemania will get. We
> may very well be looking at around the one million mark for this huge PPV. So
> you see, tv ratings DO mean something.





> Raslin my boy don't you ever learn.
> 
> Ratings are all about demographics, that's why
> the WCW gets almost 50% more dollars per hour than the wwf.
> 
> The WCW audience is made up of mostly high and intelligent salary earners
> who have a lot of money to spend.
> 
> The wwf audience attracts the blue collar and red neck brigade whose net
> salary is a lot less that the other audiences.
> 
> As some one who is the advertising game it is the products target audience
> that gets the buck. This is also why wwf can't go to three hours they
> simply can't attract the advertising dollar to sustain the 3 hours.
> 
> Thats it in nutshell.
> 
> Raslin you are so dumb you can't even figure this out, I don't want to be
> disrespectful but once again you have demonstrated your ignorance about ratings,
> demographics and the whole darn match!! You Lose!!!
> 
> Learn the business, talk the business. do the business!!!


Miss those days, miss this business and miss this fanbase *depression*. I'm more nostalgic now because I was more into Jones/Rashad than anything in pro wrestling besides Rock/Cena. What a sad state this industry is in right now.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Rock316AE said:


> Just for the comment above and half of this thread with "WHY YOU CARE ABOUT RATINGZ!!?", July 1998:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> February 99:
> 
> 
> 
> Miss those days, miss this business and miss this fanbase *depression*. I'm more nostalgic now because I was more into Jones/Rashad than anything in pro wrestling besides Rock/Cena. What a sad state this industry is in right now.


Do us all a favour and leave then. And posting stuff about ratings from 1999 just further establishes you being out of touch. Its 2012, a fuck load of the televsion industry has changed thanks to the digital evolution. Despite avredge ratings WM 28 was the most bought and watched PPV in wrestling history, more then any Attitude Era PPV. the wrestling industry is very healthy despite what you keep telling yourself.


----------



## Rock316AE

Nah, I will do whatever I want kid. it's not BTW, The only reason it got something like that is because of an Attitude Era star, The Rock. The worst roster in the history of the business, all-time low interest, I guess that's an even bigger compliment for The Rock's greatness to be able to do it now, amazing no doubt. 

About buyrates, again you're wrong as usual, with the availability of today in the US alone, at least 10 PPVs in 98-01 would have done more than 1 million domestic easily. Let alone worldwide. Hot B shows were doing 600-700k domestic back then, close or bigger than the WM number.

The industry is still a joke now. Huge props to Vince that he was able to build the WWE machine to keep the brand alive. Although with the current state, it's probably better dead.

More comments, The day after the FPOD:


> *FOLEY WINS RATINGS!!!*
> Despite WCW mocking Foleys title victory,Bischoff must be kicking
> himself in the ass right now.He has a huge Nitro with the return of
> Hogan and the nWo coming back together but it is still not enough as
> Mick Foley walks away with the belt and a 5.75 to 4.7 head to head
> victory in the ratings.





> Yeah, and hopefully Ted Turner is kicking him also... Right out the door.
> Maybe he can then find work in the WWF as on of McMahon's goons.


May 1999:


> *RATINGS ARE IN!! NITRO IS DEAD HAHAHHAHAHAHHAHA *
> 
> Head to Head Ratings:
> 
> WWF RAW.........5.9.......6.9......Composite........6.4
> WCW NITRO.......3.4.......2.8.......Composite.......3.1
> 
> HAHAHHAHAHAHA Just pathetic! THE BIGGEST BEATING IN THE HISTORY OF MONDAY NIGHT
> WRESTLING BREAKING THE RECORD THE WWF SET THREE WEEKS AGO! NO ONE IS WATCHING
> THAT CRAPPY NITRO ANYMORE CAUSE IT IS ABSOLUTE HORSE POOPY!!! THE THIRD HOUR
> WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO GET THE HIGHEST RATINGS GOT A SORRY 2.8 HAHAHAHHAHAHA!
> WHAT A JOKE. NITRO IS OFFICIALLY DEAD! YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED TO ADMIT YOU WATCH
> THAT CRAPPY SHOW!! YOU'RE NOT EVEN WORTH TROLLING ANYMORE! I AM ACTUALLY
> FEELING SORRY FOR WCW........NOT!!! BWHAHAHHAHAHAHA!!





> OK i agree, WCW really SUCKED big time the only thing i watched on Nitro was
> Sting and Goldberg and the Hardcore match cause, Hardcore is just kick ass but,
> one thing i went to a wrestling site and it has all the ratings since Nitro and
> RAW started and well here is some bad news, over the years WWF has gotten
> killed by WCW, cause RAW had only around 60 wins over Nitro and well Nitro has
> beaten RAW more then 200 times, i almost stopped counting at 100 and there was
> alot more to be counted.





> I was shocked at the 2nd hour ratings of 6.9 to 2.8. Raw crushed them. Raw for
> a change put on a better show than Nitro. I was so bored by
> Nitro.





> FUCK YOU!!!!!!! YOU ARE A LITTLE ASSHOLE, HAVE NO COMMON SENSE, AND YOU DON'T
> BELONG ON THE NG!!!!! NO LITTLE KIDS HERE YOU LITTLE SHIT.
> 
> RATINGS DON'T MATTER, QUALITY WISE. I'VE GIVEN EXAMPLES OF WHY RATINGS ARE NOT
> ACCURATE ON THIS BOARD MANY TIMES.
> 
> IF 25,000 PEOPLE WITH NIELSEN BOXES WATCHED WRESTLING, 20,000 WATCHED WWF, AND
> 5,000 WATCHED WCW, WCW WOULD GET KILLED IN THE RATINGS. IT WOULD BE 10.0 FOR
> WWF AND 2.0 FOR WCW. BUT, THEY'RE NOT ACCURATE. WHO KNOWS, MAYBE THE PEOPLE
> SAMPLED DON'T LIKE WCW. BUT DON'T SAY THAT STUFF YOU LITTLE FUCK.
> 
> YOU'LL SEE IN MY QUOTE WHAT WWF FANS DO:
> 
> WWF fans steal Nielsen boxes lmao)


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner

Rock316AE said:


> Nah, I will do whatever I want kid. it's not BTW, The only reason it got something like that is because of an Attitude Era star, The Rock. The worst roster in the history of the business, all-time low interest, I guess that's an even bigger compliment for The Rock's greatness to be able to do it now, amazing no doubt.
> 
> About buyrates, again you're wrong as usual, with the availability of today in the US alone, at least 10 PPVs in 98-01 would have done more than 1 million domestic easily. Let alone worldwide. Hot B shows were doing 600-700k domestic back then, close or bigger than the WM number.
> 
> The industry is still a joke now. Huge props to Vince that he was able to build the WWE machine to keep the brand alive. Although with the current state, it's probably better dead.
> 
> More comments, The day after the FPOD:
> 
> May 1999:


Cool story brounk2


----------



## Rock316AE

> Top Cable Shows
> RATINGS FOR WEEK OF 8/7/00 - 8/13/00
> 
> Source: Nielsen
> RANK PROGRAM NETWORK U.S. RATING DAY
> 1 WWF Entertainment USA 7.0 Mon
> 2 Movie: Running Mates TNT 5.6 Sun
> 3 WWF Entertainment USA 5.5 Mon
> 4 Movie: The Truth About Jane LIF 4.7 Mon
> 5 NASCAR: Global Crossing ESPN 3.8 Sun
> 6 Rugrats NICK 3.6 Mon
> 7 Rugrats NICK 3.5 Mon
> 7 Real World IX MTV 3.5 Tue
> 9 Movie: The American President TNT 3.4 Sat
> 10 Rugrats NICK 3.3 Mon
> 11 Rugrats NICK 3.2 Mon
> 11 Rugrats NICK 3.2 Sat
> 13 Rocket Power NICK 3.1 Tue
> 13 Rugrats NICK 3.1 Sun
> 13 Rugrats NICK 3.1 Mon
> 16 Spongebob NICK 3.0 Sat
> 16 Movie: The American President TNT 3.0 Sun
> 16 Spongebob NICK 3.0 Sat
> 19 Rugrats NICK 2.9 Mon
> 20 Movie: Striptease TNT 2.8 Sun
> 20 Movie: Hard Target USA 2.8 Tue
> 20 Rugrats NICK 2.8 Wed
> 20 Spongebob NICK 2.8 Sun
> 20 Rugrats NICK 2.8 Sun
> 25 Rocket Power NICK 2.7 Tue
> 25 WWF Sunday Night Heat USA 2.7 Sun
> 25 WCW Monday Nitro Live! TNT 2.7 Mon
> 25 Rugrats NICK 2.7 Mon
> 25 Movie: Big Jake TBS 2.7 Sun
> 25 Rocket Power NICK 2.7 Tue
> 25 Rocket Power NICK 2.7 Tue
> 25 Catdog NICK 2.7 Sat
> 25 Hey Arnold NICK 2.7 Mon
> 25 Dexter's Laboratory TOON 2.7 Tue


The 7.0 is the second hour. Amazing what happened to WCW in 2 years, they had almost 5 from the top 7 almost every week in 98 with Nitro and Thunder.


----------



## Starbuck

^^^^ :lmao at Heat beating Nitro lol.


----------



## BANKSY

Rugrats bringing in them ratings.

Tommy Pickles is a fucking draw.


----------



## Rock316AE

Nitro losing to Heat in mid 99 was fine, Heat was still a big show with almost all the stars every week, but Nitro losing to 2000 "Taped mid card matches and PPV commercials" Heat is another story lol.


----------



## Cactus

Rock316AE said:


> Nah, I will do whatever I want kid. it's not BTW, The only reason it got something like that is because of an Attitude Era star, The Rock. The worst roster in the history of the business, all-time low interest, I guess that's an even bigger compliment for The Rock's greatness to be able to do it now, amazing no doubt.
> 
> About buyrates, again you're wrong as usual, with the availability of today in the US alone, at least 10 PPVs in 98-01 would have done more than 1 million domestic easily. Let alone worldwide. Hot B shows were doing 600-700k domestic back then, close or bigger than the WM number.
> 
> The industry is still a joke now. Huge props to Vince that he was able to build the WWE machine to keep the brand alive. Although with the current state, it's probably better dead.
> 
> More comments, The day after the FPOD:
> 
> May 1999:


I find it funny that you constantly belittle other members by calling them 'kid', yet you are the one who cannot move on from his childhood.

We get it, the Attitude Era was great and all that but the company has moved on and if you hate it as much as you say you do I don't why you just don't just stop watching the show. There's plenty of alternatives out there like TNA & ROH.


----------



## Starbuck

I watched Heat all the time when they the big stars on it. I loved the Heat's before PPV's as well as they almost always ran little angles about the main feuds on the show. Heat was great until around late 2001 onwards. But Nitro falling that far is pretty darn wild. Beating WWF forever and then all of a sudden they can't even beat their C show lol. Crazy.


----------



## Rock316AE

I don't hate it at all, as a long time fan, and probably will always be a fan unless UFC really starting to interest me the level wrestling was in the past, I can't lie about the miserable state of the industry. No comparison at all to the AE or any other period of time. We all want to see it thrive again but we can't be blind to the obvious.



Starbuck said:


> I watched Heat all the time when they the big stars on it. I loved the Heat's before PPV's as well as they almost always ran little angles about the main feuds on the show. Heat was great until around late 2001 onwards. But Nitro falling that far is pretty darn wild. Beating WWF forever and then all of a sudden they can't even beat their C show lol. Crazy.


Heat was a great show until September 99 when SD came out, that's when Heat became a video packages show and then later in 2000, taped mid card matches in the SD tapings and WWF New York interviews. Was still a great hype show before every PPV. 

LOL at the WWF fans trolling WCW forums back then:


> nice try schiavani, you piece of fucking shit.....but you lose AGAIN. did i
> mention that you are a fucking piece of shit?





> Profanity is for those who lack the intelligence to make any sense. This
> pretty much sums up the intelligence level of the average WWF fan.





> *WARRIOR = Ratings Giant*
> During the time that the Warrior debuted in WCW, Nitro clobbered Raw 6.4 to
> 3.1 in the ratings. Thats over double the amount compared to the competition.
> Just thought that was interesting.





> *THURSDAY RATINGS ARE IN*
> Smackdown:
> Hour1- 5.4
> Hour2- 5.9
> Overall- 5.75
> 
> Thunder:
> Hour1- 1.8
> Hour2- 2.1
> Overall- 1.95
> 
> Smackdown wins by nearly 4 points 5.75 to 1.95





> Also take in consideration....ITS A NEW SHOW!!!!!! Check those ratings in a
> couple of months. (LOL)


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Haha even then they had rating wars threads.


----------



## Contrarian

In 10 years, This thread will be legendary.


----------



## Rock316AE

May 1999:


> *Who cares about the ratings?*
> Jeez, this topic takes up waaaaaaaaaay too much space here when you
> consider what it is really worth.
> 
> Let's just assume for the moment that the Neilson Ratings are accurate,
> and that our pal Rasslin is correct in saying that more people watch WWF
> than WCW.Popularity does not always equal quality. If it did, then you
> would have to accept that Michael Jackson is better than The Rolling
> Stones, the Beatles, and The Eagles because he has sold more albums
> (excuse me while I puke).
> 
> I'm not trying to put down Michael Jackson as an artist, despite what I
> may think of him personally, he has some talent, and obviously has mass
> appeal. But if numbers were all that mattered, then you'd have to say
> that his album Thriller is better than Exile on Mainstreet, Abby Road,
> and Hotel California. (Granted, Thriller is easier to dance to.)
> 
> What I am trying to show here, is that you can not always assume that
> greater popularity means greater quality. No matter how good your act
> is, there can always be someone who appeals to more people, even if
> their act is not as good as yours.
> 
> While we're at it, didn't Boxcar Willie outsell pretty much everybody?


The mentality of WWF fans was to rub every quarter hour in WCW's fans until they want to commit suicide, when WCW won, fans were saying that they're number 1, they're better and all that but when WWF won, the fans took it to a different level. Every quarter, every rating lol. WCW fans were the polite bunch.

November 1999:


> *Is Russo failing? *
> Seriously folks, do you think the new WCW can actually work out in the long
> term? I don't think it will last long. Crash tv requires great entertainers
> that are always fresh. That is something WCW just doesn't have. Bret Hart and
> Jeff Jarrett are the closest things they have to the WWF's. Everyone is saying
> that WCW will soon take over the ratings, but what are your reasons for this?
> In reality, you need some huge names to take the ratings. You need people the
> fans will mark out for (I'm talking about names like Austin, the Rock, and
> HBK). WCW doesn't have anyone like this at all. Another thing you have to
> consider is that for the fans to really attach themselves to these guys, they
> must have great gimmicks that are totally unlike everyone elses. Once again,
> sorry, WCW doesn't have anyone like this. It took YEARS and YEARS to get
> Austin, Mankind, the Rock, HBK, etc... to the level they are at now. WCW
> doesn't have years and years to do it. They must do it in a matter of months. I
> just don't think it can be done. You can only push someone so fast, and if you
> do it too fast the fans will react in a negative way. Russo has recently said
> that he will have the Ratings in 6 months. I just don't buy it.





> if anyone can get a no'talent worker over, I think RUSSO is the man to do
> it. He has gotten DOA over, Smiley over, and Meng. *He made Austin, and the
> Rock. *lmao) It is a known fact that WCW always wastes talent. Now they have the
> man to form the talent instead of lose it.


January 2000:


> At this Nitro, Hogan, Goldberg and Stig is suppose to return. But WCW
> needs to bring them back as soon as possible. It a fact that Hogan is
> not good in the ring but the man does attract Ratings. *I also notice
> when the Rock is doing a interview. Nitro RATINGS DROP. I say When The
> Rock comes out and do an interview send out Ric Flair. I woud love to
> see who bring in the bigger rating!* The lack of WCW stars could be the
> reason why WCW has not hit the 4.0 mark in the ratings... Here is
> missing from WCW or have not in the ring in awhile that could help WCW
> ratings. Hogan, Flair, Sting, Goldberg, The Cat , Lex has not been in a
> match since Starrcade. Eddy, Shane Douglas,Macho Man and GG. Scott Hall
> { scott spend more time out of WCW does he spend in, Why do he get paid
> Seven figures.} Scott Norton,Rowdy Roddy piper and TORRIE!!! I think if
> they bring back these people or start using them in matches Nitro would
> hit that 4.0 rating mark! WCW also need to stop with the dumb Gimmicks,
> Like PG-13, Mestro and the list goes on and on. Before I go what happen
> to Rhonda Sing?? The last time i seen her she was going to strip, that
> was some funny shit!.


July 1998:


> *STEVE AUSTIN BREAKS RATINGS RECORD!! *
> Austin Breaks Another Record for Drawing Power
> 
> For a single-night, Steve Austin set a record for biggest ratings impact.
> Austin's interview and handicap match on Raw increased the program's total
> viewership by 28% and 25% over the previous quarter respectively, for a 53%
> total ratings increase. The previous record-holder for biggest head-to-head
> Monday night ratings increase was Goldberg, who spiked Nitro's ratings by
> nearly 40% on the July 6 Nitro.
> 
> In recent weeks, "Stone Cold" has had surprisingly little impact on the
> ratings, causing some onlookers to question whether he has been overexposed by
> the WWF and had his drawing power suffer an adverse effect as a result. But,
> Austin's interview segment drew a 5.6, and his match did a 6.0 (the second best
> quarter hour ever for Raw), thus only further serving to prove that he is, in
> fact, the biggest draw the wrestling business has seen in years..


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Poor WCW fans.

Anyone who knew anything knew WCW were in trouble in 1998. Them poor WCW fans.


----------



## Cliffy

Its always been that way lol.


WWE/F fans were the juvenile bunch.

WCW fans were more chilled out. Go back and check any old forum and you'll see thats mostly the case.


----------



## Rock316AE

Yeah, the WCW fanbase was civil compared to the WWF. Not a good period for them when every week WWF broke another record and they were going down fast no matter what the company did. 

As for 98, WCW was still doing huge business at that time, they broke every record in the company, sold out every building including legit 30k paid for Nitro, 400k domestic was their average PPV numbers and house show and merchandise were at all-time peak with nWo, Goldberg, DDP, Wolfpack, Sting, Hogan etc all selling like crazy. In terms of ratings they broke the all-time cable TV wrestling record time after time with the peak for the replay of Goldberg/DDP from HH 98 with 7.2. Business was hotter than ever in every aspect so nobody knew. As a fan, you could tell that things are not doing good in June-August 99, that's when the real downfall begun.


----------



## Mr Premium

Rock316AE said:


> *Yeah, the WCW fanbase was civil compared to the WWF. Not a good period for them when every week WWF broke another record and they were going down fast no matter what the company did*.
> 
> As for 98, WCW was still doing huge business at that time, they broke every record in the company, sold out every building including legit 30k paid for Nitro, 400k domestic was their average PPV numbers and house show and merchandise were at all-time peak with nWo, Goldberg, DDP, Wolfpack, Sting, Hogan etc all selling like crazy. In terms of ratings they broke the all-time cable TV wrestling record time after time with the peak for the replay of Goldberg/DDP from HH 98 with 7.2. Business was hotter than ever in every aspect so nobody knew. *As a fan, you could tell that things are not doing good in June-August 99, that's when the real downfall begun.*


Nah, Id say you just didn't do your research enough. They were probably trolling WWF fans too during WCW's 84 week winning streak over the WWF.

I always thought it started when Nash began booking himself in the Main Event.


----------



## Hemen

jblvdx said:


> Do us all a favour and leave then. And posting stuff about ratings from 1999 just further establishes you being out of touch. Its 2012, a fuck load of the televsion industry has changed thanks to the digital evolution. Despite avredge ratings WM 28 was the most bought and watched PPV in wrestling history, more then any Attitude Era PPV. the wrestling industry is very healthy despite what you keep telling yourself.


No, it isnt. Ratings have dropped, and buyrates have dropped in every ppv the last years. Yeah, wrestelmania 28 had a great buyrate. But what happens when all the dream Rock, Brock, and Cena matches happens. Then the ratings will drop. The WWE will fall eventually, its only on buyed time thanks to draws like Rock and Brock.


----------



## Mr Premium

Hemen said:


> No, it isnt. Ratings have dropped, and buyrates have dropped in every ppv the last years. Yeah, wrestelmania 28 had a great buyrate. But what happens when all the dream Rock, Brock, and Cena matches happens. Then the ratings will drop. The WWE will fall eventually, its only on buyed time thanks to draws like Rock and Brock.


Yep, AE stars and Cena still pretty much responsible for WM's financial success in recent years.


----------



## zxLegionxz

Lol more WCW vs WWF fans comments please LOL that was great awww man thats brings back a shit load of memories hahahaha


----------



## DesolationRow

Hemen said:


> No, it isnt. Ratings have dropped, and buyrates have dropped in every ppv the last years. Yeah, wrestelmania 28 had a great buyrate. But what happens when all the dream Rock, Brock, and Cena matches happens. Then the ratings will drop. The WWE will fall eventually, its only on buyed time thanks to draws like Rock and Brock.


I don't think the dream matches you list disappearing will have that big of an impact on ratings, year-round. And perhaps not even much at all. What will perhaps be hit hard as a direct consequence, however, is WWE pay-per-view. That's been the single most erosion-devastated aspect of WWE's business, and it's been declining for years now. It's why the gimmick PPVs were created, it's one reason (though hardly the biggest) why the emphasis on Wrestlemania keeps growing every single year, since it's the big honey pot for WWE every year. They rely on it more heavily today than ever before.



Mr Premium said:


> Yep, AE stars and Cena still pretty much responsible for WM's financial success in recent years.


And Batista. 

It is true, to a very significant degree. Because of the mega success of Austin, WWE was able to expand. Internationally, domestically. More revenue streams opened up. The company went public. The concept of weekly Raws being live took hold. The television show Smackdown. Out of The Rock, came ever more expansion, greater success, a litany of broken records and more international strides. With Cena and Batista, even more international penetration, enormous licensing deals and even more solid sponsors, and an increase in the split roster's live events duties, as well as a more streamlined conveyor belt of merchandise than ever before. 

Right now, the company is fundamentally still going based chiefly on the aftereffects of these time periods, and most recently with the return of The Rock spurring quadrants of business coupled to the stability of John Cena at the top which creates an immediate sense of order for the new arrivals and returning stars like Rock and Lesnar (Rock needed to have his match vs. Cena and Lesnar giving anyone but Cena that F5 the night he returned would have meant exponentially less).


----------



## SimplyIncredible

Look at the roster, do you really see the next Lesnar, Rock and Austin on it?

They are not there, Vince knows this. Hence why all the old names are coming back.

Once the well dries up on that front, WWE are in big trouble. A blind man can see that.


----------



## mblonde09

Rock316AE said:


> House Show business is terrible now, it's not all-time low because of the strong WWE machine but it's not far away from it, PPV business is at an all-time low, that's scary if you consider the availability of PPVs now compared to 15-20 years and it's STILL not even close. Domestically even the most dark eras were doing better. WWE lost money in the last quarter for the first time in more than 10 years. There's a reason why Vince is in panic mode to bring back real stars like Rock and Brock to save the biggest show of the year which is the biggest difference maker of their revenue, in 2011 they were supposed to lose a lot money but were almost where they were the year before because of the amazing game-changer Rock was in his WM program. This year? same thing if the WM buyrate is really 1.1 million which is going to be the highest grossing pro wrestling event of all time(it's already, but they need to wait till May to announce it officially).
> 
> *Anyway, you can't except something from a roster full of clueless geeks who think that this business is a school trip, including the champions(not Sheamus, he understands the business),* last year Vince STOLE money from their pockets and these fools didn't even know about it! do you realize how pathetic it is? this is not the same industry of MEN, this is now a circus full of kids. This is the main reason why wrestling is going down every year, WWE are not dying tomorrow, it's a slow process but it's going to happen, that's inevitable with the sad state of the industry in terms of talent and mentality.


God, you do come out with some crap sometimes... "a roster full of clueless geeks who think that this business is a school trip, including the champions" - but not Sheamus. What the fuck does this nonsense even mean? Of course with the champions line, you're implying that Punk doesn't understand the business, but I think you'll find he understands the business a sight better than most - better than that joke Sheamus, and certainly better than you do. Tbh, the only clueless geek here is you.


----------



## Brye

Rockeae, I'd love to know how you know so much about these "clueless geeks" that know nothing about the business.


----------



## A-C-P

Brye said:


> Rockeae, I'd love to know how you know so much about these "clueless geeks" that know nothing about the business.


I'm thinking along the lines of takes one to know one?

What an assanine statement by him (not that I am surprised)


----------



## Hemen

mblonde09 said:


> God, you do come out with some crap sometimes... "a roster full of clueless geeks who think that this business is a school trip, including the champions" - but not Sheamus. What the fuck does this nonsense even mean? Of course with the champions line, you're implying that Punk doesn't understand the business, but I think you'll find he understands the business a sight better than most - better than that joke Sheamus, and certainly better than you do. Tbh, the only clueless geek here is you.


The only clueless geek here is you. If you think that Sheamuas is a joke tell it to him in real life and get beaten up. 
Understands better the busieness better than most? Is that why he cried in 2007 because Hogan didn't answer him when he said hi to him?




And yeah Punk is a clueless geek, that's why the gm focuses on Lesnar than Punk. And yeah we all know that you are mad because Lesnar gets more airtime than Punk and we all know he would kick you ass in real life. 
#peoplepower #Lesnarforever


----------



## Cookie Monster

Hemen said:


> The only clueless geek here is you. If you think that Sheamuas is a joke tell it to him in real life and get beaten up.
> Understands better the busieness better than most? Is that why he cried in 2007 because Hogan didn't answer him when he said hi to him?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And yeah Punk is a clueless geek, that's why the gm focuses on Lesnar than Punk. And yeah we all know that you are mad because Lesnar gets more airtime than Punk and we all know he would kick you ass in real life.
> #peoplepower #Lesnarforever


I couldn't help but laugh at everything you just said. Well done.


----------



## Brave Nash

Hemen said:


> The only clueless geek here is you. If you think that Sheamuas is a joke tell it to him in real life and get beaten up.
> Understands better the busieness better than most? Is that why he cried in 2007 because Hogan didn't answer him when he said hi to him?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And yeah Punk is a clueless geek, that's why the gm focuses on Lesnar than Punk. And yeah we all know that you are mad because Lesnar gets more airtime than Punk and we all know he would kick you ass in real life.
> #peoplepower #Lesnarforever


Brock lesnar = Boring. Below average at everything.


----------



## Vyed

WWE RAW Hour 1 - 3.662, Adult 18-49 - 1.4
WWE RAW Hour 2 - 4.671, Adult 18-49 - 1.8
WWE RAW Hour 3 - 4.832, Adult 18-49 - 1.9

Second Hour(3rd hr) Increase. Edge/Cena probably didnt make a difference for the 8PM opener. 


Pawn Stars owned RAW this week. 5.626m



> Pawn Stars was the top Monday night cable show with the 10:30 PM episode earning a 2.0 rating among adults 18-49 and the preceding 10:00 PM episode earning a 1.9. WWE Raw was the second most popular show with a 1.9 rating among adults 18-49 in its second hour followed by a 1.8 first hour.


----------



## Shock

It's pretty likely that not a lot of people knew the show was 3-hours. I certainly needed reminding.


----------



## A-C-P

#1 - Pawn Stars usually beats Raw in veiwer #s

#2 - First hour of a 3 hr show ALWAYS has lower viewers than the 2nd 2 hours

#3 - Slight increase from prior week is nice to see (Y) and a 2nd hr (3rd hr this week)increase again is good.


----------



## Vyed

I know about the first hour, thats why i said edge/cena didnt make a difference in that time slot. Third hour being closer to 5 million is great actually.


----------



## Ron Paul 2012

So Raw had 4.5 million viewers when counting the avg for the show? Not bad

I have yet to watch an episode of WWE since WrestleMania 28 but my friend told me that Raw this week was great. Was it really great? Was it worth watching?


----------



## Carcass

No surprise that the highest hour involved DB.


----------



## A-C-P

Vyed said:


> I know about the first hour, thats why i said edge/cena didnt make a difference in that time slot.


Wasn't directed at you sorry just my comments on the ratings over all and I do thank you for posting the #s for this week.

Also, IMO this was a good show this week so its good to see a good # as a result.


----------



## KrazyGreen

Good Raw overall imo.


----------



## Devon Blackstone

WillMark4NewJack said:


> Do some of you have stock in WWE lmao.


Man these people are retarded alrite


----------



## The-Rock-Says

> 3.0
> 
> It was a 3.3 in the usual two hours,


Observer.


----------



## the fox

well 3.3 is good rating if we didn't include the first hour which always doing bad since a lot of people forget about the 1 hour early start


----------



## Rock316AE

> - Last night's three-hour episode of WWE's RAW: Starring Brock Lesnar from Detroit, Michigan scored a 3.0 cable rating with 4,388,000 viewers over the full three hours. This week's show did hours of 2.48, 3.22 and 3.41.
> 
> During the normal two hours, RAW did a 3.3 cable rating with 4,752,000 viewers. This is up from the previous week and can be seen as a good sign for the John Cena vs. Brock Lesnar feud.


3.3 is a decent number for today I guess. The third hour with the Brock segment had almost 5 million viewers so that's a good sign for ER. They increased the hype for Lesnar/Cena IMO, I would do it in a different way and book Cena as strong as possible and not a scared bitch like he was on RAW. Brock is perfect in his persona and carrying the shows on his back.

250k-300k for ER, hard to believe that they're doing more for a random B show after people spent big money on WM28 just a few weeks ago.


----------



## Starbuck

The overall viewership is climbing every week. We've gone from around the 4.3 mark and are now at the 4.7 mark. That's a really good sign if you ask me.


----------



## Hemen

Brave Nash said:


> Brock lesnar = Boring. Below average at everything.


Below average at everyhing? Can you be a highschool and college wrestling champion and have a winning streak of 105 wins and 6 loses? Can you make a shooting star pres at 320 pounds, can you lift big show? Dude, that's what Brock lesnar has done, that's far from boring and below average and that's better than what Punk can do.


----------



## Cookie Monster

Starbuck said:


> The overall viewership is climbing every week. We've gone from around the 4.3 mark and are now at the 4.7 mark. That's a really good sign if you ask me.


BUT ITS A SINKING SHIP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:lol


----------



## zkorejo

Rock316AE said:


> 3.3 is a decent number for today I guess. The third hour with the Brock segment had almost 5 million viewers so that's a good sign for ER. They increased the hype for Lesnar/Cena IMO, *I would do it in a different way and book Cena as strong as possible and not a scared bitch like he was on RAW*. Brock is perfect in his persona and carrying the shows on his back.
> 
> 250k-300k for ER, hard to believe that they're doing more for a random B show after people spent big money on WM28 just a few weeks ago.


I think WWE is doing it the right way. Booking Cena strong and him losing clean to Lesnar just one month after his loss to Rock where he was booked strong simply means Cena is weak. Lesnar beats a broken Cena gets the job done prefectly. 

Cena has a explanation when he comes back(assuming he takes time off after ER) or rejuvenates, that he was shattered by his defeat at WM and wasnt himself and wasnt ready for Brock mentally at ER. Also Brock Lesnar defeats Cena in his return match making him the most dominant heel in the WWE.


----------



## Rusty Shackleford

The increase is a good sign. Maybe ER will get 250K buys.


----------



## kokepepsi

Observer Newsletter
Segment Breakdown



> Raw on 4/23 did a 3.06 rating and 4.42 million viewers, which is the usual range, but it was a three-hour show, so I’d consider that a good rating. In the usual two hours the show did a 3.33 rating and 4.76 million viewers (hours of 3.22 and 3.41–so the second hour going down as a pattern has changed of late).
> 
> It’s hard to judge this as compared to a usual episode. The general rule of a three hour Raw is the first hour is much lower, bringing down the average. But because it starts earlier and is longer, hours two and three are usually above what the show is usually getting. So in other words, this fit the usual pattern, but overall, you expect the three-hour number to be slightly down and this was right at normal levels, so it was a mild success. Raw was fourth for the night on cable. The show did a 2.4 in Males 12-17 (down 14%), 2.9 in Males 18-49 (up 4%), 0.8 in Women 12-17 (down 27%) and 1.1 in Women 18-49 (down 8%). When we talk about creatures of habit, on the three hour show, the group that tuned in late the most was teenage boys, who did a 1.3 first quarter and a 3.4 final quarter of the show. The show has 70.1% male viewers. Since Lesnar came back, there has been a shift. More guys and less women.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, Chris Jericho vs. Kofi Kingston lost 73,000 viewers.
> 
> Jericho promo, John Laurinaitis and Eve Torres backstage and taped promos of Brock Lesnar and a C.M. Punk promo gained 52,000 viewers. R-Truth vs. Lord Tensai lost 3,000 viewers.
> 
> Kane interview with Randy Orton throwing Paul Bearer into the freezer gained 865,000 viewers, which were all the people who didn’t know Raw started an hour earlier.
> 
> Cody Rhodes & Alberto Del Rio vs. Big Show & Great Khali gained 195,000 viewers.
> 
> Jericho, Laurinaitis, Torres and Teddy Long discussing Punk’s drinking lost 112,000 viewers.
> 
> Beth Phoenix vs. Nikki Bella gained 437,000 viewers, which was a big surprise.
> 
> The Field Sobriety test segment gained 270,000 viewers to a 3.63 quarter which is one of the best quarters in a while.
> 
> Sheamus vs. Mark Henry with Daniel Bryan as ref and Primo & Epico vs. Zack Ryder & Santino Marella lost 439,000 viewers.
> 
> Kane putting Paul Bearer back in the freezer and AW recruiting Primo & Epico lost 370,000 viewers.
> 
> Brodus Clay & Hornswoggle vs. Dolph Ziggler & Jack Swagger gained 225,000 viewers.
> 
> The final segment with Lesnar and Laurinaitis and Cena in at the end gained 873,000 viewers to a 3.83 quarter, built up because they went 15 minutes past time and people didn’t tune out as they sometimes do for long overruns.


Cameltoe>Punk in ratings


----------



## Green Light

KHALI DRAWS AGAIN!


----------



## D.M.N.

Hour 1
Q1 - 2.50 rating / 3.69 million
Q2 - 2.45 rating / 3.62 million
Q3 - 2.49 rating / 3.67 million
Q4 - 2.48 rating / 3.67 million

Hour 2
Q5 - 3.08 rating / 4.47 million
Q6 - 3.22 rating / 4.67 million
Q7 - 3.14 rating / 4.55 million
Q8 - 3.44 rating / 4.99 million

Hour 3
Q9 - 3.63 rating / 5.14 million
Q10 - 3.32 rating / 4.70 million
Q11 - 3.06 rating / 4.33 million
Q12 - 3.22 rating / 4.56 million
Overrun - 3.83 rating / 5.43 million


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

The Lesnar/Cena angle and the Punk/Jericho angle doing great numbers is very good news for the Extreme Rules buyrate. 

And WTF is a random ass divas match gaining that much? that must of came right before or after Lesnar attacking Josh and The Observer just jumbled then together.


----------



## Brave Nash

Is Punk/Jericho in Q8 or in Q9?


----------



## Punked Up

kokepepsi said:


> Observer Newsletter
> Segment Breakdown
> 
> 
> 
> Cameltoe>Punk in ratings


More like: Hot women>Sobriety test in ratings.

But I agree, Punk can't draw huge #'s, but he is dependable to hold a top of the hour or something.


----------



## D.M.N.

Brave Nash said:


> Is Punk/Jericho in Q8 or in Q9?


Mostly Q9, although the end of the Divas' title match and the start of Punk/Jericho was in Q8.


----------



## Bork_Laser

Lesnar's segments draw, Simple as that. It's interesting to see that since Lesnar came back, the percentage of M/F viewership has increased to 70% Male. WWE are getting exactly what they want from his return, I imagine the Buyrate for Extreme Rules will be pretty strong.


----------



## Brave Nash

D.M.N. said:


> Mostly Q9, although the end of the Divas' title match and the start of Punk/Jericho was in Q8.


So Punk/Jericho draw the most in the show that's great actually for extreme rules. Brock lesnar draw 3.2 meh but whatever.


----------



## A-C-P

jblvdx said:


> The Lesnar/Cena angle and the Punk/Jericho angle doing great numbers is very good news for the Extreme Rules buyrate.
> 
> And WTF is a random ass divas match gaining that much? that must of came right before or after Lesnar attacking Josh and The Observer just jumbled then together.


Good sign Indeed that the 2 top programs on Raw are drawing gains.

Plus, we need to admit Cameltoe = THE RATINGZ!!!!!


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Can't believe Beth losing the title gained that many viewers. That was a real surprise... very odd unless it was because it was coupled with the Punk sobriety test in Q8. Though I'm not sure if that gets taken into account, but if not it's weird, but I guess good for the divas division.

Punk's segment getting over the 5 million mark is excellent, and a great number, while him gaining on top of another big gain is another great sign not just for Punk, but the whole Punk/Jericho angle.

Lesnar and Cena then ending with a high rating and high a very high viewership is fantastic as well. Same as Punk/Jericho, shows the Lesnar/Cena stuff is drawing fans in. Lesnar's been drawing very consistently even in odd Quarter Hours, and in overruns he does huge numbers. 

So overall I'd say considering the current state of WWE, these are great numbers going into ER. Went over the 5 mil mark twice, and the average viewership for the normal two hours seem to be really nice as well.


----------



## Heel

PUNK DOESN'T DRAW. GO BACK TO THE INDIES U VANILLA MIDGET!!11


----------



## uknoww

d bryan can't draw


----------



## Carcass

They put both DB and Henry in a match with Sheamus, and Sheamus still can't get a ratings bump? This clown's a lost cause. Only a matter of time before TNA beat SD in ratings with Sheamus as the star of the show.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

D.M.N. said:


> Hour 1
> Q1 - 2.50 rating / 3.69 million
> Q2 - 2.45 rating / 3.62 million
> Q3 - 2.49 rating / 3.67 million
> Q4 - 2.48 rating / 3.67 million
> 
> Hour 2
> Q5 - 3.08 rating / 4.47 million
> Q6 - 3.22 rating / 4.67 million
> Q7 - 3.14 rating / 4.55 million
> Q8 - 3.44 rating / 4.99 million
> 
> Hour 3
> Q9 - 3.63 rating / 5.14 million
> Q10 - 3.32 rating / 4.70 million
> Q11 - 3.06 rating / 4.33 million
> Q12 - 3.22 rating / 4.56 million
> Overrun - 3.83 rating / 5.43 million


The Punk/Jericho and contract signing both did awesome numbers. Great news. And it's pretty likely Q8 did that well because the Punk/Jericho segment started in the middle of that quarter and went through into Q9. I'm just guessing. The Divas title match was only about 5 or so minutes so I doubt that's what gained 400k viewers.


----------



## Rop3

Bella twins cameltoes drew 437k viewers


----------



## Starbuck

Some really good numbers there. Divas doing such a big gain is a head scratcher lol. But here's the thing and it is a repeat of last week, they seem to be starting to gain during many segments in the show now and not just 10pm and the end. That's the best sign that they could possibly get that things are starting to click imo. 10pm finally did a respectable number and the overrun really produced the goods. The upward trend continues.


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> Some really good numbers there. Divas doing such a big gain is a head scratcher lol. But here's the thing and it is a repeat of last week, they seem to be starting to gain during many segments in the show now and not just 10pm and the end. That's the best sign that they could possibly get that things are starting to click imo. 10pm finally did a respectable number and the overrun really produced the goods. The upward trend continues.


Put on good shows and ratings are higher, who woulda thought?


----------



## Starbuck

A-C-P said:


> Put on good shows and ratings are higher, who woulda thought?


I wouldn't go jumping the gun just yet, they aren't all that good lol. It's just nice to see them gaining outside the normal slots for a change and 2 weeks in a row no less. Punk/Jericho hasn't had any huge gains on it's own these past few weeks. But the fact that the segments before it were able to gain viewers means that the overall number of people watching at that time ended up higher which is really good for them. More eyeballs are always a good thing. Brock/Cena was a slow starter but it very clearly has people's interest now.


----------



## Hollywood Hanoi

what time exactly was that divas match? it must have been during the pawn stars commercial break or somethin.


----------



## Rock316AE

kokepepsi said:


> Observer Newsletter
> Segment Breakdown
> 
> 
> 
> Raw on 4/23 did a 3.06 rating and 4.42 million viewers, which is the usual range, but it was a three-hour show, so I’d consider that a good rating. In the usual two hours the show did a 3.33 rating and 4.76 million viewers (hours of 3.22 and 3.41–so the second hour going down as a pattern has changed of late).
> 
> It’s hard to judge this as compared to a usual episode. The general rule of a three hour Raw is the first hour is much lower, bringing down the average. But because it starts earlier and is longer, hours two and three are usually above what the show is usually getting. So in other words, this fit the usual pattern, but overall, you expect the three-hour number to be slightly down and this was right at normal levels, so it was a mild success. Raw was fourth for the night on cable. The show did a 2.4 in Males 12-17 (down 14%), 2.9 in Males 18-49 (up 4%), 0.8 in Women 12-17 (down 27%) and 1.1 in Women 18-49 (down 8%). When we talk about creatures of habit, on the three hour show, the group that tuned in late the most was teenage boys, who did a 1.3 first quarter and a 3.4 final quarter of the show. The show has 70.1% male viewers. Since Lesnar came back, there has been a shift. More guys and less women.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, Chris Jericho vs. Kofi Kingston lost 73,000 viewers.
> 
> Jericho promo, John Laurinaitis and Eve Torres backstage and taped promos of Brock Lesnar and a C.M. Punk promo gained 52,000 viewers. R-Truth vs. Lord Tensai lost 3,000 viewers.
> 
> Kane interview with Randy Orton throwing Paul Bearer into the freezer gained 865,000 viewers, which were all the people who didn’t know Raw started an hour earlier.
> 
> Cody Rhodes & Alberto Del Rio vs. Big Show & Great Khali gained 195,000 viewers.
> 
> Jericho, Laurinaitis, Torres and Teddy Long discussing Punk’s drinking lost 112,000 viewers.
> 
> Beth Phoenix vs. Nikki Bella gained 437,000 viewers, which was a big surprise.
> 
> The Field Sobriety test segment gained 270,000 viewers to a 3.63 quarter which is one of the best quarters in a while.
> 
> Sheamus vs. Mark Henry with Daniel Bryan as ref and Primo & Epico vs. Zack Ryder & Santino Marella lost 439,000 viewers.
> 
> Kane putting Paul Bearer back in the freezer and AW recruiting Primo & Epico lost 370,000 viewers.
> 
> Brodus Clay & Hornswoggle vs. Dolph Ziggler & Jack Swagger gained 225,000 viewers.
> 
> The final segment with Lesnar and Laurinaitis and Cena in at the end gained 873,000 viewers to a 3.83 quarter, built up because they went 15 minutes past time and people didn’t tune out as they sometimes do for long overruns.
> 
> 
> 
> Cameltoe>Punk in ratings
Click to expand...

Nice overrun number for the Brock segment, he did the second biggest quarter after the Cena calls out Rock and his return did the biggest with 3.9, they increased the general hype for Lesnar/Cena for ER which is good because it's the only match that matters on PPV. 

The horrendous Jericho/Punk feud doing their usual weak, below average top of the hour gain, luckily for them, MEGASTAR Bella drew big on a random segment. 

Lesnar continues to gain even in the video package no matter where you put him, his backstage interview a few weeks ago did 450k gain on a filler quarter, full of commercials, that's even more impressive. People are watching for Brock, like the male 70% prove and rightfully so, only thing worth watching, especially on this terrible filler 3 hours for no reason RAW. 

ER? it's still one month after Rock/Cena, the biggest money show in wrestling history and one week after one of the biggest fights of the year Jones/Rashad which did a big number BTW with over 700k domestic so hard to know. 300k will be a huge success but it's a one match show in a terrible position, so probably 250k-300k.


----------



## Vyed

The Divas match went 6 minutes. 8 Mins including Entrances, Lumberjills coming out etc... 437K is amazing gain.


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> I wouldn't go jumping the gun just yet, they aren't all that good lol. It's just nice to see them gaining outside the normal slots for a change and 2 weeks in a row no less. Punk/Jericho hasn't had any huge gains on it's own these past few weeks. But the fact that the segments before it were able to gain viewers means that the overall number of people watching at that time ended up higher which is really good for them. More eyeballs are always a good thing. Brock/Cena was a slow starter but it very clearly has people's interest now.


Yeh i guess I am not "jumping the gun" and I hope you didn't take my comment as a negative towards your original post b.c I agree with that post.

I guess my point was more along the lines of (IMO) the last couple shows have been good quality-wise and I am talking like all the way through not just the segments in the "major" quarters and its good to see rating #s starting to reflect that somewhat.

And i apologize buyt this just struck a nerve....

Again with the weak gain at the 10PM slot crap? Seriously it was the *2ND HIGHEST RATED SEGMENT OF THE SHOW!* So because people tuned in 15 minutes eariler than the top of the hour (b/c lets face it people Cameltoe = Ratingz!) Jericho and Punk get blamed for a "weak gain" and get no credit for keeping the people that tuned in a little earlier than the top of the hour watching.

Yeh that makes sense unk2


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Rock316AE said:


> Nice overrun number for the Brock segment, he did the second biggest quarter after the Cena calls out Rock and his return did the biggest with 3.9, they increased the general hype for Lesnar/Cena for ER which is good because it's the only match that matters on PPV.
> 
> *The horrendous Jericho/Punk feud doing their usual weak, below average top of the hour gain, luckily for them, MEGASTAR Bella drew big on a random segment. *
> 
> Lesnar continues to gain even in the video package no matter where you put him, his backstage interview a few weeks ago did 450k gain on a filler quarter, full of commercials, that's even more impressive. People are watching for Brock, like the male 70% prove and rightfully so, only thing worth watching, especially on this terrible filler 3 hours for no reason RAW.
> 
> ER? it's still one month after Rock/Cena, the biggest money show in wrestling history and one week after one of the biggest fights of the year Jones/Rashad which did a big number BTW with over 700k domestic so hard to know. 300k will be a huge success but it's a one match show in a terrible position, so probably 250k-300k.



The Field Sobriety test segment gained 270,000 viewers to a *3.63 quarter which is one of the best quarters in a while.*

Huh? a segment involving Punk and Jericho in a "HORIBLE FUED!" did around the same numbers as all of The Rock segments this year. 

You're spot on about the buyrate though, its not going to do too great because of its unlucky positioning, I think it will do decent, maybe better then last years perhaps seemingly because WWE have built this years better and you have such a huge match like Cena V Lesnar.


----------



## Rock316AE

It's not, they gained a below average gain for the top of the hour just like they always do. This time the Divas match gained big on a random segment so they got a bigger overall audience. 

Last year did 220k if I remember correctly, if it wasn't for the UFC PPV, I would probably say 300k for Lesnar's return but now it's hard to predict, people already paid a lot of money on PPVs this month.


----------



## Starbuck

A-C-P said:


> Yeh i guess I am not "jumping the gun" and I hope you didn't take my comment as a negative towards your original post b.c I agree with that post.
> 
> I guess my point was more along the lines of (IMO) the last couple shows have been good quality-wise and I am talking like all the way through not just the segments in the "major" quarters and its good to see rating #s starting to reflect that somewhat.
> 
> And i apologize buyt this just struck a nerve....
> 
> Again with the weak gain at the 10PM slot crap? Seriously it was the *2ND HIGHEST RATED SEGMENT OF THE SHOW!* So because people tuned in 15 minutes eariler than the top of the hour Jericho and Punk get blamed for a "weak gain"
> 
> Yeh that makes sense unk2


The last few shows have been better. I wouldn't go calling them good though. Well you know what, maybe I will lol. They haven't been horrible by any means so I guess I can roll with good. 

But it _is_ a weak gain lol. I don't see what the problem is tbh. The Punk/Jericho program hasn't set the world on fire in terms of ratings but again, nobody was expecting it to so I don't see what the problem is. These past 2 weeks it has seemed to reap the benefit of whatever went on before it doing a better number than usual which resulted in more people watching when they came on. That's good, great even and especially for them to get over 5 million. That's really good. Doesn't change the fact that it's a weak gain though. Had they put Brock/Cena on there instead, I bet it would have done around the same numbers as it did in the overrun.


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> The last few shows have been better. I wouldn't go calling them good though. Well you know what, maybe I will lol. They haven't been horrible by any means so I guess I can roll with good.
> 
> But it _is_ a weak gain lol. I don't see what the problem is tbh. The Punk/Jericho program hasn't set the world on fire in terms of ratings but again, nobody was expecting it to so I don't see what the problem is. These past 2 weeks it has seemed to reap the benefit of whatever went on before it doing a better number than usual which resulted in more people watching when they came on. That's good, great even and especially for them to get over 5 million. That's really good. Doesn't change the fact that it's a weak gain though. Had they put Brock/Cena on there instead, I bet it would have done around the same numbers as it did in the overrun.


I can definitely agree that the last couple weeks ther ehave been unsually big gains in the Q8 segments for w/e reasons and the 10 PM segment has defenitely benefitted from a ratings standpoint for sure. I guess my issue is people always looking at and focusing the negative aspect of the 2nd highest rated quarter hour on the program.

These ratings # are just like any statistic (for the most part) if you look hard enough to can spin them to "mean" whatever you personally want them to mean.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Starbuck said:


> The last few shows have been better. I wouldn't go calling them good though. Well you know what, maybe I will lol. They haven't been horrible by any means so I guess I can roll with good.
> 
> But it _is_ a weak gain lol. I don't see what the problem is tbh. The Punk/Jericho program hasn't set the world on fire in terms of ratings but again, nobody was expecting it to so I don't see what the problem is. These past 2 weeks it has seemed to reap the benefit of whatever went on before it doing a better number than usual which resulted in more people watching when they came on. That's good, great even and especially for them to get over 5 million. That's really good. Doesn't change the fact that it's a weak gain though. Had they put Brock/Cena on there instead, I bet it would have done around the same numbers as it did in the overrun.


Peeps really need to stop looking and gains people draw and start looking at actaul numbers people draw. In the second Raw of year Cena (the biggest name in wrestling) V Ziggler drew nearly 500'000 in the overrun, but the number they drew was a 2,9. A horrible number for a overrun. So yeah, People should stop looking at gains because they are very circumstantial considering how many people are consistently watching the show.


----------



## Rock316AE

Think about it like this, if Vince was in the ring promoting a Austin segment in 98, Austin comes out, do his promo, do a huge gain, then the Blue Meanie comes out for the top of the hour timeslot and gain another 5k because it's almost impossible to lose in that TV slot for any show(*almost*, like Punk proved in the past), you want to give Blue Meanie a credit for a big quarter? you know the answer.


----------



## A-C-P

Rock316AE said:


> Think about it like this, if Vince was in the ring promoting a Austin segment in 98, Austin comes out, do his promo, do a huge gain, then the Blue Meanie comes out for the top of the hour timeslot and gain another 5k because it's almost impossible to lose in that TV slot for any show(*almost*, like Punk proved in the past), you want to give Blue Meanie a credit for a big quarter? you know the answer.


Yeh I get that theory and for w/e reason (i still stand by my cametoe = ratingz) Q8 had a 445K new people tune in, and thats an awesomething for the WWE, but the Q9 slot gets NO credit for keeping those people tuned in at all? And b/c it didn't gain another 500K viewers (which means it would've had 5.6 million total viewers roughly) the segment is a failure?


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Rock316AE said:


> Think about it like this, if Vince was in the ring promoting a Austin segment in 98, Austin comes out, do his promo, do a huge gain, then the Blue Meanie comes out for the top of the hour timeslot and gain another 5k because it's almost impossible to lose in that TV slot for any show(*almost*, like Punk proved in the past), you want to give Blue Meanie a credit for a big quarter? you know the answer.


So The Bella Twins are bigger stars then Punk and Jericho? didnt know, considering the fan interaction in the Punk/Jericho segment I could of sworn people would of watched the segment because, I dont know, they enjoy the Punk and Jericho angle.


----------



## Contrarian

270,000 gain is weak for 10 Pm slot. The Divas match saved them.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Diva's = RATINGZZZZZZ.


----------



## Contrarian

A-C-P said:


> Yeh I get that theory and for w/e reason (i still stand by my cametoe = ratingz) *Q8 had a 445K new people tune in, and thats an awesomething for the WWE, but the Q9 slot gets NO credit for keeping those people tuned in at all?* And b/c it didn't gain another 500K viewers (which means it would've had 5.6 million total viewers roughly) the segment is a failure?


But 10 pm slot hardly ever loses viewers, people usually tune in. Look at it this way, HHH/Taker drawing over a million viewers in that slot proves their drawing ability. How does a 237,000 gain prove that for Punk/jericho?


----------



## A-C-P

Contrarian said:


> But 10 pm slot hardly ever loses viewers, people usually tune in. Look at it this way, HHH/Taker drawing over a million viewers in that slot proves their drawing ability. How does a 237,000 gain prove that for Punk/jericho?


Not trying to prove that Punk/Jericho are draws just saying b/c it was a "weak gain" doesn't make the segment a failure like some people make it out to be. Also if you see the next line of my post if that segment would have gotten the 500K gain in viewers, that some people need to see to claim a 10PM time slot segment a sucess, it would;ve had 5.6 million total viewers, how many segments of WWE programming have had that viewer # lately?

Also, look at the entire break down of the HHH/Taker 1 million viewer gain and look at the # of viewers at the start of the show and the losses they had in all the other first hour segments (729K total lost viewers in the first hour from the start until the end of Q4) Again not trying to say Taker/HHH aren't draws b/c we know they are. Like I said before though you can interpret these ratings #s to say whatever you want them to say and a good # of people are just focused on the negative of everything right away.


----------



## Kabraxal

The ratings over the show have been more stable than we've been used to. For a while it was a mess of "lose 600000 gain 30000 lose 200000 gain 1 million, lose 750000 gain 1.3 million". It's actually probably a better indicator for the WWE that they aren't as wildly chaotic over the two hours time frame. Means the show overall is managing to hold viewers instead of them simply popping in and out.


----------



## Starbuck

A-C-P said:


> I can definitely agree that the last couple weeks ther ehave been unsually big gains in the Q8 segments for w/e reasons and the 10 PM segment has defenitely benefitted from a ratings standpoint for sure. I guess my issue is people always looking at and focusing the negative aspect of the 2nd highest rated quarter hour on the program.
> 
> These ratings # are just like any statistic (for the most part) if you look hard enough to can spin them to "mean" whatever you personally want them to mean.


I'm not trying to spin them to mean anything. I'm calling it like it is. I never detracted from the 3.6 and in fact said it was great for them to have that many eyeballs on there. But Punk/Jericho themselves only pulled in 250,000 or whatever it was of that number. That's why it's called a weak gain. You put Brock/Cena in that segment and you know it's going to pull a much bigger number than 250k.



jblvdx said:


> Peeps really need to stop looking and gains people draw and start looking at actaul numbers people draw. In the second Raw of year Cena (the biggest name in wrestling) V Ziggler drew nearly 500'000 in the overrun, but the number they drew was a 2,9. A horrible number for a overrun. So yeah, People should stop looking at gains because they are very circumstantial considering how many people are consistently watching the show.


Why? The gains are the best indicator of what specific people are able to draw on their own. People are channel surfing, they flick onto Raw, they see Brock Lesnar and they stop to watch. People are channel surfing, they flick onto Raw, they see Jinder Mahal and they keep on flicking. Besides, I don't think anybody said that Cena/Ziggler was a good number. It's all relative to what is being discussed but that doesn't mean that they don't give some indication of interest levels. The overall numbers are important, yes. Punk/Jericho had the second highest viewership, yes. But they didn't do all the work on their own. That's what the gains and losses are able to tell us. 



A-C-P said:


> Yeh I get that theory and for w/e reason (i still stand by my cametoe = ratingz) Q8 had a 445K new people tune in, and thats an awesomething for the WWE, but the Q9 slot gets NO credit for keeping those people tuned in at all? And b/c it didn't gain another 500K viewers (which means it would've had 5.6 million total viewers roughly) the segment is a failure?


Who is calling the segment a failure? I enjoyed the segment. I don't judge segments based on the ratings they pull. But it _did_ have a weak gain, there's no denying facts.


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> I'm not trying to spin them to mean anything. I'm calling it like it is. I never detracted from the 3.6 and in fact said it was great for them to have that many eyeballs on there. But Punk/Jericho themselves only pulled in 250,000 or whatever it was of that number. That's why it's called a weak gain. You put Brock/Cena in that segment and you know it's going to pull a much bigger number than 250k.
> 
> Who is calling the segment a failure? I enjoyed the segment. I don't judge segments based on the ratings they pull. But it _did_ have a weak gain, there's no denying facts.


My post are more in general that just directed at you. But you can't deny the logic though that calling it a weak gain is kind of like saying Punk/Jericho are vicitims of the first hour segments performing MUCH better than they have in the past. I do also agree that Cena/Lesnar in that slot would've drawn more thats evident by the viewer # for their final segment.

And the failure staement was definitely not directed at you Starbuck b/c I know your smarter than that. I understand the theory behind the 10 PM slot is supposed to gain b/c people that watch shows that end at 10PM should be switching over, I guess my issue is just calling the 2nd highest rated segment of the show "weak" and using the # as a reason to discredit the men involved in that segment the way it is. Which again you (Starbuck) are really not the one doing.

I guess a better way to explain my train of thought would be I tend to focus more on the total viewer # (b/c to me thats the # that really matters) rather than the actual gains and losses in a given segment just b/c IMO there are only so many people that are going to watch Raw in a given week so if they are already watching at 10PM (like they were this week) the top of the hour gain is going to look/be weak. Honestly, for Punk/Jericho to look lik a strong gain at the top of the 10 PM hour they would have had to have 5.5 million viewers (which i will admit the LEsnar stuff may have been able to get that in the 10PM slot)just saying you have to consider that. Again its people looking for negatives in a very postive rating # for the WWE.

Maybe the WWE should start putting their top program in the 10 PM slot and their 2nd program at the end/overrun and see how that works for them.


----------



## Rock316AE

A-C-P said:


> Yeh I get that theory and for w/e reason (i still stand by my cametoe = ratingz) Q8 had a 445K new people tune in, and thats an awesomething for the WWE, but the Q9 slot gets NO credit for keeping those people tuned in at all? And b/c it didn't gain another 500K viewers (which means it would've had 5.6 million total viewers roughly) the segment is a failure?


I would agree with you if you were talking about a random segment but not a top of the hour quarter that they rely on to bring a specific number of viewers, there's different standards for every place, it's nothing to do with RAW, or even WWE in general, it's just a logical TV fact. That's why when Brock gained 400k a few weeks ago it was big because he did it on a filler quarter and would have been a below average gain just a few minutes after that in the main event. Same thing here, it's a weak and below average gain for the timeslot, that's a fact.


----------



## Starbuck

A-C-P said:


> My post are more in general that just directed at you. But you can't deny the logic though that calling it a weak gain is kind of like saying Punk/Jericho are vicitims of the first hour segments performing MUCH better than they have in the past. I do also agree that Cena/Lesnar in that slot would've drawn more thats evident by the viewer # for their final segment.
> 
> And the failure staement was definitely not directed at you Starbuck b/c I know your smarter than that. I understand the theory behind the 10 PM slot is supposed to gain b/c people that watch shows that end at 10PM should be switching over, I guess my issue is just calling the 2nd highest rated segment of the show "weak" and using the # as a reason to discredit the men involved in that segment the way it is. Which again you (Starbuck) are really not the one doing.
> 
> I guess a better way to explain my train of thought would be I tend to focus more on the total viewer # (b/c to me thats the # that really matters) rather than the actual gains and losses in a given segment just b/c IMO there are only so many people that are going to watch Raw in a given week so if they are already watching at 10PM (like they were this week) the top of the hour gain is going to look weak.


I'm not taking anything personally lol. I'm just discussing this with you. If there were already something like 5 1/2 million people watching and they only managed a gain of 100k, yeah, it's a weak gain but like you and others have said, nobody is going to say that the segment failed or whatever because that's reaching the higher end of the maximum viewers they usually do anyways. That isn't the case here though. Take away the Bella segment for instance for whatever inexplicable reason gained that many viewers lol. Instead, lets say that segment stayed the same and then Jericho/Punk gained the 450k instead of them on top of the 250k they did gain. That would be 700k. The viewership would be the same but the fact that Jericho/Punk alone made 700,000 people who were channel surfing stop and watch Raw can be attributed solely to them and therefore that would be a very impressive gain an reflect very well on them. The overall viewership number is important, no doubt. But like I said before, the gains/losses are the best indicator we have of what is working and what isn't, who is drawing and who isn't, what angle is hot and what isn't.

EDIT - Rock316AE is spot on above too. The reason they put most of the big stuff on at 10pm is because it's the best slot they have to draw in potential viewers. That's why it's so important in the first place. Not just Raw does it either. Take a 2 hour special of a regular TV show for instance. They are going to have a huge moment or deal breaker in the storyline happen at the half way mark of the special so that all the people flicking over from what they were watching before will see whatever it is is going on and stop to watch. Unless there was a humungous number of viewers in the segment before, only pulling 200-300k at 10pm, which is the average for Jericho/Punk segments, isn't really that good and is therefore considered weak. It isn't horrible and is slightly below average even. But that doesn't make it good either, especially not compared to the monster numbers that have been drawn in that same spot by real and proven draws in the past.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

lol ratings.


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> I'm not taking anything personally lol. I'm just discussing this with you. If there were already something like 5 1/2 million people watching and they only managed a gain of 100k, yeah, it's a weak gain but like you and others have said, nobody is going to say that the segment failed or whatever because that's reaching the higher end of the maximum viewers they usually do anyways. That isn't the case here though. Take away the Bella segment for instance for whatever inexplicable reason gained that many viewers lol. Instead, lets say that segment stayed the same and then Jericho/Punk gained the 450k instead of them on top of the 250k they did gain. That would be 700k. The viewership would be the same but the fact that Jericho/Punk alone made 700,000 people who were channel surfing stop and watch Raw can be attributed solely to them and therefore that would be a very impressive gain an reflect very well on them. The overall viewership number is important, no doubt. But like I said before, the gains/losses are the best indicator we have of what is working and what isn't, who is drawing and who isn't, what angle is hot and what isn't.
> 
> EDIT - Rock316AE is spot on above too. The reason they put most of the big stuff on at 10pm is because it's the best slot they have to draw in potential viewers. That's why it's so important in the first place. Not just Raw does it either. Take a 2 hour special of a regular TV show for instance. They are going to have a huge moment or deal breaker in the storyline happen at the half way mark of the special so that all the people flicking over from what they were watching before will see whatever it is is going on and stop to watch. Unless there was a humungous number of viewers in the segment before, only pulling 200-300k at 10pm, which is the average for Jericho/Punk segments, isn't really that good and is therefore considered weak. It isn't horrible and is slightly below average even. But that doesn't make it good either, especially not compared to the monster numbers that have been drawn in that same spot by real and proven draws in the past.


Definitely understand that the gains/losses are really the ONLY #s we get to see that can serve as an idication of wahts working and what isn't. Also, I do get that any show thats longer than 1 hour does the same thing by putting their most interesing stuff at the top of the 2nd hour. I guess my question would be then if not Punk/Jericho stuff at 10PM then what should've been their a 3rd Cena/Lesnar segment?

I really would've loved to see what the #s would've been had the Lesnar/Cena/Big Johnny thing been in the 10PM slot and the Punk/Jericho thing had been at the end of the show.


----------



## Starbuck

RevolverSnake said:


> lol ratings.


I agree. People tend to get way too hung up on them. I just like to discuss them really because I find them interesting. 



A-C-P said:


> Definitely understand that the gains/losses are really the ONLY #s we get to see that can serve as an idication of wahts working and what isn't. Also, I do get that any show thats longer than 1 hour does the same thing by putting their most interesing stuff at the top of the 2nd hour. I guess my question would be then if not Punk/Jericho stuff at 10PM then what should've been their a 3rd Cena/Lesnar segment?
> 
> I really would've loved to see what the #s would've been had the Lesnar/Cena/Big Johnny thing been in the 10PM slot and the Punk/Jericho thing had been at the end of the show.


Punk/Jericho is the right way to go for now because that's the second biggest angle they have going atm. It's either them or Brock/Cena. They put anything else in that spot and I have no doubt it would most likely bomb. Jericho/Punk aren't doing anything spectacular but they aren't bombing either. I'd say they're pretty much doing a solid job of holding the fort. 

Had things been switched around I still say Cena/Lesnar would have done a big number. They were promoting it throughout the show and contract signings with big names always do well. I think Punk/Jericho would have done slightly better due to the overrun number but nothing near what Cena/Lesnar did.


----------



## A-C-P

An actual intelligent conversation in here kind of feels weird :lol


----------



## Starbuck

I guess this is the best time for it. Activity is high when the rating and quarter hours come out. Once everybody has said their piece/trolled they all go away and wait to come back the next week to do it all over again lol. Speaking of trolling, I'm just going to go ahead and attribute the gains over the past 2 weeks to one man and one man only..........*BIG JOHNNY* #people power 8*D


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> I guess this is the best time for it. Activity is high when the rating and quarter hours come out. Once everybody has said their piece/trolled they all go away and wait to come back the next week to do it all over again lol. Speaking of trolling, I'm just going to go ahead and attribute the gains over the past 2 weeks to one man and one man only..........*BIG JOHNNY* #people power 8*D


:lmao hard to argue wit htta he is in charge of the whole show :ace3


----------



## Starbuck

It's no coincidence that the People Power Era brings about a steady increase in viewership every week. I'm just putting it out there. 2012 is all about Big Johnny. In fact, they should be naming the show Monday Night Raw: Starring John Laurinaitis instead of Brock Lesnar. We all know he's the real star lol.


----------



## Rock316AE

Ace was in 2/3 biggest quarters of the year so far. With HHH in January and Brock. He's fine now, I guess I got used to him, his act with Otunga has been good so far but to put him with Lesnar was still a big mistake IMO. You can legit make an argument for Ace as a ratings draw the same way JR is(he's not JR level, let's not get carried away but he's decent)

DO A ROCK/ACE SEGMENT!


----------



## Starbuck

Ace legit makes me :lmao every time he's on. Guy is entertaining as fuck and I don't even think he knows how he's doing it lol. That's what I love about him. We need more segments like this tbh:






:lmao They play off each other perfectly imo.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

HHH was so rude to Big Johnny there. Tut tut.


----------



## Rock316AE

Great chemistry and I agree that they should do more skits and backstage segments, that's what takes a feud to another level but they're so lazy with the concept of the show that it's just promo, a few boring matches, bland backstage interview, promo, match(although maybe it's because the roster is so bad that they can't do it without looking like goofballs doing phony faces)...I also hate the HD atmosphere they're doing backstage and in the arenas with the lights.

As for Rock/Ace, already happened:
8:15


----------



## Starbuck

The-Rock-Says said:


> HHH was so rude to Big Johnny there. Tut tut.


Their dynamic is awesome. I imagine that's the way Trips talks to him in real life too which makes it even funnier lol. 



Rock316AE said:


> Great chemistry and I agree that they should do more skits and backstage segments, that's what takes a feud to another level but they're so lazy with the concept of the show that it's just promo, a few boring matches, bland backstage interview, promo, match(although maybe it's because the roster is so bad that they can't do it without looking like goofballs doing phony faces)...I also hate the HD atmosphere they're doing backstage and in the arenas with the lights.
> 
> As for Rock/Ace, already happened:
> 8:15


DAT HAIR


----------



## The-Rock-Says

The best thing about that video was Edge and The Rock at the end. :lmao


----------



## Starbuck

Lesnar, Heyman, Rock, BIG JOHNNY, Edge, Eddie, Benoit, Stephanie. 1 just returned, 1 has no chance of a return, 2 are dead, 1 is a HOF'er, 1 now has 3 freaking kids and is set to inherit it all, 1 is the freaking Rock and 1 has the best hair cut ever. Wow lol. 

:lmao at Rock/Edge and :lmao at Steph getting the fuck out of dodge when Edge came with that chair!


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Rock316AE said:


> Great chemistry and I agree that they should do more skits and backstage segments, that's what takes a feud to another level but they're so lazy with the concept of the show that it's just promo, a few boring matches, bland backstage interview, promo, match(although maybe it's because the roster is so bad that they can't do it without looking like goofballs doing phony faces)...I also hate the HD atmosphere they're doing backstage and in the arenas with the lights.
> 
> As for Rock/Ace, already happened:
> 8:15


:lmao :lmao :lmao at Edge and Rock at the end. Some awesome chemistry right there. Edge's facial reactions to everything Rock was saying and then at the end were just perfect and hilarious. And Rock of course was Rock. Hilarious as usual.


----------



## Rock316AE

Yeah, Rock and Edge was classic.

RAW, 
First hour(MEGASTAR Brock) - 4.991
Second hour(STAR Ace) - 4.768



Rock316AE said:


> Ace was in 2/3 biggest quarters of the year so far. With HHH in January and Brock. You can legit make an argument for Ace as a ratings draw the same way JR is(he's not JR level, let's not get carried away but he's decent)


I predicted it without even knowing, that's why JOHNNY ACE is main eventing a PPV in 2012. Biggest full time TV draw along with Henry and Cena.


----------



## DesolationRow

Johnny Ace = Ratings. 

Few men in history have mastered the anti-charisma charisma he brings to the table.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Johnny Ace is Monday Night RAW.


----------



## dxbender

Surprising to see how big the ratings were, especially with Cena winning against Lesnar, you'd think that'd turn off some Lesnar fans and/or Cena haters.

And there were new episodes of many shows last night too!


----------



## A-C-P

Yep that loss to Cena really killed Brock's draw for people unk2

(yes I know alot of people may not have even known what happened in the match yet)


----------



## DesolationRow

dxbender said:


> Surprising to see how big the ratings were, especially with Cena winning against Lesnar, you'd think that'd turn off some Lesnar fans and/or Cena haters.
> 
> And there were new episodes of many shows last night too!


People were curious about the fallout from the pay-per-view, regarldess. _I_ was curious. I even watched Raw live for once to see.

Take note of the second hour drop. It's not massive but it's still there. I'm guessing Brock/Ace/HHH did a pretty huge number, and a fair number of people dropped out. 

In any case, I'm thinking we're going to see some considerable drop in viewership in the next few weeks. WWE seems to cease to care right about now, and the month of May is typically about as fillerish and punching-the-clock bland as any month of the wrestling calendar, if not the most. They're clearly trying to give Lord Tensai a rub of heat from Johnny Ace and it might end up working after a few weeks, but Ace/Cena or not, I don't think fans are dying to see this after Cena saying he was going to be off for a while, etceteras. It's pretty clear that both Lesnar and Triple H will be gone for a while, too. 

Things won't pick up again, probably, until around No Way Out or right after it. I suspect they'll book Lord Tensai vs. John Cena in a cage match there and feed him to Cena after Cena takes a pin to Laurinaitis at Over the Limit. It's not exactly going to be revolutionary television.

However, for pure wrestling fans and whatnot, the prospect of Bryan/Punk should be exciting.


----------



## Starbuck

DesolationRow said:


> Johnny Ace = Ratings.
> 
> Few men in history have mastered the *anti-charisma charisma* he brings to the table.


:lmao :lmao :lmao 

It really is amazing though, isn't it? They guy is practically devoid of charisma yet he's seemingly full of it at the same time. It's madness lol. And people, I think we all know how those numbers came about. Advertised HHH appearance and things go up, coincidence? I think not!! Lol. It's obviously a high level of interest coming off extreme rules and I also think the BTC matches had a lot to do with it too. This time there was actually a reason behind the matches on Raw. People wanted to see who would beat the time etc. I'm willing to bet the odd segments do well in the breakdown when we get it. Numbers for the opener and closer should be interesting as well. But these are great overalls imo. Almost at 5 million for the first hour and not too far away from it in the second. Should put it around a 3.4 I would guess.

EDIT - Agreed on your second post too. Things will probably take quite a big hit next week and all the way until they start to care again heading into MITB I imagine lol. But they never care in May so what do you expect?


----------



## Jonny Quest

DesolationRow said:


> Johnny Ace = Ratings.
> 
> Few men in history have mastered the anti-charisma charisma he brings to the table.


LOL awesome!


----------



## Brye

Johnny just reminds you of one of those corporate bastards (probably because it's his job anyway ~___~) that everyone loves to hate and he does an awesome job of playing it.


----------



## DesolationRow

Starbuck said:


> :lmao :lmao :lmao
> 
> It really is amazing though, isn't it? They guy is practically devoid of charisma yet he's seemingly full of it at the same time. It's madness lol. And people, I think we all know how those numbers came about. Advertised HHH appearance and things go up, coincidence? I think not!! Lol. It's obviously a high level of interest coming off extreme rules and I also think the BTC matches had a lot to do with it too. This time there was actually a reason behind the matches on Raw. People wanted to see who would beat the time etc. I'm willing to bet the odd segments do well in the breakdown when we get it. Numbers for the opener and closer should be interesting as well. But these are great overalls imo. Almost at 5 million for the first hour and not too far away from it in the second. Should put it around a 3.4 I would guess.
> 
> EDIT - Agreed on your second post too. Things will probably take quite a big hit next week and all the way until they start to care again heading into MITB I imagine lol. But they never care in May so what do you expect?


Definitely a great confluence of events with the PPV the night before, the controversial finish, and advertising Triple H for the show. You're right, too, about the Beat the Clock challenge providing a good pretext for people staying around and actually watching the odd segments as well. 

And, yes, exactly. They don't care in May so no one should expect differently, haha.


----------



## Rock316AE

This is the last decent number they're going to see for now BTW, until Brock and HHH are back for their Summerslam program. Get ready because the "INDY 2.9s-2.8s" are coming back:mourinho

And of course, people wanted to see what happened in Lesnar/Cena, after the disaster they did there, probably not even at Summerslam.


----------



## A-C-P

Its pretty simple :ace3 = THe RATINGZ!!!! I agree

But yes May #s are usually not good anyways so at least that will lead to some fun posts in here!


----------



## the fox

3.3?
good rating but i don't know if they can keep it next week without brock!


----------



## Bob the Jobber

Brye said:


> Johnny just reminds you of one of those corporate bastards (probably because it's his job anyway ~___~) that everyone loves to hate and he does an awesome job of playing it.


The Lumbergh of the WWE.


----------



## Starbuck

The reaction of people on twitter and those comments from people on WWE.COM suggest to me that Johnny is truly hated and I'm talking truly hated lol. People are horrified that he has let Brock Lesnar loose on the WWE resulting in their hero John Cena getting brutalized and their beloved COO Triple H getting his arm broken. They hate Lesnar for doing it but they hate Johnny for making it happen. I'll say this, if this keeps up and his heat continues to grow, they really ought to think about keeping his eventual removal from office storyline and saving it for some upstart. Whoever dethrones him will be put over big time. Whoops, I guess that means it's either Cena or HHH then lol.


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> The reaction of people on twitter and those comments from people on WWE.COM suggest to me that Johnny is truly hated and I'm talking truly hated lol. People are horrified that he has let Brock Lesnar loose on the WWE resulting in their hero John Cena getting brutalized and their beloved COO Triple H getting his arm broken. They hate Lesnar for doing it but they hate Johnny for making it happen. I'll say this, if this keeps up and his heat continues to grow, they really ought to think about keeping his eventual removal from office storyline and saving it for some upstart. Whoever dethrones him will be put over big time. Whoops, I guess that means it's either Cena or HHH then lol.


Agreed totally here I am not sure they ever planned on Big JOhnny getting so over as a heel. They have created a unique opportunity here with his eventual "dethroning" (and I agree that it should be held off for a good while yet) but the fact its an opportunity to put over a face BIGTIME makes me feel to that it will be Cena or HHH that does it :lmao


----------



## Starbuck

A-C-P said:


> Agreed totally here I am not sure they ever planned on Big JOhnny getting so over as a heel. They have created a unique opportunity here with his eventual "dethroning" (and I agree that it should be held off for a good while yet) but the fact its an opportunity to put over a face BIGTIME makes me feel to that it will be Cena or HHH that does it :lol


I guess the most logical choice is actually HHH though given the fact that Johnny was the one who ousted him out of in the first place and also because of his obvious ties to the corporate world too. I've been saying for forever now that Trips turning heel and being the new Vince would happen somewhere down the line. Well, maybe that doesn't need to happen when the people hate Big 'run the ropes' Johnny as much as they do lol.


----------



## Rock316AE

Cena already did it, what there's to this story? nothing, they already pinned him clean. Destroyed all the buzz. If he's not destroying HHH at Summerslam and going over clean, then they officially destroyed their selling point for WM29 and the only chance to come even close to this year's business. The story that Ace is loyal to Brock is good.


----------



## Starbuck

Rock316AE said:


> Cena already did it, what there's to this story? nothing, they already pinned him clean. Destroyed all the buzz. If he's not destroying HHH at Summerslam and going over clean, then they officially destroyed their selling point for WM29 and the only chance to come even close to this year's business. The story that Ace is loyal to Brock is good.


I'm talking way down the line here. I don't want Ace to go anywhere at the minute. He's pretty much my favorite part of Raw every week lol and is completely flourishing in this role. Big Johnny is for keeps as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## God Movement

I reckon they should have HHH go into Summerslam with some lasting effects from his arm injury, that way he doesn't come across weak at all even if he loses (because shit the guy lost his last match, can't exactly have the COO losing two matches completely clean in a row).


----------



## Starbuck

It's as simple as this imo. If they want to salvage any possibility of having a big Brock match at Mania 29, then Brock goes over at Summerslam. If they don't want to do that and instead want to use him to put their guys over, then HHH is winning lol.


----------



## Carcass

God Movement said:


> I reckon they should have HHH go into Summerslam with some lasting effects from his arm injury, that way he doesn't come across weak at all even if he loses (because shit the guy lost his last match, can't exactly have the COO losing two matches completely clean in a row).


If they do HHH vs Lesnar at Summerslam, HHH needs to be full strength so Lesnar looks better in beating him. HHH wrestles like 2-3 times a year now, he doesn't need the protective booking of not losing clean or whatever.



Starbuck said:


> It's as simple as this imo. If they want to salvage any possibility of having a big Brock match at Mania 29, then Brock goes over at Summerslam. If they don't want to do that and instead want to use him to put their guys over, then HHH is winning lol.


HHH's is gonna bury the fuck out Lesnar to prove he's bigger then the UFC. Brock's legitimacy is no match for the Shovel of Doom.


----------



## Rock316AE

> THE BROCK LEFT THE BUILDING AND TOOK THE AUDIENCE WITH HIM RAW RATING
> 
> The 4/30 edition of Raw did a 3.3 rating, with 4,880,000 viewers. The show did hours of 3.41 and 3.27. Hour one did 223,000 more viewers than hour two.


Every week they did a bigger number with Brock, now after they destroyed him, it's over. Let's see what Ace/Cena does next week.


----------



## kokepepsi

2nd hour started with 3 recaps and a Randy orton match with Swagger

Probably a overall 700k loss

NO SHIT 2ND HOUR LOST VIEWERS


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Starbuck said:


> It's as simple as this imo. If they want to salvage any possibility of having a big Brock match at Mania 29, then Brock goes over at Summerslam. If they don't want to do that and instead want to *use him to put their guys over*, then HHH is winning lol.


Either HHH goes over, which I highly see happening, or Brock goes over, and only Rock or Taker is left to stop him. The investment in it has been damaged thou, due to Cena overcoming the odds. So basically the bold part seems accurate.


----------



## Vyed

First hour is high because of fall out from previous night's PPV + HHH/lesnar Confrontation.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Nice viewership. Brock leaving is obviously gonna have an impact. The opener should be huge since it was a combination of the fallout from the PPV, and Lesnar/HHH confrontation. 

How I would do the whole Lesnar situation is something like this:

Summerslam- Brock comes back, and beats/destroys HHH, maybe making him tap after breaking (or nearly breaking) his arm again. HHH gets in a little offense, but it's pro-Brock for the match.

Night of Champions- Brock gets his rematch with Cena and beats him down again, but doesn't toy with him as much and ends up beating him.

HIAC- The rubber match between Cena and Lesnar. Lesnar beats Cena again, but Cena gets more offense in on this match than any of his others. Still, he loses relatively clean.

SVS- This one's a tough one if they do Cena at NOC and HIAC. If they don't do the NOC match I suggested, they do HIAC and then this would be their rubber match. An ironman match? I think it could work. If he doesn't face Cena then maybe CM Punk, but Lesnar would have to beat CM Punk and I'd assume it would be for the title. If it's not it's fine that Lesnar beats him with Punk getting in more offense than Cena or HHH. If it's for the WWE Title, then it's a tough one. I think we could make two branches out of this. One of them is Lesnar beats Punk in a non-title match, and the other is Lesnar wins the title from him.

If Lesnar wins the title:

TLC- A rematch with Punk. Due to the nature of the match, Punk doesn't have to fight Lesnar head on like he might've at SVS, and could utilize all of the weapons in the name. Lesnar ends up winning, but not without having his hardest fought match to-date.

RR- Feed Orton to Lesnar, simple as that.

EC- Lesnar wins EC.

The next night on Raw, Rock returns and confronts Lesnar, bringing up the point he made the night after WM28 that he wants his vision to come true, and thus Rock vs. Lesnar is made. Hell maybe Rock could win the Rumble in a surprise appearance. I don't know.

WM29- Rock beats Lesnar and while Brock still shows his dominance, it's not quite as easy as it was with Cena at ER. Rock comes back and beats Lesnar after a Rock bottom People's Elbow combo.

(This is the path I prefer they not take, as I don't want to see Lesnar/Rock for reasons already explained, but I put it here as an option for those who'd like to see something like this)


(This branch is where Lesnar beats Punk, but it isn't a WWE Title match due to Punk not having the title).

RR- Lesnar is a surprise entrance and wrecks through everyone. Hell, if they want to do something very interesting have him eliminate everyone else before #30 comes out. #30 comes out, and it's Rock! After an epic mini-match with Lesnar he eliminates him, wins the Rumble, and goes onto face CM Punk for the title, which at that point or by Mania at least will be regained by Punk. Maybe for Lesnar to keep his credibility up, they make it a point to have him be one of the first 10 entrants so by the time Rock comes out at 30, he's exhausted and Rock can go toe to toe with him believably while Lesnar keeps a superhuman image.

EC- Brock becomes a participant in the chamber, and is the last one. No one else is eliminated before Lesnar comes in, and when he does. The 5 guys stop, surround Lesnar, and beat him. Each hit their finishers before eliminating Lesnar once and for all. 

Lesnar at this point is fed up and realizes he's already become champion, he beat Rock back when he was a rookie, he's beaten Cena, he's beaten HHH, he's beaten the current WWE Champ CM Punk, he's beaten Orton, and there's no one left for him to face. Think Rock's promo from 2003 where he said he was leaving, and before he has a chance to leave the ring, *GONG*. Lights go out, Taker comes out, and tells Lesnar there's one thing he hasn't done. One thing no one has done, and one thing he can't do. Beat Undertaker at WM. From there on out they can build up the fact Lesnar has beaten and destroyed Taker in the past in his own match of HIAC, but that Undertaker at WM isn't the same Undertaker you see (or don't lol) the other 364 days a year. They could though play up the fact Taker has never been able to beat Lesnar one on one. 

WM29- This will be very similar to Taker/HHH WM27. Taker will get mandhandled by Lesnar most of the match. At the start though Taker does go toe to toe with Lesnar, hits his signature moves, chokeslam, last ride, old school, etc throughout the match. Lesnar eventually starts to overpower and beat down Taker. Throws him around like a ragdoll. However after numerous F-5's and Taker kicks out of all of them, he finally pulls out the same submission he used to injure HHH and Cena, and made HHH tap out with at Summerslam. Taker's arm seemingly breaks, he passes out, and the ref almost calls for the bell but Taker gains life and somehow (I'm not sure how) reverses it into hells gates. Lesnar power bombs his way out of that like he did to the triangle choke at NM03. Lesnar brings in a chair and places it down. He then picks Taker up for one final F-5, but Taker somehow manages to counter it into a tombstone piledriver. He spike-tombstones (like he did to HBK at the end of WM26) Lesnar and doesn't even do the darkness pin, but just falls on top of him for the 1-2-3. Lesnar has to be taken out on a stretcher and he can be written out for good due to neck problems from that tombstone on the chair, while Taker may or may not be wheeled out as well. It'll be a bit more decisive win for Taker than his WM27 match if he can at least limp out in some way, so he doesn't come begging for a rematch with Lesnar at WM30.


----------



## Contrarian

Is it me or Is johnny ace really a bigger draw than WWE champion CM Punk?


----------



## -Extra-

Contrarian said:


> Is it me or Is johnny ace really a bigger draw than WWE champion CM Punk?


just like Vince was a bigger draw than Austin or Rock


----------



## purple_gloves

Rock316AE said:


> Yeah, Rock and Edge was classic.
> 
> RAW,
> First hour(MEGASTAR Brock) - 4.991
> Second hour(STAR Ace) - 4.768


Does this pretty much confirm no Lesnar = no decent ratings?

It's pretty clear looking at recent ratings, that Lesnar is one of only a handful of guys available to the WWE, that can actually draw people in on their own.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

-Extra- said:


> just like Vince was a bigger draw than Austin or Rock


.....Ugh..


----------



## Contrarian

-Extra- said:


> just like Vince was a bigger draw than Austin or Rock


Yeah but its VINCE FUCKING MCMAHON, the guy who, along with Austin, won the monday night wars. He was just as much part of that success as Steve Austin was.

Johnny Ace is just a joke compared to that, poor man's Eric bischoff and he is outdrawing WWE champion punk consistently lol.


----------



## A-C-P

^ Its not really surprising and I think this past year with Punk was a great example of this. Ultimately its the face characters that make money for the WWE (or at least thats the way it looks) but in my mind the most important guys on the roster are the HEELS. b/c without a "bad guy" that people care about to conquer the face is just not as interesting. When Punk's feuds were with ADR and Miz they didn't really do that great.

Example part of Austin being SO GREAT was b/c he had Vince McMahon and then HHH as his "bad guys" to conquer. And now for w/e reason Ace is OVER as a heel and in turn the programs hes involved in will garner more attenion from the audience as they audience is invested in seeing him "conquered"


----------



## Contrarian

^ Except John cena is the babyface benefiting by going against Johnny Ace, not CM Punk.

Anyways Punk is utter bore these days so whatever...

RAW would have been twice as entertaining if it was DB vs Johnny Ace instead of Cena.


----------



## A-C-P

Contrarian said:


> ^ Except John cena is the babyface benefiting by going against Johnny Ace, not CM Punk.
> 
> Anyways Punk is utter bore these days so whatever...
> 
> RAW would have been twice as entertaining if it was DB vs Johnny Ace instead of Cena.


Yeh not really sure about using the awesome heel heat Johny has created to benefit Cena, but hey Vince is bound determined to make him a face loved by all.

IMO Punk/Bryan as a team feuding with a stable of guys being led by Johnny would be a great future storyline.


----------



## Rock316AE

Yes, Lesnar was able to make a difference on his own, week after week the rating and quarter got bigger, until they destroyed him with the most ridiculous booking in wrestling history. Up there with every stupid decision in the history of the industry. 



Contrarian said:


> Is it me or Is johnny ace really a bigger draw than WWE champion CM Punk?


Absolutely, not like it's a big accomplishment or something but I see Ace in a JR role, JR was always a great TV draw, I don't think Ace is JR level but he's there, that's why he probably gets the most TV time in the company and is going to main event a PPV with Cena over the mid card filler strap that has never been more irrelevant in wrestling history than in this terrible Punk title run. Technically, Ace was also involved in the two highest rated segments of the year so far. 

For the guy who said Vince over Rock and Austin, he wasn't but he was probably the biggest TV draw after them during the WWF section of the MNW. If I'm not mistaken, he has the third biggest RAW quarter of all time with a promo on The Rock's history on the RAW before Backlash 2000. In general, every McMahon was a huge TV draw, especially Shane and Vince.


----------



## kokepepsi

Thought feuds with authority figures never really draw on PPV anyways ala Vince vs Austin st valentines day massacree Vince vs Hogan WM19 Vince vs Bret whenever that was fuck that match

OTL gonna do 170k buys overall

(before you all get butt hurt those matches did draw but not what would be expected like Vince vs Austin)


----------



## Rock316AE

SVDM 99 is one of the best PPVs of all time IMO, Rock/Mankind LMS, Austin/Vince in a Cage, the awesome Snow/Holly brawl, Show's debut etc. Probably the best TV period in wrestling history. Maybe Valentine's Day was a factor, they did a decent number but not astronomical or something, or maybe it was because of the Rumble the month before which did a monster buyrate. 

Last year OTL did the third lowest buyrate in WWE history so it's not like there's big expectations, Cena/Ace can draw bigger than Cena/Miz if they build Ace as a serious wrestler and not a goofy heel GM.


----------



## BANKSY

The build will most likely be focused around Ace going to get his ass handed to him by Cena , rather than him being a credible opponent to Cena. This is a fairly logical route to go since Ace is going to be facing a man who just beat Brock Lesnar.

or they could go Cena is the underdog route for the #143848343 time.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Rock316AE said:


> SVDM 99 is one of the best PPVs of all time IMO, Rock/Mankind LMS, Austin/Vince in a Cage, the awesome Snow/Holly brawl, Show's debut etc. Probably the best TV period in wrestling history. Maybe Valentine's Day was a factor, they did a decent number but not astronomical or something, or maybe it was because of the Rumble the month before which did a monster buyrate.
> 
> Last year OTL did the third lowest buyrate in WWE history so it's not like there's big expectations, Cena/Ace can draw bigger than Cena/Miz if they build Ace as a serious wrestler and not a goofy heel GM.


you joking?

cena just beat lesnar 
there is no fucking way to make a ace even a threat to him and there is now way this match should head a ppv


----------



## The-Rock-Says

They will do a Cena is the underdog for the #143848343 time.

Ace has the help of Tensai. You can bet your bottom $$$ that Tensai will be involved such means all the odds are against him.


----------



## kokepepsi

Rock316AE said:


> SVDM 99 is one of the best PPVs of all time IMO, Rock/Mankind LMS, Austin/Vince in a Cage, the awesome Snow/Holly brawl, Show's debut etc. Probably the best TV period in wrestling history. Maybe Valentine's Day was a factor, they did a decent number but not astronomical or something, or maybe it was because of the Rumble the month before which did a monster buyrate.
> 
> Last year OTL did the third lowest buyrate in WWE history so it's not like there's big expectations, Cena/Ace can draw bigger than Cena/Miz if they build Ace as a serious wrestler and not a goofy heel GM.


If you thing Ace>Punk
CAN IT OUTDRAW MITB?


----------



## Cliffy

Kinda OT:

but i kinda marked when i found out that Hogan Vs Flair in 99 did a better number than Austin vs Vince.

that was prpobably the last good moment for the company before it took a nosedive.


----------



## jonoaries

Rock316AE said:


> *SVDM 99 is one of the best PPVs of all time* IMO, Rock/Mankind LMS, Austin/Vince in a Cage, the awesome Snow/Holly brawl, Show's debut etc. Probably the best TV period in wrestling history. Maybe Valentine's Day was a factor, they did a decent number but not astronomical or something, or maybe it was because of the Rumble the month before which did a monster buyrate.
> 
> Last year OTL did the third lowest buyrate in WWE history so it's not like there's big expectations, Cena/Ace can draw bigger than Cena/Miz if they build Ace as a serious wrestler and not a goofy heel GM.












Cut it out. That PPV was total shit lol. 2 good matches and 1 decent one. I vividly remember "boring" chants throughout that whole night until the 2 main events, and one good surprise (Show's debut).


----------



## kokepepsi

Pretty sure Rock316ae is not someone you want to get wrestling reviews from anyways.

He would rather watch Big show vs Kane than CM punk vs Daniel Bryan.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

kokepepsi said:


> Pretty sure Rock316ae is not someone you want to get wrestling reviews from anyways.
> 
> He would rather watch Big show vs Kane than CM punk vs Daniel Bryan.


BECAEZE DEY ARE LARGR DEN LIFE CHARACTERZ!

(even though Punk and Daniel are both of the most over people on the current roster)


----------



## imnotastar

jblvdx said:


> BECAEZE DEY ARE LARGR DEN LIFE CHARACTERZ!
> 
> (even though Punk and Daniel are both of the most over people on the current roster)


no they are not:no:, please punk and bryan marks stop saying this, they are not, and i repeat, they are not the most over guys in the company, unless triple h, brock lesnar, john cena, and randy orton just retired


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

imnotastar said:


> no they are not:no:, please punk and bryan marks stop saying this, they are not, and i repeat, they are not the most over guys in the company, unless triple h, brock lesnar, john cena, and randy orton just retired


Triple H is not on the current roster. Cena, Orton, and Lesnar are very over, so are Punk and Bryan. Never said that them two are the most over, just they are some of the most over. Dont get bitchy about it just listen to the audience lol.


----------



## imnotastar

not being bitchy, just being truthful, i would put punk up their with those guys but not daniel bryan, his cheers have died down considerably(as thought by most people)


----------



## A-C-P

imnotastar said:


> not being bitchy, just being truthful, i would put punk up their with those guys but not daniel bryan, *his cheers *have died down considerably(as thought by most people)


Thats b/c he is still a heel character and was drawing very good heel heat b4 the whole WM thing happened and people started cheering for him, now its a mix of peole trying to cheer and some trying to boo him. 

I am not trying to argue Bryan is the MOST over guy on the roster but he is definitely far from being NOT OVER AT ALL.\

YES! there are Bryan marks that take it way to far I will admit that but its not like they are totally off base the guy is quite over (not to the extent some of them think though of course, but those are just the extreme marks)


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

imnotastar said:


> not being bitchy, just being truthful, i would put punk up their with those guys but not daniel bryan, his cheers have died down considerably(as thought by most people)


Fair enough. There not chanting "Yes" all the way through the shows like they were weeks ago but DD does have the fans chanting his cathphrase all the way through his matches though.


----------



## Rock316AE

kokepepsi said:


> If you thing Ace>Punk
> CAN IT OUTDRAW MITB?


You're saying it like they did WM28 business. At least 7 PPVs in 2011 alone, the worst domestic PPV year in wrestling history and the start of the international collapse, drew bigger. Cena/Ace can draw bigger than Cena/Miz with the I Quit stipulation for the simple reason that Ace is doing nice numbers on TV, gets the most screen time in the company and Cena is the top babyface. They're probably doing it NODQ with Albert in Ace's side.

About SVDM, awesome PPV. They had a few boring matches like every PPV. You can add a decent Shamrock/Venis match to that line. 



kokepepsi said:


> Pretty sure Rock316ae is not someone you want to get wrestling reviews from anyways.
> 
> He would rather watch Big show vs Kane than CM punk vs Daniel Bryan.


You do if you interesting, fast paced wrestling with great atmosphere, that's what I like in ring work. As for Show and Kane, watch their December 99 RAW, great TV match.


----------



## Loudness

LOL @ Bryan not beeing over. The GOAT, one of the greatest guys in the business, the guy who singlehandedly made SD relevant, leading into the biggest Ratings since the Mark Henry Era with the worst roster in history, the guy that joined RAW and instantly got put into a World Title with CM Punk and made the Lesnar/Cena fiasco irrelevant because of his presence alone. A true icon, the Anti-Cena getting "Let's Go Bryan" chants from the intelligent audience while getting booed by the kiddies and fat women, even when not beeing tagged in because of his megastar charisma and Mr.Olympia like build that made him go over the fattest guys in WWE history in Big Show and Mark Henry in the same night in a cage match clean due to his size advantage. The only guy where attempting to bury him makes him get over even more because fans don't care about unrealistic match results knowing the guy trained with Randy Couture and could tap out the whole arena if he wanted to. He's so over that you could hit the mute button and would STILL hear his reactions.


----------



## Carcass

Loudness said:


> LOL @ Bryan not beeing over. The GOAT, one of the greatest guys in the business, the guy who singlehandedly made SD relevant, leading into the biggest Ratings since the Mark Henry Era with the worst roster in history, the guy that joined RAW and instantly got put into a World Title with CM Punk and made the Lesnar/Cena fiasco irrelevant because of his presence alone. A true icon, the Anti-Cena getting "Let's Go Bryan" chants from the intelligent audience while getting booed by the kiddies and fat women, even when not beeing tagged in because of his megastar charisma and Mr.Olympia like build that made him go over the fattest guys in WWE history in Big Show and Mark Henry in the same night in a cage match clean due to his size advantage. The only guy where attempting to bury him makes him get over even more because fans don't care about unrealistic match results knowing the guy trained with Randy Couture and could tap out the whole arena if he wanted to. He's so over that you could hit the mute button and would STILL hear his reactions.


Good to see there are Rock fans that know who the real GOAT of time is, Daniel "The Great Lover" Bryan.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Carcass your gimmick is so lame.


----------



## kokepepsi

Rock316AE said:


> You're saying it like they did WM28 business. At least 7 PPVs in 2011 alone, the worst domestic PPV year in wrestling history and the start of the international collapse, drew bigger. Cena/Ace can draw bigger than Cena/Miz with the I Quit stipulation for the simple reason that Ace is doing nice numbers on TV, gets the most screen time in the company and Cena is the top babyface. They're probably doing it NODQ with Albert in Ace's side.
> 
> About SVDM, awesome PPV. They had a few boring matches like every PPV. You can add a decent Shamrock/Venis match to that line.
> 
> 
> 
> You do if you interesting, fast paced wrestling with great atmosphere, that's what I like in ring work. As for Show and Kane, watch their December 99 RAW, great TV match.


Was asking if you thought Ace vs Cena could outdraw Punk vs Cena when you keep saying how Ace is now a bigger drawn than Punk.

MITB did 205,000 buys with 146domestic

No way they do close to over 170k 

Unless let me guess if they do good you give credit to Ace but if it does bad you blame it on Punk/Bryan


----------



## #Mark

The-Rock-Says said:


> Carcass your gimmick is so lame.


Yet you support Rock316AE? Not a knock on him, since I generally like his posts but he's pretty much the epitome of a gimmick poster.


----------



## Example

Does anyone know the buyrates for Extreme Rules?


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

The-Rock-Says said:


> Carcass your gimmick is so lame.


Aint no gimmick. Deal wit it.


----------



## Hollywood Hanoi

Example said:


> Does anyone know the buyrates for Extreme Rules?



Usually not known for a few weeks, you can expect about a million "Brock is/isn't a draw" threads getting merged into this one when it does come out.


----------



## Rock316AE

Example said:


> Does anyone know the buyrates for Extreme Rules?


First estimate in probably two weeks but the buyrate next month.


----------



## Tommy-V

*4/30 RAW Breakdown*



> As noted before, the April 30th WWE RAW Supershow scored a 3.33 cable rating with 4.87 million viewers. Below is the segment breakdown:
> 
> The first segment with Brock Lesnar, Triple H and John Laurinaitis did a 3.53 quarter rating and was the highest-rated segment of the show. The second quarter only lost 9,000 fans. Santino Marella vs. The Miz and Layla vs. Brie Bella vs. Nikki Bella lost 479,000 viewers. Chris Jericho vs. Big Show and JTG vs. Brodus Clay gained 282,000 viewers back.
> 
> Jack Swagger vs. Randy Orton lost 68,000 viewers in the 10pm timeslot. R-Truth and Kofi Kingston defeating Primo and Epico for the tag titles lost 245,000 viewers while Kane vs. The Great Khali gained 81,000 viewers. Daniel Bryan vs. Jerry Lawler in the final match lost 198,000 viewers while the final segment with John Cena, Lord Tensai, John Laurinaitis and Sakomoto gained 578,000 viewers for a 3.49 overrun rating.


----------



## A-C-P

Tommy-V said:


> *4/30 RAW Breakdown*


10 PM slot LOST viewers. All i know is i better get the what a WEAK gain statement from the usual suspects this week, but i know they will have excuses for this. 

I guess they should've had another Punk/Jericho segment at the top of the hour to bring in one of those WEAK gains again. :troll

Also Funkasaurus = THE RATINGZ!


----------



## BrosOfDestruction

Kane/Khali gained viewers?


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Bitches love Khali.


----------



## Hazaq

LOL Orton. He is Legit Ratings Killer. 10 years and still going strong, The Viper, the Apex predator... My Name... is Blandy Borton.


----------



## GillbergReturns

Opening and closing segments carried the show, Orton and Bryan's respected matches both lost viewers.


----------



## the fox

bryan the goat of all time lost viewers!!!
who ever thought this can happen !!!


----------



## Hazaq

Because of Jerry Lawler obviously.


----------



## kokepepsi

Orton is such a draw right Rock316ae


----------



## GillbergReturns

Rather than focusing on small gains and losses people should just be happy about a strong rating Monday night.

Beat the clock matches really aren't going to draw because they're squash matches that have no storyline to them and most of the suspense is really held to the last match.

In this case Bryan v Lawler was pretty obvious too.


----------



## GillbergReturns

kokepepsi said:


> Orton is such a draw right Rock316ae


OMG An Orton v Swagger squash match that everyone and their momma knew was nothing more than filler didn't draw.

Fire him.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

All my favorite guys are draws and all the guys I hate are not! Time to repeat this same thing in various forms for 50 pages!


----------



## Loudness

Weird, Khali, Clay and Tensai drew...guess the non hardcore fans care about fatasses and giants


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

@Gillbergreturns

Most of us know that, but the point is that Rock316ae is an Orton fan and dislikes most of the roster. When someone he doesn't like doesn't draw ratings in a segment he puts all the blame on them and uses this to justify his dislike for said wrestler, all the while ignoring other factors. 

TBH, if Orton's segment had drawn better or if he was left off the show, Rock316ae would probably go in a bit hard on Bryan. But since Orton's segment didn't do well, he'll probably ease up a little because most arguments that can be used to defend Orton can be used to defend Bryan as well.


----------



## dxbender

Loudness said:


> Weird, Khali, Clay and Tensai drew...guess the non hardcore fans care about fatasses and giants


If you saw the WWE poll on facebook, you'll see how true that is. The "WWE Universe" would rather see Khali-Big Show as tag champs over usos,kofi/truth and others(the poll was done a few weeks ago)


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

The casuals love Khali and Big Show.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Khali dancing draws!!!!


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

LOL at the 10 spot losing viewers. They should have put Punk in there to do anything, just to get a good rating. Because God knows Orton isn't going to provide that. And who in this thread said Lesnar is over? Every time the guy comes out to the stage he gets almost zero reaction. It's rather embarrassing. Even in Chicago barely anybody gave a fuck when he came out. When he's kicking ass, that certainly gets a reaction though. So that's a good thing.

As for the actual breakdown, it's pretty good. No major loses other than one, which is a good sign. The opening and closing segments did okay as well, but nothing spectacular. Thought the opening segment would be a lot bigger but Lesnar has pretty much flopped with the ratings since coming back. I'm expecting Triple H's involvement to boost the numbers up a lot.


----------



## Vyed

GillbergReturns said:


> OMG An Orton v Swagger squash match that everyone and their momma knew was nothing more than filler didn't draw.
> 
> Fire him.


Except its the 10 pm slot that almost never loses viewers. There is simply no excuse for losing viewers in that time slot unless you're a ratings killer which Orton certainly proves to be. I guess Rockae or whatever cant come up with "random time slot" excuse for orton anymore lol.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

A-C-P said:


> 10 PM slot LOST viewers. All i know is i better get the what a WEAK gain statement from the usual suspects this week, but i know they will have excuses for this.
> 
> I guess they should've had another Punk/Jericho segment at the top of the hour to bring in one of those WEAK gains again. :troll
> 
> Also Funkasaurus = THE RATINGZ!


Well the Punk and Jericho segment last week got a higher number then anything on this show, even more then the MEGASTAR Brock and the MEGASTAR Triple H segment.

And Lol Orton.


----------



## Green Light

:shaq Khali's segments have drawn for the last 3 weeks in a row I believe, give this guy the title ASAP


----------



## e1987p

Santino Marella vs. The Miz and Layla vs. Brie Bella vs. Nikki Bella lost 479,000 viewers.


The news divas champion Layla and the Bellas doesn't draw with Santino Marella vs. The Miz.


So,looking last week no Beth no rating.


----------



## BANKSY

Green Light said:


> :shaq Khali's segments have drawn for the last 3 weeks in a row I believe, give this guy the title ASAP


----------



## Mr.Cricket

Even Khali is drawing more than Orton.:lol


----------



## Cookie Monster

PUNJABEH PLEHBOY


----------



## #1Peep4ever

wow so the 10 pm slot lost
guess punk is a draw compared to orton huh ?


----------



## JasonLives

The Orton/Swagger match was barely in the 10PM slot. That match came on at around 10.10PM. Since it was barely 5 minutes and actually went over into Quarter 6.

The 10PM slot started with a recap of the opening segment and followed up with a backstage segment and a commercial break. Then Orton/Swagger started.

Why you would open the 10PM slot with a recap and backstage segments is beyond me. Isnt exactly gonna catch the viewers eyes.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Lil'Jimmy said:


>


Khali is one sexy man.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> LOL at the 10 spot losing viewers. They should have put Punk in there to do anything, just to get a good rating. Because God knows Orton isn't going to provide that. And who in this thread said Lesnar is over? Every time the guy comes out to the stage he gets almost zero reaction. It's rather embarrassing. Even in Chicago barely anybody gave a fuck when he came out. When he's kicking ass, that certainly gets a reaction though. So that's a good thing.
> 
> As for the actual breakdown, it's pretty good. No major loses other than one, which is a good sign. The opening and closing segments did okay as well, but nothing spectacular. Thought the opening segment would be a lot bigger but Lesnar has pretty much flopped with the ratings since coming back. I'm expecting Triple H's involvement to boost the numbers up a lot.


The opening segment did a 3.5. Damn good rating. God, if that was Punk instead of lesnar, you'd be boasting about it being huge.


----------



## fulcizombie

#1Peep4ever said:


> wow so the 10 pm slot lost
> guess punk is a draw compared to orton huh ?


Everybody is a draw compared to the ratings-killer , although the wwe has done a good job replacing one ratings-killer, orton, with another, sheamus, on smackdown .


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

The-Rock-Says said:


> The opening segment did a 3.5. Damn good rating. God, if that was Punk instead of lesnar, you'd be boasting about it being huge.


Nothing to do with Punk so I don't know why you always bring him up. Punk isn't involved in that storyline. 3.5 is a good rating, yeah, I was just expecting more because it was the fallout of a supposed big PPV with a supposed big main event. The interest should have been much higher, if you ask me. To be fair, however, that might have to do with the outcome of the match. Who knows, maybe Cena winning had a lot to do with people giving up on the storyline. I'm expecting Haitch's involvement to help, though. Lord knows Lesnar needs the help.


----------



## #Mark

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Nothing to do with Punk so I don't know why you always bring him up. Punk isn't involved in that storyline. 3.5 is a good rating, yeah, I was just expecting more because it was the fallout of a supposed big PPV with a supposed big main event. The interest should have been much higher, if you ask me. To be fair, however, that might have to do with the outcome of the match. Who knows, maybe Cena winning had a lot to do with people giving up on the storyline. I'm expecting Haitch's involvement to help, though. Lord knows Lesnar needs the help.


You need help if you seriously think BROCK LESNAR isn't a draw.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Well, he's certainly a huge UFC draw. Isn't doing much at all for WWE.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

How the hell do you know? Have you seen ER buys yet?


----------



## Cookie Monster

What were the buy-rates for last years Extreme Rules?


----------



## The-Rock-Says

209,000 buys I think.

If this years Extreme Rules does 300k (considering it's a B show) then it would of done a very good number.


----------



## Cookie Monster

Not bad actually. I think Extreme Rules 2012 will probably get similar, perhaps 250,000.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

If it does 300k, then it would of done very good. (Considering it's a B show.)


----------



## Cookie Monster

Considering the buy rates for Royal Rumble and Elimination Chamber, it would be fucking amazing if it got 300,000 buys!


----------



## Rock316AE

The Orton match was actually not in the 10pm slot, they started by the end of the quarter and ended into Q6. They started the quarter with the announcers talking about Lesnar/Cena, then Ace backstage segment, then a full commercial break and only then by the end of the quarter the match. Check the Caldwell RAW report in the Torch. Orton probably saved the segment from a disaster number, thank god Punk wasn't there or we would be getting another 800k loss like his last match with Miz. 

As usual Lesnar is carrying the show on his back and did the biggest number, HHH also was in that quarter so even if they got extra viewers on him, they lost after that. Then Ace and Cena doing the second biggest number is also not surprising. That's why I guess they're main eventing a PPV.

I don't see the surprise in the Khali gain, the guy is a special attraction to every fanbase for his size alone. Show was also always a big TV draw for that reason. That's what makes wrestling something to watch for a lot of fans.

Let's see what they do next week without Lesnar and his hype, and with Ace/Cena/Albert as the main program.

300k for ER would be a huge success BTW if you look at the position of the PPV.


----------



## A-C-P

Rock316AE said:


> The Orton match was actually not in the 10pm slot, they started by the end of the quarter and ended into Q6. They started the quarter with the announcers talking about Lesnar/Cena, then Ace backstage segment, then a full commercial break and only then by the end of the quarter the match. Check the Caldwell RAW report in the Torch. Orton probably saved the segment from a disaster number, thank god Punk wasn't there or we would be getting another 800k loss like his last match with Miz.


:lmao I've been waiting to read what excuses you'd come up with for the 10PM slot and Orton since the breakdown was posted and Man you didn't dissapoint :lmao

I've had to read you just berate every 10PM segment for the last couple months as "weak" GAINS for only bringing in 50-250K viewers and now a 10PM segment LOSES viewers and it gets a complete pass and b/c Orton was in it, and actually b/c Orton was in the tail end of the segment he SAVED it from total disaster. Not sure how a timeslot, that in your own words (well Meltzer's) Is almost IMPOSSIBLE not to gain viewers in, lost viewers can be considered saved on any level either. 

Oh btw the Q6 with the rest of the Orton match in it lost another 245 K viewers, but of course that geot skipped over as well.

Yes but you are completely unbiased and only post facts :lmao


----------



## Rock316AE

Excuse? there's no place for excuses or bias here, all you need to do is look at the position to see that Orton/Swagger wasn't in that time slot. If Orton/Swagger was actually there and was doing terrible, I will say it. For some reason WWE wasted the time where they need to gain viewers on announcers putting the Brock/Cena match over, video packages and commercials. A match that actually starts at the 10pm slot and loses like Punk/Miz? that's a disaster.


----------



## kokepepsi

Cookie Monster said:


> What were the buy-rates for last years Extreme Rules?


Extreme Rules 2011: 216,000 (108 domestic)

LOLROCK316AEDELUSIONALATALLCOSTTOHATEONPUNK


----------



## Cookie Monster

kokepepsi said:


> Extreme Rules 2011: 216,000 (108 domestic)
> 
> LOLROCK316AEDELUSIONALATALLCOSTTOHATEONPUNK


Can't see it being much more to be honest.


----------



## A-C-P

Rock316AE said:


> Excuse? there's no place for excuses or bias here, all you need to do is look at the position to see that Orton/Swagger wasn't in that time slot. If Orton/Swagger was actually there and was doing terrible, I will say it. For some reason WWE wasted the time where they need to gain viewers on announcers putting the Brock/Cena match over, video packages and commercials. A match that actually starts at the 10pm slot and loses like Punk/Miz? that's a disaster.


I am fully aware that actual Orton and Swagger match was in the next quater after the 10PM slot, a quarter that lost another 245k viewers anyways. And not until I called you on it did you post about how bad what they decided to put in the 10PM slot was and why it lost viewers. In your OP on the breakdown you just explained what was in the 10PM slot and how Orton being there possibly saved it from being a disaster, when for the last month anything in the 10PM slot that didn;t gain 500K was a total disaster already, apparently.

but :lmao keep digging the hole deeper :buried 

Its hella entertaining (Y)


----------



## Rock316AE

^
Terrible number for the 10pm, not a terrible number for the Orton/Swagger match, that's what you don't understand and trying to be sarcastic to prove something you can't. Orton/Swagger also had a little part in the next quarter, it was a short match between two segments. The 10pm slot did terrible like I said, but expected because there was nothing on it besides filler. Keep trying to find something you can't and put more smiles, it's also entertaining. 



ER last year did a pretty good number by 2011 standards. Cena/Miz/Morrison and Christian/Del Rio.


----------



## kokepepsi

For the lulz PPV #'s in order of buys 

WrestleMania XXVII: 1,124,000 (679 domestic)
Royal Rumble 2011: 476,000 (281 domestic) 
SummerSlam 2011: 311,000 (180 domestic)
Survivor Series 2011: 281,000 (161 domestic)
Extreme Rules 2011: 216,000 (108 domestic)
Elimination Chamber 2011: 212,000 (145 domestic)
Money in the Bank 2011: 205,000 (146 domestic)
Hell in a Cell 2011: 182,000 (82 domestic)
TLC 2011: 179,000 (98 domestic)
Capitol Punishment 2011: 176,000 (85 domestic)
Night of Champions 2011: 169,000 (109 domestic)
Over the Limit 2011: 145,000 (72 domestic) 
Vengeance 2011: 121,000 (62 domestic)


----------



## Cookie Monster

Which shows how much I care about buys when the best PPV on that list is slap bang dead in the middle.


----------



## kokepepsi

Cookie Monster said:


> Which shows how buys do not correlate to how good a PPV turns out to be


FYP kind off



(statement does not work for WM 17)


----------



## #Mark

My main man, the workhorse Captain Charisma single handily gave WWE a pretty great buyrate last Extreme Rules. There's no denying that match was the special attraction considering the rest of the show was filled with Mania rematches and an awful triple threat main event featuring Cena, Miz and Jomo (ffs).

Christian was pulling in solid ratings during his WHC run in July through August and was garnering fair ratings during his title chase against Del Rio... Yet, WWE still don't give him the time of day.


----------



## A-C-P

Rock316AE said:


> ^
> Terrible number for the 10pm, not a terrible number for the Orton/Swagger match, that's what you don't understand and trying to be sarcastic to prove something you can't. Orton/Swagger also had a little part in the next quarter, it was a short match between two segments. The 10pm slot did terrible like I said, but expected because there was nothing on it besides filler. Keep trying to find something you can't and put more smiles, it's also entertaining.
> 
> 
> 
> ER last year did a pretty good number by 2011 standards. Cena/Miz/Morrison and Christian/Del Rio.


I'm trying to prove something I can't? I've already proved your biased b/c if ANY wrestler you didn't like would have been involved in that 10PM slot or the one after you'd be totally crushing it, and there is plenty of prior weeks of proof of that in this thread, but you just pretty much skipped over it being terrible in your OP. Your completely right about the reasons why the 10 PM slot lost viewers but I had to prompt that response from you. 

Also, I don't understand why the Q6 # isn't bad? The quarter lost 245K, that isn't good, but b/c Orton (and b4 you start throwing around I just hate Orton, I am actually a fan of Orton and really don't care what his #s are) was a part of it you can "spin" it so it sounds like its not a bad #. Plus, whats their to understand about these ratings # that isn't just right there in the #s, gains are good/losses are bad pretty, cut and dry. The only thing I've "learned" in addition to that is anyone can put a spin on any # to make it seem good or bad in their mind if they want.

But don't bother responding b/c I am sure I am wrong or don't understand something and you will put more "spin" on things and claim them to be "facts". I wonder what its like to be the only person that understands and knows how to interpret these breakdowns on WF.

And look no smilies


----------



## Brave Nash

Rock316AE said:


> ^
> Terrible number for the 10pm, not a terrible number for the Orton/Swagger match, that's what you don't understand and trying to be sarcastic to prove something you can't. Orton/Swagger also had a little part in the next quarter, it was a short match between two segments. The 10pm slot did terrible like I said, but expected because there was nothing on it besides filler. Keep trying to find something you can't and put more smiles, it's also entertaining.
> 
> 
> 
> ER last year did a pretty good number by 2011 standards. Cena/Miz/Morrison and Christian/Del Rio.


If it was Punk you will not be accepting any excuses but if its Randy "The ratings killer" Orton you will make up poor excuses. The failure Boreton strikes again face the facts dude. I mean come on who really wants to see a boring robot anyway. He's in a filler feud in the B show because he's a "failure" and thats the truth. Even the Vanilla Midget Bryan can draw in smackdown unlike Boreton.


----------



## Rock316AE

A-C-P, Wrong. All you're trying to "prove" in any post here is what I would say about A wrestler in B situation on C timeslot. There's exceptions to every accident, this is the case. please give me the last time the top of the hour quarter was 95% filler and my post where I said something about the wrestler there and I will agree with you. I don't think you can do it because it never happened in the period where you check the breakdown every week. Like I said Orton/Swagger was a short match between two segments and had no effect on Q6. I don't know what you learned here, but I know you're a reasonable poster unlike so many clueless posters in this thread and understands something so simple like that when you don't try to be sarcastic and desperately trying to break any logical point. 

Just for the record, Orton is not the biggest TV draw in the company today, he's the second biggest full time name in the industry but not the biggest TV draw or the biggest draw overall, that's not my point, he was in 2009 and he can easily be again but currently it's Cena with no competition, Henry is the second biggest.


----------



## A-C-P

^ I'll definitely give you the 10PM timeslot from this past Raw b/c I agree totally with you on that and have no idea why the WWE thought what they put in that 15 minutes was a good idea. The rest I guess we should just chalk up to a disagreement.


----------



## Contrarian

Something for discussion....



> -As part of WWE’s First Quarter 2012 earnings report announced on Thrusday, the company released pay-per-view buyrate information for this year’s Royal Rumble and Elimination chamber events.
> 
> The Royal Rumble drew 443,000 buys, down from 446,000 buys in 2011, and 462,000 buys in 2010.
> Elimination Chamber did 178,000 buys, down from 199,000 buys in 2011 and 285,000 buys in 2010.
> Even though the Royal Rumble and Elimination Chamber both did fewer buys in 2012 than they did in 2011, revenue was essentially the same due to more viewers ordering the high-definition feeds of the events, which are more expensive and made up the lost revenue.
> 
> As for WrestleMania 28′s buyrate, the official numbers will not be reported until WWE announces its Second Quarter 2012 results in a few months, *but WWE CEO Vince McMahon did say that the buyrate is expected to be “nearly 1.3 million pay-per-view buys globally,” indicating the final number might be less than the 1.3 million estimate WWE previously touted.*


----------



## ecabney

Orton lost viewers in a time slot that never loses viewers.

*files and understands*


----------



## kokepepsi

Contrarian said:


> Something for discussion....


Ah fuck
What source is that because my PPV numbers for the Elimination Chamber are off and they use buyrate which is the wrong word .......dumbasses LOLPWINSIDEROROTHERNEWZSITES.


Anyways
Melzter had already said that it could be less than the 1.3million or something like that.
1.25 still the same thing.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

It could be slightly lower than 1.3 or slightly higher. We will just have to wait and see.

But it's already the biggest grossing wrestling event in history. Huge success.


----------



## DesolationRow

The 10:00 pm segment started up with Cole and Lawler throwing us to a video package about the PPV the night before, then Orton came out around 10:08/10:09 or somewhere like that, and they went to break with Cole chirping, "Another Beat the Clock challenge match! Orton's opponent: Jack Swagger!" Commercial break (and a pretty long one, if I remember correctly). Match didn't really start until about 10:14 or so.

When Cole announced it was going to be Swagger a second before going to a commercial break, I was sure the number for the segment would be lousy. The audience doesn't care about Swagger because WWE's given nobody a single reason to for about a whole year now (almost humorously, he actually did benefit from being involved in the Cole/Lawler build-up last year, as he was in many of the most-watched segments on The Road to Wrestlemania).

Having said that, though, the last Miz/Punk match was in the 10:15-10:30 quarter hour, and based on the booking of both men as well as WWE whipping that horse over and over (they wrestled each other about ten times or so on Raw live for free between the end of August and Wrestlemania), it was about as predictable an outcome as Swagger/Orton. Michaels and Undertaker kicked off Hour 2 that night with a gain of 869,000 and lo and behold, following a lengthy commercial break the segment after that lost 888,000. That's still a bad number and everything but there is the context to consider, in both of these circumstances (Miz/Punk also had a fairly long commercial break in the middle of it, too).


----------



## Rock316AE

If we are talking huge buyrates, the Floyd Mayweather/Miguel Cotto fight is expected to break every record in PPV history or at worse, be the second biggest. Probably the first boxing fight I'm going to watch in many years, the staredown alone here is selling the PPV:

5:50





And was awesome to hear Buffer(Michael, not Bruce)again...WWE need to bring him for a WM main event one time like WCW did, imagine him announcing Rock and Brock in New York, huge hype.


----------



## Contrarian

kokepepsi said:


> Ah fuck
> What source is that because my PPV numbers for the Elimination Chamber are off and they use buyrate which is the wrong word .......dumbasses LOLPWINSIDEROROTHERNEWZSITES.
> 
> 
> Anyways
> 
> Melzter had already said that it could be less than the 1.3million or something like that.
> 1.25 still the same thing.



Its official number from Q1 results 2012 Press release...











http://www.datafilehost.com/download-1b7b2aca.html


----------



## Chi Town Punk

*Are ratings important in 2012?*

In the times of DVRs and Youtube, are ratings really important in 2012? Does it still dictate the way the product is going to go? Are "the ratings" an excuse for not giving certain guys a chance and getting pushes


----------



## Mr Premium

*Re: Are ratings important in 2012?*

It was as just as important back in 1995/1996/1997 when there were also DVRs and Youtubes, so they pretty much got away with those 1.9's, 2.6's, 2.4's........oh wait


----------



## Patrick Bateman

*Re: Are ratings important in 2012?*

For a fan it shouldn't be importtant.


----------



## Grass420

*Re: Are ratings important in 2012?*

They are important to sponsers, network executives


----------



## just1988

*Re: Are ratings important in 2012?*

For the WWE office the ratings are still very important because the higher rating they pull then the more likely the TV networks are going to want WWE on their channel. The more channels want your show, then the more you can charge whoever does end up airing the product because then you force a kind of bidding war. 

Now if the ratings were low for Raw then the prospect of having that on a TV network wouldn't be too glamorous and although somebody may give it a try because of it's former glory they'd be less inclined to pay the big money for it.

So then when you put it into practical terms, if a certain guy consistently pulls a low rating and isn't providing with the WWE with much in terms of merchandise sales then they're likely to release him because he's just not worth that much to the company. If they like him then they may re-package him as something else but that's another story.


----------



## rizzotherat

*Re: Are ratings important in 2012?*

They are more important than ever due to the decline of PPV. TV rights fees are based on ratings.



RevolverSnake said:


> For a fan it shouldn't be importtant.


Thanks for that input


----------



## GetReady2Fly

*Re: Are ratings important in 2012?*

Ratings are going down the shitter anyway.


----------



## ChrisK

*Re: Are ratings important in 2012?*

Ratings will still be the benchmark for years to come. They really shouldn't matter, as media is evolving, but what else can they use for the time being? It's a brave new world.


----------



## 20083

*Re: Are ratings important in 2012?*

Absolutely. Of course, WWE may not necessarily care about ratings as much as they used to (Monday Night Wars for example), but no question, ratings are the sole indicator of how well a TV show is doing in terms of viewership, at least for now.


----------



## APEX

*Re: Are ratings important in 2012?*

*I watch wrestling, not ratings.*


----------



## Starbuck

Forgot to comment on the breakdown. The opener did really well as expected. It also carried over into the second quarter which only lost 9,000 so I'd say that's a great sign for Trips/Lesnar. The BTC matches didn't seem to have the impact I thought they would since practically all of them lost viewers while random shit with Khali and and Clay gained lol. All this talk going on about 10pm doing so badly is fpalm. That segment started with 2 video recaps and then went to commercial. Anybody blaming that on Orton is being retarded. Doesn't matter if they had Rock, Brock, HHH and Cena in there, people tune out during commercials. Stupid conversation. It was silly of them to do the staredown with Punk/Bryan at such a weird time. I'm willing to bet half the people tuning in next week won't even know they're having a match at OTL. But with Brock gone that gives them the chance to get either the opening or closing slot next week I would imagine. The overrun did a nice number too. No, it didn't pull a million viewers but it still did the average numbers. Not fantastic but not shit either. Next week will be telling since Cena/Ace is now obviously the main deal on the show.


----------



## fulcizombie

*Re: Are ratings important in 2012?*

Of course they are . The wwe depends on its weekly tv programs , so the bigger the ratings the better .


----------



## bigdog40

*Re: Are ratings important in 2012?*

No because they have so many avenues where money comes in and USA isn't going to just dump Raw when the show pulls the networks biggest numbers. The WWE will always have a TV slot to air their shows, they will always have PPV. It's about making money, not just ratings. Ratings only mattered during the Monday Night Raw. The WWE didn't worry about ratings until Nitro debuted, and they had a 12pm slot on sunday called All American Wrestling, and Prime Time Wrestling that came on Monday's from 9pm to 11pm on the USA network before Monday Night Raw. They've had TV shows for years and ratings were a non factor. WWF Superstars and Wrestling Challenge were on network syndication during the weekend.


----------



## 8 Pound Gecko

*Re: Are ratings important in 2012?*

Of course they are and will be for a very very long time.


----------



## kofifan23

they need to push kofi to the main event. with a rightful push, kofi would make stone cold look like shawn stasiak in terms of drawing power and ratings. DO IT NAAAAAAAUUUHH WWE!!!!!


----------



## Vyed

*Re: Are ratings important in 2012?*



Midnight Rocker said:


> Absolutely. Of course,* WWE may not necessarily care about ratings as much as they used to* (Monday Night Wars for example), but no question, ratings are the sole indicator of how well a TV show is doing in terms of viewership, at least for now.


They mostly certainly do.


----------



## justbringitbitch

*Re: Are ratings important in 2012?*



The Rebel said:


> *I watch wrestling, not ratings.*


oh your on youtube watching the 80's 90's and early 2000's too, good for you then(Y)


----------



## dxbender

WWEs did you know fact of the week....

Did you know that last weeks episode of Monday Night Raw was watched by more than twice the amount of viewers as UFC on Fox.

Source: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...s-out-ufc-on-fox-on-slow-cinco-demayo/132623/


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

dxbender said:


> WWEs did you know fact of the week....
> 
> Did you know that last weeks episode of Monday Night Raw was watched by more than twice the amount of viewers as UFC on Fox.
> 
> Source: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...s-out-ufc-on-fox-on-slow-cinco-demayo/132623/


Well that isnt true, its the worst roster ever and the biz is dying, dumbass.

Seriously though, its hard to believe that WWE today gets higher ratings then shows that are world known and iconic in pop culture such as Mad Men, Game Of Thrones, South Park, Family Guy etc.

Wrestling is still a very, very healthy product.


----------



## dxbender

jblvdx said:


> *Well that isnt true, its the worst roster ever and the biz is dying, dumbass.*
> 
> Seriously though, its hard to believe that WWE today gets higher ratings then shows that are world known and iconic in pop culture such as Mad Men, Game Of Thrones, South Park, Family Guy etc.
> 
> Wrestling is still a very, very healthy product.


lol, thats what majority of this site says, despite the fact that they're still watching....

Wrestling does real well, especially since it's on cable tv. 5M viewers on a network tv show doesn't seem great, which is prob why people thinks that the ratings today suck(along with the fact that they'r also addicted to something that happened 15 years ago).


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Are ratings important in 2012?*



Vyed said:


> They mostly certainly do.


Why would they? They're the highest rated show on their current network, there's no competition, and the difference between 4.85M and 4.55M viewers for an episode of Raw doesn't mean as much to them as it seems to mean to people on here.


----------



## Contrarian

dxbender said:


> WWEs did you know fact of the week....
> 
> Did you know that last weeks episode of Monday Night Raw was watched by more than *twice the amount of viewers as UFC on Fox.
> *
> Source: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...s-out-ufc-on-fox-on-slow-cinco-demayo/132623/


You do realise UFC Tv ratings have always been 1.0 ~ 1.2 right? 

WWE RAW & UFC is not comparable as for as the TV ratings are considered. 

Wrestling is not "healthy" btw, not in 2012. They are infact struggling. If the ratings drops below 2.5 on a consistent basis, they lose USA network.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Contrarian said:


> You do realise UFC Tv ratings have always been 1.0 ~ 1.2 right?
> 
> WWE RAW & UFC is not comparable as for as the TV ratings are considered.
> 
> Wrestling is not "healthy" btw, not in 2012. They are infact struggling. If the ratings drops below 2.5 on a consistent basis, they lose USA network.


But, its erm, not going to drop to that level as Raw is USA Networks highest rated show. So lol.


----------



## Chrome

It's not the worst roster ever, but you can make a case for it being the worst *booked* roster ever.


----------



## dxbender

ChromeMan said:


> It's not the worst roster ever, but you can make a case for it being the worst *booked* roster ever.


Worst booked in WWE maybe(though 2006-2008 was worse in my mind) but WCW had way worse


----------



## rockymark94

I would say in terms of showing character and having charisma this is the worst roster in wwe history.


----------



## Chrome

dxbender said:


> Worst booked in WWE maybe(though 2006-2008 was worse in my mind) but WCW had way worse


Yeah, I was thinking strictly WWE, but no doubt WCW was absolutely atrocious. Benoit, Malenko, Saturn, Guerrero, Jericho, Raven, Booker T, Buff Bagwell, the list goes on and on. So much talent wasted just to keep the old guys on top.


----------



## Hemen

jblvdx said:


> But, its erm, not going to drop to that level as Raw is USA Networks highest rated show. So lol.


The ratings are not that high, they were higher in the attitude and ruthless agression era. 

Well, the ratings have been dropping for a while, in 3 - 5 years i can see the ratings dropping to that level.


----------



## Rock316AE

rockymark94 said:


> I would say in terms of showing character and having charisma this is the worst roster in wwe history.


Nah, this is the worst roster in the history of wrestling in every way. Even to things like real life attitude or carrying yourself like a star, nothing. Just a bunch of clueless, uncharismatic, untalented, default choices who think they're on a school trip. Miserable and embarrassing. The only full time stars, legit stars who are not physically huge like Show and Henry and can go into restaurant and turn heads are Cena and Orton. Then they're surprised when less kids are watching wrestling today than ever before? back then the wrestlers were like role models, the "I want to be like him" figure, now the kid is more "cool" than the wrestler, and don't start on the teenagers when the healthy bunch can kick 90% of the roster's ass.

The only reason WWE are with the head above water BTW, is just because of the TV deals, not the wrestling product because every aspect is almost all-time low, and most of them like PPV is at an all-time low. The minute they're dropping even more in the ratings to a regular 2.6-2.7, USA are throwing them out and they're going out of business, all that without talking about the next astronomical bomb which is the Network.


----------



## Contrarian

WWE Network could be a success if they are smart enough to know what exactly the casuals want.


----------



## rockymark94

Rock316AE said:


> Nah, this is the worst roster in the history of wrestling in every way. Even to things like real life attitude or carrying yourself like a star, nothing. Just a bunch of clueless, uncharismatic, untalented, default choices who think they're on a school trip. Miserable and embarrassing. The only full time stars, legit stars who are not physically huge like Show and Henry and can go into restaurant and turn heads are Cena and Orton. Then they're surprised when less kids are watching wrestling today than ever before? back then the wrestlers were like role models, the "I want to be like him" figure, now the kid is more "cool" than the wrestler, and don't start on the teenagers when the healthy bunch can kick 90% of the roster's ass.
> 
> The only reason WWE are with the head above water BTW, is just because of the TV deals, not the wrestling product because every aspect is almost all-time low, and most of them like PPV is at an all-time low. The minute they're dropping even more in the ratings to a regular 2.6-2.7, USA are throwing them out and they're going out of business, all that without talking about the next astronomical bomb which is the Network.


I would say WCW in 2000 or wwe in 1995 have the worst overall rosters or maybe the booking was just shitty. But then again WWE in 1995 had bret,owen,taker,hall,luger,diesel,yokozuna, bob backlund,etc. Whereas now they have Cena & Orton, Mysterio, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Indy midget hacks that can't draw


----------



## wb1899

Raw isn’t in any danger to get canceled!
Raws average viewership in 2012 is 4,544,509 and USA Networks average is 2,779,235. They are 1,765,274 viewers above the USA average. And in the advertiser’s darling demo, a18-49, Raw got an average viewership of 2,246,407 (USA - 994,529).
Until the numbers will drop big time, they aren’t in any trouble.


----------



## Kabraxal

rockymark94 said:


> I would say WCW in 2000 or wwe in 1995 have the worst overall rosters or maybe the booking was just shitty. But then again WWE in 1995 had bret,owen,taker,hall,luger,diesel,yokozuna, bob backlund,etc. Whereas now they have Cena & Orton, Mysterio, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Indy midget hacks that can't draw


When are you people going to stop this bullshit argument? Seriously, they sell merchandise and have drawn well in their segments. But since they don't look like your precious rocky they can't be halfway decent... it is getting old and tiring to hear this stupid argument. Get a damn clue.


----------



## Punked Up

Rock316AE said:


> Nah, this is the worst roster in the history of wrestling in every way. Even to things like real life attitude or carrying yourself like a star, nothing. Just a bunch of clueless, uncharismatic, untalented, default choices who think they're on a school trip. Miserable and embarrassing. The only full time stars, legit stars who are not physically huge like Show and Henry and can go into restaurant and turn heads are Cena and Orton. Then they're surprised when less kids are watching wrestling today than ever before? back then the wrestlers were like role models, the "I want to be like him" figure, now the kid is more "cool" than the wrestler, and don't start on the teenagers when the healthy bunch can kick 90% of the roster's ass.
> 
> The only reason WWE are with the head above water BTW, is just because of the TV deals, not the wrestling product because every aspect is almost all-time low, and most of them like PPV is at an all-time low. The minute they're dropping even more in the ratings to a regular 2.6-2.7, USA are throwing them out and they're going out of business, all that without talking about the next astronomical bomb which is the Network.


You're emvarrasing yourself now. Move on from the past and stop watching wrestling. It's obvious that you want WWE to fail as a company. That's not being a fan.


----------



## Marv95

rockymark94 said:


> *I would say WCW in 2000* or wwe in 1995 have the worst overall rosters or maybe the booking was just shitty. But then again WWE in 1995 had bret,owen,taker,hall,luger,diesel,yokozuna, bob backlund,etc. Whereas now they have Cena & Orton, Mysterio, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Indy midget hacks that can't draw


WCW's roster in 2000 consisted of Sting, Hogan, Sid, Steiner, Flair, Nash, Goldberg, DDP, Jarrett, Booker T, Luger, Bagwell, Vampiro, Konnan, The Cat, MIA, the CWs, legit tag teams, etc. You're telling me that WWE's roster in 2012 is _better_ than WCW's in 2000?


----------



## Ziggler Mark

mispost...


----------



## Vyed

Hour 1 - 4.431m, Adult 18-49 - 1.7
Hour 2 - 4.192m, Adult 18-49 - 1.6

Hour 2 Ouch! unk3


----------



## Rock316AE

RAW:

First hour - 4.431
Second hour - 4.192(BOMBED)

Shows how valuable THE Brock is, there's nothing that can save them now, maybe HHH in one quarter next week but that's it, this RAW probably did below 3.0, wait for September, that's when the "indy comedy" begins...:vince3


----------



## Starbuck

Ouch indeed but I think this was to be expected. No Brock, no HHH and Cena wasn't even there either.


----------



## Vyed

I dont think Punk would still be the WWE champion by september tbh.

WWE is already promoting something "Revolution is coming" on WWE.com.


----------



## DesolationRow

Did anyone think Lord Tensai vs. CM Punk was going to draw?

Eh. It's May. They don't care. I hope that tag match and aftermath to it did well in the first quarter hour of hour two, anyway.

I fear that we aren't getting Triple H vs. Lesnar at Summerslam. I have to admit, when they revealed that Trips will be back next week, my first reaction was, "NOOO!!!" (silently in my head). This is WWE, they can't book long-term. Brock/Trips is probably your No Way Out main event. This upsets me greatly as I'm going to Summerslam and I wanna see Triple H vs. Lesnar, dammit! Argh.


----------



## Vyed

Probably Cage match at No way out. Works!


----------



## Rock316AE

Even if they give away Lesnar/HHH on a random PPV, and I don't think they can logically do it with the "recovery" of the broken arm angle. It's going to be Lesnar vs Orton at Summerslam which is also great anyway. 

Where they did a "Revolution" angle?


----------



## DesolationRow

WWE had Triple H's vertebrae fractured one month, and return to seek vengeance against Kevin Nash the next. I think his arm should be all healed up in about a week from now, lol.

Orton/Lesnar's cool and all but Triple H/Lesnar is just so much bigger in my view, and it was a match that was a logical big match ages ago when Lesnar was around, they even apparently strongly considered it for WM21 before Lesnar left. Oh well.


----------



## #Mark

Yup, WWE can't build long term. If they're having the HHH/Lesnar build every week instead of having both guys take a little hiatus till June means that we're getting the match at a throw away PPV.


----------



## Starbuck

HHH/Lesnar has to be at Summerslam. Fuck WWE if it isn't lol. Seriously. This thing is off to a really good start. I just sincerely hope that they don't fuck it the fuck up as usual. At this rate you could practically physically put money into Vince McMahon's hands and he'll let it all slip through his fingers. Besides, after Lesnar/Cena and Lesnar/HHH, Lesnar/Orton would be...underwhelming. In fact, Lesnar/anybody bar Taker/Rock would be underwhelming tbh.


----------



## DesolationRow

Agreed, *Starbuck*. Orton/Lesnar is a letdown following Lesnar/Cena and Lesnar/Triple H. 

WWE creative can't book beyond week-to-week and every promising angle ends up disappointing because Vince is a lunatic who's forgotten how to helm compelling angles for more than two months at the maximum. Which coincides with The Road to Wrestlemania being two months and leading to the one event Vince/WWE actually gives a damn about all year long, ha.

True story.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

They really can't book long term. You heard before the show that there had been 3 re-writes before the show. Crazy.

Simply can't book like that.


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck and DesRow are correct here. I also has this fear that HHH/Lesnar is going to be your No Way Out ME as well. And I also agree that Lesnar/Orton after Lesnar/Cena and Lesnar/HHH would be very underwhelming at Summerslam. Hope I am wrong and the WWE is actually going to book the Lesnar/HHH thing long-term, and I do hold some hope of that with Brock "quitting" this past Raw. Plus, as bad as HHH's "broken" arm is made out to be No Way Out would be a quick healing time, even in the WWE world. I could see them maybe having Orton/Lesnar at NWO and then HHH/Lesnar at Summerslam as well.

Or the WWE has completely trolled us and Lesnar's contract was really only for one month and he was only back to put over Cena and "quit"

As for this week's ratings #s pretty much what I expected. As big of fan of Punk as I am personally, there is no way anyone should've expected a Punk/Tensai advertised ME to keep people watching.


----------



## Rock316AE

Lesnar/HHH is obviously bigger and has the potential to draw more but they gave away Brock/Cena on the first match and that was probably the biggest money match they had. Still, I can't see HHH working random PPVs, add to that the arm injury that even with WWE's logic, I don't know how you can break this angle so quickly. Lesnar/HHH is a lock for Summerslam, Lesnar/Orton is probably happening at SVS or the Rumble and with the right build up, they can do great business with that match.

WWE are booking week to week for years now, people know it and still pretending to think about long term storylines like it's even a possibility and everything WWE do is a "master plan".


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

What if Lesnar goes over HHH? Then they build Orton as that guy who can be the only one to tame him, but he fails as well? I don't see what good HHH going over would do.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

If Punk is a big star like people say, then people will tune in to see his match. Doesn't matter who it's against.

Punk is supposed to be the draw, then people will tune no matter what.


----------



## Starbuck

I'll defy all logic here and say that HHH/Lesnar is still on for Summerslam. I mean, it really shouldn't be that hard since both of them are off TV. How fucking hard can it be to keep 2 guys _off_ TV for a month and start the proper build there? It should be easy as pie but of course that's never the case with WWE anymore. I'd rather wait and get the match built properly at Summerslam than have it rushed at NWO or even worse, _bumrushed_ at OTL.


----------



## Colin Delaney

Paul Heyman return>Brock Lesnar return


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> I'll defy all logic here and say that HHH/Lesnar is still on for Summerslam. I mean, it really shouldn't be that hard since both of them are off TV. How fucking hard can it be to keep 2 guys _off_ TV for a month and start the proper build there. It should be easy as pie but of course that's never the case with WWE anymore. *I'd rather wait and get the match built properly at Summerslam than have it rushed at NWO or even worse, bumrushed at OTL*.


The very sad thing is would any of us really be that shocked if they did end up having the match at OTL?


----------



## Vyed

Vince apparently doesnt want UFC star going over his long term investments.

Dont see HHH or orton or even Punk losing to brock if the match happens.


----------



## A-C-P

Vyed said:


> Vince apparently doesnt want UFC star going over his long term investments.
> 
> Dont see HHH or orton or even Punk losing to brock if the match happens.


I get Vince's reasoning for this. And if this is the case then they should put Brock in a couple matches with guys that aren't "long term" investments to go over like Big Show, to not totally destroy his credibility. Although jsut being Brock Lesnar will carry some credibility regardless of how hes booked over the next year.


----------



## Starbuck

I can see HHH going over because technically the story kinda calls for him to go over. At the same time, it will all but kill off Brock. I think when the match does happen they have to take it a step further than Brock/Cena if possible and end it where the match has to be stopped or something, even have Steph run down and throw in the towel or whatever because Lesnar is literally killing HHH. That way Trips can disappear again until Mania, Brock looks uber strong and awaits his next feud. Problem with that is, if the COO and legend HHH can't stop Lesnar, who can? Taker? Rock? Oh wait, Cena already did so maybe Trips will call on Cena to do it again and we get the rematch. I really don't know. HHH can still look strong in defeat but the thing is, they've already fucked up the story of what happens next by having Cena beat him at ER.


----------



## kokepepsi

Hour 2 lol

That's what happens when you have Orton/Sheamus vs Jericho/ADR


----------



## Vyed

A-C-P said:


> I get Vince's reasoning for this. And if this is the case then they should put Brock in a couple matches with guys that aren't "long term" investments to go over like Big Show, to not totally destroy his credibility. Although jsut being Brock Lesnar will carry some credibility regardless of how hes booked over the next year.


But According to Pwinsider, Brock's agreement is that he would only work with the big names as in Cena,HHH,Orton,Rock,Taker etc...

Big show is big not a big name.


----------



## A-C-P

Vyed said:


> But According to Pwinsider, Brock's agreement is that he would only work with the big names as in Cena,HHH,Orton,Rock,Taker etc...
> 
> Big show is big not a big name.


Yeh I know, thus the big problem here the WWE has on their hands. They can't just have Brock lose every match but don't want to put him over any of the guys he agreed to work with. If the report is indeed accurate.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

HHH could still feel the effects of the arm injury. If Lesnar was to lose another match, I would just consider him a Jericho or Kane, and just call it a day. I feel he should win his next match for sure and start moving forward from there.


----------



## Rock316AE

Nah, Brock wants to look good and is not a corporate puppet, the power is still in his hands, from what I understand, the only reason he lost is to get the image for the company in case he quits or something(they did irreversible damage with the ridiculous lose but needs to move on), basically something to play in the video packages. Now it's behind them and he needs and I believe is going to win every match, HHH is a smart man and he should want to lose to Brock, ego or not.

As for C PPV, if I know HHH's mentality over the years, after last year's disaster results, he's not working random PPVs ever again. Especially for his public image and behind the scenes.


----------



## Starbuck

At the end of the day, if Brock is only there to collect his money and doesn't care about what happens with his character etc then I guess Vince can't really be faulted for using him to '_legitimize_' or put over his current top guys. For all we know, Rock/Cena II is already the big match for Mania 29 and Lesnar won't even be there and they're just using him to fill the gap between now and then. If that's the case, I can see WWE's POV. At the same time, with every loss Lesnar eats his value diminishes and the impact of the put over for the next guy diminishes also.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Brock has to go over HHH or his drawing power light goes even further out.

Just put him over HHH for fuck sake. I can't believe we are even having this discussion.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Starbuck said:


> At the end of the day, if Brock is only there to collect his money and doesn't care about what happens with his character etc then I guess Vince can't really be faulted for using him to '_legitimize_' or put over his current top guys. For all we know, Rock/Cena II is already the big match for Mania 29 and Lesnar won't even be there and they're just using him to fill the gap between now and then. If that's the case, I can see WWE's POV. At the same time, with every loss Lesnar eats his value diminishes and the impact of the put over for the next guy diminishes also.


Fair enough tbh.


----------



## Green Light

There aren't many people Vince loves more than Cena but Triple H is one of them so there is little chance of Brock beating him.


----------



## Starbuck

The-Rock-Says said:


> Brock has to go over HHH or his drawing power light goes even further out.
> 
> Just put him over HHH for fuck sake. I can't believe we are even having this discussion.


WWE managed to fuck up Rock/Cena. _The Rock vs. John Cena_. Anything is fuck-up-able after that.


----------



## Brye

Rock316AE said:


> Nah, Brock wants to look good and is not a corporate puppet, the power is still in his hands, from what I understand, the only reason he lost is to get the image for the company in case he quits or something(they did irreversible damage with the ridiculous lose but needs to move on), basically something to play in the video packages. Now it's behind them and he needs and I believe is going to win every match, HHH is a smart man and he should want to lose to Brock, ego or not.
> *
> As for C PPV, if I know HHH's mentality over the years, after last year's disaster results, he's not working random PPVs ever again. Especially for his public image and behind the scenes.*


What would working one of the smaller PPVs do to effect his image?


----------



## Starbuck

Brye said:


> What would working one of the smaller PPVs do to effect his image?


Trips don't want to be seen working C level PPV's with dem indy vanilla midgets DURRRR.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Starbuck said:


> WWE managed to fuck up Rock/Cena. _The Rock vs. John Cena_. Anything is fuck-up-able after that.


They build up but got the finish spot on. 

Brock should be winning that match against HHH but HHH doesn't lose very often and he wont want to lose 2 in a row.


----------



## Brye

Starbuck said:


> Trips don't want to be seen working C level PPV's with dem indy vanilla midgets DURRRR.


In that situation I feel like Trips would be looked at as a god for working a show with such talentless wrestlers in a company that dies within the year. ~____~


----------



## Starbuck

Brye said:


> In that situation I feel like Trips would be looked at as a god for working a show with such talentless wrestlers in a company that dies within the year. ~____~


Trips too busy selling DAT BORKEN ARM to work C level PPV's lol.


----------



## Rock316AE

Brye said:


> What would working one of the smaller PPVs do to effect his image?


I'm talking about some of the lowest buyrates in WWE history. HHH is too smart to do it again. 


Starbuck said:


> WWE managed to fuck up Rock/Cena. _The Rock vs. John Cena_. Anything is fuck-up-able after that.


Yes, but that was only because they were obsessed with the crowd reaction and instead of doing the feud to sell WM, they tried to bury and ruin Rock's legacy to get Cena a few desperate cheers. At the end of the day, WM28 was still an astronomical success, the actual match was great and the payoff was amazing, so that's the legacy of this feud and with all the promotion and the hype, it's iconic. 

But agree and they already managed to fuck it up anyway the moment they pinned Brock clean.


----------



## Starbuck

I personally think Summerslam should be an epic tag team main event. 

HHH/Mayweather vs. Brock/Beiber - Special Guest Ref = 50 Cent. Instant buys lol.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Yes! Starbuck.

And at the end Brock turns on Beiber and beats the living shit outta him. Hard bleeds him and all.


----------



## Brye

50 Cent would be awesome ref for that because him and Mayweather are already good friends.

Shit would be epic. :lmao


----------



## Starbuck

The-Rock-Says said:


> Yes! Starbuck.
> 
> And at the end Brock turns on Beiber and beats the living shit outta him. *Hard bleeds him* and all.


Hard bleeds him? That sounds dirty lol. I don't think I want to see Brock hard bleed Beiber.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

50 Cent being led down to the ring by 20 hot girls with candy shop playing.

Also, godfather comes back for one night.


----------



## Rock316AE

Starbuck said:


> I personally think Summerslam should be an epic tag team main event.
> 
> HHH/Mayweather vs. Brock/Beiber - Special Guest Ref = 50 Cent. Instant buys lol.


So the feud is HHH and Lesnar as equals and Floyd and Bieber as equals? Mayweather selling for Bieber is already money. Leno and Hogan will look like Angle and Benoit. Even with how embarrassing it sounds, this kid can draw huge for WWE if they promote him to sing at WM. And of course, the main event takes all the credit...

I don't see Floyd doing another wrestling show but if he does, a program with Lesnar will be everywhere. 

RAW: first hour - 3.1, second hour - 2.94.


----------



## Starbuck

@ Rock-Says - Russo, is that you?


----------



## Chrome

Starbuck said:


> I can see HHH going over because technically the story kinda calls for him to go over. At the same time, it will all but kill off Brock. I think when the match does happen they have to take it a step further than Brock/Cena if possible and end it where the match has to be stopped or something, even have Steph run down and throw in the towel or whatever because Lesnar is literally killing HHH. That way Trips can disappear again until Mania, Brock looks uber strong and awaits his next feud. Problem with that is, if the COO and legend HHH can't stop Lesnar, who can? Taker? Rock? Oh wait, Cena already did so maybe Trips will call on Cena to do it again and we get the rematch. I really don't know. HHH can still look strong in defeat but the thing is, they've already fucked up the story of what happens next by having Cena beat him at ER.


I like where you're going with this, and here's my idea to add. Have Lesnar beat HHH at Summerslam, either by pinning him or as you said, literally beating the shit out of him. Then Cena/Lesnar II can happen at Survivor Series, with Lesnar going over this time. Finally, maybe right after Royal Rumble Rock or Taker appears and challenges Lesnar to a match at Wrestlemania.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Brock will bleed Bieber the right way. LOL too funny.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

No........:side::side:


----------



## Rock316AE

Russo never gets the credit he deserves, he is the king of skits. Skits = buys.:russo(seriously)


----------



## Brye

Was Russo booker of TNA when they did the PCS skits with Nash/Shelley and the X-Division? If so, I'll give him some credit for that.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

The-Rock-Says said:


> No........:side::side:


LOL. But seriously, y'all thinking the overall ending to this is Brock vs Taker and Cena vs Rock 2? Not sure what H will do thou. Just by reading Chrome's post.


----------



## Starbuck

ChromeMan said:


> I like where you're going with this, and here's my idea to add. Have Lesnar beat HHH at Summerslam, either by pinning him or as you said, literally beating the shit out of him. Then Cena/Lesnar II can happen at Survivor Series, with Lesnar going over this time. Finally, maybe right after Royal Rumble Rock or Taker appears and challenges Lesnar to a match at Wrestlemania.


So Lesnar goes over Cena and then what? Lesnar has beat Cena, the face of the company and has beat Triple H, the corporate face of the company. WWE then has to call on Rock, the outside guy, to come and handle business for them or Taker. Given the choice between the 2 I'd pick Taker tbh. I love Rock and all but Taker is WWE through and through. Having him be the guy to come out and beat Brock and _save_ the WWE would be a better story than having Rock do it imo. That way you get Taker/Brock and Rock/Cena II where Cena gets his win as face of the company and _for_ the company, so to speak and Taker gets his win, also _for_ the company. Hmmmm, I guess this sort of makes sense lol.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Rock is the action hero, as an action hero you save the day.

Rock to take down and stop big mean Brock Les......oh wait Cena already stopped him.


----------



## Starbuck

The-Rock-Says said:


> Rock is the action hero, as an action hero you save the day.
> 
> Rock to take down and stop big mean Brock Les......oh wait Cena already stopped him.


If the whole story is about who can _save_ WWE so to speak, given the fact that Brock would have taken out both Cena and HHH, two of the biggest company men ever, I think Taker, the legend and backbone of WWE that he is, being the guy to come from the shadows and put Brock in his place is a much better fit than Rock returning to do it and then leaving again. It is what it is. Basically, somebody has to fight for WWE's honor etc. Taker > Rock in that regard imo. That would give us Brock/Taker and Rock/Cena II. As for HHH, I don't see him having a HUGE match like that next year for Mania. He simply doesn't fit in save for Shawn coming back lol.


----------



## Green Light

I've said right from the start, the end game should've been Brock-Taker at Mania. The booking is so simple and it would be an absolutely huge money match, the only reason people mention Rock is because he is the biggest star and would probably draw the most (although it's debatable). They've fucked it up though by having him lose already, casuals and marks would've loved the streak vs. streak/unbeaten match and the fact that they have history makes it even better. Am I right in thinking Taker never beat Brock one on one? That's something they could've used to add more substance to it and make it more personal but no, Vince has screwed that up idea.

Oh well


----------



## Chrome

Yeah, the way Starbuck put it, it would make more sense to have Taker face Lesnar. I'm just not really interested in Rock/Cena II, but I don't know who else Rocky could face if Lesnar and Taker are busy. Punk? Austin? 

Maybe even D-Bryan.


----------



## Starbuck

If HHH beats Brock, on kayfabe wins and losses, HHH > Brock and Taker > HHH lol. If Brock/Taker is the plan then considering what HHH did to Taker last year, Brock will have to go a step further than that which means he's going to have to literally kill Trips in this match lol. And didn't Heyman reference this on Raw? Brock said that HHH lasted almost one hour inside HIAC with The Undertaker but he couldn't last one minute with him in a fight. Ohhhhh! Foreshadowing lol.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

I was joking. I'd love to see Taker/Brock. But I would also love to see Rock/Brock.. More so Taker/Brock, because of there history.

I just don't want to see Rock/Cena II.


----------



## Starbuck

You don't want to see Rock/Cena II because you know Cena's going over this time lol.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Yes. Also because the build suck so much last time, I couldn't bear another 'I'm here and your not, I'm going to do this for all the guys in the back' blah blah blah.


----------



## Starbuck

Well it couldn't be that way a second time. They'll probably pull some bullshit about how Cena had the worst year after Rock beat him and he lost everything. Actually, that would be hell of a story if they actually had Cena lose everything stemming from that loss to Rock that he begs for a rematch to prove himself and wins. But no, the very next PPV he defeats Lesnar and it all goes to shit.


----------



## Rock316AE

It's not even about saving the company, it's just the biggest match and Rock and Brock want to work with each other, no other reason and no other match will get even close to the mainstream publicity this match will get, Taker is also a one match guy now so I don't see how he's any different. But I want to see that only if they're trying to rebuild Brock, if not then Rock/Taker is automatically the biggest match(although on that day, nothing can top Rock/Brock in the New York market). If Austin is coming back and wants a real star and a main event spot in a match that would mean something, Lesnar is perfect. You can do Rock/Taker(Rock/Cena is a dead program, no interest at all because they already gave everything people wanted to see), Austin/Lesnar and maybe HBK/HHH.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

But Cena OH SO deserves that victory. So we can all hope he turns heel again...:troll


----------



## Starbuck

Rock316AE said:


> It's not even about saving the company, it's just the biggest match and Rock and Brock want to work with each other, no other reason and no other match will get even close to the mainstream publicity this match will get, Taker is also a one match guy now so I don't see how he's any different. But I want to see that only if they're trying to rebuild Brock, if not then Rock/Taker is automatically the biggest match(although on that day, nothing can top Rock/Brock in the New York market). If Austin is coming back and wants a real star and a main event spot in a match that would mean something, Lesnar is perfect. You can do Rock/Taker(Rock/Cena is a dead program, no interest at all because they already gave everything people wanted to see), Austin/Lesnar and maybe HBK/HHH.


I'd personally prefer there to be a little meat on the bones other than MEGASTAR ROCK vs. MEGASTAR BROCK. I kind of like the idea of Brock running through HHH and Cena, holding WWE up until its venerable legend in The Undertaker comes back to put Brock in his place. I'd still like to see Rock/Brock too but really, depending on how this match with HHH goes and given how his match with Cena already went, I don't think Rock is the right fit for Brock. I have my doubts. It's going to have to be a fight in every sense of the word, not a sports entertainment spectacle like Rock/Cena was. There's no way they can do what they did in Brock/Cena in all Brock's other matches and then have him come out and _wrestle_ Rock. That wouldn't make any sense at all and would be hard for people to buy into imo.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Well Brock won't be doing to Cena to his other opponents. 

Taker won't be allowing him to elbow him in the trying make him bleed the hard way. Taker won't be allowing Brock to really knee him very hard in the sides. Either will Rock or others.

That Cena match was a one off.


----------



## Choke2Death

I would love Brock/Rock at WM29. It'll be a huge match-up and is going to be great. Then I'd also love Cena/Undertaker as it should have been done years ago. The boos Cena gets in New Jersey (they are very underrated in terms of Cena-hating) will be amazing, specially with Taker getting supported over pretty much _anyone_.

Speaking of ratings, I think Cena gets way too much credit as a draw. Even when he's there, the ratings are hardly affected and he certainly doesn't bring much buyrates for PPVs that he main events. He's just a merch selling fruit IMO.

And fuck Cena/Rock II, that shit will blow unless Cena turns heel.


----------



## Starbuck

We'll see. Brock isn't here to wrestle remember. He's here to hurt people and cause UTTER FRIGGIN CHAOS lol. He won't be able to do that in regular wrestling matches. Besides, he's already broke HHH's arm. If you think Trips is just going to want to wrestle him then nope lol. This match will be a fight imo. And if there were any 2 guys who would allow Brock to work stiff with them it's HHH and Taker. Sure Taker cut HHH up the hard way in their Mania match and HHH cut the shit out of his back with those chair shots. I don't think they'll have any problem going in there and getting the shit kicked out of them in a match.


----------



## Rock316AE

Of course Rock is not going to take a jobber beatdown like Cena got, and HHH is also not doing it. Rock can brawl, it's not the problem, with a hot New York crowd at WM, you don't need blood to create an intense atmosphere. Brock is probably changing his style before WM anyway, I can't see them doing the same type of match with HHH and Orton, they're going to get much more offence and would be just stupid for HHH to agree to take legit stiff shots like Cena did. As for the story, they can go in a lot of different directions, the big success outside of the business, the fact that Rock said that he beat them all and actually never beat Brock etc, "the fate of the company" is just one option. A lot depending on Austin, if he comes back, then he should wrestle Brock in the main event and Rock/Taker, if not, I can't see any reason not to do Rock/Brock and Taker/Cena.


----------



## Starbuck

Rock316AE said:


> Of course Rock is not going to take a jobber beatdown like Cena got, and HHH is also not doing it. Rock can brawl, it's not the problem, with a hot New York crowd at WM, you don't need blood to create an intense atmosphere. Brock is probably changing his style before WM anyway, I can't see them doing the same type of match with HHH and Orton, they're going to get much more offence and would be just stupid for HHH to agree to take legit stiff shots like Cena did. As for the story, they can go in a lot of different directions, the big success outside of the business, the fact that Rock said that he beat them all and actually never beat Brock etc, "*the fate of the company" is just one option*. A lot depending on Austin, if he comes back, then he should wrestle Brock in the main event and Rock/Taker, if not, I can't see any reason not to do Rock/Brock and Taker/Cena.


That's true. As usual I'm letting logic get the better of me and trying to weave one story arc into another which is something WWE can't ever seem to fucking do anymore. I will stand by the fact that Brock has repeatedly said he's back to hurt people and bring chaos though. That doesn't exactly have a full impact if he's having regular wrestling matches with people imo. Then again, they can move away from that to something else if they want. I'm just begging for some form of continuity from WWE these days, especially when it comes to their big angles. A well told story isn't too much to ask for lol.


----------



## Chrome

One big problem with Taker/Lesnar is that all of their history took place during Taker's ABA/Big Evil gimmick, which WWE has been shy about showing footage of that version of his character in recent years. And they sure as hell couldn't show their staredown at that UFC event a few years ago, as that absolutely destroys kayfabe lol. Then again, WWE could just pretend that they never faced each other, as they seem to be good at doing stuff like that.


----------



## fulcizombie

Choke2Death said:


> Speaking of ratings, I think Cena gets way too much credit as a draw. Even when he's there, the ratings are hardly affected and he certainly doesn't bring much buyrates for PPVs that he main events. He's just a merch selling fruit IMO.
> 
> And fuck Cena/Rock II, that shit will blow unless Cena turns heel.


Cena is not a draw, he just sells t-shirts to kids. The fact that everything is in the toilet right now (buyrates, ratings) with CENA,CENA,CENA in just about every fuckin main event speaks volumes. Wrestlemania was all the rock.

Not that Vince cares, he killed his big draw ,Brock, that was actually bringing ratings and could create the biggest wrestlemania ever with a match with the rock, just so cena gets a few cheap cheers for a few weeks .


----------



## LarryCoon

I've seen several of these posters' logic and at the end of the day, they are just arguing for their favorite wrestler to win. I just happen to agree with them on Lesnar squashing Cena opening up better storylines and better gains for both stars but these are the same people who argued for Rock to win.


----------



## mblonde09

Rock316AE said:


> Nah, this is the worst roster in the history of wrestling in every way. Even to things like real life attitude or carrying yourself like a star, nothing. *Just a bunch of clueless, uncharismatic, untalented, default choices who think they're on a school trip. Miserable and embarrassing.* *The only* full time stars, *legit stars* *who* are not physically huge like Show and Henry and *can go into restaurant and turn heads are* Cena and *Orton*. Then they're surprised when less kids are watching wrestling today than ever before? back then the wrestlers were like role models, the "I want to be like him" figure, now the kid is more "cool" than the wrestler, and don't start on the teenagers when the healthy bunch can kick 90% of the roster's ass.


Really this stupid "school trip" crap again? You really think Orton of all people turns heads and gets people's attention outside the ring? GTFO, with that crap. Orton is not a star - only Orton's fans would know who he was if he walked into a restaurant. "Miserable and embarassing" describes the vast majority of your posts and your existence on this board, BTW. I must say, though, you do an exceedingly good job of making yourself look like a complete fool, pretty much every time you post.



Rock316AE said:


> Just for the record, Orton is not the biggest TV draw in the company today, *he's the second biggest full time name in the industry* but not the biggest TV draw or the biggest draw overall, that's not my point, he was in 2009 and he can easily be again but currently it's Cena with no competition, *Henry is the second biggest.*


No, he's not and Henry second biggest ratings draw? WTF?



imnotastar said:


> no they are not:no:, please punk and bryan marks stop saying this, they are not, and i repeat, they are not the most over guys in the company, unless triple h, brock lesnar, john cena, and randy orton just retired


The only ones on that list more over than Punk are HHH and maybe Cena - only in terms of general crowd reaction (boos and cheers) though, because Punk gets bigger pops now.



Vyed said:


> But According to Pwinsider, *Brock's agreement is that he would only work with the big names as in* Cena,HHH,*Orton*,Rock,Taker etc...
> 
> 
> Big show is big not a big name.


Orton, lol.


----------



## fulcizombie

Henry has proved to be a ratings draw both on smackdown and ECW . Orton, on the other hand, is ratings poison .


----------



## uknoww

mblonde09 said:


> Really this stupid "school trip" crap again? You really think Orton of all people turns heads and gets people's attention outside the ring? GTFO, with that crap. Orton is not a star - only Orton's fans would know who he was if he walked into a restaurant. "Miserable and embarassing" describes the vast majority of your posts and your existence on this board, BTW. I must say, though, you do an exceedingly good job of making yourself look like a complete fool, pretty much every time you post.
> 
> 
> No, he's not and Henry second biggest ratings draw? WTF?
> 
> 
> The only ones on that list more over than Punk are HHH and maybe Cena - only in terms of general crowd reaction (boos and cheers) though, because Punk gets bigger pops now.
> 
> 
> Orton, lol.


yes orton is a legend punk is not even in top 1000


----------



## Starbuck

LarryCoon said:


> I've seen several of these posters' logic and at the end of the day, they are just arguing for their favorite wrestler to win. I just happen to agree with them on Lesnar squashing Cena opening up better storylines and better gains for both stars but these are the same people who argued for Rock to win.


I assume you're talking about myself and Rocky here? I'll just say that I don't care who wins the match as long as it makes fucking sense. I'm so sick of the inconsistency in WWE's storytelling. For once they need to get their shit sorted and get something right for a fucking change. Given how well Cena/Brock turned out, I'm not getting my hopes up.


----------



## purple_gloves

Starbuck said:


> WWE managed to fuck up Rock/Cena. _The Rock vs. John Cena_. Anything is fuck-up-able after that.


For me personally, a lot of the Rock/Cena was a fuck up, but 1.3 million buys proves that it certainly wasn't a fuck up.

However hardcore wrestling fans view the feud is irrelevant. The fact is, it will go down as one of the most successful feuds of all time.


----------



## A-C-P

:lmao I am glad we are SOOOOO worried about next year's WM already when theres 10 months of other programming to dissect before that.

But I guess since WM is the only thing WWE puts any effort into it seems iguess we should only care about it to.


----------



## Cliffy

agreed with choke about Cena not being much of a draw anymore. Don't even think he sells as many shirts as he used to.

And guys its already decided, we're getting Taker/Trips part 4 at WM 29 :vince2


----------



## Hazaq

Cena/Rock II
Brock/Taker 
Austin/Punk 

is the best possible card if Austin's going to return.


----------



## starvin90

*What would make raw more entertaining ?*

I found this raw to be very..... meh


----------



## vamp1ro

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

Entertainment.


----------



## truk83

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

Seriously, I would have to say less of John Lauranitis, and more of Paul Heyman. May I also mention that Raw would be much better if they would debut Dean Ambrose already.


----------



## PowerandGlory

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

mix it up. raw is outlined the exact same every week. first 15 minutes deal with biggest feud, first 15 minutes of 2nd hr is 2nd biggest feud, and last 10-15 minutes is the main event that was decided at the start of raw or some sort of confrontation between the 1 feud. everything inbetween is not interesting


----------



## Choke2Death

Hazaq said:


> Cena/Rock II
> Brock/Taker
> Austin/Punk
> 
> is the best possible card if Austin's going to return.


Switch Orton with Punk and you're right!


----------



## LarryCoon

Starbuck said:


> I assume you're talking about myself and Rocky here? I'll just say that I don't care who wins the match as long as it makes fucking sense. I'm so sick of the inconsistency in WWE's storytelling. For once they need to get their shit sorted and get something right for a fucking change. Given how well Cena/Brock turned out, I'm not getting my hopes up.


I wasn't really talking about you but I would like to address the point you brought up. Maybe after all the rematches down the line, Rock/Cena storyline finally makes sense, but Cena losing to the Rock yet winning against Lesnar is backwards booking. Rock was leaving for a long time while Lesnar is going to be the top monster heel for at least the next year. I just don't see why you would tear down Cena at Wrestlemania, but then give him the win against an incoming Brock Lesnar. I would've even preferred if Cena just lost both those matches and went away for a while. 

So Brock Lesnar lost to the guy who lost to the part-time wrestler/movie star? I know people don't always make that direct association but when it happens between two consecutive PPVs, it becomes a lot more apparent. 

I also think part of the reason why Cena won is because Vince wanted to give his fanbase a payoff after losing to Punk twice, put in an irrelevant feud with Kane and jobbing to the Rock which is why I made the argument for Cena winning at WM back then because WWE would have to spend their own resources to give him his momentum back.


----------



## ecabney

lol @ Rock316AE stanning Orton. It took dude 5 forced world title reigns to get over, and the guy has been pushed for 10 years and still can't draw.


----------



## The Skarupa

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

I know Smackdown is kind of the place for all the new guys to get going, but I think Raw needs some of that.
Send one of the newer guys like Ryback, Cesaro, Damien, one of the new tag guys over to Raw. 

Smackdown won't lose anything, they barely get any time, and I know Clay is on Raw, I get it, but it still doesn't do too much for me.


----------



## Geralt of Rivia

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

imitate the attitude era/ruthless aggression era. that's it.


----------



## -Extra-

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

less stars of yesterday more focus on younger guys and making them stars of tomorrow


----------



## The 3D BluePrint.

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

Everything they're not doing right now?


----------



## Example

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

More Brock Lesnar!


----------



## Patrick Bateman

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

Make the wwe champion the central focus of the show


----------



## alliance

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

We need The Rock back...


----------



## Mr Premium

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

Less CM Punk, more real tough guys needed.


----------



## Deebow

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

Stop making John Laurinaitis the focus of the show.


----------



## BULLY

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

Less big and slow wrestlers e.g. big slow khali , less John Cena,less squash matches, less stupid childish gimmicks (e.g. funkosaurus) more younger talented wrestlers and more actual wrestling! 
Someone noted this episode only had 28 minutes of actual wrestling in it. And the wrestling that was shown wasn't of a particularly high quality.


----------



## Mr Premium

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*



jasonrjay said:


> Less big and slow wrestlers e.g. big slow khali , less John Cena,less squash matches, less stupid childish gimmicks (e.g. funkosaurus) more younger talented wrestlers and more actual wrestling!
> Someone noted this episode only had 28 minutes of actual wrestling in it. And the wrestling that was shown wasn't of a particularly high quality.


For the majority of fans, that means more snoozefest.


----------



## just1988

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

Whether or not Raw is entertaining or not is all relative to each viewer. Personally I enjoyed certain segments of Raw. That's how it's supposed to be, since they turned the WWE into a variety show. There's something for everybody so alternatively not everything is for everybody. Enjoy the stuff that you like and don't complain about the stuff you don't enjoy because somebody else does and they're just entitled to enjoy what they like as you are to enjoy your own.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

CM Punk doing an hour comedy segment. Telling jokes, one liners. Book DAT SHIT.


----------



## robass83

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

John Cena heel turn.
Randy Orton heel turn.
Triple H heel turn.

The heel trio fucking up the whole of WWE.
Sheamus CM Punk Wade Barrett The Miz Cody Rhodes man up to fight them off. 
Makes new mega stars in a little time


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Laughing at Rock316AE having such a hard time dealing with the fact that Punk is bigger than Orton.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

Not bringing back anymore old "legends"


----------



## SpeedStick

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

Storylines for the midcard


----------



## themottoyolo

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*



-Extra- said:


> less stars of yesterday more focus on younger guys and making them stars of tomorrow


yeah no brock and cena and rock and triple h and jericho

just a bunch of midcard talent in the main event from now on


----------



## CMWit

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

less complaining


----------



## the fox

Punk only became a draw (merchandise wise) when he started to act like a little edgy version of john cena also he does appeal to kids with his hero character and standing to the heels and the evil boss
orton will never become a huge draw with his current character which really doesn't appeal to kids and women enoughwho are the biggest fan base of today product


----------



## Mr Premium

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*



themottoyolo said:


> yeah no brock and cena and rock and triple h and jericho
> 
> just a bunch of midcard talent in the main event from now on


Yea, this. 

Let's just scrap Raw and extend NXT to 2 hours with guys like Ziggler, Swagger, Kingston, Cody Rhodes, John Morrison and Zack Ryder taking turns main eventing every week. 

Let's see how long WWE will last. I'll give them 2 months.


----------



## Rock316AE

Fact? fact is that Punk is the most irrelevant WWE champion in wrestling history and made the title so meaningless that WWE were so desperate they went to Johnny Ace to save them the business. Punk will never be bigger than Orton in any way, that's a fact. Hell, Orton drew more money in 2009(when he was the undisputed top draw in the industry)than Punk will make in 10 careers, and put on more great matches in one month than Punk did in his entire, 7 years forgettable run. That's real comedy. 

Bryan Alvarez pointed out on a funny thing during Punk's horrendous promo on RAW, "I'm going to beat Bryan and save the title and then watch Cena kick your ass" which means that he already knows how much of a failure he is and the fact that Ace is main eventing a PPV over him :lmao


----------



## Vyed

the fox said:


> Punk only became a draw (merchandise wise) when he started to act like a little edgy version of john cena also he does appeal to kids with his hero character and standing to the heels and the evil boss
> *orton* will never become a huge draw with his current character which really doesn't appeal to kids and *women *enoughwho are the biggest fan base of today product


Are you sure about that?


----------



## The-Rock-Says

I can't believe (Well I can) they sent there WWE Champion out to say that.


----------



## the fox

Vyed said:


> Are you sure about that?


they scream and cheer when he comes out? sure but re they buying his merchandise ? no they buy cena-punk-rock-miz t-shirts


----------



## kokepepsi

When orton comes out you hear that high pitched girly/lil kid pop
so I would say he is over with them


----------



## Carcass

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

Put Heyman on commentary or in charge of creative. Not saying he would make WWE great again, but he would do a hell of a better job than the current creative staff and commentator.


----------



## Mr Premium

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Laughing at Rock316AE having such a hard time dealing with the fact that Punk is bigger than Orton.


Come back at me when Punk's reign averages 3.5 and above like Orton has done several times before.

Dude's basically the most uncredible WWE champion of all time. More unbelievable than The Miz, Vince's 6 day reign in 1999 and Backlund's 2 day reign back in the mid-90's. Hell, if they had given Perez Hilton a title shot during his guest hosting appearance and won, even he would have been a more believable WWE champion than Punk is.


----------



## kokepepsi

Rock's return for this years mania didn't average 3.5

OH SHIT ORTON>ROCK


----------



## Brye

Mr Premium said:


> Come back at me when Punk's reign averages 3.5 and above like Orton has done several times before.
> 
> Dude's basically the most uncredible WWE champion of all time. More unbelievable than The Miz, Vince's 6 day reign in 1999 and Backlund's 2 day reign back in the mid-90's. Hell, if they had given Perez Hilton a title shot during his guest hosting appearance and won, even he would have been a more believable WWE champion than Punk is.


Ratings don't make you a credible champion so I don't see where you're going with that.

And considering that Punk's beat Miz about 40 times, I'd consider him more credible. Not to mention Punk's beat Cena. The Vince/Backlund/Hilton remarks were clearly sarcastic though.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Yes because when Rock was WWE champion none of his segments did over 3.5.


----------



## Brye

To be fair it's a different time period.


----------



## kokepepsi

The show is 2fucking hours long
Punk only comes out maybe 2 times in the entire show.
But the overall rating is his fault?

How the fuck is that for some logic.


----------



## Mr Premium

kokepepsi said:


> Rock's return for this years mania didn't average 3.5
> 
> OH SHIT ORTON>ROCK


:lol Gotta love Fridge Logic.

Read the 1st sentence of my other post 10 times over and tell me the lowest average rating Rock ever had as WWE champion.


----------



## kokepepsi

idiots
So you say punks reign doesn't average 3.5 ratings but Orton did.

Yet Rock comes back is the biggest thing in wrestling and can't do a fucking 3.3

Why do you want to compare 2012 to 1999 when it is not the same thing. 

One segment no matter how good it does can't overcome 7 fucking segments with kofi,swagger,sheamus,ziggler,ryder,divas,backstage skits and stupid angles.

Don't blame punk moron.

just like rock not delivering good ratings for the road to wrestlemania was not his fault


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Who said it was?

But he is hardly a rating draw and he isn't even main eventing the next PPV AGAIN!

The title couldn't get any lower. It hasn't been the main focus since TLC. 6 months ago.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

When John Cena Vs Johnny Ace is main eventing the next PPV you know things are fucked up.


----------



## Vyed

Whats the point comparing Rock to CM punk? 


Even if you can prove Rock is not a bigass draw right now, It still wouldnt change the fact that Punk's title reign has some of the lowest ratings ever since 1996.


----------



## Makdafi

With Punk from all indicators he didn't move the needle as a main eventer. The whole "Summer Of Punk", which did get a lot of internet attention, and some mainstream attention. Didn't move the ratings(in fact I believe the ratings went slightly down during that time period, a tenth of a point or so). And as far as buyrates, he did increase the MITB ppv slightly, but you could easily say that is offset by the decline in the SummerSlam ppv that he headlined from the year before buyrate.

With The Rock WWE definitely did devalue him intentionally, and did decrease his drawing power because of that fact. With Punk even if WWE hadn't "sabotaged" or "sandbagged" his main event run, he still wouldn't have delivered at the box office.


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner

Rock316AE said:


> Fact? fact is that Punk is the most irrelevant WWE champion in wrestling history and made the title so meaningless that WWE were so desperate they went to Johnny Ace to save them the business. Punk will never be bigger than Orton in any way, that's a fact. Hell, Orton drew more money in 2009(when he was the undisputed top draw in the industry)than Punk will make in 10 careers, and put on more great matches in one month than Punk did in his entire, 7 years forgettable run. That's real comedy.
> 
> Bryan Alvarez pointed out on a funny thing during Punk's horrendous promo on RAW, "I'm going to beat Bryan and save the title and then watch Cena kick your ass" which means that he already knows how much of a failure he is and the fact that Ace is main eventing a PPV over him :lmao


u fail at life u madunk2unk2unk2unk2unk2unk2unk2unk2unk2unk2unk2unk2unk2unk2unk2


----------



## Punked Up

uknoww said:


> yes orton is a legend punk is not even in top 1000


Name 999 wrestlers bigger than Punk.


----------



## HeathSlater#1fan

Punked Up said:


> Name 999 wrestlers bigger than Punk.


Heath Slater, Mason Ryan, Armbar, Dolph Ziggler, Heath Slater, Ezekiel Jackson, Trent Barretta, Armbar, Cody Rhodes, Armbar, Heath Slater....


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Man, how did I know this was all going to be on Punk. How about Lord Tensai? I mean I'm the last person to engage in this storm of aspergers and cheeto-dust that is the ratings thread, but I think we can all agree that nobody gives a fuck about Lord Tensai.


----------



## the fox

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL



> Wrestling Observer Newsletter
> 
> - As noted before, the May 7th WWE RAW Supershow from Greensboro, North Carolina scored a 3.01 cable rating with 4.30 million viewers. The first quarter-rating was a 3.50 but things fell apart from there.
> In the segment breakdown, Big Show vs. Cody Rhodes lost 378,000 viewers and Kofi Kingston vs. Dolph Ziggler lost 465,000 more viewers. Kelly Kelly and Layla vs. Maxine and Natalya lost another 207,000 viewers. Sheamus and Randy Orton vs. Chris Jericho and Alberto Del Rio at the top of the hour gained 191,000 viewers, which is weak for that timeslot - doing a 2.89 quarter-rating.
> 
> The Miz vs. Brodus Clay gained 55,000 viewers in what is usually a losing segment. Paul Heyman's return gained 123,000 viewers. CM Punk vs. Daniel Bryan and Lord Tensai in the overrun actually lost viewers - 105,000 for a 2.94 rating. It's almost impossible to lose viewers in the overrun because you've got people tuning into the USA Network for their next show.


FIRST OVERRUN TO LOSE VIEWERS IN HISTORY


----------



## kokepepsi

the fox said:


> FIRST OVERRUN TO LOSE VIEWERS IN HISTORY



2008
6/9


> 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.


6/16


> The absolute shocker was the HHH vs. Jericho main event lost 205,000 viewers to a 3.13 overrun. The main event almost never goes down, let alone a match that hasn’t been done in years like that and I can’t give an explanation as to why.


:hhh


----------



## the fox

where are punk and bryan marks?
why mr kokepepsi ?
i guess he is too embarrassed to post this week Raw Breakdown


----------



## the fox

loooooooooool
i figured out you will try to find something to cover your embarrassment


----------



## ecabney

kokepepsi said:


> 2008
> 6/9
> 
> 
> 6/16
> 
> 
> :hhh


WTF at a HHH, Jeff Hardy, Cena segment losing over 200k viewers.


----------



## Carcass

That's what happens when you put Punk and Tensai in the ME, and don't advertise DB being in it.



ecabney said:


> WTF at a HHH, Jeff Hardy, Cena segment losing over 200k viewers.


And that was 4 years ago when they didn't have the worst roster in WWE history.


----------



## blazegod99

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

CM Punk actually getting his edge back ans cutting good promos frequently
The Rock returning again for his next feud
Brock Lesnar being on TV more often 
Stone Cold Steve Austin returning for one last run
Cheis Jericho vs Randy Orton feud with Randy given more mic freedom and character freedom.


----------



## Brye

the fox said:


> *where are punk and bryan marks?*
> why mr kokepepsi ?
> i guess he is too embarrassed to post this week Raw Breakdown


Probably the same place they've always been, being fans of the product and not giving a fuck what the ratings do.

It wasn't a very good match, don't care if it gained six million, I didn't enjoy it.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Brye said:


> Probably the same place they've always been, being fans of the product and not giving a fuck what the ratings do.
> 
> It wasn't a very good match, don't care if it gained six million, I didn't enjoy it.


This man is wise.


----------



## the fox

Brye said:


> Probably the same place they've always been, being fans of the product and not giving a fuck what the ratings do.
> 
> It wasn't a very good match, don't care if it gained six million, I didn't enjoy it.


hypocrisy?
i can swear i saw several of thoses marks post nonstop about the rock not being a big draw anymore because he was only gainning 500-700k in his segemnts in the overrun
now they don't care about ratings???


----------



## vanboxmeer

There is a reason why Steve Austin has been playing down his potential return against CM Punk and is far more interested in facing Brock Lesnar at Mania than any other person on the roster. Obviously, the reason is the money for his return match, which undoubtedly Brock would be significantly bigger on the return than CM Punk. Austin also has an ego where he wants his match to be a big-time draw in the history books of pro wrestling, just so he can say it.


----------



## SpeedStick

Nothing to watch on WWE TV til Money in the Bank, Hell Nothing to watch on TNA TV til King of the Mountain..


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

the fox said:


> hypocrisy?
> i can swear i saw several of thoses marks post nonstop about the rock not being a big draw anymore because he was only gainning 500-700k in his segemnts in the overrun
> now they don't care about ratings???


I'm pretty sure those posters were trolling to piss off the rocky marks, most of whom are also ratings/buyrate marks.


----------



## Isaac Newton

Even in the overrun, Punk can't draw....... :lol

:lmao at 2.9 at the overrun.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

vanboxmeer said:


> There is a reason why Steve Austin has been playing down his potential return against CM Punk and is far more interested in facing Brock Lesnar at Mania than any other person on the roster. Obviously, the reason is the money for his return match, which undoubtedly Brock would be significantly bigger on the return than CM Punk. Austin also has an ego where he wants his match to be a big-time draw in the history books of pro wrestling, just so he can say it.


Cena is the only draw WWE has.
Rock vs Cena was bound to draw
I am not saying Rock can't draw but Rock vs anyone else couldn't have been this big

Austin doesn't deserve Punk
Cena defeats Rock in a re-match at WM 29
Austin vs Cena at WM30


----------



## Brye

the fox said:


> hypocrisy?
> i can swear i saw several of thoses marks post nonstop about the rock not being a big draw anymore because he was only gainning 500-700k in his segemnts in the overrun
> now they don't care about ratings???


First of all, don't go throwing around that word without knowing what it means first. You go and try to find a post of mine saying something about Rock's drawing ability and then we'll talk.

I'm sure there were a few people that were being legitimate about that, but as JoseDRiveraTCR7 said, I'm sure most of those people were trolling on the oversensitivity of some of the Rock/DRAWZ fans.

(fuck the term marks)


----------



## Coffey

When was the last time RAW got under a 3?


----------



## Hazaq

kokepepsi said:


> 6/16


That particular RAW was really weird... 



> In the segment-by-segment on the 6/16 Raw.
> 
> Cena vs. Umaga gained 174,000 viewers which is a lot less than you’d expect from those two at that point in the show. The bikini contest gained 63,000 viewers which is also less than you’d expect from that time slot. Vince making phone calls with Duggan lost 16,000 viewers. Jeff Hardy vs. Carlito and Highlight Reel with Jericho gained 95,000 viewers, low for the 10 p.m. period but still the high point of the show at 3.44. Even though viewers traditionally tune out at 10:15 p.m., one would have thought Flair in the ring and going to a commercial break would have held. But the Flair stuff in the ring and backstage with Jericho, plus Holly & Rhodes vs. Cryme Tyme for 13 seconds lost 174,000 viewers. Burchill & Lea vs. James & Kennedy lost 111,000 viewers. The absolute shocker was the HHH vs. Jericho main event lost 205,000 viewers to a 3.13 overrun. The main event almost never goes down, let alone a match that hasn’t been done in years like that and I can’t give an explanation as to why.


----------



## Elstro1988

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

Less reliance on old faces. We've had HHH, Nash, Rock, Jericho and now Lesnar in the top level feuds since July last year (with a side order of HBK). At least involve the up-and-comers/mid-carders more. 

With the exception of Heyman....h'd probably breathe new life in, certainly more so than comatose Lawler.

The WWE Champion should be the main event. Not Cena vs (insert name here).

Less "Moments Ago" replays for the love of God. I was watching it when it happened....I don't need to see Josh Mathews get pulverise by Lesnar for the umpteenth time...or Cena attempt to stare down a camera....or Nash belt HHH with a hammer (that segment was replayed so often week in, week out, I could probably still recite it off by heart.)

And at risk of sounding butthurt...either more time than 30 fucking seconds for the Divas...or don't bother at all. 


The good thing about Raw at the moment is at least Cena's out of the WWE title hunt (for now), and there are title defences happening on Raw too which keeps it interesting.


----------



## Oh Lymping Hero!

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

A complete overhaul of the format, appearance, presenters etc.

Get rid of 'Nice guy' Jerry Lawler, he offers nothing. Hire Roddy Piper, Jesse V, Paul E or Kevin Nash to be color commentator.

Fire Cole and replace him with some new pbp guy.

Change the RAW logo, the set, the look of the ring etc. Lame white ropes are lame.

Give guys more variety in terms of how they are dressed. Too many guys just come out with their merch shirt on and short tights, it looks ridiculous.

Give the more competent guys freedom to say what they want. (CM Punk especially)

Get rid of Johnny Ace, the guy is so mediocre it's painful. This is meant to be the authority figure on par with Vince?

Book more matches between lower/mid card guys and main eventers so the lower guys get a chance to learn more and develop.


----------



## Bob the Jobber

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

Faces with edge. No one can relate to a perfect squeaky clean angel. 

Also, better booking.


----------



## Vyed

the fox said:


> LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
> 
> 
> 
> FIRST OVERRUN TO LOSE VIEWERS IN HISTORY


Atleast it was 2.94 somewhat decent. 

RAW after TLC, the one headlined by Punk/Bryan/Ryder tag match + overrun did a 2.67 rating (Lowest since 1997).


----------



## Jumpluff

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

Every match/feud need story lines, and good ones not bullshit half assed crap with Promo A, Promo B. They are starting to head in the right direction but it needs more. I don't care about PG/Not PG but stories need to be captivating and crazy, superstars need to be larger then life, if you don't cut it you're out no second chances no bullshit. 

Heels need to be more ruthless. More backstage shit. Main focus always on the WWE Champ, I don't give a fuck if it's Cena vs Rock or Austin vs Punk or w/e, The title match should always go on last at every PPV ESPECIALLY Wrestlemania. Build up the midcard, build up the tag division, build up the diva's division. 

Even the lower card, when people like Hunico/Dibiase are "feuding" If you can even call it that, there should be a story, e.g. Dibiase buys a brand new bike, Hunico steals it and him and Camacho ride out with their bike and Ted's. Ted gets revenge next episode by smashing up Hunico's bike, Next episode Hunico/Camacho gang up on Ted backstage, then someone IDK Curt Hawkins chases them off, then you have a tag match/feud and it's away from the titles, after that you can put them all in a fatal four way tag match with the two teams feuding over the tag titles, be it ladder/regular whatever thus building the lower card/mid card/tag division etc. Not the most creative thing I could have come up with but you see what I'm saying, It's not that hard to attempt to make stories for everyone and I'm just a moron in his underwear at a keyboard that thought of something on the fly and typed, they have sought after and paid writers that can't do their fucking job.

To be honest I have been enjoying the product more lately and have been for a good while but these are things I would get on top of if I was in charge. Everything should be fun not just 1 or 2 segments.


----------



## FlyLikeCat

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*



SpeedStick said:


> Storylines for the midcard


YES! YES! YES!


----------



## Isaac Newton

Vyed said:


> Atleast it was 2.94 somewhat decent.
> 
> RAW after TLC, the one headlined by Punk/Bryan/Ryder tag match + overrun did a 2.67 rating (Lowest since 1997).


Punk's the only one who can pull off diabolical numbers like that.

How can you even call that decent? Even Miz stayed afloat 3.0 in his closing segments when he was the champ.


----------



## charmed1

If Lord Tensai was in the main event you have your answer on viewer loss.


----------



## DesolationRow

*Re: What would make raw more entertaining ?*

Vince McMahon hiring someone like Chris Kreski again. Someone with actual vision, patience, intelligence and originality, to overhead creative. And Vince McMahon not being such a fucking mental case who micromanages everything and makes so much of the product so much more sterile and lackluster than it should be.

That would necessarily include

Actual storylines for the midcard
Actual semblance of a midcard
Progression of character arcs from one week to the next, one month to the next, etceteras
Consequences
Patient pushes, not the bumrushed crap we've endured... 
Intricate plotting of storylines... treat us like we have brains
Putting a dramatically higher emphasis on the quality of the product over backstage politics
Treating everyone like they matter, obviously to varying degrees, but nevertheless

Etceteras, etceteras.


----------



## Cookie Monster

Lol at people in this thread really caring about ratings.


----------



## Rock316AE

the fox said:


> LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
> 
> 
> 
> Wrestling Observer Newsletter
> 
> - As noted before, the May 7th WWE RAW Supershow from Greensboro, North Carolina scored a 3.01 cable rating with 4.30 million viewers. The first quarter-rating was a 3.50 but things fell apart from there.
> In the segment breakdown, Big Show vs. Cody Rhodes lost 378,000 viewers and Kofi Kingston vs. Dolph Ziggler lost 465,000 more viewers. Kelly Kelly and Layla vs. Maxine and Natalya lost another 207,000 viewers. Sheamus and Randy Orton vs. Chris Jericho and Alberto Del Rio at the top of the hour gained 191,000 viewers, which is weak for that timeslot - doing a 2.89 quarter-rating.
> 
> The Miz vs. Brodus Clay gained 55,000 viewers in what is usually a losing segment. Paul Heyman's return gained 123,000 viewers. *CM Punk vs. Daniel Bryan* and Lord Tensai *in the overrun actually lost viewers - 105,000 for a 2.94 rating*. It's almost impossible to lose viewers in the overrun because you've got people tuning into the USA Network for their next show.
Click to expand...

:lmao 

Punk continues to break records as the most irrelevant WWE champion of all time. Another almost 14 years low. Punk is horrendous on his own but you when add another indy guy from his type, the audience just can't handle it, been proven. They got only 7 minutes overrun so there's no way it's the viewers of the next show which means that the RAW/wrestling fanbase didn't want to see this and who can blame them? catastrophic. 

Great to see the awesome Heyman promo gained on this slot. 

Next week they're probably bringing HHH to try to save the show, hopefully Paul E will be there and Cena is probably back. I can't believe I'm saying it, but just put the belt on Cena, what Punk did to the prestige of the title in his run is almost irreversible at this point.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Rock316AE said:


> :lmao
> 
> Punk continues to break records as the most irrelevant WWE champion of all time. Another almost 14 years low. Punk is horrendous on his own but you when add another indy guy from his type, the audience just can't handle it, been proven. They got only 7 minutes overrun so there's no way it's the viewers of the next show which means that the RAW/wrestling fanbase didn't want to see this and who can blame them? catastrophic.
> 
> Great to see the awesome Heyman promo gained on this slot.
> 
> Next week they're probably bringing HHH to try to save the show, hopefully Paul E will be there and Cena is probably back. I can't believe I'm saying it, but just put the belt on Cena, what Punk did to the prestige of the title in his run is almost irreversible at this point.


Love how you bold CM Punk and Daniel Bryan and not Lord Tensai connoting that the blame should be enitrely on the two guys that are very over with the audience and the guy that has been getting consistently good numbers for the past few weeks and not Lord Tensia, a guy who has been pushed to the moon beating two of the top faces in the company and not being over a lick.

How anyone can take you seriously is beyond me as you are clearly the most biased and delusional poster on the forum.


----------



## Vyed

How can you blame Tensai when he is not even over? Punk is the WWE champion right?


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Vyed said:


> How can you blame Tensai when he is not even over? Punk is the WWE champion right?


How can you blame someone whos not over for people changing the channel when he's on? maybe because he's not over, which means people dont care about him, which means that people wont tune in to see him wrestle.

Stupid question is stupid.


----------



## robertdeniro

I don't like Punk but i don't think he is the one to blame for the low Ratings .. the product overall suck and WWE is the only thing to blame here.


----------



## dave 1981

robertdeniro said:


> I don't like Punk but i don't think he is the one to blame for the low Ratings .. the product overall suck and WWE is the only thing to blame here.


Whilst i tend to agree to a point in what your saying i can remember back a couple of years ago that John Cena was getting a lot of hate because ratings were slightly down on what they had been and was apparently the sole reason for this because he was the WWE champion and in the main event at the time. On that basis then the same has to be applied to CM Punk who whilst being The IWC darling is also WWE champion, working the main event on Raw and with no John Cena on screen CM Punk was the main focus of the show.

As everyone knows i'm a mark for CM Punk and have been since his ECW days whilst also having been a big fan since his heel ROH days but the fact it that when he is working the main event or is the main focus of Raw they lose ratings. Now i'm not someone who really cares about ratings as they don't affect my personal viewing pleasure but WWE management seem to care and the reality is that despite CM Punk arguably being the best all round in ring performer in WWE and one of the most popular doesn't draw ratings and that is why he won't ever be fully pushed ahead of John Cena.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

hell i couldnt sit through the whole show and went to sleep after the first hour
you can hardly blame punk for that
and even trips lost viewers in the main event so my gosh -.-


----------



## robertdeniro

dave 1981 said:


> Whilst i tend to agree to a point in what your saying i can remember back a couple of years ago that John Cena was getting a lot of hate because ratings were slightly down on what they had been and was apparently the sole reason for this because he was the WWE champion and in the main event at the time. On that basis then the same has to be applied to CM Punk who whilst being The IWC darling is also WWE champion, working the main event on Raw and with no John Cena on screen CM Punk was the main focus of the show.
> 
> As everyone knows i'm a mark for CM Punk and have been since his ECW days whilst also having been a big fan since his heel ROH days but the fact it that when he is working the main event or is the main focus of Raw they lose ratings. Now i'm not someone who really cares about ratings as they don't affect my personal viewing pleasure but WWE management seem to care and the reality is that despite CM Punk arguably being the best all round in ring performer in WWE and one of the most popular doesn't draw ratings and that is why he won't ever be fully pushed ahead of John Cena.


Maybe you are right .. but when you look at the road to Wrestlemania and you have Rock/Cena (the main angle on Raw) and they still couldn't save RAW from the low Ratings then that means there is a problem in the overall product.


----------



## Hladeit

I dont understand why we fight over Ratings so much every week? 

So Punk lost viewers in his segments, so did John Cena & HHH, and The Rock failed to deliver big ratings during RTWM 2012... SO FUCKING WHAT? 

what does this change exactly? The Rock is still the biggest star in wrestling, Cena is still the top guy of this generation, Triple H is still the heir to the throne and CM Punk is still the best option to push. 

Seriously WWE is in dire need of stars right now, they are not going to de-push him just because of a few low rated segments. He might lose the championship but would still remain in the main event scene for the foreseeable future. 

Vince Mcmahon didnt have his two absolute Top stars, Cena and HHH, look weak against Punk at PPVs for nothing. Cena lost twice and HHH was only able to beat punk after 3 run-ins from Miz,truth,Nash and two pedigrees, not to mention all the shoots on Stephanie, HHH's wife and Vince's daughter. Its pretty obvious they have decided to push the guy & keep him in the main event scene as a top star. 

All this bitching is pointless, waste of time. Stop doing it.


----------



## robertdeniro

If i can remember the only segment in the road to Wrestlemania that gained over a million viewers was Taker/HHH segment after EC PPV.


----------



## JasonLives

kokepepsi put up a good example back a few pages.

HHH Vs. Jeff Hardy with Cena at ringside in 2008 did a 2.99 overrun rating. CM Punk Vs. Tensai/Daniel Bryan did a 2.94 rating.

So using logic. Punk, Tensai and Bryan is as big of a stars as Triple H, Jeff Hardy and John Cena were in 2008. Its simple logic people :cool2

Imagine if the midcard actually had something interesting in it and could actually hold on to more of the viewers form the 3.5 rating the show did in the first quarter. The viewers are aware of the show but they just have trouble holding on to them threwout the show.


----------



## DesolationRow

Hladeit said:


> I dont understand why we fight over Ratings so much every week?
> 
> So Punk lost viewers in his segments, so did John Cena & HHH, and The Rock failed to deliver big ratings during RTWM 2012... SO FUCKING WHAT?
> 
> what does this change exactly? The Rock is still the biggest star in wrestling, Cena is still the top guy of this generation, Triple H is still the heir to the throne and CM Punk is still the best option to push.
> 
> Seriously WWE is in dire need of stars right now, they are not going to de-push him just because of a few low rated segments. He might lose the championship but would still remain in the main event scene for the foreseeable future.
> 
> Vince Mcmahon didnt have his two absolute Top stars, Cena and HHH, look weak against Punk at PPVs for nothing. Cena lost twice and HHH was only able to beat punk after 3 run-ins from Miz,truth,Nash and two pedigrees, not to mention all the shoots on Stephanie, HHH's wife and Vince's daughter. Its pretty obvious they have decided to push the guy & keep him in the main event scene as a top star.
> 
> All this bitching is pointless, waste of time. Stop doing it.


lol, this is all fundamentally true.

And I agree with *Starbuck*, the story of Undertaker returning to stand as the WWE's final defender is a much more logically compelling one than The Rock doing it. It's funny because from what I remember, neither guy ever won a match against Lesnar... I do have to wonder about that Heyman remark concerning Triple H surviving a HIAC match with Taker but not lasting a few seconds with Brock. Hmm...


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Listen Punk is suppose to be this big star everyone says he is. He was advertise to be in the main event. So it shouldn't matter who he's facing. He's the big star, people should want to see him. If Steve Austin was facing Mable in the main event of RAW way back, the rating would be up because of Steve Austin being in the main event. People would of tuned in to see Steve Austin.

Simple fact is, Punk was advertise for the main event and lost viewers. He's suppose to be the star, so him being a star should bring viewers in or at least not lose viewers.

No big deal to admit.


----------



## Green Light

If it was Brock Lesnar (or Orton, or pretty much anyone who isn't CM Punk) losing viewers in the overrun there would a cascade of Punk marks (not saying any names but you know who I mean) making fun of him and saying he should be fired etc etc.

Bryan's segments always seem to badly on Raw for some reason (although he did well on SD so not sure why it doesn't translate) and of course fat Albert is not over whatsoever so it doesn't surprise me that much tbh


----------



## DesolationRow

The-Rock-Says said:


> Listen Punk is suppose to be this big star everyone says he is. He was advertise to be in the main event. So it shouldn't matter who he's facing. He's the big star, people should want to see him. If Steve Austin was facing Mable in the main event of RAW way back, the rating would be up because of Steve Austin being in the main event. People would of tuned in to see Steve Austin.
> 
> Simple fact is, Punk was advertise for the main event and lost viewers. He's suppose to be the star, so him being a star should bring viewers in or at least not lose viewers.
> 
> No big deal to admit.


Exactly.

The Rock is supposed to be this big star everyone says he is. He was advertised nonstop for a week in the last days of February which is when The Road to Wrestlemania traditionally heats up to be returning after several months of being absent from the product, and was advertised relentlessly throughout the show as returning in the main event/overrun segment. So it shouldn't matter what he's doing or saying. He's the big star, people should want to see him. If Hulk Hogan was facing The War Lord in the main event of Saturday Night's Main Event, the rating would be up because of Hulk Hogan being in the main event. People would have tuned in to see Hulk Hogan.

The simple fact is, The Rock was advertised for the main event segment to cut a huge promo after being gone for several months and he lost viewers. 349,000 of them, to be more or less exact. He's supposed to be the star, so him being a star should bring in viewers or at least not lose viewers.

No big deal to admit it. 



No, seriously, it's a bit more complicated than that in all honesty: "And as noted before, the Rock’s promo pre-Cena gained 643,000 viewers to a to a 3.53, which is nothing remarkable for the overrun. And the Cena promo and him leaving and Rock finishing up lost 349,000 viewers and the show finished at a 3.30, which has to be considered a surprise."

So, during what is arguably the opening act of the final month leading into Wrestlemania with The Rock returning after a long week of endless hype and advertising which continued on for two straight hours throughout all of Raw, and was set up by John Cena's provocative promo the week before, Rock pre-Cena "gained 643,000 viewers to do a 3.53, which is nothing remarkable for the overrun." And then with Cena's promo and Rock finishing up, they lost "349,000 viewers and the show finished at a 3.30, which has to be considered a surprise."

Remember, this is the last Raw in February right in the middle of The Road to Wrestlemania with the two biggest stars WWE had at the time to use.

Meanwhile, in the month of May with Brock Lesnar suspended, Triple H injured and John Cena said to not be there, there's an episode of Raw leading into the most fillerific PPV of the year, Over the Limit, and the main event is scheduled to be between Lord Tensai, who clearly no one really cares about yet and WWE Champion CM Punk, who hasn't sniffed a main event segment since February. A tag team match involving nine-time world champion Randy Orton, Chris Jericho, Sheamus and Alberto Del Rio scores a 2.89 rating for its quarter hour, while Tensai/Punk scores a 2.94. That tag team match was really a loser in terms of viewership, as it didn't even cover the losses they sustained from the divas match in the quarter hour before (divas match lost 207,000 viewers, "star-studded tag team match" gained 191,000).

Good to see Miz and Brodus get that 55,000 gain, in any event. But really, the show didn't do very well at all, in general, aside from the opening segment with 4.30 million viewers and a 3.50 rating. 

Looks like WWE needs to put the Fisher Price Championship on John Laurinaitis. Maybe he can headline Summerslam against The Rock. (Y)


----------



## Isaac Newton

The WWE championship has been devalued so much, you don't even feel like there's a champion anymore.

Even Perez Hilton would have a better champion, seriously. You all saw how big that dude was when he guest hosted. If you put him side by side with Punk, you'd think Punk's the ****.


----------



## ecabney

DesolationRow said:


> Exactly.
> 
> The Rock is supposed to be this big star everyone says he is. He was advertised nonstop for a week in the last days of February which is when The Road to Wrestlemania traditionally heats up to be returning after several months of being absent from the product, and was advertised relentlessly throughout the show as returning in the main event/overrun segment. So it shouldn't matter what he's doing or saying. He's the big star, people should want to see him. If Hulk Hogan was facing The War Lord in the main event of Saturday Night's Main Event, the rating would be up because of Hulk Hogan being in the main event. People would have tuned in to see Hulk Hogan.
> 
> *The simple fact is, The Rock was advertised for the main event segment to cut a huge promo after being gone for several months and he lost viewers. 349,000 of them, to be more or less exact. He's supposed to be the star, so him being a star should bring in viewers or at least not lose viewers.
> 
> No big deal to admit it. *
> 
> 
> 
> No, seriously, it's a bit more complicated than that in all honesty: "And as noted before, the Rock’s promo pre-Cena gained 643,000 viewers to a to a 3.53, which is nothing remarkable for the overrun. And the Cena promo and him leaving and Rock finishing up lost 349,000 viewers and the show finished at a 3.30, which has to be considered a surprise."
> 
> So, during what is arguably the opening act of the final month leading into Wrestlemania with The Rock returning after a long week of endless hype and advertising which continued on for two straight hours throughout all of Raw, and was set up by John Cena's provocative promo the week before, Rock pre-Cena "gained 643,000 viewers to do a 3.53, which is nothing remarkable for the overrun." And then with Cena's promo and Rock finishing up, they lost "349,000 viewers and the show finished at a 3.30, which has to be considered a surprise."
> 
> Remember, this is the last Raw in February right in the middle of The Road to Wrestlemania with the two biggest stars WWE had at the time to use.
> 
> Meanwhile, in the month of May with Brock Lesnar suspended, Triple H injured and John Cena said to not be there, there's an episode of Raw leading into the most fillerific PPV of the year, Over the Limit, and the main event is scheduled to be between Lord Tensai, who clearly no one really cares about yet and WWE Champion CM Punk, who hasn't sniffed a main event segment since February. A tag team match involving nine-time world champion Randy Orton, Chris Jericho, Sheamus and Alberto Del Rio scores a 2.89 rating for its quarter hour, while Tensai/Punk scores a 2.94. That tag team match was really a loser in terms of viewership, as it didn't even cover the losses they sustained from the divas match in the quarter hour before (divas match lost 207,000 viewers, "star-studded tag team match" gained 191,000).
> 
> Good to see Miz and Brodus get that 55,000 gain, in any event. But really, the show didn't do very well at all, in general, aside from the opening segment with 4.30 million viewers and a 3.50 rating.
> 
> Looks like WWE needs to put the Fisher Price Championship on John Laurinaitis. Maybe he can headline Summerslam against The Rock. (Y)


ether


----------



## rkomarkorton

jblvdx said:


> Love how you bold CM Punk and Daniel Bryan and not Lord Tensai connoting that the blame should be enitrely on the two guys that are very over with the audience and the guy that has been getting consistently good numbers for the past few weeks and not Lord Tensia, a guy who has been pushed to the moon beating two of the top faces in the company and not being over a lick.
> 
> How anyone can take you seriously is beyond me as you are clearly the most biased and delusional poster on the forum.


yeah yeah yeah excuses excuses,if it was orton or cena there'd be nonstop bashing.......quit making up excuses,the guy isnt a draw and will never be


----------



## rkomarkorton

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Laughing at Rock316AE having such a hard time dealing with the fact that Punk is bigger than Orton.


punk bigger than orton? lol atleast orton hasnt broken countless records when it comes to poor ratings (punk sets a record everytime hes involved in the main event haha)


----------



## A-C-P

DesolationRow said:


> Exactly.
> 
> The Rock is supposed to be this big star everyone says he is. He was advertised nonstop for a week in the last days of February which is when The Road to Wrestlemania traditionally heats up to be returning after several months of being absent from the product, and was advertised relentlessly throughout the show as returning in the main event/overrun segment. So it shouldn't matter what he's doing or saying. He's the big star, people should want to see him. If Hulk Hogan was facing The War Lord in the main event of Saturday Night's Main Event, the rating would be up because of Hulk Hogan being in the main event. People would have tuned in to see Hulk Hogan.
> 
> The simple fact is, The Rock was advertised for the main event segment to cut a huge promo after being gone for several months and he lost viewers. 349,000 of them, to be more or less exact. He's supposed to be the star, so him being a star should bring in viewers or at least not lose viewers.
> 
> No big deal to admit it.
> 
> 
> 
> No, seriously, it's a bit more complicated than that in all honesty: "And as noted before, the Rock’s promo pre-Cena gained 643,000 viewers to a to a 3.53, which is nothing remarkable for the overrun. And the Cena promo and him leaving and Rock finishing up lost 349,000 viewers and the show finished at a 3.30, which has to be considered a surprise."
> 
> So, during what is arguably the opening act of the final month leading into Wrestlemania with The Rock returning after a long week of endless hype and advertising which continued on for two straight hours throughout all of Raw, and was set up by John Cena's provocative promo the week before, Rock pre-Cena "gained 643,000 viewers to do a 3.53, which is nothing remarkable for the overrun." And then with Cena's promo and Rock finishing up, they lost "349,000 viewers and the show finished at a 3.30, which has to be considered a surprise."
> 
> Remember, this is the last Raw in February right in the middle of The Road to Wrestlemania with the two biggest stars WWE had at the time to use.
> 
> Meanwhile, in the month of May with Brock Lesnar suspended, Triple H injured and John Cena said to not be there, there's an episode of Raw leading into the most fillerific PPV of the year, Over the Limit, and the main event is scheduled to be between Lord Tensai, who clearly no one really cares about yet and WWE Champion CM Punk, who hasn't sniffed a main event segment since February. A tag team match involving nine-time world champion Randy Orton, Chris Jericho, Sheamus and Alberto Del Rio scores a 2.89 rating for its quarter hour, while Tensai/Punk scores a 2.94. That tag team match was really a loser in terms of viewership, as it didn't even cover the losses they sustained from the divas match in the quarter hour before (divas match lost 207,000 viewers, "star-studded tag team match" gained 191,000).
> 
> Good to see Miz and Brodus get that 55,000 gain, in any event. But really, the show didn't do very well at all, in general, aside from the opening segment with 4.30 million viewers and a 3.50 rating.
> 
> Looks like WWE needs to put the Fisher Price Championship on John Laurinaitis. Maybe he can headline Summerslam against The Rock. (Y)


DesRow strikes again pretty much agreed here.

ALso would like to note that ratings and title prestige are the 2 most over analyzed things on these forums (its entertaining though:lol)

And just one other note on the Obersver's Rating's Breakdown report....Seriously still using that stupid "weak gain" line for the 10PM slot again? And before all the ratings nerds start with their ridiculous explanations of why its a weak gain, i get the theory behind it.

As for the ending segment, hjow can anyone really be surprised about this? The ending segment to a weak filler show (outside of Heyman's return) involving Tensai (who nobody cares about) in what is supposed to be a "punishment" match for Punk with no mention before hand that his PPV opponent would even be involved until the match started at 5 minutes to the top of the hour. Terrible to lose viewers don't get me wrong not trying to defend that I am just saying is it really that shocking?



Isaac Newton said:


> The WWE championship has been devalued so much, you don't even feel like there's a champion anymore.
> 
> Even Perez Hilton would have a better champion, seriously. You all saw how big that dude was when he guest hosted. If you put him side by side with Punk, you'd think Punk's the ****.


:lmao well it didn't take Mr. Premium long to rejoin


----------



## The-Rock-Says

DesolationRow said:


> Exactly.
> 
> The Rock is supposed to be this big star everyone says he is. He was advertised nonstop for a week in the last days of February which is when The Road to Wrestlemania traditionally heats up to be returning after several months of being absent from the product, and was advertised relentlessly throughout the show as returning in the main event/overrun segment. So it shouldn't matter what he's doing or saying. He's the big star, people should want to see him. If Hulk Hogan was facing The War Lord in the main event of Saturday Night's Main Event, the rating would be up because of Hulk Hogan being in the main event. People would have tuned in to see Hulk Hogan.
> 
> The simple fact is, The Rock was advertised for the main event segment to cut a huge promo after being gone for several months and he lost viewers. 349,000 of them, to be more or less exact. He's supposed to be the star, so him being a star should bring in viewers or at least not lose viewers.
> 
> No big deal to admit it.
> 
> 
> 
> No, seriously, it's a bit more complicated than that in all honesty: "And as noted before, the Rock’s promo pre-Cena gained 643,000 viewers to a to a 3.53, which is nothing remarkable for the overrun. And the Cena promo and him leaving and Rock finishing up lost 349,000 viewers and the show finished at a 3.30, which has to be considered a surprise."
> 
> So, during what is arguably the opening act of the final month leading into Wrestlemania with The Rock returning after a long week of endless hype and advertising which continued on for two straight hours throughout all of Raw, and was set up by John Cena's provocative promo the week before, Rock pre-Cena "gained 643,000 viewers to do a 3.53, which is nothing remarkable for the overrun." And then with Cena's promo and Rock finishing up, they lost "349,000 viewers and the show finished at a 3.30, which has to be considered a surprise."
> 
> Remember, this is the last Raw in February right in the middle of The Road to Wrestlemania with the two biggest stars WWE had at the time to use.
> 
> Meanwhile, in the month of May with Brock Lesnar suspended, Triple H injured and John Cena said to not be there, there's an episode of Raw leading into the most fillerific PPV of the year, Over the Limit, and the main event is scheduled to be between Lord Tensai, who clearly no one really cares about yet and WWE Champion CM Punk, who hasn't sniffed a main event segment since February. A tag team match involving nine-time world champion Randy Orton, Chris Jericho, Sheamus and Alberto Del Rio scores a 2.89 rating for its quarter hour, while Tensai/Punk scores a 2.94. That tag team match was really a loser in terms of viewership, as it didn't even cover the losses they sustained from the divas match in the quarter hour before (divas match lost 207,000 viewers, "star-studded tag team match" gained 191,000).
> 
> Good to see Miz and Brodus get that 55,000 gain, in any event. But really, the show didn't do very well at all, in general, aside from the opening segment with 4.30 million viewers and a 3.50 rating.
> 
> Looks like WWE needs to put the Fisher Price Championship on John Laurinaitis. Maybe he can headline Summerslam against The Rock. (Y)


Who's disagreeing with you? I was shocked that Rock's rating weren't gaining huge (in the 1 million mark) But it did translate over to PPV buys. And that promo you were talking about went on so long (20 mins past the overrun) and it became boring. But I never made excuses for Rock. But he and Cena delievered on the PPV.


----------



## Carcass

If I can be serious for a minute, the real reason the ME lost viewers is cause fans were legit pissed that they weren't able to see DB epic entrance so they changed the channel in protest.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Gimmick boring gimmick.


----------



## Vyed

Yeah Carcass's gimmick is gotten boring. Give it up dude. 

Your posts are as bad as Punk's "Humour". Toolbox!


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Hladeit said:


> I dont understand why we fight over Ratings so much every week?
> 
> So Punk lost viewers in his segments, so did John Cena & HHH, and The Rock failed to deliver big ratings during RTWM 2012... SO FUCKING WHAT?
> 
> what does this change exactly? The Rock is still the biggest star in wrestling, Cena is still the top guy of this generation, Triple H is still the heir to the throne and CM Punk is still the best option to push.
> 
> Seriously WWE is in dire need of stars right now, they are not going to de-push him just because of a few low rated segments. He might lose the championship but would still remain in the main event scene for the foreseeable future.
> 
> Vince Mcmahon didnt have his two absolute Top stars, Cena and HHH, look weak against Punk at PPVs for nothing. Cena lost twice and HHH was only able to beat punk after 3 run-ins from Miz,truth,Nash and two pedigrees, not to mention all the shoots on Stephanie, HHH's wife and Vince's daughter. Its pretty obvious they have decided to push the guy & keep him in the main event scene as a top star.
> 
> All this bitching is pointless, waste of time. Stop doing it.


Exactly. This is why this thread is awful (in addition to about a hundred other reasons). There's a ton of "DEPUSH [Insert wrestler I don't like who lost viewers]!" going on, but the logical question is then "Ok, and then push who?" No one ever addresses this. WWE needs new stars. If you acknowledge this, then you have to put faces not named Cena or Orton in the main event. So who's that gonna be if not Punk? Who is the better option on RAW? Where is this new babyface who is a proven draw that WWE is apparently not pushing?

The answer is there isn't one. Maybe Punk's reign has not been great, but it doesn't change the fact that he's pretty much the only option they have. But people continue to flail around this thread as if the next Stone Cold is just waiting to be pushed if only we could get that pesky CM Punk out of the way.


----------



## AthenaMark

No one even knew Bryan was gonna be in the main event of Raw. It was billed as Punk vs Tensai. That in itself is telling.


----------



## jonoaries

Face it: ratings will never be in the 15s or the 8s again. Its a safe bet to say its the product but to say its only the product is a lie. Its not one man or one woman, its not about who is the champion or who is the challenger its simply about the change in viewing habits over the last decade. People have new technology and new viewing habits its that simple. 

Vince can give away a million dollars, have any celebrity he wants on TV and it won't change anything. Nobody is really moving the needle that much, this is an antiquated idea of how to judge the product or how to judge a wrestler...period. 

It causes the same arguments week after week, "[insert here] IS NOT A DRAW!!!!111 WWE WUZ BETTA DURIN THE ATTIUDE ERA!!11 LOLZ" and its old and repetitive. The mods did the right idea putting this in one thread but the TV ratings argument needs to be put to bed altogether.


----------



## Starbuck

Thoughts of a Punk mark:

Orton vs. Tensai lost 5 billion viewers in the overrun. OMGZ, ORTAN CNT DRAW DURRR

Punk vs. Tensai lost 5 billion viewers in the overrun. OMGZ DAT TENSAI MADE PUNK NOT DRAW DURRR

A bad segment is a bad segment. At least be consistent in your hating lol. Bad breakdown, bad show, why is anybody surprised? Punk doing bad in his matches is nothing new. It's been happening for how long now? Why has it been happening? Same reason practically every match loses viewers on Raw, there's absolutely no purpose behind having them, that's why. Meh. I don't really see what there is to discuss about this weeks numbers tbh. We all knew they were going to be shit and they are lol. But please, Punk haters keep hating, Punk marks keep defending and around around we go.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

I BLAME THE GAME, HHH!!!!!!!11111


----------



## Starbuck

The-Rock-Says said:


> I BLAME THE GAME, HHH!!!!!!!11111


Don't worry, you can blame him next week when the overall number is still shit and it's decided that he is no longer a draw either lol.


----------



## Loudness

Holy shit, this is a new sort of decrease, WWE needs to convince Brock to be more than a part time member. People tuned into the show initially to see if he's there and what he's going to do with HHH with a strong 3.5...and well when it was revealed he wasn't almost every single segment bar three lost viewers, and one of them was with Heyman representing him and another one barely made a spike (the one involving Miz spiked 55k). And people said Lesnar doesn't draw LOL. Also Cena not beeing there, while making sense storyline wise must have also turned viewers away.


----------



## Choke2Death

Starbuck said:


> Thoughts of a Punk mark:
> 
> Orton vs. Tensai lost 5 billion viewers in the overrun. OMGZ, ORTAN CNT DRAW DURRR
> 
> Punk vs. Tensai lost 5 billion viewers in the overrun. OMGZ DAT TENSAI MADE PUNK NOT DRAW DURRR
> 
> A bad segment is a bad segment. At least be consistent in your hating lol. Bad breakdown, bad show, why is anybody surprised? Punk doing bad in his matches is nothing new. It's been happening for how long now? Why has it been happening? Same reason practically every match loses viewers on Raw, there's absolutely no purpose behind having them, that's why. Meh. I don't really see what there is to discuss about this weeks numbers tbh. We all knew they were going to be shit and they are lol. But please, Punk haters keep hating, Punk marks keep defending and around around we go.


Excellent post. Most Punk marks are pretty funny. They raid Orton threads with a bunch of crap about how he sucks and how he can't draw then when Punk loses viewers, it's everyone's fault except Punk. Either that or they'll ignore it and say "just enjoy the show". Note that this isn't aimed at ALL Punk fans, but a lot of them lurking around here. I see them in Orton related threads all the time slamming his alleged lack of drawing ability even though they idolize a guy who has not been able to draw a damn thing in terms of ratings.

Orton gets 4.1 ratings in 2009 in his feud with HHH but it's all due to HHH and Vince even though Orton tops Cena's merchandise sells too, but in 2011 and 2012, CM Punk gets 2.94 the week before Money in the Bank and it's probably somebody else's fault or the best one, "just ignore it and enjoy the damn show!!!!!!".

And on the topic of June 2008 having weak ratings, I think a lot of fans were pissed about the PG rating which was introduced in either 2/6 or 9/6, so they chose to boycott the show.


----------



## ecabney

Orton gets a lot of flack for not being a draw is because the guy has been pushed for 10 years and still cant draw.


----------



## uknoww

punk and bryan can't draw for shit


----------



## Loudness

Choke2Death said:


> Excellent post. Most Punk marks are pretty funny. They raid Orton threads with a bunch of crap about how he sucks and how he can't draw then when Punk loses viewers, it's everyone's fault except Punk. Either that or they'll ignore it and say "just enjoy the show". Note that this isn't aimed at ALL Punk fans, but a lot of them lurking around here. I see them in Orton related threads all the time slamming his alleged lack of drawing ability even though they idolize a guy who has not been able to draw a damn thing in terms of ratings.
> 
> Orton gets 4.1 ratings in 2009 in his feud with HHH but it's all due to HHH and Vince even though Orton tops Cena's merchandise sells too, but in 2011 and 2012, CM Punk gets 2.94 the week before Money in the Bank and it's probably somebody else's fault or the best one, "just ignore it and enjoy the damn show!!!!!!".
> 
> And on the topic of June 2008 having weak ratings, I think a lot of fans were pissed about the PG rating which was introduced in either 2/6 or 9/6, so they chose to boycott the show.


It's not a thing exclusive to Orton and Punk marks, it goes to all "marks" hence why I call myself a fan of most guys as I think the difference between a fan and a mark is that a fan can still be rational whereas a mark thinks his guy can do no wrong in any department. Even some good posters sometimes irrationally defend their faves in aspects where they simply aren't good at, and it's annoying. Some people need to accept that just because they like somebody a lot doesn't mean he has no faults or that he is universally adored, Orton and Punk are good talents, but won't draw based on factual numbers with few exceptions (Orton was hot in 2009 while Punk drew well in MITB for example). Doesn't make them less talented, just lesser stars.


----------



## TaporSnap

uknoww said:


> punk and bryan can't draw for shit


Ladies and gentlemen, substance.

Who gives a shit who draws and who doesn't? As long as I enjoy watching someone I couldn't care less. The WWE clearly doesn't care, if it did it wouldn't be making movies.

Ratings and draw arguments make me hate wrestling fans, stop letting it concern you, cheer your guys, boo others just enjoy it for fuck sake.


----------



## Choke2Death

ecabney said:


> Orton gets a lot of flack for not being a draw is because the guy has been pushed for 10 years and still cant draw.


Bullshit. He has not been "pushed for 10 years". WWE just made sure he had something worthwhile to do for most of his time. They never gave up on him and it surely paid off. As for him not drawing, his road to Wrestlemania 25 has drawn more than CM Punk or Daniel Bryan ever have. I have no problem with their inability to draw, just pointing out the hypocrisy.

CM Punk got to shoot on the company, that's bigger than any push Orton ever had. And he was paired with John Cena, who is universally accepted as a bigger draw than HHH. But yeah, go ahead with that non-sense. HHH brought all the ratings even though Orton was also the top merch seller and Cena caused the lack of ratings in the summer.


----------



## Coffey

TaporSnap said:


> Ladies and gentlemen, substance.
> 
> Who gives a shit who draws and who doesn't?


I'm going to go out on a limb & guess that the answer would be the people opening a thread entitled **The Official Raw *Ratings* Thread**

They sort of go hand-in-hand, no? 

A better question would be why someone would go into a thread entitled **The Official Raw *Ratings* Thread** & question why someone would _care_ about ratings and/or drawing power. I don't know, maybe because *that's what the thread is??????*


----------



## Coffey

*opens thread about Christianity*
"WHO CARES ABOUT JESUS!?"

*opens thread on Pepsi*
"WHO DRINKS SUGAR!?"

*opens thread on ratings*
"WHO CARES ABOUT RATINGS!?"


----------



## Starbuck

TaporSnap said:


> Ladies and gentlemen, substance.
> 
> Who gives a shit who draws and who doesn't? As long as I enjoy watching someone I couldn't care less. The WWE clearly doesn't care, if it did it wouldn't be making movies.
> 
> Ratings and draw arguments make me hate wrestling fans, stop letting it concern you, cheer your guys, boo others just enjoy it for fuck sake.


I'd really love to know where this myth has come from that people who discuss ratings don't enjoy wrestling lol. Seriously. When the fuck did that become the case because it isn't even remotely true. Half the people in this thread come to troll. The other half are actually discussing the rating of the show. How that equates to the latter half or even the former half not enjoying what they see or not being _true_ wrestling fans or to stop watching or any of that crap is beyond me.


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> I'd really love to know where this myth has come from that people who discuss ratings don't enjoy wrestling lol. Seriously. When the fuck did that become the case because it isn't even remotely true. Half the people in this thread come to troll. The other half are actually discussing the rating of the show. How that equates to the latter half or even the former half not enjoying what they see or not being _true_ wrestling fans or to stop watching or any of that crap is beyond me.


Well said here. Where as I am only speaking for myself here but I could could not care any less what the ratings #'s actually are, but I can still have a discussion on the numbers and seperate the #s from me actually being a fan of wrestling/certain wrestlers. The other times I come into this thread is just to either troll, laugh at the trolls, or laugh at the total obsurdity of some peoples posts that are actually being serious and not trolling.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Choke2Death said:


> Bullshit. He has not been "pushed for 10 years". WWE just made sure he had something worthwhile to do for most of his time. They never gave up on him and it surely paid off. As for him not drawing, his road to Wrestlemania 25 has drawn more than CM Punk or Daniel Bryan ever have. I have no problem with their inability to draw, just pointing out the hypocrisy.
> 
> CM Punk got to shoot on the company, that's bigger than any push Orton ever had. And he was paired with John Cena, who is universally accepted as a bigger draw than HHH. But yeah, go ahead with that non-sense. HHH brought all the ratings even though Orton was also the top merch seller and Cena caused the lack of ratings in the summer.


nah trips is a bigger draw than cena 
and just because orton drew during one feud it doesnt mean his push paid off as we have seen with smackdown 

dont let yourself get sucked in into these conversations because 80% of the people posting here are hypocrits


----------



## Vyed

Choke2Death said:


> Bullshit. He has not been "pushed for 10 years". WWE just made sure he had something worthwhile to do for most of his time. They never gave up on him and it surely paid off. As for him not drawing, his road to Wrestlemania 25 has drawn more than CM Punk or Daniel Bryan ever have. I have no problem with their inability to draw, just pointing out the hypocrisy.


WM 25 ratings were high because of his feud against HHH/Vince. It is similar to CM Punk's push where his segments consistently did 3.5 because of Cena, HHH, Vince and also Nash. Once they left him, he hasnt been able to draw on his own which is exactly where orton is too. 

I'd say Orton and Punk are on par right now. No one is bigger than the other atleast not by a big margin. 



> CM Punk got to shoot on the company, that's bigger than any push Orton ever had.


Punting Vince mcmahon, Kissing stephanie, beating up Shane? 



> And he was paired with John Cena, who is universally accepted as a bigger draw than HHH.


Not exactly, Cena isnt a big draw himself but thats another topic. And Orton feuded with cena in two extensive programs in 2007 & 2009 btw.



> But yeah, go ahead with that non-sense.


It isnt.


----------



## Choke2Death

#1Peep4ever said:


> nah trips is a bigger draw than cena
> and just because orton drew during one feud it doesnt mean his push paid off as we have seen with smackdown
> 
> dont let yourself get sucked in into these conversations because 80% of the people posting here are hypocrits


Cena is bigger than HHH. He's well known even outside the wrestling world whereas HHH is primarily recognized by people who have been or are wrestling fans. Cena vs Rock was a successful match in terms of buyrates because of both men, Rock vs a lesser name would have drawn decent numbers but purely because of Rock's presence. That includes HHH as well.
And Orton drew because it was a well booked feud, that garbage on Smackdown has even driven myself, a huge Orton fan, away too so it's not like he's at fault as much as it's the horrible half-assed booking of doing the same shit every week with slight changes. And his push *has* paid off because he's one of the most over faces in the roster.

Also, this place is filled with plenty of smart posters, including the polarizing Rock316AE who's so damn honest with telling the truth that it causes an uproar among many Punk fans who can't accept that their hero is not a draw yet they go into threads concerning Randy Orton and whine some more about how _he_ can't draw. The hypocrites are as usual, Orton haters that mark for CM Punk. (most of them anyways)

EDIT: Vyed, of course it was because the feud was against HHH/Vince but it was also the booking and Orton being good enough to make fans wanna tune in. If Alberto del Rio had gotten that push, the numbers would have been horrible. (if he had been there at the time, of course)

Attacking the McMahon family is nothing new, Austin used to it on a regular basis, so yeah, shooting on the company at a PC-era is a lot bigger than a rehashed story.

But yeah, Orton and Punk are pretty much on par, I just hate it when Punk fans talk shit about Orton and say he can't draw yet change the subject or no-show a topic when they are challenged on the weak ratings Punk has brought.


----------



## A-C-P

Choke2Death said:


> Cena is bigger than HHH. He's well known even outside the wrestling world whereas HHH is primarily recognized by people who have been or are wrestling fans. Cena vs Rock was a successful match in terms of buyrates because of both men, Rock vs a lesser name would have drawn decent numbers but purely because of Rock's presence. That includes HHH as well.
> And Orton drew because it was a well booked feud, that garbage on Smackdown has even driven myself, a huge Orton fan, away too so it's not like he's at fault as much as it's the horrible half-assed booking of doing the same shit every week with slight changes. And his push *has* paid off because he's one of the most over faces in the roster.
> 
> Also, this place is filled with plenty of smart posters, including the polarizing Rock316AE who's so damn honest with telling the truth that it causes an uproar among many Punk fans who can't accept that their hero is not a draw yet they go into threads concerning Randy Orton and whine some more about how _he_ can't draw. *The hypocrites are as usual, Orton haters that mark for CM Punk.* (most of them anyways)


Saved a bit by adding in most of them at the end. But its a 2 way street here. Now I am not defending the SUPER PUNK marks at all b/c alot of them take it over the top, but there are also the Punk haters that take it WAY over the top to and are just as big of hypocrites as the super punk marks.


----------



## Andre

Starbuck said:


> Thoughts of a Punk mark:
> 
> Orton vs. Tensai lost 5 billion viewers in the overrun. OMGZ, ORTAN CNT DRAW DURRR
> 
> Punk vs. Tensai lost 5 billion viewers in the overrun. OMGZ DAT TENSAI MADE PUNK NOT DRAW DURRR
> 
> A bad segment is a bad segment. At least be consistent in your hating lol. Bad breakdown, bad show, why is anybody surprised? Punk doing bad in his matches is nothing new. It's been happening for how long now? *Why has it been happening? Same reason practically every match loses viewers on Raw, there's absolutely no purpose behind having them, that's why.* Meh. I don't really see what there is to discuss about this weeks numbers tbh. We all knew they were going to be shit and they are lol. But please, Punk haters keep hating, Punk marks keep defending and around around we go.


DING! DING! DING! DING! DING! We have the correct answer.

I personally skip through half of the matches on raw because there is absolutely zero purpose to them. Example: "Tonight, 'generic face A' will be taking on 'cheap heat suit wearing heel B' for...", why? Why should I give a fuck about this match? Is there an incentive for either man to face each other? Is there conflict between the two? Will the winner make any kayfabe progress in his career? The answer is usually no to all of these questions, so why should the viewer care unless one of the wrestlers involved is a stand alone mega draw? It's not as if WWE has many genuine big draws, anyway.

WWE needs to stop booking all of these cold card style matches on tv and replace them with more number one contender tournaments and actual matches that have been built with hype and quality promos. I wish WWE would promote regular raw matches at least a week in advance with some sort of build while also trying to structure their shows with more advanced planning. Give me a reason to care WWE, then I might actually pay attention to non pay per view matches regardless of whether I'm viewing them on tv or online. I would rather see two or three heated matches with purpose than a slew of pointless mediocrity.


----------



## Vyed

Choke2Death said:


> Cena is bigger than HHH. He's well known even outside the wrestling world whereas HHH is primarily recognized by people who have been or are wrestling fans.


Cena is not a bigger draw. Infact in 2012, Cena is not even a PPV draw. Its the powerful WWE machine. Popularity doesnt prove Cena is a bigger draw. By that standards he is bigger than undertaker, steve austin and pretty much anyone not known as the Rock. 

How popular was batista compared to undertaker? Wasnt he a bigger draw than him the entire time on SD?



> Cena vs Rock was a successful match in terms of buyrates because of both men,


And Taker/triple H HIAC. 



> Rock vs a lesser name would have drawn decent numbers but purely because of Rock's presence. That includes HHH as well.


Wrong. HHH is no lesser name. 



> And Orton drew because it was a well booked feud, that garbage on Smackdown has even driven myself, a huge Orton fan, away too so it's not like he's at fault as much as it's the horrible half-assed booking of doing the same shit every week with slight changes. And his push *has* paid off because he's one of the most over faces in the roster.


Hornswoggle and Great Khali are insanely over as well. 



> Also, this place is filled with plenty of smart posters, including the polarizing Rock316AE who's so damn honest with telling the truth that it causes an uproar among *many Punk fans who can't accept that their hero is not a draw *yet they go into threads concerning Randy Orton and whine some more about how _he_ can't draw. The hypocrites are as usual, Orton haters that mark for CM Punk. (most of them anyways)


Applies to Orton marks as well.



> Vyed, of course it was because the feud was against HHH/Vince but it was also the booking and Orton being good enough to make fans wanna tune in. If Alberto del Rio had gotten that push, the numbers would have been horrible. (if he had been there at the time, of course)


How can you tell? This is just your assumption. ADR hasnt even used his gimmick yet. 



> Attacking the McMahon family is nothing new, Austin used to it on a regular basis, so yeah, shooting on the company at a PC-era is a lot bigger than a rehashed story.


yeah AUSTIN did it. FUCKING STEVE AUSTIN, face of AE, did it. 



> But yeah, Orton and Punk are pretty much on par, I just hate it when Punk fans talk shit about Orton and say he can't draw yet change the subject or no-show a topic when they are challenged on the weak ratings Punk has brought.


Neither are draws. FACT.


----------



## ecabney

Choke2Death said:


> Cena is bigger than HHH. He's well known even outside the wrestling world whereas HHH is primarily recognized by people who have been or are wrestling fans. Cena vs Rock was a successful match in terms of buyrates because of both men, Rock vs a lesser name would have drawn decent numbers but purely because of Rock's presence. That includes HHH as well.
> And Orton drew because it was a well booked feud, that garbage on Smackdown has even driven myself, a huge Orton fan, away too so it's not like he's at fault as much as it's the horrible half-assed booking of doing the same shit every week with slight changes. And his push *has* paid off because he's one of the most over faces in the roster.
> 
> Also, this place is filled with plenty of smart posters, including the polarizing Rock316AE who's so damn honest with telling the truth that it causes an uproar among many Punk fans who can't accept that their hero is not a draw yet they go into threads concerning Randy Orton and whine some more about how _he_ can't draw. The hypocrites are as usual, Orton haters that mark for CM Punk. (most of them anyways)
> 
> EDIT: Vyed, of course it was because the feud was against HHH/Vince but it was also the booking and Orton being good enough to make fans wanna tune in. *If Alberto del Rio had gotten that push, the numbers would have been horrible.* (if he had been there at the time, of course)
> 
> Attacking the McMahon family is nothing new, Austin used to it on a regular basis, so yeah, shooting on the company at a PC-era is a lot bigger than a rehashed story.
> 
> But yeah, Orton and Punk are pretty much on par, I just hate it when Punk fans talk shit about Orton and say he can't draw yet change the subject or no-show a topic when they are challenged on the weak ratings Punk has brought.


I find it funny that you picked a guy that's completely useless like ADR to defend your argument. Put anyone that's marginally over in the top feud heading into Mania, and it would be a ratings success.


----------



## Hazaq

Hladeit said:


> I dont understand why we fight over Ratings so much every week?
> 
> So Punk lost viewers in his segments, so did John Cena & HHH, and The Rock failed to deliver big ratings during RTWM 2012... SO FUCKING WHAT?
> 
> what does this change exactly? The Rock is still the biggest star in wrestling, Cena is still the top guy of this generation, Triple H is still the heir to the throne and CM Punk is still the best option to push.
> 
> Seriously WWE is in dire need of stars right now, they are not going to de-push him just because of a few low rated segments. He might lose the championship but would still remain in the main event scene for the foreseeable future.
> 
> Vince Mcmahon didnt have his two absolute Top stars, Cena and HHH, look weak against Punk at PPVs for nothing. Cena lost twice and HHH was only able to beat punk after 3 run-ins from Miz,truth,Nash and two pedigrees, not to mention all the shoots on Stephanie, HHH's wife and Vince's daughter. Its pretty obvious they have decided to push the guy & keep him in the main event scene as a top star.
> 
> All this bitching is pointless, waste of time. Stop doing it.


LMAo. This post is spot on.


----------



## Contrarian

So the main event Lost viewers with Punk vs Lord Tensai advertised? 

Fucking Punk is dragging DB down. Bryan needs a proper and bigger feud, its obvious Punk is not at the level. Maybe against Rock or HHH or taker?

If Shawn Michaels wasnt retired, he would have surely feuded with DB and put him over.


----------



## Haitch

Excuse for CM Punk being a ratings cancer #1: RATINGS DON'T MATTER
Excuse for CM Punk being a ratings cancer #2: RAW was predictable 
Excuse for CM Punk being a ratings cancer #3: Punk needs to be heel for the ratings to go up
Excuse for CM Punk being a ratings cancer #4:I knew nothing interesting was going to happen 
Excuse for CM Punk being a ratings cancer #5: It was the "other guy" that Punk was facing's fault
Excuse for CM Punk being a ratings cancer #6: I'm a pathetic mark who won't accept the fact that Jesus Punk can't draw flies to a shit sandwich covered in spunk.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

AndreBaker said:


> DING! DING! DING! DING! DING! We have the correct answer.
> 
> I personally skip through half of the matches on raw because there is absolutely zero purpose to them. Example: "Tonight, 'generic face A' will be taking on 'cheap heat suit wearing heel B' for...", why? Why should I give a fuck about this match? Is there an incentive for either man to face each other? Is there conflict between the two? Will the winner make any kayfabe progress in his career? The answer is usually no to all of these questions, so why should the viewer care unless one of the wrestlers involved is a stand alone mega draw? It's not as if WWE has many genuine big draws, anyway.
> 
> WWE needs to stop booking all of these cold card style matches on tv and replace them with more number one contender tournaments and actual matches that have been built with hype and quality promos. I wish WWE would promote regular raw matches at least a week in advance with some sort of build while also trying to structure their shows with more advanced planning. Give me a reason to care WWE, then I might actually pay attention to non pay per view matches regardless of whether I'm viewing them on tv or online. I would rather see two or three heated matches with purpose than a slew of pointless mediocrity.


This is perhaps the biggest problem with WWE at the moment (exculding things external to wrestling such as films division). The outcome of TV, and many PPV, matches just don't matter. There are no consequences. Matches typically fall into three categories: Matches that have been repeated like 100 times with no development, therefore why should the audience care/assume it will be different this time (see Jack Swagger/Ziggler vs. Brodus Clay); matches that are completely random and are obvious filler (see pretty much every Smackdown match since 2009); or big wins/big matches that SHOULD matter, but we've been taught over the years by WWE rollar coaster booking that they don't.

For example, Lord Tensai. He's pinned both Cena and Punk. Why doesn't this feel like a huge deal? Because we all know this dude is getting the rug pulled out from under him soon. We've seen it too many times before. We don't care because those victories are just bumps on the road to his inevitable de-push. 

There was a time when you could gleam where a guy's career was going based on who he beat, but now you can't do that anymore, and in a fake sport, that's the only reason outcomes matter. If you don't have that, you don't have anything.


----------



## DesolationRow

Somebody, somewhere, needs to make a _Mark Wars_ poster for this forum with John Cena as Luke Skywalker, CM Punk as Han Solo, Randy Orton as Boba Fett (with his eyes squinting), The Rock as Lando Calrissian, Stephanie McMahon as Princess Leia, The Undertaker as Obi-Wan Kenobi, Daniel Bryan as Yoda and Triple H as no one less than Darth Vader... With Vince as the Evil Emperor...


----------



## Starbuck

DesolationRow said:


> Somebody, somewhere, needs to make a _Mark Wars_ poster for this forum with John Cena as Luke Skywalker, *CM Punk as Han Solo*, Randy Orton as Boba Fett (with his eyes squinting), The Rock as Lando Calrissian, *Stephanie McMahon as Princess Leia*, The Undertaker as Obi-Wan Kenobi, Daniel Bryan as Yoda and *Triple H as no one less than Darth Vader*... With Vince as the Evil Emperor...


But that would mean.........


----------



## DesolationRow

Starbuck said:


> But that would mean.........


LOL, I know. :shocked:


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Punk does poorly in the overrun.

If it was a promo/segment, then that would be shocking and bad. Whether with a proven draw or being the biggest draw himself of a promo segment, he's most of the time done well.

Since it's a match though... it's bad that Punk still can't draw people into his matches, but people shouldn't act like this is some huge thing that's never happened before. And hey, as pointed out it's not the first time an Overrun lost viewers. HHH/Jericho and HHH VS. JEFF HARDY (with Cena at ringside apparently) lost viewers. HHH and Cena are proven draws and Jeff at the time was pretty fucking huge and a draw in his own right, and they still lost viewers in the overrun. 

Simply put, shit happens.


----------



## ddp

i knew this day was coming wm runs bye and were left with this crap throughout the year. but what can they do brocks only going to be their half of the time. if i was them i would get him wrestling again soon.


----------



## #Mark

Mark Wars is in full effect.


----------



## Rock316AE

You can go back to find some meaningless fluke number from 4 years ago, just like you can go to 99-00 and bring the 6.0s Albert was doing back then thanks to the show average. A lot of people here need to realize that the majority of the paying fanbase don't see their favorites as real stars and aren't going to order a PPV for them or watch the show. It's not a brain surgery. The only reason people are bringing this up is because of the delusional marks here who are believing that their cult high school gym heroes are bigger than they actually are, you just need to bring them back to reality, that's it. Nothing personal.

Orton in 2009 did the biggest quarters of the year before HHH even came to RAW for their storyline, I think I already showed it in this thread somewhere, the biggest quarters were a Shane match with the punt angle after the match, the Vince segment before the Rumble PPV and the Orton/HHH/Legacy backstage brawl to the parking lot. I think Floyd did a huge number in August that year and you can't count the Trump RAW with no commercials, but even if you want, the peak of that show was for Orton/HHH in a LMS match which did monster number. Besides, Orton did well the entire year, from Cena to Legacy matches. 

WWE need to bring back Lesnar as fast as they can even if it means paying him extras because the current state of the show is going to drive fans away in a way that they're not coming back even in August for Lesnar/Heyman/HHH.


----------



## GillbergReturns

Focusing on the positive. The show started off strong with a 3.5 rating.

I think there's interest in Lauranitis and the storyline of him wanting to create a new face for the WWE.

Since it can't be Brock because of his limited appearances they should try to maneuver someone else into that spot.


----------



## Cookie Monster

Does it really affect people's views on a wrestler if the ratings aren't up when he's on TV? Like, really?


----------



## Cookie Monster

Rock316AE said:


> You can go back to find some meaningless fluke number from 4 years ago, just like you can go to 99-00 and bring the 6.0s Albert was doing back then thanks to the show average. A lot of people here need to realize that the majority of the paying fanbase don't see their favorites as real stars and aren't going to order a PPV for them or watch the show. It's not a brain surgery. The only reason people are bringing this up is because of the delusional marks here who are believing that their cult high school gym heroes are bigger than they actually are, you just need to bring them back to reality, that's it. Nothing personal.
> 
> Orton in 2009 did the biggest quarters of the year before HHH even came to RAW for their storyline, I think I already showed it in this thread somewhere, the biggest quarters were a Shane match with the punt angle after the match, the Vince segment before the Rumble PPV and the Orton/HHH/Legacy backstage brawl to the parking lot. I think Floyd did a huge number in August that year and you can't count the Trump RAW with no commercials, but even if you want, the peak of that show was for Orton/HHH in a LMS match which did monster number. Besides, Orton did well the entire year, from Cena to Legacy matches.
> 
> WWE need to bring back Lesnar as fast as they can even if it means paying him extras because the current state of the show is going to drive fans away in a way that they're not coming back even in August for Lesnar/Heyman/HHH.


May I ask why sadly, it hasn't drove you away!?


----------



## Kamaria

Cookie Monster said:


> Does it really affect people's views on a wrestler if the ratings aren't up when he's on TV? Like, really?


Mind if I quote you in my sig?


----------



## Choke2Death

ecabney said:


> I find it funny that you picked a guy that's completely useless like ADR to defend your argument. Put anyone that's marginally over in the top feud heading into Mania, and it would be a ratings success.


A little secret: Dolph Ziggler, CM Punk and Daniel Bryan wouldn't be able to do that. And that's three guys you jock, one of which I like. (D-Bryan)



Vyed said:


> Cena is not a bigger draw. Infact in 2012, Cena is not even a PPV draw. Its the powerful WWE machine. Popularity doesnt prove Cena is a bigger draw. By that standards he is bigger than undertaker, steve austin and pretty much anyone not known as the Rock.


Cena may not be much of a draw today but he still brings the 'casual' fanbase and his crowd reaction proves it. And he's not bigger than Stone Cold (one of the two biggest stars from WWE's most successful era) or Undertaker (a guy who I knew about long before I became a wrestling fan or knew who John Cena was)



> How popular was batista compared to undertaker? Wasnt he a bigger draw than him the entire time on SD?


Yes, but Taker has also taken a few breaks here and there for the last few years which has made fans more used to seeing others such as Batista and Edge on the show rather than mostly Taker. Taker is still a bigger name in wrestling history, though.



> And Taker/triple H HIAC.


Maybe a few elitists who tried to stand-out by saying the build-up for Rock/Cena sucked. Otherwise, most of the 1.3 million buys came from the interest in the main event that was announced a year in advance and even had non-fans interested. HHH/Taker already had a WM match the year before and I don't know how many actually believed that Hunter was going to beat the streak. Rock/Cena was presented as "Once in a Lifetime", HHH/Taker were having their THIRD match at Wrestlemania, the most anyone has gotten to face Taker at the grandest stage. I bet that's going to help the show sell over the 7 digits mark. 

Wasn't Shawn Michaels/Undertaker II the selling point of WM26? This time, they even put HBK's career on the line and guess what... the sales blew for that Mania. So I doubt a match based around a similar storyline with an opponent he's already faced twice was going to sell the PPV just because of the cell structure being placed around the ring.



> Wrong. HHH is no lesser name.


Actually, he sort of is. HHH/Rock would have probably gotten the million buys but mostly because of the Rock's in-ring return as he's faced HHH many, many times before. If HHH was such a big PPV draw, let alone bigger than Cena, Night of Champions or Vengeance would have done better with them being two out of his only four PPVs where he wrestled.



> Hornswoggle and Great Khali are insanely over as well.


Yeah, with kids who find their length 'exotic'. And also, your point is?



> Applies to Orton marks as well.


Not at all. The people who attack CM Punk for being a non-draw are Rock fans with usernames/avatars of Rock, Orton marks don't really give a damn about draws and neither do they yap about how big a draw he is.



> How can you tell? This is just your assumption. ADR hasnt even used his gimmick yet.


It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that someone like ADR wouldn't succeed considering that despite all he's been given within a year, he still can't get a reaction from the crowd to save his life.



> yeah AUSTIN did it. FUCKING STEVE AUSTIN, face of AE, did it.


Your point is?



> Neither are draws. FACT.


Never disputed that, I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy of Punk marks who *always* have to talk shit about Orton's drawing abilities when their own hero can't draw shit.


----------



## Starbuck

Cookie Monster said:


> Does it really affect people's views on a wrestler if the ratings aren't up when he's on TV? Like, really?


Again, no and where the hell has this complete and utter misconception come from? Nobody here has said they only like wrestler A because he draws and they dislike wrestler B because he doesn't. People discussing ratings doesn't have a bearing on their ability to like/dislike the show either.


----------



## Brye

Starbuck said:


> Again, no and where the hell has this complete and utter misconception come from? Nobody here has said they only like wrestler A because he draws and they dislike wrestler B because he doesn't. People discussing ratings doesn't have a bearing on their ability to like/dislike the show either.


I don't think that there's anyone saying it but there's quite a few times where it seems people suggest it without saying it.


----------



## Rock316AE

In my case, most of the time I have the same opinion as the masses and I'm not a stereotypical internet/indy fanboy who likes skinny wrestlers playing grappling because they were in the indies and learn to hate guys like Hogan, Bischoff Goldberg and Nash based on the BS they're telling themselves, that's it. As for drawing cards, this side of the industry is more interesting than the actual product for a long time now, people were always talking about the business side of wrestling but especially since the MNW and continues all the way to today, this is not a real sport so that's all the facts and indicators we have on true greatness.


----------



## Haitch

rock316ae is the best user on this forum. absolutely love all of his posts. the man knows what the fuck is he talking about.

best ***** on this forum and it's not even close!


----------



## Brye

Rock316AE said:


> In my case, most of the time I have the same opinion as the masses and *I'm not a stereotypical internet/indy fanboy who likes skinny wrestlers playing grappling because they were in the indies and learn to hate guys like Hogan, Bischoff Goldberg and Nash based on the BS they're telling themselves, that's it.* As for drawing cards, this side of the industry is more interesting than the actual product for a long time now, people were always talking about the business side of wrestling but especially since the MNW and continues all the way to today, this is not a real sport so that's all the facts and indicators we have on true greatness.


I don't think indy fans just like smaller wrestlers because they were in the indys. The difference between three indy guys and guys like Nash or Hogan is the ability to put on a better match. It may not have that "larger than life" feel, but that's not what everyone is looking for. And regardless of what you think, you can still have a big match feel in a small venue, and if you don't believe me, watch Punk/Cabana from Punk's final match in ROH or Danielson/KENTA and listen to the crowd.

I can watch a Hogan match if it's against someone like Savage but he never particularly interested me. On the other hand, I can watch someone like Bourne or Ziggler face virtually anyone. 

It's really just a matter of opinion but I wouldn't say that every indy fan (don't even have to be an indy fan to like that side of wrestling) has the same stereotypical feelings. I actually feel for Hogan alot more since the divorce but someone like Golberg just never appealed to me. He had a few really nice looking moves, but very rarely did he string a good match together, imo.

Two different sides of the spectrum. One side is more a fan of the wrestling itself and others enjoy the theatrics of it. I love myself a good storyline, but if it's going to lead to bad matches then it sort of takes me out of it.


----------



## Haitch

that larger than life feel is what sells not indy midgets hacks who can't draw a dime. generic mothefuckers! the people want to see storytelling in a match not 30 headlocks, armbars, and shit!


----------



## Rock316AE

I'm not talking about you specifically, just from years of pages on the same subjects gave the internet fans this stereotype(all that without talking about the fact that they think technical wrestling is the only good style when in fact, it was never a main event style). That's why I said because this is not a real sport, the only indicator we have is the business side of the industry, people can like a Khali match more than a Kurt Angle match, it's opinion, but if WCW drew 30k for a regular Monday Nitro with Goldberg vs Nash as the main program and you like both guys(not talking about me here), that's what I'm looking for more than if a wrestler sold his finger for less than two minutes, how many boring rest holds were in the match or some meaningless stuff like that. That's my point on this and every wrestler in history will agree with me unless he simply doesn't understand the business.


----------



## Hazaq

Choke2Death said:


> Actually, he sort of is. HHH/Rock would have probably gotten the million buys but mostly because of the Rock's in-ring return as he's faced HHH many, many times before. If HHH was such a big PPV draw, let alone bigger than Cena, *Night of Champions or Vengeanc*e would have done better with them being two out of his only four PPVs where he wrestled.



Vengeance 2011 top drawing match = John Cena vs Del Rio. 

Night of champions usually does low buys every year. N.O.C 2011 did only 4000 less than the year before and its because of the fucked up booking, just like Survivor series 2011. You cant blame HHH or punk for that matter. N.O.C PPV had 4 weeks of build, for 2 weeks the build was for NASH vs Punk, then suddenly they changed the main event to HHH vs punk. The feud build up was just two promos, one on smackdown contract signing and the face-off on RAW both of which was completely filled with Insider terms. Pretty sure most of the casual fans were left confused. J.R even criticized the HHH/PUNK face-off promo on Twitter the day after. 

Anyways, I dont understand what your point is. In 2012, no one is a big PPV draw not even Rock or taker and both have a advantage of showing up once in a while. PPV is a dying business, there is not one superstar that can make a difference right now not Cena, not HHH, not Brock or Taker/Rock.

Wrestlemania did monster number because its Wrestlemania, the name value.


----------



## A-C-P

Plenty of Us here can seperate the "business side" discussions and the "wrestling side" discussions. I think the problem here is the few posters that can't seperate the 2 tend to be the most "vocal" (or on here put out the most posts) about the subject and don't realize that the rest of us are seperating the 2 discussions and take it as attacking thier favorite wrestler rather jsut a discussion on the business side of wrestling.

It works the other way to though at times when people bring the "business side" of wrestling into other threads that are more wrestling side focused as well. But when you have a forum made up of so many different fans that are fans for so many different reasons and come from so many different places things like this are bound to happen.

Well of course then there are the people who are just trolling as well.


----------



## Choke2Death

Hazaq said:


> Vengeance 2011 top drawing match = John Cena vs Del Rio.
> 
> Night of champions usually does low buys every year. N.O.C 2011 did only 4000 less than the year before and its because of the fucked up booking, just like Survivor series 2011. You cant blame HHH or punk for that matter. N.O.C PPV had 4 weeks of build, for 2 weeks the build was for NASH vs Punk, then suddenly they changed the main event to HHH vs punk. The feud build up was just two promos, one on smackdown contract signing and the face-off on RAW both of which was completely filled with Insider terms. Pretty sure most of the casual fans were left confused. J.R even criticized the HHH/PUNK face-off promo on Twitter the day after.
> 
> Anyways, I dont understand what your point is. In 2012, no one is a big PPV draw not even Rock or taker and both have a advantage of showing up once in a while. PPV is a dying business, there is not one superstar that can make a difference right now not Cena, not HHH, not Brock or Taker/Rock.
> 
> Wrestlemania did monster number because its Wrestlemania, the name value.


I know what you are saying, I was just pointing out that Cena is a bigger draw/name than HHH who doesn't even bring more buyrates as a part-timer. At this point, the only true draw they have is The Rock and even he needs the right opponent for huge buyrates.


----------



## Hazaq

Choke2Death said:


> I know what you are saying, I was just pointing out that Cena is a bigger draw/name than HHH who doesn't even bring more buyrates as a part-timer. At this point, the only true draw they have is The Rock and even he needs the right opponent for huge buyrates.


HHH is hardly a part timer. He keeps coming back every two months. Even in 2011, he returned Feb 2011 left post WM, returned again in august and was there every week all the way to Wrestlemania, missed like one month, January, in between. HHH might appear stale because he is playing a babyface for far too long and he keeps coming back too often but it doesnt mean he cant draw anymore. All he needs is to turn heel but anyway this is pointless argument, I said it before right now no one superstar is a difference maker as for PPVs are concerned. Rock is the biggest star in name value and 1.3m is a big success no doubt, but it doesnt prove Rock is a difference maker. 

As someone already pointed out, Cena is not a bigger draw but he is certainly more popular than HHH,Taker,Brock and pretty much anyone not known as The Rock.


----------



## Contrarian

Discussing Ratings is not wrong, people obsessing over it is.

Anyways, Ratings or not, DB = G.O.A.T!


----------



## ecabney

Choke2Death said:


> *A little secret: Dolph Ziggler, CM Punk and Daniel Bryan wouldn't be able to do that. And that's three guys you jock, one of which I like. (D-Bryan)
> *
> 
> 
> Cena may not be much of a draw today but he still brings the 'casual' fanbase and his crowd reaction proves it. And he's not bigger than Stone Cold (one of the two biggest stars from WWE's most successful era) or Undertaker (a guy who I knew about long before I became a wrestling fan or knew who John Cena was)
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but Taker has also taken a few breaks here and there for the last few years which has made fans more used to seeing others such as Batista and Edge on the show rather than mostly Taker. Taker is still a bigger name in wrestling history, though.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe a few elitists who tried to stand-out by saying the build-up for Rock/Cena sucked. Otherwise, most of the 1.3 million buys came from the interest in the main event that was announced a year in advance and even had non-fans interested. HHH/Taker already had a WM match the year before and I don't know how many actually believed that Hunter was going to beat the streak. Rock/Cena was presented as "Once in a Lifetime", HHH/Taker were having their THIRD match at Wrestlemania, the most anyone has gotten to face Taker at the grandest stage. I bet that's going to help the show sell over the 7 digits mark.
> 
> Wasn't Shawn Michaels/Undertaker II the selling point of WM26? This time, they even put HBK's career on the line and guess what... the sales blew for that Mania. So I doubt a match based around a similar storyline with an opponent he's already faced twice was going to sell the PPV just because of the cell structure being placed around the ring.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, he sort of is. HHH/Rock would have probably gotten the million buys but mostly because of the Rock's in-ring return as he's faced HHH many, many times before. If HHH was such a big PPV draw, let alone bigger than Cena, Night of Champions or Vengeance would have done better with them being two out of his only four PPVs where he wrestled.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, with kids who find their length 'exotic'. And also, your point is?
> 
> 
> 
> Not at all. The people who attack CM Punk for being a non-draw are Rock fans with usernames/avatars of Rock, Orton marks don't really give a damn about draws and neither do they yap about how big a draw he is.
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that someone like ADR wouldn't succeed considering that despite all he's been given within a year, he still can't get a reaction from the crowd to save his life.
> 
> 
> 
> Your point is?
> 
> 
> 
> Never disputed that, I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy of Punk marks who *always* have to talk shit about Orton's drawing abilities when their own hero can't draw shit.


I'm not gonna speak on Ziggler, but Punk and D-Bry are two guys that are marginally over and they move merch. Those two guys being booked in the top storyline heading into Mania would do solid numbers automatic. CM Punk would especially do great numbers leading up to Mania in the top feud, as the guy was one of the main reasons why MITB drew so well. If CM Punk can get implemented into a top storyline heading into a B PPV and then come out of it with solid PPV buys, then I'm almost certain that he'd flourish being an integral part of a top feud heading into Mania.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Brye said:


> I don't think that there's anyone saying it but there's quite a few times where it seems people suggest it without saying it.


I don't think people change their likes and dislikes based on what a wrestler draws, but they do use ratings to justify being "right" for liking/disliking a wrestler, which is equally stupid. The entirety of this thread is marks saying, "I was right to like [INSERT FAVORITE WRESTLER] because his quarter hour drew this week! See!" and then a small minority standing back saying, "That is a stupid way to view things."

That is what this thread is.


----------



## Isaac Newton

Contrarian said:


> Discussing Ratings is not wrong, people obsessing over it is.
> 
> Anyways, Ratings or not, DB = G.O.A.T!


Yeah, this. Absolutely agree.

David Arquette = G.O.A.T. WCW champion

The casuals were just too unsophisticated to understand the appeal.


----------



## FITZ

Rock316AE said:


> In my case, most of the time I have the same opinion as the masses and I'm not a stereotypical internet/indy fanboy who likes skinny wrestlers playing grappling because they were in the indies and learn to hate guys like Hogan, Bischoff Goldberg and Nash based on the BS they're telling themselves, that's it. As for drawing cards, this side of the industry is more interesting than the actual product for a long time now, people were always talking about the business side of wrestling but especially since the MNW and continues all the way to today, this is not a real sport so that's all the facts and indicators we have on true greatness.





Rock316AE said:


> I'm not talking about you specifically, just from years of pages on the same subjects gave the internet fans this stereotype(all that without talking about the fact that they think technical wrestling is the only good style when in fact, it was never a main event style). That's why I said because this is not a real sport, the only indicator we have is the business side of the industry, people can like a Khali match more than a Kurt Angle match, it's opinion, but if WCW drew 30k for a regular Monday Nitro with Goldberg vs Nash as the main program and you like both guys(not talking about me here), that's what I'm looking for more than if a wrestler sold his finger for less than two minutes, how many boring rest holds were in the match or some meaningless stuff like that. That's my point on this and every wrestler in history will agree with me unless he simply doesn't understand the business.


I totally understand where you're coming from and I also find the business side of wrestling really interesting but I still have a hard time understanding how you totally focus on that part of wrestling. I mean you can't tell me that the movie that made the most money is the best movie ever. Or that the best TV show is the one with the most viewers. Wrestling is not a sport but it's a form of entertainment and should be looked at on the same level as all the other forms of entertainment. When I want to find a good book to read I look at reviews and not the top seller chart.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

House show report.



> John Cena beats Miz with the STF
> 
> CM Punk over DOLPH W/ Mason Ryan to keep the title. The end comes as the ref takes a bump, Mason comes in and attacks punk and punk Dolph on top of Punk for a two count. This leads to Mason interfering again but Dolph hits Ryan with a superkick and Punk hits Dolph with the GTS for the win. Punk cuts a promo after the match thanking the sell out crowd. *A good portion of the crowd left after the Cena Match*.


Wack away, Rock316AE, wack away.


----------



## D17

The-Rock-Says said:


> House show report.
> 
> 
> 
> Wack away, Rock316AE, wack away.


unk3


----------



## Cliffy

The-Rock-Says said:


> House show report.
> 
> 
> 
> Wack away, Rock316AE, wack away.


:lmao


----------



## robertdeniro

Is it safe to say that Punk is the worst WWE champion draw since 1995 ?


----------



## The-Rock-Says

You can see why WWE don't want to give Cena time off. The business will really suffer.


----------



## Cliffy

well its their own fault for going after that audience and making cena god of the product.


----------



## Rock316AE

Cage-Taylor Phitz said:


> I totally understand where you're coming from and I also find the business side of wrestling really interesting but I still have a hard time understanding how you totally focus on that part of wrestling. I mean you can't tell me that the movie that made the most money is the best movie ever. Or that the best TV show is the one with the most viewers. Wrestling is not a sport but it's a form of entertainment and should be looked at on the same level as all the other forms of entertainment. When I want to find a good book to read I look at reviews and not the top seller chart.


I can still enjoy an interesting program when they do it, Rock/Cena, Taker/HBK/HHH and Lesnar/Cena were interesting/great TV every week and produced great and memorable matches(WWE, because TNA has one of the best rosters in a long time). Besides the special attraction guys, there's no one there who really interest me on a worth investment level so again, the business side is more interesting and I always loved that aspect in general.


The-Rock-Says said:


> House show report.
> 
> 
> 
> Wack away, Rock316AE, wack away.


:lmao 

Not really surprising, the house show crowd come to see real stars, today a lot of this type of fanbase is families in all ages, they come to a WWE show to enjoy the big attractions the company can offer, physically or star power wise. Think about UFC here, If you put a prelim fight after your main event, what do you think the crowd will do? same thing in every era of wrestling if you put Taka/Meanie or Doink/Brawler after a Rock/Austin/Foley/Hogan/Savage match people aren't going to stay, simple.


robertdeniro said:


> Is it safe to say that Punk is the worst WWE champion draw since 1995 ?


You can make the argument for him to be the worst drawing champion without competition since the extension in business, easily.


----------



## AmWolves10

Are some people here really this dumb? They built their entire product around John Cena. So his absence is felt mightily. Naturally the product's ratings will suffer when the guy they do the most work promoting isn't on.


----------



## Hazaq

The-Rock-Says said:


> You can see why WWE don't want to give Cena time off. The business will really suffer.


Not really. Plenty of house shows sold out without Cena being advertised. Anyways, whats the source of the house show report you posted? 





The-Rock-Says said:


> House show report.


Source plz because other reports I found of the show, does not say that. Where is this from?


----------



## Marv95

AmWolves10 said:


> Are some people here really this dumb? They built their entire product around John Cena. So his absence is felt mightily. Naturally the product's ratings will suffer when the guy they do the most work promoting isn't on.


Except the ratings have suffered even with him on the show. Last spring, most of the fall and this RTWM are examples.


----------



## #Mark

WWE needs The Rock back so he can skyrocket ratings, right? LOL.


----------



## the fox

#Mark said:


> WWE needs The Rock back so he can skyrocket ratings, right? LOL.


atleast people don't leave before his matches

punk marks fpalm


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Hazaq said:


> Not really. Plenty of house shows sold out without Cena being advertised. Anyways, whats the source of the house show report you posted?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source plz because other reports I found of the show, does not say that. Where is this from?


Wrestling Observer.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

The-Rock-Says said:


> Wrestling Obserever.


Lol.


----------



## Choke2Death

The-Rock-Says said:


> House show report.
> 
> 
> 
> Wack away, Rock316AE, wack away.


:lmao

I don't even know why they'd come for Cena vs The Miz anyways. We've seen them have matches on TV with Cena making Miz tap out about a million times.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Choke2Death said:


> :lmao
> 
> I don't even know why they'd come for Cena vs The Miz anyways. We've seen them have matches on TV with Cena making Miz tap out about a million times.


They came to see Cena. Not Cena Vs The Miz.


----------



## FITZ

Hazaq said:


> Not really. Plenty of house shows sold out without Cena being advertised. Anyways, whats the source of the house show report you posted?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source plz because other reports I found of the show, does not say that. Where is this from?


I was at the show with my little sister and there were fans leaving after Cena won his match. I wouldn't have said a "good portion" like the report indicated but there were some people that were leaving and a lot of people also left their seats and watched the last match from above the seats. There's no wall between the walkway outside and the seats so you can see the ring from anywhere in the building and a lot of people got closer to the door as the match was going on. 

Still the fact that there were people leaving after Cena's match and the overall reaction that Cena got certainly confirms the idea that Cena is the top guy in the company. For what it's worth thought Punk was the obvious #2 guy on the roster. He got the second best reaction and had the second most t-shirts in the crowd only behind Cena. But hey, you can't always have the top guy as champion or else Cena would have been holding the title all the time unless he's injured.

Fun show too and a good crowd. And by good I mean they were into all the matches and really loud. The place was really close to being sold out as well and while it's not a big venue by any means they probably had 6,800 of the 7,000 seats that the arena sold filled. While waiting in line I saw people turned away at the box office. I think that was because the only unfilled seats that I saw were on the very last rows of the floor and nobody probably wanted to pay $65 to sit there. Really good crowd for a Raw house show and the crowd was a lot bigger than the one I saw at the same venue a few years ago.


----------



## AmWolves10

Too many Cena marks on this thread. Of course Cena is the number one draw in the company. He is the most heavily marketed and hyped guy in the company. He is given the most opportunity to shine and is always at the top of the card and given predominance over everything else, including championships. He is built as the most important and interesting presence in the company. Its all in the marketing. Therefore the majority of the WWE fanbase are going to be John Cena fans. Cena wasn't drawing a dollar with green crayon until they pushed him as the superman of the company. Its all in the marketing and booking.


----------



## yoseftigger

Except Cena had the crowd in his favor in 2003 against the top face Brock Lesnar as a heel. The whole Survivor Series tag match in 03 was for Cena's face turn. Cena was the most over guy in 2004. Cena sold the most merchandise in 2004. All of this against mid-carders like Rene Dupree.

Cena was and is still a huge name in the WWE.


----------



## mydarkestdays

people don't want to see a glorified midcarder like cm punk.


----------



## JasonLives

Cage-Taylor Phitz said:


> Fun show too and a good crowd. And by good I mean they were into all the matches and really loud. The place was really close to being sold out as well and while it's not a big venue by any means they probably had 6,800 of the 7,000 seats that the arena sold filled. While waiting in line I saw people turned away at the box office. I think that was because the only unfilled seats that I saw were on the very last rows of the floor and nobody probably wanted to pay $65 to sit there. Really good crowd for a Raw house show and the crowd was a lot bigger than the one I saw at the same venue a few years ago.


Say what you want about the PG era, but I think it saved WWE attendance wise. When you consider how horrible house show/taping attendance was back in 2003-2004 compared to now.


----------



## kokepepsi

JBL is the worst draw
People would start leaving as soon as his matches would start
DATHEELEHEAT


----------



## Brye

JBL had an awesome reign though. His promos were hilarious.


----------



## Emberdon

But his matches were shit.


----------



## Brye

Emberdon said:


> But his matches were shit.


His series with Eddie was good as was the four way at Armageddon, triple threat at the Rumble and the Show steel cage match but the Taker matches weren't much, JBL/Booker was bad and the Cena WM match was bad. Also love the JBL/Cena I quit match.

JBL is best in a hardcore environment.


----------



## #Mark

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aow5LcAvRtQ&feature=related

Punk was over in October.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

#Mark said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aow5LcAvRtQ&feature=related
> 
> Punk was over in October.


He still is now, possibly even more.


----------



## Isaac Newton

AmWolves10 said:


> Too many Cena marks on this thread. Of course Cena is the number one draw in the company. He is the most heavily marketed and hyped guy in the company. He is given the most opportunity to shine and is always at the top of the card and given predominance over everything else, including championships. He is built as the most important and interesting presence in the company. Its all in the marketing. Therefore the majority of the WWE fanbase are going to be John Cena fans. Cena wasn't drawing a dollar with green crayon until they pushed him as the superman of the company. Its all in the marketing and booking.


You obiously only started watching in 2006. Cena was already over as fuk even before his face turn at Survivor Series 2003. A lot people enjoyed him ripping his opponenets with his freestyles and sometimes managed to even turn the crowd to his side because of it (go look up his first match against Rey).

And he acquired that heel heat/overness by himself without relying on some overhyped indy background.

Plus, you talk as if Punk hasn't been the most marketed superstar since last summer. Punk has already had that title for 80% of the time since July. And he even main evented 4 of the first 6 PPVs since his MITB title win. But what happenned? Did he moved fan interest? Did we return to Attitude Era like viewing figures like most of those deluded Punk marks predicted? Oh wait........

12/5 Raw rating................... 2.9 :lol

12/12 Raw rating................. 2.8 :lol

12/19 Raw rating................. 2.9 :lol

12/26 Raw rating................. 2.9 :lol

4 straight weeks of below 3.0 figures! For the the first in 14 years! That's New Generation numbers right there. Just diabolical.

The "new" Stone COld Steve Austin...........................................................:lmao

A dawning of a "new" era (2.9, 2.8, 2.9, 2.9).............................................:lmao

The "new" face of the WWE (always on the midcard of every show).........:lmao


----------



## krai999

sigh if only jeff hardy wasn't doing drugs oh well


----------



## mydarkestdays

Jeff Hardy should come back to WWE and save us from this non drawing hack that is CM Punk.


----------



## Brye

Isaac Newton said:


> You obiously only started watching in 2006. Cena was already over as fuk even before his face turn at Survivor Series 2003. A lot people enjoyed him ripping his opponenets with his freestyles and sometimes managed to even turn the crowd to his side because of it (go look up his first match against Rey).
> 
> And he acquired that heel heat/overness by himself without relying on some overhyped indy background.
> 
> Plus, you talk as if Punk hasn't been the most marketed superstar since last summer. Punk has already had that title for 80% of the time since July. And he even main evented 4 of the first 6 PPVs since his MITB title win. But what happenned? Did he moved fan interest? Did we return to Attitude Era like viewing figures like most of those deluded Punk marks predicted? Oh wait........
> 
> 12/5 Raw rating................... 2.9 :lol
> 
> 12/12 Raw rating................. 2.8 :lol
> 
> 12/19 Raw rating................. 2.9 :lol
> 
> 12/26 Raw rating................. 2.9 :lol
> 
> 4 straight weeks of below 3.0 figures! For the the first in 14 years! That's New Generation numbers right there. Just diabolical.
> 
> The "new" Stone COld Steve Austin...........................................................:lmao
> 
> A dawning of a "new" era (2.9, 2.8, 2.9, 2.9).............................................:lmao
> 
> The "new" face of the WWE (always on the midcard of every show).........:lmao


Issac, considering your join date is from 3 days ago, I'd love to know how you knew so much about what was going on in this forum as of last July.

Can't wait to hear this. :barkley


----------



## Amazing_Cult

I'll throw in my two cents here, since I've always been interested in this side of wrestling.

I'm not going to attack any wrestlers, but more or less the show in its current form.

IMO, the ratings have continued to go down because WWE has drawn the wrong crowd. Agree or disagree with me about this, but, the kids simply won't watch other wrestlers unless they are personally endorsed by Cena or something. If Cena isn't on, the kids most likely aren't paying attention or even watching. So when you get a champion like Bryan or Punk, I'll even reach out to ADR, the now-majority of your fan-base isn't watching. 

Like I said before, its more of a problem with how they've drawn fans instead of the wrestlers themselves.

For the past seven years, its really been all-about Cena in terms of your main draw. Its obvious most adult males can't stand the man, so you're left with the children/families demographic. This demographic sure as hell won't cheer for obvious heels, or wrestlers that are "gray" in terms of actions. 

Which explains how over some guys like Kofi, Truth, and Santino are. These three are great at getting the crowd on their side, or are basically joke characters that are literally there for the kids.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

does anybody now how what ratings the The Rock & Stone Cold Steve Austin sing to each other segment from 11/12/01 got?


----------



## The-Rock-Says

20.0


----------



## Patrick Bateman

Sounds huge.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

4.2, actually.

Why do you wanna know?


----------



## Brave Nash

mydarkestdays said:


> Jeff Hardy should come back to WWE and save us from this non drawing hack that is CM Punk.


Jeff hardy is not a draw to start an argument.


----------



## Bob the Jobber

mydarkestdays said:


> people don't want to see a glorified midcarder like cm punk.


Correction: People don't want to see a generic face Punk.

It effectively neuters what made him a star and makes him rely on his ring work, which is good but doesn't give him top guy credibility like his mic skills do. Let's face it, having huge confidence on the mic adds to a wrestlers aura and credibility.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

The-Rock-Says said:


> 4.2, actually.
> 
> Why do you wanna know?


I just saw that segment for first time since months and thought it was extremly awesome and must have got good numbers.


----------



## Vyed

Bob the Jobber said:


> Correction: People don't want to see a generic face Punk.
> 
> It effectively neuters what made him a star and makes him rely on his ring work, which is good but doesn't give him top guy credibility like his mic skills do. *Let's face it, having huge confidence on the mic adds to a wrestlers aura and credibility.*


And it isnt enough to be the top star. Lets be honest, In the AE if Stone cold cut promos sitting indian style in the middle of the ring but never backed them in up in action, would he have become a mega-star that he was? Same goes for the rock, remember how he used to "Walk down the ramp" and the crowd goes crazy everytime he says and does it? 

You need to have the look and the "badass" booking to draw the fans in millions. snarky mic work isnt enough. 

And Punk's "Huge confidence" on the mic only backfired when he kept shooting on babyface triple h who is well loved and respected by the fans. While the Internet marked out, the casuals were obviously left confused and disgusted by this. It took a John Laurinaitis to get CM Punk back his casuals' love.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

^It was a weird situation with Punk attacking HHH when he was supposed to be face... but the fans weren't disgusted at all and I think there was just confusion. He still split the crowd with HHH more often than not if he wasn't booed (and that didn't happen very often) and the ironic thing is he only got more over on a consistent basis with the audience after he lost his edgy character. He was very over fighting Del Rio, fighting Ziggler (and Big Johnny), and has gotten consistently good pops every week since that feud with HHH ended. So no doubt the feud with HHH put a hault on Punk's popularity rise for awhile, but he still held up well against the veteran HHH in terms of crowd pops.

If anything, I'd say actually the IWC was more disgusted with what Punk was doing and he rubbed more people wrong on here than amongst the casuals. I noticed during his feud with HHH, that's when a lot of people on here really started turning on Punk/voicing their hate for him.


----------



## Vyed

Obis said:


> ^It was a weird situation with Punk attacking HHH when he was supposed to be face... but the fans weren't disgusted at all and I think there was just confusion. He still split the crowd with HHH more often than not if he wasn't booed (and that didn't happen very often) and the ironic thing is he only got more over on a consistent basis with the audience after he lost his edgy character. He was very over fighting Del Rio, fighting Ziggler (and Big Johnny), and has gotten consistently good pops every week since that feud with HHH ended. So no doubt the feud with HHH put a hault on Punk's popularity rise for awhile, but he still held up well against the veteran HHH in terms of crowd pops.
> 
> If anything, I'd say actually the IWC was more disgusted with what Punk was doing and he rubbed more people wrong on here than amongst the casuals. I noticed during his feud with HHH, that's when a lot of people on here really started turning on Punk/voicing their hate for him.


He occasionally split the crowd because HHH, even though a babyface, was basically playing a heel character as in a character representing/defending the "PG era" so to speak against the rebel punk who was gunning for change. The crowd was pro-punk for like one night when raw was in Canada I think? 

Ofcourse he seemed more over against Del Rio, Ziggler etc.. because they were clear-cut heels. Even john cena with all the hatred gets loud pops against Del Rio, ziggler and Miz.


Anyways, My point is Punk needs more than just confident Mic work to become a draw.


----------



## Bob the Jobber

Vyed said:


> And it isnt enough to be the top star. Lets be honest, In the AE if Stone cold cut promos sitting indian style in the middle of the ring but never backed them in up in action, would he have become a mega-star that he was? Same goes for the rock, remember how he used to "Walk down the ramp" and the crowd goes crazy everytime he says and does it?
> 
> You need to have the look and the "badass" booking to draw the fans in millions. snarky mic work isnt enough. .


Comparing generations is meaningless. Stone Cold and the Rock wouldn't have gotten those ovations in the Golden Era either. Times change and as such, so does what gets an audience's attention. This is a generation that hasn't grown up on beautiful and handsome actors, they grew up on above average reality stars. It's a different expectation.

Your second point goes hand in hand with my "generic face Punk" comment. They had him booked as a great heel but look at him now, just another WWE face. He lost his edge, which in this generation was head and shoulders above the next guy. It's easy to book a guy like Punk as a bad ass when he's shitting on the entire roster and continues to win matches against quality opponents. They decided against that however, especially with the currently average mic work and looking very vulnerable in ring (aside from the Jericho vandamabreaker).

I have my doubts that anyone brought up in this era can ever become a draw. The rosters too thin and lacks starpower to truly put a guy over into that territory.


----------



## Rock316AE

RevolverSnake said:


> I just saw that segment for first time since months and thought it was extremly awesome and must have got good numbers.


Hours of 4.1 and 4.2 with the peak of 4.7 for the legendary Rock/Austin segment. Classic segment no doubt.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Vyed said:


> Ofcourse he seemed more over against Del Rio, Ziggler etc.. because they were clear-cut heels. Even john cena with all the hatred gets loud pops against Del Rio, ziggler and Miz.


Actually it's usually a very mixed reaction for Cena, and it really depends on the crowd with Cena whether he gets cheered or not. 

But I get what you're saying, and I agree with it. And the Punk/HHH feud was proof of this. He had not only confidence in his mic skills, but also a great character, and coming off the heels of a hot storyline that propelled him into main event. And it worked as him most of the time splitting the crowd with HHH and even as you mentioned actually getting cheered over him once (I believe the last Raw before NOC) shows he had everything he needed at the time to be a big player...

... but the feud didn't have a proper finish to benefit Punk. The next night on Raw was basically the birth of the CM Punk we have today... a very slightly more adult-targeted John Cena. Of course he still got cheered a lot and started getting cheered more consistently by the time Survivor Series rolled around because he went from feuding with a beloved face HHH to straight-up heels. I don't think his little feud with John Laurinitis though really benefited him anymore than his other feuds as far as getting pops though... which is my main argument against what you said in your original post. 



> It took a John Laurinaitis to get CM Punk back his casuals' love.


This is what I was really arguing, as it's not really true. Punk was getting consistent pops whether in smark or casual cities since his feud with HHH ended, long before his little feud with John Laurinaitis really took off in the lead up to the Rumble.


----------



## Vyed

Obis said:


> Actually it's usually a very mixed reaction for Cena, and it really depends on the crowd with Cena whether he gets cheered or not.


Nah.. Cena was getting good pops consistently at the time against those guys until the rock returned. From there on it was back to mixed reactions.



> But I get what you're saying, and I agree with it. And the Punk/HHH feud was proof of this. He had not only confidence in his mic skills, but also a great character, and coming off the heels of a hot storyline that propelled him into main event. And it worked as him most of the time splitting the crowd with HHH and even as you mentioned actually getting cheered over him once (I believe the last Raw before NOC) shows he had everything he needed at the time to be a big player...


Yes the last raw before NOC was the canadian crowd I am talking about. Most likely because of the usual Montreal screwjob heat that shawn and trips generally get there. Breaking point 2009 is a good example.




> ... but the feud didn't have a proper finish to benefit Punk. The next night on Raw was basically the birth of the CM Punk we have today... a very slightly more adult-targeted John Cena.


The storyline was a mess because of sheer incompetency and lack of long-term planning.




> I don't think his little feud with John Laurinitis though really benefited him anymore than his other feuds as far as getting pops though... which is my main argument against what you said in your original post.





> This is what I was really arguing, as it's not really true. Punk was getting consistent pops whether in smark or casual cities since his feud with HHH ended, long before his little feud with John Laurinaitis really took off in the lead up to the Rumble.


Pretty sure I remember punk's loud pops were all in smark cities like philly, chicago and New york. I think the feud with Laurianitis, even though a cheap version of Austin-mcmahon, helped him a lot at the time as it was punk's first meaningful lengthy feud since becoming WWE champion. 

It wasnt great feud but punk's promos were good.. one promo in particular was really good..


----------



## Vyed

Hour 1 - 4.094m
Hour 2 - 4.321m

Seems like RAW had heavy competetion from NBA play-offs which topped the Night's ratings above all other shows with 6.7 million viewers.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Punk/AJ promo bringing in dem viewers!!!!


----------



## Carcass

Second Quarter - 2 million loss.


----------



## A-C-P

Not surprised by the low hour 1 # as I bet alot of veiwers were turned off by last weeks debacle of a show, good to see the # increase for the 2nd hour, segment breakdowns will tell a better story.

The NBA play-offs game I am sure had an effect on the # as well.


----------



## Starbuck

Number went UP in hour 2 for a change. I bet any money that Big Show getting fired is going to do a fucking monster number or something lol. Oh lord, please don't encourage them, please!! Based on what we know so far, this doesn't bode well for the opener. Inb4demHHHDOESNTDRAWDURR posts lol.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

The segment with Big Show and Ace will have done a huge number for the 10pm slot.

Many tuning in would of stayed because Big Show was doing an awesome job and he had the whole crowd into it.


----------



## ecabney

The first segment and 2nd quarter numbers are about to be looking :holmes status.


----------



## Rock316AE

Horrendous numbers. But I want the 10pm to do big just for Show's awesome Oscar performance. Big Show is one of the best actors in wrestling history. The most impressive thing about him is that he can get sympathy from the entire fanbase even with his size, his facial expressions are money every time.


----------



## Starbuck

Really? Come on. That Show segment was horribly awkward and infinitely too long. I forwarded through to the end because it was dragging like fuck. It's probably destined to do well now lol.


----------



## Brye

It did it's purpose because kids love Show and this makes them hate Johnny, but it went on far too long and I just didn't think it was a good segment. And it was not an Oscar performance. :lmao

I actually don't even mind Show, I just hate the way he's been booked recently.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Starbuck said:


> Really? Come on. That Show segment was horribly awkward and infinitely too long. I forwarded through to the end because it was dragging like fuck. It's probably destined to do well now lol.


Show was awesome in that segment. His job in the segment was to get the crowd on his side (he did and they really were on his side) and put a ton of heat on Ace. (Again he did)

The segment did drag on but Show did an awesome job. imo.


----------



## A-C-P

Segment definitely dragged and could've been ALOT shorter but not taking anything away from Show he performed perfectly in the segment.


----------



## Starbuck

I don't even mind Show either most of the time but I didn't think it was a good segment at all. Put any other face in there that was crying etc and about to get fired and it would have been the same imo.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Rock316AE said:


> Horrendous numbers. But I want the 10pm to do big just for Show's awesome Oscar performance. Big Show is one of the best actors in wrestling history. The most impressive thing about him is that he can get sympathy from the entire fanbase even with his size, his facial expressions are money every time.


I don't know if I'd call it an Oscar performance or anything close, but Show is criminally underrated as an actor and a promo and I'd say he did a very good job in that segment.

At the same time, the segment as a whole was very boring and dragged on way too long.


----------



## Rock316AE

It was too long, no doubt, and the situation was embarrassing but Show did his part so great that you forgets about all the shit. I have no idea why he agreed to that, I know why they did it(to give Ace more heat so when Cena beat him, the crowd will cheer him)but why Show agreed to be in this situation? I don't know. Either way, he did a tremendous job like he always does, I remember a SD segment with Bryan a few months ago where Bryan just threw insults at Show until he exploded, the minute he gets Bryan, his face turned red, things like that makes him a great performer. A few years ago when you had all around deep and talented roster, people got lost in the shuffle but now when everything and everybody is so miserable, guys like Show and Henry shows their true worth.


----------



## Starbuck

Regarding Show, I always felt it was unfair that during the Jeri-Show run, Jericho got all the credit and Show got none. To me it was the chemistry of both of them that made the team work. Show can pull off some great performances when called upon and is a good hand to have on the roster. But this segment was just bad imo and will be even worse if he doesn't come back to help/screw Johnny at OTL and not even serve a purpose lol.


----------



## Choke2Death

I found that Big Show segment laughable as it dragged on and on and on but I'd take it ten times over John Cena's horrible comedy yesterday. What are the ratings in terms of the "3.08" fashion? Hope the Cena segment lost viewers or something. It was just awful.

What I can't help but laugh at is those on YouTube who write comments like "I know it's scripted but it was hard to watch". First Bork legitimately bork'd HHH's arm and now Big Show is fired and TNA is ready to hire more people. The unsure marks are the funniest. When they think something is real, they take it to that other level. Ha.


----------



## Starbuck

I imagine the Show and Cena segments will do well actually. Not too sure about the opener though. With the overall hour 1 number so low, either it did well and everything else in that hour tanked or they all did steady but nothing of note. Meh, not that it really matters. This HHH/Lesnar feud won't properly pick up until Brock is actually back on the shows. No harm no foul.


----------



## Rock316AE

I don't know if it was posted here:


> *Dana White attacks criticism of ratings decline for UFC on Fox 3, lambasts reporter Dave Meltzer *
> 
> Dana White isn't happy with the reaction from MMA media regarding the ratings for the UFC on Fox 3 event on May 5. In a new video blog post on Monday night, he showed a pre-recorded rant that would have been used on Fuel TV's "UFC Tonight" program, but with the UFC on Fuel 3 card on Tuesday that show is off for the week. In said rant, he went off on one writer in particular, Dave Meltzer of The Wrestling Observer, and formerly of Yahoo! Sports.
> 
> While he focused part of his rant on giving figures as to why the show was successful, he ripped into Meltzer over an article he wrote on the subject that essentially stated that the UFC and Fox were "blowing it" with how low the show drew. His criticisms led to the following from White:
> 
> "Dave Meltzer wrote this huge story, a doom and gloom story about how the UFC and Fox are blowing this thing, because of the numbers that came out," White began. "First of foremost, Dave, you know I like you, I respect you, but you just lost your job at Yahoo!; and you want to give us business advice? I'm actually writing a story next week that I'm gonna put out, about all the things I think you could have done to keep your job at Yahoo!. That story's coming out next week Dave, you might wanna read it, OK?"
> 
> White then put his own spin on the numbers from the event, urging everyone to "do their homework" before reacting so negatively. He stated that the Fox broadcast was the #1 program in all of the UFC's key male demos, and while it was beaten in total viewers by Shark Tank and NCIS that night, both programs saw a majority of their viewership come from viewers 50 and older.
> 
> Additionally, White said the broadcast outperformed the NBA Playoffs across the board. Furthermore, he said that television viewership as a whole was down 10 million viewers from the first Fox show the UFC put on. Meaning, 10 million less viewers were at home watching any form of television. He placed that on it being Cinco de Mayo and the opening of The Avengers, which had the biggest opening weekend in movie history.
> 
> Because of all that, he decried the "doom and gloom" reports, especially that of Meltzer's, and ripped into any thought of negativity on the numbers. Check out the full rant below:


BIG DAVE vs Dana. Dave already had a program with Vince almost 20 years ago. 


RAW rating is 2.94, before football even started...Hours of 2.91 and 2.97. Disaster numbers. Like I said last week, they need to bring back Brock as fast as they can before they drive viewers away to the point of no return. To do almost below 4 million in May is scary.


----------



## GetReady2Fly

Oh look it's a rocky.

Apropos the poll, I think it's the brand that draws. Many wise users have said that if the Other Promotion had the brand power of WWE, the ratings would be less one sided.


----------



## Starbuck

Hitting DEM BIG 2.0's already lol. Yeouch. But really, I don't think it's anything to worry about. WWE aren't even trying lol, it's obvious. If they were actually trying their asses off and getting these numbers, then I'd worry. But they aren't. They clearly don't give a fuck. Give it a month or so and once they get OTL, probably NWO too, over them things will pick up again as they always do.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Dana really going for Meltzer's throat there. Dana not happy at all.


----------



## Contrarian

May is usually just fillers. Its not surprising. Every year numbers are down at this time of the year. The game was on 7 pm & 9:40 pm right? That might have had some impact.


----------



## Marv95

Starbuck said:


> Hitting DEM BIG 2.0's already lol. Yeouch. But really, I don't think it's anything to worry about. WWE aren't even trying lol, it's obvious. If they were actually trying their asses off and getting these numbers, then I'd worry. But they aren't. They clearly don't give a fuck. Give it a month or so and once they get OTL, probably NWO too, *over them things will pick up again as they always do.*


Then Monday Night Football begins.


----------



## Choke2Death

Rock316AE said:


> RAW rating is 2.94, before football even started...Hours of 2.91 and 2.97. Disaster numbers. Like I said last week, they need to bring back Brock as fast as they can before they drive viewers away to the point of no return. To do almost below 4 million in May is scary.


I think it's always that way during May. I can't speak on many years back but the last few years, the month of May has been utter shit. Last year, it was Super Cena's return after being away from the title for almost a year and the shows were generally awful until things picked up in summer. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be any good crowds either until Long Island in June 18.


----------



## Starbuck

Marv95 said:


> Then Monday Night Football begins.


Yeah but they actually start trying again because they know if they don't they'll bomb and bomb hard. Jan - April = RTWM, May/June = filler crap where they don't give a fuck at all, July/August - Summerslam build and they start caring again, Sep - Dec = end of the year, depends on Vince's mood I suppose lol.


----------



## Y2Joe

Hustle, loyalty, ratings.

To be honest this is probably an even bigger indictment on Laurinaitis as lead heel on Raw. Can't help but think he's going to be written off Sunday.


----------



## Falkono

Down a lot over last may. They were doing 3.45 with things like Rock's birthday etc.

So of course you can list a whole lot of things as to why but the real reason is WWE has been down yoy a longtime. Less and less people are interested in it now.
And when they put out the crap they have been putting out recently can you blame them?
Being in the 2's for RAW is a bad sign.


----------



## Chrome

Yeah, WWE just seems to be treading water right. I'm hoping after OTL we start getting some answers to these:






Hopefully, it's the debut of this guy.


----------



## SpeedStick

WWE will be good round Money in the Bank right now nothing good to watch


----------



## Marv95

I mean, I know this is historically the most boring time of they year, but can they at least _try_ to be intriguing? In 2001 you had the unofficial start of the InVasion with WCW guys randomly showing up as well as Stone Cold and HHH trying to screw with Taker. 10 years ago you had the whole Austin/Flair/nWo stuff & Taker vs Hogan. In 2005 and 2006 you had ECW and May 19th(could've been _real_ good but they completely dropped it). They at least _tried_ back then.


----------



## Rock316AE

I doubt they can recover from that, they never did such a low numbers in that period without competition. They will get a few decent numbers from Lesnar but after that with MNF? would be panic mode for them, if not already...They're now at 2.9, 2.5-2.6 is where the red line is and the danger of going out. The roster is too weak and untalented and the product is too cold and bland. WWE is all about the TV business.


----------



## justbringitbitch

ChromeMan said:


> Yeah, WWE just seems to be treading water right. I'm hoping after OTL we start getting some answers to these:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully, it's the debut of this guy.


why, you want something that big a deal, to be the ultimate letdown, :StephenA if that's what thaT FOR, OH HOW FAR the wwe has fallen:kenny


----------



## Starbuck

Unless they hit consistent 2.5's for like a year when they are legitimately trying and trying as hard as they can, I don't think there's any need for them to panic. Everybody knew this show would do a shit number. There's no reason to panic over that at all. I have no doubt in my mind at all that if they actually pulled together some storylines, planned out some story arcs, developed their midcard and actually fucking tried to put on an entertaining product from top to bottom, we'd see a positive change.


----------



## Brye

justbringitbitch said:


> why, you want something that big a deal, to be the ultimate letdown, :StephenA if that's what thaT FOR, OH HOW FAR the wwe has fallen:kenny


Have you ever watched anything he's done?


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Here's Meltzer response to Dana White:


----------



## Contrarian

Last year MAY 16, 2011 did only 3.08 for the whole show even without the NBA play-offs.




> WWE Raw on Monday, May 16 scored a 3.08 rating, down one-tenth of a ratings point from last week’s show.
> 
> Raw also declined to an average of 4.7 million viewers. There was no competition from the NBA Playoffs on Monday night, which did not lead to a boost for Raw. It did allow Raw to rank #1 on cable TV in terms of overall viewers.
> 
> The overall rating was the lowest since January when WWE faced college football competition. The average viewership figure is the first time WWE hasn’t touched 5.0 million viewers since February.






Rock316AE said:


> I doubt they can recover from that, they never did such a low numbers in that period without competition. They will get a few decent numbers from Lesnar but after that with MNF? would be panic mode for them, if not already...They're now at 2.9, 2.5-2.6 is where the red line is and the danger of going out. The roster is too weak and untalented and the product is too cold and bland. WWE is all about the TV business.


Can you post the Rating breakdown for May 16, 2011 Show?


----------



## kokepepsi

Kofi Kingston vs. CM Punk lost 97,000 viewers from the opener while Kelly Kelly vs. Brie Bella and Kharma's appearance gained 333,000 viewers. There seems to be a trend of Diva segments doing well in the ratings since Kharma's arrival.

*Alberto Del Rio vs. Rey Mysterio gained 1,500 viewers*, which isn't good for the 10pm timeslot. Jerry Lawler and Michael Cole's contract signing lost 70,000 viewers while Kane & Big Show vs. Nexus lost 165,000 more viewers.

The main event of John Cena vs. Jack Swagger and The Miz's post-match attack gained 560,000 viewers, bringing the overrun to a 3.40. This less than usual for RAW's overruns.


----------



## Zatiel

2.9? A well-earned failure. Raw was recap-heavy, dragged out everything, and didn't even build much towards the PPV.

Since they're already looking past this PPV, maybe their plans will provide better television in the next cycle. One certainly hopes.


----------



## Choke2Death

kokepepsi said:


> Kofi Kingston vs. CM Punk lost 97,000 viewers from the opener while Kelly Kelly vs. Brie Bella and Kharma's appearance gained 333,000 viewers. There seems to be a trend of Diva segments doing well in the ratings since Kharma's arrival.
> 
> *Alberto Del Rio vs. Rey Mysterio gained 1,500 viewers*, which isn't good for the 10pm timeslot. Jerry Lawler and Michael Cole's contract signing lost 70,000 viewers while Kane & Big Show vs. Nexus lost 165,000 more viewers.
> 
> The main event of John Cena vs. Jack Swagger and The Miz's post-match attack gained 560,000 viewers, bringing the overrun to a 3.40. This less than usual for RAW's overruns.


1,500 viewers. :lmao

That's priceless.

The problem with WWE booking is that they don't know what to do and are confused. Take the build-up for Survivor Series last year which had disappointing buyrates. They let Cena take out The Miz and R-Truth on his own even though the storyline being build was that they are too much for him to handle on his own and that's why he was seeking The Rock for help. The dirt-sheets reported that the reason for that was because they didn't want Cena to be owned three weeks in a row but that's completely senseless. Cena was destroyed by Miz four weeks in a row on the road to WM27 and it made fans who buy into the face/heel thing more eager for WM27 to see Cena get his revenge on Miz (which he didn't but that's another story). That's also good example on how you build the good vs bad story which WWE are in love with today. One minute they cater towards the 'smarks' then another they ruin their long-term booking to keep the kids happy for a week.


----------



## jonoaries

Starbuck said:


> Yeah but they actually start trying again because they know if they don't they'll bomb and bomb hard. Jan - April = RTWM, May/June = filler crap where they don't give a fuck at all, July/August - Summerslam build and they start caring again, Sep - Dec = end of the year, depends on Vince's mood I suppose lol.


That's how I've always seen it. 

This show deserved the terrible number it got, it was a terrible show.


----------



## Carcass

kokepepsi said:


> Kofi Kingston vs. CM Punk lost 97,000 viewers from the opener while Kelly Kelly vs. Brie Bella and Kharma's appearance gained 333,000 viewers.* There seems to be a trend of Diva segments doing well in the ratings since Kharma's arrival.*
> 
> *Alberto Del Rio vs. Rey Mysterio gained 1,500 viewers*, which isn't good for the 10pm timeslot. Jerry Lawler and Michael Cole's contract signing lost 70,000 viewers while Kane & Big Show vs. Nexus lost 165,000 more viewers.
> 
> The main event of John Cena vs. Jack Swagger and The Miz's post-match attack gained 560,000 viewers, bringing the overrun to a 3.40. This less than usual for RAW's overruns.


So Kharma was drawing ratings in her short stint before she got pregnant? Good thing they had Layla return and win the belt instead of Kharma. unk2


----------



## Theproof

It's scary to think where they would be if it wasn't for The Rock and Brock drawing in a little interest. I know for a fact that I've stopped watching once I started noticing that the shows where becoming mediocre again.


----------



## charmed1

Someone posted that this is in WcW 2000 level bad but honestly its worse. How much longer can WWE draw from older wrestlers without creating new legit stars???


----------



## Coffey

charmed1 said:


> Someone posted that this is in WcW 2000 level bad but honestly its worse. How much longer can WWE draw from older wrestlers without creating new legit stars???


Who knows but you can bet your ass they're going to trot out everyone they can: The Rock, Steve Austin, Batista, The Undertaker, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, Jericho, Jerry Lawler...

I don't even want to think of what the main event(s) at Wrestlemania will be next year.


----------



## kokepepsi

how is it wcw bad
Unless they start doing 20k ppv buys


----------



## charmed1

kokepepsi said:


> how is it wcw bad
> Unless they start doing 20k ppv buys


Quality-wise. I have the last few years of WcW and I'd honestly watch that over what the WWE has become. Is this what it means to be number one...spiraling down embarrassingly like this? WcW was number one for awhile too.


----------



## fulcizombie

Raw deserves these ratings, and even lower ones, i might add ....


----------



## Myers

People thinking these numbers are terrible are idiots, Raw is still the highest rated cable show on most monday nights. TV ratings are that low in general now, people DVR or watch it streaming/youtube these days so they don't get the actual amount of viewers. Raw was the second highest Cable show this past monday, the only thing that did better were the NBA playoffs. 

Raw continues to bring in the high ratings for USA, so they don't need to worry. However, pro wrestling has been garbage since 2002, so I can't defend the quality of the program.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

This is what happends when you revolve your show around fucking John Larinatis, people get bored by him and they tune out. Simple explanation why this weeks rating is low.

And it truly shows how standards have fallen when the majority of this forum marks for this awful and useless tv personality. The man cant even deliver a senteance without fucking up or stumbling, and people still type shit like "LOL BIG JOHNNY LOL, MR EXCITEMENT LOL". It just fucking shows that the IWC lives up to its steorotype, that they will mark for the heels no matter how untalented they are just.... cause.


----------



## Cookie Monster

Myers said:


> People thinking these numbers are terrible are idiots, Raw is still the highest rated cable show on most monday nights. TV ratings are that low in general now, people DVR or watch it streaming/youtube these days so they don't get the actual amount of viewers. Raw was the second highest Cable show this past monday, the only thing that did better were the NBA playoffs.
> 
> Raw continues to bring in the high ratings for USA, so they don't need to worry. However, pro wrestling has been garbage since 2002, so I can't defend the quality of the program.


Common sense, who'd of thought it!


----------



## TRDBaron

jblvdx said:


> This is what happends when you revolve your show around fucking John Larinatis, people get bored by him and they tune out. Simple explanation why this weeks rating is low.
> 
> And it truly shows how standards have fallen when the majority of this forum marks for this awful and useless tv personality. The man cant even deliver a senteance without fucking up or stumbling, and people still type shit like "LOL BIG JOHNNY LOL, MR EXCITEMENT LOL". It just fucking shows that the IWC lives up to its steorotype, that they will mark for the heels no matter how untalented they are just.... cause.


True that, Laurinaitis sucks but he's not the only reason, there is no proper build for any feuds whatsoever, you can miss multiple episodes of Raw and you won't miss anything.
Bottom line is, the WWE is back to 2007 level bad.


----------



## BANKSY

When your main event of the evening is a Big Johnny promo , what do you expect.


----------



## zkorejo

jblvdx said:


> This is what happends when you revolve your show around fucking John Larinatis, people get bored by him and they tune out. Simple explanation why this weeks rating is low.
> 
> And it truly shows how standards have fallen when the majority of this forum marks for this awful and useless tv personality. *The man cant even deliver a senteance without fucking up or stumbling, and people still type shit like "LOL BIG JOHNNY LOL, MR EXCITEMENT LOL". It just fucking shows that the IWC lives up to its steorotype, that they will mark for the heels no matter how untalented they are just.... cause.*


Totally agreed. Never really understood the johny ace bandwagon... There is nothing impressive or entertaining about the guy.

Laurinaitis and Bischoff comparisons/competition poll over here was a joke!


----------



## jonoaries

jblvdx said:


> *This is what happends when you revolve your show around fucking John Larinatis, people get bored by him and they tune out. Simple explanation why this weeks rating is low.*
> 
> And it truly shows how standards have fallen when the majority of this forum marks for this awful and useless tv personality. *The man cant even deliver a senteance without fucking up or stumbling, and people still type shit like "LOL BIG JOHNNY LOL, MR EXCITEMENT LOL".* It just fucking shows that the IWC lives up to its steorotype, that they will mark for the heels no matter how untalented they are just.... cause.


Laurintis is probably the most unintentional funny act ever. People starting "marking" for him because he's funny. The raspy voice, the dumb shit he says, the dead pan delivery, it just works. At Wrestlemania Johnny was wearing a white suit, he looked like someone's pastor at a tent revival, its silly shit. "Mr. Excitement" is an oxymoron because he's boring as shit but HE thinks he's exciting. Shit he even calls himself "Big Johnny"! I may be silly but that's funny to me. 

However...Johnny has been overexposed the last few weeks and taking himself too seriously. He went from delusional, pencil pushing, yes-man to an overbearing, sensitive, tyrant. The whole atmosphere of the show now revolves around Johnny and that shouldn't be the case. I don't think anyone intended to push WWE to have L's on TV as much as he was the last two to three weeks. 

I personally believe this has more to do with Brock Lesnar returning than with the IWC marking for Laurinaitis.


----------



## Vyed

And his douchebag smile. 

"Big show"

*smiles* 

you're fired!" 

That was awesome.


----------



## TheWFEffect

I see no point for all the debating of the ratings at this point to be honest its pretty simple WWE has best talent filled roster and development line since the start of the Cena/Batista Era and they got the likes of the Rock and Lesnar as attractions and if anyone says they don't think the rosters whatever. All the WWE needs to do is to put on consistent storylines through out each area of the card to keep the fan's intrested and the idea that the young stars these days lack the fire the old stars and are happy with the pay check as far as I am concerned is stupid how the WWE has treated some of the young talent the past couple of years is answer enough why most of the young talent (Swagger, Ziggler, Kofi, Bourne (Fucked up himself), Drew Mcintyre and this past year poor Zack Ryder who could be right now the solid mid card attraction but of course WWE buried him for Cena.) have lost that fire its now the companys responsibility to relight that fire under their asses and give them what they want which is somthing to work and use them properly.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

jblvdx said:


> This is what happends when you revolve your show around fucking John Larinatis, people get bored by him and they tune out. Simple explanation why this weeks rating is low.
> 
> And it truly shows how standards have fallen when the majority of this forum marks for this awful and useless tv personality. The man cant even deliver a senteance without fucking up or stumbling, and people still type shit like "LOL BIG JOHNNY LOL, MR EXCITEMENT LOL". It just fucking shows that the IWC lives up to its steorotype, that they will mark for the heels no matter how untalented they are just.... cause.


I agree. I like Johnny Ace because he's so bad he's good, but the guy has X-Pac heat and it's clear people don't want to see him.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

How the hell do you know he has x-pac heat? Boos are boos at the end of the day. That's what heels live on, so it's heat.


----------



## Coffey

The-Rock-Says said:


> How the hell do you know he has x-pac heat? Boos are boos at the end of the day. That's what heels live on, so it's heat.


That's just an argument people use on the internet because they don't know any better and have read it before.

"X-Pac heat" is not a thing.


----------



## Contrarian

kokepepsi said:


> Kofi Kingston vs. CM Punk lost 97,000 viewers from the opener while Kelly Kelly vs. Brie Bella and Kharma's appearance gained 333,000 viewers. There seems to be a trend of Diva segments doing well in the ratings since Kharma's arrival.
> 
> *Alberto Del Rio vs. Rey Mysterio gained 1,500 viewers*, which isn't good for the 10pm timeslot. Jerry Lawler and Michael Cole's contract signing lost 70,000 viewers while Kane & Big Show vs. Nexus lost 165,000 more viewers.
> 
> The main event of John Cena vs. Jack Swagger and The Miz's post-match attack gained 560,000 viewers, bringing the overrun to a 3.40. This less than usual for RAW's overruns.


Thanks man.


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner

Myers said:


> People thinking these numbers are terrible are idiots, Raw is still the highest rated cable show on most monday nights. TV ratings are that low in general now, people DVR or watch it streaming/youtube these days so they don't get the actual amount of viewers. Raw was the second highest Cable show this past monday, the only thing that did better were the NBA playoffs.
> 
> Raw continues to bring in the high ratings for USA, so they don't need to worry. However, pro wrestling has been garbage since 2002, so I can't defend the quality of the program.


So fucking true post of the year(Y)


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Myers said:


> People thinking these numbers are terrible are idiots, Raw is still the highest rated cable show on most monday nights. TV ratings are that low in general now, people DVR or watch it streaming/youtube these days so they don't get the actual amount of viewers. Raw was the second highest Cable show this past monday, the only thing that did better were the NBA playoffs.
> 
> Raw continues to bring in the high ratings for USA, so they don't need to worry. However, pro wrestling has been garbage since 2002, so I can't defend the quality of the program.


:shocked: A post with logic and reason on the ratings thread.


----------



## Eskimo17

While not exactly RAW ratings, I figured it best to say this here than start a whole thread for it. It seems that South Parks lowest ever ratings were their episode making fun of the WWE  just thought it was funny considering all the talk of ratings that goes on here.


----------



## kokepepsi

> In the segment breakdown, the opener with Paul Heyman and Triple H started strong with a 3.32 quarter rating.
> 
> CM Punk and Santino Marella vs. Cody Rhodes and Daniel Bryan plus the Beth Phoenix vs. Alicia Fox match lost 601,000 viewers.
> 
> John Cena's Make-A-Wish segment lost 370,000 viewers and did the lowest rated quarter in months with a 2.64 rating.
> 
> Kane vs. Big Show and John Laurinaitis firing Show gained 1,033,000 viewers for a 3.37 quarter rating. This was one of the best 10pm gains of the year for RAW.
> 
> Brodus Clay, R-Truth and Kofi Kingston vs. The Miz, Dolph Ziggler and Jack Swagger lost 996,000 viewers.
> 
> Randy Orton vs. Chris Jericho gained 108,000 viewers
> 
> And the closing segment with Cena and Laurinaitis gained 990,000 viewers for a 3.43 overrun rating. This was among the best overrun gains of the year.
> 
> In the Show-Laurinaitis segment that gained so well, Male Teens went from a 2.0 to 2.6 rating, Female Teens went from a 0.8 to a 1.0, Males 18-49 went from 2.2 to 2.9 and Women 18-49 went from a 1.0 to 1.3 rating.
> 
> In the Cena-Laurinaitis segment, Male Teens went from 1.3 to 2.1, Female Teens went from 0.7 to 0.9, Males 18-49 went from 2.5 to 3.3 and Women 18-49 went from a 1.1 to 1.3 rating.


:ace3:ace


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Do not like the sound of these Laurinaitis segments gaining huge numbers. Good for them and all, just leaves us with more shitty angles to come. Yay.

Also, kokepepsi you must change your sig. Replace Rock's face with Johnny's. Obviously he was right when he said he's better than Lesnar and Rock combined. Ace = Biggest draw in wrestling.


----------



## Choke2Death

kokepepsi said:


> In the segment breakdown, the opener with Paul Heyman and Triple H started strong with a 3.32 quarter rating.
> 
> CM Punk and Santino Marella vs. Cody Rhodes and Daniel Bryan plus the Beth Phoenix vs. Alicia Fox match lost 601,000 viewers.
> 
> John Cena's Make-A-Wish segment lost 370,000 viewers and did the lowest rated quarter in months with a 2.64 rating.
> 
> Kane vs. Big Show and John Laurinaitis firing Show gained 1,033,000 viewers for a 3.37 quarter rating. This was one of the best 10pm gains of the year for RAW.
> 
> Brodus Clay, R-Truth and Kofi Kingston vs. The Miz, Dolph Ziggler and Jack Swagger lost 996,000 viewers.
> 
> Randy Orton vs. Chris Jericho gained 108,000 viewers
> 
> And the closing segment with Cena and Laurinaitis gained 990,000 viewers for a 3.43 overrun rating. This was among the best overrun gains of the year.
> 
> In the Show-Laurinaitis segment that gained so well, Male Teens went from a 2.0 to 2.6 rating, Female Teens went from a 0.8 to a 1.0, Males 18-49 went from 2.2 to 2.9 and Women 18-49 went from a 1.0 to 1.3 rating.
> 
> In the Cena-Laurinaitis segment, Male Teens went from 1.3 to 2.1, Female Teens went from 0.7 to 0.9, Males 18-49 went from 2.5 to 3.3 and Women 18-49 went from a 1.1 to 1.3 rating.


Laurinaitis bringing dem ratingz!!!

And I'm glad that stupid Make-a-Wish video lost viewers. Take that, you motherfuckers!

And rofl @ the 6 man tag team match losing 1 million viewers.


----------



## kokepepsi

To lazy to look up but I think Swagger has been involved in the most 1+million losses 

Like 5 of them


----------



## Brye

Fucking hell. Two dreadful segments and each of them gain. (N)

Looks like we'll be seeing lots of that stuff.


----------



## Green Light

Lol Johnny Ace is a fucking mega draw, he needs to go over Cena clean at OTL. Then he should beat Punk at No Way Out for the title, setting up a huge main event at Summerslam where he beats Lesnar in an MMA rules match to retain the title.

:ace3 :ace3 :ace3


----------



## Rock316AE

> In the segment breakdown, the opener with Paul Heyman and Triple H started strong with a 3.32 quarter rating.


Heyman was great.


> *CM Punk* and Santino Marella vs. Cody Rhodes and *Daniel Bryan* plus the Beth Phoenix vs. Alicia Fox match lost 601,000 viewers.










The indy guys, never disappointing us. Always comedy.



> Kane vs. Big Show and John Laurinaitis firing Show gained 1,033,000 viewers for a 3.37 quarter rating. This was one of the best 10pm gains of the year for RAW.


Awesome to see this segment doing HUGE gain in the 10pm slot, Big Show was always a big attraction and he was tremendous in his performance. Got sympathy in the hardest situation even with his size, really something special. Oscar performance.



> Randy Orton vs. Chris Jericho gained 108,000 viewers
> 
> And the closing segment with Cena and Laurinaitis gained 990,000 viewers for a 3.43 overrun rating. This was among the best overrun gains of the year.


Orton/Jericho gaining on a random slot is great but not surprising, second biggest star in the industry vs a big veteran star should always do good.

Ace doing good TV numbers is the regular thing. I said it for weeks that they're trying to put him out there as a JR character in terms of a TV draw, he's not JR's level, let alone Bischoff or Vince/Shane but he got the crowd investment.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

kokepepsi said:


> To lazy to look up but I think Swagger has been involved in the most 1+million losses
> 
> Like 5 of them


PROVE ME THIS.


----------



## GillbergReturns

People really respond to the d*** boss angle.

It's time to give Lauranitis a stable and a face for the company.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

"Oscar performance." :lol


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Paul/HHH, while a decent opener is still considerably lower than the past couple of weeks. Nothing terrible, but not great either all things considered.

Punk/Marella vs. Bryan/Cody losing viewers (along with the divas segment apparently, so who knows how many viewers were lost/gained between them) isn't good, but it's still the fourth most watched part of the show by a couple hundred thousand viewers at least, and only the big time slots beat it. Cena's Make a Wish video failing is great and hopefully sends a message that most WWE fans don't really care about that stuff. It's a nice message and all, but keep that stuff on wwe.com or the youtube channel.

Ace/Show gaining all the viewers back from the beginning of the show and then some scares me considering how long and boring the segment was, yet it still had such a big average number. Show has always been a good special attraction as Rock316AE has been saying, but if this means Ace is a draw... then I have a feeling things will be getting worse before they get better.

6-man tag after that obviously lost a majority of the viewers, so it shouldn't be a surprise Jericho/Orton gains somewhat. And hey, it's second best out of the quarter hours (behind Punk/Santino vs. Bryan/Cody). Ace gaining huge for the second time, along with Cena, once again tells me things are only going to get worse before they get better if WWE takes these ratings with more importance than some of the people on here do. Of course the overall rating isn't the strongest ever this year, but it's still the highest point of the show and if this means we'll be seeing more Ace in weeks to come... well... it's unfortunate. I like Ace but in small doses. But what's really bad is the storyline isn't that good at all and yet it's still pulling the strongest numbers of the show. HHH and Heyman should've done that considering the storyline, who's involved, and the slot it was in... but oh well. 

Edit: Also, I think Ace was technically in the first quarter as well, so he was in the top three spots of the night. :lmao


----------



## Brye

I'd appreciate the Laurinitas stuff if he was even close to being on Vince's level of entertainment. He's fun but a show focused around him gets rather old. If they're going to flaunt him like crazy and have him main event a PPV, at least add some depth to him. He has potential but I don't think they're using it.


----------



## Rock316AE

Something people need to realize about the first quarter: You can't affect the number unless you told the audience that you're opening the show BEFORE the show OR if the segment is longer than the 15 minutes quarter. In the peak years, the first quarter was 90% of the time the lowest of the night because the audience grew. 

When you think about it, we had good acting on this show, Show was tremendous, Heyman was awesome as usual, HHH is great and the Orton/Sheamus chemistry is perfect. So at least a few good performers in this miserable product.


----------



## RatedR10

Holy shit at Laurinaitis's numbers. I didn't expect that. If those numbers remain steady for Laurinaitis/Show/Cena, it would seem a Show & Laurinaitis vs. Cena program would draw pretty well after OTL if Show screws Cena.

I wouldn't be a huge fan of the angle, but if there's really that much interest in those angles on the show, it seems like it'd draw well along with the HHH/Heyman/Lesnar angle.


----------



## Silent KEEL

I hate the fact that Laranitis is a draw, it's sickening to know that we'll probably see EVEN MORE of him after this. I like the guy in a limited role, but he's been monopolizing the show for the past month.


----------



## jonoaries

Kane gained a million viewers and all the tag matches lost big. 

So Kane is a big draw & tag matches are not a draw. 

Yet both RAW & SD are primarily tag team matches. 
That meeeeans

More Kane, less Tag matches!

Book it Vince! Give Kane the strap!


----------



## DesolationRow

Johnny Ace becoming a draw is sort of the ultimate proof how far pro wrestling has come... or gone... He's so bland and such a black hole of charisma that it's like viewers want to immerse themselves in the caustic yet uninspired voluminous expository of Ace's promos in a _meta_ auto-critique of the state of the artform that is professional wrestling. In a positively refreshing way, however, Ace's personification of corporate cronyism juxtaposed with a forceless, feckless presence and demeanor highlights the maturation and progression of the audience's appreciation and understanding of a more nuanced characterization of the villain. Whereas "Mr. McMahon" was an over-the-top alter ego of Vince McMahon's for whom nothing less than the firmament was acceptable, Laurinaitis is actually the more immediately recognizable denizen of the hypothetical workplace. I do wonder, however, whether or not the majority of the viewers appreciate this telling difference of the times.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Ace is not the best mic talkers in the WWE at all, but the fact that his segments gain viewers is proof that people respond to characters who are well developed and of importance. Ace has been given segments with the biggest stars for the past few months and people know that when he is on something important will happen. If WWE can make a guy like Ace a draw, then most people can be a draw. Also not taking anything away from Big Show who did a good job showing sympathy and Cena since they contributed to the numbers as well.

The time slot for the tag team match involving Punk almost always loses viewers so no surprise and the fact that it is a combined number with an Alicia Fox vs Phoenix match is also why that time slot lost viewers.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Right, I might be done. 

If thats what the people are into, they're the most retarded audience on the planet. that fact that the WWE audience tune in to see John Laurinatitis more then anyone on the roster is sickening and just shows how far standerds have fallen not only in the wrestling buisness but the auience expectations aswell. And no doubt we will see more and more of him now thanks to these numbers.

I might need to take break from WWE until the summer before I start losing my mind. Fuck John Laurinaitis and fuck the dumbass audience for watching him.


----------



## BANKSY

I'm glad Show's performace was reflected in the viewers, he is a way better actor then the likes of Cena, Ryder etc.


----------



## kokepepsi

Gains and losses total for this year.
Just added the gains and then subtracted the losses.

THIS IS NOT ACCURATE MAKES ZERO SENSE DONT GET BUTTHURT DID IT FOR THE LULZ








*Cena = Gained 5,429,000*
Ace = Gained 5,004,000
Undertaker = Gained 4,657,000
HHH = Gained 3,788,000
Kane = Gained 2,870,000
Lesnar = Gained 2,802,000
Jericho = Gained 2,710,000
Rock = Gained 2,425,000
Shawn = Gained 2,256,000
Henry = Gained 1,524,000
Khali = Gained 1,227,000
Barret = Gained 1,107,000
Punk = Gained 986,000
Show = Gained 899,000
Orton = Gained 640,000
Otunga = Gained 630,000
Tensai = Gained 374,000
ADR= Lost 80,000
Rhodes = Lost 279,000
Rtruth = Lost 677,000
Epico = Lost 711,000
Miz = Lost 720,000
Primo = Lost 815,000
Ryder = Lost 878,000
Brodus = Lost 957,000
Sheamus = Lost 1,028,000
Ziggler = Lost 1,189,000
Santino = Lost 1,436,000
Kofi = Lost 1,819,000
Swagger = Lost 2,792,000
*Bryan = Lost 3,081,000*


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

kokepepsi said:


> Gains and losses total for this year.
> Just added the gains and then subtracted the losses.
> 
> THIS IS NOT ACCURATE MAKES ZERO SENSE DONT GET BUTTHURT DID IT FOR THE LULZ
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Cena = Gained 5,429,000*
> Ace = Gained 5,004,000
> Undertaker = Gained 4,657,000
> HHH = Gained 3,788,000
> Kane = Gained 2,870,000
> Lesnar = Gained 2,802,000
> Jericho = Gained 2,710,000
> Rock = Gained 2,425,000
> Shawn = Gained 2,256,000
> Henry = Gained 1,524,000
> Khali = Gained 1,227,000
> Barret = Gained 1,107,000
> Punk = Gained 986,000
> Show = Gained 899,000
> Orton = Gained 640,000
> Otunga = Gained 630,000
> Tensai = Gained 374,000
> ADR= Lost 80,000
> Rhodes = Lost 279,000
> Rtruth = Lost 677,000
> Epico = Lost 711,000
> Miz = Lost 720,000
> Primo = Lost 815,000
> Ryder = Lost 878,000
> Brodus = Lost 957,000
> Sheamus = Lost 1,028,000
> Ziggler = Lost 1,189,000
> Santino = Lost 1,436,000
> Kofi = Lost 1,819,000
> Swagger = Lost 2,792,000
> *Bryan = Lost 3,081,000*


I take this to heart...


----------



## BANKSY

Here come the Bryan marks..........


----------



## Green Light

So seriously, why the fuck does Johnny Ace draw so well? Anyone have any ideas?


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Green Light said:


> So seriously, why the fuck does Johnny Ace draw so well? Anyone have any ideas?


What's his mic/promo time lookin like? 55 plus mins?


----------



## robertdeniro

kokepepsi said:


> Gains and losses total for this year.
> Just added the gains and then subtracted the losses.
> 
> THIS IS NOT ACCURATE MAKES ZERO SENSE DONT GET BUTTHURT DID IT FOR THE LULZ
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Cena = Gained 5,429,000*
> Ace = Gained 5,004,000
> Undertaker = Gained 4,657,000
> HHH = Gained 3,788,000
> Kane = Gained 2,870,000
> Lesnar = Gained 2,802,000
> Jericho = Gained 2,710,000
> Rock = Gained 2,425,000
> Shawn = Gained 2,256,000
> Henry = Gained 1,524,000
> Khali = Gained 1,227,000
> Barret = Gained 1,107,000
> Punk = Gained 986,000
> Show = Gained 899,000
> Orton = Gained 640,000
> Otunga = Gained 630,000
> Tensai = Gained 374,000
> ADR= Lost 80,000
> Rhodes = Lost 279,000
> Rtruth = Lost 677,000
> Epico = Lost 711,000
> Miz = Lost 720,000
> Primo = Lost 815,000
> Ryder = Lost 878,000
> Brodus = Lost 957,000
> Sheamus = Lost 1,028,000
> Ziggler = Lost 1,189,000
> Santino = Lost 1,436,000
> Kofi = Lost 1,819,000
> Swagger = Lost 2,792,000
> *Bryan = Lost 3,081,000*


The last one :lmao


----------



## robertdeniro

Laranitis gaining these big numbers tells you alot about how bad the roster is today.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

darn that means we will get more bullshit segments like the big show ace one

just damn it


----------



## Starbuck

Holy fucking hell Big Johnny lol. Jesus Christ!! DEM NUMBERZ. I don't know whether to shake my head or congratulate them tbh. I mean give them their props here, they actually seemed to have created a character that people want to see. This isn't Cena or HHH who when given a big angle are expected to pull numbers like this and do. This is John Fucking Laurinaitis and now he seems to be able to pull numbers like this on his lonesome. That deserves credit at least.

The problem though and it is a glaring problem, yet again they've focused on a non-wrestler. Remember Michael Cole last year? Didn't his segments draw over a million viewers at one time too? You want to know why WWE have no heels? It's because they invest all their time and effort into creating guys like Big Johnny and Cole instead, guys who the fans hate but guys who aren't actually wrestlers and therefore can't be cashed in on in the long run. It's daft and makes no sense but there you have it, it's WWE in a nutshell. 

I still don't think this is a good sign for OTL on Sunday though. Also, instead of the holding pattern WWE had for a while there where they were having steady gains across the board. Now they have reverted back to the old way of big opener, loss, loss, loss, big 10pm, loss, loss, loss, big overrun. They've made zero progress and while Johnny is pulling numbers like this now, you have to wonder how long it will last. 

HHH/Heyman did alright. Punk/Bryan did shit. I'm willing to bet a lot of people don't even know they're having a match on Sunday tbh. Orton/Jericho gaining was nice for them. And Big Johnny trumps them all. Madness.


----------



## deadmau

it's official: Punk can't draw!


----------



## itsmadness

LOOK AT THOSE FUCKING RATINGS. David otunga should be wwe champion with laurantis as his manager and mark henry as his bodyguard. imagine those fucking ratings.


----------



## JasonLives

> CM Punk and Santino Marella vs. Cody Rhodes and Daniel Bryan plus the Beth Phoenix vs. Alicia Fox match lost 601,000 viewers.


This doesnt make sense. The Divas match was in Q3 not 2. Q2 barely had any actual match in it. Announcer talk, entrances and 2 commercial breaks filled that one up.



> John Cena's Make-A-Wish segment lost 370,000 viewers and did the lowest rated quarter in months with a 2.64 rating.


This was most of the Tag Team match, Divas match and ended with the Make-A-Wish segment ( wasent long at all ).




> Brodus Clay, R-Truth and Kofi Kingston vs. The Miz, Dolph Ziggler and Jack Swagger lost 996,000 viewers.


Im guessing this means both Q6 and Q7. Since the match happened inbetween. That half hour was 3 commerical breaks, replays, backstage stuff and the actual match. Once again unfair to put all blame on those guys when the match was only like 5 minutes in a 30 minute period.

I dont understand how they break this down. Sometimes a match is like 1 minute long and its still "Him Vs. Him lost 500,000 viewers". Really unfair.

But its always telling where the commerical breaks make the Quarters take a hit. Its no wonder that the commercial free Raw did such a huge number years ago.


----------



## DesolationRow

Have to agree with *JasonLives*. Much of the time, these breakdowns are weighed excessively, almost like WWE is booking the show so the websites can run the terrible losses for certain matches and segments. Almost every segment that saw traumatic losses was commercial- and recap-heavy as hell this week, with minimal time dedicated to wrestling.

Everything they've done in the last couple of weeks on Raw minus the Paul E. return, Triple H being brought back this week and the Laurinaitis/Big Show angle (no matter what you think of it, at least it required some thought, somewhere, from someone) demonstrates that they don't give a shit. And they're not going to until at least the first week of June at the earliest, maybe the last week of June at the latest. Depending on Vince's whims, heh.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

I knew the Big Show and Ace segment would do huge. Just because of Show's acting.

People flicking through their TV channels and come across a 7ft-500 pound man crying (doing a good job crying, BTW) and a man being able to get him to his knees without using physical force.

I TOLD YOU!!!!


----------



## Carcass

This proves Ace is a star. At Summerslam, Ace goes over punk to win the WWE title and like in Japan when he was Austin, Rock and Hogan rolled into one he'll be Rock, Austin and Hogan rolled into one in the US too.


----------



## jonoaries

Another thing to notice is that everything the E advertised gained viewers. 

They advertised Jericho/Orton, Kane/Show, HHH's return, & Cena. 

You advertise it, they will come apparently. 

I don't even believe in TV ratings anymore but I thought that was interesting.


----------



## A-C-P

Rock316AE said:


> Heyman was great.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The indy guys, never disappointing us. Always comedy.


But when an Orton match lost 588,000 viewers in that same timeslot a few months ago it was fine b/c it was just a random timeslot that always loses viewers? So the 2nd quarter hour is now not a random slot that always loses viewers?

This is the inconsistency biased posting I called you on a couple weeks ago. I know it only happens when you talk about Punk and Bryan though.


The rest of your post i agree with for the most part.

And jonoaires made a a great point above as well, evertything they advertised gain viewers, something to take note of.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

A-C-P said:


> But when an Orton match lost 588,000 viewers in that same timeslot a few months ago it was fine b/c it was just a random timeslot that always loses viewers? So the 2nd quarter hour is now not a random slot that always loses viewers?
> 
> This is the inconsistency biased posting I called you on a couple weeks ago. I know it only happens when you talk about Punk and Bryan though.
> 
> 
> The rest of your post I do agree with.


His comeback will be "Not even Orton can save such a terrible roster", but yeah very biased.


----------



## ecabney

A-C-P said:


> *But when an Orton match lost 750,000 viewers in that same timeslot a few months ago it was fine b/c it *was just a random timeslot that always loses viewers? So the 2nd quarter hour is now not a random slot that always loses viewers?
> 
> This is the inconsistency biased posting I called you on a couple weeks ago. I know it only happens when you talk about Punk and Bryan though.
> 
> 
> The rest of your post i agree with for the most part.
> 
> And jonoaires made a a great point above as well, evertything they advertised gain viewers, something to take note of.


Fixed, but let's see Rock316AE spins this one.


----------



## Brave Nash

They treat Punk like a midcarder, they put him in a match where there is two commercial breaks during it with midcarders.
He's the WWE Champion and they don't even give him time to speak about his match with Bryan. Man this guy will not draw if they keep treating him like this.
Cm Punk sells more t-shirts then anybody but still he's stuck with irrelevent wrestlers.


----------



## Choke2Death

A-C-P said:


> But when an Orton match lost 588,000 viewers in that same timeslot a few months ago it was fine b/c it was just a random timeslot that always loses viewers?


When was that? I'm guessing a rematch with Wade Barrett the night after they had a match or some random match in the last few months when he has been in no storylines or anything meaningful. That should explain it a lot. People want something interesting and meaningless matches always lose viewers. I'm not attacking Punk or Bryan, though. But at least, they are involved in something that resembles a _feud_.


----------



## uknoww

so punk and bryan still can't draw


----------



## Cliffy

They've tried punk in main segments before and the guy tanked hard.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Choke2Death said:


> When was that? I'm guessing a rematch with Wade Barrett the night after they had a match or some random match in the last few months when he has been in no storylines or anything meaningful. That should explain it a lot. People want something interesting and meaningless matches always lose viewers. I'm not attacking Punk or Bryan, though. But at least, they are involved in something that resembles a _feud_.


It was on January and he faced Ziggler. Punk and Bryans feud is as meaningless as any random tag team match. I bet people don't even know they have a match this Sunday.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Cliffy Byro said:


> They've tried punk in main segments before and the guy tanked hard.


Didn't his segments with Triple H and John Cena last year gain over 1 million viewers?


----------



## Cliffy

That was before they ruined him.

He got terrible numbers towards the end of the year.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Cliffy Byro said:


> That was before they ruined him.
> 
> He got terrible numbers towards the end of the year.


Yeah because he was feuding with Alberto Del Rio, a newly introduced Johnny Ace, then he was feuding with Ziggler, then Jericho, and now a non existent feud with Bryan.


----------



## AthenaMark

Who cares what the segments did. Show still did one of the worst ratings of 2012.


----------



## Vyed

Chicago Warrior said:


> Didn't his segments with Triple H and John Cena last year gain over 1 million viewers?


1 million? Pretty sure, the highest punk ever did was 800 000 in the overrun along with John Laurinaitis(lol) the raw following Royal rumble I think. He never did a million viewers gain.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Vyed said:


> 1 million? Pretty sure, the highest punk ever did was 800 000 in the overrun along with John Laurinaitis(lol) the raw following Royal rumble I think. He never did a million viewers gain.


Not a hundred percent, but I think his last Raw match with Cena gained over 1000000 viewers (between SS and NoC). And Punk does consistently get good numbers for the times it he's in when he's not wrestling, even if the gains aren't big (or it's a loss). When it comes to matches though, Punk just doesn't pull in the numbers he should usually. Though this week wasn't bad considering he was in the highest odd quarter hour segment (not Q1, 5, or OR). Last week though was terrible for him as I'm pretty sure he was in one of the lower quarter hours and it was the OR... Not to mention that his match actually lost viewers... well... Punk is very hit or miss.


----------



## Hladeit

Big johnny is a great TV personality, well developed & consistently pushed character for the past 10 months. I guess that explains the character's success in the ratings. Shame, they dont even push superstars like that anymore. How many guys they ruined since WM 27 because of sheer incompetence and lack of long term planning? 

Why has The Miz turned into a jobber even after working with Rock & cena?
Why did Edge beat Del Rio at Wrestlemania? why did Cena beat him at NOC for the title?
Why did Heel HHH-Punk Mania program never happen? 
WTF happened to Zack Ryder? 
Why the hell are Ziggler & Swagger stuck in a limbo, jobbing to Brodus week after week?

Except for sheamus,bryan & punk, they have managed to ruin everyone else step by step. And if Punk loses the title, he will join the rest of the group relegated back to upper mid-card. Daniel Bryan being one of the established Smackdown main eventers can still survive I guess.


----------



## Vyed

Obis said:


> Not a hundred percent, but I think his last Raw match with Cena gained over 1000000 viewers (between SS and NoC). And Punk does consistently get good numbers for the times it he's in when he's not wrestling, even if the gains aren't big (or it's a loss). When it comes to matches though, Punk just doesn't pull in the numbers he should usually. Though this week wasn't bad considering he was in the highest odd quarter hour segment (not Q1, 5, or OR). Last week though was terrible for him as I'm pretty sure he was in one of the lower quarter hours and it was the OR... Not to mention that his match actually lost viewers... well... Punk is very hit or miss.


Which Raw are you talking about? date? 

Yeah, I am not blaming him if Miz-punk match for the 100th time, lost viewers but he hasnt proved himself to be a draw either. Something's fundamentally wrong with the guy's character that it doesnt appeal to the fans enough. Maybe looks does matter to the casuals? :shocked:


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Vyed said:


> 1 million? Pretty sure, the highest punk ever did was 800 000 in the overrun along with John Laurinaitis(lol) the raw following Royal rumble I think. He never did a million viewers gain.


His contract signing with Vince gained over 1 million viewers on 7/11/11. There is probably some more he did when he was feuding with Triple H and Cena, but this was last year.


----------



## Amuroray

punk cant draw lmao


----------



## Starbuck

Chicago Warrior said:


> His contract signing with *Vince* gained over 1 million viewers on 7/11/11. There is probably some more he did when he was feuding with *Triple H* and *Cena*, but this was last year.


Nuff said really tbh. Ace was able to pull this big of a number with fucking Big Show lol. Everything has gone to shit after that.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

A-C-P said:


> But when an Orton match lost 588,000 viewers in that same timeslot a few months ago it was fine b/c it was just a random timeslot that always loses viewers? So the 2nd quarter hour is now not a random slot that always loses viewers?
> 
> This is the inconsistency biased posting I called you on a couple weeks ago. I know it only happens when you talk about Punk and Bryan though.


And this is my biggest problem with Rock316ae. I'm not going to argue that Punk and Bryan are the biggest draws on earth. They have a lot of overcome and their booking doesn't help. My problem though is that when a lose in viewers occur with segments involving Punk and Bryan it's always their fault and no other factors are considered. However, when it comes to someone Rock316ae (and other Rock/TNA marks) like, the other factors are considered and the failure for such segments are dismissed. In the rant thread on Rock316ae a lot of posters defended him claiming that unlike most people on this board he provides facts to back his opinion. He has a huge problem with confirmation bias, and twist the information to fit his worldview a lot more than most posters do.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Starbuck said:


> Nuff said really tbh. Ace was able to pull this big of a number with fucking Big Show lol. Everything has gone to shit after that.


Well, this proves that if Punk is given a good angle he can bring in good numbers. People are interested in Ace because he has gotten some good development over the past 5 months or so. They know when he is on something big will go down, plus he made Big Show cry lol.


----------



## AttitudeOutlaw

Why is anyone remotely surprised by this? Skinny, charismaless indy midgets are never going to draw under any circumstances. It's the same story every week. There's an unspeakably big difference between smart-marks chanting for Bryan/Punk and booing Cena at live shows and what the 99%ers who watch at home like. Bryan and Punk are only there because Benoit went psycho. As soon as Vince decides the heat is off these hacks will be back in ROH.

I'm glad that Show/JL drew huge because it was a great segment and very well-worked.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

AttitudeOutlaw said:


> Why is anyone remotely surprised by this? Skinny, charismaless indy midgets are never going to draw under any circumstances. It's the same story every week. There's an unspeakably big difference between smart-marks chanting for Bryan/Punk and booing Cena at live shows and what the 99%ers who watch at home like. Bryan and Punk are only there because Benoit went psycho. As soon as Vince decides the heat is off these hacks will be back in ROH.
> 
> I'm glad that Show/JL drew huge because it was a great segment and very well-worked.


You know, people at home whether smarks or casuals also like well developed feuds and Punk vs Bryan isn't that in anyway.


----------



## A-C-P

AttitudeOutlaw said:


> Why is anyone remotely surprised by this? Skinny, charismaless indy midgets are never going to draw under any circumstances. It's the same story every week. There's an unspeakably big difference between smart-marks chanting for Bryan/Punk and booing Cena at live shows and what the 99%ers who watch at home like. *Bryan and Punk are only there because Benoit went psycho. As soon as Vince decides the heat is off these hacks will be back in ROH.*
> I'm glad that Show/JL drew huge because it was a great segment and very well-worked.


Really don't know any contract details for Bryan but Punk's current contract would suggest otherwise :lol

Its like Starbuck has stated multiple times recently, it really doesn;t matter what wrestlers are involved if there is not story or no reason to care about a match or feud then people won't care about it. Right now Ace/Cena is the ONLY storyline out there and the ONLY match at OTL that has been given a reason to care about for the most part. The WHC fatal four-way has gotten some attention as well. There is no Punk/Bryan feud at all, Punk has spent more time involved in the Ace/Cena stuff than he has been involved in building his own feud with Bryan. 

The lost viewers for a random tag match involving the 2 in a segment that is nototrious for losing veiwers anyways can hardly be veiwed as a surprise.


----------



## AttitudeOutlaw

Chicago Warrior said:


> You know, people at home whether smarks or casuals also like well developed feuds and Punk vs Bryan isn't that in anyway.


Yes, definitely, but they don't like average looking nerds involved in them on-screen. Wrestlers are supposed to be larger than life in their size, presence and colorful personalities. Punk, Bryan, Bourne, Kofi, Ziggler and the others are killing the business just like how Hart and Michaels nearly did in the mid 90's after the steroid trial. There was bad press after the steroids trials like the bad press after Benoit and Eddie's deaths, thus WWE started pushing tiny guys for a period and the ratings went down drastically.


----------



## Rock316AE

For the people crying, relax, I know it's the second quarter(not like it matters with these guys lol but anyway), I just threw a line to use that Rock smiley.



Green Light said:


> So seriously, why the fuck does Johnny Ace draw so well? Anyone have any ideas?


In general, great/charismatic authority figures always did great numbers, Bischoff in WCW and WWE, Vince and Shane etc. Of course Ace is just horrible in everything he does but I guess people can relate to the abuse of power angle, even when a guy like Johnny fucking Ace is doing it. They're always putting him in interesting situations with big names, this week Show's awesome performance, Lesnar, Cena, HHH etc, and he basically took over the show with his ridiculous number of segments every week. The huge 10pm gain is 100% Show BTW, he's the guy who sold the segment so well and he was always a big attraction in house shows and TV anyway which is why he's always protected.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

AttitudeOutlaw said:


> Bryan and Punk are only there because Benoit went psycho. As soon as Vince decides the heat is off these hacks will be back in ROH.


Wait, so they're only here as replacement for Benoit? Do you think once the heat dies off Vince is going to bring Benoit back from the dead? You do know he's dead, right? The fact is people like that style of wrestling style (though Punk doesn't wrestle that style and comparing him to Benoit is ridiculous) and good wrestlers are needed, so the WWE are going to hire people to fill that need


----------



## A-C-P

Rock316AE said:


> For the people crying, relax, I know it's the second quarter(not like it matters with these guys lol but anyway), I just threw a line to use that Rock smiley.


It is a cool smiley :rocky and we finally got our Bryan smilies to :bryan1 :bryan2 :yes


As for why Johnny Ace "draws" Power Hungry Heel Authority figures have always drawn well it seems.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

AttitudeOutlaw said:


> Yes, definitely, but they don't like average looking nerds involved in them on-screen. Wrestlers are supposed to be larger than life in their size, presence and colorful personalities. Punk, Bryan, Bourne, Kofi, Ziggler and the others are killing the business just like how Hart and Michaels nearly did in the mid 90's after the steroid trial. There was bad press after the steroids trials like the bad press after Benoit and Eddie's deaths, thus WWE started pushing tiny guys for a period and the ratings went down drastically.


How are Batista, Edge, Triple H, Randy Orton, Sheamus and John Cena small guys? These guys were pushed heavy after the Chris Benoit/Eddie Guerrero incidents, which makes your argument invalid. WWE pushes guys like Punk and Bryan because they have stepped up and are better than some of the guys in the current roster. Besides if WWE really wanted to they could take the belt from Punk anytime they want and give it to a guy like Ryback, Big Show, Kane or even back to Cena, but they are comfortable enough with him as champion since he has been champion for over 5 months now.


----------



## AttitudeOutlaw

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> Wait, so they're only here as replacement for Benoit? Do you think once the heat dies off Vince is going to bring Benoit back from the dead? You do know he's dead, right? The fact is people like that style of wrestling style (though Punk doesn't wrestle that style and comparing him to Benoit is ridiculous) and good wrestlers are needed, so the WWE are going to hire people to fill that need


That's not what I said at all.  I meant that because Benoit and Eddie gained WWE a lot of bad press for steroids and perceived drug-abuse, WWE started hiring and pushing loads of small guys who clearly had never touched a steroid or even a beer in their lives to hold them up as examples that there's 'nothing to see here' with regards to any perceived drug culture (I say perceived because the naysayers are clueless idiots who don't know a thing about steroids). Like I said, once the heat is off (people forget) then they'll go back to how they were and all these gym-fearing kids will be gone.


----------



## Vyed

Whats Benoit's death has to do with Punk and bryan? lol


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

When put in good angles Punk draws well.

His contract signing with vince gained a million.

His contract signing with HHH on Smackdown gained 800'000

His match with Cena 2 weeks after Summerslam gained a million.

Gained 800'000 in a six man tag two weeks before the rumble and gained 750,000 the week after with his match with Johnny Ace.

His sobriety test with Jericho did a 3.6, the same mumber that Rock/Cena and HHH/HBK/Taker were consistently hitting on the RTWM.

So when is good angles he draws well, and in promos he draws very consistently. But when he is in a nothing feud with DB its not suprising that the audience doesnt care.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Vyed said:


> Which Raw are you talking about? date?


Looked it up and it's August 22nd. Like I said I may be mistaken, but I know Punk gained 1,000,000 with someone at least once.

And honestly, Punk is a good enough draw to the point where if he has a good angle, whether with a proven draw or not, he'll get good numbers. Yeah his best numbers came when working with proven draws in Vince, Cena, and HHH but he also had a great angle going into those and that's why the numbers were as big as they were. Then there was the OR where his segment with Ace gained 800,000+ viewers, and at the time I wouldn't call Ace a draw by any means. He was still developing into a true heel. Foley being in the segment might've helped though no doubt, but Punk has been in some big gains and one of the highest segments of the show with or without a proven draw. 

However, what separates him from a true proven draw though is if he's put into an angle with no story, no good build, and is a throw-a-way for the most part, he won't do extremely well. But he holds his own well enough. It's just guys like Rock, Taker, HHH, Vince, Cena, etc. when put in the same situation, would more than likely pull in bigger numbers.


----------



## Mister Hands

I find it hard to blame anyone other than Vince and creative for any drops, really. Across the board. The shows are written to a very predictable, outdated, insultingly shitty formula. And the fact that some of the shittiest segments are actually spiking ratings just depresses me even more.


----------



## Starbuck

Chicago Warrior said:


> Well, this proves that if Punk is given a good angle he can bring in good numbers. People are interested in Ace because he has gotten some good development over the past 5 months or so. They know when he is on something big will go down, plus he made Big Show cry lol.


Punk just needs to go around making people cry then lol.


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> Punk just needs to go around making people cry then lol.


:lol apparently so. Apparently larger than life athletes crying = DEM RATINGZ


----------



## Emberdon

Largest Athlete in the world crying = Ratings.


----------



## Punked Up

DesolationRow said:


> Johnny Ace becoming a draw is sort of the ultimate proof how far pro wrestling has come... or gone... He's so bland and such a black hole of charisma that it's like viewers want to immerse themselves in the caustic yet uninspired voluminous expository of Ace's promos in a _meta_ auto-critique of the state of the artform that is professional wrestling. In a positively refreshing way, however, Ace's personification of corporate cronyism juxtaposed with a forceless, feckless presence and demeanor highlights the maturation and progression of the audience's appreciation and understanding of a more nuanced characterization of the villain. Whereas "Mr. McMahon" was an over-the-top alter ego of Vince McMahon's for whom nothing less than the firmament was acceptable, Laurinaitis is actually the more immediately recognizable denizen of the hypothetical workplace. I do wonder, however, whether or not the majority of the viewers appreciate this telling difference of the times.


*tries to look smart*

Decent post here, agree for the most part. I completely understand what you're saying.


----------



## Rock316AE

The largest athlete in the world taking a legit punch from one of the greatest boxers of all time was mega ratings + buys. Just makes you wonder what would happen if Brock was still unstoppable, a match with Show could draw huge on a big PPV.


----------



## #Mark

Green Light said:


> So seriously, why the fuck does Johnny Ace draw so well? Anyone have any ideas?


He draws well because he's featured heavily, you simpleton.


----------



## Green Light

#Mark said:


> He draws well because he's featured heavily, you simpleton.


Shame that same logic doesn't work for Punk unk3


----------



## GillbergReturns

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> And this is my biggest problem with Rock316ae. I'm not going to argue that Punk and Bryan are the biggest draws on earth. They have a lot of overcome and their booking doesn't help. My problem though is that when a lose in viewers occur with segments involving Punk and Bryan it's always their fault and no other factors are considered. However, when it comes to someone Rock316ae (and other Rock/TNA marks) like, the other factors are considered and the failure for such segments are dismissed. In the rant thread on Rock316ae a lot of posters defended him claiming that unlike most people on this board he provides facts to back his opinion. He has a huge problem with confirmation bias, and twist the information to fit his worldview a lot more than most posters do.


It goes both ways. You have a bunch of Punk mark running in and saying Orton lost 500,000 viewers in q2 he's not a draw so when Punk loses 600,000 viewers in q2 you know the anti Punk crowd has to run in and make those same comments.


----------



## #Mark

Big Show is the only draw left.


----------



## GillbergReturns

Alot of people asking why Big Johny is drawing. People love the ***hole boss angle.

Without the Vince McMahon character Austin, Foley and Rock are nowhere near as big as they turned out to be.


----------



## Arrive.Post.Leave

GillbergReturns said:


> It goes both ways. You have a bunch of Punk mark running in and saying Orton lost 500,000 viewers in q2 he's not a draw so when Punk loses 600,000 viewers in q2 you know the anti Punk crowd has to run in and make those same comments.


Punk nuthuggers has got to be the most deluded set of marks I had ever come across in any wrestling forum ever. 

Still remembered how some of them preached about how the Summer of Punk was supposed to lead on to a dawn of new era. A new wrestling boom where ratings would be in the same sphere as the AE. Yeah right, can't remember the AE gaining straight under 3.0 figures in a span of 4 weeks......fpalm


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

GillbergReturns said:


> It goes both ways. You have a bunch of Punk mark running in and saying Orton lost 500,000 viewers in q2 he's not a draw so when Punk loses 600,000 viewers in q2 you know the anti Punk crowd has to run in and make those same comments.


They're either trolling and/or trying to make a point. Fact is a lot of the people who dislike Bryan/Punk are fans of Orton so when they do this they're trying to get under the skin of the opposing side and trying to point out the hypocrisy.


----------



## Punked Up

Arrive.Post.Leave said:


> Punk nuthuggers has got to be the most deluded set of marks I had ever come across in any wrestling forum ever.
> 
> Still remembered how some of them preached about how the Summer of Punk was supposed to lead on to a dawn of new era. A new wrestling boom where ratings would be in the same sphere as the AE. Yeah right, can't remember the AE gaining straight under 3.0 figures in a span of 4 weeks......fpalm


Considering you joined this forum THIS MONTH, I highly doubt you have any idea what you're talking about when you paraphrase what people said nearly a year ago.


----------



## Choke2Death

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> They're either trolling and/or trying to make a point. Fact is a lot of the people who dislike Bryan/Punk are fans of Orton so when they do this they're trying to get under the skin of the opposing side and trying to point out the hypocrisy.


Except it's always the Punk/Bryan marks that run their mouth about "lulz Orton cant draw". Those who make fun of Punk's drawing ability tend to be Rock fans, actually. So yeah, I have no sympathy for Punk/Bryan marks getting owned by those numbers.


----------



## Little Mac

What shows air at the same time as Raw in the US?


----------



## Brye

90% of the people that talk ratings are just trying express who they hate by any means necessary. Then there's 10% (THE ERIC BISCHOFF TEN PERCENT~!!!) that actually are intrigued by this stuff.


----------



## jonoaries

Brye said:


> 90% of the people that talk ratings are just trying express who they hate by any means necessary. Then there's 10% (THE ERIC BISCHOFF TEN PERCENT~!!!) that actually are intrigued by this stuff.


I think so too. A lot of people follow this stuff to troll that's about it.


----------



## Romanista

Punk is not a draw, everyone know it.

WWE doesn't even trust him to perform in the main events anymore, last time they let Punk wrestles in the ME (few weeks ago), he lost viewers in the main event time slot.


----------



## AthenaMark

GillbergReturns said:


> Alot of people asking why Big Johny is drawing. People love the ***hole boss angle.
> 
> Without the Vince McMahon character Austin, Foley and Rock are nowhere near as big as they turned out to be.


Vince McMahon was NOT the draw of Monday Night Raw. He was a good foil for Austin but the Rock and Foley segments outdrew all of that even though it wasn't designed to. The McMahon stuff kind of led to the downfall of alot of progression. Him screwing over Rock at Mania 2000 got trashed tossed at them but that was as hot as it could be for him. Austin kicking his ass was what made money and if he never screwed over Bret Hart, he would of never mattered on the level he did. That's how all of that shit began. The screwjob carried over into how everyone perceived him.


----------



## D.M.N.

Breakdowns for the past few weeks...

*April 30th*
Hour 1
Q1 - 3.53 rating / 5.17 million
Q2 - 3.52 rating / 5.16 million
Q3 - 3.20 rating / 4.68 million
Q4 - 3.39 rating / 4.96 million

Hour 2
Q5 - 3.36 rating / 4.89 million
Q6 - 3.19 rating / 4.65 million
Q7 - 3.05 rating / 4.45 million
Q8 + Overrun - 3.49 rating / 5.03 million

*May 7th*
Hour 1
Q1 - 3.50 rating / 5.00 million
Q2 - 3.23 rating / 4.62 million
Q3 - 2.91 rating / 4.16 million
Q4 - 2.76 rating / 3.95 million

Hour 2
Q5 - 2.89 rating / 4.14 million
Q6 - 2.94 rating / 4.20 million
Q7 - 3.03 rating / 4.32 million
Q8 + Overrun - 2.94 rating / 4.21 million

*May 14th*
Hour 1
Q1 - 3.32 rating / 4.63 million
Q2 + Q3 - 2.87 rating / 4.03 million
Q4 - 2.64 rating / 3.66 million

Hour 2
Q5 - 3.37 rating / 4.70 million
Q6 - 2.54 rating / 3.70 million
Q7 - 2.62 rating / 3.81 million
Q8 + Overrun - 3.43 rating / 4.80 million


----------



## GillbergReturns

AthenaMark said:


> Vince McMahon was NOT the draw of Monday Night Raw. He was a good foil for Austin but the Rock and Foley segments outdrew all of that even though it wasn't designed to. The McMahon stuff kind of led to the downfall of alot of progression. Him screwing over Rock at Mania 2000 got trashed tossed at them but that was as hot as it could be for him. Austin kicking his ass was what made money and if he never screwed over Bret Hart, he would of never mattered on the level he did. That's how all of that shit began. The screwjob carried over into how everyone perceived him.


I didn't imply that he was the draw. Just showed you how people relate to the *** boss angle. Stephanie McMahon is another great example. Triple H was on the verge of failure before the unholy alliance.

Rock and Foley both got huge bumps from Vinnie Mac too. Rock was the corporate champ, and Mic's hospital segments with Vince dramatically helped endear him with the crowd. 

If you don't get what I'm saying take a look at Rock's reactions the second he started interacting with Vince. After that brief face turn in 98 he was the hottest thing in wrestling.

Yes the screwjob is the reason why people hated Vince so much, but I'm not sure why that matters or why you bring it up. BTW My opinion has always been that was a calculated move on his behalf. He knew Bret was dead weight, and knew that him v Austin was the future of the company.


----------



## Padhlala

jblvdx said:


> When put in good angles Punk draws well.
> 
> His contract signing with vince gained a million.
> 
> His contract signing with HHH on Smackdown gained 800'000
> 
> His match with Cena 2 weeks after Summerslam gained a million.
> 
> Gained 800'000 in a six man tag two weeks before the rumble and gained 750,000 the week after with his match with Johnny Ace.
> 
> His sobriety test with Jericho did a 3.6, the same mumber that Rock/Cena and HHH/HBK/Taker were consistently hitting on the RTWM.
> 
> So when is good angles he draws well, and in promos he draws very consistently. But when he is in a nothing feud with DB its not suprising that the audience doesnt care.


The entire poit of a draw, is that tey bring in viewers. In a good storyline, anyone can draw.

But those segments, it was cena/HHH/Vince drawing.

Punk has been in so many woeful segments, and has constantly drawn weak numbers.

As for wwe pushing small guys, yes it's killing the business, although wrestling is scripted, it should have some element of realism. Punk beating mark Henry is stupid. Mind you, I think small people can draw as heels.


----------



## hardysno1fan

*Is this the worst year in terms of ratings?*

I came across this ratings history and Raw is almost dead. I came back to watch WE post Mania as I usually do (i tend to watch in cycles of interest) 

http://www.thewrestlingcafe.com/ind...categorised/87-wwe-and-tna-tv-ratings-history

Anyway the ratings are deader than dead. I remember in 2008/9 and people were talking about how bad the ratings were then. Raw is struggling to get a consistent 3 rating, That makes 2009 look mightily impressive. Funny thing is 2009 was awful. There was that stupid thing with William Regal when he turned the lights off for no reason. 

I know viewership has fallen dramatically from all shows but this is unprecedented. I mean how much has technology improved over the past 3 years? You cant explain everything away to technology eg streaming.


----------



## 666_The_Game_666

*Re: Is this the worst year in terms of ratings?*

From June 10th 1996 till December 15th 1997 Raw hit a 3 8 times. Lowest rating was a 1.8 on October 14 1996. From December 22 until the end of the Monday Night War Raw never dipped below a 3.


----------



## TN Punk

*Re: Is this the worst year in terms of ratings?*

People stream, people download the show, people DVR the show, people watch on YT. There are more ways to watch than just watching live right then and now.

Plus there aren't many "Man I need to make sure I watch RAW next week" moments.


----------



## 666_The_Game_666

*Re: Is this the worst year in terms of ratings?*



TN Punk said:


> People stream, people download the show, people DVR the show, people watch on YT. There are more ways to watch than just watching live right then and now.


Exactly. Meltzer usually puts the DVR numbers in the Observer and it tallys into the hundreds of thousands for an average Raw


----------



## hardysno1fan

*Re: Is this the worst year in terms of ratings?*



666_The_Game_666 said:


> Exactly. Meltzer usually puts the DVR numbers in the Observer and it tallys into the hundreds of thousands for an average Raw


U got a link?


----------



## 666_The_Game_666

*Re: Is this the worst year in terms of ratings?*



hardysno1fan said:


> U got a link?


not to a direct article i dont have any links but i found a number for the 27/2 Raw which was the Rock return. Show did 386,000 on delay or DVR making up 11% of that weeks rating.


----------



## hardysno1fan

*Re: Is this the worst year in terms of ratings?*



666_The_Game_666 said:


> not to a direct article i dont have any links but i found a number for the 27/2 Raw which was the Rock return. Show did 386,000 on delay or DVR making up 11% of that weeks rating.


Still very minor compared to the grand scale.


----------



## doinktheclowns

*Re: Is this the worst year in terms of ratings?*

Ratings are going to drop every single year, not because the product is less popular but because or because the product is bad, but because of the rise of the internet and more so now the rise of the speed of internet and the rescission.

The people that actually watch the product is a false reading because the actual ratings will be much higher because of people recording it, streaming it and watching it on youtube and other similar sites.

WWE is costing itself a lot of money because of it failure to react to the situation and I would go as far as to day it has almost gone to far to do anything about it.

There is a coincidence that ratings drop every year as internet speeds get faster each year and online content because more and more available and more and more people are becoming savvy online.

If WWE wants to really reclaim some bigger figures they need to lower the prices of the smaller PPVS like Capitol Punishment and Over The Limit etc etc.
And make the product more available worldwide.

WWE is far far far more popular in the UK than TNA is, but TNA gets higher ratings because in the circumstance TNA has made the cleverer move.

Whilst WWE is only available to people with a sky sports package costing over £50 a month and only available to a limited amount of people. TNA is instead available to every household in the UK on a free channel. It shows you the fans are still there but there not willing to pay over £50 and until WWE realises obvious facts like this they are continually shooting them selves in the foot and giving the upper hand to their rival. People instead of paying will choose to watch it for free online which if its is easy and possible to do and picture quality gets higher more and more people are going to do.

Im pretty sure Over The Limit is free in the UK tonight, which is a step in the right direction.

WWE isnt the only company suffering from deflated viewership and its the rise of the internet.


----------



## Hemen

*Re: Is this the worst year in terms of ratings?*



doinktheclowns said:


> Ratings are going to drop every single year, not because the product is less popular but because or because the product is bad, but because of the rise of the internet and more so now the rise of the speed of internet and the rescission.
> 
> The people that actually watch the product is a false reading because the actual ratings will be much higher because of people recording it, streaming it and watching it on youtube and other similar sites.
> 
> WWE is costing itself a lot of money because of it failure to react to the situation and I would go as far as to day it has almost gone to far to do anything about it.
> 
> There is a coincidence that ratings drop every year as internet speeds get faster each year and online content because more and more available and more and more people are becoming savvy online.
> 
> If WWE wants to really reclaim some bigger figures they need to lower the prices of the smaller PPVS like Capitol Punishment and Over The Limit etc etc.
> And make the product more available worldwide.
> 
> WWE is far far far more popular in the UK than TNA is, but TNA gets higher ratings because in the circumstance TNA has made the cleverer move.
> 
> Whilst WWE is only available to people with a sky sports package costing over £50 a month and only available to a limited amount of people. TNA is instead available to every household in the UK on a free channel. It shows you the fans are still there but there not willing to pay over £50 and until WWE realises obvious facts like this they are continually shooting them selves in the foot and giving the upper hand to their rival. People instead of paying will choose to watch it for free online which if its is easy and possible to do and picture quality gets higher more and more people are going to do.
> 
> Im pretty sure Over The Limit is free in the UK tonight, which is a step in the right direction.
> 
> WWE isnt the only company suffering from deflated viewership and its the rise of the internet.


WWE is now less popular than it was in the attitude era and golden age era. Not because of the interenet, but because of wwes abilty to depush stars and not create big enough stars.


----------



## Vyed

^ More like lack of competition.


----------



## jonoaries

If people can't understand the concept of time-shifted viewing there's nothing more to discuss. 
TV ratings are pretty much a dead issue in this century.


----------



## Kabraxal

Part of the reason the ratings have been bad was seen tonight... my god what a terribly booked Raw. Who would stick with it when you have 40+ minutes of Cena, the focus of the show on Lauranitis/Cena/Big Show, random segments like Santino/Ricardo, worthless Divas match, Punk/Bryan booked just oddly, and that ridiculously stupid main event. I mean... I kept flipping the entire night because the show was just fucking terrible. I hope the numbers tanked as the night went on.


----------



## Rick_James

*Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

Was I the only one laughing tonight during the main event tonight, when all the good guys start running down to the ring and you see Khali, in the midst, walking at a snails pace to the ring? This guy mobility is laughable, even if he gets a pop from the crowd sometimes, they seriously need to get rid of him already.


----------



## Shazayum

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

nah I lol'd too. Everybody's rushing to the ring and he's just strutting his stuff. :lmao


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

Khali serves his purpose well
1.Gets crowd reactions
2.He is a big man-Crowd pay money to see a freak of nature to get entertained
3.He appears for 5 Mins in a two hour programme-Don't see why all this moaning and bitching about him


----------



## CamillePunk

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

Funkasaurus really hauled ass! I was impressed!

I try to pretend Khali doesn't exist.


----------



## Couch

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

Even Brodus lapped him


----------



## alliance

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

Khali rules, great freak to watch reminds me of frankstein


----------



## Rick_James

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

He may get crowd reaction, but so does Zack Ryder (who is at least some what interesting) lol. I hate Ryback, but I think it'd make sense to have someone like him or Tensai take Khali's place in these squash matches at this point. I'm figuring part of the reason he's around is because WWE does have a fan base in India that probably watches the product to see him, but honestly, I'd rather them give Jinder Mahal a face turn or something instead lol.

Maybe I was in a giddy mood, but seeing Kofi and R-Truth running down to the ring in literally 5 seconds, hopping past people in the process, and seeing Khali walking down and making it to the ring a minute later looked worse than a Garrett Bischoff promo.


----------



## Revann

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*



austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> Khali serves his purpose well
> 1.Gets crowd reactions
> 2.He is a big man-Crowd pay money to see a freak of nature to get entertained
> 3.He appears for 5 Mins in a two hour programme-Don't see why all this moaning and bitching about him


Hes also there to give the Indian crowd their fix. He is a huge star over there and he just shows up on PPV and TV for a couple minutes max. Don't look now, but Kali is involved with almost every event in a small way. The indian market loves their wrestling. The only reason they brought him back after the Rumble was because the Indian crowd did not buy into Jinder Mahal. After all he is a Canadian being billed from India.


----------



## explosionpowell

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

Good to see I wasn't the only one who giggled at that.


----------



## Caponex75

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

Save the faces like a boss. Khali swag all day.


----------



## Randy Orton Trapper Of The Year

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

Lol it reminds me of when Henry was chasing the Nexus but he was ahead of them and slowed down so they all passed him. hahahaha


----------



## kobra860

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

It was hilarious. I'm waiting for a gif of it just like the gif with everyone outrunning Mark Henry.


----------



## Chaotic_Forces

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

I thought it was well done. He was slowly walking, seeing who to take out first.


----------



## Jumpluff

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*



Caponex75 said:


> Save the faces like a boss. Khali swag all day.


Like a bus :troll


----------



## natedogg88

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

Just watched this and it was the funniest thing of the night.


----------



## Redrox

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

:lmao Nah, that was one of the few highlights of Raw for me.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

For those that didn't see it:






Go to about 7:49.

I love how he's walking slow right in the middle and everybody just runs right past him. :lmao


----------



## That Guy

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*



Wsupden said:


> Lol it reminds me of when Henry was chasing the Nexus but he was ahead of them and slowed down so they all passed him. hahahaha


I was just about to put that. Both of those moments are absolute gold.


----------



## Saxihype

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

:lmao Yeah I noticed that too.


----------



## straightedge_kelly

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

LOL, that was funny as heck! :lmao


----------



## Arya Dark

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

*That was Khali's "hurry" mode... cut the guy some slack. :side:*


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*



Revann said:


> Hes also there to give the Indian crowd their fix. He is a huge star over there and he just shows up on PPV and TV for a couple minutes max. Don't look now, but Kali is involved with almost every event in a small way. The indian market loves their wrestling. The only reason they brought him back after the Rumble was because the Indian crowd did not buy into Jinder Mahal. After all he is a Canadian being billed from India.


I am an Indian
The only reason anyone cares about him is his size-Guy is a genetic freak


----------



## King_Of_This_World

*Re: Is this the worst year in terms of ratings?*



doinktheclowns said:


> Ratings are going to drop every single year,* not because the product is less popular but because or because the product is bad*, but because of the rise of the internet and more so now the rise of the speed of internet and the rescission.
> 
> The people that actually watch the product is a false reading because the actual ratings will be much higher because of people recording it, streaming it and watching it on youtube and other similar sites.
> 
> WWE is costing itself a lot of money because of it failure to react to the situation and I would go as far as to day it has almost gone to far to do anything about it.
> 
> There is a coincidence that ratings drop every year as internet speeds get faster each year and online content because more and more available and more and more people are becoming savvy online.
> 
> If WWE wants to really reclaim some bigger figures they need to lower the prices of the smaller PPVS like Capitol Punishment and Over The Limit etc etc.
> And make the product more available worldwide.
> 
> WWE is far far far more popular in the UK than TNA is, but TNA gets higher ratings because in the circumstance TNA has made the cleverer move.
> 
> Whilst WWE is only available to people with a sky sports package costing over £50 a month and only available to a limited amount of people. TNA is instead available to every household in the UK on a free channel. It shows you the fans are still there but there not willing to pay over £50 and until WWE realises obvious facts like this they are continually shooting them selves in the foot and giving the upper hand to their rival. People instead of paying will choose to watch it for free online which if its is easy and possible to do and picture quality gets higher more and more people are going to do.
> 
> Im pretty sure Over The Limit is free in the UK tonight, which is a step in the right direction.
> 
> WWE isnt the only company suffering from deflated viewership and its the rise of the internet.


But the product is less popular and is bad.

You can make all the excuses you like, thats the reason business is down across the board.


----------



## -Halo-

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

I didnt laugh..


----------



## Jerichosaurus

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

I was too pissed off that he still has a job to be spending that time laughing.


----------



## BBoiz94

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

Cut that guy some slack, he's got major issues walking due to his size, and it isn't even his fault. He's just born this way (No Gaga jokes). 
As long as he didnt take much tv time in a match, I don't really mind having him around. If it weren't for WWE, he might not have any jobs now. It's a win-win situation for both Khali and WWE in the way it opens out to India viewers.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

That was hilarious. All the faces are like his soldiers while he's the big bad boss that walks slowly towards the enemy.


----------



## BothGunsBlazing

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

Khali is like Andore. 

He is going to get there eventually and it's gonna hurt. EVENTUALLY. He is moving at a "methodical pace" which is the JR way of saying that guy is really fucking slow without being blunt about it.


----------



## Simon_Belmont

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

I legit lol´d, but hey the only reason he´s there is because he´s popular in India, so I don´t mind him one the roster.


----------



## SportsFan4Life

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

I was dying with laughter just the usual Khali - taking his time - by the time he made it to the ring the brawl was almost over...

Matter of time can't see him being around too much longer (i hope!)


----------



## -Extra-

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

New Khali T-shirt ->*Arive.
Still Arriving.
Almost There.
Raise Hell. 
Leave.*​


----------



## HiddenViolence

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

Dat Khali :lmao


----------



## Maz121

*Great khali - walks to the ring to make the save*

I would of atleast see Khali jog to make the save on raw, but Khali was like
'I got too much swag to be in a hurry'


----------



## The Tony

Hour 1: 4.168
Hour 2: 4.144

Ouch.


----------



## Audacity

*Re: Great khali - walks to the ring to make the save*



Maz121 said:


> I would of atleast see Khali jog to make the save on raw, but Khali was like
> 'I got too much swag to be in a hurry'


:lmao

Amen to that, brother.




-Extra- said:


> New Khali T-shirt ->*Arive.
> Still Arriving.
> Almost There.
> Raise Hell.
> Leave.*​


*GIMME GIMME GIMME!*


----------



## Shock

I wouldn't be surprised if it opened huge with Show/Cena/Laurinaitis and then dropped and never recovered after Santino and Ricardo's attempt at comedy. Putting CM Punk and Daniel Bryan in the coveted 5th quarter might explain the weak number too.


----------



## Contrarian

Adult 18-49 rating increased from first hour to second - 1.5 - 1.6. First hour is fall-out from Over the limit PPV the night before. 

Last year May 23rd 2011 show did 3.4, it was the RAW immediately following Randy Savage's death. Also Bret hart as special guest referee in the main event tag match. Strong rating.


With ratings going down like this, dont think 3-hr RAW is very good idea tbh.


----------



## Choke2Death

Tony316 said:


> Hour 1: 4.168
> Hour 2: 4.144
> 
> Ouch.


Is that in the upper 2 area? If so, well deserved for another horrible show.


----------



## Theproof

The Lesnar deal wasn't as good as I thought it would be for the WWE. You can't just have the guy come on a few weeks and just go missing for months at a time. People probably tune in to see if he's on the show and when they find out he's not going to be there they tune out.


----------



## jonoaries

A lot of people tuned in to watch Kobe go fishin'...game was fairly decent too :kobe2


----------



## Kabraxal

Shock said:


> I wouldn't be surprised if it opened huge with Show/Cena/Laurinaitis and then dropped and never recovered after Santino and Ricardo's attempt at comedy. Putting CM Punk and Daniel Bryan in the coveted 5th quarter might explain the weak number too.


Or I don't know... half the show being Cena/Show/Lauranitis with a lousy handicap match being the main event. Really, as soon as it was announced you could tell how terrible Raw was going to be.


----------



## A-C-P

Yeh I'm not one to ever blame an entire show rating on one or two guys that are involved in one 15 minute segment. But 30 mins of the first hour and 30 mins+ of the 2nd hour was completely focused on Cena/Ace/Big Show. Thats over half the show, the segment breakdown could show that these are the only segments people tuned in for, but I just don't see where the interest in Cena/Big Show feud #1000 is going to be.


----------



## Shock

Kabraxal said:


> Or I don't know... half the show being Cena/Show/Lauranitis with a lousy handicap match being the main event. Really, as soon as it was announced you could tell how terrible Raw was going to be.


Cena, Laurinaitis and Show are their biggest ratings draws right now - it is wise to base the main storyline and the show after the PPV around it. The opening segment and main-event was great, it was everything else that brought the show down.


----------



## Kabraxal

Shock said:


> Cena, Laurinaitis and Show are their biggest ratings draws right now - it is wise to base the main storyline and the show after the PPV around it. The opening segment and main-event was great, it was everything else that brought the show down.


Uh huh... if it was so great then why the shitty number? Sorry no fucking excuse or way to weasel out of the simple fact they dominated an hour of the show overall and IT DID TERRIBLY! That is proof that it obviously isn't that great or wanted!


----------



## SpeedStick

*Re: Is this the worst year in terms of ratings?*



King_Of_This_World said:


> *But the product is less popular and is bad.*
> 
> You can make all the excuses you like, thats the reason business is down across the board.


----------



## the fox

3.0 rating up from last week 2.94 but down in viewers


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner

So let me guess its all punks fault


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Yep.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Kabraxal said:


> Uh huh... if it was so great then why the shitty number? Sorry no fucking excuse or way to weasel out of the simple fact they dominated an hour of the show overall and IT DID TERRIBLY! That is proof that it obviously isn't that great or wanted!


While I don't necessarily agree with the last sentence, the rest of this post is spot on. You can't have a show do bad then NOT look at the main storyline as a reason for doing so. It's the main storyline! It should bear the lion's share of credit for both success and failure. 

It would be akin to stating about an old episode of RAW, "Ok sure, Stone Cold dominated that episode of RAW, but what about D'Lo Brown? His segment deserves a lot of credit too!" No it doesn't. It doesn't deserve any credit or blame because he's D'Lo fucking Brown and his segment, by in large, doesn't really matter. The show was about Stone Cold, and how into his storyline the fans were is pretty much the bar for how many will tune in. Well, it's Cena and Johnny's show now, and they don't just get to dodge all blame because "lol, IWC" _It's their show_.

EDIT: Anyway, everyone can now commence talking about how their favorite guy is/is not the problem.
DOUBLE EDIT: And I'm not saying Cena sucks or that he can't draw or anything like that, just that this storyline with he and show and Ace.........let's just say it leaves much to be desired.


----------



## Falkono

ThePeoplezStunner said:


> So let me guess its all punks fault


Can't blame Punk as it is a reflection of the whole company right now.
So many guys have left recently or are not active much i.e HHH.HBK,Taker,Edge,Rey,Brock, Rock, Austin etc in terms of star power WWE is getting a glimpse into their future right now as the vast majority of the roster on the last few weeks have been the younger guys. Orton,Sheamus,Del Rio,Swagger,Ziggler,Christian,Miz,Otunga,Kofi,R Truth, Cody and of course Bryan and Punk. These guys represent the future of the show. And they are in deep deep shit because of it.

Punk is just another guy in the longlist of guys WWE has tried to force on people. They get to a certain level and just can't go any higher. Punk got stale ages ago and he still has the title. If the ratings are crap then obviously they need to make it more exciting. It doesn't matter who is the champion if the booking is so poor.


----------



## Rock316AE

Funny how they're almost below 4 million and it's not even September. All that without "The 3 HOURS EXTRAVAGANZA!!", which is going to be the biggest bomb of all time. Yes, they will do some extra ad revenue for a few months but in the long run, they're going to lose more and more viewers in monthly average to the point where it's irreversible. WWE is officially WCW 2000 now, in every way, from fucked up scripts, to horrendous business decisions, to writing the show minute before air time etc. Hourglass.


----------



## Brye

Didn't like the show at all this week but I want the ratings to do well so maybe WWE will put Hawkins on TV more. :side:


----------



## kokepepsi

They won't get more ad money

That part of the contract is already a flat number they get annually.


----------



## Vyed

They dont get ad money but they get paid a flat amount yearly for the Extra hour.


----------



## Post-Modern Devil

Shock said:


> Cena, Laurinaitis and *Show* are their biggest ratings draws right now - it is wise to base the main storyline and the show after the PPV around it. The opening segment and main-event was great, it was everything else that brought the show down.


AWWW, HELL NAWH!!!


----------



## Green Light

I didn't even bother watching it on Youtube this week since I knew it would be crap so the number doesn't surprise me. As I said this is the 2-3 months of filler crap before they start the summer angles


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Brye said:


> Didn't like the show at all this week but I want the ratings to do well so maybe WWE will put Hawkins on TV more. :side:


this is one awesome gif


----------



## Kelly Kelly fan

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*

Im so glad someone mentioned this. When all the faces start running out and theres Khali just slowly walking down I thought WTF is he doing your supposed to be running to help John Cena and Sheamus. Seriously WWE needs to fire Khali as he clearly isnt very athletic to be in a company like WWE


----------



## tommo010

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: Was I the only one laughing (Khali related)*



tommo010 said:


>


NO sure why the laughing, that IS khali running :lol


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

... Can't believe I'm gonna get to post the breakdown for Raw this week. YAY ME!



> - As noted before, the May 21st WWE RAW Supershow scored a 3.03 cable rating with 4.16 million viewers.
> 
> In the segment breakdown, the John Cena and John Laurinaitis opener did well with a 3.40 quarter rating. Big Show's explanation and Cena vs. David Otunga lost 139,000 viewers. Santino Marella's angle with Ricardo Rodriguez lost 521,000 viewers and Alberto Del Rio vs. Randy Orton lost 252,000 more. Kane vs. Daniel Bryan gained 390,000 viewers for a 3.01 quarter rating. This isn't a great number for that timeslot but a good showing for a segment with CM Punk and Bryan.
> 
> Jinder Mahal vs. Christian lost 259,000 viewers while Kelly Kelly vs. Beth Phoenix gained 44,000 viewers. John Cena and Sheamus vs. Tensai, Jack Swagger and Dolph Ziggler in the Lumberjack Match gained 878,000 viewers for a 3.49 quarter rating in the overrun. The main event ratings went from a 2.3 to 2.5 in Male Teens, 2.4 to 3.1 in Males 18-49 but didn't show any real gains among females.


-Wrestling Observer Newsletter

As usual since after WM, Cena segments do the biggest numbers, which shouldn't be surprising. Punk/D.Bryan/Kane do a relatively good number, though it did start out as a promo and went into a match, which I'm sure lost some viewers. Interesting enough Cena/Otunga didn't lose as many viewers as that slot usually does, which shows even more Cena is the top draw in the company right now... even if he's not amazing himself. Del Rio/Orton being the lowest spot of the night doesn't surprise me, and can't say I care. Divas match gaining, even a small amount in a random time slot is good for them, and the overrun gaining back to the amount of viewers the show started with is a good sign since the match was advertised at that point. The overrun itself was actually shorter than usual if I'm not mistaken (like 3 minutes).


----------



## Therapy

lol @ that shitfest Russo like booking main event gaining 878k.. Vince: "Greaaaaat! Every main event now will end in giant brawl DQs that make no sense and dammit I DEMAND MORE CENA!!!!"


----------



## Emberdon

Santino FAIL.


----------



## kokepepsi

Pretty much as expected

LOL at Show

LOL at Meltzers shot at Bryan/Punk


----------



## Carcass

Daniel Bryan and Punk didn't lose viewers?!


----------



## Emberdon

Kelly Kelly actually managed to draw viewers. Layla never did. Plus kelly Kelly just got voted for Maxim Hot 100.

Put the Diva's title on her.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Wow, after losing like 600'000 viewers form the opening segment, Randy Orton, one of the "biggest stars in the the company" lost another 200'000.

Its amazing how a guy who has been pushed so heavily, a guy who's been marketed so heavily, and a guy who is very over with audience, still gets the audeince at home to tune out damn near whenever he's on. Not blaming it all on him because he was facing the most unover man in the buisness, but still, Lol Orton.


----------



## Swarhily

Lol poor Santino.


----------



## A-C-P

Swarhily said:


> Lol poor Santino.


:lol come on we all know as soon as people saw Ricardo in the ring they tuned out b/c they all thought ADR was coming out next :troll

As for the breakdwon nothing really shocking. Nice to see a gain for Punk/Bryan/Kane but of course the usual suspects will call it a "weak gain" and completely gloss over the ALL the other segments that lost viewers.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Carcass said:


> Daniel Bryan and Punk didn't lose viewers?!


:rocky


----------



## Rock316AE

I don't know where to post it but this is a ratings thread, and this is a ratings GOD!(and he's a free agent BTW):










:rocky:flair2:rocky:flair2Gold. 


> Regarding a return to WWE, some in the company believe he will be brought back because of the WWE Network and because Triple H will go to bat for him to be used again.
> 
> Flair's new deal with Coca Cola for a new energy booster is said to be lucrative enough that he could leave pro wrestling and be fine.


With RAW ratings in the sewers, miserable roster and the ridiculous 3 hours move, to bring a proven ratings draw like Ric Flair would be great for the product. Give him 20 minutes segment every week just to talk about whatever he wants and you already got 1/12 of the show covered with pure entertainment.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

Can they just use the WHC in the commercial like that?


----------



## Cookie Monster

I'm all for Ric Flair doing something perhaps backstage, helping superstars out etc. but keep him the fuck away from the ring.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

:dwayne at that Flair ad.


----------



## Brye

:lmao That Flair stuff is awesome.

I wouldn't mind seeing him in WWE but I really don't want to see him wrestling at all. I love the guy but I really wish his last match ever was with HBK.


----------



## Rock316AE

What do you think about a 2 quarters Rock/Flair segment in the 1000 RAW show? Dream promo. Top 2 in my list, mic and charisma.


----------



## A-C-P

The promo would be great I am sure, but what would it be for/about would be my question. Flair's great, but in small doeses now, IMO. I wouldn;t really want to see him back in a full-time on-air role.


Wait, didn't they just sign Flair's daughter?

Hey maybe Vince can finally do the incest angle he wanted to with Steph :Vince

:flair2 WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Now that would bring in the ratings (Y)


----------



## The Tony

Funny how the WWE fanboys want Flair back in the WWE but are complaining about Flair having some air time in TNA.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Tony316 said:


> Funny how the WWE fanboys want Flair back in the WWE but are complaining about Flair having some air time in TNA.


Unless you can name said fanboys, you're just attacking a strawman.


----------



## Rock316AE

Tony316 said:


> Funny how the WWE fanboys want Flair back in the WWE but are complaining about Flair having some air time in TNA.


I don't know on who you're talking about but I never said something like that, Flair was gold in TNA with the freedom they gave him. His "on the spot" segments with Lethal were some of the funniest promos I have ever seen in wrestling, pure comedy and his promo work there in general is typical master Ric Flair.

Impact is the best wrestling program for months IMO.


----------



## D.M.N.

Q1 - 3.40 rating / 4.60 million
Q2 - 3.29 rating / 4.46 million
Q3 - 2.91 rating / 3.94 million
Q4 - 2.72 rating / 3.68 million
Q5 - 3.01 rating / 4.07 million
Q6 - 2.75 rating / 3.81 million
Q7 - 2.78 rating / 3.86 million
Q8 + Overrun - 3.49 rating / 4.74 million


----------



## Mister Hands

I feel like funny throwaway segments with Flair are fine if the rest of the time is used flawlessly. Which neither WWE nor TNA are anywhere close to achieving. I'd be fine with WWE just giving Flair a youtube series to cut promos with/on whomever.


----------



## Brye

Impact has been interesting. It has some pretty good elements to it now that I didn't find that great before. Joe is back track and this Magnus guy seems awesome. Aries is still fucking awesome. Wish they had a couple more established X-Division guys for him to go against though. Roode has been a great champion. Not too high on RVD (no pun intended) anymore or Jeff and Angle for that matter. Gail Kim is an awesome wrestler, wish they'd use Winter more though. AJ is still pretty good but at this point he's really done everything you can do in the company. Bully Ray is great and DEVON WORLD ORDER. Anderson really let himself go but I still hope the best for him. And meh at Crimson and Gunner.

And still don't see any appeal to Bischoff's son.


----------



## Rock316AE

Prediction 2.6-2.7, I guess that only the great Big Show segments did over 3.0.


----------



## DesolationRow

I'd be shocked if the rating was better than poor for last night, since it was a holiday, Cena, who was the biggest draw the week before, was MIA, almost nothing is happening on Raw right now and they were fighting against LeBron. No surprise, I'm sure they knew they'd take a beating. Ho hum.


----------



## Brye

Hoping for a shit rating so that they change stuff.


----------



## Therapy

Brye said:


> Hoping for a shit rating so that they change stuff.


If Cena was on the show I'd agree, but it was Cenaless so the most you'll get with low ratings is them cramming more Cena down your throat.


----------



## Brye

Therapy said:


> If Cena was on the show I'd agree, but it was Cenaless so the most you'll get with low ratings is them cramming more Cena down your throat.


Yeah fuck, it's gonna be like when Hogan wouldn't appear on Nitro the week of the U.S Open so that when the rating went down he'd say it was because he wasn't on it.


----------



## Rock316AE

The rating will be the worst of the year so far, so don't worry about that Brye, but I don't think the change you want is going to make it any better...Bring back Rey, Henry and put Orton in a real program(although they're saving him for the Sheamus Summerslam feud), plus the great work Show is doing, and maybe this can change something until Brock is coming back.

[email protected] tactics(he also did it with the NBA on the TNT timeslot), the guy is a master politician. I respect him for his manipulation ability alone.


----------



## Brye

Rock316AE said:


> The rating will be the worst of the year so far, so don't worry about that Brye, but I don't think the change you want is going to make it any better...Bring back Rey, Henry and put Orton in a real program(although they're saving him for the Sheamus Summerslam feud), plus the great work Show is doing, and maybe this can change something.


Orton/Sheamus should be good but I'm not sure what Henry will do. Afraid he'll be lost in the shuffle. As for Rey, can't wait till he returns regardless of what he's doing. Show is good as the heel but I feel like it's making too many dominant forces in Show, Tensai, Ryback, Brodus (even if he got beaten up by Show) and potentially Henry again. Although I guess that doesn't fare well for Henry.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Why hasn't the rating come out yet?


----------



## RatedR10

The-Rock-Says said:


> Why hasn't the rating come out yet?


Memorial Day. The ratings are delayed until tomorrow.


----------



## Mr Eagles

Didn't we get an edgier product aka the attitude era because ratings were getting so bad? Well, when MNF starts back, RAW can easily go down to the mid 2's.


----------



## DesolationRow

Never mind the four-month deluge called Monday Night Football. The three-hour Raw concept will make the ratings drop. Every entire Raw's average rating will take a major hit from it. Of course, knowing this, I don't see why anyone would necessarily freak out over it. I'm more concerned about what the move means for the actual product. Many of us remember what happened to Nitro with the three-hour move.


----------



## Mr Eagles

I'm hoping the permanent 3 hour raw brings a new set/theme song and stuff. Hopefully the show changes up a little with how they present things.


----------



## Contrarian

Nitro went out of business because there was WWF with quality product offering an alternative to the viewers. Its not the same case with WWE right now, there are monopoly in US market. TNA is not even in the ball park.

I willing to bet this is the primary reason why vince mcmahon has taken such huge risks from WWE network to Three hour RAW.


----------



## HardNocks

3rd hour of Raw scares me... they scamper to fill 2 hours as it is. Gulp.


----------



## Mr Eagles

HardNocks said:


> 3rd hour of Raw scares me... they scamper to fill 2 hours as it is. Gulp.


Exactly. I mean, 30 minutes of the show is full of recaps from the week before now! It's really starting to get boring and I wish it wouldn't because I love a good RAW


----------



## Snothlisberger

We will see how 3 hour RAW goes. It certainly isn't going to cause the WWE to go out of business like some are claiming (Rcok316AE). Comparing it to WCW is laughable too. Pretty sure WCW was never a billion dollar company. The comparison to WCW ends with the expansion to a 3 hour show.


----------



## RatedR10

3 hour Raw scares me because, as mentioned, WWE has a hard time filling two hours, how are they going to do a three hour Raw every single week? I have a _strong_ feeling that before the end of the year, WWE will return to 2 hour Raw episodes, learning their lesson.


----------



## JasonLives

The overall rating for Raw when it does 3 hours will without a doubt be lower and I think both WWE and USA Network are fully aware of that. 
So for them to pull 2.5-2.8 overall ratings I dont think is a disaster, especially against the NFL. 
But im sure the internet will overreact like crazy.

If Raw was doing bad now with their 3.0-3.1 ratings then USA Network would have never bought another hour. A hour that is proven to do much lower.
In the eyes of the USA Network its what the different hours does that is important, not the overall. I think their main goal is to keep Hour 1 Atleast above 2.0 and keep the other two hours around the same they are doing now.
I just cant see them asking for more.

The last 3 hour show before Wrestlemania did hours 2.5, 3.2 and 3.4.


----------



## DesolationRow

JasonLives said:


> The overall rating for Raw when it does 3 hours will without a doubt be lower and I think both WWE and USA Network are fully aware of that.
> So for them to pull 2.5-2.8 overall ratings I dont think is a disaster, especially against the NFL.
> But im sure the internet will overreact like crazy.
> 
> If Raw was doing bad now with their 3.0-3.1 ratings then USA Network would have never bought another hour. A hour that is proven to do much lower.
> In the eyes of the USA Network its what the different hours does that is important, not the overall. I think their main goal is to keep Hour 1 Atleast above 2.0 and keep the other two hours around the same they are doing now.
> I just cant see them asking for more.
> 
> The last 3 hour show before Wrestlemania did hours 2.5, 3.2 and 3.4.


Completely agreed with you and this whole post. If anything has undercut the image of USA Network being severely anxious about Raw's ratings, it's the (in my view incredibly questionable at best) move to three hours this summer. However, I do think that this will if nothing more, be WWE/USA's stand against Monday Night Football. With the three-hour format, Raw will at least be on the air back east before the average MNF game starts up during football season.


----------



## Brye

The one positive I see in a 3 hour Raw each week is that they won't be able to stretch out what they're doing now and have to give a little bit of focus on the undercard. Or we'll have 4 Cena segments and 3 Cena matches.

If it wasn't for Punk/Bryan I'd be done.


----------



## DesolationRow

If WWE utilized the time to actually develop midcarders, weave together intricate mid- and undercard storylines and whatnot, I think I'd pass out from shock.

I'm expecting humiliating over-the-top rope challenges involving some midcard heel with loads of potential against The Great Khali, Santino and Ricardo segments until the end of time, about 45-68 minutes, bare minimum, of each show dedicated to John Cena, a 50% increase in recaps and video packages, more grade C- celebrity tie-ins and probably another Jerry Lawler run of matches against some heel... I'm thinking Cody Rhodes. Or maybe whoever has upset Vince backstage, like _The_ Brian Kendrick.


----------



## Chrome

DesolationRow said:


> I'm expecting humiliating over-the-top rope challenges involving some midcard heel with loads of potential against The Great Khali, Santino and Ricardo segments until the end of time, about 45-68 minutes, bare minimum, of each show dedicated to John Cena, a 50% increase in recaps and video packages, more grade C- celebrity tie-ins and probably another Jerry Lawler run of matches against some heel... I'm thinking Cody Rhodes. Or maybe whoever has upset Vince backstage, like _The_ Brian Kendrick.


:delrio:delrio:delrio

For the sake of the IWC's mental health, I hope you're wrong on that.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

DesolationRow said:


> If WWE utilized the time to actually develop midcarders, weave together intricate mid- and undercard storylines and whatnot, I think I'd pass out from shock.
> 
> I'm expecting humiliating over-the-top rope challenges involving some midcard heel with loads of potential against The Great Khali, Santino and Ricardo segments until the end of time, about 45-68 minutes, bare minimum, of each show dedicated to John Cena, a 50% increase in recaps and video packages, more grade C- celebrity tie-ins and probably another Jerry Lawler run of matches against some heel... I'm thinking Cody Rhodes. Or maybe whoever has upset Vince backstage, like _The_ Brian Kendrick.


Don't forget lots more dance contests with Brodus Clay.


----------



## Johncena-hhh

> Monday’s RAW rating won’t be available until Wednesday due to the Memorial Day holiday, but early indications are that the number could dip below 3.0 once again. RAW faced stiff competition from the Boston Celtics vs. Miami Heat NBA playoff game as well as the series premiere of the History Channel’s Hatfields & McCoys series, which had a huge first night. History sent out a press release today announcing that Hatfields & McCoys became the #1 non-sports telecast in ad supported cable television history, with over 13.9 million total viewers.


24WRESTLING.COM


----------



## DesolationRow

I'm DVRing the History Channel miniseries and will watch it all this next weekend. Yeah, Raw was facing that, too.


----------



## BANKSY

At least 1 hour of the 3 hour shows will be commercials/recaps , hardly boads well for a good rating.


----------



## wb1899

JasonLives said:


> The overall rating for Raw when it does 3 hours will without a doubt be lower and I think both WWE and USA Network are fully aware of that.
> So for them to pull 2.5-2.8 overall ratings I dont think is a disaster, especially against the NFL.
> But im sure the internet will overreact like crazy.
> 
> If Raw was doing bad now with their 3.0-3.1 ratings then USA Network would have never bought another hour. A hour that is proven to do much lower.
> In the eyes of the USA Network its what the different hours does that is important, not the overall. I think their main goal is to keep Hour 1 Atleast above 2.0 and keep the other two hours around the same they are doing now.
> I just cant see them asking for more.
> 
> The last 3 hour show before Wrestlemania did hours 2.5, 3.2 and 3.4.


USA Network only cares about the A18-49 (main demographic for advertisers/more viewers=more advertisers) and C3 viewership (for ad-revenue/higher viewership=more revenue) for each single hour.


------
+ People need to learn that the household ratings are meaningless! Only the viewership (C3 & A18-49) is important.


----------



## BrosOfDestruction

Lot of people were watching Heat/Celtics instead of RAW. The real nWo was was playing and took the game over except that Big Sexy (Chris Bosh) was injured.


----------



## Therapy

The ratings excuses honestly wear thin. It seems there is a new excuse every week for awful ratings. NBA, NFL, MLB, NHL, Season Finales, Season Premieres, The Weather, Holidays, Hulk Hogan, Lenny Dykstra, Earth Wind and Fire etc etc etc..


----------



## Therapy

> 10 WWE Entertainment USA Mon 09:00P-10:00P *4168*
> 11 WWE Entertainment USA Mon 10:00P-11:04P *4144*


Last week was 4.3 / 4.1


----------



## Cliffy

If the network cares so much about that demographic why is vince going after 8 year olds ?


----------



## Timber Timbre

Cliffy Byro said:


> If the network cares so much about that demographic why is vince going after 8 year olds ?


In all fairness, the WWE are trying to maximise their audience by appealing to all demographics, they're just doing a piss poor job at it.

In many ways, the positioning of CM Punk and Daniel Bryan have been attempts at having a more mature audience tune in every week, the problem is that they're treating these as afterthoughts to the storylines that are designed to appeal to the younger fans. It's like watching a 2 hour episode of the Mighty morphin Power Rangers with Al Pacino and Robert DeNiro making a 10 minute cameo.

The WWE knows that it can't compete with UFC's stranglehold of the 18-34 male demographic, so they aim all their focus on the dem that hasn't been cornered yet. Intelligent business strategy is only it was followed up with compelling storytelling.


----------



## D.M.N.

Therapy said:


> Last week was 4.3 / 4.1


For clarity, the numbers you have quoted are not for this past Monday. Monday's cable ratings are not out yet.


----------



## Therapy

Indeed you're right. My dates are all fucked up because of the 3 weekend..


----------



## D.M.N.

Hour 1 - 3.918m
Hour 2 - 3.911m

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...s-single-ladies-basketball-wives-more/136104/

Hatfield and McCoys on the History channel had a mammoth 13.87 million at 21:00, so under 4 million does not surprise me.


----------



## Choke2Death

Well deserved flop for a horrible show. I can only hope the ratings sink lower and lower.


----------



## A-C-P

D.M.N. said:


> Hour 1 - 3.918m
> Hour 2 - 3.911m
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...s-single-ladies-basketball-wives-more/136104/
> 
> *Hatfield and McCoys on the History channel had a mammoth 13.87 million at 21:00, so under 4 million does not surprise me.*




Holy Crap, I saw the commercials for Hatfield and McCoys (which I DVR'ed and it was quite good) and thought it would do a good # but wow not that good.

As for the # for Raw btw Hatfield and The NBA play-off game the low # is not surprising. Also, not totally surprised a show focused arounf The Big Show not doing well is not a total surprise either. And not just blaming the Big Show here. A show focused around any 1 superstar is never going to bring in huge ratings #s (for the most part, I am sure there are exceptions) Wonder how long until WWE creative realizes that they need numerous involved storylines involvng all levels of the card to really interest people, rather just having one main storyline focues around ONE guy dominating the show and treating the rest of the roster as "filler"


----------



## Rock316AE

Horrible number as expected. I see Show's great promo and Show/Clay doing decent(gain, for the standard of the show), other than that RAW was horrendous, hopefully next month Rey and Henry are coming back and Orton/Sheamus needs to be a RAW feud. Then in July, Lesnar can keep their head above water. 



> - *WWE’s new primary goal is TV ratings*and their various TV products. The change in direction has been in the making for some time now and comes straight from Vince McMahon.


Can't wait for panic reports in the WWE HQ when the 2.5-2.6s will be the regular. Hopeless company, everything is backwards.


----------



## The GOAT One

It seems like u want the company to fail rock316ae


----------



## kokepepsi

I have been wanting to see them fail since 05 so they would get rid of Cena
7 yrs later and the fucker is still on top(DESPITE NOT HAVING THE STRAP) while the show barely gets a 3.0 rating


----------



## mblonde09

Rock316AE said:


> Horrible number as expected. I see Show's great promo and Show/Clay doing decent(gain, for the standard of the show), other than that RAW was horrendous, hopefully next month Rey and Henry are coming back and *Orton/Sheamus needs to be a RAW feud.* Then in July, Lesnar can keep their head above water.
> 
> 
> 
> Can't wait for panic reports in the WWE HQ when the 2.5-2.6s will be the regular. Hopeless company, everything is backwards.


Yeah, that will bring in the ratings. No, B-level feuds need to stay on the B-show. Vince wants Punk and Cena to work more SD's because Orton can't draw for shit.


----------



## Choke2Death

TheGreatOne. said:


> It seems like u want the company to fail rock316ae


Well, they deserve that until they grow some balls and turn Cena heel. That and the awful shows they've been presenting in the last month ever since Extreme Rules was over.



mblonde09 said:


> Yeah, that will bring in the ratings. Vince wants Punk and Cena to work more SD's *because Orton can't draw for shit.*


And Punk can. unk2


----------



## mblonde09

People are going to shows to see Punk.


----------



## Choke2Death

mblonde09 said:


> People are going to shows to see Punk.


And you know this, how? There are three people that always get a consistently huge reaction: Cena, Orton and Punk. In terms of ratings, none of them are helping anything, though. This thread is about ratings and on that department, Punk has proved to be a disappointment.


----------



## Rock316AE

TheGreatOne. said:


> It seems like u want the company to fail rock316ae


You can get this vibe from the sound of my posts but no, I just know that their current roster and direction are hopeless. Then they're doing ridiculous decisions like the Network, 3 hours RAW, mid card material as default choices and Cena going over Brock clean, and you got a lot to back it up. They're at an all-time low in lot of aspects.

RAW did 2.72. Hours of 2.73 and 2.71.


----------



## TheF1BOB

This company can't do shit without The Rock. Lesnars credibility has been shattered so he can't help much when he returns. Can't say I'm upset with this as the show is crap right now and deservedly so. Horrible rating for a Horrible show. (Y)


----------



## Starbuck

mblonde09 said:


> People are going to shows to see Punk.


You keep telling yourself that lol. Punk has had as much impact on live attendance as Orton tbh. Neither of them are stellar in that regard. SD is suffering more because it's SD and Orton is literally the only attraction there. If Punk and Orton were to switch places I can guarantee that Punk wouldn't be doing any better. Orton isn't the problem. He isn't helping matters for SD by any means because he is far from the draw he should be but he isn't the problem either. But of course, I await your Punk nut hugging response. Please, your posts never fail to crack me up lol.

EDIT - 2.72? Ouch. Then again, not really since they had to have been expecting it. It's like they know nobody is watching right now so they don't even bother. Vince is sitting at gorilla not giving a fuck while everybody else runs around like headless chickens lol.


----------



## Amazing_Cult

mblonde09 said:


> People are going to shows to see Punk.


unk2

Come on now. Its been proven time and time again that doesn't draw, you know better than this. Look past your undying hatred for Orton and past your undying love for Punk and realize that one man just doesn't draw like the good 'ole days.


----------



## Rock316AE

Starbuck said:


> You keep telling yourself that lol. Punk has had as much impact on live attendance as Orton tbh. Neither of them are stellar in that regard. SD is suffering more because it's SD and Orton is literally the only attraction there. If Punk and Orton were to switch places I can guarantee that Punk wouldn't be doing any better. Orton isn't the problem. He isn't helping matters for SD by any means because he is far from the draw he should be but he isn't the problem either. But of course, I await your Punk nut hugging response. Please, your posts never fail to crack me up lol.


Not even that, people are leaving before the Punk matches on house shows lol. Orton in the past did great house show business, he's not number 8 of the decade worldwide for no reason. SD is just a dead brand with no name value to attract your casual TV viewer.

Cena and Orton are still the only real attractions.


----------



## Starbuck

Rock316AE said:


> Not even that, people are leaving before the Punk matches on house shows lol. Orton in the past did great house show business, he's not number 8 of the decade worldwide for no reason. SD is just a dead brand with no name value to attract your casual TV viewer.
> 
> Cena and Orton are still the only real attractions.


I'm a mark but I'm not going to inflate Orton's drawing ability. He's had one truly standout year in 2009 but I think that's about it. When he was absolutely white hot in mid 2010, business didn't move anywhere iirc. If it had I think they would have been prepared to push him ahead of Cena tbh. But it didn't happen. I don't know about how well he's done in other time periods though tbh. You're the number guy so I guess I'll have to take your word for it lol. Agreed on SD though. Save for moving Cena there and bringing back HHH or Taker or something, nothing will be able to bump the SD numbers. Hell, they were here in my town not too long ago and I didn't even bother going it's that bad.


----------



## Choke2Death

I agree with SD being bad. People wanna blame Orton but when a taped show always has underwhelming spoilers, it's not surprising that the ratings are so down and the attendance is low when they make the same matches every week or switch around a few names. (Ted DiBiase and Hunico probably had matches for over a month in SD until Ted got injured) And besides that, Orton doesn't do shit on the show apart from turn up in a one minute backstage promo, some match that often results in DQ or in one minute brawls with whoever he's feuding with for whatever dumb reason.

I'm a huge Orton fan and even I have had no problem with missing most of the shows in the last few months. This week's spoilers sound more exciting but that's probably because I've been so disappointed in the awful Raw they had this week so anything is a step up.


----------



## Rock316AE

Starbuck said:


> I'm a mark but I'm not going to inflate Orton's drawing ability. He's had one truly standout year in 2009 but I think that's about it. When he was absolutely white hot in mid 2010, business didn't move anywhere iirc. If it had I think they would have been prepared to push him ahead of Cena tbh. But it didn't happen. I don't know about how well he's done in other time periods though tbh. You're the number guy so I guess I'll have to take your word for it lol. Agreed on SD though. Save for moving Cena there and bringing back HHH or Taker or something, nothing will be able to bump the SD numbers. Hell, they were here in my town not too long ago and I didn't even bother going it's that bad.


of course Orton is not a game-changer, only a few were in wrestling history, but he's a main attraction, just like Cena is, they mostly can't increase the market significantly, but the people who are at the show, are there because of them, or at least at the top of the list of "who are you looking forward to see the most?". Orton is the guy who since mid 2004, main evented 90% of the house shows he was on even when the roster was full with star power, RAW or SD. With Flair and HHH, Angle, Taker, Jeff Hardy, Batista and Eddie, Rey, Jericho, Cena etc, there's a reason for that. He had plenty of successful house show programs over the years. This is not a default choice. In terms of overall star power, the peak so far was probably 2009.


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner

Rock316AE said:


> Not even that, people are leaving before the Punk matches on house shows lol. Orton in the past did great house show business, he's not number 8 of the decade worldwide for no reason. SD is just a dead brand with no name value to attract your casual TV viewer.
> 
> Cena and Orton are still the only real attractions.


your cm punk hate is creepy just sit back and enjoy the show lol


----------



## samizayn

2.7

Fucking hell. I wonder what the consequences of that number will be.


----------



## Therapy

greendayedgehead said:


> 2.7
> 
> Fucking hell. I wonder what the consequences of that number will be.


I'll guess it'll be something like this

9:00-9:25 Cena

10:00-10:10: Cena

10:45-11:05: Cena


----------



## Falkono

A 2.72 rating.... http://...............com/articles/...ng-plummets-without-john-cena-on-monday-night

Before people do that whole "it's the summer!" thing this is actually one of the worst ratings in history for the show and the lowest since september 2011. Before they do the whole "memorial day" thing it was 3.1 last year and 3.2 the year before.

So question is why has the show lost so many viewers?

No simple answer to that but one definate one is Punk cannot draw as champion. In his 7month+ reign the numbers have died. Look at his segmant numbers and your see most of them actually lose numbers. Sometimes quite a lot.

As I said on monday the company needs a big overhaul. The 3hr numbers are going to be brutal.


----------



## chronoxiong

Wow, so this week's show had a 2.72 rating? Ouch. That's very very sad. I'm not surprised as I didn't enjoy the show and gave it a harsh review on the RAW Discussion Thread.


----------



## Green Light

I haven't watched Raw in weeks, it's obvious the show is gonna be bad when Johnny Ace is in the main event and is arguably the main focus of the show. Punk and Bryan are afterthoughts and the mid card just offers absolutely nothing in terms of entertaining characters or storylines so (once again) the rating doesn't surprise me


----------



## Timber Timbre

Well, at least it's not a 1.9 like RAW did in late 96..


----------



## AthenaMark

Fucking horrible


----------



## RatedR10

Ouch is all I can say at that number. I'm curious to see the breakdown.

If WWE is serious about focusing on ratings like it was mentioned, they should begin making new stars in Ziggler, Rhodes, Barrett, etc. pronto.


----------



## ecabney

Time to de-push Show


----------



## mblonde09

Starbuck said:


> You keep telling yourself that lol. Punk has had as much impact on live attendance as Orton tbh. Neither of them are stellar in that regard. SD is suffering more because it's SD and Orton is literally the only attraction there. If Punk and Orton were to switch places I can guarantee that Punk wouldn't be doing any better. Orton isn't the problem. He isn't helping matters for SD by any means because he is far from the draw he should be but he isn't the problem either. But of course, I await your Punk nut hugging response. Please, your posts never fail to crack me up lol.


I didn't mean people are going solely to see Punk, but Punk IS a main attraction now, people ARE going to shows to see him - the huge number of Punk shirts, signs and crowd reaction, attests to that.



Rock316AE said:


> Not even that, *people are leaving before the Punk matches on house shows lol.* Orton in the past did great house show business, he's not number 8 of the decade worldwide for no reason. SD is just a dead brand with no name value to attract your casual TV viewer.
> 
> Cena and *Orton* are *still the only real attractions*.


Oh get off it, that happened ONCE, just once. All HS reports make it abundantly clear that Punk is the number 2 star in the company, behind Cena.


----------



## jonoaries

Well a solid NBA playoff game (featuring some of the leagues biggest stars: LeBron, Dwayne Wade, Rajon Rondo & Kevin Garnett) as well as a surprising TV hit (Hatfield & McCoys) pretty much explain this number. 

:bron


----------



## Starbuck

mblonde09 said:


> I didn't mean people are going solely to see Punk, but Punk IS a main attraction now, people ARE going to shows to see him - the huge number of Punk shirts, signs and crowd reaction, attests to that.


Yes you did, don't lie lol.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Nobody, but Cena (nope, not Orton or Punk) has an easily, and accurately, measurable impact on the ratings. So this is sort of a useless conversation given that the both have the same impact: zero. Now, they don't turn people away, but neither is gathering viewers solely by their presence either.


----------



## mblonde09

Starbuck said:


> Yes you did, don't lie lol.


You can believe what you want - I know what I meant.


----------



## Starbuck

mblonde09 said:


> You can believe what you want - I know what I meant.


You don't know what you meant. You talk too much nonsense to know what you mean when you say it lol.


----------



## Kabraxal

Let's see... Cena in a meaningless feud. Check. Big Show a part of that. Check. A great deal of time wasted on that when the audience doesn't care... check. Mismatched booking for EVERYONE else. Check.

Hell... no one draws for htis company anymore. You can't trust the WWE to do anything right so why waste the time? They've finally started scaring away the hardcore fans in droves and the casuals are doing their normal migration to something else shallow and shiny.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Good. I hope the Cena/Show program bombs real hard. What a ridiculous program. If it weren't for Punk/Bryan being somewhat interesting I would take a break from watching. If that Brodus/Big Show main event pops a good number, I will have no more faith.


----------



## mblonde09

Starbuck said:


> You don't know what you meant. You talk too much nonsense to know what you mean when you say it lol.


Like I said, believe what you want - I don't really have to explain myself to you. Also, I don't talk nonsense at all - you must have me confused with someone else.


----------



## FoxyRoxy

There is absoloutely nothing and I mean _nothing_ interesting going on right now.
I don't even know what feuds are happening, excluding Cena/Big Show and Punk/D-Bryan.. what else is going on? Fuck all.

No wonder the ratings are low people just don't care. WWE clearly don't either cause they continue to feed us this shit.


----------



## Snothlisberger

Cena is the star of the show, he is the focus of everything. Everything else is secondary. He is the captain and if the ship ain't right you gotta look at him first. I don't think wrestling is watched by enough people for it to fluctuate from quarter hour to quarter hour. I mean, they only really promote 3 quarters and Cena is always in 2 of those. If ratings are so bad, I think you gotta look at Cena first....

But that is just my opinion.


----------



## KO Bossy

Despite the fact that I liked several things on Monday, I'm actually glad with that rating. Maybe now the Fed will say "hmmm, maybe we should start trying to put out a good quality product." Perhaps they start trying to push talent other than Cena. Don't forget, even though he didn't appear on the show, no one knew he wasn't going to show up, as they were still chanting for him at the end. And they didn't say he wasn't there or anything. As far as anyone knew he WAS going to be there, and therefore tune in on that basis. Only when it was over did they figure out he wouldn't appear. Hence, Cena was still the main draw of the show, so this rating is just as much his fault.


----------



## kokepepsi

2.7 oh shit.

Didn't last time that happen Del Rio was champ and in the next PPV Cena won the strap

New Champion at No Way Out.............. KANE


----------



## Kabraxal

kokepepsi said:


> 2.7 oh shit.
> 
> Didn't last time that happen Del Rio was champ and in the next PPV Cena won the strap
> 
> New Champion at No Way Out.............. KANE


Which would further kill the ratings... the WWE are in the same spot they wre in 94/95 but without WCW to kick em in the balls and show them they needed to change. It's sad that we have to hope TNA starts catching eyeballs with something to force this company into action...


----------



## CandyAssets

Just found out about the 2.7 rating. All I can say is just....fcking wow. Another new low on Punk's reign of killing fan interest. Wow CM Punk. Just wow. Dude is slowly becoming WWE's version of David Arquette.


Kabraxal said:


> *Which would further kill the ratings*... the WWE are in the same spot they wre in 94/95 but without WCW to kick em in the balls and show them they needed to change. It's sad that we have to hope TNA starts catching eyeballs with something to force this company into action...


Uh, its been proven that he's at least a bigger draw than Punk and if I were Vince, I'd rather give the belt to him right now. If might not spike fan interest but at least I'll know my company would be in a stable condition.

CM Punk = Worst champion in North American sports history


----------



## Superboy-Prime

CandyAssets said:


> Just found out about the 2.7 rating. All I can say is just....fcking wow. Another new low on Punk's reign of killing fan interest. Wow CM Punk. Just wow. Dude is slowly becoming WWE's version of David Arquette.
> 
> Uh, its been proven that he's at least a bigger draw than Punk and if I were Vince, I'd rather give the belt to him right now. If might not spike fan interest but at least I'll know my company would be stable.
> 
> *CM Punk = Worst champion in North American sports history*


You just gotta love how ridiculous Punk haters can be.


----------



## Kabraxal

CandyAssets said:


> Just found out about the 2.7 rating. All I can say is just....fcking wow. Another new low on Punk's reign of killing fan interest. Wow CM Punk. Just wow. Dude is slowly becoming WWE's version of David Arquette.
> 
> Uh, its been proven that he's at least a bigger draw than Punk and if I were Vince, I'd rather give the belt to him right now. If might not spike fan interest but at least I'll know my company would be in a stable condition.
> 
> CM Punk = Worst champion in North American sports history


Dude... Diesel says high. And really, Kane would just throw up the signal that the WWE isn't trying and most people would tune out more than they already have. The reason Punk isn't drawing is because *shockawegasp* THE WWE DOESN"T GIVE HIM THE PRIME SLOTS! cena has been the focus of every damn show... come one people.


----------



## chargebeam

Kabraxal said:


> *Dude... Diesel says high.* And really, Kane would just throw up the signal that the WWE isn't trying and most people would tune out more than they already have. The reason Punk isn't drawing is because *shockawegasp* THE WWE DOESN"T GIVE HIM THE PRIME SLOTS! cena has been the focus of every damn show... come one people.


----------



## THANOS

CandyAssets said:


> Just found out about the 2.7 rating. All I can say is just....fcking wow. Another new low on Punk's reign of killing fan interest. Wow CM Punk. Just wow. Dude is slowly becoming WWE's version of David Arquette.
> 
> Uh, its been proven that he's at least a bigger draw than Punk and if I were Vince, I'd rather give the belt to him right now. If might not spike fan interest but at least I'll know my company would be in a stable condition.
> 
> CM Punk = Worst champion in North American sports history


You do know that this is starting to sound like a broken record with you guys don't you? People have been saying that Punk and Bryan are killing fan interest for months, yet the opposite is happening. Just look at the live casual audience's reception to both guys as well as both of their merch sales as pure evidence right there. *Ratings are subjective to current storylines, build, time constraints and plenty of other things, but the reaction each guy gets and the merchandise they push, can't be shifted onto anything other then those guys individually.*


----------



## KO Bossy

Superboy-Prime said:


> You just gotta love how ridiculous Punk haters can be.


Isn't it amazing how some people just never get tired of putting their feet in their mouths? 

The amount of "ZOMG ITS PUNK'S FAULT" is hilarious, I've already outlined earlier why its a shared responsibility. If anything, since Cena is the face of the company, its mostly his fault.


----------



## DFUSCMAN

Cena's the only true draw in the WWE because that's the only person they have consistently built as a star. Or haven't ruined their momentum like they did with punk.

When the WWE invests all of their time in building up john cena and nobody else then numbers will suffer. No cena=low numbers.

Plus with History Channel getting such a MASSIVE number last night and Heat/Celtics which was a huge game of course there was going to be low numbers. Plus it was memorial day in the U.S.A. which hurts numbers as well.

Perfect storm for the wwe to draw a low number on monday

And to say it's punk or bryan's fault is rediculous, why are people supposed to care about a feud when you give them no promo time to build the feud. If the WWE doesn't care about the feud why should the viewer. WWE is investing all of their time into Cena/Show so nothing else matters.

To truly build numbers then they have to invest more time in the midcard, they have to stop the trend of people watching the first segment then tuning out to watch the last segment because that's when the big stuff happens.

When they actually try to build the midcard as a legitimate thing and putting more prestige into the midcard titles then numbers will rise because viewers won't want to miss a minute of the show because they will be invested in the midcard.

WWE has to try and make new stars after completely abandoning the thought of making a new star over the past 4 years. It's come back to hurt them and they have to realize that.


----------



## Werb-Jericho

I think this figure is clearly a backlash to suspending Jericho, most people knew he wouldn't be on the show so why would you want to watch Raw?!


----------



## Brye

CandyAssets said:


> Just found out about the 2.7 rating. All I can say is just....fcking wow. Another new low on Punk's reign of killing fan interest. Wow CM Punk. Just wow. Dude is slowly becoming WWE's version of David Arquette.
> 
> Uh, its been proven that he's at least a bigger draw than Punk and if I were Vince, I'd rather give the belt to him right now. If might not spike fan interest but at least I'll know my company would be in a stable condition.
> 
> CM Punk = Worst champion in North American sports history


Because Punk was totally the focus of that show.

Your ignorance is astounding.


----------



## BANKSY

Amazing how people can blame a show that started and ended with Big Show on Daniel Bryan and CM Punk.


----------



## SpeedStick

Outside of WWE pay per views nothing to watch right now..


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

> Polarizing, arguably skippable, hit or miss product + no hook from the previous week + post-WrestleMania lull period + Memorial Day holiday affecting habitual Raw viewing + record-setting Hatfields & McCoys Night One + big NBA Playoffs audience = fewest viewers since Week 1 of Monday Night Football last year. A less-than-ideal reception to the product combined with external factors created the perfect storm Monday night.


Lol at people saying this will result with WWE taking the belt off Punk. WWE has like no stars right now, they know they need to establish some. Punk sells a fuck load of merch, gets the biggest face reactions from the live audience and is now on the fucking cover of the new WWE game. WWE has a lot of faith in Punk and with Orton being suspended and having a lot of heat with WWE atm, WWE are going to push Punk harder if anything.

And do you think anybody gives a fuck about a Big Show and Brodus Clay mainevent?


----------



## Happenstan

jblvdx said:


> Lol at people saying this will result with WWE taking the belt off Punk. WWE has like no stars right now, they know they need to establish some. Punk sells a fuck load of merch, gets the biggest face reactions from the live audience and is now on the fucking cover of the new WWE game. WWE has a lot of faith in Punk and with Orton being suspended and having a lot of heat with WWE atm, WWE are going to push Punk harder if anything.
> 
> And do you think anybody gives a fuck about a Big Show and Brodus Clay mainevent?



Pushing Punk more is the last thing they should do. Punk has hit a popularity plateau. He's not getting any higher or more over, but he can help others rise to his level. He should drop the belt to Bryan and lose the rematch to him then put him over in a promo as a serious threat. Then Bryan goes on to feud with Cena cementing his main event status and Punk helps elevate someone else (Ziggler).


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Happenstan said:


> Pushing Punk more is the last thing they should do. Punk has hit a popularity plateau. He's not getting any higher or more over, *but he can help others rise to his level. He should drop the belt to Bryan and lose the rematch to him then put him over in a promo as a serious threat. Then Bryan goes on to feud with Cena cementing his main event status and Punk helps elevate someone else *(Ziggler).


Punk hasnt even been fully established yet as a legit big player. Yeah he's held the belt long but he's always playing second fiddle to whatever stale bullshit Cena's involved in. And during he's title reign what credible big name star has he beaten? Jericho maybe but he's always been a mainevent jobber so beating him doesnt do shit for Punk as Punk was a higher level then Jericho already.

He's only beaten one big name since his face turn, John Cena, thats it. John Cena helped cement Punk as a mainevent face but not as a huge big time star which WWE needs, FUCKING NEEDS! right now.


----------



## THANOS

jblvdx said:


> Punk hasnt even been fully established yet as a legit big player. Yeah he's held the belt long but he's always playing second fiddle to whatever stale bullshit Cena's involved in. And during he's title reign what credible big name star has he beaten? Jericho maybe but he's always been a mainevent jobber so beating him doesnt do shit for Punk as Punk was a higher level then Jericho already.
> 
> He's only beaten one big name since his face turn, John Cena, thats it. John Cena helped cement Punk as a mainevent face but not as a huge big time star which WWE needs, FUCKING NEEDS! right now.


Yep he needs to go over HHH at some point, and I have a feeling that him and Rock are going to have a wwe title match at mania! Part of me thinks that the Rock hinting at wanting the title will mean he'll win it from someone and put over Punk at mania! I don't know why but The Rock has seriously been putting over Punk for quite some time now all over his twitter and seems to like and respect him MUCH MUCH more than he does Cena.

To be honest, stranger things could happen...


----------



## Happenstan

jblvdx said:


> Punk hasnt even been fully established yet as a legit big player. Yeah he's held the belt long but he's always playing second fiddle to whatever stale bullshit Cena's involved in. And during he's title reign what credible big name star has he beaten? Jericho maybe but he's always been a mainevent jobber so beating him doesnt do shit for Punk as Punk was a higher level then Jericho already.
> 
> He's only beaten one big name since his face turn, John Cena, thats it. John Cena helped cement Punk as a mainevent face but not as a huge big time star which WWE needs, FUCKING NEEDS! right now.


And who is he going to go over to get even higher? Rock? He's gone until Jan at the earliest. SCSA? Not coming back for anything but a big Mania match and pay day. HHH? HAHAHAHAHA, dat's a good one. Cena again? As I said, he's as high up as he can go right now.


----------



## Vyed

THANOS said:


> Yep he needs to go over HHH at some point, and I have a feeling that him and Rock are going to have a wwe title match at mania! Part of me thinks that the Rock hinting at wanting the title will mean he'll win it from someone and put over Punk at mania! I don't know why but The Rock has seriously been putting over Punk for quite some time now all over his twitter and seems to like and respect him MUCH MUCH more than he does Cena.
> 
> To be honest, stranger things could happen...


LOL no. Top stars are not going to be working with Punk or Bryan for that matter. They return for Mania, work their big feuds/matches and leave. Thats it.

Its obvious thats how Vince mcmahon operates these days.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Happenstan said:


> And who is he going to go over to get even higher? Rock? He's gone until Jan at the earliest. SCSA? Not coming back for anything but a big Mania match and pay day. *HHH? HAHAHAHAHA, dat's a good one*. Cena again? As I said, he's as high up as he can go right now.


?

HHH as the evil corporate boss, Punk as the anti-authority figure, Make HHH to be a legit mega-heel like only HHH can, build and build the feud over a few months, have Punk go over HHH at WM. There you go, Punks a star, not that hard.


----------



## D.M.N.

Horrible rating and compounded with Orton's suspension, not a very good week it seems. The problem is that it is "same old, same old". There is no need at all for Big Show to be hogging the main event scene, we've been there, done that, got the post card. It should be someone else getting their chance to shine, not someone who has been in the mid-card for nearly the past 10 years.


----------



## Happenstan

jblvdx said:


> ?
> 
> HHH as the evil corporate boss, Punk as the anti-authority figure, Make HHH to be a legit mega-heel like only HHH can, build and build the feud over a few months, have Punk go over HHH at WM. There you go, Punks a star, not that hard.



A) They need stars ASAP not further cementing an already over guy 10 months from now.
B) If you think HHH will come out of retirement to put over Punk when he wouldn't do it last year when it would have been the appropriate and needed time then you're higher than Orton.

EDIT: C) To make HHH that mega heel he'd have to wrestle full time to rebuild up that heel character. That's not HHH (the man) anymore. He's corporate and behind the scenes now. His wrestling days are all but over. End of an era, remember?


----------



## Therapy

You think Vince is in full blown panic mode yet considering everything that's going on?


----------



## Vyed

Happenstan said:


> A) They need stars ASAP not further cementing an already over guy 10 months from now.
> B) If you think HHH will come out of retirement to put over Punk when he wouldn't do it last year when it would have been the appropriate and needed time then you're higher than Orton.


Except he did put punk over. Losing is not the only way to put someone over. 



> EDIT: C) To make HHH that mega heel he'd have to wrestle full time to rebuild up that heel character. That's not HHH (the man) anymore. He's corporate and behind the scenes now. His wrestling days are all but over. End of an era, remember?


This I completely agree. Triple h right now is way beyond the point of being a full time heel. Plus it would take a Montreal screwjob to get him legit heel heat, the way Vince mcmahon managed to get. I think the window for HHH-Punk possibility is fully closed at this point. I doubt he will be going heel anytime soon, unless there is another absolute huge star/draw like Batista to be made.


----------



## llamadux

Hope it goes down even more so WWE stops trying to be a kids comedy show. I'm so sick of Cena, Santino and Clay.


----------



## Happenstan

Vyed said:


> Except he did put punk over. Losing is not the only way to put someone over.



Punk's momentum was butchered after his feud with HHH and I'm sure there are plenty of Punk fans and non-fans here who would agree with me that Punk wasn't put over in any way shape or form. You obviously feel differently so we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one.


----------



## Vyed

Happenstan said:


> Punk's momentum was butchered after his feud with HHH and I'm sure there are plenty of Punk fans and non-fans here who would agree with me that Punk wasn't put over in any way shape or form. You obviously feel differently so we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one.


Punk's momentum was butchered when he returned to RAW with the belt. the feud with HHH kept his momentum(whatever left of it) going. Fans who dont understand and are biased obviously dont see why the Night Of Champions match had a distraction finish instead of clean 1-2-3 pinfall in the middle of the ring for Triple h. HHH did put him over. I am not going to bother explaining the feud because I've tried before and its useless. 

Agree to disagree. Fine.


----------



## Rock316AE

Just heard the Observer Radio. The Punk vs Bryan match with a full quarter at the top of the hour LOST viewers :lmao. I told you even with the Albert match in the overrun lose that together they're suicidal and here's another proof. The peak of the show was for the awesome Big Show promo.

Dave Meltzer: "To the average fan those two don't mean anything and they don't buy them as top guys", His words.

Spot on from Big Dave as usual about what the masses want to see and who is mid card material. He said that WWE were in a big panic mode from the horrendous rating and the ratings number was as big as the second biggest full time star Randy Orton's suspension for the second time so that should tell you something. Also said that WWE knew about Orton's case for a few days and maybe weeks and he's the biggest draw on the SD brand which is why Cena and HHH are going to work TVs now to keep the business above water until he comes back.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

A CM Punk match losing viewers... nothing new here.

HOWEVER, was his segment with Laurinitis high? Of course some people will just contribute that to Laurinitis, but if that was high and then Punk/Bryan lost viewers but was still one of the highest of the night, it's all good.

Of course, I'll believe everything when I see it (which I guess won't be for another week).


----------



## Shock

Unfortunately I think Meltzer might be right about DB/Punk not catching on with the casuals. With the way they hyped it throughout the first hour and gave it the lead-in with Laurinaitis they've got to be pretty damn disappointed with losing viewers in that time-slot. Very bad news.


----------



## llamadux

I thought D.Bryan was doing decent ratings as SD champ? Punk is the one that sucks.


----------



## Happenstan

Shock said:


> Unfortunately I think Meltzer might be right about DB/Punk not catching on with the casuals. With the way they hyped it throughout the first hour and gave it the lead-in with Laurinaitis they've got to be pretty damn disappointed with losing viewers in that time-slot. Very bad news.


Does it really matter that they lost ratings if Obis is right and they still had one of the highest segments of the night?


----------



## Vyed

Yup he did say that, Just downloaded from Wrestlezone board and listened to the show. It looks like Del Rio-Santino lost over 700,000 viewers and its the second lowest rated quarter-hour on a non-July 4th RAW since 1997. Punk-Bryan match at 10 PM totally lost viewers. Those two were the real bombs. Brodus-Show gained 400,000 which is a low gain for the overrun. 

Metlzer says people are not buying Punk and bryan as Top guys/Main Eventers. They dont mean anything to the casuals.


And Cena,HHH are advertised for more upcoming smackdowns to cover up for Orton but mostly dark matches.


----------



## Loudness

I don't get why people still put Bryan and Punk in the same category, they're nothing alike. Bryan drew ratings that were rivaling Henry, he was actually the main focus of the show and even now still has a storyline and character development with AJ. Punk has been champion, yes, but he hasn't drawn in a long time nor does he have much focus or character development, he's basically an upper midcarder that happens to hold the title because Cenas not in mood for it right now, which is only beeing accentuated even more by Cena still beeing in the ME at every PPV.


----------



## dazzy666

theres only one thing to do, 

time to turn cena heel to freshing it up 

i have said time and time again in the past it wont happen, 

but ive just got this gut feeling its going to happen on the 1000th episode

then summerslams up next and he takes the title off punk 

its the only way they need huge changes for 3 hours or there going to have more and more switching off. 



another thing is people that moan about tuning in stop watching through streams and view the product then? 
streaming is not supporting the company in the slightest


----------



## Marv95

dazzy666 said:


> another thing is people that moan about tuning in stop watching through streams and view the product then?
> streaming is not supporting the company in the slightest


Streams existed when Raw was averaging about a 4.0 for several weeks straight not too long ago. That's not an excuse


----------



## A-C-P

:lol this thread never fails to dissapoint. I can't beleive there are still people who still put blame for ratings on one or 2 guys, but w/e keep it coming as it does produce laughs. Specially when the all the guys being blamed are not the ones who are the focus of the show.

Starbuck (and others) have tried explaining this many times but the main problem with Raw and SD right now is that there are *NO* actual storylines outside of w/e Cena is involved in. I mean they added AJ and now Kane to Punk/Bryan but is there really an actual stroyline there outside of Bryan, then Punk using Kane to beat-up the other guy. Not really its just Punk has belt and I wantz belt.

No storylines = no reason to care about matches or superstars' characters = No reason to stay tuned into Raw. One of the main reasons that the AE was so succesful is that pretty much EVERYONE that was getting on TV was involved in a storyline that was allowed to develop and gave the audience a reason to care about the feud itself and the people involved, no matter where on the card these people were. Nowadays on Raw its just one or 2 developed storylines maybe and a bunch of random matches and "mini-feuds" that are treated as total filler by the WWE, and people wonder why people don't watch like they used to.

But wait this post will be way to logical for alot of people here so I will throw in the standard, The low ratings are just all Punk and Bryan's fault as to not confuse some of you to bad
:bryan2 unk2


----------



## Little Mac

dazzy666 said:


> another thing is people that moan about tuning in stop watching through streams and view the product then?
> streaming is not supporting the company in the slightest


http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/question433.htm


----------



## GuessWhat: CenaSux

^^^ A-C-P is absolutely right!!

People need to realize that there is no upper card in the WWE. The upper card is Cena and whoever he is feuding with. He wins at the PPV and moves on to next person he's beaten before or he loses b/c of shenanigans and the feud continues. Everyone else, Punk and Bryan included, are basically upper mid-card. Cena >>> WWE title.

Hypothetically, Cena can feud with Hornswoggle and that feud will get the most TV time. WWE has become all about filler and as ACP said: mini-feuds. Unless WWE gives us a reason to care about characters and/or matches, ratings will tumble, slowly but surely.

Personally, I stopped watching WWE when Cena beat Lesnar. I was finally fed up. It was an incredible and amazing match that was ruined (at least for me) when Cena won "miraculously" as he always does.\

The best way to demand change is not by cheering/booing WWE/Cena, but to *stop watching WWE programming altogether*. When ratings tumble some more, VKM will feel forced to do something compelling. I'll be boycotting WWE until they stop feeding us the same stupid crap. I really WANT to love WWE and the product, but I cannot get myself to do so under the current state of their programming.


----------



## Little Mac

GuessWhat: CenaSux said:


> ^^^ A-C-P is absolutely right!!
> 
> People need to realize that there is no upper card in the WWE. The upper card is Cena and whoever he is feuding with. He wins at the PPV and moves on to next person he's beaten before or he loses b/c of shenanigans and the feud continues. Everyone else, Punk and Bryan included, are basically upper mid-card. Cena >>> WWE title.
> 
> Hypothetically, Cena can feud with Hornswoggle and that feud will get the most TV time. WWE has become all about filler and as ACP said: mini-feuds. Unless WWE gives us a reason to care about characters and/or matches, ratings will tumble, slowly but surely.
> 
> Personally, I stopped watching WWE when Cena beat Lesnar. I was finally fed up. It was an incredible and amazing match that was ruined (at least for me) when Cena won "miraculously" as he always does.\
> 
> The best way to demand change is not by cheering/booing WWE/Cena, but to *stop watching WWE programming altogether*. When ratings tumble some more, VKM will feel forced to do something compelling. I'll be boycotting WWE until they stop feeding us the same stupid crap. I really WANT to love WWE and the product, but I cannot get myself to do so under the current state of their programming.


See above. 

Only 25, 000 American homes are actually measured on their television habits. If you don't have a Nielsen meter in your home, then what you watch doesn't affect the ratings.


----------



## Heel

Guarantee next week will be the CENA SHOW. He'll probably open the show, be announced as the main event, and have a backstage segment or two between it...


----------



## roadkill_

Reminds me of WCW Nitro. Hey, shit 2.0 ratings reflecting shit product? I know! Add an extra hour of even more shittiness, that'll do it!

The third hour will make these ratings dip even lower.


----------



## Marv95

roadkill_ said:


> Reminds me of WCW Nitro. Hey, shit 2.0 ratings reflecting shit product? I know! Add an extra hour of even more shittiness, that'll do it!
> 
> The third hour will make these ratings dip even lower.


Except their product wasn't shit when they went 3 hours, and even during the 3-hour run for 2 years the product was still better than WWE's today and their roster was FAR more talented.


----------



## JasonLives

Vyed said:


> Yup he did say that, Just downloaded from Wrestlezone board and listened to the show. It looks like Del Rio-Santino lost over 700,000 viewers


Yeah, lets blame the match that wasent even 1 minute. Sometimes wonder if Meltzer even takes a look at the actual quarters.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Little Mac said:


> See above.
> 
> Only *25, 000 American homes* are actually measured on their television habits. If you don't have a Nielsen meter in your home, then what you watch doesn't affect the ratings.


You have to be fucking with me? Only 25,000 homes? This whole system is based off of such a small sampling.


----------



## A-C-P

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> You have to be fucking with me? Only 25,000 homes? This whole system is based off of such a small sampling.


Yep, around 25,000 with actual boxes I think they still do random mailings to but there is no way those are counted i nthe overnight rating #s. But if you'd study statistics at all 25,000 is plenty big of a sample size.


----------



## Green Light

25,000 is more than enough to get an accurate representation, google Statistical Significance if you're interested


----------



## mblonde09

Even if the casual fans "aren't buying" Punk and Bryan as "top guys", who actually gives a shit? They're called casual fans for a reason.


----------



## TheSupremeForce

mblonde09 said:


> Even if the casual fans "aren't buying" Punk and Bryan as "top guys", who actually gives a shit? They're called casual fans for a reason.


As long as the networks are happy, ratings are pretty pointless. You're correct. Ticket sales and merchandise would have to be a much bigger deal. Both guys are currently moving merch, so they're doing well.


----------



## mblonde09

Rock316AE said:


> Spot on from Big Dave as usual about what the masses want to see and who is mid card material. He said that WWE were in a big panic mode from the horrendous rating and the ratings number was as big as *the second biggest full time star Randy Orton*'s suspension for the second time so that should tell you something. Also said that WWE knew about Orton's case for a few days and maybe weeks and he's the biggest draw on the SD brand which is why Cena and HHH are going to work TVs now to keep the business above water until he comes back.



This clearly needs posting again - for you and anyone else who refuses to believe that Punk has leapfrogged Orton... read it a few times and it might finally start to sink in:


> - There was some talk coming out of last night’s Raw Supershow about how the backstage influence of WWE Champion CM Punk is currently at an all-time high. All this stems from the fact that Punk put his foot down last year and basically told Vince McMahon he was either going to be a main event guy or was walking. I’m told *Punk is now seen as second behind only John Cena in WWE, surpassing Randy Orton* because the company feels he caters more to the 21-35-year-old demographic they desperately need. I’m told the idea behind Punk now is to just let him keep doing what he’s been doing.


Key words: SURPASSING RANDY ORTON


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

^ I'd agree he surpassed Orton. He did it a long time ago. 

But regardless of the level of truthness to it, you're wasting your time telling Rock316AE it.

And this thread as usual has gotten ridiculously hilarious off the heels of a low rating ON MEMORIAL DAY, and now a Punk match losing viewers. Haters gonna hate.


----------



## Couch

Ratings are bad on Memorial Day?

YOU DON'T SAY


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Obis said:


> ^ I'd agree he surpassed Orton. He did it a long time ago.
> 
> But regardless of the level of truthness to it, you're wasting your time telling Rock316AE it.
> 
> And this thread as usual has gotten ridiculously hilarious off the heels of a low rating ON MEMORIAL DAY, and now a Punk match losing viewers. Haters gonna hate.


LOL @ you trying to blame Memorial Day.

Last year's RAW did 3.1 on Memorial Day and the year before 3.2.

Nothing to do with Memorial Day.


----------



## Starbuck

:lmao at those breakdown numbers and :lmao in general. This thread is going to be fucking amazing come July 23rd lol.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

The-Rock-Says said:


> LOL @ you trying to blame Memorial Day.
> 
> Last year's RAW did 3.1 on Memorial Day and the year before 3.2.
> 
> Nothing to do with Memorial Day.


and the people probably bitched last year about the rating being low so what


whatever 
this thread is entertaining... keep up the good work


----------



## ecabney

The-Rock-Says said:


> LOL @ you trying to blame Memorial Day.
> 
> Last year's RAW did 3.1 on Memorial Day and the year before 3.2.
> 
> *Nothing to do with Memorial Day.*


But everything to do with Lebron and the Heat, and Hatfield and Mccoys


----------



## dxbender

^People have complained about the rating since ratings were first made public.

I'm sure if ratings were(dont know if they were or not) available during attitude era, you could look on an attitude era archived forum and see people complaining about the rating. Especially since ratings went up and down by like .5 or something each week.

If people DURING attitude era complained so much about the rock, they'd complain about ratings too for sure


----------



## Shock

mblonde09 said:


> Even if the casual fans "aren't buying" Punk and Bryan as "top guys", who actually gives a shit? They're called casual fans for a reason.


They matter because they're the vast, vast majority and dictate whether or not WWE sinks or swims ratings-wise. I've heard some bad excuses from DB/Punk defenders but saying "casual fans don't matter" is pretty crazy.


----------



## Therapy

dxbender said:


> ^People have complained about the rating since ratings were first made public.
> 
> I'm sure if ratings were(dont know if they were or not) available during attitude era, you could look on an attitude era archived forum and see people complaining about the rating. Especially since ratings went up and down by like .5 or something each week.
> 
> If people DURING attitude era complained so much about the rock, they'd complain about ratings too for sure


Attitude era had ratings.. Back then it hardly mattered who wasn't a draw when The Rock could go out and draw an 8.4 rating just cutting a promo. (yes, he did that)


----------



## RichDV

Of course the segment I most enjoyed lost viewers, while I'm sure the ones I disliked were hits in the ratings. How exciting.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

dxbender said:


> ^People have complained about the rating since ratings were first made public.
> 
> I'm sure if ratings were(dont know if they were or not) available during attitude era, you could look on an attitude era archived forum and see people complaining about the rating. Especially since ratings went up and down by like .5 or something each week.
> 
> If people *DURING attitude era complained so much about the rock*, they'd complain about ratings too for sure


Stupid Golden era marks.

Hasn't Bryan like lost -3m viewers this year? And Punk gained 800k?


----------



## Duke Silver

Citizen Kane bombed at the box office. Did that (or does that) have any impact on the quality of the film?

In an ideal world, talent like Shawn Michaels and CM Punk would be huge draws, but that's not always the case. It takes time, money, effort and good storytelling to develop a top draw. Punk has had some time, but there's been very little effort put into his elevation and the storytelling certainly isn't there. It's possible that he'll never reach the masses, but that doesn't take away from the fact that he's more talented and more entertaining than 95% of the current roster. 

At the moment Punk is in a very similar position to that of Orton; he's incredibly popular amongst live crowds, he's selling merch like a motherfucker, but he doesn't draw in new viewers on name alone.

Besides; People like Coldplay and voted for the Nazis. You can't trust people.


----------



## peejay

I'm glad the ratings are this bad, Raw has been terrible and i hope the ratings continue to do as bad or drop even more, maybe then the WWE will actually start to make some improvements.
Are people really blaming CM Punk for it? He's not even the main event at the moment John Cena is. Low ratings aren't due to any particular wrestler it's because the product as a whole sucks.
The WWE is stale and behind the times, it's as simple as that.


----------



## mblonde09

Shock said:


> They matter because *they're the vast, vast majority and dictate whether or not WWE sinks or swims ratings-wise.* I've heard some bad excuses from DB/Punk defenders but saying "casual fans don't matter" is pretty crazy.


Casuals are the "vast, vast majority"? Really? The hardcore fanbase (the people who will watch every week without fail) far outweigh the casuals. That's why they're casual fans - they're not invested in the product whatsoever. Casuals are not going to shows or buying merchandise. When the core fanbase starts turning off, then they've got problems.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

The-Rock-Says said:


> LOL @ you trying to blame Memorial Day.
> 
> Last year's RAW did 3.1 on Memorial Day and the year before 3.2.
> 
> Nothing to do with Memorial Day.


Fair enough. I assumed because Memorial Day was a national holiday that it affected the ratings, but didnt look at past ratings.

Never the less, there are other reasons as posted in this thread why Raw was down this week.


----------



## Choke2Death

dazzy666 said:


> another thing is people that moan about tuning in stop watching through streams and view the product then?
> streaming is not supporting the company in the slightest


Yeah, let's help them when their product is at an all-time low. I don't think so. I actually think more people should use streams so the ratings sink further and they decide to make a change, fast.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

How about giving Bryan and Punk promo time instead of matches? When have WWE let these two have one promo to cement that they are feuding? Casuals probably think it was a random match with no purpose.

Punks promos usually draw better than his matches on RAW.


----------



## HalfNights70

I know exactly why Punk/Bryan/Kane lost viewers it's because of the 2 or 3 commercial breaks before, during and after the match so it does hurt the ratings that's why I don't watch it live anyway. They should treat them carefully they're not the biggest draws so its a stupid move from the WWE. I bet Punk/Johnny gained viewers not just because of johnny it will be because of Punk too. Punk mostly gains viewers from segments. Check this it proves my point:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm-Y1PLB4wc

A lot of commercials maybe 2 or 3.


----------



## jonoaries

Like I said earlier in this topic:

The NBA playoffs featured some of the leagues most marketable players in the 1st game of their series (Lebron james, Dwayne Wade, paul pierce, & kevin garnett) it was also a decent game as well. 

Then you have the surprise of Hatfields & McCoys on the history channel, which I don't think anyone believed would be such a big TV hit. 

Those factors play a bigger role than anything. 
:bron


----------



## Chicago Warrior

HalfNights70 said:


> I know exactly why Punk/Bryan/Kane lost viewers it's because of the 2 or 3 commercial breaks before, during and after the match so it does hurt the ratings that's why I don't watch it live anyway. They should treat them carefully they're not the biggest draws so its a stupid move from the WWE. I bet Punk/Johnny gained viewers not just because of johnny it will be because of Punk too. Punk mostly gains viewers from segments. Check this it proves my point:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm-Y1PLB4wc
> 
> A lot of commercials maybe 2 or 3.


You got a point these guys were given about 15 minutes and about 2 or 3 commercial breaks. I say a promo between them will draw more than a 15 minute match with 3 commercial breaks in between. Plus it was memorial day and the play offs and that History channel show doing big numbers. You got to factor all these thing into the rating. Also Punk vs Bryan hasn't been the main focus of RAW at all or have raised intensity in their feud.


----------



## robertdeniro

Why Punk is still the WWE champion ? they gave him a huge push but he is clearly can't draw.

They should give the belt to The Big Show since he is a bigger draw.


----------



## Therapy

robertdeniro said:


> Why Punk is still the WWE champion ? they gave him a huge push but he is clearly can't draw.
> 
> They should give the belt to The Big Show since he is a bigger draw.


Know how I know you're trollin?


----------



## robertdeniro

Therapy said:


> Know how I know you're trollin?


Not trollin at all,Punk is not a TV draw.The numbers don't lie (Now i'm trollin).


----------



## Falkono

Not really a rating as such but thought I would show people an interesting graph. Basically it is WWE's shares since Punk has been WWE champion










Seems Punk doesn't just lose viewers in his segments, he loses money too! Dropped almost 25% since he has been champion!


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Yeah Punk is solely responsible for any money WWE loses, you guys are great lol.


----------



## Falkono

Chicago Warrior said:


> Yeah Punk is solely responsible for any money WWE loses, you guys are great lol.


Of course he isn't just as he isn't responsible when some nerd buys his shirt.

The overal picture is the problem, not just one guy.

BUT

If people keep turning off in their droves when the champion is on then it shows that they are not as popular as some would love you to believe. If WWE keep that champion for a longtime and it keeps turning people off then that will naturally have some impact on their finances i.e buyrates down for ppv's.


----------



## RichDV

Punk losing viewers is definitely a problem. However it's not like people aren't watching the overall show due to him being champion. That's kinda silly. He's not even the main focus of the show and hasn't been for a long time.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Falkono said:


> Of course he isn't just as he isn't responsible when some nerd buys his shirt.
> 
> The overal picture is the problem, not just one guy.
> 
> BUT
> 
> If people keep turning off in their droves when the champion is on then it shows that they are not as popular as some would love you to believe. If WWE keep that champion for a longtime and it keeps turning people off then that will naturally have some impact on their finances i.e buyrates down for ppv's.


His segments draw well when there is focus and an interesting story going. Especially his promos. WWE just needs to involve their WWE Champion in the main storylines. Punk was not involved in Cena vs Rock during his return to Survivor Series, nor is he involved in any of this Brock Lesnar and Johnny Ace stuff. I am not saying he is the most popular guy in WWE, because that is not true at all.


----------



## Punkholic

Falkono said:


> Not really a rating as such but thought I would show people an interesting graph. Basically it is WWE's shares since Punk has been WWE champion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems Punk doesn't just lose viewers in his segments, he loses money too! Dropped almost 25% since he has been champion!


This is the most pathetic post I've read since I joined these boards back in 2009. You can't blame a single wrestler for the company's decline.


----------



## Falkono

Punkholic said:


> This is the most pathetic post I've read since I joined these boards back in 2009. You can't blame a single wrestler for the company's decline.


If you find that the most pathetic thing then I guess you have not really been on here much. Either that or you get offended a bit easy. Seeing as you have Punk displayed all over your sig/avatar and even in your name i'm guessing it is the later....

As I said above it was just a graph to show you how the shares have gone since he has been champion. They have gone down. I could show you a graph with any other champion if it would make you feel better?

I mentioned in my second post you can't blame the guy so maybe you missed that. But to think there is no connection between the finances and the champion of a company such as the wwe then I think thats more pathetic. I'm pretty sure if I said Cena instead of Punk you wouldn't have cared.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Dude, investors are not buying, selling, or shorting WWE stock based on who the champion is. I mean you can make the argument that Punk as champ has been bad for business - I wouldn't make that argument, but it can be made - but pulling up WWEs stock price ain't gonna do it. That's not how it works.


----------



## Falkono

SarcasmoBlaster said:


> Dude, investors are not buying, selling, or shorting WWE stock based on who the champion is. I mean you can make the argument that Punk as champ has been bad for business - I wouldn't make that argument, but it can be made - but pulling up WWEs stock price ain't gonna do it. That's not how it works.


To be honest while I agree with what you say (again have to remember my post was light hearted, notice the smiley?) I think that if say for example The Rock was champion right now it would be different. Shares are all about mommentum and how popular something is likely to be in the future. If WWE had some good things going on right now it would help to get rid of the whole doom and gloom about the company right now, it would make people think there was a bright future ahead. Where as right now I think everyone can agree the future is unknown. If things stay as they are then I think you would have to fear for them.

The champion is sort of the face of the company, they will be on a lot of various products such as the new wwe game. This creates further awareness of the product. But as I mentioned before if say someone like Rock was champion it would create more of a buzz, more people would be interested. More people interested means more potential buyers at ppvs. More buyers at ppvs means WWE makes more money, WWE making more money means investors want a piece of the action, if investors want a piece of the action share prices increase etc etc.

If something is doing well shares increase, if it is doing bad they drop. That is how it is. There will always be a connection with the champion to how the company does financially, after all why do you think they kept giving Cena the belt?


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Falkono said:


> To be honest while I agree with what you say (again have to remember my post was light hearted, notice the smiley?) I think that if say for example The Rock was champion right now it would be different. Shares are all about mommentum and how popular something is likely to be in the future. If WWE had some good things going on right now it would help to get rid of the whole doom and gloom about the company right now, it would make people think there was a bright future ahead. Where as right now I think everyone can agree the future is unknown. If things stay as they are then I think you would have to fear for them.
> 
> The champion is sort of the face of the company, they will be on a lot of various products such as the new wwe game. This creates further awareness of the product. But as I mentioned before if say someone like Rock was champion it would create more of a buzz, more people would be interested. More people interested means more potential buyers at ppvs. More buyers at ppvs means WWE makes more money, WWE making more money means investors want a piece of the action, if investors want a piece of the action share prices increase etc etc.
> 
> If something is doing well shares increase, if it is doing bad they drop. That is how it is. There will always be a connection with the champion to how the company does financially, after all why do you think they kept giving Cena the belt?


I mean sure the champion has an effect on business. But you've got to go through _a lot_ of layers before you see that reflected in stock price. To demonstrate a direct causality like that you'd have to get into some pretty hardcore mathematical analysis at a level which nobody here is probably capable of - if it is possible at all. 

But since you were being largely tongue-in-cheek, it's fine.


----------



## rkomarkorton

Punkholic said:


> This is the most pathetic post I've read since I joined these boards back in 2009. You can't blame a single wrestler for the company's decline.


Lmao but you can blame randy orton right? gtfoh


----------



## apokalypse

fuck! Without cena RAW ratings 2.72? and can't blame Punk unable to draw but blame on poor booking. last 3 weeks also i feel really bored watching RAW and on chat room i'm with they pretty fucking quite. 

WWE really losing it and drop the fucking ball lose all the momentum after WM...seriously what you looking forward to or want to watch RAW this Monday? for me simply nothing and there's nothing to talk about out of raw.

there's always reason for bad booking/poor writing...No Cena-Holiday-NBA games..excuses


----------



## kokepepsi

Seriously does no one look at the segment breakdowns.

Every single segment loses but the opener the 10pm and the overrun.
(inb4 punk haters comment on him losing in 2 out of those 3 segments)
(inb4 I post HHH/Cena/Edge/Miz/Rock/Hardy/Jericho/Orton losing in those segments)

They book like shit, people give zero fucks about the roster who is booked like shit, they don't watch/tune out.

It's not one single person at fault. It's a creative.


----------



## apokalypse

it's fucking creative fault...back in the day they have every storyline and have something for all cards, looking at the fucking Product we have large percent of squashed match and no fued plus alot of guys going no where. 

one thing i blame on wrestler is they got no fucking personality and fucking one dimensional characters along with shit on mic. 

remember last year? WWE hit fucking reset bottom few times putting focusing on Rock/Cena and screw the rest..Cm PUNk thing could have became something but now i's starting to hear few negative.


----------



## BackstreetMan

Do you all honestly think the massive drop in fan interest since Punk's reign is just purely coincidental? 

You people have been repeatedly moaning about the lack of creativity on the story lines for the past 4 or 5 years yet the numbers at least until 2010 has still been stable in the 3.2 to 3.5 region.

Then suddenly they gave the title to Punk and you have numbers that drop below 3.0 every freakin' two weeks. 

That is still creative's fault? Of course it's their fault too, but why did that phenomena only started happening when Punk got the strap? 

Even Miz and Alberto "Can't draw heat" Del Rio's title reigns managed to maintain viewership stability around 3.1-3.3 averages.


----------



## Green Light

I'm pretty sure Del Rio's reign had terrible ratings, that's why they hot-shotted the title back onto Cena

Anyway the show is fucking terrible right now so it shouldn't be a surprise that ratings are low (although to be fair I haven't watched in weeks because I assumed the shows were gonna be terrible judging by the main feud)


----------



## Vyed

Speaking of Del rio's title reign, its weird that they took the title off him at Night of champions just because RAW did 2.9 with him as champion *ONCE*, but punk's reign has hit way worse numbers many times yet he's still the champion lol. 

Not a punk hater or anything, just sayin....


----------



## BackstreetMan

Vyed said:


> *Speaking of Del rio's title reign, its weird that they took the title off him at Night of champions just because RAW did 2.9 with him as champion ONCE, but punk's reign has hit way worse numbers many times yet he's still the champion lol. *
> 
> Not a punk hater or anything, just sayin....


Just what I pointed out. Compared to Punk, dude was actually a decent draw. Punk's numbers make Del Rio SCSA-like in comparison.


----------



## Therapy

Vyed said:


> Speaking of Del rio's title reign, its weird that they took the title off him at Night of champions just because RAW did 2.9 with him as champion *ONCE*, but punk's reign has hit way worse numbers many times yet he's still the champion lol.
> 
> Not a punk hater or anything, just sayin....


You're assuming that `story' is even true though. 95% of the wrestling folklore and "facts" are fictional hot piss spawned from a dirt sheet and copy-pasted from one sheet to the next with the goal of whoring up click counts to make money off mouth breathers. lol @ subscription dirtsheets. I take everything they say with a grain of salt unless it's the very very rare times the story is quoting an actual wrestler that works for the company.


----------



## kokepepsi

Raw got a 2.7 when Del rio was champ. Like a week before or on the go home show of Night of Champions.

All the smarks were like "lol he is gonna lose the strap" 

Cena makes him tap and wins


----------



## kokepepsi

Oh and during the Del Rio reign

HHH and Punk were having a feud and carrying the show ratings wise.


----------



## Therapy

Del Rio was in Tensai territory with crowd reactions. It was absolutely no shocker his reign was so short. You'd think WWE would have learned from that. It became a running joke how cookie cutter his shtick was.

Expensive car - Check
Destiny - Check
I'm so great - Check

That was it.. Yet, here we are about 6 months later and he's EXACTLY the same as he was then. :no: I feel so bad for these guys who are given absolutely no freedom to run with their character and expand on it a bit.


----------



## Vyed

Just checked. Del rio's reign did low ratings two times 2.9 and 2.7. The 2.7 RAW was head to head with MNF first week of the year, Patriots/Dolphins did a strong 10.62 and Raiders/Broncos 8.21 rating. 

Not really his fault tbh, dont know why they took the title off him.


----------



## manjiimortal

One thing i notice here is a double standard. People say that one guy (Punk) can't be blamed because of the bad ratings, and yet are saying that it's Cena's fault (one guy) that WWE is s*** right now.

There is in fact quite some evidence that Punk *is a reason* why ratings are going down as previously stated, and while he isn't *the cause* for ratings drop he's certainly *part of the problem*.

(note the bold and read carefully, because i've notice that some people in wrestling boards don't so much as read what's written, but what they want to be written)


----------



## HalfNights70

manjiimortal said:


> One thing i notice here is a double standard. People say that one guy (Punk) can't be blamed because of the bad ratings, and yet are saying that it's Cena's fault (one guy) that WWE is s*** right now.
> 
> There is in fact quite some evidence that Punk *is a reason* why ratings are going down as previously stated, and while he isn't *the cause* for ratings drop he's certainly *part of the problem*.
> 
> (note the bold and read carefully, because i've notice that some people in wrestling boards don't so much as read what's written, but what they want to be written)


If John didn't hang on the spotlight in the last 3 years, ratings will not drop like that, he's the real reason why there is no real maineventers. He wins all the time against the talents and doesn't let them win fair and square, that means there is not real threats for John Cena. You can blame Punk all you want but it's not his fault they should treat him like a maineventer, he just beat jobbers so what credibility will he have unlike Cena he gets all cake.


----------



## ecabney

Vyed said:


> Speaking of Del rio's title reign, its weird that they took the title off him at Night of champions just because RAW did 2.9 with him as champion *ONCE*, but punk's reign has hit way worse numbers many times yet he's still the champion lol.
> 
> Not a punk hater or anything, just sayin....


They took the title off of him because he wasn't over AND was a ratings disaster. At least Punk is over and brings some revenue to the company at least.


----------



## Carcass

Vyed said:


> Speaking of Del rio's title reign, its weird that they took the title off him at Night of champions just because RAW did 2.9 with him as champion *ONCE*, but punk's reign has hit way worse numbers many times yet he's still the champion lol.
> 
> Not a punk hater or anything, just sayin....


Didn't they take the title off of him since the Mexican tour was over and that was the only reason they put it on him?


----------



## GillbergReturns

I only find this thread amusing because most of the people defending Punk and blaming creative are the same guys who will run into anti Orton or Sheamus threads and say what rating killers they are. Hell even Del Rio or Miz for that matter too. When you're guy doesn't draw it's creative. When it's someone you don't like it's them.

The difference between SD and Raw is SD gets 55-60% of the audience so the smarks actually matter on that show. They read the spoilers and decide if they want to watch and that will spike viewership. Their viewership however just doesn't transfer to Raw and that shows why Ratings success Daniel Bryan is not a ratings success on Raw. I'm not saying he's a failure or anything like it's just he's not a draw. Same goes for Punk. They have their audience, they buy their gear, but it's a fixed audience and it doesn't rise the show ratings. Hardcore wrestling fans tend to watch Raw regardless and then complain on this site that they'll never watch again. Does that sound familiar?

Not really hating on Bryan there either. 

I think when you look at the roster there's 5 guys now that established or over enough to build around (Cena, Orton, Punk, Bryan, Sheamus) and you have another 5 guys that could occasionally occupy some time too (Mysterio, Del Rio, Miz, Rhodes, Barrett). 

The roster isn't bad it's just very few people are being used right. You spend a year building Miz then you completely bury him. There's no true top heel right now. Daniel Bryan is the closest thing but he barely qualifies as a heel. I know fans don't want to boo him but if he was paired with Lauranitis right now he'd be over as sh** as a heel. From there you can easily tie him to Lesnar who kayfaybe wise was brought in by Big Johnny.


----------



## manjiimortal

HalfNights70 said:


> If John didn't hang on the spotlight in the last 3 years, ratings will not drop like that, he's the real reason why there is no real maineventers. He wins all the time against the talents and doesn't let them win fair and square, that means there is not real threats for John Cena. You can blame Punk all you want but it's not his fault they should treat him like a maineventer, he just beat jobbers so what credibility will he have unlike Cena he gets all cake.


Hogan and Austin did the exact same thing, they always won clean and never ever lost clean. The top guy always goes over because he is the top guy and the promotion is built around him.

Punk, at best, is the Randy Savage to Cena's Hulk Hogan, a guy very much over with the live crowd, but not the one that is expected to carry the company.


----------



## HalfNights70

manjiimortal said:


> *Hogan and Austin did the exact same thing, they always won clean and never ever lost clean. The top guy always goes over because he is the top guy and the promotion is built around him.*
> 
> Punk, at best, is the Randy Savage to Cena's Hulk Hogan, a guy very much over with the live crowd, but not the one that is expected to carry the company.


Are you serious...… fpalm.

Edited: Just for you to know that Hogan lost clean against Brock Lesnar, Rock, and Kurt Angle thats what I remember there is more but I can't remember. As for Austin he lost clean to Taker, Rock, and that's what I remember but he's a badass so why should he lose, he did put some talents over even if it wasn't clean and he was way bigger draw than Cena will ever be, thats why nobody complained. Cena is just burying them they can't reach the spotlight because of him and Attitude era wasn't about one guy to let you know but now it's all about John Cena and look at the ratings, now the product is more for kids and Cena is the real reason for that. Cena is haunting WWE down, he should put some deserving talents over and let them look like threats, it's not AE so this needs to happen.


----------



## Choke2Death

HalfNights70 said:


> Are you serious...… fpalm.
> 
> Edited: Just for you to know that Hogan lost clean against Brock Lesnar, Rock, and Kurt Angle thats what I remember there is more but I can't remember. As for Austin he lost clean to Taker, Rock, and that's what I remember but he's a badass so why should he lose, he did put some talents over even if it wasn't clean and he was way bigger draw than Cena will ever be, thats why nobody complained. Cena is just burying them they can't reach the spotlight because of him and Attitude era wasn't about one guy to let you know but now it's all about John Cena and look at the ratings, now the product is more for kids and Cena is the real reason for that. Cena is haunting WWE down, he should put some deserving talents over and let them look like threats, it's not AE so this needs to happen.


If the clean loss thing was a shot at Cena... then I'll say that he's lost clean more than Hogan and Austin. He's lost clean to Sheamus, HBK, HHH twice, JBL, The Rock and Orton at WM24 (triple threat).



Vyed said:


> Just checked. Del rio's reign did low ratings two times 2.9 and 2.7. The 2.7 RAW was head to head with MNF first week of the year, Patriots/Dolphins did a strong 10.62 and Raiders/Broncos 8.21 rating.
> 
> Not really his fault tbh, dont know why they took the title off him.


They probably just didn't want Cena to lose 5 PPVs in a row. (with the exception of NoC, every PPV from MITB to Vengeance, Cena lost in) And of course, another pointless title reign to make him "the biggest superstars ever". And I don't know why you put so much importance into Del Rio losing his title fast when he regained it just two weeks later, went over Cena in their last match and held it for another month.


----------



## deadmau

*WWE in PANIC MODE over Raw rating*

Source: The Wrestling Observer

WWE is reportedly alarmed at the low rating that RAW received this week. The show did a 2.7 cable rating, the lowest number of the year, and the big topic of discussion in the company was that as opposed to Randy Orton's suspension.

While the rating was hurt by several factors including Memorial Day, the record-breaking debut of Hatfields & McCoys and the NBA playoffs, officials were reportedly concerned that the CM Punk/Daniel Bryan match lost viewers and that the Alberto Del Rio/Santino Marella match was the lowest quarter hour rating that the show has had in years.


----------



## Loudness

So, does anyone have the actual quarter hour ratings instead of just verbal things Meltzer said? I'd like to see the official numbers if they are available, normally they should be around by today.


----------



## TheSupremeForce

*Re: WWE in PANIC MODE over Raw rating*

Blame commercials, as well. ADR/Santino didn't even last two minutes, making it tough to blame it for a quarter hour. Punk/Bryan wasn't much better in that regard. Part of the reason why the first quarter hour and the overrun do so well in the ratings is that they don't stick commercials into the middle.


----------



## James1o1o

*Re: WWE in PANIC MODE over Raw rating*

Hopefully these falling ratings will make WWE take notice, I only hope they don't just jump to huge conclusion that its Daniel Bryan and Punk causing it and that its John Cena and Big Show.


----------



## kokepepsi

*Re: WWE in PANIC MODE over Raw rating*

wow so punk/bryan lost viewers again

Well it was nice seeing them get a push for a while

LOLDELRIO


----------



## Chicago Warrior

*Re: WWE in PANIC MODE over Raw rating*

Lol, how about instead of giving them a 15 minute match with 3 commercial breaks, you could let them cut promos on each other. When have bryan and punk cut any promos on RAW? If this report is true then they will probably be taken off the 2nd hour slot and back to the 2nd quarter slot in some tag team match that will lose viewers automatically. Punks promos do much better than his matches so they need to try that.


----------



## manjiimortal

Hogan's only job when he was on top was against Warrior, and from mid-97 onwards Austin never lost clean. Before yes, when he wasn't on top yet. I don't think he ever lost clean after coming back from his neck injury except for his last match against Rock, and then you could very well argue that he wasn't the top guy anymore.

And your argument on why it didn't matter if Austin ever lost clean only reveals your personal prejudice to Cena.
The product being more directed to children isn't the issue here, booking is. For decades wrestling was a family oriented show in all of the USA (don't believe it, most wrestling shows aired on weekend mornings when children were usually watching) and that included *shock-gasp* children.

From a business standpoint aiming your product at children is a hell of a lot more lucrative because a child doesn't go to a wrestling show alone, at least one of his parents must also go, so that's two tickets for the price of one. Compare that to the generally anti-social, man-child, x-generation wannabe reject, slime of humanity that is the average "wrestling fan".
The so despised "casual fan" is what keeps any promotion above indy-level alive, so they should be the target audience.


----------



## NewJack's Shank

Its cause they continue to force guys who can't get over down our throats each week. Outside of Punk, Bryan, Sheamus, Cena who is there really? Why should I care about the other guys on the roster creative has never given me a reason, Im speaking from a casual standpoint aswell. Theres so many talented guys they just don't get used or get used in ways that don't help them nor the product.


----------



## TheSupremeForce

*Re: WWE in PANIC MODE over Raw rating*



James1o1o said:


> Hopefully these falling ratings will make WWE take notice, I only hope they don't just jump to huge conclusion that its Daniel Bryan and Punk causing it and that its John Cena and Big Show.


How is the WWE supposed to determine that fans are turning off the show due to Cena/Show when they're turning off during Bryan/Punk? That's a complete logic fail. 

That being said, I don't blame Punk/Bryan at all. I blame terrible commercial placement during matches. Plotting shows around commercials would help out a lot more. Anything is better than twenty minute segment followed by a match starting immediately going to commercial and then going back to commercial before the match ends.


----------



## krai999

*Re: WWE in PANIC MODE over Raw rating*



kokepepsi said:


> wow so punk/bryan lost viewers again
> 
> Well it was nice seeing them get a push for a while
> 
> LOLDELRIO


actually the only thing that gained viewers quite frankly was the match between bryan and kane as well as the main event


----------



## Kelly Kelly fan

*Re: WWE in PANIC MODE over Raw rating*

CM Punk isnt the reason for the low ratings. Its obviously this big Johnny/Cena/Big Show shit thats causing the downfall


----------



## Shock

*Re: WWE in PANIC MODE over Raw rating*



James1o1o said:


> Hopefully these falling ratings will make WWE take notice, *I only hope they don't just jump to huge conclusion that its Daniel Bryan and Punk causing it and that its John Cena and Big Show.*


Big Show drew the highest rating of the night and John Cena wasn't even on the show. The numbers don't lie with regards to CM Punk and Daniel Bryan unfortunately.


----------



## Panzer

*Re: WWE in PANIC MODE over Raw rating*

I blame the casual fans for not wanting to watch good wrestling and just wanting to see Cena, Divas, Hornswoggle, Cena and more Cena.


----------



## James1o1o

*Re: WWE in PANIC MODE over Raw rating*



Shock said:


> Big Show drew the highest rating of the night and John Cena wasn't even on the show. The numbers don't lie with regards to CM Punk and Daniel Bryan unfortunately.


Not going to lie about it, I read title and just assumed, apologies! :sad:

The fact I have been skipped through most of Raw nowadays because they are so bad I have lost track, it was the previous Raw I was thinking of, again, apologies.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Cena!, Cena!, Cena!, Cena!, Cena!, Cena!.

We want Cena! *clap clap clap* We want Cena"


----------



## Timber Timbre

The WWE title feud is treated as an afterthought, Punk and Bryan are buried somewhere in the middle of the show every week for a 10 minute segment. No promotional packages whatsoever, and they don't even bother to show their match graphic when promoting the PPV. Geez, I wonder why they're drawing a lower rating than the Big Show angle that's been piledriven down our throats since OTL.


----------



## Mr Eagles

CM Punk isn't losing viewers. When I was at a RAW house show, Punk got the loudest pop out of everyone, even Cena.


----------



## JoseBxNYC

Is funny that CM Punk called Kevin Nash a "Ratings Killer" when the show loses viewers everytime he's on TV.


----------



## Shock

Mr Eagles said:


> CM Punk isn't losing viewers. When I was at a RAW house show, Punk got the loudest pop out of everyone, even Cena.


Pops at live events and ratings are two very different things.


----------



## Mr Eagles

Shock said:


> Pops at live events and ratings are too different things.


Eh, the fact of the matter is that he's over as fuck. He gets either the loudest pop or 2nd loudest next to Cena and he doesn't get booed to the extent Cena does either. Put Cena and Shit Show segment in the middle and have Punk end the show and then see where the ratings lie.


----------



## kokepepsi

Well according to Rock316ae people are leaving the house shows when Punk matches start

So maybe that's why his pop was so loud, all the haters left and there was an echo with 10 people in the arena.


----------



## Mr Eagles

kokepepsi said:


> Well according to Rock316ae people are leaving the house shows when Punk matches start
> 
> So maybe that's why his pop was so loud, all the haters left and there was an echo with 10 people in the arena.


Lol what? Nobody left


----------



## Kabraxal

When did things start to air? Cause not only did Punk/Bryan start at a weird time but there was teh prior segment and all the bloody commercials. If I liked basketball or the H*M stuff I might have switched too.


----------



## Brye

:lmao I love how there was ONE REPORT saying that for ONE HOUSESHOW but suddenly it's an ongoing thing. :lmao


----------



## Timber Timbre

kokepepsi said:


> Well according to Rock316ae people are leaving the house shows when Punk matches start
> 
> So maybe that's why his pop was so loud, all the haters left and there was an echo with 10 people in the arena.


and according to Hitler, the Dutch were responsible for burning down the Reichstag..


----------



## Dalexian

13.9 million people watched Hatfields and McCoys... Surely some of them were wrestling fans that tuned out of a mediocre show.


----------



## Snothlisberger

wheres the breakdown?


----------



## chargebeam

kokepepsi said:


> Well according to Rock316ae people are leaving the house shows when Punk matches start
> 
> So maybe that's why his pop was so loud, all the haters left and there was an echo with 10 people in the arena.


Wait, what?


----------



## Choke2Death

Mr Eagles said:


> Eh, the fact of the matter is that he's over as fuck. He gets either the loudest pop or 2nd loudest next to Cena and he doesn't get booed to the extent Cena does either. Put Cena and Shit Show segment in the middle and have Punk end the show and then see where the ratings lie.


Unfortunately for Punk, every time he's been given the main event slot ahead of Cena and whatever feud he's in, the ratings have been disappointing. The WWE basically gave the "IWC" their wish on December by putting Punk, Bryan and Ryder together in the main event and the ratings gain was disappointing. Punk (& Bryan) also got the main event slow a few weeks ago in a match also involving Tensai and the ratings again disappointed.

Sad to say, whatever Cena is involved in still brings the most ratings even when he's in a boring, irrelevant feud with the Big Show for the millionth time. But since the show almost completely sucks, I don't even feel bad for WWE. They've deserved it for a while now after one month of shitty shows.


----------



## 20083

*Re: RAW "ItBegins" Viewership (02/01/12) - no boost*



A-C-P said:


> Looks at #'s sees they aren't much different from prior week, realizes Ratings Thread is Ratings Thread....


^ Couldn't have made a better reply if I wanted to. This ^ exactly.


----------



## Happenstan

Even if Bryan and Punk are ratings killers right now, WWE needs to push the hell out of them anyway. Cena won't last forever (and should this divorce get messy he may take a serious popularity hit), no one else is popping a rating either, and D-Bry and Punk could actually lead and entertain for years to come. Vince has no choice right now, he has to suffer through low ratings to rebuild his main event pool. He wouldn't have this problem if he stopped shoving Cena down everyone's throats and pushed other wrestlers up to Cena's level YEARS AGO, but whatever. It's all been said be-4, maybe the old man will finally get it this time but I'm doubtful.


----------



## ManInBlack

*Re: WWE in PANIC MODE over Raw rating*



Panther said:


> I blame the casual fans for not wanting to watch good wrestling and just wanting to see Cena, Divas, Hornswoggle, Cena and more Cena.


Yeah, blame the casuals because they want to be *entertained* and not fall asleep.

There's a reason why guys like Angle, Benoit, Jericho were just kept in the midcard for real entertainers like Austin, Rock, HHH and Taker.


----------



## jcags

*Re: WWE in PANIC MODE over Raw rating*



ManInBlack said:


> Yeah, blame the casuals because they want to be *entertained* and not fall asleep.
> 
> There's a reason why guys like Angle, Benoit, Jericho were just kept in the midcard for real entertainers like Austin, Rock, HHH and Taker.


Doesn't matter, you could have Austin, Rock, HHH and taker with bad booking and lame storylines and it would be boring.


----------



## Kabraxal

*Re: WWE in PANIC MODE over Raw rating*



jcags said:


> Doesn't matter, you could have Austin, Rock, HHH and taker with bad booking and lame storylines and it would be boring.


And 95/96 kinda proves this point with Rocky Maiva and the Ring Master... they had the two biggest stars still, but if they had stayed like that... well, there'd be no WWE today.


----------



## Loudness

Still no quarter hours officially released yet?


----------



## AttitudeOutlaw

Loudness said:


> Still no quarter hours officially released yet?


Not yet. All that we know so far is what Dave Meltzer has said, that Punk/Bryan bombed, Santino/Del Rio did a really bad number, and Big Show's promo got the biggest rating of the night.

WWE's supposedly in panic mode and for good reason. They need to re-asses their ethos of pleasing the internet fans and start doing what's right for business.


----------



## SpeedStick

Please any billionaire out there buy the WWE from Vince McMahon the man can not do nothing with his wife going into politics.. Mark Cuba, Bob Carter, Ted Turner, anybody


----------



## Amuroray

Happenstan said:


> Even if Bryan and Punk are ratings killers right now, WWE needs to push the hell out of them anyway. Cena won't last forever (and should this divorce get messy he may take a serious popularity hit), no one else is popping a rating either, and D-Bry and Punk could actually lead and entertain for years to come. Vince has no choice right now, he has to suffer through low ratings to rebuild his main event pool. He wouldn't have this problem if he stopped shoving Cena down everyone's throats and pushed other wrestlers up to Cena's level YEARS AGO, but whatever. It's all been said be-4, maybe the old man will finally get it this time but I'm doubtful.


Punk is one year younger then cena lol


----------



## THANOS

SpeedStick said:


> Please any billionaire out there buy the WWE from Vince McMahon the man can not do nothing with his wife going into politics.. *Mark Cuban*, Bob Carter, Ted Turner, anybody


Mark Cuban buying the WWE would be the best thing that could ever happen to wrestling! Cuban is a billionaire that doesn't mind losing money if it means he'll enjoy his properties more. The guy would instantly shift the WWE back into Attitude Era mode, and would gladly eat the short term loss from the kiddies tuning out, for the potential long term gain of a much better and cooler product. I would love that to be honest!


----------



## Geeve

The short term memory loss is hilarious in these threads, there has been plenty of weeks where Bryan/Punk or others gained viewers but as soon as any segment loses some (according to Neilsen) they are ratings killers. Pretty simple holiday weekend low ratings, I take quarter hour with grain of salt since the rating system is horribly inaccurate.


----------



## THANOS

Geeve said:


> The short term memory loss is hilarious in these threads, there has been plenty of weeks where Bryan/Punk or others gained viewers but as soon as any segment loses some (according to Neilsen) they are ratings killers. Pretty simple holiday weekend low ratings, I take quarter hour with grain of salt since the rating system is horribly inaccurate.


Agreed. I'll just post what I said in another thread to sum up my feelings on ratings.



> EXACTLY. I hate ratings arguments because 'ratings', in themselves, are inaccurate measures of drawing ability. They are subjectively based on numerous different factors such as storyline detail, character development, time placement, hype, and viewers just having the time to sit down and watch. Yet on here many people herald them as the true deciding factors on who's a star and who's not.
> 
> To be honest, I believe the only way to accurately measure how OVER someone is, is to look at merchandise sales and audience reception. The reason being that both of those things are the only factors that can be 100% traced to the individual performers.
> 
> Guys like Punk, Bryan, and even Orton sells loads of merchandise and have loud crowd activity (positive or negative) every time they're on the screen, even in casual cities, so that should prove that many people care about them, and it's certainly not just "INTERNETT FANZ" like all the haters proclaim.


----------



## THEBIGMAN212

*Do Ratings Even Matter?*

Aren't the TV boxes that transmit the ratings owned by less than 5 perecent of people?


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

*Re: Do Ratings Even Matter?*

It's been stated in the ratings thread before I think but put simply, the neilsen ratings sample is statistically significant. In other words, you would gain very little accuracy, if any, from increasing the sample size.


----------



## THEBIGMAN212

*Re: Do Ratings Even Matter?*



SarcasmoBlaster said:


> It's been stated in the ratings thread before I think but put simply, the neilsen ratings sample is statistically significant. In other words, you would gain very little accuracy, if any, from increasing the sample size.


thats what i thought too, as long as it has a decent amount of people and includes all types of people it should be fine.


----------



## Rock316AE

Loudness said:


> Still no quarter hours officially released yet?


Only in the next WON, Wednesday. But we know that Punk/Bryan bombed in catastrophic levels as usual and did one of the lowest top of the hour quarters in RAW history. Del Rio/Santino did terrible second quarter and Big Show's great segments saved the program and did the only decent numbers.


----------



## ManInBlack

*Re: WWE in PANIC MODE over Raw rating*



Kabraxal said:


> And 95/96 kinda proves this point with Rocky Maiva and the Ring Master... they had the two biggest stars still, but if they had stayed like that... well, there'd be no WWE today.


When Maivia and the Ring Master finally became legit main eventers, they actually move viewership figures in ASTRONOMICAL numbers, which Punk and Bryan did in REVERSE when they got their crowning moment of glories. 

Even during the Summer of Punk, numbers were dipping above and under 3.0, and most of his marks consider that period as his most fruitful output in his WWE career. If he can't draw in new audiences (and actually even losing some of them) when he's at his best, then what does that say about Punk?


----------



## THANOS

*Re: WWE in PANIC MODE over Raw rating*



ManInBlack said:


> When Maivia and the Ring Master finally became legit main eventers, they actually move viewership figures in ASTRONOMICAL numbers, which Punk and Bryan did in REVERSE when they got their crowning moment of glories.
> 
> Even during the Summer of Punk, numbers were dipping above and under 3.0, and most of his marks consider that period as his most fruitful output in his WWE career. If he can't draw in new audiences (and actually even losing some of them) when he's at his best, then what does that say about Punk?


You do know that in 96 during Austins rise ratings were terrible right and the Mania he headlined with Bret Hart bombed hard as well. It took a LONG time for enough people to tune and like what they saw in Austin for the ratings to actually shift. It didn't happen overnight like your claiming. Also, The Rock became a star during the peak of Austin 316, and characters similar to him, so he already had the luxury of having a lot of eyes being fixated on him, and wrestling being cool.


----------



## Loudness

Rock316AE and AttitudeOutlaw, thanks for the info. Guess I won't care if I have to wait till next wednesday. Kinda weird to see Big Show drawing, but I guess he's still a freakshow attraction.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

*Re: WWE in PANIC MODE over Raw rating*



THANOS said:


> You do know that in 96 during Austins rise ratings were terrible right and the Mania he headlined with Bret Hart bombed hard as well. It took a LONG time for enough people to tune and like what they in Austin for the ratings to actually shift. It didn't happen overnight like your claiming. Also, The Rock became a star during the peak of Austin 316, and characters similar to him, so he already had the luxury of having a lot of eyes being fixated on him, and wrestling being cool.


This is probably one of the bigger misconceptions (among many) when it comes to ratings on these boards. That putting the belt on the right guy equals immediate and instant "ratingz" That's not the way it works. That's not the way it has ever worked.

And for the record, it doesn't work for other long running TV shows with up and down periods either. Take SNL for example. You'd think that all they have to do to come out of one of their down periods is to put the right person in a segment or two on one show then BOOM, ratings skyrocket instantly, no hype needed, people will somehow telepathically know to tune in right then and there.

But that's not the way it works. You have to build buzz. For SNL, you have to teach people that the show if funny again. They have to hear about it through word of mouth, the internet, or where ever. For WWE, they have to teach the audience that certain up and comers, whether they be Daniel Byran, Punk, Sheamus, or whoever, are bid deals. Only when you truly treat a guy like he MATTERS will fans start to believe in his starpower. It doesn't happen instantly. It's a process. That so many people buy into the Vince Russo idea of smash-booking is somewhat disheartening.

EDIT: And jesus christ guys, are we really sitting here talking about Big Show being a draw with a straight face? This is the worst thread.


----------



## Brye

WWE's problem is when they put someone in the main event and the number isn't beautiful, they scrap it immediately. If they instantly assume that they're going to get consistent numbers doing that then they're in for a big disappointment.


----------



## ManInBlack

*Re: WWE in PANIC MODE over Raw rating*



THANOS said:


> You do know that in 96 during Austins rise ratings were terrible right and the Mania he headlined with Bret Hart bombed hard as well. It took a LONG time for enough people to tune and like what they in Austin for the ratings to actually shift. It didn't happen overnight like your claiming. Also, The Rock became a star during the peak of Austin 316, and characters similar to him, so he already had the luxury of having a lot of eyes being fixated on him, and wrestling being cool.


Let me explain to you what I meant using Bertrand Russell logic........

Legit main eventer = the first time you win biggest title in the promotion.

Stone Cold...in his road to glory
1998-02-09	3.2	
1998-02-23	3.2	
1998-03-02	3.8	
1998-03-09	3.6	
1998-03-23	3.6
*Austin wins WWF championship at WM 14* 
1998-03-30	3.8	
1998-04-06	4.7	
1998-04-13	4.6	
1998-04-20	4.4	
1998-04-27	5.7	
1998-05-04	5.5	
1998-05-11	4.3	
1998-05-18	5.3	

In Rock's case, the numbers were already insanely high when he first got it, and it only went higher after that.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Brye said:


> WWE's problem is when they put someone in the main event and the number isn't beautiful, they scrap it immediately. If they instantly assume that they're going to get consistent numbers doing that then they're in for a big disappointment.


Pretty much. They have to realize that ratings might dip for a time with new guys being pushed to the main, but the only way to combat that is to stick with it. Those guys will eventually be seen as big deals, and the ratings will even out.

But since they've been unwilling to take a short-term ratings hit largely since 2009, now they are seeing the results of not investing significantly in anyone new in years.

EDIT: And if the prerequisite for being champion is boosting ratings as much as SCSA, then you might as well retire the belt because even John Cena can't do that. So that's not a particularly relevant road to go down.


----------



## Brye

*Re: WWE in PANIC MODE over Raw rating*



ManInBlack said:


> Let me explain to you what I meant using Bertrand Russell logic........
> 
> Legit main eventer = the first time you win biggest title in the promotion.
> 
> Stone Cold...in his road to glory
> 1998-02-09 3.2
> 1998-02-23 3.2
> 1998-03-02 3.8
> 1998-03-09 3.6
> 1998-03-23 3.6
> *Austin wins WWF championship at WM 14*
> 1998-03-30 3.8
> 1998-04-06 4.7
> 1998-04-13 4.6
> 1998-04-20 4.4
> 1998-04-27 5.7
> 1998-05-04 5.5
> 1998-05-11 4.3
> 1998-05-18 5.3
> 
> In Rock's case, the numbers were already insanely high when he first got it, and it only went higher after that.


This isn't 1998, Candy Assets. Ratings aren't going to go in that kind of trend REGARDLESS of who is involved.

The Internet
Wrestling boom is dead
No direction from creative
The Internet
The Internet
The Internet

Don't care what you say, there are millions of ways to access Raw now without watching it on TV. More people than the rating number are watching.


----------



## Rock316AE

The amazing thing about 98, Austin got the belt, RAW won for the first time in almost two years. Rock got the belt, and Nitro never won another week ever again. Magical time.


----------



## Choke2Death

I really don't know how the internet affects ratings. Because if there's a TV channel you can access that shows Raw, why in the world would you rather go for a low quality stream?

It does, however, affect PPV buyrates, that I'm sure about.


----------



## Brye

Choke2Death said:


> I really don't know how the internet affects ratings. Because if there's a TV channel you can access that shows Raw, why in the world would you rather go for a low quality stream?
> 
> It does, however, affect PPV buyrates, that I'm sure about.


I'm talking about people that are aware it's on but are doing something else with their time knowing they can find it on youtube/dailymotion/etc without much effort anytime they want.


----------



## kokepepsi

> *On Monday, August 2, 1999,WWF Raw Is War drew a 5.9 rating
> 
> The quarter hour breakdown for Raw Is War went 4.9, 5.7, 6.4, 6.3, 6.7, 5.6, 5.3, 6.0, and 6.2 for the overrun featuring a wild brawl between all of the top WWF superstars. All numbers have been rounded to the nearest tenth.
> *


Look at that bitches.

Almost all the segments gain viewers expect the one before the top of the hour. Then two small losses followed by two gains.

Today people start tuning out as soon as they see what the show opened with. They don't even gain until the 10pm segment and then continue to lose viewers until the overrun.

NO SHIT THE RATINGS SUCK.

That's what happens when they book like shit and have crap angles and storylines.


----------



## Choke2Death

Brye said:


> I'm talking about people that are aware it's on but are doing something else with their time knowing they can find it on youtube/dailymotion/etc without much effort anytime they want.


Which, I guess, you can blame mostly on the boring, unexciting booking. If they actually bother doing something interesting, more of the people you talk about would wanna see it live because they are less patient about the show and want everything as soon as possible. (unless they GTS and Youtube it later)


----------



## Brye

Choke2Death said:


> Which, I guess, you can blame mostly on the boring, unexciting booking. If they actually bother doing something interesting, more of the people you talk about would wanna see it live because they are less patient about the show and want everything as soon as possible. (unless they GTS and Youtube it later)


That's true too, that's where poor booking comes into play.

I wish WWE would just have some patience and try some actual long term storylines.


----------



## GillbergReturns

Brye said:


> WWE's problem is when they put someone in the main event and the number isn't beautiful, they scrap it immediately. If they instantly assume that they're going to get consistent numbers doing that then they're in for a big disappointment.


Agreed.

Regardless to how you feel about someone like the Miz it's an absolute disgrace on how they've handled him recently. With proper booking he could be helping to elevate some of the younger guys.

Instead his 6 month push finishing in a victory over John Cena at Wrestlemania is completely meaningless.

Even if the guy does fail that doesn't necessarily mean they're worthless. You need guys like Mysterio (not stating he's failure) to put younger talent over. That's the role someone like the Miz should be down graded to.


----------



## Theproof

It's scary thinking about where the WWE is gonna be in the next couple of years. If The Rock and Brock hype couldn't save the show than almost nothing will. They really need to start booking their shows better and get rid of all the wasted comedy acts like Santino and Clay. They need make all of their show watchable because right now the only things that are watchable are the opening promo's and the end segments. Everything else is just filler garbage.


----------



## THANOS

Theproof said:


> It's scary thinking about where the WWE is gonna be in the next couple of years. If The Rock and Brock hype couldn't save the show than almost nothing will. They really need to start booking their shows better and get rid of all the wasted comedy acts like Santino and Clay. They need make all of their show watchable *because right now the only things that are watchable are the opening promo's and the end segments.* Everything else is just filler garbage.


This past Monday an argument could be made that those were the worst parts of the shows.


----------



## yoseftigger

SarcasmoBlaster said:


> Pretty much. They have to realize that ratings might dip for a time with new guys being pushed to the main, but the only way to combat that is to stick with it. Those guys will eventually be seen as big deals, and the ratings will even out.
> 
> But since they've been unwilling to take a short-term ratings hit largely since 2009, now they are seeing the results of not investing significantly in anyone new in years.
> 
> EDIT: And if the prerequisite for being champion is boosting ratings as much as SCSA, then you might as well retire the belt because even John Cena can't do that. So that's not a particularly relevant road to go down.


WM 21: Batista and Cena won the title and ratings increased.

Didn't ratings go up to 3.2 when Cena got the belt from Jericho in 2008 after being 2.8-2.9?


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

yoseftigger said:


> WM 21: Batista and Cena won the title and ratings increased.
> 
> Didn't ratings go up to 3.2 when Cena got the belt from Jericho in 2008 after being 2.8-2.9?


Maybe they did, I don't know. I do know that bumping the ratings by .3 is not what I'm talking about here when I talk about impacting ratings like SCSA, so it's not particularly relevant even if they did.

Also, if you hot shot the title around in an attempt to bump ratings by .3, congrats, you're now Vince Russo.


----------



## Brye

Theproof said:


> It's scary thinking about where the WWE is gonna be in the next couple of years. If The Rock and Brock hype couldn't save the show than almost nothing will. They really need to start booking their shows better and get rid of all the wasted comedy acts like Santino and Clay. They need make all of their show watchable because right now the only things that are watchable are the opening promo's and the end segments. Everything else is just filler garbage.


I don't think the opening promos or end segments/matches have been that great recently. I did like the end segment of this week though.


----------



## Little Mac

*Re: Do Ratings Even Matter?*



THEBIGMAN212 said:


> Aren't the TV boxes that transmit the ratings owned by less than 5 perecent of people?


Less than 1%. It's 25, 000 households so if we're being generous and assuming that an average home has 4 people in it (the average is about 2.6) then about 0.3% of the population of the USA are being surveyed. It was mentioned a few pages back that this was a decent enough sample size but I know nothing about statistics so I won't comment.


----------



## Rock316AE

Theproof said:


> It's scary thinking about where the WWE is gonna be in the next couple of years. If The Rock and Brock hype couldn't save the show than almost nothing will. They really need to start booking their shows better and get rid of all the wasted comedy acts like Santino and Clay. They need make all of their show watchable because right now the only things that are watchable are the opening promo's and the end segments. Everything else is just filler garbage.


Agree but it's not even about the filler, the filler is there, the problem is when everything feels like filler besides Big Show's great segments in the last two weeks. That's why I think Vince needs Russo back, Russo's mentality on a TV wrestling product is perfect for today's miserable roster. From giving every guy on the roster something to do, to creative ideas on main angles, Russo will be a savior with Vince on the creative team today. Of course it's never happening.

At least Impact is a great show now, getting better every week. Awesome promo guys like Bully Ray, great fast paced TV matches, interesting storylines like AJ/Daniels, Ray/Park, roster is full of real talent, Impact is the best show for a long time now.


----------



## THANOS

Rock316AE said:


> Agree but it's not even about the filler, the filler is there, the problem is when everything feels like filler besides Big Show's great segments in the last two weeks. That's why I think Vince needs Russo back, Russo's mentality on a TV wrestling product is perfect for today's miserable roster. From giving every guy on the roster something to do, to creative ideas on main angles, Russo will be a savior with Vince on the creative team today. Of course it's never happening.
> 
> At least Impact is a great show now, getting better every week. Awesome promo guys like Bully Ray, great fast paced TV matches, interesting storylines like AJ/Daniels, Ray/Park, roster is full of real talent, Impact is the best show for a long time now.


I think this is the first time I've ever agreed with the entirety of one of your posts. I couldn't have said it any better myself, so credit where credits due.

Impact has definitely been the best show for awhile as the roster is stacked with talent with actual characters. Having Russo back at this point would be immensely awesome and great for the current roster! We might get a few corny characters/story lines but will also get loads of fresh interesting characters/story lines as well.


----------



## Brye

WWE roster has real talent too. I do agree Impact's roster is good but as is WWE's.


----------



## THANOS

Brye said:


> WWE roster has real talent too. I do agree Impact's roster is good but as is WWE's.


Agreed. But wwe's just isn't used properly to it's potential.


----------



## Loudness

Imo WWE needs to give their heels more creative freedom, Bully Ray smokes Johnny Ace and Vickie heat as if they're amateurs and they're the most over heels in WWE by far. It's hard to get over as a heel when all you're doing is cheating in matches, and going against faces and expect people to automatically boo that guy just because. The hilarious thing about Bully Ray is that he's been putting people over left and right, he almost never wins but he's still credible and it still means something going over him, a very rare combination. Kevin Steen reminds me of him too, he has a similar style, even small details such as taking Daveys mouth protection during their match adds to his heel work (lold at the "you sick fuck" chants). 

And WWE needs to stop having faces be bland, guys like Austin Aries kept their characters even when turning without becoming boring/generic/phony, how hard is it for WWE to understand that a heel gets over, that by turning him that he would still remain over or grow even bigger if they just changed some small details instead of doing full character revamps and taking everything away from them that made them interesting in the first place.


----------



## Emberdon

You cant compare heel wrestler to authority figures. Its not the same thing.


Building heels in wwe right now is not easy. You got like 4 top babyfaces Cena,Punk,Orton,Sheamus. Anyone who goes against Cena is cheered so that fails, Punk and Sheamus are not established enough or not big enough babyfaces to get a heel over just by feuding with them. Orton's not as relevant as used to and even then he doesnt seem to be a credible babyface with the starpower to create a top heel. I mean they had wade barrett basically take him out, Rhodes got a win over orton, del rio & Ziggler had couple of matches against him but none of those guys gained much credibility. 

Cena turning is the only hope at this point.


----------



## JasonLives

Rock316AE said:


> Only in the next WON, Wednesday. But we know that Punk/Bryan bombed in catastrophic levels as usual and did one of the lowest top of the hour quarters in RAW history. *Del Rio/Santino did terrible second quarter* and Big Show's great segments saved the program and did the only decent numbers.


Omg can people cut that crap! The match wasent even 1 fucking minute but gets blamed for the whole quarter?

Yeah im sure it wasent the 2 commericial breaks and backstage segments that did it. Its such poor reporting.


----------



## Theproof

I think Russo would be a great guy to have for WWE like others have mentioned. With Russo, good talents like Ziggler, Tyson Kidd, and other midcard wrestlers would be more interesting because Russo's good at finding ways to make lower card wrestlers entertaining. That was definitely one of his strengths in the attitude era without a doubt. The problem was that when he went to WCW and TNA he had way too much freedom. You put Russo in WWE right now with filtering I guarantee the show would be a lot better right now. There's a lot of talent right now in the WWE but a lot of guys with talent like Kofi, Kidd, ect are basically left with bland gimmick's which doesn't make them very interesting to most viewers. Just look at D.Bryan. The guy used to put me to sleep but once he started doing the yes chants it completely changed everything about him and now he's one of the best things about the show. Russo would be great at helping talents find things that would help them stick out.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

Agreed on those saying that WWE would benefit using Russo these days.


----------



## Rock316AE

JasonLives said:


> Omg can people cut that crap! The match wasent even 1 fucking minute but gets blamed for the whole quarter?
> 
> Yeah im sure it wasent the 2 commericial breaks and backstage segments that did it. Its such poor reporting.


I checked and with the entrances and all that, the match was for 4-5 minutes...


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Vince Russo would sort the mid card out.

First he isn't scared of Vince and would tell him straight.


----------



## Shock

The-Rock-Says said:


> Vince Russo would sort the mid card out.
> 
> *First he isn't scared of Vince and would tell him straight.*


That's precisely why he's not employed unfortunately. Politics and ass-kissing reigns over WWE.


----------



## Choke2Death

Maybe fans need to start chanting "Hire Vince Russo" at shows. WWE would be shocked at that after thinking that traditional fans hate Russo.


----------



## Rock316AE

Who doesn't miss the legendary Russo style skits? The guy is creative and knows what a character needs to evolve. Sometimes he's too creative but at least it's not boring.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

I guess I would rather have Mae Young give birth instead of Brodus Clay dancing.


----------



## DoubleDeckerBar

Russo with McMahon's filter is a genius, I'd love him to be back in WWE. Don't know how he would do in a PG environment though.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

At least you can have a laugh. 

Vince Russo told Vince right to his face when he was a magazine boy, that your product is shit. What guy in that company right now would have the balls to do that? Remember Russo wasn't a big time wrestler or head of creative at that time. He was a magazine guy.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

The PG rating would probably filter more content from Russo.


----------



## Rock316AE

Chicago Warrior said:


> I guess I would rather have Mae Young give birth instead of Brodus Clay dancing.


I don't know if you're sarcastic or not but that's exactly why I don't like the internet fanbase. All slogans with no basic knowledge. Russo wasn't in the WWF since September 1999, Mae Young segment was in January 2000. I'm not talking about you specifically, no problem with you at all. Just hate the stereotype of this fanbase of who are "the DEVILS". 






This guy knows what he's talking about.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Rock316AE said:


> *I don't know if you're sarcastic *or not but that's exactly why I don't like the internet fanbase. All slogans with no basic knowledge. Russo wasn't in the WWF since September 1999, Mae Young segment was in January 2000. I'm not talking about you specifically, no problem with you at all. Just hate the stereotype of this fanbase of who are "the DEVILS".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This guy knows what he's talking about.


Sarcasm.

I wouldn't mind Russo to come back if he is willing to change up the programing. Oh and I would still rather watch Young give birth instead of Brodus Clay dancing, this time serious lol.


----------



## MartiniHenry

Chicago Warrior said:


> I guess I would rather have Mae Young give birth instead of Brodus Clay dancing.


Or real men as champions instead of part time electricians.
Or entertaining guys as main eventers.
Or brilliantly written storylines instead of predictable stuff every week.
Or genuinely hilarious skits instead or corny ones.
Or charismatic performers instead bland, generic wrestlers which has the character and charisma of create-a-wrestler templates.
Or a real tag team division.
Or a 6.9 rated show full of entertainment instead of a 2.9 snoozer.


----------



## ecabney

I'd rather they hired Paul Heyman as head of creative tbh. Russo is a hack


----------



## Rock316AE

Chicago Warrior said:


> Sarcasm.
> 
> I wouldn't mind Russo to come back if he is willing to change up the programing. Oh and I would still rather watch Young give birth instead of Brodus Clay dancing, this time serious lol.


No problem man, just wanted to throw it out :russo I agree on Mae. 

Russo is the guy who wanted to take the product outside the arena, his concept created so many memorable moments. But, even with that, I doubt Vince(McMahon)wants to invest in the product like he did in the past. He lost his passion IMO, like most of his fanbase...


----------



## Firallon

Russo in WWE again would be GOLD. Russo is a genius. He worked very well with McMahon back in the WWF, he may be able to turn this company around.


----------



## Brye

Wouldn't mind Russo back if he took the direction to work on midcard/tag team storylines. Only problem is we got little quality TV matches back then but then again we haven't had too many lately either.


----------



## WrestlingFan96

I've been wanting Russo to come back for months. Russo came back in '02 but was demoted to a consultant and subsequently fired because apparently of a storyline he came up with. So, I don't know if he and the company are in good terms or not.


----------



## SPCDRI

Vince Russo is a monumental horse's ass. The hottest times in WWF weren't under Russo, he killed WCW (60 million lost in 9 months), didn't do shit for TNA and wrote some of the worst garbage during his tenure there.

3 months of Russo would have you pining for Dunn and Gerwitz.


----------



## Brye

At least he'd have a filter in WWE. He can be a fucking moron but with filters he was solid before.

His WCW and TNA runs were complete garbage though.


----------



## SPCDRI

You think there is a filter? 5 separate guys with squash match angles and not a single one is over. Think about it. When you look at this writing do you think only the best of the best is selected or what?


----------



## Chicago Warrior

As long as he is filtered then he could try WWE again just to see how he does.


----------



## SPCDRI

Brye said:


> At least he'd have a filter in WWE. He can be a fucking moron but with filters he was solid before.
> 
> His WCW and TNA runs were complete garbage though.


Meaning what? He hasn't been around good wrestling writing in like 15 years? He's a passe buffoon.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Paul Heyman would probably do a good job, but I don't think he would write for WWE. Tough job I hear.


----------



## Brye

Guh, just read some of the stuff from Russo's shoot last night and he claims it sickens him that people claim he needs a filter and that he loved Arquette as champion and most of his on a pole matches. :lmao

And he compared his work in '99 to Shakespeare. :lmao:lmao:lmao


----------



## Rock316AE

Anything would be better than WWE today so it doesn't matter anyway. Russo in WWE did a great job and can do it again.

He's talking about WWF 99? because that's really a masterpiece. Best TV year of all time.


----------



## Brye

Yeah, he was talking about his WWF '99 stuff. It was good but that's still incredibly arrogant to say. :lmao

Especially considering all his failures after that.



> 'The more you keep changing things up the further you get from having a successful company' - Russo


Agree with that though.


----------



## Theproof

He's definitely a little screwed up in the head that's for sure.


----------



## Brye

> Glen Gilberti came up with idea of aliens invading WCW and led by Mike Tenay, Russo loved idea but didn't use it


:lmao


----------



## Rock316AE

You can say that WWF 99 is the Shakespeare of pro wrestling so I have no problem with that. With the huge TV results he got from this product as the main writer, he can take a little credit.


----------



## SPCDRI

Russo can never admit mistakes. He'll go to his grave defending Viagra on a pole, Judy Bagwell on a Forklift, David Arquette and his run as WCW champ, everything.


----------



## Choke2Death

SPCDRI said:


> Russo can never admit mistakes. He'll go to his grave defending Viagra on a pole, Judy Bagwell on a Forklift, David Arquette and his run as WCW champ, everything.


And that's what's so funny about him. I saw this video last summer and you wont believe how much I was _crying_ from laughing. I thought I was gonna pass out from laughing so damn much. :lmao






And the music in the background... hahahaha.


----------



## SPCDRI

Oh yeah, that one.

"As many eyeballs watching as possible."

How about quality?

"You wanna see Lucha Libre! Go to Japan!"


----------



## ▲E.

You guys need to stop trashing Russo... He didn't make any mistakes. Everything happens for a reason. 

If you're not able to stand behind your past decisions, what kind of man are you? Sure, some decisions he made have been frowned upon, but he wouldn't have made them if he wasn't supposed to. Goes back to what I said about everything happening for a reason.


----------



## Firallon

"Glen Gilberti came up with idea of aliens invading WCW and led by Mike Tenay, Russo loved idea but didn't use it"

That

Would

Have

Been

Fucking

HILARIOUS


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Man WCW and Russo where so desperate for ratings that they did anything to create buzz. That video was lol worthy. I think the main problem today is Mr Mcmahon himself. They probably have some good writers but their ideas get shot down by Vince McMahon.


----------



## Mister Hands

I dunno. Assuming Vince would be Russo's filter, we'd probably see Punk, Bryan and Kane feuding over who has the biggest penis.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Mister Hands said:


> I dunno. Assuming Vince would be Russo's filter, we'd probably see Punk, Bryan and Kane feuding over who has the biggest penis.


I guess a pg version would be who has the biggest feet lol.


----------



## Rock316AE

No doubt that Russo is a funny guy, I always love how in EVERY interview he does, it's the same "2.6 to 3.5" story. I can appreciate a great politician and manipulator. Russo is not Kevin Nash/Hulk Hogan caliber of greatness but he's up there just for the fact that he made millions with his work, was the main writer in one of the two peak years in wrestling history, and is by far the most famous creative guy of all time. Russo's move to WCW in 99 was a big deal, even in mainstream news websites, it was crazy how much recognition he got even without his face on camera.


----------



## DoubleDeckerBar

Mister Hands said:


> I dunno. Assuming Vince would be Russo's filter, *we'd probably see Punk, Bryan and Kane feuding over who has the biggest penis.*


That would be one of the most one sided feuds in history, Kane's is 3 foot long.

:kane


----------



## THANOS

DoubleDeckerBar said:


> That would be one of the most one sided feuds in history, Kane's is 3 foot long.
> 
> :kane


:lmao and 4ft around.. :Bischoff


----------



## Chrome

THANOS said:


> :lmao and 4ft around.. :Bischoff


They don't call him "The Big Red Machine" for nothing! :vince2


----------



## Loudness

:lmao @ that Russo vid, hilarious stuff, great find.

But no, he would be terrible for WWE, just compare TNAs reputations from 2007/2008-2011 to now. The Kevin Nash/Eric Young doubleswerve storyline will go down as the most stupid wrestling storyline in history, WWE just needs more creative freedom for the wrestlers, it's their job to make or break it as characters. As far as storylines go, WWE should hire some new writers/make a huge creative team overhaul with guys who actually know how to write feuds with depth that fans can buy into, and comedy segments that actually make you laugh, not corny stuff.


----------



## Vyed

Shock said:


> That's precisely why he's not employed unfortunately. Politics and ass-kissing reigns over WWE.


And it was twice as much in the 90s when he was actually employed with WWE.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Russo is the greatest of all time. Bigger than wrestling.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

Why do all the Rock mark's love Russo so much?


----------



## Duke Silver

The Russo love always baffles me. His run in WWF was good - 97/98 was an awesome run, 99 was mostly garbage - but his time in WCW & TNA saw the quality drop drastically. WCW went to shit around the time Russo entered, and TNA became damn-near unwatchable (after a really strong 05/06). Since Russo's departure, TNA has made massive strides of improvement, and WWE became a much more consistent product in 2000.

Ratings can't be argued with though. Russo is a ratings god - but then, so are American Idol & Dsncing with the Stars.


----------



## GillbergReturns

RevolverSnake said:


> Why do all the Rock mark's love Russo so much?


The same reason why all Punk marks love Heyman so much.

It's an Attitude era thing.


----------



## Marv95

World Wide said:


> The Russo love always baffles me. His run in WWF was good - 97/98 was an awesome run, *99 was mostly garbage - but his time in WCW & TNA saw the quality drop drastically. WCW went to shit around the time Russo entered,* and TNA became damn-near unwatchable (after a really strong 05/06). Since Russo's departure, TNA has made massive strides of improvement, and WWE became a much more consistent product in 2000.


In 1999 the in-ring wrestling was mostly garbage with its mostly pathetic PPVS. But back then you had a _reason_ to tune in to Raw the following week or sometimes the night after a PPV depending on how the show ended. Russo had nothing to do with the workrate. WCW was absolutely BORING and contrived TV before Russo showed up. Sid Viscous' "undefeated streak" was the big storyline at the time. Benoit, Eddie, Saturn, Malenko and Douglas were all being completely buried before Russo showed up. Things got better and more interesting, but the problem was he was given 100% total control over everything and it soon came to bite them. TNA there were some good moments with him having some more power especially in 2008-2009.


----------



## Duke Silver

Marv95 said:


> In 1999 the in-ring wrestling was mostly garbage with its mostly pathetic PPVS. But back then you had a _reason_ to tune in to Raw the following week or sometimes the night after a PPV depending on how the show ended. Russo had nothing to do with the workrate. WCW was absolutely BORING and contrived TV before Russo showed up. Sid Viscous' "undefeated streak" was the big storyline at the time. Benoit, Eddie, Saturn, Malenko and Douglas were all being completely buried before Russo showed up. Things got better and more interesting, but the problem was he was given 100% total control over everything and it soon came to bite them. TNA there were some good moments with him having some more power especially in 2008-2009.


There were some good angles during 99 - usually consisting of the main-event talent, and I'm not denying that it provided some gripping television, but it very rarely came together in a coherent manner. Overall I thought that the product in 99 was awful, and things improved drastically after Russo left (not for a few months, mind you). 

It's possible that Russo could help the product today, because Raw really has nothing going for it at the moment, but there's also a good chance that we'd get 'Judy Bagwell on a pole' matches, and angles that culminate in the crowning of David Arquette as World Champion.

I'm not denying that Russo had his moments in WCW/TNA, but I strongly believe that things really went to shit for WCW when he showed up. The product was stagnant before he arrived, but it wasn't overtly moronic. After Russo arrived, WCW produced some of the most outrageously idiotic and asinine angles in wrestling history.


----------



## Marv95

World Wide said:


> It's possible that Russo could help the product today, because Raw really has nothing going for it at the moment, but there's also a good chance that we'd get 'Judy Bagwell on a pole' matches, and angles that culminate in the crowning of David Arquette as World Champion.
> 
> I'm not denying that Russo had his moments in WCW/TNA, but I strongly believe that things really went to shit for WCW when he showed up. The product was stagnant before he arrived, but it wasn't overtly moronic. After Russo arrived, WCW produced some of the most outrageously idiotic and asinine angles in wrestling history.


I agree. I'm not denying the idiocy of WCW 2000, which people on here are comparing WWE's current product to. But at least back then it wasn't so boring, simplistic, watered down and pandering to a segment of the audience that is asleep when Raw is still on the air. As for Judy Bagwell and David Arquette(which wasn't Russo's idea), is it THAT much worse than Trump vs Rosie, Raw is Looney Tunes, a midget being pushed harder than 90% of the roster, guest hosts taking up too much time, and the world titles being treated as midcard belts?

And back then he didn't have a Vince McMahon or even a HHH as a filter.


----------



## Duke Silver

Marv95 said:


> I agree. I'm not denying the idiocy of WCW 2000, which people on here are comparing WWE's current product to. But at least back then it wasn't so boring, simplistic, watered down and pandering to a segment of the audience that is asleep when Raw is still on the air. As for Judy Bagwell and David Arquette(which wasn't Russo's idea), is it THAT much worse than Trump vs Rosie, Raw is Looney Tunes, a midget being pushed harder than 90% of the roster, guest hosts taking up too much time, and the world titles being treated as midcard belts?
> 
> And back then he didn't have a Vince McMahon or even a HHH as a filter.


You're probably right in suggesting that a lot of the WWE's worst angles over the past half-decade are equal to or worse than some of Russo's biggest blunders. The WWE have definitely produced a lot of crap in recent years. Rosie/Trump might just be the most atrocious thing I've ever seen in mainstream wrestling.

It's possible that Russo could instill some new life into the product, given how boring and bland it is at the moment, and I guess even if it didn't work, there would really be no harm done. At least there would something happening. I'm really struggling to think of the last time the WWE had more than two storylines going on across both brands, or god forbid a midcard feud with some deep backstory.


----------



## Chrome

World Wide said:


> It's possible that Russo could instill some new life into the product, given how boring and bland it is at the moment, and I guess even if it didn't work, there would really be no harm done. At least there would something happening. I'm really struggling to think of the last time the WWE had more than two storylines going on across both brands, or god forbid a midcard feud with some deep backstory.


Yeah, I'd take just about anything these days to freshen the product, Russo included. And WCW 2000 wasn't as bad as some people make it out to be. Oh sure, it had plenty of stupidity as you mentioned, but one thing going for it was the unpredictably it produced each week. WWE is about as predictable as it gets these days, which is a shame. And at least back then, if you weren't enjoying WCW, you could easily tune in to WWF, who were having one of their best years ever, to get your wrestling fix. These days the top alternative is.... TNA, who I heard just got a .89 on their last episode of Impact, which has gone live now for the foreseeable future.

These are dark times to be a wrestling fan.


----------



## Hazaq

IMO Russo doesnt get enough credit for creating star making angles in WWF.


----------



## Rock316AE

1999 is the best TV year of all time. PPV year? 2000 and 2001.


----------



## Starbuck

WWE could have the writing team from Game of Thrones or The Sopranos or whatever the fuck else and it still wouldn't matter because they'd still churn out the same shit they do now. When the guy at the top calling the shots can't stick to anything for longer then 2 minutes, this is the end result.


----------



## Brye

Best PPV year is 2004 for me, followed by 2000 and 2008.

Edit: Agreed with Starbuck. Everything is so push and pull.


----------



## DesolationRow

Everyone talks about Vince Russo, I suppose because he's around and ostensibly available, should Vince/WWE want him, but even if you want to give him some credit for this idea and that idea and the push of The Rock and the double turn with Mankind at Survivor Series 1998 (he was one guy who loved Rock more than Austin, and clearly views Rock as the once-in-a-lifetime talent with whom he ever worked, so as was said, he and Heyman/Punk or Heyman/Lesnar are an apt comparison, to a significant degree), and I'll certainly concede that he had some good ideas for storylines and pushes and characters (along with a lot of crap and nonsensical storylines that are generally just as loopy as most of WWE's botched angles of today--Corporate Ministry is about as fucked up and contrived as the endgame of last year's Summer of Punk or Nexus, but I'll admit that at least in the case of Corporate Ministry it had a vaguely satisfying conclusion by sheer comparison, but nevertheless), but even with that said, he seems almost completely burned out and used up. Furthermore, I'd argue that what WWE truly needs right now is a true heir to Chris Kreski, very high in contention for the single best head writer WWE or perhaps even North American professional wrestling has ever seen, at least in the larger modern era. 

Someone who would patiently lay out intricate-yet-logical, fresh-yet-sensible, traditional-but-wholly dynamic storylines with multifaceted purposes, provide ample character depth and development for the entire active roster and general direction. 

The problem is, Vince McMahon has lost his damned mind and it needs to be said, ever since the approximate time Kreski left WWE, I don't think Vince has displayed any conspicuous grudging respect or appreciation of any of their top writers on a purely professional basis (since Stephanie is his daughter, after all) with the very notable exception of Michael Hayes, who admittedly is generally left to Smackdown and from time to time is given inordinate freedom with which to work on that brand whenever Vince seems to dedicate more of his own time to working on Raw and other elements/fiefdoms of WWE. 

Ultimately, though, *Starbuck*'s right. The most fecund creative minds could very easily have their glorious ideas prematurely die because Vince is too insane to ever show discipline patience with just about anything, unless it's the 30,000,000th Undertaker/Kane feud or a storyline that is meant to put John Cena over as having overcome the odds. It is a bit humorous, in a dark way, that most of the best stories in recent times have either been dedicated to or at least heavily involved John Cena, the one character in WWE who, in the end, never changes anyway.


----------



## jonoaries

Vince & his hollywood writers are a problem. What they desire from their performers is also problematic. They need to stop treating wrestlers like actors who have to follow a tight script.

RAW isn't a movie, its wrestling. Wrestling is theater. Its comedic (whether intentional or unintentional) improvisational, yet still follows the original intent. 

You can't book formulaic angles and matches the way they do and not expect people to get bored. Even if people know the end of the story they want to see it unfold, you still have to try to include some surprises, include some twists for fucks sake. 

I don't want that Russo crash TV shit though. I could do without that. But the controlled chaos of Heyman's booking is perfect for wrestling. He can make a star out of a dirt clod (he got Hardcore Holly over as a legit tough guy in 2006 for fucks sake). It can be done, even if you believe the "terrible roster" myth.


----------



## WTFWWE

Predict a 2.9 rating lots of people watching E3 tonight.


----------



## Therapy

Every station on the planet could be off air except USA Network and this RAW would still score a 2.X..


----------



## Rock316AE

2.9 is a good prediction. I expect the Cole/Cena match to do a huge gain, million +, Cole did a great job hyping the match all over the program and he was always a strong TV draw, besides they did exactly what can attract fans with the BBQ and all that. When he wants, he can do a decent job on commentary.


----------



## HiddenViolence

Hope to fuck the main event lost ratings.


----------



## Kabraxal

Therapy said:


> Every station on the planet could be off air except USA Network and this RAW would still score a 2.X..


Sadly this... and they'll jsut go more reality TV style than wrestling anyway to grab more viewers. They are starting to prove they just don't give a damn.


----------



## WashingtonD

*Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

So it seems pretty obvious to me they got pretty scared by last weeks numbers and we go from an overly long Bryan-Punk match to a Cole-Cena comedy match.. let's see how the numbers do, but I think the WWE got this spot on. Cole was brilliant in his promo at the start and actually got me and my friend hyped up for the main event for a change, instead of it being just "Business as usual". Because of this, it felt like we were watching a special show, instead of just your regular old Raw of the past few months. Good stuff WWE


----------



## hahawas

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

Are you high?????? 

I thankfully didn't watch RAW live and watched it the next morning. If I did, I would have immediatly switched off after a mention of Michael Cole vs John Cena. Hell I would have switched off if the main event was ______ vs John Cena. Coel was the only thing good about the whole segment. If they wanted to gain back viewers, they should have made an interesting main event. 

This episode was just as horrific and terrible as the episodes in the last month! Who is interested or emotionally invested in this stupid feud bewteen a 42 year old giant and the bland repetitive all smiley Hero? Not me thats for sure. I'm predicting 2.6


----------



## dougfisher_05

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

I don't understand why the WWE was so concerned with the low rating last Monday. It was a major holiday here in the United States. People were out camping, BBQ'ing and the like. They weren't sitting on their assess watching television. On top of that the NBA finals are on. I think they are looking into it too much. I bet the rating will pop back up to its normal level this week--whether you had the ridiculous main event versus a wrestling main event like last week.


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

If the holiday didn't cause the 2.7 but rather the quality of the programming (or lack thereof) this show ought to be even lower.


----------



## Commodus

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

It was like weird fetish porn. Very uncomfortable to watch, especially with all that fucking BBQ sauce. Awful.


----------



## Hazaq

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*



dougfisher_05 said:


> I don't understand why the WWE was so concerned with the low rating last Monday. It was a major holiday here in the United States. People were out camping, BBQ'ing and the like. They weren't sitting on their assess watching television. On top of that the NBA finals are on. I think they are looking into it too much. I bet the rating will pop back up to its normal level this week--whether you had the ridiculous main event versus a wrestling main event like last week.


Holiday or not, they know they were going to do the same rating. Thats the reason for concern.



Commodus said:


> It was like weird fetish porn. Very uncomfortable to watch, especially with all that fucking BBQ sauce. Awful.



:lol


----------



## Algernon

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

Theyre not concerned with the ratings anymore than usual. When will people understand that the NBA playoffs are on and that pro wrestling is one of the biggest ratings victims of the Youtube/illegal steam/download/DVR age. If I can watch RAW at a later time at my convenience then I will. If I have something better to do on Monday night or a big time sporting event is on (me being a big sports junkie), then Im not watching RAW live.


----------



## Flyboy78

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

And to think we'll be getting three hours starting from July.


----------



## Hazaq

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*



Algernon said:


> Theyre not concerned with the ratings anymore than usual. When will people understand that the NBA playoffs are on and that pro wrestling is *one of the biggest ratings victims of the Youtube/illegal steam/download/*DVR age. If I can watch RAW at a later time at my convenience then I will. If I have something better to do on Monday night or a big time sporting event is on (me being a big sports junkie), then Im not watching RAW live.


Not really. Viewership of WWE Youtube Content is largely from worldwide fans, Outside of US. It doesnt affect much. 

DVRs are a different problem.


----------



## apokalypse

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

Cm "No Rating" Punk... RAW need Mark "ratings" Henry


----------



## Padhlala

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

This was not for ratings.
This was for cheap face heat for Cena.

They're coasting on the ratings side of things, while they wait to ring back Lesnar and HHH


----------



## Patrick Bateman

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

does that mean Punk vs Bryan last week did bad numbers?


----------



## Commodus

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*



RevolverSnake said:


> does that mean Punk vs Bryan last week did bad numbers?


Quite possibly. Despite the amazing, truly laudable _quality_ of their matches, the feud has been lacking in story, psychology or coherency.
It's also a massive step back to include Kane in their feud, as Kane is a laughable character who has to be oversold by everyone he's feuding with.

Now, here's the problem. To feud successfully with Kane, you have to sell him as a legitimate monster, even though the character is stupid and delivers the most absurd promos on the entire roster. But Punk's character would, if given the chance, routinely mock Kane for the Katie Vick stuff and maybe even the Issac Yankem gimmick.

Punk's kayfabe reaction to the Kane character would actually rob him of his monstrous aura. So Punk's not been on the mic as much as he should have and therefore the best talker in the entire three-way feud has been effectively silenced.

Bryan, also a great promo guy, has been given nothing interesting to do. The 'Yes' chants, far from helping him, have actually reduced him to a one trick pony who has lost his edge.

The whole feud is a massive debacle, with no reasoning behind it, no logic and next to no promo time. So whilst the matches are amazing, the story simply doesn't exist. So why does the audience care? They've not been given a reason to get emotionally invested in the Punk/Bryan programme.

It's a real shame.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

wwe univers y u no appreciate good wrestling?!


----------



## hahawas

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

We need the return of Mark 'ratings' Henry. Much better for Big Shows role


----------



## Commodus

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*



RevolverSnake said:


> wwe univers y u no appreciate good wrestling?!


Because wrestling without good storytelling isn't worth all that much.


----------



## Joel Anthony

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*



Commodus said:


> It was like weird fetish porn. Very uncomfortable to watch, especially with all that fucking BBQ sauce. Awful.


I felt dirty watching it.


----------



## Vyed

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*



RevolverSnake said:


> does that mean Punk vs Bryan last week did bad numbers?


Yes lost all viewers at 10.pm slot, which is very unusual, including WWE 13 cover segment.


----------



## FoxyRoxy

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

It's not Punk/Daniel Bryan's fault.. it's all down to WWE and their shitty booking/writing. 

There is _nothing_ interesting going on right now, all the so called feuds are boring and non existent. Last night I thought I was watching an episode of Smackdown instead of RAW.


----------



## dazzy666

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

for the record punk v bryan wasnt on the final seg last week - show and clay were.

cm punk is always on the end of 1st hour/start of 2nd.

i hope we get another lackluster rating, and vince does something massive next week


----------



## Starbuck

If in doubt, bring back Vince lol. The breakdown for last week still not come out yet?


----------



## Duke Silver

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

If this is what wrestling fans want to see, I weep for wrestling.


----------



## Vyed

Vince Mcmahon as a babyface is always awkward to watch.


----------



## Starbuck

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

More like ratings shock = Vince McMahon return to television. That's big and it came out of nowhere. They very clearly freaked the fuck out lol.


----------



## Rocky_Mark0000

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

Are you guys sure that this is not worse than 95 Raw? I didn't watch any Raw from 1995 but it's hard to imagine 95 Raw being worse than right now.


----------



## StayFresh

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

Pass the blunt.


----------



## James1o1o

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

If the ratings for last weeks raw were so low because of the fact it was holiday, then this weeks are obviously going to be slightly better. Which is bad, because that means WWE will look at it like Cena and Cole draws.


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

You'll never go broke thinking the American public is stupid. That Cole garbage is precisely the sort of stuff marks and casuals eat up with a fork and knife plus pound the table for seconds. 

Its a shame Punk, Bryan and Ziggler matches are ratings poison because they are the best workers in the company.


----------



## CaptainObvious

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

It was a terrible idea for a main event. If they are concerned about ratings, why book this? It's ratings repellent. 

As for three hour Raw, it's going to be a disaster. WWE has trouble booking two hours of Raw. I'm not sure what will change when they expand to three hours.


----------



## Romanista

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

last week 2.7 forced WWE to put Cena in the opening and the entire last quarter of the show.

THAT SUCKS!!!!

but still better than CM Punk.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

Like I said in the ratings thread, I expect the Cole/Cena match to do a huge gain, million +, Cole did a great job hyping the match all over the program and he was always a strong TV draw, besides they did exactly what can attract fans with the BBQ and all that. When he wants, he can do a decent job on commentary.

Vince is not going to be happy if the number doesn't go up next week. Yes, Cole/Cena and his return is a clear results from their panic over the disaster 2.7 rating because ratings are everything for them, especially now when it's the only major revenue that keeping them above water. What I don't understand is why the hell they said that Vince is opening the show? ridiculous thing to do because the first hour of the 3 hours is usually doing 2.4-2.5, it's probably a teaser like they did with the Lesnar contract signing and then they will do it in the main event, Vince is smarter than that.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

Yup, WWE freaks out over the rating, then decides to break out the big guns: Cena vs. Cole in a meaningless comedy match. That's their A-game at this point. Hope you guys are ready for 3 hours of this!


----------



## chargebeam

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

Last night's Raw made me ashamed of being a pro-wrestling fan. How I miss July 2011.


----------



## Vyed

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*



chargebeam said:


> Last night's Raw made me ashamed of being a pro-wrestling fan.


RAW 1995.


----------



## WashingtonD

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*



SPCDRI said:


> You'll never go broke thinking the American public is stupid. That Cole garbage is precisely the sort of stuff marks and casuals eat up with a fork and knife plus pound the table for seconds.
> 
> Its a shame Punk, Bryan and Ziggler matches are ratings poison because they are the best workers in the company.


Exactly, I'm more of a casual fan and give me Cole over Punk or Bryan any day.. he can make a main event in one night with an awesome promo, giving emotions going into the match. Punk and Bryan are simply too stale and the majority of people aren't interested in technical wrestling. Me and all my friends loved last nights show and hated the boring overly long match between Punk-Bryan last week


----------



## PacoAwesome

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

I blame Big Show for bad ratings because he is the reason I didn't even bother to tune in one RAW. I want the guy out of the main event because he bore people to tears. It doesn't make sense that people blame Punk for bad ratings when Punk isn't even the main focus of RAW. Big Johnny/Show/Cena are the big focus of RAW so if anyone needs to be blamed for bad ratings, it's them. Also doesn't help that nothing else on RAW matters since there are no meaningful mid-card feuds.


----------



## Lennon

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*

Fuck your "numbers".

Why should the amount of people watching a show or segment dictate whether I enjoy it or not? fpalm

I'm a wrestling fan, I would rather watch Punk and Bryan in a 24 hour Iron Man submission match than watch 30 seconds of Cole and Cena. And don't dare call me an indy nerd, I've never watched anything outside of WWE, TNA or WCW in my life.

If WWE really is concerned about all the bullshit that you ratings retards go on about constantly, then I'm done. If we're gonna get more shit like last night over good characters, storylines, promos and matches, then they can fuck off, I'm getting too old for this sheeeit!


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*



Lennon said:


> Why should the amount of people watching a show or segment dictate whether I enjoy it or not? fpalm



That's what I've been saying forever. People comment on Raw and are like "It was ok" and the second they find out the rating, they're like "not surprising considering how much it sucked". Or if it's a good rating, they'll be like "It's cause people wanted to see ____".


But what I'm wondering, is why people don't care about AM Raw ratings. It gets about .5M people(at 2AM!) watching. So Raw basically has at least .5M more viewers in USA than its rating shows.


----------



## Loudness

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*



dxbender said:


> That's what I've been saying forever. People comment on Raw and are like "It was ok" and the second they find out the rating, they're like "not surprising considering how much it sucked". Or if it's a good rating, they'll be like "It's cause people wanted to see ____".
> 
> 
> But what I'm wondering, is why people don't care about AM Raw ratings. It gets about .5M people(at 2AM!) watching. So Raw basically has at least .5M more viewers in USA than its rating shows.


Well, this thread is about ratings, not about talents, so I don't see why people storm in here saying "ratings don't matter", that's like joining a porn website and saying "looks/blowjob skills don't matter, it's all about the personality". I don't think the majority of the posters here are actually critisizing the talents mic/ring ability, just their mainstream appeal. At least I hope that's how it is, would be sad if someone based his enjoyment on how other people view him/her.


----------



## Hollywood Hanoi

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*



Loudness said:


> Well, this thread is about ratings, not about talents, so I don't see why people storm in here saying "ratings don't matter", that's like joining a porn website and saying "looks/blowjob skills don't matter, it's all about the personality". I don't think the majority of the posters here are actually critisizing the talents mic/ring ability, just their mainstream appeal. At least I hope that's how it is, would be sad if someone based his enjoyment on how other people view him/her.


Totally agree here, these threads are the only that'll make me think the oldest cliche in the internet --no-ones forcing you to read it!
I really don't think any sane person is basing the personal enjoyment off the show from the ratings, you have to become a fan in the first place before you'd be anyway interested in such matters, and as a fan of course its extremely interesting to see which stars/segments are appealing to the casual audience.
Its not just wrestling, these threads were all over mma forums recently too when the UFC on FOX 3 show totally bombed (despite being an all round fantastic event). The numbers are always interesting to fans of the show.


----------



## Firallon

PacoAwesome said:


> I blame Big Show for bad ratings because he is the reason I didn't even bother to tune in one RAW. I want the guy out of the main event because he bore people to tears. It doesn't make sense that people blame Punk for bad ratings when Punk isn't even the main focus of RAW. Big Johnny/Show/Cena are the big focus of RAW so if anyone needs to be blamed for bad ratings, it's them. Also doesn't help that nothing else on RAW matters since there are no meaningful mid-card feuds.


The blame also goes to Punk and Bryan. Their segmants are poorly written and their matches draw poor rating.

Listen up. I will give you a quote by Vince Russo that explains why CM Punk vs Daniel Bryan matches don't draw ratings:

"Wrestling matches equal bad ratings"

And this statement is correct. The large majority of viewers don't care about long, random wrestling matches. People want to see good stories, not watch a 20 minute match with little to no context.


----------



## bigdog40

*Re: Ratings shock = Cena & Michael Cole in main event?*



Lennon said:


> Fuck your "numbers".
> 
> Why should the amount of people watching a show or segment dictate whether I enjoy it or not? fpalm
> 
> I'm a wrestling fan, I would rather watch Punk and Bryan in a 24 hour Iron Man submission match than watch 30 seconds of Cole and Cena. And don't dare call me an indy nerd, I've never watched anything outside of WWE, TNA or WCW in my life.
> 
> If WWE really is concerned about all the bullshit that you ratings retards go on about constantly, then I'm done. If we're gonna get more shit like last night over good characters, storylines, promos and matches, then they can fuck off, I'm getting too old for this sheeeit!




I doubt the WWE cares THAT much about the ratings since in reality the ratings system is THEE most flawed and inaccurate system ever in TV. Nobody here knows exactly what a 2.7, 3.4, etc means or have a solution as to what will draw in certain quarter hours. If WWE wanted ratings, they just fill their two hr block with big stars, but judging for the last several Raw's, they don't give a shit right now.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

I just hope that WWE don't need to rely on comedy segments in *desperation* for ratings. How about rivalries? You know the ones where there are intense promos, lots of promoting, fresh material, and then the pay off match at the ends that shocks everyone.


----------



## Eulonzo

I think the fact that Vince is gonna show up on TV on RAW next week + having a random three hour special pretty much shows how desperate they are.


----------



## RichDV

Eulonzo said:


> I think the fact that Vince is gonna show up on TV on RAW next week + having a random three hour special pretty much shows how desperate they are.


The first part is true, but this 3-hour Raw was already planned months in advance. They just waited until the last possible minute to advertise it, like usual.


----------



## Starbuck

Lennon said:


> Fuck your "numbers".
> 
> Why should the amount of people watching a show or segment dictate whether I enjoy it or not? fpalm
> 
> I'm a wrestling fan, I would rather watch Punk and Bryan in a 24 hour Iron Man submission match than watch 30 seconds of Cole and Cena. And don't dare call me an indy nerd, I've never watched anything outside of WWE, TNA or WCW in my life.
> 
> If WWE really is concerned about all the bullshit that you ratings retards go on about constantly, then I'm done. If we're gonna get more shit like last night over good characters, storylines, promos and matches, then they can fuck off, I'm getting too old for this sheeeit!


Nobody is telling you what to like based on the rating. Nobody is telling you to prefer 30 seconds of Cole and Cena over a day of Punk and Bryan. If you don't like discussing ratings, don't come in this thread all butthurt and post absolute nonsense.


----------



## JasonLives

WWE Raw Viewership was up this week compared to last week. This week did 4.3 million viewers ( 3.9 million last week ):

Hour 1: 4,322,000 million viewers ( 3,918,000 last week )
Hour 2: 4,247,000 million viewers ( 3,911,000 last week )

Will probably be around a 2.9 rating.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Ryback = ratings.


----------



## D.M.N.

Depressingly good rating by recent standards.


----------



## AttitudeOutlaw

Good to see an improvement. Hopefully next week with Vince and his announcement we'll see even more. Even though the second hour was a decrease I'm guessing that the main-event drew huge as expected and everything else in the hour (Punk/Bryan/Kane, Tag match) dragged it down big time. I enjoyed the show especially the opening promo, Ryback's match and the main-event.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Sin Caras return probably did well. The Kane/Punk match and segment probably did decent as well.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

The John Cena vs Tensai match probably did not do any good, but the Cole humiliation probably did a decent number.


----------



## King_Of_This_World

Whilst there are always the 4 millionish sheep who continue to watch no matter what shit is put out, nothing will ever change.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

I bet that final segment gained 1 million people.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

The-Rock-Says said:


> I bet that final segment gained 1 million people.


Maybe, and the Tensai vs Cena match probably didn't do any good.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

I think there was a commercial break between the Kane vs Punk match so that might have lost viewers. I was watching the NBA playoffs along with RAW.


----------



## Christiangotcrewed

Lol at Kane and punk match drawing numbers.fpalm


Dave Meltzer said last week the match with Bryan lost viewers.


----------



## JasonLives

Chicago Warrior said:


> Sin Caras return probably did well. The Kane/Punk match and segment probably did decent as well.


Quarterhour 3, 4 and 7 will most likely be the biggest losers. Just because they had 2 commercial breaks in all of them.
This included the Sin Cara match so dont think his match will be rated fair. Only WWE will know how well his match did, with their minute by minute breakdown.

Of course Meltzer will probably blame the short matches and not what actually dominated the quarters.


----------



## morris3333

raw will like get 2.6 rating for last night show.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

JasonLives said:


> Quarterhour 3, 4 and 7 will most likely be the biggest losers. Just because they had 2 commercial breaks in all of them.
> This included the Sin Cara match so dont think his match will be rated fair. Only WWE will know how well his match did, with their minute by minute breakdown.
> 
> Of course Meltzer will probably blame the short matches and not what actually dominated the quarters.


What about quarter 2? Doesn't that usually lose viewers?


----------



## JasonLives

Chicago Warrior said:


> What about quarter 2? Doesn't that usually lose viewers?


Yeah, looking at Quarter 2 its actually more likely to lose more viewers then Quarter 3.

Quarter 2 was : Commercial break, backstage segment, first half of Sheamus/Ziggler, commercial break

Quarter 3 was : End of Sheamus/Ziggler, commerical break, backstage, Sin Cara/Hunico match

Like you said, Quarter 2 usually loses lots of viewers and its no suprise when the Quarters look like that. People switch channel during breaks, especially during playoff season.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Rybacks segment probably did decent numbers his match was about 5 minutes without any commercial breaks. What quarter was his match?


----------



## Shock

Chicago Warrior said:


> Rybacks segment probably did decent numbers his match was about 5 minutes without any commercial breaks. What quarter was his match?


Four, wasn't it? It was at about 9-50.


----------



## WashingtonD

*Michael Cole outdraws CM Punk*



> Monday's WWE Raw television show drew a 2.92 rating, up from the 2.72 rating the show drew last week.


From http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_62118.shtml

So while CM Punk and Daniel Bryan dominated the airwaves last week with their overly long, pointless match - this week WWE bounced back with a massive +0.2 in the ratings after featuring a one-and-done angle with Cole and Cena. Rarely does Raw feature such angles, and it was a daring challenge for the WWE to take, but it seems to have paid off. Won't mean much in the long term, just thought it was interesting point that a commentator is out-drawing the current WWE champ right now.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

*Re: Michael Cole outdraws CM Punk*

There is a ratings thread already.


----------



## Silent KEEL

*Re: Michael Cole outdraws CM Punk*

Bryan and Punk had the exact amount of time both weeks and in the same timeslot, so obviously the change in ratings had nothing to do with them. Nice try, though.


----------



## morris3333

2.9

from : http://www.f4wonline.com/more/more-top-stories/118-daily-updates/25948-raw-rating


----------



## Shock

*Re: Michael Cole outdraws CM Punk*

Merging with the ratings thread.


----------



## Solid_Rob

*Re: Michael Cole outdraws CM Punk*

So ratings still mean draws on this site?  

Ratings are for sponsors. They don't translate to ticket/merch sales.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Like I said, I hope WWE gives us intense rivalries instead of depending on comedy and BBQ sauce to draw. Segments like Cole vs Cena might be funny and bring in ratings due to curiosity, but they make wrestling seems as a joke.

Oh and WWE seems to have lost their key demographics this week. Part of it is the playoffs, but I am sure it was RAW as a show as well.



> The big item for USA Network and advertisers is the key male demos declined compared to last week's year-low show. Monday night, Raw hit year-lows in males 18-34, males 18-49, and males 12-34. The only demo that was up was teen males 12-17 on the week John Cena returned to Raw after a one-week absence.


http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_62118.shtml


----------



## Mister Hands

"You a wrestling fan or a ratings fan? I'll take cross over seg telling a good story over covering a non-wrestler with condiments any day."

Punk's tweet.


----------



## morris3333

That is up from last week but with way less competition on TV (no Hatfields & McCoys for one), it is hardly anything for WWE to feel good about. As I said on my hotline today, the first words out of Vince McMahon's mouth next week on Raw should be "You're Fired!" to John Laurinaitis. That storyline is killing the company and the talents that are being made subservient to it. It's boring, predictable and turning viewers away. If this rating, with almost no competition, doesn't send Vince and creative a message, they are deaf, dumb and blind. That only worked for one entity and that was The Who's Tommy. 

from : http://pwinsider.com/article/69059/...put-perfume-on-a-pig-its-still-a-pig.html?p=1

I got a feel Vince McMahon will fire John Laurinaitis on raw next week.


----------



## Tedious

CM Punk ‏@CMPunk
You a wrestling fan or a ratings fan? I'll take cross over seg telling a good story over covering a non-wrestler with condiments any day.


----------



## King_Kool-Aid™

They should have Big Johnny do more fucked up stuff to wrestlers if he wants to get over as a Vince character. He also should get a better stable. I doubt the casual fans give a care in the world about a corporate team featuring Otunga, Tensai, Hoeski and Big Show.


----------



## Brye

Tedious said:


> CM Punk ‏@CMPunk
> You a wrestling fan or a ratings fan? I'll take cross over seg telling a good story over covering a non-wrestler with condiments any day.


Couldn't agree with that more.

I watch the show for something interesting, not something that's Avatarish. (brings in money but wasn't really good, imo)


----------



## kokepepsi

Tedious said:


> CM Punk ‏@CMPunk
> You a wrestling fan or a ratings fan? I'll take cross over seg telling a good story over covering a non-wrestler with condiments any day.


WHO WOULDN"T FFS

Fuck this company

oh and rating is up because it wasn't a holiday THE EXACT SAME THING HAPPENED ONE YEAR AGO

Jesus you guys are a little fucked in the head


----------



## Therapy

CM Punk venting a bit is a good thing. He got served the belt on a shit sandwich and a tall glass of piss to wash it down with.


----------



## vanboxmeer

Tedious said:


> CM Punk ‏@CMPunk
> You a wrestling fan or a ratings fan? I'll take cross over seg telling a good story over covering a non-wrestler with condiments any day.


CM Punk voices his inner frustrations at Vince and Kevin Dunn. When the ratings were up when he won his very first World Title, he preached that till the cows came home as a reason why he should be pushed. The moment the ratings don't reflect his segments, he goes into "ratings don't matter" mode.


----------



## Brye

Main event segment probably had a higher number, therefore it's better.

And BBQ sauce every week now and a US title run for Cole.


----------



## ecabney

Lol @ the show getting a weak .2 increase when Cena returned.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

What does "cross over seg" mean?


----------



## Green Light

vanboxmeer said:


> CM Punk voices his inner frustrations at Vince and Kevin Dunn. When the ratings were up when he won his very first World Title, he preached that till the cows came home as a reason why he should be pushed. The moment the ratings don't reflect his segments, he goes into "ratings don't matter" mode.


Like most of his fans


----------



## Brye

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> What does "cross over seg" mean?


I think that's like an interview in between matches.

And lol at the "like his fans".


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Ratings went up .2. Off of a holiday weekend show that usually does some of the year's lowest numbers. On a night with significantly less competition.

You know what that means: Time for 50 pages talking about how Cole is a confirmed mega-draw.


----------



## Jobberwacky

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> What does "cross over seg" mean?


Doesn't it mean, cross over to the second hour?


----------



## GillbergReturns

Not that I consider Cole v Cena to be anywhere near the example I'm going to bring up but Austin v McMahon was probally the most entertaining feud ever and yes it did have it's fair share of Austin doing silly stuff to the McMahons.

You guys crack me up with this the crowd wants to see 2 wrestlers wrestle and that's it.


----------



## kokepepsi

Brye said:


> Main event segment probably had a higher number, therefore it's better.
> 
> And BBQ sauce every week now and a US title run for Cole.


Something I would expect Rock316ae to believe

:rocky


----------



## Brye

GillbergReturns said:


> Not that I consider Cole v Cena to be anywhere near the example I'm going to bring up but Austin v McMahon was probally the most entertaining feud ever and yes it did have it's fair share of Austin doing silly stuff to the McMahons.
> 
> You guys crack me up with this the crowd wants to see 2 wrestlers wrestle and that's it.


To an extent I do think the fans wants wrestling in their wrestling program. Now actual story development with those matches would be ideal. At the moment there's no story to go with the match.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

SarcasmoBlaster said:


> Ratings went up .2. Off of a holiday weekend show that usually does some of the year's lowest numbers. On a night with significantly less competition.
> 
> You know what that means: Time for 50 pages talking about how Cole is a confirmed mega-draw.


Yes Yes Yes, this.


----------



## doinktheclowns

in the past individual wrestlers drew, now its the product draws.

mainly because 12 years ago as many as 10-15 guys where massively pushed now we have only one guy.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Brye said:


> To an extent I do think the fans wants wrestling in their wrestling program. Now actual story development with those matches would be ideal. At the moment there's no story to go with the match.


That would be very ideal, the match should be the pay off from the feud.


----------



## GillbergReturns

Brye said:


> To an extent I do think the fans wants wrestling in their wrestling program. Now actual story development with those matches would be ideal. At the moment there's no story to go with the match.


Replace John Cena with Daniel Bryan last night and you don't think we're seeing a different discussion.

I really think story development is actually what's wrong this feud. When Cole was going on about him and Cena being friends I barely knew that was a lie. The same goes with Big Johnny. It's why don't they like each other.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Jobberwacky said:


> Doesn't it mean, cross over to the second hour?


Okay, that makes sense.



doinktheclowns said:


> in the past individual wrestlers drew, now its the product draws.
> 
> mainly because 12 years ago as many as 10-15 guys where massively pushed now we have only one guy.


This is true. The only young star that been pushed well has been Sheamus (and ADR but he failed to get over as a heel).


----------



## Brye

GillbergReturns said:


> Replace John Cena with Daniel Bryan last night and you don't think we're seeing a different discussion.
> 
> I really think story development is actually what's wrong this feud. When Cole was going on about him and Cena being friends I barely knew that was a lie. The same goes with Big Johnny. It's why don't they like each other.


That segment is lame regardless of who is doing it. Whether it being Punk, Bryan, Cena, Orton, Rock, etc. Not only had we just seen the same thing with Johnny two or three weeks ago.

With Austin and beer it worked because it made some sense. That was a classic moment where he came out in a huge truck and made a big moment of it.


----------



## Therapy

Brye said:


> Main event segment probably had a higher number, therefore it's better.
> 
> And BBQ sauce every week now and a US title run for Cole.


Screw that.. It's obvious Cole is the future of WWE and has surpassed HHH


----------



## Chicago Warrior

A 2.9 in reality shouldn't be anything worthy of discussion.


----------



## raz0rz

> Clearly Vince McMahon has had enough of @WWEDanielBryan & @CMPunk murdering the ratings. Project Skinny Dwarves has failed miserably. #RAWWW


Retweeted by Punk.


----------



## Brye

raz0rz said:


> Retweeted by Punk.


No doubt in my mind that twitter account is someone on here.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Brye said:


> No doubt in my mind that twitter account is someone on here.


Lol that is a guarantee.


----------



## Choke2Death

Brye said:


> No doubt in my mind that twitter account is someone on here.


:lol

:lmao @ "murdering [t]he ratings".


----------



## raz0rz

Brye said:


> No doubt in my mind that twitter account is someone on here.


He definitely visits this forum. Probably has this thread bookmarked on his iPhone lol.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

The guy who tweeted that is from London England apparently.


----------



## raz0rz

Choke2Death said:


> :lol
> 
> :lmao @ "murdering [t]he ratings".


Lol fixed.


----------



## Jobberwacky

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> Okay, that makes sense.


Don't quote me on it. 

I was hoping somebody else could confirm it?

Can't find it mentioned much online. Though it's used here on a recent Raw review....

- Daniel Bryan and Cody Rhodes lost to Santino Marella and WWE CHAMPION CM Punk in the FIRST MATCH. *The WWE Title feud now isn't even worthy of the hour-crossover segment.* It's the first match on the show. A solid match, but still... FIRST?


----------



## SPCDRI

Double dose of Cena for about 40 minutes worth, no competition whatsoever, 2.9 rating. Wahoo.


----------



## GillbergReturns

Brye said:


> That segment is lame regardless of who is doing it. Whether it being Punk, Bryan, Cena, Orton, Rock, etc. Not only had we just seen the same thing with Johnny two or three weeks ago.
> 
> With Austin and beer it worked because it made some sense. That was a classic moment where he came out in a huge truck and made a big moment of it.


I disagree. I think most people here would have loved it if it was Bryan.

With Austin it was more than that 1 instance. Spraying Steph down with mustard and taking her shirt off, making Vince p*** his pants, every week was a beer bath for someone hell go back to Cena's rise when people actually liked him and how he humiliated JB.

Was it corny. Yeah, but let's not pretend this kind of material wasn't popular back when wrestling was popular.


----------



## HalfNights70

I don't think it's difficult to do what Cena did this week, if Punk did it last week it will be much better but of course Cena gets the best booking. Others are worthless to him, Is it really that hard to book others like him.


----------



## Brye

GillbergReturns said:


> I disagree. I think most people here would have loved it if it was Bryan.
> 
> With Austin it was more than that 1 instance. Spraying Steph down with mustard and taking her shirt off, making Vince p*** his pants, every week was a beer bath for someone hell go back to Cena's rise when people actually liked him and how he humiliated JB.
> 
> Was it corny. Yeah, but let's not pretend this kind of material wasn't popular back when wrestling was popular.


I honestly think that Austin's character makes it more appropriate for him to do. 

Yeah that stuff happened, but I feel as if it's different. Like what was Cole personally doing to Cena to make his life hell like Vince tried with Austin? It was warranted then.

I don't even dislike Cena, he's not that bad of a worker, he's just been stuck in some questionable feuds.


----------



## Therapy

SPCDRI said:


> Double dose of Cena for about 40 minutes worth, no competition whatsoever, 2.9 rating. Wahoo.


Don't worry. Did you forget what forum you're on? Someone, somewhere will pull some ludicrous excuse out of their ass to justify the shit ratings.


----------



## jonoaries

2.9? I expected a slight increase...less competition on TV. This monday was equal in quality to last weeks...which is to say they both sucked lol


----------



## GillbergReturns

Brye said:


> I honestly think that Austin's character makes it more appropriate for him to do.
> 
> Yeah that stuff happened, but I feel as if it's different. Like what was Cole personally doing to Cena to make his life hell like Vince tried with Austin? It was warranted then.
> 
> I don't even dislike Cena, he's not that bad of a worker, he's just been stuck in some questionable feuds.


I do agree with this post.


----------



## SPCDRI

Not only was it a 2.9, the last hour of the program had slightly fewer viewers and slightly fewer ratings than the first hour and crossover. Again.

COLE IS A MONSTER DRAW, PEOPLE

:troll


----------



## Mister Hands

Brye said:


> I honestly think that Austin's character makes it more appropriate for him to do.
> 
> Yeah that stuff happened, but I feel as if it's different. Like what was Cole personally doing to Cena to make his life hell like Vince tried with Austin? It was warranted then.
> 
> I don't even dislike Cena, he's not that bad of a worker, he's just been stuck in some questionable feuds.


Yeah, Brye's got it. I think part of it is that everyone seems weak compared to Cena. Cena's the guy at the top of the food chain, and no one ever looks very good against him. So watching him embarrass people isn't fun or cathartic, it's just rote. I mean, it's barely a fortnight since we had the exact same thing with Cena and Big Johnny headlining OTL. Almost beat for beat the same segment, except Tensai played Show's part, and Cena won.

If it was Bryan, it still wouldn't be a very good segment, but you could at least say there's a year or two of Cole talking shit about him and Bryan never getting the upper hand. All that happened with Cena is Cole said some negative stuff after years of supporting Cena as the ultimate paragon of WWE, and Cena - who, let's remember, Rises Above Hate - immediately decided to beat him up.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

The difference between the Cena/Cole segment and the numerous Austin vs. Authority Figure X segments is that Austin's segments served a storyline purpose. What was the point of beating up Cole and humiliating him? It's not like he crossed Cena, or was an integral part of Ace/Show story. He's just a heel announcer (who has been acting much less heelish and annoying than at his peak btw) who got beat up on a random night for basically no reason.

The question would've been the same had it been Sheamus, or Punk, or Bryan beating him up: what the fuck is the point of this?


----------



## Hollywood Hanoi

GillbergReturns said:


> With Austin it was more than that 1 instance. Spraying Steph down with mustard and taking her shirt off, making Vince p*** his pants, every week was a beer bath for someone hell go back to Cena's rise when people actually liked him and how he humiliated JB.
> 
> Was it corny. Yeah, but let's not pretend this kind of material wasn't popular back when wrestling was popular.


Don't forget the time he was fighting Booker around a supermarket, emerged from a fridge and poured a carton of milk over his own head!!
Ain't gonna lie, I marked the fuck out when that happened.


----------



## Hollywood Hanoi

SarcasmoBlaster said:


> The difference between the Cena/Cole segment and the numerous Austin vs. Authority Figure X segments is that Austin's segments served a storyline purpose. What was the point of beating up Cole and humiliating him? It's not like he crossed Cena, or was an integral part of Ace/Show story. He's just a heel announcer (who has been acting much less heelish and annoying than at his peak btw) who got beat up on a random night for basically no reason.
> 
> The question would've been the same had it been Sheamus, or Punk, or Bryan beating him up: what the fuck is the point of this?


Thats actually spot-on, the number one problem, what exactly did Cole do to Cena to merit that humilation? called him boring and over-exposed? pour bbq sauce on the entire wrestlemania audience so!


----------



## Therapy

SarcasmoBlaster said:


> The difference between the Cena/Cole segment and the numerous Austin vs. Authority Figure X segments is that Austin's segments served a storyline purpose. What was the point of beating up Cole and humiliating him? It's not like he crossed Cena, or was an integral part of Ace/Show story. He's just a heel announcer (who has been acting much less heelish and annoying than at his peak btw) who got beat up on a random night for basically no reason.
> 
> The question would've been the same had it been Sheamus, or Punk, or Bryan beating him up: what the fuck is the point of this?


Not only that, the actual storyline Cena is involved was COMPLETELY no-sold by Cena like he does nearly all his angles.

Big Show: Long, dark, dramatic and intense interview about his past and how he will destroy Cena, being a destroyer etc etc.

Cena: ALL SMILES AND JOKES. LOLZ COLE!! [email protected]#!


----------



## Kabraxal

Chicago Warrior said:


> Like I said, I hope WWE gives us intense rivalries instead of depending on comedy and BBQ sauce to draw. Segments like Cole vs Cena might be funny and bring in ratings due to curiosity, but they make wrestling seems as a joke.
> 
> Oh and WWE seems to have lost their key demographics this week. Part of it is the playoffs, but I am sure it was RAW as a show as well.
> 
> 
> 
> http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_62118.shtml


Interesting... though not surprised. Aside from one or two segments (namely AJ/Punk/Bryan), what really appealed to the adult audience? This is exactly like the New Generation Era at this point but no competition lighting a fire under McMahon's ass to show him that he needs to improve the damn product.


----------



## Amuroray

LOL PUNK GOT MAD AT MY TWEET LOLOLOL


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Amuroray said:


> LOL PUNK GOT MAD AT MY TWEET LOLOLOL


Ha, at least we knew it was someone from here. Just out of curiosity but did you look at this thread to get the official rating or did you look at a dirt sheet?


----------



## TheWFEffect

Part of me wants to see the ratings fall, fall and fall WWE built up Miz as promient main eventer and he single handly drew 1 million viewers then WWE buried him and at the last PPV he lost to Brodus Clay, Zack Ryder gets himself over he and Dolph work their own bloody feud through the internet and get one or two segements on RAW but the payoff is the same Ryder becoming the top upper mid card player with the US title three weeks latter he loses the title to "JACK SWAGGER" and becomes Kane punching bag, Dolph Ziggler finally finds him nack with his show off gimmick puts it work in his fued with Ryder and leads him to his feud with Punk which was brilliant great promo work with Punk, Ace and Foley first time in months Punk kept viewers in opening segement come Royal Rumble gets GTS's 4 times back to midcard put into feud with Brodus Clay buried loses all heat he built himself back to relying on Vickie FUCK, Sheamus obviously heading to Wrestlemania potrays a great mix of being a face and at the same time keeping that edge now he is Cena 2.0, Mark Henry bring ratings back to Smackdown for months and loses the title to big show in a 6 minuite match and then continually gets buried by Sheamus.


----------



## Amuroray

Chicago Warrior said:


> Ha, at least we knew it was someone from here. Just out of curiosity but did you look at this thread to get the official rating or did you look at a dirt sheet?


Both.But it wasnt just that last week.Its been for a while.Punk doesnt draw.We knew this for a long time now.

Punk is getting all butt hurt.But hopefully he ups his game

Man people are pissed at me on twitter.
Fucking punk marks.


----------



## Brye

Amuroray said:


> LOL PUNK GOT MAD AT MY TWEET LOLOLOL


Called that. :lmao:lmao:lmao

Don't know how he can supposedly up his game when his ring work has been high quality and he doesn't even get much promo time. And when he does, it has nothing to do with the current feud.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Amuroray said:


> Both.But it wasnt just that last week.Its been for a while.Punk doesnt draw.We knew this for a long time now.
> 
> Punk is getting all butt hurt.But hopefully he ups his game
> 
> Man people are pissed at me on twitter.
> Fucking punk marks.


The shows rating shouldn't fall on one guy only. I say RAW as a whole needs to step-up.


----------



## CamillePunk

Why would Punk get blamed for bad ratings on a show where he's (relatively speaking compared to past WWE champs) barely featured? Cena opened the show. Cena (and Cole) was the advertised main event. I don't give a shit about ratings, I'm just not following the logic of people somehow holding Punk accountable for them when they're bad.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

CamillePunk said:


> Why would Punk get blamed for bad ratings on a show where he's (relatively speaking compared to past WWE champs) barely featured? Cena opened the show. Cena (and Cole) was the advertised main event. I don't give a shit about ratings, I'm just not following the logic of people somehow holding Punk accountable for them when they're bad.


Because look at this place.


----------



## jonoaries

CamillePunk said:


> Why would Punk get blamed for bad ratings on a show where he's (relatively speaking compared to past WWE champs) barely featured? Cena opened the show. Cena (and Cole) was the advertised main event. I don't give a shit about ratings,* I'm just not following the logic of people somehow holding Punk accountable for them when they're bad.*


Can't follow logic when there is none. People are just trolling


----------



## AustinRock2288

CamillePunk said:


> Why would Punk get blamed for bad ratings on a show where he's (relatively speaking compared to past WWE champs) barely featured? Cena opened the show. Cena (and Cole) was the advertised main event. I don't give a shit about ratings, I'm just not following the logic of people somehow holding Punk accountable for them when they're bad.


Quoted because he speaks the truth.


----------



## Bob the Jobber

CamillePunk said:


> Why would Punk get blamed for bad ratings on a show where he's (relatively speaking compared to past WWE champs) barely featured? Cena opened the show. Cena (and Cole) was the advertised main event. I don't give a shit about ratings, I'm just not following the logic of people somehow holding Punk accountable for them when they're bad.


Logic? In my ratings thread?!


----------



## El Barto

CamillePunk said:


> Why would Punk get blamed for bad ratings on a show where he's (relatively speaking compared to past WWE champs) barely featured? Cena opened the show. Cena (and Cole) was the advertised main event. I don't give a shit about ratings, I'm just not following the logic of people somehow holding Punk accountable for them when they're bad.


Cause Cena has an awful lot of dick riders around this joint?


----------



## Rock316AE

> Clearly Vince McMahon has had enough of @WWEDanielBryan & @CMPunk murdering the ratings. Project Skinny Dwarves has failed miserably. #RAWWW


:lmao :lmao :lmao. This is good and spot on BTW, but this:


> You a wrestling fan or a ratings fan? I'll take cross over seg telling a good story over covering a non-wrestler with condiments any day.


This is just comedy gold. I love the bitterness. This guy is probably the first guy to check the ratings every week from the way he's talking, "The dancer blames the "curve floor" for his lack of talent and ability", sad mentality. Miserable IMO. 

Anyway, for the rating, 2.9 as expected, Cole/Cena is going to do a huge gain, and that's on Cole's name, I don't like his work at all, but he did a great job on the hype for his match.


----------



## kokepepsi




----------



## TripleG

This is actually getting troublesome. It feels like the bottom ratings get lower and lower every year,

We are at a point where below 3.0 is becoming the norm.

EDIT: And no, I do not blame the champion, whether it be CM Punk, John Cena, or Brodus Clay. The champion isn't responsible for shitty writing and an evil boss storyline that is beating a near 15 year old horse to death.


----------



## kokepepsi

TripleG said:


> This is actually getting troublesome. It feels like the bottom ratings get lower and lower every year,
> 
> We are at a point where below 3.0 is becoming the norm.
> 
> EDIT: And no, I do not blame the champion, whether it be CM Punk, John Cena, or Brodus Clay. The champion isn't responsible for shitty writing and an evil boss storyline that is beating a near 15 year old horse to death.












Yeah ratings are falling overall because Internet>TV


----------



## HBK15

kokepepsi said:


>



Lol. Haters gonna hate.


----------



## Schrute_Farms

I don't know how anyone can watch that main event last night and defend this product. If you are older than 10 and enjoyed that I feel for you.

This company does nothing but insult the fans week after week and yet some of the fans will defend this garbage to the death. It's horrible, it's not entertaining, the main eveners are not entertaining, there is no consistency.

It's good the ratings are awful, it will be the ONLY thing that sparks some change from this company.


----------



## Little Mac

Schrute_Farms said:


> I don't know how anyone can watch that main event last night and defend this product. If you are older than 10 and enjoyed that I feel for you.
> 
> This company does nothing but insult the fans week after week and yet some of the fans will defend this garbage to the death. It's horrible, it's not entertaining, the main eveners are not entertaining, there is no consistency.
> 
> It's good the ratings are awful, it will be the ONLY thing that sparks some change from this company.


The fact that the ratings have been awful is _the reason_ that we got BBQ Sauce'd Cole Mainevent. That's how you fix the ratings.

You know? Michael Cole, the commentator who has significantly toned it down over the past few months, has been calling the matches, trying to put over the talent such as putting over Daniel Bryan a submission wrestler, has been 100% less insufferable and less of a bully than Jerry Lawler.


----------



## Schrute_Farms

Little Mac said:


> The fact that the ratings have been awful is _the reason_ that we got BBQ Sauce'd Cole Mainevent. That's how you fix the ratings.
> 
> You know? Michael Cole, the commentator who has significantly toned it down over the past few months, has been calling the matches, trying to put over the talent such as putting over Daniel Bryan a submission wrestler, has been 100% less insufferable and less of a bully than Jerry Lawler.


That is not how you fix ratings it's how you make your product look even more childish, ridiculous, and stupid than it already has for the last few years with a few short exceptions like around mania time each year when WWE actually tries.


----------



## fulcizombie

Another terrible rating for a terrible product. It seems that the base for Raw's rating is getting lower and lower and soon when raw is getting a 3.0 or slightly above rating the wwe officials will be celebrating. I wonder if this time next year , after brock and rock are out of the picture for good , the base for raw's rating will be 2.5

The wwe must change its whole philosophy fast , everything (buyrates, ratings, attendances) is going to the toilet quick . Focus on edgy storylines and improve the freakin writng, make some meaningful feuds for the mid card, allow the wrestlers more freedom on the mic , JUST ACT FOR FUCK'S SAKE the wwe reminds me the titanic and i don't want to see the company destroyed.


----------



## deadmau

-- Vince McMahon's return to television on next Monday's RAW SuperShow is being done in response to the program's disappointing ratings figures in recent weeks. He will kick off the three-hour show with an evaluation of John Laurinaitis's job performance as General Manager of RAW and SmackDown, which company officials are hopeful will boost first hour viewership. 

Source: The Wrestling Observer Newsletter


----------



## Rock316AE

kokepepsi said:


>


Unlike the last tweet, this is not 100% accurate.

1. Punk killed the ratings even before the TLC PPV, if you remember around that time, there were 4 RAW shows BELOW 3.0 for the first time in 15 years, so that's one thing. 

2. HBK drew big until the nWo angle. Ironically I talked about it yesterday:



Rock316AE said:


> The angle was huge for the simple fact that a big WWF star came to Nitro out of nowhere. Hogan's heel turn gave it the final push, but it was already groundbreaking before that.
> 
> It doesn't matter that Nitro wasn't on that night of the RECORD 4.7, because RAW did a 4.1 against Nitro after a few weeks. And RAW with HBK as champion beat Nitro every week until the week before the nWo started. You see that here:
> 
> Nitro beat RAW in March:
> 3.2-2.9
> 3.6-2.9
> 3.1-2.8
> HBK won the belt at WM and RAW beat Nitro every week from there including record numbers overall and head to head:
> 2.9-2.8
> 4.7 - biggest of all time at this point, overall.
> 3.1-2.8
> 3.3-2.7
> 2.9-2.1
> 4.1-1.9 - biggest of all time at that time, head to head.
> 3.5-2.3


So you need to go back all the way to 95.



> He will kick off the three-hour show with an evaluation of John Laurinaitis's job performance as General Manager of RAW and SmackDown, which company officials are hopeful will boost first hour viewership.


This is just ridiculous, why the hell Vince is opening the show when it's going to do a 2.5 at best anyway? this has nothing to do with the person. A huge TV draw like Vince can draw big on the main event segment, I hope it's a teaser just to attract viewers in the first hour and he's going to be in the main event, they tried to do it with the contract signing in April and they failed, so there's no reason to try again.


----------



## Redwood

Quite frankly, the low ratings are merited for the amount of quality they put into their shows.


----------



## Hazaq

> *You a wrestling fan or a ratings fan?* I'll take cross over seg telling a good story over covering a non-wrestler with condiments any day.


Where was that shit when he made the Kliq kliq TV remote comment about Nash? 



raz0rz said:


> He definitely visits this forum. Probably has this thread bookmarked on his iPhone lol.


Yeah I am convinced at this point.


----------



## rcc

:lmao :lmao 

I haven't watched or read about wrasslin' since Mania and I thought I would come back to the forum to check on how the ol' sports entertainment game was going. 

From reading some threads, let me get this straight: Orton is suspended for 60 days, Jericho has left the company again, AJ LEE is some kind of main character, Cena is still the same guy he's always been, Cena is feuding with Michael Cole, the massive toolbox known as CM Punk is still the WWE champion and Daniel Bryan is a main character on the show.

What the fuck is going on and why are any of you still watching? :lmao :lmao


----------



## DesolationRow

Well, to be fair, Alberto Del Rio has become the top heel of Smackdown in spite of his eternally lukewarm-at-best reactions, becoming Sheamus's most direct adversary on that brand.

Also, don't forget--The Miz is making _The Marine 3_ and The Big Show turned heel for the 8,000th time.


----------



## Starbuck

DEM RATINGS DURR. I honestly can't wait for the shit storm that happens when this thing goes 3 hours lol. This thread will be amazing.


----------



## DesolationRow

Starbuck said:


> DEM RATINGS DURR. I honestly can't wait for the shit storm that happens when this thing goes 3 hours lol. This thread will be amazing.


Will be more entertaining than Raw, no doubt. Oh, wait. I think that already started happening in the last month or so.


----------



## rcc

DesolationRow said:


> Well, to be fair, Alberto Del Rio has become the top heel of Smackdown in spite of his eternally lukewarm-at-best reactions, becoming Sheamus's most direct adversary on that brand.
> 
> Also, don't forget--The Miz is making _The Marine 3_ and The Big Show turned heel for the 8,000th time.


Good for Alberto. 

Miz playing a Marine sounds potentially hilarious. He can do his serious faces to a camera for 2 hrs straight now.


----------



## hardysno1fan

Where are the new technology excuses for Raws awful ratings?


----------



## Loudness

I guess an ok rating by modern standards. Reading Punks tweet posted here I think he does blame the ratings on himself to some degree as he took it personal, his excuse doesn't really add up considering that he was the first guy to say that Kevin Nash is a ratings killer and that him beeing WWE champion would make WWE prosper and "cool again" back last summer. I also don't think Micheals was that bad of a draw like him, HBK went up against Nitro and nWo pretty much by himself, I don't think he drew that bad on his own behalf considering how many guys he was up against. I doubt WWE would draw the numbers they do now if there was competition like WCW around, so imo Punk is overrating his drawing ability by putting himself up there with HBK.

I'm obviously not blaming the low rating of a two hour show on a guy that gets misused badly despite beeing the WWE champion (quite a rare combination) and put in random segments, but I'm critisizing the way he wrote that tweet makes it seem as if he tries to compensate for his low ratings by beeing "entertaining" as he said it which imo makes him look bad, hypocritical and arrogant (due to the HBK comparision) at the same time. He's a pretty bad spokesperson imo, he needs to learn to present himself better instead of getting cornered like that. He should have said that ratings are the average of all quarter hours (which is true) and not all on him or something but alas, he just owned himself for no reason.

On another note, isn't WWEs big storyline coming up next week? I wouldn't be surprised if it creates some buzz like the Summer of Punk/Nexus storyline etc.


----------



## SPCDRI

Guys watching streams because they don't want to be 60 bucks a month for cable when they can pay 30 bucks a month for internet and still stream cable.

Hi! 

8*D

NBA playoffs

DVRing

Waiting for it to show on Youtube or Dailymotion

NHL Playoffs

CM Punk and Daniel Bryan can't draw...when they got 12 minutes in the 9 o clock crossover but Cena got 20 minutes to open and close the show with Michale Cole being featured throughout the show. Michael Cole got more screen time than the WWE champ. RATINGZ! 8*D


----------



## Maikoes

SPCDRI said:


> Guys watching streams because they don't want to be 60 bucks a month for cable when they can pay 30 bucks a month for internet and still stream cable.
> 
> Hi!
> 
> 8*D
> 
> NBA playoffs
> 
> DVRing
> 
> Waiting for it to show on Youtube or Dailymotion
> 
> NHL Playoffs
> 
> CM Punk and Daniel Bryan can't draw...when they got 12 minutes in the 9 o clock crossover but Cena got 20 minutes to open and close the show with Michale Cole being featured throughout the show. Michael Cole got more screen time than the WWE champ. RATINGZ! 8*D


Just like in 1996 and 1997 when all the people were DVRing and watching Youtube!


----------



## Choke2Death

I don't think the internet excuse can work anymore. Streams and all that technological shit has been around for years now (7 at least) and yet the amount of money made off fans becomes lower and lower with each passing year. The show just sucks, I don't blame one person in specific, it's just uninteresting and horrible.

I wonder how low they can set the bar for ratings before they realize it's time to change something. A while back, 3.0 was considered 'panic zone' and now it seems like it's a miracle if the ratings reach that area.

With all that said, I have to laugh at Punk's bitterness in regards to the horrible ratings. Like most people that defend him, his response is "Why do you care?", which means no excuses.


----------



## Phil_Mc_90

The ratings drop is definitely down to the poorness of the current product, this week is probably the first time in about 18months I haven't watched the show and just read the results because I can't justify to myself sitting through it, if someone like me who loves wrestling is doing that then of course the casual fans will be doing it aswell

the most alarming thing I think for WWE though is the viewership falling in the second hour, this blows away all the excuses of DVR, internet etc and shows that people just aren't interested in the show


----------



## Loudness

Choke2Death said:


> I don't think the internet excuse can work anymore. Streams and all that technological shit has been around for years now (7 at least) and yet the amount of money made off fans becomes lower and lower with each passing year. The show just sucks, I don't blame one person in specific, it's just uninteresting and horrible.
> 
> I wonder how low they can set the bar for ratings before they realize it's time to change something. A while back, 3.0 was considered 'panic zone' and now it seems like it's a miracle if the ratings reach that area.
> 
> With all that said, I have to laugh at Punk's bitterness in regards to the horrible ratings. Like most people that defend him, his response is "Why do you care?", which means no excuses.


The ironic part is that despite the internet streams and DVR, general TV viewership is MUCH higher than it was in the past, there's just far more people into medias than in the past as a whole. For example during the AE, a 5.0 meant 5million viewers, nowadays a 3.5 means around the same number of viewers on mondays which means that there's more people watching TV overall. You can say that DVRs and youtube affect all TV shows equally, so it creates an even playing field, you can't really make those excuses for WWE but pretend like other shows aren't affected by it. 

I'm a regular viewer and the show is simply not interesting, the only thing that gets my interest is the Bryan/Punk/Kane storyline ( the only interesting storyline atm) and the ME and even that is getting my attention for all the wrong reasons. I lold how Ziggler went from becoming a badass one week to returning to the showoff gimmick on Monday for no reason, way to drop the ball WWE. VERY disappointing character progression, I guess WWE have no idea what to do with the poor guy now, I actually got slightly pissed at this since I wanted to see intense Ziggler more.


----------



## King_Of_This_World

The internet/streaming/downloading/torrents have been around for nearly a decade now, its not an excuse that can be used.

The product is poor and people are simply turning off.

Wrestling just isn't hot anymore, people are not interested. TNA has exactly the same problems, and impact has been mostly rather good in 2012.


----------



## just1988

King_Of_This_World said:


> The internet/streaming/downloading/torrents have been around for nearly a decade now, its not an excuse that can be used.
> 
> The product is poor and people are simply turning off.
> 
> Wrestling just isn't hot anymore, people are not interested. TNA has exactly the same problems, and impact has been mostly rather good in 2012.


It's still a valid excuse for the poor ratings because there's a whole generation of fans who are learning to watch the shows online from the comfort of wherever they want. Rather than sit and watch the shows on television.


----------



## Choke2Death

When exactly did streams start to exist? I first got internet back in 2005 (Survivor Series time) and found streams here and there but the ones I used (for other things as I wasn't into wrestling then) were low quality. Did they exist before 2005?

And I agree with wrestling simply losing popularity. It seems to have become less and less popular since 2002 when they became WWE and Austin/Rock stopped being around all that much. Then the PG rating drove away even more traditional fans, evidenced by the (lack of) Cena hate that was toned down immensely compared to 2006 and 2007.


----------



## Rock316AE

Torrents, Streams etc were all there when RAW was drawing 3.5-4.0 on a weekly basis just in 2009. So this is not even worth discussion. The people who aren't able to watch on TV, aren't going to affect the number anyway. It's just the worst roster of all time with a bunch of horrible, boring, uncharismatic, unappealing performers in a stale environment. Not that hard to figure. 

Imagine a tremendous talent like Bully Ray on RAW? working with big crowds? so much potential. Bully Ray vs Randy Orton for a big PPV would have been amazing.


----------



## Bob the Jobber

Rock316AE said:


> Imagine a tremendous talent like Bully Ray on RAW? working with big crowds? so much potential. Bully Ray vs Randy Orton for a big PPV would have been amazing.


Bully Ray wouldn't be Bully Ray in this WWE. His promos would be less intense so as to not scare the kids and he'd have to resort to typical crappy chickenshit heel tactics.


----------



## Marv95

Streams existed in 2006-2007 and Raw ratings were in the 4s. It's NOT an excuse especially when the 2nd hour rating is down from the first. Didn't the Super Bowl get a 47.8 rating? Streams a-plenty back in February. 

The product just sucks. It's too childish, bland and boring. The presentation is sterile. The format is too formulaic. The booking is absolutely moronic. Storylines are dropped and forgotten for no good reason. There's too much filler and pointless comedy. The same people(Cena) are always the focal point of the show. The star-power isn't there. The wrestlers aren't trying hard enough. It needs an overhaul because the ratings aren't going to jump to a 5 overnight.


----------



## JasonLives

Despite the falling rating im still impressed that they are still drawing somewhat decent crowds. Its not like back in 2004 when not even guys like Triple H, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, Goldberg, Brock Lesnar, Kurt Angle etc couldnt get people to come to the arena and watch them wrestle.


----------



## Loudness

Bob the Jobber said:


> Bully Ray wouldn't be Bully Ray in this WWE. His promos would be less intense so as to not scare the kids and he'd have to resort to typical crappy chickenshit heel tactics.


Probably, WWE have lost the art of building personalities that are actually hateable. Guys like Kevin Steen and Bully Ray would get extremely stripped down and useless versions of their characters, fed to Cena who cuts smiling promos and doesn't take them seriously, then get released for "not getting over".


----------



## Bob the Jobber

Loudness said:


> Probably, WWE have lost the art of building personalities that are actually hateable. Guys like Kevin Steen and Bully Ray would get extremely stripped down and useless versions of their characters, fed to Cena who cuts smiling promos and doesn't take them seriously, then get released for "not getting over".


Hell, they couldn't even do Lesnar right. That entire storyline wrote itself and they managed to even fuck it up.


----------



## Choke2Death

JasonLives said:


> Despite the falling rating im still impressed that they are still drawing somewhat decent crowds. Its not like back in 2004 when not even guys like Triple H, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, Goldberg, Brock Lesnar, Kurt Angle etc couldnt get people to come to the arena and watch them wrestle.


I think the very same people that boycotted that period would probably cry for those days to come back after seeing what WWE has become today.


----------



## Hemen

JasonLives said:


> Despite the falling rating im still impressed that they are still drawing somewhat decent crowds. Its not like back in 2004 when not even guys like Triple H, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, Goldberg, Brock Lesnar, Kurt Angle etc couldnt get people to come to the arena and watch them wrestle.


Brock Lesnar was not for wwe for the whole year so he dosent really count.

But the wrestlemania 20 had 200 00 more buyrates than the wrestlemania before where Lesnar mainevented. 

So at least Lesnar was a draw.

But he wasnt that big of a draw at that time, because the next wrestlemania with Batsta (OMG) drew 700-800 more buyrates. 

But i am sure that if Lesnar didnt leave and he were the top guy now instead of Cena. He would have reached his potential and would draw more than Cena ever will.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Ratings and shit. TEH QTER HOUR BREAKDOWN!

Wrestling Observer



> Raw on 6/4 did a 2.92 rating and 4.28 million viewers. The show was only fifth for the night on cable. The biggest competition was the Oklahoma City Thunder vs. San Antonio Spurs NBA playoff semifinal head-to-head which did a 6.32 rating and 8.51 million viewers. Game three of the Stanley Cup finals, on NBC Sports (formerly Versus) did a 1.5 rating and 1.74 million viewers, which for a comparison is what Urijah Faber and Jens Pulver were doing on that station on a worse night of the week a few years back. An interesting note regarding Memorial Day and this week is that during the Raw hours on Memorial Day there were 71.11 million U.S. homes watching television. On 6/4, there were 71.23 million, or almost identical, so it not being Memorial Day isn’t why the rating was up. It was a combination of no Hatfields & McCoys and perhaps a show where John Cena was plugged heavily, although the rating was at the low end of the usual average.
> 
> As far as demos went, the show did 2.5 in Boys 12-17 (up 14%), 2.4 in Males 18-49 (same as last week), 0.9 in Girls 12-17 (up 50%) and 1.2 in Girls 18-49 (up 20%). That’s the difference between Cena and non-Cena, is Cena draws girls at a level nobody else on Raw does. The male skew was 67.8%
> 
> As far as ratings pattern, there was a lot that wasn’t good. The show started out strong for the Cena promo doing a 3.27 first quarter, but it dropped from there and never came back. What makes this bad is that this was a show booked for train wreck ratings, in the sense the whole thing was to build up Cena getting his hands on Michael Cole. Coming off the low rating, they did little for the PPV and just tried to get Cena all over the show and do all the tricks like the heel in his underwear being humiliated. It wasn’t to build programs but just to get that "we can’t turn away from this" mentality that has in the past been effective in drawing ratings. But it didn’t appear to work this time. The overrun with Cena vs. Cole, that they had built the whole show for, ended up being weak. In the segment-by-segment, Cole trying to get out of the match talking to Laurinaitis and the beginning of Sheamus vs. Dolph Ziggler lost 753,000 viewers, which is awful and points to the Cole thing not working this time. Can’t say much for Sheamus and Ziggler either. Although the finish of their match, the post-match beatdown by Alberto Del Rio, and Sin Cara vs. Hunico gained 302,000 viewers. Ryback’s debut on Raw in the handicap match lost 298,000 viewers. C.M. Punk vs. Kane in the 10 p.m. hour gained 340,000. The first part of the match did a 2.93 quarter and the finish got up to a 3.02. It’s a little less than an average gain for that slot but better than Punk has been doing of late. Kofi Kingston & R-Truth vs. Tyler Reks & Curt Hawkins lost 646,000 viewers. John Cena vs. Tensai gained 514,000 viewers, which is super strong for the 10:45 p.m. quarter. And Cena vs. Cole gained 299,000 viewers, which is weak for the overrun, but perhaps misleading in the sense the people who usually come in for the overrun came back early I guess due to Cena being in a match. But the overrun only did a 3.14 quarter.
> 
> By demo, this was the Cena gain at the end. Teenage boys went from 2.2 to 2.7. 18-49 men from 2.0 to 2.5. Teenage girls went from 0.8 to 1.3 and 18-49 women from 1.0 to 1.3.


----------



## Therapy

HAHA.. Failure all around.. Good writing WWE..


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Lol I guess no millions for Cole. Anyways the CM Punk vs Kane match actually was interesting especially towards the end when you had AJ and Bryan interfere, which explain why it did better than usual and considering a commerical break was in between the match. Sin Cara is like the new Rey Mysterio and I am not surprised he gained since more kids probably watched this episode of RAW while the men watched the play-offs. Rybacks debut didn't do so well. I am shocked Tensai drew viewers with Cena, but like I said kids wanting to see Cenas 1 week return lol probably caused that viewer gain.

But overall nothing to be excited over.


----------



## Amuroray

Cmpunk interesting? lol.

The biggest thing he been in:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzVE9HKAtNM

5:09


----------



## Medo

*I realy don't care about this whole ratings thing, never had but Punk need to shut his mouth and don't compare himself to Shawn The Great Michaels.*


----------



## Hazaq

Cole's got the go away heat on him. Thats not going to draw viewers.


----------



## kokepepsi

*LAST WEEKS NUMBERS FOR MEMORIAL DAY *
Segment Breakdown



> In the segment-by-segment, Alberto Del Rio vs. Santino Marella lost 733,000 viewers, which is awful for that spot in the show, doing a 2.52 rating (second lowest quarter hour on a regular non-holiday Raw show of the last 14 years, ahead of only a 2.47 quarter on the 9/12 show for a Kofi Kingston vs. Miz match).
> 
> Kingston & R-Truth defending the tag titles against Dolph Ziggler & Jack Swagger gained 67,000 viewers.
> 
> A John Laurinaitis interview with C.M. Punk coming out talking the video game gained 356,000 viewers.
> 
> Punk vs. Daniel Bryan lost 30,000 viewers to a 2.79 quarter in the 10 p.m. segment which is terrible for that point in the show.
> 
> The Punk-Bryan post-match with Kane and Christian vs. The Miz lost 13,000 viewers.
> 
> A backstage skit with Laurinaitis, Eve Torres, David Otunga and Teddy Long, a Miz interview and the Memorial Day video with Cena lost 342,000 viewers to a 2.53 quarter.
> 
> Sheamus vs. Otunga gained 116,000 viewers.
> 
> And the final segment where Big Show destroyed Brodus Clay, Kingston and R-Truth gained 436,000 viewers and did a 2.91 overrun.


----------



## Choke2Death

Cena's military ass kissing lost viewers. YES! YES! YES!


----------



## The-Rock-Says

So overall the ending gained 700k. Which is good.

The product is pretty dire at the moment and I wished the number would of been lower.


----------



## Hazaq

The-Rock-Says said:


> So overall the ending gained 700k. Which is good.
> 
> The product is pretty dire at the moment and *I wished the number would of been lower.*


What good would that do? Its still going to be cena all over the show.


----------



## D.M.N.

Memorial Day Breakdown:

Q1 - 3.03 rating / 4.35 million
Q2 - 2.52 rating / 3.61 million
Q3 - 2.56 rating / 3.68 million
Q4 - 2.81 rating / 4.04 million
Q5 - 2.79 rating / 4.01 million
Q6 - 2.77 rating / 3.99 million
Q7 - 2.53 rating / 3.65 million
Q8 - 2.61 rating / 3.77 million
Overrun - 2.91 rating / 4.20 million

Evil me was hoping that Q1 was under a 3.0 rating, but it just scraped above it. Extremely bad breakdown though. I don't think Punk did too badly - after all he did recover half of the loss from Q1 in Q4, which stabilised things a bit before another plummet in Q7.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

So Punk v Bryan only lost 30,000. Yeah, that's not good for a top hour segment, but the reports last week made it sound a lot more disastrous. Also, maybe it isn't a good idea to have an unimportant match in the fifth quarter. I don't think a lot of casuals care about throw away matches with little build, especially if they saw them several times in the past few months.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Again, a Punk segment does a good number, but not a Punk match. A worthless cover unveiling did a good number, but people don't seem to care about Punk/Bryan. I don't blame them, I don't either. I want this feud to end desperately. Get Punk doing something relevant again. Punk/Ace segments have always done really good numbers in the past though, so it's no surprise it popped a good gain. But damn, what a shitty breakdown for that show.


----------



## Snothlisberger

They need to put Punk and Bryan in promo segments, let them talk on the mic and see what kind of rating that gets. People seem to tune in when Punk has a mic but don't care much for his matches. I can agree with that. He is boring to watch in the ring lots of the time. Save his matches with Bryan for PPVs as they are always PPV quality


----------



## hazuki

30,000 only? That's not too disastrous. The video game segment was really good; only highlight for me that episode.


----------



## Kabraxal

30000 is pretty damn good given how many bloody commercial breaks there were... seriously, I love Bryan/Punk but I hate commercials enough that it shakes from being able to actually watch the match. Don't interrupt matches damn it!


----------



## Therapy

Kabraxal said:


> 30000 is pretty damn good given how many bloody commercial breaks there were... seriously, I love Bryan/Punk but I hate commercials enough that it shakes from being able to actually watch the match. Don't interrupt matches damn it!


They have gotten so sloppy with the commercials. This past RAW was the worst when they started a match during the commercials. It amazes me they don't understand how ratings are going down with sloppy production work like that. (among everything else)


----------



## Rock316AE

Amazing how Ace is gaining big on his segments even on random timeslots, people are interested in him. It's also obvious that they send Kane to the feud just so he can save the quarters and he did a decent job so far. Punk/Bryan match did horrendous, and the end of the match lost more but that's not surprising.

Cena/Albert/Cole doing 800k gain is good. And like I predicted before, only the great Big Show promo did over 3.0. 

They need to do a Vince/Ace/Show/Cena segment to close RAW next week, I think they can do bigger buyrate than CP last year for Show's work alone, if they're closing with a strong angle, they can do it.


----------



## Brye

I can't imagine Capitol Punishment's numbers from last year being good at all. There was like no build to anything, those Obama promos were ridiculous and just the quality of the PPV was pretty subpar.


----------



## Rock316AE

The Obama segments were brutal, but they did the Truth/Cena feud when it was fresh, did 180k if I remember correctly.


----------



## deadmau

Punk and Bryan can't draw even if their lives depends on that.


----------



## Brye

^ I heard they're good art students, liar.

God, Truth from April to around November was so good. Especially those first few weeks, he was epic.

The Confederacy promo was one of the funniest things I've ever seen in WWE.


----------



## Snothlisberger

deadmau said:


> Punk and Bryan can't draw even if their lives depends on that.


Wow, good one.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

AJ = ratingz?


----------



## mblonde09

Rock316AE said:


> Amazing how Ace is gaining big on his segments even on random timeslots, people are interested in him. It's also obvious that they send Kane to the feud just so he can save the quarters and he did a decent job so far. Punk/Bryan match did horrendous, and the end of the match lost more but that's not surprising.
> 
> Cena/Albert/Cole doing 800k gain is good. And like I predicted before, only the great Big Show promo did over 3.0.
> 
> They need to do a Vince/Ace/Show/Cena segment to close RAW next week, I think they can do bigger buyrate than CP last year for Show's work alone, if they're closing with a strong angle, they can do it.


You know, it's getting to the point now, when I just look at your posts and laugh. You completely forget to mention that Punk was in the segment with Lauranaitis that gained and you conveniently miss out the fact that a later Lauranaitis segment lost 300,000 odd viewers. Then you say Punk/Bryan did horrendously, when it only lost 30,000. You also give the credit solely to Kane for gaining viewers, even though Punk was in the match too. In all my years of posting on wrestling forums, I've never encountered anyone like you... your total bias and sheer ignorance is unbelievable.


----------



## Da Silva

mblonde09 said:


> You know, it's getting to the point now, when I just look at your posts and laugh. You completely forget to mention that Punk was in the segment with Lauranaitis that gained and you conveniently miss out the fact that a later Lauranaitis segment lost 300,000 odd viewers. Then you say Punk/Bryan did horrendously, when it only lost 30,000. You also give the credit solely to Kane for gaining viewers, even though Punk was in the match too. In all my years of posting on wrestling forums, I've never encountered anyone like you... your total bias and ignorance is unbelievable.


Why feed the troll?


----------



## mblonde09

Da Silva said:


> Why feed the troll?


I try not to but I can't help myself. However, from now on I've decided I'm going to treat his posts with the disdain they deserve. I find most of his posts amuse me anyway, so from now on, I'll just view them as exactly what they are... a joke.


----------



## YimYac

deadmau said:


> Punk and Bryan can't draw even if their lives depends on that.


http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2012/0607/553260/john-cena/

Ryback lost 300k viewers

Punk/Bryan/Kane gained 340k

Nice try


----------



## Fanboi101

YimYac said:


> http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2012/0607/553260/john-cena/
> 
> Ryback lost 300k viewers
> 
> Punk/Bryan/Kane gained 340k
> 
> Nice try


umm if you read your link, it basically says that a number that is less than average is a good number for Punk, which suggests that he can't draw. 

"The first part of the match did a 2.93 rating while the finish got up to a 3.02 quarter rating. This is a little less than average for that timeslot but better than what Punk has been drawing as of late."


----------



## YimYac

Fanboi101 said:


> umm if you read your link, it basically says that a number that is less than average is a good number for Punk, which suggests that he can't draw.
> 
> "The first part of the match did a 2.93 rating while the finish got up to a 3.02 quarter rating. This is a little less than average for that timeslot but better than what Punk has been drawing as of late."


My point is they still drew better than Ryback. Rocky won't admit that though.


----------



## Rock316AE

Nothing to admit here because it's not true. Random timeslots and top of the hour/main event, completely different standards. If you want to compare something, last time Punk wrestled in a random timeslot like Ryback this week, he lost 600k and 800k.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Didn't Punk gain almost 400k in a random slot last week? Oh wait of course, all of the credit for that goes to Johnny Ace. My mistake.


----------



## JamesCurtis24

To be honest, I only change the channel if it's a match involving NXT wrestlers or womans match. If it's a womans match I usually have enough time to flip to sportscentre and check the score of a game before the match ends....


----------



## Punked Up

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Didn't Punk gain almost 400k in a random slot last week? Oh wait of course, all of the credit for that goes to Johnny Ace. My mistake.


Yep, he gained 400k in the same slot as Ryback.


----------



## Snothlisberger

Da Silva said:


> Why feed the troll?


He's not a troll. He believes everything he writes. He twists facts to follow his agenda but he doesn't intentionally try to piss people off, which is what a troll is. He is hilariously bias but not a troll.


----------



## JasonLives

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Didn't Punk gain almost 400k in a random slot last week? Oh wait of course, all of the credit for that goes to Johnny Ace. My mistake.


Yep, but of course if that segment had lost viewers people would have blamed Punk for it and not Johnny 

There is one telling sign by this weeks quarters. The major loses Sheamus/Dolph, Ryback Squash, Tag Title match all had 2 commercial breaks in their quarters. 
That hurts the rating quite a bit. Have no idea why they never mention that in their "reports".


----------



## D.M.N.

Copying this in here for future reference, will do breakdown later:



> The June 4th WWE RAW Supershow scored a 2.92 cable rating with 4.28 million viewers. The show did a 2.5 rating in Male Teens (up 14%), a 2.4 in Males 18-49 (same as previous week), a 0.9 in Female Teens (up 50%) and a 1.2 rating in Females 18-49 (up 20%). This was the week that WWE brought John Cena back and Cena draws females at a level nobody else does on RAW.
> 
> The show started out strong with Cena's promo doing a 3.27 quarter rating. Things went down from there and never got back up. Cole trying to get out of the match backstage and the beginning of Sheamus vs. Dolph Ziggler lost 753,000 viewers, a bad sign. The finish of their match and the attack from Alberto Del Rio plus Sin Cara vs. Hunico gained 302,000 viewers.
> 
> Ryback's RAW debut against two local wrestlers lost 298,000 viewers. Kane vs. CM Punk in the 10pm timeslot gained 340,000 viewers. The first part of the match did a 2.93 rating while the finish got up to a 3.02 quarter rating. This is a little less than average for that timeslot but better than what Punk has been drawing as of late.
> 
> Kofi Kingston and R-Truth vs. Curt Hawkins and Tyler Reks lost 646,000 viewers and John Cena vs. Tensai gained 514,000 viewers, which is very strong for the 10:45pm quarter. Cena vs. Michael Cole gained 299,000 viewers for a 3.14 rating in the overrun, which is a weak gain for the end of the show.
> 
> For the main event, Male Teens went from a 2.2 rating to a 2.7, Males 18-49 went from a 2.0 to a 2.5, Female Teens went from a 0.8 to a 1.3 rating and Females 18-49 went from a 1.0 to a 1.3.


----------



## Xander45

So what you're saying is people heard the main event was going to be Cole vs Cena and 750 thousand of them decided to change the channel.

Ouch.


----------



## Amazing_Cult

Xander45 said:


> So what you're saying is people heard the main event was going to be Cole vs Cena and 750 thousand of them decided to change the channel.
> 
> Ouch.


I hope you aren't -too- surprised.

Then again, I honestly thought the main-event would lose viewers; however, who knew KofiTruth vs Reks and Hawkins would make that many people tune out?

Thats a bigger ouch, imo.


----------



## THANOS

Amazing_Cult said:


> I hope you aren't -too- surprised.
> 
> Then again, I honestly thought the main-event would lose viewers; however, who knew KofiTruth vs Reks and Hawkins would make that many people tune out?
> 
> Thats a bigger ouch, imo.


They are barely ever featured in anything prominent and have zero chances to develop their characters so no one is invested into them. It's too bad for those guys though because they all work really hard and should be given better material, instead of aimlessly wrestling for no reason every couple weeks.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

Looks like Cena seems to be the only draw


----------



## D.M.N.

Breakdown:

Q1 - 3.27 rating / 4.81 million
Q2 - 2.76 rating / 4.06 million
Q3 - 2.97 rating / 4.36 million
Q4 - 2.76 rating / 4.06 million
Q5 - 2.93 rating / 4.28 million
Q6 - 3.02 rating / 4.41 million
Q7 - 2.58 rating / 3.76 million
Q8 - 2.93 rating / 4.28 million
Overrun - 3.14 rating / 4.57 million

Not sure how long Sin Cara was in Q3, but nice rise for when he was in action there. The only quarter that flopped was Q7. Although the fact that Cena/Cole did well is embarrassing.


----------



## rizzotherat

D.M.N. said:


> Breakdown:
> 
> Q1 - 3.27 rating / 4.81 million
> Q2 - 2.76 rating / 4.06 million
> Q3 - 2.97 rating / 4.36 million
> Q4 - 2.76 rating / 4.06 million
> Q5 - 2.93 rating / 4.28 million
> Q6 - 3.02 rating / 4.41 million
> Q7 - 2.58 rating / 3.76 million
> Q8 - 2.93 rating / 4.28 million
> Overrun - 3.14 rating / 4.57 million
> 
> Not sure how long Sin Cara was in Q3, but nice rise for when he was in action there. The only quarter that flopped was Q7. Although the fact that Cena/Cole did well is embarrassing.


If you knew what you were talking about you would know Cole/Cena didnt do well at all


----------



## HHH - The King

rizzotherat said:


> If you knew what you were talking about you would know Cole/Cena didnt do well at all


Tensai/Cena did well but the advertised match was Cole/Cena throughout the show, so technically I think he is right.


----------



## hazuki

I was one of those people who changed the channel during Cena/Cole. Just couldn't sit through. Glad too see Punk did some solid numbers for last week.


----------



## Starbuck

It's crazy to think that Raw getting between 3.0 and 3.3 has come to be considered good. This isn't a knock on anybody here, just an observation. By the time these 3 hour Raw's roll along, I think that will quickly change to 2.7 - 3.0 tbh.


----------



## bigdog40

Starbuck said:


> It's crazy to think that Raw getting between 3.0 and 3.3 has come to be considered good. This isn't a knock on anybody here, just an observation. By the time these 3 hour Raw's roll along, I think that will quickly change to 2.7 - 3.0 tbh.




Totally different landscape TV wise now to the point where ratings are irrelavant.


----------



## Starbuck

bigdog40 said:


> Totally different landscape TV wise now to the point where ratings are irrelavant.


They aren't irrelevant. If they were irrelevant they wouldn't bring so much money and be such a lucrative business. And I'm not even talking about ratings now compared to the AE if that's what you're referencing with the different landscape comment. In the past few years alone things have gone from 3.0 being a panic station rating to now being good. When you disregard everything else, that's the simple reality.


----------



## bigdog40

Starbuck said:


> They aren't irrelevant. If they were irrelevant they wouldn't bring so much money and be such a lucrative business. And I'm not even talking about ratings now compared to the AE if that's what you're referencing with the different landscape comment. In the past few years alone things have gone from 3.0 being a panic station rating to now being good. When you disregard everything else, that's the simple reality.





WWE doesn't get their money through ratings though.


----------



## Rock316AE

No RATINGS, no TV deals, no biggest revenue = no terrible WWE shows for us to watch. Ratings are everything. Nothing is more important.


----------



## Starbuck

bigdog40 said:


> WWE doesn't get their money through ratings though.


Of course they do. Everything in WWE stems from their television product. Without it they have no platform to promote their shows and stars.


----------



## Da Silva

RAW is by far USA networks biggest show, I think it can afford to lose a few viewers without being canceled.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

does anybody know how much the season finallys of GoT and Mad Men drew?


----------



## Choke2Death

Rock316AE said:


> No RATINGS, no TV deals, no biggest revenue = no terrible WWE shows for us to watch. Ratings are everything. Nothing is more important.


Exactly.

"Ratings are irrelevant" is such a cop out for the product being shit. If the ratings go further down, that means there's an even smaller audience that you can reach out to with your TV product which makes revenues go lower and lower down as nobody has been given a reason to buy PPVs or beware of whatever else the product is up to including DVD releases and merchandise. And how else will they make money with that?

It's terrible that 3.0 has gone from being the panic zone to the number they try to reach.


----------



## Vyed

Hour 1 : 3.904m , Adult 18-49 - 1.3
Hour 2 : 4.882m (Last Week : 4.322m), Adult 18-49 - 1.8
Hour 3 : 5.080m (Last Week : 4.247m), Adult 18-49 - 1.9

RAW topped the night. 

Third(second) hour went over 5 million. :yes:yes


----------



## DesolationRow

Vince McMahon + Big Johnny = Ratings... Er, rather... Viewers...


----------



## Rock316AE

H1 - 3.904
H2 - 4.882
H3 - 5.080

vince3:vince2 = Still THE BOSS. Maybe we got the first 4.0 in the Show/Vince/Ace/Cena segment since November 2011.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

thats good news actually


----------



## mblonde09

Good numbers.



WallofShame said:


> He's not a troll. He believes everything he writes. He twists facts to follow his agenda *but he doesn't intentionally try to piss people off*, which is what a troll is. He is hilariously bias but not a troll.


Do you honestly think he's not intentionally trying to piss the Punk and Bryan marks off, with all that "indy, vanilla-midget, no charisma, hacks" nonsense he keeps regurgitating every chance he gets? Of course he is - you can't be that naive, to think otherwise.


----------



## Felpent

Vyed said:


> Hour 1 : 3.904m , Adult 18-49 - 1.3
> Hour 2 : 4.882m (Last Week : 4.322m), Adult 18-49 - 1.8
> Hour 3 : 5.080m (Last Week : 4.247m), Adult 18-49 - 1.9
> 
> RAW topped the night.
> 
> Third(second) hour went over 5 million. :yes:yes


The final segment+ overrun should have gained over a million.


----------



## A-C-P

Good # for a good show pretty much says it all


----------



## DesolationRow

The show was well-booked. 

Opening with Vince and Johnny counteracted some of the many people who doubtless forgot about the first hour beginning an hour early.

Punk has proven time and time again in the last six months that people like him at the top of the 9:00 hour, whether it's been promos with Jericho, Laurinaitis or Bryan or wrestling Bryan or Mark Henry, etceteras.

Top of the third hour with Kofi/Show and concluding with Vince/Johnny/Show/Cena with all of the teasing of Vince coming to his decision at night's end put it over the top.


----------



## Choke2Death

Last night was a better show than anything else they've produced in the last 5 weeks so I can't say I'm not happy about the rising numbers. The boss finally brought back some of the entertainment that had been ENTIRELY missing for over a month now.


----------



## hazuki

Well deserved!


----------



## Starbuck

Vyed said:


> Hour 1 : 3.904m , Adult 18-49 - 1.3
> Hour 2 : 4.882m (Last Week : 4.322m), Adult 18-49 - 1.8
> Hour 3 : 5.080m (Last Week : 4.247m), Adult 18-49 - 1.9
> 
> RAW topped the night.
> 
> Third(second) hour went over 5 million. :yes:yes


DAT VINNIE MAC. The boss brings teh ratingz. That's a pretty serious jump from what they've been doing recently, like really serious lol. It was also a really fun show so well deserved imo.


----------



## Rock316AE

RAW was still horrible for the majority of the show, it's just Vince's presence made it feel more bearable than usual. Besides Vince and the final segment, RAW was the usual boring concept with Metal roster. The show felt like 10 hours long. I still can't believe that they're going 3 hours every week. As for the position, the 9pm will do the usual million viewers gain for all the people who weren't watching the first hour and Show/Vince/Cena/Ace probably did a big number. 

Vince on TV every week would be awesome, but at the same time, terrible because he's exposing his horrendous roster so much with his performance.


----------



## Starbuck

Rock316AE said:


> RAW was still horrible for the majority of the show, it's just Vince's presence made it feel more bearable than usual. Besides Vince and the final segment, RAW was the usual boring concept with *Metal roster*. The show felt like 10 hours long. I still can't believe that they're going 3 hours every week. As for the position, the 9pm will do the usual million viewers gain for all the people who weren't watching the first hour and Show/Vince/Cena/Ace probably did a big number.
> 
> Vince on TV every week would be awesome, but at the same time, terrible because he's exposing his horrendous roster so much with his performance.


:lmao :lmao :lmao Alright, this fucking killed me lol. Not even the Heat level roster but Metal? I just spat out my water at that one lol.


----------



## The GOAT One

As predicted Ziggler pulls in the ratings :vince3


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Vince.

End of


----------



## Rock316AE

THE BOSS show drew 3.5 in the regular two hours. That's special 1998 Vince McMahon affect, the crowd at NWO need to chant "YOU STILL GOT IT" from the start of the show.


----------



## Jammy

They're obviously preparing for the summer angle. 
If they don't produce something fast the novelty of Vince will fade out.
Hopefully their current main programs aka Love quadrangle and Cena will gain enough momentum to sustain these numbers.
There was good buzz generated for the Punk/Bryan/Kane/AJ program this week. Maybe that will be reflected next week.
Cena cant (shouldn't) be relied upon for every show, or every segment of the show lol.
Edit: No need to be surprised or even talk about Vince drawing viewers. He's one of the most known and established characters in the industry, him returning would obviously gain a lot. I'm surprised it didn't gain more.


----------



## Starbuck

*Dammit roster! Don't you see how I draw ratings? Don't you see my herculean physique? This is what the WWE Universe wants to see dammit! All of you need to go to the fucking gym and hit the weights, you might want to try a protein shake while you're at it dammit! None of you can draw for my television show because you're all shit. That's it, you're ALL FUCKING FIRRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEDDDDDD. FIRED! ALL OF YOU! Now fuck off outta my company. Raw is now McMahon Night Raw. Come on Paul, lets show these fucking jobbers how its done......you can come too Cena. Lets go boys. Time for brunch. *


----------



## dxbender

3 hour raw ratings will sick only cause of the 1st hour. Don't know if there'll be anything WWE can ever do to make people watch that first hour. People say "WWE is PG, so little kids will watch earlier". Ratings obviously prove that wrong. It also proves just how much fans WWE has, but how much of them watch other shows. 1M difference from 8-9pm! There weren't new episodes of any good show that I can think of?

Though WWE gets to brag about Raw being watched by more people than the stanley cup finals


----------



## dxbender

Something else about the ratings....Hopefully people realize that ratings went up cause of a great overall show, not cause of 1-2 people, the entire show was great, so people stuck around and watched it.

Proving yet again how single people don't draw drastic ratings, the overall show does.


----------



## Amazing_Cult

dxbender said:


> 3 hour raw ratings will sick only cause of the 1st hour. Don't know if there'll be anything WWE can ever do to make people watch that first hour. People say "WWE is PG, so little kids will watch earlier". Ratings obviously prove that wrong. It also proves just how much fans WWE has, but how much of them watch other shows. 1M difference from 8-9pm! There weren't new episodes of any good show that I can think of?
> 
> *Though WWE gets to brag about Raw being watched by more people than the stanley cup finals*


:l

Thats sad, but you are probably right. Then again, just about anyone can get more viewers than American hockey, or hockey in general.


----------



## bboy

strange how cena is back on raw and ratings improve but when he is not ratings decline. Also vince is another factor.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

bboy it was all VINCE. DAMNIT


----------



## Snothlisberger

Kofi Draws!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :side:


----------



## Vyed

Judging from the numbers, the obvious interest in Cena/Show build(which has been great) and the involvement of Vince, gimmick PPV etc.. makes me think No way out is gonna do really good buys this year. Possibly outdo last year's Capitol punishment? 

The card is really weak as for match quality is concerned, though. doubt triple threat is gonna be good, Cena/Show is going to be bad, Christian struggles to get babyface reaction so thats not good for cody. Ziggler/Sheamus will probably end up the match of the night.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

AJ = RATINGS!

AJ KISSING KANE = SUPAAAAA RATINGZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Rock316AE

I expected an increase but damn Vince, 3.5, still the master.


----------



## Brye

Starbuck said:


> *Dammit roster! Don't you see how I draw ratings? Don't you see my herculean physique? This is what the WWE Universe wants to see dammit! All of you need to go to the fucking gym and hit the weights, you might want to try a protein shake while you're at it dammit! None of you can draw for my television show because you're all shit. That's it, you're ALL FUCKING FIRRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEDDDDDD. FIRED! ALL OF YOU! Now fuck off outta my company. Raw is now McMahon Night Raw. Come on Paul, lets show these fucking jobbers how its done......you can come too Cena. Lets go boys. Time for brunch. *


:lmao

I'd seriously consider TNA the GOAT company if that ever happened.

Vince's stuff was good but the 4-way was better, imo. Obviously not going to do better in THE NUMBERS but it's still a more entertaining part of the show for me.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> *Dammit roster! Don't you see how I draw ratings? Don't you see my herculean physique? This is what the WWE Universe wants to see dammit! All of you need to go to the fucking gym and hit the weights, you might want to try a protein shake while you're at it dammit! None of you can draw for my television show because you're all shit. That's it, you're ALL FUCKING FIRRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEDDDDDD. FIRED! ALL OF YOU! Now fuck off outta my company. Raw is now McMahon Night Raw. Come on Paul, lets show these fucking jobbers how its done......you can come too Cena. Lets go boys. Time for brunch. *


:lmao

Completely forgot about the brunch group and had an even bigger laugh about it once I remembered.


----------



## WTFWWE

Vyed said:


> Judging from the numbers, the obvious interest in Cena/Show build(which has been great) and the involvement of Vince, gimmick PPV etc.. makes me think No way out is gonna do really good buys this year. Possibly outdo last year's Capitol punishment?



WHAT? lol the people didn't tune in for that at all the RAW shows since the feud have DECREASED! 2.7 and 2.9 the only reason it got a good rating was Mcmahon if he wasn't advertised then it would have been a 2.9 again at most. No Way Out will not do good.


----------



## Punkholic

bboy said:


> strange how cena is back on raw and ratings improve but when he is not ratings decline. Also vince is another factor.


Strange how there were no NBA playoffs games yesterday and the ratings improved.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Good rating, plus there was no NBA play-offs so that might have gave WWE a boost in the target demo. I for once enjoyed the show last night, Vince was a welcoming change last night and the show progressed nicely, it was not a phenomenal show at all, but better than what we endured the last few weeks.


----------



## King_Of_This_World

Its pretty worrying when the 65 year old boss of the company can draw bigger ratings than any of his actual wrestlers.


----------



## Brye

King_Of_This_World said:


> Its pretty worrying when the 65 year old boss of the company can draw bigger ratings than any of his actual wrestlers.


He's one of the best characters in wrestling history, to be fair.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

McMahon is a legend in his own right.


----------



## Jammy

King_Of_This_World said:


> Its pretty worrying when the 65 year old boss of the company can draw bigger ratings than any of his actual wrestlers.


That isn't worrying, nor surprising. He's one the most known people in the business. He's one of the biggest draws in wrestling. Frankly, if a superstar can draw more than him, we would have our next Austin.


----------



## kokepepsi

LOL at the guy who talked crap about me when I said the ratings would go up because of all the people asking for streams and shit.

IDIOT

Breakdown should be interesting.


----------



## TheWFEffect

Starbuck said:


> *Dammit roster! Don't you see how I draw ratings? Don't you see my herculean physique? This is what the WWE Universe wants to see dammit! All of you need to go to the fucking gym and hit the weights, you might want to try a protein shake while you're at it dammit! None of you can draw for my television show because you're all shit. That's it, you're ALL FUCKING FIRRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEDDDDDD. FIRED! ALL OF YOU! Now fuck off outta my company. Raw is now McMahon Night Raw. Come on Paul, lets show these fucking jobbers how its done......you can come too Cena. Lets go boys. Time for brunch. *


----------



## Medo

Starbuck said:


> *Dammit roster! Don't you see how I draw ratings? Don't you see my herculean physique? This is what the WWE Universe wants to see dammit! All of you need to go to the fucking gym and hit the weights, you might want to try a protein shake while you're at it dammit! None of you can draw for my television show because you're all shit. That's it, you're ALL FUCKING FIRRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEDDDDDD. FIRED! ALL OF YOU! Now fuck off outta my company. Raw is now McMahon Night Raw. Come on Paul, lets show these fucking jobbers how its done......you can come too Cena. Lets go boys. Time for brunch. *


_*:lmao this is awesome post, thank you.*_


----------



## TheWFEffect

dud.


----------



## chronoxiong

Vince McMahon = ratings!!!!!!


----------



## Timber Timbre

No doubt that Vince's presence was a breath of fresh air since he's been off tv for a while, but let's not forget that this was heavily promoted as RAW's debut 3 hour show and the go home to NWO. RAW didn't face stiff competition this week like the weeks prior, that's another thing to consider.

This week's rating isn't huge, it's marginally better than the last few weeks, but on par with what they usually do. They tend to surpass this number during the build to Wrestlemania.


----------



## Punked Up

Vince di great as suspected, and there was no competition. Also, let's not forget that the show was quality and had a lot of stuff (Punk/Bryan/Kane x2, Vince/Johnny/Cena x2, fatal fourway, cage match,etc. That people really want to see, the casual, that is. Thanks to Vince, NWO will see an increase in what's shaping up to be a very good year for WWE, buyrates wise.


----------



## Scissor Me Daddy-O!!

Question for the left over lurkers...How does commentating work? I saw Cole with a script and he had somethings hi-lighted on it. I'm guessing they're given a script they need to go over throughout the show, but they are given some free range on what else to bring up? Anyone know this stuff?


----------



## Clique

Hopefully WWE can continue to improve the booking of the shows, build characters, and tell more stories in the coming weeks. I really like how Ziggler got to shine in the 4-way this week and Show's promo was really good. Show has always been a better heel than face anyway. 




Rock316AE said:


> I expected an increase but damn Vince, 3.5, still the master.


Johnson w/McMahon vs. Lesnar w/Heyman would break records.


----------



## Rock316AE

That's a great idea if by 2013 Brock is still credible for a big match like that which I doubt after Summerslam. Vince and Heyman just make it better. I would love to see Rock/Heyman interaction. After this big rating(2012 standards)I'm sure that it's not the last time we're seeing Vince on TV this year. Vince also proved that he's not too old even for another WM program.


----------



## YimYac

King_Of_This_World said:


> Its pretty worrying when the 65 year old boss of the company can draw bigger ratings than any of his actual wrestlers.


No NBA playoffs had nothing to do with it I guess.

RockA whatever his name is pins the ratings all on Vince and says ratings are the only thing that matters, who didn't see that coming?


----------



## D.M.N.

All considering, that's a great rating. Shows that despite weeks of mediocrity, they can still hype something and increase 600k week-on-week.

Also, am I right in saying that the normal 2 hours did better than some Road to WrestleMania shows?

If I was WWE, I'd actually finish the Laurinitis storyline on Sunday, and 'reboot' next Monday with the lead up to 1,000th Raw. (the only thing continuing is Punk/Bryan)

Breakdown will be more interesting than usual this week.


----------



## DesolationRow

D.M.N. said:


> All considering, that's a great rating. Shows that despite weeks of mediocrity, they can still hype something and increase 600k week-on-week.
> 
> *Also, am I right in saying that the normal 2 hours did better than some Road to WrestleMania shows?*
> 
> If I was WWE, I'd actually finish the Laurinitis storyline on Sunday, and 'reboot' next Monday with the lead up to 1,000th Raw. (the only thing continuing is Punk/Bryan)
> 
> Breakdown will be more interesting than usual this week.


To the bolded, that is absolutely true. Freaky.


----------



## fabi1982

I think its even more interesting that the first hour did nearly the same number as the last our last week (just 200k below). And I think I wasnt the only one who thought Vince wont be shown in the first hour of the show.


----------



## Starbuck

blarg_ said:


> *This week's rating isn't huge*, it's marginally better than the last few weeks, but on par with what they usually do. They tend to surpass this number during the build to Wrestlemania.


It kind of is though. They've been hovering around the 2.7 to 3.0 range recently. Then Vince comes back and in their regular timeslot Raw does a 3.5! That's quite the jump and yes, it's even more impressive when you consider that it beats some, probably a lot, of the RTWM shows featuring all the top names. I'm pretty sure Vince is walking around rubbing it in everybody's faces lol. Vince > Rock, Cena, HHH, Taker combined. The true GAWD.


----------



## robertdeniro

Still the BOSS.


----------



## BANKSY

All aboard the ratings mobile.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

So a 67 year old, senile non wrestler is a bigger ratings draw then The Rock, Brock Lesnar, Triple H, The Undertaker, John Cena etc...

Pretty damn sad. Everything Vince did on Raw sucked too.


----------



## D.M.N.

DesolationRow said:


> To the bolded, that is absolutely true. Freaky.


Haha, yep. Of course, it will probably go back down to ~4.2 million next week unless something big goes down at No Way Out.


----------



## TheRainKing

It won't last. The hype worked this week, but as soon as Vince has made a few regular appearances, people will stop caring. In the end you can't polish a turd, if the show is still terrible then people don't want to watch.


----------



## Starbuck

jblvdx said:


> So a 67 year old, senile non wrestler is a bigger ratings draw then The Rock, Brock Lesnar, Triple H, The Undertaker, John Cena etc...
> 
> Pretty damn sad. Everything Vince did on Raw sucked too.


:vince2


----------



## llamadux

A 3.5 is huge now? How sad for WWE. Even more sad they pulled in extra viewers and did absolutely nothing to keep them hooked. You can only bait and switch for so long before people stop caring.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Everything he did sucked? No it didn't.

Vince was BOSS on Monday night.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

The-Rock-Says said:


> Everything he did sucked? No it didn't.
> 
> Vince was BOSS on Monday night.


No, everything he did was just ego masterbation and wasnt entertaining. Vince making fun of someones disability, dancing with girls a qaurter of his age, saying a former world champion is an un-recognized star, burying his PPV maieventng top heel, and generally being a pathetic, senile old man who's death would most likely benefit the company but the majority of this forum would just eat Vince's shit because HE'S FRM TEH ATTIDUDE ERAZ!

So yeah, I didnt like it.


----------



## Green Light

Vince was great, I agree. He should bury his talent on screen more imo


----------



## A-C-P

Everything Vince did sucked? :lmao

If thats your opinion, OK thats fine I guess our opinions differ


----------



## The-Rock-Says

jblvdx said:


> No, everything he did was just ego masterbation and wasnt entertaining. Vince making fun of someones disability, dancing with girls a qaurter of his age, saying a former world champion is an un-recognized star, burying his PPV maieventng top heel, and generally being a pathetic, senile old man who's death would most likely benefit the company but the majority of this forum would just eat Vince's shit because HE'S FRM TEH ATTIDUDE ERAZ!
> 
> So yeah, I didnt like it.


Wrong, Wrong, Wrong. He's was BOSS and he should bury more. 

Vince is from the AE? You do know Vince is from all kinds of different era's? 

Oh just another person trying to have a dig at the greatest era in pro wrestling history. Carry on.

And if Vince died tomorrow people on this forum would as you say 'eat his shit' because he's not only the greatest wrestling promoters, but one of the greatest characters of all time.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Ok, the only mildly amusing thing he did all night way joyriding the trolly. But even that got annoying after WWE replayed it more then CNN replayed the 9/11 attacks.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

The-Rock-Says said:


> Wrong, Wrong, Wrong. He's was BOSS and he should bury more.
> 
> *Vince is from the AE? You do know Vince is from all kinds of different era's?*
> 
> Oh just another person trying to have a dig at the greatest era in pro wrestling history. Carry on.
> 
> And if Vince died tomorrow people on this forum would as you say 'eat his shit' because he's not only the greatest wrestling promoters, but one of the greatest characters of all time.


Yes, because people relate Rock and Austin to the Ruthless Agression Era of 2003 

Yes, He was one of the greatest characters of all time and quite possibly the best heel in wrestling history. Did you know Flair was one of the best in ring workers of all time? you wouldnt know it watching him wrestle in 2010 because he's old, he's past his prime, and he sucks. Just like Vince on this monday.

Do you know why the product is so bad today? do you know who's mainly responsible for the horrible booking, the painful comedy segments, the "WWE is the best thing ever" propaganda, the hypocrtical Be a Star bullshit, the bland characters and storylines etc. Vince, Vince, and Vince. Yes, he was a great promoter, but do you think that Vince from the 80's right before WM three would say "Lol Andre hasnt performed well since 1979"? no because Vince isnt a crazy, senile, nutcase like he is today.


----------



## Green Light




----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Green Light said:


>


Yeah, bet you posted that right after Cena beat Lesnar on his first match back, or any other of the bad choices Vince has made over the past few years. I dont even hate him, but any wrestling fan who knows at least somethings about the biz should acknowledge Vince is kinda of stupid today. Thank God theres some smart people to keep afloat the company like Triple H and ..... well I'm hopefull that theres some more smart people there


----------



## Rock316AE

Vince was tremendous in everything he did, he needs to bury all his roster for being such a miserable bunch of uncharismatic, unappealing "performers".

Give me 3 hours of Vince and Flair on wheelchairs talking from a straw over the regular roster and concept RAW any day, it will also do bigger numbers.


----------



## A-C-P

Rock316AE said:


> Vince was tremendous in everything he did, *he needs to bury all his roster for being such a miserable bunch of uncharismatic, unappealing "performers".*
> 
> Give me 3 hours of Vince and Flair on wheelchairs talking from a straw over the regular roster and concept RAW any day, it will also do bigger numbers.


Agreed on the Vince was tremendous part, and I am seperating the Vince on-screen scharacter from the Vince that is the CEO of the WWE and in control of everything creativley.

Now for the bolded part, :lmao why would Vince come out and, kayfabe or no,t bury everyone who HE approved of their hiring and approves of everything that gets put on air for them to do? Not saying some of the talent doesn't deserve to be "buried" for some of their bad performances, but its a 2 way street.

Vince "burying" all his talent on TV is like Vince partially burying himself, HHH, Steph, and the rest of creative :lol


----------



## The-Rock-Says

jblvdx is an Ex old ECW fan. And is now a ROH fan.

Them fans hate Vince.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

What the hell does 'Metal Roster' mean?


----------



## Chrome

^ It was an old WWF show that ran from like 99 to 02. Usually featured the lowercard of the WWF.


----------



## Starbuck

Vince as an on screen character is as entertaining and awesome as they come. Vince as the current head honcho? Not so much. I think that's what *jblvdx* is getting at and I agree totally. I love Vince, I marked for him being back and he's one of my favorite wrestling characters of all time, even now, but he's also the biggest reason why WWE is so shit these days. I can recognize and blame him for that but I can also appreciate him as an on screen character too.


----------



## Werb-Jericho

jblvdx said:


> Yeah, bet you posted that right after Cena beat Lesnar on his first match back, or any other of the bad choices Vince has made over the past few years. I dont even hate him, but any wrestling fan who knows at least somethings about the biz should acknowledge Vince is kinda of stupid today. Thank God theres some smart people to keep afloat the company like Triple H and ..... well I'm hopefull that theres some more smart people there


you need to seperate his on-air persona from his backstage role. onscreen he was a brilliant change from the recent years Raw and having his authority there shows that is needed at Raw to perk interest from everyone. His off-screen decisions have nothing to do with his onscreen decisions :no:


----------



## wb1899

Wow, Raw beat Pawn Stars in the A18-49 demo.

Interesting fact: Compared to the last three hour episode, Raw had less viewers in the first and third hour.

A18-49
8PM - ↓ 1,010 million viewers
9PM - ↑ 7000 viewers
10PM - ↓ 2000 viewers


Source


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Starbuck said:


> Vince as an on screen character is as entertaining and awesome as they come. Vince as the current head honcho? Not so much. I think that's what *jblvdx* is getting at and I agree totally. I love Vince, I marked for him being back and he's one of my favorite wrestling characters of all time, even now, but he's also the biggest reason why WWE is so shit these days. I can recognize and blame him for that but I can also appreciate him as an on screen character too.


He's saying he's a shit on screen character now.

Which is bullshit.


----------



## Rock316AE

I believe that Vince knows how worthless his roster is, there's a reason why 95% of them are default choices. What he's doing now is just to have fun IMO, he's not passionate about this business anymore, or at least, not even close to what he was in the past. The only thing he shouldn't have done is the Big Show comment, but it was probably part of the angle for Big Show to cut the awesome, intense promo to Vince's face in the main event segment. Big Show and now Vince are saving RAW from catastrophic product for weeks now. 

BTW, guys like Big Show, performers like him(And Henry)aren't part of that current roster I'm talking about...Just to make it clear.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Henry and Big Show are part of the roster.

Doesn't stop it from being shit.


----------



## Rock316AE

No doubt.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Metal roster, what the hell does that mean?


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Rock316AE said:


> Vince was tremendous in everything he did, he needs to bury all his roster for being such a miserable bunch of uncharismatic, unappealing "performers".
> 
> Give me 3 hours of Vince and Flair on wheelchairs talking from a straw over the regular roster and concept RAW any day, it will also do bigger numbers.


Yeah Vince was awesome but burying his roster is like burying himself. It´s like telling everyone.. Hey guys never watch this show anymore I will stop doing this so go and watch TNA maybe or better just stop in general which is total bullshit because Vince loves money and as long as he gets money even if its just a lil bit he wouldnt do such a stupid thing...


----------



## Cookie Monster

The-Rock-Says said:


> Metal roster, what the hell does that mean?


As already mentioned. It was an old WWE show in the past.


----------



## BrosOfDestruction

The-Rock-Says said:


> Metal roster, what the hell does that mean?


ChromeMan already explained this to you bro. It was just like Shotgun and featured the undercard and jobbers for the most part with guys like Raven, Shawn Stasiak, Hollys, Stevie Richards etc. AJ Styles showed up on the show too before he went to TNA.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Oh missed that.

:rocky Rock316AE


----------



## Scissor Me Daddy-O!!

Question for the left over lurkers...How does commentating work? I saw Cole with a script and he had somethings hi-lighted on it. I'm guessing they're given a script they need to go over throughout the show, but they are given some free range on what else to bring up? Anyone know this stuff?


----------



## BANKSY

I guess they have to give him some freedom. If you add Raw + Smackdown + PPV thats about 7/8 hours a guy like Cole is commentating no chance he has lines for all of it.


----------



## Clique

You're Pretty Good said:


> Question for the left over lurkers...How does commentating work? I saw Cole with a script and he had somethings hi-lighted on it. I'm guessing they're given a script they need to go over throughout the show, but they are given some free range on what else to bring up? Anyone know this stuff?


They have scripts/notes/bullet points to go off, they often have someone in their ear feeding them lines or information (many times it's Vince), and other times they call what they see and add jokes/conversation when they see fit.


----------



## Punked Up

jblvdx said:


> No, everything he did was just ego masterbation and wasnt entertaining. Vince making fun of someones disability, dancing with girls a qaurter of his age, saying a former world champion is an un-recognized star, burying his PPV maieventng top heel, and generally being a pathetic, senile old man who's death would most likely benefit the company but the majority of this forum would just eat Vince's shit because HE'S FRM TEH ATTIDUDE ERAZ!
> 
> So yeah, I didnt like it.


Mr. jblvdx, what you just said was one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response did you say anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this forum is now dumber for having read that. I award you no points, and may god have mercy on your soul.

Seriously, what a dumb post. That's what death means now? Benefiting a company? fpalm


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

Green Light said:


>


Agreed.


----------



## Proc

You're Pretty Good said:


> Question for the left over lurkers...How does commentating work? I saw Cole with a script and he had somethings hi-lighted on it. I'm guessing they're given a script they need to go over throughout the show, but they are given some free range on what else to bring up? Anyone know this stuff?


Obviously another company and a few years old, but it immediately came to my mind


----------



## THANOS

Proc said:


> Obviously another company and a few years old, but it immediately came to my mind


LMFAO who's idiotic idea was it to show them reading the scripts instead of watching the screen. fpalm


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Wow. Vince FUCKING McMahon.


----------



## Hotdiggity11

Vinny Mac brings all the lil Jimmies to the television screen.


----------



## Medo

Rock316AE said:


> I believe that Vince knows how worthless his roster is, there's a reason why 95% of them are default choices. What he's doing now is just to have fun IMO, he's not passionate about this business anymore, or at least, not even close to what he was in the past. The only thing he shouldn't have done is the Big Show comment, but it was probably part of the angle for Big Show to cut the awesome, intense promo to Vince's face in the main event segment. Big Show and now Vince are saving RAW from catastrophic product for weeks now.
> 
> BTW, guys like Big Show, performers like him(And Henry)aren't part of that current roster I'm talking about...Just to make it clear.


*Vince McMahon is the man, the boss is a fucking genuis, loved his segments on Raw and the dance with the girls :lmao

Yea i agree with you man, the current roster is shity.

Maybe they need The Rock to come back to save us :troll*


----------



## The-Rock-Says

He can't do it all the time, medo.

He has to earn them $$$$ from his movies.


----------



## Rock316AE

The GOAT is a busy man bro, he has a lot of better and more important things to do than to save this terrible product. I wanted to see him on the 1000th RAW but whatever, we will see him in January for the big 20 years RAW. Until then:









In August they're going to do "HBK appreciation night" in San Antonio, so that should be interesting.

On another note, I just lost a fuckload of money because of one corner kick, ONE FUCKING CORNER KICK, fuck Holland, fuck Germany. DAMN I hate you!:Rock2


----------



## The-Rock-Says

"I'M HERE EVERY WEEK"


----------



## Medo

*:lmao sorry about you lost brah.

Is the HBK appreciation night true ?  *


----------



## Clique

Medo said:


> *
> Is the HBK appreciation night true ?  *


----------



## The-Rock-Says

They all going to come down to the ring and shout "Thank you, Shawn" And bow to him?


----------



## Choke2Death

Germany are the best! They'll win this whole thing and they better! 

And wow, Rock's life is perfect. And people wanna hate on him for choosing to lay back by the pool at home instead of run and jump around a ring when he's done it all and wont even be appreciated by everyone. Hah, this is definitely a case of jealousy I say.


----------



## Medo

*wow this will be my favorite show of all time definetly, can't wait *





The-Rock-Says said:


> "I'M HERE EVERY WEEK"


*Sup Cena ? *


----------



## The-Rock-Says

That HBK show is the show Brock beats the hell outta him. 

HHH gets :hhh


----------



## Medo

*for the love of go no, don't they dare do that *


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

The-Rock-Says said:


> :hhh


I'd mark if he made that exact same face again after it.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

HBK appreciation night? Triple H is gonna come in, pedigree him, and then leave.


----------



## Starbuck

Choke2Death said:


> Germany are the best! They'll win this whole thing and they better!


Of course they'll win. And then I'll win money and be very happy lol. COME ON DEM GERMANS!!


----------



## Choke2Death

Starbuck said:


> Of course they'll win. And then I'll win money and be very happy lol. COME ON DEM GERMANS!!


YES! It's been a long time coming. I've been waiting for this moment for A DECADE! They better not screw up at the semis or the final.

Time sure flies. At the time I was supporting them heavily in 2002, WWF had just changed to WWE and ratings were falling. If only I had been into wrestling back then... oh well.

And the HBK appreciation night sounds interesting. Would be great if they go through his WM matches, but my signature unfortunately prevents the idea from happening.


----------



## Clique

I would love to see them have a ladder match in his honor. Something featuring Bryan, Ziggler, and/or Punk.


----------



## Starbuck

Choke2Death said:


> YES! It's been a long time coming. I've been waiting for this moment for A DECADE! They better not screw up at the semis or the final.
> 
> Time sure flies. At the time I was supporting them heavily in 2002, WWF had just changed to WWE and ratings were falling. If only I had been into wrestling back then... oh well.
> 
> And the HBK appreciation night sounds interesting. Would be great if they go through his WM matches, but my signature unfortunately prevents the idea from happening.


Germany will win. Have faith. I have faith and if they don't I will be seriously pissed lol.


----------



## Rock316AE

Germany are probably taking it, from what I saw, no competition. Best moment for me so far was Shevchenko killing Ibra like the good old Milan days(I love Zlatan BTW, but that was awesome). 

As for HBK show. If they want to sacrifice Shawn for the Brock/HHH match, they can do a segment with Brock saying that Michaels is broken down and all that and challenging him to a street fight in the parking lot. Like Flair did with Randy in 2009, that way you're not giving away an HBK match for free and can draw huge rating based on the hype.


----------



## Choke2Death

Clique said:


> I would love to see them have a ladder match in his honor. Something featuring Bryan, Ziggler, and/or Punk.


Good idea. I just saw TLC III a couple of hours ago and I can't believe they gave that away on free TV (Smackdown). They could do with a ladder match featuring the guys you mentioned on free TV today.



Starbuck said:


> Germany will win. Have faith. I have faith and if they don't I will be seriously pissed lol.


Hey, I have faith too! But like you, I don't want to be pissed that they fail to take it at the end of the tournament. Has happened 4 times and I don't want a fifth!


----------



## WrestlingFan96

Monday Night RAW sucked. Absolutely nothing of value happened. They need to fire all of these Hollywood rejects and get bring someone with actual knowledge of the wrestling business in.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

> As noted before, the June 11th WWE RAW Supershow did a 3.23 cable rating with 4.65 million viewers over three-hours. The usual two hours did a 3.46 rating with 4.99 million viewers.
> 
> The show opened with Vince McMahon returning at a 2.88 rating, well above the usual start of a three-hour RAW. Tensai vs. Sheamus lost 415,000 viewers while Tensai attacking Sakomoto, Big Show knocking out R-Truth and Vince's segment with Teddy Long and John Laurinaitis gained 146,000 viewers.
> 
> Santino Marella and Layla vs. Beth Phoenix and Ricardo Rodriguez and the backstage segment with Vince and Daniel Bryan gained 98,000 viewers. Bryan's segment with CM Punk, Kane and AJ Lee gained 978,000 viewers for the 9pm time slot, RAW's usual start time.
> 
> The Christian vs. Dolph Ziggler vs. The Great Khali vs. Jack Swagger match and Ryback's squash gained 4,000 viewers. The backstage segment with Vince and Hornswoggle making fun of Jim Ross lost 145,000 viewers. Big Show vs. Kofi Kingston in the cage match at 10pm gained 320,000 viewers for a 3.59 quarter rating.
> 
> Curt Hawkins vs. Sin Cara lost 450,000 viewers while Vader vs. Heath Slater gained 324,000 more viewers, an impressive gain for that time in the show. The main event with AJ and Punk vs. Bryan and Kane lost 19,000 viewers. The final segment with Vince, Laurinaitis, John Cena and Big Show gained 721,000 viewers for a 3.99 quarter rating in the overrun.


Read more: http://www.WrestlingInc.com/wi/news/2012/0613/553479/#ixzz1xjD6nPDO

Vince = bawse.

Vader did his thing too.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Very impressive breakdown. Final segment did huge.

Just a shame since the storylines are ass.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Punk = RATINGZ GAWD


----------



## RichDV

The two best segments of show (not counting Vince's segments) in AJ and Punk vs. Bryan and Kane, and the Fatal-4-Way losing/gaining no viewers makes me kinda sad.

Cool that Vader gained viewers though.


----------



## Rock316AE

The 9pm segment did the usual gain in a 3 hours show. 

Vader did an awesome numbers for a random timeslot. 

Big Show is doing big gains all over the program is another example of how good he is. 

Not a complete 4.0 but you can still count it so that's the first quarter since Rock in Boston November 2011 to do this number. RAW desperately need Vince now. You can do a great storyline for Summerslam with Lesnar/Heyman/Show/Vince/HHH/Cena.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

RichDV said:


> The two best segments of show (not counting Vince's segments) in AJ and Punk vs. Bryan and Kane, and the Fatal-4-Way losing/gaining no viewers makes me kinda sad.
> 
> Cool that Vader gained viewers though.


Both of those segments did well considering they were in random slots. And it's an impressive breakdown because they were able to maintain good numbers throughout the show. Besides Sheamus/Tensai, no big loses at all. Even that one is excusable.

And the fact that people were obviously interested in Vader's return however they found out about it, majority of those people stuck around for AJ/Punk vs Kane/Bryan and the last segment. Just good news overall.

@Rock316AE Big Show doing big gains? The last segment, sure, except he clearly had some help. But isn't the 10 PM gain "below average"? Funny how they didn't call it below average this week.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Punks mic segments usually draw more than his matches, but also Bryan cut a good promo too, better than Punk this Monday. The last three hour RAW did less viewers at the same time. Also Vince and his automatic drawing power did well as expected.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Dave doesn't like Punk.

He doesn't like how he goes around thinking he's IT. Thinking he's the man.


----------



## ecabney

Bryan sonning Punk on the mic gaining almost a million viewers. :jordan: Cripple H and Coke Boy Vince need to do what's right for business and put the strap on DA GAWD.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Great breakdown I'd say. The number kept increasing as we went. Big gain for Punk/Bryan/Kane/AJ, though considering the slot, it's a good gain, but nothing incredible. Big Show had a nice gain in the 10PM timeslot, about average with what Punk has done the past few months in it, maybe a bit more. The gain after that though is the really interesting thing. And of course, the final segment gaining 721000 viewers is incredible. Vince, despite losing touch, getting senile, etc... he's still the biggest fucking draw they've got nowadays until Rock and Lesnar come back... and even then he may be a bigger draw than Lesnar. Not sure that even Taker and HHH could pull the above average numbers Vince got and keep the show afloat like he did. I don't think any of the Taker/HHH/HBK segments pulled a 3.99 rating. He actually impacted the whole show rather than just his main segments. I bet a lot of people stayed tuned to see if Vince would pop up. Of course I bet most people knew the likes of Taker/HHH/HBK would only show up once on the show, but it's still interesting to see. 

So yeah, Vince is awesome. Nuff said.


----------



## kokepepsi

Vince is a TV draw not a PPV draw

Can't belive Aj/Punk vs Kane/Bryan lost so little.
I guess people wanted to wait for the Vince/Show segment. 
Countdown timer was a good idea


----------



## Shazayum

Wait whys everyone talkng about germany?


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Although if I remember correctly, the last time Vince showed up on RAW the overrun did over 1 million viewer gain. But still good numbers by Vince, he is automatic draw, legend in his own right.


----------



## kokepepsi

When was the last time he showed up?

Also when was the last 3hour raw?


----------



## Kabraxal

I think the promo helped people remain interested in the Punk/Bryan/Kane match. I mean, every other time it's just been a match thrown on screen, this time there was build to it. Something COULD have happened and people stuck around more than usual.

Also, love that Big Show does Punk gains in the 10pm slot and the writer couldn't be assed this time to mention how "poor" that is for that slot. At least be consistent in the praise/criticism.

Overall... not surprised McMahon drew and not surprised that actual promos drew. Surprised at Vader though... who would have thought that many hardcore fans would tune in just for that... it certainly wouldn't be casuals changing for a blast from the past.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Chicago Warrior said:


> Although if I remember correctly, the last time Vince showed up on RAW the overrun did over 1 million viewer gain. But still good numbers by Vince, he is automatic draw, legend in his own right.


Yes, but the overall number probably wasn't as high as this.

Say the overall number had been a 2.9, then the end segment would of gained over a million.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

kokepepsi said:


> When was the last time he showed up?
> 
> Also when was the last 3hour raw?


The last time he showed up, I think it was last year. A promo segment with Triple H, Vince McMahon and John Cena did the overrun. It was in July of last year I think.

The last three hour RAW was in April and then one in December.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Kabraxal said:


> Also, love that Big Show does Punk gains in the 10pm slot and the writer couldn't be assed this time to mention how "poor" that is for that slot. At least be consistent in the praise/criticism.


Thought the same. I also love how Rock316 called it a big gain. But a few months ago, a certain sobriety test segment did practically the same gain with an even better rating, and called it terrible. Rock316 = Dave Meltzer.

A big reason, in my opinion, for the Vader match doing so great has to be Twitter. It's probably responsible for a lot of great bumps in quarter ratings. Maybe a bunch of old fans caught that he was trending on twitter and decided to tune in. We all give a lot of flack to WWE for constantly mentioning the Tweeter but hey, the shit works.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

The-Rock-Says said:


> Yes, but the overall number probably wasn't as high as this.
> 
> Say the overall number had been a 2.9, then the end segment would of gained over a million.


Well, not to sure about this but I think overall the last time he showed up, it did about 1,300,000 viewers.


----------



## kokepepsi

Chicago Warrior said:


> The last time he showed up, I think it was last year. A promo segment with Triple H, Vince McMahon and John Cena did the overrun. It was in July of last year I think.
> 
> The last three hour RAW was in April and then one in December.


Wait the contract signing angle?

I don't remember an HHH/Vince/Punk angle because they would have collectively buried the fuck out of punk.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

kokepepsi said:


> Wait the contract signing angle?
> 
> I don't remember an HHH/Vince/Punk angle because they would have collectively buried the fuck out of punk.


The Punk/Vince contract signing drew about 1,350,000 viewers overall. The week after this it was when Vince was relieved of his duties and his last appearance I think.






Overall it drew about 1,300,000 viewers.


----------



## Rock316AE

Chicago Warrior said:


> The last time he showed up, I think it was last year. *A promo segment with Triple H, Vince McMahon and John Cena did the overrun.* It was in July of last year I think.
> 
> The last three hour RAW was in April and then one in December.


That segment did 3.94 with a million viewers gain. It was the terrible crying segment from HHH and Vince which got 10 times worse after they basically told us that Vince can still do whatever the fuck he wants and cried for no reason.


----------



## kokepepsi

did you ninja edit John Cena with Punk.

Could have sworn I read Punk in your post

Vince/Punk>Vince/Cena/HHH
God did they fuck up that angle


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Rock316AE said:


> That segment did 3.94 with a million viewers gain. It was the terrible crying segment from HHH and Vince which got 10 times worse after they basically told us that Vince can still do whatever the fuck he wants and cried for no reason.


Yeah that was the last time he showed up, till this Monday.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

kokepepsi said:


> *did you ninja edit John Cena with Punk*.
> 
> Could have sworn I read Punk in your post
> 
> Vince/Punk>Vince/Cena/HHH
> God did they fuck up that angle


No, not at all.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

He showed up to tell HHH he was no longer GM.


----------



## Green Light

Vince burying talent = ratings


----------



## funnyfaces1

Are my eyes deceiving me, or is the WWE Championship feud actually drawing?

Solid RAW, but almost all of the credit for the ratings spike has to go to Vince.


----------



## DesolationRow

Vince returned last October for the "Walkout" angle to tell Triple H he was no longer GM.

That was a highly rated show, particularly the first hour when it was primarily just Trips/Cena/Punk/Sheamus/Vince for like 45 minutes or something.


----------



## Starbuck

Vince fucking McMahon people. They advertise him and the overall rating of the show goes up not to mention gains instead of losses throughout the show itself. Give credit to whoever you want but if it isn't :vince2 then you are wrong. He carried this show and the numbers speak for themselves. Vince > everybody. NWO going to get a massive number now because DA GAWD is set to appear lol.


----------



## D.M.N.

Breakdown:

Hour 1
Q1 - 2.88 rating / 4.15 million
Q2 - 2.59 rating / 3.74 million
Q3 - 2.69 rating / 3.88 million
Q4 - 2.76 rating / 3.98 million

Hour 2
Q5 - 3.39 rating / 4.96 million
Q6 - 3.40 rating / 4.96 million
Q7 + Q8 - 3.30 rating / 4.82 million

Hour 3
Q9 - 3.59 rating / 5.14 million
Q10 - 3.28 rating / 4.69 million
Q11 - 3.50 rating / 5.01 million
Q12 - 3.49 rating / 4.99 million
Overrun - 3.99 rating / 5.72 million

Probably one of the best breakdowns on the year so far. Hour's 2 and 3 incredibly stable, aside from Q10, but that's to be expected.

Hour 2 is the most positive for me though, seeing not a huge drop at all, and in fact increasing slightly into Q6.

The only negative here is actually Q2, how you can lose viewers in that quarter I don't really know. It's not often a three hour Raw nowadays starts with over 4 million, but seeing a loss there is amusing.


----------



## Starbuck

DAT OVERRUN

:vince2


----------



## Jammy

Copy pasting from somewhere else 
Raw segment-by-segment numbers:


Quote:
The big difference between this and a usual three-hour show is that all the hype about Vince McMahon in the first segment saw the show open at a 2.88 rating, well above the usual start of a three-hour show. Not only that, but those people who tuned in early instead of staying, they tuned out after as Sheamus vs. Tensai lost 415,000 viewers. Vince backstage with Laurinaitis and Teddy Long, Tensai destroying Sakamoto and Big Show knocking out R-Truth gained 146,000 viewers. Santino Marella & Layla vs. Ricardo Rodriguez & Beth Phoenix and backstage with Vince plus a Daniel Bryan interview gained 98,000 viewers. Bryan doing an interview with C.M. Punk, Kane and A.J. involved gained 978,000 viewers, but that was the audience that mostly forgot about the 8 p.m. start and tuned in. The Dolph Ziggler vs. Christian vs. Jack Swagger vs. Great Khali match and the Ryback squash gained 4,000 viewers. Backstage stuff with McMahon, Hornswoggle including making fun of Jim Ross lost 145,000 viewers. Big Show vs. Kofi Kingston in a cage match at 10 p.m. gained 320,000 viewers to a 3.59 quarter. Sin Cara vs. Curt Hawkins lost 450,000 viewers. Vader vs. Heath Slater gained 324,000 viewers, which is impressive for that point in the show, especially since Vader hasn’t had a strong TV run in the U.S. since the late 90s. A.J. & Punk vs. Bryan & Kane lost 19,000 viewers. The show’s final segment with Vince, Laurinaitis, John Cena and Show gained 721,000 viewers.


----------



## Jammy

Lol at no credit given to Bryan/AJ/Punk/Kane. Partly true tho but atleast they didn't tune out. Which is good.
Good on Bryan for gaining 98k viewers, Im sure this includes viewers that tuned out for Mixed tag match. Good signs overall.
Sheamus v Tensai loosing viewers must be worrying for them, since Sheamus is being pushed to the moon.
Huge overrun is not surprising since all involved in it are proven draws
Lol at Vince and swoggle loosing 146k viewers.


----------



## D.M.N.

Some more detail:

Hour 1
Q1 - 2.88 rating / 4.15 million <-- 1 minute of commercials; Vince/Johnny/Sheamus opening segment
Q2 - 2.59 rating / 3.74 million <-- 5.5 minutes of commercials; Sheamus vs Tensai
Q3 - 2.69 rating / 3.88 million <-- 7.5 minutes of commercials; Teddy/Johnny/Vince/Vickie backstage, Tensai destroys Sakamoto, Raw 1000th moment, Truth interview
Q4 - 2.76 rating / 3.98 million <-- 4 minutes of commercials; Santino/Layla vs Ricardo/Beth; Otunga/Vince/Kofi/Johnny backstage; Bryan entrance

Hour 2
Q5 - 3.39 rating / 4.96 million <-- no commercials; Bryan/Kane/Punk/AJ in-ring segment
Q6 - 3.40 rating / 4.96 million <-- 6.5 minutes of commercials; Fatal 4 Way match
Q7 - 3.30 rating / 4.82 million <-- 3.5 minutes of commercials; Fatal 4 Way match conclusion; Vince/Natalya/Cameron/Naomi/Ryder backstage, Ryback squash
Q8 - 3.30 rating / 4.82 million <-- 7 minutes of commercials; Steel Cage 'entrance', Vince/Hornswoggle/Cena/Otunga/Regal backstage; Kofi entrance; Big Show entrance

Hour 3
Q9 - 3.59 rating / 5.14 million <-- 3.5 minutes of commercials; Steel Cage match, Sin Cara vs Curt Hawkins
Q10 - 3.28 rating / 4.69 million <-- 7.5 minutes of commercials; Cara/Hawkins conclusion (about 1 minute), Triple H/No Way Out hype, Vince/Bryan backstage, Raw 1000th moment
Q11 - 3.50 rating / 5.01 million <-- 3.5 minutes of commercials; Heath Slater vs Vader, Make a Wish trailer, Punk/AJ backstage, Kane/Bryan entrances
Q12 - 3.49 rating / 4.99 million <-- 3 minutes of commercials; Punk/AJ entrances, Punk/AJ vs Kane/Bryan, ECW DVD trailer, SmackDown trailer, start of final segment
Overrun - 3.99 rating / 5.72 million <-- overrun = 13 minutes long, no commercials (obviously)

Conclusion: I feel sorry for American's that watch TV live... and it's pretty evident why certain quarters did not do as well (ie Q10).

_Based on: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmDYF8g3iNQ_


----------



## Starbuck

D.M.N. said:


> Some more detail:
> 
> Hour 1
> Q1 - 2.88 rating / 4.15 million <-- 1 minute of commercials; Vince/Johnny/Sheamus opening segment
> Q2 - 2.59 rating / 3.74 million <-- 5.5 minutes of commercials; Sheamus vs Tensai
> Q3 - 2.69 rating / 3.88 million <-- 7.5 minutes of commercials; Teddy/Johnny/Vince/Vickie backstage, Tensai destroys Sakamoto, Raw 1000th moment, Truth interview
> Q4 - 2.76 rating / 3.98 million <-- 4 minutes of commercials; Santino/Layla vs Ricardo/Beth; Otunga/Vince/Kofi/Johnny backstage; Bryan entrance
> 
> Hour 2
> Q5 - 3.39 rating / 4.96 million <-- no commercials; Bryan/Kane/Punk/AJ in-ring segment
> Q6 - 3.40 rating / 4.96 million <-- 6.5 minutes of commercials; Fatal 4 Way match
> Q7 - 3.30 rating / 4.82 million <-- 3.5 minutes of commercials; Fatal 4 Way match conclusion; Vince/Natalya/Cameron/Naomi/Ryder backstage, Ryback squash
> Q8 - 3.30 rating / 4.82 million <-- 7 minutes of commercials; Steel Cage 'entrance', Vince/Hornswoggle/Cena/Otunga/Regal backstage; Kofi entrance; Big Show entrance
> 
> Hour 3
> Q9 - 3.59 rating / 5.14 million <-- 3.5 minutes of commercials; Steel Cage match, Sin Cara vs Curt Hawkins
> Q10 - 3.28 rating / 4.69 million <-- 7.5 minutes of commercials; Cara/Hawkins conclusion (about 1 minute), Triple H/No Way Out hype, Vince/Bryan backstage, Raw 1000th moment
> Q11 - 3.50 rating / 5.01 million <-- 3.5 minutes of commercials; Heath Slater vs Vader, Make a Wish trailer, Punk/AJ backstage, Kane/Bryan entrances
> Q12 - 3.49 rating / 4.99 million <-- 3 minutes of commercials; Punk/AJ entrances, Punk/AJ vs Kane/Bryan, ECW DVD trailer, SmackDown trailer, start of final segment
> Overrun - 3.99 rating / 5.72 million <-- overrun = 13 minutes long, no commercials (obviously)
> 
> Conclusion: I feel sorry for American's that watch TV live... and it's pretty evident why certain quarters did not do as well (ie Q10).
> 
> _Based on: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmDYF8g3iNQ_


Kudos. If you can, you should do that every week as it gives a much clearer breakdown of things tbh.


----------



## A-C-P

So a 300,000 vewiers gained is not a "weak gain" for the 10PM slot now? God, how I love biased reporting :lol

Other than that not many surprises from the breakdown other than the very good start for a 3 hr Raw, advertising Mc Mahon for the opening segment was a good move.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

A-C-P said:


> So a 300,000 vewiers gained is not a "weak gain" for the 10PM slot now? God, how I love biased reporting :lol
> 
> Other than that not many surprises from the breakdown other than the very good start for a 3 hr Raw, advertising Mc Mahon for the opening segment was a good move.


i thought the same but oh well....


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Meltzer does not like Punk.


----------



## rizzotherat

Chicago Warrior said:


> Meltzer does not like Punk.


So he hacked the Nielsen ratings? Seemingly Dave does this weekly if that is your theory.



A-C-P said:


> So a 300,000 vewiers gained is not a "weak gain" for the 10PM slot now? God, how I love biased reporting :lol


It is.

It has nothing to do with bias and everything to do with well established trends.

This place can be really fanboyish.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

rizzotherat said:


> So he hacked the Nielsen ratings? Seemingly Dave does this weekly if that is your theory.


That's not his point. Fact is when Meltzer doesn't like someone he has no problem putting them down and taking shots at that person. For instance, Meltzer doesn't like Bob Backlund. In fact, it could be said that he hates Bob Backlund. When he brings up Backlund he consistently takes shots at the guy. He called Backlund naive, slow, incompetent in his money because he invested it in bad businesses. On the other hand, Meltzer is a Flair mark. For years Meltzer said nothing about Flair's wasteful spending, his overcompensation of alcohol that leads to him getting naked and flashing everyone, or other embarrassing activities. Seriously, most of us didn't learn about the extent of Flair's problem until several months ago when some reporter from a newspaper wrote about it. Do you seriously think Melzter, one of the top journalist on the wrestling business, didn't know about this? For a while the worst you hear Meltzer say about Flair was the mentioning of the plane ride from hell.

Also, I don't get why people keep saying Rock316AE is Meltzer. I heard Meltzer and Alvarez say a bunch of things that Rock316AE disagrees with. Just recently, Meltzer said that NWO is going to do a bad buyrate and that the Big Show angle this week on Raw did nothing to sell the PPV. He even mentioned that someone in the company called or texted him and said they were worried that the PPV was going to bomb. I'm pretty sure Rock316AE is a Roode fan and I heard and read Meltzer and Alvarez question whether Roode should be the guy and imply that Roode is the reason why TNA's ratings have fallen the past few months. Rock316AE thinks WWE should fire the entire roster, especially the indy, vanilla midgets, but Meltzer and Alvarez have said that WWE needs to continue to push these younger stars instead of the WWE's current method of push, stop out of lack of interest, and depush. There are a bunch of other example that I would have to look up, but I made my point.


----------



## rizzotherat

These are long term ratings trends. 

Look at previous ratings in that quarter over long period of time and come back to me.

Look at quarters Punk is in where he is meant to be the one driving the rating over long period of time and come back to me.



JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> Also, I don't get why people keep saying Rock316AE is Meltzer. I heard Meltzer and Alvarez say a bunch of things that Rock316AE disagrees with. Just recently, Meltzer said that NWO is going to do a bad buyrate and that the Big Show angle this week on Raw did nothing to sell the PPV.


Neither would be caught dead posting on this forum. Bryan barely posts on his own forum and Meltzer would a breakdown correcting the general idiocy and basic errors people make here. Meltzer has his own distinctive way of writing which is easily discernable which is probably foreign to most here as most don't read the Observer and with with no disrespect to Rock316AE Meltzer comes across far more knowledge in his posts.

Rock316AE isnt Meltzer.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

rizzotherat said:


> These are long term ratings trends.
> 
> Look at previous ratings in that quarter over long period of time and come back to me.
> 
> Look at quarters Punk is in where he is meant to be the one driving the rating over long period of time and come back to me.


So you completely ignore my points. 




> Neither would be caught dead posting on this forum. Bryan barely posts on his own forum and Meltzer would a breakdown correcting the general idiocy and basic errors people make here. Meltzer has his own distinctive way of writing which is easily discernable which is probably foreign to most here as most don't read the Observer and with with no disrespect to Rock316AE Meltzer comes across far more knowledge in his posts.
> 
> Rock316AE isnt Meltzer.


Dude, I know that ROCK316AE isn't literally Meltzer. My point was people keep saying that they think alike when they don't.


----------



## Vyed

Chicago Warrior said:


> Meltzer does not like Punk.


Not even close lol. He is actually biased(favorable) when it comes to the Rock and internet darlings which includes punk, probably because large percentage of his subscribers are internet fans. The Rock is his close personal friend. 

There's a whole thread on meltzer and his bias at Wrestlezone board. 




JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> Dude, I know that ROCK316AE isn't literally Meltzer. My point was people keep saying that they think alike when they don't.



Ironically, from what I've seen the one thing Rock316AE strongly disagrees with is Meltzer's views on Punk/bryan etc... cant blame him though.


----------



## rizzotherat

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> So you completely ignore my points.


They dont have anything to do with ratings thought. You would have a case for bias if he didnt comment on loads of wrestler's affect positive or negative on ratings every week. He has always been skeptic of Punk he is so so for business.



Vyed said:


> There's a whole thread on meltzer and his bias at Wrestlezone board.


Which is laughable itself. Somehow I don't think there is a great cross over between Observer and Wrestlezone readers.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

The Rock isn't his close personal friend. They hardly even talk to each other.

If Dave has a question to ask him, he emails him. Hardly a thing a 'close personal friend' would do. They'd just call them up.

Back to the email thing. Dave would email him, but Rock can take weeks to get back to him. Again, not a thing a 'close personal friend' would do.


----------



## dxbender

D.M.N. said:


> Some more detail:
> 
> Hour 1
> Q1 - 2.88 rating / 4.15 million <-- 1 minute of commercials; Vince/Johnny/Sheamus opening segment
> Q2 - 2.59 rating / 3.74 million <-- 5.5 minutes of commercials; Sheamus vs Tensai
> Q3 - 2.69 rating / 3.88 million <-- 7.5 minutes of commercials; Teddy/Johnny/Vince/Vickie backstage, Tensai destroys Sakamoto, Raw 1000th moment, Truth interview
> Q4 - 2.76 rating / 3.98 million <-- 4 minutes of commercials; Santino/Layla vs Ricardo/Beth; Otunga/Vince/Kofi/Johnny backstage; Bryan entrance
> 
> Hour 2
> Q5 - 3.39 rating / 4.96 million <-- no commercials; Bryan/Kane/Punk/AJ in-ring segment
> Q6 - 3.40 rating / 4.96 million <-- 6.5 minutes of commercials; Fatal 4 Way match
> Q7 - 3.30 rating / 4.82 million <-- 3.5 minutes of commercials; Fatal 4 Way match conclusion; Vince/Natalya/Cameron/Naomi/Ryder backstage, Ryback squash
> Q8 - 3.30 rating / 4.82 million <-- 7 minutes of commercials; Steel Cage 'entrance', Vince/Hornswoggle/Cena/Otunga/Regal backstage; Kofi entrance; Big Show entrance
> 
> Hour 3
> Q9 - 3.59 rating / 5.14 million <-- 3.5 minutes of commercials; Steel Cage match, Sin Cara vs Curt Hawkins
> Q10 - 3.28 rating / 4.69 million <-- 7.5 minutes of commercials; Cara/Hawkins conclusion (about 1 minute), Triple H/No Way Out hype, Vince/Bryan backstage, Raw 1000th moment
> Q11 - 3.50 rating / 5.01 million <-- 3.5 minutes of commercials; Heath Slater vs Vader, Make a Wish trailer, Punk/AJ backstage, Kane/Bryan entrances
> Q12 - 3.49 rating / 4.99 million <-- 3 minutes of commercials; Punk/AJ entrances, Punk/AJ vs Kane/Bryan, ECW DVD trailer, SmackDown trailer, start of final segment
> Overrun - 3.99 rating / 5.72 million <-- overrun = 13 minutes long, no commercials (obviously)
> 
> Conclusion: I feel sorry for American's that watch TV live... and it's pretty evident why certain quarters did not do as well (ie Q10).
> 
> _Based on: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmDYF8g3iNQ_



How long does an average 2 hour episode of Raw last in USA? Cause I think Canada might be diff lengths. Canada starts 15 mins later than USA, and I'm wondering if Canada just has less commercials as well. Cause average Raw lasts 2 hours 10 mins in Canada, but commercial breaks seem to last like 3 minutes.

But WWE is probably the worst at commercial breaks of all shows on TV(except football,who has a commercial break every 2 minutes it seems like lol).

Why can't they just have consistent commercial breaks. No commercials during matches either.

It sucks watching it on TV and then having them come back from a commercial just to see a backstage segment that's useless,a 2-3 min video package for something random, then the "up next" screen and back to more commercials.


----------



## A-C-P

rizzotherat said:


> It is.
> 
> It has nothing to do with bias and everything to do with well established trends.
> 
> This place can be really fanboyish.


WOW. way to completely miss my point. I know its A "weak gain" although I've gone over wh yI hate people calling it that many times so not going back into that.

It also has nothing to do with who I am a fan of or not a fan of. My point, on the biased reporting comment, is just for weeks why Punk/Jericho were pretty much the 10 PM segment i got to read every week that their 150-350 K gains there were "weak gains". This weak a Show segment same #'s range but totally passed over and not even mentioned as weak, jsut shows a biased in the reports thats all.


----------



## DesolationRow

*D.M.N.*'a breakdown with the commercial time really brings it home. Must be included every week from now on!


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

DesolationRow said:


> *D.M.N.*'a breakdown with the commercial time really brings it home. Must be included every week from now on!


Agreed. B.M.N. should replace Meltzer on WO.


----------



## A-C-P

DesolationRow said:


> *D.M.N.*'a breakdown with the commercial time really brings it home. Must be included every week from now on!


Agreed 100%, b/c commercial breaks is one of the things that affects viewer #s the most.


----------



## D.M.N.

Thanks for the comments. Will do from next week, although I probably won't be able to get down the lengths unless someone uploaded the entire show with commercials onto YouTube.

Just a thought though. Obviously people tune out during the commercials. How many tune out? 2 percent? 10 percent? 20 percent?

I haven't seen anything specific here, but I'd say about 10 percent of people tune out during the commercials. Let's use 10 percent for example purposes anyway. Stripping the commercials out of the breakdowns give you....



D.M.N. said:


> Some more detail:
> 
> Hour 1
> Q1 - 2.88 rating / 4.15 million
> Q2 - 2.59 rating / 3.74 million
> Q3 - 2.69 rating / 3.88 million
> Q4 - 2.76 rating / 3.98 million
> 
> Hour 2
> Q5 - 3.39 rating / 4.96 million
> Q6 - 3.40 rating / 4.96 million
> Q7 - 3.30 rating / 4.82 million
> Q8 - 3.30 rating / 4.82 million
> 
> Hour 3
> Q9 - 3.59 rating / 5.14 million
> Q10 - 3.28 rating / 4.69 million
> Q11 - 3.50 rating / 5.01 million
> Q12 - 3.49 rating / 4.99 million
> Overrun - 3.99 rating / 5.72 million
> 
> Conclusion: I feel sorry for American's that watch TV live... and it's pretty evident why certain quarters did not do as well (ie Q10).
> 
> _Based on: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmDYF8g3iNQ_


Q1 - *4.18 million (0.03 gain)* <-- 1 minute stripped out; Vince/Johnny/Sheamus opening segment
Q2 - *3.96 million (0.22 gain)* <-- 5.5 minutes stripped out; Sheamus vs Tensai
Q3 - *4.27 million (0.39 gain)* <-- 7.5 minutes stripped out; Teddy/Johnny/Vince/Vickie backstage, Tensai destroys Sakamoto, Raw 1000th moment, Truth interview
Q4 - *4.12 million (0.14 gain)* <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Santino/Layla vs Ricardo/Beth; Otunga/Vince/Kofi/Johnny backstage; Bryan entrance
Q5 - *4.96 million (0.00 gain) * <-- nothing stripped out; Bryan/Kane/Punk/AJ in-ring segment
Q6 - *5.34 million (0.38 gain)* <-- 6.5 minutes stripped out; Fatal 4 Way match
Q7 - *4.97 million (0.15 gain)* <-- 3.5 minutes stripped out; Fatal 4 Way match conclusion; Vince/Natalya/Cameron/Naomi/Ryder backstage, Ryback squash
Q8 - *5.24 million (0.42 gain)* <-- 7 minutes stripped out; Steel Cage 'entrance', Vince/Hornswoggle/Cena/Otunga/Regal backstage; Kofi entrance; Big Show entrance
Q9 - *5.30 million (0.16 gain)* <-- 3.5 minutes stripped out; Steel Cage match, Sin Cara vs Curt Hawkins
Q10 - *5.16 million (0.47 gain)* <-- 7.5 minutes stripped out; Cara/Hawkins conclusion (about 1 minute), Triple H/No Way Out hype, Vince/Bryan backstage, Raw 1000th moment
Q11 - *5.16 million (0.15 gain)* <-- 3.5 minutes stripped out; Heath Slater vs Vader, Make a Wish trailer, Punk/AJ backstage, Kane/Bryan entrances
Q12 - *5.11 million (0.12 gain)* <-- 3 minutes stripped out; Punk/AJ entrances, Punk/AJ vs Kane/Bryan, ECW DVD trailer, SmackDown trailer, start of final segment
Overrun - *5.72 million (0.00 gain)* <-- no commercials (obviously)

Just to show the numbers are not plucked out of nowhere... example with Q9:

Commercials = 4.626 million (3.5 minutes - 4.626 million is from taking 10% off 5.14 million)
Non-Commercials = 5.30 million (11.5 minutes)
*Average = 5.14 million* (see quoted post)

And with Q10...

Commercials = 4.221 million (7.5 minutes - 4.221 million is from taking 10% off 4.69 million)
Non-Commercials = 5.16 million (7.5 minutes)
*Average = 4.69 million* (see quoted post)

And if we are to put the above in order of highest to lowest...

5.72 million = Final segment
5.34 million = Fatal 4 Way match
5.30 million = Steel Cage match, Sin Cara vs Curt Hawkins
_5.24 million = Steel Cage 'entrance', Vince/Hornswoggle/Cena/Otunga/Regal backstage; Kofi entrance; Big Show entrance_
_5.16 million = Cara/Hawkins conclusion (about 1 minute), Triple H/No Way Out hype, Vince/Bryan backstage, Raw 1000th moment_
5.16 million = Heath Slater vs Vader, Punk/AJ backstage
5.11 million = Punk/AJ vs Kane/Bryan, start of final segment
4.97 million = Fatal 4 Way match conclusion, Vince/Natalya/Cameron/Naomi/Ryder backstage, Ryback squash
4.96 million = Bryan/Kane/Punk/AJ in-ring segment
_4.27 million = Teddy/Johnny/Vince/Vickie backstage, Tensai destroys Sakamoto, Truth interview_
4.18 million = Opening segment
4.12 million = Santino/Layla vs Ricardo/Beth, Otunga/Vince/Kofi/Johnny backstage, Bryan entrance
3.96 million = Sheamus vs Tensai

The quarters in italics were 'filler quarters' where you can't read too much into them.

This is by no means 100 percent scientific, but interesting nevertheless....


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Yeah, it's about time attention is paid towards commercials. You know, the biggest reason people tune in and out of television shows...

Good stuff DMN.


----------



## dxbender

Maybe this also proves that people want more gimmick matches on Raw(if Show-Kofi could pull such a big rating for a match that really didn't have much meaning going into it).

Or maybe it just means Kofi = Ratings lol


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Good post DMN, your breakdown is easier to navigate and it gives a better description of the quarter hour segments and commercial breaks.


----------



## HalfNights70

Lol. I have talked about commercials for weeks now and it's finally been recognise as a reason for a drop in ratings. The final segment gain is not really impressive I thought it will reach a million or something. Well the show was pretty good anyway but I hated the ending I felt like I saw it already.


----------



## D.M.N.

HalfNights70 said:


> Lol. I have talked about commercials for weeks now and it's finally been recognise as a reason for a drop in ratings. The final segment gain is not really impressive I thought it will reach a million or something. Well the show was pretty good anyway but I hated the ending I felt like I saw it already.


Commercials are not really a valid reason, they've always existed. Okay, it has _some_ effect, but not a massive effect. If we're to do the hours breakdown without commercials (as a final point here) :

- hour 1: 4.13 million (+0.23m)
- hour 2: 5.09 million (+0.21m)
- hour 3: 5.32 million (+0.24m)

That's based on my 10 percent from here. So commercials make a difference, but not a massive difference in the grand scheme of things.


----------



## rizzotherat

The-Rock-Says said:


> The Rock isn't his close personal friend. They hardly even talk to each other.
> 
> If Dave has a question to ask him, he emails him. Hardly a thing a 'close personal friend' would do. They'd just call them up.
> 
> Back to the email thing. Dave would email him, but Rock can take weeks to get back to him. Again, not a thing a 'close personal friend' would do.


That's not true and in the past you told me you dont read the newsletter. Dave & Mavias go back 30 years.



A-C-P said:


> WOW. way to completely miss my point. I know its A "weak gain" although I've gone over wh yI hate people calling it that many times so not going back into that.
> 
> It also has nothing to do with who I am a fan of or not a fan of. My point, on the biased reporting comment, is just for weeks why Punk/Jericho were pretty much the 10 PM segment i got to read every week that their 150-350 K gains there were "weak gains". This weak a Show segment same #'s range but totally passed over and not even mentioned as weak, jsut shows a biased in the reports thats all.


Link me DIRECTLY and make this case.


----------



## A-C-P

rizzotherat said:


> That's not true and in the past you told me you dont read the newsletter. Dave & Mavias go back 30 years.
> 
> 
> 
> Link me DIRECTLY and make this case.


Link you where? those reports are all in this sticky thread 200-300 pages back go find them if you care that much, I personally have WAY better things to do.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

rizzotherat said:


> That's not true and in the past you told me you dont read the newsletter. Dave & Mavias go back 30 years.


Yes, the Rock and Dave have history, but like The-Rock-Says, they're not close. Dave himself has said on WO that he'll call The Rock and won't get a response until days or weeks later. I know the Rock is busy and that's why it takes him a while to respond, but if they were close friends it wouldn't happen.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Brah, me and Big Dave email each other. We're tight, brah.

Rock and Big Dave aren't close personal friends. Rocky hardly keeps in touch with guy's he traveled the road with for 6 years.

If they were, they'd just call each other instead of emailing.


----------



## Vyed

Not sure how true.. Chris Benoit and the Rock were known to be Meltzer's inside sources during AE and ruthless aggression era.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

'Known' By who?


----------



## HalfNights70

D.M.N. said:


> Commercials are not really a valid reason, they've always existed. Okay, it has _some_ effect, but not a massive effect. If we're to do the hours breakdown without commercials (as a final point here) :
> 
> - hour 1: 4.13 million (+0.23m)
> - hour 2: 5.09 million (+0.21m)
> - hour 3: 5.32 million (+0.24m)
> 
> That's based on my 10 percent from here. So commercials make a difference, but not a massive difference in the grand scheme of things.


If you're talking about an hour, well it will not be a big problem but if you wanna talk about the matches you can see that there is like 2 or 3 commercial breaks during the match not all matches but to be more specific I think I can still remember the Punk/Henry match were there was like 3 commercials but of course it will not effect the 2 hour show if it was in some random slot but it will be a problem for the guy who was in it especially if he was the champ and poeple more often blame the guy for the drop and put the blame fully on him, you see there is reasons for it and there may not be reasons for it as if the guy is just not big enough star. I think it wouldn't be a problem if it was organised.


----------



## rizzotherat

A-C-P said:


> Link you where? those reports are all in this sticky thread 200-300 pages back go find them if you care that much, I personally have WAY better things to do.
> 
> Or you can just trust me that they are there but something tells me thats not gonna happen.


So dont back up your point.




The-Rock-Says said:


> Brah, me and Big Dave email each other. We're tight, brah.
> 
> Rock and Big Dave aren't close personal friends. Rocky hardly keeps in touch with guy's he traveled the road with for 6 years.
> 
> If they were, they'd just call each other instead of emailing.


Again you arent an authority on this. 



Vyed said:


> Not sure how true.. Chris Benoit and the Rock were known to be Meltzer's inside sources during AE and ruthless aggression era.


Benoit is completely untrue at any point of his career




JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> Yes, the Rock and Dave have history, but like The-Rock-Says, they're not close. Dave himself has said on WO that he'll call The Rock and won't get a response until days or weeks later. I know the Rock is busy and that's why it takes him a while to respond, but if they were close friends it wouldn't happen.


Dave said he was busy and didn't want to hassle him. That is him being considerate.

Dave has helped Rock with research on his families career and helped Rock write his induction speech.

The depth of their friendship isnt for you conclusively assess.


----------



## A-C-P

rizzotherat said:


> So dont back up your point.


OK, since this must have gotten posted while i was editing my post here ya go...

Since I am feeling generous her is one report from page 208 (which is easy to go back to from page 408 :lol) you can find the rest yourself if you would like...



> As noted before, the March 20th WWE RAW Supershow did a 3.10 cable rating with 4.38 million viewers.
> 
> In the segment breakdown, Kane vs. Big Show lost 125,000 viewers from the opener which is less than usual for the second slot. Santino Marella vs. David Otunga and the interview with The Rock outside in Philadelphia gained 205,000 viewers. Daniel Bryan vs. Zack Ryder lost 418,000 viewers.
> 
> *Mark Henry vs. John Cena with The Rock coming out gained 327,000 viewers for a 3.20 quarter rating at the top of the hour, which is a weak gain for that timeslot*. The Miz vs. Sheamus lost 279,000 viewers while the Randy Orton interview and Kofi Kingston & R-Truth vs. Jack Swagger & Dolph Ziggler lost 151,000 viewers.
> 
> The final segment with Shawn Michaels, Triple H and The Undertaker gained 597,000 viewers, which is below average, but the 3.32 overrun rating was still the highest rated point of the show. The final segment saw the Male Teens rating go from 2.2 to 2.5, Males 18-49 go from 2.5 to 3.2, Female Teens drop from 0.6 to 0.5 and the rating with Women 18-49 go from 1.1 to 1.2.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

> Again you arent an authority on this.


Yes, yes I am.


----------



## rizzotherat

The-Rock-Says said:


> Yes, yes I am.


As you have Rock in your username?

What creditinals do you have?

You told me you dont read the Observer.

Do you wiretap their calls?


This is getting typically silly and off topic. Post your best case about you being an authority and we will move on.


----------



## A-C-P

The Ratings thread...Silly...The hell you say :lol


----------



## rizzotherat

A-C-P said:


> The Ratings thread...Silly...The hell you say :lol


I dont normally pay attention to it as the last I read it was your typical "Rock mark" vs "Cena mark" level debate.


----------



## Snothlisberger

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> That's not his point. Fact is when Meltzer doesn't like someone he has no problem putting them down and taking shots at that person. For instance, Meltzer doesn't like Bob Backlund. In fact, it could be said that he hates Bob Backlund. When he brings up Backlund he consistently takes shots at the guy. He called Backlund naive, slow, incompetent in his money because he invested it in bad businesses. On the other hand, Meltzer is a Flair mark. For years Meltzer said nothing about Flair's wasteful spending, his overcompensation of alcohol that leads to him getting naked and flashing everyone, or other embarrassing activities. Seriously, most of us didn't learn about the extent of Flair's problem until several months ago when some reporter from a newspaper wrote about it. Do you seriously think Melzter, one of the top journalist on the wrestling business, didn't know about this? For a while the worst you hear Meltzer say about Flair was the mentioning of the plane ride from hell.
> 
> Also, I don't get why people keep saying Rock316AE is Meltzer. I heard Meltzer and Alvarez say a bunch of things that Rock316AE disagrees with. Just recently, Meltzer said that NWO is going to do a bad buyrate and that the Big Show angle this week on Raw did nothing to sell the PPV. He even mentioned that someone in the company called or texted him and said they were worried that the PPV was going to bomb. I'm pretty sure Rock316AE is a Roode fan and I heard and read Meltzer and Alvarez question whether Roode should be the guy and imply that Roode is the reason why TNA's ratings have fallen the past few months. Rock316AE thinks WWE should fire the entire roster, especially the indy, vanilla midgets, but Meltzer and Alvarez have said that WWE needs to continue to push these younger stars instead of the WWE's current method of push, stop out of lack of interest, and depush. There are a bunch of other example that I would have to look up, but I made my point.


http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/6891795/the-wrestler-real-life

http://deadspin.com/5835099/ric-fla...n-though-the-falsehoods-came-from-flairs-book

Flair is a piece of shit.


----------



## Felpent

Vyed said:


> Not sure how true.. Chris Benoit and the Rock were known to be Meltzer's inside sources during AE and ruthless aggression era.


Benoit was well known subscriber of Wrestling observer not a source.


----------



## rizzotherat

I do like the idea that Meltzer never wrote about Flair's drinking and public nudity before the Grantland articles. He must edit that in the Observer back issues or something before posting them.



Felpent said:


> Benoit was well known subscriber of Wrestling observer not a source.


Benoit was a source for Bryan Alverez and the Figure 4 Weekely.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Hold on......just getting a call from Big Dave. BRB.


----------



## LarryCoon

Switch to Wade Keller and Jason Powell. Meltzer and Brian Alvarez analysis consist of sucking Rock's dick to no end.

I may or may not be paid by Pro Wrestling Torch to say this.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

LOL LarryCoon. What a hater.


----------



## Felpent

LarryCoon said:


> Switch to Wade Keller and Jason Powell. Meltzer and Brian Alvarez analysis consist of sucking Rock's dick to no end.
> 
> I may or may not be paid by Pro Wrestling Torch to say this.


GOD NO. Dont ever do that. 

Metlzer and Alvarez are 100 times more reliable than those two. Keller is like your typical IWC moron, most of his opinions/reports are based on speculations going on wrestling boards.


----------



## A-C-P

Felpent said:


> GOD NO. Dont ever do that.
> 
> Metlzer and Alvarez are 100 times more reliable than those two. Keller is like your typical IWC moron, most of his opinions/reports are based on speculations going on wrestling boards.



Insults "IWC Morons"

<insert favorite IWC meme pic here>

Posts on wrestling internet forum.


----------



## Felpent

I meant "Moron(s)" of the IWC, not IWC as a whole. Get a clue.


----------



## A-C-P

If thats what you really meant then I agree there are definitely some moron's that are part of the IWC. Sorry I jsut find it funny when some posting on an internet wrestling forums throws insults about "The IWC"


----------



## THANOS

Yep Meltzer obviously gives zero credit to punk and bryan for anything and it shows. They do an amazing number for their segment and he makes an excuse that he wouldn't normally list if someone like the Rock, HHH, or evidently Big Show was in that segment. Then as I mentioned, we look to the 10pm slot and Big Show gets a 300k gain and Meltzer doesn't call it a week gain like he calls it every time Punk or Bryan gets that number in that slot. What a biased fool.


----------



## Rock316AE

When I talked about Big Show's drawing power as a big and reliable TV attraction for over 15 years, it's not just about one quarter, he gained all over the program even with a backstage segment and the biggest quarter since November 2011 was basically his promo to Vince's face. Great to see because he's doing an awesome job, makes the entire roster looks like amateurs. 

LOL @ Rock as a "close friend", Dave knows Rock's family personally for over 20 years and he emails Rock to ask something, he basically said it himself that Rock responds to him after weeks most of the time. He knows him, like he knows a lot of people, FAR from a close friend. Although I would love to hear The Rock on the Observer Radio one day.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

I would like to hear Meltzer and Alvarez interview Rock, too. I don't like Batista, but his interview with them was very interesting.


----------



## Felpent

THANOS said:


> Yep Meltzer obviously gives zero credit to punk and bryan for anything and it shows. They do an amazing number for their segment and he makes an excuse that he wouldn't normally list if someone like the Rock, HHH, or evidently Big Show was in that segment. Then as I mentioned, we look to the 10pm slot and Big Show gets a 300k gain and Meltzer doesn't call it a week gain like he calls it every time Punk or Bryan gets that number in that slot. What a biased fool.


To be fair, "Weak gain" is meant to be understood, Dave Meltzer doesnt have to note that everytime. Its not like he's false reporting the numbers or anything.


----------



## Rock316AE

The Batista interview was awesome. I always liked the guy, but even if you were never a fan, you will have much more respect for him after hearing him talk about the business, a great wrestling mind. Which is understandable if you see how big he was and how much money he drew in such a short time.


----------



## Starbuck




----------



## swagger_ROCKS

I am sorry, I had no idea who Dave is. Just googled, is he a credible journalist?


----------



## THANOS

Felpent said:


> To be fair, "Weak gain" is meant to be understood, Dave Meltzer doesnt have to note that everytime. Its not like he's false reporting the numbers or anything.


He never notes it outside of Punk/Bryan segments so I think he's trying to shove his bias in with the actual numbers to skew peoples opinions. That much should be pretty evident by now, but you'll see the proof of that next week when Punk and/or Bryan are in the 10pm slot and Meltzer reports "...which is a weak gain" like he always does.


----------



## Rock316AE

Starbuck said:


>


BIG DAVE and The GOAT, nice. If it's real, never saw it before.


----------



## Starbuck

Rock316AE said:


> BIG DAVE and The GOAT, nice. If it's real, never saw it before.


Rock's half is real lol. You can see his tat.


----------



## kokepepsi

Rock did do an interview for f4w I posted it(it was text) but I ain't looking for it again.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Anybody think he looks like matt striker a bit?


----------



## Punked Up

So....Vince/Cena/Punk/Bryan/Kane/Show in a filler month > Show/Kane/Henry/Rock/Jericho/Orton/Triple H/HBK/Undertaker on the road to wrestlemania in ratings?:vince3


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Starbuck said:


>


Ah my boat party I threw a few years ago, quite the night that was, old son.

Haha Rock told this joke that cracked Big Dave up hahaha......you had to be there...


----------



## Rock316AE

That was the time Rock told him to add a zero to every gate he drew? :rocky


----------



## The-Rock-Says

That was also the time he told Dave to bury every segment rating Punk or Bryan do. 

"If it gains 300k, say its a poor rating for that spot, if it does under say the casuals don't think they're stars.". "Right Big Dave, good man.

"Ah there's my good friend Tom Hanks.".


----------



## Rock316AE

Good job Dave, but that's not a hard thing to do. That's like burying Robben on his tremendous luck... 










"The Rock is bigger than Tom Cruise and Tom Hanks but he still has to deal with these, Long Island skanks!"

Rock needs to promote the Wrestling Observer next time he's on RAW, for every time Dave added an extra 1.5 in every quarter he did in 2000.


----------



## Shazayum

There's a PWTorch Torch Talk interview from like 2000 with wade keller and the rock that i've been dying to hear/read. I read an excerpt and it was super interesting...if anyone has it...kindly throw it my way.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

And my way too.


----------



## Rock316AE

It was January 2000(Rock did it in December 99 but Keller put it in the 2000 Newsletter), but I can't find it. Interesting interview, HBK, Austin, locker room feel, series with Foley, breaking records at WM with no celebrities etc.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Come on, 316AE.

Find it, breh.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

WHO'S THE MAN? ME



> *Wade Keller:* Who do you think is the next Rock or the next Steve Austin on the WWF roster? Who has that untapped potential in the type of things that it took for you to make it - the dedication, almost perfectionism, all of those superlatives and adjectives? Who has those qualities so that in a year or three years, they are going to be the next guy knocking at your top spot?
> 
> *Rock*: That is hard to say. We have so much talent in the WWF. We have so many young guys who are clawing and scratching and hungry. I say young like I'm old even though I'm twenty-seven. But there are guys who are twenty-five or twenty-six, I think we have a couple of twenty-four year-olds, again, these guys are hungry which is great to see. So that is a hard question to answer.
> 
> *Keller*: Are there one or two guys, without trying to exclude anyone, that you can name that are above that crowd right now? Is it Andrew Martin, or Edge, or Matt Hardy, or Val Venis? Do any of those names really just stick out or are they all just kind of right there?
> 
> *Rock*: I tell you, all of those guys that you just mentioned are great guys. The Hardy Boys, Edge and Christian, Andrew (Martin).
> 
> *Keller*: D-Lo (Brown)?
> 
> *Rock*: D-Lo, sure, absolutely. Val Venis, I enjoy working with Shawn (Moorley). And I enjoyed him as a heel. He worked with me as a heel and he worked with Steve (Austin) as a heel. In time, I see big things for Shawn as I do for Andrew. Shawn showed that tenacity and that aggressiveness that you need when I worked with him. I can foresee big things for a lot of guys. Even the Dudley Boys. I was pleasantly surprised after our match, our tag match. I thought it went very well. I think they have certain idiosyncrasies that you don't see too often as heels. To be a true heel you can't have an ego. You have to have the mentality that I'm going to go out there and get my ass whooped and I'm going to give this babyface the biggest comeback he's ever had in his life and I'm going to keep these people up as high and for as long as I possibly can. That's the role of being a heel.
> 
> *Keller*: They are willing to show ass, so to speak.
> 
> *Rock*: Absolutely, you've got to. As a heel, you are going to get your ass whooped. If you are a great heel, you can get your ass whooped nightly, and have incredible heat. Going back to me as a heel, whether it was the IC Title or the World Title. I mean, the IC Title, I lost nightly (laughs).
> 
> *Keller*: As did Steve Austin before his WrestleMania win.
> 
> *Rock*: Sure. Absolutely.
> 
> *Keller*: I don't think Austin had one high-profile win over Shawn Michaels or Bret Hart or Undertaker, yet he was the biggest star in the WWF.
> 
> *Rock*: Absolutely. There is something special about getting your ass whooped and walking out the champion.
> 
> *Keller*: I left him off of the list, but a lot of people are talking about Chris Jericho. He's kind of had a rocky start in certain ways, a lot of it due to high expectations, but what is your take on his spot because he's received a bigger push upon entering the WWF than all of those other names that I mentioned?
> 
> *Rock*: Chris did have a hard time initially coming in. We have a different style up here, of working. Chris was so used to working with a lot of the luchadors and that style, again, we have a very distinct WWF-esque type of entertaining style up here. And it has taken Chris a little bit of time to get used to that and acclimate himself to that. Slowly, but surely, he's going to be there.
> 
> *Keller*: Is it fair to blame the DX group for trying to sabotage Chris Jericho's career out of jealous because he is a threat to some of them or all of them? Friends of his in WCW are speculating that that might be the case. Is there any truth to that?
> 
> *Rock*: I couldn't tell you that. I have no idea. Anyone who really knows me knows that I try not to involve myself in a lot of that political bullsh--. You can't hold talent down. There were times when some were trying to hold down the Rock from ascending to that very top tier, but you just can't do it. True or not, who knows?
> 
> *Keller*: But Jericho's adjustment to acclimating himself was not created solely by jealousy on anyone's part, it is simply an acclimation process? Is that fair?
> 
> *Rock*: I think that is fair to say. He was brought in and held in the highest regard and was ready to receive a big push. And of course, he made his debut with the Rock. I felt it was a hell of a segment. So, yes, Chris just needed to get acclimated. He is still acclimating himself and I think he's going to do fine. He should forget about all of the outside bullsh-- that goes on. My advice to Chris has always been, "Never mind the bullsh--, just go out there and do your thing. If you do things right, nothing is going to hold you down."
> 
> *Keller*: I don't think Shawn Michaels's name has come up other than when we talked about the Survivor Series. What are your thoughts on him? Was he helpful to you? Was he a hindrance to you? Was he someone you learned from, even his mistakes? Did he set a good example?
> 
> *Rock*: He was not helpful to me. I never sought his help. I really have nothing to say about Shawn.
> 
> *Keller*: Is that because if you can't say something good, you don't want to say anything at all?
> 
> *Rock*: Not necessarily. He was cordial with me as I was with him. But other than that, he doesn't know me well enough to speak of me and I don't know him well enough to speak of him.
> 
> *Keller*: Michaels is regarded as a fabulous athlete, a fabulous performer, and one of the best of this era or generation. If you agree with that to any degree, do you have a desire to work a top program with him if he were able to come back and work a handful of matches?
> 
> *Rock*: No, I have no desire to work with Shawn. None whatsoever.
> 
> *Keller*: Do you disagree that he was a great performer?
> 
> *Rock*: Not at all. He was a tremendous performer, a tremendous athlete. His work was an asset to the business.
> 
> *Keller*: You said one of your first memories in wrestling was of Pat Patterson. As I understand it, he is incredibly influential to this day when you are working out a match or an interview. What has he meant to you?
> 
> *Rock*: Not really on interviews, but matches. Pat Patterson's mind for the business is amazing. The finishes, the drama that he comes up with is fantastic. I would like to end the misconception that he only comes up with great finishes for the Rock's matches. That's not the case. The top matches have Pat Patterson's finishes. The WWF Title matches have Pat Patterson's finishes. I'm constantly picking his mind as I am Vince's (McMahon's) and guys like that. He just has a tremendous mind for the business. And the guys who reach a certain level and have the privilege of working with him and consume the drama that he comes up with and the theatricalities that he comes up with in terms of match finishes is fantastic.
> 
> *Keller*: What is your favorite match that you've been in to this point?
> 
> *Rock*: My favorite pay-per-view match would have to be WrestleMania XV with Steve and then the match after that, "Backlash" with Steve, as well. And, of course, I've had some great house show matches with Steve. I've had some great house show matches as well as pay-per-view matches with Hunter. I enjoy working with Hunter. Hunter is a real student of the game. He's great to have around and I learn from him. If I learn from him then we feed off of each other. I tell you what, X-Pac is another guy I've had great matches with. I enjoy working with Sean (Waltman, a.k.a. X-Pac).
> 
> *Keller*: X-Pac seems like someone who, if you are not privy to the inner-workings of the wrestling business, you might think he's cool or popular, you might like to see him perform, but I think people are surprised at his age the level of respect he's reached behind the scenes in the business. Some people would be surprised by the respect he has from all levels in wrestling.
> 
> *Rock*: Absolutely. We're the same age, he and I, we're twenty-seven. He's like the oldest twenty-seven year-old I know. I enjoy working with him and I've had some great matches with him. And Mick Foley, too, is another guy I've enjoyed working with over the years. With Mick's style and my style, and especially with all of the pay-per-view matches we did and TV matches and half-time of the Super Bowl, we've had so many matches that we've always been forced to be creative. There is a comedy chemistry that you have with Mick and me. There is an undeniable chemistry there with Mick and me in terms of entertainment. Again, as there is an undeniable kick-ass chemistry between Rock and Austin.
> 
> *Keller*: What did it mean to you to headline WrestleMania? Had it at that point become inevitable and it was just the next logical step, or was there something special about that name , WrestleMania, and being the headliner on the marquee?
> 
> *Rock*: Absolutely. It was very special to me to headline WrestleMania, with the history of WrestleMania, all of those who have been in the headlining position of WrestleMania, and to know that Steve and I did that, pulled in a record number without the celebrities that WrestleMania usually has. That was a fantastic feeling.
> 
> *Keller*: What makes a match good in your eyes? Is it all crowd pops, is it whether it draws money, is it a sense of wanting to do something new?
> 
> *Rock*: What makes a match to me is to not necessarily go out there and do moves that are going to kill you, but to go out there and present a match that is essentially an emotional roller-coaster, complete with ups and downs, drama, and it obviously helps to have two characters in there who click. And, of course, a dramatic ending - win, lose, or draw.
> 
> *Keller*: Seeing what has happened to Steve Austin and looking at Mick Foley today, have you worked very hard at being very efficient, so to speak, in the moves that you do to limit wear and tear on your body?
> 
> *Rock*: I've worked very hard at being efficient. I've worked very hard at being very crisp and solid with what I do. I don't do a thousand moves. I do a good number of moves, but I always make sure that what I do is very solid and I absolutely believe in the moves that I'm doing. They are very crisp, very solid, and very believable. I believe it and I know it comes across that way, that's why I know that the people believe it. It's one of those things that it's easier said than done. It's easier to say than to realize and try to ingest that everything happens for a reason. I told Steve that and I know that Mick knows that, too. Anyone who has had an injury knows that. I've had my fair share of injuries in football and in wrestling, too, but it's one of those things where when you think about it, I don't believe you perform to the best of your ability. You have to go out there and not think about getting hurt, think you are in God's hands, and go out without inhibitions.
> 
> *Keller*: This is one of those locker room scuttlebutt type things, but a couple of years ago I heard that "Rocky is too careful, he's not willing to take enough chances." Was there ever a time when you took that too far?
> 
> *Rock*: I think that came from (laughs). In fact I know that came from the run I had with Mick Foley. Mick Foley was doing everything while the Rock was taking a DDT through a table and that was it (laughs). I was very fortunate as a heel with the heat I got and as a babyface the reactions I get. What I will do is go out there and entertain you. Everything I do will be solid and believable. Mick Foley's choice of path is, as we all know, is very dangerous. And he has chosen that way and he's found his niche and that is his niche. But that certainly is not mine (laughs).
> 
> *Keller*: How about at the time of the ladder match with Triple H? Did you hear any criticism that you were too conservative?
> 
> *Rock*: I never heard any criticism about that, and if I did, I would say okay. That particular ladder match was not necessarily full of taking crazy bumps and unnecessarily crazy bumps, but moreso just putting in thirty minutes of drama and working toward a hell of a reaction at the end of the match. And that is exactly what we got.
> 
> *Keller*: Kind of an emotional roller-coaster ride as opposed to one highspot after another?
> 
> Rock: Oh, absolutely.
> 
> *Keller*: How long do you want to wrestle?
> 
> *Rock*: I want to wrestle as long as I continue to be blessed with the ability. That sounds corny, but it's true.
> 
> *Keller*: Mick Foley came out with this unbelievable book and you have one coming out in a couple of weeks. Are you worried about not living up to Mick Foley's book? Or how is it different from what Mick Foley has done?
> 
> *Rock*: I am not worried about being able to follow Mick's book. The success of Mick's book has been unbelievable and I'm very happy for him. My book, "The Rock Says," is a different type of book. Again, I grew up in the industry whereas Mick didn't. There is different insight coming from a completely different view of growing up in the industry. A lot of the book is written as the Rock speaking, talking about matches. This is where it becomes zany and a laugh-out-loud, hysterically entertaining book. You can imagine.


----------



## Green Light

Rock obviously didn't like HBK did he


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Green Light said:


> Rock obviously didn't like HBK did he


HBK as you probably know, was an ass back then. Bret said he tried to bury Rock to Vince and stop him from breaking that glass ceiling. 

He picked the wrong dude to try and hold down, breh.


----------



## Rock316AE

Nice, I don't know if it's the full interview, because Keller usually did that in 3-4 parts on 3-4 Newsletters but that's enough to realize that Rock is not only the greatest performer/greatest on the mic/most charismatic in wrestling history, but also a wrestling genius. Keep in mind that at that time, he was just 4 actual years in the business. Unbelievable mind for the industry, shows why he became bigger than the entire thing so fast. 

As for HBK, that was then(I'm sure Shawn realized how stupid he was), Rock is all about business, which is why he wrestled more big stars in dream matches than almost any wrestler and did it in the shortest time. He can create these opportunities, Rock/HBK can still happen...Rock/Savage sadly will never happen, so Rock/HBK and Rock/Sting are next, Rock wants Sting for many years now.


----------



## Green Light

What's Dwayne "The Cock" Johnson doing in the Impact Zone Tazz??!


----------



## The-Rock-Says

His name in TNA would be 'The Stone', Green Light.


----------



## Rock316AE

:rocky 

The Rock in the Impact Zone, just the image...That's like putting a Lion in a Hamsters cage.

Yeah Sting needs to wrestle in a stadium for that to happen.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Rock is like a whale in a tear drop in WWE. What would he be like in TNA?


----------



## imnotastar

Kharma in a tear drop :rocky






"DAT POP"

tna can't give the GOAT the pop he deserves anyway.


----------



## Shazayum

Thanks dude, was hoping you had the entire audio though lol. Thats just an excerpt, but its very interesting.


----------



## Choke2Death

The-Rock-Says said:


> His name in TNA would be 'The Stone', Green Light.


And Stone Cold would switch to "Rock Cold" Steven Williams. :austin


----------



## charmed1

The-Rock-Says said:


> Rock is like a whale in a tear drop in WWE. What would he be like in TNA?


A great plus but not needed. TNA has there shows solidly booked and putting over all the right people. WWE can't create a star to save there lives so they need to fall back on the older guys who are proven commodities.


----------



## The GOAT One

Sheamus doing what he does best = lose viewers. 

415,000 in total. Oh dear.

Back to the mid card please Vinny Mac, nothing to see here, move along. :vince3


----------



## The-Rock-Says

SummerLove said:


> Thanks dude, was hoping you had the entire audio though lol. Thats just an excerpt, but its very interesting.


Oh is it?

Anyone with a sub to Torch please get the whole interview in text.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

The-Rock-Says said:


> Rock is like a whale in a tear drop in WWE. What would he be like in TNA?


He'd crush TNA. It would no longer be known as TNA. It would be known as "The People's Show"


----------



## The-Rock-Says

True, Obis 

All 800 of TNA fans in attendance would be chanting 'YOU'VE STILL GOT IT'


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

TheGreatOne. said:


> Sheamus doing what he does best = lose viewers.
> 
> 415,000 in total. Oh dear.
> 
> *Back to the mid card please Vinny Mac, nothing to see here, move along.* :vince3












Sheamus is holding that title till SS and beyond. Expect a good program between him and Wade, Rio, or Orton.


----------



## Rock316AE

The Rock needs to buy TNA and put Dave as the head of creative, get them a bigger Network timeslot, and do mic/performance/charisma classes every Wednesday before the show. 3.0s and 150k PPVs in less than a year.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

I agree.

My new sig is the shit.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

What about Russo?


----------



## Brye

TNA is doing fine as it is.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Chicago Warrior said:


> What about Russo?


Russo's been gone for a while now.


----------



## Medo

Rock316AE said:


> As for HBK, that was then(I'm sure Shawn realized how stupid he was), Rock is all about business, which is why he wrestled more big stars in dream matches than almost any wrestler and did it in the shortest time. He can create these opportunities, Rock/HBK can still happen...Rock/Savage sadly will never happen, so Rock/HBK and Rock/Sting are next, Rock wants Sting for many years now.


*I realy admire The Rock for not saying one single word dissing Miichaels in that interview despite deep down inside him he couldn't stand the guy at that time.

That's why i respect The Great One.*


----------



## The GOAT One

That's why he's the GOAT, Medo. :rocky


----------



## DesolationRow

I've always remembered that Torch Talk with Keller and Rock from back when I first read it in the newsletter (yes, I subscribed to it back then, haha). The lines about a heel being willing to go out there, get heat on them and giving the babyface the biggest damned comeback they've ever had and getting one's ass whooped especially has always stayed with me for one reason or another.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

Rock buying TNA? lol


----------



## deadmau

Mike Tenay: what's the Stone doing in the iMPACT Zone, Taz?
Taz: I have absolutely no idea Mike

after a few moments

Mike Tenay: and now the 200 ******** from the iMPACT Zone chanting the Stone's name... Stony Stony Stony Stony Stony :lmao


----------



## ultimatekrang

*riddle me this...*

how is PUNK being blamed for bad ratings(by iwc..) when CENA is the one in the main even... week in and week out!


----------



## THANOS

*Re: riddle me this...*

Because he's a vanilla indy midget hack remember?  The majority on this forum ACTUALLY believes he's more stale than Cena, which says everything I need to know about their opinions.


----------



## dxbender

*Re: riddle me this...*



ultimatekrang said:


> how is *_____* being blamed for bad ratings(by iwc..)


I think that's all that needs to be said.

How is any superstar being blamed for bad ratings when Raw is a 2 hour(soon to be 3 hour) show. Where about 90 minutes of the 2 hour show is the actual show and 30 mins are commercials. And the most time a star appears on a single episode might be like 20 minutes. 20/130(10 mins of overrun)= 15%.

So at most, a star can appear on Raw for like 15% of a show, and gets blamed for a bad rating for the other 75% of the show.


----------



## GetStokedOnIt

*Re: riddle me this...*

The ratings argument is ridiculous, period. It's a cheap, misinformed way of saying "I think 'wrestler X' sucks and can 'prove it'".


----------



## dxbender

*Re: riddle me this...*



GetStokedOnIt said:


> The ratings argument is ridiculous, period. It's a cheap, misinformed way of saying "I think 'wrestler X' sucks and can 'prove it'".


Don't get why people even care about ratings. For networks like CBS,NBC,FOX. Ratings matter just to see which network is the bigger network of the night, and over a period of time, ratings determine if a show stays on a certain day/time or even just on the air in general.

For WWE, what do ratings mean to them.....USA doesn't really have any competing network, no competing wrestling company for WWE, and no matter what happens, WWE will always find a network for Raw and Smackdown to air, so it's not like ratings mean a single thing for them.

Ratings were only relevant from 1996-2001.


----------



## DegenerateXX

*Re: riddle me this...*



dxbender said:


> I think that's all that needs to be said.
> 
> How is any superstar being blamed for bad ratings when Raw is a 2 hour(soon to be 3 hour) show. Where about 90 minutes of the 2 hour show is the actual show and 30 mins are commercials. And the most time a star appears on a single episode might be like 20 minutes. 20/130(10 mins of overrun)= 15%.
> 
> So at most, a star can appear on Raw for like 15% of a show, and gets blamed for a bad rating for the other 75% of the show.


X2

About time someone says this. Seriously people take notes of this.


----------



## dxbender

*Re: riddle me this...*



DegenerateXX said:


> X2
> 
> About time someone says this. Seriously people take notes of this.


About time....I've been saying this for years lol.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

*Re: riddle me this...*

Ratings are so 2001


----------



## SpeedStick

*Re: riddle me this...*

Bad show, RAW have no mid-card only time to watch is when a main eventer is on air (I.E. Cena, Punk, Ace, HHH,)...


----------



## Bl0ndie

*Re: riddle me this...*



dxbender said:


> I think that's all that needs to be said.
> 
> How is any superstar being blamed for bad ratings when Raw is a 2 hour(soon to be 3 hour) show. Where about 90 minutes of the 2 hour show is the actual show and 30 mins are commercials. And the most time a star appears on a single episode might be like 20 minutes. 20/130(10 mins of overrun)= 15%.
> 
> So at most, a star can appear on Raw for like 15% of a show, and gets blamed for a bad rating for the other *75%* of the show.


*85%

...sorry


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: riddle me this...*

Punk gets the "rating" jokes because WWE let him main event a few times with his buddy Bryan and at one point, Zack Ryder, and the ratings failed to deliver. That was the nail in the coffin after he was already the center of the "ratings failure" arguments last summer when his mega-push failed to raise much numbers. The flame got hotter a few weeks ago when a match between Punk and Bryan lost viewers.

I don't blame anyone in specific for bad ratings, the show sucks and they deserve what they get.


----------



## 666_The_Game_666

*Re: riddle me this...*

cos when Punk was actually in the Main Event segments of Raw the rating did poor and WWE shat themselves cos the ratings apparently mean something again like its 1999. So they put Cena in as many segments as they can so they can get what they would call a decent rating and when they do a poor rating their plan is to either use a certain character in nearly all the shows segments so the casual fan might give a damn about the current product.


----------



## MOX

*Re: riddle me this...*

Guys, and girls, I have to fess up.

The ratings are possibly bad because selfish bastards like me watch Raw, Smackdown and PPVs a day after on Dailymotion and/or Youtube. I couldn't give less of a shit about their ratings. I couldn't give a flying monkey's shag if you are enjoying the shows. I only have enough fucks to give for me, and whether or not I enjoy the shows.

I'm interested in whether or not this wrestler or that wrestler is responsible for the degradation of the DDT maneuver sine Jake's deadly invention, but I'm completely out of fucks for Punk's ratings.

I enjoy the manky cunt, so I'm going to continue enjoying him and also enjoy my life seeming as I am the sperm that won, thus shall I celebrate every single fucking day.

That's right. I'm the sperm that won. So are you. Well done.

Fuck ratings.


----------



## -Extra-

*Re: riddle me this...*

LOLratings

unk2


----------



## dxbender

*Re: riddle me this...*



Bl0ndie said:


> *85%
> 
> ...sorry


lol. How'd I and other ppl who even quoted me, miss that.

85% is even more reason why guys shouldn't be blamed!

Main eventers aren't on tv for 85% of a show yet still get blamed for ratings!


----------



## Hemen

*Re: riddle me this...*



Anark said:


> Guys, and girls, I have to fess up.
> 
> The ratings are possibly bad because selfish bastards like me watch Raw, Smackdown and PPVs a day after on Dailymotion and/or Youtube. I couldn't give less of a shit about their ratings. I couldn't give a flying monkey's shag if you are enjoying the shows. I only have enough fucks to give for me, and whether or not I enjoy the shows.
> 
> I'm interested in whether or not this wrestler or that wrestler is responsible for the degradation of the DDT maneuver sine Jake's deadly invention, but I'm completely out of fucks for Punk's ratings.
> 
> I enjoy the manky cunt, so I'm going to continue enjoying him and also enjoy my life seeming as I am the sperm that won, thus shall I celebrate every single fucking day.
> 
> That's right. I'm the sperm that won. So are you. Well done.
> 
> Fuck ratings.


Nope, ratings are down because overall popularity of WWE is down. 

Are you telling me that you think WWE is as popular as it were in the attitude era? Thats idiotic.

Buyrates and ratings are down because popularity of wrestling has been down since 2006. 

WWE still earns alot of money in terms of multimedia and merchandising.

But what they have earned of the wrestling product itself has gone down since 2006.

So yeah, WWE still earns money in other stuff, but pro wrestling itself is unpopular today.


----------



## Hemen

You can easily see popularity of pro wrestling has gone down by looking at todays society. You dont need a master grade in science to see that. 

Ratings may not matter to some guys, but buyrates does. And buyrates shows that interest of wrestling in recent years has gone down.

Fact is pro wrestling is unpopular in todays society either you guys like it or not.


----------



## KrazyGreen

Hemen said:


> You can easily see popularity of pro wrestling has gone down by looking at todays society. You dont need a master grade in science to see that.
> 
> Ratings may not matter to some guys, but buyrates does. And buyrates shows that interest of wrestling in recent years has gone down.
> 
> Fact is pro wrestling is unpopular in today's society either you guys like it or not.


You're probably very young, because clearly you have no idea what you're talking about. 

The WWE is more popular worldwide today then it was 10 years ago. They have a publicly shared IPO and their stock is decent. They've expanded beyond the realm of "professional wrestling" and into a successful conglomerate beyond being the monopoly of Sports Entertainment. 

You don't understand the semantics and logistics, beyond just ratings, earning sheets, annual merchandise sales vs. demo's in various countries, marketing in demo's that 10 years ago weren't even plausible, endeavors outside the ring for the wrestlers, partnerships with YouTube and other web based networking outlets, etc. The company, per it's annual statements, is netting more revenue now then in previous decades. 

Do a little research before you make incorrect statements.


----------



## Hemen

KrazyGreen said:


> You're probably very young, because clearly you have no idea what you're talking about.
> 
> The WWE is more popular worldwide today then it was 10 years ago. They have a publicly shared IPO and their stock is decent. They've expanded beyond the realm of "professional wrestling" and into a successful conglomerate beyond being the monopoly of Sports Entertainment.
> 
> You don't understand the semantics and logistics, beyond just ratings, earning sheets, annual merchandise sales vs. demo's in various countries, marketing in demo's that 10 years ago weren't even plausible, endeavors outside the ring for the wrestlers, partnerships with YouTube and other web based networking outlets, etc. The company, per it's annual statements, is netting more revenue now then in previous decades.
> 
> Do a little research before you make incorrect statements.


Incorrect statements, wtf. Yes, i meant that WWE as a company earns more, but the wrestling product itself has been more unpopular than it were for example 12 years ago? 

Is that incorrect you idiot?

Yes, the company earns more than before. But as i said it's because of merchandising and multimedia interest in the wrestling product itself has been going down. 


It hasnt gone beyond the real of proffesional wrestling, it has just found other ways to earn money now that professional wrestling is unpopular.

The wrestling product itself is important. Imagine if they could make new boom era + to earn money they do today. 

The money they would earn would be alot more than they would today.

But the wrestling product itself is unpopular because of societys opinion on pro wrestling, + poor product and + they havent found guys that can draw llke Hogan and Rock.

As long as there is money to make and imporvement to make the wrestling product is important even though they ear n money with other stuff these days. Fact is they could earn alot more with the wrestling product if they would make improvements on it that would make more interest on it.


----------



## Cliffy

I love bryan and Punk fans.

Haven't realised that Vince is grudgingly accepting them and does infact blame them for bad ratings.

Get ready for the influx of bodybuilders.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

I was listening to a Cena interview with the Observer from 2001 last night. On the interview Dave said Heat had done a 2.4 that week and Live Wire did a 1.4 :bron


----------



## Rock316AE

Dave on squash matches ratings:


> Q: Dave/Bryan,
> 
> Just curious how the ratings have been for Ryback matches have been. I guess the same would apply for Clay and Sandow, basically the guys being brought in the way people used to brought in, ie essentially squash matches.
> 
> If the ratings aren’t noticeably dipping for these segments, do you think there’s a chance that WWE might slowly morph back into having more squash matches on RAW and SD, which would help protect people and maybe make some new stars?
> 
> DM: I don't get quarter hours for Smackdown. As far as Raw goes, it varies. Ryback's squash on 6/11 did fine, but on 6/4 it lost viewers. Sin Cara squashes on 6/4 did well but on 6/11 it didn't do well. Vader's squash on 6/11 did really well. It comes down to the person. If the guy was over, he'd gain viewers for a squash. If he's so-so over, then the results would be so-so. When Bill Goldberg was in WCW, his squashes would, on average, see ratings jump 0.4 every time he was out there which is a huge deal, and that's with another competitive show on at the same time.





Chicago Warrior said:


> What about Russo?


Russo will be the guy writing the skits of course...


----------



## Kabraxal

Cliffy Byro said:


> I love bryan and Punk fans.
> 
> Haven't realised that Vince is grudgingly accepting them and does infact blame them for bad ratings.
> 
> Get ready for the influx of bodybuilders.


And get ready as more fans leave the WWE when they continue to hire no talent hacks that simply "look the role". Too bad so many people don't have a damn clue and realise the "look" is only a small part of it at best. It's charisma.. it's talent in the ring and on the mic... it's all about performing. That is how Foley got over. That is how Jake the Snake got over. And Piper. Hell, most people didn't have this look so many are infatuated with... there are actually only a few that have had that body builder statuesque look and that actually hit it huge.


----------



## JasonLives

Rock316AE said:


> Dave on squash matches ratings:


Still dont understand how you rate how well a sqaush did based on a Quarterhour. A squash it at most 5 minutes, including entrances/hightlights. Thats not gonna determine how well the quarter did, especially if there is 10 minutes left of god knows what.

Who knows, maybe the guy actually gains viewers for the squash but when the match is over and the commercials starts then the viewers leave again. So just by looking at the quarterhours, it would seem like the guy didnt gain at all. But minute by minute numbers show otherwise.

I just find it pointless looking at the quarterhour numbers if a match or segment didnt take up almost all of it.


----------



## Rock316AE

I just watched the new Russo shoot(not the live show he did), a lot of interesting and 100% true things:

Russo said that when RAW was at its peak, he was sitting with Vince every week on the minute/minute breakdown of ratings to see what works, what did well, he put on TV more the next week. Which is why they were always booking week to week, always based on the ratings. 

Talked about the fact that the audience don't care about wrestling matches and just wait to see the results, usually what happens after the match is doing a bigger number than the match. 

When he was asked if he was watching the product today, he said no but when he changes channels and watch from time to time, he said that almost nobody looks like a star, all of them looks like regular people. Said how the people in the office are allowing this to happen and why the hell he should watch some ordinary guys pretending to be wrestlers. 

He said that if he can pick one person from the industry today to start a company, he will pick Randy Orton because of how believable he is with his character. He said that if he watches a wrestling program and even thinks "I can take this guy", you're killing the entire aura of this business. He said that if he sees a guy like Orton, he is doing his gimmick to perfection and can be legit intimidating. 

Who can be the next Rock from the industry today? He said nobody from this material.

When clueless marks always talking about "Russo finish" and all that BS without understanding that there are agents who are booking this and he's just the TV writer, a guy who write characters to draw the biggest rating possible. That's not even his aspect(go back a few pages ago to the Rock interview when he talks about Patterson booking the finish for top matches)Basically how people think they know the business and talking based on slogans and stigmas.

The business is dying, irrelevant and out of touch with the real world. The creative meetings of 20 guys with 20 different visions are ridiculous. When the numbers were at the peak, 2 guys were writing the shows, Russo and Ed, with Vince giving his touch to the full script, now 20 people are writing the shows and the numbers are almost all-time low, so where's the logic here? He said that he will come back to WWE but only if he can truly make a difference like he did in the past, if he's just a part of that 20 people meeting, it's not worth his time or the company's.

Great interview, especially the second part, Russo understands the business and what the masses want to see, his mentality is spot on and when he's not talking about 2.6-3.5 on Nitro 2000, he's 100% real in everything he says.


----------



## TheRainKing

Rock316AE said:


> I just watched the new Russo shoot(not the live show he did), a lot of interesting and 100% true things:
> 
> Russo said that when RAW was at its peak, he was sitting with Vince every week on the minute/minute breakdown of ratings to see what works, what did well, he put on TV more the next week. Which is why they were always booking week to week, always based on the ratings.
> 
> Talked about the fact that the audience don't care about wrestling matches and just wait to see the results, usually what happens after the match is doing a bigger number than the match.
> 
> *When he was asked if he was watching the product today, he said no but when he changes channels and watch from time to time, he said that almost nobody looks like a star, all of them looks like regular people. Said how the people in the office are allowing this to happen and why the hell he should watch some ordinary guys pretending to be wrestlers.
> 
> He said that if he can pick one person from the industry today to start a company, he will pick Randy Orton because of how believable he is with his character. He said that if he watches a wrestling program and even thinks "I can take this guy", you're killing the entire aura of this business. He said that if he sees a guy like Orton, he is doing his gimmick to perfection and can be legit intimidating.
> 
> Who can be the next Rock from the industry today? He said nobody from this material.*
> 
> When clueless marks always talking about "Russo finish" and all that BS without understanding that there are agents who are booking this and he's just the TV writer, a guy who write characters to draw the biggest rating possible. That's not even his aspect(go back a few pages ago to the Rock interview when he talks about Patterson booking the finish for top matches)Basically how people think they know the business and talking based on slogans and stigmas.
> 
> The business is dying, irrelevant and out of touch with the real world. The creative meetings of 20 guys with 20 different visions are ridiculous. When the numbers were at the peak, 2 guys were writing the shows, Russo and Ed, with Vince giving his touch to the full script, now 20 people are writing the shows and the numbers are almost all-time low, so where's the logic here? He said that he will come back to WWE but only if he can truly make a difference like he did in the past, if he's just a part of that 20 people meeting, it's not worth his time or the company's.
> 
> Great interview, especially the second part, Russo understands the business and what the masses want to see, his mentality is spot on and when he's not talking about 2.6-3.5 on Nitro 2000, he's 100% real in everything he says.


He is spot on there.

Wrestlers use to look intimidating, but this current roster just look like a bunch of poor actors.


----------



## -Skullbone-

TheRainKing said:


> He is spot on there.
> 
> Wrestlers use to look intimidating, but this current roster just look like a bunch of poor actors.


All of them? Honestly? I certainly wouldn't want to run into a few of them on a bad day. I'm more fond of there being less carnival freaks these days whose purpose is best suited for people to gawk at. Don't get me wrong though, it makes for a great story if they all had talent that went along with their look.



Rock316AE said:


> I just watched the new Russo shoot(not the live show he did), a lot of interesting and 100% true things:
> 
> Russo said that when RAW was at its peak, he was sitting with Vince every week on the minute/minute breakdown of ratings to see what works, what did well, he put on TV more the next week. Which is why they were always booking week to week, always based on the ratings.
> 
> Talked about the fact that the audience don't care about wrestling matches and just wait to see the results, usually what happens after the match is doing a bigger number than the match.
> 
> When he was asked if he was watching the product today, he said no but when he changes channels and watch from time to time, he said that almost nobody looks like a star, all of them looks like regular people. Said how the people in the office are allowing this to happen and why the hell he should watch some ordinary guys pretending to be wrestlers.
> 
> He said that if he can pick one person from the industry today to start a company, he will pick Randy Orton because of how believable he is with his character. He said that if he watches a wrestling program and even thinks "I can take this guy", you're killing the entire aura of this business. He said that if he sees a guy like Orton, he is doing his gimmick to perfection and can be legit intimidating.
> 
> Who can be the next Rock from the industry today? He said nobody from this material.
> 
> When clueless marks always talking about "Russo finish" and all that BS without understanding that there are agents who are booking this and he's just the TV writer, a guy who write characters to draw the biggest rating possible. That's not even his aspect(go back a few pages ago to the Rock interview when he talks about Patterson booking the finish for top matches)Basically how people think they know the business and talking based on slogans and stigmas.
> 
> The business is dying, irrelevant and out of touch with the real world. The creative meetings of 20 guys with 20 different visions are ridiculous. When the numbers were at the peak, 2 guys were writing the shows, Russo and Ed, with Vince giving his touch to the full script, now 20 people are writing the shows and the numbers are almost all-time low, so where's the logic here? He said that he will come back to WWE but only if he can truly make a difference like he did in the past, if he's just a part of that 20 people meeting, it's not worth his time or the company's.
> 
> Great interview, especially the second part, Russo understands the business and what the masses want to see, his mentality is spot on and when he's not talking about 2.6-3.5 on Nitro 2000, he's 100% real in everything he says.


It's ironic that you base a conclusion on WWE being out of touch when it appears you're pushing for taller, musclier guys to spearhead the company. Look is important of course, it helps round out a character type and sustains the audience's perception of them. There has to be variety in there for goodness sake. Are we supposed to take heel characters like Miz as serious, no nonsense arse kickers? Of course not, and his look is indicative of his character's traits. 

There's more to deterioration of the industry "aura" than stringently maintaining a certain look. Creativity and lack of special talent for starters. Orton, for instance, may be equipped with a good look, talent to boot and a fair depiction of a sociopathic character. Even by his own admission, though, the character is pretty flat. Why is that? Lack of enthralling surrounding characters to create any intriguing stories he could be involved in (the Kane thing wasn't terrible, although it was terribly one-note). It's interesting to see you included his mentioning of The Rock and the connection to quality of material from his time to that of today. Aside from his extraordinary abilities as a performer, this problem of choice material is pretty much etched in stone for creative to wrap their heads around. 

I haven't heard this Russo interview, but taking into account his previous recollections on how he'd work closely with characters surely he's aware of how one-dimensional characters and distinct lack of creativity in mindset are stagnating things. Looks work on a superficial level and adds to the aura, but doesn't make it 100% as you put it. I know kids like simple, but they can appreciate certain things of slightly higher intellectual value, as can older audiences. Just something to invest in with confident company backing for goodness sake.


----------



## TheRainKing

-Skullbone- said:


> All of them? Honestly? I certainly wouldn't want to run into a few of them on a bad day. I'm more fond of there being less carnival freaks these days whose purpose is best suited for people to gawk at. Don't get me wrong though, it makes for a great story if they all had talent that went along with their look.


Well I'm not suggesting I can take someone from the current roster in a fight. I'm just saying, if you compare them to the rosters from the past, they do not look very tough or intimidating.

Here are some examples..













































Compared to























































Who would you be more afraid of?

Image is arguably the most important attribute when it comes to being a wrestler in the WWE. People rarely idolise wrestlers that are small and ordinary looking. What they want is larger than life characters and big impressive athletes. They are always the most successful wrestlers. Obviously you need some kind of talent with that to become a megastar, and thats how wrestlers like Rock, Austin and Hogan became so big.

Batista is a good example of how far having the right appearance can take you. He didn't have much talent, but he did have a great look, and he became one of the biggest stars in the company.

Image is important when it comes to selling a wrestling show as well. If the wrestlers involved don't look serious or tough then people will never believe the story lines, promos and matches and they won't care enough to tune in or buy PPVs.


----------



## Brye

I seriously don't understand how someone can supposedly be a fan of wrestling and not care what the match looks like. Even when I was 7 I still cared.


----------



## JasonLives

CM Punk looks way more dangerous then the other barbiedolls. Dude looks like he could make some pretty good meth, probably packing aswell.


----------



## Da Silva

I like RainKing picked the current lots least intimidating photos and the old guards most intimidating. Fucking wow, skew things to fit your message why don't you.


----------



## TheRainKing

Da Silva said:


> I like RainKing picked the current lots least intimidating photos and the old guards most intimidating. Fucking wow, skew things to fit your message why don't you.


I just picked what came up on google image search. The only filtering I did was to make sure the pictures I chose were not too big or small.

Type those names in on google image search for yourself and you'll see practically the same pattern. The current roster look jolly, colourful and fake; whereas the old stars look tough and intimidating.


----------



## -Skullbone-

TheRainKing said:


> I just picked what came up on google image search. The only filtering I did was to make sure the pictures I chose were not too big or small.
> 
> Type those names in on google image search for yourself and you'll see practically the same pattern. The current roster look jolly, colourful and fake; whereas the old stars look tough and intimidating.


Many of those old stars stuck around and can still be seen wrestling these days. Interestingly enough, one of those guys got his big break in 2004 after having his look altered from the one you posted. 

You mention the importance of image and I completely agree that it's a key selling point for the business. The notion of look is not limited to the physique, but also the presentation of their character; namely strengths, individuality and their placement in a particular story. Creating a compelling image and personality is paramount. Of course believability is important, but that is also a result of adequate booking that cements the position in the eyes of viewers. 

I think Batista was the beneficiary of fantastic booking and great backing, particularly in his fued with Evolution which saw him rise through to the Main Event . That's not a knock on him as a performer personally, even though I don't care much for his talents. He is an important example of the role playing up the strengths of a performer (even if they may only be marginal) and fully accentuating them through the character's image. His physique was important in establishing his 'toughness', but his _overall_ image was the thing that stood out in the minds of viewers. Remember the tweaks in his attire as he became heel later on? His image became a little more outlandish and attention-grabbing which worked well into his prima donna- esque attitude.


----------



## dxbender

I really hope quarterly ratings are posted. Will love to see the rating drop for the promo with slater,piper and those 2 other ppl


----------



## D.M.N.

Estimated timings...

21:00 to 21:13 - Opening Segment (13 minutes)
--> commercial [4 minutes]
21:17 to 21:22 - Sheamus/Punk vs Kane/Bryan (5 minutes)
--> commercial [4 minutes]
21:26 to 21:35 - Sheamus/Punk vs Kane/Bryan (9 minutes)
--> commercial [4 minutes]
21:39 to 21:42 - Vickie/Dolph/Swagger backstage, Laurinitis/Otunga/Show backstage (3 minutes)
21:42 to 21:49 - Dolph vs Swagger (7 minutes)
21:49 to 21:50 - Triple H/No Way Out promo (1 minute)
--> commercial [4 minutes]
21:54 to 21:57 - Raw 100th moment (3 minutes)
21:57 to 22:10 - Triple H/Heyman segment (13 minutes)
--> commercial [4 minutes]
22:14 to 22:20 - Del Rio vs Santino (6 minutes)
22:20 to 22:22 - Cyndi Lauper hype (2 minutes)
--> commercial [3 minutes]
22:25 to 22:36 - Lauper segment (11 minutes)
--> commercial [4 minutes]
22:40 to 22:46 - Primetime Players vs Primo and Epico (6 minutes)
--> commercial [4 minutes]
22:50 to 22:51 - Raw 1000th promo (1 minute)
22:51 to 22:54 - Laurinitis promo (3 minutes)
--> commercial [3 minutes]
22:57 to 23:11 - Handicap match (14 minutes)

I genuinely hope that hour two is not higher than hour one. If it is higher, I hope it's because of Triple H and Heyman, and not because of Cena.


----------



## SteenIsGod

Brye said:


> I seriously don't understand how someone can supposedly be a fan of wrestling and not care what the match looks like. Even when I was 7 I still cared.


Do you mean match quality or Big men in a match to make it seem more like a real fight?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

You're the man, D.M.N. Thanks for posting that. And I agree with you on that last sentence.


----------



## dxbender

D.M.N. said:


> Estimated timings...
> 
> 21:00 to 21:13 - Opening Segment (13 minutes)
> --> commercial [4 minutes]
> 21:17 to 21:22 - Sheamus/Punk vs Kane/Bryan (5 minutes)
> --> commercial [4 minutes]
> 21:26 to 21:35 - Sheamus/Punk vs Kane/Bryan (9 minutes)
> --> commercial [4 minutes]
> 21:39 to 21:42 - Vickie/Dolph/Swagger backstage, Laurinitis/Otunga/Show backstage (3 minutes)
> 21:42 to 21:49 - Dolph vs Swagger (7 minutes)
> 21:49 to 21:50 - Triple H/No Way Out promo (1 minute)
> --> commercial [4 minutes]
> 21:54 to 21:57 - Raw 100th moment (3 minutes)
> 21:57 to 22:10 - Triple H/Heyman segment (13 minutes)
> --> commercial [4 minutes]
> 22:14 to 22:20 - Del Rio vs Santino (6 minutes)
> 22:20 to 22:22 - Cyndi Lauper hype (2 minutes)
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:25 to 22:36 - Lauper segment (11 minutes)
> --> commercial [4 minutes]
> 22:40 to 22:46 - Primetime Players vs Primo and Epico (6 minutes)
> --> commercial [4 minutes]
> 22:50 to 22:51 - Raw 1000th promo (1 minute)
> 22:51 to 22:54 - Laurinitis promo (3 minutes)
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:57 to 23:11 - Handicap match (14 minutes)
> 
> I genuinely hope that hour two is not higher than hour one. If it is higher, I hope it's because of Triple H and Heyman, and not because of Cena.


So if hour 2 is high, it's cause HHH/Heyman segment which lasted 10 minutes on hour 2? And if hour 2 is bad, its cause Cena was on tv for 14 minutes while there were about 40 minutes of the 2nd hour NOT containing Cena


----------



## D.M.N.

If Hour 2 is marginally higher than Hour 1, then yes I would hope that's due to HHH and Heyman.
If Hour 2 is significantly higher than Hour 1, then I suspect unfortunately WWE's core audience liked the final segment and the Lauper segment.


----------



## Kabraxal

D.M.N. said:


> If Hour 2 is marginally higher than Hour 1, then yes I would hope that's due to HHH and Heyman.
> If Hour 2 is significantly higher than Hour 1, then I suspect unfortunately WWE's core audience liked the final segment and the Lauper segment.


I don't know... it could be people watched something else the first hour then switched since nothing else was on. I mean, I missed the first hour then only switched over around the last half hour to make sure I caught Common Law.


----------



## D.M.N.

The problem also is that Cyndi Lauper is not relevant to today's Raw audience. At least last week I think the majority of the audience would have heard the name Vader or would probably have Google'd the name afterwards and watched a few of his clips.


----------



## Brye

SteenIsGod said:


> Do you mean match quality or Big men in a match to make it seem more like a real fight?


I'm talking both. Match quality always mattered to me and then I couldn't care less if it seems like a 'real' fight because it isn't real. Usually matches like Show/Kane did nothing for me but I'll admit that they can occasionally be good (Taker/Show - CS '08). But I'm just more into matches.


----------



## D.M.N.

4.853m and 5.072m.

_Source: TV By The Numbers_

Average of *4.962m*, only marginally down on the hour two and hour three average of *4.981m* from last week...


----------



## Starbuck

Better. Much better. If they can keep this up things will be looking good for MITB and heading into the summer.


----------



## D.M.N.

Interestingly, a 3.4 cable rating, will make it the highest rating for Raw since the post-WrestleMania show. I can't believe I've actually just typed that given the quality, but hey ho.


----------



## JasonLives

So if it was in line with last week that should be around a 3.4 rating. 

Not bad, not bad at all. But was expecting them to do this with the stipulation at No Way Out.


----------



## Brye

More Roddy Piper plz.

Although I don't ever want to see another one of those shit main events again.


----------



## KO Bossy

Brye said:


> More Roddy Piper plz.
> 
> Although I don't ever want to see another one of those shit main events again.


Roddy "Ratingz" Piper. 

I don't want to see another one of those crappy main events either, but let's face it, that's exactly what we're gonna see...over and over again.


----------



## Starbuck

D.M.N. said:


> Interestingly, a 3.4 cable rating, will make it the highest rating for Raw since the post-WrestleMania show. I can't believe I've actually just typed that given the quality, but hey ho.


Big Johnny and DEM RATINGZ


----------



## The GOAT One

People really hate johnny ....


----------



## Amuroray

Cena once again gets high ratings


----------



## D.M.N.

Excluding commercials, Raw averaged approximately *5.029 million* (+176k) and *5.244 million* (+172k).


----------



## Starbuck

These quarter hours shall be interesting as always lol. Both hours are pretty consistent though so it's either going to be minimal gains and losses throughout the show or huge gains and losses at the all important opener, 10pm and overrun quarters. We shall see but one thing is certain, Big Johnny draws dem numbers.


----------



## KO Bossy

I love how people are calling this 3.4 rating great and whatnot. In reality, 3.4 is really nothing special, its very routine for what we saw about 4 months ago. The only reason people are fawning over it is because its a bit up from the embarrassing 2.7 and 2.9 ratings from a few weeks ago. When compared to those, 3.4 is good, but on its own, its average at best.

Of course idiots will just attribute that to Cena and ignore the fact that even with him on the show 2 weeks ago it still drew a 2.9. Face it, as much as you'd like to believe, Cena does not influence the ratings THAT much. If anything they wanted to see the Triple H fallout and anything that happened with Big Johnny because those were the only different things on the show (plus Piper of course).


----------



## Firallon

People are starting to tune in now that Big Johnny is finally gone.


----------



## SteenIsGod

Oh God, John Larunitis coming back on TV now.


----------



## Felpent

Calm down people, its fall-out from last nights PPV. Rating usually is high following PPVs.

Lets see how next week does before judging what actually draws.


----------



## chronoxiong

Rodney the Piper brings them ratings!!!! What a good rating for an average/below average show. I want to see the segment ratings to see who really was bringing the viewers. I'm tired of seeing Cena end the shows but it seems like the ratings are working in spite of it. Darn!!!!


----------



## King_Of_This_World

It really does astonish me that 4-5 million people keep on tuning in each monday for such a poor/below average product.

The 'WWE' brand is some seriously strong shit.


----------



## KO Bossy

chronoxiong said:


> _*Rodney*_ the Piper brings them ratings!!!! What a good rating for an average/below average show. I want to see the segment ratings to see who really was bringing the viewers. I'm tired of seeing Cena end the shows but it seems like the ratings are working in spite of it. Darn!!!!


?????????????????????


----------



## chronoxiong

That's what Santino used to call Piper when Santino was a heel and used to feud with Piper. He also used to call the Honky Tonk Man the "****** Donkey Man."


----------



## KO Bossy

How long ago was that?


----------



## chronoxiong

During 2008-09 when he wasn't seen as a joke. Lol...Seriously, Santino mispronounces many WWE superstars names and it's just part of his character.


----------



## KO Bossy

Hmmm, I wasn't watching in 2008-2009 (lucky me apparently). That explains why I had no idea what you were talking about.


----------



## dxbender

How did so many people tune in for the whole show? Proving yet again how viewership numbers doesn't mean a good show. 4M with a great show, or 5M with a bad show. I'd take 4M cause I don't care how many people watch.



chronoxiong said:


> During 2008-09 when he wasn't seen as a joke. Lol...Seriously, Santino mispronounces many WWE superstars names and it's just part of his character.


lol. That's one of the funny things about Santino is when he mispronounces guys names. Like Michael McGilligillicutty and Damien Sandhouse(I think that's what he called him)


----------



## Jingoro

Raw has been pretty weak for several weeks in a row. I'm watching mainly for daniel bryan, c.m. punk, kane, and a.j. lee. everything else is boring and/or stupid. the last memorable Raw was the one lesnar broke triple h's arm. i don't even recall if it was a great show overall, but at least it had that one awesome segment. everything else since then has been bryan, punk, aj, and kane being interesting and everyone else sucking miles of [email protected] they need to do something drastic like hire writers who have some talent and have written for real tv shows. people that are outside of the wrestling biz and can come up with fresh ideas. their current writers and whomever else is responsible for this garbage weekly have clearly run out of ideas.


----------



## Hades1313

Jingoro said:


> Raw has been pretty weak for several weeks in a row. I'm watching mainly for daniel bryan, c.m. punk, and a.j. lee. everything else is boring and/or stupid.


I thought last weeks Raw with Vinny Mac was one of the better ones this year. Yesterdays sucked.


----------



## Jingoro

Hades1313 said:


> I thought last weeks Raw with Vinny Mac was one of the better ones this year. Yesterdays sucked.


it was better i'll admit, but this week it did revert back to crap. even with vince it wasn't a great show. the backstage segment with him and brodus clay's dancers was painfully unfunny as was the part with vince and hornswoggle doing stroked out jr impressions. those two segments were zero stars and embarrassing to watch alone. i put my hand over my face in disgrace that i was watching something that bad on purpose. i forgot to say i voted "watchable", but if it doesn't get better soon i may have to take a vacation from wrestling at least until lesnar comes back.


----------



## fabi1982

Monday ratings:

Hour1: 4.853
Hour2: 5.072

Looks like many people were interested in Cena beating Big Jonnny...Hope that don´t mean more Cena final segments =/

EDIT: didnt saw that the numbers were posted by two pages before


----------



## D.M.N.

KO Bossy said:


> I love how people are calling this 3.4 rating great and whatnot. In reality, 3.4 is really nothing special, its very routine for what we saw about 4 months ago. The only reason people are fawning over it is because its a bit up from the embarrassing 2.7 and 2.9 ratings from a few weeks ago. When compared to those, 3.4 is good, but on its own, its average at best.


That's really not true at all. Since about 2008/09, a 3.4 rating in June would be good. Normally Raw at that stage is doing 3.1's.

As for Big Johnny, the ratings have only gone up last week and this week because he's job is under threat, ie. the viewing audience want him off their screens as he is detrimental to the product.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Or they are interested in Johnny. I know, big shock.


----------



## D.M.N.

The-Rock-Says said:


> Or they are interested in Johnny. I know, big shock.


If they were interested in Johnny, the ratings would have been good for the past few months since he was put in charge. Except, they haven't been good.


----------



## Starbuck

> _The Monday Night Raw from Nassau Coliseum was a hit in the TV ratings. The HHH/Heyman business along with the Cena/Big Johnny content at the end of the night were big winners._


From JR's blog.


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> From JR's blog.


So basically, the 2 timeslots that usually do the highest rating, did the highest rating monday night? :lol WOW :cena2


----------



## Starbuck

Come on ACP. You know that whenever Punk is on at 10pm it certainly isn't the highest rated segment.

:vince2


----------



## A-C-P

Starbuck said:


> Come on ACP. You know that whenever Punk is on at 10pm it certainly isn't the highest rated segment.
> 
> :vince2


Yeh but thats b/c he is facing geeks like Jericho,Bryan, Miz, and ADR in that slot all the time. :bryan

BTW I was making a joke and am not trying to argue Big Johnny did not have a positive effect on rating #s (And I know you probably knwo that Starbuck but alot of people won't :lol)


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

JR has that info?

Regardless, I believe it no doubt. One had Heyman and HHH and the other had Cena/Ace getting fired in the OR.


----------



## BANKSY

Why does Cena vs Cole/Ace always seems to do good ratings.

Casuals > IWC.


----------



## HHH - The King

Lil'Jimmy said:


> Why does Cena vs Cole/Ace always seems to do good ratings.
> 
> Casuals > IWC.


Because they always close the show and people are conditioned to tune in at that time every monday.


----------



## Starbuck

A-C-P said:


> Yeh but thats b/c he is facing geeks like *Jericho*,Bryan, Miz, and ADR in that slot all the time. :bryan


Just noticed that you said Jericho here. Jericho? Jericho was from the AE therefore he's automatically better than all the indy hacks today. FFS ACP, get your shit together! You should know that!


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

OMG YAY I GETZ TO POST BREAKDOWN AGAIN!



> - As noted before, the June 18th WWE RAW Supershow scored a 3.40 cable rating with 4.97 million viewers. This is the best rating RAW has done since the day after WrestleMania 27.
> 
> In the segment breakdown, CM Punk and Sheamus vs. Daniel Bryan and Kane lost 241,000 viewers from the opener that started strong. Dolph Ziggler vs. Jack Swagger lost 22,000 more viewers. The segment with Paul Heyman and Triple H gained 559,000 more viewers for a show-high 3.74 quarter rating.
> 
> Santino Marella vs. Alberto Del Rio lost 711,000 viewers. The segment with Heath Slater, Wendi Richter, Cyndi Lauper and Roddy Piper lost 12,000 more viewers. John Cena vs. David Otunga and John Laurinaitis in the main event gained 573,000 viewers to a 3.74 quarter rating.


-Wrestling Observer


Not a bad drop for the tag match in Q2 since it was in just that... quarter 2. Not to mention the opener was strong. Hell Swagger/Ziggler bad either all things considered. Heyman/HHH as expected drew in a lot, better than the average for the 10PM timeslot and got the highest rating/viewership of the night (though OR is same rating, viewership might be higher). Santino/Del Rio losing that many viewers viewers is music to my ears tbh. The Lauper segment losing more viewers is great to see as well since it was shit. The main event was of course going to do a lot with who was involved.

I feel though we're missing a bit. Got this from NoDQ (and the source for them was The Wrestling Observer), but it seems a bit empty.


----------



## Mqwar

Lauper/piper segment could be considered a success because the segment lost only 12,000 viewers. 

Santino is on a roll being a weekly ratings killer. Take the title off him and put it on swagger or better yet on damien sandow.


----------



## HHHbkDX

How did that abomination of a show get a 3.4 rating!? 

I HOPE that doesn't mean they're going to view that as a "success" and continue the crap they've been spewing for the past few weeks. ;/


----------



## chronoxiong

ADR is a ratings killer. Ouch.


----------



## DesolationRow

Santino is DAT RATINGS KILLER, dawg.

Seriously, he's been in segments that have seen Alicia Fox-level devastation in viewership losses. Granted, he generally appears in segments that are thoroughly inundated with commercials and his match or segment is typically kept rather short, but on Raw this week they advertised him vs. Del Rio at roughly the top of that quarter hour, and that is just a terrible, terrible number, in any case. 

Triple H-eyman segments doin' da big numbers.


----------



## SteenIsGod

When Has Santino Lost Viewers before? Sorry, I usually don't look at breakdowns.


----------



## THANOS

Danny_Westbrook said:


> :lol .Another week, another 100k viewer dropped from this part time electrician. Seriously, who was its idea that somebody that looks like a Pizza Hut delivery guy could pass as the main champion of any combat sport or any sports entertainment ever?


Just stop it fpalm. Can you not read? Meltzer said the show opened STRONG, and "only" lost 200k viewers for quarter 2. Have you not seen what second quarters usually loose?


----------



## Jammy

Danny_Westbrook said:


> :lol .Another week, another 100k viewer dropped from this part time electrician. Seriously, who was its idea that somebody that looks like a Pizza Hut delivery guy could pass as the main champion of any combat sport or any sports entertainment ever?


You don't know how to read ratings. Post above me sorts you out. + let's not forget multiple advertisements.


----------



## D.M.N.

_Please also read here and here, the second link is from last week._

Firstly, one thing I absolutely hate is when they throw two quarters together and come up with a 'loss'. Dolph vs Swagger went over two quarters (Q3/Q4) yet they 'claim' that they lost 22k. Anyway here's what I have:

Q1 - 3.51 rating / 5.04 million
Q2 + Q3 - 3.34 rating / 4.80 million
Q4 - 3.33 rating / 4.78 million
Q5 - 3.74 rating / 5.34 million
Q6 - 3.13 rating / 4.62 million
Q7 - 3.12 rating / 4.61 million
Q8 + Overrun - 3.74 rating / 5.19 million

For the purpose of the following, I've broken up Q8 and Q9 into two separate ratings so that the breakdown below makes sense. The overrun obviously had more viewers than Q8 yet at the moment the breakdown wouldn't support that. So:

Q8 - 3.37 rating / 4.98 million
Overrun - 3.70 rating / 5.50 million

Q8 and overrun cannot be 3.74 rating, otherwise the overrun is higher than 3.74 rating, contrary to what the breakdown says. So:

Q1 - *5.12 million (0.08 gain)* <-- 2 minutes stripped out; Opening Segment
Q2 - *5.12 million (0.32 gain)* <-- 6 minutes stripped out; Sheamus/Punk vs Kane/Bryan
Q3 - *4.97 million (0.17 gain)* <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Sheamus/Punk vs Kane/Bryan, Vickie/Dolph/Swagger backstage, Laurinitis/Otunga/Show backstage, Dolph vs Swagger
Q4 - *4.95 million (0.17 gain)* <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Dolph vs Swagger, Triple H/No Way Out promo, Raw 100th moment, Heyman's entrance
Q5 - *5.53 million (0.19 gain)* <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Triple H/Heyman segment, start of Del Rio vs Santino
Q6 - *4.74 million (0.12 gain)* <-- 3 minutes stripped out; Del Rio vs Santino, Cyndi Hauper hype, 5 minutes of that segment
Q7 - *4.78 million (0.17 gain)* <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Lauper segment, Primetime Players vs Primo and Epico
Q8 - *5.42 million (0.44 gain)* <-- 7 minutes stripped out; Raw 1000th promo, Laurinitis entrance and promo
Overrun - *5.50 million (0.00 gain)* <-- no commercials (obviously)

So the one person that said Q2 lost on Q1 may want to redact his statement...


----------



## Jammy

Thanks again D.M.N. Bryan/punk marks heaving a sigh of relief?


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

*6/18 Santino Marella vs. Alberto Del Rio lost 711,000 viewers*

*5/28 Alberto Del Rio vs. Santino Marella lost 733,000 viewers, which is awful for that spot in the show, doing a 2.52 rating (second lowest quarter hour on a regular non-holiday Raw show of the last 14 years, ahead of only a 2.47 quarter on the 9/12 show for a Kofi Kingston vs. Miz match).*

*5/21 Santino Marella doing the angle with Ricardo Rodriguez lost 521,000 viewers. Randy Orton vs. Alberto Del Rio lost 252,000 *

Del Rio and Santino are death to viewership


----------



## Starbuck

DEM RATINGZ YO

No surprises here. Trips/Heyman and Cena/Johnny do the big numbers, everything else is meh. I wonder if they did enough to keep interest for next week though.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

D.M.N. said:


> _Please also read here and here, the second link is from last week._
> 
> Firstly, one thing I absolutely hate is when they throw two quarters together and come up with a 'loss'. Dolph vs Swagger went over two quarters (Q3/Q4) yet they 'claim' that they lost 22k. Anyway here's what I have:
> 
> Q1 - 3.51 rating / 5.04 million
> Q2 + Q3 - 3.34 rating / 4.80 million
> Q4 - 3.33 rating / 4.78 million
> Q5 - 3.74 rating / 5.34 million
> Q6 - 3.13 rating / 4.62 million
> Q7 - 3.12 rating / 4.61 million
> Q8 + Overrun - 3.74 rating / 5.19 million
> 
> For the purpose of the following, I've broken up Q8 and Q9 into two separate ratings so that the breakdown below makes sense. The overrun obviously had more viewers than Q8 yet at the moment the breakdown wouldn't support that. So:
> 
> Q8 - 3.37 rating / 4.98 million
> Overrun - 3.70 rating / 5.50 million
> 
> Q8 and overrun cannot be 3.74 rating, otherwise the overrun is higher than 3.74 rating, contrary to what the breakdown says. So:
> 
> Q1 - *5.12 million (0.08 gain)* <-- 2 minutes stripped out; Opening Segment
> Q2 - *5.12 million (0.32 gain)* <-- 6 minutes stripped out; Sheamus/Punk vs Kane/Bryan
> Q3 - *4.97 million (0.17 gain)* <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Sheamus/Punk vs Kane/Bryan, Vickie/Dolph/Swagger backstage, Laurinitis/Otunga/Show backstage, Dolph vs Swagger
> Q4 - *4.95 million (0.17 gain)* <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Dolph vs Swagger, Triple H/No Way Out promo, Raw 100th moment, Heyman's entrance
> Q5 - *5.53 million (0.19 gain)* <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Triple H/Heyman segment, start of Del Rio vs Santino
> Q6 - *4.74 million (0.12 gain)* <-- 3 minutes stripped out; Del Rio vs Santino, Cyndi Hauper hype, 5 minutes of that segment
> Q7 - *4.78 million (0.17 gain)* <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Lauper segment, Primetime Players vs Primo and Epico
> Q8 - *5.42 million (0.44 gain)* <-- 7 minutes stripped out; Raw 1000th promo, Laurinitis entrance and promo
> Overrun - *5.50 million (0.00 gain)* <-- no commercials (obviously)
> 
> So the one person that said Q2 lost on Q1 may want to redact his statement...


Ah, interesting... so the tag match itself didn't even lose viewers (or many viewers)... which is great for Punk/Bryan/Kane. Not sure about Sheamus since he's the odd man out since he's not really involved in the feud, but at the very least he certainly didn't hurt to be added. And it only lost when stuck in Q3 with other stuff. 

So Foley, Lauriatis, Punk, Sheamus, Bryan, Kane, Heyman, HHH, Cena, Big Show, and Otunga were in all the big numbered segments (over 5 million). I think Vince last week brought some older fans back and they decided to stick around this week and see what would happen. I'm sure "Lesnar responding to HHH" advertisement also drew in some viewers... even though Lesnar never showed up, the implication might've been enough for some.


----------



## A-C-P

Nothing really shocking in the breakdown and thanks for the in depth breakdown posted by DMN once again.


----------



## dxbender

jblvdx said:


> *6/18 Santino Marella vs. Alberto Del Rio lost 711,000 viewers*
> 
> *5/28 Alberto Del Rio vs. Santino Marella lost 733,000 viewers, which is awful for that spot in the show, doing a 2.52 rating (second lowest quarter hour on a regular non-holiday Raw show of the last 14 years, ahead of only a 2.47 quarter on the 9/12 show for a Kofi Kingston vs. Miz match).*
> 
> *5/21 Santino Marella doing the angle with Ricardo Rodriguez lost 521,000 viewers. Randy Orton vs. Alberto Del Rio lost 252,000 *
> 
> Del Rio and Santino are death to viewership


 USA doesn't like foreign superstars? lol

Wanna see what ratings are for these segments in Mexico and Italy.


----------



## Amuroray

Cena keeps on bringing in the numbers


----------



## Amuroray

Cena keeps on bringing in the numbers


----------



## Amuroray

Cena keeps on bringing in the numbers


----------



## RatedR10

DMN's breakdowns are in depth and a better way at looking at what gains and loses, love it. Tag match to open didn't really lose at all since it factored in with backstage segments.

Santino and/or ADR are losing viewers every single week...and these people are tuning out in BIG numbers.


----------



## Felpent

About D.M.N's analysis.... How can you be sure its exactly 10% of viewers that tune out? Even RAW with no commercials, like the one with trump in 09, loses viewers as the show progresses. Its flawed imo.


----------



## A-C-P

Felpent said:


> About D.M.N's analysis.... How can you be sure its exactly 10% of viewers that tune out? Even RAW with no commercials, like the one with trump in 09, loses viewers as the show progresses. Its flawed imo.


Of course its "flawed" unless we get the minute by minute ratings like the WWE does anything we try to breakdown here will be "flawed". But, Its ALOT less flawed than just the normal breakdown saying this 15 minutes gained so many viewers and this 15 minutes lost so many viewers w/o any details.

But because the #s aren't showing what you want to post then of course shit on the report.


----------



## dxbender

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ks-number-one-in-percentage-increases/137441/

Those are DVR ratings for tv shows. It really makes me wonder what the Raw ratings are if you include DVRs. A show like 30 Rock which gets about 3.4M viewers, increased by over 1.2M thanks to DVR ratings(meaning 4.6M viewers). Another show like Whitney which gets about 4.2M viewers, increased by about 1.2M viewers(meaning about 5.7M) thanks to DVR.

So Raw could be following a similar trend. Having over 1M DVR viewers(and who knows how many viewers that just watch online as well)


----------



## Hazaq

I find it funny when internet darlings like CM Punk lose viewers, you get all kinds of excuses like "Ratings are flawed, ratings dont matter" and all kinds of analysis trying to prove they draw but when the same happened to Orton or john morrison no one gave a shit. The same ratings that are flawed now were perfect then to make fun of Orton and Morrison. 

Gotta love the IWC.


----------



## JasonLives

dxbender said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ks-number-one-in-percentage-increases/137441/
> 
> Those are DVR ratings for tv shows. It really makes me wonder what the Raw ratings are if you include DVRs. A show like 30 Rock which gets about 3.4M viewers, increased by over 1.2M thanks to DVR ratings(meaning 4.6M viewers). Another show like Whitney which gets about 4.2M viewers, increased by about 1.2M viewers(meaning about 5.7M) thanks to DVR.


Nah, Raw usually average between 250,000-400,000 DVR viewers. 

According to WWE, their quarterly reports, between the period January-March this year their ratings went up by 0.3 thanks to DVR. 
WWE reports that the average rating was 3.5 ( included DVR ), when the normal rating ( not DVR ) showed it being 3.15.


----------



## mblonde09

Danny_Westbrook said:


> :lol .*Another week, another 100k viewer dropped from this part time electrician.* Seriously, *who was its idea that somebody that looks like a Pizza Hut delivery guy could pass as the main champion of any combat sport* or any sports entertainment ever?


Actually, with his size and his tats, Punk could easily be mistaken for a UFC fighter.

And:
Q1 - 5.12 million (0.08 gain) <-- 2 minutes stripped out; Opening Segment
Q2 - 5.12 million (*0.32 gain*) <-- 6 minutes stripped out; Sheamus/*Punk* vs Kane/Bryan

So, you should probably hush now.


----------



## aaronoafc

Only just saw the rating here - http://www.internetwrestlingnews.com/2012/06/raw-rating-no-way-out-draws-low.html decent rating two weeks in a row which is bad as I hate that Cena is finishing every Raw + PPV as of late.


----------



## dxbender

JasonLives said:


> Nah, Raw usually average between 250,000-400,000 DVR viewers.
> 
> According to WWE, their quarterly reports, between the period January-March this year their ratings went up by 0.3 thanks to DVR.
> WWE reports that the average rating was 3.5 ( included DVR ), when the normal rating ( not DVR ) showed it being 3.15.


Still. Not bad when you include DVR ratings. And will obviously be higher when you consider amount of live stream viewers too.

That's something WWE should do one time. Air an episode of Raw but also have it airing live on youtube as well. So they can really see just how many people watch live streams online


----------



## Hemen

dxbender said:


> Still. Not bad when you include DVR ratings. And will obviously be higher when you consider amount of live stream viewers too.
> 
> That's something WWE should do one time. Air an episode of Raw but also have it airing live on youtube as well. So they can really see just how many people watch live streams online


Just stop it please. Its okay if you like WWE as it is now good for you. 

But by all means WWE isnt how i met your mother or some other popular show. In Europe and North America its unpopular. 

Therefore the live streams viewers it will get isnt big. Really the only ones who watch Raw online are the hardcore/iwc wrestling fans.

WWE's revenue has gone up in recent years, but thats because of being more available in other countries, merchandising sales and multimedia.

The wrestling product itself is very unpopular. Because of societys opinion on wrestling + the writing of the show (which appeals to mostly kids not other age groups ) + lacking a star that draws like Austin and Rock.

The ratings raw gets is bigger than some shows.

But not bigger ratings than the shows that actually matters like How i met your mother, the simpsons and Two And a halfmen.

You don't need to be a scientist to understand that WWE's wrestling products popularity has gone down since 2006. 

Fact is wrestling is unpopular today wheter you like it or not.


----------



## YimYac

Danny_Westbrook said:


> :lol .Another week, another 100k viewer dropped from this part time electrician. Seriously, who was its idea that somebody that looks like a Pizza Hut delivery guy could pass as the main champion of any combat sport or any sports entertainment ever?


Raw lost 200k viewers AFTER the match.

Learn to read you fool.


----------



## D.M.N.

Felpent said:


> About D.M.N's analysis.... How can you be sure its exactly 10% of viewers that tune out? Even RAW with no commercials, like the one with trump in 09, loses viewers as the show progresses. Its flawed imo.


Not as flawed as blaming one person for a low quarter if they were only in that quarter for say 5 minutes as the dirtsheets tend to do.



dxbender said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ks-number-one-in-percentage-increases/137441/
> 
> Those are DVR ratings for tv shows. It really makes me wonder what the Raw ratings are if you include DVRs. A show like 30 Rock which gets about 3.4M viewers, increased by over 1.2M thanks to DVR ratings(meaning 4.6M viewers). Another show like Whitney which gets about 4.2M viewers, increased by about 1.2M viewers(meaning about 5.7M) thanks to DVR.
> 
> So Raw could be following a similar trend. Having over 1M DVR viewers(and who knows how many viewers that just watch online as well)


Raw DVR's a lot less as live TV is more 'must see' TV nowadays compared with dramas, which is recorded.


----------



## dxbender

^Same with NBA. They barely had anyone DVR those games.

I wasn't trying to argue that Raw is as popular as some top shows on CBS/NBC and stuff. I'm just saying that there are more people who watch Raw than people on here think(in USA at least). So don't freak out when you see 4.5M viewers, cause actual number who watched it will be up to 5M(though compared to most cable tv shows,5M is a good number)


----------



## Emberdon

D.M.N. said:


> Not as flawed as blaming one person for a low quarter if they were only in that quarter for say 5 minutes as the dirtsheets tend to do.
> 
> 
> 
> Raw DVR's a lot less as live TV is more 'must see' TV nowadays compared with dramas, which is recorded.


I think what Meltzer reports is that people tend to stick around or tune out based on the particular match/promo that opens the segment as opposed to everything that follows that match/promo in that quarter hour. You also have to include entrances with the matches. I think its makes sense. 


DVR's ratings dont matter bcause people who DVR live shows usually skip commercials when watching them later. 






YimYac said:


> *Raw lost 200k viewers AFTER the match.*


 WTF?

The match lost 200k viewers.


----------



## Hemen

dxbender said:


> ^Same with NBA. They barely had anyone DVR those games.
> 
> I wasn't trying to argue that Raw is as popular as some top shows on CBS/NBC and stuff. I'm just saying that there are more people who watch Raw than people on here think(in USA at least). So don't freak out when you see 4.5M viewers, cause actual number who watched it will be up to 5M(though compared to most cable tv shows,5M is a good number)


Yes, the ratings are that much that watch RAW i know that already. But it is not one of the highest rated show like in were in the attitude era. And it has worse ratings than the ruthless agression era (2002-2005).


----------



## kokepepsi

Interesting stuff D.M.N
IMO though 10% is too much 

Wish someone here would get a job at Nielsen headquarters and post the minute by minute ratings


----------



## imnotastar

what page is the breakdown on


and whoever puts the breakdown should always start it with this.


----------



## dxbender

I wonder if Hemen realizes that red repping someone with more than 50 times the amount of rep than they do for no reason at all, has absolutely no impact on my rep points.


----------



## Emberdon

imnotastar said:


> what page is the breakdown on
> 
> 
> and whoever puts the breakdown should always start it with this.


Here..

- As noted before, the June 18th WWE RAW Supershow scored a 3.40 cable rating with 4.97 million viewers. This is the best rating RAW has done since the day after WrestleMania 27.

In the segment breakdown, CM Punk and Sheamus vs. Daniel Bryan and Kane lost 241,000 viewers from the opener that started strong. Dolph Ziggler vs. Jack Swagger lost 22,000 more viewers. The segment with Paul Heyman and Triple H gained 559,000 more viewers for a show-high 3.74 quarter rating.

Santino Marella vs. Alberto Del Rio lost 711,000 viewers. The segment with Heath Slater, Wendi Richter, Cyndi Lauper and Roddy Piper lost 12,000 more viewers. John Cena vs. David Otunga and John Laurinaitis in the main event gained 573,000 viewers to a 3.74 quarter rating.


----------



## THANOS

Hazaq said:


> I find it funny when internet darlings like CM Punk lose viewers, you get all kinds of excuses like "Ratings are flawed, ratings dont matter" and all kinds of analysis trying to prove they draw but when the same happened to Orton or john morrison no one gave a shit. The same ratings that are flawed now were perfect then to make fun of Orton and Morrison.
> 
> Gotta love the IWC.


It's because their fans don't get anywhere near as much flack as the Punk/Bryan fans do.


----------



## THANOS

imnotastar said:


> what page is the breakdown on
> 
> 
> and whoever puts the breakdown should always start it with this.


Here you go...



> Please also read here and here, the second link is from last week.
> 
> Firstly, one thing I absolutely hate is when they throw two quarters together and come up with a 'loss'. Dolph vs Swagger went over two quarters (Q3/Q4) yet they 'claim' that they lost 22k. Anyway here's what I have:
> 
> Q1 - 3.51 rating / 5.04 million
> Q2 + Q3 - 3.34 rating / 4.80 million
> Q4 - 3.33 rating / 4.78 million
> Q5 - 3.74 rating / 5.34 million
> Q6 - 3.13 rating / 4.62 million
> Q7 - 3.12 rating / 4.61 million
> Q8 + Overrun - 3.74 rating / 5.19 million
> 
> For the purpose of the following, I've broken up Q8 and Q9 into two separate ratings so that the breakdown below makes sense. The overrun obviously had more viewers than Q8 yet at the moment the breakdown wouldn't support that. So:
> 
> Q8 - 3.37 rating / 4.98 million
> Overrun - 3.70 rating / 5.50 million
> 
> Q8 and overrun cannot be 3.74 rating, otherwise the overrun is higher than 3.74 rating, contrary to what the breakdown says. So:
> 
> Q1 - 5.12 million (0.08 gain) <-- 2 minutes stripped out; Opening Segment
> Q2 - 5.12 million (0.32 gain) <-- 6 minutes stripped out; Sheamus/Punk vs Kane/Bryan
> Q3 - 4.97 million (0.17 gain) <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Sheamus/Punk vs Kane/Bryan, Vickie/Dolph/Swagger backstage, Laurinitis/Otunga/Show backstage, Dolph vs Swagger
> Q4 - 4.95 million (0.17 gain) <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Dolph vs Swagger, Triple H/No Way Out promo, Raw 100th moment, Heyman's entrance
> Q5 - 5.53 million (0.19 gain) <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Triple H/Heyman segment, start of Del Rio vs Santino
> Q6 - 4.74 million (0.12 gain) <-- 3 minutes stripped out; Del Rio vs Santino, Cyndi Hauper hype, 5 minutes of that segment
> Q7 - 4.78 million (0.17 gain) <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Lauper segment, Primetime Players vs Primo and Epico
> Q8 - 5.42 million (0.44 gain) <-- 7 minutes stripped out; Raw 1000th promo, Laurinitis entrance and promo
> Overrun - 5.50 million (0.00 gain) <-- no commercials (obviously)


----------



## D.M.N.

Emberdon said:


> The match lost 200k viewers.


The match only lost 200,000 viewers if you include the six minutes of adverts in Q2...



kokepepsi said:


> Interesting stuff D.M.N
> IMO though 10% is too much
> 
> Wish someone here would get a job at Nielsen headquarters and post the minute by minute ratings


I agree, it's probably somewhere between 5% and 10%. Although it's still interesting as you say and sheds light on the breakdowns when a massive proportion of certain quarters has commercials.


----------



## Falkono

Like how people try and come up with excuses for why Punk segments drop viewership. So the latest is the ads? By that logic when any segments drop in viewership it isn't any of the wrestlers faults then? Bit of a lame excuse isn't it? Punks segments have always lost viewers it isn't anything new. Some weeks they do alright.
But look at this weeks, his segment lost 275k viewers while Cenas gained 590k. That shows as much as we dislike Cena he is a huge draw. He is the number one guy by miles. People talk about Punk being the 2nd top guy but look at his numbers, they are pretty crap. To me that isn't a reflection on Punks abilities it is a reflection on how the show has been designed to make one guy look better then everyone else. If something ever happened to Cena the company would be fucked. It also shows as much as people on here make Punk out to be great and popular the people away from here couldn't give a shit about him. You could put the title on anyone other then Cena and it would be the same for them.


----------



## JasonLives

Falkono said:


> Like how people try and come up with excuses for why Punk segments drop viewership. So the latest is the ads? By that logic when any segments drop in viewership it isn't any of the wrestlers faults then? Bit of a lame excuse isn't it? Punks segments have always lost viewers it isn't anything new. Some weeks they do alright.


If a segment drops in viewership in a quarter that has a lot of commercial, then yes the wrestlers shouldnt be blamed. 
Of course if it was no commercial then there is nobody to blame but the wrestlers.

Goes for everyone. Not just Punk. Ive said that for several weeks now when Meltzer is being retarded and says "That 2 minute match lost 300,000 viewers" while ignoring the fact that the rest of the quarter was commercial and backstage stuff.


----------



## A-C-P

This is not directed at anyone in particular jsut a general statement...But Agreed with JasonLives post above and to think that commercials have NO effect on the #s that certain segments do is stupid.


----------



## Hemen

dxbender said:


> I wonder if Hemen realizes that red repping someone with more than 50 times the amount of rep than they do for no reason at all, has absolutely no impact on my rep points.


Yeah, same with me. But you red repped me because "it was my opinion". What you also say is you opinion, you dont have facts. In the Vince interview with Bloomberg. It showed that what they earned on the wrestling product had gone down. But what they earned on media had gone up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNxn85vfgcE 6:18 to 7:15. So no what i said isnt a opinion, it is proved on this video.

So i am right that the interest in wrestling has gone down, and what they earn with the wrestling product itself is less. But wwe earn the money elsewhere Advertising, merchandising, books, video games...


----------



## Kid Kablam

Falkono said:


> Like how people try and come up with excuses for why Punk segments drop viewership. So the latest is the ads? By that logic when any segments drop in viewership it isn't any of the wrestlers faults then? Bit of a lame excuse isn't it? Punks segments have always lost viewers it isn't anything new. Some weeks they do alright.
> But look at this weeks, his segment lost 275k viewers while Cenas gained 590k. That shows as much as we dislike Cena he is a huge draw. He is the number one guy by miles. People talk about Punk being the 2nd top guy but look at his numbers, they are pretty crap. To me that isn't a reflection on Punks abilities it is a reflection on how the show has been designed to make one guy look better then everyone else. If something ever happened to Cena the company would be fucked. It also shows as much as people on here make Punk out to be great and popular the people away from here couldn't give a shit about him. You could put the title on anyone other then Cena and it would be the same for them.


I'll agree Punk gets too much of a pass, and that there is a double standard when it comes to him. Same with pretty much any wrestler who has a lot of fans. Randy Orton Fans are going to have an excuse when their guy tanks, and Santino fans are going to have an excuse when their guy tanks (they've needed a lot of excuses lately). That's human nature etc etc.

One of the things you bring up is ability, and I think that's where a lot of the defensiveness comes from. posters like Imnostar and a certain banned poster who usually drives the discussion here, frequently equate ratings with ability. Punk isn't drawing the same number of viewers as the Rock ergo Punk isn't as electrifying as the Rock, ergo Punk doesn't have the ability or the right to lick the Rock's boots. What most people are really arguing, whether they know it or not since the arguments get so heated, is what you pointed out above: It's not about ability, it's about what the company does to tell the viewers who the main attraction is.

One of the reasons I am a little itchy about trusting ratings is that I don't know who's on the other end of those number drops. I don't know if that's really casual fans, I don't know if that kids with a 10:30 bedtime, I don't know if those are just people who don't like CM Punk. Being that he is a divisive star, there very well may be a section of fans who do the same thing I do during a John Cena segment. I go by pops. If a guys is getting a reaction, it means that what he's doing is, more or less working. If the pops are not translating into ratings, then I put that on creative and management because they are the ones doing nothing with the pops, and putting commercial breaks in at terrible times.


----------



## uknoww

punk can't draw to save his life


----------



## Firallon

Danny_Westbrook said:


> Btw, what the hell happened to TheGreatOne316AE? I came here for HIS analysis.


He was banned.


----------



## HalfNights70

uknoww said:


> punk can't draw to save his life


Same thing goes to Sheamus, Kane, Bryan, Orton. So stop blaming Punk when others are just like him and what's the point of bashing him as if others can do better than Punk, Cena only draws because he always gets the best storylines and always booked to be in the mainevent. Punk still sells a lot of merchandise he's #2 in men category and #1 in women category and #2 in kids category, so he's successful whether you like it or not.


----------



## Rock316AE

> In the segment-by-segment, Sheamus & C.M. Punk vs. Daniel Bryan & Kane lost 241,000 viewers. Jack Swagger vs. Dolph Ziggler lost 22,000 viewers. The Paul Heyman/HHH in-ring gained 559,000 viewers and a show high 3.74 quarter. Alberto Del Rio vs. Santino Marella lost 711,000 viewers. The segment with Cyndi Lauper, Wendi Richter, Heath Slater and Roddy Piper lost 12,000 viewers. I expected that segment to do well, a little because of Piper (not because of Lauper because it’s been a long time since she’s been a big deal) and a little because of the train wreck philosophy of ratings. John Cena vs. David Otunga & John Laurinaitis in the overrun segment gained 573,000 viewers to a 3.74 quarter. As far as main event growth, for Teenage boys it was up from 3.3 to 3.5, Men 18-49 from 2.9 to 3.5, Teenage girls from 1.2 to 1.7 and 18-49 women from 1.3 to 1.5.


Regular breakdown, who did big quarters or the losses as expected. The Heyman/HHH segment deserved a bigger number for Heyman's awesome performance alone. They promoted Brock for this segment so probably a lot of the audience expected to see him there. 

Vince was able to bring back part of the audience and the Show/Ace/Cena angle was able to keep them for at least a week to see the Ace firing payoff. If they continue with this run, the main event segment of the 1000th RAW with Austin/Taker/Vince/Cena/Lesnar/DX/Flair is going to do the biggest number of the year.


----------



## DesolationRow

Outside of the AJ/Kane/Bryan/Punk angle, and Triple H barking in his Batman voice (stolen from *Starbuck*) at Paul Heyman's Batman villain The Penguin, Raw is so largely dull these days that this thread's topsy-turvy, ever-evolving narrative over the course of a week kind of trumps it in overall entertainment value at the moment. Which is humorous, because NXT, Smackdown and roughly half of TNA's program are drastically better than Raw at the moment. Oh well...

Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more?


----------



## Felpent

Is it me or some of the posts missing here?


----------



## D.M.N.

Estimated timings...

21:00 to 21:04 - Punk/Kane/Bryan/AJ promo; AJ segment [4 minutes]
21:04 to 21:07 - Opening titles; Vickie on stage [3 minutes]
21:07 to 21:13 - Punk vs Kane vs Bryan [6 minutes]
--> commercial [4 minutes]
21:17 to 21:23 - Punk vs Kane vs Bryan [6 minutes]
21:23 to 21:25 - Vickie/Dolph/Del Rio/Ricardo backstage [2 minutes]
--> commercial [3 minutes]
21:28 to 21:34 - Show vs Clay [6 minutes]
21:34 to 21:36 - Cena/Make a Wish promo [2 minutes]
--> commercial [3 minutes]
21:39 to 21:41 - Raw 1000th moment [2 minutes]
21:41 to 21:45 - HHH/Lesnar/Heyman recap [4 minutes]
21:45 to 21:47 - AJ/Kane backstage [2 minutes]
--> commercial [3 minutes]
21:50 to 21:55 - Santino vs Swagger [5 minutes]
--> commercial [4 minutes]
21:59 to 22:13 - Cena/Jericho in-ring segment [14 minutes]
--> commercial [3 minutes]
22:16 to 22:23 - Slater vs Sid [7 minutes]
--> commercial [4 minutes]
22:27 to 22:35 - Del Rio vs Ziggler [8 minutes]
22:35 to 22:37 - AJ/Bryan/Punk recap [2 minutes]
22:37 to 22:38 - AJ and Punk backstage [1 minutes]
--> commercial [4 minutes]
22:42 to 22:43 - Raw 1000th moment [1 minute]
22:43 to 22:48 - Divas' Battle Royal [5 minutes]
--> commercial [4 minutes]
22:52 to 22:56 - Cena vs Jericho [4 minutes]
--> commercial [4 minutes]
23:00 to 23:06 - Cena vs Jericho [10 minutes]

Ugh, I'm trying to genuinely think here which quarter do I want to do well. Q1 and Q2 probably, but that's about it. Ziggler too, but I'd love to know who booked that match. A ladder match between the two for a contract would have been, erm, nicer. Cena and Jericho will probably do well. What will be interesting here is whether we're still in the high 4m's or whether we've plummeted back down to the low 4m's.


----------



## D.M.N.

4.59m (4.77m excluding commercials) for hour 1 and 4.835m (5.03m) for hour 2: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...american-teen-bunheads-teen-wolf-more/139315/

Fairly solid numbers there.


----------



## JasonLives

Hour 2 did good. Im suprised to see it being that much better then Hour 1. Since imo there wasent much of a hook in that second hour.

Ratings guess, 3.1 maybe?


----------



## DesolationRow

Good numbers again. 

I actually _enjoyed_ Raw last night, which was refreshing. Some segments were lame and/or riddled with awkward shenanigans, but it nevertheless felt like a show that was given some thought and care for a good, solid through-line narrative throughout it (the best and most persistent being the whole AJ storyline with Kane, Bryan and Punk). Making Brodus Clay sympathetic for the fans and not completely indestructible is a good move, too.


----------



## A-C-P

DesolationRow said:


> Good numbers again.
> 
> I actually _enjoyed_ Raw last night, which was refreshing. Some segments were lame and/or riddled with awkward shenanigans, but it nevertheless felt like a show that was given some thought and care for a good, solid through-line narrative throughout it (the best and most persistent being the whole AJ storyline with Kane, Bryan and Punk). Making Brodus Clay sympathetic for the fans and not completely indestructible is a good move, too.


Agreed here, outside the typical crapfest Cena promo at the top of the hour (which I have learned to accept) Raw was good last night. Its to bad so many are jsut to focused on that Cena promo.

Good #s to.


----------



## Starbuck

I imagine the Cena/Jericho promo did well because they advertised a historic Cena announcement and casuals are stupid lol. My guess is that is the cause for the bump in the second hour. Overall good numbers though. I wonder if they can build up a head of steam heading into MITB and the big Raw 1000th show?


----------



## Vyed

JasonLives said:


> Hour 2 did good. Im suprised to see it being that much better then Hour 1. Since imo there wasent much of a hook in that second hour.


Cena's history making announcement? Cena/Jericho?



> Ratings guess, 3.1 maybe?


3.3 rating

Hour 1 - 3.21

Hour 2- 3.37.


Big johnny character is gone and ratings increases. Coincidence?


----------



## Chicago Warrior

> This week's episode of WWE RAW Supershow did yet another strong number, scoring a 3.3 rating with 4.713 million viewers. The first hour did a 3.21 rating and 4.59 million viewers, while the second did a 3.37 and 4.835 million viewers.
> 
> The number was down slightly from last week's post-No Way Out episode, which garnered a 3.4 rating with 4.963 million viewers.
> 
> Read more: http://www.WrestlingInc.com/wi/news/2012/0626/553848/wwe-raw-rating/#ixzz1ywS35By0


 http://www.WrestlingInc.com/wi/news/2012/0626/553848/wwe-raw-rating/#ixzz1ywS35By0


----------



## Choke2Death

3.5 ---> 3.4 ---> 3.3

Good to see the ratings down after trying to use Vince as their resource for bumping the ratings. Now things are back to the (boring) normal, something needs to give them a kick in the ass.


----------



## SteenIsGod

Good Rating. They _Should_ be doing 3.6's-3.7's consistently with Brock and Hunter in July and The Punk/Cena stuff heading into Summerslam. Well for the Normal 2 hours at least.


----------



## King_Of_This_World

It amazes me that the rating are still like they are with the product WWE has been putting out for years now.

People really will watch anything that has the 'WWE' name on it wont they?

It certainly aint the quality of the shows that draws viewers, Impact shows you that, its the brand and name recognition.

Which is why WWE will never be forced to change the product for the better, so why people celebrate decent ratings is beyond me. You should* want *low ratings so they are forced to change the product.


----------



## Happenstan

Vyed said:


> Big johnny character is gone and ratings increases. Coincidence?


But they're returning to where they were. People like unpredictability. Big John getting fired started that but unfortunately Vince slipped right back into the same old pattern with Cena talking about wanting the WWE title and entering MITB. A friend of mine was watching with me (this guy hates wrestling and knows little about it) but as soon as Cena said he was entering MITB my friend said, "So they're giving 'him' the title *yet again* I see." Even non-fans are sick of Cena with the belt. Unpredictability goes right out the window.

Cena should be like Shawn Micheals. That guy would occasionally challenge for the belt but never win it because he knew he didn't need it. Neither does Cena. Only Cena doesn't seem to get that like Michaels did.


----------



## KO Bossy

I think we all know who to thank for the fact that this rating was above a 2.9


----------



## DesolationRow

Cena would be the ideal first-time-ever briefcase-holder who cashes in (honorably, natch) and goes on to lose (to Punk at Summerslam?!). He's completely bulletproof, it wouldn't harm him in the least and it could be a major step in bringing back the Cena of those four weeks between Wrestlemania and Extreme Rules rather than the Cena who's appeared ever since that time. His resentment toward Punk and the burning desire to retake the WWE Championship and actually defeat The Rock could create--_gasp_!--a potentially compelling Cena again. 

This also practically reduces the overreliance on Money in the Bank to "create stars," which it hardly ever does anymore. Recently only The Miz and Daniel Bryan (in the last 15-20% of his run with the briefcase) have actually gained anything from having the damned thing. For guys like Jack Swagger and Alberto Del Rio, the briefcase did nothing for them in the end. 

Maybe a Dolph Ziggler or a Cody Rhodes or even a returning Wade Barrett can take the other briefcase for the WHC and be given a gradual, long-term build with it going into the fall. Will be interested to see if the person holding that briefcase doesn't stumble right back into the midcard muck only months afterward. Odds are, yes, lol.


----------



## YimYac

Chris Jericho's return definitely helped ratings


----------



## chronoxiong

Great rating as this week's show was good. It was well deserved and I hope it continues to stay in this range and not the 2.9's.


----------



## A-C-P

Happenstan said:


> But they're returning to where they were. People like unpredictability. Big John getting fired started that but unfortunately Vince slipped right back into the same old pattern with Cena talking about wanting the WWE title and entering MITB. A friend of mine was watching with me (this guy hates wrestling and knows little about it) but as soon as Cena said he was entering MITB my friend said, "So they're giving 'him' the title *yet again* I see." Even non-fans are sick of Cena with the belt. Unpredictability goes right out the window.
> 
> Cena should be like Shawn Micheals. That guy would occasionally challenge for the belt but never win it because he knew he didn't need it. Neither does Cena. Only Cena doesn't seem to get that like Michaels did.


This is a great point. I think the recent ratings has ALOT to do with the "unpredictability" of what was going to happen with and after the firing of Big Johnny. And to me Cena being the focus is going to get WAY to much of the credit by the WWE for the good rating. Now I am not saying he doesn't deserve any of the credit b/c he does, just not as much as I think hes going to get by the WWE. IF Cena wins MITB and then wins the title at SS, after HHH/Lesnar is done at SS and Cena is the champ again wheres the "unpredicitability coming in the shows then?

Quoted poster is spot on here, the time to start having Cena helping get new guys over as "top" guys that fans will pay to see is now or sooner rather than later. And how the WWE "Can't See This" is beyond me. Seriously, look at it, Punk is the one full-time guy that Cena can feud with that would put ANY doubt in the outcomne of the feud and even then we are all still pretty much certain that Cena will win the feud.


----------



## D.M.N.

As an interesting aside, if the Cena and Jericho segment did over 5 million viewers, wouldn't that be the highest rated Jericho segment since his return in January? Even his return only did 4.5 million if I recall.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

DesolationRow said:


> Cena would be the ideal first-time-ever briefcase-holder who cashes in (honorably, natch) and goes on to lose (to Punk at Summerslam?!). He's completely bulletproof, it wouldn't harm him in the least and it could be a major step in bringing back the Cena of those four weeks between Wrestlemania and Extreme Rules rather than the Cena who's appeared ever since that time. His resentment toward Punk and the burning desire to retake the WWE Championship and actually defeat The Rock could create--_gasp_!--a potentially compelling Cena again.
> 
> This also practically reduces the overreliance on Money in the Bank to "create stars," which it hardly ever does anymore. Recently only The Miz and Daniel Bryan (in the last 15-20% of his run with the briefcase) have actually gained anything from having the damned thing. For guys like Jack Swagger and Alberto Del Rio, the briefcase did nothing for them in the end.
> 
> Maybe a Dolph Ziggler or a Cody Rhodes or even a returning Wade Barrett can take the other briefcase for the WHC and be given a gradual, long-term build with it going into the fall. Will be interested to see if the person holding that briefcase doesn't stumble right back into the midcard muck only months afterward. Odds are, yes, lol.


Pretty much. I'd like to see DB win at MITB just because I think their last chance to put the belt on him while he's still hot/reputable. If he loses again he becomes Christian circa 2011. But I agree with you about Cena. Either way, he can cash it in for a match at SS, lose, and not be harmed by it whatsoever. It'll also get one of the MITB holders out of the way early, which has unfortunately become sort of a necessity ever since they started having two seperate briefcases.


----------



## Rock316AE

Far from a "great rating", you can call it decent after the 2.7-2.9s they were doing but that's it. Vince/Show/Cena/Ace angle gave them a boost for a few weeks but now it's back to normal which today is the horrible 2.9-3.0 levels.


----------



## AttitudeOutlaw

Cena/Jericho promo and the bikini battle royal obviously contributed to the strong second hour.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

When was the last time we've seen the Diva's in bikini's?


----------



## A-C-P

The-Rock-Says said:


> When was the last time we've seen the Diva's in bikini's?


Last summer probably, but IMO we need to see more of that (Y)


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Indeed we do.


----------



## Vyed

Pwtorch.com



> *Raw TV ratings through First Semester of 2012; comparison to past six years at half-way mark*
> 
> Through the first six months and 26 weeks of 2012, WWE Raw has averaged a 3.14 rating and 4.49 million viewers.
> 
> The average rating is down 6.8 percent compared to the first-half of 2011 during The Rock's return to WWE, which boosted ratings during the WrestleMania 27 build-up. Average viewership is down 12.0 percent compared to the first-half of 2011.
> 
> The first-half of this year's Raw was dogged by a slow start to 2012, a lack of ratings spikes during the WrestleMania 28 build-up, and a pronounced post-WrestleMania lull period prior to Vince McMahon's TV return two weeks ago.
> 
> The following is a break down of the last six years of Raw TV ratings through the first-half of each year.
> 
> First-Half Raw TV ratings / Viewership last six years
> 
> 2012 - 3.14 rating / 4.49 million viewers
> 2011 - 3.37 rating / 5.11 million viewers
> 2010 - 3.39 rating / 4.93 million viewers
> 2009 - 3.67 rating / 5.39 million viewers
> 2008 - 3.41 rating / 4.92 million viewers
> 2007 - 3.88 rating / 5.32 million viewers






A-C-P said:


> Last summer probably, but IMO we need to see more of that (Y)


Agreed. (Y)


----------



## Jammy

Apparently the divas battle royale lost viewers. Bryan/Punk/Kane feud is doing strong. The fact that they kept all their viewers through the long opening segment/match is great news. Sycho Sid loosing out is saddening, damn fans.
Usual breakdown (not as detailed as D.M.N's)

*In the segment-by-segment, C.M. Punk vs. Kane vs. Daniel Bryan lost 30,000 viewers from start-to-finish, which is actually a lot better than the usual drop as the migrating viewer pattern is watch the opening interview and come back at the top of the hour. The opening segment was down a little opening with the match instead of the usual set-up interviews. But they kept the audience better and overall. The new format for the week was a plus. Big Show vs. Brodus Clay gained 50,000 viewers. Santino Marella vs. Jack Swagger for the U.S. title lost 167,000 viewers, but I’d even consider that successful given how Swagger has been booked. The John Cena interview and return of Chris Jericho gained 803,000 viewers, which is way up from the usual top of the hour growth level this year, doing a 3.69 quarter. However, Sycho Sid’s return with Heath Slater was not the success the Vader segment was, losing 607,000 viewers. Alberto Del Rio vs. Dolph Ziggler in a pole match gained 202,000 viewers. The Divas swimsuit Battle Royal lost 238,000 viewers. That segment done most summers is usually a ratings winner, and usually it’s just filler as opposed to having a woman (A.J.) who they are building around and the comedy spots with Vickie. The Cena vs. Jericho main event gained 567,000 viewers to a 3.57 overrun. *


----------



## Vyed

Surprised at Ziggler/Del Rio gaining viewers. How the hell did that happen? Suddenly out of no where people decided to watch a Ziggler/Del Rio match? lol

Main event+overrun was a decent gain but Cena's history making announcement is a big success. 

Divas battle royal lost viewers because there was no Eve Torres.


----------



## xhc

Jericho and Cena gaining those viewers.


----------



## D.M.N.

Quarter Hours - June 25th, 2012
Q1 - 3.24 rating / 4.63 million
Q2 - 3.22 rating / 4.60 million
Q3 - 3.25 rating / 4.65 million
Q4 - 3.13 rating / 4.48 million
Q5 - 3.69 rating / 5.29 million
Q6 - 3.26 rating / 4.68 million
Q7 - 3.40 rating / 4.88 million
Q8 - 3.24 rating / 4.64 million
Overrun - 3.57 rating / 5.21 million

So, using 10 percent as per usual:

Q1 - *4.70 million (0.07 gain)* <-- 2 minutes stripped out; Punk/Kane/Bryan/AJ promo, AJ segment; Vickie on stage, Punk vs Kane vs Bryan
Q2 - *4.83 million (0.23 gain)* <-- 5 minutes stripped out; Punk vs Kane vs Bryan, Vickie/Dolph/Del Rio/Ricardo backstage, 
Q3 - *4.77 million (0.12 gain)* <-- 3 minutes stripped out; Show vs Clay, Cena/Make a Wish promo, Raw 1000th moment, HHH/Lesnar/Heyman recap
Q4 - *4.87 million (0.39 gain)* <-- 7 minutes stripped out; AJ/Kane backstage, Santino vs Swagger, Cena entrance
Q5 - *5.37 million (0.08 gain)* <-- 2 minutes stripped out; Cena/Jericho in-ring segment
Q6 - *4.91 million (0.23 gain)* <-- 5 minutes stripped out; Slater vs Sid, Del Rio vs Ziggler
Q7 - *5.06 million (0.18 gain)* <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Del Rio vs Ziggler, AJ/Bryan/Punk recap, AJ and Punk backstage, Raw 1000th moment, Vickie attempting to dance
Q8 - *5.17 million (0.53 gain)* <-- 8 minutes stripped out; Divas' Battle Royal, Cena vs Jericho [started 7 minutes into quarter]
Overrun - *5.21 million (0.00 gain)* <-- no commercials (obviously)

As I noted on the page before, with the timings: http://www.wrestlingforum.com/11648653-post4272.html

- Show vs Clay was in Q3 for 4 minutes
- The Diva's Battle Royal was in Q8 for 3 minutes

So can you really attribute gains and losses to them? Not particularly. Once you remove commercials though, there was nice growth across the whole of hour two from Q6 onwards.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Nice to see people are invested in this Punk/Bryan/Kane/Aj angle, even if its filler.

People probably didnt know who Psycho Sid was since WWE never spotlights him in their video packages.


----------



## e1987p

AJ doesn't draw.


----------



## Starbuck

DAT CENA

:cena2


----------



## Rock316AE

> In the segment-by-segment, C.M. Punk vs. Kane vs. Daniel Bryan lost 30,000 viewers from start-to-finish, which is actually a lot better than the usual drop as the migrating viewer pattern is watch the opening interview and come back at the top of the hour. The opening segment was down a little opening with the match instead of the usual set-up interviews. But they kept the audience better and overall. The new format for the week was a plus. Big Show vs. Brodus Clay gained 50,000 viewers. Santino Marella vs. Jack Swagger for the U.S. title lost 167,000 viewers, but I’d even consider that successful given how Swagger has been booked. The John Cena interview and return of Chris Jericho gained 803,000 viewers, which is way up from the usual top of the hour growth level this year, doing a 3.69 quarter. However, Sycho Sid’s return with Heath Slater was not the success the Vader segment was, losing 607,000 viewers. Alberto Del Rio vs. Dolph Ziggler in a pole match gained 202,000 viewers. The Divas swimsuit Battle Royal lost 238,000 viewers. That segment done most summers is usually a ratings winner, and usually it’s just filler as opposed to having a woman (A.J.) who they are building around and the comedy spots with Vickie. The Cena vs. Jericho main event gained 567,000 viewers to a 3.57 overrun.


I don't see what Dave says here about the first quarter. It was below what that segment usually does but it's some accomplishment that they lost only X/Y number? Where's the logic here? The first segment this week was a match for almost two quarters, something they didn't do in years and unbelievably this match was almost the lowest number of the night, not happened in years. 

Big Show again gains on random segments. 

You can't blame Sid as he was a surprise and after a big gain in the top of the hour. 

Jericho's return and Cena's promo did a big gain, that's what happens when you put Jericho there with another star. Jericho/Cena match was good overall.

Del Rio/Ziggler is probably what proves again the Russo mentality on pro wrestling TV, you use the stipulation to attract random viewers.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

The casual's love a good pole match.


----------



## #Mark

Ratings are better than when Rocky was on.. Hmmm..


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Rock316AE said:


> I don't see what Dave says here about the first quarter. It was below what that segment usually does but it's some accomplishment that they lost only X/Y number? Where's the logic here? The first segment this week was a match for almost two quarters, something they didn't do in years and unbelievably this match was almost the lowest number of the night, not happened in years.
> 
> Big Show again gains on random segments.
> 
> You can't blame Sid as he was a surprise and after a big gain in the top of the hour.
> 
> Jericho's return and Cena's promo did a big gain, that's what happens when you put Jericho there with another star. Jericho/Cena match was good overall.
> 
> Del Rio/Ziggler is probably what proves again the Russo mentality on pro wrestling TV, you use the stipulation to attract random viewers.


Because Q1 often does a 3.4 or 3.5, but Q2 often loses 500,000 viewers, so because the Q1 still did solid (even if a little less then in past weeks) but hardly lost anything in a segment that nearly always loses big, Dave and most likely WWE consider it a success. I know that you dont because you couldnt give any credit to Punk if youre life depended on it because of your incredible bias.


----------



## Rock316AE

Again, there's nothing to give credit here and the fact that Dave tried to do it in a situation like that, says it all. If Q1 is doing 3.4-5 and then loses 400-500k to a 3.1-3.2 in the second quarter, fine. But if Q1 is doing 3.2 and then loses and doing another 3.1-3.2 then you just got TWO low quarters instead of one strong and one low. Where's the logic here? Besides they gave this match almost two full quarters in the opening which has not happened in a long time, maybe years. If someone remembers when was the last time, tell me and I will try to check it. 



The-Rock-Says said:


> The casual's love a good pole match.


Yeah. WWE need to bring back the triple cage, that was a spectacle.


----------



## Starbuck

I just think its good that a match with the WWE Champion and main contenders in it didn't lose a bunch of viewers as per usual lol. If that isn't a good thing, what is?


----------



## A-C-P

No real surprises from the breakdown, other than Q2 not losing hardly any viewers, which no matter what biased posters that have defended that segment lossing 500,000 viewers in the past will say.


----------



## Vyed

Q1 was weak but
Q2 was a success.

So whats the problem here?


----------



## Punked Up

Rock316AE said:


> I don't see what Dave says here about the first quarter. It was below what that segment usually does but it's some accomplishment that they lost only X/Y number? Where's the logic here? The first segment this week was a match for almost two quarters, something they didn't do in years and unbelievably this match was almost the lowest number of the night, not happened in years.
> 
> Big Show again gains on random segments.
> 
> You can't blame Sid as he was a surprise and after a big gain in the top of the hour.
> 
> Jericho's return and Cena's promo did a big gain, that's what happens when you put Jericho there with another star. Jericho/Cena match was good overall.
> 
> Del Rio/Ziggler is probably what proves again the Russo mentality on pro wrestling TV, you use the stipulation to attract random viewers.


As for the first segment - the match started towards the end of the 1st quarter (like 11 minutes in) and went well into the second. Usually that segment is the biggest/one of the biggest ratings drops of the night - even Cena lost 125k against Otunga about a month back in that timeslot. Punk/Bryan/Kane managed to keep alot of the viewers they usually lost. Who am I to talk though? You'r the ratings master.

Overall I think they did well with the format this time. For the most part they fleshed out hour 1 with bigger stuff to keep viewers before the second hour when they had Cena. They had Kane/Punk/Bryan lead into Show/Brodus and then in the last hour they had the diva battle royal to keep viewers.


----------



## Rock316AE

Vyed said:


> Q1 was weak but
> Q2 was a success.
> 
> So whats the problem here?


That's what I'm saying and it's more about what Meltzer wrote, not about the second quarter not losing a lot of people. On what Dave wrote, Q1 was "weak" as you said, but Q2 didn't lose a lot, so what you basically got is TWO weak quarters instead of ONE. 

But whatever, pointless subject anyway.


----------



## #Mark

Starbuck said:


> I just think its good that a match with the WWE Champion and main contenders in it didn't lose a bunch of viewers as per usual lol. If that isn't a good thing, what is?


A Punk segment could gain 10 millions viewers and he'd still find a way to give it a negative spin.


----------



## Rock316AE

On another subject, someone knows what was the rating for Miami/OKC? It did 18 million viewers.


----------



## A-C-P

Rock316AE said:


> On another subject, someone knows what was the rating for Miami/OKC? It did 18 million viewers.


Same pointless discussion as wrestling ratings :lol Different TV environment and nobody will ever have higher ratings than Jordan's Bulls(sounds familiar to the discussions in here much?)


----------



## Starbuck

#Mark said:


> A Punk segment could gain 10 millions viewers and he'd still find a way to give it a negative spin.


Who, Meltzer or Rocky lol? Either way what does it matter? The simple fact is that the angle is working and people want to see it. It may not be popping 5 million numbers every week but for once people are sticking around to watch it play out and at a time when most people turn over and come back at 10pm. That can only be a good thing. 

Speaking of which, Cena/Jericho did very well but I'm not attributing that to Jericho at all. When WWE advertise something momentous or historic concerning Cena it always does well. Primo could have been in there with him and it would have been the same. From an entertainment standpoint, Jericho saved the segment from the usual mindless Cena drivel but he was pretty much a non factor numbers wise.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Starbuck said:


> Who, Meltzer or Rocky lol? Either way what does it matter? The simple fact is that the angle is working and people want to see it. It may not be popping 5 million numbers every week but for once people are sticking around to watch it play out and at a time when most people turn over and come back at 10pm. That can only be a good thing.
> 
> Speaking of which, Cena/Jericho did very well but I'm not attributing that to Jericho at all. When WWE advertise something momentous or historic concerning Cena it always does well. Primo could have been in there with him and it would have been the same. From an entertainment standpoint, Jericho saved the segment from the usual mindless Cena drivel but he was pretty much a non factor numbers wise.


Even WWE knows Cena's speaking drivel. In the Raw repeat that aired last night, WWE edited out the stupid comment about how the audience is 9 years old and the "fudgin" line.


----------



## Starbuck

jblvdx said:


> Even WWE knows Cena's speaking drivel. In the Raw repeat that aired last night, WWE edited out the stupid comment about how the audience is 9 years old and the "fudgin" line.


Of course they know but they also know that for the most part, it works. Until it stops working we're stuck with it and even then they'll probably still force it on us because Cena is Jesus incarnate lol.


----------



## #Mark

jblvdx said:


> Even WWE knows Cena's speaking drivel. In the Raw repeat that aired last night, WWE edited out the stupid comment about how the audience is 9 years old and the "fudgin" line.


What was Cena thinking? That was such an awful line to say. It certainly didn't bode well for the already slumping teen/adult demographic. That comment alienated any person watching over the age of ten and instantly reminded viewers of how uncool wrestling is.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

#Mark said:


> What was Cena thinking? That was such an awful line to say. It certainly didn't bode well for the already slumping teen/adult demographic. That comment alienated any person watching over the age of ten and instantly reminded viewers of how uncool wrestling is.


In a promo with The Rock "I was a here when it wasnt so cool to be a WWE superstar"

NO FUCKING SHIT! YOUR THE CAUSE!


----------



## D.M.N.

The way Raw was laid out to begin the show this week was a bit different compared to previous week's. Normally your typical Raw has the intro followed by a long promo setting up the main event.

They took a different route this week with an AJ backstage segment, then Vickie coming onto the stage and then straight into a match. If you compare last week with this week:

June 18th, 2012
21:00 to 21:13 - Opening Segment (13 minutes)
--> commercial [4 minutes]

June 25th, 2012
21:00 to 21:04 - Punk/Kane/Bryan/AJ promo; AJ segment [4 minutes]
21:04 to 21:07 - Opening titles; Vickie on stage [3 minutes]
21:07 to 21:13 - Punk vs Kane vs Bryan [6 minutes]
--> commercial [4 minutes]

Also, last week had the PPV hook with Johnny fired whereas this week, there was no hook as nothing 'earth shattering' happened at the end of last week.

It's not a bad thing at all though, it's nice having the show start off different and without a promo instead of the same formulaic way of doing it.


----------



## Rock316AE

The 9 years old Cena comment was a strong contender for the "worst line in the history of TV wrestling". You want to say that the product is aimed at kids? fine, but when he says that the majority of viewers are that age when in fact, less than 10% are in that demo is just ridiculous. You made **90%** of your audience feel stupid that they're still watching this garbage and made it even more "uncool" to watch for the teen demo which is going down crazy fast in the last two years. 

There's not even 1% chance that WWE wrote it for him, so maybe he wants to sabotage the company and every demo that is not his fanbase(half sarcastically but who knows)


----------



## A-C-P

Rock316AE said:


> The 9 years old Cena comment was a strong contender for the "worst line in the history of TV wrestling". You want to say that the product is aimed at kids? fine, but when he says that the majority of viewers are that age when in fact, less than 10% are in that demo is just ridiculous. You made **90%** of your audience feel stupid that they're still watching this garbage and made it even more "uncool" to watch for the teen demo which is going down crazy fast in the last two years.
> 
> There's not even 1% chance that WWE wrote it for him, so maybe he wants to sabotage the company and every demo that is not his fanbase(half sarcastically but who knows)


Agreed here, but if you really are a "conspiracy theorist" Cena trying to alienate the "older" fans so all the WWE would have left is kids and parents then he would w/o question be the top guy until he was dead, which he pretty much is now it seems anyways. So you could look at the statement as a subtle way for Cena trying to hang onto his top spot :lol

Anyways, it was Cena's lame attempt at a comeback to the verbal assault his "promo" was getting from Jericho and it epically failed.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

A-C-P said:


> Agreed here, but if you really are a "conspiracy theorist" Cena trying to alienate the "older" fans so all the WWE would have left is kids and parents then he would w/o question be the top guy until he was dead, which he pretty much is now it seems anyways.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Rock316AE said:


> The 9 years old Cena comment was a strong contender for the "worst line in the history of TV wrestling". You want to say that the product is aimed at kids? fine, but when he says that the majority of viewers are that age when in fact, less than 10% are in that demo is just ridiculous. You made **90%** of your audience feel stupid that they're still watching this garbage and made it even more "uncool" to watch for the teen demo which is going down crazy fast in the last two years.
> 
> There's not even 1% chance that WWE wrote it for him, so maybe he wants to sabotage the company and every demo that is not his fanbase(half sarcastically but who knows)


True. With the teen demo rapidly shrinking (the only people left now are basically kiddies and older people who watched wrestling back when it was cool), you'd think the last thing they'd want to do is make the ones who are still left feel stupid for sticking around. Cena's line did just that though. I really hope someone pulled him aside and asked him what the hell he was thinking after that was over. This is present day WWE though. They probably told him it was a great line and that next week he should say it again, do an Urkel impression, then dance with Hornswoggle.


----------



## #Mark

I swear, Cena has such a low wrestling IQ. He's such an embarrassment. Whenever I feel disdain towards Cena I always remember this line from the great one..

"We went from the powerful Austin 3:16 to the iconic Can you smell what the Rock is cookin all the way to... you can't see me?"

This line is certainly appropriate now, I mean honestly, this past month alone we've suffered through unbearable "loooooser" promos, childish star wars references, and a match with Michael Cole that would put any weird, fetish porn to shame.. I long for the days of Austin/Rocky.


----------



## HalfNights70

Cena said a lot of stupid lines "I'm here when it's not cool to be a WWE superstar" something like that, also I remember him saying to Punk "You have lost sight of everything" well actually Cena it describes you perfectly, I think this guy thinks he's doing a great job but he's actually destroying the company within "the majority of the fans are nine" fpalm and also how can I forget this line "I'm here every week" this guy is unreal.


----------



## Choke2Death

There's one thing I like about Cena talking his usual crap and that's whenever he's having a back and forth with somebody else, he gets owned 99% of the time. Jericho on Monday, CM Punk last year and The Rock every single time they had a promo. Best of them was him trying to diss Punk but then Punk destroyed him with that New York Yankees comparison.

I seriously can't believe how far he's fallen. He even admitted that he used to have a pretty edgy and enjoyable character in his first few years but now he's become everything opposite of that. At first, I thought to myself, why is Cena so hated? But then I started to check out his past character and made the comparison to what he's become and I'm 100% behind hating this goof. He's done a complete 180 and gone from cool to uncool. So bad that his Marine character is Stone Cold in comparison to the shit he comes up with today.


----------



## vanboxmeer

Cena's running out of things to do as the face of the company, they might need to transition him a more Undertaker like role soon as a guy who occasionally headlines, but is working with the midcard talent to give him something new to work with.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Someone pull Cena aside and tell him off? Yer havin a laugh?


----------



## Hemen

HalfNights70 said:


> Cena said a lot of stupid lines "I'm here when it's not cool to be a WWE superstar" something like that, also I remember him saying to Punk "You have lost sight of everything" well actually Cena it describes you perfectly, I think this guy thinks he's doing a great job but he's actually destroying the company within "the majority of the fans are nine" fpalm and also how can I forget this line "I'm here every week" this guy is unreal.


He is right though. WWE is uncool and in this era its unpopular to be a wwe superstar.


----------



## The GOAT One

Dolph Ziggler is money.

Pulls in the viewers again, just like when he headlined Smackdown last week.


----------



## Starbuck

TheGreatOne. said:


> Dolph Ziggler is money.
> 
> Pulls in the viewers again, just like when he headlined Smackdown last week.


unk2


----------



## The GOAT One

:vince2


----------



## Falkono

Another week another Punk segment that loses viewers. Cena gains basically 900k viewers. Thats the difference between a draw and just another guy.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Are people forgetting there was a commercial break during the Kane vs Bryan vs Punk match? The match did decent despite the commercial break. Plus the match dragged on to the second quarter which only lost about 30,000 viewers. The second quarter match usually loses more than 300,000 viewers. That is why Meltzer said it did better than usual for that time slot.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

Falkono said:


> Another week another Punk segment that loses viewers. Cena gains basically 900k viewers. Thats the difference between a draw and just another guy.


Now I understand why Austin has second thoughts over facing Punk

Rock had opportunity to face Cena-One of the holy trinity of wrestling plus the only drawing wrestler now

Austin vs Punk-Austin will draw and Punk will lose viewers.Lol


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

HalfNights70 said:


> Cena said a lot of stupid lines "I'm here when it's not cool to be a WWE superstar" something like that, also I remember him saying to Punk "You have lost sight of everything" well actually Cena it describes you perfectly, I think this guy thinks he's doing a great job but he's actually destroying the company within "the majority of the fans are nine" fpalm and also how can I forget this line "I'm here every week" this guy is unreal.


Everything he said is true

This era is not cool to be a wrestler.It follows the hugely successful Attitude Era,Vince wants his product to aimed for kids and advent of internet has killed kayfabe

Majority of fans are nine-It was a god damn joke.It looked he was taking a shot at WWE and knew IWC would go crazy


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

vanboxmeer said:


> Cena's running out of things to do as the face of the company, they might need to transition him a more Undertaker like role soon as a guy who occasionally headlines, but is working with the midcard talent to give him something new to work with.


Cena time running out as face-
1.Not unless anyone can replace him
2.He is the only real draw wwe has now
3.he sells merchandise 
4.He is a told model for kids

Undertaker's role-
1.No way.As great as Undertaker,Cena has become too big to work with mid-card talent.

I can't imagine Cena vs Cody or Cena vs Swagger to sound believable


----------



## Vyed

When did this turn into a John Cena thread?


----------



## HalfNights70

austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> Everything he said is true
> 
> This era is not cool to be a wrestler.It follows the hugely successful Attitude Era,Vince wants his product to aimed for kids and advent of internet has killed kayfabe
> 
> Majority of fans are nine-It was a god damn joke.It looked he was taking a shot at WWE and knew IWC would go crazy


Wow, just because it's true it doesn't mean he have to say it while he have a big match with The Rock, not cool is not only WWE's fault it's Cenas fault too, it's his character that made WWE uncool. Him hugging the spotlight is what made this uncool, open your eyes dude, Cena is a joke nothing more, a lot of people don't watch this show because of him. It's funny you like stone cold and both have different characters one is amazing and the other one is boring. Cena is the key of everything right now, he should put some talents over, he's just unbeatable which is why nobody believe that Cena can be beaten nobody is a threat to him. Thanks Cena you helped a lot fpalm. And what's with this uncool thing, if he was in the attitude era he will be nothing but a jobber, he should thank WWE for turning this to a PG era because without it he will be nothing, just like what Lesnar said, all the big stars left and he's alone destroying it.


----------



## DesolationRow

TV ratings: the _ultima ratio regum_ of our time.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

Vyed said:


> When did this turn into a John Cena thread?


He is the only relevant thing in wwe now

Cena means 
50-50 reaction for the crowd
Money for wwe
For iwc to thrash him


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

HalfNights70 said:


> Wow, just because it's true it doesn't mean he have to say it while he have a big match with The Rock, not cool is not only WWE's fault it's Cenas fault too, it's his character that made WWE uncool. Him hugging the spotlight is what made this uncool, open your eyes dude, Cena is a joke nothing more, a lot of people don't watch this show because of him. It's funny you like stone cold and both have different characters one is amazing and the other one is boring. Cena is the key of everything right now, he should put some talents over, he's just unbeatable which is why nobody believe that Cena can be beaten nobody is a threat to him. Thanks Cena you helped a lot fpalm. And what's with this uncool thing, if he was in the attitude era he will be nothing but a jobber, he should thank WWE for turning this to a PG era because without it he will be nothing, just like what Lesnar said, all the big stars left and he's alone destroying it.


I don't like anything about Cena
Only time I liked was when he was rapper

But the product is aimed at kids mostly
And he is doing fine 

Cena can be good but the creative team sucks


----------



## A-C-P

Vyed said:


> When did this turn into a John Cena thread?


Well since the WWE has basically become the John Cena show I think he is a very "on-topic" issue in this thread.



DesolationRow said:


> TV ratings: the _ultima ratio regum_ of our time.


:lol its just to bad alot of people who post here won't get this


----------



## Rock316AE

Not about WRASSLIN! but interesting peak numbers:

2008 Olympics opening ceremony - all time peak of 593 million viewers worldwide. 

2010 World Cup final, Holland/Spain - all time peak of 530 million viewers worldwide.

2008 Euro final, Germany/Spain - all time peak of 237 million viewers worldwide. 

2011 SuperBowl - all time peak of 111 million viewers worldwide. 

UEFA expects 250 million peak for the final this year(Italy/Spain). 

WM29 main event:

:rocky VS :balo


----------



## Starbuck

Fuck Balo. That fucker cost me money...the fucker! I wanna see Rock people's elbow his ass all over the pitch.


----------



## Rock316AE

Believe me man, to say that this Euro was "financially damaging" for me is an understatement. But Super Mario was awesome. He's a natural heel. Who doesn't like his MONEY facial expressions after his goals?


----------



## Starbuck

:neuer :neuer :neuer

:balo2 :balo2 :balo2


----------



## Choke2Death

Fuck Balotelli, I'm tired of Germany's semi/final failures now!

Go! Spain! Go!

Being. Boring. Brings. Trophies. 

On topic: why doesn't WWE ever bring anybody from the football business to their shows? They will draw huge simply because football is the biggest sport in the world.


----------



## Rock316AE

Starbuck said:


> :balo2 :balo2 :balo2





















The hell with boring Spain, Balo(I)taly all the way.



> On topic: why doesn't WWE ever bring anybody from the football business to their shows? They will draw huge simply because football is the biggest sport in the world.


Probably because it's not Vince's territory so he thinks that if he doesn't care, nobody cares. I'm not even talking about a CR7 caliber megastar, but a big name would draw huge on the international market.


----------



## Starbuck

I wish there was a footballing HHH to bury his ass lol. Balo needs to meet the :buried


----------



## Choke2Death

Rock316AE said:


> Probably because it's not Vince's territory so he thinks that if he doesn't care, nobody cares. I'm not even talking about a CR7 caliber megastar, but a big name would draw huge on the international market.


They did have Mourinho at ringside on Raw in April 2007 when they went to London, though. And Shane even pointed it out and said something about him.



Starbuck said:


> I wish there was a footballing HHH to bury his ass lol. Balo needs to meet the :buried


He sure does!


----------



## Rock316AE

Yeah I remember that RAW, Shane also tried to bury Chelsea in that promo lol. But GOAT Mourinho wasn't scripted or something, he was probably there because of his kids, they were in DX gear IIRC. 

You can't bury Balo :balo2 He's THE Cerebral Assassin.


----------



## zxLegionxz

Rock316AE said:


> Yeah I remember that RAW, Shane also tried to bury Chelsea in that promo lol. But GOAT Mourinho wasn't scripted or something, he was probably there because of his kids, they were in DX gear IIRC.
> 
> You can't bury Balo :balo2 He's THE Cerebral Assassin.


Well balotelli gets buried everytime fans throw bananas at him


----------



## GillbergReturns

Choke2Death said:


> Fuck Balotelli, I'm tired of Germany's semi/final failures now!
> 
> Go! Spain! Go!
> 
> Being. Boring. Brings. Trophies.
> 
> On topic: why doesn't WWE ever bring anybody from the football business to their shows? They will draw huge simply because football is the biggest sport in the world.


I know WWE is world wide but it's centered around North America and America just doesn't care for soccer.

We have a better chance of recognizing Pee Wee Herman over insert soccer star.

It is getting more popular over here though. 46% rise right now and viewership is around 2 mil.


----------



## D.M.N.

Thought I'd put up some Raw, SmackDown and Impact UK ratings for anyone interested, in red is the highest from the period based on the data available:

Raw
02/04 - 268k (2 showings)
09/04 - 169k (1 showing - live)
16/04 - 197k (2 showings)
23/04 - 163k (1 showing - live)
30/04 - 165k (1 showing - live)
07/05 - no data available for any Sky channel
14/05 - 253k (2 showings)
21/05 - 133k (1 showing - live)
28/05 - 176k (3 showings)
04/06 - 210k (2 showings)
11/06 - no figures available for Sky Sports 3

SmackDown
06/04 - 146k (2 showings)
13/04 - 194k (4 showings)
20/04 - 164k (2 showings)
27/04 - 119k (2 showings)
04/05 - 155k (3 showings)
11/05 - no data available for any Sky channel
18/05 - 104k (1 showing)
25/05 - 090k (1 showing)
01/06 - 167k (2 showings)
08/06 - 091k (1 showing)
15/06 - 091k (3 showings; no figures available for Sky Sports 3)

Impact
05/04 - 192k (1 showing)
12/04 - 355k (3 showings)
19/04 - 179k (1 showing)
26/04 - 388k (3 showings)
03/05 - 206k (2 showings)
10/05 - 202k (1 showing)
17/05 - 235k (2 showings)
24/05 - 397k (3 showings)
31/05 - 244k (2 showings)
07/06 - 178k (2 showings)
14/06 - 237k (2 showings)

TNA Lockdown - 181k (1 showing)
TNA Sacrifice - 201k (2 showings)
WWE Over the Limit - 234k (1 showing - live)
TNA Slammiversary - 222k (2 showings)

_Source: BARB_


----------



## Vyed

Hour 1 - 4.711m (Last Week: 4.59m), Adult 18-49: 1.6
Hour 2 - 4.702m (Last Week: 4.83m), Adult 18-49: 1.7


----------



## Shock

So the 1st hour was up on last weeks but the second was down compared to last weeks. I'm guessing that the Paul Heyman video and the fairly long opening promo did well.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Vyed said:


> Hour 1 - 4.711m (Last Week: 4.59m), Adult 18-49: 1.7
> Hour 2 - 4.702m (Last Week: 4.83m), Adult 18-49: 1.6


Another great week. That's awesome.


----------



## A-C-P

Another week with veiwership over 4.5 million (Y) good news


----------



## funnyfaces1

A well-deserved good viewership for a solid, cohesive show. Things are looking up now that May and June are over.


----------



## D.M.N.

I have a feeling that there's some 'extra' viewers sticking around purely because of Raw 1000th, and they therefore think there is no point tuning out for a few weeks.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Good decent rating


----------



## KO Bossy

Ugh. Honestly, this is bad news. If they keep pulling off "meh" ratings like this, Vince will take this as a sign that he's doing something right since they're not the 2.7 and 2.9 we saw last month. As a result, he's going to keep dishing out crap weekly like John Cena bad comedy segments and lame promos, overexposing AJ until people are really sick of her, putting Brodus fucking Clay on TV with kids to dance featuring guys like Christian who are getting dragged down so much by association, Tensai beating up his worshiper and ADR squash matches. So basically a mediocre rating that is good IN COMPARISON to the other bad ratings will be a reason to continue with the awful, horrific bullshit we've had to endure for so long now. 

What the Fed NEEDS is for people to stop watching and for viewership to tank so Vince will get a clue and put out a good, quality product for a change instead of this waste of time we're currently getting.


----------



## Ray

*DEAN AMBROSE
*

That is all.


----------



## AttitudeOutlaw

The awful rating(s) from a month ago is making this seem better than it actually is. It seems like they aren't putting any effort in and are saving it all for Raw 1000.


----------



## HankHill_85

Things are looking brighter than they were in May and June. Hopefully it continues and the 1000th Raw pulls an amazing number.


----------



## Marv95

Just because the rating is good in comparison to the spring doesn't mean the show was good. Just like if the rating was atrocious doesn't mean the show was atrocious. And technically hour 2 dropped from hour 1.


----------



## Hades1313

The first hour and a half of the show sucked ass. The last 45 mins was pretty good.

As for the answer to your question. I would say it's equal between the WWE and the wrestlers draw.


----------



## chronoxiong

What would those viewership numbers translate to overall? A 3.3 rating???


----------



## Vyed

3.2 rating.


----------



## Rock316AE

The reason this rating looks and sounds decent is the disaster numbers they got before the Vince/Show/Ace/Cena payoff. That's what gave them the boost and I can see them holding viewers with the 1000th show hype and then with Lesnar coming back to TV. After Summerslam and the 3 hours, it's going to be the worst average since 97 on a weekly basis and besides 95, worst of all time with no competition.


----------



## SpeedStick

How to watch RAW

*9PM to 9:25pm* 
after that go watch whatever,comeback
*10:00 to 10:15*
after that go watch whatever, comeback
*10: 52 to 11:05*

RAW have no midcard so you won't be missing anything


----------



## Vyed

Rock316AE said:


> The reason this rating looks and sounds decent is the disaster numbers they got before the Vince/Show/Ace/Cena payoff. That's what gave them the boost and I can see them holding viewers with the 1000th show hype and then with Lesnar coming back to TV. After Summerslam and the 3 hours, *it's going to be the worst average since 97 on a weekly basis and besides 95, worst of all time with no competition.*


Without a doubt! I expect it to be in the range 2.4 - 2.7 every week until RTWM begins.


----------



## dxbender

4.7M viewers equals only 3.3 rating? Didn't 5M viewers used to equal 4 rating or something?


----------



## imnotastar

psx71 said:


> *DEAN AMBROSE
> *
> 
> That is all.


WHO

That is all.


----------



## Quasi Juice

dxbender said:


> 4.7M viewers equals only 3.3 rating? Didn't 5M viewers used to equal 4 rating or something?


Ratings have changed, which is why it's kind of unfair how the IWC sometimes compares it to old ratings.


----------



## Hemen

imnotastar said:


> WHO
> 
> That is all.


THE FUTURE.

That is all.


----------



## wb1899

dxbender said:


> 4.7M viewers equals only 3.3 rating? Didn't 5M viewers used to equal 4 rating or something?


A 3.3 HH-Rating (the word "Rating (s)" is used today only for the demos!) only means, that Raw aired in 3.432.000 *Households*.
That HH-Rating or the total number of housholds has nothing to do with the viewership and is meaningless.
Important are only the A18-49, C3 and Live+7 viewership.


----------



## King_Of_This_World

Quasi Juice said:


> Ratings have changed, which is why it's kind of unfair how the IWC sometimes compares it to old ratings.


They have changed, but there is no doubt that far many more millions were watching back in the attitude era in the US than today.

Business is down considerably, including ratings.

And they deserve to be down in all areas. The product is piss poor.


----------



## D.M.N.

21:00 to 21:16 - Opening Segment
--> commercial [3 minutes]
21:19 to 21:23 - 8-Man Tag Team match
--> commercial [3 minutes]
21:26 to 21:31 - 8-Man Tag Team match
21:31 to 21:33 - Del Rio, Long and Ricardo backstage
--> commercial [3 minutes]
21:36 to 21:38 - Raw 1000th moment
21:38 to 21:42 - Del Rio vs Sin Cara
21:42 to 21:44 - AJ and Bryan backstage
--> commercial [4 minutes]
21:48 to 21:50 - Triple H/Heyman recap
21:50 to 21:53 - Heyman interview
--> commercial [4 minutes]
21:57 to 22:05 - Sheamus/AJ vs Dolph/Vickie
22:05 to 22:06 - AJ and Punk backstage
--> commercial [4 minutes]
22:10 to 22:15 - Slater vs Doink the Clown
22:15 to 22:17 - 'No Holds Barred' preview
--> commercial [4 minutes]
22:21 to 22:22 - Troops promo
22:22 to 22:29 - Big Show vs Kane
22:29 to 22:31 - Long, AJ and Eve backstage
--> commercial [4 minutes]
22:35 to 22:37 - Raw 1000th moment
22:37 to 22:40 - Tensai vs Tyson Kidd
22:40 to 22:42 - Bryan/Jericho backstage; Punk/Cena backstage
--> commercial [3 minutes]
22:45 to 22:46 - Tensai killing Tyson Kid backstage
22:46 to 22:53 - Jericho/Bryan vs Punk/Cena
--> commercial [3 minutes]
22:56 to 23:08 - Jericho/Bryan vs Punk/Cena

Two things here:

- Q2 will shed a lot more viewers than usual against Q1 as it had 6 minutes of adverts
- The start of hour two won't gain a lot, because there was 4 minutes of adverts in Q5


----------



## imnotastar

Hemen said:


> THE FUTURE.
> 
> That is all.


hopefully he got banned for this comment


----------



## AttitudeOutlaw

SpeedStick said:


> How to watch RAW
> 
> *9PM to 9:25pm*
> after that go watch whatever,comeback
> *10:00 to 10:15*
> after that go watch whatever, comeback
> *10: 52 to 11:05*
> 
> RAW have no midcard so you won't be missing anything


Usually I'd agree 100% with that but with this weeks Raw all three of the usually decent spots were overran with AJ, making for the worst Raw since I started watching over 15 years ago.


----------



## Snothlisberger

a single rating point is equivalent to 1% of total households with TVs. That is why its different now. More televisions.


----------



## TheRock95

3,3 is okay. Better than what they got weeks ago. The ratings are up most likely because of the former GM leaving.

We have to see in coming months if the ratings rise is something that will last or is only a trend.


----------



## Punkholic

TheRock95 said:


> 3,3 is okay. Better than what they got weeks ago. The ratings are up most likely because of the former GM leaving.
> 
> We have to see in coming months if the ratings rise is something that will last or is only a trend.


They're most likely up because of the NBA Playoffs ending.


----------



## joeisgonnakillyou

So people power was a anti-draw?


----------



## Jammy

Breakdown



> As noted before, the WWE RAW Supershow on July 2nd scored a 3.2 cable rating with 4.71 million viewers.
> 
> In the segment breakdown, David Otunga, Cody Rhodes, Titus O'Neil and Darren Young vs. Santino Marella, R-Truth, Kofi Kingston and Christian lost 467,000 viewers from the opener. The big surprise of the show was Alberto Del Rio's beatdown on Sin Cara, which gained 584,000 viewers - a 14% growth among teenage boys and 23% among Men 18-49.
> 
> The Paul Heyman interview and first part of Sheamus and AJ Lee vs. Vickie Guerrero and Dolph Ziggler lost 383,000 viewers. The match itself plus Heath Slater vs. Doink the Clown gained 234,000 viewers - a weak number for the 10pm timeslot. Diamond Dallas Page laying out Heath Slater and Kane vs. Big Show in a No DQ Match lost 69,000 viewers, which is very good for that time period of the show. So far out of the recent Legend returns, Vader's return has done the best by far.
> 
> Tensai vs. Tyson Kidd lost 307,000 viewers while the main event with John Cena and CM Punk vs. Daniel Bryan and CM Punk gained 684,000 viewers and peaked with a 3.47 rating for the overrun.


Corroborate it with D.M.N.'s segment breakdown for full detail.


----------



## RichDV

Q5 did a lot better than I expected for what it was. Also surprised by the Del Rio/Sin Cara segment. That's good.


----------



## Starbuck

DAT SIN CARA


----------



## Rock316AE

Normal breakdown except SIN CARA! He's doing it every week. I guess he still got that Mexican drawing power. And Del Rio also got good number in the last few weeks, especially with the old school 1998 Vince heat he got on RAW. 

Also Big Show is a TV machine, you can put him everywhere. Reminds me of 2003 Kane after the mask angle, he was doing such big numbers that they threw Austin with him and gave him a McMahons storyline. Bryan Alvarez used to call him: "The Big Red RATINGS Machine".


----------



## e1987p

AJ super push fail again.She doesn't draw.


----------



## Vyed

Sin cara vs curt hawkins lost viewers two weeks ago. I think its ADR but how the hell did he become a ratings draw all of a sudden? Even last week his match with ziggler gained viewers in a random time slot.


----------



## THEBIGMAN212

Looks like Punk, Cena, Jericho and Bryan are doing good.


----------



## Arya Dark

Quasi Juice said:


> Ratings have changed, which is why it's kind of unfair how the IWC sometimes compares it to old ratings.


*The ratings haven't changed really. It just all goes by percentage and how many people are watching TV on any given night. That's why 4.7 million viewers one week could give you a lower *or higher* rating than 4.7 million viewers on the next week.*


----------



## hazuki

Good mainevent rating


----------



## SteenIsGod

YES. Hopefully AJ Continues to tank in Ratings.


----------



## alliance

go sincara!!


----------



## D.M.N.

Quarter Hours - July 2nd, 2012
Q1 - 3.28 rating / 4.87 million
Q2 - 2.97 rating / 4.40 million
Q3 - 3.36 rating / 4.98 million
Q4 - 3.10 rating / 4.60 million
Q5 - 3.27 rating / 4.83 million
Q6 - 3.22 rating / 4.76 million
Q7 - 3.01 rating / 4.46 million
Q8 - 3.06 rating / 4.53 million
Overrun - 3.47 rating / 5.14 million

So, using 10 percent as per usual:

Q1 - *4.89 million (0.00 gain)* <-- no commercials
Q2 - *4.69 million (0.29 gain)* <-- 6 minutes stripped out; 8-Man Tag Team match
Q3 - *5.16 million (0.18 gain)* <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Del Rio, Long and Ricardo backstage, Raw 1000th moment, Del Rio vs Sin Cara, AJ and Bryan backstage
Q4 - *5.00 million (0.40 gain)* <-- 7 minutes stripped out; Triple H/Heyman recap, Heyman interview, start of Sheamus/AJ vs Dolph/Vickie
Q5 - *5.01 million (0.18 gain)* <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Sheamus/AJ vs Dolph/Vickie, AJ and Punk backstage, Slater vs Doink the Clown
Q6 - *4.94 million (0.17 gain)* <-- 4 minutes stripped out; 'No Holds Barred' preview, Troops promo, Big Show vs Kane
Q7 - *4.85 million (0.39 gain)* <-- 7 minutes stripped out; Long, AJ and Eve backstage, Raw 1000th moment, Tensai vs Tyson Kidd, Bryan/Jericho backstage, Punk/Cena backstage
Q8 - *4.64 million (0.11 gain)* <-- 3 minutes stripped out; Tensai killing Tyson Kid backstage, Jericho/Bryan vs Punk/Cena
Overrun - *5.14 million (0.00 gain)* <-- no commercials (obviously)

Well I correctly predicted that Q2 would shed a bit from Q1 and that the start of hour two would not gain a lot compared to hour one, in fact when removing commercials, the gain is very small.

But I did not expect a downward trend for hour two all the way through to the overrun. Which is somewhat odd.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

It's nice seeing the Overrun get a big bump from Q8, since Cena and Jericho left the match almost immediately at the 11 PM mark. The real shock is Q3 doing so well. Can't see a reason why lol. And thanks again DMN for the detailed breakdown. I'd rep you if I could.


----------



## DesolationRow

Vyed said:


> Sin cara vs curt hawkins lost viewers two weeks ago. I think its ADR but how the hell did he become a ratings draw all of a sudden? Even last week his match with ziggler gained viewers in a random time slot.


Historically, dating back to the Road to Wrestlemania in 2011, Alberto Del Rio has displayed some ratings strength. He and Christian were working TV match after TV match on Smackdown in March 2011 and the audience responded quite well to it. 

I think the final verdict about Del Rio's first two years in WWE is that people actually want to see him, but when he was overpushed and became WWE Champion last year, it was far too much and that is the time period in which segments involving him frequently did poorly. He and CM Punk especially seemed to not mix well in this regard, particularly in the first few weeks of their lengthy on-again, off-again feud last late summer and throughout the fall. Del Rio really should really primarily stay on Smackdown and work the Raw midcard, as this is what fans seem to embrace from him, but he doesn't mesh particularly well with WWE's Raw elite such as Cena or Punk. 

That Laredo crowd's response to Del Rio probably helped make the casual viewer stop dead in their tracks on Raw because it was quite a spectacle.


----------



## gl83

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> It's nice seeing the Overrun get a big bump from Q8, since Cena and Jericho left the match almost immediately at the 11 PM mark.




Especially since they basically foreshadowed that AJ was going to do something during the main event.


----------



## Saxihype

Sin Cara and ADR getting it done.


----------



## gl83

Saxihype said:


> Sin Cara and ADR getting it done.



Sin Cara getting destroyed=RATINGS!


----------



## BrokenWater

Alberto Del Ratings!!!


----------



## JasonLives

So AJ heavy show> Big Show heavy show.


----------



## Quasi Juice

I don't get it, how do people figure from that ratings breakdown that Del Rio brings ratings? The biggest gains came _after_ he made an appearance.


----------



## Redwood

When was the most recent low Raw rating? IIRC, wasn't it sometime in fall 2010?


----------



## mblonde09

I'm not understanding how Big Show is a "TV machine", you can put anywhere:

*Kane vs. Big Show in a No DQ Match lost 69,000 viewers*

The Punk/Bryan match a few weeks ago only lost 30,000 and according to Rocky ratings, that was "disasterous".


----------



## NearFall

Sorry, but the Big Show and Kane match was horrible. Surprised it didn't lose that much.


----------



## MMAMAN

what ratings

one thousand?


----------



## Domenico

MMAMAN said:


> what ratings
> 
> one thousand?


WWE is about showmanship and still get's better ratings then MMA.


----------



## MMAMAN

mblonde09 said:


> I'm not understanding how Big Show is a "TV machine", you can put anywhere:
> 
> *Kane vs. Big Show in a No DQ Match lost 69,000 viewers*
> 
> The Punk/Bryan match a few weeks ago only lost 30,000 and according to Rocky ratings, that was "disasterous".


by the way who is that midget on your sig

he looks retarded lol cain velasquez and company could beat his ass anydday


----------



## Domenico

MMAMAN said:


> by the way who is that midget on your sig
> 
> he looks retarded lol cain velasquez and company could beat his ass anydday


Why are you here? Go and be a hero on an MMA forum. Wrestling is scripted, but it's still far more dangerous then MMA will ever be.


----------



## Kid Kablam

MMAMAN said:


> what ratings
> 
> one thousand?


Oh man! You just...you just shattered my world view. The truth! The truth you just dropped on me was so harsh! It's hurting me! it's hurting me!

*burps*

No, that was all just indigestion.


----------



## MMAMAN

Domenico said:


> Why are you here? Go and be a hero on an MMA forum. Wrestling is scripted, but it's still far more dangerous then MMA will ever be.


ok i will be nice i will shutup and not tell the truth that hurts so much for you wrestling fans


----------



## dxbender

Domenico said:


> Why are you here? Go and be a hero on an MMA forum. Wrestling is scripted, but it's still far more dangerous then MMA will ever be.


Wrestling is more dangerous.....? In MMA, the goal it to hurt(and knockout or submit) your opponent.

Wrestling moves have the potential to be more dangerous than MMA moves if they go wrong(imagine if someone sold a move like RKO real bad and snapped their neck, or landed a shooting star press on their head...), but MMA in general is obviously more dangerous.

Wrestling in the long run takes out more from a person than MMA, since wrestlers compete 200-300 days a year, while MMA guys compete 3-4 times a year and spend most of the other time just training.



D.M.N. said:


> Q2 - *4.69 million (0.29 gain)* <-- *6 minutes* stripped out; 8-Man Tag Team match
> 
> Q4 - *5.00 million (0.40 gain)* <-- *7 minutes* stripped out; Triple H/Heyman *recap*, Heyman interview, start of Sheamus/AJ vs Dolph/Vickie
> 
> Q6 - *4.94 million (0.17 gain)* <-- 4 minutes stripped out; *'No Holds Barred' preview, Troops promo*, Big Show vs Kane
> Q7 - *4.85 million (0.39 gain)* <-- *7 minutes* stripped out; Long, AJ and Eve backstage, *Raw 1000th moment, Tensai* vs Tyson Kidd, Bryan/Jericho backstage, Punk/Cena backstage


Reasons like that are why people tune out.

Stop showing replays and recaps, and having 1 quarter hour have like 7 mins of commercials, while another has like 3. Does WWE seriously need to recap everything that happened. People aren't that stupid. Maybe people in WWE incharge of running replays are, but that's it.


If you didn't read my post above...I was talking about how things like recaps were stupid.

WWE better change this.

Earlier in my post, I was talking about how things like recaps are stupid.


Doesn't it sound annoying lol.


----------



## hardysno1fan

dxbender said:


> Wrestling is more dangerous.....? In MMA, the goal it to hurt(and knockout or submit) your opponent.
> 
> Wrestling moves have the potential to be more dangerous than MMA moves if they go wrong(imagine if someone sold a move like RKO real bad and snapped their neck, or landed a shooting star press on their head...), but MMA in general is obviously more dangerous.
> 
> Wrestling in the long run takes out more from a person than MMA, since wrestlers compete 200-300 days a year, while MMA guys compete 3-4 times a year and spend most of the other time just training.
> 
> 
> 
> Reasons like that are why people tune out.
> 
> Stop showing replays and recaps, and having 1 quarter hour have like 7 mins of commercials, while another has like 3. Does WWE seriously need to recap everything that happened. People aren't that stupid. Maybe people in WWE incharge of running replays are, but that's it.
> 
> 
> If you didn't read my post above...I was talking about how things like recaps were stupid.
> 
> WWE better change this.
> 
> Earlier in my post, I was talking about how things like recaps are stupid.
> 
> 
> Doesn't it sound annoying lol.



Its really counter productive because they could just use that time to give somebody the mic.


----------



## Call_Me

Even in drawing ratings, Cena is carrying Punk's skinny fat......


----------



## MMAMAN

having 4,7 in ratings is good but i bet mma has alot more


----------



## funnyfaces1

MMAMAN said:


> having 4,7 in ratings is good but i bet mma has alot more


UFC on FOX has actually been a ratings disaster.


----------



## D.M.N.

21:00 to 21:20 - Opening Segment
--> commercial [4 minutes]
21:24 to 21:28 - Sheamus vs Jack Swagger
21:28 to 21:29 - Santino and Ryder backstage
--> commercial [4 minutes]
21:33 to 21:37 - Christian/Kidd vs Ziggler/Tensai
21:37 to 21:40 - Cole and King arguing; GM intervention
--> commercial [3 minutes]
21:43 to 21:47 - Brodus Clay vs Drew McIntyre
21:47 to 21:49 - Santino, Jericho and Show backstage
--> commercial [3 minutes]
21:52 to 21:54 - Raw 1000th moment
21:54 to 22:06 - Cena promo; Cena/Kane vs JeriShow
--> commercial [3 minutes]
22:09 to 22:14 - Cena/Kane vs JeriShow
--> commercial [3 minutes]
22:17 to 22:22 - Cena/Kane vs JeriShow
22:22 to 22:24 - Opening Segment recap
--> commercial [3 minutes]
22:27 to 22:29 - Punk and Eve backstage
22:29 to 22:30 - Khali and Santino backstage
22:30 to 22:31 - Sin Cara entrance
--> commercial [4 minutes]
22:35 to 22:42 - Sin Cara vs Heath Slater; Bob Backlund return
22:42 to 22:43 - Michael Cole vs Jerry Lawler Poll result
--> commercial [3 minutes]
22:46 to 22:51 - Michael Cole vs Jerry Lawler
--> commercial [3 minutes]
22:54 to 22:56 - 'No Holds Barred' promo
22:56 to 23:08 - Punk and AJ vs Bryan and Eve

Also, with the star power now on Raw 1000th, if I was WWE, I would be mighty disappointed if segments did not hit 4.0.


----------



## Vyed

I dont think they are going to hit 4.0 even with the amount of starpower on 1000th episode. RTWM this year had almost the same amount of starpower with Rock,Taker,Trips,Cena,Hbk but wasnt exactly a ratings success. And the week after brock returned, the opening seg with cena brawl in the ring did only 3.2. Other than these guys you got Austin, Bret and possibly Ric flair, not sure if they can draw as much. The Final segment with a big Overrun gain might do a 4.0 though.


----------



## TheWFEffect

RAW drew a 3.5 ratings things looking up.

*MOD EDIT:* No source to suggest this is true.


----------



## 666_The_Game_666

TheWFEffect said:


> RAW drew a 3.5 ratings things looking up.
> 
> *MOD EDIT:* No source to suggest this is true.


the fuck that show did a 3.5 how in the world did that happen


----------



## Starbuck

TheWFEffect said:


> RAW drew a 3.5 ratings things looking up.
> 
> *MOD EDIT:* No source to suggest this is true.


Really? DAT AJ!!!!!


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

TheWFEffect said:


> RAW drew a 3.5 ratings things looking up.
> 
> *MOD EDIT:* No source to suggest this is true.


Source?


----------



## dxbender

666_The_Game_666 said:


> the fuck that show did a 3.5 how in the world did that happen



This is exactly what's wrong with this thread.

This is what people basically do:

Watch Raw
Comment on Raw:"Raw was ok, I've seen better"
Find out Raws ratings........
If the ratings were good: It was a great show, no surprise to see ratings like that
If the ratings were bad: The show sucked, worst in WWE history, of course the ratings would suck


I don't care if Raw gets 40M viewers or 4M viewers, I watch Raw, and if I like it, I like it, if I don't, then I don't. I don't come on here throughout the show and start constantly talking about how much I loved or hated it.


----------



## Brye

dxbender said:


> This is exactly what's wrong with this thread.
> 
> This is what people basically do:
> 
> Watch Raw
> Comment on Raw:"Raw was ok, I've seen better"
> Find out Raws ratings........
> If the ratings were good: It was a great show, no surprise to see ratings like that
> If the ratings were bad: The show sucked, worst in WWE history, of course the ratings would suck
> 
> 
> *I don't care if Raw gets 40M viewers or 4M viewers, I watch Raw, and if I like it, I like it, if I don't, then I don't.* I don't come on here throughout the show and start constantly talking about how much I loved or hated it.


Couldn't agree more with this.


----------



## Starbuck

dxbender said:


> I don't care if Raw gets 40M viewers or 4M viewers, I watch Raw, and if I like it, I like it, if I don't, then I don't. I don't come on here throughout the show and start constantly talking about how much I loved or hated it.


So? Nobody is telling you to like it, not like it or to base your decision on the rating it gets. I personally found Raw to be alright this week but I would be surprised if the number reported is true because 3.5 is very good for Raw these days and nothing of note happened on the show. What's your point?


----------



## A-C-P

wow 3.5, so I guess it wasn't the worst Raw ever then? Think I'll wait for a "solid" report to buy that #.

although I tend to agree with the quoted post below. Some people like to discuss the ratings #s and thats all well and good, and usually a subject that can be cause for some decent discussion (with certain posters) I just have an issue with the people who use the ratings # to determine their own personal enjoyment of a certain show.



dxbender said:


> This is exactly what's wrong with this thread.
> 
> This is what people basically do:
> 
> Watch Raw
> Comment on Raw:"Raw was ok, I've seen better"
> Find out Raws ratings........
> If the ratings were good: It was a great show, no surprise to see ratings like that
> If the ratings were bad: The show sucked, worst in WWE history, of course the ratings would suck
> 
> 
> I don't care if Raw gets 40M viewers or 4M viewers, I watch Raw, and if I like it, I like it, if I don't, then I don't. I don't come on here throughout the show and start constantly talking about how much I loved or hated it.


----------



## RichDV

The numbers shouldn't be out for another 2 hours or so. It'll probably end up 2.9-3.1.


----------



## Shock

TheWFEffect said:


> RAW drew a 3.5 ratings things looking up.


It doesn't say that anywhere online.


----------



## Vyed

*Hour 1 - 4.294m (Last Week :4.711m), 1.5
Hour 2 - 4.520m (Last Week :4.702m) , 1.6
*

Opening Segment went too long and dragged, not surprising.


----------



## KO Bossy

So what, a 3.1?


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Good. Hope WWE learns not to have fucking AJ all over their show.


----------



## A-C-P

Breakdowns should be fun this week


----------



## Shock

Wow, that's gonna be a bad rating for sure. I'm guessing that the top of the hour tag match with Cena, Show, Kane and Jericho drew well to help the second hour rebound from the bad first.


----------



## xerxesXXI

The only way they can pop the ratings at this point is if vince does the live
sex celebration with linda.


----------



## gl83

jblvdx said:


> Good. Hope WWE learns not to have fucking AJ all over their show.



But AJ was only in the first segment and the final segment of this show. Hardly all over the show.


----------



## dxbender

2 shows on cable tv also got 6+M viewers. MLB Home Run Derby, and the closer(on TNT)


----------



## Starbuck

That's more like it lol.


----------



## AttitudeOutlaw

So the first hour dropped 400,000 compared to last week and hour two dropped 200,000 on last week. I'm glad that the atrocious two weeks of AJ have resulted in a drop but I was hoping for more of a drop than that.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

I'm so glad the numbers dropped. I hope the AJ shit bombed hard.


----------



## Vyed

Rating 3.2. 



dxbender said:


> 2 shows on cable tv also got 6+M viewers. MLB Home Run Derby, and the closer(on TNT)


Yes they had some heavy competition. Could be the reason for low first hour.


Also looks like AM raw did pretty bad. Usually 0.45 to 1.1 range.



> The 7/7 edition of AM Raw did a 0.33 rating and just 383,000 viewers. That is a bad number


As for AJ, lets just hope it ends with MITB PPV. But I think they are going to continue this since they need to fill 3 hrs show and Cole/King/Hornswoggle crap wont work every week.


----------



## gl83

> Last night's show did 4.41 million viewers, down from the recent weeks, but the show always goes down against the Home Run Derby so it's about what would be expected. It will fall in the 2.9 to 3.2 range, depending on viewers per home.
> 
> Home Run Derby did 6.89 million viewers, up from last year's 6.55 million. Raw against Home Run Derby did 4.41 million, exactly the same as this year.
> 
> 
> 
> The 7/9 edition of Raw did a 3.2 rating, with 4,407,000 viewers. The show did hours of 3.11 and 3.22




Credit: PWInsider


----------



## King_Of_This_World

Its amazing to me that they keep on getting the ratings they are for such a poor show.

The majority of casual fans really are just sheep who watch purely out of habit and because of the brand strength of the WWE name.

Vince will never be forced to improve the product, ever.


----------



## Choke2Death

Ratings dropping? Thank God! I really hope they start hitting the upper 2 area again for the horrendous garbage they've been putting on recently. The 1000th episode is the final hope.


----------



## Jammy

Opening segment was ridiculous. It would've been much more entertaining if it were shorter. No fucking clue why it dragged on for so long.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Jammy said:


> Opening segment was ridiculous. It would've been much more entertaining if it were shorter. No fucking clue why it dragged on for so long.


Because AJ is god awful and is the female equivalent of Randy Orton on the mic.


----------



## Pro Royka

AttitudeOutlaw said:


> So the first hour dropped 400,000 compared to last week and hour two dropped 200,000 on last week. I'm glad that the atrocious two weeks of AJ have resulted in a drop but I was hoping for more of a drop than that.


Your signature is so amusing and ridiculously stupid, they're not killing the business kid. Cena is killing the business obviously because he turned this business to what it is right now. Funny that you only like big guys despise how boring some of them are. 

Even though I wish this AJ thing stops, this is turning to be a love twilight movie which I really hate. I just feel sorry for Punk, I never saw him acting this way, WWE f**k you for ruining him. I don't know what to expect in the future, I bet it will be another love story starring Eve, Khali and Hornswaggle. Even if the ratings were good it doesnt change the fact of how boring the show is.


----------



## Rock316AE

Vyed said:


> *Hour 1 - 4.294m (Last Week :4.711m), 1.5
> Hour 2 - 4.520m (Last Week :4.702m) , 1.6
> *
> 
> Opening Segment went too long and dragged, not surprising.


So numbers dropped to almost below 4 million again. Great, that's what happens when you give the worst wrestling storyline of all time too much TV time with 3 amateurs trying to play actors and giving us nightmares with their disaster performance. This feud is the reason I will never watch a full RAW again besides special shows like the 1000th episode. 

I imagine that the Show/Jericho vs Cena/Kane match saved the second hour.


----------



## NearFall

I am very surprised they did not lose more viewers. The AJ segements were so damn drawn out. It is OBVIOUS this is just complete filler until the 1000th RAW.


----------



## King_Of_This_World

To be honest, it pisses me off that this garbage is getting nearly 5 million viewers whilst Impact is stuck on 1.5 million each week for a far better show.

WWE really do have the attitude era to thank, because its that which has given them the huge brand name recognition and brand strength which keeps people tuning in.

You have to give credit to WWE, their marketing is so damm good they can keep people tuning into what it basically a shoddy 3rd rate children's program made by retards.


----------



## Vyed

King_Of_This_World said:


> To be honest, it pisses me off that this garbage is getting nearly 5 million viewers whilst Impact is stuck on 1.5 million each week for a far better show.


So you're finally out with the butthurt.



> WWE really do have the attitude era to thank, because its that which has given them the huge brand name recognition and brand strength which keeps people tuning in.


True, but at the same time TNA also had equal opportunity to establish themselves using WWE's fanbase and Attitude era success/popularity. TNA only have themselves to blame for not doing so. 

Let me just quote this awesome post by Andrebaker that explains better.. 



AndreBaker said:


> The difference being that the WWWF didn't have the benefit of worldwide media outlets such as the intenet, pay per view or an already gigantic market of 'sports-entertainment' fans to tap into, they had to build a strong enough territory that would enable them the financial clout to buy out other regional groups and turn themselves into a national company. After turning national the soon to be WWF rapidly developed into a worldwide phenomenon, their growth from recently turned national company to mainstream phenomenon occured in less time than TNA have currently been in existence.
> 
> In 2002 TNA had a lot of the hard work that many new market buisness ventures face already done for them, WWE had built a wordwide market of millions that TNA could tap into. The majority of TNA's bigger draws over the years made their names through exposure from WWE. For some to say that TNA have achieved so much in 'just' nine years is very short sighted, look at how much WCW achieved in less time when Ted Turner bought out JCP. Then you have to add in the factor of Panda bankrolling many of TNA's high expenses, I doubt that the WWF had this luxury in the 80's. TNA have been afforded so many short cuts yet they still seem to be struggling to break away from independent/regional status.
> 
> When you think about it WWE have only really had a twenty year head start, 1982-2002. In their infancy TNA were at the same point as the WWWF when Vince McMahon Senior sold his company to his son. Having said that, the length of time a company is afforded to grow is really irrelevant in the grand scheme of things, unless TNA discover a promoting visionary like Vince McMahon to lead their charge then they'll always be doomed to failure. If TNA can attract a new audience that haven't previously been exposed to wrestling, build a brand that relies on homegrown talent/original main event draws whilst implementing fresh ideas that aren't merely rehashes of angles popularised by far bigger and better promotions...then, and only then can we can have a discussion.


----------



## Amuroray

punk CANT DRAW LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Complete loser.


----------



## Heimerdinger

Rock316AE said:


> So numbers dropped to almost below 4 million again. Great, that's what happens when you give the worst wrestling storyline of all time too much TV time with 3 amateurs trying to play actors and giving us nightmares with their disaster performance. This feud is the reason I will never watch a full RAW again besides special shows like the 1000th episode.
> 
> I imagine that the Show/Jericho vs Cena/Kane match saved the second hour.


Raw


> ratings:
> 
> Last night's show did 4.41 million viewers, down from the recent weeks, but the show always goes down against the Home Run Derby so it's about what would be expected. It will fall in the 2.9 to 3.2 range, depending on viewers per home.
> 
> Home Run Derby did 6.89 million viewers, up from last year's 6.55 million. Raw against Home Run Derby did 4.41 million, exactly the same as this year.


Nice try


----------



## AthenaMark

Just heard the rating news...AJ is apparently keeping those ratings UP. Higher than last week and now she's increasing the viewership in the second hour...something that DID NOT happen with Cena closing the show. LMAO!


----------



## Woo-Woo-Woo

*Does the WWE realize that...*

they haven't got past the 3.3 ratings mark for like 8 months? Even the road to wrestlemania, last year they hit the 4.2 but this year with The rock and Brock on one same night only made 3.3 !!!


And now they are making the show 3 hours because 2 hours of shit is not enough! LOL


----------



## Patrick Bateman

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*

if you're one of the people who enjoy the show the ratings shouldn't matter to you. but if you're not enjoying the show i don't know why you even care.


----------



## Brye

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*

Who honestly cares? Seriously?

Unless there's a wrestler you don't like and don't have the cognitive ability to explain why in a fair manner.


----------



## 11rob2k

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*

As long as they stay the highest rated wrestling show on tv i don't think they care.


----------



## ogorodnikov

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*



Brye said:


> Who honestly cares? Seriously?


http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/594794-official-raw-ratings-thread-discuss-ratings-here.html


----------



## Silent KEEL

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*

Ratings are only used on this board as a way for people with stupid opinions to have an excuse to not like something. They're called sheep.


----------



## Punked Up

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*

2 situations here:

1) You enjoy the show, why should ratings matter?

2) You don't enjoy the show yet complain about ratings, why should you watch? (This is the more likely of the two options as you said the show was shit)


----------



## Domenico

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*

Why would you care if you enjoy the show?

Although low ratings wouldn't surprise me if they pull off a show like last RAW.


----------



## Brye

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*



The Redeemer said:


> Ratings are only used on this board as a way for people with stupid opinions to have an excuse to not like something. They're called sheep.


More or less. And 90% of those people act like they're successful businessmen in the Television world and their word is law.


----------



## will94

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*

They got a 3.4 three weeks ago and the night after Mania that you spoke about, and a 3.5 back in January. They haven't had a 4.0+ rating for RAW in over 6 years.

Nice try though. Research before posting next time.


----------



## joeisgonnakillyou

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*

Is 3.3 really that bad after this week RAW?

Dear WWE, book hornswoggle vs santino for the main event of next week RAW just to prove wrestling fans will watch anything.


----------



## WPack911

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*



will94 said:


> They got a 3.4 three weeks ago and the night after Mania that you spoke about, and a 3.5 back in January.
> 
> They haven't had a 4 rating in over 6 years. Nice try though.


They could do anything on Raw and they won't get a 4, wrestling is not mainstream anymore. Don't worry about ratings just watch because you are a fan not because it's mainstream.


----------



## Woo-Woo-Woo

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*

People saying who cares about ratings obviously don't watch the show and they just dont see how fucking crappy it is


----------



## WPack911

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*



Woo-Woo-Woo said:


> People saying who cares about ratings obviously don't watch the show and they just dont see how fucking crappy it is


I watch the show and I don't care about ratings. Raw is not going anywhere, I only care about ratings on shows I like that might get canceled, Raw will be on the air for an episode 2000.


----------



## bme

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*

"Ratings don't matter when something i like is low, but when it's something i hate.... i can't stop talkin about it"


----------



## Pro Royka

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*



will94 said:


> They got a 3.4 three weeks ago and the night after Mania that you spoke about, and a 3.5 back in January. They haven't had a 4.0+ rating for RAW in over 6 years.
> 
> Nice try though. Research before posting next time.


Lol, what yes they did.


----------



## bigdog40

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*

Blame Bischoff for planting it in people's head ratings matter because they don't. Nobody was talking about ratings before the Monday Night Raw and WWE had TV shows for years prior. Also the ratings system is so flawed because it's only a sample and is not a true indicator on who's drawing or now. The ratings system doesn't count anybody on here anyway and yes I don't think WWE cares too much if they haven't drawn a 3.5 in x amount of months. They are still making their money so what's it to you?


----------



## Brye

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*



Woo-Woo-Woo said:


> People saying who cares about ratings obviously don't watch the show and they just dont see how fucking crappy it is


I clearly watch the show.

It was bad this week. I still don't care what rating it gets.


----------



## will94

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*



Pro Royka said:


> Lol, what yes they did.


There hasn't been an episode of RAW that's had a 4.0 or higher rating since 2006. 

4.2 million viewers does not equal a 4.2 rating.


----------



## WWF/E

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*

Don't understand the moderators in this forum let these clear troll/gimmick losers even have accounts let alone allow threads like these to have life.


----------



## Pro Royka

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*



will94 said:


> There hasn't been an episode of RAW that's had a 4.0 or higher rating since 2006.
> 
> 4.2 million viewers does not equal a 4.2 rating.


In 2009, it had 4.1 ratings two weeks a row and a 4.5 rating, that happened when Orton was the Champ and he was feuding with HHH, Vince, Shane, Stephanie, Batista. Also even tho in 2010 it had a 3.8 rating when Batista was the champ impressive # because there wasn't too much happening except for Batista/Cena. Also last year it got 3.9 when The Rock appeared. It isn't 4.0+ but it was close, so in 2009 it got 4.0+ it's like 4 years ago.


----------



## Heimerdinger

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*



Brye said:


> More or less. And 90% of those people act like they're successful businessmen in the Television world and their word is law.


The only time I see people care about ratings is to justify their hate for a wrestler

"Hey look CM Punk and Bryan did a 2.9 instead of a 3.0, lol they can't draw"


----------



## Rusty Shackleford

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*

As a fan, I don't understand why you even care about the ratings. You should only watch to be entertained. If you're not entertained then change the channel. Bitching about ratings when you own zero stock in the WWE and make $0 from the show is pretty pointless.


----------



## will94

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*



Pro Royka said:


> In 2009, it had 4.1 ratings two weeks a row and a 4.5 rating, that happened when Orton was the Champ and he was feuding with HHH, Vince, Shane, Stephanie, Batista. Also even tho in 2010 it had a 3.8 rating when Batista was the champ impressive # because there wasn't too much happening except for Batista/Cena. Also last year it got 3.9 when The Rock appeared. It isn't 4.0+ but it was close, so in 2009 it got 4.0+ it's like 4 years ago.


Oh yea, forgot about Trump's commercial-free RAW in 2009 drawing huge.

Funny that Trump has been the only thing that can draw in the last few years lol


----------



## 1TheRockHHH

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*

Vince doesn't care about ratings like he did years ago during the monday night wars so why should he have to worry or care about the ratings when there's no competition?


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*

Last year when Rock came back to Chicago, they did a 4.0 in the second hour and a 4.8 for his segment, it was a 3-4 years peak. Other than that, they got a huge boost from Rock's return in 2011. Before that it was Bret/Vince/Batista/Cena for the RTW. Orton's hot heel run against Vince/Shane/HHH and Floyd/Show did the biggest numbers of 2008 in their first segment after NWO 2008. 



1TheRockHHH said:


> Vince doesn't care about ratings like he did years ago during the monday night wars so why should he have to worry or care about the ratings when there's no competition?


Of course he cares. Besides the MNW. More than ever because it's the only thing keeping them above water. The USA Network TV deal. He's booking the entire show week to week based on the ratings, you people need to realize that WWE is in the TV world and all they do is TV promotion. Ratings are the god and indicator of this world.


----------



## Call_Me

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*



Rock316AE said:


> Last year when Rock came back to Chicago, they did a 4.0 in the second hour and a 4.8 for his segment, it was a 3-4 years peak. Other than that, they got a huge boost from Rock's return in 2011. Before that it was Bret/Vince/Batista/Cena for the RTW. Orton's hot heel run against Vince/Shane/HHH and Floyd/Show did the biggest numbers of 2008 in their first segment after NWO 2008.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course he cares. Besides the MNW. More than ever because it's the only thing keeping them above water. The USA Network TV deal. He's booking the entire show week to week based on the ratings, you people need to realize that WWE is in the TV world and all they do is TV promotion. Ratings are the god and indicator of this world.


I had always wondered this, man.......

What do you do for a living?


----------



## dxbender

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*



Rock316AE said:


> Of course he cares. Besides the MNW. More than ever because it's the only thing keeping them above water. The USA Network TV deal. He's booking the entire show week to week based on the ratings, you people need to realize that WWE is in the TV world and all they do is TV promotion. Ratings are the god and indicator of this world.



Obviouslly he'll care, but not as much as before.

WWE is USA networks top show. Even USA Network knows that if they ever drop Raw, WWE will easily be able to find a new home for Raw, cause many channels would love to get a show that has 4+M guaranteed viewers every single week(and will be able to advertise shows for that network during their show).


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*



Call_Me said:


> I had always wondered this, man.......
> 
> What do you do for a living?


Maybe he is vince mcmahon himself


----------



## Domenico

Ratings do not dictate the quality of the product, though arguably the current product we watch is pretty bad judging last RAW. Regardless, i don't even understand why this thread is here in the first place, ratings shouldn't matter to any of us, we are the fans that should enjoy or loathe the product, whatever you choose, we just watch for entertainment.


----------



## SteenIsGod

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*



WPack911 said:


> They could do anything on Raw and they won't get a 4, wrestling is not mainstream anymore. Don't worry about ratings just watch because you are a fan not because it's mainstream.


It got a 4.2 in 2009 with Orton/HHH

Nice try, this storyline is one of the reasons professional wrestling is on the down hill slide.


----------



## D.M.N.

Not actually a bad rating, viewership a little low, but still staying above the 3.0 rating mark and 4 million viewers. The ad-breakdown can't have helped:

Q1 - 0 minutes
Q2 - 5 minutes
Q3 - 6 minutes
Q4 - 3 minutes
Q5 - 4 minutes
Q6 - 5 minutes
Q7 - 6 minutes
Q8 - 4 minutes

Q1 will probably end up the highest rated segment with Q2 and Q3 dragging hour 1 down a lot, before a nice gain for hour 2.


----------



## Vyed

*Re: Does the WWE realize that...*



will94 said:


> There hasn't been an episode of RAW that's had a 4.0 or higher rating since 2006.


They hit 4.0+ 10 times in 2007 alone and 2 times in feb of 2009 with HHH/Orton. 


I dont get all the complaining here, no one forced you guys to open this thread. Vince mcmahon does care about ratings that should be obvious.


----------



## -Skullbone-

Domenico said:


> Ratings do not dictate the quality of the product, though arguably the current product we watch is pretty bad judging last RAW. Regardless, i don't even understand why this thread is here in the first place, ratings shouldn't matter to any of us, we are the fans that should enjoy or loathe the product, whatever you choose, we just watch for entertainment.


To me ratings, buy rates, merchandise, etc are apart of an interesting overall concept to get one's teeth into. In particular, when this approach becomes a part of deeper discussions based on how one's favourites are being received by fans, how they are/should be utilised by companies, as well the appeal of certain characters or personalities as opposed to others (past, present comparisons and all that). 

However...



> Ratings are the god and indicator of this world.


Tidbits like this are quite worrying. Particularly when they are coming from smart-alec fans professing something as gospel that people (fellow fans) should flock to.


----------



## joeisgonnakillyou

I need confirmation but it seems RAW this week got 3.2 :lmao

It's official, they can do whatever they want.


----------



## AttitudeOutlaw

joeisgonnakillyou said:


> I need confirmation but it seems RAW this week got 3.2 :lmao
> 
> It's official, they can do whatever they want.


As long as John Cena is on the show they will draw. It doesn't matter that everything else is garbage and that AJ/Punk/Bryan are currently making the worst feud in wrestling HISTORY - John Cena is THAT big of a star and THAT popular that people will always watch while he's there. The one time he wasn't on the show this year the ratings plummeted to worrying levels and that says it all. Unfortunately Cena is the only megastar in the land right now and if he were to get injured they would be screwed to hell. They need Orton back in the main-event because he's the #2 guy and the only other active guy who can carry the brand.


----------



## SteenIsGod

AttitudeOutlaw said:


> As long as John Cena is on the show they will draw. It doesn't matter that everything else is garbage and that AJ/Punk/Bryan are currently making the worst feud in wrestling HISTORY - John Cena is THAT big of a star and THAT popular that people will always watch while he's there. The one time he wasn't on the show this year the ratings plummeted to worrying levels and that says it all. Unfortunately Cena is the only megastar in the land right now and if he were to get injured they would be screwed to hell. They need Orton back in the main-event because he's the #2 guy and the only other active guy who can carry the brand.


I agree that this Storyline is one of the worst in history, but your logic is stupid. Why would people watch the parts of the show that John Cena isn't on just because John Cena is a draw?


----------



## Jammy

*From the Observer:


If there was a key to the Raw rating, the tease that A.J. was going to marry the person she left the ring with worked. The gain of 711,000 viewers for the overrun is normal level (a good 3.61 overrun), but this was done without John Cena in the segment, and with C.M. Punk and Daniel Bryan, who have never moved ratings big. Plus, there was gigantic increase in teenage boys watching for the overrun only that wasn’t there for the rest of the show. That demo hovered between a 2.7 and 3.2 rating the entire show, but hit a 4.4 for the overrun. Overrun growth was 3.2 to 4.4 in that demo, 2.5 to 3.1 in Males 18-49, 1.2 to 1.4 in Girls 12-17 and stayed at 1.1 with Women 18-49. It should be noted that it’s the marrying gimmick and not the personalities since A.J., Punk nor Bryan spiked ratings in that demo in their interview segment this week or any other week in this storyline. Whether it’s a sign of things to come, or something meaningless where the tease of a marriage sparked interest that isn’t going to sustain will be determined in the future.

As far as comparisons to the week before, Boys 12-17 did a 3.1 (up 3%, all due to the overrun), Males 18-49 did a 2.5 (same as last week), Girls 12-17 did a 1.1 (down 8%) and Women 18-49 did a 1.1 (down 15%). That’s also notable because the wedding teases usually inflates the female audience more than the men, plus Home Run Derby figured to hurt among men, not women. The male skew was 67.4%. Raw was in 5th place for the night on cable.

For quarters, the long opening monologue with A.J., Punk and Bryan along with Sheamus vs. Jack Swagger lost 74,000 viewers. Christian & Tyson Kidd vs. Tensai & Dolph Ziggler and the Lawler vs. Cole angle building their match lost 416,000 viewers. Brodus Clay vs. Drew McIntyre plus Stephanie McMahon talking about the angle where she and HHH were to renew their vows gained 102,000 viewers. John Cena & Kane vs. Big Show & Chris Jericho gained 66,000 viewers, which is not good for that time period. What happened is they did about a 280,000 gain at 10 p.m., which is lower than usual, but then lost those viewers when the match went longer and went through the second break. Heath Slater vs. Sin Cara and his angle with Bob Backlund lots 21,000 viewers. Lawler vs. Cole and the Hornswoggle as General Manager reveal also lost 21,000 viewers.

Quote:
A note regarding updated universes of the various cable stations. With people very slowly switching away from satellite and dishes, there has been a small drop, not enough yet to really matter but it is a worrisome trend.

As of the end of June, the USA Network was available in 99,301,000 homes, which is 86.6% of the homes in the U.S. They peaked at nearly 101 million a year ago. Almost every station has shown similar declines. Spike TV is in 98,623,000 homes after peaking at more than 100 million. We don’t have a number for FX, but it’s in the 98.5 million range. Syfy is in 98,006,000 homes. MTV 2 is in about 75 million homes and Fuel is in 36.2 million homes.*

Analyses of the breakdowns are a little questionable. Great to see that Bryan/Punk/AJ are sustaining and gaining viewers.


----------



## Starbuck

Get Steph and Hunter back on the show for another marriage. That should do the trick lol since their video package did well. Great overrun number and I agree that the tease of a marriage was what drew people in. I think this is the first time a Punk segment (bar that one Johnny promo) has gained such a big number without Cena/Vince/HHH there to help. This time it was AJ who helped!! Lol. It's strange that teen boys tuned in for a potential wedding rather than females though who actually dropped. You would expect those numbers to be the other way round which is quite surprising to me. Is that a statement upon the teenage boys of America lol? I don't know but if it is it surely can't be a good one, haha! The 10pm number is rather shitty too considering who was in it. All in all a rather bad breakdown. They just kept losing and losing viewers until the end pretty much. Back to normal I guess.


----------



## SteenIsGod

DAMN, A Cena Segment gaining that Poorly? LOL LOL LOL


----------



## Starbuck

SteenIsGod said:


> DAMN, A Cena Segment gaining that Poorly? LOL LOL LOL


Cena's amazing drawing power was offset by the giant, the fairy and the monster.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

> the giant, the fairy and the monster.


That'll be a movie title one day. Starring all three of them.


----------



## D.M.N.

There's an error in the breakdown provided somewhere, so I've balanced it out, so below hour 1 is slightly higher than what it should be with hour 2 slightly lower than what it should be:

Quarter Hours - July 9th, 2012
Q1 - 3.33 rating / 4.60 million
Q2 - 3.28 rating / 4.53 million
Q3 - 2.98 rating / 4.11 million
Q4 - 3.05 rating / 4.21 million
Q5 - 3.20 rating / 4.49 million
Q6 - 3.09 rating / 4.34 million
Q7 - 3.08 rating / 4.32 million
Q8 - 3.06 rating / 4.30 million
Overrun - 3.61 rating / 5.01 million

So, using 10 percent as per usual:

Q1 - *4.60 million (0.00 gain)* <-- no commercials
Q2 - *4.75 million (0.23 gain)* <-- 5 minutes stripped out; Opening Segment end, Sheamus vs Jack Swagger, Santino and Ryder backstage
Q3 - *4.38 million (0.27 gain)* <-- 6 minutes stripped out; Christian/Kidd vs Ziggler/Tensai, Cole and King arguing, Brodus Clay vs Drew McIntyre
Q4 - *4.32 million (0.11 gain)* <-- 3 minutes stripped out; Brodus Clay vs Drew McIntyre, Santino, Jericho and Show backstage, Raw 1000th moment, Cena promo
Q5 - *4.66 million (0.16 gain)* <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Cena/Kane vs JeriShow
Q6 - *4.56 million (0.22 gain)* <-- 5 minutes stripped out; Cena/Kane vs JeriShow, Opening Segment recap, Punk and Eve backstage, Khali and Santino backstage
Q7 - *4.61 million (0.29 gain)* <-- 6 minutes stripped out; Sin Cara vs Heath Slater, Bob Backlund return, Michael Cole vs Jerry Lawler Poll result
Q8 - *4.46 million (0.16 gain)* <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Michael Cole vs Jerry Lawler, 'No Holds Barred' promo, Punk and AJ vs Bryan and Eve start
Overrun - *5.01 million (0.00 gain)* <-- no commercials (obviously)


----------



## A-C-P

Damn what happened to that TV rtaing machine Big Show? And apparently no one cares about Cena in MITB. And wait the worst storyline in wrestling history doing good #s in its 2 segments? I am so confused.

Looks like its back to normal like Starbuck said People tune it for the opening seg, the 10PM seg and the last seg. Still above 4 million though.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

A match starring John Cena, Kane, Jericho and the Big show gains only that little. Looks like no one gives a shit about the Raw MITB match lols.

The Jerry Lawler V Cole match is the lowest rated segment on the show, Good.

People are clearly most invested in the Punk/Bryan/AJ angle, its most likely closing MITB as this is the angle WWE are putting their effort into.


----------



## Starbuck

The-Rock-Says said:


> That'll be a movie title one day. Starring all three of them.


The Cena Skywalker Chronicles, Episode I: The Giant, the Fairy and the Monster.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

:lmao at the pathetic breakdown explanations. Jericho/Cena gains 500,000+ viewers two weeks ago. Last week the main event with Cena, Punk, and Bryan did 600,000+ viewers. And hell three weeks ago in Laurinitis' final match the overrun did 500,000+ viewers as well. But Punk/Bryan/AJ gain 700,000 viewers and that is all of a sudden "normal" level, even when it hasn't for at least a month. lol.


----------



## Starbuck

I'd say that a normal overrun number has become 500,000 after this past year or so all things considered. Anything less than 500,000 is a disappointment. 500,000 - 600,000 is normal/average. 600,000 - 750,000 is above average and really good. 750,000 - 900,000 is an excellent number and 900,000 to 1 million+ is of course insane.


----------



## Vyed

Something's wrong with the Breakdown. 



D.M.N. said:


> Quarter Hours - July 9th, 2012
> Q1 - 3.33 rating / 4.60 million
> Q2 - 3.28 rating / 4.53 million
> Q3 - 2.98 rating / 4.11 million
> Q4 - 3.05 rating / 4.21 million
> Q5 - 3.20 rating / 4.49 million
> Q6 - 3.09 rating / 4.34 million
> Q7 - 3.08 rating / 4.32 million
> *Q8 - 3.06 rating / 4.30 million
> Overrun - 3.61 rating / 5.01 million*


At what time exactly did the main event match start? and how long was the overrun? Bit confused here.


----------



## A-C-P

Vyed said:


> Something's wrong with the Breakdown.
> 
> 
> 
> At what time exactly did the main event match start? and how long was the overrun? Bit confused here.


If my memory is correct the ME match started about 10:57 so 3 minutes of the last quarter and the overrun was I think 7-10 minutes.

So if those #s are correct people only tuned back in to see the Punk/Bryan/AJ stuff.


----------



## D.M.N.

Should gave quoted this earlier, exact times



D.M.N. said:


> 21:00 to 21:20 - Opening Segment
> --> commercial [4 minutes]
> 21:24 to 21:28 - Sheamus vs Jack Swagger
> 21:28 to 21:29 - Santino and Ryder backstage
> --> commercial [4 minutes]
> 21:33 to 21:37 - Christian/Kidd vs Ziggler/Tensai
> 21:37 to 21:40 - Cole and King arguing; GM intervention
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 21:43 to 21:47 - Brodus Clay vs Drew McIntyre
> 21:47 to 21:49 - Santino, Jericho and Show backstage
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 21:52 to 21:54 - Raw 1000th moment
> 21:54 to 22:06 - Cena promo; Cena/Kane vs JeriShow
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:09 to 22:14 - Cena/Kane vs JeriShow
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:17 to 22:22 - Cena/Kane vs JeriShow
> 22:22 to 22:24 - Opening Segment recap
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:27 to 22:29 - Punk and Eve backstage
> 22:29 to 22:30 - Khali and Santino backstage
> 22:30 to 22:31 - Sin Cara entrance
> --> commercial [4 minutes]
> 22:35 to 22:42 - Sin Cara vs Heath Slater; Bob Backlund return
> 22:42 to 22:43 - Michael Cole vs Jerry Lawler Poll result
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:46 to 22:51 - Michael Cole vs Jerry Lawler
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:54 to 22:56 - 'No Holds Barred' promo
> 22:56 to 23:08 - Punk and AJ vs Bryan and Eve


----------



## Xander45

No wonder they're going AJ crazy if she's drawing these kinda numbers in.


----------



## Words Of Wisdom

Wow surprised AJ drawing in these #s. Im a fan of the storyline, so I'm happy to see she is drawing. Although not drawing huge #s, she is drawing though. Good for her!


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

The storyline is obviously working. I don't know how, but it is.

Big Show, what a TV ratings machine, huh.


----------



## A-C-P

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> The storyline is obviously working. I don't know how, but it is.
> 
> Big Show, what a TV ratings machine, huh.


Yup on both statements. I am not one who bashed the Punk/Bryan/AJ sotryline as I actually do like it, but just thought that opening segment was just to long this past monday. But eventhough I personally liked it never thouht it would do this well from a veiwers standpoint.


----------



## Words Of Wisdom

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> The storyline is obviously working. I don't know how, but it is.
> 
> Big Show, what a TV ratings machine, huh.


Yeah I'm a fan of the storyline, but even I will admit the opening segment was a little too chaotic and dragged out. Maybe this storyline is drawing because it's something different? Even if you're a fan or even hate this storyline, it definitely is a change, that we haven't had in a while. I mean I haven't seen a diva like AJ pushed or even draw this well in a really long time.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Xander45 said:


> No wonder they're going AJ crazy if she's drawing these kinda numbers in.


She's not, the whole cast of the storyline is. Do you think the final segment would of gained 700,000 if it was just AJ V Eve?


----------



## Xander45

I like the storyline, and the fact that it's pretty well done as far as long running storylines go.

AJ/Bryan have been a storyline together since last November! They were drawing well over on SD and have brought their drawing ability over to Raw.


----------



## The XL

jblvdx said:


> She's not, the whole cast of the storyline is. Do you think the final segment would of gained 700,000 if it was just AJ V Eve?


True, but she's the focal point of the story.


----------



## funnyfaces1

What in Allah's glorious world is going on with the ratings for this storyline? Never would even the biggest of Punk/Bryan fans could have predicted that this would be a ratings success.


----------



## RatedR10

Holy shit at the 10 PM gain. Wow. With that star power in it, especially Cena, you expect better.

I guess Raw starring AJ will continue with the gains. I'm not a fan but whatever.


----------



## WPack911

Glad to see the big ratings spike for the AJ/Punk/Bryan overrun segment. This storyline is not only awesome (even if the haters do what they do and hate on it), but it also is helping my favorite Diva and my 2 current favorite fulltime male wrestlers over even more. 

These type of good ratings will hopefully force WWE to make sure to keep all three on TV in prominent roles even after this storyline ends. 

Also, maybe WWE will see that other people besides Cena can close a show on a consistent basis now all if that happens we all win.


----------



## kokepepsi

LOLwhat

Like I said this AJ thing is borderline so bad it's good.

LOl at 66k for Cena


----------



## Green Light

So they got an influx of horny teenage boys hoping to see some wedding night sex between goatface and AJ


----------



## AthenaMark

> Monday's WWE RAW Supershow drew a 3.17 rating with 4.42 million viewers, virtually even with the previous week. Considering the fact that RAW was up against the MLB Home Run Derby (4.79 rating and 6.88 million viewers), the rating is considered a strong showing for WWE and a good sign of momentum headed into Sunday's Money in the Bank pay-per-view.
> 
> Digging deeper into the numbers, A.J. Lee proved to be a big ratings draw for WWE, with the overrun segment featuring her decision of "who she was going to marry" gained 711,000 viewers. Considering the fact that the segment featured CM Punk (typically not big a ratings draw) and no John Cena, this is great news for WWE. Even more noteworthy is that the teenage male demographic, which has been hurting badly this year, saw a major spike during the overrun.


I hate to say I told you so but I TOLD YOU SO..AJ Runs Raw and is a CONFIRMD ratings hit. No getting around it. Stop whining about it...stop crying. She kicked Cena out of the main event and THIS IS WHY. AJ! AJ! AJ!



jblvdx said:


> She's not, the whole cast of the storyline is. Do you think the final segment would of gained 700,000 if it was just AJ V Eve?


Nope but it damn sure wouldn't have drawn like that with just Punk and Bryan. We ALL know that. AJ's element added the viewers and it's been filed forever.


----------



## Bob the Jobber

I'm a little surprised by the numbers, especially Cena/Kane/Show/Jericho, but it's not too far fetched to see people are invested in the AJ/Bryan/Punk angle. If nothing other than the fact it's the only week to week storyline going on. It sure as hell beats having constant one on one matches with dirty finishes to protect both participants before the PPV.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

It's not AJ. It's the storyline, it's obviously working. All three play their role well in the story, therefore all three deserve credit. 

It can't be expressed enough, storylines draw. Why do you think Rock/Cena was such a fail in terms of ratings? The angle was nothing new, boring, and all in all complete shit. AJ/Punk/Bryan outdrew Rock/Cena in every segment they had during the RTWM.


----------



## e1987p

AthenaMark said:


> I hate to say I told you so but I TOLD YOU SO..AJ Runs Raw and is a CONFIRMD ratings hit. No getting around it. Stop whining about it...stop crying. She kicked Cena out of the main event and THIS IS WHY. AJ! AJ! AJ!



Confirmed. What?
All other time never prove to draw.
Out from the start or the the end of the show (where generally rating always go up),she can't draw even when promoted in a match.
One time is not a prove when other time was not relevant.


----------



## Snothlisberger

Where is Rocke316ae :side:


----------



## SteenIsGod

Wish it was somebody hot playing AJ's role and not a 12 Year Old Anorexic.


----------



## AthenaMark

e1987p said:


> Confirmed. What?
> All other time never prove to draw.
> Out from the start or the the end of the show (where generally rating always go up),she can't draw even when promoted in a match.
> One time is not a prove when other time was not relevant.


One time my ass..she's been carrying Raw for weeks. And if she was a ratings loser, she would of been buried 3 weeks ago. But instead she stole the show and has the crowd energy up and chanting for her decisions over both the WWE title contenders. She did a better ratings gain than CM Punk ever gets....get real, man.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

AthenaMark said:


> One time my ass..she's been carrying Raw for weeks. And if she was a ratings loser, she would of been buried 3 weeks ago. But instead she stole the show and has the crowd energy up and chanting for her decisions over both the WWE title contenders. She did a better ratings gain than CM Punk ever gets....get real, man.


The segment also drew better than any segment The Rock did in 2012. Is she a bigger ratings draw than The Rock as well?


----------



## ogorodnikov

AthenaMark said:


> One time my ass..she's been carrying Raw for weeks.


no, she hasn't.



> And if she was a ratings loser, she would of been buried 3 weeks ago.


what does that even mean? there are a lot of segments and wrestlers that consistently get poor ratings, and they haven't been buried. what the fuck are you talking about?



> But instead she stole the show and has the crowd energy up and chanting for her decisions over both the WWE title contenders. She did a better ratings gain than CM Punk ever gets....get real, man.


there are a lot of kids in the crowd. the fact that she has to do something drastic to get these types of ratings should say _something_ to you. especially considering that both times that she came out during Raw, she got absolutely no reaction whatsoever.

some people need to re-read this:



> It should be noted that it’s the marrying gimmick and not the personalities since A.J., Punk nor Bryan spiked ratings in that demo in their interview segment this week or any other week in this storyline.


people need to understand that the marriage gimmick is obviously something DRASTIC that is going to bring in viewers. these kids don't care if this storyline has no substance to it whatsoever and how things happen at completely random times for no explicable reason, but eventually they will get bored of AJ's horrible shit if this goes past MITB. you can't keep doing relatively the same thing every single week.

it's funny as fuck watching Bryan fans reaction to this though. 

"i like Bryan because of who he is, ratings don't matter to me!" ---> "wow, look how much AJ's proposal got, that's why this storyline is working!"

seriously the most deluded fanbase of any wrestler, and it's not even close.


----------



## Tnmore

LMAO AJ outdraws WWE champion punk? Wow worst drawing champion in history BY FAR. 

Why is he still champion? he is stale, corny, sloppy and cant draw shit to save his life. I hope the rock takes the title on 1000th raw show.


----------



## PGSucks

Well, of course AJ drew in the teenage male viewers. She looks like she's 17 (one of the major reasons I think she's cute, but that's for a different topic).

I'm also glad that the overrun did such good numbers, because maybe WWE would consider stretching this feud out for ~ ONE MORE MATCH ! ~


----------



## BrosOfDestruction

PGSucks said:


> Well, of course AJ drew in the teenage male viewers. *She looks like she's 17 (one of the major reasons I think she's cute, but that's for a different topic).
> *
> I'm also glad that the overrun did such good numbers, because maybe WWE would consider stretching this feud out for ~ ONE MORE MATCH ! ~


----------



## Jammy

This feud may not end at MITB looking at these numbers. Don't know what else they can do next though.


----------



## chronoxiong

I’m glad to see the breakdown for this week. It clearly shows the WWE Universe that no one wants to see Lawler vs Cole ever again. Their voting was clearly rigged. No one enjoyed it except for probably Vince McMahon himself.


----------



## AthenaMark

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> The segment also drew better than any segment The Rock did in 2012. Is she a bigger ratings draw than The Rock as well?


No one is a bigger draw than the Rock because WM 28 made more money than anything John Cena, CM Punk, AJ, Bryan, Undertaker, HHH, Shawn Michaels, or Lesnar have done in the company in the last two years alone. He is who they beg and get on their knees for to show up...whole different ball game. But she clearly outdrew Cena and it's right there on the record.



> what does that even mean? *there are a lot of segments and wrestlers that consistently get poor ratings, and they haven't been buried.* what the fuck are you talking about?


Happens all the time...WTF are you talking about.



> there are a lot of kids in the crowd. the fact that she has to do something drastic to get these types of ratings should say something to you. especially considering that both times that she came out during Raw, she got absolutely no reaction whatsoever.


Drastic? She just did a marriage proposal promo. That was it and apparently that was enough.



> people need to understand that the marriage gimmick is obviously something DRASTIC that is going to bring in viewers. these kids don't care if this storyline has no substance to it whatsoever and how things happen at completely random times for no explicable reason, but eventually they will get bored of AJ's horrible shit if this goes past MITB. you can't keep doing relatively the same thing every single week.


Of course they'll get bored...people have been bored of Cena since October 2005 when they chose Kurt Angle over him outright. People were bored of the computer GM thing over two years ago. Beating a dead horse. Wake up.


----------



## GillbergReturns

The numbers did the exact same as last year. Let's stop overrating the AJ is a draw nonsense.

It was a good gain on an average drawing show. Also this is the 1st week it saw that type of gain. I'd like to think you guys are a little more rational than drawing conclusions based off of 1 segment.


----------



## D.M.N.

"Plus, there was gigantic increase in teenage boys watching for the overrun only that wasn’t there for the rest of the show. That demo hovered between a 2.7 and 3.2 rating the entire show, but hit a 4.4 for the overrun. Overrun growth was 3.2 to 4.4 in that demo, 2.5 to 3.1 in Males 18-49, 1.2 to 1.4 in Girls 12-17 and stayed at 1.1 with Women 18-49."

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...hats-a-tv-rating-and-who-is-it-dating/102756/

So assuming teenage boys is half of 240k, then that demo went from *769k to 1.06m, a 291k gain. (3.2 to 4.4)*

Men 18-49 went from *1.60m to 1.98m, a 380k gain. (2.5 to 3.1)*

Girls 12-17 (again half of 240k) went from *144k to 168k, a 28k gain (1.2 to 1.4)*

Women 18-49 stayed at *704k*


----------



## THANOS

I don't give a shit about ratings personally, but it's good to see the love triangle storyline is drawing in casual viewers to Punk and Bryan segments! Both of those guys need casual interest because their appearance's don't instantly draw in casuals like the Batista's, HHH's, and Cena's of the world did/do.

A special comment needs to be made about AJ's tremendous work in this storyline, as she reminds more and more of Mickie James (trish stratus feud) every week!


----------



## Starbuck

GillbergReturns said:


> It was a good gain on an average drawing show. Also this is the 1st week it saw that type of gain. I'd like to think you guys are a little more rational than drawing conclusions based off of 1 segment.


I was about to ask if anybody remembered how the angle had been doing over the last few weeks. If I recall, everybody was happy that there was a shitty rating not too long back. I think this is the only time it has done so well and given the nature of the show this week, I'm not surprised at all. The marriage proposal was unpredictable and people tuned in for it, that's it. That doesn't make AJ or Punk or Bryan some incredible draw. It made their angle very interesting for one night. I really don't see why this has started mark wars tbh.


----------



## ogorodnikov

AthenaMark said:


> Happens all the time...WTF are you talking about.


as evidenced by your "AJ has been carrying raw by herself" comment, you're clearly bias and have no idea what you're talking about. you see the big 700k number and just go off of that without fucking reading. christ.

let's imagine when AJ first started acting like a psycho bitch, the ratings were shit. why would the WWE just stop out of the blue with that storyline? is it not obvious to you that this is the only storyline they're putting any effort into? nobody cared about Tensai, rumors were going around that he was done and that he was being repackeged entirely, then he comes back and he's in the MITB.

i... i just don't know what to say to you. every single week there are wrestlers, non-wrestlers, and segments that consistently lose viewers and the WWE doesn't give a shit. even on the same fucking Raw, it's apparent nobody wants to see Cole vs Lawler anymore, it's apparent everyone wants Hornswoggle dead, and yet they keep putting them on TV. want to know why? because they don't give a shit what you think. the fact that you said "if AJ brought in bad ratings, they'd have buried her" shows just how dumb your thought process is. especially since people consider this a filler-fued.



> Drastic? She just did a marriage proposal promo. That was it and apparently that was enough.


uh, what? a marriage proposal is obviously going to be popular. so yes, it was drastic. did you not read what i just said? she had to do that to get a reaction. she has to steal Daniel Bryan's catchphrase to get a reaction. she has to slap or kiss someone to get a reaction. the only time she's ever gotten a pop was when she came dressed out as Kane, and that was near her hometown. she's come out to no reaction many times. people like to debate this and say she's neither a face or heel, but that's obviously a stupid thing to say. nobody knows what Kharma was doing or why she was doing it, she got a reaction. Kane is neither a heel or a face, and he gets reactions from places other than his hometown. if AJ was so amazingly perfect like people here act, wouldn't girls love her? hate her? wouldn't guys find her hot? wouldn't guys want her to go the fuck away? nope, instead nobody cares when she comes out time and time and time again.

no matter how many times people try to bring up facts to AJ fans like you, you just don't care. no matter how many times you're told it's going to be difficult to keep her character progress going after this is over without boring people to tears, you just don't care. she actually lost viewers 2 or 3 Raws ago, but again, you don't care. you just read one thing about the ratings breakdown and say "OH, WELP, SHE GOT MORE VIEWERS THAN CENA!" who was in a tag match. the marriage gimmick is obviously a huge thing in this storyline, but you just brush it off as if it's just that damn easy for AJ to get viewers. this really isn't that difficult to figure out. stop drawing conclusions after 1 fucking segment, jesus christ.


----------



## Brye

Starbuck said:


> I was about to ask if anybody remembered how the angle had been doing over the last few weeks. If I recall, everybody was happy that there was a shitty rating not too long back. I think this is the only time it has done so well and given the nature of the show this week, I'm not surprised at all. The marriage proposal was unpredictable and people tuned in for it, that's it. That doesn't make AJ or Punk or Bryan some incredible draw. It made their angle very interesting for one night. I really don't see *why this has started mark wars tbh.*


Because everything starts mark wars, especially when THE NUMBERS are involved.


----------



## Green Light

Green Light said:


> So they got an influx of horny teenage boys hoping to see some wedding night sex between goatface and AJ





D.M.N. said:


> "Plus, there was gigantic increase in teenage boys watching for the overrun only that wasn’t there for the rest of the show. That demo hovered between a 2.7 and 3.2 rating the entire show, but hit a 4.4 for the overrun. Overrun growth was 3.2 to 4.4 in that demo, 2.5 to 3.1 in Males 18-49, 1.2 to 1.4 in Girls 12-17 and stayed at 1.1 with Women 18-49."


(Y)


----------



## Starbuck

If there's one thing to take from this it's the fact that AJ gives US teenage males a boner. They should try to put her in provocative situations from now on and she'll probably continue to draw them in lol. Is she a draw in general? No. Could she be a draw for this demo based on that information? I say she could if they stuck with her.


----------



## AthenaMark

ogorodnikov said:


> as evidenced by your "AJ has been carrying raw by herself" comment, you're clearly bias and have no idea what you're talking about. you see the big 700k number and just go off of that without fucking reading. christ.


Is this guy slow or what?



> let's imagine when AJ first started acting like a psycho bitch, the ratings were shit. why would the WWE just stop out of the blue with that storyline? is it not obvious to you that this is the only storyline they're putting any effort into? nobody cared about Tensai, rumors were going around that he was done and that he was being repackeged entirely, then he comes back and he's in the MITB.


Imagine? No need to. It's on Youtube. Look it up. The ratings were shit because Cena was maineventing and he has been a failure all year long without a Rock carryjob.



> i... i just don't know what to say to you. every single week there are wrestlers, non-wrestlers, and segments that consistently lose viewers and the WWE doesn't give a shit. even on the same fucking Raw, it's apparent nobody wants to see Cole vs Lawler anymore, it's apparent everyone wants Hornswoggle dead, and yet they keep putting them on TV. want to know why? because they don't give a shit what you think. the fact that you said "if AJ brought in bad ratings, they'd have buried her" shows just how dumb your thought process is. especially since people consider this a filler-fued.


Bryan vs CM Punk's matches and crowd reactions don't sound filler to me.



> uh, what? a marriage proposal is obviously going to be popular. so yes, it was drastic. did you not read what i just said? she had to do that to get a reaction. she has to steal Daniel Bryan's catchphrase to get a reaction. she has to slap or kiss someone to get a reaction. the only time she's ever gotten a pop was when she came dressed out as Kane, and that was near her hometown. she's come out to no reaction many times. people like to debate this and say she's neither a face or heel, but that's obviously a stupid thing to say. nobody knows what Kharma was doing or why she was doing it, she got a reaction. Kane is neither a heel or a face, and he gets reactions from places other than his hometown. if AJ was so amazingly perfect like people here act, wouldn't girls love her? hate her? wouldn't guys find her hot? wouldn't guys want her to go the fuck away? nope, instead nobody cares when she comes out time and time and time again.


A marriage proposal is gonna be popular? It wasn't popular when it happened with Cripple H and Stephanie. It wasn't popular for Edge and Lita. None of that shit was legit. It was pushed hard. That was it. 

Nobody cares about AJ coming out? What the fuck show have you been watching? She's been getting the biggest reactions on Raw next to Vickie Guerrero, Bryan, and Punk.



> no matter how many times people try to bring up facts to AJ fans like you, you just don't care. no matter how many times you're told it's going to be difficult to keep her character progress going after this is over without boring people to tears, you just don't care. she actually lost viewers 2 or 3 Raws ago, but again, you don't care. you just read one thing about the ratings breakdown and say "OH, WELP, SHE GOT MORE VIEWERS THAN CENA!" who was in a tag match. the marriage gimmick is obviously a huge thing in this storyline, but you just brush it off as if it's just that damn easy for AJ to get viewers. this really isn't that difficult to figure out. stop drawing conclusions after 1 fucking segment, jesus christ.


BIG FUCKING DEAL if she lost viewers two Raws ago. She wasn't the ultra main focus. Cena and his bullshit was. Now she's been in the true spotlight for two weeks..ratings have went up and her segments are getting good overruns. That's a fact. Not some trumped up geek opinion that's been spouted in anger out of the fucking blue.


----------



## ogorodnikov

way to ignore most of my post, but i'm not surprised considering you made a dubious statement and have no ways of backing up your complete and utter nonsense.



AthenaMark said:


> Imagine? No need to. It's on Youtube. Look it up. The ratings were shit because Cena was maineventing and he has been a failure all year long without a Rock carryjob.


why are you trying to correlate 2 completely different things? you do realize i said to *imagine* if the ratings were complete shit with AJ segments, right? yet you say here that the ratings actually were overall were bad because of Cena. uh... okay? :lol

try to keep up, what i'm saying is that if the ratings were bad for AJ's segments (which some of them have been anyway) they're not just going to throwing it away completely and bury the shit out of her, which is what you said they'd do. unfortunately you didn't respond to like 90% of my fucking post, so i can't really say much. i gave you just a few examples of segments/people that usually lose viewers and they're still shown. 



> Bryan vs CM Punk's matches and crowd reactions don't sound filler to me.


what? their mixed tag matches? :lmao

dude, it's largely considered a "fun filler feud" by a LOT of people. just because AJ has to steal the most over catchphrase in wrestling right now doesn't prove anything. it's not difficult at all to get people to chant that.



> A marriage proposal is gonna be popular? It wasn't popular when it happened with Cripple H and Stephanie. It wasn't popular for Edge and Lita. None of that shit was legit. It was pushed hard. That was it.


unreal.



> Nobody cares about AJ coming out? What the fuck show have you been watching? She's been getting the biggest reactions on Raw next to Vickie Guerrero, Bryan, and Punk.


and this just proves you skimmed through my post entirely. here, i'll post it _again,_ so maybe you can actually try to respond to it instead of rambling on about absolutely nothing in particular.



> she had to do that to get a reaction. she has to steal Daniel Bryan's catchphrase to get a reaction. she has to slap or kiss someone to get a reaction. the only time she's ever gotten a pop was when she came dressed out as Kane, and that was near her hometown. she's come out to no reaction many times. people like to debate this and say she's neither a face or heel, but that's obviously a stupid thing to say. nobody knows what Kharma was doing or why she was doing it, she got a reaction. Kane is neither a heel or a face, and he gets reactions from places other than his hometown. if AJ was so amazingly perfect like people here act, wouldn't girls love her? hate her? wouldn't guys find her hot? wouldn't guys want her to go the fuck away? nope, instead nobody cares when she comes out time and time and time again.





> BIG FUCKING DEAL if she lost viewers two Raws ago.


so wait... i guess she hasn't been carrying Raw all by herself after all like you said? and lol @ you saying she hasn't been the "ultra main focus." do you seriously watch the show? or read the reactions? she's been shoved down peoples throats. a big complaint here is that she is overshadowing the title, Punk, and Bryan.

holy shit... it was even a fucking segment ON RAW. did you watch? Eve herself said AJ has been overshadowing Punk. :lmao

good god, you're incredibly dense, and now proving to be dyslexic to top it all off. the fact remains that you went apeshit over an unexpected marriage proposal and drew a bunch of stupid conclusions because of it. pretty embarrassing for you.


----------



## Vyed




----------



## imnotastar

People, clearly eve is the draw of the 4. i most def tuned in to see what she was going to do. i thought wwe was going to throw some type of swerve and add her to the love triangle or something.


----------



## Rock316AE

So they pulled the desperate wedding card to carry this horrendous storyline. Not surprising, this concept is like the Rumble, always a proven draw no matter who is involved. They attracted teenage boys for a few minutes, other than that, normal overall. Good to see that they lost viewers the moment they passed the 15 minutes mark for their atrocious opening segment(worst of all time material, not only wrestling). Test/Stephanie, HHH/Stephanie, Kane/Lita, Billy/Chuck(...), Edge/Lita etc all did good numbers, of course much bigger growth because everyone of these people is a bigger draw than all the current 3 combined. Sad that they're so desperate, they're trying to rely on a BRUTAL NXT actress. 

All the biggest full time TV draws were in the tag match so that was a rare case of something like that doing below average.


----------



## Bob the Jobber

imnotastar said:


> People, clearly eve is the draw of the 4. i most def tuned in to see what she was going to do. i thought wwe was going to throw some type of swerve and add her to the love triangle or something.


You joke, but I wouldn't be surprised if a good portion tuned in assuming AJ and Eve would make out at the end.


----------



## DesolationRow

Jammy said:


> *Stephanie McMahon talking about the angle where she and HHH were to renew their vows gained 102,000 viewers.*


*

DAT STEPH! (Y)*


----------



## Jammy

DesolationRow said:


> DAT STEPH! (Y)


It was the wedding that drew and not Stephanie and HHH... :troll. 1000th Raw recaps are great.


----------



## D.M.N.

Rock316AE said:


> Good to see that they lost viewers the moment they passed the 15 minutes mark for their atrocious opening segment(worst of all time material, not only wrestling)


A comment like that shows you don't understand the ratings breakdown.

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/5...ad-discuss-ratings-here-181.html#post11725747

The Q1 rating covers the entire period from 21:00 to 21:15 on Monday night.
The Q2 rating covers the entire period from 21:15 to 21:30 on Monday night. It also covers 5 minutes of commercials and Sheamus vs Jack Swagger.

Q1 had an average of 4.60 million. Between 21:00 and 21:14 (the last minute of said quarter) the viewership would have probably grown from about 4.3 million to 4.9 million. Give or take.

Q2 had an average of 4.53 million. As 21:14 had 4.9 million, it means 21:15 had a similar number, and probably grew further to 5.0 million by 21:19. When the commercials come along, the number drops significantly, with not much of a gain for Sheamus vs Jack Swagger (a glorified squash) or anything that followed it in that particular quarter. Leading to an overall average for that quarter, again, of 4.53 million.

It does not just turn 21:15 on your clock and 70,000 viewers tuned off 'just like that'. It does not work that way.


----------



## Rock316AE

If Meltzer talked about the full quarter, I agree, I thought he was talking only about the opening segment.

But I don't see how you know how the number is dropping based on commercials in all the breakdowns you do, it's pure assumption unless you have the minute by minute, and from what I know. Nobody has it.


----------



## D.M.N.

Rock316AE said:


> If Meltzer talked about the full quarter, I agree, I thought he was talking only about the opening segment.
> 
> But I don't see how you know how the number is dropping based on commercials in all the breakdowns you do, it's pure assumption unless you have the minute by minute, and from what I know. Nobody has it.


In 95 percent of television shows, the number drops for commercials. I've never known a TV show to increase its number for a commercial.

The only minute-by-minute breakdown I've seen in the past was for the Impact show in January 2010 which was against Raw.

Meltzer's breakdowns are based on full quarters as far as I know, except these reporters decide to lump entire matches/segments into one quarter only which is strictly untrue.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Dave Meltzer is right.


----------



## Rock316AE

Of course ratings are dropping during commercials, no doubt, obvious pattern of the TV business and that's not what I'm saying. I'm just saying that it's impossible to calculate numbers based on assumptions on how much it grew or dropped, it's pointless IMO. We don't know where or how it grew/dropped and the quarter hours is all we have for now. Unless someone in the company decides to leak the minute by minute breakdown at some point. And if it never happened during the MNW, I don't think it's going to happen now. Even Scherer who was the first guy posting back then and Meltzer who is the first guy posting in the last few years don't have it from what I know.


----------



## Rock316AE

I forgot to add Macho Man and Liz in the list of wedding angles. 

If you want some history of that segment:

Test/Stephanie - Started 6.3, grew to a 7.3 overrun, peak of the show. Overall - 6.5
Kane/Lita - Started 4.0, grew to a 4.9 overrun, peak of the show and biggest quarter in a long time at that time. Overall - 3.6
Edge/Lita - 4.5 at the top of the hour, peak of the show. Overall - 3.9


----------



## DesolationRow

So...

Lesnar draws in the adult males.

AJ draws in the teenage males.

Triple H draws in everybody.

John Cena has ceased to draw anybody, the well has run dry.

The Rock loses viewers.

CM Punk can't draw.

Jerry Lawler finally lost his drawing powers.

Michael Cole is now an anti-draw.

Stephanie draws like nobody in this great business of ours and is a TV ratings machine--they should air a four-hour Steph Special on Super Bowl Sunday against the Super Bowl on USA Network with her starring in a WWE-produced USA Network TV miniseries called _Loathsome Love_ where she lives on the prairie in the early 1880s and Triple H plays her cattle baron husband and Kane plays a masked man from Triple H's past (revealed in the final minutes in a Sergio Leone-inspired flashback sequence set to bone-chilling harmonica that Trips violated Kane's deceased adolescent sweetheart on Boot Hill), ends with Steph slapping Trips and Kane shooting Triple H to pieces and riding off with Stephanie into the sunset--and they'd beat the Super Bowl in the ratings BY GAWD.


----------



## BANKSY

What do people think the rating will be for Raw 1000?

The fact they seem to be hyping it more then the upcoming PPV seems to suggest Vince wants this to do really big numbers. And with so much star power on the show it could balance out the vierwership throughout the show instead of the usual gains/losses.Although they seem to be lacking any momentum storyline wise to help attract viewers that way.

I'm going to go around a 3.8


----------



## The-Rock-Says

10.0


----------



## Rock316AE

For RAW 1000th, I can see a 3.5-3.6, 3.7 at best. With 2-3 segments doing above 4.0. So much star power, you can throw mega star after mega star, it's crazy. Vince then Bret then Foley then Flair then Taker then Cena then Show/Jericho/Kane then Brock then DX then Austin then Rock etc, this show has the potential to hold the viewers for the entire 3 hours if they book it the right way.


----------



## Call_Me

Rock316AE said:


> I forgot to add Macho Man and Liz in the list of wedding angles.
> 
> If you want some history of that segment:
> 
> Test/Stephanie - Started 6.3, grew to a 7.3 overrun, peak of the show. Overall - 6.5
> Kane/Lita - Started 4.0, grew to a 4.9 overrun, peak of the show and biggest quarter in a long time at that time. Overall - 3.6
> Edge/Lita - 4.5 at the top of the hour, peak of the show. Overall - 3.9


I remembered my mom, who isn't a wrestling fan, stopping by to watch that Test/Stephanie wedding with my old buds. Then Trips ruined the whole thing and she kept laughing at it, ridiculing me afterwards for how fake the wedding gimmick was. Good times.


----------



## Starbuck

DesolationRow said:


> So...
> 
> Lesnar draws in the adult males.
> 
> AJ draws in the teenage males.
> 
> Triple H draws in everybody.
> 
> John Cena has ceased to draw anybody, the well has run dry.
> 
> The Rock loses viewers.
> 
> CM Punk can't draw.
> 
> Jerry Lawler finally lost his drawing powers.
> 
> Michael Cole is now an anti-draw.
> 
> Stephanie draws like nobody in this great business of ours and is a TV ratings machine--they should air a four-hour Steph Special on Super Bowl Sunday against the Super Bowl on USA Network with her starring in a WWE-produced USA Network TV miniseries called _Loathsome Love_ where she lives on the prairie in the early 1880s and Triple H plays her cattle baron husband and Kane plays a masked man from Triple H's past (revealed in the final minutes in a Sergio Leone-inspired flashback sequence set to bone-chilling harmonica that Trips violated Kane's deceased adolescent sweetheart on Boot Hill), ends with Steph slapping Trips and Kane shooting Triple H to pieces and riding off with Stephanie into the sunset--and they'd beat the Super Bowl in the ratings BY GAWD.


I'd watch that tbh. Sounds awesome. 

And Rocky, you forgot the Steph/HHH wedding vow renewal too, the one in the video this week. I'm sure it did well since a video package about it 10 years later brings DEM GAINS.


----------



## Rock316AE

I know but I don't have it, I just know that it did 4.5(same as the week before)overall, hours of 4.2 and 4.6 and the women demo grew significantly. Probably did the peak of the show with 4.9/5.0+. They also had heavy competition from the Olympics at that time.


----------



## Starbuck

Yeah. Reading that the female demos were down from last week during the whole AJ marriage thing was probably most surprising to me. You would expect that to be the one place that would experience growth. Instead it was all horny teen boys lol.


----------



## Amazing_Cult

Starbuck said:


> Yeah. Reading that the female demos were down from last week during the whole AJ marriage thing was probably most surprising to me. You would expect that to be the one place that would experience growth. Instead it was all horny teen boys lol.


Are you really surprised though?

From what I can see in this forum, none of the girls here like AJ, but a good chunk of the boys, which are probably teenagers, fawn over her and ejaculate continuously when she comes out.

Its easy to see this in the RAW thread.


----------



## Vyed

Come to think of it, They could do a AJ-Bryan Wedding on 1000th RAW with a legend interrupting it...Austin or maybe even the Rock interrupting would be awesome.


----------



## Starbuck

Amazing_Cult said:


> Are you really surprised though?
> 
> From what I can see in this forum, none of the girls here like AJ, but a good chunk of the boys, which are probably teenagers, fawn over her and ejaculate continuously when she comes out.
> 
> Its easy to see this in the RAW thread.


Slightly romantic/more soap opera oriented storylines tend to attract female fans. The fact that this didn't is rather surprising to me yes.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

AJ will be starring in EastEnders soon. She'll be Dirty Dens kid.


----------



## DesolationRow

American teenage boys are more fucked up than I thought.


----------



## dxbender

Vyed said:


> Come to think of it, They could do a AJ-Bryan Wedding on 1000th RAW with a legend interrupting it...Austin or maybe even the Rock interrupting would be awesome.


I can see them actually announcing on Raw1000 that they're getting married, then having the wedding at Summerslam(before Bryans WWE title match...)


----------



## Jammy

Vyed said:


> Come to think of it, They could do a AJ-Bryan Wedding on 1000th RAW with a legend interrupting it...Austin or maybe even the Rock interrupting would be awesome.


Would be epic of epic proportions. RATINGS!!11!


----------



## DesolationRow

Another Summerslam Wedding? OOOOOOOOHHH YEAH!!!!!!!!!!

Goat Face & The Girl cordially invite you...


----------



## D.M.N.

I think they will have the wedding on Raw 1000. As long as they do actually follow up with a wedding and don't pretend that the proposals from this past Monday do not exist.


----------



## checkcola

Thanks for the ratings breakdown. Looks like the WWE miscalculated with the top star Raw MITB match.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

Vyed said:


> Come to think of it, They could do a AJ-Bryan Wedding on 1000th RAW with a legend interrupting it...Austin or maybe even the Rock interrupting would be awesome.


If anybody should stop a wedding 
It should be HHH


----------



## Vyed

austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> If anybody should stop a wedding
> It should be HHH


LOL yeah, he's done it twice.


----------



## D.M.N.

21:00 to 21:13 - Opening Segment
--> commercial [4 minutes]
21:17 to 21:22 - Kofi/Truth vs Primetime Players
--> commercial [4 minutes]
21:26 to 21:29 - Kofi/Truth vs Primetime Players
21:29 to 21:31 - AJ, Bryan and Eve backstage
--> commercial [3 minutes]
21:34 to 21:36 - Touting
21:36 to 21:41 - Ryder vs Del Rio and Mysterio's return
21:41 to 21:43 - Raw 1000th moment
--> commercial [3 minutes]
21:46 to 21:51 - Slater vs Rikishi and Rikishi/USOs dancing
--> commercial [4 minutes]
21:55 to 22:08 - Bryan/AJ vs Miz/Eve
--> commercial [4 minutes]
22:12 to 22:13 - Raw 1000th moment
22:13 to 22:17 - Ryback vs Swagger
--> commercial [4 minutes]
22:21 to 22:22 - Touting
22:22 to 22:30 - Ziggler and Jericho segment
--> commercial [4 minutes]
22:34 to 22:35 - Touting
22:35 to 22:36 - Raw 1000th hype
22:36 to 22:38 - Clay entrance
--> commercial [4 minutes]
22:42 to 22:46 - Clay vs JTG
--> commercial [4 minutes]
22:50 to 23:07 - Show vs Punk

Expecting overrun to do good numbers again, as there was no commercials from 22:50 onwards.


----------



## dxbender

2nd hour might do bad.

Of the 39 minutes worth of stuff from 10-11pm, only 25 minutes of that was really worth watching(I can see alot of people not watching the ryback-swagger match, the tout stuff, raw1000 videos or brodus clay match)

1st hour should do good though, cause for the most part, 1st hour was real good


----------



## Jammy

Overrun is a test for Punk since this is his first without AJ storyline, I expect it to be good since it was a big match vs Big Show + Cena was expected. On top of that there were no commercials either. I expect a 3.2-3.5 overall.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Last nights social media activity was the third highest of the year. A good indicator on the ratings.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

How is this his first? Punk has pulled a lot more good-great overrun numbers than bad.


----------



## Vyed

I am just curious how well top of the hour did with Bryan/AJ marriage deal. 

Cena was part of the overrun btw, infact it was all about Cena's big announcement at the end.


----------



## RichDV

Vyed said:


> I am just curious how well top of the hour did with Bryan/AJ marriage deal.


10pm slot probably didn't do that well. Expecting 200-300k gain in that slot since the Bryan/AJ thing only lasted till 7 past the hour, the next 6 minutes were commercials/recaps so a lot of people tuned out I'm sure.

Expecting the overrun to do a huge number this week also.


----------



## ogorodnikov

are we going to do that thing again where we bounce off the fucking walls spazzing out and praise AJ for being part of a segment that almost always gets a lot of viewers?


----------



## Vyed

RichDV said:


> 10pm slot probably didn't do that well. Expecting 200-300k gain in that slot since the Bryan/AJ thing only lasted till 7 past the hour, the next 6 minutes were commercials/recaps so a lot of people tuned out I'm sure.
> 
> Expecting the overrun to do a huge number this week also.


you're probably right.


----------



## A-C-P

Yeh with the commercial break right in the middle of the 10PM slot I am expecting a "weak gain" report for that slot in the breakdown


----------



## Vyed

July 18th, Post Money in the bank RAW *2011* drew 3.22 rating with Summer of Punk angle. 
July 19th, Post Money in the bank RAW *2010* drew 3.38 rating with Cena/nexus angle. 

Lets see if Cena becoming MITB winner for the first time was worth it.


----------



## D.M.N.

4.720m and 5.038m: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...er-lizard-lick-towing-perception-more/141787/

That will probably be a 3.4. Good chance the overrun hit a 3.9 there as well.

Very slightly down on the No Way Out fallout show.


----------



## Vyed

Hour 1 : 4.720 (Last Week : 4.294m)
Hour 2 : 5.038 (Last Week : 4.520m)


----------



## Pro Royka

I'm expecting 3.5 - 3.7. The show was very draw in, so there is no excuses.


----------



## Vyed

Last year's RAW Overrun hit 3.9...



> The July 18th WWE RAW did a 3.23 cable rating with 4.86 million viewers, as previously noted. Here’s the segment-by-segment breakdown.
> 
> The opener with Vince McMahon did a 3.32 quarter rating. WWE Title tournament matches with The Miz vs. Alex Riley and Jack Swagger vs. R-Truth lost 370,000 viewers.
> 
> Alberto Del Rio’s promo with Ricardo Rodriguez returning lost 135,000 but Del Rio’s match with Kofi Kingston gained 367,000 back. Rey Mysterio vs. Dolph Ziggler and the 7 on 7 Divas match gained 33,000 viewers, which is a low gain for the 10pm time slot.
> 
> The Miz vs. Kofi Kingston in the semi-finals lost 311,000 viewers while the Truth vs. Mysterio semi-final match gained 269,000 back. The RAW overrun this week with Vince McMahon, John Cena and Triple H went 14 minutes long – gained 1,063,000 viewers and doing a 3.94 rating, a big success.


----------



## D.M.N.

Almost identical viewership year-on-year. Spooky.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Vyed said:


> Hour 1 : 4.720 (Last Week : 4.294m)
> Hour 2 : 5.038 (Last Week : 4.520m)


Great numbers. Interested to see how they hold up after RAW 1000.


----------



## A-C-P

Well the #s are slightly higher than last year and 2010 so I guess Cena winning MITB was worth it?

Good #s for sure and hopefully ythey will hold up after Raw 1000


----------



## Marv95

Maybe it has to do with Raw 1,000 and fans are tuning in during the build like they have been for the last month? 

They _should_ do a 4.0 or more next week with all of this hype.


----------



## TheF1BOB

How in the hell is the rating this high??? Are all the kids off for the summer now???

:damn


----------



## The GOAT One

Wow good number !


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Really good rating for RAW.


----------



## Words Of Wisdom

As much as most of us hate john Cena... This guy can draw big #s... Which makes me think he's gunna win on 1000th raw now.... Although the Rest of the show seems to have done well also.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

WWE Raw on Monday, July 16 the night after Money in the Bank scored a 3.44 rating, which was up 8.5 percent compared to last week's 3.17 rating for the MITB lead-in.

The 3.44 rating topped Raw after WrestleMania, which scored a 3.43 rating, and topped Raw after No Way Out last month, which scored a 3.42 rating. Monday's Raw ranked #2 for the year, trailing Raw after the Royal Rumble, which scored a 3.55 rating.

-- Raw averaged 4.88 million viewers, which was up 470,000 viewers (10.7 percent) compared to the MITB lead-in Raw last week.

Raw averaged 4.72 million first hour viewers, then increased to an average of 5.04 million second hour viewers. It reflects WWE's hook for the second hour to see if John Cena would cash in his MITB briefcase on WWE champion C.M. Punk after the Punk-Big Show main event.

Viewership was very similar to the Raw after No Way Out in June. The June 18 episode averaged 4.96 million viewers on the strength of 5.07 million viewers in the second hour.

-- Monday's Raw viewership was up slightly compared to the Raw after Money in the Bank last year following C.M. Punk's "walk-off" WWE Title victory. The 2011 show averaged 4.84 million viewers off a first hour average of 4.70 million viewers and second hour average of 4.91 million viewers.

-- On cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #3 behind TNT's dramas. However, Raw took the #1 ranking among all adults, all male adults, and all teen viewers. 

The key to the ratings surge was the return of younger male viewers. Raw scored its highest rating of the year in males 12-17 and Raw was up 20 percent in males 12-34. Raw also showed strong increases in males 18-34 & males 18-49 compared to last week.


----------



## Pro Royka

Great. Now we can see Punk maineventing, I want to see Punk/Orton (Heel) or Punk/Rock if possible for the title. So there is no worries for Punk being with them.


----------



## chronoxiong

Wow, that's a great rating!!!! It just goes to show that Cena main eventing = ratings (just joking)! I'm glad to see the viewership increase dramatically in the 2nd hour. That's something that needs to stay consistent. Now the big question remains is the rating for next week. With so much promotion and big things planned next week, it NEEDS to be higher than 3.4.


----------



## dxbender

Next weeks will surely top 5M mark, wonder how many fans who tune in to Raw1000 might stick around abit after Raw1000 as well(especially when they find out that Lesnar is fighting again)

WWE has a huge opportunity in the next few weeks to gain new fans(or regain old ones), so they better not blow it. The next 1-2 months should be better than WM quality stuff to attract these fans.


----------



## BTNH

jblvdx said:


> WWE Raw on Monday, July 16 the night after Money in the Bank scored a 3.44 rating, which was up 8.5 percent compared to last week's 3.17 rating for the MITB lead-in.
> 
> The 3.44 rating topped Raw after WrestleMania, which scored a 3.43 rating, and topped Raw after No Way Out last month, which scored a 3.42 rating. Monday's Raw ranked #2 for the year, trailing Raw after the Royal Rumble, which scored a 3.55 rating.
> 
> -- Raw averaged 4.88 million viewers, which was up 470,000 viewers (10.7 percent) compared to the MITB lead-in Raw last week.
> 
> Raw averaged 4.72 million first hour viewers, then increased to an average of 5.04 million second hour viewers. It reflects WWE's hook for the second hour to see if John Cena would cash in his MITB briefcase on WWE champion C.M. Punk after the Punk-Big Show main event.
> 
> Viewership was very similar to the Raw after No Way Out in June. The June 18 episode averaged 4.96 million viewers on the strength of 5.07 million viewers in the second hour.
> 
> -- Monday's Raw viewership was up slightly compared to the Raw after Money in the Bank last year following C.M. Punk's "walk-off" WWE Title victory. The 2011 show averaged 4.84 million viewers off a first hour average of 4.70 million viewers and second hour average of 4.91 million viewers.
> 
> -- On cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #3 behind TNT's dramas. However, Raw took the #1 ranking among all adults, all male adults, and all teen viewers.
> 
> The key to the ratings surge was the return of younger male viewers. Raw scored its highest rating of the year in males 12-17 and Raw was up 20 percent in males 12-34. Raw also showed strong increases in males 18-34 & males 18-49 compared to last week.


Excuse my ignorance, but how the FUCK does anyone know about things like ages? How in God's name can you know about males between certain ages watching


----------



## Starbuck

The main contribution to the spike is down to the hype surrounding Raw 1000 imo with the fallout of MITB playing second to that. Simply put, they've hyped the shit out of this for weeks and next week I'm expecting big numbers. The hook with Cena cashing in was obviously a big part of it too. Really good number that gives them a lot of momentum now.


----------



## King_Of_This_World

Its continues to amaze me how high the ratings are each and every week for what has been a show on decline for a very long time now.

The WWE/Raw brand is so freaking strong its unreal. They could put a couple of 96 year old black jews out there each week for two hours and still get 4 million viewers.

Its the very reason they are not forced to improve the product, Vince learned that after the attitude era and the death of WCW they basically could put out anything they wanted and the same people will continue to watch.


----------



## Starbuck

King_Of_This_World said:


> Its continues to amaze me how high the ratings are each and every week for what has been a show on decline for a very long time now.
> 
> The WWE/Raw brand is so freaking strong its unreal. They could put a couple of 96 year old black jews out there each week for two hours and still get 4 million viewers.
> 
> Its the very reason they are not forced to improve the product, Vince learned that after the attitude era and the death of WCW they basically could put out anything they wanted and the same people will continue to watch.


Fallout from a PPV that produces exciting and unpredictable situations? Check.

Mad as hell hype for a milestone episode taking place the following week and that has been promoted like crazy for months? Check.

Overall enjoyable show with a lot of enjoyable segments instead of just one/two? Check. 

It's really not that hard to understand why this show did well. For the first time in a long time hype, and I mean real and legitimate hype, is surrounding WWE and surrounding it in spades. Of course it's going to have a positive effect on viewership.


----------



## Medo

*Hate him or like him, Cena is the big deal in this company.*


----------



## Starbuck

Yup. As much as I'm fucked off at him right now, they teased a Cena cash in throughout the night and it very obviously worked with that second hour spike. Combine that with the overall higher interest in the show (due to Raw 1000 most likely) and there you have it.


----------



## itssoeasy23

King_Of_This_World said:


> Its continues to amaze me how high the ratings are each and every week for what has been a show on decline for a very long time now.
> 
> The WWE/Raw brand is so freaking strong its unreal. They could put a couple of 96 year old black jews out there each week for two hours and still get 4 million viewers.
> 
> Its the very reason they are not forced to improve the product, Vince learned that after the attitude era and the death of WCW they basically could put out anything they wanted and the same people will continue to watch.


In my opinion this week's RAW was a very good show compared to the last few weeks. It's obvious the high rating was based on the fall-out of MITB. WWE continues to get high ratings because their PPV's create interest that people want to see what happens next.


----------



## King_Of_This_World

Starbuck said:


> Fallout from a PPV that produces exciting and unpredictable situations? Check.
> 
> Mad as hell hype for a milestone episode taking place the following week and that has been promoted like crazy for months? Check.
> 
> Overall enjoyable show with a lot of enjoyable segments instead of just one/two? Check.
> 
> It's really not that hard to understand why this show did well. For the first time in a long time hype, and I mean real and legitimate hype, is surrounding WWE and surrounding it in spades. Of course it's going to have a positive effect on viewership.


I'm talking about the regular 4 million+ audience, not just Mondays rating.

The fact that the show has rarely ever gone under 4 million despite piss poor shows says alot. Most will watch whatever WWE put out.


----------



## validreasoning

King_Of_This_World said:


> Its continues to amaze me how high the ratings are each and every week for what has been a show on decline for a very long time now.
> 
> The WWE/Raw brand is so freaking strong its unreal. They could put a couple of 96 year old black jews out there each week for two hours and still get 4 million viewers.


was only 7 weeks ago (may 28th) there was doom and gloom when raw did a 2.7 rating (3.8 million viewers) and this following a pretty poor mania season ratings wise

raw brand might be strong but you still need something to keep the viewers, cena is a draw, clearly the aj/bryan/punk storyline this past month is also a draw


----------



## Bob the Jobber

King_Of_This_World said:


> I'm talking about the regular 4 million+ audience, not just Mondays rating.
> 
> The fact that the show has rarely ever gone under 4 million despite piss poor shows says alot. Most will watch whatever WWE put out.


They're invested. They know the characters, how things operate kayfabe wise and that brings a feeling of comfort. Going into a entirely new entity like TNA would require a viewer to jump in mid-angle in a lot of storylines and have to learn from the ground up who everyone is, past feuds/history, who's in charge and adapt to the differing style of show. It's not as easy for people that only tune in once or twice a week to put in that much effort into learning a new product, if they even know it exists.

There's also a feeling of "loyalty" for past entertainment. It's much like stores that have given you great deals and sales, you'll continue to shop there even when the value isn't there on a normal basis. It's just how human psychology works.


----------



## AthenaMark

Medo said:


> *Hate him or like him, Cena is the big deal in this company.*


Hasn't been a big deal for several weeks because he was losing viewers and couldn't carry the show in the least.


----------



## Kid Kablam

BTNH said:


> Excuse my ignorance, but how the FUCK does anyone know about things like ages? How in God's name can you know about males between certain ages watching


Neilsen has very detailed information on all the families/households that have their boxes. I believe each family member has a code they have to punch in if they are the ones watching.


----------



## Ron Swanson

Bob the Jobber said:


> They're invested. They know the characters, how things operate kayfabe wise and that brings a feeling of comfort. Going into a entirely new entity like TNA would require a viewer to jump in mid-angle in a lot of storylines and have to learn from the ground up who everyone is, past feuds/history, who's in charge and adapt to the differing style of show. It's not as easy for people that only tune in once or twice a week to put in that much effort into learning a new product, if they even know it exists.
> 
> There's also a feeling of "loyalty" for past entertainment. It's much like stores that have given you great deals and sales, you'll continue to shop there even when the value isn't there on a normal basis. It's just how human psychology works.


This. I watch both but even though TNA had been putting on better shows in the past few weeks (I thought last nights Raw was better than a lot of recent Impacts) I still get more excited to watch Raw. Ive been watching WWE for 20 years (since I was 4). Its a pretty big part of my TV watching life. No matter how bleak it gets I wont stop watching it. I dont feel nearly the same loyalty to TNA. The second I get down on it, Ill drop it. Its a shame too because competition is great for the business.


----------



## HEELBellaArmy

The show got a 3.4 this week which is not bad considering there use to getting 3.0 or 3.1. I'm expecting a lot higher rating next week, closer to 4.0


----------



## AthenaMark

> The key to the ratings surge was the return of younger male viewers. Raw scored its highest rating of the year in males 12-17 and Raw was up 20 percent in males 12-34. Raw also showed strong increases in males 18-34 & males 18-49 compared to last week.


That's AJ right there..I'm sorry, haters. She matters.


----------



## Carcass

Everyone tuning in too see D-Bry propose to AJ. I wonder how big of a number the wedding is gonna do next week.


----------



## RatedR10

Raw has HUGE momentum with the ratings now. I can't see how the 1000th Raw doesn't at least hit a 4.0 at this pace and with everything lined up for the show. 

After the 1000th Raw...we'll see how the momentum keeps up for Raw.


----------



## blazegod99

Considering that Punk's storyline has closed out the end of the show for the last 3 weeks, and he wrestled in the main event... how is this Cena's doing. Cena's segments the last few months havent been GREAT numbers... so... yeah.

However... RAW 1000 could do a 4.0-4.2 with all the legends... give Punk the win, a new belt, set up Rock vs Punk, the next week could do 3.8-4.0... give Cena the belt and it's going to go back down to 3.3-3.5


----------



## Ray

I could actually see the 1000th RAW doing between 3.7-4.0 now. Good news for WWE, and it was a pretty good show this week.


----------



## Rock316AE

Good number for 2012. One thing I need to give them credit is the hype for the 1000th show, they're able to carry the entire program based on this attraction. They threw everything for next week, ALL the megastars available besides Goldberg and Batista(I'm saying it because I think Austin and Taker are going to be there), Cena in a title match, wedding angle etc. If this show did 3.4, next week is doing 3.7 at least.

My prediction for the position next week:

8pm - DX 
9pm - Wedding 
10pm - Rock's announcement.
11pm/overrun - Lesnar's announcement. 

Brock in the main event because his program continues the next week.


----------



## D.M.N.

The interesting thing about next week is that you have like 'stars' in every segment. Even Raw 15th anniversary and the Homecoming had a few dud segments if I recall, and the star-power looks substantially bigger this time around, as neither of those two shows had Lesnar or Rock.


----------



## Call_Me

blazegod99 said:


> Considering that Punk's storyline has closed out the end of the show for the last 3 weeks, and he wrestled in the main event... how is this Cena's doing. Cena's segments the last few months havent been GREAT numbers... so... yeah.
> 
> However... RAW 1000 could do a 4.0-4.2 with all the legends... give Punk the win, a new belt, set up Rock vs Punk, the next week could do 3.8-4.0... give Cena the belt and it's going to go back down to 3.3-3.5


Cena winning MITB and possibility of him becoming WWE champion obviously aroused interest.

This Punk-AJ-Bryan out-twilighting-twilight storyline has obviously been as big as a draw as the divas matches.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

WWE must really be happy that the ratings are staying around the 3.3.

This time last year, they were doing 2.9s.


----------



## Jamjam22

*Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

So Episode #999 of Raw got a 3.44 rating. Post-Wrestlemania did a 3.43.

With the announcements of DX, The Rock, Brock Lesnar, and many others, as well as Cena vs Punk, and AJ and Bryan's wedding...

*Predict what you believe the 3-hour rating for Monday Night RAW will be next week.*

I'll say it'll do a 3.50. Could be higher but the third hour will make it drop in my opinion.


----------



## Austin & DX

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

My guess is 3.48


----------



## Rockstar1

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

4.0


----------



## saaam121

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

19.6


----------



## ben_fletch

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

In terms of millions of viewers, i reckon around 6 million


----------



## BrendenPlayz

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

Its going to be the biggest raw in years I don't know American ratings or whatever but it should hit a 4.0 if that raw got 3.44.


----------



## Flux

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

4.0 at max, but I reckon 3.8


----------



## Zankman Jack

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

Hm.

I think I agree, 3 hours might actually be a detriment (like how it will be in the longer run). 

Let's be super optimistic and go with: 4.16.


----------



## Heel

Rock316AE said:


> Good number for 2012. One thing I need to give them credit is the hype for the 1000th show, they're able to carry the entire program based on this attraction. They threw everything for next week, ALL the megastars available besides Goldberg and Batista(I'm saying it because I think Austin and Taker are going to be there), Cena in a title match, wedding angle etc. If this show did 3.4, next week is doing 3.7 at least.
> 
> My prediction for the position next week:
> 
> 8pm - DX
> 9pm - Wedding
> 10pm - Rock's announcement.
> 11pm/overrun - Lesnar's announcement.
> 
> Brock in the main event because his program continues the next week.


I think Brock will interrupt DX, so those two angles will merge into one. Cena vs. Punk will likely close the show.


----------



## Marv95

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

4.0. Anything below that should be considered a failure.


----------



## DNoD

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

Definitely A Decent RAW (DADR) = 4.1418 = 4.14 

Rating of 4.14 because it will definitely be a decent RAW.

Makes sense, no?


----------



## robass83

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

I actually want them to get a very fucking low rating. So that they learn some thing and start creating a mid card divison and stop giving a fuck about tout twitter facebook as they arent really helping shit.


----------



## Tricky T

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

3.44


----------



## Punked Up

Predictions for the timeslot stuff:

8PM: DX reunion, adress Brock Lesnar, joke around. Paul Heyman on the Titantron to say Brock is in the building to make his decision.

9PM: Rock return to announce he's in the Rumble or to challenge Taker for the streak. (Rock is early to pull in any viewers who forgot it starts at 8)

10PM: D-Bry, AJ Wedding Segment, Brock Lesnar hype.

10:45-Overrun: Cena vs. Punk. If they want to do the angle this week, cut to a shot of HBK in the back holding his arm and dead (figuratively) to close the show.

In between have DX joking around, Taker or Austin squashing Slater, Austin/Rock interraction, Ryback in a challenging match, a big Sheamus/Mysterio/Kane vs. ADR/Bryan/Ziggler match, the return of Mark Henry, Ambrose debut if they want to, and some minor legends cameos.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

3.9.

Hour 1 = 3.5
Hour 2 = 4.0
Hour 3 = 4.2


----------



## Huganomics

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

Going to second DMN's post and say 3.9.


----------



## Rock316AE

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

3.7 overall with the peak of 4.2+(Biggest since May 2011).


----------



## Cookie Monster

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

3.9


----------



## YoungGun_UK

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

I don't think it will do anything better than RAW's on the road to WrestleMania 27 and 28.


----------



## Woo-Woo-Woo

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

3.5 is the maximum they could ever achieve...mark my words


----------



## Ray

News on the quarter hours yet?


----------



## A-C-P

psx71 said:


> News on the quarter hours yet?


That information usually comes out on wednesday afternoons


So you'll have to wait a few more hours before you decide what segments you liked on Raw and who your new fav superstar is :troll


----------



## N-Zone

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

The first hour of a 3-hour Raw always drags the whole shows rating down. So with that in mind I'll go with them getting a slightly lower or slightly higher rating than the ones they've been getting in recent weeks, probably around a 3.5.


----------



## Macho Minion

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

I think an equally interesting thing to bet on is how many minutes will elapse before we actually see a match of any kind. I'm guessing 40 minimum.


----------



## GetStokedOnIt

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

The cynic in me wants it to get something like a 2.8, just to see WWE meltdown and fucking panic. Some men just want to watch the world burn.

I reckon it'll be around a 3.6 or something though, people will tune in as it's been so hyped up, but I doubt it'll be a huge increase.



Macho Minion said:


> I think an equally interesting thing to bet on is how many minutes will elapse before we actually see a match of any kind. I'm guessing 40 minimum.


Triple H promo + Shaun Michaels promo = about 40 minutes. I'd say your guess is spot on.


----------



## Oakue

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

3.85

And that will likely be the highest for a long time if they can't figure out how to fill 3 hours every week without putting people to sleep.


----------



## CC91

Punked Up said:


> Predictions for the timeslot stuff:
> 
> 8PM: DX reunion, adress Brock Lesnar, joke around. Paul Heyman on the Titantron to say Brock is in the building to make his decision.
> 
> 9PM: Rock return to announce he's in the Rumble or to challenge Taker for the streak. (Rock is early to pull in any viewers who forgot it starts at 8)
> 
> 10PM: D-Bry, AJ Wedding Segment, Brock Lesnar hype.
> 
> 10:45-Overrun: Cena vs. Punk. If they want to do the angle this week, cut to a shot of HBK in the back holding his arm and dead (figuratively) to close the show.
> 
> In between have DX joking around, Taker or Austin squashing Slater, Austin/Rock interraction, Ryback in a challenging match, a big Sheamus/Mysterio/Kane vs. ADR/Bryan/Ziggler match, the return of Mark Henry, Ambrose debut if they want to, and some minor legends cameos.


How about Ryback vs Mark Henry?


----------



## AEA

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

3.5 maybe 3.6 Cant really say obviously


----------



## English Dragon

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

8.4


----------



## Tedious

*Re: Guess Raw 1000's TV Rating.*

3.8ish possibly topping 4.0 for some segments. Highest might get to around 4.2 when someone big is on. Hoping for a good show.


----------



## Punkholic

I'll go with a 3.8.


----------



## King_Kool-Aid™

Probably a 3.9. WWE will never get really high ratings again if they just rely on old wrestlers casuals marked out for a decade ago. They don't care about rushing to see them anymore, they want new stars on par with the old ones. WWE can't produce it so no one is rushing to watch them even if you have DX, Rock, Brock, Stone Cold and the entire Golden era and Attitude Era rosters on the same night having a battle royale for the WWE title.


----------



## hazuki

4.3 maybe.


----------



## Greek_Kane_Fan

Why do you guys think it won't be 5.0 or higher?
During the Attitude Era RAW used to get around 6.0 on a regular basis.
Older fans are bound to tune in for the show.


----------



## A-C-P

Greek_Kane_Fan said:


> Why do you guys think it won't be 5.0 or higher?
> During the Attitude Era RAW used to get around 6.0 on a regular basis.
> Older fans are bound to tune in for the show.


WAY different TV ratings enviroment the WWE is dealing with today vs the time of the AE. I would be very surprised if Raw 1000 got a 5.0 rating in the year 2012. I would guess a very high 3, but most likely a rating in the 4's for Raw 1000


----------



## dxbender

Greek_Kane_Fan said:


> Why do you guys think it won't be 5.0 or higher?
> During the Attitude Era RAW used to get around 6.0 on a regular basis.
> Older fans are bound to tune in for the show.


Ratings back then were diff than today.

Attitude Era really got like 6-7M viewers. I saw one rating from an archived thread that said one episode in 1999 got 5M viewers with a rating in the 6's.

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/classic-wrestling/621298-raw-1999-5m-viewers.html

6.3 rating got like 4.8M viewers.

If things were done the same today, WWE would be averaging ratings in the 6's as well.

In order to get 4 ratings today, Raw would need almost 6M viewers, so it's like the inverse of what it used to be.


----------



## Ray

There was less things on back then. Ratings are basically percentages of people watching a certain show who have the network available. That's why I never got the whole comparison to the Attitude Era ratings around here.

If you're talking WRESTLING in general, then yeah. WCW was getting pretty strong ratings in 1999 as well, so both WWE/WCW and wrestling in general had between 8-10 million people watching regularly on Monday.


----------



## Brye

Greek_Kane_Fan said:


> Why do you guys think it won't be 5.0 or higher?
> During the Attitude Era RAW used to get around 6.0 on a regular basis.
> Older fans are bound to tune in for the show.


The internet, DVR, etc. Plus people grow out of it.


----------



## dxbender

psx71 said:


> There was less things on back then. Ratings are basically percentages of people watching a certain show who have the network available. That's why I never got the whole comparison to the Attitude Era ratings around here.
> 
> If you're talking WRESTLING in general, then yeah. WCW was getting pretty strong ratings in 1999 as well, so both WWE/WCW and wrestling in general had between 8-10 million people watching regularly on Monday.


But 1 thing about the WWE/WCW ratings...how many were same viewers?

EX-If someone tunes in to watch WWE from 9-9:09pm and then WCW from 9:10-9:15pm, wouldn't that count for quarter hours on both shows?

And another thing about tv ratings, what if multiple people watch a show in the same house? WWE being a family show today, that could mean 2-3 people watch Raw in a single house.


----------



## DesolationRow

3.8 rating for next week. Let's not forget, it's three hours long. There are going to be dips. 

Having said that, there hasn't been a "special" episode of _anything_ from WWE this well-hyped in so long... 

Nevertheless, still difficult to see a complete hour of Raw average a 4.0 rating or whatever. 

It's _possible_ because of all of the Monday night TV shows on cable, like on TNT and whatnot, will contribute to making viewership numbers attain higher ratings.

Hmmmm...

Can you imagine how much fun it would be to book the 1,000th episode of Raw? It's probably the one episode of Raw in years that has been given planning and preparation and thought about a month in advance. This is one they need to hit out of the park. This week's Raw was excellent, I thought; a bit light on wrestling content, perhaps, but nevertheless excellent. We'll see about next week.


----------



## dxbender

DesolationRow said:


> Can you imagine how much fun it would be to book the 1,000th episode of Raw? It's probably the one episode of Raw in years that has been given planning and preparation and thought about a month in advance. This is one they need to hit out of the park. This week's Raw was excellent, I thought; a bit light on wrestling content, perhaps, but nevertheless excellent. We'll see about next week.


Or on the other side of that....it could just be booked like another episode of Raw.


"Stone Cold and Rock are booked for Raw 1000,what do we do with them?"
"Put them in a 5 minute promo, have Jinder Mahal come out, both guys hit their finisher on him,and then go to commercial break"

"How do we end Raw 1000?"
"Cena wins WWE title, celebrates, the entire roster comes to the stage, they thank the fans, and Raw is done"


----------



## Ray

dxbender said:


> But 1 thing about the WWE/WCW ratings...how many were same viewers?
> 
> EX-If someone tunes in to watch WWE from 9-9:09pm and then WCW from 9:10-9:15pm, wouldn't that count for quarter hours on both shows?
> 
> And another thing about tv ratings, what if multiple people watch a show in the same house? WWE being a family show today, that could mean 2-3 people watch Raw in a single house.


There's so many factors now a days, that these ratings are never completely accuarate. Like you said, there's far too many things to consider now a days.


----------



## Rock316AE

dxbender said:


> Ratings back then were diff than today.
> 
> Attitude Era really got like 6-7M viewers. I saw one rating from an archived thread that said one episode in 1999 got 5M viewers with a rating in the 6's.
> 
> http://www.wrestlingforum.com/classic-wrestling/621298-raw-1999-5m-viewers.html
> 
> 6.3 rating got like 4.8M viewers.
> 
> If things were done the same today, WWE would be averaging ratings in the 6's as well.
> 
> In order to get 4 ratings today, Raw would need almost 6M viewers, so it's like the inverse of what it used to be.


You said the same thing there and even AFTER people explained it to you, you say it again? No. 4.8 is **households**, not actual viewers.

As for 5.0 or even 4.0+ overall. Not happening. The roster is WOAT and the product is cold as hell. They almost did a 5.0 for The Rock's segment in Chicago last year and they actually did 4.1 for the second hour that night. You're not going to see something like that now because back then you had the astronomical buzz from Rock's presence in the wrestling industry again that made the business hot for 2 months.


----------



## Vyed

3.6 for next week. Doubt they will do 3.8 with three hours.


----------



## DesolationRow

Yeah, 3.6 sounds right, actually. 3.8 for the final two hours. 3.6 overall.


----------



## Starbuck

I say 3.7 to be safe lol. I expect a few segments to do big numbers though and get at or around the 4.0 mark, most likely Rock and the title match. Depending on what happens in Lesnar/HHH, that might hit up there too. But yeah, 3.7 overall makes the most sense to me.


----------



## validreasoning

Greek_Kane_Fan said:


> Why do you guys think it won't be 5.0 or higher?
> During the Attitude Era RAW used to get around 6.0 on a regular basis.
> Older fans are bound to tune in for the show.


yeah but a 5 or 6 in 1998 is not equal to a 5 or 6 in 2012, in 1999 a 5.5 was roughly equal to 5.7 million viewers average (depending on what competition was opposite), trump raw did 6.8 million viewers average (including a second hour of 7.9 million viewers, one of top 3-5 most watched raw hours ever) in 2009 but that show only did a 4.5 rating


----------



## #Mark

If Charlie Sheen tweets, it could break 4.0.


----------



## AthenaMark

For the 2 hours? It might do a 3.8 or something. Cena is in it and you can't trust people to wanna watch shit he's in. I expect the Wedding to get a decent number though.


----------



## kokepepsi

Damn Rikishi and that 169k viewer gain

RIKISHI VS ROCK WM30


----------



## Pro Royka

kokepepsi said:


> Damn Rikishi and that 169k viewer gain
> 
> RIKISHI VS ROCK WM30


How did you know that?


----------



## kokepepsi

Segment Breakdown
Source same as always


> The big story was the last few minutes did a 3.99 rating, which was Cena, Show and Punk out there with them teasing Cena cashing in the briefcase.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, Kofi Kingston & R-Truth vs. Titus O’Neil & Darren Young lost 384,000 viewers.
> 
> A.J. and Daniel Bryan backstage and Alberto Del Rio vs. Zack Ryder with the Rey Mysterio return gained 252,000 viewers.
> 
> Rikishi vs. Heath Slater gained 169,000 viewers.
> 
> The Miz & Eve Torres vs. Bryan & A.J., plus the proposal, gained 282,000, which surprised me because I would have thought the proposal would have done better.
> 
> The big surprise, even though it was a drop, is that the Ryback vs. Tyler Reks and Dolph Ziggler/Chris Jericho confrontation lost 20,000 viewers. They usually lose several hundred thousand in that time slot.
> 
> Brodus Clay vs. JTG lost 491,000, so what that says is people stayed for the Ryback match and Ziggler and Jericho, but then tuned out.
> 
> C.M. Punk vs. Big Show gained 325,000 viewers and the post-match with Cena teasing cashing in the briefcase gained 719,000 viewers.


----------



## Snothlisberger

Lol of course Bryan gains in all his spots but he is "surprised" it _only_ gained about 300k because he expected more. What a tool.


----------



## validreasoning

yeah the bryan quarter was the most watched part of the regular show discounting the over-run with +319k viewers (from start of show)


----------



## Vyed

Good to know People are interested in Ryback and not Brodus. Sick of that dancing clown. 

Amazing, Del Rio still a strong ratings draw. This is the third consecutive week he has gained viewers in random timeslot. 

Great overrun rating, "Tout" is obviously working bigtime for WWE.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Punk/Show started in Q8, correct? If so, that's a great gain, and makes the Cena/Punk/Show cash-in segment look even better that it gained 700,000 viewers and basically got a 4.0 (fuck 3.99, I'm rounding up). 

AJ/Bryan vs. Eve/Miz Q4+Q5 increase is great (and they also were a part of Q3 as well). Even though it's not a huge increase in Q5, it's average for today. What makes it great is it's the second highest point of the show by my calculation. Ryback also keeping most of those viewers is great as well. Even though I'm not a fan, I am always interested to see who Ryback's gonna plow through next. It's a weird addiction but I can see many casuals are the same. Hell Ryback has the crowds chanting "FEED ME MORE!" now. Ryback's on a good role right now.

The first quarter... I don't know what the number is for it, but it was in the lower half of watched segments of the show. But then Punk/Show in Q8, an odd Quarter hour was one of the higher points. It's odd. But who knows. Based on the overall numbers, Q1 started strong but the show just kept attracting people and everything did stronger than normal.


----------



## #Mark

Everyone did well but Brodus. If the WWE had one more intriguing angle at that spot, the rating would have been significantly better. Also shows that a Cena/Punk angle is the biggest draw out there.


----------



## SpeedStick

Dammit WWE made people care about AJ Lee noway she can go back to normal now..


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Punk usually draws well when put in the major storylines, so no surprise there. Also I am amazed RAW was able to retain most of their viewers throughout the show and they slightly gained viewers through most of the quarters hours. The Brodus Clay vs JTG match seemed to be the one to lose most of the viewers, but the main event regained them back nicely.


----------



## Amuroray

Cena DESTROYED EVERYONE AGAIN LOL


----------



## funnyfaces1

Excellent job by everyone except Brodus. A well rounded show with a very good main event that deserves a good rating.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Damn, that Q8 number is quite good. For a segment that doesn't usually gain much if at all, gained more viewers than the 10 spot. And makes the overrun just that much better. A 4.0? That's awesome, and great news for next week's show. Looks like Punk/Cena was the right thing to do. Gee, who would've thunk it, put Punk in a serious, relevant program and it'll produce some numbers. 

A little surprised at the 10 number though, I thought it would have been a huge success. Nevertheless, I expect the wedding to still do big.


----------



## Carcass

Obviously the 10 PM spot would've done better if the AJ and D-Bry thing didn't end less than halfway into that quarter.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Good point. I don't know if I missed D.M.N.'s post if he's made one, but I don't know what the times of the commercial breaks were. If the proposal had ended half way through the quarter, then the number is completely justified.


----------



## Carcass

It was like 6 minutes into it. I remember going to the guide to see what else was one and noticed it was like 7:06.


----------



## DesolationRow

Interesting breakdown. Nothing lost much aside from Brodus Clay. Which, it should be said, was the one segment all night where it felt like they were comparatively phoning it in and didn't really develop anything in terms of storytelling, beyond halfheartedly reintroducing JTG to the viewing audience. The "wedding proposal" segment certainly does have a valid "excuse" for the ostensibly anemic showing, since that angle was wrapped up by about seven or so past the top of the hour. The main event segment and overrun segment point to Cena/Punk being the right call for Raw 1,000 indeed.


----------



## D.M.N.

I don't believe Raw has had a 4.0 quarter at all this year, not even during the Rock/Cena segments. I may be wrong, but I don't recall seeing a 4.0 once this year. If that is the case, then Monday's overrun was the highest rated segment of the year so far. Which, of course, is a brilliant sign for WWE going into next week, and it is academic now that they will be breaking 4.0 several times next week.

I think the main growth is due to Cena possibly cashing in, but also due to the Raw 1000 hype, in my opinion.

Quarter Hours - July 16th, 2012
Q1 - 3.39 rating / 4.84 million
Q2 - 3.12 rating / 4.46 million
Q3 - 3.30 rating / 4.71 million
Q4 - 3.42 rating / 4.88 million
Q5 - 3.64 rating / 5.16 million
Q6 - 3.62 rating / 5.14 million
Q7 - 3.28 rating / 4.65 million
Q8 - 3.50 rating / 4.97 million
Overrun - 3.99 rating / 5.69 million

Very strong looking breakdown. One or two people are making the point that the Q5 growth is not too big, that does not matter as much this week as much as other weeks, because Q3 and Q4 increased, which is an unusual occurrence, so those that normally tune in for hour 2 only, tuned in earlier, so to say.

And Q5 and Q6 drew very strong ratings, so kudos not only to AJ and Bryan, but also to Ryback, Jericho and Ziggler, because that is a very rare occurrence.

Using 10 percent, if you don't like the following, ignore it. I will not claim that it is 100 percent accurate, however - in my opinion, it is more accurate than the above.

Q1 - *4.91 million (0.07 gain)* <-- 2 minutes stripped out
Q2 - *4.75 million (0.30 gain)* <-- 6 minutes stripped out; Kofi/Truth vs Primetime Players, AJ, Bryan and Eve backstage
Q3 - *4.94 million (0.24 gain)* <-- 5 minutes stripped out; AJ, Bryan and Eve backstage, Touting, Ryder vs Del Rio and Mysterio's return, Raw 1000th moment
Q4 - *5.12 million (0.24 gain)* <-- 5 minutes stripped out; Slater vs Rikishi and Rikishi/USOs dancing, Bryan/AJ vs Miz/Eve
Q5 - *5.35 million (0.19 gain)* <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Bryan's proposal, Raw 1000th moment, Ryback vs Swagger
Q6 - *5.33 million (0.19 gain)* <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Ryback vs Swagger, Touting, Ziggler and Jericho segment
Q7 - *5.18 million (0.53 gain)* <-- 8 minutes stripped out; Touting, Raw 1000th hype, Clay entrance, Clay vs JTG
Q8 - *5.15 million (0.18 gain)* <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Show vs Punk
Overrun - *5.69 million (0.00 gain)* <-- no commercials (obviously)

Q7 had eight minutes of commercials, hence the large gain and the low quarter in the breakdown.


----------



## DesolationRow

*D.M.N.* is the ratings guru. Repped.

The commercial saturation in Q7 most certainly helps to explain that "large gain and low quarter in the breakdown."


----------



## Rock316AE

Not surprising because with the exception of last week, Show and Cena are the 2 biggest TV draws by far. WWE were able to hype the 1000th show and bring more viewers to the program based on that show.

Good to see Rikishi gains and Ryback is clearly getting over. 

Even with the weak number at the top of the hour, I expect the wedding next week to do a big number. It's going to get a main timeslot, that's 100%. I hope it's not getting the 9pm slot because that's just the viewers who forgot about RAW in 8pm.


----------



## A-C-P

Nothing really surprising in the breakdown and the "important" stuff has been covered. The commercial placement in the 10PM qurater is what hurt that segment IMO.

Punk/Cena is definitely the right choice for s ME for he 1000th Raw. I am expecting a Big SHow interference in that match to.


----------



## Punked Up

So the only 2 segments that did poorly were Brodus and the tag division. WWE has ignored the tag division for so long that now that they're focusing on it, it's biting them in the arse. Brodus is explainable as well, A) This muust be around his 30th squash match and B)segments before him did very well, so he'd probably lose even in a real match. 

Great to see Rikishi do well, same with Del Rio, Ryder and Rey, which is not exactly surprising, as Del Rio and Rey are strong TV draws. 10PM and a little before did well IMO, I imagine a lot of people tuned out in the remaining 9 minutes of the quarter after the proposal. Had they kept that going longer, it would've been a huge gain. The WWE's schedueling seemed to be a few minutes off all night (part of me even thinks they just did the Brodus match to kill time on the fly). Great to see Ryback becoming a ratings draw. This is why the squashes work - he's winning every week, every single week and the audience are starting to like him a lot. Jericho/Ziggler doing well bodes well for that fueds future. Good to see Punk becoming a ratings draw, last week and now this week, WWE seem to have more faith in him, especially considering that his match was schedueled to ME over CENA as far as I know. Overrun doing great was expected, but the overral number was made much better by Punk and Show gaining. Strong rating for a solid, well thought out show.


----------



## Pro Royka

Rock316AE said:


> Not surprising because with the exception of last week, *Show and Cena are the 2 biggest TV draws by far*. WWE were able to hype the 1000th show and bring more viewers to the program based on that show.
> 
> Good to see Rikishi gains and Ryback is clearly getting over.
> 
> Even with the weak number at the top of the hour, I expect the wedding next week to do a big number. It's going to get a main timeslot, that's 100%. I hope it's not getting the 9pm slot because that's just the viewers who forgot about RAW in 8pm.


Hello, you can't just ignore Punk when he's part of it. You don't give credit to others when you don't like them, it just shows how low you're.


----------



## Starbuck

DAT JAWN CENA CASH IN worked like a charm. Combine that with the super ass hype surrounding Raw 1000 and an overall enjoyable show and boom, DEM RATINGZ.


----------



## Call_Me

Pro Royka said:


> Hello, you can't just ignore Punk when he's part of it. You don't give credit to others when you don't like them, it just shows how low you're.


They were only waiting for Cena to show up and cash in the briefcase, which led to.......


> and the post-match with Cena teasing cashing in the briefcase gained 719,000 viewers


----------



## HalfNights70

It was a great show overall, but the only thing that I didn't like was Brodus match, the outcome was so obvious. But a big gain in the overrun, Punk cant Draw at all how can he do that.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Pro Royka said:


> Hello, you can't just ignore Punk when he's part of it. You don't give credit to others when you don't like them, it just shows how low you're.


It's classic Rock316AE to only talk about Punk when the numbers are abysmal/slightly disappointing. I'm actually surprised he didn't go on slaughtering Punk for weak in comparison to the rest of the show Q1 viewers (but it was still a very strong opener). 

Bryan/AJ, Ryback, and Ziggler/Jericho having over 5 million viewers between the two segments is fantastic. It's great to see all of those have really caught on. And as I said earlier, Q8 gaining like it did, followed by the very strong overrun in anticipation for a potential Cena/Punk match due to cash-in is an amazing gain.

Overall a great breakdown going into next Monday. I'm sure if WWE plays their cards right next Monday they can have at least one of the hours get a 4.0+... or at least a few of the segments. Rock will of course draw big. DX/Heyman/Lesnar will draw big. Punk/Cena based on this breakdown will draw big. Undertaker, Austin, etc. could draw big even as surprise appearances if enough time is given for spread of word that they're on TV, which I'm sure happens in surprise returns (at least sometimes, like earlier this year when Taker returned). Guess we'll have to wait and see. Though while ratings do interest me, at the end of the day I'm just hoping for an awesome show.


----------



## Pro Royka

Call_Me said:


> They were only waiting for Cena to show up and cash in the briefcase, which led to.......


It was aimed to be a big announcement, I'm sure even Miz can do that when you're advertised to be the MITB winner and make people believe that you'll cash it in later when Punk is knocked out. But I also know it will not be the same gain but it's okay it's the poster boy always in the top.
Then again I know John were part of it but again how come you forget Punk in their, it was about all three of them period

Edited: given me a red rep Rock316 doesn't change the fact that you're low and ignorant. You don't respect opinions, that means you're a one angry mark that doesn't like Punk when he gets praised.


----------



## Rock316AE

Pro Royka said:


> Hello, you can't just ignore Punk when he's part of it. You don't give credit to others when you don't like them, it just shows how low you're.


Of course he was there, but he wasn't a major factor like Show and Cena were. And they're without question the two biggest full time TV draws in WWE today.

If they're smart enough with the booking of Ryback, unlike what they're doing now with jobbers getting so much offense on him. A year from now he's going to be big. It's not going to be a Goldberg/Big Dave/Lesnar caliber of rise but it will happen.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Punks is the WWE Champion, so people were anxious to see if there would be a cash in. So yeah he was pretty much a big factor as well.


----------



## Choke2Death

Cena was clearly the big draw in here. Big Show and Punk couldn't even get the amount of viewers that the previous segment lost, then Cena arrived with his "announcement" and gained them two and a half the amount the Punk/Show match did, making it one million combined.

And Big Show is not a draw, his match with Kane a couple of weeks ago actually lost viewers and I think it was at the top of the hour.


----------



## Rock316AE

It wasn't, the last Show/Kane match at the top of the hour was along with the Show/Ace segment and it did a HUGE gain of a million+. Big Show was also a major part in the two biggest quarters of the year, nobody is close to him currently besides Cena in his consistency.


----------



## Pro Royka

Rock316AE said:


> It wasn't, the last Show/Kane match at the top of the hour was along with the Show/Ace segment and it did a HUGE gain of a million+. Big Show was also a major part in the two biggest quarters of the year, nobody is close to him currently besides Cena in his consistency.


Mr. Excuses, why don't you accept facts bringing numbers from the past to justify yourself, it wasn't Show who gained that much, it was loud and clear that Johnny who gained that much because he proved it later when he gained the same.

Edited: what are you mad, are you gonna give me some red reps because thats the only thing you can do.


----------



## Choke2Death

Rock316AE said:


> It wasn't, the last Show/Kane match at the top of the hour was along with the Show/Ace segment and it did a HUGE gain of a million+. Big Show was also a major part in the two biggest quarters of the year, nobody is close to him currently besides Cena in his consistency.


I'm talking about the no DQ match they had about two or three weeks ago on that awful Raw where Jericho returned. It lost viewers iirc.


----------



## D.M.N.

D.M.N. said:


> *January 30th, 2012 - Breakdown*
> Q1 + Q2 - 3.90 rating / 5.65 million
> Overrun - 3.85 rating / 5.64 million





D.M.N. said:


> Quarter Hours - July 16th, 2012
> Overrun - 3.99 rating / 5.69 million


The viewership for the overrun was higher than that on January 30th, which means that overrun on Monday's Raw was the highest rated segment for the entire year to date.

Segments involving The Rock and John Cena did not get as high as that.

I know it hasn't been a stellar year for Raw, but still quite an achievement for the segment on Raw to do higher than that pre-WrestleMania.


----------



## Rock316AE

Choke2Death said:


> I'm talking about the no DQ match they had about two or three weeks ago on that awful Raw where Jericho returned. It lost viewers iirc.


That was a match on a random position and it actually did great for the timeslot. Biggest number of the year was Vince/Show/Cena/Ace segment before NWO.


----------



## Punked Up

Rock316AE said:


> That was a match on a random position and it actually did great for the timeslot. Biggest number of the year was Vince/Show/Cena/Ace segment before NWO.


Show vs. Kane in Q6 a few weeks back lost 69k (be mature please) IIRC.


----------



## Starbuck

Forget Show and Punk for that matter. The hook was clearly whether or not Cena would cash in. Did it help that Punk was the champ and they have a great history together? Probably. Would it have mattered if it were somebody else as champion instead? I don't think so. The hype for Raw 1000 has very clearly had a positive effect. More people were tuned in and because of the Cena announcement promotion throughout the show the same jump most likely would have happened had somebody else been champion and had Show not been there. Attributing the bump to anything other than Cena is just wrong. The possibility of Cena cashing in and the overall added viewers due to Raw 1000 caused the jump. Nothing else.


----------



## Rock316AE

I agree that the RAW 1000th hype is clearly the big attraction. After that you can give credit to Cena's MITB teaser. 



Punked Up said:


> Show vs. Kane in Q6 a few weeks back lost 69k (be mature please) IIRC.


And that's actually great for the timeslot. This is not surprising to me, because anyone who follows this aspect of wrestling for a long time knows that Big Show has been a big and reliable TV draw for over 13 years now. Vince tested him in a match with Steve Austin in March 99 and that match did RECORD viewership for RAW at that time. After that all the rumors about a Show/Austin WM16 came out. Besides his amazing condition for a guy in his size after almost 20 years on the road and a big attraction for house shows crowd, that's a big part in why he's main eventing after all these years.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

If we were to do it in percents, Cena was like 80% of the reason for that big number, Punk was 15% and Show was 5%. Obviously though Cena was by far the biggest factor in it all. But had it not been Punk and someone like Ziggler, I don't think the number would've been quite as big. If it was someone like Orton though, then yeah, it probably would've been the same. But I get the point no matter who it was, it still would've been a big overrun number because of Cena's cash-in. And of course the 1000th episode hype is certainly a factor, but that's more for the overall show as opposed to just that one segment.


----------



## D.M.N.

Rock316AE said:


> Biggest number of the year was Vince/Show/Cena/Ace segment before NWO.


Good spot actually, so it was:

3.99 rating / 5.72 million


----------



## Starbuck

BIG JOHNNY > Cena, Rock, HHH, Taker, Vince, Brock


----------



## IraGoldberg

*Raw numbers -fans change channel on brotus*

http://www.ringsidenews.com/article...ho-vs-ziggler-draws-fans-tune-out-for-brodus/


- As noted before, the July 16th WWE RAW Supershow did a 3.44 cable rating with 4.90 million viewers. 

In the segment breakdown, Titus O'Neil and Darren Young vs. Kofi Kingston and R-Truth lost 384,000 viewers from the opening segment. AJ Lee and Daniel Bryan's backstage segment plus Zack Ryder vs. Alberto Del Rio with Rey Mysterio's return gained 252,000 viewers. Rikishi's return vs. Heath Slater gained another 169,000 viewers. 

Eve Torres and The Miz vs. AJ and Bryan plus the wedding angle gained 282,000 viewers. The big surprise of the show was the Ryback vs. Tyler Reks & Curt Hawkins match with the confrontation between Chris Jericho and Dolph Ziggler. These lost 20,000 viewers in a spot in the show where RAW usually loses several hundred thousand viewers. 

Brodus Clay vs. JTG lost 491,000 viewers, which indicates that fans stayed for the Ryback match and the Jericho-Ziggler segment but tuned out as soon as the next segment began. 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. 

Not bad!! Glad the fans are showing they dislike brotus... Get that sideshow off tv... Santino is enough ..


----------



## zamdeth

*Re: Raw numbers -fans change channel on brotus*

Brotus


----------



## Shazayum

Rock316AE said:


> Of course he was there, but he wasn't a major factor like Show and Cena were. And they're without question the two biggest full time TV draws in WWE today.
> 
> If they're smart enough with the booking of Ryback, unlike what they're doing now with jobbers getting so much offense on him. A year from now he's going to be big. It's not going to be a Goldberg/Big Dave/Lesnar caliber of rise but it will happen.


Show doesn't draw. He doesn't. Never did and never will, he's a fucking bore. Stop it.


----------



## WWCturbo

*Re: Raw numbers -fans change channel on brotus*

Whatever his name is Brodus or Brotus the guy is horrible.


----------



## thierry90

*Re: Raw numbers -fans change channel on brotus*

"Welcome back to Monday Night Raw.. Coming up next, the Funkasaurus Brotus Clay goes one on one against The Moz"

Anyway, back to topic... I don't blame them for switching off. The mini-feud with Show made it seem like Brodus was going to start mixing it up and developing, but no, same old s**t.


----------



## samizayn

Predicting at least a 5.0 for tonight, the first since millions tuned in to see Edge strip down to his underwear


----------



## Rocky Mark

could you imagine if it got a 3.0 ? :lmao 

this would probably be Vince's reaction :


----------



## D.M.N.

If all three hours come in below 4.0, I think WWE will be bitterly disappointed.


----------



## holt_hogan

greendayedgehead said:


> Predicting at least a 5.0 for tonight, the first since millions tuned in to see Edge strip down to his underwear


I'm predicting a forum crash in about 3 minutes.....


----------



## holt_hogan

ha. Smug bastard.


----------



## Khalid Hassan

Too many heels on RAW now. Jericho didn't look like a face tonight, so he's what... a Tweener or something??? Show, Ziggler, Del Rio, Cody, Bryan, Kane (sometimes, it depends), Miz, and now Punk on the heel side??? Who's the faces? Cena, Sheamus, Rey, Truth, Kofi, Brodus, Santino, Christian................ seems very very unequal on every level.


----------



## RatedR10

I think this overrun is going to do a HUGE number. I think it WILL get to a 5.0 at least in the overrun.

For the rest of the show, I expect somewhere between 3.8 - 4.3 to be honest. There was a HUGE amount of hype.


----------



## Rock316AE

Rock came out as a surprise on a random segment, no idea why. The final minutes overrun with Rock/Cena/Show/Punk probably peaked with 4.0+.


----------



## Rocky Mark

so does anyone think they could break the 4.0 ? not only did the promote the show like crazy but almost every segment had something major going on


----------



## Starbuck

Bit iffy about some of the quarters now tbh. The way they organized things was a bit weird to me. Rock came out at a random time, Brock/HHH started at 10 minutes to 10 and was over around 7/8 minutes past iirc. The wedding didn't last the full quarter either if I recall. I think the overrun will do the best of the night of obvious reasons. Big title match and no commercials. The rest of the breakdown should be interesting though lol. Can't wait to see it, haha.


----------



## TheRainKing

Rating will probably be between 3.7 and 4.0.


----------



## D.M.N.

20:00 to 20:04 - Opening
20:04 to 20:06 - Mr McMahon segment
20:06 to 20:20 - DX segment
20:20 to 20:21 - Raw 1000 previews
--> commercial [3 minutes]
20:24 to 20:31 - JR; Six-Man Tag Team match entrances
--> commercial [3 minutes]
20:34 to 20:39 - Six-Man Tag Team match
--> commercial [3 minutes]
20:42 to 20:43 - Touts
20:43 to 20:44 - Charlie Sheen live
20:44 to 20:47 - AJ and Layla backstage
--> commercial [3 minutes]
20:50 to 20:55 - Swagger vs Clay
20:55 to 20:57 - DX and Trish backstage
--> commercial [3 minutes]
21:00 to 21:11 - The Wedding of AJ and Daniel Bryan
--> commercial [3 minutes]
21:14 to 21:29 - Bryan, Punk and Rock segment
--> commercial [4 minutes]
21:33 to 21:38 - Christian vs The Miz
--> commercial [4 minutes]
21:42 to 21:46 - Christian vs The Miz
21:46 to 21:48 - Charlie Sheen live
--> commercial [3 minutes]
21:51 to 21:52 - Raw 1000 moment
21:52 to 22:04 - HHH, Lesnar, Heyman, Steph segment
--> commercial [3 minutes]
22:07 to 22:09 - Touts
22:09 to 22:10 - WWE 13 preview
22:10 to 22:12 - Raw 1000 moment
--> commercial [3 minutes]
22:15 to 22:24 - Slater vs Lita
22:24 to 22:26 - Bryan recap and interview
--> commercial [3 minutes]
22:29 to 22:30 - WWE's 100,000,000 social media follower
22:30 to 22:32 - Raw 1000's famous catchphrases
22:32 to 22:34 - Ryder, Mene Gene, Cena and Rock backstage
--> commercial [3 minutes]
22:37 to 22:45 - Kane and Undertaker reunion
22:45 to 22:46 - Be a Star promo
--> commercial [4 minutes]
22:50 to 22:52 - Charlie Sheen live
22:52 to 22:56 - Cena and Punk entrances
--> commercial [3 minutes]
22:59 to 23:14 - Cena vs Punk

_Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8GunZMOfhw_

Let the mark wars begin....


----------



## SteenIsGod

Khalid Hassan said:


> Too many heels on RAW now. Jericho didn't look like a face tonight, so he's what... a Tweener or something??? Show, Ziggler, Del Rio, Cody, Bryan, Kane (sometimes, it depends), Miz, and now Punk on the heel side??? Who's the faces? Cena, Sheamus, Rey, Truth, Kofi, Brodus, Santino, Christian................ seems very very unequal on every level.


Stupid Argument. Ziggler, Del Rio, Cody, Kane and Miz are all Mid Carders. They need a legit top heel like HHH in 2000. Not saying Punk will be as good as HHH in 2000 but you get the point. They need at least 1 guy as The Top Heel, where as before everyone was just floundering on the heel side. Cena and Orton can fill in as those Mega Faces, Sheamus is no where close to being a mega star. Also Jericho's a Face, it's pretty obvious they were building towards Jericho/Ziggler for Summerslam.

Predicting a 3.3 for this show, it's not going to do earth shattering numbers, most of the audience were casuals and tuned out for most of the nostalgic stuff.

If you factor in the possibly low first hour, I'm thinking 3.0-3.1. I'm telling you guys, the show isn't going to do this 4.0 crap you guys are talking about, maybe a segment or two but that's it.


----------



## Starbuck

D.M.N. said:


> 20:00 to 20:04 - Opening
> 20:04 to 20:06 - Mr McMahon segment
> 20:06 to 20:20 - DX segment
> 20:20 to 20:21 - Raw 1000 previews
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 20:24 to 20:31 - JR; Six-Man Tag Team match entrances
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 20:34 to 20:39 - Six-Man Tag Team match
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 20:42 to 20:43 - Touts
> 20:43 to 20:44 - Charlie Sheen live
> 20:44 to 20:47 - AJ and Layla backstage
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 20:50 to 20:55 - Swagger vs Clay
> 20:55 to 20:57 - DX and Trish backstage
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 21:00 to 21:11 - The Wedding of AJ and Daniel Bryan
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 21:14 to 21:29 - Bryan, Punk and Rock segment
> --> commercial [4 minutes]
> 21:33 to 21:38 - Christian vs The Miz
> --> commercial [4 minutes]
> 21:42 to 21:46 - Christian vs The Miz
> 21:46 to 21:48 - Charlie Sheen live
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 21:51 to 21:52 - Raw 1000 moment
> 21:52 to 22:04 - HHH, Lesnar, Heyman, Steph segment
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:07 to 22:09 - Touts
> 22:09 to 22:10 - WWE 13 preview
> 22:10 to 22:12 - Raw 1000 moment
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:15 to 22:24 - Slater vs Lita
> 22:24 to 22:26 - Bryan recap and interview
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:29 to 22:30 - WWE's 100,000,000 social media follower
> 22:30 to 22:32 - Raw 1000's famous catchphrases
> 22:32 to 22:34 - Ryder, Mene Gene, Cena and Rock backstage
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:37 to 22:45 - Kane and Undertaker reunion
> 22:45 to 22:46 - Be a Star promo
> --> commercial [4 minutes]
> 22:50 to 22:52 - Charlie Sheen live
> 22:52 to 22:56 - Cena and Punk entrances
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:59 to 23:14 - Cena vs Punk
> 
> _Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8GunZMOfhw_
> 
> Let the mark wars begin....


Lots of commercials in the middle of the big segments which is what I was talking about earlier. Either somebody ran over or they were worried about running out of time at the end or something. Commercials in the wedding, in Lesnar/HHH/Steph/Heyman (what odd timing for that segment tbh) and then Rock in a random quarter. Just strange they way they arranged this show imo.


----------



## Punked Up

I'm predicting the show does around a 3.7-3.9 but the overrun does a huge number, like a 4.5.


----------



## Starbuck

I originally predicted 3.7 (I think lol) but I'm changing it to 3.5 overall with one or 2 segments getting over 4.0, especially the overrun.


----------



## Ray

I'll go a 3.75 rating, with the overrun being a massive 4.0 or above or something like that. They paced the show nicely last night.


----------



## Starbuck

psx71 said:


> I'll go a 3.75 rating, with the overrun being a massive 4.0 or above or something like that. They paced the show nicely last night.


I don't think so. They had commercials right smack in the middle of 2 of their big hyped segments and then had Rock come out at a random quarter.


----------



## Tedious

Starbuck said:


> I don't think so. They had commercials right smack in the middle of 2 of their big hyped segments and then had Rock come out at a random quarter.


Your sig is awesome. I wanted that GIF as soon as I saw her do that. She somehow looks hot making that face as well.


----------



## Ray

Starbuck said:


> I don't think so. They had commercials right smack in the middle of 2 of their big hyped segments and then had Rock come out at a random quarter.


Commercials were not what I was talking about. I was talking in context of the show quarters in that they had the right segment at the right times to keep the viewers instead of lose them.

Commercials definitely affected the viewership though, no doubt about it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

With Undertaker doing this well on social media, makes me wonder how his surprise return segment (which was in a random quarter hour) did.

I'm especting at least an above average quarter hour number for the DX opening segment, though with how much they advertised it to death last week that they would be on at 8, it should be a good number if people were paying even the slightest bit of attention to it. Not to mention Vince being there surely helps.

Bryan/AJ wedding should do great, and then Punk/Rock/Bryan may actually gain viewers. Rock (and Punk) were out there long enough where it should've given people enough time to change the channel to Raw if they weren't on it, and with the fact it was one of the high points of that social media chart, it should be a good number. It may lose a little bit, but didn't the segment after the 10pm slot last week only lose less than a hundred thousand? (I may be completely off base with that, so correct me if I'm wrong) If so, then I don't see why it shouldn't have gained viewers.

Lesnar/HHH/Steph/Heyman was on long enough and should've attracted some, if it doesn't get the normal lot that comes in after the 10PM slot. Though will the rest of Q9, which was filled with touts and video packages bring it down? 

No reason Punk/Cena with Show and Rock coming out should do anything low. It was during the overrun, there were no commercials, The Rock came out, Punk turned heel. If the segment isn't a 4.0+, then something's up.


----------



## HankHill_85

Three-hour Raws are tricky to come up with any sort of rating predictions. They better hope they did a damn good job of really hyping the earlier start time.

I predict a 3.7 overall, with a large overrun of 4.2. I'd love if those numbers were bigger, though.


----------



## D.M.N.

worth keeping an eye out twitter.com/tedontv - if there is any big numbers/peaks for Raw, he may well report them before they come in on any sites.


----------



## Rock316AE

Starbuck said:


> I don't think so. They had commercials right smack in the middle of 2 of their big hyped segments and then had Rock come out at a random quarter.


No idea why they did it, and it wasn't a big star power segment or something, just the 1000 Punk/Bryan promo that nobody cares about and suddenly Rock comes out there for no reason. Especially after the big gain of the wedding and the 9pm slot from all the people who weren't watching at 8. Hell, I was about to go to drink something during that segment until Rock came out. 

Same thing with Lesnar/HHH, they clearly screwed the program and potential huge quarters. So my bet is still the final minutes of the overrun with Rock/Cena/Show/Punk. Stupid company, until they had a chance with that kind of audience, they're booking shit like that without even knowing the time limits of their segments:Rock2:hhh


----------



## Vyed

DX was trending #1 worldwide during the first segment, so there is a good chance first hour did really well, possibly over 4.2m.

Last three hour RAW with Vince Mcmahon drew really good..
H1 - 2.73, H2 - 3.34, H3 - 3.55


----------



## Choke2Death

Can't wait for the ratings to come out. Before it happens, I predict that the end result is either 3.5 or 3.6, wont expect anything close to 4.0 as they probably hoped.


----------



## blazegod99

I think they might get a 3-7.-3.8 but I did hear a lot of people say they tuned out after the Clay and Swagger match lol.

If it does 4.0 or higher.... then next week will be back to 3.2-3.5 and they will blame it on Punk not being able to draw, although that aint true.


----------



## D.M.N.

Hour 1 - 5.439m
Hour 2 - 6.318m
Hour 3 - 6.300m

Source: TV By The Numbers

EASILY over 4.0!

I think that is the highest hourly rating since the commercial free Raw in 2009, which I believe makes it the most watched hour including commercials for ten years.


----------



## Vyed

Hour 1 : 5.439
Hour 2 : 6.318 (Last Week : 4.720m)
Hour 3 : 6.300 (Last Week : 5.038m) 

HOLY shit!


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

DAT RATING!


----------



## JasonLives

D.M.N. said:


> Hour 1 - 5.439m
> Hour 2 - 6.318m
> Hour 3 - 6.300m
> 
> Source: TV By The Numbers
> 
> EASILY over 4.0!


Daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaamn!


----------



## Rock316AE

H1 - 5.439 
H2 - 6.318
H3 - 6.300

FUCK! 

There's a chance that Rock peaked the show as a surprise on a random segment? hard to believe but who knows. HUGE success and should be a 4.0+ for the regular hours. Biggest since Rock in Chicago before WM27.


----------



## DesolationRow

_*HOLY SHIT*_!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Vyed

Yup, that would be 4.2 Rating, if I am right.

Edit: Guess went wrong.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

AJ and DB wedding along with the Rock appreance right after is most likely the reason why the second hour is the highest. If only by a bit.


and 6 million people watched Punk lay out The Rock and close the show


----------



## D.M.N.

Rock316AE said:


> Biggest since Rock in Chicago before WM27.


Hour 2 had 6.231m then: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...mieres-down-being-human-rj-berger-more/87545/

So both hour 2 and 3 had higher last night.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

D.M.N. said:


> Hour 1 - 5.439m
> Hour 2 - 6.318m
> Hour 3 - 6.300m
> 
> Source: TV By The Numbers
> 
> EASILY over 4.0!
> 
> I think that is the highest hourly rating since the commercial free Raw in 2009, which I believe makes it the most watched hour including commercials for ten years.


Holy *fuck*.


----------



## Starbuck

D.M.N. said:


> Hour 1 - 5.439m
> Hour 2 - 6.318m
> Hour 3 - 6.300m
> 
> Source: TV By The Numbers
> 
> EASILY over 4.0!
> 
> I think that is the highest hourly rating since the commercial free Raw in 2009, which I believe makes it the most watched hour including commercials for ten years.


WOW HOLY SHIT. That's a fucking mad number for hour 1 and then to get hour 2 and 3 over 6 million is fucking insane. This is what you get when you promote the hell out of something lol. _Very_ impressive numbers here. I'm blown away by that and they pretty much retained their viewership for the normal 2 hours as well. The drop next week is going to be comical though lol. No way they keep this going for 2 weeks straight.


----------



## DesolationRow

I now see why they wanted that cliffhanger ending. One would hope/think it would lead into a big opening rating for next week.

Wow, they actually have something to build off of! Something the equivalent to Mount Everest!


----------



## TheWFEffect

WWE may have gained some old school viewers back because they kept watching I am no fan of D-Bryan but he really shined on RAW looking back at his NXT promo and now just shows anyone can be developed into a star.


----------



## Vyed

Taker's surprise return & Rock/Punk/Bryan must have done extremely well.


----------



## Pro Royka

Just like what I thought very impressive. I was looking at some previous numbers and counted shows, and I was positive it will be above 4.0+.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

If they're lucky they'll still manage to scrape over the 5 million mark in the (old) normal time slot of 9-11. Then again who knows. Can't wait to see the breakdown. Is it at all possible something got over 7 million?


----------



## Green Light

That's fucking insane. Wow.


----------



## JasonLives

I think at this point you can say that in todays world roughly 6 million viewers is the roof for pro wrestling these days. The show was as stacked as its ever going to get, it had all the hype it could ever have. Those 6.3 million viewers is the roof. Maybe if they did a Stone Cold Vs. The Rock match or something they could push it a little further. But other then that.

Atleast for a commercial Raw. Could have been higher without commercials for sure.

Hell of a number. Of course the drop will be huge the coming weeks. But its to be expected.


----------



## Starbuck

I reckon the overrun may be close to 7 million tbh. It started late, everybody knew _something_ was going to go down and it had no commercial breaks. Whatever way it pans out I'm expecting a pretty steady breakdown once we get into hour 2. Looks like they were able to retain viewership for the whole show which is something they haven't been able to do for the longest time now. I swear to fuck if this keeps happening because of all this Tout shit I give up lol.


----------



## D.M.N.

Starbuck said:


> WOW HOLY SHIT. That's a fucking mad number for hour 1 and then to get hour 2 and 3 over 6 million is fucking insane. This is what you get when you promote the hell out of something lol. _Very_ impressive numbers here. I'm blown away by that and they pretty much retained their viewership for the normal 2 hours as well. The drop next week is going to be comical though lol. No way they keep this going for 2 weeks straight.


Ah, but _that's_ why they turned Punk heel. To try and keep the audience next week. Obviously it will drop, it is simply a matter of how much.


----------



## Vyed

Adult 18-49 Rating was also massive. 2.0, 2.4, 2.4.

Vince mcmahon must be happy. :vince2


----------



## Starbuck

Before the mark wars erupt etc when the breakdown comes, for a pro wrestling show to get 6 million viewers in 2012 and retain them for 3 hours is a HUGE accomplishment. Vinnie Mac be smiling tonight lol. 

As for next week, well, the hook is there. Punk turned heel and I'm willing to bet close to 7 million people saw it. Now all we need to see is whether or not it works.


----------



## Rock316AE

Next week is going to be good for 2012 standards because of all the people still expecting to see Rock/Brock/Taker/DX etc on the show, then week after week you're going to see some astronomical drop. They still got the Brock/Heyman/HHH storyline to save them until Summerslam, after that along with MNF, comedy and panic begins.

Another thing is the 3 hours, which is too long, even on RAW it felt too long with all the star power. Unbearable material from next week.


----------



## hazuki

D.M.N. said:


> Hour 1 - 5.439m
> Hour 2 - 6.318m
> Hour 3 - 6.300m
> 
> Source: TV By The Numbers
> 
> EASILY over 4.0!
> 
> I think that is the highest hourly rating since the commercial free Raw in 2009, which I believe makes it the most watched hour including commercials for ten years.


----------



## Starbuck

If I were booking Raw next week I would have Punk open the show tbh. He was the closing image of this weeks show, he was the hook so he needs to open and if they are serious about this heel turn then he needs to set the tone going forward. Punk to open, Brock/HHH at 10pm and Punk to close again, he's your hook for the week after and so on and so forth. 

EDIT - I forgot about the extra hour lol. Tout.


----------



## DesolationRow

Completely agree, *Starbuck*--I was just thinking the same thing. Punk should open up next week. Cena comes out, they create a new "hook" for the end of the show. Brock/Trips and Friends at 10:00pm, then finish up whatever angle they can stitch together for Punk, Cena and I guess Big Show for next week's Raw in the main event and overrun segments. Seems like a sound plan.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> If I were booking Raw next week I would have Punk open the show tbh. He was the closing image of this weeks show, he was the hook so he needs to open and if they are serious about this heel turn then he needs to set the tone going forward. Punk to open, Brock/HHH at 10pm and Punk to close again, he's your hook for the week after and so on and so forth.
> 
> EDIT - I forgot about the third hour lol.



:lmao

Isn't 8PM just a recap of stuff/bs anyway? I read that in a report, or was that not true?

If not...

8PM- Punk promo, Punk doesn't finish as Cena comes out, Cena match announced for main event, with Punk teasing he has a lot to "get off his chest" after it.
9PM- Sheamus match/tag of some sort... despite the fact he might not gain many viewers, there's really no one else to put here unless it's Big Show related.
10PM- Lesnar/HHH feud progress promo
11PM- Cena match, Punk sits at the top of the ramp, and airs his frustrations as he did a year ago. Summer of Punk starts all over again, and they do it right this time.

Problem is this would just lead to Punk getting cheered more and more unless he puts more emphasis in slaughtering the fans more so than he did last time for supporting Cena still being the center of the show.


----------



## Choke2Death

That's some HUGE numbers they've got!


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Only thing I just thought though regarding putting Punk in 8PM... I'm not entirely sure people are used to tuning in at 8 just yet, so unless it's heavily advertised on WWE.com, twitter, and Smackdown, I can't see it being a good idea.


----------



## Starbuck

Obis said:


> :lmao
> 
> Isn't 8PM just a recap of stuff/bs anyway? I read that in a report, or was that not true?
> 
> If not...
> 
> 8PM- Punk promo, Punk doesn't finish as Cena comes out, Cena match announced for main event, with Punk teasing he has a lot to "get off his chest" after it.
> 9PM- Sheamus match/tag of some sort... despite the fact he might not gain many viewers, there's really no one else to put here unless it's Big Show related.
> 10PM- Lesnar/HHH feud progress promo
> 11PM- Cena match, Punk sits at the top of the ramp, and airs his frustrations as he did a year ago. Summer of Punk starts all over again, and they do it right this time.
> 
> Problem is this would just lead to Punk getting cheered more and more unless he puts more emphasis in slaughtering the fans more so than he did last time for supporting Cena still being the center of the show.


I thought the reports said that big shit was going down at the start of the show in order to get people used to tuning in at 8pm to see it. Whatever way, I don't think that's going to work lol, at least not off the bat anyways. I think 9pm rather than 10pm is going to become the new BIG spot to pull in a lot of viewers because that's going to be the spot when everybody usually tuning in for the start will tune in so that's where they'll want to put a big segment on. Then 10pm slot will become an above average time slot while the main event/overrun remains the same and will most likely be depended upon to pull in a big number to hike the overall number.

EDIT - I guess when you look at it like that, nothing changes does it lol? Punk at 9PM, Brock/HHH at 10pm and Punk to close again, ha! Stupid fucking extra hour. It's just too long for any television show.


----------



## Pro Royka

Next week will probably be as good as Raw last week (not sure for this week) or even better depends if there is no filler matches and if there is some progress in storylines. They should make Taker/Kane vs some tag team wrestlers, Punk will probably cut a hot promo (a new WWE title design), or maybe some returns or debuts its perfect time for it ex: Wade Barrett, Dean Ambrose debut, Austin, Rock via whatever or maybe he's busy, Brock/Heymen/Trips/Steph, Cena in action against Bryan maybe, Miz defends his title. The product is getting better I hope.


----------



## Words Of Wisdom

Insane rating! Awesome! Seems like AJ/Bryan/Punk/rock drew?


----------



## mblonde09

Good news, but you had to expect bigger numbers for a show of this magnitude, following all the weeks of hype - even if the end product did end up being a bit of a let-down. As for the HHH/Lesnar/Heyman storyline "saving them until Summerslam"... that's pretty much an afterthought now. Nobody is talking about that anymore.


----------



## Choke2Death

The third hour is why they will not get any ratings close to this any time soon, I think.


----------



## Starbuck

Best-In-The-World said:


> Insane rating! Awesome! Seems like AJ/Bryan/Punk/rock drew?


Everything drew. I'm not expecting this to be a case of 2 or 3 big segments raking in around 1mil+ to bump the numbers. I'm expecting this to be a case of sustained viewership with slight bumps for the bigger segments but nothing too drastic. There's no way they would be able to pull off a number this impressive if it was the former imo. At least I don't think so. Ah well, we won't be long finding out. Then this thread will become mighty interesting lol.


----------



## chronoxiong

Holy shit at that rating! That's huge! That's awesome!


----------



## Words Of Wisdom

Starbuck said:


> Everything drew. I'm not expecting this to be a case of 2 or 3 big segments raking in around 1mil+ to bump the numbers. I'm expecting this to be a case of sustained viewership with slight bumps for the bigger segments but nothing too drastic. There's no way they would be able to pull off a number this impressive if it was the former imo. At least I don't think so. Ah well, we won't be long finding out. Then this thread will become mighty interesting lol.


Lol I'm getting the popcorn ready for Mark wars. I'm very happy with the rating, really good for the WWE, and maybe Vince will realize to keep these viewers and sustain good ratings, is to keep the product interesting, and unpredictable. Huge success for the WWE for the 1000th raw.


----------



## Alco

Mother of ratings :cool2


----------



## totoyotube

absolutely sick rating


----------



## D.M.N.

Hmmm, I'm unsure if anything actually broke 7 million. The reason I say that is because it is not likely people would tune out from 21:20 to 22:00 and then from 22:20 to 22:55, ie. everything is likely to be high without any major peaks or troughs.


----------



## Starbuck

D.M.N. said:


> Hmmm, I'm unsure if anything actually broke 7 million. The reason I say that is because it is not likely people would tune out from 21:20 to 22:00 and then from 22:20 to 22:55, ie. everything is likely to be high without any major peaks or troughs.


Yeah I'm starting to think the same. The only OMFG DAT GAIN is going to be at 9PM for all those who forget the 8PM start and didn't tune in until late. The rest I'm expecting to be pretty even tbh with a few peaks here and there.


----------



## iMMORTALTNA

why the hour 3 did less than hour 2 ? i don't get it :|


----------



## Starbuck

iMMORTALTNA said:


> why the hour 3 did less than hour 2 ? i don't get it :|


I'd score them about even tbh. It isn't really that big of a difference. And check back on Thursday when the breakdown comes out lol. You won't be long finding out. Just look for whatever group of marks marking or raging throughout the thread lol.


----------



## Words Of Wisdom

Brodus clay and dude love getting DEM Ratings! That's what raw needed


----------



## Starbuck

Personally I attribute the whole thing to Hand Henry. What a guy. What a guy.


----------



## JasonLives

The hour ratings were:

Hour 1 : 3.48
Hour 2 : 3.95
Hour 3 : 4:09

Overall : 3.84


----------



## RatedR10

I expected a number in the high 3's, low 4's...but fuck, even my mouth dropped at this. HUGE number. Insane!


----------



## totoyotube

JasonLives said:


> The hour ratings were:
> 
> Hour 1 : 3.48
> Hour 2 : 3.95
> Hour 3 : 4:09
> 
> Overall : 3.84


damn not a 4? Im dissapointed. BUt still a kick ass rating


----------



## Starbuck

JasonLives said:


> The hour ratings were:
> 
> Hour 1 : 3.48
> Hour 2 : 3.95
> Hour 3 : 4:09
> 
> Overall : 3.84


Hour 1 prevented it from being a 4.0 then. Whatever. It's still impressive as fuck.


----------



## Vyed

Pwtorch..



> -Raw drew an average household rating greater than 4.0 last night during the two usual hours, and the final hour averaged greater than 4.0 without any rounding. More details coming soon.


----------



## D.M.N.

JasonLives said:


> The hour ratings were:
> 
> Hour 1 : 3.48
> Hour 2 : 3.95
> Hour 3 : 4:09
> 
> Overall : 3.84


And that's why I prefer looking at viewership, because a 3.95 rating for example can differ week-on-week.

Viewership shows the genuine increase.


----------



## Vyed

> WWE Raw on Monday, July 23 recognizing 1,000 episodes scored a WrestleMania-level 3.84 rating for all three hours (3.48 first hour, 3.95 second hour, and 4.09 final hour). The regular two hours averaged to a 4.02 rating.
> 
> Looking at the standard two hours, it was the first time Raw topped a 4.0 in three years dating back to June 22, 2009 when WWE offered a commercial-free episode. Outside of the commercial-free Raw, it was the first time since April 13, 2009 two weeks after WrestleMania 25.
> 
> - Raw averaged 6.02 million viewers for all three hours. The standard two hours averaged 6.31 million viewers. It was the first time an episode of Raw topped six million viewers since the commercial-free episode in June 2009. Other than commercial-free, it was the first time since February 23, 2009 leading up to WM25.
> 
> Raw started with a strong average audience of 5.44 million viewers in the new first hour. That alone was the most viewers for an hour of Raw in over one year dating back to May 23, 2011.
> 
> Raw then averaged 6.32 million viewers in the second hour and stayed very even with an average of 6.30 million third hour viewers.


Still impressive.


----------



## kingfunkel

Did raw ratings go up? Yeah? CM Punk = ratings! Fair is fair if raw rates bad it's all punks fault as he's champion, let's turn the fence raw ratings were good and as punk is champion.....it's all because of him.
Now see how stupid that statement was? That's how stupid people sound when they blame the ratings fall all on CM Punk.


----------



## JasonLives

D.M.N. said:


> And that's why I prefer looking at viewership, because a 3.95 rating for example can differ week-on-week.
> 
> Viewership shows the genuine increase.


Agree. A 3.8 one week can be a 4.0 the next one with the same amount of viewers.

Its an impressive number. And a 4.02 for the normal 2 hours is pretty great. 

Its now all on WWE to try and maintain some of those extra viewers. They have to start right away at 8PM next Monday. Cant start by having hour 1 be a recap/throwaway hour now after this show. They need a hot start and a hot finish.


----------



## KO Bossy

While its an impressive rating for this day and age, I'm starting to wonder just what they're going to have to do to break 4.0. As its been said, they haven't broken 4.0 in 3 years. This Raw rating was the same they did for the go home show for WM27 (3.84). And this was the 1000th episode, had over a dozen returning legends, was promoted for the past 2 months, had an extra hour and the main event was a title match with Cena cashing in his MiTB against Punk. Like, what do they have to do? Crucify Justin Bieber?


----------



## totoyotube

reminds me a bit of that goldberg episode in 98 where he won the title, yeah you did well in the ratings but you threw everything but the kitchen sink. Its gonna be hard to keep momentum after this, but right now, awesome rating. The first hour is going to be a tough on ethough


----------



## D.M.N.

*Confirmed - most watched Raw in 10 years*: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...s-debuts-third-hour-to-record-ratings/142679/


----------



## Starbuck

D.M.N. said:


> *Confirmed - most watched Raw in 10 years*: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...s-debuts-third-hour-to-record-ratings/142679/


DAT HYPE. DAT PROMOTION. DEM ATTITUDE ERA STARS.



> Reflective of the on-air numbers, social activity also exploded over the digital channels:
> 
> According to Trendrr, WWE Raw was the No. 1 program on Cable and Broadcast.
> Social activity buzz for WWE Raw bested all broadcast programs combined for the day.
> WWE accumulated 52 worldwide trends during yesterday's three-hour telecast of WWE Raw including #Raw1000, #wwe, #raw, #dx and #undertaker.
> At its peak, WWE Raw received over 9,000 tweets-per-minute, the top tweeted segment in the show's history, with the appearance of The Undertaker claiming the title of the biggest single social media moment of the show when activity spiked to more than 11,000 comments per minute.


I honestly believe a lot of those Taker tweets were due to the hilarious hood fail lol but all the same that's awesome.


----------



## Words Of Wisdom

I really can't wait for the segment breakdowns. Please come sooner lol. And wow most watched in ten years omg!


----------



## Johncena-hhh

ATTITUDE ERA STARS = THE RATINGS


----------



## KO Bossy

Johncena-hhh said:


> ATTITUDE ERA STARS = THE RATINGS


Its true. Those guys were the chief draws back then and they are the chief draws today. Say what you want about John Cena, CM Punk and the rest of the roster, they can't draw over a 3.4 by themselves these days.


----------



## Marv95

That's it? Only 3.8? With all of the hype? Like Bossy said what do they have to do to get to 4.0?

Most watched Raw in 10 years? So when the Trump Raw did a 4.5 how many viewers did that equal? What about the 15th anniversary which did a 4.4(wasn't that a 3 hour show)?


----------



## AthenaMark

> We don't have the rating yet, but Raw averaged 6.02 million viewers last night, which would be the biggest number in many years. The rating should be somewhere in the 4.0 to 4.2 level and the final two hours probably will fall in the 4.3 to 4.4 range and more than 6.3 million viewers. It is likely the biggest number since an episode with Donald Trump.


The Rock portions draw huge again..it must feel good to be the greatest of all time.


----------



## ecabney

D-Bry putting the company on his back=RATINGS!


----------



## AttitudeOutlaw

KO Bossy said:


> Its true. Those guys were the chief draws back then and they are the chief draws today. Say what you want about John Cena, CM Punk and the rest of the roster, they can't draw over a 3.4 by themselves these days.


Without Cena WWE would be the wrong side of 2.5. Don't disparage and overlook his drawing power.


----------



## Kabraxal

KO Bossy said:


> Its true. Those guys were the chief draws back then and they are the chief draws today. Say what you want about John Cena, CM Punk and the rest of the roster, they can't draw over a 3.4 by themselves these days.


That's because they haven't been buried by one guy for 6 years and tossed aside as inconsequential when they aren't feuding with him. The WWE doesn't want to admit it, but their pushing of Cena like a wrestling god is what has hurt their roster the most... not that they don't have a talented roster. For crying out loud, you have Bryan, Punk, Ziggler, Kidd, McIntyre, Barrett, Kofi, Orton, and quite a few guys that only show up on Superstars or FCW that can perform. They are just misused horribly because... Cena. 

I hope this Punk angle does lead to Rock/Punk because it could finally elevate someone on to Cena's level no matter how much the WWE hasn't been able to do it. Though honestly, if Rock/Punk is as good as it can be, Cena will be wishing he was on Punk's level because let's face it... Cena/Rock showed that as long as the WWE keeps Cena face, he can't be on Rock's level.

Next week will be the important show though... how does the fallout go down and who steps up to fill that extra hour. There is opportunity here.


----------



## DNoD

Good rating. Could've been better, though. Nonetheless, still a good rating.

And regarding the current generation and Cena, Punk, Bryan etc, sure they can't draw as well as others, and Cena can only draw so much but it's not just their fault.


----------



## AthenaMark

AttitudeOutlaw said:


> Without Cena WWE would be the wrong side of 2.5. Don't disparage and overlook his drawing power.


That's BS. He's been losing viewers ever since he got "mic wins" over the Rock. Even before that..he's been losing viewers for years and they've relied on special gimmicks to try to hype up Raws these days.


----------



## King_Of_This_World

AthenaMark said:


> That's BS. He's been losing viewers ever since he got "mic wins" over the Rock. Even before that..he's been losing viewers for years and they've relied on special gimmicks to try to hype up Raws these days.


You are deluded.

Cena is by far the biggest draw WWE have, when he isnt on Raw the numbers drop every single time, when he on Raw they go up again.

To even try and suggest he isnt a big draw is ridiculous. Along with Hogan, Austin and Rock, he is well up there as the biggest draw they have ever had.


----------



## Pro Royka

AttitudeOutlaw said:


> Without Cena WWE would be the wrong side of 2.5. Don't disparage and overlook his drawing power.


That's BS at its best. I hate Cena fans so arrogant and ignorant. Cena maybe the vocal of the show but thats just a disgrace of an option. The show last night only featured Cena in the mainevent so I don't think fans will stay for more than 2 hours just to watch Cena, especially that he lost a lot of viewers before, and tbh without Vince, the big push and the advertisement he gets he will be nothing. Like in the past 3 weeks, he was advertised to have a big announcement, and things like that drew people in, Storylines=Ratings.


----------



## King_Of_This_World

KO Bossy said:


> While its an impressive rating for this day and age, I'm starting to wonder just what they're going to have to do to break 4.0. As its been said, they haven't broken 4.0 in 3 years. This Raw rating was the same they did for the go home show for WM27 (3.84). And this was the 1000th episode, had over a dozen returning legends, was promoted for the past 2 months, had an extra hour and the main event was a title match with Cena cashing in his MiTB against Punk. Like, what do they have to do? Crucify Justin Bieber?


Why are you looking at the point number?

It is the viewership numbers that count and it always has been, it is the viewership numbers than advertisers look at, not the rounded up point number.

You are looking at the wrong thing. The ratings number is of no importance, the viewership is.


----------



## King_Of_This_World

Pro Royka said:


> That's BS at its best. I hate Cena fans so arrogant and ignorant. Cena maybe the vocal of the show but thats just a disgrace of an option. The show last night only featured Cena in the mainevent so I don't think fans will stay for more than 2 hours just to watch Cena, especially that he lost a lot of viewers before, and tbh without Vince, the big push and the advertisement he gets he will be nothing. Like in the past 3 weeks, he was advertised to have a big announcement, and things like that drew people in, Storylines=Ratings.


Again, you are deluded and wrong. You dont have to be a Cena fan to realise he is a major draw.

You seem to think that ratings = being a draw. You are wrong.


----------



## KO Bossy

Kabraxal said:


> That's because they haven't been buried by one guy for 6 years and tossed aside as inconsequential when they aren't feuding with him. The WWE doesn't want to admit it, but their pushing of Cena like a wrestling god is what has hurt their roster the most... not that they don't have a talented roster. For crying out loud, you have Bryan, Punk, Ziggler, Kidd, McIntyre, Barrett, Kofi, Orton, and quite a few guys that only show up on Superstars or FCW that can perform. They are just misused horribly because... Cena.
> 
> I hope this Punk angle does lead to Rock/Punk because it could finally elevate someone on to Cena's level no matter how much the WWE hasn't been able to do it. Though honestly, if Rock/Punk is as good as it can be, Cena will be wishing he was on Punk's level because let's face it... Cena/Rock showed that as long as the WWE keeps Cena face, he can't be on Rock's level.
> 
> Next week will be the important show though... how does the fallout go down and who steps up to fill that extra hour. There is opportunity here.


You're correct, of course. That's one major reason I loved Attitude so much-edginess aside, they had an incredible variety in their main event: Austin, Rock, Hunter, Taker, Foley (in all 3 personas), Kane, Big Show, Angle, Michaels, Bret...some of the all time greats in there. Each wrestler had his place on the roster, and it was well defined. Guys like Jericho, Benoit, Guerrero, Shamrock, Godfather, Val Venis, Goldust, Jeff Jarrett, Owen Hart, D'Lo, X-Pac all strongly held the mid card together, you had the Outlaws, Headbangers, the Hollys, Rock and Sock, Kane and X-Pac, Hardys, Edge and Christian, Dudleys, APA, Too Cool holding the tag division, the likes of Al Snow, Hardcore Holly, Road Dogg, Crash Holly, Bossman, and Steve Blackman heading the Hardcore division, etc. No one got too big for their britches (usually), they had a spot on the roster and they went out and showed why.

Today is a major clusterfuck of guys and aside from a couple, most of them have no clear role. Look at Cody Rhodes-tons of talent, but first he's a jobber, then in a stable with Legacy as a tag team, then is in the mid card, then looks to be getting a main event push, then he's back in the midcard, another main event push, back to midcard and then he's jobbing to Big Show...Miz is another guy-in a tag team with Morrison, midcard, huge main event push to headline a Wrestlemania, then he plummets drastically into the midcard jobbing left and right and working the Youtube preshow with Santino, now he's back up in the midcard as IC champion. What is going on with these guys?

You're also correct about the fallout next week. The event itself is always important but the booking following it is equally as crucial.


----------



## King_Of_This_World

Also, why do some of you wet your pants with excitement when WWE get a good rating?

I find it so very odd. Do you really care that much either way?


----------



## KO Bossy

King_Of_This_World said:


> Why are you looking at the point number?
> 
> It is the viewership numbers that count and it always has been, it is the viewership numbers than advertisers look at, not the rounded up point number.
> 
> You are looking at the wrong thing. The ratings number is of no importance, the viewership is.


Why would I care about what advertisers look at? This is supposed to be a wrestling show, not an infomercial with wrestling breaks (which the show kind of felt like last night, especially with that girl delivering Sonic Shakes to Lawler and Cole). 

The viewership directly relates to the point number. More people watching=higher number. I look at the point number as a general summation of how popular the show was. 3.84 is a very good number in today's age, but I am surprised because I expected it to be higher. I mean, they gave more attention to this show than 2 PPVs, and those PPV buys would have at least made them more money than cable TV.


----------



## 123bigdave

King_Of_This_World said:


> Also, why do some of you wet your pants with excitement when WWE get a good rating?
> 
> I find it so very odd. Do you really care that much either way?


+1

The only people that ratings should matter to are people involved within the f'n show!!!


----------



## Loader230

King_Of_This_World said:


> You are deluded.
> 
> Cena is by far the biggest draw WWE have, when he isnt on Raw the numbers drop every single time, when he on Raw they go up again.
> 
> To even try and suggest he isnt a big draw is ridiculous. *Along with Hogan, Austin and Rock, he is well up there as the biggest draw they have ever had.*


Bullshit. Thats not even close to true.


----------



## AthenaMark

King_Of_This_World said:


> Also, why do some of you wet your pants with excitement when WWE get a good rating?
> 
> I find it so very odd. Do you really care that much either way?


It's not that. Sometimes you need those numbers to justify pushes and why idiots like Orton and Cena get so much time and get pushed as if they were the saviors of the professional wrestling industry.


----------



## Pro Royka

King_Of_This_World said:


> Again, you are deluded and wrong. You dont have to be a Cena fan to realise he is a major draw.
> 
> You seem to think that ratings = being a draw. You are wrong.


Again why don't you realise that he's being advertised like nobody else. Vince, Best storylines, big major superstars made Cena a draw. Did I say Cena isn't a draw, I was trying to say that he was supposed to be a draw beacuse of all of this push he gets. Everything is about Cena in WWE so that is expected. But don't tell me that the show will do 2.5 if Cena wasn't there, so you're saying last Raw got that huge rating because Cena was there and if he wasn't it will be the worst ever, well that can maybe be true because there is no true star aside from Cena, and that will not happen if WWE was advertising the other wrestlers like Cena and give them the biggest push as much as they can.


----------



## Words Of Wisdom

WE care about ratings because if the ratings get better, we hope Vince and WWE keep things interesting, with more time and effort in there product. When viewership goes up, the quality of the product needs to be better as well


----------



## validreasoning

D.M.N. said:


> *Confirmed - most watched Raw in 10 years*: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...s-debuts-third-hour-to-record-ratings/142679/


so they are ignoring the trump raw then it seems, that did 6.8 million average over 2hrs, i do think its unfair to compare last night with the trump raw of course because one was commercial free


----------



## validreasoning

KO Bossy said:


> Its true. Those guys were the chief draws back then and they are the chief draws today. Say what you want about John Cena, CM Punk and the rest of the roster, they can't draw over a 3.4 by themselves these days.


they draw for a one off special sure, but put billy gunn or whoever on tv every week and see how much will they draw, even rock, hhh or taker on every week will draw fuck all after a few months, rock drew big last year but this year his highest quarter before last night didn't even hit a 3.6 (aj, bryan and punk managed a 3.61 quarter two raws ago)


----------



## English Dragon

I thought the rating system changed and this is why it looks as if ratings were much higher back in the day?


----------



## Rocky Mark

this whole "Rating system changed" is bullshit , fact is wrestling was much more popular 10-15 years ago , look at house shows and attendance numbers back then and look at them now , it's a no-brainer really ..


----------



## paulborklaserheyma

King_Of_This_World said:


> You are deluded.
> 
> Cena is by far the biggest draw WWE have, when he isnt on Raw the numbers drop every single time, when he on Raw they go up again.
> 
> To even try and suggest he isnt a big draw is ridiculous. Along with Hogan, Austin and Rock, he is well up there as the biggest draw they have ever had.


LOL...typical Cena mark.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Good rating for RAW reaching over 6 million viewers in their big night.


----------



## KO Bossy

King_Of_This_World said:


> You are deluded.
> 
> Cena is by far the biggest draw WWE have, when he isnt on Raw the numbers drop every single time, when he on Raw they go up again.
> 
> To even try and suggest he isnt a big draw is ridiculous. Along with Hogan, Austin and Rock, he is well up there as the biggest draw they have ever had.


No, he's the biggest draw of this era. There's a very large difference between that and being one of the biggest draws ever. Cena could draw virtually nothing, and as long as he draws more than others, he'll be the biggest draw of this era by default. Everyone else just happened to suck more than him. To think that he's on par with guys like Hogan, Austin and Rock is just laughable.

Read this link:

http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2012-tv-ratings/

It has all the Raws ratings of the year 2012 so far. The average ratings so far from this year is 3.15, with 4 Raws receiving below 3.0. Not even the dreaded 2009 Raws got below a 3.0, meaning that despite being a shit show, at least people watched. The last year Raw ever saw this many below 3.0 ratings was 2007. So ratings for TV are basically at their lowest in half a decade. 

In the meantime, the ratings average of Raws from 1998-2003 was never below 3.76, and from 1998-2002 the ratings average wasn't never below a 4.01. In the past 4 years for the WWE, they've been on an incredible downward decline, topping off at 3.61 and finally last year ending up at 3.28. 

So here's conclusive proof that Raws are in fact, on the whole, seriously down in ratings since Cena became the face of the company. I fully expect tons of Cena defenders to come in and tell me how the ratings don't matter and I'm being too harsh. The proof is in the ratings. Since he has become the face of the company, not as many people care about wrestling and not as many are watching.

What's next, you're gonna tell me that Cena main evented the most watched Wrestlemania ever? Tell me how that was all Cena and not Rock...

Cena is a draw, but don't think he's anywhere close to the likes of Hogan, Rock and Austin because he isn't.


----------



## vanboxmeer

Meltzer confirms that the Rock/Bryan/Punk was "through the roof" and destroyed the wedding that opened 9pm. Especially amongst teenage boys and girls. Doubled 18-49 for women during that segment and was the "biggest growth segment".

The biggest 'letdown' segment was Christian/Miz, but that followed The Rock segment.
The Slater segment actually was higher than the Lesnar/HHH segment.


----------



## Rock316AE

The Rock's (now) iconic Oompa Loompa promo did huge number as a surprise on a random segment? Bow down to the Greatest Of All Time people.


----------



## DesolationRow

KO Bossy said:


> While its an impressive rating for this day and age, I'm starting to wonder just what they're going to have to do to break 4.0. As its been said, they haven't broken 4.0 in 3 years. This Raw rating was the same they did for the go home show for WM27 (3.84). And this was the 1000th episode, had over a dozen returning legends, was promoted for the past 2 months, had an extra hour and the main event was a title match with Cena cashing in his MiTB against Punk. Like, what do they have to do? Crucify Justin Bieber?


Well, to be honest, Raw would have cleared the 4.0 rating mark with no trouble at all if not for the first hour, which dragged the overall three-hour-plus telecast down a little bit. It's still the most viewed Raw in ten years. An astonishing feat.


----------



## Hazaq

D.M.N. said:


> 20:00 to 20:04 - Opening
> 20:04 to 20:06 - Mr McMahon segment
> 20:06 to 20:20 - DX segment
> 20:20 to 20:21 - Raw 1000 previews
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 20:24 to 20:31 - JR; Six-Man Tag Team match entrances
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 20:34 to 20:39 - Six-Man Tag Team match
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 20:42 to 20:43 - Touts
> 20:43 to 20:44 - Charlie Sheen live
> 20:44 to 20:47 - AJ and Layla backstage
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 20:50 to 20:55 - Swagger vs Clay
> 20:55 to 20:57 - DX and Trish backstage
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 21:00 to 21:11 - The Wedding of AJ and Daniel Bryan
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 21:14 to 21:29 - Bryan, Punk and Rock segment
> --> commercial [4 minutes]
> 21:33 to 21:38 - Christian vs The Miz
> --> commercial [4 minutes]
> 21:42 to 21:46 - Christian vs The Miz
> 21:46 to 21:48 - Charlie Sheen live
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 21:51 to 21:52 - Raw 1000 moment
> 
> 
> *21:52 to 22:04 - HHH, Lesnar, Heyman, Steph segment
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:07 to 22:09 - Touts
> 22:09 to 22:10 - WWE 13 preview
> 22:10 to 22:12 - Raw 1000 moment
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:15 to 22:24 - Slater vs Lita
> *
> 
> 22:24 to 22:26 - Bryan recap and interview
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:29 to 22:30 - WWE's 100,000,000 social media follower
> 22:30 to 22:32 - Raw 1000's famous catchphrases
> 22:32 to 22:34 - Ryder, Mene Gene, Cena and Rock backstage
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:37 to 22:45 - Kane and Undertaker reunion
> 22:45 to 22:46 - Be a Star promo
> --> commercial [4 minutes]
> 22:50 to 22:52 - Charlie Sheen live
> 22:52 to 22:56 - Cena and Punk entrances
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:59 to 23:14 - Cena vs Punk
> 
> _Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8GunZMOfhw_
> 
> Let the mark wars begin....



Q8 and Q9 placement is really weird. So HHH/lesnar was already over by 4 minutes into that quarter? Rest is just Tout, WWE 13, Raw 1000 and commercial crap? WTF?


----------



## DesolationRow

Hazaq said:


> Q8 and Q9 placement is really weird. So HHH/lesnar was already over by 4 minutes into that quarter? Rest is just Tout, WWE 13, Raw 1000 and commercial crap? WTF?


That whole segment's placing really made me scratch my head.


----------



## Hazaq

Indeed, I willing to bet top of the hour 2 did poorly.


----------



## Punked Up

Next week I predict 3.1 for hour 1, 3.4 for hour 2 and 3.3-3.5 for hour 3. After that - 3.2 range for a while, they'll go from there.


----------



## Rock316AE

Meltzer said that The Rock segment did monster numbers in specific demos and was the biggest growth of the show("through the roof" as he said). The Cena/Punk actually LOST viewers from what Dave says UNTIL the run in from The Rock and Show. Cena/Punk match lost viewers from the segment with Taker and Kane. From what Dave said, Stephanie/HHH/Heyman did decent, same with Taker/Kane but it wasn't "through the roof" in both cases. Slater's payoff was a big success and grew after the top of the hour. The lowest quarter did around 3.5.


----------



## scrilla

Rock316AE said:


> The Rock's (now) iconic Oompa Loompa promo did huge number as a surprise on a random segment? Bow down to the Greatest Of All Time people.


except that means Danielson and AJ's wedding drew the number not Dwayne.


----------



## BrosOfDestruction

Oompa loompa doopity ding, you look like a troll from lord of the rings = RATINGS. :lmao


----------



## Rock316AE

BrosOfDestruction said:


> Oompa loompa doopity ding, you look like a troll from lord of the rings = RATINGS. :lmao


Imagine The Rock calling Mae Young's son a Oompa Loompa - 10 million viewers on the spot with Twitter exploding forever from overload. Don't forget who his father is...:rocky 






Classic.


----------



## zxLegionxz

Rock vs Mark Henry at Wrestlemania with his son as the referee=2.5 million buys


----------



## JasonLives

Rock316AE said:


> The Cena/Punk actually LOST viewers from what Dave says UNTIL the run in from The Rock and Show. Cena/Punk match lost viewers from the segment with Taker and Kane.


Bullshit. Meltzer doesnt have any minute by minute ratings. And the ME was a as D.M.N put up like this :

22:52 to 22:56 - Cena and Punk entrances
--> commercial [3 minutes]
22:59 to 23:14 - Cena vs Punk + Rock/Big Show run in


So we got Quarter 12 and Overrun. 
With the way Meltzer usually spins things he means Quarter 12 had less viewers then The Undertaker match. Which is no big suprise since that quarter was Charlie Sheen, entrances to the ME and two commercial breaks. But it didnt contain Cena Vs. Punk match. The overrun doing big goes to all four guys and people expecting a big closing angle.
Without minute by minute numbers nobody can say when the ratings shot up.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Big numbers. Well done, WWE.

They got the big angle seen by 6 odd million people. Just brilliant.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Good to see Daniel Bryan, AJ, CM Punk and The Rocks segments drew in most of the viewers.


----------



## D.M.N.

validreasoning said:


> so they are ignoring the trump raw then it seems, that did 6.8 million average over 2hrs, i do think its unfair to compare last night with the trump raw of course because one was commercial free


Correct, the Trump Raw is - quite rightly in this case actually - being ignored as it was commercial free.



vanboxmeer said:


> The Slater segment actually was higher than the Lesnar/HHH segment.





Hazaq said:


> Q8 and Q9 placement is really weird. So HHH/lesnar was already over by 4 minutes into that quarter? Rest is just Tout, WWE 13, Raw 1000 and commercial crap? WTF?





DesolationRow said:


> That whole segment's placing really made me scratch my head.


Which is the ONLY reason that Lesnar/HHH (Q9 which Meltzer is looking at) was lower than Slater (Q10).

They should have took a break during HHH's entrance, allowing them to run the majority of Q9 ad-free until 22:12.


----------



## Kurt 'Olympic Gold

BrosOfDestruction said:


> Oompa loompa doopity ding, you look like a troll from lord of the rings = RATINGS. :lmao


Exactly.


----------



## Kurt 'Olympic Gold

vanboxmeer said:


> *Meltzer confirms that the Rock/Bryan/Punk was "through the roof" and destroyed the wedding that opened 9pm. *Especially amongst teenage boys and girls. Doubled 18-49 for women during that segment and was the "biggest growth segment".
> 
> The biggest 'letdown' segment was Christian/Miz, but that followed The Rock segment.
> The Slater segment actually was higher than the Lesnar/HHH segment.


Not surprising, Rock is the best.



Rock316AE said:


> The Rock's (now) iconic Oompa Loompa promo did huge number as a surprise on a random segment? Bow down to the Greatest Of All Time people.


----------



## Jammy

This is just massive for a guy like Bryan, doesn't matter what you think of him. He is getting sustained TV exposure on a massive level, hope they dont drop the ball. His segment with The Rock was wonderful and deserved monster numbers. I really really hope they use all of this to create a star.


----------



## D.M.N.

https://twitter.com/TedOnTV/status/227884812403367936



> Looking at just "regular" 9-11 portion most watched since May 2002 (excl comm free eps) at 6.3M viewers. Best 18-49 since December '07 (3.1M)


Looking at Raw's ratings in May 2002, it seems it is the most watched since the May 6th, 2002 episode, which coincidentally was the first Raw under the WWE name. 

For old time sakes, this is what happened on that show: http://www.onlineworldofwrestling.com/results/raw/020506.html



> KICKOFF: Announcement of "Get the F Out" Campaign
> WWE WOMENS TITLE: Jazz w/Steven Richards defeats Trish Stratus
> WWE HARDCORE TITLE madness
> BACKSTAGE: The nWo
> IN THE RING: The new World order + Ric Flair
> EUROPEAN TITLE: Spike Dudley vs William Regal
> BACKSTAGE: Ric Flair & Arn Anderson
> EARLIER TODAY: Booker T
> BACKSTAGE: Ric Flair
> BACKSTAGE: Undertaker + nWo
> MATCH: Brock Lesnar w/Paul Heyman defeats Shawn Stasiak
> BACKSTAGE: The Undertaker
> 
> IN THE RING: Hulk Hogan + The Undertaker
> TAG MATCH: Rob Van Dam & Jeff Hardy defeats Eddie Guerrero & Booker T
> INTERVIEW: The Coach & Terri
> BACKSTAGE: Ric Flair & Arn Anderson
> SWIMSUIT CHALLENGE: Terri & Molly Holly
> BACKSTAGE: Ric Flair + Jacky
> BACKSTAGE: Ric Flair + Debra + Bradshaw
> BACKSTAGE: Undertaker
> MAIN EVENT: XPac / Scott Hall / Big Show vs Bradshaw / Steve Austin / Ric Flair - no contest


----------



## ThePhenomRises

> Reflective of the on-air numbers, social activity also exploded over the digital channels:
> 
> According to Trendrr, WWE Raw was the No. 1 program on Cable and Broadcast.
> Social activity buzz for WWE Raw bested all broadcast programs combined for the day.
> WWE accumulated 52 worldwide trends during yesterday's three-hour telecast of WWE Raw including #Raw1000, #wwe, #raw, #dx and #undertaker.
> At its peak, WWE Raw received over 9,000 tweets-per-minute, the top tweeted segment in the show's history, *with the appearance of The Undertaker claiming the title of the biggest single social media moment of the show when activity spiked to more than 11,000 comments per minute.*


GOAT at work. :cool2




Starbuck said:


> I honestly believe a lot of those Taker tweets were due to the hilarious hood fail lol but all the same that's awesome.


Aww, don't be mad 'cos your boy Trips had his ass handed to him by Taker at 3 different WMS... 

JK.


----------



## validreasoning

KO Bossy said:


> * This Raw rating was the same they did for the go home show for WM27 (3.84).* And this was the 1000th episode, had over a dozen returning legends, was promoted for the past 2 months, had an extra hour and the main event was a title match with Cena cashing in his MiTB against Punk. Like, what do they have to do? Crucify Justin Bieber?


same rating NOT the same viewership, that raw did 5.6 million viewers average over the 2hrs, monday nights raw did 6.3 million viewers average over the normal 2 hours so thats quite alot more viewers

only the trump raw (which did 6.8m average over 2hrs) beat out the normal 2hrs of last mondays show this past 5 years, i only have the info going back to 2007 but i know for a fact that the trump raw was the most watched raw since the 2002 draft show (March 25, 2002) in terms of total viewers

most watched raws since summer 2007 (just the normal 2hrs of 9-11pm to make things easier even though the 3hrs average last monday beat out every 2hr show last 5 years except trump raw as well)

1. trump raw 6/22/2009 6.8 million 
2. 1000th raw 7/23/2012 6.31 million
3. 15th anniversary raw 12/10/2007 6.12 million
4. post NWO raw 2/23/2009 6 million
5. pre NWO raw 2/16/2009 5.97 million 
6. post trump raw 6/29/2009 5.96 million
7. post mania 25 raw 4/6/2009 5.94 million
8. pre trump raw 6/15/2009 5.9 million
9. post summerslam 2009 raw 8/24/2009 5.86 million
10. post EC raw 2/21/2011 5.85 million
11. wwe draft 4/13/2009 5.82 million


----------



## Starbuck

ThePhenomRises said:


> Aww, don't be mad 'cos your boy Trips had his ass handed to him by Taker at 3 different WMS...
> 
> JK.


I'll just leave this here. 










As for the already ongoing mark wars lol, I'll just say this. CM Punk, after this weeks show, has well and truly been given the ball. Like somebody else pointed out, HE ended the show over everybody else. It's all on Punk now, and his booking of course. But I have a feeling he's going to get a proper shot this time. If they do this right and treat him like the big deal they want us to believe that he is, then this is it for him. Judging by what we've heard here, a HUGE number of people saw what went down during the overrun. Over 6 million people. One complaint from everybody has been that WWE doesn't use their older stars to give the spotlight to the newer ones. Well they used Rock here to do just that. Punk had all those eyeballs on him. Rock won't be on the show next week but Punk will. CM Punk is now the hook. It's on him. Of course, Cena is there which will help but they are going to have to promote this as all about Punk, not Cena. 

If he's going to complain about being overlooked etc then they're going to have to have him closing shows and doing what he wasn't doing before; headlining as the star of the show. If it works, there you go, they will have a legit new star on their hands. They weren't ready for what happened last year but I'd like to think some measure of thought has gone into this. This will be Punk's proper run with the ball. What I want to see next week is him portrayed as the huge deal they will be expecting us to believe he is. I also want him to cut a promo explaining himself, on his own, and I want to see a big number for that segment. I want to see CM Punk, on his own, without Cena, without Rock, without HHH, without Vince, pulling in huge numbers like he should after this. If that happens, maybe I'll have some faith that this was the right move to make. If not, then I really don't know what to say tbh. What can you say? If people don't tune in to see this, to see the aftermath, all those extra people who were watching then what can you say?


----------



## The-Rock-Says

"Cena and Rock have been main eventing PPV's over me" "Not anymore"

*HHH Vs Brock Lesnar main events SummerSlam*


----------



## Starbuck

The-Rock-Says said:


> "Cena and Rock have been main eventing PPV's over me" "Not anymore"
> 
> *HHH Vs Brock Lesnar main events SummerSlam*


That's why I think the WWE title match should now main event Summerslam. Trips/Lesnar won't be hurt at all if it takes place in the middle of the show or wherever. It's a special attraction match. Whether it takes place in the middle or at the end, people will still pay to see it. Neither Brock or HHH need to be portrayed as huge deals either because they already ARE huge deals. Punk, however, isn't at that level and the only way he's going to get there is if he starts backing up what he says. It will be beyond stupid if he says that he has been overlooked so he turned his back on everybody only to continue to get overlooked lol. Let, what I assume will be a triple threat with Punk/Cena/Show, close out Summerslam. It won't hurt HHH/Brock at all.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

By that logic, CenaVsRock at WM 28 shouldn't of main evented over the title.


----------



## Starbuck

The-Rock-Says said:


> By that logic, CenaVsRock at WM 28 shouldn't of main evented over the title.


Don't know where you're getting that from. I'm talking about Summerslam. HHH/Lesnar is a huge match but it isn't Rock/Cena big and it isn't Wrestlemania. Also, they have officially pronounced Punk as the man of the moment after Raw. He was never that during the RTWM and they didn't try to tell us that he was either. I'd like to think that the ending of Raw was a statement of intent and if it is then Punk should take top billing. If it was a statement of intent that Raw will be all about Punk going forward then they should follow through and make that the case.


----------



## KrazyGreen

Kurt 'Olympic Gold said:


> Not surprising, Rock is the best.


The Rock is the G.O.A.T. Daniel Bryan looks like a goat, quite a difference.


----------



## DesolationRow

I did hold on to an optimistic feeling that they were going to use the 1,000th episode and its main event/overrun to put Punk over--really for the first time as WWE Champion, aside from Chris "Catapult" Jericho working with him and putting him over during Wrestlemania season and at Wrestlemania and Extreme Rules--and WWE did that, though I'm naturally at least healthily concerned that in that same moment they may have pointed to hurting his booking since he's now a heel and we all know heels can't have any moments of intelligence/foresight/courage/fortitude/dominance, at least not when interacting with John "Shall Overcome" Cena. 

It certainly is all on CM Punk now, they finally gave him the chance to simply stand out as a true star, not just a "fighting WWE Champion," which they've clearly regarded as only minimally worthwhile. It's also on WWE to capitalize on this and not fuck it up. It's in their interest to not. This is the guy they have on the ads and cover for the WWE 13 video game and he has a DVD coming out in a couple of months. A powerful villain is more compelling to people in most cases than a weak one (which is one reason I afford Miz so much credit for his ability to stand alongside Rock and Cena and carry his end of the program and more in the WM27 build-up, and at least WWE finally depicted him as downright cunning, which aided him greatly). 

Patience is also required, and based on how long Punk's been champion already I'm also solidly optimistic on this score, too. That added first hour (which, lol, I did completely forget about in my analysis with *Starbuck* over what they should book for next week, too... if _we_ are forgetting about it, how many more casual fans are?) is going to harm them as far as the overall rating to the show goes. Most wrestling outlets will probably begin posting the overall three-hour rating and viewership, followed by the rating and viewership for the 9-11 hours. Even on this enormously hyped Raw this week the early hour gave the overall three-hour rating an elbow to the teeth. The key will be seeing how Punk does, opposite Cena at first and then as they separate once again from one another, away from him. I hope they have Orton return and feud with Punk again in a more back-and-forth affair this time, and even more than that, it would be grand to see face Triple H/heel Punk work Survivor Series together with Trips coming back for the last Raw in October (which is on Punk's birthday, haha) after going back completely to his behind-the-scenes WWE job following Summerslam. 

If the plan is Rock/Punk at The Royal Rumble (which is a safe bet) and if Punk has turned heel in part to secure the match with Austin at Wrestlemania after having "turn[ed] the intensity up" as Austin verbally demanded, Punk should be a completely, 100% "made man" by Road to Wrestlemania season and early spring, and then we can see view how his drawing power is or is not affected. In any event, he will, barring some kind of bizarre calamity, be viewed as a legitimate top-tier capital-S Star for the remainder of his WWE career, which creates stunning opportunities for him but frankly even more importantly for WWE and its fans. Taker, Triple H, Rock and Austin aren't going to be around forever, it is now time to start admitting at least a couple of new "1's"--not #2's, but 1Bs and 1Cs to Cena's 1A. Even if that change does not come with sweeping improvements in WWE's business, it can at least, with no limitations, be engendered in the eyes and minds of the audience through the sheer, unadulterated power of perception and execution.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Bryan deserves high rating for his promo segments. Dudes brilliant of late. 

He's like Kurt Angle of 2000.(without the winning of championships) You know, the massive geek.


----------



## Starbuck

Punk/Trips round II at Survivor Series, *Deso*? You really see that happening? I don't know. I think Brock takes Trips out at Summerslam and that's him until the RTWM. Punk's turn does suddenly put Austin/Punk back on the table though and if it is, he _will_ be a made man from working back to back programs with Rock and Austin. There's no way he can't be lol but the first hurdle is how they book him against Cena and it's a mighty big hurdle indeed.

EDIT - You know I just saw something that might work regarding HHH/Punk actually. The closing image of Brock/Punk/Heyman at the end of Summerslam. They form an alliance, maybe after Brock helps Punk retain or something. Brock goes away again and Heyman sticks around to manage Punk for the next few months. HHH returns around Survivor Series and there you have it, your S.Series main event, HHH/Punk.


----------



## DesolationRow

I think Triple H vs. Punk could very well happen, if for no other reason than for lack of any strong, credible babyfaces with whom Punk can feud between Night of Champions time, when he's presumably done with Cena, and January. Unless of course they have Cena and Punk feud all the way to Hell in a Cell in climactic fashion, which... _Could_ happen. Perhaps it'll be Show/Cena/Punk at Summerslam, Punk retains, then it's Cena vs. Punk in Boston at NoC, Punk retains but Cena gets some moral victory afterward or whatever, feud heats up and it gets blown off at Hell in a Cell. If that is the plan, it would buy them plenty of time to build somebody else or turn somebody (like a Bryan or whoever) for Survivor Series/TLC time. Of course, having Punk work three PPVs in a row with Cena is perilous because as we all know by now, Cena cannot go more than two PPVs in a row without getting his win. Show could take teh fall at Summerslam, though, there could be some extremely shoddy finish at NoC to piss Cena/whatever fans he actually has in his hometown and then the capper would be Punk outsmarting and out-sadism-ing Cena inside the Cell (lol, I can't believe I'm even talking about Hell in a Cell this way... they probably should scrap the PPV after the End of an Era match at Wrestlemania, but on the contrary, they'll see that match as having boosted HIAC's prestige and importance as a gimmick match to perhaps even increase buys year vs. year for that PPV). That would put Punk over with an almost minimal amount of damage done to Cena, with only one "clean" loss to Punk at Hell in a Cell. 

I think Trips/Punk II is much more realistic now that Punk's heel, though. On one hand Triple H might not return until RTWM time but I can see Vince become antsy when Monday Night Football season is at its peak in the middle of fall and wanting Trips to work wtih Punk for at least a solid month. But again, that is a bit off in the distance at this point in time. All I know is I'd certainly like to see Triple H/Punk again, with no more vague, ambiguous "I'm sort of a tweener face, but I'm a complete douchebag asshole, too"/"Well I'm going to outshoot you, you shooting shitter shooter"/"Oh yeah? Well, you and Vince only dig bodybuilders," crap. Just a hot, heavy babyface legend Triple H vs. dastardly heel WWE Champion CM Punk. It would be cool if Punk were so well-booked that his crimes against humanity in WWE draw Triple H back out early from rehabilitating his broken body following Summerslam, which is the perfect precondition to letting Punk go over Triple H at Survivor Series or wherever, maximizing heat on Punk and sympathy for the fallen legend he's tormenting. 

I also love the idea of Punk and Brock both being "Paul Heyman guys," and clearly you do, too, haha. Once Brock exits after halfway crippling Triple H at Summerslam, Heyman can indeed form an alliance with Punk and right there you have a mighty catalyst to bring Triple H back into Punk's world. Excellent thinking, there, *Starbuck*.

Argh, why do I build up my expectations through forays into wishful fantasy booking at times like these?


----------



## Starbuck

DesolationRow said:


> I think Triple H vs. Punk could very well happen, if for no other reason than for lack of any strong, credible babyfaces with whom Punk can feud between Night of Champions time, when he's presumably done with Cena, and January. Unless of course they have Cena and Punk feud all the way to Hell in a Cell in climactic fashion, which... _Could_ happen. Perhaps it'll be Show/Cena/Punk at Summerslam, Punk retains, then it's Cena vs. Punk in Boston at NoC, Punk retains but Cena gets some moral victory afterward or whatever, feud heats up and it gets blown off at Hell in a Cell. If that is the plan, it would buy them plenty of time to build somebody else or turn somebody (like a Bryan or whoever) for Survivor Series/TLC time. Of course, having Punk work three PPVs in a row with Cena is perilous because as we all know by now, Cena cannot go more than two PPVs in a row without getting his win. Show could take teh fall at Summerslam, though, there could be some extremely shoddy finish at NoC to piss Cena/whatever fans he actually has in his hometown and then the capper would be Punk outsmarting and out-sadism-ing Cena inside the Cell (lol, I can't believe I'm even talking about Hell in a Cell this way... they probably should scrap the PPV after the End of an Era match at Wrestlemania, but on the contrary, they'll see that match as having boosted HIAC's prestige and importance as a gimmick match to perhaps even increase buys year vs. year for that PPV). That would put Punk over with an almost minimal amount of damage done to Cena, with only one "clean" loss to Punk at Hell in a Cell.
> 
> I think Trips/Punk II is much more realistic now that Punk's heel, though. On one hand Triple H might not return until RTWM time but I can see Vince become antsy when Monday Night Football season is at its peak in the middle of fall and wanting Trips to work wtih Punk for at least a solid month. But again, that is a bit off in the distance at this point in time. All I know is I'd certainly like to see Triple H/Punk again, with no more vague, ambiguous "I'm sort of a tweener face, but I'm a complete douchebag asshole, too"/"Well I'm going to outshoot you, you shooting shitter shooter"/"Oh yeah? Well, you and Vince only dig bodybuilders," crap. Just a hot, heavy babyface legend Triple H vs. dastardly heel WWE Champion CM Punk. It would be cool if Punk were so well-booked that his crimes against humanity in WWE draw Triple H back out early from rehabilitating his broken body following Summerslam, which is the perfect precondition to letting Punk go over Triple H at Survivor Series or wherever, maximizing heat on Punk and sympathy for the fallen legend he's tormenting.
> 
> I also love the idea of Punk and Brock both being "Paul Heyman guys," and clearly you do, too, haha. Once Brock exits after halfway crippling Triple H at Summerslam, Heyman can indeed form an alliance with Punk and right there you have a mighty catalyst to bring Triple H back into Punk's world. Excellent thinking, there, *Starbuck*.
> 
> Argh, why do I build up my expectations through forays into wishful fantasy booking at times like these?


Both of us tend to get carried away which is why I'm reeling myself in right now lol. It all falls on this upcoming Raw. That is going to tell us off the bat how they are going to book him. I'm prepared for and expecting WWE shitty heel booking 101 and even worse than that, WWE shitty heel booking against John Cena. But maybe just maybe they'll surprise us. I will say this though, there wouldn't be a better path for any guy to receive on their way to superstardom that going over/facing John Cena, Triple H, The Rock and Stone Cold in the space of a few months. If the stars align for Punk here he'll be flying lol.


----------



## samizayn

D.M.N. said:


> *Confirmed - most watched Raw in 10 years*: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...s-debuts-third-hour-to-record-ratings/142679/


Spectacular viewership #! They didn't even have to strip Edge to his underwear this time!


But seriously, this Monday was kind of like an 'open house' for me personally. I have a lot of family and friends that stopped watching in the mid 00's or earlier and watched this one because of the hype of it being 1000 and everything. They wouldn't have been the only ones (clearly) to do this, and luckily WWE put on a superb show. Perfectly booked with enough returning legends to get everyone excited but also with enough current stars to show what WWE of today is truly about. Now, pretty much all of them want to continue watching. Good job WWE. I'm not saying every show has to be the 1000th, but if they approach every episode with as much sense and logic as they did this (and they can, it is very much possible) then it's only upwards from here.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

If they are looking CM Punk to go all out full heel, and he does the shooting shite again, then it's going to be hard for him to stay heel. The fans will eat that shit up, and Cena will just be booed in every match/segment they have. 

This will be hard for WWE.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

DesolationRow said:


> I think Triple H vs. Punk could very well happen, if for no other reason than for lack of any strong, credible babyfaces with whom Punk can feud between Night of Champions time, when he's presumably done with Cena, and January. Unless of course they have Cena and Punk feud all the way to Hell in a Cell in climactic fashion, which... _Could_ happen. Perhaps it'll be Show/Cena/Punk at Summerslam, Punk retains, then it's Cena vs. Punk in Boston at NoC, Punk retains but Cena gets some moral victory afterward or whatever, feud heats up and it gets blown off at Hell in a Cell. If that is the plan, it would buy them plenty of time to build somebody else or turn somebody (like a Bryan or whoever) for Survivor Series/TLC time. Of course, having Punk work three PPVs in a row with Cena is perilous because as we all know by now, Cena cannot go more than two PPVs in a row without getting his win. Show could take teh fall at Summerslam, though, there could be some extremely shoddy finish at NoC to piss Cena/whatever fans he actually has in his hometown and then the capper would be Punk outsmarting and out-sadism-ing Cena inside the Cell (lol, I can't believe I'm even talking about Hell in a Cell this way... they probably should scrap the PPV after the End of an Era match at Wrestlemania, but on the contrary, they'll see that match as having boosted HIAC's prestige and importance as a gimmick match to perhaps even increase buys year vs. year for that PPV). That would put Punk over with an almost minimal amount of damage done to Cena, with only one "clean" loss to Punk at Hell in a Cell.
> 
> I think Trips/Punk II is much more realistic now that Punk's heel, though. On one hand Triple H might not return until RTWM time but I can see Vince become antsy when Monday Night Football season is at its peak in the middle of fall and wanting Trips to work wtih Punk for at least a solid month. But again, that is a bit off in the distance at this point in time. All I know is I'd certainly like to see Triple H/Punk again, with no more vague, ambiguous "I'm sort of a tweener face, but I'm a complete douchebag asshole, too"/"Well I'm going to outshoot you, you shooting shitter shooter"/"Oh yeah? Well, you and Vince only dig bodybuilders," crap. Just a hot, heavy babyface legend Triple H vs. dastardly heel WWE Champion CM Punk. It would be cool if Punk were so well-booked that his crimes against humanity in WWE draw Triple H back out early from rehabilitating his broken body following Summerslam, which is the perfect precondition to letting Punk go over Triple H at Survivor Series or wherever, maximizing heat on Punk and sympathy for the fallen legend he's tormenting.
> 
> I also love the idea of Punk and Brock both being "Paul Heyman guys," and clearly you do, too, haha. Once Brock exits after halfway crippling Triple H at Summerslam, Heyman can indeed form an alliance with Punk and right there you have a mighty catalyst to bring Triple H back into Punk's world. Excellent thinking, there, *Starbuck*.
> 
> Argh, why do I build up my expectations through forays into wishful fantasy booking at times like these?


The Punk/HHH idea would be a perfect way for Punk to go over HHH "clean", while not hurting HHH one bit. He breaks HHH down even more at SVS and puts him out seemingly permanently. Hell tbh, I'm not sure what HHH would need to do at WM. Rock/Cena is there. Punk/Austin is another (unless Austin can't work it, in which case HHH would fit nicely here), and Taker/Brock to round out all the big stars/matches. HHH could have an undercard feud/match with someone like Barrett or Sandow, but I think for the benefit of Punk's heel run, he should put HHH out as long as possible. Maybe HHH comes back for Summerslam next year, beats Punk for the title (which he will regain at some point after losing it to Rock), gets the title back at NOC by some cheap means, and then the rubber match at Hell in a Cell which Punks wins in a similar fashion to how HHH beat Austin at NWO01. 

But as you said, it's all wishful thinking. Not like WWE would think this deep in this day and age. Punk being in a power stable, working a feud and match with Rock going toe to toe with him, and then beating Austin at Wrestlemania 29 alone would make him a made man. The HHH stuff would be extra, but would be some good shit for Punk if they went through with it.

But I'll believe it will happen when I see it happen.


----------



## Starbuck

That's why getting over Cena will be the first and probably biggest hurdle. Any heel feuding with Cena becomes the face because half the fans refuse to get behind him lol. A freshly turned heel should be kept as far away from John Cena and his booking as possible. Once they get past that it should be smooth sailing and especially if they do have legends in HHH, Rock and Austin lined up for him next.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

A returning Brock Lesnar got Cena over going into ER has the clear fan fav.

At ER you heard a few loud Cena sucks chant at the start of the match, but 2 mins in - it had stopped.

Punk will just have to try his best to get the crowd to really dislike him.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

If they really wanted to go extreme with Punk, after everything I just mentioned... Wrestlemania 30, Punk ends the streak. If everything else doesn't make him one of the greatest/most hated heels of all time, this would do it.


----------



## Starbuck

The-Rock-Says said:


> A returning Brock Lesnar got Cena over going into ER has the clear fan fav.
> 
> At ER you heard a few loud Cena sucks chant at the start of the match, but 2 mins in - it had stopped.
> 
> Punk will just have to try his best to get the crowd to really dislike him.


That's because Lesnar fucking destroyed him. Punk isn't going to be that type of heel. He doesn't have the sheer physical presence to pull that off. Cena legit got the tar beat out of him and that turned the fans. It's a rare one off occasion. That match was something special and so unique. 



Obis said:


> If they really wanted to go extreme with Punk, after everything I just mentioned... Wrestlemania 30, Punk ends the streak. If everything else doesn't make him one of the greatest/most hated heels of all time, this would do it.


Lol, no. Streak won't ever end and besides, Mania 30 is Cena/Taker. It's obvious.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Punk will have to bring his shot gun to WM to beat Taker. Actually anyone facing Taker at WM will.


----------



## Starbuck

Yep. It's amazing how every year the streak has just grown in hype, stature and importance not to mention that every year it takes more and more to keep Taker down lol. The next guy to face him should keep a shotgun under the ring just in case, haha.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Do a mankind and pin him with a folk lift......he'd probably still kick out.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Lol, no. Streak won't ever end and besides, Mania 30 is Cena/Taker. It's obvious.


Actually forgot all about Taker/Cena with all this Punk talk. 

But yeah, Taker/Cena is for WM30 and didn't think Punk ending the streak was happening, nor do I want it to, but just throwing it out there.


And yeah, Lesnar was just a fucking asshole who had no passion for the business, and due to the fact they played that on-screen it made him a very hated heel right off the bat that even Cena haters couldn't really get behind. I couldn't even get behind Lesnar 100%, though I can't lie and say I didn't enjoy watching him beat Cena within an inch of his life. But it was grueling, and made Lesnar pretty fucking dispicable and unlikebable to the vast majority of his fans. He went from

But Punk does have a passion for the business and after everything that's happened it wouldn't feel right if they all of a sudden made it seem like he doesn't care about anything except money like Lesnar, and I don't think the fans would buy it. Punk can be an asshole and get heat, but it will be a very difficult task to turn Cena into a fan favorite against him. We'll see.


----------



## Starbuck

The only way to beat Taker is to put a hood over his head. TAKER JOBS TO HOODS.


----------



## Rock316AE

Punk is just going to look like a fool doing all these promos complaining(he half already in this AJ storyline), last year it was "I'm not a main eventer!! blah blah", now, "My title run is irrelevant!! blah blah". What's next for him? To cry that he doesn't win the Rumble every year? It's almost becomes a comedy character and comes off whiny and childish. 

And even if he's doing it, Lesnar vs HHH is the main event of Summerslam, Brock Lesnar is the big selling point, he's main eventing no matter what, so he looks like an even bigger fool. They need different direction if they want this thing to be something reliable and not a mess like last year. It's only a matter of time until Cena takes the belt anyway, if not at Summerslam, at NOC, it's happening, and clean.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

The only person taking the belt off Punk I think is Rock at the Rumble. Now Punk has turned, it gives him a whole new set of people to have feuds with and it gives him excuses to retain the belt. He attacked the Rock, no way are they not settling it at the Rumble.


----------



## DesolationRow

Starbuck said:


> Both of us tend to get carried away which is why I'm reeling myself in right now lol. It all falls on this upcoming Raw. That is going to tell us off the bat how they are going to book him. I'm prepared for and expecting WWE shitty heel booking 101 and even worse than that, WWE shitty heel booking against John Cena. But maybe just maybe they'll surprise us.* I will say this though, there wouldn't be a better path for any guy to receive on their way to superstardom that going over/facing John Cena, Triple H, The Rock and Stone Cold in the space of a few months. If the stars align for Punk here he'll be flying lol*.


Haha... Yes, I'm reeling myself back right now, too. But to the bolded, yes, this is precisely correct! After over half a year of working with guys who were so undeniably beneath him in the WWE pecking order, the next six months or nine months would be astronomically huge for Punk, if he were to feud with/going over John Cena, Triple H, The Rock and Stone Cold. It appears that this is finally his time to shine. But again, we'll have to see what they do as soon as Raw opens up next week. Punk should flat-out state that Raw is now his show, and combine that line of thinking with a WWE version of his "The Devil Exists" promo from ROH and you have must-see TV right off the bat.



greendayedgehead said:


> Spectacular viewership #! They didn't even have to strip Edge to his underwear this time!
> 
> 
> But seriously, this Monday was kind of like an 'open house' for me personally. I have a lot of family and friends that stopped watching in the mid 00's or earlier and watched this one because of the hype of it being 1000 and everything. They wouldn't have been the only ones (clearly) to do this, and luckily WWE put on a superb show. Perfectly booked with enough returning legends to get everyone excited but also with enough current stars to show what WWE of today is truly about. Now, pretty much all of them want to continue watching. Good job WWE. I'm not saying every show has to be the 1000th, but if they approach every episode with as much sense and logic as they did this (and they can, it is very much possible) then it's only upwards from here.


Thank you for this story. There's no denying that Raw 1,000 was a gigantic success. It will be interesting to see how many older viewers who got out of watching will now return on a semi-regular basis. Sounds like it worked for many of your family and friends, though, so that is a good building block.


----------



## DesolationRow

*Obis*, good thoughts and thanks. 

I think what CM Punk is going to have to become is a new version of Edge and maybe with a hint of Brock Lesnar added. There was a match Punk had with Cena in January 2011 to main event a Raw where, toward the end, Punk kind of just physically dissected him with submissions and it looked like Cena was almost legitimately passing the fuck out. (I'd search for a video if I didn't have to run off in a minute.) They need Punk to be as savvy and as smart and as cunning and as despicable as possible for him to keep his heat while feuding with Cena. It speaks volumes about how screwed up the WWE landscape is, really, when the top face is the most difficult foe for heels to feud with if they want to remain hated. 

*Starbuck*'s enduring point about Punk's heel turn being inevitable as he is the Cult of Personality (look at the song lyrics) needs to come to fruition, too. One thing most people don't like and tend to feel dirty over is being used by someone. Punk needs to make it crystal clear that for the last 13 months, since The Shoot, he's been using every single fan for his own ends. Hell, he never really contradicted his Shoot wherein he lambasted the fans who were booing Cena/cheering him as being part of the diseased problem. That has to be remembered. He worked us for all we were worth because The Devil Exists.

And I'm :lmao at the Taker hood videos. Goodness gracious. 

Would be priceless if Lesnar USED THE HOOD to nearly destroy Undertaker at Wrestlemania. It's his kryptonite!


----------



## Green Light

WHERE DEM BREAKDOWNS AT


----------



## The-Rock-Says

DAT DAVE MELTZER WILL REPORT THEM LATER TODAY, BRAH.


----------



## Rock316AE

Overrun did 4.4 which is a good number but with the show doing a 4.1 average, this is not that great. Especially when according to Meltzer Cena/Punk lost viewers at the start and got them back with all the run ins from The Rock and Show. Lowest quarter was 3.5.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

The-Rock-Says said:


> The only person taking the belt off Punk I think is Rock at the Rumble. Now Punk has turned, it gives him a whole new set of people to have feuds with and it gives him excuses to retain the belt. He attacked the Rock, no way are they not settling it at the Rumble.


I think they'll break up his title reign, I think even WWE wouldn't consider the same person holding for over a year, I think Cena will win clean in his 'hometown' (you wouldnt think it huh) for a 'feel good' moment only for them to settle the score inside Hell in a Cell where Punk regains it. 

If the goal is Austin at WrestleMania than dropping the title to Rock is fine but if its not I could see Punk retaining against Rock with the possible help of Lesnar.


----------



## Starbuck

Rock316AE said:


> Overrun did 4.4 which is a good number but with the show doing a 4.1 average, this is not that great. Especially when according to Meltzer Cena/Punk lost viewers at the start and got them back with all the run ins from The Rock and Show. Lowest quarter was 3.5.


I'd go back and look at when the match actually started because as we discussed the other day, their timing for some of the segments on this show was a bit whack. The wedding only lasted about 10 mins and then went to commercial iirc. Trips/Brock/Heyman/Steph started at 9.50PM and was over at around 10.05PM which is just fucking stupid as hell when you think about it lol. I can't remember but what if Cena/Punk started after a commercial or something and that's when people tuned out? Where the fuck is *DMN* lol?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

All I know is Punk/Cena started maybe a couple of minutes before the turn of the hour, right after the commercial break. I don't see how it's possible that the match and the run-in by Rock after could actually be split into one losing viewers and one gaining, unless Meltzer does have minute-by-minute ratings after all. Q12 probably lost viewers off of Quarter 11, as Quarter 11 had Undertaker for the majority of it while Quarter 12 was filled with ads and just the entrances for the Punk/Cena match (plus maybe the first couple of minutes of the match).


----------



## robertdeniro

Starbuck said:


> I'll just leave this here.


This would have been an awkward moment if it happened at Wrestlemania 28 lol.


----------



## Starbuck

robertdeniro said:


> This would have been an awkward moment if it happened at Wrestlemania 28 lol.


:lmao :lmao :lmao Oh Jesus no. That would have been fucking awful had it happened at Mania. I'm pretty sure HHH, HBK and the entire arena would have pissed themselves. It's still making me laugh now every time I look at it lol.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Undertaker vs. The Hood WM29?


----------



## D.M.N.

Starbuck said:


> I'd go back and look at when the match actually started because as we discussed the other day, their timing for some of the segments on this show was a bit whack. The wedding only lasted about 10 mins and then went to commercial iirc. Trips/Brock/Heyman/Steph started at 9.50PM and was over at around 10.05PM which is just fucking stupid as hell when you think about it lol. I can't remember but what if Cena/Punk started after a commercial or something and that's when people tuned out? Where the fuck is *DMN* lol?





D.M.N. said:


> 20:00 to 20:04 - Opening
> 20:04 to 20:06 - Mr McMahon segment
> 20:06 to 20:20 - DX segment
> 20:20 to 20:21 - Raw 1000 previews
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 20:24 to 20:31 - JR; Six-Man Tag Team match entrances
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 20:34 to 20:39 - Six-Man Tag Team match
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 20:42 to 20:43 - Touts
> 20:43 to 20:44 - Charlie Sheen live
> 20:44 to 20:47 - AJ and Layla backstage
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 20:50 to 20:55 - Swagger vs Clay
> 20:55 to 20:57 - DX and Trish backstage
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 21:00 to 21:11 - The Wedding of AJ and Daniel Bryan
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 21:14 to 21:29 - Bryan, Punk and Rock segment
> --> commercial [4 minutes]
> 21:33 to 21:38 - Christian vs The Miz
> --> commercial [4 minutes]
> 21:42 to 21:46 - Christian vs The Miz
> 21:46 to 21:48 - Charlie Sheen live
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 21:51 to 21:52 - Raw 1000 moment
> 21:52 to 22:04 - HHH, Lesnar, Heyman, Steph segment
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:07 to 22:09 - Touts
> 22:09 to 22:10 - WWE 13 preview
> 22:10 to 22:12 - Raw 1000 moment
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:15 to 22:24 - Slater vs Lita
> 22:24 to 22:26 - Bryan recap and interview
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:29 to 22:30 - WWE's 100,000,000 social media follower
> 22:30 to 22:32 - Raw 1000's famous catchphrases
> 22:32 to 22:34 - Ryder, Mene Gene, Cena and Rock backstage
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:37 to 22:45 - Kane and Undertaker reunion
> 22:45 to 22:46 - Be a Star promo
> --> commercial [4 minutes]
> 22:50 to 22:52 - Charlie Sheen live
> 22:52 to 22:56 - Cena and Punk entrances
> --> commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:59 to 23:14 - Cena vs Punk
> 
> _Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8GunZMOfhw_
> 
> Let the mark wars begin....


Yeah.

BTW:

Hour 1 - 3.48 rating / 5.439m
Hour 2 - 3.95 rating / 6.318m
Hour 3/Overrun - 4.09 rating / 6.300m

A 4.4 overrun is still 6.78 million viewers.

At the end of the day, if there are millions of casuals watching, then the overrun won't increase as much, will it?

And besides, I can't imagine Vince cares about the lack of growth, he's just hoping the majority of the 6.8m come back next week...


----------



## Starbuck

Yeah. They did the wedding and then 3 mins commercials after it to make up that quarter. They did Brock/HHH after Sheen, a commercial break and a Raw 1000 moment that lasted until 5 after 10, then finished the rest of that quarter with touts, more commercials, another Raw 1000 moment and WWE 13 stuff. Just mad placement there. Cena/Punk entrances were at 10.55 and it started right on the dot at 11pm so I don't see how Meltzer can say people tuned out at the start of the match and came back for Rock unless he has minute by minute numbers here.


----------



## Jatt Kidd

Man, The Rock just draws.


----------



## Rock316AE

I don't think enough people are talking about the possibility of CHARLIE SHEEN working a wrestling PPV. This is huge if happening. This is not a random GH or something, Sheen is a legit worldwide celebrity and can draw big with tons of mainstream attention. Personally, I would save him for WM but if they got him for Summerslam, that's still huge.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Rock316AE said:


> I don't think enough people are talking about the possibility of CHARLIE SHEEN working a wrestling PPV. This is huge if happening. This is not a random GH or something, Sheen is a legit worldwide celebrity and can draw big with tons of mainstream attention. Personally, I would save him for WM but if they got him for Summerslam, that's still huge.


Sheen doesn't have that much drawing power. The ratings for the 2nd episode of his new show plummeted in half from the first episode. He may have a lot of followers, but most aren't willing to invest in him.


----------



## D.M.N.

F4W's review: http://www.f4wonline.com/component/...ks-2013-schedule-your-questions-and-tons-more


----------



## Rock316AE

I don't know about his show but that's a different situation. For the media to know that a legit A-list celebrity is doing rasslin' is a big deal and you're going to get a lot of people, fans/haters/random people who just know him, who want to see him in this environment. Not only on PPV, but on talk shows, news, etc. If Vince was able to sign it, smart move.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

D.M.N. said:


> F4W's review: http://www.f4wonline.com/component/...ks-2013-schedule-your-questions-and-tons-more


The best parts start at 24:00 and 28:00.


----------



## Starbuck

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> The best parts start at 24:00 and 28:00.


What are they about? I'm listening and I can't believe they shat on the Hand thing. Fuck them. That was awesome lol.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Starbuck said:


> What are they about? I'm listening and I can't believe they shat on the Hand thing. Fuck them. That was awesome lol.


24:00 is them talking about how great Bryan is. 28:00 is them talking about the problems between Steph and Heyman.


----------



## Starbuck

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> 24:00 is them talking about how great Bryan is. 28:00 is them talking about the problems between Steph and Heyman.


I'll get to them eventually but :lmao at them talking about the Rock Rumble announcement. They are so spot on though lol. I didn't even catch it when watching it live but Rock said he had been informed he was getting a title shot at the Rumble, not even that he demanded it, just a week after guys were killing themselves in MITB for a title shot! :lmao


----------



## DesolationRow

Rock was doubtless made aware of his Royal Rumble WWE Championship shot by the mysterious "Board of Directors."


----------



## Choke2Death

Rock316AE said:


> I don't know about his show but that's a different situation. For the media to know that a legit A-list celebrity is doing rasslin' is a big deal and you're going to get a lot of people, fans/haters/random people who just know him, who want to see him in this environment. Not only on PPV, but on talk shows, news, etc. If Vince was able to sign it, smart move.


Lol, Sheen would probably turn up to his "match" high on coke. Would be priceless to see. :lol


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Listening to that podcast and just now I'm on the part where they're talking about Taker's entrance and I'm :lmao cause it's all true.


----------



## KO Bossy

DesolationRow said:


> Rock was doubtless made aware of his Royal Rumble WWE Championship shot by the mysterious "Board of Directors."


You know, I've been wondering if the "Board of Directors" are in any way related to "The Powers that Be" from WCW. I mean, wouldn't it be a twist if the Board of Directors showed up on Raw for a live review of the show in general and it turned out their Chairman turns around and all we see is:

:russo:russo:russo

And it turns out he was behind AJ getting hired as the GM because he's the one she's been in love with all along? And now Russo has all the power again and he goes on a huge tear through the company, giving people ridiculous gimmicks, making hundreds of "(blank) on a pole" matches and having people randomly turn heel one week just to turn face the next. Then he reveals it was all to get back at Vince McMahon for not giving him the proper credit he deserved for helping make Attitude a success? Then we have a Wrestlemania 30 main event of "Who's the Best Vince?" between Russo and McMahon?

We're talking the mother of all swerves here. I'd totally watch it.


----------



## Starbuck

They shit on Taker. Don't really know why tbh. I thought he looked fine.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> They shit on Taker. Don't really know why tbh. I thought he looked fine.


I actually agree with what they said. Taker looked to have a relatively small body to his norm, and I thought he looked pretty old from his face to his body. Age is definitely catching up. I'm sure Taker will look better by Mania, and move a lot quicker than he did on Raw (his movements in the ring, not entrance... his entrance shall never be quickened  ), but I honestly can't see him going for more than even a month at a time anymore, if even that. At least not based on what we saw on Raw.


----------



## totoyotube

Rock316AE said:


> I don't think enough people are talking about the possibility of CHARLIE SHEEN working a wrestling PPV. This is huge if happening. This is not a random GH or something, Sheen is a legit worldwide celebrity and can draw big with tons of mainstream attention. Personally, I would save him for WM but if they got him for Summerslam, that's still huge.


someone is thinking like russo


----------



## Starbuck

Well I didn't check out his body and all that. I enjoyed the segment and thought he looked fine.


----------



## Green Light

:lol They are right about Rock and the title shot, it's not like he even said he asked for it or anything but just turned up for the show and someone said hey, you've got a title match at the Rumble!


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Well I didn't check out his body and all that. I enjoyed the segment and thought he looked fine.


Was my favorite segment of the night. Loved seeing Taker and the monster pop he received. Even though I guess I've known this since seeing him last year at Mania, but his days really are numbered in the ring unless he finds the fountain of youth. His appearance on Raw made that very clear to me (if it wasn't already). 

Speaking of Raw, WE WANT THE BREAKDOWN!


----------



## Starbuck

Green Light said:


> :lol They are right about Rock and the title shot, it's not like he even said he asked for it or anything but just turned up for the show and someone said hey, you've got a title match at the Rumble!


It's fucking ridiculous and I can't believe I didn't catch it the first time around. Hey Punk, the board told me I wanted a title shot so I want a title shot....in 6 months when I have the time off to fight you....if you're even the champion by then....8*D


----------



## Rock316AE

They FORCED The Rock to take this belt lol. Apparently, it was AJ who made the decision. Seriously that's explanation according to Bryan.

They need to make Henry and his son the new "Two Man Power Trip".


----------



## Starbuck

DAT STORYTELLING

Seriously though, it's great to see Rock back and everything but so far his programs have been all flash and no substance. Vs. Miz/Truth was laughable, vs. Cena was a fucking disgrace and now this. Put some meat on the damn bones please.


----------



## Rock316AE

Nah, doesn't bother me, I enjoyed 99% of the things he did so far, he did great work and business so there's no reason to change it. It's all for fun, fans don't need a complicated storyline to enjoy watching him. Also the one year Cena storyline was maybe hypocritical for us, but the entire fanbase was invested like never before, the groups, who is going to win, the promos, the interaction and of course the match. It was iconic for this generation of wrestling. Besides, him coming back to get a title shot is completely believable, Cena did the same thing in 2008. Rock also explained that he wants to be champion again, he had a vision to be WWE champion the day after WM28.
_
ONE DAY, he will walk DOWN THAT AISLE. As the Jabroni-Beating, Pie-Eating, Trail-Blazing, Eyebrow-Raising, one vision in mind, don't need no revamping, The Rock is GONNA BE......._*WWE Champion!* ***explosion***.


----------



## ecabney

> WWE sent out a press release, evidently not realizing about the Trump show, as they proclaimed the final two hours as the most watched regular two hours of Raw in more than ten years. You could argue it was more impressive to do the number they did on a show with commercials, and it was, but it was not the highest viewing audience for Raw in ten years. There were segments on the Trump show that topped 8 million viewers while on this show nothing topped 7 million. But it was the highest except for the Trump show since WWE came back to the USA Network from Spike in 2005.
> 
> But the show was a huge success because they had 5.58 million viewers already tuned in for the start of the show, meaning all the plugs about three hours largely worked and the audience is already aware of the new start time. The rating was actually in a sense deceptively low, because they had 1.58 viewers per home, a number that dates back to the kind of levels the show did in its glory days.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, the DX segment opened so strong that the second quarter gain with the end of the segment where they tossed out Damien Sandow gained 27,000 viewers. Rey Mysterio & Sin Cara & Sheamus vs. Alberto Del Rio & Dolph Ziggler & Chris Jericho with a Charlie Sheen interview lost 395,000 viewers. Brodus Clay vs. Jack Swagger and a bunch of backstage stuff involving legends gained 326,000 viewers. It’s pretty clear this was a show where people were tuning in to see guys who aren’t on the roster.
> 
> *The wedding at 9 p.m., when you would expect several hundred thousand to tune in, gained 616,000 to a 3.91 rating. The Rock coming out with Bryan and Punk in the ring gained 575,000 viewers to a 4.28.* Christian vs. The Miz lost 895,000 viewers, but given the gains in the prior segments and that people were not watching for the current wrestlers, that shouldn’t be a surprise. The segment with HHH (his third already on the show) with Paul Heyman and Stephanie McMahon gained 334,000 viewers. Brock Lesnar’s brawl with HHH gained 90,000 viewers. The big thing to show the nostalgia lure is the Heath Slater segment with all the legends, that would be expected to lose a ton of viewers after Lesnar and HHH, gained 25,000 viewers, and did 3.99 quarter in a time slot that usually loses big, and beat both HHH/Stephanie/Heyman segment and the HHH/Lesnar brawl.
> 
> Undertaker’s return gained 293,000 viewers. And the Punk vs. Cena with Rock and Show doing the run-in gained 389,000 viewers and peaked the show with a 4.43 overrun. It’s not a gigantic overrun gain, but when the audience is already so large, and watching consistently, there probably isn’t room for a ton of gain. The last segment did a 5.6 among teenage boys.
> 
> Overall in the demos, the show did a 4.8 in teenage boys (up 41%), 3.6 in Males 18-49 (up 16%), 2.4 in Teenage girls (up 33%) and 1.8 in Women 18-49 (up 100%). You would expect the women numbers up due to the wedding, but the wedding was over by 9:15 p.m. Overall the audience was 67.1% male.
> 
> The show also had nearly triple the amount of social media activity as the week before and more than any episode of Raw in history. Usually there is more social media activity surrounding Love & Hip Hop Atlanta on VH-1 on Mondays, but this week Raw almost doubled it. Again, what that means when you spend the show telling people to do something, which no other show does to that degree, it’s something to brag about. However, nothing related to WWE was among the top searched items on Google, which is the only trending metric that has historically shown to be any kind of a predictor of business. The rating, as the last show to beat this number showed, doesn’t guarantee anything going forward, but getting Sheen for SummerSlam and shooting the Punk angle (leading to one main event) and Lesnar angle (leading to the other) in front of so many viewers should pay dividends.
> 
> The first segment with Rock, Bryan and Punk was really the most impressive if you consider the time slot it aired in. It did a 5.7 with teenage boys, 4.0 with Men 18-49, 2.3 in Teenage girls and 2.0 in Women 18-49. Plus, if you are going to start being hot, the teenage audience is the quickest to sway both up and down, because the adult audience is harder to move and more stable. They’ve had a strong increase in teenagers watching for the last month, far and away growing more than the audience itself at large.
> 
> The show also drew a sellout 18,318 fans, and about 15,000 paid in St. Louis for the show.
> 
> Far more important than the ratings, which will be forgotten in a week, is that before their largest possible audience, they shot the Punk heel turn, but did it in a way that should help next week’s number because you were left with curiosity as to why and without the interview explanation. Punk is likely to have to turn hard on the fans because he’s likely programmed back with Cena, and that dynamic not done carefully can lead to Punk being cheered. The key was screwing with the Money in the Bank, something people think they can count on, and the brilliance of messing with the people’s elbow spot. Plus, the “not helping” as opposed to turning and watching someone else do the dirty work was more effective. If he would have simply turned and done a heel move to beat Cena, the normal turn method, he would have been cheered like crazy by a decent segment of the audience. And there were a few cheers when he nailed Rrock, but they were a distinct minority.
> 
> There were 6.93 million people watching when Punk turned, 6.69 million watching when Rock announced his title challenge at the Rumble, and 6.22 million watching when HHH and Lesnar did their angle for the SummerSlam main event. So whatever the reason people came to see the show, in the key segments, they shot the most important angles for their next three major shows, as well as the angle for hooking people for next week’s show. While there were no great matches, and really, no great promos either, the show was brilliantly put together for future business.
> 
> I don’t know that this was a Pat Patterson angle idea, but in the 70s, when Pat Patterson and Don Muraco were the top two babyfaces in San Francisco, there was a heel beatdown on Patterson and instead of Muraco joining in as would be the traditional turn, he just stood there, didn’t leave, but didn’t help, which was actually far more effective. Because it was the only angle of that type for years, while the usual No. 2 face going heel is done all the time, it was more effective and memorable than most.


Dwayne getting the rub from "The Great One"


----------



## KO Bossy

Rock316AE said:


> They FORCED The Rock to take this belt lol. Apparently, it was AJ who made the decision. Seriously that's explanation according to Bryan.


Are you sure it was AJ? Are you sure its not her secret mystery lover who has been manipulating her behind the scenes to gain control over Raw by MAKING her GM? The same man who is the chairman of the faceless board of directors who put Triple H in charge and made McMahon take a leave of absence? I think its clear that there's only one man devious, calculating and evil enough to pull a genius swerve like this off....


































:russo:russo:russo:russo:russo:russo:russo



Wrestlemania 30-Vince vs Vince. BOOK IT.


----------



## Starbuck

Commence mark wars lol.


----------



## Rock316AE

Rock coming out as a surprise on a random segment - 4.3 
Rock coming out as a surprise in the overrun - 4.4 

Why not put him on a top of the hour segment or something with promotion Vince? Anyway, the most watched RAW since 2005 is still impressive, although nothing did the Rock/Cena 2011 numbers. It's the biggest they're going to get today and it took all the megastars besides a few and tons of hype and promotion. Back to reality next week...Maybe they can do it again in January, this time also bring Austin, Goldberg and Flair.


----------



## Jammy

Breakdown as expected, mostly. Nothing surprising.


----------



## Starbuck

:lmao The drop next week is going to be comical. We all know it's coming but it's still funny to think about lol. Whatever way the final number turns out, Punk needs to hit it out of the park next week. Like they said here, almost 7 million people saw that go down. 4 million is their audience for the average Raw these days with anything over 5 million being a great success. I'd like to think whatever he does next week can hit that. It almost has to tbh.


----------



## DesolationRow

DAT BREAKDOWN...

Haha, kind of an interesting breakdown in some ways. Definitely a resounding success all the way around, even with the bizarro placements for certain segments.



Starbuck said:


> DAT STORYTELLING
> 
> Seriously though, it's great to see Rock back and everything but so far his programs have been all flash and no substance. Vs. Miz/Truth was laughable, vs. Cena was a fucking disgrace and now this. Put some meat on the damn bones please.


It's definitely a drawback for his angles because he's so rarely around. Not giving them an excuse but it does make things a bit difficult for them. That being said, they still should have cooked up something much more clever than "I've been given a title shot at The Royal Rumble, lulz, don't ask me why." 

Nevertheless, I'm happy that he's going to be there and it's thrilling for me in the moment as my Royal Rumble 2013 tickets just arrived in the mail! :cool2


----------



## Jammy

> The rating was actually in a sense deceptively low, because they had 1.58 viewers per home, a number that dates back to the kind of levels the show did in its glory days.


Massive success.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Good to see so many people were watching Bryan and Punk.

Also, Court Baurer talked to Alvarez and said that Steph doesn't exactly hate Heyman. I transcribed it in the "Steph call it as it is" thread.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Excellent breakdown. The fact after that Miz/Christian drop they only kept gaining and gaining and gaining was great. 

Highest-Lowest segments by my calculations (DMN can do his stuff and/or put them in order when he makes his post):

1) Punk vs. Cena w/ Show and Rock run-ins+Punk heel turn (6,930,000)
2) Rock/Punk/Bryan Segment (6,694,000) 
3) Undertaker's return helping Kane beat down jobbers (6,541,000)
4) Heath Slater vs. Lita and Legends (6,248,000)
5) HHH/Lesnar fight (6,223,000)
6) Heyman/Stephanie/HHH segment (6,133,000)
7) Bryan/AJ Wedding (6,119,000)
8) Christian vs. Miz (5,799,000)
9) Damien Sandow/DX (5,572,000)
10) DX (5,545,000)
11) Clay/Swagger and other shit (5,503,000)
12) 6-man tag (5,177,000)

Over 6-million people saw THE ONE MAND BAAAAAAAAAAND do his thang.


----------



## kokepepsi

So 6million people say that horrible HHH/Step family jerkoff display and Lesnar get bitched out.

Hello to 305k summerslam buys

inb4 sheen vs bryan which adds 50k


----------



## Words Of Wisdom

Rock is a massive draw. But overall great breakdown. Brodus clay proving why he is a massive draw


----------



## AthenaMark

Rock, Bryan, and Punk getting the most impressive rating on the whole show. No surprise there.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

AthenaMark said:


> Rock, Bryan, and Punk getting the most impressive rating on the whole show. No surprise there.


I used to joke that Bryan is the next Austin, but it's clear that Punk is the next Austin and Bryan is the next Rock.


----------



## chronoxiong

Awesome breakdown. The marketing strategy worked and fans tuned in for the segments that mattered the most. I don't expect huge ratings for next week but hope to see it stay in the mid 3.0 range.


----------



## ecabney

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> I used to joke that Bryan is the next Austin, but it's clear that Punk is the next Austin and Bryan is the next Rock.


D-Bry is clearly being groomed as the number two heel of the company moving forward. 

Punk is obviously the number one heel at the moment.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Oh and thanks to Undertaker, 6.5 million people now know of the existence of Drew McIntyre, Curt Hawkins, Tyler Reks, Camacho, Hunico, and Jinder Mahal.

YOU'RE WELCOME!

Edit: They also now know Taker's one true weakness.


----------



## AthenaMark

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> I used to joke that Bryan is the next Austin, but it's clear that Punk is the next Austin and Bryan is the next Rock.


Daniel Bryan's success in 2012 is more impressive than anything I've seen in pro wrestling in a long time. When you think about where he was in January 2011 and now look at him..fans are begging for a face turn and he's the heel everyone loves to hate and chant with. It's fun shit. 

Saying that..CM Punk better have one of the best promos of his career, Indy or WWE, after how the spotlight is gonna be on him. He can't fuck this up and do the whiny and sarcastic goofy shit. It better be on point. This kind of stuff makes careers and turns popular stars into legends.


----------



## DesolationRow

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> *I used to joke that Bryan is the next Austin*, but it's clear that Punk is the next Austin and Bryan is the next Rock.


I joked that Bryan was the next Austin back in February because of a silly thread in the Smackdown section but then "YES!" became the new "WHAT?" and I've begun to wonder if I wasn't onto something.


----------



## Shazayum

Rating next week is probably going to be like a 3.2. Nothing is really expected except the fallout from the Punk heel turn. Neither Brock nor Rock are advertised. If they want the ratings to be up for at least the next few weeks, they'd better do a hell of a job building this angle.


----------



## Words Of Wisdom

WWE and Vince need to keep fresh and exciting story lines an ongoing thing right now. Now I know it was a special episode of RAW, but if you want to keep some of these viewers come back, they don't want to see brodus clay, and other nonsense and recaps. Even if you want to keep a small portion of this audience that was apart of the 1000th RAW, show needs to start off with a bang, fuck the recaps. Have some interesting Feuds going on, keep this Punk situation interesting. Please don't resort to just throwing the usual on, make some of these extra viewers continue to watch, even a small improvement is better than nothing.


----------



## RatedR10

Nearly 7 million people witnessed the Punk turn. I guarantee there'll be people who aren't regular viewers tuning in next week to watch and see the explanation. Nice hook by WWE.

The breakdown is crazy. Random gains in the middle of the hour. To my count from what I read, EVERY segment in the 10-11 PM hour gained from the Lesnar/HHH/Heyman/McMahon angle, to the Slater/Legends pay-off to The Undertaker's return. Fucking crazy. This has to be a definite success in the eyes of WWE with these numbers.


----------



## A-C-P

Nothing really surprising from the breakdwon show was destined to do big viewer #s. Like Starbuck said next week is the real test.

IT did surprise me that both segments with The Rock were "surprises" and scheduled at the top of one of the hours


----------



## apokalypse

Daniel "Ratings" Bryan


----------



## Bob the Jobber

Daniel needs to do something along the lines of the old Rock trademark _"this ain't sing along with the champ"_ line when the crowd starts chanting with him. All that did was make the crowd love Rock even more. They wanted Rock to be a face more than anything I've ever seen in wrestling. Yes, that went completely off topic.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Daniel "Ratings" Bryan at it again.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

Starbuck said:


> :lmao The drop next week is going to be comical. We all know it's coming but it's still funny to think about lol. Whatever way the final number turns out, Punk needs to hit it out of the park next week. Like they said here, almost 7 million people saw that go down. 4 million is their audience for the average Raw these days with anything over 5 million being a great success. I'd like to think whatever he does next week can hit that. It almost has to tbh.


lol the drop is going to be huge.


----------



## Words Of Wisdom

Also I'm guessing but the first hour of next week's raw may take a slight hit because probably many viewers are forgetting or dont know it's permanent 3 hours from here on out.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Obis* has covered the numbers below, but just for consistency purposes, my post is below. I am assuming the breakdown has ignored Q12 because there is no way hour 2 averaged 6.3m with the breakdown as it is. Hence, Q12 in the below has a low number:

Quarter Hours - July 23rd, 2012
Q1 - 3.55 rating / 5.55 million
Q2 - 3.57 rating / 5.57 million
Q3 - 3.31 rating / 5.18 million
Q4 - 3.52 rating / 5.50 million
Q5 - 3.91 rating / 6.12 million
Q6 - 4.28 rating / 6.69 million
Q7 - 3.63 rating / 5.80 million
Q8 - 3.83 rating / 6.13 million
Q9 - 3.89 rating / 6.22 million
Q10 - 3.99 rating / 6.25 million
Q11 - 4.25 rating / 6.54 million
Q12 - 3.65 rating / 5.62 million
Overrun - 4.43 rating / 6.93 million

Obviously a brilliant breakdown, which does not need to be said, really. Onto the next bit:

Q1 - *5.55 million (0.00 gain)* <-- no commercials
Q2 - *5.71 million (0.14 gain)* <-- 3 minutes stripped out; end of DX segment, Raw previews, JR; Six-Man Tag Team match entrances
Q3 - *5.52 million (0.35 gain)* <-- 6 minutes stripped out; Six-Man Tag Team match, Touts, Charlie Sheen live
Q4 - *5.87 million (0.37 gain)* <-- 6 minutes stripped out; AJ and Layla backstage, Swagger vs Clay, DX and Trish backstage
Q5 - *6.27 million (0.15 gain)* <-- 3 minutes stripped out; The Wedding of AJ and Daniel Bryan
Q6 - *6.74 million (0.05 gain)* <-- 1 minutes stripped out; Bryan, Punk and Rock segment
Q7 - *6.31 million (0.51 gain)* <-- 7 minutes stripped out; Christian vs The Miz
Q8 - *6.29 million (0.15 gain)* <-- 3 minutes stripped out; Charlie Sheen live, Raw moment, start of HHH/Lesnar segment
Q9 - *6.64 million (0.41 gain)* <-- 6 minutes stripped out; end of Lesnar/HHH segment, Touts, WWE '13 preview, Raw moment
Q10 - *6.40 million (0.16 gain)* <-- 3 minutes stripped out; Slater vs Lita, Bryan recap and interview, WWE's 100,000,000 social media follower
Q11 - *6.70 million (0.16 gain)* <-- 3 minutes stripped out; Raw 1000's famous catchphrases, Ryder, Mene Gene, Cena and Rock backstage, Kane and Undertaker reunion
Q12 - *6.11 million (0.49 gain)* <-- 7 minutes stripped out; Be a Star promo, Charlie Sheen live, Cena and Punk entrances
Q13 - *6.93 million (0.00 gain)* <-- no commercials

In order therefore:

6.93 million - WWE Championship match
6.73 million - Punk, Bryan and Rock segment
6.70 million - Kane and Undertaker reunion
6.64 million - Lesnar and HHH segment
6.40 million - Slater vs Lita
6.27 million - The Wedding

I'm going to do something more detailed later, which I will probably put into spoiler tags.


----------



## validreasoning

didn't the over-run only gain 389,000 viewers so quarter 12 should be 6.54 million


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Gaining 389,000 when there is already 6 odd million people watching pretty damn good.


----------



## D.M.N.

validreasoning said:


> didn't the over-run only gain 389,000 viewers so quarter 12 should be 6.54 million


Did you read the opening two lines of my post?


----------



## Lastier

Imagine if Henry would've been involved in the Rock/Punk/Bryan segment as well.

8 Million viewers and a 4.0+ rating guaranteed!


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Lastier said:


> Imagine if Henry would've been involved in the Rock/Punk/Bryan segment as well.
> 
> 8 Million viewers and a 4.0+ rating guaranteed!


Henry would've managed 10 million+ viewers if he was in that segment.


----------



## BANKSY

He was there in spirit for the Mae Young's son segment.


----------



## cg2916

WOW! The last overrun is mind-blowing. A 4.4 rating and almost 7 MILLION people!


----------



## AthenaMark

WrestlingforEverII said:


> lol the drop is going to be huge.


It's gonna be some funny shit


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Back to 3-4 million next week.


----------



## TheRainKing

The ratings are going to get really ugly between September and January.


----------



## validreasoning

the last two times they had specials like this ie trump raw and 15th anniversary show about 1 million viewers dropped off the next week, if that happens again ratings won't be too bad next week especially with more people watching tv next week with the olympics

football season for the first month usually sees viewership drop by 10-15%, its going to be interesting this year because raw starts before MNF not 30mins after it


----------



## Happenstan

TheRainKing said:


> The ratings are going to get really ugly between September and January.


Yep. And that's why Punk will be dropping the title to Cena REAL SOON.


----------



## gl83

How much impact will the Olympics have on Raw's rating, you think?


----------



## Da Silva

gl83 said:


> How much impact will the Olympics have on Raw's rating, you think?


None, the Olympics happen during daytime in the UK, RAW starts at 1am UK time. The only way the Olympics will affect rating is if the sports channels there aren't showing the Olympics live.


----------



## WPack911

Da Silva said:


> None, the Olympics happen during daytime in the UK, RAW starts at 1am UK time. The only way the Olympics will affect rating is if the sports channels there aren't showing the Olympics live.


In the US, NBC is doing unaired tape delayed Primetime Olympic coverage on the east coast that will affect Raw somewhat for sure. I would not read to much into Raw's rating the next 2 weeks for this reason.


----------



## HelmsFan42

Such negativity.

The only thing that matters when you look at if the "new" viewers come back is the Punk/Rock/Cena angle and whether or not it draws. WWE needs to have Punk come out at the beginning of the show and let him rip. They should also replay it at the beginning of the second hour for those who forget about the 7pm start time. Either way, he needs to have something special up his sleeve in terms of a career defining promo. 

You can't just turn heel on the Rock and Cena, on the biggest RAW of quite possibly the past 10 or so years, and not follow it up with something special.

Punk wants his moment, and this is it.


----------



## dxbender

HelmsFan42 said:


> Such negativity.
> 
> The only thing that matters when you look at if the "new" viewers come back is the Punk/Rock/Cena angle and whether or not it draws. WWE needs to have Punk come out at the beginning of the show and let him rip. They should also replay it at the beginning of the second hour for those who forget about the 7pm start time.


They shouldn't be giving people reasons for tuning in late. Right now, WWE is basically telling people "Go ahead and miss the first half of the show, we'll replay the important parts that happened, in the 2nd hour"

Or for all we know, starting next week, for the first half of the show, it's one thing,then we get another show intro to start off the 2nd half of the show(and it's basically "Raw Zone" for 2nd half of show), and the 2nd half starts off with a recap of the 1st half.

Something like that would be cool too. Didn't WWE used to do that in the 90s when they first went to 2 hours?


----------



## HelmsFan42

dxbender said:


> They shouldn't be giving people reasons for tuning in late. Right now, WWE is basically telling people "Go ahead and miss the first half of the show, we'll replay the important parts that happened, in the 2nd hour"


How is that giving them a reason to tune in late? It's pretty common that people who are casual fans are going to forget it starts at 7pm. If he rips the best promo of his career, would you want people tuning in at 8 and missing it?

Replays have a purpose. And that's one of them.


----------



## ogorodnikov

have Bryan or AJ gotten good ratings without an incredibly pathetic and desperate segment that is almost always good for viewers no matter who it is? no? okay, cya.


----------



## funnyfaces1

ogorodnikov said:


> have Bryan or AJ gotten good ratings without an incredibly pathetic and desperate segment that is almost always good for viewers no matter who it is? no? okay, cya.


Wasn't Bryan getting great ratings as champ on Smackdown?


----------



## AthenaMark

Bryan was getting higher ratings than Blandy all year. He was saddled with CM Punk on Raw who, has been a consistent ratings loser, without AJ or a Rock attachment.


----------



## Carcass

Not surprised that D-Bry did such a great job gaining viewers in the segment following the wedding.


----------



## Jammy

Wonder how all the recaps will affect the ratings.


----------



## Cliffy

terrible show.

they'll lose a ton of viewers.


----------



## D.M.N.

20:00 to 20:06 - Fire and Raw 1000 recap
20:06 to 20:19 - Opening Segment
=> commercial [3 minutes]
20:22 to 20:23 - Touts
20:23 to 20:26 - Santino vs Del Rio
=> commercial [4 minutes]
20:30 to 20:35 - Santino vs Del Rio
=> commercial [4 minutes]
20:39 to 20:43 - Clay, Vickie and Sandow segment
20:43 to 20:45 - Ziggler and Jericho recap
=> commercial [3 minutes]
20:48 to 20:50 - Bryan and AJ segment
20:50 to 20:54 - Lesnar and HHH recap
20:54 to 20:56 - Voting for Sheamus vs Bryan; Sheamus interview
=> commercial [3 minutes]
20:59 to 21:07 - Sheamus vs Bryan
=> commercial [3 minutes]
21:10 to 21:18 - Sheamus vs Bryan
21:18 to 21:20 - Opening Segment recap
=> commercial [4 minutes]
21:24 to 21:26 - Opening Segment recap
21:26 to 21:30 - Bryan, Kingston and Truth segment
=> commercial [4 minutes]
21:34 to 21:36 - Touts
21:36 to 21:41 - Kingston and Truth vs Primetime Players
21:41 to 21:42 - Punk and Cena backstage
=> commercial [4 minutes]
21:46 to 21:46 - Punk and Cena backstage recap
21:47 to 21:52 - Slater vs Orton
21:53 to 21:55 - Bryan and a Doctor
=> commercial [4 minutes]
21:59 to 22:07 - Y2J and Christian vs Miz and Ziggler
=> commercial [3 minutes]
22:10 to 22:19 - Y2J and Christian vs Miz and Ziggler
22:19 to 22:20 - Bryan and a Doctor
=> commercial [3 minutes]
22:23 to 22:25 - Touts
22:25 to 22:30 - Tensai vs Kidd
22:30 to 22:31 - Bryan and a Doctor
=> commercial [3 minutes]
22:34 to 22:39 - Lesnar and HHH recap
22:39 to 22:40 - CM Punk entrance
=> commercial [3 minutes]
22:43 to 22:51 - Cena vs Show
=> commercial [3 minutes]
22:54 to 23:06 - Cena vs Show


----------



## Ray

In b4 less then 4 mill viewers :kobe:


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

I think the first hour won't do well because most people are still used to their pattern of the show starting at 9. I know a lot of people tuned in for the first hour last week, but it was the 1000th Raw and I don't think the common person will remember it's now 3 hours for regular episodes too.


----------



## BANKSY

> => commercial [3 minutes]
> 20:22 to 20:23 - Touts
> 20:23 to 20:26 - Santino vs Del Rio
> => commercial [4 minutes]
> 20:30 to 20:35 - Santino vs Del Rio
> => commercial [4 minutes]


inb4 loss of 800,000.


----------



## dxbender

D.M.N. said:


> 20:00 to 20:06 - Fire and Raw 1000 recap
> 20:06 to 20:19 - Opening Segment*
> => commercial [3 minutes]
> 20:22 to 20:23 - Touts*
> 20:23 to 20:26 - Santino vs Del Rio
> => commercial [4 minutes]
> 20:30 to 20:35 - Santino vs Del Rio*
> => commercial [4 minutes]
> 20:39 to 20:43 - Clay, Vickie and *Sandow *segment*
> 20:43 to 20:45 - Ziggler and Jericho recap
> => commercial [3 minutes]
> 20:48 to 20:50 - Bryan and AJ segment
> 20:50 to 20:54 - Lesnar and HHH recap
> 20:54 to 20:56 - Voting for Sheamus vs Bryan; Sheamus interview
> => commercial [3 minutes]
> 20:59 to 21:07 - Sheamus vs Bryan
> => commercial [3 minutes]
> 21:10 to 21:18 - Sheamus vs Bryan*
> 21:18 to 21:20 - Opening Segment recap
> => commercial [4 minutes]
> 21:24 to 21:26 - Opening Segment recap*
> 21:26 to 21:30 - Bryan, Kingston and Truth segment*
> => commercial [4 minutes]
> 21:34 to 21:36 - Touts*
> 21:36 to 21:41 - Kingston and Truth vs Primetime Players
> 21:41 to 21:42 - Punk and Cena backstage*
> => commercial [4 minutes]
> 21:46 to 21:46 - Punk and Cena backstage recap*
> 21:47 to 21:52 - Slater vs Orton
> 21:53 to 21:55 - Bryan and a Doctor
> => commercial [4 minutes]
> 21:59 to 22:07 - Y2J and Christian vs Miz and Ziggler
> => commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:10 to 22:19 - Y2J and Christian vs Miz and Ziggler
> 22:19 to 22:20 - Bryan and a Doctor*
> => commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:23 to 22:25 - Touts
> 22:25 to 22:30 - Tensai vs Kidd*
> 22:30 to 22:31 - Bryan and a Doctor*
> => commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:34 to 22:39 - Lesnar and HHH recap*
> 22:39 to 22:40 - CM Punk entrance
> => commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:43 to 22:51 - Cena vs Show
> => commercial [3 minutes]
> 22:54 to 23:06 - Cena vs Show


Those are probably big points of show where people tuned out


----------



## D.M.N.

WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM	4719	1.5
WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM	4701	1.5
WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM	4064	1.4

Back to square one etc etc etc. Not a good drop.


----------



## Vyed

H1 - 4.064m
H2 - 4.719m
H3 - 4.701m

H1 did OK for usual standards I guess.


----------



## TheSupremeForce

Taking into account how many people watched the Olympics last night, those are good numbers.


----------



## WPack911

Very solid numbers when going up against the Olympics, the first hour did way more solid then I thought it would. They keep pulling a solid number like that from the 1st hour compared to hours 2 & 3 on average and we will see 3hr Raws for a long time to come.


----------



## Starbuck

I say those are good numbers actually, especially for the regular 2 hours. Better than I was expecting anyways tbh. I'm sure something hit over the 5 million mark, most likely the end of the show.


----------



## Vyed

> - WWE Raw on Monday, July 30 dropped off 20-22 percent in TV viewing from last week's huge audience for the Raw 1,000 episode.
> 
> Raw scored a *3.08 rating* for all three hours and 3.23 rating for the standard two hours. The overall rating was down 20 percent from Raw 1,000 and was the lowest since June 4, which led to Vince McMahon returning to WWE TV to jumpstart Raw 1,000 build-up.
> 
> Raw averaged 4.49 million viewers for all three hours and 4.71 million viewers for the standard two hours. The overall audience was down 22 percent from Raw 1,000 and smallest audience since June 4.
> 
> *Looking at the important new first hour, Raw averaged 4.06 million viewers at 8:00 p.m. EST, down from 5.44 million new first hour viewers last week. Monday's first hour did top recent first hours for three-hour Raws on April 23 and June 11, but only by 100,000 viewers compared to June 11.*
> 
> 
> 8:00 p.m. EST: 2.79 rating / 4.06 million viewers
> 9:00 p.m. EST: 3.21 rating / 4.72 million viewers
> 10:00 p.m. EST: 3.25 rating / 4.70 million viewers


First Hour of June 11 RAW with Vince Mcmahon drew 3.904m viewers.


----------



## Ray

Hour 1's really going to drag down the rating there. Great viewership for the regular 2 hours though.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

People still getting accustomed to the 8pm start time I presume, but overall the (old) normal two hours did good for today's standards. Not good though that they lost almost all the audience who watched last week.


----------



## Jammy

Lol so Punk heel turn wasn't a good enough hook for people to return after RAW 1000 and tune in for 1st hour. Mark wars? Mark wars.


----------



## Nabz™

i dont know why people are saying olympics are a factor, but in Canada we have a 5 hour difference between the olympics most events are already done and the day is done to of events, must be similar for Americans too. And in London it's around midnight time. 

I know people may watch recap stuff but still...


----------



## WPack911

Nabz™ said:


> i dont know why people are saying olympics are a factor, but in Canada we have a 5 hour difference between the olympics most events are already done and the day is done to of events, must be similar for Americans too. And in London it's around midnight time.
> 
> I know people may watch recap stuff but still...


In the US the biggest events (Swimming, Gymnastics, ect.) are being showed on unaired tape delay on NBC in prime time starting at 8PM EST. So it has a big impact.


----------



## totoyotube

WPack911 said:


> In the US the biggest events (Swimming, Gymnastics, ect.) are being showed on unaired tape delay on NBC in prime time starting at 8PM EST. So it has a big impact.


I disagree, not many people are watching the replays do to knowing the results. If they were live, sure but NBC has been doing a horrible job keeping results quite this year. but I could be wrong


----------



## AthenaMark

[email protected] rating. CM Punk coming up short again with no AJ or Rock anchor.


----------



## Quasi Juice

AthenaMark said:


> [email protected] rating. CM Punk coming up short again with no AJ or Rock anchor.


Cena and Big Show main evented, but it's Punk's fault.....


----------



## WPack911

totoyotube said:


> I disagree, not many people are watching the replays do to knowing the results. If they were live, sure but NBC has been doing a horrible job keeping results quite this year. but I could be wrong


NBC is not saying the results on their coverage until after they have aired the event, though of course in this the internet age you could find out, but only if you searched for it. Don't underestimate the Olympics, even on tape delay.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Obis said:


> People still getting accustomed to the 8pm start time I presume, but overall the (old) normal two hours did good for today's standards. Not good though that they lost almost all the audience who watched last week.


I don't recall them even mentioning that RAW was going to three hours permanently on RAW 1000. They basically treated it like a live edition of Smackdown, ake mention it maybe once and then expect viewers to know to tune in. If you don't check up on this sort of thing on the internet, I don't expect you'd be aware of the change at all. So, yeah. Not a bad rating given the circumstances.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

WPack911 said:


> NBC is not saying the results on their coverage until after they have aired the event, though of course in this the internet age you could find out, but only if you searched for it. Don't underestimate the Olympics, even on tape delay.


Yeah, the opening ceremony, which also aired on tape-delay in the US, supposedly got a pretty monster rating. So it is safe to say that yes, a lot of people in the US are tuning in to the Olympics.


----------



## TheSupremeForce

Nabz™ said:


> i dont know why people are saying olympics are a factor, but in Canada we have a 5 hour difference between the olympics most events are already done and the day is done to of events, must be similar for Americans too. And in London it's around midnight time.
> 
> I know people may watch recap stuff but still...


They estimated that better than 27 million people watched the Olympics on NBC last night in the US. It drew the highest ratings by a ridiculously wide margin.


----------



## Punked Up

Hour 1: 2.8

Hour 2: 3.2

Hour 3: 3.3

Decent rating for the 2 hour show, I guess you could call it a mild success for 3 hour RAW.


----------



## DFUSCMAN

The Olympics are the main factor. 27 million watching in the US, jeez. That's insane


----------



## Snothlisberger

totoyotube said:


> I disagree, not many people are watching the replays do to knowing the results. If they were live, sure but NBC has been doing a horrible job keeping results quite this year. but I could be wrong


They are getting the highest ratings ever.


----------



## ecabney

Hour 2 headlined by DA GAWD :jordan

:bryan


----------



## oompa_loompa

It has been confirmed again what most people already know, nobody really cares about Punk besides the people who has been with him since his high school gym days.

LOL at that drop.

Punk = Mr 2.8


----------



## Rock316AE

Huge drop as expected but I actually saw them above 5 million. They made a mistake that the entire angle was Punk, he can attack Rock, Austin and Hogan in a triple GTS, it doesn't matter. The general audience don't see him as an attraction and it's never going to happen. They needed to do the Lesnar/HHH segment in the overrun last week with Brock attacking HBK, then this week, promoting HHH's response to what Brock did last week. 

They gave away a full Big Show/Cena match this week which is the biggest match they can book from the current roster besides Orton/Cena, Show and Cena are the biggest TV draws in the company and this match probably did big. Other than that, Lesnar/HBK/HHH needs to close the program next week. They had almost 7 million potential viewers. An audience that is not going to come back at least until January 2013 if they're able to do the same hype for the 20 years RAW show. Now it's gone in a week, 3.1 is just the foreplay before the comedy against MNF. 

We need to hope for catastrophically low numbers so they can go back to 2 hours before 2013.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Considering the Olympics had 31m people watching last night in the US, the rating is good.


----------



## -Skullbone-

Rock316AE said:


> Huge drop as expected but I actually saw them above 5 million. They made a mistake that the entire angle was Punk, he can attack Rock, Austin and Hogan in a triple GTS, it doesn't matter. The general audience don't see him as an attraction and it's never going to happen.


Why will it never happen?


----------



## DesolationRow

That's really not that bad. First hour is a lamb going to slaughter, though; it's almost surprising that Hour 1 even did _that_ well.


----------



## Rock316AE

Big Dave on that Foley/Schiavone January 1999 accident we talked about a few months ago. The one that Vince is still obsessed. 



> While the big switch of audiences to see Foley win the title is much remembered, what is forgotten is that after Foley won the title, a Goldberg run-in on Nitro and Austin run-in on Raw were going on at the same time for the overrun. Goldberg saw Nitro bring its audience back, going from a 4.6 to a 6.5, taking many of those viewers back from Raw which went from a 5.9 to a 5.1. The growth of the final segment of Nitro, many returning after Foley had won the title, was an incredible 2.1 million viewers, among the biggest growth periods in history. Between the two shows on that night during the overrun, there were 8,642,000 homes and 13,827,000 different viewers watching wrestling. And keep in mind two other factors. There were only 74.5 million homes with cable on that night, compared with more than 99 million today. And going head-tohead with wrestling that night was the Fiesta Bowl game that determined college football’s national championship, which had nearly 30 million viewers.


Amazing numbers, especially with the factors of availability compared to today Meltzer mentioned. 

Goldberg/nWo doing that *2 million viewers* gain lol.

Nitro, Hollywood Hogan vs Kevin Nash WCW title with Goldberg:









VS 

RAW, The Rock vs Mankind WWF title with Austin:


----------



## Choke2Death

Okay numbers at best. 2.8 was expected with the extra hour. As was the huge drop.



-Skullbone- said:


> Why will it never happen?


Because he fears ratings? :hmm:


----------



## -Skullbone-

Choke2Death said:


> Because he fears ratings? :hmm:


Heh. Well I'm also of the belief he isn't a standalone attraction at the moment. The numbers would indicate as such.

It's a short sighted stance to take when saying someone will _never_ be a main attraction though. For goodness sakes things can change quite easily in the eyes of casuals depending on what you present them with. What's unusual is that in an era so deprived of alternatives to the top dog one would be so quick as to shut someone down who proved to be a successful commodity at least during one point in their career.

Frankly, it's a form of thinking that prevents the company from pulling the trigger on enough personalities, as well as continuing their current momentum or utilising them tastefully.


----------



## Jammy

> While the big switch of audiences to see Foley win the title is much remembered, what is forgotten is that after Foley won the title, a Goldberg run-in on Nitro and Austin run-in on Raw were going on at the same time for the overrun. Goldberg saw Nitro bring its audience back, going from a 4.6 to a 6.5, taking many of those viewers back from Raw which went from a 5.9 to a 5.1. The growth of the final segment of Nitro, many returning after Foley had won the title, was an incredible 2.1 million viewers, among the biggest growth periods in history. Between the two shows on that night during the overrun, there were 8,642,000 homes and 13,827,000 different viewers watching wrestling. And keep in mind two other factors. There were only 74.5 million homes with cable on that night, compared with more than 99 million today. And going head-tohead with wrestling that night was the Fiesta Bowl game that determined college football’s national championship, which had nearly 30 million viewers.


Holy shit! Holy shit! Holy shit!


----------



## Choke2Death

-Skullbone- said:


> Heh. Well I'm also of the belief he isn't a standalone attraction at the moment. The numbers would indicate as such.
> 
> It's a short sighted stance to take when saying someone will _never_ be a main attraction though. For goodness sakes things can change quite easily in the eyes of casuals depending on what you present them with. What's unusual is that in an era so deprived of alternatives to the top dog one would be so quick as to shut someone down who proved to be a successful commodity at least during one point in their career.
> 
> Frankly, it's a form of thinking that prevents the company from pulling the trigger on enough personalities, as well as continuing their current momentum or utilising them tastefully.


I know what you're saying, but to be fair, some people just never manage to click with the audience. Lex Luger is an example of this, they wanted to make him face of the company after Hogan left, but the audience just didn't care. We may have a similar case in our hands currently.

Hell, Cena himself has never truly clicked with the whole audience. He was extremely over at first and has always been loved by the female audience (kids joined in as his superman push started) but not all men were fans of his and slowly but surely, they turned on him. He had the misfortune of the hate bandwagon spreading _fast_ so his overness turned into "controversy" (WWE's idea) but on the other hand, he's been a consistent seller of merchandise which has kept the boat afloat somewhere in between, rather than at the very bottom or at the very top.


----------



## NearFall

Saddest thing is in all the recaps they failed to mention HBK stuff next monday and a Lesnar appearance. 

Way to go.


----------



## A-C-P

USA network is who wanted the 3 hour Raw, so I hope they are happy with these #s b/c IMO that first hour rating is going to be the norm for that hour at least for awhile.


----------



## Vyed

> [While the big switch of audiences to see Foley win the title is much remembered, what is forgotten is that after Foley won the title, a Goldberg run-in on Nitro and Austin run-in on Raw were going on at the same time for the overrun. Goldberg saw Nitro bring its audience back, going from a 4.6 to a 6.5, taking many of those viewers back from Raw which went from a 5.9 to a 5.1. The growth of the final segment of Nitro,* many returning after Foley had won the title, was an incredible 2.1 million viewers, among the biggest growth periods in history.* Between the two shows on that night during the overrun, there were 8,642,000 homes and 13,827,000 different viewers watching wrestling. And keep in mind two other factors. There were only 74.5 million homes with cable on that night, compared with more than 99 million today. And going head-tohead with wrestling that night was the Fiesta Bowl game that determined college football’s national championship, which had nearly 30 million viewers.


Thats the key part there. 2 million is a huge gain but its not the same as today. Overrun gain today is basically viewers tuning in to watch the next show post RAW. But back then in peak years, overrun was largely wrestling fans switching back and forth between RAW and nitro. After Foley won, fans switched back to nitro thats why the gain is so massive.


----------



## murder

Vyed said:


> Thats the key part there. 2 million is a huge gain but its not the same as today. Overrun gain today is basically viewers tuning in to watch the next show post RAW. But back then in peak years, overrun was largely wrestling fans switching back and forth between RAW and nitro. After Foley won, fans switched back to nitro thats why the gain is so massive.


Those 2 million had to be watching either Raw or Nitro in the first place to switch to the other show. And why were they watching?! Why were 13 million people watching that night?! 

Two years ago, when Impact was on Mondays, there were no 2 million switching channels, almost as if people cared for neither show.


----------



## dxbender

A-C-P said:


> USA network is who wanted the 3 hour Raw, so I hope they are happy with these #s b/c IMO that first hour rating is going to be the norm for that hour at least for awhile.


Considering that USA networks show that'd air at 8pm probably gets like 2M viewers, I think they're more than happy with 4M for Raw from 8-9pm


----------



## Amuroray

Goldberg was a hell of a draw


----------



## mblonde09

Rock316AE said:


> Huge drop as expected but I actually saw them above 5 million. They made a mistake that the entire angle was Punk, he can attack Rock, Austin and Hogan in a triple GTS, it doesn't matter. The general audience don't see him as an attraction and it's never going to happen. They needed to do the Lesnar/HHH segment in the overrun last week with Brock attacking HBK, then this week, promoting HHH's response to what Brock did last week.
> 
> *They gave away a full Big Show/Cena match this week which is the biggest match they can book from the current roster besides Orton/Cena, Show and Cena are the biggest TV draws in the company* and this match probably did big. Other than that, Lesnar/HBK/HHH needs to close the program next week. They had almost 7 million potential viewers. An audience that is not going to come back at least until January 2013 if they're able to do the same hype for the 20 years RAW show. Now it's gone in a week, 3.1 is just the foreplay before the comedy against MNF.
> 
> We need to hope for catastrophically low numbers so they can go back to 2 hours before 2013.


Good lord, you don't half talk a load of bollocks. The biggest match they can book from this current roster, is Cena/Punk, because Punk has usurped Orton as number two star. I doubt many people care to see Cena and Big Show face off for the millionth time and Show is no bigger a TV draw than Punk. Cena/Orton is no big deal either, due to Orton's stock diminishing considerably, him not being a TV draw, and the fact that he and Cena have barely any in-ring chemistry. Cena/Orton was played out years ago - and it was a load of shite then.


----------



## Jammy

mblonde09 said:


> Good lord, you don't half talk a load of bollocks. The biggest match they can book from this current roster, is Cena/Punk, because Punk has usurped Orton as number two name. Nobody cares to see Cena and Big Show face off for the millionth time and Show is no bigger a TV draw than Punk. Cena/Orton is no big deal either, due to Orton's stock diminishing considerably, him not being a TV draw, and the fact that he and Cena have barely any in-ring chemistry. Cena/Orton was played out years ago - and it was a load of shite then.


Cena vs a returning heel Orton will by, by far, a bigger match on RAW.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

mblonde09 said:


> Good lord, you don't half talk a load of bollocks. The biggest match they can book from this current roster, is Cena/Punk, because Punk has usurped Orton as number two star. I doubt many people care to see Cena and Big Show face off for the millionth time and Show is no bigger a TV draw than Punk. Cena/Orton is no big deal either, due to Orton's stock diminishing considerably, him not being a TV draw, and the fact that he and Cena have barely any in-ring chemistry. Cena/Orton was played out years ago - and it was a load of shite then.


You're right, but really, don't bother.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Jammy said:


> Cena vs a returning heel Orton will by, by far, a bigger match on RAW.


Why would a match we've already seen 100 times before be "by far" bigger?


----------



## Jammy

SarcasmoBlaster said:


> Why would a match we've already seen 100 times before be "by far" bigger?


Because he's returning after 60 (90?) days, a match with Cena would indicate ambiguity in his face/heel status and would generate a lot of interest.


----------



## kokepepsi

Last time Orton mainevented Raw?


----------



## ecabney

kokepepsi said:


> Last time Orton mainevented Raw?


Exactly. Lulz at ANY match involving Orton being some sort of big deal in 2012. Dude got demoted to SD!, and is practically a midcarder.


----------



## Choke2Death

Jammy said:


> Cena vs a returning heel Orton will by, by far, a bigger match on RAW.


Or better yet, heel Cena vs face Orton. It was meant to be WM27's main event with Cena turning heel during the Nexus angle. Too bad they pussied out and SuperCena was brought back to life.

If they bother giving Orton some actual angle, he can easily get back on top with Cena as the top two stars.


----------



## Pro Royka

Choke2Death said:


> Or better yet, heel Cena vs face Orton. It was meant to be WM27's main event with Cena turning heel during the Nexus angle. Too bad they pussied out and SuperCena was brought back to life.
> 
> If they bother giving Orton some actual angle, he can easily get back on top with Cena as the top two stars.


They already gave him the torch, and he couldn't reach the top again. Orton needs Trips, Vince, Steph, Shane, Celebrities, Legends, and some big names so for him to get attention and if you want the truth it has been 4 years now and he's not anywhere near the top ever since 2009, and I will love it if he proves me wrong.


----------



## kokepepsi

Breakdown
From same place as always



> In the segment-by-segment, Alberto Del Rio vs. Santino Marella lost 261,000 viewers and you shouldn’t drop in the first hour because the idea is starting low because people forget, people should be remembering steadily through that hour.
> 
> The Damien Sandow-Brodus Clay angle with Vickie Guerrero dancing gained 214,000 viewers.
> 
> Daniel Bryan and A.J. in the office and the second clip showing Stephanie McMahon beating up Paul Heyman lost 18,000 viewers.
> 
> Sheamus vs. Daniel Bryan at the top of the hour gained 521,000 viewers which sounds good but it’s still a deal where so many people tuned in at 9 p.m. out of habit that you can’t really figure out if they were tuning in because they liked what was on the air or it was simply the time they tuned in.
> 
> The stuff with R-Truth, Kofi Kingston, Bryan and A.J. taking Bryan out of the ring for a psychiatric evaluation gained 274,000 viewers. That’s good for the time slot.
> 
> Kofi Kingston vs. Titus O’Neil lost 223,000 viewers.
> 
> Randy Orton vs. Heath Slater gained 40,000 viewers.
> 
> Chris Jericho & Christian vs. Dolph Ziggler & The Miz gained 51,000 viewers which is extremely weak for the 10 p.m. slot and only did a 3.24.
> 
> Tensai vs. Tyson Kidd lost 34,000 viewers.
> 
> The third showing of the Stephanie McMahon/Paul Heyman segment lost 246,000 viewers.
> 
> John Cena vs. Big Show for the SummerSlam title shot with C.M. Punk involved gained 1,181,000 viewers to a 3.86 overrun. That was the best gaining segment in a while.


OH SHIT 1million

SHOW vs ROCK WM 30 WWE TITLE BOOK IT

lolmiz typical shit 10pm rating


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

dat overrun. dat spotlight on CM Punk.


----------



## hazuki

> Sheamus vs. Daniel Bryan at the top of the hour gained 521,000 viewers which sounds good but it’s still a deal where so many people tuned in at 9 p.m. out of habit that you can’t really figure out if they were tuning in because they liked what was on the air or it was simply the time they tuned in.
> 
> The stuff with R-Truth, Kofi Kingston, Bryan and A.J. taking Bryan out of the ring for a psychiatric evaluation gained 274,000 viewers. That’s good for the time slot.


Dat D Bryan. 









What did the opening segment drew?


----------



## Carcass

Punk vs Lawler on commentary, and mentally unstable D-Bry are bringing in those numbers. D-Bry gained 795k over two segments.


----------



## ecabney

Who knew that recaps didn't draw?









Punk drawing over a million viewers









D-Bry drawing over 750K









Who knew that these two anti-drawing indy, vanilla midget hacks could draw such huge numbers? :jordan


----------



## Pro Royka

ADR/Santino, Tensai/Tyson Kidd, Kofi/O'neal lost viewers how ironic. Who the hell wants to see ADR/Santino I mean come on, strip Santino from the title.
Tensai/Tyson is ridicules it's just something you don't want to watch, maybe Tensai/Clay will do much better and it sure will be. Kofi/O'neal another filler match that nobody is really interested in. But great overrun and great gain for DB very impressive.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Sandow drawing in dem ratings.


----------



## Jammy

LOL the overrun cannot be attributed to Punk alone, the match was promoted as Cena vs Show, if im not mistaken Punk was a surprise commentator (not sure)
But, Bryan is doing fucking great, those numbers look awesome for him. If he we're 5 inches taller, he'd be holding all titles at once.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Cena/Show with Punk on commentary bringing in dem ratings as well. And yeah, Punk was a factor (not the only factor though, as Cena/Show was plenty promoted). Sometimes surprises do have an impact on the viewership (much like Undertaker last week, as I doubt that near 300,000k plus gain in an odd quarter would be attributed to Kane or the jobbers). Without Punk I'm betting Cena/Show may have had a 600k-800k increase (which is still great, but it's no 1.1 million).

I noticed though that for the 9-11 slot they remained very consistent with the viewers, which is something interesting to think about.


----------



## Jammy

Obis said:


> I noticed though that for the 9-11 slot they remained very consistent with the viewers, which is something interesting to think about.


Dat D-Bry :bryan


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Bryan doesn't bring in dem ratings. Bryan IS DA RATINGS!


----------



## Jammy

Why is it not clear as to what the Opening segment with Punk promo + Big Show did? Did it loose viewers?


----------



## Green Light

Lol at Big Show vs. John Cena gaining over a million viewers, what is wrong with these people


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Jammy said:


> Why is it not clear as to what the Opening segment with Punk promo + Big Show did? Did it loose viewers?


The opening quarter hour can't lose viewers because it's the opening quarter hour. 

And I know people want to know how many viewers the opening segment did so we can do "Punk is/is not a draw" part one million, but all the opening viewership is really going to tell you is how many people actually remembered that RAW was going to three hours, which is honestly probably not many.

EDIT: Not saying that's why you want to know, btw, just that that is what the many people here will use the opening number for, unfortunately.


----------



## Jammy

Green Light said:


> Lol at Big Show vs. John Cena gaining over a million viewers, what is wrong with these people


At least Bryan gained 750k to counter the stupidity in this world. :bryan


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Interesting breakdown, Daniel Bryan and his segments was the backbone of RAW for the second hour and managed to draw in some viewers, good for him. Also the 1 million gain in the main event is very impressive.


----------



## Jammy

SarcasmoBlaster said:


> The opening quarter hour can't lose viewers because it's the opening quarter hour.
> 
> And I know people want to know how many viewers the opening segment did so we can do "Punk is/is not a draw" part one million, but all the opening viewership is really going to tell you is how many people actually remembered that RAW was going to three hours, which is honestly probably not many.


Well, it will provide an indication whether the Punk heel turn hook at end of RAW 1000 was strong enough to deliver strong viewership for the opening.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Jammy said:


> Well, it will provide an indication whether the Punk heel turn hook at end of RAW 1000 was strong enough to deliver strong viewership for the opening.


Except to assume that, you would also have to assume that everyone knew that RAW was starting an hour early, and that is not the case.


----------



## Jammy

Could the 3rd recap segment of Stephanie + Heyman loosing 250k factor into the 1 mil overrun? I think it did, all those viewers tuning back.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Jammy said:


> Could the 3rd recap segment of Stephanie + Heyman loosing 250k factor into the 1 mil overrun? I think it did, all those viewers tuning back.


Yeah, that seems like exactly what happened. It's probably going to become a regular thing if they keep pounding the recaps like that.


----------



## yoseftigger

No surprise. Cena is their current biggest TV draw. Big Show is also another big TV draw. No shit their match is going to draw big. Plus the match went long and was quite good for Big Show.


----------



## DesolationRow

SarcasmoBlaster said:


> The opening quarter hour can't lose viewers because it's the opening quarter hour.
> 
> And I know people want to know how many viewers the opening segment did so we can do "Punk is/is not a draw" part one million, but all the opening viewership is really going to tell you is how many people actually remembered that RAW was going to three hours, which is honestly probably not many.
> 
> EDIT: Not saying that's why you want to know, btw, just that that is what the many people here will use the opening number for, unfortunately.


Essentially what I was just thinking as I was reading over comments asking about what the opening quarter hour drew. Unfortunately, the 8:00pm start time is going to make many opening hours from here on have oddball numbers, because WWE's somehow done a rather poor job of establishing, with no ambiguity, that Raw is now a three-hour show. It was like the 1,000th episode ate up so much oxygen, the move to three hours was lost.

But, anyway... Daniel Bryan is a Ratings Dynamo! :cool2


----------



## funnyfaces1

Daniel Bryan doing what he does best: DRAW.


----------



## totoyotube

Wow, are you guys really trying to say He is a draw because of that 500k boost? That was because of the 9 pm time slot, not him XD. That 200k one is fine but the 500k he had nothing to do with


----------



## ChickMagnet12

The Big Show vs Mark Henry at Wrestlemania 29.

More buys than Cena-Rock.


----------



## Evolution

> *Sheamus vs. Daniel Bryan at the top of the hour gained 521,000 viewers which sounds good but it’s still a deal where so many people tuned in at 9 p.m. out of habit that you can’t really figure out if they were tuning in* because they liked what was on the air or it was simply the time they tuned in.
> 
> *The stuff with R-Truth, Kofi Kingston, Bryan and A.J. taking Bryan out of the ring for a psychiatric evaluation gained 274,000 viewers. That’s good for the time slot.*


These seem like conflicting statements. In my estimation Bryan doing that big of a gain in an unusual slot proves that he and Sheamus should be taking credit for that 9pm draw or at least some of it.

You'd be a fool not to think that CM Punk would somehow be involved with the Cena/Show match, having him on commentary was good because it might of kept some people watching who might normally not be interested in a Cena/Show match plus to see what he would follow up his actions last week with. Good to see that between the three of them they can pull big numbers. I'd like to see this sort of thing continue in coming weeks.


----------



## yoseftigger

Evolution said:


> These seem like conflicting statements. In my estimation Bryan doing that big of a gain in an unusual slot proves that he and Sheamus should be taking credit for that 9pm draw or at least some of it.
> 
> You'd be a fool not to think that CM Punk would somehow be involved with the Cena/Show match, having him on commentary was good because it might of kept some people watching who might normally not be interested in a Cena/Show match plus to see what he would follow up his actions last week with. Good to see that between the three of them they can pull big numbers. I'd like to see this sort of thing continue in coming weeks.


Show has always been a big TV draw. Remember that quarter hour with Johnny L and Show. Gained like a million viewers. The weeks after, Show continued to draw in them ratings. Cena is also a big TV draw.

So Cena vs Show was bound to draw big. If anything, Punk should be lucky to work with them as he hasn't done that great in the rating department.


----------



## Rock316AE

Rock316AE said:


> They gave away a full Big Show/Cena match this week which is the biggest match they can book from the current roster besides Orton/Cena, Show and Cena are the biggest TV draws in the company and this match probably did big.





> John Cena vs. Big Show for the SummerSlam title shot with C.M. Punk involved gained 1,181,000 viewers to a 3.86 overrun. That was the best gaining segment in a while.


As expected. Show and Cena are the two biggest TV draws so it's not surprising. Other than that, the Sheamus/Bryan match was in 9pm, which means all the viewers who forgot about RAW in 8pm. You're going to see this pattern now until you got almost the same audience in 8pm and 11pm. For TNA, it took almost 2 months until Impact had the same viewership for the entire show. Orton/Slater did good on random spot.


----------



## Felpent

I doubt punk had anything to do with big main event gain. Smarks love his commentary, casuals dont give a shit. He wasnt even advertised for main event, was he?


----------



## D.M.N.

Quarter Hours, July 30th, 2012
Q1 - 2.85 rating / 4.16 million
Q2 - 2.67 rating / 3.90 million
Q3 - 2.82 rating / 4.11 million
Q4 - 2.81 rating / 4.09 million
Q5 - 3.14 rating / 4.61 million
Q6 - 3.32 rating / 4.89 million
Q7 - 3.17 rating / 4.66 million 
Q8 - 3.20 rating / 4.70 million
Q9 - 3.24 rating / 4.76 million
Q10 - 3.26 rating / 4.72 million
Q11 - 3.09 rating / 4.48 million
Q12 - 3.09 rating / 4.47 million
Overrun - 3.86 rating / 5.66 million


----------



## Starbuck

Bryan was the most entertaining thing about Raw this week so those numbers are well deserved imo. Having said that, the gain at 9PM is the gain at 9PM and can't be attributed to just him and Seamus imo. But the next segment gaining is all him and that I give him full credit for. 

Shitty 10pm gain but I'm not quite sure what that means right now since it's a 3 hour show and all. Will that become standard for the 3 hour shows or can, as last week proved, big numbers be drawn with the right people? We'll see. 

Massive numbers for Cena/Show which was advertised throughout the program. I do think as somebody pointed out, the loss of people from the repeat video package then tuning back in again can be attributed to this big number as well. Not to say that Punk was a non factor, I'm sure some people were watching for him but the focus wasn't on him in this match at all except for the end. He is yet to gain any number close to that without a bigger name being involved in the same segment and until that happens I'm not giving him big amounts of credit for something it has been proven that he can't do. Having said that though, for the second week in a row now he has benefited from having lots of people see him close out the show so that can only be a good thing. I say they should stick him on at 9 or 10 next week, on his own, and we'll get a much clearer picture. As of now though I'm not completely sold that this was the right move but at least they're doing the right thing in terms of his placement on the show because like I said, whether he drew the eyeballs on him or not, they are there and they are seeing what he's doing so it's a good call imo.


----------



## Amuroray

CENA>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Show draws more then punk lol


----------



## GenocideZ

Vyed said:


> H1 - 4.064m
> H2 - 4.719m
> H3 - 4.701m
> 
> H1 did OK for usual standards I guess.


We can see pubic hair on the girl to the very right on your sig...

OT: Undertaker vs Kane Double retirement match = Record breaking attendance/ PPV buy rates.


----------



## Punked Up

Pretty good numbers. D-Bry really is pulling the nummbers, this isn't a mrk wars thin anymore. I don't think you could have a case to say that D-Bry isn't becoming a TV draw. No surprise the ME did big. That's what happens when they put two big stars in a meaningful match with a purpose, surrounding an actual, develpoing storyline. I guess you could call that a decent rating.


----------



## Cliffy

This won't sustain.

The viewership will go down slightly everyweek.


----------



## Oakue

Never mind, I see that's all ready been discussed.


----------



## JinderMahal69er

See what happens when you take mahal/mcintyre/hawkins/reks of tv, the ratings drop


----------



## Tedious

JinderMahal69er said:


> See what happens when you take mahal/mcintyre/hawkins/reks of tv, the ratings drop


These random wrestler mega mark trolls really aren't funny or original.


----------



## DesolationRow

Starbuck said:


> Shitty 10pm gain but I'm not quite sure what that means right now since it's a 3 hour show and all. Will that become standard for the 3 hour shows or can, as last week proved, big numbers be drawn with the right people? We'll see.


Not big on pointing out how much other TV programs/games/whatnot can harm Raw's viewership on a regular basis but I think Monday at 10:00pm (and shortly before, which would carry over the 10:00pm mark) was one such example where Raw was hurt by something else on TV. Roughly at 10:00pm, it was the peak of NBC's prime time videotape delay playing the diving and swimming events at the Olympics, which did astronomical numbers. 

I like your suggestion of using Punk at the top of one of the hours on his own to check out how he does, but the 9:00pm timeslot is going to receive the asterisk that the Bryan/Sheamus streetfight did this week, as doubtless a healthy number of viewers forgetting about the first hour are just showing up to join the viewers who were along for the ride in the first hour. At least for a good while, anyway.


----------



## Choke2Death

Wow, don't know why Cena and Big Show would be such a huge gain when they are never more boring than when they are against each other. (actually, Show is boring all the time)

I guess the truth remains, which is Cena being an undeniable draw.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

DesolationRow said:


> I like your suggestion of using Punk at the top of one of the hours on his own to check out how he does, but the 9:00pm timeslot is going to receive the asterisk that the Bryan/Sheamus streetfight did this week, as doubtless a healthy number of viewers forgetting about the first hour are just showing up to join the viewers who were along for the ride in the first hour. At least for a good while, anyway.


Pretty much this. 8PM is no good right now because not everyone is tuning in at that time yet. 9PM will get the big gain for the next several weeks as mentioned, and the 11pm/overrun, even if Punk was in a segment by himself and gained 1,000,000 viewers, it would just be because "people were tuning in for the next show". 

The 10PM slot is the only place Punk can do no wrong if he gained big, but that slot doesn't gain like it used to (besides when there are 2-3 huge names in it like Taker/HBK/HHH earlier this year). 

Also for this week, in addition to what I said already, I'm sure Punk's commentary also kept people from tuning out and bringing the overall gain up due to people wondered "What would Punk do?" Personally I was hoping he'd drop another big "pipebomb" like last year. He kinda did it with Lawler but I was hoping for something a little more hard-hitting by the end. Oh well, perhaps we'll get something in the next month or so. 

Also hopefully Punk calls Rock "Dwayne" a lot more in the future. The reaction on here for it in the Raw thread was hilarious. :lmao (And I don't normally like the whole "calling them by their real name if they have a character name" thing, but people's reactions were beyond hilarious).


----------



## AthenaMark

yoseftigger said:


> No surprise. Cena is their current biggest TV draw. Big Show is also another big TV draw. No shit their match is going to draw big. Plus the match went long and was quite good for Big Show.


Cena hasn't been their "biggest" draw in awhile. One of the segments with Big Show did terrible a few weeks ago. Hell, Johnny L and Big Show outdrew that shit.


----------



## Rock316AE

It's not about a one time deal, it's about a pattern, and Punk proved time after time that he's not an attraction. He can be over with your core audience that are coming to the arenas and that can bring a wrestler to certain level, especially today when the depth in the talent pool is at an all-time low. But to draw the masses, you need that imaginary IT factor and the look of a star to be able to captivate the people, it's the same "turn heads" presence, Punk is not that guy and with everything they gave him, everything you can give to a wrestler for over 6 years, will never be that guy.

I just checked some old 2009 breakdown, if you remember the Big Show/Cena/Miz angle from that time period, the one before Miz's US title run. That program did big numbers all over the show. Besides Orton who was on fire, and proven draws like Show and Cena, I didn't remember the Miz angle doing that good. After that you got regular people like Batista, HBK, HHH and Vince. A Big Show/John Cena match actually main evented the big commercial free Trump show. And with the buyrate they drew for NWO 2012, 202k worldwide(biggest of the year from the regular shows besides Brock), it's not a surprise why they're going back to it almost every year.


----------



## Choke2Death

Wasn't the biggest gain in that Trump episode the LMS match between Orton and HHH? Orton truly was a draw back then. From being the top merchandise seller to bringing 4.1 ratings and main eventing Wrestlemania. (although the latter was kind of disappointing but the tired crowd was one big reason for that)


----------



## Rock316AE

Yes, peak of the show was Orton/HHH LMS.


----------



## Jammy

Rock316AE said:


> It's not about a one time deal, it's about a pattern, and Punk proved time after time that he's not an attraction. He can be over with your core audience that are coming to the arenas and that can bring a wrestler to certain level, especially today when the depth in the talent pool is at an all-time low. But to draw the masses, you need that imaginary IT factor and the look of a star to be able to captivate the people, it's the same "turn heads" presence, Punk is not that guy and with everything they gave him, everything you can give to a wrestler for over 6 years, will never be that guy.


Kinda agree about Punk, though his storylines can draw. About the turn heads though, Bryan has consistently been doing good numbers since Smackdown. Hopefully, he becomes a dependent TV draw. He just has to be entertaining.
Hard to believe Bryan becoming the turn heads guy, maybe he just has IT.


----------



## Starbuck

The thing with Bryan, to me, is that he's actually getting something interesting, different and entertaining to do which is why people want to watch him. The build to the wedding, the wedding itself, the promo with Rock and now the shrink examination this week. I'm not a DB mark by any means but I watched everything he did Monday because it was fun and they were good segments. If they keep giving him things to do then people will keep watching. If they don't and they start sticking him in random squash matches etc, then people won't watch. The same thing applies to practically everybody else on the roster give or take the legends/legit stars lol. 

It's going to take a while for us to determine what the regular gain is for 9PM though but that will come over time. Same goes for 10pm as well under this new 3 hour format.


----------



## Choke2Death

I understand that. I personally always respected Bryan in relation to the whole "indy midget" thing that goes around here. Bryan is an excellent in-ring wrestler who pays tribute to the great Chris Benoit with his signature moves and comes across as respectable in person, not to mention has actually been _entertaining_ during his push this year. Plus he's actually been pulling some good numbers in breakdowns every now and then. Almost a complete 180 to his buddy, Phil. Bryan may have some annoying marks, but he certainly doesn't deserve to catch the same fire as Phil.

Before somebody asks why I call Phil by his real name. I do it because YOU (not you, specifically) keep asking about it. Also because he enjoys the use of people's real names when he's supposed to stay in character.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Choke2Death said:


> I understand that. I personally always respected Bryan in relation to the whole "indy midget" thing that goes around here. Bryan is an excellent in-ring wrestler who pays tribute to the great Chris Benoit with his signature moves and comes across as respectable in person, not to mention has actually been _entertaining_ during his push this year. Plus he's actually been pulling some good numbers in breakdowns every now and then. Almost a complete 180 to his buddy, Phil. Bryan may have some annoying marks, but he certainly doesn't deserve to catch the same fire as Phil.
> 
> *Before somebody asks why I call Phil by his real name. I do it because YOU (not you, specifically) keep asking about it*. Also because he enjoys the use of people's real names when he's supposed to stay in character.


So you admit your attention seeking, your cool.


----------



## Choke2Death

jblvdx said:


> So you admit your attention seeking, your cool.


*You're.


----------



## Hazaq

Bryan's push seems to be more of a success than Punk's push. Bryan deserves it. I hope they dont drop the ball with him.


----------



## mrmacman

been saying ever since phil got his massive push, he's got wrestling skills, mic skills(more like whining skills)also looks but nothing that attract masses .for casual fans he is still a janitor lookalike.


----------



## Saddlerrad

I have to be honest, im not entirely sure what it is peeople see in D Bryan. He's not my cup of tea. Im not a technical fan, bit of an attitude era lover, but I can still apprecaite good performers these days. Ziggler for example, I am very fond of his character and his in-ring work. It just feels like to me that Bryan has slow matches, that drag and are boring. Without the whole 'YES' thing D Bryan is fairly dull and I really, really think that throughout this whole love 'tangle' that AJ has carried the both of Punk and Bryan.


----------



## Loudness

Sheamus buries D Bryan at WM - Bryan gets massively over.

The GOAT The Rock buries Bryan on the mic - D Bryan becomes a top RAW draw. 

Conclusion: You can't bury a GOAT.

That said, Bryan deserves it, he has been entertaining all the time and I think him beeing involved in a segment with The Rock made the general public take more notice of him than before, especially since his storyline was featured heavily on the show, so he just took the ball, ran with it and landed a touchdown. Nice to see that even on RAW he's starting to become a legitimate star.


----------



## Words Of Wisdom

The thing about Bryan, is Either you really love him, or you can't stand him. Which is great. It's not a matter of being boring or not drawing a reaction, or doing nothing entertaining at all. That's why Bryan always gets a great reaction, it's not like ADR(He has gotten better heat of late) where sometimes there is no reaction at all, Bryan always gets one.


----------



## Rock316AE

The 500k gain for Sheamus/Bryan wasn't the actual match OR the wrestlers, it was simply the people who don't know/forgot about the 8pm start. You only need to look at the number, 3.1 is actually below average for the start of RAW. It was still a great TV match but it wasn't "drawing" or something.

The gain after that for Bryan's doctor skits or whatever it was, you can credit him. And I agree with you because he was great in that segment. Unlike most of his segments where he's just over the top, doing this ridiculous, unrealistic YES act. He was natural and completely believable here and it shows. He's not becoming a TV draw or something, that's just exaggeration, but he can definitely be entertaining with the right material.


----------



## -Skullbone-

Choke2Death said:


> I know what you're saying, but to be fair, some people just never manage to click with the audience. Lex Luger is an example of this, they wanted to make him face of the company after Hogan left, but the audience just didn't care. We may have a similar case in our hands currently.
> 
> Hell, Cena himself has never truly clicked with the whole audience. He was extremely over at first and has always been loved by the female audience (kids joined in as his superman push started) but not all men were fans of his and slowly but surely, they turned on him. He had the misfortune of the hate bandwagon spreading _fast_ so his overness turned into "controversy" (WWE's idea) but on the other hand, he's been a consistent seller of merchandise which has kept the boat afloat somewhere in between, rather than at the very bottom or at the very top.


Was Punk not clicking with casuals? It doesn't appear that he is a stand-alone figure for viewers to singularly tune in to, although there were past indicators that viewers were drawn to his promos more then his matches (a worrying trend for what he's been trying to preach, regardless). That part is one of the few grey shades in an otherwise widely appraised face run by audiences, however. Let's be honest with ourselves, the twilight period of 2011 saw him pitted mainly against unconsolidated main event figures such as ADR and Miz to formulate the ME scene. With no particular angle resting on it aside from a few back and forth matches it wasn't exactly compelling viewing, nor was the injection of Cena to a few gimmick-based PPVs. 

Speaking of Cena, your point on his connection to the overreaching audience has some merit. The reality is, however, his 'mixed popularity' has been a major selling point for most of his career and continues to be. His arena reception means nothing in the great scheme of his overarching appeal, namely the projection of his branding. The best thing they did for the legacy of John Cena (business-wise) was redirect his key demographic to the younger audiences. He still maintained many of his older fans mid 2008 when this movement became more noticeable as well. 

Although it is a unique dynamic they’ve come across, it will still be a career marred by infamy. When we look back on the character it’ll probably be looked on a little more positively like most things are. Picture this; the top face that was not fully accepted, but wouldn’t change in spite of it. It would have a great ring to it if it wasn’t for a few things; namely the smarks laying their boots into his poor abilities that broke the “fourth wall” of kayfabe. As you said, the legacy of John Cena will always be tainted by his inability to incite the desired response from all audiences (despite it being turned into a positive somewhat). I ask though, where has face Punk received the same level of hostility from the masses based on something like his ability or even his appeal? 



Rock316AE said:


> It's not about a one time deal, it's about a pattern, and Punk proved time after time that he's not an attraction. He can be over with your core audience that are coming to the arenas and that can bring a wrestler to certain level, especially today when the depth in the talent pool is at an all-time low. But to draw the masses, you need that imaginary IT factor and the look of a star to be able to captivate the people, it's the same "turn heads" presence, Punk is not that guy and with everything they gave him, everything you can give to a wrestler for over 6 years, will never be that guy.


Obviously “imaginary” isn’t quite the word you’re looking for when describing the “It” factor, although I agree it exists without it being necessarily tangible. For all the talk about booking in this thread, however, Punk has had quite a checkered history in spite all his accolades. I think he’d be the first to argue that continuity was a real issue at some junctures and I’m not necessarily referring to his WWE Title run. Regardless, the white-hot period he came riding in on after that shoot should be proof that Punk can be a large contributor to the company’s profit, so it’s shortsighted to say he can’t amount to anything of worth when he probably would’ve come close to doing such had it not been for such a weak conclusion. 

Let’s face it, most of today’s problems lies with WWE’s lack of captivating angles and programs. That’s what I feel it mostly boils down to, and I encourage others to come at that remark with reasons as to why they think it isn't the case. 

Also, these overzealous outburst from the D-Bry sector over their boy drawing is growing into something quite irritating. I realize a few of you would likely be taking the piss over this 'criteria' so many fans parrot to make their boys legit. I also know, however, that there will be a few jumping for joy over the news and running over to threads about, say, Randy Orton to rub it in. It ain't a two way street people, and you can't blindly follow something and disregard it when it suits you _without_ making yourself look like an idiot.

Wonder what some of you will be when D-Bry gets that inevitable loss in viewer numbers during one of his major segment. Creating more of these intolerable mark wars? Probably.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Raw 1000 in the UK on Sky Sports* had a massive 460,000 viewers, with the live airing getting 357,000 viewers. It is easily the most watched Raw in ten years in the UK.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Huge. When you put in it context that it's 1am to 4am in the morning, it's huge. Fucking hell.


----------



## D.M.N.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...et-life-of-the-american-teenager-more/144098/

Hour 1 - 4.007m
Hour 2 - 4.648m
Hour 3 - 4.446m

Hour 3 rating lower than Hour 2 shocks me. Given Lesnar was at the top of the hour, I do wonder if some people consider him damaged goods already given that he lost to Cena?


----------



## dxbender

Or maybe people thought they'd just be seeing another HHH-Lesnar recap.

WWE did do a good job with spacing everything out. It was basically a main event match per hour(Punk-Mysterio in first hour, Orton-Big Show in 2nd hour, Cena-Bryan in 3rd hour)


----------



## DesolationRow

Hour 1 holding onto 4 million viewers by a couple of fingernails.

WWE's going to have to deliver some goods at Summerslam to recapture even a fraction of the hoopla that the 1,000th Raw episode garnered. Until then, they're back on autopilot. The only match scheduled for Summerslam that feels like an attraction--partly because everything else has been played-out by now (if they could subtract Big Show from Cena/Punk in the future, that would help)--is Lesnar/Triple H and the storyline has little in the way of genuine momentum. It's like they're just filling the episodes out. Next week Lesnar will attack Shawn, cut to Triple H's angry face, Trips/Brock storyline finished aside from the fight they're going to have at Summerslam, of course. Next week, Cena will stand tall over a fallen Punk and a fallen Show. Del Rio will probably "injure" Sheamus. One more PTP/Air Truth segment. Probably a Jericho/Ziggler promo. Bryan wondering, along with the entire audience, what on earth he's doing facing Kane at Summerslam. That's about it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Inb4 Punk gets blamed for hour 1 doing only 4 million.


----------



## totoyotube

Its going to be a rough fall this year against the NFL, they did face the Olympics so it's a good excuse, they are lucky the USA basketball team wasnt on at raw.

I dont think that first hour will ever draw


----------



## dxbender

I don't think there's really anything WWE can do to get hour 1 to be better ratings.

They even advertised DX for Raw1000(and rumors about Road Dogg,X-Pac being there too), and the ratings for that, was lower than most other parts of the show.


----------



## Amuroray

punk failing again


----------



## Happenstan

DesolationRow said:


> WWE's going to have to deliver some goods at Summerslam to recapture even a fraction of the hoopla that the 1,000th Raw episode garnered.



WWE should have went with Bryan (C) vs Cena and Punk vs Heel Orton at Summerslam instead of Show vs Punk vs Cena. It might not garner better ratings but let's face it...with RAW going to 3 hours ratings were gonna drop anyway. At least we would be watching something new and exciting instead of re-hashing the past.


----------



## NearFall

Happenstan said:


> WWE should have went with Bryan (C) vs Cena and Punk vs Heel Orton at Summerslam instead of Show vs Punk vs Cena. It might not garner better ratings but let's face it...with RAW going to 3 hours ratings were gonna drop anyway. At least we would be watching something new and exciting instead of re-hashing the past.


Agreeing with that. Punk losing to Bryan by AJ as the ref would have not taken away his credibility, and it would keep him face(did not want a heel turn at all). Although I am enjoying Bryans current position, he could be higher up the card. Im only expecting Punk to actually get interesting post SummerSlam.

As for the first hour ratings, they will always struggle in my opinion. Other two hours, meh, surprised hour 3 had less than hour 2.


----------



## Pro Royka

Amuroray said:


> punk failing again


You fail on understanding ratings. You fail at realising the drop in the 3rd hour and you also failed on realising that John Cena was in the first segment.


----------



## Amuroray

Pro Royka said:


> You fail on understanding ratings. You fail at realising the drop in the 3rd hour and you also failed on realising that John Cena was in the first segment.


Punk also had a match in the first hour.

Miz kane was on the last hour i think


----------



## Pro Royka

Amuroray said:


> Punk also had a match in the first hour.
> 
> Miz kane was on the last hour i think


Did they show the breakdown yet, No. Yeah it was in that last hour because Cena vs Bryan was invincible fpalm.


----------



## Alim

Happenstan said:


> WWE should have went with Bryan (C) vs Cena and Punk vs Heel Orton at Summerslam instead of Show vs Punk vs Cena. It might not garner better ratings but let's face it...with RAW going to 3 hours ratings were gonna drop anyway. At least we would be watching something new and exciting instead of re-hashing the past.


No way would WWE give away three first time ever matches on one show. (Punk/Orton wouldn't be the first time, but their first feud sucked so it doesn't count)


----------



## Jammy

Ladies, save the mark wars for after the breakdown. Jeez.


----------



## Vyed

> WWE Raw on Monday, August 6 scored a 3.08 rating for all three hours, the same rating as last week post-Raw 1,000. The standard two-hour rating was also identical with a 3.23 rating.
> 
> One difference was Raw's third hour declining from the second hour. Raw peaked with a 3.26 rating in the second hour (previous first hour) before declining to a 3.19 rating in the final hour. The extra first hour scored a 2.80 rating vs. a 2.79 rating last week.
> 
> -- Raw declined 130,000 (2.9 percent) in total viewers compared to last week. Raw averaged 4.37 million viewers for all three hours, which was the fewest average viewers for a full episode since June 4. For just the standard two hours, it was the fewest viewers since July 9.
> 
> Similar to the hour-by-hour ratings, Raw viewership peaked in the second hour and declined in the third hour. Raw averaged 4.07 million first hour viewers, topped out at 4.65 million second hour viewers, and dropped to 4.47 million third hour viewers.
> 
> The third hour of Raw registered the fewest final hour viewers since June 4, so Raw did not finish strong this week.
> 
> UPDATED INFO:
> 
> -- On cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #2 in overall viewers behind "The Closer" on TNT. The show ranked #1 in all key male demographics.
> 
> The demographic ratings were very similar to last week's show. *The only real change was one-tenth of a rating increase among males & adults 18-34.*
> 
> *-- Looking back to last year, the August 8, 2011 episode scored nearly the exact same rating for a two-hour show. The demographic ratings are also nearly identical for this week's three-hour Raw compared to last year's two-hour Raw. The only difference is recovery of teen male viewers in 2012 compared to the noticeable downturn this time last year.*


They should have promoted Shawn/Lesnar appearance a week in advance. Dont know why it wasnt promoted. Cena/bryan Main event also should have been promoted in advance by Twitter or through the website or whatever.


----------



## Rock316AE

Another drop and that's because they were too stupid to promote that "BROOOCCK LESSNARRR!" is going to be there along with HBK in his hometown. In 80 video packages you can't even throw one commercial? Maybe they're trying to sabotage this program? If not I don't get it. You just say out of the blue that HBK is going to be there like it's happening every week, then bring out Brock without promoting him. Ridiculous. 

As for the second hour doing the biggest. They should have saved the Big Show/Orton match, which is a big and fresh match that happened maybe 2-3 times to the third hour and then Lesnar/Heyman/HBK/HHH in the main event segment.


----------



## NearFall

They spent 5 million for 28-30ish Lesnar appearances and don't advertise them. fpalm Lolwat Vince?


----------



## AthenaMark

Who cares about Shawn Michaels. He's nothing. But it's odd they didn't advertise Lesnar being there LIVE. I guess when you have a near 70 year old man who has lost his creative edge that made him special that this is just the way it's going to be. Stands to reason considering Cole should of been taken off television close to two years ago now.


----------



## Marv95

I'm a tiny bit surprised. Thought the rating would drop from last week. And it's surprising that this show isn't routinely in the 2s with the bland product they put out week after week. Still NFL season's approaching...


----------



## DesolationRow

Rock316AE said:


> Another drop and that's because they were too stupid to promote that "BROOOCCK LESSNARRR!" is going to be there along with HBK in his hometown. In 80 video packages you can't even throw one commercial? Maybe they're trying to sabotage this program? If not I don't get it. You just say out of the blue that HBK is going to be there like it's happening every week, then bring out Brock without promoting him. Ridiculous.


I have to agree. No mention of Lesnar, Triple H or Shawn Michaels in any ads, nor the wwe.com preview, nor anywhere. I have no idea why they wouldn't plug the hell out of the three of them appearing. At least Michaels and Lesnar, since you can assume by extension Triple H will be there, too. Inexplicable.


----------



## Starbuck

DesolationRow said:


> I have to agree. No mention of Lesnar, Triple H or Shawn Michaels in any ads, nor the wwe.com preview, nor anywhere. I have no idea why they wouldn't plug the hell out of the three of them appearing. At least Michaels and Lesnar, since you can assume by extension Triple H will be there, too. Inexplicable.


VINCE. IS. A. RETARD. 

I think that should suffice. Stupid, stupid, god damn fucking stupid. They haven't given any promotion to this match. At all. It's ridiculous.


----------



## Shock

NearFall said:


> They spent 5 million for 28-30ish Lesnar appearances and don't advertise them. fpalm Lolwat Vince?


WWE doesn't know what they're doing in advance, that's the big problem. I guarantee you they had no idea if Brock was going to be on next weeks show when they had Raw 1001. They probably told Brock on Sunday "you're on Raw" because he would have had to make travel arrangements, but even then I doubt they knew how to use him until the show.


----------



## kokepepsi

*Breakdown*



> In the segment-by-segment, C.M. Punk vs. Rey Mysterio gained 123,000 viewers.
> 
> Alberto Del Rio vs. Christian also gained 123,000 viewers.
> 
> Randy Orton vs. Big Show at the top of the hour which also coincided with the familiar 9 p.m. start time gained 480,000 viewers.
> 
> Ryback vs. Curt Hawkins & Tyler Reks plus Titus O’Neil & Darren Young vs. Primo & Epico gained 78,000 viewers. Looking at that lineup, you’d expect that to lose which likely shows Ryback is catching on.
> 
> The Damien Sandow/Brodus Clay angle lost 135,000 viewers.
> 
> The return of Kelly Kelly, facing Eve Torres, gained 113,000 viewers.
> 
> The highest rated segment of the show was Shawn Michaels, Brock Lesnar, Paul Heyman and HHH, which gained 232,000 viewers, which is not a strong gain for the 10 p.m. hour, doing a 3.45 quarter.
> 
> Dolph Ziggler vs. Alex Riley lost 390,000 viewers.
> 
> Kane vs. The Miz lost 208,000 viewers.
> 
> And John Cena vs. Daniel Bryan gained 345,000 viewers, which is not a strong overrun segment, finishing at 3.27.


Kind of meh numbers


----------



## Jammy

All numbers there are meh, every one of them. Not much to discuss I guess.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Orton/Show and Cena/Bryan failed big time. 480k is terrible for the 9 PM, and obviously that's a shit overrun. The Lesnar/HHH/HBK stuff did bad as well, even though the rating is the highest of the night. But as I recall people always telling me, the gain means more than the rating. Just like when Punk/Jericho gained 200k and did a 3.6, it was still a weak showing. Same thing applies here then, no? Just disappointing numbers all around.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Sandow loses viewers? 

Things are... interesting. This is the second week the 9:15 slot gained (maybe third, forgot the Raw 1000 episode). Sandow/Clay did lose but it didn't lose a lot in the grand scheme of things. The HBK/Lesnar segment with HHH at the end did the average gain for the 10PM slot, but it did peak the show which is telling. Cena/Bryan not having the strongest gain ever, and by my calculations it's actually had the fourth most viewers of the night (behind Show/Orton and Kelly/Eve).

Orton/Show, nothing impressive. Actually could be seen as a disappointment based on the amount it gained, though it did have the second highest number of viewers in the show, so I guess that's good.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

There wasn't a big enough gain after the main event match since John Cena , Big Show, and CM Punk all did a segment for like 5 minutes,and nothing really important happened, so that might explain the low draw. They need to give the WWE title picture some fire next week. Also the Daniel Bryan vs John Cena match was so random that it didn't even serve much purpose but to give Cena a win, so no surprised the match itself didn't draw strong.

Also the Triple H segment with Brock drew so low, but I bet not many knew they were going to be there. Lack of advertisement.


----------



## SteenIsGod

Good Gain from Punk/Rey at that slot. Randy/Show absolutley failed, Orton ISN'T good for ratings, he couldn't gain over 500,000 with a ratings monster like Show and the 9 PM Slot? Failure. Bryan/Cena is surprising, I'd think it would do Much Better. Odd to see a lot of the Lower Card talents gaining pretty well. I know Brock/HHH did the highest number, but a 232,000 gain is fucking poor as hell at the 10 PM Slot. That's what they get for Not advertising Shawn or Brock being on the Show.


----------



## DesolationRow

Obis said:


> Sandow loses viewers?


Well, the segment Meltzer/whoever is suggesting belonged to Sandow and Clay was in actuality mostly recaps, AJ and Daniel Bryan bickering backstage, commercials and Touts, with about four or five minutes of Sandow and Clay somewhere in the middle of all of that. Difficult to pin the responsibility for those fairly modest losses on Sandow, methinks.

Kind of a dull breakdown, but in some ways WWE is probably happy or at least content with it. Though some segments obviously underperformed. 

In the case of the 10:00pm segment involving HBK, Lesnar and Triple H, as *Starbuck* said, Vince is apparently a retard... Could/should have done at least significantly better. Granted, they did plug Triple H and Lesnar appearing throughout the show, but no ads or wwe.com preview hype concerning it for the whole week beforehand, which is just staggeringly obtuse.


----------



## Choke2Death

Pretty disappointing numbers but it's good to see Orton's part gain almost half a million viewers.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Choke2Death said:


> Pretty disappointing numbers but it's good to see Orton's part gain almost half a million viewers.


That's the normal gain for the time RAW would normally start if it was 2 hours. I think last week that same spot gained 500,000+. I would assume most are still getting used to the 3 hour format, or most don't care about the first hour.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

It's not even a normal gain, it's a shit gain for the 9 spot for a 3 hour show.


----------



## funnyfaces1

On one hand, you could argue that the first two hours were fairly consistent as nothing drastic really happened. On the other hand, the fact that nothing drastic happened, even with segments that should have gotten monster gains, is an even worse sign. I don't know how to feel about this rating, but I can't find much that is good about it. Overall though, I did like this match-heavy show that also put focus on the midcard as well as the two main event feuds for Summerslam.


----------



## Rock316AE

Horrible breakdown and not a good sign for Summerslam. Big Show/Orton and Lesnar/Heyman/HBK/HHH doing the biggest numbers as expected. Other than that, the main event shows that John Cena is not a miracle formula and needs the opponent. Bryan is not that type of guy which is why they drew so low even with the fresh match. On the other hand, you got Cena against Big Show, two proven draws and the two biggest in the company against each other for the 800 time in the last 8 years and it draws huge. For the record, I actually liked the Cena/Bryan TV match.

The number the HHH/Lesnar segment did this week is a perfect result of WWE's miserable promotion. Brock Lesnar, a mega star who is going to be on RAW only 3 more times this year is going to be there live and you're not even giving him ONE COMMERCIAL in 3 hours? HBK in his hometown is going to be on RAW for a rare appearance and again, nothing? Keep in mind that the shows did the same rating but Big Show/Cena attracted a much bigger share of the audience. The only thing I can say about it is maybe WWE are trying to sabotage this on purpose, unless, I underestimated their stupidity again, and after Cena vs Miz/Truth in November 2011 and Cena's protection in March 2012, I can't believe I'm even saying it.

On another note, Ryback is getting over big, not only live crowds, not only the chants, now the TV audience which is the most important factor. Maybe we're going to see a Goldberg/squash pattern(obviously not even close to Goldberg's level), it's 3 weeks in a row now IIRC.


----------



## D.M.N.

Don't forget NBC had the Olympics on Monday, which may contribute to the dull breakdown with not many tuning in and/or out. Hence why there is nothing alarming, it's just, well, dull.


----------



## Jammy

Rock316AE said:


> Big Show/Orton and Lesnar/Heyman/HBK/HHH doing the biggest numbers as expected.


Big Show/Orton was 9pm, like Bryan/Sheamus was 9pm, IIRC Bryan/Sheamus gained 100k more than Show/Orton. Weak gains all around, hopefully its due to massive competition from the Olympics.


----------



## Leechmaster

Again, I don't understand why people base their favouritewrestlers on ratings and buys...do you do the same with music (record sales) and movies (box office receipts)?


----------



## Starbuck

Again, I don't understand why people think that talking about ratings means that you base your favorites on said ratings. Basic comprehension fail. Do you see anybody doing that outside the retarded mark wars? No. This is such a stupid misconception and I have no idea where it came from. 

Shit breakdown that tells us nothing. If they had promoted HBK turning up for a one off appearance along with Lesnar and HHH appearing too then this would have done much better. It's common sense. You don't advertise things then people don't know about them therefore they don't watch and you don't get big numbers, simple as that. They could have had Rock come out here and it would have been the same because they barely advertised it at all. Just ridiculous. It was still the high point of the show but that isn't saying much. They had better plan to promote the shit out of Summerslam this coming Monday and inject a nice shot of adrenaline into this feud or things won't be looking good come the buyrate.

I'm surprised that Bryan/Cena didn't do so well. Thought it would have popped a nice number since it's a first time deal and all. I still think a proper program between them will draw nicely. Seems like they made small gains throughout the first 2 hours which is about the only positive from this breakdown I guess. The third hour killed them though. After DX/Lesnar 600,000 people tuned out and only half of them came back. 

On Orton/Show and the 9PM spot, last week the gain was just over 500k, right? This week it's just under 500k. I'll go ahead and say that 500k is going to be the normal gain for that timeslot then based on the info we have as of now lol. We'll be able to have a fuller picture as the weeks roll on. 

So yeah, pretty meh breakdown and it just amazes me how WWE can go from an absolute monster of a promotional campaign for Raw 1000 and then 2 weeks later they completely fail to promote the selling point of their next PPV. It really is just ridiculous. Speaking of which, while Lesnar/HHH has nowhere near the hype it should, take it off the card and Summerslam looks like a piece of shit tbh. Biggest party of the Summer my ass. Punk/Cena/Show is so pedestrian, ADR/Seamus is boretastic and it looks like they're going to leave Rey and Orton off which is madness. In the span of 2 weeks we've seen such a dramatic drop in momentum and basic fucking marketing and promotion that I just don't even know anymore.


----------



## Green Light

Leechmaster said:


> Again, *I don't understand why people base their favouritewrestlers on ratings and buy*s...do you do the same with music (record sales) and movies (box office receipts)?


Nobody does that. Why do people keep coming in here with that strawman?


----------



## The-Rock-Says

I base my fav's on ratings. That's why Blackman is one of my favourite's.


----------



## Kid Kablam

Starbuck said:


> Again, I don't understand why people think that talking about ratings means that you base your favorites on said ratings. Basic comprehension fail. Do you see anybody doing that outside the retarded mark wars? No. This is such a stupid misconception and I have no idea where it came from.
> 
> Shit breakdown that tells us nothing. If they had promoted HBK turning up for a one off appearance along with Lesnar and HHH appearing too then this would have done much better. It's common sense. You don't advertise things then people don't know about them therefore they don't watch and you don't get big numbers, simple as that. They could have had Rock come out here and it would have been the same because they barely advertised it at all. Just ridiculous. It was still the high point of the show but that isn't saying much. They had better plan to promote the shit out of Summerslam this coming Monday and inject a nice shot of adrenaline into this feud or things won't be looking good come the buyrate.
> 
> I'm surprised that Bryan/Cena didn't do so well. Thought it would have popped a nice number since it's a first time deal and all. I still think a proper program between them will draw nicely. Seems like they made small gains throughout the first 2 hours which is about the only positive from this breakdown I guess. The third hour killed them though. After DX/Lesnar 600,000 people tuned out and only half of them came back.
> 
> On Orton/Show and the 9PM spot, last week the gain was just over 500k, right? This week it's just under 500k. I'll go ahead and say that 500k is going to be the normal gain for that timeslot then based on the info we have as of now lol. We'll be able to have a fuller picture as the weeks roll on.
> 
> So yeah, pretty meh breakdown and it just amazes me how WWE can go from an absolute monster of a promotional campaign for Raw 1000 and then 2 weeks later they completely fail to promote the selling point of their next PPV. It really is just ridiculous. Speaking of which, while Lesnar/HHH has nowhere near the hype it should, take it off the card and Summerslam looks like a piece of shit tbh. Biggest party of the Summer my ass. Punk/Cena/Show is so pedestrian, ADR/Seamus is boretastic and it looks like they're going to leave Rey and Orton off which is madness. In the span of 2 weeks we've seen such a dramatic drop in momentum and basic fucking marketing and promotion that I just don't even know anymore.


I think with the 3 hour raws, the later segments are going to not have such dramatic gains. It wouldn't surprise me if people are exhausted by the time the main event starts, and won't be sticking around for the overruns.

Also, Olympics.


----------



## Starbuck

Kid Kablam said:


> I think with the 3 hour raws, the later segments are going to not have such dramatic gains. It wouldn't surprise me if people are exhausted by the time the main event starts, and won't be sticking around for the overruns.
> 
> Also, Olympics.


Based on last week that's not true since the overrun had a monster gain. I guess the main difference maker is that with Cena/Bryan, nothing was on the line but with Cena/Show, a shot at the title was on the line. And Show is a bigger star than Bryan I guess. That's the only thing I can see that's any different. 

Besides, it's usually the later 2 hours that do better with 3 hours shows but that could change with that format now a permanent thing. We're just going to have to wait it out until we can see some patterns you know.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

The Cena vs Bryan match might have been a first, but I don't think many casuals knew that. Also Since Daniel Bryan isn't feuding with Cena then most probably saw it as an easy win for Cena, and with no purpose really.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

My guess is people remembered Cena's match with Big Show last week where he threw punches like a green diva and decided that not even the GOAT, Daniel Bryan, could make them watch the match. I bet is Daniel Bryan was booked to wrestle himself, he would have brought in a million viewers.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> My guess is people remembered Cena's match with Big Show last week where he threw punches like a green diva and decided that not even the GOAT, Daniel Bryan, could make them watch the match. I bet is Daniel Bryan was booked to wrestle himself, he would have brought in a million viewers.


Speaking of ratings, I hear Ms Lynch isn't doing too good in that department. What a shame since she is the best part about impact. A heck of an actress.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

It was one small bump. I'm sure the next segment she's in will draw huge. They should make her the KO champion.


----------



## DesolationRow

Starbuck said:


> So yeah, pretty meh breakdown and it just amazes me how WWE can go from an absolute monster of a promotional campaign for Raw 1000 and then 2 weeks later they completely fail to promote the selling point of their next PPV. It really is just ridiculous. Speaking of which, while Lesnar/HHH has nowhere near the hype it should, take it off the card and Summerslam looks like a piece of shit tbh. Biggest party of the Summer my ass. Punk/Cena/Show is so pedestrian, ADR/Seamus is boretastic and it looks like they're going to leave Rey and Orton off which is madness. In the span of 2 weeks we've seen such a dramatic drop in momentum and basic fucking marketing and promotion that I just don't even know anymore.


I completely agree. And I say this as someone driving 400 miles to go to Summerslam.

If the rumor about Jericho missing Summerslam is true, and there's no Ziggler/Jericho, either, well, at that point the only thing I'm truly looking forward to seeing live is Lesnar/Triple H. It would be cool if The Prime Time Players take the Tag Championships from Air Truth, and I hope that Rey and Orton are actually given something to do on the pay-per-view since WWE both rushed them back to TV as soon as they could (lol)...

Once again, WWE's let us down. I was actually cautiously optimistic that they could somewhat easily parlay the major success (driven by their ridiculous marketing power when they opt to utilize it) of Raw 1,000 into a great build into Summerslam but instead they're going in with practically zero momentum and it's maddening.


----------



## King_Of_This_World

Warrior said:


> Speaking of ratings, I hear Ms Lynch isn't doing too good in that department. What a shame since she is the best part about impact. A heck of an actress.


Which say a lot, considering the 5 minutes of airtime she gets is pretty much better than 3 entire hours of Raw each week.


----------



## A-C-P

I think we are starting to see how the 3-hour format is going to effect the breakdowns. 3 hours is just tom uch EVERY week and the last segments of the shows are going to keep getting these "weak" gains, which in a few months we will be discussing as the normal gains for those timeslots.


----------



## Rock316AE

Jammy said:


> Big Show/Orton was 9pm, like Bryan/Sheamus was 9pm, IIRC Bryan/Sheamus gained 100k more than Show/Orton. Weak gains all around, hopefully its due to massive competition from the Olympics.


Yes, but you already had all the gains of people in the first hour, last week they opened at 3.1 in 9pm. This week it was probably bigger. We need to wait a few months until you got the same audience at 8 and 11. Probably not going to happen.



King_Of_This_World said:


> Which say a lot, considering the 5 minutes of airtime she gets is pretty much better than 3 entire hours of Raw each week.


Bro, out of all the things you can praise from Impact, the awesome Bully Rays, Kurt Angles, Bobby Roodes, James Storms, AJs etc. You choose to praise Claire Lynch? Don't get me wrong, Impact is the best show by far, with the best roster, best product etc, but Claire Lynch is horrendous, just brutal to watch and if not Daniels saving the segments with her, this would have been a disaster on TV.


----------



## BrosOfDestruction

Rock316AE said:


> Yes, but you already had all the gains of people in the first hour, last week they opened at 3.1 in 9pm. This week it was probably bigger. We need to wait a few months until you got the same audience at 8 and 11. Probably not going to happen.
> 
> 
> 
> Bro, out of all the things you can praise from Impact, the awesome Bully Rays, Kurt Angles, Bobby Roodes, James Storms, AJs etc. You choose to praise Claire Lynch? Don't get me wrong, Impact is the best show by far, with the best roster, best product etc, *but Claire Lynch is horrendous, just brutal to watch and if not Daniels saving the segments with her, this would have been a disaster on TV.*


:lmao GOAT316AE telling it like it is. Lynch is a horrendous AJ Lee level actress.


----------



## D.M.N.

Reason number 1, and the only reason why Raw will stay permanently 3 hours:

USA Network - 20:00 to 21:00
- 09/07 - 2.926 million / 0.6 18-49 rating <-- NCIS
- 16/07 - 3.149 million / 0.6 18-49 rating <-- NCIS
- 23/07 - n/a (Raw 1000)
- 30/07 - 4.064 million / 1.4 18-49 rating <-- RAW
- 06/08 - 4.007 million / 1.4 18-49 rating <-- RAW


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Rock316AE said:


> *Yes, but you already had all the gains of people in the first hour, last week they opened at 3.1 in 9pm. This week it was probably bigger. We need to wait a few months until you got the same audience at 8 and 11. Probably not going to happen.
> *
> 
> 
> Bro, out of all the things you can praise from Impact, the awesome Bully Rays, Kurt Angles, Bobby Roodes, James Storms, AJs etc. You choose to praise Claire Lynch? Don't get me wrong, Impact is the best show by far, with the best roster, best product etc, but Claire Lynch is horrendous, just brutal to watch and if not Daniels saving the segments with her, this would have been a disaster on TV.


I say this week the 9pm probably opened up to about 3.15. The Santino vs Alberto Del Rio match in the first hour last week lost about 260,000 viewers which was a lot.


----------



## Choke2Death

Jammy said:


> Big Show/Orton was 9pm, like Bryan/Sheamus was 9pm, IIRC Bryan/Sheamus gained 100k more than Show/Orton. Weak gains all around, hopefully its due to massive competition from the Olympics.


Actually it was 40k more viewers the Sheamus/Bryan match got. Nothing to make a big deal out of. Just a decent and standard gain. But since it's Orton, he's a failure at drawing whereas if it was Bryan "ZUMG DA GAAWD IZ MR RATINGZZZ!!!!111".


----------



## RatedR10

Brock Lesnar and Shawn Michaels appearing definitely should've been promoted more. They threw so many recaps on Raw 1001 that I don't even remember them mentioning Lesnar appearing on Raw in San Antonio, as well as Michaels.

I get the vibe looking at the numbers that more and more people DVR Raw and watch it afterwards or watch it on YouTube or something because 3 hours is too much. It's just the vibe I get. Very meh numbers, with no HUGE gain or HUGE loss like other breakdowns have.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

A segment involving Lesnar, HBK and HHH only did a 3.45? and only gained 250'000?

this angle has no heat. Yes they weren't advertised but still, people and notify other people, they should of done way more then that.


----------



## Leechmaster

Green Light said:


> Nobody does that. Why do people keep coming in here with that strawman?


I just don't see why a fanatic would care about buys and ratings. It doesn't affect who is the most entertaining in the business, so why bother arguing over which wrestler draw more or lamenting a .01 drop in the ratings?


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

I think anytime you have a long match in the final slot it's going to fail, because nobody cares about matches anymore due to WWE training it's viewers that the outcomes don't matter.


----------



## Adramelech

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> My guess is people remembered Cena's match with Big Show last week where he threw punches like a green diva and decided that not even the GOAT, Daniel Bryan, could make them watch the match. I bet is Daniel Bryan was booked to wrestle himself, he would have brought in a million viewers.


How dare you say something like that! Hey John, this jerk is saying you can't punch! Get in here and beat him up!


----------



## Shazayum

Still better than Shane McMahons punches on Orton. Good Lord that traumatized me.


----------



## -Skullbone-

Leechmaster said:


> I just don't see why a fanatic would care about buys and ratings. It doesn't affect who is the most entertaining in the business, so why bother arguing over which wrestler draw more or lamenting a .01 drop in the ratings?


Ratings and buys are some of the closest thing to a confirmation the company has in regards to who is seen as the "most entertaining."

Granted, I agree that the melancholic tone of some of these posts are ridiculously overwrought. 

And why are people over Orton's case in this instance? Would these be the same patrons of the D-Bry, CM Punk fanbases by any chance?


----------



## Kid Kablam

Leechmaster said:


> I just don't see why a fanatic would care about buys and ratings. It doesn't affect who is the most entertaining in the business, so why bother arguing over which wrestler draw more or lamenting a .01 drop in the ratings?


Some people like following the pitch and roll of the business and enjoy seeing what works and what doesn't. I'll agree that taking ratings as dogma is a mistake and I'm not fond of the idea that you should ignore live reactions, but ratings do give you good feedback on how the company is reaching people. It's the same as watching box office results and seeing why "Batman The Dark Knight Rises" has been a disappointment (despite earning a shitton of money) versus why its predecessors were considered such successes. It's an interesting thing to talk about, provided you understand the limitations of your data, and that there are things you aren't seeing.


----------



## Goku

Adramelech said:


> How dare you say something like that! Hey John, this jerk is saying you can't punch! Get in here and beat him up!


:lmao

Punk loves it.


----------



## Kabraxal

Are people really surprised by the numbers though? I mean, the WWE has proven it can't write a solid, long running story line so more and more fans are just tuning out? The only reason the 1000th episode did anything was for the nostalgia... we wanted to see some old faces and remember the days when the WWE didn't have an idiot in charge. Sad to think the supposed genius is the same damn idiot now... oi.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

jblvdx said:


> A segment involving Lesnar, HBK and HHH only did a 3.45? and only gained 250'000?
> 
> this angle has no heat. Yes they weren't advertised but still, people and notify other people, they should of done way more then that.


Right. It's a pretty shitty excuse. Yes advertising it more would have helped a little bit, but not by much despite what people keep preaching. This is a shitty rating for these three. Then again Lesnar hasn't been a TV draw since coming back anyway so no real surprise. This angle, just like Rock/Cena, isn't doing much as far as ratings go. At least not as much as it should.


----------



## Starbuck

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Right. It's a pretty shitty excuse. Yes advertising it more would have helped a little bit, but not by much despite what people keep preaching. This is a shitty rating for these three. Then again Lesnar hasn't been a TV draw since coming back anyway so no real surprise. This angle, just like Rock/Cena, isn't doing much as far as ratings go. At least not as much as it should.


:lmao Rock/Cena was the most promoted match probably in WWE history. It got built for a whole year. A year. WWE didn't even advertise the fact that Brock, HBK, or HHH were going to be on this show and a random 'Oh btw, guess who's here next!!' promo at the top of the hour doesn't count. Ridiculous comparison. Rock/Cena disappointed with a bazillion times the promotion behind it than HHH/Lesnar. The latter, outside the arm break and Raw 1000 segments, has just been a disappointment all together. Why? Because outside of said segments, WWE has failed to follow even the most basic rules of advertising, promotion and their old favorite, feud building/story telling. Advertising it more would have helped more than a little bit. Don't be stupid. If people who don't follow every week don't know top names are going to be on a particular show, they don't watch. Seems like your butthurt/bias/whatever you want to call it against Brock Lesnar, for whatever reason that you have it in the first place, is clouding your judgment when it comes to him.


----------



## Coffey

It Pat Patterson still around backstage to help with angles & whatnot?


----------



## Starbuck

I really don't think it matters who they have back there so long as Vince makes the final call. Until that changes, nothing changes.


----------



## Coffey

Starbuck said:


> I really don't think it matters who they have back there so long as Vince makes the final call. Until that changes, nothing changes.


That's why I'm asking because it used to be Pat & Vince that did everything & if Pat isn't around anymore, that puts a lot more pressure & workload onto a Vince McMahon that isn't getting any younger. Thus, he might be tempted to push a lot of the shit he usually overseas, onto other people like Hayes or Stephanie.

I know Pat used to lay out all the Rumbles, but when he stopped you could noticeably see the difference in the matches. They made less sense.


----------



## Starbuck

Vince seems to have his hand in too many things. He can't be a creative genius if he only dedicates say 20% of his time to creative. That's what the creative team is there for, to work on creative for the 80% of the time when he's doing all the other things he has to do but what seems to happen is that Vince does his shit, gets everybody else to do their shit and then when it's presented to him, uses the little time he has dedicated to okaying things to completely change everything and the end result is actual shit for a product. So many former writers have said the exact same thing, former wrestlers, current wrestlers and even Stephanie and HHH have both said it too, that's he's basically spread too thin and that he makes ALL the decisions. Like I said before, until that changes, nothing changes.


----------



## Coffey

Walk-In said:


> It Pat Patterson still around backstage to help with angles & whatnot?


Anyone know?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Starbuck said:


> :lmao Rock/Cena was the most promoted match probably in WWE history. It got built for a whole year. A year. WWE didn't even advertise the fact that Brock, HBK, or HHH were going to be on this show and a random 'Oh btw, guess who's here next!!' promo at the top of the hour doesn't count. Ridiculous comparison. Rock/Cena disappointed with a bazillion times the promotion behind it than HHH/Lesnar. The latter, outside the arm break and Raw 1000 segments, has just been a disappointment all together. Why? Because outside of said segments, WWE has failed to follow even the most basic rules of advertising, promotion and their old favorite, feud building/story telling. Advertising it more would have helped more than a little bit. Don't be stupid. If people who don't follow every week don't know top names are going to be on a particular show, they don't watch. Seems like your butthurt/bias/whatever you want to call it against Brock Lesnar, for whatever reason that you have it in the first place, is clouding your judgment when it comes to him.


I wasn't directly comparing it to Rock/Cena, I was just saying it's a similar situation. There's a feud that was, like you said, probably the most promoted match in WWE history. It was still doing decent numbers, 3.5 overruns, but not something you'd expect out of a program of that magnitude. You'd expect better, obviously. Same applies here. Except what differs is the numbers this feud is doing aren't even decent. They're just not good. And oh come on, everyone knows the deal. 6 million+ people watched RAW 1000, they know what's main eventing Summerslam in just a few days. They know it's Lesnar/HHH. You don't need to advertise that they're on RAW because people assume the build up is going to be taking place. I doubt most people are thinking "Oh the match is in two weeks, but nah they won't appear or say a word until then." It's a crummy excuse. The feud is just not clicking, whether it be drawing-wise or storyline-wise, it's not clicking. Hell, the three way feels more like the SS main event than this does.

And I have no bias towards Lesnar lol. I'm entertained by him most of the time when his mouth isn't open. Who doesn't love just watching a beast do his thing. I'm just saying, he's not really been impressive since coming back, in terms of TV ratings. People can put the blame on him being beaten by Cena all they want, but really this started the week after he came back when the first segment drew embarrassingly low.


----------



## #Mark

I still don't get why they're involving HBK. If he's not working then what's the point of them building a story between Bork/Michaels?


----------



## AthenaMark

Starbuck said:


> :lmao Rock/Cena was the most promoted match probably in WWE history. It got built for a whole year. A year. WWE didn't even advertise the fact that Brock, HBK, or HHH were going to be on this show and a random 'Oh btw, guess who's here next!!' promo at the top of the hour doesn't count. Ridiculous comparison. Rock/Cena disappointed with a bazillion times the promotion behind it than HHH/Lesnar. The latter, outside the arm break and Raw 1000 segments, has just been a disappointment all together. Why? Because outside of said segments, WWE has failed to follow even the most basic rules of advertising, promotion and their old favorite, feud building/story telling. Advertising it more would have helped more than a little bit. Don't be stupid. If people who don't follow every week don't know top names are going to be on a particular show, they don't watch. Seems like your butthurt/bias/whatever you want to call it against Brock Lesnar, for whatever reason that you have it in the first place, is clouding your judgment when it comes to him.


Rock/Cena disappointed because they made it about Cena and no one wanted to watch that. It was no surprise that the ratings went down when the promos of his started to go away from a dream match aspect and into a whining aspect that featured his played out rap character that no one had seen since 2005 or him trying to talk like an adult all of a sudden when he was apologizing full stop to Edge/HHH/Michaels and everyone else for years. Cena brought the Rock ratings down yet of course, the Rock fans brought the PPV buys through the roof. 

Lesnar was paid 5 million and if he doesn't go over Cripple H in some form at Summerslam, it will be the biggest waste of time of 2012 by far.


----------



## Quasi Juice

AthenaMark said:


> Rock/Cena disappointed because they made it about Cena and no one wanted to watch that. It was no surprise that the ratings went down when the promos of his started to go away from a dream match aspect and into a whining aspect that featured his played out rap character that no one had seen since 2005 or him trying to talk like an adult all of a sudden when he was apologizing full stop to Edge/HHH/Michaels and everyone else for years. Cena brought the Rock ratings down yet of course, the Rock fans brought the PPV buys through the roof.
> 
> Lesnar was paid 5 million and if he doesn't go over Cripple H in some form at Summerslam, it will be the biggest waste of time of 2012 by far.


He will go over HHH at Summerslam for sure. Summerslam will be the moment Lesnar gets built up again as a brutal beast. They are banking on him to draw big at WrestleMania, probably against The Rock.


----------



## Starbuck

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I wasn't directly comparing it to Rock/Cena, I was just saying it's a similar situation. There's a feud that was, like you said, probably the most promoted match in WWE history. It was still doing decent numbers, 3.5 overruns, but not something you'd expect out of a program of that magnitude. You'd expect better, obviously. Same applies here. Except what differs is the numbers this feud is doing aren't even decent. They're just not good. And oh come on, everyone knows the deal. 6 million+ people watched RAW 1000, they know what's main eventing Summerslam in just a few days. They know it's Lesnar/HHH. You don't need to advertise that they're on RAW because people assume the build up is going to be taking place. I doubt most people are thinking "Oh the match is in two weeks, but nah they won't appear or say a word until then." It's a crummy excuse. The feud is just not clicking, whether it be drawing-wise or storyline-wise, it's not clicking. Hell, the three way feels more like the SS main event than this does.
> 
> And I have no bias towards Lesnar lol. I'm entertained by him most of the time when his mouth isn't open. Who doesn't love just watching a beast do his thing. I'm just saying, he's not really been impressive since coming back, in terms of TV ratings. People can put the blame on him being beaten by Cena all they want, but really this started the week after he came back when the first segment drew embarrassingly low.


6+million people watched Raw 1000, they were advertised as appearing for weeks and when they did they got a very impressive number. The next week what happened? Absolutely nothing. That very clearly doesn't work and if you know anything about even basic marketing principles you would know that out of sight, out of mind. Then they didn't even advertise them for the week after and Shawn Michaels just randomly appears out of nowhere to top it all off. It's an absolute promotional mess and they numbers prove it. It isn't like Brock and HHH are there every week and people just expect them to be on the show like they can with Cena etc. He's a guarantee. Brock/HHH are not. If they want big programs like this to work then they need to let people know what's going on. If they know and still don't tune in because of the storyline direction, then you can call it a fail. And btw, I'm not trying to excuse anything because there is nothing to excuse. They didn't advertise therefore people didn't know therefore they didn't watch. Creatively it has been a disappointment because outside of 2 segments, the arm break and Raw 1000, they were very clearly filling time between now and back then. Ratings wise it has been a disappointment because outside of 2 segments, the arm break and Raw 1000, HHH and Heyman have been carrying things since Brock doesn't appear and when he does and something might actually happen, they don't advertise it. It's not as simple as labeling it a failure because 2 big stars haven't hit the mark every week. How can they when 1 of them is never there and when he is they don't tell anybody, they don't tell anybody his opponent is there and then they don't tell anybody about special appearances by beloved hall of famers either?

And what about the week after that when his segment drew 900,000+ iirc? He hasn't been the ratings monster that somebody like Rock is but he isn't a complete fail, he bumped up the ER buyrate and most likely will give Summerslam a nice bump too provided they pull their head out of their ass and start treating this the way that they should have all along. 



AthenaMark said:


> Rock/Cena disappointed because they made it about Cena and no one wanted to watch that. It was no surprise that the ratings went down when the promos of his started to go away from a dream match aspect and into a whining aspect that featured his played out rap character that no one had seen since 2005 or him trying to talk like an adult all of a sudden when he was apologizing full stop to Edge/HHH/Michaels and everyone else for years. Cena brought the Rock ratings down yet of course, the Rock fans brought the PPV buys through the roof.
> 
> Lesnar was paid 5 million and if he doesn't go over Cripple H in some form at Summerslam, it will be the biggest waste of time of 2012 by far.


I know that and I've been saying it since it happened. We didn't get Rock/Cena at Mania, we got Dwayne/John and it didn't do anywhere near as well as it should have in terms of tv ratings of course. It still was a massively successful program financially because at the end of the day, people still wanted to see them go at it. On a substantive level though and as a huge mark for both guys I was highly disappointed with how the feud played out.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Rock/Cena feud sucked and it was hard to watch cause they were doing this thing were Rock was an outsider Hollywood actor, (guy's an wrestling Icon, shouldn't of been trying to make him an outsider) while Cena was the great white knight, protecter of the WWE. As Starbuck says, it was more Dwayne/John, than Rock/Cena. People might be confused by that but there is a difference.  But at the end of the day it has done 1,217,000 so far....highest grossing wrestling event in the history of the business. It was a massively successful, and that was what WWE wanted.


----------



## Rock316AE

Megastar Brock was doing great segments in his return and after that. His interview on random slot gained huge, his contract signing did big overrun, the awesome video package gained all over the program. Now? It was simply WWE's fault, you don't tell your audience the special attraction is there, you're not going to get the extra viewers watching for him. + This program with HHH has that dead feeling in the air when you know that Lesnar is going to lose and be a complete waste. 



AthenaMark said:


> Rock/Cena disappointed because they made it about Cena and no one wanted to watch that. It was no surprise that the ratings went down when the promos of his started to go away from a dream match aspect and into a whining aspect that featured his played out rap character that no one had seen since 2005 or him trying to talk like an adult all of a sudden when he was apologizing full stop to Edge/HHH/Michaels and everyone else for years. Cena brought the Rock ratings down yet of course, the Rock fans brought the PPV buys through the roof.
> 
> Lesnar was paid 5 million and if he doesn't go over Cripple H in some form at Summerslam, it will be the biggest waste of time of 2012 by far.


That was unbelievable because the moment people realized that this is just a series of attempts to get WWE's charity case over, they refused to support it, Cena was losing week after week, the more he talked the hypocritical BS, the more he lost. He was lucky that The Rock is such a monster force worldwide and the greatest money promo of all time that he was able to bring this program not only to "successful" level, but to "record breaking, iconic" caliber.


----------



## #Mark

Rock/Cena was hard to watch because Cena's a fucking square. If Rocky wasn't the well-mannered genuinely nice guy he is he would have buried Cena after that baseless comment about lines on his wrist. Seriously, Vince really had no shame. He did anything and everything to try to make John boy look bigger than he really is.

As for Lesnar, he's a proven draw. They hardly advertised him last week, I thought there was gonna be a pre-tape tbh. I guarantee a lot of others thought the same. Summerslam's buyrate will definitely be up; Lesnar/Hunter/HBK are all huge draws and will probably save a shit PPV (well, if Punk loses than not much can save it from being shit).


----------



## murder

Cena/Rock, a disappointment?! Got the 6th biggest domestic buyrate of all time and the biggest including international.


----------



## D.M.N.

Hour 2 should be the highest hour by a long well. Commercial placement was a bit fucked up...


----------



## D.M.N.

Okay, I'm wrong. 3.795m, 4.252m and 4.354m....


----------



## dxbender

Maybe the finale of The Closer impacted Raws rating? It usually gets 6M viewers, but the finale episode got 9M(and the spinoff show which aired after, got 7M)


----------



## KO Bossy

dxbender said:


> Maybe the finale of The Closer impacted Raws rating? It usually gets 6M viewers, but the finale episode got 9M(and the spinoff show which aired after, got 7M)


Or, you know, the show just wasn't very good.


----------



## JY57

http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe..._Lowest_Viewership_Of_The_New_3-Hour_Era.html



> The ratings are in for Monday's 3-hour WWE RAW and it's not good news for WWE. Monday's RAW drew a 2.84 rating for the 3-hours and a 2.93 for the final two hours, RAW's old timeslot. 2.84 is the lowest rating RAW has done since expanding to 3-hours on a weekly basis last month.
> 
> The show averaged 4,134,000 viewers, also a new low for the 3-hour era. The first hour dipped below 4 million viewers (for the first time since RAW 1,000), with 3,795,000 viewers. Hour two had 4,252,000 viewers while hour three did 4,354,000.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

JY57 said:


> http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe..._Lowest_Viewership_Of_The_New_3-Hour_Era.html


ouch.

Thank goodness for Youtube and downloads. I refuse to watch 3 hrs every week Not worth it.


----------



## God Movement

Good news. Sooner or later they're going to have to do something about it.


----------



## Mister Excitement

2.8 is a well deserved rating. Hopefully next week draws even lower.


----------



## SteenIsGod

BORK LASER GETTING A 2.8 AMAZING.


----------



## lancaster223

Punk and his long string of under 3.0 ratings........ fpalm


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

2.8? I guess no one wants to see vanilla giants like Bork and HHH.


----------



## KO Bossy

Mister Excitement said:


> 2.8 is a well deserved rating. Hopefully next week draws even lower.


This 100%.

I'm of the belief that it will take a complete ratings meltdown for us to see some change. Viva la revolution!

LOL at the people blaming Punk alone for the rating. I think this is a collectively earned dud. Except for Sandow, Jericho, Ziggler, Miz and Christian. Those guys are exempt from blame for yesterday.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Wow seems people are not sold on Summerslam.


----------



## JY57

With Monday Nigh Football returning soon. I don't see it increasing by much.


----------



## checkcola

Maybe the belt back on Cena is the best option.


----------



## joeisgonnakillyou

2.8? 5 years too late...
eeh next week they go back to 3.2 with one good segment in a 3 hours show and everything goes back to usual.


----------



## TripleG

Well let's be real, the show in its current format is hard to watch. The Three Hours deal is becoming a problem and it is clear they are having trouble filling the extra time which has led to shitty pacing and an over abundance of stupid things to fill that time like Twitter, Tout, and Cole & Lawler being Cole & Lawler.


----------



## Vyed

2.84 rating.




> - WWE got its first taste of going head-to-head with NFL this year, as pre-season NFL football on ESPN averaged 5.3 million viewers. Also, the series finale of "The Closer" on TNT averaged 9.1 million viewers and TNT's new show, "Major Crimes," averaged 7.18 million viewers.
> 
> On cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #6 in overall viewers, #2 in key male demos behind the NFL, and #1 in teen males.
> 
> *- The interesting thing is all key demographics (males 18-49, males 18-34, and teen males) were up compared to last week. Also, the show scored its highest demo ratings in the three-week stretch of shows that followed the huge Raw 1,000 audience.
> 
> The overall ratings drop-off is likely attributed to a loss of female viewers and adults over the age of 49, which is likely related to the TNT and ESPN programming.*


----------



## Ray

Let the destruction of the 3 hour era begin :lmao


----------



## Choke2Death

So much for the GO HOME SHOW!!!!!! It was awful and the bad ratings is what they deserve for coming out with shitty shows week after week. That and the fact they are not creative enough to fill out 3 hours with some decent stuff once in a while, let alone on a weekly basis.


----------



## Falkono

Terrible rating. Further proof that Punk can't draw to save his life.


----------



## Ray

LOL at people blaming Punk when Lesnar, Triple H, John Cena, Big Show, Chris Jericho and other guys were also on that show.


----------



## Pro Royka

Falkono said:


> Terrible rating. Further proof that Punk can't draw to save his life.





checkcola said:


> Maybe the belt back on Cena is the best option.





lancaster223 said:


> Punk and his long string of under 3.0 ratings........ fpalm


Are these guys for real. This right here is what pathetic means, blaming Punk for the overrun and ratings fully, fpalm. Punk was teaming with Cena against Big show and Bryan, so how is it his fault. People it's a 3 hour show how can you blame one guy for it fpalm. 3 hour show was never a good idea in the first place + the sickening commercials kills it for me.


----------



## Chrome

And it's hard to blame Punk for the ratings when HHH and Lesnar took up like a half hour total and closed the show. What with 10,000 recaps and Lesnar predictably beating up Michaels, it's no wonder people are tuning out.


----------



## Vyed

Top of the hour with Piper's pit/Jericho probably didnt do well. Commercial placement in the third hour was weird as fuck.




ChromeMan said:


> And it's hard to blame Punk for the ratings when HHH and Lesnar took up like a half hour total and closed the show. What with 10,000 recaps and Lesnar predictably beating up Michaels, it's no wonder people are tuning out.


Third hour had the most number of viewers if you didnt notice.


----------



## Rock316AE

Abysmal rating and a good sign that the 3 hours concept is not going to last more than a few more months. 

The Lesnar/Heyman/HBK angle was probably the only decent number and it's the most important, maybe Jericho/Piper did good as Piper's pit with Jericho should be a big deal.


----------



## Choke2Death

Lesnar and HHH should not be blamed for the shitty rating. WWE did all they could to make the "main event" as awful as possible. First they had that stupid 'peaceful' contract signing which was a complete waste of time, then they went to commercial and there was about 50 recaps before the parking lot segment then commercials again then recap of what just happened and finally the arm-break in the ring. It was a complete clusterfuck and split up in such a way, you can't even call it "taking up 30 minutes".


----------



## uknoww

do you guys now were can i find the breakdown segment from 2007,2008,and 2009?


----------



## Billy Kidman

Falkono said:


> Terrible rating. Further proof that Punk can't draw to save his life.


Always comes back to one guy... :no:


----------



## The XL

2.8, and it will almost certainly drop. I'm a diehard, and it felt like I was watching for 10 hours. That's what happens when a show is poorly booked.


----------



## chucky101

2.8 going into the 2nd biggest show of the year

i hope it keeps dropping, maybe vince is wake up, hopefully the mid carders walk out or something, this company sucks right now

im debating even if i should dvr it, i watched about 15 min of real time this morning on my dvr from raw last night, took me about 25 min to get through the whole thing, only watched 2 small parts in real time


----------



## King_Of_This_World

Good, the show is very poor and deserves it.


----------



## chucky101

the only really great segment i saw on raw this whole summer, hell since extreme rules was the dx 1000 raw reunion

no joke, a bunch of guys from 15 years ago with some beer bellys entertained me more than any of the current product had combined the last 4 months, this is not a joke


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Choke2Death said:


> Lesnar and HHH should not be blamed for the shitty rating. WWE did all they could to make the "main event" as awful as possible. First they had that stupid 'peaceful' contract signing which was a complete waste of time, then they went to commercial and there was about 50 recaps before the parking lot segment then commercials again then recap of what just happened and finally the arm-break in the ring. It was a complete clusterfuck and split up in such a way, you can't even call it "taking up 30 minutes".


I definitely agree Lesnar and HHH shouldn't be blamed for the shitty rating. While the feud might be horrible, Lesnar, HHH, and HBK as well are draws and there's no way their segments didn't do well unless the feud really is THAT bad to the casual fans.

The third hour not only had half an hour of that, but also had the tag team match between Cena/Punk/Show/Bryan, and I'm sure that helped picked the 3rd hour up a bit.



> the only really great segment i saw on raw this whole summer, hell since extreme rules was the dx 1000 raw reunion
> 
> no joke, a bunch of guys from 15 years ago with some beer bellys entertained me more than any of the current product had combined the last 4 months, this is not a joke


You need to be enlightened by the man in my avatar.


----------



## chucky101

um no, the current product stinks, the only single segmant i truly enjoyed and made me watch again was the dx reunion, from extreme rules-summerslam


----------



## RatedR10

People listing off a bunch of names need to give it a rest. Maybe the shitty rating is the fact that no one wants to sit through a three hour show where a large chunk of it involves Tout, twitter a long recap videos.

Thank god I PVR Raw since after watching Raw 1001 live, I can't stand all that bullshit and I doubt anyone else can. I expect largely the same ratings, and even the number dropping, by the time the NFL regular season begins.


----------



## Medo

*I understand this shity numbers since Orton wasn't there



*


----------



## Jingoro

why even bother tuning in when you know nothing great will happen? brock beating up hbk was basically given away last week. the whole fun of brock is the lunatic character that can beat the fuck out of people at any moment. it has to feel spontaneous. telling us it's going to happen a week before ruins that. the typical lets set up a 4 man tag between guys involved in summer slam matches as a little preview bullshit they've done for as long as i've watched wrestling. 2 hours of wrestling entertainment and there one good triple threat match. that's all there was for good wrestling in a 2 hour long show with the ads cut out. shocking the masses are tuning in. waste 2 hours for a good 15 minute match or watch a movie or a bunch of good tv show on netflix streaming and have fun the entire time? gee that's a tough one. i can't imagine watching it live and sitting there for 3 hours and change to get so little good content. i can barely watch it with the commercials already edited out.


----------



## Oakue

God, and this is without Monday Night Football and the Network Fall lineup yet.

WWE is going to get destroyed come September and October. 2.5 and below every week.


----------



## charmed1

You take a horrible two hour program and add an hour... what do people expect?


----------



## SpeedStick

3 hours is a bad idea , just do sunday night heat for 1 hour, and go back to 2 hours RAW


----------



## deadman18

Wonder what was the rating for the last 20 minutes, cause I thought it was the end of the show after the contract signing. I said MNF would kill them and I think Love & Hip Hop Atlanta got a bigger rating than RAW.


----------



## xerxesXXI

Raw goes back to 2 hours after a month of MNF.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Regardless of how poor last night's ratings were, I can't see RAW moving back to two hours in a while. It's still getting some of the highest ratings on the USA network. Remember that the network wanted the three hour move.

With that said, I enjoyed the last few RAWs, but I do agree that all the material in a three hour show can easily be fit into a strong two hour show.


----------



## Happenstan

So does Vince's panic mode go into effect and Punk loses the title to Cena this Sunday or will they wait until NOTC and have Cena take the belt off Punk then as many expect?


----------



## KO Bossy

How much do we want to bet that in about 6 weeks Cole is gonna get on the headset and say:

"WWE has listened to you, the WWE universe, and we have some history breaking news! Starting next week we are going to be airing our show from 9pm-11pm in a brand new, 2 hour format. I can't wait, King."

Just like TNA humbly did when their switch to Monday nights didn't quite work out.


----------



## chucky101

how anyone can watch 3 hours live needs to be given a gold medal, i can barely watch it even with dvr skipping over 90% of it

not even dvr worthy, in fact the only reason why they got a 2.8 is there name power, the name power and long history of raw on monday nights is the only reason why the rating hoovers at 3.0


----------



## chucky101

hopefully this wakes them up, but probably not

-they just got a 2.8 rating going into there biggest ppv of the year not called wrestlemania
-they are still relying on non full time aging stars from past like rock/taker/hhh/hbk/lesnar
-cena owns everyone for 7 years, nobody has a chance to really shine besides him
-big slow is main eventing in 2012 nuff said
-monday night football is starting up VERY soon
-they just went 3 hours so to go back to 2 hours is not happening until early 2013 earliest
-a large part of the roster is pissed about pay, vince pokes fun at them last night
-linda just won some race today so thats not going away anytime soon

i just hope the ratings go low, real low, south of 2.5, then maybe that will be the wake up call vince needs, i think even vince won't take a 2.5 rating


----------



## Redwood

Pretty sure Vince is too senile to realize no one wants to really sit through a recap-heavy, social network whoring 3 hour "sports entertainment" show. Oh wait...


----------



## HHHbkDX

I'm not one to argue about ratings, but even I realize that a sub 3.0 rating is PITIFUL, ESPECIALLY for a go home show. 


Cena WILL win at Summerslam. No fucking question about that now.


----------



## HHHbkDX

KO Bossy said:


> How much do we want to bet that in about 6 weeks Cole is gonna get on the headset and say:
> 
> "WWE has listened to you, the WWE universe, and we have some history breaking news! Starting next week we are going to be airing our show from 9pm-11pm in a brand new, 2 hour format. I can't wait, King."
> 
> Just like TNA humbly did when their switch to Monday nights didn't quite work out.


I see this happening EXACTLY the way you described it.


----------



## Chrome

moonmop said:


> God, and this is without Monday Night Football and the Network Fall lineup yet.
> 
> WWE is going to get destroyed come September and October. 2.5 and below every week.


I was going to come in this thread and say something like this, but never got around to it. If WWE thinks a 2.8 rating is bad now, wait until the fall. In addition, their first hour will be going head to head with MNF and other fall shows. And Lesnar, HHH, Michaels, Rock likely won't be around for at least two months as the next two ppvs are Night of Champions and Hell In A Cell, B-level ppvs none of them really need to be at. Things could be getting rough soon for Raw ratings.


----------



## TheRainKing

No surprise here. Back when the show was still two hours, lots of people predicted that from August to December you would see terrible ratings, and now that the show is 3 hours its only going to be worse. I can't wait to see how lost the WWE are when they can't rely on big names like Rock and Lesnar to drum up interest in their product.


----------



## lancaster223

LOL, Punk with below 3.0 numbers again :lmao


----------



## Huganomics

Wow, Punk haters are more obsessed with the guy than his marks are.


----------



## Amuroray




----------



## The-Rock-Says

CM Punk, huh? Guy couldn't draw money from a bank.


----------



## Redwood

lolPunkhaters


----------



## ChickMagnet12

Prepare yourselves.


----------



## roadkill_

Amuroray said:


>


----------



## Falkono

Pro Royka said:


> Are these guys for real. This right here is what pathetic means, blaming Punk for the overrun and ratings fully, fpalm. Punk was teaming with Cena against Big show and Bryan, so how is it his fault. People it's a 3 hour show how can you blame one guy for it fpalm. 3 hour show was never a good idea in the first place + the sickening commercials kills it for me.


Because if you look the opening segment had the lowest viewing numbers. Who opened the show? 

You can't blame punk for the low rating as that's stupid. But on his own he isn't getting people to tune in. People are skipping his segments. That shows he is nowhere near as popular as people on here would love you to believe. If these numbers mean anything its that its pretty much certain Cena walks out of Summer slam the champ. When wwe gets crap ratings they revert back to Cena.


----------



## Green Light

ChickMagnet12 said:


> Prepare yourselves.


:mark:

I actually thought this Raw was the best 3 hour show post-1000 but there you go


----------



## Clique

ChickMagnet12 said:


> Prepare yourselves.


It's like death, I'm prepared for the inevitable. Don't fucking want it but I have accepted that it will come when it will come.

THE CHAMP IS HERE!


----------



## #Mark

How can people blame Punk when he wasn't even the main selling point? The whole show was built around the contract signing. Also, the show was full of recaps. It's really unfair to blame Punk.


----------



## joeisgonnakillyou

I love how people blame one wrestler (cena or punk) as the reason why ratings are in the shitter.
With the lack of decent angles and new stars, it's a miracle RAW still gets around 3.0.


----------



## SPCDRI

September/October also has playoff hunt and post season baseball along with Monday Night Football and all the network's top shows come back and hyped shows debut. Blood bath up ahead.


----------



## Vyed

Calm down folks, the 2hr Go-home RAW show for last year's Summerslam, Aug 8th 2011, did only 3.09 rating which was a disappointment(although Viewership was higher with 4.54m average compared to this week's 4.30m for regular 2hrs). Adult 18-49 actually dropped 17.8% compared to previous year and teen males also went down 38.4%. And Punk retained/won the title last year by defeating Cena. Del rio cashed in and won, but that had nothing to do with ratings, Cena-Del Rio was original plan but Punk's shoot promo kinda changed everything from MITB.

Point is, One week's low rating is nothing to worry about. I still believe Punk is set to retain by pinning Big show at summerslam. He will most likely drop it to the Rock at rumble, Cena wins Rumble 2013 on the same night and there you have it, your Wrestlemania 29 main event. 

Once in a lifetime 2. :cena2:Rock4:vince


----------



## Choke2Death

ChickMagnet12 said:


> Prepare yourselves.












Been ten months too long. I think it'll happen at Night of Champions as that picture shows, though. Not SummerSlam, which is where Show is there only to take the pin.


----------



## NearFall

Choke2Death said:


> Been ten months too long. I think it'll happen at Night of Champions as that picture shows, though. Not SummerSlam, which is where Show is there only to take the pin.


Ten great PPV matches :cool2

But I disagree with the Night of Champions statement. I think this is happening at SummerSlam










Nobody can Rise Above Cena :cena2

:lol


----------



## Choke2Death

Nah, it'll take place in NoC because it's in Cena's hometown and they want to give him another "moment" there. Plus they want to drag the Punk/Cena feud as long as they can, so it's wiser for them to let Punk pin Show after Cena does the job (as in FUs Show) so they have an official one-on-one on NoC and a couple of rematches until a traditional elimination match at Survivor Series with Punk overcoming the dirty way somewhere down the road so he takes the Rock Bottom at Royal Rumble.


----------



## NearFall

Choke2Death said:


> Nah, it'll take place in NoC because it's in Cena's hometown and they want to give him another "moment" there. Plus they want to drag the Punk/Cena feud as long as they can, so it's wiser for them to let Punk pin Show after Cena does the job (as in FUs Show) so they have an official one-on-one on NoC and a couple of rematches until a traditional elimination match at Survivor Series with Punk overcoming the dirty way somewhere down the road so he takes the Rock Bottom at Royal Rumble.


That makes more sense. More so, when I think of it, Punk mentioned the new Title Design probably debuting after NOC. So Cena might introduce it as a new start to his reign or something.


----------



## BANKSY

DJ PAULY D'S TWITTER IS NOT A DRAW.


----------



## chucky101

they have 1 hour of crap, tout/paulyd/recaps so much crap, i mean how many times did they show the lesnar/hhh stuff, am i dreaming or did i see that same long promo 4-5 times in 3 hours

the show was terrible at 2 hours, now we have 1 hour of extra garbage on top of it

how any of you can defend the product right now is laughable and shows your just a fanboy, you would defend satino sitting in the ring for 2 hours on a chair


----------



## chucky101

i forget to mention the new scooby doo movie, nothing changing folks, last year they had the chance with the summer of punk, they had something there, and ruined it

now we have the same crap, cena always the focus, he will win the title if not sunday it will be a matter of time, scooby doo movies, linda just won some race yesterday

this PG era is going nowhere anytime soon


----------



## KO Bossy

Time to channel my inner Jericho.

I love the hypocrisy on this forum. Ratings are up? Oh it must have been Daniel Bryan or Mark Henry or whoever else is the flavor of the week. Ratings are down? Punk's fault. Without fail, a bad rating is dismissed as being the fault of Punk, my guess whether he's champ or not. Allow me to educate you.

-The WWE title has been so completely devalued that its not longer a main draw, taking a back seat to several superstars
-Punk himself has been devalued by constantly getting booked to be second and often third fiddle to whatever Cena and occasionally Hunter, Shawn or Taker happen to be doing
-The June 4th edition of Raw was John Cena's big return after being accosted by Big Show at OTL. The main event was John Cena vs Michael Cole (the infamous BBQ sauce segment). The show drew a 2.92. I guess by all of your logic Cena isn't a draw either.


I find it absolutely hilarious that people can convince themselves into hate. Just face facts and say you don't like Punk. Its your right to have an opinion. Whatever you hate, his look, his moves, it doesn't matter. But at least stop the blind hate and give a justifiable reason for your dislike. You come off as so much more credible when you do. If you choose to ignore certain evidence, that's your call. At least say "I guess the ratings drop isn't all Punk's fault, I still don't like him." You can't look at this bad rating and blame it solely on Punk, its not the least bit logical. Was he out there for all 180 minutes? Was he the main focus of the show? Were his actions what a major angle hinged on? No. So think realistically-how can a bad rating for all 180 minutes be blamed on one single guy who was out there for maybe 20? It can't be. And you're delusional if you think it can. 

If you're desperate to blame someone for it, perhaps try Vince McMahon? You know, he's the one who runs all this stuff, supervises the shitty writing, supervises the atrocious booking, supervises the crappy commentary, pushes for the social media plugs, organizes the card so we have time for 100 commercial breaks, etc. My God, he was the one in Michael Cole's ear telling him to say how the Piper's Pit sucked. He's devaluing his OWN product.


----------



## Choke2Death

Lol, I think those who blame Punk for it are just joking. I dislike Punk and still think it's hyperbole to blame him solely for the terrible ratings, specially when he's not the main focus like last year.


----------



## Loader230

LOL knew it, Punk apologist come running defending his ass. Face it, he's a failure who doesnt deserve such a massive push he is currently receiving from the company.


----------



## KO Bossy

Punk apologist? Please, I am most definitely not a Punk mark...in fact, there's about 3 guys who I admit I'm a giant mark for and Punk is not one of them. I call a spade a spade, and when someone does something that is crap, I'll be the first to say so. However, I live in a logical world, and blaming Punk for all the failings of this company is completely ILLOGICAL.

Out of curiosity, you blind Punk haters ever think to yourselves "gee, Punk had a really good promo last summer, how can a guy exhibit great talent like that and then go to the kinda crap he does today? Maybe, just maybe, its more than 'he just sucks'..." Nah, somehow I don't think you guys have.

As a matter of fact, the WWE title is more of an anchor to Punk at this point. The title means absolutely nothing, all the highest caliber feuds going on are beyond the title, maybe if he drops it people can start a crusade of blaming someone else when the ratings don't improve. Matter of fact, I'd love to see Bryan get the WWE title and have him become the new poster boy for the shitty ratings. It'd piss off so many of his supporters, seeing the blind haters attribute the lack of success to the new scapegoat.


----------



## Pro Royka

Loader230 said:


> LOL knew it, Punk apologist come running defending his ass. Face it, he's a failure who doesnt deserve such a massive push he is currently receiving from the company.


You sir are wrong, its not his fault for this week ratings. How is he a failure? He isn't the focus of the show, he wasn't alone in his segments, if they want to see Cena, Show, and Bryan, then they will want to see the match. Punk isn't the one who ended the show and he wasn't in every single segment as its a 3 hour show, some segments has a big drop and even if he wasn't in that segment you will say its his fault lol.


----------



## checkcola

ChickMagnet12 said:


> Prepare yourselves.


I actually don't think its a bad idea. At the very least, it might cause CM Punk to go over the edge and drop this weak ass tweener stuff.


----------



## SteenIsGod

If Punk is Killing Raw, Then By that logic Orton was Killing Smackdown in 2011 before Christian, Mark Henry, Daniel Bryan and Sheamus saved it. Not that it's true, it's just going by your guys' logic.


----------



## chucky101

its not punk, cena is still the focus, who has been in the real main event in the last several ppvs, also what closed the show on monday, hbk/hhh/lesnar which was hyped up

but it's all punk's fault, please lol


----------



## Shazayum

ChickMagnet12 said:


> Prepare yourselves.


I'd rather that than Big Show winning it.


----------



## vanboxmeer

The show was hurt by strong cable competition, as it was only 6th for the night, including the first Monday night football game of the season (4.07 rating; 5.37 million viewers for Dallas Cowboys vs. Oakland Raiders). Usually preseason football doesn’t hurt Raw, as Raw traditionally does big August numbers and drops 10% or so in September against the regular season games. But preseason games also usually don’t beat Raw as this one did. The final episode of The Closer on TNT did a 6.8 rating and the debut of Major Crimes on TNT did a 5.5 rating, which are likely to be the two highest rated shows of the week on cable. There was nothing big on network programming. The debut of “Stars Earn Stripes,” a reality show promoted heavily on the Olympics, with Eve Torres, did a 3.05 rating and 5.24 million viewers, which is up from what NBC had been averaging (a 2.4) in that time slot this summer before the Olympics.

It was the lowest rated Raw since the 5/28 show did a 2.72 rating and 3.91 million viewers, which got killed by the Hatfield & McCoy mini-series and the Celtics vs. Heat NBA playoff game. The rule of thumb is not to overreact to one weeks rating, particularly when ratings were good the past few weeks. The three hours were 2.68, 2.89 and 2.98. Teenage boys did a 3.1 (up 11%), Males 18-49 did a 2.6 (up 4%), Teenage girls did a 1.5 (up 7%) and Women 18-49 did a 1.0 (down 9%). The skew was 70.1% male which means they were significantly down with women overall.

In the segment-by-segment, the promotion online and through social media that they were opening with C.M. Punk vs. Big Show led to a 2.60 quarter, the lowest quarter for a Raw episode in months. Ryback vs. JTG gained 63,000 viewers. R-Truth vs. Heath Slater gained 186,000 viewers. Sin Cara vs. Tensai lost 105,000 viewers. The Piper’s Pit segment with Chris Jericho, Dolph Ziggler and The Miz gained 516,000 viewers for the 9 p.m. start. You’d think by four weeks that wouldn’t happen, but it’s been ten weeks for TNA and it still happens. Jericho vs. Ziggler vs. Miz in a three-way lost 96,000 viewers. Backstage stuff with Shawn Michaels, John Cena and Punk lost 374,000 viewers. Eve Torres & Beth Phoenix vs. Kaitlyn & Layla gained 45,000 viewers. Cena & Punk vs. Show & Daniel Bryan gained 247,000 viewers to a 2.94 quarter at 10 p.m. Still not good for that time slot even with Cena. Christian vs. Damien Sandow lost 121,000 viewers. The contract signing with Brock Lesnar, HHH, Heyman and Michaels gained 431,000 viewers. The parking lot car accident and lights attack lost 394,000 viewers. And the in-ring angle where Lesnar “broke Michaels’ arm” gained 817,000 viewers to a 3.44 overrun. 


INSERT X DRAWS, Y DOESN'T DRAW FOR THIS ONE SPECIFIC WEEK AND GENERALIZE A STATEMENT BUT FORGET THESE RATINGS ONCE NEXT WEEK'S SHOW ARRIVES.

Commence..


----------



## yoseftigger

^ I expect an average buyrate for Summerslam.

That "car accident" had more touts than anything else btw.


----------



## Loader230

> In the segment-by-segment, *the promotion online and through social media that they were opening with C.M. Punk vs. Big Show led to a 2.60 quarter, the lowest quarter for a Raw episode in months.* Ryback vs. JTG gained 63,000 viewers. R-Truth vs. Heath Slater gained 186,000 viewers. Sin Cara vs. Tensai lost 105,000 viewers. The Piper’s Pit segment with Chris Jericho, Dolph Ziggler and The Miz gained 516,000 viewers for the 9 p.m. start. You’d think by four weeks that wouldn’t happen, but it’s been ten weeks for TNA and it still happens. Jericho vs. Ziggler vs. Miz in a three-way lost 96,000 viewers. Backstage stuff with Shawn Michaels, John Cena and Punk lost 374,000 viewers. Eve Torres & Beth Phoenix vs. Kaitlyn & Layla gained 45,000 viewers. Cena & Punk vs. Show & Daniel Bryan gained 247,000 viewers to a 2.94 quarter at 10 p.m. Still not good for that time slot even with Cena. Christian vs. Damien Sandow lost 121,000 viewers. The contract signing with Brock Lesnar, HHH, Heyman and Michaels gained 431,000 viewers. The parking lot car accident and lights attack lost 394,000 viewers. And the in-ring angle where Lesnar “broke Michaels’ arm” gained 817,000 viewers to a 3.44 overrun.



That right there is all the proof you need. Even after a week long promotion through social media and other means, the *WWE CHAMPION* draws *THE LOWEST QUARTER OF THE ENTIRE YEAR*(I'm pretty sure it is). Hell even Ryback/JTG outdrew him by gaining 63,000 viewers over the shitty first quarter. Ryback is becoming a big TV draw.

I still dont understand WHY CM PUNK DESERVES TO BE THE LONGEST REIGNING CHAMPION IN YEARS? He clearly does not draw. What else has he done to deserve this massive push? Suck on Vince Mcmahon/Triple H's dick backstage? It use to be when the prestigious title was given only to the wrestler who could draw fans in thousands, when the wrestlers actually earned the title but now punk has completely killed the credibility of the championship. 




Amuroray said:


>


:lmao Putting the title on punk must be the biggest mistake made by the company probably in last 10 years of WWE.


----------



## D.M.N.

Quarter Hours - August 13th, 2012
Q1 - 3.759 million
Q2 - 3.822 million
Q3 - 4.008 million
Q4 - 3.903 million
----------
Q5 - 4.419 million
Q6 - 4.323 million
Q7 - 3.949 million
Q8 - 3.994 million
----------
Q9 - 4.241 million
Q10 - 4.120 million
Q11 - 4.551 million
Q12 - 4.157 million
Overrun - 4.974 million

If you ignore hour 1 for a second, then the hour 2 'opening' with Piper's Pit actually did better than the 22:00 slot.

Also kudos to Sandow, since Raw 1000 I don't think I've seen him record a big loss once.

Overrun did well, although I've been plain uninterested with Lesnar/HHH/Michaels. Lesnar needed to take out Michaels before Monday and maybe even take out other DX members before beating HHH at SummerSlam.


----------



## Falkono

However you wish to look at it no WWE champion should be getting the lowest viewing nunber if the year under a week before one of the main ppvs. People will come in and make excuses for Punk as always. The guy has been given one of the longest reigns ever...You cant blame the wwe for him not being able to draw.


----------



## Redwood

Loader230 said:


> It use to be when the prestigious title was given only to the wrestler who could draw fans in thousands, when the wrestlers actually earned the title but now punk has completely killed the credibility of the championship.
> 
> :lmao Putting the title on punk must be the biggest mistake made by the company probably in the last 10 years of WWE.


He hasn't been the selling point of WWE for months, which automatically killed the credibility of the title. Any feud he was involved in, would play second fiddle to whatever Cena was involved in. Once again, blind Punk haters stuck in Bizarro land.


----------



## e1987p

The divas draw again .This time with Layla and Beth back.
We have to taking into account that Layla never draw without Beth and Beth was the one trending.
Time for a new Diva Champion.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

Loader230 said:


> I still dont understand WHY CM PUNK DESERVES TO BE THE LONGEST REIGNING CHAMPION IN YEARS? He clearly does not draw. What else has he done to deserve this massive push? Suck on Vince Mcmahon/Triple H's dick backstage? It use to be when the prestigious title was given only to the wrestler who could draw fans in thousands, when the wrestlers actually earned the title but now punk has completely killed the credibility of the championship.
> 
> :lmao Putting the title on punk must be the biggest mistake made by the company probably in last 10 years of WWE.


*English mothaf*cka do you read it?*




KO Bossy said:


> Time to channel my inner Jericho.
> 
> I love the hypocrisy on this forum. Ratings are up? Oh it must have been Daniel Bryan or Mark Henry or whoever else is the flavor of the week. Ratings are down? Punk's fault. Without fail, a bad rating is dismissed as being the fault of Punk, my guess whether he's champ or not. Allow me to educate you.
> 
> -The WWE title has been so completely devalued that its not longer a main draw, taking a back seat to several superstars
> -Punk himself has been devalued by constantly getting booked to be second and often third fiddle to whatever Cena and occasionally Hunter, Shawn or Taker happen to be doing
> -The June 4th edition of Raw was John Cena's big return after being accosted by Big Show at OTL. The main event was John Cena vs Michael Cole (the infamous BBQ sauce segment). The show drew a 2.92. I guess by all of your logic Cena isn't a draw either.
> 
> 
> I find it absolutely hilarious that people can convince themselves into hate. Just face facts and say you don't like Punk. Its your right to have an opinion. Whatever you hate, his look, his moves, it doesn't matter. But at least stop the blind hate and give a justifiable reason for your dislike. You come off as so much more credible when you do. If you choose to ignore certain evidence, that's your call. At least say "I guess the ratings drop isn't all Punk's fault, I still don't like him." You can't look at this bad rating and blame it solely on Punk, its not the least bit logical. Was he out there for all 180 minutes? Was he the main focus of the show? Were his actions what a major angle hinged on? No. So think realistically-how can a bad rating for all 180 minutes be blamed on one single guy who was out there for maybe 20? It can't be. And you're delusional if you think it can.
> 
> If you're desperate to blame someone for it, perhaps try Vince McMahon? You know, he's the one who runs all this stuff, supervises the shitty writing, supervises the atrocious booking, supervises the crappy commentary, pushes for the social media plugs, organizes the card so we have time for 100 commercial breaks, etc. My God, he was the one in Michael Cole's ear telling him to say how the Piper's Pit sucked. He's devaluing his OWN product.


----------



## uknoww

the divas outdraw punk


----------



## AthenaMark

e1987p said:


> The divas draw again .This time with Layla and Beth back.
> We have to taking into account that Layla never draw without Beth and Beth was the one trending.
> Time for a new Diva Champion.


Layla was the one trending too..what are you talking about? LOL. And Beth has been a ratings loser for who knows how long at this point. Kharma and Mickie James were the legit female rating draws until AJ got that 700k increase before the match with Bryan/Punk.



> In the segment-by-segment, the promotion online and through social media that they were opening with C.M. *Punk vs. Big
> Show led to a 2.60 quarter, the lowest quarter for a Raw episode in months.* Ryback vs. JTG gained 63,000 viewers. R-Truth vs.
> Heath Slater gained 186,000 viewers. Sin Cara vs. Tensai lost 105,000 viewers. The Piper’s Pit segment with Chris Jericho,
> Dolph Ziggler and The Miz gained 516,000 viewers for the 9 p.m. start. You’d think by four weeks that wouldn’t happen, but it’s
> been ten weeks for TNA and it still happens. Jericho vs. Ziggler vs. Miz in a three-way lost 96,000 viewers. Backstage stuff with
> Shawn Michaels, John Cena and Punk lost 374,000 viewers. Eve Torres & Beth Phoenix vs. Kaitlyn & Layla gained 45,000
> viewers. Cena & Punk vs. Show & Daniel Bryan gained 247,000 viewers to a 2.94 quarter at 10 p.m. Still not good for that time
> slot even with Cena. Christian vs. Damien Sandow lost 121,000 viewers. The contract signing with Brock Lesnar, HHH,
> Heyman and Michaels gained 431,000 viewers. The parking lot car accident and lights attack lost 394,000 viewers. And the in-
> ring angle where Lesnar “broke Michaels’ arm” gained 817,000 viewers to a 3.44 overrun.


That CM Punk rating is a damn shame. All that shit the boy talks and he isn't drawing shit but it's not like he cares. His paycheck got better from the whining heel gimmick that was believed to be "shoots" by the naive wrestling public.


----------



## N-destroy

WWE should have known better. Considering Punk's track record as a rating disaster in the past, why open the show with him? Makes no sense.




Y2Raven said:


> *He hasn't been the selling point of WWE for months,* which automatically killed the credibility of the title. Any feud he was involved in, would play second fiddle to whatever Cena was involved in. Once again, blind Punk haters stuck in Bizarro land.


Exactly why it baffles me why they let him open the show. Show vs Cena rematch could have done better as the opening match imo.


----------



## MethHardy

Ha punk sucks and he has nerve to call TNA indy league when the ratings tank cause of him to tna levels. what a loser.


----------



## Falkono

Y2Raven said:


> He hasn't been the selling point of WWE for months, which automatically killed the credibility of the title. Any feud he was involved in, would play second fiddle to whatever Cena was involved in. Once again, blind Punk haters stuck in Bizarro land.


Dude your the one living in fantasy land...

Go back a year and a half and your see Punk HAS been the main focus in many of the storylines and ppvs. Just look at this time last year. To try and imply we ruined it is stupid. Fuck even a few weeks ago on the biggest WWE show for almost a decade (1000th episode) it was all about Punk. He was on air longer then anyone and in the end took out two of the biggest stars in wwe history is Rock and Cena. After that he has opened and closed raw almost every week... what else could they do for him?
Wwe have given Punk one of the best years in recent memory and after everything he still can't get people to tune in.

While you talk about Punk haters I think your wrong. People don't hate Punk they are just tired of his reign. One which has gone on for nearly a year and has overall not been that memorable.
Some people seem to want to believe Punk is this great wrestler who is popular. That Wwe are to blame for him not being a megastar. Which is total bollocks. Punk just isn't good enough and seems people such as yourself would prefer to look for any excuse going to defend him. JTG just got a biggest rating then Punk. If that doesn't open your eyes then nothing will.


----------



## murder

Just three weeks ago, Raw got 6 million viewers. Granted, it was Raw 1000 but no 6 million people would watch if the current direction (Punk as champ) was bad. And he was in the two longest and most successful segments of the evening.

The reason why ratings have gone down again since that is because of bad booking and writing. If every Raw was as hyped and as well booked and written as Raw 1000, it would constantly be around 6 million viewers with Punk as champ.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

I feel there is no buzz for the WWE title picture and people just don't care. I mean there hasn't been any real developments going into Summerslam for the WWE title picture and it feels like the pay-off to this Cena vs Punk feud will be perhaps at Night of Chamions or Survivor Series. A match with CM Punk and Big Show doing the lowest quarter in a while isn't good per say, but like I said there is no buzz for the WWE title scene.


----------



## Kid Kablam

Did it ever occur to anyone that part of the reason the show started out so poorly is that this 3 hour thing is kind of a mistake in its current form?

It's not what people are used to, it hasn't been used for anything other than the usual opening interviews (except for this week), it's full of the wrestling equivalent of pop up ads, and the WWE hasn't exactly been doing a great job of getting people excited for the longer shows. Add in the fact that they re cap everything ad nauseum, and there really is no reason to watch the first hour.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

Falkono said:


> Dude your the one living in fantasy land...
> 
> Go back a year and a half and your see Punk HAS been the main focus in many of the storylines and ppvs. Just look at this time last year. To try and imply we ruined it is stupid. Fuck even a few weeks ago on the biggest WWE show for almost a decade (1000th episode) it was all about Punk. He was on air longer then anyone and in the end took out two of the biggest stars in wwe history is Rock and Cena. After that he has opened and closed raw almost every week... what else could they do for him?
> Wwe have given Punk one of the best years in recent memory and after everything he still can't get people to tune in.
> 
> While you talk about Punk haters I think your wrong. People don't hate Punk they are just tired of his reign. One which has gone on for nearly a year and has overall not been that memorable.
> Some people seem to want to believe Punk is this great wrestler who is popular. That Wwe are to blame for him not being a megastar. Which is total bollocks. Punk just isn't good enough and seems people such as yourself would prefer to look for any excuse going to defend him. JTG just got a biggest rating then Punk. If that doesn't open your eyes then nothing will.


WWE have gave Punk a great year? Sure hes been the champ, but hes played 2nd or even 3rd (wrestlemania) fiddle in terms of storylines. Even when he won the title at Survivor Series, the Cena/Rock tag team match was billed as more important.

It was only around October last year (after Punk had came to prominence) that the haters started growing for Punk in droves. It always happens when a IWC underdog gets his time around the main event, hes turned on (Ryder earlier this year and now Bryan). People start looking for excuses to bash him. 

Sure, it wasn't a great rating. But the first hour of the 3 hour Raws are always low, and this Raw in particular was lower than average due to MNF. Lets not forget that Cena and Bryan were in the first segment (only a fool couldn't guess that Cena was going to get involved somehow in the match, does this mean Cena can't draw?).

You think it was JTG who drew 63k? Under that logic (Ryback and JTG both drawing), Big Show, D Bry and Cena can't draw either.

Still the championship is playing 2nd fiddle to HHH-Lesnar. There's where the problem lies.


----------



## Starbuck

Mega ouch at that opener. Wouldn't have been so bad if it wasn't advertised although it has to be said that it wasn't advertised on TV but only online and over twitter etc, right? Even still, that's not good. The tag match later on in the evening which by all accounts, was a pretty fun match, didn't do too well either and didn't even get over a 3.0. The build for the title has been pedestrian at best so I'm not surprised, even with Cena in there. I think the highest rated segment during the build for this match was Cena/Show if I'm not mistaken. It seems like an anomaly when you look at it lol but whatever. My interest in the match couldn't be any lower than it is and it's no surprise to me that others feel the same. 

I guess we can say that the average gain for 9PM is 500,000 based on the last few weeks. In that regard Piper's Pit was on the dot. Can't complain there given who was in the segment. The Divas drawing is a surprise but kudos to them I guess. Outside of that and the first hour, everything else lost viewers. Looking at DMN's breakdown they had 5 quarters under 4 million and that is the real thing to worry about, if anything, 3 of which involved the WWE title picture. 

Combined, the Brock/HHH stuff gained over 1.2 million viewers and was the highest rated stuff on the show. The contract signing happened at a very unusual time slot but it still pulled in over 400k which is very good. The car accident bit lost viewers but iirc that quarter was full of commercials and in general, the placement of segments during the last half hour was all over the place. The end did a very nice number. Big gain of over 800k and right on the money at 5 million viewers. That's about the only positive thing to be taken from this breakdown lol. 5 million is the magic number and 5 million people watched the hard sell for Summerslam at the end so they can take solace in that I suppose.


----------



## JY57

http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe/8_13_


> RAW_Breakdown_CM_Punk_vs_Big_Show_Opener_Lesnar_s_Attack_on_Michaels_and_More.html
> 
> 8/13 RAW Breakdown: CM Punk vs. Big Show Opener, Lesnar's Attack on Michaels and More
> By Marc Middleton
> Aug 16, 2012 - 7:47:20 AM
> 
> - As noted before, the August 13th WWE RAW did a 2.85 cable rating with 4.14 million viewers - not good numbers for the SummerSlam go-home RAW.
> 
> In the segment breakdown, CM Punk vs. Big Show opened with a 2.60 quarter rating - the lowest quarter for RAW in months. JTG vs. Ryback gained 63,000 viewers while Heath Slater vs. R-Truth gained 186,000 more. Tensai vs. Sin Cara lost 105,000 viewers.
> 
> Piper's Pit with Dolph Ziggler, Chris Jericho, The Miz and Roddy Piper at 9pm gained 516,000 viewers. Jericho vs. Ziggler vs. Miz lost 96,000 viewers. Backstage segments with Shawn Michaels, John Cena and CM Punk lost 374,000 viewers while the Divas match with Eve Torres and Beth Phoenix vs. Layla and Kaitlyn gained 45,000 viewers.
> 
> John Cena and CM Punk vs. Big Show and Daniel Bryan gained 247,000 viewers for a 2.94 quarter rating at 10pm - not a good increase for that timeslot, even with Cena featured. Christian vs. Damien Sandow lost 121,000 viewers. The contract signing angle with Brock Lesnar, Triple H, Paul Heyman and Shawn Michaels gained 431,000 viewers. The angle in the parking lot where the camera went out lost 394,000 viewers and the in-ring angle where Lesnar broke Shawn's arm gained 817,000 viewers for a 3.44 overrun.


----------



## DFUSCMAN

LET.THE.MARK.WARS.COMMENCE.


----------



## -Skullbone-

ChickMagnet12 said:


> WWE have gave Punk a great year? Sure hes been the champ, but hes played 2nd or even 3rd (wrestlemania) fiddle in terms of storylines. Even when he won the title at Survivor Series, the Cena/Rock tag team match was billed as more important.
> 
> It was only around October last year (after Punk had came to prominence) that the haters started growing for Punk in droves. It always happens when a IWC underdog gets his time around the main event, hes turned on (Ryder earlier this year and now Bryan). People start looking for excuses to bash him.


While I certainly agree that WWE have not made their main title and Punk (as well as when put together) the hot commodities they should've, that number is worrisome (especially with Show in there). Even if I'm of the belief that Cena is one key reason why little else matters in most fans minds the overall reception to Punk and this long reign is spotty when put under the spotlight. We'll see if he can attract some more interest when some further tweaks are added into his character though.

I've also got to add this: the guy brings all this smart fan hatred and disdain on himself for being a knucklehead. Being the real-life dweeb that he gives the impression he is I can't say he doesn't deserve having the boots laid into him even if those people don't matter in the great scheme of things (him replying to them at times is quite funny).


----------



## BrosOfDestruction

LITTLE JIMMY = DRAW.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Punk the past couple of weeks has done okay in the opening slot. What's the difference this week? This week he was in a match (last week he was in a match after Q1 if I recall). But even then, the angle has been turned to shit, and it's proof in the fact all three men in the triple threat plus Daniel Bryan couldn't pull in at least a 3.0. The whole compelling thing about Punk/Cena in the first place was Punk's heel turn. However once again he's been put in the backseat of the feud and they added Big Show into the mix. That being said it's not good at all this Raw opened the lowest in months, but WWE gets what they give. They give shit, they get a shit amount of viewers. I don't know about everyone else, but I certainly didn't care to see Punk/Show. 

As far as Punk/Show getting promoted, I remember hearing about it maybe once in the last week. They got about as much promotion as HHH/Lesnar did last week. 

As far as Lesnar/HHH/HBK/Heyman goes, no matter how shit the angle is, with that starpower it's going to draw big when advertised. As expected, it did. Even in a random quarter hour it does well, and then the overrun gains 800,000+ viewers, second only to the Cena/Show with Punk on commentary from a couple of weeks ago since moving to three hours. 

But yeah, not good for the go home show, but as someone else pointed out last year's go-home show did pretty poorly as well for Summerslam. Next week will be interesting. I'm fully expecting Cena to become WWE Champion at Summerslam, and if so it will be very interesting if that brings in viewers. We also have the fallout of Lesnar/HHH, which hopefully will be more than just a video package, but if the two destroy eachother that's all we'll get.


----------



## Kabraxal

It's really simple why Raw is dipping this low again... people gave the WWE a chance with 1000th and gave it a few eppies to see what happened. Turned out it was more of the same bad booking and idiotic casual grabbing shit. Many wrestling fans are tuning out of this entertainment product McMahon wants... too bad he doesn't realise it is BAD entertainment.


----------



## kokepepsi

Damn was hoping to see a Rock316ae post burying PUnk for that opener rating

Betcha 50 bucks if it had done well he would have credited it to another Big Show Oscar winning performance.

LOL at that 10pm gain.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Also, went back the last couple of weeks and noticed something:

1) Last week, Lesnar/HHH was at a 3.45 rating, where this week was 3.44. Not sure how close the viewership was for each, but we can assume they've been able to keep everyone interested with the tease when Lesnar said "I'll see you before Summerslam" to HBK.

2) The 10PM slot hasn't had a huge gain since moving to 3 hours. HHH/Lesnar from Raw 1000 gained like 90,000 (granted on top of 300,000 from the quarter before it with Heyman/Steph/HHH). A tag match on Raw 1001 gained 50,000. Raw 1002 with another Lesnar/HHH segment gained a little over 200,000. So this week at the very least, falls in the line with the gains, but I'm not sure how many viewers each segment got, so can't really comment on that, but I do know the Lesnar/HHH segment from last week was the highest of the night. And on Raw 1,000, pretty much everything gained aside from a couple of segments.


----------



## N-destroy

Obis said:


> Punk the past couple of weeks has done okay in the opening slot. What's the difference this week? This week he was in a match (last week he was in a match after Q1 if I recall). But even then, the angle has been turned to shit, and it's proof in the fact all three men in the triple threat plus Daniel Bryan couldn't pull in at least a 3.0. The whole compelling thing about Punk/Cena in the first place was Punk's heel turn. *However once again he's been put in the backseat* of the feud and they added Big Show into the mix. That being said it's not good at all this Raw opened the lowest in months, but WWE gets what they give. They give shit, they get a shit amount of viewers. I don't know about everyone else, but I certainly didn't care to see Punk/Show.


Thats not true, Punk has been booked well in this three way feud. 




Obis said:


> Also, went back the last couple of weeks and noticed something:
> 
> 1) Last week, Lesnar/HHH was at a 3.45 rating, where this week was 3.44. Not sure how close the viewership was for each, but we can assume they've been able to keep everyone interested with the tease when Lesnar said "I'll see you before Summerslam" to HBK.
> 
> 2) The 10PM slot hasn't had a huge gain since moving to 3 hours. HHH/Lesnar from Raw 1000 gained like 90,000 (granted on top of 300,000 from the quarter before it with Heyman/Steph/HHH). A tag match on Raw 1001 gained 50,000. Raw 1002 with another Lesnar/HHH segment gained a little over 200,000. So this week at the very least, falls in the line with the gains, but I'm not sure how many viewers each segment got, so can't really comment on that, but I do know the Lesnar/HHH segment from last week was the highest of the night. And on Raw 1,000, pretty much everything gained aside from a couple of segments.


I dont think you can really compare RAW 1000 numbers though, because viewers were already large and consistent throughout the show. Gain will be very little when that happens, even the Overrun that night with Rock/Cena gained only 300K IIRC.


----------



## KO Bossy

Loader230 said:


> That right there is all the proof you need. Even after a week long promotion through social media and other means, the *WWE CHAMPION* draws *THE LOWEST QUARTER OF THE ENTIRE YEAR*(I'm pretty sure it is). Hell even Ryback/JTG outdrew him by gaining 63,000 viewers over the shitty first quarter. Ryback is becoming a big TV draw.
> 
> I still dont understand WHY CM PUNK DESERVES TO BE THE LONGEST REIGNING CHAMPION IN YEARS? He clearly does not draw. What else has he done to deserve this massive push? Suck on Vince Mcmahon/Triple H's dick backstage? It use to be when the prestigious title was given only to the wrestler who could draw fans in thousands, when the wrestlers actually earned the title but now punk has completely killed the credibility of the championship.


Oh man, I love people like you who open their mouths without having the least idea of what they're talking about.

That 2.60 quarter hour is NOT the lowest of the year. Have a gander at this:

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2012/0607/553256/cm-punk/

Memorial Day Raw



> *In the segment breakdown, Santino Marella vs. Alberto Del Rio lost 733,000 viewers from the opener, which is very bad for that spot in the show. That did a low 2.52 quarter-hour rating*. Kofi Kingston and R-Truth vs. Dolph Ziggler and Jack Swagger gained 67,000 viewers while a segment with John Laurinaitis and CM Punk for WWE '13 gained 356,000 viewers.
> 
> Punk vs. Daniel Bryan lost 30,000 viewers for a 2.79 quarter-hour rating in the 10pm timeslot - which is a bad number for that point in the show. The post-match segment with Kane plus The Miz vs. Christian lost 13,000 more viewers.
> 
> *A backstage segment with Laurinaitis, Eve Torres, Teddy Long and David Otunga plus an interview with The Miz and John Cena's Memorial Day video lost 342,000 viewers for a 2.53 quarter-hour rating*. Sheamus vs. David Otunga gained 116,000 viewers. The final segment of the night where Big Show took out R-Truth, Kingston and Brodus Clay gained 436,000 viewers and did a 2.91 overrun rating.
> 
> Read more: http://www.WrestlingInc.com/wi/news/2012/0607/553256/cm-punk/#ixzz23jeaTqxL


Backed up by Meltzer. 

Oh and here's another:

http://www.wwemafia.com/2012/04/drunk-cm-punk-draws-fans-stick-around.html

Go home show to Extreme Rules



> *In the segment breakdown, the opener with John Cena, Edge and the contract signing that never happened started the show with a low 2.50 quarter-rating. *Chris Jericho vs. Kofi Kingston lost 73,000 viewers from the opener while Jericho’s promo, Brock Lesnar & CM Punk videos plus the segment with Eve Torres and John Laurinaitis gained 52,000 viewers. Lord Tensai vs. R-Truth lost 3,000 viewers. Kane’s segment and Randy Orton putting Paul Bearer into the freezer gained 865,000 viewers – which were the WWE fans tuning into RAW at the normal time of 9pm EST.
> 
> Alberto Del Rio and Cody Rhodes vs. The Great Khali and Big Show gained 195,000 viewers while the backstage segment with Jericho, Laurinaitis, Eve and Teddy Long talking about CM Punk being drunk lost 112,000 viewers. Nikki Bella winning the Divas Title from Beth Phoenix gained 437,000 viewers, which can be seen as a big surprise. *The field sobriety test in the ring with CM Punk gained 270,000 viewers to a 3.63 quarter-rating, which is one of the best quarters in a while.*


Wow, would you look at that. A segment featuring EDGE and JOHN CENA, the WWE's golden boy, drew a 2.50 quarter hour. Why, the 2.60 Punk and Big Show drew looks like Wrestlemania 3 in comparison. And what's that...why I do believe Punk and Jericho drew a 3.63 quarter hour rating, which was one of the best in a while at that point in time. Well what do you know?

Want more facts? Fatal Four Way, the PPV in 2010 drew 143,000 buys. The main event? Sheamus vs Cena vs Edge vs Orton. No PPV Punk has headlined has drawn that low. In fact, the next lowest buyrate I found was Vengeance 2011 with 121,000. The main event? John Cena vs ADR.

So if Punk is this giant ratings drain, how is it that 2 segments featuring John Cena drew even lower than this one with Punk, which you incorrectly claimed was the lowest of the year? And how is it that 2 of the lowest grossing PPVs have been main evented by people all other than Punk, and at times when Punk wasn't even the champion? You obviously follow the ratings to a T. Your logic stipulates that John Cena is actually a ratings drain as well. There's the proof above. At the same time, Punk is not. So in the face of proof, I'm guessing you're still going to dismiss it and claim Punk is this scourge. This means that you're not only blind, but stubborn as well. You're a biased individual who simply doesn't like CM Punk for one reason or another. Thus, you will shun logic and proof that speaks contrary to your opinion in order to prove to yourself more than anyone that you're right. Its actually really pathetic, and makes everything you say come across as nothing more than verbal diarrhea. 

Oh and in case you also haven't clued into another fact, the WWE title stopped being given to wrestlers who were proven they could draw a long time ago. Sheamus, Miz...hell, look at Dull Rio's 2 terrible reigns in the fall.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

kokepepsi said:


> Damn was hoping to see a Rock316ae post burying PUnk for that opener rating
> 
> Betcha 50 bucks if it had done well he would have credited it to another Big Show Oscar winning performance.
> 
> LOL at that 10pm gain.


Wait, is he banned?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

N-destroy said:


> Thats not true, Punk has been booked well in this three way feud.


He's been booked well, but he hasn't been the star of the feud. Cena is still the one who gets the main events and the feuds last couple of weeks has felt more about him, or at least just as much about him as Punk.






> I dont think you can really compare RAW 1000 numbers though, because viewers were already large and consistent throughout the show. Gain will be very little when that happens, even the Overrun that night with Rock/Cena gained only 300K IIRC.


While true, I was just making a point the 10PM slot this week had an average gain when compared to the rest of the three hour shows. Hell, even two hour Raws for pretty much the whole year have had an average of only 200-400 thousand viewers, with the only segments off the top of my mind gaining close to/above a million viewers were all the Taker/HBK/HHH segments from earlier this year. Besides that none off the top of my head gained quite as much in the 10pm slot. 

Now granted, I'm talking about gains and not the amount of viewers. Even though the 10PM slot may have been an average gain, the amount of viewers might be well below the average for these three hour Raws. I'm not sure though.


----------



## lancaster223

> In the segment-by-segment, the promotion online and through social media that they were opening with *C.M. Punk vs. Big
> Show led to a 2.60 quarter, the lowest quarter for a Raw episode in months.* Ryback vs. JTG gained 63,000 viewers. R-Truth vs.
> Heath Slater gained 186,000 viewers. Sin Cara vs. Tensai lost 105,000 viewers. The Piper’s Pit segment with Chris Jericho,
> Dolph Ziggler and The Miz gained 516,000 viewers for the 9 p.m. start. You’d think by four weeks that wouldn’t happen, but it’s
> been ten weeks for TNA and it still happens. Jericho vs. Ziggler vs. Miz in a three-way lost 96,000 viewers. Backstage stuff with
> Shawn Michaels, John Cena and Punk lost 374,000 viewers. Eve Torres & Beth Phoenix vs. Kaitlyn & Layla gained 45,000
> viewers. Cena & Punk vs. Show & Daniel Bryan gained 247,000 viewers to a 2.94 quarter at 10 p.m. Still not good for that time
> slot even with Cena. Christian vs. Damien Sandow lost 121,000 viewers. The contract signing with Brock Lesnar, HHH,
> Heyman and Michaels gained 431,000 viewers. The parking lot car accident and lights attack lost 394,000 viewers. And the in-
> ring angle where Lesnar “broke Michaels’ arm” gained 817,000 viewers to a 3.44 overrun.


Punk = Diesel 2012


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

KO Bossy said:


> Oh man, I love people like you who open their mouths without having the least idea of what they're talking about.
> 
> That 2.60 quarter hour is NOT the lowest of the year. Have a gander at this:
> 
> http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2012/0607/553256/cm-punk/
> 
> Memorial Day Raw
> 
> 
> 
> Backed up by Meltzer.
> 
> Oh and here's another:
> 
> http://www.wwemafia.com/2012/04/drunk-cm-punk-draws-fans-stick-around.html
> 
> Go home show to Extreme Rules
> 
> 
> 
> *Wow, would you look at that. A segment featuring EDGE and JOHN CENA, the WWE's golden boy, drew a 2.50 quarter hour. Why, the 2.60 Punk and Big Show drew looks like Wrestlemania 3 in comparison. And what's that...why I do believe Punk and Jericho drew a 3.63 quarter hour rating, which was one of the best in a while at that point in time. Well what do you know?
> 
> Want more facts? Fatal Four Way, the PPV in 2010 drew 143,000 buys. The main event? Sheamus vs Cena vs Edge vs Orton. No PPV Punk has headlined has drawn that low. In fact, the next lowest buyrate I found was Vengeance 2011 with 121,000. The main event? John Cena vs ADR.
> 
> So if Punk is this giant ratings drain, how is it that 2 segments featuring John Cena drew even lower than this one with Punk, which you incorrectly claimed was the lowest of the year? And how is it that 2 of the lowest grossing PPVs have been main evented by people all other than Punk, and at times when Punk wasn't even the champion? You obviously follow the ratings to a T. Your logic stipulates that John Cena is actually a ratings drain as well. There's the proof above. At the same time, Punk is not. So in the face of proof, I'm guessing you're still going to dismiss it and claim Punk is this scourge. This means that you're not only blind, but stubborn as well. You're a biased individual who simply doesn't like CM Punk for one reason or another. Thus, you will shun logic and proof that speaks contrary to your opinion in order to prove to yourself more than anyone that you're right. Its actually really pathetic, and makes everything you say come across as nothing more than verbal diarrhea.
> 
> Oh and in case you also haven't clued into another fact, the WWE title stopped being given to wrestlers who were proven they could draw a long time ago. Sheamus, Miz...hell, look at Dull Rio's 2 terrible reigns in the fall.*


Great post and well said. A post people should read before blindly hating and bursting out the typical "LOL Punk is terrible fire him already" bullshit and actually think a little bit. Nicely done.


----------



## uknoww

lancaster223 said:


> Punk = Diesel 2012


yep


----------



## Falkono

KO Bossy said:


> Oh man, I love people like you who open their mouths without having the least idea of what they're talking about.
> 
> That 2.60 quarter hour is NOT the lowest of the year. Have a gander at this:
> 
> http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2012/0607/553256/cm-punk/
> 
> Memorial Day Raw
> 
> 
> 
> Backed up by Meltzer.
> 
> Oh and here's another:
> 
> http://www.wwemafia.com/2012/04/drunk-cm-punk-draws-fans-stick-around.html
> 
> Go home show to Extreme Rules
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, would you look at that. A segment featuring EDGE and JOHN CENA, the WWE's golden boy, drew a 2.50 quarter hour. Why, the 2.60 Punk and Big Show drew looks like Wrestlemania 3 in comparison. And what's that...why I do believe Punk and Jericho drew a 3.63 quarter hour rating, which was one of the best in a while at that point in time. Well what do you know?
> 
> Want more facts? Fatal Four Way, the PPV in 2010 drew 143,000 buys. The main event? Sheamus vs Cena vs Edge vs Orton. No PPV Punk has headlined has drawn that low. In fact, the next lowest buyrate I found was Vengeance 2011 with 121,000. The main event? John Cena vs ADR.
> 
> So if Punk is this giant ratings drain, how is it that 2 segments featuring John Cena drew even lower than this one with Punk, which you incorrectly claimed was the lowest of the year? And how is it that 2 of the lowest grossing PPVs have been main evented by people all other than Punk, and at times when Punk wasn't even the champion? You obviously follow the ratings to a T. Your logic stipulates that John Cena is actually a ratings drain as well. There's the proof above. At the same time, Punk is not. So in the face of proof, I'm guessing you're still going to dismiss it and claim Punk is this scourge. This means that you're not only blind, but stubborn as well. You're a biased individual who simply doesn't like CM Punk for one reason or another. Thus, you will shun logic and proof that speaks contrary to your opinion in order to prove to yourself more than anyone that you're right. Its actually really pathetic, and makes everything you say come across as nothing more than verbal diarrhea.
> 
> Oh and in case you also haven't clued into another fact, the WWE title stopped being given to wrestlers who were proven they could draw a long time ago. Sheamus, Miz...hell, look at Dull Rio's 2 terrible reigns in the fall.


Your logic is flawed because in your examples you fail to mention that in Punks segements he lost viewers.....

PLUS who cares about a memorial day raw?
If you want to compare it then compare it to the same raw last year before summerslam. Which got a 3.31 rating.


----------



## Starbuck

Amuroray said:


>


I'm not an advocate of this whole Punk is destroying the company thing but this made me :lmao so hard. Vince's fucking face lol. How did I miss that the first time around?


----------



## murder

You do know that last year, Punk was also champion the week before Summerslam and the focus of the show. Fact of the matter is that ratings and buyrates are only as good as the WWE title is booked. And right now it's booked like crap so the ratings tank and the buyrate this Sunday will suck. Well maybe not if Brock still draws after 5 months of being wasted.


----------



## KO Bossy

Falkono said:


> Your logic is flawed because in your examples you fail to mention that in Punks segements he lost viewers.....
> 
> PLUS who cares about a memorial day raw?
> If you want to compare it then compare it to the same raw last year before summerslam. Which got a 3.31 rating.


Uhh, on the go home show for ER his segment GAINED ratings. Do Punk's segments lose viewers? Sure. My point is that every superstar has segments that lose viewers. Blaming all squarely on Punk because he's the champion is completely ridiculous. What is the proof people have? Well they claim his segments always lose ratings. They don't-I just showcased that. They say he's not a draw and that Cena always gets great ratings-well I also disproved that. In a nutshell, I'm just poking gaping holes into the asinine arguments these blind Punk haters always rely on. They don't have the least bit of credibility to them. I also try to point out that if their same logic was to be applied in other circumstances based on the same line of thinking that it would make them look even more stupid.

As for Memorial Day Raw, a rating is a rating...

In regards to Summerslam last year, which as you said got a 3.31, Punk vs Cena was the big match being advertised as the main event. So this even further hurts the anti Punk arguments because 3.31 in this day and age is a decent rating. Were Punk involved, by their logic, the show would have bombed. Why is this year's so much lower? Well, has anyone considered that Big Show might be bringing it down? He's the only difference maker in terms of the match, and correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't he Punk's opponent on Monday? Why does Punk share the burden alone of a segment with bad rating? Was he wrestling himself? No? Then its not ALL his fault. Or perhaps, maybe the build isn't as interesting as last year? Before we had Punk returning after leaving, Triple H as the guest ref and the unification of the World Titles, and we were right in the middle of Summer of Punk, the hottest the industry has been in a while. This year...very business as usual feel. Also doesn't help that the World Title match is kinda being overshadowed by the real main event, Trips vs Lesnar. Punk in total was exposed for about 20 minutes on Monday, what with the tag match, his vignette with Cena and the match with Big Show. Lesnar and Hunter had about 3 recaps (at about 2-3 minutes each), 4-5 backstage segments with Shawn and 35 minutes of the end of the show devoted to it, which equals about 45-50 minutes, almost 2.5 times what Punk got.


----------



## Pro Royka

Too much obsession on Punk, saying he can't draw I don't see the problem of that, he isn't the focus of the show, starting the show with a low number is not a big deal especially that I don't know when was the last time the show started with a match, Cena and Bryan came in later it's not about who can draw, its just means people is not interested on the feud. If you wanna blame Punk, you also should blame Cena and Big show for not adding anything to the match, how can you say that they are big draws as people say but not blame them because they don't have the title, aren't they part of the feud, so if they want to see Cena or Show win the title then people will tune in, but now it's just proves that nobody is interested to see them as champs. People should give it a rest trying to look for the smallest thing to blame him for everything. What will Cena add to the title absolutely nothing, it will just make others look bad.


----------



## Starbuck

If Punk's segments had done well you better believe his marks would be giving him all the credit. They haven't and now it's everybody's fault but his. Just saying. The double standards are quite ridiculous.


----------



## CMojicaAce

Let's just fire everyone except for John Cena. He's clearly the only one that draws.


----------



## Loader230

KO Bossy said:


> Oh man, I love people like you who open their mouths without having the least idea of what they're talking about.
> 
> That 2.60 quarter hour is NOT the lowest of the year. Have a gander at this:
> 
> http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2012/0607/553256/cm-punk/
> 
> Memorial Day Raw


First of all, RAW on Memorial day always does low rating. I'll admit that i was wrong about 2.6 being the lowest quarter, even though its terribly low for WWE CHAMPION having a match and being RAW opener unlike Santino/ADR of the RAW breakdown you posted.




> Oh and here's another:
> 
> *Punk vs. Daniel Bryan lost 30,000 viewers for a 2.79 quarter-hour rating in the 10pm timeslot - which is a bad number for that point in the show.* The post-match segment with Kane plus The Miz vs. Christian lost 13,000 more viewers.
> 
> http://www.wwemafia.com/2012/04/drunk-cm-punk-draws-fans-stick-around.html


LOL look at it again, the WWE champion loses viewers in the 10 P.M quarter where viewers ALWAYS tune in. It wasnt even a low gain, he actually lost viewers which means people were almost sick of him that they decided to tune out on top of the hour. 

There's also many times that punk vs Miz lost viewers consistently at 10pm and main event, he also lost viewers against Tensai in the Main Event. 




> Alberto Del Rio and Cody Rhodes vs. The Great Khali and Big Show gained 195,000 viewers while the backstage segment with Jericho, Laurinaitis, Eve and Teddy Long talking about CM Punk being drunk lost 112,000 viewers. *Nikki Bella winning the Divas Title from Beth Phoenix gained 437,000 viewers,* which can be seen as a big surprise. The field sobriety test in the ring with CM Punk gained 270,000 viewers to a 3.63 quarter-rating, which is one of the best quarters in a while.
> 
> And what's that...why I do believe Punk and Jericho drew a 3.63 quarter hour rating, which was one of the best in a while at that point in time. Well what do you know?


What do I know? I know that the quarter was big because of the Divas match randomly gaining over 400K before the corny drunk segment by the wwe champion. Punk and Jericho gained only 200k which is actually weak for 10 pm, while divas gained 400k. That says it all. 




> Want more facts? Fatal Four Way, the PPV in 2010 drew 143,000 buys. The main event? Sheamus vs Cena vs Edge vs Orton. No PPV Punk has headlined has drawn that low. In fact, the next lowest buyrate I found was Vengeance 2011 with 121,000. The main event? John Cena vs ADR.


Once again I have to point out, Punk has lost viewers many times in his shitty reign which cena never did when he was champion. Besides whats your point comparing these two anyway? Cena has been part of the main event drawing matches of last two manias, he has a proven record of drawing high ratings. Punk is no John cena. By comparing these two, you only make yourself look stupid. 





> Oh and in case you also haven't clued into another fact, the WWE title stopped being given to wrestlers who were proven they could draw a long time ago. Sheamus, Miz...hell, look at Dull Rio's 2 terrible reigns in the fall.


None of those superstars were *longest reigning WWE champion in years. *Face it, Punk is a over-pushed peice of shit, a failure. He does not deserve such a massive push. He is the WWE champion but struggles to draw which is the reason they took him off main events and turned him into a mid card champion. Like someone said he is the kevin nash of 1995.


The RAW go home for summerslam 2011 did 3.01 rating not 3.31. The RAW before that week did 3.3 which means ratings were going down "*and we were right in the middle of Summer of Punk*" as you pointed out.


----------



## Pro Royka

Loader230 said:


> First of all, RAW on Memorial day always does low rating. I'll admit that i was wrong about 2.6 being the lowest quarter, even though its terribly low for WWE CHAMPION having a match and being RAW opener unlike Santino/ADR of the RAW breakdown you posted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL look at it again, the WWE champion loses viewers in the 10 P.M quarter where viewers ALWAYS tune in. It wasnt even a low gain, he actually lost viewers which means people were almost sick of him that they decided to tune out on top of the hour.
> 
> There's also many times that punk vs Miz lost viewers consistently at 10pm and main event, he also lost viewers against Tensai in the Main Event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do I know? I know that the quarter was big because of the Divas match randomly gaining over 400K before the corny drunk segment by the wwe champion. Punk and Jericho gained only 200k which is actually weak for 10 pm, while divas gained 400k. That says it all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once again I have to point out, Punk has lost viewers many times in his shitty reign which cena never did when he was champion. Besides whats your point comparing these two anyway? Cena has been part of the main event drawing matches of last two manias, he has a proven record of drawing high ratings. Punk is no John cena. By comparing these two, you only make yourself look stupid.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of those superstars were *longest reigning WWE champion in years. *Face it, Punk is a over-pushed peice of shit, a failure. He does not deserve such a massive push. He is the WWE champion but struggles to draw which is the reason they took him off main events and turned him into a mid card champion. Like someone said he is the kevin nash of 1995.
> 
> 
> The RAW go home for summerslam 2011 did 3.01 rating not 3.31. The RAW before that week did 3.3 which means ratings were going down "*and we were right in the middle of Summer of Punk*" as you pointed out.


How is he failure, it's a 3 hour show. When was the last time the show started with a match. Punk is a failure because he can't draw :no:, well I will rather watch Punk all day than watch Cena cut a promo or have a match, all you care about is ratings, why didn't you say anything in the last month were he was drawing good numbers, you like to talk more than you watch. Ryback lost a lot of viewers time to time but you don't say anything about him. When Cena became the face of the company, it happens to be one the worst eras with awful ratings, Edge and Batista carried his ass for that matters.


----------



## KO Bossy

Starbuck said:


> If Punk's segments had done well you better believe his marks would be giving him all the credit. They haven't and now it's everybody's fault but his. Just saying. The double standards are quite ridiculous.


As I've pointed out, I'm not a Punk mark. I'm just looking for logic in these arguments. To blame these crappy ratings all on Punk makes absolutely no sense. Is he partly to blame? Absolutely. Solely? No, and no one in their right mind can argue that. Cena, Hunter, Brock, Big Show, Bryan and company all bear part of this cross.



Loader230 said:


> First of all, RAW on Memorial day always does low rating. I'll admit that i was wrong about 2.6 being the lowest quarter, even though its terribly low for WWE CHAMPION having a match and being RAW opener unlike Santino/ADR of the RAW breakdown you posted.


You seem to be ignorant of the fact that the WWE title has been devalued to much over the past 8 months. Its main evented ONE PPV, whereas every other PPV (bar the Rumble) has been headlined by Cena. Most of those matches didn't even deserve the main event slot-Cena vs Laurinaitis was really more important than Punk and Bryan? Let's also not forget the fact that AJ's involvement COMPLETELY overshadowed the title, to the point that the focus wasn't on the champion and challenger, it was on who AJ was going to side with and what whacko thing she'd do next. 

My biggest problem with this whole Punk reign is that its like he's had roadblock after roadblock set up in front of him, like the Fed WANTS him to fail. Yes, he's had many atrocious segments like calling Ace a giant toolbox and whatnot. Not disputing that. You call him the worst drawing champion in a decade. I ask you, what other champion has had as many obstacles thrown in his path like Punk? Never main events PPVs, often his matches are placed in the middle of the card, a fucking diva is given 3 times the TV time he was getting, his feuds were set ups for Cena...he's the champion who isn't being treated as such. Cena and Hunter seem to be the only guys in the company who are having any focus put on them. Any Punk gets is pretty half assed. If the guy can't get a fair chance, how can he really succeed?




Loader230 said:


> LOL look at it again, the WWE champion loses viewers in the 10 P.M quarter where viewers ALWAYS tune in. It wasnt even a low gain, he actually lost viewers which means people were almost sick of him that they decided to tune out on top of the hour.
> 
> There's also many times that punk vs Miz lost viewers consistently at 10pm and main event, he also lost viewers against Tensai in the Main Event.


Yeah and I don't dispute that Punk's segments haven't lost viewers. Never said they didn't. Do they always? No. Do Cena's segments always draw? No. Hence, Punk can't be the sole beneficiary of the blame for the crappy ratings.




Loader230 said:


> What do I know? I know that the quarter was big because of the Divas match randomly gaining over 400K before the corny drunk segment by the wwe champion. Punk and Jericho gained only 200k which is actually weak for 10 pm, while divas gained 400k. That says it all.


What's your point? You say Punk can't draw and in this segment he drew viewers. Your argument is invalid.




Loader230 said:


> Once again I have to point out, Punk has lost viewers many times in his shitty reign which cena never did when he was champion. Besides whats your point comparing these two anyway? Cena has been part of the main event drawing matches of last two manias, he has a proven record of drawing high ratings. Punk is no John cena. By comparing these two, you only make yourself look stupid.


So you're saying that Cena has NEVER had a bad segment when he's champion? That's not correct and you know it.

Please, continue trying to convince yourself that people bought Wrestlemania 27 to see Cena vs Miz. Its really quite amusing. They paid to see the Rock and you damn well know that. And don't even try saying that Cena was the driving force behind the buys of WM28. Rock's first singles match in 8 years and his main stream publicity are what MADE that WM.

But you bring up a good point-Punk isn't John Cena. John Cena does have a proven record of drawing power. Does Punk? How should we know, he's never been given a chance. He's always playing second or third string behind whatever Cena and Hunter happen to be doing. They've given him the title and yet don't treat him like a champion. What other WWE champion in history has main evented 1 PPV in an 8 month reign? None. He's being treated like a second rate champion. It'd be like Alexander Ovechkin being called a dud because he was only scoring 15 goals a season because he's stuck on the 4th line. Of course he's not living up to his potential, he hasn't been given a fair chance.





Loader230 said:


> None of those superstars were *longest reigning WWE champion in years. *Face it, Punk is a over-pushed peice of shit, a failure. He does not deserve such a massive push. He is the WWE champion but struggles to draw which is the reason they took him off main events and turned him into a mid card champion. Like someone said he is the kevin nash of 1995.


fpalm

Just...I don't even know where to start.

How can this guy be over pushed? He hasn't main evented a PPV in over 8 months. You call THAT an over push? John Cena must be Jesus then.

He doesn't deserve a massive push? Has he failed in some phantom push I've never seen? You see, if they pushed him really strongly, like Kevin Nash in 1995, and he failed, sure. Except they haven't...they've given him a half assed push instead and now he's floundering. You'd expect different results? How about when Cena won the title in 2005 if they booked him like they're booking Punk now. You could get Trish Stratus to overshadow the title, have him feud with guys like Carlito or Rhyno. You think he'd be anywhere near the draw he is today? Of course not, they treated him like a serious champion. So in the end, they got serious results. Punk has been treated like a champion who isn't important. So guess what the audience thinks?

He struggles to draw and that's why they took him off main events? He main evented ONE PPV. How in the blue hell is that a reasonable way to look at a guy and judge his drawing power? "Hmm this PPV did 10,000 less buys than last year, this guy isn't a draw, back to the midcard." That makes absolutely zero sense. One PPV in the main event is not in any way, shape or form an accurate gauge of a person's drawing power. To say otherwise is ludicrous.

Like...you're completely ignorant about this stuff. If you call how CM Punk has been treated in his tenure as champion fair or that the WWE has really gotten behind him, I suggest you take up knitting. Wrestling clearly is not for you. I'd have an infinite amount more respect for what you're saying if you'd just be truthful. You don't like Punk and have convinced yourself of a bunch of misinformed facts based on incorrect and biased information. Just say it.




Loader230 said:


> The RAW go home for summerslam 2011 did 3.01 rating not 3.31. The RAW before that week did 3.3 which means ratings were going down "*and we were right in the middle of Summer of Punk*" as you pointed out.


And yet Cena was also WWE champion at the time as well...where does his portion of the blame factor into your reasoning?


----------



## checkcola

CMojicaAce said:


> Let's just fire everyone except for John Cena. He's clearly the only one that draws.


Well, I do think the company shoots itself in the foot when it mutes its top draw going into a 3 way title match that isn't even really about Cena chasing the title. Instead, the match is about CM Punk being angry he's overshadowed by everyone. I just don't see how that translates into Cena's fanbase being engaged.


----------



## Marv95

Loader230 said:


> First of all, RAW on Memorial day always does low rating.


Raw did a 3.8 on Memorial Day in 05 and 06, not that long ago. Compared to today that's not what I call "low". http://www.twnpnews.com/information/wwfraw.shtml


----------



## Rock316AE

Scary number for that Punk/Show match. Disaster. The biggest number of that feud so far was a Big Show/John Cena match, two proven draws in the main event so it's not surprising. Big Show/Cena also drew decent on PPV in their 1800 match which is astonishing. Punk can't be that guy, he doesn't have "it" in him. Simple, you can force him on the audience, you can give him a year with the belt, you can book him to attack the biggest star in wrestling history, it doesn't matter. The problem is in the core. You can try to sell a Fiat with a Porsche logo, it's still a Fiat.

And for people using low quarters from the first hour of the 3 hours RAWs, completely different because back then it was a one week deal, and we were always talking about the regular two hours, now there's no "regular 2 hours". It's a 3 hour show every week.



Rock316AE said:


> The Lesnar/Heyman/HBK angle was probably the only decent number and it's the most important, maybe Jericho/Piper did good as Piper's pit with Jericho should be a big deal.


Like I predicted, Jericho/Piper and Lesnar/Heyman/HBK did the biggest numbers. The final 30 minutes of the show gaining big is a good sign for Summerslam, although now without Sheen and the weak booking of Brock, I'm not going close to 400k.


----------



## Pro Royka

Rock316AE said:


> Scary number for that Punk/Show match. Disaster. The biggest number of that feud so far was a Big Show/John Cena match, two proven draws in the main event so it's not surprising. Big Show/Cena also drew decent on PPV in their 1800 match which is astonishing. Punk can't be that guy, he doesn't have "it" in him. Simple, you can force him on the audience, you can give him a year with the belt, you can book him to attack the biggest star in wrestling history, it doesn't matter. The problem is in the core. You can try to sell a Fiat with a Porsche logo, it's still a Fiat.
> 
> And for people using low quarters from the first hour of the 3 hours RAWs, completely different because back then it was a one week deal, and we were always talking about the regular two hours, now there's no "regular 2 hours". It's a 3 hour show every week.
> 
> 
> 
> Like I predicted, Jericho/Piper and Lesnar/Heyman/HBK did the biggest numbers. The final 30 minutes of the show gaining big is a good sign for Summerslam, although now without Sheen and the weak booking of Brock, I'm not going close to 400k.


You dont care about talents all you care about is ratings, it's funny you say Punk doesn't have it but WWE still pushes him, you may not like him but the guy is talented, you can pray to god that Rocky beats and kills Punk but that is not good for business. You know what last year summer he was hot, he was in the top of the mountin, if the guy can be in the top then of course the guy has "It", he did it once with Hardy and twice with Cena last year, so the guy is clearly capable of doing it, you can say Orton has it on the mic and on every single smallest thing but I just don't see it, where is the prove, you say he can draw but what numbers youre talking about, I don't see it and I know why because WWE destroyed his old character just like what they did to Punk, you can deny it but he was very succesful and won a lot of achievement and awards in one year, and again you say he doesn't have it, his fans love him and you can hate him all you want but without him WWE will have no other maineventers, he has the mic skills, ring skills, the character or gimmick, he's marketable, he has his fans or followers gaining every week and he can be very charismatic. I don't care about ratings because it's not a big factor that can be blamed on one guy. You can say that Cena/Show did a great number but that wasn't in the beginning of the show, there is many other factors on why it draws, and I don't know why people are blaming him for ratings when certainly Cena and show is part of the feud, aren't they supposed to sell the match, I don't see that happening at all. Rock/Punk will happen one day and if it happens that means WWE believes in him. You can say Rocky, Show, Cena, and Orton are very succesful but that's because they are very established and got a lot of opportunities, sure you can say Punk had them but everytime he's about to reach it WWE drops the ball with him, he's not established yet, he only defeated Small amout of big stars Cena, and Jeff Hardy that's it, as for the other guys well you can't count them because there is too many, which Punk didn't have the pleasure to face them and that's why he can't draw big, people doesn't take him seriously because he didn't beat anyone that was bigger than him, all he did is face some random names in the current roster because thats what he has right now it's too thin and he needs more help. You can put the blame on him all you want but you know it's wrong.


----------



## KO Bossy

I'd prefer to reserve judgment on Punk until he gets a fair chance at being a legit champion the company makes a solid attempt to get behind. If they continue with this half assed push, then he'll be a half assed champion. You get out of something what you put into it. If they get behind Punk and give him a fair chance as being the guy to carry the company and the ratings tank, I'll be more than happy to place the blame where it lies. As for how things are now, Punk is floundering and they haven't really gotten behind him as a legit top guy. Until we see what happens when they DO get behind him, all anyone can do is guess, and guesses aren't facts. If that never happens, then we'll never know how good Punk could have been. All we'll have seen is how he didn't do well when the company didn't get behind him, and that's hardly surprising.


----------



## -Skullbone-

Let's also get one thing straight. The blame (lol) does not full solely on Punk for that opening number alone either, even if it is a little disturbing for the champ to garner such little buzz. As it is with the majority of segments every party out there contributes. 

That number hangs over Big Show's head as well.


----------



## TeamRocketGrunt

Cm punk is a great champion but he just shouldn't be leading any shows untill he actually get's some momentum 

Punk's biggest asset is shooting on people and that's most likely the only way punk will be able to bring in the ratings, and as much i hate to say this being a punk fan and all he will never be a john cena and just appear in a random match or segment and draw.


----------



## Starbuck

KO Bossy said:


> As I've pointed out, I'm not a Punk mark. I'm just looking for logic in these arguments. To blame these crappy ratings all on Punk makes absolutely no sense. Is he partly to blame? Absolutely. Solely? No, and no one in their right mind can argue that. Cena, Hunter, Brock, Big Show, Bryan and company all bear part of this cross.


I was just pointing out the obvious hypocrisy. I know for a fact that had that Punk/Show match opened with a 3.6 rating, Punk marks would be giving him all the credit and singing his praises but the opposite happened and look at the sob story we're getting. You have to know that were this Randy Orton the same Punk marks making up all the excuses of the day here would be shitting all over him for doing so poorly. I don't mark for Punk but I don't think he's to blame either. My point was just to emphasize the double standards at play. That's all.


----------



## -Skullbone-

^^^ Exactly right.

You'd think some of the wrestler's mums were on the forums the way some of their fans defend their image and rub it in the face of others.

Especially over such a irrelevant factor to fandom like drawin' ability.


----------



## lancaster223

I think we already had like 15 to 20 under-3.0 rated Raws since Punk won the belt last December. That's got to be a record for the company's biggest title holder, usually whoever's the champion on Raw, ever since the brand split. Somebody give Punk a medal for that.


----------



## Choke2Death

Starbuck said:


> I was just pointing out the obvious hypocrisy. I know for a fact that had that Punk/Show match opened with a 3.6 rating, Punk marks would be giving him all the credit and singing his praises but the opposite happened and look at the sob story we're getting. You have to know that were this Randy Orton the same Punk marks making up all the excuses of the day here would be shitting all over him for doing so poorly. I don't mark for Punk but I don't think he's to blame either. My point was just to emphasize the double standards at play. That's all.


Exactly. Last week when Orton and Big Show gained ~500k viewers at the 9 PM spot, people with Punk on their avatars and sigs were whining about how awful that was for the spot. This week Punk brings awful ratings as the (advertised) opener with Big Show and they come up with a million excuses "It's a 3 hour show", "people are not used to tuning in one hour before", "who cares, I'd rather watch Punk than Cena" etcetera and etcetera. For the record, Punk is clearly the worst at drawing viewers from the three people involved in the WWE Championship picture. Cena and Big Show gained 1 million viewers a couple of weeks ago during their match.

And I don't buy into the "He's played second fiddle to Cena, that has ruined his drawing ability" excuse. Last year around this time, when he feuded with Nash & HHH, he was given more TV time than anybody else and main evented over the WWE Championship feud which involved CENA, but he failed to help the ratings in any way, so they went back to status quo and let Cena take the main event spotlight.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

I'm surprised people are still trying to debate. KO Bossy's posts pretty much put an end to their arguments but haters gonna hate I suppose.


----------



## Kabraxal

I just can't believe there is an argument for a single person drawing anymore... it should be pretty obvious that it's about the consistency in booking and how the WWE treats the product. They've done a terrible job on both counts and people are tuning out even if their favourites are still there. 1000th episode only drew that much because of the nostalgia. If that episode hadn't been there, we'd probably be close to drawing less than 3.5 million viowers in the third hour. The product is absolute shit right now.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

CM Punk couldn't be a guest on Euro millions lotto. He can't draw.


----------



## KO Bossy

Choke2Death said:


> Exactly. Last week when Orton and Big Show gained ~500k viewers at the 9 PM spot, people with Punk on their avatars and sigs were whining about how awful that was for the spot. This week Punk brings awful ratings as the (advertised) opener with Big Show and they come up with a million excuses "It's a 3 hour show", "people are not used to tuning in one hour before", "who cares, I'd rather watch Punk than Cena" etcetera and etcetera. For the record, Punk is clearly the worst at drawing viewers from the three people involved in the WWE Championship picture. Cena and Big Show gained 1 million viewers a couple of weeks ago during their match.
> 
> And I don't buy into the "He's played second fiddle to Cena, that has ruined his drawing ability" excuse. Last year around this time, when he feuded with Nash & HHH, he was given more TV time than anybody else and main evented over the WWE Championship feud which involved CENA, but he failed to help the ratings in any way, so they went back to status quo and let Cena take the main event spotlight.


Yeah, but how is 4 weeks of being a major focus of the show an accurate gauge of his drawing ability when compared to Cena who has had 6 years to prove himself? That would be akin to putting Sidney Crosby on the first line, and in his first game, if he didn't score at least 3 goals, he's benched. If we were talking like 3-4 months and the ratings slipped, sure, but a couple of weeks? Come on.

Even Cena himself isn't pulling in the mega ratings people constantly seem to attribute to him. By their logic, based on Cena alone we should never be seeing below 3.30. 2.84 on a show featuring Cena, Brock, Hunter AND Shawn? Despite Punk's alleged inability to draw, what the hell happened with these guys?


----------



## Tnmore

A "Ratings killer" is different from a superstar who is "not a draw". Guys like rey mysterio, bryan, jericho are not draws. They are not going to draw exceptional well put in main events like the big stars but they can be trusted enough to sustain viewership at normal levels. 

But guys like CM Punk and John Morrison are flat out ratings killers. These guys drag the show down in viewership and most likely the reason show opens with low viewers. People tune in, see punk in a match or bitching on the mic they tune out and never come back. Hence Low ratings.


----------



## ellthom

I'd rather me be happy with CM Punk being champion with low rating attached than John Cena being champion with high rating and me facepalming to the bank.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

KO Bossy with DAT LOGIC!


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Obis said:


> KO Bossy with DAT LOGIC!


He completely raped this thread.


----------



## Choke2Death

KO Bossy said:


> Yeah, but how is 4 weeks of being a major focus of the show an accurate gauge of his drawing ability when compared to Cena who has had 6 years to prove himself? That would be akin to putting Sidney Crosby on the first line, and in his first game, if he didn't score at least 3 goals, he's benched. If we were talking like 3-4 months and the ratings slipped, sure, but a couple of weeks? Come on.
> 
> Even Cena himself isn't pulling in the mega ratings people constantly seem to attribute to him. By their logic, based on Cena alone we should never be seeing below 3.30. 2.84 on a show featuring Cena, Brock, Hunter AND Shawn? Despite Punk's alleged inability to draw, what the hell happened with these guys?


Maybe he should have gotten more opportunities headlining shows but to be fair, even after the Hunter feud, when he closed shows, the ratings were some of the lowest ever. Didn't he have a 6 man tag match after TLC with Zack Ryder & D-Bryan as his partners? That closed the show and the ratings proved to be disappointing (and Ryder _lost_ viewers on his main event segment a couple of weeks after :lmao), same story when Punk vs Tensai/D-Bryan closed the show a few months back. He was also given the honor of closing Raw 1000 with the 'big storyline' by attacking The Rock and turning heel, yet all the one-time viewers for that episode couldn't be kept around because this was not good enough.

Let's be honest, he's been given plenty of opportunities and storylines to prove himself but he's failed to bring the ratings. Cena proved himself years ago which is why Vince was unwilling to turn him heel 6 years ago and continues to even today when he gets staler every passing day. And if we need more explanation for his drawing abilities, he and Big Show gained 1 million viewers just two weeks ago. I may not like him the way he is, but I give credit where it's due and as much as I'd love to see Cena's star power fade, making a heel turn possible, he just doesn't give up. When was the last time Punk gained 1 million? If he ever got any close, he happened to be in the ring with another big name like Cena or Vince. And Brock/Hunter/Shawn gained 800k viewers or something in their main event segment this week, didn't they?


----------



## Punked Up

Loader230 said:


> That right there is all the proof you need. Even after a week long promotion through social media and other means, the *WWE CHAMPION* draws *THE LOWEST QUARTER OF THE ENTIRE YEAR*(I'm pretty sure it is). Hell even Ryback/JTG outdrew him by gaining 63,000 viewers over the shitty first quarter. Ryback is becoming a big TV draw.
> 
> I still dont understand WHY CM PUNK DESERVES TO BE THE LONGEST REIGNING CHAMPION IN YEARS? He clearly does not draw. What else has he done to deserve this massive push? Suck on Vince Mcmahon/Triple H's dick backstage? It use to be when the prestigious title was given only to the wrestler who could draw fans in thousands, when the wrestlers actually earned the title but now punk has completely killed the credibility of the championship.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :lmao Putting the title on punk must be the biggest mistake made by the company probably in last 10 years of WWE.


I was going to go into a reply talking about all of the things wrong with this "post" (I don't even want to call it a post, it was that bad) but I can see by your attitude in your posts that you're not someone I want to waste my time with.


----------



## KO Bossy

Choke2Death said:


> Maybe he should have gotten more opportunities headlining shows but to be fair, even after the Hunter feud, when he closed shows, the ratings were some of the lowest ever. Didn't he have a 6 man tag match after TLC with Zack Ryder & D-Bryan as his partners? That closed the show and the ratings proved to be disappointing (and Ryder _lost_ viewers on his main event segment a couple of weeks after :lmao), same story when Punk vs Tensai/D-Bryan closed the show a few months back. He was also given the honor of closing Raw 1000 with the 'big storyline' by attacking The Rock and turning heel, yet all the one-time viewers for that episode couldn't be kept around because this was not good enough.
> 
> Let's be honest, he's been given plenty of opportunities and storylines to prove himself but he's failed to bring the ratings. Cena proved himself years ago which is why Vince was unwilling to turn him heel 6 years ago and continues to even today when he gets staler every passing day. And if we need more explanation for his drawing abilities, he and Big Show gained 1 million viewers just two weeks ago. I may not like him the way he is, but I give credit where it's due and as much as I'd love to see Cena's star power fade, making a heel turn possible, he just doesn't give up. When was the last time Punk gained 1 million? If he ever got any close, he happened to be in the ring with another big name like Cena or Vince. And Brock/Hunter/Shawn gained 800k viewers or something in their main event segment this week, didn't they?


All very valid points. If you'll look, I've never said that Punk was a huge draw. I freely admit that his segments often lose viewers. However, they don't ALWAYS lose viewers. And on top of that, its not ALL Punk's fault for the ratings. Partly? Absolutely. Fully? No. Even if Punk is a horrid draw, a show that featured Cena, Lesnar, Hunter AND Shawn, and the 3 latter got 45-50 minutes of the show devoted to them, the show should have done better than a 2.84 (as I've already stated). Punk wrestled 3 other guys that night, how can you tell that maybe all involved weren't that interesting? If Punk wrestled himself and it lost ratings, fine. But he didn't.


----------



## Choke2Death

KO Bossy said:


> All very valid points. If you'll look, I've never said that Punk was a huge draw. I freely admit that his segments often lose viewers. However, they don't ALWAYS lose viewers. And on top of that, its not ALL Punk's fault for the ratings. Partly? Absolutely. Fully? No. Even if Punk is a horrid draw, a show that featured Cena, Lesnar, Hunter AND Shawn, and the 3 latter got 45-50 minutes of the show devoted to them, the show should have done better than a 2.84 (as I've already stated). Punk wrestled 3 other guys that night, how can you tell that maybe all involved weren't that interesting? If Punk wrestled himself and it lost ratings, fine. But he didn't.


I never claimed Punk is fully responsible for the bad ratings, though. Shitty booking is certainly not to be forgotten. And blaming one person for bad ratings is just foolish. The whole show doesn't revolve around one person only, so no one in specific is entirely responsible for bad ratings, although they can be bad enough to continuously make viewers change the channel. (*cough* Alberto Del Rio squashing Santino every other week *cough*)


----------



## Starbuck

End of the day Bossy, Punk hasn't been able to draw significantly without the help of a bigger name. He isn't alone in that either because it's the same for everybody else on the roster who isn't one of said bigger names. Rather than give him a fully fledged run at the top, WWE have opted to give him a half hearted and very long run just under that mark in the hopes that through sheer longevity, the masses will be conditioned to think he's a huge deal instead of actually presenting him as such. When paired with the right guys (Cena/Vince/HHH/Rock) his segments have pulled in huge numbers. When paired with anybody else he has failed to impress and at times has even floundered in timeslots that usually do a lot better and even lost viewers which is never a good sign. But like I said before, he isn't the first and he'll most likely continue to fluctuate in the ratings department depending on who he works with until WWE decides to fully solidify him into that upper echelon. The numbers back that up and to me, the real issue or the issue that deserves most attention when it comes to ratings are the double standards at play because that is where all the arguments come from. 

I'll use the aforementioned Punk/Orton example that I did before. This week Punk's segment bombed and what happens? His haters storm in and proclaim him public enemy number one, a ratings killer etc etc while his marks absolve him of all blame. Switch Punk with Orton and what happens? His haters storm in and proclaim him public enemy number one, a ratings killer etc etc while his marks absolve him of all blame. Because of these reasons, it's pointless to even try to debate ratings with some people because they can't be objective about it. Like I said before, the same Punk marks getting upset over everybody putting blame on him for this week would be first in line to place blame on somebody else if it happens next week. The double standards are the problem, not the numbers themselves because any objective person can look at them and come to logical conclusions, especially when you throw a little context in there too.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I agree with your point Starbuck about double standards. At the end of the day though, everyone plays double standards with their favorites, though the best posters can usually rise above that to some degree. 

In any event, the talk of Punk drawing is on both sides. I think what ended up happening was this:

1) For years, Punk marks praised Punk, call him the best in the company, etc. and haters, while not agreeing kept quiet because Punk wasn't a major star.
2) Punk becomes a major star and haters seem to take offense, along with all The Rock marks who took personal offense to comment against Punk calling him Dwayne.
3) They see his segments only gain half the time and thus will bash him anytime his segment under-performs and try to credit anyone and everyone else in a segment with Punk if it gains (which might be the case in some circumstances, but not others).
4) Marks will do the complete opposite (though not as bad as the haters), where they'll make excuses for why he doesn't do well (and some valid), but then give him all or most of the credit when ratings do well.

And that cycle has continued over and over and over for a year. If one side lets go it makes them look like the "loser" where the "winner" will keep posting the same shit over and over again. It's a never-ending mark vs. hater war. Punk and Orton, as Starbuck pointed out, are probably the two biggest stars that are the center of these wars when they come to drawing. Hell, they're probably the only ones right now. Usually the wars between marks and haters for guys like Sheamus, Del Rio, Barrett, etc. are all regarding talent, not who draws and who doesn't. 

Daniel Bryan though, always has the "BRYAN DRAWS!" posters, who probably haven't met much retaliation from haters since he's not the champion or in the spotlight. I can guarantee that will change if Bryan ever gets the title or somehow becomes the center of the show and much like Punk, half his segments draw, half don't.

The overall show rating being down is on WWE for not creating compelling storylines. Lesnar/HHH, while still the biggest drawing points of the show would be even bigger if the storyline was better. Punk/Cena/Show is incredibly bland as well after the first week or two.


----------



## KO Bossy

Choke2Death said:


> I never claimed Punk is fully responsible for the bad ratings, though. Shitty booking is certainly not to be forgotten. And blaming one person for bad ratings is just foolish. The whole show doesn't revolve around one person only, so no one in specific is entirely responsible for bad ratings, although they can be bad enough to continuously make viewers change the channel. (*cough* Alberto Del Rio squashing Santino every other week *cough*)


Exactly. One person isn't to blame. However, when I came into this thread on Tuesday, sure enough, the first thing I saw was a few posts saying "2.84? Punk continues to fail." I just wish they'd understand this simple concept-everyone has a part in a good or bad rating.



Starbuck said:


> End of the day Bossy, Punk hasn't been able to draw significantly without the help of a bigger name. He isn't alone in that either because it's the same for everybody else on the roster who isn't one of said bigger names. Rather than give him a fully fledged run at the top, WWE have opted to give him a half hearted and very long run just under that mark in the hopes that through sheer longevity, the masses will be conditioned to think he's a huge deal instead of actually presenting him as such. When paired with the right guys (Cena/Vince/HHH/Rock) his segments have pulled in huge numbers. When paired with anybody else he has failed to impress and at times has even floundered in timeslots that usually do a lot better and even lost viewers which is never a good sign. But like I said before, he isn't the first and he'll most likely continue to fluctuate in the ratings department depending on who he works with until WWE decides to fully solidify him into that upper echelon. The numbers back that up and to me, the real issue or the issue that deserves most attention when it comes to ratings are the double standards at play because that is where all the arguments come from.
> 
> I'll use the aforementioned Punk/Orton example that I did before. This week Punk's segment bombed and what happens? His haters storm in and proclaim him public enemy number one, a ratings killer etc etc while his marks absolve him of all blame. Switch Punk with Orton and what happens? His haters storm in and proclaim him public enemy number one, a ratings killer etc etc while his marks absolve him of all blame. Because of these reasons, it's pointless to even try to debate ratings with some people because they can't be objective about it. Like I said before, the same Punk marks getting upset over everybody putting blame on him for this week would be first in line to place blame on somebody else if it happens next week. The double standards are the problem, not the numbers themselves because any objective person can look at them and come to logical conclusions, especially when you throw a little context in there too.


I totally agree, debating ratings with people who are just too stubborn and blatantly turning a blind eye to evidence in support of the contrary is a total waste of time.

Double standards...gotta love em, huh?



Obis said:


> I agree with your point Starbuck about double standards. At the end of the day though, everyone plays double standards with their favorites, though the best posters can usually rise above that to some degree.
> 
> In any event, the talk of Punk drawing is on both sides. I think what ended up happening was this:
> 
> 1) For years, Punk marks praised Punk, call him the best in the company, etc. and haters, while not agreeing kept quiet because Punk wasn't a major star.
> 2) Punk becomes a major star and haters seem to take offense, along with all The Rock marks who took personal offense to comment against Punk calling him Dwayne.
> 3) They see his segments only gain half the time and thus will bash him anytime his segment under-performs and try to credit anyone and everyone else in a segment with Punk if it gains (which might be the case in some circumstances, but not others).
> 4) Marks will do the complete opposite (though not as bad as the haters), where they'll make excuses for why he doesn't do well (and some valid), but then give him all or most of the credit when ratings do well.
> 
> And that cycle has continued over and over and over for a year. If one side lets go it makes them look like the "loser" where the "winner" will keep posting the same shit over and over again. It's a never-ending mark vs. hater war. Punk and Orton, as Starbuck pointed out, are probably the two biggest stars that are the center of these wars when they come to drawing. Hell, they're probably the only ones right now. Usually the wars between marks and haters for guys like Sheamus, Del Rio, Barrett, etc. are all regarding talent, not who draws and who doesn't.
> 
> Daniel Bryan though, always has the "BRYAN DRAWS!" posters, who probably haven't met much retaliation from haters since he's not the champion or in the spotlight. I can guarantee that will change if Bryan ever gets the title or somehow becomes the center of the show and much like Punk, half his segments draw, half don't.
> 
> The overall show rating being down is on WWE for not creating compelling storylines. Lesnar/HHH, while still the biggest drawing points of the show would be even bigger if the storyline was better. Punk/Cena/Show is incredibly bland as well after the first week or two.


I'm at least happy that some of us here are humble enough to say "you know what? I love X superstar and that segment he did was shit." You can acknowledge when they're not doing their best work, instead of just saying "X was involved, that makes it amazing" or "X was involved, it was terrible". AKA blind devotion and blind hate. Its so damn irritating sometimes. The Bryan marks have been getting to me lately, especially.


----------



## SteenIsGod

Starbuck said:


> End of the day Bossy, Punk hasn't been able to draw significantly without the help of a bigger name. He isn't alone in that either because it's the same for everybody else on the roster who isn't one of said bigger names. Rather than give him a fully fledged run at the top, WWE have opted to give him a half hearted and very long run just under that mark in the hopes that through sheer longevity, the masses will be conditioned to think he's a huge deal instead of actually presenting him as such. When paired with the right guys (Cena/Vince/HHH/Rock) his segments have pulled in huge numbers. When paired with anybody else he has failed to impress and at times has even floundered in timeslots that usually do a lot better and even lost viewers which is never a good sign. But like I said before, he isn't the first and he'll most likely continue to fluctuate in the ratings department depending on who he works with until WWE decides to fully solidify him into that upper echelon. The numbers back that up and to me, the real issue or the issue that deserves most attention when it comes to ratings are the double standards at play because that is where all the arguments come from.
> 
> I'll use the aforementioned Punk/Orton example that I did before. This week Punk's segment bombed and what happens? His haters storm in and proclaim him public enemy number one, a ratings killer etc etc while his marks absolve him of all blame. Switch Punk with Orton and what happens? His haters storm in and proclaim him public enemy number one, a ratings killer etc etc while his marks absolve him of all blame. Because of these reasons, it's pointless to even try to debate ratings with some people because they can't be objective about it. Like I said before, the same Punk marks getting upset over everybody putting blame on him for this week would be first in line to place blame on somebody else if it happens next week. The double standards are the problem, not the numbers themselves because any objective person can look at them and come to logical conclusions, especially when you throw a little context in there too.



Spot on. I think Orton and Punk COULD'VE been huge draws, but, I know your a big fan of HHH, the loss to HHH really killed both of them. In Orton's Case the WM 25 match, that was HIS time, HHH should've done the right thing and Put Orton over and made him a Cena-Esque Star. And they Completely botched the Angle with HHH-Punk, Instead of Building it up for 3 months, give Casuals a reason to watch Punk because he's with a guy like HHH, he instead loses to HHH in one of the most meaningless PPV's ever. I know your a huge fan of HHH, trust me I am too, but it's just my opinion anyway.

And Punk is a HORRENDOUS ratings guy, so that means since Casuals don't like him, I can't like him either? Some of you haters are just completely missing it.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Punks promos always do better than his matches. I will leave it at that.


----------



## #Mark

Orton's had 5 or 6 years of a hardcore push, dat ***** should be drawing just as well as Cena by now.


----------



## Rock316AE

Let's not pretend that Punk got a 3 weeks push. He got endless programs since 2006, 2 MITBs, programs with ALL the big stars of the last decade(Batista/Cena/Orton/Hardy/Mysterio/Taker/HHH/Edge/JBL...), 5-6 titles, leader of two stables etc. In fact, he got more than most ever got and they were much more successful than he is. Why? because they had the "IT" factor, the marketability and the talent to attract the masses, he is currently 7 years in the company, his status and impact in the wrestling business is non-exist which should tell you everything. He will never be the guy, a top draw or carry a brand. The best move for a guy like him is to save money while he can still be active full time, from all his talk about retirement, I can see him working two more years, in that time he should be careful because after that he will not be able to work for big money again like other wrestlers who came back as an attraction to special events.

Anyway, I heard Diesel in this thread, the house shows business, gates revenue and some of the PPVs actually increased during his run. Besides, even in 1995 PPVs were doing better than today. If you take out a successful WM from their page now, they're 20 levels below the red line. The Kevin Nash WWF Timeline interview was awesome BTW, best ever along with Cornette's 1997. You really get the perspective on how things have changed from that time where wrestlers were men working 2 shows a day on the road in their car to the "grateful to be there" kids we have in the locker room today. Completely different world and shows you how Vince is able to manipulate them today like puppets to the point where he can steal money from their pocket and they didn't even notice. Back then when a wrestler heard that someone in the same position on the card got a bigger payday, he will demand the same from Vince. Like the HBK SVS 1995 story Nash told. In general, Nash is money, funny/honest and always great to hear. If you travel from arena to arena 24/7/365 in the wrestling industry, you want to travel with Nash. Probably can make it bearable.









:lol 

If you never watched a timeline, start with Nash(95)and Cornette(97). And if you watched, you know when the 1998 Cornette comes out?


----------



## #Mark

Rock316AE said:


> Let's not pretend that Punk got a 3 weeks push. He got endless programs since 2006, 2 MITBs, programs with ALL the big stars of the last decade(Batista/Cena/Orton/Hardy/Mysterio/Taker/HHH/Edge/JBL...), 5-6 titles, leader of two stables etc. In fact, he got more than most ever got and they were much more successful than he is. Why? because they had the "IT" factor, the marketability and the talent to attract the masses, he is currently 7 years in the company, his status and impact in the wrestling business is non-exist which should tell you everything. He will never be the guy, a top draw or carry a brand. The best move for a guy like him is to save money while he can still be active full time, from all his talk about retirement, I can see him working two more years, in that time he should be careful because after that he will not be able to work for big money again like other wrestlers who came back as an attraction to special events.
> 
> Anyway, I heard Diesel in this thread, the house shows business, gates revenue and some of the PPVs actually increased during his run. Besides, even in 1995 PPVs were doing better than today. If you take out a successful WM from their page now, they're 20 levels below the red line. The Kevin Nash WWF Timeline interview was awesome BTW, best ever along with Cornette's 1997. You really get the perspective on how things have changed from that time where wrestlers were men working 2 shows a day on the road in their car to the "grateful to be there" kids we have in the locker room today. Completely different world and shows you how Vince is able to manipulate them today like puppets to the point where he can steal money from their pocket and they didn't even notice. Back then when a wrestler heard that someone in the same position on the card got a bigger payday, he will demand the same from Vince. Like the HBK SVS 1995 story Nash told. In general, Nash is money, funny/honest and always great to hear. If you travel from arena to arena 24/7/365 in the wrestling industry, you want to travel with Nash. Probably can make it bearable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :lol
> 
> If you never watched a timeline, start with Nash(95)and Cornette(97). And if you watched, you know when the 1998 Cornette comes out?


Same can be said for Orton though. Orton's been getting a hardcore push since 03-04 and still isn't a ratings draw. 

You also fail to recognize that Punk (and Orton) are monster merch sellers. Lastly, Punk had an on and off push for majority of his tenure before the Summer of Punk. You shouldn't say he was getting a consistently big push because that just isn't the case.


----------



## funnyfaces1

We need The-Rock-Says to make some more jokes. I love his gimmick of mocking Rock fans.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

KO Bossy said:


> I'm at least happy that some of us here are humble enough to say "you know what? I love X superstar and that segment he did was shit." You can acknowledge when they're not doing their best work, instead of just saying "X was involved, that makes it amazing" or "X was involved, it was terrible". AKA blind devotion and blind hate. Its so damn irritating sometimes. The Bryan marks have been getting to me lately, especially.


I agree, but I think what happens, especially with a guy like Punk who isn't quite where he should be yet to a lot of people (Undisputed number 1 guy), they want him to succeed. And so they'll try to find any little thing they can to rationalize why Punk isn't responsible for that segment drawing poorly and the other guy is, or WWE is, or whatever. Sometimes though it's just bad advertising on WWE's part. I'm not sure where they advertised Punk/Show besides I think on SD (not sure where I read it, but I know I read it). But why didn't they make that match the week prior on Raw? AJ comes out or they do a quick backstage skit where AJ announces it to open the show up? I don't know if it would've made a major difference, but it would've been better to have that on top of the advertising they did.

Same thing happened with Lesnar/HHH last week. Now granted it did still get the highest number of the night, but the gain still felt underwhelming, and I'd like to believe as a Lesnar mark that the reason it didn't gain more was because of little to no advertising. But like I said, they got the highest number last week, and the overrun got the highest number this week so maybe they just capped out on what they could do and advertising wouldn't of helped. But who knows?

But yeah, I'd say those are valid reasons why those two portions of the show didn't do as well as they maybe could've. But I still did and will admit again that the fact Punk/Show pulled out THAT LOW of a quarter hour isn't good at all in the slightest for either man or the feud, regardless of how bad the advertising was. Even with little to no advertisement, with internet and modern technology word of mouth spreads quickly, and if people heard that Taker was making his entrance to the ring, especially with how long his entrance is , I'm sure people would've tuned in and it would've gotten a higher rating. I'm sure that's what happened the last 3-hour Raw before it became permanent, the one Vince was on where his appearance wasn't advertised to be at the start of the show, but it was and it drew well. So the fact Punk and Show couldn't do that shows they really aren't proven draws yet. They draw, but just not on "that" level yet. They just aren't consistent.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Punk marks act like they don't care about what his timeslots do in ratings. When Punk doesn't do a great number they come in here saying "I don't care, ratings aren't everything and it doesn't make a wrestler good or bad" When Punk is in a segment that does a good rating "Punk segment did an amazing number, this is a great sign" And as Starbuck says when his segment does a bad rating they're in here defending him and blaming other people, but when his segment does great they can't wait to break out the champagne.


----------



## Rock316AE

#Mark said:


> Same can be said for Orton though. Orton's been getting a hardcore push since 03-04 and still isn't a ratings draw.
> 
> You also fail to recognize that Punk (and Orton) are monster merch sellers. Lastly, Punk had an on and off push for majority of his tenure before the Summer of Punk. You shouldn't say he was getting a consistently big push because that just isn't the case.


Orton had more than enough success in his run, was the biggest ratings draw in the business, headlined a successful WM, drew on PPV, drew on house shows, he did everything in that push he got, this is not the same situation. Orton currently, wasn't the focus of the show for more than a year, or even had a serious program, when he gets that position again on RAW, we can talk about his rating ability. 

The average of merchandise is down(and by a pretty big gap IIRC from the last WWE report), so Punk, or Orton for that matter. Can sell and be on the top of the list, but if the overall is down? What two years ago would have been top 10 in amount, can be top 3 today.


----------



## Pro Royka

#Mark said:


> Same can be said for Orton though. Orton's been getting a hardcore push since 03-04 and still isn't a ratings draw.
> 
> You also fail to recognize that Punk (and Orton) are monster merch sellers. Lastly, Punk had an on and off push for majority of his tenure before the Summer of Punk. You shouldn't say he was getting a consistently big push because that just isn't the case.


Lol, you explained and answered pretty much everything with few sentences. 

Punk doesn't get the complete push because when he's about to be something big WWE stops his push. Just like after his feud with Jeff Hardy (which was great) it ended after him for no logical reason against Taker, same thing goes with Trips it ended pretty fast as Trips buried all of his momentum that he had. Saying he's not marketable is stupid as you can easily prove it, he's standing toe to toe with Cena in WWEshop. Maybe he's not a big draw but his segments does pull off good numbers.


----------



## Falkono

Don't you see that is a bit hypocritical to say Punk has not been pushed when you have a SIG showing him taking out the rock? Who else has done that in past 10 years?

Sorry but some of the Punk defence brigade really are scrapping the barrel. Punk has been starting and ending the shows since the last ppv, even being then main focus on 1000th episode. Going into the 3rd biggest ppv and he is posing bad ratings. If he is doing that after everything what makes you think he will post higher ratings if he continues to be the focus?

Wwe have done everything they could for him. Its not their fault nobody gives a shit about him...


----------



## Kabraxal

It's all about consistency... I mean, the WWE fucked up the Summer of Punk with their ridiculous booking. They should have ridden Punk fully instead of trying to give Punk to HHH/Nash and the title to Del Rio. At this point, the WWE has done so much damage to their creative image that I don't think that the Rock will be able to do the numbers they'd hope for. People expect everything to be flubbed now and they just don't turn in like they used to. Why get your hopes up anymore?


----------



## Pro Royka

Falkono said:


> Don't you see that is a bit hypocritical to say Punk has not been pushed when you have a SIG showing him taking out the rock? Who else has done that in past 10 years?
> 
> Sorry but some of the Punk defence brigade really are scrapping the barrel. Punk has been starting and ending the shows since the last ppv, even being then main focus on 1000th episode. Going into the 3rd biggest ppv and he is posing bad ratings. If he is doing that after everything what makes you think he will post higher ratings if he continues to be the focus?
> 
> Wwe have done everything they could for him. Its not their fault *nobody gives a shit about him*...


:ns

When he was the focus of the show back in the summer, he gained over a million and lil less within every week. But ever since Trips defeated Punk he wasn't the same after it in 4 weeks. What you're saying is that when he GTSed Rocky he lost viewers, no he didn't and that's not even what I was talking about fpalm. What I was saying that he didn't get his full push yet, who did he defeat some rising stars and some midcarders if you think that's a push, well I think you missed all the points. And how can you blame him for ratings is he in every segment, if Miz or whatever lost viewers will you blame Punk for it, if you do well I think you're stupid. You can't say he's the problem when you have a terrible roster thanks to Cena
which he pulled all the credibility from them. If people don't care about him he will lose over a million viewers did that happen no it didn't and they will not buy his Tshirts and be in the top with Cena if people didnt care about him. In the last 4 or 3 weeks he was drawing good number in his segments or marches but if it dropped its all Punks fault. Starting a match in the beginning of 3 hour show is stupid, if it's a 2 hour show I don't think it will drop that much as people always tune in the second hour.

The bold part do you really believe in that. You must be a troll.


----------



## BrosOfDestruction

> @CMPunk you drew a 2.5 on monday.LOL.No one wants to watch a skinny fat,boring waste of space do clumsy spots
> Retweeted by CM Punk


:ti @ Punk retweeting this. Punk and that guy who tweeted this know what's up because it's the truth but I'm surprised he didn't call him a CLUELESS INDY HACK too.


----------



## Felpent

"Oh! I am working the marks, I am so cool." 

Punk is just embarrassing. Honestly, Guys like Kurt Angle and CM Punk should never be allowed to a twitter account.


----------



## Falkono

Pro Royka said:


> :ns
> What you're saying is that when he GTSed Rocky he lost viewers, no he didn't and that's not even what I was talking about fpalm. What I was saying that he didn't get his full push yet, who did he defeat some rising stars and some midcarders.....


Dude are you for real? First off don't call people trolls because you don't agree with an opinion.
Secondly have you even watched raw this year? Do you even know what a push is?

My point which clearly went over your head was that over a month ago WWE started to hype the shit out of the coming 1000th episode. It was advertised everywhere and its rating reflects that. That show was built as a huge deal. One of the biggest nights in years. Bigger then Mania. Who was the focus of that show? Punk. Who was left ending the show? Punk. Who did Punk take out? The Rock. Possibly the 2nd biggest draw in the attitude era. Punk was the focus of that show and has remained the focus since. Your whole defence revolves around your opinion he has been overshadowed which is stupid. Who has Punk beaten this year? Jericho, Cena, Bryan, Miz, Ziggler, Del Rio etc you have to go back to night of champions almost a year exactly ago to see Punks last singles loss at a Ppv. Cena has lost loads in that time. Who else could WWE have got for him to feud with? 

Whether you like it or not Punk has had a huge past year and is the 12th longest reign in history. This whole CM Punk has not been pushed theory is a lie old by Punk marks to defend his lack of ability to draw or create interest since last year.
Punk has been pushed just as much as anyone.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

> Amuroray ‏@Amuroraymark2
> @CMPunk you drew a 2.5 on http://monday.LOL.No one wants to watch a skinny fat,boring waste of space do clumsy spots
> 
> Retweeted by CM Punk


Punk just dont give a shit.


----------



## Amuroray

punk retweeted me again.

he knows the truth


----------



## Green Light

BrosOfDestruction said:


> :ti @ Punk retweeting this. Punk and that guy who tweeted this know what's up because it's the truth but I'm surprised he didn't call him a CLUELESS INDY HACK too.


Lol the guy who tweeted that posts on here "Amuroray"

Edit: Speak of the devil^


----------



## Pro Royka

Falkono said:


> Dude are you for real? First off don't call people trolls because you don't agree with an opinion.
> Secondly have you even watched raw this year? Do you even know what a push is?
> 
> My point which clearly went over your head was that over a month ago WWE started to hype the shit out of the coming 1000th episode. It was advertised everywhere and its rating reflects that. That show was built as a huge deal. One of the biggest nights in years. Bigger then Mania. Who was the focus of that show? Punk. Who was left ending the show? Punk. Who did Punk take out? The Rock. Possibly the 2nd biggest draw in the attitude era. Punk was the focus of that show and has remained the focus since. Your whole defence revolves around your opinion he has been overshadowed which is stupid. Who has Punk beaten this year? Jericho, Cena, Bryan, Miz, Ziggler, Del Rio etc you have to go back to night of champions almost a year exactly ago to see Punks last singles loss at a Ppv. Cena has lost loads in that time. Who else could WWE have got for him to feud with?
> 
> Whether you like it or not Punk has had a huge past year and is the 12th longest reign in history. This whole CM Punk has not been pushed theory is a lie old by Punk marks to defend his lack of ability to draw or create interest since last year.
> Punk has been pushed just as much as anyone.


Jericho is a upper/midcarder, Miz is a midcarder, Bryan is a rising star, Ziggler is a midcarder, and Del Rio is generic but their feud still drew well in that time. Cena did lose but he defeated every one possible in this era to be a draw, and he lost by a DQ or by a distraction. Punk never defeated Cena, Big Show, Taker, Trips, Orton, Batista etc. fair and squere, and he didn't even beat some of them. If you consider beating midcarders is a push, then I don't know what to say to you exactly.


----------



## BrosOfDestruction

All it took was one line to ether and bury Punk. Dat pipebomb by Amuroray.


----------



## Amuroray

BrosOfDestruction said:


> All it took was one line to ether and bury Punk. Dat pipebomb by Amuroray.


Ive done it twice to the guy.

He responded pissed the first time.

He knows he cant draw to save his life and it hurts him.


----------



## Starbuck

Punk needs to pull a page from the CeNation and RISE ABOVE DAT HATE. He may or may not be bothered by comments like that but by retweeting them all it does is make him seem a bit butthurt tbh.


----------



## Vyed

Amuroray said:


> punk retweeted me again.
> 
> he knows the truth


LMAO. It was you..awesome. 










Punk probably has this thread in his bookmarks.


----------



## Kabraxal

Starbuck said:


> Punk needs to pull a page from the CeNation and RISE ABOVE DAT HATE. He may or may not be bothered by comments like that but by retweeting them all it does is make him seem a bit butthurt tbh.


To be fair it is a good laugh to read something of these people and they think what they said was intelligent.


----------



## Choke2Death

Amuroray said:


> Ive done it twice to the guy.
> 
> He responded pissed the first time.
> 
> He knows he cant draw to save his life and it hurts him.


His first response was a bitter one. He said something about "Are you a ratings fan or wrestling fan?" which screams butthurt.


----------



## NearFall

Starbuck said:


> Punk needs to pull a page from the CeNation and RISE ABOVE DAT HATE. He may or may not be bothered by comments like that but by retweeting them all it does is make him seem a bit butthurt tbh.


He is working us all with da retweets, he is like my signature in reality unk2


----------



## Jammy

Punk has been GOTTEN TO. lol amuroray


----------



## Starbuck

PULL DA STRINGS PULL DA STRINGS OF HATE AND REPLACE DEM WITH LOVE


----------



## Rock316AE

Amuroray said:


> Ive done it twice to the guy.
> 
> He responded pissed the first time.
> 
> He knows he cant draw to save his life and it hurts him.





Vyed said:


>


:lmao I remember the first tweet when he tried to put Shawn Michaels' name in the same line with him. He probably gets a lot of it since last year. The funny thing is that he's probably the first guy to ask about the numbers. When he sold close to Cena merchandise for a few minutes in August last year, you saw him telling it in every interview he did. Or even better, after RAW in Chicago in December 2011, he wrote "I sold out the Allstate arena" or something like that. The guy is a fool. No way around it.


----------



## Jammy

Punk has some serious Napoleon complex going on, he's trying it shout it out real loud that he's a relevant and drawing champion. 

'Look at me! Look at me! I did a shoot (approved by boss) on live TV, midcard champ for 250 days!! Bask in my magnificence!'

Kinda wish he stops responding to tweets, guess that's just his nature.

Edit:


> I don't retweet nice things about me because that seems so desperate. I retweet the haters because they pop me.They're here to entertain me!


----------



## Starbuck

Isn't a Napolean complex for short people though?


----------



## Jammy

Starbuck said:


> Isn't a Napolean complex for short people though?


Kinda modified it to fit the situation, didn't know what other complex to use. Hmm maybe inferiority. Didn't Nash anyway say that he was a midget?

We need a Nash smiley, for lulz.

Edit: apparently napoleon complex also means 'the term is also used more generally to describe people who are driven by a perceived handicap to overcompensate in other aspects of their lives.'


----------



## Choke2Death

Starbuck said:


> Isn't a Napolean complex for short people though?


You mean like Punk?


----------



## Starbuck

He isn't a midget lol. He's the height of the average male, probably slightly bigger but because of his environment he looks small, especially when standing next to the likes of Cena, HHH, Rock never mind the abnormally tall Kevin Nash's of the world.


----------



## NearFall

CM Punk is a midget look:


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

^

Got some big hands though.


----------



## Starbuck

When I met him he seemed a lot bigger in person. Then again, I've seen the likes of Cena, HHH, Rock, Lesnar etc from a foot away and they were all fucking HUGE so...I don't know what my point is anymore lol.


----------



## BrosOfDestruction

Jammy said:


> Kinda modified it to fit the situation, didn't know what other complex to use. Hmm maybe inferiority. Didn't Nash anyway say that he was a midget?
> 
> We need a Nash smiley, for lulz.
> 
> Edit: apparently napoleon complex also means 'the term is also used more generally to describe people who are driven by a perceived handicap to overcompensate in other aspects of their lives.'


Mods give us a Nash smiley or else.


----------



## Starbuck

BrosOfDestruction said:


> Mods give us a Nash smiley or else.


I see your Nash with gun post and raise you a Randy Orton gun collection.










rton


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Guns=RATINGS!!!11!1!!!!!!

So I guess it's on topic.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Starbuck said:


> He isn't a midget lol. He's the height of the average male, probably slightly bigger but because of his environment he looks small, especially when standing next to the likes of Cena, HHH, Rock never mind the abnormally tall Kevin Nash's of the world.


He's as tall as Cena. But probably because Cena is huge it gives off the impression that because he's bigger he's also taller than Punk.


----------



## Starbuck

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> He's as tall as Cena. But probably because Cena is huge it gives off the impression that he's taller than Punk.


Think he might be just under Cena's height tbh. Cena is absolutely fucking massive though. So is HHH. And Rock. Then Brock Lesnar walked past me and they were the ones who looked like midgets lol.


----------



## Felpent

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> He's as tall as Cena. But probably because Cena is huge it gives off the impression that because he's bigger he's also taller than Punk.


I dont think so, from last week -


----------



## Rock316AE

BrosOfDestruction said:


> Mods give us a Nash smiley or else.


Options:

























You want ratings? Give Nash his own talk show on RAW every week. In a month, they're throwing Leno and Kimmel. Seriously, that's a good idea. Like the nWo Bischoff talk show in 1998 during the Leno feud. Although I don't remember how it did on TV.


----------



## Jammy

BrosOfDestruction said:


> Mods give us a Nash smiley or else.


Nash or riot.
























Mine are better RockAE, I took the trouble in finding expression faces and cropping them, dat dedication,


----------



## NearFall

Starbuck said:


> I see your Nash with gun post and raise you a Randy Orton gun collection.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rton


Starbuck pls.










unk


----------



## Starbuck

Fuck Nash. Boring vanilla giant. See what I did there? unk


----------



## IncapableNinja

BrosOfDestruction said:


> Mods give us a Nash smiley or else.


Isn't that Jericho's jacket?

BERRIED.

Also, this thread is amazing. Over the course of 5300 posts, we've identified that 4 and something million people tune in to watch Raw each week. GO TEAM. 

Good stuff, Deso, Starback and DMN and a couple of other people; but do you have to ruin everything with common sense and logic?  :lol


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

They're both pretty much exactly 6 feet so it's a bit pointless to figure out which one is taller if the difference is even less than an inch most likely lol.

Lesnar with that Megastar~ power burying those midget hacks Rock and Haitch.



Felpent said:


> I dont think so, from last week -


Punk looks like he's hunching over.


----------



## Felpent

How about this one? would make a great smiley


----------



## Starbuck

IncapableNinja said:


> Good stuff, Deso, *Starback* and DMN and a couple of other people; but do you have to ruin everything with common sense and logic?  :lol


:yes we do.

EDIT - Hold up. _Starback_? Dafuq is Starback? 

PS - It really is scary though. Rock and HHH aren't small guys, neither is Cena, yet Brock completely dwarfs them. The man really is a fucking beast in human form.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

DMN is Da MaN. He's really the only guy that posts in this thread that really knows a thing about ratings. Everyone else uses them for the WARS.


----------



## NearFall

NASH OR RIOT.


----------



## Starbuck

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> DMN is Da MaN. He's really the only guy that posts in this thread that really knows a thing about ratings. Everyone else uses them for the WARS~


I'm offended.


----------



## IncapableNinja

Starbuck said:


> :yes we do.
> 
> EDIT - Hold up. _Starback_? Dafuq is Starback?


You know..Starback!

Alright I fucked up.


----------



## Starbuck

IncapableNinja said:


> You know..Starback!
> 
> Alright I fucked up.


:hhh


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Starbuck said:


> PS - It really is scary though. Rock and HHH aren't small guys, neither is Cena, yet Brock completely dwarfs them. The man really is a fucking beast in human form.


Insane. Other than Heyman being awesome, it's really the only thing I'm looking forward to about Sunday's match. I know it'll be a spectacle. Thank God for Heyman though, really. Have Lesnar never open his mouth and all will be well.



Starbuck said:


> I'm offended.


Well you too, Starback.


----------



## Starbuck

I feel the feeling that you're feeling, *Wrestlinfan35*. I feel it. I don't feel your edit though. Fucking Starback lol.


----------



## Green Light

STARBORK


----------



## Starbuck

STARFEELTHEFEELIN


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

:lmao What the fuck were they thinking giving him 20 minutes with only Johnny Ace to work with? Of course Big Johnny had to carry the show like he always does.


----------



## NearFall

Starbuck said:


> STARFEELTHEFEELIN


i think starback is a pretty cool guy, eh feels the feelin he sensing cause he feelin and dont afraid of anything


----------



## Jammy

Starbuck channeling his inner Nash.


----------



## KO Bossy

Well as long as we're posting pictures we want to see made into smileys...










Quote-I see what you did there...









Quote-Pimpin ain't easy










Quote-Oh HELL no.










Quote-Shit just got real.










Quote-Marking out.










Quote-Wooooo.










Quote-Markout level over 9000.










Quote-What the fuck?










Quote-Creepy


----------



## Amuroray

:lmao @ hogans is this real life pic


----------



## KO Bossy

Hahaha kinda looks like the Hogan pic I posted earlier is him finding out wrestling is scripted.

"YOU MEAN...THEY LIED TO ME?!"


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Walks into thread*

*... has no fucking idea what's going on*

*Leaves*


----------



## Huganomics

Starbuck said:


> I see your Nash with gun post and raise you a Randy Orton gun collection.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rton


Probably should've used that when :hhh came barging into his house.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

ITV wanted Punk to do the FA Cup draw last year. But he had to tell them he couldn't draw.


----------



## Coffey

Nice to know that Randy Orton wastes his money...but no one said wrestlers were smart. :lol


----------



## Choke2Death

Walk-In said:


> Nice to know that Randy Orton wastes his money...but no one said wrestlers were smart. :lol


How is he wasting his money? The alien invasion is coming. How are we going to kill the aliens when they land? 

They should book Orton vs Aliens when they land, that's gonna draw RATINGZZZZZZZZZ~!!!! Orton is at his home, shooting them as they come and it's an Ironman match. Ends with Orton running towards the arena Raw is being taped at and that's when the pistols come in handy. 

End rating will probably be 20.7 which sets the new record!


----------



## Coffey

Choke2Death said:


> How is he wasting his money? The alien invasion is coming. How are we going to kill the aliens when they land?


Don't say things like this because then we'll have to sit through WWE Films Presents: Martian Massacre starring WWE Superstar Randy Orton.

"They came in peace. They leave in pieces."


----------



## BANKSY

It's a PG show so he will have to fight them off with water pistols or something.


----------



## NearFall

Choke2Death said:


> How is he wasting his money? The alien invasion is coming. How are we going to kill the aliens when they land?
> 
> They should book Orton vs Aliens when they land, that's gonna draw RATINGZZZZZZZZZ~!!!! Orton is at his home, shooting them as they come and it's an Ironman match. Ends with Orton running towards the arena Raw is being taped at and that's when the pistols come in handy.
> 
> End rating will probably be 20.7 which sets the new record!


All we need is Mark "DA RATINGZZZ!" Henry and Rocky to show up as support to NWO Music and Kevin Nash as narrator. #GOLD


----------



## Clued

WWE is going back to status quo soon and is getting boring again.

Once CM Punk's jets have been cooled then everyone is on an even playing field again, no more standouts. 

Just Cena vs The Rock again.


----------



## Das Wunderberlyn

AJ skipping around was fucking shit on fucking proportions.. just get this ho out of my screen. thank fuck i can skip those segments.

otherwise ok show with good orton/del rio and ziggler/jericho matches. 

Orton was fucking over in a shit crowd.


----------



## Choke2Death

Clued said:


> WWE is going back to status quo soon and is getting boring again.
> 
> Once CM Punk's jets have been cooled then everyone is on an even playing field again, no more standouts.
> 
> Just Cena vs The Rock again.


It IS in the status quo and has been that way since last year's SummerSlam, with slight 'changes' being made for the Road to Wrestlemania but we all knew that was temporary. If the "big" storyline right now is some whiny douchebag crying about not getting respect, then I feel sorry for the writers. What a HUGE storyline, right?


----------



## KO Bossy

Choke2Death said:


> It IS in the status quo and has been that way since last year's SummerSlam, with slight 'changes' being made for the Road to Wrestlemania but we all knew that was temporary. If the "big" storyline right now is some whiny douchebag crying about not getting respect, then I feel sorry for the writers. What a HUGE storyline, right?


Its more then just that. We have a whiny, douchebag crying about not getting respect. We also have a green jackass who effectively said that the title is all well and good, but its not the most important thing to him. Oh gee, I'm really excited about seeing a match between these two.

Cena's promo last night just screamed "please cheer me" with all the cheap pops, ass kissing to the fans and whatnot.

And I'll fucking bet you anything that the WWE will try to play off of this angle by saying "see? Punk's crappy booking was done on purpose SO WE COULD BUILD THIS FEUD. WE WERE PLANNING AHEAD."


----------



## Vyed

Hour 1 - 4.352m (Last Week : 3.795m)
Hour 2 - 4.657m (Last Week : 4.252m)
Hour 3 - 4.426m (Last week : 4.354m)


----------



## Starbuck

Big jump from hour 1 last week to hour 1 this week. Nice jump from hour 2 last week to hour 2 this week. Good little bump for hour 3 too. I suspect the overrun got at or around 5 million based off that number which is always nice. The fallout of Summerslam is obviously the reason for the bump in hour 1 imo. Pretty alright numbers. Breakdown should be a bit wacky though because the placement of this show was all over the fucking place.


----------



## KO Bossy

Brock "Master of the Brocktagon AND ratings" Lesnar


----------



## Rock316AE

Damn, Paul E and his client, the new King of Kings, The Master of the BrockTagon, MEGASTAR - BRRROOOOOOOOOOCKK LLLLESSSSSSSNNAR. Bumping that first hour. That jump surprised even me because I thought that it's a viewers habit problem, more than the content, but I guess Brock and Heyman was big enough to get their attention and 9pm as expected doing the biggest from all the fans coming to see what happened in Brock/HHH at Summerslam. Orton vs Del Rio did the peak of the show, I'm 99% sure in that. 

Overall, below average numbers, hopefully the rating is not above 3.1, next week it's going back to below 3.0 anyway.


----------



## vanboxmeer

BBBBRRRRRAAAAWWWWWWKKKKKK Lesnar


----------



## NearFall

Mark "RATINGZ" Henry VS Brock "THE BROCKTAGON KING OF KINGS" Lesnar with NWO music and Nash giving running commentary/talk show. 4.0+


----------



## D.M.N.

I'd laugh if the first segment of a three hour show happens to be the highest rated segment of the entire night. There's a first for everything.


----------



## Starbuck

DAT SUMMERSLAM FALLOUT

HHH crying draws ratings lol.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Heyman's promo was the fucking bomb!

The lower number for hour 3 makes me think Punk/Cena overrun didn't do so well. We'll see though.


----------



## NearFall

Starbuck said:


> DAT SUMMERSLAM FALLOUT
> 
> HHH crying draws ratings lol.


His tears only rust the shovel. Soon it will need to be scraped off again. He will return :hhh


----------



## Starbuck

We need a smiley of HHH's sad panda face.


----------



## SonoShion

^ DAT SIG :mark:


----------



## TheWFEffect

Vyed said:


> Hour 1 - 4.352m (Last Week : 3.795m)
> Hour 2 - 4.657m (Last Week : 4.252m)
> Hour 3 - 4.426m (Last week : 4.354m)


BORK AND HUNTER BRING DEA RATINGS


----------



## Rock316AE

NearFall said:


> Mark "RATINGZ" Henry VS Brock "THE BROCKTAGON KING OF KINGS" Lesnar with NWO music and Nash giving running commentary/talk show. 4.0+


If you put Hand Henry in RATINGZ corner, Wolfpack theme and Nash on commentary burying everything? 6.0+ peak. 

And fucking :lmao at The Giant video, imagine if at that time they would have done a slogan for him: "A pink world, you can see only through red eyes", put that on a pink and black nWo shirt. Record money. When you think about it, although it's not PG, they can do it for Ryback with his gimmick colorful eyes.


----------



## Kabraxal

Not a really great number for the night after the "second" biggsst PPV of the year. But then, Summerslam was disappointing and each segment save for one or two good ones either dragged or made NO sense. Maybe WWE is trying some abstract post modernism and I'm just not seeing they art behind it...


----------



## NearFall

Something like this *Starbuck*










Just without the white backround, and scaled a bit lol




Rock316AE said:


> And fucking :lmao at The Giant video, imagine if at that time they would have done a slogan for him: "A pink world, you can see only through red eyes", put that on a pink and black nWo shirt. Record money. When you think about it, although it's not PG, they can do it for Ryback with his gimmick colorful eyes.


Funniest part ever, it would explain why he eats so much :lmao :lmao :lmao 

Wish they gave Show back the smokes. Can imagine him mid-match taking a drag, while screaming "POLISH THAT TITLE FOR ME!" at Punk


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

The Heyman promo most likely did very well.

Orton and Del Rio probably gained 500'000 for the people not tuning into the first hour and the Orton marks will all wave their dicks around saying "SEE, SEE, ORTON DRWS!".

The Kane, Ryder V Miz, DB tag match probably did very bad.

The overrun probably did well with the two top stars on Raw cutting a promo in a big overrun.


----------



## Starbuck

Why so butthurt about rton *jblvdx*?


----------



## lancaster223

Even the overrun rating gains hates Punk. :lmao


----------



## holt_hogan

Folks are over looking the fact that WWE now have over 4 million people tune in to an extra hour regularly that neither they or the network had previously. I think they'd be pretty happy about that.


----------



## Choke2Death

lancaster223 said:


> Even the overrun rating gains hates Punk. :lmao


LMFAO. While there's almost half a million increase for the first two hours, the last one barely even increase and look who was in the main event. :lmao

No jokes, I'm really starting to see a pattern with him.


----------



## TeamRocketGrunt

you won't see to many punk marks here once the breakdown goes up


----------



## hazuki

Think the Punk segment probably did decent, atleast. Saw a quite a bit of talk about it after the show.


----------



## Vyed

> WWE Raw on Monday, August 20 the night after Summerslam scored a 3.14 rating for all three hours and 3.21 rating for the standard two hours. This was up from a 2.84 rating for all three hours last week and 2.93 rating for the standard two hours.
> 
> Despite the overall rating increasing 10 percent, Raw's key demographic ratings were flat or slightly down compared to last week's show.
> 
> - Raw averaged 4.48 million viewers, which is okay for the show after Summerslam. By comparison, last year's Raw after Summerslam averaged 5.05 million viewers for a two-hour show.
> 
> Raw followed an interesting viewership pattern with 4.35 million first hour viewers, which was easily the most of the three-hour era following Raw 1,000. Raw then peaked with 4.66 million second hour viewers. The third hour dipped to an average of 4.43 million viewers, which was within 100,000 viewers of the new first hour.
> 
> It appears viewers tuned in early for the immediate Summerslam fall-out, including Brock Lesnar's farewell, stayed tuned for Shawn Michaels's appearance addressing Triple H's teased retirement, and tuned out without an announced main event for the third hour.
> 
> - On cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #4 in overall viewers behind NFL pre-season football on ESPN, "Pawn Stars" on History Channel, and "Major Crimes" on TNT. Raw also fell behind the season finale of "Love and Hip Atlanta" on VH1 among all adult viewers.
> 
> In the key demographics, Raw ranked #2 behind the NFL in adult males. Raw ranked #1 among younger male viewers.


.


----------



## Vyed

> The following is a break down of the last five years of Raw TV ratings and viewership the night after Summerslam. In parenthesis is the percentage increase in *viewership* compared to the previous week's Summerslam lead-in Raw.
> 
> 8/18/08 - 3.30 rating / 4.86 mill. viewers (+4.0%)
> 8/24/09 - 3.93 rating / 5.86 mill. viewers (+5.9%)
> 8/16/10 - 3.30 rating / 4.77 mill. viewers (+2.9%)
> 8/15/11 - 3.27 rating / 5.05 mill. viewers (+11.3%)
> 8/20/12 - 3.14 (3.21 for 2H) / 4.48 mill. viewers (+8.3%)


.


----------



## Starbuck

I'd say the overrun did well based on these numbers actually. I guess we'll find out tomorrow lol.


----------



## Rock316AE

The overrun probably did decent, Cena in a main event promo usually does well and they took a long 14 minutes overrun for that segment.

Peak of the show was probably Orton/Del Rio or Lesnar/Heyman.


----------



## murder

Those ratings compared to last couple of years is scary, especially considering that they now have Lesnar. But honestly this show was crap. 

- Lesnar and Heyman just talking with no new angle shot 
- No HHH of course and HBK only via sattelite 
- No main event. 
- Cena same old generic babyface and Punk generic heel again


----------



## Tnmore

Jericho vs Ziggler was the main event right?


----------



## xerxesXXI

here comes mnf and the excuses.


----------



## The Lady Killer

> Raw followed an interesting viewership pattern with 4.35 million first hour viewers, which was easily the most of the three-hour era following Raw 1,000.


BROCK = RATINGS


----------



## Punked Up

What I've learned from 540+ pages of this thread:

-CM Punk is a draw.
-CM Punk is not a draw.
-Randy Orton is a draw.
-Randy Orton is not a draw.
-Ratings matter.
-Ratings don't matter.
-Merchandise sales matter.
-Merchandise sales don't matter.
-PPV buys are #1.
-PPV buys are not #1.
-John Cena is the only mega star.
-John Cena is not a maga star. It's only in comparison the rest of the roster.
-Mark Henry is good for ratings.
-Rock316AE has a very good memory.

Yeah, so there's your 540 pages. In one post. You're welcome.


----------



## DesolationRow

Punked Up said:


> What I've learned from 540+ pages of this thread:
> 
> -CM Punk is a draw.
> -CM Punk is not a draw.
> -Randy Orton is a draw.
> -Randy Orton is not a draw.
> -Ratings matter.
> -Ratings don't matter.
> -Merchandise sales matter.
> -Merchandise sales don't matter.
> -PPV buys are #1.
> -PPV buys are not #1.
> -John Cena is the only mega star.
> -John Cena is not a maga star. It's only in comparison the rest of the roster.
> -Mark Henry is good for ratings.
> -Rock316AE has a very good memory.
> 
> Yeah, so there's your 540 pages. In one post. You're welcome.


Nah, you missed the parts about John Laurinaitis and The Big Show and AJ and Daniel Bryan, and how Laurinaitis was both responsible for drawing in viewers and for turning viewers off, Big Show being a ratings powerhouse but also underwhelming, AJ and Daniel Bryan being draws and yet not being draws, either, as well as Rock losing viewers, Rock being the biggest star of all time and Rock being the only reason WWE is still alive at this point. And Triple H and Undertaker and Shawn Michaels being mixed together = ratings juggernaut. Oh, and my point that Stephanie = ratings. There ya go.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

The Breakdown



> In the segment-by-segment, R-Truth & Kofi Kingston & Sin Cara vs. Darren Young & Titus O’Neil & Cody Rhodes gained 9,000 viewers. The Ryback squash and backstage stuff with Chris Jericho and Dolph Ziggler and A.J. gained 198,000 viewers. The Alberto Del Rio interview gained 33,000 viewers. Randy Orton vs. Alberto Del Rio gained 280,000 viewers in the 9 p.m. slot. You’d expect more growth in that segment, but since they started high, they didn’t get it. Damien Sandow vs. Brodus Clay lost 112,000 viewers. The Shawn Michaels interview lost 198,000 viewers. I wouldn’t have expected that. Big Show vs. David Otunga gained 86,000 viewers. Kane & Zack Ryder vs. Daniel Bryan & The Miz plus Cena and C.M. Punk backstage stuff gained 199,000 viewers to a 3.32 quarter for the 10 p.m. slot. So below usual growth for the top of the third hour. The Divas Battle Royal lost 369,000 viewers. Chris Jericho vs. Dolph Ziggler career vs. briefcase lost 30,000 viewers. The final segment with Punk, Cena and Jerry Lawler gained 466,000 viewers and did a 3.36 overrun.


Not much to say except Shawn Michaels can't draw and the Primetime Playas are bigger stars than Brock Lesnar as breakdowns always are accurately truthful to ones drawing power.


----------



## DesolationRow

Little Jimmy draws.


----------



## TeamRocketGrunt

jblvdx said:


> The Breakdown
> 
> 
> 
> Not much to say except Shawn Michaels can't draw and the Primetime Playas are bigger stars than Brock Lesnar as breakdowns always are accurately truthful to ones drawing power.


Shawn michaels is one of the greatest draws in history, it's just sandows and clays fault for having no drawing power what so ever, so the viewers were leaving during and after there match.


----------



## Rock316AE

> The show opened with Brock Lesnar and Paul Heyman at a 2.97 rating, significantly higher than usual. In the segment breakdown, the six-man match with R-Truth, Kofi Kingston and Sin Cara vs. Darren Young, Titus O'Neil and Cody Rhodes gained 9,000 viewers. The Ryback squash and backstage segment with Dolph Ziggler and Chris Jericho gained 198,000 viewers. The Alberto Del Rio segment gained 33,000 viewers while Del Rio vs. Randy Orton gained 280,000 viewers in the 9pm timeslot.
> 
> Brodus Clay vs. Damien Sandow lost 112,000 viewers and the satellite interview with Shawn Michaels lost 198,000 viewers. David Otunga vs. Big Show gained 86,000 viewers. Kane and Zack Ryder vs. Daniel Bryan and The Miz plus backstage stuff with John Cena and CM Punk gained 199,000 viewers for a 3.32 quarter rating at the 10pm timeslot.
> 
> The Divas Battle Royal to name a new #1 contender was the biggest loss of the show with 369,000 viewers. Dolph Ziggler vs. Chris Jericho in Jericho's exit lost 30,000 viewers. The main event segment with Punk, Cena and Jerry Lawler gained 466,000 viewers for a 3.36 overrun rating.


Lesnar and Heyman was a big success, opening with 3.0, I guess when there's a real attraction, it gets people's attention even if it's not in their viewing habit.

Nobody wants to see Michaels as HHH's sidekick, crying about a storyline that 99.99999% of the audience knows is not real. They want to see the legend H-B-K when he's there.

Orton vs Del Rio as I predicted, did the peak of the show. 

Big Show is still a TV machine gaining all over the place and his angry promo after losing at Summerslam was awesome.

Cena/Punk promo was the biggest surprise for me, I thought about a 800k gain like Cena usually does there, horrible gain.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

inb4 "Punk can't draw".


----------



## TeamRocketGrunt

punk cant draw


----------



## ChickMagnet12

inafter "Punk can't draw"


----------



## The-Rock-Says

CM Phil couldn't draw water from a well.


----------



## Cactus

TeamRocketGrunt said:


> Shawn michaels is one of the greatest draws in history, it's just sandows and clays fault for having no drawing power what so ever, so the viewers were leaving during and after there match.


I don't think one of the greatest draws in history would of nearly killed the company when he was on top...


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Rock316AE said:


> Lesnar and Heyman was a big success, opening with 3.0, I guess when there's a real attraction, it gets people's attention even if it's not in their viewing habit.
> 
> Nobody wants to see Michaels as HHH's sidekick, crying about a storyline that 99.99999% of the audience knows is not real. They want to see the legend H-B-K when he's there.
> 
> *Orton vs Del Rio as I predicted, did the peak of the show. *
> 
> Big Show is still a TV machine gaining all over the place and his angry promo after losing at Summerslam was awesome.
> 
> Cena/Punk promo was the biggest surprise for me, I thought about a 800k gain like Cena usually does there, horrible gain.


No it didnt. Meltzer said on the Observer Radio that Punk and Cena promo was the peak of the show


----------



## Rock316AE

> No it didnt. Meltzer said on the Observer Radio that Punk and Cena promo was the peak of the show


How? They started with 3.0 for Brock/Heyman and gained 500k until the Orton/Del Rio match, Cena/Punk segment did 3.3...Whatever.


Cactus said:


> I don't think one of the greatest draws in history would of nearly killed the company when he was on top...


For the time he was on top? PPVs were doing better domestically than now, gates were significantly higher and they were actually selling out house shows, the difference is that back then before the AE, they didn't build the machine internationally and increased prices like they're doing now to stay above red line. Ratings? the first month of his run after WM12 until Scott Hall made his Nitro debut, increased huge and broke RAW records at that time.


----------



## TeamRocketGrunt

Cactus said:


> I don't think one of the greatest draws in history would of nearly killed the company when he was on top...


He was carrying the entire wwf on his back, and he was also competing with the nwo, no 1 man can compete with that, without hbk wwf would have died back in 1996


----------



## D.M.N.

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> DMN is Da MaN. He's really the only guy that posts in this thread that really knows a thing about ratings. Everyone else uses them for the WARS.





Starbuck said:


> I'm offended.


You're welcome.

Quarter Hours - August 20th, 2012
Q1 - 4.292 million
Q2 - 4.301 million
Q3 - 4.499 million
Q4 - 4.532 million
------
Q5 - 4.812 million
Q6 - 4.700 million
Q7 - 4.502 million
Q8 - 4.588 million
------
Q9 - 4.787 million
Q10 - 4.418 million
Q11 - 4.388 million
Q12 and Overrun - 4.854 million

I'm surprised at how poorly Jericho and Ziggler did in Q11, although being right after a Diva's match can't have helped. Despite Lesnar and Heyman going on first, it was still the lowest rated segment of the night, so they didn't bump things too much, otherwise people would have tuned out for Q2, Q3 and Q4.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Punk gets lowest quarter of the night last week. People shit all over him.

Lesnar gets lowest quarter of the night this week. People don't talk about it.

Ahhh, the ass backward nature of the IWC.


----------



## SteenIsGod

Good rating from Ryback, Decent gain for ADR/ORTON, ADR did a good job salvaging what could've been piss poor from Orton. Cena and Punk did good as expected from a Cena feud, and gotta give it to Punk because he did start out that segment so you'd expect worse. Brock did pretty damn good, but they should've switched the positing of Orton/ADR and Lesnars segment. You already know an Orton segment is going to do too good, and they probably would've gotten more outta Lesnar if he was at 9.


----------



## lancaster223

Cena carrying Punk as usual. Not just in the ring but in gaining viewership.

Da Brocktagon gaining the biggest opening viewership since 3 hr Raw started. Good job.


----------



## D.M.N.

There's a fantastic article here, from the Wrestling Observer a few weeks ago celebrating Raw 1000, thanks to Clique: http://www.wrestlingforum.com/class...rs-ago-wrestling-observer-8.html#post11814274

Here's a few of the relevant ratings bits of interest:



> When Ted Turner went to Eric Bischoff in 1995 and asked him why Vince McMahon’s ratings on Monday night were now ahead of their Saturday night ratings, Bischoff told him it was because Monday was a better night and because Raw was sometimes live. Turner then told him that TNT would clear an hour for him every Monday night and he would go live. The feeling in wrestling at the time is that there were a certain number of wrestling fans, and with the shows going head-to-head, it would divide the audience. Instead of a reasonably well rated Raw, which was doing between a 2.5 and 3.0 rating (remember, it was not the primary show at the time; Superstars, usually syndicated in various time slots on the weekends was), you’d have two shows splitting the audience and not doing very well and the result would be a perception wrestling programming wasn’t strong. But the opposite happened. Raw was definitely hurt at first by Nitro, but instead of splitting the overall wrestling audience, the audience grew. Raw did well with younger viewers, kids and teenagers. Nitro, through using so many of the stars from the 80s on top, brought back an older fan base that was not watching on Monday nights.
> 
> Raw’s numbers dropped 15-20% right away, but from the start, the overall audience grew about 60%. It wasn’t long before the overall audience doubled and eventually tripled. Raw didn’t get back to its old numbers until 1998, but at that point, with wrestling so big on Mondays and Raw delivering the better product, the numbers skyrocketed. In 1995, although Raw had been on the air for three years and WWF had a Monday night presence dating back many years before that, to most people, wrestling was something you watched on Saturdays or Sundays, either morning, afternoon, or evening, depending on the city you lived in. Very quickly, Monday became wrestling night, a tradition that has remained for a generation.
> 
> At the peak of the wars in 1998, the differences in the audience were noteworthy. The median age of a Raw viewer ranged between 23 and 25, which means half the viewers were older and half were younger. That was a remarkably low skewing number for a prime time television show. *Moreover, as Raw got more risque and popular, they picked up so many young viewers that even when picking up disgruntled Nitro viewers starting in late 1998, and more in 1999, they got as high as 39% of the audience being 17 or under (right now it’s about half that). The ratings for kids and teenagers were among the highest shows, network or otherwise, on television. Nitro’s median audience during the peak period was 32, but as time went on and they lost the younger viewers when Raw became the hot show, it’s remaining viewers skewed older, hovering closer to 40.* Their older audience stuck with it through the bad times while the younger audience either switched to Raw, or many gave up on watching wrestling. That older audience for the most part ceased being fans of wrestling over the last two years of Nitro, and those remaining in 2001 almost all gave up during that year and never came back. The death of WCW immediately cut the over 40 audience watching wrestling down by 35% almost immediately, and that audience never came back.
> 
> *What is notable is that today, Raw’s median audience ranges weekly from 38 to 40 (although this past week, notable because it was a nostalgia show that should have skewed older, it actually skewed younger because of the influx of teenage boys). *
> 
> The irony is the show is written today to aim younger than the previous boom period, yet the actual audience is significantly older, even than the Nitro audience. Yet, if you go to the live events, kids are more prevalent, meaning that unless you go to a Raw taping or a PPV show, where a lot more people in their 20s and 30s attend, the aim low works to draw smaller crowds and missing out on the largest block of TV viewers. And that isn’t the case for any other sport-like activity.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> During the heyday of the Monday Night Wars, about 10 million people would watch wrestling on Monday nights. Keep in mind that at that time there were also only 75 million homes wired for cable, as compared to just under 100 million today. There were weeks in when Raw was on fire that more than 11 million people would watch wrestling on Mondays, and wrestling was so strong that it legitimately hurt the ratings of ABC’s Monday Night Football starting with the 1998 season.
> 
> As for syndication, because so many people were watching on cable and wrestling was so hot, neither WWF nor WCW needed local syndication, although they did maintain it in many markets. In those days, wrestling would come to town and the demand for tickets got higher and higher. WCW peaked in 1998, although the seeds for the decline, a combination of a complete lack of understanding of what its audience wanted from a wrestling TV show and not making new stars, was already establishing ****** in the foundation. *Things would have declined more, as Raw had taken over as the top show due to momentum started with a Steve Austin vs. Mike Tyson angle that saw WrestleMania numbers triple 1997 levels (237,000 buys to 730,000 buys), and led to the landmark Austin vs. McMahon program.* But WCW was able to have its best year at the gate and on PPV due to the emergence of Bill Goldberg. After ending Goldberg’s winning streak and doing things like the infamous one-finger touch title change (which would have no negative effect today but was a killer back then), and the miscue of making fun of the taped WWF Raw where Mick Foley won the title, and WCW went down hard in 1999 while WWF had the best year in its history.
> 
> Raw ratings declined from their peak when adding a second weekly show, Smackdown. Being on network television, Smackdown actually had more viewers than Raw for a time, although it always drew lower ratings than Raw. While Raw’s ratings peaked in 1999, attendance and popularity continued to expand through 2000. In late 2000, there were signs that the peak was over, and the fall came after WrestleMania in 2001, based on the heel turn of Austin and a number of other factors. The death of WCW eliminated competition head-to-head, even though WCW had really ceased to be competition in 1999. And the show experienced a slow but steady decline in ratings and PPV, although the emergence of new top headliners like John Cena, Batista and others did lead to attendance at live events increasing from a bottoming out period about seven years ago.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> July 27, 1998: Perhaps the most shocking moment in the history of Raw was one of the few times they went into the ring without a script. During the height of the Monday Night Wars, everything under the sun was tried, including doing actual legitimate matches, the “Brawl for All” concept. The idea was to do a tournament and not script it, with the idea of creating a tough guy superstar in Steve “Dr. Death” Williams, to set up a program against Steve Austin. To say this concept backfired would be an understatement. A number of wrestlers, including Williams, Savio Vega, Mark Canterbury, Charles Wright and others ended up getting significant injuries. Many wrestlers tough-guy images took a tumble, and even the eventual winner, Bart Gunn, was no longer with the company the next year and whatever he got out of winning was a job with All Japan Pro Wrestling for a few years and a brief career in MMA, which had a limited upside given that he was past the age of 40 when he started. Williams had a reputation as a bar fighter, for his ability to knock people out with one punch from his college days and early career in Mid South Wrestling. He was also a four-time All-American heavyweight wrestler at the University of Oklahoma during perhaps the deepest period of talent ever in the U.S. collegiate heavyweight division. But Williams at this point was 38, hadn’t trained for fighting and his last competitive wrestling match was 16 years earlier. Brawl for All was not MMA, although the idea was taken from MMA and the original choice for referee was John McCarthy (he turned it down, although Danny Hodge was used as the commissioner). It was boxing with oversized gloves, with takedowns legal and worth points, but no ground work. It was somebody’s idea of taking the punching of MMA, eliminating all kicks and submissions, with the idea of no ground work because the wrestling fans may find it boring. *The segments were hit-and-miss, as some wrestling crowds hated them, and others liked them. Some matches did not do well in the ratings, but others, like this one, did. In fact, the Williams vs. Gunn match, featuring two guys who normally wouldn’t figure to be over, gained nearly 1 million viewers and was the difference maker in Raw beating Nitro that night.* Most remember Gunn knocking Williams out, but the back story made it more interesting. Each had won their first round match in the tournament. Dan Severn, who also won his first round match, was asked to pull out because of the fear he might be the one guy who could beat Williams. Williams had beaten Severn when both were in college, and Severn was 40, but had remained active and competing the entire time. Williams’ body had taken a beating from 16 years of physically tough pro wrestling, working the hard style of Mid South Wrestling and the even harder style of All Japan Pro Wrestling. Williams also had developed a number of drug issues associated with both the pain and partying that were part of being a superstar in Japan, and was clearly past his prime when he came over. Before the match, Gunn told someone in WWF, most stories have it being Jim Ross, although others have said it was really Bruce Prichard (I’ve heard both, Ross certainly makes for a better story), asking if he would get heat for knocking out Williams, since everyone knew Williams was supposed to win. Gunn had won Tough Man contests when he was younger, so had more experience with actual boxing than Williams, who had no boxing training. Throwing punches at guys in bars who don’t know how to fight, and moving in the ring with oversized gloves is something completely different. Still, Williams was winning the fight on points when Gunn surprised Williams with a takedown, and in doing so, Williams completely tore his hamstring. He knew he was done, and had no business coming out for the third round, even though he was ahead, and no ability to move, starting taking a series of punches from Gunn, and was eventually knocked out.
> 
> January 4, 1999: What made this show so famous was not anything on Raw, although Mick Foley as Mankind, beating The Rock to win the WWF title was certainly a big deal. It was the words of Tony Schiavone, on Nitro, under orders by Bischoff, to say that Mankind, Mick Foley, who used to wrestle here, will be winning their world title on a taped show, and mocked the decision to make Foley champion, saying, “That’ll put asses in seats.” While Foley had established himself as a main eventer, and his Hell in a Cell match with Undertaker in 1998 was one of the most talked about matches of the decade and maybe in history, he was not the kind of person that anyone would have expected to be world champion. In many ways, Foley’s title win was the first time McMahon made the title an award for loyal service as opposed to it being for the top face or top heel in the company, since clearly those positions were held by Austin and The Rock. *At the time of the announcement, roughly 375,000 homes and a total of 600,000 viewers at that moment switched from Nitro to Raw, making it one of the biggest promotional blunders of all-time. Little known is that on that night, Bischoff was asking around whether or not he should announce it on the show, and the consensus was strong that it would be a big mistake. Bischoff usually listened, but this time he didn’t. To understand how big pro wrestling was on that night, Raw set its all-time record rating up to that point, a 5.76, while Nitro did a 4.96. While Mankind beat Rock for the title, WCW did the infamous Hulk Hogan one-finger to the chest title change to Kevin Nash, who had just ended Bill Goldberg’s winning streak. While the big switch of audiences to see Foley win the title is much remembered, what is forgotten is that after Foley won the title, a Goldberg run-in on Nitro and Austin run-in on Raw were going on at the same time for the overrun. Goldberg saw Nitro bring its audience back, going from a 4.6 to a 6.5, taking many of those viewers back from Raw which went from a 5.9 to a 5.1. The growth of the final segment of Nitro, many returning after Foley had won the title, was an incredible 2.1 million viewers, among the biggest growth periods in history. Between the two shows on that night during the overrun, there were 8,642,000 homes and 13,827,000 different viewers watching wrestling.* And keep in mind two other factors. There were only 74.5 million homes with cable on that night, compared with more than 99 million today. And going head-to-head with wrestling that night was the Fiesta Bowl game that determined college football’s national championship, which had nearly 30 million viewers.
> 
> May 10, 1999: During the height of the Monday Night Wars, with Nitro pre-empted due to the NBA playoffs and Raw having the night to themselves, *the show drew a 8.09 rating and 9.2 million viewers*, destroying the 1.4 that the NBA playoff game did the same night. The show peaked with a main event of The Rock & Steve Austin & Vince McMahon vs. The Undertaker & HHH & Shane McMahon, *which did a 9.17 quarter and 10.4 million viewers*.
> 
> 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.


The median for today's shows surprises me, for something that should be having a median of about ~25 is in fact average an age of around 39 or 40, which is poor for Raw. It should be skewing younger, the main reason it isn't is because of the stale product that is failing to bring in young teenage viewers and early 20's. Despite what WWE would like you to think, not everyone wants to see SuperCena, and the above number for me proves that a lot.


----------



## lancaster223

> a Goldberg run-in on Nitro and Austin run-in on Raw were going on at the same time for the overrun. Goldberg saw Nitro bring its audience back, going from a 4.6 to a 6.5, taking many of those viewers back from Raw which went from a 5.9 to a 5.1.


That Austin run in actually happened BEFORE Foley got the pin. Are they telling us the audience switched back to Nitro and didn't even wait for the finish plus post match celebrations? That didn't make sense since they wanted to SEE Foley win it in the first place.


----------



## JY57

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



> As noted before, the August 20th WWE RAW did a 3.14 rating with 4.47 million viewers, up from the previous week.
> 
> The show opened with Brock Lesnar and Paul Heyman at a 2.97 rating, significantly higher than usual. In the segment breakdown, the six-man match with R-Truth, Kofi Kingston and Sin Cara vs. Darren Young, Titus O'Neil and Cody Rhodes gained 9,000 viewers. The Ryback squash and backstage segment with Dolph Ziggler and Chris Jericho gained 198,000 viewers. The Alberto Del Rio segment gained 33,000 viewers while Del Rio vs. Randy Orton gained 280,000 viewers in the 9pm timeslot.
> 
> Brodus Clay vs. Damien Sandow lost 112,000 viewers and the satellite interview with Shawn Michaels lost 198,000 viewers. David Otunga vs. Big Show gained 86,000 viewers. Kane and Zack Ryder vs. Daniel Bryan and The Miz plus backstage stuff with John Cena and CM Punk gained 199,000 viewers for a 3.32 quarter rating at the 10pm timeslot.
> 
> The Divas Battle Royal to name a new #1 contender was the biggest loss of the show with 369,000 viewers. Dolph Ziggler vs. Chris Jericho in Jericho's exit lost 30,000 viewers. The main event segment with Punk, Cena and Jerry Lawler gained 466,000 viewers for a 3.36 overrun rating.


----------



## Pro Royka

JY57 said:


> http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe..._Opener_Chris_Jericho_s_Final_Match_More.html


I thought this was already posted, because I looked at it already in WrestlingInc like hours ago.

Never mind, I think the gaining in the first hour is impressive. The Overrun was also impressive, Punk started it and finished it.


----------



## TeamRocketGrunt

jblvdx said:


> Punk gets lowest quarter of the night last week. People shit all over him.
> 
> Lesnar gets lowest quarter of the night this week. People don't talk about it.
> 
> Ahhh, the ass backward nature of the IWC.


Lesner is a proven draw, Punk isn't


----------



## murder

Lesnar is a proven draw in UFC, yes. Whether he can deliver big buyrates and ratings in WWE remains to be seen. This quarter does not imply that he is.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

TeamRocketGrunt said:


> Lesner is a proven draw, Punk isn't


Proven draw in WWE?


----------



## Choke2Death

jblvdx said:


> Punk gets lowest quarter of the night last week. People shit all over him.
> *
> Lesnar gets lowest quarter of the night this week. People don't talk about it.*
> 
> Ahhh, the ass backward nature of the IWC.


Getting the highest rating for the first quarter since the 3 hour thing became permanent is not good enough?

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

Nice to see Orton doing his thing and keeping the ratings afloat when he's on at the 9PM spot. Too bad they had him tap out to Alboreto Dull Rio the next day. And Bork is doing what Bork does best and that's bring in viewers. Shawn losing viewers is not even surprising considering how watered down they've made him recently, serving as HHH's bitch who can't fight for himself despite being called Mr. Wrestlemania and the Showstopper. And rather disappointing ratings for the main event. While the two matches preceding it lost 400k viewers, that amount was brought back in the main event but only with 66k more. I guess since Cena was not expected to interrupt, it was disappointing as he usually gains almost 1 million whenever he turns up. Same routine with the anti-draws being their usual self and the proven draws keeping the ratings in the acceptable border.


----------



## Punked Up

Does anybody know what the overrun with the famous Punk shoot did back then?


----------



## Amuroray

How consistent is cena?

Incredible.

Bigshow is bringing it aswell


----------



## murder

What I get from the ratings breakdown is, people don't want to see Clay, the Divas and "via sattelite" promos. Those are the exact same things I don't like about the show. Problem is that Vince won't realize this.


----------



## Rock316AE

Besides what I said earlier, I forgot to add that Ryback continues to be a big attraction, we are starting to see a Goldberg pattern here. Obviously not in the same league but it's happening.



Punked Up said:


> Does anybody know what the overrun with the famous Punk shoot did back then?


Punk's overrun promo did a weak 314k gain to a 3.3 number. The peak of that show was a Big Show/Del Rio match with a Big Show/Henry brawl in the top of the hour which gained 471k.


----------



## Choke2Death

Rock316AE said:


> Punk's overrun promo did a weak 314k gain to a 3.3 number. The peak of that show was a Big Show/Del Rio match with a Big Show/Henry brawl in the top of the hour which gained 471k.


ROFL, Henry truly is a ratings machine.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

D.M.N. said:


> You're welcome.
> 
> Quarter Hours - August 20th, 2012
> Q1 - 4.292 million
> Q2 - 4.301 million
> Q3 - 4.499 million
> Q4 - 4.532 million
> ------
> Q5 - 4.812 million
> Q6 - 4.700 million
> Q7 - 4.502 million
> Q8 - 4.588 million
> ------
> Q9 - 4.787 million
> Q10 - 4.418 million
> Q11 - 4.388 million
> Q12 and Overrun - 4.854 million
> 
> I'm surprised at how poorly Jericho and Ziggler did in Q11, although being right after a Diva's match can't have helped. Despite Lesnar and Heyman going on first, it was still the lowest rated segment of the night, so they didn't bump things too much, otherwise people would have tuned out for Q2, Q3 and Q4.


So Punk/Cena, 4.854 mill ending. Great stuff. Highest of the night, which is the least you ask for for an overrun. Orton/Del Rio surprised me a bit with the overall number, but what do ya know? 

Lesnar got the lowest segment of the night, but it was a great start for the show. 

HBK losing dem viewers talking about HHH... not good. Sandow/Clay losing viewers... meh. While it was interesting the first couple of weeks, nothing of significance has happened since. No promo between the two, just Sandow kicking Clay
s fat ass until last night. Hopefully the feud is done.

Sadly Jericho isn't really a draw, and this proves it. Even for his exit he does has one of three lowest segments of the night with Ziggler. 

And finally, Ryback WITH DEM VIEWERS! I hate how Ryback is doing, as he really is nothing more than a Goldberg clone, but damn it's been working.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Ryback is the man. It pleases me very much that you hate him and hate that he's getting over. Lovely.


----------



## Rock316AE

The Jericho match lost only 30k on a random slot, not bad at all there. Jericho started doing good numbers again after he came back from the suspension, that's also when he started to be enjoyable to watch again(He is always, but the storyline held even him down)after months of horrible program. He should have been a babyface from the start. Lesnar brought the entire overall of the show up, record number for the opening segment and interest in who won between him and HHH. From next week, there's no Lesnar/Heyman/Jericho and and Orton is going to film a movie soon, add to that the MNF competition and they should get comical ratings.



Choke2Death said:


> ROFL, Henry truly is a ratings machine.


The entire Show/Henry program did great, RAW and SD. On SD it was to the point where they brought the entire average to RTW levels in October/November or whatever it was.


----------



## mblonde09

Rock316AE said:


> *The Jericho match lost only 30k on a random slot, not bad at all there.* Jericho started doing good numbers again after he came back from the suspension, that's also when he started to be enjoyable to watch again(He is always, but the storyline held even him down)after months of horrible program. He should have been a babyface from the start. Lesnar brought the entire overall of the show up, record number for the opening segment and interest in who won between him and HHH. From next week, there's no Lesnar/Heyman/Jericho and and Orton is going to film a movie soon, add to that the MNF competition and they should get comical ratings.


So one of your faves, Jericho loses 30k and that's "not bad at all", but when Punk and Bryan lost 30k a few weeks ago, it was "a disasterous, horrendous loss" As for Lesnar, he's done nothing for the ratings since he came back. Also, the absence of Orton won't affect the ratings in the least.



TeamRocketGrunt said:


> Lesner is a proven draw, Punk isn't


In the UFC, yes - but not in the WWE... never has been.


----------



## Starbuck

Lesnar/Heyman was the highest opener they've had since the 1000th Raw so people were obviously interested in the fallout of Summerslam. I imagine had this gone on at 9pm or 10pm it would have done a lot better. Then again, had it not happened here I think the opening would have done a lot worse, probably around the 2.6 mark that Punk/Show pulled last week. People kept tuning in for the whole first hour. 4.2 million, 4.3 million, 4.4 million etc right up until Q6 when they started losing them with steady falls in the second hour. The third hour is all over the place. 

Shawn losing viewers in a via satellite interview, while obviously not good, isn't necessarily bad either. He wasn't live, it was obvious that HHH wasn't going to be there and honestly, it just wasn't a very good segment either. Having said that, this took up no more than 5 minutes of a 15 minute quarter. I'm not sure what else happened in that time frame but if it was commercials then it's not surprising that it did badly. Taped segment + commercials = obvious result. 

I'm surprised at Jericho/Dolph losing viewers. I know Jericho hasn't impacted on the ratings at all since his return but that match was advertised and had his career on the line. For that segment to lose viewers isn't a good sign for either of them tbh and really, if you ever needed proof that Chris Jericho doesn't make a dent as far as television ratings are concerned, this is it. On top of that, people obviously didn't give a fuck if Dolph lost his MITB either. Just bad. Maybe it's because everybody knew he was leaving anyways? I don't know. 

The overrun number is good enough. Not up to the usual Cena standards but still the most watched segment of the night. It's a pity because I thought it was a great segment. We'll see for next week what happens because the lead in is there with Cena walking away and Punk kicking Lawler.


----------



## Vyed

I think the low 280k gain at 9pm shows that the fallout from previous night's PPV gain happened at 8pm with Brock/Heyman opening the show. Clay losing viewers is good news. Shawn Michaels interview losing viewers is not surprising, "Via satellite" promos usually dont do well. Even the Rock's via sat interviews have lost viewers. I expected that Jericho/Ziggler match viewership loss. Overrun with Punk/Cena should have done better. 



murder said:


> What I get from the ratings breakdown is, people don't want to see Clay, the Divas and "via sattelite" promos.


Pretty much.




lancaster223 said:


> That Austin run in actually happened BEFORE Foley got the pin. Are they telling us the audience switched back to Nitro and didn't even wait for the finish plus post match celebrations? That didn't make sense since they wanted to SEE Foley win it in the first place.


Yeah that whole thing is pretty confusing. I read in another board where same topic was being discussed, RAW that night ended before Nitro's overrun and viewers switched over post match. It makes sense if you consider how the WWE is actually pushing it, but not too sure.




Rock316AE said:


> The entire Show/Henry program did great, RAW and SD. On SD it was to the point where they brought the entire average to RTW levels in October/November or whatever it was.


Actually Henry outdid RTWM ratings. RTWM Avg = 1.92, Henry's Title reign Avg = 2.07 

Ratings Henry was fucking Legit.










Shame it had to end early because of his injury.


----------



## Starbuck

Vyed said:


> I think the low 280k gain at 9pm shows that the fallout from previous night's PPV gain happened at 8pm with Brock/Heyman opening the show.


Good point actually. Might have been the case.


----------



## murder

Vyed said:


> I read in another board where same topic was being discussed, RAW that night ended before Nitro's overrun and viewers switched over post match. It makes sense if you consider how the WWE is actually pushing it, but not too sure.
> 
> Yes, that's what happened. Raw, a taped show, ended several minutes before Nitro finished. So after Raw went off-air, maybe even immediately after Foleys win, people switched over to Nitro, which happened all the time back then.


----------



## Rock316AE

Both shows had a 5 minutes overrun that night. That's what Meltzer meant. WWE's version of the story and his influence is complete bullshit.

Jericho's match was in the middle of the show, I don't see how it is surprising that it lost 30k, that's probably above average for what that segment usually does. As for Brock in wrestling:


> 2003 - 1. Brock Lesnar; 2. HHH; 3. Kazushi Sakuraba; 4. Big Show and Kurt Angle; 6. Yuji Nagata, Hulk Hogan, Kenta Kobashi, Masahiro Chono, Bill Goldberg, Shawn Michaels and Wanderlei Silva


He was becoming bigger every year, the moment he left and Kurt was injured, SD collapsed in 2004. That was the year it really became the clear B level program.


----------



## Vyed

Nah.. Brock wasnt much of a draw in his previous WWE run. SD attendance in 2003 was just as bad as 2004. Brock headlined WM 19, that did the worst buys in history. No mercy 2003 did the lowest buys of the entire year and brock was the headlining act. He is #1 in that list coz HHH suffered a groin injury that year and brock had to work all of the house shows. Lesnar left WWE in 2004 and it didnt affect the business one bit. I've said this before, Brock became a tremendous draw as a MMA fighter but never as a wrestling character. Vince Mcmahon wanted him to be the next mega-star, the face of WWE, gave him the biggest push since Goldberg but it never happened. 

As of now, even the company doesnt know how big of a draw he really is, only mania 29 buys next year could show his true worth to WWE. We'll have to wait and see if he can outdraw Rock/Cena from WM28.


----------



## Rock316AE

Yes he was. Biggest on the roster actually. SD 2003 was significantly higher than 2004, that year they were working TVs in 3k arenas sometimes. First of all, WM19 never did "worst of all time", and second, selling point match was Hogan/Vince, Vince blamed that along with the Seattle market. "Brock had to work all of the house shows" ?? Nobody worked all the house shows, they had brand shows and HHH was working most of the year on his brand with his injury, Brock and Angle drew bigger on their brand. 

When Brock left SD was a dead program, around that time Angle was also injured and that started the fall of the show to what it is now. Vince himself said on OTR interview that Brock was becoming bigger attraction every year and he did everything to keep him. In late 2003 Brock signed a huge contract, Vince offered him that deal because he was the top star of the company. That contract will also become a big problem for Brock when he left because according to it he couldn't wrestle until it expired(2009-2010 IIRC). I don't think you know about this situation from what you wrote there. Most of it not close to reality.

The standard for success is never biggest of all time, according to that logic, any basketball player besides Jordan is worthless. WM29 has the potential to break it if they're doing Rock/Brock. Until now he did good business, on TV he did peak most of the time or did record opening like this week and sold out shows after his return in Apri + the increase on PPV at ER and probably Summerslam, not happening without his name on it.


----------



## D.M.N.

- http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2002-ratings/
- http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2003-ratings/
- http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2004-ratings/

Lesnar helped SmackDown consistently get mid 3.0's from mid 2002 to early 2004, in late 2003 the ratings were on par and beating Raw.

Once Lesnar left and the 2004 draft happened the ratings dropped to the ~3.0 range although the ratings picked up late in the year around the time of the Cena/Carlito feud.


----------



## Marv95

Vyed said:


> Nah.. Brock wasnt much of a draw in his previous WWE run. SD attendance in 2003 was just as bad as 2004. Brock headlined WM 19, that did the worst buys in history. *No mercy 2003 did the lowest buys of the entire year and brock was the headlining act.* He is #1 in that list coz HHH suffered a groin injury that year and brock had to work all of the house shows. Lesnar left WWE in 2004 and it didnt affect the business one bit.


Such BS. Especially the bold part. Armageddon did the lowest buys at 240,000(look it up), which was a Raw PPV headlined by HHH, Goldberg and Kane. Didn't affect business one bit? Heck No Mercy 2004 did almost 100,000 less than No Mercy 2003. SD in 04 was without Brock, Hogan, Rock, Vince, Piper even Benoit. Angle was injured. Big Show took time off. Eddie couldn't do it alone and it showed. SD were doing shows in convention centers at times.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

^What does all this prove? "The New King of Kings/The Master of the Brocktagon/Conqueror of the WWE Universe" Brock Lesnar=RATINGZ!!!!


----------



## Patrick Bateman

I bet JBL did outdraw all that shit.


----------



## Vyed

Rock316AE said:


> Yes he was. Biggest on the roster actually. SD 2003 was significantly higher than 2004, that year they were working TVs in 3k arenas sometimes. *First of all, WM19 never did "worst of all time", and second, selling point match was Hogan/Vince, Vince blamed that along with the Seattle market.* "Brock had to work all of the house shows" ?? Nobody worked all the house shows, they had brand shows and HHH was working most of the year on his brand with his injury, Brock and Angle drew bigger on their brand.


It was one of the worst WM buyrates. I'm pretty sure Vince/Hogan was a big attraction match, just like Brock/Goldberg was for the following year, not the key drawing match for WM 19. Even Torch newsletter credited Lesnar/Angle for the WM 19 attendance record iirc. The last time I checked HHH got hurt in a house show against goldberg and didnt work any of them for few months. 



> When Brock left SD was a dead program, around that time Angle was also injured and that started the fall of the show to what it is now. *Vince himself said on OTR interview that Brock was becoming bigger attraction every year and he did everything to keep him. In late 2003 Brock signed a huge contract, Vince offered him that deal because he was the top star of the company.* That contract will also become a big problem for Brock when he left because according to it he couldn't wrestle until it expired(2009-2010 IIRC). I don't think you know about this situation from what you wrote there. Most of it not close to reality.


You cant trust what Vince says. He was probably putting him over as he always does with all the guys that he made. No different than vince calling hogan the GOAT one year and austin the GOAT next and shawn michaels the next. Yes, I know about that contract issue and the lawsuit that followed when lesnar left to japan. Vince tried to keep him because he gave him an insane push to make him a star, put him over all the top stars, obviously as a promoter he wasnt going to let him go after that kinda investment.



> The standard for success is never biggest of all time, according to that logic, any basketball player besides Jordan is worthless. WM29 has the potential to break it if they're doing Rock/Brock. Until now he did good business, on TV he did peak most of the time or did record opening like this week and sold out shows after his return in Apri + the increase on PPV at ER and probably Summerslam, not happening without his name on it.


I never said, he wasnt a success though. I meant you cant determine how big of a draw he really is until Mania 29 next year. Brock's return thus far hasnt been overall ratings success like Rock's 2011 return was. 



Marv95 said:


> Such BS. Especially the bold part. *Armageddon did the lowest buys at 240,000(look it up), which was a Raw PPV headlined by HHH, Goldberg and Kane.* Didn't affect business one bit? Heck No Mercy 2004 did almost 100,000 less than No Mercy 2003. SD in 04 was without Brock, Hogan, Rock, Vince, Piper even Benoit. Angle was injured. Big Show took time off. Eddie couldn't do it alone and it showed. SD were doing shows in convention centers at times.


Hmm.. weird the website from which I've 2003-2005 ppv numbers saved, had No mercy at 0.46 buyrate and armageddon at 0.49 buyrate. Thats why I noted No mercy 03 as the lowest of the year.


----------



## RatedR10

Ryback is drawing real well lately. They should get him into a real program.

Shawn Michaels losing surprises me and then it doesn't surprise me. A guy like Michaels would usually gain, he's a legend, but the entire storyline isn't really interesting and I can see why people would tune out.

I expected a larger gain for the overrun with Cena/Punk/Lawler, but whatever.


----------



## Rock316AE

Vyed said:


> It was one of the worst WM buyrates. I'm pretty sure Vince/Hogan was a big attraction match, just like Brock/Goldberg was for the following year, not the key drawing match for WM 19. Even Torch newsletter credited Lesnar/Angle for the WM 19 attendance record iirc. The last time I checked HHH got hurt in a house show against goldberg and didnt work any of them for few months.
> 
> You cant trust what Vince says. He was probably putting him over as he always does with all the guys that he made. No different than vince calling hogan the GOAT one year and austin the GOAT next and shawn michaels the next. Yes, I know about that contract issue and the lawsuit that followed when lesnar left to japan. Vince tried to keep him because he gave him an insane push to make him a star, put him over all the top stars, obviously as a promoter he wasnt going to let him go after that kinda investment.
> 
> I never said, he wasnt a success though. I meant you cant determine how big of a draw he really is until Mania 29 next year. Brock's return thus far hasnt been overall ratings success like Rock's 2011 return was.


It wasn't one of the worst, it's probably still top 10 biggest domestically. What do you mean "pretty sure"? It WAS the most promoted match on the card by far(just like the Lesnar/Goldberg storyline and Rock/Foley/Evolution were the most promoted for WM20)with Vince and Hogan closing both RAW(a long overrun after Rock Concert), SD and even the 3th degree special they did before the show with Hogan on WWF New York, or The World at that time. Torch probably did that because of card position. HHH still worked most of the year, as he was champion most of the year, the point is, Lesnar and Angle just drew bigger as top guys on SD. 

I don't trust what Vince said, I saw it myself, with the fact that Lesnar also was the biggest draw in the company only into his second year, which means a huge success as he did something that only Goldberg was able to do(becoming biggest and top guy in the company in one year), and that he was growing every year. And I also saw the huge impact Brock had on SD when it became a completely different program when he left in every aspect and dropped big time. Vince wouldn't offer such a huge deal to a guy who is "not clicking like he hoped" as you claimed which is a ridiculous argument without even explaining why it's wrong and how successful Lesnar was for the simple fact that he worked on the full time roster only for 16 months, and 11 months as a main eventer. For all the other BS like "lowest PPV" or ratings, others already corrected you. 

Nothing was going to bring the astronomical interest Rock did in his 2011 return, that was a one time deal and like I said, not the standard. Lesnar is a big success in his current run for all the reasons I mentioned.


----------



## Redwood

RockAE with DEM STATISTICS.


----------



## Loader230

Rock316AE said:


> Lesnar and Heyman was a big success, opening with 3.0, I guess when there's a real attraction, it gets people's attention even if it's not in their viewing habit.
> 
> Nobody wants to see Michaels as HHH's sidekick, crying about a storyline that 99.99999% of the audience knows is not real. They want to see the legend H-B-K when he's there.
> 
> Orton vs Del Rio as I predicted, did the peak of the show.
> 
> Big Show is still a TV machine gaining all over the place and his angry promo after losing at Summerslam was awesome.
> 
> *Cena/Punk promo was the biggest surprise for me, I thought about a 800k gain like Cena usually does there, horrible gain.*


This. Overrun with Cena does great numbers. Marks need to face the facts, casuals just dont care about Punk. He is not a star and never will be. He lacks "it". He is overrated, over-pushed piece of shit. Its about time Cena took the title off him.

On a side note, Was Hogan vs Vince mcmahon match really the top draw of Wrestlemania XIX? I always thought it was Kurt angle vs Lesnar because the RAW go home show of mania ppv ended with Brock lesnar and Kurt Angle recap video package and they even main evented the ppv.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Hogan/Vince was the big match of the show. After that I'm not sure what the actual order was, but I believe it was:

2) Rock/Austin
3) Lesnar/Angle
4) Booker/HHH
5) Y2J/HBK

Not sure though. That's what always struck me as far as match order in importance went. Maybe 2 and 3 are switched.


----------



## DegenerateXX

Rock316AE said:


> For the time he was on top? PPVs were doing better domestically than now, gates were significantly higher and they were actually selling out house shows, the difference is that back then before the AE, they didn't build the machine internationally and increased prices like they're doing now to stay above red line. Ratings? the first month of his run after WM12 until Scott Hall made his Nitro debut, increased huge and broke RAW records at that time.





TeamRocketGrunt said:


> He was carrying the entire wwf on his back, and he was also competing with the nwo, no 1 man can compete with that, without hbk wwf would have died back in 1996


Thank you guys. I'm tired of the 'HBK can't draw' shit. People need to understand WCW and the nWo wasn't going to be beaten by one man alone. HBK was WWF, and they were blessed to have him. 

Anyway, him losing viewers via satellite isn't too surprising. Even The Rock has lost viewers that way. It just isn't something people want to see. They should have placed it in a better spot too.


----------



## Rock316AE

Obis said:


> Hogan/Vince was the big match of the show. After that I'm not sure what the actual order was, but I believe it was:
> 
> 2) Rock/Austin
> 3) Lesnar/Angle
> 4) Booker/HHH
> 5) Y2J/HBK
> 
> Not sure though. That's what always struck me as far as match order in importance went. Maybe 2 and 3 are switched.


Hogan/Vince was by far the most promoted. In the week before the show, the main event slot changed every day between Rock/Austin, Angle/Lesnar and Hogan/Vince. In a Roundtable a year ago, JR said that Rock/Austin was supposed to close the show but with Austin's condition the night before, they thought it will be safer to deliver in the main event with Lesnar and Angle, crazy weekend with all the drama.

As for biggest in promotion:

1. Hogan/Vince
2. Rock/Austin
3. Angle/Lesnar - for this match, everybody knew that we're getting Angle vs Lesnar in the main event of WM19 from August of 2002, that was THE match for the background of the athletes alone. Combined with all the talk about their real mat wrestling contest in 2001(which Angle won BTW)and Angle's ON/OFF status for the match, they had a lot of hype.
4. HBK/Y2J above Booker/HHH because they started this with a teaser in December 2002, a great 4 months program while Booker just got his match on a battle royal after NWO(+ the stupid race angle they did with HHH). 

This is Top 3 PPV of all time IMO, WM17, WM19 and Summerslam 2002.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

The overrun was still the highest segment of viewership of the night as expected. The Orton vs Alberto Del Rio match was in second place and then the Kane/Ryder vs Miz/Daniel Bryan match in third place. I like Ryback so his segments doing good is nice. Viewers just like to see a tank plow through people lol.


----------



## Pro Royka

Loader230 said:


> This. Overrun with Cena does great numbers. Marks need to face the facts, casuals just dont care about Punk. He is not a star and never will be. He lacks "it". He is overrated, over-pushed piece of shit. Its about time Cena took the title off him.
> 
> On a side note, Was Hogan vs Vince mcmahon match really the top draw of Wrestlemania XIX? I always thought it was Kurt angle vs Lesnar because the RAW go home show of mania ppv ended with Brock lesnar and Kurt Angle recap video package and they even main evented the ppv.


I actually can't wait for Cena to become a champion so I can see the amazing ratings that you talk about, because I don't care how boring and stale he's all I care about is ratings. Punk sucks he should focus on ratings and how he can bring them in and also by sucking up to the fans and tell them how awesome they're. Punk should quit WWE and let Cena mainevent all the PPV and beat up all the young talents and get another long title reign.
Punk has no talents because he can't draw screw that skinny piece of shit pussy. 

Being a troll is awesome.


----------



## Tnmore

This breakdown proves my post earlier in this thread. Punk is a ratings killer like John Morrison. Cena would have gained big alone.


----------



## murder

Loader230 said:


> On a side note, Was Hogan vs Vince mcmahon match really the top draw of Wrestlemania XIX? I always thought it was Kurt angle vs Lesnar because the RAW go home show of mania ppv ended with Brock lesnar and Kurt Angle recap video package and they even main evented the ppv.


No it wasn't. Austin/Rock was the real main event, the two biggest draws in history. 

And please don't take those "Best Box Office draws" lists from Meltzer serious. As much as I respect his opinion, those lists are pointless. He simply adds all attendance numbers, which means the guy with the most show sold most tickets. That is saying absolutely nothing about drawing ability. 

Like Yved said, Lesnar, out of all the main eventers, wrestled the most house shows by far in 2003 since Goldberg, HBK and Taker didn't work fulltime and HHH was injured for a few months. So, obvioulsy he leads this list. Doesn't prove he was the biggest draw. 

Now I'm not saying he wasn't the biggest draw at that time. But even if he was, that's pretty worthless considering WWE was at its lowest in 2003 since 1997.


----------



## Pro Royka

Tnmore said:


> This breakdown proves my post earlier in this thread. Punk is a ratings killer like John Morrison. Cena would have gained big alone.


If Punk loses +800 viewers I will tell you myself that he's a rating killer, since that didn't happen I can't see your argument to be true. I said it before if he faces some known stars casual will recognise him and they may like him or they will not. If he faces Taker in WM, make Cena tape out, faces Rocky and Austin I think casual will like him if he was impressive, if he wasn't well its his problem he blowed it.


----------



## Cactus

TeamRocketGrunt said:


> He was carrying the entire wwf on his back, and he was also competing with the nwo, no 1 man can compete with that, without hbk wwf would have died back in 1996


If that is so true, how comes the WWF started to fight back against WCW AFTER he retired? He was a prick backstage and kept everyone else back. Vader, a know draw in WCW and Japan, was a failure in WWF due to HBK's bullshit. Who knows who else he could of kept back?


----------



## Fanboi101

Pro Royka said:


> I actually can't wait for Cena to become a champion so I can see the amazing ratings that you talk about, because I don't care how boring and stale he's all I care about is ratings. Punk sucks he should focus on ratings and how he can bring them in and also by sucking up to the fans and tell them how awesome they're. Punk should quit WWE and let Cena mainevent all the PPV and beat up all the young talents and get another long title reign.
> Punk has no talents because he can't draw screw that skinny piece of shit pussy.


This. Punk can't draw.


----------



## Jobberwacky

Fanboi101 said:


> This. Punk can't draw.




That. Sarcasm can't draw.


----------



## Choke2Death

Rock316AE said:


> Hogan/Vince was by far the most promoted. In the week before the show, the main event slot changed every day between Rock/Austin, Angle/Lesnar and Hogan/Vince. In a Roundtable a year ago, JR said that Rock/Austin was supposed to close the show but with Austin's condition the night before, they thought it will be safer to deliver in the main event with Lesnar and Angle, crazy weekend with all the drama.
> 
> As for biggest in promotion:
> 
> 1. Hogan/Vince
> 2. Rock/Austin
> 3. Angle/Lesnar - for this match, everybody knew that we're getting Angle vs Lesnar in the main event of WM19 from August of 2002, that was THE match for the background of the athletes alone. Combined with all the talk about their real mat wrestling contest in 2001(which Angle won BTW)and Angle's ON/OFF status for the match, they had a lot of hype.
> 4. HBK/Y2J above Booker/HHH because they started this with a teaser in December 2002, a great 4 months program while Booker just got his match on a battle royal after NWO(+ the stupid race angle they did with HHH).
> 
> This is Top 3 PPV of all time IMO, WM17, WM19 and Summerslam 2002.


The Lesnar/Angle build-up was rather badly done so I can see why it wouldn't have drawn as well as it should have. On SD, they had them in tag matches or Lesnar vs Team Angle every week and then teased a title match for no good reason even though it was going to happen at WM anyways. They centered SD three weeks before WM around Angle/Lesnar as main event and in the end, ripped off the fans by having Angle's "brother" hide his face there and be used to lure Lesnar. Such a pointless thing to do. But yeah, as 2003 went further on, Brock clearly became a much bigger deal and had 'star' written all over him once he turned heel again. It's too bad he left so soon, what sucks is he did it because he was tired of traveling all over the world only to wrestle the likes of Hardcore Holly.


----------



## Rock316AE

Choke2Death said:


> The Lesnar/Angle build-up was rather badly done so I can see why it wouldn't have drawn as well as it should have. On SD, they had them in tag matches or Lesnar vs Team Angle every week and *then teased a title match for no good reason even though it was going to happen at WM anyways. They centered SD three weeks before WM around Angle/Lesnar as main event and in the end, ripped off the fans by having Angle's "brother" hide his face there and be used to lure Lesnar. Such a pointless thing to do.* But yeah, as 2003 went further on, Brock clearly became a much bigger deal and had 'star' written all over him once he turned heel again. It's too bad he left so soon, what sucks is he did it because he was tired of traveling all over the world only to wrestle the likes of Hardcore Holly.



I don't remember the week to week booking of the feud but at that time Lesnar was really going to win the title in a short match on SD because Angle couldn't wrestle at WM in a main event match. Then when Kurt demanded to take the risk for the opportunity to main event WM, they changed the match to a teaser with Eric Angle. It was a crazy month of news for Kurt, every day it was ON and OFF, the doctors wouldn't allow him, he doesn't care, a scary chance to get paralyzed for the rest of his life or that it's going to be his last match. When they talked about all that, the earliest date for his return, if at all, was 2004. But instead he did an alternative surgery and came back in 4 months. Kurt gained a new level of respect from every fan with his performance at WM19 and the fact that he even wanted to wrestle, he showed his heart and passion for the industry like no other to the point where he even risk the ability to live a normal life just to perform in the biggest match of the year. 

The problem at WM19 was mostly the 100% focus on Hogan and Vince(and the Seattle market according to Vince), they pushed it so hard everywhere. In every way possible, even taping clips of celebrities predicting who will win the match. The problem was that Vince, while a huge TV draw, was never a guy who can sell big PPVs for his matches.

As for the program, the best part started after WM, when they did the storyline that Brock of all people was the one who went to check Kurt's condition in the hospital after the surgery, then their awesome "friendly" skits together until the shocking heel turn from Brock in a cage match with Vince. Awesome chemistry, program of the year 2003.






Great time for SD in 2002-2003, best period in the history of the show after the AE.


----------



## OneofUS

Who the fuck cares if someone draws or not? Is Punk entertaining as a champ? Hell Yes...Are you a member of the WWE board/ a shareholder in the company? Hell No..Then what's the problem?


----------



## ChickMagnet12

Came into thread expecting same old shit.

Left satisfied. 

Should rename this thread to "Gain or Lose viewers, Punk doesn't draw".


----------



## KO Bossy

Ah, its so nice to be able to just sit back and watch everyone tear apart each other, with Punk doesn't draw even when his segment gains numbers, Big Show is a ratings monsters, etc etc.

I'm glad I stopped caring about this company.


----------



## Redwood

lol since when is Big Show a proven ratings draw?


----------



## murder

KO Bossy said:


> Ah, its so nice to be able to just sit back and watch everyone tear apart each other, with Punk doesn't draw even when his segment gains numbers, Big Show is a ratings monsters, etc etc.
> 
> I'm glad I stopped caring about this company.


Yeah, you just sit back and watch everyone tear each other apart while also posting in the same thread about a company you don't care about.


----------



## lancaster223

How many times had Cena saved Punk's 97 lb ass?

Gave him the greatest match of his life at MITB 2011.

The only time Punk ever gains massive viewership is when Cena around.

Cena = MJ
Punk = Scottie Pippen


----------



## SteenIsGod

Let me ask you guys this, do you base your favorite wrestlers on guys who can/can't draw? I mean it seems like some of you that's all you care about, whether the guy draws or not. Some of my favorite Wrestlers like Orton, Punk, ADR are looked at on these forums as anti-draws, and is that a reason to just flat out "Hate" the guys because the Mass audience seems to dislike them?


----------



## The-Rock-Says

SteenIsGod said:


> Let me ask you guys this, do you base your favorite wrestlers on guys who can/can't draw? I mean it seems like some of you that's all you care about, whether the guy draws or not. Some of my favorite Wrestlers like Orton, Punk, ADR are looked at on these forums as anti-draws, and is that a reason to just flat out "Hate" the guys because the Mass audience seems to dislike them?


You're the kind of Punk fan that will make that kind of comment when Punk does a shit rating, but will be all ready to throw a party when he does a great rating.


----------



## SteenIsGod

The-Rock-Says said:


> You're the kind of Punk fan that will make that kind of comment when Punk does a shit rating, but will be all ready to throw a party when he does a great rating.


I've said many times that Punk is a HORRIBLE ratings guy, I've NEVER defended him when it comes to Ratings. Does this mean, I have to hate the guy? No, I don't.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Who said you did?


----------



## Patrick Bateman

What I don't get is that Punk is a bad draw but why do the fans cheer him and I don't care about stuff like that and didn't check it but as far as I know Punk is one of the top merch sellers of the company. It just dosn't make any sense to me.


----------



## Choke2Death

RevolverSnake said:


> What I don't get is that Punk is a bad draw but why do the fans cheer him and I don't care about stuff like that and didn't check it but as far as I know Punk is one of the top merch sellers of the company. It just dosn't make any sense to me.


In his peak earlier this year, Zack Ryder was also going crazy with merch sales and every arena popped for him but guess what... when he had a segment in the main event spot... he LOST viewers and did the lowest final quarter rating since 1997!!! Crowd reaction and merch sales don't necessarily translate to being a draw that brings interest to the product.



SteenIsGod said:


> Let me ask you guys this, do you base your favorite wrestlers on guys who can/can't draw? I mean it seems like some of you that's all you care about, whether the guy draws or not. Some of my favorite Wrestlers like Orton, Punk, ADR are looked at on these forums as anti-draws, and is that a reason to just flat out "Hate" the guys because the Mass audience seems to dislike them?


You're an Orton fan? Lol, because I could've sworn that guessing by the posts you've made about him, it seems like you are the opposite of a fan. And your current sig also speaks for itself.



Rock316AE said:


> I don't remember the week to week booking of the feud but at that time Lesnar was really going to win the title in a short match on SD because Angle couldn't wrestle at WM in a main event match. Then when Kurt demanded to take the risk for the opportunity to main event WM, they changed the match to a teaser with Eric Angle. It was a crazy month of news for Kurt, every day it was ON and OFF, the doctors wouldn't allow him, he doesn't care, a scary chance to get paralyzed for the rest of his life or that it's going to be his last match. When they talked about all that, the earliest date for his return, if at all, was 2004. But instead he did an alternative surgery and came back in 4 months. Kurt gained a new level of respect from every fan with his performance at WM19 and the fact that he even wanted to wrestle, he showed his heart and passion for the industry like no other to the point where he even risk the ability to live a normal life just to perform in the biggest match of the year.


Ah, thanks for the clarification. I really wondered why they kept teasing Lesnar vs Angle every week on the RTWM and it seems like their plans were messed up by Angle's neck injury. Still, I gotta give all my respect to Kurt because he put on one hell of a match despite having a bad neck then came back two months later as good as before. His run as Brock's friend was pretty nice and resulted in some funny segments, specially the one with the milk thing.


----------



## Redwood

Let's not forget guys, Punk is currently the anti-christ of the WWE, the Diesel of our generation...


----------



## roadkill_

Y2Raven said:


> Let's not forget guys, Punk is currently the anti-christ of the WWE, the Diesel of our generation...


At least Diesel looked like a wrestler.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Idiocy. Everything you see here is idiocy.


----------



## Leechmaster

roadkill_ said:


> At least Diesel looked like a wrestler.


So does Punk. 

As for the ratings, it's largely inconsequential if you're a fan of the product, not an advertiser. Even then, ratings are going down for pretty much anything due to streaming/downloads/etc. 

Funny reading this thread though. Punk's segments lose viewers = bashing. Punk's segments GAIN viewers = even more bashing. 

Some of you are just flat out pathetic.


----------



## lancaster223

Leechmaster said:


> So does Punk.
> 
> As for the ratings, it's largely inconsequential if you're a fan of the product, not an advertiser. Even then, ratings are going down for pretty much anything due to streaming/downloads/etc.
> 
> Funny reading this thread though. Punk's segments lose viewers = bashing. Punk's segments GAIN viewers = even more bashing.
> 
> Some of you are just flat out pathetic.


Punk looks more like a burrito vendor...


----------



## Pro Royka

lancaster223 said:


> Punk looks more like a burrito vendor...


He looks more like Spider-Man (Skinny fat ass), He kicked Macho Man ass in the movie tho. Something admiring about it. Punk looks like a movie star now .


----------



## Shazayum

Punk's look isn't the problem people. He just can't be a face in the WWE.


----------



## Felpent

Looks doesnt matter if can draw but he doesnt so people question his looks.


----------



## Starbuck

Felpent said:


> Looks doesnt matter if can draw but he doesnt so people question his looks.


Looks don't matter if you can draw but those who draw on the highest level tend to have 'the look' lol. And around and around we go!


----------



## BTNH

Just an interesting note on Punk concerning casual fans. Well might not be interesting to some of you, but anyway.

I was watching last episodes Raw, where Punk was closing the show with Cena and he was cutting his promo. My Dad was in the room (used to watching wrestling every now and again, stopped when Eddie died) and he just dropped "how can you watch this crap? Why is this guy the champion? He's bloody boring." Just interesting in the height of the debate in regards to Punk drawing and the way the casuals see things. For a hardcore wrestling fan like myself, Punk is my favourite and I look forward to everything he says. However for casual fans, they just cant seem to get behind him.


----------



## dxbender

SteenIsGod said:


> Let me ask you guys this, do you base your favorite wrestlers on guys who can/can't draw? I mean it seems like some of you that's all you care about, whether the guy draws or not. Some of my favorite Wrestlers like Orton, Punk, ADR are looked at on these forums as anti-draws, and is that a reason to just flat out "Hate" the guys because the Mass audience seems to dislike them?


That's the thing I hate about this forum. People will base 50% of their decision on something based on if they like it, the other 50% is based on something like PPV buys, tv rating and stuff like that.

Something can be real great, but tv rating sucks, so people will suddenly call it average. Or people won't really care about watching something, but it does great rating, and people suddenly jump on that bandwaggon.

Looking at my sig, you can obviously tell I'm not like most people on this forum, I don't care who draws ratings, who does what. If I like a star, I like them, if I don't like them, then I don't. I don't need a reason like "tv ratings" or anything like that, to explain why I like or don't like a star.


----------



## Starbuck

WHO THE FUCK HAS EVER SAID THAT THEY BASE THEIR FAVORITE STARS ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE DRAWS?

This shit seriously needs to fucking stop. Nobody has ever said that yet we get all the morons of the day coming in here and repeating this over and over and over again. Jesus fuck. Comprehension people, comprehension.


----------



## Choke2Death

Starbuck said:


> WHO THE FUCK HAS EVER SAID THAT THEY BASE THEIR FAVORITE STARS ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE DRAWS?
> 
> This shit seriously needs to fucking stop. Nobody has ever said that yet we get all the morons of the day coming in here and repeating this over and over and over again. Jesus fuck. Comprehension people, comprehension.


Funny thing is, about every single one of these "Why do you care about ratings?" posts are coming from Punk marks.


----------



## Brye

DOWN WITH THE PUNK MARKS~! GENERALIZE~!


----------



## NearFall

Waaayyy to much generalisations on this forum.



Choke2Death said:


> Funny thing is, about every single one of these "Why do you care about ratings?" posts are coming from Punk marks.


I find that is mostly because Punk marks get insulted for liking "Someone who can't draw". To quote a few people. People hate a lot on Punk, and usually it is based on his drawing power. I know that hardly anybody cares if their favourites draw or not(me included) and I do not care if someone likes ratings or not.

But the fact is, a lot of the time it is used as an argument as to why you should not like someone(a lot of the time Punk arguments end in the fact he is useless as he can not draw). Which then ends up with the presumption that the person who said it, only likes draw power. Which probably is not true at all.

Either way, I just like who I like


----------



## Brye

Wanna know why I don't care about the ratings? Because I'm not some sort of executive. It's not making me any sort of money. Would it be ideal if the things I liked got big ratings and the things I didn't like didn't? Sure. But I'm not gonna sit around and spend half my day trying to say that my least favorite wrestler is the shittiest wrestler alive (I'm talking about most of the people that joined this year that post around here) because he didn't get a good rating or why another guy is amazing because he did. There's so many fucking factors that go into it and honestly, I don't see why it should cross my mind once while I'm trying to enjoy the show.

So you can generalize as LOL PUNK MARK or actually read the fucking post.


----------



## Choke2Death

Hey, I didn't say EVERY Punk mark is like that. I just said the people who take offense to the rating discussions happen to also be Punk fans. Which brings me to this: why enter the ratings thread just to say "WHY DO U CARE ABT RATINGZZZ!!!! I LYK PUNK BECUZ HE ENTERTAINZ ME!!!"?


----------



## Brye

Choke2Death said:


> Hey, I didn't say EVERY Punk mark is like that. I just said the people who take offense to the rating discussions happen to also be Punk fans. Which brings me to this: why enter the ratings thread just to say "WHY DO U CARE ABT RATINGZZZ!!!! I LYK PUNK BECUZ HE ENTERTAINZ ME!!!"?


Posted to defend myself, tbh.

And back when I used to post in here it was because I was trying to understand why people cared.

Had done a good job avoiding this thread for a while. Not gonna get dragged back in. (Y)


----------



## The-Rock-Says

LOL PUNK MARK.


----------



## Starbuck

Once again, why do you have to be a TV Executive to talk about ratings? Some people enjoy watching Tyson Kidd matches. Others enjoy discussing and analyzing the ratings every week. How that makes either person less of a fan or a wannabe TV Executive, I'll never know. You can't complain about being generalized and then go and do the exact same thing you're accusing others of doing.

EDIT - And on the whole Punk marks thing. Some, not all, but some Punk marks don't want to know about ratings and are constantly saying that they don't matter. Then if/when Punk's segment does well they are the first people here to boast and throw a party about it. That screams hypocrisy to me. Those same marks are also the same people crucifying the likes of Orton for something they're willing to give their favorite guy, CM Punk, a free pass for. Again, hypocrisy. Bottom line is this, if you don't like to discuss ratings and don't think they're relevant, DONT COME INTO THE RATINGS DISCUSSION THREAD. It's as simple as that.


----------



## Brye

Starbuck said:


> Once again, why do you have to be a TV Executive to talk about ratings? Some people enjoy watching Tyson Kidd matches. Others enjoy discussing and analyzing the ratings every week. How that makes either person less of a fan or a wannabe TV Executive, I'll never know. *You can't complain about being generalized and then go and do the exact same thing you're accusing others of doing.*


You're right there. I apologize for that.

I just look at it the same as any other television show. I wouldn't watch Seinfeld with the same mindset, the same way I wouldn't here.


----------



## Starbuck

When I actually watch Raw or SD or whatever, ratings don't enter my mind at all. When I come into this thread though, I'm here to talk about them because that's what it's for. Honestly lol, you very clearly don't like discussing them so I don't get why you come in here. I understand that you have to mod and all that but just ignore the discussions if they bother you that much.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Choke2Death said:


> Funny thing is, about every single one of these "Why do you care about ratings?" posts are coming from Punk marks.


And at the same time, I could say the people that hate/dislike/find Punk overrated are the ones who jump into this thread head first to hurl any insult they can about Punk being in the position he's in.


This shit seriously needs to fucking stop. Nobody has ever said that yet we get all the morons of the day coming in here and repeating this over and over and over again. Jesus fuck. Comprehension people, comprehension.



Starbuck said:


> WHO THE FUCK HAS EVER SAID THAT THEY BASE THEIR FAVORITE STARS ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE DRAWS?


As far as ratings go, I think the whole people basing favorites on ratings they do is... well... just read Starbuck's post I quoted above. I like people who are big draws in ratings (Rock, Taker, etc.) and people that aren't drawing in the ratings (Barrett, Sandow, etc.). Granted I like looking at them to see how certain guys are doing in that regard, but I certainly will never base who I like or not based on who's drawing. 

The thing is though, nobody on the current roster is really a proven draw on their own. Hell, there's always a possibility anyone could do below average in a segment, even the likes of Cena and HHH. Cena especially doesn't always have high gains when in there in a crappy feud with someone who doesn't draw any better than Punk. 

Only Rock right now is 100% capable of really drawing in the viewers just on his name alone. No one else associated with WWE can. Maybe Lesnar to some degree as well has that power but even then neither guy is on the roster more than a few days a year. Which makes you wonder if they did come back every week, would the ratings go up that highly? Maybe the first few weeks, and sure they'd be higher generally than without them, but they wouldn't be bringing in these numbers people are ridiculing Punk for not bringing in. 5,000,000+ viewers every week on average just isn't going happen when the product is lazy as shit. It's not going to happen when the biggest championship on the brand is the "beating John Cena" title. It's not going to happen when the the mid-card tag division, and hell even the divas division aren't having any mind payed to them and are just going through the motions. 

If there was a compelling storyline for all parts of the show, with or without The Rock or Brock Lesnar, whether CM Punk is the face of WWE or not, the show would be pulling in 5,000,000+ viewers a week. We've seen based on the Raw 1,000 that they have a potential fanbase of nearly 7,000,000 people, of which with the lackluster product they somehow manage to get around 4,000,000 of a week. So the viewers are there, but WWE needs to do more to make them care about the whole show and the WWE Championship. Not just the special attractions like Rock and Lesnar. Now granted some of those fans will never come back to watching WWE for various reasons (PG, growing out of it, hate Cena, hate CM Punk, etc.) and just watched it for the night to see some of their old favorites again. But I don't believe that they can't get 5,000,000+ viewers a week easily if they just did a better job with the quality of the show all around (not just the main event). Especially in a period where there is no mega draw like Austin or Rock there consistently and there is no competition. They could get away with it being mostly about them back then, but not in this day and age. There needs to be something interesting for everyone on the show, not just the top 2-3 guys.

Edit:


> EDIT - And on the whole Punk marks thing. Some, not all, but some Punk marks don't want to know about ratings and are constantly saying that they don't matter. Then if/when Punk's segment does well they are the first people here to boast and throw a party about it. That screams hypocrisy to me. Those same marks are also the same people crucifying the likes of Orton for something they're willing to give their favorite guy, CM Punk, a free pass for. Again, hypocrisy. Bottom line is this, if you don't like to discuss ratings and don't think they're relevant, DONT COME INTO THE RATINGS DISCUSSION THREAD. It's as simple as that.


I think you're unfairly generalizing Punk marks. There are marks of him that like to talk about ratings and marks of him that don't. And there might be one or two who will be the hypocrites you claim them to be, but we could say the same thing about Orton marks for Orton. Bryan marks for Bryan. HHH marks for HHH. Taker marks for Taker. Rock marks for Rock. The only difference is those last three rarely underperform in ratings, especially in this day and age when they're big special attractions.

EDIT 2: Fuck, you did put only some Punk marks. Ignore the first sentence of that last paragraph. <_< However, my point still stands that you could say that about some marks for any wrestler.


----------



## Brye

Starbuck said:


> When I actually watch Raw or SD or whatever, ratings don't enter my mind at all. When I come into this thread though, I'm here to talk about them because that's what it's for. Honestly lol, you very clearly don't like discussing them so I don't get why you come in here. I understand that you have to mod and all that but just ignore the discussions if they bother you that much.


Honestly, I've tried not to. I don't think I had been in here the last couple months other than to make sure everyone was following the rules. More or less was just annoyed by Choke2Death's comment and figured I'd speak up. But I don't plan on becoming a mainstay here. :side:


----------



## Starbuck

Brye said:


> Honestly, I've tried not to. I don't think I had been in here the last couple months other than to make sure everyone was following the rules. More or less was just annoyed by Choke2Death's comment and figured I'd speak up. But I don't plan on becoming a mainstay here. :side:


You should stick around. MNF has started again. Punk's going to need you if he keeps the title heading into the fall lol.


----------



## NearFall

Brye said:


> And back when I used to post in here it was because I was trying to understand why people cared.


Some people just like to analyse it to see how the show is doing. I check in from time to time to see how an episode did, but I don't really care overall. I usually joke around about MASSIVE RATINGS in this thread. People use ratings to see how well certain angles/segments etc are doing. That does not mean that it takes away from their enjoyment of it. It is just part of the interest they have.



Choke2Death said:


> why enter the ratings thread just to say "WHY DO U CARE ABT RATINGZZZ!!!! I LYK PUNK BECUZ HE ENTERTAINZ ME!!!"?


As said earlier. It basically comes down to the fact that arguements against CM Punk are nearly always based on his drawing power from haters. When someone sees this arguement made, they then assume that the poster only cares about ratings and since it is against Punk, it is mostly his marks that assume this. 

I have seen numerous times where someone has based their entire dislike on his drawing power, while ignoring everything else. It just leads to the people asking, "What about the other factors". 

On the other end of the spectrum, when a Punk segment does well, _some_ marks will come out and proclaim this. They will then say it matters. And begin doing the exact same thing haters do, but to other wrestlers. Until of course, Punk does a bad segment, when they revert to the other arguement. 

Why this happens? Because they simply want their guy, CM Punk to be accepted above all else, as that is how they see him. It happens with every other wrestler aswell to a degree.


----------



## Brye

Starbuck said:


> You should stick around. MNF has started again. Punk's going to need you if he keeps the title heading into the fall lol.


The problem with that is that I'll probably be watching MNF. :argh:


----------



## Choke2Death

Obis said:


> And at the same time, I could say the people that hate/dislike/find Punk overrated are the ones who jump into this thread head first to hurl any insult they can about Punk being in the position he's in.


I don't deny that either. There are some trolls that join just to talk about how much of a non-drawing vanilla midget Punk is but they shouldn't set the example for the kind of discussion that goes around in this thread when it's usually perfectly fine and civilized talk about ratings of the latest episode or the history of it in general. But equally annoying as the "anti-Punk" trolls are the WWE/Punk apologists that come in here and say "Ratings are irrelevant, why is there even a discussion thread for it? You should be concerned about enjoying the product!" or the horribly overdone "Why do people here base their favorite wrestler on who draws the most?" which couldn't be further from the truth.



Starbuck said:


> Once again, why do you have to be a TV Executive to talk about ratings? Some people enjoy watching Tyson Kidd matches. Others enjoy discussing and analyzing the ratings every week. How that makes either person less of a fan or a wannabe TV Executive, I'll never know. You can't complain about being generalized and then go and do the exact same thing you're accusing others of doing.
> 
> EDIT - And on the whole Punk marks thing. Some, not all, but some Punk marks don't want to know about ratings and are constantly saying that they don't matter. Then if/when Punk's segment does well they are the first people here to boast and throw a party about it. That screams hypocrisy to me. Those same marks are also the same people crucifying the likes of Orton for something they're willing to give their favorite guy, CM Punk, a free pass for. Again, hypocrisy. Bottom line is this, if you don't like to discuss ratings and don't think they're relevant, DONT COME INTO THE RATINGS DISCUSSION THREAD. It's as simple as that.


And that's exactly what I mean, I was just misunderstood because some people felt targeted by my mention of 'Punk marks' when the word 'all' was nowhere to be found, meaning not _every_ Punk fan was on the discussion. And Brye, if you're never in this thread, I don't know why you felt offended by my comment. I was mainly talking about people like the guy with the DDP avatar that start crying in here every time someone makes a post targeting Punk's (lack of) drawing ability. When I first joined, I was a Punk fan so therefore, the ratings discussions didn't suit me and for that reason, I stayed away from threads regarding ratings. I'm not a fan anymore but his rating abilities is certainly not my reason for that but I find it a lot more enjoyable to discuss this topic when I don't have a favorite who's the top heel of the thread. With that said, sorry for any misunderstandings.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Choke2Death said:


> And that's exactly what I mean, I was just misunderstood because some people felt targeted by my mention of 'Punk marks' when the word 'all' was nowhere to be found, meaning not _every_ Punk fan was on the discussion. .


Well... I'll be damned. And I made a whole last paragraph edit in response to him thinking he was saying all Punk marks were like that. My mistake.

REMEMBER TO READ, PEOPLE!


----------



## Brye

Choke2Death said:


> I don't deny that either. There are some trolls that join just to talk about how much of a non-drawing vanilla midget Punk is but they shouldn't set the example for the kind of discussion that goes around in this thread when it's usually perfectly fine and civilized talk about ratings of the latest episode or the history of it in general. But equally annoying as the "anti-Punk" trolls are the WWE/Punk apologists that come in here and say "Ratings are irrelevant, why is there even a discussion thread for it? You should be concerned about enjoying the product!" or the horribly overdone "Why do people here base their favorite wrestler on who draws the most?" which couldn't be further from the truth.
> 
> 
> 
> And that's exactly what I mean, I was just misunderstood because some people felt targeted by my mention of 'Punk marks' when the word 'all' was nowhere to be found, meaning not _every_ Punk fan was on the discussion. *And Brye, if you're never in this thread, I don't know why you felt offended by my comment. I was mainly talking about people like the guy with the DDP avatar that start crying in here every time someone makes a post targeting Punk's (lack of) drawing ability. When I first joined, I was a Punk fan so therefore, the ratings discussions didn't suit me and for that reason, I stayed away from threads regarding ratings. I'm not a fan anymore but his rating abilities is certainly not my reason for that but I find it a lot more enjoyable to discuss this topic when I don't have a favorite who's the top heel of the thread. With that said, sorry for any misunderstandings.*


Fair enough. I understand that. I took it as a potential shot as me because of my views on ratings.


----------



## Rock316AE

Personally I love reading Brye's posts on ratings. Even in the old weekly ratings threads before this official so I hope he stays. 

Tyson Kidd vs Khali drawing a 7.0 would be great. Seriously Brye, what would be your first reaction, saying how huge Kidd is today, or saying that the quality of the match wasn't what you want to see from him?


----------



## Brye

Rock316AE said:


> Personally I love reading Brye's posts on ratings. Even in the old weekly ratings threads before this official so I hope he stays.
> 
> Tyson Kidd vs Khali drawing a 7.0 would be great. Seriously Brye, what would be your first reaction, saying how huge Kidd is today, or saying that the quality of the match wasn't what you want to see from him?


I sense some sarcasm. :side:

In that situation, I'd probably go with the former. Mainly since I don't think he's ever done much himself so it'd be nice to see and would hopefully lead to something bigger out of him. But if it meant that his matches were going to drastically suffer, I'm not sure how I'd feel.

That's a situation where I might actually be a bit interested in the rating if it was good. But at the same time I hate when they push/de-push someone after one week's ratings.


----------



## Rock316AE

Brye said:


> I sense some sarcasm. :side:
> 
> In that situation, I'd probably go with the former. Mainly since I don't think he's ever done much himself so it'd be nice to see and would hopefully lead to something bigger out of him. But if it meant that his matches were going to drastically suffer, I'm not sure how I'd feel.


Not at all, I honestly mean it. I just gave unrealistic number because that would mean he gets a push no matter what. Just wanted to know if you want to see him as a main star even if it means that you're not going to like his matches the same way you did on Superstars for example. Personally I don't think I saw more than 10 matches from him and they were probably when he was in the new Hart Foundation tag team. I remember him against DX on SD one time.


----------



## Brye

Rock316AE said:


> Not at all, I honestly mean it. I just gave unrealistic number because that would mean he gets a push no matter what. Just wanted to know if you want to see him as a main star even if it means that you're not going to like his matches the same way you did on Superstars for example. Personally I don't think I saw more than 10 matches from him and they were probably when he was in the new Hart Foundation tag team. I remember him against DX on SD one time.


Fair enough. In all honestly I think I'd like to see him most in a midcard role where he can have some exposure but still have a wide selection of people to face.

Really thought Hart Dynasty was going to take off. They had really great chemistry together. That match with DX was pretty fun and they had a good PPV match with Miz/Jericho from OTL '10.

And they had Bret backing them, which I thought helped quite a bit.


----------



## DesolationRow

*Brye*: He'll Mark for Tyson Kidd Unless He Becomes Too Big of a Star, Which Could Theoretically Damage the Workrate of His Matches

If Kidd's reading this somewhere, *Brye*, he's muttering, "Wow, my fans are really great... thanks a lot, assholes."

(Completey Kidding.)


----------



## Starbuck

Brye said:


> The problem with that is that I'll probably be watching MNF. :argh:


Wait a second. Are you saying that.....the ratings themselves.....they don't draw?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Ratings are serious, guys. Be serious, guys.



Starbuck said:


> Wait a second. Are you saying that.....the ratings themselves.....they don't draw?


:cornette


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Its the wrestling business, superstars come and go based on the ratings and drawing ability and other stuff the executives only know. Most of the times I see the ratings be brought up in order to defend or support ones favorite wrestler. Its no secret people here don't like every single superstar equally. You like a certain superstar and you hope they are successful as you watch their careers take off, and sometime we use the ratings to make a case on why this guy is pushed over the other guy. Some of the regular posters on this ratings thread can actually make a compelling argument about a certain superstar drawing but then we have the other majority who rub it in or bitch when their favorites do good or bad for the one week.

Long Live the Ratings Thread!!!


----------



## funnyfaces1

Is there any other wrestling forum that cares about ratings? I know Gamefaqs and Reddit (LOL, I know) never cared about such matters. They don't care that Mark Henry or The Rock are rating draws, they care about how entertaining they are.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

funnyfaces1 said:


> *Is there any other wrestling forum that cares about ratings?* I know Gamefaqs and Reddit (LOL, I know) never cared about such matters. They don't care that Mark Henry or The Rock are rating draws, they care about how entertaining they are.


I think Wrestling Observer forums.


----------



## Choke2Death

funnyfaces1 said:


> Is there any other wrestling forum that cares about ratings? I know Gamefaqs and Reddit (LOL, I know) never cared about such matters. They don't care that Mark Henry or The Rock are rating draws, *they care about how entertaining they are.*


And what has made you think that people in this topic don't?

That's gotta be the most annoying misconception made about this topic. "You post in the ratings topic, so that MUST mean you care more about who draws instead of who entertains you!"


----------



## Yankees4Life

My Raw Preview http://a-listsports.blogspot.com/2012/08/8-27-raw-preview-something-is-up-tonight.html


----------



## Callisto

Ugh... why must they put AJ is such a pointless storyline.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

If Punk v Lawler doesn't draw then I'm putting full blame on Lawler. #IAintJoking


----------



## WTFWWE

Vince has got one more week of hardly any rival shows for RAW but watch them ratings FALL HARD! on September 10th the little kids will being going bed earlier and MNF returns ha can't wait for them 2.6's so Vince freaks out again and gets forced to put on good shows. One more week of RAW for me and then BYE VINCE! See ya for Royal Rumble build up when you actually give a fuck.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> If Punk v Lawler doesn't draw then I'm putting full blame on Lawler. #IAintJoking


No. Everything is Punk's fault, don't you read this thread?


----------



## Piercdbruh

I love how the WWE forces fans to cheer their faces and boo their heels. If Punk's fans cheer too loudly next week in Chicago, Vince is going to have Punk raping nuns and biting the heads off of kittens while clubbing baby seals in the ring.


----------



## reDREDD

its almost impossible nowadays to get a straight reaction

for anyone


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Holy shit RAW is in Chicago next week? Awesome. Then apparently Montreal the week after.


----------



## Loader230

Why would you blame 62 yr old Lawler when punk is the WWE champion? The reason it was promoted as the main event was because it involved WWE champion, CM Punk not because jerry fucking lawler was part of it. If you're going to put the blame on Lawler that would mean you expect lawler to be a draw, in which case it could have been anyone facing him in the main event why punk? 

All that being said, I think ME+overrun would do good numbers this time. It was only 6 mins at the end + steel cage gimmick usually draws.


----------



## Belladonna29

Piercdbruh said:


> I love how the WWE forces fans to cheer their faces and boo their heels. If Punk's fans cheer too loudly next week in Chicago, Vince is going to have Punk raping nuns and biting the heads off of kittens while clubbing baby seals in the ring.


LOL. I will say this -- while plenty of the IWC were pining for "interesting and edgy" CM Punk to turn back heel, they failed to realize how Punk at least become a legitimate other #1 face on Raw. 

Despite all the bitching and flailing about whether Punk draws or had become stale, he was undoubtedly over and was getting cheered just as much (if not usually more) than Cena was for months. We spent years demanding that the WWE elevate someone else to compete with Cena on the roster and with the fanbase, and Punk was as close as anyone's gotten in a while. 

But now, they're turning him heel, and while Punk may not care (after all, he likes being a heel), and may always be a better heel than face, it's ironic that it's happening this way. Now, we're back to having Cena as THE dominate face and you have to hope they don't screw up Punk's heel turn because people just don't want to boo him.


----------



## Ether

Piercdbruh said:


> I love how the WWE forces fans to cheer their faces and boo their heels. If Punk's fans cheer too loudly next week in Chicago, Vince is going to have Punk raping nuns and biting the heads off of kittens while clubbing baby seals in the ring.


Watch Punk be "suspended for his actions" by AJ or some other bullshit to keep him off the show.


----------



## azhkz

For all the HHHaterz out there calling out Hunter's segment pointless and unnecessary need to understand that he is among the VERY few top draws on the show. I will be surprised if his segment doesn't do the best or one of the best numbers of the night. Hunter's only competition IMO is Cena in terms of drawing power not counting the trinity of Austin, Rock, Hogan.


----------



## Loader230

Piercdbruh said:


> I love how the WWE forces fans to cheer their faces and boo their heels. *If Punk's fans cheer too loudly next week in Chicago,* Vince is going to have Punk raping nuns and biting the heads off of kittens while clubbing baby seals in the ring.


Its punk's job to make sure they dont. I hate his hypocritical ass but he is a really good mic worker atleast for today's standards. He should be able to get good heat. I remember him opening WM 27 RAW go home show(I think) in chicago as a heel, he should do the same next week.


----------



## Tnmore

I predict a 3.1 for this raw.


----------



## Starbuck

Overrun should do really well imo. It was a RawActive match, it had a steel cage and they promoted it throughout the show. I think it will do a great number.


----------



## Choke2Death

Hope the main event flops, as it should because Punk vs Lawler is just a horrible match-up no matter how you look at it. Even with the awesome steel cage structure around them. Have not seen the show and wont (maybe save for the HHH speech) but I'm surprised Cena was given a random match-up with The Moz in the middle of the show. It was around the 10PM spot, right?


----------



## JY57

Choke2Death said:


> Hope the main event flops, as it should because Punk vs Lawler is just a horrible match-up no matter how you look at it. Even with the awesome steel cage structure around them. Have not seen the show and wont (maybe save for the HHH speech) but I'm surprised Cena was given a random match-up with The Moz in the middle of the show. It was around the 10PM spot, right?


end of of the 1st hour


----------



## lancaster223

Prepare for the first overrun viewership loss in months.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

I really like Punks and Jerry's mini feud. I really want a back and forth promo between them. Jerry could take him, imo.


----------



## Lastier

This should do an all time record rating

- Squash matches everywhere
- Triple H appreciation night
- A 70 year old wrestling in the main event
- TOUTTWITTERFACEBOOKYOUTUBELOL

What more could you ask for?


----------



## The-Rock-Says

He's 62 actually.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

If the overrun loses viewers and isn't one of the top 3 segments of the night, I'll concede Punk isn't a draw. That build up was mostly on him and for once, even though Cena was in there at the end, Punk was the primary draw (not sure on Jerry's drawing ability in this day and age). If he fails to do well in gains or being one of the top segments of the night, then that's pretty much that. 

Granted, he probably won't be in the highest rated segment of the show since the HHH retirement stuff was promoted just as much if not more than Punk/Jerry... and HHH is HHH. So I'm not expecting Punk/Lawler to do more than that, but he should at least be in the second or third highest slot of the night in the overrun. I know Punk matches don't generally draw, but the build to it was perfect and a great way to get Punk over as a hated heel who people want to see get his ass kicked. There's no reason it shouldn't have one of the highest 2-3 numbers of the night unless Punk really isn't a draw. He was given the spotlight and main event for Raw finally in a highly (TV) promoted and built match.

But we'll see.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Obis it'll never lose viewers. It never does. 

You know that. Saving your ass there.


----------



## Roydabest

Brye said:


> Wanna know why I don't care about the ratings? Because I'm not some sort of executive. It's not making me any sort of money. Would it be ideal if the things I liked got big ratings and the things I didn't like didn't? Sure. But I'm not gonna sit around and spend half my day trying to say that my least favorite wrestler is the shittiest wrestler alive (*I'm talking about most of the people that joined this year that post around here*) because he didn't get a good rating or why another guy is amazing because he did. There's so many fucking factors that go into it and honestly, I don't see why it should cross my mind once while I'm trying to enjoy the show.
> 
> So you can *generalize* as LOL PUNK MARK or actually read the fucking post.


Talks about generalizing negatively and generalizes in his own post.  gotta love it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

The-Rock-Says said:


> Obis it'll never lose viewers. It never does.
> 
> You know that. Saving your ass there.


Oh but it has, and with Punk if I'm not mistaken. Of course I'm pretty sure when Punk did the match wasn't anywhere near as hyped as this one.

But that's my point. It has no reason to lose viewers and if it does, then it's confirmed Punk isn't a draw. 

However, it should also be at least the number 2 segment of the night. Number 3 at worst if the Cena/Miz match (somehow) does well since it did go into the 9:00 hour if I'm not mistaken. But I don't know.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

If it doesn't do 1 million gain and isn't the top rating of the show, then CM Phil should be fired. I'm serious. Really.

You are right, sorry. Ryder/Punk tag match (IIRC) did the lowest rating since 1995. (IIRC)


----------



## Loader230

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...s-single-ladies-american-pickers-more/146434/

WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM - 4.160
WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM - 4.786
WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00PM - 4.499

John cena vs the Miz probably is the highest point of the show.


----------



## Arcade

The-Rock-Says said:


> If it doesn't do 1 million gain and isn't the top rating of the show, then CM Phil should be fired. I'm serious. Really.
> 
> You are right, sorry. Ryder/Punk tag match (IIRC) did the lowest rating since 1995. (IIRC)


Nope, it's sarcasm.


----------



## Vyed

Pawn stars topped the night.

Hour 1 - 4.160m (Last week : 4.352m) 
Hour 2 - 4.786m (Last week : 4.657m)
Hour 3 - 4.499m (Last week : 4.426m)

About the same as last week, So now the trend every week is probably hour 2 will get the most viewership.


----------



## KO Bossy

Loader230 said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...s-single-ladies-american-pickers-more/146434/
> 
> WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM - 4.160
> WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM - 4.786
> WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00PM - 4.499
> 
> John cena vs the Miz probably is the highest point of the show.


I think it was probably Hunter's speech, since that started at about 9:50.


----------



## KO Bossy

Oh and that's a terrible first hour rating. Lowest we've seen for that hour since they first dipped below 4 million.


----------



## Rock316AE

Lawler/Punk is going to do well, Jerry Lawler is a big respected legend and always drew when they gave him a main event match, last year his Rumble win and celebration on RAW before EC drew a 4.0 and 1,100,000+ gain. And that's before Rock's return. + Almost all the Lawler/Cole segments drew big and was the biggest feud on TV after Rock/Cena/Miz. IIRC his TLC with Miz also did big. So you can count on a Cage match with Jerry Lawler to do at least decent.


----------



## dxbender

We should be expecting lower 1st hour ratings starting in September, cause that's when TV shows are having season premieres and stuff, and many good shows are on around 8pm.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

KO Bossy said:


> Oh and that's a terrible first hour rating. Lowest we've seen for that hour since they first dipped below 4 million.


Actually, besides last week with Lesnar and Raw 1000, it's the highest first hour number.


----------



## murder

Rock316AE said:


> Almost all the Lawler/Cole segments drew big and was the biggest feud on TV after Rock/Cena/Miz.


I'm sure you forgot the HHH/Taker feud.


----------



## Choke2Death

Very average numbers without much change from last week. Bring on the breakdown!


----------



## KO Bossy

Obis said:


> Actually, besides last week with Lesnar and Raw 1000, it's the highest first hour number.


I guess the Master of the Brocktagon spoiled me last Monday...

Just in general, though, the first hour was crappy. Besides Punk and Lawler having a good opening segment, we had a Divas match, Ryback squash, the first anger management segment and the start of the Triple H recaps...really filler.


----------



## Rock316AE

murder said:


> I'm sure you forgot the HHH/Taker feud.


True, Lawler/Cole was just so dominant on TV I forgot about the Taker/HHH promos.


----------



## RatedR10

> WWE Raw on Monday, August 27 averaged 4.481 million viewers, which was nearly identical to an average of 4.478 million viewers last week for the post-Summerslam episode.
> 
> We will not have official Raw TV ratings until later this week. The following is a viewership break down for all three hours reported by TVBytheNumbers.com .
> 
> - First Hour: 4.16 million viewers, which was down 200,000 viewers from last week's new first hour.
> 
> - Second Hour: 4.79 million viewers, which was the most viewers for any hour of Raw since the Raw 1,000 episode. This was up 130,000 viewers compared to last week's second hour/previous first hour.
> 
> - Third Hour: 4.49 million viewers for the C.M. Punk vs. Jerry Lawler main event, the second-half of Triple H's retirement tease, and filler in-between the Hunter promo and main event. This was down 70,000 viewers compared to last week's third hour.
> 
> The net result is a wash compared to last week with -200,000 viewers in Hour One, +130,000 viewers in Hour Two, and -70,000 in Hour Three.
> 
> - Check back later this week for detailed Raw ratings.


pwtorch


----------



## Amuroray

cenas hour once again gains


----------



## KO Bossy

Amuroray said:


> cenas hour once again gains


Well, here's my question. Punk is a bad draw. Hence, if he's in the first hour, it would be a low rating. That means that naturally, whomever was in the second hour, it would experience a draw. Does this mean the second hour experienced an increase in viewers because Cena was in it or because Punk WASN'T?

I wouldn't attribute that increase to Cena since it could have been anybody in the second hour and it would have drawn, except Punk. We need to see a ratings breakdown first.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

How big of a draw was Hardcore Holly? the audience must of bought him as a legit tough guy.


----------



## lancaster223

KO Bossy said:


> Well, here's my question. Punk is a bad draw. Hence, if he's in the first hour, it would be a low rating. That means that naturally, whomever was in the second hour, it would experience a draw. Does this mean the second hour experienced an increase in viewers because Cena was in it or because Punk WASN'T?
> 
> I wouldn't attribute that increase to Cena since it could have been anybody in the second hour and it would have drawn, except Punk. We need to see a ratings breakdown first.


Cena's spots gaining huge no.s should be pretty much automatic by now.

It's not coincidence he spiked the 2nd hour's viewership higher than the average.


----------



## Johncena-hhh

> * First Hour: 4.16 million viewers, down 200,000 viewers from last week.
> * Second Hour: 4.79 million viewers, up 130,000 viewers from last week.
> * Third Hour: 4.49 million viewers, down 70,000 viewers from last week.
> 
> The final rating for Raw will not be released until later this week.


24wrestling.com


----------



## lancaster223

jblvdx said:


> How big of a draw was Hardcore Holly? the audience must of bought him as a legit tough guy.


I'm more interested to know how he treated Punk during their first match together.

Didn't they feud sometime during WWECW's infancy?


----------



## Starbuck

Should be an interesting breakdown to say the least lol. Punk got his shot with Lawler at the end. He opened and he closed which is what everybody has been clamoring for. Let's see if he can deliver. I think he will. As Rock316AE already pointed out, when placed in a hyped situation, King brings the goods so that should help. It was also a stip match and promoted throughout the show so it has absolutely no reason not to do well. 

Trips should do well in his bit too. How well? I don't know. The 10pm slot hasn't been doing so well lately. Maybe he'll turn that around. 

We'll just have to wait for the breakdown as always lol. Then the real bitching can begin.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

lancaster223 said:


> I'm more interested to know how he treated Punk during their first match together.
> 
> Didn't they feud sometime during WWECW's infancy?


Yeah, he punched Punk in the eye so hard he can't hardly see out of it. Holly beating up vanilla midgets who won't ever become stars, what he does best.


----------



## Pro Royka

Amuroray said:


> cenas hour once again gains


Is that an accomplishment? If Cena cant draw that means he's a failure, so don't be so happy about it because he's booked real strong, and has 5x accomplishments than any wrestler in the roster. The product is shit and ratings are at it all time lowest, so even if Cena was the champ it will not change a thing. There is 3 hours filled with other wrestlers and if they can't draw it's not the champ fault, it's them. Cena can draw but that doesn't change the fact that he's boring, stale, and killing the product because no one is able to beat him fairly and they can't have the same opportunities.


----------



## KO Bossy

lancaster223 said:


> Cena's spots gaining huge no.s should be pretty much automatic by now.
> 
> It's not coincidence he spiked the 2nd hour's viewership higher than the average.


Well who says it was Cena? Hunter's segment started at 9:50. That might have helped a ton.


----------



## Stall_19

I think people look way too much into these ratings.


----------



## King_Of_This_World

Stall_19 said:


> I think people look way too much into these ratings.


No shit.


----------



## funnyfaces1

It seems like every week, the second hour does best. Am I just imagining things?


----------



## dxbender

funnyfaces1 said:


> It seems like every week, the second hour does best. Am I just imagining things?


1st hour:Mostly kids, some adults
2nd hour: split of kids/adults
3rd hour: Mostly adults, some kids


That's how I'm guessing the ratings go in terms of demographics


----------



## SpeedStick

Nattie and Jack Swagger, are this year Beth and McIntyre


----------



## Rock316AE

I always loved Bob and Crash Holly as The Super Heavyweights, Crash's most memorable period was his classic 24/7 Hardcore title run but this is up there with it. Comedy gold. I will never forget that in one of Crash's first appearances, Hardcore brought him to the WWF as a back up for him and all that, and on their first segment they had a disagreement and started a crazy brawl, in the ring to the backstage area to the parking lot, even on a roof of a Truck lol. Classic AE/Russo skits and awesome chemistry. Bob Holly was never in a position to draw big(For the fact that the roster was too good back then, even to be in his position)but if you want a date or something, I can find it.


----------



## JoseBxNYC

Is obvious that Vince fucking hates Bryan when he doesn't let him go over Truth.


----------



## Vyed

It was a count-out, plus that loss plays into his anger management storyline. How come Daniel Bryan is bigger star and more relevant than R truth, if Vince hates him?


----------



## Brye

I remember the segment where Crash Holly was fighting off people in the Chuck E Cheese. :lmao


----------



## Rock316AE

Gold from Crash(RIP)every week during that time. This is one of the best title runs ever in wrestling IMO, comedy or not. Good times.


----------



## Chrome

^ :lmao

Just another reason to miss the Hardcore title. I do wish they would bring it back. I know WWE's PG now, but most of the stuff in those videos really wouldn't violate the PG rating, so it's always a possibility. Eh, I can dream.


----------



## JY57

> - Monday’s WWE RAW scored a 3.1 cable rating. Hour one did 4.2 million viewers, hour two did 4.8 million viewers and the third hour dropped to 4.5 million viewers for an average viewership of 4.5 million.


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


----------



## Shazayum

Decent rating.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

> In the quarters, Ryback vs. Jack Swagger and Natalya vs. Layla lost 160,000 viewers. The Vickie Guerrero/A.J. interview and brawl gained 439,000 viewers. So all that crowd reaction for the segment equated to more viewers watching as well. John Cena vs. The Miz gained 525,000 viewers but that also went through 9 p.m. when a ton of people are going to naturally tune in. Heath Slater vs. Santino Marella lost 124,000 viewers. Brodus Clay & Sin Cara vs. Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow and the final Anger Management segment lost 214,000 viewers. R-Truth vs. Daniel Bryan gained 232,000 viewers. The HHH retirement segment was the big segment of the show gaining 257,000 viewers and doing a 3.51 quarter. Since I would expected that segment to do huge, and it was the highest point of the show, the long shows starting at 8 may have hurt the 10 p.m. segment’s ability to pull the big gains as you’d have expected this segment to add 700,000 viewers. Sheamus & Randy Orton vs. Dolph Ziggler & Alberto Del Rio lost 576,000 viewers. That’s with two of the top three babyfaces in the company and two of the more pushed heels. That’s losing due to the length of the show. David Otunga vs. Zack Ryder lost 131,000 viewers. And C.M. Punk vs. Jerry Lawler gained 479,000 viewers and did a 3.35 overrun. Lawler vs. Punk saw Boys 12-17 go from 1.9 to 2.3, Males 18-49 go from 2.7 to 3.2, Women 12-17 stay at 0.9 and Women 18-49 to stay at 1.1.


Two of the top four superstars losing half a million stars is pretty bad. 

Lawler V Punk drew decent.

HHH retirement getting the highest numbers isn't surprising 

Ryback's streak is dead,.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

So Triple H gaining 200k to a 3.5 is a huge success. But when Punk/Jericho gained 200k to a 3.6, it was a below average gain that meant nothing. Oh well, I'm done trying to understand whoever comes up with these breakdown details and take them as I please. 

Punk/Lawler did good for what it was. I expected it to bomb since, well, it really speaks for itself. But the opening promo from Punk built it up really well so I'm not too surprised. Sheamus and Orton in a tag team match losing 500k is ouch. Other than that not too much to discuss.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> So Triple H gaining 200k to a 3.5 is a huge success. But when Punk/Jericho gained 200k to a 3.6, it was a below average gain that meant nothing. Oh well, I'm done trying to understand whoever comes up with these breakdown details and take them as I please.
> 
> Punk/Lawler did good for what it was. I expected it to bomb since, well, it really speaks for itself. But the opening promo from Punk built it up really well so I'm not too surprised. Sheamus and Orton in a tag team match losing 500k is ouch. Other than that not too much to discuss.


CM Punk vs Henry the night after WM gained 200k for a 3,6 rating as well, but thats just nothing, below average. HHH gaining 200k for a 3.5 however is INCREDIBLE! You just don't understand the business son.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

So let's see here...

Punk/Lawler's opening segment seemed to do okay. Their match did well as that had 700,000+ viewers from their opening segment from what I can tell. It had the third largest number of viewers of the night, which I semi-expected as the 9PM segment has usually been in the top 2 segments since the move to 3 hours. I thought maybe Punk/Lawler would've still beaten it, but there was only a 70,000 viewer difference. HHH's segment as expected had the biggest number of the night, and while Wrestlingfan is right in his assessment that the fact Punk/Jericho wasn't considered a success but this will be by some is pretty BS. But yeah, HHH doing that well though is no surprise. It was an average gain, but still top number of the night.

Sheamus/Orton vs. Del Rio/Ziggler losing 500k+ is lol. That's the number 3 and 4 on the biggest current stars ladder losing 500,000 viewers. Now in all fairness though, it was after the show had peaked with HHH's segment, but if they were as big stars/draws as some claim them to be (Rock316AE  ), they would've been able to minimize the loss to something like 200,000. However taking what I think of Orton/Sheamus' drawing ability, they did well considering the circumstance. 

Sandow losing viewers again makes me


----------



## Bob the Jobber

I'm not a guy that pays attention to ratings, but that HHH placement seems odd given that he was the biggest storyline going into RAW and it wouldn't surprise me if most people just tapped out and figured they'd watch the rest online after his promo ended. After all, it basically killed the live crowd.

Edit: Seems AJ's drawing.


----------



## Vyed

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> So Triple H gaining 200k to a 3.5 is a huge success. But when Punk/Jericho gained 200k to a 3.6, it was a below average gain that meant nothing. Oh well, I'm done trying to understand whoever comes up with these breakdown details and take them as I please.
> 
> Punk/Lawler did good for what it was. I expected it to bomb since, well, it really speaks for itself. But the opening promo from Punk built it up really well so I'm not too surprised. Sheamus and Orton in a tag team match losing 500k is ouch. Other than that not too much to discuss.





jblvdx said:


> CM Punk vs Henry the night after WM gained 200k for a 3,6 rating as well, but thats just nothing, below average. HHH gaining 200k for a 3.5 however is INCREDIBLE! You just don't understand the business son.



No, Meltzer is right actually. This is highest 10 pm quarter since 1000th RAW.

RAW 7/30 - Jericho/Christian vs Ziggler/Miz tag match at 10pm did 3.24

RAW 8/6 - Shawn/Brock/Heyman promo did 3.43

RAW 8/13 - Cena/Punk vs Show/Bryan did 2.94

RAW 8/20 - Kane/Ryder vs Miz/Bryan did 3.32

So its pretty clear since three hours became a permanent thing, the extra hour is hurting the 10 pm gain as Dave Meltzer has noted in the breakdown. Punk/Jericho was on a regular two hour RAW iirc?


----------



## Choke2Death

Very average numbers as expected. And the tag match losing viewers doesn't surprise when I really think about it. These four guys have wrestled each other a million times with the line-up switched around every week on Raw and Smackdown, it's no wonder people lose interest and just change the channel after a while.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

The extra hour may be hurting the gains, but not the rating for the 10PM slot. And come to think of it the 10PM's slots have been in the 200-400,000 gains since late last year at least on average. The only segments off the top of my head that had huge gains consistently in the 10PM slot were the Taker/HBK/HHH segments.


----------



## azhkz

I agree with Vyed.


----------



## Vyed

Obis said:


> The extra hour may be hurting the gains, but not the rating for the 10PM slot. And come to think of it the 10PM's slots have been in the 200-400,000 gains since late last year at least on average.


No actually Jericho+Cena promo gained 800,000 viewers few weeks before RAW 1000 on a regular 2 hr RAW. 



> The only segments off the top of my head that had huge gains consistently in the 10PM slot were the Taker/HBK/HHH segments.


True but it was also Wrestlemania season. Not the same thing.


----------



## RatedR10

Ouch at two of the top three babyfaces losing more than 500K viewers. I know it was right after Triple H, but still. That's not good.

Ryback's streak of gaining viewers is over.

Very average numbers.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Vyed said:


> No, Meltzer is right actually. This is highest 10 pm quarter since 1000th RAW.
> 
> RAW 7/30 - Jericho/Christian vs Ziggler/Miz tag match at 10pm did 3.24
> 
> RAW 8/6 - Shawn/Brock/Heyman promo did 3.43
> 
> RAW 8/13 - Cena/Punk vs Show/Bryan did 2.94
> 
> RAW 8/20 - Kane/Ryder vs Miz/Bryan did 3.32
> 
> So its pretty clear since three hours became a permanent thing, the extra hour is hurting the 10 pm gain as Dave Meltzer has noted in the breakdown. Punk/Jericho was on a regular two hour RAW iirc?


No, it was a three hour RAW. That RAW drew a 3.06. The same argument applies, really. The extra hour hurt the gain, but it still did a very strong rating. 



> As noted before, the three-hour WWE RAW Supershow on April 23rd scored a 3.06 cable rating with 4.42 million viewers. In the normal two hours, RAW did a 3.33 rating with 4.76 million viewers. The normal RAW hours would have done a 3.22 and 3.41 – so the trend of hour two losing viewers has changed as of late.
> 
> In the segment breakdown, the opener with John Cena, Edge and the contract signing that never happened started the show with a low 2.50 quarter-rating. Chris Jericho vs. Kofi Kingston lost 73,000 viewers from the opener while Jericho’s promo, Brock Lesnar & CM Punk videos plus the segment with Eve Torres and John Laurinaitis gained 52,000 viewers. Lord Tensai vs. R-Truth lost 3,000 viewers. Kane’s segment and Randy Orton putting Paul Bearer into the freezer gained 865,000 viewers – which were the WWE fans tuning into RAW at the normal time of 9pm EST.
> 
> Alberto Del Rio and Cody Rhodes vs. The Great Khali and Big Show gained 195,000 viewers while the backstage segment with Jericho, Laurinaitis, Eve and Teddy Long talking about CM Punk being drunk lost 112,000 viewers. Nikki Bella winning the Divas Title from Beth Phoenix gained 437,000 viewers, which can be seen as a big surprise. *The field sobriety test in the ring with CM Punk gained 270,000 viewers to a 3.63 quarter-rating, which is one of the best quarters in a while.
> *
> Sheamus vs. Mark Henry with Daniel Bryan as referee and the tag match with Zack Ryder & Santino Marella vs. Primo & Epico lost 439,000 viewers. Kane putting Bearer back in the freezer and Abraham Washington recruiting the Tag Team Champions lost 370,000 more viewers. Dolph Ziggler & Jack Swagger vs. Hornswoggle & Brodus Clay gained 225,000 viewers.
> 
> The final segment with Brock Lesnar and John Cena’s contract signing gained 873,000 viewers for a 3.83 quarter rating. The number was built up because they went 15 minutes past the time and fans didn’t tune out as they sometimes do for long overruns.


----------



## Rock316AE

Surprised to see Lawler/Punk doing below average gain with a cage match. I would expect a much bigger gain from a hyped stipulation Jerry Lawler match in the main event. But Punk even last week with Cena, did a below average gain so I guess that's as far as you can go with him in a major role in the segment. Not close to what Lawler did with Miz IIRC.

HHH doing the biggest is expected, it was by far the biggest attraction on the show with the most hype which is why the random tag lost that much after that. I imagine that the HHH promo also helped the match before because his segment started minutes before the top of the hour.

Other than that, nothing. I agree with Meltzer that people aren't going to watch 3 hours and it hurts what big time slots did in the past. Before that you had a lot of times, also with Show/Henry/Cena etc.



> The only segments off the top of my head that had huge gains consistently in the 10PM slot were the Taker/HBK/HHH segments.


Jericho, Cena and especially Big Show with a huge gain before OTL, all did big in that time slot. Before that you had a lot of big gain there with Show/Henry/Cena etc.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Vyed said:


> No actually Jericho+Cena promo gained over 800,000 viewers few weeks before RAW 1000.


"On average"... there will always be exceptions, for higher and lower. 



> True but it was also Wrestlemania season. Not the same thing.


But even then, consistently on a weekly basis, those were the only consistent gains of that magnitude in the last year for the 10pm time slot. 

At the end of the day, it's about the number of viewers watching. I don't remember if the Punk/Jericho segment or Punk/Henry were top segments of their respective nights (Punk/Henry I doubt was since that was Brock's return), but the fact is they didn't have great gains but had a high rating. That's why I stopped caring about gains. Much like on Raw 1,000. An overrun featuring Rock, Punk, and Cena only gained 300,000 something viewers, but it was the biggest number of the night and the only reason it didn't gain more was because the majority of people kept watching and only some tuned out and they kept coming back for the final hour.


----------



## Vyed

@Wrestlingfan35

Nope. Its not the same, three hour RAW is a permanent thing now. The RAW show you're talking about was a one night deal. This is why I specifically noted in my post..



> So its pretty clear *since three hours became a permanent thing*, the extra hour is hurting the 10 pm gain as Dave Meltzer has noted in the breakdown.


I never said punk/jericho did "weak" btw, you did.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

I never said it drew weak, I said people called it a weak gain and didn't give it any credit. It's just a bit biased is all. I see Rock316 praising the Triple H number this week but:



Rock316AE said:


> The horrendous Jericho/Punk feud doing their usual weak, below average top of the hour gain


I agree with Obis, here. Gains are important, yeah, but to disregard the rating and number of viewers and just look at the gain is silly. The number of viewers is most important.


----------



## lancaster223

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> *So Triple H gaining 200k to a 3.5 is a huge success. But when Punk/Jericho gained 200k to a 3.6, it was a below average gain that meant nothing.* Oh well, I'm done trying to understand whoever comes up with these breakdown details and take them as I please.
> 
> Punk/Lawler did good for what it was. I expected it to bomb since, well, it really speaks for itself. But the opening promo from Punk built it up really well so I'm not too surprised. Sheamus and Orton in a tag team match losing 500k is ouch. Other than that not too much to discuss.


That was a RTW rating where Rock gained like 4.0 that night. 3.6 gain was a below the average gain that time.


----------



## Rock316AE

Praising? I'm not praising it in any way. I didn't even like the segment. All I said that it was peak of the show as expected and got the most hype.

Oh and that Jericho/Punk program was horrendous. Jericho did his best work when he came back from the Brazil suspension. That's when I truly enjoyed his work again.


----------



## KO Bossy

Triple H did the largest gain...not surprised.

Still funny how when Punk gains, people still refuse to acknowledge it and say "it should have done better" as Wrestlingfan35 pointed out.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

lancaster223 said:


> That was a RTW rating where Rock gained like 4.0 that night. 3.6 gain was a below the average gain that time.


Rock did nothing near 4.0 on the RTWM. This was in late April where the Lesnar/Cena contract signing did the highest of the night. Rock/Cena failed to bring in any good ratings on the RTWM. That was all Triple H, Shawn Michaels and Undertaker.

@Rock316 fair enough, you're not praising. But you were certainly a lot more negative towards the Punk/Jericho number. It just screams bias but hey, that's almost everybody in this thread. Like I said before, Mark wars~

Edit: I'll agree with you saying that program was horrendous lol. I enjoyed that segment but I didn't enjoy what Punk/Jericho was bar the matches. But apparently shitty TV is in these days. See: AJ/Bryan/Punk and Cena/Ace.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Nothing too out of the ordinary. The issue at hand is debating just how amazing Crash Holly was. LMFAO at his program with the British Bulldog at Insurrextion.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Just for the record, and to stir the pot, these are the last 10 Raws (besides Memorial day since I couldn't find it... though I'm sure it's somewhere in this thread, I used google to get these) breakdowns before Raw 1000.



> Raw 7/16/12 breakdown:
> As reported before, In the segment breakdown, Titus O'Neil and Darren Young vs. Kofi Kingston and R-Truth lost 384,000 viewers from the opening segment. AJ Lee and Daniel Bryan's backstage segment plus Zack Ryder vs. Alberto Del Rio with Rey Mysterio's return gained 252,000 viewers. Rikishi's return vs. Heath Slater gained another 169,000 viewers.
> 
> *Eve Torres and The Miz vs. AJ and Bryan plus the wedding angle gained 282,000 viewers*. The big surprise of the show was the Ryback vs. Jack Swagger angle with the confrontation between Chris Jericho and Dolph Ziggler. These lost 20,000 viewers in a spot in the show where RAW usually loses several hundred thousand viewers.
> 
> Brodus Clay vs. JTG lost 491,000 viewers, which indicates that fans stayed for the Ryback match and the Jericho-Ziggler segment but tuned out as soon as the next segment began. 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.
> 
> 
> 
> Raw 7/9/12 breakdown:
> As reported before, the July 9th WWE RAW Supershow scored a 3.17 cable rating with 4.42 million viewers.
> In the segment breakdown, the opener with AJ Lee, CM Punk and Daniel Bryan with Sheamus vs. Jack Swagger lost 74,000 viewers. Christian and Tyson Kidd vs. Tensai and Dolph Ziggler plus the Michael Cole vs. Jerry Lawler angle lost 416,000 viewers. Brodus Clay vs. Drew McIntyre plus the Stephanie McMahon video promoting the 1,000th RAW gained 102,000 viewers.
> *Kane and John Cena vs. Chris Jericho and Big Show gained 66,000 viewers, a low gain for that time period in the show. The match did about a gain of 280,000 at 10pm, which is lower than usual, but then lost those viewers when the match went longer and through a second commercial break.*
> Sin Cara vs. Heath Slater and the return of Bob Backlund lost 21,000 viewers. Lawler vs. Cole and the reveal of Hornswoggle as the Anonymous General Manager lost another 21,000 viewers.
> It appears AJ's tease from earlier that she would be leaving with her future husband did the trick as far as the rating goes. The overrun following AJ and Punk vs. Daniel Bryan and Eve Torres gained 711,000 viewers - which is normal but it should be noted that this was done without John Cena in the segment and with CM Punk and Daniel Bryan, who have never moved ratings big.
> There was a huge increase in Male Teens watching the overrun that wasn't there for the rest of the show. Male Teens hovered between a 2.7 and 3.2 rating for the entire show but jumped up to a 4.4 rating for the overrun.
> 
> 
> Raw 7/2/12 breakdown:
> In the segment breakdown, David Otunga, Cody Rhodes, Titus O’Neil and Darren Young vs. Santino Marella, R-Truth, Kofi Kingston and Christian lost 467,000 viewers from the opener. The big surprise of the show was Alberto Del Rio’s beatdown on Sin Cara, which gained 584,000 viewers – a 14% growth among teenage boys and 23% among Men 18-49.
> The Paul Heyman interview and first part of Sheamus and AJ Lee vs. Vickie Guerrero and Dolph Ziggler lost 383,000 viewers. *The match itself plus Heath Slater vs. Doink the Clown gained 234,000 viewers – a weak number for the 10pm timeslot. * Diamond Dallas Page laying out Heath Slater and Kane vs. Big Show in a No DQ Match lost 69,000 viewers, which is very good for that time period of the show. So far out of the recent Legend returns, Vader’s return has done the best by far.
> Tensai vs. Tyson Kidd lost 307,000 viewers while the main event with John Cena and CM Punk vs. Daniel Bryan and CM Punk gained 684,000 viewers and peaked with a 3.47 rating for the overrun.
> 
> 
> Raw 6/25/12 breakdown:
> As noted before, the June 25th WWE RAW Supershow scored a 3.29 cable rating with 4.72 million viewers.
> In the segment breakdown, CM Punk vs. Kane vs. Daniel Bryan lost just 30,000 viewers from the opener. Big Show vs. Brodus Clay gained 50,000 viewers while Santino Marella vs. Jack Swagger lost 167,000 viewers. * John Cena's interview and the return of Chris Jericho gained 803,000 viewers for a 3.69 quarter rating - up from the usual 10pm growth this year.*
> Psycho Sid's return didn't see the same success that Vader's did as Sid's win over Heath Slater lost 607,000 viewers. Dolph Ziggler vs. Alberto Del Rio in the #1 contender's match gained 202,000 viewers while the Divas Bikini Battle Royal lost 238,000 viewers. The main event with Chris Jericho vs. John Cena gained 567,000 viewers for a 3.57 overrun rating.
> 
> 
> Raw 6/18/12 breakdown:
> 
> As noted before, the June 18th WWE RAW Supershow scored a 3.40 cable rating with 4.97 million viewers. This is the best rating RAW has done since the day after WrestleMania 27. In the segment breakdown, CM Punk and Sheamus vs. Daniel Bryan and Kane lost 241,000 viewers from the opener that started strong. Dolph Ziggler vs. Jack Swagger lost 22,000 more viewers. *The segment with Paul Heyman and Triple H gained 559,000 more viewers for a show-high 3.74 quarter rating.* Santino Marella vs. Alberto Del Rio lost 711,000 viewers. The segment with Heath Slater, Wendi Richter, Cyndi Lauper and Roddy Piper lost 12,000 more viewers. John Cena vs. David Otunga and John Laurinaitis in the main event gained 573,000 viewers to a 3.74 quarter rating.
> 
> Raw 6/11/12 breakdown:
> 
> As noted before, the June 11th WWE RAW Supershow did a 3.23 cable rating with 4.65 million viewers over three-hours. The usual two hours did a 3.46 rating with 4.99 million viewers.
> The show opened with Vince McMahon returning at a 2.88 rating, well above the usual start of a three-hour RAW. Tensai vs. Sheamus lost 415,000 viewers while Tensai attacking Sakomoto, Big Show knocking out R-Truth and Vince’s segment with Teddy Long and John Laurinaitis gained 146,000 viewers.
> Santino Marella and Layla vs. Beth Phoenix and Ricardo Rodriguez and the backstage segment with Vince and Daniel Bryan gained 98,000 viewers. Bryan’s segment with CM Punk, Kane and AJ Lee gained 978,000 viewers for the 9pm time slot, RAW’s usual start time.
> The Christian vs. Dolph Ziggler vs. The Great Khali vs. Jack Swagger match and Ryback’s squash gained 4,000 viewers. The backstage segment with Vince and Hornswoggle making fun of Jim Ross lost 145,000 viewers. *Big Show vs. Kofi Kingston in the cage match at 10pm gained 320,000 viewers for a 3.59 quarter rating.*
> Curt Hawkins vs. Sin Cara lost 450,000 viewers while Vader vs. Heath Slater gained 324,000 more viewers, an impressive gain for that time in the show. The main event with AJ and Punk vs. Bryan and Kane lost 19,000 viewers. The final segment with Vince, Laurinaitis, John Cena and Big Show gained 721,000 viewers for a 3.99 quarter rating in the overrun.
> 
> 
> Raw 6/4/12 breakdown:
> --RAW open to a strong 3.27 quarter
> --Michael Cole begging John Laurinaitis not to put him in a match with John Cena and the beginning of Sheamus vs, Dolph Ziggler lost 753,000 viewers. YIKES.
> --Finish of Sheamus-Ziggler and Alberto Del Rio and Ricardo Rodriguez attacking Sheamus post-match, along with Sin Cars vs. Hunico gained 302,000 viewers.
> --Ryback's RAW debut and demolition of two jobbers lost 298,000 viewers.
> *--CM Punk vs. Kane gained 340,000 viewers in the 10pm hour. First half did a 2.93 and finish did a 3.02 rating, which is higher than what Punk has recently done. *
> --WWE Tag Team Champions Kofi Kingston and R-Truth vs. Tyler Reks and Curt Hawkins lost 646,000 viewers.
> --John Cena vs. (no longer Lord) Tensai gained 514,000 viewers in the 10:45pm quarter. Quite a bit for that time.
> --Cena vs. Cole gained 299,000 viewers for a 3.14 quarter for the overrun.
> 
> (can't find 5/28)
> 
> Raw 5/21/12 breakdown:
> As noted before, the May 21st WWE RAW Supershow scored a 3.03 cable rating with 4.16 million viewers.
> In the segment breakdown, the John Cena and John Laurinaitis opener did well with a 3.40 quarter rating. Big Show's explanation and Cena vs. David Otunga lost 139,000 viewers. Santino Marella's angle with Ricardo Rodriguez lost 521,000 viewers and Alberto Del Rio vs. Randy Orton lost 252,000 more. *Kane vs. Daniel Bryan gained 390,000 viewers for a 3.01 quarter rating.* This isn't a great number for that timeslot but a good showing for a segment with CM Punk and Bryan.
> Jinder Mahal vs. Christian lost 259,000 viewers while Kelly Kelly vs. Beth Phoenix gained 44,000 viewers. John Cena and Sheamus vs. Tensai, Jack Swagger and Dolph Ziggler in the Lumberjack Match gained 878,000 viewers for a 3.49 quarter rating in the overrun. The main event ratings went from a 2.3 to 2.5 in Male Teens, 2.4 to 3.1 in Males 18-49 but didn't show any real gains among females.
> 
> 
> Raw 5/14/12 breakdown:
> 
> As noted before, the May 14th WWE RAW Supershow did a 2.95 cable rating with 4.22 million viewers. The show did a 1.9 in male teenagers, which could be an all-time low in that demographic – down 24% from the previous week. In the segment breakdown, the opener with Paul Heyman and Triple H started strong with a 3.32 quarter rating. CM Punk and Santino Marella vs. Cody Rhodes and Daniel Bryan plus the Beth Phoenix vs. Alicia Fox match lost 601,000 viewers. John Cena’s Make-A-Wish segment lost 370,000 viewers and did the lowest rated quarter in months with a 2.64 rating. *Kane vs. Big Show and John Laurinaitis firing Show gained 1,033,000 viewers for a 3.37 quarter rating.* This was one of the best 10pm gains of the year for RAW. Brodus Clay, R-Truth and Kofi Kingston vs. The Miz, Dolph Ziggler and Jack Swagger lost 996,000 viewers. Randy Orton vs. Chris Jericho gained 108,000 viewers and the closing segment with Cena and Laurinaitis gained 990,000 viewers for a 3.43 overrun ...
> 
> Raw 5/7/12 breakdown:
> As noted before, the May 7th WWE RAW Supershow from Greensboro, North Carolina scored a 3.01 cable rating with 4.30 million viewers. The first quarter-rating was a 3.50 but things fell apart from there. In the segment breakdown, Big Show vs. Cody Rhodes lost 378,000 viewers and Kofi Kingstonvs. Dolph Ziggler lost 465,000 more viewers. Kelly Kelly and Layla vs. Maxine and Natalya lost another 207,000 viewers. *Sheamus and Randy Orton vs. Chris Jericho and Alberto Del Rio at the top of the hour gained 191,000 viewers, which is weak for that timeslot – doing a 2.89 quarter-rating.* The Miz vs. Brodus Clay gained 55,000 viewers in what is usually a losing segment. Paul Heyman’s return gained 123,000 viewers. CM Punk vs. Daniel Bryan and Lord Tensai in the overrun actually lost viewers – 105,000 for a 2.94 rating.


So the 10PM gains before Raw moved to 3 hours were as follows:

7/16: 282,000
7/9: 66,000/280,000
7/2: 234,000
6/25: 803,000
6/18: 559,000
6/11: 320,000
6/4: 340,000
5/21: 390,000
5/14: 1,033,000
5/7: 191,000

Now I don't know the numbers for each of those slots, just the gains (if someone wants to fill in on that, go ahead). Only 3 of those 10 did more than a 400,000 gain. The 1,000,000 gain was John Laurinaitis firing Big Show. The 500,000 gain was for a Heyman/HHH segment, and the 800,000 gain was for Cena/Jericho.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

The highest point of the night was the Triple H retirement stuff which is expected as he is still a massive draw with casuals. Then the second highest point was the Miz vs John Cena match at the beginning of the 2nd hour. The third highest point was the CM Punk vs Jerry Lawler main event. last week the Punk, Cena and Lawler stuff was the highest point of RAW in the overrun. 

The lowest point of RAW was Zack Ryder vs David Otunga match in the third hour, the second lowest was Vickie and AJ stuff but RAW is usually gaining viewers in the 1st hour so its normal for it to start gaining slowly. The third lowest was surprisingly the Sheamus and Randy Orton tag team match against Ziggler and Alberto Del Rio in the third hour.

Edit: The Ryback/Swagger match and Natalya vs Layla would be the lowest point of RAW in the first hour, then Zack Ryder vs Otunga in the third hour would be the second lowest and then third lowest the AJ segment in the 1st hour.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

In addition to my last point and to drive the point home about the 10PM slot and how overall numbers should be looked at over the gains, here are the gains for each 10pm slot, the rating (since they breakdowns don't say the viewer numbers) and who/what was the highlight of the segment for this year:

10PM Slot statistics:
8/27: 257,000 (3.51)- HHH
8/20: 199,000 (3.32)-Kane-Ryder/Bryan-Miz plus Cena/Punk
8/13: 247,000 (2.94)- Cena-Punk/Show-Bryan
8/6: 232,000 (3.45)- Lesnar/Heyman/HBK/HHH
7/30: 51,000 (3.24)- Jericho-Christian/Miz-Ziggler
7/23: 413,000 (323,000+90,000) (??)- Heyman/HHH/Stephanie/Lesnar
7/16: 282,000 (??)- Miz-Eve/Bryan-AJ
7/9: 66,000/280,000 (??)- Cena-Kane/Jericho-Big Show
7/2: 234,000 (??)- Sheamus-AJ/Dolph-Vickie and Slater/Doink
6/25: 803,000 (3.69)- Cena/Jericho
6/18: 559,000 (3.74)- Heyman/HHH
6/11: 320,000 (3.59)- Show/Kofi
6/4: 340,000 (2.93-3.02)- Punk/Kane
5/21: 390,000 (3.01)- Kane/Bryan w/ Punk (?)
5/14: 1,033,000 (3.37)- Kane/Show/Laurinaitis
5/7: 191,000 (2.89)- Sheamus-Orton/Jericho-Del Rio
4/30: -68,000 (??)- Orton/Swagger
4/23: 270,000 (3.63)- Punk/Jericho
4/16: 400,000 (??)- Cena
4/9: 379,000 (3.19)- Punk/Jericho
4/2: 148,000 (3.6)- Punk/Henry (got the rating from posts recently in this thread... not sure if accurate, but if it is, then it's a huge success)
3/26: 132,000 (2.96)- Punk/Christian/Jericho + Clay/Hawkins
3/19: 327,000 (3.2)- Cena/Henry w/Rock appearance
3/12: 869,000 (3.73)- Taker/HBK
3/5: 205,000 (3.20)- Punk-Sheamus/Bryan-Jericho
2/27: 388,000 (3.09)- Cena/Miz
2/20: 1,122,000 (3.85)- Taker/HHH
2/13: 822,000 (3.56)- HBK/HHH
2/6: 94,000 (??)- Punk/Jericho
1/30: 219,000 (3.54)- Punk/Bryan
1/23: 609,000 (??)- Kane/Ryder
1/16: 526,000 (??)- Over the top Challenge
1/9: 128,000 (3.0)- Punk/Swagger
1/2: 325,000 (??)- Cena/Miz

The one's with (??) didn't have ratings listed).

Only one loss and that was Orton/Swagger. 

The highest rated segment was Taker/HHH. Followed by Heyman/HHH and Taker/HBK. The lowest out of the ones I have numbers for is Sheamus/Orton vs. Jericho/Del Rio from a week after the Raw after ER.

But let's take this little bit for example:

6/25: 803,000 (3.69)- Cena/Jericho
6/18: 559,000 (3.74)- Heyman/HHH

One had a higher gain, the other had a higher rating. Which is better (not in quality but in terms of financial/ratings/etc.)? I'd say Heyman/HHH. Of course then you have Taker/HHH gaining huge in the 10PM slot, the biggest gain of the year for the 10PM slot and the highest quarter rating (not counting Raw 1,000 obviously). 

Once again, I don't know the viewer numbers, but just thought it would be interesting to share.

I'll also do this for the overruns for the fuck of it.


----------



## kokepepsi

Look at the losses before each 10pm segment.
That is why it's a bit unfair to look at the rating or judge one person on the entire rating since it is the sum of all the quarters. If Punk and Jericho followed 2 huge losses in viewers then I would say their gain/rating is more impressive. 

Then again you could make the argument that the only reason they got 800k viewers was because of the huge loses before the 10pm segment


Anyways


> Only one loss and that was Orton/Swagger.


LOL


----------



## #Mark

Taker is still a monster draw.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

And here's for the overrun:

8/27: 479,000 (3.35)- Punk/Lawler
8/20: 446,000 (3.36)- Punk/Cena/Lawler
8/13: 817,000 (3.44)- Lesnar/HBK
8/6: 345,000 (3.27)- Cena/Bryan
7/30: 1,181,000 (3.86)- Cena/Show w/ Punk 
7/23: 389,000 (4.43)- Punk/Cena w/ Show-Rock
7/16: 719,000 (3.99)- Punk/Show w/ Cena 
7/9: 711,000 (??)- Punk-AJ/Bryan-Eve
7/2: 684,000 (3.47)- Cena-Punk/Bryan-Show-
6/25: 567,000 (3.57)- Cena/Jericho
6/18: 573,000 (3.74)- Cena/Laurniatis-Otunga
6/11: 721,000 (3.99)- Vince/Laurniatis/Cena/Show
6/4: 299,000 (3.14)- Cena/Cole
5/21: 878,000 (3.49)- John Cena and Sheamus vs. Tensai, Jack Swagger and Dolph Ziggler in the Lumberjack Match
5/14: 990,000 (3.43)- Cena/Laurinaitis
5/7: -105,000 (2.94)- Punk/Bryan-Tensai
4/30: 578,000 (3.49)- Cena/Laurinaitis/Tensai
4/23: 873,000 (3.83)- Lesnar/Cena
4/16: 319,000 (3.42)- Cena/Tensai
4/9: 301,000 (3.42)- Cena/Otunga w/ Lesnar
4/2: 1,036,000 (3.9)- Lesnar Return
3/26: 626,000 (3.57)- Rock/Cena
3/19: 597,000 (3.32)- Taker/HHH/HBK
3/12: 509,000 (3.51)- Rock concert
3/5: 763,000 (3.57)- Rock/Cena
2/27: 643,000 (3.53)- Rock
2/20: 601,000 (3.31)- Battle Royal for WWE Title match at WM
2/13: 505,000 (3.14)- Cena/Ryder/Kane
2/6: 443,000 (3.42)- Jericho vs. Punk vs. The Miz vs. R-Truth vs. Dolph Ziggler vs. Kofi Kingston 
1/30: 753,000 (??)- HHH/Laurnaitis/Undertaker
1/23: 761,000 (3.54)- Punk/Laurnaitis
1/16: 817,000 (3.32)- Punk, Bryan and Chris Jericho vs. Mark Henry, David Otunga and Ziggler plus the segment with Punk, Foley and John Laurinaitis
1/9: 640,000 (2.84)- Cena/Ziggler plus Cena/Kane/Ryder parking lot
1/2: 543,000 (3.26)- Cena/Kane

One loss which was Punk vs. Bryan/Tensai. Not good in the slightest but if I remember correctly Punk/Tensai was advertised and Bryan was only put in as the match was about to start. And Punk/Tensai had no business happening anyway.

Highest besides Raw 1,000 was a tie between Punk/Show with Cena teasing a cash-in on Raw 999 and the Vince/Laurinaits/Cena/Show segment before NWO.

Lowest rating was for 1/9/12, and lowest gain was Cena/Cole 6/4.



> Look at the losses before each 10pm segment.
> That is why it's a bit unfair to look at the rating or judge one person on the entire rating since it is the sum of all the quarters. If Punk and Jericho followed 2 huge losses in viewers then I would say their gain/rating is more impressive.
> 
> Then again you could make the argument that the only reason they got 800k viewers was because of the huge loses before the 10pm segment


Yeah, there's no perfect way to determine who draws what and if it was a big success or not. If a big gain comes after a big loss, people will say it's because of the big loss. If a big gain comes after a number of gains, people will say it's just people tuning in some by some. There will always be some reason why the rating wasn't a success. Even the Rock/Cena stuff could get ragged on for being lower than the Taker/HBK/HHH stuff which were in the 10PM slot. But of course, when Taker/HBK/HHH was in the overrun, it did worse than any of the Rock/Cena stuff. 

So all in all, it's just a giant headache.


----------



## Loader230

> *Highest besides Raw 1,000 was a tie between Punk/Show with Cena* teasing a cash-in on Raw 999 and the Vince/Laurinaits/Cena/Show segment before NWO


No, it was John cena as the MITB winner. Punk/Show match had a low gain boosted once Cena entered. 



> C.M. Punk vs. Big Show gained 325,000 viewers and the post-match with Cena teasing cashing in the briefcase gained 719,000 viewers.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Loader230 said:


> No, it was John cena as the MITB winner. Punk/Show match had a low gain boosted once Cena entered.


Wrong, it's not a low gain. Punk/Show started in Q8 and went pretty far into the overrun. 300k in a random quarter is very impressive, that's all Punk/Show. The overrun gaining 700k is Punk, Show and Cena. Overall, that match with the Cena promo gained 1 million viewers.


----------



## Rock316AE

From the quote earlier, that was in April about the gains and overall audience:


Rock316AE said:


> Think about it like this, if Vince was in the ring promoting a Austin segment in 98, Austin comes out, do his promo, do a huge gain, then the Blue Meanie comes out for the top of the hour timeslot and gain another 5k because it's almost impossible to lose in that TV slot for any show(*almost*, like Punk proved in the past), you want to give Blue Meanie a credit for a big quarter? you know the answer.


The point of that is when people pretending that X person drew Y number of people for the segment when in fact, he had nothing to do with it because the audience was there before his segment and a bigger X would have done a bigger number than he did in Z time slot. There are people who bring the overall up and there's people who are just "there" taking a TV spot in that specific show. Which is why you can't call a 148k gain in the top of the hour a huge success for the people in it even if it did a 5.0.

Anyway, in the peak years, the pattern was always a huge gain in the second quarter, a complete opposite from the pattern that started in mid-late 2010 that this spot is mostly a killer.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Okay, the gain was for the overrun and it was Punk/Show w/ Cena announcing cash in. Punk/Show went into the overrun, which is why it's included. It's speculation it was all on Cena cashing in, granted it probably was for the most part. But Punk/Show gained 300,000 and then with the overrun I'm sure without Cena they would've gained another 200,000-300,000.


----------



## Loader230

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Wrong, it's not a low gain. Punk/Show started in Q8 and went pretty far into the overrun. 300k in a random quarter is very impressive, that's all Punk/Show. The overrun gaining 700k is Punk, Show and Cena. Overall, that match with the Cena promo gained 1 million viewers.


How is it impressive when Cena/Tensai main event match gained 520k only a couple of weeks before that? Not to mention Cena/Show gain over 1 million. In comparison, Punk/tensai match actually lost viewers.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Loader230 said:


> How is it impressive when Cena/Tensai main event match gained 520k only a couple of weeks before that? Not to mention Cena/Show gain over 1 million. In comparison, Punk/tensai match actually lost viewers.


If you read my post, it's impressive for a random quarter. The gains you mentioned were all in the overrun. For Show vs. Punk to gain that much in Q8 is impressive. The 700k gain was for the overrun.


----------



## Loader230

Cena/Tensai was not the overrun. It was Q8.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Rock316AE said:


> From the quote earlier, that was in April about the gains and overall audience:
> 
> 
> The point of that is when people pretending that X person drew Y number of people for the segment when in fact, he had nothing to do with it because the audience was there before his segment and a bigger X would have done a bigger number than he did in Z time slot. There are people who bring the overall up and there's people who are just "there" taking a TV spot in that specific show. Which is why you can't call a 148k gain in the top of the hour a huge success for the people in it even if it did a 5.0.
> 
> Anyway, in the peak years, the pattern was always a huge gain in the second quarter, a complete opposite from the pattern that started in mid-late 2010 that this spot is mostly a killer.


But at the same time, people would've tuned out if they didn't want to see the following segment, and people wouldn't of watched. If people kept watching for Blue Meanie, then by all means give Blue Meanie credit for keeping the interest. If he's with Austin, at least he wasn't an anti-draw.

I get your point, but it's just as flawed as basing things based off of the overall number. Raw 1,000 proves this. There was no massive gains besides the 9pm from what I remember, but even the lowest quarter hour can be considered a success to some degree as they kept more than the average number of people watching (average compared to an ordinary Raw, not Raw 1,000).

Of course if a segment loses 800,000 viewers, even if the overall rating was still high it could be considered a success or failure depending on how you look at it. There are so many different variables to consider when saying a segment is a success or not. Punk/Henry gained, and KEPT the viewers from the previous segment. That's why it's a success. Had it lost 800,000 viewers, it wouldn't have had that high of a rating. 

But it's all just a giant mind fuck. You have to consider everything and every reason the viewers might've tuned in. Even Punk on commentary for the Show/Cena main event, which I know you would never do. I mentioned this but Punk's presence surely added to the match. Do I think Cena/Show would've been a success without Punk? Absolutely I do. Do I think Punk added to the success? Yes I do, and I most certainly don't think he deterred on it. It wasn't like he was just sitting on a chair at ringside. He was doing commentary, and some people may have found that a reason to watch the match.

But yeah... a whole lot of stuff to consider. I'm not saying your view is wrong, just that it's flawed (and I'm not saying mine isn't flawed), but it all just goes in a circle.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Ah okay, I thought you were talking about the Cena/Tensai match that main evented. This was the one with the Cole angle. It's an impressive gain, but the rating/viewership was low. So nothing that impressive about it, really. The overrun with Cole gained another 200k and only did a 3.1. Punk/Show had an impressive gain as well as an impressive viewership in Q8.


----------



## Punked Up

Ryback's first time losing viewers, right? Who cares, he's still awesome and that wasn't too many. Just have him keep calling out more guys and get like 3 wins a night. See how that does.

Lawler vs. Punk did well, Punk cut a nice promo to build it at the beginning.

I'm at a loss for why Orton/Sheamus/Del Rio/Ziggler lost. Seems like that would get 250k.

Bryan brings in DAH RATINGS like the GOAT he is. (slow applause).


----------



## KO Bossy

Punked Up said:


> Bryan brings in DAH RATINGS like the GOAT he is. (slow applause).


Please, let's leave the blind Bryan fandom out of this thread. I'd prefer not to vomit.


----------



## TeamRocketGrunt

dolph ziggler's drawing abilities in full view


----------



## Hazaq

Rock316AE said:


> Surprised to see Lawler/Punk doing below average gain with a cage match. I would expect a much bigger gain from a hyped stipulation Jerry Lawler match in the main event. But Punk even last week with Cena, did a below average gain so I guess that's as far as you can go with him in a major role in the segment. Not close to what Lawler did with Miz IIRC.
> 
> HHH doing the biggest is expected, it was by far the biggest attraction on the show with the most hype which is why the random tag lost that much after that. *I imagine that the HHH promo also helped the match before because his segment started minutes before the top of the hour.*


This is what I was wondering when I saw this breakdown. I checked the segment time and as KO bossy as already noted in this thread earlier, HHH segment started at 9:50. Since Meltzer takes the entire quarter as a whole, he has credited the gain to Bryan/Truth match which was only 6 mins. The gain was actually two quarters back to back. Not that I'm complaining about it or anything since thats how it has always been reported by newsletters. Just pointing it out. 

Anyways, Not a bad rating for 3 hours RAW but its gonna get worse, really worse in two weeks because of the lack of starpower on the show. Punk fans better be prepared for this lol.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Jesus Meltzer said on his radio that the Orton/Seamus vs Del Rio/ Ziggler match was designed to keep viewers watching because it has Orton and Sheamus in it.

Yeah. it somewhat failed then.


----------



## D.M.N.

I absolutely hate how websites (presuming Wrestling Observer in the first place) dump different quarters together to create a gain/loss and to spin it.

What's the point of that? It's happened twice in this week's quarter hours.


----------



## murder

Orton comes back hot and gains viewers every week. Then taps to ADR, and the monday after, he loses viewers. Not hard to figure out what happened there.


----------



## Starbuck

Fucking hell this shit got technical in a hurry. DAT TRIPLE H WIT DEM TEARS.

EDIT - He should also get the credit for the previous quarter too imo since he was in 10 minutes of the 15. *DMN*, where you at with your weekly thing lol?


----------



## D.M.N.

Starbuck said:


> Fucking hell this shit got technical in a hurry. DAT TRIPLE H WIT DEM TEARS.
> 
> EDIT - He should also get the credit for the previous quarter too imo since he was in 10 minutes of the 15. *DMN*, where you at with your weekly thing lol?


It's boring and stale. The ratings _and_ the product. Always between 4 million and 5 million. As proven:

Q1 - 4.170m
Q2 - 4.010m
Q3 - 4.010m
Q4 - 4.449m
Q5 - 4.974m
Q6 - 4.850m
Q7 - 4.636m
Q8 - 4.868m
Q9 - 5.125m
Q10 - 4.549m
Q11 - 4.418m
Q12 - 4.897m
Overrun - 4.897m

Okay, I lied. Sort of. But it is a sad state of affairs when none of your current roster can do wonders ratings wise. The only credit goes to Daniel Bryan and Damien Sandow for doing well in hour 2 after Cena versus Miz, a 300k drop through that hour is quite impressive.

Unless WWE start to take risks and do things outside of the box, that's how it will be until December time. I'd like to be proven wrong, though.


----------



## Starbuck

Well what do you expect lol? When they do something special (RAW 1000) they get special results. When it's regular weekly shows they get regular weekly ratings. I suspect things will take quite the hit once MNF starts pretty soon. One thing that does stand out though is that the second hour did rather well here. From Q5 to Q9 they were flying and even got 1 segment over 5 million. If you cut the first hour out and put the good parts of that with the good parts of the third hour and we'd have an overall much better show and probably a much better rating for WWE to boast over too. Meh. Things always go a bit flat this time of year until December/Jan really. I don't think this year will be any different.


----------



## D.M.N.

Saturday Morning Slam did rather well, over 1 million viewers and a 0.7 rating: http://www.pwinsider.com/article/71543/wwe-touts-debut-success-of-saturday-morning-slam.html?p=1



> The series premiere of WWE Saturday Morning Slam on August 25 (CW, 10-10:30am) was Saturday morning’s (7am-12pm) most watched program on CW among total viewers and the following kids demos: Kids under 18, Kids 2-5, Kids 2-11, Kids 6-11, Kids 9-14, Boys under 18, Boys 2-5, Boys 2-11, Boys 6-11, Girls under 18, Girls 2-11, Girls 6-11, Girls 9-14 and Female Teens (F12-17).
> 
> It delivered a 0.7 U.S. household rating / 2 share in 747,000 TV households with 1,126,000 total viewers (persons 2+). This household rating is up +75% versus the prior four week time period performance which averaged a 0.4 U.S. household rating / 1 share in 456,000 TV households with 675,000 total viewers.
> 
> The top programs among total viewers during the Vortexx block were:
> 
> WWE Saturday Morning [email protected] (1,126,000 viewers / 0.7 HH rating)
> Justice League Unlimited @9:30am (1,003,000 viewers / 0.6 HH rating)
> Dragon Ball Z Kai @10:30am (841,000 viewers / 0.5 HH rating)
> Iron Man: Armored Adventures @9am (802,000 viewers / 0.6 HH rating)
> Power Rangers Lost Galaxy @8am (662,000 viewers / 0.4 HH rating)
> Yu-Gi-Oh! @11am (661,000 viewers / 0.4 HH rating)
> Yu-Gi-Oh Zexal @8:30am (631,000 viewers / 0.4 HH rating)
> Rescue Heroes @7:30am (519,000 viewers / 0.4 HH rating)
> Yu-Gi-Oh Zexal @11:30am (494,000 viewers / 0.3 HH rating)
> Cubix @7am (457,000 viewers / 0.3 HH rating)
> 
> WWE Saturday Morning Slam was CW’s most watched Saturday morning program since 3/10/12 (Dragon Ball Z Kai @10:30am / 1,140,000 viewers).
> WWE Saturday Morning Slam was CW’s most watched Saturday morning program in the time period since 2/25/12 (Dragon Ball Z Kai / 1,196,000 viewers).
> WWE Saturday Morning Slam was the most watched entertainment program on broadcast TV Saturday Morning among total viewers.
> 
> WWE Saturday Morning Slam was watched by more viewers than the following 10-10:30am programs: The Green Lantern on Cartoon Network, Noodle and Doodle on NBC, Little Bear on Nick Jr., Doodlebops on CBS, Pair of Kings on Disney XD and Power Rangers on Nicktoons.
> During the 10-10:30am time-period, WWE Saturday Morning Slam was watched by more Boys under 18 (including the Boys 2-11 and Boys 6-11 demos) than every program on broadcast TV, Nick Jr., Disney XD and Nicktoons.
> 
> WWE Saturday Morning Slam was watched by more Boys under 18 (including the Boys 6-11 demo) than every program on broadcast TV, Nick Jr., Nicktoons, and Disney XD.
> WWE Saturday Morning Slam was watched by more Kids 6-11 than every program on broadcast TV, Nick Jr. or Nicktoons.
> WWE Saturday Morning Slam was watched by more Kids under 18 than every program on broadcast TV or Nicktoons.
> 
> WWE Saturday Morning Slam is part of the television premiere of Vortexx on The CW, a Saturday morning kids’ television block. This marks the first time, since 2001, WWE has a program in a kids’ time slot and reinforces WWE’s commitment to kid-friendly entertainment.


----------



## uknoww

D.M.N. said:


> Saturday Morning Slam did rather well, over 1 million viewers and a 0.7 rating: http://www.pwinsider.com/article/71543/wwe-touts-debut-success-of-saturday-morning-slam.html?p=1


look at dragon ball z bringing in DEM RATINGZZZ


----------



## Vyed

D.M.N. said:


> Saturday Morning Slam did rather well, over 1 million viewers and a 0.7 rating: http://www.pwinsider.com/article/71543/wwe-touts-debut-success-of-saturday-morning-slam.html?p=1


Posted this in Smackdown section earlier

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/smackdown/634043-wwe-saturday-slam-apparently-big-ratings-success.html

Big rating for a morning show.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

A WWE Z show does a better rating that Impact Wrestling.


----------



## DesolationRow

The-Rock-Says said:


> A WWE Z show does a better rating that Impact Wrestling.


:lmao

Good rating overall but of course Trips brought in those viewers with those tears. DA GAME.


----------



## Choke2Death

So WWE are so desperate that Hunter cries for ratings? :lol

As if Big Show doing it was not enough!


----------



## DesolationRow

Choke2Death said:


> So WWE are so desperate that Hunter cries for ratings? :lol
> 
> As if Big Show doing it was not enough!


Vince did it last summer, and just you wait until Jerry Lawler sheds some tears over what that mean ol' CM Punk did to him.


----------



## Choke2Death

DesolationRow said:


> Vince did it last summer, and just you wait until Jerry Lawler sheds some tears over what that mean ol' CM Punk did to him.


Well, we all know the real reason they cry.  It surely ain't because they get fired or tap out, but because they are crying to the fans, asking them to watch their declining product to keep the ratings in the acceptable border!


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Crying=Ratings.

What if Hogan, Rock, and Austin were all in the same ring and they started crying? I think nielsen boxes would explode.

Think we also need a Mark Henry crying segment... only not backstage on a wwe.com interview, but live on camera in the ring.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

True, Big Shows crying segment with Ace did over 1 million viewers.


----------



## Choke2Death

Obis said:


> Crying=Ratings.
> 
> What if Hogan, Rock, and Austin were all in the same ring and they started crying? I think nielsen boxes would explode.
> 
> Think we also need a Mark Henry crying segment... only not backstage on a wwe.com interview, but live on camera in the ring.





Warrior said:


> True, Big Shows crying segment with Ace did over 1 million viewers.


Now picture the ratings Mark Henry will get if he starts crying! I'm guessing around 10 million viewers because he's a ratings machine.


----------



## dxbender

Choke2Death said:


> Now picture the ratings Mark Henry will get if he starts crying! I'm guessing around 10 million viewers because he's a ratings machine.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekzZYIZMb48

^Though like many things, WWE just made it a wwe.com exclusive.



With school starting back, I wonder what NEXT WEEKs Raw will get in terms of ratings. Cause everyone will start getting back into their regular non-summer routine, and for Raw, that could lead to more(or less) people watching Raw.


----------



## DesolationRow

Raw is about to take a massive hit. Labor Day tomorrow, Monday Night Football beginning the next week for seventeen weeks.

Can't wait for the endless wailing and gnashing of teeth.


----------



## Huganomics

dxbender said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekzZYIZMb48
> 
> ^Though like many things, WWE just made it a wwe.com exclusive.


*grabs tissue box* What a legend.


----------



## Rock316AE

BREAKING NEWS: Big Dave got his Twittah Machine. Already SHOOTIN'(on HHH)

Big Dave Meltzer at @davemeltzerWON:



> I wonder if we can trick HHH into thinking Roy Jones is fighting on the 22nd in Toronto so he can walk to the ring and hold up the belt.





> Then on the next Monday we can get another story about his magic cast.


RAW is going below 2.8 this week IMO. Nothing major or attractive on the show.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Dave doesn't have Twitter.


----------



## Rock316AE

The-Rock-Says said:


> Dave doesn't have Twitter.


Legit. Bryan:


> Big Dave joins Twitter @davemeltzerwon -- no, seriously!


----------



## Starbuck

Choke2Death said:


> *So WWE are so desperate that Hunter cries for ratings?* :lol
> 
> As if Big Show doing it was not enough!


:lmao :lmao :lmao 

Vince has cried, Big Show cried, Hunter cried. I guess Cena's up next then lol.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Link me up. I can't find it on Twitter


----------



## Rock316AE

The-Rock-Says said:


> Link me up. I can't find it on Twitter


http://www.f4wonline.com/more/more-top-stories/3-news/27303-dave-joins-twitter


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Thanks. This is great news for the world. Big David on Twitter.


----------



## DesolationRow

You join Twitter, your body is replaced by the alien pod people replicant body. Sorry to see Dave become... UnDave.

Now he'll eat steak and eggs for breakfast every morning and come to Washington, D.C. in a spacecraft looking like Richard Kiel.


----------



## NearFall

Starbuck said:


> :lmao :lmao :lmao
> 
> Vince has cried, Big Show cried, Hunter cried. I guess Cena's up next then lol.





Choke2Death said:


> So WWE are so desperate that Hunter cries for ratings? :lol
> 
> As if Big Show doing it was not enough!


There will eventually be a compilation episode. Looking back at the top tear-inducing moments. With backstage interviews of guys in tears remembering those moments. Henry Show and Trips will have a triple threat first-tear match as main-event. :vince


----------



## Starbuck

I love you, pop.

I'm just sorry he borked your arm, son.


----------



## Choke2Death

Starbuck said:


> :lmao :lmao :lmao
> 
> Vince has cried, Big Show cried, Hunter cried. I guess Cena's up next then lol.


Cena crying will probably up the ratings a little. Then when they want more, Stone Cold, Hogan and The Rock join forces to cry together and the ratings skyrocket. The next step to take will be Mark Henry, who will draw more than all of them combined!


----------



## dxbender

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-and-who-is-it-dating-2012-13-edition/147028/

1.0 rating equals around 1.142 households. Doesn't that mean Raw should be getting in high 3's ratings if they get over 4.5M viewers per show?


----------



## Danjo1986

Punk should do the following to further his character:

1.) Introduce Heyman as his ally

2.) Introduce Dean Ambrose as his dirty work crony.

3.) Throw the WWE Title in the trash and burn it, introduce a new one while running down the crowd for supporting Cena's title.

One of these three things would be awesome in my book.


----------



## HOJO

Punk was on 3 times tonight already. But only acted heel in the 3rd time he was on.


----------



## Creme De La Creme

straightedge891 said:


> Punk was on 3 times tonight already. But only acted heel in the 3rd time he was on.


him interrupting the baby face champion and then walking out of a match because he wanted "a day off" wasn't heelish to you?


----------



## Ether

Danjo1986 said:


> Punk should do the following to further his character:
> 
> *1.) Introduce Heyman as his ally*
> 
> 2.) Introduce Dean Ambrose as his dirty work crony.
> 
> 3.) Throw the WWE Title in the trash and burn it, introduce a new one while running down the crowd for supporting Cena's title.
> 
> One of these three things would be awesome in my book.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Danjo1986 said:


> Punk should do the following to further his character:
> 
> 1.) Introduce Heyman as his ally
> 
> 2.) Introduce Dean Ambrose as his dirty work crony.
> 
> 3.) Throw the WWE Title in the trash and burn it, introduce a new one while running down the crowd for supporting Cena's title.
> 
> One of these three things would be awesome in my book.


I love Ambrose, but some of you guys need to hop off his dick.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Do people actually still think he's 'tweener'? Wake up.


----------



## The GOAT One

Wonder if DEM jeans will bring the ratingz in? unk


----------



## Choke2Death

TheGreatOne. said:


> Wonder if DEM jeans bring the ratingz in? unk


Punk bringing in ratings is like money raining from the sky. unk3


----------



## KO Bossy

Choke2Death said:


> Punk bringing in ratings is like money raining from the sky. unk3


No its not. I wouldn't be dancing in the streets if Punk started becoming a ratings machine. If it was raining money, on the other hand...


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Choke2Death said:


> Punk bringing in ratings is like money raining from the sky. unk3


You are so mad at Punk.


----------



## Choke2Death

jblvdx said:


> You are so mad at Punk.


It was a joke. Relax.


----------



## D.M.N.

Labor Day in America means that you have to wait 24 hours before all hell breaks loose.


----------



## Starbuck

OH NOEZ DELAYED MARK WARZ 

The social media score is down 21% for this week. Take from that what you will. I don't know about it's past indications of ratings outside of Raw 1000.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Where the hell are my damn ratings? I NEED MY RATINGS!!!! 

PUNK ISN'T A DRAW, MY RATINGS WILL PROVE THIS.


----------



## D.M.N.

Hour 1 - 4.308m
Hour 2 - 4.395m
Hour 3 - 3.907m

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-wwe-raw-major-crimes-perception-more/147334/

*Booker T voice* WHAT DA HELL?


----------



## dxbender

How did ratings drop in the 3rd hour...Cena was in main event too.

Or could this be because schools starting back, so their younger audience stopped watching at 10pm or something?


----------



## Starbuck

D.M.N. said:


> Hour 1 - 4.308m
> Hour 2 - 4.395m
> Hour 3 - 3.907m
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-wwe-raw-major-crimes-perception-more/147334/
> 
> *Booker T voice* WHAT DA HELL?


Holy fuck. That's....terrible. Like, really bad. Big time ouch there and they weren't even against MNF. Next week is going to murder them lol. Vince is not a happy bunny tonight. Not a clue what the fuck happened in that third hour. Not a one. The overrun should definitely be interesting this time around.


----------



## Randy Orton Trapper Of The Year

Danjo1986 said:


> Punk should do the following to further his character:
> 
> 1.) Introduce Heyman as his ally
> 
> 2.) Introduce Dean Ambrose as his dirty work crony.
> 
> 3.) Throw the WWE Title in the trash and burn it, introduce a new one while running down the crowd for supporting Cena's title.
> 
> One of these three things would be awesome in my book.


How the fuck...


----------



## KO Bossy

Well I guess this conclusively proves that Punk doesn't draw. :troll


Love seeing a bad rating in an hour when Cena is involved. More proof that he's not the be all, end all Vince would like us to think.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Starbuck said:


> Holy fuck. That's....terrible. Like, really bad. Big time ouch there and they weren't even against MNF. Next week is going to murder them lol. Vince is not a happy bunny tonight. Not a clue what the fuck happened in that third hour. Not a one. The overrun should definitely be interesting this time around.


Well it was on a holiday so it isn't that shocking, lol. The only thing shocking is that hour one and two are similar, and hour 3 is lower than both. What da hayl is right.

Punk leaving after the start of hour 2 = viewers doing the same. But really, the breakdown should be interesting.


----------



## Starbuck

Forgot that it was a holiday actually. I suppose that takes the sting away just a little. Even still, it isn't good at all especially considering what's coming at them next week. That third hour number is rather crazy. I can't even remember what else happened that would turn people away and Cena/ADR was actually a fun match so I'm rather surprised at that. I guess we will just have to wait for the breakdowns to figure it all out.


----------



## Kabraxal

Starbuck said:


> Holy fuck. That's....terrible. Like, really bad. Big time ouch there and they weren't even against MNF. Next week is going to murder them lol. Vince is not a happy bunny tonight. Not a clue what the fuck happened in that third hour. Not a one. The overrun should definitely be interesting this time around.


Outside of the holiday drop, it isn't as bad as I thought it could be. However, I'm shocked at the drop in the third hour given Cena was advertised to be the main attraction at that point and Punk was gone. The breakdown will tell the tale I guess... but I don't think you can blame Punk for this one.. the first two hours didn't do terribly for a holiday and he didn't show up (nor was anyone sure he would) until the last few minutes.

But then I've been saying it hasn't been ONE guy for some time... it's the booking. Why tune in when you are going to get filler crap, inconsistent angles, dropped stories, illogical crap, and a whole slew of different issues? There isn't an incentive to get immersed and emotionally involved in the product WWE is putting out.


----------



## Starbuck

The only thing to really take from this is the fact that they're going to get murdered next week lol. I'll be amazed if they manage to hold 4.4 million for all 3 hours tbh.


----------



## Kabraxal

Starbuck said:


> The only thing to really take from this is the fact that they're going to get murdered next week lol. I'll be amazed if they manage to hold 4.4 million for all 3 hours tbh.


They have a chance to pull a decent number... they just really have to hit a home run with this Heyman/Punk angle and slowly start resurrecting the mid card and build atual stories all around. And keeping Lawler off would be awesome too.. much easier to watch without him.


----------



## totoyotube

Holy F balls, what the hell happened in the 3rd? Cena vs Del Rio, And that terrible AJ and Vickie segment. Did Vickie scare away viewers with her sit in? I mean my god, thats got to be the lowest 3rd hour/2nd hour in a long long time


----------



## Grass420

I stopped watching as soon as CM Punk left, i was like "Screw this"

I honestly find 3 hours way too much.. even without commercials it is too long. 

I usually just read the results and watch the parts i want to see on youtube..

true story, one night I was so exhausted and I was reading the Raw results and I just could not get through reading the results without falling asleep.. I would read some fall asleep, wake up, try reading again but I kept falling asleep.. it was that boring lol


----------



## Choke2Death

Holy fuck. Third hour didn't even reach 4 million. That's really bad for them but I think they deserve these bad ratings based on the results which suggests "HORRIBLE".


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

The first hour was the most watched first hour since raw 1000 I believe.

But yeah. That third hour is clearly wearing people out.


----------



## Choke2Death

The night after SummerSlam got 4,350,000 which I believe remains the highest first hour since July 23.


----------



## NearFall

When Punk leaves so do viewers. unk2

Anyway, hour 3 to watch was terrible and slow, which probably is the main reason. The main event match was quite fun, though I was not interested upon hearing it, maybe some viewers thought the same and didn't care for it.


----------



## Grass420

jblvdx said:


> The first hour was the most watched first hour since raw 1000 I believe.
> 
> But yeah. That third hour is clearly wearing people out.


exactly, less is more..

Even during the attitude era 3 hours was too long,

this is a post I came across on another forum, it is not by me, but I like what the person says about the current state of the WWE

"But the show was dead long time ago, and it's not improving- is this the same plan as the mid-90s, to bore everyone to death and then BAM- come back strong again with another attitude era or something and pull all the fans back in? Or is this for real, where they're just sailing off into the sunset... Vince is getting older, etc etc so the good old days are probably gone and now they're just "maintaining" the show so to speak"


as for the poll in the post, does the WWE draw or do the wrestlers draw? I am sure this has been sound a million times already but "neither draws" haha


----------



## totoyotube

Well it looks like the third hour had the hug it out, AJ segment, Ryder vs slater(really?), and Santino vs cesaro. I see why people left


----------



## mblonde09

Well at least people can't blame Punk for the last hour loss.



Choke2Death said:


> It was a joke. Relax.


Jokes are supposed to be funny.


----------



## Falkono

mblonde09 said:


> Well at least people can't blame Punk for the last hour loss.
> 
> 
> Jokes are supposed to be funny.


Who ended Raw? I have not seen it so actually don't know.

The last quarter normally get's a huge gain so these numbers indicate either last quarter didn't get as many or the first three quarters were dire.


----------



## Starbuck

They can still blame him for the first 2 8*D.


----------



## KO Bossy

Falkono said:


> Who ended Raw? I have not seen it so actually don't know.
> 
> The last quarter normally get's a huge gain so these numbers indicate either last quarter didn't get as many or the first three quarters were dire.


The main event was ADR vs Cena, and Punk interfered as a surprise in for about 2 minutes in the overrun. Only ADR vs Cena was advertised.


----------



## dxbender

Overrun is one big thing that'll hurt the rating. When it was 2 hours, it was basically 2 hours and 10 minutes or something. So you got about an extra quarter rating, which always boosted the rating of the show. Now, they only have like a 1-2 min overrun at most.


----------



## Falkono

Was it one of those quick run in distract Cena so ADR get's the roll up win kinda endings or was it something longer? I read Heyman was there so must of been at least 15mins?


----------



## KO Bossy

Falkono said:


> Was it one of those quick run in distract Cena so ADR get's the roll up win kinda endings or was it something longer? I read Heyman was there so must of been at least 15mins?


No, it was falls count anywhere and they were fighting in the back. Cena hit the AA to ADR on some stage storage cases, and then Punk just kicked Cena in the head from behind, put Del Rio on him, after Cena lost he gave him a GTS so that his face bounced off a car, bent over and said "RESPECT", got into the back of the car, pulled out his title and raised it up, then the driver's window rolled down and we see Heyman looking disgusted at Cena, then he drives away. Punk's involvement and Heyman's brief cameo was like...3 minutes tops. The entire match itself was probably about 10-15.


----------



## Choke2Death

Starbuck said:


> They can still blame him for the first 2 8*D.


He's the centerpiece of the show. Therefore, it's all Punk's fault the ratings are horrible. 

Cena seems to become the new Orton. He has some star power (a lot more than Orton and ten times more than anyone else) but is relegated into having meaningless match on the shows, which kills his drawing power. I'm pretty sure he'll help the ratings in a couple of weeks if he takes the title and ends the biggest reign of terror in history!


----------



## Boss P

Wrestling is way too rooted in predictable repetition, and way too limited in the stories it can tell to be three hours every week.


----------



## JenksIX

> Interesting RAW numbers this week. 1st hour did 4.31 million viewers, 2nd hour 4.40 million, and 3rd dropped to 3.91 million.


Cena doesn't DRAW!!!!


----------



## KO Bossy

Choke2Death said:


> He's the centerpiece of the show. Therefore, it's all Punk's fault the ratings are horrible.
> 
> Cena seems to become the new Orton. He has some star power (a lot more than Orton and ten times more than anyone else) but is relegated into having meaningless match on the shows, which kills his drawing power. I'm pretty sure he'll help the ratings in a couple of weeks if he takes the title and ends the biggest reign of terror in history!


To be fair, you could argue that almost all of the matches in WWE these days seem pointless. Like, how many times do we have to see ADR vs Sheamus, Sheamus vs Ziggler and the like? The more a match takes place, the more the later matches feel like "wait, why do I care?"

Though with MNF starting I don't think a Cena title win will do much.

And can you honestly say Punk's reign is the biggest reign of terror in history? Really? Come on, man, there have been worse. Its been a very empty reign and the title has been very devalued, and I understand that you're not a Punk fan (which is fair, to each his own), but can you seriously say that David Arquette's reign, for example, was better than Punk's? Keep in mind, you didn't say which title reign, just that it was the biggest Heavyweight title reign of terror, which to me means it could be the WCW title, WWE title, TNA title, etc. If you mean WWE title...well its certainly up there...or down there, whichever makes more sense. Miz's reign was pretty bad, and he main evented a Wrestlemania. Rey had the belt for 90 minutes...Hogan's 1993 reign he didn't defend the title once (even though Raw was on the air) until KOTR, where he lost.


----------



## Starbuck

I'd hardly call this a reflection of Cena's drawing power lol. We all know he can still pull monster numbers with or without any hype behind him. If anything I'd say it's more of an indication that nobody wants to see Del Rio. But we won't know for sure until the breakdown comes.


----------



## Choke2Death

KO Bossy said:


> To be fair, you could argue that almost all of the matches in WWE these days seem pointless. Like, how many times do we have to see ADR vs Sheamus, Sheamus vs Ziggler and the like? The more a match takes place, the more the later matches feel like "wait, why do I care?"
> 
> Though with MNF starting I don't think a Cena title win will do much.
> 
> And can you honestly say Punk's reign is the biggest reign of terror in history? Really? Come on, man, there have been worse. Its been a very empty reign and the title has been very devalued, and I understand that you're not a Punk fan (which is fair, to each his own), but can you seriously say that David Arquette's reign, for example, was better than Punk's? Keep in mind, you didn't say which title reign, just that it was the biggest Heavyweight title reign of terror, which to me means it could be the WCW title, WWE title, TNA title, etc. If you mean WWE title...well its certainly up there...or down there, whichever makes more sense. Miz's reign was pretty bad, and he main evented a Wrestlemania. Rey had the belt for 90 minutes...Hogan's 1993 reign he didn't defend the title once (even though Raw was on the air) until KOTR, where he lost.


I was talking about lengthy title reigns. If I'm not mistaken, Arquette was not champion for 10 months. And I have little to no knowledge of things that took place before the 1997 period so I can't judge any of Hulk Hogan and co's title reigns. History was just hyperbole, by the way.

And I think people need to lighten up a bit with some of the things I say. I don't literally mean it all but I realize that sarcasm doesn't translate too well in text form so you wont really know what I really mean and what I don't.


----------



## Evil Peter

Choke2Death said:


> I was talking about lengthy title reigns. If I'm not mistaken, Arquette was not champion for 10 months. And I have little to no knowledge of things that took place before the 1997 period so I can't judge any of Hulk Hogan and co's title reigns. History was just hyperbole, by the way.
> 
> And I think people need to lighten up a bit with some of the things I say. I don't literally mean it all but I realize that sarcasm doesn't translate too well in text form so you wont really know what I really mean and what I don't.


It's not just that sarcasm doesn't come across that well in text form, it's also the fact that the Internet is full of people trolling and using provocative language just to annoy people. With all that it's easy to come across different than you might intend, or different from how you would in a more upfront environment.


----------



## RatedR10

Holy shit at that 3rd hour. It didn't even reach 4 million, wtf.

I'm guessing that AJ/Vickie segment made A LOT of people tune out and possibly not come back until the overrun, but we'll see. I'm curious to see the breakdowns now.


----------



## uknoww

cm fat ass punk strikes again


----------



## HHHbkDX

uknoww said:


> cm fat ass punk strikes again



:lmao Your knight in green shining armor is the one who main evented. 

I'm expecting a sub-3.0 rating next week, due to Monday night football.


----------



## NearFall

uknoww said:


> cm fat ass punk strikes again


Yep! He managed to bring down the third hour while not being there. 8*D I guess people turned off their TVs and celebrated when he walked out of RAW at hour 2!


----------



## totoyotube

Official number is 2.83, ouch

http://www.twnpnews.com/2012/09/wwe-raw-ratings-viewership-news-for-this-week/


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

1.Three hours is too tiring

2.Del Rio is the biggest anti-draw ever.Even Andre the Giant can't draw with this guy

3.Starr of third hour was miserable

4.Most of show was focused on CM Punk.Punk holding interest for 3 hours is not possible


----------



## Marv95

"It's a holiday." "School's starting." Dude, I can go back to previous years(Ruthless Aggression, even _2007_) and Labor Day Raws weren't 2.8s. Those aren't valid excuses. The third hour score is terrible. Doesn't it usually increase into the 10pm hour?
http://www.twnpnews.com/information/wwfraw.shtml

At least it seems like they have a big storyline now that MNF is about to start with Punk/Heyman, but they need to deliver on it.


----------



## Grass420

haha - wwe sucks!!!


----------



## Pro Royka

I already expected this, having stupid and pointless matches in the third hour is the reason for this drop.


----------



## #Mark

How can anyone sit down and watch RAW for three hours? I hope the ratings keep dropping till it goes back to two hours.


----------



## KO Bossy

austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> 4.Most of show was focused on CM Punk.Punk holding interest for 3 hours is not possible


Well how come Punk's hours that featured him prominently drew decent viewership and the 3rd hour, which featured him in an unannounced, surprise 3 minute segment in the overrun, was what drew so terribly? As far as everyone was concerned he'd left in hour 2. This rating does NOT fall on Punk. Then again, most don't, yet people just like to blame him anyway. Regardless, in this case there is no possible way anyone can twist things around to make him appear to be the big ratings killer.


----------



## Kabraxal

KO Bossy said:


> Well how come Punk's hours that featured him prominently drew decent viewership and the 3rd hour, which featured him in an unannounced, surprise 3 minute segment in the overrun, was what drew so terribly? As far as everyone was concerned he'd left in hour 2. This rating does NOT fall on Punk. Then again, most don't, yet people just like to blame him anyway. Regardless, in this case there is no possible way anyone can twist things around to make him appear to be the big ratings killer.


Exactly... how in the fuck was he the focus of the show? He was there for maybe 20 minutes in the first hour, left, and didn't come back til the very end. Yeah... that was the focus... sure. And that third hour... yup, the ghost of CM Punk was haunting the camera and scared away the millions wanting to tune in but just couldn't because of CM Punk. 

Most of the show seemed built around AJ being terrible if you go by what was on screen. I just don't understand these people so desperate to hate a wrestler they spout this crap to try and prove their hatred right. It's quite pathetic.


----------



## Brodus Clay

I'm a fan of Punk that said...Punk and Workout Buddy(who is also a rating killer) had a promo together that sure killed a lot of interest.


----------



## Vyed

> WWE Raw on Labor Day Monday, September 3, 2012 scored a 2.83 rating for all three hours, down 10 percent from a 3.14 rating the previous two weeks. It was the lowest overall rating since May 28.
> 
> The standard two-hour rating was a 2.85 rating, which was the result of the final hour (not the new first hour) dragging down the overall rating.
> 
> - Raw averaged 4.20 million viewers for all three hours, which was the second-fewest of the 3-Hour Raw era. Again, the average was dragged down by the final hour (as opposed to the new first hour).
> 
> The final hour averaged a year-low 3.91 million viewers. The score was lower than the final hour of the May 28 episode (against the NBA Playoffs and Hatfield & McCoy combo) and the January 9 episode (against the BCS National Title game). The previous final-hour-low was 3.85 million viewers on November 7, 2011.
> 
> The hour-by-hour break down of Raw was 4.31 million first hour viewers, 4.40 million second hour viewers, and a steep decline to 3.91 million third hour viewers.
> 
> - Externally, Raw's final hour was opposed by a down-to-the-wire conclusion to ESPN's college football game, which averaged 4.30 million viewers overall, two episodes of "Pawn Stars" on History, and a TNT drama, "Perception," which outdrew Raw.
> 
> As a result, Raw ranked #5 in overall viewers Monday night. Raw did rank #1 in key male demographics despite significant drop-offs in adult male viewers compared to last week.
> 
> Raw's m18-34 rating was down three-tenths of a rating compared to last week, the m18-49 rating was down nearly three-tenths, and males 12-34 was down one-and-a-half-tenths. Meanwhile, the unpredictable teen males 12-17 rating swung up three-tenths after swinging down five-tenths the previous week.


Like I noted before, the extra hour is hurting the third hour viewership. This is probably the new pattern WWE are looking at for rest of the year, until RTWM begins next year.


----------



## AthenaMark

> "It's hilarious that CM Punk can't draw flies to shit. When are more people gonna wake up and realize that he's about as entertaining as watching old re-runs of Murder She Wrote?
> 
> He plays a bitchy, grouchy angry little man with a Napoleon complex who everyone thinks is cool and hip because he breaks the fourth wall by people by their real names like he does The Rock.
> 
> Well...Phil Brooks or whatever the fuck your name is...you couldn't draw a crowd like "Dwayne" (as you like to call him) if your life depended on it. The only people who give a flying fuck about you are the minority. His fans can blame Labor Day, Fourth of July, Easter, Christmas, Thanksgiving, NFL, MLB, NBA, Pro Bowling, Pro Golf, the rise in popularity of C-Span for the low ratings while the truth is...
> 
> Nobody who matters to them gives a flying fuck about CM Punk!"
> 
> Posted By: theshape (Guest) on September 05, 2012 at 08:56 PM



LMAO. HAHAHA. Damn shame. It really is. What happened to those "changes" and "making THIS fun again" that was promised?


----------



## Fatcat

So Punk only appears in the higher rated half of Raw yet gets blamed for the shitty half that featured Cena, Kane, and D Bryan. LOGIC!


----------



## AthenaMark

Don't try to throw D Bryan in that shit..he didn't main event Raw and get the massive fall off...he had segments throughout the show. The higher rated parts..


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

I think the problem has less to do with who was where and more to do with the show being 3 hours.


----------



## KO Bossy

AthenaMark said:


> Don't try to throw D Bryan in that shit..he didn't main event Raw and get the massive fall off...he had segments throughout the show. The higher rated parts..


Well, we don't know until we see the segment breakdown...his hug with Kane was in the 10pm slot, for all we know that could have contributed to the abomination that was the hour 3 rating.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

:lmao

So Punk is in the two high hours of the night, and yet gets blamed for the show's rating? I don't even know how that's jokingly conceivable. Next thing you know if the overrun turns out to do really low/lose viewers, people will blame Punk's 2-minute appearance that made people turn the tv off/change the channel. 

The hate has become so hilariously petty that I'm not even sure anymore what the difference is between hating CM Punk and attempting to troll CM Punk fans is.


----------



## DesolationRow

Oh, wow, it was the lowest rated Raw since... the last Monday that was a national holiday. Shocking, shocking. 

Not saying the show deserved any better because it really didn't but, yeah.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

CM Fail.


----------



## Tnmore

2.8? Thats what happens when you put the focus of the entire show on a irrelevant phony mid card WWE champion.

Punk is officially Diesel 1995.


----------



## fabi1982

I realy never wanted to be part of these mark wars (Punk is shit, Cena is shit, everyone I hate is shit), but everyone who saw RAW saw Punk in the first 20mins (and hour one was good actually), then he left for the rest of the night (thats what he said) and a surprise comeback at the last 3mins, which wasnt advertised or whatever...Really everyone can have their opinion, but blaming Punk for these numbers isnt correct. Maybe the people lost interest BECAUSE Punk wasnt on the show? Maybe not...Whatever...really sad that the numbers are that low because the show itself was good imo.

Problem is everybody know the matches for NOC and no HHH, no Brock, nothing special, just the ususal "stars" (maybe its because of Lawler missing the show ^^)...so why watch the show after Punk said he want a day off, when Punk/Cena is actually the only interesting thing atm..


----------



## PHX

Obis said:


> :lmao
> 
> So Punk is in the two high hours of the night, and yet gets blamed for the show's rating? I don't even know how that's jokingly conceivable. Next thing you know if the overrun turns out to do really low/lose viewers, people will blame Punk's 2-minute appearance that made people turn the tv off/change the channel.
> 
> The hate has become so hilariously petty that I'm not even sure anymore what the difference is between hating CM Punk and attempting to troll CM Punk fans is.





fabi1982 said:


> I realy never wanted to be part of these mark wars (Punk is shit, Cena is shit, everyone I hate is shit), but everyone who saw RAW saw Punk in the first 20mins (and hour one was good actually), then he left for the rest of the night (thats what he said) and a surprise comeback at the last 3mins, which wasnt advertised or whatever...Really everyone can have their opinion, but blaming Punk for these numbers isnt correct. Maybe the people lost interest BECAUSE Punk wasnt on the show? Maybe not...Whatever...really sad that the numbers are that low because the show itself was good imo.
> 
> Problem is everybody know the matches for NOC and no HHH, no Brock, nothing special, just the ususal "stars" (maybe its because of Lawler missing the show ^^)...so why watch the show after Punk said he want a day off, when Punk/Cena is actually the only interesting thing atm..


If I felt like making a 3 paragraph post I'd use these two post. KO Bossy post a few pages back too. 

7 years on wrestling forums and this is still the among one of the dumbest topics on them. Always gets used to back why they dislike a wrestler or to brag about their favorite wrestler. Same shit, different wrestlers and it's Punk's turn apparently since 2011. Some people in this thread I see just do it for tongue in cheek humor which if that's what you got to do to make this silly thread amusing then more power to you. But for those who take it seriously like that AthenaMark dude did Punk fuck your cat or something? If you aren't entertained by him good for you like who you like hate who you hate but don't hide behind ratings. Let alone in a embarrassing illogically way in this specific case.


----------



## Starbuck

2.8 this week? YOU GNA DIE NEXT WEEK RAW. Those numbers are not going to be pretty at all.


----------



## Evil Peter

The discussion about the ratings of this episode is pretty much a win-win for Punk. The people actually looking at the numbers see that he featured in the parts that kept the audience and then use logic to try to figure out why it dropped in the last hour. The people bashing Punk just come across as immature and use pretty childish arguments so they do nothing but sink themselves as it's an apparent attempt to, for the millionth time, tell everyone that they just don't like someone.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

According to the Wrestling Observer radio. The first segment was one of the highest of the show, a 2.9. The same as the Lesnar and Heyman promo. So for people blaming Punk for the overall rating are just haters, nothing more.

The Santino Vs that other dude match drew a 2.5. Lowest of the night.


----------



## Starbuck

Punk marks, why are you still trying to argue with people blindly hating lol? You could have Vince McMahon himself tell the world that Punk is a draw and some people still wouldn't believe it. You guys are wasting your time but I guess it is amusing to watch things go in 1 ear and out the other on both sides.


----------



## Green Light

jblvdx said:


> According to the Wrestling Observer radio. The first segment was one of the highest of the show, a 2.9. The same as the Lesnar and Heyman promo. So for people blaming Punk for the overall rating are just haters, nothing more.
> 
> Oh and also a little something for the people who say PUNK CANT DRW!
> 
> 
> 
> WWE attributes the rise of their stock to the Rock, Brock, and the good for nothing vanilla midget.


Erm, isn't that a poll from the Observer? Voted on by its readers? If so it has absolutely nothing to do with WWE


----------



## Starbuck

Yeah. I was just about to say that WWE themselves didn't make that poll. Actually, the idea of WWE holding a poll on who they think attributed to their stock price is rather ridiculous lol.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Damn. Well. That failed. Good for you to read what your going to quote before hand.


----------



## Starbuck

jblvdx said:


> Damn. Well. That failed. Good for you to read what your going to quote before hand.


:lmao It was a good try though lol. 

So 2.5 was the lowest of the night and 2.9 was the highest? Yeah, this breakdown is going to blow chunks lol. Did it say whether the opener was higher than the ending?


----------



## The-Rock-Says

blvdx is such a try hard.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

The-Rock-Says said:


> blvdx is such a try hard.


Hey at least I can admit that I'm wrong sometimes, unlike 90% of this forum


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Starbuck said:


> :lmao It was a good try though lol.
> 
> So 2.5 was the lowest of the night and 2.9 was the highest? Yeah, this breakdown is going to blow chunks lol. Did it say whether the opener was higher than the ending?


Lord Meltzer said that the overrun got under a 3.0. So the overrun may be a little higher then the opening. Which isn't good.


----------



## Starbuck

If the ending got just under a 3.0 then that suggests to me that everything in the third hour bombed apart from the main event and if so, they should have quite a huge gain. If the opener and closer are around the same viewership, people watched the start, knew what was coming for the main event, left and only came back for the main event so it will be the same people coming back to see what was advertised rather than new viewers you know. That's just my guess based on what you've told me here. 

WWE Universe Vote now on who YOU think is responsible for WWE's stock price!!

John Cena
The Rock
John Cena
Brock Lesnar
John Cena
CM Punk
John Cena
Triple H
John Cena
Triple H's Haircut

..............................

150% = TRIPLE H'S HAIRCUT!!!!!!!!!


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Starbuck said:


> WWE Universe Vote now on who YOU think is responsible for WWE's stock price!!
> 
> John Cena
> The Rock
> John Cena
> Brock Lesnar
> John Cena
> CM Punk
> John Cena
> Triple H
> John Cena
> Triple H's Haircut
> 
> ..............................
> 
> 150% = TRIPLE H'S HAIRCUT!!!!!!!!!



RAW ACTIVE TIME, WHO DO YOU THINK IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RISE OF WWE'S STOCK PRICE

#Triple H

# The Game Triple H

# The King of King's Triple H

He has to get his weekly fix of burying the roster somehow.


----------



## BANKSY

HHH's new haircut is clearly building to Undertaker/HHH 4 at Wrestlemania.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

HHH's reveal of his Wall Street hair won't be more awesome than Takers reveal at Raw 1000


----------



## Starbuck

jblvdx said:


> RAW ACTIVE TIME, WHO DO YOU THINK IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RISE OF WWE'S STOCK PRICE
> 
> #Triple H
> 
> # The Game Triple H
> 
> # The King of King's Triple H
> 
> He has to get his weekly fix of burying the roster somehow.


They don't need to do a poll for that. Trips buries the roster without even trying. His haircut buried Raw this week by a mile. DAT GAME.


----------



## Rock316AE

What you can get from this rating is that after almost 2 months viewers finally got the new start time, which is why they had a "normal" audience in 8pm, unlike when Brock and Heyman were and actually increased the audience with their appearance and drew a 3.0, biggest so far there but they should break it every week now that people are there from start to finish. The drop for the final hour is a great sign because that shows people aren't going to watch 3 hours, 2.8 overall is abysmal number and next week it should be a 2.6, hopefully lower so they can go back to 2 hours before 2013.


----------



## Tnmore

I just listened to that show. Meltzer said Punk vs sheamus which was promoted at 9 pm 'didnt deliver'. Those were his exact words.


----------



## Starbuck

Look at all these breakdown spoilers. You people need to use tags for that shit.


----------



## JY57

they really need to realize that a 3 hour show will get ratings like this. Not everyone can watch the whole show or getting tired of it. 2 hours is where they should have stayed at and should return back to 2 hours.


----------



## D.M.N.

Tnmore said:


> I just listened to that show. Meltzer said Punk vs sheamus which was promoted at 9 pm 'didnt deliver'. Those were his exact words.


Obviously it didn't deliver, because it didn't happen.

Sheamus comes out, Punk comes out, says no and then you get Jack Swagger of all people, no surprise that Q5 did nothing.

And checking the Raw discussion thread, Punk walked out at 21:08.

So don't bother attributing any lack of rise to Punk, when it's quite possible that the first 7/8 minutes of Q5 went up, before a drop when Swags appeared.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

:lmao i so love this thread
never gets boring


----------



## A-C-P

#1Peep4ever said:


> :lmao i so love this thread
> never gets boring


:lmao my thoughts exactly


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

Tnmore said:


> 2.8? Thats what happens when you put the focus of the entire show on a irrelevant phony mid card WWE champion.
> 
> Punk is officially Diesel 1995.


Except that Diesel had a great look and was responsible for revolutionising the business a later in WCW

But TBH,I enjoy Punk as a heel.He is so boring as a face,more boring than Cena


----------



## roadkill_

austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> Except that Diesel had a great look and was responsible for revolutionising the business a later in WCW
> 
> But TBH,I enjoy Punk as a heel.He is so boring as a face,more boring than Cena


I don't enjoy him as either. Punk is worse than even superCena - he inspires no heat. Cena, for all his faults, is guaranteed to make a historic heel.


----------



## Choke2Death

roadkill_ said:


> I don't enjoy him as either. Punk is worse than even superCena - he inspires no heat. Cena, for all his faults, is guaranteed to make a historic heel.


Yep. A few months ago I was full of hate for Cena to the point that it was reaching beyond character. I was confident that no one was gonna make me support Cena in a feud, but Punk has just done that. Not because he's a heel, just because I simply can't be on his side ever.


----------



## NearFall

roadkill_ said:


> Cena, for all his faults, is guaranteed to make a historic heel.


That is actually quite true. Cena is such a predominant baby face and is stale beyond belief that a heel turn will be very interesting. While I will not hold my breathe as to when it happens, when it does happen it will be one these "big angles" that help bring major life into the product. I don't know how much of an effect it will have on the mainstream of the product(due to the fact Cena has been the face during the down slump) but it wi make for interesting TV.


----------



## Tommy-V

*RAW 9/3 Breakdown*



> - As noted before, the September 3rd Labor Day edition of WWE RAW did a 2.83 cable rating with 4.19 million viewers. Compared to previous Labor Day shows, the 2011 show did a 2.99 rating, 2010 did a 3.00 rating, 2009 did a 3.83 rating with Bob Barker as guest host, 2008 did a 2.93 rating and 2007 did a 3.64 rating.
> 
> The stuff with CM Punk, Jerry Lawler and Sheamus opened strong with a 2.90 quarter rating. Dolph Ziggler vs. Randy Orton gained 25,000 viewers while the tag match with Tensai and Cody Rhodes vs. Rey Mysterio and Sin Cara lost 175,000 viewers. The second anger management skit and the other segment with Punk and Sheamus gained 370,000 viewers at the 9pm timeslot.
> 
> Sheamus vs. Jack Swagger and Kaitlyn vs. Eve Torres lost 85,000 viewers. The final anger management skit with Kane and Daniel Bryan arguing lost 310,000 viewers. Jinder Mahal vs. Ryback gained 243,000 viewers. Kane and Bryan hugging at the top of the 10pm hour lost 55,000 viewers for a 3.02 quarter rating - a bad number for that time slot.
> 
> Santino Marella vs. Antonio Cesaro for the United States Title and Heath Slater vs. Zack Ryder lost 591,000 viewers and did a 2.53 quarter rating - one of the lowest of the year. This was the big drop in the show and the period that killed the third hour rating. The segment with Vickie Guerrero and AJ Lee gained 238,000 viewers while the Falls Count Anywhere Match with John Cena vs. Alberto Del Rio gained 442,000 viewers for a 2.99 overrun rating - down a lot from usual.


----------



## D.M.N.

Ouch. As much as we loved Kane/Bryan it seemed to kill the numbers, after all it would normally be a ~300k gain then a 591k loss, instead they made no gain and a loss.


----------



## KO Bossy

So...let's see the Bryan marks defend this with their "Bryan is a ratings machine" bullshit.


----------



## Loudness

^Don't Blame The Big Red American Dragons, blame Harold .


----------



## KO Bossy

roadkill_ said:


> I don't enjoy him as either. Punk is worse than even superCena - he inspires no heat. Cena, for all his faults, is guaranteed to make a historic heel.


Yeah I think the crowds would disagree that he inspires no heat. And there is no way that he's worse than super Cena who hasn't changed in 7 years and constantly ruins matches due to retarded booking where he wins with 2 moves. That just shits on pro wrestling.



Choke2Death said:


> Yep. A few months ago I was full of hate for Cena to the point that it was reaching beyond character. I was confident that no one was gonna make me support Cena in a feud, but Punk has just done that. Not because he's a heel, just because I simply can't be on his side ever.


No offense but that's kind of a stupid reason. You can't hate Cena more than Punk because you can't be on Punk's side ever?


----------



## Choke2Death

Ryback gaining them viewers it seems. :lol

And yep, I can't hate Cena more than Punk because I am not against anyone more than the latter. At least I'm a Cena fan, just hate his character.


----------



## Pro Royka

Choke2Death said:


> Yep. A few months ago I was full of hate for Cena to the point that it was reaching beyond character. I was confident that no one was gonna make me support Cena in a feud, but Punk has just done that. *Not because he's a heel, just because I simply can't be on his side ever.*


And that's the bottom line because Rock316ae said so . You already support Cena dude, if that isn't true you will not have him in your fav list, unless you like him because of Punk, lol what a lame excuse dude. I understand now, keep on hating guys that are steroids free.



Choke2Death said:


> Ryback gaining them viewers it seems. :lol
> 
> And yep, I can't hate Cena more than Punk because I am not against anyone more than the latter. At least I'm a Cena fan, just hate his character.


Contradiction. Yeah big guys gaining viewers yabee. Shame that you have Benoit the wrestling goat as your fav but you hate the ones that is in his size for no reason.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

Santino
Ryder
Cesaro
Slater

Damn Rating Killers


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

Del Rio is the anti-draw of WWE

He can't pull ratings with Cena also,leave alone Sheamus


----------



## Gang

Why the hell Santino and Ryder still on TV?


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Ryback kicking ass in the ring and in the ratings. WHAT A MAN.


----------



## TeamRocketGrunt

Ryback is already a bigger draw then bryan :lol

And look at the drawing power of zack ryder to :lol :lol even jinder mahal drew better then those hack!!


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner3

I guess without steroids you cant draw


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Poor Bryan. I thought that hug segment would do well since casuals usually love that shit. Maybe it was too long? Also, were the skits long enough to take credit for most of a quarter?


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Lets hope they don't do anymore hug segments in WWE that span about 10 minutes. Anyways the breakdown was nothing special at all. Ryback is doing good just destroying people left and right, and that is it really. The hug segment at the 10 pm slot did bad and the main event did below average numbers.


----------



## FITZ

KO Bossy said:


> So...let's see the Bryan marks defend this with their "Bryan is a ratings machine" bullshit.


4 million people watched him hug another man!!!!!!! 

It was a pretty stupid segment in all honesty. I hope WWE blames twitter for the bad rating because I don't think it would have been as bad if they just had a match.


----------



## JY57

WWE probably thought that the WWE Universe would vote for a match. And they got surprised. So they let just play-out and drag on.

Anyways just bad numbers all around. And it will get even worst next week when their a MNF double header


----------



## Chicago Warrior

JY57 said:


> WWE probably thought that the WWE Universe would vote for a match. And they got surprised. So they let just play-out and drag on.
> 
> Anyways just bad numbers all around. And it will get even worst next week when their a MNF double header


Nah, I bet they expected the hug, believe it or not but stuff like "Hug-offs", and "dance offs" usually win those type of polls.


----------



## Starbuck

They opened well, 9PM did alright. IIRC, most of the previous 9PM slots have gained at least 450k. I could be wrong with that but it's still good. 

The whole Kane/DB thing obviously struck out this week. I enjoyed it and thought it was the best part of the show but very clearly the rest of the viewing audience didn't and tuned out in their droves. The fact that they actually _lost_ viewers at the 10pm slot is fucking horrible tbh. No matter what, that slot should never be losing viewers. This is a case of the gain taking precedence over the rating itself because 10PM was higher than the opening segment but I'd hardly call it a success. Context people, context. Ryback bringing DEM GAINS. U MAD? 

That 2.53 quarter killed them and it took the next 2 quarters to get those viewers back. The overrun number is bad. I guess the only thing to take from it is the fact that they ended the show with the same number of viewers as when they opened. In other words, they were able to get the people already watching to stay watching but this weeks show didn't attract any new viewers at all. That's the bad part. Good and bad all in one lol. 

I stand by the fact that next week they are truly dead. BRING DA PAIN lol. Vince gna be mad :vince3


----------



## Chicago Warrior

The highest rated segment for RAW was the CM Punk and Sheamus promo along with the 1st Anger management segment. The second highest was believe it or not the Divas match and Sheamus vs Jack Swagger, then 3rd highest was the Cena vs Alberto Del Rio main event.

The lowest rated segment for RAW was the Santino vs Cesaro match and the Heath Slater vs Zack Ryder match (this completely killed off the 3rd hour). The second lowest was the AJ/Vickie promo in the third hour that couldn't recover due to the Santino/Cesaro and Ryder/Slater matches. The third lowest was the final anger management segment.


----------



## JY57

People can't watch this mess for 3 hours straight. Its just the way it is. They really need to just admit that 3 hours over 2 hours will ultimately be their doom.


----------



## Shawn Morrison

ill admit the hug was kind of boring.


----------



## Choke2Death

Starbuck said:


> They opened well, 9PM did alright. IIRC, most of the previous 9PM slots have gained at least 450k. I could be wrong with that but it's still good.


That's true. Just a few weeks ago Big Show vs Randy Orton at 9PM gained 480,000 viewers and there were some Punk marks who got on Orton's case because it was a "horrible" gain, lol.


----------



## DesolationRow

The matter of segment breakdowns is just the final piece of evidence in the argument that Santino Marella is in desperate need of a heel turn. His comedic babyface character has run almost completely out of steam, and this current storyline with "The Cobra," while cute at first, is becoming more grating and less amusing as it goes along. They got 3-1/2 years out of this face run, and for the most part it's been fun/enjoyable for what it is but the character has lost a great deal of luster. When he comes out now, it feels like crowds and apparenatly viewers react with a nominal, "Oh, Santino," reaction these days. Ironic how the United States Championship reign, which should have been a promotion, feels like the period of time in which he grew staler and staler, as well as more superfluous to the product at large. 

He needs a somewhat inventive heel turn, with a fresh character modification, like R-Truth in the spring of 2011.


----------



## vanboxmeer

DesolationRow said:


> The matter of segment breakdowns is just the final piece of evidence in the argument that Santino Marella is in desperate need of a heel turn. His comedic babyface character has run almost completely out of steam, and this current storyline with "The Cobra," while cute at first, is becoming more grating and less amusing as it goes along. They got 3-1/2 years out of this face run, and for the most part it's been fun/enjoyable for what it is but the character has lost a great deal of luster. When he comes out now, it feels like crowds and apparenatly viewers react with a nominal, "Oh, Santino," reaction these days. Ironic how the United States Championship reign, which should have been a promotion, feels like the period of time in which he grew staler and staler, as well as more superfluous to the product at large.
> 
> He needs a somewhat inventive heel turn, with a fresh character modification, like R-Truth in the spring of 2011.



Someone named Daniel Bryan is already in that heel Santino midcard spot.


----------



## DesolationRow

vanboxmeer said:


> Someone named Daniel Bryan is already in that heel Santino midcard spot.


Eh.

I'd actually like to see Santino's heel work veer off into some darker territory. I'm not completely sure how to pull it off at this time, but it feels like it's becoming a greater necessity with each passing week. 

If you look back at WWE circa mid-2000, Bryan's "spot," as it were, reminds me a great deal of Kurt Angle's more than anybody else's. Pre-Trips/Steph/Kurt love triangle angle, that is.

If Taker were fully active, Bryan would _so_ be that guy right now who is stalked by him throughout an arena like Angle for that Fully Loaded angle. And the match would probably be similarly booked, too, but as with Kurt then, it really wouldn't hurt Bryan much/at all.


----------



## Amuroray

these indys always struggle with ratings


----------



## Snothlisberger

Hug dragged on for way too long


----------



## JasonLives

> The final anger management skit with Kane and Daniel Bryan arguing lost 310,000 viewers. Jinder Mahal vs. Ryback gained 243,000 viewers.


This doesnt make much sense since it was in the same quarter. Atleast in the online reports.

Im guessing the loss was Quarter 7. Which was Swagger/AJ backstage, 2 commercial breaks, Final Anger skit and most of the Ryback/Jinder match.
I then guess that the gain was in Quarter 8. Which was replays of the Ryback/Jinder match, commercial break, and start of the "Hug me" segment.
So from what I seen is that the start of the Hug me segment drew in eyes to begin with, but lost viewers when it started to drag.

I always dislike when they say "This and that gained/lost viewers" when the segment/match didnt even take up most of the quarters. 
Sure, if it took up 10 minutes, but when a quarter has 2 commercials breaks and a 3 minute match. The match is not gonna draw just by looking at the quarter and unfair to blame the drop on that specific match.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Choke2Death said:


> That's true. Just a few weeks ago Big Show vs Randy Orton at 9PM gained 480,000 viewers and there were some Punk marks who got on Orton's case because it was a "horrible" gain, lol.


Actually, that was Bryan marks if I'm not mistaken. Bryan had done very well the week prior doing 500,000 and 200,000 gains in Q5 and Q6 respectively. But people (and since someone likes pointing fingers we'll just blindly say some Orton marks) decided that was poor for some reason I can't remember. So when Orton/Show gained less, Bryan marks were on that as "revenge".

However, let me just remind everyone Orton/Del Rio from two weeks ago only gained 280,000 viewers. I'm not saying that was a bad number or a good number, I'm just saying it for the record.

Punk/Lawler fight and Punk/Sheamus promo opening as strong as it did, on Labor Day no less is an excellent number. Then even better Orton/Ziggler managed to gain on top of that. Tensai/Rhodes against The Mask Bros took it down a notch, but Punk/Sheamus tease and the Anger Management segment had the top number of the night which is great.

I'm surprised Sheamus/Swagger and Kaitlyn/Eve only lost 85,000. I would've expected more tbh. Of course more were lost during the Anger Management's final skit which sucks. It was very entertaining but I suppose either people got tired of it, or people tuned out after Eve/Kaitlyn and just didn't think to come back right away. Ryback gaining 243,000 viewers with Jinder Mahal... Ryback is a ratings machine. How many times in this day and age can one guy have a squash and people be so into it? Not to mention he was very very over with the crowd in Chicago. I don't think I'll ever understand it at least until I see Ryback in a semi-important feud.

Kane/Bryan losing viewers in 10PM is not good, but... maybe it was due to the gain in Q8 with Ryback? Here's the thing with that excuse, from what I can see, all Q8's since Raw 1000 have actually gained viewers. Last week with Bryan/Truth gained 232,000. Two weeks ago with Otunga/Show gained 86,000. Three weeks ago even a Divas Tag drew 45,000 viewers. But the thing with all those dates is the 10PM slot always gained. Granted a segment or two in 10PM was Lesnar/Heyman/HHH/HBK related, but still... that excuse can't be used for the 10PM slot. I think ultimately when people saw they were just going to "Hug it out", they tuned it out. I personally found the crowd and the segment as a whole ridiculously hilarious, but I guess others didn't. Oh well.

So Marella/Cesaro was what overall brought down the last hour. Can't say I'm surprised. I'm not even sure the feud has gotten any TV time, as DesoRow pointed Santino's character is stale and done with and Cesaro is no draw. Believe it or not I'm actually surprised it wasn't even lower than that, but what can you do?

AJ/Vickie gaining the viewers again. And Cena/Del Rio (with Punk/Heyman at the end) did a good gain, but a terrible overall number. 

So yeah, it was Labor Day so let's see what happens next week. The show opened strong, but ended weak. The second hour though as usual did the biggest number.

Edit:



> This doesnt make much sense since it was in the same quarter. Atleast in the online reports.
> 
> Im guessing the loss was Quarter 7. Which was Swagger/AJ backstage, 2 commercial breaks, Final Anger skit and most of the Ryback/Jinder match.
> I then guess that the gain was in Quarter 8. Which was replays of the Ryback/Jinder match, commercial break, and start of the "Hug me" segment.
> So from what I seen is that the start of the Hug me segment drew in eyes to begin with, but lost viewers when it started to drag.
> 
> I always dislike when they say "This and that gained/lost viewers" when the segment/match didnt even take up most of the quarters.
> Sure, if it took up 10 minutes, but when a quarter has 2 commercials breaks and a 3 minute match. The match is not gonna draw just by looking at the quarter and unfair to blame the drop on that specific match.


I agree, and hate that the breakdown is written as is. Can't they just do something like:

Q1: (Put number of viewers, rating, and what was in the segment)
Q2: (Put number of viewers, ratings, gain/loss, and what was in the segment)
(etc. etc)


----------



## Chicago Warrior

DesolationRow said:


> The matter of segment breakdowns is just the final piece of evidence in the argument that Santino Marella is in desperate need of a heel turn. His comedic babyface character has run almost completely out of steam, and this current storyline with "The Cobra," while cute at first, is becoming more grating and less amusing as it goes along. They got 3-1/2 years out of this face run, and for the most part it's been fun/enjoyable for what it is but the character has lost a great deal of luster. When he comes out now, it feels like crowds and apparenatly viewers react with a nominal, "Oh, Santino," reaction these days. Ironic how the United States Championship reign, which should have been a promotion, feels like the period of time in which he grew staler and staler, as well as more superfluous to the product at large.
> 
> He needs a somewhat inventive heel turn, with a fresh character modification, like R-Truth in the spring of 2011.


True and also Zack Ryder. Zack Ryder match along with the Santino match lead to the 3rd hour falling apart. I bet the Zack Ryder match dropped more viewers than the Santino match.


----------



## Choke2Death

Obis said:


> Actually, that was Bryan marks if I'm not mistaken. Bryan had done very well the week prior doing 500,000 and 200,000 gains in Q5 and Q6 respectively. But people (and since someone likes pointing fingers we'll just blindly say some Orton marks) decided that was poor for some reason I can't remember. So when Orton/Show gained less, Bryan marks were on that as "revenge".


No, it was some Punk marks that said it. (or maybe just one) Although I'm aware some Bryan marks were jizzing all over their keyboards when his match with Sheamus gained 520k the week before that at the 9PM spot. Below is one post that I caught where Orton's "terrible" gain is called out.



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Orton/Show and Cena/Bryan failed big time. 480k is terrible for the 9 PM, and obviously that's a shit overrun.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Each quarter lasts 15 minutes including commercial breaks right?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Choke2Death said:


> No, it was some Punk marks that said it. (or maybe just one) Although I'm aware some Bryan marks were jizzing all over their keyboards when his match with Sheamus gained 520k the week before that at the 9PM spot. Below is one post that I caught where Orton's "terrible" gain is called out.


Ever think maybe he's a Bryan mark as well? I'm not saying I know, as I don't. However I've always taken Wrestlinfan's posts as "counter-attacks" to what others would say if Punk was the one that had those gains and just trolls the Punk haters. Whether Wrestlinfan believes what he types or not... I don't know.


----------



## Loudness

I don't see what the big deal with this weeks D Bryan/Kane segments is, he and Kane drew in the first segment, got a below average, but still slight ratings increase for their 2nd segment and got a decline for their third, hardly a big deal or a negative ratings average compared to most of the roster, especially if you take into account Bryans recent numbers. The majority probably just thought the hug it out thing would be corny and boring so they tuned out, which isn't necessarily Kanes or Bryans fault either.


----------



## DesolationRow

Loudness said:


> I don't see what the big deal with this weeks D Bryan/Kane segments is, he and Kane drew in the first segment, got a below average, but still slight ratings increase for their 2nd segment and got a decline for their third, hardly a big deal or a negative ratings average compared to most of the roster, especially if you take into account Bryans recent numbers. The majority probably just thought the hug it out thing would be corny and boring so they tuned out, which isn't necessarily Kanes or Bryans fault either.


NO! YOU CANNOT BRING REASON AND RATIONALLY-CONCEIVED THOUGHTS TO THIS THREAD!!!!!!!!!11

DAT PITIFUL INDY MIDGET AND THE OLD HASBEEN RON PAUL SUPPORTER CANNOT DRAWWZZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111111111

NO MATTER WHAT THE CONTENT OF THE SEGMENT IS, HOW QUESTIONABLE IT MAY OR MAY NOT BE, WHAT VARIABLES DO OR DO NOT EXIST, ALL THAT MATTERS IS WHO WAS IN WHICH QUARTER HOUR AND HOW DID IT DO?!?!?!?!!!!!

Seriously, most of the trends that one can see with certain wrestlers such as the one I was pointing out with Santino Marella, are ones derived from problems that have little to do with the talent that wrestler may or may not possess. Santino is clearly a charismatic and entertaining talent when given something worthwhile and isn't going through the same stale motions that have helped to make him seem so shopworn at this point in time. The problem is almost always a matter of writing and booking.


----------



## ogorodnikov

personally, i'm glad Bryan fans have accepted the fact that he's solidified himself as the heel Santino, as he should be.


----------



## Rock316AE

The audience got the new start time, normal start here and will be below average in a few weeks. 

Kane/Bryan in the skits was awesome. But did terrible in their segment and I can't blame them, that was 7 minutes too long. 

Bring back Big Show along with Mark Henry, the two biggest TV draws along with Cena not on TV now is a ridiculous decision with MNF starting. Show was in Australia or something, they filmed something there so that was probably the reason he wasn't on TV. Henry needs to come back the moment he's 100%. 

Ryback continues to be a TV beast.


----------



## NearFall

Rock316AE said:


> Ryback continues to be a TV beast.


Crazily enough that is what shocks me the most in recent weeks. I usually never dissect ratings seriously, and only look over them casually. However RyBack has gotten over tremendously with the "FEED ME MORE!" catchphrase, and he is drawing viewers in equally well. 

The main point of thought is, how long will the squashes of no-names last? I mean, his first feud/normal length match will be the make/break point of RyBack's character. They cannot afford to get it wrong. That is partly why they may be holding out, until they get more confidence of how to use RyBack. Either way, his new theme was a great addition.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Can somebody update me on the mark wars? I need to find out the new ways to make fun of Phil in order to impress the Attitude Era marks.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Choke2Death said:


> No, it was some Punk marks that said it. (or maybe just one) Although I'm aware some Bryan marks were jizzing all over their keyboards when his match with Sheamus gained 520k the week before that at the 9PM spot. Below is one post that I caught where Orton's "terrible" gain is called out.


Like Rock316 said a few posts back, people are finally adapting to RAW starting one hour earlier, which is the most likely cause of hour one and two being similar. At that time, it was a bad gain because you still had people tuning in later in the show because of the recent 8 PM start. Not saying this week's was a good gain, in fact I never said that lol. It wasn't a good gain, but Punk/Sheamus tease was the peak this week. He drew decent, u just mad.


----------



## Choke2Death

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Like Rock316 said a few posts back, people are finally adapting to RAW starting one hour earlier, which is the most likely cause of hour one and two being similar. At that time, it was a bad gain because you still had people tuning in later in the show because of the recent 8 PM start. Not saying this week's was a good gain, in fact I never said that lol. It wasn't a good gain, but Punk/Sheamus tease was the peak this week. *He drew decent, u just mad.*


???

I never said _anything_ about Punk or whatever he gained this week. Maybe it was decent for the low standards that was this week, though.


----------



## Rock316AE

Orton/Show 500k for 9pm is not "low", "bad", "below average" in any way as the biggest they did in the current run was RAW 1000 and it was 600k. Good is the right description.



NearFall said:


> Crazily enough that is what shocks me the most in recent weeks. I usually never dissect ratings seriously, and only look over them casually. However RyBack has gotten over tremendously with the "FEED ME MORE!" catchphrase, and he is drawing viewers in equally well.
> 
> The main point of thought is, how long will the squashes of no-names last? I mean, his first feud/normal length match will be the make/break point of RyBack's character. They cannot afford to get it wrong. That is partly why they may be holding out, until they get more confidence of how to use RyBack. Either way, his new theme was a great addition.


I think that it's the presentation of the guy. When you see this mountain throwing people in the air like it's nothing, you stop and watch. They want to build him slowly because he can't work that style with protected babyfaces like Cena/Orton/Sheamus. Probably give him a belt, a big feud with Show or Henry, then start pushing for the main events. He's a big success so far and started a Goldberg TV pattern(Of course not close to the same level but you get my point...)


----------



## RaymerWins

Rock316AE said:


> What you can get from this rating is that after almost 2 months viewers finally got the new start time, which is why they had a "normal" audience in 8pm, unlike when Brock and Heyman were and actually increased the audience with their appearance and drew a 3.0, biggest so far there but they should break it every week now that people are there from start to finish. The drop for the final hour is a great sign because that shows people aren't going to watch 3 hours, 2.8 overall is abysmal number and next week it should be a 2.6, hopefully lower so they can go back to 2 hours before 2013.


They must be encouraged that this past Monday was the first time since Raw1000 that they didn't promote an opening segment and the tune ins was still respectable at the open.

I don't blame the 3 hours, I blame the lack of CM Punk (who left the arena), the non-existence of Cena until th Main Event, (WWE trying to protect his face image instead of him being booed out of the arena during a segment) and a string of 90 minutes of non-consequential wrestling with the worst Mid-Card WWE has had since 2005.

Bring up Ambrose, promote Barrett over the weekend (starting at Smackdown) and cut Ryder, Sin Cara, Santino.

But please don't think the answer is e Big Show coming back... Noone cares.


----------



## Scissor Me Daddy-O!!

after watching the RAW recap, did Lawler attack CM Punk first?


----------



## TeamRocketGrunt

This proves that people don't want to watch skinny midgets wrestle
EG daniel bryan
EG Punk
EG Ryder

nuffsaid


----------



## AthenaMark

So basically Cena did another terrible overrun number...Vickie/AJ drew....Bryan was 1/3 this week. And they don't even trust Punk to draw in his own hometown. Good deal.


----------



## chronoxiong

Just barely saw the segment breakdowns for this past week's show. And people wonder why Zack Ryder isn't on RAW more. The dude is a ratings killer straight up. Him and Santino.


----------



## PHX

TeamRocketGrunt said:


> This proves that people don't want to watch skinny midgets wrestle
> EG daniel bryan
> EG Punk
> EG Ryder
> 
> nuffsaid


A Shawn Michaels fan dissing smaller guys who are pretty much the same size as HBK that makes tons of sense. Ever sense Kevin Nash started trolling again with his dissing of smaller guys people go any lengths to cosign him.


----------



## -Skullbone-

TeamRocketGrunt said:


> This proves that people don't want to watch skinny midgets wrestle
> EG daniel bryan
> EG Punk
> EG Ryder
> 
> nuffsaid


Funny that Ryder is billed as being taller than Shawn Michaels.


----------



## Felpent

Skyfall said:


> after watching the RAW recap, did Lawler attack CM Punk first?


Yeah lol, I thought Lawler was whopping Punk's ass real good at the start. It looked legit.


----------



## TeamRocketGrunt

PHX said:


> A Shawn Michaels fan dissing smaller guys who are pretty much the same size as HBK that makes tons of sense. Ever sense Kevin Nash started trolling again with his dissing of smaller guys people go any lengths to cosign him.


Shawn michaels in his prime was 238 pounds, that's a good weight and it's believeable, plus he's one of the best looking guys in wwe so the girls got wet over him, no girl wants to get wet over balding ryder, drug addict punk or hobo bryan



-Skullbone- said:


> Funny that Ryder is billed as being taller than Shawn Michaels.


He was also 24 pounds smaller


----------



## DesolationRow

LMFAO.

Yeah, sure. Sure. Shawn Michaels was 238 pounds. Uh-huh. Okay.


----------



## PHX

TeamRocketGrunt said:


> Shawn michaels in his prime was 238 pounds, that's a good weight and it's believeable, plus he's one of the best looking guys in wwe so the girls got wet over him, no girl wants to get wet over balding ryder, drug addict punk or hobo bryan
> 
> 
> 
> He was also 24 pounds smaller


:lmao HBK was not 238 he's always been the same weight just about and still doesn't change the fact that he is the same height or smaller than the guys you called "midgets" Unless you're a chick or gay which I'm hoping you are with that 2nd part why would you care about them being "good looking" and making girls wet? This is wrestling not porn


----------



## TeamRocketGrunt

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kT_9P5TQ9MI

go to 2:38

The announcer said hbk was 234 pounds, same as randy orton

OWNED


----------



## -Skullbone-

TeamRocketGrunt said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kT_9P5TQ9MI
> 
> go to 2:38
> 
> The announcer said hbk was 234 pounds, same as randy orton
> 
> OWNED


Still shorter than Ryder. Thus, he must be a midget.

I also like that always talking about how your faves make everybody wet. I'd have thought that the family-friendly, unsullied, sterile events of Pokemon would have exorcised those naughty thoughts from your mindset.




AthenaMark said:


> So basically Cena did another terrible overrun number...Vickie/AJ drew....Bryan was 1/3 this week. And they don't even trust Punk to draw in his own hometown. Good deal.


A good deal, as in validation of your own taste?


----------



## PHX

Since when does 234 = 238? And no matter what point in his career he still wasn't a tall guy. Not to mention it's known that they always add a few pounds or take them away when it comes to billing them. So you didn't own anybody. For most of his career he was in the 210-225 range. Not that a few pounds matter all that much all that matters is Shawn is the poster boy for the smaller group of wrestlers in comparisons to how big wrestlers usually are and you're just grasping at straws to hate on Bryan, Ryder and Punk when all you have to do is say that you simply don't like them. Not use dumb ass reasoning like a few pounds and claim that the viewers at home are gonna say "Fuck Zack Ryder for not weighing 5 more pounds and doesn't have the ability to give me an orgasm like HBK I'm turning the damn channel."


----------



## Hotdiggity11

TeamRocketGrunt said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kT_9P5TQ9MI
> 
> go to 2:38
> 
> The announcer said hbk was 234 pounds, same as randy orton
> 
> OWNED




And, as we know, the WWE has never exaggerated the height and weight of their wrestlers. Andre the Giant was really 7"5 also, right? :cool2:cool2:cool2:cool2


----------



## TeamRocketGrunt

andre was 8 foot and hbk was 234 pounds, zack ryder is 214, that means he's a midget


----------



## -Skullbone-

TeamRocketGrunt said:


> andre was 8 foot and hbk was 234 pounds, zack ryder is 214, that means he's a midget


Brisbane Lions supporter logic, maybe?

Anyway, all that business aside, I'm still surprised that a few posters in here get so buoyed by the news of ratings rising/dropping favouring (or being against) guys/gals.

I'm guessing its the fandom shining through again and overriding most sense. Yes, it may mean more backstage investment for your guy but I'm curious to know how many support the mindset of backstage and management in the first place (ie: uninteresting and bland story lines, inability to build more the a few people up at a time, and continually propping up the dreaded social media campaign that interferes with the quality of the shows). Your favourite might just seem not so favourable if the big guys back there have their way.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

TeamRocketGrunt said:


> andre was 8 foot and hbk was 234 pounds, zack ryder is 214, that means he's a midget


since you are simply a grunt i am going to ignore you... where is giovanni?


----------



## Hotdiggity11

TeamRocketGrunt said:


> andre was 8 foot


8 foot huh?


----------



## Evolution

TeamRocketGrunt said:


> andre was 8 foot and hbk was 234 pounds, zack ryder is 214, that means he's a midget


Andre the Giant was 2.24m tall, a.k.a 7 ft 4 inches.

HBK was not 234 pounds for the vast majority of his career. You're being ridiculous by using a one-off announced entrance weight by the WWE (wrestling is fictional) as a source for your argument. Stop it. I'm not kidding here.


----------



## Hotdiggity11

Evolution said:


> Andre the Giant was 2.24m tall, a.k.a 7 ft 4 inches.
> 
> HBK was not 234 pounds for the vast majority of his career. You're being ridiculous by using a one-off announced entrance weight by the WWE (wrestling is fictional) as a source for your argument. Stop it. I'm not kidding here.




No Evolution, really, Andre was 8 feet tall. I saw him towering over Manute Bol while demonstrating a sweet sky hook. :cool2:cool2:cool2


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

CM Punk is taller then Shawn.


----------



## Loudness

ITT: Pro wrestling = NBA height + Bodybuilding weight. I feel enlightened, I always thought it was about entertainment aka wrestling skills, charisma, mic skills, storylines, characters and all that irrelevant jazz that made me watch the shows. Need to tweet all the smaller guys to bulk up or else I won't be allowed to like em anymore. I'll start yessing for D Bryan again once he hits the 500 lbs mark so he can be as big as Big Show.


----------



## Rock316AE

Statistics in this case are irrelevant, you can't count muscle mass and body fat as the same thing for example, it's about the build and besides being an exceptional performer with rare presence and charisma, Shawn Michaels was a big guy in tremendous shape in his prime, bigger than HHH at that time. He's not in this discussion.


----------



## -Skullbone-

Rock316AE said:


> Statistics in this case are irrelevant, you can't count muscle mass and body fat as the same thing for example, it's about the build and besides being an exceptional performer with rare presence and charisma, Shawn Michaels was a big guy in tremendous shape in his prime, bigger than HHH at that time. He's not in this discussion.


When a silly poster calls someone a midget (a 'reason' he can't draw) who's ironically taller than his favourite wrestler and still persists with such a ridiculous argument, then it's open season. 

However, it's going too far off topic now. We've had our fun with him so that should be it.


----------



## PHX

Rock316AE said:


> Statistics in this case are irrelevant, you can't count muscle mass and body fat as the same thing for example, it's about the build and besides being an exceptional performer with rare presence and charisma, Shawn Michaels was a big guy in tremendous shape in his prime, bigger than HHH at that time. He's not in this discussion.


Shawn was never known as a "big guy" He's in great shape of course but at the end of the day was still a small guy in comparison to the typical pro wrestler. That is not a bad thing at all it's part of his legacy. When the question pops of of which wrestler paved the way for smaller guys to be world champion his name will come up 9 out of 10 times. Don't know why anyone would try to deny this to try and not put him in that category.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Rock316AE said:


> Statistics in this case are irrelevant, you can't count muscle mass and body fat as the same thing for example, it's about the build and besides being an exceptional performer with rare presence and charisma, Shawn Michaels was a big guy in tremendous shape in his prime, bigger than HHH at that time. He's not in this discussion.


What the fuck are you talking about?

He was known to be the smallest WWE champion ever when he won it from Bret and still to this day is the fourth smallest WWE champion of all time next to Chris Jericho, Eddie Guerrero and Rey Mysterio.

Your ignorance is mind-blowing.


----------



## Rock316AE

Yes, he was at that time when guys like Diesel and Yokozuna were the champions before him, then Hogan/Warrior/Savage/Andre before that etc. I would say that at his physical prime he was the same or close to Bob Backlund. HBK/Eddie/Jericho were all much bigger than Punk BTW so they aren't smallest. My point was that people are looking at the Statistics, height, weight etc, when it's never accurate, especially in wrestling. It's all about the build of the guy. Like Nash explained here a few weeks ago:



> "Shawn Michaels was 6-foot-1 and a half and weighed 225 pounds in his prime. That's a big difference between 5-foot-7. That's a difference between a 6-foot-8 power forward and a 7-foot-1 center. CM Punk doesn't have Shawn Michaels' physical ability. I mean, Vince Carter and [Michael] Jordan are the same size."


----------



## Loudness

HBK wasn't that well conditioned though. He stood out there because everybody else was eating burgers and had water retention all over the place, so having 10% bodyfat with little water was impressive back then regardless of size. Throw him in with Orton, Ziggler and especially JoMo and he would look ugly as hell in comparision. Not to mention, HBK is 5'11, not 6'1 1/2, not even close.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

TeamRocketGrunt said:


> andre was 8 foot and hbk was 234 pounds, zack ryder is 214, that means he's a midget


Andre wasn't 8 feet.
No way.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Rock316AE said:


> Yes, he was at that time when guys like Diesel and Yokozuna were the champions before him, then Hogan/Warrior/Savage/Andre before that etc. I would say that at his physical prime he was the same or close to Bob Backlund. HBK/Eddie/Jericho were all much bigger than Punk BTW so they aren't smallest. My point was that people are looking at the Statistics, height, weight etc, when it's never accurate, especially in wrestling. It's all about the build of the guy. Like Nash explained here a few weeks ago:












But whatever. Shawn's a big guy. Kevin (the worlds highest drawing champion) Nash said otherwise because he doesn't have any bias to his backward ass logic whatsoever.


----------



## Starbuck

CM Punk is taller than Shawn Michaels. Shawn Michaels is more ripped than CM Punk.


----------



## Loudness

CM Punk has better fitness/bodybuilding genetics than HBK though, far better muscleshape, if he would lose 5% bodyfat, or especially 7% he would look great. He has over 15% bf and still doesn't look blocky despite beeing as big as he is, a rare feat.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

HBK and Punk are both vanilla midgets that can't draw. You guys should just accept that Khali is more interesting to casuals.


----------



## James1o1o

This weeks Raw just did the 2nd lowest ratings of the year.

The lowest rating show (May 28th one) was the lowest with a 2.7 but that was due to it being a holiday.

I wonder if this means they are going to roll Vince McMahon in again.


----------



## Loudness

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> HBK and Punk are both vanilla midgets that can't draw. You guys should just accept that Khali is more interesting to casuals.


Giant Gonzales, The Greatest of All Time, literally.


----------



## DrugFreeGeorge

Shawn Michaels vs. CM Punk is something that may never happen. And I'm not okay with that. :-(

-DFG


----------



## funnyfaces1

Shawn Michaels would never accept a match with that liberal, indy, vanilla, anti-draw, atheist, unhygienic, trashy midget Phil.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

funnyfaces1 said:


> Shawn Michaels would never accept a match with that liberal, indy, vanilla, anti-draw, atheist, unhygienic, trashy midget Phil.


I completely agree. HBK would know that since he himself is a anti-draw vanilla midget he would need to work with someone that can actually draw to make up for what he would lose.


----------



## -Skullbone-

Ratings thread has hit a new low, thanks to my innocuous comments about a dolt's interpretation of what a midget is in spite of his favourite wrestler being _billed_ as shorter than the guy he mocks.

We'll look back on this and laugh, fellas.


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner3

LOL so I guess according to ratings logic Mark Herny is better than Shawn Michaels


----------



## Loudness

Mark Henry = GOAT. Mass and Class. He ain't pooring kool-aid out of his heart.


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner3

Rock316AE said:


> Yes, he was at that time when guys like Diesel and Yokozuna were the champions before him, then Hogan/Warrior/Savage/Andre before that etc. I would say that at his physical prime he was the same or close to Bob Backlund. HBK/Eddie/Jericho were all much bigger than Punk BTW so they aren't smallest. My point was that people are looking at the Statistics, height, weight etc, when it's never accurate, especially in wrestling. It's all about the build of the guy. Like Nash explained here a few weeks ago:


Shawn took roids so did Eddie and Jericho that's the only reason their bigger than Punk take the roids away and Punk is bigger than them.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Are people still talking about CM Phil and his anti drawing ability?


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner3

The-Rock-Says said:


> Are people still talking about CM Phil and his anti drawing ability?


Its never gonna end :lol:lol


----------



## The GOAT One

James1o1o said:


> This weeks Raw just did the 2nd lowest ratings of the year.
> 
> The lowest rating show (May 28th one) was the lowest with a 2.7 but that was due to it being a holiday.
> 
> I wonder if this means they are going to roll Vince McMahon in again.


:vince2


----------



## #Mark

I don't understand why people are so adamant in saying that HBK is bigger than Punk? Imo, Punk looks considerably taller and HBK doesn't seem well toned either. While we're on the subject, I never understood why people consider Austin as physically big. He was never especially ripped and was what, 6'1? He's considered one of the greatest stars of all time but to me he seemed to be of both average weight and height. Maybe someone can explain this to me.


----------



## Rock316AE

HBK was in a different league in his physical prime, like I said, he was bigger than HHH for that period. Which is why I don't do "height and weight", all about build. Shawn was a rock with veins popping everywhere, he stood out and looked like a stud, like an athlete, which of course, he was. There are a few guys who can overcome limitations from this type, Shawn Michaels and Rey Mysterio were able to do it based on their amazing talent, athleticism and in Shawn's case, a presence of Andre The Giant in him as a charismatic figure alone. When HBK entered a restaurant, he turned every head in the place because he carried himself and looked like a superstar. That's what separate an average guy in the street that will get lost in a crowd and a legit star.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

The-Rock-Says said:


> Are people still talking about CM Phil and his anti drawing ability?


:lmao



whatever... its astonishing that people are blaming punk though he wasnt in the third hour but yeah keep up the good work...


----------



## Loudness

Rock316AE said:


> HBK was in a different league in his physical prime, like I said, he was bigger than HHH for that period. Which is why I don't do "height and weight", all about build. Shawn was a rock with veins popping everywhere, he stood out and looked like a stud, like an athlete, which of course, he was. There are a few guys who can overcome limitations from this type, Shawn Michaels and Rey Mysterio were able to do it based on their amazing talent, athleticism and in Shawn's case, a presence of Andre The Giant in him as a charismatic figure alone. When HBK entered a restaurant, he turned every head in the place because he carried himself and looked like a superstar. That's what separate an average guy in the street that will get lost in a crowd and a legit star.


Shawn Micheals was nothing but an uglier version of John Morrison. HBK: 5'11", Jomo: 6'2". HBK: 9-10% bodyfat, Jomo:6-8% bodyfat; HBK: Average face; Jomo: Babyface fit for commercials; HBK: Average muscle shape; JoMo: Fitness Model muscle shape. I don't get how someone can think HBK got into the ME by looks, rather than his charisma and ring skills. That was all he was about, and as someone else said, to this date, he still counts as one of the smallest WWE champions ever.


----------



## Rock316AE

You really trying to compare a feminine and shy person like John Morrison to the charisma machine that was Shawn Michaels in his prime? Come on bro, and the statistics like I said before are irrelevant. I never said that Shawn was main eventing because of his size, I said that he had the ability to overcome it with his look and the way he was carrying himself like a megastar, of course along with the fact that he was an unbelievable athlete. 


> There are a few guys who can overcome limitations from this type, Shawn Michaels and Rey Mysterio were able to do it based on their amazing talent, athleticism and in Shawn's case, a presence of Andre The Giant in him as a charismatic figure alone. When HBK entered a restaurant, he turned every head in the place because he carried himself and looked like a superstar. That's what separate an average guy in the street that will get lost in a crowd and a legit star.


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner3

Rock316AE said:


> You really trying to compare a feminine and shy person like John Morrison to the charisma machine that was Shawn Michaels in his prime? Come on bro, and the statistics like I said before are irrelevant. I never said that Shawn was main eventing because of his size, I said that he had the ability to overcome it with his look and the way he was carrying himself like a megastar, of course along with the fact that he was an unbelievable athlete.


What would Shawn look like without roids ?


----------



## Starbuck

ThePeoplezStunner3 said:


> LOL so I guess *according to ratings logic* Mark Herny is better than Shawn Michaels


There is such a thing?


----------



## Cliffy

Im a straight guy but no way was JoMo better looking than Shawn was back in the day.

Dude had a face that was carved by angels.


----------



## PHX

jblvdx said:


> But whatever. Shawn's a big guy. Kevin (the worlds highest drawing champion) Nash said otherwise because he doesn't have any bias to his backward ass logic whatsoever.





Starbuck said:


> CM Punk is taller than Shawn Michaels. Shawn Michaels is more ripped than CM Punk.


Pretty much this stuff right here. All this other nonsense is irrelevant to my original point which is stupid to use height or weight as a reason to diss someone when your favorite wrestler is the poster boy for smaller guys who got into the main event picture. He's a different kind of smaller guy than Punk or Ryder or Eddie but they are all in the same boat no matter what way you wanna try and go around that point.


----------



## Pasab

Hotdiggity11 said:


> 8 foot huh?


Yes, André had 8 foot, he was moreover known as the Octopus Messi in his prime.


----------



## Snothlisberger

God, the last couple of pages are mind numbingly dumb. Enough with the weight stuff. Kid that started it was trollin anyway.


----------



## -Skullbone-

^^^I think your username sums up the last page and a half of this thread.

There's a difference between look and ability. Stars of the business make the big time with both those assets at hand. That's all that needs to be said.


----------



## DegenerateXX

Some of the stupidity in here is just downright mind numbing. This ratings shit is the most retarded argument. If we're going by ratings, Mark Henry is more popular than Punk and HBK. And that is so far from the truth it isn't even funny. A quality show that has multiple stars draws numbers. 

Shawn Michaels IN HIS PRIME was taller and more muscular than Punk. The man has shrunk in his age. Seriously, go back and watch HBK in 97. He was only a little smaller than Austin. I don't know why it even matters. Shawn has never been the biggest man on the block and neither is Punk. Doesn't change the fact that both are charismatic and kickass wrestlers. And that is all that matters.

And no ****, but if we're gonna compare Shawn Michaels to John Morrison in the looks department, both men being popular with women. They both had star-like looks. Shawn Michaels in the 90's looked good enough for Hollywood. Morrison had the look of a rock star I guess you would say, but I wouldn't put him above HBK one bit.


----------



## TeamRocketGrunt

Loudness said:


> Shawn Micheals was nothing but an uglier version of John Morrison. HBK: 5'11", Jomo: 6'2". HBK: 9-10% bodyfat, Jomo:6-8% bodyfat; HBK: Average face; Jomo: Babyface fit for commercials; HBK: Average muscle shape; JoMo: Fitness Model muscle shape. I don't get how someone can think HBK got into the ME by looks, rather than his charisma and ring skills. That was all he was about, and as someone else said, to this date, he still counts as one of the smallest WWE champions ever.


hbk is better looking then morrison you moron


----------



## ChickMagnet12

Just saw the ratings for last week.

Ouch for Ryder and Bryan. That hug segment was boring as hell for me and I'm not surprised it did poorly, I hope they find better things for Bryan now. The final hour was shocking, did people really leave when Punk did? Admittedly due to booking and look the guy isn't exactly Lesnar but how did he manage to draw out so many viewers when he left?

MNF is going to murder Raw. Cena will have DAT 13TH TITLE REIGN! It's Vince's only plan B.


----------



## Kabraxal

ChickMagnet12 said:


> Just saw the ratings for last week.
> 
> Ouch for Ryder and Bryan. That hug segment was boring as hell for me and I'm not surprised it did poorly, I hope they find better things for Bryan now. The final hour was shocking, did people really leave when Punk did? Admittedly due to booking and look the guy isn't exactly Lesnar but how did he manage to draw out so many viewers when he left?
> 
> MNF is going to murder Raw. Cena will have DAT 13TH TITLE REIGN! It's Vince's only plan B.


What's ironic is that is the plan B that has led the WWE into the current rut over the past few years. It's the one move that shows he has no creative ability left. Add that with Cena's booking compared to the echampion's right now and there is your reason the WWE is considered shit by wrestling fans. McMahon just can't accept it that his golden boy isn't so golden.


----------



## AthenaMark

LOL. John Morrison wasn't no damn 6'2...5'10 MAYBE and that was it.


----------



## mblonde09

HBK is under 6', and anyone who thinks he got anywhere near 238lbs is having a laugh, and to at any time, have him bigger than HHH at 255lbs, is a joke. I've read stuff that saying that Michaels' true weight was barely over 200lbs. But in the end, whether Punk is bigger than HBK is irrelevant, as Punk has overcome his lack of size with amazing talent and putting on stellar performances, night in, night out, like Michaels himself did. 



KO Bossy said:


> Yeah I think the crowds would disagree that he inspires no heat. And there is no way that he's worse than super Cena who hasn't changed in 7 years and constantly ruins matches due to retarded booking where he wins with 2 moves. That just shits on pro wrestling.
> 
> 
> 
> No offense *but that's kind of a stupid reason*. You can't hate Cena more than Punk because you can't be on Punk's side ever?


Have you read his posts? Virtually everything he posts, regarding Punk is stupid, eg, posting stupid pictures of a pizza delivery scooter. He wants to be Rock316AE's little sidekick so bad... it's rather pathetic, IYAM.


----------



## D.M.N.

Hour 1 - 3.777m
Hour 2 - 4.362m
Hour 3 - 4.270m

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ny-basketball-wives-major-crimes-more/148125/

Not going to comment on Hour 3 in the circumstances, but I think they will be pleased with Hour 1 and 2.


----------



## JY57

not bad going up against MNF


----------



## Ether

JY57 said:


> not bad going up against MNF


my thoughts exactly


----------



## Starbuck

bama


----------



## #1Peep4ever

D.M.N. said:


> Hour 1 - 3.777m
> Hour 2 - 4.362m
> Hour 3 - 4.270m
> 
> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ny-basketball-wives-major-crimes-more/148125/
> 
> Not going to comment on Hour 3 in the circumstances, but I think they will be pleased with Hour 1 and 2.


what was in hour 2? i wouldnt have though they will make 3.5mio viewers


----------



## JY57

#1Peep4ever said:


> what was in hour 2? i wouldnt have though they will make 3.5mio viewers


Punk/Orton/Ziggler/Lawler was about 40 minutes from hour 2. Recap of Kane/Bryan hugging with music, a segment with AJ Lee/Kane/Bryan/Dr. Shelby, Ryder/Ryback/Slater, & AJ Lee/PTP segment


----------



## #1Peep4ever

JY57 said:


> Punk/Orton/Ziggler/Lawler was about 40 minutes from hour 2. Recap of Kane/Bryan hugging with music, a segment with AJ Lee/Kane/Bryan/Dr. Shelby, Ryder/Ryback/Slater, & AJ Lee/PTP segment


ok thank you... will be interesting to see which segment(s) made the difference


----------



## KO Bossy

Ay...and its only gonna get worse as the season progresses. What rating does this translate into? Has to be lower than last week.


----------



## The GOAT One

Not bad numbers considering they were going ONE ON ONE with NFL.


----------



## Choke2Death

Certainly an improvement over last week.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Not good, but as said not terrible given the circumstances.

Although tbh, I would've actually thought hour 3 would be given a boost with what happened to Lawler as people would tune in to hear any update on him after what happened. I know after reading on the forums about it (since I wasn't paying attention to the the stuff between when it happened and Cole finishing his first update on the matter) I was staying tuned in to hear any possible update on his condition and hoping he'd be okay.

Social Media score was up though and was number 1 on cable, so I'd at least think what happened to Lawler greatly contributed to that.

But besides that, and the lower numbers than usual, it's the same ordinary story. Hour 2 does the best, hour 3 second best, and hour 1 the worst... though I think hour 1 was better than hour 3 last week, but not sure.


----------



## JY57

http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe...r_Flair_Talks_Lawler.html#Mus4u3BG0kQSyyOH.99



> - In an update on the RAW rating, the show did a 2.88 cable rating. In comparison, the two Monday Night Football games on ESPN did 10.96 million viewers and 10.45 million viewers.


----------



## Starbuck

And the era of the 2.0's begins lol.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Last year the very same Raw got a 2.7. So its an improvement over last year at least


----------



## Vyed

> WWE Raw on Monday, September 10 scored a 2.88 rating against Week 1 of ESPN's Monday Night Football coverage. The rating was up slightly from a 2.83 rating last week.
> 
> The standard two-hour Raw rating was a 2.98, up from a 2.85 rating for the two-hour block last week due to a stronger third hour with viewers tuning in for updates on Jerry Lawler's health.
> 
> - Raw averaged 4.14 million viewers, down two percent from 4.20 million viewers on Labor Day Monday last week. Hourly Break Down:
> 
> 8:00 p.m. EST: 3.77 million viewers, which was the fewest first hour viewers during the three-hour Raw era. The first hour was down 12 percent compared to last week's first hour.
> 
> 9:00 p.m. EST: 4.36 million viewers, which was slightly down from 4.40 million second hour viewers last week.
> 
> 10:00 p.m. EST: 4.27 million viewers as viewers gravitated toward Raw for updates on Jerry Lawler's health. This was up from 3.91 million viewers in last week's third hour, but three percent below the final hour average in the three-hour era.
> 
> - On cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #3 in overall viewers behind the NFL and "Major Crimes" on TNT, #2 on in all key demographics behind the NFL, and ranked #1 among male teens. About four times as many males 18-49 watched NFL compared to Raw.
> 
> - Last year's Raw against Week 1 of the NFL scored a 2.71 rating for the standard two-hour block.


.


----------



## Choke2Death

HEART ATTACKS = RATINGZ~!!!!

Sorry, I just had to, lol.


----------



## Rock316AE

Bret and Lawler probably helped a lot. Bret and the awesome energy and ovation the audience gave him at the start and people wanting to hear any new updates on King's condition. I imagine that the next SD rating is going to be bigger than usual. But yeah, this 2.9 is the sky for them today, I actually expected a 2.6 before Bret was announced.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Bret Hart's first appearance on TV in Montreal brought in tons of viewers, including myself. Cena and Punk also did a fantastic job building up their feud.


----------



## Pro Royka

If it was a two hour show, what will the numbers be.


----------



## Starbuck

Regardless of my feelings about it, I expect the overrun to do well this week. They advertised Cena in there with Bret in a promo. That should bring the people in.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

I'm marvelled at the third hour being the second lowest as I though people would of tuned to see what the fuck was happening with Lawler as it was all over Twitter and Facebook.

The Cena/Bret overrun would of done well and maybe the Orton V Punk match as PunkVOrton was trending on twitter through the match and for once its a match with two big names instead of the usual big name vs mid carder/upper mid carder quarter hour matches that happen often.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

You know what's great though about Punk vs. Orton? No matter whether the segment gains or losses, mark wars between the groups of fans will ensue. 

*If it gains and does well*

"OMG ORTON'S DA DRAWZ!!!"

"NO LOL PUNK WAS ADVERTISED ORTON IS THE RATINGS KILLER!"

"LOL HE DONT LOSE RATINGS IN OVERRUN LIKE PUNK! PPL HERD ORTON WAS IN MATCH AND TUNED IN!"

"PUNK'S BEST IN WORLD ORTON'S A FAKE VIPER!"

"PUNK SUX!"

"ORTON SUX!"

And if the segment doesn't do well:

"OMG PUNK'S A FUCKING RATINGS FAILURE!"

"WTF YOU TALKIN' BOUT? ORTON KILLED SD RATINGS LAST YEAR!"

"PUNK SUX!"

"ORTON SUX!"


This is going to be fun.

--

The overrun will probably do better than it would have with the Lawler stuff happening and people tuning in hoping Lawler's okay. Add that with Hart/Cena and then eventually Hart/Cena/Punk, it should be a great overrun number.


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner3

Obis said:


> You know what's great though about Punk vs. Orton? No matter whether the segment gains or losses, mark wars between the groups of fans will ensue.
> 
> *If it gains and does well*
> 
> "OMG ORTON'S DA DRAWZ!!!"
> 
> "NO LOL PUNK WAS ADVERTISED ORTON IS THE RATINGS KILLER!"
> 
> "LOL HE DONT LOSE RATINGS IN OVERRUN LIKE PUNK! PPL HERD ORTON WAS IN MATCH AND TUNED IN!"
> 
> "PUNK'S BEST IN WORLD ORTON'S A FAKE VIPER!"
> 
> "PUNK SUX!"
> 
> "ORTON SUX!"
> 
> And if the segment doesn't do well:
> 
> "OMG PUNK'S A FUCKING RATINGS FAILURE!"
> 
> "WTF YOU TALKIN' BOUT? ORTON KILLED SD RATINGS LAST YEAR!"
> 
> "PUNK SUX!"
> 
> "ORTON SUX!"
> 
> 
> This is going to be fun.
> 
> --
> 
> The overrun will probably do better than it would have with the Lawler stuff happening and people tuning in hoping Lawler's okay. Add that with Hart/Cena and then eventually Hart/Cena/Punk, it should be a great overrun number.


gonna get some popcorn


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Hour 3 still down from hour 2. It just hits the fact home, 3 hours is too damn long.


----------



## wb1899

A18-49 viewership:
08:00P-09:00P: 1.549 million viewers
09:00P-10:00P: 1.851 million viewers
10:00P-11:15P: 1.984 million viewers


----------



## Vyed

The-Rock-Says said:


> Hour 3 still down from hour 2. It just hits the fact home, 3 hours is too damn long.


Its probably the new pattern.


----------



## Loudness

Lold at the guy getting banned for saying HBK is better looking than JoMo.

Either way, are the quarter hours out yet?


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

> In the segment-by-segment, Kofi Kingston & R-Truth vs. The Miz & Antonio Cesaro lost 426,000 viewers. That’s terrible because they actually had most of the viewers there at 8 p.m., but lost them after the Bret Hart opening segment. The Sheamus-David Otunga deposition gained 403,000. Even in the first hour that’s good. Eve Torres & Kaitlyn & Layla vs. Natalya & Beth Phoenix & Alicia Fox lost 145,000 viewers. C.M. Punk vs. Randy Orton gained 555,000 viewers at the 9 p.m. time slot when people are used to tuning in. Punk & Dolph Ziggler vs. Orton & Jerry Lawler gained 7,000 viewers. The Kane/Daniel Bryan backstage with Dr. Shelby plus Heath Slater vs. Ryback lost 247,000 viewers. Kane & Daniel Bryan vs. Titus O’Neil & Darren Young gained 164,000 viewers to a 3.08, which is still lackluster growth at 10 p.m. One thing notable of late is that you’re not getting the 10 p.m. growth anywhere near what it used to be, probably because they are wearing out the audience. Alberto Del Rio vs. Tyson Kidd and Sheamus vs. David Otunga gained 38,000 viewers. At 10:30 p.m., where you would expect a pick-up with social media blowing up about Lawler, it didn’t happen. Booker T and A.J. on stage, some backstage stuff and a Michael Cole update lost 342,000 viewers. So the flat show as far as no announcing as far as ratings went meant more than social media telling people what was going on. Rey Mysterio vs. Cody Rhodes gained 33,000 viewers. The final segment with Hart, Cena and Punk gained 407,000 viewers.


This thread would of been well more fun if the Orton V Punk match didn't do good.


----------



## Choke2Death

Sheamus is starting to become a draw slowly! LET'S GO SHEAMUS!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## vanboxmeer

So the two feuding anti-draws together created a universe backlogic flip that caused a decent drawing 9pm segment.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Choke2Death said:


> Sheamus is starting to become a draw slowly! LET'S GO SHEAMUS!!!!!!!!!!!


still cant see how you see his reign being any more interesting than punks but well to each his own i guess


----------



## funnyfaces1

How on earth did Ryback not draw, yet Phil and Randall put on a drawing clinic?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Well... 9PM gains in the number it usually does. 10PM does decently enough considering it's not been a big gainer in months, and the overrun was an average gain. 

Punk/Orton and the match following with the two gaining is great, even if it was a very low gain and shows they had kept people's interest and others tuned in to check it out. Sheamus/Otunga had a good gain, but unless I'm incorrect in my math it's still under what the start of the show was, and for most of the shows since Raw 1000 the 8PM slot has been one of the weaker slots of the opening hour and the whole show. So Sheamus/Otunga's gain happened because nearly the same number of people tuned out the prior quarter. 

I'm surprised they didn't see a large gain at least in the overrun with what happened to Lawler. Either people just couldn't bare watching the show anymore for the night after reading what happened to Lawler, or they just felt no need to. It's still an average overrun gain and the highest segment of the night I believe, but I guess I shouldn't have expected more when thinking more about it.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Punk with dem ratings.


----------



## Starbuck

Well I think it has become official now. 9PM is the new 10PM. Punk/Orton did very well there and the following tag match. I don't really know what to say about the rest tbh. The overrun had a disappointing gain for a 2 hour show but I think this has become the norm for the 3 hour shows now? I don't know. Other than that it's a pretty boring breakdown. Nobody can fight over this one lol. BORING.


----------



## KO Bossy

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Punk with dem ratings.


Yeah, but no one else will admit it.

Get used to the 2s, people. With football season just under way we'll be seeing a lot more of them.


----------



## Starbuck

KO Bossy said:


> *Yeah, but no one else will admit it*.
> 
> Get used to the 2s, people. With football season just under way we'll be seeing a lot more of them.


Admit what? Punk with Bret Hart, Punk with Randy Orton and Punk with John Cena had the highest segments of the night? Shocker lol. Equal credit where it's due.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Admit what? Punk with Bret Hart, Punk with Randy Orton and Punk with John Cena had the highest segments of the night? Shocker lol. Equal credit where it's due.


Hell fucking no. Punk doesn't bring the ratings. Punk is the ratings! No one else deserves credit for it!


----------



## Starbuck

Obis said:


> Hell fucking no. Punk doesn't bring the ratings. Punk is the ratings! No one else deserves credit for it!


Punk is the ratings? Big 2.8? :vince2


----------



## ChickMagnet12

It's all Punk's fault of course.

trollface.jpg


----------



## Rock316AE

The Hitman opened strong with the awesome ovation. Sheamus starting to do big, they also increased the SD rating this week, Sheamus skit was good(Sheamus is not Ric Flair but he is getting more and more natural)and he was able to hold people for a squash match. I imagine that Jerry's condition helped and hurt, one because people wanting to hear update on what happened(And the tag match teaser with Orton which held the audience)and two because nobody cared about the product after hearing such a terrible, real life situation. Other than that, standard.


----------



## NearFall

Starbuck said:


> Punk is the ratings? Big 2.8? :vince2


Would be 0.8 without him. unk


----------



## Pro Royka

Punk have been gaining viewers for more than a month now. You give him the attention, you get your result. In another hand we have some matches that keeps on losing monster viewers, should just give them a break or let them go they are not helping. Guys like Santino, Heath, Miz (should not be used for a match, maybe for a segment) Zack, etc.


----------



## dxbender

Surprised the ratings didn't jump when the Lawler stuff happened, you'd think lots of people(WWE fans or not) would tune in to see what's happening. Though I guess there were way more updates online than on WWETV


----------



## e1987p

Eve Torres & Kaitlyn & Layla vs. Natalya & Beth Phoenix & Alicia Fox lost 145,000 viewers.

The divas stuff last exactly 5 minutes.So it's only 1/3 of the quarter.
The other things happened in the quarter ?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Starbuck said:


> Punk is the ratings? Big 2.8? :vince2


Damn right Punk's the ratings. Just like last week, if he were to leave, the audience would too. unk



Obis said:


> Hell fucking no. Punk doesn't bring the ratings. Punk is the ratings! No one else deserves credit for it!


Well, yes. But the credit should only be shared if a Punk segment does well. If it doesn't however, it's all on Punk. Get with the ratings~ logic around here, Obis.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Damn right Punk's the ratings. Just like last week, if he were to leave, the audience would too. unk
> 
> 
> 
> Well, yes. But the credit should only be shared if a Punk segment does well. If it doesn't however, it's all on Punk. Get with the ratings~ logic around here, Obis.


I thought the ratings logic around here was if a segment with Punk does well, it's because of everyone except Punk, not shared equally?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Obis said:


> I thought the ratings logic around here was if a segment with Punk does well, it's because of everyone except Punk, not shared equally?


You're right, my mistake. What was I thinking giving Punk any bit of credit. How could I forget perhaps the most important piece of the WF ratings logic. Still much to learn.


----------



## Starbuck

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Well, yes. But the credit should only be shared if a Punk segment does well. If it doesn't however, it's all on Punk. Get with the ratings~ logic around here, Obis.





Obis said:


> I thought the ratings logic around here was if a segment with Punk does well, it's because of everyone except Punk, not shared equally?


Oh hush you two and stop getting butthurt. Context and common sense is clearly lost on some. Punk + Cena = segment does well = OMGZ PUNK BRINGS DEM RATINGS. Punk + ADR = segment does bad = OMGZ DEL RIO IZ DA RATINGS KILLA. Equal credit where it's due. Stop doing what you both get mad over others doing.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Starbuck said:


> Oh hush you two and stop getting butthurt. Context and common sense is clearly lost on some. Punk + Cena = segment does well = OMGZ PUNK BRINGS DEM RATINGS. Punk + ADR = segment does bad = OMGZ DEL RIO IZ DA RATINGS KILLA. Equal credit where it's due. Stop doing what you both get mad over others doing.


Hey now, I have to stand up for my boy Punk~

I wasn't being serious, I was only having a bit of fun, just like you and I assume Obis were as well. That's pretty much how I treat this thread nowadays lol. All joking aside, what you've said is what I've been saying for a while. The credit, as well as the blame whatever the case may be, should be shared equally. It isn't a one man show. Of course, that's not what happens in here. It's mark wars, all the time.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Oh hush you two and stop getting butthurt. Context and common sense is clearly lost on some. Punk + Cena = segment does well = OMGZ PUNK BRINGS DEM RATINGS. Punk + ADR = segment does bad = OMGZ DEL RIO IZ DA RATINGS KILLA. Equal credit where it's due. Stop doing what you both get mad over others doing.


:lmao



> Hey now, I have to stand up for my boy Punk~
> 
> I was only having a bit of fun, just like you and I assume Obis were as well. That's pretty much how I treat this thread nowadays lol. All joking aside, what you've said is what I've been saying for a while. The credit, as well as the blame whatever the case may be, should be shared equally. It isn't a one man show. Of course, that's not what happens in here. It's mark wars, all the time.


Agreed. And if you can't beat em, join em!


----------



## Starbuck

I'm never being serious except when I'm being serious. 

unk2


----------



## Wayne Rooney's Fellatio Slave

I'm blaming the serious lack of Hornswoggle for the ratings. The 0 - 3 demographic need their hero!


----------



## DesolationRow

Heart attacks do not = ratings. Thank goodness. With Monday Night Football back, if the Lawler incident popped a rating, Vince would be proposing another death storyline as we type.


----------



## Choke2Death

DesolationRow said:


> Heart attacks do not = ratings. Thank goodness. With Monday Night Football back, if the Lawler incident popped a rating, Vince would be proposing another death storyline as we type.


I was about to quote my original post with "Heart attacks kill ratings" as response.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> I'm never being serious except when I'm being serious.
> 
> unk2


Then don't ever be serious.


----------



## krai999

not surprised by the ratings for punk vs orton. I mean c'mon which one of you guys didn't tune out for when the match was on?


----------



## Starbuck

DesolationRow said:


> Heart attacks do not = ratings. Thank goodness. With Monday Night Football back, if the Lawler incident popped a rating, Vince would be proposing another death storyline as we type.


He's not that fucking bad. Remembers he wanted to put his own daughter's wedding on PPV. Remembers he wanted to be the kayfabe father to his own daughters child. Hangs head in shame.

WRASSLIN IZ SRS BIZNUS.


----------



## Rock316AE

:flair3

The scripted Ric Flair heart attack in 1998 did great numbers, but that's not really an indicator because it's WRESTLING GOD! Naich who can sell you that he hates alcohol and it was part of the Bischoff/Flair program which did huge almost every week.


----------



## NearFall

Starbuck said:


> I'm never being serious except when I'm being serious.
> 
> unk2


As serious as Brock feeling the feel because he senses it?




Starbuck said:


> He's not that fucking bad. Remembers he wanted to put his own daughter's wedding on PPV. Remembers he wanted to be the kayfabe father to his own daughters child. Hangs head in shame.
> 
> WRASSLIN IZ SRS BIZNUS.


He did fight God though, and won.


----------



## Starbuck

NearFall said:


> As serious as Brock feeling the feel because he senses it?


As serious as Punk's ice cream bars, as serious as Cena's fruity pebbles, as serious as Rock's twitter trends, as serious as Trips new haircut and as serious as Vince's lunacy. I'm very fucking serious.


----------



## NearFall

Starbuck said:


> *As serious as Punk's ice cream bars*, as serious as Cena's fruity pebbles, as serious as Rock's twitter trends, as serious as Trips new haircut and as serious as Vince's lunacy. I'm very fucking serious.


That's insulting, Punk would never lie. He is still working on that. Change takes time. Ask Obama. He would agree. unk2


----------



## DesolationRow

y so srs?


----------



## Starbuck

John Cena said Punk is irrelevant so he's irrelevant OK?


----------



## NearFall

DesolationRow said:


> y so srs?


CM Punk's promises are srs bsns.




Starbuck said:


> John Cena said Punk is irrelevant so he's irrelevant OK?


----------



## KO Bossy

*Looks at Miz/Cesaro vs Truth/Kofi ratings*

Hmmm...Truth and Kofi won and the segment experienced a gigantic loss.

*Looks at Kane/Bryan vs PTP*

Hmmm...Kane and Bryan won and the segment gained viewers.


Conclusion-minorities beating up white people loses ratings. On the other hand, white people beating up minorities gains ratings. Interesting. The proof is all right there.


----------



## Vyed

With Hart/Cena promoted throughout the show, I expected Overrun to do much better than 400k gain.


----------



## Amuroray

Orton always draws alot.That 9 pm slot is great to draw in.Punk did better then usual proably beucase of hart.

Cena continues his incredible drawing record.


----------



## Amuroray

Orton always draws alot.That 9 pm slot is great to draw in.Punk did better then usual proably beucase of hart.

Cena continues his incredible drawing record.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Ah fuck. I was really looking forward to coming in here and giving CM Phil stick. Well, there is always next week.


----------



## funnyfaces1

The-Rock-Says said:


> Ah fuck. I was really looking forward to coming in here and giving CM Phil stick. Well, there is always next week.


Haven't you been saying this for the past few weeks? By some stroke of miracle, Phil has actually not been blundering with regards to ratings. I guess we will have to keep waiting for our favorite vanilla midget to falter.


----------



## RomelKBonnett

Amuroray said:


> Orton always draws alot.That 9 pm slot is great to draw in.Punk did better then usual proably beucase of hart.
> 
> Cena continues his incredible drawing record.


Yes I'm sure Punk only drew because of Hart. There is no way he can draw by himself.(SARCASM)


----------



## ThePhenomRises

Starbuck is mod! WATCH OUT HHH HATERS!:

Great, DesoRow too! Congrats to you both.


----------



## wwffans123

Yes


----------



## A-C-P

ThePhenomRises said:


> Starbuck is mod! WATCH OUT HHH HATERS!:
> 
> Great, DesoRow too! Congrats to you both.


Congrats to Both!


----------



## NearFall

*Starbuck's* gonna go on a burying spree in this thread, inspired by his boy, Triple Haitch.


----------



## D.M.N.

Quarter Hours - September 10th, 2012
Q1 - 4.031m
Q2 - 3.605m
Q3 - 4.008m
Q4 - 3.863m
Q5 - 4.418m
Q6 + Q7 - 4.432m 
Q8 - 4.185m
Q9 - 4.349m
Q10 - 4.387m
Q11 - 4.045m
Q12 - 4.078m
Overrun - 4.485m

The overrun gain actually wasn't great considering Q11 and Q12.


----------



## Green Light

Makes sense, Starbuck is an ass-kissing politicker just like his heroes Cena and Aich Aich Aich unk2


----------



## NearFall

Green Light said:


> Makes sense, Starbuck is an ass-kissing politicker just like his heroes Cena and Aich Aich Aich unk2


I should have a CM Punk inspired Pipe-Bomb to become a Mod unk


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

NearFall said:


> I should have a CM Punk inspired Pipe-Bomb to become a Mod unk


Just don't say the "D" word and you shouldn't make any immediate enemies to get in your way.


----------



## Starbuck

I could respond to these horrible posts about me but I'll just rise above, like Cena, and bury your asses if you fuck me off, like Hunter.


----------



## NearFall

Starbuck said:


>


----------



## Starbuck

Nobody gives a fuck about Punk so you aren't alone in that. :vince2


----------



## NearFall

Starbuck said:


> Nobody gives a fuck about Punk so you aren't alone in that. :vince2


Then why is the most discussed in this forum. unk2


----------



## The GOAT One

Ratings thread getting heated and it isn't even Tuesday night :kg2


----------



## Starbuck

NearFall said:


> Then why is the most discussed in this forum. unk2


Because Rock, Taker, HHH, Lesnar and all the relevant people are gone. People only talk about Punk when there's nobody else to talk about.

unk


----------



## NearFall

Starbuck said:


> Because Rock, Taker, HHH, Lesnar and all the relevant people are gone. People only talk about Punk when there's nobody else to talk about.
> 
> unk


Shame he gets involved in all Rock threads then. unk3


----------



## Starbuck

NearFall said:


> Shame he gets involved in all Rock threads then. unk3


Punk only calls Rock DWAYYNNEE to piss off his marks into talking about him on wrestling forum because nobody wants to talk about him otherwise.

:rocky


----------



## NearFall

Starbuck said:


> Punk only calls Rock DWAYYNNEE to piss off his marks into talking about him on wrestling forum because nobody wants to talk about him otherwise.
> 
> :rocky



Heh. Then why does Punk aswell as Rock trend on twittah? Not to mention the staple fact that he is featured on the most socially active RAWs EVER! :vince


----------



## Starbuck

NearFall said:


> Heh. Then why does Punk aswell as Rock trend on twittah? Not to mention the staple fact that he is featured on the most socially active RAWs EVER! :vince


Punk cut his hair and no fucks were given. Triple H cuts his hair and trends worldwide on a Wednesday. He doesn't need the most socially active Raw's to be relevant. 

:hhh

Rock tweets #boots2asses, trends worldwide. 

:rocky

Punk tweets #kicks2faces, no fucks given. 

unk3

John Cena

:cena2


----------



## Choke2Death

Probably because his marks desperately want to make him relevant so they name-drop him on 1000 back-to-back tweets when Raw is on.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Dat sour, embarrassing Punk hate.


----------



## dxbender

Comparing Punk/Cena to Rock/Austin is like comparing Crosby/Ovechkin to Gretzky/Lemieux, or Lebron/Kobe to MJ/Magic


----------



## Starbuck

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Dat sour, embarrassing Punk hate.


:vince2

(Yes, this is my favorite smiley lol)


----------



## BANKSY

Rock only selling 1% more merch than Punk @ MSG for his own in ring return .

:torres


----------



## NearFall

Starbuck said:


> Punk cut his hair and no fucks were given. Triple H cuts his hair and trends worldwide on a Wednesday. He doesn't need the most socially active Raw's to be relevant.
> 
> :hhh


Need I remind you?

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/630325-cm-punk-returning-his-awesome-hair-style.html



Starbuck said:


> Rock tweets #boots2asses, trends worldwide.
> 
> :rocky
> 
> Punk tweets #kicks2faces, no fucks given.


#GOATface ... Running gag for a character :kobe



Starbuck said:


> John Cena
> 
> :cena2


CM Punk unk



Choke2Death said:


> Probably because his marks desperately want to make him relevant so they name-drop him on 1000 back-to-back tweets when Raw is on.


Majority of Punk's twittah that gets retweeted is from his haters. How do you feel to be adding to the great success of the great man CM Punk? :cena2



Lil'Jimmy said:


> Rock only selling 1% more merch than Punk @ MSG for his own in ring return .
> 
> :torres


1% away from being CM GOAT unk2


----------



## JY57

so now Punk/Cena are like Rock/Austin? Now I heard everything.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

NearFall has taken this very serious. It's Ok. CM Phil is a huge star.


----------



## NearFall

The-Rock-Says said:


> NearFall has taken this very serious. It's Ok. CM Phil is a huge star.


As serious as Phil is taking Cena's promo last Monday. unk3 He is not as big as Dolph Ziggler or Cody Rhodes can be. He should put them over.


----------



## SPCDRI

The most troubling thing to me is the third hour drop off in viewership. 3 hours is just TOO LONG for a weekly wrestling product. 

I'm a nut, but I was advocating for just the opposite for 3 Hour RAW: 90 minute RAW. Cut the filler, cut the recap shit, all killer, 90 minutes and a 5 to 15 minute overrun. 7 to about 8:45 with the overrun.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

CM Phil needs to maybe go away for a while and find himself. Then come back and become a better person. Like Cena. :cena


----------



## NearFall

He is a bad man. Canada and Cena said so. I think he will need to leave with the WWE Championship again. Maybe for 2 weeks this time.


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner3

Cm Punk is the Meg of Ratings :lmao:lmao:lmao


----------



## funnyfaces1

JY57 said:


> so now Punk/Cena are like Rock/Austin? Now I heard everything.


You're right. Punk/Cena is far better than those vanilla midgets.


----------



## NearFall

unk2


----------



## Tnmore

NearFall said:


> unk2


:lmao

One more thing i remember related to the ratings, is when Punk made a joke about Kevin Nash last year, that when he walks it makes the sound "Kliq" "Kliq" and that it is also happens to be the sound of the remote when people change the channel. That comment backfired on him completely lol.


----------



## Choke2Death

Tnmore said:


> :lmao
> 
> One more thing i remember related to the ratings, is when Punk made a joke about Kevin Nash last year, that when he walks it makes the sound "Kliq" "Kliq" and that it is also happens to be the sound of the remote when people change the channel. That comment backfired on him completely lol.


That proved one thing. Karma is a bitch, Mr. Punk! To hell with Kevin Nash, though.

And that fan with the "Ratings" sign should be sued by WWE for lying to them. :lol


----------



## NearFall

Tnmore said:


> :lmao
> 
> One more thing i remember related to the ratings, is when Punk made a joke about Kevin Nash last year, that when he walks it makes the sound "Kliq" "Kliq" and that it is also happens to be the sound of the remote when people change the channel. That comment backfired on him completely lol.


Meh. Nash probably tore a quad changing the channel when he sees Punk. Bitter and all. :cool2


----------



## Ether

Wonder how many viewers MizTV lost


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

If was on the 9-9:15 quarter so there will most likely be a gain. The question is whether or not the gain will be good.


----------



## TheUltimateSmark

Yall do know that ratings are based on only 30,000 people that signed up for Neison boxes right??? Ratings are not important.


----------



## Starbuck

Ether said:


> Wonder how many viewers MizTV lost


At one time Miz was in the midst of becoming a legit ratings draw actually. His Making Miztory segment drew something like 1 million viewers featuring just him by himself with no help from a top name. That's something neither Punk, Orton, Bryan or whoever the hell else stupid mark wars erupt over has done. On other occasions in unusual slots with stupid things (Subway promo) he has gained and proven that if they actually put effort into him, people are prepared to watch. It's quite a shame what has happened to him since then tbh.


----------



## NearFall

*Starbuck* no selling my post as good as Seamus. Anyway, he is right about Miz though. Real shame how far he has fallen.


----------



## Choke2Death

NearFall said:


> *Starbuck** no selling my post as good as Seamus.* Anyway, he is right about Miz though. Real shame how far he has fallen.


:lmao

It sucks how much Moz has lost of his momentum. Even if they tried they can't create stars, I'm starting to think.


----------



## KO Bossy

Choke2Death said:


> :lmao
> 
> It sucks how much Moz has lost of his momentum. Even if they tried they can't create stars, I'm starting to think.


Yeah, and then when they don't try, guys get over. Look at Ziggler at NoC on Sunday. People were booing Orton and jeering him while chanting FOR Ziggler. This is the guy who has been flattened right before whenever he tries to cash in his MiTB briefcase. Who has jobbed to Orton and Sheamus week after week for eons. Who was jobbing to Brodus fucking Clay earlier this year. Who was stuck in a dead end tag team with Jack "Black Hole of Charisma" Swagger. The fans are still into him and getting behind him DESPITE all the roadblocks the Fed has put up.


----------



## Starbuck

KO Bossy said:


> Yeah, and then when they don't try, guys get over. Look at Ziggler at NoC on Sunday. People were booing Orton and jeering him while chanting FOR Ziggler. This is the guy who has been flattened right before whenever he tries to cash in his MiTB briefcase. Who has jobbed to Orton and Sheamus week after week for eons. Who was jobbing to Brodus fucking Clay earlier this year. Who was stuck in a dead end tag team with Jack "Black Hole of Charisma" Swagger. *The fans are still into him and getting behind him DESPITE all the roadblocks the Fed has put up.*


Smarks are starting to bandwagon him BECAUSE of all the roadblocks WWE are supposedly putting in his way. If he had a smooth and easy ride to the top guaranteed that this place would be hating on him like they're currently hating on Ryback or Seamus. 

And WWE don't make stars anymore. They give some guys their 15 minutes, in most cases, with John Cena, before having Cena put them back in their place again.


----------



## NearFall

Starbuck said:


> And WWE don't make stars anymore. They give some guys their 15 minutes, in most cases, with John Cena, before having Cena put them back in their place again.


I have actually seen that as quite a pattern. Nexus, Miz are two prime examples. They rise but then lose to Cena, following that they simply lose it all. I remember reading a rumour that Vince buries new talents to a degree to see how they "take it" before pushing them again. It actually seems that way.


----------



## Choke2Death

KO Bossy said:


> Yeah, and then when they don't try, guys get over. Look at Ziggler at NoC on Sunday. People were booing Orton and jeering him while chanting FOR Ziggler. This is the guy who has been flattened right before whenever he tries to cash in his MiTB briefcase. Who has jobbed to Orton and Sheamus week after week for eons. Who was jobbing to Brodus fucking Clay earlier this year. Who was stuck in a dead end tag team with Jack "Black Hole of Charisma" Swagger. The fans are still into him and getting behind him DESPITE all the roadblocks the Fed has put up.


A better example would be Daniel Bryan IMO. He was starting to get over just fine as World Champion then they tried to bury him hard at Wrestlemania with that 18 seconds crap to the point where he would be tossed to the curb and a jobber doing absolutely nothing. Then he got over to the point where he can battle Cena, Punk, Orton and whoever else for the most over in the company and they had no choice but to give him something to do. And now they've done their best to make him relevant without giving him a World Title by making him a comedy heel with Kane. I mean, yeah, that's some pretty funny stuff they're doing (even his haters here admit it) but Bryan and Kane both are better than being comedy characters.

The problem is Vince's stubbornness. He only pushes those who he likes. Take Alberto del Rio for instance. No one gives two fucks about him in the audience but he continues to get title runs, title shots, beat top guys, win gimmick matches and anything you can possibly think of. But he still can't get a reaction to save his life. Then there's someone like Zack Ryder. Yeah, he sucks and is a jobber at best but he got over and got a push while he was at his hottest. Quickly they turned him into a stupid geek that was tossed around by Kane and outsmarted by Eve until he once again became a jobber that comes out and loses in 1 minute long squash matches to Alberto. Or take Christian for another example. I know he's old now and all, but he was extremely over last year and could have done something good as World Champion but they cut his legs off before he even had a chance and now he's a jobber and never even shows up to Raw or SD. If somebody gets over despite not being liked by Vince, they'll do anything to sabotage said person's momentum. But if it's Vince's pet project, he'll continue to shove him down the audience's throat and never give up. The question remains on whether he'll ever stop the Del Rio push but that's always the example to use for "pushed despite being unimportant".


----------



## NearFall

The redeeming case for Del Rio though, which has been very evident, is that he is incredibly over in his specific target market, Mexico. Now, while he is of course considered to be a top a heel and should be more over than he is with the general audience, Vince specifically wanted him to be a big draw for the mexican/luchador market. Which he is. The RAWs where he got the big "Culero" chants, the same areas in which Rey Mysterio is targeted for. Sin Cara is also the same. Sadly, despite the fact that he is not that over with the general audience, his target audience absolutely hate him, and we are in desperate need of heels. So Del Rio will continue to be pushed. 

That all said, I still find him terribly boring.

As for the rest. Good post *Choke2Death*, although 2005 was the time to really give Christian a main-event run.


----------



## KO Bossy

Choke2Death said:


> A better example would be Daniel Bryan IMO. He was starting to get over just fine as World Champion then they tried to bury him hard at Wrestlemania with that 18 seconds crap to the point where he would be tossed to the curb and a jobber doing absolutely nothing. Then he got over to the point where he can battle Cena, Punk, Orton and whoever else for the most over in the company and they had no choice but to give him something to do. And now they've done their best to make him relevant without giving him a World Title by making him a comedy heel with Kane. I mean, yeah, that's some pretty funny stuff they're doing (even his haters here admit it) but Bryan and Kane both are better than being comedy characters.
> 
> The problem is Vince's stubbornness. He only pushes those who he likes. Take Alberto del Rio for instance. No one gives two fucks about him in the audience but he continues to get title runs, title shots, beat top guys, win gimmick matches and anything you can possibly think of. But he still can't get a reaction to save his life. Then there's someone like Zack Ryder. Yeah, he sucks and is a jobber at best but he got over and got a push while he was at his hottest. Quickly they turned him into a stupid geek that was tossed around by Kane and outsmarted by Eve until he once again became a jobber that comes out and loses in 1 minute long squash matches to Alberto. Or take Christian for another example. I know he's old now and all, but he was extremely over last year and could have done something good as World Champion but they cut his legs off before he even had a chance and now he's a jobber and never even shows up to Raw or SD. If somebody gets over despite not being liked by Vince, they'll do anything to sabotage said person's momentum. But if it's Vince's pet project, he'll continue to shove him down the audience's throat and never give up. The question remains on whether he'll ever stop the Del Rio push but that's always the example to use for "pushed despite being unimportant".


Don't forget that Ryder also had the burden of being saddled with John Cena as they tried to use him to quell Superman's boos. Then once the boos started to subside they quickly tossed him to the curb while Cena went straight back to the main event in classics against Laurinaitis and Big Show...fpalm

I'm still pissed off about Christian. TNA took him in and gave him an opportunity and he showed that he can be a legit main event star. Vince just doesn't see it because he's a senile old fool, so instead of capitalizing on what TNA was able to do with him, he went right back to being a nobody.


----------



## D.M.N.

"Super main event" (WWE's terms, not mine) = not so super ratings: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...crimes-bad-girls-club-perception-more/148993/

Hour 1 - 4.111m
Hour 2 - 4.119m
Hour 3 - 3.925m


----------



## Vyed

Hour 1 - 4.111m (Last Week: 3.777m)
Hour 2 - 4.119m (Last week: 4.362m)
Hour 3 - 3.925m (Last week: 4.270m)


----------



## Vyed

8pm start of the show with Cena/heyman and Fall-out from sunday night's PPV, could be the biggest since 3hr became permanent deal imo.


----------



## totoyotube

Hour 3 is an ouch moment


----------



## Starbuck

D.M.N. said:


> "Super main event" (WWE's terms, not mine) = not so super ratings: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...crimes-bad-girls-club-perception-more/148993/
> 
> Hour 1 - 4.111m
> Hour 2 - 4.119m
> Hour 3 - 3.925m


I'd hardly say that yet. There's less that 200k in it between hour 3 and the other 2 which are dead even. Wouldn't be surprised to find out that the main event was the only thing that did well in the last hour tbh. That seems to be becoming the trend now. This is a steady result if you ask me. Not impressive by any means but steady. I'll be surprised if anything hits over 5 million though.


----------



## JY57

what was in hour 3 again?


----------



## Choke2Death

Wow, they got under 4 million in the third hour again.


----------



## TripleG

Well, they can call it a "Super Main Event" but in reality, we've seen the main event feuds combined to make a tag team match almost every week for the past decade.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I hope the main event doesn't do well. I hate tag matches that are so basic in formation and have nothing interesting about them.

Sad thing is, it's probably the only thing that did well in that hour.

Hour 1... so close to passing hour 2. I think the 8PM start time is finally in the vast majority of fans' heads and it may consistently be higher than hour 2 in due time, with hour 3 being the new lowest hour. 

The good thing is at least the hours are steady with no major differences between them as Starbuck pointed out.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Teddy Long must be relieved that even though he has been fired as GM, he can still book tag team main events vicariously through AJ.


----------



## Airstyles77

Ouch! at the 10PM hour. I wonder who's to blame for the fall?

Bryan Kane's Tag Team match aftermath
Orton vs Tensai
Sandow vs Ryder 
or the Main Event Tag team match


----------



## holt_hogan

This week's WWE RAW drew a 2.9 cable rating, with an average of 4,051,667 viewers. That is the same number from last week. Hour one drew 4,111,000 viewers, hour two drew 4,119,000 viewers and hour three dropped to 3,925,000 viewers.


----------



## KO Bossy

The era of 2s has begun!


----------



## Rock316AE

> His Making Miztory segment drew something like 1 million viewers featuring just him by himself with no help from a top name. That's something neither Punk, Orton, Bryan or whoever the hell else stupid mark wars erupt over has done.


Orton did plenty of big segments alone and in his Legacy days. Miz was bigger than Punk and Bryan but he's not even close to Orton or to what Orton did in the past. Orton was "the top name" who was helping others.

Anyway, horrible viewership, even too high for such a lifeless and boring program. I can see it going down week after week.


----------



## holt_hogan

*Re: With ratings gradually decline longterm, do you see RAW going back to Attitude?*



SpeedStick said:


> WWE need to go back to Saturday morning, hell SpongeBod is getting solid 6 million views on saturday mornings


Someone posted this 5 months ago, nice forecasting.

Also, I'm convinced they've introduced the 3rd hour to make up financially for the drop in ratings over the last 12 months. They want to try improving the product instead.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Airstyles77 said:


> Ouch! at the 10PM hour. I wonder who's to blame for the fall?
> 
> Bryan Kane's Tag Team match aftermath
> Orton vs Tensai
> Sandow vs Ryder
> or the Main Event Tag team match


OR the fact that RAW is now 3 hours long, and the 3rd hour is always going to suffer because people get burned out. Seriously, this is going to be a trend (and pretty much already is), so get used to it. The fact is that asking people to watch full 3 hours of a wrestling show is a lot to ask. I'm sure that won't stop people from blaming WRESTLER X though.


----------



## #Mark

Yeah, WWE had something going with Miz. He should have went over to SD! to join the WHC title hunt right after Sheamus finished feuding with Bryan.

Anyways, Miz imo, could be a bigger draw than Punk/Orton. I like the other two a hell of a lot more but it just seems like he has some redeeming qualities that casuals really like.


----------



## Johncena-hhh

Deserve this bad number


----------



## D.M.N.

SarcasmoBlaster said:


> OR the fact that RAW is now 3 hours long, and the 3rd hour is always going to suffer because people get burned out. Seriously, this is going to be a trend (and pretty much already is), so get used to it. The fact is that asking people to watch full 3 hours of a wrestling show is a lot to ask. I'm sure that won't stop people from blaming WRESTLER X though.


Or maybe, the demographics are changing in such a way that Raw would be better on from 8pm to 10pm? Are kids and teenagers likely to stay up till gone 11pm on a school night?

(I have no idea how US and UK sleeping patterns differ, so I may be off the mark)


----------



## The-Rock-Says

When I was in P 2 I used to stay up to 5am in the morning and go to school at 8.30am.


----------



## Vyed

D.M.N. said:


> Or maybe, the demographics are changing in such a way that Raw would be better on from 8pm to 10pm? Are kids and teenagers likely to stay up till gone 11pm on a school night?
> 
> (I have no idea how US and UK sleeping patterns differ, so I may be off the mark)


You're probably right. 



> WWE Raw on Monday, September 17 following the Night of Champions PPV scored a 2.87 rating for all three hours, essentially even with a 2.88 rating last week.
> 
> This week's standard two-hour rating was a 2.93 rating, compared to a 2.98 two-hour rating last week, reflecting a poor third hour rating this week.
> 
> - Raw averaged 4.05 million viewers, down two percent from last week's average of 4.14 million viewers up against Week 1 of ESPN's Monday Night Football season.
> 
> Raw took another third hour hit, averaging a show-low 3.93 million viewers despite advertising a "Super Main Event" at the start of Raw. The third hour slightly beat the year-low final hour viewership two weeks ago.
> 
> The hourly break down: 4.11 million first hour viewers for immediate Night of Champions fall-out (vs. 3.78 million 1H viewers last week), 4.12 million second hour viewers, and 3.93 million third hour viewers.
> 
> - On cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #3 behind the NFL and "Major Crimes" on TNT. Top competition was Peyton Manning on Monday Night Football Week 2, which averaged 15.5 million viewers, up five million viewers from Week 1.
> 
> *In the key male demos, Raw's final hour outdrew the second hour. However, teen males dropped off in the final hour, which reflects viewer fatigue or viewers not able to stay up that late during the school year.*


----------



## DesolationRow

SarcasmoBlaster said:


> OR the fact that RAW is now 3 hours long, and the 3rd hour is always going to suffer because people get burned out. Seriously, this is going to be a trend (and pretty much already is), so get used to it. The fact is that asking people to watch full 3 hours of a wrestling show is a lot to ask. I'm sure that won't stop people from blaming WRESTLER X though.


I completely concur with this.

Two things I've noticed in the past few weeks under "3-hour Raw"? Firstly, I can envision many families across the land now adjusting to the new start time with their kids, and thus the new time is more kid-friendly, but because those kids still consume two hours' worth of Raw a week, the parents and perhaps even the kids are satisfied with those two hours and are done at 10:00pm with it. WWE's emphasis toward families has probably never been more strongly felt than right now. WWE's largest demo remains young adult males, of course, and as the numbers indicate, they stay around, by and large, but that little drop-off of 200,000 or better each week may have something to do with this phenomenon I'm imagining through osmosis and boredom.

Secondly, these three-hour breakdowns are vastly less interesting than the old two-hour ones, rendering many discussions about same kind of redundant and tired. Never before has the viewership habits of Raw been more overwhelmingly dictated by bland times in the abstract rather than our imagining that it has everything to do with WRESTLER X drawing so well and WRESTLER Y having no clue in how to draw at all. Clearly there are guys who are doing well on their own in random quarter hours like Ryback and at times The Miz but for the most part, there is a kind of plain-to-see, undeniable "flow" to the three hours now and it's like the same song each week with a few minor tweaks in the highness or lowness of the notes.


----------



## DesolationRow

And what do you know? I had written a couple of sentences of that post above and then went on to write a lengthy post in a Wade Barrett thread, then returned here to finish the above post... and right above it, *Vyed*'s post more or less confirms my own insect antennae-based "theory." *D.M.N.* and *The-Rock-Says* also got in, ha.


----------



## Rock316AE

> In the key male demos, Raw's final hour outdrew the second hour. However, teen males dropped off in the final hour, which reflects viewer fatigue or viewers not able to stay up that late during the school year.


RAW was in school year every week, every year. In the same timeslot and with MUCH more teens watching the product than today, when it's close/or at an all-time low. So no, this is not a factor like it wasn't in 18 years of programs, the pattern was always second hour growing with the rare 1-2 times in a few months, it changed since mid 2011 for some odd reason, probably because of the dull concept every week. The third hour pattern is clearly viewers sending a message that they're not going to sit through a filler 3 hour RAW every week. I hope the gap continue to grow and hopefully it goes back to 2 hours before RAW 20 years in January.


----------



## holt_hogan

Source: EWN

Below are RAW comparison numbers since 7/23.

7/23 RAW: 6.02 million viewers (average)
7/30 RAW: 4.50 million viewers (average)
8/6 RAW: 4.37 million viewers (average)
8/13 RAW: 4.13 million viewers (average)
8/20 RAW: 4.48 million viewers (average)
8/27 RAW: 4.48 million viewers (average)
9/3 RAW: 4.20 million viewers (average)
9/10 RAW: 4.14 million viewers (average)
9/17 RAW: 4.1 million viewers (average)


----------



## murder

So within 8 weeks, they've lost 33% of their audience. I guess Vince is counting the days until Rock comes back.


----------



## uknoww

cm punk hitting those dem rating strong,diesel 1995 type of strong


----------



## holt_hogan

murder said:


> So within 8 weeks, they've lost 33% of their audience. I guess Vince is counting the days until Rock comes back.


To be fair we should discount the 7/23 "Raw 1000" 

More like 10-15% loss over 7 weeks I think. It's still a bad trend.


----------



## That Guy

I lol'd hard at Ryback throwing the Miz's couch out of the ring like it was nothing.


----------



## JY57

sooner or later they have to realize that going back to 2 hours will be better off for them.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

Yeah theirs no doubt the 3 hours are burning out the audience, I think you can't really figure out whose drawing or not at the minute because of that.


----------



## murder

I don't think that burning out is the real problem. It wasn't a problem at Raw 1000 at all. 

Back when Nitro was 3 hours, they had some of the highest rated quarters in history in hour 3, Luger and Goldberg winning the title from Hogan, for example, broke all records at the time.


----------



## UniverseMark24

I predict the rating to average somewhere between 2.0 - 2.5 in the next 6 years without Cena there to carry their TNA-level drawing backsides.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Choke2Death said:


> A better example would be Daniel Bryan IMO. He was starting to get over just fine as World Champion then they tried to bury him hard at Wrestlemania with that 18 seconds crap to the point where he would be tossed to the curb and a jobber doing absolutely nothing. Then he got over to the point where he can battle Cena, Punk, Orton and whoever else for the most over in the company and they had no choice but to give him something to do. And now they've done their best to make him relevant without giving him a World Title by making him a comedy heel with Kane. I mean, yeah, that's some pretty funny stuff they're doing (even his haters here admit it) but Bryan and Kane both are better than being comedy characters.
> 
> The problem is Vince's stubbornness. He only pushes those who he likes. Take Alberto del Rio for instance. No one gives two fucks about him in the audience but he continues to get title runs, title shots, beat top guys, win gimmick matches and anything you can possibly think of. But he still can't get a reaction to save his life. Then there's someone like Zack Ryder. Yeah, he sucks and is a jobber at best but he got over and got a push while he was at his hottest. Quickly they turned him into a stupid geek that was tossed around by Kane and outsmarted by Eve until he once again became a jobber that comes out and loses in 1 minute long squash matches to Alberto. Or take Christian for another example. I know he's old now and all, but he was extremely over last year and could have done something good as World Champion but they cut his legs off before he even had a chance and now he's a jobber and never even shows up to Raw or SD. If somebody gets over despite not being liked by Vince, they'll do anything to sabotage said person's momentum. But if it's Vince's pet project, he'll continue to shove him down the audience's throat and never give up. The question remains on whether he'll ever stop the Del Rio push but that's always the example to use for "pushed despite being unimportant".


very good post 
repped

Edit: Must spread some blabla before giving it to you again...


----------



## Nicain

Wish I could see the ratings before and after A.J. comes out.

I turned it on to see any backlash regarding the draw the night before, then when she came out I changed the channel and ended up watching the football game.


----------



## JY57

> - As noted before, the September 17th WWE RAW scored a 2.86 cable rating with 4.05 million viewers, about the same as the previous two weeks. The total number of viewers was the lowest in months. In comparison, the Denver Broncos vs. Atlanta Falcons NFL game did a 11.58 rating with 15.52 million viewers.
> 
> The highest rated segment this week came in the first quarter-hour at 8pm, which did a 3.21 rating. WWE had a large audience to start but lost them early when the football game started.
> 
> In the segment breakdown, Sin Cara and Rey Mysterio vs. Primo and Epico lost 404,000 viewers when the football game started. Titus O'Neil and Darren Young attacking them plus Eve Torres vs. Beth Phoenix lost 17,000 viewers. Heath Slater vs. Brodus Clay lost 129,000 more viewers. MizTV with The Miz, Booker T and Ryback gained just 381,000 viewers in the 9pm time slot.
> 
> Dolph Ziggler vs. Santino Marella and Justin Gabriel vs. Wade Barrett lost 153,000 viewers. The Subway segment with Jared and various Superstars lost 478,000 viewers and fell to a 2.64 quarter rating. Kane and Daniel Bryan vs. R-Truth and Kofi Kingston gained 362,000 viewers, picking back up most of the viewers who tuned out during the Subway segment.
> 
> The post-match stuff with them hugging lost 169,000 viewers in the 10pm timeslot, doing a low 2.78 quarter rating. This is a very bad number for that time period of the show. This is the second time a long drawn out hugging segment in a key timeslot has bombed.
> 
> Tensai vs. Randy Orton lost 150,000 viewers. Zack Ryder vs. Damien Sandow lost 169,000 viewers and did a 2.56 quarter rating. 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.


Read more at http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe..._Losing_Viewers_More.html#dV6J4XFvrYWBogS3.99


----------



## kokepepsi

*SEGMENT BREAKDOWN*



> Raw on 9/17 did a 2.86 rating and 4.05 million viewers. The rating was in the same ballpark as the previous two weeks. The total viewer number was the lowest in months, even coming the day after a PPV. The difference was the football game with the Denver Broncos vs. Atlanta Falcons that did an 11.58 rating and 15.52 million viewers, way up from last week.
> 
> The most notable thing about the ratings is the highest rated segment of the show was the first quarter at 8 p.m., which did a 3.21. So they had a large audience there at the start. They lost them early, when the football game started. But they have now succeeded in getting their audience acclimated to 8 p.m., and also losing them because of the length of the show. The third hour, which should be the highest, has for the last two weeks been the lowest, with hours at 2.97, 2.90 and 2.73.
> 
> Raw was third for the night on cable. Raw did a 2.4 in teenage boys (down 8%), 2.4 in Males 18-49 (up 4%), 0.6 in Girls 12-17 (same as last week) and 1.0 in Women 18-49 (down 9%). Viewership was 69.1% male.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, Rey Mysterio & Sin Cara vs. Primo & Epico lost 404,000 viewers when the football game started.
> 
> Prime Time Players attacking Mysterio & Sin Cara plus Eve Torres vs. Beth Phoenix lost 17,000 viewers.
> 
> Brodus Clay vs. Heath Slater lost 129,000 viewers.
> 
> At 9 p.m., when you expect the pick up, with Miz TV interviewing Booker T and Ryback, they gained 381,000 viewers.
> 
> Dolph Ziggler vs. Santino Marella and Wade Barrett vs. Justin Gabriel lost 153,000 viewers.
> 
> The segment with Jared Fogle offering Subway Sandwiches to everyone lost 478,000 viewers and fell to a 2.64 quarter. Hey, at least they got paid for it.
> 
> Daniel Bryan & Kane defending against Kofi Kingston & R-Truth gained 362,000 viewers. So mostly picking back up the people who tuned out for Jared.
> 
> All the post-match with Bryan & Kane with the hugging lost 169,000 viewers and that’s at the 10 p.m. hour, doing a 2.78 quarter. That’s disastrous at that time of the show, as usually that’s growth and then people tune out. That’s the second time they’ve done the big long drawn out hugging spot in a key time slot and both times it’s bombed.
> 
> Randy Orton vs. Tensai lost 150,000 viewers.
> 
> Zack Ryder vs. Damien Sandow lost 169,000 viewers and did a 2.56 quarter.
> 
> John Cena & Sheamus vs. C.M. Punk & Alberto Del Rio did the best growth quarter in a while, gaining 823,000 viewers to a 3.14 overrun.


----------



## Vyed

> *The highest rated segment this week came in the first quarter-hour at 8pm, which did a 3.21 rating.* WWE had a large audience to start but lost them early when the football game started.


Just like predicted before. This is the biggest 8pm quarter since 7/23 RAW 1000th show. Overrun with Cena and punk, coming off the PPV WWE title controversy obviously did good.


----------



## Choke2Death

MozTV gaining them viewers. :lol

Not surprising, though. Because the segments preceding it only lost viewers. Sucks the main event did so well since generic tag matches fucking suck.


----------



## JY57

does WWE even pay attention to this stuff? 'This segment gained viewers, that segment lost viewers,' because if they did they have bad way of improving or changing it.


----------



## The Lady Killer

> All the post-match with Bryan & Kane with the hugging lost 169,000 viewers and that’s at the 10 p.m. hour, doing a 2.78 quarter. That’s disastrous at that time of the show, as usually that’s growth and then people tune out. That’s the second time they’ve done the big long drawn out hugging spot in a key time slot and both times it’s bombed.


Saving the Bryan haters trouble by making this evidence readily available.

Guess that means he sucks, right guys?


----------



## SpeedStick

TNA many people in the WWE with no character or good story in this era of the WWE + 3 hours is terrible..

Blame the people running the WWE today...


----------



## JY57

The Lady Killer said:


> Saving the Bryan haters trouble by making this evidence readily available.
> 
> Guess that means he sucks, right guys?


I am no Bryan fan by any means. but not blaming him, I blame the WWE Universe for voting hug it out and fans at the arena chanting 'hug it out" making Bryan & Kane wanting to give the fans what they want.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

GEEZ, don't think i have ever read "LOST" so many damn times in one segment breakdown before. Keep being epic DB. (Y)


----------



## The Lady Killer

JY57 said:


> I am no Bryan fan by any means. but not blaming him, I blame the WWE Universe for voting hug it out and fans at the arena chanting 'hug it out" making Bryan & Kane wanting to give the fans what they want.


I was being facetious since most Bryan haters will jump at the chance of blaming him for not being a draw while neglecting to notice the ratings boost during his other segments.


----------



## Mister Hands

I think when even the people who are loving the Bryan/Kane gimmick were saying "ugh, enough" by that point, it's hardly surprising that people tuned out. DB and Kane are awesome, but the writers milked it for more than it was worth on Raw. The fact that it came on the turn of the hour that's been hurting lately probably didn't help.


----------



## Kabraxal

These numbers don't surprise me... people basically tuned in for the beginning and the end to see what's happening in the main event. While there were some minor glimmers of building the card elsewhere, it was overshadowed by a sense of malaise and lack of pace that just made most segments feel boring and not worth the time. This might be the three hours kicking in and just really hurting the show overall. 

Right now, I just don't know what the WWE will do to try and right the ship. It's clear their style of wrestling isn't working to maintain interest, let alone build upon itself. That is a scary trend. It's like they are wearing blinders and refuse to accept they might just have to go with "unproven" guys over who they think is a star... or worse, the fact that the 80s face/heel dynamic just doesn't work anymore. You can't paint by numbers anymore and I think the ratings are reflecting the WWE's failure to cope with that fact.


----------



## Pro Royka

10 matches is way too much. 6 or 7 matches are enough they should start doing more segments and they should make the matches a lot longer.


----------



## D.M.N.

Rock316AE said:


> RAW was in school year every week, every year. In the same timeslot and with MUCH more teens watching the product than today, when it's close/or at an all-time low. So no, this is not a factor like it wasn't in 18 years of programs, the pattern was always second hour growing with the rare 1-2 times in a few months, it changed since mid 2011 for some odd reason, probably because of the dull concept every week. The third hour pattern is clearly viewers sending a message that they're not going to sit through a filler 3 hour RAW every week. I hope the gap continue to grow and hopefully it goes back to 2 hours before RAW 20 years in January.


But are teens today different to that of 10/15 years ago? Do they go to bed earlier? (I don't know, just throwing it out there)


----------



## Starbuck

Holy fuck. People basically tuned in at the start and then kept tuning out all the way until the end. I would call the main event an impressive gain and it is indicative of people wanting to see that match I guess but really, all they did was get back everybody who left in all the segments prior lol. To gain 800,000 viewers and still only be at a 3.1 isn't exactly something to celebrate. The third hour is murdering them these days. People just stop watching from around 10 to 10.45 it seems, then debate coming back for the end depending on what it is.


----------



## The GOAT One

Conclusion: hugging doesn't draw.


----------



## Mister Hands

D.M.N. said:


> But are teens today different to that of 10/15 years ago? Do they go to bed earlier? (I don't know, just throwing it out there)


Question from someone completely ignorant about the actual system of gathering ratings: if someone watched the first two hours, then recorded the third, would that count as tuning out? I gotta think it's way more convenient to do that these days than it was 10-15 years ago.


----------



## Starbuck

Long story short, 3 hours is just too damn long to sit and watch any program continuously no matter what it is. Movies aren't even this long. People just don't have the attention span for it no less in this day and age when most folks can't go 3 minutes without being on their phone, ipad or laptop never mind 3 hours. It's just too long and unless they have an Emmy award winning writing team, they simply won't be able to sustain interest for that period of time and even if they did, I still don't think they'd be able to do it because it's simply just too long.


----------



## JY57

Starbuck said:


> Long story short, 3 hours is just too damn long to sit and watch any program continuously no matter what it is. Movies aren't even this long. People just don't have the attention span for it no less in this day and age when most folks can't go 3 minutes without being on their phone, ipad or laptop never mind 3 hours. It's just too long and unless they have an Emmy award winning writing team, they simply won't be able to sustain interest for that period of time and even if they did, I still don't think they'd be able to do it because it's simply just too long.


pretty much this. Sooner or later they have to realize 2 hours is better off for them


----------



## Mister Hands

Starbuck said:


> Long story short, 3 hours is just too damn long to sit and watch any program continuously no matter what it is. Movies aren't even this long. People just don't have the attention span for it no less in this day and age when most folks can't go 3 minutes without being on their phone, ipad or laptop never mind 3 hours. It's just too long and unless they have an Emmy award winning writing team, they simply won't be able to sustain interest for that period of time and even if they did, I still don't think they'd be able to do it because it's simply just too long.


It's almost like the Bryan/Kane segments are a microcosm of WWE's TV woes at the moment: they don't know how to deliver consistently good TV, so just deliver more and more product of hugely variable quality, constantly constantly constantly, until people can't take it anymore. They bump Raw up to 3 hours, then there's 2 hours of Smackdown, 1 hour of Superstars, 1 hour of NXT, then Saturday Morning Slam or whatever, and now this WWE Main Event show that's coming out. Holy shit, guys - I barely watch that many hours of TV a week in general, never mind WWE-specific.


----------



## DCY

JY57 said:


> I am no Bryan fan by any means. but not blaming him, I blame the WWE Universe for voting hug it out and fans at the arena chanting 'hug it out" making Bryan & Kane wanting to give the fans what they want.


I'm not either, and I agree.


----------



## Choke2Death

D.M.N. said:


> But are teens today different to that of 10/15 years ago? Do they go to bed earlier? (I don't know, just throwing it out there)


If anything, teens stay up a lot longer nowadays. That's just my take from personal experience, though.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Less hugging = ratings. They do seem to drag on the hugs now that it's 3 hours. You can't really blame Kane and Daniel Bryan. Also the overrun did really good. Controversies = Ratings.


----------



## checkcola

The Lady Killer said:


> Saving the Bryan haters trouble by making this evidence readily available.
> 
> Guess that means he sucks, right guys?


"Hug it out" should be a live event bit, not a RAW TV bit.


----------



## #Mark

Punk/Cena/Heyman is drawing so far. Good to see. Kane and Bryan is so hot, they're a bonafide draw.

Miz TV also drawing good numbers, too bad Miz didn't come off too well.

Edit: Missed the part about the post match for Bryan/Kane. Shame the hugging did so poorly, I thought it was an excellent bit. I think hug it out has run it's course though, can't see them doing it passed next week. Their's still interest in the tag titles though as the match gained a shit load of viewers.


----------



## JY57

checkcola said:


> "Hug it out" should be a live event bit, not a RAW TV bit.


I agree they should keep it for house shows & even PPVs. But when the fans keep chanting it than Kane & Bryan feel they have to oblige (which they are doing). I notice they are doing it only when the fans start chanting "hug it out"


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Punk/Cena/Heyman stuff is drawing "well" (compared to the rest of the show at least). That being said the overrun gain, while a huge gain, wasn't that high of an overall number. Plus they had been going down all throughout the third quarter, and just as I feared, Sandow/Ryder was a very low rating. 

But oh well. The show felt like a true filler show. Even the Punk/Cena/Heyman stuff didn't really progress much if at all. They have 5 weeks left before HIAC, and it wouldn't surprise me if they drag as much stuff out as long as possible. It wouldn't surprise me if next week and even the week after are similar to this show in little to no storyline progression. Maybe at the end of Raw in 2 weeks is when they'll announce Punk/Cena HIAC.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

*Buck is right on the overrun. Not impressive at all.

Just getting all the viewers back then lost in the final hour.


----------



## Rock316AE

Good opener for Paul E and Cena. Other than that terrible numbers all over the show including the overrun. One thing is that viewers officially got the new start time.


----------



## DesolationRow

Whoa, whoa, whoa...

I just took another look at Raw. I began my recording at 8:00pm sharp, so my counter was accurate. 

Reading this, I'm highly amused: 

"*All the post-match with Bryan & Kane with the hugging lost 169,000 viewers and that’s at the 10 p.m. hour, doing a 2.78 quarter. That’s disastrous at that time of the show, as usually that’s growth and then people tune out. That’s the second time they’ve done the big long drawn out hugging spot in a key time slot and both times it’s bombed.*"

Um... no. Or, as Daniel Bryan might say, "No! No! No!"

The Bryan/Kane "overrun" and that is what I am calling it, because that is essentially what it was--an _overrun_ from the 9:45pm-10:00pm quarter hour--lasted, at _most_, three and one half minutes past 10:00pm. What followed that? A tedious "Be A Star" video package with Big Show telling kids to not be bullies and be nice to one another, and a big, long commercial break until about 10:08pm or so, at which time Randy Orton started to come out for the Orton/Tensai match, which concluded at 10:17pm, or thereabouts, overrunning from the 10:00pm-10:15pm quarter hour into the 10:15pm-10:30pm quarter hour. 

That makes this "analysis" of the next quarter hour's "failing," or whatever one wishes to call it, all the more amusing: 

"*Randy Orton vs. Tensai lost 150,000 viewers.*"

Um... _what_? As I just stated, Orton/Tensai went into the 10:00pm-10:30pm quarter hour by... a whopping _two fucking minutes_. Who writes this shit? 

As for the 10:00pm-10:15pm quarter hour, is it really such a risky proposition to make the assumption that the primary cause for the ratings hemorrhage was the overlong, boring "Be A Star" video package and lengthy commercial break, rather than the _210 seconds_ (or so) of Kane and Bryan doing their "Hug It Out" shtick after the tag team match with Air Truth? And maybe, just _maybe_, nobody gives a damn about Tensai. But even so... Blaming Orton/Tensai for the loss in the 10:15pm-10:30pm quarter hour is simply hilariously off the mark, too, as that match concluded at approximately 10:17pm. That leaves thirteen whole minutes in that quarter hour to be held in judgment and/or analysis.


----------



## Starbuck

DESO WITH DEM NUMBERS lol. They get what actually happens in the quarters wrong all the time now it seems though, unless it's obvious that something took up the entire 15 mins, commercials and video packages need to be taken into consideration I guess, along with that dominated each quarter too.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Alliance of Punk/Heyman = working.


----------



## D.M.N.

Oh Deso, please send that to Dave Meltzer. For the lol's.

Hour 1 - 4.111m
Hour 2 - 4.119m
Hour 3 - 3.925m

Quarter Hours - September 17th, 2012
Q1 - 4.455m
Q2 - 4.051m
Q3 - 4.034m
Q4 - 3.905m
Q5 - 4.286m
Q6 - 4.133m
Q7 - 3.655m
Q8 - 4.017m
Q9 - 3.848m
Q10 - 3.698m
Q11 - 3.529m
Q12 + Overrun - 4.352m

I can only assume Q7 had three commercials in it, because you cannot blame a two minute segment for an anomaly like that.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Do commercials really lower numbers? During the 1000th ep, the Bryan segment drew 400k (iirc) and they went to a break. When Rock came out the gained another 500k. The ads didn't lower the numbere there.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Yeah, but I'm not sure you can reliably use the 1000th episode as a benchmark because of who was being advertised. People likely didn't want to miss anything. With your everyday, run-of-the-mill episode of Raw, people will be channel surfing the entire show.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Yeah, I suppose you are right. And that gain after the ad just happen to have the GOAT come out.


----------



## funnyfaces1

I came to this topic hoping to find a way to make fun of Phil, but once again, I have to wait for next week.


----------



## dxbender

The-Rock-Says said:


> Do commercials really lower numbers? During the 1000th ep, the Bryan segment drew 400k (iirc) and they went to a break. When Rock came out the gained another 500k. The ads didn't lower the numbere there.


It depends on how much of a quarter is taken up by commercials.

EX-Lets say a commercial airs at 10:14pm and runs until 10:16pm, that wouldn't really impact ratings for any of those 2 quarters.

But if a commercial aired from 10:12pm until 10:15pm, it'd have more impact on that quarter hour ratings.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Phil haters need to get a life. Now, Punk haters have it right.


----------



## Duke Silver

I used to like Phil, but I could never trust him after he tried to kill Grant.


----------



## The Lady Killer

The-Rock-Says said:


> Yeah, I suppose you are right. And that gain after the ad just happen to have the GOAT come out.


Exactly. So many big names were advertised for that show. The 1000th episode was an anomaly when discussing ratings.


----------



## KO Bossy

DesolationRow said:


> Whoa, whoa, whoa...
> 
> I just took another look at Raw. I began my recording at 8:00pm sharp, so my counter was accurate.
> 
> Reading this, I'm highly amused:
> 
> "*All the post-match with Bryan & Kane with the hugging lost 169,000 viewers and that’s at the 10 p.m. hour, doing a 2.78 quarter. That’s disastrous at that time of the show, as usually that’s growth and then people tune out. That’s the second time they’ve done the big long drawn out hugging spot in a key time slot and both times it’s bombed.*"
> 
> Um... no. Or, as Daniel Bryan might say, "No! No! No!"
> 
> The Bryan/Kane "overrun" and that is what I am calling it, because that is essentially what it was--an _overrun_ from the 9:45pm-10:00pm quarter hour--lasted, at _most_, three and one half minutes past 10:00pm. What followed that? A tedious "Be A Star" video package with Big Show telling kids to not be bullies and be nice to one another, and a big, long commercial break until about 10:08pm or so, at which time Randy Orton started to come out for the Orton/Tensai match, which concluded at 10:17pm, or thereabouts, overrunning from the 10:00pm-10:15pm quarter hour into the 10:15pm-10:30pm quarter hour.
> 
> That makes this "analysis" of the next quarter hour's "failing," or whatever one wishes to call it, all the more amusing:
> 
> "*Randy Orton vs. Tensai lost 150,000 viewers.*"
> 
> Um... _what_? As I just stated, Orton/Tensai went into the 10:00pm-10:30pm quarter hour by... a whopping _two fucking minutes_. Who writes this shit?
> 
> As for the 10:00pm-10:15pm quarter hour, is it really such a risky proposition to make the assumption that the primary cause for the ratings hemorrhage was the overlong, boring "Be A Star" video package and lengthy commercial break, rather than the _210 seconds_ (or so) of Kane and Bryan doing their "Hug It Out" shtick after the tag team match with Air Truth? And maybe, just _maybe_, nobody gives a damn about Tensai. But even so... Blaming Orton/Tensai for the loss in the 10:15pm-10:30pm quarter hour is simply hilariously off the mark, too, as that match concluded at approximately 10:17pm. That leaves thirteen whole minutes in that quarter hour to be held in judgment and/or analysis.


Yeah, this is a major flaw I saw in the ratings gathering I saw a long while ago. Glad someone else has seen it. I think I commented on it earlier in this thread, too.


----------



## D.M.N.

I'm surprised no one's already done this, but anyway...

"Ripartizione Awful."
"Desglose Awful."
"Répartition terrible."
"Awful Zusammenbruch."
"Awful breakdown."

In five different languages.


----------



## Swarhily

D.M.N. said:


> I'm surprised no one's already done this, but anyway...
> 
> "Ripartizione Awful."
> "Desglose Awful."
> "Répartition terrible."
> "Awful Zusammenbruch."
> "Awful breakdown."
> 
> In five different languages.


It's becoming a thing!


----------



## Burgle_the_Kutt

messed up post


----------



## murder

Awful is not a german word. Don't use google translator people.


----------



## totoyotube

WWE Entertainment USA 9:00 PM 3.990 
WWE Entertainment USA 10:00 PM 3.603 
WWE Entertainment USA 8:00 PM 3.769 



one of the worst viewed in years


----------



## totoyotube

damn what happened?


----------



## The Lady Killer

They didn't really advertise anything aside from Lawler's interview, and no feuds had been set in stone prior to the show.

Perhaps people thought Cena's injury would leave him off the show (unless he tweeted otherwise).


----------



## JY57

like poster above said nothing was advertised outside of Lawler interview and Cena appearing. And MNF. And sitcoms starting to return to TV (people forget that its that time of year now)


----------



## Vyed

Hour 1 - 3.769 (Last Week: 4.111m)
Hour 2 - 3.990 (Last week: 4.119m)
Hour 3 - 3.603 (Last week: 3.925m)

Damn.


----------



## Green Light

Well that is terrible


----------



## Starbuck

totoyotube said:


> WWE Entertainment USA 9:00 PM 3.990
> WWE Entertainment USA 10:00 PM 3.603
> WWE Entertainment USA 8:00 PM 3.769
> 
> 
> 
> one of the worst viewed in years


That is bad, no two ways around it. Not 1 hour over 4 million. Just bad, awful actually. On the plus side, this thread should certainly be a lot of fun when the Punk fans/haters get here lol. Bring on the popcorn. It's a shame though. I really enjoyed the show this week and thought it was the best they've put on since Raw 1000.


----------



## HankHill_85

Damn, that third hour is just not catching on. Doesn't help that sitcoms, dramas and everything else are returning. I get the feeling WWE is gonna be sitting in a decent shitstorm for the next few months.


----------



## TheRainKing

:lmao

Deserved rating.


----------



## Tnmore

Vyed said:


> Hour 1 - 3.769 (Last Week: 4.111m)
> Hour 2 - 3.990 (Last week: 4.119m)
> Hour 3 - 3.603 (Last week: 3.925m)
> 
> Damn.


Wow thats terrible when compared to last week. This is what happens when you make CM Punk the focus of the entire show. He started the show with heyman and 9Pm with Foley and closed the show with Cena in the overrun. 


Diesel 1995 without a doubt. Atleast, Kevin nash was a Main Eventer with the title.


----------



## JY57

Starbuck said:


> That is bad, no two ways around it. Not 1 hour over 4 million. Just bad, awful actually. On the plus side, this thread should certainly be a lot of fun when the Punk fans/haters get here lol. Bring on the popcorn. It's a shame though. I really enjoyed the show this week and thought it was the best they've put on since Raw 1000.


sitcoms & drama shows returning will make it worst. Pretty sure some returned last night.

but yeah I am sure some peeps will use Cena/Punk/Bryan/Ryback BS again for the ratings.


----------



## KO Bossy

Starbuck said:


> That is bad, no two ways around it. Not 1 hour over 4 million. Just bad, awful actually. On the plus side, this thread should certainly be a lot of fun when the Punk fans/haters get here lol. Bring on the popcorn. It's a shame though. I really enjoyed the show this week and thought it was the best they've put on since Raw 1000.


I thought the show had some pretty solid moments last night as well. Liked the opening segment and the Punk/Foley promo was excellent I thought. But yeah, that rating...I'm kinda happy in a way, maybe Vince will start giving us something good soon to try and increase the ratings. Doubt it, but hey, I can hope, can't I?

However, I'm stepping in before Punk starts getting blasted and laying out some truth:

Bryan and Kane are comedy. Comedy in such a big role doesn't draw. Sorry, just how it is. There's a place for comedy on the card, but not to this extent. The audience being into them and them drawing successfully are two different things, and the past few weeks their segments have lost viewers big time.


----------



## JY57

Tnmore said:


> Wow thats terrible when compared to last week. This is what happens when you make CM Punk the focus of the entire show. He started the show with heyman and 9Pm with Foley and closed the show with Cena in the overrun.
> 
> 
> Deisel 1995 without a doubt. Atleast, Kevin nash was a Main Eventer.


sure Punk got an hour of TV time (I don't even like the guy). But it doesn't matter who is in what. People don't want to watch wrestling for 3 hours, want to watch sports, or want to watch returning primtime shows (its the Fall season after all)


----------



## KO Bossy

Tnmore said:


> Wow thats terrible when compared to last week. This is what happens when you make CM Punk the focus of the entire show. He started the show with heyman and 9Pm with Foley and closed the show with Cena in the overrun.
> 
> 
> Diesel 1995 without a doubt. Atleast, Kevin nash was a Main Eventer with the title.


----------



## Green Light

There's always some excuse, MNF, warm weather, cold weather, holidays, sitcoms, romcoms, dramas, NBA, NFL, NHL, CIA, FBI etc. etc. etc.

Maybe people just aren't interested in the show right now? Don't get me wrong, I thought it was a very good show but people need to stop making up all these excuses every time Raw does a bad rating.


----------



## JY57

Green Light said:


> There's always some excuse, MNF, warm weather, cold weather, holidays, sitcoms, romcoms, dramas, NBA, NFL, NHL, CIA, FBI etc. etc. etc.
> 
> Maybe people just aren't interested in the show right now? Don't get me wrong, I thought it was a very good show but people need to stop making up all these excuses every time Raw does a bad rating.


this too. but you cant escape the going out, sports, dramas, sleeping, sitcom, whatever. It is what is


----------



## Mister Hands

Inconsistent weekly show gets inconsistent weekly ratings shocker.


----------



## ogorodnikov

#ENCORE should've been on Raw. instant ratings.


----------



## Starbuck

I don't think saying comedy segments don't draw is right tbh. A lot of big time comedy segments have drawn huge in the past. Half the shit modern day DX did were comedy segments and they drew huge and that's just one example. Besides, each of the Kane/DB segments probably added up to 15 minutes of the show in total. Punk's segments took up around 45 minutes in total. Just putting it out there.


----------



## vanboxmeer

Brock Lesnar and The Rock's phones just got a little bit busier.


----------



## vanboxmeer

Daniel Bryan going from main event heel to midcard comedy joke coincides with massive drop.


----------



## The Lady Killer

vanboxmeer said:


> Brock Lesnar and The Rock's phones just got a little bit busier.


:lmao

The thing is that's probably 100% accurate.


----------



## vanboxmeer

Shawn Michaels is now hiding in his church with his hunting rifle.


----------



## vanboxmeer

Vince just texted Donald Trump and Donna Goldsmith if they want to do another commercial free Raw. Included with a bucket of grilled chicken for ratings disaster CM Punk to get the rub off of.


----------



## Choke2Death

Never even reached 4 million for one hour. Has this happened before? Certainly not in this past year.


----------



## Amuroray

CM PUNK CANT DRAW.

Horrible champion.A joke.Shouldnt have had the title for a week let alone 300+ days


----------



## AthenaMark

Cena and Punk failing again. [email protected] third hour being the lowest watched.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Ryback to squash Punk for the title in an effort to spike ratings.


----------



## Amber B

If people couldn't tolerate 2 hours, how did they figure that people were going to tolerate 3 hours with the majority of it being filler and commercials? These bitches are stupid.


----------



## chronoxiong

Dang, that rating sounds and look horrible. What does it equal to for 3 hours? 2.6 or 2.7? I really don't know what they can do to spike it up. Last night's show was good.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Well it is only Punk's fault whenever the ratings do bad. His fault and his fault only. So yes, he is to blame. Get the title off already ugh.

But remember, only when the ratings are bad. Damnit, Punk! You're killing the biz asshole.


----------



## Shazayum

Phil is so bad that even Ryan appearing at the end and teasing a monster push couldn't help ratings. What a horrible person Phil is.


----------



## D.M.N.

In the past few years, there has been one Raw in September which has had all of the hours under 4m, so it appears this Raw is that one...


----------



## Mister Hands

I wonder what the monetary difference between the numbers they were doing for 2 hours, and the lower numbers they're doing now, but for an hour more, actually is. I don't know how it works, but maybe the hit is worth it?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Vyed said:


> Hour 1 - 3.769 (Last Week: 4.111m)
> Hour 2 - 3.990 (Last week: 4.119m)
> Hour 3 - 3.603 (Last week: 3.925m)
> 
> Damn.


Fucking ouch. Punk was on the most out of the roster of the show so it's certainly not a good sign for him with these numbers. However as usual, wait to see what the breakdown numbers are before you point fingers. If all of Punk's segment numbers were above these average ones, then maybe there's another reason for this.

Just an interesting little note:

In 2010, the last Raw of September got the lowest rating of the year, a 2.75
In 2009, the last Raw of September got a 3.1, the lowest of the year (well, tied lowest with another Raw around the same time)

And last year, while not the lowest of the year got a 2.93. It could very well be the time of the year that the whole overall numbers are this down, plus now the show being 3 hours doesn't help matters at all. As D.M.N pointed out as well, there's usually always at least one Raw in September that under performs.

But regardless, still not good numbers. A shame to because the show was actually a very good show, even though JBL wasn't on commentary.

Wait...

JBL WASN'T ON COMMENTARY!

JBL=RATINGS!


----------



## hardysno1fan

Green Light said:


> There's always some excuse, MNF, warm weather, cold weather, holidays, sitcoms, romcoms, dramas, NBA, NFL, NHL, CIA, FBI etc. etc. etc.
> 
> Maybe people just aren't interested in the show right now? Don't get me wrong, I thought it was a very good show but people need to stop making up all these excuses every time Raw does a bad rating.


^^^This

I also don't buy the digital VCR excuse either. If people want to watch something badly enough they will watch it live regardless of ads. It's the same with sport. People don't want to watch highlights they want to watch it live.

I wonder if it would help if WWE reduced the amount of ads. Instead of the 15-5 mins ratio what about just 2 mins for every 15? It would stop people from changing the channel and may encourage most not to record but wtach live.


----------



## vanboxmeer

Vince personally strips CM Punk of the title and fires AJ at the top of 8PM. Paul interrupts with Brock Lesnar in tow. He wants title match, Vince says his opponent is special guest Mike Tyson. Main event: Tyson vs Lesnar for the WWE title.


----------



## JY57

> - Last night's Green Bay Packers vs. Seattle Seahawks NFL game on ESPN drew 16.17 million viewers and led to the least-watched WWE RAW of the year with 3.79 million viewers.
> 
> This week's RAW did 3.77 million viewers the first hour, 3.99 million viewers the second hour and a low 3.60 million viewers in the third hour. The full rating isn't out yet but it should be somewhere between a 2.5 and 2.7.


Read more at http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe..._Episode_of_the_Year.html#fdSXXbQiv41DVDYO.99


----------



## Starbuck

Next week, AJ and Paul Heyman live sex celebration.

Week after, Stephanie McMahon and Triple H live sex celebration to bury Heyman's one.

Ratings through the roof.


----------



## The Lady Killer

"This Is Your Life" segments on every member of the roster.


----------



## Choke2Death

Starbuck said:


> Next week, AJ and Paul Heyman live sex celebration.
> 
> Week after, Stephanie McMahon and Triple H live sex celebration to bury Heyman's one.
> 
> Ratings through the roof.


Linda's political dreams will be shattered and everybody wins!


----------



## Starbuck

Kane grows a 6 foot penis to the delight of Vince McMahon who still has a boner from his daughter and son-in-law's live sex celebration while Daniel Bryan runs around the ring chanting SEX SEX SEX.


----------



## Pro Royka

I bet All Punk segments gained and others lost over 600+, maybe they should put more effort on making the matches watchable. So many filler matches that certainly doesn't help.


----------



## vanboxmeer

Tar and feather AJ and then Kane sets her on fire while Bryan appreciates.


----------



## The High King

take out punk, team hellno, and sandow and raw sucks


----------



## ogorodnikov

vanboxmeer said:


> Tar and feather AJ and then Kane sets her on fire *while Bryan appreciates.*


as will most wrestling fans.


----------



## apokalypse

RAW need more Cena...


----------



## Choke2Death

Pro Royka said:


> I bet All Punk segments gained and others lost over 600+, maybe they should put more effort on making the matches watchable. So many filler matches that certainly doesn't help.


The only thing that's left is that he actually loses viewers in his segments... :side:

Of course they will gain because that's what the show is centered around and is the main draw. Thing is, it doesn't draw well at all and for all its gains, it still doesn't reach above the 4 million mark. Now I'm not saying all blame should be on his shoulders but he has more of a responsibility for bad ratings than someone like Kofi Kingston who wrestles a random match in the middle of the show.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Yeah regardless of who is to blame, the maximum # of viewers is still embarrassing.


----------



## PHX

Can be a ton of reasons why ratings go up or down but all that should really matter is if you personally enjoy the show good rating or bad rating. I myself enjoyed the show and will take that over a show that does a good rating yet blows.


----------



## Beautiful Bobby

Mister Hands said:


> I wonder what the monetary difference between the numbers they were doing for 2 hours, and the lower numbers they're doing now, but for an hour more, actually is. I don't know how it works, but maybe the hit is worth it?


From their point of view it will be since they will no doubt be making more money from the extra hour every Monday. Just like having a top babyface that gets booed out of the building on some occasions and running a PPV once a month, all that matters to WWE is whats financially viable and then they worry about the fans that are unhappy with the product when they've got the time to spare.

WWE is an extremely well-run business & they deserve credit for that, but you have to wonder how much longer it will be before their mistakes creatively come back to haunt them and hurt them financially. As someone who fell out of love with company years ago, I don't see that happening anytime soon since they know what they are doing, but that doesn't mean that it will never happen. The one good thing about their current strategy is that by appealing to kids they are developing a whole new audience that might help their business model in the future rather than appeasing jaded 'Attitude' fans.


----------



## Pro Royka

The thing is if they focus on the stipulation of every match, people may wanna see it, but having random matches and it appears to be so predictable is just stupid.

Ziggler/Kofi the match wasn't bad but if it was a 2 out of 3 falls, people may wanna watch it. 
Sheamus/Rey/Cara vs ADR/Otunga/Ricardo, fpalm really? How predictable atleast make it an elimination match. 
Brodus Clay/Tensai and be interrupted by Big Show, just make it a triple threat instead of wasting our time.
Ryback/Miz not gonna complain but if it was interrupted by someone instead of Miz losing, the IC title is so useless now.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Choke2Death said:


> The only thing that's left is that he actually loses viewers in his segments... :side:
> 
> Of course they will gain because that's what the show is centered around and is the main draw. Thing is, it doesn't draw well at all and for all its gains, it still doesn't reach above the 4 million mark. Now I'm not saying all blame should be on his shoulders but he has more of a responsibility for bad ratings than someone like Kofi Kingston who wrestles a random match in the middle of the show.


Just keep in mind Punk's segments could very well be a fair bit over the 4 million mark, especially in the second hour where the overall number was close to 4 million. Punk could've gotten his regular average number where it's just the rest of the show that a lot of people tuned out during. If that's the case Punk doesn't deserve the (majority) blame for the overall numbers being anywhere near as low as they are. Granted if he was a bigger draw, he could've brought the numbers up but unless you have a mega draw like The Rock who plenty of people will keep the show on for any possible appearance, the overall numbers weren't going to be that much bigger.


----------



## Marv95

Green Light said:


> There's always some excuse, MNF, warm weather, cold weather, holidays, sitcoms, romcoms, dramas, NBA, NFL, NHL, CIA, FBI etc. etc. etc.
> 
> Maybe people just aren't interested in the show right now? Don't get me wrong, I thought it was a very good show but people need to stop making up all these excuses every time Raw does a bad rating.


Yep. They competed with football before and ratings were rarely this low. There is nothing to entice people to tune in. No huge storyline, no older megastars, nothing. Instead of blaming football or other crap blame the company for not producing compelling, entertaining TV.


----------



## RatedR10

Personally, I thought this was one of the better shows of the three hour era since Raw 1000, but holy fuck that rating is terrible.

The third hour AGAIN loses viewers. It's hard to keep people tuned in when you only have very few interesting things going on to keep the fans hooked right now.


----------



## Vyed

> WWE Raw on Monday, September 24 scored a 2.72 rating for all three hours and 2.70 rating in the standard two-hour timeslot. The overall rating tied with the May 28 Raw for lowest of the year when Raw was up against the perfect storm of Hatfield & McCoys, NBA Playoffs, and Labor Day.
> 
> - Raw averaged 3.79 million viewers, which was the smallest audience of the year and smallest since July 4, 2011. The previous low was also a holiday episode on December 24, 2007. *It makes Monday's Raw the least-watched non-holiday Raw in over five years.*
> 
> Raw did not top four million viewers in any of the three hours. The show followed the recent pattern of peaking in the second hour before declining in the third hour. For the second consecutive week, the third hour dropped below the new first hour.
> 
> Raw Hourly Break Down: 3.77 million first hour viewers (down 8.3% vs. last week), 3.99 million second hour viewers (down 3.1% vs. last week), and 3.60 million third hour viewers (down 8.2% vs. last week).
> 
> The third hour was the least-watched final hour of Raw in over five years.
> 
> *- Raw's top competition was ESPN's Monday Night Football game, which averaged 16.2 million viewers. The game was up four percent compared to last week and was a tight game throughout the second-half up against Raw's third hour.*
> 
> On cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #4 in overall viewers behind the football game, post-game SportsCenter, and "Major Crimes" on TNT. It's not quite a Monday Night Wars, but TNT outdrew Raw with an average of 4.30 million viewers with the crime show.
> 
> Raw did rank #2 in key male demos behind the NFL game. However, the teen male audience dipped below programming on Cartoon Network and was down nearly four-tenths of a rating compared to last week's Raw.


Atleast they have an excuse.


----------



## FITZ

Bad rating. 

Bad week though to get a good rating. Monday Night Football aside this is the week where we're seeing a lot of new premieres. 

Strange how the third hour has totally changed the viewing habits.


----------



## Fanboi101

This show was built around Punk and he had almost an hour of tv time. Result = lowest rating of the year and the lowest viewership for a non holiday raw in 5 years... LOL 

Obviously you can't blame one guy but Punk clearly is not someone that brings in ratings, and the show should not revolve around him like it did this week. Just goes to show how weak the roster is right now that a guy like Punk gets the amount of tv time that he does.

I feel like the reality era has been disastrous for the WWE. All of these promos like the one between Foley and Punk that are really serious and weave in and out of kayfabe do not entertain casuals. Casuals like humour and over the top shit, like austin and his trucks or the Rock cutting up an opponent. They don't want to watch a fake version of the UFC.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Goddammit Phil.


----------



## Jobberwacky

apokalypse said:


> RAW need more Cena...



He was advertised as the ME, talking with a sling.


----------



## Arcade

Monday Night Football plus season premieres of TV shows probably hurt the rating of Raw.


----------



## chucky101

Arcade said:


> Monday Night Football plus season premieres of TV shows probably hurt the rating of Raw.


oh please, enough with excuses, in the late 90s ratings were high no matter what else was on

you put on a good show people will watch, the attitude era proved it, stop blaming other shows

let me guess next week you will blame a rerun of pawn stars for raw not getting a 3.0

reality is the show as a whole sucks right now, thus ratings are not great and haven't been even before football

but keep blaming other shows, you really think the new "2 broke girls" is the reason raw never drew a 3.5, yaaaaaa sure


----------



## MikeChase27

Not shocked as we keep having these 3 hour RAW's that the ratings keep going lower. I can't wait to see what part of the show hurt the rating the most my guess will be the last hour.

Oh and guys lets be honest wrestling just isn't cool anymore.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

> Caldwell's Analysis: Raw faced a "perfect storm" going up against the Green Bay Packers in football and fall TV season premieres on broadcast TV, but the shows are clearly too long to sustain the audience without burning out viewers. Also, the lack of a hook from last week to this week as WWE just tries to get through a three-hour show every week is coming up in the numbers with an inability to retain viewers.


Yep.


----------



## MikeChase27

I also don't think a bunch of random tag matches are going to keep the fans tuning in.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

CM Phil strikes again!

People no selling the 3rd hour.


----------



## PHX

chucky101 said:


> oh please, enough with excuses, *in the late 90s ratings were high no matter what else was on*
> 
> you put on a good show people will watch, the attitude era proved it, stop blaming other shows
> 
> let me guess next week you will blame a rerun of pawn stars for raw not getting a 3.0
> 
> reality is the show as a whole sucks right now, thus ratings are not great and haven't been even before football
> 
> but keep blaming other shows, you really think the new "2 broke girls" is the reason raw never drew a 3.5, yaaaaaa sure


Just want to address that part only to say it's not the late 90's anymore. I don't know why people keep comparing a time that was the boom period for wrestling to now esp when during that time you didn't have all these tons of ways to watch Raw like you do now. WWE has pretty much conceded to this hence why they upload stuff from Raw and Smackdown on their youtube channel and now have a deal with Hulu to watch Raw and other WWE programming on. Think people on here freak out more about the ratings than WWE themselves do. They seem more concerned with their social media score and shit than ratings nowadays.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Of course WWE are worried about ratings. Ratings is what keep them on TV and how much they get from being on TV.

USA network damn well care about ratings and they have a huge voice in WWE's ear. They are the people that convinced Vince to go 3 hours.


----------



## wb1899

Ratings are important, but not that irrelevant HH-rating!
Important are only the A18-49 and C3 viewership!


----------



## PHX

I never said they aren't worried about them my point was they aren't freaking out about them like it was 1996 because this is the age of the internet. Big difference between caring and freaking out living and dying by the ratings. If they still worried about the ratings to the extent they did back in the day then they would not try and adapt to the internet age the way they have.


----------



## Marv95

PHX said:


> Just want to address that part only to say it's not the late 90's anymore. *I don't know why people keep comparing a time that was the boom period for wrestling to now esp when during that time you didn't have all these tons of ways to watch Raw like you do now.*WWE has pretty much conceded to this hence why they upload stuff from Raw and Smackdown on their youtube channel and now have a deal with Hulu to watch Raw and other WWE programming on. Think people on here freak out more about the ratings than WWE themselves do. They seem more concerned with their social media score and shit than ratings nowadays.


Then what about well after the boom was over in the 2000s and streams & technology were really coming into play? They were still getting 3s at WORST when they were competing with MNF, new fall shows, etc. Part of this time was when they were on Spike which from what I heard wasn't available to everybody in the country like USA is today, as well as SC and Rock both MIA. The NFL and other shows have access to what they can watch online as well. It's not an excuse.

Maybe when the product doesn't improve by the late fall and ratings are barely above 2.0(I know it's not too likely but still) maybe they will care.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

Stupid people with the nelson box shit, why do you hate Punk so much? unk3


----------



## Choke2Death

RevolverSnake said:


> Stupid people with the nelson box shit, why do you hate Punk so much? unk3


Because he can't draw! :balo2




Fourth week in the upper 2s. They are only lowering their standards more and more.


----------



## Rock316AE

Disaster number. That was even below the holiday number viewership earlier this year. The product is stale and bland, people aren't going to watch "one of 52" instead of a special alternative they have elsewhere, it didn't help that Punk was all over the program when it was proven time after time that the TV audience aren't invested in him no matter what he does. I get their new trick of putting him with big stars like Bret/Foley/Cena who will keep the general audience but it's a short term solution and it's time to refresh the product.



Choke2Death said:


> Because he can't draw! :balo2


You put Super Mario on RAW - 8.0s. The Rock vs Balotelli WM30 main event - dream match.


----------



## JigsawKrueger

Every casual fan I have spoken to doesn't seem too endeavored with the move to 3 hours. Usual complaints of too many commercials and pointless filler. It was like that before, just less noticeable.

Now they (WWE) have have competition in MNF, Dancing with the Stars, The Voice, Castle, Hawaii Five-0, Bones and 2 Broken Girls.


----------



## NearFall

Rock316AE said:


> You put Super Mario on RAW - 8.0s. The Rock vs Balotelli WM30 main event - dream match.


*WrestleMania 29:Main event*

_WWE TITLE MATCH_

The Rock(with Floyd Mayweather) VS Brock Lesnar(C)(with "Iron" Mike Tyson)
Special Guest Referee: "Super" Mario Balotelli
Guest Colour commentator: "Big Sexy" Kevin Nash

Dem buys unk


----------



## Rock316AE

NearFall said:


> *WrestleMania 29:Main event*
> 
> _WWE TITLE MATCH_
> 
> The Rock(with Floyd Mayweather) VS Brock Lesnar(C)(with "Iron" Mike Tyson)
> Special Guest Referee: "Super" Mario Balotelli
> Guest Colour commentator: "Big Sexy" Kevin Nash
> 
> Dem buys unk


:mark::mark::mark:


----------



## Starbuck

NearFall said:


> *WrestleMania 29:Main event*
> 
> _WWE TITLE MATCH_
> 
> The Rock(with Floyd Mayweather) VS Brock Lesnar(C)(with "Iron" Mike Tyson)
> Special Guest Referee: "Super" Mario Balotelli
> Guest Colour commentator: "Big Sexy" Kevin Nash
> 
> Dem buys unk


Makes a post about buys. Includes CM Punk smiley face. 

8*D


----------



## Patrick Bateman

:rocky


----------



## NearFall

Starbuck said:


> Makes a post about buys. Includes CM Punk smiley face.
> 
> 8*D


:rocky

That's a good one. 

Of course I ment it in context, it will Punk's surprised reaction to WWE Title finally main eventing unk2

I felt bad typing that. Sorry Punk.

Anyway, as for this week's rating. It goes to show, the 3rd hour continues to drag, a lot. Not to mention the fact that a majority of the casual audience still see Punk as a "meh" guy in terms of importance to tune-in.


----------



## Rock316AE

NearFall, I will change only one thing in your match and that's giving Mayweather to Brock and putting Jose Mourinho with The Rock. Only because Rock/Mourinho was always my dream team.


----------



## Starbuck

^^^^Why you wan't non-wrestlers having matches for? Dafuq is Ballotelli and Jose gonna do in the ring lol?

At this rate the only thing that can/will save him is a program with Rock and/or a proper Mania main event program with Brock/HHH/Taker. I don't know what else they can do to get the message across tbh. They've paired him with Cena, Bret Hart, now Mick Foley. What more can they do? What other legends are left you know? Austin? It's got to be the residual effect of completely ignoring him for 9 months of his 10 month title reign. They can't just undo what they've done during that time. As THE main storyline and focus of the show this past month, something isn't clicking.


----------



## Rock316AE

I want to see the interactions, you can put it on any TV show you want lol. Although, Mourinho and Balotelli are classic pro wrestling characters without even trying.

At this point, I don't want something to save them TBH, I hope they're going to drop even lower, 3 hours is just too much and the lower the rating, there's a bigger chance they will get it in the near future. And please not Lesnar/HHH for Mania, that would be a bigger waste than Rock in another match with Cena for 29. I honestly prefers Lesnar/Sheamus or Lesnar/Ryback over this. But they have two huge matches with Rock/Brock and Taker/Cena so of course they want to find a way to ruin it.


----------



## NearFall

Starbuck said:


> At this rate the only thing that can/will save him is a program with Rock and/or a proper Mania main event program with Brock/HHH/Taker. I don't know what else they can do to get the message across tbh. They've paired him with Cena, Bret Hart, now Mick Foley. What more can they do? What other legends are left you know? Austin? It's got to be the residual effect of completely ignoring him for 9 months of his 10 month title reign. They can't just undo what they've done during that time. As THE main storyline and focus of the show this past month, something isn't clicking.


Honestly, the thing I have always come back to is the complete botch they made of bringing Punk back, FAR too early. The "leaving" with the WWE title should have spanned much longer. Many people, including myself thought he would be gone for 2-3 months or such. Punk even said he was promised time off. They could have built a longer storyline, with run ins from Punk causing big issues, such as costing Vince's "champion"(Cena, Vince says he is the only one that can solve the mess he made or a big-time heel, who Vince trusts over Cena)matches(in favour of incredibly over babyface). Simple stuff like that, until later on Vince gets fired and then Punk returns at the end of a PPV where we see Cena win. However, WWE always like to pull the trigger early when they are sure of something. And again, this was the case. They decided to capitalize on the rematch and his overness as fast as they could. 

As for the whole "LOL HHH BERRIED PUNK AT NOC" argument. As I have said before, that was another big mistake in the storyline. Not necessarily having Punk lose at NOC, but the entire balls they made of the afterwards. Punk apologises, and turns into John Cena lite. We saw during July-August how effective and over Punk was as the "edgy" babyface. Simply being Punk. As for the quick post-NOC babyface turn the casual audience were not getting fully behind this "edgy" Punk. Being a sarcastic and witty dick to the babyfaces did not mull over well with the casual audience, despite how much better of a character it was for him. I think the best measure here was to turn HHH heel and have him take the title from Del Rio and have the storyline be "HHH was the liar all along".

I think the entire reign he has had, and his entire treatment(of being 2nd place to Cena) since post-WrestleMania moreso, has left the audience with the idea of "meh". They dont lose anything if they dont care for him, as the pinnacle and most important part of the show was Cena. However by that time, Punk was not making as much money at all compared to Cena, his summer "spark" had been whittled out. They sadly had no choice but to place Cena above Punk leading out of Mania.

Is it too late for Punk? Who knows. He could find and rebuff his entire flare again. But what will it take? The only possible answers, that are possible in the near-future, I can see now are:
-Beating John Cena cleanly
-Feuding with The Rock
-Teaming with Brock Lesnar
We will just have to see how WWE executes this going further. But it is looking rather dim.


----------



## TheF1BOB

:mourinho :Rock3 Vs. :balo unk2

DEM RATINGS


----------



## Rock316AE

TheF1BOB said:


> :mourinho :rocky Vs. :balo :flair3
> DEM RATINGS


Now, DEM RATINGS. 

Balotelli is so great as a natural, cocky no selling heel, he transcended the definition of "heel".






After the story that he won 25k in a casino and then gave 1000 to a random homeless just because he was there, you realize the level of greatness. All that without talking about wearing a Santa Claus outfit and driving around Manchester just randomly throwing money at people. I can appreciate the investment in the antics.


----------



## Starbuck

Rock316AE said:


> I want to see the interactions, you can put it on any TV show you want lol. Although, Mourinho and Balotelli are classic pro wrestling characters without even trying.
> 
> At this point, I don't want something to save them TBH, I hope they're going to drop even lower, 3 hours is just too much and the lower the rating, there's a bigger chance they will get it in the near future. And please not Lesnar/HHH for Mania, that would be a bigger waste than Rock in another match with Cena for 29. I honestly prefers Lesnar/Sheamus or Lesnar/Ryback over this. But they have two huge matches with Rock/Brock and Taker/Cena so of course they want to find a way to ruin it.


It won't be HHH/Lesnar. I'm 95% sure that it won't be happening. Taker's streak matches are too big of a priority and if they do that he's left without a match. It isn't happening. Taker/Cena they are obviously saving for Mania 30 so that only leaves 2 options available. Cena/Rock II, Taker/Brock and possibly HHH/Punk.


----------



## JY57

NearFall said:


> Honestly, the thing I have always come back to is the complete botch they made of bringing Punk back, FAR too early. The "leaving" with the WWE title should have spanned much longer. Many people, including myself thought he would be gone for 2-3 months or such. Punk even said he was promised time off. They could have built a longer storyline, with run ins from Punk causing big issues, such as costing Vince's "champion"(Cena, Vince says he is the only one that can solve the mess he made or a big-time heel, who Vince trusts over Cena)matches(in favour of incredibly over babyface). Simple stuff like that, until later on Vince gets fired and then Punk returns at the end of a PPV where we see Cena win. However, WWE always like to pull the trigger early when they are sure of something. And again, this was the case. They decided to capitalize on the rematch and his overness as fast as they could.
> 
> As for the whole "LOL HHH BERRIED PUNK AT NOC" argument. As I have said before, that was another big mistake in the storyline. Not necessarily having Punk lose at NOC, but the entire balls they made of the afterwards. Punk apologises, and turns into John Cena lite. We saw during July-August how effective and over Punk was as the "edgy" babyface. Simply being Punk. As for the quick post-NOC babyface turn the casual audience were not getting fully behind this "edgy" Punk. Being a sarcastic and witty dick to the babyfaces did not mull over well with the casual audience, despite how much better of a character it was for him. I think the best measure here was to turn HHH heel and have him take the title from Del Rio and have the storyline be "HHH was the liar all along".
> 
> I think the entire reign he has had, and his entire treatment(of being 2nd place to Cena) since post-WrestleMania moreso, has left the audience with the idea of "meh". They dont lose anything if they dont care for him, as the pinnacle and most important part of the show was Cena. However by that time, Punk was not making as much money at all compared to Cena, his summer "spark" had been whittled out. They sadly had no choice but to place Cena above Punk leading out of Mania.
> 
> Is it too late for Punk? Who knows. He could find and rebuff his entire flare again. But what will it take? The only possible answers, that are possible in the near-future, I can see now are:
> -Beating John Cena cleanly
> -Feuding with The Rock
> -Teaming with Brock Lesnar
> We will just have to see how WWE executes this going further. But it is looking rather dim.


or they could just give the belt back to :cena2


----------



## God Movement

Starbuck said:


> It won't be HHH/Lesnar. I'm 95% sure that it won't be happening. Taker's streak matches are too big of a priority and if they do that he's left without a match. It isn't happening. Taker/Cena they are obviously saving for Mania 30 so that only leaves 2 options available. *Cena/Rock II, Taker/Brock and possibly HHH/Punk*.


Yeah, pretty much the best 3 main events they can put together with the current roster.


----------



## PHX

Marv95 said:


> Then what about well after the boom was over in the 2000s and streams & technology were really coming into play? They were still getting 3s at WORST when they were competing with MNF, new fall shows, etc. Part of this time was when they were on Spike which from what I heard wasn't available to everybody in the country like USA is today, as well as SC and Rock both MIA. The NFL and other shows have access to what they can watch online as well. It's not an excuse.
> 
> Maybe when the product doesn't improve by the late fall and ratings are barely above 2.0(I know it's not too likely but still) maybe they will care.


Couple things NFL now is the most popular it has ever been. It wasn't in the time period you are talking about. That's kind of the same with the internet usage when it comes to wrestling hence why WWE is using the internet a lot more than they did during the time period you're talking about. 

But the purpose of my post wasn't even "make excuses for why the ratings are going down" Was simply to point out why the ratings don't mean as much as they did back then. I don't even really give a damn about the ratings and never have as it does zero for my enjoyment or dislike for the product.


----------



## Oakue

The ratings should be no surprise. We all called this was going to happen in the summer. As the ratings continued to drop in the summer, with NOTHING competing with it, it was obvious when the fall came and it had to compete with Monday Night Football, and brand new seasons of network television shows, it was going to get annihilated. 

Ratings will only go down from here in my opinion.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

If I really, really enjoyed a ep of RAW but if it drew a bad number, then I'd not like it anymore.


----------



## Starbuck

The-Rock-Says said:


> If I really, really enjoyed a ep of RAW but if it drew a bad number, then I'd not like it anymore.


:lmao Don't start that shit lol.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

The-Rock-Says said:


> If I really, really enjoyed a ep of RAW but if it drew a bad number, then I'd not like it anymore.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Sorry guys. I'm seeking help for my problem.

I'll get over this illness. 

#pray4me


----------



## NearFall

*The-Rock-Says* is a good man. I only hope, judging on his avatar/sig that he finds this funny and it helps him.


----------



## Tnmore

I dont understand why the theory "Low rating = Less entertaining product" is simply dismissed as false? I mean dont we attribute the Ratings/PPV buys success of the Attitude era to more entertaining product? more entertaining and larger than life characters? 

So we can credit the success of a show in terms of ratings to the quality of the product, but not when it bombs?


----------



## The-Rock-Says

NearFall said:


> *The-Rock-Says* is a good man. I only hope, judging on his avatar/sig that he finds this funny and it helps him.





> "WILL YOU SHUT UP, WILL YOU, WILL YOU PLEASE SHUT UP, WILL YOU SHUT UP, SHUT UP, SHUT UP"
> 
> "Well...well I've never...I've never, Tony I'm putting you my list of enemies"
> 
> *Pulls out a note book*
> 
> "There. You're in for it now Tony"
> 
> "Ha, only joking.


Best comedy ever, imo.


----------



## NearFall

> "DOWN WITH THIS SORT OF THING!"
> "Careful now!"


Is probably my favourite quote.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

> "Young boys running round in shorts. I bet you like that, don't you?"
> 
> "And you, only you're thinking of what they'd look like without the shorts. You're sitting there, imagining that, with a huge smile on your face. You dirty fecker."


NearFall, old boy. You said that?


----------



## PHX

Tnmore said:


> I dont understand why the theory "Low rating = Less entertaining product" is simply dismissed as false? I mean dont we attribute the Ratings/PPV buys success of the Attitude era to more entertaining product? more entertaining and larger than life characters?
> 
> So we can credit the success of a show in terms of ratings to the quality of the product, but not when it bombs?


The theory is flawed because not everybody likes the same shit. I personally really liked Raw this past Monday but someone else probably hated it. Cena could be champ and feuding with Big Show and Raw gets a 4.0 rating for example does that mean it's going to = entertaining to me? No, everybody watches for their own reasons and like and dislike different things. Everybody would be Cena fans if we used the if it's successful it must be good logic.


----------



## Kabraxal

Can't say I'm surprised... the booking is so inconsistent right now for most of the card and there are very few reasons to actually care about what is happening anymore. Most fans have been cultivated and trained through months and years of bad booking to not get invested becasue the WWE will not follow through on anything. And on top of that... you take a star that was actually over, made him the typical snivelling, whiny, cowardly heel that gets upstaged by the bullies WWE calls faces and most people just shrug and find something better to watch. This booking is on par, if not worse, than the New Generation Era. Just now, TNA hasn't reached WCW's level yet to force McMahon's hand into actually improving his product.

But even then, I don't know if it will happen. McMahon is obsessed with being an entertainment company that might have some decent wrestling, instead of a wrestling company that might have some decent entertainment. He's doing things completely backwards but expects it to work... sorry, there is better entertainment on the market. I watch a wrestling company for the wrestling. If I wanted a sitcom I'd switch over to CBS or NBC or something.


----------



## kokepepsi

*Segment Breakdown*


> In the segment-by-segment, they opened with the second strongest segment of the show, with the Paul Heyman, C.M. Punk, Brad Maddox and A.J. segment at 2.99.
> 
> Kofi Kingston vs. Dolph Ziggler lost 262,000 viewers.
> 
> Santino Marella & Zack Ryder vs. Titus O’Neil & Darren Young lost 295,000 viewers to a 2.59 quarter and that was still in the first hour so it wasn’t burnout.
> 
> The Mick Foley/C.M. Punk segment at 9 p.m. gained 877,000 viewers which is one of the best growth segments in weeks and did a 3.22 quarter.
> 
> Miz vs. Ryback and the Harry Met Sally segment in the diner lost 533,000 viewers.
> 
> Wade Barrett vs. Tyson Kidd and the Jerry Lawler interview stayed even. I’d suggest that’s probably a combo of a big loss for Barrett vs. Kidd and a big gain back for the Lawler promo but don’t have that broken down.
> 
> Alberto Del Rio & David Otunga & Ricardo Rodriguez vs. Sheamus & Rey Mysterio & Sin Cara lost 129,000 viewers. That was at the 10 p.m. mark and did a 2.75 quarter, so the three hour show has really done a number on people tuning in at 10 p.m.
> 
> The third Bryan & Kane segment and the attack on Bryan & Kane by Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow lost 412,000 viewers and did a 2.45 quarter. They probably were going down anyway at that point given it’s a three hour show, but three segments of that was one too many at best and that’s among the worst Raw quarters in 15 years. Well, until the quarter with Layla & Alicia Fox vs. Beth Phoenix & Eve Torres and Brodus Clay vs. Tensai, which lost 34,000 viewers and did a 2.43.
> 
> The final segment with John Cena, C.M. Punk and Paul Heyman gained 428,000 viewers to a 2.74, which obviously is a terrible overrun and the growth wasn’t good for that segment.


LULZ at that overrun


----------



## The Lady Killer

Foley = ratings


----------



## JY57

Mankind/Punk is the only good segment it seems. Even the overrun sucked (but people will say but it gained viewers, so what, overall it did bad)


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Most of the breakdown was "lost viewers". Terrible week for WWE in ratings. I doubt they will remain 3 hours for more then 2 years.


----------



## NearFall

Punk with 2 strong segments there, but that overrun is terrible.


----------



## JY57

Warrior said:


> Most of the breakdown was "lost viewers". Terrible week for WWE in ratings. I doubt they will remain 3 hours for more then 2 years.


2 years? Too much. It will be gone less than that at this pace.


----------



## vanboxmeer

Welp, Bryan's career officially ended.


----------



## RatedR10

I think WWE's finally overdone the Kane/Bryan stuff and it's putting the fans off. Not surprising, it was bound to happen that they do it to death, but this quickly?

CM Punk had a great showing though. Two solid segments, but that overrun... not great.


----------



## KO Bossy

KO Bossy said:


> Bryan and Kane are comedy. Comedy in such a big role doesn't draw. Sorry, just how it is. There's a place for comedy on the card, but not to this extent. The audience being into them and them drawing successfully are two different things, and the past few weeks their segments have lost viewers big time.


Aaaaaaannnnnnnndddddddddddd I was right.


Even Mr. Ratings Ryback has been on the decline for the past few weeks.


And as I figured, Punk was involved in the 2 highest rated segments of the night at 8 and 9. If anyone can seriously look at this and say he's not a draw, you are clearly trolling or in denial.


----------



## MikeChase27

So much for Ryback being a draw lol. 

I think it says something when the two things that are over with Vince loses viewers.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Wow at that breakdown.

Well, first the good news. People have adjusted to the 8PM start time. For 3 out of the last 4 weeks, if I'm not mistaken, it has done well. Punk/Heyman/AJ started off the show nicely considering the average number of the show. Punk/Foley picked back up all that was lost in the first hour after Punk/Heyman/AJ. 

Now the mixed/kinda bad news. The overrun/final segment, while an average gain, was an overall pitiful number. Considering Punk/Cena should be doing a lot better, *especially* considering Cena was advertised which should've grabbed his fan's attention. Doesn't help that Punk had already appeared twice that night prior and no matter how big a draw you are, appearing in three segments in a night is going to diminish your drawing power for the final one. That being said, I'm not taking the blame off Punk. If he was as big a draw as Cena, they should've at least packed back in the viewers they had at the 8PM slot, but they were down 300,000+ viewers from that. Definitely something is off about the appeal of the program. Maybe Starbuck really does have a point that this "shooting/kayfabe breaking" is bad for a storyline from a drawing perspective, even if it is very very entertaining for those of us who enjoy it. Then again, there wasn't much kayfabe breaking going on, was there?

Overall, a bad week in the ratings game for Raw. Let's see what happens next week and if the downward trend continues. I have a feeling honestly this is as low as it's going to be. As I mentioned, Raw's in September, especially the last week seems to be one of if not the lowest rating of the year. It might still only hover above this week's number and still won't be good overall by today's standards, but I don't think it'll drop any lower. This will probably continue until the build up to SVS when Lesnar comes back.


----------



## JY57

Lesnar & Johnson getting a million phone messages right about now


----------



## kokepepsi

KO Bossy said:


> And as I figured, Punk was involved in the 2 highest rated segments of the night at 8 and 9. If anyone can seriously look at this and say he's not a draw, you are clearly trolling or in denial.


You forgot all those times he lost viewers at the 10pm slot and the weak overruns he has had.
unk3


----------



## MikeChase27

Whatever push Ryback was going to get could be dead after this week lol.



> You forgot all those times he lost viewers at the 10pm slot and the weak overruns he has had.


Well seeing how on the east coast its already 11:00pm and a good portion on WWE's new "REAL FANS" as WWE marks would like to say, Well most of them are in bed. But I would agree that Punk isn't a major draw but to blame "him" and not the WWE is a bit foolish.


----------



## KO Bossy

kokepepsi said:


> You forgot all those times he lost viewers at the 10pm slot and the weak overruns he has had.
> unk3


Nah, didn't forget. I never said the guy was an *awesome* draw. People in this thread constantly blame him for the poor ratings week after week and claim he's not a draw _period_. I'm saying that's false. He CAN draw, the ratings for his segments the past few weeks have proven that. It just happens that his drawing is inconsistent. Some weeks its up, some weeks its down (as you've already mentioned, he's lost viewers in the 10pm slot and had weak overruns). However, to shoulder him with all the responsibility of the horrid ratings and to say the guy can't draw at all, that's incorrect. Look at Cena, he's had bad drawing segments (his segments before ER with Edge was one of the lowest of the year and that OPENED Raw). Does that mean he's not a draw? Of course not. So why is it that same logic shouldn't be applied to Punk? If he never had a segment that drew, THEN I'd agree that he can't draw.

The fact that his segments the past few weeks, even without Cena, have had good gains and some of the best rated segments of the show tells me that the fans are into him, which is great.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Well I guess I was too pre-emptive on putting the blame on Punk. Lo and behold, he was probably the only bright spot on the active roster. The breakdown still looks awful even though the show was really entertaining. The fact that the draw for this episode was Lawler's interview, and that segment did nothing at all, is a very telling sign.


----------



## SteenIsGod

Rock316AE Mode

Obviously the segments with Foley and Heyman did good. Good thing they saved the anit-draw in CM Punk. Everything else is standard fair, Cena drawing as always and Rocks dust keeping this company alive.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

SteenIsGod said:


> Rock316AE Mode
> 
> Obviously the segments with Foley and Heyman did good. Good thing they saved the anit-draw in CM Punk. Everything else is standard fair, Cena drawing as always and Rocks dust keeping this company alive.


Don't forget Ryback at the end saving the overrun from losing viewers.


----------



## ogorodnikov

> The third Bryan & Kane segment and the attack on Bryan & Kane by Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow lost 412,000 viewers and did a 2.45 quarter. They probably were going down anyway at that point given it’s a three hour show, but three segments of that was one too many at best and that’s among the worst Raw quarters in 15 years


GOAT and now a ratings machine. you can't KEEP Daniel Bryan from being the perfect wrestler, and basically the perfect human being. Main Event status is sure to come. oh wait, he already is a Main Eventer. just ignore that whole him being on the midcard thing.

he didn't lose at Over the Limit btw. he.... demands..........a REMATCH!!!!!!!!!!! fuck, he's better than Rock on the mic too.



vanboxmeer said:


> Welp, Bryan's career officially ended.


i'm stealing this. just try and fucking stop me.


----------



## Loudness

Hum, WWE has had that tendency for the longest time, starting out decent and only dropping save for a few Heyman/Punk or Cena segments. Interesting that Team Hell No turns viewers away, I guess wrestling fans and casual have a different opinion on entertainment, or maybe they just don't care about the storyline for different reasons. But regardless of specific names, WWE needs to find a way to turn around the way their ratings develop throughout the show, having every quarter drop shows that the fans at home are only tuning out, but hardly tuning in, regardless who is on (except the mentioned names).

On a totally unrelated note, great work by the mod/admin adding Scott Steiner tags under our forum names, GOAT!


----------



## Pro Royka

Just like what I said, all punk segments gained and the rest lost a lot of viewers. Nothing else to see here and obviously it's not Punks fault.


----------



## Mister Hands

So the takeaway is that when you put out an inconsistent product, even your main draws get inconsistent ratings. Nobody's a big enough deal that people will sit through 3 hours of mediocre television. Colour me surprised.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Loudness said:


> Hum, WWE has had that tendency for the longest time, starting out decent and only dropping save for a few Heyman/Punk or Cena segments. Interesting that Team Hell No turns viewers away, I guess wrestling fans and casual have a different opinion on entertainment, or maybe they just don't care about the storyline for different reasons. But regardless of specific names, WWE needs to find a way to turn around the way their ratings develop throughout the show, having every quarter drop shows that the fans at home are only tuning out, but hardly tuning in, regardless who is on (except the mentioned names).
> 
> On a totally unrelated note, great work by the mod/admin adding Scott Steiner tags under our forum names, GOAT!


Maybe so many Shelby segs is overkill and they wanna see some action. And then after all that they come into the ring just to decide a name? Peeps ain't getting much from that. I find it entertaining, but I guess some are just thinking it's dragging out. I guess WWE is taking a slow calm approach with re development of the tag division, but maybe people just don't have much patience or care to watch those segments over and over.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Punk in the two biggest segments of the night. Conclusion = Blame Punk. DAT WF RATINGS LOGIC


----------



## Loudness

swagger_ROCKS said:


> *Maybe so many Shelby segs is overkill and they wanna see some action*. And then after all that they come into the ring just to decide a name? Peeps ain't getting much from that. I find it entertaining, but I guess some are just thinking it's dragging out. I guess WWE is taking a slow calm approach with re development of the tag division, but maybe people just don't have much patience or care to watch those segments over and over.


Definitely I guess. Now I personally didn't mind the segments at all, I loved every single one of them all but as you said, the fans seem to have a different opinion on that matter. But regardless of Bryan and Kane, nobody except Heyman (with Punk) and Cena really draws from the currently active roster, its quite telling when the number of fans watching only decreases as the show progresses, the senseless matches with no buildup/announcement and the recaps are destroying the viewership I assume.


----------



## SteenIsGod

Maybe Punk is starting to draw as a heel? Who knows, consistency is key and will see how his segments do next week. But it's funny that Punk nearly tripled Orton's 9 O'clock segment a couple weeks ago.

Nope, but Orton is a mega star that draws like a monster and Punk is a indie jabroni.

Not saying Punk is a draw, but give him credit where credit is due. Not saying Orton doesn't draw, I'm just using it as an example.


----------



## The Buryer

What about Foley? Is he not a draw?


----------



## Secueritae

Although a lot of us enjoyed Kofi Dolph, it lost 262k viewers.
IWC's delight = WWE going bankrupt? :S


----------



## Kabraxal

Mister Hands said:


> So the takeaway is that when you put out an inconsistent product, even your main draws get inconsistent ratings. Nobody's a big enough deal that people will sit through 3 hours of mediocre television. Colour me surprised.


Doesn't help on top of this it's 3 hours... even when you have decent stuff in the final hour like Bryan/Kane people are so worn out they just start tuning out. 

But, to be fair, they went up against the final bit of that close and controversial game of american football too.


----------



## Jingoro

Secueritae said:


> Although a lot of us enjoyed Kofi Dolph, it lost 262k viewers.
> IWC's delight = WWE going bankrupt? :S


it was also cut from raw on hulu plus.


----------



## -Skullbone-

There's a difference between someone who _draws_ and someone who _drew_.

How many on the current roster could be classified a bonafide attraction on name alone for fans of the product as well as those outside the WWE/professional wrestling bubble?


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

So, only three segments actually gained viewers, and all of them featured Punk in the prominent role. Can this Punk can't draw fad die now?

Also it warms my heart that Ryback lost 500'000 viewers in his biggest squash match yet.

And its pretty horrible that a match featuring the World Heavyweight Champion and the biggest heel on SD loses viewers in the top of the hour quarter. 

And viewers apparently hate the DB and Kane angle, all of their segments have bombed.


----------



## D.M.N.

Quarter Hours - September 24th, 2012
Q1 + Q2 - - 3.908 million
Q3 - 3.646 million
Q4 - 3.351 million
Q5 + Q6 - 4.228 million
Q7 + Q8 - 3.695 million
Q9 - 3.694 million
Q10 - 3.282 million
Q11 - 3.248 million
Q12 + Overrun - 3.796 million

Yeah.


----------



## Starbuck

I really don't see why any of these numbers are cause for celebration or proof that somebody draws tbh. The highest point of the show only had 4.2 million people watching. 4.2 million. That's fucking awful. Yes, Punk/Foley at 9pm had a great gain and it was a great segment but really, all they did was get back the people who left in the slot before them. 3.3 mill to 4.2 million. The good thing is that they came back of course but it sort of takes the sting away when you put it like that. Outside of the opener which has been the only thing doing consistently well for the past few weeks now, for that part of the show at least, every thing else bombed. That breakdown is horrific. They lost viewers all night pretty much and didn't even get them back in their usual numbers for the main segments. The overrun is just...I don't even know. Seems like the third hour has made the ending to the show redundant now because nobody is tuning in to watch whether it's Cena, Punk or whoever. 10pm did horribly which seems to be the trend now it seems. The 3 hour format has really killed their ability to get any gains on the level that they would usually expect. The last thing that did well at 10pm iirc was Trips retirement which had over 5 million viewers and gained over 600k based on him alone and was the highest point of the show. That's somebody who draws, who is a draw and who has been doing so at the highest level for a very long time as a legitimate star attraction that the vast majority of fans want to see. 

I don't see how anybody can go calling Punk a draw based off these numbers tbh. It's actually making me lol. Least watched Raw in over 5 years, Punk's a draw!! Forget the fact that 9pm did well and look at the overall picture instead of wetting your pants over 4.2 million viewers. I personally will not call CM Punk a draw until he proves on a consistent basis that he is and I really don't see how anybody, other than his marks of course, can say it either. Any time he has done well he has done so with a legend, never on his own. Don't you find that coincidental? Even Miz has gained over 1 million viewers on his name alone. I take nothing away from that Punk/Foley promo btw. The credit goes to both of them because it was great stuff, from both of them and deserved to be the high point of the night because it was for me. But I don't see that segment doing half as good as it did if it were just Punk by himself. You have to look at things in context. When Punk loses viewers at 10pm it's brushed under the rug. When he gains at 9pm he's a mega draw. It's the hypocrisy that gets me tbh.

Kane/DB sucking in the ratings is crap. I really enjoy those segments and think they're hilarious but they clearly aren't doing the business as the past few weeks have shown. 

And I'm not letting Cena off the hook here either. He didn't appear for the entire show and they promoted him doing so at the end. They also promoted Punk coming out to confront him during Punk/Foley too. The result was pitiful. For the main feud to not even be able to get over a 3.0 overrun is just shocking and it's a terrible reflection on the program itself. Something clearly just isn't clicking here. The difference is, Cena can fall back on the fact that he has drawn at the highest level on a consistent basis. We all know he is a draw but the pattern in recent times has shown that he isn't as consistent as he used to be. Punk on the other hand, he has nothing to fall back on. That's why Cena is able to get somewhat of a free pass I suppose. I'll still hold him to account though. 2.74 for an advertised John Cena appearance sucks balls plain and simple.

The only thing left to consider is the fact that the football game had a huge number. That doesn't absolve them of fault though. If they want to compete with that every week then they need to produce a television product that can. Getting their audience back up to a regular 5 million every week wouldn't be a bad place to start. Right now they can't even get 4.


----------



## Rock316AE

Don't see the surprise here of "See, Punk gained", obviously, he was in all the key segments of the show(And the overall audience was the lowest for a non-holiday RAW since 1997). The factor here is the gain and that overrun was a disaster number and one of the lowest RAW overruns since they started doing overruns after Bischoff started this "trick" with Nitro. The only real decent spot here is Mick Foley's return promo. Everything else was horrible, including the Ryback match but that was more because it was right after a big surprise with Foley at the 9pm segment.


----------



## -Skullbone-

People shouldn't be too concerned with the possibility of management tossing aside the Kane-Bryan team concept because of the numbers. It's obvious they're intent on pushing the tag-team aspect of the program. Whether or not they'll get the same coverage remains to be seen, however. 

Saying that, it wouldn't be a bad thing they toned back the hug segments (love it if they ditched it altogether from this point) and became more proactive in creating weekly 'hooks' to keep things fresh. Personal taste aside (I don't find Team Friendship funny, although I don't look to WWE for comedic value), I reckon a lot of viewers quite like the Anger Management concept but can't stand the 'hug it out' schtick. Aside from its charm it's not exactly captivating, must-see television, and a lot of casuals hate seeing that sort of stuff in their program. 

Then again, they seem to like love-triangle storylines. :hmm:


----------



## DesolationRow

Kabraxal said:


> Can't say I'm surprised... the booking is so inconsistent right now for most of the card and there are very few reasons to actually care about what is happening anymore. Most fans have been cultivated and trained through months and years of bad booking to not get invested becasue the WWE will not follow through on anything. And on top of that... you take a star that was actually over, made him the typical snivelling, whiny, cowardly heel that gets upstaged by the bullies WWE calls faces and most people just shrug and find something better to watch. This booking is on par, if not worse, than the New Generation Era. *Just now, TNA hasn't reached WCW's level yet to force McMahon's hand into actually improving his product.*


Haha. Don't hold your breath on that happening anytime too soon, either.



MikeChase27 said:


> Whatever push Ryback was going to get could be dead after this week lol.


No way. A roughly half a million viewer loss coming off the top quarter hour segment with Punk and Foley where Ryback's involvement really wasn't that big and there was a comedy segment and a bunch of commercials in there, too... It's not going to impact Ryback one bit.

Anyway, I'm sure Vince is somewhere glancing at the breakdown, letting his eyeglasses slip down his nose a little bit, and then raising his eyes to Triple H, cackling, "I told you this tag team shit doesn't draw, son! Now, starting next week, let's break up Team Friendship and have them drop the titles to Rhodes Scholars, who will break up in a couple of weeks and drop those titles back to Air Truth who will break up the following week when Kofi Kingston turns heel on R-Truth by beating up Lil Jimmy..."

I blame the replacement refs.


----------



## Starbuck

At least Team Hell No are funny and Vince apparently laughs at them lol. If they weren't giving them focus who else would they be giving it to? Cena's arm chips lol.


----------



## Twisted14

IMO the whole NFL ordeal has completely screwed up the Raw ratings to a point where it is hardly worth over analysing it this way. The breakdown seems to be all over the place to me. Even Cena being hyped up throughout the show did very little. It's clear that the NFL would have brought in a whole heap of people to see what would happen with their referees. 

One thing I don't get is why you guys even have football on a Monday night anyway. That's just weird to me. With our main football league in Australia they play on Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays each week. With only one week in the year where they play on a Monday afternoon. It's solely a weekend thing otherwise.

edit: I'm getting ignored by Scott Steiner, that's awesome.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

> When Punk loses viewers at 10pm it's brushed under the rug. When he gains at 9pm he's a mega draw. It's the hypocrisy that gets me tbh.


Punk losing viewers gets brushed under the rug? What alternate universe do you live in, Starbuck?

I don't disagree with your post. This doesn't prove Punk is a "draw", but certainly it proves that he's not an anti-draw which so many spout ridiculously. Punk's incredibly inconsistent, but he can draw big, arguably bigger than anyone else on the roster when put with a big draw (besides another big draw). When he's not with a big draw though, it's split with whether he draws well or not.

Actually, that intrigues me a bit. A few weeks ago I got together all the breakdowns up to that point from this year and saved them. What I'm gonna do for the fuck of it, is gather all the Punk segments where he wasn't with a proven draw (which at this point in WWE I'm only considering Cena, HHH, Rock, Undertaker, Lesnar and maybe Foley... though he's a legend I'm not sure how big of a draw he actually is in this day and age. I'd need to check his segments in breakdowns to see that for myself). I'll have to wait until Friday or Saturday to do it since that's where my laptop is, so if anyone else wants to beat me to it, feel free. I'm interested myself in seeing if he really has never drawn well with a proven draw. The one I was thinking of at first was the Punk "shoot" on Laurinaitis in January a couple of weeks before the Rumble, but then I remembered Foley was there at the end of it and was there for a good enough time where he'd have brought in viewers if he was going to. 

But hell, Laurinaitis could be considered a proven draw as well when he was an authority figure because of just that... he was an authority figure.

Then again, today in WWE what really draws exceptionally isn't an individual wrestler, but a great storyline.


----------



## DesolationRow

*Starbuck*, I agree with what you're saying about Punk and all of that above, but at the same time I think this whole storyline is in large part failing to draw what it ought to because of the taxing three-hour format. It's just too much. I think if we took a time machine to, say, 2006 and had Raw beginning in late July '06 start going three hours every week, we'd see even DX at the top impacted negatively by the format. It's the only cogent explanation for why Cena's drawing ability with viewers appears to be at an all-time low, in conjunction with no angle or personality who's regularly featured (Triple H deserves an immense level of credit for that showing from the Raw the night after Summerslam in the 10:00pm slot but he's a special attraction legend, no longer a star ala Cena or Punk or Sheamus or Miz or whoever who has to be in the trenches every week). 

The third hour has become poison in terms of building a solid rating and viewership number throughout the program (lol, "program"... with the overrun the typical Raw clocks in at about ten minutes shorter than fucking _Schindler's List_, and with about 10,000x the padding, filler and overall puerile crappiness that _Schindler's List_ is free of) unless they have something truly magnificent lined up like for Raw 1,000 or something that at least approaches that magnitude in terms of name and star value. It's just too damned long. It's not like the late '90s when Nitro went to three hours because now every other wrestling fan seems to giddily check it all out on YouTube the next morning or next day or next week or whenever instead, or they're recording it or whatever. I'm not trying to give them any excuses, that's not in my interest, but it figures that bloating the program to three hours is only going to hasten this already-existing phenomenon. Simply put, Raw at three hours loses the last shreds of "must-see TV" it still boasted as the premiere professional wrestling program on cable television. 

Every year in late September there seems to be a nadir they reach, and sometimes it extends into the first week of October or so, so I don't know how much this is a simple rehashing of that phenomenon (a mixture or perfect storm if you will with MNF back, new fall shows back, kids going back to school and a billion other slight, minor factors to perhaps be considered or not considered). That Cena with his busted arm can't attract more fans to the product at that point in time than that speaks volumes of how much this whole current format is ostensibly preventing them from hitting any high notes in the final hour or even overrun, week after week now. Fans have caught on to the early hour at eight, but the third hour has paid a heavy price for that, it would seem.


----------



## DesolationRow

The Sandrone said:


> Punk losing viewers gets brushed under the rug? What alternate universe do you live in, Starbuck?
> 
> I don't disagree with your post. This doesn't prove Punk is a "draw", but certainly it proves that he's not an anti-draw which so many spout ridiculously. Punk's incredibly inconsistent, but he can draw big, arguably bigger than anyone else on the roster when put with a big draw (besides another big draw). When he's not with a big draw though, it's split with whether he draws well or not.
> 
> Actually, that intrigues me a bit. A few weeks ago I got together all the breakdowns up to that point from this year and saved them. What I'm gonna do for the fuck of it, is gather all the Punk segments where he wasn't with a proven draw (which at this point in WWE I'm only considering Cena, HHH, Rock, Undertaker, Lesnar and maybe Foley... though he's a legend I'm not sure how big of a draw he actually is in this day and age. I'd need to check his segments in breakdowns to see that for myself). I'll have to wait until Friday or Saturday to do it since that's where my laptop is, so if anyone else wants to beat me to it, feel free. I'm interested myself in seeing if he really has never drawn well with a proven draw. The one I was thinking of at first was the Punk "shoot" on Laurinaitis in January a couple of weeks before the Rumble, but then I remembered Foley was there at the end of it and was there for a good enough time where he'd have brought in viewers if he was going to.
> 
> But hell, Laurinaitis could be considered a proven draw as well when he was an authority figure because of just that... he was an authority figure.
> 
> Then again, today in WWE what really draws exceptionally isn't an individual wrestler, but a great storyline.


Your experiment sounds fascinating, but I think you may be missing *Starbuck*'s point, which is, point of fact, Punk by himself is not a draw. Even at his hottest like in the summertime of 2011, he was paired with John Cena, Vince McMahon and Triple H. Although he has drawn well otherwise against guys like Daniel Bryan, Chris Jericho and if memory serves even Alberto Del Rio in one or two segments in the past, he's wildly inconsistent. He'll never get an ounce of credit for, say, the overrun to Raw 1,000 even though he was the central focus, because Cena and Rock were out there with him. So until he can hold his own by himself on a consistent basis in segments that are focused either solely or at least dominantly around him, and draw and make programs against lesser names bigger by simply being present in them, it's questionable how much of a "draw" he really is. 

Of course, I think WWE's entire approach to this has been wrongheaded in the extreme. They had John Cena tell the world and CM Punk to his face that his 300+ day WWE Championship reign was completely irrelevant. WWE is determined to have Punk be the heel. But the problem is, to ensure that he draws heat, they have to strip anything that is even remotely noble or even arguably "cool" about him away from him, reducing him to a whiny, sniveling bitch who's upset because nobody gives a damn about his irrelevant ass. I mean... let's face it, that is not the best way to make someone out to be a star that people should flock to see and wait to watch any time they show up on television. The whole way they've gone about this angle has actually damaged both Cena and Punk, because Punk is an irrelevant WWE Champion only relevant now because Cena has him in his crosshairs, but the audience has been so thoroughly conditioned into not only accepting but anticipating Cena's inevitable victory over all, that how dramatic can a face-off be between the all-powerful Superman and Mr. Irrelevancy?

How any of this is a basis for a feud that culminates inside Hell in a Cell is beyond me. At this point, I think I'd rather see Punk feud with Mick Foley than anything else, based on this past week's Raw. That's sad.


----------



## Starbuck

^^^^ Yup. I said that sometime this week, that the way they've gone about presenting Punk to us for the past 9 months or so, the damage that was done during that time, well, we may be seeing now that the results are unfixable so to speak. They can't promote somebody as second or third best for 9 months and then expect people to believe he's the shit in month 10. It doesn't work like that and in a way, that bit really isn't his fault is it?



The Sandrone said:


> Punk losing viewers gets brushed under the rug? What alternate universe do you live in, Starbuck?
> 
> *I don't disagree with your post. This doesn't prove Punk is a "draw", but certainly it proves that he's not an anti-draw which so many spout ridiculously. Punk's incredibly inconsistent, but he can draw big, arguably bigger than anyone else on the roster when put with a big draw (besides another big draw). When he's not with a big draw though, it's split with whether he draws well or not.*
> 
> Actually, that intrigues me a bit. A few weeks ago I got together all the breakdowns up to that point from this year and saved them. What I'm gonna do for the fuck of it, is gather all the Punk segments where he wasn't with a proven draw (which at this point in WWE I'm only considering Cena, HHH, Rock, Undertaker, Lesnar and maybe Foley... though he's a legend I'm not sure how big of a draw he actually is in this day and age. I'd need to check his segments in breakdowns to see that for myself). I'll have to wait until Friday or Saturday to do it since that's where my laptop is, so if anyone else wants to beat me to it, feel free. I'm interested myself in seeing if he really has never drawn well with a proven draw. The one I was thinking of at first was the Punk "shoot" on Laurinaitis in January a couple of weeks before the Rumble, but then I remembered Foley was there at the end of it and was there for a good enough time where he'd have brought in viewers if he was going to.
> 
> But hell, Laurinaitis could be considered a proven draw as well when he was an authority figure because of just that... he was an authority figure.
> 
> Then again, today in WWE what really draws exceptionally isn't an individual wrestler, but a great storyline.


By his marks. I'd love to live in a alternate universe where double standards and hypocrisy didn't exist but what fun would that be? I'm pretty sure that when Punk's segments bomb there are no Punk marks to be found in this thread yet if they don't there'll all here proclaiming him as some super draw and having a go at Randy Orton lol. 

:lmao Did you even read that before you posted it? You basically said Punk can draw when he's with somebody else who draws better than him and if not then he can't lol. What point are you trying to make?

I don't even know why you would want to do all that tbh. Why waste your time? You just said the only people you consider to be draws in WWE right now are Rock, Cena, HHH, Lesnar and Taker. If you want to call Punk a draw then you're putting him up there with these guys and he isn't. It's as simple as that. But hey, if you want to trawl through a bazillion breakdowns to make yourself feel better about Punk's drawing ability then be my guest lol. It still won't prove anything. He isn't consistent, the times he has done really well he's been paired with a bigger name and he has flat out bombed in a few instances too which doesn't help his case. A few months back I remember calling Punk a semi-draw but I'm starting to take that back now tbh. I understand that there is more to consider than just 1 guy and of course, the 3 hour shows aren't helping thing but sooner or later you have to wonder just what it's going to take. I suppose they have one last shot with Rocky heading into the Rumble and if that doesn't work then I really don't know.

@*Deso* - You are right about the new format and I touched upon that above. The thing is though, this is the way it is now. At the beginning we didn't know how things were going to turn out but by this stage we've been able to establish some patterns etc. This is what Raw is and this is the format in which they have to build their stars now. So far it most certainly isn't working because week after week the losses are coming and coming, especially in the third hour which really is killing them. But when even your main program involving Mr WWE himself John Cena and your invigorated WWE Champion can't pull back the viewers then you're in trouble. HHH is one example but I'm curious to see how other big names will perform when we get them on the show in the coming months. I guess that's the only way we'll be able to know for sure, if it's truly the 3 hour format or if it's the current talent/direction/creative/whatever. If Triple H can still manage to get over 5 million people to watch him then I reckon Rock will be able to best that. If so then what does that tell us? It is still possible but only with the right people.


----------



## DesolationRow

Well, that is what I'm getting at with my point about the three hours being too much, *Starbuck*. If even Cena has seen his drawing superpowers diminished by this format, then anyone who's not a legendary part-timer who the audience can't get burned out on simply because they're so seldom around (Triple H, Lesnar, Rock, Taker) is probably going to suffer. Now the part-timers like those aforementioned four gentlemen are the "special events"; and this line of thinking is hugely reinforced by the move to three hours, because like I say, it has, simply put, reduced the emphasis on WWE's Monday Night Raw as being "must-see television" for wrestling fans, and of course casuals are the first ones to become... more... casual... in their viewing habits. It's probably going to take a Triple H or an Undertaker or a Rock showing up for a 10:00pm segment or an overrun segment to truly compel most audience members and the vast majority of casuals to either stay around in the first place throughout the run of a program or at least to tune in for them. 

It's a phenomenon that is somewhat difficult to fully explain, but it does remind me of of the WCW Nitro situation when they moved to three hours. Although to be perfectly fair, one thing TNT did was replay Nitro right after Nitro finished airing, and at least USA isn't doing that with Raw. It should also be noted that WCW started up the Goldberg push in the weeks following the move to three hours, and Ryback's push on Raw sort of fits in that general timeline with WWE's move to three hours on Monday nights.


----------



## Starbuck

Cena's powers have been diminishing long before the 3 hours though. And while he isn't as dominating as he used to be, he still manages to pop very impressive numbers now and again. The match vs. Big Show a while back being one of them iirc. I just wonder how they will be able to NOT burn people out on particular guys with a weekly 3 hour show. They sort of did it this week with Cena only appearing for 15 mins at the end but if they do that every week will that result in more people tuning in to see him when he's on because they miss him or more people tuning out because he's not there lol? I really don't know what they can do. If you have 3 hours of TV to fill every week, it's most definitely going to be harder to keep guys fresh and intriguing because people will get burnt out a lot quicker. One has to wonder if they can truly create must see TV given the length of the show and the current environment for wrestling right now. We haven't seen somebody come along who has truly captivated the masses to the point where they tune in no matter when they appear or how many times. I wonder if it's still possible tbh. They haven't made things any easier on themselves by switching to 3 hours that's for sure.


----------



## -Skullbone-

It seems the general consensus found between Starbuck and DesolationRow's posts is shared by the majority of viewers, posters here and likely management themselves:

3 hours is too long to sit through.

One positive that may emerge, however, is how this unflattering format may urge the big boss and his cronies to step up their creative game for the product and for their network's benefit. They have to _fight_ to get people to stay tuned in this time around instead of resting back on their laurels, hands on heads and chortling amongst themselves about those schmucks stuck in TNA .


----------



## Hazaq

I think the only effective way to prove punk is a draw to the internet fans is with PPV buys. Ratings are not going to help in that case, even if he can draw over million viewers at top of the hour or overrun occasionally, its gonna get dismissed as a one night deal and forgotten because thats how the Internet Community operates. But if he can manage to show strong PPV numbers main eventing with a lesser star, it can be factually proved that he is a draw. Just my opinion on the matter.


----------



## Grass420

so looking at the break downs..

i wonder if the CM Punk haters will stfu now lol.

CM Punk is the only thing that gained viewers


----------



## BANKSY

Like I said before this move to 3 hours I can see them keeping the earlier 2 hours when the eventual change happens to make the program more accessible for children.


----------



## Shawn Morrison

Yeah, and now everyone should forget this Raw and name it one of the worst just because of the viewers. Who cares? fact is the show was booked greatly and IMO was the best 3 hour show since the 1000th Raw.

and i'm pretty sure the Kane/Bryan segment's get low ratings because when the camera's switch to backstage, people change the channel. Backstage segments do bad in general. It feels like an ad more than something thats part of the show. But i'm pretty sure they will do better ratings because the fans DO enjoy kane and bryan.


----------



## Cliffy

Obviously not if the fans keep switching off during their segments.


----------



## JY57

Shawn Morrison said:


> Yeah, and now everyone should forget this Raw and name it one of the worst just because of the viewers. Who cares? fact is the show was booked greatly and IMO was the best 3 hour show since the 1000th Raw.
> 
> and i'm pretty sure the Kane/Bryan segment's get low ratings because when the camera's switch to backstage, people change the channel. Backstage segments do bad in general. It feels like an ad more than something thats part of the show. But i'm pretty sure they will do better ratings because the fans DO enjoy kane and bryan.


some jsut want wrestling over backstage segments or hugging. Its not their fault its what WWE is giving them. The re-match they had last week with Kofi/R-truth if not mistaken did good in numbers. Their hug after the match only was 2 minutes of the 15 minutes (next quarter) last week I hardly put major blame on that. the first time they hugged was like 15 minutes; talk about dragging out like hell, you can't blame people tuning out. A hug lasts only 30 seconds not 15 minutes.

but overall if they just have them wrestle 90 % of the time over skits & hugging (they haven't done that since last week Raw seems like BOD is slowing down on that angle along with I am Tag team Champions crap) than they would be fine. But like others said they like to overkill with the comedy stuff like with AJ/Punk/Bryan (it was fine with Kane involved since it was still fresh, but after he left the scene it got overdone fast)


----------



## Choke2Death

I know Starbuck spoke for me on this one, but Punk gets the peak of the show at _barely_ above 4 million at the 9PM spot in a segment featuring Mick Foley, a legend that has returned for the first time since WM28 if I'm not mistaken, and following two quarters that lost half a million viewers and he's declared as a "draw" here. LOL.

Thank God the Punk/Cena feud #32159739175 is failing to draw. That feud lost what made it special a year ago and now they are trying to use it in hopes of better ratings but it's irrelevant and done with. Keep fallin', ratings, keep fallin'!


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

The logic in here is mindblowing. Before this breakdown, we saw posts "Of course it got low numbers, Punk was all over the show." then low and behold his segments were the only ones saving the show from being even lower. And again, when we see his segments do good numbers, "oh, but the credit must be shared equally." And once again before the breakdown, we saw that only CM Punk got the blame. If credit should be shared, shouldn't the blame be as well? The lack of consistency in this thread is nuts. But it's not surprising, every single person is biased because of mark wars~!


----------



## The-Rock-Says

^ Why do you even care? You've said many times you don't care about ratings. 

Anytime Punk does a bad rating you're in here saying "So what if Punk drew low, I don't care about ratings"

Then when he does good numbers you are in here throwing a party.

Anyway, this is the comedy club.


----------



## Choke2Death

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> The logic in here is mindblowing. Before this breakdown, we saw posts "Of course it got low numbers, Punk was all over the show." then low and behold his segments were the only ones saving the show. And again, when we see his segments do good numbers, "oh, but the credit must be shared equally." And once again before the breakdown, we saw that only CM Punk got the blame. If credit should be shared, shouldn't the blame be as well? The lack of consistency in this thread is nuts. But it's not surprising, every single person is biased because of mark wars~!


What else is there to discuss outside of the most overpushed person on the roster and his (lack of) drawing abilities? That Santino and Zack Ryder lose viewers every time they're on? Not very interesting, is it?

And the logic is indeed mind-blowing. Orton as champion on Smackdown gets 1.7 and all blame is placed on him without anyone even looking at segment breakdowns or anything beyond the full show ratings but Raw is doing terribly bad with Punk as champion and him main eventing the show yet he always gets away with it because his segments gain viewers since the rest of the show has viewers tuning out at a rapid pace. And to further show Punk's lack of drawing abilities, ratings are constantly going down with him being the centerpiece of the show. At least when Cena's meaningless feuds main evented, they didn't reach the upper 2 area for a month straight!

First it was "PUNK CANT DRAW BECAUSE WWE MAKES HIM IRRELEVANT!!!!11" now there's new excuses like "He gains back the 500k viewers that tuned out and still gets called a ratings killer!!!! ARGH!!!!".


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

If I didn't care I wouldn't be posting in here. I find them interesting and I like to not take this thread seriously most of the time because of how ridiculous it is, so I join in on the unbiased mark wars~ that go on.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Any way, the ref and Heyman drew the first number and Foley drew the 2nd.

AND OFF WE GO!


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

No, it was AJ. Remember how she single-handedly carried that stupid love triangle storyline? What a ratings juggernaut. Maddox definitely helped. Guy has a big following.


----------



## Pro Royka

No Criss Angle helped a lot his tweets was the main reason for the gains. People liked his tweets toward Punk so they had to tune in. Also the ref was bulky people thought he will kick Punks skinny ass. The ending was Punks problem, Cena and Ryback helped it to rise little bit, even tho they ended the show. :troll

Where is the guy that said "Punk cant draw" I bet he got tons of green reps.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Lord Meltzer says that Punk and Foley promo was the only hit and did very well. The overrun is one of the worst ever in fifteen years, and that next weeks Raw could do worse as they didn't advertise anything for next week.


----------



## NearFall

*Choke2Death* brings up a good point regards Cena/Punk. The whole idea of "respect" is quite retarded. Punk beat Cena in the _best_ possible build they could have had last year in July. A year later, after months of Cena "respecting" Punk, heck he even said it in a promo backstage last year during August, for standing up and holding true to his words of winning in Chicago. Now we have them actually have a semi-decent build with decent overruns, until we get a draw as a result at PPV. That, coupled with the fact there was little to no build last week, made the outset for this RAW and the future of this fued, disastrous and unappealing to many. But if WWE find something works, they will use it again and again. (With dwindling interest)



Choke2Death said:


> What else is there to discuss outside of the most overpushed person on the roster and his (lack of) drawing abilities? That Santino and Zack Ryder lose viewers every time they're on? Not very interesting, is it?
> 
> _And the logic is indeed mind-blowing. Orton as champion on Smackdown gets 1.7 and all blame is placed on him without anyone even looking at segment breakdowns or anything beyond the full show ratings but Raw is doing terribly bad with Punk as champion and him main eventing the show yet he always gets away with it because his segments gain viewers since the rest of the show has viewers tuning out at a rapid pace. _And to further show Punk's lack of drawing abilities, ratings are constantly going down with him being the centerpiece of the show. At least when Cena's meaningless feuds main evented, they didn't reach the upper 2 area for a month straight!
> 
> *First it was "PUNK CANT DRAW BECAUSE WWE MAKES HIM IRRELEVANT!!!!11" now there's new excuses like "He gains back the 500k viewers that tuned out and still gets called a ratings killer!!!! ARGH!!!!".*


-Italics: However, it does go both ways. Back when Punk was feuding with Jericho(3.1-.3.3s with Rock/Cena as ME) and then Daniel Bryan( which it was Big Show VS Cena and 2.7s-3.0s) the entire ratings were blamed on Punk by a lot of people. But it is probably just his blind haters, like the blind Orton haters.

-Bolded: Rather than bring back my huge post earlier. I'll simply put it as *Starbuck* did. The fact that he has been treated so irrelevantly as Champion will make people rather uninterested in his first(relatively) main event program as Champion. It simply is not clicking as for the past months, if they missed Punk, they did not miss the main event. Perhaps that ideology is still with a portion of the audience?


----------



## KO Bossy

Choke2Death said:


> What else is there to discuss outside of the most overpushed person on the roster and his (lack of) drawing abilities? That Santino and Zack Ryder lose viewers every time they're on? Not very interesting, is it?
> 
> And the logic is indeed mind-blowing. Orton as champion on Smackdown gets 1.7 and all blame is placed on him without anyone even looking at segment breakdowns or anything beyond the full show ratings but Raw is doing terribly bad with Punk as champion and him main eventing the show yet he always gets away with it because his segments gain viewers since the rest of the show has viewers tuning out at a rapid pace. And to further show Punk's lack of drawing abilities, ratings are constantly going down with him being the centerpiece of the show. At least when Cena's meaningless feuds main evented, they didn't reach the upper 2 area for a month straight!
> 
> First it was "PUNK CANT DRAW BECAUSE WWE MAKES HIM IRRELEVANT!!!!11" now there's new excuses like "He gains back the 500k viewers that tuned out and still gets called a ratings killer!!!! ARGH!!!!".


Denial is not just a river in Egypt...

The arguments of so many people on here are that Punk can't draw PERIOD. The fact that his segments gained viewers dispute that. Now is he inconsistent? Absolutely. But to say he can't draw at all is wrong.


----------



## GillbergReturns

KO Bossy said:


> Denial is not just a river in Egypt...
> 
> The arguments of so many people on here are that Punk can't draw PERIOD. The fact that his segments gained viewers dispute that. Now is he inconsistent? Absolutely. But to say he can't draw at all is wrong.


He's not drawing viewers is the point. Segment breakdowns are irrelvant when Raw's overall numbers are decreasing. 

I don't think Punk's to blame for WWE's issues but Main Event storylines are almost always going to garner the most attention and draw the best numbers for the show.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Sure, people tune into Punk's segments (when he's paired with Foley), but overall viewership is still declining. That's like when you're down 30 in a basketball game and you go on a 10-0 run. Well, you're gaining ground, but you're still losing.


----------



## HalfNights70

I was actaully reading the last 35 pages that I missed and I'm still not surprised about the ignorance around here.


----------



## Starbuck

jblvdx said:


> Lord Meltzer says that Punk and Foley promo was the only hit and did very well. The overrun is one of the worst ever in fifteen years, and that next weeks Raw could do worse *as they didn't advertise anything for next week*.


RYBACK

And I think a lot of people are missing the point here tbh. Y U PUNKS MARKS NO UNDERSTAND?


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

The overall viewership was shit. But Punk should absolutely not be getting any of the blame as the ONLY THREE SEGMENTS THAT GAINED NUMBERS involved Punk. Yes the numbers they got were not good, but the average viewership was down anyway because of the heavy competition. Stars like Sheamus, Del Rio, Ziggler, Rey Mysterio, Ryback, Daniel Bryan, Kane etc drove all the viewers further away as Punk, Foley, Heyman, Cena etc at least got some of them back.


----------



## Werb-Jericho

The Lady Killer said:


> Sure, people tune into Punk's segments (when he's paired with Foley), but overall viewership is still declining. That's like when you're down 30 in a basketball game and you go on a 10-0 run. Well, you're gaining ground, but you're still losing.


i pretty much only watch for Punk, i tune out or fast forward the rest as it is mediocre at best. It's not Punk's fault there is literally nothing else entertaining on the show


----------



## DesolationRow

jblvdx said:


> The overall viewership was shit. But Punk should absolutely not be getting any of the blame as the ONLY THREE SEGMENTS THAT GAINED NUMBERS involved Punk. Yes the numbers they got were not good, but the average viewership was down anyway because of the heavy competition. Stars like Sheamus, Del Rio, Ziggler, Rey Mysterio, Ryback, Daniel Bryan, Kane etc drove all the viewers further away as Punk, Foley, Heyman, Cena etc at least got some of them back.


But Punk's the WWE Champion! And as the current storyline reinforces, it's the WWE Champion who is at the center of everything in WWE and must be held accountable for all things! It is the centerpiece of the product and WWE has consistently made it apparent how relevant Punk is no matter what anyway!


----------



## GillbergReturns

jblvdx said:


> The overall viewership was shit. But Punk should absolutely not be getting any of the blame as the ONLY THREE SEGMENTS THAT GAINED NUMBERS involved Punk. Yes the numbers they got were not good, but the average viewership was down anyway because of the heavy competition. Stars like Sheamus, Del Rio, Ziggler, Rey Mysterio, Ryback, Daniel Bryan, Kane etc drove all the viewers further away as Punk, Foley, Heyman, Cena etc at least got some of them back.


Yeah he does. When was the last time you saw a segment that occupies the Main Event lose viewers?

That's the focal point of the show and that's why those segments will draw the most. They're in the best time slots and because of the momentum they're almost guaranteed to get increase in any scenario.

If Sheamus draws a 1.8 on SD when Henry draws a 2.2 all the blame goes on Sheamus. Nobody says did you see the break down? All of Sheamus's SD segments gained viewers so he's not the problem.

I'm not saying Punk is the problem because I think this alot more to do with the 3 hour broadcasts, but you can't say he's drawing because he's not. People are always going to gravitate towards the storyline that's booked the strongest. That's the Main Event.

Bottom line is Raw's putting put up terrible numbers right now.


----------



## Tnmore

LOL at the excuses...as if the guy ever drew when he was the "relevant" champion. Remember the overrun number the night after TLC 2011 with Punk,Bryan and Ryder?

Yeah.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

GillbergReturns said:


> Yeah he does. When was the last time you saw a segment that occupies the Main Event lose viewers?
> 
> That's the focal point of the show and that's why those segments will draw the most. They're in the best time slots and because of the momentum they're almost guaranteed to get increase in any scenario.
> 
> If Sheamus draws a 1.8 on SD when Henry draws a 2.2 all the blame goes on Sheamus. Nobody says did you see the break down? All of Sheamus's SD segments gained viewers so he's not the problem.
> 
> I'm not saying Punk is the problem because I think this alot more to do with the 3 hour broadcasts, but you can't say he's drawing because he's not. People are always going to gravitate towards the storyline that's booked the strongest. That's the Main Event.
> 
> Bottom line is Raw's putting put up terrible numbers right now.


The overrun didn't lose viewers?

Cena and Punk had to gain nearly a MILLION VIEWERS to break into the three's. because the quarter they had to rebound from was THE LOWEST QUARTER HOUR IN FIFTEEN YEARS (a shitty 2.3 thanks to the Divas)


----------



## Pro Royka

Choke2Death said:


> What else is there to discuss outside of the most overpushed person on the roster and his (lack of) drawing abilities? That Santino and Zack Ryder lose viewers every time they're on? Not very interesting, is it?
> 
> And the logic is indeed mind-blowing. Orton as champion on Smackdown gets *1.7* and all blame is placed on him without anyone even looking at segment breakdowns or anything beyond the full show ratings but Raw is doing terribly bad with Punk as champion and him main eventing the show yet he always gets away with it because his segments gain viewers since the rest of the show has viewers tuning out at a rapid pace. And to further show Punk's lack of drawing abilities, ratings are constantly going down with him being the centerpiece of the show. At least when Cena's meaningless feuds main evented, they didn't reach the upper 2 area for a month straight!
> 
> First it was "PUNK CANT DRAW BECAUSE WWE MAKES HIM IRRELEVANT!!!!11" now there's new excuses like "He gains back the 500k viewers that tuned out and still gets called a ratings killer!!!! ARGH!!!!".


It was actually 1.57 and 1.6. As I said be mad about truth, put the frustration on me, obsessed man. Also your obsessed friend Rock316ae, made another excuse saying Orton was a draw, didn't he have Vince, Shane, Steph, Trips, etc. if Orton is a big draw he will help SD but instead it was about to get cancelled as Mark Henry, Bryan, and show helped it to gain a lot more. Its hard to talk to trolls or obsessed men, as they run away and the only thing they do is give me red reps and never respond, run away from the truth. Punk can draw, Orton can draw, everyone can draw if been given the right storyline, booking, and opponents. 

Even tho Orton had a big supported career before, he can't draw in SD, it's a failed project tbh, admit the truth, a guy like Batista who was with Orton in evolution drew bigger than him and he wasn't meant to be one but guess what he's a bigger star then him. I don't hate wrestlers because they can't draw or they're aren't big enough, I cheer the talent that entertains me more. Not saying Orton is not a good talent but he's lazy getting suspended and doing stupid staff. People like you say Orton was good on the mic or had a great character before, so what? Why don't you talk about the current Orton, many agrees that he's boring now.


----------



## NearFall

*0:40* Respect huh? unk2 He should be caring now John.


----------



## GillbergReturns

jblvdx said:


> The overrun didn't lose viewers?
> 
> Cena and Punk had to gain nearly a MILLION VIEWERS to break into the three's. because the quarter they had to rebound from was THE LOWEST QUARTER HOUR IN FIFTEEN YEARS (a shitty 2.3 thanks to the Divas)


I don't get what you're saying here. I didn't say the overrun lost viewers. The overrun rarely ever loses viewers. It's a gain every single week.

My point is the top storyline is always going to draw in the most viewers. If you accurately show that Punk's segments equal the same amount of viewers that Raw got in "May" in those timeslots you have a much better point than just saying Punk added 500,000 viewers he's not the problem. If 500,000 viewers equals to 3.9 mil and Raw generally gets 4.2 mil in that time slot he's part of the problem.


----------



## Choke2Death

NearFall said:


> -Italics: However, it does go both ways. Back when Punk was feuding with Jericho(3.1-.3.3s with Rock/Cena as ME) and then Daniel Bryan( which it was Big Show VS Cena and 2.7s-3.0s) the entire ratings were blamed on Punk by a lot of people. But it is probably just his blind haters, like the blind Orton haters.
> 
> -Bolded: Rather than bring back my huge post earlier. I'll simply put it as *Starbuck* did. The fact that he has been treated so irrelevantly as Champion will make people rather uninterested in his first(relatively) main event program as Champion. It simply is not clicking as for the past months, if they missed Punk, they did not miss the main event. Perhaps that ideology is still with a portion of the audience?


I can understand the Punk/Bryan argument to an extent (Cena no showed an episode or two around May-June IIRC). Now for Punk/Jericho? Specially on the RTWM, to blame it for the ratings not rising is just a blatant troll move. I was not a regular visitor of this thread back then so I can't speak on what took place but the feud itself was an afterthought on the show and never once main evented (other than that battle royal after Elimination Chamber) and with The Rock, Taker/HHH/HBK & Lesnar around, it truly was.

On the second part, maybe or maybe not. Punk himself has not done anything to become a non-draw, he just doesn't seem to be able to get to that position is all. And if full show ratings are to be used (similar to how it has been used by trolls against Orton on SD), Punk was unable to help them rise from the get go as the go home show for MITB 11 got right below 3.0 which is not what everyone had hoped for. And he also failed in the ratings department around new year time when Cena took a backseat before his feud with Kane came into full force and Punk main evented with other IWC darlings such as Bryan and Zack Ryder. What they're doing now is trying to get him to become a draw by giving him so much TV time after treating him as irrelevant for the longest time being. It may be too late now and so far, ratings are still down.



KO Bossy said:


> Denial is not just a river in Egypt...
> 
> The arguments of so many people on here are that Punk can't draw PERIOD. The fact that his segments gained viewers dispute that. Now is he inconsistent? Absolutely. But to say he can't draw at all is wrong.


To be very honest, anyone can get the fortune of gaining viewers. The thing is as you mentioned, consistency. Punk doesn't have that. They can't trust him enough to have him go out there and expect him to carry any segment he's in to be a draw or huge gain. Only times he's "impressive" are when he's given somebody who is most likely gaining viewers to back him up (Cena, Foley, Heyman) and therefore, he's not a draw. I don't think anybody has said "He can't gain viewers at all" because something as simple as that just needs the breakdowns to be corrected. People are just saying he's not a trustworthy "draw" if one at all. And like I said before, the bad ratings are not to be blamed on him ENTIRELY. But he deserves to take some of the blame since he's the centerpiece of the show and appears numerous times throughout the 3 hours.


----------



## Mister Hands

Choke2Death said:


> To be very honest, anyone can get the fortune of gaining viewers. The thing is as you mentioned, consistency. Punk doesn't have that. They can't trust him enough to have him go out there and expect him to carry any segment he's in to be a draw or huge gain. Only times he's "impressive" are when he's given somebody who is most likely gaining viewers to back him up (Cena, Foley, Heyman) and therefore, he's not a draw. I don't think anybody has said "He can't gain viewers at all" because something as simple as that just needs the breakdowns to be corrected. People are just saying he's not a trustworthy "draw" if one at all. And like I said before, the bad ratings are not to be blamed on him ENTIRELY. But he deserves to take some of the blame since he's the centerpiece of the show and appears numerous times throughout the 3 hours.


Nobody on the main roster has consistency. Any drawing power anyone has, had or might have is negated by the tedium of WWE creative/3 hour Raws/overexposure. It's a numbing concept for a thread based on analysing the ratings, but I can't draw any other conclusion.


----------



## NearFall

Choke2Death said:


> On the second part, maybe or maybe not. Punk himself has not done anything to become a non-draw, he just doesn't seem to be able to get to that position is all. And if full show ratings are to be used (similar to how it has been used by trolls against Orton on SD), Punk was unable to help them rise from the get go as the go home show for MITB 11 got right below 3.0 which is not what everyone had hoped for. And he also failed in the ratings department around new year time when Cena took a backseat before his feud with Kane came into full force and Punk main evented with other IWC darlings such as Bryan and Zack Ryder. What they're doing now is trying to get him to become a draw by giving him so much TV time after treating him as irrelevant for the longest time being. It may be too late now and so far, ratings are still down.


Punk last year was incredibly over during the summer and sold great merch for two months, and topped August, this indicates to me, at least, that he could have been a better draw if the "summer of Punk" had gone better. The thing is shortly after that it just ended up with him losing and becoming John Cena lite. The whole return and further storyline was a botch. As for December, while the ratings did suffer, the buyrate was pretty steady, it only fell by a few thousand. But the win came off the coattails of Cena/Rock hype for SVS, so that could be an attributing factor. The main thing though is the fact that Punk was just a shadow of himself as a face and the audience probably didn't care.

As for the future, I don't know either. Being treated as second best and non-main eventing as a champion for nearly a year will hurt anybody. I think you're correct in saying they are trying now to build him as a bigger player than previously, as they now know they need him as the top heel. Feuding with Rock, strong booking(Within heel respects) and a decent WrestleMania program (HHH or Sheamus perhaps?) would be the ideals. Feuding with Rock would obviously be the biggest point of his career, and it would cement him as a top heel if done correctly. It should simply be Punk looking for respect amongst a legend, but he should avoid the "DWAYNE" and "IM ALWAYS HERE AND YOU'RE NOT" crap that Cena and Punk himself pulled last year.


----------



## Starbuck

Here's my deal. 

*Rock/Lesnar* = Legit crossover stars with mainstream appeal and BIG time draws/money makers. Part time.

*HHH/Taker* = Legit WWE star attractions with widespread appeal to casuals and big time draws/money makers. Part time. 

*Legends* = Ability to pop a number based on special appearances but no real long term ability due to obvious restrictions. Sporadic appearances. 

*John Cena* = Legit WWE star attraction with widespread appeal to casuals and big time draw/money maker. Full time. Clearly suffering from overexposure and lack of other star attractions. 

**Vince McMahon* = Legit WWE star attraction with widespread appeal to casuals and big time draw/money maker. Sporadic appearances. 

That's your lot in today's WWE. That is your list of draws based on the numbers and overall common sense dictated by those numbers. Where do you place CM Punk on that list?

*CM Punk* = Not a legitimate star attraction. No widespread appeal to casuals. Not a big time draw/money maker. Full time. Needs help of somebody from the above list to truly make an impact when it comes to drawing. 

So I ask again, where does he go on the list? The simple fact is, he doesn't fit on there. That's my issue. You want to call Punk a draw then you're placing him on the same level as other draws when he doesn't have the same credentials. Where's the sense in that? Everybody else on the list has been drawing consistently and at the highest level for years. Their ability to draw fans to TV, sell PPV's, move merch and sell live show tickets is proven. Either that or they are a one off special attraction that obviously aids them in the way that people want to see them because they aren't on all the time. All of them have earned their spot on the list. Factually, they all deserve to be on it. Is Punk at the same level as these guys? Has he met the same criteria and proven that he should be on the list too? No, he hasn't. Which then of course begs the question, is Punk a draw? I think there's only one answer to the question tbh.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Basically, the only full time member of the roster who can draw a dime is Cena. That should be common sense to anyone. All of this TV ratings analysis is futile.


----------



## Starbuck

The Lady Killer said:


> Basically, the only full time member of the roster who can draw a dime is Cena. *That should be common sense to anyone*. All of this TV ratings analysis is futile.


Obviously not since this has been debated ad nauseam lol.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Well right, but I'll be damned if I'm gonna sift through 629 pages.


----------



## NearFall

I never said Punk was a big time draw nor did I mean to imply I thought he was. I was saying that he had the potential to be last year. He sold shirts, he sold house show tickets throughout the summer. Even with the early return. However from there, I mentioned where it went wrong in my previous posts. If you want me to honestly rank him now? A talented star for others to word with who acts as a supporting guy. Not anywhere near that list. Could he have been on that list? Quite possibly if all the stars aligned he could have reached a tier near-ish Cena, but never capping him, that just wouldn't plain out happen. He just lacked/lacks the mainstream appeal that Cena has.


----------



## Starbuck

The Lady Killer said:


> Well right, but I'll be damned if I'm gonna sift through 629 pages.


629 pages of gold lol.

@*Nearfall*, my post wasn't directed at you btw. It was just a general comment.


----------



## The Lady Killer

To be honest I don't see anyone approaching Cena's level for a really long time.

It's crazy to think that a few years ago we had a roster consisting of 7-8 full-time Cena's (HBK, HHH, Taker, Rock, Austin, Angle, etc).

Also, I'd still say Orton is a bigger draw atm than Punk (not saying much either way).


----------



## Starbuck

It's crazy to think that the message still hasn't got through that they need more than 1 Cena to build a fucking show around.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Yeah I've gave up on that message being delivered long ago.


----------



## Starbuck

You're going to start shit with that Orton comment lol. His peak trumps Punk's peak by a considerable distance but at the same time, Orton had a much more established supporting cast. As for the whole SD thing, if the roles were reversed and Punk was on SD as the sole 'star' I don't think the ratings there would be any better with him at the helm. The problem on SD is much worse than on Raw.


----------



## NearFall

I know *Starbuck*, but I was just replying to it. As for only having 1 Cena? Well, that message will seldom be read by them, and even more seldom be taken to heart. Outta interest, when did Cena last lose clean before The Rock? I know Punk came close to "clean" at MITB 2011(some actually consider it clean, but that is BS), but still, I am curious. I think they will ride out the wave that is Cena as long as they can. And when he goes, then they will realise, "Fuck, we need new guys".

As for Orton/Punk debate. Well, Orton drew and had more success in his big run rather than Punk that is just a fact, but it is too much for me to get into now as to my full opinion.(Supporting wrestlers for feuds, timeframe, averages, overall aftermath etc) lol


----------



## The Lady Killer

Yeah, I figured that'd be a fire starter but fuck it, it's true. The difference is that nobody cares about SD! Results are posted ahead of time and it's always painfully obvious that it's the B-level show. It'd be interesting to see what would happen to Raw's ratings if they swapped Punk for Orton, or even moved Orton to Raw to shake the main event scene up a bit. Punk/Orton is something we've seen before but Punk was nowhere near the level he's at now when they faced each other previously.


----------



## Pro Royka

The Lady Killer said:


> To be honest I don't see anyone approaching Cena's level for a really long time.
> 
> It's crazy to think that a few years ago we had a roster consisting of 7-8 full-time Cena's (HBK, HHH, Taker, Rock, Austin, Angle, etc).


That's the problem with wrestling today. Nowadays everyone gets limited opportunities, and Cena gets unlimited opportunities.


----------



## The Lady Killer

They're afraid of taking Cena out of the main event for fear of a drop in revenue/ratings/merch sales/etc, but at the same time it's extremely dangerous to put all your eggs in one basket. In reality, it's killing their product. They're fortunate that Cena has remained this healthy over the last 8 years.


----------



## PHX

The Lady Killer said:


> *Basically, the only full time member of the roster who can draw a dime is Cena*. That should be common sense to anyone. All of this TV ratings analysis is futile.


I don't like this misconception as it comes off as people think T.V ratings in 2012 is a indication of how much money a guy is pulling in. Not saying you're doing that with your post but I've seen others with this outlook. Obviously Punk is bringing in some money for Vince or else they would have took the belt off of him long ago. He's still a top merch seller (which seems to be a very underminded aspect on this site), the house shows are doing fine and at one point had to put Punk on the Smackdown shows to help attendance when Orton got suspended. Apparently does better than Cena in regards to people showing up for comic con which there is money there. And of course when it comes to using the hometown factor to pack a house that seems to be a strength they have in Punk since there isn't anyone on the roster who is more loved in their hometown than he is. So Punk is obviously putting money in the companies pocket. Then you got a guy like Rey who always sells merch and is very important to the latin market same with Sin Cara to a lesser extent. I'm sure Orton helps them sell live event tickets for the Smackdown brand, and merch too. 

So I don't agree with this assumption that only Cena makes money for the company and everyone else doesn't contribute at all. He of course makes them the most money but not ALL of it is all I'm saying.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Well look at PPV buyrates. I think the only ones that saw a significant increase from last year were the ones that featured Taker/Rock/Brock/HHH.


----------



## Redwood

WWE needs MOAR CENA guys. That's why Punk, Orton, Sheamus, and Del Rio will never come close to lacing his boots in terms of drawing power.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

If Cena goes down with something that keeps him out more than a few months, WWE is fucked. The only guy who could maybe even slightly possibly replace Cena based on the fact his matches most of the time lead to increases is... well... Ryback. And that's a big IF, because while people might be content watching him in short burst matches, would he be accepted in main events or would be tune out? And even then, once Ryback loses his undefeated streak, does his appeal and drawing ability instantly go away? WWE seem to be grooming Sheamus, but he's not doing any better on SD for the overall number than Punk is doing for the overall number on Raw. 

As far as Punk/Orton goes, they're in the exact same boat for me. They both did feud with HHH, and both involved the McMahon family (to some extent). The difference though was the execution and it's why Orton/HHH did as well as it did and why Orton in 2009 was a proven draw to some extent. Orton/HHH was heated, intense, and very personal with Orton taking out the McMahons one by one leading to him ultimately going against HHH at Mania. Punk/HHH was Punk complaining that HHH was a bad COO and it remained that for the entirety of the feud. It also goes to show that storylines and feuds can draw just as much as the wrestlers in the feud.

However the thing with Orton, was once he didn't have that safety net of HHH and an awesome feud to go along with it, namely I'm talking about in 2010 Raw, he didn't do any better than Punk is doing now as far as overall numbers go (I don't know what the breakdowns were back then, so if anyone wants to fill in, be my guest). Same thing with him on SD in 2011, because once they put the title on Mark Henry, suddenly ratings shot back up to WM ratings time. 

But as I said, I don't know what the breakdown numbers of that time on Raw was, and SD doesn't have breakdowns so we can't really do much with that. I just think if you're going to call Orton a draw currently (not in 2009, CURRENTLY), then don't say Punk is not a draw, and vice-versa.


----------



## Falkono

Punk couldn't even draw in a kids drawing contest...

Takw away guys like Mick out of his segments and those numbers would be nowhere near what they were. And thats the difference. Punk HAS to have someone in there with him of near legend status among attitude fans in either Mick or Heyman. You put him in there alone with no guys like that and watch the numbers fall away. That is the difference between everyone else and Cena. Cena could come out, sit in the ring and not say anything for 30mins and it would still draw.

I know it sounds harsh but apart of me actually hopes Cena get's a really bad injury that will keep him away for months. Because that way WWE will then be forced into doing other things. Punk will then be the main man and your get a lot better idea of what people think about him.

Also if anything these numbers show that the PG era has not worked at all. The numbers are terrible. One of the quarter losses was the worst for over 10 years. WWE needs to go back to being more random/crash style tv. The wrestlers need to get better gimmicks rather then generic heel number 1 Punk or generic Face number 1 Cena. 

As I mentioned awhile back rumours here are that Sky are thinking of dropping WWE again when the contract is up at the end of the year. In the UK TNA is destroying wwe and Sky recently picked up their channel and broadcasting rights. If these type of numbers continue you can bet your ass Sky won't re-sign anywhere near for the amount they did in the past. And if they drop out they are screwed as nobody else will do ppv.


----------



## PHX

The Lady Killer said:


> Well look at PPV buyrates. I think the only ones that saw a significant increase from last year were the ones that featured Taker/Rock/Brock/HHH.


Yeah that is true just saying that you said only Cena is bringing in money but other guys do bring in money in different ways. PPV's is just one of many ways. Which I'm glad you brought that point up cause I think Cena's drawing power gets overrated. If he was this Hulk Hogan of our time in that regard the PPV numbers would be better because of him regardless since he pretty much has headline all of them since forever. They wouldn't have to keep using special attractions for PPV's if a PPV was just gonna sell cause Cena was on it.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Obviously others bring in money, but it's all relative. I was strictly referring to TV ratings since this is the Raw ratings thread.


----------



## Choke2Death

Starbuck said:


> You're going to start shit with that Orton comment lol. His peak trumps Punk's peak by a considerable distance but at the same time, Orton had a much more established supporting cast. As for the whole SD thing, if the roles were reversed and Punk was on SD as the sole 'star' I don't think the ratings there would be any better with him at the helm. The problem on SD is much worse than on Raw.


But Orton was also the top merch seller and got cheered despite being a heel so it's clear that he was a big draw on his own despite having a better supporting cast than the whole roster put together today.


----------



## Tnmore

Is big show actually a bigger draw than Punk? Lsat time his match with Cena in the main event drew over million viewers and the PPV no way out outdrew last year buyrate. 

Is he really a bigger draw? Just wondering.


----------



## Pro Royka

Choke2Death said:


> *But Orton was also the top merch seller and got cheered despite being a heel so it's clear that he was a big draw* on his own despite having a better supporting cast than the whole roster put together today.


He was, but not by his own, you need to watch the rest of the show. If you have the breakdowns of 2009 you will understand what I mean.


----------



## NearFall

Pro Royka said:


> He was, but not by his own, you need to watch the rest of the show. If you have the breakdowns of 2009 you will understand what I mean.


But isn't that the logic you use when people accuse Punk of not drawing? "Don't look at the full show look at the segment break-downs".


----------



## Pro Royka

NearFall said:


> But isn't that the logic you use when people accuse Punk of not drawing? "Don't look at the full show look at the segment break-downs".


Whats your point. Yes, you need to check the breakdowns to see his/her drawing abilitys. That's what I always base my opinion on.

Edited: How can you blame one guy for a full show, specially if it's a 3 hour show.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I see what you're saying Pro Royka, but do you have Raw 2009 breakdowns, or know where to find them? I tried Google, but didn't see anything.


----------



## NearFall

Pro Royka said:


> Whats your point. Yes, you need to check the breakdowns to see his/her drawing abilitys. That's what I always base my opinion on.
> 
> Edited: How can you blame one guy for a full show, specially if it's a 3 hour show.


But you're saying it when Orton is a proven higher draw in his peak than Punk was, I was assuming that you were saying it as if *Choke2Death* implied Orton "carried" the show. (Akin to the statement Punk "ruining" the show in terms of low ratings). It didn't make sense to me.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Pro Royka said:


> Edited: How can you blame one guy for a full show, specially if it's a 3 hour show.


You don't, they're all bad draws. You could draw a connection between the champion (since they're usually the most heavily featured) and ratings trends, though (i.e. The 1995 Diesel Effect, or the soon-to-follow 1996 Shawn Michaels Effect). Champ usually takes the fall.


----------



## Pro Royka

The Sandrone said:


> I see what you're saying Pro Royka, but do you have Raw 2009 breakdowns, or know where to find them? I tried Google, but didn't see anything.


It's really hard to find, I could try tho. I did find some of the ones in 2010, not sure in 2009 I will check.




The Lady Killer said:


> You don't, they're all bad draws. You could draw a connection between the champion (since they're usually the most heavily featured) and ratings trends, though (i.e. The 1995 Diesel Effect, or the soon-to-follow 1996 Shawn Michaels Effect). Champ usually takes the fall.


Sounds good, they do get the blame but 3 hours show never was a good idea, even in the past. Today era is really different, it takes years to get them back, because many of the current wrestlers aren't build enough to reach that level.


----------



## Pro Royka

> By James Caldwell, Torch assistant editor
> 
> 
> WWE Raw TV ratings in 2009 were marked by definitive fluctuations that occurred due to specific events. The first three months of the year were the most consistent building to WrestleMania 25, then a post-Mania lull, seasonal changes, and the guest host concept created those distinct changes.
> 
> Looking at the average of each three-month period that makes up the four quarters of the year, the first quarter from January to March averaged a 3.67 rating and 5.41 million viewers. April to June (Q2) declined slightly to a 3.66 rating and 5.36 million viewers.
> 
> July to September (Q3) declined a little more to a 3.62 rating and 5.24 million viewers. This was followed by a distinct drop-off to a 3.39 rating and 4.93 million viewers from October to December (Q4). The following is a graph of the quarterly ratings trend.
> 
> Q1 - 3.67 rating and 5.41 million viewers
> Q2 - 3.66 rating and 5.36 million viewers
> Q3 - 3.62 rating and 5.24 million viewers
> Q4 - 3.39 rating and 4.93 million viewers
> 
> There are patterns within the quarterly break down that captured the distinct fluctuations. The first quarter of the year contained the second-most watched month of TV when February averaged a 3.81 rating and 5.61 million viewers. This fed into a relatively strong month of March prior to WrestleMania 25.
> 
> The month of April (Q2) started strong with post-WrestleMania fall-out, but then completely tapered off to where the month of May nearly hit rock-bottom for the year. If not for November's weak TV ratings, May would have been the least-watched month of Raw programming during the year.
> 
> WWE instituted the guest-hosting concept at the end of June after incorporating Donald Trump into storylines that helped boost the Q2 average rating. That created an upward trend for Q3 that lasted until August for the Summerslam build-up. However, at the end of Q3 in September, ratings dropped off 7.9 percent compared to August.
> 
> The final three months of the year from October to December were part of the natural seasonal decline in viewership against Monday Night Football on ESPN. WWE tried to utilize the guest-hosting concept to off-set declines in viewership and it helped to some degree.
> 
> The fourth quarter declined 7.9 percent in TV ratings compared to the first quarter at the beginning of the year. Looking at the same 2008 seasonal changes, the fourth quarter 2008 declined 13.0 percent compared to the first quarter at the beginning of 2008.
> 
> In Part 2, we'll do a complete comparison of 2009 overall ratings compared to the 2008 overall ratings while also comparing the yearly trends. The following is a list of several periodic comparisons to create a visual of the 2009 trend in Raw TV ratings.
> 
> 2009 Monthly Raw TV averages
> 
> -- Jan: 3.59 rating and 5.29 million viewers
> -- Feb: 3.81 rating and 5.61 million viewers
> -- Mar: 3.63 rating and 5.32 million viewers
> -- Apr: 3.77 rating and 5.52 million viewers
> -- May: 3.35 rating and 4.78 million viewers
> -- June: 3.87 rating and 5.77 million viewers
> -- July: 3.66 rating and 5.32 million viewers
> -- Aug: 3.74 rating and 5.42 million viewers
> -- Sept: 3.47 rating and 4.97 million viewers
> -- Oct: 3.42 rating and 4.92 million viewers
> -- Nov: 3.34 rating and 4.85 million viewers
> -- Dec: 3.39 rating and 5.01 million viewers
> -- 2009 Average: 3.59 rating and 5.23 million viewers
> 
> Quarterly Raw TV averages
> 
> -- January: 3.59 rating and 5.29 million viewers
> -- February: 3.81 rating and 5.61 million viewers
> -- March: 3.63 rating and 5.32 million viewers
> Q1 - 3.67 rating and 5.41 million viewers
> 
> -- April: 3.77 rating and 5.52 million viewers
> -- May: 3.35 rating and 4.78 million viewers
> -- June: 3.87 rating and 5.77 million viewers
> Q2 - 3.66 rating and 5.36 million viewers
> 
> -- July: 3.66 rating and 5.32 million viewers
> -- Aug: 3.74 rating and 5.42 million viewers
> -- Sept: 3.47 rating and 4.97 million viewers
> Q3 - 3.62 rating and 5.24 million viewers
> 
> -- Oct: 3.42 rating and 4.92 million viewers
> -- Nov: 3.34 rating and 4.85 million viewers
> -- Dec: 3.39 rating and 5.01 million viewers
> Q4 - 3.39 rating and 4.93 million viewers
> 
> 2009 Monthly Raw TV averages
> 
> -- HIGH MONTH: June (3.87 rating and 5.77 million viewers)
> -- LOW MONTH: Nov. (3.34 rating and 4.85 million viewers)
> -- HIGH % ABOVE YR. AVG.: June was 7.9 percent better than 2009 average
> -- LOW % BELOW YR. AVG.: Nov. was 6.8 percent worse than 2009 average


..............

Yes, I found two. 


* 9:00: Q1 - 3.53 (Jericho/Flair)
* 9:15: Q2 - 3.26 (Jeff Hardy vs. Dolph Ziggler)
* 9:30: Q3 - 3.19 (Punk, MVP, Kofi and Christian vs. Benjamin, Kane, Finlay and Henry)
* 9:45: Q4 - 3.32 (Orton Interview/Edge and Big Show Entrances)

* 10:00: Q5 - 3.59 (Edge vs. Big Show/Mysterio vs. Regal)
* 10:15: Q6 - 3.73 (Mysterio vs. Regal/Undertaker and HBK Promo)
* 10:30: Q7 - 3.53 (Sanrtino vs. Mickie James)
* 10:45: Q8 - 3.73 (Orton and Dibiase vs. HHH)
* Overrun - 3.67 (Orton and Dibiase vs. HHH cont…)

Credit: Pwinsider.com

* 9:00: 3.28 - Vince vs. Stan Kroenke, The Miz Appears
* 9:15: 3.15 - Miz and Cena, Maryse vs. Kelly
* 9:30: 2.99 - Backstage with fake Jack Nicholson, US Title Shot Triple Threat
* 9:45: 2.90 - US Title Shot Triple Threat, Flair walks
* 10:00: 3.26 - Flair vs. Orton confrontation, Santino comes to the ring
* 10:15: 3.42 - Santino and Mickie vs. Chavo and Beth, Kendrick and Festus vs. Goldust and Hornswoggle
* 10:30: 3.29 - Kendrick and Festus vs. Goldust and Hornswoggle, main event announcement of "players"
* 10:45: 3.31 - 5 on 5 main event
* Overrun: 3.81 - 5 on 5 main event and aftermath


----------



## Choke2Death

NearFall said:


> But isn't that the logic you use when people accuse Punk of not drawing? "Don't look at the full show look at the segment break-downs".


Well said. And blaming bad ratings on Orton for Smackdown 2011 rings a bell too!

And I'll get this in while I'm at it.

Pro Royka logic: "I could [sic] careless [sic] about you trolls" *name-checks said "trolls" on signature*


----------



## Pro Royka

Choke2Death said:


> Well said. And blaming bad ratings on Orton for Smackdown 2011 rings a bell too!
> 
> And I'll get this in while I'm at it.
> 
> Pro Royka logic: "I could [sic] careless [sic] about you trolls" *name-checks said "trolls" on signature*


Not 2011, I mean 2010 after his peak. So many reason for his peak, Trips one of them, he made sure that Orton and Batista have the best booking and everything else, he made them no question about that. The difference is Batista is a bigger draw both on Raw and SD.

No, sometimes you act like a troll, in the end of the day you're the one who gave me 28+ red reps including Rock316ae and others didn't. I dont waste my time doing that to you. I only respond to your and others comments and you just hide behind your red reps.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Pro Royka said:


> ..............
> 
> Yes, I found two.
> 
> 
> * 9:00: Q1 - 3.53 (Jericho/Flair)
> * 9:15: Q2 - 3.26 (Jeff Hardy vs. Dolph Ziggler)
> * 9:30: Q3 - 3.19 (Punk, MVP, Kofi and Christian vs. Benjamin, Kane, Finlay and Henry)
> * 9:45: Q4 - 3.32 (Orton Interview/Edge and Big Show Entrances)
> 
> * 10:00: Q5 - 3.59 (Edge vs. Big Show/Mysterio vs. Regal)
> * 10:15: Q6 - 3.73 (Mysterio vs. Regal/Undertaker and HBK Promo)
> * 10:30: Q7 - 3.53 (Sanrtino vs. Mickie James)
> * 10:45: Q8 - 3.73 (Orton and Dibiase vs. HHH)
> * Overrun - 3.67 (Orton and Dibiase vs. HHH cont…)
> 
> Credit: Pwinsider.com
> 
> * 9:00: 3.28 - Vince vs. Stan Kroenke, The Miz Appears
> * 9:15: 3.15 - Miz and Cena, Maryse vs. Kelly
> * 9:30: 2.99 - Backstage with fake Jack Nicholson, US Title Shot Triple Threat
> * 9:45: 2.90 - US Title Shot Triple Threat, Flair walks
> * 10:00: 3.26 - Flair vs. Orton confrontation, Santino comes to the ring
> * 10:15: 3.42 - Santino and Mickie vs. Chavo and Beth, Kendrick and Festus vs. Goldust and Hornswoggle
> * 10:30: 3.29 - Kendrick and Festus vs. Goldust and Hornswoggle, main event announcement of "players"
> * 10:45: 3.31 - 5 on 5 main event
> * Overrun: 3.81 - 5 on 5 main event and aftermath


What were the dates of these shows? That's very interesting that the overrun lost viewers on the first batch when it had Orton and HHH involved. Who was in the 5 on 5 main event? That got a big gain. I can only assume it had something to with HHH, Orton, the McMahons, and/or maybe Taker/HBK, but I'm not sure.


----------



## Pro Royka

The Sandrone said:


> What were the dates of these shows? That's very interesting that the overrun lost viewers on the first batch when it had Orton and HHH involved. Who was in the 5 on 5 main event? That got a big gain. I can only assume it had something to with HHH, Orton, the McMahons, and/or maybe Taker/HBK, but I'm not sure.


03.25.2009 and 05.28.2009.

I also found this 02.11.2009.
- As reported yesterday, Monday's edition of WWE Raw scored a 3.4 cable rating, which was down from last week's 3.6. The show did hours of 3.34 and 3.50. Here are the quarter hour breakdowns:

* 9:00 - 3.37
* 9:15 - 3.28
* 9:30 - 3.40

* 9:45 - 3.31 
* 10:00 - 3.48. - it's one of those three that Orton was part of, nothing was impressive, he's not a big draw like some says. He lost viewers in the overrun in my previous post, it just proves my point. The show was fully supported by others.
* 10:15 - 3.46

* 10:30 - 3.50
* 10:45 - 3.41
* Overrun - 3.83


----------



## N-destroy

The Sandrone said:


> What were the dates of these shows? That's very interesting that the overrun lost viewers on the first batch when it had Orton and HHH involved. Who was in the 5 on 5 main event? That got a big gain. I can only assume it had something to with HHH, Orton, the McMahons, and/or maybe Taker/HBK, but I'm not sure.


The first one was in March, that was the night when Orton kissed Stephanie in the ring after laying her out with an RKO. Back then, I was a member of another popular wrestling forum, I remember when this particular rating breakdown came out, there was a lot of long discussions going on, about why the overrun lost viewers. Apparently the reason was "Man on Woman Violence" tend to be direct rating killers with the casuals. I'm not sure if thats the case but it makes sense since the main event was high point of the show and outdrew the Overrun. Also, i recall someone posted that rating dropped when Cena attacked Lita back in 05/06? at the top of the hour or something. Not too sure though.

The second one was in May. The big rating was because of the conflict over pepsi center with NBA, when WWE had to move the event to staples center coz of double booking on the same date. Vince Mcmahon effectively used it for publicity and booked a 5 on 5 match involving MVP, Cena, Batista, Lawler & Kennedy vs. Orton, Legacy, The Miz & Show.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepsi_Center#Double-booking_controversy

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2009/news/story?id=4188189

Match sucked but was hilarious,


----------



## wb1899

For some Users: Remember this..

*Q: Are Household ratings irrelevant form of measurement when looking at ratings? No one seems to mention them anymore 

A (Ted Linhart: SVP of Research at USA Network): Good Q. Yes HH started being irrelevant in 90s. Total viewers for bragging rights & 18-49 (rating or viewers) for revenue generation are it*

..before writing about ratings.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Starbuck said:


> It's crazy to think that the message still hasn't got through that they need more than 1 Cena to build a fucking show around.


Yup, WWE has pushed Cena over everyone. I think a heel turn would be a great attraction because that could help make new stars instantly. Look @ Kofi and how over he became instantly going up against Orton, and he's still over as hell from then. Then again, I don't know what's good for business other than me just tuning in. lol


----------



## Rock316AE

Huge discussion on this week. The entire story this week was that Punk was all over the show, in every key segment and they did the least amount of viewers for a non-holiday RAW since 97. Along with what was probably, Top 5 worst overruns in the history of wrestling overruns. The strongest point here was a big Mick Foley return which is why his segment did decent and everything else bombed. Extremely low numbers but exactly what you would expect from the breakdown.


The Lady Killer said:


> To be honest I don't see anyone approaching Cena's level for a really long time.
> 
> It's crazy to think that a few years ago we had a roster consisting of 7-8 full-time Cena's (HBK, HHH, Taker, Rock, Austin, Angle, etc).
> 
> Also, I'd still say Orton is a bigger draw atm than Punk (not saying much either way).


He is and that's because he's much more valuable to the mass audience who saw him as a Top guy and leading attraction for almost a decade, even when he wasn't booked in a real feud for almost a year now, he still gets the biggest pops on his connection alone. That's why they're not turning him heel until Sheamus gets to his level as a brand carrier. Don't see the reason for all the Orton/Punk talk, they're in completely different calibers, one is the guy who main evented house shows for 9 years in a row, drew big on PPVs, drew big on TV(Alone, yes, HHH got into the program with him in 2009 because he was so hot, not the other way around, the biggest segments of the program were Orton and Vince in Chicago, and a Orton/Shane match after NWO. And Orton also did it on many years before that, huge success with Hardy in 2008), main evented WMs, was in a program with almost every Top star in the last 15 years, one of the biggest WWE draws on the road for 00-09(Top 8)and already had a legendary career to a guy who is booked as "top guy" for less than a year, never a difference maker, was in the mid card for most of his time including his "top guy" year with most of it as a completely forgettable run. Some people confused who gets currently more attention on TV to the overall career. These two guys aren't comparable in any way. People weren't saying that X-Pac was a bigger star than Arn Anderson for example just because he got more attention on TV at times as part of his Wolfpack run in 1997. It's all in perspective.


----------



## Pro Royka

As I showed, not comparing both careers because its not really fair, he had a huge cast support. Orton in 2009 lost viewers in the overrun with Triple H, and the show as a whole gained a lot, Orton never gained over a million alone, he had the full support by other big stars such as Trips, Batista, Cena, Vince, Shane, Steph, Flair, Donald Trump all of those guys are the real reason as the breakdowns can easily prove it. If Raw today had Batista, Trips, Lesnar with guys like Punk and Cena, I dont think ratings will be the same. So you can't put the blame on Punk when he needs those guys to help gain viewers within the show. I just used logic, and facts.


Edited: those are Orton numbers as a WWE champion in 2010. 

September 20-24	2.8
9/27 – 10/1 2.75 - the lowest in that year, and the highest was Batista as a champion with 3.8, it just proves my point.

October 4-8 3.35	
October 11-15 2.9
October 18-22 3.1
October 25-29 3.07
November 1-5 3.26
November 8-12	3.1
November 15-19	+++3.05

Thats lower than any champion in that year of Raw.

And those are from 2011 when he was the WHC champion on SD:


May 2-6 1.74
May 9-13 1.72
May 16-20	1.92
May 23-27	1.83
5/30 – 6/3	1.77
June 6-10	1.79
June 13-17	1.73
June 20-24	1.72
6/27-7/1 1.63 - the lowest in that year. I don't know why I'm not shocked. 
July 4-8 1.73
July 11-15	1.72 
July 18-22	1.89 - Christain won the title.
July 25-29	2.02 - Christian as a champion, lol Orton even Christian. Christian rocks by the way. 
Aug. 1-5 1.81
August 8-12	1.83
August 15-19	1.86 - Orton got the title back.
August 22-26	1.78 - Orton strikes again.

And when Mark "Ratings" Henry got the title, it got between 1.9 to 2.26 (which was the highest that year). Orton big Draw my ass, as this proves he's not.


----------



## N-destroy

IMO, its unfair to compare Orton's 2009 push with that of punk. Orton's push was extremely well planned and booked, starting with Rumble 2009 with HHH being a part of the final four and Orton eliminating him as a heel. And then the feb ppv No way out, his match against Shane Mcmahon, HHH becoming the WWE champion on the same night .. it was all well planned ahead and executed perfectly. It was also the first time they acknowledged HHH's real life relationship with Vince and Stephanie on-screen. All that played a key role in the success of the whole program. The feud itself was extremely intense and personal. Punk's push was largely rushed with no proper planning and pay-off. It was like they didnt know how to proceed with the angle, the week to week booking clearly didnt help. I remember a report at the time that said there was 6 different scripts at one point. The biggest mistake they ever did with the program was bringing him back too early to pop a good buyrate for Summerslam. Also, it should be noted that Orton's peak was wrestlemania season, the program itself peaked with Mcmahons/HHH vs Legacy/Orton brawl on the go home show which did a 4.1 overrun. Punk's push happened suddenly outta no where, in the middle of the summer starting with the shoot, got rushed and fizzled out before you could even figure out the whole storyline.


----------



## totoyotube

Did wwe have to pay for celebrities in 2009?


----------



## Tnmore

Tnmore said:


> Is big show actually a bigger draw than Punk? Lsat time his match with Cena in the main event drew over million viewers and the PPV no way out outdrew last year buyrate.
> 
> Is he really a bigger draw? Just wondering.


^^^

anyone?


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

RAW is a three hour show that isn't very good. It's tough to make people stick around for a three hour show, even when it is good, and it's impossible to do when it's not. That's why the third hour continually tanks. It's simple, people. You don't need a 5,000 word thesis on how your ARCH ENEMY wrestler X is to blame. Christ.


----------



## MikeChase27

SarcasmoBlaster said:


> RAW is a three hour show that isn't very good. It's tough to make people stick around for a three hour show, even when it is good, and it's impossible to do when it's not. That's why the third hour continually tanks. It's simple, people. You don't need a 5,000 word thesis on how your ARCH ENEMY wrestler X is to blame. Christ.


This, I don't get how some of the people on this site don't get that. Wrestling isn't in a boom period anymore and to casual fans it's just BORING.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Punk in highest segments of show = Punk at fault for entire show. This thread never fails. The fucking brilliance.


----------



## Mister Hands

SarcasmoBlaster said:


> RAW is a three hour show that isn't very good. It's tough to make people stick around for a three hour show, even when it is good, and it's impossible to do when it's not. That's why the third hour continually tanks. It's simple, people. You don't need a 5,000 word thesis on how your ARCH ENEMY wrestler X is to blame. Christ.


Team Sarcasmo.


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner3

LOL how many more pages does it take to say Cm Punk cant DRAW its the same thing every week Ratings marks vs Punk marks will it ever end lol


----------



## DesolationRow

Tnmore said:


> ^^^
> 
> anyone?


No doubt Big Show is a novelty act, a special attraction to casual fans of sort. And when you plug him into a scenario like facing John Cena in the main event of Raw, a lot of people are probably going to tune in. It's completely anathema to the so-called "IWC," but evidence seems to bear it out. 

He's probably a bigger "pure" draw than Punk is, objectively speaking, but then, we're talking about one guy who's been heavily featured in pro wrestling for the last seventeen years, was at or near the top of WCW, before and during the Monday Night Wars and was then a huge "trade," so to speak, when he went to WWE in early 1999. And he's been heavily featured for a long, long time in WWE ever since then; even when he essentially fulfills the duties of a midcarder, he's a "name" that many people like to follow.

Punk is like the guy who had a great season in a sport with his performance last summer when he had some excellent teammates helping him out in Cena, Vince McMahon and Triple H, and it's hard to gauge how and where you place him, whether it's vs. Big Show or not. 



SarcasmoBlaster said:


> RAW is a three hour show that isn't very good. It's tough to make people stick around for a three hour show, even when it is good, and it's impossible to do when it's not. That's why the third hour continually tanks. It's simple, people. You don't need a 5,000 word thesis on how your ARCH ENEMY wrestler X is to blame. Christ.


You know... That kind of makes sense to me.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

At this point I'd say Show is a bigger draw than Punk, but compared to the standards we've been comparing Punk to? The likes of Rock/Taker/Cena? I wouldn't call Show a "draw" except in special cases. Though he can pop bigger numbers, bigger than Punk on occasion, he's not consistent, which is the same problem Punk has, though Punk is the WWE Champion and pushed as the number 2 guy, so he sticks out more. 

But as I said, on occasion, Show can be a big draw. Like for WM24. Now granted, Mayweather was "The Draw" of the PPV, but I think putting him in a match with Show, because of Show's size that makes him a larger than life figure (to some degree), plus it matches so well with Mayweather, I'd say Show ended up being a bigger draw with Mayweather than anyone else in the company at the time would've (including bigger draws than Show normally like HHH, HBK, Flair, etc.), except maybe Undertaker and Cena. For Taker that's mainly due to the fact a "Streak vs. Streak" match would've been a huge deal, and Taker much like Show has always been a big special attraction draw, though Taker's also generally a big draw as well as the deadman. For Cena he's the number one guy in the company, even back then, and Cena/Mayweather would probably be the biggest match they could make.


----------



## Cack_Thu

Regarding ratings it seems that CM Punk cant even hold guan sena's jockstraps 

That said i strongly believe Phil is the best internet drawing champion in the world (Y)


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Punk's the second biggest draw in the company on the current full time roster. Despite what people in here spout during these MARK WARZS. Then again nobody on the full time roster is _that _big of a draw anymore, not even Cena. The special attractions are the big draws and the only reason they are is because they're just that, special attractions. They only show up once in a while so it's obvious they'll spark some buzz whenever they come back. But then their appeal dies down. See: Rock during RTWM and Triple H.


----------



## kokepepsi

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Punk in highest segments of show = Punk at fault for entire show. This thread never fails. The fucking brilliance.


Yup, annoying as fuck
3 segments gain consistently. Boom end of story, regardless of who is shown. The numbers might jump a couple hundred thousand if A STAR is involved, big fucking WHOOPDIDUODA.

shit ratings until they can keep viewers throughout the show.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Punk's the second biggest draw in the company on the current full time roster. Despite what people in here spout during these MARK WARZS. Then again nobody on the full time roster is _that _big of a draw anymore, not even Cena. The special attractions are the big draws and the only reason they are is because they're just that, special attractions. They only show up once in a while so it's obvious they'll spark some buzz whenever they come back. But then their appeal dies down. See: Rock during RTWM and Triple H.


Rock's appeal hasn't died down. WM - 1.217m (so far)


----------



## kokepepsi

He is talking about TV ratings which sort of stagnated/were not as good as the year before

Although Rock could have shown up maybe 2 times on Raw and it would still have done 1million+ buys


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Yes. But Rock and Brock will be judged on PPV numbers. 

They've done great, great business so far. (Rock has done amazing business.)


----------



## Tnmore

DesolationRow said:


> No doubt Big Show is a novelty act, a special attraction to casual fans of sort. And when you plug him into a scenario like facing John Cena in the main event of Raw, a lot of people are probably going to tune in. It's completely anathema to the so-called "IWC," but evidence seems to bear it out.
> 
> He's probably a bigger "pure" draw than Punk is, objectively speaking, but then, we're talking about one guy who's been heavily featured in pro wrestling for the last seventeen years, was at or near the top of WCW, before and during the Monday Night Wars and was then a huge "trade," so to speak, when he went to WWE in early 1999. And he's been heavily featured for a long, long time in WWE ever since then; even when he essentially fulfills the duties of a midcarder, he's a "name" that many people like to follow.
> 
> *Punk is like the guy who had a great season in a sport with his performance last summer when he had some excellent teammates helping him out in Cena, Vince McMahon and Triple H, and it's hard to gauge how and where you place him, whether it's vs. Big Show or not. *


I see your point but what about his early push against the likes of Batista, Taker, Jeff Hardy? All those world titles and main events? Didnt he "retire" Jeff hardy in 09, thats huge. 

In my opinion, Anyone else in Punk's place with the 6 yrs of push would have been a solid reliable draw by now, for the company.


----------



## Starbuck

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Punk's the second biggest draw in the company on the current full time roster. Despite what people in here spout during these MARK WARZS. Then again nobody on the full time roster is _that _big of a draw anymore, not even Cena. The special attractions are the big draws and the only reason they are is because they're just that, special attractions. They only show up once in a while so it's obvious they'll spark some buzz whenever they come back. But then their appeal dies down. See: Rock during RTWM and Triple H.


What do you keep talking about mark wars for? Myself and a few others actually discuss the numbers regardless of who is behind them. Despite what YOU think about Punk's apparent amazing drawing power, not everybody sees it the same way. The reason the special attractions are big draws isn't just because they are special attractions, it's because the are legitimate money makers, _proven and consistent_ legitimate money makers, something that Punk isn't. When HHH was COO and not doing anything of note, his segments were still better than most. When he actually had a feud or something important going on, the numbers spiked considerably. When Rock appears, things skyrocket. The problem with Rock during the RTWM wasn't Rock, it was the off putting content of the feud with Cena. When it came time for people to actually pay to see him, it broke records. Punk doesn't have an effect on anything. The show wouldn't suffer without him. Ratings wouldn't suffer without him. PPV wouldn't suffer without him. Live events wouldn't suffer without him and that's very clearly a hard pill for you to swallow, that much is obvious. Take Punk off a PPV card and nobody would care. Add Rock/Brock to a PPV card and a LOT of people start to care. I'm pretty sure that were the same discussions happening about the same numbers but they weren't about Punk, you'd be shitting all over whoever else it was but because it's Punk, you can't take your mark glasses off. He just happens to be the current champion and the man in the middle of the storm right now, that's why everybody is talking about and scrutinizing him, not because we're all OMGZ HATERZ HAVIN DEM MARK WARZ.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Starbuck, put down HHH's shovel. 

:buried


----------



## DesolationRow

I would quibble with one point there, *Starbuck*, which is that looking over live events numbers, I think Punk during his babyface run in the last twelve months did have a positive impact there for the Raw brand and for Smackdown shows that boasted him appearing. At the Oakland, CA house show I attended back in January, there were literally thousands of fans wearing Punk shirts and who fell outside the Cena "net" of fans (i.e., kids and families, of which there were many, too). I think it's fair to estimate that Punk has made a bit of a dent in attendance figures for WWE, because Smackdown shows with him and no Cena have on average largely did at least decently above the average Smackdown show which only featured Orton or Sheamus or both. As one "Is Punk a draw?" thread concerning live events attendance went a few months ago, I remember a few people and I clarifying that while Punk isn't WWE's biggest full-time draw by any means, he is _a_ draw. There's unmistakably a solid number of fans (many of them young adult males for whom Cena became something of a non-factor or potentially even a negative years and years ago) who are going to shows to see him above anyone else, and the numbers do bear that out. It'll be interesting to see what happens with him going heel, though I imagine a significant portion of those adult males will still be cheering for Punk, buying his shirts and going to live events chiefly to see him, lol.

*Tnmore*, the summer of 2009 was great for Punk, but Smackdown at that time was a very poor venue from which to draw significantly unless your name was Jeff Hardy and in terms of ratings and PPV buys, Hardy never really made much of a dent, either. I was speaking of the 2011 summer as being a "great season" for Punk in terms of actually drawing, while noting that he had a fine cast of characters around whom to do so, all proven long-running draws and mega-draws which only helped Punk enormously in terms of viewership and ratings figures for quarter hours and whatnot.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Punk never had a real program with Batista. Even though they had a PPV match, Batista was more concerned with Edge, JBL, Kane, Cena, Michaels, and Jericho at the time. Quite a shame because I am sure that they could have mustered some fun stuff. That entire first title reign of Punk's was just a mess.


----------



## DesolationRow

Yeah, that first world championship reign in 2008 was hideous.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Tnmore said:


> I see your point but what about his early push against the likes of Batista, Taker, Jeff Hardy? All those world titles and main events? Didnt he "retire" Jeff hardy in 09, thats huge.
> 
> In my opinion, Anyone else in Punk's place with the 6 yrs of push would have been a solid reliable draw by now, for the company.


Punk probably would've been, but for every really good thing Punk has had, it's been screwed up. 

His first WHC? He wasn't quite at that level yet, and it ended in a poor way.

His second WHC/Jeff Hardy feud? It was all going good, and great for him he ended Hardy's career but Punk got himself buried by Taker with some remarks behind the scenes (not sure if ever confirmed though) and this probably would've been the run to cement Punk had that not happened.

The SES/New Nexus? Both led to nothing because they were treated as such. Mysterio handled SES and shaved Punk's head, and then Show comes in and dismantles them. New Nexus? Same thing and it got destroyed by Cena, and then Orton. Not to mention Nexus was a dead group by the time he began to lead it. 

His shoot promo/Summer of Punk 2011? Comes back early, has an uneventful feud with HHH, loses, and then the night after he apologizes to HHH and becomes a squeaky clean babyface. He turns from an edgy babyface to a cringe-worthy jokester, much like Cena and now Sheamus.

His 300+ day title reign? He's been overshadowed by Cena constantly and has only main evented 2 PPV's. Sure, Cena main eventing with Rock and Lesnar makes sense. Hell, I even understand somewhat Cena/Laurinaitis main eventing over Punk's match (not like we could see the future and how much of a classic match Punk/Bryan was going to be). Also I suppose Cena ending MITB would be alright if it wasn't for the fact the MITB has never ended the PPV before. But Cena/Kane's ambulance match main eventing EC? Cena/Show main eventing NWO? Absolutely no reason they couldn't have at least put Punk's feuds/matches at that time on that level and main eventing Raw half the time. But they proceed to make him an afterthought.

Punk's Raw 1000 heel turn? He goes from a face who takes on all comers, had been in a couple triple threat title matches, one of which being a TLC, and having a lot of respect to all of a sudden having no respect, having a big issue with triple threats and becoming your standard cowardly heel number 156 who outside of his Summerslam match always gets out-smarted and made to look weak. There's nothing interesting about him as a heel besides the fact he's aligned with Heyman. The problem is Punk doesn't need a mouthpiece and it just feels like filler for Heyman until Lesnar comes back. 

So while Punk has been graced with a lot of opportunities, he's been fucked out of more than his fair share. Now the first one I mentioned wasn't really anybody's fault, and though his reign ended poorly, he wasn't really ready for being the champion of Raw yet. And his second run his attitude cost him big time as that was probably the run that would've put Punk over as the top heel of WWE. However the crap that happened with his factions, the Summer of Punk, his title run and his heel turn that has been unspectacular is pure terrible booking and not his fault. 

And ultimately it's that that's the reason he's not as big of a draw as he should be. He doesn't have the "it" factor where he can draw when doing nothing/having his feuds/runs/storylines ruined. I know a few people claim him to be the next Austin, and hell when he first did that shoot promo and for the first month, I thought the same thing. But it's clear now he can't ever be that. Could he be, say, an HBK? A HHH? Possibly, but at this point with his luck, it's very unlikely. He's certainly not going to be the face of the company, as he's just much more natural as a heel.



> I would quibble with one point there, Starbuck, which is that looking over live events numbers, I think Punk during his babyface run in the last twelve months did have a positive impact there for the Raw brand and for Smackdown shows that boasted him appearing. At the Oakland, CA house show I attended back in January, there were literally thousands of fans wearing Punk shirts and who fell outside the Cena "net" of fans (i.e., kids and families, of which there were many, too). I think it's fair to estimate that Punk has made a bit of a dent in attendance figures for WWE, because Smackdown shows with him and no Cena have on average largely did at least decently above the average Smackdown show which only featured Orton or Sheamus or both. As one "Is Punk a draw?" thread concerning live events attendance went a few months ago, I remember a few people and I clarifying that while Punk isn't WWE's biggest full-time draw by any means, he is a draw. There's unmistakably a solid number of fans (many of them young adult males for whom Cena became something of a non-factor or potentially even a negative years and years ago) who are going to shows to see him above anyone else, and the numbers do bear that out. It'll be interesting to see what happens with him going heel, though I imagine a significant portion of those adult males will still be cheering for Punk, buying his shirts and going to live events chiefly to see him, lol.


Edit: Interesting. Never heard anything about live event numbers for Punk.


----------



## Starbuck

*@Deso*, I don't dispute that he doesn't have fans who pay to see him. In some fashion, everybody does and Punk's no different. Of course he has a fanbase who pay for his merch, pay to see him at shows and pay to watch him on PPV. That can't be disputed. But we're talking large scale here. I won't deny that he draws his own fanbase, a fanbase that has no doubt grown over the past year. But he clearly doesn't seem to have the ability to draw anybody outside of that fanbase unless paired with somebody who can. This is the meat of the issue, no? The ability to draw casual fans on a large scale bases? When I said that he would have no impact on live events, I meant that in the sense that if he wasn't advertised I doubt attendance would take a major dip, not in the way that taking Cena or HHH off a card has resulted in offering refunds in the past. Not in the way HHH and Jeff Hardy had to fly to do a show in Peru I think it was back in 2008 when they got drafted to SD because the fans were kicking up a fuss about it. Of course he has an effect/impact but it's minimal. Credit where it's due though, he did help out when Orton fucked up and SD was left without...anybody to appear there lol. He deserves kudos for that, yes.


----------



## DesolationRow

If you're trying to fit Punk into a comparison with a past star, I'm going to say that, in terms of main event trajectory, Punk is the new Edge.

Particularly in that Punk's main event tenure has become defined by being a natural rival to Cena. And honestly, Punk and Edge are about equal in being draws when we look at most factors. Edge used controversy in his push in one way, Punk in another. Except Punk had to be a bit hotter unto himself during his ascent vs. Cena than Edge had to be, since Cena in 2011/2012 is such old, stale news compared to Cena back in '06. (Though Cena's existence in that regard supplied Punk with the meat of his argument against Cena last year, so there is that to consider.) Also in that both Edge and Punk had/will have five year runs at the top before calling it quits.


----------



## DesolationRow

Starbuck said:


> *@Deso*, I don't dispute that he doesn't have fans who pay to see him. In some fashion, everybody does and Punk's no different. Of course he has a fanbase who pay for his merch, pay to see him at shows and pay to watch him on PPV. That can't be disputed. But we're talking large scale here. I won't deny that he draws his own fanbase, a fanbase that has no doubt grown over the past year. But he clearly doesn't seem to have the ability to draw anybody outside of that fanbase unless paired with somebody who can. This is the meat of the issue, no? The ability to draw casual fans on a large scale bases? When I said that he would have no impact on live events, I meant that in the sense that if he wasn't advertised I doubt attendance would take a major dip, not in the way that taking Cena or HHH off a card has resulted in offering refunds in the past. Not in the way HHH and Jeff Hardy had to fly to do a show in Peru I think it was back in 2008 when they got drafted to SD because the fans were kicking up a fuss about it. Of course he has an effect/impact but it's minimal. Credit where it's due though, he did help out when Orton fucked up and SD was left without...anybody to appear there lol. He deserves kudos for that, yes.


Ah, yes, I see what you're getting at there. Agreed.


----------



## Starbuck

It's interesting how both Edge and Punk's best character performances seem to spark off of Cena and what he stands for but both in entirely different ways lol.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> I meant that in the sense that if he wasn't advertised I doubt attendance would take a major dip, not in the way that taking Cena or HHH off a card has resulted in offering refunds in the past.


You know, this brings up something I've wanted to ask for a couple of years, but due to the fact it wasn't very important and it never seemed to be brought up after it, I suppose now is the time to ask:

Back in Late 2010-2011, Cena and Barrett were in a match at a house show, and while I forgot what happened exactly, Cena seemingly went down with an injury. I don't believe he appeared on Raw, and the fans were refunded their money. I never heard this happening before (well, I know the refund thing happened on the commercial free Raw with Trump... unless that was strictly kayfabe), but a top guy advertised but not being able to make it and people getting their money refunded? I just wonder when and if this happened before? I mean I can only imagine it would've happened with Austin and Rock at least back in the AE if they missed the show, but I wouldn't know of any instances because as far as I know, they were there every week as advertised. Just something I've been a bit curious about since.

Edit:



> If you're trying to fit Punk into a comparison with a past star, I'm going to say that, in terms of main event trajectory, Punk is the new Edge.
> 
> Particularly in that Punk's main event tenure has become defined by being a natural rival to Cena. And honestly, Punk and Edge are about equal in being draws when we look at most factors. Edge used controversy in his push in one way, Punk in another. Except Punk had to be a bit hotter unto himself during his ascent vs. Cena than Edge had to be, since Cena in 2011/2012 is such old, stale news compared to Cena back in '06. (Though Cena's existence in that regard supplied Punk with the meat of his argument against Cena last year, so there is that to consider.) Also in that both Edge and Punk had/will have five year runs at the top before calling it quits.


Yeah, I was mainly talking about by the end of his career he could be at those two level I mentioned, but he's obviously not there yet. Truth be told I'm not quite sure he's on Edge's level either. Edge was a great draw and white hot in 2006 from what I remember, and held SD up at least TV wise 2007-2008. That being said, not sure how he did merch and live event wise, but for the former, I can only assume though Punk has done better. But I suppose they're comparable.


----------



## Starbuck

The Sandrone said:


> You know, this brings up something I've wanted to ask for a couple of years, but due to the fact it wasn't very important and it never seemed to be brought up after it, I suppose now is the time to ask:
> 
> Back in Late 2010-2011, Cena and Barrett were in a match at a house show, and while I forgot what happened exactly, Cena seemingly went down with an injury. I don't believe he appeared on Raw, and the fans were refunded their money. I never heard this happening before (well, I know the refund thing happened on the commercial free Raw with Trump... unless that was strictly kayfabe), but a top guy advertised but not being able to make it and people getting their money refunded? I just wonder when and if this happened before? I mean I can only imagine it would've happened with Austin and Rock at least back in the AE if they missed the show, but I wouldn't know of any instances because as far as I know, they were there every week as advertised. Just something I've been a bit curious about since.


It's happened a couple of times with Cena and HHH when they missed shows for whatever reason. The HHH/Jeff one sticks out in my mind the most because I remember the fans being very upset and how they both had to work one show and then fly to do the one they were originally advertised for iirc. I don't remember there being any reports of it happening back in the AE tbh. You probably need to ask Rocky about that one lol.


----------



## Pro Royka

I don't think Raw ratings will gain if Punk isn't there, specially if its last week, ratings will plummet some more. Nobody gained viewers last week put a side Punk segments. I'm not sure what others are trying to say. I'm not saying Punk is a Big draw but he's a draw none or less, all the big draws are very well established and have been constant on what they do. Punk in the other side is a very complicated case, he's not fully booked, things with him just get squashed, even if he didn't do anything wrong. Punk was great in 2009, until they decided to stop his push against Taker, and the question is what went wrong with him, he was great. Same thing happened in the last year summer, he got squashed by Trips (technically) and every thing went down with him, and again what did he do wrong. If you wanna be a big draw you need to beat the biggest draws. If you lose to them you're nothing, that what I have noticed from the casual point of view. In the IWC it doesn't matter who you beat, you will still be worshiped.


----------



## Tnmore

The Sandrone said:


> Punk probably would've been, but for every really good thing Punk has had, it's been screwed up.
> 
> His first WHC? He wasn't quite at that level yet, and it ended in a poor way.
> 
> His second WHC/Jeff Hardy feud? It was all going good, and great for him he ended Hardy's career but Punk got himself buried by Taker with some remarks behind the scenes (not sure if ever confirmed though) and this probably would've been the run to cement Punk had that not happened.
> 
> The SES/New Nexus? Both led to nothing because they were treated as such. Mysterio handled SES and shaved Punk's head, and then Show comes in and dismantles them. New Nexus? Same thing and it got destroyed by Cena, and then Orton. Not to mention Nexus was a dead group by the time he began to lead it.
> 
> His shoot promo/Summer of Punk 2011? Comes back early, has an uneventful feud with HHH, loses, and then the night after he apologizes to HHH and becomes a squeaky clean babyface. He turns from an edgy babyface to a cringe-worthy jokester, much like Cena and now Sheamus.
> 
> His 300+ day title reign? He's been overshadowed by Cena constantly and has only main evented 2 PPV's. Sure, Cena main eventing with Rock and Lesnar makes sense. Hell, I even understand somewhat Cena/Laurinaitis main eventing over Punk's match (not like we could see the future and how much of a classic match Punk/Bryan was going to be). Also I suppose Cena ending MITB would be alright if it wasn't for the fact the MITB has never ended the PPV before. But Cena/Kane's ambulance match main eventing EC? Cena/Show main eventing NWO? Absolutely no reason they couldn't have at least put Punk's feuds/matches at that time on that level and main eventing Raw half the time. But they proceed to make him an afterthought.
> 
> Punk's Raw 1000 heel turn? He goes from a face who takes on all comers, had been in a couple triple threat title matches, one of which being a TLC, and having a lot of respect to all of a sudden having no respect, having a big issue with triple threats and becoming your standard cowardly heel number 156 who outside of his Summerslam match always gets out-smarted and made to look weak. There's nothing interesting about him as a heel besides the fact he's aligned with Heyman. The problem is Punk doesn't need a mouthpiece and it just feels like filler for Heyman until Lesnar comes back.
> 
> So while Punk has been graced with a lot of opportunities, he's been fucked out of more than his fair share. Now the first one I mentioned wasn't really anybody's fault, and though his reign ended poorly, he wasn't really ready for being the champion of Raw yet. And his second run his attitude cost him big time as that was probably the run that would've put Punk over as the top heel of WWE. However the crap that happened with his factions, the Summer of Punk, his title run and his heel turn that has been unspectacular is pure terrible booking and not his fault.
> 
> And ultimately it's that that's the reason he's not as big of a draw as he should be. He doesn't have the "it" factor where he can draw when doing nothing/having his feuds/runs/storylines ruined. I know a few people claim him to be the next Austin, and hell when he first did that shoot promo and for the first month, I thought the same thing. But it's clear now he can't ever be that. Could he be, say, an HBK? A HHH? Possibly, but at this point with his luck, it's very unlikely. He's certainly not going to be the face of the company, as he's just much more natural as a heel.


While I agree to a degree with your post, mainly the points about how screwed up the pay-off to most of his feuds has been in the past, but i think you fail to realize how much of a push he has been handed consistently for years, despite not entirely deserving it. 

Like you said yourself, he wasnt even ready when he won his first world title, but they put the title on him regardless, had him working against Batista the second biggest star of the PG era. For all the IWC bitching about the "big man fetish", here they put the title on a skinny dude with tattoos who looked like a 14yr old school kid standing against batista, despite the fact he didnt deserve it. 

The summer of punk 2009 is often regarded as one of the best angles of the post Attitude era. It was a huge main event push on Smackdown against one of the most over stars of the past decade, Jeff hardy. Yes Taker killed the momentum of the feud, but it doesnt take away from how much exposure he got by working with these two top stars. 

As for Nexus/SES thing, WWE had enough faith in him to make him the leader of two major heel factions on both the A-show and the B-show of the company. At one point, he was the biggest heel in the company. Once again, you dont realize the magnitude of the push. Cena, Orton, Rey, show are all huge babyface characters, working with them itself is big. Yes, Summer of punk 2011 did not end well but it wasnt drawing much to begin with. MITB bumped 20,000 extra buys and ratings stayed the same throughout. 

About the main event thing, I dont exactly understand what difference it would have made even if he did main event over Cena? Whats the point if it isn't the key drawing match for the PPV anyway? Just assume he does main event over Cena/Show and Cena/Laurinaitis, so now he main evented 4 PPVs out of 10, what does that prove? Is he a draw now because of it? Cena matches are still the ones responsible for PPV buys and everyone knows that for a fact. If anything this main event thing is an effective excuse for punk fans, to cover up his lack of drawing power. 

He was turned heel on RAW 1000 because his face character completely ran out of steam, it came to a point where its either a heel turn or lose the title to Cena for punk and WWE decided to turn him heel by having him lay out THE BIGGEST STAR IN WRESTLING INDUSTRY today in the middle of the ring, at the end of the biggest RAW show of the decade which drew massive rating as we all know. 

See here's my problem with these excuses, If you're a wrestler who needs 6 yrs of constant push and every one of those to end well in your favor with the right pay-off to *atleast* show signs of being a draw, then in my opinion you're NOT worth that investment to begin with. 

I mean how many wrestlers who made their debut during the same time as punk, get to say they were ECW world champion, two time MITB winner, 3 time heavyweight champion, leader of two top heel factions, worked with the likes of Edge, Batista, JBL, Jeff hardy(and retired him), Taker, Rey Mysterio, big show, Randy Orton, John Cena, Vince Mcmahon, Triple H, Chris Jericho, the guy who was allowed to "shoot"/break kayfabe on live raw, the guy who turned heel by attacking the biggest star in the company? How many superstars could claim to even half of that push? 

As I mention above, like most of the Punk marks on the internet you're so obsessed with these excuses that you fail see how much he has been handed since day one. I am not a big advocate of Kevin Nash's "Vanilla midget" looks theory but in punk's case it might be true. Punk needs tonnes of hype, top stars and main event buzz surrounding him to draw, if at all. When left alone, clearly he cant deliver. 

People refuse to see this guy as a top star because he lacks "IT" factor. Simple

And obviously No, he's never going to a hbk or hhh or taker or even Jericho or kurt angle. Thats just not happening.


----------



## Mister Hands

For what it's worth, whether Punk draws by himself or not, it's silly to underestimate the value of someone who can be such an effective foil to the top draws.


----------



## Pro Royka

Tnmore said:


> While I agree to a degree with your post, mainly the points about how screwed up the pay-off to most of his feuds has been in the past, but i think you fail to realize how much of a push he has been handed consistently for years, despite not entirely deserving it.
> 
> Like you said yourself, he wasnt even ready when he won his first world title, but they put the title on him regardless, had him working against Batista the second biggest star of the PG era. For all the IWC bitching about the "big man fetish", here they put the title on a skinny dude with tattoos who looked like a 14yr old school kid standing against batista, despite the fact he didnt deserve it.
> 
> The summer of punk 2009 is often regarded as one of the best angles of the post Attitude era. It was a huge main event push on Smackdown against one of the most over stars of the past decade, Jeff hardy. Yes Taker killed the momentum of the feud, but it doesnt take away from how much exposure he got by working with these two top stars.
> 
> As for Nexus/SES thing, WWE had enough faith in him to make him the leader of two major heel factions on both the A-show and the B-show of the company. At one point, he was the biggest heel in the company. Once again, you dont realize the magnitude of the push. Cena, Orton, Rey, show are all huge babyface characters, working with them itself is big. Yes, Summer of punk 2011 did not end well but it wasnt drawing much to begin with. MITB bumped 20,000 extra buys and ratings stayed the same throughout.
> 
> About the main event thing, I dont exactly understand what difference it would have made even if he did main event over Cena? Whats the point if it isn't the key drawing match for the PPV anyway? Just assume he does main event over Cena/Show and Cena/Laurinaitis, so now he main evented 4 PPVs out of 10, what does that prove? Is he a draw now because of it? Cena matches are still the ones responsible for PPV buys and everyone knows that for a fact. If anything this main event thing is an effective excuse for punk fans, to cover up his lack of drawing power.
> 
> He was turned heel on RAW 1000 because his face character completely ran out of steam, it came to a point where its either a heel turn or lose the title to Cena for punk and WWE decided to turn him heel by having him lay out THE BIGGEST STAR IN WRESTLING INDUSTRY today in the middle of the ring, at the end of the biggest RAW show of the decade which drew massive rating as we all know.
> 
> See here's my problem with these excuses, If you're a wrestler who needs 6 yrs of constant push and every one of those to end well in your favor with the right pay-off to *atleast* show signs of being a draw, then in my opinion you're NOT worth that investment to begin with.
> 
> I mean how many wrestlers who made their debut during the same time as punk, get to say they were ECW world champion, two time MITB winner, 3 time heavyweight champion, leader of two top heel factions, worked with the likes of Edge, Batista, JBL, Jeff hardy(and retired him), Taker, Rey Mysterio, big show, Randy Orton, John Cena, Vince Mcmahon, Triple H, Chris Jericho, the guy who was allowed to "shoot"/break kayfabe on live raw, the guy who turned heel by attacking the biggest star in the company? How many superstars could claim to even half of that push?
> 
> As I mention above, like most of the Punk marks on the internet you're so obsessed with these excuses that you fail see how much he has been handed since day one. I am not a big advocate of Kevin Nash's "Vanilla midget" looks theory but in punk's case it might be true. Punk needs tonnes of hype, top stars and main event buzz surrounding him to draw, if at all. When left alone, clearly he cant deliver.
> 
> People refuse to see this guy as a top star because he lacks "IT" factor. Simple
> 
> And obviously No, he's never going to a hbk or hhh or taker or even Jericho or kurt angle. Thats just not happening.


Whats the point of facing them and not beating them, will that make you a draw. Punk is a draw, not a big draw, nor should he be one. Jeff wasn't a big draw, he was just massively over with the crowed and got high merchindise sales. Didn't know that you can see the future. 

Edited: By the way, Punk segments were gaining over a million last year going to MITB, same thing with Trips and Nash, he gained over a million and 500+ every week, until they turned him to a babyface. Of course mainly because of his lose against Trips which effected his momentum real bad.


----------



## Choke2Death

Tnmore said:


> While I agree to a degree with your post, mainly the points about how screwed up the pay-off to most of his feuds has been in the past, but i think you fail to realize how much of a push he has been handed consistently for years, despite not entirely deserving it.
> 
> Like you said yourself, he wasnt even ready when he won his first world title, but they put the title on him regardless, had him working against Batista the second biggest star of the PG era. For all the IWC bitching about the "big man fetish", here they put the title on a skinny dude with tattoos who looked like a 14yr old school kid standing against batista, despite the fact he didnt deserve it.
> 
> The summer of punk 2009 is often regarded as one of the best angles of the post Attitude era. It was a huge main event push on Smackdown against one of the most over stars of the past decade, Jeff hardy. Yes Taker killed the momentum of the feud, but it doesnt take away from how much exposure he got by working with these two top stars.
> 
> As for Nexus/SES thing, WWE had enough faith in him to make him the leader of two major heel factions on both the A-show and the B-show of the company. At one point, he was the biggest heel in the company. Once again, you dont realize the magnitude of the push. Cena, Orton, Rey, show are all huge babyface characters, working with them itself is big. Yes, Summer of punk 2011 did not end well but it wasnt drawing much to begin with. MITB bumped 20,000 extra buys and ratings stayed the same throughout.
> 
> About the main event thing, I dont exactly understand what difference it would have made even if he did main event over Cena? Whats the point if it isn't the key drawing match for the PPV anyway? Just assume he does main event over Cena/Show and Cena/Laurinaitis, so now he main evented 4 PPVs out of 10, what does that prove? Is he a draw now because of it? Cena matches are still the ones responsible for PPV buys and everyone knows that for a fact. If anything this main event thing is an effective excuse for punk fans, to cover up his lack of drawing power.
> 
> He was turned heel on RAW 1000 because his face character completely ran out of steam, it came to a point where its either a heel turn or lose the title to Cena for punk and WWE decided to turn him heel by having him lay out THE BIGGEST STAR IN WRESTLING INDUSTRY today in the middle of the ring, at the end of the biggest RAW show of the decade which drew massive rating as we all know.
> 
> See here's my problem with these excuses, If you're a wrestler who needs 6 yrs of constant push and every one of those to end well in your favor with the right pay-off to *atleast* show signs of being a draw, then in my opinion you're NOT worth that investment to begin with.
> 
> I mean how many wrestlers who made their debut during the same time as punk, get to say they were ECW world champion, two time MITB winner, 3 time heavyweight champion, leader of two top heel factions, worked with the likes of Edge, Batista, JBL, Jeff hardy(and retired him), Taker, Rey Mysterio, big show, Randy Orton, John Cena, Vince Mcmahon, Triple H, Chris Jericho, the guy who was allowed to "shoot"/break kayfabe on live raw, the guy who turned heel by attacking the biggest star in the company? How many superstars could claim to even half of that push?
> 
> As I mention above, like most of the Punk marks on the internet you're so obsessed with these excuses that you fail see how much he has been handed since day one. I am not a big advocate of Kevin Nash's "Vanilla midget" looks theory but in punk's case it might be true. Punk needs tonnes of hype, top stars and main event buzz surrounding him to draw, if at all. When left alone, clearly he cant deliver.
> 
> People refuse to see this guy as a top star because he lacks "IT" factor. Simple
> 
> And obviously No, he's never going to a hbk or hhh or taker or even Jericho or kurt angle. Thats just not happening.


Absolutely amazing post that brings up lots of valid points. Shit like the main event thing are just nitpicking by Punk marks because they refuse to admit he failed to become the top star WWE hoped for when he was given the big angle of 2011 to work with.


----------



## Pro Royka

Choke2Death said:


> Absolutely amazing post that brings up lots of valid points. Shit like the main event thing are just nitpicking by Punk marks because they refuse to admit he failed to become the top star WWE hoped for when he was given the big angle of 2011 to work with.


Anything negative about Punk is amazing to you. :lol. He gains viewers and be blamed for it not being that much of a gain, like if others could do the same in the current roster, everybody lost viewers last week besides Punk segments, why don't you talk about them, they are the problem, you don't expect one man to carry a 3 hours show.


----------



## kokepepsi

lol at the idea that HHH not showing up at a house show would result in people asking for refunds.
PFFFFFFfff

What were the buys for the Kevin Nash vs HHH Sledge Hammer on a string ladder match?


----------



## Choke2Death

Pro Royka said:


> Anything negative about Punk is amazing to you. :lol. He gains viewers and be blamed for it not being that much of a gain, like if others could do the same in the current roster, everybody lost viewers last week besides Punk segments, why don't you talk about them, they are the problem, you don't expect one man to carry a 3 hours show.


There are no expectations from them. Most of them just come out, wrestle some random meaningless matches and leave. I would be surprised if they DON'T lose viewers. Punk pretty much has the show built around him and gets all the meaningful angles. It's only right that he gets a large portion of the blame since he's the most exposed person on the show. And it also makes sense that he gains viewers because everything else loses. Plus he also gets all the 'big gain' spots (opener, 9PM and closer) and has the likes of Mick Foley and John Cena covering his ass to assure that viewers _do_ tune in.

Lastly, where are the opportunities Punk has gotten for the rest of the roster so I can judge their drawing abilities? They have got zero opportunities so it would just be dumb to expect them to magically draw just for being there.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Tnmore said:


> While I agree to a degree with your post, mainly the points about how screwed up the pay-off to most of his feuds has been in the past, but i think you fail to realize how much of a push he has been handed consistently for years, despite not entirely deserving it.
> 
> 
> Like you said yourself, he wasnt even ready when he won his first world title, but they put the title on him regardless, had him working against Batista the second biggest star of the PG era. For all the IWC bitching about the "big man fetish", here they put the title on a skinny dude with tattoos who looked like a 14yr old school kid standing against batista, despite the fact he didnt deserve it.


As I said, the reign shouldn't have happened (at least at that point without more building up of Punk) but he didn't exactly look strong against Batista from what I recall, and once again that has to do with booking. He looked like a weak champ because he was booked as a weak champ. Going against Batista at the time while not bad, didn't do Punk any favors either.



> The summer of punk 2009 is often regarded as one of the best angles of the post Attitude era. It was a huge main event push on Smackdown against one of the most over stars of the past decade, Jeff hardy. Yes Taker killed the momentum of the feud, but it doesnt take away from how much exposure he got by working with these two top stars.


While against Jeff Hardy, he got great exposure. But not all exposure is good. He was essentially Taker's whipping boy for a couple of months, and even though Taker is a legend and it's never bad to lose to him, it's terrible to look as bad as Punk did to Taker to anyone. Once again gets exposure, but it's not exactly good when you're booked to look like you don't belong in the main event. Like I said this is what I think really hurt Punk's image in the eyes of the casual, and the worst part is if the reports are true, Punk did it to himself.




> As for Nexus/SES thing, WWE had enough faith in him to make him the leader of two major heel factions on both the A-show and the B-show of the company. At one point, he was the biggest heel in the company. Once again, you dont realize the magnitude of the push. Cena, Orton, Rey, show are all huge babyface characters, working with them itself is big. Yes, Summer of punk 2011 did not end well but it wasnt drawing much to begin with. MITB bumped 20,000 extra buys and ratings stayed the same throughout.


But once again, him and his groups were made to look like chumps. Bad exposure is bad. It hurts his image to see time and time again that he fails in his feuds and it makes it harder for the casuals to get behind him.



> About the main event thing, I dont exactly understand what difference it would have made even if he did main event over Cena? Whats the point if it isn't the key drawing match for the PPV anyway? Just assume he does main event over Cena/Show and Cena/Laurinaitis, so now he main evented 4 PPVs out of 10, what does that prove? Is he a draw now because of it? Cena matches are still the ones responsible for PPV buys and everyone knows that for a fact. If anything this main event thing is an effective excuse for punk fans, to cover up his lack of drawing power.


He's the WWE Champion. It devalues the title when it's never the main event despite the fact that it's supposedly the most prestigious prize in the business, and hurts Punk's reign (and image once again) that he's constantly playing second-fiddle to Cena, even when he has the title. So even if it's not the key drawing point, if it's promoted on Raw as the main event as it should be, at the very least the title credibility and reign is preserved to some extent. Casuals don't really know who draws and who doesn't... at least as far as I know. It's not something they think about.

And the other thing is when I say for Punk to main event, I don't necessarily mean him just being the last match on the PPV, but to week in and week out be the focus of the show. Now I know you're just going to point to this Monday's Raw as an example that you can't use Punk as the center of the show, but once again there are plenty of reasons why the rating was so low that had nothing to do with Punk. For all we know even if Cena was the one featured throughout the show it would've still been a low number. Hell Cena was advertised in the last part of the show and it still did underwhelming. Essentially all we know is Punk's first two segments kept the show afloat. 

Now if Punk was given the opportunity to go out there for the next 3-4 weeks and be the center of the show and ratings get lower or don't budge, and then they give Cena a week as the center and ratings go back up, then yes, that would be proof Punk can't be the main event and center of the show, and as such he has no business being WWE Champion for the more than a couple of months. But Punk never had that opportunity. He had one terrible overrun that lost viewers in an uninspired match which put him against Tensai and Bryan (which by the way I'm not sure if he was the center of that show either, but I'd need to check), but even HHH has lost viewers in the overrun on more than one occasion. But Punk has never been given a shot to prove he could consistently hold the numbers together for the show and to prove that number was just an odd occurrence. Instead he's a very little or non-factor as a mid-card WWE Champion while Cena is treated as the top prize in the company. He can never prove his worth if not given the chance, and only giving him a one-off shot every few months isn't giving him a chance. 



> He was turned heel on RAW 1000 because his face character completely ran out of steam, it came to a point where its either a heel turn or lose the title to Cena for punk and WWE decided to turn him heel by having him lay out THE BIGGEST STAR IN WRESTLING INDUSTRY today in the middle of the ring, at the end of the biggest RAW show of the decade which drew massive rating as we all know.
> 
> See here's my problem with these excuses, If you're a wrestler who needs 6 yrs of constant push and every one of those to end well in your favor with the right pay-off to *atleast* show signs of being a draw, then in my opinion you're NOT worth that investment to begin with.
> 
> I mean how many wrestlers who made their debut during the same time as punk, get to say they were ECW world champion, two time MITB winner, 3 time heavyweight champion, leader of two top heel factions, worked with the likes of Edge, Batista, JBL, Jeff hardy(and retired him), Taker, Rey Mysterio, big show, Randy Orton, John Cena, Vince Mcmahon, Triple H, Chris Jericho, the guy who was allowed to "shoot"/break kayfabe on live raw, the guy who turned heel by attacking the biggest star in the company? How many superstars could claim to even half of that push?
> 
> As I mention above, like most of the Punk marks on the internet you're so obsessed with these excuses that you fail see how much he has been handed since day one. I am not a big advocate of Kevin Nash's "Vanilla midget" looks theory but in punk's case it might be true. Punk needs tonnes of hype, top stars and main event buzz surrounding him to draw, if at all. When left alone, clearly he cant deliver.
> 
> People refuse to see this guy as a top star because he lacks "IT" factor. Simple
> 
> And obviously No, he's never going to a hbk or hhh or taker or even Jericho or kurt angle. Thats just not happening.


First, it's not needing every single push to be successful, it's needing a few of them. He's looked weak time and time again after a short time of looking like a main eventer. No top draw got over by having their pushes constantly derailed. Hogan, Austin, Rock, Taker, Lesnar, HHH, Cena, etc. All almost always were booked to succeed in their feuds and never made to look like chumps as WWE Champion, even as heels. Imagine if Austin had tapped out to Bret at WM13 and then stopped being Austin 3:16. No way Austin/McMahon would've been as successful. Imagine Rock never leading the Nation. Imagine Evolution getting destroyed by Benoit in 04 and Orton and Batista becoming nothing. Imagine HHH losing the title to Foley at the RR and the WM ME that year being Rock vs. Foley. How about during HHH's 9 month reign, not only does he get overshadowed by Rock/Austin and Rock/Goldberg, but then Goldberg's feuds overshadow HHH's and HHH looks like a mid-card act in comparison, along with the title? Or how about JBL defeating Cena at WM21 and Cena getting traded to Raw before he could win the title? Or how about winning the title, but then losing in the I QUIT match to JBL? Lastly, what about Taker beating Lesnar in the cell at NM?

None of those men would be the same if those things happened, and for Punk I still believe that the time he could've been big originally was 2009, but what we saw was what would've happened if the last thing I said happened in that last paragraph. Punk's SES would've been more successful if he was champion similar to Evolution. He would've never had to take over the New Nexus or they would've just had him convert them to the SES. He would've been a top heel and a top draw. 

You don't need the "IT" factor to be a big draw. You need the "IT" factor to be the biggest superstar of all time. Punk would've never been that, but he could've been big draw by now. But they fuck up his heel run, and then they fuck up his face run. Now he's back to heel trying that again, but it's only a matter of time before that's fucked up. I don't believe HHH had the "IT" factor, but he had proper booking, character development, and excellently written storylines. I'd say if he did have the "IT" factor, he could've very well been the biggest star of all time. But that's just me.

Are these excuses? I prefer to think of them as reasons. Are they valid reasons? Absolutely. Fact is none of his runs were booked properly all the way through. Because of that all those championships. accolades and guys he worked with in the past were all for naught. It's exactly why a poorly executed push can destroy someone. Punk's been dealing with it for the majority of his career. He's dealt with it for the past year and his title run, his face run, and his drawing power have suffered because of it. 

Hell, another example of someone who's been failed by failed runs constantly is Randy Orton. 2004? Evolution's bitch, but he was also still emotionally immature so that falls on him. 2006? Again, fucked himself up after having all the momentum and getting put back over by Taker with his immature behavior. 2007, they failed to give him the title at SS when they should've, but he still did go on to have a good reign as champion, though he looked weak at times, like getting SCM every week for like 5 weeks in a row (I think). 2009 he had his gigantic push though, and that was fucked up. He remained a draw and the people he worked with helped and the storyline he had helped, but once he was taken away from them and given the title in 2010 and forced into the same position Punk's been in for the majority of the last year (playing second fiddle to Cena), his numbers suffered and he wasn't a "draw" by the standards we've been using for Punk. His title run went nowhere, his World Title reigns flopped, and he's been doing nothing of relevance ever since. And Orton's peak was actually hotter than Punk's, so if that could happen to Orton after failed push after failed push, it's no wonder it happens to Punk.


----------



## Pro Royka

Choke2Death said:


> There are no expectations from them. Most of them just come out, wrestle some random meaningless matches and leave. I would be surprised if they DON'T lose viewers. Punk pretty much has the show built around him and gets all the meaningful angles. It's only right that he gets a large portion of the blame since he's the most exposed person on the show. And it also makes sense that he gains viewers because everything else loses. Plus he also gets all the 'big gain' spots (opener, 9PM and closer) and has the likes of Mick Foley and John Cena covering his ass to assure that viewers _do_ tune in.
> 
> Lastly, where are the opportunities Punk has gotten for the rest of the roster so I can judge their drawing abilities? They have got zero opportunities so it would just be dumb to expect them to magically draw just for being there.


I'm not sure when was the last segment of Cena alone that gained big. Punk gained a lot of viewers in the past. Zero opportunities lol, what were they doing in the last 5 shows, you're putting excuses on them, just like what I thought. You said no excuses for Punk, but in the end he was the one gaining viewers in that last 5 shows or more. Sheamus the champion have been losing viewers a lot in the past 5 shows or more. I don't see you pointing fingers on him, I bet if Punk was the WHC instead you will talk about how he have been losing viewers every week, but since it's Sheamus it's Okay, he's a huge guy not a skinny fat ass to put the blame on. I remember you said soemthing like this about Sheamus "oh Sheamus gained viewers he's a draw" but when he doesn't you don't talk about him. I'm not sure about that but it seems this way, as you dont say anything about him. Mick Foley gained viewers not Punk, really? That segment will mean nothing if Punk wasnt there, and I'm sure it will not get that kind of gain. I wish Cena was alone in that last segment so I can see how he can do.


----------



## Tnmore

The Sandrone said:


> As I said, the reign shouldn't have happened (at least at that point without more building up of Punk) but he didn't exactly look strong against Batista from what I recall, and once again that has to do with booking. He looked like a weak champ because he was booked as a weak champ. Going against Batista at the time while not bad, didn't do Punk any favors either.


He's not going to look strong against Batista who was the second biggest babyface behind Cena, especially not with his looks. No other superstar is going to look strong against batista unless its someone bigger than him, Cena or legends like HHH/Taker. Working with batista is big rub, you dont need to win or booked dominantly to get that. 




> While against Jeff Hardy, he got great exposure. But not all exposure is good. He was essentially Taker's whipping boy for a couple of months, and even though Taker is a legend and it's never bad to lose to him, it's terrible to look as bad as Punk did to Taker to anyone. Once again gets exposure, but it's not exactly good when you're booked to look like you don't belong in the main event. Like I said this is what I think really hurt Punk's image in the eyes of the casual, and the worst part is if the reports are true, Punk did it to himself.



Once again, He retired Jeff freaking hardy, he WON that MAIN EVENT feud. Taker took the title off him but the win over Jeff hardy gave punk big credibility. 



> But once again, him and his groups were made to look like chumps. Bad exposure is bad. It hurts his image to see time and time again that he fails in his feuds and it makes it harder for the casuals to get behind him.


There is no such thing as bad exposure when working against Top stars, unless its a repulsive storyline/angles like Katie Vick. Being the leader of the stable, dominating RAW/SD show as top heel, being a threat to the top babyfaces? This is bad exposure to you? If anything he was presented as an equal to those top faces more than he deserved. 

Again, you just fail to see the primary push given to him, working against top guys, dominating them as heels etc.. which most superstars on the roster would kill for. 



> He's the WWE Champion. It devalues the title when it's never the main event despite the fact that it's supposedly the most prestigious prize in the business, and hurts Punk's reign (and image once again) that he's constantly playing second-fiddle to Cena, even when he has the title. So even if it's not the key drawing point, if it's promoted on Raw as the main event as it should be, at the very least the title credibility and reign is preserved to some extent. Casuals don't really know who draws and who doesn't... at least as far as I know. It's not something they think about.


Casuals know who THEY bought the ppv for, who they pay money for and trust me its not Punk. Cena main evented because they paid to see him. No point in having the guy main event when he's mid card act in reality. He's played second to Cena because thats what he really was. 

If the credibility of the WWE title was an issue, then they should have taken the title off him. Not falsely book the mid card act as a main event attraction. 



> And the other thing is when I say for Punk to main event, I don't necessarily mean him just being the last match on the PPV, but to week in and week out be the focus of the show.


He has been the focus of the show for a very long time now, you dont even realize it. Results have been the same in terms of ratings, with Cena and the mega-stars still holding the fort because otherwise we wouldnt be having this discussions at all. 




> But Punk has never been given a shot to prove he could consistently hold the numbers together for the show and to prove that number was just an odd occurrence.


He was, before and after TLC PPV for two months when the main event and overrun bombed huge, like never seen before and WWE obviously panicked and took him off the main events. Besides, Summer of punk 2011 was punk's peak, how did that work out for ratings? 

Like Cena said in his promo, there is no conspiracy here. Punk lacks "it", he's unable to connect with masses and WWE was left with no other choice. 



> Instead he's a very little or non-factor as a mid-card WWE Champion while Cena is treated as the top prize in the company.


Thats because Cena is the top prize currently who is full time. As noted above, Summer of punk failed to increase anything other than one ppv by 20,000 extra buys. 



> He can never prove his worth *if not given the chance*, and only giving him a one-off shot every few months isn't giving him a chance.


He was, time after time through years to prove himself. If you stopped looking for these excuses, maybe you'd notice it.




> First, it's not needing every single push to be successful, it's needing a few of them. He's looked weak time and time again after a short time of looking like a main eventer. No top draw got over by having their pushes constantly derailed. Hogan, Austin, Rock, Taker, Lesnar, HHH, Cena, etc. All almost always were booked to succeed in their feuds and never made to look like chumps as WWE Champion, even as heels. Imagine if Austin had tapped out to Bret at WM13 and then stopped being Austin 3:16. No way Austin/McMahon would've been as successful. Imagine Rock never leading the Nation. Imagine Evolution getting destroyed by Benoit in 04 and Orton and Batista becoming nothing. Imagine HHH losing the title to Foley at the RR and the WM ME that year being Rock vs. Foley. How about during HHH's 9 month reign, not only does he get overshadowed by Rock/Austin and Rock/Goldberg, but then Goldberg's feuds overshadow HHH's and HHH looks like a mid-card act in comparison, along with the title? Or how about JBL defeating Cena at WM21 and Cena getting traded to Raw before he could win the title? Or how about winning the title, but then losing in the I QUIT match to JBL? Lastly, what about Taker beating Lesnar in the cell at NM?



And you contradicted there yourself. Austin through 1996/1997 didnt receive the mega push that he did in 1998. Most of 96 through mid 97 was weak stuff. The Rock received some of the worst bullshit booking when he was put against Billy gunn over the tag title despite the insane overness, Benoit/Goldberg/Micheals/Austin have all destroyed Evolution at one point and multiple times in that period. Austin always made them look like chumps even though he was only a authority figure and not a wrestler. Triple H until dec 1999, is quite possibly the weakest booked top heel in history, not only was he constantly overshadowed by corporate ministry but also lost his no.1 contender's spot to a woman in Chyna. Always got his ass whipped at the highest level by Austin that entire year even as the WWF Champion. In 2003, HHH similar to punk was overshadowed by Rock/Austin, Brock/Angle and even Vince/Hogan. Cena, again similar to punk received a great main event push only on the B-show, as did Lesnar for the most part. AND EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM DREW despite the set backs. 




> You don't need the "IT" factor to be a big draw. *You need the "IT" factor to be the biggest superstar of all time.* Punk would've never been that, but he could've been big draw by now. But they fuck up his heel run, and then they fuck up his face run. Now he's back to heel trying that again, but it's only a matter of time before that's fucked up. I don't believe HHH had the "IT" factor, but he had proper booking, character development, and excellently written storylines. I'd say if he did have the "IT" factor, he could've very well been the biggest star of all time. But that's just me.


Absolutely laughable post. You have no clue what "it" means. Its the ability to connect with fans where they are willing to pay money to see you perform, buy PPVs on your name alone, tune in when you're on their TV screen. Ability to draw, ability to grab someone’s attention, to possess the charisma, charm, skills and a look to back the character is "IT Factor". By your logic, the only one's who had it are Rock, Hogan, Austin, ultimate warrior and Goldberg. According to you, The Undertaker never had "It" because he was never the biggest, never was a top guy in the company, almost never lost any feud, has the most match wins in WWE history even more than John Cena, plus always a guaranteed wrestlemania win to protect him. Even in the 90s and even as a heel he hardly lost to anyone other than Austin and Bret. But it would be completely idiotic on my part to claim The Undertaker didnt have "It" when he's become one of the biggest legends. With that ridiculous statement "Biggest superstar of all time", what you're trying to say is Randy Savage never had "it" or Ric Flair never had "It" or Sting, Nash etc. To say HHH didnt have "IT" is stupid especially considering his 2002 peak, when he was bumping ratings and buyrates huge along with Hogan, as a babyface upon his return. 




> Are these excuses? I prefer to think of them as reasons. Are they valid reasons? Absolutely. Fact is none of his runs were booked properly all the way through. Because of that all those championships. accolades and guys he worked with in the past were all for naught. It's exactly why a poorly executed push can destroy someone. Punk's been dealing with it for the majority of his career. He's dealt with it for the past year and his title run, his face run, and his drawing power have suffered because of it.


No, they are reasons why many of his pushes didnt end well with the right pay-off but they become excuses when used as such, to cover up for his lack of drawing ability. 

I stand by what I said few pages back, Anyone else with the same 6 yr push would have been a solid reliable draw for WWE by now.


----------



## Tnmore

Got this off PVo board wrestling section, Dave Meltzer on Punk's peak



> *Punk, for the 7/17 match with Cena, did something Tanahashi never did, which was make a big difference at the box office. While PPV numbers in a sense for Money in the bank were disappointing, they were still a big increase over the prior year, and punk clearly was the difference maker. However, given Tanahashi was the winner by traditional long-time world champion on top having great matches standards. What almost surely cost punk the first is that past Money in the bank one show, there was no evidence he was a difference maker. House shows stayed the same, PPV for the most part was down from the prior year when he was on top, including Summerslam and other shows he headlined.
> 
> What seemingly was special that they had with him in July. But there is no evidence past anecdotal that it was past the internet audience. There absolutely was a few weeks where punk fueled an increase in our business, but that's only a niche and it was only a few weeks. On a big-time basis, such as WWE web site or business, past the PPV and August merch sales, there's really no evidence of anything.*


With "Our business", Meltzer is referring to F4W/Observer Website traffic.


----------



## Mister Hands

I don't think it can really be considered "looking for excuses" to say WWE botched Punk's rise. But not just Punk's: they've done it with _everyone_ since Cena and Batista. That's why so many hopes were pinned on Punk in the first place - it seemed to be happening not just despite the WWE machine's ineptitude, but as a direct response to it.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

WWE were willing to give refunds last weekend's house shows because Cena wasn't on the card anymore.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Not going to respond to everything (in depth):



Tnmore said:


> There is no such thing as bad exposure when working against Top stars, unless its a repulsive storyline/angles like Katie Vick. Being the leader of the stable, dominating RAW/SD show as top heel, being a threat to the top babyfaces? This is bad exposure to you? If anything he was presented as an equal to those top faces more than he deserved.
> 
> Again, you just fail to see the primary push given to him, working against top guys, dominating them as heels etc.. which most superstars on the roster would kill for.


But he didn't get to dominate shows as the top heel... which is exactly my point and makes this little blurb ridiculous.




> Casuals know who THEY bought the ppv for, who they pay money for and trust me its not Punk. Cena main evented because they paid to see him. No point in having the guy main event when he's mid card act in reality. He's played second to Cena because thats what he really was.
> 
> If the credibility of the WWE title was an issue, then they should have taken the title off him. Not falsely book the mid card act as a main event attraction.


No. Casuals know what they, the individual paid for, but they don't know what everyone else does and unless they're the odd casual who goes online and looks at ratings and stuff but doesn't go completely into smarkville, then they really don't have a clue who draws besides who they like. Not to mention a lot of the casuals are kids nowadays. 




> He has been the focus of the show for a very long time now, you dont even realize it. Results have been the same in terms of ratings, with Cena and the mega-stars still holding the fort because otherwise we wouldnt be having this discussions at all.


:lmao no, he hasn't. 




> He was, before and after TLC PPV for two months when the main event and overrun bombed huge, like never seen before and WWE obviously panicked and took him off the main events. Besides, Summer of punk 2011 was punk's peak, how did that work out for ratings?


Punk was the main event for like a week or two leading into TLC. I need to see breakdowns though before I can really comment on how well he did.

He always did well in that time period (Summer) in the breakdowns aside from an odd occurrence. The problem is he was ALWAYS with a top guy and never given a chance to prove himself at that time on a consistent basis. 



> And you contradicted there yourself. Austin through 1996/1997 didnt receive the mega push that he did in 1998. Most of 96 through mid 97 was weak stuff. The Rock received some of the worst bullshit booking when he was put against Billy gunn over the tag title despite the insane overness, Benoit/Goldberg/Micheals/Austin have all destroyed Evolution at one point and multiple times in that period. Austin always made them look like chumps even though he was only a authority figure and not a wrestler. Triple H until dec 1999, is quite possibly the weakest booked top heel in history, not only was he constantly overshadowed by corporate ministry but also lost his no.1 contender's spot to a woman in Chyna. Always got his ass whipped at the highest level by Austin that entire year even as the WWF Champion. In 2003, HHH similar to punk was overshadowed by Rock/Austin, Brock/Angle and even Vince/Hogan. Cena, again similar to punk received a great main event push only on the B-show, as did Lesnar for the most part. AND EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM DREW despite the set backs.


With Austin, perhaps that's true, but he had the "It" factor where people would pay to see him, and he was still booked strong and correctly throughout. Same with Rock, though I already said Rock could be the exception. Evolution was never destroyed by those men, but they got occasionally one-uped on. They were still booked as the dominant group in WWE. I agree HHH in 1999 wasn't booked greatly, but as I said it's the feud with Foley is what made him and without that, he wouldn't be where he is today. 2003, he was overshadowed by Rock/Austin, and Vince/Hogan but those were for only 2-3 months in the year. Brock/Angle was on a different show. So really, not a good example. He was booked as the top guy as a heel, though Lesnar was above him. Don't compare Punk to Cena and Lesnar. It's embarrassing. Cena received a push against Lesnar and lost, but looked strong. He then got pushed similarly to how he is now in 2004 in the US Title division, became popular with his gimmick, and after he won the title was booked in the main event of Raw constantly once drafted and always won every match. You want to compare Sheamus to Cena? Go ahead, but Punk? No. I'm not even going to get into how different Punk and Lesnar are. :lmao 





> Absolutely laughable post. You have no clue what "it" means. Its the ability to connect with fans where they are willing to pay money to see you perform, buy PPVs on your name alone, tune in when you're on their TV screen. Ability to draw, ability to grab someone’s attention, to possess the charisma, charm, skills and a look to back the character is "IT Factor". By your logic, the only one's who had it are Rock, Hogan, Austin, ultimate warrior and Goldberg. According to you, The Undertaker never had "It" because he was never the biggest, never was a top guy in the company, almost never lost any feud, has the most match wins in WWE history even more than John Cena, plus always a guaranteed wrestlemania win to protect him. Even in the 90s and even as a heel he hardly lost to anyone other than Austin and Bret. But it would be completely idiotic on my part to claim The Undertaker didnt have "It" when he's become one of the biggest legends. With that ridiculous statement "Biggest superstar of all time", what you're trying to say is Randy Savage never had "it" or Ric Flair never had "It" or Sting, Nash etc. To say HHH didnt have "IT" is stupid especially considering his 2002 peak, when he was bumping ratings and buyrates huge along with Hogan, as a babyface upon his return.


The "It" factor is subjective in meaning. I interpret as an aura that attracts you to watch them no matter what. It's actually for the most part of what you say, but the thing is, when you say sell the PPV on their name alone, by what standards? Because Cena has been selling PPV's on his name alone for the last few years for the most part and the PPV's are all lower than that they used to be. I mean Punk can sell a PPV on his name alone, it just won't do as well. If you mean selling to where you make a profit on a PPV, I see no reason Punk can't do that or any indication he can't. There's a certain standard towards selling the PPV on their own that the "It" factor guys have. And there only are a handful. I'm not too familiar with how Savage was perceived back in his hayday, but even if he did have the "It" factor, Hogan was simply bigger and Savage would never remain over him. Punk is actually kind of in the same position with Cena, though Punk is nowhere near Savage and Cena is nowhere near Hogan. Same thing with Flair, though Flair was the main man of a successful company, was he not? Can't say I remember too much with Sting, but I suppose he had to have it for never being in WWE and being a top guy in WCW at it's peak. All these guys could've been the biggest superstar of all time depending on how they were pushed. At the end of the day, Hogan's the one who's known as the biggest of all time. Nash? Absolutely not. Who's the guy people say Punk's reign is the worst since in the ratings? Precisely. And for Taker, he's an odd case. His gimmick works in two ways, because while he's pushed well and it's a huge attraction and draw on a show, it's not something you can build the company off of. He has a deformed (for lack of better term) "It" factor because he's not at his strongest as the center of the show, but as a side-attraction/co-lead star? He's possibly the biggest ever (and Rock/Austin don't count in the mold).

Right now for me, the only men that have the "It" factor for sure are Hogan, Rock, Austin, and Flair. Taker to some extent as well, and guys like Savage and Sting possibly have it as well, but I can't really comment. 




> No, they are reasons why many of his pushes didnt end well with the right pay-off but they become excuses when used as such, to cover up for his lack of drawing ability.
> 
> I stand by what I said few pages back, Anyone else with the same 6 yr push would have been a solid reliable draw for WWE by now.


And because those pushes fell flat, so did his starpower. Punk doesn't have the "It" factor and I never said he did. But that's why he needs not only great feuds, but a successful ending to those feuds in his favor to be a big star. He's not someone who has no potential, but he's not naturally gifted in charisma to be able to bounce back from nothingness.



Tnmore said:


> Got this off PVo board wrestling section, Dave Meltzer on Punk's peak
> 
> 
> 
> With "Our business", Meltzer is referring to F4W/Observer Website traffic.


And amazingly enough, he impacted business when he was being booked correctly those first few weeks going into MITB. But then everything goes downhill besides merchandise sales, which if I'm not mistaken falls as well eventually. He comes back too soon, loses his title to Del Rio, goes into a feud with Nash which leads to nothing. Then has a feud with HHH that leads to him losing and apologizing for everything and then becoming nothing more than an alternative to Cena who's very identical to Cena. Once again, bad booking costs Punk.


----------



## Starbuck

kokepepsi said:


> lol at the idea that HHH not showing up at a house show would result in people asking for refunds.
> PFFFFFFfff
> 
> What were the buys for the Kevin Nash vs HHH Sledge Hammer on a string ladder match?





> WWE Smackdown & ECW House Show Results - 8/2/08
> Location: Johnson City, Tennessee
> 
> Alicia Fleming sent this report in:
> 
> Show started off by the Ring Announcer *saying that Triple H would not be here that if you wanted a refund you could get it* and that we could vote via text message for what match we wanted between the Main event Jeff Hardy Vs Umaga.





> Before the first match even started, it was announced that due to injuries he received at the Royal Rumble, *Jeff Hardy would not be present. Lots of boos. They said that anyone who wanted a refund had until the end of the first match*. I didn’t see anyone leave. Some of that might be they announced that the Main Event would be a triple threat match for the WWE Title between Edge, Vladimir Kozlov, and Triple H.





> Due to John Cena being pulled from last night's WWE House Show in White Plains due to injury fans were refunded if they asked by the second match.





> The show started a little disappointing with the announcement of *no Undertaker. We were given until the end of the first match to get a refund if we wanted*. Come on though lets face it, we are in Cheyenne WY and this is the biggest thing to happen here in a long time. No one left.


Don't see why it's so hard to believe tbh. People paying money to see the top guys/draws are offered refunds if they don't appear. Makes sense.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Before the first match even started, it was announced that due to injuries he received at the Royal Rumble, Jeff Hardy would not be present. Lots of boos. They said that anyone who wanted a refund had until the end of the first match. I didn’t see anyone leave. Some of that might be they announced that the Main Event would be a triple threat match for the WWE Title between Edge, *Vladimir Kozlov*, and Triple H.
Click to expand...

KOZLOV THE DRAW!


----------



## The-Rock-Says

> After John Cena Vs Kane match, people started to leave. From live reports people say a lot of people left after Cena's match and the main event was still to come. Which was CM Punk Vs Ziggler.


*Whistles on past*


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Fucking Ziggler's such an anti-draw people left early. No wonder he's not world champ yet.unk3


----------



## The-Rock-Says

> From the live reports we got from people, they say people didn't leave because of Ziggler, but because of CM Punk.


*Whistles on past again*


----------



## The GOAT One

:lmao


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

The-Rock-Says said:


> *Whistles on past again*


...

fucking moronic fans.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

> From live reports, some guy called Sandrone was first to walk out and was telling others to leave as well. His words were to this affact "lets leave people, King Cena has had his match and just some midget is up next"


Well, that's a turn up for the books. This Sandrone guys really hates Phil.


----------



## Cack_Thu

That little putz Danny boy is another terror to the ratings.Seems whenever Bryan's segment is shown people probably go make a sandwich for little jimmy,attend nature's call or check their email BUT only after ensuring they have changed to a different channel 

Now imagine Bryan being the *Face* of the company as per the wet dreams of IWC hipsters and guys like THE Rock,taker,bork laser,trips jobbing to him,Punk,Amberhoes, on a regular basis at PPV ('cause they are only part time wrassslers). BAAAAAA
Dean Ambrose vs Bryan - Iron man match to decide the No 1 contender for Punk's WWE belt.On the other side Cessaro and Willam regal slug it out for Doll Jiggler's WHC..Of course guys like Guan Sena,Shemus,Ryback,KANE,Big show are routinely used in comedic segments(similar to santino's) for their inability to compete in 40+ min matches and usually passing-out in the middle of the ring when up against the said indy stars.The minimum alloted time for each match is no less than 40 min and the ME is a 2 Hr long affair.Hang on...enough of this indy take over shit. 8*D

Thank God Vince still has some brain cells left in him.That is why ROH is ROH and WWE is in WWE's place as the numero uno company.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

The-Rock-Says said:


> Well, that's a turn up for the books. This Sandrone guys really hates Phil.


...

...

IT'S TRUE! It's true! :kurt


----------



## JY57

tomorrow they will go up against Cowboys vs Bears (I am watching that since am Cowboys fan) and whole bunch of returning sitcoms & drama shows, along with fans who can't watch 3 straight hours of the show. Not sure how much the ratings will improve, if at all.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

JY57 said:


> tomorrow they will go up against Cowboys vs Bears (I am watching that since am Cowboys fan) and whole bunch of returning sitcoms & drama shows, along with fans who can't watch 3 straight hours of the show. Not sure how much the ratings will improve, if at all.


i am afraid they might sink even further


----------



## -Skullbone-

Yikes, another unfunny post from a rejoiner a couple above me. Haven't these guys got jobs or something?

It appears some people persist in skewing these postings to suit their mode of fandom. That takes dedication, I'll give them that! However, it's probably a matter of misinterpretation somewhere along the line where they lost track of the significance of certain things. Granted, I only know a little bit about the entire spectrum of this business so I'll go with areas I know at little to discuss conceptually.

*Why not just actually look at what the indications are without getting carried away by our love/dislike (come on, we're not kids anymore and can make a distinction between what's there and what's not) for a wrestler? No biased viewpoints, no sides taken. Just look what's presented in front of our eyes? Then again, not every piece of data is made publicised in the first place which further casts doubt over the validity of our weekly scrutinising sessions. *But I digress from my original point, so let's get on with it.

To Punk fans. Numbers suggest that Punk drew a healthy amount casual intrigue in a show that was low in viewership. He's also been the beneficiary of solids gains during other times during his reign and was a hefty merch mover during his white-hot streak in 2011 (actually had Cena toppled off the #1 spot for the first time since 2006-ish I think). However, he's been involved in some very nasty lull-spots such as the countless matchups with Miz that saw viewers get out of dodge, as well as that worrying trend where matches weren't received with nearly as much interest as his promos were.

Punk drew no matter which way people try to spin it as in he gained viewer numbers. As I pointed out before, though, there's a difference between someone who _draws_ and someone who _drew_. *The guy is not a proven stand-alone figure that is capable of carrying the flag solo in barely anything outside of being a big hometown hero. Being at least reliable in most areas for a sustainable amount of time makes you a bankable and investment-worthy draw. Punk isn't at that level.*

To his haters. You can attempt to look at this anyway you like like 'he hasn't got a good look, not a company man, can't carry stuff by himself', etc. That's fine as they're all things that can't necessarily be _disproven_. *To draw these fairly obscure comparisons between guys of yesteryear, the push-timeframe ratio in comparison to Punk's and all that, however, could lead us to endless round-about arguments that also can't be proven. Ironically, a lot of anti-Punk point made stray away from the one thing you guys should be relying on: numbers. They indicate, but aren't the summary of someone's career until that guy/gal finished up one way or another. *



> Triple H until dec 1999, is quite possibly the weakest booked top heel in history, not only was he constantly overshadowed by corporate ministry but also lost his no.1 contender's spot to a woman in Chyna. Always got his ass whipped at the highest level by Austin that entire year even as the WWF Champion. In 2003, HHH similar to punk was overshadowed by Rock/Austin, Brock/Angle and even Vince/Hogan. Cena, again similar to punk received a great main event push only on the B-show, as did Lesnar for the most part. AND EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM DREW despite the set backs





> I stand by what I said few pages back, Anyone else with the same 6 yr push would have been a solid reliable draw for WWE by now.


Like these ones. How can one accurately compare one era to another when the company works its model around different cycles through the generations? How can one compare the stars of one era to another when they were the beneficiaries of many things that these guys weren't and, to a lesser extent, vice versa? How could you be confident in this 'guideline to drawing' that performers must adhere to when they are subjected to the different timeframes, audiences, business models, as well their own strengths and weaknesses? This is particularly interesting to note when you acknowledge the factor/importance of 'good vs. poor' booking which most people view as spasmodic and lackadaisical nowadays in comparison to yesteryear.

And if you really think he was getting _pushed_ for 6 years then you're off the mark. Punk has _not_ been in the spotlight for 6 years. As for his biggest push to date, keep in mind he has been on the end of it for a little over a year where has been through a heel turn, a face turn, back to a heel turn almost to the exact day within that timeframe. Today's audiences in particular appear to take time to acclimatise to change. 

The business can be quite reactionary, and has to respond to the world changing around it (no matter how their renowned micromanagement style goes about getting a unity amongst workers in their performance style). Times and circumstances change, which means performers are never likely to be, nor received generally, as their proceeders. It's common consensus by a lot of people that this is a particularly awkward era for wrestling promotions as well, in spite of the turbulent nature and esoteric interest group that's always been apart of this line of work. 

People really should be patient with the business side of things, although I don't know why fans have to be considering it shouldn't need to satisfy their nosey-parker ways in the first place. The whole notion is a lot like an overgrown baby at first - it stinks, it cries, is a really fucking heavy thing to drag along and needs a whole lotta' nurturing. If it's raised right, though, it grows up big and strong and is the result of a lot of quality time invested into it.


----------



## Pro Royka

Tnmore said:


> He's not going to look strong against Batista who was the second biggest babyface behind Cena, especially not with his looks. No other superstar is going to look strong against batista unless its someone bigger than him, Cena or legends like HHH/Taker. Working with batista is big rub, you dont need to win or booked dominantly to get that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once again, He retired Jeff freaking hardy, he WON that MAIN EVENT feud. Taker took the title off him but the win over Jeff hardy gave punk big credibility.
> 
> 
> 
> There is no such thing as bad exposure when working against Top stars, unless its a repulsive storyline/angles like Katie Vick. Being the leader of the stable, dominating RAW/SD show as top heel, being a threat to the top babyfaces? This is bad exposure to you? If anything he was presented as an equal to those top faces more than he deserved.
> 
> Again, you just fail to see the primary push given to him, working against top guys, dominating them as heels etc.. which most superstars on the roster would kill for.
> 
> 
> 
> Casuals know who THEY bought the ppv for, who they pay money for and trust me its not Punk. Cena main evented because they paid to see him. No point in having the guy main event when he's mid card act in reality. He's played second to Cena because thats what he really was.
> 
> If the credibility of the WWE title was an issue, then they should have taken the title off him. Not falsely book the mid card act as a main event attraction.
> 
> 
> 
> He has been the focus of the show for a very long time now, you dont even realize it. Results have been the same in terms of ratings, with Cena and the mega-stars still holding the fort because otherwise we wouldnt be having this discussions at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He was, before and after TLC PPV for two months when the main event and overrun bombed huge, like never seen before and WWE obviously panicked and took him off the main events. Besides, Summer of punk 2011 was punk's peak, how did that work out for ratings?
> 
> Like Cena said in his promo, there is no conspiracy here. Punk lacks "it", he's unable to connect with masses and WWE was left with no other choice.
> 
> 
> 
> Thats because Cena is the top prize currently who is full time. As noted above, Summer of punk failed to increase anything other than one ppv by 20,000 extra buys.
> 
> 
> 
> He was, time after time through years to prove himself. If you stopped looking for these excuses, maybe you'd notice it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you contradicted there yourself. Austin through 1996/1997 didnt receive the mega push that he did in 1998. Most of 96 through mid 97 was weak stuff. The Rock received some of the worst bullshit booking when he was put against Billy gunn over the tag title despite the insane overness, Benoit/Goldberg/Micheals/Austin have all destroyed Evolution at one point and multiple times in that period. Austin always made them look like chumps even though he was only a authority figure and not a wrestler. Triple H until dec 1999, is quite possibly the weakest booked top heel in history, not only was he constantly overshadowed by corporate ministry but also lost his no.1 contender's spot to a woman in Chyna. Always got his ass whipped at the highest level by Austin that entire year even as the WWF Champion. In 2003, HHH similar to punk was overshadowed by Rock/Austin, Brock/Angle and even Vince/Hogan. Cena, again similar to punk received a great main event push only on the B-show, as did Lesnar for the most part. AND EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM DREW despite the set backs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolutely laughable post. You have no clue what "it" means. Its the ability to connect with fans where they are willing to pay money to see you perform, buy PPVs on your name alone, tune in when you're on their TV screen. Ability to draw, ability to grab someone’s attention, to possess the charisma, charm, skills and a look to back the character is "IT Factor". By your logic, the only one's who had it are Rock, Hogan, Austin, ultimate warrior and Goldberg. According to you, The Undertaker never had "It" because he was never the biggest, never was a top guy in the company, almost never lost any feud, has the most match wins in WWE history even more than John Cena, plus always a guaranteed wrestlemania win to protect him. Even in the 90s and even as a heel he hardly lost to anyone other than Austin and Bret. But it would be completely idiotic on my part to claim The Undertaker didnt have "It" when he's become one of the biggest legends. With that ridiculous statement "Biggest superstar of all time", what you're trying to say is Randy Savage never had "it" or Ric Flair never had "It" or Sting, Nash etc. To say HHH didnt have "IT" is stupid especially considering his 2002 peak, when he was bumping ratings and buyrates huge along with Hogan, as a babyface upon his return.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, they are reasons why many of his pushes didnt end well with the right pay-off but they become excuses when used as such, to cover up for his lack of drawing ability.
> 
> I stand by what I said few pages back, Anyone else with the same 6 yr push would have been a solid reliable draw for WWE by now.


There is a big different between exposure and pleasure. Punk defeated Jeff Hardy but that feud was been carried by Punk, and it was the feud of the year. The next thing was him going against Taker ratings went up when they found out how far Punk is going, but he lost countless times to him, it made him look weak as hell. That doesn't help his cerdibility at all, it just kills it. Give me one big star that was booked like Punk and was a big draw, I dare you to find one.

:lol, Punk cant connect with the masses. Sounds weird as Cena can't do that either. Punk is the guy who gets his name chanted every week, that doesn't happen to Cena. As I said before Punk gained over a million viewers on his way to MiTB, and also all the way to Night of Champion with Trips and Nash and himself alone. So he never failed actually, they just dont want to go deep with him.

As for merchandise, Punk has been beating Cena in many categories for more than 8 months, and now he's still going toe to toe with him, check out WWEshop, for prove. 

Evolution is way too different to compare, :lmao. Do you realise that Trips had defeated the names you mentioned :lol. So it doesn't matter, Punk never defeated Cena, Orton, Trips, HBK, Batista, Taker, fair and squere and he didn't face some of them either. Who the hell is Jeff Hardy to make Punk a big draw, when he never was in the first place.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

He beat Cena for ONE month in merch sales. ONE MONTH.

His marks are still pretending he's top merch guy.


----------



## PHX

-Skullbone- said:


> Yikes, another unfunny post from a rejoiner a couple above me. Haven't these guys got jobs or something?
> 
> It appears some people persist in skewing these postings to suit their mode of fandom. That takes dedication, I'll give them that! However, it's probably a matter of misinterpretation somewhere along the line where they lost track of the significance of certain things. Granted, I only know a little bit about the entire spectrum of this business so I'll go with areas I know at little to discuss conceptually.
> 
> *Why not just actually look at what the indications are without getting carried away by our love/dislike (come on, we're not kids anymore and can make a distinction between what's there and what's not) for a wrestler? No biased viewpoints, no sides taken. Just look what's presented in front of our eyes? Then again, not every piece of data is made publicised in the first place which further casts doubt over the validity of our weekly scrutinising sessions. *But I digress from my original point, so let's get on with it.
> 
> To Punk fans. Numbers suggest that Punk drew a healthy amount casual intrigue in a show that was low in viewership. He's also been the beneficiary of solids gains during other times during his reign and was a hefty merch mover during his white-hot streak in 2011 (actually had Cena toppled off the #1 spot for the first time since 2006-ish I think). However, he's been involved in some very nasty lull-spots such as the countless matchups with Miz that saw viewers get out of dodge, as well as that worrying trend where matches weren't received with nearly as much interest as his promos were.
> 
> Punk drew no matter which way people try to spin it as in he gained viewer numbers. As I pointed out before, though, there's a difference between someone who _draws_ and someone who _drew_. *The guy is not a proven stand-alone figure that is capable of carrying the flag solo in barely anything outside of being a big hometown hero. Being at least reliable in most areas for a sustainable amount of time makes you a bankable and investment-worthy draw. Punk isn't at that level.*
> 
> To his haters. You can attempt to look at this anyway you like like 'he hasn't got a good look, not a company man, can't carry stuff by himself', etc. That's fine as they're all things that can't necessarily be _disproven_. *To draw these fairly obscure comparisons between guys of yesteryear, the push-timeframe ratio in comparison to Punk's and all that, however, could lead us to endless round-about arguments that also can't be proven. Ironically, a lot of anti-Punk point made stray away from the one thing you guys should be relying on: numbers. They indicate, but aren't the summary of someone's career until that guy/gal finished up one way or another. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like these ones. How can one accurately compare one era to another when the company works its model around different cycles through the generations? How can one compare the stars of one era to another when they were the beneficiaries of many things that these guys weren't and, to a lesser extent, vice versa? How could you be confident in this 'guideline to drawing' that performers must adhere to when they are subjected to the different timeframes, audiences, business models, as well their own strengths and weaknesses? This is particularly interesting to note when you acknowledge the factor/importance of 'good vs. poor' booking which most people view as spasmodic and lackadaisical nowadays in comparison to yesteryear.
> 
> And if you really think he was getting _pushed_ for 6 years then you're off the mark. Punk has _not_ been in the spotlight for 6 years. As for his biggest push to date, keep in mind he has been on the end of it for a little over a year where has been through a heel turn, a face turn, back to a heel turn almost to the exact day within that timeframe. Today's audiences in particular appear to take time to acclimatise to change.
> 
> The business can be quite reactionary, and has to respond to the world changing around it (no matter how their renowned micromanagement style goes about getting a unity amongst workers in their performance style). Times and circumstances change, which means performers are never likely to be, nor received generally, as their proceeders. It's common consensus by a lot of people that this is a particularly awkward era for wrestling promotions as well, in spite of the turbulent nature and esoteric interest group that's always been apart of this line of work.
> 
> People really should be patient with the business side of things, although I don't know why fans have to be considering it shouldn't need to satisfy their nosey-parker ways in the first place. The whole notion is a lot like an overgrown baby at first - it stinks, it cries, is a really fucking heavy thing to drag along and needs a whole lotta' nurturing. If it's raised right, though, it grows up big and strong and is the result of a lot of quality time invested into it.


This was a very refreshing post to read in this thread that is usually filled with subjective bullshit.


----------



## PHX

The-Rock-Says said:


> He beat Cena for ONE month in merch sales. ONE MONTH.
> 
> His marks are still pretending he's top merch guy.


Was actually more than one month and went head to head with him month after month for a good bit (can look a find reports of them being neck and neck in merch sales in February). Don't know if that is still the case as of now or even lately since it's been a bit since Punk has had new merch out but yeah I'm certain his run of topping and being head to head with him is much longer than you're giving credit for.


----------



## Srdjan99

It would seem Ryback is the backup plan if Cena isn't cleared to compete at HITC...which honestly is intriguing. Punk/Ryback could do something memorable in a HITC given their workstyles. If Punk wins, he ends the streak and adds credibility...and Ryback gets a potential HUGE match to push him into the upper scene. I don't see a bad side to this, amazingly, if that's where this is headed.


----------



## Pro Royka

The-Rock-Says said:


> He beat Cena for ONE month in merch sales. ONE MONTH.
> 
> His marks are still pretending he's top merch guy.


You know guessing is really good, it can fool people. One month, I'm sure it's more than that, as I was checking his merch after that for more than 4 months and he was still the top merchandise seller, because I bought one and he was still in the top. I'm not assuming things, I said check WWEshop, and the only thing you could say is "ONE month".

Edited: As PHX said they were reports about it.

-----------

No, Jeff Hardy wasn't a big draw, Rock316ae. 

In SD when he was the WWE champion he drew:

Many 1.8, and two or more 1.7, and 1.9 and ever since he left, ratings got to 2.0+ constantly and Punk was the champ for 3 weeks within them. Also I remember Jeff Hardy/Trips lost viewers in the overrun on Raw. He was just massively over with the crowed and got high merchandise sales.

In TNA tour:
2010 - Attendance for this past week’s TNA Wrestling live event tour was dubbed “horrible,” especially considering that World Heavyweight Champion Jeff Hardy headlined the cards. Thursday in Sedalia, MO drew 600, Friday in Springfield, MO drew 300, and Saturday in West Plains, MO drew 500.

Just for a further prove. 

So, as always I proved that you're wrong troll.

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

To Chock2death: 

Punk gets his name chanted over Cena every time. So I don't see your point, he gets Cena sucks chants, that's not support chants. And about the merchandise I already proved it. 

Again you two trolls, hide behind your red reps, I know you can't handle the truth.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

You do know WWE shop lists aren't fact, right? You can go on there one day and check top sellers and then the next day the top sellers list is totally different from the day before. 

He beat him for one month in all demos. After that, Cena went back to being king.


----------



## Pro Royka

The-Rock-Says said:


> You do know WWE shop lists aren't fact, right? You can go on there one day and check top sellers and then the next day the top sellers list is totally different from the day before.
> 
> He beat him for one month in all demos. After that, Cena went back to being king.


That's the thing you don't have a prove. It's more than that, Punk said it in his interviews after the one month, it was for months after. 
No, WWEshop never said Ziggler was the top merchandise seller to not believe it. Punk was #1 and Cena was #2 that's what I saw for months. Cena only beats him in kids category.


----------



## Choke2Death

You haven't proved a damn thing. I searched on google and all I got was a report from October that states Punk has overtaken Cena as the top seller and another from February that says they are "neck and neck". Nothing more.

And the more you cry about red reps, the more I'll hand out. I'm not "hiding" behind anything, I'm very open about red repping you.


----------



## Pro Royka

Choke2Death said:


> You haven't proved a damn thing. I searched on google and all I got was a report from October that states Punk has overtaken Cena as the top seller and another from February that says they are "neck and neck". Nothing more.
> 
> And the more you cry about red reps, the more I'll hand out. I'm not "hiding" behind anything, I'm very open about red repping you.


:lol I'm not crying about it dude as much as you're, I'm just laughing at you guys as you're the only ones giving me more than 30+ red reps. Are you both the same guys or something fpalm. Or both of you are just obsessed. You're just mad about the truth as you can't respond to me and handle it, so you have no choice but to give me red reps and hide, you're weak that's why. It's old news you can't easily find it on Google. As I said watch his old interviews, you gonna find it somewhere.


----------



## Choke2Death

Pro Royka said:


> :lol I'm not crying about it dude as much as you're, I'm just laughing at you guys as you're the only ones giving me more than 30+ red reps. Are you both the same guys or something fpalm. Or both of you are just obsessed. You're just mad about the truth as you can't respond to me and handle it, so you have no choice but to give me red reps and hide, you're weak that's why. It's old news you can't easily find it on Google. As I said watch his old interviews, you gonna find it somewhere.


"Weak"? Hah, give me a break. You act like it's a fight or something. Only time I red rep you is when you moan about it or make stupid posts which happens A LOT, hence the "30+" reds. And the fact that you name-check me on your sig shows just how much you are bothered by it so therefore, I'll continue doing it just for that, but I'm fair enough so the posts I rep actually deserve it! And you threatened Green Light with "I'm gonna unleash red rep on you every hour". How sad is that? Not to mention since you are in the red, you can't rep anybody! :lol

And "the truth"? Only thing you come out with is mad bullshit, you still haven't proved anything about merchandise sales other than saying "its on google go watch his interview". Like I said, my google search showed me two reports, one from October that says Punk has become #1 merch seller and another from February that says Cena and Punk are "neck and neck".

Until you're willing to prove what you're saying with actual links other than "some old interview", this is the last time I'm replying to you and from now on, only replies I'll hand out are through red reps!


----------



## funnyfaces1

The more that I think about it, the more I realize just how eerily similar Orton and Punk are. Why there is so much fighting between the two fanbases is something I will never understand.


----------



## Pro Royka

Choke2Death said:


> "Weak"? Hah, give me a break. You act like it's a fight or something. Only time I red rep you is when you moan about it or make stupid posts which happens A LOT, hence the "30+" reds. And the fact that you name-check me on your sig shows just how much you are bothered by it so therefore, I'll continue doing it just for that, but I'm fair enough so the posts I rep actually deserve it! And you threatened Green Light with "I'm gonna unleash red rep on you every hour". How sad is that? Not to mention since you are in the red, you can't rep anybody! :lol
> 
> And "the truth"? Only thing you come out with is mad bullshit, you still haven't proved anything about merchandise sales other than saying "its on google go watch his interview". Like I said, my google search showed me two reports, one from October that says Punk has become #1 merch seller and another from February that says Cena and Punk are "neck and neck".
> 
> Only you're willing to prove what you're saying with actual links other than "some old interview", this is the last time I'm replying to you and from now on, only replies I'll hand out are through red reps!


You mean the posts, like one time when I said "Cena has weak ass 5 moves", is that really so shocking for you, and stupid to you. Youre just mad about anything I say about Cena as if I was wrong. You just don't like opinions about your Fav wrestler, as if I was trying to provoke you, no not at all, I just find him annoying and very childish with his promos, and doesnt sell the moves correctly and you get mad about that as if Im wrong. Who cares dude.

As for GreenLight this was my post: 



> Rock316ae
> Happy 13th Birthday(Today)for the iconic "Rock - This is Your Life" segment. A magic moment that will live forever.
> 
> ProRoyka
> Give credit to Mick Foley, the guy who created the idea of that segment. You're so obsessed with the Rock that you don't mention the guy who was part of it. To Foley and Rock credit, is that hard to say.


And these two guys agrees with me: 




> Quote: to Rock316ae
> 
> To throw a spanner in the works The Rock is quoted in an interview on YouTube saying Mick Foley came up with the original idea to do This is your life.
> 
> + this:
> 
> True, Mick Foley's drawing power is very underrated.


And the only thing Green light said when he red rep me is "No" as if he's Rock316ae or something. Trying to act smart but he's wrong.



As for the prove, you mean when I exposed Orton and Hardy drawing power. How many times should I prove something to you. Really? I just don't have it right now. You can't really find the reports as its freaking old news. But you already said it from october and to February, that's like what 4 or 5 months + from July how much it will give, :lol you just answered yourself, wah stupid. You're just trying to be an Ass, as I said I bought one after February, 20 days after it, and Punk was still the top seller on Tshirts. 

And this is the most recent interview it may show why some can't beat Cena on Kids category:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3h4VTra2lb8

And I'm not gonna waste my time and check his old interviews for you. You will not believe it anyways if he said it himself, you go and check them.
@PHX was with me on this, so he knows its true.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

That Punk interview: 

"I was using the anaconda vise and the office didn't want me to use it anymore. Probably because it was working." :lmao

Also, interesting that they don't make his shirt in youth sizes.


----------



## DesolationRow

funnyfaces1 said:


> The more that I think about it, the more I realize just how eerily similar Orton and Punk are. Why there is so much fighting between the two fanbases is something I will never understand.


It's like Chicago White Sox fans vs. Chicago Cubs fans. (Which is a pretty sweet analogy on my part because Punk is a diehard Cubs fan from Chicago who detests the White Sox.)

You can brush up on the sociological meaning of the divide between White Sox fans and Cubs fans here: http://northernstar.info/dekalb_scene/article_c1128293-7269-55fc-b780-4a36031d4093.html?mode=jqm


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Okay, so anyway, going to post the results from my little experiment regarding Punk. Now I didn't do every segment. Punk is seldom out of the turn of the hour segments anyway. I didn't do everything, as tbh... I got lazy. But this is certainly the vast majority of segments where he's been arguably the biggest draw. I use the 9PM (for 3-hour Raws only), the 10PM, and the 11PM. 

There is no perfect way to determine whether the quarter was a "success" (using that loosely) or a "failure". What I did was simple. The first thing I looked at was the rating number and compared it to the average of the show. If it was above the average rating, it was a success. And by success, I mean it did better than the average of the show, which may not be a success to the whole product, but the segment/match held the show up. If it was below the average rating, it was a failure. If there's no rating indicated in the breakdown I got it from, I look at the gain compared to other gains. 

It's a fair way to look at it, but I know there's logic in assuming gains are what should be looked at primarily, but I just think the average of the show is what we should look at and compare numbers to. It's the simplest way to do it as well I'd think. But anyway, here it is:

Punk Segment Gains/Losses (Gains have nothing in front of number, losses have "-" in front of number)
11PM
5/7: -105,000 (2.94)- Punk/Bryan-Tensai (Failed, lost viewers and average rating 3.01)

10PM
1/9: 128,000 (3.0)- Punk/Swagger (Success, overall rating 2.86)
1/30: 219,000 (3.54)- Punk/Bryan (Failed, overall rating 3.55)
2/6: 94,000 (??)- Punk/Jericho (Failed, no rating indicated, very low gain)
3/5: 205,000 (3.20)- Punk-Sheamus/Bryan-Jericho (Failed, overall rating 3.23)
3/26: 132,000 (2.96)- Punk/Christian/Jericho + Clay/Hawkins (Failed. Overall rating 3.05)
4/2: 148,000 (3.6?)- Punk/Henry (Success, overall rating 3.42, though down 150,000 from opener which did a 3.6, so Punk/Henry should only be a little lower and thus still a success)
4/9: 379,000 (3.19)- Punk/Jericho (Success, overall rating 3.10)
4/23: 270,000 (3.63)- Punk/Jericho (Success, overall 3.33 rating for normal two hours)
6/4: 340,000 (2.93-3.02)- Punk/Kane (Success, overall rating 2.92)

9PM
9/10: 555,000 (??)- Punk/Orton (Success, highest 9PM gain since 7/23 Raw 1000, no rating indicated)
9/3: 370,000 (??)- Anger Management and Punk/Sheamus (Failed, second lowest 9PM gain)


A one quick note is that Henry, while doing well for SD's buyrates as champion, has underperformed on Raw in breakdowns many times. So I don't put him on the top level as a draw and so that match is included.

Let me know if anyone knows the ratings for the segments missing them, and let me know if anything is incorrect/should be adjusted as far as ratings, gains, and who was in the segment. I took these right from the breakdowns and I'll post them if people want me to.

I know this doesn't really prove anything, but I was just interested in seeing it. And what do you know, I was right in that half the time he does well without a major draw, half the time he doesn't (at least by how I did it).


----------



## Starbuck

:lmao What in the name of fuck is happening in this thread lol? REP IZ SRS BIZNUS. Holy Jeebus.


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner3

LOL I love mark wars


----------



## funnyfaces1

DesolationRow said:


> It's like Chicago White Sox fans vs. Chicago Cubs fans. (Which is a pretty sweet analogy on my part because Punk is a diehard Cubs fan from Chicago who detests the White Sox.)
> 
> You can brush up on the sociological meaning of the divide between White Sox fans and Cubs fans here: http://northernstar.info/dekalb_scene/article_c1128293-7269-55fc-b780-4a36031d4093.html?mode=jqm


Trust me, as a fellow Chicagoan, I know how ridiculous the century-long feud is.


----------



## Tnmore

Just read the replies and I see no point in continuing this discussion further with *The Sandrone* especially when it's come down to the point of questioning whether or not Randy freaking Savage has "It" factor. Thats just ridiculous and very disrespective to one of the greats in the industry IMO. Besides like someone said we're going in endless round-about arguments anyway. But, I wanted to respond to this part in particular




> And amazingly enough,* he impacted business when he was being booked correctly those first few weeks going into MITB.* But then everything goes downhill besides merchandise sales, which if I'm not mistaken falls as well eventually. He comes back too soon, loses his title to Del Rio, goes into a feud with Nash which leads to nothing. Then has a feud with HHH that leads to him losing and apologizing for everything and then becoming nothing more than an alternative to Cena who's very identical to Cena. Once again, bad booking costs Punk.


See, here's the problem with it. Its highly questionable whether it was really punk who impacted the business, or it was just the shock factor of the shoot promo that lasted for a few weeks. Punk moved business for One PPV, just one, with absolutely no effect on ratings. He wins the title at MITb and leaves chicago with the WWE championship, kissing Vince goodbye. In theory, he was the biggest and the hottest act in the wrestling industry at that point, so now he returns to RAW with the title with all that momentum, goes head to head with the top guy John Cena at Summerslam, one of the big 4 PPVs and the buyrate.... *DROPS*. Note that he was still the very edgy "pipe-bomb" punk here, and was treated as the biggest main event attraction even over the top guy Cena at this point. So really whats the excuse for the poor Summerslam buyrate? All this time, Ratings stayed the same, even went down a bit for the Go-home show iirc.

In my opinion, The MITB 20k bump was merely just the aftermath of a shocking *shoot* promo which I certainly will give him credit for. But I dont understand why the booking post Summerslam is used as an excuse by his fans, whenever punk fails to draw? You gonna have to explain the lack of increase in summerslam buyrate and RAW ratings even at his hottest, before you can claim things like "booking is what ruined him, otherwise he would have become the Stone cold Steve Austin of this era" etc..


----------



## Tnmore

*-Skullbone-* makes a lot of valid points, especially about the push-timeframe issue when conceptually discussing the success of wrestlers push, I understand that but you try to make it as if the guys back then had it easy compared to now, which is not true. Lets not forget the competition in that era which was much stronger in terms of talent/skills and the fans expectation, the behind the scenes political environment was ten times worse and nasty back then compared to now and thats not even debatable. One more thing people tend to forget is the wwf title at the time was thrown around back and forth so frequently that it barely had any credibility, it was often treated as a joke and at one point even Vince Mcmahon was the world champion. 

CM Punk as of right now has been the WWE champion for 310+ days with the most focus of the show put on him, which quite frankly he doesnt deserve it at all. He clearly does not draw, barely gets the intended reaction from the crowd unless he's dissing them and is not reliable like Cena when it comes to representing the company as its champion in the public media. Dont get me wrong, he certainly earned the title when he first won it against John Cena at chicago, but this 310+ reign so far? Totally over-pushed and an undeserved one. 

Another thing is the starpower available to help establish guys when comparing different eras. As it was discussed before, CM Punk had some of the biggest stars, well established babyface characters readily available to work with like Jeff hardy, The Undertaker, Rey Mysterio, batista, John Cena, Triple H, Chris Jericho etc.. but that was not the case in the attitude era, guys established themselves by extensively working with each other, they didnt have this luxury of top guys giving them the rub and putting them over, the biggest example would obviously be Rock and HHH. Chris Jericho, Kurt angle, even the tag teams like the hardys made themselves stars for the most part. Point is, Punk has had too many pushes and opputunities handed to him in the last 6 yrs, even after all this he has showed no signs of being a reliable draw for the company on his own. There is something fundamentally flawed with him or his character that people refuse to see him as a top guy. You can blame the booking all you want, come up with all sorts of excuses but its useless because the problem lies with him.


----------



## kokepepsi

How can one person affect the ratings.
Look at the breakdowns, every single segment loses viewers but 2 or 3.
For Punk to increases the ratings his segment/s would have to gain on average 1.1 million viewers.
No one can do that weekly. NO ONE.

His momentum dropped as soon as he came back. I swear to god I am the only one that noticed this but this forum went from Punk is the best to Punk sucks one week before Summerslam, What happened.

BTW this years summerslam only did 40k buys better than last year.
That is very weak considering it was THEGAME vs UFCPPVGOD.
If a big UFC superstar that was drawing 1million+ buys can only bump your 3rd biggest PPV of the year by 40k, the problem lies elsewhere(BOOKING YOU MARKS)


----------



## ChickMagnet12

My signature.

Enjoy the product. Forget the ratings. People enjoy Punk. People dislike Punk. The only thing that ratings effect is Vinny Mac's lack of toilet money to clean his backside with.


----------



## Pro Royka

Source: F4WOnline

According to a source, the Survivor Series pay-per-view buy figure is lower than the initial estimate of 280,000. It was reported that of that figure, 180,000 pay-per-view purchases came from the United States. The updated estimate drops the buy figure to 260,000 as only 160,000 pay-per-view purchases came from the United States for The Rock's first wrestling match in over seven years.
The estimate compares to 244,000 buys for Survivor Series in 2010 and 235,000 in 2009, which nearly got the show scrapped from the annual pay-per-view line.

Things like this happens. Summerslam garnered 296 more than the Survivor Series PPV 260,000. 350 is not little tho.

Cena mainevented Vengeance with ADR and the pay-per-view garnered 121,000 buys, down from 137,000 buys the previous year's event.

Punk mainevented against ADR and Miz and the event received 179,000 pay-per-view buys, which was down from the previous year's 195,000 buys.
So it's not like he decreased buyrates like nobody else did.


----------



## kokepepsi

Wait so Survivor Series, The Rock's first match in 7 years only did 16k buys better than the previous year

So Punk had a bigger impact on a B PPV than THE ROCK?

FUCKING LULZ


----------



## Rock316AE

The final Survivor Series number was 312k, biggest since 2007.

MITB did horrible on PPV either way BTW, 20k+ just made it better than the horrendous 2010 buyrate of 170k. 195k for an angle that they thought is "big" is an abysmal number and Big Show vs Cena for the 18th time on PPV did the same number this year for NWO.


kokepepsi said:


> BTW this years summerslam only did 40k buys better than last year.
> That is very weak considering it was THEGAME vs UFCPPVGOD.
> If a big UFC superstar that was drawing 1million+ buys can only bump your 3rd biggest PPV of the year by 40k, the problem lies elsewhere(BOOKING YOU MARKS)


Agreed on the Summerslam booking because they made Brock look horrible before this match when you're supposed to sell him as a guy who is ABOVE the standards of pro wrestling and can easily beat every person, stupid things like running away from HHH when Cena sold fear from him was ridiculous. They sacrificed buys to make HHH look better during the program. Brock probably sold this PPV on his name alone after they succeeded in killing his aura. Still a decent number for the market today.


----------



## murder

As if it really mattered whether or not MITB had a 20k increase and who was "responsible" for it. The buyrate is weak one way or another. PPV business is dead except Mania. 

And you know why it's dead? Yes, UFC of course. But mainly because there is nobody that can draw on the current roster as long as he's not in the main event of Wrestlemania.


----------



## Fanboi101

kokepepsi said:


> Wait so Survivor Series, The Rock's first match in 7 years only did 16k buys better than the previous year
> 
> So Punk had a bigger impact on a B PPV than THE ROCK?
> 
> FUCKING LULZ


Nope. Rock acually had more than 3x the impact of Punk

http://www.411mania.com/wrestling/news/245325

- The updated buyrate for the 2011 Survivor Series stands at 312,000 buys, 179,000 of then being domestic buys. That is up from 2010's total buyrate of 244,000. [Credit: Wrestling Observer]
Read more at http://www.411mania.com/wrestling/news/245325#vqATb4O4EfzBpiKv.99


----------



## Tnmore

kokepepsi said:


> How can one person affect the ratings.
> Look at the breakdowns, every single segment loses viewers but 2 or 3.
> For Punk to increases the ratings his segment/s would have to gain on average 1.1 million viewers.
> No one can do that weekly. NO ONE.
> 
> His momentum dropped as soon as he came back. I swear to god I am the only one that noticed this but this forum went from Punk is the best to Punk sucks one week before Summerslam, What happened.
> 
> BTW this years summerslam only did 40k buys better than last year.
> That is very weak considering it was THEGAME vs UFCPPVGOD.
> If a big UFC superstar that was drawing 1million+ buys can only bump your 3rd biggest PPV of the year by 40k, the problem lies elsewhere(BOOKING YOU MARKS)


1. 350,000 buys for Summerslam 2012 is preliminary estimate, Summerslam 2011 311,000 buys was the final number, estimated initial number was way down. 

2. Summerslam 2012 did an increase of over 43% in domestic, 264,000 domestic. That is freaking huge. Dave Meltzer himself said the program was a big success, despite his loss to Cena at Extreme rules which in theory may have hurt buyrate. 




Pro Royka said:


> Source: F4WOnline
> 
> According to a source, the Survivor Series pay-per-view buy figure is lower than the initial estimate of 280,000. It was reported that of that figure, 180,000 pay-per-view purchases came from the United States. The updated estimate drops the buy figure to 260,000 as only 160,000 pay-per-view purchases came from the United States for The Rock's first wrestling match in over seven years.
> The estimate compares to 244,000 buys for Survivor Series in 2010 and 235,000 in 2009, which nearly got the show scrapped from the annual pay-per-view line.
> 
> Things like this happens. Summerslam garnered 296 more than the Survivor Series PPV 260,000. 350 is not little tho.
> 
> Cena mainevented Vengeance with ADR and the pay-per-view garnered 121,000 buys, down from 137,000 buys the previous year's event.
> 
> Punk mainevented against ADR and Miz and the event received 179,000 pay-per-view buys, which was down from the previous year's 195,000 buys.
> So it's not like he decreased buyrates like nobody else did.


Survivor Series did 312k overall, a 26% projected increase over 2011. Cena/Del Rio Vengeance was a dead program and Cena nor del rio was on a hot run like punk was during Summerslam of 2011. 

I'm not talking about anything post Summerslam at all, If punk was the difference maker you people make him out to be and if booking was the reason he was/is unable to draw? then prove the case to me. Summerslam was right in the middle of his hot run, explain lack of ratings increase.


----------



## kokepepsi

Rock316AE said:


> The final Survivor Series number was 312k, biggest since 2007.
> 
> 
> Agreed on the Summerslam booking because they made Brock look horrible before this match when you're supposed to sell him as a guy who is ABOVE the standards of pro wrestling and can easily beat every person, stupid things like running away from HHH when Cena sold fear from him was ridiculous. They sacrificed buys to make HHH look better during the program. Brock probably sold this PPV on his name alone after they succeeded in killing his aura. Still a decent number for the market today.


If the number is legit than that is pretty good which I expect from DAROCK.


----------



## Pro Royka

Tnmore said:


> 1. 350,000 buys for Summerslam 2012 is preliminary estimate, Summerslam 2011 311,000 buys was the final number, estimated initial number was way down.
> 
> 2. Summerslam 2012 did an increase of over 43% in domestic, 264,000 domestic. That is freaking huge. Dave Meltzer himself said the program was a big success, despite his loss to Cena at Extreme rules which in theory may have hurt buyrate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Survivor Series did 312k overall, a 26% projected increase over 2011. Cena/Del Rio Vengeance was a dead program and Cena nor del rio was on a hot run like punk was during Summerslam of 2011.
> 
> I'm not talking about anything post Summerslam at all, If punk was the difference maker you people make him out to be and if booking was the reason he was/is unable to draw? then prove the case to me. Summerslam was right in the middle of his hot run, explain lack of ratings increase.


So the final number for SummerSalm 2011 is 311k. It's good, I don't know why you're complaining.
2012 SummerSlam had 2 bigger mainevents. Brock Lesnar/Triple H and Punk/Cena/Show. Last year it had Punk/Cena and Orton/Christian. Sounds legit and fair to me.

Edited: Cena mainevented as a champion in HIAC and the event received 182,000 pay-per-view buys, down from 210,000 buys the previous year.


----------



## Choke2Death

SummerSlam 2010 drew 350,000 which is why 311,000 is disappointing. A far more interesting angle yet the buyrate was down big time.


----------



## Pro Royka

Choke2Death said:


> SummerSlam 2010 drew 350,000 which is why 311,000 is disappointing. A far more interesting angle yet the buyrate was down big time.


SummerSlam was decreasing every year anyway. SummerSlam 2009 got higher than 2010 and same thing in 2008 it got higher than 2009. I guess Brock Lesnar did a good job. It had bigger mainevents than last year anyway.

Edited: Actually Survivor Series in 2008 received 319,000 pay-per-view buys not since 2007. So it's higher than 2011. SummerSlam got 311k and Survivor Series got 312k very slightly higher.


----------



## DesolationRow

funnyfaces1 said:


> Trust me, as a fellow Chicagoan, I know how ridiculous the century-long feud is.


:lmao

I gots the ESP!


----------



## Chicago Warrior

CUBS will get the big win soon enough. You Punk haters will see!!!!


----------



## Starbuck

I'm seriously going to lol so fucking hard if Cena isn't on this week and DAT RYBACK kills it in the numbers. Either way, we should be in for another fun week. If Ryback is a hit = bring on the haterade. If Ryback is a flop = bring on the haterade. Good times lol.


----------



## NearFall

Indeed *StarBuck*. He is the most polarising superstar in all of the WWE, THE RYBACK!


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

I just want him to cut promos and have matches that last longer then 5 mins. He's been doing the same old shit since April.


----------



## Starbuck

A Punk/Ryback promo has all sorts of weird and wonderful possibilities. 

"You're hand picked by the brass because you're big!"

"Feed me!"

"I won't let you overshadow me like John Cena!"

"MOOOOOOAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!"


----------



## NearFall

Not really promos, but I liked the little pre-recorded talk he gave during his entrance against Jinder Mahal a few weeks ago on RAW.


----------



## DesolationRow

They shouldn't simply drop the Michael Cole-stated point that Ryback is a voracious reader of books. Have Punk attempt to belittle Ryback psychologically and then...

PUNK: "You've done well for yourself, as management greases the wheels for you and you get to make a big splash by swallowing whole little fish. But we're talking about a completely different level, Ryback. I am the WWE Champion. I have been WWE Champion for 316 days. 316. That makes me CM Punk: 316. [Said as though it is mimicry of Steve Austin's old "Austin 3:16."] And you? You've never been a champion at all, have you, Ryback? You probably don't understand how the entire heirarchy works here. I'm WWE Champion. That makes me top dog. You cannot know what is in store for you in this main event tonight. I'm going to take you to school, Ryback. I'm going to hurt you and humiliate you before the entire world."

RYBACK: "Punk... What you say carries much weight. You are a learned warrior. And yet, the irrevocable bonds between what, on one hand, constitutes your experiences and your trials and tribulations, and that, on the other [pointing toward WWE Championship belt] which represents the fruits of your indefatigable, inexhaustible labor... Are not beyond my comprehension. Far from it. To quote John Dryden, 'Beware the fury of a patient man.' And, Punk, the patience I possess is not--"

PUNK: "Wait, what?"

RYBACK: "I have accumulated vast reservoirs of knowledge. I have studied your methods, watched your contests. For as Sun Tzu writes in _The Art of War_, 'Know thyself, know thy enemy. A thousand battles, a thousand victories.' And I do know you, Punk. I know that you, today, sit at the top of the food chain of WWE... The only problem for you is my hunger grows more achingly voracious each time I am physically near you. To wit, I say... _FEED... ME... MORE_!!!!!!!!"

Then just leave that aspect to his character alone for several months as he goes back to roaring, "FEED ME MORE!"


----------



## NearFall

DesolationRow said:


> They shouldn't simply drop the Michael Cole-stated point that Ryback is a voracious reader of books. Have Punk attempt to belittle Ryback psychologically and then...
> 
> PUNK: "You've done well for yourself, as management greases the wheels for you and you get to make a big splash by swallowing whole little fish. But we're talking about a completely different level, Ryback. I am the WWE Champion. I have been WWE Champion for 316 days. 316. That makes me CM Punk: 316. [Said as though it is mimicry of Steve Austin's old "Austin 3:16."] And you? You've never been a champion at all, have you, Ryback? You probably don't understand how the entire heirarchy works here. I'm WWE Champion. That makes me top dog. You cannot know what is in store for you in this main event tonight. I'm going to take you to school, Ryback. I'm going to hurt you and humiliate you before the entire world."
> 
> RYBACK: "Punk... What you say carries much weight. You are a learned warrior. And yet, the irrevocable bonds between what, on one hand, constitutes your experiences and your trials and tribulations, and that, on the other [pointing toward WWE Championship belt] which represents the fruits of your indefatigable, inexhaustible labor... Are not beyond my comprehension. Far from it. To quote John Dryden, 'Beware the fury of a patient man.' And, Punk, the patience I possess is not--"
> 
> PUNK: "Wait, what?"
> 
> RYBACK: "I have accumulated vast reservoirs of knowledge. I have studied your methods, watched your contests. For as Sun Tzu writes in _The Art of War_, 'Know thyself, know thy enemy. A thousand battles, a thousand victories.' And I do know you, Punk. I know that you, today, sit at the top of the food chain of WWE... The only problem for you is my hunger grows more achingly voracious each time I am physically near you. To wit, I say... _FEED... ME... MORE_!!!!!!!!"
> 
> Then just leave that aspect to his character alone for several months as he goes back to roaring, "FEED ME MORE!"


His vocabulary must have a helluva appetite...

Awesome idea actually. Makes him seem very neutral and honest to the matter, and sticks to his character by "feeding" up the foodchain.


----------



## Loudness

Intellectual Roidhead? Sounds like an absolutely awesome idea, would recommend you to WWEHQ. Reminds me of the good old days with the genetic freak from the highly educated university of Michigan. Not to mention, far more potential twists in character development as opposed to generic roidheads. Thinking about it, apart from Kane, WWE rarely does weird gimmicks where one guy has a schizophrenic/unorthodox personality, I'm sure that DesoRows idea would work well in todays environment.


----------



## Mister Hands

Kind of like a Warrior promo with proper sources and footnotes.


----------



## Evil Peter

Loudness said:


> *Intellectual Roidhead?* Sounds like an absolutely awesome idea, would recommend you to WWEHQ. Reminds me of the good old days with the genetic freak from the highly educated university of Michigan. Not to mention, far more potential twists in character development as opposed to generic roidheads. Thinking about it, apart from Kane, WWE rarely does weird gimmicks where one guy has a schizophrenic/unorthodox personality, I'm sure that DesoRows idea would work well in todays environment.


"You're making me angry. You wouldn't like me when I'm angry, because I back up my anger with facts and documented sources." - The Credible Hulk.


----------



## Starbuck

Evil Peter said:


> "You're making me hungry. You wouldn't like me when I'm hungry, because I back up my hunger with....FEED ME MOARRRRRRR." - The Ryback.


He really said that?


----------



## Rock316AE

Smart move for Cena not to be there. They're going to bomb even more this week and then he will come back the week after when they're probably going to be up from the last two weeks so they can pretend that he was the difference maker in this process. Ryback also shouldn't be a factor here because they just showed him for 5 seconds "saving" Foley, a half teaser but not really something that will change interest.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

wrong thread.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

DesolationRow said:


> They shouldn't simply drop the Michael Cole-stated point that Ryback is a voracious reader of books. Have Punk attempt to belittle Ryback psychologically and then...
> 
> PUNK: "You've done well for yourself, as management greases the wheels for you and you get to make a big splash by swallowing whole little fish. But we're talking about a completely different level, Ryback. I am the WWE Champion. I have been WWE Champion for 316 days. 316. That makes me CM Punk: 316. [Said as though it is mimicry of Steve Austin's old "Austin 3:16."] And you? You've never been a champion at all, have you, Ryback? You probably don't understand how the entire heirarchy works here. I'm WWE Champion. That makes me top dog. You cannot know what is in store for you in this main event tonight. I'm going to take you to school, Ryback. I'm going to hurt you and humiliate you before the entire world."
> 
> RYBACK: "Punk... What you say carries much weight. You are a learned warrior. And yet, the irrevocable bonds between what, on one hand, constitutes your experiences and your trials and tribulations, and that, on the other [pointing toward WWE Championship belt] which represents the fruits of your indefatigable, inexhaustible labor... Are not beyond my comprehension. Far from it. To quote John Dryden, 'Beware the fury of a patient man.' And, Punk, the patience I possess is not--"
> 
> PUNK: "Wait, what?"
> 
> RYBACK: "I have accumulated vast reservoirs of knowledge. I have studied your methods, watched your contests. For as Sun Tzu writes in _The Art of War_, 'Know thyself, know thy enemy. A thousand battles, a thousand victories.' And I do know you, Punk. I know that you, today, sit at the top of the food chain of WWE... The only problem for you is my hunger grows more achingly voracious each time I am physically near you. To wit, I say... _FEED... ME... MORE_!!!!!!!!"
> 
> Then just leave that aspect to his character alone for several months as he goes back to roaring, "FEED ME MORE!"


That sounds awesome. The only question is how good of a mic worker is Ryback? As Skip a couple years ago I wasn't overly impressed, and as Ryback not sure I've ever heard him say anything except "Feed Me More!"

But if he's at least good on the mic this could be an awesome road to take. Actually kinda of reminds me of Maria (?) who was an interviewer and dumb in all her interviews, but then in the Bischoff court segment the act is dropped and she just slaughters Bischoff. Then she goes back to playing dumb. Doing the same or a similar thing with Ryback would add some flavor to his character so he can survive after he loses his undefeated streak.


----------



## TromaDogg

DesolationRow said:


> RYBACK: "I have accumulated vast reservoirs of knowledge. I have studied your methods, watched your contests. For as Sun Tzu writes in _The Art of War_, 'Know thyself, know thy enemy. A thousand battles, a thousand victories.' And I do know you, Punk. I know that you, today, sit at the top of the food chain of WWE... The only problem for you is my hunger grows more achingly voracious each time I am physically near you. To wit, I say... _FEED... ME... MORE_!!!!!!!!"
> 
> Then just leave that aspect to his character alone for several months as he goes back to roaring, "FEED ME MORE!"


That's not a bad idea actually...just that the whole 'as Sun Tzu writes' thing would be a blatent rip off of what Abyss was doing last year in TNA so not sure if they'd go with it.


----------



## Ether

Early bets on how bad the World Championship Debate does?


----------



## SteenIsGod

Ether said:


> Early bets on how bad the World Championship Debate does?


Big Show is a good ratings guy so it'll do pretty well tbh.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

That was the most embarrassingly bad segment I've ever watched. I could actually see the ratings plummeting into the depths of hell.


----------



## JY57

http://www.wrestlezone.com/news/261...wwe-expecting-poor-viewership-for-raw-tonight



> WWE Expecting Poor Viewership For Raw Tonight?
> 
> According to F4WOnline.com, talk within WWE this has been that tonight's edition of Raw might be one of the least watched shows in quite awhile, based on last week's trends and the competition Raw was up against.
> 
> Last week's show was the least viewed episode of Raw since the 4th of July this year, and had the smallest audience for a non-holiday show in over 5 years. Last week's Green Bay vs Seattle game took in 16.167 million viewers, and tonight's Chicago vs Dallas game is expected to top that number.


----------



## Kabraxal

JY57 said:


> http://www.wrestlezone.com/news/261...wwe-expecting-poor-viewership-for-raw-tonight


It's amazing of how deep into denial the WWE is... yes, the game will have some effect, but if your show was worth watching people wouldn't be tuning out IN DROVES. They just refuse to face up to facts and let their pride take a hit and admit what they are doing now is some of the most horrid programming they have ever done. There are serious, crippling issues within the WWE, but they have been able to hide it behind something for a while... but now it's really starting to be obvious. I don't know what it will take, because they've obviously convinced themselves that if they dip close to the 3 million and less mark it is because of some other factor that their show is just plain shit.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Though last week I said that would be the lowest number they get and they'd be around that number for the next few weeks but never lower, I'm re-thinking that right now based on a few things that have come to light. First off, with what Wrestlezone said (though Kabraxal is right on the money). Second of all, no Cena. Third of all, the show seemed so un-centered and off the wall. There was nothing big advertised to look forward to besides the JR Appreciation Night. The center of the show was what was going on with AJ, though even then that wasn't focused on much at all and nothing monumental took place. 

All these factors combined, Raw will probably do worse than it did last week. The 8, 9, and 11 spots will probably do above average, and so will the JR/Punk segment, but I'm expecting to see a poor overall number. It's almost like without Cena there, Vince just said "fuck it" and tried to write the worst show possible and see if they could still keep the average number up throughout the show. I expect the 3rd hour number to be painfully terrible.


----------



## Oakue

JY57 said:


> http://www.wrestlezone.com/news/261...wwe-expecting-poor-viewership-for-raw-tonight


So what does that mean? They decided not to try?

What the hell? So they went into the night thinking the show would be poorly rated and their response to that was to say, oh well that's the way it goes?

The old man is losing his mind.

:vince3


----------



## DesolationRow

Vince treating tonight's Raw like the Indianapolis Colts treated last year's season without Peyton Manning. "Oh, our big star player isn't here. Fuck it."


----------



## Starbuck

They didn't even give themselves a fair shot with the way they structured this show tbh. It was all over the place, the promos really dragged, they put Punk/JR in a random ass time slot and yeah, the whole thing was just all over the place. I think it's clear that they don't give a fuck about the 10p slot either anymore because Seamus/Sandow were in the middle of their match during that time iirc. Why not put Punk/JR there to give the fans some time to recover after all that talking instead of taking a fucking break and then going into the match? I don't even know. Horribly structured but I guess they really did know that they were already beat heading in so they didn't even try. Last week's Raw as the lowest viewed in a long time, last week's SD was the lowest viewed SD since June or something of this year, clearly the WWE Universe weren't feeling it last week. I wouldn' be surprised at all if things take a further dip this week, in fact, I'm expecting it.


----------



## zkorejo

Raw pretty much sucked... as always. Only thing worth watching was CM Punk and JR promo, it was done pretty nicely and Ryback's involvement was just awesome. Ryback can be huge if built well. Oh and fire Tensai that fat piece of japanese pig shit.


----------



## IJustKickedStam

zkorejo said:


> Raw pretty much sucked... as always. Only thing worth watching was CM Punk and JR promo, it was done pretty nicely and Ryback's involvement was just awesome. Ryback can be huge if built well.Oh and fire Tensai that fat piece of japanese pig shit.


A wise man once said...


----------



## -Skullbone-

He ain't Japanese :jordan


----------



## Felpent

How did this fat man become a big star in Japan is beyond me.


----------



## JY57

He should have stayed in Japan.


----------



## zkorejo

-Skullbone- said:


> He ain't Japanese :jordan


Tell that to Vince.


----------



## roadkill_

-Skullbone- said:


> He ain't Japanese :jordan


No shit.


----------



## Happenstan

Felpent said:


> How did this fat man become a big star in Japan is beyond me.



It's Japan. They have vending machines selling dirty used panties down the street from the local school. They're an _interersting_ group of people to say the least.


----------



## -Skullbone-

^^Okay then. Culture aside, I recommend guys actually look into Giant Bernard to see what the hooha was about in the first place. 

Anyway, judging by how awful the Raw results were and the stiff competition it faced on the telly, it's hard to get look the speculation that they decided to pull up shop creatively for a week due to Cena's absence. It's not something that can be consolidated from a fans point of view, but it would be incredibly disappointing to think the company can't appease all fans because they can't be arsed to.


----------



## Happenstan

It's burn out. WWE is on practically every night now. If these writers are this burned out maybe they should go the Hollywood route and "remake" old successful storylines from the 80s and 90s...updated for current times of course. Can't possibly be any worse than this shit they've been shoving down out throats. Then again...


----------



## Evil Peter

zkorejo said:


> Raw pretty much sucked... as always. Only thing worth watching was CM Punk and JR promo, it was done pretty nicely and Ryback's involvement was just awesome. Ryback can be huge if built well. Oh and fire Tensai that fat piece of japanese pig shit.


I thought Ryback's involvement was the opposite since it showed that he just can't act. When he was trying to look intimidating he first looked like he was holding back tears and then struggling with allergies.


----------



## -Skullbone-

Happenstan said:


> It's burn out. WWE is on practically every night now. If these writers are this burned out maybe they should go the Hollywood route and "remake" old successful storylines from the 80s and 90s...updated for current times of course. Can't possibly be any worse than this shit they've been shoving down out throats. Then again...


Nah, I don't believe they're burnt out. Just laziness and complacency that another week's programming is just another week's living. I reckon that's something that goes all the way through the company and not just restricted to the writers. 

Their formulas have been pretty much the same since I started watching. They're pretty safe with what's been working for the last seven or so years. Hopefully they wake up when the audience grows up and most begin to tire of it.


----------



## JY57

http://www.wrestlezone.com/news/261909-report-vince-mcmahon-not-happy-after-raw



> Report: Vince McMahon Not Happy After RAW
> PWInsider.com reports Vince McMahon was not happy after Raw was over. The creative direction reportedly is not where he wanted it to be and notes of him appearing very stressed out in recent weeks is all taking a toll on him. The show had some timing issuses which included some backstage segments being cut as well as a Justin Gabriel match.


----------



## Roydabest

Watch out for WWE. The lower the rating gets the more shows they shower us with! First Saturday...whatever the fuck it is, then this Main Event. Do you realize they have fucking 6 shows a week nowadays. Vince counts it like: "If I can't get 5 million viewers for Raw, I'll get the missing million from Saturday...(yeah, can't remeber it either), and if I can't get 4 million viewers, what about a sixth show? The fans will love it! Just like they love Superstars and NXT, by god, I will throw so many shows at them that they can't avoid them!" Even though nobody that watches the inferior shows misses a Raw. They don't seem to get it that quality goes over quantity.


----------



## -Skullbone-

Hope that tidbit from the sheets is on the money. Maybe he'll relinquish much of that stranglehold he apparently has and start to allow people in his company to breathe easier while circulating some fresh ideas around.

What's likely to happen, though, is he'll break down the headquarter's load-bearing walls with his son-in-law's sledgehammer and proclaim how he'll "never retire" (woo), get dragged to the nearest asylum by a 45 men team of security, before taking the unlikely route of Silas Marner to pocket his fortune and live in isolation for the rest of his days - comforted by cash that he'll never spend.

Yep, I'm a novelist


----------



## Starbuck

I have to say that he looked really worn in the JR clips from after the show. His eyes were all dark and sunken in. I know he's nearing 70 and all but every time I see him he looks older and older. If things really are getting to him like this then...well I don't know but it isn't good lol.


----------



## JY57

Starbuck said:


> I have to say that he looked really worn in the JR clips from after the show. His eyes were all dark and sunken in. I know he's nearing 70 and all but every time I see him he looks older and older. If things really are getting to him like this then...well I don't know but it isn't good lol.


I think he needs to realize that the time to pass the torch to HHH & Stephanie should be soon. But we all know he won't, cause he too stubborn for his own good.


----------



## Oakue

He needs to do something. The guy is old and constant travel has probably taken years off his life. Without sounding too morbid the guy could very well be in his final decade of life, because of a lifetime of travel.

It does not take a genius to see there is somewhat of a demise here for the company he built. I think it has peaked out and it is now all downhill, with the demise of his company accelerating in recent years.


----------



## cokecan567

So guys what was the ratings segments/overall rating for raw last night? Where exactly is the link. Was it even lower than previous weeks? Where is the link.


----------



## cokecan567

Roydabest said:


> Watch out for WWE. The lower the rating gets the more shows they shower us with! First Saturday...whatever the fuck it is, then this Main Event. Do you realize they have fucking 6 shows a week nowadays. Vince counts it like: "If I can't get 5 million viewers for Raw, I'll get the missing million from Saturday...(yeah, can't remeber it either), and if I can't get 4 million viewers, what about a sixth show? The fans will love it! Just like they love Superstars and NXT, by god, I will throw so many shows at them that they can't avoid them!" Even though nobody that watches the inferior shows misses a Raw. They don't seem to get it that quality goes over quantity.


Agreed 100 percent. Instead of making more shows which probably will suck. You would think he would just improve the product rather than continuously giving us garbage.



cokecan567 said:


> So guys what was the ratings segments/overall rating for raw last night? Where exactly is the link. Was it even lower than previous weeks? Where is the link.


Lmk folks if anyone has link or the results of ratings etc.


----------



## Choke2Death

cokecan567 said:


> So guys what was the ratings segments/overall rating for raw last night? Where exactly is the link. Was it even lower than previous weeks? Where is the link.


Give it a day or two.


----------



## funnyfaces1

I'm expecting a 2.6 with a poor overrun and an awful gain for the debate. The largest gain will probably be the Punk/JR/Ryback segment.


----------



## Pro Royka

I can't imagine how people will react about the ratings this week, they gonna unleash on Punk as expected. I agree it's all his fault, doesn't matter if he gained viewers in his segments. If Sheamus didn't gain a lot of viewers in that debut segment, then he should lose his title, he's not even entertaining to begin with. Punk needs help throughout the show, I hope some/most gained viewers and not all of them lost viewers.


----------



## The GOAT One

Big Dave reckons it may be the lowest rated Raw in 15 years.

The suspense is killing me.


----------



## Dinobot

So did anyone count the number of jobber entrances we saw last night. I'm morbidly curious as to how many there were.


----------



## Starbuck

funnyfaces1 said:


> I'm expecting a 2.6 with a poor overrun and an awful gain for the debate. The largest gain will probably be the Punk/JR/Ryback segment.


Same. I think the overrun will do really badly because the show just seemed to die after Punk/JR/Ryback. Speaking of which, even though it was in a random quarter I think it will do well or as well as can be expected lol. I think the debate will do better than people are expecting tbh. Whatever way you spin it, the numbers are going to suck and suck badly.


----------



## chbulls1_23

I saw that Bloomberg was estimating a 2.4 or 2.5 for this week. 3 hours of B.S. material is really killing the show. They should just pull the plug on the whole 3 hour deal and fast.


----------



## Amber B

TheGreatOne. said:


> Big Dave reckons it may be the lowest rated Raw in 15 years.
> 
> The suspense is killing me.


That abomination of an episode deserves it.


----------



## WTFWWE

Oh man the rumored rating for the show is around 2.5 or even 2.4 it's not looking good at all with one hour even dropping to high 2 million.


----------



## Ether

WTFWWE said:


> Oh man the rumored rating for the show is around 2.5 or even 2.4 it's not looking good at all with one hour even dropping to high 2 million.


2.4 :lmao fuck!
TNA are about to start the 3rd Monday Night Wars unk


----------



## JY57

> - Monday's WWE RAW had a social media score of 249,121, according to Trendrr.tv. This was down another 13% from last wee and the lowest social media score since RAW went to 3 hours every week.
> 
> The show ranked #2 on cable behind ESPN's Monday Night Football game.
> 
> - ESPN's Bill Hofheimer tweeted on Tuesday that Monday's NFL game between the Cowboys and Bears on ESPN scored a season-high 11.6 cable rating. This is another ominous sign for this week's RAW rating, which is out later today.


Read more at http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe...edia_Score_Down_More.html#TsueE6bKjWLTT8Rh.99


----------



## vanboxmeer

Save those ratings!


----------



## totoyotube

WWE Entertainment USA 10:00 PM 3472 
WWE Entertainment USA 9:00 PM 3598 
WWE Entertainment USA 8:00 PM 3436 

holy yikes!!!!


----------



## totoyotube

How low can the ratings get? Damn horrendous


----------



## The Lady Killer

Vince McMahon playing a friendly game of Limbo with his viewership.


----------



## Green Light

Vince is probably on the phone to Mark Henry right now begging him to come back early.


----------



## holt_hogan

October 1st Edition of Monday Night Raw had the following viewing figures:

Hour 1: 3436
Hour 2: 3598
Hour 3: 3472

Compared to last weeks:

Hour 1: 3769
Hour 2: 3990
Hour 3: 3603


----------



## The GOAT One

Knew they should have put THE RYBACK in the main event.


----------



## totoyotube

this could actually manage to get a 2.5, that would indeed be sad


----------



## WTFWWE

HOLY SHIT @ them numbers! So the rumor was right them numbers usually = 2.4/5 area.


----------



## Choke2Death

holt_hogan said:


> October 1st Edition of Monday Night Raw had the following viewing figures:
> 
> Hour 1: 3436
> Hour 2: 3598
> Hour 3: 3472
> 
> Compared to last weeks:
> 
> Hour 1: 3769
> Hour 2: 3990
> Hour 3: 3603


So now even 4 million is becoming a 'dream' number for them? Oh well, with the shitty shows they put on, I enjoy the constant drops!

DROP SOME MORE, NUMBERS!


----------



## JY57

they expected it. so they probably didn't care.


----------



## totoyotube

JY57 said:


> they expected it. so they probably didn't care.


so if i expected to get shot tomorrow, i shouldn't be upset? next week isnt going to be any easier


----------



## Oakue




----------



## The GOAT One

Tbf they put no effort into the show cause Cena was out, so they deserve this embarrassment of a rating.


----------



## holt_hogan

My calculations bring a 2.47 rating. That will probably be rounded up slightly and it depends if there was any significant difference in how many had their TV's switched on from last week, but it's looking at a 2.4-2.5

To add also: Monday Night Football had 500,000 extra viewers than last week. From a 16.1m to 16.6m


----------



## JY57

totoyotube said:


> so if i expected to get shot tomorrow, i shouldn't be upset? next week isnt going to be any easier


why should they care when they don't even bother trying when the main star is out? Cena is their scapegoat, so Vince will ultimately say we have a reason (even though they still suck)


----------



## Headliner

Hopefully it continues to spiral downhill until the incompetent executives are forced to revamp the entire product.


----------



## Pro Royka

:lmao hour 2 dropped big time from last week, specially it's the hour that people usually tune in. I guess its gonna be a 2.5 rating. They should drop the three hour show, they have a thin roster with half of them not having enough credibility or a deserved spot. They also should make it about Raw roster not a supershow, people will have no reason to watch SD anymore as they saw enough, therefore less viewers.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Well deserved rating. They put no effort into the show and they get what they deserve. Even though this hurts the argument for Punk even kind of being a draw, it doesn't matter. I'm glad the rating was low. A shit show is a shit show, even if one guy brings a bright spot to it.

Hopefully they start actually trying next week on. And that doesn't mean just throwing Cena at everything, because even he can't bring the ratings back up to where they should be on his own (though him being on the show will put them back in the right direction).


----------



## #1Peep4ever

oh holy shit


----------



## AJ

Headliner said:


> Hopefully it continues to spiral downhill until the incompetent executives are forced to revamp the entire product.


Just what I was thinking.


----------



## holt_hogan

I put this together earlier whilst anticipating today's figures:

Put's things in perspective a little better.


----------



## Cack_Thu

holt_hogan said:


> October 1st Edition of Monday Night Raw had the following viewing figures:
> 
> Hour 1: 3436
> Hour 2: 3598
> Hour 3: 3472
> 
> Compared to last weeks:
> 
> Hour 1: 3769
> Hour 2: 3990
> Hour 3: 3603


:damn


Anybody care to post the breakdown numbers segment wise?:buried :buried :buried :buried unk2 :yes


----------



## roadkill_

:vince2 Worst rating since October '97 incoming. Keep pushin' that Nickelodeon shit, V-Man. Keep it up. :vince2


----------



## Lastier

FIRE EVERYONE!!


----------



## chbulls1_23

The product really does need revamped. Hopefully the ratings get so low that they'll have to force a change.


----------



## Starbuck

Everything that needs to be said has been said already. Horrendous numbers. Yes, the football game was on and did really well but it doesn't excuse them completely. They haven't even been able to hold on to their regular viewing audience of 4 million give or take the time of the year which is the real problem. Used to be pushing 5 million. Then they were close to 4. Then they settled around 4. Now they're down to 3.5. If this keeps up God knows where we'll be by the end of the year.


----------



## Pro Royka

Cack_Thu said:


> :damn
> 
> 
> Anybody care to post the breakdown numbers segment wise?:buried :buried :buried :buried unk2 :yes


Don't worry the breakdown will show Punk segments gaining viewers and the rest losing viewers. Just like last week. 
You know nothing about ratings, this isn't a 2 hour show to blame it on one guy. 



roadkill_ said:


> :vince2 Worst rating since October '97 incoming. Keep pushin' that Nickelodeon shit, V-Man. Keep it up. :vince2


Sheamus the WHC killed hour 2, unless you don't count him :troll. It's a 3 hours show how can your logic lead you to blame it on one guy.




holt_hogan said:


> I put this together earlier whilst anticipating today's figures:
> 
> Put's things in perspective a little better.


Wow, so it's a 4.7 rating if it's a 2 hours show or I'm misunderstanding it. Thanks by the way.


----------



## Marv95

And people on here actually laughed at the idea of the product needing a reboot...


----------



## TheWFEffect

Hilarious that rating is, I feel I have said it before it is not the wrestlers but the brand and the entertainment value that draw WWE during 98/99 had god awful storylines but guess what they at least had storylines going on through all areas of the card that kept people watching for "ENTERTAINMENT" they pray themselves on being a "Sports Entertainment Company" but their writers can't maintain the so called entertainment throughout the show so its down to the wrestlers themselves to do everything it their powers to shake things up at the moment there is no big WWE title feud no draw or reason to it unlike last year Punk/Cena feuded when it felt everything was on the line and around this time WWE was in anarchy with Triple H losing it and the conspiracy ary it kept me watching because it was entertaining.


----------



## D.M.N.

Horrific number. Back to two hours please asap, three hours is too long.


----------



## Arcade

Horrible show=Horrible Ratings.


----------



## holt_hogan

Pro Royka said:


> Wow, so it's a 4.7 rating if it's a 2 hours show or I'm misunderstand it. Thanks by the way.


No these are all 3 hour shows starting the week after the 1000th anniversary show which shouldn't be included given it was a special show and a higher rating was guaranteed and delivered.

It shows the viewing figures in millions for each of the 3 hours over the 10 weeks, and the final rating is included too.


----------



## Pro Royka

holt_hogan said:


> No these are all 3 hour shows starting the week after the 1000th anniversary show which shouldn't be included given it was a special show and a higher rating was guaranteed and delivered.
> 
> It shows the viewing figures in millions for each of the 3 hours over the 10 weeks, and the final rating is included too.


The Hour 2 and 3 seems to be the highest point of the show. It's just another way to prove change. Good job if you made that (Y).


----------



## roadkill_

Marv95 said:


> And people on here actually laughed at the idea of the product needing a reboot...


They did? I must have missed that. This shit makes HLA era look like masterwork.


----------



## Ray

Did you know:

"Last week's Monday Night RAW had the lowest rating in the last 15 years! "

I don't suppose that'll make the cut onto air :hmm:


----------



## holt_hogan

Raw rating was a 2.5 - the lowest non-holiday Raw rating in 15 years.


----------



## WTFWWE

Wow WWE how far have you fallen?


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Well, nobody could've seen this coming.


Wait........nearly everyone here _did_ see this coming after they announced the move to 3 hours? Huh, how about that.


----------



## Falkono

As I said to that Punk nut hugger when Raw was on last night. WWE has catered to guys like that for far to long and the product now is showing the fruits of that.
I think you would have to be a mental case to think RAW and WWE in general is any good right now. Last night we had Punk telling JR to leave the ring, then pulled him back. A couple of people were saying how great that was. Well thats cool that you think thats great but in the real world thats called nothing happening. And this nothing happening has been going on for ages. People are tired of the product and would much rather watch something else. The worst rating in 15 years is not a coincidence. The rating reflects the quality of the show, which was pure garbage.

The PG era has not worked and will not work.

In my opinion I think WWE needs to create a new show to appeal to the older generation. They can keep RAW and Smackdown for the kids but have a new show that is more hardcore, more adult orientated. You can keep guys like Cena and Punk off there but the other guys who get little air time and generally nobody cares about should be on there. Mixed in with new guys coming through.
Do not have just one guy be the man, make everyone equal. We need gimmicks, we need characters and we need a reason to give a shit.


----------



## totoyotube

first time raw has averaged in 5 straight 2's since july 1997, going back to the old days


----------



## The Lady Killer

^ Pretty well said. I don't think they need any more shows, though. There's wrestling on TV practically every night nowadays. Far too much.

edit @ falkono


----------



## WTFWWE

Last nights show was so dull though it was like you could miss it and still know 90% of what is going on if you watch the next week. The ending to RAW was one of the worst of 2012.


----------



## Bowlen

They deserve even worse.


----------



## TripleG

When you have the Cowboys playing on MNF and you put on a bad show like they did last night, this could happen.


----------



## AthenaMark

Heard the rating was a 2.3-2.5. FUCKING HORRIBLE. HAHAHAHA. I thought he was making this "fun again". What happened? What's the excuse gonna be this week? No Cena...football again? It's funny how football never affects other shows like it does Raw though.


----------



## JigsawKrueger

That rating is lower than ANY 3 hour episode of WCW Nitro, which was in the shitter for most of 1999.

When, not if, Cena has a major injury and has to miss months of action the company is f**ked.


----------



## Mister Excitement

2.5 is amazing. It's great to see them finally getting the ratings they deserve.


----------



## vanboxmeer

With brilliant talent like Ryback, Sheamus, and AJ leading Team Steph. TNA may soon be legitimate competition simply by not dying or improving in the slightest!


----------



## FoxyRoxy

when will they get a fucking clue and invest some time and effort into the show? Even Punk said that the writers don't have a clue what they're doing each week... it wouldn't surprise me if the script was written 30 minutes before the show started. 

What reason are they giving us to tune in each week? I am tired of the same old shit each and every week. RAW and Smackdown are always the same format.. same matches each and every week, boring promos and shite feuds. There's no interesting feuds at all going on, there's nothing that makes me say "I need to tune in next week to see what happens!"

You can bring back Rock and Brock for some cheap little rating pops but those guys don't care about the company anymore. Their interests lie elsewhere.


----------



## Amber B

holt_hogan said:


> Raw rating was a 2.5 - the lowest non-holiday Raw rating in 15 years.


Good. WWE basically equals this 








A fucking mess.


----------



## kokepepsi

Russo must be eagerly sitting next to his phone waiting for a call from McMahon

In 2 weeks he will have them back up to a 2.7


----------



## Oakue

If Linda loses in a few weeks I bet they go TV-14 and edgy again. They almost have to. It may not work like it once did but at least it's trying something different, trying something new. They need a spark. That could be it.


----------



## Coffey

Cactus said:


> I really wish people get it through their heads that PG isn't the problem. It's pro-wrestling, it's predominately for children. It's meant to be PG.


TV-PG is not the problem but professional wrestling is more popular with 30+ year olds than it is with children & it always has been. Children will watch anything that they perceive as "cool" or popular. Right now, wrestling isn't either, so...

There's no doubt that WWE is trying to pander to a different group of people nowadays, including children, but that's bad business. Hulk Hogan appealed to everyone, not just kids. Steve Austin appealed to almost everyone, & kids got on board. 

Kids don't have money. They can't buy tickets or PPV. They have to talk their parents into it. What parent is going to buy a $50 PPV where their kid has to stay up until 11 PM on a school night? Who is going to buy tickets to a show where you have to sit there for, what is it, five hours now? Since they tape RAW & NXT & Superstars & Smackdown & Main Event & the Saturday morning show all over the course of two days (Monday & Tuesday) every week? So you can get home at like 11:30 to midnight on a Monday when you probably have to be up the next morning at like 6?

I can't pinpoint exactly what the problem is but I can guess!


----------



## WTFWWE

WWE is killing the cycle instead of kids growing out of WWE at 15 or 16 they are growing out of it at like 9 or 10 and want to watch the bad things not cookie cutter clean image WWE.


----------



## Amuroray

The show is a joke.


----------



## Bowlen

moonmop said:


> If Linda loses in a few weeks I bet they go TV-14 and edgy again.


I bet they won't.


----------



## Amuroray

Cm punk needs to lose the strap.

Hes a terrible champion


----------



## HHHbkDX

Excellent rating. This is exactly what they deserve, and I HOPE that it continues dropping even further until the incompetent creative team can get their heads out of their asses and realize that their product is absolute bullshit. Turning their backs on their real and loyal fans in order to cater to the fans that are killing their product(not just the kids) is beyond stupid. I hope they keep failing. I guess in order to succeed, you have to fail first.


----------



## Stall_19

So how big a part of no Cena was this ratings disaster?


----------



## TheF1BOB

INB4 We need The Rock to come back threads start to show up again. 

THE DWANE CAN'T SAVE.US :Rock4

but he can try...


----------



## Amuroray

Cena is by far and away the best on the roster


----------



## kokepepsi

Amuroray said:


> Cm punk needs to lose the strap.
> 
> Hes a terrible champion


Yeah because the Ratings shot up when Del Rio won it and feuded with Cena
LOL NO


----------



## Amuroray

kokepepsi said:


> Yeah because the Ratings shot up when Del Rio won it and feuded with Cena
> LOL NO


Dont make me bring up cena title reign figures.

The man along with orton have drawn more viewrs then punk will ever,

Infact half the roster probably has lol.

Punk acknowledges that he is a terrible draw


----------



## WTFWWE

TheF1BOB said:


> INB4 We need The Rock to come back threads start to show up again.
> 
> THE DWANE CAN'T SAVE.US :Rock4
> 
> but he can try...


IWC March 2012: GO AWY ROK STOP HOGGIN DA SPOTLIGHT 4 DA ZIGGLES N DA D.BRYNZ

IWC now: COME BACK ROCKY SAVE_US.ROCK we need ratings!



Rock is the king of ratings. When all looks bad don't forget Rocky is always here to save the day :rocky


----------



## Pro Royka

Amuroray said:


> Dont make me bring up cena title reign figures.
> 
> The man along with orton have drawn more viewrs then punk will ever,
> 
> Infact half the roster probably has lol.
> 
> Punk acknowledges that he is a terrible draw


:lmao seriously dude you're a joke. You don't understand ratings if you think it's Punks fault. Edge and Batista drew more than Cena and Orton. Let's see if you know that or not.


----------



## Coffey

I don't think the problem is any superstar, not any one individual. It's the whole show & presentation of the show. It's not C.M. Punk or John Cena or A.J. as G.M. It's _everything_. You know why people tuned into RAW 1,000? It's because they were expecting something different. It was the first 3-hour show, it was going to feature a ton of Legends & returns. It was supposed to be a spectacle. People will still watch WWE if it is fun.

What WWE needs to do, I feel, it change things up on a week-by-week basis. Stop following such a heavily predictable script. Every single show does not have to start with some 20 minute in-ring promo. We don't have to have each show end with a tag match of team babyface against team heel. We don't need the G.M. authority figure to show up & make matches on the fly in backstage vignettes to kill time. Start the show with some anarchy going on backstage, or start the show with a match already in progress, like the two wrestlers couldn't wait to get going, or start the match with an injury angle. Something different. Give us a cliffhanger to start the show so we have a reason to stick around & watch the show. Then give us a cliffhanger at the end of the show so we want to tune-in next week to see the resolve. Move different guys around, try different things, put different guys in different spots against other wrestlers.


----------



## Amuroray

Pro Royka said:


> :lmao seriously dude you're a joke. You don't understand ratings if you think it's Punks fault. Edge and Batista drew more than Cena and Orton. Let's see if you know that or not.


All great stars.


Punks terrible.


----------



## TheF1BOB

WTFWWE said:


> IWC March 2012: GO AWY ROK STOP HOGGIN DA SPOTLIGHT 4 DA ZIGGLES N DA D.BRYNZ
> 
> IWC now: COME BACK ROCKY SAVE_US.ROCK we need ratings!
> 
> 
> 
> Rock is the king of ratings. When all looks bad don't forget Rocky is always here to save the day :rocky


The :Rock3 conquers all like :mourinho conquers enaldo.

SAD MOTHERF'KER 4 LIFE.


----------



## Pro Royka

Amuroray said:


> All great stars.
> 
> 
> Punks terrible.


Seriously dude do you think Punk is responsible for others not gaining viewers. Come on its a 3 hours show, you need big stars to gain viewers throughout the show. Sheamus failed miserably in hour 2 is that Punks fault. If it's a 2 hours show I can agree if he failed but this is different, Punk was gaining viewers in the last 6 shows. He's doing just fine.


----------



## SpeedStick

Even with Cena there the show was going to get bad rating the show is just BAD go back to 2 hours cut the roster and get some better people in there...


----------



## KO Bossy

Amuroray said:


> All great stars.
> 
> 
> Punks terrible.


Whichever mod decided to boot this guy, you have my thanks.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

You know what the big problem with Raw this week was? That it was so all over the place with everyone that even CM Punk wasn't the focus of the show like he was last week. This week the show revolved around nothing, except maybe the whole AJ/Trainer shit that was never going to go anywhere and promoting JR's appreciation night for the first 2 hours. There was no real focus on anything throughout the show, and that made the show suffer greatly. That, and the fact the quality of the stuff was absolutely terrible. Punk/JR had a great promo, but it really didn't go anywhere and was a weaker version of last week's Punk/Foley promo. Sandow/Sheamus was good but the ending sucked and the debate between Sheamus and Show was awful. 

If anything, this shows just what a mistake it was to keep Cena at the top of the mountain all the years and not build up any new stars who could be at that level. And if it looked like they were going to, something fucked it up. Jeff Hardy? He fucked himself over and left. CM Punk? Already explained that in the past week. Randy Orton? A horrible booking choice at WM25 cost him all his momentum and he lost his chance being in Cena's league as a star/draw. Wade Barrett/Nexus? Cena destroyed Barrett, Barrett lost all the heat he had and the potential at being the top heel of the company now, and Nexus was destroyed by Cena/Orton in both versions. And because of all this, if Cena goes down WWE has no one to keep up the numbers. Rock has movies. Lesnar only has a limited number of dates. Taker's shape is too poor at this point in his life to compete consistently. HHH has become fully corporate and has problems at performing at a top level himself. Cena's the only guy right now they have to keep the show afloat due to their terrible bookings, including the summer of Punk last year, and now they're paying for it. 

God forbid Cena get injured, WWE is fucked unless they create a new top level star fast. Sheamus isn't there yet. Ryback I truly think will cease having any allure once his undefeated streak is gone, and Punk has turned heel and even if he turned face again, I can't see him being the top face anymore. Randy's chances are over, and there's no one else even remotely close.


----------



## Vyed

> WWE Raw on Monday, October 1 scored a year-low 2.54 rating for all three hours, which is down seven percent from a near-year-low 2.72 rating last week. *The standard two-hour rating was actually lower at a 2.53 rating.*
> 
> Raw's previous low was a 2.40 rating on the Fourth of July 2011. Before that, Raw scored a 2.49 rating the day before Christmas 2007.
> 
> - Raw averaged 3.50 million viewers, which was down 285,000 viewers (7.5 percent) compared to last week and the fewest viewers in over five years. All three hours were about the same, ranging from 3.43 to 3.60 million viewers.
> 
> Hourly Breakdown: 3.44 million first hour viewers, an increase to 3.60 million second hour viewers, and a now-typical third hour decline to 3.47 million viewers.
> 
> - On cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #3 behind Monday Night Football, which was up three percent to 16.6 million viewers for Cowboys vs. Bears, and "Major Crimes" on TNT. In the key male demos, Raw ranked #2 behind Monday Night Football, which drew six times as many males 18-49 as Raw did.
> 
> -* In Raw's weekly demos, the show registered year-lows in males 12-34, males 18-49, males 18-34, adults 18-49, and adults 18-34.*
> 
> The drop-offs from last week were very noticeable, as males 12-34 was down two-tenths of a rating, males 18-49 was down 17 percent, and males 18-34 was down three-tenths of a rating.


Too bad, I liked the show and matches/segments this week.


Apparently Caldwell thinks Punk is Over-exposed -


> It was clearly going to be a rough outing this week after last week's poor rating and Raw going against the Cowboys vs. Bears this week, but the reality of Raw's ratings situation is very startling. It should send WWE a few messages: the bill is coming due on WWE's procrastination developing the next John Cena or a combination of tip-top stars to fill the gap when he's off TV for even one week, they need to start taking better care of their stars who could be the next Cena, they have to create a hook for the following week because they're giving away everything and leaving viewers wanting nothing in this three-hour Raw era, *and stars are being over-exposed. C.M. Punk has been in six major segments the past two weeks - it's just too much.* Plus, add in a new TV show on Wednesdays and two hours of Smackdown after the Smackdown brand dominates Raw, and there's a lot of content to fill without a roster to handle the load and draw in an audience.


----------



## wwffans123

amazing Rating,CM Punk just a joke.
I hope Raw get 2.0 rating one day.


----------



## Ether

wwffans123 said:


> amazing Rating,CM Punk just a joke.
> I hope Raw get 2.0 rating one day.


Yes, let's put the blame on Punk and not how shitty the entire product as a whole. Actually, that's all Punk's fault too, right?


----------



## Coffey

Vyed said:


> Apparently Caldwell thinks Punk is Over-exposed -


*EVERYONE* is over-exposed. The guys that are just on the show once a week already feel like old hat. That's one of the major problems with RAW. They have to put every person on TV every week when that's uncalled for. It's the same reason why the people that never make TV are never on each week. They don't cycle people in or out & when something hits, they run it into the ground until people turn on it, like G.M. A.J. or the Daniel Bryan/Kane tag team.


----------



## Kabraxal

Love the blind Punk hatred still... but then, they are just like the WWE and refuse to see it's the whole damn product that is shit. Let's start blaming the one man that really has that much affect on the product... McMahon.


----------



## -Skullbone-

Ha, that's quite the number to stew over for them. Whatever it takes for them to get their arses in gear, though. I do wonder how many actually sat through the show yet are applauding this horrid rating and hope that a similar trend will continue? I don't know who could sit through a three hour _weekly _wrestling show in the first place, but shouldn't you be joining the number of those tuning out as well if you truly can't stand the current climate?

Walk-In's examples of possible changes being made to the show's format raises a good point in this idea of 'conditioning' the viewer. I don't think many casuals would be disdainful of how the shows pan out as many of their favourites get to do their think every weekday, but I'm sure the near-exact model used for each episode doesn't have them thinking they've missed out on too much either. Whether management want to think about it or not, the show's routine layout have been pretty firmly implanted into our idea of how it will all eventuate and that includes audiences of all ages.

And yes, exposure and handling of stars is a major problem. I remember how many were absolutely adamant that when Lesnar would return he should be held off from in-ring competition until much later in the year for the company to reap the fullest rewards off his name marketability. Instead, he faces Cena and loses to Cena a month into his return at the first given PPV.


----------



## Hollywood Hanoi

Raw needs to call in the big guns


----------



## TromaDogg

WTFWWE said:


> WWE is killing the cycle instead of kids growing out of WWE at 15 or 16 they are growing out of it at like 9 or 10 and want to watch the bad things not cookie cutter clean image WWE.


This is something I've thought for a while.

When they went back to a PG rating and greatly watered the content down, they said it was to create 'brand loyalty' from an earlier age.

Unfortunately for them, that doesn't work really work long term. By having a show that caters to teenagers and the older demographic a little more, you have an audience that will carry on watching for literally _years_. Kids will think it's 'cool' to watch it when they're younger and will carry on enjoying it as they grow older.

With a show that only mainly focuses on kids and soccer mom types, you have an audience that will mostly grow out of wrestling and stop watching as soon as they hit their teens, finding it dull and childish.

That being said, it is the fault of the creative team, not the rating itself....WWF from 1997 to 1999 (before they went TV-14) was mostly great stuff, with the likes of Nation of Domination, DX, etc. There's no reason why they can't make a great show like that now within PG guidelines that entertains us older fans, they're just choosing to pour all their focus on (what I believe is) by far the wrong demographic.

At the rate they're shedding viewers at the moment, it won't be too long before TNA is actually considered legit competition to them each week fpalm (and I'm saying that as someone who watches TNA)


----------



## RatedR10

Eventually, WWE has to start getting serious about building stars for the future. If John Cena had a career ending injury at Hell in a Cell, what the hell happens to the product? Things are just going to get worse and worse if something doesn't change. An edgier product let's say. I'm not saying Attitude Era, but let's be real here, this shit that WWE gives us every week isn't PG, it's more G rated. There's a lot more that can be done under PG parameters and WWE doesn't do anything. It's alienating a lot of viewers, even the younger teens, more than WWE wanted I bet.

I said for a while that Raw would dip down to 2.5 eventually, but I'm surprised it happened this quickly. There's nothing interesting about the product whatsoever today, and the viewership numbers prove that. What makes people want to tune in on a weekly basis for three hours? Absolutely nothing. Something has to change quickly, because ratings will just continue to drop at this pace.


----------



## Marv95

2.5 is at Nitro 1999 and 2000-levels before and after Russo was fired. In fact it's worse than what they did, and they had Raw to compete with. Anyone remember how BORING Nitro was throughout 1999 post nWo/pre Russo and 2000 during the Sullivan Era? But at least they had starpower.

Yes 3-hours are a huge problem but even if they went back to the regular 2 it wouldn't make THAT much of a difference. They've gotten 2s before the 3-hour switch. Despite some potential in one or 2 guys the rest of the show and product is a complete mess. Cena isn't gonna save it, JBL back full-time won't save it, TV-14 won't save it (see 2007). It needs a revamp. Trim the fat and get rid of the guys who aren't ready/waste space and bring in guys who clearly are and push them. _Enforce_ the brand split or just abolish it already and have one world champ. Turn guys heel/face who are long overdue. Focus on a more serious product instead of pointless comedy. Give us a storyline that creates a buzz around the wrestling world(Nexus, Summer of Punk, Conspiracy) and _follow through _on it.


----------



## Rock316AE

Disaster number as expected, not only from last week but from June when they announced this ridiculous 3 hours deal. Hope that interest continue to plummet, this week was the longest TV show I have ever seen, completely dull, lifeless and boring.


----------



## Ray

This whole PG thing is such a stupid excuse. It means fuck all. FYI, SmackDown was PG since it's inception, and in 2001-2003, it featured some of the best storylines and content/matches I've ever see. PG only limits WWE because they want it too, otherwise it does fuck all to the type of programming WWE can produce, and is only a segway for Vince to capture the attention of moms and children.


----------



## TromaDogg

Jon Jones said:


> This whole PG thing is such a stupid excuse. It means fuck all. FYI, SmackDown was PG since it's inception, and in 2001-2003, it featured some of the best storylines and content/matches I've ever see. PG only limits WWE because they want it too, otherwise it does fuck all to the type of programming WWE can produce, and is only a segway for Vince to capture the attention of moms and children.


I can't speak for others, but I don't think the PG rating is the problem...it's what they choose to do with it that is causing problems.

Smackdown was excellent back then, you're absolutely correct. But Smackdown back then also didn't feature a general manager that skipped to the ring, a fat freak that had a kiddies disco in the ring after his matches (Too Cool used to dance, but they didn't drag kids from the audience in) and a top star that specialiased in 'PG swearing' and using such powerful insults as 'son of a bee sting' fpalm

Raw could be a great PG show again. They just need to focus on the right demographic, as (as others have said) it's been putting out more 'G' style content than 'PG' for a while now.


----------



## -Skullbone-

Marv95 said:


> Turn guys heel/face who are long overdue. Focus on a more serious product instead of pointless comedy.


What good are turns going to do if creative struggles to make long-lasting programs that get people's attention in the first place and stay there? The comedy's always going to be around although I agree much of it is pointless. Then again, much of the company's programming appears to be pretty pointless anyway.

Continuity is a huge issue at the moment and the WWE can't seem to hold on to an angle in the long run. I maintain that the only program to possess a semblance of longevity it is the Bryan-AJ-Kane-Punk arc, whose roots can be traced back to the Wrestlemania WHC fiasco. Everything else gets put on the shelf after a month with no real implication or 'hook' for the audience to latch onto aside from programs involving Cena, Triple H as well as Undertaker and Lesnar when they appear (maybe Punk if I'm being extremely generous, but he's still climbing that ladder of relevance). Everything else appears to happen by proxy.


----------



## The XL

Amber B said:


> Good. WWE basically equals this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A fucking mess.


LMFAO at that gif!!

I really think the WWE is in real trouble. I could see them going under in like 10 years if they don't turn this ship around soon.


----------



## roadkill_

Jon Jones said:


> This whole PG thing is such a stupid excuse. It means fuck all. FYI, SmackDown was PG since it's inception, and in 2001-2003, it featured some of the best storylines and content/matches I've ever see. PG only limits WWE because they want it too, otherwise it does fuck all to the type of programming WWE can produce, and is only a segway for Vince to capture the attention of moms and children.


No ab-libbing is allowed under the current strict regimen. Steve Austin himself would have a hard time flourishing under such tight bullshit (My guess is he woulda walked, probably to TNA where f-bombs have been heard several times past few months).


----------



## Serious_frusting

Interesting fact

WCW got a 2.6 ten weeks before it died and it was going up against the WWF.

Not saying that the WWE is about to die though, I just wanted to put things into perspective.


----------



## Theproof

lol this is great news and nobody should be mad about this. I'm surprised they even get this with the crap they've been putting out over the years.


----------



## FIREW0LF

Not suprised in the slightest. Put on a show that is utter shite, get utter shite ratings.


----------



## Vyed

roadkill_ said:


> *No ab-libbing is allowed under the current strict regimen.* Steve Austin himself would have a hard time flourishing under such tight bullshit (My guess is he woulda walked, probably to TNA where f-bombs have been heard several times past few months).


I doubt that is true. Its one of those Internet myths with no proof. I was listening to a CM punk interview from 2009, where he said he does a lot of ad-libbing in his promos. I think the real problem is lack of drive among the superstars to make it to the absolute top, as JR has pointed out many times in his interviews and blogs.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

lol I haven't sat down and fully watched this shit of a show since RAW 1000. Sad to see how far its fallen in recent weeks. Nothing meaningful is going on.


----------



## Kabraxal

Vyed said:


> I doubt that is true. Its one of those Internet myths with no proof. I was listening to a CM punk interview from 2009, where he said he does a lot of ad-libbing in his promos. I think the real problem is lack of drive among the superstars to make it to the absolute top, as JR has pointed out many times in his interviews and blogs.


I think that is more along the lines of the absolute top guys have some pull to do their thing. We've heard numerous reports about guys like Ziggler ad libbing then getting berated for not sticking to script enough times that I don't think it is far off from teh truth. McMahon has gone iron fisted on the product. And maybe that is the real reason it's decaying... there is no organic feel to anything. It's all so mechanical for any of the few feuds or stories we have while everything else is just... there.


----------



## KO Bossy

Marv95 said:


> 2.5 is at Nitro 1999 and 2000-levels before and after Russo was fired. In fact it's worse than what they did, and they had Raw to compete with. Anyone remember how BORING Nitro was throughout 1999 post nWo/pre Russo and 2000 during the Sullivan Era? But at least they had starpower.
> 
> Yes 3-hours are a huge problem but even if they went back to the regular 2 it wouldn't make THAT much of a difference. They've gotten 2s before the 3-hour switch. Despite some potential in one or 2 guys the rest of the show and product is a complete mess. Cena isn't gonna save it, JBL back full-time won't save it, TV-14 won't save it (see 2007). It needs a revamp. Trim the fat and get rid of the guys who aren't ready/waste space and bring in guys who clearly are and push them. _Enforce_ the brand split or just abolish it already and have one world champ. Turn guys heel/face who are long overdue. Focus on a more serious product instead of pointless comedy. Give us a storyline that creates a buzz around the wrestling world(Nexus, Summer of Punk, Conspiracy) and _follow through _on it.


Oh I remember how boring Nitro was. During the Sullivan Era I think that the most unique concept invented was the Yappapi Indian Strap match.

I'll say this about Russo WCW-it was often illogical, stupid and poorly thought out, but it was never boring.


----------



## Rock316AE

Serious_frusting said:


> Interesting fact
> 
> WCW got a 2.6 ten weeks before it died and it was going up against the WWF.
> 
> Not saying that the WWE is about to die though, I just wanted to put things into perspective.


WCW even on its last legs had a much bigger overall TV audience than WWE now. In the last few months and in general, they were always doing the 3.5/3.9 quarters in the first hour and then the 2.5/3.0- against RAW(only 00). The downfall below 3.0 only started in late 99 and even then they had plenty of weeks above it. They had a RAW one time in 11pm because of Tennis, Nitro that night drew a 4.0+. That was the same night of the War Games on TV IIRC, which was a big success. Point is, Nitro with no competition at its peak on their neck, would have done at least a 4.0+ every week.


----------



## Wayne Rooney's Fellatio Slave

Damn, TNA maintaining their core audience is looking pretty good now.


----------



## RatedR10

Vyed said:


> I doubt that is true. Its one of those Internet myths with no proof. I was listening to a CM punk interview from 2009, where he said he does a lot of ad-libbing in his promos. I think the real problem is lack of drive among the superstars to make it to the absolute top, as JR has pointed out many times in his interviews and blogs.


There's been tons of things out there that say only a few superstars get to ad-lib, and those are the top guys. Former creative writers have also noted that Dolph Ziggler's gone off script a few times and every time he has, he's been punished for it in someway.


----------



## Ray

roadkill_ said:


> No ab-libbing is allowed under the current strict regimen. Steve Austin himself would have a hard time flourishing under such tight bullshit (My guess is he woulda walked, probably to TNA where f-bombs have been heard several times past few months).


Not true. If your idea of a a good product is swearing in every sentence, nudity, and excessive blood, then your just hanging on to the Attitude Era, which quite frankly, was an overrated period, and featuring more bad stuff then good. 

I do agree that creative should not write promo's and vignettes for the wrestlers, nor should they come up with the character of the wrestlers, but Vince not letting his wrestlers ad-lib has nothing to do with whether or not the PG rating affects WWE in a negative manner, because it doesn't. It's a matter of Vince being senile, and him wanting to control every little thing on his show, because he's a near 70 year old who thinks in his own mind that he's a god, and thus wants to act as such.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

:lmao Terrible numbers. Like others have said, you can blame your least favourite wrestler all you want, the problem lies with the shitty product. And not just a shitty product, a three hour long shitty product. A number they deserved and I'm glad to see it.


----------



## Vyed

RatedR10 said:


> There's been tons of things out there that say only a few superstars get to ad-lib, and those are the top guys. Former creative writers have also noted that Dolph Ziggler's gone off script a few times and every time he has, he's been punished for it in someway.


Do you have a source link/report? anything?


----------



## RatedR10

Vyed said:


> Do you have a source link/report? anything?


Ah, I can't find the exact source online. I remember it was in that diary/journal thing from a former WWE intern/writer/assistant writer or something like that. I remember him commenting on how top guys are given freedom to go off script (Cena, Punk, etc) but Ziggler was punished for it a few times when he would do it. I'll try to find it, or if anyone else knows what I'm talking about, if they can help out, that'd be great.


----------



## Coffey

The Big Show ad-libbed just last night when his podium broke & he called himself a little overweight...


----------



## Olympus

I just came here to see how shitty the rating was. I don't even watch anymore and haven't in months. Shit is a joke. The current product has made me actually DISLIKE wrestling for the most part. I barely have interest in the genre period.

Vince is an idiot and the non stop John Cena parade that he's been force feeding people for the last 7 years is FINALLY showing it's side effects. Without the proper supporting cast, the show is a joke. Losing HBK, HHH, Taker, Batista, Edge, Hardy, Umaga, Angle, JBL, Jericho, MVP, Kennedy, Benjamin, Morrison, Eddie, Benoit, and others over the years and the failure to create new stars fucked them and they mostly did it to themselves. MVP and Kennedy should have been the next big things but the E just threw them away. Now of course Kennedy was injury prone, but still. Then there was always Lashley who, despite the IWC hate, was pretty over and could have been pretty big.

But they just kept shooting themselves in the foot with *SHIT* booking. They buried Barrett, they held back Ziggler, fuck it took Punk's contract expiring and a worked shoot promo that went viral to keep this man in the company otherwise he would have been history and guess what? They actually RELY on this man. If Punk left today the company's fucked. Same with Bryan. They didn't want Bryan to succeed. Vince wanted to play politics and now what happened? Top star/draw. The WWE is just run by imbeciles with archaic, aging mentalitys.

I hope this company keeps getting the shit beat out of them. I pray, *PRAY* for the day Impact beats Raw in the ratings and by the looks of things, it's not too far away.


----------



## Das Wunderberlyn

best in the world at killing ratings


----------



## Redwood

Heard it was a 2.5. Was it Punk's fault again?


----------



## Johncena-hhh

Deserve this number


----------



## Olympus

Y2Raven said:


> Heard it was a 2.5. Was it Punk's fault again?


It's always Punk's fault.


----------



## wwffans123

Y2Raven said:


> Heard it was a 2.5. Was it Punk's fault again?


Punk is the WWE Champion,it's the most important thing in wwe,surely CM Punk is one of the reason why the rating sucks.


----------



## TheRealFunkman

EVERYONE BOYCOTT WWE NEXT WEEK.....I wanna see how much lower their ratings will drop. just dvr that shit. maybe vince will realize his show blows now.


----------



## chbulls1_23

TheRealFunkman said:


> EVERYONE BOYCOTT WWE NEXT WEEK.....I wanna see how much lower their ratings will drop. just dvr that shit. maybe vince will realize his show blows now.


I'm only gonna watch the Punk segments next week since everything else is sucking balls. I'm gonna watch them on youtube though. I'm not giving them my viewership if the product is gonna be that shitty.


----------



## TheRealFunkman

chbulls1_23 said:


> I'm only gonna watch the Punk segments next week since everything else is sucking balls. I'm gonna watch them on youtube though. I'm not giving them my viewership if the product is gonna be that shitty.


im on same boat I only watch for punk but theyre fuckin up his run with heyman so far I had high hopes


----------



## Coffey

I really feel like writing a long, rambling post/paper/rant about Vince McMahon & how he has continually gotten lucky over the years, how he is overrated as a promoter & how he has tarnished the entire industry with his "vision" of what the shows should be. But I don't know if I care enough to put that much effort into something anymore. 

His father with the WWWF, then VKM "uniting" the territories by stealing all the talent right as cable went big. Hogan catching fire & becoming mainstream. Continuing through the early 90's steroid trials with the Afa threats to jurors. Then instead of dying to WCW years later, he lucked into a hot streak with the likes of MULTIPLE once-in-a-lifetime talents while WCW continually blundered & made mistakes. Now WWE is publicly traded. It's fucking insane while he pisses away millions & millions of dollars on stupid shit like Linda running for senate & WWE films. Just crazy.

Not everyone would agree of course, and some would call Vince McMahon the best promoter of all-time & honestly, that's hard to dispute. But there's a lot of revisionist history & brainwashing that has happened over the years too & that will only continue to get worse the older we all get & the more time that passes by. And yet, despite being a dreadful human being, an adulterer, a drug abuser, a person that exploits people, a carny, he'll be remembered as a pioneer & a "genius."


----------



## chronoxiong

This rating is so sad to hear that I actually wish it can continue so the WWE can really shake things up. It's not even CM Punk's fault either. A lot of people find him entertaining so it has to be the shitty product overall that is killing itself in the ratings. We don't want to endure 3 hours of it especially during football season.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

And yet, WWE won't care and this won't change anything. WWE put KANE AND DB (who have been death to ratings recently) in the main event. They seemingly don't give a shit.


----------



## BANKSY

Yeah a main event with no babyfaces was never going to draw.


----------



## CHIcagoMade

Makaveli said:


> I just came here to see how shitty the rating was. I don't even watch anymore and haven't in months. Shit is a joke. The current product has made me actually DISLIKE wrestling for the most part. I barely have interest in the genre period.
> 
> Vince is an idiot and the non stop John Cena parade that he's been force feeding people for the last 7 years is FINALLY showing it's side effects. Without the proper supporting cast, the show is a joke. Losing HBK, HHH, Taker, Batista, Edge, Hardy, Umaga, Angle, JBL, Jericho, MVP, Kennedy, Benjamin, Morrison, Eddie, Benoit, and others over the years and the failure to create new stars fucked them and they mostly did it to themselves. MVP and Kennedy should have been the next big things but the E just threw them away. Now of course Kennedy was injury prone, but still. Then there was always Lashley who, despite the IWC hate, was pretty over and could have been pretty big.
> 
> But they just kept shooting themselves in the foot with *SHIT* booking. They buried Barrett, they held back Ziggler, fuck it took Punk's contract expiring and a worked shoot promo that went viral to keep this man in the company otherwise he would have been history and guess what? They actually RELY on this man. If Punk left today the company's fucked. Same with Bryan. They didn't want Bryan to succeed. Vince wanted to play politics and now what happened? Top star/draw. The WWE is just run by imbeciles with archaic, aging mentalitys.
> 
> I hope this company keeps getting the shit beat out of them. I pray, *PRAY* for the day Impact beats Raw in the ratings and by the looks of things, it's not too far away.


Don't forget how they fucked up The Miz.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Wrestling seriously needs TNA to get it's shit in gear and beat them or get anywhere near them in the ratings.

Then and only will WWE get it's ass in gear.


----------



## WashingtonD

Hire Russo


----------



## -Skullbone-

I'm interested in this talk about how TNA becoming better will make _WWE_ better for the sake of rival promotions one-upping the other. What happens if you guys start enjoying TNA more should this neck and neck competition become more apparent in the future? A switch of alliances perhaps? What if TNA were able to, by some miracle, help put WWE out of business?

:jeter


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Lil'Jimmy said:


> Yeah a main event with no babyfaces was never going to draw.


And what do ya know, they're doing the same thing for SD. 

Though technically I think Kane is a face... but then again Kane/Bryan is a very tweenerish team, so who knows. But that is an interesting point that the main event had no solid 100% indisputable face in it... well besides AJ I guess.


----------



## Green Light

Ryback bringing in dem ratings


----------



## ashley678

thats the thing not everyone seems to realises, one person doesnt bring the ratings, its everyone, back in attitude area it wernt just stone cold and the rock who brought ratings (they did alot) but generally it was everyone cos the whole show was actually good, every belt had meaning every wrestler had a meaning that they used.

they gave time to alot of people not just the same suspect 6 or so people and kept doing same shit over and over. 3 hours is too long for a normal raw show each week, and when your whole product is shit all but the ending 20 or so minutes yeah you have shit ratings.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

WashingtonD said:


> Hire Russo


I hope they do.


----------



## mcliquez

fucking midgets like Punk, Bryan, etc. and meatheads with no charisma, ring skills, etc. like RyBerg and Sheamus are destroying this business. Dean Ambrose should never see the light of the main roster. Fire that skinny vanilla midget right now. One of the worst things that happened to WWE is the born of CM Punk.


----------



## Evil Peter

Green Light said:


> Ryback bringing in dem ratings


Poor Tinberg, not even JR mentions him after he came in and "helped".


----------



## -Skullbone-

The "born" of CM Punk?


----------



## checkcola

CHIcagoMade95 said:


> Don't forget how they fucked up The Miz.


It amazes me how they had a guy who did mean something, yet buried him and for what? I never understood why he was punished in the first place. Miz always has been a shameless company man who puts the WWE over every chance he got. You'd think they'd want more of those kinds of performers around. He can talk and is ok in the ring. Now he's out there in a match and its completely meaningless, despite main eventing and winning at a WM.

I do think DB/Kane as tag champs is a big big mistake. They wrestled and were involved in some CM Punk title defenses. The idea that their issues can't be solved with a match runs contrary to everything pro wrestling should be (a feud is settled via a match). No one told Austin and McMahon to hug it out. These two should lose the titles and have a blowoff match. Have AJ lose her GM power in an unrelated storyline and then she turns heel in anger, helps DB win, and they are reunited as an act. That will get some real heat back on DB and the right kind of heat.


----------



## Shawn Morrison

Not that i care much about ratings. Raw was kind of law in quality though, and i think if WWE cares about ratings they should probably go back to two hours, i personally can never watch tv three hours straight, which is why i watch WWE on youtube. I guess the ratings this week will give the writers a wake up call and tell them to start booking better. 

Oh and i find it pretty damn annoying how people here judge superstars because of ratings and stuff, are you kidding me? Judge people by their talent/quality, don't judge them because of how many people see them on tv. This is why some superstars never get over, all people these days do to find out who they should 'support' is look at the ratings to see if someone is a draw. Pathetic.


----------



## Chismo

The thing is... I barely even watch WWE anymore, I watch Raw here and there, and from my POV, it doesn't even deserve 1.0, it's a pile of shit TV.


----------



## roadkill_

JoeRulz said:


> The thing is... I barely even watch WWE anymore, I watch Raw here and there, and from my POV, it doesn't even deserve 1.0, it's a pile of shit TV.


Its currently the worst wrestling show I've ever witnessed.


----------



## Happenstan

Vyed said:


> I doubt that is true. Its one of those Internet myths with no proof. I was listening to a CM punk interview from 2009, where he said he does a lot of ad-libbing in his promos.



I think the difference is Linda wasn't running for office in 09. 2010-12 is Linda's "legacy." Hopefully it ends in November.




> But they just kept shooting themselves in the foot with *SHIT* booking. They buried Barrett, they held back Ziggler, fuck it took Punk's contract expiring and a worked shoot promo that went viral to keep this man in the company otherwise he would have been history and guess what? They actually RELY on this man. If Punk left today the company's fucked. Same with Bryan. They didn't want Bryan to succeed. Vince wanted to play politics and now what happened? Top star/draw. The WWE is just run by imbeciles with archaic, aging mentalitys.



Don't forget the complete wipe out Christian received at Orton's hands last year. Same with D-Bry against Punk earlier. So many opportunities to elevate someone...all passed on. Makes no sense. They didn't have to give them the titles but having those guys get completely owned was a waste. Yet ShameUs continues to exist every week telling those God awful "Cena style jokes." THAT is HHH's fault. He's not gonna be the great savior a lot of people expect him to be.


----------



## -Skullbone-

Happenstan said:


> Don't forget the complete wipe out Christian received at Orton's hands last year. Same with D-Bry against Punk earlier. So many opportunities to elevate someone...all passed on. Makes no sense. They didn't have to give them the titles but having those guys get completely owned was a waste. *Yet ShameUs continues to exist every week telling those God awful "Cena style jokes." THAT is HHH's fault. He's not gonna be the great savior a lot of people expect him to be*.


That's due to the insistence they have on producing another Cena character for this next generation of fans. Christ, even the first one wasn't received very well and John's 10X better at playing it than Sheamus.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

The Jim Ross/CM Punk segment was the highest rated segment on the show according to Jim Ross's twitter.


----------



## MethHardy

mcliquez said:


> fucking midgets like Punk, Bryan, etc. and meatheads with no charisma, ring skills, etc. like RyBerg and Sheamus are destroying this business. Dean Ambrose should never see the light of the main roster. Fire that skinny vanilla midget right now. One of the worst things that happened to WWE is the born of CM Punk.


What? Ambrose is like 6'4 lol


----------



## JY57

last week over-run was the worst over-run in 15 years right? That will probably be # 2 worst now.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Well done, J.R.


----------



## THANOS

Evil Peter said:


> Poor Tinberg, not even JR mentions him after he came in and "helped".


Yep Ryback was in that segment for how long again? It was ALL due to Punk and JR.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

I think RAW was entertaining. unk3

BTW. Does any of you rating pro's know what rating the season premier of Dexter got?


----------



## The-Rock-Says

What was entertaining about it? 

Jeez, you'd think Big Show coming out and taking a big shit in the ring was entertaining.


----------



## wwffans123

Raw is Unwatchable will gone till Dwayne,Undertaker come back..


----------



## Patrick Bateman

I for one found the opening segment good. The mic duel between JR and Punk was also nice. To be honest i skipped the Sheamus/Show stuff, but the match against Sandow was okay. Team Friendship vs Ziggler and Punk was a entertaining little main event with a cool finish. And of course Cesaro beating Clay was a highlight.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

2.5? Just about what the quality of the show deserved.

Not the biggest TNA fan but I really do hope they can find a way to draw in ratings to around a 2.0, then WWE might actually make an effort.


----------



## Choke2Death

I really hope the ratings continue to sink and at one point, TNA manages to get one over on WWE. It'll be epic because this company doesn't deserve to stay in business anymore. At least it seems like in TNA they have respect for the fans, unlike Vince and his old ass mind.

And despite what it seems like I've said in the past, Punk is not the sole person to blame for the ratings. He certainly doesn't help them (hence he's no draw) but I wouldn't say he's a "ratings killer". The whole show is just terrible and that's why the ratings go down every week.


----------



## DJ2334

CM Punk is pretty much the only reason I watch and I have to say, he's made Raw way more entertaining than it's been in months.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

DJ2334 said:


> CM Punk is pretty much the only reason I watch and I have to say, he's made Raw way more entertaining than it's been in months.


It makes me laugh that people think Punk is the reason ratings are low. Imagine this Raw or last weeks Raw without Punk, do people acutely think Raw ratings would go up or even stay the same? they would sink even lower then they are now as everything around Punk and Cena are bombing in the breakdowns. DB, Kane, Sheamus, Del Rio and everyone except Cena, Punk and Big Show are losing viewers.


----------



## -Skullbone-

Choke2Death said:


> I really hope the ratings continue to sink and at one point, TNA manages to get one over on WWE.* It'll be epic because this company doesn't deserve to stay in business anymore.* At least it seems like in TNA they have respect for the fans, unlike Vince and his old ass mind.
> 
> And despite what it seems like I've said in the past, Punk is not the sole person to blame for the ratings. He certainly doesn't help them (hence he's no draw) but I wouldn't say he's a "ratings killer". The whole show is just terrible and that's why the ratings go down every week.


Mate, I'm not a company loyalist by any means but saying they deserve to go out of business is overstepping the mark a tad. Forgive this sudden bout of PC, but the guys and gals that really, genuinely give it their all don't need to be held to such a statement based on what is ultimately management's final say. What's more, your enjoyment is likely to change at the drop of the hat when the 'E do step it up and appeal to your taste (whether they stumble into it or it's by design is irrelevant really).

The fact of the matter is that this company is still chugging along quite well in many aspects and this will probably be regarded as another slight obstacle they overcame in three to four weeks. I've been on these forums (sporadically) since 2006 and have seen a lot of posts of similar nature forecasting dark days ahead based on incidents the company would largely shrug off years later. Perhaps that is what irked me about your post: the hyperbole in response to the situation. One week you'll say they deserve to die out but it's very likely you and many others will come back in here in, say, three to four and say something along the lines of "well done WWE! You've really stepped it up since that one really bad show, keep it up, nice going, etc."


----------



## vanboxmeer

When Vince dies and Team Steph takes over everything. The floodgates will open up. That dumb broad consists of all of Vince's bad traits and none of his good ones. If she wasn't his daughter, she'd of been fired many years ago for massacring her dad's creative direction to the point where domestic is in dire straits. The only thing propping this company up was Shane McMahon opening them up to the international markets a decade ago. And even those markets are eroding.


----------



## Choke2Death

-Skullbone- said:


> Mate, I'm not a company loyalist by any means but saying they deserve to go out of business is overstepping the mark a tad. Forgive this sudden bout of PC, but the guys and gals that really, genuinely give it their all don't need to be held to such a statement based on what is ultimately management's final say. What's more, your enjoyment is likely to change at the drop of the hat when the 'E do step it up and appeal to your taste (whether they stumble into it or it's by design is irrelevant really).
> 
> The fact of the matter is that this company is still chugging along quite well in many aspects and this will probably be regarded as another slight obstacle they overcame in three to four weeks. I've been on these forums (sporadically) since 2006 and have seen a lot of posts of similar nature forecasting dark days ahead based on incidents the company would largely shrug off years later. Perhaps that is what irked me about your post: the hyperbole in response to the situation. One week you'll say they deserve to die out but it's very likely you and many others will come back in here in, say, three to four and say something along the lines of "well done WWE! You've really stepped it up since that one really bad show, keep it up, nice going, etc."


I'm waiting for that day where they manage to make me say something along the lines of that final sentence and the show doesn't rely on the star power of a legend like The Rock or special attraction like Lesnar. I respect the talent that genuinely want to put on a show but with this company dying, it might also make them work for a different promotion where their talent is truly appreciated and they are utilized properly. And that aside, I just don't find majority of them entertaining to start with, so it's not like the fault lies 150% on Vince and the writers.

That aside, the last time I really enjoyed a full show from this company was Raw after Wrestlemania and WM28 itself as well as Extreme Rules barring the ending. I also enjoyed most of Raw 1000 and some of Raw is Vince (June) but otherwise, Raw and specially Smackdown have been horse-shit in over 5 months now. These are the darkest days in WWE history since 1995. I'd rather go back to the the Guest Host Era. And fuck it, I'd even go back to the summer of *2007* of all years!!! That's how bad it is today. I'm saying that just when I thought wrestling couldn't be surrounded by darker clouds more so than it was in 2007 following the Benoit tragedy.

And I have a bigger chance of becoming a millionaire in a week than WWE changing for the better. They are HOPELESS, I'm telling ya. I tried to be optimistic many times when they were screwing up but I've had enough and the management is full of idiots that need to be fired and get hit in the head with an object so maybe they come to their senses.


----------



## James1o1o

TheRealFunkman said:


> EVERYONE BOYCOTT WWE NEXT WEEK.....I wanna see how much lower their ratings will drop. just dvr that shit. maybe vince will realize his show blows now.


No. Because when people do that, Vince thinks its because Cena isn't on the show, and that is exactly what everyone at WWE will be thinking. Lowest ratings of the year, funnily enough, Cena wasn't on the show. So they will attempt to push MORE Cena down our throats, which we don't want.

That aside.

Aren't the low ratings this week down to the fact there was a huge NFL match or something?


----------



## Evil Peter

Choke2Death said:


> I really hope the ratings continue to sink and at one point, TNA manages to get one over on WWE. It'll be epic because this company doesn't deserve to stay in business anymore. At least it seems like in TNA they have respect for the fans, unlike Vince and his old ass mind.
> 
> And despite what it seems like I've said in the past, Punk is not the sole person to blame for the ratings. He certainly doesn't help them (hence he's no draw) but I wouldn't say he's a "ratings killer". The whole show is just terrible and that's why the ratings go down every week.


Why doesn't it deserve to stay in business? Because it's not to your taste? I'm surprised how much you know about the show's quality since you regularly say that you're not watching. Seems like my relation to Smackdown, which I don't watch. I know what segments happen at times but I can't judge the quality of them without seeing them. I just know that I'm not interested in viewing another WWE show and therefor don't care how it does. 

I don't disagree that a lot of Raw is bad, but that's obviously not my point either.


----------



## chbulls1_23

WWE desperately needs a revamp. Put Raw on from 8-10 pm and make the rating at least PG-DLV like Smackdown use to be. Or make it have the same type of edge that the "Summer of Punk" had last year. That's when it was actually entertaining because of it's edginess and maturity of the program. Now it's a fuckin' joke for hardcore fans and the IWC because it's so corny and targeted to 4 year olds.


----------



## Coffey

If WWE just had 90 minutes of live RAW every Monday & that was the only show they had other than the monthly Pay-Per-View, I guarantee the show would improve. Why? Because they would actually have to manage the show accordingly, to get the important stuff on the air & they would be forced to eliminate the nonsense & filler. When RAW is 3 hours long, Smackdown is 2 hours long, NXT is an hour, Main Event is an hour, SLAM! is half an hour & Superstars is an hour, I think they're just worried about being able to put enough stuff on TV at all, since they tape it all in two days, on Monday & Tuesday.

I remember when I used to watch WCW Saturday Night. It felt special back in the day, before the nWo era. 6:05 P.M., baby! But when the show was over, I wasn't tired, I wasn't burned out on the product. I wanted to see more. I was left wanting more. That's important. By the time RAW is over, if you can make it to the end, you feel dreadful. You feel like the show has been on forever. You think "man, good thing this isn't on for another week." Every show burns you out. Imagine if you have tickets & you're there live & they're taping other stuff before that show even! It is crazy.


----------



## DesolationRow

mcliquez said:


> fucking midgets like Punk, Bryan, etc. and meatheads with no charisma, ring skills, etc. like RyBerg and Sheamus are destroying this business. Dean Ambrose should never see the light of the main roster. Fire that skinny vanilla midget right now. One of the worst things that happened to WWE is the born of CM Punk.


:lmao

Post of the decade.


----------



## D.M.N.

I think the problem here starts at Raw 1000. Look at who they brought back for that show:

- Road Dogg
- X Pac
- Shawn Michaels
- Roddy Piper
- Mick Foley
- Trish Stratus
- The Rock
- Bret Hart
- APA
- Lita
- Rikishi
- Undertaker

The point is, they haven't reached back out to many. Why didn't they reach back out to Rikishi? Trish? They did not capitalise on that show in any way, shape or form.

There again, did anyone expect anything different?


----------



## chbulls1_23

Walk-In said:


> If WWE just had 90 minutes of live RAW every Monday & that was the only show they had other than the monthly Pay-Per-View, I guarantee the show would improve. Why? Because they would actually have to manage the show accordingly, to get the important stuff on the air & they would be forced to eliminate the nonsense & filler. When RAW is 3 hours long, Smackdown is 2 hours long, NXT is an hour, Main Event is an hour, SLAM! is half an hour & Superstars is an hour, I think they're just worried about being able to put enough stuff on TV at all, since they tape it all in two days, on Monday & Tuesday.
> 
> I remember when I used to watch WCW Saturday Night. It felt special back in the day, before the nWo era. 6:05 P.M., baby! But when the show was over, I wasn't tired, I wasn't burned out on the product. I wanted to see more. I was left wanting more. That's important. By the time RAW is over, if you can make it to the end, you feel dreadful. You feel like the show has been on forever. You think "man, good thing this isn't on for another week." Every show burns you out. Imagine if you have tickets & you're there live & they're taping other stuff before that show even! It is crazy.


I would gladly sit through an hour and a half of Raw every week. Then it wouldn't be filled with so much B.S. filler material.


----------



## Choke2Death

Evil Peter said:


> Why doesn't it deserve to stay in business? Because it's not to your taste? I'm surprised how much you know about the show's quality since you regularly say that you're not watching. Seems like my relation to Smackdown, which I don't watch. I know what segments happen at times but I can't judge the quality of them without seeing them. I just know that I'm not interested in viewing another WWE show and therefor don't care how it does.
> 
> I don't disagree that a lot of Raw is bad, but that's obviously not my point either.


Why? There are many reasons and it not being to my taste is very minor compared to that. One reason is the fact that Vince wastes valuable money on worthless crap like Linda's senate run, pointless movies that about 5 people end up buying and all that shit. Another is the way wrestling has become a shadow of its former self. No, not in a "fuk pg bring bak attitood era!!!!11" way, but in that it insults the fan intelligence big time. I would not want anyone to know that I have the slightest display of interest for WWE in recent times. Just imagine someone who grew up on the Attitude Era and then quit watching wrestling around that point coming into your room as you watch AJ skip around or when she was "knocked out" by a simple push from the Big Show. I, for one, would be embarrassed. Or hell, even teenagers that hung around for the Ruthless Aggression period from 2003-2007. I would NOT want them to see me watching while Smackdown shows a backstage segment of Natalya randomly farting, Hornswoggle being revealed as the anonymous GM or the Muppets appearing in unfunny childish segments on Raw.

As for me "knowing the show's quality" despite not watching... no shit. The _reason_ I stopped watching in the first place was because the quality was terrible. I have still read the results most of the time except the last two weeks and as far as I'm concerned, this shit _still_ sucks and many people agree on that so I take their word for it. I don't have to see the segments to know that they are shit, curiosity has driven me into watching them and I've regretted that choice 9/10 times. I know better than to constantly make the same mistake over and over again. When something sucks so often, you learn to assume that the automatic conclusion will be the same when you read about it.


----------



## Tnmore

jblvdx said:


> It makes me laugh that people think Punk is the reason ratings are low. Imagine this Raw or last weeks Raw without Punk, do people acutely think Raw ratings would go up or even stay the same? they would sink even lower then they are now as everything around Punk and Cena are bombing in the breakdowns. DB, Kane, Sheamus, Del Rio and everyone except Cena, Punk and Big Show are losing viewers.


LOL What? Thats because Punk is the focus of the entire show. He's part of all the key quarters, 8pm/9pm/10pm/overrun and the show does the lowest viewership/rating in 15 years.


----------



## Evil Peter

Choke2Death said:


> Why? There are many reasons and it not being to my taste is very minor compared to that. One reason is the fact that Vince wastes valuable money on worthless crap like Linda's senate run, pointless movies that about 5 people end up buying and all that shit. Another is the way wrestling has become a shadow of its former self. No, not in a "fuk pg bring bak attitood era!!!!11" way, but in that it insults the fan intelligence big time. I would not want anyone to know that I have the slightest display of interest for WWE in recent times. Just imagine someone who grew up on the Attitude Era and then quit watching wrestling around that point coming into your room as you watch AJ skip around or when she was "knocked out" by a simple push from the Big Show. I, for one, would be embarrassed. Or hell, even teenagers that hung around for the Ruthless Aggression period from 2003-2007. I would NOT want them to see me watching while Smackdown shows a backstage segment of Natalya randomly farting, Hornswoggle being revealed as the anonymous GM or the Muppets appearing in unfunny childish segments on Raw.
> 
> As for me "knowing the show's quality" despite not watching... no shit. The _reason_ I stopped watching in the first place was because the quality was terrible. I have still read the results most of the time except the last two weeks and as far as I'm concerned, this shit _still_ sucks and many people agree on that so I take their word for it. I don't have to see the segments to know that they are shit, curiosity has driven me into watching them and I've regretted that choice 9/10 times. I know better than to constantly make the same mistake over and over again. When something sucks so often, you learn to assume that the automatic conclusion will be the same when you read about it.


Ok, I understand you. I think it's far more productive to try to gain the confidence not to care what other people think of you, but I understand. I don't care the least who knows that I watch wrestling, and it doesn't matter if it's the PG era or the Attitude era, it's still full of things that could potentially be embarrassing. Stupid things like you describe happened in every era, not to mention that there's always "dumb" things happening that hardcore fans actually like, or at the very least accept. All from basic things like the Irish Whip to there being pseudo-undead that, for some reason, choose to use their powers for wrestling.

And the other part was just to get more info what makes the people that keep on being involved with things they hate tick. It's a pretty interesting phenomenon and it's fun to analyze behavior.


----------



## Heel

Main reason for the bad ratings: THREE HOURS IS WAY TOO FUCKING LONG.


----------



## Gang

Heel said:


> Main reason for the bad ratings: THREE HOURS IS WAY TOO FUCKING LONG.


Weak roster makes 3 hours so long.


----------



## KO Bossy

Tnmore said:


> LOL What? Thats because Punk is the focus of the entire show. He's part of all the key quarters, 8pm/9pm/10pm/overrun and the show does the lowest viewership/rating in 15 years.


...............

That's like, approximately, 45 minutes of the show that features Punk (15 to open, 10ish at 9, 10ish at 10, 10 at 11). Last I checked, with overrun, the show was pushing 190 minutes in total. Mathematically speaking, that's less than 24% of the show that has something to do with Punk. What about the other 76%+ that doesn't deal with him? How can you logically argue that Punk is to blame for things he has absolutely nothing to do with?

Oh no wait, its because he's part of all the key quarters as you claim. Except in past weeks those quarters gained viewers (including last week when he and Foley gained 877,000 viewers, pretty solid for today's age). Its the segments like Bryan and Kane hugging, Santino vs Antonio Cesaro and Zack Ryder vs Heath Slater that lose 500,000 viewers at a time that put the WWE in a hole that they can't climb out of. When you start off with a decent number of people watching (say 4 million), then lose 460,000, then gain 80,000, then lose another 220,000, then gain 110,000, then lose 90,000, you're still at a major deficit. Going by my numbers, your 4 million viewers has dwindled to 3,420,000, meaning however decent some segments did, others did so catastrophically bad that the overall number is still shit. Punk's segments draw, but nowhere near the amount they need to to save the show. Fuck, Rock appearing wouldn't be enough to dig them out of some of these viewership loss holes they get into.

This has not so much to do with Punk being a ratings drain as it does with wrestling just not being a cool thing to watch anymore. If Punk legitimately was so terrible at drawing, then by that theory, whenever he wasn't the center of attention, the show would automatically draw spectacularly. Except...it doesn't. Those last 2 Raws before WM28...3.09 and 3.04 ratings, and that's with Rock was in the ring verbally confronting John Cena. Those are NOT good numbers, especially a 3.04 for your go home show to the alleged biggest Wrestlemania ever. Go home show to ER, featuring this supposed huge match with Lesnar and Cena? 3.06. These are when Punk was firmly in the backseat to whatever Cena was doing, and Cena was paired with monster draws. Yet the show...still didn't do that great, especially considering who was involved.

Here's the Raw ratings average by year for the past few years:

2009: 3.59
2010: 3.28
2011: 3.21
2012: 3.12 (so far)

Notice how the ratings are constantly going down. Notice also how they go down even WITHOUT CM Punk being the focus of the show. Guys like Hunter, Shawn, Cena, Edge, Orton, Batista and the like were the prime players in those times. This year is just the next in a pattern showing that people generally just aren't into the product anymore. People like you might try to pin it on Punk, but regardless of who it was, it would happen. Don't believe me? Well, you seem to buy into the numbers, and numbers don't lie. There's the proof. Raw has been getting less and less viewers on average year after year, even when it had nothing to do with Punk. But NOW its Punk's fault. Ridiculous.

Punk is just the scapegoat, a target to pin the shitty ratings on. Its not about Punk, its about the product. As much fun as the kids (a rather paltry percentage of the audience) have watching it, do you really think 25 year olds look at Brodus Clay dancing in the ring with children, Santino dressing up as Sherlock Holmes, Cena screaming out in anguish "BALONEY FUDGE AND MUSTARD" when he receives bad news or Hornswoggle and Vince doing an impression of Jim Ross, and then say to themselves "damn, I have to see how this turns out!" No, they're most likely going to say "Jesus, this is some stupid, lame kiddy show, I wonder what's on ESPN." In fact, almost nothing on the show appeals to kids above 10, and collectively people above 10 are your biggest market. They're the ones tuning out in droves. And they have been for the past several years. Its not an appealing show for them. The IWC seems to have generated a need to pin the blame on someone. Right now, its Punk's turn, just like Orton gets a lot of flak as well. Most of you don't realize that its not people who are to blame, its WHAT is to blame. And that's the product. John Cena being a goofball is not what ruins this product. Its the writers and bookers who are getting him to go out and play this character. I remember once upon a moon when Cena was a really interesting character. Why? Because he was written and booked that way. Punk is not a ratings drain. The entire product is because its been constantly on a decline in quality over the past few years.

If you want to place blame, do so on the right people:










David Kapoor, head writer for Raw










Stephanie McMahon, executive vice president of creative










Brian Gewirtz, senior vice president of creative writing


You wanna blame someone? Blame these people.


----------



## Tnmore

^^^

fpalmfpalm 

Punk and the title is the entire focus of Monday night RAW and *the overall viewership is the least since 1997*. He is the main event storyline, Do you not get it? 


*GillbergReturns* explained it ten pages before,



GillbergReturns said:


> Yeah he does. When was the last time you saw a segment that occupies the Main Event lose viewers?
> 
> That's the focal point of the show and that's why those segments will draw the most. They're in the best time slots and because of the momentum they're almost guaranteed to get increase in any scenario.
> 
> If Sheamus draws a 1.8 on SD when Henry draws a 2.2 all the blame goes on Sheamus. Nobody says did you see the break down? All of Sheamus's SD segments gained viewers so he's not the problem.
> 
> I'm not saying Punk is the problem because I think this alot more to do with the 3 hour broadcasts, but you can't say he's drawing because he's not. People are always going to gravitate towards the storyline that's booked the strongest. That's the Main Event.
> 
> Bottom line is Raw's putting put up terrible numbers right now.






GillbergReturns said:


> I don't get what you're saying here. I didn't say the overrun lost viewers. The overrun rarely ever loses viewers. It's a gain every single week.
> 
> My point is the top storyline is always going to draw in the most viewers. If you accurately show that Punk's segments equal the same amount of viewers that Raw got in "May" in those timeslots you have a much better point than just saying Punk added 500,000 viewers he's not the problem. If 500,000 viewers equals to 3.9 mil and Raw generally gets 4.2 mil in that time slot he's part of the problem.


He's not interesting enough for the casuals. They dont want him to as the top guy, he is over-pushed, over-exposed, extremely forced, glorified mid-card act and the result is lowest viewership in 15 years.


----------



## Nimbus

They need to get the tittle off punk ASAP, this is getting worse every week...

The guy clearly failed as champ.


----------



## Choke2Death

Evil Peter said:


> Ok, I understand you. I think it's far more productive to try to gain the confidence not to care what other people think of you, but I understand. I don't care the least who knows that I watch wrestling, and it doesn't matter if it's the PG era or the Attitude era, it's still full of things that could potentially be embarrassing. Stupid things like you describe happened in every era, not to mention that there's always "dumb" things happening that hardcore fans actually like, or at the very least accept. All from basic things like the Irish Whip to there being pseudo-undead that, for some reason, choose to use their powers for wrestling.
> 
> And the other part was just to get more info what makes the people that keep on being involved with things they hate tick. It's a pretty interesting phenomenon and it's fun to analyze behavior.


Trust me, if there's one person that doesn't care what others think, it's me. But even I have my limits. What would be embarrassing about it where I live is the fact that everyone has moved on from wrestling since 07/08 and has started becoming a fan of UFC while I'm still stuck in something that has peaked in the past and the only way to go is seemingly down from now on.

And at the very least, the stupid things that took place in the past had that badassness or edginess to them that makes them acceptable to an extent. What I used as examples are shit that 5 years old would probably enjoy and that's pretty much what WWE has turned into. The point I'm trying to make is that they have gone way too childish and it's just sad to one minute watch Austin enter the arena with the middle fingers in the air then shower Vince and The Rock with beer then the next minute watch a modern day segment where Brodus Clay is dancing with kids.


----------



## KO Bossy

Tnmore said:


> ^^^
> 
> fpalmfpalm
> 
> Punk and the title is the entire focus of Monday night RAW and *the overall viewership is the least since 1997*. He is the main event storyline, Do you not get it?
> 
> 
> *GillbergReturns* explained it ten pages before,


No, apparently you're the one who doesn't 'get it'.

If Punk and the title were the ENTIRE focus of Monday Night Raw, then it'd be him sitting in the ring by himself. But it isn't. That means, he's not the entire focus. That's what ENTIRE means. He's a *main* focus of the show, sure. But not ENTIRE. In fact, one of the main focuses of the show as well is legends to put over John Cena...(if you haven't noticed in recent weeks).

Punk isn't *the* (singular) main event storyline. Again, if it was him, he'd be wrestling himself. However, its not. This storyline is twofold. Its part Punk demanding respect because he's the champion, and its part John Cena rising up once again to reclaim the WWE title. Therefore, John Cena vs CM Punk is the main event, not just CM Punk. This is something you evidently don't grasp. Thus, if the main event is CM Punk vs John Cena, and the program is not drawing particularly well, then its the fault of both guys. Not just CM Punk.

You seem so incredibly intent on blaming Punk for this ratings drop and nobody else. You evidently didn't read what I posted before. Ratings are going down across the board for WWE programming, and it doesn't matter who they get to put in the main event: Cena, Rock, Lesnar, Big Show, whatever. Ratings are going down. Punk is currently getting the blame because one single episode of Raw of which he was a main focus of that didn't feature John Cena drew an extremely poor rating. The truth is that this was going to happen eventually anyway (using proof of the past to judge the fate of the future), whether we got John Cena in a feud with Tensai, or another Cena/Big Show feud. It just happened to be when Punk was facing Cena, hence he's getting the heat. You had John Cena vs Rock on Raw for weeks straight, and then what happened in the last 2 Raws before WM? The ratings STILL sucked. Stop with this "lowest in 15 years" crap, a bad rating is a bad rating-it means less people are watching. And I've PROVEN that less people are watching even when Punk wasn't the center of attention. 

And since you mentioned overall viewership is down, again, Punk is featured for less than 1/4 of Raw. How does that translate into him getting 100% of the blame? Because he's the champion? The holder of the prestigious WWE title that has been devalued so much over the past year that currently the most valuable championship in the company is in the tag team division? Because he's in the main event for the second time in 10 months?

You also conveniently ignore the fact that Punk's segments gain ratings. Read:



> The Mick Foley/C.M. Punk segment at 9 p.m. gained 877,000 viewers which is one of the best growth segments in weeks and did a 3.22 quarter.
> 
> Miz vs. Ryback and the Harry Met Sally segment in the diner lost 533,000 viewers.
> 
> Wade Barrett vs. Tyson Kidd and the Jerry Lawler interview stayed even. I’d suggest that’s probably a combo of a big loss for Barrett vs. Kidd and a big gain back for the Lawler promo but don’t have that broken down.
> 
> Alberto Del Rio & David Otunga & Ricardo Rodriguez vs. Sheamus & Rey Mysterio & Sin Cara lost 129,000 viewers. That was at the 10 p.m. mark and did a 2.75 quarter, so the three hour show has really done a number on people tuning in at 10 p.m.
> 
> The third Bryan & Kane segment and the attack on Bryan & Kane by Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow lost 412,000 viewers and did a 2.45 quarter. They probably were going down anyway at that point given it’s a three hour show, but three segments of that was one too many at best and that’s among the worst Raw quarters in 15 years. Well, until the quarter with Layla & Alicia Fox vs. Beth Phoenix & Eve Torres and Brodus Clay vs. Tensai, which lost 34,000 viewers and did a 2.43.


So Punk and Foley brought the show up to a 3.22, and all the good done was promptly shattered by segment after segment of heavy losses (none of which featured Punk) to the point where they were so far in the hole for viewers that they couldn't come back, even with John Cena's drawing power. So Punk draws people in, a bunch of others stars lose viewers and not only undo the good Punk's segment did, but dig the hole further, and yet somehow its Punk's fault because he did his part in helping the problem? That logic is completely retarded.

I don't know why you dislike CM Punk, but your blind hate is extremely irritating, especially when you use shoddy, nonsensical and flat out wrong logic and facts to back it up.


----------



## Tnmore

Nope. You still dont get it. 

Main event storyline in key segments is always going to gain viewers. 



> Punk isn't the (singular) main event storyline.


Yes he is.


----------



## Coffey

Jesus, is it time for another pissing contest again already?


----------



## kokepepsi

Tnmore said:


> ^^^
> 
> fpalmfpalm
> 
> Punk and the title is the entire focus of Monday night RAW and *the overall viewership is the least since 1997*. He is the main event storyline, Do you not get it?
> 
> 
> *GillbergReturns* explained it ten pages before,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He's not interesting enough for the casuals. They dont want him to as the top guy, he is over-pushed, over-exposed, extremely forced, glorified mid-card act and the result is lowest viewership in 15 years.



And you don't get that the show is made up of more than 3 segments apart from the Overrun, 10pm and now 9pm segments. How is punk to blame when every single of these segments loses viewers. ALL OF THEM.

For him to make an impact he would need to gain 1million on average every week. He can't do that, NO ONE CAN.

BTW
HHH,Cena,Vince,Jericho,Rock have all lost viewers on the Overrun


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

KO Bossy, bringing logic to this thread as usual. It's really very simple to understand. No matter how well someone who's a draw does for a segment in the breakdown (and I'm not saying Punk is/isn't a draw, just to make that point as it's irrelevant whether he draws or not), as long as WWE puts out shit like what KO Bossy described, people will tune out in droves and the average for Raw will decrease severely. Now if it was Cena/Taker/HHH out there in those times besides Punk, would that segment do a lot better? Would the overall number be that much better? Let's just use this as an example:

Q1: 4,000,000
Q2: 3,600,000
Q3: 3,300,000
Q4: 3,100,000
Q5: 3,800,000
Q6: 3,600,000
Q7: 3,300,000
Q8: 3,000,000
Q9: 3,400,000
Q10: 3,300,000
Q11: 3,100,000
Q12: 2,900,000
Overrun: 4,100,000

Let's pretend for a second that is a Raw breakdown (realistic or unrealistic is irrelevant). The average viewership number for that is 3,423,000 (rounded). Now let's say HHH was there, and was in Q5 and the OR. Let's say Q5 and the overrun did 500,000 more than it did in that breakdown (which is more than it'd probably be anyway, but let's just keep it rolling). The average rating, despite those vastly increased numbers only goes up to 3,500,000. Let's even say HHH did a million better in each segment than Punk would. The average would be about 3,576,000, only 150,000 more than Punk. Now granted this isn't factoring in advertising for HHH, which would cause more people to tune in initially, but that is a whole other thing. This is assuming that they appear on the fly for a 15 minute segment, which is what's the case with Punk most of the time anyway. But even if they did advertise HHH for the show, it would just cause more people to watch his segment, but not necessarily the rest of the show, which is still the problem. 

Hopefully that clears it up for some people. Even if Punk is 2-3 of the major key points, it's not like anyone else, even those who are draws, would be able to impact the show's overall rating that much if they were in his place. What makes this especially true is WWE is predictable, even I'm sure the casuals notice bigger things happen at the start of the show, at the turn of the hours and at the end of the show, so they'd know to only tune in at those points anyway. 

KO Bossy's point (at least from what I got) wasn't that Punk is some super draw, just that he's not responsible for the show's decline solely. It's the filler crap that people will tune out during, not Punk (most of the time).


----------



## JY57

why do people like blaming a certain star or whatever? How about blaming the product in general.


----------



## Honey Bucket

Oh boy, Tnmore does it again.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Tnmore said:


> Nope. You still dont get it.
> 
> Main event storyline in key segments is always going to gain viewers.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes he is.


fpalm Dear God it's painful to read your posts.

KO Bossy at it again. With some actual logic and sense. And in the ratings thread, who woulda thunk it?


----------



## KO Bossy

Tnmore said:


> He's not interesting enough for the casuals. They dont want him to as the top guy, he is over-pushed, over-exposed, extremely forced, glorified mid-card act and the result is lowest viewership in 15 years.


This is ALL your opinion. Every single thing you said. They don't want him as top guy? No, you don't. Over pushed? You believe he is. Over exposed? Your opinion. Glorified mid card act? Your 2 cents.

You speak about Punk like we were getting ratings of 5.0 and 6.0 before and now we've taken this dive into the gutter. The ratings have been hovering around this point for a LONG time now. We're talking about a very slight dip compared to how the ratings looked like before and as it happened, it led to the lowest viewership in 15 years. Now you're acting like this is the worst thing ever. In reality, this is only a minor loss because the program itself has been doing extremely poorly in general, barely floating above this dreaded line you've created.


----------



## Starbuck

I think the point *Tnmore* is trying to make is that the main event feud is the main feature and focus of the show and it therefore props everything else around it up. When your main program isn't doing the business then naturally, everything else is going to blow chunks. The vast majority of people don't tune in to see the midcard acts because they're just that, midcard acts. People tune in for the 'main event' of the show with all the other feuds seen as sort of, extras I suppose and that's especially true in today's WWE where the main event is the only thing that gets any progression week to week if even. The main event program gets the major timeslots on the show in order to give Raw as a whole a chance to make better gains and get a better overall rating. More people tend to be watching at the start, at 9pm, at 10pm and at the end so segments are strategically placed to maximize viewership. The stronger the main event program and the people in it, the stronger the rating. The weaker the main event program and the people in it, the weaker the rating. That's why a lot of times we see breakdowns and overall ratings only to find out that a certain segment propped up a particular hour and impacted upon the show rating overall. Of course, it takes 2 people to have a feud and right now Punk isn't feuding with anybody. However, when Cena was around, their segments were still sucking and dropping every week anyways. People have been tuning out of the midcard acts for years now but now more so than ever. The difference is, more people were watching the main event program, whatever it happened to be, so the overalls weren't _that_ bad. Now, less people are tuning in to even watch the main feud in the company so how can the 'extras' or midcard acts be expected to do any better? 

Regardless of whether it involves Punk or not, when the main feud/segment on the show peaks at 4.2 million viewers (which it did last week iirc) then you have a serious problem. I just don't get how anybody can then go and claim that that makes whoever a draw. It doesn't. Overall viewership is at its highest when there is more than 1 thing to tune in for. When there isn't and there is only 1 main feud, that takes the responsibility of propping up the rest of the show as the central and focal point of that show. If that feud is failing to produce the goods then the rest is almost doomed to fail. If people aren't even bothering to tune in to watch John Cena or CM Punk feud over the WWE title, why in the hell are they going to bother tuning in for Kofi Kingston or Tyson Kidd in a match that means absolutely nothing?


----------



## Cack_Thu

TV : Punk cant draw a fly to shit.
PPV : Punk cant draw shit to a fly.

Inference: Punk cant draw shit or a fly

#hipstermode


----------



## Mister Hands

But it's also a little more complex than that, Starbuck, because now the main event is charged with propping up a whole extra hour of the meaningless stuff. Punk's position comes with a good deal of responsibility, sure, but considering how Cena-hobbled his run at the top has been, the general lack of interest in wrestling (outside of Brock/Rock/last year's shoot), and the near-complete creative bankruptcy of a WWE that's never had _more_ TV exposure, it's also a position that'd be fairly untenable for all but the most bulletproof of draws.


----------



## Starbuck

Mister Hands said:


> But it's also a little more complex than that, Starbuck, because now the main event is charged with propping up a whole extra hour of the meaningless stuff. Punk's position comes with a good deal of responsibility, sure, but considering how Cena-hobbled his run at the top has been, the general lack of interest in wrestling (outside of Brock/Rock/last year's shoot), and the near-complete creative bankruptcy in WWE, it's also a position that'd be fairly untenable for all but the most bulletproof of draws.


No doubt the 3 hours aren't helping matters but not a single hour of Raw this week even reached 4 million viewers which has become the benchmark for the regular viewership in recent times. We have seen a pattern of people tuning in and then leaving in the third hour but they aren't even doing that anymore. The standard 2 hours of Raw this week still only amounted to a 2.5 overall. And I'm not even discussing Punk here. He just happens to be the guy in the centre of the storm because he's the champion, he's the focus of the show and he's getting the most airtime. Whether it's him in this position or not, the fact still remains and regardless of the extra stress the third hour brings, when the main program on the show isn't pulling in the viewers then you're already beat. That encompasses Punk, Cena and creative as a whole. Raw can't even sustain it's regular weekly viewers now. That's a pretty serious problem.


----------



## KO Bossy

Tnmore said:


> Nope. You still dont get it.
> 
> Main event storyline in key segments is always going to gain viewers.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes he is.


Really? That's interesting you brought that up.

*April 23rd, 2012*-go home show for ER. Edge telling John Cena he needs to beat Brock on Sunday opens up the show. A Hall of Famer and your top guy in the company, the proven ratings draw. Quarter hour-2.60, at the time one of the worst of the year.

That defeats your theory, evidently.


----------



## Pro Royka

Cack_Thu said:


> TV : Punk cant draw a fly to shit.
> PPV : Punk cant draw shit to a fly.
> 
> Inference: Punk cant draw shit or a fly
> 
> #hipstermode


You know nothing about ratings, you dont understand how it works.
He cant draw for buyrates when was the last time he headlined a PPV anyway :lol.


----------



## Starbuck

Pro Royka said:


> You know nothing about ratings, you dont understand how it works.
> He cant draw for buyrates when was the last time he headlined a PPV anyway :lol.


Didn't you think 4.7 million viewers equalled a 4.7 rating when you read that chart somebody posted yesterday? Yeah, I really wouldn't go preaching about people knowing nothing about ratings if I were you. Just saying.


----------



## Mister Hands

Starbuck said:


> No doubt the 3 hours aren't helping matters but not a single hour of Raw this week even reached 4 million viewers which has become the benchmark for the regular viewership in recent times. We have seen a pattern of people tuning in and then leaving in the third hour but they aren't even doing that anymore. The standard 2 hours of Raw this week still only amounted to a 2.5 overall. And I'm not even discussing Punk here. He just happens to be the guy in the centre of the storm because he's the champion, he's the focus of the show and he's getting the most airtime. Whether it's him in this position or not, the fact still remains and regardless of the extra stress the third hour brings, when the main program on the show isn't pulling in the viewers then you're already beat. That encompasses Punk, Cena and creative as a whole. Raw can't even sustain it's regular weekly viewers now. That's a pretty serious problem.


You're right, of course. It's kinda sad, because I'm a huge fan of Punk, Bryan, Ziggler, etc, and I'm turned off the product even as they're getting main event slots and big pushes, just because the product is in a huge creative morass and showing no signs of getting out of it. I can't imagine what it's like for a "casual" fan who only invests in the surface level of WWE. Especially now when there's so much genuinely outstanding TV available on-demand that they could watch instead.


----------



## KO Bossy

Starbuck said:


> I think the point *Tnmore* is trying to make is that the main event feud is the main feature and focus of the show and it therefore props everything else around it up. When your main program isn't doing the business then naturally, everything else is going to blow chunks. The vast majority of people don't tune in to see the midcard acts because they're just that, midcard acts. People tune in for the 'main event' of the show with all the other feuds seen as sort of, extras I suppose and that's especially true in today's WWE where the main event is the only thing that gets any progression week to week if even. The main event program gets the major timeslots on the show in order to give Raw as a whole a chance to make better gains and get a better overall rating. More people tend to be watching at the start, at 9pm, at 10pm and at the end so segments are strategically placed to maximize viewership. The stronger the main event program and the people in it, the stronger the rating. The weaker the main event program and the people in it, the weaker the rating. That's why a lot of times we see breakdowns and overall ratings only to find out that a certain segment propped up a particular hour and impacted upon the show rating overall. Of course, it takes 2 people to have a feud and right now Punk isn't feuding with anybody. However, when Cena was around, their segments were still sucking and dropping every week anyways. People have been tuning out of the midcard acts for years now but now more so than ever. The difference is, more people were watching the main event program, whatever it happened to be, so the overalls weren't _that_ bad. Now, less people are tuning in to even watch the main feud in the company so how can the 'extras' or midcard acts be expected to do any better?
> 
> Regardless of whether it involves Punk or not, when the main feud/segment on the show peaks at 4.2 million viewers (which it did last week iirc) then you have a serious problem. I just don't get how anybody can then go and claim that that makes whoever a draw. It doesn't. Overall viewership is at its highest when there is more than 1 thing to tune in for. When there isn't and there is only 1 main feud, that takes the responsibility of propping up the rest of the show as the central and focal point of that show. If that feud is failing to produce the goods then the rest is almost doomed to fail. If people aren't even bothering to tune in to watch John Cena or CM Punk feud over the WWE title, why in the hell are they going to bother tuning in for Kofi Kingston or Tyson Kidd in a match that means absolutely nothing?


I get the points he was trying to make. The thing is, if Punk's segments gain viewer, and everyone else's segments lose them, how is it Punk's fault? Should the blame be placed on, you know the people involved in the segments that lost viewers? How can you blame the guy who brought in viewers for other people losing them? It'd be like blaming an MLB pitcher for losing a game when every ball that was hit was a pop fly and the fielders dropped it. He doesn't have any control over what they're capable of, so how can it be his fault? 

I never said Punk was some mega draw who could bring in a million viewers in each segment he's in. Then again, I don't think Rock vs Brock given away free on Raw with 6 months of hype could bring in that many people. Why? Because the interest for the product isn't there in the first place.


----------



## PHX

KO Bossy pretty much the one making the most sense in this thread. Fact of the matter is a decent amount of people on here hate or love a guy and will try and use whatever numbers they can just to make a opinion a universal fact which is stupid. The idea of solely blaming one person for the success or failure of the entire show is just wrong. Saw the example get brought up of Rock/Cena feud not bringing in the ratings it should have and that was not only the focus of Raw but billed as the biggest match ever and had a year long build. Yet not many people will dare blame that on them esp in the case of Rock. If your logic is whoever is the main focus of the show is the sole or majority reason to blame even if their segments did good in the ratings then don't be subjective about it and just twist and turn it depending on who you like or dislike.


----------



## Starbuck

Mister Hands said:


> You're right, of course. It's kinda sad, because I'm a huge fan of Punk, Bryan, Ziggler, etc, and I'm turned off the product even as they're getting main event slots and big pushes, just because the product is in a huge creative morass and showing no signs of getting out of it. I can't imagine what it's like for a "casual" fan who only invests in the surface level of WWE. Especially now when there's so much genuinely outstanding TV available on-demand that they could watch instead.


I just happened to be watching Raw with my dad in the room this week. Punk/JR was on at that particular time and what did he think about it? Why the hell is this guy talking to the commentator about respect? That's what he said. Admittedly I lol'd but if that doesn't give some insight into a casual fans perspective then I don't know what will. And he isn't even a casual fan. He just knows the main guys because I've been watching all my life and happens to catch the show whenever I have it on in the same room. Is that what most other people are thinking when they're watching these Punk vs. Legend promos? If it is then is it any wonder nobody is bothering to tune in and the regular weekly viewership number is dropping as every week passes by.


----------



## Tnmore

The Sandrone said:


> KO Bossy, bringing logic to this thread as usual. It's really very simple to understand. No matter how well someone who's a draw does for a segment in the breakdown (and I'm not saying Punk is/isn't a draw, just to make that point as it's irrelevant whether he draws or not), as long as WWE puts out shit like what KO Bossy described, people will tune out in droves and the average for Raw will decrease severely. Now if it was Cena/Taker/HHH out there in those times besides Punk, would that segment do a lot better? Would the overall number be that much better? Let's just use this as an example:
> 
> Q1: 4,000,000
> Q2: 3,600,000
> Q3: 3,300,000
> Q4: 3,100,000
> Q5: 3,800,000
> Q6: 3,600,000
> Q7: 3,300,000
> Q8: 3,000,000
> Q9: 3,400,000
> Q10: 3,300,000
> Q11: 3,100,000
> Q12: 2,900,000
> Overrun: 4,100,000
> 
> Let's pretend for a second that is a Raw breakdown (realistic or unrealistic is irrelevant). The average viewership number for that is 3,423,000 (rounded). Now let's say HHH was there, and was in Q5 and the OR. Let's say Q5 and the overrun did 500,000 more than it did in that breakdown (which is more than it'd probably be anyway, but let's just keep it rolling). The average rating, despite those vastly increased numbers only goes up to 3,500,000. Let's even say HHH did a million better in each segment than Punk would. The average would be about 3,576,000, only 150,000 more than Punk. Now granted this isn't factoring in advertising for HHH, which would cause more people to tune in initially, but that is a whole other thing. This is assuming that they appear on the fly for a 15 minute segment, which is what's the case with Punk most of the time anyway. But even if they did advertise HHH for the show, it would just cause more people to watch his segment, but not necessarily the rest of the show, which is still the problem.
> 
> Hopefully that clears it up for some people. Even if Punk is 2-3 of the major key points, it's not like anyone else, even those who are draws, would be able to impact the show's overall rating that much if they were in his place. What makes this especially true is WWE is predictable, even I'm sure the casuals notice bigger things happen at the start of the show, at the turn of the hours and at the end of the show, so they'd know to only tune in at those points anyway.
> 
> KO Bossy's point (at least from what I got) wasn't that Punk is some super draw, just that he's not responsible for the show's decline solely. It's the filler crap that people will tune out during, not Punk (most of the time).


But thats not how it works. Your analysis is flawed. You cannot randomly add up 500k to a quarter and claim this is what would have happened. Thats stupid(no offense).

Lets say either Cena/Taker/HHH/Rock/Brock is advertised for the RAW for the main event angle, then the shows opens with strong viewership, the usual drop occurs in the segments following that, picks back up by 9pm, drops, picks up by 10 and then the final gain at the overrun. The viewership average and the Rating will majorly depend on the overall the show started with. The gains at the key quarters are gonna happen regardless because people are conditioned to these key quarters. This is the reason the champion is usually blamed for low ratings/viewership. Do you see people making excuses for Shawn Michaels 1996? or Kevin Nash 1995 rating? like you're doing here "oh hey look at this quarter michaels gained, look nash gained at 10 pm, what a mega-draw!". 

The focus of the entire show on Punk, he is the champion and the main angle and the show does lowest viewership in 15 years *two weeks in a row.* Like I said earlier, you can blame the booking all you want, come up all sorts of excuses it doesnt change the fact people dont wanna see him as a top guy. He is being forced on them and now you see the result. Vince needs to the take the title off him ASAP. Maybe if Ryback takes the title after squashing him, maybe then the viewership/rating will go back up to normal levels.


----------



## Tnmore

KO Bossy said:


> Really? That's interesting you brought that up.
> 
> *April 23rd, 2012*-go home show for ER. Edge telling John Cena he needs to beat Brock on Sunday opens up the show. A Hall of Famer and your top guy in the company, the proven ratings draw. Quarter hour-2.60, at the time one of the worst of the year.
> 
> That defeats your theory, evidently.


Another fpalm worthy post. That was one night deal, three hours for RAW was not regular as it is now. Completely different.


----------



## Mister Hands

Starbuck said:


> I just happened to be watching Raw with my dad in the room this week. Punk/JR was on at that particular time and what did he think about it? Why the hell is this guy talking to the commentator about respect? That's what he said. Admittedly I lol'd but if that doesn't give some insight into a casual fans perspective then I don't know what will. And he isn't even a casual fan. He just knows the main guys because I've been watching all my life and happens to catch the show whenever I have it on in the same room. Is that what most other people are thinking when they're watching these Punk vs. Legend promos? If it is then is it any wonder nobody is bothering to tune in and the regular weekly viewership number is dropping as every week passes by.


Heh, the family perspective is always fun. I remember last year, my dad (who used to watch a bit of WWF back in the Hogan years, and bits of it over the years whenever I'd have it on, and some World of Sport too) was watching a Smackdown main event with me - Sheamus/Henry, I think. About halfway through the match, he just walked out. I asked him why later, and he said "Well, the commentators weren barely paying attention to the match, so why should I?" There are all these things that we're so used to (and used to complaining about) that we probably forget are a huge turn off to fairweather or potential new fans.


----------



## Starbuck

Mister Hands said:


> Heh, the family perspective is always fun. I remember last year, my dad (who used to watch a bit of WWF back in the Hogan years, and bits of it over the years whenever I'd have it on, and some World of Sport too) was watching a Smackdown main event with me - Sheamus/Henry, I think. About halfway through the match, he just walked out. I asked him why later, and he said "Well, the commentators weren barely paying attention to the match, so why should I?" There are all these things that we're so used to (and used to complaining about) that we probably forget are a huge turn off to fairweather or potential new fans.


I watched Mania 28, with my dad in the room again, a few weeks back and he found Show vs. Cody absolutely fucking hilarious because Cody was getting his ass kicked by this huge guy. He legit :lmao at that match lol. It was nuts. He joked about with the rest of the matches. Then when the HIAC came on he completely shut up, went silent and pretty much lost himself in the spectacle of it all which I teased him about of course because he teases me for watching in the first place lol. Then he fucked off for the rest of the show and came back to see Rock vs. Cena at the end. He's a Rock fan and acts like he's been there all along. Still calls it WWF too lol. 

@*Tnmore* - I don't think taking the title off Punk will change anything. He isn't helping matters but I don't think he's making them drastically worse either. Their entire approach to the title and their stars needs an overhaul. Taking the belt off him and giving it to Cena is a short term solution.

@*Bossy* - I don't actually think you do tbh. I'm not being a dick when I say that either. You can blame the midcard, sure. But they don't get any focus or time afforded to them to give them purpose or to give people a reason to want to watch them. That's why people tune out during those segments and will continue to tune out until the opposite occurs. Or you can blame the main segment of the show that is receiving all the focus and all the time because it's the main portion of the show, the promoted portion of the show and essentially THE thing that is supposed to make people want to watch in the first place. Or you can blame them both which is the best option if you ask me. I'm not solely blaming Punk and I never have. But he isn't helping matters...at all. Sure, the segments he's in are gaining viewers but you're giving credit for taking one step forward and two steps back. Your MLB comparison doesn't fly either because you're presuming that the pitchers are all on an equal level when that isn't the case when it comes to main event stars and midcard stars in WWE. It's more like a star player hits every ball while a bunch of no namers strike out every time...just like they were expected to do. In the same example, the star player isn't even that much of a star either. It's not the same thing. 

PS - Both of you keep it civil plz.


----------



## Pro Royka

Starbuck said:


> Didn't you think 4.7 million viewers equalled a 4.7 rating when you read that chart somebody posted yesterday? Yeah, I really wouldn't go preaching about people knowing nothing about ratings if I were you. Just saying.


No, I didnt read the chart correctly I saw the 1000 episodes headlined and I saw 4.7 as the highest as if it's a two hour show for that episode. I just toke a blink look and post it as fast as I can, then he replied and I realised it was about the last 10 shows. For a fact, I exposed other wrestlers drawing ability, so yes I know what I'm talking. I bet you didn't know that the 3 hours show never did good even in the past right. Just saying.


----------



## Starbuck

Pro Royka said:


> No, I didnt read the chart correctly I saw the 1000 episodes headlined and I saw 4.7 as the highest as if it's a two hour show for that episode. I just toke a blink look and post it as fast as I can, then he replied and I realised it was about the last 10 shows. For a fact, I exposed other wrestlers drawing ability, so yes I know what I'm talking. I bet you didn't know that the 3 hours show never did good even in the past right. Just saying.


You exposed them did you? No, I didn't know that. :side:


----------



## kokepepsi

Attitude era breakdowns would show an increase of viewership throughout the show with big gains in the 10pm/ovverrun. Rarely lost viewers in any segment, and if they did it was very little.

Focus was on the midcard and main event.

The current notion that the mainevent is all that matters is what is hurting them.
They buried everyone to benefit the main angle and people don't have a reason to sit through 3 hours of shit for 20 minutes worth watching.


----------



## Mister Hands

Starbuck said:


> I watched Mania 28, with my dad in the room again, a few weeks back and he found Show vs. Cody absolutely fucking hilarious because Cody was getting his ass kicked by this huge guy. He legit :lmao at that match lol. It was nuts. He joked about with the rest of the matches. *Then when the HIAC came on he completely shut up, went silent and pretty much lost himself in the spectacle of it all which I teased him about of course because he teases me for watching in the first place lol.* Then he fucked off for the rest of the show and came back to see Rock vs. Cena at the end. He's a Rock fan and acts like he's been there all along. Still calls it WWF too lol.


Man, who'd have thought that stripping away the bullshit and presenting a wrestling match like it genuinely means something would capture people's attention? But nah, let's have a fucking Tout debate about the WHC title match instead. 

Also, as far as apportioning blame goes, my vote goes to creative, and the McMahons. They might not be able to magically conjure up mega-draws, but it's totally their job to figure out how to stop the viewer haemorrhaging that's going on. No matter where you are on the card, you're at the mercy of those guys.


----------



## Starbuck

^^^^ It was a combo of the spectacle, Metallica in the background lol, he knows HHH and Taker, the loudness of the fans on the surround sound and the awesomeness of the actual match itself. He was totally hooked. Same for Rock/Cena. 



kokepepsi said:


> Attitude era breakdowns would show an increase of viewership throughout the show with big gains in the 10pm/ovverrun. Rarely lost viewers in any segment, and if they did it was very little.
> 
> Focus was on the midcard and main event.
> 
> *The current notion that the mainevent is all that matters is what is hurting them.
> They buried everyone to benefit the main angle and people don't have a reason to sit through 3 hours of shit for 20 minutes worth watching.*


Exactly, which is why most of the burden is then placed on the main program to draw in the bulk of the viewers and prop up the rest of the show. That's why the opener, 9pm, 10pm and overrun are such important time slots, because they are the only real opportunities to maximize viewership which is why the main feud of the show usually gets put in these slots. When these segments are doing below average numbers then the rest of the show doesn't stand a chance. They need to invest in the whole show in order to get the fans to do the same.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Tnmore said:


> But thats not how it works. Your analysis is flawed. You cannot randomly add up 500k to a quarter and claim this is what would have happened. Thats stupid(no offense).
> 
> Lets say either Cena/Taker/HHH/Rock/Brock is advertised for the RAW for the main event angle, then the shows opens with strong viewership, the usual drop occurs in the segments following that, picks back up by 9pm, drops, picks up by 10 and then the final gain at the overrun. The viewership average and the Rating will majorly depend on the overall the show started with. The gains at the key quarters are gonna happen regardless because people are conditioned to these key quarters. This is the reason the champion is usually blamed for low ratings/viewership. Do you see people making excuses for Shawn Michaels 1996? or Kevin Nash 1995 rating? *like you're doing here "oh hey look at this quarter michaels gained, look nash gained at 10 pm, what a mega-draw!".*
> 
> The focus of the entire show on Punk, he is the champion and the main angle and the show does lowest viewership in 15 years *two weeks in a row.* Like I said earlier, you can blame the booking all you want, come up all sorts of excuses it doesnt change the fact people dont wanna see him as a top guy. He is being forced on them and now you see the result. Vince needs to the take the title off him ASAP. Maybe if Ryback takes the title after squashing him, maybe then the viewership/rating will go back up to normal levels.


Something else is Punk wasn't even the focus of the show this week. The show this week wasn't about anything in particular and was all over the place. AJ was more of the center for the show this week than Punk. Last week? You have a point. This week? No, even if he was in the key gaining points, the show was more about AJ and even JR than it was about Punk, and as much about that debate. Which is the problem, there was no focus on anything, on top of the fact most the show was poor. 

It's true that I didn't take into account the fact there would still be more people willing to tune in throughout the show if they tune in at the start of the show in anticipation for one of those big stars. I still don't think the filler segments would be that much bigger and we'd see a much much bigger drop from if Rock opened the show to the next segment as opposed to Punk opening the show to the next segment. There's a lot of stuff to figure in this kind of stuff.

The bold part pretty much sums up that I think you're not getting the point in all of this. Nobody (at least me and KO Bossy I believe) that's saying the show is the problem not Punk is saying Punk is some major draw. He's not. He's just not the reason the reason the show is in such a shit hole. Poor booking choices (which I argued with you about last week), competition, and the overall quality of the show is the reason the overall rating is so low. Not Punk, though Punk isn't helping matters with his inability to bring his segments up through the roof and having the drawing power to make people tune in throughout the show in hopes of seeing him (truth be told though, in this day and age I believe only The Rock and maybe Lesnar can do this). But the numbers you've seen the last few weeks is the average when a major draw isn't on the show, but then that's a problem because they've put all their eggs in one basket as far as full-time workers go.


----------



## KO Bossy

Starbuck said:


> @*Bossy* - I don't actually think you do tbh. I'm not being a dick when I say that either. You can blame the midcard, sure. But they don't get any focus or time afforded to them to give them purpose or to give people a reason to want to watch them. That's why people tune out during those segments and will continue to tune out until the opposite occurs. Or you can blame the main segment of the show that is receiving all the focus and all the time because it's the main portion of the show, the promoted portion of the show and essentially THE thing that is supposed to make people want to watch in the first place. Or you can blame them both which is the best option if you ask me. I'm not solely blaming Punk and I never have. But he isn't helping matters...at all. Sure, the segments he's in are gaining viewers but you're giving credit for taking one step forward and two steps back. Your MLB comparison doesn't fly either because you're presuming that the pitchers are all on an equal level when that isn't the case when it comes to main event stars and midcard stars in WWE. It's more like a star player hits every ball while a bunch of no namers strike out every time...just like they were expected to do. In the same example, the star player isn't even that much of a star either. It's not the same thing.


How can you say the midcard is getting no focus when we have a tag team tournament, multiple anger management skits weekly and Kane/Bryan, the tag champions, recently had almost a full episode of Smackdown devoted to them, they were in the main event this week and in past week have have the luxury of getting the 10pm slot? Ryback as well has been getting a lot of attention as of late, and he's still in the midcard.

Punk is absolutely getting the main focus of the show, and he isn't drawing in the viewers a John Cena of 2006 would. I'm not disputing that. What I AM disputing is these ridiculous allegations that simply due to the fact that he's WWE champion, he warrants all of the blame for this rating. That's why comments like "a 2.7? Man, Punk just continues to kill the ratings" piss me off. They don't make any sense. One guy isn't responsible for how the entire show draws. He can influence it, yes, but he's not solely to blame (or praise, depending on the situation).

This is why Tnmore's arguments baffle me. "Its the lowest rating in 15 years, its all Punk's fault." The ratings already sucked, this is a minor dip. And its possible Punk is to blame. But this guy is talking like the WWE was doing 5s and 6s in ratings before Punk became champion. Even still, while Punk may not be helping matters, he certainly isn't the only culprit who deserves blame.


----------



## Pro Royka

Starbuck said:


> You exposed them did you? No, I didn't know that. :side:


Yes, I did actually. The superstars names are Ra... :side: ...Ndy..... And Je..... :side:...Ff. You know the rest.


----------



## Starbuck

KO Bossy said:


> How can you say the midcard is getting no focus when we have a tag team tournament, multiple anger management skits weekly and Kane/Bryan, the tag champions, recently had almost a full episode of Smackdown devoted to them, they were in the main event this week and in past week have have the luxury of getting the 10pm slot? Ryback as well has been getting a lot of attention as of late, and he's still in the midcard.
> 
> Punk is absolutely getting the main focus of the show, and he isn't drawing in the viewers a John Cena of 2006 would. I'm not disputing that. What I AM disputing is these ridiculous allegations that simply due to the fact that he's WWE champion, he warrants all of the blame for this rating. That's why comments like "a 2.7? Man, Punk just continues to kill the ratings" piss me off. They don't make any sense. One guy isn't responsible for how the entire show draws. He can influence it, yes, but he's not solely to blame (or praise, depending on the situation).
> 
> This is why Tnmore's arguments baffle me. "Its the lowest rating in 15 years, its all Punk's fault." The ratings already sucked, this is a minor dip. And its possible Punk is to blame. But this guy is talking like the WWE was doing 5s and 6s in ratings before Punk became champion. Even still, while Punk may not be helping matters, he certainly isn't the only culprit who deserves blame.


First of all, you shouldn't be getting pissed off at people on the internet. Some people don't discuss things in great detail like most in here do. A lot of folks pop in this thread, see the overall is dropping week by week and naturally place the blame on the champ. That's happened for as long as I can remember and will continue to happen too because that's just what people do and you can't change that. In 2003 ratings were dropping hard with HHH as champ and he took the brunt of the blame for that. It didn't matter to some people that the boom was over and Rock/Austin were gone or on their way out. HHH was the champ and he was the one 'killing the business' lol. That's just the way some folks are going to view things and there's no reason to get legit pissed off about it. 

The midcarders have been getting ignored for around 5 years now. 5 weeks of investment isn't going to magically change that and thinking that it will is naive tbh. For the longest time WWE have been telling us that everybody outside the title picture is basically worthless. That takes a hell of a lot of time to undo and it certainly isn't going to be fixed because they finally pulled their head out of their ass and decided to let the tag teams have a tournament. Ryback? He hasn't even been on TV for a year. Come on. These guys are in no position to take responsibility for drawing fans and I don't think anybody realistically expects them to either.


----------



## Tnmore

The Sandrone said:


> Something else is Punk wasn't even the focus of the show this week. The show this week wasn't about anything in particular and was all over the place. AJ was more of the center for the show this week than Punk. Last week? You have a point. This week? No, even if he was in the key gaining points, the show was more about AJ and even JR than it was about Punk, and as much about that debate. Which is the problem, there was no focus on anything, on top of the fact most the show was poor.


The hook for the show was from last week and he was the focus of the show. And No, AJ was not the focus of this week's show, punk was/still is, he was part of all the key quarters, he is the main event storyline. That is a pathetic excuse, blaming a diva AJ. 



> The bold part pretty much sums up that I think you're not getting the point in all of this. Nobody (at least me and KO Bossy I believe) that's saying the show is the problem not Punk is saying Punk is some major draw. He's not. He's just not the reason the reason the show is in such a shit hole. Poor booking choices (which I argued with you about last week), competition, and the overall quality of the show is the reason the overall rating is so low. Not Punk, though Punk isn't helping matters with his inability to bring his segments up through the roof and having the drawing power to make people tune in throughout the show in hopes of seeing him (truth be told though, in this day and age I believe only The Rock and maybe Lesnar can do this). But the numbers you've seen the last few weeks is the average when a major draw isn't on the show, but then that's a problem because they've put all their eggs in one basket as far as full-time workers go.


Point blank, *PUNK CANT DRAW AS CHAMPION.* 




> This is why Tnmore's arguments baffle me. "Its the lowest rating in 15 years, its all Punk's fault." The ratings already sucked, *this is a minor dip.* And its possible Punk is to blame.


LOWEST IN 15 F*CKING YEARS? Can you even read? 



> Even still, while Punk may not be helping matters, he certainly isn't the only culprit who deserves blame.


Yes he is. He cant draw as champion, as the focus of the show and he should take the blame. If mid card is responsible for ratings/viewership, drop or increase, then why is this guy the WWE champion?


----------



## KO Bossy

Tnmore said:


> The focus of the entire show on Punk, he is the champion and the main angle and the show does lowest viewership in 15 years *two weeks in a row.* Like I said earlier, you can blame the booking all you want, come up all sorts of excuses it doesnt change the fact people dont wanna see him as a top guy. He is being forced on them and now you see the result. Vince needs to the take the title off him ASAP. Maybe if Ryback takes the title after squashing him, maybe then the viewership/rating will go back up to normal levels.


Ugh...

No, its not ENTIRELY on Punk. Learn English for the love of God. Punk is *a* main focus of the show, not the main focus of the *entire* show.

And this lowest viewership in 15 years you keep dwelling on is just inane. The WWE has been treading water above this line you've created for almost a year now, and now its dipped below it. "Oh Punk is such an anti draw, he needs to lose the title!" How do you explain the shitty ratings for the rest of the year when he WASN'T as much of a focus?

Once again, you speak for the entire WWE audience by making mother hood statements like "people don't want to see him as top guy." No, YOU don't want to see him as top guy because of some hidden grudge you have against him. What did he do, defecate on your porch or something? When he started getting more of a focus on the show in late July up until mid September, the ratings were on par for the course with WWE ratings of today. Why don't you ever bring that up? You'd rather focus on the past 2 weeks to judge his entire drawing ability, which is absolutely ridiculous. You are going out of your way to look for fault in CM Punk and conveniently ignore the times when he does something well, which screams that you have some sort of agenda to try and push.

You claim he's being forced on the fans, when in reality his segments have been gaining lately, so he gets more air time. You're all about the ratings, apparently. Increase in viewers means increase interest, hence the audience wanting to see more of him. If this guy was like ADR and got no reaction and was still getting the amount of air time he gets now, then I'd agree, he's being forced on the audience.

And since you're a ratings fiend, why not look at Ryback's segments over the past few weeks and notice that most, if not all, have LOST viewers. So you want Punk, the man who has been gaining viewers, to lose the title to a man who is losing them. The holes in your own logic expose your prejudice.

You seemingly live by one creed-the WWE champion is responsible solely for how the show draws, and that logic is mind boggling.

Something else I find funny-John Cena was on the show and pushed heavily in the main event slot and overrun last week, and Punk came out unscheduled and unannounced to talk to him. You've made zero mention of Cena's part to play in week 1 of the lowest ratings in 15 years. Gee, wonder why that is...


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

> The hook for the show was from last week and he was the focus of the show. And No, AJ was not the focus of this week's show, punk was/still is, he was part of all the key quarters, he is the main event storyline. That is a pathetic excuse, blaming a diva AJ.


:lmao 

What hook? The hook they completely ignored until the JR segment? Yeah... no, he was as much the center of the show as Team Hell No was. 



Tnmore said:


> Point blank, *PUNK CANT DRAW AS CHAMPION.*


Even if that's true, what's WWE going to do? Put the title on Cena? Starbuck said it best, it'd just be a temporary solution. Besides Cena, no one else have proven they'd be able to draw any more than Punk has. Punk is their best bet for the time being until Rock takes the title from him at RR.


----------



## Starbuck

Both of you need to calm your shit and keep things civil. No more insulting each other. No need for that and if you can't then just stop replying to each other. You're both going in circles anyways lol.


----------



## Evil Peter

Choke2Death said:


> Trust me, if there's one person that doesn't care what others think, it's me. But even I have my limits. What would be embarrassing about it where I live is the fact that everyone has moved on from wrestling since 07/08 and has started becoming a fan of UFC while I'm still stuck in something that has peaked in the past and the only way to go is seemingly down from now on.
> 
> And at the very least, the stupid things that took place in the past had that badassness or edginess to them that makes them acceptable to an extent. What I used as examples are shit that 5 years old would probably enjoy and that's pretty much what WWE has turned into. The point I'm trying to make is that they have gone way too childish and it's just sad to one minute watch Austin enter the arena with the middle fingers in the air then shower Vince and The Rock with beer then the next minute watch a modern day segment where Brodus Clay is dancing with kids.


We're in quite different positions since where I live not many people of any age watches wrestling. Since the first big PPV I watched as it was new (not live but aired around the same time) a kid was Wrestlemania VI it's been a long time since I've knew many people that watch it. Of course I've had many multi-year breaks from wrestling since I was a kid, but I've kept coming back for periods of time. I'm quite into UFC myself, not least since I've been an active competitior in several martial arts, but I haven't really found that it has changed much about wrestling for me.

And I certainly agree that much is too kid oriented. Raw doesn't air here but even if I did I don't think I could watch it live. I need to be able to skip everything that doesn't suit me, so watching Raw doesn't take too long for me. It's basically only been the Punk stories that's consistently entertained me, but since they do I keep watching them. I do think there's been plenty of stuff to fast forward though in previous times as well though (and I wouldn't exactly say that the Austin+Rock equivalent of today's show is Brodus Clay ).


----------



## kokepepsi

*Breakdown*


> Another 52,000 U.S. homes dropped cable and satellite over the last month. The total erosion is from 101 million to 98.7 million over the past couple of years. What was notable to me is when WWE announced its Hulu Plus deal, I heard from people who said that they were now going to start back watching it because they had given up when giving up cable.
> 
> Raw on 10/1 did a 2.54 rating and 3.50 million viewers as noted on page one. Even with the record-low numbers, it was the third highest rated show on cable that night, trailing only football and Major Crimes on TNT.
> 
> The show did a 2.0 in teenage boys (same as last week), 2.0 in Males 18-49 (down 25%), 0.6 in Girls 12-17 (same as the past two weeks) and 0.8 in Women 18-49 (same as last week). The show had 68.9% male viewers. Like with Impact, viewers per home were at all-time low levels.
> 
> In the segment-by-segment, 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.
> 
> Rey Mysterio & Sin Cara vs. Primo & Epico and Brodus Clay vs. Antonio Cesaro lost 461,000 viewers.
> 
> The Miz vs. Zack Ryder lost 47,000 viewers and did a 2.37 quarter.
> 
> The Sheamus/Big Show debate which had the usual 9 p.m. growth gained 421,000 viewers.
> 
> Ryback vs. Tensai and Eve Torres vs. Beth Phoenix lost 350,000 viewers.
> 
> Santino Marella vs. Heath Slater gained 222,000 viewers. That one surprised me.
> 
> Sheamus vs. Damien Sandow in the long match lost 63,000 viewers and that was the 10 p.m. segment. I think we can declare the 10 p.m. segment traditional growth as being on life support.
> 
> 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.
> 
> Alberto Del Rio vs. Kofi Kingston lost 824,000 viewers and did a 2.29 quarter, the lowest quarter for a regular episode of Raw in 15 years. Basically, 21% of all the viewers who watched the Ross segment, tuned out, whether it was football or elsewhere, when that segment ended. 38% of teenage boys tuned out, 25% of Males 18-49, 28% of teenage girls and 20% of Women 18-49 tuned out at that point.
> 
> The Daniel Bryan & Kane vs. Dolph Ziggler & C.M. Punk main event gained 532,000 viewers to a 2.70 overrun.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

So... where's that breakdown?

Edit: Lol, posted at the same time I posted this. 

Well... if we can take anything from this breakdown, it's that at the very least, most who watched at the start came back at the end.


----------



## Choke2Death

Wow @ that breakdown. The gains were all horrible and the loses were mind-blowing. Specially Alberto/Kofi losing almost 1 million. :lmao



Evil Peter said:


> We're in quite different positions since where I live not many people of any age watches wrestling. Since the first big PPV I watched as it was new (not live but aired around the same time) a kid was Wrestlemania VI it's been a long time since I've knew many people that watch it. Of course I've had many multi-year breaks from wrestling since I was a kid, but I've kept coming back for periods of time. I'm quite into UFC myself, not least since I've been an active competitior in several martial arts, but I haven't really found that it has changed much about wrestling for me.
> 
> And I certainly agree that much is too kid oriented. Raw doesn't air here but even if I did I don't think I could watch it live. I need to be able to skip everything that doesn't suit me, so watching Raw doesn't take too long for me. It's basically only been the Punk stories that's consistently entertained me, but since they do I keep watching them. I do think there's been plenty of stuff to fast forward though in previous times as well though (*and I wouldn't exactly say that the Austin+Rock equivalent of today's show is Brodus Clay* ).


Yeah, I guess. Over here in my part of town (Sweden), WWE was extremely popular with those I hung around in my early teens around 2004-2007 then once the Benoit tragedy took place, I never heard about it from anyone again. Funny thing is, I got into wrestling once the buzz had completely died down so when I wanted to talk about it with others, there was very little interest shown and considering what WWE has turned into nowadays, I can fully understand why it'd happen. I think I might also be finished once I've watched all the past years I'm interested in. (1997-2008)

And yeah, I don't think I'll ever make the mistake of watching an entire Raw episode live as all the commercials and pointless filler makes it annoying. I've only watched the Montreal show since Raw 1000 and a few random segments or matches here and there. I'm pleased about how fast I lost interest and it stopped being an addiction to me. Haven't read any results in two weeks either, so it might be a matter of time before I stop participating in 'current' topics altogether!

Lastly @ the *bold*, I never said it was!


----------



## Falkono

Starbuck hit the nail on the head.

Naturally the Punk defenders will defend their king but logically look at it like this. After having pretty much three months of being the main focus and having the most air time is it a good sign that the ending is down a lot on the other hours? Change Punks name to wrestler x and think about it that way. If you invested nearly a year with wrestler x being the champ and at your anniversary show which will be the most viewed in years have him the main ficus by beating up two icons. Would you expect the lowest rating in 15 years? What does it mean?

It means that the main story/angle sucks so bad that people no longer tune in to see it. It means 99% of the guys on the roster nobody gives a shit about. And as much as Punk lovers will try and ignore that includes Punk. The two shows where Cena has not been in this year and Punk was the main guy ratings were terrible.

The overall product stinks and people have had enough. It isn't about the internet or other bullshit like that. Other shows do a lot higher ratings, the internet has not hurt them.
WWE is showing us nothing. There is little in the way of entertainment and 3hrs just drags the shit out even more.
Go back and look at the attitude era. Something interesting would happen every night. Not just at the end but all the way through. Even the jobbers had fun angles going on. Remember Kai Entai doing the indeed thing. Tajiri with Regal. The characters were developed and you gave a shit about them. You had a good tag division with actual tag teams not just putting two random guys together. There were factions and they were unpredictable.

Wwe right now is the master of its own downfall. It decided to go against the audience that made it popular and appeal to kids. It took away the tag division and hardly ever had factions or stables. When they do make someone interesting they ruin it ie Barratt. They make the show about one guy and forget everyone else. The writing is so shit it just doesn't work. 

They have to go back to the old formula or they are dead for sure. When even kids no longer find it interesting then you got huge problems.


----------



## Pro Royka

Tnmore said:


> The hook for the show was from last week and he was the focus of the show. And No, AJ was not the focus of this week's show, punk was/still is, he was part of all the key quarters, he is the main event storyline. That is a pathetic excuse, blaming a diva AJ.
> 
> 
> 
> Point blank, *PUNK CANT DRAW AS CHAMPION.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOWEST IN 15 F*CKING YEARS? Can you even read?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes he is. He cant draw as champion, as the focus of the show and he should take the blame. If mid card is responsible for ratings/viewership, drop or increase, then why is this guy the WWE champion?


Do you think ratings will be the same, If Lesnar, Trips, Taker, Cena, Punk (c) etc. were/are part of the show. One hand can't clap for a whole show, considering it's a 3 hours show. If its a 2 hours show, I may agree if he failed, but it's clearly not his fault. Poor show = Poor ratings, it's creatives fault. He was the only one gaining viewers last week, or you wanna dismiss that.

Edited: :lmao.


----------



## KO Bossy

Tnmore said:


> The hook for the show was from last week and he was the focus of the show. And No, AJ was not the focus of this week's show, punk was/still is, he was part of all the key quarters, he is the main event storyline. That is a pathetic excuse, blaming a diva AJ.


Your memory must suck because 3 months ago AJ was positioned as being ABOVE the WWE title, champion and #1 contender...

In fact, the hook from last week was Ryback, since he was the last one we saw on the show...



Tnmore said:


> LOWEST IN 15 F*CKING YEARS? Can you even read?


Your denial is seriously amusing.

Lowest in 15 years. 2.7 rating. Down from the usual 3.0 we see weekly. What does that translate into, a loss of half a ratings point or something? Do you know how many viewers tuning out it takes to go from a 3.0 to 2.7? Hardly anything, its a minor drop in viewers. Couple hundred thousand. 

Now the way you explain it, WWE has been consistently doing Attitude type ratings and Punk came in and lowered them to a 2.7. Were that the case, I'd be the first person to admit he killed them. However, that's a hypothetical situation. In reality, Punk being the main focus really hasn't lost that many viewers compared to what they had before. Thus, the lowest rating in 15 years argument really doesn't hold very much merit anymore.



Tnmore said:


> Yes he is. He cant draw as champion, as the focus of the show and he should take the blame. If mid card is responsible for ratings/viewership, drop or increase, then why is this guy the WWE champion?


So let me get this straight...

Steve Austin brings in a million viewers per segment he's in. Then, in between the segments, all the viewers he gained are lost by the Oddities, Al Snow, Hardcore Holly and Bart Gunn, all midcard guys. However, their colossal losses aren't their fault, its Steve Austin's fault for not bringing in more viewers to pad the ratings drain that these other guys are. Thus, since Steve Austin is WWF champion and the top guy in the company, he's the one to blame for the shortcomings of others.

Now, replace Steve Austin with CM Punk and the midcard guys of Attitude with midcard guys of today. This is the logic you're trying to push. If you seriously believe this, then I truly pity you because sorry to say, and I mean no offense when I say this, but your brain does not function properly.


----------



## Starbuck

:lmao at show topping 2.89 quarter. They just worded it funny lol. Nothing surprising here except Santino/Slater. DAT ONE MAN BAND. Show basically died after the whole Punk/JR/Ryback thing. ADR/Kofi probably didn't even have 3 million people watching it lol. That's insane. What's even more insane is that 1 half of this match contained a former Royal Rumble winner and 2 time WWE champ. Absolutely fucking ridiculous stat. Horrific overrun again. Just a horrible breakdown across the board.


----------



## KO Bossy

Falkono said:


> Starbuck hit the nail on the head.
> 
> Naturally the Punk defenders will defend their king but logically look at it like this. After having pretty much three months of being the main focus and having the most air time is it a good sign that the ending is down a lot on the other hours? Change Punks name to wrestler x and think about it that way. If you invested nearly a year with wrestler x being the champ and at your anniversary show which will be the most viewed in years have him the main ficus by beating up two icons. Would you expect the lowest rating in 15 years? What does it mean?
> 
> It means that the main story/angle sucks so bad that people no longer tune in to see it. It means 99% of the guys on the roster nobody gives a shit about. And as much as Punk lovers will try and ignore that includes Punk. The two shows where Cena has not been in this year and Punk was the main guy ratings were terrible.
> 
> The overall product stinks and people have had enough. It isn't about the internet or other bullshit like that. Other shows do a lot higher ratings, the internet has not hurt them.
> WWE is showing us nothing. There is little in the way of entertainment and 3hrs just drags the shit out even more.
> Go back and look at the attitude era. Something interesting would happen every night. Not just at the end but all the way through. Even the jobbers had fun angles going on. Remember Kai Entai doing the indeed thing. Tajiri with Regal. The characters were developed and you gave a shit about them. You had a good tag division with actual tag teams not just putting two random guys together. There were factions and they were unpredictable.
> 
> Wwe right now is the master of its own downfall. It decided to go against the audience that made it popular and appeal to kids. It took away the tag division and hardly ever had factions or stables. When they do make someone interesting they ruin it ie Barratt. They make the show about one guy and forget everyone else. The writing is so shit it just doesn't work.
> 
> They have to go back to the old formula or they are dead for sure. When even kids no longer find it interesting then you got huge problems.


I agree. You have been one of the few people divert from the "this is 100% Punk's fault" path to conclude that its everything overall that sucks. That's what I was saying a few pages ago. The whole product is trash, and I absolutely agree, part of it is Punk's fault. Nowhere did I say it wasn't. I'm rebutting this asinine argument that its ALL his fault, because its not.


----------



## Falkono

So then Sheamus quarter was higher then Punks main event. Says it all.


----------



## Mister Hands

So Punk, JR, Hell No and Ziggler did okay, Punk and JR even topping the show (admittedly not hard) at an awkward time. Santino and Slater gained. Sheamus and Show gained, then Sheamus and Sandow lost. Everyone else lost. Del Rio and Kingston massively so. Let's blame Punk.


----------



## KO Bossy

Mister Hands said:


> So Punk, JR, Hell No and Ziggler did okay, Punk and JR even topping the show (admittedly not hard) at an awkward time. Santino and Slater gained. Sheamus and Show gained, then Sheamus and Sandow lost. Everyone else lost. Del Rio and Kingston massively so. Let's blame Punk.


Yeah, seems about that way around here, doesn't it? 

That Del Rio and Kofi loss is like...inexcusable. Now Del Rio, THERE is a ratings drain.


----------



## Kabraxal

That breakdown is just damning for the show though. You only had a few jumps and only two that you can argue weren't because of the time period... one being baffling with Marella and Slater. But then, when the writing is so disconnected from the fundamental aspects of wrestling, this should come as no surprise. 

What is really shocking though is that it's starting to get to the level where we can say TNA is competition... not because they are growing their audience in leaps and bounds, but because the WWE is hemmoraging its audience. It's quite possible that in 5 years the WWE could be on the verge of losing it's cable deal... what is sad though, I don't think any alarm bells are going off in the back that they are doing it wrong. Everything I read they are blaming something else other than horrendous booking for the dismal state of the product.


----------



## Pro Royka

Falkono said:


> So then Sheamus quarter was higher then Punks main event. Says it all.


No, :lmao. Once again Punk had the most gains. I told you people others can't draw. Only Punk and Show did in this show.


----------



## Mister Hands

I can't believe they're still (apparently) going ahead with the network when they can't even hit 4 million viewers for Raw.


----------



## ohyeah11

Mister Hands said:


> I can't believe they're still (apparently) going ahead with the network when they can't even hit 4 million viewers for Raw.


pathetic.

"my snuffaluffagus is pumping"


----------



## Starbuck

By the time we reach Christmas I'm willing to bet 3 million becomes the standard weekly viewership lol. And spiraling down we go...


----------



## Kabraxal

Starbuck said:


> By the time we reach Christmas I'm willing to bet 3 million becomes the standard weekly viewership lol. And spiraling down we go...


I could see it much lower if Cena gets the belt back and we have the superface twins leading with both titles. And if they don't start fixing the midcard and stop the stupid recaps and touting wasting so much time, that's only going to make it worse. At this point, the Rock coming back might spike the viewership just above 4 million instead of anything more. 

Man has this company really shot itself in the foot. And it's so obvious while you watch the shows that you are watching a sinking ship......


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> By the time we reach Christmas I'm willing to bet 3 million becomes the standard weekly viewership lol. And spiraling down we go...


lol, and Christmas Eve is on a Monday this year. (Not sure how much that will affect Raw, but I'm a regular watcher and I'm fairly certain my family will be at a party that night so I won't be watching that day most likely). 

It's unfortunate though. Their average for Raw 1000 was 6+million if I remember correctly, and now a few months later they're struggling to get half of that.

But in any event, once Cena's back viewership will go up a bit, and then it'll go up some more as WM season rolls around. 4 million viewers will be the 5 million viewers expectation from last year.


----------



## Starbuck

Trips needs to 'push' Vince down the stairs or poison his bourbon lol.


----------



## Falkono

Pro Royka said:


> No, :lmao. Once again Punk had the most gains. I told you people others can't draw. Only Punk and Show did in this show.


You may want to look at the numbers again. Sheamus segment was 2.77 and the final quarter with Punk was a 2.70.
When they say gain/loss they mean from the previous quarter. If a quarter has a high loss then a high gain looks great. But it isn't if you compare to the highest parts of the show. The highest point was a 2.9. Seeing as it started with a 2.7 its shows the peak of the show ascent much at all. An additional 200k.


----------



## Tnmore

KO Bossy said:


> Learn English for the love of God. Punk is *a* main focus of the show, not the main focus of the *entire* show.


:lmao WTF is this? 

are you telling me there are multiple "Main focus" of the show? :lol



> And this lowest viewership in 15 years you keep dwelling on is just inane. The WWE has been treading water above this line you've created for almost a year now, and now its dipped below it. "Oh Punk is such an anti draw, he needs to lose the title!" How do you explain the shitty ratings for the rest of the year when he WASN'T as much of a focus?


Shitty? How so? You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. 

Punk as the champion is expected to draw viewers/ratings for the show, he cant do it because people wont accept him as the top guy, they see him as a glorified mid card act. As a result of which, you have lowest viewership/rating since 1997.



> And since you're a ratings fiend, why not look at Ryback's segments over the past few weeks and notice that most, if not all, have LOST viewers. So you want Punk, the man who has been gaining viewers, to lose the title to a man who is losing them. The holes in your own logic expose your prejudice.


Ryback has not received the same massive push that Punk has received for 6yrs. You cant tell if he would draw or not, until you put the title on him.




The Sandrone said:


> :lmao
> 
> What hook? The hook they completely ignored until the JR segment? Yeah... no, he was as much the center of the show as Team Hell No was.


Nope. He was/is the main focus of RAW. He is the Wwe Chapion ffs, he opens the Show, is part of all major segments, the main event and closes the show. Everything is built around him with heyman as his side-kick. 

You're going to deny that he is not the main focus, even when he is? These excuses are getting really sad.




> Even if that's true, what's WWE going to do? Put the title on Cena? Starbuck said it best, it'd just be a temporary solution. Besides Cena, no one else have proven they'd be able to draw any more than Punk has. Punk is their best bet for the time being until Rock takes the title from him at RR.


Ryback. See above. 





KO Bossy said:


> So let me get this straight...
> 
> Steve Austin brings in a million viewers per segment he's in. Then, in between the segments, all the viewers he gained are lost by the Oddities, Al Snow, Hardcore Holly and Bart Gunn, all midcard guys. However, their colossal losses aren't their fault, its Steve Austin's fault for not bringing in more viewers to pad the ratings drain that these other guys are. Thus, since Steve Austin is WWF champion and the top guy in the company, he's the one to blame for the shortcomings of others.
> 
> Now, replace Steve Austin with CM Punk and the midcard guys of Attitude with midcard guys of today. This is the logic you're trying to push. If you seriously believe this, then I truly pity you because sorry to say, and I mean no offense when I say this, but your brain does not function properly.


Yes it is Steve Austin's fault if the overall viewership/rating drops because people tuned in to see him particularly. He is the main guy that the show revolves around.


----------



## Honey Bucket

Ryback as WWE Champion? Wow what a great idea.


----------



## Tnmore

So the show opened with a 2.7? is that the lowest or the second lowest since RAW 1000th episode? 

Punk did a 2.6 once iirc?


----------



## Tnmore

Marty Vibe said:


> Ryback as WWE Champion? Wow what a great idea.


Why not? he has the potential to be a big star like Batista.


----------



## Honey Bucket

Tnmore said:


> Why not? he has the potential to be a big star like Batista.


The word there is _potential_. He's not even been in the company for a year. He's not even FACED someone above the midcard. Giving him the WWE belt now would be perhaps the worst idea of all time.


----------



## Tnmore

Marty Vibe said:


> The word there is _potential_. He's not even been in the company for a year. He's not even FACED someone above the midcard. Giving him the WWE belt now would be perhaps the worst idea of all time.


Maybe or maybe not. He cant do worse than punk in the ratings, thats for sure.


----------



## Pro Royka

Falkono said:


> You may want to look at the numbers again. Sheamus segment was 2.77 and the final quarter with Punk was a 2.70.
> When they say gain/loss they mean from the previous quarter. If a quarter has a high loss then a high gain looks great. But it isn't if you compare to the highest parts of the show. The highest point was a 2.9. Seeing as it started with a 2.7 its shows the peak of the show ascent much at all. An additional 200k.


ADR/Kofi lost near a 1 million viewers. You get it or should I explain it more.


----------



## kokepepsi

> Yes it is Steve Austin's fault if the overall viewership/rating drops because people tuned in to see him particularly. He is the main guy that the show revolves around.


WOW


----------



## Honey Bucket

Tnmore said:


> Maybe or maybe not. He cant do worse than punk in the ratings, thats for sure.


Ha, I bet he could. Either way I couldn't give a shit. It's not going to happen so this is all completely redundant.


----------



## Pro Royka

kokepepsi said:


> WOW


Wow is not enough. :lmao


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Falkono said:


> You may want to look at the numbers again. Sheamus segment was 2.77 and the final quarter with Punk was a 2.70.
> When they say gain/loss they mean from the previous quarter. If a quarter has a high loss then a high gain looks great. But it isn't if you compare to the highest parts of the show. The highest point was a 2.9. Seeing as it started with a 2.7 its shows the peak of the show ascent much at all. An additional 200k.


Wait wait, how do you figure out Sheamus' segment got a 2.77? From what I got, both Sheamus segments were lower than all of Punk's segments. Am I missing something on the breakdown?



> Maybe or maybe not. He cant do worse than punk in the ratings, thats for sure.


Actually he can do a lot worse. There's a lot of numbers below the 3,500,000 or so Raw got.



> Yes it is Steve Austin's fault if the overall viewership/rating drops because people tuned in to see him particularly. He is the main guy that the show revolves around.


:lmao :lmao :lmao

Okay, now I see there is no longer a point in arguing with you. I'm not going to get anywhere doing so if that's the type of "logic" you go by.


----------



## Tnmore

kokepepsi said:


> WOW


Explain? 

Who's considered the face of Attitude ERA and who's credited for the success of Monday night ratings wars? Isnt it Steve Austin?



Marty Vibe said:


> Ha, I bet he could. Either way I couldn't give a shit. It's not going to happen so this is all completely redundant.


He probably could. He's massively over both the casuals and internet fans. If they dont fuck-up, he can be big.


----------



## Tnmore

Its simple really. If people are not willing to tune in to see your champion, buy PPVs on his name then tell me why this guy needs to remain the WWE champion.

You can blame the midcard all you want but the low viewership two weeks in a row, clearly proves Punk as WWE champion is a failed project.


----------



## Honey Bucket

Tnmore said:


> Explain?
> 
> Who's considered the face of Attitude ERA and who's credited for the success of Monday night ratings wars? Isnt it Steve Austin?


Yeah you're right, so I guess The Rock, Vince McMahon, Shane McMahon, Mick Foley, The Undertaker, Kurt Angle, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, Edge and Christian, The Dudleys et al. had NOTHING to do with it.




> He probably could. He's massively over both the casuals and internet fans. If they dont fuck-up, he can be big.


At the moment he's just still in the nucleus stages of a 'monster' gimmick whose main claim to fame is having a stare-down with the WWE Champion. He hasn't had any mic time yet, hasn't had long enough matches and as far as I'm concerned, still has ALOT to learn. Absolutely no chance in hell.


----------



## GillbergReturns

kokepepsi said:


> WOW


You know it's true. Nobody breaks down Smackdown's segment ratings. If Sheamus drew a 1.9 SD you're not rationalizing by saying well his segments had a 250,000 viewer increase.

You're just saying well Henry's averaged 2.3.

The focal point of the show will almost always draw in the most viewers.

In fairness to Punk though I don't think the decrease has much to do with him. It's the 3 hour format finally sinking in. It's just a chore to watch Raw nowadays.


----------



## Tnmore

Marty Vibe said:


> Yeah you're right, so I guess The Rock, Vince McMahon, Shane McMahon, Mick Foley, The Undertaker, Kurt Angle, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, Edge and Christian, The Dudleys et al. had NOTHING to do with it.


1998, Austin was The Man. 1999/2000 is different story. Ofcourse The Rock surpassed him completely and became the bigger star/draw/legend in the industry. 




> At the moment he's just still in the nucleus stages of a 'monster' gimmick whose main claim to fame is having a stare-down with the WWE Champion. He hasn't had any mic time yet, hasn't had long enough matches and as far as I'm concerned, still has ALOT to learn. Absolutely no chance in hell.


Well I think we can agree on that, he's relatively new. But its gonna happen soon regardless trust me, Vince is high on him and next year he would probably end up as champion.


----------



## Pro Royka

GillbergReturns said:


> You know it's true. Nobody breaks down Smackdown's segment ratings. If Sheamus drew a 1.9 SD you're not rationalizing by saying well his segments had a 250,000 viewer increase.
> 
> You're just saying well Henry's averaged 2.3.
> 
> The focal point of the show will almost always draw in the most viewers.
> 
> In fairness to Punk though I don't think the decrease has much to do with him. It's the 3 hour format finally sinking in. It's just a chore to watch Raw nowadays.


Raw is a supershow. SD guys are part of it, and we can see their drawing ability. I agree tho, SD should have somebody for the breakdowns.


----------



## GillbergReturns

Pro Royka said:


> Raw is a supershow. SD guys are part of it, and we can see their drawing ability. I agree tho, SD should have somebody for the breakdowns.


That wasn't my point.

On Smackdown overall numbers are the only thing that get judged but when it comes to judging Raw superstars they want to sweep it aside and just look at segment breakdowns.

Addressing your topic though, the Smackdown storyline is rarely the focal point of the show. Very rarely does anything significant happen to advance the World Heavyweight Championship storyline. No, I don't think Sheamus, Orton or insert Smackdown star should be held to the same ratings standards as Cena or Punk. For the most part it's just them killing time. Sheamus stealing ADR's car and Monday's debate are exceptions but we all know a random Orton v Tensai match is just worthless filler.


----------



## RatedR10

Holy shit at that breakdown. :lmao

Two surprises for me... 1) surprised Santino/Slater gained viewers to be honest. Wonder what led to that. 2) I know Del Rio isn't necessarily a ratings draw, but this guy is a former two time WWE Champion, MITB winner and the only 40 man Royal Rumble winner in history...and his match with Kofi Kingston loses nearly a million viewers. Absolutely terrible. fpalm


----------



## -Skullbone-

Tnmore said:


> Well I think we can agree on that, he's relatively new. But its gonna happen soon regardless trust me, Vince is high on him and next year he would probably end up as champion.


The numbers that Ryback's pulled in over last few weeks isn't exactly reflective of the desire casuals appear to have that Vince certainly does in putting him on that podium is it? 

What's your desire in seeing this guy as being a figurehead? What will he bring besides the stereotypical image?


----------



## Brogue Kick

terrible


----------



## Starbuck

Tnmore said:


> Its simple really. If people are not willing to tune in to see your champion, buy PPVs on his name *then tell me why this guy needs to remain the WWE champion.*
> 
> You can blame the midcard all you want but the low viewership two weeks in a row, clearly proves Punk as WWE champion is a failed project.


For 9 months Punk was treated as second best if even. Since Raw 1000 he's been the central point of the show. Now granted, he hasn't been doing any good but you can't treat any champion in that position like dirt for 9 months out of 10 and then suddenly expect masses of people to buy into him as a legit show carrying superstar because all the actual show carrying superstars left. Taking the title off Punk solves nothing. This weeks Raw we got some insight into what WWE looks like without any star power. Punk is the 'top star' right now on a roster where there are no stars. There is a lot of merit in what you're saying and I spent a few posts saying the same thing myself but it isn't as black and white as that either. Punk is essentially feuding with nobody right now. He's in limbo while WWE sit on their hands waiting to see if John Cena can compete at the PPV. They haven't treated him the way a champion of 300+ days should have been treated for the duration of his reign so is it any bit of wonder he's bombing in the ratings?


----------



## DesolationRow

What I've learned from the last several pages of this thread is that *Starbuck*'s dad sounds like a very cool guy.


----------



## Starbuck

DesolationRow said:


> What I've learned from the last several pages of this thread is that *Starbuck*'s dad sounds like a very cool guy.


:lmao


----------



## roadkill_

Tnmore said:


> 1998, Austin was The Man. 1999/2000 is different story. Ofcourse The Rock surpassed him completely and became the bigger star/draw/legend in the industry.


Lol. No, Rock rode out on Austins success.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Starbucks father is pretty cool. I've talked to him a few times.

He's a 42 year old pro wrestler turned COO. He's got a giant nose too.


----------



## Starbuck

The-Rock-Says said:


> Starbucks father is pretty cool. I've talked to him a few times.
> 
> He's a 42 year old pro wrestler turned COO. He's got a giant nose too.


How do you know that!!! Fuck. I've been found out. Damn. Dad is gonna bury me now. No WWE title for me.


----------



## Loudness

Trying to look at WWE from a distanced view (casual), what reason do non-hardcore WWE fans have to tune in? They have two storylines going, Punk/Heyman and Team Hell No, everything else is so downplayed in importance by the booking, effort in writing or mic effort/time that it doesn't even matter to most regular viewers, let alone fans who barely watch. Why should the TV viewers care, if WWE themselves, and their commentators ironically make most feuds sound like filler material, talking about unrelated things during matches or half the roster getting jobber entrances nowadays.

If they wanted to gain more mainstream popularity, they will have to try to make every character and storyline as worthwhile as possible, watching three hours of stagnation minus the ME and one Tag Team isn't going to cut it. By worthwhile, I also mean presented as a big deal, rather than an unimportant feud. 

As for individual draws, there's very few (if none at all) that unconditionally draw regardless of how much effort was put in the storyline, who they feud with and where that storyline is placed card wise apart from John Cena. But then you compare the way Cena has been booked for years with full-force (or any other wrestlers that ever became big draws) with the start-stop philosophy and the random burials after somebody gets over (Bryan at WM, Ryder and others) and you can see why nobody appearing like such a big deal anymore.


----------



## Starbuck

The fact that not one segment got over a 3.0 this week is very disturbing. Is there a big MNF game on next week too? I wonder if they can bounce back. I guess the only good news is that when you fall this far, the only place left to go is up....unless they keep going down lol.


----------



## dan the marino

Falkono said:


> So then Sheamus quarter was higher then Punks main event. Says it all.


:kobe His gain came from the regular 9:00 slot. A lot of people don't even give a shit that RAW starts at 8 now and continue their schedule of tuning in at 9: I know I did for the longest time until just a few weeks ago. Not to mention it's just hard to watch 3 hours of any show sometimes, nevermind RAW when it's like it was last week.

You can't blame Punk and you can't blame one person for this mess. It's the product at the whole and overall, it's bad. I don't think it's worse than 2009's RAWs yet but if they continue with shows like last weeks it will get there fast.

Which is odd as the week before was pretty great (the first two hours, at least). What a drop in quality.


----------



## JY57

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



> - We noted earlier this week that Vince McMahon was seen upset at Monday's RAW. By the time the night was over, it's said that he was in a much better mood for the Jim Ross Appreciation Night stuff that happened after RAW. One of the reasons Vince is in a bad mood these days is because USA Network officials aren't happy with the way things are going with three-hour RAW shows.
> 
> Partial source: PWInsider


yeah if this keeps up. I say going back to 2 hours will eventually happen


----------



## Cack_Thu

As seen on the Online slang list .:shocked:

Raw is Le Punk *: *a far more deadly phenomenon than Gustave ,Quicksand,Bermuda Triangle, that makes people mysteriously disappear .
:evil:


----------



## The-Rock-Says

You can't blame one man for a whole rating of a show. We go by what they do in their segments and matches. Not the overall rating.

The overall rating projects how good the product is. And this product sucks.


----------



## Mister Hands

I feel like they should try two months of Raw as written by the guy who wrote the Anger Management stuff, along with Trips and his NXT team.


----------



## roadkill_

Loudness said:


> Trying to look at WWE from a distanced view (casual), what reason do non-hardcore WWE fans have to tune in? They have two storylines going, Punk/Heyman and Team Hell No, everything else is so downplayed in importance by the booking, effort in writing or mic effort/time that it doesn't even matter to most regular viewers, let alone fans who barely watch.


One thing Russo got right was: He said that every wrestler must have a story, or something going on. It wasn't just violence that made TAE good, it was the undercard having something on the burner, however stupid it was. For that reason I even enjoyed watching HEAT back in the day, it was like a mini-Raw. And at the time, J.R. would section his commentary. So if Al Snow was doing something stupid in the first quarter, J.R. would mostly stick to that angle and sell that wrestler. Now, its shit all over and Cole just plugs the 1-2 angles kept for later right from the start.


----------



## King_Of_This_World

Why are you people still watching this shit?

Why?


----------



## Choke2Death

GillbergReturns made a great point. If Smackdown has a terrible rating with Sheamus or Orton as champion, people will quickly call them rating killers but if Punk as champion does terrible ratings, they will all go "BUT HIS SEGMENTS GAINED VIEWERS!!!". Double standards, they never cease to exist!

The champion always gains viewers... unless they are CM Punk. I hope you haven't forgotten that episode before Over the Limit when he wrestled Daniel Bryan and Tensai in a handicap match as the MAIN EVENT and it actually *lost viewers*! :lol



Cack_Thu said:


> As seen on the Online slang list .:shocked:
> 
> Raw is Le Punk *: *a far more deadly phenomenon than Gustave ,Quicksand,Bermuda Triangle, that makes people mysteriously disappear .
> :evil:


:lmao :lmao :lmao

"Must spread some reputation", by the way.


----------



## Honey Bucket

Utterly hilarious.

:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol


----------



## Pro Royka

At least losing viewers against Tensai and Bryan in a handicap match is better than losing viewers against Trips in the overrun in 2009. And besides we already saw Sheamus and Orton drawing ability on Raw supershow in the last 10 shows, so it's save to blame them but not the full blame tho. Mark "Ratings" Henry proved himself on Raw and SD with higher ratings than them as a champion. So it's not really a coincidence for that to happen and not to them when he had a 2.23 something every week and drops when he isn't.


----------



## Evil Peter

Are people still not seeing how most who post in this thread just are insecure and are trying to use ratings to somehow put some "fact" behind their opinions, and are just trying to attack some wrestlers and their fans? If more people actually were smart enough to make credible posts, like KO Bossy has done, it would be worth reading but now it just comes across as teenagers bickering.


----------



## D.M.N.

Quarter Hours - October 1st, 2012
Q1 - 3.68 million
Q2 - 3.68 million
Q3 - 3.22 million
Q4 - 3.17 million
Q5 - 3.59 million
Q6 - 3.24 million
Q7/Q8 - 3.47 million
Q9 - 3.40 million
Q10 - 3.86 million
Q11 - 3.04 million
Q12/Overrun - 3.57 million

SmackDown had 2.625 million viewers, so it is quite possible that Del Rio's SmackDown segments beat his Raw segment. Amusingly.


----------



## Choke2Death

Pro Royka said:


> At least losing viewers against Tensai and Bryan in a handicap match is better than losing viewers against Trips in the overrun in 2009. And besides we already saw Sheamus and Orton drawing ability on Raw supershow in the last 10 shows, so it's save to blame them but not the full blame tho. Mark "Ratings" Henry proved himself on Raw and SD with higher ratings than them as a champion. So it's not really a coincidence for that to happen and not to them when he had a 2.23 something every week and drops when he isn't.


As pointed out before, the reason Orton/HHH lost viewers in the overrun was likely because of sensitive PC pussies that didn't want their kids watching Orton assaulting Stephanie. Might also explain why the male wrestlers never lay their hands on the females in any way unless it's "accidental" (Big Show pushing AJ) now. It's mad obvious as the reason because their match at the commercial free Raw was the peak of that show.

What was the reason for the handicap match losing viewers? Nothing I can think of other than lack of interest!


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Neg rep Pro Royka more. It get's his tail up.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

I love this thread.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Everybody active sucks. Nobody active is a draw (aside from Cena).

/thread


----------



## dan the marino

Choke2Death said:


> As pointed out before, the reason Orton/HHH lost viewers in the overrun was likely because of sensitive PC pussies that didn't want their kids watching Orton assaulting Stephanie.


:kobe Bullshit. I don't know why they lost viewers or even that they did, but losing viewers in the overrun is just really bad no matter how many shit excuses you want to try.


----------



## Choke2Death

dan the marino said:


> :kobe Bullshit. I don't know why they lost viewers or even that they did, but losing viewers in the overrun is just really bad no matter how many shit excuses you want to try.


Considering the politically correct world we're living in along with the PG rating that was there in 2009 (and still is), I say that's very likely and not just a "shit excuse". People could have switched on, saw what took place and quickly changed the channel because they thought that's a horrible thing.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

usual overrun with average gains (in our times)
the only thing thats bad is the amount of losses they have but yeah nothing surprising in the overrun


----------



## vanboxmeer

When a old fan tunes into this show nowadays out of accident or just curiosity, what does he see? He sees a paint-by-the-numbers heavily manifactured show trying to be "hip" with them spouting off TOUT~!, twitta machines, and having some mediocre female performer who looks like they plucked out of a tween Nickolodeon show in charge of the show and promoted as one of their focal points above almost every other male act. He sees none of the environment or atmosphere that made him a fan in the first place where matches, wins, losses, and storylines were presented as something worthy to be emotionally invested in. He instead sees some poor imitation of some adolescent variety show with some wrestling in it with a bunch of wacky, goofy characters comprising 85% of the show. He then sighs and thinks to himself, "Wow, wrestling really has changed." and then does something else.


----------



## SteenIsGod

CM-DRAW is his new name.


----------



## JY57

damn @ ADR & Kofi losing almost a 1,000,000 viewers


----------



## Rock316AE

Like Foley last week, JR did the peak of the show this week(Horrendous number anyway). JR was always a big TV draw, which most of the time hasn't worked in his favor because Vince used this excuse against him. Other than that, Big Show/Sheamus did second biggest as expected and the overrun, which if I'm not mistaken was lower than last week, did probably the worst overrun number in the history of RAW.

As for the Vince situation, like vanboxmeer explained perfectly a few pages ago, Stephanie is Vince without the ambition, the business mind, the creative sense and the order management ability. She's completely clueless and one of the reasons this company is on an hourglass.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

The Lady Killer said:


> Everybody active sucks. Nobody active is a draw (aside from Cena).
> 
> /thread


This. Fuck, this thread is the absolute worst.

Hint: If you have to argue about whether or not someone is a draw for 600 pages, they are not a draw.


----------



## mblonde09

Rock316AE said:


> Like Foley last week, *JR did the peak of the show this week*(Horrendous number anyway). JR was always a big TV draw, which most of the time hasn't worked in his favor because Vince used this excuse against him. Other than that, Big Show/Sheamus did second biggest as expected and the overrun, which if I'm not mistaken was lower than last week, did probably the worst overrun number in the history of RAW.
> 
> As for the Vince situation, like vanboxmeer explained perfectly a few pages ago, Stephanie is Vince without the ambition, the business mind, the creative sense and the order management ability. She's completely clueless and one of the reasons this company is on an hourglass.


LOL at you acting like Punk wasn't even there. Punk completely owned that segment.


----------



## Pro Royka

Rock316AE said:


> Like Foley last week, JR did the peak of the show this week(Horrendous number anyway). JR was always a big TV draw, which most of the time hasn't worked in his favor because Vince used this excuse against him. Other than that,* Big Show/Sheamus did second biggest as expected and the overrun, which if I'm not mistaken was lower than last week,* *did probably the worst overrun number in the history of RAW.*
> 
> As for the Vince situation, like vanboxmeer explained perfectly a few pages ago, Stephanie is Vince without the ambition, the business mind, the creative sense and the order management ability. She's completely clueless and one of the reasons this company is on an hourglass.


Everything you say is questionable, I hate the fact that you dismiss Punk as if he doesn't exist. Your hate is way too stupid actually, even if the guy had a huge success you will find a way to make an excuse and try your hardest to label the success to his opponent. Dude Orton can't draw, I already proved it, he lost in the overrun with Trips, and got the lowest ratings in 2010 as a WWE champion were others did much better ratings in the exact same year, and also got the lowest ratings on SD as a champion with a 1.63 and when Christian won the title he raised ratings to 2.2 and when Orton won it back he strikes again with another low rating 1.78, nobody wants to see this boring guy on SD and ratings doesn't get effected if he isnt there instead it actaully rises. No, it isn't the lowest gain of all time kid, whats with you everything is lowest of all time when it comes to Cm Punk, as you don't show facts when infact many did worst including Orton, Cena, Hardy etc. Show/Sheamus was actaully a poor gain as its the time were people actually tune in mostly. Last week it was near a million viewers the guy that supposed to be the worst of all time, fpalm when infact that segement was about him and he gained a lot not only last week, also in the previous year and still can. One more thing Orton highest gain this year was with the worst of all time Punk when they had a match and when it comes in other times Orton lose tons of viewers that if I'm not mistaken. Making excuses and blaming his opponent for not being intresting enough to gain viewers when infact it wasnt the only time, it happened mostly all the time because if he doesnt face guys like Show or Punk he doesnt draw shit as the weekly breakdowns can prove it. Most of the time you're a pathetic excuse of a poster, arent you the guy who said Show has great mic skills.


----------



## Tnmore

-Skullbone- said:


> The numbers that Ryback's pulled in over last few weeks isn't exactly reflective of the desire casuals appear to have that Vince certainly does in putting him on that podium is it?


Not really. He's reliable, with such short amount of push(it has been what 6 months right? and most of them were local jobbers), he's proved that he can draw even at random quarters. Like I said before, we dont really know if he can draw or not until they actually put the title on him.




> What's your desire in seeing this guy as being a figurehead? What will he bring besides the stereotypical image?


He will bring what Batista or Goldberg brought to the table. A powerhouse brute who's unstoppable. People love that kinda stuff as proven in the past, he can be a big draw if pushed right. That "stereotypical image" is something that exists only among the internet fans and wrestling hardcores to a degree, casuals dont care so its irrelevant.




Starbuck said:


> For 9 months Punk was treated as second best if even. Since Raw 1000 he's been the central point of the show. Now granted, he hasn't been doing any good but you can't treat any champion in that position like dirt for 9 months out of 10 and then suddenly expect masses of people to buy into him as a legit show carrying superstar because all the actual show carrying superstars left. Taking the title off Punk solves nothing. This weeks Raw we got some insight into what WWE looks like without any star power. Punk is the 'top star' right now on a roster where there are no stars. There is a lot of merit in what you're saying and I spent a few posts saying the same thing myself but it isn't as black and white as that either. Punk is essentially feuding with nobody right now. He's in limbo while WWE sit on their hands waiting to see if John Cena can compete at the PPV. They haven't treated him the way a champion of 300+ days should have been treated for the duration of his reign so is it any bit of wonder he's bombing in the ratings?


I disagree. Just because he played second fiddle to John Cena, the absolute top guy of the company, doesnt mean he was "treated like dirt". By that logic, Batista was treated like dirt most of his career. Much like Sheamus right now, Batista post 2006 hardly ever main evented over Cena and the WWE title. Hell, he couldnt even main event with Cena, wrestlemania 26 Cena/Batista was the top draw but they promoted Taker/Shawn as the top match instead and it bombed. How many PPVs did Jeff Hardy main event? the few he did main event were against Punk. You can push the mid card act as a main event attraction every ppv if you want, but its just not going to work because the fundamental problem lies with Punk.


----------



## -Skullbone-

Tnmore said:


> Not really. He's reliable, with such short amount of push(it has been what 6 months right? and most of them were local jobbers), he's proved that he can draw even at random quarters. Like I said before, we dont really know if he can draw or not until they actually put the title on him.


Jesus, he _drew_. 'Drew' is not the same as 'draw.' The last couple of weeks has seen Ryback lose viewers where he's been utilised as a standalone figure. Since I know such numbers aren't much more than an indication of the performer reception for company insiders, I'm confident in saying that that's nothing to be too concerned about if you're hoping for a Ryback push. However, in a thread where posters appear to have this mindset that viewership numbers must go through the roof in every possible segment I figured I'd follow suit and voice concerns over his current 'appeal.' 

Slapping the title on Ryback to 'see if he's a draw' is the sort of management that's a key problem with current WWE. There's a lack of continuity in the company, as well as a discernibly even level of performers that can be accepted by audiences without being forced over others and fear any sort of backlash. The reason he's generally 'quite liked' around here is because the guy has had his weaknesses masked, strengths accentuated and has a character that's somewhat of a change of pace in this era. 

As champion he's going to have to start carrying segments and working promos of high importance, become a prominent media figure to represent the company, and work matches of main event caliber. I cannot see this guy do anything of the sort because he hasn't exhibited _any_ outstanding or particularly strong qualities that make him stand out as someone that will specifically sought after by a large enough number of outsider fans to be considered a draw. 



> He will bring what Batista or Goldberg brought to the table. A powerhouse brute who's unstoppable. People love that kinda stuff as proven in the past, he can be a big draw if pushed right. That "stereotypical image" is something that exists only among the internet fans and wrestling hardcores to a degree, casuals dont care so its irrelevant.


Do _you_ like that stuff? You're an internet fan as well so we can discuss it in proper context. In regards to your comparisons with Batista and Goldberg. I'm sorry but looking at those three three shoulder to shoulder will not work out in his favour. Goldberg came at a time where his appeal could be exploited for all that was possible, and Batista was the beneficiary of fantastic, inspired booking that's distinctly lacking from today's product. 

On a surface level, the guy is currently a second-rate continuation to both these wrestlers and comes up short in most of their identifiable assets and renowned traits. Casuals see it as well and are already comparing Ryback to those sort of characters with tepid receptions. *Continuations that are only a couple of years spanned apart from each are not destined for great feats unless they possess a hook or uniquely specialized trait the original lacked. *

If you truly concerned about casual appeal and not just doing it to justify your hatred of certain wrestlers, then I'm afraid you may be disappointed to find that there's little appeal in wrestling to a larger audiences to draw in large quantities of viewers and consumers. *It'll take something of extraordinary appeal to get people of modern culture to care about professional wrestling. Current Ryback is very, very unlikely to be anything extraordinary and has proven very little aside from possessing a badass look. * 

I hope he can improve in all areas as I do every performer. However, unless he becomes an extraordinarily popular brand in himself stemming from some sort of fantastic market pitch (as that's all he is based off after all: appearances), despite the company not doing much right in that area outside of one or two instances he'll be seen by a large enough portion of the audience as many do here to undermine him: a second-rate, one-dimensional and plain ol' boring continuation of roided up freaks who live under the stigma of being dimwitted. *He may well become a viewership success in time, but it isn't going to change the current lack of interest outside of the established fan group. No individual can at this moment in time. *


----------



## bboy

so no cena and then the worst ratings in 15 years?


----------



## YoungGun_UK

Rock316 is easily the best heel in the business, wheres that gif off Punk reeling in the bate?


----------



## Twisted14

The problem may be Punk, but it isn't because of the work he does. It's the shitty way WWE has gone about pushing him and promoting him. He's the WWE champion and has put on great matches throughout his run, what else can he do? I think everybody on the roster is going out there and doing the best they damn well can. Punk goes out every week and performs extremely well, whether you like the guy or you don't, you have to admit that. They all do their best with what they're given. The problem is Cena. As bboy has pointed out above. No Cena and the ratings drop. This isn't the fault of Cena or anyone else on the roster. It's quite clearly the WWE's fault. 

Nobody else is on his level. Punk is the closest. There are so many people out there (kids and adults included) who only tune in to watch Cena and don't give a shit about the rest of the show. It's pretty clear when you have stories of WWE giving partial refunds to people who went to live shows expecting Cena to be there. It's a sad fucking state that they have nobody that can replace him. They have nobody built up for it. Where's Randy Orton? Filming a fucking movie. Sheamus is being built to be in that spot but he's not there yet. It's just too little too late. This is a desperate time, they have spent the last however many years dicking around and building only one guy and ignoring everyone else. 

They didn't lose ALL THAT many viewers. It's the lowest rating in a long time but it isn't THAT many people, they still have heaps of people watching and there are other factors here. The football, the fact that ratings often dip around this time of year, and the fact it is a 3 hour show. A lack of Cena would definitely have contributed to it though.

They've been riding on the success of Cena for way too long and haven't been using him to put anyone else up on the same level. They came close with CM Punk this year. But they went and screwed that up by putting him below Cena all the time. This was bound to happen eventually, Cena would get injured and they wouldn't know what to do. What happens if Cena can't make HIAC? Punk v. Ryback? I would rather not see that. But if not him then who else?


----------



## ToddTheBod

Amber B said:


> Good. WWE basically equals this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A fucking mess.


Haha, what the hell is that .gif?


----------



## TheWFEffect

Oh well RAW, Smackdown and Impact may all suck recently but there is one bright light in wrestling N X FUCKING T.









Also I think it's important to note a lot of young kids who have been following WWE for the past 8 years those little Cena fans we all hate and all once were are growing up now WWE needs to shake things up a bit for its core audience.


----------



## Cack_Thu

Punk's sloppy-whinny ass successfully spearheaded RAW to its worst ratings in over 15 years.Punk is so great that he need not actually go for the GTS to make people go to sleep.Best in the world at what he does.

In Le Punk we trust.(Y)


----------



## DenGal

The writers are lazy every main event build up is the same nothing intresting
and Vince cares more about politics than WWE.


----------



## Happenstan

ToddTheBod said:


> Haha, what the hell is that .gif?



Matt Hardy making a fool of himself. So basically just another day in the life of...


----------



## lewisvee

No wonder ratings are low, they don't listen to the fans but instead spoon feed us garbage we don't want, I'm getting bored of the current product, they need to listen to people more


----------



## KO Bossy

TheWFEffect said:


> Oh well RAW, Smackdown and Impact may all suck recently but there is one bright light in wrestling N X FUCKING T.


Hey, don't lump in Impact with Raw and Smackdown. Its quite a bit more entertaining than anything the Fed is putting out.


----------



## mblonde09

Tnmore said:


> Not really. *He's reliable, with such short amount of push(it has been what 6 months right? and most of them were local jobbers), he's proved that he can draw even at random quarters.* Like I said before, we dont really know if he can draw or not until they actually put the title on him.


You are delusional, and Ryback segments have been losing viewers for weeks now. As far as him being "reliable" goes... how reliable he is going to be when he gets his second wellness violation?


----------



## funnyfaces1

Why are you guys arguing with Tnmore? The guy obviously did not even watch the Attitude Era when it occurred, and he just posts on here to talk about Phil.


----------



## MikeChase27

Yeah I find it odd that most of the Punk haters who bring up ratings are Ryback fans who keep trying to say he is a draw.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

In fairness to Ryback, he does have the ability to draw, but only while his undefeated streak is intact. That, along with his build and the way his matches work makes him easy to watch. He just goes out there, destroys, yells "Feed me more!" and leaves, and usually all in less than 5 minutes with no commercial breaks, making his segments easy to stick around for for casuals.

The only thing is, what happens when he's not undefeated? Or even if he's still undefeated, what happens when he stays on the screen for more than 5 minutes at a time? Will casuals still stick around for him? It worked for Goldberg, but honestly I feel Goldberg had that invincible aura down much much better than Ryback, and that he had a much bigger presence. Goldberg is superior to Ryback (or was), and so history might not repeat itself with Ryback. 

Another thing is I think Ryback's appeal is already wearing thin (even though he still has his undefeated streak). Back around his Raw debut, he either gained or lost less than the usual loss in odd segments, but now it seems the opposite. A few weeks ago in the 9PM segment that gained less than usual, he was there towards the end. Now granted he wasn't advertised, but he was there long enough where people could've heard about him being on there and would've tuned in if he was a big draw. But I won't go deep into that since the fact remains the segment was mostly about Miz. Last week Ryback/Tensai was in a quarter that lost 350,000 viewers. Ryback/Miz the week before was in the quarter that lost 500,000+ viewers. A few weeks ago Ryback/Slater lost 164,000 viewers. But of course then you look back in early August, the quarter Ryback was in gained 78,000 when he was facing Reks/Hawkins. Or the final 2 hour Raw, where Ryback/Swagger lost only 20,000 viewers off the 10PM segment which had a near 300,000 viewer gain. 

So all in all, I think Ryback's appeal is thinning, and unless his undefeated streak ends up being as long as Goldberg's and he becomes champion while undefeated a year or two down the line, I'm certain when his undefeated streak goes, so does anything interesting in the casual fans eyes about him and so does any drawing power he has right now. If let's say Cena can't compete in the cell and they go with Punk/Ryback, and Punk beats Ryback, then I'm certain that's what will happen. If Ryback won... well, who knows what would happen. I think it's too unpredictable to tell at this point. Keep him undefeated for a year or so, have him in semi-big/big feuds with Orton/Sheamus/Punk/Cena/Big Show/Henry, have him win the championship sometime in 2014 or at latest WM31, and then after that have him lose to really put over a heel huge. And by that point he'd have gained so much momentum and drawing ability that unless WWE turns him into another Cena in terms of character and adults shy away from him, he'd have solidified himself as a top draw and star.

It's why I also think they shouldn't have involved Ryback in the WWE Title feud so soon. Honestly if WWE wanted to take a huge gamble with Punk as the top heel and champion in order to hugely benefit Ryback at the end, have Punk retain his title all the way to WM31, beating Rock, HHH, Austin, Cena, Orton, Sheamus, as well as everyone else he's already beaten and adding some other people to the mix to cement himself as the top heel in the industry and the undisputed number 1 guy. He'd have been champ for 40+ months by that point, and after beating everyone by hook or crook, Ryback wins the Rumble and gets to face Punk at WM31, he beats him, and ends the reign of terror by CM Punk. Then at some point towards the end of the year, Ryback loses the title some big heel like, for example, Wade Barrett (by that point).

Hell, if they wanted to go even deeper than that, have a story where Ryback's behavior as of now is all because of drug addiction, and Punk at some point in the near future beats down Ryback/attacks him from behind and does something to take Ryback out of action for awhile. When Ryback comes back and say, helps Punk beat Austin/HHH at WM29 as a shocker to retain the title, Punk reveals Ryback's previous drug addiction and how he brought him back. Now he'll still be a dominant force in the ring, but he'd be allowed to cut better promos and still be unstoppable. Rather than only knowing how to say "Feed Me More!" he cuts promos of a wider variety, while still keeping him beastly aura and letting his actions most of the time do the talking, and uses it to help Punk. Punk then saves another young guy fro drugs... say... Dean Ambrose for the fuck of it (replace this name with any younger guy not on main WWE television right now), and Heyman sticks around with Punk and acts as the manager for all three. It would be similar to Evolution actually, with Punk as the HHH, Heyman as the Flair (though not a competitor, but as a suck-up to Punk and everyone in the group and interfering in matches to ensure the group almost always wins), Ryback as the Batista, and Ambrose as the Orton. Two years of Punk on top of the food chain, only unlike HHH, he keeps the title through all of it, and the hate for him skyrockets, especially when he's using the group (and mainly Ryback) just as well as HHH used Evolution. They repeat history from ten years prior where Ryback wins the Rumble, and slowly turns on Punk before finally declaring he faces Punk for the title. He beats him at Mania, and the rest is history. Heyman would maybe stick with Punk or leave from that point, and Ambrose/whoever would go on to become WHC, and hell, maybe they could become WHC while Punk is WWE Champion.

Now this isn't going to happen, and honestly it's not even what I'd personally like to happen. 40+ months of Punk or ANYONE as champion in this day and age is way too much and it's a huge risk because if people don't react where they want to tune in to see Punk lose and instead just flat out stop watching, it could come close to killing the company if it doesn't do so. But if it would work, it could be what saves the business from the downward spiral it's on right now. Sometimes huge risks are necessary for huge rewards. 

But as I said, it won't, shouldn't, and I don't want it to really happen. While the idea of Punk being on top like that is great, even him as champion for that long doesn't appeal to me. Hell, if he's still champion after WM29, I'll definitely have something to say about that. And while I understand he could lose the title at some point and then gain it back like HHH did, Punk doesn't have the same natural credibility based on look that HHH had, and I think in order for the results to replicate what we saw with Batista, Ryback needs to be the one after everyone else couldn't get the title away from Punk for a second, that takes the title off Punk.

Like I said already a few times, it's not that I want this to happen (at least not exactly), but the point of writing all this is to suggest a path Ryback could become a solidified top draw for many years in the future. You could replace Punk with someone else capable of being the top heel if you have some vendetta against Punk, though you'd have to re-write my version a bit since Punk's manipulation of getting Ryback to join him relies on the whole drug addiction story, but if could convincingly get Ryback to turn heel, it could work extremely well well with any capable top heel of leading a group.


----------



## FosterJemini

lewisvee said:


> No wonder ratings are low, they don't listen to the fans but instead spoon feed us garbage we don't want, I'm getting bored of the current product, they need to listen to people more


RALLY!!!


----------



## Evil Peter

funnyfaces1 said:


> Why are you guys arguing with Tnmore? The guy obviously did not even watch the Attitude Era when it occurred, and he just posts on here to talk about Phil.


Yes, he's more obsessed with him than the Punk fans are.


----------



## The XL

KO Bossy said:


> Hey, don't lump in Impact with Raw and Smackdown. Its quite a bit more entertaining than anything the Fed is putting out.


Raw and Smackdown are garbage, but that doesn't mean Impact is any good. It's still shit.


----------



## Nimbus

Punk will lose the tittle at Hell in a cell, mark my words.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Nimbus said:


> Punk will lose the tittle at Hell in a cell, mark my words.


This is only the beginning of the CM punk devil angle.


----------



## Coffey

Remember when Triple H was trying to be Ric Flair? Then they put a bunch of other wrestlers into the roles of Flair's old opponents, so that Triple H could role play like he was Flair. Shelton Benjamin was Sting, Buh-Buh Ray Dudley was Dusty Rhodes. Anyone else remember this?

Justin Gabriel would be a great Ricky Steamboat. I'm not sure how that is relevant to the conversation or anything, it is just something that I observed. I see a lot of babyface potential in Gabriel as a Steamboatesque babyface.


----------



## chucky101

*The Only Way WWE Gets Better........*

everybody just don't watch, keep that rating at 2.5 or lower, boycott

if mondays raw gets another 2.5 even with vince, vince would have to dig deeper and really have a game changer

if raws rating sparks to a 3.0ish then we are going to get the same thing as last time he returned, little spark but then back to normal with no real change

the only way vince will truly change the product for the better is if the ratings continues this way


----------



## Defei

I read somewhere that they only have two weeks to build for Rock vs Punk for Royal Rumble 2013 because of Rock's schedule. It would suck if thats true.


----------



## Chaos-In-Motion

*Re: The Only Way WWE Gets Better........*

Or he'll continue to settle for mediocrity like he's done for the past half decade, and as CM Punk said, make money despite himself.


----------



## reDREDD

*Re: The Only Way WWE Gets Better........*

well this is a shocking new idea

i doubt anyone on this relatively small forum even has a nielson box. or buys ppvs


----------



## Attitude3:16

*Re: The Only Way WWE Gets Better........*

Some competition is needed too! i hope TNA can bring some!


----------



## BrosOfDestruction

Defei said:


> I read somewhere that they only have two weeks to build for Rock vs Punk for Royal Rumble 2013 because of Rock's schedule. It would suck if thats true.


That's why we have this wonderful invention known as satellite.

But that's what it seems like so far although it's probably gonna be 3 weeks instead of 2. I'm pretty sure he's gonna return on the 20th anniversary show which is on 7th Jan and the RR is on the 27th so that's most likely 3 consectuive shows he's gonna work to build up the match. 

Not like this would be anything new though. I remember the Rock/Hogan feud in 03 and he appeared via satellite for a couple of weeks and only did 1 appearance in person on the go home show.


----------



## Xiphias

*Re: The Only Way WWE Gets Better........*

Vince logic:

Instead of focusing on a few shows of amazing quality/popularity, saturate the market with a veritable shit-ton of shows, so that the total viewership across all shows is as much as when there was just RAW and 1-2 other things in the Attitude Era. It's not like the wrestlers are going to burn out. No.
:vince2


----------



## Living Tribunal

*Re: The Only Way WWE Gets Better........*

Bring back Attitude. As much as the internet hates to hear that, the ratings would skyrocket and you know it. Also, bring back the Hardcore title!


----------



## 11rob2k

*Re: The Only Way WWE Gets Better........*

Unless you have a nielson box it doesn't matter if you watch or not.


----------



## Curry

*Re: The Only Way WWE Gets Better........*

Remember when everyone was going to boycott after AW got fired? That went well...


----------



## -Sambo Italiano-

*Re: The Only Way WWE Gets Better........*

Low ratings bring us things like celebrity guest hosts and million dollar mania.


----------



## Green Light

BrosOfDestruction said:


> That's why we have this wonderful invention known as satellite.
> 
> But that's what it seems like so far although it's probably gonna be 3 weeks instead of 2. I'm pretty sure he's gonna return on the 20th anniversary show which is on 7th Jan and the RR is on the 27th so that's most likely 3 consectuive shows he's gonna work to build up the match.
> 
> Not like this would be anything new though. I remember the Rock/Hogan feud in 03 and he appeared via satellite for a couple of weeks and only did 1 appearance in person on the go home show.


Do you people really wanna boo The Rock? BOOOOOOOOOOOOO

That was one of my favourite promos from Rock as well, like ever. When he is on his game that is all he needs to sell a match anyway, not to mention Punk can easily carry the feud in the weeks before Rock is there. Oh and, let's not forget Raw is THREE HOURS now. They will have several Rock-Punk segments each show I'm sure.

(If I remember rightly Rock made two appearances on that SD! 03 show, one promo alone and one where he came out to face Hogan, mocked him and then spat water in his face)


----------



## Defei

Green Light said:


> Do you people really wanna boo The Rock? BOOOOOOOOOOOOO
> 
> That was one of my favourite promos from Rock as well, like ever. When he is on his game that is all he needs to sell a match anyway, not to mention Punk can easily carry the feud in the weeks before Rock is there. Oh and, let's not forget Raw is THREE HOURS now. *They will have several Rock-Punk segments each show I'm sure.*
> 
> (If I remember rightly Rock made two appearances on that SD! 03 show, one promo alone and one where he came out to face Hogan, mocked him and then spat water in his face)


More like several replays. It is probably going to be two promos and then the match. Gonna suck ass.


----------



## hardysno1fan

Twisted14 said:


> The problem may be Punk, but it isn't because of the work he does. It's the shitty way WWE has gone about pushing him and promoting him. He's the WWE champion and has put on great matches throughout his run, what else can he do? I think everybody on the roster is going out there and doing the best they damn well can. Punk goes out every week and performs extremely well, whether you like the guy or you don't, you have to admit that. They all do their best with what they're given. The problem is Cena. As bboy has pointed out above. No Cena and the ratings drop. This isn't the fault of Cena or anyone else on the roster. It's quite clearly the WWE's fault.
> 
> Nobody else is on his level. Punk is the closest. There are so many people out there (kids and adults included) who only tune in to watch Cena and don't give a shit about the rest of the show. It's pretty clear when you have stories of WWE giving partial refunds to people who went to live shows expecting Cena to be there. It's a sad fucking state that they have nobody that can replace him. They have nobody built up for it. Where's Randy Orton? Filming a fucking movie. Sheamus is being built to be in that spot but he's not there yet. It's just too little too late. This is a desperate time, they have spent the last however many years dicking around and building only one guy and ignoring everyone else.
> 
> They didn't lose ALL THAT many viewers. It's the lowest rating in a long time but it isn't THAT many people, they still have heaps of people watching and there are other factors here. The football, the fact that ratings often dip around this time of year, and the fact it is a 3 hour show. A lack of Cena would definitely have contributed to it though.
> 
> They've been riding on the success of Cena for way too long and haven't been using him to put anyone else up on the same level. They came close with CM Punk this year. But they went and screwed that up by putting him below Cena all the time. This was bound to happen eventually, Cena would get injured and they wouldn't know what to do. What happens if Cena can't make HIAC? Punk v. Ryback? I would rather not see that. But if not him then who else?



^^^^ This. They put all their eggs in 1 basket with Cena. They made him an unstoppable force in 07 and they kept it going at the rest of the rosters expense.


----------



## Shawn Morrison

*Re: The Only Way WWE Gets Better........*

Well i couldnt do much about that since im not in USA, but it could work cause desperate situations call for desperate measures.


----------



## AthenaMark

Defei said:


> I read somewhere that they only have two weeks to build for Rock vs Punk for Royal Rumble 2013 because of Rock's schedule. It would suck if thats true.


You can assume all you want but you won't know shit until it goes down. The Rock is returning in January as he told everyone and that's the only concrete thing that is known to date.


----------



## -Skullbone-

> Bring back Attitude. As much as the internet hates to hear that, the ratings would skyrocket and you know it. Also, bring back the Hardcore title!


What aspects of Attitude though? Also, we have a heap of titles at the moment and a lot of them have lost their significance.


----------



## King_Of_This_World

*Re: The Only Way WWE Gets Better........*



Living Tribunal said:


> Bring back Attitude. As much as the internet hates to hear that, the ratings would skyrocket and you know it. Also, bring back the Hardcore title!


Compare the roster back then to this one now, it would never work, they simply dont have the talent.


----------



## -Skullbone-

*Re: The Only Way WWE Gets Better........*



King_Of_This_World said:


> Compare the roster back then to this one now, it would never work, they simply dont have the talent.


Gee I don't think it's that clear cut. Sure, back then you had a few once-in-a-lifetime performers and legitimately established stars whose pulling power will be next to impossible to emulate nowadays (can't ever say it's 100% impossible though). While starpower is sorely lacking nowadays, as are angles that go all the way to the bottom of the midcard and undercard, today's roster is pretty stacked in terms of talent. 

The one thing that has been noted that is lacking in spades performer-wise is the requested desire from the company. That's only word of mouth from WWE cronies, however, and might just be there own way of skewing things to take the blame off of themselves for the company's shortcomings.


----------



## Medo

*CM Punk is indeed the best in the world at killing the ratings.


But hey you can blame Orton for this one too, it's ok.*


----------



## NearFall

Punk/Rock will get about 3 weeks or so. I can imagine them getting multiple segments per show and via satellite/titantron if needed for Rock's schedule.




Medo said:


> CM Punk is indeed the best in the world *at killing the ratings.*


Good idea he left the last part off his t-shirt unk


----------



## Medo

*He absolutely did*


----------



## SteenIsGod

Medo said:


> *CM Punk is indeed the best in the world at killing the ratings.
> 
> 
> But hey you can blame Orton for this one too, it's ok.*


They both get shitted on for being bad ratings draws, and rightfully so, they can't draw worth for shit.

Cena is the ONLY draw in the company and that's the way it is. Sheamus, Punk and Orton are all Jobbers compared to Cena. That's not opinion, that's fact from watching the television.


----------



## Punked Up

The inevitable 2.3 will come soon. Mark my words. We're at the point were soon we'll start seeing a real change in programming. Hell, they'll already be getting less than 3 million viewers in a couple of segments soon.


----------



## The GOAT One

Punked Up said:


> The inevitable 2.3 will come soon. Mark my words. We're at the point were soon we'll start seeing a real change in programming. Hell, they'll already be getting less than 3 million viewers in a couple of segments soon.


Not tonight, especially with Mr Ratings, the big dog, Vincent Kennedy McMahon returning.

:vince :vince2


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I'd be laughing my ass off is numbers stay the same as last week or they actually go down. :lmao

Not gonna happen, but still...


----------



## MikeChase27

LOL If this show did a 1.9


----------



## Fenice

Vince just took a shot at a new shirt he is trying to sell... Confused.


----------



## funnyfaces1

I expect a 1.3 million gain for the overrun. Vince and heel Punk are draws on the level of the likes of Mark RATINGS Henry.


----------



## Bob the Jobber

Fenice said:


> Vince just took a shot at a new shirt he is trying to sell... Confused.


Anyone that was contemplating buying a heel Punk shirt wouldn't care about Vince's opinion, and if anything would want to buy it more after his comment.


----------



## dannytaker

*Should lesnar,hhh or the undertaker be brought in to help boost raws ratings?*

as the ratings of raw have been down in the past few weeks should vince be thinking of bringing one of these guys in to try and help boost the ratings?


----------



## Lm2

*Re: Should lesnar,hhh or the undertaker be brought in to help boost raws ratings?*

they prob wont make appearances to RR or even After EC


----------



## Brogue Kick

*Re: Should lesnar,hhh or the undertaker be brought in to help boost raws ratings?*

I don't know why HHH isn't on TV much anymore (except when he has a feud). It would help,e ven though he is not wrestling.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

*Re: Should lesnar,hhh or the undertaker be brought in to help boost raws ratings?*

WWE shouldn't bring them back if they want to create new stars that have the ability to draw.


----------



## lewisvee

*Re: Should lesnar,hhh or the undertaker be brought in to help boost raws ratings?*



RevolverSnake said:


> WWE shouldn't bring them back if they want to create new stars that have the ability to draw.


But we know their not doing that to well so why not have these guys back


----------



## dannytaker

*Re: Should lesnar,hhh or the undertaker be brought in to help boost raws ratings?*

very true, does anyone knw of the taker survivor series rumours are true?


----------



## Oakue

*Re: Should lesnar,hhh or the undertaker be brought in to help boost raws ratings?*

Lesnar very well might be on his way back. I mean with Ryback getting involved with Punk, wouldn't it make sense?


----------



## Hollywood Hanoi

*Re: Should lesnar,hhh or the undertaker be brought in to help boost raws ratings?*

Lesnar will probably turn up once or twice in the build for Survivor Series, where the natural thing looks like a tag match with Punk (maybe against Cena/Ryback or whoever).
Then its filler for the rest of the year till Rock shows up once or twice in the build toward the Rumble. Taker is solely a Mania/RTWM attraction if hes even working that this year.


----------



## TheSupremeForce

*Re: Should lesnar,hhh or the undertaker be brought in to help boost raws ratings?*

Bringing a few guys back really isn't going to help ratings.


----------



## ratedR3:16

*Re: Should lesnar,hhh or the undertaker be brought in to help boost raws ratings?*

HHH he will be the one who can attend or bother to attend raw


----------



## Interceptor88

*Re: Should lesnar,hhh or the undertaker be brought in to help boost raws ratings?*



RevolverSnake said:


> WWE shouldn't bring them back if they want to create new stars that have the ability to draw.


 We have spent years saying that, and the new drawing stars are nowhere to be seen.


----------



## Coffey

*Re: Should lesnar,hhh or the undertaker be brought in to help boost raws ratings?*

That's exactly why they're in this position in the first place. Current crop of guys suck? Instead of making them better, let's bring back stars from yesteryear to make 'em look worse by comparison! Then when the old guys leave again, welp, now the guys they didn't care about before they care about even less. Hooray, 2.5! Better bring back MORE old guys!


----------



## SUPER HANS

*Re: Should lesnar,hhh or the undertaker be brought in to help boost raws ratings?*

The aura and attraction of the Undertaker is now wrestlemania and the streak, it won't change.


----------



## ben_fletch

*Re: Should lesnar,hhh or the undertaker be brought in to help boost raws ratings?*

Thats a quick fix, I know thats WWE's favourite solution to most things, but still.


----------



## ssppeeddyy

*Re: Should lesnar,hhh or the undertaker be brought in to help boost raws ratings?*



dannytaker said:


> as the ratings of raw have been down in the past few weeks should vince be thinking of bringing one of these guys in to try and help boost the ratings?


i dont know, i like if lesnar and taker would be back, but the taker is old and against who should he fight or have a feud ? the roster today is a joke. and lesnar can fight all of them and win, and not have to lose to cena.

but the wwe has to learn to bring good ratings without the old stars, because they can bring them not back everytime when raw is lame or 20years later.


----------



## Starbuck

The breakdown should be very interesting this week to say the least. Vince/Punk promo was in a random quarter and this was the first proper main event that felt truly important and was hyped to full effect in the 3 hour era. Given the recent string of overrun disappointments, I wonder if this will show that if the attraction is there, people will stay tuned in? Interdasting times ahead lol. I expect things to go up based on Vince being there and the general hype/excitement he brought with him. Raw felt...different than usual, having him around.


----------



## Randy Orton Trapper Of The Year

when are the ratings gonna be out


----------



## SideTableDrawer

I loved yesterday's show, I hope the ratings are good.


----------



## Coffey

Starbuck said:


> The breakdown should be very interesting this week to say the least. Vince/Punk promo was in a random quarter


That is a random quarter? I think it was a strategically selected quarter, myself. The quarter right before the kick-off on the Monday Night Football game. I've never really looked at the placement of stuff on the card before, so I thought it was the norm.


----------



## holt_hogan

The 8/10 edition of Monday Night Raw drew the following viewers:

Hour 1: 4.191m
Hour 2: 4.067m
Hour 3: 4.065m

Compared to last weeks:

Hour 1: 3.436m
Hour 2: 3.598m
Hour 3: 3.472m


----------



## The Lady Killer

VINCE = RATINGS


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Half a million more viewers.... for this week.


----------



## Randy Orton Trapper Of The Year

dat 3rd hour :lmao


----------



## vanboxmeer

Greatly reducing AJ Lee segments = less people tuning out because they're pissed off at WWE's Nickoledon Lite. Time to sent her to the Brodus Clay line of useless garbage to be disposed of.


----------



## Starbuck

Walk-In said:


> That is a random quarter? I think it was a strategically selected quarter, myself. The quarter right before the kick-off on the Monday Night Football game. I've never really looked at the placement of stuff on the card before, so I thought it was the norm.


Oh. I didn't know that. If that's the case then I guess it was smart. I was getting at the fact that it didn't start at 8pm/9pm/10pm which is where something like that would normally go.



The Lady Killer said:


> VINCE = RATINGS


It's official. 

:vince2


----------



## JY57

not bad going against Yankees (me being one who watched the game) & MNF


----------



## Brogue Kick

thats good. compared to last week so i guess something around 2.8 - 3.0?


----------



## RatedR10

Nice viewership rise. I guess Vince McMahon stays on TV for a few more weeks. If all the stuff with creative is true and a change in programming coming, I think once Linda loses (hopefully), WWE will shift into a more edgier type of programming (not Attitude Era type...let's say Ruthless Aggression era-esque), and there'll be a big shift in how feuds are booked from the main event to the lower tier of the card, which should surely help ratings.

Last night did feel different though. After the filler first half hour, from the Punk/McMahon segment to the end, the show had a different feel, IMO.


----------



## mb1025

It is a 2.7. 

You know they wanted it to be above a 3. It is in line with the show from 2 weeks ago so it really doesn't do much.


----------



## Randy Orton Trapper Of The Year

Yeah the match between them then the Ryback run in and shit felt different. Maybe we're gonna see a better product, a huge maybe.


----------



## holt_hogan

Brogue Kick said:


> thats good. compared to last week so i guess something around 2.8 - 3.0?


My calculations from the viewer-ship numbers bring it out at a 2.78/2.79


----------



## Amuroray

Cena started raw didnt he.

Great draw from cena.

Vince did great aswell


----------



## Choke2Death

Vince = Ratings, lol. And STILL, they can't get into the 3 area yet! Welcome to the 2 era of ratings!


----------



## Honey Bucket

Amuroray said:


> Cena started raw didnt he.
> 
> Great draw from cena.
> 
> Vince did great aswell


lol why do u still watch this garbage


----------



## chronoxiong

What a huge jump in viewers last night. Vince McMahon clearly = ratings! Move over Mark Henry.


----------



## Starbuck

Every time Vince comes back and the ratings jump I always picture him walking around in that patented strut yelling at everybody he sees in the back. YOU SEE THAT YOU FUCKERS!! THATS HOW YOU GET PEOPLE TO TUNE IN!! FUCKING SONS OF BITCHES COULDNT ENTERTAIN YOUR WAY OUT OF A PAPER BAG. PAUL, GET ME A PROTEIN SHAKE DAMMIT!!


----------



## Pro Royka

It's a 2.8 rating. Others are still losing a lot of viewers, it was a good show that what should matter now. The breakdown will probably show a match losing a lot of viewers in the third hour.


----------



## Amuroray

Marty Vibe said:


> lol why do u still watch this garbage


i didnt watch.

cena said on twitter that he is starting raw.


----------



## MikeChase27

What a major jump in ratings lol.


----------



## holt_hogan

Updated Raw Ratings Comparison data:


----------



## Dec_619

Nothing to be impressed with WWE


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Every time Vince comes back and the ratings jump I always picture him walking around in that patented strut yelling at everybody he sees in the back. YOU SEE THAT YOU FUCKERS!! THATS HOW YOU GET PEOPLE TO TUNE IN!! FUCKING SONS OF BITCHES COULDNT ENTERTAIN YOUR WAY OUT OF A PAPER BAG. PAUL, GET ME A PROTEIN SHAKE DAMMIT!!


:lmao

Now that I've seen this, I'm going to imagine this every time as well. Damn you!

That being said, while it's a considerable jump from last week, a show with Vince advertised and Cena returning from his week-long vacation, the fact they can still only just barely get over 4 million viewers each quarter can't be a good thing. 

Lesnar should be back for the SVS build one of these weeks as well, right? Assuming of course he's even competing.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Vince should compete more often.


----------



## Starbuck

The Sandrone said:


> :lmao
> 
> Now that I've seen this, I'm going to imagine this every time as well. Damn you!
> 
> That being said, while it's a considerable jump from last week, a show with Vince advertised and Cena returning from his week-long vacation, the fact they can still only just barely get over 4 million viewers each quarter can't be a good thing.
> 
> Lesnar should be back for the SVS build one of these weeks as well, right? Assuming of course he's even competing.


I always picture him like that lol but when he has some sort of triumph the image gets even more robust, ha. 

:vince3


----------



## Honey Bucket

The strut is in overdrive.


----------



## Coffey

Starbuck said:


> I always picture him like that lol but when he has some sort of triumph the image gets even more robust.


Don't forget *"BROWN SUGAHH!"*

It's just like the Cranky Vince Twitter account! :lol


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

A small bump that will do nothing to stop the overall downward trend. So, good job Vince I guess?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

We need more Punk/McMahon.


----------



## KO Bossy

I'm starting to think this company is screwed. Vince was advertised a fair amount for being on this Raw, Cena came back and was involved in both the beginning and ending segments...and the best they could do is a 2.8?

This is why I don't get why so many clueless yokels try arguing that Punk is the sole reason for the bad ratings. Look at this, even getting desperate and putting Vince in there and getting Cena involved and we get a relatively minor ratings increase that STILL can't break a 3.0. That's also why I don't understand the ridiculous "last week was the lowest drawing Raw in 15 years, its all Punk's fault" shit either. Its not exactly like they had very far to fall for that to happen. Now they pull out all the stops and still only manage to pull off a 2.8, which is still really unimpressive. What's the excuse gonna be this week? Global warming? The 1992 L.A. riots? Malaria? Communism? 

Face it, wrestling just isn't a hot product these days, and the only remedy is building it up again to the point of greatness, not this once in a while going all out for one night of ratings that don't suck as badly and the rest of the time its the same old shit (ie. the formula they currently use). This problem didn't just happen overnight, and its not going to be fixed that quickly either. In both cases, we're talking years here.


----------



## kokepepsi

They would need to do big on the 9pm,10pm and overrun in order to get back up to a 3.0+

What was the 9pm? Sheamus vs Barrett LOL
10pm was JR/Vince waste of 10minutes

2.8 as sad as it seems is the best they can do until mania when they can fill each of those other segments with some real star power.
Even then 3.3 is probably the max they will reach.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Or until MNF ends.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

WWE needs to re-invent wrestling somehow, but in a good way, many of the most successful eras were sparked by some unique attribute. For example Golden era had the larger than life characters and the Attitude Era had a fuck the rules feel to it. The product is clearly outdated to some extent.


----------



## Choke2Death

Lol, now it has become "They can't even reach 3.0" when it was "They can't even reach 4.0" after Raw 1000. Wow, the 3 hour thing has really bombed!


----------



## Oakue

It's a decent showing compared to last week.


----------



## TromaDogg

The Lady Killer said:


> Or until MNF ends.


Thing is though, are all those people who've ditched Raw to watch MNF going to go straight back to watching Raw afterwards?

A large part of WWE's problem in recent years has been alienating it's 'core' fanbase to the point of them just not watching anymore and then completely failing to win any of them back, beyond a few very short term fixes like getting Rock/Brock in to boost ratings.

A lot of people, myself included to an extent, only watch Raw out of habit and a vain hope that it'll start making steps to improve again at some point. If I were to break the habit and start watching something else instead, then I'd probably find it difficult to get back into and interested in again if they're still churning out the same calibre of shows as they have been recently. The ratings won't just magically jump back up to what they were a couple of months back even when MNF's finished.

In some ways, I'm starting to think that the wrong company won the Monday Night Wars. At least if WCW had won, they would've inherited a lot of WWF's staff and roster and been able to improve going forward. All I really remember about this week's Raw (apart from the Punk/Vince McMahon stuff) is JBL repeating pretty much every 5 minutes about Vince McMahon 'He beat Ted Turner!' fpalm Rather than focus on putting out the best wrestling show they can manage every week, the McMahons (by which I mean mostly Vince & Steph) are just completely consumed with trying to better Ted Turner's accomplishment's in the media world, even if it means completely bastardizing and dumbing down their flagship programme to do so. Rather than focus on what they have and make it a massive success, they'd rather waste millions of dollars on futile ventures like the XFL, WWE Studios and more recently the WWE Network. fpalm These kinds of things are all that are really important to Vince and Steph, and in the meantime, so long as Raw hasn't sank as low as TNA in the ratings, they don't care what shit they put out so long as they're still getting an income from merch sales and advertising revenue in order to fund whatever other crazy venture that they come up with next in order to attempt to establish Vince and Steph as bigger media moguls than Ted Turner.

But we in the real world know that isn't ever going to happen. Only an idiot would think that something like the WWE Network would become as big/bigger then the likes of CNN, but that's likely the crazy vision that Vince and Steph truly believe. And meanwhile the WWE ship carries on slowly sinking around them as people gradually lose interest and trail off.

I can only hope that last week's 2.5 rating was actually a wake up call to the senile old bastard and his daughter, to pour some of their energy and creativity into improving something they have rather than wasting it on pipe dreams. Monday night's show though suggested to me that there's still a pretty strong vibe of 'must outdo Ted Turner!' with the McMahons. They need to just lay it to rest now. Yeah, their wrestling promotion beat his wrestling promotion and helped to kill it off. But they're unlikely to ever match Turner's lifetime success in media, and they need to just accept that. It's ultimately going to be their failed obsession with trying to turn WWE into some kind of multimedia extravaganza and ignoring why fans started watching their shows in the first place that's going to be the death of them and see ratings dwindle more and more. Not CM Punk, Not John Cena. Not anybody on the roster.


----------



## #Mark

If ratings aren't up before the RTWM then they'll push to go back to 9 PM. I doubt they'd get much interest in Mania if the program is still three hours long.


----------



## pushJTG

ToxieDogg said:


> In some ways, I'm starting to think that the wrong company won the Monday Night Wars. At least if WCW had won, they would've inherited a lot of WWF's staff and roster and been able to improve going forward. All I really remember about this week's Raw (apart from the Punk/Vince McMahon stuff) is JBL repeating pretty much every 5 minutes about Vince McMahon 'He beat Ted Turner!' fpalm Rather than focus on putting out the best wrestling show they can manage every week, the McMahons (by which I mean mostly Vince & Steph) are just completely consumed with trying to better Ted Turner's accomplishment's in the media world, even if it means completely bastardizing and dumbing down their flagship programme to do so. Rather than focus on what they have and make it a massive success, they'd rather waste millions of dollars on futile ventures like the XFL, WWE Studios and more recently the WWE Network. fpalm These kinds of things are all that are really important to Vince and Steph, and in the meantime, so long as Raw hasn't sank as low as TNA in the ratings, they don't care what shit they put out so long as they're still getting an income from merch sales and advertising revenue in order to fund whatever other crazy venture that they come up with next in order to attempt to establish Vince and Steph as bigger media moguls than Ted Turner.


one of the main problems with wwe's front office is all of the ex wcw employees ....

have u seen the god awful names dusty rhodes gives wrestlers in fcw


----------



## Ham and Egger

If they push Bryan as champ the ratings would skyrocket to 3.0 and above! :bryan


----------



## KO Bossy

Heavenly Invader said:


> If they push Bryan as champ the ratings would skyrocket to 3.0 and above! :bryan


*Looks out the window*

Nope, no pigs flying.


----------



## cokecan567

ah 2.78 is the rating? ic basically 2.8. not a bad raw imho i really enjoyed the ending. only thing i disliked was that brodus clay with r truth shit

anyways does anyone have the results of how many tuned viewers in/tuned out for each segment. something like that was posted for last weeks raw in this section of the forum. if anyone can post that here would greatly appreciate im just curious to see thank you


----------



## Loudness

The rating is very bad considering the effort WWE put into the show, Cena opening the show and advertising the ME, Vince vs Punk, most midcarders getting less time than usual to make room for Punk/Heyman, general more effort in skits/promos, Ryback beeing put together with the maineventers on screen etc. However, it's understandable, the show has no momentum at all, if their rating from last week was 3.0 than they would have scored around a 3.4 or so, but alas they're moving up from a 2.5 so the overall rating couldn't have gotten that much better in the end I guess.

Vince should definitely return to TV though, not for ratings, but for entertainments sake, he's still one of the GOAT characters, going strong at 67 years old.


----------



## Blueforce7

SideTableDrawer said:


> I loved yesterday's show, I hope the ratings are good.


I agree with you. I really enjoyed yesterdays show. I hope it draws decent numbers.


----------



## Vyed

It's an increase over last week's year low rating, this is not bad. Not at this time with RAW being 3 hrs and MNF to compete with. 

What they should be concerned about is the third hour viewership imo. It looks like with the new three hour format they have effectively managed to kill that viewing pattern where we have a big gain at 10 pm and the main event. I think this is what Dave Meltzer talked about when 3 hrs was first announced, comparing with wCw and how they burned out their viewers with three hours. If Vince Mcmahon is planning on going back to two hours, then better do it before its too late.


----------



## Cack_Thu

holt_hogan said:


> The 8/10 edition of Monday Night Raw drew the following viewers:
> 
> Hour 1: *4*.191m
> Hour 2: *4*.067m
> Hour 3: *4*.065m
> 
> Compared to last weeks:
> 
> Hour 1: 3.436m
> Hour 2: 3.598m
> Hour 3: 3.472m


Punk has done it!!Punk has finally done it!CM Phil has PROVED he is THE MAN!Fuck you Punk haters,fuck you .
After consecutive dip in Raw is Le Punk viewership,that registered the lowest rating in over 15 years,Punk all by himself managed to push Raw near the 4 million viewership mark i.e without any sort of help from part timers or King Guan Sena.

Good drinking,i havent been thing...(Y) [Insert Scott Hall Smiley]


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

Vince McMahon is a bigger draw than Cena,Punk and anyone today


----------



## Marv95

> and MNF to compete with.


It's not an excuse. They've been competing with MNF since the show started. Even 6 years ago(which isn't too long ago) they were getting almost a point higher, sometimes more . 3 hours is too much but stop using football as an excuse when they've done much better ratings before this era took place.


----------



## Pro Royka

austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> Vince McMahon is a bigger draw than Cena,Punk and anyone today


He was on the biggest draws in the AE. Im big a fan of Austin but lets not forget what Vince did for Austin. They both made it what it was worth back then. In 2009 people notice the big ratings that's because of Vince and his family lets be honest here without them Raw will suck in that year.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

Pro Royka said:


> He was on the biggest draws in the AE. Im big a fan of Austin but lets not forget what Vince did for Austin. They both made it what it


Austin vs McMahon = The greatest and most entertaining time in pro-wrestling


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> Vince McMahon is a bigger draw than Cena,Punk and anyone today


This is especially true now that he only appears once every few months nowadays.

But I do wonder how well the Punk/Vince segments did since Vince was advertised to some extent in both of them. We knew 10 minutes ahead of time Vince would be appearing, as well as it being advertised for several days prior to that, and the match was heavily advertised and the replay of Punk slapping Vince was shown several times throughout the night. Plus Cena kicking off the show which was announced ahead of time... and yet they still only mustered a little over 4 million viewers, and actually the 3rd hour is still down from hour 1 despite that big advertised main event (though that's why I'm very interested in the breakdown, to see how well Punk/Vince did). I suppose though hour 1 had the Cena promo, Ryback match, and Punk/Vince so it would naturally have the highest average number. Don't remember too well what was in hour 3 besides Punk/Vince anyway.


----------



## Brogue Kick

The Sandrone said:


> This is especially true now that he only appears once every few months nowadays.
> 
> But I do wonder how well the Punk/Vince segments did since Vince was advertised to some extent in both of them. We knew 10 minutes ahead of time Vince would be appearing, as well as it being advertised for several days prior to that, and the match was heavily advertised and the replay of Punk slapping Vince was shown several times throughout the night. Plus Cena kicking off the show which was announced ahead of time... and yet they still only mustered a little over 4 million viewers, and actually the 3rd hour is still down from hour 1 despite that big advertised main event (though that's why I'm very interested in the breakdown, to see how well Punk/Vince did). I suppose though hour 1 had the Cena promo, Ryback match, and Punk/Vince so it would naturally have the highest average number. Don't remember too well what was in hour 3 besides Punk/Vince anyway.


Larry King/Kofi/Miz, Rhode Scholars vs Ryder/Cobra, Eve vs Kaitlyn were the first 3 quarters of hour 3. Last quarter was Bryan/Kane/Kings backstage & Punk/McMahon


----------



## Irish Jet

KO Bossy said:


> I'm starting to think this company is screwed. Vince was advertised a fair amount for being on this Raw, Cena came back and was involved in both the beginning and ending segments...and the best they could do is a 2.8?
> 
> This is why I don't get why so many clueless yokels try arguing that Punk is the sole reason for the bad ratings. Look at this, even getting desperate and putting Vince in there and getting Cena involved and we get a relatively minor ratings increase that STILL can't break a 3.0. That's also why I don't understand the ridiculous "last week was the lowest drawing Raw in 15 years, its all Punk's fault" shit either. Its not exactly like they had very far to fall for that to happen. Now they pull out all the stops and still only manage to pull off a 2.8, which is still really unimpressive. What's the excuse gonna be this week? Global warming? The 1992 L.A. riots? Malaria? Communism?
> 
> Face it, wrestling just isn't a hot product these days, and the only remedy is building it up again to the point of greatness, not this once in a while going all out for one night of ratings that don't suck as badly and the rest of the time its the same old shit (ie. the formula they currently use). This problem didn't just happen overnight, and its not going to be fixed that quickly either. In both cases, we're talking years here.


This thread is no place for sense and logic. GTFO!


----------



## Snothlisberger

Context. Always second or third for monday nights on cable. On the second most expensive ad day in television. Not only does USA make big ad bucks from RAW's time slot but I guarantee USA uses RAW as major leverage during reups of subscription fees with cable distributors. Something they could never replace with original content or a syndicated show. Ratings aren't the problem, not even close.


----------



## TripleG

It is funny to me that Monday Night Football has become a bit of an accepted ratings killer for the WWE every year and that assessment is certainly valid. 

However, it is worrisome to me that the hit from MNF seems to get worse every year. I never thought the WWE would find themselves having Raw go down under a 3.0 multiple weeks in a row.


----------



## Big Dog

Tbh WWE isn't just US, it's also worldwide and I wouldn't put to much thought on the ratings purely from America, when elsewhere it's viewed a lot. When they say they are trending on twitter..it's because worldwide they really are because worldwide in different time zones it's not competing against anything. Yes ratings in US do count for that market but it's not the only part of the company.


----------



## KO Bossy

TripleG said:


> It is funny to me that Monday Night Football has become a bit of an accepted ratings killer for the WWE every year and that assessment is certainly valid.
> 
> However, it is worrisome to me that the hit from MNF seems to get worse every year. I never thought the WWE would find themselves having Raw go down under a 3.0 multiple weeks in a row.


Not to mention under 3.0 ratings WITH Vince AND Cena.


----------



## Cliffy

RatedR10 said:


> Nice viewership rise. I guess Vince McMahon stays on TV for a few more weeks. If all the stuff with creative is true and a change in programming coming, I think once Linda loses (hopefully), WWE will shift into a more edgier type of programming (not Attitude Era type...let's say Ruthless Aggression era-esque), and there'll be a big shift in how feuds are booked from the main event to the lower tier of the card, which should surely help ratings.
> 
> Last night did feel different though. After the filler first half hour, from the Punk/McMahon segment to the end, the show had a different feel, IMO.


In alot of ways the RA was alot edgier than the AE. Just saying, bugs me how people say the AE was smuttier.

There wasn't any HLA, One legged wrestlers being pushed down stairs, Corpse shagging etc. in the AE.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Sooooooooooo.... how about that breakdown?


----------



## chbulls1_23

Raw just needs to go back to 2 hours. It was so much more enjoyable with out all the crappy filler. That's really what's killing it and nothing else TBH. If Vince can't see that he's a F'n moron.


----------



## D.M.N.

The Sandrone said:


> Sooooooooooo.... how about that breakdown?


Vince gained 1m+ viewers, the rest lost viewers. :evil:

Erm, don't think it has been released yet.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

D.M.N. said:


> Vince gained 1m+ viewers, the rest lost viewers. :evil:
> 
> Erm, don't think it has been released yet.


Breakdown:



> -Raw opened strong with the Cena segment followed by the Ryback match. Clay/Truth dancing lost 746,000 viewers. Vince/Punk segment gained 891,000 viewers, which was a great gain considering they not only got the viewers they lost back, but they also got more viewers on top of that. Certainly the best gain for an odd quarter in a while. Mysterio and Cara facing Prime Time Players only lost 415,000 viewers. Not too bad considering they were coming off a huge gain.
> 
> The 9PM match of Barrett facing Sheamus gained 318,000 viewers, which is a below average gain. Cesaro/Kidd lost 974,000 viewers, a terrible loss. Team Hell No against Ziggler and Del Rio gained 357,000 viewers, which is to be expected after the major loss by Cesaro and Kidd.
> 
> Larry King and Miz/Kofi in the 10PM slot lost 147,000. This has come to be expected in recent weeks with the 10PM slot being a normal loser. The big story and surprise is the gain for Sandow and Rhodes facing Ryder and Santino in the tag tournament. Our intellectual savior of the masses Mr. Sandow and that guy he teamed up with facing the two biggest ignoramuses on the roster gained 9,976,000 viewers. People are clearly starting to accept Sandow's enlightening and tuned in the second they heard he was competing. Civilization may be saved yet. The divas title match after lost 11,072,000 viewers, which is to be expected after the greatest talent on the roster parted from the screen. Punk facing Vince gained 2,000,000 viewers exactly in the overrun.


----------



## The Lady Killer

:lmao

Did Punk/Vince main event really gain 2M?


----------



## KO Bossy

Almost two segments that nearly lost a million viewers...sweet candy coated Jesus.

Vince is flexing his ratings guns. I'm sure a lot of people tuned in for Punk as well. Both men contributed to awesome gains (if that 2 million is legit, can't tell with all of Sandrone's embellishment ).


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Just an update to the breakdown I posted, which I think may explain how the overrun got 2,000,000 viewers



> Sources are reporting that there was someone that looked like The Rock, who was noticeable only in the final match in row 12 seat 52. Apparently a lot of The Rock's fans heard about this as the match was going on and tuned into the show to see if they could catch a glimpse of The Great One.


Rock helping that viewership when he's not even there. :rocky


----------



## Kabraxal

Is that real breakdown though? Some of it looks believable then you had the two segments prior to the final segment with horridly unreal numbers. Dont' know if just that was the joke or the whole thing was.


----------



## Shazayum

The Sandrone said:


> Just an update to the breakdown I posted, which I think may explain how the overrun got 2,000,000 viewers
> 
> 
> 
> Rock helping that viewership when he's not even there. :rocky


Did you make that up?


----------



## Choke2Death

ROFL @ ten million viewers for the Sandow tag match. :lmao

And for those of you asking, of course it's a joke.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I'll give you all a hint.

I either made up the whole thing or it's all real.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Fairly convincing until the Sandow part.


----------



## Starbuck

:lmao Sandtroll. 9 million gain for Sandow and 11 million loss for Divas? Come on peeps. You be getting worked lol.


----------



## Kabraxal

The Sandrone said:


> I'll give you all a hint.
> 
> I either made up the whole thing or it's all real.


What I figured... though if the numbers mirrored that I wouldn't be too surprised. Well, excluding those 10000000 jumps and dives... if that happened shocked wouldn't even begin to describe it!


----------



## Shazayum

It's all real, then. Damn, the Rock is the best person ever.


----------



## Green Light

Vince wishes he had 10 million viewers for the divas to lose :vince


----------



## Starbuck

Green Light said:


> Vince wishes he had 10 million viewers for the divas to lose :vince


:lmao 

GOD DAMN FUCKING WOMEN LOSING VIEWERS WE NEVER EVEN HAD!! ON YOUR KNEES BITCHES, ON YOUR KNEES AND BARK LIKE A DOG!!


----------



## KO Bossy

Starbuck said:


> :lmao
> 
> GOD DAMN FUCKING WOMEN LOSING VIEWERS WE NEVER EVEN HAD!! ON YOUR KNEES BITCHES, ON YOUR KNEES AND BARK LIKE A DOG!!


I guess with the women on their knees, Vince could say:






And it would have a lot more meaning.


----------



## The GOAT One

Sandrone :lol


----------



## Loudness

It would make sense if Damien gained so many viewers. Let's think about this from a rational standpoint:

Now, let's break down the character in question first:

1) What's Damien Sandows character? An intellectual of the highest degree. His speeches have been reported to raise the average WWE fans IQ by 3 since his tenure. The average wrestling fans is said to still be below average but this is another topic for another day.

Target Demographic:

2) So, who is the target demographic that Damien Sandow is aiming towards to? Certainly not the unwashed masses and those who would rather watch shows with people getting drunk in clubs. He does, however appeal to the washed minority, the intellectuals who crave for transcendent minds.

How Ratings work:

3) Now everybody in this thread has heard about the infamous Nielsen Ratings system. A system where a sample of 25000 so called Nielson Boxes have been spread all over the US in various households to estimate the viewership for shows that are beeing shown by national channels.

So how does this all add up, how did Sandow draw in 11 millions of viewers all by himself?

4) As explained above, it's quite clear that it couldn't have been the unwashed masses who turned on for him, at least not willingly. Instead, it was all clearly a very well planned terrorist attack Intellectuals Ratings rally on the Nielson Boxes owners TVs by a gang of Sandrones, who needs quantity when you can have well-organised quality. They found out the location of every single Nielson Box around, travelled to their respective places, with blue/pink tissues akin to his attires and Laptops in their bag so they could 

a) Follow RAW so they would make sure they wouldn't miss the Intellectual Saviours segment(s) and

b) Watch some more Sandow promos during the flight

Now this is the interesting part. So the gang of Sandrones all arrived at their respective places where the Nielsen Boxes are. However, they are not entering the owners appartments/houses/dumps yet, they do not, and I mean, do not want to prematurely take actions and see their plans go to waste by acting brash, violent and hasty. Instead they follow their advice of their leader, and his idea of making sound decisions. They watch the show, surprisingly like the rest of the unwashed masses, or in this case IWC nerds via streams on their laptops. They have their Sandow styled tissues ready to be used any moment. But used for WHAT?

Sandow/Rhodes vs Team Geeks starts aka shit is going to get real aka Conclusion of the whole thing:

5) So the entrace of Rhodes Dollars starts. This very moment, the Sandrones enter the house of their targets, some by breaking down the doors, some by jumping through the windows right into the rooms with the TV where famed Nielson Boxes are setup too, and some Ninja style jumping down from the roof down the camin, if no other options are available for fast entry (solid doors, windows that a horde of bulls couldn't break through etc). Tissues are at hand, they approach the victims who're just passing their Moday Nights watching TV. They take their tissues and put them in the domestic owners face, so they would pass out and they could go on to work without disruptions and people asking wtf they're doing in their homes. They change the channel to USA and mark the hell out as Rhodes Dollars are beating Team Geeks, entering the finals of the tag team tournament. As the show ends, they put the remotes right onto their victims for safety precautions. They may be offenders, but they do not want to make their victims wake up to a divas match, in case they wake up early.

tl;dr version aka Cliffs:

-Bored Intellectuals want to feel enlightenment, form the Sandrones gang
-Sandrones decide they want to make Damien Sandow a bigger draw than Austin, Hogan and Rock combined
-Sandrones travel to every home with Nielsen Boxes, pink/blue tissue similar to Sandrones attire and Laptop are in their travelling bags
-Arrive at their destination where the domestics with the Nielsen Boxes are, but don't enter right away, watching RAW via Stream just outside of their target homes
-Rhodes Dollars have their match against Team Geeks, Sandrones turn of their laptops and infiltrate house and go straight to the room with the TV.
-Make their victims pass out with the Sandow styled tissued, change the channel to USA, watching WWE as Rhodes Dollars beats Santino/Ryder
-Sandrones are marking out
-Match ends, they put the remotes near the victims, so in case they wake up early they could promptly change the channel as the Divas are on next
-Sandow gets biggest ratings rise in WWE history for quarter hours (11 millions) so Sandrones and their idol win


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Sandows gain was exponential, y=e^x, y = Viewers gained during Sandows segment, and x = Sandows greatness which is about 23.0259. That explains that 10 million gain during that segment.


----------



## RatedR10

More than 9 million people wanted to be in the presence of the intellectual savior the best way they could: through television. 

I have hope for the future.


----------



## DesolationRow

*Sandtroll* :lmao


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

DesolationRow said:


> *Sandtroll* :lmao


----------



## TheF1BOB

The Sandrone said:


> Just an update to the breakdown I posted, which I think may explain how the overrun got 2,000,000 viewers
> 
> 
> 
> Rock helping that viewership when he's not even there. :rocky


CONFIRMS DA :rocky = DA PEOPLES CHAMPION = DA unk2 GETTING BEAT UP BY DA PEOPLE 

Damn you Rocky, damn you to HEELLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!! :vince


----------



## Brogue Kick

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



> - As noted before, the October 8th WWE RAW did a 2.80 rating with 4.11 million viewers.
> 
> In the segment breakdown, the dancing segment with Brodus Clay and R-Truth lost 241,000 viewers from the opener. Vince McMahon's return with CM Punk gained 459,000 viewers for a 3.06 quarte3r rating. Sin Cara and Rey Mysterio vs. Titus O'Neil and Darren Young lost 653,000 viewers. Sheamus vs. Wade Barrett at 9pm gained 446,000 viewers for a 2.92 quarter rating.
> 
> A backstage segment with AJ Lee and Punk plus a clip of Cena on Kelly & Michael lost 254,000 viewers. Tyson Kidd vs. Antonio Cesaro lost 225,000 more viewers. That match did a 2.59 quarter - the lowest of the show. Kane and Daniel Bryan vs. Dolph Ziggler and Alberto Del Rio went into the 10pm timeslot and gained 210,000 viewers with a 2.84 quarter.
> 
> The segment with Larry King, The Miz and Kofi Kingston plus Zack Ryder and Santino Marella vs. Cody Rhodes and Damien Sandow lost 27,000 viewers. Kaitlyn vs. Eve Torres lost 321,000 more viewers. Vince McMahon vs. CM Punk in the main event gained 1,233,000 viewers for a 3.46 overrun rating. This is the best growth segment in a long time.


----------



## Green Light

Ryback bringing in dem ratings for the main event


----------



## JY57

Barrett & Sheamus = Ratings


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Green Light said:


> Ryback bringing in dem ratings for the main event


Yeah, that's it. 

Punk/McMahon is money. The promo was epic, we need more of this.


----------



## DesolationRow

Vince/Punk going to create new era of splendid ratings and business like Austin/McMahon!!! Whooo... 8*D


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Eh, so I was a little off with my breakdown.

And here's some fun facts for the 9, 10, and Overrun:

Punk/McMahon gaining BIG and keeping the third hour from becoming a total disaster of a number. Great to see there's interest in a Punk/McMahon match... maybe we'll get a mini-feud/big feud after Mania/going into Mania if Punk's doing nothing else (though I'm not hoping for this necessarily out of all the options Punk has, but it'd be better than facing some mid-carder). Just a few interesting stats for 9PM, 10PM, and Overrun:

Overrun is the largest gain this year. The rating is also the highest since the Cena/Show match with Punk on commentary on July 30th only counting overruns. 10PM for HHH on August 27th was a 3.51. 

10PM is the first time the segment's gain since 9/10 (which is the segment Bryan/Kane became a team and fought Titus and Young). Also it's the highest 10PM quarter hour rating (unless last week's was higher) since that night as well. 

9PM gained 44,000 more viewers for Barrett/Sheamus over the Show/Sheamus debate last week. An average gain though for the 9PM segment.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Fuckin' Vince. Guy still has it.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Vince need to compete MOAR.


----------



## RatedR10

Raw needs more Vince.

It'd be fun to see Punk/McMahon continue to have an on-camera feud. I'm sure it'd continue to pull in strong numbers.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Vince McMahon and CM Punk are bringing in those Mark Henry numbers.


----------



## Snothlisberger

CM Punk drawing.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Vince and Punk with biggest overrun of the year, very nice to see as it was one of the best segments of the year.

There contract sighing last year also gained a million viewers. Punk and Vince in an actual program would be money.


----------



## buckatee

I expect to see a sign next week saying Vince=Ratings (for real).


----------



## The-Rock-Says

So many viewers tuned out after the first Vince segment and then came back.

It's no surprise tho. Vince is one of the biggest TV draws of all time.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

'Punk vs McMahon' is money it seems, they would be crazy to drop it. I think it makes sense for that to be a continuous 'background' feud now with Vince being able to bring in Rock to stop Punk or even better eventually Austin to branch these feuds together.


----------



## Choke2Death

Sheamus and Vince = DRAWZZZZ!!!!!!!!!

That's what the breakdown suggests, more so for Vince.


----------



## MikeChase27

Fuck Cena and Ryback have CM Punk vs Vince at Hell in a Cell.


----------



## Falkono

Vince is a huge draw. Why are people trying to imply punk made those numbers? punk had a segment with aj and lost nearly 300k viewers...draws bring high viewers in whatever they do. Punk needs those guys around him to get anywhere near those numbers...


----------



## HalfNights70

Choke2Death said:


> Sheamus and Vince = DRAWZZZZ!!!!!!!!!
> 
> That's what the breakdown suggests, more so for Vince.


Stupid comment. Punk/Vince draws others couldnt, since when gaining viewers in the 9pm timeslot is a big success, Punk and Orton and half of the roster drew more than Shemaus in that timeslot, Sheamus cant show his muscles in other timeslots. Funny comments are just funny comments, I guess you will be the next guy to laugh at his comments. Sarcastic "Oh, I hate this guy I should not give him credit, boo" kids are funny. I guess you're one of the next Rock316ae wannabes. Hate is a strong word, and I can't believe some of you with comments like that, can enjoy it. If Sheamus can draw in other timeslots that's a good sigh but if not that's just whatever.


----------



## MikeChase27

Falkono said:


> Vince is a huge draw. Why are people trying to imply punk made those numbers? punk had a segment with aj and lost nearly 300k viewers...draws bring high viewers in whatever they do. Punk needs those guys around him to get anywhere near those numbers...


Ryback has had weeks where he loses 500k and yet people say he is a draw so I think its fair to assume that it is partly due to it being Punk vs Vince, You must think if it was Vince VS Primo it would draw.


----------



## Evil Peter

Falkono said:


> Vince is a huge draw. Why are people trying to imply punk made those numbers? punk had a segment with aj and lost nearly 300k viewers...draws bring high viewers in whatever they do. Punk needs those guys around him to get anywhere near those numbers...


Well, if we puzzle a bit with the breakdown we see that the quarter where Vince and JR talk backstage had less viewers than the quarter where Punk and AJ talked.

Of course any rational person won't draw many conclusions based on either of those segments. Punk's didn't even last 1,5 minutes and Vince's was only about 2 minutes so neither was really long enough to have time to draw people in, or to be a significant part of their respective quarters.

Vince is of course the biggest attraction that was on Raw, both due to it's being him and because he's not been there in a while, but since Punk's segments pretty much always gain viewers it's just silly to say that Vince would have drawn the same amount with anyone.


----------



## TheF1BOB

Falkono said:


> Vince is a huge draw*. Why are people trying to imply punk made those numbers?* punk had a segment with aj and lost nearly 300k viewers...draws bring high viewers in whatever they do. Punk needs those guys around him to get anywhere near those numbers...


Especially when he wasn't advertised to come out.


----------



## Amuroray

vince is a draw


----------



## D.M.N.

Quarter Hours - October 8th, 2012
Q1 - 4.31 million
Q2 - 4.07 million
Q3 - 4.52 million
Q4 - 3.87 million
-----
Q5 - 4.32 million
Q6/Q7 - 4.06 million
Q8 - 3.84 million
----
Q9 - 4.05 million
Q10/Q11 - 4.02 million
Q12 - 3.70 million
Overrun - 4.93 million

Annoying that websites bundle quarters together, ie. Q10 and Q11: "The segment with Larry King, The Miz and Kofi Kingston plus Zack Ryder and Santino Marella vs. Cody Rhodes and Damien Sandow lost 27,000 viewers."


----------



## HalfNights70

The Q12 always does horrible which it hurts the overrun badly. They should hint interest in that timeslot.



Kabraxal said:


> What did the show open at? Would be interesting to see that number and then see how Cena did with it.
> 
> As for the rest of the numbers, only Vince/Punk was really worth anything. Vince brought in curious viewers and pairing him with Punk only drove that higher... people expect that pairing to produce sparks and it at least SEEMS unpredictable. So the number isn't just Vince's or just Punk's, it's the fact that the story to the segment is just intriguing. People want to see those two go at it... the more casual fans for Punk daring to go against the boss (o how times have changed...) and the smarkier crowd to see how Punk goes off about Vince's ability as the showrunner. It's a money program no matter how you look at it... it grabs everyone.


The show started with a 2.78 quarter rating.


----------



## Kabraxal

What did the show open at? Would be interesting to see that number and then see how Cena did with it.

As for the rest of the numbers, only Vince/Punk was really worth anything. Vince brought in curious viewers and pairing him with Punk only drove that higher... people expect that pairing to produce sparks and it at least SEEMS unpredictable. So the number isn't just Vince's or just Punk's, it's the fact that the story to the segment is just intriguing. People want to see those two go at it... the more casual fans for Punk daring to go against the boss (o how times have changed...) and the smarkier crowd to see how Punk goes off about Vince's ability as the showrunner. It's a money program no matter how you look at it... it grabs everyone.


----------



## e1987p

I know that the divas have little time.
But it happens (to the divas) to gain viewers in a quarter sometimes.
Since WWE start and keep doing this feud about Katlyn ,Layla and Eve they lost viewer every week whatever the quarter was placed.I talk about a 8 week in a row of lost viewers.Maybe this Katlyn ,Layla and Eve thing doesn't positively work at all.


----------



## hazuki

Nice too see Vince/Punk drawing. Only thing interesting on RAW. The tag champs gaining viewers is awesome too!


----------



## Starbuck

DAT VINNIE MAC DRAWING DEM NUMBAHS

They had almost 5 million viewers for the main event which is great and the best numbers they've done it a while. The only question is, will it equal more people tuning in next week? I would think so, especially since they sort of implied that Vince was going to be there. Anybody else get that vibe? Either way, they left the whole Ryback/Cena choice thing as a hook so even if Vince isn't there fans have a reason to tune in to see who Punk is going to choose. Just goes to show that if you have an attraction to end the show, people WILL tune back in to watch it despite the 3 hour format. The main events have just been super shit, uninteresting and unimportant these past few months which is why we've seen the downward trend in the 3rd hour.

1.2 MILLION VIEWERS! YOU FUCKERS SEE THAT! THATS HOW YOU DRAW FANS YOU SONS OF BITCHES! HOJSDFLGKRSGHNU!!


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Vince was awesome in that last segment. 67 YEARS OLD.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

So amazing Punk could carry an old man to nearly 5 million viewers. unk2


----------



## Cliffy

which game is on next monday ?

The regains were in part due to them not competing with the mighty cowboys.


----------



## Starbuck

Cliffy Byro said:


> which game is on next monday ?
> 
> The regains were in part due to them not competing with the mighty cowboys.


I'd say they're more down to the fact that there was actually something people wanted to see on Raw for once, hence the big gains. Take away that main event and nowhere near over 1 million people are tuning in for that overrun. Not on your life.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

So amazing Vince could carry a midget to nearly 5 million viewers. :vince


----------



## Starbuck

So amazing Vince could still be Vince and carry the entire show at 67 years of age lol.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

So amazing Damien Sandow, a new guy, can gain 9,000,000 viewers.

Oh wait, that didn't happen. You fuckin' people.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Vince should be at next weeks show doing backstage segments burying people.


----------



## Johncena-hhh

Seems to be the era of 2.8 has begun.. SO SAD


----------



## D.M.N.

The thing is with WWE is that the peak of 5 million shows that the audience is still there. Raw 1000 shows that those numbers can be achieved (I know that was nostalgia, but the point is there).

It is not a case of the viewers have gone and are never coming back. In 3 months once Rock is back, three hours is back down to two and WrestleMania season is in full swing, the numbers will be back up.

Hopefully. I say hopefully because this year only did ~4.5 million. But this year's build was uninspiring to say the least.


----------



## WWEAss

Hell


----------



## WWEAss

D.M.N. said:


> The thing is with WWE is that the peak of 5 million shows that the audience is still there. Raw 1000 shows that those numbers can be achieved (I know that was nostalgia, but the point is there).
> 
> It is not a case of the viewers have gone and are never coming back. In 3 months once Rock is back, three hours is back down to two and WrestleMania season is in full swing, the numbers will be back up.
> 
> Hopefully. I say hopefully because this year only did ~4.5 million. But this year's build was uninspiring to say the least.


Agreed


----------



## Raptor22

Wasn't too bad a show I thought.


----------



## Big Dog

So have the actual ratings been out yet? I went back several pages and found something but it ended up being a troll.


----------



## Kabraxal

D.M.N. said:


> The thing is with WWE is that the peak of 5 million shows that the audience is still there. Raw 1000 shows that those numbers can be achieved (I know that was nostalgia, but the point is there).
> 
> It is not a case of the viewers have gone and are never coming back. In 3 months once Rock is back, three hours is back down to two and WrestleMania season is in full swing, the numbers will be back up.
> 
> Hopefully. I say hopefully because this year only did ~4.5 million. But this year's build was uninspiring to say the least.


This... wrestling is never truly "down". It might not always peak at the 10 million plus levels, but the niche audience is always there. All it takes is good consistent booking and we flock back to the product in droves. Hopefully some of those reports are true and someone finally got in McMahon's face and called him out for booking shit. Not the writers, not the wrestlers... but McMahon. 

As you said... when something happens the numbers are there. It's just been that they make a noise then do nothing for months and expect people to stay watching now.


----------



## KO Bossy

Falkono said:


> Vince is a huge draw. Why are people trying to imply punk made those numbers? punk had a segment with aj and lost nearly 300k viewers...*draws bring high viewers in whatever they do*. Punk needs those guys around him to get anywhere near those numbers...


That's pretty faulty logic considering Cena, who everyone here proclaims is a proven draw, had a quarter hour with Edge on the April 23rd go home show to Extreme Rules that did a 2.60 rating, which is absolutely horrendous. So evidently, draws don't ALWAYS bring in high viewers in WHATEVER they do.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

KO Bossy said:


> That's pretty faulty logic considering Cena, who everyone here proclaims is a proven draw, had a quarter hour with Edge on the April 23rd go home show to Extreme Rules that did a 2.60 rating, which is absolutely horrendous. So evidently, draws don't ALWAYS bring in high viewers in WHATEVER they do.


Yup. Also haven't guys like Triple H, The Rock, John Cena and Jeff Hardy lost viewers in the overrun before? The logic in this thread is as astounding as always.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

HalfNights70 said:


> Stupid comment. Punk/Vince draws others couldnt, since when gaining viewers in the 9pm timeslot is a big success, Punk and Orton and half of the roster drew more than Shemaus in that timeslot, Sheamus cant show his muscles in other timeslots. Funny comments are just funny comments, I guess you will be the next guy to laugh at his comments. Sarcastic "Oh, I hate this guy I should not give him credit, boo" kids are funny. I guess you're one of the next Rock316ae wannabes. Hate is a strong word, and I can't believe some of you with comments like that, can enjoy it. If Sheamus can draw in other timeslots that's a good sigh but if not that's just whatever.


This you?
http://www.wrestlingforum.com/204706-brave-nash.html


----------



## Starbuck

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Yup. Also haven't guys like Triple H, The Rock, John Cena and Jeff Hardy lost viewers in the overrun before? The logic in this thread is as astounding as always.


The difference is that guys like Triple H/Rock/Cena are proven big time money makers at a consistent level, something nobody else on the roster is and no, not Punk or Orton or whoever. They are proven but that doesn't mean they are full proof either. If somebody is a proven draw but they lose viewers the odd time it doesn't mean that they aren't a draw anymore. It really shouldn't be that hard to understand tbh.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Wrestlinfan35, stop being so butthurt.


----------



## N-destroy

D.M.N. said:


> The thing is with WWE is that the peak of 5 million shows that the audience is still there. Raw 1000 shows that those numbers can be achieved (I know that was nostalgia, but the point is there).
> 
> It is not a case of the viewers have gone and are never coming back. In 3 months once Rock is back, three hours is back down to two and WrestleMania season is in full swing, the numbers will be back up.
> 
> Hopefully. I say hopefully because this year only did ~4.5 million. But this year's build was uninspiring to say the least.


So wait Vince/Punk actually managed to outdraw Rock/Cena from RTW this year?


----------



## Choke2Death

KO Bossy said:


> That's pretty faulty logic considering Cena, who everyone here proclaims is a proven draw, had a quarter hour with Edge on the April 23rd go home show to Extreme Rules that did a 2.60 rating, which is absolutely horrendous. So evidently, draws don't ALWAYS bring in high viewers in WHATEVER they do.


To be fair, that was one of the exclusive 3 hour shows before the 3 hours era begun so that might have something to do with it.


----------



## NearFall

Choke2Death said:


> To be fair, that was one of the exclusive 3 hour shows before the 3 hours era begun so that might have something to do with it.


True. But the fact remains the same. Even though Cena is a proven draw everybody has off days. However as *Starbuck* has said, Cena and the others mentioned(HHH Rock) are proven money-makers. Punk and many others, Orton(outside of his massive 2009 run) and Hardy included have been what could be best described as "fluxuating" or "hit and miss" in terms of ratings(whereas all 3 have reamined incredibly over and sold lots of merchandise)


----------



## Choke2Death

NearFall said:


> True. But the fact remains the same. Even though Cena is a proven draw everybody has off days. However as *Starbuck* has said, Cena and the others mentioned(HHH Rock) are proven money-makers. Punk and many others, Orton(outside of his massive 2009 run) and Hardy included have been what could be best described as "fluxuating" or "hit and miss" in terms of ratings(whereas all 3 have reamined incredibly over and sold lots of merchandise)


Exactly. Guys like Cena and Rock have proven to be consistent draws whereas other like Orton (ratings/merchandise in 2009) and Punk (merchandise last year) have had their periods as valuable assets to the business but are not nearly as consistent.


----------



## KO Bossy

NearFall said:


> True. But the fact remains the same. Even though Cena is a proven draw everybody has off days. However as *Starbuck* has said, Cena and the others mentioned(HHH Rock) are proven money-makers. Punk and many others, Orton(outside of his massive 2009 run) and Hardy included have been what could be best described as "fluxuating" or "hit and miss" in terms of ratings(whereas all 3 have reamined incredibly over and sold lots of merchandise)





Choke2Death said:


> Exactly. Guys like Cena and Rock have proven to be consistent draws whereas other like Orton (ratings/merchandise in 2009) and Punk (merchandise last year) have had their periods as valuable assets to the business but are not nearly as consistent.


Agreed with both.

All I was saying was that there has never been a proven draw that has never experienced a segment that lost viewers. Its laughable to say otherwise. They consistently bring in the high ratings and buys, of course, but they're not perfect. No one is.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Starbuck said:


> The difference is that guys like Triple H/Rock/Cena are proven big time money makers at a consistent level, something nobody else on the roster is and no, not Punk or Orton or whoever. They are proven but that doesn't mean they are full proof either. If somebody is a proven draw but they lose viewers the odd time it doesn't mean that they aren't a draw anymore. It really shouldn't be that hard to understand tbh.


Oh, I agree. I was just commenting on the person who said all proven draws are always going to do well, which obviously isn't the case. Wasn't trying to say Trips, Rock and Cena aren't proven draws lol, that would be ridiculous.


----------



## Tnmore

LOL at Punk drawing. Anyone could draw in a match with Vince freaking Mcmahon, who has always been a big TV draw and well established on-screen authority for 15 years. When was the last time vince was involved in an advertised RAW match with a talent? 2009? 2010?. This is Vince Mcmahon's FIRST MATCH with a talent in the ring since Wrestlemania 26 PPV. I'm sure Vince in a match with Sheamus or even Del Rio in the overrun could have done just as big, if not more. Punk gets no credit for this and he shouldnt. 

Punk marks desperate as usual, with KO bossy being their leader. 



KO Bossy said:


> That's pretty faulty logic considering Cena, who everyone here proclaims is a proven draw, *had a quarter hour with Edge on the April 23rd go home show to Extreme Rules that did a 2.60 rating, which is absolutely horrendous.* So evidently, draws don't ALWAYS bring in high viewers in WHATEVER they do.



See? fpalm


----------



## -Skullbone-

> *I'm sure Vince in a match with Sheamus or even Del Rio in the overrun could have done just as big, if not more.* Punk gets no credit for this and he shouldnt.
> 
> Punk marks desperate as usual, with KO bossy being their leader.


And what makes you sure about that?

And what was so bad about what KO Bossy said about that number that Cena and Edge segment produced?


----------



## Tnmore

-Skullbone- said:


> And what makes you sure about that?


I already have explained why. It was Vince Mcmahon in his first match since Mania that got the viewers hooked, you just need a heel who is over as a supporting act. 



> And what was so bad about what KO Bossy said about that number that Cena and Edge segment produced?


3 Hrs was not a permanent thing in april. It is desperate and pathetic to go find a low quarter that Edge and Cena did at the start of the show months ago, to prove "Punk can draw". No he does not, give it up. He's undeservingly over-pushed.


----------



## Happenstan

Punk isn't a draw. That is true. He is also majorly over-pushed for someone who produces the ratings he does but I think the way he was booked this year has a bit to do with that. Look at the year Punk has had. Always beating out his challengers with no real struggle or adversity to speak of.

Imagine a big buildup with some guy Vince decided to push to the big leagues FINALLY getting a title shot only to have the heel champ punch the ref as soon as the opening bell rang and getting DQ'ed, keeping the title and sending "the challenger" to the back of the line to start over again (Ryback v Punk at the next PPV? No HITC could be used in that equation though.). If milked right the audience would LOVE an underdog story like that. Instead we got WWE's formula of pushing a new talent by giving them the belt and hoping they succeed. The thing is at that point the audience has nothing to invest in, that is why this plan constantly fails. Punk winning the belt was the equivalent of reaching the top of the mountain (in WWE story-land) right at the beginning of his permanent move to main event land. Wouldn't it have been better to have Punk chase a strong heel that kept screwing him over to keep the belt from Punk? (Obviously that means he would have had to have been a face last year instead so no quitting/"shoot"/Cena feud. Some may disagree about the shoot but has it REALLY helped him that much given the facts as they are today?). That is a major reason SCSA/McMahon was successful. Even though Austin always won he was perceived as the underdog against the big bad boss. Seems like a no brainer to me but whatever.


----------



## -Skullbone-

Tnmore said:


> I already have explained why. It was Vince Mcmahon in his first match since Mania that got the viewers hooked, you just need a heel who is over as a supporting act.


Why would you use _Del Rio_ and _Sheamus_ as examples for guys who would do equal to or better than Punk? They've proven to be less of a viewership commodity than the champ has been. 



> 3 Hrs was not a permanent thing in april. It is desperate and pathetic to go find a low quarter that Edge and Cena did at the start of the show months ago, to prove "Punk can draw". No he does not, give it up. He's undeservingly over-pushed.


It wasn't to prove anything except that bonifide drawcards like Cena and (to a lesser extent) Edge could not always bring home the bacon on _every _occasion that so many here think top guys are guaranteed do. That goes for just about everyone outside of a few super-dupa megastars that were near-unanimously viewer dynamite (the guy in your sig being one of those) on a weekly basis. Of course, these guys came from different eras but I digress. 

I can't see how it had anything to do with trying to prove that Punk can "draw." I think you're buying into markdom a bit too much.


----------



## Tnmore

My point was Vince Mcmahon and his first advertised match in two years is the reason for that big overrun gain, not punk. It didnt matter who he was against Del Rio/Sheamus/Punk, it was going to be a success regardless.



> It wasn't to prove anything except that bonifide drawcards like Cena and (to a lesser extent) Edge could not always bring home the bacon on every occasion that so many here think top guys are guaranteed do.


Once again, RAW wasn't three hours on a regular basis back then, its totally different. Cena/Edge was never meant to draw big on that night. Raw has been three hours since the 1000th episode and Cena/Heyman few weeks ago drew the biggest 8pm rating.

I dont see why anyone needs to bring up a random QH rating from months ago involving Cena and Edge into this discussion at all? Clearly, the intention was to use that and make a desperate excuse for Punk's failure at ratings. Explain Why the sudden need to prove Cena or Edge cant 'always draw big'?


----------



## -Skullbone-

Tnmore said:


> My point was Vince Mcmahon and his first advertised match in two years is the reason for that big overrun gain, not punk. It didnt matter who he was against Del Rio/Sheamus/Punk, it was going to be a success regardless.


So why say it would've been bigger with those two than it would be with Punk?



> I dont see why anyone needs to bring up a random QH rating from months ago involving Cena and Edge into this discussion at all? Clearly, the intention was to use that and make a desperate excuse for Punk's failure at ratings. *Explain Why the sudden need to prove Cena or Edge cant 'always draw big'?*


Because a lot of people need reminding that even the big dogs (although Edge wasn't quite in that same echelon as Cena) are not *always* going to rope in the services of company viewers. That the top guys aren't going to shit out gold week in and week out. That this notion of drawing is only a side of things that takes our fandom onto new levels of ignorance when we stick up for or deride our favourites/most hated. 

By the way, I'm not saying Punk shouldn't be a draw. That's a ridiculous notion that only his most blindly deluded mark would adhere to when talking about the business side of things. He needs to be a commodity as he's the champ and one of the top guys in the company. I'm of the belief that he isn't a standalone name and has only scratched the surface of being a true drawcard. What you said about Edge/Cena segment drawing low being due to the novelty of 3 hours is also likely an accurate one that I too agree with. 

What continues to amuse me (and anyone with a semblance of intelligence) though is that people will try to justify their love or hatred for an individual that will only ultimately be used by the company as they see fit. They don't even see the business side spectrum outside their Nielsen ratings system mindset. Someone described it as a weekly pissing contest and I couldn't agree more in some of what's been posted. 

Someone in this thread also described ratings as the 'god' of television some time ago. While there's a lot of truth to that (unfortunately) it's a sentiment shared and utilised by too many that can't get their heads past the dreaded 'weekly numberz' and argue and argue and argue about stuff that won't even eventuate from their own opinion. 

The real smart guys in this thread will discuss, speculate and conceptualise ideas relating to viewership patterns and numbers, trends and the overall appeal of wrestling personalities pertaining to what happens weekly. The stupid guys will lurch around throwing numbers they don't know the meaning of to support their dumb fandom and try to (unsuccessfully) strip others of theirs.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Guys, this is a futile argument. Here's the problem, that's already been stated like 100 times in this thread but everyone ignores because logic is not welcome her apparently: Nobody in this company, accept Cena (and even then not on a major Rock/Hogan scale) is a draw. So is Punk a draw? Not really, no. Here's the follow-up to that that never seems to be addressed though: neither is anyone else on the active roster. Randy Orton doesn't draw. Sheamus doesn't draw. Miz doesn't draw. Big Show doesn't draw. Bryan doesn't draw. Now, whether that's due to the talent itself or WWE's shit booking is an interesting conversation to have, and probably one for another thread, but the fact is nobody draws. So once you've established Punk can't draw like Cena (the only draw in the company), what do you do? Take him out of the main event? And replace him with who? One of the other non-draws listed above? What does that help? 

You've got a 3 hour show to fill, and no draws to fill it. That is not a problem that is solved by "Well if only they put [INSERT FAVORITE] in the main event this show would draw!", so let's stop acting like it is.


----------



## Cliffy

Nobody full time is a draw. Cena hasn't been a big draw since they wen't full retard in 2008 with his booking.

Interesting Angles are what draw viewers in. Shit Angles result in shit ratings.

End of discussion.


----------



## TheWFEffect

Punk isn't over because come the end of the summer of Punk he still had not been put over he beat Cena twice in inconsistent circumstances and lost too Triple H on a C level PPV Punk should have beaten Triple H at Wrestlemania its that simple the feud was their and could have made itself the heat and real fire between the two that was first felt at comic con where the seed was planted and it was wasted and Punk was put second to Triple H, Nash, Rock and Cena.


----------



## RyanPelley

I just now watched Cena's opening promo... What the fuck? Way to completely dump all over Cesaro with the nipple line. And that "Team Heeeyaaaaawaaaell No" joke was one of the dumbest fucking things I've ever heard. Please go away.


----------



## KO Bossy

First off, thank you to Skullbone for speaking on my behalf.

Tnmore, please take notice that there's no point in replying to me or anything because you're on my ignore list (and have been for over a week). You're diarrhea of the mouth and constant pushing of your opinions as facts became rather tiresome and was something I didn't want to see cluttering up my screen.

However, I have been able to see some of your recent ramblings thanks to the quotes in Skullbone's posts. He's outlined the exact reason for my bringing up Cena and Edge's shitty quarter hour rating earlier this year very nicely. No need to go on about that.

There is something I would like to address, but this is more aimed at everyone in the thread. Folks, please read what Tnmore has actually said. Once you've done that, read my post relating to the quarter hour with Cena and Edge. Notice how I said nothing about CM Punk, or his drawing ability, in it, but in Tnmore's reply the first thing he does is call me the leader of the Punk marks and then later says that I wouldn't have brought it up unless I was trying to use it to prove somehow that Punk was a draw. That's right-I said nothing about CM Punk and yet according to this joker, it had EVERYTHING to do with CM Punk. I think that if it wasn't fairly evident before, it is now beyond a shadow of a doubt. *This guy will go so far as to put words into peoples' mouths in a sad attempt to try and push his anti-Punk agenda*. He's got Punk on the brain. It doesn't matter what the topic of discussion is, in his demented little mind, he will somehow twist it all around into a way where he can let everyone know that a) he dislikes CM Punk and b) because of this, you should agree with him and not like Punk either. He will continue making things up, spouting ridiculous claims that are baseless and unprovable, carefully selecting pieces of information that support his opinion (whilst flat out ignoring others that don't, or from a piece of information just taking the part that he likes and leaving the rest) and generally just vomiting up bullshit in his efforts for attention.

You need to ask yourselves-why would I want to read such drivel? I mean, I've just proven that this guy is purposely trying to find and put anti-Punk meaning in places that it doesn't exist, going to lengths like completely making up things that I supposedly said, yet clearly didn't. A right mind doesn't do this. A stupid mind? Sure. A broken mind? Absolutely. But why would you want to read anything formulated by a mind like that? You wouldn't, because its crap, nonsense and a waste of your time.

Just put this guy on ignore and eventually he'll get banned when one of the mods figures out he's trolling for a fight and is contributing nothing worthwhile to this site except a headache. For all I know, he already is banned-since I have him on ignore, I can't see his status.

Anyway, last I'll say on the subject. I'll also be repping Skullbone for his previous posts as well.


----------



## funnyfaces1

No need to waste your time on Tnmore, KO Bossy. The kid wasn't even around for the Attitude Era anyways.


----------



## AthenaMark

Starbuck said:


> The difference is that guys like Triple H/Rock/Cena are proven big time money makers at a consistent level, something nobody else on the roster is and no, not Punk or Orton or whoever. They are proven but that doesn't mean they are full proof either. If somebody is a proven draw but they lose viewers the odd time it doesn't mean that they aren't a draw anymore. It really shouldn't be that hard to understand tbh.


Case in point..Raw 1000..everyone got hyped up BIG that night. But who was the big ratings winner? The Rock. Wedding was a 600k increase but the Rock's music hit and an instant 530k add on happens and then the big overrun for the save and heel turn. That was when the show was at 6 million an hour. Now look at them:cool2

Let's go all the way back to 2002..you wanna know why Rock vs Hogan mattered? Despite Austin getting huge pops and the What chants being ultra over, no one was outdrawing the Rock at that point. Every segment he touched was highly rated and his worth on PPV was bigger at that juncture. It's just the way things work out.


----------



## Hawksea

Good grief, Punk. fpalm

2.5, 2.7 numbers can't give you any more excuses.

Take out Cena and the legends, who had been carrying his 97 lb ass in gaining viewership, from his vicinity and he's just as much as draw as Diesel was.

Remember the 5k - 10k gains with Daniel Bryan and AJ with their twilight-esque angle? Except Robert Pattinson was so much more intimidating than Punk and Bryan combined.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Hawksea said:


> Good grief, Punk. fpalm
> 
> 2.5, 2.7 numbers can't give you any more excuses.
> 
> Take out Cena and the legends, who had been carrying his 97 lb ass in gaining viewership, from his vicinity and he's just as much as draw as Diesel was.
> 
> Remember the 5k - 10k gains with Daniel Bryan and AJ with their twilight-esque angle? Except Robert Pattinson was so much more intimidating than Punk and Bryan combined.


like last weeks show with vince and john cena and they still had 2.7


----------



## Cookie Monster

#1Peep4ever said:


> like last weeks show with vince and john cena and they still had 2.7


Don't waste your breath brother


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Cookie Monster said:


> Don't waste your breath brother


yeah i guess its really the best


----------



## The-Rock-Says

CM DRAW


----------



## WTFWWE

Everyone ready for the suck ass 2.6/7's again? There is only one man who can save us...


NO ONE MAN SHOULD HAVE ALL THAT DRAWING POWER. :rocky


----------



## Cookie Monster

I'M READYYY COZ I CARE FOR RATINGZ, THEY TOTALLY CHANGE MY MIND ON DA PRODUCT


----------



## Choke2Death

The ratings would reach 4.0 if Mark Henry would return but since that was just somebody trolling, they'll now hit a new low because everyone who fell for it will change the channel out of protest!


----------



## Loudness

Wrong thread lol


----------



## Hawksea

Won't be surprised if this one falls below 2.0


----------



## CMojicaAce

Hawksea said:


> Won't be surprised if this one falls below 2.0


What's with all the negativity you bring into almost every thread? Seriously.


----------



## wwffans123

Good Raw.


----------



## JY57

next week will be brutal for RAW. Their competitions: Bears vs Lions, final presidential debate between Obama vs Romney, potential game 7 of Giants vs Cardinals, sitcoms & dramas, 3 hours too long, etc etc. And this is the go home show for HIAC.

It will be interesting to see how much effort they put into next week. I am not sure even Vince can save them from getting 2.5 (hell maybe even lower) again.

So he better hope this week he increased (or at least maintained a 2.8) rather than decrease.


----------



## MikeChase27

Ryback = Ratings Killer


----------



## roadkill_

MikeChase27 said:


> Ryback = Ratings Killer


Um no. CM Punk is the biggest turd in this toilet.


----------



## JY57

> Jim Ross ‏@JRsBBQ
> Broadcasting 3 hour #Raw programs are daunting. 15 comm'l brks! Zero bathroom brks. #WWE


even JR knows its too long


----------



## TheRainKing

JY57 said:


> even JR knows its too long


At least he gets plenty of time to catch up on sleep.


----------



## Chingo Bling

Wade Barret matches are so boring.

That tag match went too long. They didn't do any cool tag moves or any cool spots. It was a generic tag match.

The show was terrible.


----------



## holt_hogan

JY57 said:


> final presidential debate between Obama vs Romney


Agree with this, 58 million tuned in to the first debate and the final debate should get more. They're used to dealing with 16 million watching the football on Monday nights, not over 50 million as competition.


----------



## JY57

holt_hogan said:


> Agree with this, 58 million tuned in to the first debate and the final debate should get more. They're used to dealing with 16 million watching the football on Monday nights, not over 50 million as competition.


this is one reason why I question Vince even trying next week (not like he does anyways), but it really doesn't matter what the hell he does, the guy is going to get destroyed, humiliated, & completely trashed in ratings next week. We're talking even reaching below the 2.5 area. To make things worst its the go home show for HIAC


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

764,000 viewers for Raw next week... and they will only show up for Damien Sandow's match.


----------



## checkcola

I don't see the third debate having much impact on the RAW audience. The third debate is exclusively foreign policy and will have limited appeal. The football game will probably have more of an impact.


----------



## holt_hogan

checkcola said:


> I don't see the third debate having much impact on the RAW audience. The third debate is exclusively foreign policy and will have limited appeal. The football game will probably have more of an impact.


I assume the majority of people don't tune in because they are interested in the specific subject, but more to see if any gaffes are made, how the personalities come across and if anyone takes a pounding like Obama did in the 1st debate. It will by hyped as important given it's the last debate before people go to the polls.


----------



## holt_hogan

The 15/10 edition of Monday Night Raw drew the following viewers:

Hour 1: 4.067m
Hour 2: 4.013m
Hour 3: 3.886m

Compared to last weeks:

Hour 1: 4.191m
Hour 2: 4.067m
Hour 3: 4.065m


----------



## Choke2Death

Another decrease. :lmao

I guess this will be 2.7 or something, not a huge drop. It would be funny if next week they go below 2.0 with the massive competition.


----------



## TromaDogg

Hmmm.

I was predicting about a 2.65/2.7 for this show as well, seems like that's what it'll be.

Shit writing/booking reaps shit ratings. That's all there really is to it.

At this stage in time, I honestly don't think they'd be that much higher even without the competition from MNF and presidential debates.


----------



## Dec_619

That's a pretty big drop for the last hour, considering it had Ryback, Cena, Punk and Vince!


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

OH NOES! VINCE CAN'T DRAW! OMG WWE IS DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## NearFall

The Sandrone said:


> OH NOES! VINCE CAN'T DRAW! OMG WWE IS DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Only Sandow can save us now. DAT +9 million segment.


Anyway, the rumours of trying to bring back Rock, won't be surprised if Vince actually tries now. Nothing seems to be working.


----------



## nikola123

holt_hogan said:


> The 15/10 edition of Monday Night Raw drew the following viewers:
> 
> Hour 1: 4.067m
> Hour 2: 4.013m
> Hour 3: 3.886m
> 
> Compared to last weeks:
> 
> Hour 1: 4.191m
> Hour 2: 4.067m
> Hour 3: 4.065m


thx,was waiting to see if it ratings droped again xd

repped


----------



## Snothlisberger

Likely EVERYONE left during the third hour and Punk, Cena, Vince and overrun brought them back.


----------



## holt_hogan

2.79 (2.8) cable rating


----------



## #1Peep4ever

well yeah nothing unexpected


----------



## TromaDogg

holt_hogan said:


> 2.79 (2.8) cable rating


Well that's a bit better than I thought at least.

Shame that seems like it's going to be the top end of ratings going forwards though apart from when The Rock comes back for a short while. The days of Raw consistently scoring over 3 are past.


----------



## TheRainKing

It's gonna be funny when the WWE are so use to being in the 2's that they actually mark out when they achieve a 3.0 rating.


----------



## King_Kool-Aid™

Its the 3 hours. No one can sit through 3 hours of pro wrestling.


----------



## Medo

_*Nice to hear cus the product sucks.*_


----------



## holt_hogan

Updated Ratings Tracker:


----------



## HHHbkDX

:lmao Can't wait to see them get beat down next week during MNF and the presidential debate. I'm HOPING for a sub 2.5 at least. I guess that 2.5 rating didn't make them realize that their writing and booking is absolute trash.


----------



## MethHardy

Fans like to chant feed me more but that doesnt equal tv ratings. Ryback = fail.


----------



## apokalypse

last night Raw i feel RAW went too long and i fall asleep...


----------



## MikeChase27

Another 2.7 boy Ryback is really bringing in them ratings.


----------



## Tnmore

So the viewership dropped? fpalm 
You knew this was going to happen when they promoted and built the show around Punk. Clearly the hook from last week was "Who will the wwe champion face at Hell in a cell PPV, Ryback or Cena? it's decision time". Overrun with Contract signing will probably end up the highest rated part of the show.


----------



## Hawksea

:lol at Phil "Mr. 2.7" Brooks

Diesel 1995 >>>>>>>> Punk 2012


----------



## MikeChase27

The bad overrun is on Cena and Ryberg.


----------



## kokepepsi

yes because the overrun didn't gain 2million to offset the Barrett/Sheamus and diva match at the 10pm slot

Marks should leave this thread


----------



## KO Bossy

Hahaha some people are still blaming Punk for the crappy ratings despite Vince AND Cena being there. Oh its so funny, I'm shitting my pants in amusement.


/sarcasm

There's being blind, there's being ignorant, and then there's these guys.


----------



## Epididymis

If they wanted a ratings spike they'd just be smart to advertise the return of Mark Henry.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

"DAMMIT, GET DWAYNE AND STEVE ON THE PHONE, THOSE SONSOFABITCHES OWE ME FOR MAKING THEM WHO THEY ARE!"


----------



## #1Peep4ever

:lmao

yeah people keep on blaming punk


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner3

Blaming Punk again i've never seen that before


----------



## apokalypse

last night Raw i feel RAW went too long and i fall asleep...


----------



## apokalypse

Mark Ratings Henry + Daniel Viewers Bryan=win win situation


----------



## Heart Of Lion

HHHbkDX said:


> :lmao Can't wait to see them get beat down next week during MNF and the presidential debate. I'm HOPING for a sub 2.5 at least. I guess that 2.5 rating didn't make them realize that their writing and booking is absolute trash.


then don't watch and stop bitching every week


----------



## Falkono

Seeing as Punk is the main focus and has had more air time then anybody how can you not blame him? I seriously do not understand Punk marks. Right now he is the main attraction. He is the one cutting the promos and finishing the shows. Cena has done nothing and not been on for long recently. People knew long in advance that tje show would end with Punk ahain. But people didnt tune in.
Beyond this forum nobody cares. Punk is possibly the most over hyped wrestler in wwe history. His promos are basically about nothing at all. They are becoming unbearable to watch. We get it you want respect....

If the numbers were good Punk marks would credit him with it thats for sure. 
As a critic pointed out Punk has Heyman with him, has had a high feud going with Vince, has had guys like Folly doing promos on his ability and is involved with the three main stars in Cena,Rock and Stone Cold. Even after all that he still cant draw in the numbers. The near 2 years of Punk being shoved down our throats needs to end and soon.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Falkono said:


> Seeing as Punk is the main focus and has had more air time then anybody how can you not blame him? I seriously do not understand Punk marks. Right now he is the main attraction. He is the one cutting the promos and finishing the shows. Cena has done nothing and not been on for long recently. People knew long in advance that tje show would end with Punk ahain. But people didnt tune in.
> Beyond this forum nobody cares. Punk is possibly the most over hyped wrestler in wwe history. His promos are basically about nothing at all. They are becoming unbearable to watch. We get it you want respect....
> 
> If the numbers were good Punk marks would credit him with it thats for sure.
> As a critic pointed out Punk has Heyman with him, has had a high feud going with Vince, has had guys like Folly doing promos on his ability and is involved with the three main stars in Cena,Rock and Stone Cold. Even after all that he still cant draw in the numbers. The near 2 years of Punk being shoved down our throats needs to end and soon.


but do expect him to draw 2mio viewers every segment he is in?
his segments (at least the past weeks) its all the other segments that lose viewers so how can you blame him for that


----------



## Falkono

#1Peep4ever said:


> but do expect him to draw 2mio viewers every segment he is in?
> his segments (at least the past weeks) its all the other segments that lose viewers so how can you blame him for that


Simple because he is to blame...

Everybody knows the end of the show is the most important part of the programme. It is what the show builds towards. It will have an event/cliffhanger that leads into the following show. It will be the main angle in WWE. 
People leave during the show as lets be honest sometimes its so bad your go watch something else.
But if the final viewing number is lower then the start or second hour number it means less people wanted to tune in to see the end. The end should be the highest viewed part of the show. If the segment before it lost 1m viewers and the final segment gained 900k viewers tjats still 100k down on the highest point. Thats what is important. People are not tuning in to watch the end in the same volume they once did. Seeing as Punk ends the show I fail to see how people cannot attribute his popularity to that. If Rock ended the show it would be the highest peak in terms of viewership in the show.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Falkono said:


> Simple because he is to blame...
> 
> Everybody knows the end of the show is the most important part of the programme. It is what the show builds towards. It will have an event/cliffhanger that leads into the following show. It will be the main angle in WWE.
> People leave during the show as lets be honest sometimes its so bad your go watch something else.
> But if the final viewing number is lower then the start or second hour number it means less people wanted to tune in to see the end. The end should be the highest viewed part of the show. If the segment before it lost 1m viewers and the final segment gained 900k viewers tjats still 100k down on the highest point. Thats what is important. People are not tuning in to watch the end in the same volume they once did. Seeing as Punk ends the show I fail to see how people cannot attribute his popularity to that. If Rock ended the show it would be the highest peak in terms of viewership in the show.


if the storyline is bad its still isnt punks fault though and i still fail to see how it is punks fault when there are vince and cena in that segment

so its either the people dont wanna see neither vince nor cena nor punk or they are just not interested which i can fully understand since that stupid storyline is just a clusterfuck... 

then there is the thing with the 3 hour show... its just way too long... even i couldnt keep myself till the contract signing... and just watched it the day after

punk isnt the biggest draw and well thats quite obvious but i still fail to see how he is the only one to blame when the show just keeps on losing viewers and viewers and even vince and cena could not help to get the lost viewers back


----------



## Bushmaster

Maybe the ratings were bad because noone wants to see Punk face Ryback or Cena. Maybe they wanna see Punk face someone good and different. Punk going against 2 supermen isnt interesting.

I always find it funny ppl blame one guy which is usually Punk yet Vinny Mac was advertised for the show, Cena was gonna be on the show and the new guy ppl are saying is a draw in Ryback. They are going against MNF they will never win especially when the demographic that watches wwe also watches the NFL and im pretty sure they would rather watch a live football game and watch Raw on YouTube.

Funny im sure if ratings were great it'll be due to the "only draw" in wrestling Cena or maybe Vinny Mac, hell im sure ppl would say Ryback is drawing the ratingz.


----------



## chbulls1_23

Wow another shitty week. It's the 3 hours that's killing it. This week would've been a good show if it didn't drag on. Dammit Vince, drop an hour from Raw.


----------



## Tnmore

> *If the numbers were good Punk marks would credit him with it thats for sure.*
> As a critic pointed out Punk has Heyman with him, has had a high feud going with Vince, has had guys like Folly doing promos on his ability and is involved with the three main stars in Cena,Rock and Stone Cold. Even after all that he still cant draw in the numbers. The near 2 years of Punk being shoved down our throats needs to end and soon.


Exactly. If the numbers were high, punk marks would credit that to punk. But it failed to increase and look at all the excuses here.. 3 hrs is too long, poor storylines, Cena, Vince etc.. He has to be top champion but wont take the responsibility for low ratings? even when he is the focus of the show? the main event angle? If good booking is what really makes the difference then why does this guy even need to be the champion? Build a new star instead, perhaps with someone who can actually be a draw with minimal amount push. Fuck punk, enough of this "I've been held back" garbage.


----------



## King_Of_This_World

Are people really still doing this ridiculous thing of blaming individual wrestlers for poor ratings? Was it Rock and Austins fault that ratings dropped in 2002-03 when they were still the main guys like they were the years before when the ratings were huge? No, of course not.

If Punk and Ryback where in the attitude era it would still be getting monster ratings....because it was the attitude era when the product and roster was far better than it is now.

Its the product, storylines and roster that is the reason less people are watching nowadays, not Punk or Ryback.


----------



## Teh_TaKeR

Falkono said:


> Simple because he is to blame...
> 
> Everybody knows the end of the show is the most important part of the programme. It is what the show builds towards. It will have an event/cliffhanger that leads into the following show. It will be the main angle in WWE.
> People leave during the show as lets be honest sometimes its so bad your go watch something else.
> But if the final viewing number is lower then the start or second hour number it means less people wanted to tune in to see the end. The end should be the highest viewed part of the show. If the segment before it lost 1m viewers and the final segment gained 900k viewers tjats still 100k down on the highest point. Thats what is important. People are not tuning in to watch the end in the same volume they once did. Seeing as Punk ends the show I fail to see how people cannot attribute his popularity to that. If Rock ended the show it would be the highest peak in terms of viewership in the show.


So you say he's to blame at the end yet he wasn't the only one in the ring to end the show. Nice logic. Blind haters.


----------



## TromaDogg

Meh, we all knew before they went to 3 hours that adding the extra hour was gonna cause problems, especially given that most people could only just about manage sitting through the 2 hours of crap they were putting out before. It's not mattering a great which wrestlers they put on the programme at the moment.

Trying to put the entire blame on Punk or anyone else is pointless. WWE Raw itself as a whole is a fundamentally damaged product at this stage. It needs better writing, structure and focus in order to pick itself up again.


----------



## Choke2Death

SoupMan Prime said:


> Maybe the ratings were bad because noone wants to see Punk face Ryback or Cena. Maybe they wanna see Punk face someone good and different. Punk going against 2 supermen isnt interesting.


Yeah, right. Like when Punk vs Bryan actually _lost_ viewers when they were heading into their first real feud? 

Face it, Punk cannot be blamed for losing viewers from the existing audience during Raw but he can be blamed for failing to bring in a bigger audience from the get-go when he's promoted as the focal point of the show and gets several segments every week.


----------



## The Hardcore Show

Choke2Death said:


> Yeah, right. Like when Punk vs Bryan actually _lost_ viewers when they were heading into their first real feud?
> 
> Face it, Punk cannot be blamed for losing viewers right now but he can be blamed for failing to bring in a bigger audience when he's promoted as the focal point of the show and gets several segments every week.


So I guess the answer is to have Ryback kill him at Hell in a Cell and never smell a main event again right? Or maybe John Cena can do that because he really needs the the WWE Championship?


----------



## Choke2Death

The Hardcore Show said:


> So I guess the answer is to have Ryback kill him at Hell in a Cell and never smell a main event again right? Or maybe John Cena can do that because he really needs the the WWE Championship?


I didn't say a word about Ryback beating him at HIAC or Cena becoming WWE Champion so stop putting words in my mouth. (although I would rather have them as champions because I can't stand Punk but that's a different topic)


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

"If the numbers were good Punk marks would credit him with it thats for sure."

If the numbers were good, Punk haters would never credit him and it would always be someone else, that's for sure. 

Here's the fact of the matter, the numbers are just going to keep going down, slowly with Vince around, but still surely. Vince coming back gave it a nice bump, but the numbers are going to follow a downward trend if WWE keeps up with the lazy storylines they produce. Even if they bring Lesnar back for a few weeks, only the first week they advertise Lesnar will see an increase, and then it will keep going down from that number until The Rock comes back. Then it will go down for a few weeks until Mania time rolls around, and then that combined with having Rock, Lesnar, Undertaker, and maybe HHH to go on top of Vince, Cena, and Punk, will we see ratings remain steady as they'll have another starpower to go around throughout the whole show in all the main segments without having to use someone twice. That is when ratings won't be on a downward trend. The other way to keep ratings from going in a downward trend is to come up with creative, interesting storylines that people will tune in and see what happens each week. But until WWE have writers that can do that, or they can find another megastar on the roster, they'll have to rely on these old big drawing super/megastars to bump the numbers up for a week or two.


----------



## chbulls1_23

The Sandrone said:


> "If the numbers were good Punk marks would credit him with it thats for sure."
> 
> If the numbers were good, Punk haters would never credit him and it would always be someone else, that's for sure.
> 
> Here's the fact of the matter, the numbers are just going to keep going down, slowly with Vince around, but still surely. Vince coming back gave it a nice bump, but the numbers are going to follow a downward trend if WWE keeps up with the lazy storylines they produce. Even if they bring Lesnar back for a few weeks, only the first week they advertise Lesnar will see an increase, and then it will keep going down from that number until The Rock comes back. Then it will go down for a few weeks until Mania time rolls around, and then that combined with having Rock, Lesnar, Undertaker, and maybe HHH to go on top of Vince, Cena, and Punk, will we see ratings remain steady as they'll have another starpower to go around throughout the whole show in all the main segments without having to use someone twice. That is when ratings won't be on a downward trend. The other way to keep ratings from going in a downward trend is to come up with creative, interesting storylines that people will tune in and see what happens each week. But until WWE have writers that can do that, or they can find another megastar on the roster, they'll have to rely on these old big drawing super/megastars to bump the numbers up for a week or two.


WWE's gonna be in some serious shit when they don't have those guys as a crutch. Bringing back old talent will only stop the bleeding for so long.


----------



## KO Bossy

Falkono said:


> Simple because he is to blame...
> 
> Everybody knows the end of the show is the most important part of the programme. It is what the show builds towards. It will have an event/cliffhanger that leads into the following show. It will be the main angle in WWE.
> People leave during the show as lets be honest sometimes its so bad your go watch something else.
> But if the final viewing number is lower then the start or second hour number it means less people wanted to tune in to see the end. The end should be the highest viewed part of the show. If the segment before it lost 1m viewers and the final segment gained 900k viewers tjats still 100k down on the highest point. Thats what is important. People are not tuning in to watch the end in the same volume they once did. Seeing as Punk ends the show I fail to see how people cannot attribute his popularity to that. If Rock ended the show it would be the highest peak in terms of viewership in the show.


He's closed the show about a dozen times in the past 12 months...you're using that as an accurate gauge?

Here's the thing-the Fed has kept Punk from the main event for so long that people started to view him and the title as unimportant. So now in the past 2 months they're suddenly telling us "no, they're actually really important, you should care about them." Well...you've spent 10 months saying and acting otherwise, it will take a little while to undo the damage done...

This directly relates to what Choke2Death was saying about it being Punk's fault for not bringing in more viewers, but not for losing them. Last November until this September, Punk hasn't been treated like a champion. Name one other WWE champion in history who has been booked this way-clearly second fiddle to somebody else, having to deal with the leftovers of attention that the #1 guy doesn't receive, almost never put in the main event. All of this says "this guy isn't as important as this other guy." So people think that. Now they're doing damage control and things are messy...what did you expect, a bed of roses? They dug this hole themselves. 

As for you, you said "well if the Rock was in that segment, it would be the highest peak. That's because the Rock has never received the type of shitty, inconsistent and illogical booking that Punk has, and was always treated as a top tier, #1 guy from the end of 1999 and on. If he had, people wouldn't care nearly as much about him today.

It all comes down to one simple thing-people will tune in to watch a guy whose name means something. Guys like John Cena, the Fed has made his name mean something over the years. In this year long reign of Punk's, what has the Fed made his name mean? Second best. And that right there is why Punk's drawing potential is hurting.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Another thing you'll notice as far as average numbers is the numbers have been going down for years. Look at the average yearly rating for Raws since 2002:

2002- 4.01
2003- 3.76
2004- 3.67
2005- 3.81
2006- 3.90
2007- 3.61
2008- 3.27
2009- 3.57
2010- 3.28
2011- 3.21
2012- 3.10

Now keep this in mind, generally the trend is downward but look at when the overall numbers were bumped from the previous year. 2005 was the rise of Cena, Batista, and had the red-hot Batista/HHH feud, as well as the Edge/Hardy feud, which I'm not sure what ratings it did, but it was red-hot based on reactions. 2006 had Edge when he was a draw, had Cena when he was solidly the top guy and the top draw, had HBK/Vince, DX returning and facing the McMahons, and had a lot of shit going on. 2007 had for the most part Cena's long reign but nothing spectacular. 2008 saw a big decrease which probably gives us an idea what Raw's 2005 and 2006 would be like if they were on auto-pilot. Raw in 08 lost Cena to injury for 3 of the last 4 months of the year when ratings were really bad not to mention losing HHH to SD as well and not getting someone like Undertaker in return. 2009 had the whole Orton/McMahons angle, and Orton/HHH did well for the first half of the year, and Orton/Cena did okay for the end of the year. However they also had DX returning that helped bump business up for the last 4 months. 2010 saw things go back down, though higher than 2008, but probably would've been lower without The Nexus angle. Though that angle lost steam after the first couple of months and without any big draw on the Nexus individually, it wasn't able to keep the numbers up. Orton also became champ at that time and this is where the comparisons to Punk get made... he failed to help bring numbers up, and actually got the lowest rating in years for Raw (2.75) as champion. Not blaming Orton for the number, but he didn't help things, just like Nexus didn't help things, why? Because everything was on auto-pilot by that point and Nexus got killed at Summerslam. 2011 and 2012 we see things get even lower. Punk certainly isn't helping, but now not even Vince is really helping. Cena isn't really helping. Guys like Rock, Taker, and Lesnar as I mentioned in my post will only help so much on there own and together they'd only make a difference while they're there. Once they're gone the show's ratings are going to drop down to continue with the downward trend Raw's been on. 

There just hasn't been any mega angles to keep people interested and while having a naturally appealing superstar who draws in fans helps, but it's not necessary if the writing is amazing. Okay, it might be necessary to have another Attitude Era for both to be present, but one or the other would suffice. And for the sake of quality television, I'd like to believe trying to get more interesting storylines in the books is what WWE wants. Even numbers like in 2004 would be nice at this point and I firmly believe are attainable if WWE put on hot storylines throughout all the divisions for the entire year, even if they have no megastar present.


----------



## charmed1

I\m not blaming Punk for the bad rating that belongs to them all but enough of the WWE is keeping Punk down crap. I'll paraphrase Vince here,,"Punk screwed Punk."

Bryan has been put in crappier situations than Punk and came out on top, unfortunately Punk cant handle it as well


----------



## Jotunheim

Choke2Death said:


> I didn't say a word about Ryback beating him at HIAC or Cena becoming WWE Champion so stop putting words in my mouth. (although I would rather have them as champions because I can't stand Punk but that's a different topic)


and if they fail to bring in ratings (because they will), who will you blame?, Chris benoit?


----------



## Snothlisberger

People continuing to say that ratings are "terrible" when given the TV environment and context their ratings are fine.

Did you know that RAW brings in similar 18-49 demo rating as some of the new shows on _broadcast_ television? They also are the top ranking scripted cable show on Mondays now that there are no more new Pawn Stars. 1.4 18-49 demographic rating for 3 full hours on second most valuable night, Monday = $$$$. 

Don't even know why people even look at aggregate viewership. The only thing advertisers pay for is 18-49 demo rating....And if you argue that the low viewership is killing the company because it signals the company is losing fans. Viewership is down across the board for all TV. Though I'm not arguing that WWE is as popular now as the AE, just that the company is by no means dying.


----------



## DesolationRow

Buster MVPosey and Ryan VogelSTRONG outdrawing the entire WWE product all by themselves. GIANTS baseball killin' Vince! 8*D


----------



## The-Rock-Says

You can't blame one wrestler for an overall rating. You look at their segment number and if it went up or down, simple.

Simple fact is. The overall product fucking sucks and no one wants to watch it. That's why the overall rating is in the 2s.

Just look at the product. I can skip through a 3 hour RAW in half an hour. When the product get's better, then the rating will.

Just look at when Brock Lesnar came back. The big bawl he had with Cena in the ring. It was great and he busted him up and there was agents and other wrestlers out to spilt them up. Just badass and something different.

Then 5 minutes later they have the 3 cunts acting like cunts. 

When Steve Austin was on top, he wasn't the only one that was cutting from the pack and doing edgy stuff.

The whole product changed. FUCK does this product ever suck.


----------



## Amuroray

CM punk is now the worst drawing long champion since diesel.

Wow.

But overall the product is a joke.Awful/no story lines. Flat characters,no atmosphere.

Just terrible.Everything about it is. Rock cant save it.Its just too much. The rock v cena feud was a shining light in a rather shitty dark product.

Brock cena was going great but it stopped to quickly.


----------



## CoZa

Punk isnt the main problem, the whole product stinks.


----------



## Starbuck

They need a spark of something, anything, to get people talking and bring some urgency back to the product. Some big must see angle. When you think about it, there isn't actually any solid reason to watch Raw anymore. There isn't. It's completely missable and that's why so many people have tuned out over the past few months. Right now the only folks watching are the diehard, core audience that aren't going anywhere but even that has dropped from 4 million to 3 million since the 3 hour era began. 3 hours is simply too long to sustain that many viewers and it shows. Punk isn't helping matters by any stretch of the imagination but it sure as hell isn't his fault either. The only times they've managed to pull in _new_ viewers has been for HHH's retirement speech and Vince/Punk last week, both of which were over the 5 million mark iirc. The audience is there if they have something interesting to watch. It's just a matter of providing a quality, entertaining and must see program from John Cena right the way down to Justin Gabriel.


----------



## Marv95

So in other words Starbuck, they need a _huge_ storyline that was rumored to begin in the summer. Could have redone the Summer of Punk/Conspiracy thing from last year and follow through on it. Or at least start a storyline based on the WWE 13 game like they did in 2005 with Raw vs SD which should have lasted until Mania 22 but that's for a different thread...

And as already mentioned, as much as 2007 sucked, there was at least something going on to keep viewership afloat even if the angle ended up wasted(who blew up the limo?Vince's bastard son).


----------



## YoungGun_UK

I think its worrying times, I can see this time next year them struggling to hit 2.0.


----------



## Choke2Death

Marv95 said:


> So in other words Starbuck, they need a _huge_ storyline that was rumored to begin in the summer. Could have redone the Summer of Punk/Conspiracy thing from last year and follow through on it. Or at least start a storyline based on the WWE 13 game like they did in 2005 with Raw vs SD which should have lasted until Mania 22 but that's for a different thread...
> 
> And as already mentioned, as much as 2007 sucked, there was at least something going on to keep viewership afloat even if the angle ended up wasted(who blew up the limo?Vince's bastard son).


To be fair about 2007, it was a cursed year. Every month, WWE kept losing some of their key players due to injuries (Undertaker, HBK, HHH, Edge, Cena, Mr. Kennedy and so on) and the Benoit tragedy (which resulted in a bunch of suspensions) made sure that year will never be looked at in a positive light ever again. With 2012, it's just the writing that has been terrible along with lack of star power.


----------



## NearFall




----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Starbuck said:


> They need a spark of something, anything, to get people talking and bring some urgency back to the product. Some big must see angle. When you think about it, there isn't actually any solid reason to watch Raw anymore. There isn't. It's completely missable and that's why so many people have tuned out over the past few months. Right now the only folks watching are the diehard, core audience that aren't going anywhere but even that has dropped from 4 million to 3 million since the 3 hour era began. 3 hours is simply too long to sustain that many viewers and it shows. Punk isn't helping matters by any stretch of the imagination but it sure as hell isn't his fault either. The only times they've managed to pull in _new_ viewers has been for HHH's retirement speech and Vince/Punk last week, both of which were over the 5 million mark iirc. The audience is there if they have something interesting to watch. It's just a matter of providing a quality, entertaining and must see program from John Cena right the way down to Justin Gabriel.


I feel ya. I think they need "must see entertainment". somthing that appeals to all ages. Miz is not "must see" no matter how much he preaches it. lol I really do think that if the prduct was a bit more edgy, things would at least pic up. Really don't know what else to say tbh, especially with the lackluster booking on the stretch of a 3 hour program. And a B rated program that has been literally stripped of practically all it's star power and decent booking.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

> prduct was a bit more edgy


Careful, Swagg. You'll get told off wanting the AE back, but that's not true.

You, like me, just want some edgy TV and not TV for 5 year olds.


----------



## Green Light

Strap a rocket onto Ryback and watch the ratings soar along with his push.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

I want CM Punk to come out and just say to Cena:

"Fuck you Cena" "Fuck your Mom, and your Dad" "Fuck all your stupid fucking fans too"

Then bust him open with a flat head screw driver.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

The-Rock-Says said:


> Careful, Swagg. You'll get told off wanting the AE back, but that's not true.
> 
> You, like me, just want some edgy TV and not TV for 5 year olds.


It's really all I got left, they're really making retarded choices with the high star power they have left, and soon they won't have that star power anymore, and then what...? You (not you specifically, TRS) can hit me with LOL the product has always been PG herp derp, but what I am seeing right now isn't what I have been seeing a long time ago. I remember when the face of the company turned heel, and was giving so many new faces a nice rub and Jericho stood on the entrance ramp and called stone cold a "slut". If Vince could cut a promo before a RAW one monday night and say "the following program you are about to see is strongly advised for viewers 13 and older...blah blah blah" I can only imagine what may or may not happen after that. 

@Green Light LOL maybe Ryback's music could hit and the crowd would go wild, but then cole would be all "wait...wait a damn minute...is that RYBACK ON THE FRIGGIN TITANTRON CHANTING FEED ME MORE? IT IS!!!!"


----------



## chbulls1_23

The-Rock-Says said:


> Careful, Swagg. You'll get told off wanting the AE back, but that's not true.
> 
> You, like me, just want some edgy TV and not TV for 5 year olds.


(Y)


----------



## thaimasker

The 2nd presidental debate got about 65 million rating..down slightly 67 mil from the first debate....and thats not even including the people that watched online.. So the 3rd one next monday should get in the 60 million range as well.

R.I.P next mondays raw ratings


----------



## King_Of_This_World

FFS the problem is not Punk, Ryback or any individual wrestler, the problem is quite clearly the very poor product.

How can people be so un-intelligent that they cant see this and automatically go 'OMG X IS TO BLAME HE CANT DRAW SHIT!'?


----------



## LKRocks

Hey Vince, I have an Idea: Put the WWE Title on Ryback, the WHC on Daniel Bryan, and have them wrestle in a 3 hour Ironman match for the Undisputed title next week. Oh, and have AJ as the ref wearing only a thong.


----------



## MikeChase27

Does anyone have the breakdown?


----------



## SinJackal

SoupMan Prime said:


> Maybe the ratings were bad because noone wants to see Punk face Ryback or Cena. Maybe they wanna see Punk face someone good and different. Punk going against 2 supermen isnt interesting.
> 
> I always find it funny ppl blame one guy which is usually Punk yet Vinny Mac was advertised for the show, Cena was gonna be on the show and the new guy ppl are saying is a draw in Ryback. They are going against MNF they will never win especially when the demographic that watches wwe also watches the NFL and im pretty sure they would rather watch a live football game and watch Raw on YouTube.
> 
> Funny im sure if ratings were great it'll be due to the "only draw" in wrestling Cena or maybe Vinny Mac, hell im sure ppl would say Ryback is drawing the ratingz.


Or perhaps the ratings are bad because people are tired of seeing Punk all the time? The guy's been champ for 330+ days, and in my personal opinion, it's been the most boring long WWE title reign since Diesel. And it's been boring to me because of the wrestler who's champ and the fact that he predictably goes over at every PPV. The WWE title scene has been terrible because Punk is garbage at selling his opponents as credible threats, while he monotonously builds himself up as better than everyone else on the show.

Punk was on screen (including replays, and excluding commercials), for over 1/4th of the show the last 3 weeks, and his storyline has been getting somewhere in the ballpark of 3/4ths of the promo/storyline time each Raw in the same timespan.

So while I'm all for not blaming a single guy for an entire show's ratings, I can't ignore the fact that ratings are tanking when a single guy is getting all the significant attention to detail in both stories and promos.

Almost nothing else is going on but Punk's stuff right now. So while you can say the midcard's booked like shit, you can't say Punk isn't because he's getting metic-fucktons of air time right now.


Time for a change, even if that change is just giving the title back to Cena. The reason that's acceptable to me is that even though Cena will be champ again, at least his storylines don't suck up most of the show's storyline segments like Punk's do.


----------



## funnyfaces1

SinJackal said:


> Or perhaps the ratings are bad because people are tired of seeing Punk all the time? The guy's been champ for 330+ days, and in my personal opinion, it's been the most boring long WWE title reign since Diesel. And it's been boring to me because of the wrestler who's champ and the fact that he predictably goes over at every PPV. The WWE title scene has been terrible because Punk is garbage at selling his opponents as credible threats, while he monotonously builds himself up as better than everyone else on the show.
> 
> Punk was on screen (including replays, and excluding commercials), for over 1/4th of the show the last 3 weeks, and his storyline has been getting somewhere in the ballpark of 3/4ths of the promo/storyline time each Raw in the same timespan.
> 
> So while I'm all for not blaming a single guy for an entire show's ratings, I can't ignore the fact that ratings are tanking when a single guy is getting all the significant attention to detail in both stories and promos.
> 
> Almost nothing else is going on but Punk's stuff right now. So while you can say the midcard's booked like shit, you can't say Punk isn't because he's getting metic-fucktons of air time right now.
> 
> 
> Time for a change, even if that change is just giving the title back to Cena. *The reason that's acceptable to me is that even though Cena will be champ again, at least his storylines don't suck up most of the show's storyline segments like Punk's do.*


You honestly do not believe this lie, do you?


----------



## TromaDogg

chbulls1_23 said:


> The-Rock-Says said:
> 
> 
> 
> Careful, Swagg. You'll get told off wanting the AE back, but that's not true.
> 
> You, like me, just want some edgy TV and not TV for 5 year olds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Y)
Click to expand...

(Y)(Y)

Don't want this to seem like a spam post, just that there's nothing more to be said there really.


----------



## KO Bossy

SinJackal said:


> Or perhaps the ratings are bad because people are tired of seeing Punk all the time? The guy's been champ for 330+ days, and in my personal opinion, it's been the most boring long WWE title reign since Diesel. And it's been boring to me because of the wrestler who's champ *and the fact that he predictably goes over at every PPV. The WWE title scene has been terrible because Punk is garbage at selling his opponents as credible threats, while he monotonously builds himself up as better than everyone else on the show.*
> 
> Punk was on screen (including replays, and excluding commercials), for over 1/4th of the show the last 3 weeks, and his storyline has been getting somewhere in the ballpark of 3/4ths of the promo/storyline time each Raw in the same timespan.
> 
> So while I'm all for not blaming a single guy for an entire show's ratings, I can't ignore the fact that ratings are tanking when a single guy is getting all the significant attention to detail in both stories and promos.
> 
> Almost nothing else is going on but Punk's stuff right now. So while you can say the midcard's booked like shit, you can't say Punk isn't because he's getting metic-fucktons of air time right now.
> 
> 
> Time for a change, even if that change is just giving the title back to Cena. * The reason that's acceptable to me is that even though Cena will be champ again, at least his storylines don't suck up most of the show's storyline segments like Punk's do.*


.....................................................................

Do you even WATCH wrestling?


----------



## Jotunheim

SinJackal said:


> The reason that's acceptable to me is that even though Cena will be champ again, at least his storylines don't suck up most of the show's storyline segments like Punk's do.


yeaah...your whole argument went to shit when you mentioned this, I'm sure facing big show for the 999999th time and Undressing Lauranitis while putting BBQ sauce on top of one of the commentators is gold storytelling, that, or being "fired" from WWE just to come back every week, every time while at the same time destroying all of nexus by himself

you can't seriously say that and have a straight face and if you do, may god have mercy on your soul :fpalm


----------



## Redwood

:lol this Punk hate has definitely become more illogical than his booking earlier this year.


----------



## SinJackal

KO Bossy said:


> .....................................................................
> 
> Do you even WATCH wrestling?


I do, and I participate in the Forum's prediction game for PPVs for the last year and a half. Almost everyone who plays it predicted CM Punk to go over at every PPV in the last year with the exception of 2 (EC and WM).

So I ask you, do you even REMEMBER how Punk's fueds have played out? Because it has been predictable that he was going over in almost all of them during the entirety of his current reign.

Perhaps you were swept up in the boneheaded belief that WWE was trying to "kill his reigns" or "bury Punk" with that deluge of stipulation matches he was getting to drum up interset in his title reign, rather than see them for what they were which was forcing Punk down people's throats as a "beat the odds" face.




funnyfaces1 said:


> You honestly do not believe this lie, do you?


Punk's stories get more air time than Cena's have been. It isn't a lie, it's called having a basic concept of time. The only time Cena's fueds have gotten as much time as Punk's has been when he's fueded with Punk.

Don't bring up that terrible "main event" argument either. We're talking about time, not timeslots. CM Punk has been getting more air time.




Jotunheim said:


> yeaah...your whole argument went to shit when you mentioned this, I'm sure facing big show for the 999999th time and Undressing Lauranitis while putting BBQ sauce on top of one of the commentators is gold storytelling, that, or being "fired" from WWE just to come back every week, every time while at the same time destroying all of nexus by himself
> 
> you can't seriously say that and have a straight face and if you do, may god have mercy on your soul :fpalm


Nothing you said refutes the fact that CM Punk's segments take much longer than Cena's. I didn't expect it to though, since your post quality has always been piss poor.

Punk comes out and drones on and on on the mic for 15 minutes. Cena, at worst, speaks for 5 mins. . .right before a PPV. S ometimes twice. Punk talks more than that every day regardless. So I would rather Cena be champ because he at least won't clog up a significant portion of the show with boring speches that we've heard dozens of times already.

Cena will just take up an acceptable portion of the show with boring speeches we've heard a dozen times already. It's the lesser of two evils to me. Punk is more boring right now than Cena ever was. So I'd rather Cena have the title if it means that much less Punk. Then WWE will put more effort into other shit for a change rather load all their eggs into the CM Punk basket.

My argument clearly didn't go to "shit" either. You're an overreacting Punk mark, and I would expect the same melodramatic knee-jerk reaction to any post in threads you're looking at that doesn't paint Punk in a positive light.

Here's a few of your recent terrible posts just to give people an idea of why not to ever take your posts seriously:



Jotunheim said:


> seriously?, are your standards that low?, it was fucking awful and cringe worthy, even Lesnar cuts a better promo and that's saying something because he is bad as hell fpalm





Jotunheim said:


> seriously, it's all garbage booking......now after punk defeats ryback they will go back the same shit about respect because punk has not beaten Cena....fpalm





Jotunheim said:


> fpalm oh god, this shit is brutal....cena doing his best to put ryback over





Jotunheim said:


> you are giving them too much credit, time after time in recent history they have proven they are a bunch of half brained jackasses, Cm punk not being respected by management it's not an isolated case, it has happened to a number of wrestlers in the past, including Daniel Bryan, it just so happens that these 2 examples just took a bad chance and turned it into something Huge and positive, not everyone can do that and be succesful, anyone that tells me that piece of shit Sehamus with the 18 second wrestlemania Win against Bryan wasn't a tactic to bury him it's delusional


^ Case in point. And that's just stuff from this week. You're an overreacting Punk mark that's incapable of rational thought. Just about everything you post is melodramatic nonsense, or some blast back, knee-jerk reaction to someone else's opinion.

Might's well change your name to Drama King if you're going to keep that dumb shit up. 

:jordan2


----------



## Jotunheim

SinJackal said:


> Nothing you said refutes the fact that CM Punk's segments take much longer than Cena's. I didn't expect it to though, since your post quality has always been piss poor.
> 
> Punk comes out and drones on and on on the mic for 15 minutes. Cena, at worst, speaks for 5 mins. . .right before a PPV. S ometimes twice. Punk talks more than that every day regardless. So I would rather Cena be champ because he at least won't clog up a significant portion of the show with boring speches that we've heard dozens of times already.
> 
> Cena will just take up an acceptable portion of the show with boring speeches we've heard a dozen times already. It's the lesser of two evils to me. Punk is more boring right now than Cena ever was. So I'd rather Cena have the title if it means that much less Punk. Then WWE will put more effort into other shit for a change rather load all their eggs into the CM Punk basket.
> 
> My argument clearly didn't go to "shit" either. You're an overreacting Punk mark, and I would expect the same melodramatic knee-jerk reaction to any post in threads you're looking at that doesn't paint Punk in a positive light.
> 
> Here's a few of your recent terrible posts just to give people an idea of why not to ever take your posts seriously:
> 
> 
> ^ Case in point. And that's just stuff from this week. You're an overreacting Punk mark that's incapable of rational thought. Just about everything you post is melodramatic nonsense, or some blast back, knee-jerk reaction to someone else's opinion.
> 
> Might's well change your name to Drama King if you're going to keep that dumb shit up.
> 
> :jordan2


oh god, did moon25 had an alternate account or something fpalm?


----------



## -Skullbone-

SinJackal said:


> Perhaps you were swept up in the boneheaded belief that WWE was trying to "kill his reigns" or "bury Punk" with that deluge of stipulation matches he was getting to drum up interset in his title reign,* rather than see them for what they were which was forcing Punk down people's throats as a "beat the odds" face.*


Would you rather see someone of Punk's...fairly limited stature take out security teams and huge heels like ol' Stone Cold? I think the guy himself would be aware of what looks realistic and what doesn't. Punk looks like and carries himself like a pugnacious scrapper.



> Punk comes out and drones on and on on the mic for 15 minutes. Cena, at worst, speaks for 5 mins. . .right before a PPV. S ometimes twice. Punk talks more than that every day regardless. So I would rather Cena be champ because he at least won't clog up a significant portion of the show with boring speches that we've heard dozens of times already.


So we'll have Punk's boring speeches taken away and replaced with...Cena's boring speeches. Doesn't sound particularly good either way, particularly when Cena is booked to be beyond the title and has achieved so much that a promo as champ will have little significance.



> Cena will just take up an acceptable portion of the show with boring speeches we've heard a dozen times already. It's the lesser of two evils to me. Punk is more boring right now than Cena ever was. So I'd rather Cena have the title if it means that much less Punk. Then WWE will put more effort into other shit for a change rather load all their eggs into the CM Punk basket.


But then they'll put it back into Cena's basket in all likelihood. Who in your mind can take the reigns of newly established face of WWE from today's roster off of Punk? One name.


----------



## KO Bossy

You can try to do whatever it is you want-call people Punk marks, or say that they're blind and ignorant. I'm not even a Punk mark, I just call a spade a spade, exactly the way I see it.

All I have to say to SinJackal is that if you truly, honestly believe that Punk is being forced down peoples' throats after the 7 never ending years of putting up with John Cena as the #1 guy in this company and the bullshit that's accompanied that, then you clearly are NOT watching pro wrestling. Or can you name me another time when the #1 BABYFACE in a company has been so consistently booed because the audience is sick to death of what he's doing?

How can you honestly complain when Punk has been receiving this increased amount of attention for just over a month and a half, and yet Cena has been getting it for well over half a decade?

Oh, and if you want to talk about hogging the spotlight for the majority of shows and...how did you put it...being "garbage at selling his opponents as credible threats, while he monotonously builds himself up as better than everyone else on the show", why don't you ask the Nexus what a feud with John Cena is like. That is, if you can find the ones who make their weekly appearances on Superstars.

I am extremely shocked that you bitch and complain about how terrible you think Punk is: about how he's a beat the odds face, that he gets too much air time, that he goes over at almost every PPV, that he's boring and stale...and yet you want to give the title back to the man who is KING of all of these negative traits you've identified. 

Everything you've said is so full of misinformation, bias and double standards that its laughable. Then you completely crap on any good you might have done by being a child and attacking other peoples' posts because they don't agree with you. There's no other logical conclusion to come to other than you've jumped on the CM Punk hate wagon because you have a personal grudge against the guy, and now you're trying to make, not persuade, make others agree with you. Sad.


----------



## MikeChase27

Whats even worse is the fact that SinJackal thinks Ryback is a draw.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

@SinJackal 
at least Punk has to beat the odds rather than be the odds like Cena


----------



## JY57

http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe..._RAW_Delayed_Viewers.html#obYGML97JYvKP6ij.99



> - The September 17th WWE RAW had 302,000 homes watching via tape delay or DVR while the September 24th RAW had 341,000 homes watching on a delay.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

RyRatingz


----------



## Felpent

The highest point of the show was only a 3.1?


----------



## JY57

that 3rd hour is just downright sad. Nothing new when it comes to the third hour. They have to realize soon its a fail


----------



## SinJackal

#1Peep4ever said:


> @SinJackal
> at least Punk has to beat the odds rather than be the odds like Cena


Punk: 9-0-1 in last 10 PPVs. 330+ days without losing a title match. 100% win ratio with one no contest since winning the title.

Cena: 6-6-2 over last 14 PPV appearances. 50% win rate, and two no contests.

How is Cena the odds and Punk not? He always wins at PPVs lately while Cena is losing half the time. You've got it backwards bro. This isn't 3+ years ago. Cena's been jobbing quite a bit, even on PPVs.

Punk is being booked the way Cena haters hated, and Cena's being booked the way Cena haters wanted, yet you guys are still blowing Punk and bashing Cena with hypocrisy in full effect. You guys clearly will never be happy about it unless they bury and fire Cena.




MikeChase27 said:


> Whats even worse is the fact that SinJackal thinks Ryback is a draw.


Perhaps the dumbest post of the bunch.

Ryback isn't a draw? k. Let's review.

Punk gained 161,000 viewers in his segment with Vince early in the show.


The Ryback vs. Dolph Ziggler and David Otunga squash match gained 512,000 viewers. That's Ryback + two guys who don't draw. Ryback drew more than three times as many viewers than Punk could with Vince McMahon himself on screen too.


The contract signing at the end with Vince, Ryback, Cena, and Punk gained 766,000 viewers.

Ryback again associated with the biggest ratings gain of the show. You can't credit Punk or even Vince because their gain was poor earlier in the show. Cena, of course, is partly responsible for the big jump as he usually is, but I'd also credit Ryback far more than I would Punk due to the ratings they each pulled earlier in the show.


Perhaps you should wait until the ratings are posted before you consider making such an ignorant statement next time?

Funniest thing of all is that I never said Ryback was a draw in the first place. All you did was make Punk marks look stupid and uninformed for no reason. You should apologize to them tbh.




-Skullbone- said:


> Would you rather see someone of Punk's...fairly limited stature take out security teams and huge heels like ol' Stone Cold? I think the guy himself would be aware of what looks realistic and what doesn't. Punk looks like and carries himself like a pugnacious scrapper.


At least there was one reply worth reading. Thanks for making the effort in asking me to clarify while posting decent arguments.

He just doesn't personally entertain me in the least. I'm entitled to my opinion on it just like you are.

Being fair and honest, I enjoyed Punk during "Summer of Punk", as I had a huge dislike for John Cena at the time (not anymore). But the more time passed, especially during his current reign, Punk has become less and less interesting to me, to the point him still going over despite all odds is just annoying to see now because it always happens.

This isn't "blind hate" or anything, it's legitimate just getting tired of seeing the guy over time since he's constantly getting put over in nearly every promo and every PPV. I don't give Punk a pass because I liked him at one point or just because "at least it's not Cena". I just call a spade a spade, dude. I wasn't a fan of Austin back in the day for the same reasons too. Got tired of seeing him always go over. Predictable dominance (including promos) is never entertaining to me when it's scripted.

If this was real fighting, there might be some value to it. Since it's scripted, there's always that element of, "why do they always script him to win?" in the background. It's a hard pill to swallow.




> So we'll have Punk's boring speeches taken away and replaced with...Cena's boring speeches. Doesn't sound particularly good either way, particularly when Cena is booked to be beyond the title and has achieved so much that a promo as champ will have little significance.


Both will still make their boring speeches regardless of who has the title. However, since Punk has gotten the title, his mic time has gone way up since he's been champ whereas Cena's has been roughly the same he always did (i.e. about a third as much as Punk, up to 1/2 during serious fueds).

In a nutshell, I expect both guys to be getting air time and mic time regardless of who's champ. But if Punk isn't champ (and hopefully not still going for it immediately after losing it), I expect less Punk mic time which is addition by subtraction imo. Less Punk mic time means more mic time for everyone else.

Perhaps what I said didn't make sense to you because you expect Cena will be getting the same ungodly amount of promo time that Punk does now. Cena wasn't getting that much promo time before. . .I see no reason why they'd change that in the future. Cena's push will be roughly the same as it's always been, whereas I'm just looking for less of a Punk push so WWE spends that valuble promo time in other areas rather than giving 50% of it to Punk every week. It makes for a boring Raw if you don't like CM Punk.

Cena really is the lesser of two evils. If you hate Cena, at least you don't have to see him that much. If you hate Punk, too bad because he's going to be on there at least 50% longer than Cena. Punk simply doesn't get to the point fast enough (like HHH), whereas Cena does. The only time Cena cuts a long promo is right before a PPV. . .Punk does it damn near every week. You just don't notice because you like Punk. Watch for it from now on (or cue up some old Raw episodes from the last 2-3 months) and you'll see what I mean.




> But then they'll put it back into Cena's basket in all likelihood. Who in your mind can take the reigns of newly established face of WWE from today's roster off of Punk? One name.


I already said the one name with Cena. Cena can win it back, reign for 2-3 months, then drop it to Randy Orton or whoever, and start moving the title around again at a reasonable rate (3-5x a year) so the WWE title scene isn't a snoozefest anymore.

Cena's already established as a bigger draw than Punk despite Punk's very lengthy and hard push. It's already proven that Punk can't carry the company and that it will tank if Cena isn't being pushed as basically the co-main event alongside him.

As for future guys who could be the face of the company (btw I'm not sure why that'd be Punk anyway since he's almost as old as Cena, in worse shape, and talking about retiring in a few years), here's a few guys who imo have potential to be the WWE title main event 2-3 years from now:

Sheamus, Orton, Ziggler, Miz, Daniel Bryan, Ryback, and possibly Sandow, Kofi, and Cesaro too.

No one dude has to hold it. I'd rather that not be the case. I can't predict who the next big megastar might be, but it's obviously not Punk. If it were, it would've happened by now. Thus far he's just an established WWE personality who doesn't interest casual viewers, which let's be honest, is what we're talking about when we're talking about the face of the company. Not a guy who knows a few more hammerlocks than most, and talks about insider stuff occaisionally that goes over most viewers' heads.

I don't believe there's a dire need to replace Cena right this second. Especially not to forcefully do it with a guy who isn't working very well in that role. I'd rather not see a show I enjoy watching die due to demanding a new guy take over the main role who isn't doing as good of a job as the last guy just because I wanted a change for the sake of change. Like I said, Cena is a neccessary evil. And that evil's not any worse than the current evil. It even draws better.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Pretty sad 3.1 is the best they can muster.

Punk/Vince probably would've gained more if they went the full quarter just by themselves, but Del Rio/Brodus probably lost quite a bit. 9PM with Ryback against Ziggler and Otunga is an above average gain, but a good quarter rating considering what the average rating for the show was, which shows he's still going stronger in drawing than anyone on the roster minus Cena and Punk. Barrett/Sheamus started in the quarter before the 10PM, so I wonder how it did there. I suppose it's good though they managed to get 279,000 viewers more in the 10PM slot (plus with whatever else was in the 10PM). And the overrun was a strong gain and the highest of the show, but still in the grand scheme of things the quarter rating being the highest for the show and only being a 3.1 isn't good.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Like I said, RyRatingz


----------



## nikola123

The-Rock-Says said:


> Like I said, RyRatingz


Rytingz is better


----------



## Evil Peter

SinJackal said:


> Punk gained 161,000 viewers in his segment with Vince early in the show.
> 
> 
> The Ryback vs. Dolph Ziggler and David Otunga squash match gained 512,000 viewers. That's Ryback + two guys who don't draw. Ryback drew more than three times as many viewers than Punk could with Vince McMahon himself on screen too.


While Ryback did pull some nice numbers you're coming to the conclusion in the wrong way. It's pretty irrelevant how much you gain unless you look at how much was lost previously, plus that it matters when your segment is on.

Ryback was on the 9 pm segment, which is one of the most beneficial ones, and he came after a segment that just lost 427k viewers, so a relevant gain there was pretty much a given when you have a good push. It's also very wrong to directly compare it to the quarter with Punk and Vince, since that quarter also had a match with Brodus Clay and ADR, who of course brought the quarter down, plus that it came after a quarter that wasn't as low rated as the one preceding Ryback's quarter. It would have been different if Punk and Vince had the quarter to themselves, like on the previous show.

But while the reasoning was wrong we can still see that Ryback did well because he reached a high total number, which is the relevant part. It shows that the sudden extreme push is working as he's previously lost viewers in his own segments but now competed well with the other peaks on the show.

Just pointing out that coming to the answer in the correct way is more important than reaching the answer.


----------



## Choke2Death

:lol

Ryback bringing dem ratings like a real draw! Over half a million when wrestling two rating killers in Ziggler and Otunga.


----------



## Oakue

Decent ratings for the modern day WWE. Can't really hope for much higher at the moment in my opinion.


----------



## FITZ

SinJackal said:


> Punk: 9-0-1 in last 10 PPVs. 330+ days without losing a title match. 100% win ratio with one no contest since winning the title.
> 
> Cena: 6-6-2 over last 14 PPV appearances. 50% win rate, and two no contests.
> 
> How is Cena the odds and Punk not? He always wins at PPVs lately while Cena is losing half the time. You've got it backwards bro. This isn't 3+ years ago. Cena's been jobbing quite a bit, even on PPVs.
> 
> Punk is being booked the way Cena haters hated, and Cena's being booked the way Cena haters wanted, yet you guys are still blowing Punk and bashing Cena with hypocrisy in full effect. You guys clearly will never be happy about it unless they bury and fire Cena.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps the dumbest post of the bunch.
> 
> Ryback isn't a draw? k. Let's review.
> 
> Punk gained 161,000 viewers in his segment with Vince early in the show.
> 
> 
> The Ryback vs. Dolph Ziggler and David Otunga squash match gained 512,000 viewers. That's Ryback + two guys who don't draw. Ryback drew more than three times as many viewers than Punk could with Vince McMahon himself on screen too.
> 
> 
> The contract signing at the end with Vince, Ryback, Cena, and Punk gained 766,000 viewers.
> 
> Ryback again associated with the biggest ratings gain of the show. You can't credit Punk or even Vince because their gain was poor earlier in the show. Cena, of course, is partly responsible for the big jump as he usually is, but I'd also credit Ryback far more than I would Punk due to the ratings they each pulled earlier in the show.
> 
> 
> Perhaps you should wait until the ratings are posted before you consider making such an ignorant statement next time?


You're not taking into account when segments happens as well as what the previous segment did.


----------



## vanboxmeer

Clearly, fans of Ryback have just as many brain cells to rub together in that empty cranium as their beloved former "High Dosage" member in Ryan Reeves. 9PM segment has constantly gained that amount of viewers every single week, but like the vultures in a political debate, they jump on it like Fox News.


----------



## kokepepsi

that 9pm slot could have had a diva match and it would have at least gained 200k
Marks stop being marks

Surprised that the Punk segment in the 1st hour gained at all.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Haters gonna hate.

What a rating, Ryback.

Take a bow, son. Take a fucking bow.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Ryback and CM Punk bringing in those numbers. No need to fight, marks from both sides.


----------



## Loudness

funnyfaces1 said:


> Ryback and CM Punk bringing in those numbers. No need to fight, marks from both sides.


This, I don't see why marks of both worlds are trying to make their points by posting long-winded, illogical posts full of excuses and bias why either one of these sucks when both of them do their job right. CM Punk owns as a heel, Ryback owns as a monster, end of story. If people just weren't so restricted that there's more in wrestling than beeing a roid monkey or a built-fat "technical wrestler" most people would be far more happy. I liked both Chris Jericho in his prime and Goldberg, going by that theory CM Punk and Ryback are shitty ripoffs that should be jobbing on heat. Reality check, they're still two good performers in their roles and I don't mind them at all, in fact I look up to those guys segments the most next to Team Hell No.


----------



## kokepepsi

Did you just imply Punk is a Jericho rip off
unk2


----------



## Amuroray

Ryback doing the business.

He has to beat punk


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Doesn't the 9 pm quarter draw almost regardless of who's in it? I'm not saying Ryback isn't doing well, but just like Bryan a few weeks, he doesn't get all the credit for the 9 pm quarter.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

lol @ all the people crediting Ryback for doing absolutely nothing. Oddly enough, the same people who discredit Punk at every chance. Didn't see this coming.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

^Brah, stop taking ratings so serious.

It's just a rating.


----------



## Loudness

kokepepsi said:


> Did you just imply Punk is a Jericho rip off
> unk2


Lostinbetweencomparisions/10

And yeah, Jericho > Punk just like Goldberg > Ryback. 

Don't see how that makes anyone of those look weaker considering they're beeing compared to one of the most entertaining wreslters ever in Jericho or beeing compared to one of the most intense looking guys (goldberg) in wrestling ever.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

The-Rock-Says said:


> ^Brah, stop taking ratings so serious.
> 
> It's just a rating.


Shit, you don't say. :cornette

You're telling that to the wrong person.


----------



## Green Light

Wow Ryback bringing in dem ratings yet again, this guy is gonna change the business like Austin did. Predicting 300,000 buys for NIAC at this rate

Ryback 3:16 says FEED ME MORE


----------



## e1987p

Kelly and Beth decided to leave the company so they are anymore the focus.

The focus now is only on Eve, Layla and Katlyn.The result is a new record.

Nine consecutive weeks they lost viewers in their quarter.


----------



## Sheik

The numbers don't lie, and so far the numbers are CLEARLY stating Ryback = ratings... which means big things are coming for Ryback.

Imagine a Ryback vs. Mark Henry program :mark: :vince2


----------



## Jotunheim

Ryback will be the next GOAT, better than The rock and stone cold put together, that charisma, that Wrestling and mic skills, book it WWE, make ryback the face of WWE and the whole universe


----------



## Loudness

Sheik said:


> *The numbers don't lie*, and so far the numbers are CLEARLY stating Ryback = ratings... which means big things are coming for Ryback.
> 
> Imagine a Ryback vs. Mark Henry program :mark: :vince2


And they spell disatster for you. See, normally when you go one on one with a normal wrestler, you got a 50/50 chance of winning. But BPP isn't normal, and you've got a 25% at winning at best. So you add your 33 a 1/3rd chance off winning, and add the GOAT s 66 and 2 3rds %, I gotta 141 and 2/3rds chance of winning.

So Joe, the numbers dont lie and they spell disaster for you. Would you rather be with me, or would you rather be with be with Joe: "Well, Joe is rather nice" 

"I'm talking to all my freaks out there. Would yiou rather be with a genetic freak, to statisfy you every night, or go to that fatass Samoa Joe."


----------



## Sheik

Loudness said:


> And they spell disatster for you. See, normally when you go one on one with a normal wrestler, you got a 50/50 chance of winning. But BPP isn't normal, and you've got a 25% at winning at best. So you add your 33 a 1/3rd chance off winning, and add the GOAT s 66 and 2 3rds %, I gotta 141 and 2/3rds chance of winning.
> 
> So Joe, the numbers dont lie and they spell disaster for you. Would you rather be with me, or would you rather be with be "Well, Joe is rather nice"
> 
> "I'm talking to all my freaks out there. Would yiou rather be with a genetic freak, to statisfy you every night, or go to that fatass Samoa Joe."


:steiner2


----------



## Loudness

Î'm sorry, I just couldn't hesitate. Put dat skinny vanilla midget to a real man next to BPP, and he'd look like shit. Where's the passion, where's the intensity, where's the muscles, and most of all, where's the fucking roidrage.

:troll

:steiner2


----------



## Falkono

Have to say i'm very surprised by the Ryback numbers! He is turning into a draw for sure. And whats even more shocking is other then feed me more he hasen't really said anything!
Maybe Punk needs to take note. It isn't how much you say or how many times you say it. Its about the quality and it would seem people prefer "Feed me more" to "best in da worldz"


----------



## Falkono

funnyfaces1 said:


> Ryback and CM Punk bringing in those numbers. No need to fight, marks from both sides.


Pretty sure Vince being there was the main reason for those numbers.

It also shows how far WWE has fallen that people call a 3 rating drawing....


----------



## roadkill_

Loudness said:


> Î'm sorry, I just couldn't hesitate. Put dat skinny vanilla midget to a real man next to BPP, and he'd look like shit. Where's the passion, where's the intensity, where's the muscles, and most of all, where's the fucking roidrage.
> 
> :troll
> 
> :steiner2


The problem is CM Punk isn't skinny either. On the HIAC poster he has love handles. He's like the guy who fixes your car, not fat, not muscular, but certainly not ripped. The original vanilla midgets, as envision by Nash, Benoit and Saturn etc - those guys were short but at least they hit the gym and were ripped. CM Punk is a fatty vanilla midget and his promos bore to tears.

In the 90's and 00's, there was a guy who did Punk's schtick better. Guy by the name of Lance Storm. He had the bitching/whining thing down without being boring, funny even. CM Punk bitches and whines like an old aunt. An old aunt with love handles who is 5'9.5 while claiming to be 6'1.


----------



## D.M.N.

> - The September 17th WWE RAW had 302,000 homes watching via tape delay or DVR while the September 24th RAW had 341,000 homes watching on a delay.


Both poor numbers really considering the poor live viewership.

Quarter Hours - October 15th, 2012
Q1 - 4.04 million
Q2 - 4.11 million
Q3 - 4.27 million
Q4 - 3.85 million
----
Q5 - 4.36 million
Q6/Q7 - 4.00 million
Q8 - 3.90 million
----
Q9 - 4.18 million
Q10 - 4.12 million
Q11 - 3.68 million
Q12 - 3.68 million
Overrun - 4.44 million

The pattern seems to be now that viewers can watch two and a half hours of Raw but no more. Watching Raw on Monday I could see that, plus there was little purpose to Kingston vs Miz again and the tag team match was irrelevant and way too long for what it was meant to do.

I can't see WWE admitting defeat in the three hour experiment, but I do wonder whether they would consider doing:

20:00 to 20:30 - WWE Raw (Pre Show)
20:30 to 21:30 - WWE Raw (Hour 1)
21:30 to 22:30 - WWE Raw (Hour 2)
22:30 to 23:05 - WWE Raw (Hour 3)

Or is that unlikely because the start of the hour would have to be 'on the hour'? The pre show would include a match before the show starts properly at half past the hour, so say going on this past week, the pre-show would have Miz TV and Rhodes Scholars vs Primo & Epico for example as well as a lot of backstage stuff hyping the show.


----------



## Rock316AE

I think that they found their new big chant, instead of this:

5:58












Ryyyyyyyyyyytings Ryyyyyyyyyyyyytings Ryyyyyyyyyyyyyytings









BTW, the reaction when Bret said there that he is "The Best There Is..." was awesome. Mega hot WCW crowd with the old school, passionate wrestling fanbase. This Bret promo along with the Goldberg angle is one of the best segments of all time. 

Random fact, WCW usually lost a lot of money every time they took an overrun. Unlike USA from about 1998 when Vince started to copy Bischoff, most of the time TNT didn't know that Nitro is going to "overtime" as Tony Schiavone said after 11pm.


----------



## TromaDogg

D.M.N. said:


> I can't see WWE admitting defeat in the three hour experiment, but I do wonder whether they would consider doing:
> 
> 20:00 to 20:30 - WWE Raw (Pre Show)
> 20:30 to 21:30 - WWE Raw (Hour 1)
> 21:30 to 22:30 - WWE Raw (Hour 2)
> *22:30 to 23:05 - WWE Raw (Hour 3)*
> 
> Or is that unlikely because the start of the hour would have to be 'on the hour'? The pre show would include a match before the show starts properly at half past the hour, so say going on this past week, the pre-show would have Miz TV and Rhodes Scholars vs Primo & Epico for example as well as a lot of backstage stuff hyping the show.


Interesting post...but Hour 3 is only 35 minutes?


----------



## D.M.N.

ToxieDogg said:


> Interesting post...but Hour 3 is only 35 minutes?


Yes, because the format would be 30 minutes pre-show, 2 hours 35 minutes Raw.


----------



## Loudness

roadkill_ said:


> The problem is CM Punk isn't skinny either. On the HIAC poster he has love handles. He's like the guy who fixes your car, not fat, not muscular, but certainly not ripped. The original vanilla midgets, as envision by Nash, Benoit and Saturn etc - those guys were short but at least they hit the gym and were ripped. CM Punk is a fatty vanilla midget and his promos bore to tears.
> 
> In the 90's and 00's, there was a guy who did Punk's schtick better. Guy by the name of Lance Storm. He had the bitching/whining thing down without being boring, funny even. CM Punk bitches and whines like an old aunt. An old aunt with love handles who is 5'9.5 while claiming to be 6'1.


I agree with you fully, however I guess you didn't get the "Steiner lines". We weren't talking about Punk, but about Ryback. Compared to Big Poppa Pump, Ryback is a skinnyfat nerd so we used a more muscular guy as an example to show that he's a skinnyfat too, and not just Punk, for the lulz obviously lol. Would rather have a roided up guy with the comican talent of a god, than any other guy, regardless if "skinny" or built So Steiner > Ryback and Goldberg. Don't look too much into it, you're quoting a CM Punk fan here, not a hater. I don't really get the legitimate hate for his look tbh.


----------



## chbulls1_23

They should just make the first hour of Raw like a preshow with guys like Brodus Clay and other mid to lower card guys. Then have all the major angles in the last 2 hours. That way when people wanna watch they won't miss anything and won't have to sit through all 3 hours.


----------



## Jotunheim

roadkill_ said:


> The problem is CM Punk isn't skinny either. On the HIAC poster he has love handles. He's like the guy who fixes your car, not fat, not muscular, but certainly not ripped. The original vanilla midgets, as envision by Nash, Benoit and Saturn etc - those guys were short but at least they hit the gym and were ripped. CM Punk is a fatty vanilla midget and his promos bore to tears.
> 
> In the 90's and 00's, there was a guy who did Punk's schtick better. Guy by the name of Lance Storm. He had the bitching/whining thing down without being boring, funny even. CM Punk bitches and whines like an old aunt. An old aunt with love handles who is 5'9.5 while claiming to be 6'1.


the whole thing went waaaaaay out of your head :steiner2


----------



## Loudness

Jotunheim said:


> the whole thing went waaaaaay out of your head :steiner2


You know the say all men are created aequil but you look at me and you look at CM Punk and you can see that statement is not true. See, normally when you gon on one with another wrestler you got a 50/50 chance of winning...but I 'm a genetic freak, and I'm not normal, sou you got a 25% at best BEST at beating me, and things start drasically going to get down.
See at the threeway at HIAC, you got a 33 and a third chance of winning but John Cena KNOWS he cant beat me so hes not even gonna try I got a 66 and two thirds chances of winning. So, CM Punk, you take your 33 and a third chance, minus your 25 chance and you got an eight and a third of winning. BUT THEN YOU TAKE MY 75% chance, and you take my 66 and 2/3rds chance of winning........I GOAT A 141 and 2/3rds chance of winning... See Punk, the numbers don't like and they spell disaster for you.

But let me ask the ladies. Would you rather be with Punk, or would you rather be with me?

"Well Punk is kinda nice you know?"

You're one of those girls that like romance. I'm talking to all my freaks out there. Would you rather come home to me, and get satisfied every night, or go home to that skinny fatass CM Punk?"


----------



## KO Bossy

Loudness said:


> You know the say all men are created aequil but you look at me and you look at CM Punk and you can see that statement is not true. See, normally when you gon on one with another wrestler you got a 50/50 chance of winning...but I 'm a genetic freak, and I'm not normal, sou you got a 25% at best BEST at beating me, and things start drasically going to get down.
> See at the threeway at HIAC, you got a 33 and a third chance of winning but John Cena KNOWS he cant beat me so hes not even gonna try I got a 66 and two thirds chances of winning. So, CM Punk, you take your 33 and a third chance, minus your 25 chance and you got an eight and a third of winning. BUT THEN YOU TAKE MY 75% chance, and you take my 66 and 2/3rds chance of winning........I GOAT A 141 and 2/3rds chance of winning... See Punk, the numbers don't like and they spell disaster for you.
> 
> But let me ask the ladies. Would you rather be with Punk, or would you rather be with me?
> 
> "Well Punk is kinda nice you know?"
> 
> You're one of those girls that like romance. I'm talking to all my freaks out there. Would you rather come home to me, and get satisfied every night, or go home to that skinny fatass CM Punk?"


You know what the ladies say-there's nothing finer than Scott Steiner.


----------



## Loudness

KO Bossy said:


> You know what the ladies say-there's nothing finer than Scott Steiner.


You know, as my freaks would say: Size DOES matter, and I'm the biggest of em all!


----------



## Choke2Death

Speaking of Steiner, I think he could help the ratings for WWE if he would come over.

STEINERMANIA IS RUNNIN' WILD!


----------



## KO Bossy

The fans of the WWE aren't ready for the Big Bad Booty Daddy in 2012. If some lady got upset ADR ripped her kid's sign up, just wait until she lays her eyes on the genetic freak. He'd have her screaming BOOM-shakalaka, and she'd be howling at the moon.


----------



## Jotunheim

Loudness said:


> You know the say all men are created aequil but you look at me and you look at CM Punk and you can see that statement is not true. See, normally when you gon on one with another wrestler you got a 50/50 chance of winning...but I 'm a genetic freak, and I'm not normal, sou you got a 25% at best BEST at beating me, and things start drasically going to get down.
> See at the threeway at HIAC, you got a 33 and a third chance of winning but John Cena KNOWS he cant beat me so hes not even gonna try I got a 66 and two thirds chances of winning. So, CM Punk, you take your 33 and a third chance, minus your 25 chance and you got an eight and a third of winning. BUT THEN YOU TAKE MY 75% chance, and you take my 66 and 2/3rds chance of winning........I GOAT A 141 and 2/3rds chance of winning... See Punk, the numbers don't like and they spell disaster for you.
> 
> But let me ask the ladies. Would you rather be with Punk, or would you rather be with me?
> 
> "Well Punk is kinda nice you know?"
> 
> You're one of those girls that like romance. I'm talking to all my freaks out there. Would you rather come home to me, and get satisfied every night, or go home to that skinny fatass CM Punk?"


you gotta look at the person who's making the threads, that fat sonbitch cm punk has been telling all of us that he is world champion before, been in this business for 15-20 years, this skinny-FAT sonbitch.....HE'S SKINNY FAT! :steiner2:


----------



## DesolationRow

Just about all of my casual friends cannot bear to watch all three hours of Raw. They tend to watch the middle hour more than anything else, from what I've heard and that seems to fit with what we're seeing in these viewership reports. 

You could literally hear Jim Ross run out of energy about two hours and twenty or so minutes into Raw this week. Three hours is just... too... loooong...

What's funny is that based on my experience going to _last_ week's Raw in Sacramento, the challenge for the crowd isn't that bad because they have arranged all of the week's "pre-show tapings" for Smackdown, with matches and promos for Saturday Morning Slam, Superstars and Main Event (have I missed any?) all compressed into a ninety-minute frame before they begin the Smackdown taping (which results in _three and a half hours_ of a "live show" for the audience, roughly what Raw is with the one single dark match to warm up the crowd fifteen minutes or so before the show goes on the air and the "dark" overrun to the overrun on TV, whatever it happens to be). 

But, to the viewing audience, three hours of program is just too much. It's rough.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

I think they should look to probably cut 30 minutes off at least, because that 3rd hour is Velocity level of programming except for the last segment.


----------



## robertdeniro

Ryback > Punk :trollunk3


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner3

Choke2Death said:


> Speaking of Steiner, I think he could help the ratings for WWE if he would come over.
> 
> STEINERMANIA IS RUNNIN' WILD!


How would Steiner work in pg lol


----------



## Choke2Death

ThePeoplezStunner3 said:


> How would Steiner work in pg lol


Vince would regain his balls, lol. Steiner would break every PG law there is and ratings would skyrocket then Vince would be like "Fuck your sponsors and all your kids. Steiner brings me them ratings and that's all that matters!" :vince


----------



## KO Bossy

Choke2Death said:


> Vince would regain his balls, lol. Steiner would break every PG law there is and ratings would skyrocket then Vince would be like "Fuck your sponsors and all your kids. Steiner brings me them ratings and that's all that matters!" :vince


His peaks would have the audience mesmer-mized.


----------



## krai999

you want ratings put the wwe championship on a wrestling bear i'm dead serious it's obvious that the bear would draw in more ratings than punk


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner3

krai999 said:


> you want ratings put the wwe championship on a wrestling bear i'm dead serious it's obvious that the bear would draw in more ratings than punk


Not gonna lie I would love to see Big Show vs the bear


----------



## Bushmaster

So WWE has every excuse for a bad rating tonight still I wonder how many will blame Punk or it being PG for it.


----------



## vanboxmeer

1.9 will be beautiful.


----------



## bigdog40

vanboxmeer said:


> 1.9 will be beautiful.





It doesn't affect us so what does it matter. They could have the Rock, Stone Cold, Undertaker, Hulk Hogan, Rowdy Piper, Shawn Michaels, and they would draw a 3.2 at most in these day and age.


----------



## vanboxmeer

bigdog40 said:


> It doesn't affect us so what does it matter. They could have the Rock, Stone Cold, Undertaker, Hulk Hogan, Rowdy Piper, Shawn Michaels, and they would draw a 3.2 at most in these day and age.


Oh the naive fools in here. Vince and USA network blowing a gasket undoubtedly will affect the product which in the end affects what the viewer is watching. Trotting out the defeatist attitude of "everything is out of our control, no matter what hypothetical thing we do" is already one foot in the grave.


----------



## StonecoldGoat

Why does IWC cares for ratings so much?besides Tv rating is inaccurate for the most part.Not every house In america has a nielson rating device.


----------



## Choke2Death

StonecoldGoat said:


> Why does IWC cares for ratings so much?besides Tv rating is inaccurate for the most part.Not every house In america has a nielson rating device.


I personally care because I enjoy watching the ratings decrease for the horrible shows they keep putting on.


----------



## chbulls1_23

Choke2Death said:


> I personally care because I enjoy watching the ratings decrease for the horrible shows they keep putting on.


Pretty much this. I'm waiting for a much needed change in the product at some point. Oh and once again I must say "fuck 3 hour Raws".


----------



## reDREDD

Or you know, stop watching and not give a fuck

There are infinitely better things to do with your time than watch a show that bores you, from a company you hate and you hope goes down the crapper

Someone said the Giant game, or football, or even the debate. Heck, read a book. Or play Resident Evil. Or develop alcoholism.


----------



## TromaDogg

Redead said:


> Or you know, stop watching and not give a fuck
> 
> There are infinitely better things to do with your time than watch a show that bores you, from a company you hate and you hope goes down the crapper
> 
> Someone said the Giant game, or football, or even the debate. Heck, read a book. Or play Resident Evil. Or develop alcoholism.


People like you completely miss the point.

A lot of us who don't like the way the show is at the moment actually want it to improve, because we've seen how much better it was in days gone by and know that they do have the tools there to succeed, they're just not using them properly. The only way they will be jolted into action is if there's a reason to. Like low ratings.

Yeah, I realise that it's hypocritical to wish them to have low ratings when they put on a crappy show, but still watch the show myself but it is what it is. I've been watching Raw pretty much since it began (and WWF itself for a while before thate even) so I'm not about to suddenly give up on it now, knowing that it's greatly entertained me in the past and has the potential to do so again if they stop pandering to a kiddie/social media type audience and just put on a decent wrestling orientated show that everyone can enjoy. I actually enjoyed the road to Wrestlemania and Extreme Rules this year (before things when rapidly back downhill again), Raw Episode 1000 was also good and we're nearly at Survivor Series now, so I'm sure things will pick up at least a little soon, even if only for the short term. I'll be interested to see what they do for the Raw 20th Anniversary show as well.

Complaining about how shit WWE have been in recent years and actually 'hating' them are 2 completely different things.


----------



## chbulls1_23

Redead said:


> Or you know, stop watching and not give a fuck
> 
> There are infinitely better things to do with your time than watch a show that bores you, from a company you hate and you hope goes down the crapper
> 
> Someone said the Giant game, or football, or even the debate. Heck, read a book. Or play Resident Evil. Or develop alcoholism.


I don't hate WWE, I just want a change in the product. I don't really even watch anymore either, I just pay attention to the main event scene cuz everything else pretty much sucks at this point.


----------



## StonecoldGoat

Redead said:


> Or you know, stop watching and not give a fuck
> 
> There are infinitely better things to do with your time than watch a show that bores you, from a company you hate and you hope goes down the crapper
> 
> Someone said the Giant game, or football, or even the debate. Heck, read a book. Or play Resident Evil. Or develop alcoholism.


This.Just enjoy the damn product.


----------



## bigdog40

ToxieDogg said:


> People like you completely miss the point.
> 
> *A lot of us who don't like the way the show is at the moment actually want it to improve*, because we've seen how much better it was in days gone by and know that they do have the tools there to succeed, they're just not using them properly. The only way they will be jolted into action is if there's a reason to. Like low ratings.
> 
> Yeah, I realise that it's hypocritical to wish them to have low ratings when they put on a crappy show, but still watch the show myself but it is what it is. I've been watching Raw pretty much since it began (and WWF itself for a while before thate even) so I'm not about to suddenly give up on it now, knowing that it's greatly entertained me in the past and has the potential to do so again if they stop pandering to a kiddie/social media type audience and just put on a decent wrestling orientated show that everyone can enjoy. I actually enjoyed the road to Wrestlemania and Extreme Rules this year (before things when rapidly back downhill again), Raw Episode 1000 was also good and we're nearly at Survivor Series now, so I'm sure things will pick up at least a little soon, even if only for the short term. I'll be interested to see what they do for the Raw 20th Anniversary show as well.
> 
> Complaining about how shit WWE have been in recent years and actually 'hating' them are 2 completely different things.





When has the ever satisfy everyone in the audience, NEVER. Even during everyone's favorite era, the Attitude Era, there were people saying the same shit the people constantly bitch about. The blame for WWE's slump is from top to bottom, to Vince, to the creative team, to the wrestler's themselves, and even the fans themselves can be blamed for WWE's state. If you want WWE to get better, it starts with the talent themselves first and foremost. If you want the WWE to build new main eventers, then let these young guys be build up on their own and let them develop instead of hotshotting everything and fans judging someone when they are green as hell and unpolished. You think Stone Cold, The Rock, and Triple H became stars overnight?


----------



## TromaDogg

bigdog40 said:


> When has the ever satisfy everyone in the audience, NEVER. Even during everyone's favorite era, the Attitude Era, there were people saying the same shit the people constantly bitch about. The blame for WWE's slump is from top to bottom, to Vince, to the creative team, to the wrestler's themselves, and even the fans themselves can be blamed for WWE's state. If you want WWE to get better, it starts with the talent themselves first and foremost. If you want the WWE to build new main eventers, then let these young guys be build up on their own and let them develop instead of hotshotting everything and fans judging someone when they are green as hell and unpolished. *You think Stone Cold, The Rock, and Triple H became stars overnight?*


No, because I was there watching when those guys first made their debut, and even remember 'Stunning' Steve Austin and Paul Levesque on WCW, before Steve Austin mouthed off against Bishoff on ECW even, let alone appeared in WWF as The Ringmaster before becoming Stone Cold.

They've probably never completely satisfied their entire audience, but never in the 20+ years that I've been watching WWF/E have I felt such apathy and general boredom towards the show, even back in 1995 (though granted I was only 18 years old back then, maybe a bit more accepting of shit on WWF than I am now having seen stuff during the Attitude and Ruthless Agression eras that was much better).


----------



## Choke2Death

Redead said:


> Or you know, stop watching and not give a fuck


If you were talking about me, then I don't know what this is about. I stopped watching full-time 5 months ago then after Raw 1000, I've only watched ONE show.



StonecoldGoat said:


> This.Just enjoy the damn product.


Except it's not enjoyable in the slightest. I'm not the type that nitpicks on every fucking thing even when I demanded it happens like some in this forum do but Raw right now is GARBAGE.


----------



## reDREDD

no it was a more general statement

analysing every single .1 in the ratings is as retarded as threatening to kill someone 1/4 star in the rating of a match. its makes wrestling fans look even sadder than they are. its seriously putting the 'anal' in analysing


----------



## Hawksea

Velocity 2002 - 2004 >>>>>>>>>>> WWF LiveWire >>>>>>>>>>>> Confidential >>>>>>>> Raw 2012


----------



## WTFWWE

If they get anything above 2.5 it will be considered good but I can see it being a 2.4 or even 2.3 which will cause Vince to blow the fuck up.


----------



## chbulls1_23

Hawksea said:


> Velocity 2002 - 2004 >>>>>>>>>>> WWF LiveWire >>>>>>>>>>>> Confidential >>>>>>>> Raw 2012


Spongebob>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Raw 2012


----------



## Grass420

who wants to bet that Raw bombs in the ratings tonight? we should have a pool.. I say it will be 2.4

what has WWE done to promote tonight's show so far?

"This afternoon, mere hours before Raw kicks off in her home state of New Jersey, Raw General Manager AJ Lee posted the following on her official Twitter account"
@WWEAJLee: Been called to an emergency meeting with the WWE Board of Directors at #WWE Global HQ. #Confused #RAW"

that's it...

with all the social media they have, they can do so much to promote their show.. but they don't.. 

i am re-watching raws from the 1999, and even back then, they did a lot more to promote raw.. 
even at the beginning of the show, they would tell you at least 3 matches that would take place that night.
you don't even get that anymore, it does not give you a reason to tune in..

if you don't promote the show, or any of the matches, how can you expect people to tune in? you cannot blame wrestlers for people not tuning into their matches when they are not promoted..

so many times we watch Raw and a wrestler will come out, we won't know who he is fighting and it's not set up like an element of surprise, it's just WWE does not tell us.. they are too busy showing recaps and telling people to go on twitter and tout and facebook.


----------



## HHHbkDX

They're gonna get a sub 2.5 rating tonight. Well deserved actually. Get your shit together WWE.


----------



## Choke2Death

I think 2.4 is pretty high considering the debate they are competing with, not to mention the usual MNF. I expect something between 1.8-2.3 which is unfortunately going to be the new standard they settle for because they are too lazy to get back their fans.


----------



## Starbuck

2.3 imo. Too much competition. I'll be impressed if they get above that tbh.


----------



## SinJackal

Yeah. . .ratings are probably gonna tank tonight. Especially during the midcard. If it's still 2.5, I'll be very surprised. Even though 2.5 isn't great, if they actually do hit that mark again, it should be considered a victory considering how watered down most of the show is right now. . .not to mention all the competion for that timeslot tonight.


----------



## Marv95

Holy crap are they hyping up the debate tonight. On top of the NLCS and MNF. But if this was 2004 with them against the same amount of competition or if they actually had some sort of big storyline to get people to watch with starpower, the worst they'd do would be a 2.9.


----------



## Hawksea

I'm willing to bet the extermination of my account for a below 2.0


----------



## chucky101

it would be shocking if it did more than 2.5, 2.5 is best case scenario

more likely it will be 2.3-2.4, maybe even worse

its tough to call, how knows how many normal wrestling fans are also debate/mlb fans, so its tough, it could be as low as 2.2 or as high as 2.5

if vince gets a 2.5 consider himself lucky

i predict 2.3-2.4 range, but it could even be lower


----------



## TromaDogg

I can't see them doing less than 2.0, but a sub 2.5 is fairly conceivable given what else is on US TV at the same time.

Though it's not just the competition that's killing their ratings, it's the rut that their product has fallen into in recent months.

They seem to be putting all their eggs in one basket and hoping that Ryback is going to be their 'saviour' of sorts. I'll keep my opinions about him to the Ryback Discussion thread, but I'm not convinced. We'll see over the next few weeks.


----------



## chucky101

ryback is not the saviour, vince thinks he is but he will be a bust

the fact that there putting all there eggs in the basket shows how bad and desperate they are, the product has been so bad for so long they need some long term solutions

start pushing younger talent like ambrose/ziggler/rollins/etc

either that or keep seeing the rating fall and short term bandage solutions


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

The last two world champion vs world champion matches didn't do well in the ratings. Let's see what this one does.


----------



## Jotunheim

let's see dem 9.0 ratingz guyz :lmao because we all know ryback is a huge draw and everyone will stop watching MLB/NFL and the presidential debate for him and such awesome Writting team after Vince got mad and fired the head writter


----------



## MikeChase27

This show might just fall below the 2.0 mark lol.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

I'm honestly expecting it to be lower than 2.0. That was a pretty dreadful show.


----------



## JasonLives

2.3-2.4. Dont think they will look too much into the rating this week.


----------



## chucky101

they deserve sub 2.0 for this crap


----------



## RatedR10

With the competition alone, I don't expect a huge rating. I said 2.4-2.6 yesterday, but I'll change that to 2.2-2.5. I don't think they go below 2.0... yet.


----------



## chbulls1_23

I didn't think it was a bad show. It was just long as hell like usual and struggles to keep my attention. The ratings are gonna tank bad though this week with all the stuff going on TV. I expect low 2's.


----------



## chucky101

chbulls1_23 said:


> I didn't think it was a bad show. It was just long as hell like usual and struggles to keep my attention. The ratings are gonna tank bad though this week with all the stuff going on TV. I expect low 2's.


you didn't think it was bad show, really

if it wasn't bad then it must be good, so what exactly was god about it?


----------



## Twisted14

chucky101 said:


> you didn't think it was bad show, really
> 
> if it wasn't bad then it must be good, so what exactly was god about it?


Implying there is no middle ground between good and bad.

This is what I was going to write in my post in the other Raw discussion thread. Some here seem to think that if a show wasn't good, then it was automatically terrible. No middle ground with some of you guys.


----------



## chbulls1_23

chucky101 said:


> you didn't think it was bad show, really
> 
> if it wasn't bad then it must be good, so what exactly was god about it?


Well I thought the matches were pretty good. I was happy about AJ stepping down as GM. My only complaint was the 3 hours that felt like a chore to watch. I'm not saying it was a fantastic show, but compared to 3 weeks ago it was better.


----------



## Oakue

They're going to get killed.

Game 7
Monday Night Football
Final Debate

I'm actually leaning towards a 2.0 with 2.1 being the highmark. I'm serious too. I think this is going to be a total bomb.


----------



## DJ2334

Lol 718 pages of people bitching about ratings lolololol.


----------



## chucky101

moonmop said:


> They're going to get killed.
> 
> Game 7
> Monday Night Football
> Final Debate
> 
> I'm actually leaning towards a 2.0 with 2.1 being the highmark. I'm serious too. I think this is going to be a total bomb.


i hope your right, i want a total bomb so many they will wake up

if 2.5 forced vince to come back, a 2.1 or lower should make him change some things up


----------



## HHHbkDX

I really, really, REALLY hope they get a 2.0 or below. They absolutely deserve it. Shit like that should get pitiful ratings.


----------



## StonecoldGoat

chucky101 said:


> i hope your right, i want a total bomb so many they will wake up
> 
> if 2.5 forced vince to come back, a 2.1 or lower should make him change some things up


the product overall isn't a big draw in 2012 so it wont get any better regardless of the quality of the product.the only time they get decent ratings is the road to wrestlemania.


----------



## Coffey

Predicting a 2.7 overall.


----------



## DesolationRow

Couldn't be bothered to even record Raw this week with GAME 7 this week and recording the debate on VHS as well. Go, GIANTS! National League Champions!


----------



## The GOAT One

DesolationRow said:


> Couldn't be bothered to even record Raw this week with GAME 7 this week and recording the debate on VHS as well. Go, GIANTS! National League Champions!


I was under the impression that mods had it in their iron clad contracts that they HAVE to watch Raw live every Monday without fail. :cena2


----------



## Rock316AE

I personally stopped watching RAW at the beginning of the 10pm segment with Striker, Kane and Bryan. Not because of NFL or the debate, for the simple fact of how horrible, long, pointless it was with 90% filler on the show just to kill time. 3 hours is unbearable. 

It's not going to be 2.1, but I can see a 2.4-2.5.


----------



## Cliffy

They aren't getting anywhere near a 2.5, not with that competition.


----------



## Medo

_*This week deserves below 2.0*_


----------



## WTFWWE

Walk-In said:


> Predicting a 2.7 overall.


Jesus! Did you even see what RAW was up against? A 2.7 would be like a 4.0 rating. If they got a 3.0+ that is like getting a 5.0+

Rating is gonna fucking tank bad. If they got 2.5 they should be happy like really happy.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

You might aswell wipe this week off. They could of done anything and they still wouldn't get 3.0.


----------



## TheF1BOB

The ignorance of some... remember,

unk2 = DEM RATINGZ

It's good. :cool2


----------



## cokecan567

I honestly wonder if they even tried to make the show good last night or said fuck it and made it crappy and didn't care and said oh well fuck this week due to all the competion going on from football baseball and most importantly the presidential debate..... Either way if u look at it like this in 2008 the company just turned pg so they wouldn't really have to worry that much about low rating back then cause it was no where as low as it would be now due to it not being as shitty etc. but since its 2012 and its the like second presidential debate since the company is gone to shit since 2008. its gonna be low as fuck rating etc and they should really try hard to make it good imo.

anyways if they really were trying then imo they are fuckin dumb cuz that show was so fucking shitty last night. I honestly hope they get lower than 2.0 rating for this week. and i hope the ratings keep going down and don't improve unless they change this stupid product overall. make it more edgy and fuck off with these stupid shitty storylines. dumbass writers putting vickie guerro in wtf??????????????????????? I mean ya finally aj is gone as gm but shes prob still going to be getting a shit load of tv time now with this vicke/cena/aj angle shit. so dumb and pointless

anyways just my 2 cents


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

I love how they need to over emphasize everything now "BIGGEST LUMBERJACK MATCH IN RAW HISTORY".

If it wasn't for that lumberjack match I would have never known Mason was still employed.

Anyways, this fly by booking is seriously cringe worthy now, and it's been like this since the fuck up of the "summer of Punk".


----------



## YoungGun_UK

Hoping for below 2.5


----------



## hardysno1fan

I bet even the Raw locker room didn't even watch the show.


----------



## MikeChase27

hardysno1fan said:


> I bet even the Raw locker room didn't even watch the show.


They were getting ready for THE BIGGEST LUMBERJACK MATCH EVER!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Oakue

Didn't they spend the whole night hyping as the biggest lumberjack match that would have the *entire roster* out there?

Except for Cena, Ryback, Kane, Bryan...etc...yeah.

But it was the entire roster though...


----------



## hardysno1fan

moonmop said:


> Didn't they spend the whole night hyping as the biggest lumberjack match that would have the *entire roster* out there?
> 
> Except for Cena, Ryback, Kane, Bryan...etc...yeah.
> 
> But it was the entire roster though...


Speaking of which is it me or is WWE turning into WCW? UNO with the constant lack of clean finishes.


----------



## funnyfaces1

hardysno1fan said:


> Speaking of which is it me or is WWE turning into WCW? UNO with the constant lack of clean finishes.


It was even worse during the Attitude Era. Ref bumps everywhere.


----------



## chucky101

i hope its below 2.0 but probably won't be

wwe is a big name product and there won't be a huge drop just based off there name power and creatures of habit tuning in every monday

i predict 2.3 but hoping its lower


----------



## holt_hogan

*The 22/10 edition of Monday Night Raw drew the following viewers:
*
Hour 1: 3.578m
Hour 2: 3.653m
Hour 3: 3.432m

*Compared to last weeks:
*
Hour 1: 4.067m
Hour 2: 4.013m
Hour 3: 3.886m

The average over the 3 hours is *3,554,333.*

The October 1st edition which was the lowest rated Raw in 15 years had an average of *3,502,000* viewers which had a *2.5 rating.*

Yesterdays edition of raw averaged just *54,000 viewers more* than the lowest rated raw in 15 years on the 1st October.

The final rating will be released later, but it should come out at *2.5*


----------



## JY57

thought it would be worst than that. but at least they got average of 3.5+ million viewers with the competition they had


----------



## D.M.N.

Whilst obviously the ratings are bad to say the least, those hoping for something ridiculously low are likely to be disappointed.


----------



## MikeChase27

Dat Ryback push is bringing dem ratings.


----------



## WTFWWE

Still is a bad rating.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I suppose better than expected all things considered. Not a good number, but eh...


----------



## reDREDD

D.M.N. said:


> Whilst obviously the ratings are bad to say the least, *those hoping for something ridiculously low are likely to be disappointed.*


so basically, everyone? :torres



u mad ratings nerds?

:troll


----------



## MikeChase27

Redead said:


> so basically, everyone? :torres
> 
> 
> 
> u mad ratings nerds?
> 
> :troll


unk3


----------



## Bushmaster

Surprised the ratings ppl would want a terrible number. Dont they have wwe stock? Shouldnt they want it to be better lol.

With everything on last night that number is decent. Hell during all of last night I forgot there was a MNF game. Last night was definitely stacked.


----------



## Oakue

I'm shocked at the 2.5. Really, you can see an earlier post of mine where I thought it'd be much lower.


----------



## WTFWWE

2.5 is still bad. It shows that 500,000 viewers would rather watch something else also hour 3 is the worst non holiday RAW hour in over 15 years.


WWE BREAKING DEM ALL TIME LOW RECORDS! ONE WEEK AT A TIME!


----------



## Teh_TaKeR

Lol cant wait for the raitings dick suckers to complain..

PUNKZ WIT DEM FAILZZZ DRRAWWWZ TOOK BELT AHF HIMZZZ

unk2


----------



## holt_hogan

I think it shows that no matter what the competition is or how relatively bad the show is 3.5 million is the number of fans who will tune in no matter what's going on. That's their inner core audience that are currently remaining loyal. If they start dipping below the 3.5 million, or 2.5 rating that's when they're entering troubled waters.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

better than excepted


----------



## RatedR10

Better than I expected to be honest. I predicted 2.2 - 2.5, but I thought it'd be around 2.2 or 2.3 to be honest, just because of the competition on last night with the debates, football and baseball.


----------



## WTFWWE

So we should praise a rating that got less viewers than a 4th of July RAW?

http://www.wrestlezone.com/news/239249-wwe-raw-rating-july-4th-2011

Still don't know how July 4th 2011 raw got 3.7 million viewers = 2.4 rating yet RAW yesterday gets 3.5M viewers and gets a 2.5 rating.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

The 9pm hour still does the highest. I think Team Hell No literally took over that whole hour, to kill time. I think it was Ziggler vs Daniel Bryan, then Kane vs Big Show then the Game show stuff.


----------



## holt_hogan

WTFWWE said:


> So we should praise a rating that got less viewers than a 4th of July RAW?
> 
> http://www.wrestlezone.com/news/239249-wwe-raw-rating-july-4th-2011
> 
> Still don't know how July 4th 2011 raw got 3.7 million viewers = 2.4 rating yet RAW yesterday gets 3.5M viewers and gets a 2.5 rating.


That was a holiday edition of MNR and generally aren't counted when considering trends etc.

Also the Nielsen number of households which calculates the rating has been changed since July 2011. They also take into account the number of people watching television on a particular night.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

WTFWWE said:


> So we should praise a rating that got less viewers than a 4th of July RAW?
> 
> http://www.wrestlezone.com/news/239249-wwe-raw-rating-july-4th-2011
> 
> Still don't know how July 4th 2011 raw got 3.7 million viewers = 2.4 rating yet RAW yesterday gets 3.5M viewers and gets a 2.5 rating.


Its due to three hours, the rating would have been much lower if it was only 2 hours at 3.5 million viewers.


----------



## vanboxmeer

Welcome to the 2.5 territory. Breaking records every week.


----------



## Loudness

Hey, at least the ratings were consistent throughout all hours, which means that most casuals have watched something else while the 3.5 million fans, of which most are regular ones, have kept watching this week.


----------



## Choke2Death

They should be celebrating with the 2.5, lol. I expected a lot less as did many others. (probably Vince included) Or maybe it's because 2.5 is the new standard...


----------



## Starbuck

holt_hogan said:


> I think it shows that no matter what the competition is or how relatively bad the show is *3.5 million is the number of fans who will tune in no matter what's going on. That's their inner core audience that are currently remaining loyal*. If they start dipping below the 3.5 million, or 2.5 rating that's when they're entering troubled waters.


That number used to be 4.5 million not too long ago. They've already dropped a million. If they dip any further they really _will_ be in troubled waters. This is better than I was expecting but still not good. Era of the 2s indeed. I wonder what will finally crack the 3.0 barrier and be considered a success lol.


----------



## Shadow Madven

The product sucks tbh. A 3 hours show is killing it, WWE has a thin roster. Very few can draw, so just turn it to a two hours show and stop this supershow BS. 3 hours show will only work if there is guys like Lesnar, Trips, Taker, Michaels, Rock etc. To help through out the show.


----------



## Honey Bucket

Redead said:


> so basically, everyone? :torres
> 
> 
> 
> u mad ratings nerds?
> 
> :troll


'worst ratings results ever! im never watchin the ratings thread ever again!!!111'

*one week later*

'they're gonna be so low lol'


----------



## Snothlisberger

DesolationRow said:


> Couldn't be bothered to even record Raw this week with GAME 7 this week and recording the debate on VHS as well. Go, GIANTS! National League Champions!


VHS? I didn't know VHS still existed.


----------



## TheF1BOB

Choke2Death said:


> They should be celebrating with the 2.5, lol. I expected a lot less as did many others. (probably Vince included) *Or maybe it's because 2.5 is the new standard*...


Within four years, that standard will decrease to a 1.5 rating.

Trust me on this. :cena2

.


----------



## DenGal

RAW used to have 4.0 as a norm and like 3 years ago was around 3.5. Why does WWE think PG is a bigger audience? Edgy TV appeals to young kids and adults. When I was young we all watched WWF. Look at Jersey Shore and other edgy shows they draw more.


----------



## Choke2Death

TheF1BOB said:


> Within four years, that standard will decrease to a 1.5 rating.
> 
> Trust me on this. :cena2
> 
> .


With Cena gone most likely (I know most say "lulz hez like hogan and will wrestle till he's 60" but I doubt it), they will not have a single draw in their hands anymore as we can pretty much assume that The Rock finishes things off and is inducted to the HOF, Undertaker will probably retire and HHH is going to strictly work behind the scenes.


----------



## DenGal

Choke2Death said:


> With Cena gone most likely (I know most say "lulz hez like hogan and will wrestle till he's 60" but I doubt it), they will not have a single draw in their hands anymore as we can pretty much assume that The Rock finishes things off and is inducted to the HOF, Undertaker will probably retire and HHH is going to strictly work behind the scenes.


WWE is going to be dead then, or will have to totally change the product. Probably have celebrities wrestle and make all stars on one brand.


----------



## TheF1BOB

Choke2Death said:


> With Cena gone most likely (I know most say "lulz hez like hogan and will wrestle till he's 60" but I doubt it), they will not have a single draw in their hands anymore as we can pretty much assume that The Rock finishes things off and is inducted to the HOF, Undertaker will probably retire and HHH is going to strictly work behind the scenes.


100% Agree. When :cena2 & :rocky are gone, the company dies. The :miz will be our last great hope.

At least TNA will have some competition... if they are still intact that is. :kurt


----------



## DenGal

WWE should just hire Vince Russo and let the ratings man bring the magic back. Vince and Vince were a great team.


----------



## NearFall

Choke2Death said:


> With Cena gone most likely (I know most say "lulz hez like hogan and will wrestle till he's 60" but I doubt it), they will not have a single draw in their hands anymore as we can pretty much assume that The Rock finishes things off and is inducted to the HOF, Undertaker will probably retire and HHH is going to strictly work behind the scenes.


Don't worry. We always got Dolph Ziggler and Cody Rhodes! :vince3


Sorry, couldn't resist! unk


----------



## chbulls1_23

DenGal said:


> RAW used to have 4.0 as a norm and like 3 years ago was around 3.5. Why does WWE think PG is a bigger audience? Edgy TV appeals to young kids and adults. When I was young we all watched WWF. Look at Jersey Shore and other edgy shows they draw more.


The edginess is what drew me and so many people to it, so why they got to take this corny road, I don't know.


----------



## mb1025

It can still be below a 2.5. It depends how many people watched TV on Monday compared to who just watched Raw.


----------



## Choke2Death

NearFall said:


> Don't worry. We always got Dolph Ziggler and Cody Rhodes! :vince3


Both would make some good midcard talent but when the company is so low on stars, these two will probably get their shot at main eventing for an amount of time.



TheF1BOB said:


> 100% Agree. When :cena2 & :rocky are gone, the company dies. The :miz will be our last great hope.
> 
> At least TNA will have some competition... if they are still intact that is. :kurt


Don't know about Moz. When they heavily pushed him, the result was a terrible WM main event last year. He's one of the best on the mic, though.



DenGal said:


> WWE is going to be dead then, or will have to totally change the product. Probably have celebrities wrestle and make all stars on one brand.


People say I'm crazy when I predict WWE's downfall being sooner rather than later. But at the rate they are losing viewers, the panic zone may be where they find themselves soon. Some will say "ratings are not important" because that will somehow makes them more optimistic about the future but they are just dodging the problem. With less ratings, there will be less buyrates for PPVs drop, less merch will be sold and who is helping WWE's stock if nobody is watching? Whoever says "ratings don't matter" are just fooling themselves.

This is starting to look like WCW towards the end which is another reason why I have a bad feeling the company is reaching their end.

*awaits raged mark that responds with "Y U CARE ABT RATINGZ!!!".*


----------



## Striker

chbulls1_23 said:


> The edginess is what drew me and so many people to it, so why they got to take this corny road, I don't know.


Because PG still makes them more money overall then they would be making if it wasn't.


----------



## DenGal

Now we really dont know when a big raw is coming up because every show is 3 hrs, back when it was 2 hrs and they announced a 3 hr raw they could get a lot of viewers because everyone knew it was going to be a good show. Now its just opposite.


----------



## Marv95

The NLCS was a blowout and some folks don't care about Lions/Bears, so the number was probably helped by those factors. But that's still not a number to be celebrating over considering Nitro did better in its worst period for a product.


----------



## DenGal

Striker said:


> Because PG still makes them more money overall then they would be making if it wasn't.


no doubt, kids get whatever they please.

I was at Survior Series last year in NY and a kid with his dad at the stand got 300 dollars worth of merch all by himself. From shirts, to sin caras arm bands to a big show hat to rey mysterio mask.


----------



## Marv95

Striker said:


> Because PG still makes them more money overall then they would be making if it wasn't.


They've lost over a half billion since 2010. If this was 2009 when they were still recovering from Benoit I might agree with you.


----------



## reDREDD

Marv95 said:


> They've lost over a half billion since 2010. If this was 2009 when they were still recovering from Benoit I might agree with you.


id like to see the figures that indicate the wwe lost half a billion dollars in 2 years


----------



## LKRocks

Oh yeah. They should totally hire Russo again. Can't wait to see the "CM Punk on a pole match" between Ryback and Cena


----------



## Choke2Death

Redead said:


> id like to see the figures that indicate the wwe lost half a billion dollars in 2 years


http://www.prowrestling.net/artman/publish/WWE/article10026535.shtml

A lot of it is due to Linda's campaign too. The more money they waste on shit like that, the worse things can only get.


----------



## Marv95

Redead said:


> id like to see the figures that indicate the wwe lost half a billion dollars in 2 years


It was in a thread in the General WWE section a while back

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/gener...-off-wwe-stock-costs-mcmahon-500-million.html

http://www.greenwichtime.com/news/ar...259.php#page-1


----------



## Hawksea

Next week, I'm predicting a 2.3

I'm sensing a pattern here.


----------



## MethHardy

Looks like TNA won't have to catch up to WWE now. WWE is falling to TNAs level. This is hilarious. I will enjoy WWE downfall cause the product is just so bad they deserve to go under.


----------



## Coffey

Choke2Death said:


> This is starting to look like WCW towards the end which is another reason why I have a bad feeling the company is reaching their end.


But WWE is publicly traded & Vince McMahon owns the majority of the shares. There's no AOL/Time Warner merger than can get rid of WWE.


----------



## chucky101

2.5 is becoming normal, the second "15 year low" one in less than a month

even a 3-4 years ago they were doing 3.5

the annual raw rating has been tanking and headed down since 2002, but this last year seems like a new rock bottom

how are some of you celebrating this, sure its not as low as some predicted but its still a 15 year record low number

tna is not far behind, if they got there crap together and keep improving the product they will match them

2.5 for a company like this on there flagship program is laughable


----------



## chucky101

with vince spending all this money on linda's election, record low ratings, no future stars...

when will he finally wake up


----------



## reDREDD

thats not really money 'lost'. for the shareholders wanting to sell its hell but as far year to year profits vs losses im not sure how it works out

as for linda's campaign thats another story. thats not wwe losing money as much as it is vince blowing it. like on a yacht. a very crappy, pointless fictional yacht

the only real figures that indicate the company's health are the yearly profits and losses. the very simple, very basic bottom line. unless those start going down the toilet, the wwe is fine. if they go down the toilet, vince still has a long way to go before ending up in 1996 levels


----------



## chucky101

but don't you understand, cena is the man with this PG great era, he is a true number 1 guy like austin/rock

sheamus/cena/ryback are going to bring in the 5.0's baby, ryback will be the next hulk hogan and change wrestling forever LOL


----------



## Amber B

Oh fucking well. They deserve it. Their heads are in the sand and/or up their own asses.


----------



## reDREDD

no offence chukcy but jokes on raw are funnier than you

and thats saying something

ive genuinely never seen people watch and talk about something they hate so much. if raw is giving you aids, then try impact, or an indy, or watch videos of the last 30 years of wrestling that didnt suck. anything is better than this


----------



## KO Bossy

Didn't even bother to watch Raw this week, although as per my Tuesday ritual, I did listen to John Pollock and Wai Ting's Review a Raw (which is about ten thousand times better than Raw ever is), and from their analysis, the show sounded like shit. Cena and AJ getting the majority of focus and air time on your go home show when Cena isn't even fucking wrestling on the PPV? Ridiculous. Punk got the shit kicked out of him by Ryback again and ran away once more (or rather, crawled)? Does the Fed even know the fucking essentials of booking anymore? No, I don't suspect they do. Next thing you know, Joe Smith is going to debut as some jobber and beat Sheamus clean for the World Title without Sheamus even getting an offensive move in. Just horrendous.

So what's the excuse for the crappy rating this week, considering Punk was NOT the main focus of the show and I hardly even think they mentioned that this was inside a Cell on Sunday. You had Cena as the major focus, fucking AJ, the worst actress in decades, both together in some corny quasi-love story, then sprinkle it with Vince McMahon in there just for appearances. Yet we get a 2.5. And no, the electoral debate and MNF are no excuse. You blind Punk haters wouldn't give him any leeway when he got the famous "worst rating in 15 years". This rating is terrible, Punk took a backseat to a bigger storyline, and the result was another shit rating. Your logic dictates that once Punk is not the central character on the show, that ratings would get better. And yet...they didn't (which anyone would know, except you guys who are blind with hate).

I think this pretty much conclusively proves that Punk is NOT, and never was, the big problem, but of course, these people won't admit it. You know who you are.


----------



## reDREDD

meh, punk has one job now. interrupting people who talk shit about him, and then running out and getting creamed

have confidence he'll retain on sunday though


----------



## kokepepsi

watch ryback get the strap for dat .3 gain in ratings

LOL at people thinking there were crossovers between debates and rasslin


----------



## MikeChase27

I still find it funny how as Ryback "gets over" the ratings still seem to suck. So much for him being a draw.


----------



## Ray

I wonder how long until they switch back to 2 hours.


----------



## HHHbkDX

KO Bossy said:


> Didn't even bother to watch Raw this week, although as per my Tuesday ritual, I did listen to John Pollock and Wai Ting's Review a Raw (which is about ten thousand times better than Raw ever is), and from their analysis, the show sounded like shit. Cena and AJ getting the majority of focus and air time on your go home show when Cena isn't even fucking wrestling on the PPV? Ridiculous. Punk got the shit kicked out of him by Ryback again and ran away once more (or rather, crawled)? Does the Fed even know the fucking essentials of booking anymore? No, I don't suspect they do. Next thing you know, Joe Smith is going to debut as some jobber and beat Sheamus clean for the World Title without Sheamus even getting an offensive move in. Just horrendous.
> 
> So what's the excuse for the crappy rating this week, considering Punk was NOT the main focus of the show and I hardly even think they mentioned that this was inside a Cell on Sunday. You had Cena as the major focus, fucking AJ, the worst actress in decades, both together in some corny quasi-love story, then sprinkle it with Vince McMahon in there just for appearances. Yet we get a 2.5. And no, the electoral debate and MNF are no excuse. You blind Punk haters wouldn't give him any leeway when he got the famous "worst rating in 15 years". This rating is terrible, Punk took a backseat to a bigger storyline, and the result was another shit rating. Your logic dictates that once Punk is not the central character on the show, that ratings would get better. And yet...they didn't (which anyone would know, except you guys who are blind with hate).
> 
> I think this pretty much conclusively proves that Punk is NOT, and never was, the big problem, but of course, these people won't admit it. You know who you are.


This pretty much sums it all up in one post. You guys shit talked and acted like Punk was the sole reason why the rating is in the crapper, when in fact, it was because the product is absolute shit right now. I'm disappointed that WWE got a 2.5, not because it's a low rating, but because they deserve much, much lower. 

People act like Ryback is some huge, massive draw. He isn't. He's Skip fucking Sheffield. Morons are relying on Skip Sheffield to save this product? Really?


----------



## reDREDD

you mean like stunning steve austin saving the wwf with rocky maivia

for all we know ryback could be bigger than curly fries, its just his buildup could have been handled better. you know, by actually having some buildup


----------



## wwffans123

i hope Raw get 2.0 rating


----------



## chucky101

Redead said:


> you mean like stunning steve austin saving the wwf with rocky maivia
> 
> for all we know ryback could be bigger than curly fries, its just his buildup could have been handled better. you know, by actually having some buildup


ok i was just going to ignore you, but your really comparing ryback to stone cold and the rock

i just can't take you serious after a comment like that, and i got numbers on my side buddy

you seem to be defending the product when almost everyone else on here agrees with my point that the product SUCKS

and there getting therelowest ratings in 15 YEARS, give it up man


----------



## KO Bossy

Redead said:


> you mean like stunning steve austin saving the wwf with rocky maivia
> 
> for all we know ryback could be bigger than curly fries, its just his buildup could have been handled better. you know, by actually having some buildup


Whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa........

Nobody, I repeat, NOBODY is bigger than curly fries.


----------



## reDREDD

how am i defending it, i fell asleep last night watching it

literally, fell asleep in my chair and woke up with aj crying or whatever. then vickie came out and i turned off the Tv and decided to finish re-reading the count of monte christo. its a very fine book. love it

my problem is with you chucky. your mentality. im not saying ryback will be bigger than austin, because he wont. im commenting that its unfair to hold him to his previous gimmick. my all time favourite wrestler, used to be 'mean mark callous'. but he showed everyone later how great he was

second, hypothetically if i liked the product. well then, fuck you. thats my choice. if everyone in the whole fucking universe, multiverse, across all time and space said something sucked, but i thought it didnt. then it wouldnt make a difference. fuck what everyone else likes, im not gonna like something for them, im gonna fucking like it because i like it.

and the ratings have often very little to do with the product a lot of times. ECW did shit ratings but some of the stuff they did down there with mick foley, Eddie Guerrero, RVD and Jerry lynn, cactus jack and such was amazing. why the fuck would i care about ratings if I enjoy the show? the only instance in HISTORY i gave a flying fuck about ratings is for my favourite TV show community. Because it is a work of art and it would kill me to see it cancelled. But even then i dont monitor the ratings on a day to day basis

seriously chuck. get over it

now if you excuse me, im in the mood for some curly fries


----------



## KO Bossy

=DRAW


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

PG has backfired so bad. I bet Vince was all like "YES! Now that the product is aimed at kids, we'll get fucking huge ratings!"

HA.HA.HA.

Fuck WWE and their shitty programming.


----------



## DenGal

And why are people saying its not PG that is causing these ratings, this is WRESTLING. Wrestling is fighting its not a friendly kids show. Times have changed this isnt the 80s and early 90s when that worked. The world has changed and the world of TV is changing to more edgy material. 
You see stuff like UFC where the buildup and the fighting is real and people love to watch it, its not dedicated to 3rd graders. Most of the audience is dead during the show because half the audience is parents!


----------



## NearFall

> Source: TV By The Numbers, F4WOnline via WrestlingInc.com
> 
> Monday's Raw broadcast drew a 2.48 cable rating, the program's worst rating for a non-holiday episode since October 27, 1997 (which drew a 2.3). This is below the rating for the Oct. 1, 2012 show, which garnered a 2.54 in comparison.
> As reported earlier, the three-hour program averaged 3.55 million viewers, beating a year-low of 3.50 million viewers on Oct. 1. Raw drew 3.58 million viewers in the first hour, 3.65 million in the second hour, and 3.43 million in third and final hour.
> 
> Viewership for the third hour was a year-low, below 3.47 million viewers on Oct. 1. It was the tenth consecutive week where third hour viewership was below viewership in the second hour.
> 
> 
> http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2012/1023/557382/ryback/



:torres


----------



## Rocky Mark

they fucking deserve that rating, I'm not a stuck-in-the-past hater, but if you're gonna shove Vickie Guerrero down my throat for the 1000000th time after finally getting rid of the train-wreck that is Aj, then sorry, i'm not on your team

and as if there isn't enough imaginary head positions, they add one more , so basically now you have a chairman, a COO, a CEO, the GM, the Interim GM, the Smackdown consultant, the commissioner, and now the head supervisor fpalm 

oh wait there's more, now we got yet another love soap opera storyline with Cena and Aj, because the Eve/Cena/Ryder was a total blast 


hmmm .. a face wrestler meets a helpless diva that's counting on him, oh gee, I wonder how would that turn out, I mean it's not like she'll double cross him and turn heel in the process, because they NEVER did that before right ?  


i hope their ratings plummet until they get their heads out of their asses, I still can't get over the fact that the tub of lard Vickie is given yet another big role , until then to hell with them and their boring long-ass 3 hours


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

DenGal said:


> And why are people saying its not PG that is causing these ratings, this is WRESTLING. Wrestling is fighting its not a friendly kids show. Times have changed this isnt the 80s and early 90s when that worked. The world has changed and the world of TV is changing to more edgy material.
> You see stuff like UFC where the buildup and the fighting is real and people love to watch it, its not dedicated to 3rd graders. Most of the audience is dead during the show because half the audience is parents!


Exactly! People who try to refrain from blaming PG are just deluding themselves. Look at shows like Jersey Shore, absolutely fucking abysmal in quality, but it draws, because it's not fucking PG.

PG is to blame.


----------



## mb1025

Redead said:


> thats not really money 'lost'. for the shareholders wanting to sell its hell but as far year to year profits vs losses im not sure how it works out
> 
> as for linda's campaign thats another story. thats not wwe losing money as much as it is vince blowing it. like on a yacht. a very crappy, pointless fictional yacht
> 
> the only real figures that indicate the company's health are the yearly profits and losses. the very simple, very basic bottom line. unless those start going down the toilet, the wwe is fine. if they go down the toilet, vince still has a long way to go before ending up in 1996 levels


Ratings reflect that though. Most of their money comes from ad revenue. If you ratings continue to fall and less people invest into your company the ad revenue will go down. I think over the past few years the only thing saving them from making less money than the previous years is Wrestlemania and the 10 million dollars they get from SyFy for Smackdown. 

Also this year will be interesting because they added two new shows which means they have to spend more money. We will see if the ad revenue is enough to justify these new shows.


----------



## Rocky Mark

DenGal said:


> And why are people saying its not PG that is causing these ratings, this is WRESTLING. Wrestling is fighting its not a friendly kids show. Times have changed this isnt the 80s and early 90s when that worked. The world has changed and the world of TV is changing to more edgy material.
> You see stuff like UFC where the buildup and the fighting is real and people love to watch it, its not dedicated to 3rd graders. Most of the audience is dead during the show because half the audience is parents!


WWE's got 99 problems, being PG isn't one of them 

back in 1997 and 1998, during the peak of the attitude era and their most controversial period with the media, the first hour of RAW was PG and it was called "Monday Night RAW" , the second hour was TV-MA and it was called "The Warzone" , both together were called "RAW is WAR" 

the reason the product is this shitty and bland is because they are too pussy to make an enjoyable wrestling show for everyone, the fact is they are too busy with looking good in the media and the mainstream, they forget to improve the quality of the show 

Vince is the media's bitch, here's an example, now *I understand and applaud supporting the fight against breast cancer*, but can I just ask, what difference would it make to change the colors of the sets to pink, would cancer magically disappear by having John Cena wear pink? would people be cured just because the rope is pink ?

my issue isn't with the pink ropes or the sets, it's the fact that Vince would bend over just to look noble in the public's eye, and the sad thing is he's trying too hard , not just the breast cancer, but with the whole package, GLAAD, the B A STAR , etc.. I mean a show about people punching each other for 3 hours is gonna protest against bullying ? come on now 


Vince is too scared to pull something edgy because he's afraid it would give him bad buzz, when the fact that that's not true, you could be edgy AND get some positive buzz, look at last year's WWE with CM Punk after the infamous shoot promo, it got a lot of people talking and pay attention to the show and it was cutting edge 


you could be edgy without having a guy rape a dead corpse at a funeral home or bleeding for no reason whatsoever other than the fuck of it, as a fan I don't need pointless blood, just give me shit like CM Punk's rise last year for example , that's all i'm asking , is it too much ?


----------



## MikeChase27

Rocky Mark said:


> WWE's got 99 problems, being PG isn't one of them
> 
> back in 1997 and 1998, during the peak of the attitude era and their most controversial period with the media, the first hour of RAW was PG and it was called "Monday Night RAW" , the second hour was TV-MA and it was called "The Warzone" , both together were called "RAW is WAR"
> 
> the reason the product is this shitty and bland is because they are too pussy to make an enjoyable wrestling show for everyone, the fact is they are too busy with looking good in the media and the mainstream, they forget to improve the quality of the show
> 
> Vince is the media's bitch, here's an example, now *I understand and applaud supporting the fight against breast cancer*, but can I just ask, what difference would it make to change the colors of the sets to pink, would cancer magically disappear by having John Cena wear pink? would people be cured just because the rope is pink ?
> 
> my issue isn't with the pink ropes or the sets, it's the fact that Vince would bend over just to look noble in the public's eye, and the sad thing is he's trying too hard , not just the breast cancer, but with the whole package, GLAAD, the B A STAR , etc.. I mean a show about people punching each other for 3 hours is gonna protest against bullying ? come on now
> 
> 
> Vince is too scared to pull something edgy because he's afraid it would give him bad buzz, when the fact that that's not true, you could be edgy AND get some positive buzz, look at last year's WWE with CM Punk after the infamous shoot promo, it got a lot of people talking and pay attention to the show and it was cutting edge
> 
> 
> you could be edgy without having a guy rape a dead corpse at a funeral home or bleeding for no reason whatsoever other than the fuck of it, as a fan I don't need pointless blood, just give me shit like CM Punk's rise last year for example , that's all i'm asking ,* is it too much ?*


But Ryback...


----------



## DenGal

Rocky Mark said:


> WWE's got 99 problems, being PG isn't one of them
> 
> back in 1997 and 1998, during the peak of the attitude era and their most controversial period with the media, the first hour of RAW was PG and it was called "Monday Night RAW" , the second hour was TV-MA and it was called "The Warzone" , both together were called "RAW is WAR"
> 
> the reason the product is this shitty and bland is because they are too pussy to make an enjoyable wrestling show for everyone, the fact is they are too busy with looking good in the media and the mainstream, they forget to improve the quality of the show
> 
> Vince is the media's bitch, here's an example, now *I understand and applaud supporting the fight against breast cancer*, but can I just ask, what difference would it make to change the colors of the sets to pink, would cancer magically disappear by having John Cena wear pink? would people be cured just because the rope is pink ?
> 
> my issue isn't with the pink ropes or the sets, it's the fact that Vince would bend over just to look noble in the public's eye, and the sad thing is he's trying too hard , not just the breast cancer, but with the whole package, GLAAD, the B A STAR , etc.. I mean a show about people punching each other for 3 hours is gonna protest against bullying ? come on now
> 
> 
> Vince is too scared to pull something edgy because he's afraid it would give him bad buzz, when the fact that that's not true, you could be edgy AND get some positive buzz, look at last year's WWE with CM Punk after the infamous shoot promo, it got a lot of people talking and pay attention to the show and it was cutting edge
> 
> 
> you could be edgy without having a guy rape a dead corpse at a funeral home or bleeding for no reason whatsoever other than the fuck of it, as a fan I don't need pointless blood, just give me shit like CM Punk's rise last year for example , that's all i'm asking , is it too much ?


There is different kinds of PG the PG where it is borderline G rated which is WWE and the other where you can bleep out swear words like Smackdown used to. And have edgy TV. 
YES WWF Smackdown was PG but look at that PG compared to this. The difference is like the difference between a PG-13 flick and a R rated flick. WWE is in love with this, if they could be G rated they would.


----------



## Striker

Jon Jones said:


> I wonder how long until they switch back to 2 hours.


Hopefully soon. I want to know what happens during the show but I fall asleep and have to watch a recording the next day.


----------



## Rocky Mark

MikeChase27 said:


> But Ryback...


I fucking hate Ryback, but if there's one thing that could make him enjoyable, it's the fact that he's not a smiling goofball like all of the faces, so that's the only thing that makes me connect to him, that he's the only "badass" character available, which is sad considering that he's a rip-off and not original 

I'd take Ryback over Sheamus anytime of the day, at least Ryback doesn't make me wanna bust a pipe anytime he's on tv, that doll segment last night fpalm

I can't begin to imagine the dark days of Sheamus being the top guy of the company


----------



## Tha Masta

I think it's many things that are to blame for the decreasing ratings.

1. The WWE are trying to expand in everything & not focusing on what made them.
They want to be mainstream, be in Hollywood. (WWE Films & the saturday morning show)

2. The audience, they are trying to bring in.
They want the younger crowd, the children. (rating PG)

3. The older crowds seem to be left out.
The product just doesn't seem to connect with me anymore. 
So I seem to be turning the channel a lot more.
"JBL is poopy", what is that? 

4. The writing & storylines.
It's just not good, remember most of them are hollywood writers.
I doubt some of them even watched wrestling, before being hired.

5. The advertising revenue.
They want the primetime ads, not the late night adult ads.

6. Lida's campaign.
Whatever they do, someone will try to use it againdst them.

7. The wrestlers.
It's not who we like, it's who the WWE want us to like.
So they force feed us who they want to succeed.
Then bury who makes it on his own, just because they weren't involved. (Zack Ryder, not a fan btw)

8. The competition.
There's better stuff on, durning the fall.
Different sports games & new episodes of popular shows start up again.


----------



## Rocky Mark

DenGal said:


> There is different kinds of PG the PG where it is borderline G rated which is WWE and the other where you can bleep out swear words like Smackdown used to. And have edgy TV.
> YES WWF Smackdown was PG but look at that PG compared to this. The difference is like the difference between a PG-13 flick and a R rated flick. WWE is in love with this, if they could be G rated they would.


they can swear, "Bitch" and "Ass" are commonly allowed for a PG show, as long as they don't mention sexual or racial slurs like "Fuck" or "......" it's ok 

hell didn't Aj say "shit" last night during her awful promo ? 


I'm a fan of swearing in wrestling, I think it could be helpful and interesting *when used right* , like for example Steve Austin's character, his character was a ******* that didn't give a shit, that's why cursing and swearing helped his character, The Rock and many others too 

another example was CM Punk's promo last year, it was out of the blue and shocking at the time,

however when it's used wrong it becomes pointless, like every TNA promo in 2010, it's like they were saying just for the sake of saying it, it looked forced and cheesy 

plus, my issue with the current promos isn't saying ass or bitch, it's the fact that it's scripted and sugar-coated


----------



## DenGal

Rocky Mark said:


> they can swear, "Bitch" and "Ass" are commonly allowed for a PG show, as long as they don't mention sexual or racial slurs like "Fuck" or "......" it's ok
> 
> hell didn't Aj say "shit" last night during her awful promo ?
> 
> 
> I'm a fan of swearing in wrestling, I think it could be helpful and interesting *when used right* , like for example Steve Austin's character, his character was a ******* that didn't give a shit, that's why cursing and swearing helped his character, The Rock and many others too
> 
> another example was CM Punk's promo last year, it was out of the blue and shocking at the time,
> 
> however when it's used wrong it becomes pointless, like every TNA promo in 2010, it's like they were saying just for the sake of saying it, it looked forced and cheesy
> 
> plus, my issue with the current promos isn't saying ass or bitch, it's the fact that it's scripted and sugar-coated


Stuff that makes us hate a heel like beating up a girl, lighting someone on fire, kidnapping someone is just not happening anymore. In main event fueds there used to be a back story and hatred towards each other. You wanted the face to kick the heels ass. 
Now for the last 3 years its basically the same buildup for 4 weeks untill the PPV, they end the show in a run in or something. And all the mid carders have no storylines or backstories at all.

Even up untill around 2007 everyone had a back story.


----------



## TN Punk

Shocked no one is blaming Punk.


----------



## DenGal

Nexus is like the last good storyline, WWE stoped caring about Storylines when they have the guest stars who didnt care about WWE just promoting their thing. Triple H breaking into Ortons house is something cool that happends.

WWE is at its best from Royal Rumble untill night after WM. They actually care.


----------



## Randy Orton Trapper Of The Year

Clocks ticking quicker and quicker.


----------



## Stall_19

This was to be expected considering what they were against that night. Didn't help that the show wasn't too bad bar a couple good matches.


----------



## chronoxiong

Damn this week's show got a 2.5 rating again? It could've been worse with all the competition that was going on. Seriously, the writing has been crap and Vince continues to approve it. It's a shame and I wonder if they can ever get in the 3.0's again.


----------



## Oakue

They're cooked. Not going to magically get better either.


----------



## Redwood

TN Punk said:


> Shocked no one is blaming Punk.


Don't speak too soon. This would be obvious bait to Punk detractors.


----------



## chucky101

PG was different back in the 90s, correct me if im wrong but PG is more strict today, alot of 80s movies had swearing and edgy stuff and were stilling rated PG

todays PG is so "PC" compared to the PG we saw in late 90s


----------



## MikeChase27

A 2.48 lol "WE GOTTA PUSH RYBACK HE BRINGING IN RATINGS"


----------



## Shadow Madven

TN Punk said:


> Shocked no one is blaming Punk.


Soon they will, I was in Wrestliginc, and some of them are blaming Punk. Theyre sleeping now, lets wait until they wake up.


----------



## Kabraxal

McMahon is going to do his best to deflect the truth that he is the problem... sorry, but you are no longer the genius booker you've tried to portray yourself as. You might still be a good promoter, but creatively you are washed up. Give it up and let the new generation save this joke of a company... we beg you.


----------



## reDREDD

mb1025 said:


> Ratings reflect that though. Most of their money comes from ad revenue. If you ratings continue to fall and less people invest into your company the ad revenue will go down. I think over the past few years the only thing saving them from making less money than the previous years is Wrestlemania and the 10 million dollars they get from SyFy for Smackdown.
> 
> Also this year will be interesting because they added two new shows which means they have to spend more money. We will see if the ad revenue is enough to justify these new shows.


that reminds me

did vince want the three hours or usa?


----------



## GillbergReturns

Normally I'd say competition is not an excuse but not this week. MNF, presidential debate, game 7.

This was a throw away week because they could have had Rock, Stone Cold, and Taker and still drew a crappy number.


----------



## Mr Eagles

Is there any chance WWE can go back to being edgy if Linda loses her election in a few weeks? You bring back the PG-13 element with blood, more weapons, divas acting like sluts again....those are the type of things that bring in ratings.


----------



## DenGal

Wasnt Smackdown a few years ago getting the rating Raw is now?


----------



## Randy Orton Trapper Of The Year

USA wanted the 3 hours and would pay em more for it. Sooner or later they're going to have to go through the pain of lowered ratings for a while as they build up stars, doing it with ryback as a start can be better for the long run.


----------



## JasonLives

Meh, a 2.5 rating is better then what 90% on this board thought they was gonna get. ( Think they will get under 2.0 LOL )

It was a good show so im glad it didnt tank huge.

Have no idea why some even bring up the PG rating. It doesnt matter how edgy, or how much foul language you use. If its not booked right, it wont draw. 
WWE has been dropping in ratings since 1999 so it has nothing to do with going more PG.


----------



## MikeChase27

Flocka Ambrose said:


> USA wanted the 3 hours and would pay em more for it. Sooner or later they're going to have to go through the pain of lowered ratings for a while as they *build up stars, doing it with ryback as a start can be better for the long run.*


:kobe


----------



## Striker

Mr Eagles said:


> Is there any chance WWE can go back to being edgy if Linda loses her election in a few weeks? You bring back the PG-13 element with blood, more weapons, divas acting like sluts again....those are the type of things that bring in ratings.


Not really considering how much of the younger audience will tune out and no teens/adults will be anymore interested then they are now.


----------



## DenGal

Striker said:


> Not really considering how much of the younger audience will tune out and no teens/adults will be anymore interested then they are now.


It would be so funny to watch WWE all of a sudden get edgy and all the kids wouldnt be able to watch WWE anymore, but thats not the case. Kids will still watched, look at up untill 2008 when it was PG how were all the kids in the stands? Because they watched it even tho it was TV-14


----------



## TN Punk

Shadow Madven said:


> Soon they will, I was in Wrestliginc, and some of them are blaming Punk. Theyre sleeping now, lets wait until they wake up.





Y2Raven said:


> Don't speak too soon. This would be obvious bait to Punk detractors.


Good point. haha. I don't like when he get's the blame at all. It's not his fault. When he dropped the Pipebomb, they flopped with that. SMH.



Mr Eagles said:


> Is there any chance WWE can go back to being edgy if Linda loses her election in a few weeks? You bring back the PG-13 element with blood, more weapons, divas acting like sluts again....those are the type of things that bring in ratings.


Last time she lost, they started getting more edgy...but it wasn't no Attitude Era stuff. It was actually PG and not G rated like they were earlier in the year.


----------



## JasonLives

Redead said:


> that reminds me
> 
> did vince want the three hours or usa?


This was "reported" by the Wrestling Observer in January 2010:



> It has been said that the USA Network is high on RAW going to three-hours, but Vince and Stephanie are both said to be against the idea. The word right now is that this is something being talked about a lot by some within the company.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

Striker said:


> *Not really considering how much of the younger audience will tune out* and no teens/adults will be anymore interested then they are now.


Really? Kids love that shit! It's the parents dictating what their kids should be watching that are the problem. Kids love violence, just like I did when I was their age, and I'm assuming most of you did too. 

Blame the parents.


----------



## Mr Eagles

4everEyebrowRaisin said:


> Really? Kids love that shit! It's the parents dictating what their kids should be watching that are the problem. Kids love violence, just like I did when I was their age, and I'm assuming most of you did too.
> 
> Blame the parents.


Hell yea I did. I was a kid during the attitude era and it was amazing.


----------



## Jingoro

delete


----------



## Tha Masta

It doesn't help, that the WWE has a show on almost everyday of the week.
Monday- Raw
Wednesday- Main Event
Friday- Smackdown
Saturday- Morning Slam
Sunday morning & night- A.M. Raw & whatever PPV that day.

Can't forget the replays of Raw & Smackdown on the MUN2 & Universal networks.
Mun2: Raw- Wednesday night, Sunday morning & afternoon 
Smackdown- Saturday night
Universal: both back to back on Saturday nights.

Then they have the Raw recap on every show.
Miss Raw live, don't worry just get caught up on the 10 recaps/replays durning the week.

Then theres the internet.

The more I list, the more I think the ratings of 1 show is less important.
What is the total of everything combined?
Are the same people watching every show?
Or are there different people tuning when they can?

2.5 is bad, but there is different ways & times to see WWE programming.
If it actually does entertain you.


----------



## Jingoro

all kids love violence and we all watched that stuff when we were little whether or it was attitude era wwf or violent movies. i went to catholic school when i was little in the 80's and would watch rambo and predator at night on hbo and lots of kids at school did too cuz we'd talk about it the next day. all this stupid coddling of kids is pointless. everyone is afraid that their kid is secretly fucked in the head and if they are exposed to violence that it'll unlock that part of their brain and they'll act out somehow. if they are that fucked, then it'll happen at some point and there's nothing you can do about it. if they are normal like 99.9% of the population then they can watch anything or play any video game and nothing will come of it other than they get entertained. lawyers and fucking uptight parents are partly responsible for all this pussyfication of the usa and we the adults get punished for it and have our wwe's balls cut off cuz of it. other countries like japan aren't into this crap. you know some of their cartoons that are rated about pg level are considered pg 13 in the usa. yet, their population is so condensed that they all live on top of each other practically and yet crime and rape is much lower compared to usa. funny considering their kids are allowed to watch more violent mature stuff shouldn't it be the other way around? usa has become a huge vagina.


----------



## chucky101

Jingoro said:


> all kids love violence and we all watched that stuff when we were little whether or was ae wwe or violent movies. i went to catholic school in the 80's and would watch rambo and predator at night on hbo and lots of kids at school did too cuz we'd talk about it the next day. all this stupid coddling of kids is pointless. everyone is afraid that their kid is secretly fucked in the head and if they are exposed to violence that it'll unlock that part of their brain and they'll act out somehow. if they are that fucked, then it'll happen at some point and there's nothing you can do about it. if they are normal like 99.9% of the population then they can watch anything or play any video game and nothing will come of it other than they get entertained. lawyers and fucking uptight parents are partly responsible for all this pussyfication of the usa and we the adults get punished for it and have our wwe's balls cut off cuz of it.


AMEN
alot of us were kids watching attitude era and it was awesome

the PC controlled world we live in is sickening

most of us who grew up in the 80s/90s watched edgy wrestling, late night mature movies with swearing and stuff

the cuddling and PC world if just to much, whats next, fining someone for using a swear word


----------



## reDREDD

people get fined for swearing all the time. its called the fcc


----------



## Jingoro

i also forgot to say any lifelong wwe fans here feel happy the ratings are bad? i do. somehow it gives me hope that things will change cuz if the ratings go down then i assume the usa network gets less money from advertising revenue and then starts hassling vince to improve his product. at least i hope it works like that. otherwise, it'll stay crap forever.


----------



## chucky101

Redead said:


> people get fined for swearing all the time. its called the fcc


ya and it sucks, back in 80s/90s it was less PC

watch movies like richard pryor and such, they did edgy jokes all the time in there movies that would never fly today

PG 2012 is alot different than PG 1983 or even PG 1999

are u saying you like this new soft crappy era?


----------



## MikeChase27

3MB said:


> punk will be cut for this, it doesn't matter if the show is bad or not, he will be punished for being a champion in the lowest rated wwe era since 1997


I guess Cena and Ryback will too seeing how they are the top faces.


----------



## The Hardcore Show

3MB said:


> well not really, cena has been injured during the ratings slump, and ryback is only just starting to get a push
> 
> Punk has to take the blame here, remember he is the champion, he is meant to be the draw.


Sorry that does not fly with whoever the Champion is Punk, Orton Sheamus etc don't get the blame. John Cena is the only star in WWE and has the biggest responsibility of getting people to tune in. So when he is on the show and the ratings go up he gets pretty much all the credit when they go down he gets all the blame. He is the only thing close to a draw in the whole company right now.


----------



## Honey Bucket

3MB said:


> well not really, cena has been injured during the ratings slump, and ryback is only just starting to get a push
> 
> Punk has to take the blame here, remember he is the champion, he is meant to be the draw.


Fuck sake.


----------



## Honey Bucket

The only person that has to take the blame is Vince McMahon and his creative team. The buck stops with him. One person from the roster cannot and should not take the blame for poor ratings.


----------



## Revann

3MB said:


> _*i didn't say it was punks fault*_, but he has to take the blame, the wwe champion is meant to draw, and blaming it on a crippled guy is pathetic.


A post earlier ......


> This is punk's fault plain and simple


Trolls be Trolls... LOL :lelbron


----------



## Honey Bucket

3MB said:


> Awkward, but the wwe champion is still meant to draw


NOBODY FUCKING DRAWS. Sigh. Jesus Christ, I'm going to sleep.


----------



## The Hardcore Show

3MB said:


> Awkward, but the wwe champion is still meant to draw


If the ratings failed doing the Attitude era you know who would get the blame for it champion or not? Stone Cold Steve Austin because he was the biggest box office attraction they had when WCW was breathing down their neck.

You can say the same thing about John Cena when he shows up on Raw injured or not. No one is a biggest box office attraction then him in today's WWE. Outside of him no one is a draw.


----------



## Jingoro

doesn't vince and everyone under him have enough talent to work with to put on even a decent show on a consistent basis? it's completely their fault. they have enough talent. it's all there for the them to use, but they are fucking it all up. that crowd on raw was filled with real wrestling fans wanting to cheer and were really quiet most of the show. i guess that's punk's fault? it's the same reason people tune out at home. the show's have been garage.


----------



## Revann

3MB said:


> Awkward, but the wwe champion is still meant to draw


Nice way to play off being a hypocrite.


----------



## kobra860

lol. This is probably Vince after seeing the ratings:


----------



## Revann

DenGal said:


> WWE should just hire Vince Russo and let the ratings man bring the magic back. Vince and Vince were a great team.


This.

A russo swerve here and there is much better than this crap.


----------



## Genesis 1.0

Redead said:


> how am i defending it, i fell asleep last night watching it
> 
> literally, fell asleep in my chair and woke up with aj crying or whatever. then vickie came out and i turned off the Tv and decided to finish re-reading the count of monte christo. its a very fine book. love it
> 
> my problem is with you chucky. your mentality. im not saying ryback will be bigger than austin, because he wont. im commenting that its unfair to hold him to his previous gimmick. my all time favourite wrestler, used to be 'mean mark callous'. but he showed everyone later how great he was
> 
> second, hypothetically if i liked the product. well then, fuck you. thats my choice. if everyone in the whole fucking universe, multiverse, across all time and space said something sucked, but i thought it didnt. then it wouldnt make a difference. fuck what everyone else likes, im not gonna like something for them, im gonna fucking like it because i like it.
> 
> and the ratings have often very little to do with the product a lot of times. ECW did shit ratings but some of the stuff they did down there with mick foley, Eddie Guerrero, RVD and Jerry lynn, cactus jack and such was amazing. why the fuck would i care about ratings if I enjoy the show? the only instance in HISTORY i gave a flying fuck about ratings is for my favourite TV show community. Because it is a work of art and it would kill me to see it cancelled. But even then i dont monitor the ratings on a day to day basis
> 
> seriously chuck. get over it
> 
> now if you excuse me, im in the mood for some curly fries


Repped for Truth.


----------



## reDREDD

chucky101 said:


> ya and it sucks, back in 80s/90s it was less PC
> 
> watch movies like richard pryor and such, they did edgy jokes all the time in there movies that would never fly today
> 
> PG 2012 is alot different than PG 1983 or even PG 1999
> 
> are u saying you like this new soft crappy era?


if you keep putting words in my mouth son, im gonna shove my foot so up your ass its gonna occupy that space in your head where your brain is supposed to be

are we understood boy?


----------



## Sheik

chucky101 said:


> ya and it sucks, back in 80s/90s it was less PC
> 
> watch movies like richard pryor and such, they did edgy jokes all the time in there movies that would never fly today
> 
> PG 2012 is alot different than PG 1983 or even PG 1999
> 
> are u saying you like this new soft crappy era?


lol at people still using PG as an excuse for the declining ratings, or lack of interest in the product...


----------



## reDREDD

how u doing sheiky


----------



## Sheik

Redead said:


> how u doing sheiky


sup brothaman... just watching the main event of raw on DVR trying to keep my eyes open


----------



## StonecoldGoat

Its not long before Tna shifts back to Monday and Start competing for ratings with Wwe once again..


----------



## FoxyRoxy

I wonder if this is a big enough wake up call for Vince to realize his product fucking sucks? How much longer are we gonna have to watch shit like this. The ratings are heading into the 1.9-2.0's and that's sad to see.

Something needs to happen soon or else Vince will lose more and more fans.. I actually think that's what he wants to happen.


----------



## donlesnar

the product has been different from how it was back then
its not a single guys fault
every segment with punk is f'n interesting..its not punks fault.
afterall, its the job of the babyfaces to draw more than the heels
punk was never the top face/draw of the company
even when he was face, they made him #2 to cena
now you cant complain that punk is to blame for it


----------



## wb1899

Household ratings are irrelevant. A18-49 and C3 are the only important numbers!


----------



## Green Light

wb1899 said:


> Household ratings are irrelevant. A18-49 and C3 are the only important numbers!


Are you just gonna post this same sentence every week? I mean you may be right but clearly, nobody cares


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Threatening to kick someones ass over the internet.  LOL


----------



## Kingy_85

3MB said:


> i didn't say it was punks fault, but he has to take the blame,QUOTE]
> 
> Rule no.1 of the idiots guide to the internet.
> 
> *ALWAYS start an argument by contradicting yourself. *


----------



## The German Suplex

*With the Raw rating being the worst in 15 years...*



> Monday's RAW broadcast drew a *2.48 (2.5) cable rating*, the program's worst rating for a non-holiday episode since October 27, 1997 (which drew a 2.3). This is below the rating for the Oct. 1, 2012 show, which garnered a 2.54 in comparison.


Now of course, they had some competition but this has been a pattern for a while now. I find it interesting that these low ratings are being compared to ratings in 1997. Although I think that the AE was just a perfect example of being at the right place at the right time (with the right people), does this mean that they may be able to turn it around again? Surely they have to realize that some things have to change with ratings this bad and I don't want this to turn solely into a "get rid of WWE PG" threat, but I do think that being able to swear or bleed at important moments and important feuds adds to the moment, because it makes a rivalry look real. No one believes there's real animosity between two wrestlers if one calls the other "poopy".

So basically the question is: Can the WWE turn this around (and what has to be done) or does a show like Monday Night Raw not fit in this time anymore as a show that gets 4.xx ratings. And should they hold on to the younger viewers or try to shift to a more adult demographic once again and hope that the children of 2000-2012 grow along with the product. Of course, most people on this forum would want an edgier Raw, but the question is if it would be succesful since all the forum members still don't add up to better ratings.


----------



## MarkOut4Barrett

*Re: With the Raw rating being the worst in 15 years...*

Monday's show was a complete mess and for that reason it deserves a low rating. If you are a casual fan then why would you sit through 3 hours being confused as hell and not knowing anything that is going to happen in the next hour as nothing gets announced these days.


----------



## cmpunkisgod.

*Re: With the Raw rating being the worst in 15 years...*

Children are simply not a big enough market to make it a viable business. Yet they continue to dumb down and pacify the product to fit the PG-audience. There has simply been no revolution in wrestling for ~a decade and real fans are getting more tired with every complacent RAW.

Heck, it took me 40 minutes to get through monday's RAW and even that I found a chore..


----------



## wwf20112

You really don't have charasmatic guys anymore. I can't watch raw as I work and that comes first and I dont bother to DVR it. There are things in life that come before wrestling. I doubt I will watch it again and only play the games


----------



## Scrotey Loads

*Re: With the Raw rating being the worst in 15 years...*

They had to know that going to 3 hours was going to kill ratings. It's a weekly miracle that I watch the whole show (minus the B.A. Star bullshit; not even a miracle could make me watch that). 

But I'm sure AD REVENUE has never been higher! And I guess that's what's important - not ratings - when you're a 66-year-old businessman who's done everything that can ever be done in the world of pro wrestling.


----------



## roadkill_

I don't want to watch CM Punk. He doesn't look like a wrestler. His promos are annoying as fuck - and I don't mean good heat. Beyond that its not just a kids show now, its a show for dumb kids who need special attention in class.


----------



## WTFWWE

*RAW in 2006 should have been the next "Wrestling Boom" wtf happened?*

http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2006-ratings/


2006 at one point had 4.0+ ratings for 11 weeks. The last time this happened was in 2002! RAW's average rating for the year was the best since 2003 and 2006 managed to pull the averages from 3.6/3.7 everything was pointing to WWE 2006 being the next boom but what the fuck happened? 2007 BOMBED bad and then it was downhill since. 

What do you think happened? What would you have done to make 2007 even better in the ratings?


Note: Ratings were getting bad before the Benoit incident so don't mention it.


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: With the Raw rating being the worst in 15 years...*

Some remarkable similarities with the end of WCW;

1) Not promoting PPV's, even in the run-in show
2) Going to three hours
3) Bringing in celebs for quick-fixes
4) Bringing in has-beens for quick fixes
5) Killing momentum of guys who are clearly over - Daniel Bryan was the most over behind Rock at WM. Fail.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

*Re: RAW in 2006 should have been the next "Wrestling Boom" wtf happened?*

Wrestling is out.


----------



## HOV

*Re: RAW in 2006 should have been the next "Wrestling Boom" wtf happened?*

I agree, 2006 had the rise of RVD, Edge and the return of ECW. It all looked rosey. As for 2007, the Great Khali, Chris Benoit, Donald Trump its hard to specify what went wrong.


----------



## TromaDogg

*Re: With the Raw rating being the worst in 15 years...*



Scrotey Loads said:


> But I'm sure AD REVENUE has never been higher! And I guess that's what's important - not ratings - when you're a 66-year-old businessman who's done everything that can ever be done in the world of pro wrestling.


They won't continue to get high ad revenue forever with ratings falling the way they are though. The two go hand in hand.

What makes me laugh now is what Vince said when he was introducing the Attitude Era.



Vince McMahon said:


> 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.


Basically, most viewers back then felt the exact same way about the show as they do now, WWE recognised this and addressed it and made changes. Now over the last few years, they've got straight back to this bullshit and viewers are tuning out in their droves again. It really isn't difficult to see the connection.

I don't want the Attitude Era back 'as was'....I don't want to see crap like Mae Young giving birth to a hand again, women taking chair headshots from men, anything like that. I do want a show though where there's a point to every guy on the roster being there, where you don't have 'Super Cena' hugging babies snd kissing fat girls, 'Super Sheamus' winning every match with the same move, or even the boring 'Super Punk' that we got for the first half of this year fpalm. A show where you have lower card guys featured in backstage segments and a half decent storyline to build them up so that when they come to fight in the ring, the crowd actually gives a shit rather then crap like Hornswoggle being named as the anonymous Raw GM, or that crap on Monday with AJ resigning and being replaced by Vickie. That's truly intelligence insulting to the viewing audience.

Am I, and all the other people who complain each week really asking too much?


----------



## Duke Silver

*Re: RAW in 2006 should have been the next "Wrestling Boom" wtf happened?*

The rise of Cena and Batista heavily contributed to the success of 2006, but 2007 was a tough year. Constant injuries, shitty storylines, and the Benoit tragedy. I don't know if it's possible to pinpoint exactly why the WWE started to slide. It's more likely to be an amalgamation of reasons. By that point, people were starting to get tired of Cena and Batisita, Triple H was injured in January, Taker was injured in April, HBK was injured in May, Cena was injured in September, add to that list Kennedy and a few others that slip my mind. Raw was at it's worst and Smackdown had more than a few hiccups. 

Basically, the product went to hell in 2007.


----------



## Fall of Arcadia

*Re: With the Raw rating being the worst in 15 years...*



roadkill_ said:


> Some remarkable similarities with the end of WCW;
> 
> 1) Not promoting PPV's, even in the run-in show
> 2) Going to three hours
> 3) Bringing in celebs for quick-fixes
> 4) Bringing in has-beens for quick fixes
> 5) Killing momentum of guys who are clearly over - Daniel Bryan was the most over behind Rock at WM. Fail.


There's just a lack of passion behind almost everything that we see on the show, it's gone on for far too long and it needs to change, CM Punk is practically the only one delivering passion in his promo's...


----------



## BornBad

*Re: RAW in 2006 should have been the next "Wrestling Boom" wtf happened?*

Cena and UFC killed Wrestling


----------



## MarkOut4Barrett

*Re: RAW in 2006 should have been the next "Wrestling Boom" wtf happened?*



4hisdamnself said:


> Cena and UFC killed Wrestling


UFC, really?


----------



## The German Suplex

*Re: With the Raw rating being the worst in 15 years...*



roadkill_ said:


> Some remarkable similarities with the end of WCW;
> 
> 1) Not promoting PPV's, even in the run-in show
> 2) Going to three hours
> 3) Bringing in celebs for quick-fixes
> 4) Bringing in has-beens for quick fixes
> 5) Killing momentum of guys who are clearly over - Daniel Bryan was the most over behind Rock at WM. Fail.


I see the similarities but the WWE now doesn't have the competition WCW had. TNA isn't big enough of a threat to put the WWE in danger, which basically means that mainstream wrestling/sports entertainment has to die completely to put WWE out of business.

As for point 5, while I agree that the "18 seconds" decision was terrible and a slap in the face for everyone that wanted to see DB at the "biggest stage of them all", Bryan's reaction grew enormously immediately after the match and probably was at an all time high the Raw after WM. So I think, per accident, they didn't kill his momentum and Bryan probably would be less prominent on Raw if this never happened.


----------



## Interceptor88

*Re: RAW in 2006 should have been the next "Wrestling Boom" wtf happened?*



HOV said:


> I agree, 2006 had the rise of RVD, Edge and the return of ECW. It all looked rosey. As for 2007, the Great Khali, Chris Benoit, Donald Trump its hard to specify what went wrong.


 2006: Young and _really_ charismatic newcomers like Carlito, Mr.Kennedy, CM Punk and MVP. Legit uppercarder/main eventer talent like Edge, Jeff Hardy, John Cena, Rey Mysterio and Orton were still very young, and a great crop of stars headed by the enshrined veterans Shawn Michaels, Undertaker and Triple H. Also Batista, Booker, RVD, Kurt Angle, Kane, Finlay, Regal, Matt Hardy...

You cannot compare. Now there are people that think McGillicutty and Kofi are amazing. That says a lot about how standards have dropped.


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: With the Raw rating being the worst in 15 years...*



The German Suplex said:


> I see the similarities but the WWE now doesn't have the competition WCW had. TNA isn't big enough of a threat to put the WWE in danger, which basically means that mainstream wrestling/sports entertainment has to die completely to put WWE out of business.
> 
> As for point 5, while I agree that the "18 seconds" decision was terrible and a slap in the face for everyone that wanted to see DB at the "biggest stage of them all", Bryan's reaction grew enormously immediately after the match and probably was at an all time high the Raw after WM. So I think, per accident, they didn't kill his momentum and Bryan probably would be less prominent on Raw if this never happened.


I'm talking about the weeks following WrestleMania. When Rock was on RAW afterwards, the YES chants were deafening, not since SCSA has a wrestler solicited such a response with a one-word catchphrase. What did WWE do? Bury Bryan, effectively. They realistically should've had Bryan vs a heel Cena by the Royal Rumble. This would've worked. But they buried him, pushed CM Punk who hasn't got 30% of Bryans charisma and are still milking Super Cena. This reminds me on WCW burying Goldberg and pushing Jeff Jarrett and Kevin Nash.


----------



## NearFall

roadkill_ said:


> Some remarkable similarities with the end of WCW;
> 
> 1) Not promoting PPV's, even in the run-in show
> 2) Going to three hours
> 3) Bringing in celebs for quick-fixes
> 4) Bringing in has-beens for quick fixes
> 5) Killing momentum of guys who are clearly over - Daniel Bryan was the most over behind Rock at WM. Fail.


That list is shockingly true. Especially the Daniel Bryan part. CM Punk at MITB 2011 or Rock whenever/wherever was the only pop/chants in the past 3 or so years, similar to the ones Bryan had for WEEKS after WrestleMania. 




roadkill_ said:


> *I don't want to watch CM Punk. He doesn't look like a wrestler. His promos are annoying as fuck* - and I don't mean good heat. Beyond that its not just a kids show now, its a show for dumb kids who need special attention in class.


"I don't want to watch CM Punk." Unfortunately, a lot of casuals have also adopted that mindset. I am not blaming Punk entirely for the ratings, but he is not helping like a champion should help. I put it down to two things really, personal charisma and presentation. Punk was never portrayed as being that charismatic good good guy when he was a face like Cena. He was more a Cena-lite. And the fact he never even main evented as a champion has cost them dearly. The audience don't care about Punk since he has been treated second best as champion.I never had the "look like a wrestler" opinion/argument, but I can understand where it comes from. As for his promos, I am feeling the same to be honest. The only good one he has had in weeks was with Vince McMahon. I waited for his promo work to evolve above just the respect stuff but nothing has happened. Hopefully they add more layers to his promos in the next few weeks. But I doubt it. Either Punk wins and we get respect stuff, or RyBack wins and we get "FEED ME MORE" and Respect stuff.


----------



## WTFWWE

Don't know why my thread was merged with the ratings thread at all.


----------



## Shawn Morrison

personally i think they are working much harder with the booking, but 3 hours is just too much. I enjoy the show and find it entertaining, but 3 hours is too damn exhausting, if only they'd book 2 hours with as much effort. Also, i like the low ratings, encourages them to do better. One thing i really DONT want however is for them to start thinking they have to bury Punk just because of the ratings, that sort of mindset is what makes me want to kill Vince.



NearFall said:


> That list is shockingly true. Especially the Daniel Bryan part. CM Punk at MITB 2011 or Rock whenever/wherever was the only pop/chants in the past 3 or so years, similar to the ones Bryan had for WEEKS after WrestleMania.
> 
> "I don't want to watch CM Punk." Unfortunately, a lot of casuals have also adopted that mindset. I am not blaming Punk entirely for the ratings, but he is not helping like a champion should help. I put it down to two things really, personal charisma and presentation. Punk was never portrayed as being that charismatic good good guy when he was a face like Cena. He was more a Cena-lite. And the fact he never even main evented as a champion has cost them dearly. The audience don't care about Punk since he has been treated second best as champion.I never had the "look like a wrestler" opinion/argument, but I can understand where it comes from. As for his promos, I am feeling the same to be honest. The only good one he has had in weeks was with Vince McMahon. I waited for his promo work to evolve above just the respect stuff but nothing has happened. Hopefully they add more layers to his promos in the next few weeks. But I doubt it. Either Punk wins and we get respect stuff, or RyBack wins and we get "FEED ME MORE" and Respect stuff.


i honestly don't think the ratings have a single thing to do with Punk. Punk is one of the only entertaining parts of Raw and his promos are the best heel mic work i've seen in ages, the casuals watch just because they want someone to shut him up or beat him (what a heel's supposed to make the casuals feel like). Also, 3 hours is the reason of all this, put this Cm Punk and this much effort into booking a two hour show and ratings would get better.


----------



## vanboxmeer

As long as that spoiled, shrill, selfish, conceited Connecticut trust-fund cunt is heading Team Steph and having the type of ideas as shoehorning her self-insert manic pixie girl into top angle after top angle instead using that time to develop other more deserving and better payoff talents, the core problems will still remain.


----------



## DenGal

I honestly think once Vince dies Pro Wrestling will be dead, it wont exist anymore. Ratings will get so bad that they will just close. 
Pro Wrestling isnt popular anymore, im not saying it cant be but it is starting to die.

WWE had many guys who I thought would be in the main event now 3-4 years ago like MVP,Kennedy,Jeff Hardy, ex to still carry the WWE.


----------



## Choke2Death

DenGal said:


> I honestly think once Vince dies Pro Wrestling will be dead, it wont exist anymore. Ratings will get so bad that they will just close.
> Pro Wrestling isnt popular anymore, im not saying it cant be but it is starting to die.
> 
> WWE had many guys who I thought would be in the main event now 3-4 years ago like MVP,Kennedy,Jeff Hardy, ex to still carry the WWE.


I wouldn't say wrestling will die. I think it will just go underground with WWE gone and pretty much loses anything mainstream it has to it... unless another company manages to reach the top like WWE did with Hulkamania.


----------



## reDREDD

The-Rock-Says said:


> Threatening to kick someones ass over the internet.  LOL


watch it boy, i got another foot free

i can jam it up your ass too outta the comfort of my own seat

but there will never be enough to feet for all the asses that need them

if only i was a millipede 

you were right red


----------



## MikeChase27

I think casuals are just sick of the same old same old, Super faces beating up cowardly heels. I think Cena's appeal is starting to wear off.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

Not surprised with the catastrophic ratings. The roster/talent is ridiculously thin yet they have some really talented people in NXT who are potential draws that they leave on the back burner. Not only that but they're trying to make adult men watch children's programming, it defies logic. They cater Raw to children, yet it's on at an adult time slot, for 3 hours. Try and keep any lil jimmy's attention for 3 hours, it's difficult. When you have a TV program on at 11 pm, it needs to have some sort of edge. Linda McMahon's campaign is killing professional wrestling.

That said, the actual show can be to blame too. Dreadful storylines, even worse booking (how many times have we seen "Champion vs Champion" in 2012? Two lumberjack main events in a week with Sheamus? b-o-r-i-n-g). How anyone can place the blame solely on individual wrestlers is idiotic.

The switch to 3 hours could be the real jump the shark moment. But let's not forget that it's not every week there is a presidential debate too.


----------



## TheWFEffect

Jesus the ratings is no ones fault but Vince and the network 3 HOURS IS TOO MUCH its that simple and its obviously doing more than just making people switch channels and switch back its obviously pissed off alot of casual viewers who ain't even watching anymore.


----------



## Coffey

3 hours wasn't too much for WCW Nitro.

It's not the quantity it's the quality. All Pay-Per-Views are three hours long & people don't complain about their length. Fact of the matter is, it doesn't matter if RAW is one hour or six hours, if it's quality programming, people will watch.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

I thought you weren't coming back to this section, tough guy?


----------



## D.M.N.

I do wonder whether WWE should not have live Raw's on December 24th and December 31st if they are still in trouble, and come in with a 'reset' on January 7th to start the New Year. After all, viewing is always going to be depleted on December 24th and 31st so I don't really see much point on having shows on those dates.

Of course, January 7th will probably be "Raw 20th Anniversary", its from Tampa, Florida for anyone wondering. I do wonder whether they will bring in Rock from Survivor Series onwards once Fast Six has finished filming.


----------



## TromaDogg

A video I found on Youtube, which was posted back in 2008 shortly after they changed the rating back to PG:






Now, it's exaggerated sarcasm obviously, but frightingly it's also pretty prophetic.

Raw has had plenty of things recently as bad as Doink The Clown ever was (ie. Santino's glove puppet Cobra), Bret Hart and Shawn Micheals DID end their feud and shake hands live on Raw, Randy Savage and WWE WERE on better terms again (one of the last things Savage did before his death was a promotional advert for the WWE All Stars game), that nonsense with Triple H at 0.41s reminded me worryingly of a Brodus Clay match, and this year we've had the whole Kane/Daniel Bryan 'hug it out' bullshit fpalm on top of WWE introducing a show that is actually G rated as well (Saturday Morning Slam).

Whilst I'm not a 'PG hater' as such, it's obvious that Creative, in terms of characters and storylines at least, have been putting a show together for the most part as if aiming for a G rating rather than a PG one.

To add to what I said before, why aren't the lower card guys being used in storylines more in order to give them more exposure and meaning on the show. Take Monday's Raw for instance. What good does it do them to have Cena involved in that AJ/Vickie storyline. Cena's as over as he'll ever get, it won't help his career or the show at all in the long run. But if, say, they put a mid carder who could do with a little bit more of a push like...Kofi Kingston (just an example, there's other guys who would benefit from the same spot as well), it could really elevate him. Cena doesn't need to be involved in any complex storylines in the same way that Stone Cold didn't...his popularity's pretty much peaked already. Give the undercard a chance to develop properly and get comfortably over with the audience before pushing them into main events out of nowhere (*cough*Ryback*cough*) Focusing everything on the same 2 or 3 guys week in, week out (whoever they are) is helping to kill ratinss even if those guys are capable of working a 5 star match.

I dunno. I'm really running out of ideas to save this mess. It doesn't seem to matter what anybody posts on the internet, and I've seen a lot of seemingly great ideas from a lot of different people (both here and elsewhere), might as well accept that they're gonna carry on putting the same shit out regardless now fpalm ....


----------



## Cliffy

Steph: "Forget the lower card, nobody cares about them"

True story.


----------



## BornBad

Walk-In said:


> 3 hours wasn't too much for WCW Nitro.


WCW had a crazy Cruiserweight division, the low-mid card was awesome and the top dogs were charismatic. 

Now it's all about endless promos, spots, social medias, 10 minutes matches, Cena is totally generic now....


----------



## MikeChase27

Is the breakdown out yet?


----------



## Oakue

There are similarities but it's a long, LONG time before WWE gets into any type of serious trouble. They will still turn a tremendous profit, and have no ownership or hierarchy issues the way WCW did.

I'll tell you the time to begin to worry is the day WWE has to pull themselves from the stock market and is no longer able to be a publicly traded company. That is panic mode time for the company.

But that isn't even remotely close to happening.


----------



## THANOS

2.48 LMAO! Wow I hope the ratings drops below a 2 when Vince pushes Ryback over Punk at HIAC. They need a true wake-up call. Maybe then they will create edgy programming again, revert to 2hrs, and push Punk, Bryan, and call-up Ambrose for fuck sake. We need a new character to attack the entire system again and actually WIN against McMahon's body buillder superheroes.


----------



## Jingoro

THANOS said:


> 2.48 LMAO! Wow I hope the ratings drops below a 2 when Vince pushes Ryback over Punk at HIAC. They need a true wake-up call. Maybe then they will create edgy programming again, revert to 2hrs, and push Punk, Bryan, and call-up Ambrose for fuck sake. We need a new character to attack the entire system again and actually WIN against McMahon's body buillder superheroes.


if only heyman were in control


----------



## N-destroy

THANOS said:


> 2.48 LMAO! Wow I hope the ratings drops below a 2 when Vince pushes Ryback over Punk at HIAC. They need a true wake-up call. Maybe then they will create edgy programming again, revert to 2hrs, and *push Punk, Bryan*, and call-up Ambrose for fuck sake. We need a new character to attack the entire system again and actually WIN against McMahon's body buillder superheroes.


Isn't that what they have been doing all year long? I doubt pushing punk or bryan anymore would do good for the product.


----------



## chucky101

bryan is stuck in some corny tag team storyline, start pushing bryan as a legit singles champ along with ambrose/rollins

turn cena heel along with this and make it more edgy, doesn't need to be ecw late 90s, but atleast a little non PG stuff


----------



## Nimbus

Punk cant draw, these ratings are a disaster.

I hope he loses the belt at HIAC, at this point i belive Ryback would do a better job as a champ.


----------



## Shadowcran

Nimbus said:


> Punk cant draw, these ratings are a disaster.
> 
> I hope he loses the belt at HIAC, at this point i belive Ryback would do a better job as a champ.


Rylack is a no selling, musclebound, waste of space. I dub him: The Ultimate Goldberg! Let's have him run to the ring full tilt with security guards keeping pace alongside, jump into the ring, shake the ropes, run back and forth like an idiot, and do the Goldberg flex thing and make this farce complete.


----------



## Hawksea

THANOS said:


> 2.48 LMAO! Wow I hope the ratings drops below a 2 when Vince pushes Ryback over Punk at HIAC. They need a true wake-up call. Maybe then they will create edgy programming again, revert to 2hrs, *and push Punk, Bryan*, and call-up Ambrose for fuck sake. We need a new character to attack the entire system again and actually WIN against McMahon's body buillder superheroes.


Isn't that the reason why they're in this situation in the first place?


----------



## Oakue

Nimbus said:


> Punk cant draw, these ratings are a disaster.
> 
> I hope he loses the belt at HIAC, at this point i belive Ryback would do a better job as a champ.


Ratings would be no better if Cena was the champ. It really has nothing to do with Punk quite frankly. The current champion will always get the blame for low ratings, but the whole product is stale. The entire thing as a whole is going in the wrong direction.


----------



## The Hardcore Show

Hawksea said:


> Isn't that the reason why they're in this situation in the first place?


No its the fact no one cares about WWE has a whole. You could fire both Punk & Danielson tomorrow and nothing would change. The only superstar that can be praised or called out for the ratings being bad is the person who is in the position of being the "box office attraction" and that person right now is John Cena.


----------



## reDREDD

i think the problem the wwe lacks any long term vision

at this point it looks like theyre just fucking around till the rock is back


----------



## Pasab

Redead said:


> i think the problem the wwe lacks any long term vision
> 
> at this point it looks like theyre just fucking around till the rock is back


http://pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/spotlightarticleboxcenter/article_62241.shtml



> In general, though, did Vince care about storyline consistency? No, says DeJoseph.
> 
> "It would always be brought up. Logic would always be brought up, but sometimes it'd just be thrown right out the window. He'd sometimes say he couldn't even remember what happened three weeks ago, so how is the audience going to remember it? I think sometimes that was his thought…"
> 
> DeJoseph says the blame should be on Vince himself, and not the writing team, for the big gaps in logic, dropped storylines, and stream of aggravating contradictions. He says the writing team typically tries to fix any gaps in logic.
> 
> "I'm sure they're going to try or at least they've been pitching all week or they're going to try to explain something. I'm sure they have something in mind to explain it logically. If they don't that'll be interesting, too."
> 
> The attitude is Vince doesn't think it's ultimately important to business or the bottom line. "It's a big promotional thing that's going to get eyeballs on this TV show and I think that's what he thinks [matters]," DeJoseph says.



The WWE problem is Vince McMahon.


----------



## SinJackal

Tbh, I'm surprised the show even got a 2.48 rating, considering it plummeted all the way down to 2.5 last week. This last Monday had far better stuff on tv to watch. I literlaly skipped most of Raw myself because of the other stuff that was on.

Some here were predicting 2.1's, or "I'd be surprised if they got more than 2.3". To basically retain the same rating is a victory despite being the worst in 15 years.

Well, one thing's for sure: without Cena around to fight people, the show dives down into ratings hell.




moonmop said:


> Ratings would be no better if Cena was the champ. It really has nothing to do with Punk quite frankly. The current champion will always get the blame for low ratings, but the whole product is stale. The entire thing as a whole is going in the wrong direction.


Except Raw ratings have never been this bad even once when Cena has been champ.


----------



## PHX

SinJackal said:


> Tbh, I'm surprised the show even got a 2.48 rating, considering it plummeted all the way down to 2.5 last week. This last Monday had far better stuff on tv to watch. I literlaly skipped most of Raw myself because of the other stuff that was on.
> 
> Some here were predicting 2.1's, or "I'd be surprised if they got more than 2.3". To basically retain the same rating is a victory despite being the worst in 15 years.
> 
> Well, one thing's for sure: without Cena around to fight people, the show dives down into ratings hell.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except Raw ratings have never been this bad even once when Cena has been champ.


Raw was never 3 hours regularly when Cena was champ either.


----------



## THANOS

Hawksea said:


> Isn't that the reason why they're in this situation in the first place?


Punk has only gotten the ball for the past 3 months in featured time slots, and his segments have consistently gained the most viewers ever since. His push needs to continue circa HHH 2003-2005. Bryan needs a huge singles push where he plays a convincing underdog while maintaining his current tweaner character that embraces the "yes!" And what needs to end is the shitty superman booking. Its time to end all that bullshit because no one is buying it anymore as evidenced with the lack of interest in Ryback's push, and the obvious disinterest in Cena and Sheamus' characters.


----------



## cokecan567

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cu2H75TD-tw&list=UUjSGqelNQO0v50b0ixepz-A&index=1&feature=plcp\

watch wrestlingjesusYT video from youtube his review on 2.48 rating he speaks the truth!!!!! link is there


----------



## ROGERTHAT21

chucky101 said:


> bryan is stuck in some corny tag team storyline, start pushing bryan as a legit singles champ along with ambrose/rollins
> 
> turn cena heel along with this and make it more edgy, doesn't need to be ecw late 90s, but atleast a little non PG stuff


*Lol Ambrose/Rollins.What the hell would they do? They should try and push the people they already have like The Miz, Ziggler, among others. As a matter of fact they need to fix the entire damn show. I mean, they're doing something with the tag team division. It really shouldn't be that hard.*


----------



## codyj123_321

LOL at these guys saying push Ambrose...

Only the IWC cares for the guy.


----------



## THANOS

codyj123_321 said:


> LOL at these guys saying push Ambrose...
> 
> Only the IWC cares for the guy.


Of course only the IWC care about him. How would casuals get a chance to express their opinions on him if wwe won't debut him? 

Are you inept or something?


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

> Rey Mysterio & Sin Cara vs. Damien Sandow & Cody Rhodes opened at a 2.46 rating which is a very weak open. Kofi Kingston vs. Michael McGillicutty lost 41,000 viewers. John Cena doing his promo for Ryback and C.M. Punk and Paul Heyman coming out gained 530,000 viewers. Antonio Cesaro vs. Justin Gabriel lost 372,000 viewers. *The high point of the show came with Vince McMahon, A.J., Paul Heyman and Vickie Guerrero out which gained 529,000 viewers to a 2.91 quarter*. The 9 p.m. segment has usually been showing good growth. My feeling watching that segment is that A.J. is going to be a lot more of a star away from the G.M. role. I think she sucked in the role and people resented her. But now that she was screwed out of the position and is back in a sympathetic role, she’s going to do a lot better when people don’t see her in a position that it makes no sense for her to be in. *Ryback vs. The Miz and the Kaitlyn, Eve Torres and Layla brawl lost 613,000 viewers. Considering that was the Ryback quarter, it speaks volumes about where he is right now with the masses*. Daniel Bryan vs. Dolph Ziggler lost 253,000 viewers with their great match which finished doing a 2.31 quarter, the lowest for a non-holiday show in 15 years, although this record was broken later in the night. The Newly Tagged game and Kane vs. Show gained 62,000 viewers in the 10 p.m. segment but that segment has been dead for a while. John Cena confronting Vince McMahon and Vickie Guerrero and Alberto Del Rio vs. Zack Ryder gained 26,000 viewers. *Then, in the lowest quarter going back 15 years and it may be a lot of years before this is broken, an interview with Dolph Ziggler, a Ryback promotional piece and the entrance of the lumberjacks lost 319,000 viewers to a 2.15 quarter*.* C.M. Punk vs. Sheamus in the champion vs. champion lumberjack match gained 1,058,000 viewers which is awesome anytime but particularly on this night, finishing at 2.89.*
> 
> Main event growth saw Teenage boys stay at 1.9, Males 18-49 from 2.0 to 2.9, Teenage girls from 0.5 to 0.7 and Women 18-49 from 0.8 to 0.9.


Bolded the parts worth reading.


----------



## Kethal

people doesn't care about RyBerg. He has chants piped in... only a few in the crowd cheer for him.


----------



## Joeyontherun22

THANOS said:


> 2.48 LMAO! Wow I hope the ratings drops below a 2 when Vince pushes Ryback over Punk at HIAC. They need a true wake-up call. Maybe then they will create edgy programming again, revert to 2hrs, and *push Punk, Bryan, and call-up Ambrose for fuck sake. * We need a new character to attack the entire system again and actually WIN against McMahon's body buillder superheroes.


lol they've been pushing both bryan and Punk ALL YEAR LONG! Just because Bryan doesn't have the title doesn't mean he is not a big part of the show. punk and bryan is one of the most featured guys on the roster right now. I agree with Ambrose tho i remember watching him live in a FCW event. He'll be good but won't solve the problem.


----------



## Joeyontherun22

kempes said:


> people doesn't care about RyBerg. He has chants piped in... only a few in the crowd cheer for him.


that bullshit, and its not Rybergs fault either because he just RECENTLY was promoted to the main event. This Ratings problem started way because this current push towards the title.


----------



## KO Bossy

Punk getting a million viewers in that last segment is a great gain, best we've seen in a while.

Yet people say he can't draw...don't get it.


----------



## CHIcagoMade

KO Bossy said:


> Punk getting a million viewers in that last segment is a great gain, best we've seen in a while.
> 
> Yet people say he can't draw...don't get it.


At this point they probably only say that to generate a reaction or they probably base it on the entire rating for the show since Punk passed the segment gaining test.


----------



## MikeChase27

Boy Ryback is just bringing in them ratings.


----------



## vanboxmeer

2.15 quarter, absolutely laughable.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

So let's see this breakdown...

Starts off weak with the tag tourney finals, which isn't surprising, but it certainly wasn't good and didn't set a good tone for the rest of the show. Cena/Punk gaining a nice amount of viewers in a random quarter is good, but of course with the weak start, it might be expected. I have noticed though that that quarter might not be as random anymore, as since Vince returned a couple of weeks ago, it's been a quarter they've done some big things in (Vince/Punk a couple of weeks ago and last week Punk/Vince again). Maybe WWE is trying to get people used to tuning into that quarter as shows at 8:30 end. And hey, the segment this week gained 500,000 viewers, so it appears to be working to some degree. 9PM gained well and topped the night... which is sad considering the rating was a 2.91. Ryback/Miz losing 600,000 viewers, more than was gained in the previous quarter doesn't speak great things about Ryback's drawing ability, and it appears from what we've seen, he's no more consistent than Punk is, even with as hot he is right now.

Gains and losses follow, but damn at the lowest rating quarter. A 2.15... would that mean less than 3,000,000 viewers were watching that? Oh well... from the breakdown they wouldn't have missed anything. It was purely a filler quarter after all. Punk/Sheamus gaining a million viewers is very good, but the overall rating number, despite being above the average for the show, is still disappointing.


----------



## fabi1982

Punk vs Shameful WHC (a match where everyone in here says UUGGHH) + No Cena in the Main Event gets one of the best gains in recent memory...Although there were two unusual programms starting at 10.34 (DEBATE NIGHT IN AMERICA and ON THE RECORD W/GRETA which got 15mio viewers combined) + the football game still going at that time...that means about 25mio viewers watching other stuff and they still get a gain of 1mio+

Usually I´m no "he draws/ he doesnt draw" guy, but that is something all the people blaming punk for the low ratings should think about


----------



## Green Light

Looks to me more like a huge amount of people tuned out for the crap that came before the main event, look how low the previous quarter did, anything less than a big gain for the main event would've been terrible. Not saying this is any reflection on Punk or Sheamus at all just that when so many people tune out for the stuff before you are bound to get a good gain for the segment that follows (especially when it's the main event between your two world champions)


----------



## Rock316AE

Punk/Sheamus gained like that because they just did one of the lowest quarters in RAW history in the beginning of the segment. The overrun was still one of the lowest overrun numbers in history. The lowest was probably 2-3 weeks ago. Vince started to copy Bischoff's WCW strategy and take 5-10 minutes overrun in 1998 BTW. So the lowest 1997 numbers against Nitro aren't a factor in this case.

The Ryback match was after the 9pm angle and was probably less than 5 minutes overall.

Vince/AJ/Vickie doing the biggest is not surprising, and not just because it was Vince in the 9pm segment. I actually thought that they're going to bring RIC FLAIR as the new GM. There's a chance that it's happening next week from his hometown, can only hope that they're doing another long and boring AJ/Vickie segment(although they always did good numbers on TV), suddenly WOOOOOOO! and the crowd explodes. Big potential. Ric Flair can save this program.


----------



## Shawn Morrison

All i see from the ratings is that 3 hours is way too damn long, people only hang around that long for special 3 hour episodes, not regular ones. Go back to 2 hours and book with effort.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Fella doing the business. 

All because of Fella.


----------



## Vyed

The match between Ryback and The Miz lasted all of four minutes, immediately following that match they aired "Be A Star" video package with Stephanie and Otunga, following that backastage brawl with Eve, Layla and kaitlyn, following which josh mathews interview with Sheamus with his mattel toy. All of those lasted 12 minutes including the Ryback match. Daniel Bryan has already made his entrance two minutes before the quarter ended.

Also, agreed with *Sandrone* on the 8:30PM timeslot, seems like they are trying to establish that for big angles.


----------



## Starbuck

KO Bossy said:


> Punk getting a million viewers in that last segment is a great gain, best we've seen in a while.
> 
> Yet people say he can't draw...don't get it.


First of all, it wasn't Punk on his own and second of all, the quarter before was the lowest rated quarter hour in Raw history. It would have been terrible if they _didn't_ pull a number like that. 

2.9 was the nigh point of the show? Says it all really although there isn't much to talk about. We all knew this week was going to bomb hard and it did.


----------



## murder

Starbuck said:


> the quarter before was the lowest rated quarter hour in Raw history.


There have been lower quarters in history than that. Let's not exaggerate, the number is already bad enough as it is.


----------



## roadkill_

I think even Russo got 6.0 quarter hours in WCW - with behemoth competition.


----------



## fabi1982

All the "oh that quarter was low so there had to be a huge gain" discussion is really worthless...that would mean with a high rating before there couldnt be any huge gains? I think we all saw good quarters before the last one and there were gains like a million as well. The viewers knew what was on the last quarter so they decided to watch it, not depending on the low quarter before.

I know that this ratings discussion is really worthless, but everyone who is speaking about them should keep his standpoint and not jumping from "oh weak gain" to "oh huge gain, but because of weak quarter before"...makes no sense at all and shows how useless this threat is  It´s like on Tuesdays with low hour ratings "ah we can blame wrestler xxx for that" and on Thursday with the quarter ratings its like "oh shit, makes no sense, lets blame the quarter before for the gain, see wrestler xxx still cant draw"


----------



## NearFall

KO Bossy said:


> Punk getting a million viewers in that last segment is a great gain, best we've seen in a while.
> 
> Yet people say he can't draw...don't get it.


They lost viewers in nearly each quarter during the hour before the over-run. And a lot just before it. A majority of the viewers were just regains. Remember the piss poor over-run Punk/Cena had a few weeks back?


----------



## SinJackal

Vyed said:


> The match between Ryback and The Miz lasted all of four minutes, immediately following that match they aired "Be A Star" video package with Stephanie and Otunga, following that backastage brawl with Eve, Layla and kaitlyn, following which josh mathews interview with Sheamus with his mattel toy. All of those lasted 12 minutes including the Ryback match. Daniel Bryan has already made his entrance two minutes before the quarter ended.
> 
> Also, agreed with *Sandrone* on the 8:30PM timeslot, seems like they are trying to establish that for big angles.


I'm curious how many people tuned out AFTER the Ryback match. If the dropoff occurred then, as opposed to during it. I suspect a lot of people may have stayed tuned in until Ryback's match and then left to watch the debate or MNF. If Ryback was only present during the first 1/3rd of the segment he was in, it's not logical to give him all the blame for it if WWE ran a bunch of terrible crap for 8 minutes after his match and the segment's gains/losses were merged together.

And as for the 8:30 timeslot, I think they try to start big angles there to compete with MNF since that's when the game starts.




PHX said:


> Raw was never 3 hours regularly when Cena was champ either.


Yet, Raw has had three hour shows several times in the past and never done that poorly. Raw's three hour show theme has been around now for months, and it's been bombing since Cena went out and Punk was the sole main event. That happened quickly too, so I don't think it's a coincidence. If you bing "wwe ratings", one of the top searches is, "WWE RAW ratings plummet with CM Punk as the main star", and that's back in May after Lesnar left and Cena was supposed to be "hurt".


----------



## PHX

SinJackal said:


> Yet, Raw has had three hour shows several times in the past and never done that poorly. Raw's three hour show theme has been around now for months, and it's been bombing since Cena went out and Punk was the sole main event. That happened quickly too, so I don't think it's a coincidence. If you bing "wwe ratings", one of the top searches is, "WWE RAW ratings plummet with CM Punk as the main star", and that's back in May after Lesnar left and Cena was supposed to be "hurt".


It's not the same thing and you know it you're just trying hard to put over this Punk is causing the ratings to go down foolishness. Big difference between a 3 hour Raw every now and again to 3 hours every single week. Maybe you would have somewhat of a point if Punk's segments and matches were losing big numbers or numbers at all for that matter (which that whole segment by segment loss or gain thing is so flawed to me since not everyone changes the channel for the same reason) but that isn't the case as it's been the opposite actually. No one man is responsible for holding your interest in whatever else is going on during the show that he isn't involved in. Which is why this trying to blame one or give praise to one guy for the entire show is retarded but it gets done 9/10 times to either be used to diss a wrestler they don't like or stroke the ego of their a wrestler they do like. That's the only reason most people on here care about ratings to push your own little agendas whether it be praise or hate or as to why WWE sucks to them.


----------



## Loudness

Starbuck and NearFall bringing it as always. I don't get why people still argue Punk beeing a draw. He isn't the type of guy who will scare away viewers as some biased posters claim, but please tell me a single feature of him that would make a non-WWE fan tune in specifically to see him, there is none, he has very good mic skills and is doing a fine work as a heel but this is of no concern to the general public, they'd rather have a charismatic character with a unique (read: unique, not roided up) look who stands out and Punk has neither of those features, nor does he have an identifiable character, he's chickenshit heel #132998723. That said, even despite the lack of having any tangible mainstream features he still manages to at least draw above average by wrestlers standards due to Heyman involvement and storylines, but WWE really needs to use him better, and let him become something unique, give him a legit look for starters.

Now, take the rest of the roster, who also lack any mainstream abilities for the most part, but unlike Punk, have shitty storylines and no mic skills, which is why they are drawing fans away. WWE really needs to start concentrating on storylines, giving their wrestlers personalities, revamping their looks and make them stand out, that's what the WWE machine is for ffs.


----------



## SinJackal

PHX said:


> It's not the same thing and you know it you're just trying hard to put over this Punk is causing the ratings to go down foolishness. Big difference between a 3 hour Raw every now and again to 3 hours every single week. Maybe you would have somewhat of a point if Punk's segments and matches were losing big numbers or numbers at all for that matter (which that whole segment by segment loss or gain thing is so flawed to me since not everyone changes the channel for the same reason) but that isn't the case. No one man is responsible for holding your interest in whatever else is going on during the show that he isn't involved in. Which is why this trying to blame one or give praise to one guy for the entire show is retarded but it gets done 9/10 times to either be used to diss a wrestler they don't like or stroke the ego of their a wrestler they do like. That's the only reason most people on here care about ratings to push your own little agendas whether it be praise or hate or as to why WWE sucks to them.


I don't have to try hard because the numbers speak for themselves. I'm simply looking at the ratings and comparing them to what's happening in the show, and looking at who's getting the most air time and who's supposed to be the main draw. My only "agenda" here is to view and speak my observation about the numbers in a logical way, whereas your agenda is to rationalize them and make excuses for Punk.

It's a logical way of looking at it. Not a biased agenda way (an example of that would be blaming anything but Punk like you've done). If the show is tanking while a specific guy is having the show centered around him, whereas it never tanked this hard before that (including with the 3 hour Raw) in 15 years, it's logical to assume that it's at least in part, his fault. You can't say "the entire show sucks and that's why", when the show's been a better draw for 5 straight years.

Ratings (and buyrates) also tanked before when Punk was the main star instead of Cena. That's why WWE kept putting Cena back in the main event. So this is not the first time it's happened either. And it happened before the 3 hour Raw change. Here's a history of Raw ratings: http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2011-ratings/

Notice how when Punk takes over as champ, the ratings start slipping down, then consistently drop below 3. Raw's ratings have been trending down ever since Punk got the WWE title back. The only times they went up was when The Rock and Brock Lesnar came back to main event with John Cena. As soon as Brock left, ratings crashed down again with Punk as the star and stayed down. A couple months later, the 3 hour Raws started airing. And the ratings for those Raws didn't start out bad either.


Also, wrong, my point would not "only be valid if Punk's segments were losing numbers". That's ridiculous. My point would be valid if Punk's segments didn't gain big numbers or didn't have a high rating. And most of them don't unless he's in the typical "viewers go up at this point" segments, such as the overrun which I've never seen lose viewers. And btw, ratings are bad even during Punk's segments. The high point was 2.9. 2.9 would be considered a failure for an overall Raw episode as recent as last year, much less at the "high point of the show"!. I gave you the ratings list, so you should know that isn't an agenda comment, it's just the truth. If you could find a compiled 2012 list, I'd bet anything it'd show bad overall ratings any time Punk is spotlighted and Cena isn't. Just like PPV buys were worst when Punk main evented and best when Cena did.

If the ratings were great, Punk would be getting the credit for it since he's the main star. You'd probably be one of the ones saying it. I would also admit that Punk was a good draw despite the fact that I wasn't a fan (exactly the same way I admit Cena is a good draw despite the fact that I am not a fan). But they're not great, they're bad. Therefore he deserves the most blame since he's aired more than anyone else. . . and when he does air, the ratings aren't even good during his segments. They're pretty normal if not below the usual average anyway. A 2.8-2.9 rating is not good. It's low.


----------



## Loudness

^Already explained why he doesn't draw, dunno why you are trying to make him look like an anti-draw though when he isn't. Draw ability is achieved by having the right look, personality and charisma aswell as booking/storylines, that's all there is to it, there's no complexity in that. Do you think CM Punk is a bad wrestler/mic worker?


----------



## PHX

SinJackal said:


> I don't have to try hard because the numbers speak for themselves. I'm simply looking at the ratings and comparing them to what's happening in the show, and looking at who's getting the most air time and who's supposed to be the main draw. My only "agenda" here is to view and speak my observation about the numbers in a logical way, whereas your agenda is to rationalize them and make excuses for Punk.
> 
> It's a logical way of looking at it. Not a biased agenda way (an example of that would be blaming anything but Punk like you've done). If the show is tanking while a specific guy is having the show centered around him, whereas it never tanked this hard before that (including with the 3 hour Raw) in 15 years, it's logical to assume that it's at least in part, his fault. You can't say "the entire show sucks and that's why", when the show's been a better draw for 5 straight years.
> 
> Ratings (and buyrates) also tanked before when Punk was the main star instead of Cena. That's why WWE kept putting Cena back in the main event. So this is not the first time it's happened either. And it happened before the 3 hour Raw change. Here's a history of Raw ratings: http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2011-ratings/
> 
> Notice how when Punk takes over as champ, the ratings start slipping down, then consistently drop below 3. Raw's ratings have been trending down ever since Punk got the WWE title back. The only times they went up was when The Rock and Brock Lesnar came back to main event with John Cena. As soon as Brock left, ratings crashed down again with Punk as the star and stayed down. A couple months later, the 3 hour Raws started airing. And the ratings for those Raws didn't start out bad either.
> 
> 
> Also, wrong, my point would not "only be valid if Punk's segments were losing numbers". That's ridiculous. My point would be valid if Punk's segments didn't gain big numbers or didn't have a high rating. And most of them don't unless he's in the typical "viewers go up at this point" segments, such as the overrun which I've never seen lose viewers. And btw, ratings are bad even during Punk's segments. The high point was 2.9. 2.9 would be considered a failure for an overall Raw episode as recent as last year, much less at the "high point of the show"!. I gave you the ratings list, so you should know that isn't an agenda comment, it's just the truth. If you could find a compiled 2012 list, I'd bet anything it'd show bad overall ratings any time Punk is spotlighted and Cena isn't. Just like PPV buys were worst when Punk main evented and best when Cena did.
> 
> *If the ratings were great, Punk would be getting the credit for it since he's the main star. You'd probably be one of the ones saying it.* I would also admit that Punk was a good draw despite the fact that I wasn't a fan (exactly the same way I admit Cena is a good draw despite the fact that I am not a fan). But they're not great, they're bad. Therefore he deserves the most blame since he's aired more than anyone else. . . and when he does air, the ratings aren't even good during his segments. They're pretty normal if not below the usual average anyway. A 2.8-2.9 rating is not good. It's low.


FYI no I wouldn't because for one I never have cared about the ratings enough to use them to speak highly of a guy I like or down on a guy I don't like. And secondly I don't believe in basing the whole show ratings on one guy champ or not whether I like the guy or not. You seem to think this only has to do with Punk but for me it's not just about Punk I'm talking in general Punk just happens to be the guy who is getting the finger pointed at and have felt this way about ratings since I've been on wrestling forums. People watch or don't watch for their own reasoning and it's not always for the guy who is champion even if he's the world champion. Ratings is a reflection of a multitude of things and right now it's pretty undeniable it is a reflection on how 3 hours is too long on a week to week basis. Which I think WWE was prepared for given the Hulu deal that shows a cut down version of Raw. Rather than sit 3 hours through a whole show one could watch a shorter version on Hulu, dvr it and skip through some stuff, etc. To pretend this isn't the biggest factor above anything else people want to point the finger at whether it be Punk, the PG ratings, who draws or doesn't draw, etc to the ratings right now makes no sense.


----------



## Duke Silver

This has to be the most useless thread on the entire site. Same responses every single week from the same people, dissecting a flawed system that they probably don't understand, while simultaneously trying to convince people that Wrestler X is/isn't a draw. 

Even if you crack the code, you're still just a guy on the internet spending hours of your time arguing with other people who are obsessed with how many eyeballs are currently glued to a particular television program. 

It might be a moderately interesting subject if the thread wasn't inhabited by quite so many idiots. The fact that WWE have fallen in recent times is worrying/exciting/whateverthefuck, but blaming any one wrestler for the decline in viewership of a 3 hour program is borderline moronic.


----------



## PHX

Duke Droese said:


> This has to be the most useless thread on the entire site. Same responses every single week from the same people, dissecting a flawed system that they probably don't understand, while simultaneously trying to convince people that Wrestler X is/isn't a draw.
> 
> Even if you crack the code, you're still just a guy on the internet spending hours of your time arguing with other people who are obsessed with how many eyeballs are currently glued to a particular television program.
> 
> It might be a moderately interesting subject if the thread wasn't inhabited by quite so many idiots. The fact that WWE have fallen in recent times is worrying/exciting/whateverthefuck, but blaming any one wrestler for the decline in viewership of a 3 hour program is borderline moronic.


Pretty much sums it up in a nutshell and what I was trying to say in my rare and last appearance in this thread. I realize this type of logical thinking wouldn't generate as much discussion but in this case it would be for the better.


----------



## Choke2Death

NearFall said:


> They lost viewers in nearly each quarter during the hour before the over-run. And a lot just before it. A majority of the viewers were just regains. Remember the piss poor over-run Punk/Cena had a few weeks back?


This pretty much explains it.

LOL @ Sheamus being completely no-sold for the main event and all credit going to Punk. Then Punk marks will whine if Rock316AE no-sells his presence if he has a segment with Cena/JR/Laurinaitis/Vince that gains huge.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

I remember a report saying WWE would use the 3 hours to hype the ME a lot more. Guess they are holding true to that.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

So WWE, still has trouble maintaining viewers through-out the show. Three hours is even worse, since they try to kill time with the under-card. They need to get it together, three hours is perhaps exposing the lack of creativity in WWEs storylines and segments. Although you don't need three hours to see that.


----------



## KO Bossy

Starbuck said:


> First of all, it wasn't Punk on his own and second of all, the quarter before was the lowest rated quarter hour in Raw history. It would have been terrible if they _didn't_ pull a number like that.
> 
> 2.9 was the nigh point of the show? Says it all really although there isn't much to talk about. We all knew this week was going to bomb hard and it did.


Evidently my sarcasm was somewhat lot on you...

The Punk haters on this site have no problem laying 100% of the blame on Punk when the ratings do poorly. That's been fairly well established, considering all of the comments like "2.5? Punk is just killing those ratings again" and "he's the champion, its his fault." So then the segment he was in on Monday did a good number with one of the best gains we've seen in a while. If he's apparently solely responsible for the ratings overall taking a nose dive, why isn't he also solely responsible when a segment he's in or show does a good rating or gain?

I was pointing out the double standard. When its a loss or bad rating, its Punk's fault. When its a gain or good rating, suddenly its a team effort and everyone deserves credit. Sad to say, Starbuck, but you kind of proved my point, although I'm well aware you are not one of the blind Punk haters.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

That double standard is what made this thread a sticky in the first place.


----------



## D.M.N.

Quarter Hours - October 22nd, 2012
Q1 - 3.44 million
Q2 - 3.40 million
Q3 - 3.93 million
Q4 - 3.55 million
----
Q5 - 4.08 million
Q6/Q7 - 3.47 million
Q8 - 3.22 million
----
Q9 - 3.28 million
Q10 - 3.31 million
Q11 - 2.99 million
Q12/Overrun - 4.04 million

Punk/Sheamus saved Hour 3 from being a complete embarrassment. I remember the days of seeing 4 million for most quarters and 5 million for your overruns, boy, how the dynamics have adjusted down.

Someone green repped me, but asked why I don't put the ratings above, problem is I'm not seeing the hourly ratings being reported much anymore, hence why it is not above.


----------



## Falkono

Dude Punk was out there with the entire roster.....only a blind Punk mark would give him credit with 40 guys out there....

But hey let's look at it your way. That segment was still LOWER then Vince and Paul Heyman's segment. Seeing as in the past Punk has been standing with these guys in highish rated segments it shows that people don't tune in to those segments to see Punk considering he was not in that segment this week. Vince + Heyman = ratings.


----------



## Starbuck

murder said:


> There have been lower quarters in history than that. Let's not exaggerate, the number is already bad enough as it is.





> _Then, in the lowest quarter going back 15 years and it may be a lot of years before this is broken, an interview with Dolph Ziggler, a Ryback promotional piece and the entrance of the lumberjacks lost 319,000 viewers to a 2.15 quarter._


I wasn't exaggerating.



KO Bossy said:


> Evidently my sarcasm was somewhat lot on you...
> 
> The Punk haters on this site have no problem laying 100% of the blame on Punk when the ratings do poorly. That's been fairly well established, considering all of the comments like "2.5? Punk is just killing those ratings again" and "he's the champion, its his fault." So then the segment he was in on Monday did a good number with one of the best gains we've seen in a while. If he's apparently solely responsible for the ratings overall taking a nose dive, why isn't he also solely responsible when a segment he's in or show does a good rating or gain?
> 
> I was pointing out the double standard. When its a loss or bad rating, its Punk's fault. When its a gain or good rating, suddenly its a team effort and everyone deserves credit. Sad to say, Starbuck, but you kind of proved my point, although I'm well aware you are not one of the blind Punk haters.


But it wasn't even a good rating lol. I don't know what you think you have proven with this. That main event gained back all the viewers who tuned out and gave the show its lowest quarter hour in history. What an accomplishment. You blame people for looking at things in black and white and then go and do the exact same thing. Every week you're in here arguing with the same people who aren't going to listen or change their minds. Then you get butthurt when they, surprise surprise, don't listen and don't change their minds. I'm not a blind Punk hater. I'm not even a Punk hater at all. But to call him a draw based on recent numbers really is just ridiculous. He isn't responsible for killing the show like some claim he is but he sure as hell isn't doing anything to help it either. Why waste your time saying the same thing every week and having the same arguments every week, trying to prove points when all you're doing is wasting your time and coming across as severely butthurt and you aren't even a Punk mark. It's just silly. 

Double standards are part and parcel of the internet. At Survivor Series 2008, Cena beat Jericho for the WHC after returning from injury and the IWC threw a super bitch fit. On the same night, Edge returned out of nowhere to win the WWE title and the place rejoiced. There's a double standard for you. Accept it, live with it and move on. It isn't going to change and it's utterly pointless to even try and stop it. You aren't accomplishing anything by coming in here and saying the same shit every week and neither are the people arguing with you on the opposite side. It really has just reached childish levels at this stage tbh and is starting to become embarrassing. Is it any bit of wonder this thread is a laughing stock. Some of you really take this shit WAY too seriously. You come in here, say your piece, the Punk marks agree with you, somebody argues for the opposite, the Punk haters agree with that person and it's the same thing every week. What's the point?


----------



## KO Bossy

swagger_ROCKS said:


> That double standard is what made this thread a sticky in the first place.


A very good point.



Falkono said:


> Dude Punk was out there with the entire roster.....only a blind Punk mark would give him credit with 40 guys out there....


And only a blind Punk hater would blame him solely for segments not doing well when he's standing there with Cena, the biggest draw on the roster, currently. Oh wait, that happens...all the time.

Yes, I'm well aware that the million plus gain for the last quarter was not all Punk. When I said it was before, I was sarcastically trying to make a point, which was apparently lost on some people.

Yet the fact that you were so eager to immediately turn around and kick Punk back to the curb again reveals your true feelings about Punk (along with the fact that you have been very vocal against him in the past). You're one of the people who refuses to give him any sort of credit when he earns it. If Punk is in a segment that gains, "well its everybody else in the ring, they had something to do with it." If Punk is in a segment that bombs, "see?! The segment did terrible. I told you guys Punk is a ratings killer, this proves it," while conveniently ignoring who else might have been involved. You're selectively poaching bits of information and then trying to arrange them into some Frankenstein like argument. Sorry, but it doesn't work that way, not to mention its a pathetic attempt to push your personal agenda.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Does anyone actually take this thread serious? I mean, do people actually get pissed off?

Jeez.


----------



## Ziggler Mark

Ryback Segments losing viewers....

http://bit.ly/OOtm0R


where's the marks to defend him now?


----------



## The-Rock-Says

That's look at Zigglers numbers. :stevie:


----------



## Ziggler Mark

The-Rock-Says said:


> That's look at Zigglers numbers. :stevie:


lol i dont sit here and foam at the mouth saying how dolph is a ratings monster. :bosh


----------



## D.M.N.

Ziggler Mark said:


> Ryback Segments losing viewers....
> 
> http://bit.ly/OOtm0R
> 
> 
> where's the marks to defend him now?


Well he was in that quarter for six minutes. What about the other nine?


----------



## The-Rock-Says

And no one has ever said Ryback is one, YET.


----------



## kokepepsi

I doubt Ryback could lift honey boo boo

LOL at 2.15

WWE dead in 2.15 years


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

kokepepsi said:


> *I doubt Ryback could lift honey boo boo*
> 
> LOL at 2.15
> 
> WWE dead in 2.15 years


I like Ryback, but chuckled tbh.


----------



## KO Bossy

Starbuck said:


> But it wasn't even a good rating lol. I don't know what you think you have proven with this. That main event gained back all the viewers who tuned out and gave the show its lowest quarter hour in history. What an accomplishment. You blame people for looking at things in black and white and then go and do the exact same thing. Every week you're in here arguing with the same people who aren't going to listen or change their minds. Then you get butthurt when they, surprise surprise, don't listen and don't change their minds. I'm not a blind Punk hater. I'm not even a Punk hater at all. But to call him a draw based on recent numbers really is just ridiculous. He isn't responsible for killing the show like some claim he is but he sure as hell isn't doing anything to help it either. Why waste your time saying the same thing every week and having the same arguments every week, trying to prove points when all you're doing is wasting your time and coming across as severely butthurt and you aren't even a Punk mark. It's just silly.
> 
> Double standards are part and parcel of the internet. At Survivor Series 2008, Cena beat Jericho for the WHC after returning from injury and the IWC threw a super bitch fit. On the same night, Edge returned out of nowhere to win the WWE title and the place rejoiced. There's a double standard for you. Accept it, live with it and move on. It isn't going to change and it's utterly pointless to even try and stop it. You aren't accomplishing anything by coming in here and saying the same shit every week and neither are the people arguing with you on the opposite side. It really has just reached childish levels at this stage tbh and is starting to become embarrassing. Is it any bit of wonder this thread is a laughing stock. Some of you really take this shit WAY too seriously. You come in here, say your piece, the Punk marks agree with you, somebody argues for the opposite, the Punk haters agree with that person and it's the same thing every week. What's the point?


Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

If this thread is so pointless, why do you bother posting here at all, then? This post comes off as being so high and mighty, and yet week in, week out, you're in here with us, debating the ratings. Whether you like it or not, you're as opinionated as the rest of us. You try not to be and maintain some sort of neutral ground, but everyone's posts in this thread are biased, including yours. I like the part where you say that everyone takes this shit way too seriously, but you for some reason felt the need to post this. You're essentially complaining about other peoples' complaining. If you didn't take this shit seriously to some degree, you wouldn't have felt the need to post this lengthy diatribe. 

Really, you're right. This thread is a total waste of time. I've put at least 5 people on ignore because of their asinine points of view. I try, like you, to look at things from a logical and neutral point of view, and call a spade a spade. Yet I myself find that sometimes I say things with a bias. It can't be helped.

I just don't understand, nor appreciate, your post. I respect you as a poster, but you rip into everyone in this thread for things that you yourself are also guilty of.

And for the record, I believe the source said it was the lowest quarter hour in 15 years, not of all time.


----------



## Starbuck

KO Bossy said:


> Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
> 
> If this thread is so pointless, why do you bother posting here at all, then? This post comes off as being so high and mighty, and yet week in, week out, you're in here with us, debating the ratings. Whether you like it or not, you're as opinionated as the rest of us. You try not to be and maintain some sort of neutral ground, but everyone's posts in this thread are biased, including yours. I like the part where you say that everyone takes this shit way too seriously, but you for some reason felt the need to post this. You're essentially complaining about other peoples' complaining. If you didn't take this shit seriously to some degree, you wouldn't have felt the need to post this lengthy diatribe.
> 
> Really, you're right. This thread is a total waste of time. I've put at least 5 people on ignore because of their asinine points of view. I try, like you, to look at things from a logical and neutral point of view, and call a spade a spade. Yet I myself find that sometimes I say things with a bias. It can't be helped.
> 
> I just don't understand, nor appreciate, your post. I respect you as a poster, but you rip into everyone in this thread for things that you yourself are also guilty of.
> 
> And for the record, I believe the source said it was the lowest quarter hour in 15 years, not of all time.


I'm not complaining about you complaining. I'm stating facts. You DO come in here every week and post the same thing over and over again and have the same arguments with the same people. It's not just you but you seem to be the one person getting most bothered by it all. Of course I have an interest in the ratings otherwise I wouldn't be in here but I sure as hell don't take them seriously. I don't take any of this shit seriously. At the end of the day it's just wrestling. I don't need to put anybody on an ignore list though. Why? Because I don't take it that seriously. People talk shit. Deal with it. All the essay length and logical posts in the world aren't going to change their minds. I'm a Triple H and John Cena mark. Trust me when I say that I don't take this place seriously because if I did I'd be the most angry and butthurt fan in the world given the amount of crap that gets posted about those 2 guys. 

You don't appreciate my post? I'm sorry if that makes you feel better but all I've done is state facts. Nobody can be 100% objective all the time but I don't think I've let any bias get in the way of what I've said in the past. I don't hate CM Punk. I don't mark for CM Punk. I'm neutral when it comes to him and I'm calling it the way I see it. You see a match between Punk and Seamus gaining 1mil+ after the previous quarter was one of the lowest in _15 years_ as an accomplishment. I see it as the only logical thing that could happen after such a horrible drop in the segment before. You think you're right. I think I'm right. You think I'm letting personal bias cloud my judgment because you don't agree with what I'm saying. I think you don't agree with what I'm saying because you're letting your own personal bias cloud your own judgment. So where does that leave us? Nowhere and we've both wasted our time writing out posts to each other over something as ridiculous as this.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Bottom line is, these ratings are becoming an issue fast, and I really don't see them improving at all in the near future unless they rush Rock/Brock/Taker back for a short-term fix. Even then, I think we're past the days of 4.0+ ratings (at least for this phase of wrestling boom/recession cycle).


----------



## Choke2Death

I'll be the first to admit I'm a little bias but I always try to go by facts therefore my bias only comes from me being happy whenever Punk flops. For the "hot topic" here, Punk not being a draw shouldn't even be debated.

On Raw 1000, they had about 6 million viewers and Punk got the ball to run with and he attacked The Rock to turn heel. By next week, half these viewers were gone as expected. And there's no "he didn't get to main event" or "WWE intentionally held him down" excuse to cover this up. *Fact* that the indy midget* was not a good enough draw to keep the viewers they managed to bring back for that one night. Try explaining that one to everyone that disputes Punk not being a draw!

His segments (with far better proven draws such as Vince or Cena btw) gaining 500k or 1 million viewers that all tuned out in the previous (filler) segments don't mean shit. And before somebody talks about me saying Ryback or whoever else is a draw, I'm only joking there and frankly, I don't care about them. Only thing that matters to me is Punk flopping in becoming what WWE wishes he could be. That's all and I'm not even gonna pretend otherwise. 8*D

* = I have nothing against independent (or short) wrestlers. It's just that term fits Punk to a T, so I'll use it when I see fit.


----------



## Headliner

Reason for low ratings:

-Wrestling is not over.
-WWE ruins every big storyline or hot character that comes their way, tuning out the audience in the process.

Boom.


----------



## Jammy

^ 

you're wrong, its all because of indy midget vanilla hacks. 

we need the attitude era back! Thumbs up if you agree!!!111


----------



## BANKSY

Its fairly clear that Punk just draws PPV buyrates as they are all up this year.

He is the yin to Mark Henry's yang.


----------



## KO Bossy

Starbuck said:


> I'm not complaining about you complaining. I'm stating facts. You DO come in here every week and post the same thing over and over again and have the same arguments with the same people. It's not just you but you seem to be the one person getting most bothered by it all. Of course I have an interest in the ratings otherwise I wouldn't be in here but I sure as hell don't take them seriously. I don't take any of this shit seriously. At the end of the day it's just wrestling. I don't need to put anybody on an ignore list though. Why? Because I don't take it that seriously. People talk shit. Deal with it. All the essay length and logical posts in the world aren't going to change their minds. I'm a Triple H and John Cena mark. Trust me when I say that I don't take this place seriously because if I did I'd be the most angry and butthurt fan in the world given the amount of crap that gets posted about those 2 guys.
> 
> You don't appreciate my post? I'm sorry if that makes you feel better but all I've done is state facts. Nobody can be 100% objective all the time but I don't think I've let any bias get in the way of what I've said in the past. I don't hate CM Punk. I don't mark for CM Punk. I'm neutral when it comes to him and I'm calling it the way I see it. You see a match between Punk and Seamus gaining 1mil+ after the previous quarter was one of the lowest in _15 years_ as an accomplishment. I see it as the only logical thing that could happen after such a horrible drop in the segment before. You think you're right. I think I'm right. You think I'm letting personal bias cloud my judgment because you don't agree with what I'm saying. I think you don't agree with what I'm saying because you're letting your own personal bias cloud your own judgment. So where does that leave us? Nowhere and we've both wasted our time writing out posts to each other over something as ridiculous as this.


That's odd that I seem the one most bothered by it all...considering in actuality I don't really care that much. The people who are on my ignore list are just people whose posts I don't care to see. Some of them are from this thread, and its not because I don't agree with them. I just think they're completely illogical and moronic so I don't want their crap cluttering up my page.

I guess my tone is hard to convey because you're reading it instead of hearing me say it. Kind of like how you're claiming that you don't care but the tone of your posts and the fact that you're scrutinizing everything I say, like you claim I do to others, makes you the one who seems bothered by all of this...

I'm well aware people talk shit. And I've learned how to deal with it. However, on this site, I have the magical ability to mute those who talk shit. So I do. I hear enough in my day, I don't need to hear more when I'm engaging in an activity that is supposed to be enjoyable.


----------



## KO Bossy

Headliner said:


> Reason for low ratings:
> 
> -Wrestling is not over.
> -WWE ruins every big storyline or hot character that comes their way, tuning out the audience in the process.
> 
> Boom.


That about sums it up.


----------



## Starbuck

KO Bossy said:


> That's odd that I seem the one most bothered by it all...considering in actuality I don't really care that much. The people who are on my ignore list are just people whose posts I don't care to see. Some of them are from this thread, and its not because I don't agree with them. I just think they're completely illogical and moronic so I don't want their crap cluttering up my page.
> 
> I guess my tone is hard to convey because you're reading it instead of hearing me say it. Kind of like how you're claiming that you don't care but the tone of your posts and the fact that you're scrutinizing everything I say, like you claim I do to others, makes you the one who seems bothered by all of this...
> 
> I'm well aware people talk shit. And I've learned how to deal with it. However, on this site, I have the magical ability to mute those who talk shit. So I do. I hear enough in my day, I don't need to hear more when I'm engaging in an activity that is supposed to be enjoyable.


I'm a law graduate. I can't help it that I scrutinize things more than others. I've been taught to do it. Besides, I hardly _scrutinized_ what you said lol. I commented on it. 

If this is what you call enjoyable, the equivalent to talking to a brick wall, then I'd hate to see what you'd be like on a downer. 

My point still stands. Getting butthurt about ratings, wrestling in general and/or the opinions of obvious haters/trolls is stupid. If you have all these people on ignore then why the hell are you still arguing with everybody? And now you aren't even arguing with them, you're arguing with me over something as ridiculous as this.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Headliner said:


> Reason for low ratings:
> 
> -Wrestling is not over.
> -WWE ruins every big storyline or hot character that comes their way, tuning out the audience in the process.
> 
> Boom.


This is what it comes down to. 

Fact is it doesn't matter who's been on top, since the AE ratings have been on a downward trend. When HHH was the top guy who Raw centered around in 2002-2005, ratings were going down and fast. When Cena was the center of Raw for most of the last 7 years, ratings have been going down, and fast. Now Punk is having his go, and ratings are going down, and fast. The difference is we're in the era of Punk (so to speak) and Cena and HHH's Raw numbers from back then look godly compared to what Punk being the "center" (I use that word loosely in Punk's case) is doing. In 5 years if Ryback is on top and numbers are still going down and the average Raw rating becomes a 1.8, and then a Punk appearance/the show becoming about Punk for a few months bumps the rating up to a 2.2/2.3 average (with his segments doing a 2.7-2.8) and that being the new 4.0, would that make Punk a draw? 

Punk right now is being compared to some of the biggest draws of all time, and he's never going to draw better than them. But the ratings are on a downward spiral due to the reasons Headliner stated, and they'll remain that way until another golden era comes and we get another Hogan/Austin. But where Punk may not be a draw now, he may be in a few years compared to the standards set by the top superstar at that point. Of course I don't know what the absolute bottom is for WWE before they'd be force to call it quits, and I don't know what the actual number of people who will remain watching no matter what happens is, but it's just something to think about.


----------



## Rock316AE

Big Sexy takes a mic:

Wolfpack. IN. DA. *crowd* HOUSE. 

Headliner's sig reminded me a time where every second shirt you saw in a 15k arena was a red and black, Wolfpack colors. They were as over as you can possibly be in wrestling. If you play the Wolfpack's theme in the background of RAW for 3 hours, you automatically gets an extra 0.5 to your overall rating. 






GOAT theme in rasslin'.


----------



## Coffey

Headliner said:


> Boom.


I take it you have been listening to the Konnan MLW podcasts? :lol


----------



## Starbuck

I thought it was Boom, Lawyer'd. Or am I getting that from something else?


----------



## Sheik

Rock316AE said:


> Big Sexy takes a mic:
> 
> Wolfpack. IN. DA. *crowd* HOUSE.
> 
> Headliner's sig reminded me a time where every second shirt you saw in a 15k arena was a red and black, Wolfpack colors. They were as over as you can possibly be in wrestling. If you play the Wolfpack's theme in the background of RAW for 3 hours, you automatically gets an extra 0.5 to your overall rating.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GOAT theme in rasslin'.


The Wolfpac were pretty much the coolest thing at that time, not just in wrestling, the coolest thing PERIOD. It's going to be hard for WWE or Pro Wrestling in general to ever come up with something as cool and fun to be a part of as nWo Wolfpac. To compare it to anything in modern day Professional Wrestling is just unfair.


----------



## Coffey

Nothing says cool like forty-year-old white dudes coming out to rap music. :lol


----------



## Sheik

Walk-In said:


> Nothing says cool like forty-year-old white dudes coming out to rap music. :lol


Yeah, that's what the Wolfpac were all about. Just a bunch of forty year old's coming out to rap music. You hit the nail on the head man.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Even WWE knows wrestling is borderline awful now, which is why they continuously push nostalgia acts. They have no clue what to do in regards to creating something new and innovative.

The sport just isn't as popular. Ultimately, no amount of change is going to save a dying fad. Something outside the box will have to make wrestling "cool" again. If people have stopped watching, how are they to know that it has changed to begin with? We complain about the industry dying, but we're the ones who still watch. It's the ones that don't watch that need to be brought back, or new viewers brought in. The demand just isn't there.


----------



## Loudness

Someone hire Magnus for WWE and push him to the moon, or at least get Bully Ray for a quick fix so at least the fans at home will get a credible face/heel to cheer/boo for. Still loling at WWE for dismissing A Double for beeing a few inches too short and not hiring him, guess their plans didn't work out well at all.


----------



## Shadow Madven

Im surprised that Bryan/Ziggler lost viewers what the hell do these people wanna watch? That match was very good.
As for now bring back Henry and turn R-Truth heel. Here they will have something worthy to watch throughout the show.
Punk is gaining a million and near a million in the last 2 months, more than anything Cena gained in the last 2 year. People also should stop talking about Cenas buyrates its not any higher than Punk, theyre the same have been decreasing every year with or without Cena, only Lesanr & Rock could do it.


----------



## Arcade

Shadow Madven said:


> Im surprised that Bryan/Ziggler lost viewers what the hell do these people wanna watch? That match was very good.
> As for now bring back Henry and turn R-Truth heel. Here they will have something worthy to watch throughout the show.
> Punk is gaining a million and near a million in the last 2 months, more than anything Cena gained in the last 2 year. People also should stop talking about Cenas buyrates its not any higher than Punk, theyre the same have been decreasing every year with or without Cena, only Lesanr & Rock could do it.


A whole lot of people are more interested in the political matters of the US, than wrestling.


----------



## Loudness

Still doesn't change that vanilla roidlets with acne full over his back will make people watch, at least get a guy who actually is bignripped, not some random nerd who has taken a few cycles and still managed to become fat. Sheamus won't get far at all. I wish this generation had their own BPP, not some uncharismatic nerds trying to become Hogan or Goldberg.


----------



## Arcade

Loudness said:


> Still doesn't change that vanilla roidlets with acne full over his back will make people watch, at least get a guy who actually is bignripped, not some random nerd who has taken a few cycles and still managed to become fat. Sheamus won't get far at all. I wish this generation had their own BPP, not some uncharismatic nerds trying to become Hogan or Goldberg.


fpalm


----------



## Rock316AE

Sheik said:


> The Wolfpac were pretty much the coolest thing at that time, not just in wrestling, the coolest thing PERIOD. It's going to be hard for WWE or Pro Wrestling in general to ever come up with something as cool and fun to be a part of as nWo Wolfpac. To compare it to anything in modern day Professional Wrestling is just unfair.


No doubt. The Wolfpack still remains one of the greatest things I have seen from Rasslin' TV. They attracted that teens demo like no other with the "cool factor". Besides the fact that it was a group of huge, believable and charismatic superstars, their presentation was perfect. Nobody could have done it that way besides those guys because that's who they really are. The walk to the ring, the sarcastic facial expressions, the "leaning on the ropes" during a promo, the look, the theme, perfect.


----------



## Choke2Death

The Lady Killer said:


> Even WWE knows wrestling is borderline awful now, which is why they continuously push nostalgia acts. They have no clue what to do in regards to creating something new and innovative.
> 
> The sport just isn't as popular. Ultimately, no amount of change is going to save a dying fad. Something outside the box will have to make wrestling "cool" again. If people have stopped watching, how are they to know that it has changed to begin with? We complain about the industry dying, but we're the ones who still watch. It's the ones that don't watch that need to be brought back, or new viewers brought in. The demand just isn't there.


Unfortunately, I don't think wrestling can become huge again. The Attitude Era is the greatest era ever and it can't be replaced but can't be duplicated either. With stricter rules and more awareness regarding the consequences of blading left & right and taking huge bumps, it was shown that such a thing cannot last very long. Now unless wrestling becomes like the AE again, it will not reach another popular era and is likely going to fade out with its dying popularity while MMA/UFC is on the way in. And we all know another AE wont happen because the wrestlers can't just jump from cells, land on thumbtacks, take chair shots to the head or blade every other week since the effort is more put into stopping deaths at a young age rather than pushing the wrestlers towards the edge.


----------



## Andre

Headliner said:


> Reason for low ratings:
> 
> -Wrestling is not over.
> -WWE ruins every big storyline or hot character that comes their way, tuning out the audience in the process.
> 
> Boom.


Lol at this thread that is built on walls of text being negated by a few simple words.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

Choke2Death said:


> This pretty much explains it.
> 
> LOL @ Sheamus being completely no-sold for the main event and all credit going to Punk. Then Punk marks will whine if Rock316AE no-sells his presence if he has a segment with Cena/JR/Laurinaitis/Vince that gains huge.


It works both ways. If a Punk segment does poorly it's all his fault, forgetting everyone else in the segment. The annoying anti-mark/mark shenanigans in this thread/forum make me want the admins to make the mention of "CM Punk" a bannable offence on the forums

Ratings are the quality of the show, not particularly the people in it most of the time. Sheamus's ratings can be poor, and Punk's failings ratings wise are well documented, yet they draw 1m tonight. Point proven.


----------



## Jotunheim

ChickMagnet12 said:


> It works both ways. If a Punk segment does poorly it's all his fault, forgetting everyone else in the segment. The annoying anti-mark/mark shenanigans in this thread/forum make me want the admins to make the mention of "CM Punk" a bannable offence on the forums
> 
> Ratings are the quality of the show, not particularly the people in it most of the time. Sheamus's ratings can be poor, and Punk's failings ratings wise are well documented, yet they draw 1m tonight. Point proven.


^spot on

I hate how people put so much importante in the wrestler "drawing power", when it's already proven that no matter how much a wrestler draws it doesn't help at all if the whole product/storylines/booking is a piece of shit, which it is right now, the blame shouldn't go to any particular wrestler but rather the overall quality of the show, which is obviously, crap


----------



## mblonde09

Choke2Death said:


> I'll be the first to admit I'm a little bias but I always try to go by facts therefore my bias only comes from me being happy whenever Punk flops. For the "hot topic" here, Punk not being a draw shouldn't even be debated.
> 
> On Raw 1000, they had about 6 million viewers and Punk got the ball to run with and he attacked The Rock to turn heel. By next week, half these viewers were gone as expected. And there's no "he didn't get to main event" or "WWE intentionally held him down" excuse to cover this up. *Fact* that *the indy midget** was not a good enough draw to keep the viewers they managed to bring back for that one night. Try explaining that one to everyone that disputes Punk not being a draw!
> 
> His segments (with far better proven draws such as Vince or Cena btw) gaining 500k or 1 million viewers that all tuned out in the previous (filler) segments don't mean shit. And before somebody talks about me saying Ryback or whoever else is a draw, I'm only joking there and frankly, I don't care about them. Only thing that matters to me is Punk flopping in becoming what WWE wishes he could be. That's all and I'm not even gonna pretend otherwise. 8*D
> 
> * = I have nothing against independent (or short) wrestlers. *It's just that term fits Punk to a T, so I'll use it when I see fit.*


Except it doesn't suit Punk to a T... just how many 6'1 midgets have you seen? It might fit Aries, Bourne or Bryan, but not Punk. You are being ridiculous as per usual.


----------



## KO Bossy

Choke2Death said:


> Unfortunately, I don't think wrestling can become huge again. The Attitude Era is the greatest era ever and it can't be replaced but can't be duplicated either. With stricter rules and more awareness regarding the consequences of blading left & right and taking huge bumps, it was shown that such a thing cannot last very long. Now unless wrestling becomes like the AE again, it will not reach another popular era and is likely going to fade out with its dying popularity while MMA/UFC is on the way in. And we all know another AE wont happen because the wrestlers can't just jump from cells, land on thumbtacks, take chair shots to the head or blade every other week since the effort is more put into stopping deaths at a young age rather than pushing the wrestlers towards the edge.


That's not ALL Attitude was and you know it 

I'd honestly be really happy if WWE just gave me a product that didn't feel like a 3 hour long commercial that featured wrestling breaks.

The things TNA is doing appeal to me, for example. That's why I watch it. I think the push of Bobby Roode as the #1 guy was great. It started off a bit rocky at first with how he first won the title, and I thought they kinda fucked up on that, but the rest of his reign was awesome. It makes Punk's reign look like crap in comparison. He had great matches, he could talk well, he did a terrific job as the mega heel champion, his rivalry with James Storm was awesome, but most importantly, TNA presented him AS a champion. They did basically everything in their power to take a guy who had been in a tag team the preceding 4 years and make the man seem like a legit champion. Guess what? People were into him. Punk, on the other hand, they've so badly fucked up with him that I'd rather not watch anymore. 

I don't even really care about the giant brawls, occasional swearing, sexual themes or violence in TNA. Sure its there, but there's more. The biggest difference I see is that they're more willing to let guys have creative input into their characters, and help them accentuate their strengths. Look at Bully Ray. 3 years ago, did anyone think that he'd eventually turn into the best heel in the industry? Not a chance. TNA took the risk with him and there was great reward. Ditto with Austin Aries, Christopher Daniels, Samoa Joe, AJ Styles, Christian, and all sorts of other guys at some point in the past.

WWE, in stark contrast, will take a guy like Christian, who flourished in TNA, and have him dance with Brodus and lose the WHC to Randy Orton 2 days after winning the damn thing because Vince has this stupid idea in his head. Dolph Ziggler is very competent on the mic, yet he hardly ever gets the chance to talk. Daniel Bryan is terrific in ring, so the Fed decides to stick him with a limited move set where he repeats the same 5-7 moves over and over again. Zack Ryder was really over with the fans, so the WWE decides to stick him with John Cena to quell the boos and eventually Ryder is kicked to the curb. Why is it that they don't just let these guys work? They're always saddled with bullshit. That's not to say that the WWE has always been this way, lots of guys have had input and been allowed to showcase their strengths. This era...not so much it seems.


----------



## Jotunheim

mblonde09 said:


> Except it doesn't suit Punk to a T... just how many 6'1 midgets have you seen? It might fit Aries, Bourne or Bryan, but not Punk. You are being ridiculous as per usual.


ditto, heck, that means shawn michaels is an "indy vanilla *midget*" since he is not much taller than Cm punk, or chris jericho


----------



## Samantha™

*They need to take action quick.. The ratings have not been this low since the mid 90's and if this isn't a warning sign for danger then I don't know what is.I'm sure wwe can live off of merch sales but even the ppv buys are down.The problem with wwe right now is that no one is stepping up to change things and that is going to hurt them in the end.WWE is not the only wrestling company that is suffering because tna has been hitting all time lows as well.If wwe does go down I am affraid the entire industry will fall as well.*


----------



## -Skullbone-

> *They need to take action quick.*. The ratings have not been this low since the mid 90's and if this isn't a warning sign for danger then I don't know what is.I'm sure wwe can live off of merch sales but even the ppv buys are down.The problem with wwe right now is that no one is stepping up to change things and that is going to hurt them in the end.WWE is not the only wrestling company that is suffering because tna has been hitting all time lows as well.If wwe does go down I am affraid the entire industry will fall as well.


Have you got any ideas as to how they might do it?


----------



## Jingoro

KO Bossy said:


> That's not ALL Attitude was and you know it
> 
> I'd honestly be really happy if WWE just gave me a product that didn't feel like a 3 hour long commercial that featured wrestling breaks.
> 
> The things TNA is doing appeal to me, for example. That's why I watch it. I think the push of Bobby Roode as the #1 guy was great. It started off a bit rocky at first with how he first won the title, and I thought they kinda fucked up on that, but the rest of his reign was awesome. It makes Punk's reign look like crap in comparison. He had great matches, he could talk well, he did a terrific job as the mega heel champion, his rivalry with James Storm was awesome, but most importantly, TNA presented him AS a champion. They did basically everything in their power to take a guy who had been in a tag team the preceding 4 years and make the man seem like a legit champion. Guess what? People were into him. Punk, on the other hand, they've so badly fucked up with him that I'd rather not watch anymore.
> 
> I don't even really care about the giant brawls, occasional swearing, sexual themes or violence in TNA. Sure its there, but there's more. The biggest difference I see is that they're more willing to let guys have creative input into their characters, and help them accentuate their strengths. Look at Bully Ray. 3 years ago, did anyone think that he'd eventually turn into the best heel in the industry? Not a chance. TNA took the risk with him and there was great reward. Ditto with Austin Aries, Christopher Daniels, Samoa Joe, AJ Styles, Christian, and all sorts of other guys at some point in the past.
> 
> WWE, in stark contrast, will take a guy like Christian, who flourished in TNA, and have him dance with Brodus and lose the WHC to Randy Orton 2 days after winning the damn thing because Vince has this stupid idea in his head. Dolph Ziggler is very competent on the mic, yet he hardly ever gets the chance to talk. Daniel Bryan is terrific in ring, so the Fed decides to stick him with a limited move set where he repeats the same 5-7 moves over and over again. Zack Ryder was really over with the fans, so the WWE decides to stick him with John Cena to quell the boos and eventually Ryder is kicked to the curb. Why is it that they don't just let these guys work? They're always saddled with bullshit. That's not to say that the WWE has always been this way, lots of guys have had input and been allowed to showcase their strengths. This era...not so much it seems.


 very limited thinking and every talent is put into a small box they are only allowed to work within. add vince's random horrible ideas and the classic build them up only to tear them shortly after formula with a twist of corny ass supermen cena, sheamus, and now ryback and that's the wwe in 2012.


----------



## Defei

-Skullbone- said:


> Have you got any ideas as to how they might do it?


A new megastar?


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner3

I wonder if Cm Punk was bad in art class when he was a kid the other kids probably were bitching at him saying bla bla bla you can't draw.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Choke2Death said:


> Unfortunately, I don't think wrestling can become huge again. The Attitude Era is the greatest era ever and it can't be replaced but can't be duplicated either. With stricter rules and more awareness regarding the consequences of blading left & right and taking huge bumps, it was shown that such a thing cannot last very long. Now unless wrestling becomes like the AE again, it will not reach another popular era and is likely going to fade out with its dying popularity while MMA/UFC is on the way in. And we all know another AE wont happen because the wrestlers can't just jump from cells, land on thumbtacks, take chair shots to the head or blade every other week since the effort is more put into stopping deaths at a young age rather than pushing the wrestlers towards the edge.


They need to lighten up on the pg content, and they need more than 1 larger than life character with some ground breaking story lines. The key problem was messing up with the OVER talent that they already had and using that generation to put over this one that is coming up, and so on. Now they're all in TNA or japan, and HHH and Taker are still main eventing MANIA. It just seems like WWE is starting from scratch and this strong PG content is seriously holding the new guys back, not to mention the shit booking. Look at PTP, they lost AW, and now they're not as interesting as when they first had AW join there team, road is rocky again. 

There's a horrible fluctuating pattern going on in the WWE, there's another example, and it's a pretty sad example, which is Miz.


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner3

The only reason there is a ratings thread is because people were bitching about Cm Punk FACT


----------



## D.M.N.

ThePeoplezStunner3 said:


> The only reason there is a ratings thread is because people were bitching about Cm Punk FACT


How would you know, you joined last month?


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner3

D.M.N. said:


> How would you know, you joined last month?


Im a lurker


----------



## Snothlisberger

Rock316AE said:


>


That promo fucking sucked. Just awful.


----------



## Shadow Madven

Does some people still think that if Ryback or Cena are champions, ratings will get better? considering the fact that Punk gained more viewers than Cena, Ryback and Rock. Over a million viewers with Vince, Sheamus, show/Cena w/ Punk ending the show, Foley near a million viewers. So, the numbers say that Punk is the biggest draw this year so far pulling in million viewers. Am I right or wrong?


----------



## Choke2Death

Shadow Madven said:


> Does some people still think that if Ryback or Cena are champions, ratings will get better? considering the fact that Punk gained more viewers than Cena, Ryback and Rock. Over a million viewers with Vince, Sheamus, show/Cena w/ Punk ending the show, Foley near a million viewers. So, the numbers say that Punk is the biggest draw this year so far pulling in million viewers. Am I right or wrong?


Yeah. Foley, Vince and company are nonexistent. 

Once Punk can gain a million on his own, then you may be onto something.


----------



## Shadow Madven

Choke2Death said:


> Yeah. Foley, Vince and company are nonexistent.
> 
> *Once Punk can gain a million on his own, then you may be onto something*.


Cena didnt do it, so why should Punk do it. Doesnt make sense to me because Cena had a segment with them and its not higher than Punk.


----------



## Choke2Death

Shadow Madven said:


> Cena didnt do it, so why should Punk do it. Doesnt make sense to me because Cena had a segment with them and its not higher than Punk.


And your point is? It all depends on how many viewers tuned out in the previous segments. For instance, the week before Raw 1000 when Cena ran out with the briefcase, damn near 1 million viewers were gained (it was around 800k I think). Around August, he had a match with Big Show which gained over a million viewers. (Punk's match with Show before Raw 1000 gained 300k only IIRC)

Also, if we venture out of the rating gains, Cena IS above Punk (even Punk marks have the decency to admit it) since he's also a bigger merchandise seller. (Punk had the upper-hand for like a month but it always comes back to Cena) Not to mention, there was one house show where Punk main evented and Cena wrestled right before him and some fans started leaving once Cena's match was over. I think that speaks for itself.

I also forgot to address your laughable statement that Punk has gained more viewers than The Rock (with the help of Vince, Heyman, Foley and other rare appearance makers no less). In Raw 1000, during the wedding segment with Punk/Bryan, as soon as Rock's music hit, a million and a half tuned in if I got the numbers correct. That's ALL to The Rock's credit.


----------



## Shadow Madven

Choke2Death said:


> And your point is? It all depends on how many viewers tuned out in the previous segments. For instance, the week before Raw 1000 when Cena ran out with the briefcase, damn near 1 million viewers were gained (it was around 800k I think). *Around August, he had a match with Big Show which gained over a million viewers. (Punk's match with Show before Raw 1000 gained 300k only IIRC).*
> 
> Also, if we venture out of the rating gains, Cena IS above Punk (even Punk marks have the decency to admit it) since he's also a bigger merchandise seller. (*Punk had the upper-hand for like a month but it always comes back to Cena*) Not to mention, there was one house show where *Punk main evented and Cena wrestled right before him and some fans started leaving once Cena's match was over. I think that speaks for itself.*
> I also forgot to address your laughable statement that Punk has gained more viewers than The Rock (with the help of Vince, Heyman, Foley and other rare appearance makers no less). *In Raw 1000, during the wedding segment with Punk/Bryan, as soon as Rock's music hit, a million and a half tuned in if I got the numbers correct. That's ALL to The Rock's credit*.


Well, I guess you didnt read my post well, that match had Punk involvment on both commentary and ring work in the end as he ended the show (So also the credit goes to Punk). Actually Punks match with show gained 719,000. Punk had an upper hand on Cena from July to February on merchandise. Houseshows whatever, Punk was a rebal, thats a long time ago before he even beats Cena, credibility speaks for itself. What about NOC 12 in Bosten when Cena had the upper hand on Punk, there were some tickets left, I guess people are not intrested in Cena winning. Rock was in after the wedding segment it gained 575,000 viewers. Im talking about Punk segments gaining over a million viewers, over Cena that couldnt pull that number without Punks involvments. Even when Cena gained a million its still not higher than Punks million viewers. You dont get the point. Keep notice I was talking about this year, not last year.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

lot of comedy in this thread.


----------



## Choke2Death

Shadow Madven said:


> Well, I guess you didnt read my post well, that match had Punk involvment on both commentary and ring work in the end as he ended the show (So also the credit goes to Punk). *Actually Punks match with show gained 719,000.* Punk had an upper hand on Cena from July to February on merchandise. Houseshows whatever, Punk was a rebal, thats a long time ago before he even beats Cena, credibility speaks for itself. What about NOC 12 in Bosten when Cena had the upper hand on Punk, there were some tickets left, I guess people are not intrested in Cena winning. Rock was in after the wedding segment it gained 575,000 viewers. Im talking about Punk segments gaining over a million viewers, over Cena that couldnt pull that number without Punks involvments. Even when Cena gained a million its still not higher than Punks million viewers. You dont get the point. Keep notice I was talking about this year, not last year.


http://www.wrestlingforum.com/11760912-post4700.html



> C.M. Punk vs. Big Show gained 325,000 viewers and the post-match with Cena teasing cashing in the briefcase gained 719,000 viewers.



On second thought, I'm not even gonna bother with you, *PRO ROYKA*.


----------



## Shadow Madven

Choke2Death said:


> http://www.wrestlingforum.com/11760912-post4700.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On second thought, I'm not even gonna bother with you, *PRO ROYKA*.


Great. You only focused on that, well guess what if Cena wasnt advertised to cash in his MITB briefcase, it will not be that high of a gain, just like if Punk wasnt in commentary or was part in the ring it will not get that kind of a gain. Its a group of work, and it depends on the story and the credibilty of it, you give Bryan that MITB breifcase it will still gain maybe not as much but it will still be as close. Oh, typical fans trying to point fingers to be cool, sorry for dissapointing you im not that guy/girl. I have a busy life not some guy talking about who draws and who cant, and im not the guy who will hate the other guy because of drawing abilities, but all this hate towards Punk are just the ones who have nothing else against him. 

Punk gained a million it doesnt matter if its not only him in the segment but he was the champion and the story is/was about him, theyre not talking about balls, asses, and bitches to gain ratings, Punk did it with his intensity and by chosing the right words with whatever hes with in the segment. Punk is a draw, if not he will not gain a million viewers 3 times this year and the funny thing is its higher than Cenas gainings this whole year. Not enough starpowers is the reason for the low ratings.


----------



## NearFall

I don't know why people are arguing so much over Punk still, each week. It is obvious by now, the man is not a consistent draw in ratings. Give him a decent storyline and a good name to work with, and people will watch. But he himself is not a full capable big draw. Why? In a nutshell: He just has never been portrayed consistently as a big deal while champion as well as lacking the charisma and vibe to capture the casuals attention. He is not an anti-draw either, he doesn't cause viewers to totally and completely tune-out in his segments like some of the anti-drawing mid-card/low-card. It is really that simple.


----------



## MikeChase27

NearFall said:


> I don't know why people are arguing so much over Punk still, each week. It is obvious by now, the man is not a consistent draw in ratings. Give him a decent storyline and a good name to work with, and people will watch. But he himself is not a full capable big draw. Why? In a nutshell: He just has never been portrayed consistently as a big deal while champion as well as lacking the charisma and vibe to capture the casuals attention.* He is not an anti-draw either, he doesn't cause viewers to totally and completely tune-out in his segments* like some of the anti-drawing mid-card/low-card. It is really that simple.


That would be Ryback.


----------



## NearFall

MikeChase27 said:


> That would be Ryback.


Not really. RyBack has had a good track record of when he has a full quarter or so to himself. He can gain or regain a small portion of viewers. Probably because power-houses are generally eye-catching and have fun to watch matches. This week people tuned out, however as stated he only had a quick part of that quarter(his match carried over a quick timeframe at the end of one and beginning of another). The rest of the quarter had some "Be A Star" stuff, Sheamus with a talking toy, and some Eve/Layla brawling stuff. Nobody will watch that. RyBack isn't a big time draw or anything, but people are interested in some sense.


----------



## roadkill_

*Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*










With the worst ratings in 15 years, its obvious. Change is needed, and that can happen overnight. I have no doubt that WWE has this in cold storage, a WMD scenario that has already been broken down into acts. Bet on it: As stupid as WWE have been, they've been discussing this for a while. The recent talk of McMahon looking for the next Cena hints at that. Someone as powerful as Cena influences an entire product. Right now, Cena is cookie cutter. When Cena turns, so will the makeup of WWE, in close reflection. Happened with Hogan. Happened with Austin. It'll happen in the next five years.

A Cena heel turn will destroy all RAW ratings from the last decade.

A scenario such as Cena turning at WrestleMania. For example, hype a family winning VIP ringside tickets to WM. Hype of the lucky winners appearance, young parents bringing kid Cena fans. Have Cena win dirty, beat The Rock to a pulp with a weapon. Have the planted 'family' leave in disgust. The following RAW would see Cena present an explanation. Guaranteed, the quarter hour for this promo would be through the roof. Now granted, WWE would lose merchandise sales with this. But when one window closes, another opens. A heel John Cena, minus the silly Barney clothing, with new edgier persona would inject RAW ratings so much that the advertisement gains in for the new third hour would work towards merchandise loss. Another consideration is to actually use it to boost merchandise sales. All it takes is the right slogan. Guaranteed, if Cena turns heel hardcore fans will start supporting him. WWE may even get him over using this method over a 2-year period.

Its possible something like this could emerge when McMahon is finished with politics. Not an Attitude era. Each new era must be of its own. This could all be done under PG. WCW did it.

And you know what? I, personally, wouldn't dare miss a RAW with a John Cena dressed in black who gets on the mic and starts shitting on being forced to smile at kids week in, week out.

WE GONNA PAHTY UP IN HERE!


----------



## TKOW

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*


----------



## Silent KEEL

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*

I agree, a Cena heel turn is the perfect solution to all of WWE's ratings problems.

No joke.


----------



## Kratosx23

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*

Heel Cena with 2 hours instead of 3 would do better than 4.0. 

But no, we can't have that, think of the merchandise sales which won't even be affected!


----------



## TempestH

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*

No, because if Cena turned heel, then he'd just be booed by kids and cheered by adults.


----------



## The Hardcore Show

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*



roadkill_ said:


> With the worst ratings in 15 years, its obvious. Change is needed, and that can happen overnight. I have no doubt that WWE has this in cold storage, a WMD scenario that has already been broken down into acts. Bet on it: As stupid as WWE have been, they've been discussing this for a while. The recent talk of McMahon looking for the next Cena hints at that. Someone as powerful as Cena influences an entire product. Right now, Cena is cookie cutter. When Cena turns, so will the makeup of WWE, in close reflection. Happened with Hogan. Happened with Austin. It'll happen in the next five years.
> 
> A Cena heel turn will destroy all RAW ratings from the last decade.
> 
> A scenario such as Cena turning at WrestleMania. For example, hype a family winning VIP ringside tickets to WM. Hype of the lucky winners appearance, young parents bringing kid Cena fans. Have Cena win dirty, beat The Rock to a pulp with a weapon. Have the planted 'family' leave in disgust. The following RAW would see Cena present an explanation. Guaranteed, the quarter hour for this promo would be through the roof. Now granted, WWE would lose merchandise sales with this. But when one window closes, another opens. A heel John Cena, minus the silly Barney clothing, with new edgier persona would inject RAW ratings so much that the advertisement gains in for the new third hour would work towards merchandise loss. Another consideration is to actually use it to boost merchandise sales. All it takes is the right slogan. Guaranteed, if Cena turns heel hardcore fans will start supporting him. WWE may even get him over using this method over a 2-year period.
> 
> Its possible something like this could emerge when McMahon is finished with politics. Not an Attitude era. Each new era must be of its own. This could all be done under PG. WCW did it.
> 
> And you know what? I, personally, wouldn't dare miss a RAW with a John Cena dressed in black who gets on the mic and starts shitting on being forced to smile at kids week in, week out.
> 
> WE GONNA PAHTY UP IN HERE!


It's never going to happen Vince has never had the balls to turn his biggest faces hell outside of Bret & Shawn in 1997. He never did it to Hogan and Austin's heel turn was 100% HIS idea and pretty much ruined the rest of his career. hate to say it but John Cena will NEVER turn heel no matter how bad business gets.


----------



## Silent KEEL

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*



TempestH said:


> No, because if Cena turned heel, then he'd just be booed by kids and cheered by adults.


That would be a mistake from the adult fans then, who want him to turn heel, because he would just go right back to face.


----------



## Heel

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*



TempestH said:


> No, because if Cena turned heel, then he'd just be booed by kids and cheered by adults.


This is why smarks at events are idiots. You love a guy's heel character? Then BOO him at the shows and he'll stay a heel. Don't fucking cheer him and complain when they turn him babyface.


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*



Tyrion Lannister said:


> Heel Cena with 2 hours instead of 3 would do better than 4.0.
> 
> But no, we can't have that, think of the merchandise sales which won't even be affected!


The third hour (Or more accurately, the first hour of the three) is a current source of income for WWE. The downside to this is taking damage in ratings. Cena turning boosts all three hours, increasing revenue. A new Cena t-shirt with some less than kiddie slogan, but not outright offensive, would shift like gold nuggets.

The only question is when, they'll do it eventually.


----------



## The Hardcore Show

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*



Heel said:


> This is why smarks at events are idiots. You love a guy's heel character? Then BOO him at the shows and he'll stay a heel. Don't fucking cheer him and complain when they turn him babyface.


Well when the babyfaces they do have suck what do you think people are going to do? They cheer for whoever is more entertaining.


----------



## Heel

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*



The Hardcore Show said:


> Well when the babyfaces they do have suck what do you think people are going to do? They cheer for whoever is more entertaining.


If you love a heel and you cheer him, you're doing him a disservice. They WANT to be booed.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*

Yes. Only thing that can save this hopeless product is Cena turning heel.


----------



## Rusty Shackleford

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*

As long as John is the biggest babyface, he'll never turn heel. Someone has to surpass him before Vince ever considers turning him heel.


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*

If WWE isn't hopelessly, tragically stupid, they already have the plans in place and the wrestler selected for Heelna to put over. Cena turning will boost WWE for 5 years and serve as the platform to build the next guy to carry the next five years after that. One angle can influence a full decade with only two wrestlers.


----------



## SinJackal

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*

Regular Cena as champ will pull much better ratings than right now. Heel Cena's not even required tbh. Though I agree, temporarily ratings will go up even more with heel Cena. I'm not sure how it'll be long-term though with no decent babyface to go against him.

A mega heel Orton go against face Cena will pull nice ratings too. If Orton's allowed to get crazy backstage stunts and whatnot that is, and is booked as being able to beat Cena cleanly like he was the last few times they faced off.


----------



## jammo2000

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*

some off you guys claiming he will never turn heel? wtf course he will. he was gonna turn last year the build with piper and mic foley and kane were the seeds. but they pulled the plug. no idea why but they will turn him heel at some point. my money is the next mania is the date he will turn heel. when he loses to the rock again you watch this space. or he will cheat to will. they have no choice to turn him its a must and even cena knows it


----------



## CHIcagoMade

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*



Queen Akasha said:


> As long as John is the biggest babyface, he'll never turn heel. Someone has to surpass him before Vince ever considers turning him heel.


That's the thing as long as Cena is face no one can surpass him because he will always be booked better.

A heel Cena is needed to create the next big babyface.


----------



## Vyed

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*

Doubt it. He is just one guy who's biggest worth to the company lies in merchandise sales, not ratings or PPV buys or media sales. John Cena, despite being very popular, draws only as much as his fanbase is willing to pay for him. Dave Meltzer has stated many times that Cena's worth as a draw to the company does not resonate with his level of popularity, not even half of it. Lets not forget, Cena as a bad guy is not going to attract the same demo, kids and teens of the world. Infact, the potential risk of Cena's heel turn hurting the company, especially in merch sales and their primary topface marketing strategies they heavily rely on, far outweigh the success of it long-term to WWE.




Choke2Death said:


> Yes. Only thing that can save this hopeless product is Cena turning heel.


Not really.


----------



## Marv95

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*



TempestH said:


> No, because if Cena turned heel, then he'd just be booed by kids and cheered by adults.


We're talking about viewership. And it depends how he's booked. If he insults the crowd hard enough and wrestles like crap he ain't getting praised by the adults.


----------



## jammo2000

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*

you say its critical if cena turns heel so what if he quit or had a serious injury or had a car smash. surly the wwe have looked at ifs and buts and surly there is a plan b if anything did happen to cena.


----------



## alliance

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*

the more i think about the more i dont want it any more


----------



## NearFall

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*

I agree *roadkill_*. It makes sense. A Cena heel turn is what fans who have tuned out but check up desperately want, and what regular fans for a majority desperately want. It would not cause a massive boom era like Hulk Hogan's, due to Wrestling just not being that mainstream anymore, aswell as the fact Cena is not as big as Hulk Hogan was at all. As for how it would be done. It needs to be a slow build, that teeters to keep people guessing, then just goes all out with a bang. Although, ratings could also be increased by having decent creative and booking. But nothing will change.


----------



## Ziggler Mark

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*

oh, a john cena heel turn thread. HOW FUCKING ORIGINAL


----------



## TheRainKing

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*

The WWE need to be competent enough to do the heel turn correctly, and considering they can't do anything right at the moment, I wouldn't get my hopes up. Besides, one heel turn isn't going to a fix a product which is a fucked from top to bottom.


----------



## kingfunkel

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*

1 man and his turn doesn't equal ratings! Do you think people who don't care about wrestling will suddenly care? no. Wrestling is not cool anymore. Do you honestly believe a heel turn will improve creative and the booking?

1 man doesn't equal ratings! Get over it. If Cena is such a draw why do we have such low ratings? do you think because he doesn't have a championship belt, people would start watching again? So get off this is he/isn't he a draw. You draw and fail collectively not as individuals.

Even during the beloved Attitude era you had Austin, Rock, HHH, Undertaker, Kane, Jericho etc. collectively they all could draw if you had a show with the same low-mid cards and same writers as today but Austin was on top of the card do you think it would of drawn? no. The reason it did draw the ratings it did was because of everyone who performed as well as the backstage crew. Which made for an entertaining show.

Individually 1 person can draw but it won't make much difference to the overall ratings. To make a 3.5-4.0 you need more than 1 person. Especially over 3 hours. Cm Punk drew me back to wrestling but how come the ratings haven't went up? To every 1 person who is happy with a decision there's another guy who's pissed about it.


----------



## tonytheknight

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*

I just wonder what else is there for a face Cena to do? Just think of all of the fresh storylines creative could draw up using a heel or anti-hero Cena. Putting the next 'top face' in a feud with a nearly unstoppable heel Cena not long after his debut would be great way to foreshadow the future of the WWE's Main Event Scene like the backstage encounter Cena had with the Undertaker after his debut match against Kurt Angle.


----------



## Bubba T

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*



roadkill_ said:


> *Now granted, WWE would lose merchandise sales with this.*


Do you realize how much Cena as he is now is worth to the WWE?

http://www.cagesideseats.com/2012/1/11/2699045/wwe-john-cena-fruity-pebbles-pro-wrestling-news



> Michele Steele of ESPN sent out a tweet just yesterday saying WWE claims *Cena was a $106 million retail brand ... by himself.* PWTorch confirmed the story and added that with the company posting $477.7 million in total revenue that year, Cena can be credited with roughly 22-percent of it.
> 
> The idea of turning him heel is ludicrous when looking at numbers like that.


For this simple reason alone, they will not turn him heel.


----------



## Vyed

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*



Bubba T said:


> Do you realize how much Cena as he is now is worth to the WWE?
> 
> http://www.cagesideseats.com/2012/1/11/2699045/wwe-john-cena-fruity-pebbles-pro-wrestling-news
> 
> 
> 
> For this simple reason alone, they will not turn him heel.


Actually Dave Meltzer debunked that claim when the report originally came out...



> Originally Posted by *Dave Meltzer*
> Let me know when some of the reporters using that figure use their brain and realize how completely full of shit it is.
> 
> No one person is responsible for 22% of company revenue. The very idea of it is preposterous. If Cena is moving $106 million in anything, he should be earning $40-50 million a year instead of a small fraction of that.
> 
> That's like in 1991 when some similar full of shit report talked about how WWF was a $1.7 billion dollar a year company and it got repeated everywhere when the company actually only grossed $125 million the previous year.
> 
> I know it was on our site as well.
> 
> Look at WWE revenues by category and see what Cena meant.
> 
> *He means a little bit on house shows, a little bit on PPV, a little on DVDs (the majority of which he's only a part of or not even a part of at all), he means virtually nothing when it comes to the TV money which is under contract whether he's with the company or not and doesn't go up when he's there and down when he's not there.
> 
> This isn't a guy who is the difference between 250,000 buys and 800,000 buys. And while his merch moves. Total merch for last year was $45 million so even if he means 20% of that, you're still talking $8 million.
> 
> The best you're getting is Cena means maybe 5% of total revenue of $478 million or $24 million, and that's giving him the benefit of a lot of numbers that may not be warranted and giving him 20% of merch which is a shot in the dark number likely way higher than the real number.
> *
> I know it was on this site as well. I saw that figure and I just thought, common sense says it's a full of shit number and moved on. Then when everyone started going with it, I satdown and tried to figure if it was possible, and it's not.


----------



## Shadow Madven

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*



kingfunkel said:


> 1 man and his turn doesn't equal ratings! Do you think people who don't care about wrestling will suddenly care? no. Wrestling is not cool anymore. Do you honestly believe a heel turn will improve creative and the booking?
> 
> 1 man doesn't equal ratings! Get over it. If Cena is such a draw why do we have such low ratings? do you think because he doesn't have a championship belt, people would start watching again? So get off this is he/isn't he a draw. You draw and fail collectively not as individuals.
> 
> *Even during the beloved Attitude era you had Austin, Rock, HHH, Undertaker, Kane, Jericho etc. collectively they all could draw if you had a show with the same low-mid cards and same writers as today but Austin was on top of the card do you think it would of drawn? no. The reason it did draw the ratings it did was because of everyone who performed as well as the backstage crew. Which made for an entertaining show.*
> *
> Individually 1 person can draw but it won't make much difference to the overall ratings. To make a 3.5-4.0 you need more than 1 person. Especially over 3 hours. Cm Punk drew me back to wrestling but how come the ratings haven't went up? To every 1 person who is happy with a decision there's another guy who's pissed about it*.


Yeah, but some people are still clueless about this. They think one guy equals ratings. Well, let this thing happen, so we can see this fantasy ratings coming, fpalm. Anyone who thinks one guy equals ratings is just clueless, You need at least 5 or 6 guys that can draw to pull that kind of a rating. Like in 2006/7/8 they had Trips, Michaels, Batista, Edge, Cena, Taker, Jericho, Show, adding Punk, (Heel) Orton too. Now we only have Cena, Punk, Show, and sometimes Orton, this especially not enough for a 3 hours show.


----------



## Bubba T

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*



kingfunkel said:


> If Cena is such a draw why do we have such low ratings? do you think because he doesn't have a championship belt, people would start watching again? So get off this is he/isn't he a draw. You draw and fail collectively not as individuals.
> 
> Even during the beloved Attitude era you had Austin, Rock, HHH, Undertaker, Kane, Jericho etc. collectively they all could draw if you had a show with the same low-mid cards and same writers as today but Austin was on top of the card do you think it would of drawn? no. The reason it did draw the ratings it did was because of everyone who performed as well as the backstage crew. Which made for an entertaining show.
> 
> Individually 1 person can draw but it won't make much difference to the overall ratings. To make a 3.5-4.0 you need more than 1 person. Especially over 3 hours. Cm Punk drew me back to wrestling but how come the ratings haven't went up? To every 1 person who is happy with a decision there's another guy who's pissed about it.


You contradicted yourself in your post, but you make some sense. It's the same deal every time, one or two big names draw people to the event, but the undercard is what keeps people interested and engaged throughout. The undercard warms up the crowd to the bout they came to see, but they aren't the ones drawing people in, per se. That's what the main event is for. That's why they market the main events for. So when people post how a guy with the IC title doesn't draw it doesn't make sense. They aren't supposed to draw, they are the guys who keep people interested in the show.


Read: Names like John Cena, The Rock, and Brock Lesnar are draws. Names like Dolph Ziggler, Zach Ryder, and Kofi Kingston are not. They are not driving forces to bring people in the show.


----------



## Bubba T

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*



Vyed said:


> Actually Dave Meltzer debunked that claim when the report originally came out...


Okay, didn't see that. My original point stands. The guy brings a lot of cash into the business. You don't change a sure thing.


----------



## Senor Ding Dong

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*



The Hardcore Show said:


> It's never going to happen Vince has never had the balls to turn his biggest faces hell outside of Bret & Shawn in 1997. He never did it to Hogan and Austin's heel turn was 100% HIS idea and pretty much ruined the rest of his career. hate to say it but John Cena will NEVER turn heel no matter how bad business gets.


Nah it didn't the Austin of 2001 was far less popular than his character of the late nineties. He was stale and boring and allying with Vince McMahon actually was shocking for it's day. The problem was the booking after that and then a second swerve literally months later when he nonsensically joined WCW.


----------



## The Hardcore Show

*Re: Heel Cena would pull 4.0 ratings*



Senor Ding Dong said:


> Nah it didn't the Austin of 2001 was far less popular than his character of the late nineties. He was stale and boring and allying with Vince McMahon actually was shocking for it's day. The problem was the booking after that and then a second swerve literally months later when he nonsensically joined WCW.


Austin said it himself he wished he never turned heel because by the end of match with The Rock whatever edge he thought he had lost going in he got back. The whole thing was a joke a night after it happened because they needed to jump the shark with putting him together with Triple H because they knew the fans would not boo him otherwise.


----------



## hazuki

Lots of people out of power in the east coast unexpectedly. Expect lowwww ratings.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

hazuki said:


> Lots of people out of power in the east coast unexpectedly. Expect lowwww ratings.


I'm on Long Island, NY... I STILL GOT THAT POWAH!

Though we have lost it once today so far for a second, and the weather is only going to get worse. Hoping it hangs in there until the end of Raw. *fingers crossed*

But yeah, ratings might be lower due to the power going out for Raw. If so, I hope the people who blame Punk weekly will spice up their stories a bit. Like how Punk knew he was gonna fail in ratings again and called on the wrath of Hurricane Sandy to knock out the power of many people so the low ratings could be justified... or some shit like that.


----------



## FITZ

Power going out will lead to less total viewers of course but it shouldn't impact the overall number (like 3.1 or whatever). Unless a greater percentage of people on the east coast watch then compared to other parts of the US the rating shouldn't be affected.


----------



## holt_hogan

The 29/10 edition of Monday Night Raw drew a 2.9 rating.

Actual viewer-ship numbers will be released later.


----------



## kent8

fucking hell! that's good for 2012 standards. Ryback draws!


----------



## D.M.N.

WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM	4306	1.5
WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM	4217	1.5
WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM	3783	1.4

FEED ME MOAR. Seriously, Hour 1 did very well, Hour 2 did well and Hour 3 performed badly.


----------



## holt_hogan

The 29/10 edition of Monday Night Raw drew the following viewers:

Hour 1: 4.306m
Hour 2: 4.217m
Hour 3: 3.783m

2.9 final rating.

Compared to last weeks:

Hour 1: 3.578m
Hour 2: 3.653m
Hour 3: 3.432m

2.5 final rating.


----------



## JY57

that third hour is a lost cause it seems


----------



## KO Bossy

That's...a pretty surprising rating, actually. Of course, I love how one guy says "RYBACK DRAWS" immediately, but I get scrutinized when I gave credit to Punk last week. 

So the show drew a decent (for this day and age) rating this week, and Punk was involved majorly. I think we ALL know who is to credit for this.











That's right:


----------



## vanboxmeer

Ryback losing = Ratings clearly.

Give that man a losing streak!


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

OMG THE RATING. OMG OMG OMG.

Hour 1 did well so whoever was in it are my favourite wrestlers now.

Hour 3 did bad so whoever was in it are my least favourite wrestlers now.


----------



## dxbender

How did ratings go up when so many people didn't even have power to watch TV....

Don't get peoples obsession with ratings though. Raw is the most watched non sports show on cable tv, yet people still bash that constantly....


----------



## Vyed

Fall out from sunday night's PPV clearly. Interest was high.


----------



## Coffey

I'm shocked, I have to be honest. If anything, I thought the ratings would be _worse_.


----------



## Dec_619

Ratings went up, looks like Vince will Feed Us More


----------



## The One

HURR RATINGZ!!!11 DERP I DONT LIKE HIM CUZ HE CANT DRAW!!!!111


----------



## holt_hogan

dxbender said:


> How did ratings go up when so many people didn't even have power to watch TV....


Ironically maybe more people stayed in and watched TV cos of the weather.


----------



## chucky101

firstly its not a good number, it only seems good because lasts week was so bad, anything less than a 3.0 is still bad, and they lost viewers in the third hour which is a bad sign
also its a raw after ppv, fans are curious

secondly to judge the show based and 1 week's ratings is wrong, one needs to look at the rating overall month by month, year by year

month by month, the last couple of years have been bad

even if this weeks raw was a 3.2, really doesn't mean anything in the grand scheme of things, overall the month, or year ratings are awful and doesn't come close to what they were doing even a few years ago

lol at those bragging that they drew a 2.9, as if they are doing attitude era numbers

get back to me when they do 4.0 or more EVERY week


----------



## Dec_619

chucky101 said:


> firstly its not a good number, it only seems good because lasts week was so bad, anything less than a 3.0 is still bad, and they lost viewers in the third hour which is a bad sign
> also its a raw after ppv, fans are curious
> 
> secondly to judge the show based and 1 week's ratings is wrong, one needs to look at the rating overall month by month, year by year
> 
> month by month, the last couple of years have been bad
> 
> even if this weeks raw was a 3.2, really doesn't mean anything in the grand scheme of things, overall the month, or year ratings are awful and doesn't come close to what they were doing even a few years ago
> 
> lol at those bragging that they drew a 2.9, as if they are doing attitude era numbers
> 
> get back to me when they do 4.0 or more EVERY week


They probably won't bother improving the product until they have some legit competition.

Really TNA needs to lift there game, they could start with getting Cena


----------



## apokalypse

Cena isn't Austin and he's not in Austin league...comparison is stupid. look at Punk and Bryan got cheer when they in ring with Rock but Cena then firt music hits got fucking boo...Cena easily to get boo just like Hogan in WCW got fucking boo many times before heel turn.

Cena heel turn will be like Hogan.


----------



## kokepepsi

Interesting rating
Viewership was down because of the Sandy thing so the overall rating would be up or that refee swerve drew the marks in.

3 hours is fucking destroying them.


----------



## hardysno1fan

Raw deserved a shitter rating. Seriously we waited like 3hrs just to find out who tag team partners would be for a fucking meaningless survivor series match!


----------



## Dec_619

hardysno1fan said:


> Raw deserved a shitter rating. Seriously we waited like 3hrs just to find out who tag team partners would be for a fucking meaningless survivor series match!


It deserved a below 2.0

I can't believe the teams they actually put together. 

It's just the Heels and Faces from HiAC, blame the Indian on Creative!


----------



## D.M.N.

kokepepsi said:


> Interesting rating
> Viewership was down because of the Sandy thing so the overall rating would be up or that refee swerve drew the marks in.
> 
> 3 hours is fucking destroying them.


Except viewership was actually up on the past few weeks.


----------



## TromaDogg

I said this on the Raw thread last night, but last night's show wasn't _bad_ at least. it was just _boring, dull and predictable_.

In a year that's been so full of shit so far that many including myself believe that WCW from the year 2000 was more entertaining, last night's show could've been much, much worse. The rating's a little higher than I expected, but I wasn't expecting it to be as low as last week anyway.

I still didn't enjoy it much though.


----------



## chucky101

many of who are saying "it was up from last week"

um so what, its still a crap rating

the storm did little to effect the rating, many new yorkers had power and to blame it on that is wrong

they had no real threat last night, no mlb, no nba, no nhl, no "sexy" nfl matchup, just a throwaway, all the shows were repeats because of sandy

sandy imo helped raw, many turned away from there regular shows due to repeats, wwe had no real threat, and it was after a ppv, and they still couldn't draw a 3.0

horrible news imo


----------



## Arcade

chucky101 said:


> many of who are saying "it was up from last week"
> 
> um so what, its still a crap rating
> 
> the storm did little to effect the rating, many new yorkers had power and to blame it on that is wrong
> 
> they had no real threat last night, no mlb, no nba, no nhl, no "sexy" nfl matchup, just a throwaway, all the shows were repeats because of sandy
> 
> sandy imo helped raw, many turned away from there regular shows due to repeats, wwe had no real threat, and it was after a ppv, and they still couldn't draw a 3.0
> 
> horrible news imo


#1 Ratings Mark.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Honestly, a good number for WWE today, especially with Hurricane Sandy. I didn't watch Raw last night due to power being out (I was at my Grandma's house) and everyone else in my family I talked to (dad, brother, mother, and aunts) as well as some friends said the power was out. So Hurricane Sandy did have some effect on the viewership I'd think.

Also isn't this also the first week in a while hour 2 isn't the biggest in viewership? Fallout from PPV with the ref in Punk/Ryback is probably the big reason.


----------



## Starbuck

Fallout from the PPV no doubt. 3 hours is death to any program though. I really hope it gets scrapped and soon.


----------



## chucky101

lol is 2 hours of crap much better than 3 hours of crap

no matter the length, the product sucks, thats the problem


----------



## JigsawKrueger

Rating will be crap next week.

Taped in UK = phoned in.

Day before election.

TV back to normal

Survivor Series uninspiring


----------



## Shadow Madven

Actaully this is a good rating, its as same as the 3 hours show that occured in the past years.

hour 1 is impresive, I guess they should always start with Punk segment first, Ryback match second, Randy Orton or Wade Barrett match as third, Team Hell NO with whatever team, Cenas segment, and finally Cesaro or Kofi or Miz or R-Truth matches.


----------



## Defei

Mahal blows, he doesnt fit in the group. I said it before they need to bring john morrison, replace mahal and make him the leader. 3mb is basically his gimmick.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

This is all because of Brad. Is there anything this man can't do?


----------



## Cliffy

Next Few weeks are gunna tank hard thanks to Punk retaining at HIAC.


----------



## Green Light

Clearly people tuned in to see new WWE champion THE RYBACK, but now they know that isn't the case ratings will plummet again.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Even Paul Hyeman is calling Ryback, The Ryback now. Maybe they should all just call him The Ryback.

Have him cut promo's saying 'The Ryback says' "Know your bread roll and shut your mouth" *POP*


----------



## Honey Bucket

Bread Roll Boulevard and Macaroni Drive


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

> 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. Ryback vs. JTG lost 432,000 viewers so Ryback is still not a ratings draw. Randy Orton vs. Wade Barrett gained 123,000 viewers. Daniel Bryan & Kane vs. Prime Time Players gained 1,000 viewers. The Vickie Guerrero/John Cena in ring at 9 p.m. gained 373,000 viewers, although 9 p.m. has become a traditional gain spot doing a 3.25. Kofi Kingston vs. Antonio Cesaro and A.J. Lee and Vickie Guerrero backstage lost 451,000 viewers. Zack Ryder & Santino Marella vs. Jinder Mahal & Heath Slater and A.J. Lee vs. Beth Phoenix lost 304,000 viewers, so Lee wrestling is not a big deal to viewers. At 2.70, it was the low point of the show. The Sheamus and Big Show in-ring 324,000 viewers, which came at 10 p.m., and is the best 10 p.m. growth in a while doing a 2.94. Rey Mysterio & Sin Cara vs. Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow lost 189,000 viewers.
> 
> The in-ring Susan G. Komen check presentation lost 143,000 viewers. Alberto Del Rio vs. Justin Gabriel gained 59,000 viewers. The Punk/Foley team announcement gained 708,000 viewers to a show high 3.26 overrun.


So Punks the biggest draw in WWE and is my favourite wrestler now.

Ryback is a flop and should be fired. 

AJ Lee is a flop and should be fired.

And Cancer kills both people and ratings and should be fired.


----------



## Shadow Madven

jblvdx said:


> So Punks the biggest draw in WWE and is my favourite wrestler now.
> 
> Ryback is a flop and should be fired.
> 
> AJ Lee is a flop and should be fired.
> 
> And Cancer kills both people and ratings and should be fired.


Ryback is nothing but hype. 
I agree with you completely.


----------



## vanboxmeer

It's not hype, it's HEIDENREICH!


----------



## gl83

vanboxmeer said:


> It's not hype, it's HEIDENREICH!



If that's the case, he needs to kidnap Michael Cole and violate him while reading a poem to him.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

So is it fair to assume Punk and Cena are now level when it comes to a TV draw, I'd think so.


----------



## Starbuck

YoungGun_UK said:


> So is it fair to assume Punk and Cena are now level when it comes to a TV draw, I'd think so.


Yes because in the opening promo Punk was talking to himself and then at the end of the show it was just Punk again talking to himself. At Survivor Series it's going to be Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk vs. Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk. The special ref is Phil Brooks. unk2


----------



## Coffey

Defei said:


> Mahal blows, he doesnt fit in the group.


Jinder Mahal not fitting in the group is the entire point. He sticks out like a sore thumb. He's _supposed_ to stick out like a sore thumb. It's awkward comedy & cheap heat.


----------



## Shadow Madven

Starbuck said:


> Yes because in the opening promo *Punk was talking to himself *and then at the end of the show it was just Punk again talking to himself. At Survivor Series it's going to be Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk vs. Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk. The special ref is Phil Brooks. unk2


Funny because that what actually happened at first, talking *about* his title, then Foley comes in the last 3 min. Nobody is given the full credit to Punk but in the segment they were talking about him anyway, people are intrested in him. Cena did a weak gain in the 9 pm, it usually gets higher than that, also later on his segment he lost viewers (not necessarily because of him but he was part of it). Also Ryback lost viewers, no excuses here. Why are you angry anyway, repeating his name like the ones in his team or in the opposite team gained more than him in the last 2 months. Credit to both but every high gain, Punk was part of it.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Punk has been on fire recently with these numbers. He's practically the only guy actually doing consistently well these days. 

Also, Ryback is a flop. Week after week, he loses viewers.


----------



## RatedR10

I really can't see how people can continue to say Punk is the reason the ratings are shit, when really, he's been consistently drawing viewers in whenever he's onscreen for the last few months. He's been on fire and has proven to be able to draw viewers. Yet, people will continue to blame the shit ratings on Punk.

Ryback continues to not be a ratings draw and I can't say I'm surprised.


----------



## Choke2Death

Starbuck said:


> Yes because in the opening promo Punk was talking to himself and then at the end of the show it was just Punk again talking to himself. At Survivor Series it's going to be Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk vs. Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk. The special ref is Phil Brooks. unk2


lmao, well said. It's funny how Punk marks are ready to celebrate if his segment does well then when it's not the case, they whine and say "Y U KARE ABT RATINGZ!!!!"

I bet a segment involving Punk choosing his team against Santino's team would have gained as much because Punk is such a monster draw that he does it all by himself.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

^It works both ways. Haters won't acknowledge when Punk does well and will be ready to celebrate and call him a failure if his segment don't do well. Really, it's a moot point at this time. Marks will mark. Haters will hate. It's that simple and straight-forward. I don't see the point in it being brought up every week (following this post, I'm not even going to acknowledge them).

Now onto the marking... 

The hook from the PPV, combined with Punk and Foley keeping the interest did a very nice start. Had the strongest opening rating since the 9/17 show, and set the tone for the rest of the show to do the best rating in a while. What makes it even better is the final segment did better than this starting segment, showing people were interested in seeing the teams and there's interest in the Team Punk/Team Foley SVS teams. Cena/Guerrero actually did the lowest gain in the 9PM slot since 9/3, but had the highest rating by a considerable margin for at least the month of October (don't have the ratings for 10PM slots from before then). 

Show/Sheamus's gain was the largest 10PM gain since 7/23 (1000th Raw which was Lesnar/HHH/Heyman/Steph) and before that since 6/25 with Jericho return and Cena/Jericho promo. Show/Sheamus is catching on, and after their great MOTN at HIAC, it should be. The rating itself wasn't anything special. And the overrun was actually the lowest gain of the last 4 weeks, but a higher rating than any overrun in the last two months minus Punk vs. Vince.

Punk's drawing ability is clearly there to some degree, and I think after being in the overrun week after week, having constantly big gains, it's clear he's an draw of sorts. Of course the ratings for those overrun quarters are generally poor, but at the same time they're generally well above the average rating for the show, which is a positive. Punk is easily the biggest (full-time) draw they have minus Cena, but at the end of the day he, and even Cena still need a hot angle to get people from the outside interested. Otherwise WWE have to resort to getting guys like Rock, Taker, HHH, Foley, Vince, Lawler, and any other legend that returns to get that normal return bonus they get for a week for that legend before things start going back down to normal. Clearly the ref angle is attracting some attention, and I suppose the Cena/AJ/Vickie stuff is doing the same as well. We'll have to see as the weeks progress, including with where the Team Punk/Team Foley stuff goes.


----------



## N-destroy

> Ryback vs. JTG lost 432,000 viewers so Ryback is still not a ratings draw. Randy Orton vs. Wade Barrett gained 123,000 viewers.


Wait what? How is this? Almost 7 minutes of Orton vs barrett match was part of the same quarter IIRC. Ryback/JTG was extremely short match with a min promo from Ryback.



Starbuck said:


> Yes because in the opening promo Punk was talking to himself and then at the end of the show it was just Punk again talking to himself. At Survivor Series it's going to be Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk vs. Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk. The special ref is Phil Brooks. unk2



lol still not the main event :cena2


----------



## Snothlisberger

Starbuck said:


> Yes because in the opening promo Punk was talking to himself and then at the end of the show it was just Punk again talking to himself. At Survivor Series it's going to be Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk vs. Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk. The special ref is Phil Brooks. unk2


You usually post good stuff but I feel this is shit. Punk has become a draw, period. He has continued to gain more than expected for awhile now and every time you make the same excuse more or less of "Punk's not the only one in the promo/match/whatever." Last time I checked Cena doesn't wrestle himself or cut all his promos talking to himself either but we give him all the credit as a draw. 

Fact is, Punk has become a draw. Haters will just have to deal with it. Or continue to make excuses.

But on the same note too, Punk Marks that are calling for The Ryback's head because he isn't drawing big numbers sound like hypocrites because they were screaming to give Punk time to start moving numbers when he was getting shit gains/losses. Although, pretty sure some of the Punk Marks are just mocking people like Rock316ae


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Mick Foley, well done. Drew all the big numbers of then night. 

Big star.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Starbuck said:


> Yes because in the opening promo Punk was talking to himself and then at the end of the show it was just Punk again talking to himself. At Survivor Series it's going to be Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk vs. Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk. The special ref is Phil Brooks. unk2


Could be said about any segment ever that had more then one wrestler in it and that did well to try and dismiss one drawing power. Thats like the first bad post i've read from you. I am disappoint.


----------



## Shazayum

Impressed it did better this week, thought it would do worse because of the hurricane.


----------



## Loudness

Punk is taking 7 years to draw = Punk is a success

Ryback is an inconsistent draw after 7 months = Ryback is a failure

I'm not trying to bash Punk, he did achieve something, although I'm still not sure how he would do without investment, but that's the point in maineventers - beeing invested in by the creative and he finally made it on a consistent basis, albeit with big stars around him (Foley, Cena supporting him often recently). However just because he made it (and deservedly so, at least if the numbers stay up) doesn't mean that others, who his fanbase targets won't do the same after the same amount of years beeing in the WWE, maybe even better or at least equal. Too often, ratings are taken at face value on a weekly basis to justify why someone likes their wrestler/hates another instead of trying to judge their drawing ability rationally, it just doesn't work like that. In order for someone to become an actual draw, he has to be a legitimate mainstream star, and apart from Cena and the oldtimers or part time megastars (Rock, Lesnar), nobody is at that level yet.


----------



## JY57

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2012/1101/557601/cody-rhodes/



> Source: F4WOnline
> - The October 1st episode of WWE RAW had 298,000 viewers watching on DVR or tape delay - way lower than the usual number. The October 8th episode had 305,000 homes watching on DVR or tape delay.


----------



## SDWarrior

I love how people blame Ryback for ratings drops. If it's Ryback, why don't the numbers come back? Nobody on the roster is a draw. Fans tune in for the beginning pieces and if Vince is one and then they turn it off. Do ratings people really expect people to care about a 1 minute squash match against a wrestler nobody knows or remembers?


----------



## holt_hogan

> 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. Ryback vs. JTG lost 432,000 viewers so Ryback is still not a ratings draw. Randy Orton vs. Wade Barrett gained 123,000 viewers. Daniel Bryan & Kane vs. Prime Time Players gained 1,000 viewers. The Vickie Guerrero/John Cena in ring at 9 p.m. gained 373,000 viewers, although 9 p.m. has become a traditional gain spot doing a 3.25. Kofi Kingston vs. Antonio Cesaro and A.J. Lee and Vickie Guerrero backstage lost 451,000 viewers. Zack Ryder & Santino Marella vs. Jinder Mahal & Heath Slater and A.J. Lee vs. Beth Phoenix lost 304,000 viewers, so Lee wrestling is not a big deal to viewers. At 2.70, it was the low point of the show. The Sheamus and Big Show in-ring 324,000 viewers, which came at 10 p.m., and is the best 10 p.m. growth in a while doing a 2.94. Rey Mysterio & Sin Cara vs. Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow lost 189,000 viewers.
> 
> The in-ring Susan G. Komen check presentation lost 143,000 viewers. Alberto Del Rio vs. Justin Gabriel gained 59,000 viewers. The Punk/Foley team announcement gained 708,000 viewers to a show high 3.26 overrun.


I'm confused how people can reach the conclusion that Punk is drawing the high numbers for this show after reading these numbers. He's in two main segments, the two segments that traditionally draw the highest numbers without exception. The beginning (to see what's happening this week) and the end (to see the conclusion/build up of the show, Flair? and/or people waiting for the following show to come on).


----------



## The-Rock-Says

> -Vince said television ratings are good. He said they remain the No. 1 show on USA Network and Syfy. Vince said the third hour of Raw is doing "extremely well."


From Vince this morning on the latest conference call. How the fuck does he get way with making statements like that and not one caller call him out on his bullshit?


----------



## Starbuck

People, I was joking. Jeebus. All these folks claiming they don't care about ratings and trying to act like they don't care about ratings then go and get butthurt over a joke. I thought the unk2 face would have made that clear. 



The-Rock-Says said:


> From Vince this morning on the latest conference call. How the fuck does he get way with making statements like that and not one caller call him out on his bullshit?


They're all Punk marks unk


----------



## The Lady Killer

Starbuck, your sig/avy combo (glad you brought that back) reminded me that the SummerSlam buyrate for 2012 was up ~20% over last year. BROCK.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Starbuck said:


> *People, I was joking. Jeebus. All these folks claiming they don't care about ratings and trying to act like they don't care about ratings then go and get butthurt over a joke. I thought the unk2 face would have made that clear.*
> 
> 
> 
> They're all Punk marks unk


Dont joke about it. Ratings is a serious business.


----------



## Starbuck

The Lady Killer said:


> Starbuck, your sig/avy combo (glad you brought that back) reminded me that the SummerSlam buyrate for 2012 was up ~20% over last year. BROCK.


DA BROCKTAGON BRINGING DEM BUYS



jblvdx said:


> Dont joke about it. Ratings is a serious business.


Very true. I'm sorry. Forgive me? unk3


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Starbuck said:


> DA BROCKTAGON BRINGING DEM BUYS
> 
> 
> 
> Very true. I'm sorry. Forgive me? unk3


No unk4

Wheres experts like Rock316AE at? the last few pages of this thread have been full of people who simply don't understand the biz.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Summerslam buys... Brocktagon. Reminds me of the epic Heyman promo the night after Summerslam. I don't remember off the top of my head, but that had to a 6.2 rating at least, right? RIGHT!?


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Brock is a beast on PPV and Rock is beast on PPV. Put them in a match at WM and they'd blow up the PPV business. :Rock4 :brock


----------



## Green Light

COME HERE YA LITTLE WEASEL

I TOLD YA I WAS GONNA GET YA


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Yes, Green Light. I laughed hard when Brock said that. 

Legit tough guys use the word 'weasel'


----------



## KO Bossy

Starbuck said:


> Yes because in the opening promo Punk was talking to himself and then at the end of the show it was just Punk again talking to himself. At Survivor Series it's going to be Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk vs. Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk, Punk. The special ref is Phil Brooks. unk2


No wonder those segments did bad, look at all those fat asses in the ring. You got Seem Punk, who looks like he just came from eating a plate of nachos and cheese burgers, and then this Phil Brooks, and we all know how fat his ass is, because he's just a piece of white trash from Chicago, which is right across Lake Mishgin from that cesspool Canada, or as I like to call it, "MEXICO NORTH." 

You want a segment to draw, you only need two things going head to head, and that's the largest arms in the world. The peaks of the Big Bad Booty Daddy will have all the freaks tuning into every segment, and those white trash ratings now will scream BOOM shakalaka and sky rocket to the moon!


----------



## D.M.N.

Hour 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. Ryback vs. JTG *lost 432,000 viewers* so Ryback is still not a ratings draw. Randy Orton vs. Wade Barrett *gained 123,000 viewers*. Daniel Bryan & Kane vs. Prime Time Players *gained 1,000 viewers*.

Hour 2
The Vickie Guerrero/John Cena in ring at 9 p.m. *gained 373,000 viewers*, although 9 p.m. has become a traditional gain spot doing a 3.25. Kofi Kingston vs. Antonio Cesaro and A.J. Lee and Vickie Guerrero backstage *lost 451,000 viewers*. Zack Ryder & Santino Marella vs. Jinder Mahal & Heath Slater and A.J. Lee vs. Beth Phoenix *lost 304,000 viewers*, so Lee wrestling is not a big deal to viewers. At 2.70, it was the low point of the show.

Hour 3
The Sheamus and Big Show in-ring *324,000 viewers*, which came at 10 p.m., and is the best 10 p.m. growth in a while doing a 2.94. Rey Mysterio & Sin Cara vs. Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow *lost 189,000 viewers*. The in-ring Susan G. Komen check presentation *lost 143,000 viewers*. Alberto Del Rio vs. Justin Gabriel *gained 59,000 viewers*. The Punk/Foley team announcement *gained 708,000 viewers* to a show high 3.26 overrun.

Just a note there is a pretty significant error in the breakdown, or something is missing, running it through Excel and with the figures provided there is no way Hour 3 averaged 3.783 million - in fact all the quarters I have at above 3.783 million based on the figures above.

So Hour 3 above has a big error in it.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

Just remember guys, CM Punk doesn't draw.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

D.M.N. said:


> Hour 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. Ryback vs. JTG *lost 432,000 viewers* so Ryback is still not a ratings draw. Randy Orton vs. Wade Barrett *gained 123,000 viewers*. Daniel Bryan & Kane vs. Prime Time Players *gained 1,000 viewers*.
> 
> Hour 2
> The Vickie Guerrero/John Cena in ring at 9 p.m. *gained 373,000 viewers*, although 9 p.m. has become a traditional gain spot doing a 3.25. Kofi Kingston vs. Antonio Cesaro and A.J. Lee and Vickie Guerrero backstage *lost 451,000 viewers*. Zack Ryder & Santino Marella vs. Jinder Mahal & Heath Slater and A.J. Lee vs. Beth Phoenix *lost 304,000 viewers*, so Lee wrestling is not a big deal to viewers. At 2.70, it was the low point of the show.
> 
> Hour 3
> The Sheamus and Big Show in-ring *324,000 viewers*, which came at 10 p.m., and is the best 10 p.m. growth in a while doing a 2.94. Rey Mysterio & Sin Cara vs. Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow *lost 189,000 viewers*. The in-ring Susan G. Komen check presentation *lost 143,000 viewers*. Alberto Del Rio vs. Justin Gabriel *gained 59,000 viewers*. The Punk/Foley team announcement *gained 708,000 viewers* to a show high 3.26 overrun.
> 
> Just a note there is a pretty significant error in the breakdown, or something is missing, running it through Excel and with the figures provided there is no way Hour 3 averaged 3.783 million - in fact all the quarters I have at above 3.783 million based on the figures above.
> 
> So Hour 3 above has a big error in it.


Hm, yeah. Sandow/Rhodes vs. Cara/Mysterio losing seems likely considering the last few weeks (stupid unwashed masses not appreciating Mr. Sandow's presence!)

The whole cancer segment thing may have lost more and it's a typo. Maybe Punk/Foley team announcing is off? Then again, segments like that do attract larger numbers of viewers. Or perhaps Sheamus/Show. The gain was the largest in several months, and it seems odd to some extent, though maybe with Sheamus losing the title and now the underdog in the feud, it may have breathed new life into the feud and people were interested. Plus the rating itself from what we saw wasn't anything special. 

What strikes me though as odd is Del Rio/Gabriel gaining anything. Del Rio's been a consistent ratings loser and had had some of the lowest quarters in years, but yet this week for some reason with Gabriel he gained.

I didn't actually watch all of Raw, so I can't say what's missing if anything. Hour 2 seems to be missing a quarter though.


----------



## holt_hogan

D.M.N. said:


> Hour 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. Ryback vs. JTG *lost 432,000 viewers* so Ryback is still not a ratings draw. Randy Orton vs. Wade Barrett *gained 123,000 viewers*. Daniel Bryan & Kane vs. Prime Time Players *gained 1,000 viewers*.
> 
> Hour 2
> The Vickie Guerrero/John Cena in ring at 9 p.m. *gained 373,000 viewers*, although 9 p.m. has become a traditional gain spot doing a 3.25. Kofi Kingston vs. Antonio Cesaro and A.J. Lee and Vickie Guerrero backstage *lost 451,000 viewers*. Zack Ryder & Santino Marella vs. Jinder Mahal & Heath Slater and A.J. Lee vs. Beth Phoenix *lost 304,000 viewers*, so Lee wrestling is not a big deal to viewers. At 2.70, it was the low point of the show.
> 
> Hour 3
> The Sheamus and Big Show in-ring *324,000 viewers*, which came at 10 p.m., and is the best 10 p.m. growth in a while doing a 2.94. Rey Mysterio & Sin Cara vs. Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow *lost 189,000 viewers*. The in-ring Susan G. Komen check presentation *lost 143,000 viewers*. Alberto Del Rio vs. Justin Gabriel *gained 59,000 viewers*. The Punk/Foley team announcement *gained 708,000 viewers* to a show high 3.26 overrun.
> 
> Just a note there is a pretty significant error in the breakdown, or something is missing, running it through Excel and with the figures provided there is no way Hour 3 averaged 3.783 million - in fact all the quarters I have at above 3.783 million based on the figures above.
> 
> So Hour 3 above has a big error in it.


What figure did you start the show with?


----------



## vanboxmeer

The show should simply consist of Brock Lesnar grabbing people by the scruff of their necks and calling them weasels. He can do his little jig before and after and maybe during each hunting endeavor. Punk can be his bag boy and Heyman can keep his job as the secondary distraction.


----------



## Snothlisberger

The-Rock-Says said:


> From Vince this morning on the latest conference call. How the fuck does he get way with making statements like that and not one caller call him out on his bullshit?


Because its true? Ratings are all about context. Monday is the second most expensive ad day of the week and Raw is ALWAYS the 3rd or 2nd highest rated cable program on Mondays. The show is an absolute anchor for USA. 

People just can't seem to figure this out.



holt_hogan said:


> I'm confused how people can reach the conclusion that Punk is drawing the high numbers for this show after reading these numbers. He's in two main segments, the two segments that traditionally draw the highest numbers without exception. The beginning (to see what's happening this week) and the end (to see the conclusion/build up of the show, Flair? and/or people waiting for the following show to come on).


The opening segment has been opening at like 2.7 or 2.8. When Punk opens its been over 3.0, in this case 3.2.


----------



## Amuroray

the last segment drew well since everyone wanted to know who were in the teams.

Wasnt down to a single person.


----------



## D.M.N.

holt_hogan said:


> What figure did you start the show with?


About 4.7 million I think it was.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Come on Ryback, you're killing them out there.


----------



## Jammy

I just came here to say...

rybacklolol, indy midget hack.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I think we should all just accept the fact everyone's an indy midget vanilla hack except Rock. Even Undertaker. You see him standing in front of Giant Gonzales? What a fucking midget Mark is!


----------



## #1Peep4ever

punk drawing with others in a segment = credit cant be all given to punk
punk loosing viewers or doing a bad gain with others = its all punks fault and no one is to blame but him



Keep it up guys


as for ryback... his match was pretty short as far as i remember it but for the sake of this thread:

stupid little vanilla midget killing the wwe


----------



## Rock316AE

Foley was promoted pretty heavily the entire show(drew decent in his last promo), but even then, what they did in the overrun was a regular number. 2.5 is not going to be the standard on a weekly basis. They're not going to do a 3.0 probably until January, but 2.5 is a number they will get in special cases. Of course that the same was said about a 3.5, then a 3.0, then a 2.8 etc, but for now, that's probably their minimum in the 2.4-5 range. 

Ryback's entire segment was probably less than 5 minutes. When they gave him a main time slot segment, he did good. Two weeks ago IIRC in a match with Ziggler and Otunga.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Wouldn't consider Foley much of a draw anymore.


----------



## Jammy

When ryback loses viewers, are we actually starting to use logic before typing? like length of segment and such? Wow

i thought ratings and logic were mutually exclusive.


----------



## Snothlisberger

Nobody tunes in to see fucking Foley. Give me a break.

And I'm sure if the leader of the group had been Orton and no Punk the number would be the same unk2


----------



## funnyfaces1

Somehow, Mark Henry is responsible for any kind of gain, not vanilla midget liberal Punk or old man Foley.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Rock316AE said:


> Ryback's entire segment was probably less than 5 minutes. When they gave him a main time slot segment, he did good. Two weeks ago IIRC in a match with Ziggler and Otunga.


It was a 512,000 gain, rating 3.04, however it was in the 9PM slot, which has a 100% gain rate, mostly around 400,000-500,000. So it was an average gain. However it's good he didn't turn viewers away and still kept up with the average, and actually it's slightly above average as a more accurate average (based on all Raw's in October) is 460,000. 

That being said, I didn't watch most of the show and that includes the Ryback match, so I can't say what else was in the quarter. Only saw one post that said Orton/Barrett was in the same quarter. But I'm certain people are only trolling when they say Ryback isn't a draw. Like Punk, he's a draw to some degree, though not to the likes of Cena.


----------



## Jotunheim

KO Bossy said:


> No wonder those segments did bad, look at all those fat asses in the ring. You got Seem Punk, who looks like he just came from eating a plate of nachos and cheese burgers, and then this Phil Brooks, and we all know how fat his ass is, because he's just a piece of white trash from Chicago, which is right across Lake Mishgin from that cesspool Canada, or as I like to call it, "MEXICO NORTH."
> 
> You want a segment to draw, you only need two things going head to head, and that's the largest arms in the world. The peaks of the Big Bad Booty Daddy will have all the freaks tuning into every segment, and those white trash ratings now will scream BOOM shakalaka and sky rocket to the moon!


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


----------



## kokepepsi

WallofShame said:


> Nobody tunes in to see fucking Foley. Give me a break.


Did he help Tna..............no



WallofShame said:


> And I'm sure if the leader of the group had been Orton and no Punk the number would be the same unk2


Pretty much yes


----------



## TromaDogg

kokepepsi said:


> Did he help Tna..............no


This is where the IWC, and more specifically, WWE marks are fucking hypocritical though.

You could put the likes of Stone Cold Steve Austin on next weeks TNA, announce it in advance and WWE marks still wouldn't watch it and would just carry on with the whole 'TNA sux, lolz' comments.

Have Stone Cold appear on Raw though, and it's all 'OMG! Stone Cold! He's BACK! Must tune in to see this! Best segment ever!' For some bizarre reason, there's a prevailing belief with these people that if a legend appears on WWE, then it will automatically be a better segment than if they appeared elsewhere.

Fact is, *nobody* they put on Raw will be a _significant_ draw until the whole show improves. If I only liked one character in a sitcom but the rest of them fucking sucked and I didn't find most of the jokes funny, then I wouldn't bother watching it even for the 1 guy I liked. The current ratings suggest that there's a fair few people feeling the same way about Raw.


----------



## murder

Hogan did boost TNAs ratings in the beginning. For example, his debut did a 1.9 quarter, with over two million viewers. So, yes Austin, Rock or Cena appearing on TNA would do something to their ratings for sure, at least for one or two shows.

The problem is a comeback, debut and maybe the first couple appearances always draw rating but after that they have must have a good story for the character to keep those fans or bring in new fans. That's what TNA failed to do with Hogan, who had his first angle (They) 9 months after his debut.


----------



## Kingy_85

So RAW tomorrow is in the UK? What time will it be on? I'm guessing it won't be live on Sky Sports as it usually is over here?


----------



## purple_gloves

ToxieDogg said:


> Fact is, *nobody* they put on Raw will be a _significant_ draw until the whole show improves. If I only liked one character in a sitcom but the rest of them fucking sucked and I didn't find most of the jokes funny, then I wouldn't bother watching it even for the 1 guy I liked. The current ratings suggest that there's a fair few people feeling the same way about Raw.


The truest comment i have seen so far in this thread.

Everybody who is bickering about bullshit and trying to find ways to prove your favorite draws, sit back and read this comment. 

Repped.


----------



## Dec_619

Any news on the ratings for this week?


----------



## IncapableNinja

Monday Night Football was Monday's number 1 cable program, with a 5.1 adults 18-49 rating up from last week's 4.3. WWE Raw came in second with a 1.5 adults 18-49 rating, even with last week.

WWE Entertainment USA *8:00 PM 4.066*
WWE Entertainment USA *9:00 PM 4.279* 
WWE Entertainment USA *10:00 PM 3.883 *

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...hrissy-mr-jones-basketball-wives-more/156340/

*Last week:*



> Hour 1: 4.306m
> Hour 2: 4.217m
> Hour 3: 3.783m


*Week before last AKA 2.5 AKA creative gon' get dey wig split.*



> Hour 1: 3.578m
> Hour 2: 3.653m
> Hour 3: 3.432m


----------



## JY57

has Raw ever increased from Hour 2 to Hour 3 yet? Seems like every week they keep dropping in hour 3.


----------



## Kabraxal

Not a good number... and I'll say next week will probably be worse after the random and sudden booking changes made that shattered the illusion there was logic and a plan in the company. I think many people now will be wondering what will be changed just because next....


----------



## Randy Orton Trapper Of The Year

lol


----------



## TromaDogg

Kabraxal said:


> Not a good number... *and I'll say next week will probably be worse after the random and sudden booking changes made that shattered the illusion there was logic and a plan in the company.* I think many people now will be wondering what will be changed just because next....


I really hope you're right about that. Last night's show was easily the second worst I've seen this year (closely behind the John Cena/Micheal Cole/BBQ Sauce main event they had a few months back).

What really saddens me is that I've just played through the Attitude Era mode on the new WWE 13 game. I've been thinking recently that maybe I've just somehow grown out of wrestling or it hasn't really gotten much worse, I'm just getting old (I'm 35)...but no, seeing recreations of those matches and feuds from 1997-2000 has really cemented in my mind that the characters, storytelling and booking were far, far, far superior back then to the horrendous shit we're expected to put up with now.


----------



## Randy Orton Trapper Of The Year

yeah last nights show was booked in real time probably


----------



## MikeChase27

Ryback is a draw guys!!!!!!!


----------



## blur

MikeChase27 said:


> Ryback is a draw guys!!!!!!!



Shut up you spineless troll.


On the topic, not bad, although WWE logic have been fucked this week, they basically changed the whole SS card within 5 minutes without thinking it over. Terrible.


----------



## KO Bossy

ToxieDogg said:


> I really hope you're right about that. Last night's show was easily the second worst I've seen this year (closely behind the John Cena/Micheal Cole/BBQ Sauce main event they had a few months back).
> 
> What really saddens me is that I've just played through the Attitude Era mode on the new WWE 13 game. I've been thinking recently that maybe I've just somehow grown out of wrestling or it hasn't really gotten much worse, I'm just getting old (I'm 35)...but no, seeing recreations of those matches and feuds from 1997-2000 has really cemented in my mind that the characters, storytelling and booking were far, far, far superior back then to the horrendous shit we're expected to put up with now.


What about that episode with the Cena "LOSERRRRRR!" promo?


----------



## TromaDogg

KO Bossy said:


> What about that episode with the Cena "LOSERRRRRR!" promo?


That was awful, I'll give you that...but on a scale of shows that includes a Cena vs Cole main event consisting of Cena stripping a middle aged commentator down to his underwear and covering him in BBQ sauce without Cole even attempting to fight back, and last night's 'Let's just completely fuck around with the Survivor Series card in such a manner that last week's show was a complete waste of time!', Cena's 'Looooseerrr!' promo only ranks a third for me.

But it's like saying eating a shit sandwich is worse than drinking a piss soda. They're both horrifically bad. This year, which actually started out OK until Wrestlemania but then nosedived after Cena went over Brock at Extreme Rules, is long going to be remembered as one of WWE's worst I think, especially with the recent low ratings managing to match the record low ratings of 15 years ago. Unless next year manages to lower the bar even further.


----------



## N-destroy

- Last night's episode of WWE RAW garnered a 2.76 rating and 4.076 million viewers. The numbers were down from last week's show, which scored a 2.94 rating with 4.102 million viewers.

The show drew 4.066 million viewers in the first hour and 4.279 million in the second hour. Viewers dropped 9% from the second hour to the third, which garnered 3.883 million viewers. It was the twelfth week in a row where viewership for the third hour was below viewership in the second hour.


----------



## hardysno1fan

N-destroy said:


> - Last night's episode of WWE RAW garnered a 2.76 rating and 4.076 million viewers. The numbers were down from last week's show, which scored a 2.94 rating with 4.102 million viewers.
> 
> The show drew 4.066 million viewers in the first hour and 4.279 million in the second hour. Viewers dropped 9% from the second hour to the third, which garnered 3.883 million viewers. It was the twelfth week in a row where viewership for the third hour was below viewership in the second hour.


Thats pretty generous considering how fucking terrible last week was.


----------



## Snothlisberger

Great numbers. You guys realize that RAW gets higher ratings than some broadcast shows right?


----------



## DesolationRow

*IncapableNinja*'s _12 Angry Men_ signature is perfect for this thread!

I can see it now...

HENRY FONDA
Guys... Guys... I think it's a little bit unreasonable to solely blame CM Punk for WWE's ratings woes.

LEE J. COBB
Nonsense! HE'S GUILTY! YOU KNOW HE'S GUILTY!

HENRY FONDA
We _don't_ know that! Besides, WWE treated him like he was a lowly midcarder his whole WWE Championship reign until Duh-wayne showed up back in July for that big episode thingamaging thingy.

LEE J. COBB
No! No! You know that kind! You know that they're rotten. That kid, Punk... You're letting him slip through our fingers!

JACK KLUGMAN
Guys, calm down! I think HENRY has a point, but I need to see the quarter hours... I think Punk's guilt is completely dependent on whether or not--

LEE J. COBB
No! NO! FONDA is letting him slip through our fingers and I won't have it!

HENRY FONDA
You sound like you want to be Punk's executioner! You're sick! You're a sadist! You probably liked the Spirit Squad/DX feud! You probably defended Mr. Kennedy's face turn! You probably hated Smackdown in the summer of 2009, you monster!

E.G. MARSHALL
Let's not lose our heads. Let's think rationally. I don't think Punk's helping matters, but FONDA does present a good point that WWE left him disenfranchised for a long, long period of time. You could argue with compelling facts that Punk was, to a major degree, set up to fail. But that doesn't mean he's helping matters, either, because he clearly isn't.

(*Starbuck* is E.G. MARSHALL.)


----------



## TheRainKing

Only about 13 comments since the ratings were posted a few days ago. Even the ratings thread is failing to draw now.


----------



## Kabraxal

TheRainKing said:


> Only about 13 comments since the ratings were posted a few days ago. Even the ratings thread is failing to draw now.


I just think many many fans are getting too disenfranchised with this company to bother as much anymore. You can only keep up energy for so long before such terrible products sap you to the point you just can't say much anymore. And really, it's gotten to the point no one guy can clearly be blamed outside of McMahon for the ratings turmoil.


----------



## kokepepsi

*Breakdown*


> In the segment-by-segment, Rey Mysterio & Sin Cara & R-Truth vs. Titus O’Neil & Darren Young & Antonio Cesaro and the beginning of John Cena and Vickie Guerrero in the ring gained 313,000 viewers, which is really strong.
> 
> The rest of the Cena/Guerrero stuff and Daniel Bryan vs. Cody Rhodes lost 56,000 viewers.
> 
> Kane vs. Damien Sandow lost 36,000 viewers.
> 
> The Brad Maddox interview where Vince McMahon came out with Vickie Guerrero to change Survivor Series gained 341,000 viewers in the 9 p.m. slot which is no more than it usually would gain at that time.
> 
> Sheamus vs. The Miz lost 355,000 viewers.
> 
> Backstage stuff with Dolph Ziggler, C.M. Punk and Vickie Guerrero and William Regal and Sheamus lost 190,000 viewers.
> 
> Eve Torres & Aksana vs. Layla & Kaitlyn gained 96,000 viewers.
> 
> Alberto Del Rio vs. Kofi Kingston put at 10 p.m. lost 49,000 viewers at 10 p.m. which used to never happen.
> 
> Santino Marella & Zack Ryder vs. Primo & Epico and Wade Barrett vs. Brodus Clay lost 179,000 viewers.
> 
> Heath Slater vs. Jey Uso lost 167,000 viewers to a show low 2.48 quarter.
> 
> John Cena & Ryback vs. Dolph Ziggler & C.M. Punk gained 1,084,000 viewers to a 3.22 overrun. So the idea of Cena & Ryback as a team was a huge hit.


that is like the 4th time the 10pm has lost viewers this year and like the 3rd time with Del Rio

DAT OVERRUN


----------



## JY57

Divas match/segment finally gained viewers. Its a miracle


----------



## Pasab

JY57 said:


> Divas match/segment finally gained viewers. Its a miracle


You mean like divas in signatures for rep. Oh wait!


----------



## Starbuck

@*Deso* - 

Things are so bad even the ratings don't draw anymore.


----------



## holt_hogan

Starbuck said:


> Things are so bad even the ratings don't draw.


Folks are missing my graphs. :no:


----------



## RatedR10

The divas gained? I actually let out a what the fuck on that one...


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Another great overrun for CM Punk, The Cult of Personality, The Voice of the Voiceless, and the Straight-Edge Savior. He's just a fucking ratings machine who can't be stopped. You put him in the overrun and numbers will sore above what the other hacks on the roster are bringing them down to.

In Punk we trust.



> IncapableNinja's 12 Angry Men signature is perfect for this thread!
> 
> I can see it now...
> 
> HENRY FONDA
> Guys... Guys... I think it's a little bit unreasonable to solely blame CM Punk for WWE's ratings woes.
> 
> LEE J. COBB
> Nonsense! HE'S GUILTY! YOU KNOW HE'S GUILTY!
> 
> HENRY FONDA
> We don't know that! Besides, WWE treated him like he was a lowly midcarder his whole WWE Championship reign until Duh-wayne showed up back in July for that big episode thingamaging thingy.
> 
> LEE J. COBB
> No! No! You know that kind! You know that they're rotten. That kid, Punk... You're letting him slip through our fingers!
> 
> JACK KLUGMAN
> Guys, calm down! I think HENRY has a point, but I need to see the quarter hours... I think Punk's guilt is completely dependent on whether or not--
> 
> LEE J. COBB
> No! NO! FONDA is letting him slip through our fingers and I won't have it!
> 
> HENRY FONDA
> You sound like you want to be Punk's executioner! You're sick! You're a sadist! You probably liked the Spirit Squad/DX feud! You probably defended Mr. Kennedy's face turn! You probably hated Smackdown in the summer of 2009, you monster!
> 
> E.G. MARSHALL
> Let's not lose our heads. Let's think rationally. I don't think Punk's helping matters, but FONDA does present a good point that WWE left him disenfranchised for a long, long period of time. You could argue with compelling facts that Punk was, to a major degree, set up to fail. But that doesn't mean he's helping matters, either, because he clearly isn't.
> 
> (Starbuck is E.G. MARSHALL.)


Can I be Fonda?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Another week down, another week where CM Punk just continues to bring in those great numbers. He's truly untouchable right now.


----------



## Snothlisberger

"Ryback and Cena was obviously a huge hit"

OR Punk has been gaining that big in the overrun for weeks now..


----------



## Maikoes

Kabraxal said:


> I just think many many fans are getting too disenfranchised with this company to bother as much anymore. You can only keep up energy for so long before such terrible products sap you to the point you just can't say much anymore. And really, it's gotten to the point no one guy can clearly be blamed outside of McMahon for the ratings turmoil.


I still come here every wednesday hoping the ratings are low, so Raw will finally change. At this point though I've given up hope that it will actually do.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Well done again, Ryback.

This guy is ratingz draw beast. Him and Cena teaming up = TEAM MEGA DRAWZ.


----------



## Apex Rattlesnake

Ryback bringing in them ratings


----------



## Rock316AE

Ryback doing the business. Like I said in the RAW thread, they need to hype the first Ryback/Cena match big. WM29 or Summerslam 2013 but save it from any B show(let alone on TV)because there's big potential in that match on a major PPV.


----------



## Green Light

Apparently Vince gave credit to Ryback for HIAC doing well on DirecTV (whatever that is.)

What a draw.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Rock316AE said:


> Ryback doing the business. Like I said in the RAW thread, they need to hype the first Ryback/Cena match big. WM29 or Summerslam 2013 but save it from any B show(let alone on TV)because there's big potential in that match on a major PPV.


Where were you last week when Ryback lost 500'000 viewers and the week before when he lost 500'000 viewers?

Dudes a failure. 8 years in developmental and WWE can't trust him to work over 2 mins in a 15 min tag match. Pathetic.


----------



## Rock316AE

IIRC, I posted after every breakdown in the last two weeks. And I said that Ryback should be tested on a main time slot. One time he did good in the 9pm for his match with Ziggler and Otunga, and this week he did a big gain for the tag with Cena.



Green Light said:


> Apparently Vince gave credit to Ryback for HIAC doing well on DirecTV (whatever that is.)
> 
> What a draw.


Just saw it



> It was said that pay-per-view buy numbers for Hell in a Cell on DirecTV were "surprisingly strong." Privately, McMahon credited Ryback for the result and felt placing him in a ten-man tag team, even though he'd likely be left standing, would did nothing for him. McMahon feels they need to capitalize on Ryback's momentum, which would require the muscle-bound grappler challenging for the WWE Championship in the main event.


Ryback is hot right now without a doubt.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

jblvdx, stop getting your knickers in a twist.

Embrace the MEGA DRAW that is The Ryback.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Rock316AE said:


> IIRC, I posted after every breakdown in the last two weeks. And I said that Ryback should be tested on a main time slot. One time he did good in the 9pm for his match with Ziggler and Otunga, and this week he did a big gain for the tag with Cena.
> 
> 
> 
> Just saw it
> 
> 
> 
> Ryback is hot right now without a doubt.


Do you even know why you like him? Are you just blinded by the fact he's big? Don't you acknowledge he's just a Goldberg ripoff but with none of the presence, stardom or intensity he possessed?


----------



## Rock316AE

I see him as a fresh, interesting and believable character on the show. He knows his character, you can see it with his walk, facial expressions, taunts, etc and can get better in the future. I have no problem with his style in ring because it suits his presence. You say that they're not trusting him to work 15 minutes tag matches, but what's the purpose of him working 8 minutes of the match and selling half the time when there's a chance to protect his aura? That way Cena sells, Ryback destroys and looks unstoppable. I thought the booking of the tag match was pretty obvious, especially with Ryback entering after Cena. Yes, without Goldberg, there's no Ryback. And he will never be close to Goldberg in any aspect, but Goldberg was a megastar to a completely difference fanbase. That fanbase is mostly gone by now. Ryback is a big future money with the right presentation. If that report is true, he's already showing his worth.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Rock316AE said:


> *I see him as a fresh, interesting and believable character* on the show. He knows his character, you can see it with his walk, facial expressions, taunts, etc and can get better in the future. I have no problem with his style in ring because it suits his presence. You say that they're not trusting him to work 15 minutes tag matches, but what's the purpose of him working 8 minutes of the match and selling half the time when there's a chance to protect his aura? That way Cena sells, Ryback destroys and looks unstoppable. I thought the booking of the tag match was pretty obvious, especially with Ryback entering after Cena. Yes, without Goldberg, there's no Ryback. And he will never be close to Goldberg in any aspect, but Goldberg was a megastar to a completely difference fanbase. That fanbase is mostly gone by now. Ryback is a big future money with the right presentation. If that report is true, he's already showing his worth.



How is a man who only says feed me more believable in any sense of the word? imagine someone who hasn't watched wrestling before and seeing a jacked up grown man lifting his arms up and down shouting FEED ME MORE over and over again. They would think its ultra lame and stupid and only lends to more evidence as to why wrestling isn't cool anymore.

fresh? even though we saw the exact same character done a million times better 13 year ago? 

And if WWE intends to have him as a maineventer in the future he will have to work over 15 min matches damn near every week, and if WWE don't even trust him to work 3 mins on TV and 10 mins on PPV, EVEN THOUGH HE HAS BEEN IN WWE DEVELOPMENTAL FOR 8 FUCKING YEARS! then what the hell can you do with him? what more help can he possibly need?

Sooner or later he'll be horribly exposed and WWE will give up on him. I guarantee it. Its happened before with dozens of big men, nothing leads me to believe Ryback will be an exception.


----------



## Starbuck

jblvdx said:


> How is a man who only says feed me more believable in any sense of the word? imagine someone who hasn't watched wrestling before and seeing a jacked up grown man lifting his arms up and down shouting FEED ME MORE over and over again. They would think its ultra lame and stupid and only lends to more evidence as to why wrestling isn't cool anymore.
> 
> fresh? even though we saw the exact same character done a million times better 13 year ago?
> 
> And if WWE intends to have him as a maineventer in the future he will have to work over 15 min matches damn near every week, and if WWE don't even trust him to work 3 mins on TV and 10 mins on PPV, EVEN THOUGH HE HAS BEEN IN WWE DEVELOPMENTAL FOR 8 FUCKING YEARS! then what the hell can you do with him? what more help can he possibly need?
> 
> Sooner or later he'll be horribly exposed and WWE will give up on him. I guarantee it. Its happened before with dozens of big men, nothing leads me to believe Ryback will be an exception.


How is a short junkie looking guy who says he's the best in the world believable when his manager looks more intimidating than him?

How is a guy in jorts and colorful t-shirts who cuts some of the most ridiculous promos and gets shit on by half the crowd every night believable?

How is a guy who pretends to be dead believable?

How is a guy who talks in the third person and constantly tries to get shit trending on twitter believable?

How is a guy with a larger than usual nose who constantly references his dick believable?

You really want to go that route? Ryback hasn't exactly set the world on fire but he has appeal. He may not appeal to you but that doesn't mean that he can't appeal to others. I'm not completely sold on him but I'm not going to shit all over him because he's getting a chance. You whine and bitched for how long about Punk never getting a chance. Now other people are getting chances and suddenly it's a horrible thing that should never happen. Stop crying. If you're so certain Ryback is going to fail then wait it out and he'll be gone in a couple of months. What's the problem?


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Starbuck said:


> How is a short junkie looking guy who says he's the best in the world believable when his manager looks more intimidating than him?
> 
> How is a guy in jorts and colorful t-shirts who cuts some of the most ridiculous promos and gets shit on by half the crowd every night believable?
> 
> How is a guy who pretends to be dead believable?
> 
> How is a guy who talks in the third person and constantly tries to get shit trending on twitter believable?
> 
> How is a guy with a larger than usual nose who constantly references his dick believable?
> 
> You really want to go that route? Ryback hasn't exactly set the world on fire but he has appeal. He may not appeal to you but that doesn't mean that he can't appeal to others. I'm not completely sold on him but I'm not going to shit all over him because he's getting a chance. You whine and bitched for how long about Punk never getting a chance. Now other people are getting chances and suddenly it's a horrible thing that should never happen. Stop crying. If you're so certain Ryback is going to fail then wait it out and he'll be gone in a couple of months. What's the problem?


I think you got hooked up on my first complaint of believability. What about the fact he's been wrestling in OVW/FCW since 2004 and WWE didn't trust him to work 10 mins on a main event of a PPV for the WWE championship? That a huge, gaping problem IMO that those who you compared my former complaint too didn't/don't have that problem.


----------



## NearFall

jblvdx said:


> Where were you last week when Ryback lost 500'000 viewers and the week before when he lost 500'000 viewers?
> 
> Dudes a failure. 8 years in developmental and WWE can't trust him to work over 2 mins in a 15 min tag match. Pathetic.


Two bad segments and you call Ryback a failure. But when somebody ESTABLISHED like Punk gets 2 bad segements you call it "an off day" or "the storyline sucks". You should not double standard like that. And for the record, RyBack was not the full quater holder in either of those quaters. Filler stuff occupied it too(like Be-A-Star and a Sheamus doll).



jblvdx said:


> How is a man who only says feed me more believable in any sense of the word?.


What about these:

An Undead Funeral Director

A man who refers to himself in third person and used catchphrases all the time

A ******* who guzzled beer and hated his boss

A champion who doesn't weigh more than 210 pounds and is referred to ON-SCREEN as "skinnyfat"

A man who wears a rainbow of colours and acts like a boyscout


Its wrestling, when you're over with the crowd, you're over and popular.


----------



## N-destroy

What the fuck does the "feed me more" catchphrase has to do with believability?


----------



## Starbuck

jblvdx said:


> I think you got hooked up on my first complaint of believability. What about the fact he's been wrestling in OVW/FCW since 2004 and WWE didn't trust him to work 10 mins on a main event of a PPV for the WWE championship? That a huge, gaping problem IMO that those who you compared my former complaint too didn't/don't have that problem.


What's with all this WWE didn't trust him crap? His gimmick is to be a monster. Why would he need 10 minutes inside HIAC to beat a guy WWE have told us he can easily dominate? What does it matter how long he's been in developmental for? He's getting a chance now and so far it seems to be working. People like him. If they didn't they wouldn't be chanting with/for him. I agree that eventually he will have to wrestle longer matches and the unbeatable aura surrounding him will gradually disappear but not right now only a month into his main event push. They should still be working to establish that aura not trying to destroy it by having Punk match him and take him to the limit inside HIAC of all places. He's a monster. He doesn't need 10+ minutes to beat people, not yet anyways. You're basically saying your problem stems from the fact that he was in developmental longer than usual and has a stupid catchphrase. So what? I'm not even a Ryback fan but your reasons for hating on the guy are a bit ridiculous. Like *Nearfall* has pointed out, you're quick to call Ryback a failure and pathetic when his segments lose viewers but when it happens to Punk somehow it isn't his fault. Double standards much? If Ryback is a ratings failure then so is Punk. If Punk is a ratings success then so is Ryback. You can't have it both ways.


----------



## Evil Peter

jblvdx said:


> How is a man who only says feed me more believable in any sense of the word? imagine someone who hasn't watched wrestling before and seeing a jacked up grown man lifting his arms up and down shouting FEED ME MORE over and over again. They would think its ultra lame and stupid and only lends to more evidence as to why wrestling isn't cool anymore.
> 
> fresh? even though we saw the exact same character done a million times better 13 year ago?
> 
> And if WWE intends to have him as a maineventer in the future he will have to work over 15 min matches damn near every week, and if WWE don't even trust him to work 3 mins on TV and 10 mins on PPV, EVEN THOUGH HE HAS BEEN IN WWE DEVELOPMENTAL FOR 8 FUCKING YEARS! then what the hell can you do with him? what more help can he possibly need?
> 
> Sooner or later he'll be horribly exposed and WWE will give up on him. I guarantee it. Its happened before with dozens of big men, nothing leads me to believe Ryback will be an exception.


I have to agree here. Ryback looks like a little kid when he stands there repeating "feed me more" and flapping his arms. It starts getting more unbelievable when you notice that he actually never really says much else, regardless of who he interacts with, so he actually comes across as more retarded than Eugene (as someone said in the thread), but for some reason no one on the show ever points that out.

For that to be believable I think you have to find some real life analog to compare it to, and I have never seen anything remotely like that (save for kids playing and perhaps retarded people). Could you imagine Alistair Overeem going into the cage if JDS beats Velasquez and start flapping his arms and shout "feed me more"? When Rogan comes to interview him he just keeps repeating his phrase, or at best changes it to "feed me Dos Santos". He'd be the laughing stock of MMA. And before anyone says that wrestling characters don't work in real life, I'll remind people that Chael Sonnen is pretty much doing the CM Punk act and has talked himself into title matches in two weight classes.

As for it not being fresh to be a copy of Goldberg, I'd also say that the unstoppable monster isn't exactly an underused gimmick either. Big Show always does it as a heel, Mark Henry did a short but memorable thing with it a year ago, Tensai was brought in to do it, etc. But being booked to look unbeatable just isn't much of a character and it's not that impressive in a scripted sport.

I also agree that he looks really untalented in the ring, seeing how he's actually been in the business for a pretty long time and still don't look very good or is allowed to put on longer matches. As you say he will have to start wrestling the longer matches if he stays in the main event scene but how much room can there actually be to improve after 8 years? People were saying that he was being a sponge when he was taught by Punk at house shows but we still didn't get anything good at HIAC. Punk has had good matches with very varied kinds of opponents, but this was probably one of his worst main events in WWE.

So I certainly hope you're right and that they find someone with strong overall talent (that you can depend on for promos and long matches) to be pushed instead.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

NearFall said:


> Two bad segments and you call Ryback a failure. But when somebody ESTABLISHED like Punk gets 2 bad segements you call it "an off day" or "the storyline sucks". You should not double standard like that. And for the record, RyBack was not the full quater holder in either of those quaters. Filler stuff occupied it too(like Be-A-Star and a Sheamus doll).
> 
> 
> 
> What about these:
> 
> An Undead Funeral Director
> 
> A man who refers to himself in third person and used catchphrases all the time
> 
> A ******* who guzzled beer and hated his boss
> 
> A champion who doesn't weigh more than 210 pounds and is referred to ON-SCREEN as "skinnyfat"
> 
> A man who wears a rainbow of colours and acts like a boyscout
> 
> 
> Its wrestling, when you're over with the crowd, you're over and popular.


Damn it seems like I'm fighting off the world here loll

CM Punk is never celebrated as being a big draw unlike for reason Ryback is (and I'm not saying CM Punk is a big draw, he isn't). I'm just stressing to some people that Ryback isn't either. 

And the people listed above were actual characters, please someone explain to me what the fuck Ryback is supposed to be? 

And everyone should stop getting hung up on my believability criticism and focus and the bigger problem, that he's been wrestling in developmental for 8 years and WWE don't trust him to wrestle 10 mins on a main event of a PPV and 3 mins on TV. I dare anyone to defend him when it comes to this aspect.


----------



## Starbuck

If you dislike him because you don't think he can work a match or because you don't find him entertaining then that's fine. There's nothing wrong with that. But if you dislike him because he was in developmental too long and has a silly catchphrase, that's just being silly. Ryback certainly isn't without his faults. I don't think he's particularly good in the ring. Hell, I witness first hand a Punk/Ryback match at a house show last night and it boring as shit. But there is a place for Ryback's in WWE and I'm certainly not going to hate on the guy because he was in developmental longer than usual. What reason is that to hate on somebody? Again you're coming with this WWE don't trust him to do x, y, z stuff but I don't know how you can say that. His gimmick dictates what they let him do. Why would they have him wrestle 15 minutes matches on Raw when he's supposed to be a squashing machine? Why would they put him inside HIAC with a much smaller guy and be forced to go 25 minutes when it would make him look horrible? Your reasons for disliking him are stupid tbh.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Starbuck said:


> If you dislike him because you don't think he can work a match or because you don't find him entertaining then that's fine. There's nothing wrong with that. But if you dislike him because he was in developmental too long and has a silly catchphrase, that's just being silly. Ryback certainly isn't without his faults. I don't think he's particularly good in the ring. Hell, I witness first hand a Punk/Ryback match at a house show last night and it boring as shit. But there is a place for Ryback's in WWE and I'm certainly not going to hate on the guy because he was in developmental longer than usual. What reason is that to hate on somebody?


Its not because he was in developmental for nearly a decade as to why I don't like him. Its the fact that he was in developmental for nearly ten years and he's still this mediocre and this green is baffling to me. What more help can he possibly need to improve? the FEED ME MORE wackiness is only the cherry on top.


----------



## Evil Peter

Starbuck said:


> How is a short junkie looking guy who says he's the best in the world believable when his manager looks more intimidating than him?
> 
> How is a guy in jorts and colorful t-shirts who cuts some of the most ridiculous promos and gets shit on by half the crowd every night believable?
> 
> How is a guy who pretends to be dead believable?
> 
> How is a guy who talks in the third person and constantly tries to get shit trending on twitter believable?
> 
> How is a guy with a larger than usual nose who constantly references his dick believable?
> 
> You really want to go that route? Ryback hasn't exactly set the world on fire but he has appeal. He may not appeal to you but that doesn't mean that he can't appeal to others. I'm not completely sold on him but I'm not going to shit all over him because he's getting a chance. You whine and bitched for how long about Punk never getting a chance. Now other people are getting chances and suddenly it's a horrible thing that should never happen. Stop crying. If you're so certain Ryback is going to fail then wait it out and he'll be gone in a couple of months. What's the problem?


You've never seen people claim that they are the best even when they aren't? I've seen that countless times in real life so that's believable. It's of course special who can win a wrestling match because wrestling has it's own set of rules and physics but we were talking about characters.

Apart from the shirts it sounds like you're talking about Jon Jones (UFC LHW champ). He says a lot of dumb and corny things and wants to be liked but is disliked by a good amount of the fanbase for being fake.

A guy that pretends to be dead is unbelievable and it's always clashed with the more modern style of wrestling environment. Especially since he's not always pretending but can actually perform magic.

What's supposed to be unbelievable about someone talking about himself in third person and using Twitter? That can't happen in real life? It has. The same goes for having a big nose and talking about his dick.

The thing was that Ryback acts incredibly strange since he's never talking normally, which we knows because we've seen him in all kinds of scenarios (backstage with his boss, with someone from Subway, in interviews, in in-ring promos, during matches etc). Just because there are other unbelievable characters doesn't mean that you have to agree when someone calls Ryback's character believable (which was what generated the notion that he wasn't believable, it wasn't dragged up out of nowhere).


----------



## JY57

people can talk trash about Ryback all they want and blame him for bad ratings (their opinions, nothing wrong with that). In the end doesn't really matter, because Vince is obsessed with the guy and sees him as one of his top faces of the future. And right now that is what Vince is going to do (push him and push him even more). He won't be 1 or 2, but he can easily be in the top 5 of the company, as long as Vince is around. Have no idea what HHH and Stephanie think of the guy, so who knows what they will do with him once Vince is gone.


----------



## Starbuck

jblvdx said:


> Its not because he was in developmental for nearly a decade as to why I don't like him. *Its the fact that he was in developmental for nearly ten years and he's still this mediocre and this green is baffling to me*. What more help can he possibly need to improve? the FEED ME MORE wackiness is only the cherry on top.


That's fair. Simply disliking him because he was in developmental longer that usual just seemed very childish to me tbh. I don't have an issue with Feed Me More. Some of the most iconic catchphrases of all time are ridiculous. As long as they're over, it isn't a problem. 



Evil Peter said:


> You've never seen people claim that they are the best even when they aren't? I've seen that countless times in real life so that's believable. It's of course special who can win a wrestling match because wrestling has it's own set of rules and physics but we were talking about characters.
> 
> Apart from the shirts it sounds like you're talking about Jon Jones (UFC LHW champ). He says a lot of dumb and corny things and wants to be liked but is disliked by a good amount of the fanbase for being fake.
> 
> A guy that pretends to be dead is unbelievable and it's always clashed with the more modern style of wrestling environment. Especially since he's not always pretending but can actually perform magic.
> 
> What's supposed to be unbelievable about someone talking about himself in third person and using Twitter? That can't happen in real life? It has. The same goes for having a big nose and talking about his dick.
> 
> The thing was that Ryback acts incredibly strange since he's never talking normally, which we knows because we've seen him in all kinds of scenarios (backstage with his boss, with someone from Subway, in interviews, in in-ring promos, during matches etc). Just because there are other unbelievable characters doesn't mean that you have to agree when someone calls Ryback's character believable.


You're watching a wrestling program. If you can accept a deadguy as a believable character you should be able to give most things a go. Ryback is a huge dominating monster. He doesn't need to talk to get his character across. He goes to the ring, he destroys people, he chants and he leaves. He isn't wildly sophisticated or complex. That's what he does. It's simple and it has appeal otherwise he wouldn't be over and people wouldn't care. Like I said before, is he taking the wrestling world by storm and causing a revolution in viewership with his push? No. But CM Punk didn't last year and neither did Randy Orton the year before that when Raw was all about him. He's something different and I'm not about to hate on somebody because of their catchphrase of all things.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

People on here have said they've seen him wrestle before Ryback and he's a decent worker. 

But as Starbuck says, his gimmick right now is to be this big monster face that fucks people up quick and easy, Putting him in 15 min matches right now kinda ruins the aura around him.


----------



## Rock316AE

> imagine someone who hasn't watched wrestling before and seeing a jacked up grown man lifting his arms up and down shouting FEED ME MORE over and over again. They would think its ultra lame and stupid and only lends to more evidence as to why wrestling isn't cool anymore.


I can agree with that in the same way I said in the past that big guys shouldn't be selling for a skinny guy like Punk, Bryan doing the horrendous YES act, or team "Hell No" doing their "I'm the tag champions" act. When something is so goofy and unrealistic in a main event character, it can hurt the general audience's interest. And I'm not talking Taker here because he's 100% a wrestling character. Ryback can definitely try to get the "Feed Me More" chant over in a different way(It's already over big, like you saw on RAW, they're chanting it when he's not even in the ring), like what he does in the matches with the fist motion. Other than the taunt, he's completely believable in every aspect. His presence and facial expressions are always spot on, he looks visually impressive every time he wrestles. 

As for the length of the matches. Why do you want to book him in 15-20 minutes matches when the basis of his character is that he can kill his opponents in 2 minutes? It's the same thing with the tag match on RAW, why you want to see him in the ring selling and Cena gets a hot tag, when he's not supposed to sell? He already dominated Punk 4-5 times, why suddenly you want them to book him to sell for him for 6-7 minutes just so Cena can get the pin? It was a simple booking, Ryback is booked above the roster, nobody is a threat to him yet. It doesn't matter how many years he was in OVW because in this kind of character, the booking execution is critical to keep the aura. It's much more important for him to be protected and destroy everybody, than to wrestle a regular 10 minute match, to sell or to do new moves. They chose to create this character and to make him a main eventer, they need to protect him and that's what they're doing now. Goldberg did it better *13 years ago*, so yeah, Ryback is fresh and it's working because like I said, the majority of the audience that was there when Goldberg was a megastar is no longer watching or following wrestling. Ryback is already hot and making a difference on PPV a month into his main event run, that just shows his huge potential.


----------



## Evil Peter

Starbuck said:


> You're watching a wrestling program. If you can accept a deadguy as a believable character you should be able to give most things a go. Ryback is a huge dominating monster. He doesn't need to talk to get his character across. He goes to the ring, he destroys people, he chants and he leaves. He isn't wildly sophisticated or complex. That's what he does. It's simple and it has appeal otherwise he wouldn't be over and people wouldn't care. Like I said before, is he taking the wrestling world by storm and causing a revolution in viewership with his push? No. But CM Punk didn't last year and neither did Randy Orton the year before that when Raw was all about him. He's something different and I'm not about to hate on somebody because of their catchphrase of all things.


As I said, I don't accept Taker as believable these days (it was a different environment when he had his debut), I just try to ignore that aspect when he's on. I do the same with Ryback, but if someone states that he has a believable character (which was what happened here) I'll disagree.

As for Ryback not bringing a revolution of ratings I don't care. I've never faulted wrestlers for not being big draws as that's irrelevant to whether I enjoy what they do. Ratings are only relevant to me as a way to help me predict what WWE will do.


----------



## Starbuck

Evil Peter said:


> As I said, I don't accept Taker as believable these days (it was a different environment when he had his debut), I just try to ignore that aspect when he's on. I do the same with Ryback, but if someone states that he has a believable character (which was what happened here) I'll disagree.
> 
> As for Ryback not bringing a revolution of ratings I don't care. I've never faulted wrestlers for not being big draws as that's irrelevant to whether I enjoy what they do. Ratings are only relevant to me as a way to help me predict what WWE will do.


You don't accept Taker as a believable character? If that's the case then I don't even know how you can watch wrestling tbh. That character is probably the most ridiculous thing ever but it works and has worked for years because of the way WWE have presented it to us. But if you don't buy Taker then yeah, I can see how you won't buy Ryback. 

I don't care either. This misconception that people who discuss ratings only mark for those who draw is fucking ridiculous. I've never faulted wrestlers for not being big draws because it's also irrelevant to whether I enjoy what they do. Most of the people in here don't do that either. I was merely commenting on *jbldvx's* obvious bias for Punk and against Ryback. Ryback loses viewers and he's pathetic. Punk loses viewers and it isn't his fault.


----------



## Amuroray

Cena and ryback with the ratings.


----------



## Evil Peter

Starbuck said:


> You don't accept Taker as a believable character? If that's the case then I don't even know how you can watch wrestling tbh. That character is probably the most ridiculous thing ever but it works and has worked for years because of the way WWE have presented it to us. But if you don't buy Taker then yeah, I can see how you won't buy Ryback.
> 
> I don't care either. This misconception that people who discuss ratings only mark for those who draw is fucking ridiculous. I've never faulted wrestlers for not being big draws because it's also irrelevant to whether I enjoy what they do. Most of the people in here don't do that either. I was merely commenting on *jbldvx's* obvious bias for Punk and against Ryback. Ryback loses viewers and he's pathetic. Punk loses viewers and it isn't his fault.


No, I think it clashes with how the WWE presents its environment today. I watched when he made his debut and it worked on a different level then because of two things. First is of course that I was a kid, and second it was in a time where the gimmicks were really exaggerated. These days the wrestlers are presented more as normal people, which makes it really weird that there's an undead guy with magic walking around. Since WWE tries to be more a part of the normal world (presenting the wrestlers as athletes like in any sport) an undead guy would cause some extreme reactions by the world. As I said I can ignore that and find entertainment in it as an isolated thing though.

When it comes to Ryback the believable thing isn't that big for me, I'm just not a fan of what he does. Both in terms of his abilities (in the ring and his mannerisms) and that he's booked in the way that I find the most boring. I want to see wrestling where the matches are full team efforts to make both guys look good while telling a story. Squash matches doesn't display the art of wrestling very well for me and it's all about the ride since the destination is less impressive in a scripted sport. I of course had the same problem with Goldberg, although he was one of the few that could impress me with some really nice power moves.

The best part about Ryback in terms of ratings discussions is that since he's been pushed and not really changing anything the constant "Punk can't draw" discussions seem to have ebbed out to a large degree. I find the discussions now a bit more to the point of what I think is relevant.


----------



## roadkill_

CM Punks and dat dead heat.


----------



## Duke Silver

The biggest problem I see with Ryback is that he's perhaps the hollowest performer on the entire roster right now. His character has no depth. He does the exact same act every single week, and that consists of awkwardly stomping around, waving his arms, shouting "FEED ME MORE" and hitting all three of his moves. There's no substance to that and it's something that could get old very quickly.

Perhaps more worrying is that when you delve deeper, there's the possibility that Ryback can't be fleshed out. For a guy that's been wrestling ten years, he's not very good. His performances in the ring are questionable and I'm not convinced that he'll ever truly succeed at anything more than he's doing right now. It's going to be interesting to see how he fairs in the deep waters, because there obviously will come at time when he has to cut a proper promo, carry a feud or... shock horror... wrestle a match.

STOMP
WAVE
FEED


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Gotta love how when Punk is in a match/segment with Cena/pretty much anyone, it's all Cena's/their doing doing, but when Ryback is, he's suddenly a ratings success. And now he's apparently getting credit for a strong HIAC buyrate? I like Ryback, but the HIAC buyrate had as much to do with Punk as Ryback, not to mention the fact for the first time ever (I think) it was 6 weeks after the previous PPV, which I'm sure had something to do with it.

Personally I consider both of them draws on about the same level (for different reasons of course), but I do have to lol at the attempts to overlook whenever Punk may have influence on the main event, including this week, including last last... hell including the last several weeks. But then Ryback gets credit when he's been just as inconsistent (gains one week, loses the next, etc.)


----------



## Starbuck

The Sandrone said:


> Gotta love how when Punk is in a match/segment with Cena/pretty much anyone, it's all Cena's/their doing doing, but when Ryback is, he's suddenly a ratings success. And now he's apparently getting credit for a strong HIAC buyrate? I like Ryback, but the HIAC buyrate had as much to do with Punk as Ryback, not to mention the fact for the first time ever (I think) it was 6 weeks after the previous PPV, which I'm sure had something to do with it.
> 
> Personally I consider both of them draws on about the same level (for different reasons of course), but I do have to lol at the attempts to overlook whenever Punk may have influence on the main event, including this week, including last last... hell including the last several weeks. But then Ryback gets credit when he's been just as inconsistent (gains one week, loses the next, etc.)


The people giving Ryback credit are joking...I think. Punk's a bigger draw than Ryback imo but that's not saying much. Both of them are wildly inconsistent and obviously need a lot of help to produce any significant sort of number. I'd attribute the HIAC buyrate to the fact that Punk was legitimately in danger of losing his title for the second time in his reign. The first was against Cena and this time it was Ryback. For all his other matches everybody knew he was going to win. People genuinely didn't know who would win that one though and it was a fresh match. Both of them get the credit as far as I'm concerned along with the intriguing story behind it all. 

And you must have missed the part where people were calling Ryback pathetic whilst marking for DAT RATINGS MACHINE CM PUNK. Don't act like there aren't double standards on both sides. Fact is, nobody draws anymore. Cena has the ability to bump numbers when they give him something decent but even he's not making as much of a dent as he used to. 3 hours is killing them.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

That Triple H gif is epic.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> The people giving Ryback credit are joking...I think. Punk's a bigger draw than Ryback imo but that's not saying much. Both of them are wildly inconsistent and obviously need a lot of help to produce any significant sort of number. I'd attribute the HIAC buyrate to the fact that Punk was legitimately in danger of losing his title for the second time in his reign. The first was against Cena and this time it was Ryback. For all his other matches everybody knew he was going to win. People genuinely didn't know who would win that one though and it was a fresh match. Both of them get the credit as far as I'm concerned along with the intriguing story behind it all.
> 
> And you must have missed the part where people were calling Ryback pathetic whilst marking for DAT RATINGS MACHINE CM PUNK. Don't act like there aren't double standards on both sides. Fact is, nobody draws anymore. Cena has the ability to bump numbers when they give him something decent but even he's not making as much of a dent as he used to. 3 hours is killing them.


Well you were covering the double standards on the other side, so I decided to cover the side. 

I'm certain Rock316AE wasn't joking, and I'm certain that's the case for a few others at least (I'm sure there were some joking though). But who's to say those marking for Punk drawing and saying Ryback is pathetic aren't joking either? It works both ways on all levels, does it not?

But eh, I'm a mark for Punk, a fan of Ryback, and I'm happy their HIAC buyrate did well and segments/matches involving the two of them seem to be doing well, even if it the gains may be due to Cena/Vince/whoever else is there/whatever other circumstances there are.


----------



## Starbuck

The Sandrone said:


> Well you were covering the double standards on the other side, so I decided to cover the side.
> 
> I'm certain Rock316AE wasn't joking, and I'm certain that's the case for a few others at least (I'm sure there were some joking though). But who's to say those marking for Punk aren't joking either? It works both ways on all levels, does it not?


Punk marks like to act like they don't think ratings are a big deal yet they're in here every week celebrating a big 2.7 lol. I'm onto your GAME you skinnyfats. 

It will be interesting to see what Rock is able to do when he eventually turns up. Of course he'll have the benefit of the RTWM but I don't think even he will be able to have a massive impact on things. 3 hours is just too damn long.


----------



## Duke Silver

WWE should bring back Flair, Rock, Austin, Lesnar and a bunch of AE midcarders (Venis, Godfather, Gangrel, BLACKMAN). 

That's the ticket.

On second thought, just bring back STEVE BLACKMAN. Fuck the rest.


----------



## IncapableNinja

DesolationRow said:


> *IncapableNinja*'s _12 Angry Men_ signature is perfect for this thread!
> 
> I can see it now...
> 
> HENRY FONDA
> Guys... Guys... I think it's a little bit unreasonable to solely blame CM Punk for WWE's ratings woes.
> 
> LEE J. COBB
> Nonsense! HE'S GUILTY! YOU KNOW HE'S GUILTY!
> 
> HENRY FONDA
> We _don't_ know that! Besides, WWE treated him like he was a lowly midcarder his whole WWE Championship reign until Duh-wayne showed up back in July for that big episode thingamaging thingy.
> 
> LEE J. COBB
> No! No! You know that kind! You know that they're rotten. That kid, Punk... You're letting him slip through our fingers!
> 
> JACK KLUGMAN
> Guys, calm down! I think HENRY has a point, but I need to see the quarter hours... I think Punk's guilt is completely dependent on whether or not--
> 
> LEE J. COBB
> No! NO! FONDA is letting him slip through our fingers and I won't have it!
> 
> HENRY FONDA
> You sound like you want to be Punk's executioner! You're sick! You're a sadist! You probably liked the Spirit Squad/DX feud! You probably defended Mr. Kennedy's face turn! You probably hated Smackdown in the summer of 2009, you monster!
> 
> E.G. MARSHALL
> Let's not lose our heads. Let's think rationally. I don't think Punk's helping matters, but FONDA does present a good point that WWE left him disenfranchised for a long, long period of time. You could argue with compelling facts that Punk was, to a major degree, set up to fail. But that doesn't mean he's helping matters, either, because he clearly isn't.
> 
> (*Starbuck* is E.G. MARSHALL.)


:lol Genuinely brilliant.

"..I have a proposition for the jury. One final vote regarding whether or not CM Punk is guilty of being both a ratings sink and a no-draw vanilla midget.

"..Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. The final tally is 42 guilty Vs. 1 not guilty.

"Wait. Something's not right. How on earth did we accumulate 42 guilty votes from 12 jurors?

"IT DOESN'T MATTER, FOREMAN! Take that identical switchblade, turn it sideways.."

"Rock316AE? How did you get on the set? No, you can't be in Network. I don't care who you tweet in Hollywood!"


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Punk marks like to act like they don't think ratings are a big deal yet they're in here every week celebrating a big 2.7 lol. I'm onto your GAME you skinnyfats.
> 
> It will be interesting to see what Rock is able to do when he eventually turns up. Of course he'll have the benefit of the RTWM but I don't think even he will be able to have a massive impact on things. 3 hours is just too damn long.


I AM NOT SKINNYFAT... okay, well... maybe a little...

But as far as Rock's impact goes, I said it awhile ago and I'll say it again, I don't think he'll make a huge splash on the overall rating. This year the highest rating he got for a show leading up to Mania was a 3.3 (night after WM did get a 3.4), and with the last several weeks being under 3.0, something that didn't happen in this time every week in 2011, if the trend remains downwards, I'd say the highest we'd see would be maybe a 3.1/3.2 (also taking into account the show is now 3 hours as opposed to earlier in the year). Of course Rock's segments will do big numbers, but I don't see him bringing the overall numbers up to where they should be for WM time on his own. Same with anyone else, but a combination of Rock, Cena, Lesnar, Taker, and HHH/Austin if one/both of them are there would round out the show and hopefully keep the numbers up throughout (and even then, it depends...)


----------



## ChickMagnet12

Ratings are too inconsistent week in week out to label any one particular superstar a "draw". In my opinion the only real "draws" that entice new people to watch are the part time guys like Rock and Lesnar. Apart from that, we get the same shit week in week out in here. Sheamus lost 350k this week, gained over 1m in a overrun the other week. Pretty much makes RATINGZ and arguments over who made the show gain 0.1 of a rating from the previous week look nonsensical.


----------



## Kabraxal

What's sad... they had a 1 million overrun and probably didn't have anywhere near an actual good number still. Where is a WCW when you need it... this starting to look exactly like the mid nineties, but sadly nothing seems likely to kickstart a resurgence anywhere in wrestling.


----------



## Hawksea

As expected, no Cena or HoFamers to carry his skinnyfat a**c***k = guaranteed viewership drop for Punk


----------



## vanboxmeer




----------



## Choke2Death

Duke Droese said:


> WWE should bring back Flair, Rock, Austin, Lesnar and a bunch of AE midcarders (Venis, Godfather, Gangrel, BLACKMAN).
> 
> That's the ticket.
> 
> On second thought, just bring back STEVE BLACKMAN. Fuck the rest.


No, they should just play Chris Benoit matches for three hours and that shit is gonna draw mad numbers!

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

I don't really post here anymore since my interest in the shows are further fading out but seeing a bunch of pages brought me here now. Looking at the numbers, the fruit and Ryan did a good number. Nothing interesting otherwise.

Also lol @ anyone complaining about believability when they mark for a guy that looks like a tattered junkie that hasn't bathed in a long time and is starving badly so he resorts to taking drugs.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

vanboxmeer said:


>


:lmao

Hopefully Vince can smell the coffee now.


----------



## Bossdude

If CM Punk wasn't champion or even on TV would the ratings be lower? Probably not.


----------



## SinJackal

vanboxmeer said:


>


lol, you bastard, I looked at that for like 30 seconds before realizing nothing was going to happen.


----------



## SinJackal

The Sandrone said:


> Gotta love how when Punk is in a match/segment with Cena/pretty much anyone, it's all Cena's/their doing doing, but when Ryback is, he's suddenly a ratings success. And now he's apparently getting credit for a strong HIAC buyrate? I like Ryback, but the HIAC buyrate had as much to do with Punk as Ryback, not to mention the fact for the first time ever (I think) it was 6 weeks after the previous PPV, which I'm sure had something to do with it.
> 
> Personally I consider both of them draws on about the same level (for different reasons of course), but I do have to lol at the attempts to overlook whenever Punk may have influence on the main event, including this week, including last last... hell including the last several weeks. But then Ryback gets credit when he's been just as inconsistent (gains one week, loses the next, etc.)


I usually give credit to the bigger star, most pushed guy, or guy who usually pulls ratings regardless of who he's put against. Then of course, on occaision. . .rare occaision, you can credit the storyline if it's a good one.

When did Ryback actually lose ratings since being put in the main event btw? The only time I remember him losing ratings on Raw was when WWE ran some Susan G Komen for the Cure commercial and a diva's segment right after Ryback's match and the tally was done for that block of 3 segments, not just Ryback's match.

I didn't see the HIAC buyrate, but I assume people are crediting him more than Punk since every PPV Punk has main evented when not against Cena (excluding this last one) has been lower than the normal buyrate. So if it suddenly does well, it's hard not to look at the other guy since the common denominator with Punk main eventing has been lowish buyrates unless against Cena.

But I do agree that it's stupid to credit solely one guy. In this case in particular, obviously Ryback isn't going to get huge ratings and huge buys if he went against someone like Health Slater at HIAC instead of CM Punk. Though Slater hasn't has Punk's push or had the title for a year.


----------



## murder

The guy challenging tor the title should always be credited more than the champion. There is always more money to be made when a babyface chases the champion.


----------



## Kabraxal

murder said:


> The guy challenging tor the title should always be credited more than the champion. There is always more money to be made when a babyface chases the champion.


So you're saying Flair wasn't the draw back during his heel dominance with the NWA title? Hmm......


----------



## TromaDogg

SinJackal said:


> I didn't see the HIAC buyrate, but I assume people are crediting him more than Punk *since every PPV Punk has main evented when not against Cena (excluding this last one) has been lower than the normal buyrate.* So if it suddenly does well, it's hard not to look at the other guy since the common denominator with Punk main eventing has been lowish buyrates unless against Cena.


Unless Cena was involved in the match, Punk (as WWE Champion) hasn't main evented a PPV since TLC 2011, and only once in 2011 without Cena before that...it's all been Cena, Cena, Cena, Cena, and more fucking Cena, with a bit of Triple H ego massaging thrown in. Here's a rundown of PPV main events since Punk's win against Cena at MITB last year...

Money In The Bank 2011 - *John Cena* vs CM Punk
Summerslam 2011 - *John Cena* vs CM Punk
Night Of Champions - *Triple H* vs CM Punk (No DQ match, won by the momentum killer Triple H fpalm...also worth noting that *John Cena* won the WWE Championship in the match just before it)
Hell In A Cell 2011 - *John Cena* vs CM Punk vs Alberto Del Rio Triple Threat Cell Match.
Vengeance 2011 - *John Cena* vs Alberto Del Rio Last Man Standing match
Survivor Series 2011 - *John Cena* & The Rock vs Awesome Truth
TLC 2011 - CM Punk vs The Miz vs Alberto Del Rio TLC Match
Royal Rumble 2012 - Royal Rumble Match (Surprisingly, neither *John Cena* nor *Triple H* were in the actual Royal Rumble Match. But as WWE Champion, neither was CM Punk)
Elimination Chamber 2012 - *John Cena* vs Kane Amubulance Match
Wrestlemania 2012 - *John Cena* vs The Rock ('Once in a lifetime!' fpalm)
Extreme Rules 2012 - *John Cena* vs Brock Lesnar
Over The Limit 2012 - *John Cena* vs John Laurinaitis
No Way Out 2012 - *John Cena* vs Big Show (Steel Cage Match)
Money In The Bank 2012 - Raw Money In The Bank Ladder Match (featuring, and won by *John Cena*)
Summerslam 2012 - *Triple H* vs Brock Lesnar

Then after that...

Night Of Champions 2012 - *John Cena* vs CM Punk

and (as we all already know), the only reason he wasn't in the Hell In A Cell main event was because of his injury. As the WWE champion, Punk's only main evented 1 PPV without Cena being in the match, and only 2 when Cena _was_ in the match (Summerslam 2011, Night Of Champions 2012). Really unfair to say he's been responsible for any lower buyrates asides from (maybe) TLC 2011. :no:


----------



## KO Bossy

ToxieDogg said:


> Unless Cena was involved in the match, Punk (as WWE Champion) hasn't main evented a PPV since TLC 2011, and only once in 2011 without Cena before that...it's all been Cena, Cena, Cena, Cena, and more fucking Cena, with a bit of Triple H ego massaging thrown in. Here's a rundown of PPV main events since Punk's win against Cena at MITB last year...
> 
> Money In The Bank 2011 - *John Cena* vs CM Punk
> Summerslam 2011 - *John Cena* vs CM Punk
> Night Of Champions - *Triple H* vs CM Punk (No DQ match, won by the momentum killer Triple H fpalm...also worth noting that *John Cena* won the WWE Championship in the match just before it)
> Hell In A Cell 2011 - *John Cena* vs CM Punk vs Alberto Del Rio Triple Threat Cell Match.
> Vengeance 2011 - *John Cena* vs Alberto Del Rio Last Man Standing match
> Survivor Series 2011 - *John Cena* & The Rock vs Awesome Truth
> TLC 2011 - CM Punk vs The Miz vs Alberto Del Rio TLC Match
> Royal Rumble 2012 - Royal Rumble Match (Surprisingly, neither *John Cena* nor *Triple H* were in the actual Royal Rumble Match. But as WWE Champion, neither was CM Punk)
> Elimination Chamber 2012 - *John Cena* vs Kane Amubulance Match
> Wrestlemania 2012 - *John Cena* vs The Rock ('Once in a lifetime!' fpalm)
> Extreme Rules 2012 - *John Cena* vs Brock Lesnar
> Over The Limit 2012 - *John Cena* vs John Laurinaitis
> No Way Out 2012 - *John Cena* vs Big Show (Steel Cage Match)
> Money In The Bank 2012 - Raw Money In The Bank Ladder Match (featuring, and won by *John Cena*)
> Summerslam 2012 - *Triple H* vs Brock Lesnar
> 
> Then after that...
> 
> Night Of Champions 2012 - *John Cena* vs CM Punk
> 
> and (as we all already know), the only reason he wasn't in the Hell In A Cell main event was because of his injury. As the WWE champion, Punk's only main evented 1 PPV without Cena being in the match, and only 2 when Cena _was_ in the match (Summerslam 2011, Night Of Champions 2012). Really unfair to say he's been responsible for any lower buyrates asides from (maybe) TLC 2011. :no:


Quite well laid out.


----------



## TromaDogg

KO Bossy said:


> Quite well laid out.


Oh, it's absolutely frightning when you look back at the last 3 years and see how much Cena has been rammed down everybody's throats and dominated the PPV main event scene during this so called 'PG Era'....even when he's not actually competing in the main event (such as when he was drafted into The Nexus), he's always heavily involved in the main event of the PPV anyway fpalm. I went back 1 more year, this is what the PPV main events were.

Money In The Bank 2010 - *John Cena* vs Sheamus
Summerlam 2010 - Team WWE (led by *John Cena*) vs The Nexus 
Night Of Champions 2010 - *John Cena* vs Randy Orton vs Sheamus vs Wade Barrett vs Edge vs Chris Jericho 6-Pack Challenge
Hell In A Cell 2010 - The Undertaker vs Kane (The last time the WHC belt main evented a PPV and was placed higher up the card than Cena. Presumably only because they realised that having Undertaker in a Cell match was a possible draw though)
Bragging Rights 2010 - Randy Orton vs Wade Barrett (w/ *John Cena*. The match was more focused around Cena than the WWE Championship as the stipulation was that Cena would be fired if Barrett lost the match. Cena attacked Wade Barrett causing Orton to lose via disqualification)
Survivor Series 2010 - Randy Orton vs Wade Barrett (w/ *John Cena as the Special Referee*. The match was more focused around Cena than the WWE Championship as the stipulation was that Cena would be fired if he didn't help Barrett win the match. Orton won, Cena was 'fired'....but was back a couple of weeks later fpalm)
TLC 2010 - *John Cena* vs Wade Barrett Chairs Match (in which Wade was literally 'buried' underneath a ton of chairs. His career's never really recovered from it fpalm)
Royal Rumble 2011 - Featuring *John Cena*
Elimination Chamber 2011 - *John Cena* vs CM Punk vs John Morrison vs Sheamus vs Randy Orton vs R-Truth No.1 WWE Championship Contender Elimination Chamber Match
Wrestlemania 27 - *John Cena* vs The Miz
Extreme Rules 2011 - *John Cena* vs The Miz vs John Morrison Triple Threat Cage Match
Over The Limit 2011 - *John Cena* vs The Miz 'I Quit' match
Capitol Punishment 2011 - *John Cena* vs R-Truth

I haven't seen such consistent ridiculously strong pushing of any wrestler over a prolonged period of time since Hogan and Savage back in the 1980's, and obviously back then the entire wrestling landscape was different, with Hogan and Savage and Andre being HUGE draws and those around them like DiBiase, Ricky Steamboat, Jake Roberts, Rick Rude etc. still being massively popular, as well as kayfabe still being alive and as well as plenty of adults still not realising that the outcomes of the matches were all scripted. Why Vince thinks that what worked back then will work now, I don't know.

Either way, as far as PPV buyrates falling in recent years go, most PPVs have always been sold on the strength of their main events. The only person who's name I've seen consistently involved with almost every PPV main event in 2010, 2011 and 2012 (this year) is Cena. Go figure. Crazy to think that only back in 2009, CM Punk was actually main eventing PPVs in World Heavyweight Championship matches with Jeff Hardy and The Undertaker and nowadays the WHC belt has been devalued to almost nothing and Punk as WWE Champion has always been booked below Cena on the card, unless Cena's competing for the WWE Championship himself or not on the card at all fpalm unk3:buried:cena3:vince


----------



## murder

Kabraxal said:


> So you're saying Flair wasn't the draw back during his heel dominance with the NWA title? Hmm......


Of course but it takes two to draw. In this case, the babyfaces Luger, Steamboat and Sting chasing the heel champion Flair is what drew back then.


----------



## Kabraxal

murder said:


> Of course but it takes two to draw. In this case, the babyfaces Luger, Steamboat and Sting chasing the heel champion Flair is what drew back then.


Except Flair drew huge crowds against nobodies in several territories as the NWA champ... people paid to see Flair get his ass kicked. That was the draw. Granted, you want both the face and heel to be draws, but of the two the most important factor is the heel. You can last forever with a heel champion giving up rare wins. It makes you want to watch... after a few years of a super baby face beating all the odds, people stop caring. There is no intensity or drama. Even Hogan started to wane at points and you'd see him drop the title in some fashion from time to time. 

What really seems to work best though, are heels that can win cleanly, but aren't afraid to cheat in some matches when they might lose and mix that with a more pissed off, harder edged face that can lose often enough. It lets teh audience hate the heel not only for cheating to win, but knowing full well he really is that damn good to win cleanly and all the while lets them actually connect to the face since he isn't some super clean unrealistic super hero that only little kids can latch onto. 

People like to think Rock and Austin were only big because of certain elements, but it was the fact they were dynamic characters that believably could take each other to the limit. Same with HHH, Foley, Taker, HBK, Hart... you could believe any of them winning and you didn't know what to expect day in or day out because there was no "well, he always overcomes the odds...". Austin got his ass handed to him quite a few times... and Foley more than was probably necessary


----------



## Ether

I'm expecting a huge drop during/after that awful Punk/Heyman segment, just look at the WWE facebook page right now. Tons of people are saying how they turned off the channel after that/are never watching again/etc.


----------



## TromaDogg

Ether said:


> I'm expecting a huge drop during/after that awful Punk/Heyman segment, just look at the WWE facebook page right now. Tons of people are saying how they turned off the channel after that/are never watching again/etc.


I wasn't the biggest fan of that segment, but I'll admit it did get a bit of a laugh out of me (when Punk 'revived' Heyman and then said 'You almost gave me a heart attack!' :lol Sorry.)

As for the Facebook complainers...they'll probably be back watching next week as normal. If not...then I'm not gonna lie and pretend to be upset about WWE losing some of the Soccer moms/sensitive kids audience too much.


----------



## Ether

I wouldn't be begging for them back either, but some on here were changing the channel too. Although, it wasn't just from that segment. We had that awful AJ/Vickie segment (I was going to change but I heard Cena's music), the bullshit heart attack recap, the offensive to some Punk/Heyman segment, etc. And that all happened in about an hour


----------



## Choke2Death

Ether said:


> I'm expecting a huge drop during/after that awful Punk/Heyman segment, just look at the WWE facebook page right now. Tons of people are saying how they turned off the channel after that/are never watching again/etc.


I hope to god that segment loses viewers. If IM Punk kills viewership enough times, there might be a small chance at a revival for 2013.


----------



## Starbuck

I don't think it will lose viewers. It was like a train wreck, you just couldn't look away lol.


----------



## Jotunheim

Starbuck said:


> I don't think it will lose viewers. It was like a train wreck, you just couldn't look away lol.


I will laugh like a madman if in fact, it gained ratings during that segment, the Punk Rating haters tears will be hilarious :lmao and I'm already predicting it

"this is disgusting, fuck WWE, and fuck the world, how they can gain viewers by doing something so awful!!"


----------



## JasonLives

Unless anyone gets the minute by minute ratings nobody will be able to tell if it lost viewers or didnt. Sorry to burst anyones bubble.

The segment took place in Quarter 5. A quarter that usually draws solid, so unless it completely bombs and loses viewers its not gonna be able to tell how it did.
That the following quarter loses viewers will prove nothing since its the quarters that most likely loses viewers on a show.
Doesnt help that it consisted of mostly backstage segments, commercial, ring entrances and a bit of the 8 man tag.


----------



## Oakue

You had 2 shitty segments, AJ/Vickie/Ziggler/Cena then 15 minutes of Punk ripping on Lawler for his heart attack.

Followed by 2 squash matches in a row, followed by a random squash segment backstage.

Umm...

Yeah. I'm thinking this is not the magical formula for ratings.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

> The WON are reporting that last nights RAW scored a 2.0. The Jerry Lawler segment was in fact the highest point of the show, until CM Punk came out and a whopping, 3 million people tuned out. Some returned, most stayed away for the night. More details as we get it.


www.f4wonline.com/rawratings


----------



## Choke2Death

WrestlingforEverII said:


> www.f4wonline.com/rawratings


That's a joke, right? A whopping 3 million? :lmao


----------



## Oakue

WrestlingforEverII said:


> www.f4wonline.com/rawratings


:nash

I told you all. Never trust teh vanilla midgetz...


----------



## Starbuck

WrestlingforEverII said:


> www.f4wonline.com/rawratings


I refuse to believe this is true but holy fuck if it is lol.

EDIT - Clicked link. Didn't work. I see what you did there...unk2


----------



## krai999

WrestlingforEverII said:


> www.f4wonline.com/rawratings


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

F4Wonline



> Early numbers for the CM Punk/Jerry Lawler segment indicate that it was a massive ratings hit, scoring a big 3.9. Because of this Vince has forced creative to come up with more edgy, possibly offensive angles and characters to create buzz and draw in new fans. Ideas pitched so far are for A.J Lee to be gang raped by Cena, Daniel Bryan and Punk, new gimmicks such as new developmental talent playing aids/cancer victims, and a big idea pitched by Triple H is a holocaust angle where people who under 6ft 2 are kayfabe "exterminated" by Triple H on screen. This creative movement was spawned after Linda's second campaign failure, Vince was very frustrated with the results and he plans on ushering in a new era. The most popular name being tossed around WWE headquarters at the moment is the "U Mad? Era. More details on this creative shakeup incoming


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

jblvdx said:


> F4Wonline


:lmao gold


----------



## Amuroray

jblvdx said:


> F4Wonline


lol


----------



## #1Peep4ever

jblvdx said:


> F4Wonline


ahahahahahahahahahahahaha


thank you sir
you made my day XD


----------



## mblonde09

Choke2Death said:


> I hope to god that segment loses viewers. *If IM Punk kills viewership enough times*, there might be a small chance at a revival for 2013.


What a pity he's not been killing viewership at all. Just out of interest, what stupid nickname does the "IM" stand for?


----------



## The GOAT One

Gunna guess at Indy Midget?


----------



## mblonde09

Like I said, stupid, because if Punk is a "midget", then so are Cena and Ryback. It's funny, because the murderer in his sig, WAS a midget, in wrestling terms.


----------



## Jotunheim

jblvdx said:


> F4Wonline
> 
> 
> 
> Early numbers for the CM Punk/Jerry Lawler segment indicate that it was a massive ratings hit, scoring a big 3.9. Because of this Vince has forced creative to come up with more edgy, possibly offensive angles and characters to create buzz and draw in new fans. Ideas pitched so far are for A.J Lee to be gang raped by Cena, Daniel Bryan and Punk, new gimmicks such as new developmental talent playing aids/cancer victims, and a big idea pitched by Triple H is a holocaust angle where people who under 6ft 2 are kayfabe "exterminated" by Triple H on screen. This creative movement was spawned after Linda's second campaign failure, Vince was very frustrated with the results and he plans on ushering in a new era. The most popular name being tossed around WWE headquarters at the moment is the "U Mad? Era. More details on this creative shakeup incoming
Click to expand...











this gif describes it pretty well :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## D.M.N.

WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM	4027	1.4
WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM	4399	1.4
WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM	4154	1.3


----------



## Kabraxal

D.M.N. said:


> WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM	4027	1.4
> WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM	4399	1.4
> WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM	4154	1.3


Wait... are those real numbers? That is TNA level isn't it?


----------



## holt_hogan

Kabraxal said:


> Wait... are those real numbers? That is TNA level isn't it?


No those ratings are for the 18-49 demographic. Just look at the viewer-ship number, not the rating on the end, the final rating is released in an hour or two.


----------



## Starbuck

D.M.N. said:


> WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM	4027	1.4
> WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM	4399	1.4
> WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM	4154	1.3


That's got to be for the 18-49 demo or something, right?


----------



## holt_hogan

The 12/11 edition of Monday Night Raw drew the following viewers:

Hour 1: 4.154m
Hour 2: 4.399m
Hour 3: 4.027m

Compared to last weeks:

Hour 1: 4.066m
Hour 2: 4.279m
Hour 3: 3.883m


----------



## TheWFEffect

holt_hogan said:


> The 12/11 edition of Monday Night Raw drew the following viewers:
> 
> Hour 1: 4.154m
> Hour 2: 4.399m
> Hour 3: 4.027m
> 
> Compared to last weeks:
> 
> Hour 1: 4.066m
> Hour 2: 4.279m
> Hour 3: 3.883m


DAT BRAD MADOX VS THE "RYBACK" WITH DAT DRAWING POWER !!! YOU KNOW IT PUNK unk4


----------



## Dec_619

Raw last night averaged 4.2 million viewers. The Monday Night Football game on ESPN won the night with 12.8 million viewers.


----------



## Bob the Jobber

holt_hogan said:


> The 12/11 edition of Monday Night Raw drew the following viewers:
> 
> Hour 1: 4.154m
> Hour 2: 4.399m
> Hour 3: 4.027m
> 
> Compared to last weeks:
> 
> Hour 1: 4.066m
> Hour 2: 4.279m
> Hour 3: 3.883m


So much for the Punk/Lawler segment losing viewers.


----------



## Oakue

That's pretty good ratings for them compared to what they've been getting. Seems like Lawler's return was the big draw. No surprise I guess.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Punk/Cena being advertised (got a text for it), Lawler returning and Ryback/Maddox did well for Raw it seemed. I do wonder how well Punk/Cena did. Raw seems to be back on a decent track nowadays.


----------



## BANKSY

It would be fairly worrying if a match between the two biggest full time stars in the company didn't do well.


----------



## Choke2Death

I assume the Fruit did so well in the main event that it brought the viewership above the 4 million mark. EAT FRUITY PEBBLES AND YOU'LL DRAW!!! :cena


----------



## TromaDogg

The Great Below said:


> So much for the Punk/Lawler segment losing viewers.


I'm glad it didn't, actually.

It may not have been exactly the kind of 'edgy' segment I was hoping for, but I'll take it any day over any of the Barney the Dinosaur-esque type stuff they've done in recent years.


----------



## Jotunheim

The Great Below said:


> So much for the Punk/Lawler segment losing viewers.


:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao indeed, clearly the segment was so awful and disgustin it actually gained ratings

AL HAIL THE U MAD ERA :troll



Choke2Death said:


> I assume the Fruit did so well in the main event that it brought the viewership above the 4 million mark. EAT FRUITY PEBBLES AND YOU'LL DRAW!!! :cena



you almost gave me a heart attack


----------



## Bob the Jobber

ToxieDogg said:


> I'm glad it didn't, actually.
> 
> It may not have been exactly the kind of 'edgy' segment I was hoping for, but I'll take it any day over any of the Barney the Dinosaur-esque type stuff they've done in recent years.


Agreed. I thought it was great.


----------



## Teh_TaKeR

UMAD ERA IN FULL SWING!!! Eat a dick ratings nerds and Punk haters.


----------



## THANOS

I'll wait til the full breakdown comes out, but just as I expected it seemed the shock segment probably gained tremendously and was the high point of the show.


----------



## Starbuck

:lmao at everybody marking out over a 2.6 or whatever it ends up being.


----------



## Bushmaster

Dont see where anyone is marking out due to ratings?

Curious to see how the Punk,Lawler and Foley segment went. either the ppl who hated it who were saying based off FB comments ppl turned it off were right or the segment actually made ppl stay. 

Anywahs as a go home show to SS it really didnt hype the ppv much imo. The ending was just funny though :lmao


----------



## SinJackal

Jotunheim said:


> I will laugh like a madman if in fact, it gained ratings during that segment, the Punk Rating haters tears will be hilarious :lmao and I'm already predicting it
> 
> "this is disgusting, fuck WWE, and fuck the world, how they can gain viewers by doing something so awful!!"


I'm not sure what's so "hilarious" about a segment gaining viewers. Are you that desperate for CM Punk validation that a segment involving him gaining viewers will make you "laugh like a madman"? :no: It was Lawler's return. Obviously it was going to gain viewers (it was advertised for weeks). Advertised as JUST Lawler's return btw, not as a Punk/Lawler confrontation.

Basic logic and common sense dictates that the main draw would've been Lawler returning since that's what was advertised. Punk showing up wasn't.


----------



## Jotunheim

SinJackal said:


> I'm not sure what's so "hilarious" about a segment gaining viewers. Are you that desperate for CM Punk validation that a segment involving him gaining viewers will make you "laugh like a madman"? :no: It was Lawler's return. Obviously it was going to gain viewers (it was advertised for weeks). Advertised as JUST Lawler's return btw, not as a Punk/Lawler confrontation.
> 
> Basic logic and common sense dictates that the main draw would've been Lawler returning since that's what was advertised. Punk showing up wasn't.


:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao I forgot the other excuse "It was thanks to lawler"

I almost had a heart attack there


----------



## Mockfrog

If a segment involving Punk gains viewers it's always the guy he's with that's the reason, never him.

If a segment involving Punk would happen to lose viewers it's always Punk's fault, never the guys he's with.

The Punk haters are so predictable.


----------



## SinJackal

Jotunheim said:


> :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao I forgot the other excuse "It was thanks to lawler"
> 
> I almost had a heart attack there


The segment was advertised as Lawler's return, which was an anticipated event. So he should get most of the credit for increases in viewership. Not a guy who randomly showed up and was on mic for a few minutes.

You can't actually be that dumb, so I will give you the benefit of the doubt and just chalk up your shitty posts as Punk mark trolling, rather than just assume you're a total imbecile.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

SinJackal said:


> The segment was advertised as Lawler's return, which was an anticipated event. So he should get most of the credit for increases in viewership. Not a guy who randomly showed up and was on mic for a few minutes.
> 
> You can't actually be that dumb, so I will give you the benefit of the doubt and just chalk up your shitty posts as Punk mark trolling, rather than just assume you're a total imbecile.


it wasnt just a few minutes probably half the segment... then again i am not so sure about it whatever..


----------



## TheF1BOB

Choke2Death said:


> I assume the Fruit did so well in the main event that it brought the viewership above the 4 million mark. EAT FRUITY PEBBLES AND YOU'LL DRAW!!! :cena


DA FRUITY PEBBLE IS STRONG WIT DIS ONE :cena


----------



## THANOS

Starbuck said:


> :lmao at everybody marking out over a 2.6 or whatever it ends up being.


Dude your posts in here have really went downhill in the past few weeks. Trying to extrapolate excuses some Punk fans have for the ratings to make it seem like a majority response fpalm, when it's quite obvious to everyone with two eyes that its the opposite with people lining up to take shots at Punk.


----------



## Jotunheim

SinJackal said:


> The segment was advertised as Lawler's return, which was an anticipated event. So he should get most of the credit for increases in viewership. Not a guy who randomly showed up and was on mic for a few minutes.
> 
> You can't actually be that dumb, so I will give you the benefit of the doubt and just chalk up your shitty posts as Punk mark trolling, rather than just assume you're a total imbecile.


aaaaand, reported, thanks for making my and mods jobs so easy :lmao


----------



## nikola123

Jotunheim said:


> aaaaand, reported, thanks for making my and mods jobs so easy :lmao


mommy,big bad man hurt my feelings unk3


----------



## Headliner

Everyone get back on topic and drop the trolling and insults. Thanks.


----------



## Coffey

Headliner said:


> Everyone get back on topic and drop the trolling and insults. Thanks.


Headliner, I'll love you forever if you can find it in your cold-blooded heart to take this thread out behind the shed & execute it with a bullet to the head. I'll throw a parade in your honor.


----------



## BANKSY

^

The weekly Raw ratings threads were 10x as bad.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Why would you want to take down a thread that keeps all the shit in one place. It's like the GOAT thread. 

It keeps him vs him shit in one big thread.


----------



## Choke2Death

THANOS said:


> Dude your posts in here have really went downhill in the past few weeks. Trying to extrapolate excuses some Punk fans have for the ratings to make it seem like a majority response fpalm, when it's quite obvious to everyone with two eyes that its the opposite with people lining up to take shots at Punk.


But he's right. Punk is still not a draw because overall viewership says so. His segments gaining is just among the last group of viewers, who will obviously be more interested in the _developed_ storyline as opposed to watching a random Kofi Kingston match or Alberto Del Rio squashing a jobber. For how many weeks have the ratings been in the 2 zone now? That's pretty much it. I wont call Punk the "rating killer" since the shows overall suck but he's certainly not a draw just because his segments gain while every other filler spot loses.


----------



## KO Bossy

I'd just like to point out to SinJokel that yes, Lawler's return was the draw in that segment, not Punk. And the segment probably did well.

Now let's rewind. In the past there are lots of segments where Punk hasn't been scheduled to come out. Then he does, unannounced, same as he did Monday. Except that segment bombed in the ratings. Now in this situation, all of the morons who will do anything to discredit Punk, will suddenly blame Punk for how bad the segment did.

So...which is it? Punk isn't announced to come out and does + segment does well=Punk wasn't the draw of the segment, it was something else. Punk isn't announced to come out and does + segment does poorly=See? That rating was all Punk's fault.

How some of you cretins can follow such baffling, stupid logic is beyond me.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Actually, Punk's promo went the entire 9-9:15 quarter, along with Mick Foley coming out. Lawler's promo was the one that lasted a few minutes.

If the segment does well, all three men should get credit. Stop being biased trolls for once, even though practically all 7700 posts in this thread are just that.


----------



## Jotunheim

KO Bossy said:


> I'd just like to point out to SinJokel that yes, Lawler's return was the draw in that segment, not Punk. And the segment probably did well.
> 
> Now let's rewind. In the past there are lots of segments where Punk hasn't been scheduled to come out. Then he does, unannounced, same as he did Monday. Except that segment bombed in the ratings. Now in this situation, all of the morons who will do anything to discredit Punk, will suddenly blame Punk for how bad the segment did.
> 
> So...which is it? Punk isn't announced to come out and does + segment does well=Punk wasn't the draw of the segment, it was something else. Punk isn't announced to come out and does + segment does poorly=See? That rating was all Punk's fault.
> 
> How some of you cretins can follow such baffling, stupid logic is beyond me.


that's why you treat them like the clowns they are, the more they go far and beyond to prove their point, the easier they look like trolls and the easier everyone will see them for what they are



nikola123 said:


> mommy,big bad man hurt my feelings unk3


:batista3


----------



## SinJackal

KO Bossy said:


> I'd just like to point out to SinJokel that yes, Lawler's return was the draw in that segment, not Punk. And the segment probably did well.
> 
> Now let's rewind. In the past there are lots of segments where Punk hasn't been scheduled to come out. Then he does, unannounced, same as he did Monday. Except that segment bombed in the ratings. Now in this situation, all of the morons who will do anything to discredit Punk, will suddenly blame Punk for how bad the segment did.
> 
> So...which is it? Punk isn't announced to come out and does + segment does well=Punk wasn't the draw of the segment, it was something else. Punk isn't announced to come out and does + segment does poorly=See? That rating was all Punk's fault.
> 
> How some of you cretins can follow such baffling, stupid logic is beyond me.


Putting your lame childish insult attempts aside, your reply to me would be a relevant thing for you to complain about if I actually said all those things. I've never come on here and bemoan one of Punk's segments for being ratings failures. Feel free to check back in the thread, you won't find any posts stating that. The only things I've said about Punk here were pretty much along the same lines, questioning people's thought process for solely crediting Punk for segments with other people (Vince, Cena, Ryback), and acting like the other guy was little to no factor (which is pretty much the most common post regarding Punk in this thread. Crediting him more than his share for everything good ratings-wise, excuse-making for everything bad).

I'm sure you're angry about seeing other people do what you're talking about, but don't lump everyone into the same category. When you reply to a single person, you aren't replying to "the IWC", I'm not their spokesman dude. Nor am I one of the people who talked about some Punk segment that bombed. Tbh, I'm not even sure what segment you're referring to that Punk bombed in. I don't remember ever seeing any Punk segments with ratings losses. I've seen some with small gains, but that's the worst of it.

But yes, if Punk comes out unannounced (mid-segment, not right at the beginning or less than a minute into one), whether it's a ratings success or ratings failure, it's not logical to credit or discredit him for the ratings. Though if he comes out at the start of a segment (such as less than a minute into it and is the focus of the segment, even unadvertised), he can be blamed if people tune out. If he comes out advertised, and ratings tank, then it's definitely his fault (or anyone else in the same situation). Of course, again, I've never seen a Punk segment lose viewers, though I don't check the ratings very often. Mayybe 5-10% of the time.




Jotunheim said:


> aaaaand, reported, thanks for making my and mods jobs so easy :lmao


:lol @ how mad this kid is for getting exposed for being a Punk mark troll.


----------



## Starbuck

THANOS said:


> Dude your posts in here have really went downhill in the past few weeks. Trying to extrapolate excuses some Punk fans have for the ratings to make it seem like a majority response fpalm, when it's quite obvious to everyone with two eyes that its the opposite with people lining up to take shots at Punk.


:lmao Why so serious? I could swear that I've seen you say that ratings don't matter. Why then are you in here getting butthurt over something that supposedly doesn't matter to you? Calm down plz and stop taking it all so personally. I'm not trying to do anything. You obviously disagree with what I'm saying. Doesn't mean I have some ulterior motive going on. Fucking hell. 

EXTRAPOLATE


----------



## THANOS

Choke2Death said:


> But he's right. Punk is still not a draw because overall viewership says so. His segments gaining is just among the last group of viewers, who will obviously be more interested in the _developed_ storyline as opposed to watching a random Kofi Kingston match or Alberto Del Rio squashing a jobber. For how many weeks have the ratings been in the 2 zone now? That's pretty much it. I wont call Punk the "rating killer" since the shows overall suck but he's certainly not a draw just because his segments gain while every other filler spot loses.


If the overall viewership determines it then no one is a draw on the current roster including Cena, because no matter how much his or Punk's segments gain, the OVERALL viewership is low so they're not draws by your logic. You seem to understand that there are other aspects of the show that occur randomly with no purpose that sink the ratings, yet still seem unwilling to place any validation on people that cause consistent gains on the tired and drawn out show. 

The biggest draw factor on the entire show are the, albeit rare but, good storylines. They hardly ever occur but when they do, those are the only things that cause consistent growth in this era. Create creative storylines for everyone on the roster and the ratings will sort themselves out.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

this thread once was funny 
now i am just checking for the breakdowns though its kinda hard to NOT read the comments
kinda like a solar eclipse... i know i shouldnt but i cant help but read them


----------



## THANOS

Starbuck said:


> :lmao Why so serious? I could swear that I've seen you say that ratings don't matter. Why then are you in here getting butthurt over something that supposedly doesn't matter to you? Calm down plz and stop taking it all so personally. I'm not trying to do anything. You obviously disagree with what I'm saying. Doesn't mean I have some ulterior motive going on. Fucking hell.
> 
> EXTRAPOLATE


They don't matter to my enjoyment and never will, but it doesn't mean I have forbid myself from discussing them . In response to the rest of what you said, if you really want to see a post about taking things personally, you should hold a hand mirror in front of your computer. You gotta admit that that was a pretty defensive post dude :kg2


----------



## The Lady Killer

When the 1000th episode of Raw (w/advertisements of DX, Rock, wedding, BROCK, etc) can only get you a high 3.x rating, I'm not sure how anyone expects your run-of-the-mill episode to draw anything above a low 3.x. None of the current crop of wrestlers are huge ratings juggernauts. Cena/Punk/etc sell merch and tickets, but television ratings are stagnant regardless of who is being advertised. Not sure why so much nitpicking goes on about who caused a fucking .1 increase/decrease from week to week.


----------



## Starbuck

This breakdown will be the first one in a while that will actually mean something since they had a lot of segments advertised beforehand and most of them had implications/consequences. The final Foley team pick, the scandalous non-affair of Cena and AJ, the Ryback/Maddox thing, the return of King and Punk/Cena. They advertised these things ahead of time so people had time to consider whether they wanted to watch them or not. I reckon the main event does the top number of the night tbh. People know they're in for something worthwhile when those 2 have a match together.

*@THANOS* - They don't matter to my enjoyment either. Don't really know what makes you think that they would. If you think that was a defensive post then I really don't know what to say to you either tbh. I have nothing to defend lol. You quoted me crying about something I said and I told you to calm down. DAT DEFENSE.


----------



## The Lady Killer

That, and the overrun is usually the top drawing segment.

We need THE GAME back to give the ratings a real spike (SIX FEET UNDER BECAUSE HE'D BURY THEM~!).


----------



## Starbuck

THE GAME would bury every Neilsen box in the world if he came back. 

:buried


----------



## Choke2Death

THANOS said:


> If the overall viewership determines it then no one is a draw on the current roster including Cena, because no matter how much his or Punk's segments gain, the OVERALL viewership is low so they're not draws by your logic. You seem to understand that there are other aspects of the show that occur randomly with no purpose that sink the ratings, yet still seem unwilling to place any validation on people that cause consistent gains on the tired and drawn out show.
> 
> The biggest draw factor on the entire show are the, albeit rare but, good storylines. They hardly ever occur but when they do, those are the only things that cause consistent growth in this era. Create creative storylines for everyone on the roster and the ratings will sort themselves out.


Nobody full-time is a draw, really. Even when they come up with good storylines, the ratings are low. Last year, the go-home show for MITB 2011 only got a 2.9 and that's way before the 2s became the norm. And the people that gain viewers when they are on are always given spots that are reliable gainers or always given a reason to make people care about them. Best example is Punk. He gets plenty of TV time, storylines, is the champion and everything. So how can he NOT gain viewers? It's just the standard formula of the weekly breakdowns. All the filler with directionless guys in meaningless matches cause huge losses but when a reliable spot comes around, there's a gain and depending on how many tuned out, they all return which is reflected every time by the number of viewers gained.

And to all the butthurt Punk marks that wanna cry about things said here ("You blame him for viewers lost but give everyone except him credit when his segments gain") - I'm just joking around. Apparently, I struck a nerve with some guy called Mockfrog when I jokingly credited "The Fruit" aka Cena for the 3rd hour numbers as it's his fifth time or something where he tries (& fails) to red rep me as if his non-existent rep power will do anything, lol. And similarly, many other Punk marks are mad at me too since they respond to me like wild animals everywhere I post.


----------



## TromaDogg

SinJackal said:


> Putting your lame childish insult attempts aside, your reply to me would be a relevant thing for you to complain about if I actually said all those things. I've never come on here and bemoan one of Punk's segments for being ratings failures. * Feel free to check back in the thread, you won't find any posts stating that.*


Yeah, OK. You don't actually _explicitly_ state that Punk loses ratings (seemingly, that's your 'get out' clause if anybody ever confronts you about it) but you do _imply_ that it's his fault that ratings go down whenever he's on or if they don't, then it's the other guy that's been just as much as a draw, at least with PPVs.



SinJackal said:


> I usually give credit to the bigger star, most pushed guy, or guy who usually pulls ratings regardless of who he's put against. Then of course, on occaision. . .rare occaision, you can credit the storyline if it's a good one.
> 
> When did Ryback actually lose ratings since being put in the main event btw? The only time I remember him losing ratings on Raw was when WWE ran some Susan G Komen for the Cure commercial and a diva's segment right after Ryback's match and the tally was done for that block of 3 segments, not just Ryback's match.
> 
> I didn't see the HIAC buyrate, but I assume people are crediting him more than Punk since every PPV Punk has main evented when not against Cena (excluding this last one) has been lower than the normal buyrate. So if it suddenly does well, it's hard not to look at the other guy since the common denominator with Punk main eventing has been lowish buyrates unless against Cena.
> 
> But I do agree that it's stupid to credit solely one guy. In this case in particular, obviously Ryback isn't going to get huge ratings and huge buys if he went against someone like Health Slater at HIAC instead of CM Punk. Though Slater hasn't has Punk's push or had the title for a year.


You implied that Punk has been main eventing PPVs and this caused lower buyrates. I've already completely discredited that with a complete list of PPV main events for the last couple of years (Punk has only actually main evented 3 PPVs as WWE Champion in over a year, and in two of those matches he's been against Cena who's apparently a bigger star/draw than Punk is)...plus there's also the fact that since Wrestlemania 28 (which broke records), *buyrates for every PPV have actually slightly increased this year too.*

That in turn makes it even more laughable when you automatically assume that people would credit Ryback for a decent Hell In A Cell buyrate, due to the completely false implication that Punk has been main eventing PPVs and causing lower buyrates....I realise that you're a Ryback fan, or at least I've noticed that you seem to defend Ryback against criticism a lot, such as the post above and the Ryback discuassion threads, but that's just absurd.

Whilst this is PPVs I'm talking about and you're talking about segements on Raw, it really isn't hard to see why people would read you as someone who believes that Punk causes lower ratings. I kind of got that impression about you myself.

Apologies if I've got this completely wrong.


----------



## NearFall

*Starbuck* worse than Vince. Always keeping Punk down.



Choke2Death said:


> And similarly, many other Punk marks are mad at me too since they respond to me like wild animals everywhere I post.


Judging by this thread, Punk/Ratings is a money feud imo.


----------



## Choke2Death

NearFall said:


> Judging by this thread, Punk/Ratings is a money feud imo.


Ratings have to carry Punk to passable numbers. unk3


----------



## Starbuck

NearFall said:


> *Starbuck* worse than Vince. Always keeping Punk down.
> 
> 
> 
> Judging by this thread, Punk/Ratings is a money feud imo.


:vince3

I hardly keep Punk down. It's my posts that are going downhill though. Apparently anyways. THANOS doesn't like them. unk3

EDIT - :lmao @ self fail. Took me 3 goes to get the right Punk smiley there lol.


----------



## KO Bossy

Did SinJackal actually respond to me? I saw some of what he wrote in ToxieDogg's post. I can't see myself because he's on my ignore list. His posts were so full of fail they hurt my eyes.


----------



## Green Light

I think you guys just need to hug it out.


----------



## Jotunheim

SinJackal said:


> :lol @ how mad this kid is for getting exposed for being a Punk mark troll.


that kid looks happy to me unk3



Green Light said:


> I think you guys just need to hug it out.


I for one, welcome our new U MAD overlords












KO Bossy said:


> Did SinJackal actually respond to me? I saw some of what he wrote in ToxieDogg's post. I can't see myself because he's on my ignore list. His posts were so full of fail they hurt my eyes.


yep, it's the same crap as always


----------



## KO Bossy




----------



## TromaDogg

KO Bossy said:


> Did SinJackal actually respond to me? I saw some of what he wrote in ToxieDogg's post. I can't see myself because he's on my ignore list. His posts were so full of fail they hurt my eyes.


Yeah, he did. I decided to respond to him because he strongly implied earlier in the thread that Punk was main eventing PPVs and causing the buyrates to go down, which simply isn't true (Punk hasn't main evented a PPV for nearly a year, and buyrates for all PPVs since Wrestlemania 28 have actually slightly increased since the same period after Wrestlemania 27 in 2011), implied that Ryback was more responsible than Punk for decent Hell In A Cell 2012 buyrates based on his flawed logic, didn't respond to my post that listed all the PPV main events for the last year proving Punk wasn't in them, and then claimed he wasn't criticising Punk for lower ratings and challenged anyone to check his earlier posts.

Think I'll make use of the Ignore function myself. Probably for the best in the long run.


----------



## SinJackal

KO Bossy said:


> Did SinJackal actually respond to me? I saw some of what he wrote in ToxieDogg's post. I can't see myself because he's on my ignore list. His posts were so full of fail they hurt my eyes.


Translation: You got called out for getting gotten to by the IWC, since you're responding to specific people as if they were the head of some IWC organism with the same shared brain, despite them not saying anything that you were talking about. Now you're trying to play it off by claiming you have me on ignore when you _just_ posted a reply to me.

Paranoid conspiracy theories and sloppy cover up attempts for the utter failure, noted.




ToxieDogg said:


> Yeah, OK. You don't actually _explicitly_ state that Punk loses ratings (seemingly, that's your 'get out' clause if anybody ever confronts you about it)


lol. There's no hidden meaning behind any of my posts. There aren't any black helicoptors either.



> but you do _imply_ that it's his fault that ratings go down whenever he's on


No I don't. I specifically said the opposite of that at least once, if not twice.



> or if they don't, then it's the other guy that's been just as much as a draw, at least with PPVs.


When the trend is that one guy constantly gets worse buyrates than the previous year under a certain circumstance (him being in the main event and Cena not), then ONE time he gets better buyrates, then yes, I will look at giving at least equal credit for it to the other guy due to the trend.

Quick example: Jimmy plays football. Every time he plays football, Jimmy loses. Jimmy used to always win at football, but only when John was on his team. Jake joins Jimmy's football team, and they win their first game. Who's more likely to have been the cause of the win? Jimmy, who's always lost without John before Jake joined his team? Or Jake, who is undeated with that same team?




> You implied that Punk has been main eventing PPVs and this caused lower buyrates. I've already completely discredited that with a complete list of PPV main events for the last couple of years (Punk has only actually main evented 3 PPVs as WWE Champion in over a year, and in two of those matches he's been against Cena who's apparently a bigger star/draw than Punk is)...plus there's also the fact that since Wrestlemania 28 (which broke records), *buyrates for every PPV have actually slightly increased this year too.*
> 
> That in turn makes it even more laughable when you automatically assume that people would credit Ryback for a decent Hell In A Cell buyrate, due to the completely false implication that Punk has been main eventing PPVs and causing lower buyrates....I realise that you're a Ryback fan, or at least I've noticed that you seem to defend Ryback against criticism a lot, such as the post above and the Ryback discuassion threads, but that's just absurd.
> 
> Whilst this is PPVs I'm talking about and you're talking about segements on Raw, it really isn't hard to see why people would read you as someone who believes that Punk causes lower ratings. I kind of got that impression about you myself.
> 
> Apologies if I've got this completely wrong.


No I didn't imply that he loses ratings. I have in fact "implied" the exact opposite; stating that I've never seen a Punk segment lose ratings once. (third time I've said this now). So yes, you do have it completely wrong. You're confusing "ratings" for "buyrates when main eventing". These are two seperate things which are not the same. I'm guessing this is why you're confused about my points.

When speaking about Punk's main eventing, I was (and am) talking about his whole push. I am including as far back as MITB. Going further back would be unfair, but starting there is fair imo, since that's when he first gained the WWE title.

If you want the actual, factual numbers of the PPVs Punk main evented that Cena did not, here they are: the Royal Rumble buyrates were down about 4.2% from 2011 (428k from 446k, and about 8% from the year before that (462k). NoC buyrates were down by about 2.5% from 2010(161 from 165k, and yes, they sucked bad the year before too), and TLC buyrates were down about 16% (182k from 211k. This is the one where Cena didn't appear at all).

Lastly, why are you speaking out of both sides of your mouth, and crediting Punk for the year's overall increase in buyrates, yet at the same time spouting off at the mouth about how Punk hasn't main evented in nearly a year so you can't discredit him for low buys. :lmao

Here's some more facts: From NoC to RR, 3 of those 5 PPVs featured Punk in the main event, and not Cena. All 3 had decreased buys from the previous year. The other two, featuring Cena as the main event, had increased buys. Seeing this obvious trend, the WWE switched gears and just put Cena as the main event for every PPV since the first one, and lo and behold, buyrates are up for the year.

Perhaps these numbers will make it more clear to you why I'm open-minded enough to credit Ryback and the storyline before I will believe that CM Punk is mostly responsibile if HIAC has increased buys. Going on trends, that'd be the least likely scenerio.



> You implied that Punk has been main eventing PPVs and this caused lower buyrates. I've already completely discredited that with a complete list of PPV main events for the last couple of years


Whelp, obviously you didn't, because I just posted the actual numbers, and they prove you to be dead wrong and me to be 100% correct. If I said Punk got good buyrates when he main evented and Cena didn't, I'd be a liar.

Punk is 0/3 in getting increased buys without Cena, so yes, I am going to see who he was facing and what was going on before I speculate that CM Punk is main reason why the buyrates were good. Facts and trends matter more than opinions. And it has nothing to do with how I feel about Punk. I don't like Cena either, yet you'll never catch me saying he doesn't get ratings or buys, because obviously that'd be false.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

800k tuned out during the Punk/Heyman/Jerry angle. Didn't work.

The 800k came back 45 mins later to see Ryratings beat Brad. Then tuned out again and didn't come back. Punk/Cena match didn't draw well for the final segment.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

> In the segment-by-segment, Randy Orton & Kofi Kingston vs. Dolph Ziggler & Alberto Del Rio lost 74,000 viewers. The angle with Vickie Guerrero, A.J. Lee, Dolph Ziggler and John Cena in the ring as well as the short Big Show vs. William Regal match gained 468,000 viewers, which is a strong showing at that point in the show. Kaitlyn vs. Layla and the clips from the package building to Lawler’s return lost 234,000 viewers. The return of Lawler, which included C.M. Punk, Paul Heyman and Mick Foley all involved gained 745,000 viewers to a 3.38 quarter hour. The end of the angle lost 876,000 viewers. Rey Mysterio & Sin Cara & Justin Gabriel & Tyson Kidd vs. Titus O’Neil & Darren Young & Primo & Epico gained 233,000 viewers in the last few minutes. R-Truth vs. Tensai lost 253,000 viewers. Ryback vs. Brad Maddox gained 755,000 viewers to a 3.28 quarter at 10 p.m. That’s the best 10 p.m. growth in a long time, so this angle clicked. This is the first time Ryback has shown on his own the ability to really move numbers. Sheamus vs. David Otunga lost 910,000 viewers, which would be among the most viewers lost in a segment all year. Kane & The Miz vs. Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow lost 40,000 viewers. Interestingly, the lowest point of the entire show was the beginning of Cena vs. Punk, which one would think would be huge. The first half of the match lost 313,000 viewers and did a 2.42 quarter hour. It picked up at 11 p.m. for the overrun, which is probably a combo of creatures of habit coming back at 11 knowing that’s the big angle, and people tuning in early for the next show. The match by the finish had gained 528,000 viewers to a 2.99.


They should stop doing Cena/Punk matches for a while.


----------



## Defei

Main event lost viewers even with Punk and Cena match advertised?


----------



## kent8

> C.M. Punk, Paul Heyman and Mick Foley all involved gained 745,000 viewers to a 3.38 quarter hour. *The end of the angle lost 876,000 viewers.*


People were disgusted by that shit.


----------



## JasonLives

> The return of Lawler, which included C.M. Punk, Paul Heyman and Mick Foley all involved gained 745,000 viewers to a 3.38 quarter hour. The end of the angle lost 876,000 viewers. Rey Mysterio & Sin Cara & Justin Gabriel & Tyson Kidd vs. Titus O’Neil & Darren Young & Primo & Epico gained 233,000 viewers in the last few minutes


Thats a nice way to try and spin things. Breakdown doesnt make much sense.

Breakdown was most likely:

Quarter 5 gained 745,000 viewers.
( The next quarter hour is missing, so im guessing this would be Quarter 6 ).
Quarter 6 lost 876,000 viewers. No suprise since it had 2 commercial breaks, ring entrances, backstage segment and just a minute of a match. Its a big drop but nothing shocking.
Quarter 7 gained 233,000, which contained most of the match.

Sheamus Vs. Otunga had the problem sharing their quarter with 2 commercial breaks. Add in it being a very uninteresting match and it will do badly.

The start of Cena Vs. Punk ( Quarter 12 ) also contained 2 commerical breaks, ring entrances and about 3 minutes of the match.

The trend is pretty clear when Quarters have 2 commercial breaks in them. 

Whoever reports these always try to spin these numbers despite the fact that they only get Quarterhour breakdowns, they dont get minute by minute numbers.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Punk mark trying to spin things again. SMH


----------



## JY57

looks like people are sick and tired of Cena/Punk. Rightfully so. Last week at least there was intrigue of Ryback & Cena teamed together for the 1st time.


----------



## JasonLives

The-Rock-Says said:


> Punk mark trying to spin things again. SMH


But im right.

Just like when they report "This match lost 400,000 viewers". Despite the match being 2 minutes and the rest of the quarter being nonsense :disdrogba


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

The people who tune out when shit gets tough need to grow some balls.

This is why WWE will be ultra PC for a long time as society is ultra PC.


----------



## Starbuck

> In the segment-by-segment, Randy Orton & Kofi Kingston vs. Dolph Ziggler & Alberto Del Rio lost 74,000 viewers. The angle with Vickie Guerrero, A.J. Lee, Dolph Ziggler and John Cena in the ring as well as the short Big Show vs. William Regal match gained 468,000 viewers, which is a strong showing at that point in the show. Kaitlyn vs. Layla and the clips from the package building to Lawler’s return lost 234,000 viewers. The return of Lawler, which included C.M. Punk, Paul Heyman and Mick Foley all involved gained 745,000 viewers to a 3.38 quarter hour. The end of the angle lost 876,000 viewers. Rey Mysterio & Sin Cara & Justin Gabriel & Tyson Kidd vs. Titus O’Neil & Darren Young & Primo & Epico gained 233,000 viewers in the last few minutes. R-Truth vs. Tensai lost 253,000 viewers. Ryback vs. Brad Maddox gained 755,000 viewers to a 3.28 quarter at 10 p.m. That’s the best 10 p.m. growth in a long time, so this angle clicked. This is the first time Ryback has shown on his own the ability to really move numbers. Sheamus vs. David Otunga lost 910,000 viewers, which would be among the most viewers lost in a segment all year. Kane & The Miz vs. Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow lost 40,000 viewers. Interestingly, the lowest point of the entire show was the beginning of Cena vs. Punk, which one would think would be huge. The first half of the match lost 313,000 viewers and did a 2.42 quarter hour. It picked up at 11 p.m. for the overrun, which is probably a combo of creatures of habit coming back at 11 knowing that’s the big angle, and people tuning in early for the next show. The match by the finish had gained 528,000 viewers to a 2.99.


Is this real? Holy shit lol. That's all over the fucking place. Wow. Thought Punk/Cena would have done much better. I guess they have all about killed the appeal of it by now. Silly. 9PM did well. The whole King/Punk thing...I don't even know how to interpret that tbh lol. I don't get where they're getting how the 8 man tag gained in the last few minutes unless they have minute by minute information, which they don't. Shrug. 10PM did VERY well. DAT RYBACK. He was the main guy featured here and he did it all on his own. Impressive. The whole thing is very up and down though, more so than usual. Very strange breakdown overall but interesting. 

Mark wars.....COMMENCE!!!


----------



## Hennessey

RYBACK = RATINGS

Wooooooooooooo. Happy Ryback mark here. Only one thing left for WWE to do now.


----------



## The Lady Killer

BRAD MADDOX EQUALS FUCKING RATINGS.


----------



## Green Light

> Brad Maddox vs. Ryback gained 755,000 viewers for a 3.28 quarter rating in the 10pm timeslot. This is the best 10pm growth in a long time.


:vince :vince :vince2 :vince2 :vince3 :vince3


----------



## Starbuck

Vince got a boner when he saw those numbers no doubt lol.


----------



## Jammy

It was a gimmick match and was well promoted. Anyway, looking at how this is going Ryback is probably going to inflict us with drudgery for the next few years. Probably a good time to find another hobby, like planking or something.


----------



## Patrick Bateman

Stupid people with stupid nelson box thingy why do you rather watch Ryback vs Referee instead of CENA vs PUNK?

:hhh


----------



## Choke2Death

Wow, that breakdown was fucking awesome! Rytingz gains huge, Punk/Heyman mocking Lawler's heart-attack lost a shitload of viewers and Cena/Punk lost viewers too. So much for "LULZ LULZ U MAD!!! U MAD???? LULZ!". 

Mad props to everyone that changed the channel when Punk was on. Have a great day, each and everyone of you. Even the soccer moms that want WWE to remain a shitty PC G-rated piece of garbage!


----------



## Headliner

> The end of the angle lost 876,000 viewers.


Exactly what I thought would happen.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

This is actually a very interesting breakdown...

First thing is first, thank god the end of the segment lost more than the Lawler return gained, as it should. While it probably means they tuned out whenFoley came out/during Foley's speech, it's obviously because of that shit they had Punk and Heyman do. I would've turned off Raw at that point as well had it not been for Foley coming out (and he delivered). But yeah, great news when a disgusting segment like that loses.

Ryback/Maddoxx gaining? Wow, I mean... just shows what happens when you have a good build up for a match. But even then, Ryback is turning into a true proven ratings draw. He still has his losses, but if he keeps this up like doing the best 10PM number in 4 months (and it was a great rating in today's WWE for the segment as well), he'll be a bigger ratings draw than even Cena in a few months. We'll see what happens. I've been becoming a fan of Ryback over the last month or two and I've been enjoying his face character as it's a fresh breath of air from the normal corny top babyfaces we've gotten in the last 2 years (which I'm sure is part of the reason he's drawing so well, but still it is what it is). I'm hoping Ryback continues this success in the ratings.

I do wonder though, if during the match more people tuned in in hopes of seeing Lesnar. I suppose it would be a long shot for the casuals, but I mainly tuned in to see Lesnar pop out of that ambulance.

Punk/Cena lost viewers initially, but then gained in the overrun, which is normal. It shows though that the mega-appeal of the match has been worn away and Punk/Cena, at least for a Raw, just isn't the big time draw anymore. 

Sheamus/Otunga losing 900,000+ viewers is terrible, but expected right Ryback destroyed Maddox.


----------



## Roncaglione

Headliner said:


> Exactly what I thought would happen.


Dave Meltzer was the source of those ratings and here is his breakdown in the lead story of the Observer:



> As far as people tuning out, there was, in fact, a huge tune-out factor actually during the angle itself, with 17.7% of those viewing turning off their TV or switching to another channel in the last few minutes of the angle. It was 21% leaving in the Male 18-49 demo, or one in five, which is kind of staggering if you think about it. I had expected the “train wreck” mentality where people would hate it but stick with it and then tune out for the next match, but they didn’t wait. But as far as long-term, there was no effect since almost all came back to the show roughly 45 minutes later, watched one segment, and there was a massive tune-out again from there, which is the normal third hour pattern as people get tired of the show late..


----------



## holt_hogan

RevolverSnake said:


> why do you rather watch Ryback vs Referee instead of CENA vs PUNK?
> 
> :hhh


They've had loads of matches I assume.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Once again Ryback, CM Punk, and Mark Henry prove their ratings power.


----------



## blur

Punk draws and kill ratingz at the same time.

Was it done before?


----------



## Snothlisberger

Starbuck said:


> Is this real? Holy shit lol. That's all over the fucking place. Wow. Thought Punk/Cena would have done much better. I guess they have all about killed the appeal of it by now. Silly. 9PM did well. The whole King/Punk thing...I don't even know how to interpret that tbh lol. I don't get where they're getting how the 8 man tag gained in the last few minutes unless they have minute by minute information, which they don't. Shrug. 10PM did VERY well. DAT RYBACK. He was the main guy featured here and he did it all on his own. Impressive. The whole thing is very up and down though, more so than usual. Very strange breakdown overall but interesting.
> 
> Mark wars.....COMMENCE!!!


Actually, Nielsen does have ratings minute by minute. They are considered unnecessary tho.


----------



## JasonLives

WallofShame said:


> Actually, Nielsen does have ratings minute by minute. They are considered unnecessary tho.


But Meltzer dont. Which is why he usually guess why a quarter rised or gained, or spin it in a way that suits him. Of course he always seem to leave out commercial breaks.
Since the different gains and losses are easily explainable just looking at what took place in what quarter. 

Like saying that the start of Cena/Punk drew poorly. No, the quarter drew poorly because it had 3 minutes of matchtime and the rest was commercials and entrances.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

WOW. Number's don't lie I guess, WWE will probably make Punk and Heyman apologize on the PPV or even RAW. Rybacks gain and Lawler Fiasco loss are both connected so you don't really now what numbers Ryback would have gained without the unnatural amount of people tuning out tuning back in, he's definitely getting some buzz though. 

Cena/Punk has died a death which is expected, Ive said it loathes but Cena really isn't any bigger of a 'TV Draw' than Punk, I wonder if that angle will have any effects on future Punk segments or they'll just forget about it.


----------



## Oakue

How the hell did that awful and ridiculous AJ/Cena/Vickie/Ziggler angle gain nearly half a million viewers?

I'm not sure what people want to see anymore, quite frankly.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Don't think some of you get it. Q6 lost 800k viewers because there was nothing featured in the quarter. Quarters filled with two commercial breaks, backstage segments and video promos tend to do that. Nothing unusual. The Punk/Lawler/Foley thing did very well. Props to Ryback, despite failing the past few weeks, I give him as well as the hype/reasoning for the match full credit for a really good 10PM number. 

And just like Q6, Q12 had basically nothing featured except for the entrances of Punk and Cena in the second half of the quarter. Their match started at the overrun, so it drew decent, but not as well as it should have. Their matches have done much better in the past. Like I said, you have #1 vs. #2 too often and it begins to lose appeal. Focusing on a Punk/Foley then Punk/Rock feud and whatever Cena does will help keep these two away.


----------



## Amuroray

cm punk killing raw once again


----------



## Jingoro

holt_hogan said:


> They've had loads of matches I assume.


that's kind of the problem and to have them wrestle yet again on raw. maybe make it a little special by having them only wrestle on ppvs? it's that too forward thinking for vince?


----------



## Kabraxal

Ryback/Maddox did well because the feeling is that something would happen... not just a boring long squash match. Not surprised at the rest of the numbers really... mostly gains are tied to the times instead of anything else since everything else has really lost any real appeal. People just don't expect consistency for the most part.

And if the Punk/Lawler segment took a huge hit at the end... well, should have happened at the stupid ass recap before Lawler came out. That was far worse than the fake heart attack by Heyman.


----------



## Perfect.Insanity

moonmop said:


> How the hell did that awful and ridiculous AJ/Cena/Vickie/Ziggler angle gain nearly half a million viewers?
> 
> I'm not sure what people want to see anymore, quite frankly.


People are hypocrites. They get offended by the scripted mock of Punk to Lawler, yet they don't get offended by the fact that WWE insults their intelligence with stuff like the AJ "scandal"


----------



## Hawksea

LOL at that horrendous 300k+ loss.

I guess people have been so much sick of Punk all over Raw all the time that they're even starting to get tired of Punk segments that has Cena on it. Cena can only carry his non drawing skinny fat bum so much.


----------



## KO Bossy

Ryback goes weeks without being in a segment that draws-Rybck marks have nothing to say
Ryback has a segment one week that draws-ZOMG RYTINGZ HE'S A PROVEN DRAW!


CM Punk goes several weeks being in segments that draw-"Oh it was whoever else was involved in the segment that drew, Punk can't be given all the credit"
CM Punk finally has one night where 2 segments he's in with other proven draws loses viewers-"YOU SEE?! PUNK CAN'T DRAW, THERE'S THE PROOF, HE'S A LOSER!"


This, folks, is the kind of logic your brain creates when you've been given bleach to drink as a child.

I'll be the first to admit Punk is not a draw in this day and age. Nobody is. But the ridiculous shit some of you talk yourselves into about who's a draw and who isn't based on who you like and don't like makes me think you've been dropped when you were a baby.

I can't wait until Ryback and Daniel Bryan become full main eventers, its gonna be awesome seeing this forum completely turn on them the way they have Punk.


----------



## Roncaglione

JasonLives said:


> But Meltzer dont.


He does. Did you read what I posted?


----------



## Apex Rattlesnake

*RY*_"Bringingdemratingz"_*BACK*


----------



## Evil Peter

KO Bossy said:


> Ryback goes weeks without being in a segment that draws-Rybck marks have nothing to say
> Ryback has a segment one week that draws-ZOMG RYTINGZ HE'S A PROVEN DRAW!
> 
> 
> CM Punk goes several weeks being in segments that draw-"Oh it was whoever else was involved in the segment that drew, Punk can't be given all the credit"
> CM Punk finally has one night where 2 segments he's in with other proven draws loses viewers-"YOU SEE?! PUNK CAN'T DRAW, THERE'S THE PROOF, HE'S A LOSER!"
> 
> 
> This, folks, is the kind of logic your brain creates when you've been given bleach to drink as a child.
> 
> I'll be the first to admit Punk is not a draw in this day and age. Nobody is. But the ridiculous shit some of you talk yourselves into about who's a draw and who isn't based on who you like and don't like makes me think you've been dropped when you were a baby.
> 
> I can't wait until Ryback and Daniel Bryan become full main eventers, its gonna be awesome seeing this forum completely turn on them the way they have Punk.


I couldn't agree more. It shows that some people here are just so desperate to be able to write something negative about Punk that they jump like sharks on anything that's negative, not realizing how dumb it looks when they are silent during all the segments he has that has the opposite effect. That's just not intelligent even for trolling.

No one is a real draw here, but I'd also say that no one is really a big reason why ratings are lower these days either. The main problem lies with WWE writing. There's no consistency and there's no depth due to that they always seem to take the short-term decisions. The times they do take a long-term approach they don't seem to know how to mix that with the short-term events leading up to that.

This is just an environment where it's unlikely for anyone to anyone to reach any revolutionary success. There are several on the roster doing very well, but they are limited by what they are set to perform.


----------



## RatedR10

What a weird breakdown. The loss to close the Punk/Heyman/Lawler/Foley segment is big and odd unless people were actually that sick from the angle.

I'm a huge Ziggler fan, so for me, him being involved in a segment that gained big is awesome. The more eyes on Ziggler, the better. Hopefully he gets more mic time.

The 10 PM gain with Ryback...can't say I expected that. I doubt all that alone is just Ryback. I bet a lot of people were anticipating some sort of bigger angle and not an extended squash. Vince would obviously LOVE to see those numbers though!

The whole Punk/Cena thing has been beat to death really, so while I'm not surprised it didn't do a HUGE number before the overrun, I'm surprised it was the lowest point of the show and lost that many viewers.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

It's funny to see the same people week in week out in here arguing over the same fucking thing. Just don't watch if you don't like, some claim to not watch yet are always in here. Obvious trolls are obvious.


----------



## SinJackal

Perfect.Insanity said:


> People are hypocrites. They get offended by the scripted mock of Punk to Lawler, yet they don't get offended by the fact that WWE insults their intelligence with stuff like the AJ "scandal"


AJ possibily being in a relationship with John Cena isn't nearly as bad as someone faking a heart attack ro make fun of a guy who legit had a heart attack and JUST came back.

The two things are not equal man. Not even close. Even I felt awkward when they ran that segment.




JasonLives said:


> But im right.
> 
> Just like when they report "This match lost 400,000 viewers". Despite the match being 2 minutes and the rest of the quarter being nonsense :disdrogba


Yeah, that actually is true, for that kind of situation. Like when a segment (before commercials) kicks off with a short match, then some WWE Be a Star or Susan Komen for the Cure thing pops up then a divas match, then commercials. . .then yes, you can say "well the first match doesn't have much to do with the segment drawing poorly". So if that happened with Punk, I'd completely agree that that's mostly responsible for any ratings losses. The Punk promo wasn't 2 minutes long though. It was at least 5 minutes, maybe 10 (I didn't count obviously).

Anyway, for the commercials/segment thing: When they advertise, "this match is up next", or "this segment is up next". . .if it's interesting, you won't have a big tune out. So commercials really really responsible for losses. It's usually just what's happening on the show. People will leave if the next segment looks like a stinker.

As for the match, I don't think people would tune out after seeing Punk and Cena enter the ring. "Oh, they're about to have a match~? *switches channel* Fuck it! I can't wait another few minutes for the match even thouggh I just watched 3 hours of Raw." Who does that?


----------



## Ether

ignore this


----------



## Ether

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Don't think some of you get it. Q6 lost 800k viewers because there was nothing featured in the quarter. Quarters filled with two commercial breaks, backstage segments and video promos tend to do that. Nothing unusual. The Punk/Lawler/Foley thing did very well. Props to Ryback, despite failing the past few weeks, I give him as well as the hype/reasoning for the match full credit for a really good 10PM number.
> 
> And just like Q6, Q12 had basically nothing featured except for the entrances of Punk and Cena in the second half of the quarter. Their match started at the overrun, so it drew decent, but not as well as it should have. Their matches have done much better in the past. Like I said, you have #1 vs. #2 too often and it begins to lose appeal. Focusing on a Punk/Foley then Punk/Rock feud and whatever Cena does will help keep these two away.


(Y)

Was all ready to mock that shitty Punk/Lawler segment too :hhh


----------



## ywall2breakerj

ZOMG PUNK DON'T DRAW RYBACK DON'T DRAW JESUS DON'T DRAW TURN EVERYONE HEEL HEELS DRAW.


----------



## BHfeva

WOW didn't expect Brad Maddox to be such a draw !!


----------



## Falkono

Firstly I think it shows how far the product has fallen that some think a 2.8 rating is good...that is dire. The same week last year did a 3.37.

Secondly that is the last one before one of the wwe ppv flagships in the survivor series...I imagine that is the worst pre Survivor Series Raw in history.

Thirdly the last segment loses with Cena and Punk show that the third hour needs to go. These two are technically the two top guys on the show and if that results in loses then something is seriously wrong there. People are bored and tired having to sit through three hours of the show. Especially when content is spread so thin.

The real shame is as I mention the build up to Survivor Series. It has been a total clusterfuck and buy rates will be waaaay down.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Falkono said:


> Firstly I think it shows how far the product has fallen that some think a 2.8 rating is good...that is dire. The same week last year did a 3.37.


In all fairness, last year's build had Rock and was only two hours, so it isn't a really fair comparison. However, what you could point out is Raw's ratings for the last two months have been lower than where they were last year during the same two months (almost every week has been down the whole year if I'm not mistaken).

However 2.8-2.9 is becoming the average, which is terrible, but at this point if the show gets even that, it's "okay" for right now's standards, though obviously bad in the grand scheme of things. However if they can remain in business even with those ratings, it doesn't really matter.


----------



## Starbuck

DAT 2.0 ERA


----------



## Shawn Morrison

FOR THE LOVE OF GAWD GOOO BACK TOO 2 HOURS. People didn't even tune in for the top two guys in WWE, Punk and Cena, that is how tiring 3 hours is. Plus with 3 hours, they already run all the possible match combinations to the ground, they will be left with nothing original to do.


----------



## Starbuck

Here's the decision they are faced with...apparently lol:

1) Have a 3 hour show, make an absolute mint off the third hour but at the expense of ratings and the overall quality of the shows

2) Go back to 2 hours, lose out on a lot of money, improve the quality of the show and most likely improve ratings as well

As a businessman, what would you do if you were Vince McMahon? I can see why they've done it, even if they were forced into it by USA. Maybe they can do it for now while the show and wrestling in general is a bit of a slump. They can set aside all that extra money and then when they're ready to perhaps start a new boom or go in a new direction, they'll have a shit ton of money just sitting to spend on advertising, promotion, marketing, whatever the hell else. Who knows, it's just an idea. Or maybe we'll be stuck with 3 hours forever. Money > all at the end of the day. It's just unfortunate that in order for them to make that money they have turned their flagship show into a complete chore to watch.


----------



## Shawn Morrison

Starbuck said:


> Here's the decision they are faced with...apparently lol:
> 
> 1) Have a 3 hour show, make an absolute mint off the third hour but at the expense of ratings and the overall quality of the shows
> 
> 2) Go back to 2 hours, lose out on a lot of money, improve the quality of the show and most likely improve ratings as well
> 
> As a businessman, what would you do if you were Vince McMahon? I can see why they've done it, even if they were forced into it by USA. Maybe they can do it for now while the show and wrestling in general is a bit of a slump. They can set aside all that extra money and then when they're ready to perhaps start a new boom or go in a new direction, they'll have a shit ton of money just sitting to spend on advertising, promotion, marketing, whatever the hell else. Who knows, it's just an idea. Or maybe we'll be stuck with 3 hours forever. Money > all at the end of the day. It's just unfortunate that in order for them to make that money they have turned their flagship show into a complete chore to watch.


Once ratings start decreasing even further the network itself will tell them to go back to two hours, or else they will risk the viewers for the show, which is a bad thing for both WWE and the USA Network.


----------



## Rock316AE

I expected Jerry's promoted return to do big and it did for the first part which was real and emotional, what it should have been. Good to see that the second part with the disturbing act of the Punk/Heyman segment lost all the viewers and more. That's exactly what I predicted in the RAW thread. Cena/Punk doing horrible wasn't surprising, it was never that big to begin with and the fact that they did it so many times lowered it even more. The most impressive thing in this breakdown is the big 10pm gain, I'm pretty sure that it's the biggest 10pm gain since the move to 3 hours. Ryback is currently 3 out of 3 in a main time slot, Ziggler/Otunga, tag with Cena and now a huge gain for a match with a ref. Ryback is the hottest TV attraction in the industry today based on his results every time they're promoting him in a key position. And if he made a difference on PPV, according to a report a few weeks ago in his first PPV main event ever(In his current persona), he can be considered along with Cena in every aspect besides his merchandise sales and family fanbase on the road.


----------



## Hennessey

Why do people complain about RAW being 3 hours? Personally, I don't watch the entire 3 hours. I either just tune in and out, or I just skip the entire first hour completely, and just catch anything good that happened on you tube. If you don't like it, then just don't watch an hour of it.


----------



## Choke2Death

The Sandrone said:


> *In all fairness, last year's build had Rock and was only two hours*, so it isn't a really fair comparison. However, what you could point out is Raw's ratings for the last two months have been lower than where they were last year during the same two months (almost every week has been down the whole year if I'm not mistaken).
> 
> However 2.8-2.9 is becoming the average, which is terrible, but at this point if the show gets even that, it's "okay" for right now's standards, though obviously bad in the grand scheme of things. However if they can remain in business even with those ratings, it doesn't really matter.


Wrong, "Raw Gets Rocked" at 14/11/2011 was a three hour special and I remember staying up to watch it and almost falling asleep at school due to being extremely tired. What a waste of time that was. The Rock did his thing but I just expected a lot more with all the excitement and shit.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

It's a 3 hour show now which obviously means the number was going to get diluted.


----------



## Jotunheim

Sparta101 said:


> Why do people complain about RAW being 3 hours? Personally, I don't watch the entire 3 hours. I either just tune in and out, or I just skip the entire first hour completely, and just catch anything good that happened on you tube. If you don't like it, then just don't watch an hour of it.


you just said it yourself, the idea is that the overall product should be good enough to sit through it, but instead it's complete garbage and we have to skip most of it because it's mind numbingly boring, thus, the overall product it's awful, affecting ratings, and so on


----------



## ellthom

Ratings will never be high for wrestling again, wrestling isn't cool anymore. WWE will never go back to the ratings they had over 10 years ago no matter who has the title, not a single person in the WWE right NOW can draw. We can pick names and point fingers but lets face it everyone has tuned out of wrestling to either move on or go watch something more engaging. The only people still wathcing now are 

Those that cling onto hope that wrestling will be great again.
Kids who will most likely feel Wrestling is childish by the time they are 12
then there are probably a large amount of people who instead illegally stream/pirate the shows which don't help the ratings either.

Ratings will go up slightly maybe and go back down again. Wrestlemania showed us that the only way to make people watch is to add a former wrestler now movie star to a match, a FORMER WWE star, thats very sad that WWE cant create new stars and have got to rely on old ones to big up the ratings. People just don't watch to watch WWE as much as they used too. It sounds harsh but its near true. I am the only one of my friends who now watches WWE out of everyone I knew who used to.. very sad.

I wouldnt be surprised to see WWE in TNA ratings territory soon


----------



## Shawn Morrison

Sparta101 said:


> Why do people complain about RAW being 3 hours? Personally, I don't watch the entire 3 hours. I either just tune in and out, or I just skip the entire first hour completely, and just catch anything good that happened on you tube. If you don't like it, then just don't watch an hour of it.


exactly...people tune out. Which is why the ratings are going down. Which is why they need to go back to 2 hours.


----------



## Snothlisberger

2.8 for 3 hours >>>>>>>>> 3.37 for 2 hours. People continue to talk ratings when they don't understand them

The fact people quote the overall viewership rating rather than the 18-49 demo rating proves their lack of understanding.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Choke2Death said:


> Wrong, "Raw Gets Rocked" at 14/11/2011 was a three hour special and I remember staying up to watch it and almost falling asleep at school due to being extremely tired. What a waste of time that was. The Rock did his thing but I just expected a lot more with all the excitement and shit.


Okay, true it was 3 hours, but it still had Rock promoted for the first time live in about 6 months. So I'd still chalk that 3.31 to Rock being there and nothing else. That being said, there's a good chance even with Rock not being there, the rating for last year's show would've been higher than this year's anyway, so I guess it doesn't really matter.


----------



## Hawksea

I love how Punk referenced Diesel for having recently surpassed his almost year long championship reign.

Though it looks like it won't be the only record he will surpass Diesel at.


----------



## King_Kool-Aid™

ellthom said:


> Ratings will never be high for wrestling again, wrestling isn't cool anymore. WWE will never go back to the ratings they had over 10 years ago no matter who has the title, not a single person in the WWE right NOW can draw. We can pick names and point fingers but lets face it everyone has tuned out of wrestling to either move on or go watch something more engaging. The only people still wathcing now are
> 
> Those that cling onto hope that wrestling will be great again.
> Kids who will most likely feel Wrestling is childish by the time they are 12
> then there are probably a large amount of people who instead illegally stream/pirate the shows which don't help the ratings either.
> 
> Ratings will go up slightly maybe and go back down again. Wrestlemania showed us that the only way to make people watch is to add a former wrestler now movie star to a match, a FORMER WWE star, thats very sad that WWE cant create new stars and have got to rely on old ones to big up the ratings. People just don't watch to watch WWE as much as they used too. It sounds harsh but its near true. I am the only one of my friends who now watches WWE out of everyone I knew who used to.. very sad.
> 
> I wouldnt be surprised to see WWE in TNA ratings territory soon


Yeah i don't blame your friends. Everytime had a get together to watch WWE within the last several years the episode ALWAYS turned out to be underwhelming, failing to live up to any of our expectations that were created by WWE from the 90s to early 00s. They have to ruin every storyline, make everything so lame and boring. Nothing has a badass feel that pro wrestling should have. The midcard all looks like jobbers with no interesting personas and none of the titles matter anymore and have all lost prestige. WWE was putting on underwhelming shows as far back 2006, its no surprise its impossible now to get anyone to sit through it with you, not to mention making it 3 hours makes it even more of a chore than it ever was. 

And to think i actually fell into Punk's scripted lines and believed he would actually "make this shit cool again". What a mark i am.

Sad thing is i even took a break in most of 2010 and 2011 but i see its just not going to improve. I think its time for me to just move on to something else. People just want a modern day badass wrestling show that's entertaining and not boring as fuck or try too hard to be edgy. Problem is WWE is so out of touch with modern culture that isn't for kids that they end up alienating more wrestling fans when they go after nickolodeon stars or celebrities that haven't been relevant in 10 years. They never get anyone now who's modern yet cool and not a lame tool. They did get mayweather a few years back but who have they gotten since? Snooki? lol well at least she was part of modern culture at the time. Why didn't they have tebow on the show or lebron james? or any modern artist who doesn't make terrible music that will get them booed or ignored by the majority of the crowd. 

They're so out of touch. I mean seriously they have ziggler considering getting on an elevator with someone as reaching 2nd base? really? people don't even use the baseball terms for "scoring" anymore. Goddamn WWE is so oudated!

Oh well, sorry for venting like a lil bitch.


----------



## wb1899

WallofShame said:


> 2.8 for 3 hours >>>>>>>>> 3.37 for 2 hours. People continue to talk ratings when they don't understand them
> 
> The fact people quote the overall viewership rating rather than the 18-49 demo rating proves their lack of understanding.


An overall viewership rating would be an P2+ rating, but nobody uses them.
P2+ ratings from Monday:
8:00 - 1.44
9:00 - 1.52
10:00 - 1.39
They talk about household ratings, which is even worse.

But the rest is 100% right (only the A18-49 demo is important).
For those who are interested:
A18-49 numbers from Monday
8:00 - 1.674 million (1.32 rating)
9:00 - 1.797 million (1.42)
10:00 - 1.787 million (1.41)


----------



## Sam Knight

*What will happen to WWE if RAW's ratings fall to 1's,Smackdown's ratings drop to 0's?*

Will WWE's broadcasting right be taken away?


----------



## Undashing Rom

*Re: What will happen to WWE if RAW's ratings fall to 1's,Smackdown's ratings drop to*

I don't think so, even though I hope that it'll happen and then perhaps they will realise something is wrong and will try to fix it.


----------



## -Sambo Italiano-

*Re: What will happen to WWE if RAW's ratings fall to 1's,Smackdown's ratings drop to*

Vince will steal thousands of Nielsen boxes. Did you know that Raw, Smackdown, Main Event, Saturday morning slam and NXT are the most watched television shows in history.


----------



## Superior Quality

*Re: What will happen to WWE if RAW's ratings fall to 1's,Smackdown's ratings drop to*

If that happens then surely they will move Raw back to two hours and as far a Smackdown goes, it would possibly lose its tv deal. I hope if it does happen, then WWE will remove Steph from head of creative and fire the entire creative team and replace them for people who know how to book a wrestling show.


----------



## reDREDD

*Re: What will happen to WWE if RAW's ratings fall to 1's,Smackdown's ratings drop to*

pretty sure you dont wake up and find out your viewership halved overnight


----------



## Adyman

*Re: What will happen to WWE if RAW's ratings fall to 1's,Smackdown's ratings drop to*



Redead said:


> pretty sure you dont wake up and find out your viewership halved overnight


If Santino wins the WWE Championship then yes


----------



## Adyman

*Re: What will happen to WWE if RAW's ratings fall to 1's,Smackdown's ratings drop to*



Redead said:


> pretty sure you dont wake up and find out your viewership halved overnight


If Punk retains then yes


----------



## Kratosx23

*Re: What will happen to WWE if RAW's ratings fall to 1's,Smackdown's ratings drop to*

They'd still manage, considering TNA has a deal. It would be horrific, but they'd still manage. I doubt that's possible, though, the WWE Machine is too established and built that a lot of people will watch it no matter what.


----------



## Superior Quality

*Re: What will happen to WWE if RAW's ratings fall to 1's,Smackdown's ratings drop to*

^ Double post? Punk has been champ for a while so I'm sure he won't be the cause of the ratings going down.


----------



## itssoeasy23

*Re: What will happen to WWE if RAW's ratings fall to 1's,Smackdown's ratings drop to*

By the time RAW's ratings fall the low 2's constantly they well do something about it. 

I highly doubt that'll ever happen though.


----------



## Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

*Re: What will happen to WWE if RAW's ratings fall to 1's,Smackdown's ratings drop to*

CENA. More CENA. :vince2


----------



## jonoaries

*Re: What will happen to WWE if RAW's ratings fall to 1's,Smackdown's ratings drop to*

Titan Towers becomes the new Jonestown?

It would take something huge for that to happen. Stop worrying about tv ratings anyway, they don't mean shit.


----------



## Brye

*Re: What will happen to WWE if RAW's ratings fall to 1's,Smackdown's ratings drop to*

The internet will talk about it.


----------



## cokecan567

*Re: What will happen to WWE if RAW's ratings fall to 1's,Smackdown's ratings drop to*

I hope they keep getting low ratings and have the ratings go lower and lower... the product they put on nowadays diserves shit ratings. I also hope tna oneday rises up and triumps over wwe. and wwe goes out of buisness. and something better comes. wwe is dead nowadays


----------



## reDREDD

*Re: What will happen to WWE if RAW's ratings fall to 1's,Smackdown's ratings drop to*



Adyman said:


> If Punk retains then yes


the butthurt is strong with this one


----------



## murder

Raw rating was a 2.9 last week and here we are talking about 1's? The fuck happened to this thread? 

I already knew it was a bad thread. I mean I got red rep because I said that Ryback drew the HIAC buyrate instead of Punk because he was the hot babyface chasing the heel champion. But what can you do about the 12 year olds that are running around this forum.

But now it's getting really stupid really fast.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

murder said:


> Raw rating was a 2.9 last week and here we are talking about 1's? The fuck happened to this thread?
> 
> I already knew it was a bad thread. I mean I got red rep because I said that Ryback drew the HIAC buyrate instead of Punk because he was the hot babyface chasing the heel champion. But what can you do about the 12 year olds that are running around this forum.
> 
> But now it's getting really stupid really fast.


A topic made on the forum was merged into this thread. But even so, this thread is so full of crap.


----------



## Superior Quality

I honestly don't pay attention to ratings anymore but a 2.9 is actually pretty good compared to what people were saying it was a few weeks ago.


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: What will happen to WWE if RAW's ratings fall to 1's,Smackdown's ratings drop to*



Adyman said:


> If Punk retains then yes


----------



## SerapisLiber

SinJackal said:


> When speaking about Punk's main eventing, I was (and am) talking about his whole push. I am including as far back as MITB. Going further back would be unfair, but starting there is fair imo, since that's when he first gained the WWE title.
> 
> If you want the actual, factual numbers of the PPVs Punk main evented that Cena did not, here they are: the Royal Rumble...


Got to cut it off right there, since Punk did not main event the Royal Rumble.
Hint: The main event of that PPV is in the title.

No doubt this will likely provoke a reply with an ad hoc stipulation along the lines of 'you know what I mean! Da last match BEFORE da royale! Da royale don't count (since Punk wasn't in it)!!!1! 

Well, the 2011 RR it was the... 

*DIVAS MATCH* that went on just prior to the battle royale, so does the divas match count as the Main Event over the royale?

Hardly.

The royale is the main event of the Rumble, not the match prior. Punk didn't main event the RR 2012.



SinJackal said:


> buyrates were down about 4.2% from 2011 (428k from 446k, and about 8% from the year before that (462k). NoC buyrates were down by about 2.5% from 2010(161 from 165k, and yes, they sucked bad the year before too), and TLC buyrates were down about 16% (182k from 211k. This is the one where Cena didn't appear at all).
> 
> ...
> 
> Here's some more facts: From NoC to RR, 3 of those 5 PPVs featured Punk in the main event,and not Cena.


No. Only two did.



SinJackal said:


> All 3 had decreased buys from the previous year.


Two. All two had decreased, one of which was by a comparatively small margin, and yet also actually _*increased*_ domestically (NoC), allegedly.



SinJackal said:


> The other two, featuring Cena as the main event, had increased buys. Seeing this obvious trend, the WWE switched gears and just put Cena as the main event for every PPV since the first one, and lo and behold, buyrates are up for the year.


Too bad that strategy didn't work for them the previous year.



SinJackal said:


> Perhaps these numbers will make it more clear to you why I'm open-minded enough to credit Ryback and the storyline before I will believe that CM Punk is mostly responsibile if HIAC has increased buys. Going on trends, that'd be the least likely scenerio.


And what trend did Ryback have? You go on to say "Punk is 0/3 in getting increased buys without Cena" (actually 0/2) prior to HIAC, yet Ryback prior to HIAC is 0/0 in getting increased buys without Cena. By your own criteria their score was even going in, thus by your own criteria there is nothing to justify crediting Ryback anymore than Punk. 

Yet, given that Punk is an established main event talent and the Champion, my bias goes to him. If Ryback was still in the ME but not Punk, the only other person I could conceive of as getting as good or better a number than Punk would be Cena. However, in vice-versa, there are still a few names I would suspect could have been thrown in there against Punk and yet still would have drawn as good or even better than Ryback.



SinJackal said:


> If I said Punk got good buyrates when he main evented and Cena didn't, I'd be a liar.


Exempting HIAC, of course.



SinJackal said:


> Punk is 0/3[0/2 actually] in getting increased buys without Cena, so yes, I am going to see who he was facing and what was going on before I speculate that CM Punk is main reason why the buyrates were good. Facts and trends matter more than opinions.


And likewise, Ryback was 0/0 in getting increased buys without Cena, so yes, I am going to see who he was facing and what was going on before I speculate that Ryback is the main reason why the buyrates were good. Facts and trends matter more than absolutely no facts or trends to go on at all, i.e., no Ryback main events wherewith we may compare.
(And do note that I have _*not*_ said that *you did* speculate Ryback was the reason.)

I have to wonder though, are you consistent and do you do the same thing with the inverse data? When Punk main events and numbers are down from the previous year, do you likewise look to see who his opponents were, and what their trends were going in?

For instance, since TLC was down, was the fact that his competition was Del Rio & Miz taken into consideration before 'speculating that Punk was the main reason'? Is Del Rio's trend going into that PPV taken into account, namely, the fact that he just main evented two previous PPVs, both of which were down from 2010?

Can even the best draw in the world still draw well even if he were booked against a "broom-stick"?

And since you use Cena as a main variable in your data, what was his trend in 2011? In fact, is it taken into account in your data that the trend for 2011 overall was a relatively downward trend, with eight of the thirteen PPVs (the majority) all doing worse than the previous year, most of those in the latter part of the year? Interestingly enough, that same year, 2011, is when the two PPVs you selected to use against Punk occurred. His positive gain (HIAC) happened this year.

Since you tried to compare Punk's main event PPVs without Cena in 2011 against the previous year's numbers as data against his drawing ability, and since your elimination of Cena implies you treat him as a better draw, it is interesting to see how Cena holds up when your same ad hoc test is applied to him.

The following data is courtesy of Wikipedia.

While the numbers vary depending on which site you go to, the up or down from the previous year is still consistent, and the margin of difference from site to site is nothing major.

For convenience I chose the Wiki numbers as they are the most commonly repeated I have seen. So if you have more accurate data from a reliable source, cite to me the link and if reliable, I will make the correction.

Royal Rumble = *Down*
2010 ~462k 
ME: Rumble (Winner Del Rio)

2011 ~446k 
ME: Rumble (Winner Sheamus)


Elimination Chamber = *Down*
2010 ~285k 
Me: EC, Jericho over Punk, Morrison,R-Truth, UnderTaker, Rey

2011 ~199k 
ME: EC, Cena over Punk, Morrison, R-Truth, Sheamus, Orton

Down? No Cena a better draw than Cena?


Wrestle Mania = *Up*
2010 ~885k 
ME: UnderTaker over Shawn Michaels

2011 ~1,059,000
ME: Miz over Cena (Rock as guest host)


Extreme Rules = *Up*
2010 ~182k
ME: Cena over Batista

2011 ~209k
ME: Cena over Miz & Morrison

Cena was in both, so the variable is the Miz + Morrison. They a better draw than Cena?


Over The Limit = *Down*
2010 ~197k
ME: Cena over Batista

2011 ~140k
ME: Cena over Miz

Cena was in both. Cena can't draw as much as Cena? Miz & Cena both in ExRu, so variable is Morrison. Morrison draws 69k more than Cena & Miz combined (sans Rock)?


Capitol Punishment = *Up*
F4WAY 2010 ~143k
ME: Cena over Sheamus, Edge, & Orton

2011 ~170k
ME: Cena over R-Truth

Cena was in both, so variable is R-Truth. Cena can't draw as much as Cena? R-Truth a better draw than Edge, Orton, and Sheamus combined?


Money In The Bank = *Up*
2010 ~165
ME: Sheamus over Cena

2011 ~195
ME: Punk over Cena

Cena was in both, so variable is Punk.


Summer Slam = *Down*
2010 ~350k
ME: 7 vs 7 Elimination, WWE over Nexus

2011 ~296
ME: Punk over Cena

Cena in both, so variable is Punk. Understandable that the combined force of 13 other superstars can edge out Punk alone. Ironically, though down from '10, still drew significantly more than their MITB match, which was _*UP*_ from '10. Is 195>296?


Night of Champions = *Down*
2010 ~165k
ME: 6-Pack Elim. Orton over Sheamus, Cena, Edge, Barrett, and Jericho

2011 ~161k
ME: HHH over Punk

Understandable that 6 stars outdrew 2, one of which was in semi-retirement. Although, the 6 combined only made a difference of 4k. 


Hell In A Cell = *Down*
2010 ~210k
ME: Kane over Taker

2011 ~182k
ME: Del Rio over Punk & Cena.

Includes both Punk & Cena. No excuses here. Not yet, at least.


Vengeance = *Down*
Brag. Rights 2010 ~137k
ME: Orton over Barett

2011 ~121k 
ME: Del Rio over Cena

Worst draw of the year. It even did worse than Bragging Rights from the previous year, which is quite a feat, given that BR 2010 was considered such a flop that BR 2011 was cancelled and eventually replaced with Vengeance. So actually, this was the worst draw of the past TWO years up to that point (possibly even further, haven't checked yet. And who headlined? Who drew the worst buyrate of the past two years from '10-'11?

CM Punk?

Nope.

Del Rio and...

John Cena.

When they had Punk a moth earlier, they weren't far off the 200k mark. When it was just Punk & Cena earlier in the year, they WERE around the 200k mark and later around the 300k mark.

I ask again, can even the best draw in the world still draw well even if booked against a "broomstick"?

Evidently, the answer is no.

Should Punk be expected to draw any better with the same broomstick? I don't think it's fair to. Yet Punk DID do better with that broomstick at TLC.

Survivor Series = *Up*
2010 ~244k
ME: Orton over Barrett

2011 ~281k
ME: Rock & Cena over Awesome Truth

You talk about trends, well, one I'm noticing that is rather conspicuous is that the Rock still draws.

TLC = *Down*
2010 ~195k
ME:

2011 ~179k
ME: Punk over Del Rio & Miz

Punk booked against that same broomstick didn't seem to manage to bring down SS, and when booked in a rematch the very next PPV, while down from TLC 2010, it still WAY outdrew Cena with the broomstick.

Both Del Rio & Punk also main evented HIAC, so the variable here is Miz replacing Cena.

Since you excluded Punk's main events that included Cena because you suspected Cena's drawing power skews the data, I too will exclude Cena's main events that involve the Rock, as I likewise suspect that skews the data, hence I shall nix WM and SurSer. 
Also, since you counted even the one where Punk main evented with more than one opponent, I shall likewise not exclude the main events where Cena had multiple opponents.

That leaves Cena with 8 main evented PPVs in 2011, 3 of which were UP, 5 were down, and one of those 5 was the absolute worst of 2011 AND 2010, and in a year that was already on a downward trend at that.

2011 was just a bad year period, the few high points seem to be connected with the Rock or Punk's "shoot" buzz.

Cena on his own doesn't seem to be that much more of a draw than Punk, if at all.

Our only common data point between them is when they faced each other and/or Del Rio, in which case, Punk appears to have drawn better with Del Rio than Cena did. You might be able to argue a Miz factor in there, but by that point (TLC) he had fallen from grace. 

So I think Toxie still has a point. Punk hasn't been able to outdraw Cena because he hasn't been given as much opportunity as Cena, he hasn't been booked as well as him, even after being champ. Only now, in the latter half of 2012 is WWE finally starting to book Punk in a way as if to see if their time invested in him will pay off. And if HIAC is any indication, it looks like it is finally starting to.

Ryback has appeal, he has potential _*to be*_ a draw, but I say as of right now there is no data to say that he is, at least, no data to say he is *MORE* of a draw than Punk. 

Depending on how this month's PPV is booked, I don't expect it to do all that great, since rumor is Punk dropping to Rock at Rumble has been written in stone for a while now, so December will probably just be a filler month until then. Though this Ambrose/Reigns/Rollins stable has me intrigued.


----------



## Dec_619

Any news on Ratings yet?


----------



## N-destroy

Here - 

WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM 3.873m
WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM 3.923m
WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM 3.710m

Oh this is bad. Night after PPV too.





Past two weeks:



holt_hogan said:


> The 12/11 edition of Monday Night Raw drew the following viewers:
> 
> Hour 1: 4.154m
> Hour 2: 4.399m
> Hour 3: 4.027m
> 
> Compared to last weeks:
> 
> Hour 1: 4.066m
> Hour 2: 4.279m
> Hour 3: 3.883m


----------



## Dec_619

Oh wow, that's not good!


----------



## Snothlisberger

That's quite surprising.

Now I gotta listen to all the people that think they're ratings experts but really don't know shit tell me how Punk can't draw and this is a sign that people don't/will never care about the new Indy guys.

This thread is like a fat bitch in slutty clothes. It is painful to look at but I just can't look away.


----------



## Dec_619

> That's quite surprising.


Ratings don't mean much to us, but it does to Vince (I think).

Looks like it's going to be a pretty low rating. That's not good for a RAW after one of the Four 'Big' PPV's


----------



## vanboxmeer

Clearly the viewers were disappointed that "Sugar" Dean Ambrose didn't debut, instead they got some guy in black security uniform with two other guys. And he didn't even look directly into camera and say "He's full!".


----------



## Ndiech

rocky! rocky! rocky! rocky! Rocky!.....


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Ouch, not good numbers. The show was a bit of a mess tbh. Punk's title celebration was promoted throughout the show as the main event, so that *should * draw well (but who knows?)

Opening segment with Ryback/Vickie/Tensai should do well as well since it's the direct fallout from the PPV. Besides that I expect the AJ/Vickie stuff to do relatively poor for the 9PM slot unless the Cena/AJ kissing part brought in the viewers last second, and can't see Sheamus/Sandow doing too well for the 10PM slot. 

But still, mediocre numbers for a fallout from a PPV, a big 4 PPV never the less.


----------



## MikeChase27

Ryback bringing in monster numbers.


----------



## Bossdude

The Sandrone said:


> Ouch, not good numbers. The show was a bit of a mess tbh. Punk's title celebration was promoted throughout the show as the main event, so that *should * draw well (but who knows?)


The guy has never drawn in his entire career (save a decent MITB buyrate last year)

Yet smarks keep making excuses for him because the IWC cannot be objective.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Bossdude said:


> The guy has never drawn in his entire career (save a decent MITB buyrate last year)
> 
> Yet smarks keep making excuses for him because the IWC cannot be objective.


Oh right, silly me.

Segment will probably lose viewers because Punk was in it cause he's a vanillia indy midget hack who says stupid stuff like calling Rock "Dewey" and he's a prick.

Oh, and there were no balloons.


----------



## Starbuck

N-destroy said:


> Here -
> 
> WWE Entertainment	USA	8:00 PM 3.873m
> WWE Entertainment	USA	9:00 PM 3.923m
> WWE Entertainment	USA	10:00 PM 3.710m
> 
> Oh this is bad. Night after PPV too.


Ouch. Super shit numbers there. I would have expected much better considering the fallout of Survivor Series should have pulled people in. Guess not which doesn't exactly bode well for the buyrate of that PPV. Not one hour over 4 million. Just terrible. Things aren't going to pick up until we hit Jan and the RTWM tbh. May as well just continue coasting until then.


----------



## Green Light

I don't really think there is much if any correlation between ratings and buyrates, I mean the RTWM got pretty weak numbers on TV and yet it was the most bought wrestling PPV of all time. And yeah those numbers are bad.


----------



## BANKSY

And for they year buy rates are up while the ratings are in the shitter.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Ouch. Super shit numbers there. I would have expected much better considering the fallout of Survivor Series should have pulled people in. Guess not which doesn't exactly bode well for the buyrate of that PPV. Not one hour over 4 million. Just terrible. Things aren't going to pick up until we hit Jan and the RTWM tbh. May as well just continue coasting until then.


I know in other posts you've said right now just feels like filler for whoever Rock faces at RR? I think that sums all this up best. WWE treats this stuff as filler, casuals will see it as filler, and the ratings will reflect that.

Last year the highest rating they did on the road to WM this year was the fallout of the RR, which had Laurinaitis who was going to get fired by HHH with Taker returning. This year they may have Rock for the RR fallout if he wins the title, but if he doesn't, who knows? Besides that and the Raw after WM, no show broke a 3.3, so I wonder with 3 hour Raws, just how well can WWE really do? I suppose they have Lesnar as well this year, but it still makes you wonder.


----------



## MikeChase27

Green Light said:


> I don't really think there is much if any correlation between ratings and buyrates, I mean the RTWM got pretty weak numbers on TV and yet it was the most bought wrestling PPV of all time. And yeah those numbers are bad.


Yeah but thats mania, you can't compare mania to some poorly thrown together shit like SS.


----------



## mb1025

This is where you can blame CM Punk. The company put a lot of effort into building up to CM Punks celebration through out the entire show. The 3rd hour got the lowest rating and if Punks segment did do well it would have shown.


----------



## Brye

Considering MNF was a game of two backup QBs, I'm surprised more people didn't watch. Although KAEPERNICK is great.


----------



## Dec_619

Don't you guys think Three Hours is actually killing the show, not the wrestlers?


----------



## Jotunheim

Starbuck said:


> Ouch. Super shit numbers there. I would have expected much better considering the fallout of Survivor Series should have pulled people in. Guess not which doesn't exactly bode well for the buyrate of that PPV. Not one hour over 4 million. Just terrible. Things aren't going to pick up until we hit Jan and the RTWM tbh. May as well just continue coasting until then.


it was expected to be honest, the go home show for SS was complete garbage, heck, there was 0 momentun leading to said PPV, and it was supposed to be one of the main ones, I'm not surprised people didn't buy it, why would they? what reason could there be?, people's expectation were low for this PPV, we were "shocked" only at the end of it because of the appearance of the 3 nxt guys, but that's it, no real reason to buy the PPV at all

oh and obligatory "cm punk sucks, he can't draw because he is a vanilla midget, we need more people like ryback with those steroid pumped muscles, his eloquent mic work and his technical wrestling skills on par if not better with bret hart" comments unk3 unk2


----------



## mb1025

It was a 2.7 rating. Second lowest of the 3 hour format.


----------



## vanboxmeer

Yes, three hours full of comedy bullshit permeating 70% of the show, TMZ storylines, Team Steph self-indulgence, and general incompetence does hurt more than 2 hours of it.


----------



## Bossdude

Dec_619 said:


> Don't you guys think Three Hours is actually killing the show, not the wrestlers?


no because Punk wasnt drawing before the three hours


----------



## Dec_619

Bossdude said:


> no because Punk wasnt drawing before the three hours


What's Punk got to do with this? 

By the time he came out for his celebration, the show was Three Hours in!


----------



## MikeChase27

Bossdude said:


> no because Punk wasnt drawing before the three hours


Neither was Cena or The Miz.


----------



## N-destroy

Looks like this gonna be a record low for the year.

Wrestlezone - 



> The Wrestling Observer is reporting that Monday's episode of WWE Raw, despite being the one year anniversary of WWE Champion CM Punk's title reign and the follow-up to Survivor Series, may very well draw another near-record low for the company.
> 
> Raw did hours of 3.9, 3.9 and 3.7 (in millions of viewers) with Punk's celebration drawing the lowest rating. To put it in perspective, October's record low rating was a 2.48, and this week's show only brought in a few hundred thousand more viewers.


Official rating is not out yet.


----------



## Eddie Ray

to be fair, punks celebration was literally in the last 5 minutes of scheduled time. I felt tricked that I sat through that much shit to see punk for what was, at max 10 minutes...but we get like 5 recaps of Cena kissing AJ...


----------



## AthenaMark

> Monday's WWE Raw television show drew a 2.72 rating,
> 
> The third hour was the lowest rated hour of the three.




Not good for a one year reigning champion, eh?


----------



## Choke2Death

mb1025 said:


> This is where you can blame CM Punk. The company put a lot of effort into building up to CM Punks celebration through out the entire show. The 3rd hour got the lowest rating and if Punks segment did do well it would have shown.


Not to mention, if people gave a fuck about him and his #1YEARCELEBRATION, surely they would have tuned in and raised the overall viewership.

Well deserved numbers because the shows continue to suck.


----------



## AthenaMark

Choke2Death said:


> Not to mention, if people gave a fuck about him and his #1YEARCELEBRATION, surely they would have tuned in and raised the overall viewership.
> 
> Well deserved numbers because the shows continue to suck.


Nothing but the truth.


----------



## Eddie Ray

Choke2Death said:


> Not to mention, if people gave a fuck about him and his #1YEARCELEBRATION, surely they would have tuned in and raised the overall viewership.
> 
> Well deserved numbers because the shows continue to suck.


even you have to admit that Punks Celebration was poorly placed and even more poorly executed...I remember it being halfway through the 3rd hour and me wondering "is this shit even going to happen?" and then when it did I was like "thats not a fucking celebration!"...at least ryback got put through the table again (Y)


----------



## Awesome22

Wow. Bad rating considering they really hype the final segment and it was a post PPV show. Didn't expect such a low rating.


----------



## Green Light

Fans have been conditioned to know that the good segments happen at the end of the show (and occasionally at the beginning and top of the hours) so you can't blame Punk for people tuning out during those other parts of the show


----------



## TN Punk

They need to go back to 2 hours. Also Punk's celebration didn't even start till what? 10:55? lol


----------



## mikey2004

Punks celebration should have been at the start of the show.


----------



## Eddie Ray

TN Punk said:


> They need to go back to 2 hours. Also Punk's celebration didn't even start till what? 10:55? lol


This! it actually happened in the last 5 minutes of scheduled time


----------



## MikeChase27

Did the WWE forget how to time out a show.


----------



## Starbuck

Green Light said:


> I don't really think there is much if any correlation between ratings and buyrates, I mean the RTWM got pretty weak numbers on TV and yet it was the most bought wrestling PPV of all time. And yeah those numbers are bad.


I wouldn't count Mania in that tbh. No matter what, it was still The Rock vs. John Cena at the end of the day and it did the business. There isn't a full proof correlation between ratings and buyrates but I reckon there's some evidence to suggest a link. 



The Sandrone said:


> I know in other posts you've said right now just feels like filler for whoever Rock faces at RR? I think that sums all this up best. WWE treats this stuff as filler, casuals will see it as filler, and the ratings will reflect that.


Yeah. We've gone from 2 hours of filler to 3 lol. 

If that post about Punk's celebration being the lowest of the night is true then holy fucking shit btw.


----------



## Eddie Ray

mikey2004 said:


> Punks celebration should have been at the start of the show.


exactly. I suppose Ryback still needed to be put through a table in front of punk though, to show him what really happened at SS...i guess they could do the big celebration at the start and one speech or something to wrap it up at the end.


----------



## MikeChase27

Should have had Ryback at the end so he can give his thoughts on the finish at the PPV.


----------



## Choke2Death

Eddie Ray said:


> even you have to admit that Punks Celebration was poorly placed and even more poorly executed...I remember it being halfway through the 3rd hour and me wondering "is this shit even going to happen?" and then when it did I was like "thats not a fucking celebration!"...at least ryback got put through the table again (Y)


I didn't watch the show but wasn't it placed in the main event? In that case, I must say it was well placed and should gain viewers.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Choke2Death said:


> I didn't watch the show but wasn't it placed in the main event? In that case, I must say it was well placed and should gain viewers.


it started at like 5min before the end or something


----------



## Eddie Ray

MikeChase27 said:


> Should have had Ryback at the end so he can give his thoughts on the finish at the PPV.


Punk would have to be present for that end segment to happen, its intrinsic to the plot to reveal it as heyman's plan and punks obvious unawareness towards it. (punk was unconscious during the SS attack)


----------



## Eddie Ray

Choke2Death said:


> I didn't watch the show but wasn't it placed in the main event? In that case, I must say it was well placed and should gain viewers.


5 mins before the end of the show is cutting it super thin, my friend.


----------



## MikeChase27

Eddie Ray said:


> Punk would have to be present for that end segment to happen, its intrinsic to the plot to reveal it as heyman's plan and punks obvious unawareness towards it. (punk was unconscious during the SS attack)


Simple have Punk come out and insult Ryback.


----------



## N-destroy

Starbuck said:


> If that post about Punk's celebration being the lowest of the night is true then holy fucking shit btw.


Rating was just reported, there is no way anyone would have the quarter hours this soon. Wrestlezone is probably referring to the 3rd hour viewership which was the lowest of the night. Most of Punk's "celebration" was in the overrun of the show and it was well promoted so it could still end up doing big.


----------



## KO Bossy

Should be an interesting breakdown.


----------



## Eddie Ray

MikeChase27 said:


> Simple have Punk come out and insult Ryback.


I don't think he would considering he is terrified of Ryback. Heels don't put themselves in danger on purpose, thats the problem.

I suppose we could have punk at the top of the ramp, ryback in the ring and he leaves the ring, gets attacked like he did on monday, punk, curious, comes down to the ring and watches it happen.

yeah, that coulda worked...


----------



## Starbuck

N-destroy said:


> Rating was just reported, there is no way anyone would have the quarter hours this soon. Wrestlezone is probably referring to the 3rd hour viewership which was the lowest of the night. Most of Punk's "celebration" was in the overrun of the show and it was well promoted so it could still end up doing big.


It would need to tbh. I didn't see that that report was from Wrestlezone. It is now void and full of shit lol. Most likely lies imo.


----------



## Choke2Death

#1Peep4ever said:


> it started at like 5min before the end or something


A main event is a main event. Hell, the fact it started so late should help it going into the overrun since people who watch the next show might tune in.


----------



## Eddie Ray

Choke2Death said:


> A main event is a main event. Hell, the fact it started so late should help it going into the overrun since people who watch the next show might tune in.


no, it was cutting it thin, even me, a punk mark, was thinking " I could just go to bed"...very poor choice of timing imo


----------



## Medo

*Ohh great numbers and well deserved.*


----------



## Kabraxal

The problem wasn't any of the stars... it was the pacing. And it has been the pacing mixed with just.. inconsistent bullshit... and you have a product, not wrestlers, a product that is dull and not worth the time. I mean, last night was the perfect example. You had the chance to have the three new invaders make noise all night... they show up in a repeat segment of the prior night. You could have set up a new feud for CM Punk, instead, no one has a clue if Ryback is going after Punk again or if he is now pulled into a feud with the other three men. You had a flop in terms of booking 101 with Barret going over the IC champ and not becoming champ but earning his shot. You had the drawn out BS with the soap opera angle... that surprisingly gave us the only real flash of something awesome in Ziggler last night. 

Why would that kind of a show draw? You could have Hogan, Austin, and Rock all in their primes in that show and it still wouldn't draw... that is how pathetic the WWE is right now.


----------



## Vårmakos

One year later and Punk still hasn't been accepted as a main event star. Take the title off of him already.


----------



## Jotunheim

I'm a big punk fan, but the end segment was extremely short and didn't deliver enough, It felt as if punk and heyman were just talking fast to get rid of the 5 minutes, the whole video was great, but everything about the last segment felt average at best, didn't help that the whole show was unbearable and I felt asleep just waiting for the celebration to happen


----------



## TromaDogg

Another depressing week, both in show quality and ratings. 

It's bad that these ratings are for a show that followed Survivor Series, but considering how badly built up Survivor Series was this year (possibly the worst attempt at a PPV build I've ever seen, and I've been watching for over 20 years) I'm not very surprised.


LOL at people blaming Punk's celebration for not drawing when they didn't start it until the last five minutes of the show.....almost the entire last hour was taken up by Sheamus vs Sandow, Team Hell No vs Mysterio/Sin Cara, and various segments and recaps featuring AJ & Cena. Feel free to choose any one of those for being responsible for the ratings disaster. :lol

Another thing is...remember a few weeks back when Raw had it's 2.48 rating? What were the matches on that show? I can remember two of them....Ryback vs Tensai (where he had trouble lifting Tensai up) and Cesaro vs Brodus Clay, where Cesaro (impressively) defeated Brodus with the Neutralizer. What did we get last night? Ryback vs Tensai (where he actually managed to lift Tensai up this time) and Cesaro doing the Neutralizer on Brodus again (didn't look as impressive the second time, fat fuck took most of the impact on his knees). So are they the cause for the overall ratings drop maybe? :lol  Ryback bringing in dem ratingz, eh?  

Fact is, none of them really are. The overall booking of the show full of 'same old shit, seen them 100 times before' type matches, shit storylines, very unfunny and childish comedy and mostly dull as dishwater cookie cutter characters are doing more damage to the ratings than any single wrestler by themselves ever will.


----------



## TheRainKing

It's not that people didn't tune in, they were just left behind.


----------



## Vyed

> WWE Raw on Monday, November 19 following Survivor Series scored a measly 2.72 rating, down five percent from a 2.87 rating for the PPV lead-in episode.
> 
> It was Raw's lowest rating since a 2.49 rating on October 22 leading into Hell in a Cell.
> 
> -- Raw averaged 3.84 million viewers, which was down 8.5 percent from last week's average of 4.19 million viewers.
> 
> Hourly Break Down: 3.87 million first hour viewers for the immediate Survivor Series fall-out, which was the fewest 1H viewers since the Oct. 22 Raw. 3.92 million second hour viewers, which was also the fewest 2H viewers since Oct. 22. And, a decline to 3.71 million third hour viewers.
> 
> By comparison, the post-HIAC Raw on Oct. 29 averaged 4.31 million viewers in the first hour, then declined to 4.22 million viewers and 3.78 million viewers in the final two hours.
> 
> Also of note, Raw's viewership declined from the second to third hour for the 14th consecutive week and 17th week out of 18 weeks during the three-hour era.
> 
> -- Competition from a blow-out Monday Night Football game does not appear to be a contributor to Raw's viewership decline with 12.4 million viewers compared to 12.8 million last week and a seasonal average of 13.2 million viewers. Although, the NFL game featured Chicago, which is a strong wrestling market.
> 
> Overall on cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #2 behind the NFL game in both viewers and key male demos. In the third hour, "Pawn Stars" on History Channel beat Raw in viewership, but Raw beat Pawn Stars in key male demos.
> 
> -- In the week-to-week demos, Raw did not drop off too far in any category other than teen males 12-17, which hit a four-week low. Males 12-34, males 18-49, and males 18-34 were all down one-tenth of a rating.
> 
> The bigger issue is a year-to-year drop-off. This week's Raw was down four-tenths to five-tenths of a rating in key male demos compared to mid-November Raw episodes.


Torch.


James Caldwell believes jerry lawler heart attack angle they did with heyman the previous week could be a factor..



> Raw's social media score also showed weak interest in Monday's Raw following Survivor Series, so the events at Survivor Series either did not catch viewer interest or the big hooks during Raw (C.M. Punk's title celebration and the A.J./Cena-Vickie/Ziggler business) did not attract an audience. There could also be the Jerry Lawler factor, where enough people were turned off by WWE's fake heart attack angle last week on Raw that it carried over to this week. The pattern:
> 
> 11/12 second hour - 4.39 million viewers during Lawler return hour
> 11/12 third hour - 4.02 million viewers
> 11/19 first hour - 3.87 million viewers
> 11/19 second hour - 3.92 million viewers (very slight bump to the former first hour)
> 11/19 third hour - 3.71 million viewers
> 
> Bottom line, WWE is turning away viewers one way or another - Lawler angle, Raw being three hours, the A.J./Cena storyline, or other reasons. It's leading to audience erosion that is affecting USA Network's stranglehold on the quarterly cable TV ratings race. And, it's not like WWE can serve up a "three-hour Raw special" now that every Raw is three hours. Perhaps going to monthly themed shows will be the artificial, inorganic solution that WWE and USA come up with, but Raw has bigger problems beyond slapping a theme on an in-between-PPVs episode.


----------



## TheF1BOB

Kabraxal said:


> The problem wasn't any of the stars... it was the pacing. And it has been the pacing mixed with just.. inconsistent bullshit... and you have a product, not wrestlers, a product that is dull and not worth the time. I mean, last night was the perfect example. You had the chance to have the three new invaders make noise all night... they show up in a repeat segment of the prior night. You could have set up a new feud for CM Punk, instead, no one has a clue if Ryback is going after Punk again or if he is now pulled into a feud with the other three men. You had a flop in terms of booking 101 with Barret going over the IC champ and not becoming champ but earning his shot. You had the drawn out BS with the soap opera angle... that surprisingly gave us the only real flash of something awesome in Ziggler last night.
> 
> *Why would that kind of a show draw? You could have Hogan, Austin, and Rock all in their primes in that show and it still wouldn't draw... that is how pathetic the WWE is right now.*












Blame it on Phil. unk2


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Rock is coming back soon.


----------



## Borko

I don't know how could anybody watch the show with Jerry Lawler being back. When he returned last week, I decided to stop watching Raw.


----------



## TheF1BOB

swagger_ROCKS said:


> Rock is coming back soon.


Via Satellite next week guaranteed :cool2


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

So Punk's face is on TV for 5-10 minutes in total out of 190 minutes, and he's (still) getting blamed?

I know haters are going to hate, but I didn't know they'd be this desperate to try and get ammo on Punk. If the celebration doesn't do well, then fair enough. That segment was all promoted Punk and that's that. If it does well it's because of him and can be used as evidence that there is some drawing value to Punk's name. If it doesn't do well, it just proves what has been said for the last 16 months over and over and over again, that Punk isn't a TV draw and that only Cena can be considered a TV draw out of full-time guys.


----------



## SinJackal

Brye said:


> Considering MNF was a game of two backup QBs, I'm surprised more people didn't watch. Although KAEPERNICK is great.


And it was a blowout by time Punk's segment was on.




SerapisLiber said:


> Got to cut it off right there, since Punk did not main event the Royal Rumble.
> Hint: The main event of that PPV is in the title.


His fued was the main fued of that PPV. The build for the PPV was mainly around Punk. Ergo, he was the main event despite the RR match going last as it almost always does. That PPV is unique in that respect, since it's the only one that has that match in it.




> No doubt this will likely provoke a reply with an ad hoc stipulation along the lines of 'you know what I mean! Da last match BEFORE da royale! Da royale don't count (since Punk wasn't in it)!!!1!


You didn't doubt it because you already know that's the case. It'd be like me saying you're a terrorist, and that no doubt your reply would be to deny it. Obvious reply is obvious.

Speaking of ad hoc, are you not doing exactly that yourself? You're trying to take the blame off of Punk for the buyrate losses for not having the "final match", despite knowing full well the PPV was practically built around him. The only other fueds were Daniel Bryan defending his title in the first match of the show, and a filler fued with Cena/Kane that didn't get a lot of air time.

So, according to you, nobody deserves credit for RR. But every other PPV can be acredited to someone. Again, for someone trying to be cute by throwing around the phrase "ad hoc", it's exactly the logic you're using.




> Well, the 2011 RR it was the...
> 
> *DIVAS MATCH* that went on just prior to the battle royale, so does the divas match count as the Main Event over the royale?


Is there a point here? 




> The royale is the main event of the Rumble, not the match prior. Punk didn't main event the RR 2012.


I never said the match before the RR is always the main event. Terrible straw man argument.




> No. Only two did.


3, Royal Rumble counts since he was getting the lion's share of air time on Raw every week leading up to the Rumble.




> Two. All two had decreased, one of which was by a comparatively small margin, and yet also actually _*increased*_ domestically (NoC), allegedly.


You don't need to make the same argument twice. Three, not two. Also, domestic numbers don't mean shit when the overall numbers drop.

For example, if a PPV sells better in Texas one year vs the last, it doesn't magically erase it selling worse everywhere else.





> And what trend did Ryback have? You go on to say "Punk is 0/3 in getting increased buys without Cena" (actually 0/2) prior to HIAC, yet Ryback prior to HIAC is 0/0 in getting increased buys without Cena. By your own criteria their score was even going in, thus by your own criteria there is nothing to justify crediting Ryback anymore than Punk.


0/3.

Also, LOL at the terrible thought that 0/3 (or even 0/2) is the same as 0/0. 0/0's percentage would be classified as "N/A", where 0/3 and 0/2 are classified as 0%. It isn't the same thing.

Now it's 100% vs 25%. Or if I induldged you and pretended that CM Punk's fued wasn't the main storyline of RR, it's 33%. Still terrible.

So by my own criteria, Punk has a terrible track record with that, Ryback has no track record. Not the same thing at all. Terrible logic.




> Yet, given that Punk is an established main event talent and the Champion, my bias goes to him. If Ryback was still in the ME but not Punk, the only other person I could conceive of as getting as good or better a number than Punk would be Cena. However, in vice-versa, there are still a few names I would suspect could have been thrown in there against Punk and yet still would have drawn as good or even better than Ryback.


Biased without using any statistical facts.




> Exempting HIAC, of course.


Obviously, since buyrates weren't released yet when I made the post, so it would've been unjust to act as if the numbers were better or owrse than the previous year. Or is it just ex post facto time for you since your arguments thus far have been pretty bad?




> And likewise, Ryback was 0/0 in getting increased buys without Cena, so yes, I am going to see who he was facing and what was going on before I speculate that Ryback is the main reason why the buyrates were good. Facts and trends matter more than absolutely no facts or trends to go on at all, i.e., no Ryback main events wherewith we may compare.
> (And do note that I have _*not*_ said that *you did* speculate Ryback was the reason.)


I already addressed this. Skipping.




> I have to wonder though, are you consistent and do you do the same thing with the inverse data? When Punk main events and numbers are down from the previous year, do you likewise look to see who his opponents were, and what their trends were going in?


I didn't bother since Punk was being heralded as a big draw. If he's a draw, it shouldn't matter very much who he's up against. Therefore I don't need the post the burden of proof on every single point in history. That'd be up to you to formulate an argument about it. Or do you expect every poster to write both sides of every argument with every post? Please.




> For instance, since TLC was down, was the fact that his competition was Del Rio & Miz taken into consideration before 'speculating that Punk was the main reason'? Is Del Rio's trend going into that PPV taken into account, namely, the fact that he just main evented two previous PPVs, both of which were down from 2010?


Yet it wasn't down because Cena wasn't there? Okay. here's why that's bullshit:

Miz and Del Rio have PPVed in the past. They have main evented. None of those PPVs tanked by nearly 20%. What more need be said? Seriously.




> Can even the best draw in the world still draw well even if he were booked against a "broom-stick"?


Punk isn't the "best in the world". And if you're a draw, it's not supposed to matter who you're up against. You make your fueds good, not coast through them until a good one comes along.




> And since you use Cena as a main variable in your data, what was his trend in 2011? In fact, is it taken into account in your data that the trend for 2011 overall was a relatively downward trend, with eight of the thirteen PPVs (the majority) all doing worse than the previous year, most of those in the latter part of the year? Interestingly enough, that same year, 2011, is when the two PPVs you selected to use against Punk occurred. His positive gain (HIAC) happened this year.


Why's that "interesting"? If buyrates tank when Punk main events, they tank. Mentioning them isn't cherry picking. 




> Since you tried to compare Punk's main event PPVs without Cena in 2011 against the previous year's numbers as data against his drawing ability, and since your elimination of Cena implies you treat him as a better draw, it is interesting to see how Cena holds up when your same ad hoc test is applied to him.
> 
> The following data is courtesy of Wikipedia.
> 
> While the numbers vary depending on which site you go to, the up or down from the previous year is still consistent, and the margin of difference from site to site is nothing major.
> 
> For convenience I chose the Wiki numbers as they are the most commonly repeated I have seen. So if you have more accurate data from a reliable source, cite to me the link and if reliable, I will make the correction.
> 
> Royal Rumble = *Down*
> 2010 ~462k
> ME: Rumble (Winner Del Rio)
> 
> 2011 ~446k
> ME: Rumble (Winner Sheamus)
> 
> 
> Elimination Chamber = *Down*
> 2010 ~285k
> Me: EC, Jericho over Punk, Morrison,R-Truth, UnderTaker, Rey
> 
> 2011 ~199k
> ME: EC, Cena over Punk, Morrison, R-Truth, Sheamus, Orton
> 
> Down? No Cena a better draw than Cena?
> 
> 
> Wrestle Mania = *Up*
> 2010 ~885k
> ME: UnderTaker over Shawn Michaels
> 
> 2011 ~1,059,000
> ME: Miz over Cena (Rock as guest host)
> 
> *Miz = ratings then?*
> 
> 
> Extreme Rules = *Up*
> 2010 ~182k
> ME: Cena over Batista
> 
> 2011 ~209k
> ME: Cena over Miz & Morrison
> 
> Cena was in both, so the variable is the Miz + Morrison. They a better draw than Cena?
> 
> *I guess this kills your theory that Miz isn't a draw*
> 
> 
> Over The Limit = *Down*
> 2010 ~197k
> ME: Cena over Batista
> 
> 2011 ~140k
> ME: Cena over Miz
> 
> Cena was in both. Cena can't draw as much as Cena? Miz & Cena both in ExRu, so variable is Morrison. Morrison draws 69k more than Cena & Miz combined (sans Rock)?
> 
> 
> Capitol Punishment = *Up*
> F4WAY 2010 ~143k
> ME: Cena over Sheamus, Edge, & Orton
> 
> 2011 ~170k
> ME: Cena over R-Truth
> 
> Cena was in both, so variable is R-Truth. Cena can't draw as much as Cena? R-Truth a better draw than Edge, Orton, and Sheamus combined?
> 
> 
> Money In The Bank = *Up*
> 2010 ~165
> ME: Sheamus over Cena
> 
> 2011 ~195
> ME: Punk over Cena
> 
> Cena was in both, so variable is Punk.
> 
> 
> Summer Slam = *Down*
> 2010 ~350k
> ME: 7 vs 7 Elimination, WWE over Nexus
> 
> 2011 ~296
> ME: Punk over Cena
> 
> Cena in both, so variable is Punk. Understandable that the combined force of 13 other superstars can edge out Punk alone. Ironically, though down from '10, still drew significantly more than their MITB match, which was _*UP*_ from '10. Is 195>296?
> 
> 
> Night of Champions = *Down*
> 2010 ~165k
> ME: 6-Pack Elim. Orton over Sheamus, Cena, Edge, Barrett, and Jericho
> 
> 2011 ~161k
> ME: HHH over Punk
> 
> Understandable that 6 stars outdrew 2, one of which was in semi-retirement. Although, the 6 combined only made a difference of 4k.
> 
> 
> Hell In A Cell = *Down*
> 2010 ~210k
> ME: Kane over Taker
> 
> 2011 ~182k
> ME: Del Rio over Punk & Cena.
> 
> Includes both Punk & Cena. No excuses here. Not yet, at least.
> 
> 
> Vengeance = *Down*
> Brag. Rights 2010 ~137k
> ME: Orton over Barett
> 
> 2011 ~121k
> ME: Del Rio over Cena
> 
> Worst draw of the year. It even did worse than Bragging Rights from the previous year, which is quite a feat, given that BR 2010 was considered such a flop that BR 2011 was cancelled and eventually replaced with Vengeance. So actually, this was the worst draw of the past TWO years up to that point (possibly even further, haven't checked yet. And who headlined? Who drew the worst buyrate of the past two years from '10-'11?


Here's the problem with that: You're only going one year back when Cena has a very long career of bringing in big buyrates. You're also throwing every PPV out the window that Cena got good buys in, and are harping on every PPV that dropped in buyrates. Pidgeon-holing the discussion with special rules doesn't work.

I'm just going to yank this from another thread to prove my point:



> So lets look at the evidence presented; John Cena is seemingly proving to be a bigger draw than Shawn Michaels, Bret Hart, The Undertaker, Kurt Angle and Brock Lesnar. Granted, he aint pulling the same kind of numbers as Austin and The Rock, but he ain't that far behind.
> 
> Lets take a closer look at the figures. In spite of the jeers, buyrates for the 2005 ppv's were some of the best ever:
> 
> Wrestlemania 21 drew the highest pay-per-view buyrate in the history of the event, Wrestlemania 22 will break it (you have to understand the buyrate system has changed over the years; the 10.2 buyrate for Wrestlemania III would be different to a modern 10.2 buyrate).
> 
> Judgment Day 2005 drew the highest buyrate since Judgment Day 2002 (which you'll remember featured a bona-fide dream card).
> 
> Vengeance 2005 was only fractionally beaten by Vengeance 2002, but still managed to outdraw 2001, 2003 and 2004.
> 
> Summerslam 2005 drew the highest buyrate since Summerslam 2000 and outdrew 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996 and 1997.
> 
> Survivor Series 2005 drew the highest buyrate since Survivor Series 2001 (the big WWF vs. WCW finale) and outdrew 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997.
> 
> Royal Rumble 2006 drew the highest buyrate since Royal Rumble 2002, and outdrew 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997 and 1998. It was also only fractionally behind Royal Rumble 2001.
> 
> New Years Revolution 2006 and Taboo Tuesday 2005 drew larger buyrates than New Years Revolution 2005 and Taboo Tuesday 2004.


Cena's not a draw though? Not to mention he main evented several of the highest drawing Wrestlemanias ever.

Oh, but let me predict your reply, since you like doing that: "What happened that long ago doesn't matter, (insert some meandering rant reason why)".

Well then guess what? 2010 doesn't matter either since it's 2 years ago. If 3 years ago doesn't count, 2 years ago doesn't either. So then we're back to where we were to begin with. Who drew more since Punk got his big main event push? Whoops, John Cena. He's still the bigger draw.




> CM Punk?
> 
> Nope.
> 
> Del Rio and...
> 
> John Cena.
> 
> When they had Punk a moth earlier, they weren't far off the 200k mark. When it was just Punk & Cena earlier in the year, they WERE around the 200k mark and later around the 300k mark.


moth?




> I ask again, can even the best draw in the world still draw well even if booked against a "broomstick"?
> 
> Evidently, the answer is no.


He isn't the best in the world, and of course the answer is no. He isn't The Rock. But that isn't the discussion anyway, it's unfair to compare him to a legend.




> Should Punk be expected to draw any better with the same broomstick? I don't think it's fair to. Yet Punk DID do better with that broomstick at TLC.


Why do you keep saying the same thing? That's like the third or fourth time you've said that.




> Survivor Series = *Up*
> 2010 ~244k
> ME: Orton over Barrett
> 
> 2011 ~281k
> ME: Rock & Cena over Awesome Truth
> 
> You talk about trends, well, one I'm noticing that is rather conspicuous is that the Rock still draws.
> 
> TLC = *Down*
> 2010 ~195k
> ME:
> 
> 2011 ~179k
> ME: Punk over Del Rio & Miz
> 
> Punk booked against that same broomstick didn't seem to manage to bring down SS, and when booked in a rematch the very next PPV, while down from TLC 2010, it still WAY outdrew Cena with the broomstick.


Why didn't you post the main event of TLC 2010? It was Cena vs Barret AGAIN. Speaking of broomsticks, Cena ourdrew Punk vs Miz and Del Rio with that very same broomstick, in a REPEAT MATCH. lol~ That's even worse.

But hey, those TLC numbers for Punk weren't fair, since Cena wasn't on the show very much to help him draw. Oh wait, that's the point I was making in the first place. Silly me, I forgot for a second there.




> Both Del Rio & Punk also main evented HIAC, so the variable here is Miz replacing Cena.


And if you're crediting guys evenly, based on the table from wikipedia you posted, Miz drew well in 2 of his 3 PPV main events prior to that PPV. So either you have to admit Miz is a draw, or you have to admit Cena carried the fued with Miz and was the draw there. Either way, it punches another hole in your already very perforated argument.




> Since you excluded Punk's main events that included Cena because you suspected Cena's drawing power skews the data, I too will exclude Cena's main events that involve the Rock, as I likewise suspect that skews the data, hence I shall nix WM and SurSer.
> Also, since you counted even the one where Punk main evented with more than one opponent, I shall likewise not exclude the main events where Cena had multiple opponents.


See, the argument is Cena vs Punk, not Cena vs Punk vs Rock, so you can't exclude The Rock unless you're just wanting to create more special rules for yourself.

So let's take a timeout to review all your special rules:

If Cena main evented a PPV the year before, it "doesn't count" if he draws better the next year. That way you can exclude most of his increased buyrates, and just focus on decreases to spin doctor your obviously false belief that Cena doesn't draw as much as Punk.

Since the argument is Cena vs Punk, and we're excluding their matches against eachother for obvious reasons, you also want to exclude any matches with The Rock, hey, or any PPVs with him in it! That way you can take 3 more increased draws off his record. Though I'm sure if/when Punk faces The Rock at RR, you won't be excluding that in Punk's drawing power if you come on here to argue about it later.

"RR doesn't count", even when their fued gets by far the most air time of any fued on Raw.

Predicted future argument: Anything more than 2 years ago doesn't count, because Cena drew well, therefore you want to make sure that's excluded too.


You might's well come right out and say we can't include any buyrate gains Cena got, that way we're only left with losses.




> That leaves Cena with 8 main evented PPVs in 2011, 3 of which were UP, 5 were down, and one of those 5 was the absolute worst of 2011 AND 2010, and in a year that was already on a downward trend at that.


That's what happens when you're competing against yourself, and are carrying the load of so many PPVs every year. There's going to be ups and downs in a given season, so it will reflect on the guy who's in most of the main events.

Here's the thing:

Ratings were higher than they are now in both 2010 and 2011. Ratings started dropping on Raw at two key points: When Punk won the WWE title for the second time, and after Cena defeated Brock Lesnar and was kayfabe injured. Not joking. Review the facts here, and compare to events that were happening on Raw: 

http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2010-ratings/

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






> 2011 was just a bad year period, the few high points seem to be connected with the Rock or Punk's "shoot" buzz.


Actually, wrong. Review the ratings list, and buyrates list. Other than the immediate fallout of the Punk shoot (MITB), there was practicaly no impact on either buyrates or ratings. The more Punk was spotlighted, the more ratings dropped, and the more buyrates dropped from the previous year.

This is the point that seems to be going over your head. The PPVs I'm mentioning with Punk (yes last year), were supposed to be at the peak of Punk's popularity. When his push was fresh, when he was "still cool". . .supposedly. Yet, according to ratings and buyrates, it had a negative impact, not positive.




> Cena on his own doesn't seem to be that much more of a draw than Punk, if at all.


If this, then that? Rofl. They aren't equal. Review the facts. More bad logic dude.




> Our only common data point between them is when they faced each other and/or Del Rio, in which case, Punk appears to have drawn better with Del Rio than Cena did. You might be able to argue a Miz factor in there, but by that point (TLC) he had fallen from grace.


More rule changes, cool. Now Miz counts as a draw in the past when he was facing Cena, but not when he was facing Punk. Convienient, AGAIN. All you do is make excuses and try to exclude as much as possible to suit your false belief.

The difference between us is that my opinion is based on the facts I've seen, and that you look at the facts and try to suit them to your opinion.



> So I think Toxie still has a point. Punk hasn't been able to outdraw Cena because he hasn't been given as much opportunity as Cena, he hasn't been booked as well as him, even after being champ. Only now, in the latter half of 2012 is WWE finally starting to book Punk in a way as if to see if their time invested in him will pay off. And if HIAC is any indication, it looks like it is finally starting to.


That's a matter of opinion. I think Punk has been given every possible luxury and more. Nobody else on the show has gotten more luxury with the exception of Cena getting placed in Matches with The Rock and Brock Lesnar. . .PPVs which you choose to exclude from the argument.




> Ryback has appeal, he has potential _*to be*_ a draw, but I say as of right now there is no data to say that he is, at least, no data to say he is *MORE* of a draw than Punk.


Except the fact that all of his segments drew 200k+ since his recent push started, besides the one where he had a 4 minute squash match right before a be a star/susan g komen commercial (whatever it was) and divas match immediately after, and the entire block was calculated for the ratings, and not just his match. And that he is 1/1 in PPVs being big buyrates when main eventing with someone besides John Cena, and Punk is 1/4 since Summer of Punk. You know, other than that tidbit, there's no data to say he is.

Btw, I don't think Ryback is a bigger draw than Punk on a regular basis. My point was that it's perfectly reasonable to assume Ryback was the cause of the good buyrates because he was the hotter ticket at the time, and didn't have a track record of bombing in main events without Cena like Punk does. Not that Ryback is going to sell more merch, main event and gets shittons of buys for the rest of his life. Obviously not, since Punk's been pushed hard as fuck for a year and a half and Ryback has 2 months of push going for him.

18 months vs 2. . .obviously Punk is the bigger draw in general, but for that PPV? Ryback deserves plenty of the credit. He was the interesting part of that fued, NOT Punk. It was just Punk title defense #12. Far be it from me to assume what other people think but I don't think casuals don't give a shit about that. Ryback was the hot ticket, not Punk. You've got to be really biased to not realize that.

Give him some credit ffs. Are you one of these people who think that when someone says Punk is less of a draw than Cena, that they're saying he's a shit draw? Punk can draw, just not as much as Cena. Without Cena, the show doesn't draw that well. It doesn't mean Punk sucks dick, it just means Cena is that important (and no, I am not a Cena fan, I'm just somebody with a basic grasp of logic that doesn't deny factual numbers). It's reflected in the numbers. You can cherry pick Cena's worst PPV numbers all you want, but you can't deny the entirty of his history, or the fact that his PPVs have been vastly outdrawing Punk, and that Punk's only big PPVs are against Cena.




> Depending on how this month's PPV is booked, I don't expect it to do all that great, since rumor is Punk dropping to Rock at Rumble has been written in stone for a while now, so December will probably just be a filler month until then. Though this Ambrose/Reigns/Rollins stable has me intrigued.


So now you're progressing to the pre-emptive excuse, rather than the ex post facto excuse. More convienient exceptions for your argument. Good for you.

I do agree though that the ratings will probably suck and that it's likely just filler. . .like the last few months have been. First correct thing you've said that you didn't just paste from wikipedia.


----------



## cyrus_cesar

I know it's been stated before, but the third hr is really killing the show. Not only because it's three hours of filler, but even if you do miss anything, all you have to do is turn back, and guaranteed you will see a recap of almost everything. Every show I'll give it to about 9:45 maybe, and tune out til the main event. Last night the ending was so lackluster, and worst, it started at 10:55 or around that time. So in essence, if you did want to see the celebration, you know that after almost two hours, it's going to be at the end. Why even bother watching til then? And if you were one of those who watched the whole 3 hrs waiting for something, then God Bless your heart.


----------



## N-destroy

Sandrone, Punk's face might have been on TV only for 5 mins but he retained the WWE title in the main event of survivor series lol.

EDIT : Holy shit, you people take these ratings/buyrates way too seriously imo. Most of those PPV figures quoted aren't even the real numbers.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Well, I honestly slept through a huge majority of the show, but from what I saw, the show still follows the same formula of randomness all over the place. I mean, did the attackers get any mic time? I know patience is needed, but shit. You get what you get. friggin Khali? fpalm


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

N-destroy said:


> Sandrone, Punk's face might have been on TV only for 5 mins on TV but he retained the WWE title in the main event of survivor series lol.


Yep, which is why his segment should do well. I've said it before and I'll say it again, no one person can pull a 3 hour show up in ratings besides a return/surprise appearance that would keep people tuned into the show, but that would just be for 1-2 shows tops. Even when they had Rock, Cena, Taker, HHH, and HBK all there in one show, on the road to Wrestlemania non-the-less every week, they were still in the low 3.0's. Lesnar/HHH? 3.1 was the best they could do when both were on the show (with HBK), and keep in mind that's for the second biggest show of the year (and obviously I'm not counting Raw 1000). So overall ratings can't be attributed to any one person, especially on a 3-hour show. If Rock couldn't do a miracle with the ratings, how does anyone expect Punk to?

As long as Punk's segment does well, it's fine as far as I'm concerned. I'm not sure of the last time he had a segment all to himself (though Heyman was there for all of it, and I'm sure people will play that card if the segment does well, but whatever). So this will be a good test. Probably the best test Punk has had since he returned after MITB 2011.


----------



## Starbuck

Well fuck. This thread got serious in a hurry. Calm down peeps. There's no way of knowing the breakdowns until they come out in a few days lol.


----------



## TromaDogg

swagger_ROCKS said:


> Well, I honestly slept through a huge majority of the show, but from what I saw, the show still follows the same formula of randomness all over the place. I mean, did the attackers get any mic time?* I know patience is needed, but shit. You get what you get. friggin Khali? fpalm*


Which is why I put a lot of the blame on guys current Raw head writer Dave Kapoor (best known for his on screen appearences as Khali's manager 'Ranjin Singh') rather than guys like Brian Gerwitz who got fired last time Vince had a rant about low ratings. Kapoor must really lick a lot of ass in WWE fpalm The AJ/Cena angle in particular is shit, and I'm surprised Cena agreed to do it even with the added perk of getting to grope and kiss AJ.

Amongst other things, one of the worst descisions Vince ever made was putting Stephanie as Executive Vice President of Creative. Much easier to blame other people and bury your head in the sand at corporate meetings claiming that you're happy with the ratings rather than blame daddy's little girl though fpalm.


----------



## Awesome22

Bad rating and bad crowd attendance...Vince must be going crazy at the moment.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> Well fuck. This thread got serious in a hurry. Calm down peeps. There's no way of knowing the breakdowns until they come out in a few days lol.


Not unless you're me. Here's how the overrun did:



> Punk's 365 day title celebration gained 3,141,592 viewers for an over 9.0 rating.


Source: Myass.com

It all comes full circle. unk2


----------



## TromaDogg

Vyed said:


> WWE Raw on Monday, November 19 following Survivor Series scored a measly 2.72 rating, down five percent from a 2.87 rating for the PPV lead-in episode.
> 
> It was Raw's lowest rating since a 2.49 rating on October 22 leading into Hell in a Cell.
> 
> -- Raw averaged 3.84 million viewers, which was down 8.5 percent from last week's average of 4.19 million viewers.
> 
> Hourly Break Down: 3.87 million first hour viewers for the immediate Survivor Series fall-out, which was the fewest 1H viewers since the Oct. 22 Raw. 3.92 million second hour viewers, which was also the fewest 2H viewers since Oct. 22. And, a decline to 3.71 million third hour viewers.
> 
> By comparison, the post-HIAC Raw on Oct. 29 averaged 4.31 million viewers in the first hour, then declined to 4.22 million viewers and 3.78 million viewers in the final two hours.
> 
> Also of note, Raw's viewership declined from the second to third hour for the 14th consecutive week and 17th week out of 18 weeks during the three-hour era.
> 
> -- Competition from a blow-out Monday Night Football game does not appear to be a contributor to Raw's viewership decline with 12.4 million viewers compared to 12.8 million last week and a seasonal average of 13.2 million viewers. Although, the NFL game featured Chicago, which is a strong wrestling market.
> 
> Overall on cable TV Monday night, Raw ranked #2 behind the NFL game in both viewers and key male demos. In the third hour, "Pawn Stars" on History Channel beat Raw in viewership, but Raw beat Pawn Stars in key male demos.
> 
> -- In the week-to-week demos, Raw did not drop off too far in any category other than teen males 12-17, which hit a four-week low. Males 12-34, males 18-49, and males 18-34 were all down one-tenth of a rating.
> 
> *The bigger issue is a year-to-year drop-off*. This week's Raw was down four-tenths to five-tenths of a rating in key male demos compared to mid-November Raw episodes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Torch.
Click to expand...

That's another thing I'm interested in. Can't be bothered trawling back through months of Raw ratings at the moment but just wondering...over the last decade, has this year suffered from the biggest ratings decrease overall as compared to the previous year? If it has, that wouldn't really surprise me either.


----------



## N-destroy

The Sandrone said:


> Yep, which is why his segment should do well. I've said it before and I'll say it again, no one person can pull a 3 hour show up in ratings besides a return/surprise appearance that would keep people tuned into the show, but that would just be for 1-2 shows tops. Even when they had Rock, Cena, Taker, HHH, and HBK all there in one show, on the road to Wrestlemania non-the-less every week, they were still in the low 3.0's. Lesnar/HHH? 3.1 was the best they could do when both were on the show (with HBK), and keep in mind that's for the second biggest show of the year (and obviously I'm not counting Raw 1000). So overall ratings can't be attributed to any one person, especially on a 3-hour show. If Rock couldn't do a miracle with the ratings, how does anyone expect Punk to?
> 
> As long as Punk's segment does well, it's fine as far as I'm concerned. I'm not sure of the last time he had a segment all to himself (though Heyman was there for all of it, and I'm sure people will play that card if the segment does well, but whatever). So this will be a good test. Probably the best test Punk has had since he returned after MITB 2011.


I understand that. In one of your earlier posts you mentioned "fallout from PPV", I was just pointing out that punk retaining the title was the fallout from SS. 

Punk's segment was in the overrun, it would most likely end up the highest or second highest rated part of the show.


----------



## Rock316AE

Ricezilla said:


> One year later and Punk still hasn't been accepted as a main event star. Take the title off of him already.


Many of us said it even before the one year run. Based on similar past situations and his overall presentation. I said it back then and you can say it now, the guy will never be able to connect to a wide audience, let alone attract him. 

As for the overrun segment(For people saying "it was only 5 minutes in the show", true, but it was in the best position and they built almost the entire show around it), it's probably going to do a decent gain for the fact that they promoted it in full force, not only with their promotion but also the backstage segments throughout the entire show. My prediction that the Vickie/AJ segment did the biggest number, with Ryback's promo and match second. Still, it doesn't really matter who does the biggest in this case because the overall is so low. Terrible rating and viewership, deservedly.


----------



## Cookie Monster

Go back to 2 hours, have less recaps, great wrestling matches which we have been getting on the 3 hour show, some backstage segments like the Ziggler/Cena beat down and of that ilk and some more stories based on the titles and ratings will slowly go up again.


----------



## Mister Hands

It's funny how the Raw thread is always a constant stream of "this entire show has been awful, who would watch this?" and then this thread immediately defaults to "It's all this one very specific person's fault." I frankly applaud the people with the willpower to leave Raw behind.


----------



## KO Bossy

Rock316AE said:


> Many of us said it even before the one year run. Based on similar past situations and his overall presentation. I said it back then and you can say it now, the guy will never be able to connect to a wide audience, let alone attract him.
> 
> As for the overrun segment(For people saying "it was only 5 minutes in the show", true, but it was in the best position and they built almost the entire show around it), it's probably going to do a decent gain for the fact that they promoted it in full force, not only with their promotion but also the backstage segments throughout the entire show. My prediction that the Vickie/AJ segment did the biggest number, with Ryback's promo and match second. Still, it doesn't really matter who does the biggest in this case because the overall is so low. Terrible rating and viewership, deservedly.


You know what would be a RTWM that would draw in 4.0s and above?

:Rock vs :steiner2


Think of the promos...


----------



## Rock316AE

KO Bossy said:


> You know what would be a RTWM that would draw in 4.0s and above?
> 
> :Rock vs :steiner2
> 
> 
> Think of the promos...


The Rock/Steiner interaction was always a legit dream scenario. Hollywood Rock with 2000 Big Poppa Pump could have been incredible.


----------



## KO Bossy

Rock316AE said:


> The Rock/Steiner interaction was always a legit dream scenario. Hollywood Rock with 2000 Big Poppa Pump could have been incredible.


It really could have. They'd be competing for the "Who's the biggest dick?" award.

The funny thing is that I was never really impressed with Cena in his feud with Rock. Rock did his part quite well but Cena...I just never felt any intensity from him. You could tell Rock's character hated Cena, but with Cena himself, he took it as a big joke, it seemed. You want to build up some legitimate heat for a feud? Give Steiner and mic and say "go out there and say what you want about Rock." That's all you need. If we got a promo from Scott reminiscent of his big unscheduled shoot on Ric Flair in January 2000, but this time on the Rock, damn that'd be sweet.


----------



## cokecan567

people blame punk... fuckin idiots man its not punks fault. u all should thank punk if not for him many people wouldnt even of came back to wwe. hell he got me interested again. I honestly watch mostly for punk heyman. i cant stand cenas char and his same old shit and the fact wwe still trys to make us like him by showing that make a wish shit last night, ya hes a good guy and all but fuck his char. and ryback is meh for me. Im glad wwe use ryback more now as a main event guy this way cena can be replaced one day.

anyways the problem is the 3 hours they give us these shit matches which are boring as fuck. wwe keeps clamming shit in to try and fill the show. like really do u really want to see the fuckin great kali dancing with hornswoggle? that whole skit made me cringe... I can go on like the boring antonio sezaro vs fricken brodus clay we seen it already... ryback vs tensai we seen already also.... etc and the main event all of that was to build up throughout tghe show heyman going on saying punks celebration. which was a big disapointment cause it was pretty much the same ending as survivor seires lol


----------



## kokepepsi

IT"S NOT BUYRATES YOU FUCKING MORORNS

LOL at that rating.


----------



## Kabraxal

TheF1BOB said:


> Blame it on Phil. unk2


Just like Rock spiked ratings up to 6 million every week he showed up in this product... right? Please, it's the product, not the wrestler. Get it through your head.


----------



## Schrute_Farms

I think that Kofi vs Wade match put everyone to sleep. I know I almost fell into a coma.


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

The entire show got a shitty rating, the "third hour" excuse is wearing thin.

Let's just blame it all on one guy, though. Going by the logic of some of the 'tards on this site, I could just as easily blame Cena for the poor ratings. Yup, John Cena's fault. Put him on Superstars.


----------



## Choke2Death

4everEyebrowRaisin said:


> The entire show got a shitty rating, the "third hour" excuse is wearing thin.
> 
> Let's just blame it all on one guy, though. Going by the logic of some of the 'tards on this site, I could just as easily blame Cena for the poor ratings. Yup, John Cena's fault. Put him on Superstars.


Considering that Cena only appeared in the middle of the show in some stupid love angle and isn't pushed to the moon like Punk (who gets most of the blame) is, it makes no sense. At least make sure the person you blame it on is realistic.


----------



## KO Bossy

Choke2Death said:


> Considering that Cena only appeared in the middle of the show in some stupid love angle *and isn't pushed to the moon like Punk* (who gets most of the blame) is, it makes no sense. At least make sure the person you blame it on is realistic.


Look, I know you strongly dislike Punk, and I can respect that other people have opinions, but come on now...the statement in bold is wrong and you know it.


----------



## Honey Bucket

Lol people are STILL blaming Punk? Fucking cretins.


----------



## TromaDogg

I decided to look up the average Raw ratings since 1998. Source: www.gerweck.net

1998 - 4.43
1999 - 5.9 
2000 - 5.88
2001 - 4.64
2002 - 4.01
2003 - 3.76
2004 - 3.67
2005 - 3.81
2006 - 3.9
2007 - 3.61
2008 - 3.27
2009 - 3.57
2010 - 3.28
2011 - 3.21

Hmm. Well obviously there was a dropoff when the 'Attitude era' boom period was over, things remained on a relatively even keel until 2007 (with gradual increases probably being down to things like the rises of Cena and Batista as the new top stars) then things took a hit in 2007 (all kinds of injuries, plus the Benoit incident), then (unsurprisingly) a larger than usual drop in 2008 when WWE decided to go all 'squeaky clean' with the return of the PG rating and (in my honest opinion) when it really started to get noticeably bad. Not really sure what caused the increase in 2009 as it was a goddawful year with guest hosts...maybe it was helped by Jeff Hardy and Batista's heel run? But then 2010 and 2011 are back to below 3.3.

Anybody know what the current average for this year is? My guess is that all these recent '2's have got to be dragging things down quite a bit.


----------



## KO Bossy

I think you mean www.gerweck.net, as www.gerwick.net is not wrestling related.

Gerweck does indeed have the current average for 2012, and its kinda surprising. So far, not including this week, the average is 3.06. Still crap, but I fully expected it to be in the 2.0s. Here's the link:

http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2012-tv-ratings/


----------



## Awesome22

ToxieDogg said:


> I decided to look up the average Raw ratings since 1998. Source: www.gerwick.net
> 
> 1998 - 4.43
> 1999 - 5.9
> 2000 - 5.88
> 2001 - 4.64
> 2002 - 4.01
> 2003 - 3.76
> 2004 - 3.67
> 2005 - 3.81
> 2006 - 3.9
> 2007 - 3.61
> 2008 - 3.27
> 2009 - 3.57
> 2010 - 3.28
> 2011 - 3.21
> 
> Hmm. Well obviously there was a dropoff when the 'Attitude era' boom period was over, things remained on a relatively even keel until 2007 (with gradual increases probably being down to things like the rises of Cena and Batista as the new top stars) then things took a hit in 2007 (all kinds of injuries, plus the Benoit incident), then (unsurprisingly) a larger than usual drop in 2008 when WWE decided to go all 'squeaky clean' with the return of the PG rating and (in my honest opinion) when it really started to get noticeably bad. Not really sure what caused the increase in 2009 as it was a goddawful year with guest hosts...maybe it was helped by Jeff Hardy and Batista's heel run? But then 2010 and 2011 are back to below 3.3.
> 
> A*nybody know what the current average for this year is?* My guess is that all these recent '2's have got to be dragging things down quite a bit.


So far it's 3.06.


----------



## Choke2Death

The average may be 3.06 now but it will definitely get below 3.0 by the end of the year since it's almost half of the year where 2s have become the norm.



KO Bossy said:


> Look, I know you strongly dislike Punk, and I can respect that other people have opinions, but come on now...the statement in bold is wrong and you know it.


He's pushed way more than he should be, that's for sure. A one year+ long title reign... legends with a shitload more talent than him like Stone Cold, The Rock, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, Triple H, Chris Benoit, Chris Jericho, Eddie Guerrero and Kurt Angle never had a title reign this long yet this joke has it. And if you suggest Cena is more pushed than him, that might have been true in the past but it definitely *isn't anymore*. The last few months it's been nothing but PUNK, PUNK, PUNK while Cena is stuck in some stupid angle with AJ and gets put in title matches just to bump the buyrates. It's not wrong at all.


----------



## Cookie Monster

This is why I couldn't care less for ratings. 2009 was the worst year out of every one of those years you mentioned yet it's ratings have been better than the previous two years and even 2008.


----------



## TromaDogg

KO Bossy said:


> I think you mean www.gerweck.net, as www.gerwick.net is not wrestling related.


I think you are correct and my typing is shitty fpalm :lol I'll change that now.

I'm surprised this year's average is as high as 3.06. But we've still got another month and a half to go yet to get it down into those 2s before 2013. Certainly seems to be the goal WWE are aiming for at the moment.


----------



## NeyNey

> 1998 - 4.43
> 1999 - 5.9
> 2000 - 5.88
> 2001 - 4.64
> 2002 - 4.01
> 2003 - 3.76
> 2004 - 3.67
> 2005 - 3.81
> 2006 - 3.9
> 2007 - 3.61
> 2008 - 3.27
> 2009 - 3.57
> 2010 - 3.28
> 2011 - 3.21


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Current year's Raw average is 3.06 (Edit: Beaten to it)

2009 had Orton/McMahons and Taker/HBK for the 2-3 out of the first 4 months that did great business for ratings. Orton was red-hot and his feud with HHH even after HHH returned still did great ratings from what I can tell. Orton/Cena dropped the ratings a bit but they were still average for the time. Not to mention the return of DX surely had some impact. Plus despite how terrible they were, I'd think that the guest hosts did have some impact, bringing in some of their respective fanbases to watch them on Raw. I know ZZ Top being Guest Hosts one week got my dad to watch the show as he's a huge ZZ Top fan (bar Summerslam 2005 and a handful of shows including the ZZ Top Guest Host one, he hasn't watched an inkling of wrestling in 10+ years).

Batista's heel turn and Hardy's run was on SD anyway.


----------



## TromaDogg

The Sandrone said:


> Current year's Raw average is 3.06 (Edit: Beaten to it)
> 
> 2009 had Orton/McMahons and Taker/HBK for the 2-3 out of the first 4 months that did great business for ratings. Orton was red-hot and his feud with HHH even after HHH returned still did great ratings from what I can tell. Orton/Cena dropped the ratings a bit but they were still average for the time. Not to mention the return of DX surely had some impact.
> 
> *Batista's heel turn and Hardy's run was on SD anyway.*


True. I was just trying to think off the top of my head for a moment what happened in WWE in 2009 that I enjoyed. I don't even watch Smackdown at all anymore because it's become so bad, so just shows what a huge difference a couple of years can make if they don't get their finger out of their ass and improve Raw.


----------



## KO Bossy

Choke2Death said:


> He's pushed way more than he should be, that's for sure. A one year+ long title reign... legends with a shitload more talent than him like Stone Cold, The Rock, Shawn Michaels, Triple H, Chris Benoit, Chris Jericho, Eddie Guerrero and Kurt Angle never had a title reign this long yet this joke has it. And if you suggest Cena is more pushed than him, that might have been true in the past but it definitely *isn't anymore*. The last few months it's been nothing but PUNK, PUNK, PUNK while Cena is stuck in some stupid angle with AJ and gets put in title matches just to bump the buyrates. It's not wrong at all.


Yeah, but all this reign has proved is that the number of days means absolutely nothing in a reign. Mick Foley was champion for maximum 2 and a half weeks at most, and his reigns were extremely memorable and worthy. So why does it matter? Let them think it does, we, as the fans, know it doesn't.

And for the record, it hasn't been the past few months. Cena and Punk fought at NoC and were supposed to fight again at HIAC, but Cena's elbow fucked that up. This shitty AJ angle has only been around for 3-4 weeks, which is hardly months. Now because you hate Punk, it may seem like he's been pushed more than Cena in the past few months, but really, things haven't changed that much. Plus, how can you compare a short amount of time of stronger booking to 7 years?

Punk's year long reign hasn't been very memorable, you're right. And yes, he has received an incredible push despite not proving that he's that much of a draw. However, he has a far way to go before he reaches Cena levels. Let him take on and eventually beat an entire main event heel stable by himself for a few months, work his way up to 10 title reigns and main event 9/10 PPVs over the WWE champion and then maybe we can talk.

@ToxieDogg Its a real shame pro wrestling doesn't have a draft like the MLB, NHL, NBA or NFL. That way, the excuse for aiming to do shitty is to get a top pick to turn things around next season. In this case, though...I don't know if its deliberate or just extreme incompetence.


----------



## Hennessey

Choke2Death said:


> The average may be 3.06 now but it will definitely get below 3.0 by the end of the year since it's almost half of the year where 2s have become the norm.
> 
> 
> 
> He's pushed way more than he should be, that's for sure. A one year+ long title reign... legends with a shitload more talent than him like Stone Cold, The Rock, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, Triple H, Chris Benoit, Chris Jericho, Eddie Guerrero and Kurt Angle never had a title reign this long yet this joke has it. And if you suggest Cena is more pushed than him, that might have been true in the past but it definitely *isn't anymore*. The last few months it's been nothing but PUNK, PUNK, PUNK while Cena is stuck in some stupid angle with AJ and gets put in title matches just to bump the buyrates. It's not wrong at all.


I hate Punk a lot but this isnt fair. You cant blame Punk for keeping the title for so long. That is the WWE's fault for having such a shit roster. All those guys you named had much more competition then Punk has. That is why their reigns were not as long. Who was Punk supposed to drop the title to? Ziggler, who at the time was a pure midcarder with nothing under his belt. Or Jericho, who was well past his prime, and only came back to Put Punk over. How about Daniel Bryan, and guy that was not ready in my opinion. Or a green Ryback maybe? Or how about Miz when he was jobbing left and right to everyone?


----------



## Choke2Death

KO Bossy said:


> Yeah, but all this reign has proved is that the number of days means absolutely nothing in a reign. Mick Foley was champion for maximum 2 and a half weeks at most, and his reigns were extremely memorable and worthy. So why does it matter? Let them think it does, we, as the fans, know it doesn't.
> 
> And for the record, it hasn't been the past few months. Cena and Punk fought at NoC and were supposed to fight again at HIAC, but Cena's elbow fucked that up. This shitty AJ angle has only been around for 3-4 weeks, which is hardly months. Now because you hate Punk, it may seem like he's been pushed more than Cena in the past few months, but really, things haven't changed that much. *Plus, how can you compare a short amount of time of stronger booking to 7 years?*
> 
> Punk's year long reign hasn't been very memorable, you're right. And yes, he has received an incredible push despite not proving that he's that much of a draw. However, he has a far way to go before he reaches Cena levels. Let him take on and eventually beat an entire main event heel stable by himself for a few months, work his way up to 10 title reigns and main event 9/10 PPVs over the WWE champion and then maybe we can talk..


@ the bold, I was not comparing them and I am talking about PRESENT, not the past. Whatever has happened in seven years is irrelevant to what is happening NOW and right now, Punk is getting overpushed (any push not down a sewer is an overpush for him IMO, though) while Cena is played second fiddle just like smarks have begged for years.

And I really don't want Punk to have 10 title reigns, that would only destroy the championship even further and kill any credibility it has. After this 14 months of boredom, I really hope Punk never gets another title run or only a short one at best. If you're talking about comparing the pushes. Again, that's not what I was doing, I was only talking PRESENT and since Cena's elbow injury, he's played third wheel to Punk and Ryback. That would be two months.

As for the length not mattering, you're right that it doesn't matter. But I also think it should be justified through the guy having it being talented enough or a draw and in my opinion, Punk is neither (although the latter is a fact).


----------



## Jotunheim

Choke2Death said:


> @ the bold, I was not comparing them and I am talking about PRESENT, not the past. Whatever has happened in seven years is irrelevant to what is happening NOW and right now, Punk is getting overpushed *(any push not down a sewer is an overpush for him IMO, though)* while Cena is played second fiddle just like smarks have begged for years.
> 
> And I really don't want Punk to have 10 title reigns, that would only destroy the championship even further and kill any credibility it has. After this 14 months of boredom, I really hope Punk never gets another title run or only a short one at best. If you're talking about comparing the pushes. Again, that's not what I was doing, I was only talking PRESENT and since Cena's elbow injury, he's played third wheel to Punk and Ryback. That would be two months.
> 
> As for the length not mattering, you're right that it doesn't matter. *But I also think it should be justified through the guy having it being talented enough or a draw and in my opinion, Punk is neither* (although the latter is a fact).


jesus christ, I get you don't like punk, not everyone does, but some of the thing you say in all of your different punk diatribes are borderline ridiculous, it's like you legit hate the guy and want him to die or something out of some personal spite :fpalm


----------



## Honey Bucket

Choke2Death just upset he's the WORLD CHAMP for 365 DAYS. 

Sorry, 366 DAYS.


----------



## SpeedStick

Too much "wrestling" on RAW last night casual fans care about storylines not in ring action


----------



## cokecan567

SpeedStick said:


> Too much "wrestling" on RAW last night casual fans care about storylines not in ring action


ya indeed no doubt, and shitty wrestling to. not even good matches boring as fuck etc. What I dont get is vince mcmahon doesnt want to be considered a ''wrestling company'' and considers everyone superstars and not wrestlers. yet he gives us this shit lol. 

people want to see good violent ass shit with storylines, not the shit they give now. its a damn shame really. how things are. I mean who the fuck wants to watch boring fake fighting? I want to see good fake fighting with violent shit and nice over the top storylines. If I want to watch fightingw with no storylines I watch the ufc... vinnce mac is so out of touch with shit or just idk hes so fuckin stupid its sad.


----------



## Post-Modern Devil

SpeedStick said:


> Too much "wrestling" on RAW last night casual fans care about storylines not in ring action


I have to agree with this despite being a proponent for more wrestling. I don't know what was worse: the complete lack of storyline buildup or promo time for upper-midcarders like Orton, Del Rio, Barrett, Kingston, Hell No, Sheamus, or Sandow or the three unknown guys who attacked one of your title contenders literally not appearing except at the very end to rehash what they did last night? 

Honestly, the company really should be using its lowercarders/lower-midcarders to carry a big portion the TV wrestling and focus on getting their uppercard guys in storylines. The current product throws many of their supposed "top" guys in pointless matches with each other so match they almost feel like full on midcarders compared to Cena/Punk/Ryback.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

A lot of long wrestling matches that mean nothing = low ratings.

People need a story to get invested in a match. Thats the structure of wrestling since the late 60's. You'd think WWE would know that.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

From a storyline perspective WWE is always at its best when they have a storyline that carries from the beginning of the show to the end. Right now they have that with the AJ/Cena/Dolph/Vickie storyline. The storyline is still brewing. This angle can get more ratings in if it gets edgier. That started with the kiss (which I know you Daniel Bryan fans loved!). Vickie mention something about a picture -- perhaps that picture should be of a nude AJ (censored of course). That will be intriguing to fans. I realize it's a cheap way to more viewers, but WWE needs to do something big in order to hold their audience until the new year starts.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

You can't blame one man for an entire show number. It's the product that is the blame.


----------



## Snothlisberger

The periodic drop in ratings from 1998 is not because the company is dying. It is because of the way we now consume media largely coupled with wrestling not being quite as popular, less important.

ZOMGZZ RATINGS DROPPED 21% FROM 2000 TO 2001, COMPANY WAS DYING THEN TOO!!

They've only dropped 15% since 2007, a 6 year period


----------



## ChickMagnet12

3 hours is really killing them. For a show that's aimed at kids I would not be surprised if it's the kids tuning out to go to bed or whatever. I personally have never watched the entirety of the 3 hour show, just record it and skim through it the next day. If I do that and I'm a supposed member of the IWC, imagine the casuals/kiddies.

Punk is red hot right now, anyone who doesn't see that is someone who dislikes him. That's cool, each to their own, but this ratings thing needs to be looked at logically and not through eyes of hate.

If Monday night was a two hour show it would of been amazing. We get about an hour of boring SD feuds like Orton against Barret/Del Rio for the 50,000th time and directionless tag team stuff. Add in tout and millions of ad breaks.


----------



## Evil Peter

I love these threads when people are crying because Punk is breaking records. Hilarious how the show has such an effect on people that even those that claim they don't even watch get upset.

The big problem for WWE is obviously the overall writing direction (or rather lack thereof). The three hours doesn't help, but it's just another function of the writing since it has to do with dragging out material that's not even enough for two hours.

But who knows, it might be looking up in some ways. Apart from the same simple-minded people that whine about the same thing week in and week out there's actually been an insurgence of anticipation among many people here. Perhaps WWE can finally capitalize a bit on that?


----------



## TromaDogg

WallofShame said:


> The periodic drop in ratings from 1998 is not because the company is dying. It is because of the way we now consume media largely coupled with wrestling not being quite as popular, less important.
> 
> ZOMGZZ RATINGS DROPPED 21% FROM 2000 TO 2001, COMPANY WAS DYING THEN TOO!!
> 
> They've only dropped 15% since 2007, a 6 year period


You completely missed the point of what I'm trying to get at by posting the Raw ratings since 1998.

I've already said that I understand why ratings dropped at the start of the decade. The 'Attitude Era' boom period being over was the single biggest reason for that. I've also said that ratings for a good few years remained pretty much on an even keel and were pretty much what you'd expect.

But asides from the increase in 2009, we are now really starting to see noticeable ratings drops in line with the show actually getting shittier and more and more people complaining about it. You can deny that if you want but the evidence is all there.

I often see people saying 'the way we now consume media has changed' as a defence for ratings this year being so bad. It's 2012. People didn't just suddenly start DVR'ing and watching shows online recently. I was DVR'ing Raw back in 2004. The shit they're putting out now is baffling most people (who can't understand why something that entertained them _a lot_ not so long back in, say 2005 for instance barely entertains them at all now) and slowly but surely turning them away once their ingrained fanboy loyalty to WWE finally burns out. There _are_ numerous and severe problems with the direction WWE have taken their product in recent times (not least of all the shows now being 3 hours and mostly full of 'filler' crap), and it honestly wouldn't surprise me if they continue to shed viewers more quickly over the next couple of years than they have done over the entire last decade unless they do something about it.


----------



## Starbuck

Cena's drawing power has been slowly but surely dying over the past 2 or 3 years. He isn't able to get by on his name alone anymore because he's been over-saturated to the point of near irrelevance tbh. He isn't the powerhouse TV draw he used to be. People aren't buying it anymore. Yeah, he's still the best they currently have and the best full time guy they have but that isn't saying much when things are slipping and continue to slip like they are. I've always said that Punk isn't a ratings killer but at the same time he sure as hell isn't helping matters at all. Well at this point, Cena, in his current form, isn't helping things either. The entire product is stale and completely lifeless. The Rock's, Brock's HHH's and Undertaker's are only band aids to the real problem. When they're gone, the problem still exists. Until they fix that, things will continue to drop.


----------



## Shawn Morrison

ChickMagnet12 said:


> 3 hours is really killing them. For a show that's aimed at kids I would not be surprised if it's the kids tuning out to go to bed or whatever. I personally have never watched the entirety of the 3 hour show, just record it and skim through it the next day. If I do that and I'm a supposed member or the IWC, imagine that casuals/kiddies.
> 
> Punk is red hot right now, anyone who doesn't see that is someone who dislikes him. That's cool, each to their own, but this ratings thing needs to be looked at logically and not through eyes of hate.
> 
> If Monday night was a two hour show it would of been amazing. We get about an hour of boring SD feuds like Orton against Barret/Del Rio for the 50,000th time and directionless tag team stuff. Add in tout and millions of ad breaks.


i couldn't agree more. The 3 hours is all that the blame should go to, it is far too long, even when i'm forwarding stuff it feels too long. If they go back to 2 hours, the show will be awesome as they will have relevant storylines that will fill up the show, and not filler annoying crap like Smackdown rematches and jobber matches, not to mention touts and replays.


----------



## MikeChase27

jblvdx said:


> A lot of long wrestling matches that mean nothing = low ratings.
> 
> People need a story to get invested in a match. Thats the structure of wrestling since the late 60's. You'd think WWE would know that.


Wrestling? We're sports entertainment :vince3


----------



## YoungGun_UK

Starbuck said:


> Cena's drawing power has been slowly but surely dying over the past 2 or 3 years. He isn't able to get by on his name alone anymore because he's been over-saturated to the point of near irrelevance tbh. He isn't the powerhouse TV draw he used to be. People aren't buying it anymore. Yeah, he's still the best they currently have and the best full time guy they have but that isn't saying much when things are slipping and continue to slip like they are. I've always said that Punk isn't a ratings killer but at the same time he sure as hell isn't helping matters at all. Well at this point, Cena, in his current form, isn't helping things either. The entire product is stale and completely lifeless. The Rock's, Brock's HHH's and Undertaker's are only band aids to the real problem. When they're gone, the problem still exists. Until they fix that, things will continue to drop.


See here's the thing I agree, I don't think Punk is a monster draw but I'd be pretty confident hes level in terms of drawing an audience to RAW as Cena is today, neither of them are going to bring flocks of fans for the entire show but both guys do decent/good numbers in their segments. 

were also in the age of the internet, I don't need to watch the entire show to see what Punk and Cena did, I'll just YouTube it on my Smart Phone the next day. Things have changed.


----------



## ellthom

How many people you think stream WWE events and PPVs now?


----------



## Choke2Death

Jotunheim said:


> jesus christ, I get you don't like punk, not everyone does, but some of the thing you say in all of your different punk diatribes are borderline ridiculous, it's like you legit hate the guy and want him to die or something out of some personal spite :fpalm


Okay, so you had the decency to mark the parts that supposedly made you feel the way you do in this post so I have to address them both.

Firstly, how does saying that he doesn't have the talent to deserve a 1 year title reign translate to "legit hate the guy and want him to die"? :lmao

And the sewer line you also bolded is a J-O-K-E. You know, like when somebody makes a thread saying "Should _____ be pushed?" and the obligatory "Yeah, off a cliff/out the door" responses that follow. I'm surprised you took it this seriously considering the fact that you were jerking off all over the place for that heart-attack segment.


----------



## TN Punk

ellthom said:


> How many people you think stream WWE events and PPVs now?


Streaming and Downloading has got to be in the millions. Monday Night RAW and the PPV are always at the top of torrent list 's the day after. Streaming, there are always thousands of tweets during the PPV or show. I check these kind of things just to see the online buzz.


----------



## just_one

TN Punk said:


> Streaming and Downloading has got to be in the millions. Monday Night RAW and the PPV are always at the top of torrent list 's the day after. Streaming, there are always thousands of tweets during the PPV or show. I check these kind of things just to see the online buzz.


im from portugal and i download PPV the day after. Same thing for RAW.

Yes WWE is broadcasted on TV but we have a delay around 2/3 weeks from whats going on in the US and they dont show PPV´s live also.


----------



## Oakue

Punk celebration should have kicked off the show. I really can't blame him for the dip in ratings during the actual celebration. It's 3 hours, and they pushed him on the air with his celebration at 10:57 PM.

That's just ridiculous. 

But to be honest I'm not sure how much Vince and Co pay attention to these ratings anymore. I think there are quite a bit of people watching the shows on Hulu, and do DVR recordings even count in ratings? So I think we should all keep that in mind when we see ratings that look unimpressive.

I mean I know for me I haven't watched a non sporting event live in about 10 years. So if DVR recording don't count in the ratings than they're missing out on a portion of the audience.


----------



## Jotunheim

Choke2Death said:


> Okay, so you had the decency to mark the parts that supposedly made you feel the way you do in this post so I have to address them both.
> 
> Firstly, how does saying that he doesn't have the talent to deserve a 1 year title reign translate to "legit hate the guy and want him to die"? :lmao
> 
> And the sewer line you also bolded is a J-O-K-E. You know, like when somebody makes a thread saying "Should _____ be pushed?" and the obligatory "Yeah, off a cliff/out the door" responses that follow. I'm surprised you took it this seriously considering the fact that you were jerking off all over the place for that heart-attack segment.


see?, this is the part where I can hardly take your post seriously, the tone of the whole response seems completely hostile even tho I said that sure you don't like it, not everybody does, but you seem to not only dislike cm punk the character but you legit hate the persons guts, I dislike John cena the character like nobody else, but I admit the wrestler, the person itself has talent, is a workhorse and it's overall a nice guy, you seem to just hate cm punk whatever he is, to the point where most people could think that if you see him in the streets you would shoot him on sight

and what's funny that even tho you say in past conversations that everything is mostly your opinion you keep pushing everything you say as a fact regarding him, that's what I meant that people hardly take post like that seriously because they seem outright trollish


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

ToxieDogg said:


> Which is why I put a lot of the blame on guys current Raw head writer Dave Kapoor (best known for his on screen appearences as Khali's manager 'Ranjin Singh') rather than guys like Brian Gerwitz who got fired last time Vince had a rant about low ratings. Kapoor must really lick a lot of ass in WWE fpalm The AJ/Cena angle in particular is shit, and I'm surprised Cena agreed to do it even with the added perk of getting to grope and kiss AJ.
> 
> Amongst other things, one of the worst descisions Vince ever made was putting Stephanie as Executive Vice President of Creative. Much easier to blame other people and bury your head in the sand at corporate meetings claiming that you're happy with the ratings rather than blame daddy's little girl though fpalm.


AJ and Cena don't have chemistry like AJ and DB. Cena can't really act out these more dramatic storylines or make it convincing. But even that's not it. Whole thing is random as fuck and seems like it's leading absolutely nowhere, which is what will probably end up happening, just like the embrace the hate, bigger picture, conspiracy, and the whole Cena losing to Rock. 

Also, like what Starbuck said, not many peeps are able to carry the show on their name alone, and those people are, Orton, Punk, and Cena, these dudes have been run dry, and it's looking bad. The show needs a big direction change because their doesn't seem to be much star power at all anymore. As for Steph, LOL forgot she was in charge of creative. I remember someone mentioning that to me, but geez, some of this shit...fpalm.


----------



## murder

moonmop said:


> But to be honest I'm not sure how much Vince and Co pay attention to these ratings anymore.


Oh, Vince does care for ratings. If not, he wouldn't freak out over a 2.5 rating like he did a few weeks ago. And more importantly, the network cares about ratings.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Vince not appearing = ratings slump


----------



## Choke2Death

Jotunheim said:


> see?, this is the part where I can hardly take your post seriously, the tone of the whole response seems completely hostile even tho I said that sure you don't like it, not everybody does, but you seem to not only dislike cm punk the character but you legit hate the persons guts, I dislike John cena the character like nobody else, but I admit the wrestler, the person itself has talent, is a workhorse and it's overall a nice guy, you seem to just hate cm punk whatever he is, to the point where most people could think that if you see him in the streets you would shoot him on sight
> 
> and what's funny that even tho you say in past conversations that everything is mostly your opinion you keep pushing everything you say as a fact regarding him, that's what I meant that people hardly take post like that seriously because they seem outright trollish


Just what in the world are you talking about? I see absolutely no connection between this post and what you responded to.

There was no hostility in my post because I was legit laughing while pressing the "Submit Reply" button and it may look like I hate Punk beyond the character but that's a complete misunderstanding. I don't care for Punk the person (the way I've gotten to know him outside the ring, he comes across as an egotistical, obnoxious, whiny douchebag) and strongly dislike the on-screen character but what kind of hyperbole shit is - to rephrase your point - "you look like you would shoot him in the streets"?

And no, I don't push anything as a fact and if I do, I would like to see it pointed out because I see none of it "pushed as fact". Things like talent are subjective so of course I'm going to present it from my own point of view but it's not like I say "It's a fact he's not talented enough to deserve a push" or whatever. Oh, and one of the parts you highlighted on my post that you first responded to, I clearly used "IMO" inside the parenthesis. This type of complete twisting of my posts is exactly why I don't take 99% of the Punk marks mad at me seriously. There are some I respect like NearFall and The Sandrone, but the majority try to make up a bunch of garbage to make me look stupid ("Y U HATE PUNK 4 BAD RATINGZ!!!").

Joke's on you!


----------



## Jotunheim

Choke2Death said:


> Just what in the world are you talking about? I see absolutely no connection between this post and what you responded to.
> 
> There was no hostility in my post because I was legit laughing while pressing the "Submit Reply" button and it may look like I hate Punk beyond the character but that's a complete misunderstanding. I don't care for Punk the person (the way I've gotten to know him outside the ring, he comes across as an egotistical, obnoxious, whiny douchebag) and strongly dislike the on-screen character but what kind of hyperbole shit is - to rephrase your point - "you look like you would shoot him in the streets"?
> 
> And no, I don't push anything as a fact and if I do, I would like to see it pointed out because I see none of it "pushed as fact". Things like talent are subjective so of course I'm going to present it from my own point of view but it's not like I say "It's a fact he's not talented enough to deserve a push" or whatever. Oh, and one of the parts you highlighted on my post that you first responded to, I clearly used "IMO" inside the parenthesis. This type of complete twisting of my posts is exactly why I don't take 99% of the Punk marks mad at me seriously. There are some I respect like NearFall and The Sandrone, but the majority try to make up a bunch of garbage to make me look stupid ("Y U HATE PUNK 4 BAD RATINGZ!!!").
> 
> Joke's on you!


I think the joke's on you man, for a guy that claims to dislike punk or not care about the person at all you seem to go out of your way to post how much you dislike, hate, push your subjective opinions of him in each and every single thread iregardles if it is about him or not


----------



## Choke2Death

Jotunheim said:


> I think the joke's on you man, for a guy that claims to dislike punk or not care about the person at all you seem to go out of your way to post how much you dislike, hate, push your subjective opinions of him in each and every single thread iregardles if it is about him or not


Except that's not true. And recently, I have pretty much stopped talking about him outside of this thread and General WWE threads where he's relevant. The first page of the Raw section is always dominated by Punk discussion and at most, I have only made 1 post in them as they are right now. And why do you keep changing the subject? One moment you are concerned about how badly I hate him, then another you are talking about me being in every thread posting about him, which is exactly what my previous post pointed out. FALSE ACCUSATIONS.

And you still failed to point out where I pushed my opinion as "fact" or said _anything_ resembling "I want Punk to die" or "I wish he would get shot". I might have posted in most threads Punk-related weeks ago (and what can you do when about 8/10 of the first page is Punk threads?) but I've pretty much stopped because there's really no point in doing it even though the reaction from the army of angry dogs that come to Punk's defense even if he would have killed a group of fans in the streets is hilarious.


----------



## AthenaMark

Vince is a bigger draw than Cena or Punk.


----------



## Snothlisberger

ToxieDogg said:


> You completely missed the point of what I'm trying to get at by posting the Raw ratings since 1998.
> 
> I've already said that I understand why ratings dropped at the start of the decade. The 'Attitude Era' boom period being over was the single biggest reason for that. I've also said that ratings for a good few years remained pretty much on an even keel and were pretty much what you'd expect.
> 
> But asides from the increase in 2009, we are now really starting to see noticeable ratings drops in line with the show actually getting shittier and more and more people complaining about it. You can deny that if you want but the evidence is all there.
> 
> I often see people saying 'the way we now consume media has changed' as a defence for ratings this year being so bad. It's 2012. People didn't just suddenly start DVR'ing and watching shows online recently. I was DVR'ing Raw back in 2004. The shit they're putting out now is baffling most people (who can't understand why something that entertained them _a lot_ not so long back in, say 2005 for instance barely entertains them at all now) and slowly but surely turning them away once their ingrained fanboy loyalty to WWE finally burns out. There _are_ numerous and severe problems with the direction WWE have taken their product in recent times (not least of all the shows now being 3 hours and mostly full of 'filler' crap), and it honestly wouldn't surprise me if they continue to shed viewers more quickly over the next couple of years than they have done over the entire last decade unless they do something about it.


Top rated show 2004: American Idol 16.5
Top rated show 2012: Sunday Night Football 12.9

Percentage change: 21%

RAW 2004: 3.67
RAW 2012: 3.06

Percentage change:16%

:hmm:

I loled when you said you DVRed back in 2004 so you just assume everybody else did then too. You don't represent the entire viewing audience, sorry. And DVRs are accounted for in ratings anyway. That isn't really what is changing. Don't feel like writing a 5 page paper on how consumption of media has changed, tho.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I think we can all concur that until Mr. Laurinaitis returns, ratings will never go back up again.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Let's be very honest here. If John Cena was champion for the last 6-8 months or someone like RKO/Sheamus people would be ripping them for the ratings sucking. But because it's CM Punk as WWE Champion people are unwilling to pin any blame on him. The way the internet protects is very similar to how the media protects the President -- he can do no wrong and if there are problems its because of his surroundings.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

The Boy Wonder said:


> Let's be very honest here. If John Cena was champion for the last 6-8 months or someone like RKO/Sheamus people would be ripping them for the ratings sucking. But because it's CM Punk as WWE Champion people are unwilling to pin any blame on him. The way the internet protects is very similar to how the media protects the President -- he can do no wrong and if there are problems its because of his surroundings.


Well, yeah. The same hardcore CM punk marks will have every slightest excuse ready to defend him, yet if it's someone like Sheamus, those same hardcore marks will rip him with the same crap they tried to defend CM punk against. This isn't new and it's the very reason this thread became a sticky. I'm surprised this still needs explaining, just save your time.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

The Boy Wonder said:


> Let's be very honest here. If John Cena was champion for the last 6-8 months or someone like RKO/Sheamus people would be ripping them for the ratings sucking. But because it's CM Punk as WWE Champion people are unwilling to pin any blame on him.


First two sentences are right, third sentence is wrong. Only people unwilling to place the blame fully on Punk are fans/marks, and it's the same case with Orton and Sheamus fans/marks. The problem is people try to put the blame on someone, when it reality it has very little to do with them because the product as a whole sucks and is unpopular.

Damn, I feel like I'm posting this week after week (in addition to others who post it every week), and I could've sworn I said last week I'd stop. I think I have a problem.

My name is Sandrone and I'm a Ratings Thread-a-holic.


----------



## TheWFEffect

Three hours is too much and before somebody says "Well WCW went three hours and got better ratings" different era, different time and different attitude in terms of where the actual effort WWE is willing to put into its storylines at the moment three hours is definitely too much one storyline will not keep viewers watching. As far as characters go WWE has a great roster at the moment the tag team division PTP, team hell no, Rey and Botch Cara, Int Airstrike, Uso's and Epico,Primo and Rosa's ass, Mid card Barrett, Sandow, Kingston, The Miz, Cesaro, Truth, Ryder, Marrella and 3MB. The problem is WWE just needs to do somthing with the roster why don't they look back in their archives and see how just a simple tag team feud with backstage interviews, brawls and special match types drew them big and how mid card feud could be turned personal just like how they book the main event.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

The problem is bigger than who is holding the belt. When you really break it down, it is literally a prop. I can't believe there are still superfans who think that changing who has that prop will cause ratings to skyrocket. It is such a stupid thing to think.


----------



## Nimbus

Please guys *OPEN YOUR EYES*, Punk is not a draw, nobody gives a shit about him except the indie marks.

This is killing the industry, the ratings has been decreasing for the past year.....yeah, the year he has been holding the belt.


----------



## JasonLives

Nimbus said:


> Please guys *OPEN YOUR EYES*, Punk is not a draw, nobody gives a shit about him except the indie marks.
> 
> This is killing the industry, the ratings has been decreasing for the past year.....yeah, the year he has been holding the belt.


The ratings have been decreasing for the last 12 years...


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

So, is there going to be no breakdown this week due to it being the week of Thanksgiving? Or is it just another case of a late breakdown. Do I need to pull a breakdown out of thin air again to keep this thread talking...?


----------



## SerapisLiber

Yeah, it's a shame. All that talent gone to waste. Reminds me of when Shawn finally got the belt in 96, and business didn't get any better, and at times even got worse. He was one of, if not the most talented worker the WWE ever had up to that point, I was so anxious to finally see him get the ball, and WWE blew it. We all know Shawn had more than enough talent to be a huge draw, so it clearly wasn't his fault. It was bad timing (poor roster, still reeling from steroid scandal, head to head with NWO storyline) along with poor creative direction with his character. 

Likewise, I'd say many of us know Punk has the talent. Hell, A LOT of guys on that roster have the talent, but as pointed out so many times in this thread, WWE is failing in its creative direction, and has been failing for so long that inertia is against them.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

In a rarity, the highest rated segment of the entire show was the Ryback interview and Ryback vs. Tensai match which did a 2.91 quarter. Kofi Kingston vs. Wade Barrett lost 298,000 viewers. A Paul Heyman and C.M. Punk backstage interview plus Aksana vs. Kaitlyn lost 80,000 viewers. Brodus Clay vs. Antonio Cesaro and the John Cena Make a Wish segment gained 376,000 viewers. The segment with Vickie Guerrero, A.J. Lee, Cena where Dolph Ziggler attacked gained 195,000 viewers to a 2.85 quarter. I have to say I was shocked because 9 p.m. is usual growth and I thought this would be a big one, and that’s as low a 9 p.m. growth period as they’ve had. Randy Orton vs. Alberto Del Rio 2/3 falls lost 122,000 viewers. Great Khali vs. Primo & Epico lost 186,000 viewers. The Miz vs. David Otunga gained 223,000 viewers which for those two has to be considered a success. Sheamus vs. Damien Sandow gained 105,000 viewers at 10 p.m. The A.J. and Dolph Ziggler locker room deal which ended with the Cena and Ziggler brawl lost 241,000 viewers. Not good at all considering the nature of that segment. Kane & Daniel Bryan vs. Rey Mysterio & Sin Cara lost 266,000 viewers to a 2.50 quarter. Airing clips of all the Cena angles on the show gained 101,000 viewers. The C.M. Punk 365th day in-ring celebration gained 419,000 viewers to a 2.87 overrun.


----------



## The GOAT One

Interesting stuff from Big Dave and Alvarez on Observer Radio today talking about Ratings and Punks lack of drawing power.

As they say, it's thanks to The Rock that Punk is still champ really. Usually when someone does regular poor numbers they just put the belt back on Cena, but cause Rock wants to face Punk and win the title, Punk keeps retaining. 

So Punk marks - thank :Rock that Punk hasn't been buried yet.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

It was one of the lowest overruns ever for RAW. Poor. 

Yes Punk marks, bow to the GOAT. :Rock2


----------



## JY57

all over the place with that one. opening did better than ending, Ziggler/Cena/AJ backstage lost viewers but the recaps of it gained, rest also gone crazy.

Oh well whatever I never understand these breakdowns anyways.

^^ I would think that is the main reason Punk has held it this long, The Rock wants him at Rumble.:rock4


----------



## The GOAT One

Yeah 5th lowest ever. Mental.


----------



## Amuroray

TheGreatOne. said:


> Interesting stuff from Big Dave and Alvarez on Observer Radio today talking about Ratings and Punks lack of drawing power.
> 
> As they say, it's thanks to The Rock that Punk is still champ really. Usually when someone does regular poor numbers they just put the belt back on Cena, but cause Rock wants to face Punk and win the title, Punk keeps retaining.
> 
> So Punk marks - thank :Rock that Punk hasn't been buried yet.


Punk marks just cant admit that punk cant draw.


----------



## Evil Peter

Amuroray said:


> Punk marks just cant admit that punk cant draw.


There's a lot of Punk fans here saying that he doesn't draw so you're either not paying any attention or that's a very weak troll attempt. The big problem is that no one else on the show is drawing either. No matter what the ratings are below 3.0, even if Cena, Punk, Ryback, Sheamus etc are featured prominently.

What many say though is that drawing power is pretty irrelevant to whether you think someone is good or not. People that try to troll by using ratings come off as the biggest mainstream wannabes.


----------



## SerapisLiber

Rock responsible for Punk's long reign, eh?
Hmmm, is the Rock also the one behind the shitty story lines in order to deliberately push ratings down to make for a bigger spike when he (and Lesnar) return for RtWM?

I don't think ratings necessarily have a direct correlation to length of title reigns. 

Wasn't Nash allegedly the lowest drawing champion, at least up to that point, and yet he also held the belt for a year?

Shawn, as I pointed out earlier, also didn't improve business and yet he held the title 8 months straight, and then won it back shortly thereafter.

Same with Bret's 2nd reign which lasted 8 months.

Were ratings up in 2003 during HHH's 9 month reign? I'll have to check. 

From what I've read, there's a lot of politics involved with title runs. I heard that Bret would have it put in his contract that he had to be champion for at least X amount of days per year. So regardless of how he drew, he was guaranteed to be champ.
I've read that Shawn was asked to drop the belt several times during his reign, but he bitched and threatened to jump to WCW, so they kept it on him.
I read Billy Graham brought up business during his reign, but it was already pre-determined before he got it that he was just a transitional champ for Backlund, so regardless of being a draw, he was forced to job.

In Punk's DVD he said at MITB he didn't re-sign until the PPV had already started, and Vince said Punk had him over a barrel. He clearly was really going to leave and so likely was not scheduled to get the belt. He probably added that as a stipulation for re-signing, and it wouldn't surprise me if Punk pulled a Bret and had it put in his contract that he had to have the belt for this long.

I also heard HHH moving up the corporate ladder had a hand in the decision for longer title reigns, i.e., Punk & Sheamus, in order to bring prestige and hype back to title changes.

I don't know how true every one of these things is, but it does lead to the conclusion that ratings=/=title reign.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

So everything is doing bad in the ratings because the show sucks. What else is there to say?

Not one thing got over a 3.0. I know WWE doesn't value ratings like they used to, but god damn, take a hint and improve your product.


----------



## Bob the Jobber

It's tough to draw for anyone in what could possibly be the worst environment of creative/booking the WWE has seen in more than 15 years.


----------



## JasonLives

The-Rock-Says said:


> Airing clips of all the Cena angles on the show gained 101,000 viewers.


Says the Cena clips drew 101,000 viewers. Clips was 2 minutes long in a 15 minute quarter :disdrogba



> Great Khali vs. Primo & Epico lost 186,000 viewers.


Says Khali Vs. Primo/Epico lost 186,000 viewers. Was a 1 minute match in a 15 minute quarter :disdrogba



*Q1*- 2.91 rating. = Ryback promo, Ryback Vs. Tensai, 1 commercial break

*Q2*- Lost 298,000 viewers = Kingston Vs. Barrett, 1 commercial break

*Q3*- Lost 80,000 viewers = Various videos and backstage promos, Divas Match, 2 commercial breaks 

*Q4*- Gained 376,000 viewers = Cesaro Vs. Truth, 1 commercial break, start of AJ/Cena/Vickie,Ziggler segment

*Q5 9PM* - Gained 195,000 viewers = AJ/Cena/Vickie/Ziggler segment, 1 commercial break, start of Orton Vs. Del Rio

*Q6*- Lost 122,000 viewers = Orton VS. Del Rio, 1 commercial break, backstage segment

*Q7*- Lost 186,000 viewers = 2 commercial break, Khali Vs. Primo/Epico, backstage segment, start of Miz Vs. Otunga

*Q8*- Gained 223,000 viewers = End of Miz Vs. Otunga, 1 commercial break, Sheamus/Big Show segment

*Q9 10PM* - Gained 105,000 viewers = End of Sheamus/Big show segment, Sheamus Vs. Sandow, 1 commercial break

*Q10*- Lost 241,000 viewers = End of Sheamus Vs. Sandow, backstage segment, Cena/Ziggler backstage brawl, 2 commercial breaks

*Q11*- Lost 266,000 viewers = Backstage segment, Bryan/Kane Vs. Mysterio/Sin Cara, 1 commercial break

*Q12* - Gained 101,000 viewers = End of Bryan/Kane Vs. Mysterio/Sin Cara, 1 commercial break, Cena/AJ/Ziggler recap, Start of CM Punk celebration

*Overrun 11PM*- Gained 419,000 viewers = CM Punk celebration continues


Many segments and matches went into 2 quarters and therefore hard to determine how it did.
Not much in high drops or high gains. A bit all over the place, just like the show itself. Just a overall lack of intrest in the product right from the start of the show.


----------



## N-destroy

DAT RYBACK! 

Just read Punk/Taker for the title/streak is the plan for Mania 29 which wont work at all because punk is way past needing a WM star-rub, now he needs a legitimate win. Ryback/Taker will be much better option imo. Ryback just needs the rub, he doesn't need to win.


----------



## JY57

N-destroy said:


> DAT RYBACK!
> 
> Just read Punk/Taker for the title/streak is the plan for Mania 29 which wont work at all. Ryback/Taker will be much better option imo. Ryback just needs the rub, he doesn't need to win.


I don't see Taker agreeing to work with Ryback. If it was to Vince he probably jack off at the idea, but The Deadman does have the final say in the matter.


----------



## N-destroy

I know that taker has the final say, but why would he not agree to work with Ryback? It's not like he is going to lose the match.


----------



## AthenaMark

The-Rock-Says said:


> In a rarity, the highest rated segment of the entire show was the Ryback interview and Ryback vs. Tensai match which did a 2.91 quarter. Kofi Kingston vs. Wade Barrett lost 298,000 viewers. A Paul Heyman and C.M. Punk backstage interview plus Aksana vs. Kaitlyn lost 80,000 viewers. Brodus Clay vs. Antonio Cesaro and the John Cena Make a Wish segment gained 376,000 viewers. The segment with Vickie Guerrero, A.J. Lee, Cena where Dolph Ziggler attacked gained 195,000 viewers to a 2.85 quarter. I have to say I was shocked because 9 p.m. is usual growth and I thought this would be a big one, and that’s as low a 9 p.m. growth period as they’ve had. Randy Orton vs. Alberto Del Rio 2/3 falls lost 122,000 viewers. Great Khali vs. Primo & Epico lost 186,000 viewers. The Miz vs. David Otunga gained 223,000 viewers which for those two has to be considered a success. Sheamus vs. Damien Sandow gained 105,000 viewers at 10 p.m. The A.J. and Dolph Ziggler locker room deal which ended with the Cena and Ziggler brawl lost 241,000 viewers. Not good at all considering the nature of that segment. Kane & Daniel Bryan vs. Rey Mysterio & Sin Cara lost 266,000 viewers to a 2.50 quarter. Airing clips of all the Cena angles on the show gained 101,000 viewers. The C.M. Punk 365th day in-ring celebration gained 419,000 viewers to a 2.87 overrun.


Ryback and Miz outdrawing CM Punk and Ziggler's loved promo? You can't make this shit up, man. I can't wait until the night after TLC...ready to hear that legendary theme.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

jblvdx said:


> So everything is doing bad in the ratings because the show sucks. What else is there to say?
> 
> Not one thing got over a 3.0. I know WWE doesn't value ratings like they used to, but god damn, take a hint and improve your product.


nah
its all punks fault people arent interested in khali vs primo/epico with hornshit included


----------



## Starbuck

DAT CELEBRATION

I think it would have done much better had people actually given a fuck about Punk's title reign for even a quarter of those 365 days. But hey, this is what happens when you treat something like shit and then expect people to care. They don't. Hell, they're treating Cena being in WWE for 10 years as a bigger deal than Punk being champ for 1. 

This clarifies a lot of things for me and should for others too. Punk's segment wasn't even the highest of the night and it was promoted heavily throughout the show not to mention got the overrun slot which should have helped big time. It was his big moment to shine and nobody cared. Says it all really. And before some idiot starts flaming, I'm not solely blaming him for the entire show performance. But this segment was all Punk in what was supposed to be the biggest segment of the night and the obvious hook of the show and it couldn't even beat the opener. 

Also, the Cena/AJ/Vickie thing doing so badly is another wake up call. I think that has to be one of the worst 9PM growths in some time. Why? Because they've been doing the exact same segment at the exact same time slot for the past month. Any bit of wonder why people aren't watching it. Besides, it's retarded as fuck which doesn't help matters either. 

Horrible breakdown. Not one segment got over a 3.0 which is just awful. What else is there to say other than the fact that they're stuck in a rut and won't get out of it until they get their act together across the board. Punk isn't doing anything to help when it comes to television audiences. I've been saying this for months. Now it appears that even John Cena isn't enough anymore. They're all striking out.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

I liked that Orton vs Rio match. But the whole formula of these bookings remains the same, and it's wearing attention spans very thin.


----------



## Awesome22

How many times have Orton vs Del Rio happened? Not only is the show boring but it's the same freaking matches week after week. They deserve this rating.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Awesome22 said:


> How many times have Orton vs Del Rio happened? Not only is the show boring but it's the same freaking matches week after week. They deserve this rating.


Not sure, but Orton's won the majority of them and there isn't much story in it. Couple of good promos here and there, but I see it leading nowhere. My excuse is, they're keeping Orton strong for his supposed heel turn, and if that's the case, then I ain't even mad. (Y)


----------



## DOPA

Man product has horrible ratings across the board this week. Punk isn't hurting the ratings but certainly isn't helping either.


----------



## MikeChase27

N-destroy said:


> I know that taker has the final say, but why would he not agree to work with Ryback? It's not like he is going to lose the match.


Seeing how this is could be his last mania I doubt he wants to risk getting seriously hurt.


----------



## N-destroy

Orton and Del Rio have had eight 1-on-1 matches together in 2012, Orton has won 6 of them. 1 no-contest finish and the other submission win for Del Rio.



MikeChase27 said:


> Seeing how this is could be his last mania I doubt he wants to risk getting seriously hurt.


This is not his last mania, WM-30 against Cena(possibly heel) will be his last. Ryback is by no means a reckless worker. He is just inexperienced.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

N-destroy said:


> Orton and Del Rio have had eight 1-on-1 matches together in 2012, Orton has 6 of them. 1 no-contest finish and the other submission win for Del Rio.


Well damn. Guess they are gonna have a chairs or tables match to end the feud, with Orton going over. And then probably Orton's gonna eliminate Rio in the EC match.


----------



## MikeChase27

N-destroy said:


> Orton and Del Rio have had eight 1-on-1 matches together in 2012, Orton has won 6 of them. 1 no-contest finish and the other submission win for Del Rio.
> 
> 
> 
> This is not his last mania, WM-30 against Cena(possibly heel) will be his last. Ryback is by no means a reckless worker. He is just inexperienced.


Did a dirt sheet tell you that? Its well known that Taker is hurting and to be honest to go from NBA and HHH all the way to Ryback is pretty shitty.


----------



## N-destroy

No, Taker/Cena for the streak is a big money match. It's a logical assumption.

It isn't "shitty" if they can properly build up Ryback as a threat to the streak. The only other available option is a "Fight" with Lesnar and that's much worse compared to Ryback.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Okay, this breakdown is actually pretty steady for the most part. Of course it's in the poor range, but it's steady, which I suppose means it kept the people's interest who tuned in for the most part.

Ryback had the highest rated segment, but by my calculations, based on the gains/losses provided, his segment was not the highest viewership... unless I made some mistake (which is possible), but Punk's segment at the end seemed to have the highest viewership, followed by he 10PM, then the 9PM, and then the Miz/Otunga match.

That being said, with the Punk segment, it's both good and bad. Good because he did get the most amount of viewers for the show and what can still be a success to some degree because it certainly wasn't a failure as it was well above the ratings average for the show. However, it's also bad. The segment was all Punk and it ended up being one of the lowest overrun quarters of the year. Not to mention the gain was the weakest overrun gain in a couple of months. The fact that it was heavily promoted and it didn't bring in more viewers with the nature of the segment in mind, that's pretty fucking bad and feeds the whole "Punk doesn't draw' argument. However where I was hoping this segment would either sway me on the side of him firmly not being a draw (even though I'd of course still be a mark) or him being a draw with the right promotion much like any other top name, the segment didn't do either. There are positives and negatives for the numbers he got. You could argue he simply did the best he could if he did get the highest viewership, and there was no greater audience for tonight (as far fetched as that sounds). So yeah, I'm still in the same spot I was. Not a top level draw, but not a ratings bust either. Just in the middle of that who has his good nights, his good moments, and his bad nights/bad moments in the ratings game.

Let's talk about Ryback's segment, because while it is a success to some degree, getting the highest rating of the night, it's not all good either. He had the opening segment from SVS in the 8PM slot, the first thing people would see after Sunday's show and what they'd be tuned in and interested for, and all he gets is a 2.91? Much like Punk, it's great he did above the average and in relationship to the night of the show it was a good number, but in the grand scheme of things it was poor. Ryback's still in the same boat as Punk. Not a top level draw, but certainly not a ratings bust. Plus he'll now always have the 10PM segment from last week, which was the highest gaining 10PM segment in months, to work for him.

Ouch at the Vickie/AJ/Cena angle. I would've thought the whole kissing thing would've grabbed people in by word of mouth like it's done in the past, but I guess not. Still it's one of the highest viewers segments of the night for the show, but it still is a pretty sucky overrun/gain.

The big success of the night imo was Miz/Otunga in a random quarter gaining 223,000 viewers. They just might be on to something with face Miz. I've been thinking if Miz turned face I could see him winning the Rumble, and now if he keeps doing well in the ratings, I'd wager more on that happening.

But yeah, they started in a rut with the direct fallout from the PPV with Ryback's promo and Ryback/Tensai, and didn't really go anywhere. Some came, some left, but they never dug themselves out of that rut, and Punk's just not a big enough draw, even in a heavily promoted segment, to do that.


----------



## Loader230

MikeChase27 said:


> Did a dirt sheet tell you that? Its well known that Taker is hurting and *to be honest to go from NBA and HHH all the way to Ryback is pretty shitty.*


What makes you think punk is not a shitty option? Considering Ryback is the #2 star behind Cena right now, Taker should pick Ryback over the #3 star of the show, CM Punk.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Loader230 said:


> What makes you think punk is not a shitty option? *Considering Ryback is the #2 star behind Cena right now*, Taker should pick Ryback over the #3 star of the show, CM Punk.


Is this true? Is he above Sheamus, Orton, and Punk?


----------



## vanboxmeer

Team Steph and her self-insert Mary Sueing it up all over her daddy's show. Perhaps her and her TMZ writing staff can con Vinny to keep writing the same diatribe to indulge her antiquated 'girl power' movement that's only been slowly deteriorating their core fan base and having shows in front of half-empty buildings. If people want to see a teen drama show, they won't watch pro wrestling. They'll watch an actual teen drama show with actual actors and legitimate writers, fuckwits.


----------



## King_Kool-Aid™

KO Bossy said:


> @ToxieDogg Its a real shame pro wrestling doesn't have a draft like the MLB, NHL, NBA or NFL. That way, the excuse for aiming to do shitty is to get a top pick to turn things around next season. In this case, though...I don't know if its deliberate or just extreme incompetence.


Even when they had the WWE Draft they still failed at keeping things interesting. The draft would be alright for the first 2 months and then fissile out afterwards back to mediocrity.


----------



## Choke2Death

And this breakdown pretty much confirms it. Punk is NOT a draw. He finally got his moment where he's all on his own without any legends or proven draws on his side and the viewership numbers were lukewarm at best.

But Starbuck put it best, the only real draw in the roster is Cena and even he is losing his star power due to over-exposure, shitty storylines and just being too stale for words. Ratings are not in a good place right now.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Punk is up there due to the MITB thing, but it seems his name still ain't powerful enough.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Lol at people going "U SEE, PUNK CANT DRAW!" We know.

Punk isn't a ratings draw, but guess what, nobody is. Hell Cena got a lower rating than Punk. Nobody draws ratings on the roster. The only ones that do are Rock, Brock, HHH and Taker because they always get top billing and promotion for big events. "WRESTLEMANIA IS COMING UP, ROLL OUT THE RED CARPET FOR ALL THE GUYS WHO ARE NEVER HERE AND IN THEIR FORTIES" its that mentality thats killing the product.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

jblvdx said:


> Lol at people going "U SEE, PUNK CANT DRAW!" We know.
> 
> Punk isn't a ratings draw, but guess what, nobody is. Hell Cena got a lower rating than Punk. Nobody draws ratings on the roster. The only ones that do are Rock, Brock, HHH and Taker because they always get top billing and promotion for big events. "WRESTLEMANIA IS COMING UP, ROLL OUT THE RED CARPET FOR ALL THE GUYS WHO ARE NEVER HERE AND IN THEIR FORTIES" its that mentality thats killing the product.


Yes, HHH vs Taker 2 years in a row HHH vs Brock Cena getting all the big names and main eventing with Johnny ace is doing nobody favors. Punk being said as a person who isn't drawing attention is a statement made out to the marks who would probably say the exact same thing if someone like Miz was champ and people would say he isn't a draw even thou the show as a whole is pretty crap.


----------



## Green Light

Rydraw strikes again


----------



## N-destroy

Just heard Ryback drew 200,000 buys legit for Hell in a cell PPV. Biggest rated QH this week. He's on a roll for sure.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Now that's a moment.


----------



## D.M.N.

The above post is a great lead-in here....

Enough of this American ratings breakdown, how about a much needed UK ratings breakdown to mull over?  

WWE Late Night Raw - Monday 12th November 2012
AVERAGE = 168k (8.29%)
Q1 - 129k (3.76%)
Q2 - 130k (4.43%)
Q3 - 187k (6.62%)
Q4 - 135k (5.27%)
Q5 - 230k (9.44%)
Q6 - 151k (7.65%)
Q7 - 143k (7.73%)
Q8 - 99k (6.05%)
Q9 - 178k (12.10%)
Q10 - 125k (9.97%)
Q11 - 155k (13.25%)
Q12 - 118k (11.24%)
Overrun - 188k (17.70%)

The top five 'five minute segments' were:

Q5 - 70 minutes to 75 minutes into show: 254k (11.39%)
Q3 - 30 minutes to 35 minutes into show: 240k (8.09%) 
Q5 - 65 minutes to 70 minutes into show: 232k (8.72%)
Q2 - 25 minutes to 30 minutes into show: 210.5k (7.24%)
Q5 - 60 minutes to 65 minutes into show: 205k (8.21%)

And a demographic breakdown:

Children 4-15 - 22k (13.0%)
Adults 16-24 - 43k (25.4%)
Adults 25-34 - 66k (39.4%)
Adults 35-44 - 11.5k (6.8%)
Adults 45-54 - 9k (5.6%)
Adults 55-64 - 2k (1.0%)
Adults 65+ - 15k (8.7%)

So most popular with Adults 25-35 and then going down to kids.

_Includes anyone who recorded it and watched it within seven days of original broadcast._

In comparison, over here Raw 1000 averaged *315k (13.63%)*, peaking with a huge *479k (20.18%)* 20 minutes into Hour 2 which was when The Rock returned. Ironically, linked in the post above...


----------



## TN Punk

I just purchased 2 CM Punk shirts!!!!!


----------



## TromaDogg

WallofShame said:


> Top rated show 2004: American Idol 16.5
> Top rated show 2012: Sunday Night Football 12.9
> 
> Percentage change: 21%
> 
> RAW 2004: 3.67
> RAW 2012: 3.06
> 
> Percentage change:16%
> 
> :hmm:
> 
> I loled when you said you DVRed back in 2004 so you just assume everybody else did then too. You don't represent the entire viewing audience, sorry. And DVRs are accounted for in ratings anyway. That isn't really what is changing. Don't feel like writing a 5 page paper on how consumption of media has changed, tho.


Not entirely sure what you found so amusing that you LOL'd  I didn't say I represented the entire viewing audience or that everybody else used DVR's (which is accounted for in ratings)...I was making the point that alternative ways of viewing shows have been available for years (including Youtube and downloading)...it's not just some new phenomenon that is all of a sudden causing ratings to suddenly plummet to the levels they are now at the tail end of 2012 like you and others like to imply. I could just as easily LOL at you comparing the viewing figures of completely unrelated shows to WWE. Of course viewing figures for things like American Idol will rapidly disappear over a shorter period of time...it was an interesting new concept to begin with (plus 2004 was still a time when those kind of shows were booming in popularity) but fast forward to 2012 and it's been same old shit year in, year out. It's been even more monotonous than WWE. American Idol may have morphed into The X Factor but it hasn't really changed much...pretty much mirrors the situation in the UK (we had Pop Idol which also became X Factor) where the bubble has burst on these kinds of shows and they don't pull the viewers they once did. Unlike WWE which has been around for decades, American/Pop Idol was a fad. It was never going to maintain a high viewership long term without things like developing characters and interesting storylines (not really possible on shows like that).

It's the 'same old shit' mentatlity that's got them into that mess, but they don't care so long as they can still convince idiots to spend their money by phoning in to vote for whichever acts they have on each week. Actually, in that regard it's not such a different situation from the mess WWE haas gotten itself into at all...same old shit, viewers go down but so long as the kids buy the Cena merchandise and keep the money coming in, then things won't change much.

As far as Raw ratings go, you missed my point there as well. I said twice already (but I'll say it a third time, just for you) that ratings remained on an even keel for most of the last decade (after the Attitude Era bandwagon jumpers left), even going back up towards higher levels when decent new stars were created (Cena and Batista)...my concern is that a combination of the shit that WWE have been putting out (especially for the last couple of years, asides from the odd highlight from guys like Rock/Triple H/Undertaker/Brock) along with the now 3 hour shows are causing figures to drop a lot more than the norm for WWE.

My guess at this point is that if WWE had taken the direction it has recently back in 2004, than you'd likely see an even bigger drop than the 16% or even 21% you've mentioned by the end of 2012. That's not because people's viewing habits have rapidly changed all of a sudden. It's simply because WWE Raw has become 90% 'same old shit' garbage with nothing 'must see' about it most weeks anymore. When somebody tunes into the show on Monday and sees the likes of Ryback vs Tensai and Cesaro vs Brodus Clay, the exact same matches that were on the show a few weeks ago with the exact same guys winning as before...well it hardly inspires them to carry on watching does it?

Still LOL'ing?


----------



## Bossdude

You say that no one can draw, but you dont know that for sure. 
I mean if ratings have been in the shitter with Punk as champion, maybe, just maybe they should try pushing someone else.
It certainly cant hurt.


----------



## Coffey

I think there's just a big disconnect between Vince McMahon & reality.

Vince McMahon seems to think that wrestlers used to draw, so he tried to change the industry to make it so that the brand name draws. This has worked, to an extent, as people will pay to see Wrestlemania or The Royal Rumble. But they will not simply buy anything that has the WWE logo on it.

Reality is that stars themselves do still draw, just like in Hollywood, and no matter what Vince McMahon does, that will never change. All of his attempts to make the brand draw instead of stars just sabotages potential money as he squanders potential resources by lessening the impact of his stars in an effort to provide the "circus act" show that provides something for everyone.

The show should be built around stars and they company should be working to create stars. Instead they seem to care about more people talking about WWE instead of paying to see the stars. They seem terrified of being burned by big name guys or some shit. It just screams insecurity from the top. No matter what Vince McMahon does, the landscape of professional wrestling is not going to change. It's always going to be about good vs. evil, drama & relatable characters. If you try to do anything other than that, it doesn't work.

A WWE Presents: Gimmick Pay-Per-View doesn't matter when the fans don't care about or can't relate to anyone on the card. When it's a bunch of people trading wins/losses with each other for months, leading to apathy and no heat.


----------



## Starbuck

jblvdx said:


> Lol at people going "U SEE, PUNK CANT DRAW!" We know.
> 
> Punk isn't a ratings draw, but guess what, nobody is. Hell Cena got a lower rating than Punk. Nobody draws ratings on the roster. The only ones that do are Rock, Brock, HHH and Taker because they always get top billing and promotion for big events. "WRESTLEMANIA IS COMING UP, ROLL OUT THE RED CARPET FOR ALL THE GUYS WHO ARE NEVER HERE AND IN THEIR FORTIES" its that mentality thats killing the product.


:lmao You know what Punk's smelling in your sig? BUTTHURT.


----------



## Falkono

A year of being the champ and having a Hogan style booking where he never loses and he still can't draw. Least seen champion in history.


----------



## Coffey

jblvdx said:


> "WRESTLEMANIA IS COMING UP, ROLL OUT THE RED CARPET FOR ALL THE GUYS WHO ARE NEVER HERE AND IN THEIR FORTIES"


I think the CAPS LOCK might be turning some people off but I actually agree whole-heartedly with this statement. A big part of the problem is that WWE have no faith in their current stars. Then, instead of trying to help them shine brighter, they just cut their legs out from under them & leave them high & dry while hoping stars from yesteryear continue to bail them out. That won't work forever. There is not always going to be a Rock, 'Taker or Austin to show up & increase the buyrates. 

If WWE treats someone like they are not a star, why will the fans think they are a star?


----------



## Jotunheim

Starbuck said:


> :lmao You know what Punk's smelling in your sig? BUTTHURT.


he is right tho, there will be a time where Rock, Taker, Triple H, Cena, Punk, heck even freaking Ryback (who is almost as old as cena/punk) won't be there anymore, and the supposedly up and coming current stars like ziggler, Barret, rhodes, Sandow, don't get the proper booking, push and story lines they deserve, they can't keep trusting the whole show to a bunch of part timers at best for the rest of their career to keep pushing ratings and buys

like Walk-in said, If WWE treats someone like they are not a star, why will the fans think they are a star?, that's why recently most IWC members are happy at the inclution of Ambrose, Rollins and Roman reigns in the WWE landscape, and we are expecting, almost praying they don't fuck this up, these 3 guys and mostly Ambrose and Rollins are the long future of the WWE, and if they screw this up (which us, being the negative nancies that we are, think they will) it speaks volumes that WWE can't do shit and they don't care anymore about the product itself

and like most people here said, sure, the WWE belt could change hands from punk to ryback, or heck, the minute rock gets it, but what will happen when that doesn't draw either?, will Punk Haters still blame punk for the low draw rates? (obviously they will, they are stupid that way), or will they finally accept that the whole product is crap and it's not helping their stars to be in such a mess of booking/storyline mediocrity?


----------



## KO Bossy

Falkono said:


> A year of being the champ and having a *Hogan style booking *where he never loses and he still can't draw. Least seen champion in history.


This makes it very apparent that you have no idea what Hogan style booking is.


----------



## Hawksea

:lmao at that overrun rating. 

A full year of a crappy title reign later. 

2.6 ratings had become the norm.

He should have had celebrations for those record viewership losses too.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

Starbuck said:


> :lmao You know what Punk's smelling in your sig? BUTTHURT.


He's right though, Punk isn't a draw, no one on the main roster is including Cena, the myth that Cena still brings in people needs to end. 

People only tune in for the old stars now.


----------



## SerapisLiber

When Rock was at his peak as the top draw, wasn't he mostly chasing the title rather than holding it? I think in 2000 he only had the belt for like a third of the year. Rest was HHH & Angle. 

Punk ain't a draw (nor is anyone right now), but obviously there's more to a title than draw power. Politics, merchandise sales (wasn't Punk's DVD #1 for several weeks?), house show buyrates, PPV buyrates, social media trending, etc., etc.

If people aren't watching Raw to see Punk have no balloons, but are consistently selling out house shows to see Punk get his ass kicked by Ryback, well, ying-yang, ya know?

At least Punk isn't filling only 1/3 the seats at MSGarden shows like Nash did. He's moving around as much merch as Cena (so they say). I'm sure all of that factors in. There is a market for Punk out there, there _*is*_ a crowd that wants to see him, but just doesn't want to see him in shitty storylines. 
Such as feuding with senior citizen after senior citizen.


----------



## Ndiech

wow.even his "celebration" didnt make people care.


----------



## chronoxiong

I have to admit, these ratings for Punk's title reign has been so disappointing. I really don't know if it's due to CM Punk or just the crappy direction that the company has been going. I think it's all of those factors. If there was one segment that I predicted right in terms of losing viewers for this past week's show, it would be for the lame Great Khali/Hornswoggle segment. Saw that coming from a mile away.


----------



## LovelyElle890

Punk fans, you have to admit that Punk has been afforded luxuries that other wrestlers have not. You can't keep saying he is the only one who has had his character murdered and been placed in terrible storylines. Did he get his WWE title by defeating his opponent in an 18 second joke match at Wrestlemania? No. Did he get stuck in a 5-month feud with Del Rio? No. He has been allowed to feud with Jericho, Cena, and has an upcoming feud with The Rock, but despite that he has had a non-memorable title reign. I am not saying he is solely responsible for the terrible ratings, but at some point you just have to cut your losses. I think it would do Punk a lot of good to go back to chasing the title.

Unfortunately, no one besides the part timers are draws. Every wrestler on the roster is stale in some way. Either the character is stale and the story is good or the character is good and the story sucks or both the character and the story suck. It is very depressing to know that the creative staff cannot come up with great, consistent storylines anymore. It cannot be that hard to do. I came up with a storyboard for all of the main event wrestlers from now until Wrestlemania, created character development, and filled in the plotholes from current storylines in less than 20mins.


----------



## Shawn Morrison

Honestly, Punk is the best option. If they make someone else the champ, they will get lower ratings. Punk is the reason they are still managing to stay alive with the ratings, if not for him they'd probably be down to 2.0's because of the stupid 3 hour with so much filler and pointless replays/touts. 

Yeah, so you should all be thankful to Cm Punk. I personally have fast-forwarded every single Raw since its gone 3 hours, i'm surprised they even manage 2.8's, which is why Cm Punk deserves credit.


----------



## Hennessey

Shawn Morrison said:


> Honestly, Punk is the best option. If they make someone else the champ, they will get lower ratings. Punk is the reason they are still managing to stay alive with the ratings, if not for him they'd probably be down to 2.0's because of the stupid 3 hour with so much filler and pointless replays/touts.
> 
> Yeah, so you should all be thankful to Cm Punk. I personally have fast-forwarded every single Raw since its gone 3 hours, i'm surprised they even manage 2.8's, which is why Cm Punk deserves credit.


What are you talking about? Where is all your info coming from? Your ass? How do you know they will get even lower ratings if they make someone else champion?


----------



## Shawn Morrison

Sparta101 said:


> What are you talking about? Where is all your info coming from? Your ass? How do you know they will get even lower ratings if they make someone else champion?


because logic. A heel with a one year long reign attracts viewers, they want to see him get beat up, a new challenger to take him on and beat him for the title. If they made someone like Ryback or Cena champion, with the dragging 3 hours, the few loyal viewers who watch it for Punk's title reign would go and their ratings would go straight down. Which is why the smartest thing is to go back to 2 hours right now.


----------



## Snothlisberger

ToxieDogg said:


> Not entirely sure what you found so amusing that you LOL'd  I didn't say I represented the entire viewing audience or that everybody else used DVR's (which is accounted for in ratings)...I was making the point that alternative ways of viewing shows have been available for years (including Youtube and downloading)...it's not just some new phenomenon that is all of a sudden causing ratings to suddenly plummet to the levels they are now at the tail end of 2012 like you and others like to imply. I could just as easily LOL at you comparing the viewing figures of completely unrelated shows to WWE. Of course viewing figures for things like American Idol will rapidly disappear over a shorter period of time...it was an interesting new concept to begin with (plus 2004 was still a time when those kind of shows were booming in popularity) but fast forward to 2012 and it's been same old shit year in, year out. It's been even more monotonous than WWE. American Idol may have morphed into The X Factor but it hasn't really changed much...pretty much mirrors the situation in the UK (we had Pop Idol which also became X Factor) where the bubble has burst on these kinds of shows and they don't pull the viewers they once did. Unlike WWE which has been around for decades, American/Pop Idol was a fad. It was never going to maintain a high viewership long term without things like developing characters and interesting storylines (not really possible on shows like that).


Honestly, I stopped reading your wall of text after this paragraph because you demonstrated in said paragraph your total lack of understanding. 

When I said "top rated show", I meant, in the year 2004 the show WITH THE HIGHEST TOTAL HOUSEHOLD VIEWERSHIP RATING ON ALL TELEVISION was American Idol. The fact that is happens to be American Idol is irrelevant. It just happened to be the highest rated show on all of television. In 2012 it happens to Football. I'm looking at the "top rated show" and its rating. Has nothing to do with what that show may have been that year. In 2010, I think it may have been NCIS. Doesn't mattr. The numbers show the downward trend in TV as even the (again) TOP RATED SHOW IN ALL TELEVISION ON ALL CHANNELS has gone down 21%. If I could look at average rating among all television shows then I would, but it's not available. However, it would show the same thing.

You should learn the subject matter before trying to argue it.


----------



## Hennessey

Shawn Morrison said:


> because logic. A heel with a one year long reign attracts viewers, they want to see him get beat up, a new challenger to take him on and beat him for the title. If they made someone like Ryback or Cena champion, with the dragging 3 hours, the few loyal viewers who watch it for Punk's title reign would go and their ratings would go straight down. Which is why the smartest thing is to go back to 2 hours right now.


So why have the ratings fallen down so much during Punk's year long title reign then? I agree that they have to go back to 2 hours though.


----------



## Snothlisberger

Looking forward to seeing the buyrate. Most important thing is to see if they are up or down. People can bitch all they want about low ratings demonstrating the lack of interest in the product. That's fine.

But I'm assuming their 18-49 demo is not down that much so WWE wouldn't be losing too much money in term of advertising/marking. Especially with 3 hours. So to say their losing ad money is dumb. Buyrate you can put a clear price on. And they have not been bad with Punk and may be why they've allowed the reign to go 365


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

> Originally Posted by Starbuck
> You know what Punk's smelling in your sig? BUTTHURT.


Did you even read my post?


----------



## SinJackal

swagger_ROCKS said:


> Is this true? Is he above Sheamus, Orton, and Punk?


I believe he's above Orton right now, but not Sheamus or Punk. Orton's been really killed lately. . .getting knocked out by Barret twice, tapping out to Del Rio, getting KOed by Ziggler to interrupt what would've been a cool spot to put Orton ba ck in the spotlight, etc.

Orton's been getting semi-buried lately, losing WAY more matches than he should be, and he's losing them either 100% clean or 80% clean (short distraction then turning around for the loss, is not really a -very- unclean loss).

Can't be above Punk or Sheamus since Punk's champ, and Sheamus was just WHC for a long time. By default those two are above Ryback due to titles. Cena's above them all since he's still the biggest draw and biggest crossover star.




The Sandrone said:


> Okay, this breakdown is actually pretty steady for the most part. Of course it's in the poor range, but it's steady, which I suppose means it kept the people's interest who tuned in for the most part.
> 
> Ryback had the highest rated segment, but by my calculations, based on the gains/losses provided, his segment was not the highest viewership... unless I made some mistake (which is possible), but Punk's segment at the end seemed to have the highest viewership, followed by he 10PM, then the 9PM, and then the Miz/Otunga match.
> 
> That being said, with the Punk segment, it's both good and bad. Good because he did get the most amount of viewers for the show and what can still be a success to some degree because it certainly wasn't a failure as it was well above the ratings average for the show. However, it's also bad. The segment was all Punk and it ended up being one of the lowest overrun quarters of the year. Not to mention the gain was the weakest overrun gain in a couple of months. The fact that it was heavily promoted and it didn't bring in more viewers with the nature of the segment in mind, that's pretty fucking bad and feeds the whole "Punk doesn't draw' argument. However where I was hoping this segment would either sway me on the side of him firmly not being a draw (even though I'd of course still be a mark) or him being a draw with the right promotion much like any other top name, the segment didn't do either. There are positives and negatives for the numbers he got. You could argue he simply did the best he could if he did get the highest viewership, and there was no greater audience for tonight (as far fetched as that sounds). So yeah, I'm still in the same spot I was. Not a top level draw, but not a ratings bust either. Just in the middle of that who has his good nights, his good moments, and his bad nights/bad moments in the ratings game.
> 
> Let's talk about Ryback's segment, because while it is a success to some degree, getting the highest rating of the night, it's not all good either. He had the opening segment from SVS in the 8PM slot, the first thing people would see after Sunday's show and what they'd be tuned in and interested for, and all he gets is a 2.91? Much like Punk, it's great he did above the average and in relationship to the night of the show it was a good number, but in the grand scheme of things it was poor. Ryback's still in the same boat as Punk. Not a top level draw, but certainly not a ratings bust. Plus he'll now always have the 10PM segment from last week, which was the highest gaining 10PM segment in months, to work for him.
> 
> Ouch at the Vickie/AJ/Cena angle. I would've thought the whole kissing thing would've grabbed people in by word of mouth like it's done in the past, but I guess not. Still it's one of the highest viewers segments of the night for the show, but it still is a pretty sucky overrun/gain.
> 
> The big success of the night imo was Miz/Otunga in a random quarter gaining 223,000 viewers. They just might be on to something with face Miz. I've been thinking if Miz turned face I could see him winning the Rumble, and now if he keeps doing well in the ratings, I'd wager more on that happening.
> 
> But yeah, they started in a rut with the direct fallout from the PPV with Ryback's promo and Ryback/Tensai, and didn't really go anywhere. Some came, some left, but they never dug themselves out of that rut, and Punk's just not a big enough draw, even in a heavily promoted segment, to do that.


Good post man. I usually read them when I come across them in threads regardless of the length.

I'd like to talk a bit about your sort of sitting on the fence about the Punk ratings thing. Here's my personal take on that: While Punk isn't "losing ratings", he isn't bringing them in nearly as much as he's supposed to be as the main event and WWE champ. When you're in the main event slot (and being pushed as hard as Punk, you're supposed to be the most exciting part of the show that brings in people to watch the product, and hopefully stick around to watch everything else.

You know, like when The Rock makes an appearance (for example), people will stay tuned in to see if he pops up for a brief appearance despite knowing that his segment will be scheduled later. The "runoff" effect, where when you have a big star in the main event, the rest of the show gets pulled up by his coattails.

That isn't what's happening. The opposite is. Punk's ratings are roughly what a mid-show rating should be. Not a filler segment, but maybe the kind of ratings the 3rd or 4th best fued on the show would be getting. Then by default, the ratings for everything else starts to drop down since less people are giving a shit about the peak of the show.

So, imo, I don't think CM Punk can be exempted from the responsibility of bad ratings because of the nature of the way the show usually works. He is not bringing in viewers, and clearly isn't keeping them around either (as overall ratings have fallen pretty consistently over time and are still going down).

I'm interested to see what happens when Punk loses the title, because I am pretty close to 100% sure they are going up and staying there for months (on average), because of something different finally taking place.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Of the top 5 worse overruns in RAW history, Punk has been involved in all 5. unk


----------



## Shawn Morrison

Sparta101 said:


> So why have the ratings fallen down so much during Punk's year long title reign then? I agree that they have to go back to 2 hours though.


First of all, the ratings have been in a long descent ever since the Attitude Era, that is nothing new. Recently, the low ratings have obviously been caused by 3 hours, it is too long and drowns out anything good that happens. What i'm saying is that if someone else was champion the ratings would probably be much lower than they already are.


----------



## Evil Peter

I think the biggest problem with the current title picture is that there just isn't this big face that everyone wants to see get the title. As someone pointed out a lot of the big face stars were the biggest when they were chasing the title. Cena is the closest one but it's been going on for so long, and it was screwed up by his surgery. There's also a good amount of people that don't want to see him have the title again.

Ryback became an attempt at doing something fresher but obviously that feud hasn't changed anything either. The celebration wasn't just about Punk, it was also about the feud since Ryback was invited.


----------



## Ganjusan

Hey guys. Long time lurker, first time poster. 
The way I see it, viewership is down because people simply don't want to sit through an hour of adverts in a three hour show. It's the main reason I don't watch it live because it's gone from being a nuisance to just being flat-out annoying having adverts every five minutes or so (even in the middle of matches!). If I'm watching online the next day I usually enjoy most of the show, only occasionally skipping the odd section (Brodus Clay for example) and that's about it. In terms of creative direction I'm enjoying where the show is going, it's just all those wretched commercials that put me off watching it live.


----------



## Shawn Morrison

Ganjusan said:


> Hey guys. Long time lurker, first time poster.
> The way I see it, viewership is down because people simply don't want to sit through an hour of adverts in a three hour show. It's the main reason I don't watch it live because it's gone from being a nuisance to just being flat-out annoying having adverts every five minutes or so (even in the middle of matches!). If I'm watching online the next day I usually enjoy most of the show, only occasionally skipping the odd section (Brodus Clay for example) and that's about it. In terms of creative direction I'm enjoying where the show is going, it's just all those wretched commercials that put me off watching it live.


Couldn't agree more. I enjoy the show alot when i watch the 'two relevant hours' of it, and skip the filler, commercial, tout, smackdown replay-filled third hour. The viewers are going down because of the pointless third hour. Cm Punk as the champion is really entertaining and if it was 2 hours he'd probably be getting them good ratings, its just bad luck that his reign has to be during this dark age of 3 hours.


----------



## N-destroy

WallofShame said:


> Looking forward to seeing the buyrate. Most important thing is to see if they are up or down. People can bitch all they want about low ratings demonstrating the lack of interest in the product. That's fine.
> 
> But I'm assuming their 18-49 demo is not down that much so WWE wouldn't be losing too much money in term of advertising/marking. Especially with 3 hours. So to say their losing ad money is dumb. Buyrate you can put a clear price on. And they have not been bad with Punk and may be why they've allowed the reign to go 365


Are you talking about Survivor Series buyrate? Doubt it will be big. UFC GSP return fight was the night before which is probably why WWE didn't even care building up the main event.


----------



## Evil Peter

N-destroy said:


> Are you talking about Survivor Series buyrate? Doubt it will be big. UFC GSP return fight was the night before which is probably why WWE didn't even care building up the main event.


Yes, that's a very significant factor. GSP is arguably the biggest draw in MMA and when he returns from a 1,5 year layoff most people somewhat interested in MMA will buy that over a wrestling PPV.


----------



## SerapisLiber

^Especially since there is a significant overlap in their audiences, in spite of the WWE trying to be obstinate about that fact.


----------



## Choke2Death

Shawn Morrison said:


> Honestly, Punk is the best option. *If they make someone else the champ, they will get lower ratings. *Punk is the reason they are still managing to stay alive with the ratings, if not for him they'd probably be down to 2.0's because of the stupid 3 hour with so much filler and pointless replays/touts.


How the fuck do you know that when nobody else has been champion all year long? Stop talking out of your ass!


----------



## Shawn Morrison

Choke2Death said:


> How the fuck do you know that when nobody else has been champion all year long? Stop talking out of your ass!


I am giving my opinion of what I think. 

I could say the same about all the Punk haters. You say he can't draw, when in reality he has kept ratings steady until they changed to 3 hours. No one else has been champion this year and proven to be a better draw, then how can you say that it is _Punk_ who can't draw? That is talking out of your ass. 

If there's anything the ratings show, its that 3 hours is too long for many viewers because they have dropped big since they changed to 3 hours.


----------



## WTFWWE

Remember when WWE had a PPV the same weekend as a Brock Lesnar UFC PPV? WWE got KILLED! Got like 100K buyrate.


----------



## Pol93

I don't care what the ratings were, I enjoyed Raw this week.


----------



## SarcasmoBlaster

Evil Peter said:


> I think the biggest problem with the current title picture is that there just isn't this big face that everyone wants to see get the title. As someone pointed out a lot of the big face stars were the biggest when they were chasing the title. Cena is the closest one but it's been going on for so long, and it was screwed up by his surgery. There's also a good amount of people that don't want to see him have the title again.
> 
> Ryback became an attempt at doing something fresher but obviously that feud hasn't changed anything either. The celebration wasn't just about Punk, it was also about the feud since Ryback was invited.


Yup. This is a huge problem for the company as a whole. The closest thing they have to the big face you mention is Cena, and when at least 50% of the fanbase doesn't want to see him win the title, that's a problem. Not to mention the fact that all the momentum in that feud has been lost, partly due to Cena's injury, and partly due to the fact that they've already had them fight, and Cena lose, too many times.

They've got the same problem on the heel side. Say you've got a babyface who you want to put over in a big way. Well, there's only one heel on the active roster who can put anyone over in meaningful way and that's Punk. So, you've got a company where there's no clear #1 face that everyone is behind, and only one real, big-time heel that is capable of putting guys over. It's a problem whose roots go all the way back to 2009, when they failed to build new stars after a rash of established guys left. It took years to do, and it'll probably take years to undo (unfortunately for fans). It's issues like this, BIG issues, that have an effect on ratings. Way more so than "Guy X has the title" Super-fans can't see the forest through the trees though.


----------



## Starbuck

jblvdx said:


> Did you even read my post?


Course I did. And you're right. Hell I've been saying the same thing myself for forever now. Still doesn't change the fact that you're oh so very obviously butthurt about it lol.


----------



## Adyman

You guys still care to watch Raw after Punk getting away with it YET AGAIN???


----------



## Choke2Death

Shawn Morrison said:


> I am giving my opinion of what I think.
> 
> I could say the same about all the Punk haters. You say he can't draw, when in reality he has kept ratings steady until they changed to 3 hours. *No one else has been champion this year and proven to be a better draw*, then how can you say that it is _Punk_ who can't draw? That is talking out of your ass.
> 
> If there's anything the ratings show, its that 3 hours is too long for many viewers because they have dropped big since they changed to 3 hours.


Do you even read what you say? How can anyone prove to be a better draw if nobody other than Punk has been champion for the whole year? fpalm

And even hardcore Punk marks have accepted that he can't draw, you might as well join them.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Starbuck said:


> Course I did. And you're right. Hell I've been saying the same thing myself for forever now. Still doesn't change the fact that you're oh so very obviously butthurt about it lol.


Erm, okay.


----------



## Das Wunderberlyn

Punk has gotten his revenge over Diesel for last year's attack..

Punk's not only surpassing Diesel in terms of #days of reign.. but also the title of 'Worst Drawing Champion' of all time.


----------



## Evil Peter

SarcasmoBlaster said:


> Yup. This is a huge problem for the company as a whole. The closest thing they have to the big face you mention is Cena, and when at least 50% of the fanbase doesn't want to see him win the title, that's a problem. Not to mention the fact that all the momentum in that feud has been lost, partly due to Cena's injury, and partly due to the fact that they've already had them fight, and Cena lose, too many times.
> 
> They've got the same problem on the heel side. Say you've got a babyface who you want to put over in a big way. Well, there's only one heel on the active roster who can put anyone over in meaningful way and that's Punk. So, you've got a company where there's no clear #1 face that everyone is behind, and only one real, big-time heel that is capable of putting guys over. It's a problem whose roots go all the way back to 2009, when they failed to build new stars after a rash of established guys left. It took years to do, and it'll probably take years to undo (unfortunately for fans). It's issues like this, BIG issues, that have an effect on ratings. Way more so than "Guy X has the title" Super-fans can't see the forest through the trees though.


Exactly. The Ryback situation is a perfect example of what's bad about only having Punk to put guys over. Punk is something WWE desperately needs because without big heels you can't tell good stories (not even the shady quality they are writing now). If Ryback goes over Punk there's a big risk of an anti-climax since there will be no one else for Ryback to face that has any credibility, and that jump is pretty much going from nobody to unopposed.

Of course some feel that it's an anti-climax that Ryback doesn't get this rub now but I think that's a lesser problem than what the other scenario would present. We can only hope that this new stable is written well enough so it's a first step to fixing this mess.



Choke2Death said:


> Do you even read what you say? How can anyone prove to be a better draw if nobody other than Punk has been champion for the whole year? fpalm
> 
> And even hardcore Punk marks have accepted that he can't draw, you might as well join them.


You don't have to have a title to draw. As someone said a few pages back even The Rock had most of his best days chasing the title, rather than being champion. Since he's one of the biggest draws of all time that shows that it's rather being in good main event stories that is being at the top and the title is just a feud prop in that regard. Of course the title means something, but not so much as you seem to allude to.

Therefor the drawing responsibility isn't solely on Punk here, it's just as much with the faces chasing his title as well. It's just that there's no one that is a big draw anymore, which of course partially has to do with that wrestling overall isn't hot anymore, plus that the show is poorly written and very long so it's pretty demanding to sit through it on TV.


----------



## SerapisLiber

Phenomenal One said:


> Punk has gotten his revenge over Diesel for last year's attack..
> 
> Punk's not only surpassing Diesel in terms of #days of reign.. but also the title of 'Worst Drawing Champion' of all time.


Not just yet, unless you mean exclusively in terms of RAW ratings. As I already stated earlier here, Nash not only bombed in ratings, but in selling out arenas. A lot of the WWEs major territories were only filling arenas half or a quarter full under Nash, such as Madison Square or in Montreal (which led to the Carl Ouellet incident), with fans today recollecting how embarrassed they were to be at those shows.

I have yet to hear such stories of Punk (not to say for sure there aren't possibly some out there, I just have yet to hear of it.) I also understand that Punk is so far doing better PPV numbers than Nash as well, now that they are FINALLY giving him the main events when the year is almost over. 

Punk also moves about around as much merchandise as Cena, which is far better than Nash did in WWE. He didn't start moving much until the NWO/Wolfpack era.

All of these things factor in as well.


----------



## SerapisLiber

Evil Peter said:


> Exactly. The Ryback situation is a perfect example of what's bad about only having Punk to put guys over. Punk is something WWE desperately needs because without big heels you can't tell good stories (not even the shady quality they are writing now). If Ryback goes over Punk there's a big risk of an anti-climax since there will be no one else for Ryback to face that has any credibility, and that jump is pretty much going from nobody to unopposed.


That almost seems like exactly the problem that's led to Del Rio's fall. Punk was still face at the time, and so with Del Rio pretty much the only major heel in the title picture at the time, he was used to put over every major face over the past year to the point where he just doesn't seem like a credible threat anymore. With every new feud we just expect him to get squashed. But they don't have enough believable heels, especially for Smackdown, and so they just keep throwing Del Rio in there again and again, and with each loss his credibility as a threat gets that much more diluted.


----------



## Rock316AE

TheGreatOne. said:


> Interesting stuff from Big Dave and Alvarez on Observer Radio today talking about Ratings and Punks lack of drawing power.
> 
> As they say, *it's thanks to The Rock that Punk is still champ* really. Usually when someone does regular poor numbers they just put the belt back on Cena, but cause Rock wants to face Punk and win the title, Punk keeps retaining.
> 
> So Punk marks - thank :Rock that Punk hasn't been buried yet.


That was obvious the moment he kept the belt against Ryback when the week before the PPV did a 2.5 and is bombing consistently with the worst average since 97 and probably the worst weekly ratings with no competition in RAW history. In any other situation, he's losing the belt months ago but Rock saved his run with the fact that they booked his match for Royal Rumble 6 months in advance. 


The-Rock-Says said:


> Of the top 5 worse overruns in RAW history, Punk has been involved in all 5. unk


LOL. That's probably true considering that they started taking overruns from 98. And even if a overrun bombed over the years, it wasn't on this level and/or the average was higher.

Ryback is 4 out of 4 with this quarter, not like it's any impressive number because the average was horrible but he was able to attract the most viewers without any promotion. He's currently hotter than Cena. Especially last week when his match with a ref in the 10pm segment, a timeslot that lost almost all his value in the last few months, gained huge. Add to that the difference he made on PPV for HIAC in his first ever main event. They need to be careful with him and his booking because he's future big money.


----------



## Shawn Morrison

Choke2Death said:


> Do you even read what you say? How can anyone prove to be a better draw if nobody other than Punk has been champion for the whole year? fpalm
> 
> And even hardcore Punk marks have accepted that he can't draw, you might as well join them.


Exactly. No one has been champion so no one has proven to be a better draw. Then how can you say it is _Punk_ who is a bad draw and causing the bad ratings? Most likely it is the 3 hours since that is when the ratings started to drop.

You can only say Punk is a bad draw if someone else was champion and got better ratings during this year. It didn't happen.


----------



## murder

Shawn Morrison said:


> Exactly. No one has been champion so no one has proven to be a better draw. Then how can you say it is _Punk_ who is a bad draw and causing the bad ratings? Most likely it is the 3 hours since that is when the ratings started to drop.
> 
> You can only say Punk is a bad draw if someone else was champion and got better ratings during this year. It didn't happen.


So baiscally, this year noone has been a good or a bad draw because only Punk was champ, I get it now.


----------



## murder

Double post


----------



## AthenaMark

Shawn Morrison said:


> Exactly. No one has been champion so no one has proven to be a better draw. Then how can you say it is _Punk_ who is a bad draw and causing the bad ratings? Most likely it is the 3 hours since that is when the ratings started to drop.
> 
> You can only say Punk is a bad draw if someone else was champion and got better ratings during this year. It didn't happen.


Daniel Bryan was World Champion on Smackdown and ratings were up.


----------



## Cliffy

Ratings were down before the move to three hours which kills you're argument.

Remember the so called future in Punk, Ryder and Bryan (which all the idiot indy smarks on here sigged) that tanked ?

Turns out that was the future nobody wanted with their six man tag doing a horrible number.


----------



## Shawn Morrison

murder said:


> So baiscally, this year noone has been a good or a bad draw because only Punk was champ, I get it now.


Yes, because 3 hours is too blame for the ratings. If someone other than Punk managed to get higher ratings during 3 hours and in a year like 2012 where wrestling is not 'cool' anymore, then you could say Punk is not a good draw. But you can't cause no one else has been champion this year.



Cliffy Byro said:


> Ratings were down before the move to three hours which kills you're argument.
> 
> Remember the so called future in Punk, Ryder and Bryan (which all the idiot indy smarks on here sigged) that tanked ?
> 
> Turns out that was the future nobody wanted with their six man tag doing a horrible number.


I stand by my argument that as a heel that Punk is right now, he would have gotten good ratings if only it was 2 hours. Hell i know many people who returned to watching WWE just because they find his heel run entertaining, but 3 hours turned them off.

Not to mention. A big part of the 'ratings' is the feuds and the booking. Punk's first few feuds as champion (Berty, Miz, Ziggler) were big turn offs compared to the whole Summer of Punk, you can't expect them to get high ratings with feuds like that.



AthenaMark said:


> Daniel Bryan was World Champion on Smackdown and ratings were up.


how does that prove he is a better draw than Punk? 'Smackdown ratings'


----------



## Choke2Death

Shawn Morrison said:


> Exactly. No one has been champion so no one has proven to be a better draw. Then how can you say it is _Punk_ who is a bad draw and causing the bad ratings? Most likely it is the 3 hours since that is when the ratings started to drop.
> 
> You can only say Punk is a bad draw if someone else was champion and got better ratings during this year. It didn't happen.


I never said Punk is causing the bad ratings. I just said he's not a draw which he isn't. Otherwise the ratings wouldn't continue to decrease almost weekly, 3 hours or not. Punk is not the ratings killer but as has been pointed out, he's not helping them in any way. At this point, not even the last full-time draw in Cena is of any help.

And you also contradict yourself here. This conversation started with you claiming that Punk is keeping the ratings up and anyone else would have caused them to further drop. How come now you have turned it around?


----------



## SerapisLiber

Cliffy Byro said:


> Ratings were down before the move to three hours which kills you're argument.


Mehhh, kinda, but not really. 

Yeah, ratings were down as far as in they have been on a fairly consistent downward trend annually since around 2006. However, needless to say, that was way before Punk was moved to the current focus of the show.

As per Gerweck.net:

2006- 3.90
2007- 3.61
2008- 3.27
2009- 3.57
2010- 3.28 
2011- 3.21
2012 (so far)- 3.06

So in effect, it could also be said that "_*Ratings were down before the move*_" of the focus to Punk "_*which kills your argument*_." (That assumes your argument was ever that Punk was the main cause of the ratings dip, which, since I'm new here, I don't know and so will give you the benefit of the doubt.)

As per the Gerweck charts below, the ratings average from 11/21/11, when Punk won his current title, to the 1000th RAW, when the 3 hour change was made, the ratings average was approximately(~) 3.14.

After the 1000th Raw, since 3 hours has been permanent (7/30/12), the average has been ~2.86.

If we extrapolate back to 6/27/11, the night of Punk's shoot when he became the focus of the show, through to the 1000th RAW, the average was ~3.11, and from 6/27/11 (the shoot) to 11/14/11 just before Punk won the title, the ratings average was ~3.06.

So actually, since Punk won his current title up to the 1000th RAW, the ratings average took a slight bump upwards, a ~3.14 compared to either the ~3.11 and/or ~3.06 above, which ever you choose to use to compare.

So the real dive downwards does in fact appear to have started with the 3 hour change.

Also, the below charts seem to imply an annual downward trend when heading into the holiday season and then an upward trend during the Road to WM. So the inference from this is that even without Punk as champ and even without 3 hours, ratings would be down around this time of the year regardless. 3 hours just seems to make it that much lower.


----------



## roadkill_

As a hardcore wrestling fan, I cannot bring myself to watch RAW with CM Punk as champion. It's not good heat. It's not bad heat. It's no heat, or dead heat/X-Pac heat. So if hardcore fans aren't inclined to watch it, what does that say about casuals? I mean even recently when WWE was shit, there was always some residual value in seeing Cena get real heat.

I hope these ratings continue to slide and the product is rebooted without VM Punk. The only reason I'm even on this site is because of the TNA forum, I just post in WWE sections because I happened to be signed up. Otherwise its worse than dead to me.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

Look at those charts, ALL wrestling is down. If Impact can't capitalize in times like these they'll never get big.


----------



## TRDBaron

ChickMagnet12 said:


> Look at those charts, ALL wrestling is down. If Impact can't capitalize in times like these they'll never get big.


In my opinion the WWE is the face of wrestling in America, if the WWE sucks it will impact the image of the entire wrestling business.
But i agree with you on TNA, they can't help but shoot themselves in the foot by trying to be sports entertainment like the WWE.


----------



## DOPA

Evil Peter said:


> I think the biggest problem with the current title picture is that there just isn't this big face that everyone wants to see get the title. As someone pointed out a lot of the big face stars were the biggest when they were chasing the title. Cena is the closest one but it's been going on for so long, and it was screwed up by his surgery. There's also a good amount of people that don't want to see him have the title again.
> 
> Ryback became an attempt at doing something fresher but obviously that feud hasn't changed anything either. The celebration wasn't just about Punk, it was also about the feud since Ryback was invited.


Bingo. Great post right here. I've been saying this for months to friends of mine who are wrestling fans. One of the biggest problems WWE has is that they have not built up big enough credible faces. It's all fine and dandy to have built up this mega heel Punk has become as champion but without the yin to the yang so to speak there is no reason to watch. Ryback will obviously not be the guy because he's just been pushed into that position without really much build up. There really isn't much reason for the casual fan to watch until Rock comes back because there is no credible wrestler who the fans believe can take the title from Punk. I think its at least a reason why the ratings have been falling including the 3 hour format, the lack of creativity in the product, horrible storylines (see AJ scandal) etc.

Wrestling has been stagnant for years now and seems to be on a downward spiral. Of course the ratings will probably pick up around the road to Mania because you'll have Rock, HHH, Lesnar and maybe Taker coming back and its usually when WWE finally decides to kick itself up the ass for the biggest show of the year.


----------



## -Skullbone-

roadkill_ said:


> As a hardcore wrestling fan, I cannot bring myself to watch RAW with CM Punk as champion. It's not good heat. It's not bad heat. It's no heat, or dead heat/X-Pac heat. So if hardcore fans aren't inclined to watch it, what does that say about casuals? I mean even recently when WWE was shit, there was always some residual value in seeing Cena get real heat.
> 
> I hope these ratings continue to slide and the product is rebooted without VM Punk. The only reason I'm even on this site is because of the TNA forum, I just post in WWE sections because I happened to be signed up. *Otherwise its worse than dead to me.*


Worse than dead? Now _that's_ intense


----------



## SerapisLiber

LOL, damn, [USER]Rock316AE[/USER] hates facts, evidently. He keeps negative rec'n all of my posts here. Guess I have my first block.


----------



## KO Bossy

-Skullbone- said:


> Worse than dead? Now _that's_ intense


I'm kind of trying to picture what could be worse than dead. Maybe he's on fire and is experiencing all the pain that goes with it, but he's also immortal so he can't die...


----------



## -Skullbone-

^Brutal.

Hope Mr. Punk is scouring these forums so he can fully comprehend the pain and anguish he brings to us loyal fans.


----------



## -Skullbone-

Overcome the "odd"? eyton2


----------



## Honey Bucket

Defei said:


> Same old tiresome bullshit.


Isn't there some month old thread somewhere you should be bumping up for no reason?


----------



## Defei

-Skullbone- said:


> Overcome the "odd"? eyton2


The pic was during his late 2011/early 2012 face run. just posted for fun.




Marty Vibe said:


> Isn't there some month old thread somewhere you should be bumping up for no reason?


No. Why do you get all butthurt whenever something bad is posted about punk in this section?


----------



## Honey Bucket

Defei said:


> No. Why do you get all butthurt whenever something bad is posted about punk in this section?


Because it's mostly from idiotic dullards who can't think of logical reasons to give constructive criticism on a guy who is one of the top guys in the promotion at the moment, so they resort to lame attempts at humour.


----------



## ElTerrible

ChickMagnet12 said:


> Look at those charts, ALL wrestling is down. If Impact can't capitalize in times like these they'll never get big.


So in times when the economy is down, wrestling as a whole is down and WWE as the market leader is suffering from the PPV competition of MMA/boxing and other sports like the NFL/NBA up and running, the small time TNA should boost their PPV and TV ratings? Currently I´d say TNA is doing a good job keeping the audience they have and actually having decent attendances at their road PPVs. Whether TNA has potential to grow in the near future depends largely on the A&8´s leader and his reasonings for the "invasion". Not sure what storyline WWE has going. I don´t watch Raw or Smackdown, I watched Survivor Series and the only guy I found interesting was the dude from Switzerland. The black dude in the opener was a catastrophe. Not sure why the hell he was on the PPV and Prince Albert.


----------



## Hawksea

2.8 at the overrun?

That's just impossible, man fpalm

Just impossible.


----------



## Shawn Morrison

Choke2Death said:


> I never said Punk is causing the bad ratings. I just said he's not a draw which he isn't. Otherwise the ratings wouldn't continue to decrease almost weekly, 3 hours or not. Punk is not the ratings killer but as has been pointed out, he's not helping them in any way. At this point, not even the last full-time draw in Cena is of any help.
> 
> And you also contradict yourself here. This conversation started with you claiming that Punk is keeping the ratings up and anyone else would have caused them to further drop. How come now you have turned it around?


i haven't turned anything around. IMO i think anyone else other than Punk would have probably made the ratings drop further. I was replying to people who said that there is proof Punk can't draw, when there isn't because its way more likely the 3 hours is causing the drop and no one else has proven to get better ratings this year, because no one else has been champion, so you can't say it is _Punk_ who is the bad draw and the reason ratings are going down.


----------



## Choke2Death

Shawn Morrison said:


> i haven't turned anything around. IMO i think anyone else other than Punk would have probably made the ratings drop further. I was replying to people who said that there is proof Punk can't draw, when there isn't because its way more likely the 3 hours is causing the drop and no one else has proven to get better ratings this year, because no one else has been champion, so you can't say it is _Punk_ who is the bad draw and the reason ratings are going down.


Considering that Punk has been in all of the 5 lowest overruns in the last 15 years, it's safe to say that he can't draw. (and yes, some of them were even before the 3 hours move, so it's not an excuse) Once again, I didn't say HE is the reason ratings are dropping. He doesn't help them in any way, though, and that's what you claimed by suggesting that anyone else as champion would have caused the ratings to further drop even though you have nothing to back this statement up with. Also since ratings are based on facts, I don't think there's a place for "IMO" in here.


----------



## kent8

Punk is destroying the rasslin biz with his awful reign.

and the Punk marks that are counting his reign in their signature are even more awful.


----------



## ellthom

Its in times like this TNA should get their fingers out their butt holes and push up their ratings, they are not that far off really. Hopefully when TNa catch up it'll force WWE to open their eyes. Of cours eI am only dreaming


----------



## LovelyElle890

Marty Vibe said:


> Because *it's mostly from idiotic dullards who can't think of logical reasons to give constructive criticism on a guy who is one of the top guys in the promotion at the moment*, so they resort to lame attempts at humour.


Isn't that what you Punk marks do to Cena, Orton, and Sheamus on a daily basis? :kane They can never win with Punk marks but Punk has to win with his detractors. He is never to be criticized for anything. Gotcha.:cool2


----------



## Honey Bucket

LovelyElle890 said:


> Isn't that what you Punk marks do to Cena, Orton, and Sheamus on a daily basis? :kane They can never win with Punk marks but Punk has to win with his detractors. He is never to be criticized for anything. Gotcha.:cool2


'You Punk marks' 

To be quite honest, I wouldn't even call myself a proper CM Punk fan, he's not even in my Top 10. I just know good talent when I see it. For the record, I like Sheamus, and can appreciate the work Cena does even though I think he's awfully stale. I'm not a fan of Randy Orton at all, but I don't go stating that fact in every single fucking thread that exists.


----------



## LovelyElle890

Marty Vibe said:


> 'You Punk marks'
> 
> To be quite honest, I wouldn't even call myself a proper CM Punk fan, he's not even in my Top 10. I just know good talent when I see it. For the record, I like Sheamus, and can appreciate the work Cena does even though I think he's awfully stale. I'm not a fan of Randy Orton at all, but I don't go stating that fact in every single fucking thread that exists.


I am not dismissing his talent but at the same time he is not above blame. He is the champ and blame falls squarely on his shoulders. Just like when Sheamus was champion on Smackdown, despite not having segment breakdowns, he was responsible for the low ratings. Fair is fair, right?


----------



## Honey Bucket

LovelyElle890 said:


> I am not dismissing his talent but at the same time he is not above blame. He is the champ and blame falls squarely on his shoulders. Just like when Sheamus was champion on Smackdown, despite not having segment breakdowns, he was responsible for the low ratings. Fair is fair, right?


Not really, the blame falls at Vince McMahon, the writers, the bookers etc. They're the ones who give the orders and make the decisions, so they're responsible.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Marty Vibe said:


> Not really, the blame falls at Vince McMahon, the writers, the bookers etc. They're the ones who give the orders and make the decisions, so they're responsible.


I just don't understand why this is rocket science to some people. Yes, Punk may not be helping matters, much like Sheamus may not be helping things on Smackdown, but it comes down to creative, and ultimately comes down to the man at the head of creative, Vince.

I think people just expect another Hogan/Austin to come flying through the window to create another boom period, but the reality is it takes an "it" factor that very very very few possess. Punk isn't that guy. Sheamus isn't that guy. Orton isn't that guy. Even Cena isn't that guy anymore (unless he turns heel, then maybe he can be that guy). Right now the only person on the roster in their current gimmick who looks like they could _potentially_ be that guy is Ryback, but only time will tell on that, and even then I'm not sure how favorable those odds are.


----------



## Dunk20

I like Rybacks voice


----------



## teick

Ryback sounds like John Laurinatis...


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Ryback sounds a bit like Big Show.....


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Ryback sounds like Skip Sheffield... nah.


----------



## DOPA

When things aren't going well there is always going to be a scapegoat talent wise for it. Punk is getting it right now as he's been the champ for over a year and whilst he certainly isn't helping matters with the ratings to put all the blame on him when there are obvious problems creatively is pretty ridiculous.






This guy hits the nail on the end.


----------



## Dec_619

Bring in them low ratings!


----------



## mb1025

Might not be a good week for Raw. All the shows on the big networks had season highs in viewers. Tie in the Monday Night Football game and they might have a pretty low score.


----------



## jonoaries

Crusade said:


> When things aren't going well there is always going to be a scapegoat talent wise for it. Punk is getting it right now as he's been the champ for over a year and whilst he certainly isn't helping matters with the ratings to put all the blame on him when there are obvious problems creatively is pretty ridiculous.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This guy hits the nail on the end.



I tried to stop that video 7 or 8 times....its amazing. Dude is awesome


----------



## Dec_619

Any news on da ratings?


----------



## Nimbus

Terrible show overall...also Punk vs Ryback again?...AGAIN????


----------



## Perfect.Insanity

Nimbus said:


> Terrible show overall...also Punk vs Ryback again?...AGAIN????


I can sum it up in a few words - WWE are idiots


----------



## D.M.N.

Thanksgiving last week = ratings backlog/delays


----------



## Amuroray

what im getting is that raw did a 2.67


----------



## Dec_619

Amuroray said:


> what im getting is that raw did a 2.67


Where'd you pull that from


----------



## Oakue

Well I know one thing.

You ain't never seeing May 10, 1999 and a 8.1 ever again.


----------



## Dec_619

moonmop said:


> Well I know one thing.
> 
> You ain't never seeing May 10, 1999 and a 8.1 ever again.


Christ, what was in that show?

Edit: http://www.angelfire.com/mo/THEUSER/raw51099.html


----------



## Nimbus

Perfect.Insanity said:


> I can sum it up in a few words - WWE are idiots


I d rather see a rematch betwen Khali and Horsnwaggle vs Primo and epico. Seriously, weve had enought of Punk Vs Ryback.....


----------



## Werb-Jericho

Nimbus said:


> I d rather see a rematch betwen Khali and Horsnwaggle vs Primo and epico. Seriously, weve had enought of Punk Vs Ryback.....


you wont be seeing either since you put this in the other thread -



PHP:


Thats it for me. This show F%&//( sucks, it willbe a looong time before i watch WWE again.

F$%& YOU WWE


----------



## D.M.N.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-raw-pawn-stars-basketball-wives-more/159270/

Hour 1 - 4.147m
Hour 2 - 4.126m
Hour 3 - 3.488m

Hours 1 and 2 did well, but what the hell happened with Hour 3?


----------



## Green Light

Betting Ryback segment was the peak of the show again


----------



## JY57

D.M.N. said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-raw-pawn-stars-basketball-wives-more/159270/
> 
> Hour 1 - 4.147m
> Hour 2 - 4.126m
> Hour 3 - 3.488m
> 
> Hours 1 and 2 did well, but what the hell happened with Hour 3?


same story every week with hour 3. this like 15th straight week it fell down after hour 2. nothing new


----------



## the frenchise

D.M.N. said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-raw-pawn-stars-basketball-wives-more/159270/
> 
> Hour 1 - 4.147m
> Hour 2 - 4.126m
> Hour 3 - 3.488m
> 
> Hours 1 and 2 did well, but what the hell happened with Hour 3?


People realized that the G.O.A.T lost the raw active poll and wasn't on the main event. they switched off the tv.


----------



## N-destroy

Woah what happened? That's a big drop. Was Cena/Ziggler in the third hour? Maybe that match should have main evented over Punk/Kane.


----------



## BANKSY

Punk happened :troll


Expecting a big drop for the complete reply of the shield segment , similar to that time they showed trips/BORK about 10 times.


----------



## TomahawkJock

I usually am drowsy about an two hours in. I crash at about the two hour mark. Maybe it's because I'm not interested in anything going on... just a thought.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

That's a pretty big fucking drop for hour 3? Besides Punk/Kane and the overrun (if that counts towards the third hour) with Punk/Ryback/The Shield, what the fuck was in that quarter? Cena/Ziggler ended right as the quarter began. I know Sheamus/Cesaro was right off that match, though it didn't start the hour. Besides that I completely forget what took place. Sandow/Ryder I can't remember what place it was in, and same with Bryan/Mysterio.

Fuck it though, three hours is too long and that's no new story, but the fact the third hour dropped off so much shows Cena is still the main draw of the show after all and what most fans seem to tune in for... though we won't know for sure how everything did, but there's no way Punk's match with Kane did the best number of the night, and same with the overrun... at least I don't think it's possible with the difference unless one of the quarters in hour 3 was extremely low. TBH it wouldn't surprise me if some people (maybe not enough to completely account for how many average wise tuned out the third hour, but still maybe only took away more) was if the far majority did vote for Punk/Bryan and when Punk/Kane was announced, they had no interest to see the match. I had no interest to see the match either, but I did stay tuned to see what would happen with The Shield. However they are getting repetivie, doing virtually the same ending for the third time in a row (not the exact same though as this week they didn't put him through a table, but they all attacked and destroyed Ryback).

Only the quarter hours will tell us what is really to blame. I have a feeling that what really hit rock bottom for the show, if it was in the third hour, was Sandow/Ryder. Sandow hasn't been a good ratings guy (fucking ignorant people :hhh ), but Ryder has especially been a ratings loser in the past on several different occasions, including being a part of one or two overruns that lost viewers.


----------



## JasonLives

Hour 3 was:

End of Cena Vs Ziggler
Sheamus Vs. Cesaro + Big Show coming out
Sandow Vs. Ryder
CM Punk Vs. Kane

Some parts of these must have done Under 3 million viewers.


----------



## TromaDogg

D.M.N. said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-raw-pawn-stars-basketball-wives-more/159270/
> 
> Hour 1 - 4.147m
> Hour 2 - 4.126m
> Hour 3 - 3.488m
> 
> Hours 1 and 2 did well, but what the hell happened with Hour 3?


Combination of children going to bed and/or people having difficulty watching more than 2 hours of WWE in one go seeing as there's not much in the way of interesting characters or feuds these days.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

Dat Vanilla Champion unk

Suprised at how well hour 1 and 2 did though.


----------



## N-destroy

ToxieDogg said:


> Combination of children going to bed and/or people having difficulty watching more than 2 hours of WWE in one go seeing as there's not much in the way of interesting characters or feuds these days.


Kids probably went to bed after the Cena match lol.


----------



## Kabraxal

Horrible third hour... but wasn't that filled with recap after recap for most of it? And I think a lot of people just got fed up with the show going nowhere along with the same old formula of established stars going over supposedly "rising" stars. The WWE product is absolute shit right now. And it's only going to get worse for the next month... no one wants Ryback/Punk again. Not only too many matches in such a short period, but Ryback seems to be going the Cena route of kids being his main fanbase while everyone else is mixed at best. Wake up McMahon... you need to fix your show....


----------



## roadkill_

lol VM Punk torpedoed the third hour.


----------



## RatedR10

That third hour... fpalm

If I remember correctly, it was a whole lot of recaps/other useless junk. They replayed the entire interview with The Shield, some adverts, etc. Big drop. Curious to see the breakdown.


----------



## Das Wunderberlyn

Punk was in the thid hour, so that explains it.


----------



## charmed1

Its a bad time for wrestling. TNA had horrible ratings too. This no longer has to do with which show is good or not, wrestling really is on a downswing right now and it is drastically unpopular. 
I didn't watch all of Raw this week, I did however like the Shield interview which I managed to catch. They do show promise. Its not really a great time to be a wrestling fan.


----------



## AthenaMark

the frenchise said:


> People realized that the G.O.A.T lost the raw active poll and wasn't on the main event. they switched off the tv.





> Being WWE Champion: “Well, to me it means you’re carrying the company, you’re putting asses in seats, your kind of toeing the line, and you’re a leader.”


WTF happened to Hour 3 since Punk turned heel on the Rock at Raw 1000? It's become HIDEOUS


----------



## JY57

overall rating was 2.7


----------



## Coffey

If WWE are trying to right the ship, I'm not sure if 3 unknown developmental guys, Ryback & C.M. Punk are the direction that they should be heading in. I guess that is better than picking up the telephone & trying to get some old timer to come in & show up though. The last thing we need are more stars of yesteryear coming back to take the spotlight again. We have already had to endure Foley & in January, The Rock is still due.

WWE really don't have any stars & they have to take most of the blame on that themselves. Over-writing the show, over-scripting everything. Nothing is organic & they're trying to turn wrestlers into actors. That's never going to work. See WWE Films.

Thinking about it though, where are all the next generation of pro-wrestlers going to come from? There isn't other territories to pick people from. I can't imagine an influx of recruits showing up to development schools when they can choose a path in MMA instead. Are kids that grew up in the John Cena era going to want to pursue pro-wrestling as a career & "follow in the footsteps" of him? The future looks bleak to say the least.


----------



## hardysno1fan

AthenaMark said:


> WTF happened to Hour 3 since Punk turned heel on the Rock at Raw 1000? It's become HIDEOUS


Bit harsh. The booking has been absolutely atroscious. Take SS the stadium has a capacity of 18k and they could only sell 8,500. It's nothing to do with who has the belt its just how bland the show has been.


----------



## N-destroy

8,500 for survivor series is not surprising considering WWE didn't even care building up the title match. No one person draws attendance these days, it's largely the WWE brand strength.


----------



## KO Bossy

Its pretty bad that I can remember entire episodes and segments of Raw from 14 years ago, but I can't remember what happened in the third hour of the show 2 days ago. THAT is how bad WWE 2012 is. Its also why I voted it the worst Raw year in history specifically for that reason. Everything means NOTHING.


----------



## SerapisLiber

I know, things are so boring that even the self-proclaimed "TMZ of wrestling" TVTrax has had nothing to post in a month or more, lol. He used to post at least every other day. That's how little news there is to talk about in wrestling right now.


----------



## SerapisLiber

LMAO, at least Punk was able to bring up ratings for that 'Talking Dead' (Walking Dead's live post-show review) from 1.919 mil to 1.985 mil, getting 1.1 for the 18-49 demo compared to the previous week's 1.0. I remember reading that Punk was pissed about WWE not promoting that as well as his appearance at Chicago Thanksgiving parade. Viewership might have been even better if they had. Maybe WWE didn't want their audience exposed to Punk out of character since he's supposed to be the biggest heel right now. Who the hell knows. Probably just yet more incompetence on their part, true to form for them.


----------



## Coffey

What, you mean you guys don't want C.M. Punk Vs. Ryback for the third time in a row after two PPV fuck finishes!? You're just haters~! A feud that STARTED in a cage match!? C'mon, this time there's going to be ladders & stuff!! Smell the buyrates!!


----------



## BANKSY

And Ryback is going to lose at 3 PPVs in a row. Way to build a star WWE.


----------



## SuperIvysaur

Phenomenal One said:


> Punk was in the thid hour, so that explains it.


Haha, agreed. The fact that somebody can be champion for over a year, defeating the likes of Cena and Jericho, being promoted like a big time star and STILL not helping ratings is just beyond me. Thank god his reign of boredom ends in january.


JK. It's Triple H's fault. Punk lost to him few years ago, WWE can't blame Punk unk2


----------



## Nimbus

Seriously, why is Punk still champion?? these ratings are unaceptable, the guy cant draw shit.

I hope Ryback beat him at TLC, hes proven to be a better draw than punk countless times.


----------



## Awesome22

The viewership for the third hour proves two thing:

1-Punk doesn't draw ratings
2-Nobody cares about The Shield


----------



## N-destroy

Lil'Jimmy said:


> And Ryback is going to lose at 3 PPVs in a row. Way to build a star WWE.


Yeah TLC will be his third PPV loss in a row and they don't even bother protecting the guy on RAW anymore lol.


----------



## Amuroray

punk is a joke


----------



## Choke2Death

Awesome22 said:


> The viewership for the third hour proves two thing:
> 
> *1-Punk doesn't draw ratings*
> 2-Nobody cares about The Shield


That was proven a year ago, though.


----------



## DA

Needs more Bork


----------



## kokepepsi

/thread


----------



## THANOS

Some people are so relentless in their hate that they failed to realize that the major reason for the 3rd hour decline was probably Sheamus/Cesaro. I'm willing to bet Punk's match with Kane and the overrun did well. Also those idiots blaming a new group in the Shield already are completely blind when they barely even appeared in the 3rd hour other than close to the overrun.


----------



## TromaDogg

Regardless of whether Punk is champ or not, we all know that ratings will pick up a bit more when The Rock returns again.

But I'm predicting that once Rock leaves (again) and Punk isn't champ anymore, ratings will sink back to where they are now (maybe a little lower) if the overall quality of the show hasn't improved from what it is at the moment.

It'll be interesting to see where ratings are in 6 months time, that's for sure.


----------



## Jotunheim

it's going to be lolworthy when the belt changes hand and the ratings still suck (which they will) in the third hour


----------



## THANOS

Jotunheim said:


> it's going to be lolworthy when the belt changes hand and the ratings still suck (which they will) in the third hour


Oh it will happen and I already know what all the pink haters will say in response. "Punk has tarnished the company so bad with his reign that they are beyond recovery no matter how holds the title :troll"

I'm willing to give 99% assurance that this will happen, and as a, hopefully, future CPA, that's a pretty damn confident estimate lol.


----------



## Werb-Jericho

i watch 90% for punk...


----------



## Alim

Dat drop :ass


----------



## DA

We need feuds where it feels like the two wrestlers involved actually want to kill eachother, that will make people tune in. When Lesnar came back it somehow genuinely felt like he truly hated Cena, that time he busted him open and the entire locker room came out made me go "HOOOOOOLLLLLLYYYYYYYY SHIIIIIIIITTTTTTT" even though I know it's scripted. 
Feuds where one of the wrestlers is always being a goofball and smiling, or calling his opponent "Bertie" aren't going to draw huge numbers because they don't have that sense of realistic hatred


----------



## itssoeasy23

Nimbus said:


> Seriously, why is Punk still champion?? these ratings are unaceptable, the guy cant draw shit.
> 
> I hope Ryback beat him at TLC, hes proven to be a better draw than punk countless times.


See, I understand this is off topic, but I have to acknowledge your sig. How you have Aces and Eights and The Shield and say "How Original." Well, How about The Nexus, or Immortal, or even Main Event Mafia. 2 out of the three groups were from TNA and all had one sole purpose, to "take over" TNA. 

WWE on the other hand have 3 rookies protecting a champion. There's no hostile takeover, no hiding behind masks, no bullshit no named jobbers from another company. Aces and Eights is basically TNA trying a storyline for the third time and hoping it'll be successful, WWE's storyline has more questions than answers. 

And besides, nothing's original in professional wrestling, mostly everything has been done before. Every stable is basically ripped off from the NWO.


----------



## krai999

the frenchise said:


> People realized that the G.O.A.T lost the raw active poll and wasn't on the main event. they switched off the tv.


yeah damn right i was one of those people that switched off by the time it was the 3rd hour


----------



## roadkill_

The fact that Punk is a cocksucker in real life who think's he's hot shit makes his exposure as ratings cancer all the sweeter.


----------



## DA

roadkill_ said:


> The fact that Punk is a cocksucker in real life who think's he's hot shit makes his exposure as ratings cancer all the sweeter.


There is only one person being a cocksucker in Punk's real life and it ain't Punk. BITW


----------



## THANOS

The only people I watch for are Punk/Heyman, Bryan, Cesaro, Sandow, and, now, the Shield. I don't ever watch the rest of the crap live and only watch the other wrestlers segments after reading a few reports on the show. This is how I hedge my losses and don't end up falling asleep through the show as a result of some stupid santino/hornswaggle segment, or boring Orton/Del Rio/Big Show match.


----------



## Nimbus

itssoeasy23 said:


> See, I understand this is off topic, but I have to acknowledge your sig. How you have Aces and Eights and The Shield and say "How Original." Well, How about The Nexus, or Immortal, or even Main Event Mafia. 2 out of the three groups were from TNA and all had one sole purpose, to "take over" TNA.
> 
> WWE on the other hand have 3 rookies protecting a champion. There's no hostile takeover, no hiding behind masks, no bullshit no named jobbers from another company. Aces and Eights is basically TNA trying a storyline for the third time and hoping it'll be successful, WWE's storyline has more questions than answers.
> 
> And besides, nothing's original in professional wrestling, mostly everything has been done before. Every stable is basically ripped off from the NWO.


Not sure if trolling, but as you can see in my sig, WWE even copied the angle of the picture. Its so obvious its like they are desesperate or the writers are just stupid.


----------



## What_A_Maneuver!

Werb-Jericho said:


> i watch 90% for punk...


This.

Regardless of ratings, Punk & Heyman are the most entertaining thing hands down. (Not including The Shield as they've hardly got the ball rolling yet)

There's pretty much no arguing with that... Are you gonna tell me the Cena/AJ scandall is the best thing on the show? Or how about Team Hell No coming out and doing the same thing every week? Ryback having a squash match every single week? Or the numerous repetitive tag team matches where one team will win one week and then lose the next week, making every win forgettable and resulting in absolutely no progression? 

If I was a casual I probably would've tuned out by the third hour as well with all the crap that goes on.


----------



## Loader230

What_A_Maneuver! said:


> This.
> 
> Regardless of ratings, Punk & Heyman are the most entertaining thing hands down. (Not including The Shield as they've hardly got the ball rolling yet)
> 
> There's pretty much no arguing with that... Are you gonna tell me the Cena/AJ scandall is the best thing on the show? Or how about Team Hell No coming out and doing the same thing every week? Ryback having a squash match every single week? Or the numerous repetitive tag team matches where one team will win one week and then lose the next week, making every win forgettable and resulting in absolutely no progression?
> 
> If I was a casual I probably would've tuned out by the third hour as well with all the crap that goes on.



If Punk and Heyman are the most entertaining thing then why would you tune out by the third hour?


----------



## itssoeasy23

Nimbus said:


> Not sure if trolling, but as you can see in my sig, WWE even copied the angle of the picture. Its so obvious its like they are desesperate or the writers are just stupid.


Desperate? How in the hell would WWE be desperate? Their not copying a storyline in TNA that 1) is not drawing in viewers, and 2) not bringing in ratings and interest. And besides, Aces and Eights is TNA's third attempt to try out a storyline that never works for the company: their trying to "take over" TNA. Both Immortal and the Main Event Mafia were also trying to "take over" TNA. You know who else tried to "take over" a company? The New World Order. TNA have tried 3 times to unsuccessfully copy the success of the NWO storyline. 

The Shield is benefiting CM Punk, and Punk doesn't even know it. Tell me how a bunch of hooligans with masks on is similar to a group of rookies out to protect the WWE Champion. 

So WWE has a picture with the same angle of a picture from TNA? And that means they copied TNA, how? WWE have no reason to copy *ANYTHING* TNA does. That's like saying Subway is copying a diner in the middle of nowhere. 

WWE is introducing rookies for the benefit of the future. TNA is trying a storyline for the third time and are hoping it'll work this time by having a bunch of no-names be in a group trying to "take over" TNA.


----------



## P1KACHU

The WWE is quite literally one of the worst things on TV at the moment (that I know of), so getting 3 million + people to tune in every week is still impressive.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Wrestlingforum Ratings logic: Ignore fact that show is 180 minutes long, and writing is less than mediocre. Blame it on one person because LULZ I HATE HIM.

Much love for this thread.


----------



## itssoeasy23

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Wrestlingforum Ratings logic: Ignore fact that show is 180 minutes long, and writing is less than mediocre. Blame it on one person because LULZ I HATE HIM.
> 
> Much love for this thread.


People will just call you a CM Punk mark because of your sig. 

And I do agree though with what you said. The only reason people blame Punk is because they don't like him. No, it's not the fact that 3 hour RAWs have historically done poorer in ratings and maybe 3 hours every week is making people burn out of watching because it is too much for some people. 

A 2.7 isn't a bad rating, especially for a 3 hour show.


----------



## jonoaries

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Wrestlingforum Ratings logic: Ignore fact that show is 180 minutes long, and writing is less than mediocre. Blame it on one person because LULZ I HATE HIM.
> 
> Much love for this thread.


Ratings and shit like that are rarely the fault or because of one particular person. This includes when times are good. There's nothing happening on RAW. It wouldn't matter who the champion is, or where the show is, if there's nothing that's "must see" about it, nobody will watch it. 


Things need to change. I mean serious change. I mean serious and significant change. Changing the champion will move the needle a bit maybe but it still won't be anything special. The audience just isn't there anymore and the show is doesn't have anything noteworthy anymore. 


the days of 10 million people watching wrestling is dead. 3 million is good but nothing compared to 10, people need to realize...can't NOBODY bring that audience back. 


Only thing you can do is try new things and change it up.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

If Vince really want a rating he should just insert this Punk and Ryback fued into the Cena and AJ love story, make AJ kiss all of them. Love stories = rating. Oh and having Big Show cry in the ring = ratings as well.

Seriously though 3 hours is too much for the mediocre storylines they have going throughout the show.


----------



## itssoeasy23

jonoaries said:


> Ratings and shit like that are rarely the fault or because of one particular person. This includes when times are good. There's nothing happening on RAW. It wouldn't matter who the champion is, or where the show is, if there's nothing that's "must see" about it, nobody will watch it.
> 
> 
> Things need to change. I mean serious change. I mean serious and significant change. Changing the champion will move the needle a bit maybe but it still won't be anything special. The audience just isn't there anymore and the show is doesn't have anything noteworthy anymore.
> 
> 
> the days of 10 million people watching wrestling is dead. 3 million is good but nothing compared to 10, people need to realize...can't NOBODY bring that audience back.
> 
> 
> Only thing you can do is try new things and change it up.


I don't think there was ever a time when WWE had 10 million viewers.


----------



## jonoaries

itssoeasy23 said:


> I don't think there was ever a time when WWE had 10 million viewers.


I was exaggerating with the 10 million viewers, I have no idea what's the most they've ever had because ratings aren't important to me, I was sort of making a point that they will never go back to Attitude Era viewers...whatever that was.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Where is Rock316 when you need him lol.

I may be wrong but the highest was maybe around 8 million in the USA, but if you count other countries it might have been close to 10 million.


----------



## What_A_Maneuver!

Loader230 said:


> If Punk and Heyman are the most entertaining thing then why would you tune out by the third hour?


That's why I said 'if I was a casual'. They probably don't realise the potential of a Punk/Heyman segment and just give up on the show as a whole.


----------



## Stad

People still give a shit about the ratings? :lmao no wonder i never come in this thread, it's full of idiots.


----------



## Ron Swanson

Warrior said:


> Where is Rock316 when you need him lol.
> 
> I may be wrong but the highest was maybe around 8 million in the USA, but if you count other countries it might have been close to 10 million.


Raw is Owen did an 8.1

The 2 highest rated segments (I think) were 'This is your Life, Rock' and Edge and Litas live sex celebration.


----------



## Twisted14

> Coming off the heels of the third and final hour of Monday's Raw broadcast suffering a fifteen percent drop in viewership, Comcast's listing for Monday programming on the USA Network (available at TVGuide.com) has a rerun of NCIS airing during the 8:00 p.m. time slot with Raw listed as a two-hour program beginning at 9:00 p.m.
> 
> The first hour of Monday's show garnered 4,147,000 viewers, with hour two slightly dropping 4,126,000. The third hour, however, suffered its sharpest decline since the program was lengthened to three hours in July, dropping to 3,488,000 viewers. It marked as the fifteenth consecutive week and eighteenth week out of nineteen weeks in which viewership dropped off during the third hour.


From nodq.com

High chance it's just a typo. But then there's a possibility that WWE are quietly reverting back to the 2 hour format. I would like it if they are but we'll have to wait and see. I still kinda like the idea of Raw being 3 hours. Before the shift I was really looking forward to it. There were some weeks when the 2 hours was up and I wished it was a little bit longer. But in the last month or two I've found that it's just not easy to watch 3 hours worth. Even when I don't watch it live and watch it later without commercials, I sometimes find it difficult to make it through that 2 hours and 15 minutes or so and begin to get tired and restless towards the end of the show.

I'm also just tired of looking at this thread every week and seeing the constant arguments of who is bringing in the ratings and who is bringing them down. I think the only time they had a good number for the third hour was the Punk/Vince match. The rest have been bad numbers, no matter who was put in that timeslot. It's clearly a problem of the product not being good enough to warrant a third hour. I still enjoy it every week. I certainly don't hate what the WWE is doing right now and like it a lot more than many people here, but I'm also beginning to struggle to make it through an episode.

I'm tired of trying to find people and other things to blame the low ratings on. PPVs still draw the same buyrates, sometimes slightly higher than past years. Smackdown still draws the same numbers. Raw is the flagship show and it's the only show losing people. It doesn't even have that much to do with the quality of the product. It's simply too long.


----------



## Coffey

They should drop it to an hour & a half then cut out the filler & replays.


----------



## Striketeam

Raw deserves bad ratings, given how awful the writing/booking has been for a while now. Horrible storylines, lack of character development, random matches for no reason, etc.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

I'm loving the twitter shots Dave Meltzer and CM Punk are taking at each other. 



> CM Punk ‏@CMPunk
> I am getting X-rays. Thought you should know. @davemeltzerWON #scoop





> Dave Meltzer ‏@davemeltzerWON
> Is Raw moving back to 2 hours? Comcast listing for Monday has NCIS at 8 p.m., Raw at 9 p.m. @CMPunk #2.3 quarter hour


----------



## #1Peep4ever

dat drop....


----------



## What_A_Maneuver!

Dave Meltzer is the biggest bell-end in wrestling.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Punk and his marks pretend they don't care about the ratings but they really do. Punk does anyway. It eats at him that he gets messgaes on Twitter about it.


----------



## WashingtonD

Punk has sunk Raw to 1995-1996 levels of shittiness. I think Vince has legitimately gone insane


----------



## Rock316AE

Yeah, the Punk/Kane match before the overrun did a 2.28, one of the lowest quarters in RAW history. And the overrun did 2.6 so Punk now has probably the Top 7-8 worst overruns in company history. 

In July I predicted that they're going back to 2 hours around December-January, looks like they're still not getting it. But if this pattern of the big third hour drop continues, they will have no choice. To drop 15% in a hourly breakdown in that time slot is crazy. It's only a matter of time. 

As for MNW viewership, 10 million viewers on a weekly average is actually correct. When both Nitro and RAW were going strong at the same time. 10 million+ viewers every Monday for pro wrestling was pretty much the standard. For example on the memorable Rock/Foley/Nash/Hogan/FPOD night, both shows did a combined audience of over 13 million viewers.


----------



## SuperIvysaur

Lol @ people thinking they are smart and cool just because they don't care about ratings.

"I DON'T KARE ABOUT RATINGS, THEREFOR I AM GREATER HUMAN BEING THAN THOSE WHO ACTUALLY KARE, GIMME THE RESPECT I DESERVE"


----------



## Quasi Juice

The third hour was always bound to fail.


----------



## JY57

^ pretty much. When you have 15 straight weeks & 18 out of 19 weeks with the 3rd hour dropping sharply, I am pretty sure its a clear sign its a failure


----------



## Cliffy

great article on Punk & Meltzer:

http://www.cagesideseats.com/wwe/20...nues-to-prove-hes-terribly-petty-and-insecure


----------



## JasonLives

Quasi Juice said:


> The third hour was always bound to fail.


Of course. And considering the USA Network is only paying half for the 3rd hour then the previous 2 then they expected the same.


----------



## Coffey

SuperIvysaur said:


> Lol @ people thinking they are smart and cool just because they don't care about ratings.
> 
> "I DON'T KARE ABOUT RATINGS, THEREFOR I AM GREATER HUMAN BEING THAN THOSE WHO ACTUALLY KARE, GIMME THE RESPECT I DESERVE"


And yet they come into the RATINGS THREAD to tell us...


----------



## Evil Peter

SuperIvysaur said:


> Lol @ people thinking they are smart and cool just because they don't care about ratings.
> 
> "I DON'T KARE ABOUT RATINGS, THEREFOR I AM GREATER HUMAN BEING THAN THOSE WHO ACTUALLY KARE, GIMME THE RESPECT I DESERVE"


Since you decided make a strawman argument about it I take it that their posts actually hurt you?


----------



## SuperIvysaur

When someone calls me an idiot/moron simply because I give a shit about ratings, I have the right to be annoyed.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Lord Meltzer said that the number wasn't Punk's fault. So ya'll are wrong.


----------



## YoungGun_UK

When's the breakdown show up?

Meltzer vs Punk WM29 = BOOK IT


----------



## Evil Peter

SuperIvysaur said:


> When someone calls me an idiot/moron simply because I give a shit about ratings, I have the right to be annoyed.


I didn't say you can't be offended, I was mostly referring to that strawman arguments doesn't help anything.

I don't care if people are following ratings, but I also don't feel ashamed of laughing at those that use ratings to try to imply what's good or not (I know it's mean to pick on the insecure). All of the former don't do the latter though and I think very few have said that someone's an idiot for caring about ratings at all, it's mostly directed to how people use them.


----------



## Shawn Morrison

SuperIvysaur said:


> Lol @ people thinking they are smart and cool just because they don't care about ratings.
> 
> "I DON'T KARE ABOUT RATINGS, THEREFOR I AM GREATER HUMAN BEING THAN THOSE WHO ACTUALLY KARE, GIMME THE RESPECT I DESERVE"


You can care about ratings all you want, what is extremely annoying is when people will look at ratings to a judge a superstar/show/feud/etc. There could be a really good Raw, yet the ratings would be down for certain reasons on that day, and people would call it a terrible Raw for that alone. Also it's really stupid how people use it to judge superstar's talent, ratings don't say shit about how talented someone is, however they do show how well/or not well those superstars are being booked, cause if they were booked well they would get better ratings. 

This is why it is annoying. Honestly i find it lame to blame anything other than Creative or 3 hours for the ratings. I mean different superstars get different ratings each week, and just like sheep you change your opinions about them every week too. It is obvious that it's the booking and storyline that gets the ratings, yet you will still find a way to make an excuse and keep saying 'this superstar sucks, he can't draw, etc.'. 3 hours has drastically decreased the ratings, if anything deserves blame, its that.


----------



## TheWFEffect

jblvdx said:


> Lord Meltzer said that the number wasn't Punk's fault. So ya'll are wrong.


This LOL I am no fan of Punk but Meltzer seems to support him got be honest Punk is always put in the worst time slots and 3 hours is too much viewers are going to continue to drop please WWE use your brain for once go back too two.


----------



## ellthom

Ratings have been falling since Cena became face of the WWE... just saying *troll face*


----------



## Choke2Death

Shawn Morrison said:


> You can care about ratings all you want, *what is extremely annoying is when people will look at ratings to a judge a superstar/show/feud/etc.* There could be a really good Raw, yet the ratings would be down for certain reasons on that day, and people would call it a terrible Raw for that alone. Also it's really stupid how people use it to judge superstar's talent, ratings don't say shit about how talented someone is, however they do show how well/or not well those superstars are being booked, cause if they were booked well they would get better ratings.


Except NOBODY does that unless it's just a troll baiting the super-sensitive Punk marks that will defend their hero all the way to their graves. I fucking hate this misconception made about this thread that if you care about ratings, you automatically decide who your favorite is based on who's segments get the most viewers. It's just complete bullshit.


----------



## SuperIvysaur

Shawn Morrison said:


> You can care about ratings all you want, what is extremely annoying is when people will look at ratings to a judge a superstar/show/feud/etc. There could be a really good Raw, yet the ratings would be down for certain reasons on that day, and people would call it a terrible Raw for that alone. Also it's really stupid how people use it to judge superstar's talent, ratings don't say shit about how talented someone is, however they do show how well/or not well those superstars are being booked, cause if they were booked well they would get better ratings.
> 
> This is why it is annoying. Honestly i find it lame to blame anything other than Creative or 3 hours for the ratings. I mean different superstars get different ratings each week, and just like sheep you change your opinions about them every week too. It is obvious that it's the booking and storyline that gets the ratings, yet you will still find a way to make an excuse and keep saying 'this superstar sucks, he can't draw, etc.'. 3 hours has drastically decreased the ratings, if anything deserves blame, its that.


I assure you that I'm not judging wrestlers talent by ratings. I judge them by how entertaining they are and I simply like to use poor ratings to make fun of them (it's just internet, after all). Del Rio often makes bad numbers and I really like him.

Since Raw 1000 two things have changed - Raw became 3 hours long and CM Punk became #1 guy. You can't really say that Punk has NOTHING to do with poor-ass ratings. My brother and uncle (they are casuals), who were wrestling fans since 2007, stopped watching WWE 2 months ago, and they said it's because Punk is boring and makes them fall asleep.

I'm not saying Punk is killing WWE or shit like that, he just fails to help boost ratings and considering what WWE gave to him, he SHOULD be doing that. When you look at the worst overruns in history, you see CM Punk's name everywhere, no matter what you think, it CAN'T be coincidence.


----------



## Das Wunderberlyn

stadw0n306 said:


> People still give a shit about the ratings? :lmao no wonder i never come in this thread, it's full of idiots.


oh ma.. look at me, i'm cool and don't give a shit because my fav guy is doing shit ratings.

Punk is a ratings killer. just accept it.. match with Kane did 2.28.. ya do your math. 

a real douche deserves this ratings.. 

you will see the effect in ratings once he loses it.


----------



## Snothlisberger

The-Rock-Says said:


> Punk and his marks pretend they don't care about the ratings but they really do. Punk does anyway. It eats at him that he gets messgaes on Twitter about it.


lmao it eats at him? Does it now? Ok bro. We got us a PhD in psychology


----------



## Jof

WallofShame said:


> lmao it eats at him? Does it now? Ok bro. We got us a PhD in psychology


It's probably true. It's easier to get a reaction from him on twitter if you tweet about low ratings. You will know if you follow him.


----------



## Starbuck

Discounting the third hour, viewership for the first 2 hours is still SHIT. Barely above 4 million. Yes, 3 hours is hurting them. That's a given. But if it was the real crux of the problem, people would still be watching from the beginning of the show and we'd see a gradual dip in viewers as the third hour hits and the show comes to an end. But that isn't happening. They're not starting well and the drop in viewers is the natural consequence of a 3 hour long program. They're starting shit and getting worse. The third hour makes the whole thing look horrible but take it away and the problem is still there. 5 million used to be normal. Then 4.5 became normal. Now 4 is normal. The pattern is obvious. Nobody is able do TV business anymore and that includes John Cena. He'll probably be the highest of the night and the best full time draw they have but he isn't able to do even decent numbers anymore purely on his name alone. 

And I've probably said this every week since this whole debate began way back when but CM Punk isn't doing anything to move TV numbers. At all. If he's in there with a Vince McMahon etc, people care. If he's not, people don't give a shit. Why some of you are still continuing to discuss this is beyond me. He doesn't draw. Whether that's his fault or WWE's fault, it doesn't matter because he still doesn't draw. Talk about beating a dead horse. Take his match with Kane, cut out the third hour, stick it at the end of the second hour, give it the overrun slot and it's still only doing barely above 4 million viewers. It's still shit. If that 2.3 quarter hour for his match with Kane is true then holy fuck. And I think it very obviously does eat at him otherwise he wouldn't bother to retweet all the hate he gets. Cena probably gets ten times as much hate directed at him on his twitter but he ignores it. Punk clearly spends time reading through and then retweeting peoples messages about his inability to draw. Why? Because it obviously bothers him. BUT HEZ WORKIN DA MARKZ RITE??? Whatever.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Yeah, I agree w/Starbuck. Anyone who still truly believes that Punk can draw is delusional beyond repair. Please don't try to throw random numbers at me for segments that drew better than the rest of the garbage on the show. Chocolate covered shit is still shit.


----------



## Starbuck

The Lady Killer said:


> Yeah, I agree w/Starbuck. Anyone who still truly believes that Punk can draw is delusional beyond repair. Please don't try to throw random numbers at me for segments that drew better than the rest of the garbage on the show. Chocolate covered shit is still shit.


What are you talking about? My posts are really going downhill, remember?

unk2


----------



## The Lady Killer

Oh fuck, my bad. I've been MIA for a week so I completely forgot to never agree w/anything you say. You're an awful poster and your opinions are shit.

PUNK = RATINGS KING


----------



## Starbuck

The Lady Killer said:


> Oh fuck, my bad. I've been MIA for a week so I completely forgot to never agree w/anything you say. *You're an awful poster and your opinions are shit*


unk3



The Lady Killer said:


> PUNK = RATINGS KING


unk


----------



## ChickMagnet12

I really don't understand this thread.


My own opinion is that the brand itself draws, but I still come in here to see the breakdowns out of curiosity. I don't understand why if Punk is a draw or not is such a heated debate. I like the guy's work either way and have been a fan since the Hardy feud, others hate him and that's all well and good. Each to their own. I don't see what proving he is a draw or not will achieve, this thread has the same argument every week and it goes nowhere until the next breakdown where even if Punk gains 1m viewers or has a low overrun, its still the fucking same cretin fanboys/haters arguing the same thing.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

No one draws ratings on the roster except Cena and even he doesn't draw ratings that well anymore. What else is there to talk about?


----------



## Starbuck

jblvdx said:


> No one draws ratings on the roster except Cena and even he doesn't draw ratings that well anymore. What else is there to talk about?


Talking? MOAR LIK HEETED DBATEZ DURR 8*D


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

So Punk/Kane ended up doing the lowest? 2.3? If true, that's brutal. It's strange, because Punk always used to have respectable numbers for his segments compared to the average rating, but I think he's been becoming even less of a draw as his heel run continues. For example a year ago a Punk/Cena match would gain a million viewers, but just a couple of weeks ago it got less than half of that. Earlier this year Punk and Kane had matches that did average numbers in the 10PM slot, but now in the last segment/overrun they're doing well below average. I didn't give it much thought before, but that report about how the whole Punk and Heyman making fun of Lawler's heart attack turning people off from Punk may not be entirely off the ball, because since then his numbers have been very weak. 

It sucks, but with past few weeks in mind I think Punk is not just not doing anything to help the ratings, but he's actually hurting them. With what I said above, I also think when he turned heel it hurt his popularity as well. He was easily the second biggest face in the company and kids were really catching onto him as a second to Cena, and of course he always had the teen/adult male audience on his side. Turning him heel, while making him more entertaining than what he was as a generic face to me and perhaps his core fanbase, turned the casuals and kids off from him. 

He should still be able to sell title matches on PPV on the fact he's been champ for over a year and he's the heel people want to see lose the title, and he'd maybe even be able to draw in more than normal if he actually defended his title (like if he defended it against Kane this week I'm sure the number wouldn't have been anywhere near as low), but as far as general appeal on his name alone, it's been deteriorating since his heel turn and as I said before, with his mocking of Lawler's heart attack with Heyman, it's been completely wiped out and now casuals just plain don't want to see him.

Punk should still keep the title till Royal Rumble of course since Punk/Rock is what they've been building up for months, and I still do believe despite his negative appeal it wouldn't hurt to keep the strap on him till Mania since there will be Rock, Lesnar, and Taker/HHH to balance things out if they want Ryback to be the one to take the title off Punk. 

But yeah, that's my thoughts on that for the 0 of you that care. 

Edit: One other reason I'm leaning towards the numbers being on Punk this week if the 2.3 number is true is because besides Ryback in the overrun (if you count him), he was the only big star in the third hour and the number declined very sharply. I'm not sure there's ever been a fall that big from hour 2 to hour 3 since the 3rd hour stuff started.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

ChickMagnet12 said:


> I really don't understand this thread.
> 
> My own opinion is that the brand itself draws, but I still come in here to see the breakdowns out of curiosity. I don't understand why if Punk is a draw or not is such a heated debate. I like the guy's work either way and have been a fan since the Hardy feud, others hate him and that's all well and good. Each to their own. I don't see what proving he is a draw or not will achieve, this thread has the same argument every week and it goes nowhere until the next breakdown where even if Punk gains 1m viewers or has a low overrun, its still the fucking same cretin fanboys/haters arguing the same thing.


Its quite clear that punk is no draw but he isnt a ratings killer either. Kind of ridiculous to blame the rating of a 3hour show on one man but whatever. As far as I am concerned he is either hit or miss and the times he gains its nothing spectacular but well yeah.. The Show itself is horrible. 3hours are too long and even Cena has only a lil bit left of his drawing power. They are just lazy with booking and write show to show without trying till the Rock appears.

And if they dont start booking thing correctly when the rock is there i see ratings declining again even with the rock since rock wont be gaining 3million viewers to save the show. He didnt in his feud against Cena which was horrible btw and and he wont now. 

Just make everything interesting so people watch the whole show and not just the rock parts. And fucking return to 2hours. I thought they would try using that time for showcasing the talent they have, giving them more mic time and shit but thats probably too much for them...

Anyone knows when the breakdown is out?

Edit: If that number is true about the match with kane... BIG OUCH


----------



## ChickMagnet12

Starbuck said:


> Talking? MOAR LIK HEETED DBATEZ DURR 8*D


----------



## Kabraxal

The Sandrone said:


> So Punk/Kane ended up doing the lowest? 2.3? If true, that's brutal. It's strange, because Punk always used to have respectable numbers for his segments compared to the average rating, but I think he's been becoming even less of a draw as his heel run continues. For example a year ago a Punk/Cena match would gain a million viewers, but just a couple of weeks ago it got less than half of that. Earlier this year Punk and Kane had matches that did average numbers in the 10PM slot, but now in the last segment/overrun they're doing well below average. I didn't give it much thought before, but that report about how the whole Punk and Heyman making fun of Lawler's heart attack turning people off from Punk may not be entirely off the ball, because since then his numbers have been very weak.
> 
> It sucks, but with past few weeks in mind I think Punk is not just not doing anything to help the ratings, but he's actually hurting them. With what I said above, I also think when he turned heel it hurt his popularity as well. He was easily the second biggest face in the company and kids were really catching onto him as a second to Cena, and of course he always had the teen/adult male audience on his side. Turning him heel, while making him more entertaining than what he was as a generic face to me and perhaps his core fanbase, turned the casuals and kids off from him.
> 
> He should still be able to sell title matches on PPV on the fact he's been champ for over a year and he's the heel people want to see lose the title, and he'd maybe even be able to draw in more than normal if he actually defended his title (like if he defended it against Kane this week I'm sure the number wouldn't have been anywhere near as low), but as far as general appeal on his name alone, it's been deteriorating since his heel turn and as I said before, with his mocking of Lawler's heart attack with Heyman, it's been completely wiped out and now casuals just plain don't want to see him.
> 
> Punk should still keep the title till Royal Rumble of course since Punk/Rock is what they've been building up for months, and I still do believe despite his negative appeal it wouldn't hurt to keep the strap on him till Mania since there will be Rock, Lesnar, and Taker/HHH to balance things out if they want Ryback to be the one to take the title off Punk.
> 
> But yeah, that's my thoughts on that for the 0 of you that care.
> 
> Edit: One other reason I'm leaning towards the numbers being on Punk this week if the 2.3 number is true is because besides Ryback in the overrun (if you count him), he was the only big star in the third hour and the number declined very sharply. I'm not sure there's ever been a fall that big from hour 2 to hour 3 since the 3rd hour stuff started.


I think it is more with a rather directionless feel to his reign hurting him more than the Lawler incident. I'm a fan of Punk, but I'll admit to tuning out lately. I have no interest in whiny/cowardly heel number 422 going against Ryback of all people. Doesn't do anything for me. Just don't really care.

Which is not just a problem for Punk... it's for the whole WWE. I don't really give a damn about almost anything. Nothing feels important. Nothing feels like it's happening. it all just seems like the WWE is spinning it's wheel in the mud and I'm just getting splattered with it... so I start tuning out. And I'm a hardcore wrestling fanatic... you get us not to care and you have a serious serious problem with your product. Because if actual wrestling fans leave... then you'll have no one left when the casual inevitably stops watching. Which is exactly what we are seeing... McMahon has shit on real wrestling fans in order to be an entertainment company with some wrestling geared, seemingly, towards children. But none of those casuals he so desperately wants can be counted on to stay around. So you have ratings just plummeting lower and lower because his product ends up appealing to no one. 

And it's all his fault... he was the idiot that tried to appeal to a different demographic than the one that has always been there for wrestling.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Kabraxal said:


> I think it is more with a rather directionless feel to his reign hurting him more than the Lawler incident. I'm a fan of Punk, but I'll admit to tuning out lately. I have no interest in whiny/cowardly heel number 422 going against Ryback of all people. Doesn't do anything for me. Just don't really care.
> 
> Which is not just a problem for Punk... it's for the whole WWE. I don't really give a damn about almost anything. Nothing feels important. Nothing feels like it's happening. it all just seems like the WWE is spinning it's wheel in the mud and I'm just getting splattered with it... so I start tuning out. And I'm a hardcore wrestling fanatic... you get us not to care and you have a serious serious problem with your product. Because if actual wrestling fans leave... then you'll have no one left when the casual inevitably stops watching. Which is exactly what we are seeing... McMahon has shit on real wrestling fans in order to be an entertainment company with some wrestling geared, seemingly, towards children. But none of those casuals he so desperately wants can be counted on to stay around. So you have ratings just plummeting lower and lower because his product ends up appealing to no one.
> 
> And it's all his fault... he was the idiot that tried to appeal to a different demographic than the one that has always been there for wrestling.


See, the thing is this explains the general decline in ratings, but not the sharp decline for hour 3 this week, and the apparent 2.3 rating for Punk/Kane. If hour 3's average was... say... a 3.9 million/more in line with the average percent drop from hour 2 to hour 3, I wouldn't say it's Punk at all. 

Of course everything when it comes down to it falls on the heads of WWE creative/Vince, and that includes superstars booking which could influence their ability to draw. However I can't see how a 2.3 for Punk/Kane in the final quarter hour before the overrun(assuming it's true of course) can't be attributed to a negative appeal of either Punk or Kane. Or maybe the disgust with the whole twitter thing being rigged and people tuning out not wanting to see Punk/Kane at all. That's the only other thing I can think of to explain it.


----------



## Kabraxal

The Sandrone said:


> See, the thing is this explains the general decline in ratings, but not the sharp decline for hour 3 this week, and the apparent 2.3 rating for Punk/Kane. If hour 3's average was... say... a 3.9 million/more in line with the average percent drop from hour 2 to hour 3, I wouldn't say it's Punk at all.
> 
> Of course everything when it comes down to it falls on the heads of WWE creative/Vince, and that includes superstars booking which could influence their ability to draw. However I can't see how a 2.3 for Punk/Kane in the final quarter hour before the overrun(assuming it's true of course) can't be attributed to a negative appeal of either Punk or Kane. Or maybe the disgust with the whole twitter thing being rigged and people tuning out not wanting to see Punk/Kane at all. That's the only other thing I can think of to explain it.


There are a few reasons.

Burnout - unless the product is hitting on all aspects, 3 hours is just too long.

Ads - for a 3 hour PPV, there are no ads to fuck up the flow of a match or a segment. It's all about the show. Course now we are getting ads during PPVs...... idiotic practice there.

Recaps - Why do we need so many recaps of stuff that happened last week let alone that very night...

Poor booking overall - especially this week, Raw felt like nothing was happening and that nothing would happen. People just didn't watch because of that and they were right.

All in all, the third hour in general is no surprise when it's low. This weeks doesn't shock me at all... the third hour was filled with a few segments of no consequence, an overload of ads and recaps, and it followed a terrible show already. It wasn't an indictment on any one guy since there were a few familiar faces in teh segments that have drawn before... it is just the general sense from fans that the WWE doesn't give a fuck so why waste our time?


----------



## Starbuck

The third hour was horribly low. The first two hours were also low. If the third hour wasn't there the first two hours are still shit. The third hour clearly isn't helping matters but their problems run a lot deeper than that. Adding in the extra hour is just exasperating things.


----------



## Mister Hands

It's funny how we still focus on whether such-and-such is a draw, when it seems the best the WWE can hope for is something that doesn't actively drive viewers away. What an oddly unlikable product they've created.


----------



## Starbuck

Oddly unlikable product is the best description of current WWE I've heard yet lol. I want to like it because I'm a wrestling fan and have been for forever but oddly, I don't find it enjoyable and pretty much don't like it right now because it's, well, because it's shit.


----------



## TheF1BOB

Even though the booking is blame to a certain extent, these wrestlers of today are just boring. 

Serious development on their characters need major work imo.


----------



## Mister Hands

TheF1BOB said:


> Even though the booking is blame to a certain extent, these wrestlers of today are just boring.
> 
> Serious development on their characters need major work imo.


Well, sure, some people might find the wrestlers boring. But then you've got a guy like me: I'm a huge mark for Punk, huge mark for Bryan, big fan of Ziggler, the Shield, Cesaro, Sheamus (at times), the new tag division, and a whole bunch of other stuff that's going on. So why do I find it eye-searingly painful to sit through Raw? Why have I stopped giving a single hot shit about Smackdown?

I think it's because I feel it's insulting. The lack of thought (or at least, lack of clear thought) that goes into everything WWE does these days is so plainly obvious that it's hard not to feel like your time is better spent elsewhere. They don't give a single shit about pleasing people who watch week-to-week, or even hour-to-hour. Otherwise they wouldn't recap every important segment from the first hour, in full, at least once before the end of the show. Or give a beat-for-beat repeat of the huge finish from Survivor Series on Raw the next night. Or have a recap of the closing 20 minutes of Raw positioned as the main event of Superstars. They have Cesaro hang with Sheamus (and frankly, look better than him) on Raw, but two days ago on Smackdown, he lost clean in about two minutes to R-fucking-Truth. Never mind the fact that for a solid five minutes towards the start of that really, really great match, Cole and King said absolutely nothing about what was going on the ring. They don't care - why would anyone watching?

The only show that's actually consistent is NXT, but that's _internally consistent_, and completely divorced from the rest of WWE TV. So divorced in fact, that Cole will repeatedly reference Ambrose being on NXT. Ambrose, who has, as the people who make the effort to actually watch WWE programming know, spent a sum total of zero seconds on NXT.

Who _could_ be happy watching that product? Why _wouldn't_ people tune out in droves, no matter who's champion, no matter who's in which segment? They could build a main event program of solid gold around Punk, Ryback, Cena, or hell, even Rocky, but it'd still be balanced on the same bullshit foundations that's making it a chore to watch these days, and people would continue to lose interest.


----------



## Coffey

Way back when, sometimes around when the thread first started, I voted "WWE Brand Draws." I don't think I believe that anymore. I think it is true for Wrestlemania & Royal Rumble & that's it. People still want to see stars & I don't think that will ever change. To me, C.M. Punk is just not a star. Yes, to us internet fans we know him as the guy from the Indies that worked his way up to the top & has some great mic skills & good matches. To the everyday, common viewer though, regardless of if he is heel or face, he's sort of just another guy. A year-long WWE title reign has not changed this.

C.M. Punk is not the only one though. There really aren't any stars on the show & that is the problem. There is no one to make people want to tune in or to stick around if they do tune in. If you put on WWE Monday Night RAW, you are pretty much going to see the same thing every week & for whatever reason when they do hand-select a new flavor-of-the-week (because lord knows they're not listening to the fans) they pick guys like Ryback. Even Goldberg went through the undercard & won a midcard belt. Ryback went from squashing two nobodies at a time to getting a WWE PPV title shot in a cage damn near over night. Never winning the U.S. or I.C. title. He was just thrust to the tippy-top because WWE were in panic mode because they don't have any planning. All of their eggs are in the John Cena basket.

I'm in the camp that other than keeping the USA Network happy, the ratings don't matter at all anymore (& haven't since WCW stopped being around) & certainly shouldn't matter to the fans. It is interesting to seem them continually go down though because I do find that to be a reflection of the quality of the show.


----------



## TheF1BOB

Mister Hands said:


> Well, sure, some people might find the wrestlers boring. But then you've got a guy like me: I'm a huge mark for Punk, huge mark for Bryan, big fan of Ziggler, the Shield, Cesaro, Sheamus (at times), the new tag division, and a whole bunch of other stuff that's going on. So why do I find it eye-searingly painful to sit through Raw? Why have I stopped giving a single hot shit about Smackdown?
> 
> I think it's because I feel it's insulting. The lack of thought (or at least, lack of clear thought) that goes into everything WWE does these days is so plainly obvious that it's hard not to feel like your time is better spent elsewhere. They don't give a single shit about pleasing people who watch week-to-week, or even hour-to-hour. Otherwise they wouldn't recap every important segment from the first hour, in full, at least once before the end of the show. Or give a beat-for-beat repeat of the huge finish from Survivor Series on Raw the next night. Or have a recap of the closing 20 minutes of Raw positioned as the main event of Superstars. They have Cesaro hang with Sheamus (and frankly, look better than him) on Raw, but two days ago on Smackdown, he lost clean in about two minutes to R-fucking-Truth. Never mind the fact that for a solid five minutes towards the start of that really, really great match, Cole and King said absolutely nothing about what was going on the ring. They don't care - why would anyone watching?
> 
> The only show that's actually consistent is NXT, but that's _internally consistent_, and completely divorced from the rest of WWE TV. So divorced in fact, that Cole will repeatedly reference Ambrose being on NXT. Ambrose, who has, as the people who make the effort to actually watch WWE programming know, spent a sum total of zero seconds on NXT.
> 
> Who _could_ be happy watching that product? Why _wouldn't_ people tune out in droves, no matter who's champion, no matter who's in which segment? They could build a main event program of solid gold around Punk, Ryback, Cena, or hell, even Rocky, but it'd still be balanced on the same bullshit foundations that's making it a chore to watch these days, and people would continue to lose interest.


You just seem disinterested with the product like some are on here, probably because of the shitty story lines we get these days. 
I just used the whole _wrestlers boring_ tag to outline one of the many problems I have with the WWE today. 

The product just isn't what it once was.


----------



## Starbuck

Walk-In said:


> Way back when, sometimes around when the thread first started, I voted "WWE Brand Draws." I don't think I believe that anymore. I think it is true for Wrestlemania & Royal Rumble & that's it. People still want to see stars & I don't think that will ever change. To me, *C.M. Punk is just not a star*. Yes, to us internet fans we know him as the guy from the Indies that worked his way up to the top & has some great mic skills & good matches. To the everyday, common viewer though, regardless of if he is heel or face, he's sort of just another guy. A year-long WWE title reign has not changed this.
> 
> *C.M. Punk is not the only one though. There really aren't any stars on the show & that is the problem.*


This is actually something that struck me when I was at a house show earlier this month. Cena came out in the middle of the show to fight Dolph and you really got the sense that you were watching a superstar as corny as that may sound lol. But for everybody else that same feeling wasn't there. Punk came out to face Ryback in the main event and I didn't get the same feeling that I did with Cena. He's just CM Punk. It didn't feel like I was sitting there watching a superstar make his entrance and all that, it just felt completely normal, like he was just another guy. I think part of that is to do with his heel turn because the last time I saw him live was over Mania weekend and he had a different vibe to him then as a face. I don't know. The one thing I do know, however, is that the lack of stars and star power is what's killing them, that and horribly shitty writing/structure/story arcs/whatever you want to call it.


----------



## Shazayum

Yeah, Cena is the only guy with real star power on the roster. Not saying this to bash Punk though, he definitely showed he could be something huge last summer but boy did that ever change.


----------



## jonoaries

There is a laundry list of problems with the WWE product, and that's before you get to in-ring talent. The whole structure of the organization is askew and has been for awhile now. Whenever they have something that works, and can be big they fumble the ball. 


Just think about all the strikes they have been set up with the last few years and how many of them they quickly snuffed out for little to no reason. Wrestlers generate interest then the front office kills it. 


Its the organization. Its not like anyone can sink their teeth into anything out there. Dolph is the only motivated act on the screen at times and he's even stuck in something pathetic and poorly written. 


Ultimately we need to resign ourselves to the fact that VKM has the final say over what goes on that TV screen. Its got shit to do with any on screen talent, Vince isn't motivating the talent, he's not giving the fans interesting television and its a cop out to blame anyone else. 


Complaining like the talent is fucking up is the wrong way to critique the product. Its not like these cats are turning chicken salad into chicken shit out there. They have chicken shit given to them. 


The way the company operates is in disarray and the product is stale beyond belief, what can that produce but shit? We have this innate desire to always blame the workers for the problems of the company. Its almost like the truth that a multimillionaire businessman is fucking up on his own is hard to swallow. 


I'm almost at the point of absolving the creative team from blame and placing it solely on the shoulders of Vince. You have plenty of smart guys like Dusty & Michael Hayes that know the business and how to book and even its unfair to them to shit on the creative team when ultimately Vince makes the decisions on who goes on TV and does what and says what to whom and when. 


They can't do shit about it, and the talent can't do shit about it.


----------



## Coffey

WWE certainly need to let guys just be themselves. Stop trying to fit square pegs into round holes. These are not actors, they are professional wrestlers. Stop trying to make them memorize promos & shit & let them just be wrestlers. Can you imagine if Ric Flair or Dusty Rhodes had promos written for them in the 80's? I mean, c'mon...

It's like WWE is against people getting themselves over or something. Let things happen organically & naturally & stop trying to create artificial & fabricated characters & scenarios. Even basic booking 101 has went out the window. In what other era could you fathom a feud starting in a cage match on Pay-Per-View? Can you imagine if Magnum & Tully started in a cage? :lol


----------



## jonoaries

Walk-In said:


> WWE certainly need to let guys just be themselves. Stop trying to fit square pegs into round holes. These are not actors, they are professional wrestlers. Stop trying to make them memorize promos & shit & let them just be wrestlers. Can you imagine if Ric Flair or Dusty Rhodes had promos written for them in the 80's? I mean, c'mon...
> 
> It's like WWE is against people getting themselves over or something. Let things happen organically & naturally & stop trying to create artificial & fabricated characters & scenarios. Even basic booking 101 has went out the window. In what other era could you fathom a feud starting in a cage match on Pay-Per-View? Can you imagine if Magnum & Tully started in a cage? :lol


Exactly!! Let these guys WORK!! Vince micro-managed Steve Austin for almost 2 years, when he let go...it worked. Vince micro-managed Rocky Maivia, when he let it go...it worked. If a guy has it in him to be major it'll show when you let him be himself. The cream will rise to the top and the fans will support it. 


That fool is going in the opposite direction. Dolph should have dropped that name 2 years ago. Vince has been trying to push him for 3 years and it hasn't worked because he's not a damn actor! 


The concept of just telling a guy to go be himself and see what comes out is dead to Vince now. That's ridiculous because it WORKS!! People want someone to be the guy that breaks the mold, somebody has to bring color to black & white.


----------



## -Skullbone-

EDIT: Couple of good points above me. Nice to see the thread taking a momentary turn with actual discussions taking place.

Let's be honest with ourselves; three hours for a movie alone is hard enough as it is. Three hours for a weekly television show, coupled with a hefty cast of supporting shows like SmackDown, Main Event, etc, is _murder _and overkill to the highest degree. We all knew it was going to underline weaknesses the product had in it's two hour format, and it undoubtedly has done so (although I'm probably in the minority in thinking they've done some things better now than from what I saw earlier in the year). 

It's a shame as the wrestling action has been really carried out well be many top-notch performers willing to improve, yet we have some people on this forum even saying they don't watch for the wrestling and only for an individuals speaking abilities or some crap. They blame the in-ring aspect for dwindling interest. 

What many fans have come to realise as they've gotten older (and something the brass seem to have forgotten) is that all these...em, criterion I guess we class it as, are individual aspects that put over the feud or story being settled by two or more opponents. How well that angle is put over depends on the talent's abilities of course, but that is simply not enough if the story is lacklustre.  Lots and lots of people want to see rivalries, feuds, and competition take place like real life situations and have the foundations of pro wrestling take over, drum it up as only pro wrestling can and still have people buy into the rivalry as if it were real life.  They want to suspend belief for this stuff and want to buy into it. 

I don't know if Vince or his underlings think that pro wrestling is an outdated concept, but playing mainstream catchup takes the best of both worlds and throws it to the dirt. It makes him and his company look ridiculously dated and desperate to _everyone_ bar the unwashed masses and too-loyal patrons. People in the public that think that wrestling's gay fake fighting would have more ammunition against it, and the core fan base is turned away from it because it does, indeed, 'jump the shark'. Don't give into fickleness, but at least be pro active in improving the quality of it, old boy. Let those who know about the industry have a crack at it. Think about the marketing of it, but don't actively alienate people away when doing so. 

As for the Punk dilemma, the only people who should be worried about it aren't so much his fans (many of whom claim they don't care about the ratings, yet jump for joy when he miraculously pulls out a good viewership number), but more so the company and the guy himself. Company is condemned to the knowledge of how they dropped the ball with his push in its early stages, and Punk is condemned to the knowledge that he's not the big commodity that he'd want to be and may well be on his last legs as a major player pending a superb program with Rock or someone else that rekindles some genuine spark from the masses. I'm of the belief his existent star power and appeal is withering badly with this run to the point where people may start to avoid him and his obnoxious reign as champ (as well as any other major runs in the future). Writing to someone's strengths and best abilities help give birth to a star, which is mush more significant and substantial than pushing anyone with muscles and height, and it would take great investment for a 365+ day reign to be captivating for even a significant portion. Aside from a couple of bright spots this hasn't been much more then run-of-the-mill, particularly after his heel turn. The elements were there I feel, but they were capitalised on in a shallow manner with not much thinking behind it all (outside the love triangle and events leading up to it, which worked for the most part in my mind). 

That article posted was quite funny as well. People do seem to let the guy get to them with his snideness, grumpiness and little remarks here and there. The person behind CM Punk appears to hate ignorance in any capacity, especially in regards to his profession. I admit though it is a little funny to see it turned against him, as he does attract it with that apparent brash, obnoxious, I'm-smart-but-not-as-smart-as-I-wish-to-be attitude.


----------



## Stad

Phenomenal One said:


> oh ma.. look at me, i'm cool and don't give a shit because my fav guy is doing shit ratings.
> 
> Punk is a ratings killer. just accept it.. match with Kane did 2.28.. ya do your math.
> 
> a real douche deserves this ratings..
> 
> you will see the effect in ratings once he loses it.


Coming from the guy with ADR in his avatar :lmao

I don't give a shit if he's a draw or not. I watch Punk to be entertained not care about ratings every week.


----------



## Coffey

stadw0n306 said:


> Coming from the guy with ADR in his avatar


No offense but what the fuck does that have to do with anything? It shouldn't matter if someone has an avatar of a tractor or an erect penis or an old woman in a wig, it doesn't make what they type any less valid. Talk about grasping as straws dude, for real. Grow up.


----------



## SerapisLiber

jonoaries said:


> Exactly!! Let these guys WORK!! Vince micro-managed Steve Austin for almost 2 years, when he let go...it worked. Vince micro-managed Rocky Maivia, when he let it go...it worked.


And when he let Punk cut loose for one night only in the summer of last year, that actually worked. But they haven't let him do anything remotely that interesting since.


----------



## Kabraxal

SerapisLiber said:


> And when he let Punk cut loose for one night only in the summer of last year, that actually worked. But they haven't let him do anything remotely that interesting since.


Or Ziggler or even it seems a guy like Titus. A lot of the characters fall flat now because they come of as stilted and fake.. too scripted. Most wrestlers are not actors. And even so, wrestling is a business in which acting doesn't quite work in the same way. With the amount of time these guys are the characters, it just seems it's best that they amplify aspects of their own personality.

It not only seems to make it easier for the wrestlers to not only get over, but for the audience to shut off disbelief and willingly go for the ride. There are very few, if any top tier talents that were pure characters like McMahon is trying to construct. The only two I could possibly argue are Kane and Taker.. but you have seen them evolve and tact closer to what the real person seems to be like over their original "gimmicky" beginnings.


----------



## jonoaries

SerapisLiber said:


> And when he let Punk cut loose for one night only in the summer of last year, that actually worked. But they haven't let him do anything remotely that interesting since.


Exactly.


----------



## Ndiech

no breakdown yet?


----------



## King_Kool-Aid™

Kabraxal said:


> Or Ziggler or even it seems a guy like Titus. A lot of the characters fall flat now because they come of as stilted and fake.. too scripted. Most wrestlers are not actors. And even so, wrestling is a business in which acting doesn't quite work in the same way. With the amount of time these guys are the characters, it just seems it's best that they amplify aspects of their own personality.


Biker Taker and i like how masked Kane evolved in 03. i remember when it seemed like orton was evolving then he devolved.

i like what they did with titus last week on commentary and what they've been doing with Ziggler and Miz lately. Ziggler has been on a great roll for the last 2 weeks hopefully they can keep it up for months to come because he's really showing he has what it takes to be entertaining and put over a feud. 

aside from this weeks RAW i've found the WWE over the last 2 weeks as a little more enjoyable than they've been for most of this year. I really like how they're handling Miz now as well and the tag division(despite still not giving anyone any legit feuds). It just seems like instead of focusing on these positives you guys just focus on the negatives instead.

Also i lol'd at the kids and casual fans getting butthurt by Punk's promo on Lawler. Shame how those feelings of disgust didn't show in the live audience. i've been waiting for Punk to get super heel heat but it just doesn't seem to be happening.


----------



## Hawksea

'kin hell at that 2.3 number fpalm

That's as hideous as Punk's physique.


----------



## roadkill_

Hawksea said:


> 'kin hell at that 2.3 number fpalm
> 
> That's as hideous as Punk's physique.


It really is disastrous. Punk on the intertubes (All 200 of 'em) say otherwise, though.


----------



## Shawn Morrison

SerapisLiber said:


> And when he let Punk cut loose for one night only in the summer of last year, that actually worked. But they haven't let him do anything remotely that interesting since.


thats easy for you to say. They let him go loose more than any other Superstar after that. Just that the Pipe Bomb near MITB was the absolute best, they can't duplicate or improve that. Back then it was a big thing to 'break loose', PG was restricting things alot. Once he's already done it, don't expect another pipe bomb that is just as big. Since then he has had MANY great promos where he rips into other Superstars and the company itself, they have let him loose. His promos with Heyman every week are gold. Yes nothing can match the level of MITB, but Punk is still the most entertaining thing in WWE, and with upcoming feuds like Punk vs Rock we will probably see some more pipe-bombs.


----------



## CHIcagoMade

stadw0n306 said:


> Coming from the guy with ADR in his avatar :lmao
> 
> I don't give a shit if he's a draw or not. I watch Punk to be entertained not care about ratings every week.


But yet you're in the ratings thread


----------



## Choke2Death

Although I agree with the idea of letting wrestlers go a bit more loose on the mic, I disagree with it "helping" in any way. Punk got the okay and did it several times and it didn't make him a "star" in the literal sense of the word. He's just become the new version of Cena that smarks jerk off to but is even more boring and also possesses 0% of Cena's star power. Thankfully, many of the casuals and old fans that returned for Raw 1000 made a clear statement that none of them give a fuck about Punk by tuning out of the shows completely. I wonder if they will continue to push him as hard as this dreadful year after he loses the title.


----------



## Duke Silver

Choke2Death said:


> Although I agree with the idea of letting wrestlers go a bit more loose on the mic, I disagree with it "helping" in any way. Punk got the okay and did it several times and it didn't make him a "star" in the literal sense of the word. He's just become the new version of Cena that smarks jerk off to but is even more boring and also possesses 0% of Cena's star power. *Thankfully, many of the casuals and old fans that returned for Raw 1000 made a clear statement that none of them give a fuck about Punk by tuning out of the shows completely.* I wonder if they will continue to push him as hard as this dreadful year after he loses the title.


That's a fact, huh? :lmao You guys.


----------



## Choke2Death

Duke Droese said:


> That's a fact, huh? :lmao You guys.


Ratings are based on facts, so yeah, I don't know what you're trying to challenge here. Can it be made more crystal clear when Raw 1000 gets nearly 4.0 but the next week, they are back down again? We can pretty much establish it as a fact that the returning fans saw Punk close the show with the "big storyline" and had no interest in it, so they tuned out and went back to whatever they do around that time.


----------



## Duke Silver

Choke2Death said:


> Ratings are based on facts, so yeah, I don't know what you're trying to challenge here. Can it be made more crystal clear when Raw 1000 gets nearly 4.0 but the next week, they are back down again? We can pretty much establish it as a fact that the returning fans saw Punk close the show with the "big storyline" and had no interest in it, so they tuned out and went back to whatever they do around that time.


Yeah, expect that's not a "fact". It's you making an assumption and trying to pass it off as a fact.

Ratings are down and Punk isn't some kind of wonder draw. Those are statements to work off of. Not "Hey guys, thanks for tuning out to show support in your hatred for Punk lol". That's just... dumb.


----------



## roadkill_

Duke Droese said:


> Yeah, expect that's not a "fact". It's you making an assumption and trying to pass it off as a fact.
> 
> Ratings are down and Punk isn't some kind of wonder draw. Those are statements to work off of. Not "Hey guys, thanks for tuning out to show support in your hatred for Punk lol". That's just... dumb.


On the internet, we've had access to this thing called the quarter hour now. Had it since the 90s, often even by Tuesday night. Now, shall we discuss Punks quarter hour ratings?


----------



## -Skullbone-

roadkill_ said:


> On the internet, we've had access to this thing called the quarter hour now. Had it since the 90s, often even by Tuesday night. Now, shall we discuss Punks quarter hour ratings?


Absolutely you can. Although, you might want to take a squiz at third hour weekly trend as well (such as in this past week's case where it likely contributes to the huge drop off).


----------



## MrAxew

Duke Droese said:


> Yeah, expect that's not a "fact". It's you making an assumption and trying to pass it off as a fact.
> 
> Ratings are down and Punk isn't some kind of wonder draw. Those are statements to work off of. Not "Hey guys, thanks for tuning out to show support in your hatred for Punk lol". That's just... dumb.


He didn't say they tuned out of hatred, he meant out of dis-interest.


----------



## Falkono

As someone else said a huge part of the problem is there are no stars right now. On the contrary to what the Punk defence force are saying wwe has done everything they could for Punk to make him a star and it just didn't work. He has had possibly the best year and a half of any wrestler for a long long time. People try and pass it off and say but Cena was ahead of him, which isn't true. After survivor series 2011 Punk started to main event. He main even ted the very next ppv TLC ahead of guys like Triple H. Main even ted the Rumble, other then the rumble itself. At mania he had the 2nd to last match. Rock vs Cena was always going to main event Mania as it was years in the making. That is the match most people wanted to see. 

The day after mania Brock came back. Again naturally that would be the main event.

Fast forward to august 2012 and this is where Punk truley became the main focus. He started to main event again and at Night of champions it marked a year of ppv,s where he was undefeated. At the biggest show in decades raw 1000 he was the main guy by taking out the rock and cena. They could of given the ending to anyone who has been with the wwe over the past 20 odd years but they gave it to him. And he has been in the main event since. That is nearly 5 months.

He has gone 377 days as champion.
In 3 days time he will surpass Cena's time as champion. Which will mean he will have had the longest title reign since 1984. It will be the 7th longest reign in history. The 5th individual longest reign.

I can go on and on but there is no need to. Punk has been one of the main things about we for a long long time and is one of the reasons ratings are down. That doesn't mean he is the main reason it means he is simply one of the reasons.
He is not a big star and after everything they have one for him he never will be.


----------



## SPCDRI

CM Punk is Diesel minus 1 foot of height and add about 15 wrestling moves.

He said he was The Man in WWE as WWE champ. It was on him to put asses in the seats. He took the responsibility now he has to bear some. 

He has to bear some blame for 2.2 quarter hours.


----------



## Snothlisberger

Where's this 2.3 for the ME coming from? Just curious, wanna see it. All I see is the rock316ae making that claim


----------



## Coffey

Falkono said:


> As someone else said a huge part of the problem is there are no stars right now.


See my sig. *hint, hint*


----------



## Mister Hands

SPCDRI said:


> CM Punk is Diesel minus 1 foot of height and add about 15 wrestling moves.
> 
> He said he was The Man in WWE as WWE champ. It was on him to put asses in the seats. He took the responsibility now he has to bear some.
> 
> He has to bear some blame for 2.2 quarter hours.


Yeah, the champ should never be in such a low-rated segment. But, man, what a shitty time for anyone to be an unproven champ. There is literally no one there to make him the star he needs to be.


----------



## RatedR10

WallofShame said:


> Where's this 2.3 for the ME coming from? Just curious, wanna see it. All I see is the rock316ae making that claim


pretty sure Meltzer tweeted out something about it.

Terrible number. I'm a Punk fan, but as WWE Champion in the main event, that's just bad.


----------



## BHfeva

I'm a Punk fan, he's the reason i started watching WWE again. Guess what? I just CANT TUNE INTO 3 HOURS OF RAW, it's TOO much. Even if SCSA was WWE champ, i would tune out at the third hours.


----------



## #Mark

Do you people honestly expect people to sit through three hours of this shit? Regardless of who's champion, no one wants to invest their own time in the product because it's obvious the company doesn't invest their effort into it. Hell, we're the biggest wrestling fans on the planet and we can barely stomach 30 minutes of RAW. Blaming any of this on one wrestler makes little to no sense.

Anyways, I can't wait till Punk drops the title and the new champ draws the same exact numbers.. Would love to see if the hate transfers to him.


----------



## John_Sheena22

no one can sit through 3 hour show.
I won't blame CM Punk though....the whole product is just so boring, so we can't just blame it on CM Punk


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

#Mark said:


> Do you people honestly expect people to sit through three hours of this shit? Regardless of who's champion, no one wants to invest their own time in the product because it's obvious the company doesn't invest their effort into it. Hell, we're the biggest wrestling fans on the planet and we can barely stomach 30 minutes of RAW. Blaming any of this on one wrestler makes little to no sense.
> 
> Anyways, I can't wait till Punk drops the title and the new champ draws the same exact numbers.. Would love to see if the hate transfers to him.


And what if it doesn't and asses start being put in seats, what will your excuse be? "Well Punk was booked like shit anyway"?


----------



## #Mark

swagger_ROCKS said:


> And what if it doesn't and asses start being put in seats, what will your excuse be? "Well Punk was booked like shit anyway"?


I'm not even a Punk fan, I just understand the system's flawed. If it does, then Punk really isn't a draw, but I doubt it will.. I honestly don't even think Rocky as champ would make a substantial difference in this day and age (Saddens me because Rock's my favorite of all time).


----------



## Duke Silver

roadkill_ said:


> On the internet, we've had access to this thing called the quarter hour now. Had it since the 90s, often even by Tuesday night. Now, shall we discuss Punks quarter hour ratings?


Yeah, it's just a shame you take it at face-value.

I'm not saying that Punk is a draw, or that a 2.3 is a good number. Honestly, I don't care either way. I'm not sitting at home on a Tuesday afternoon frantically hitting F5 to see the latest numbers on who's watching wrestling. I don't care who's tuning in for Cena and tuning out for Punk. I'm not fascinated by buyrates or how much money The Rock made Vince McMahon last year. Ratings are absolutely and entirely irrelevant in my life at this time.

My one and only point was that it's dumb to look at the ratings and assume that it's all down to Punk. It's even worse when you look at a number and automatically assume that the decrease is down to people banding together in their "disinterest" of Punk. That's just delusional. That might be the case, but we have absolutely no way of knowing. With the awful numbers the third hour has been drawing, plus the lack of direction, terrible storylines, underdeveloped talent, and no star power, it's impossible to define a single reason that people are tuning out.

There are enough posters in this thread drilling that notion into the ground that I thought even the most ardent of Punk haters would've cottoned on by now. 2.3 is a shitty number and if Punk continued to pull those numbers it could be a problem. Can't say I care though. It's the fucking WWE.


----------



## murder

Duke Droese said:


> My one and only point was that it's dumb to look at the ratings and assume that it's all down to Punk.


Ok, I agree to an extent. But let's look at the best and worst raw rating of all time. 

The best was on May 10th 1999, a 8.1 rating. Who was champion? Stone Cold. The worst rating ever was a 1.5 and who was champion then? Psycho Sid. This is no coincidence. 

Basically what I'm saying is this. When Austin was champion, ratings would never ever fall below 3.8, let alone Sids 1.5 or Punks 2.5. 

I can't believe people still blame the three hours. Do you know that WCW best ratings ever were three hour Nitros? 

But if you really wanna blame the three hours, then just go ahead and look at the first two hour ratings and exclude the third hour from the overall rating.


----------



## -Skullbone-

murder said:


> Ok, I agree to an extent. But let's look at the best and worst raw rating of all time.
> 
> The best was on May 10th 1999, a 8.1 rating. Who was champion? Stone Cold. The worst rating ever was a 1.5 and who was champion then? Psycho Sid. This is no coincidence.
> 
> Basically what I'm saying is this. If Austin was champion, never ever did the ratings fall below 3.8, let alone a 1.5.
> 
> I can#t believe people still blame the three hours. Do you know that WCW best ratings ever were all three hour Nitros?
> 
> But if you really wanna blame the three hours, then just go ahead and look at the first two hour ratings and exclude the third hour from the overall rating.


But look at what the three hour trends produce _nowadays_. Nothing's drawing in big viewership numbers as a solo act (although Ryback has looked promising in sparking a growth in several instances) but you have a steep decline in many, many instances as the show ticks on which makes things even worse.

Be honest with yourself: can you watch a three hour Raw show _nowadays_? Can you honestly compare it to WCW's yesteryear in cultural context, product excitement, as well as your personal tastes at the time? The quantity of time is extraordinarily hefty for a weekly show, and the quality is going to have to be equally extraordinary, which it is not.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

WWE don't really care about ratings anyway. Punk isn't a ratings draw, yet he has been WWE champion for a year and has been the focal point of the show for about four months now.


----------



## Duke Silver

murder said:


> Ok, I agree to an extent. But let's look at the best and worst raw rating of all time.
> 
> The best was on May 10th 1999, a 8.1 rating. Who was champion? Stone Cold. The worst rating ever was a 1.5 and who was champion then? Psycho Sid. This is no coincidence.
> 
> Basically what I'm saying is this. When Austin was champion, ratings would never ever fall below 3.8, let alone Sids 1.5 or Punks 2.5.
> 
> I can't believe people still blame the three hours. Do you know that WCW best ratings ever were three hour Nitros?
> 
> But if you really wanna blame the three hours, then just go ahead and look at the first two hour ratings and exclude the third hour from the overall rating.


Comparisons are great but those examples have little significance or meaning in this day and age. 

Austin was STONE COLD STEVE FUCKING AUSTIN (GOAT) and champion during the Attiude era. He was surrounded by superstars and epic booking. It was the most popular era in wrestling history. 

Likewise, three hour Nitro's aired during the most successful era in wrestling history.

Sid was champion at the end of the weakest period in wrestling history. The roster was awful, booking was terrible, and there was little star power.

This is 2012. Wrestling is in a down-swing, there's no one with name value on the roster, booking is in the shitter, there are a thousand different ways to watch Monday Night Raw, and whether you believe it or not, the move to three hours is certainly a contributing factor. Plus championships don't draw anymore, and Punk obviously isn't lighting the world on fire. There's any number of reasons that ratings are down.


----------



## Cliffy

Mister Hands said:


> Yeah, the champ should never be in such a low-rated segment. But, man, what a shitty time for anyone to be an unproven champ. There is literally no one there to make him the star he needs to be.


Hunter should have done the job.


----------



## Cliffy

jblvdx said:


> WWE don't really care about ratings anyway. Punk isn't a ratings draw, yet he has been WWE champion for a year and has been the focal point of the show for about four months now.


Only because Rock wants to work with him so you can credit Punks entire reign to dwayne.


----------



## Shawn Morrison

jblvdx said:


> WWE don't really care about ratings anyway. Punk isn't a ratings draw, yet he has been WWE champion for a year and has been the focal point of the show for about four months now.


because Rock vs Punk and a one year long reign makes more entertaining storylines. Also who really could have been given the belt? The only options were Cena and Ryback. Cena winning the title again needs to be special and a big thing, a random title win for him at point of his career is just pointless. Ryback could have won it too, but its too early, and why ruin a perfectly long reign of Cm Punk?

What sounds better on paper: Rock vs Punk (who just won the title back by cheating against Ryback)

OR

Rock vs Punk (the one year long champion who has beaten pretty much everyone in the roster)


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Cliffy Byro said:


> Only because Rock wants to work with him so you can credit Punks entire reign to dwayne.


Are we also crediting Rock for Punk closing out every Raw and PPV for the past four months too? 


Punk doesn't draw ratings yet he takes up more TV time then anybody on the roster. WWE doesn't care about ratings as much as most of the posters in this thread.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

so no breakdown yet?


----------



## Mister Hands

swagger_ROCKS said:


> And what if it doesn't and asses start being put in seats, what will your excuse be? "Well Punk was booked like shit anyway"?


If a new champion (and I mean properly new, not Cena or Rocky or whoever, someone untested) draws big numbers as champion, then yeah, Punk looks worse coming out of it. On the other hand, assuming it's not someone completely out of the blue, Punk's reign will just be seen as making the best of a transition period while other guys were _properly_ built up. Yes, he was booked ineptly - everything in WWE is. It's not a get-out-of-jail free card for pulling some of the numbers he's done, but then, I don't see that WWE had or have any better options available. I mean, ratings aside (and let's face facts, nobody full-time in WWE is really drawing flies to shit these days, so we really can put the numbers aside), I'd take a historic year-long Punk reign with awesome matches with Ziggler, Bryan, Jericho, et al, Heyman coming back, and some genuine new blood in the title scene (if not the main event scene, grumble grumble), over whatever Cena-centric hot potato shit they probably would have been doing otherwise.

But if a new champ draws good numbers in his segments, and there's still matches that haemhorrage a million viewers (or whatever ridiculous number Kofi/Del Rio dropped a while back) and the viewers are still mostly hovering around the 4 million mark, what's really been fixed in the long term? You'll probably still have a crowd that sits on their hands until Super Champ #47 walks out, and you'll still have a product that is, as I coined before, oddly unlikable.

But then, what if the next unproven champ fails too? And what if its a WWE pet project, not an "IWC wet dream" like Punk? Do we call them a failure too? What if a Cena reign doesn't do any better? Or, worse, a Henry reign? At what point do people (and more importantly, WWE themselves) start to accept that the problems we're all mumbling about aren't going to be solved by finding a hot ticket champion? And that, while talking ratings is fun (at times, I guess, sorta), we're probably putting undue focus on the guys who are generally doing good, entertaining, crowd-pleasing shit when given the opportunity, but just aren't being given many of those opportunities by Steph, Kapoor, and co?


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Cliffy Byro said:


> Only because Rock wants to work with him so you can credit Punks entire reign to dwayne.


:lmao This thread.


----------



## SerapisLiber

Where the HELL are the segment breakdowns? How often does it take this long?


----------



## checkcola

I actually think the case can be made that Cena as the defending champ vs Rock at WM puts Cena in a more underdog role than chasing the title going into WM. 

If Rock loses the title, what's really the big deal? He's already won the title as a movie star twice a year special attraction. Cena beating him for it proves nothing. Plus, Rock will have defeated Cena's arch enemy Punk, something Cena failed to do.


----------



## murder

-Skullbone- said:


> Be honest with yourself: can you watch a three hour Raw show _nowadays_?


To be honest, I could not sit through two hours of Monday Night Raw this year let alone three. 

However, the best raw this year and the one with the highest rating was a three hour show. Would they give every show as much attention as far as advertising, booking, character developments, storylines and overall writing go, numbers woudn't be this low, whether the show lasts one, two or three hours, whether or not Football is on and whether or not it's cold or warm outside.

But like I said, just count the first two hours if you think three hours is the problem. If raw gets hours of 3.0, 3.0 and 2.5, ignore the third hour and the show has a 3.0 rating. That's a fair comparison to shows prior to Raw 1000.


----------



## Choke2Death

checkcola said:


> I actually think the case can be made that Cena as the defending champ vs Rock at WM puts Cena in a more underdog role than chasing the title going into WM.
> 
> If Rock loses the title, what's really the big deal? He's already won the title as a movie star twice a year special attraction. Cena beating him for it proves nothing. Plus, Rock will have defeated Cena's arch enemy Punk, *something Cena failed to do.*


Didn't he beat him last month? LOL.


----------



## Shawn Morrison

Choke2Death said:


> Didn't he beat him last month? LOL.


Punk walked out with the champion in every single title match he's had with Cena, so yeah. That Cena victory was just done to give him a little momentum going into Survivor Series, doesn't really mean anything.


----------



## mb1025

jblvdx said:


> Are we also crediting Rock for Punk closing out every Raw and PPV for the past four months too?
> 
> 
> Punk doesn't draw ratings yet he takes up more TV time then anybody on the roster. WWE doesn't care about ratings as much as most of the posters in this thread.


WWE cares more about ratings than anything else. It pretty much is what keeps them in business. Better ratings equals better advertising revenue, merchandise sales, and so on.


----------



## Choke2Death

mb1025 said:


> WWE cares more about ratings than anything else. It pretty much is what keeps them in business. Better ratings equals better advertising revenue, merchandise sales, and so on.


Well said. The reason Punk continues to get pushed despite the terrible ratings is because they don't really have any other options. They seem to want to keep Cena away from winning it for a while so when he's the champion again, it'll feel more special than just "duh, another title win". And better ratings also equals better promotion since the TV shows are their main source in letting everyone know what's coming up next week, next PPV and so on.



Shawn Morrison said:


> Punk walked out with the champion in every single title match he's had with Cena, so yeah. That Cena victory was just done to give him a little momentum going into Survivor Series, doesn't really mean anything.


A win is a win, though.


----------



## Evil Peter

mb1025 said:


> WWE cares more about ratings than anything else. It pretty much is what keeps them in business. Better ratings equals better advertising revenue, merchandise sales, and so on.


Not according to the reports that were posted here some days ago. Those said that WWE aren't too bothered with the ratings because they are on a longtime TV deal which won't end soon. Since that's the case I'd say that the report seems likely to be correct since there are more important things to focus on. We also know that WWE earns more money from the three hour show, even though we also know that the three hour format draws lower ratings.

That said the low ratings are of course not unimportant to them as they are a direct negative thing for WWE, seeing how it's one of the indicators of the interest in the current product.


----------



## krai999

this man is the voice of reason for the marks on this forum




sounds like rock316ae doesn't he lol


----------



## hardysno1fan

krai999 said:


> this man is the voice of reason for the marks on this forum
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sounds like rock316ae doesn't he lol


I usually dont watch fan vid opinions but I agree with EVERYTHING he said. Punk doesn't have the draw power. Cena has alienated half the fan base and that the alternatives are shockingly awful. This generation is really poor though. I don't see Ziggler, Swagger, the Miz or Ryback uniting all audiences. IMO WWE needs to A) give them more control over their characters and B)Get tougher. If you can't draw get out.


----------



## Cliffy

pspower is a YWC legend.

Anyways, i predict a 2.3 what with the Redskins game on.


----------



## El_Absoluto

That was a good fucking promo....


----------



## BrendenPlayz

I really enjoyed raw tonight, great show and a pretty sweet finish as well. Shield made a good impact tonight, really interested to see what their role in TLC will be and when they will debut in-ring. Punk was fantastic on the mic tonight, miz not to bad either. Fatal four way was really cool, Cesaro is growing on me fast, along side Ziggler I think he has a bright future ahead I didn't like him at first but now I am starting to see a lot of potential.

Great raw can't wait for next week.


----------



## roadkill_

TeamHeadsh0t said:


> I *really enjoyed raw* tonight, *great show* and a *pretty sweet* finish as well. Shield made a *good impact* tonight, *really interested* to see what their role in TLC will be and when they will debut in-ring. *Punk was fantastic* on the mic tonight, *miz not to bad* either. Fatal four way was *really cool*, Cesaro is *growing on me fast*, along side Ziggler I think he has a *bright future ahead* I didn't like him at first but now I am starting to see a lot of potential.
> 
> Great raw *can't wait for next week.*


Shilling on the internet used to be a subtle affair.


----------



## King_Kool-Aid™

hardysno1fan said:


> I usually dont watch fan vid opinions but I agree with EVERYTHING he said. Punk doesn't have the draw power. Cena has alienated half the fan base and that the alternatives are shockingly awful. This generation is really poor though. I don't see Ziggler, Swagger, the Miz or Ryback uniting all audiences. IMO WWE needs to A) give them more control over their characters and B)Get tougher. If you can't draw get out.


It doesn't matter if Punk has drawing power or not he's still selling merch and is better than any other option WWE has right now.


----------



## D.M.N.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...f-beverly-hills-american-pickers-more/160188/

Hour 1 - 3.56m
Hour 2 - 3.36m
Hour 3 - 3.37m

*WARNING: PANIC BUTTON HAS BEEN ACTIVATED. FIVE. FOUR. THREE. TWO. ONE....*

Awful numbers. Awful.


----------



## Green Light

Oh lawd :lmao


----------



## JY57

yeah at this point its all garbage till Rumble season, so not surprising. If they still do bad numbers at Rumble/Mania season they might as well give up.

PS: go back to 2 hours while you at it


----------



## Choke2Death

Not a single four million. :lmao


----------



## DOPA

Man the ratings keep plummeting. I thought this weeks Raw was better than the last 2 yet its got a lower rating....


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Something tells me this three hour thing isn't working so well.


----------



## The Lady Killer

I'm anxious to see how Brad 'The Great' Maddox's segment drew relative to the others.


----------



## Green Light

I guess Punk's promo telling people to change the channel worked a treat! :brock


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

D.M.N. said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...f-beverly-hills-american-pickers-more/160188/
> 
> Hour 1 - 3.56m
> Hour 2 - 3.36m
> Hour 3 - 3.37m
> 
> *WARNING: PANIC BUTTON HAS BEEN ACTIVATED. FIVE. FOUR. THREE. TWO. ONE....*
> 
> Awful numbers. Awful.


...Holy shit that is bad. Wow.

lolryback


----------



## chronoxiong

Not even an announced Vinnie Mac appearance was going to help the ratings. Ouch. Just ouch. End this dumb 3-hour format please!!!


----------



## Starbuck

DAT 2.0 ERA - If you can't get behind this you'll be left behind...along with everybody else who stopped watching 8*D

Panic button indeed. While the 3 hour format certainly isn't helping matters, the fact that viewership for the first 2 hours and in general is _that_low is flat out terrible. The third hour has become something of a scapegoat it seems. If it weren't there I imagine things would be marginally better but not by much. If people really wanted to tune in and the only issue they had was the third hour/length of the show we'd see normal numbers for the first 2 hours and then a big drop off towards the end. That isn't happening. Like I said last week, they're starting shit and ending worse. I doubt even Rock can do anything to save the entire show tbh. It's a top to bottom issue with everything flowing from the top of the card down. When the top of the card isn't producing the goods, nobody else stands a chance, hence the complete haemorrhaging of viewership over the past few months. It's crazy to think that 6 million people saw CM Punk lay out the Rock in July and since then just over half of them are still watching. Crazy.


----------



## purple_gloves

D.M.N. said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...f-beverly-hills-american-pickers-more/160188/
> 
> Hour 1 - 3.56m
> Hour 2 - 3.36m
> Hour 3 - 3.37m
> 
> *WARNING: PANIC BUTTON HAS BEEN ACTIVATED. FIVE. FOUR. THREE. TWO. ONE....*
> 
> Awful numbers. Awful.


I try to stop myself from posting in this crazy thread, but i have got to say, jesus christ!

Horrific numbers. If that doesn't prove to them that what they are currently doing is shit, then nothing will.


----------



## TheF1BOB

Are they taking any orders for the "Rise & Fall of the WWE" DVD yet?


----------



## HankHill_85

It doesn't help that they never announce anything in advance for next week anymore. The booking is so on-the-fly and scattered that everything has to happen in one night. Give people at least a morsel of incentive to sit through these marathon Raws.


----------



## Coffey

You know you're in bad shape when you're getting beat in viewership by Teen Mom II.

So this is going to be lower than their 15-year record low of 3.5?


----------



## Awesome22

This is horrible! Holly shit! They actually deserve this rating! Watch out...TNA is coming! :lmao


----------



## vanboxmeer

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=didzxUkrtS0

Tumblin' down, tumblin' down.

DAT triangle of mediocrity: "Smackdown Killer" Sheamus, Useless AJ Lee, and Casey Ryback


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

I doubt they care as much as they would if this were during any other time of the year. They know once Punk/Rock starts, the buzz will come back. Starbuck mentions that 6 million people saw Punk lay out the Rock. Well, they clearly didn't leave over night. That was six months ago, the viewers fizzled out because the product is in a garbage state right now. This Ryback project is a fail, and it's a shame that Cena got injured because if Punk/Cena carried on I doubt the product would be as shitty as it is right now. We would have had at least something worth watching. Right now, there is nothing. Not until Rock comes back.

God, Punk/Rock can't come soon enough.


----------



## teick

The problem is not the 3 hours format. The problem is the PG Era. They have to realize that this crap era is hurting their product...


----------



## The Lady Killer

Thought an extra hour would give more wrestlers a chance to showcase their talents w/lengthier matches, but instead we get the same # of squashes with an extra 45 minutes of babbling and 15 more minutes of commercials.


----------



## Green Light

Punk vs. Cena before SS bombed in the main event, their feud is completely oversaturated and played out at this point. Not to mention Ryback has been doing the best quarters for weeks on his own, drew big in the tag match with Cena and did a huge domestic buyrate for HIAC. If that's a failed project then God knows what that makes Punk, the champion, who has been part of something like 7 of the worst overruns and quarters in company history. 

But hey on a positive note at least there wasn't such a huge drop-off in the third hour this week (Y) :Rock


----------



## RatedR10

teick said:


> The problem is not the 3 hours format. The problem is the PG Era. They have to realize that this crap era is hurting their product...


The problem is the booking. They've put off viewers for so long with crappy booking. You can have a good product under PG.

Also, three hours of wrestling is too much wrestling in one shot for anyone.


----------



## Starbuck

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I doubt they care as much as they would if this were during any other time of the year. They know once Punk/Rock starts, the buzz will come back. Starbuck mentions that 6 million people saw Punk lay out the Rock. Well, they clearly didn't leave over night. That was six months ago, the viewers fizzled out because the product is in a garbage state right now. This Ryback project is a fail, and it's a shame that Cena got injured because if Punk/Cena carried on I doubt the product would be as shitty as it is right now. We would have had at least something worth watching. Right now, there is nothing. Not until Rock comes back.
> 
> God, Punk/Rock can't come soon enough.


It's all Ryback's fault? :lmao Cena/Punk wasn't doing anything to help so I don't know why you're saying that either tbh. 

6 million people saw Punk lay out Rock on Raw 1000 and from that point on Punk has been promoted as THE guy on Raw. Up until that point he was second fiddle, third fiddle even, and for the brief Brock/HHH program heading into Summerslam he took a backseat but other than that it's been all Punk as the central and focal point of the show. You give Punk a pass for the past 6 months while Ryback's been around for 6 weeks and it's his fault? This is why I can't take you seriously. You're WAY too much of a mark to see straight. The fact that people are going to come back to watch Rock in his first title feud in a decade isn't exactly a ringing endorsement for your boy. Regardless of whether Punk was champion or not, people would still be tuning in come January because it's the Rock going for the belt and nothing else. That's the hook. Punk will just happen to be along for the ride. Maybe he'll get a win out of it, maybe not. I think he could beat Rock clean, go on to end the steak at Mania and you'd still be blaming Ryback if Punk's segments were doing shit lol. Take your little marky glasses off please. You'll start to see much more clearly.


----------



## Coffey

A lot of the stuff WWE have been trying lately has not been as _grandiose_ as I had hoped. Nothing that happens on the live, 3-hour show between the first twenty minutes & the last twenty minutes matters at all, ever. That's over two hours of completely wasted time.

Ryback is over. If people are still doubting that, then I don't know what to tell them. But he is not so over that you put him as the main event of continuous Pay-Per-Views in a row & have him opening & closing the A-Show. A.J. Lee, although I love her as a performer, has run her course with her current direction. She needs revamped pretty badly. Beating Tamina Snuka with a roll-up in a throw-away three minute match is not going to benefit anyone. Vince McMahon coming back to talk for a beyond stale Vickie Guerrero is not the solution.

I think the biggest problem is all of the replays, ads, recaps & shilling. That is legitimately an hour of the show every single week. People change the channel during that shit. Especially when they have other viewing options, like Monday Night Football. Oh, mid-match commercial? I'm turning to ESPN. 

The entire layout of the show is old fashioned & dated. It's not 1998 anymore. They need a different format. One for the world of 2012, with DVR & short attention spans. They're booking the show like it's WCW Monday Nitro without any of the mid-card talent. There is not a Cruiserweight Division, a credible tag division, an IC division people care about or even contenders in the U.S. division. It's a bunch of guys killing time in-between nWo promos.


----------



## hardysno1fan

The problem is everything but the wrestlers need a long hard look at themselves. Some of them have to either improve or go.


----------



## Dec_619

teick said:


> The problem is not the 3 hours format. The problem is the PG Era. They have to realize that this crap era is hurting their product...


No, the problem is three hours.

Who wants to sit through 20 ad breaks and countless replays?


----------



## Oakue

The show sucks.

I mean we can all come on here and say "oh that's the best Raw in a while"...yeah...it's not.

The writing sucks. The wrestling sucks. It's a terrible product. And it's not just that. It's the presentation. The graphics, the social media aspect, all of it. It turns people off because it is B-O-R-I-N-G.


----------



## Dec_619

moonmop said:


> The show sucks.
> 
> I mean we can all come on here and say "oh that's the best Raw in a while"...yeah...it's not.
> 
> The writing sucks. The wrestling sucks. It's a terrible product. And it's not just that. It's the presentation. The graphics, the social media aspect, all of it. It turns people off because it is B-O-R-I-N-G.


Bring back the Smackdown! Fist


----------



## Starbuck

I personally think they need to rip shit up and start from scratch because everything is just dated/boring/redundant/stale as fuck. New set design, RED RING ROPES, new theme, NEW BOSS :hhh, new direction. They need to let the world know that things are well and truly getting shaken up. Merge the rosters, combine the world titles, state that things are going to be very different and we ARE entering a new era and then actually follow through on that promise and do it. Have 1 authority figure that is in the background as part of the show and not the central focus of the show. Have villains people can hate and heroes will be born. 

I feel like I'm writing a PR piece here lol. Basically, the need to legitimately shake shit up and make some drastic and visible changes. The shock of something like that happening would have a lot of people watching. From there they would have the platform to keep those people watching as they fully transitioned into the new era etc.


----------



## Mister Hands

I mean, if the big, promoted Vinny Mac appearance is to patronise Vickie for three minutes then fuck off again, yeah, 3 million sounds about right. First half hour and last half hour of Raw were good last night, and that's it, but I don't blame anyone who didn't bother tuning back in for the latter.


----------



## Coffey

Lost my entire edit due to the board crashing again & now I'm way too lazy to re-write it. So just read my fucking blog: http://5-pw.blogspot.com/2012/11/where-has-all-star-power-gone.html


----------



## D.M.N.

Hmmmm.

H1 26/11/2012 - 4,147,000
H2 26/11/2012 - 4,126,000
H3 26/11/2012 - 3,488,000
H1 03/12/2012 - 3,580,000
H2 03/12/2012 - 3,370,000
H3 03/12/2012 - 3,360,000

What happened at the end of Hour 2 or the start of Hour 3 last week that turned half a million people away? We should have the 26th November breakdown in the next day or two - delayed due to Thanksgiving, but clearly something happened for viewers to tune out.


----------



## Vyed

D.M.N. said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...f-beverly-hills-american-pickers-more/160188/
> 
> Hour 1 - 3.56m
> Hour 2 - 3.36m
> Hour 3 - 3.37m
> 
> *WARNING: PANIC BUTTON HAS BEEN ACTIVATED. FIVE. FOUR. THREE. TWO. ONE....*
> 
> Awful numbers. Awful.


The numbers are quoted wrong. Probably a mistake.

Hour 1 - 3.58m
Hour 2 - 3.37m
Hour 3 - 3.36m

But yeah terrible terrible numbers. They do have an excuse though, MNF average over 16 million viewers almost 52% increase from last week's MNF viewership.


----------



## Awesome22

I heard the rating was 2.55. Ouch. Next week: Houston vs New England...WWE is screwed. :lmao


----------



## Ndiech

punk told them to change the channel.....and they did.lol


----------



## #1Peep4ever

shit thats fucking horrendous


----------



## Starbuck

Reverse psychology no work for CM Punk. Tells people to change the channel and they...change the channel lol.


----------



## TheF1BOB

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> I doubt they care as much as they would if this were during any other time of the year. They know once Punk/Rock starts, the buzz will come back. Starbuck mentions that 6 million people saw Punk lay out the Rock. Well, they clearly didn't leave over night. That was six months ago, the viewers fizzled out because the product is in a garbage state right now. This Ryback project is a fail, and it's a shame that Cena got injured because if Punk/Cena carried on I doubt the product would be as shitty as it is right now. We would have had at least something worth watching. Right now, there is nothing. Not until Rock comes back.
> 
> God, Punk/Rock can't come soon enough.


The buzz will come back because of The Rock, not some hobo who can't draw for shit.

The ratings don't lie. Punk is killing this company.


----------



## DOPA

vanboxmeer said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=didzxUkrtS0
> 
> Tumblin' down, tumblin' down.
> 
> DAT triangle of mediocrity: "Smackdown Killer" Sheamus, Useless AJ Lee, and Casey Ryback


AJ had a combined air time of 5 mins this week :lmao :lmao :lmao

Sheamus and Ryback were in segments that were expected to draw ill give you that.

There is not one or three talents you can blame solely for ratings dropping. You have to look at the product as a whole and blame the guy who runs the ship, who is ultimately *Vince McMahon.*


----------



## Vyed

> WWE Raw on Monday, December 3 scored a 2.55 overall rating and 2.53 rating for the regular two-hour block. The overall rating was down 6 percent compared to a 2.72 rating last week.
> 
> Raw nearly scored a year-low, with only the October 22 episode scoring lower at a 2.49 rating.
> 
> - Raw averaged 3.44 million viewers (down 500,000 viewers/12 percent compared to last week). Hourly Break Down: 3.58 million first hour viewers, 3.37 million second hour viewers, and 3.36 million third hour viewers.
> 
> - On cable TV Monday night, Raw's second and third hours ranked behind "Pawn Stars" on History Channel. But, Raw finished #2 in the key male demos behind ESPN's huge audience for Monday Night Football, which pulled away male viewers.
> 
> Raw also took a big hit among adult women. Raw typically draws a 1.0 rating in the adult females demo, but this week's show scored a 0.7 rating in the demo.
> 
> Overall, Raw was defeated in adults 18-34, women 18-34, adults 18-49, and women 18-49 by a variety of programming on VH1 as well as the traditional Christmas Vacation movie on ABC Family.
> 
> - In the week-to-week demos, Raw hit year-lows in numerous categories. Included in the year-lows was Raw down four-tenths of a rating among males 12-34 & males 18-49, down nearly seven-tenths of a rating in males 18-34, down two-tenths of a rating among all adults 18-49, and down nearly four-tenths of a rating in adults 18-34.


Torch.


----------



## Coffey

Vyed said:


> They do have an excuse though


Of course they do. They have an excuse every single week. The "excuses" make it so they never have to look at themselves and say "hey, what we're doing is not working, maybe we should go in a new direction."


----------



## Starbuck

TheF1BOB said:


> The buzz will come back because of The Rock, not some hobo who can't draw for shit.
> 
> The ratings don't lie. *Punk is killing this company*.


Disagree with this. He isn't single handedly killing the company, that's a gross misstatement. But as I've been saying all along, he certainly isn't helping matters either and I'd like to think that that has been proven at this stage. Obviously not...


----------



## IncapableNinja

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Starbuck mentions that 6 million people saw Punk lay out the Rock. *Well, they clearly didn't leave over night. *That was six months ago, the viewers fizzled out because the product is in a garbage state right now.


They did all leave overnight, didn't they? Not only did THEY leave overnight, so did an extra few hundred thousand.

Raw 999 drew an average of 4.88 million.
Raw 1000 drew an average of 6 million.
Raw 1001 drew an average of 4.5 million.

Hence why Raw1001 has to be the most disappointing rating of the year as they threw absolutely, everything including the Punk/ Rock angle, at the returning audience in an attempt to hook them and came up with absolutely nothing.

The fans they've managed to lose since then are the "hardcore", the ones you have to work pretty hard to erode from the viewership.


----------



## TheF1BOB

Starbuck said:


> Disagree with this. He isn't single handedly killing the company, that's a gross misstatement. But as I've been saying all along, he certainly isn't helping matters either and I'd like to think that that has been proven at this stage. Obviously not...


Punk is killing this company _along with Vince_.


----------



## Mister Hands

Starbuck said:


> Disagree with this. He isn't single handedly killing the company, that's a gross misstatement. But as I've been saying all along, he certainly isn't helping matters either and I'd like to think that that has been proven at this stage. Obviously not...


I think the real question is whether _anyone_ could help matters much, outside of one specific office.


----------



## MikeChase27

3 hours is killing RAW.


----------



## Coffey

It's a combination of all the factors that is hurting RAW:
- Monday Night Football
- MMA
- Wrestling is no longer "cool" or popular.
- The booking/writing is poor & lacks continuity.
- No one has any heat.
- There aren't any stars.
- The titles don't mean anything.
- The wins/losses don't mean anything.
- The show is too long.
- People don't want their intelligence insulted.
- There aren't any fresh match-ups & WWE runs everything into the ground.
- There's no reason to watch each week. Nothing ever changes. There are no consequences or cliff hangers.
- There is no emotional investment, either positively or negatively, for anyone on the entire roster.\
- Too many ads, replays, recaps & media whoring.


----------



## Kabraxal

Not surprised at all.. there was no heat heading into the night and nothing really happened. You had some potential in the first hour before it went right back to the same ole fuckery. That is hte problem... there is no logic or sense in the WWE. Nothing happens for a reason... or if it does, that reason is quickly tossed away. They need to bring back sensible, sustained booking. Until then, the numbers will not improve. Simple as that.


----------



## Bossdude

Mister Hands said:


> I think the real question is whether _anyone_ could help matters much, outside of one specific office.


Who knows? But they might as well try, rather than keep pushing a guy who hasn't drawn the entire time he's been champion.

What have the WWE got to lose by pushing someone else instead of CM Cunt?


----------



## Starbuck

Mister Hands said:


> I think the real question is whether _anyone_ could help matters much, outside of one specific office.


I think there is a solution and light at the end of the tunnel lol. But it isn't something that can be fixed right away. WWE's main problem right now, to me, is their short sightedness. Because of that, nothing has meaning anymore. I think if they designated some of those writers for planning out long ranging story arcs, even if its just for the top of the card, it would give a lot of fans something to gain a genuine interest in and they'd slowly claw their audience back. At the moment, there's literally NO reason to watch WWE. None at all. Everything is missable except for when one of their legit star attractions shows up who a lot of people already have a huge personal investment in as a character. Everything is meaningless. People would rather watch something else, record Raw and watch it later. It isn't a must see television show anymore, not even for its core fanbase which is starting to erode as well as the casuals. I do believe that they can make it a must see show again but it's going to take a couple of years to build the stars they need to do it and get themselves out of this downward trend.


----------



## vanboxmeer

Crusade said:


> AJ had a combined air time of 5 mins this week :lmao :lmao :lmao
> 
> Sheamus and Ryback were in segments that were expected to draw ill give you that.
> 
> There is not one or three talents you can blame solely for ratings dropping. You have to look at the product as a whole and blame the guy who runs the ship, who is ultimately *Vince McMahon.*


The ratings slowly deteriorating have also correlated with AJ's entire self-indulgent megapush that leads to mediocre matches and poor television. Yes, prior to WWE Raw becoming a parody of a teen Nickelodeon drama series starring AJ Lee and her pursuit for Lurve, CM Punk was doing no better than anyone else and everything was about the same level it had been for 3 years. The only thing they get is to get some company PR telling an embellished story about how great and awesome their company is for taking the "poor, little homeless girl" and made her one of the primary focuses of the entire company. You know, the same story any wrestler working the indies often have to do in sleeping in cars and hotels traveling town to town to do indy shots, except they're not perceived as marketable and attractive and would ironically be bad PR for the company knowing how the rest of the industry looks like.


----------



## Coffey

A simple solution WWE can do to start righting the ship: instead of sending out Sin Cara Vs. Alberto Del Rio for no reason, or Damien Sandow Vs. Santino Marella for no reason, use this week to give them a vignette, something backstage to give them a reason to want to wrestle. Then give us their match the NEXT week. At least then the match is happening for a fucking reason. Plus it gives the commentators something to talk about.


----------



## Kabraxal

Walk-In said:


> A simple solution WWE can do to start righting the ship: instead of sending out Sin Cara Vs. Alberto Del Rio for no reason, or Damien Sandow Vs. Santino Marella for no reason, use this week to give them a vignette, something backstage to give them a reason to want to wrestle. Then give us their match the NEXT week. At least then the match is happening for a fucking reason. Plus it gives the commentators something to talk about.


Really... that would be a refreshing return to form in some respects. I miss the vignettes... hell, some of my favourite wrestling memories are the vignettes for Perfect.


----------



## Starbuck

Raw writers need to watch NXT and take notes tbh. Boom. Problems solved lol. It isn't mind blowing TV but first and foremost it makes sense, it doesn't insult your intelligence, the vast majority of people on it have a character and the the vast majority of matches have a purpose. Imagine that on your wrestling show in 2012. Mind = blown.


----------



## Mister Hands

Starbuck said:


> I think there is a solution and light at the end of the tunnel lol. But it isn't something that can be fixed right away. WWE's main problem right now, to me, is their short sightedness. Because of that, nothing has meaning anymore. I think if they designated some of those writers for planning out long ranging story arcs, even if its just for the top of the card, it would give a lot of fans something to gain a genuine interest in and they'd slowly claw their audience back. At the moment, there's literally NO reason to watch WWE. None at all. Everything is missable except for when one of their legit star attractions shows up who a lot of people already have a huge personal investment in as a character. Everything is meaningless. People would rather watch something else, record Raw and watch it later. It isn't a must see television show anymore, not even for its core fanbase which is starting to erode as well as the casuals. I do believe that they can make it a must see show again but it's going to take a couple of years to build the stars they need to do it and get themselves out of this downward trend.


Ha, it's not that I doubt there's a solution. It's more that I doubt the solution is anything other than Trips pedigreeing Vince into early(ish) retirement.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

Walk-In said:


> It's a combination of all the factors that is hurting RAW:
> - Monday Night Football
> - MMA
> - Wrestling is no longer "cool" or popular.
> - The booking/writing is poor & lacks continuity.
> - No one has any heat.
> - There aren't any stars.
> - The titles don't mean anything.
> - The wins/losses don't mean anything.
> - The show is too long.
> - People don't want their intelligence insulted.
> - There aren't any fresh match-ups & WWE runs everything into the ground.
> - There's no reason to watch each week. Nothing ever changes. There are no consequences or cliff hangers.
> - There is no emotional investment, either positively or negatively, for anyone on the entire roster.\
> - Too many ads, replays, recaps & media whoring.



[/THREAD]


----------



## krai999

STING AS RAW GM?


----------



## DOPA

vanboxmeer said:


> The ratings slowly deteriorating have also correlated with AJ's entire self-indulgent megapush that leads to mediocre matches and poor television. Yes, prior to WWE Raw becoming a parody of a teen Nickelodeon drama series starring AJ Lee and her pursuit for Lurve, CM Punk was doing no better than anyone else and everything was about the same level it had been for 3 years. The only thing they get is to get some company PR telling an embellished story about how great and awesome their company is for taking the "poor, little homeless girl" and made her one of the primary focuses of the entire company. You know, the same story any wrestler working the indies often have to do in sleeping in cars and hotels traveling town to town to do indy shots, except they're not perceived as marketable and attractive and would ironically be bad PR for the company knowing how the rest of the industry looks like.


I'm not saying there isn't a correlation, I even agreed with you before remember? I've never argued that AJ should be one of the main focuses of the company even as a fan of hers. But to say that AJ's push is the direct cause of the ratings drop when you consider how many problems WWE has with its product right now in generating buzz and interest is laughable and ridiculous. It's even more laughable that AJ was almost a non factor in this week's Raw and not even in the main segments of the show which drew an even lower rating than the past two weeks and yet you are still blaming AJ as a main reason for a low drawing rating for this week :lol.

You make some very valid points but you are also very clouded in your bias towards AJ and "Team Steph" as you sometimes like to call it.


----------



## Headliner

Ratings will get back to 3.0 when Rock wins the title. Rumble to Mania is always the peak rating time.


----------



## Amber B

I wouldn't mind reruns at this point. I watch my old Raw episodes on my bitchin VHS with more excitement than I do any of the nonsense that's going on right now and I already know the outcome. 

With every storyline (if you can call it that) going on right now, either it's going on for too long because they don't know how to end it or it ends within a month because they saw something new and shiny. They have the talent. Granted, there isn't much of it but WWE simply doesn't give much of a fuck anymore to do what they should be doing with that talent because they truly believe that their shit doesn't stink. In reality, they smell like the 125th Street train station.


----------



## Falkono

Punk with them ratings! 

Seriously though giving Hornswoggle the belt would probably draw more fans....


----------



## funnyfaces1

A shame that such a great episode got such a low rating. Almost every segment was fantastic.


----------



## Choke2Death

funnyfaces1 said:


> A shame that such a great episode got such a low rating. Almost every segment was fantastic.


There's no shame in a show with Punk in the closing segment getting a low rating. It's well deserved!


----------



## Awesome22

funnyfaces1 said:


> A shame that such a great episode got such a low rating. Almost every segment was fantastic.


:lmao Pleeeaaaaseee...


----------



## JigsawKrueger

WWE won't change a thing. Eventually they'll have a 40 year old babyface wearing urban clothing, still smiling and acting like an idiot. Ratings will average less than 3 million viewers etc.


----------



## MikeChase27

Ryback with them ratings :vince


----------



## SPCDRI

This is now the 16th straight week in a row where hour 3 had fewer viewers than hour 2.


----------



## NearFall

Same shit, different week.



Choke2Death said:


> There's no shame in a show with Punk in the closing segment getting a low rating. It's well deserved!


:damn


----------



## TheRainKing

Great rating. :lmao

I almost wish The Rock wasn't coming back now. I wanna see those ratings continue to drop.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

LOLWWE


----------



## DA

People not tuning in because there are no captivating storylines. Time to bring back the evil heel owner shtick :vince where he fucks over everybody and somebody stands up to him :austin

Only one man for the job :hhh


----------



## The XL

MikeChase27 said:


> Ryback with them ratings :vince


It ain't Ryback. I mark for Ryback, and I can't watch this shit anymore. 3 hours of filler, commercials, ads, reruns, etc, shit storylines, Cena is stale as fuck, Big Show is fucking World Champ in 2012, hell, I'm a Sheamus mark but his face run is stale and boring. 

Another problem is Punk. Great talent, but he's not a top 3 guy in a major company. He simply doesn't have "it." He also cuts the same fucking boring promo every week.

WWE is in trouble


----------



## MikeChase27

The XL said:


> It ain't Ryback. I mark for Ryback, and I can't watch this shit anymore. 3 hours of filler, commercials, ads, reruns, etc, shit storylines, Cena is stale as fuck, Big Show is fucking World Champ in 2012, hell, I'm a Sheamus mark but his face run is stale and boring.
> 
> Another problem is Punk. Great talent, but he's not a top 3 guy in a major company. He simply doesn't have "it." He also cuts the same fucking boring promo every week.
> 
> WWE is in trouble


Sheamus and AJ have it?


----------



## The XL

MikeChase27 said:


> Sheamus and AJ have it?


AJ gets a lot of screen time, but I wouldn't consider her a face of the company.

And yes, Sheamus has it more than Punk does. Neither is suited for being a top 3 guy in the company, though, both are miscast in those roles.


----------



## chessarmy

wow a 2.5? Are they bringing back 2 hours yet or what? This is bad...


----------



## WTFWWE

This time last year RAW was getting 2.8-3.2's and that was a worrying sign back then :lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao


Save_Us.Rocky :rock4


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

D.M.N. said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...f-beverly-hills-american-pickers-more/160188/
> 
> Hour 1 - 3.56m
> Hour 2 - 3.36m
> Hour 3 - 3.37m
> 
> *WARNING: PANIC BUTTON HAS BEEN ACTIVATED. FIVE. FOUR. THREE. TWO. ONE....*
> 
> Awful numbers. Awful.


OK. You cannot blame the third hour anymore! I'm fed up of seeing the same shit every motherfuckin' week; "THE THIRD HOUR IS THE PROBLEM!!!11"

There you have it, people. ALL-THREE-HOURS drew horrendous numbers. 

You can't blame one guy either. The entire roster is fucking terrible.


----------



## Theproof

:lmao

WWE is so shitty nowadays. The declining ratings prove it. Count me as one of the millions who don't watch this garbage anymore. I can't remember the last time I've seen a full episode of any WWE related program. I saw this coming back in 2006. The quality of the WWE has just been getting worse and worse every year and I knew eventually people would start realizing that it's not worth investing the time in. It's only gotten worse now that they expect us to suffer through three hours of this garbage.

You guys should be dancing in the streets that they got a low rating like this. It's about the only thing that could possibly get them to understand that what they are currently doing isn't working. I hope next weeks show is even lower.



WTFWWE said:


> This time last year RAW was getting 2.8-3.2's and that was a worrying sign back then :lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao
> 
> 
> Save_Us.Rocky :rock4


Yep, that's how it happens. Soon this 2.5 here will be considered an amazing rating.


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

It still needs to go back to two hours but it needs to go back to two hours with better writing.


----------



## Amber B

4everEyebrowRaisin said:


> OK. You cannot blame the third hour anymore! I'm fed up of seeing the same shit every motherfuckin' week; "THE THIRD HOUR IS THE PROBLEM!!!11"
> 
> There you have it, people. ALL-THREE-HOURS drew horrendous numbers.
> 
> You can't blame one guy either. The entire roster is fucking terrible.


Way to throw the talent under the bus when they aren't the problem.
I fucking can't with threads like this. :lmao


----------



## TheRainKing

chessarmy said:


> wow a 2.5? Are they bringing back 2 hours yet or what? This is bad...


Going back to 2 hours isn't gong to save them. The WWE was always going in this direction as soon as they lost all the big names that can actually draw.


----------



## Dec_619

Walk-In said:


> It's a combination of all the factors that is hurting RAW:
> - Monday Night Football
> - MMA
> - Wrestling is no longer "cool" or popular.
> - The booking/writing is poor & lacks continuity.
> - No one has any heat.
> - There aren't any stars.
> - The titles don't mean anything.
> - The wins/losses don't mean anything.
> - The show is too long.
> - People don't want their intelligence insulted.
> - There aren't any fresh match-ups & WWE runs everything into the ground.
> - There's no reason to watch each week. Nothing ever changes. There are no consequences or cliff hangers.
> - There is no emotional investment, either positively or negatively, for anyone on the entire roster.\
> - Too many ads, replays, recaps & media whoring.


THIS


----------



## Kabraxal

It isn't the roster people... really, this roster has a lot of talent. I'd say equal with any other era in the WWE. The problem is they are all booked to be generic cookie cutter personalities that don't stand out, don't have stories, don't have feuds, and that fans just can't get behind. Add that with horrendous short term chaotic booking and voila... you have this era. Hell, put any of the AE stars so many here love in this exact product and it's still shit!


----------



## jonoaries

Well....that happened


----------



## Oakue

Rock should come back with Jericho's Save Us gimmick. 

Because for the love of god the G.O.A.T. REALLY IS going to save it.


----------



## Lord Stark




----------



## WashingtonD

Batista/Randy Orton/Cena/Triple as champions 3 years ago was doing 4.0's regularly. CM Punk as champ = 2.5.-2.7 ..

Compare Punk to those 4 aforementioned guys and you can see why.

Push Orton, Sheamus, Del Rio and Barrett along with Cena as the top guys in the company and the ratings will instantly go up. People want to see men fight, not boys (Punk).

Also, I guess nobody gives a fuck about The Shield except the online marks. Make a brand split and put Ziggler, Bryan, Punk, Ambrose and co. on Smackdown, and the wrestlers the casuals want to see on Raw. That way, Raw will get both the casuals and the internet marks, as they will watch regardless.

Unlike all you geeks, I have real life friends, 8 of whom casually watch wrestling. All of whom were watching from Royal Rumble up to Extreme Rules, while legitimately none of them are watching right now as they all phased out through the year. Reason: all of them are tired of CM Punk. That's enough first-hand evidence for me to know that it's Punk who is killing the show. I think even Big Johnny Laurinaitis was a bigger draw than Punk.


----------



## MethHardy

Ryback and Punk fail. Punk is boring as champ. Not his fault really his storylines suck and Ryback is just terrible. If he was over people would tune in to see him beat up Punk but hes not.

I say send both to SD and let them fail there and move Orton/Barrett to Raw in return.


----------



## Striketeam

Raw is in dire straights right now, almost everything about the show is boring or just plain bad. I hope the ratings keep getting lower and lower, this product is a disgrace.


----------



## holt_hogan

The numbers should jump when Rock comes back in around 6 weeks, then it's the road to WM, the post WM bump and by that time the TV pilots and Football season will be over.

If they're still pulling in mid-high 2's when Rock is advertised and they're closer to WM then they have problems.


----------



## jonoaries

Wow so we gonna act like Attitude Era rating monster Vince McMahon wasn't on that show last night? :vince
Hmmmmmm


----------



## Oakue

I think it's time to face a terrible reality.

Only the IWC cares about these different wrestlers and them getting stories and titles.

The casuals do not. They only care about John Cena. That's it. And quite frankly AJ Lee and Ryback are starting to climb their way up to being cared about by the casuals. But to be honest, I feel like Ryback has all ready lost a step with the casuals from where he was pre Hell in a cell. AJ is on her way to female version of Cena status with the casuals pretty soon. But other than that? Nothing.

Why do you think the crowd is so dead EVERY week? That's it. They don't give two shits about anyone not named John Cena.

We can analyze it all we want. 

I really think it's as simple as that.

And that is a serious problem for WWE, and completely their fault by the way.


----------



## pushJTG

Walk-In said:


> It's a combination of all the factors that is hurting RAW:
> - Monday Night Football
> - MMA
> - Wrestling is no longer "cool" or popular.
> - The booking/writing is poor & lacks continuity.
> - No one has any heat.
> - There aren't any stars.
> - The titles don't mean anything.
> - The wins/losses don't mean anything.
> - The show is too long.
> - People don't want their intelligence insulted.
> - There aren't any fresh match-ups & WWE runs everything into the ground.
> - There's no reason to watch each week. Nothing ever changes. There are no consequences or cliff hangers.
> - There is no emotional investment, either positively or negatively, for anyone on the entire roster.\
> - Too many ads, replays, recaps & media whoring.


wwe is turning into late wcw


----------



## Oakue

It really is. It's scary actually how much it is.


----------



## pushJTG

moonmop said:


> It really is. It's scary actually how much it is.


word ... if anyone could find the number i would love to know how many ex wcw employees are currently working in the wwe front office .... 


dusty 
johnny ace


----------



## King_Kool-Aid™

Losing all those female viewers must mean WWE's attempt at catering to them with this godawful AJ storyline failed. 

Good.


----------



## Annihilus

I hadnt been following the ratings lately so this is pretty stunning. TNA is hovering around 1.0 rating, if TNA improves at all and WWE keeps sliding, they could become a lot closer than we thought was ever possible. 

Theres no question that the 3 hour raws are hurting ratings, case in point: I post on a IWC forum and probably care about wrestling a lot more than the average casual fan, and yet *I* dont even hardly watch RAW anymore! that says it all, I suffered from "wrestling fatigue" from trying to watch 5+ hours a week, so not only did I stop watching smackdown, I dont even sit through RAW anymore. I only watch the opening and closing 20 minutes of Raw and skip the rest.

3 hours aside, there just isnt much reason to give a shit about the product right now. Wrestling isn't cool anymore, i'd be embarassed to even admit I watch it to anyone considering how much it caters to children now. Like it or not, the PG rating and kid-friendly programming is killing the product, not just because its PG but because its limiting WWE to boring, repetitive booking. 

They can't do any high spots anymore, can't do any potentially dangerous moves, can't hardly have any edgy programming, can't have blood, can't have scantily clad women, there just isnt anything to get excited about, hence ratings are falling. Even hardcore fans like us are not watching loyally anymore, so the casual fan sure as fuck isn't going to be.


----------



## LovelyElle890

You can blame the storylines and booking all you want, but was Raw 1000 really booked well? No. It was all over the place, 3 hours, and it relied heavily on nostalgia, but despite this fact it delivered ratings even without Stone Cold being on the show. 

The reason why people do not watch wrestling anymore is because all of the "larger than life" characters are gone. People got attached to the extravagant looks, iconic voices, and the way they carried themselves as superstars. Now these fools think that "breaking kayfabe" is what is going to get them over. No one wants to hear about you fighting "Dewayne" they want to hear about you fighting "The Rock". These wrestlers today have no style and do not understand the concept of showmanship. No one cares about supposed "superstars" that look like people you would run into on the street. This is not about height either. The big guys dress like crap, look like crap, and carry themselves as crap too.

They had an opportunity to turn this company around at Raw 1000 by starting an Attitude Era vs PG Era storyline. Especially, since you were going to have a game promoting the exact same idea coming out later in the year fpalm. They should've had Triple H, The Rock, Stone Cold (later since he was having the surgery), The Undertaker, Chris Jericho, and Shawn Michaels form a Supreme Mega Heel stable bashing the PG Era "superstars" for killing ratings, destroying the wrestling industry, and bringing shame to their names by making comparisons between the two eras. You know, the same things that the majority of fans have been saying for the longest time. These stars know how to get "booed" and are the only people capable of putting this new era over since it is incapable of doing it on its own. They don't even need to wrestle often. They can just denounce the top 5 stars: Randy Orton, Cm Punk, Sheamus, John Cena, and Brock Lesnar(for being a baby and leaving the business), and all those who support those 5. Then they could sponsor guys from this era that they see potential in and take them under their wings to get rid of those they denounced. The other Attitude Era stars could be torn on who to support and ultimately be forced into taking sides. Team Attitude Era and Team PG Era shirts, anyone? 

Fans would get used to the idea of seeing the stars interact with each other regularly via promos and matches. Eventually, people will be able to take these new wrestlers seriously and you wouldn't have alienated the older fans that tuned in to see the nostalgia because those older guys would be there in some form or fashion. You would have to tune in every week because you wouldn't know which of the Attitude Era guys would be showing up each week, who they were going to try to attack, and what method would they use to accomplish it. Would Vince side with his stars of the past or bank on these new guys to take the business to greater heights?

The level of the promo work would go up and practicing with these older stars on a regular basis could give these young guys the experience that is desperately needed. You would have clearly defined heels who aren't pushovers like these "Non-Charismatic Team Rocket Knockoffs" blasting off every week and certain wrestlers who thrive on venting their frustrations at people, would excel. There are so many directions you could go with this and the match possibilities would be interesting. The storyline would end at either WM29 or WM30, where the old stars would end up giving the new guys "their due" or have Triple H turn into his corporate mega heel role and take it from there.:hhh

Or, you do what these clowns did and end up with ratings below 3.0.unk2


----------



## The-Rock-Says

unk3 "They weren't really supposed to turn off"


----------



## Roncaglione

moonmop said:


> Only the IWC cares about these different wrestlers and them getting stories and titles.


Did you conduct a poll or are you just generalising?


----------



## NearFall

Can't wait for Rocky to return and show Punk how to draw. Gonna be like Bob Ross trying to teach a toddler who can only finger paint.unk


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Punk will do his magic trick when he Rock is back. He'll tell everyone to turn off again.


----------



## NearFall

The-Rock-Says said:


> Punk will do his magic trick when he Rock is back. He'll tell everyone to turn off again.


Rock should try it. "Go ahead jabronis try and tune out, try and forget about the great one" *takes off sunglasses* *troll smile*:rock4


----------



## Chismo

moonmop said:


> I think it's time to face a terrible reality.
> 
> Only the IWC cares about these different wrestlers and them getting stories and titles.
> 
> The casuals do not. They only care about John Cena. That's it. And quite frankly AJ Lee and Ryback are starting to climb their way up to being cared about by the casuals. But to be honest, I feel like Ryback has all ready lost a step with the casuals from where he was pre Hell in a cell. AJ is on her way to female version of Cena status with the casuals pretty soon. But other than that? Nothing.
> 
> Why do you think the crowd is so dead EVERY week? That's it. They don't give two shits about anyone not named John Cena.
> 
> We can analyze it all we want.
> 
> I really think it's as simple as that.
> 
> And that is a serious problem for WWE, and completely their fault by the way.


Well, that's because WWE is stupid, and since 2005, they never bothered to build someone as Cena's arch nemesis, his eternal rival. Austin had The Rock and HHH, Hogan had Andre and Warrior, and so on... But Cena just goes over randomers all the fucking time. Umaga, Lashley, Batista, Orton, even Lesnar. They're all just randomers compared to Cena. Well, they're trying something (God knows what) with Punk, but he's let's face it - it's fucking CM Punk, people don't care about him.

To sum it up, Cena lacking a generation rival = bad things longterm.


----------



## Cookie Monster

So what happens when The Rock comes back and the ratings stay the same?


----------



## Chismo

It won't stay the same, though. Sure, it won't go over 3.1-3.3, but it will cruise comfortably around 2.9, I reckon.


----------



## Evil Peter

NearFall said:


> Can't wait for Rocky to return and show Punk how to draw. Gonna be like Bob Ross trying to teach a toddler who can only finger paint.unk


So the lesson according to you is "be a big star from before"? It doesn't matter what The Rock does when he comes back. He could come in and just do a tired routine where he just burps his catchphrases but he still draws in people just because of his name that's already built up.

That doesn't really solve anything, just as it won't help Rock much more than short term if Johnny Depp, or some other real actor, does a movie with him.


----------



## hardysno1fan

I HATE it when people say *'this is the problem'* as if there is just 1. There are multiple problems ATM. The booking is crap. The 3hrs are crap. The wrestling is good but the characters themselves are crap. 

Back in the AE there were characters that we loved to love and loved to hate. Austin, Rock and HHH were all universally loved. Cena is hated by half the fan base. Punk clearly isn't a draw for the average/ young youth. That is unfortunate but it's true. However, the blame does not lye on 1 person. The whole lockeroom needs to take a long hard look at themselves. Many of them have been touted as the *'future'* but the future is NOW and they are still not drawing and stuck in the mid cards DESPITE MULTIPLE OPPORTUNITIES.

Back in the AE you were lucky to get an opportunity the competition was so intense. To see these young *'future'*stars be handed opportunities on a platter for not being good enough, makes me feel sick. 

THE PROBLEM ISN'T 1 PERSON. The problem is EVERYONE AND EVERYTHING.


----------



## Marv95

Walk-In said:


> It's a combination of all the factors that is hurting RAW:
> *- Monday Night Football
> - MMA*
> - Wrestling is no longer "cool" or popular.
> - The booking/writing is poor & lacks continuity.
> - No one has any heat.
> - There aren't any stars.
> - The titles don't mean anything.
> - The wins/losses don't mean anything.
> - The show is too long.
> - People don't want their intelligence insulted.
> - There aren't any fresh match-ups & WWE runs everything into the ground.
> - There's no reason to watch each week. Nothing ever changes. There are no consequences or cliff hangers.
> - There is no emotional investment, either positively or negatively, for anyone on the entire roster.\
> - Too many ads, replays, recaps & media whoring.


The first 2 in bold existed 6 years ago and ratings were a point higher, sometimes even more. They aren't an excuse. The rest I could agree with. You forgot one: the sterile presentation/format of the show.


----------



## roadkill_

Lord Stark said:


>


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

Evil Peter said:


> So the lesson according to you is "be a big star from before"? It doesn't matter what The Rock does when he comes back. He could come in and just do a tired routine where he just burps his catchphrases but he still draws in people just because of his name that's already built up.
> 
> That doesn't really solve anything, just as it won't help Rock much more than short term if Johnny Depp, or some other real actor, does a movie with him.


lol at you responding to that seriously.


----------



## hardysno1fan

Punk: 'this belt will look great on my back'


----------



## Starbuck

That Punk ratings gif always gets me lol. Oh Vince, make it STAHP.


----------



## Evil Peter

WrestlingforEverII said:


> lol at you responding to that seriously.


So you're not aware of how that's the way to get the most fun out of trolls?


----------



## blur

Starbuck said:


> That Punk ratings gif always gets me lol. Oh Vince, make it STAHP.


----------



## Starbuck

blur said:


>


:lmao That one too, along with the one where he's literally shovelling into a grave, haha. 

DAT BURYING KING 

:hhh

Btw, what the fuck is with your sig and avy? Insensitive much?


----------



## blur

Starbuck said:


> :lmao That one too, along with the one where he's literally shovelling into a grave, haha.
> 
> DAT BURYING KING
> 
> :hhh
> 
> Btw, what the fuck is with your sig and avy? Insensitive much?



It was interesting enough for people to negative rep me for having "Vanilla Midgets" sig and avy, I wanted to test out Hitler, and it goes a "_rant_" dedicated to it... soo...


----------



## Apex Rattlesnake

Punk driving away dem fans :lmao


----------



## Starbuck

blur said:


> It was interesting enough for people to negative rep me for having "Vanilla Midgets" sig and avy, I wanted to test out Hitler, and it goes a "_rant_" dedicated to it... soo...


So you can remove it now? It's rather offensive tbh. But I'm pretty certain that somebody above me on the food chain has seen it by now and so far they haven't seemed to have done anything about it. I'd prefer if you removed it though but maybe that's just me.


----------



## blur

Starbuck said:


> So you can remove it now? It's rather offensive tbh. But I'm pretty certain that somebody above me on the food chain has seen it by now and so far they haven't seemed to have done anything about it. I'd prefer if you removed it though but maybe that's just me.



Yeah..Amber B or whatever his username is PMed me to remove it. I'll remove it by tomorrow.


----------



## roadkill_

Starbuck said:


> So you can remove it now? It's rather offensive tbh. But I'm pretty certain that somebody above me on the food chain has seen it by now and so far they haven't seemed to have done anything about it. I'd prefer if you removed it though but maybe that's just me.


What if I put a pic of Stalin in mine?


----------



## Starbuck

blur said:


> Yeah..Amber B or whatever his username is PMed me to remove it. I'll remove it by tomorrow.


Thank you. 



roadkill_ said:


> What if I put a pic of Stalin in mine?


Do what you want, just be prepared to face the shovel if you do :hhh


----------



## WrestlingforEverII

Evil Peter said:


> So you're not aware of how that's the way to get the most fun out of trolls?


He wasnt trolling though but ok.


----------



## Falkono

Walk-In said:


> It's a combination of all the factors that is hurting RAW:
> - Monday Night Football
> - MMA
> - Wrestling is no longer "cool" or popular.
> - The booking/writing is poor & lacks continuity.
> - No one has any heat.
> - There aren't any stars.
> - The titles don't mean anything.
> - The wins/losses don't mean anything.
> - The show is too long.
> - People don't want their intelligence insulted.
> - There aren't any fresh match-ups & WWE runs everything into the ground.
> - There's no reason to watch each week. Nothing ever changes. There are no consequences or cliff hangers.
> - There is no emotional investment, either positively or negatively, for anyone on the entire roster.\
> - Too many ads, replays, recaps & media whoring.


Football and MMA have been around for years. That excuse is possibly the worst of them all.
For comparison sakes this is the ratings for the same show through the years
2012 - 2.5 rating
2011 - 3.2 rating
2010 - 3.1 rating
2009 - 3.2 rating
2008 - 3.4 rating
2007 - 3.2 rating
2006 - 3.5 rating
2005 - 3.9 rating
2004 - 3.9 rating
2003 - 3.8 rating
2002 - 3.3 rating

As you can see from the past 10 years of RAW on that date they have been all very similar with last year actually an increase on the year before. Football and MMA have nothing to do with that drop.

- Wrestling isn't cool or popular because it has been shit for a long long time. It has gone in the direction of being a young kids show. Naturally that means the older fans no longer enjoy it due to the content not appealing to them.

- The titles don't mean much however Punk for example has had the 6th longest reign in history. The longest since 1984. Does that mean he is a reason the title is not as meaningful? Seeing as since he has been champ the ratings have dropped from 3.2 to 2.5. A drop of 22% on the previous year.

- No-one has heat? I would say whenever Vickie comes out she get's it pretty bad. Punk got it too when he did the cheap heat Heart attack angle.

Everything else you said is right.

The problem is the direction they went in was wrong. Simple things have set them on this course. For example ppv's. These used to be the place where feuds would finally be settled. They would be the pay off for the months build up. We would want to pay to see the two wrestlers finally collide.
This has now changed. You have to go back to July of this year to see the last ppv that ended clean. The last ppv we had three nobodies (as in nobody knows who they are so thus why care?) interfere. The one before that has a ref interfere. The one before that they pinned each other for a draw. The one before that saw Punk sneak in the ring after Show was hit by Cena and steal the victory. And so on. That is basically 5 months of lame endings. WWE needs to return to using the ppvs as a way to end the feuds not create quick fix story lines.

The ads/replays/social media is also a huge problem and if anything is the main reason why there appears to be no fluency. The stop start feel hurts interest. When you have an ad every 5-10 minutes it becomes frustrating and encourages people to flick the channel. As a business analyst I find that to be a shocking decision by the company because if you give people the opportunity to flick channel and see what else is on then there is a high chance many will actually find something and stay there. So the amount of ads actually encourages people to look elsewhere. 

In contrast look at a company like Sky. When sports are in action they will stick with it. Sky is one of the biggest companies on the planet. If you have fewer breaks then it means you can charge more for when you do have a break. A half time ad say in football will cost a lot. 

All in all the company is just being run wrong from top to bottom. The wrestlers are average in comparison to guys over the past 10 years, the title holders don't have star power. Too many guys are shoved down your throat and then taken away for little or no reasoning. The gimmicks/characters are all bland and boring. People on here claim Punk to be good on the mic when in reality he really isn't WHEN you compare him to people gone by. 
The future will always be compared to the past as the past is what brings you to the future. And in wrestling that means we went through a really high quality 10-20 years and then the last 5 were really shit. Then people saying you should ignore that previous 20 and judge it on its own merits. Which you can't do and shouldn't do. 

WWE need to go back to what they were doing right and doing what worked. As I said it is the simple things. Have matches build up properly, have them finish after a ppv. Create more interesting matches and outcomes. If you have a Hell in the cell match do something with the structure to remind people why it is called Hell in a cell. 

But without a doubt the main change HAS to be the re-merging of Smackdown and RAW and having one main title. The roster is too small to have 2 main titles now.


----------



## TheF1BOB

Lord Stark said:


>





blur said:


>


:lmao (Y)


----------



## Evil Peter

WrestlingforEverII said:


> He wasnt trolling though but ok.


Well, if nothing else I yet again managed to create the funny scenario where Rock316AE gets upset but doesn't man up to actually respond with a real post. Like I would care what my reputation is. :lmao


----------



## NearFall

Lord Stark said:


>





blur said:


>










......


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

NearFall said:


> ......


----------



## The-Rock-Says

DEM MUSCLES


----------



## SerapisLiber

WashingtonD said:


> I have real life friends, *8* of whom casually watch wrestling. ... That's enough first-hand evidence for me


8 people out of 3 to 4 million is enough evidence?


----------



## NearFall

Evil Peter said:


> So the lesson according to you is "be a big star from before"? It doesn't matter what The Rock does when he comes back. He could come in and just do a tired routine where he just burps his catchphrases but he still draws in people just because of his name that's already built up.
> 
> That doesn't really solve anything, just as it won't help Rock much more than short term if Johnny Depp, or some other real actor, does a movie with him.


I was kidding. But since you responded seriously, I'll give my opinion on the matter. Not at all should the show have to rely on older stars such as the Rock to keep them afloat in ratings. Do they have a place on the show for certain periods? Definitely, its always nice to see people back but when your RELYING on that star to keep your entire show afloat ,due to how bad things currently are(and this is based on ALOT of factors, not just the talent/roster), then that is a major issue. RAW needs to continue to plummet before WWE and Vince realise that not even the casuals care. Even with Cena/Punk and Punk/RyBack, their most faithed pairings, the ratings are going the shitter. The main-event just wont carry the show anymore, and since they only focus on the main-event semi-decently, they really are in trouble.



jblvdx said:


>


----------



## CC91




----------



## Coffey

Marv95 said:


> The first 2 in bold existed 6 years ago and ratings were a point higher, sometimes even more.


It's a combination of excuses. They are still an excuse. They do still factor into the equation. They always will. That's just how things are. How much they factor in can be argued but the fact that they do factor in can not.

Besides MMA being huge six years ago is a big reason why modern wrestling is in the shape it is in. Think of all the potential wrestlers that went to MMA schools instead of wrestling schools. Six years later, those athletes, some with ability, are not honing their craft in a squared circle but sparring instead. It definitely factors in, we just can't see it visually.


----------



## Das Wunderberlyn

2.5.. wtf haha..

that's Diesel-like ratings.


----------



## Evil Peter

NearFall said:


> I was kidding. But since you responded seriously, I'll give my opinion on the matter. Not at all should the show have to rely on older stars such as the Rock to keep them afloat in ratings. Do they have a place on the show for certain periods? Definitely, its always nice to see people back but when your RELYING on that star to keep your entire show afloat ,due to how bad things currently are(and this is based on ALOT of factors, not just the talent/roster), then that is a major issue. RAW needs to continue to plummet before WWE and Vince realise that not even the casuals care. Even with Cena/Punk and Punk/RyBack, their most faithed pairings, the ratings are going the shitter. The main-event just wont carry the show anymore, and since they only focus on the main-event semi-decently, they really are in trouble.


I didn't mean that there's anything negative about The Rock coming back, quite the contrary. I just meant that I don't think the rest learn too much from him because it doesn't matter what he does, he's already over and no one can really copy what he does either.

I agree with you on that they are in trouble and, as you allude to, the writing is the big problem. It's very thin in quality and it gets worse when that needs to be stretched over three hours. I do think they have enough talent to make a good show but while the wrestlers need to step up it's more important that they get good things to work with.


----------



## joeisgonnakillyou

Ryback bringing dem ratings


----------



## Coffey

Let's talk about the writing. Yes, we all know it is not stellar, but _why_ is it that way? There are a lot of theories: 

- The writers aren't wrestling fans so they don't know how to write wrestling.
- The writers are not writing to appease an audience, they are writing to appease Vince McMahon.
- No matter what the writers submit, it is rewritten by other people anyway, including Vince McMahon.
- People like Stephanie McMahon & Michael Hayes having a say in the creative process is a conflict of interest as they play favorites & politic as much as the wrestlers do.

So, really, if one or any combination of those are actually true, there is no real solution. It would require Vince McMahon to step away from WWE completely, Stephanie McMahon to lose her creative job & then either the writers could write with free reign or would be replaced with wrestling fans, which again just leads to politics and playing favorites.

With constant re-writes, last minute changes, injuries, suspensions, ratings panic, Vince McMahon mood swings, etc. it doesn't matter who is writing what it is never going to have any continuity or make any sense. It is a creative frog in a blender. So now the show is just a way to kill time, from a creative standpoint. It does not really matter what is put on air as long as they get through each show. That is why things happen for no reason. It is why feuds never die. It is why no one is over, there is no heat, titles don't mean anything, title reigns don't mean anything, champions don't matter, shows don't matter, etc.

Plus, just from a creative standpoint, having to write, what, 7 1/2 hours of TV/Internet shows a week (on non-PPV weeks) & over 10 hours worth of material (on a week with PPV) EVERY WEEK would burn anyone out. That's over thirty hours a month.


----------



## LovelyElle890

Maybe they should have a special Attitude Era talk session for Raw? Three hours of the stars from that era roundtable talking, showing clips, and taking fan questions. Then compare that rating to the current product's rating and you can then see how astronomical/minute the gap between the old stars and new stars truly is. If people would rather watch the old stars just talk than watch the new stars wrestle, then you have a very serious problem that isn't going away. 

Watch it do a 5.0+ rating for all three hours.:rock4:austin:vince2


----------



## Vyed

Was just posted in wrestlezone board, RAW Rating/Viewership since Summerslam -












Its true that you can't blame punk for three hours of poorly booked RAW, however he is the champion of the brand and these numbers evidently establish the fact, Punk just isn't the star he is required to be in that position. People seem to compare Punk with Kevin Nash due to low ratings but when you think about it, he's more of a Shawn Michaels imo. 

Extremely talented champion but just not someone who can carry the show as its top star.


----------



## Choke2Death

I think Punk is a lot more comparable to Diesel. Both as a talent and draw. I mean, why else would he be all over the top 10 lowest overruns? And yeah, that includes terrible overruns way before 3 hours started. And talent wise, he shouldn't even be put in the same sentence as HBK.

I give Punk credit for one thing. He's made looking forward towards the Raw ratings every week over the show itself more interesting. Whenever it's Tuesday (since Raw is on late at night over here), I think "another week, more ratings" rather than think about the show itself. You know Raw sucks when the ratings are more of a draw than the shows themselves, lol.


----------



## Starbuck

DAT TRIPLE H RETIREMENT HOOK

DEM TEARS

DEM YOU TAPPED OUT CHANTS

DEM NUMBERS

DAT DRAWING POWER

DAT VIEWERSHIP OVER 5 MILLION

DAT GAME

:hhh



DAT 2.0 ERA

DAT YELLOW SHIRT

DAT KNEE

DEM DIESEL NUMBERS

DAT PAUL HEYMENS

DAT VIEWERSHIP AT 3.5 MILLION

DAT CM PUNK

unk3


----------



## The Lady Killer

Welp, I'm convinced.


----------



## Nimbus

It wouldbe hilarious if the ratings go UP now what punk is injured and off TV, LOL.


----------



## roadkill_

The rating won't change much with Punk injured. So Punk marks will use that to say it isn't him. Fact is, the people who watch don't know he'll be missing.


----------



## THANOS

Choke2Death said:


> I think Punk is a lot more comparable to Diesel. Both as a talent and draw. I mean, why else would he be all over the top 10 lowest overruns? And yeah, that includes terrible overruns way before 3 hours started. And talent wise, he shouldn't even be put in the same sentence as HBK.
> 
> I give Punk credit for one thing. He's made looking forward towards the Raw ratings every week over the show itself more interesting. Whenever it's Tuesday (since Raw is on late at night over here), I think "another week, more ratings" rather than think about the show itself. You know Raw sucks when the ratings are more of a draw than the shows themselves, lol.


Ok that's just blind hate and you know it. To compare Punk to Diesel in talent is just atrocious posting at its finest. You're really going to tell me that Diesel was ever in his entire career as good as Punk in the ring and on the mic? If you actually believe it then ur just being ridiculous fpalm.

As far as drawing as a whole, yes you are correct, without any strong supporting draws to help him Punk can't hold the show to a high rating overall with his two segments a night. What a huge anti-draw !

That other poster was bang on when he compared him to HBK. A similar type of talent for sure.


----------



## Starbuck

Diesel Man Punk


----------



## Coffey

I would say I actually even prefer Kevin Nash over C.M. Punk if we're looking at their careers as a whole. The level of success that Nash achieved in WCW will never be approached by Punk. If anything, Nash is vastly underrated on-line as a talent, both in & out of the ring.


----------



## Defei

THANOS said:


> Ok that's just blind hate and you know it. To compare Punk to Diesel in talent is just atrocious posting at its finest. You're really going to tell me that Diesel was ever in his entire career as good as Punk in the ring and on the mic? If you actually believe it then ur just being ridiculous fpalm.
> 
> As far as drawing as a whole, yes you are correct, without any strong supporting draws to help him Punk can't hold the show to a high rating overall with his two segments a night. What a huge anti-draw !
> 
> That other poster was bang on when he compared him to HBK. A similar type of talent for sure.


Nash was far more charismatic in his glory days than Punk ever was.


----------



## THANOS

Defei said:


> Nash was far more charismatic in his glory days than Punk ever was.


No he wasn't. I can show you ROH promos of Punk better than Nash's best stuff, and that's before he even stepped foot in the wwe.


----------



## THANOS

Walk-In said:


> I would say I actually even prefer Kevin Nash over C.M. Punk if we're looking at their careers as a whole. The level of success that Nash achieved in WCW will never be approached by Punk. If anything, Nash is vastly underrated on-line as a talent, both in & out of the ring.


Underrated yes. Nash was very good at what he did, but what he did was very restricted. Sometimes when I look back on his career, especially after watching the nwo dvd, it's easy to see that the storylines around his character constantly were bigger than his talent ever was. Having said that he has definitely had a much better career than Punk for sure, but judging solely on talent level, he's below Punk in every category except look and presence.


----------



## Starbuck

THANOS said:


> No he wasn't. I can show you ROH promos of Punk better than Nash's best stuff, and that's before he even stepped foot in the wwe.


:lmao

Promos =/= charisma. Jesus.


----------



## Coffey

THANOS said:


> No he wasn't. I can show you ROH promos of Punk better than Nash's best stuff, and that's before he even stepped foot in the wwe.


No you can't because they don't exist. I watched Punk's entire ROH run too, back with his shitty blonde hair & basketball shorts doing Pedigrees off the top rope. He was entertaining & had his moments but to act like anything he did was better than Nash's best stuff is being ridiculous. I don't know if you're a Punk lover, a Nash hater, or both but you're definitely underselling Nash. Hell, other than Punk's shoot promo & maybe yelling at a stripper & calling her a whore, I don't know what even comes into the conversation with Nash's best stuff. Actually, his constant Rumble promos were good but just Paparazzi Productions alone in TNA are better than a lot of the stuff that Punk has done.


----------



## THANOS

Starbuck said:


> :lmao
> 
> Promos =/= charisma. Jesus.


Ok how about this. I can show "segments" and matches where Punk shows way more charisma then Nash. Off the top of my head, any from his feud with Raven or Jimmy Rave, and his summer of punk will show that. In WWE his feud with Hardy, royal rumble 2010 appearance, SES, etc.


----------



## THANOS

Walk-In said:


> No you can't because they don't exist. I watched Punk's entire ROH run too, back with his shitty blonde hair & basketball shorts doing Pedigrees off the top rope. He was entertaining & had his moments but to act like anything he did was better than Nash's best stuff is being ridiculous. I don't know if you're a Punk lover, a Nash hater, or both but you're definitely underselling Nash. Hell, other than Punk's shoot promo & maybe yelling at a stripper & calling her a whore, I don't know what even comes into the conversation with Nash's best stuff. Actually, his constant Rumble promos were good but just Paparazzi Productions alone in TNA are better than a lot of the stuff that Punk has done.


I listed above various segments I would rate higher than Nash's work and I would like to add Punk's IWA-MS feud with Raven as well where he was cutting promos about airports and on entire audiences in the halls in england.

I loved Nash's segments in Paparazzi Productions and those were definitely entertaining, probably more than anything else he did in his entire as far as pure enjoyment goes, but Punk's best will always overtake Nash's best for me. Call it personal bias if you'd like but I just found it much more entertaining. But again we're talking about overall talent, and I don't think anyone can say Nash had more natural talent than Punk.


----------



## Starbuck

THANOS said:


> Ok how about this. I can show "segments" and matches where Punk shows way more charisma then Nash. Off the top of my head, any from his feud with Raven or Jimmy Rave, and his summer of punk will show that. In WWE his feud with Hardy, royal rumble 2010 appearance, SES, etc.


You don't 'show' charisma. You either have it or you don't. You're either charismatic or you're not. What you've listed is a bunch of moments you mark out for.


----------



## Choke2Death

THANOS said:


> Ok that's just blind hate and you know it. To compare Punk to Diesel in talent is just atrocious posting at its finest. You're really going to tell me that Diesel was ever in his entire career as good as Punk in the ring and on the mic? If you actually believe it then ur just being ridiculous fpalm.
> 
> As far as drawing as a whole, yes you are correct, without any strong supporting draws to help him Punk can't hold the show to a high rating overall with his two segments a night. What a huge anti-draw !
> 
> That other poster was bang on when he compared him to HBK. A similar type of talent for sure.


No, it's not. Diesel is way better on the mic and don't even bring up their confrontations, because Diesel is just not one to use scripts. As for the in-ring stuff, Punk is sloppy as fuck and without a good opponent, he's about as boring to watch as it gets. But with a good opponent, he is capable of having quality matches, that I give him. Diesel is a tall man with fragile quads, I can't really have the same standards for both of them so they're not comparable. That's like expecting Rey Mysterio and The Great Khali to put on good matches of the same quality regardless of opponents even though they couldn't be any more different.

And since Punk is promoted as the top guy (don't tell me it's Cena, he's stuck in some stupid love angle) who always gets the main event spot, it's up to him to keep the numbers up. But look what's happening, viewership continues to decrease at an alarming rate which is a sign of people not being interested in this boring anti-drawing cunt.

And comparing him to HBK is an insult to the Showstopper. Shawn could carry a broomstick to a good match, is a million times better at cutting (heel) promos and has more charisma in his nails than Punk in his entire body. Shawn had attitude, style and personality. Punk sounds like an emo, yelling as loud as he can, trying to get noticed. And yes, I'm specially thinking about that "intense" "I hate you" promo from ROH.


----------



## THANOS

Starbuck said:


> You don't 'show' charisma. You either have it or you don't. You're either charismatic or you're not. What you've listed is a bunch of moments you mark out for.


Of course you can "show" charisma. Have you read Jericho's 1st book? The guy wasn't naturally charismatic. It was something he worked on for years before he craeted his lion heart gimmick in wcw and took off. He says that you "can" develop charisma and show it in some instances but not in others. Put it this way, does the ABA gimmick allow Undertaker to show more charisma then his deadman gimmick? The same guy be said about many guys like The Rock, and even Hunter Hearst Helmsley.


----------



## Coffey

Choke2Death said:


> No, it's not. Diesel is way better on the mic and don't even bring up their confrontations, because Diesel is just not one to use scripts. As for the in-ring stuff, Punk is sloppy as fuck and without a good opponent, he's about as boring to watch as it gets. But with a good opponent, he is capable of having quality matches, that I give him. Diesel is a tall man with fragile quads, I can't really have the same standards for both of them so they're not comparable. That's like expecting Rey Mysterio and The Great Khali to put on good matches of the same quality regardless of opponents even though they couldn't be any more different.


I think what bothers me most about C.M. Punk is that it is painfully obvious that he is about as far away from an athlete as you can be. Like, everything he does is awkward. Run, jump, etc. He's just an awkward kind of guy. You can tell that he's a book geek that probably didn't play a lot of sports. Meanwhile, although limited by his size, Nash did play ball & was at least an athlete prior to getting into wrestling. 

It's why a lot of the stuff that Punk does, like his top rope elbow, look so funky & awkward. It bothers me because it looks more like he's role-playing being a wrestler instead of _feeling_ like a wrestler. I don't have the suspension of disbelief that I should for his matches.


----------



## THANOS

Choke2Death said:


> No, it's not. Diesel is way better on the mic and don't even bring up their confrontations, because Diesel is just not one to use scripts. As for the in-ring stuff, Punk is sloppy as fuck and without a good opponent, he's about as boring to watch as it gets. But with a good opponent, he is capable of having quality matches, that I give him. Diesel is a tall man with fragile quads, I can't really have the same standards for both of them so they're not comparable. That's like expecting Rey Mysterio and The Great Khali to put on good matches of the same quality regardless of opponents even though they couldn't be any more different.
> 
> And since Punk is promoted as the top guy (don't tell me it's Cena, he's stuck in some stupid love angle) who always gets the main event spot, it's up to him to keep the numbers up. But look what's happening, viewership continues to decrease at an alarming rate which is a sign of people not being interested in this boring anti-drawing cunt.
> 
> And comparing him to HBK is an insult to the Showstopper. Shawn could carry a broomstick to a good match, is a million times better at cutting (heel) promos and has more charisma in his nails than Punk in his entire body. Shawn had attitude, style and personality. Punk sounds like an emo, yelling as loud as he can, trying to get noticed. And yes, I'm specially thinking about that "intense" "I hate you" promo from ROH.


Don't sit here and tell me that you can refute the inring comparison because you don't feel it's fair. You're either good in the ring or you're not. The Big Show is even bigger than Nash and in his prime was twice or more the inring talent than Nash ever was. Saying Shawn is that much better than Punk is another example of blindly disregarding a wrestler you hate's ability. Punk is probably better than HBK ever was on the mic, and isn't too far behind him in charisma either. Hbk has him beat easily in the ring but Punk's a lot more comparable with him then with Kevin Nash. Their skill sets are a lot more alike than that of Nash.

As far as you shitting on the ROH Raven promo and comparing it to an emo screaming to get attention. Well I'm afraid we'll have to just agree to disagree there because that's one of the most passionate and intense story driven promos I've ever seen, so we'll never agree on him as a mic worker if that's your feelings on it.


----------



## Starbuck

THANOS said:


> Of course you can "show" charisma. Have you read Jericho's 1st book? The guy wasn't naturally charismatic. It was something he worked on for years before he craeted his lion heart gimmick in wcw and took off. He says that you "can" develop charisma and show it in some instances but not in others. Put it this way, does the ABA gimmick allow Undertaker to show more charisma then his deadman gimmick? The same guy be said about many guys like The Rock, and even Hunter Hearst Helmsley.


Jericho also thinks he can put people over and make them stars. Just because he said it doesn't mean it's true. You take a guy who has that IT factor and put them into situations where their natural charisma shines through and that's how you create stars and get them over. Charisma isn't something you switch on for certain moments and then switch off for others. You're talking about getting different gimmicks to click with different people at different stages in their careers but the end result is always the same. When they found what worked for them, their natural charisma shone through because they were naturally charismatic people. 

You're also confusing mic work and promos for charisma which isn't true but has unfortunately come to be taken for granted on this forum. Examples of great promos aren't indicative of someone _showing _charisma. Stone Cold could drink a six pack of bud and flip the bird without saying a single word and it would pop an entire arena because Steve Austin is charismatic as fuck and he was established in that character base. I don't know what you're trying to prove with the Taker example either. Taker as the ABA or the Deadman is still charismatic as hell. The only difference is that with the latter comes that special mystique and presence of the Deadman due to the nature of his character, something the ABA couldn't provide because he was presented as a human character just like everybody else.


----------



## DOPA

THANOS said:


> Don't sit here and tell me that you can refute the inring comparison because you don't feel it's fair. You're either good in the ring or you're not. The Big Show is even bigger than Nash and in his prime was twice or more the inring talent than Nash ever was. Saying Shawn is that much better than Punk is another example of blindly disregarding a wrestler you hate's ability. *Punk is probably better than HBK ever was on the mic, and isn't too far behind him in charisma either.* Hbk has him beat easily in the ring but Punk's a lot more comparable with him than was Kevin Nash. There's skill sets are a lot more alike than that of Nash.
> 
> As far as you shitting on the ROH Raven promo and comparing it to an emo screaming to get attention. Well I'm afraid we'll have to just agree to disagree there because that's one of the most passionate and intense story driven promos I've ever seen, so we'll never agree on him as a mic worker if that's your feelings on it.


Eh, I love Punk but HBK is easily more charismatic. HBK is better than Punk in the ring by default simply because very few could ever touch HBK's in ring performance skills. Mic skills I would give to Punk but its not as clear cut as you claim it to be. Punk is definitely more comparable to HBK than Nash though.

Nash definitely has more of a presence, better look and arguably has more star power. But Nash's star power in my mind comes from the people in his career he was surrounded with, especially Hall and Hogan. Nash had more star power and was more of a draw with the NWO than he ever was in his entire career. Put him on his own and his star power diminishes and is only there now because of Nostalgia.

Charisma is not the same as mic skills. Punk easily beats out Nash on the mic department. Its not even close. Name me one memorable promo Nash has ever cut because I can't think of any and I can think of quite a few for Punk just off the top of my head. In terms of charisma however Nash does beat out Punk. And remember this coming from someone who loves Punk and is not a fan of Nash's by any means.

Comparing Punk to Nash in terms of in ring performance however is a joke. Punk is one of the best in the ring in WWE today. Nash's only really good matches were with HBK who can't have a bad match to save his life.


----------



## Choke2Death

THANOS said:


> Don't sit here and tell me that you can refute the inring comparison because you don't feel it's fair. You're either good in the ring or you're not. The Big Show is even bigger than Nash and in his prime was twice or more the inring talent than Nash ever was. Saying Shawn is that much better than Punk is another example of blindly disregarding a wrestler you hate's ability. Punk is probably better than HBK ever was on the mic, and isn't too far behind him in charisma either. Hbk has him beat easily in the ring but Punk's a lot more comparable with him then with Kevin Nash. Their skill sets are a lot more alike than that of Nash.
> 
> As far as you shitting on the ROH Raven promo and comparing it to an emo screaming to get attention. Well I'm afraid we'll have to just agree to disagree there because that's one of the most passionate and intense story driven promos I've ever seen, so we'll never agree on him as a mic worker if that's your feelings on it.


But it is NOT fair. When you are taller, it's a lot harder to move and they wrestle different styles. To go back to the comparison I made, you can't hate on The Great Khali's limitations just because he can't move as fast as Rey Mysterio. You have to have a criteria for each category. But for Diesel's size, I think he's been a decent in-ring competitor in his peak.

How am I "blindly disregarding" Punk's abilities? You do realize it's SHAWN MICHAELS we're talking about, right? A top 10 great so it's not like Punk should be embarrassed just because he doesn't possess 1/10th of Shawn's talent. And I disagree completely. Shawn's 1997 heel promos or the ones with Hulk Hogan are better than anything that ever came out of Punk's mouth. And I can't even compare them when it comes to charisma because Punk simply doesn't have much. It's covered up by how much of a loudmouth he is, though. Shawn oozed charisma just by walking down the ramp.

And yes, whatever you say on the last part. To me, I see no intensity. When I see that Punk promo, he sounds like an emo who just had a terrible breakup with the only ever person who wanted to be his significant other and that has made him a depressed screamer.



> I think what bothers me most about C.M. Punk is that it is painfully obvious that he is about as far away from an athlete as you can be. Like, everything he does is awkward. Run, jump, etc. He's just an awkward kind of guy. You can tell that he's a book geek that probably didn't play a lot of sports. Meanwhile, although limited by his size, Nash did play ball & was at least an athlete prior to getting into wrestling.
> 
> It's why a lot of the stuff that Punk does, like his top rope elbow, look so funky & awkward. It bothers me because it looks more like he's role-playing being a wrestler instead of feeling like a wrestler. I don't have the suspension of disbelief that I should for his matches.


Agreed completely. Have you seen him do a Dropkick? Or Jericho's Springboard Dropkick? Or the more usual Suicide Dive? His execution of those moves is extremely awkward. Compare his Suicide Dive to Benoit or D-Bryan's and they'll wipe the floor with his version. Or look at Ziggler/Orton/Bob Holly do a Dropkick then look at Punk. (hell, Punk did it once in a match with Ziggler which takes guts since Ziggler makes his look like shit)

It's like he's jogging when he should be running as much as he can. I guess he needs to trim some of that fat and spend a bit of time inside the gyms instead of reading comic books.


----------



## Starbuck

And for the record, if I had to choose I'd take Punk over Nash because Nash bores the hell out of me. I do find it ironic though that Punk took the piss out of Nash about his knees and people changing the channel when he's on the TV and now he's out with a bum knee and driving away viewers faster than it takes Nash to blow a quad. DAT CLIQUE.


----------



## Jotunheim

> No, it's not. Diesel is way better on the mic and don't even bring up their confrontations, because Diesel is just not one to use scripts. As for the in-ring stuff, Punk is sloppy as fuck and without a good opponent, he's about as boring to watch as it gets. But with a good opponent, he is capable of having quality matches, that I give him. Diesel is a tall man with fragile quads, *I can't really have the same standards for both of them* so they're not comparable.


of all the things you could say as a punk hater this is the probably the most stupid one, I have nothing against you hating punk with all your guts, that's your issue, but seriously?, you can't compare nash with punk on the ring because "it's not fair?", how much completely biased could you ever be?, so you have standards according to which wrestlers you like against the ones you don't, good, glad we could take that out of the system and glad you just exposed yourself as borderline troll



> But for Diesel's size, I think he's been a decent in-ring competitor in his peak.


no he wasn't for christs sake fpalm if you compare 2 wrestlers, you do it by all of their qualities, and even in his prime Nash was horrendous on the ring


----------



## Hawksea

Crusade said:


> Eh, I love Punk but HBK is easily more charismatic. HBK is better than Punk in the ring by default simply because very few could ever touch HBK's in ring performance skills. Mic skills I would give to Punk but its not as clear cut as you claim it to be. Punk is definitely more comparable to HBK than Nash though.
> 
> Nash definitely has more of a presence, better look and arguably has more star power. But Nash's star power in my mind comes from the people in his career he was surrounded with, especially Hall and Hogan. Nash had more star power and was more of a draw with the NWO than he ever was in his entire career. Put him on his own and his star power diminishes and is only there now because of Nostalgia.
> 
> Charisma is not the same as mic skills. Punk easily beats out Nash on the mic department. Its not even close. *Name me one memorable promo Nash has ever cut because I can't think of any* and I can think of quite a few for Punk just off the top of my head. In terms of charisma however Nash does beat out Punk. And remember this coming from someone who loves Punk and is not a fan of Nash's by any means.
> 
> Comparing Punk to Nash in terms of in ring performance however is a joke. Punk is one of the best in the ring in WWE today. Nash's only really good matches were with HBK who can't have a bad match to save his life.


You were obviously born in 2004.


----------



## DOPA

Hawksea said:


> You were obviously born in 2004.


No actually I was very much alive when he was in WCW and I've watched back at some of his WWE run as well. Try again.


----------



## THANOS

Crusade said:


> Eh, I love Punk but HBK is easily more charismatic. HBK is better than Punk in the ring by default simply because very few could ever touch HBK's in ring performance skills. Mic skills I would give to Punk but its not as clear cut as you claim it to be. Punk is definitely more comparable to HBK than Nash though.
> 
> Nash definitely has more of a presence, better look and arguably has more star power. But Nash's star power in my mind comes from the people in his career he was surrounded with, especially Hall and Hogan. Nash had more star power and was more of a draw with the NWO than he ever was in his entire career. Put him on his own and his star power diminishes and is only there now because of Nostalgia.
> 
> Charisma is not the same as mic skills. Punk easily beats out Nash on the mic department. Its not even close. Name me one memorable promo Nash has ever cut because I can't think of any and I can think of quite a few for Punk just off the top of my head. In terms of charisma however Nash does beat out Punk. And remember this coming from someone who loves Punk and is not a fan of Nash's by any means.
> 
> Comparing Punk to Nash in terms of in ring performance however is a joke. Punk is one of the best in the ring in WWE today. Nash's only really good matches were with HBK who can't have a bad match to save his life.


Great post! It's always good to have this conversation with a poster who understands due care. A lot of what you say is rational and argued very well. I can't really debate any of it to be honest lol. We each have our own rating systems and may not agree with some things but I can respect your unbiased approach.

Many really good talking points in here about the entire NWO storyline and what it essentially did for the Nash character. Can't disagree with any of it.


----------



## Coffey

Jotunheim said:


> of all the things you could say..


Pretty sure his entire point is that it's hard to compare styles, which is true. A big man style, like say One Man Gang, is going to be vastly different than that of a technician, like Chris Benoit. Just like a slow, plodding, Terminator that can't be stopped (Nash offense) is going to differ from Punk, so they are hard to compare. It's not like Punk is going to work like a big man & do falling tree spots or David Vs. Goliath matches.


----------



## Starbuck

Nash's voice is as slow and monotone as they come. He could be narrating a story about the most exciting thing on earth and he'd still make it sound boring as fuck.


----------



## THANOS

Starbuck said:


> And for the record, if I had to choose I'd take Punk over Nash because Nash bores the hell out of me. I do find it ironic though that Punk took the piss out of Nash about his knees and people changing the channel when he's on the TV and now he's out with a bum knee and driving away viewers faster than it takes Nash to blow a quad. DAT CLIQUE.


Well done! :lol: I laughed.


----------



## Starbuck

I didn't think anybody laughed at Big Sexy quad jokes anymore....... :side:


----------



## Choke2Death

Starbuck said:


> I didn't think anybody laughed at Big Sexy quad jokes anymore....... :side:


Nash and quad jokes will NEVER get old!


----------



## Defei

THANOS said:


> No he wasn't. I can show you ROH promos of Punk better than Nash's best stuff, and that's before he even stepped foot in the wwe.


Charisma is not the quality of a promo work. Hogan's promos for example, wouldn't compare with the best promo guys in the business like Foley or Jake roberts but he was arguably the most charismatic superstar ever in his peak. Hulkamania was a global phenomenon.


----------



## TheF1BOB

Nash is boring on the mic but as a WWE Champion, he had credibility.

Punk has neither. Trying to be a smartarse isn't cool.

unk2


----------



## Jotunheim

Walk-In said:


> Pretty sure his entire point is that it's hard to compare styles, which is true. A big man style, like say One Man Gang, is going to be vastly different than that of a technician, like Chris Benoit. Just like a slow, plodding, Terminator that can't be stopped (Nash offense) is going to differ from Punk, so they are hard to compare. It's not like Punk is going to work like a big man & do falling tree spots or David Vs. Goliath matches.


then again, everything you said about nash offense is false, he was more like a slow retarded jellyfish that could easily be stopped by himself whenever he teared his quads, and I was a big fan of nash, but instead of being a complete idiot you have to admit what is true, Nash wrestling skills were complete and utter garbage, and saying he can't be compared with punk who is miles ahead of him wrestling wise because nash is bigger is utter horse BS, he sucks and sucked in the rin, punk did not, period, there's no other way to say it


----------



## TheF1BOB

And that applies to Cena too.

Fuck him.


----------



## Coffey

Jotunheim said:


> then again, everything you said about nash offense is false, he was more like a slow retarded jellyfish that could easily be stopped by himself whenever he teared his quads, and I was a big fan of nash, but instead of being a complete idiot you have to admit what is true, Nash wrestling skills were complete and utter garbage, and saying he can't be compared with punk who is miles ahead of him wrestling wise because nash is bigger is utter horse BS, he sucks and sucked in the rin, punk did not, period, there's no other way to say it


DAT INTERNET BAD ASS :lol Fuckin' Jotunjobber is apparently really serious about some Kevin Nash opinions, Jesus.

Nash is underrated. I prefer giants in my matches as opposed to the Benoit & Angle workers of the world. Unless it's strong style. Nash worked fine for what he was trying to do. Was he the best? Of course not. But he was far from the worst, like people want to act like.

I guess I'm just a "complete idiot" for not acknowledging that Nash was a "slow retarded jellyfish" that "teared" (sic) his quads. What was I thinking!?


----------



## Jotunheim

Walk-In said:


> DAT INTERNET BAD ASS :lol


say hello to my little friend :gun:



> Nash is underrated. I prefer giants in my matches as opposed to the Benoit & Angle workers of the world. Unless it's strong style. Nash worked fine for what he was trying to do. Was he the best? Of course not. But he was far from the worst, like people want to act like.


I'd prefer someone good with overall talent, Nash was a decent, pretty good promo talker, but he should've stayed out of the ring because it was cringe worthy to watch, it's complete delusion to say otherwise, I've always liked nash, but you have to give it where is due, and he sucked on the ring


----------



## Coffey




----------



## N-destroy

3.5, 3.3 and 3.3? :lmao can this get anymore miserable?



Starbuck said:


> Reverse psychology no work for CM Punk. Tells people to change the channel and they...change the channel lol.


More like they never tuned in.



About Nash/Punk discussion, You people are arguing back and forth about athletic ability which is pointless. It's about storytelling in the ring. You don't have to jump around from turnbuckles to put on a memorable match. Punk is better because he understands in-ring psychology unlike Nash. Nash definitely has him beat when it comes to charisma, Look and presence though.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

So... where's dem breakdowns?


----------



## Jotunheim

N-destroy said:


> About Nash/Punk discussion, You people are arguing back and forth about athletic ability which is pointless. It's about storytelling in the ring. You don't have to jump around from turnbuckles to put on a memorable match. Punk is better because he understands in-ring psychology unlike Nash. Nash definitely has him beat when it comes to charisma, Look and presence though.


hey not saying I hate nash, of everything he did I admit he had a great presence, look and was a pretty good promo talker, but saying he was better than punk ON EVERYTHING, screams complete bias, idiocy and looking being a moron, at least people should be objective and say it like it is, Nash sucked on the ring and even in his best days Punk surpass him by light years ahead

but oh no, "Nash is better simply because I hate punk"


----------



## SpeedStick

This girl gets mad tv time


----------



## Mister Hands

A fleeting thought I should probably develop further before posting it: I wonder how much the viewers' disconnect is related to the disconnect between the champion and the rest of the roster? I feel like we've got maybe the most humanised WWE champion in a long, long time - a fairly regular-lookin' guy, for a WWE champ, with a grounded character akin to your Stone Colds and so forth, but nowhere near as mythologised a figure as the stars of the past. A product of a star-making promo that was supposed to kickstart a "reality era", a reign that was supposed to bring about sweeping changes that brought the outdated, stale WWE more in line with Punk's vision of a modern wrestling company.

And then, you put him in a program with The Terminator.

Or in a "hilarious" love triangle with a crazy skipping chick and a goat-faced maniac.

Or on a goofy "quest for respect" that insults the intelligence of everyone watching. "Just because you're the champion doesn't mean you're entitled to respect. Also, tune in to Night of Champions this Sunday." _ACTUAL MICHAEL COLE QUOTE_

And he's on a roster full of either weird, outsized caricatures like Cena and Sheamus, or underdeveloped blanks that could be something much more, like Barrett and Del Rio.

How much of WWE's problem is that there's too much really, really great TV available right now for it to be so confused about its own tone? Maybe they need to just decide that either we're going with cartoon characters like Ryback (who's getting over with the fans in a huge way right now) or more relatable characters like Punk (who gave the industry its most exciting moment in years) and stick with it, because putting the two types in a program together just seems to suck the air out of everyone's sails, including the audience. Maybe Punk's a really great NWA champ stuck in a Hulk Hogan world?

(Actually, running with that thought, is there so much great TV right now that, even _if_ WWE was a really well-written, focused, cohesive wrestling show, a well-written wrestling show isn't good enough to get the very far above 4 million viewers anymore outside of nostalgia pops and such?)


----------



## DegenerateXX

Starbuck said:


> Diesel Man Punk


I freaking love that avatar of yours. :lmao


----------



## SerapisLiber

LOL, Nash was never good even for his character's niche of the lumbering giant. He doesn't hold a candle to Taker, Kane, Big Show, etc.

And the real clincher, that should settle any discussion about it is that...

Nash even frickin' admits this himself!

He often rips on his own style and workrate. Hell, just recently I watched a vid he did for Kayfabe Commentaries and someone asked a question about him wrestling the Big Show again and he responded (paraphrasing): "Why the hell would you want to see that? So we can put you to sleep? I only have four moves and I can't do any of them to him!"


----------



## jonoaries

Mister Hands said:


> A fleeting thought I should probably develop further before posting it: I wonder how much the viewers' disconnect is related to the disconnect between the champion and the rest of the roster? I feel like we've got maybe the most humanised WWE champion in a long, long time - a fairly regular-lookin' guy, for a WWE champ, with a grounded character akin to your Stone Colds and so forth, but nowhere near as mythologised a figure as the stars of the past. A product of a star-making promo that was supposed to kickstart a "reality era", a reign that was supposed to bring about sweeping changes that brought the outdated, stale WWE more in line with Punk's vision of a modern wrestling company.
> 
> And then, you put him in a program with The Terminator.
> 
> Or in a "hilarious" love triangle with a crazy skipping chick and a goat-faced maniac.
> 
> Or on a goofy "quest for respect" that insults the intelligence of everyone watching. "Just because you're the champion doesn't mean you're entitled to respect. Also, tune in to Night of Champions this Sunday." _ACTUAL MICHAEL COLE QUOTE_
> 
> And he's on a roster full of either weird, outsized caricatures like Cena and Sheamus, or underdeveloped blanks that could be something much more, like Barrett and Del Rio.
> 
> How much of WWE's problem is that there's too much really, really great TV available right now for it to be so confused about its own tone? Maybe they need to just decide that either we're going with cartoon characters like Ryback (who's getting over with the fans in a huge way right now) or more relatable characters like Punk (who gave the industry its most exciting moment in years) and stick with it, because putting the two types in a program together just seems to suck the air out of everyone's sails, including the audience. *Maybe Punk's a really great NWA champ stuck in a Hulk Hogan world?*
> 
> (Actually, running with that thought, is there so much great TV right now that, even _if_ WWE was a really well-written, focused, cohesive wrestling show, a well-written wrestling show isn't good enough to get the very far above 4 million viewers anymore outside of nostalgia pops and such?)


That may be a significant statement. CM Punk is looking a lot like Bret Hart in that respect. Its the transition from the WWE-style overpushed, "Larger than life" super babyface to a more grounded, workhorse, common man champion. Of course I don't think him being that type of individual can account for the fall off of the audience. The drop is too large to attribute to one person. I think that is a good statement though, knowing that casual audiences expect over the top characters and story lines and they're not getting that right now.


----------



## Kabraxal

Mister Hands said:


> A fleeting thought I should probably develop further before posting it: I wonder how much the viewers' disconnect is related to the disconnect between the champion and the rest of the roster? I feel like we've got maybe the most humanised WWE champion in a long, long time - a fairly regular-lookin' guy, for a WWE champ, with a grounded character akin to your Stone Colds and so forth, but nowhere near as mythologised a figure as the stars of the past. A product of a star-making promo that was supposed to kickstart a "reality era", a reign that was supposed to bring about sweeping changes that brought the outdated, stale WWE more in line with Punk's vision of a modern wrestling company.
> 
> And then, you put him in a program with The Terminator.
> 
> Or in a "hilarious" love triangle with a crazy skipping chick and a goat-faced maniac.
> 
> Or on a goofy "quest for respect" that insults the intelligence of everyone watching. "Just because you're the champion doesn't mean you're entitled to respect. Also, tune in to Night of Champions this Sunday." _ACTUAL MICHAEL COLE QUOTE_
> 
> And he's on a roster full of either weird, outsized caricatures like Cena and Sheamus, or underdeveloped blanks that could be something much more, like Barrett and Del Rio.
> 
> How much of WWE's problem is that there's too much really, really great TV available right now for it to be so confused about its own tone? Maybe they need to just decide that either we're going with cartoon characters like Ryback (who's getting over with the fans in a huge way right now) or more relatable characters like Punk (who gave the industry its most exciting moment in years) and stick with it, because putting the two types in a program together just seems to suck the air out of everyone's sails, including the audience. Maybe Punk's a really great NWA champ stuck in a Hulk Hogan world?
> 
> (Actually, running with that thought, is there so much great TV right now that, even _if_ WWE was a really well-written, focused, cohesive wrestling show, a well-written wrestling show isn't good enough to get the very far above 4 million viewers anymore outside of nostalgia pops and such?)


That really is a good point... didn't quite think about it that way, but aside from Punk there are very few realistic characters even near the ME scene right now that just aren't cartoonish or bland. Off the top of my head... Ziggler is the only one that isn't a complete cartoon right now. Brings a new perspective on two angles... kids not conneting because he is too grounded and smarks (maybe even adult fans in general) only connecting to him and a few others because they are more realistic. So you have massive issues with the product chasing away both types of viewers.


----------



## Coffey

Mister Hands said:


> Maybe Punk's a really great NWA champ stuck in a Hulk Hogan world?


Never really thought of it like that before but that makes a lot of sense now that you mention it.


----------



## kobra860

blur said:


> It was interesting enough for people to negative rep me for having "Vanilla Midgets" sig and avy, I wanted to test out Hitler, and it goes a "_rant_" dedicated to it... soo...


The Vanilla Midgets stuff was hilarious.


----------



## KO Bossy

I dunno...I grew up on Nash in WCW and I always enjoyed him. Sure his in ring work wasn't the best but he was good on the stick, and actually pretty damn funny (watch his reaction to Sid's famous self-insult, its priceless).

Punk strikes me as really kind of a one note character. He's got great delivery, but the more I see of him in the Fed, the more its obvious-the guy plays an excellent jerk heel because he's a jerk in real life. He's at his best when he's given free reign to go out there and, pretty much, complain. This isn't like the days of a Hollywood Hogan where he's leading the faction of heel invaders trying to take over the company or Triple H circa 2000 who got the title and built up a fortress of guys around him while he strutted around like a cocky prick, flaunting how dominant he was. You know, the times when heels were booked to be dominant and seem threatening. Punk's current heel character is based around being a whiner who constantly boasts about a statistic in an era where that statistic means absolutely nothing.

SES Punk was something refreshing because he was being made into this cult leader type character, and they were playing off of how a lot of straight edge people have this holier than thou attitude about them. Made sense, and was done very well. This time around...doesn't work.

I'll give Punk credit, he's a very solid heel, but I personally found Nash more entertaining. Could just be nostalgia talking, but I enjoyed Nash as both a heel in the nWo and when he was a face when he broke off to form the Wolfpac, for example. Punk...he's not babyface material, and even his current heel character isn't working for me (he's engaging and his promos are solid but the character itself is flawed because at its core, it makes no sense).


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Nash more entertaining than Punk... I just... I... well everyone's entitled to their opinion... but... eh...

Okay, can't say I agree at all. As a kid, I loved the NWO (mainly due to my father's influence, but still) and I liked Nash. From what I've seen in old videos he does know how to work the stick, no question asks, and I wouldn't argue he has more charisma than Punk.

But Nash being more entertaining or better than Punk in any category related to talent completely blows my mind, and honestly I never would've thought anyone would've thought that.

It is what it is though. I personally find Punk 100 times better on the mic, 1,000,000 times better in the ring, more entertaining and more fun to watch. I've always preferred Big Show as a giant to Nash anyway.

Edit: No breakdowns? I'm a sad Sandrone.


----------



## KO Bossy

The Sandrone said:


> Nash more entertaining than Punk... I just... I... well everyone's entitled to their opinion... but... eh...
> 
> Okay, can't say I agree at all. As a kid, I loved the NWO (mainly due to my father's influence, but still) and I liked Nash. From what I've seen in old videos he does know how to work the stick, no question asks, and I wouldn't argue he has more charisma than Punk.
> 
> But Nash being more entertaining or better than Punk in any category related to talent completely blows my mind, and honestly I never would've thought anyone would've thought that.
> 
> It is what it is though. I personally find Punk 100 times better on the mic, 1,000,000 times better in the ring, more entertaining and more fun to watch. I've always preferred Big Show as a giant to Nash anyway.
> 
> Edit: No breakdowns? I'm a sad Sandrone.


Well, I never said Nash was better in ring than Punk. That's kind of indisputable, Punk is the better in ring worker. Promos...Punk in his own way is sorta one dimensional. He's got awesome delivery but he's truly at his best when he's complaining. We saw his attempts at comedy early this year and...yeah. Cena worthy. I bought Nash more as a babyface than I ever did Punk. Heel wise...both did well in their own ways.

Again, could just be nostalgia talking. I do enjoy Punk but I really, REALLY fucking hate this current era, and that may very well sour me on 99% of things in 2012. Nash, when I watched him, was at his peak during the Monday Night Wars, which was my favorite period of pro wrestling. I admit, I'm probably biased.


----------



## Rock316AE

Kevin Nash is one of the smartest and most natural performers of all time. Even if you put his entire career aside. Only a few in wrestling history were bigger than Nash was in 97-98. This is the guy who was neck to neck with Goldberg at his peak as the Top 2 babyfaces of WCW's biggest year ever in merchandise sales, ratings and crowd reactions. Nash is one of the best ever on the mic, one of the most charismatic, looked and carried himself like a superstar. Punk will never be half the star Nash was at his peak, Nash was doing mainstream tours all over the place back then. Not comparable to Punk in any way, unless you talk in-ring, which is obvious since Nash is much more limited due to his size and big man style. Eeven with that, he had plenty of classic matches when he cared with Bret and Shawn. "Diesel 1995" became more of a stigma than what actually happened, fact is, WWF were making more money in 1995 than they were making in 1993-1994, IYH started on PPV, gates were much bigger, etc. Nash was a game-changer in WCW, a major part in the nWo, one half of the iconic tag team The Outsiders and the leader of the Wolfpack, one of the most popular stables of all time. And like I always said, I can also appreciate his ability to manipulate and play with every locker room in any way he wants. The things he did in WCW was a masterful work. 

In addition to that, all the nWo members credited Nash for all the mega popular nWo catchphrases, "Too Sweet", "Wolfpack in the house", "4-life", all started when Nash ran with it spontaneously on TV every week and it got over huge and made millions of dollars worldwide.


















Nash is a legend. + The fact that he had the greatest theme of all time bumps him on the list even more






Someone need to make a smiley of the GENIUS AA imitation Nash did in 1997.


----------



## Coffey

"If there's one thing you can say when Arn Anderson is coming to town...it's that Arn Anderson is coming to town."


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

THIS WEEK



> In the segment-by-segment, Kane & Bryan vs. Prime Time Players opened 2.57. The Shield attacking Kane & Bryan plus A.J. vs. Tamina Snuka gained 126,000 viewers. The C.M. Punk and Paul Heyman interview before Miz came out gained 24,000 viewers. Once Miz came out and they started on the lie detector stuff they lost 214,000 viewers. John Cena & Sheamus vs. Big Show & Dolph Ziggler gained 138,000 viewers which is very weak for 9 p.m. and did a 2.63. Damien Sandow vs. Santino Marella in-ring comedy plus match lost 226,000 viewers. Alberto Del Rio vs. Sin Cara lost 121,000 viewers. The in-ring segment with Vince McMahon and Vickie Guerrero gained 493,000 viewers and was the highest rated non-overrun segment at 2.73. Randy Orton vs. Brad Maddox and The Shield attack on Orton lost 167,000 viewers. Kofi Kingston vs. Antonio Cesaro vs. R-Truth vs. Wade Barrett lost 169,000 viewers. The lie detector segment and Shield beat down of Miz, Kane and Bryan and Ryback save gained 509,000 viewers to a 2.86.


LAST WEEK



> n the segment-by-segment, the Ryback vs. Titus O’Neil opened with a 2.89 rating. Alberto Del Rio vs. Great Khali gained 129,000 viewers and ended up being the highest rated segment of the show with a 2.98 quarter. The Michael Cole interview with Seth Rollins, Roman Reigns and Dean Ambrose lost 139,000 viewers. Tamina Snuka vs. Alicia Fox gained 46,000 viewers. The in-ring with John Cena, Vickie Guerrero, A.J. and Dolph Ziggler plus Kofi Kingston vs. Tensai gained 90,000 viewers which would be probably the lowest 9 p.m. gain since the show went to three hours. Daniel Bryan vs. Rey Mysterio lost 366,000 viewers. John Cena vs. Dolph Ziggler lost 17,000 viewers and did a 2.70 at 10 p.m. That number can’t be in the realm of what would have been expected there. Sheamus vs. Antonio Cesaro lost 229,000 viewers. Damien Sandow vs. Zack Ryder lost 421,000 viewers and did a 2.25 quarter. 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.


Nobody draws except the boss of the company who's the main reason why WWE is so shitty. Bad times my friends, bad times.


----------



## Snothlisberger

ZZZZOOOOOOOOMMMMMGGGGGGGG CENA CANT DRAW!!!! CENA CANT DRAW!!!!!!!!! NDWKJENFWENFNQNLE


----------



## LovelyElle890

jblvdx said:


> Nobody draws except the boss of the company who's the main reason why WWE is so shitty. Bad times my friends, bad times.


You mean nobody draws except the stars of the past. Triple H's single tear draws more ratings than these fools.:lmao :lmao :lmao

Next week on Raw a mega main event has been announced!

*Fatal 4-Way Ironman Match:*

Triple H's tear vs The Rock's $1000 shirt vs Stone Cold's empty beer can vs Undertaker's hat = massive ratings!!!

8*D


----------



## The Boy Wonder

I'm pretty sure a good portion of the IWC thought the "Epic" CM Punk would usher in a new audience and higher ratings for the WWE. That didn't happen and it's not because of how they booked Punk. The fact is CM Punk didn't bring anyone new in with his promo. The IWC hoped it would but it didn't happen. So while he's been a good champion for over a year the audience didn't grow under his reign -- it remained the same and as of late it's been going down.


----------



## N-destroy

The numbers are all over the place as usual with Meltzer's breakdowns. You really have to look into quarter segments, the commercials and backstage stuff to know what actually drew. Meh...

That 10 PM quarter had only the end of Cena/Dolph match iirc? However seems like the previous quarter lost viewers as well, so I guess Cena/Dolph/AJ/Vickie scandal clearly failed. 

With Punk hurt, TLC PPV's top drawing match would be Cena vs Dolph ladder match. I'd be worried for the buyrate if I were vince.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

ok as far as i am concerned the only one that really drew numbers was vince and punk floating somewhere in between much like cena right now and everyone else loosing viewers


----------



## JY57

*USA Network Happy with WWE's Third Hour of RAW, WWE's Feelings on Their Network*

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



> - WWE CFO George Barrios participated in the 40th annual UBS Global Media Conference in New York City on Monday and said the company is very focused on creating new content, according to a transcript on SeekingAlpha.com.
> 
> It doesn't sound like WWE will be taking RAW back to two hours anytime soon. Barrios touted that the third hour of RAW is up 35% versus the programming that was airing in its place on the USA Network. He added that USA is very happy with that. Barrios also noted that Saturday Morning Slam on the CW Network is up 50% over what it replaced and Main Event on Ion is up about 15% from the programming it replaced.
> 
> Barrios also talked about five major deals that WWE has coming up for renewal over the next few years, ones that he is confident about - RAW on USA, SmackDown on SyFy, BSkyB in the UK, Taj TV in India and Mattel.
> 
> Barrios briefly discussed the WWE Network but didn't really say anything new from what we've heard already. He mentioned that WWE feels there is too much there in a potential Network not to keep pushing at it. WWE believes the payoff could be too large to give up on it and continue to push on that.


----------



## jonoaries

Welp...that's the nail in the coffin of doomsday theorists. If USA is happy, Vince is happy and thus all is well unk2


----------



## TrentBarretaFan

"Daniel Bryan vs. Rey Mysterio lost 366,000 viewers"

Really? Investment in pure pro wrestling seems not profitable today...


----------



## The-Rock-Says

More bullshit from WWE. WOW, it replaces some shit TV that no one watches and they beat them in that time slot. WOW.

Your ratings are down, WWE. That is all that matters and it 80% to do with you going 3 hours.


----------



## Twisted14

I guess we could stop analysing these ratings so much now. If they really don't mean anything anymore and WWE is content with the numbers they're pulling now, then what's the point? I also hope (though I know that my hope is completely futile) that the constant arguments of who draws and doesn't in this company can end. It's pretty clear to me that nobody fucking draws for TV. 

The only regulars who stand a chance now are Punk and Cena, but neither are really able to do a while lot on their own. Also, seriously, if Cena is losing viewers, then what is it the real problem here?

With the possibility of voiding my whole post here, I'll say it anyway. Yeah, I'm a Punk mark. I really like the guy and enjoy what he does and he's one of the few reasons I watch WWE programming. Programming that I actually enjoy for the most part unlike a lot of other people here. However despite all that, I can see that there is a problem with WWE programming that is turning people off, and for fuck's sake it isn't any individual wrestler. 

Would the ratings be any better if John Cena were champion right now? I really doubt it.


----------



## jonoaries

The-Rock-Says said:


> More bullshit from WWE. WOW, it replaces some shit TV that no one watches and they beat them in that time slot. WOW.
> 
> *Your ratings are down, WWE. That is all that matters and it 80% to do with you going 3 hours.*


Actually no it isn't. PPV buys (13%) [both Summerslam and Night of Champions were way up from last year] and live & televised entertainment (5%) are up from last year, business was down 4% however. USA is happy that people, even a small amount (relative to what was doing) stick around to watch the 3rd hour. I don't see why they wouldn't be, all the network cares about is viewers, RAW brings viewers so they are happy. 

.
I keep telling you people that RAW is irreplaceable on the USA network and thus all your doom and gloom talk isn't relevant but I'm a CM Punk mark, and I know 10 million people aren't watching wrestling on monday nights anymore but really what do I know? Nothing I guess. 
.

To act like the CFO is "working" people is to deny common sense. The man is running a company and has to release financial information for shareholders, he's not going to "work" them. TV ratings is an archaic barometer of how a company is doing. Trust me if it were a big deal they would've made changes by now.


----------



## JasonLives

That the 3rd hour would do worse was expected by both USA Network and WWE. Which is why USA Network is paying less for that 3rd hour then the previous 2.

Im sure the previous 2 hours are doing disappointing numbers but the extra hour was always bound to draw less.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

jonoaries said:


> Actually no it isn't. PPV buys (13%) [both Summerslam and Night of Champions were way up from last year] and live & televised entertainment (5%) are up from last year, business was down 4% however. USA is happy that people, even a small amount (relative to what was doing) stick around to watch the 3rd hour. I don't see why they wouldn't be, all the network cares about is viewers, RAW brings viewers so they are happy.
> 
> .
> I keep telling you people that RAW is irreplaceable on the USA network and thus all your doom and gloom talk isn't relevant but I'm a CM Punk mark, and I know 10 million people aren't watching wrestling on monday nights anymore but really what do I know? Nothing I guess.
> .
> 
> To act like the CFO is "working" people is to deny common sense. The man is running a company and has to release financial information for shareholders, he's not going to "work" them. TV ratings is an archaic barometer of how a company is doing. Trust me if it were a big deal they would've made changes by now.


Their ratings ARE down. I can't see how anyone can deny this. It's fact. They don't hit or anywhere hit 3.0 anymore. They hit 2.5's and 2.6s 7s most weeks. 

And with every passing week, they keep breaking records. Not the records you want to break. Record lows for 15 years.


----------



## JasonLives

So based on the numbers that was put up:

This week:

*Q1: 2.57 rating* - Bryan/Kane Vs. Prime Time Players, commercial break
*Q2: + 126,000* - End of Tag match and beatdown by The Shield, commercial break, AJ Vs. Tamina
*Q3: + 24,000 * - Commercial break, CM Punk/The Miz segment
*Q4: - 214,000* - End of Segment, commercial break, Start of Cena/Sheamus Vs. Ziggler/Big Show
*Q5: + 138,000 ( 2.63 )* - Tag match continues, 2 commercial breaks
*Q6: - 226,000* - Sandow promo, Sandow Vs. Santino, commercial break
*Q7 + Q8: - 121,000* - End of Sandow Vs. Santino, backstage segments, 2 commercial breaks, Del Rio Vs. Sin Cara
*Q9: + 493,000* - Vickie Guerrero/Vince McMahon segment, commercial break
*Q10: - 167,000* - Orton Vs. Maddox, commercial break, backstage segments
*Q11: - 169,000* - Commercial break, US Title match
*Q12 + Overrun: + 509,000* - US Title match continues, commercial break, Lie Detector Segment


Last week:

*Q1: 2.89 rating* - Ryback Vs. Titus, commercial break, Ryback promo
*Q2: + 129,000 * - Ryback promo continues, commercial break, Del Rio Vs. Great Khali
*Q3: - 139,000* - 2 commercial breaks, The Shield interview, 
*Q4: + 46,000 * - Tamina Vs. Fox, commercial break, AJ/Cena angle,
*Q5: + 90,000* - AJ/Cena angle continues, commercial break, Kingston Vs. Tensai
*Q6: - 366,000* - Daniel/Kane backstage, commercial break, half of Bryan Vs. Mysterio, commercial break

Unsure about the numbers here. Either the previous -366,000 is a sum of Q6,Q7 and Q8. Or Q8 and Q9 is summed up, or there are numbers missing.

*Q7: * - Bryan Vs. Mysterio continues, backstage segments, commercial break, 
*Q8:* - Cena Vs. Ziggler, commercial break
*Q9: - 17,000* - Cena Vs. Ziggler continues, 2 commercial breaks, Cesaro Vs. Sheamus
*Q10: - 229,000* - Cesaro Vs. Sheamus, commercial break
*Q11: - 421,000* - Sandow Vs. Zack Ryder, commercial break
*Q12 + Overrun: + 592,000* - CM Punk Vs. Kane, post match with The Shield


----------



## SerapisLiber

JasonLives said:


> Last week:
> 
> *Q1: 2.89 rating* - Ryback Vs. Titus, commercial break, Ryback promo
> *Q2: + 129,000 * - Ryback promo continues, commercial break, Del Rio Vs. Great Khali
> *Q3: - 139,000* - 2 commercial breaks, The Shield interview,
> *Q4: + 46,000 * - Tamina Vs. Fox, commercial break, AJ/Cena angle,
> *Q5: + 90,000* - AJ/Cena angle continues, commercial break, Kingston Vs. Tensai
> *Q6: - 366,000* - Daniel/Kane backstage, commercial break, half of Bryan Vs. Mysterio, commercial break
> 
> Unsure about the numbers here. Either the previous -366,000 is a sum of Q6,Q7 and Q8. Or Q8 and Q9 is summed up, or there are numbers missing.
> 
> *Q7: * - Bryan Vs. Mysterio continues, backstage segments, commercial break,
> *Q8:* - Cena Vs. Ziggler, commercial break
> *Q9: - 17,000* - Cena Vs. Ziggler continues, 2 commercial breaks, Cesaro Vs. Sheamus
> *Q10: - 229,000* - Cesaro Vs. Sheamus, commercial break
> *Q11: - 421,000* - Sandow Vs. Zack Ryder, commercial break
> *Q12 + Overrun: + 592,000* - CM Punk Vs. Kane, post match with The Shield


So once again, Punk brought the largest gain of the night, and yet, when the dismal overall number was posted last week, all the haters heaped the blame squarely on Punk.


----------



## Evil Peter

On top of all the problems WWE has, I don't understand how people in the US can sit and watch things as they air with that insane amount of commercial breaks you have over there.


----------



## kingbucket

Evil Peter said:


> On top of all the problems WWE has, I don't understand how people in the US can sit and watch things as they air with that insane amount of commercial breaks you have over there.


Simple really.. We change the channel.. At least I do, and every person I watch tv with.. You are right tho, there is an insane amount of commercials shown here in the US. I never realized that until I went to France and lived there for 10 months. When I came back, the ridiculousness of the amount of commercials was crystal clear. 

Having such a large amount of commercials forces you to change the channel.. And when I change the channel, sometimes I get caught up in a different show and forget to change it back. I'm sure I am not the only person this happens to.. I remember RAW went commercial free a couple times a few years ago.. I wonder how those shows did in terms of ratings and holding its viewers..


----------



## Evil Peter

kingbucket said:


> Simple really.. We change the channel.. At least I do, and every person I watch tv with.. You are right tho, there is an insane amount of commercials shown here in the US. I never realized that until I went to France and lived there for 10 months. When I came back, the ridiculousness of the amount of commercials was crystal clear.
> 
> Having such a large amount of commercials forces you to change the channel.. And when I change the channel, sometimes I get caught up in a different show and forget to change it back. I'm sure I am not the only person this happens to.. I remember RAW went commercial free a couple times a few years ago.. I wonder how those shows did in terms of ratings and holding its viewers..


Yes, my comment was a bit exaggerated since I understand that you'll of course get used to it. Even though I'm used to a lower amount of breaks that's annoying as well and I often make sure to do something else at the same time as I watch shows on commercial channels and I can't watch movies on those channels at all as I'm more picky about that. The annoying part of channel switching is that here most channels seem to time their breaks fairly well with each other.

Commercial free airings sound interesting, although I'm not so sure it attracts that many more viewers just because they are used to it. I think it might just make the normal viewers happier. I wonder if the lack of commercial breaks are noticeable for the live crowd as well?


----------



## DA

JasonLives said:


> Last week:
> 
> *Q1: 2.89 rating* - Ryback Vs. Titus, commercial break, Ryback promo
> *Q2: + 129,000 * - Ryback promo continues, commercial break, Del Rio Vs. Great Khali
> *Q3: - 139,000* - 2 commercial breaks, The Shield interview,
> *Q4: + 46,000 * - Tamina Vs. Fox, commercial break, AJ/Cena angle,
> *Q5: + 90,000* - AJ/Cena angle continues, commercial break, Kingston Vs. Tensai
> *Q6: - 366,000* - Daniel/Kane backstage, commercial break, half of Bryan Vs. Mysterio, commercial break
> 
> Unsure about the numbers here. Either the previous -366,000 is a sum of Q6,Q7 and Q8. Or Q8 and Q9 is summed up, or there are numbers missing.
> 
> *Q7: * - Bryan Vs. Mysterio continues, backstage segments, commercial break,
> *Q8:* - Cena Vs. Ziggler, commercial break
> *Q9: - 17,000* - Cena Vs. Ziggler continues, 2 commercial breaks, Cesaro Vs. Sheamus
> *Q10: - 229,000* - Cesaro Vs. Sheamus, commercial break
> *Q11: - 421,000* - Sandow Vs. Zack Ryder, commercial break
> *Q12 + Overrun:+ 592,000 - CM Punk Vs. Kane, post match with The Shield*


*

unk

Let's hear ya now haters unk2*


----------



## #1Peep4ever

DwayneAustin said:


> unk
> 
> Let's hear ya now haters unk2


it was kane
he is a proven draw from the AE

seriously though its not a great overrun


----------



## DA

#1Peep4ever said:


> it was kane
> he is a proven draw from the AE
> 
> seriously though its not a great overrun


At least it maybe shows that it's not Punk who is losing all these ratings like so many have claimed and it's actually the rest of the shite that is driving away viewers.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

DwayneAustin said:


> At least it maybe shows that it's not Punk who is losing all these ratings like so many have claimed and it's actually the rest of the shite that is driving away viewers.


Yes. It has been said already. Punk is no draw but he isnt really THE reason for the decline.


----------



## PoisonMouse

Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter
The CM Punk and Paul Heyman interview before The Miz came out gained 24,000 viewers. Once The Miz came out, they lost 214,000 viewers.

I lolled.


----------



## The Lady Killer

The main issue is that everyone currently involved in the main event/main event storylines with the exception of Cena would be midcarders at best 10-15 years ago.


----------



## kokepepsi

BREAKDOWN and 2 OF THEM

Nov 26


> In the segment-by-segment, the Ryback vs. Titus O’Neil opened with a 2.89 rating.
> 
> Alberto Del Rio vs. Great Khali gained 129,000 viewers and ended up being the highest rated segment of the show with a 2.98 quarter.
> 
> The Michael Cole interview with Seth Rollins, Roman Reigns and Dean Ambrose lost 139,000 viewers.
> 
> Tamina Snuka vs. Alicia Fox gained 46,000 viewers.
> 
> The in-ring with John Cena, Vickie Guerrero, A.J. and Dolph Ziggler plus Kofi Kingston vs. Tensai gained 90,000 viewers which would be probably the lowest 9 p.m. gain since the show went to three hours.
> 
> Daniel Bryan vs. Rey Mysterio lost 366,000 viewers.
> 
> John Cena vs. Dolph Ziggler lost 17,000 viewers and did a 2.70 at 10 p.m. That number can’t be in the realm of what would have been expected there.
> 
> Sheamus vs. Antonio Cesaro lost 229,000 viewers.
> 
> Damien Sandow vs. Zack Ryder lost 421,000 viewers and did a 2.25 quarter.
> 
> 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.


LOL at dat Khali/Del rio ratings gain.............LOL at Cena(ziggler gon get buried)

12/3


> In the segment-by-segment, Kane & Bryan vs. Prime Time Players opened 2.57.
> 
> The Shield attacking Kane & Bryan plus A.J. vs. Tamina Snuka gained 126,000 viewers.
> 
> The C.M. Punk and Paul Heyman interview before Miz came out gained 24,000 viewers. Once Miz came out and they started on the lie detector stuff they lost 214,000 viewers.
> 
> John Cena & Sheamus vs. Big Show & Dolph Ziggler gained 138,000 viewers which is very weak for 9 p.m. and did a 2.63.
> 
> Damien Sandow vs. Santino Marella in-ring comedy plus match lost 226,000 viewers.
> 
> Alberto Del Rio vs. Sin Cara lost 121,000 viewers.
> 
> The in-ring segment with Vince McMahon and Vickie Guerrero gained 493,000 viewers and was the highest rated non-overrun segment at 2.73.
> 
> Randy Orton vs. Brad Maddox and The Shield attack on Orton lost 167,000 viewers.
> 
> Kofi Kingston vs. Antonio Cesaro vs. R-Truth vs. Wade Barrett lost 169,000 viewers.
> 
> The lie detector segment and Shield beat down of Miz, Kane and Bryan and Ryback save gained 509,000 viewers to a 2.86.


----------



## Choke2Death

Now Cena is starting to lose viewers too, lol. Since they will remain 3 hours, it'll be fun to watch the ratings go down further. And lol @ Del Rio vs Khali gaining the most viewers.


----------



## funnyfaces1

The fact that John Cena of all people is bringing in disastrous ratings/viewership shows just how poor the direction is in the WWE. The only person that seems to be a bright spot in drawing is Ryback and on occasions, CM Punk, but both of them (especially Punk) are inconsistent and certainly not going to save this sight of horror.


----------



## vanboxmeer

AJ has killed Cena's drawing power with the women that's he's had for so many years. Similar to how CM Punk's rebel face character got badly neutered playing love interest #157 on the generic drama series and his drawing power utterly collapsed. Good job, Team Steph.


----------



## Mister Hands

The fact that both Bryan/Rey and Sheamus/Cesaro lost a fair heap of viewers last week does not speak well of the WWE Universe.


----------



## hardysno1fan

The thing is kids are the people who like John Cena. Kids do NOT like romance. Anyone could tell you that. No suprise that they aint watching their Jesus Christ.


----------



## Das Wunderberlyn

Put the damn title on this ratings machine. :delrio


----------



## Green Light

Most WWE fans do not care about "good" wrestling, at least what the IWC perceives as good wrestling, and never have

Surprises me that people on here don't realise that yet


----------



## hardysno1fan

Green Light said:


> Most WWE fans do not care about "good" wrestling, at least what the IWC perceives as good wrestling, and never have
> 
> Surprises me that people on here don't realise that yet


People dont watch wrestling for the wrestling.


----------



## blur

Sandow killing dem ratingz


----------



## Starbuck

LovelyElle890 said:


> You mean nobody draws except the stars of the past. Triple H's single tear draws more ratings than these fools.:lmao :lmao :lmao
> 
> Next week on Raw a mega main event has been announced!
> 
> *Fatal 4-Way Ironman Match:*
> 
> *Triple H's tear vs The Rock's $1000 shirt vs Stone Cold's empty beer can vs Undertaker's hat = massive ratings!!!*
> 
> 8*D


DAT TEAR vs. DAT SHIRT vs. DAT BEER vs. DAT HAT = :mark:

I'd watch lol. 

Horrible breakdowns as expected. Now 9pm and 10pm are starting to blow chunks and they're supposed to be the holding positions of the show. Lulz.


----------



## Coffey

Mister Hands said:


> The fact that both Bryan/Rey and Sheamus/Cesaro lost a fair heap of viewers last week does not speak well of the WWE Universe.


You can't just have random matches on RAW for no reason & expect the matches being good to be enough of a reason to make people care. There's no heat, emotion or story & every single match has bad commentary & a mid-match commercial break. Plus, it doesn't even matter who wins.

Although the wrestling in WWE nowadays is actually really good it is sadly the thing that matters the least. 

As an example, why is John Cena (babyface) wrestling Dolph Ziggler (heel) on the TLC Pay-Per-View (for $50) when John Cena (the GOOD GUY) has already beaten Dolph Ziggler (the BAD GUY) twice, for free, on TV, clean?? The bad guy/heel is not getting any come uppance, the good guy/babyface is not getting any revenge. It is a story with no arch or even a middle. It was over when it started because the good guy thwarted the villain in the beginning.

WWE TV is just FULL of shit like that, so no one gives a fuck about the matches & they can just turn to football instead.


----------



## jonoaries

Poor writing, poor storytelling, no drama, no intensity and the product is too sanitized. Everything suffers at that point.


----------



## blur

Starbuck, how's my new sig?


----------



## Starbuck

blur said:


> Starbuck, how's my new sig?


I liked the other one with the tree better but I can live with JR lol.


----------



## Mister Hands

Walk-In said:


> You can't just have random matches on RAW for no reason & expect the matches being good to be enough of a reason to make people care. There's no heat, emotion or story & every single match has bad commentary & a mid-match commercial break. Plus, it doesn't even matter who wins.
> 
> Although the wrestling in WWE nowadays is actually really good it is sadly the thing that matters the least.
> 
> As an example, why is John Cena (babyface) wrestling Dolph Ziggler (heel) on the TLC Pay-Per-View (for $50) when John Cena (the GOOD GUY) has already beaten Dolph Ziggler (the BAD GUY) twice, for free, on TV, clean?? The bad guy/heel is not getting any come uppance, the good guy/babyface is not getting any revenge. It is a story with no arch or even a middle. It was over when it started because the good guy thwarted the villain in the beginning.
> 
> WWE TV is just FULL of shit like that, so no one gives a fuck about the matches & they can just turn to football instead.


Oh, I know. It just makes me hyperaware of how far outside the (apparent) target demographic I am when those matches haemhorrage viewers, and Del Rio vs Khali draws huge.


----------



## blur

Let me use a .gif for sig. A permanent one!


----------



## The-Rock-Says

The reasons why viewers tune out of most matches on RAW is because 99% of them don't mean anything. They are thrown together without heat. Look at Ryback Vs Brad for example. It drew really well and that's because it had a meaning and something was on the line. Now, not every match can have something one the line. But that's the main reason matches don't really draw on RAW.


----------



## Green Light

Nah it's cause Rydraw was involved in a slot that isn't predestined to always lose viewers


----------



## Coffey

The-Rock-Says said:


> Now, not every match can have something on the line.


They can if WWE are smart about it. Like, make wins/losses matter. Where if you win, talk about the "winner's purse" or how they're closer to a title shot or something. Just kayfabe it. But they don't even try!!



Mister Hands said:


> Oh, I know. It just makes me hyperaware of how far outside the (apparent) target demographic I am when those matches haemhorrage viewers, and Del Rio vs Khali draws huge.


Yeah, you & me both. The Khali match is baffling to me, I guess maybe it is just the freak show appeal? I have no idea. I am really outside of the target demo. too, which is honestly kind of sad as it feels like I have been forgotten as fan despite supporting the company for over twenty years. I suppose I want a more realistic, sports feel to the product, like old Crockett or NWA days, which I think C.M. Punk would fit in with perfectly. To achieve that though, wins/losses have to matter, continuity has to exist, there should be repercussions & consequences to things & the titles need to be prestigious so that people chasing them makes sense.


----------



## Ndiech

wow.titus o'neal drew well last week.


----------



## Brodus Clay

Just make a ADR vs Khali feud to save the show xD


----------



## RatedR10

I still can't believe ADR vs. Khali was the peak of last week's show. fpalm


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

ADR/Kane was the peak of last week's show? Well fuck me.

A couple of things: Last week I mentioned how if the 2.3 was true for the Punk/Kane match, that it definitely feeds the argument that Punk is a ratings killer. However upon seeing the breakdown and the way it's worded, it sounds like the match was gaining viewers throughout and amounted to the gain we saw combined with the overrun. So the match didn't do as terribly as it appeared. That being said, a 2.66 overrun (especially when it also had Shield and Ryback in it) is dreadful.

Cena just isn't helping the show anymore. Between this week's Cena and Sheamus tag match doing a terrible 9PM gain and abysmal rating number, and last week's Cena/Ziggler match losing 17,000 in the 10PM after weeks of build up, it's safe to say Cena isn't a ratings draw anymore, which would also explain the overall ratings continual decline. Vince McMahon's 10PM segment was the best gain in awhile for that segment, but it's still a mediocre number. Same thing goes for the overrun as far as rating goes for this week's show. Punk's segment gaining in a random quarter before Miz came out is a good sign for Punk. Of course it's only 24,000, but considering the week before it lost 139,000, and the week before that it lost 80,000, and it's just generally a losing quarter is good to some extent. Nothing to jump up and down about, but it's not bad at all.

Oh, and Ryback/Titus doing a decent number to start the show (and for the show's rating a great number) last week is a good sign for Ryback. He's continuing to do well in the ratings. I would say the same about Titus, but his tag match this week didn't provide the same goods. Perhaps a singles run is the way to go for Titus. But honestly based on the past several weeks, Ryback may just be the strongest ratings draw WWE has right now.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

The Khali match might have drawn because he hasn't been on TV for a while and the casuals love Khali. 

Random matches with nothing at stake don't draw. The fact that the WWE gave away Bryan v Mysterio, a match we've never seen before, with no build after having just announced moments beforehand shows how much their booking sucks.

Funny how Punk is one of the few people who's drawing ratings. But I suppose people are still going to blame him for the declining ratings. To quote Mick Foley from his book, _Have a Nice Day_:



> About an hour before the match, Flair had talked to me for a longtime about changing the course of my career. Naitch, short for Nature Boy, felt that I needed to be a heel (bad guy). His rationale was simple.”You and Vader had the most brutal bouts I’ve ever witnessed,” began Flair in his trademark voice, a strange combination of lisping and perfect enunciation “But your rematch didn’t raise the ratings at all. Nobody cares about you as a babyface.”
> 
> Even before the Monday night Raw/Nitro wars, WCW had always lived and died by its television ratings. At that time, its flagship show was WCW Saturday Night. Also at that time, there were no quarter-hour breakdowns to more accurately determine just who was responsible for viewing patterns. In other words, Flair was holding my fifteen minutes on air responsible for the ratings of the entire two-hour show. He also failed to realize that ratings increases are more a result of trends and ongoing story lines than just one match. In my book (and once again, this is my book) Flair was wrong about the ratings. But he sure as hell was right about the brutality of my matches with Vader.


Kevin Nash was one of the worst bookers in WCW and wrestling history. I don't care how eloquently, entertaining, or logically guys like him, Russo, or Cornette can explain their views on booking, it doesn't mean they're right or that they're good bookers. Nash can go on about how smart he is and how is IQ is a 156, or whatever the fuck it is, but Chris Langan, a man who is considered to be the smartest man/have the highest IQ in the world has done nothing with his talent and intelligence, blaming others for his problems.


----------



## D.M.N.

Depressingly low ratings. The fact that Cena is not moving anything is concerning. Ever since the middle of last year his ratings have not done much.

In the build-up to WrestleMania 27, his segments with The Miz and The Rock did fantastic numbers. Fast forward one year and the two were not pulling in big numbers.

It seems the Summer of Punk last year elevated Punk, but may have permanently damaged Cena as a draw. And when you choose to turn Punk heel, that turns into a bigger problem than you may imagine...

As for The Shield. Hmmm. Imagine if you have not watched Raw in a year, and whatever reason. You see two people you recognise in the main angle (Punk and Heyman) and then four people who you've never seen before (Ryback and The Shield). Are you likely to continue watching? Probably not.

Did they push Ryback too fast to the main event? Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but that is what happens when you get yourself into a situation by booking gimmick PPV's. Will he be forgotten about in a year time? This being WWE, I suspect he will...


----------



## Defei

The Sandrone said:


> ADR/Kane was the peak of last week's show? Well fuck me.
> 
> A couple of things: Last week I mentioned how if the 2.3 was true for the Punk/Kane match, that it definitely feeds the argument that Punk is a ratings killer. *However upon seeing the breakdown and the way it's worded,* it sounds like the match was gaining viewers throughout and amounted to the gain we saw combined with the overrun. So the match didn't do as terribly as it appeared. That being said, a 2.66 overrun (especially when it also had Shield and Ryback in it) is dreadful.


Yeah looks like it's worded in a way to save punk from the embarrassment. The big gain was only at the 11 P.M overrun, Q12 drew 2.28 and Q11 2.25.




D.M.N. said:


> *Did they push Ryback too fast to the main event*? Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but that is what happens when you get yourself into a situation by booking gimmick PPV's. Will he be forgotten about in a year time? This being WWE, I suspect he will...


Probably, but I think having him lose his first PPV main event match against someone like Punk was a bigger mistake that hurt him. Like Jericho said, should have put the title on him at HIAC and made a new legitimate star.


----------



## Chicago Warrior

Well since Cenas storyline with Ziggler is second to Ryback vs Punk then it's no surprise Cenas stuff isn't drawing. Perhaps people respond to important stuff instead of rehashed love triangles with the same girl. You make Cena important he draws, but if not then he doesn't. Right now people are tuning in either randomly or for the Ryback VS Punk stuff.


----------



## SerapisLiber

Defei said:


> Yeah looks like it's worded in a way to save punk from the embarrassment.


No, his 592,000 gain was what saved Punk from further embarrassment. Though, a 2.66 is still pretty humiliating.



> The big gain was only at the 11 P.M overrun,


Which still took place during... _*Punk*_'s match. No matter how you try and slice it or twist it, or rather, no matter how *you* try to "word it", it was still him, and it was still the biggest gain of the night. But again, admittedly, a 2.66 is nothing to boast about.

I have to wonder if rigging the Twitter vote had any influence on how it did, especially at the beginning. Of course, intros and commercial breaks should probably be considered as well. When did those happen? Anyone know?


----------



## THANOS

Defei said:


> Yeah looks like it's worded in a way to save punk from the embarrassment. The big gain was only at the 11 P.M overrun, Q12 drew 2.28 and Q11 2.25.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Probably, but I think having him lose his first PPV main event match against someone like Punk was a bigger mistake that hurt him. Like Jericho said, should have put the title on him at HIAC and made a new legitimate star.


Dave Meltzer trying to save Punk from embarrassment? Do you even know how the man feels about Punk? He's been doing the exact opposite of that for the past year. If anything, with the way it's worded, the match segment did well and he decided not to show that rating and instead just showed the overrun. That is far easier to believe than Meltzer saving Punk from embarrassment. :lol


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Meltzer has said positive things about Punk in the past. He tries to remain as objective as possible.


----------



## THANOS

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> Meltzer has said positive things about Punk in the past. He tries to remain as objective as possible.


Very rarely. I've seen him call gains Punk has gotten "weak for this timeslot" and when someone like Sheamus/Big Show/Cena does the same he'll either not comment on it or call it a strong gain. The fact is he's shown his bias more than enough times to know there's something up with that.


----------



## vanboxmeer

Meltzer likes Punk. He did give him two 5 star matches. It was Punk who attacked first.


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

THANOS said:


> Very rarely. I've seen him call gains Punk has gotten "weak for this timeslot" and when someone like Sheamus/Big Show/Cena does the same he'll either not comment on it or call it a strong gain. The fact is he's shown his bias more than enough times to know there's something up with that.


Meltzer has ranted on Punk a few times before, some of which were funny, but I don't think he hates Punk. It's not like he blames Punk for the overall declining ratings, or at least I never heard him say that.


----------



## THANOS

vanboxmeer said:


> Meltzer likes Punk. He did give him two 5 star matches. It was Punk who attacked first.


Have you listened to Meltzer talk about Punk before? He always criticizes him, whether it be for burying someone like Del Rio/Miz, whining, bad mouthing the Rock, etc. If you can find any of his podcasts and listen to then you'll hear the tone he has about Punk.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Meltzer has appeared to have a bias against Punk because anytime I've heard anything from Meltzer regarding Punk, it's been negative (In all fairness though, I don't listen to Meltzer often... only when he's brought up on here). I don't believe he "hates" Punk.


----------



## THANOS

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> Meltzer has ranted on Punk a few times before, some of which were funny, but I don't think he hates Punk. It's not like he blames Punk for the overall declining ratings, or at least I never heard him say that.


I've heard him try and explain why he believes casuals don't like Punk, meaning he believes Punk isn't drawing well, and his explanations took a lot of shots at Punk which he joked about. Also, like I said about the comments he makes on his ratings breakdowns, you can see the bias there front and centre with how he comments on Punk's segments the majority of time in comparison with others getting the same ratings for their segments.


----------



## THANOS

The Sandrone said:


> Meltzer has appeared to have a bias against Punk because anytime I've heard anything from Meltzer regarding Punk, it's been negative (In all fairness though, I don't listen to Meltzer often... only when he's brought up on here). I don't believe he "hates" Punk.


Exactly which proves my original point, that it is much easier to believe that Meltzer downplays Punk's good segments and emphasizes his bad segments, than him deliberately trying save Punk from embarrassment like that one poster said.


----------



## Nimbus

Stop arguing. Its very simple: ¿Who is the champion?? who is the main focus of the show? CM PUNK.

Hes not a draw, these ratings are almost at tna lvls.


----------



## BHfeva

Nimbus said:


> Stop arguing. Its very simple: ¿Who is the champion?? who is the main focus of the show? CM PUNK.
> 
> Hes not a draw, these ratings are almost at tna lvls.


Tbh if a 34 yo scsa debuts right now, i doubt he's gonna get better ratings. Ratings are about the show as a whole, a single "champion" can't dramatically change the ratings. (imo)


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Nimbus said:


> Stop arguing. Its very simple: ¿Who is the champion?? who is the main focus of the show? CM PUNK.


The thing is, it's not that simple.

Of course, there's no use in trying to argue it. Rather, let's just wait until Rock becomes champion and they're only just managing to get 3.0-3.1's.


----------



## Shawn Morrison

Nimbus said:


> Stop arguing. Its very simple: ¿Who is the champion?? who is the main focus of the show? CM PUNK.
> 
> Hes not a draw, these ratings are almost at tna lvls.


sorry to disappoint, but no. No one checks who the champion is to watch the whole show. It's a 3 hour show, which is the only reason the ratings are going down a hell hole. The champion is irrelevant.


----------



## Roncaglione

THANOS said:


> Very rarely. I've seen him call gains Punk has gotten "weak for this timeslot" and when someone like Sheamus/Big Show/Cena does the same he'll either not comment on it or call it a strong gain. The fact is he's shown his bias more than enough times to know there's something up with that.


Link or issue dates please.

Unlike most here I am a reader I don't see this at all.


----------



## Cliffy

Shawn Morrison said:


> sorry to disappoint, but no. No one checks who the champion is to watch the whole show. It's a 3 hour show, which is the only reason the ratings are going down a hell hole. The champion is irrelevant.


Posts like this should be a bannable offence.

Lets ignore the shit ratings Punk got this time last year as champ.


----------



## austin316 G.O.A.T

Austin or Rock can become champion and the ratings won't change much.

Hogan,Austin and Rock were present around WM 19 and it was one of the worst selling PPV.The scenario has changed so much.


----------



## murder

austin316 G.O.A.T said:


> Austin or Rock can become champion and the ratings won't change much.
> 
> Hogan,Austin and Rock were present around WM 19 and it was one of the worst selling PPV.The scenario has changed so much.


I bet if Rock becomes champion at the Rumble the rating will be in the 3's again. 

When Rock returned to Raw in 2003, the rating was in the 4's again. But they weren't able to keep the viewers leading up to mania, which the horrible Booker/HHH "main event" feud is more likely to blame for. 

Hogan wasn't on one single Raw show by the way. That's also why the ratings (and the buyrate) sucked, they had no Hogan and no Taker, two of the biggest draws ever and two of the most important guys on a Wrestlemania card on Raw.


----------



## hardysno1fan

I generally think it's the show that draws and not just 1 individual. Cena may be very popular but even his 2007 title reign lost a load of viewers on the whole. Hell it went from 4.0's to like low 3's. Thats huge. 

At the end of the day the whole product has to be superb. Yes you need a poster body or a the 'guy' but it's what you do with the roster that is important. John Cena didn't affect the ratings last week because he appeals to children and yet children DONT like romance. It's stupid.


----------



## Choke2Death

Cliffy Byro said:


> Posts like this should be a bannable offence.
> 
> Lets ignore the shit ratings Punk got this time last year as champ.


Well said. 3 hour has just become an excuse to cover up what a ratings cancer Punk is. Last year the go home show to MITB got a 2.94 and that was panic zone numbers at that time. He got to main event around December time (along with IWC darlings in D-Bryan and Zack Ryder) and the numbers were horrible. He then LOST viewers twice, once in the 10PM spot in a match with Bryan (IIRC) and the other was in the MAIN EVENT when he took on Bryan and Tensai. Now it's 3 hours, then the response was "Y U KARE ABT RATINGZZZ!!!!???!?!" while others accepted that 'casuals' just don't care for Punk.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

I actually lol'd when Phil told the viewers at home to tune out. You can see it's really got to him. Poor guy.


----------



## teick

The real ratings cancer is Vince, with his stupid ideas and countless booking changes. The man is senile, he should retire and let HHH to take over the company.


----------



## Loudness

The problem is that neither the storylines, nor stars are good enough to make wrestling bloom. I don't think wrestling is dying unlike most who try to overexagerate things, but let's just compare WCW and WWF in its prime to current WWE.

WCW had Steiner/Goldberg, the more brute personalties, WWE had the more hollywood style personas. Austin was the characterised ******* who drinks a lot of beer, The Rock was the arrogant high-society guy with charisma that would get his way, Steiner was the ultimate alpha male who would beat guys up for no pleasing their wife, and Goldberg would be the badass guy with insane intensity that could fuck anyone up.

In all four cases, creative did their best to display each wrestlers character. Nowadays wresters are both less interesting and storylines try less to make them standout more. If Austin didn't kick ass, if Rock didn't have catchphrases and expensive suits, if Goldberg lost and if Steiner never got chicks, how would they look like? Not very well.

On another note, WWE really needs a Scott Steiner like personality. Imagine a huge guy ripped to shreds shooting back on Punk and owning him totally, then fucking Lita, only to beat him up again. Maybe Cesaro could do it? He's a great ring worker put in a shitty gimmick, but he has the strength needed, and probably enough charisma if needed. Dunno if he could ever get Steiner level personality but it would probably be a good effort.


----------



## Falkono

Man those breakdowns are brutal.

If anything they show that Cena is losing some of his drawing power and people really don't care about Punk.
You could put that broom Ziggler wrestled on its own in the centre of the ring in the last segment and it would gain viewers on the segment before that. So because the last segment is higher then the one before does not mean who is in that segment is a draw. Because getting 2.7 in the last segment is awful and anyone claiming that = drawing needs a mercy killing...


----------



## Falkono

Shawn Morrison said:


> sorry to disappoint, but no. No one checks who the champion is to watch the whole show. It's a 3 hour show, which is the only reason the ratings are going down a hell hole. The champion is irrelevant.


Sorry but that's bullshit and you know it. To think Who is champ does not matter is one of the worst defences for Punk ever.

Its like saying whoever the boxing champ is doesn't effect the popularity of the card. People buy ppvs due to the main event and that is fact. Whether that be boxing, mma,or wrestling.

If Rock/Taker/SCSA/HBK or any of those guys were champ the ratings would go up big time. The reason for that is because those guys are popular. People want to watch them. They are draws. Fuck even Rock just singing had a 3.8 rating. Now imagine the rating when/if he is champ?

People need to accept that the current roster including the champ is mostly very under average guys. Being champ means a lot its just right now the champ isn't that interesting.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Mister Hands said:


> The fact that both Bryan/Rey and Sheamus/Cesaro lost a fair heap of viewers last week does not speak well of the WWE Universe.


And the fatal 4 way, man, that was a good match. Attention spans running on severe low. Tamina drawing like a BOSS. :side:


----------



## ChickMagnet12

Choke2Death said:


> Well said. 3 hour has just become an excuse to cover up what a ratings cancer Punk is. Last year the go home show to MITB got a 2.94 and that was panic zone numbers at that time. He got to main event around December time (along with IWC darlings in D-Bryan and Zack Ryder) and the numbers were horrible. He then LOST viewers twice,* once in the 10PM spot in a match with Bryan (IIRC)* and the other was in the MAIN EVENT when he took on Bryan and Tensai. Now it's 3 hours, then the response was "Y U KARE ABT RATINGZZZ!!!!???!?!" while others accepted that 'casuals' just don't care for Punk.


Has the 10pm slot ever gained in the 3 hour era? It's a poor time slot and just about everyone has lost viewers at that time (I stand to be corrected, I haven't studied the ratings).


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Falkono said:


> People need to accept that the current roster including the champ is mostly very under average guys.


That's the argument most people are fucking making when they say that Punk . The idea that there aren't guys who are there own could draw would be folly, but say that one guy is the reason for the declining ratings, even though there are so many other factors, is ignorant. The roster is filled mostly with uninteresting characters with shitty booking and few actual storylines. You talk about how certain guys can make the ratings go up big time, but when the Rock and Brock Lesnar were around the ratings barely got past the low 3s. The Rock wrestled for Survivor Series last year and it barely drew more than the year before. Lesnar wrestled for Extreme Rules this year and it barely drew more than the year before. It wasn't until they were put in PPVs that matter that the full extent of their drawing power could be harnessed. The booking has made it so most of the guys, episodes, titles, and PPVs mean nothing. You can bring in some of the most entertaining guys in the history of the business, but it still won't make the product hot or save it.

I also find it strange that some of you say Punk was/is a midcard champion, and blame him for the declining ratings. If he was booked in the midcard and not treated as the center/star of the show, I don't see how he can take a large portion of the blame. For most of Punk's reign, Cena was the center of the WWE Universe and continued to be the figurehead of Raw while Punk only had one or two segments in Quarters like 2,3,6, etc. Cena was the one who took up multiple segments during the RtWM to build up to his main event with the Rock. Cena was the one who wrestled one of the most popular UFC champions in history, Brock Lesnar. Cena was the one who feuded with the top heel, Johnny Ace. If your theory about how shows only draw due to one guy, then this should all fall upon Cena's shoulders since he's been the centerpiece for the WWE and face of the business for not just the past year, but the past 6 years.


----------



## Choke2Death

ChickMagnet12 said:


> Has the 10pm slot ever gained in the 3 hour era? It's a poor time slot and just about everyone has lost viewers at that time (I stand to be corrected, I haven't studied the ratings).


That was in May. Way before 3 hours. Back then, it was a big gainer almost every time.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

Choke2Death said:


> That was in May. Way before 3 hours. Back then, it was a big gainer almost every time.


Ah, my mistake. Apologies.

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

On Topic: I do think the majority of the Ratings problem is WWE's doing rather than an individual. Wrestling is no longer "cool" or popular in the mainstream, and anyone who remains (like us idiots who discuss it's ratings more than what actually happened in the show) have to endure the booking/writing that is incredibly poor & lacks continuity. 

Then we have the superstars themselves, the heels really struggle for heat unless you're blessed with Vickie Guerrero's voice. The faces themselves struggle to create themselves into mainstream stars and resort to cheap pops (right here in x town!!!!).

The titles mean nothing, especially the WHC title, the same title that Goldberg/HHH/Flair/Benoit made famous, meaningless. The brand split needs to return or the titles unified, asap. Wins and losses are traded on Raw/SD far too often, how are we supposed to take Cena/Ziggler at TLC seriously when Cena has already beat him clean on Raw just last week?

3 hours is just too long. Anyone saying this isn't a problem is deluding themselves. I have to record and fast forward to anything worth watching every week. Every damn thing insults my intelligence (Hornswaggle anonymous GM) and it's the same matches every week (Orton vs Barrett/Del Rio part XXXXXXX). There's nothing fresh to look forward too. Just think back to the hype caused by Punk/Ryback's stare down, it wasn't anything amazing, but it was fresh and people were hyped solely for that. 

I struggle to find reasons to tune in the next week, there's not enough cliff hangers. When Heyman peered out of the limo at the end of the Chicago raw in September, that had me dying to watch Raw the next week. I know someone of Heyman's history and status can't return every week, but you catch my drift, I hope.

Too many ads, recaps, tout, twitter and general media whoring. 

Be a star.

If anyone can say that the problems listed above are NOT effecting the ratings as much as Punk/any one individual is, you're deluded with anti-markism.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Falkono said:


> If Rock/Taker/SCSA/HBK or any of those guys were champ the ratings would go up big time. The reason for that is because those guys are popular. People want to watch them. They are draws. Fuck even Rock just singing had a 3.8 rating. Now imagine the rating when/if he is champ?


Exactly what kind of ratings are you expecting for the whole show based on one of them being champion? Because we'll more than likely be able to test your prediction with The Rock in February... when he'll also have the backing of Lesnar, Taker, and possibly HHH, as well as the fact it's Wrestlemania season. I'm sure they'll be higher than what Punk is getting now, but if you think you're going to be seeing anything above a 3.2 overall rating, I'd be willing to bet on that. 



> Its like saying whoever the boxing champ is doesn't effect the popularity of the card. People buy ppvs due to the main event and that is fact. Whether that be boxing, mma,or wrestling.


Here's the thing, TV ratings are a completely different beast from PPV buys. For Pay Per Views, Punk and his match (at least since Night of Champions) are what's mainly responsible for the Pay Per View buys, and it's where he does deserve a bulk of the blame if the numbers aren't good. However that's not the case for TV ratings, because the champion doesn't defend his title on every show, and therefore the fact he's champion holds little relevance as far as TV ratings go.

There's no doubt him being in the main event means he should definitely get more of the blame for a lousy number than say... Wade Barrett, but to think he's the one overwhelmingly responsible for the decline is wrong. The major reasons are 3 hour Raws (despite what some would say, they're just too long for people to stay tuned throughout), lack of intense storylines and lack of interesting characters.


----------



## SrsLii

Falkono said:


> Sorry but that's bullshit and you know it. To think Who is champ does not matter is one of the worst defences for Punk ever.
> 
> Its like saying whoever the boxing champ is doesn't effect the popularity of the card. People buy ppvs due to the main event and that is fact. Whether that be boxing, mma,or wrestling.
> 
> If Rock/Taker/SCSA/HBK or any of those guys were champ the ratings would go up big time. The reason for that is because those guys are popular. People want to watch them. They are draws. Fuck even Rock just singing had a 3.8 rating. Now imagine the rating when/if he is champ?
> 
> People need to accept that the current roster including the champ is mostly very under average guys. Being champ means a lot its just right now the champ isn't that interesting.


Rock being champ/in the ME isn't going to stop anyone from fast forwarding the rest of the show to get there. You need to look at the overall picture.


----------



## P1KACHU

If Punk weren't such an arrogant prick, people wouldn't enjoy making fun of him so much.


----------



## SPCDRI

3 hour RAW is one hour too long. This is I think the 18th month in a row where hour 3 had fewer viewers than hour 2 and it is clearly the least-watched hour of the program on a consistent basis. 3 hours is just too long. You can promise matches with the hot guys and the champs and do gimmicky stuff like the lie detector thing but the fact is about 500,000 people quit watching from the start of hour 1 and hour 3's "rating boost" is just them trying to get back all the people they lost because the product is too long and is not compelling start to finish.

The show does not maintain viewership or gain throughout the night.

Edit: My guess was that Hour 3 would continue to be the most viewed and highest rated portion of the show but that Hour 2 would be a massacre. But it doesn't seem like that. The show consistently sheds viewers and gets some of the shed viewers back for the close of the program and the overrun but nobody is really watching the meat and potatoes of the final 70 to 80 minutes of the show. It is disastrous. If you had to pick any hour to have the fewest viewers you'd pick hour 2, not hour 3 and overrun.


----------



## hardysno1fan

I don't think it will be long before the E goes back to 2hrs. They can't be making much more money what with the dire ratings. I just don't see how it is worth the hassle.

The big question is if it went back to 2hrs would they regain the viewers lost or is the damage irreversible?


----------



## murder

hardysno1fan said:


> The big question is if it went back to 2hrs would they regain the viewers lost or is the damage irreversible?


No because the show sucks, whether it's one, two or three hours long.

Rock coming back and becoming champion along with HHH/Lesnar/Taker coming back and, get this, better storylines will regain viewers.

Speaking of storylines, how does anyone expect Cena to draw ratings in a storyline as bad as his current one with AJ/Vickie/Ziggler? Even Austin and Rock had a problem to draw ratings in 2001 when Debra was involved.


----------



## sesshomaru

The ratings in the 3rd hour would spike if Rocky was Champion, but the rest of the show won't spike..maybe just go up a bit.



Even if the Champ's awesome, he can't carry 3 hours. Maybe 2, but definitely not 3


Here's what would boost ratings:
Storylines (at the same time)
Cena/Taker
Lesner/HHH
Rocky/Punk
Orton/Zigglar?
Barett/Jericho?
Meangiful midcard storylines to gain interest for the rest of the show


AKA, they can turn everything around this Wrestlemania if they make 5 great storylines that have interesting progression every week instead of one great storyline and a bunch of thrown-together-1-minute-before-the-promo storylines. That was my problem with last year's WM. Besides Rock/Cena (which wasn't even written that well, they relied far too much on "Dwayne" and bad jokes, Cena wasn't serious until 1 week before the match, and even then it was a taped promo. When he got to the ring he was his Barney the Dinosaur self again) everything else was kinda shit. Taker/HHH was fantastic, but it kinda wrote itself, and they had 3 veterans to help them. The writers don't really deserve credit here. Punk/Jericho was a travesty. It was just _boring_, with Jericho calling Punk CM Drunk and saying he's the BITW. It's like they couldn't give them a real reason to have conflict so they just wrote out of their asses and hoped the match would make up for it. It didn't. Also, Sheamus/Bryan was terrible. Both the match and storyline. Plus, WWE had no "redemption" storyline for Bryan to bring himself back up after losing in 30 seconds. The fans literately had to force WWE to keep Bryan relevant. WWE was trying to make him the next Jack Swagger. As if they don't have enough jobbers, now they're trying to use former WHCs.

They've done this before. Why can't they write more then 1 storyline at a time? Is Vince nickel-and-diming on the writing team?


----------



## BKsaaki

baleeted


----------



## DOPA

The Sandrone said:


> Here's the thing, TV ratings are a completely different beast from PPV buys. For Pay Per Views, Punk and his match (at least since Night of Champions) are what's mainly responsible for the Pay Per View buys, and it's where he does deserve a bulk of the blame if the numbers aren't good. However that's not the case for TV ratings, because the champion doesn't defend his title on every show, and therefore the fact he's champion holds little relevance as far as TV ratings go.
> 
> There's no doubt him being in the main event means he should definitely get more of the blame for a lousy number than say... Wade Barrett, but to think he's the one overwhelmingly responsible for the decline is wrong. The major reasons are 3 hour Raws (despite what some would say, they're just too long for people to stay tuned throughout), lack of intense storylines and lack of interesting characters.


Stop it Sandrone, you are making too much sense for the Punk haters who want to blame Punk for every single little problem WWE has with its products and its ratings.

No matter that there are other parts of the show to worry about which creatively sucks and has no reason for casuals to tune in right now ITS ALL VANILLA MIDGET PUNK'S FAULT.


----------



## hardysno1fan

Me no like punk. He make number bad. Me want number good.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

Has anyone even considered that nobody cares about Ryback chasing the title? If the low ratings are based on Punk despite him gaining in segments, why isn't the same said about Ryback? He's had equal if not more exposure/hype as Punk.


----------



## validreasoning

Falkono said:


> If Rock/Taker/SCSA/HBK or any of those guys were champ the ratings would go up big time. The reason for that is because those guys are popular. People want to watch them. They are draws. *Fuck even Rock just singing had a 3.8 rating. Now imagine the rating when/if he is champ?*


rock singing did a 3.5 rating and that was a two hour show with no competition 2 weeks away from mania, rock or anybody else is not moving the rating much in november/december in 2012 up against big football games with no important ppv till the final days of january 

look at the numbers raw was doing in june and july...look at the over-run numbers back then, the july 2nd/9th/16th raws all had over-runs which beat out every rock over-run during mania season

january is always a time when ratings should rebound anyway, after the bcs championship game, the raw after the rumble is always one of the most watched of the year


----------



## Apex Rattlesnake

Ryback bringing in dem raitingz


----------



## Nimbus

We need star power like the Rock or Austin....

Punk was given everything and failed. The guy is not a draw and wont be, its been a year...things wont change.


----------



## Falkono

validreasoning said:


> january is always a time when ratings should rebound anyway, after the bcs championship game, the raw after the rumble is always one of the most watched of the year


Sorry but this isn't correct. Or it depends on your definition of rebound.

Last January did a 3.1/ 2.8/ 3.0 and 3.1.
In the December just gone it did a 2.9/ 2.8/ 2.9 and 2.9.

So while ratings increased in January it was not by much at all.

The ratings do increase as we get towards Mania but in recent years it has not been by much at all. For example the last RAw before Mania this year did a 3.05 rating. Where as the one the year before did a 3.8. That in itself shows this year something is seriously wrong for numbers to fall so low.

As I said before the problem is the lack of stars on the roster. To prove my point you only need to go back to Raw 1000 to see a 3.8 rating for a 3 hour show. This show had a lot of the older guys involved so it is no surprise to see the numbers that high. You take away those guys and you have what we have now. And naturally the ratings reflect that.

Having The Rock as champion or even just being involved will increase the overall rating due to the amount of people who will watch his segments. 

My opinion is WWE needs to start getting the older guys involved more. Even if in a non wrestling capacity. On August the 6th when HBK was on in the 2nd hour his segment did a 3.5 rating. Compare that to the highest segment rating this week and your see it is a big difference. Vince needs to get those guys involved even if it is acting as a manager/referee. As I mentioned before the newer guys are just not interesting on their own. Punk is a good example of that. He was struggling and Heyman came along to help him be more interesting. They need to do that with others. The Shield on their own will bomb. They have already lost viewers. If they had a known guy be their leader it would be different. Punk is not a strong enough name to be their leader.


----------



## -Skullbone-

Falkono said:


> My opinion is WWE needs to start getting the older guys involved more. Even if in a non wrestling capacity. On August the 6th when HBK was on in the 2nd hour his segment did a 3.5 rating. Compare that to the highest segment rating this week and your see it is a big difference. Vince needs to get those guys involved even if it is acting as a manager/referee. As I mentioned before the newer guys are just not interesting on their own. Punk is a good example of that. He was struggling and Heyman came along to help him be more interesting. They need to do that with others. The Shield on their own will bomb. They have already lost viewers. If they had a known guy be their leader it would be different. Punk is not a strong enough name to be their leader.


So how would you make the current guys interesting? We all know the older guys like Rock won't be around forever and are only temporary solutions to aspects like viewership numbers. They are only there by name, so what's going to sustain interest around guys like The Shield once they aren't there? Keep in mind that they'll be the ones inside the ring and continuing future feuds and programs as well. 

Also, Heyman's involvement with Punk has not noticeably boosted his appeal if we were to go by numerical indicators. You say he's more interesting, but people aren't paying much attention by the looks of things.



Nimbus said:


> We need star power like the Rock or Austin....


Tell us how we get star power like the Rock or Austin...


----------



## Guy LeDouche

Cookie Monster said:


>


Nice to see he has pepperonis as nipples.


----------



## BHfeva

Rock and Austin became this popular because they were part of a good show and interesting story lines. CM Punk simply cannot become as popular as Rock/Austin by being part of a crappy show.


----------



## DA

Ain't no blaming Punk for that monstrosity this week no matter what way people want to spin it

Can't wait for the shitstorm in here in a couple of days


----------



## Kabraxal

Who knows what the ratings will look like... terrible terrible show, but it's not like a lot more was on that was worth watching. The MNF game was a blowout, unlike last weeks, and there just wasn't much happening. I could see a slight bump this week.


----------



## Bushmaster

The Pats played Monday. :brady2 they are easily the biggest draws in the NFL. Expect raw to not do well. Hoping ppl see the difference of a Raw without alot of Punk. He is easily the best part of Raw and hopefully he is still around even though he cant wrestle.


----------



## checkcola

BHfeva said:


> Rock and Austin became this popular because they were part of a good show and interesting story lines. CM Punk simply cannot become as popular as Rock/Austin by being part of a crappy show.


CM Punk is not a victim of the times. If he were arround during the Austin Era of RAW, he'd be a midcarder. He certainly wouldn't be taking Rock or Austin's spots. If he were in WCW, he'd either be just another member of the nWo or directionless in the midcard.


----------



## Headliner

2.3, 2.4 maybe? Houston/New England game could play a factor.


----------



## blur

Punk had only one segment on the entire RAW, and RAW was shittier than it ever was (except the four way tag match, Cesaro and the ending). I expect the ratings to be shit, seriously, I'm expecting a 2.2 or 2.1.

Dem haters to blame Punk for a 2.2 now.


----------



## TheRainKing

It's not going to be 2.2 or anything like that, probably 2.6 at worst.


----------



## roadkill_

Come on 2.2!!


----------



## Choke2Death

Another Raw... time for ratings! :mark:

I have not watched or read the results for the show and I don't care enough to do so. Only reason I wait for every Tuesday is just for the ratings. That's how bad WWE is atm. And I'm not even gonna bother with the blame games anymore.


----------



## DA

My Prediction: 2.4 :vince3


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Punk only had one, 5 min segment. Raw's gonna do horrible.


----------



## IncapableNinja

Didn't watch the show but I'm expecting a slight bump in the ratings for this week as the American football game was a blowout.

Entering my prediction of 2.71 into the ratings sweepstakes.


----------



## WTFWWE

Very early numbers. 

Hour 1: 3.443 
Hour 2: 3.432
Hour 3: 3.164

HOLY SHEEEEEEEEEEET :lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

What the fuck is that number? 2.3 or 2.4? 


Save_Us.Rocky :rock4


----------



## blur

^ fake.


----------



## Stad

Choke2Death said:


> Another Raw... time for ratings! :mark:
> 
> *I have not watched or read the results for the show and I don't care enough to do so. Only reason I wait for every Tuesday is just for the ratings. That's how bad WWE is atm. And I'm not even gonna bother with the blame games anymore.*


Talk about a sad life :lmao


----------



## 123bigdave

stadw0n306 said:


> Talk about a sad life :lmao


Says somebody with nearly 3,500 posts on a Pro Wrestling forum. . .


----------



## vanboxmeer

2.3


----------



## Stad

123bigdave said:


> Says somebody with nearly 3,500 posts on a Pro Wrestling forum. . .


I average 6 posts a day, you know since that takes up so much time.


----------



## mblonde09

stadw0n306 said:


> Talk about a sad life :lmao


Yep he just waits for Tuesday and the viewing figures to come out, so he can troll the ratings thread with his tedious, anti-Punk, schtick... sad indeed.


----------



## DOPA

WTFWWE said:


> Very early numbers.
> 
> Hour 1: 3.443
> Hour 2: 3.432
> Hour 3: 3.164
> 
> HOLY SHEEEEEEEEEEET :lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao
> 
> What the fuck is that number? 2.3 or 2.4?
> 
> 
> Save_Us.Rocky :rock4


Ratings haven't come out yet. Those numbers are made up.


----------



## krai999

YEAH DAMN RIGHT I WAS ONE OF THEM THAT DIDN'T WATCH THEY JOBBED OUT MY BOY D BRYAN TO REY MYSTERIO GUESS THAT WOULD TEACH THEM A LESSON


----------



## THANOS

mblonde09 said:


> Yep he just waits for Tuesday and the viewing figures to come out, so he can troll the ratings thread with his tedious, anti-Punk, schtick... sad indeed.


Notice how he said he won't play the blame game this week as well! Well of course he won't because CM Punk was barely on the show at all :lol.

These ratings will be hilarious to see since no one that is usally shit on for being anti-draws got a lot of time. Hell no barely featured, Punk barely featured, and Shield only had a repeat of their smackdown promo and a run-in at the end. This was mostly the Cena/Ziggler, Sheamus/Show, AJ/Vickie, and midcard show.


----------



## Green Light

Looks like Choke2Death has really gotten to you lot.


----------



## Choke2Death

stadw0n306 said:


> Talk about a sad life :lmao


Want me to talk about sad lives? Sure enough. The life of stadw0n306 is the perfect example. 

> Claims not to care about ratings
> Visit the Ratings thread anyway
> Probably on a daily visit just to leave smart-ass replies like above
> Gets butthurt by the posts a certain member makes about his favorite wrestler
> Puts said member's posting history on bookmark and reads through it frequently to find something he sees fit to respond to
> Constantly responds to said member on a regular basis
> Thinks that "waiting for the ratings" means literally counting minutes and seconds just for the numbers to show up



mblonde09 said:


> Yep he just waits for Tuesday and the viewing figures to come out, so he can troll the ratings thread with his tedious, anti-Punk, schtick... sad indeed.


You shouldn't even open your mouth. You come to this thread regularly just so you can leave some stupid remark about me. That's literally all you ever do in here. You clearly have have an obsession with me. Oh and I "just wait for Tuesday"? Have you been following me around outside of the computer screen? If yes, that takes obsession to a whole new level.

Punk marks love me and the feeling is mutual. Where would I be without my fans constantly responding to me? :


----------



## D.M.N.

Hour 1 - 3.743m
Hour 2 - 3.876m
Hour 3 - 3.672m

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...sh-teen-mom-2-wwe-raw-pawn-stars-more/161135/

Was that a sigh of relief I just heard in Stamford?


----------



## holt_hogan

The 10/12 edition of Monday Night Raw drew the following viewers:

Hour 1: 3.743m
Hour 2: 3.876m
Hour 3: 3.672m

Compared to last weeks:

Hour 1: 3.58m
Hour 2: 3.37m
Hour 3: 3.36m


----------



## #1Peep4ever

still awfull


----------



## JasonLives

Still shitty but a bit up.

So guessing a 2.7 rating maybe?


----------



## Starbuck

No Punk and the viewership increases.

:lmao

I rest my case

8*D


----------



## iMMORTALTNA

look i don't wanna sound like punk hater 'cause i like the guy and his my fave in WWE but would you guys just look at the numbers? coincidence??


----------



## JasonLives

SANTA GAME said:


> No Punk and the viewership increases.
> 
> :lmao
> 
> I rest my case
> 
> 8*D


Highest watched was Hour 2, guess what started that hour unk

And Sheamus Vs. Ziggler probably did pretty well in that hour aswell ( in terms of not losing a bunch of viewers ). That or Del Rio Vs. Ryder afterwards was a major draw.


The only thing WWE can be happy about is that no hour bombed. Like Hour 3 usually do, now it held pretty steady.


----------



## DA

unk :heyman saving Hour 2 








unk :heyman


----------



## Starbuck

JasonLives said:


> Highest watched was Hour 2, guess what started that hour unk
> 
> And Sheamus Vs. Ziggler probably did pretty well in that hour aswell ( in terms of how shitty the overall viewership was ).


ZOMG PUNK WUZ ONLY IN DAT SGMNT 4 LIK 5 MINUTS HE CNT B BLAMED 4 DA TURRIBLE QURTR HOUR

unk3

ZOMG PUNK WUZ ONLY IN DAT SGMNT 4 LIK 5 MINUTS DAT MEANS HE GETS CREDITS 4 DA FULL HOUR!!!

unk2


----------



## WTFWWE

Wow don't call a 2.7 a good rating at all. It is still fucking shit.


----------



## DOPA

SANTA GAME said:


> No Punk and the viewership increases.
> 
> :lmao
> 
> I rest my case
> 
> 8*D


Highest hour was the second and Punk started that hour. Punk drawing those numbers.... unk

Still bad numbers but at least they are a bit up from previous weeks.


----------



## Choke2Death

SANTA GAME said:


> No Punk and the viewership increases.


:lmao :lmao :lmao

I guess it's a bit better but still a terrible number.


----------



## MikeChase27

RG3 wasn't playing on MNF you dummies.


----------



## Starbuck

Based on this information I think it's safe to predict 3.4 million buys for TLC. No Punk = $$$.

unk3


----------



## The Lady Killer

FUCK OFF PUNK MARKS


----------



## MikeChase27

MNF drew 2 million less, TOM BRDY ISN'T A DRAWZ GUYZ THE PATZ NEEDZ TOO BENCH HIMZ


----------



## #1Peep4ever

oh my... i see where this is going

best thing is we just wait for the breakdown shall we?


----------



## Starbuck

The Reindeer Killer said:


> FUCK OFF PUNK MARKS


:lmao

FUCK OFF PUNK

HELLO VIEWERSHIP


----------



## DOPA

The Reindeer Killer said:


> FUCK OFF PUNK MARKS


:lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## JasonLives

SANTA GAME said:


> ZOMG PUNK WUZ ONLY IN DAT SGMNT 4 LIK 5 MINUTS HE CNT B BLAMED 4 DA TURRIBLE QURTR HOUR
> 
> unk3
> 
> ZOMG PUNK WUZ ONLY IN DAT SGMNT 4 LIK 5 MINUTS DAT MEANS HE GETS CREDITS 4 DA FULL HOUR!!!
> 
> unk2


Helped draw in viewers in the end of Hour 1, saved Hour 2 in the process. What a hero unk2


----------



## Starbuck

JasonLives said:


> Helped draw in viewers in the end of Hour 1, saved Hour 2 in the process. What a hero unk2


Rants like a bitch about ratings one week, then removes himself from the show the next to let it prosper. Yes, a true hero.


----------



## DA

Inb4 the breakdown showing Punk's segment brought in +500,000 viewers 8*D


----------



## MikeChase27

NO RYBACK = MORE VIEWERS

MORE BRAD MADDOX = MORE VIEWERS


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

CM Punk once again saves the show. Even injured, they need him there.

Punk = GOAT.


----------



## Starbuck

DwayneAustin said:


> Inb4 the breakdown showing Punk's segment brought in +500,000 viewers 8*D


DAT 5 MINUTE SEGMENT


----------



## MikeChase27

Isn't this like the 17th week in a ROW where the 3rd hour is the least watched?


----------



## The Lady Killer

Preliminary breakdown:

Hour 1 - Bunch of ladders surrounding the ring = 3.7M viewers. Ziggler/Sheamus/Show/Cena segment saw a 500k increase. VINCE interrupting jobbers saw a 1M increase in viewership. Once VINCE left and it was strictly Truth/Barrett, viewership declined drastically. Only thing that saved the segment was Cesaro's satchel. Fatal 4 way tag trended worldwide as Cody's moustache increased viewership by 350k.

Hour 2 - Punk promo w/Heyman witnessed the largest dip in viewership since Raw went to 3 hours. Embarrassing. Luckily, Sheamus/Ziggler brought most of the viewers back. Top rope X-Factor increased viewership for 10 seconds. Divas crap saw a large decline in viewers, but nothing as drastic as Punk's promo earlier in the hour. AJ/Vickie (coined as a '3rd main event') would've been a disaster had it not been for Brad 'The Great' Maddox.

Hour 3 - ADR/Ryder had the audience (and the general viewing public, apparently) groaning, as viewership tanked. Fortunately, Cesaro's tilt-a-whirl on Kofi saved the 3rd hour from being a complete disaster. Miz looked like a jobber, which added a few more viewers. Finally RYBACK contributed to one of the best overruns for a 3rd hour of Raw. It's amazing what happens to viewership when a true star such as Ryback closes the show and Punk is nowhere to be found.


----------



## JasonLives

SANTA GAME said:


> DAT 5 MINUTE SEGMENT


8 minutes bro unk4




The Reindeer Killer said:


> Hour 3 - ADR/Ryder had the audience (and the general viewing public, apparently) groaning, as viewership tanked.


Was in Hour 2. Del Rio might have actually drawn for the first time ever!


----------



## Starbuck

JasonLives said:


> 8 minutes bro unk4


DAT 8 MINUTE SEGMENT


----------



## checkcola

AJ Lee featured as a crazy chick, increased viewership?


----------



## DOPA

DwayneAustin said:


> Inb4 the breakdown showing Punk's segment brought in +500,000 viewers 8*D


Will definitely be a gain.

Whilst there are definitely a lot of Punk marks defending him even though he certainly isn't a ratings draw (and Punk is one of my favorite wrestlers) it is humorous to poke fun at some of the Punk haters who are even more dogmatic in their views thinking one guy is causing a ratings slump in a product full of creative problems :lol.

OMGZ PUNKZ DOESN'T DRAWZ RATINGZ WILL INCREASE TO 3.5 IF THEY TAKE HIM OFF TELEVISIONZ unk


----------



## Oakue

The AJ/Vickie match may have lost a ton of viewers but it is only because they didn't advertise the G.O.A.T. would be the ref.

And if it's true that the Punk segment saw the largest ratings drop since going to 3 hours...well then...I'm not sure what more can be said.


----------



## Green Light

Even the mere mention of The Rock's name brings in the ratings unk


----------



## WTFWWE

Less Cena/Punk/AJ/Vickie 

MOAR RYBACK!


----------



## MikeChase27

RAW before three hours 4.7 million viewers, RAW during three hours 3.7 million viewers.


----------



## Starbuck

Wouldn't be surprised to see AJ/Vickie do rather well tbh. I hope the Miz TV segment does well though. The 3 of them deserve the spotlight imo. Great segment.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

MikeChase27 said:


> Isn't this like the 17th week in a ROW where the 3rd hour is the least watched?


18th time or 19th time


----------



## Oakue

Doesn't AJ usually do well in the ratings for some ungodly strange reason? Seems like every week I'm reading a + something when she's on.


----------



## The Lady Killer

JasonLives said:


> Was in Hour 2. Del Rio might have actually drawn for the first time ever!


Yeah, they all seem to blend together after awhile.


----------



## MikeChase27

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...sh-teen-mom-2-wwe-raw-pawn-stars-more/161135/

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...single-ladies-2-american-pickers-more/140347/

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...pper-housewives-of-beverly-hills-more/109328/

Is it safe to say that blaming poor RAW numbers on MNF is a bit silly? Link 1 was from this past Monday, Link 2 is from earlier in the year, and the final link is from last year during a MNF game between The Chiefs and Chargers.


----------



## DOPA

moonmop said:


> Doesn't AJ usually do well in the ratings for some ungodly strange reason? Seems like every week I'm reading a + something when she's on.


Dat AJ drawing power!

Seriously I dunno, I didn't think so tbh.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

DwayneAustin said:


> Inb4 the breakdown showing Punk's segment brought in +500,000 viewers 8*D


Dont think Punk drew that much.. If at all maybe 500k viewers
Still hilarious to see people hating on Punk because of that little increase saying he wasnt there for most of the show. Pretty sure if the number was the same as last week they would have said its Punks fault because he still was on the show. And the third hour is still the least watched.

Lets see what the breakdown brings


----------



## Oakue

Crusade said:


> Dat AJ drawing power!
> 
> Seriously I dunno, I didn't think so tbh.


Maybe I'm thinking of someone else then.


----------



## vanboxmeer

The only thing AJ is drawing is a massive negative to Cena's segments and bringing HIS drawing power in all demos to the lowest it's ever been since he's been on Raw.

She's also drawing in more Vickie television exposure, when before Vickie was merely a background character. The only reason Vickie is no longer in her diminished role is purely to put over AJ, else we wouldn't have to see that hag and the rag on television and being promoted as a top 3 program in the entire company every week shitting up the product with zero legitimate upside versus the amount of creative effort, advertising, and opportunity cost put into this cyclone self-indulgent, antiquated, poorly executed "gurl powa" movement.


----------



## MikeChase27

Crusade said:


> Dat AJ drawing power!
> 
> Seriously I dunno, I didn't think so tbh.


Pedophiles want to rape her and 12 year girls hate her.

That should be on the next AJ Lee shirt.


----------



## JasonLives

Im guessing there wasent any MAJOR gains or MAJOR loses. Kinda like last week. +200.000 here or -200.000 there. Where most loses can be explained by commercial breaks.
When viewership reaches this low there is less fluctuations because there are less casuals watching. Who are usually the biggest reason for gains and drops.

Next week is the Live commercial free SmackDown. That would actually be a interesting breakdown ( which we never see ) where its nothing to blame but what is actually going on in the ring.


----------



## MikeChase27

vanboxmeer;12367774[B said:


> ]The only thing AJ is drawing is a massive negative to Cena's segments and bringing HIS drawing power in all demos to the lowest it's ever been since he's been on Raw.[/B]
> 
> She's also drawing in more Vickie television exposure, when before Vickie was merely a background character. The only reason Vickie is no longer in her diminished role is purely to put over AJ, else we wouldn't have to see that hag and the rag on television and being promoted as a top 3 program in the entire company every week shitting up the product with zero legitimate upside versus the amount of creative effort, advertising, and opportunity cost put into this cyclone self-indulgent, antiquated, poorly executed "gurl powa" movement.


Thats a great point.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

No Ryback for the first two hours = Ratings Prosper
Ryback gets 2 minutes on hour three = Ratings Die

Even with 2 minutes of airtime Ryback kills ratings. They should call him RyIcantdraw lol.


----------



## Starbuck

:lmao at Punk marks trying to troll Ryback. Sorry kids. It ain't funny cuz he hasn't been WWE CHAMP for a year. More Punk trolling plz. It's much more fun.


----------



## MikeChase27

The Cynical Miracle said:


> No Ryback for the first two hours = Ratings Prosper
> Ryback gets 2 minutes on hour three = Ratings Die
> 
> Even with 2 minutes of airtime Ryback kills ratings. They should call him RyIcantdraw lol.


Ever since Ryback main evented Hell in a Cell ratings have been dead. unk


----------



## The Lady Killer

You guys do realize Ryback was the most over person on the roster last night, right?


----------



## MikeChase27

The Reindeer Killer said:


> You guys do realize Ryback was the most over person on the roster last night, right?


Yet ratings are down.


----------



## The Lady Killer

They are also down with your butt buddy as the champ. What's your point?


----------



## MikeChase27

The Reindeer Killer said:


> They are also down with your butt buddy as the champ. What's your point?


My point is the product as a whole blows and thats why ratings are down.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Well above it looked as though you were blaming Ryback. 

Last week hour 3 featuring PUNK = 3.36
This week hour 3 w/out PUNK = 3.67

I rest my case. :hb


----------



## hardysno1fan

Yesterdays ratings were pretty good. I mean by todays standard.


----------



## DOPA

vanboxmeer said:


> The only thing AJ is drawing is a massive negative to Cena's segments and bringing HIS drawing power in all demos to the lowest it's ever been since he's been on Raw.
> 
> She's also drawing in more Vickie television exposure, when before Vickie was merely a background character. The only reason Vickie is no longer in her diminished role is purely to put over AJ, else we wouldn't have to see that hag and the rag on television and being promoted as a top 3 program in the entire company every week shitting up the product with zero legitimate upside versus the amount of creative effort, advertising, and opportunity cost put into this cyclone self-indulgent, antiquated, poorly executed "gurl powa" movement.


:lmao :lmao


----------



## MikeChase27

The Reindeer Killer said:


> Well above it looked as though you were blaming Ryback.
> 
> Last week hour 3 featuring PUNK = 3.36
> This week hour 3 w/out PUNK = 3.67
> 
> I rest my case. :hb


Punk as champ last year = 4.369

Ryback = 3.67

I rest my case


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Edit


----------



## The Lady Killer

RYBACK putting him through a table accounted for 450/500k increase if I can be honest for a moment.


----------



## Tnmore

Ofcourse the viewership increased. This was the first time in three whole months Punk wasn't part of the Main event or overrun. They actually promoted a proven draw with Cena and Big show this time instead of that overrated, overpushed, boring, miserable mid card champion and there you have the right results. 

When was the last time Punk wasn't promoted for the RAW Main event/Overrun? I think it was September 3rd episode with Cena/Del Rio main event iirc? 

This clearly proves casuals don't give a single fuck about this guy, not even when he is legit injured. Possibly the worst WWE champion in history.


----------



## MikeChase27

The Reindeer Killer said:


> RYBACK putting him through a table accounted for 450/500k increase if I can be honest for a moment.


Yes 450/500k tuned back in for a 5 seccond spot. :rock4


----------



## TinkerMan

Last nights Raw was brilliant. Showed that they intend to start improving the product. Some very risky stuff as well that stirred the crowd and that you wouldn't have got a few years ago. Plenty of weapon shots, Big Show being racist towards Sheamus, Khali and Vicky segment, Cesaro's mic work and the Miz renaming Rhodes Scholars "the pink and the stink" (which means vagina and anus btw)

Top stuff.


----------



## Kabraxal

MikeChase27 said:


> My point is the product as a whole blows and thats why ratings are down.


This... Punk was hotter than Ryback could dream last year around MitB. Then nothing as a whole changed with WWE and he was relegated to being HHH's bitch and a midcard WWE champion for most of his reign. I'll call it now... you put the belt on Ryback and within months, people will be wondering why they gave it to him. He can't wrestle, he can't speak... the WWE is doing it right now by leaving him to do 2 minute run ins where he can't stink up the joint. The moment he gets more time, the crowd won't be so hot to say the least. 

And really... being over really doesn't seem to mean much. You had crowds chanting Punk's name. You had crowds erupting in Yes! for Bryan. You've had guys like Ziggler and Ryder either sneak into getting ovations for short bursts or staying relevant for longer. None of that has drastically improved anything. For crying out loud... you have a heel champion with a face chasing for the title and it isn't improving shit. As much as some want to blame Punk only... you have to look at who's chasing him too. Most wrestling fans are looking at it and going "well, Punk wins and he gets jobbed to the Rock for Rock/Cena II or Ryback wins and we get... whatever mosntrousity that would be.... yipee.............". It's a dead feud no matter how you look at it. And that is the problem... there are too many dead feuds because either outcome is just boring or because everyone knows that if you lose, it doesn't matter... it will have no affect on your title shots. SO people just start tuning out because nothing happens at all.


----------



## Starbuck

Triple H's Tear = 5+ million

Hunter's tear > Punk's entire reign > Ryback

Your case is :buried


----------



## MikeChase27

If Ryback is such a monster drawing face why aren't people tuning in to see him chase Punk for the belt?


----------



## Starbuck

MikeChase27 said:


> If Ryback is such a monster drawing face why aren't people tuning in to see him chase Punk for the belt?


If Punk is such a monster drawing heel why aren't people tuning in to see him at all? 8*D


----------



## Choke2Death

MikeChase27 said:


> If Ryback is such a monster drawing face why aren't people tuning in to see him chase Punk for the belt?


Because even an idiot knows that Punk will not drop the belt until the Royal Rumble at least.


----------



## MikeChase27

SANTA GAME said:


> Triple H's Tear = 5+ million
> 
> Hunter's tear > Punk's entire reign > Ryback
> 
> Your case is :buried


When HHH hits someone with a pedigree he says "You've been buried bitch"

That would be a great t-shirt.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Fact. Punk was in the highest rated segment in the last ten years on Raw 1000. Also the last two PPV's where Punk was in the main event increased from last year's same two events in terms of buy rates. Also Summerslam last year made more money in terms of overall revenue then this year's even though this year's Summerslam was headlined by a so called megastar. Guess who headlined Summerslam last year?

Men Lie, Women Make Sandwiches, Numbers Don't.


----------



## Nimbus

This is hilarious, first show without punk in a while = Rating increase.

I wonder whats the excuse this time punk marks???


----------



## Starbuck

The Cynical Miracle said:


> Fact. Punk was in the highest rated segment in the last ten years on Raw 1000. Also the last two PPV's where Punk was in the main event increased from last year's same two events in terms of buy rates. Also Summerslam last year made more money in terms of overall revenue then this year's even though this year's Summerslam was headlined by a so called megastar. Guess who headlined Summerslam last year?
> 
> Men Lie, Women Make Sandwiches, Numbers Don't.


:lmao :lmao :lmao

Yeah right ratings don't matter to you yet here you are presenting your case every week. Amusing. Just you keep telling yourself whatever you want. It'll be all right lol.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

^ :lol Starbuck why are you so butthurt about all of these comments crediting Punk? For Christ sake 99% of the posts in this thread are troll posts and meant to be taken as such. Stop taking them so seriously.


----------



## DA

The Cynical Miracle said:


> Fact. Punk was in the highest rated segment in the last ten years on Raw 1000. Also the last two PPV's where Punk was in the main event increased from last year's same two events in terms of buy rates. Also Summerslam last year made more money in terms of overall revenue then this year's even though this year's Summerslam was headlined by a so called megastar. Guess who headlined Summerslam last year?
> 
> Men Lie, *Women Make Sandwiches*, Numbers Don't.


:vince2

Inb4 Asenath Hutz


----------



## Starbuck

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> ^ :lol Starbuck why are you so butthurt about all of these comments crediting Punk? For Christ sake 99% of the posts in this thread are troll posts and meant to be taken as such. Stop taking them so seriously.


Another one bites the dust lol.


----------



## The Lady Killer

Yeah, Starbuck. Your posting has really deteriorated lately. I hardly even recognize you anymore. What a shame.


----------



## Choke2Death

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> ^ :lol Starbuck why are you so butthurt about all of these comments crediting Punk? For Christ sake 99% of the posts in this thread are troll posts and meant to be taken as such. Stop taking them so seriously.


Pot calling the kettle black.


----------



## Kabraxal

I think it would be nice if people stopped blaming it all on one guy... especially one that hardly main evented and was second fiddle to Cena most of the year. In all this we are forgetting that some posters new shiny toy in Ryback isn't drawing. Cena isn't drawing. McMahon isn't even spiking numbers. I wouldn't be shocked to see the Rock return and there to be a marginal increase. It isn't the talent scaring away viewers right now... it's knowing that WWE will not give one fuck about any storyline and change the rules at any given time with no good reason. The only reason to watch Raw right now is to watch a once iconic show crash and burn horribly and maybe hoping it's a pheonix and not just a cheap Pinto now.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

SANTA GAME said:


> Another one bites the dust lol.


unk2

But seriously, Ryback is an anti-draw. His push has failed. BUT HOW COULD THIS BE POSSIBLE, HE GOT MUSSLES. LARGER DEN LIFE~~~~~~


----------



## MikeChase27

More people watched Pawn Stars than the last hour of RAW. Ryback putting those kids to sleep unk3


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

The segment with Jericho and Punk on the same night as the big brawl between Lesnar and Cena out drew it in terms of viewership and ratings?

CM Punk V Mark Henry match did the same number as The Rock promo after WM on the same night? 

Punk has been in more segments that have gained over a million than any other superstar this year?

Conclusion = Punk is a bigger star than David Beckham


----------



## Coffey

I hope that The Usos did well. I would like to see more of them. They were pretty entertaining last night.


----------



## JY57

overall rating was 2.67


----------



## DOPA

Kabraxal said:


> I think it would be nice if people stopped blaming it all on one guy... especially one that hardly main evented and was second fiddle to Cena most of the year. In all this we are forgetting that some posters new shiny toy in Ryback isn't drawing. Cena isn't drawing. McMahon isn't even spiking numbers. I wouldn't be shocked to see the Rock return and there to be a marginal increase. It isn't the talent scaring away viewers right now... it's knowing that WWE will not give one fuck about any storyline and change the rules at any given time with no good reason. The only reason to watch Raw right now is to watch a once iconic show crash and burn horribly and maybe hoping it's a pheonix and not just a cheap Pinto now.


Unfortunately short sighted marks will be short sighted. There is always a scapegoat. Right now its Punk. And before then it was Cena. And I'm not someone arguing Punk is a ratings draw, he isn't but its not all his fault. You can't blame the entire product on a single talent.


----------



## Crona

Walk-In said:


> I hope that The Usos did well. I would like to see more of them. They were pretty entertaining last night.


Agreed, Usos are fun and the crowd was at least somewhat responsive to them.


----------



## TheF1BOB

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> ^ :lol Starbuck why are you so butthurt about all of these comments crediting Punk? For Christ sake 99% of the posts in this thread are troll posts and meant to be taken as such. Stop taking them so seriously.


This is rich coming from a Phil mark. fpalm


----------



## Starbuck

The Reindeer Killer said:


> Yeah, Starbuck. Your posting has really deteriorated lately. I hardly even recognize you anymore. What a shame.


I think you mean my posting has really gone downhill. Maybe it's because I changed my name and turned my back on the WF Universe. SANTA GAME = Heel Starbuck. Nobody even noticed my heel turn either. Now I know what CM Punk feels like 



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> unk2
> 
> But seriously, Ryback is an anti-draw. His push has failed. BUT HOW COULD THIS BE POSSIBLE, HE GOT MUSSLES. LARGER DEN LIFE~~~~~~


I've never said that Ryback draws or doesn't draw. I've commented on his segments and that's about it. Nobody was even talking about Ryback though lol. Not until the Punk Defence League got here of course  Y U BE HATIN CUZ DAT RYBACK GOT DEM MUSKLES AND DAT PUNK GOT DAT SKINNYFAT?


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> ^ :lol Starbuck why are you so butthurt about all of these comments crediting Punk? For Christ sake 99% of the posts in this thread are troll posts and meant to be taken as such. Stop taking them so seriously.


He's just mad that Punk has held the title longer then all his favourite wrestlers. 

And while HHH is getting his arm broken and crying during a fake retirement speech no one believes or cares about. Punks trailblazing the business.


----------



## Tnmore

MikeChase27 said:


> If Ryback is such a monster drawing face why aren't people tuning in to see him chase Punk for the belt?


Because he is no longer the monster drawing face. He was until HIAC PPV main event where they had punk beat him. That clearly ruined his appeal. 

All PPV numbers have been up this year btw. It's not punk. MITB '11 is the only PPV you can credit him for the buys.


----------



## The Lady Killer

SANTA GAME said:


> I think you mean my posting has really gone downhill. Maybe it's because I changed my name and turned my back on the WF Universe. SANTA GAME = Heel Starbuck. Nobody even noticed my heel turn either. Now I know what CM Punk feels like



Oh right, it was "downhill." Maybe you're starting to rub off on me. I feel a little off my GAME (pun intended).


----------



## Nimbus

Who is this starbuck you guys talking about?, i dont see anyone with that name, confusing.


----------



## Kabraxal

Crusade said:


> Unfortunately short sighted marks will be short sighted. There is always a scapegoat. Right now its Punk. And before then it was Cena. And I'm not someone arguing Punk is a ratings draw, he isn't but its not all his fault. You can't blame the entire product on a single talent.


I think some scapegoated Cena only because he was the poster boy of the biggest problem with the WWE... it was all about Cena and to hell with everything else. Most of us have stopped blaming Cena personally and recognised it's shitty booking and only shitty booking killing this company. Back in 95, I heard it so many times that the roster just couldn't compete and wasn't good enough. Then when the shackles came off, that very same roster was suddenly the hottest damn thing on television. You went from Ringmaster to SCSA... Maiva to the Rock... cowboy and roadie to the New Age Outlaws... blue blood to ass kicking degenerate... Dentist to the Big Red Machine. Really, they had a hell of a lot of talent that was hamstrung by some of the shittiest booking ever. That is the exact same thing happening now. This roster is stacked and this should could be electric... they just need to pull their head out of their ass and book it properly. Could you imagine the midcard fueds? The tag feuds? And the non main event feuds? IT would be must watch TV if they let this roster achieve it's potential!


----------



## The Lady Killer

Nimbus said:


> Who is this starbuck you guys talking about?, i dont see anyone with that name, confusing.


The guy responding to posts that start with "Starbuck, ..."


----------



## TheF1BOB

DAT SANTA GAME WORKIN DEM PHIL MARKS LIKE A BOSS! :lol


----------



## Starbuck

The Cynical Miracle said:


> He's just mad that Punk has held the title longer then all his favourite wrestlers.
> 
> And while HHH is getting his arm broken and crying during a fake retirement speech no one believes or cares about. Punks trailblazing the business.


:lmao Wow. The butthurt is strong in this one. Meh. My favorite wrestlers don't need to hold the title for a year to be relevant and it really doesn't matter to me either. Besides, while Punk 'trailblazes' the business, whatever that means, Trips GNA RUN DA BIZNUS pretty soon. U just be mad bout DAT TEAR meaning more than DAT TITLE RUN ever will. I almost feel bad for you. 



The Reindeer Killer said:


> Oh right, it was "downhill." Maybe you're starting to rub off on me. I feel a little off my GAME (pun intended).


Off your GAME?? I see what you did there bama


----------



## DA

Cody's moustache bringing in dem viewers. Steve Austin had one and Punk has a moustache too so that unquestionably means he brings in dem ratings aswell unk

My logic is bulletproof :jordan2


----------



## nwoattitude

I think its unfair to blame Punk for the ratings dropping this drastically. Its down to crappy acting, crappy ass promos, and the show is too long. I mean Punk is no mega draw but all the ppv he Main evented between last year and this year went up in buys didnt they? And he has done relatively well in merchandise. So to say he doesnt draw a dime is a bit of an over statement. He draws decent and that is not bad at all. People need to stop comparing the ratings and the talent to the talent of yesteryear. I mean no one is gonna draw like Rock did. Or Austin did. Not even Cena in 06-07. So we just gotta take it for what it is. Punk is an Ok draw and even if he isnt so what? WRESTLING as a product isnt drawing so how can one man be expected to draw? I just dont get it. The show was OK. Nice matches here and there.


----------



## MikeChase27

nwoattitude said:


> I think its unfair to blame Punk for the ratings dropping this drastically. Its down to crappy acting, crappy ass promos, and the show is too long. I mean Punk is no mega draw but all the ppv he Main evented between last year and this year went up in buys didnt they? And he has done relatively well in merchandise. So to say he doesnt draw a dime is a bit of an over statement. He draws decent and that is not bad at all. People need to stop comparing the ratings and the talent to the talent of yesteryear. I mean no one is gonna draw like Rock did. Or Austin did. Not even Cena in 06-07. So we just gotta take it for what it is. Punk is an Ok draw and even if he isnt so what? WRESTLING as a product isnt drawing so how can one man be expected to draw? I just dont get it. The show was OK. Nice matches here and there.


This, Wrestling isn't "cool" right now the cool thing right now is MMA. The WWE needs to take notes on how the UFC builds talent.


----------



## Ether

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> ^ :lol Starbuck why are you so butthurt about all of these comments crediting Punk? For Christ sake 99% of the posts in this thread are troll posts and meant to be taken as such. Stop taking them so seriously.


Back-to-back, double plat', I did what you won't
Men lie, women lie, numbers don't
Ain't nothin changed for, me 'cept the year it is
I think I have to send you a reminder, here it is

Even Jay-Z knows Punk isn't a draw


----------



## MikeChase27

I think its sad that John Cena couldn't get 4 million people to watch his main event match.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

SANTA GAME said:


> :lmao Wow. The butthurt is strong in this one. Meh. My favorite wrestlers don't need to hold the title for a year to be relevant and it really doesn't matter to me either. Besides, while Punk 'trailblazes' the business, whatever that means, Trips GNA RUN DA BIZNUS pretty soon. U just be mad bout DAT TEAR meaning more than DAT TITLE RUN ever will. I almost feel bad for you.
> 
> 
> 
> Off your GAME?? I see what you did there bama


Levesque (lol no wonder he changed his name to HHH, that name would never draw) marks be mad that his legacy will be that he was the guy who married the boss's daughter and got handed everything to him because of it. (even if it isn't true)

That or his failed movie career. "All i want to do is wrestle" yet makes an effort to get cast in shitty Blade sequels and WWE produced movies. Probably married the producers wife just so he can get cast in them.


----------



## KO Bossy

There are people in this thread who actually believe that Punk not being on the show in a prime role somehow contributed to a rating that is completely equal with all of the other ratings they've been getting lately. Almost like a 2.67 is something to be proud of because they think it proves some ridiculous point despite the mountain of evidence against it. 

"DERP HEY GUYS, 2.67 RATING DIS WEEK! MORE PPL LIKE DA SHOW WEN PUNK ISN'T DERE HUR DERP!" Yeah, nothing shameful about a rating that is .19 of a rating point above the lowest in 15 years. Way to shoot for the stars. Soon the show might even be getting the unattainable 2.9s that exist only in legend. This company now lives for the day it can break the 3.0-it'd be like Christ's second coming.

I just...I can't do it...to fathom the stupidity...its impossible for me. And people wonder why the IWC complains about wrestling today-its because a 2.67 is now interpreted as a good rating.

Remember back in the day when Raw used to be able to pull off 4+ weekly? Shit, there was a time when anything in the 4s was considered low in comparison. Now? A fucking 3.0 has become the Holy Grail. Embarrassing. I don't know how you people can fight about this shit. Calling Ryback a better draw than Punk is like saying brown is a more appealing color of shit than green-its still shit, who cares? Punk is shit, Ryback is shit, Cena is shit, nobody can draw to save their lives and its gotten to the point where their big 1000th episode, that they hyped up for MONTHS before hand, drew a whopping 3.43 rating! It used to be when they could hint towards one thing happening the next week and that alone meant 5.0+. Now, they pull out all the stops, throw in everything including the kitchen sink on like...a weekly basis...and you guys are bickering about why a 2.67 rating suddenly proves all these crazy theories you have.

Ratings are in the toilet-that's the bottom line, and those of you who look for this hidden meaning that isn't there...don't get it.


----------



## Starbuck

The Cynical Miracle said:


> Levesque (lol no wonder he changed his name to HHH, that name would never draw) marks be mad that his legacy will be that he was the guy who married the boss's daughter and got handed everything to him because of it. (even if it isn't true)
> 
> That or his failed movie career. "All i want to do is wrestle" yet makes an effort to get cast in shitty Blade sequels and WWE produced movies. Probably married the producers wife just so he can get cast in them.


Ur blowing chunks tonight. I expected more from you tbh. Stephanie jokes? Movie jokes? That's all you got? What's next, quad jokes? Well, I don't think we need 3 guesses to figure out where you're getting your material from lol.


----------



## nwoattitude

MikeChase27 said:


> This, Wrestling isn't "cool" right now the cool thing right now is MMA. The WWE needs to take notes on how the UFC builds talent.


Exactly. When me and buddies talk about wrestling, we always end up throwing in a Rock / SC / Hogan / Taker / Foley / HBK / Goldberg / Macho Man tidbit. When someone you know finds out that you watch wrestling arent they like, " STILL"? OMG, so lame. lol. It just isnt that big a deal anymore. I mean my mother used to watch wrestling with me during the AE and shit. Now when she sees me she's just like boy why are you watching that crap? Even if SCSA, Rock, Hogan, Goldberg, came back to WWE the ratings would never reach 8.0+ again. 

This is the new, "new generations era ". RE era still had HBK, Taker, Trips, Hogan, Lesnar who were all good to great draws. Since those guys started getting older or leaving it just went downhill from there. Now its Cena and to a much lesser degree Punk ( debatable). There is no genuine interest in wrestling. I think the internet and the focus on entertainment have attributed to this but its just one of those phases. Hopefully we get a new boom period or atleast a period with the level of interest of the RE era which was IMO pretty much as good as the AE in the beginning.


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

SANTA GAME said:


> Ur blowing chunks tonight. I expected more from you tbh. Stephanie jokes? Movie jokes? That's all you got? What's next, quad jokes? Well, I don't think we need 3 guesses to figure out where you're getting your material from lol.


He's got a big nose also.


----------



## charmed1

The ratings are crappy because the shows have been either bad or at the best mildly entertaining but uneven. To be honest though, the current WWE fan will bend over and like almost anything they are given so I can't say better programming is deserved at this point.


----------



## chronoxiong

It's so sad that we have to look at a 2.7 rating as a big thing. The shows haven't been that bad so they really shouldn't be in that range. I just really dont understand it all.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

KO Bossy said:


> There are people in this thread who actually believe that Punk not being on the show in a prime role somehow contributed to a rating that is completely equal with all of the other ratings they've been getting lately. Almost like a 2.67 is something to be proud of because they think it proves some ridiculous point despite the mountain of evidence against it.
> 
> "DERP HEY GUYS, 2.67 RATING DIS WEEK! MORE PPL LIKE DA SHOW WEN PUNK ISN'T DERE HUR DERP!" Yeah, nothing shameful about a rating that is .19 of a rating point above the lowest in 15 years. Way to shoot for the stars. Soon the show might even be getting the unattainable 2.9s that exist only in legend. This company now lives for the day it can break the 3.0-it'd be like Christ's second coming.
> 
> I just...I can't do it...to fathom the stupidity...its impossible for me. And people wonder why the IWC complains about wrestling today-its because a 2.67 is now interpreted as a good rating.
> 
> Remember back in the day when Raw used to be able to pull off 4+ weekly? Shit, there was a time when anything in the 4s was considered low in comparison. Now? A fucking 3.0 has become the Holy Grail. Embarrassing. I don't know how you people can fight about this shit. Calling Ryback a better draw than Punk is like saying brown is a more appealing color of shit than green-its still shit, who cares? Punk is shit, Ryback is shit, Cena is shit, nobody can draw to save their lives and its gotten to the point where their big 1000th episode, that they hyped up for MONTHS before hand, drew a whopping 3.43 rating! It used to be when they could hint towards one thing happening the next week and that alone meant 5.0+. Now, they pull out all the stops, throw in everything including the kitchen sink on like...a weekly basis...and you guys are bickering about why a 2.67 rating suddenly proves all these crazy theories you have.
> 
> Ratings are in the toilet-that's the bottom line, and those of you who look for this hidden meaning that isn't there...don't get it.



How dare you be reasonable?! I mean..really?! How dare you?!


----------



## Starbuck

#1Peep4ever said:


> How dare you be reasonable?! I mean..really?! How dare you?!


Reasonableness isn't over in this thread. That's why I stopped posting reasonably and/or logically a long time ago. Delusion on the other hand? Delusion in running wild, brother!!! :hogan I mean, CM Punk is trailblazing the business!!!


----------



## #1Peep4ever

SANTA GAME said:


> Reasonableness isn't over in this thread. That's why I stopped posting reasonably and/or logically a long time ago. Delusion on the other hand? Delusion in running wild, brother!!! :hogan I mean, CM Punk is trailblazing the business!!!


I laughed.

That Hogan smiley and your Profile pic are a very effective combo. Well done


----------



## Starbuck

#1Peep4ever said:


> I laughed.
> 
> That Hogan smiley and your Profile pic are a very effective combo. Well done


Hunter Hurst Hogan and Hollywood Hulk Helmsley are a formidable team.

:hhh :hogan


----------



## Choke2Death

Double HHH. Should've been a tag team.


----------



## roadkill_

This fucking sucks. The only redeeming quality WWE has these days is to gloat over its asshole ratings, venting a subconscious hope that it'll force change. But when it inches back up it kills even the complaining part. It's like a shit film that is so bad that it can't even be laughed at. Seems to me there are a few stages;

1) Unmissable
2) Good, eager to catch up
3) Not bad
4) Poor
5) Laughable
6) Bad. So bad that speculating is fun
7) Bad. So bad its time to move on

I mean, the late WCW had the redeeming quality of floating between 4, 5 and 6. This, this is just pull-the-plug bad.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Choke2Death said:


> Double HHH. Should've been a tag team.


----------



## Brown Hippy

Why do people keep talking about Starbuck? Who is that? Is it the third guy from The Shield(not Tyler Black or the blonde dude)?


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Brown Hippy said:


> Why do people keep talking about Starbuck? Who is that? Is it the third guy from The Shield(not Tyler Black or the blonde dude)?


:lmao :lmao :lmao


Santa Game `= Starbuck


----------



## SinJackal

KO Bossy said:


> There are people in this thread who actually believe that Punk not being on the show in a prime role somehow contributed to a rating that is completely equal with all of the other ratings they've been getting lately. Almost like a 2.67 is something to be proud of because they think it proves some ridiculous point despite the mountain of evidence against it.
> 
> "DERP HEY GUYS, 2.67 RATING DIS WEEK! MORE PPL LIKE DA SHOW WEN PUNK ISN'T DERE HUR DERP!" Yeah, nothing shameful about a rating that is .19 of a rating point above the lowest in 15 years. Way to shoot for the stars. Soon the show might even be getting the unattainable 2.9s that exist only in legend. This company now lives for the day it can break the 3.0-it'd be like Christ's second coming.
> 
> I just...I can't do it...to fathom the stupidity...its impossible for me. And people wonder why the IWC complains about wrestling today-its because a 2.67 is now interpreted as a good rating.
> 
> Remember back in the day when Raw used to be able to pull off 4+ weekly? Shit, there was a time when anything in the 4s was considered low in comparison. Now? A fucking 3.0 has become the Holy Grail. Embarrassing. I don't know how you people can fight about this shit. Calling Ryback a better draw than Punk is like saying brown is a more appealing color of shit than green-its still shit, who cares? Punk is shit, Ryback is shit, Cena is shit, nobody can draw to save their lives and its gotten to the point where their big 1000th episode, that they hyped up for MONTHS before hand, drew a whopping 3.43 rating! It used to be when they could hint towards one thing happening the next week and that alone meant 5.0+. Now, they pull out all the stops, throw in everything including the kitchen sink on like...a weekly basis...and you guys are bickering about why a 2.67 rating suddenly proves all these crazy theories you have.
> 
> Ratings are in the toilet-that's the bottom line, and those of you who look for this hidden meaning that isn't there...don't get it.


Is your mind not capable of rational thought? Must everything debase into "everyone's out to get Punk, must defend Punk"?

The fuck did you expect with the ratings? Instant 4.0's all the time when ratings haven't been that high in consistently in like 7 years? That number is irrelevant. And yes, actually getting back into the 3's will be viewed as a good thing because ratings have been in the 2's for several months.

You're trying to set the bar to a laughably high level that's higher than the show's probably capable of getting back to anymore. That way you can lazily pretend that any ratings increases "aren't a big deal" and "don't prove anything" when Punk's out of the spotlight. . .even though the ratings will visibly have gone up.

2.7 isn't shitty rating, but it's better than 2.2. It's called a positive trend in the right direction, rather than constantly trend downward until it gets into the 1's while people like you still foolishly spin doctor it to make excuses for Punk, or, like in that post, try to muddy the waters with nonsense about ratings from nearly 7 years ago before Punk was even on the Raw roster.


Ratings will go up and stay up for months as soon as The Rock comes back to inform us he's going to take the title off Punk, so long as Punk loses to him and the title stays off him. Watch.


----------



## Huganomics

Starbuck can't draw a dime, people have to ask who he is FFS. Vanilla indy midget anti-draw hack.


----------



## BKelly237

WWE is lucky the MNF game was a blowout


----------



## -Skullbone-

I wonder if roadkill's ready to tell us how exactly 2012 WWE can be "worse than dead."

I also wonder how many ‘haters of current WWE’ here are actually worried about the ratings slump. I'm talking legitimately concerned for the company’s future. Let it be known that there should be no real reason to be worried from their perspective of things. Decreasing interest from those in TV land might mean management will start changing their weekly format around and if not, well, it'll be the company's loss really. With the way some people respond to today's programming, you'd think that they are losing out more by sitting the shows instead of hoping, by some miracle, they'll be threatened with extinction. For instance, I would be quite satisfied if their trump card in The Rock were to perform under their original expectations so they'll drop this silly notion of 'holding out hope’ for ol’ faithful, instead of being proactive with the current roster and formatting problems that are likely to exist. 

Let's be honest, what the hell is a part time wrestler/movie star going to do with the main championship? Be entertaining for his fans I suppose, but it's only a temporary solution for the company's existing issues. One of those issues, by the way, will surely grow, as a part-timer walking out champion will continue to undermine everything involved with the immediate roster and product. Old guys like the Rock are temps for helping out current standings. Pro wrestling stars are always going to replace one another for the upcoming generations of fans. If the company can’t build stars from this roster for future proceeds, well, it’ll certainly feel the consequences. 

*You have nothing to gain from a product that sucks. You only prosper if the company is producing the goods, and they do, in turn, reap the rewards as well. If people are really disenchanted with how things are being run there’s no need to stick by it through ‘loyalty.’ If it runs itself into the ground, does it really matter if it sucked for you? Isn’t it more a case of ‘good riddance to bad rubbish’*?

And who sits through _three hours_ worth of stuff they hate anyway?


----------



## NearFall

*Choke2Death* and *Starbuck* truthbombs seem to be getting to some people here....anyway.



stadw0n306 said:


> Talk about a sad life :lmao


Calling someone sad for posting in ratings, yet posts about ratings themselves. unk2



MikeChase27 said:


> Ever since Ryback main evented Hell in a Cell ratings have been dead. unk


Yeah, now let's cast back to early summer/late spring when Punk was champion versus Daniel Bryan and such....



The Cynical Miracle said:


> No Ryback for the first two hours = Ratings Prosper
> Ryback gets 2 minutes on hour three = Ratings Die
> 
> Even with 2 minutes of airtime Ryback kills ratings. They should call him RyIcantdraw lol.


But if the ratings die within 2 minutes when its Punk, it's everyone else fault for the hour 



Wrestlinfan35 said:


> ^ :lol Starbuck why are you so butthurt about all of these comments crediting Punk? For Christ sake 99% of the posts in this thread are troll posts and meant to be taken as such. Stop taking them so seriously.


Son, you just described yourself.


Punk is not a reliable draw. Simple as. unk


----------



## Kabraxal

-Skullbone- said:


> I wonder if roadkill's ready to tell us how exactly 2012 WWE can be "worse than dead."
> 
> I also wonder how many ‘haters of current WWE’ here are actually worried about the ratings slump. I'm talking legitimately concerned for the company’s future. Let it be known that there should be no real reason to be worried from their perspective of things. Decreasing interest from those in TV land might mean management will start changing their weekly format around and if not, well, it'll be the company's loss really. With the way some people respond to today's programming, you'd think that they are losing out more by sitting the shows instead of hoping, by some miracle, they'll be threatened with extinction. For instance, I would be quite satisfied if their trump card in The Rock were to perform under their original expectations so they'll drop this silly notion of 'holding out hope’ for ol’ faithful, instead of being proactive with the current roster and formatting problems that are likely to exist.
> 
> Let's be honest, what the hell is a part time wrestler/movie star going to do with the main championship? Be entertaining for his fans I suppose, but it's only a temporary solution for the company's existing issues. One of those issues, by the way, will surely grow, as a part-timer walking out champion will continue to undermine everything involved with the immediate roster and product. Old guys like the Rock are temps for helping out current standings. Pro wrestling stars are always going to replace one another for the upcoming generations of fans. If the company can’t build stars from this roster for future proceeds, well, it’ll certainly feel the consequences.
> 
> *You have nothing to gain from a product that sucks. You only prosper if the company is producing the goods, and they do, in turn, reap the rewards as well. If people are really disenchanted with how things are being run there’s no need to stick by it through ‘loyalty.’ If it runs itself into the ground, does it really matter if it sucked for you? Isn’t it more a case of ‘good riddance to bad rubbish’*?
> 
> And who sits through _three hours_ worth of stuff they hate anyway?


Why do people abuse meth despite what it does? It's an addiction... we are hardcore fans that it takes a lot for us to stop watching at all.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Damn, trollamania is runnin' wild tonight!

As far as the numbers, they mean nothing as for Punk being a draw or not. SVS and NOC as well had stronger go-home shows than the previous week's respective show. Punk being injured and not on the show much had virtually nothing to do with the increase. Same with him being the segway into the second hour probably had nothing to do with that being the highest number of the night (it really depends on how well his segment did, but he only had 3-4 minutes in the second hour, so it's debatebul either way).

Still a terrible number regardless, and if it shows anything, it shows Cena and even McMahon advertised can't save the overall show. Also apparently outside circumstances regarding MNF from what I'm seeing actually potentially helped Raw's rating. Just something to think about.


----------



## -Skullbone-

Kabraxal said:


> Why do people abuse meth despite what it does? It's an addiction... we are hardcore fans that it takes a lot for us to stop watching at all.


Well, expect more of your time being wasted as the current product benefits from your contribution then. Perhaps these fans are a glutton for punishment after all?

In fact, if some people on this forum are willing to put up with all the lows being presented for the sake of being loyal to...whoever, then I don't see a need why they'd need to complain about anything. Why vent if they still persist with what they call "terrible", despite knowing full well what will be churned out on a weekly basis?


----------



## TromaDogg

Brown Hippy said:


> Why do people keep talking about Starbuck? Who is that? Is it the third guy from The Shield(not Tyler Black or the blonde dude)?


No, Starbuck's the guy who climbs down your chimney on Christmas Eve, drinks your beer, shits in your stocking and then pedigrees you when you cry about it.


----------



## mblonde09

Choke2Death said:


> Want me to talk about sad lives? Sure enough. The life of stadw0n306 is the perfect example.
> 
> > Claims not to care about ratings
> > Visit the Ratings thread anyway
> > Probably on a daily visit just to leave smart-ass replies like above
> > Gets butthurt by the posts a certain member makes about his favorite wrestler
> > Puts said member's posting history on bookmark and reads through it frequently to find something he sees fit to respond to
> > Constantly responds to said member on a regular basis
> > Thinks that "waiting for the ratings" means literally counting minutes and seconds just for the numbers to show up
> 
> 
> 
> You shouldn't even open your mouth. *You come to this thread regularly just so you can leave some stupid remark about me. That's literally all you ever do in here.* You clearly have have an obsession with me. *Oh and I "just wait for Tuesday"? Have you been following me around outside of the computer screen? If yes, that takes obsession to a whole new level.*
> 
> Punk marks love me and the feeling is mutual. Where would I be without my fans constantly responding to me? :


Well, that's pretty much all your posts are good for. Oh, and:



Choke2Death said:


> Another Raw... time for ratings! :mark:
> 
> I have not watched or read the results for the show and I don't care enough to do so. *Only reason I wait for every Tuesday is just for the ratings*. That's how bad WWE is atm. And I'm not even gonna bother with the blame games anymore.





Choke2Death said:


> I give Punk credit for one thing. *He's made looking forward towards the Raw ratings every week over the show itself more interesting. Whenever it's Tuesday (since Raw is on late at night over here), I think "another week, more ratings" rather than think about the show itself.* You know Raw sucks when the ratings are more of a draw than the shows themselves, lol.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Well done, Ryback. The casual's thought Ryback injured Phil and thought he wouldn't be on the show boring them. 

That's a true star.


----------



## Das Wunderberlyn

> Punk promo w/Heyman witnessed the largest dip in viewership since Raw went to 3 hours


:lmao


----------



## Hawksea

LOL at Raw gaining 300k from last week because they thought The Undrawing One won't show up.

:ti at The Undrawing One


----------



## Tango222

CM Punk not being the main focus of the show is the first step to do something with those horrible ratings.

Still a hideous numbers, though.


----------



## hardysno1fan

They need to bring back the Hardys. They will bring back some excitement.


----------



## JY57

*New Internal Push To Make RAW Edgier*

http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2012/1212/558686/vince-mcmahon/



> Source: PWInsider
> 
> - WWE officials are looking to be more edgier with RAW. The feeling is that Vince McMahon isn't behind the new push but obviously is on-board with it. Vince realizes that numbers are down and it's said that he is open to suggestions.
> 
> With the low ratings, WWE officials want to put out a product that's a little different than what we've seen over the past year or so. We can also expect to see more wrestling-heavy WWE programming.


we'll see what they plan for being more edgy.


----------



## DOPA

Biggest problem with WWE right now is that there is no long term plan for the future. Everything is being done last minute as a quick fix to the situation which in the long run won't do them any good. Biting your fingernails waiting for those weekly ratings in this day and age is not going to help matters one bit. Without a long term investment to fix the problems of the product and make it must watch every week, those long term problems with the product which is making the rating numbers drop won't be solved and we'll still see the low numbers that we are getting now. Maybe even lower.

And those long term problems do not limit to the OMGZ PUNKZ CAN'T DRAWZ TAKE HIM OFF AS CHAMPZ AND RATINGZ WILL INCREASEZ!

Punk not as champ will not increase the ratings significantly. Its more likely to be exactly the same because of the state of the product.


----------



## BKsaaki

Bring back the babes


----------



## blur

THONGS! THONGS! THONGS!


----------



## Choke2Death

mblonde09 said:


> Well, that's pretty much all your posts are good for. Oh, and:


Thanks for your support, darling. I appreciate it because without my kind fans such as mblonde09 and stadw0n306, I would have no reason to continue doing this!  

But I have to correct you on one thing. Looking forward to Raw's ratings more than the show itself doesn't mean that's the only thing I think about. It just means the shows are boring and I find more entertainment in reading about the rating breakdowns more than the three hours itself. Believe me, I got a lot of better things to spend my time on whether it's wrestling related or not.


----------



## Shawn Morrison

the show was terrible imo. ratings are up becuz big show vs cena is a big draw for casuals i guess.


----------



## SerapisLiber

blur said:


> THONGS! THONGS! THONGS!


Excuse me, but it goes "Thong-Thuh-Thong-Thong-Thong!"


----------



## Green Light

She had dumps like a truck, truck, truck
Thighs like what, what, what austin)
ALL NIGHT LONG
LET ME SEE THAT THOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG
THAT THONG TH-THONG THONG THONG


----------



## Cookie Monster

Does anyone remember Big Show being in the video for the Thong Song. DAT BIG SHOW LOOK


----------



## SPCDRI

I'm astonished that show gained viewers from last week. Thought it would lose. I thought it was going lower than last week's for sure.


----------



## MikeChase27

Shawn Morrison said:


> the show was terrible imo. ratings are up becuz big show vs cena is a big draw for casuals i guess.


The last hour was still the lowest rated.


----------



## Bossdude

> We can also expect to see more wrestling-heavy WWE programming.


Wrestling matches = low ratings

we need more skits, more promos, more storylines and LESS in ring wrestling


----------



## kokepepsi

Of course the ratings went up, when one of your guys gets hurt and it becomes big news guess what happens, people tune in, especially when the guy is the fucking champion.


----------



## ThePhenomRises

kokepepsi said:


> Of course the ratings went up, when one of your guys gets hurt and it becomes big news guess what happens, people tune in, especially when the guy is the fucking champion.


Nope! I'm sticking with people being so happy that he's injured that they celebrated by tuning in. fpalm

Seriously.  The Punk hate has gotten to ridiculous levels, even though I know this thread is no measure for that, but still. I for one don't mark for Ryback or Punk or particularly any full-time guy at the moment but I actually like BOTH of them. Finally, two people other than Cena are getting pushed seriously by the WWE and that's definitely the right thing to do after his 6-year reign of terror. So that's all I care about.


----------



## CHIcagoMade

I love this thread just PURE comedy :lol


----------



## SinJackal

Crusade said:


> Will definitely be a gain.
> 
> Whilst there are definitely a lot of Punk marks defending him even though he certainly isn't a ratings draw (and Punk is one of my favorite wrestlers) it is humorous to poke fun at some of the Punk haters who are even more dogmatic in their views thinking one guy is causing a ratings slump in a product full of creative problems :lol.
> 
> OMGZ PUNKZ DOESN'T DRAWZ RATINGZ WILL INCREASE TO 3.5 IF THEY TAKE HIM OFF TELEVISIONZ unk


You have a very hyperbolic thought process.

Someone thinking that Punk is the biggest problem of the show now drawing does NOT = they think Punk is the only problem of the show. That's just a strawman argument for you to more easily argue against while you ignore the actual argument.

It's dumb to act like Punk isn't significantly at fault when he's been spotlighted the ENTIRE TIME ratings have been falling. At some point, you have to open your eyes and see what the common denominator is. Punk gets the most air time, most of the mic time on the show period, and has the main story always circle around him.

If Punk can't pull ratings up as the main star, he shouldn't be in that position. That's what this boils down to.



The Cynical Miracle said:


> No Ryback for the first two hours = Ratings Prosper
> Ryback gets 2 minutes on hour three = Ratings Die
> 
> Even with 2 minutes of airtime Ryback kills ratings. They should call him RyIcantdraw lol.


Bad take. Unadvertised, no match, no promo. . .just a run in at the tail end of the show. . for less than 2 minutes. Yet you're blaming him for the entire hour being poorly rated? Talk about straw grasping.

Even The Rock couldn't have saved that hour with an unadvertised sub 2 minute run in.


----------



## Coffey

I think it's also some what important to acknowledge that Monday Night Football was a blow-out. I'm sure that played a part too.


----------



## DOPA

SinJackal said:


> Someone thinking that Punk is the biggest problem of the show now drawing does NOT = they think Punk is the only problem of the show. That's just a strawman argument for you to more easily argue against while you ignore the actual argument.


Have you even been reading some of the Punk hater's comments? There are members like roadkill who blame Punk entirely for the ratings going down. That isn't a strawman, it's what people have been saying.



SinJackal said:


> It's dumb to act like Punk isn't significantly at fault when he's been spotlighted the ENTIRE TIME ratings have been falling. At some point, you have to open your eyes and see what the common denominator is. Punk gets the most air time, most of the mic time on the show period, and has the main story always circle around him.


I never said Punk wasn't at fault. I even stated that he isn't a ratings draw fpalm. Where have I defended Punk other than saying that it isn't entirely his fault? Punk doesn't draw ratings, I get that. He isn't helping. But the writing around him has also been shockingly awful, the AJ/Cena storyline and the whole AJ scandal has been dreadful and it shows because not even Cena can pull the numbers up in his segment. The WHC storyline has been painfully generic and hasn't been drawing numbers either. None of the top stars right now are drawing anything significantly to suggest that it is entirely Punk's fault or even Punk's fault significantly. If it were, then especially Cena would be drawing significantly more than Punk and the numbers show that he isn't. Yes, I get that Raw for past few months has built round Punk but when even your poster child John Cena can't get the ratings to spike up in a storyline they have been building for months now that suggests that the ratings issue is a much bigger than one just one guy. 

It's very easy to scapegoat and point the finger at one individual when in reality the problem is a lot larger than that. And that is what some Punk haters cannot admit: that Punk is only a part of the problem, he isn't the main or the whole issue here.

You could have someone like Austin or Rock in their prime who are two of the biggest draws this business has ever seen but if you don't have the right material behind them then people are simply not going to give a shit.


----------



## murder

SinJackal said:


> If Punk can't pull ratings up as the main star, he shouldn't be in that position.


You nailed it. 

And Ryback only appeared in the overrun, didn't he?! So his appearance isn't even included in the actual rating.

Austin and Rock in maybe the worst feud of all time, WWF vs The Alliance, still managed to hold the rating in the high 3's. That was bad for the time but WWE would kill to get numbers like that today.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I don't know if it's been said, but it needs to be said because I noticed something about Raw this week that they didn't have last week...

Cody Rhodes Mustache=Ratings!!!!!


----------



## SinJackal

Crusade said:


> Have you even been reading some of the Punk hater's comments? There are members like roadkill who blame Punk entirely for the ratings going down. That isn't a strawman, it's what people have been saying.
> 
> 
> 
> I never said Punk wasn't at fault. I even stated that he isn't a ratings draw fpalm. Where have I defended Punk other than saying that it isn't entirely his fault? Punk doesn't draw ratings, I get that. He isn't helping. But the writing around him has also been shockingly awful, the AJ/Cena storyline and the whole AJ scandal has been dreadful and it shows because not even Cena can pull the numbers up in his segment. The WHC storyline has been painfully generic and hasn't been drawing numbers either. None of the top stars right now are drawing anything significantly to suggest that it is entirely Punk's fault or even Punk's fault significantly. If it were, then especially Cena would be drawing significantly more than Punk and the numbers show that he isn't. Yes, I get that Raw for past few months has built round Punk but when even your poster child John Cena can't get the ratings to spike up in a storyline they have been building for months now that suggests that the ratings issue is a much bigger than one just one guy.
> 
> It's very easy to scapegoat and point the finger at one individual when in reality the problem is a lot larger than that. And that is what some Punk haters cannot admit: that Punk is only a part of the problem, he isn't the main or the whole issue here.
> 
> You could have someone like Austin or Rock in their prime who are two of the biggest draws this business has ever seen but if you don't have the right material behind them then people are simply not going to give a shit.


Some of the posters have terrible takes about CM Punk and go overboard with the hate, I won't deny that. But it's unfair to everyone else to just lump them into the same category as the idiots. It just devalues the entire opposing view in a really lazy and unreasonable way.

It's also just as easy to make excuses than it is to scapegoat.

My problem with this whole argument is this: One side makes a legitimate point or observation, and the other makes excuses for it. Just because "Punk haters" are annoying doesn't make everyone who talks about it a hater. It's constructive criticism. 

Personally speaking, I don't want Punk gone, I just think the show's viewership would significantly improve if his reign was ended and they went in another direction with the title and the main storyline. Somehow that equates to being a "hater" though. I think I'm just being realistic. It's simply well past the point where it's "someone else's turn".

As for "the material sucks". . .dude, people have been saying that for years. That hasn't magically manifested itself when Punk got the title, so I don't see why that's suddenly the go to excuse when everyone was bashing Cena to hell and back as needing to be replaced. No one said a damn thing about his "material". It was just the guy. Now it's about the material, not the guy. . .because you guys actually like this particular wrestler.

I already addressed that argument in my last post though. I don't (and most don't) think Punk is the ONLY problem. He's just one of the biggest ones. Punk should always have a role in the show since he's one of the top 10 stars in WWE, it just shouldn't be as big as it is anymore. With guys like Punk, his title reigns shouldn't last more than 3-4 PPVs. He's more interesting chasing the title or being in grudge fueds. Sort of like the way Orton is more interesting chasing than actually being champ.

I don't think Punk is shit or something dude. His role just needs to be reduced for awhile. He's been champ way too long. It's boring now.


----------



## NearFall

The Sandrone said:


> I don't know if it's been said, but it needs to be said because I noticed something about Raw this week that they didn't have last week...
> 
> Cody Rhodes Mustache=Ratings!!!!!


I think you're Miztaken. Mr.Sandow was in that segment, normally Mr.Sandow gains 6-8 million viewers, as you have found out in the past. That Mustache is a hell of an anti-draw. Cody can't stop bringing the Sandow down. :rock4 :sadpanda


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

NearFall said:


> I think you're Miztaken. Mr.Sandow was in that segment, normally Mr.Sandow gains 6-8 million viewers, as you have found out in the past. That Mustache is a hell of an anti-draw. Cody can't stop bringing the Sandow down. :rock4 :sadpanda


Holy crap, this is true. I feel like such an ignoramus. I must write Mr. Sandow an apology at once! It may take a little while since he only reads letters over 10,000 words and neatly written (and my handwriting is anything but "neat"), but I must get it done.

Off the topic of the GOAT, when is the breakdown gonna be posted?


----------



## blur

Any ratings breakdown of RAW?


----------



## wb1899

The Vince McMahon/Vickie Guerrero in-ring interaction plus R-Truth vs. Wade Barrett and A.J. Lee running down the aisles and going into the men’s locker room lost 41,000 viewers. 
The four-way with Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow vs. Usos vs. Primo & Epico vs. Prime Time Players lost 262,000 viewers. 
Eve Torres vs. Alicia Fox and the C.M. Punk and Paul Heyman promo gained 223,000 viewers. 
Sheamus vs. Dolph Ziggler gained 201,000 viewers in the 9 p.m. slot. 
The Shield interview lost 354,000 viewers. 
Alberto Del Rio vs. Zack Ryder gained 114,000 viewers. 
A.J. Lee vs. Vickie Guerrero in the 10 p.m. slot gained 115,000 viewers.
Kofi Kingston vs. Antonio Cesaro lost 546,000 viewers. 
Miz TV with Sandow & Rhodes gained 169,000 viewers. 
John Cena vs. Big Show gained 11,000 viewers. 
The overrun, which was the brawl involving The Shield and everyone else, gained 627,000 viewers.


----------



## DOPA

SinJackal said:


> Some of the posters have terrible takes about CM Punk and go overboard with the hate, I won't deny that. But it's unfair to everyone else to just lump them into the same category as the idiots. It just devalues the entire opposing view in a really lazy and unreasonable way.


Hey I did name an example didn't I? 





SinJackal said:


> As for "the material sucks". . .dude, people have been saying that for years. That hasn't magically manifested itself when Punk got the title, so I don't see why that's suddenly the go to excuse when everyone was bashing Cena to hell and back as needing to be replaced. No one said a damn thing about his "material". It was just the guy. Now it's about the material, not the guy. . .because you guys actually like this particular wrestler.


This is true for some Punk fans, however personally I have held the same view for Cena as I held for Punk, so it does not apply for me. Material is hugely important in any wrestling show, if you don't have the material to keep people's interest and intrigue then you are not going to get good ratings regardless. Look at WCW, they had Hogan, Sting and Goldberg who were all proven ratings draws and who were bringing in big numbers in 97-98 with hot angles like the NWO and the Streak. Fast forward only 1-2 years later and the same people are in shows that are drawing nothing above 3.5. If that doesn't prove my point, then nothing ever will.

I did think Cena needed a break for being the champion which will leads to what I'm about to say next.




SinJackal said:


> Personally speaking, I don't want Punk gone, I just think the show's viewership would significantly improve if his reign was ended and they went in another direction with the title and the main storyline. Somehow that equates to being a "hater" though. I think I'm just being realistic. It's simply well past the point where it's "someone else's turn".
> 
> I already addressed that argument in my last post though. I don't (and most don't) think Punk is the ONLY problem. He's just one of the biggest ones. Punk should always have a role in the show since he's one of the top 10 stars in WWE, it just shouldn't be as big as it is anymore. With guys like Punk, his title reigns shouldn't last more than 3-4 PPVs. He's more interesting chasing the title or being in grudge fueds. Sort of like the way Orton is more interesting chasing than actually being champ.
> 
> I don't think Punk is shit or something dude. His role just needs to be reduced for awhile. He's been champ way too long. It's boring now.


Put this all together because it kinda goes together. I agree the show needs to go in a different direction for sure. It was coming across to me anyway that you didn't like Punk and felt like the ratings would increase if he were gone (ala roadkill, HEELkris etc. short sighted idiots, yeah...sue me guys.) hence my response. I also agree Punk is more interesting chasing than holding the title, I actually said this on another wrestling forum I was once a moderator for some time ago when Punk was a face as the champion. Then the heel turn happened and then ever since then personally, I've found him much more interesting as the champion.

The direction of the company from a ratings standpoint obviously is not working and that includes Punk being champion right now which some Punk marks on here don't want to admit. The reign in my opinion needs to come to an end soon, preferably at the Rumble. This is from a business standpoint, let me make that clear. From a personal standpoint as a fan, purely subjective, I wouldn't mind if Punk went over Rock at the Rumble. If Rock was coming back full time until Mania from the new year then it would be a no brainer to put the title on the Rock till Mania. But since Rock won't be and since whatever program he is in will almost guarantee to draw, and draw more than Punk or Cena could and the fact he'll probably be in the main event of Mania again regardless it leaves it a bit more open for options.

But I think Punk's time is about done as champion anyway. I don't think WWE are going to swerve us at the Rumble by keeping Punk champion.


----------



## JY57

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



> - As noted before, the December 10th WWE RAW did a 2.67 rating with 3.76 million viewers, the fourth lowest rating of the past 15 years.
> 
> In the segment breakdown, the show opener with Dolph Ziggler, Sheamus and Big Show did a 2.78 opening quarter. The segment with Vince McMahon and Vickie Guerrero plus R-Truth vs. Wade Barrett and the backstage segment with AJ Lee lost 41,000 viewers. The tag team match with Cody Rhodes & Damien Sandow vs. The Usos vs. Darren Young & Titus O'Neil vs. Primo & Epico lost 262,000 viewers.
> 
> Alicia Fox vs. Eve Torres and the segment with CM Punk and Paul Heyman gained 223,000 viewers. Dolph Ziggler vs. Sheamus gained 201,000 viewers in the 9pm timeslot for a 2.87 quarter rating. The backstage video from Seth Rollins, Dean Ambrose and Roman Reigns lost 354,000 viewers. Zack Ryder vs. Alberto Del Rio gained 114,000 viewers. Vickie Guerrero vs. AJ Lee in the 10pm timeslot gained 115,000 viewers for a 2.78 quarter rating.
> 
> Antonio Cesaro vs. Kofi Kingston lost 546,000 viewers and did a show-low 2.39 quarter rating. MizTV with The Miz, Rhodes and Sandow gained 169,000 viewers. John Cena vs. Big Show gained 11,000 viewers in the main event, doing a 2.52 quarter rating. This would be among the lowest drawing main events in the last 15 years. The RAW overrun which featured The Shield and everyone else in a big brawl gained 627,000 viewers for a 2.96 overrun rating.
> 
> Source: Wrestling Observer Newsletter


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

> John Cena vs. Big Show gained 11,000 viewers in the main event, doing a 2.52 quarter rating. This would be among the lowest drawing main events in the last 15 years.


Cena and Big Show are such huge draws, guys.


----------



## N-destroy

How long was the Cena/show match actually? How much of it was part of overrun?

It seems Cena's drawing abilities are no longer what it used to be.


----------



## Falkono

These numbers show two important things. Firstly Punk isn't that popular seeing as his segment was lower then the opening one and the one directly after his. Plus he was not in the overun /ending which again shows you could have anyone in that slot and they would gain viewers.

And secondly Cena is losing his star power.

Tbh Cena and Punk both have a lot in common. Their characters are stale and boring and they have been forced down peoples throats for years. They are on TV more then anyone else.

If these numbers don't show Vince things need to change then none will.


----------



## Green Light

Holy crap they've really hurt Cena's drawing power somewhere along the line haven't they

And of course Ryback does the peak of the show yet again #Rydraw #Rybackers


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Green Light said:


> Holy crap they've really hurt Cena's drawing power somewhere along the line haven't they
> 
> And of course Ryback does the peak of the show yet again #Rydraw #Rybackers


Yeah, they hurt him by not having him change and evolve his character.


----------



## Da Silva

I call bullshit on The Shield interview losing 350k viewers. It's a 1 minute long video for fucks sake, how can one minute of a quarter be used to judge it's success?


----------



## vanboxmeer

AJ Leech killing dat Cena drawing power.


----------



## DA

vanboxmeer said:


> AJ Leech killing dat Cena drawing power.


Incoming burial :buried 
Bury her John! Save us John







:cena2


----------



## SerapisLiber

So once again, Punk gains significantly, in spite of being injured and in spite of not being placed in the magic overrun spot where allegedly anyone will gain even if it's Ryder against Santino in a staring contest for the vacant Diva's championship.

Meanwhile, Cena bombs in the main event.

What more can be said? It's not Punk. It's not Cena. It's the company.


----------



## Choke2Death

HOLY FUCK @ 11,000 viewers. :lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## King_Kool-Aid™

Green Light said:


> Holy crap they've really hurt Cena's drawing power somewhere along the line haven't they


Never changing his character up, having him go over everyone, rarely losing cleanly, dominating the product since 2006 and giving him lousy opponents and feuds for the majority of his career over the last several years will do that.

Like i said way back WWE should have been trying to build Kennedy, MVP and Carlito as their next big things and never dropped the ball with them. Maybe the ratings wouldn't be so shit right now if we had 3 other upper carder/main eventers for Cena to feud with.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

wow 
just wow


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin

There's the evidence, people. CM Punk is NOT the problem. 

I'm laughing so hard right now. John Cena's new theme song; "My Time Is Up."


----------



## hardysno1fan

I think the crappy Cena rating is also an indictment on Ziggler. Nobody is taking him seriously as a threat and that's why people aren't tuning in.


----------



## THANOS

Falkono said:


> These numbers show two important things. Firstly Punk isn't that popular seeing as his segment was lower then the opening one and the one directly after his. Plus he was not in the overun /ending which again shows you could have anyone in that slot and they would gain viewers.
> 
> And secondly Cena is losing his star power.
> 
> Tbh Cena and Punk both have a lot in common. Their characters are stale and boring and they have been forced down peoples throats for years. They are on TV more then anyone else.
> 
> If these numbers don't show Vince things need to change then none will.


You do know that Punk's segment was grouped in with the Alicia Fox/Eve Torres match right? That's a guaranteed loss so Punk's segment would have to gain a helluva lot to make up for that and still end up with a 200000 gain. His portion of the quarter probably gained like 500000.


----------



## Duke Silver

Out of interest, what did Cena/Show do earlier this year (assuming they had a match on Raw, I really can't remember)?


----------



## FearIs4UP

Da Silva said:


> I call bullshit on The Shield interview losing 350k viewers. It's a 1 minute long video for fucks sake, how can one minute of a quarter be used to judge it's success?


It can't, this is ridiculous.


----------



## Choke2Death

Scrooge McDuck said:


> Out of interest, what did Cena/Show do earlier this year (assuming they had a match on Raw, I really can't remember)?


I think they gained about 1,000,000 viewers during the summer while they had a match.

From 1 million.......................... to 11,000. :show


----------



## THANOS

Choke2Death said:


> I think they gained about 1,000,000 viewers during the summer while they had a match.
> 
> From 1 million.......................... to 11,000. :show


Of course the earlier one did a million views, Punk was on commentary. :troll


----------



## DOPA

SerapisLiber said:


> So once again, Punk gains significantly, in spite of being injured and in spite of not being placed in the magic overrun spot where allegedly anyone will gain even if it's Ryder against Santino in a staring contest for the vacant Diva's championship.
> 
> Meanwhile, Cena bombs in the main event.
> 
> What more can be said? It's not Punk. It's not Cena. It's the company.


What I've been saying..


----------



## Falkono

THANOS said:


> You do know that Punk's segment was grouped in with the Alicia Fox/Eve Torres match right? That's a guaranteed loss so Punk's segment would have to gain a helluva lot to make up for that and still end up with a 200000 gain. His portion of the quarter probably gained like 500000.


Er no....

They are done by segment break downs i.e quarterly parts of the hour. His segment was the longest part of that quarter. The Torres match lasted about 1 minute...
The TOTAL number of viewers is what is important not the actual gains. To put that into an example for you there were more people watching AJ and Vickie then there were watching Punk's segment...

To further clarify why Punk is not a draw if you look he was in the exact same time slot last week and gained a giant...24000 viewers...


----------



## THANOS

Falkono said:


> Er no....
> 
> They are done by segment break downs i.e quarterly parts of the hour. His segment was the longest part of that quarter. The Torres match lasted about 1 minute...
> 
> To further clarify why Punk is not a draw if you look he was in the exact same time slot last week and gained a giant...24000 viewers...


You do know it was also in a slot that was prior to the top of the hour as well right? A quarter that rarely ever gains.

And the match and entrances were much closer to 4/5 minutes then 1 minute fpalm. That's more than enough time to lose a lot of viewers especially when you consider the track record of divas matches this year.


----------



## blur

Sandow killing dem ratingz.


----------



## Falkono

THANOS said:


> You do know it was also in a slot that was prior to the top of the hour as well right? A quarter that rarely ever gains.


As I edited in above gains/loses are not what is important the total viewership of the segment is. And as already mentioned it was about the 4th-5th watched segment of the show.

As for saying it rarely gains.....

Here is a list of that quarter segment for previous weeks..
3/12/12 - Gain of 24k
26/11/12 - Alicia Fox vs Taminka gain of 46k (the segment prior to that was a 2.71 rating...
19/12/12 - Cena make a wish shit 376k gain
12/11/12 - Lawler return 745k gain 
5/12/12 - Vince return 341k gain
29/10/12 - Cena angle gain of 373k

I can't be bothered to go further back as for the last 6 weeks at least they all been gains...


----------



## The Lady Killer

Give Cesaro a better feud, plz.


----------



## THANOS

Falkono said:


> As I edited in above gains/loses are not what is important the total viewership of the segment is. And as already mentioned it was about the 4th-5th watched segment of the show.
> 
> As for saying it rarely gains.....
> 
> Here is a list of that quarter segment for previous weeks..
> 3/12/12 - Gain of 24k
> 26/11/12 - Alicia Fox vs Taminka gain of 46k (the segment prior to that was a 2.71 rating...
> 19/12/12 - Cena make a wish shit 376k gain
> 12/11/12 - Lawler return 745k gain
> 5/12/12 - Vince return 341k gain
> 29/10/12 - Cena angle gain of 373k
> 
> I can't be bothered to go further back as for the last 6 weeks at least they all been gains...


Ok point proven, but look at the group of people that had better gains than Punk. Cena, Vince, and Lawler. Lawler's return was also grouped with Punk as well. There's no shame in not drawing as well as those people because Cena is the only real draw in the wwe, Vince ALWAYS draws, and Lawler was returning from a heart attack.


----------



## kokepepsi

> John Cena vs. Big Show gained 11,000 viewers with a main event doing a 2.52, which is among the lowest main events in the last 15 years.


Can we now see it's not a wrestlers fault but the booking and the overall product.

btw>>>>>>>FUCKING LOL


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Punk is NOT helping the ratings but he isnt hurting them as much as the booking is hurting it 
Even fucking Cena cant draw for shit anymore


----------



## Starbuck

Mark the date, John Cena's drawing power has officially died. Everybody mourn. Now there are NO full time draws anymore. 

In other news, MizTV gaining = (Y) The three of them deserve it for such a great segment.


----------



## kokepepsi

Meh in March those Rock/Cena segments are gonna gain 500k+


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Them segments in march will be hugging segments.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

So... it looks like Cena's drawing power really is dead. Granted, I do still think Punk on commentary back in the Cena/Show match in July helped it gain more than it would have, but not enough to figure the difference between what Cena/Show gained this week and what it would've gained back then without Punk. Clearly Cena's drawing power is in the shitter, and Ryback seems to be the biggest full-time draw they have at this point. '

Punk was in Q4 and the first 5 minutes of the 9PM and probably had something to do with that gain as well, and the Sheamus/Ziggler match was in part the last 5 or so minutes of the 9PM, with commercials in between. 9PM though had it's strongest gain and quarter hour rating since the Lawler/Punk/Heyman/Foley promo when Lawler returned. 

10PM with Vickie/AJ, by today's standards wasn't a bad 10PM gain (since it loses half the time). Interestingly enough, the quarter hour rating for it was a 2.78, and last week with Vince/Vickie was a 2.73. Does that mean... AJ'S A BIGGER DRAW THAN VINCE!!!!???? 8*D

Overrun rating was the strongest it's been since Punk/Cena, and the gain is the biggest since Punk and Ziggler teamed up to face Cena and Ryback. The overrun was a crazy brawl and that definitely helped things. There was Cena, Show. Sheamus, Ziggler, Shield, Team Hell No, and Ryback (WITH DAT POP) all being out there.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

They are booking Ryback perfect at the moment in terms of using him on TV.

Only using him at the end of the show and the crowd begging for him to come out. Only helps him get over more and get over more with the TV casuals.


----------



## Green Light

Dem #Rybackers going wild.


----------



## Cliffy

Which is the opposite of how they booked Cena. He was all over the goddamn show the last few years !!!

He's like the worlds worst "Where's Waldo ?"


----------



## The-Rock-Says

WHATCHA GONNA DO WHEN RYBACKERMANIA RUNS WILD ON YOU, BROTHER!!!


Please say it Ryback...just once.


----------



## RatedR10

John Cena's drawing power... where has it gone? I think he's in need of a serious character change.


----------



## jonoaries

My adopted nephew came over chanting "feed me more" today *sighs* jesus christ Vince


----------



## Cliffy

:vince

He's done it again the old bastard.

He's so good he can create stars by accident...:cena :austin unk......


















.....Nah just kidding at that last one !!


----------



## Kabraxal

That is shocking for Cena... but really does show that it's the booking and not the wrestlers that is driving people away. 

As for the Shield... um, whoever wrote the breakdown needs to be smacked. That was what... a minute long video? And it's getting blamed for a whole 15 minutes? Yeah, sure... whatever. They totally weren't part of the overrun that drew decently. Not great, but at least it did better than 11000 before it.

Ziggler/Sheamus and the Punk breadowns actually benefit Punk if you want to argue that... a terrible time slot with the diva match and punk draws 200000. Couple that with the 200000 Ziggler/Sheamus drew and you see that normal top of hte hour bump. So it means people turned in SOONER because Punk was on. Still, as a heel champion with faces to chase him and an injury, they could be booking this so much better that the angle would be gaining huge. Instead, no one really believes it will come of anything until the Rock shows up.

Man... the WWE is in deep shit and I really don't know if they can pull themselves out of it. I mean, do they even realise what is the real problem or they just going to blame wrestling fans more for not liking shit entertainment?


----------



## krai999

*NEWS FLASH PEOPLE
BIG SHOW VS JOHN CENA HAS BEEN DONE MANY TIMES WHY WOULD PEOPLE WANT TO WATCH IT AGAIN IT'S BEEN DONE ALREADY THEY'RE JUST TIRED OF SEEING IT*


----------



## CHIcagoMade

^^^ 

Exactly Cena/Show has been done to death since 2003.


----------



## JY57

Big Show/Cena is even worst than Punk/Cena. People just sick of it even more than Punk/Cena. If not mistaken Punk vs Cena main event last month did bad as well as it was only did a 2.6 rating till the overrun with Ryback involved.


----------



## zkorejo

Lol.. I guess I am not the only one who skipped the main event. I am glad people tuned out.


----------



## Coffey

I'm surprised more people aren't talking about how terrible the "found footage" video of The Shield was.


----------



## zkorejo

^^ TBH as much as I like the guys in the group (esp. Ambrose), I dont like Shield very much. The whole idea of "shielding WWE from injustice" is lame.

Its just the same old shit in a new packaging. Same old random nexus style group attacks and we all know Cena will get rid of them eventually. And this time its not even seven guys.. its just three lol.

BTW Why the fuck do they wear black army vests?.. lol..


----------



## SerapisLiber

RatedR10 said:


> John Cena's drawing power... where has it gone? I think he's in need of a serious character change.


----------



## Coffey

zkorejo said:


> I don't like Shield very much. The whole idea of "shielding WWE from injustice" is lame. It's just the same old shit in a new packaging.


Seriously, what the fuck was this?










Is he practicing a fucking facial expression for Myspace or something? Then the whole putting the names on the video & it was just so bad all around. Like, who oversees this shit & doesn't point *ANY* of this shit out!?


----------



## zkorejo

LMAO yeah that shot was pretty funny when I saw it :LMAO


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Walk-In said:


> Seriously, what the fuck was this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is he practicing a fucking facial expression for Myspace or something? Then the whole putting the names on the video & it was just so bad all around. Like, who oversees this shit & doesn't point *ANY* of this shit out!?


:lol I thought the exact same thing the first time I saw this. Glad I'm not the only one. That promo was corny as all fuck.


----------



## Starbuck

NOPE


----------



## TheShield

*Ratings obsession?*

Why are so many people on here obsessed with ratings. Nobody but the WWE, Share Holders, TV Companies and Wrestlers should care. It doesn't matter to us as fans, and whats worse is that way too many people band around the ratings of individual wrestlers, but yet don't understand the context of ratings and what they mean in to the wider field of wrestler and TV culture.

Its laughable to see people desperately clasp at straws and blame low ratings on specific wrestler (at the moment CM Punk). Not considering the poor current product and writing, constant coasting to RTWM, 3rd hour killing ratings, NBA, NFL, NHL, MLB, WWE not moving with the times, recession, natural disasters, watered down product, lack of top tier drawing full timers (only two to my mind), the rise of live streaming, youtube and faster internet speeds, tivo, sky +, time zones, inconsistant and dropped feuds, 5 years of pushing only one guy(Cena), transitional talent period to name but a few.

To blame someone like CM Punk for low ratings is ridiculous and taken way out of context. And if he walked away from WWE forever tomorrow, im pretty sure that WWE would lose quite a lot of viewers.

In 2012 nobody draws anymore, with the odd exception a small handful of people but only depending on who they face. The Rock been the only person who would draw no matter who he faced.

And if your still bothered I suppose in 2012 you judge who is a draw by who sells the most merch, who features on video game covers (putting your face on the front of a video game and promotional stuff in the main stream public means that WWE have decided that they think you are bigger to draw extra game buys), dvd sales, twitter/facebook/klout. All of which he scores high on.

But having said all that it shouldn't matter to use as fans and we should be more bothered about the quality of wrestling and promos. If you dont like CM Punk for them reasons then fair enough but blaming ratings on him is simply moronic. 

As The Undertaker once said - Fans have forgotten they are fans.

5.50


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

Though I feel like this post will either be largely ignored or shitted on, you are right 100%.


----------



## Zuperman

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

It's funny how The Undertaker says these things when he's in rougher shape than EDGE and many other talents.

WOW.


----------



## TheShield

*Re: Ratings obsession?*



Zuperman said:


> It's funny how The Undertaker says these things when he's in rougher shape than EDGE and many other talents.
> 
> WOW.


The Undertakers career started in 1984 Edges Started in 1997 - The Undertaker put on possibly match of the year 8 months ago.


----------



## TheShield

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

double post


----------



## Mr.Cricket

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

OP is only mad because Punk is not a draw.


----------



## TheShield

*Re: Ratings obsession?*



Mr.Cricket said:


> OP is only mad because Punk is not a draw.


Obviously not a strong reader.


----------



## cokecan567

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

What everyone fails to realize is that video of undertake was back in 2003. nearly 10 years ago BACK when wrestling was fucking good and people who complained aobut this are idiots and should of appreciated a good product for what we had. if we had a time machine and would of seen this horrible product coming with john cena shoved down our throats for years. ratings matter to fans because we all know if the lower they get maybe theres hope of the product changing. 

Anyways the entire product sucks and should be blamed as a whole for the low ratings.


----------



## PAULHEYMANGUY

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

100% agree with OP.


----------



## PAULHEYMANGUY

*Re: Ratings obsession?*



Mr.Cricket said:


> OP is only mad because Punk is not a draw.


Seriously man, grow up.


----------



## PAULHEYMANGUY

*Re: Ratings obsession?*



Mr.Cricket said:


> OP is only mad because Punk is not a draw.


Seriously man, grow up.


----------



## jonoaries

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

I think people should have the right to follow the ratings if they want. They just don't have the right to demand other people do, nor do they have the right to force and/or demand that people choose their favorites based on them. 



I been judging wrestlers by the amount of entertainment they brought me since 1990. Ratings were never important until Eric Bischoff started gloating about it on Nitro. There's no more Nitro, no more WCW, so we should have been gone back to a time where the shit isn't relevant. Technology has made it less relevant in real terms over the years anyway. The only original indicator of "drawing" that is still valid is attendance, because you will always need an audience.


----------



## Snothlisberger

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

People don't even understand ratings. They see the declining ratings, and they also compare today's ratings to 2002 or even as late as 2009. Yet, they fail to realize/understand that TV ratings as a whole are declining rapidly year to year. 

RAW's ratings have actually decreased at a lower percentage over the past decade then the "average TV show." The average rating for the Top Rated Show in TV in 2012 is like 21% lower then the Top Rated Show in TV in 2004. Whereas the average RAW 2012 rating is only 16% lower then RAW 2004


----------



## charmed1

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

People follow the ratings because its a tv show and in the world of tv ratings matter. Though not as much as they use too.People who hate certain wrestlers will use ratings to show that wrestler as doing bad however those exact same people who say ratings dont matter will also use ratings when the numbers work for them.

Its a tv show. Ratings do matter whether people want them to or not.


----------



## Mr.Cricket

*Re: Ratings obsession?*



TheShield said:


> Obviously not a strong reader.


My point still stands. You're just mad that Punk is not a draw.

If he's drawing big numbers right now, you'll be like "OMG GUYZ PUNK IS A DRAW. RATINGZ ARE SO IMPORTANT".


----------



## Brodus Clay

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

If isn't ratings it would be crowd reaction, ring or promo ability,politic antics etc. people gonna use them as bullets on the wrestlers they hate even if they have avatars or sig with wrestlers that share the same problem.

So don't lose your time on that, I like ADR and I had to deal with a bunch of smarks hating on him daily so whatever.


----------



## BrendenPlayz

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

Just listen to what the Undertaker said and that sums up everything perfectly. People just need to shut up and enjoy the show instead of complaining about every second of the show every week. Fans have forgotten why they are fans and they are focusing on the negatives instead of the beauty of wrestling.


----------



## Ham and Egger

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

I said it once and I'll say it again. Rating marks are the lowest form of marks in this forum. It's pathetic when they try to rationalise why a wrestler sucks by how much they draw. :no:


----------



## Hawksea

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

Who ever said people who are "obssessed" with ratings were enjoying or were supposed to enjoy the idea of having Punk as the champion in the first place?


----------



## CHIcagoMade

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

Question is why do YOU care if other people care about ratings?


----------



## Shawn Morrison

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

agree 100%. people here are starting to prefer quantity over quality, which makes them no different from Vince McMahon, who they happen to always be complaining about. Hypocrites.


----------



## Mike`

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

Agreed. Said thing is people on here obsess over ratings but don't even understand how ratings actually work.


----------



## HEELKris

*Re: Ratings obsession?*



Mr.Cricket said:


> My point still stands. You're just mad that Punk is not a draw.
> 
> If he's drawing big numbers right now, you'll be like "OMG GUYZ PUNK IS A DRAW. RATINGZ ARE SO IMPORTANT".


Very true


----------



## Ham and Egger

*Re: Ratings obsession?*



Mr.Cricket said:


> My point still stands. You're just mad that Punk is not a draw.
> 
> If he's drawing big numbers right now, you'll be like "OMG GUYZ PUNK IS A DRAW. RATINGZ ARE SO IMPORTANT".


Why the fuck would he care about that? I think he'd be more happy that his favorite guy has been champion for over a year and about to have one hell of a feud with the Rock at the Royal Rumble.


----------



## Gandhi

*Re: Ratings obsession?*



Mr.Cricket said:


> My point still stands. You're just mad that Punk is not a draw.
> 
> *If he's drawing big numbers right now, you'll be like "OMG GUYZ PUNK IS A DRAW. RATINGZ ARE SO IMPORTANT"*.


Not true,I'd never care if people I enjoyed drawed or not.If I like them I'll like them thats that,I don't care what ratings the guy gets or what others think of him all that matters is that I like them.


----------



## TromaDogg

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

I care about the ratings.

Because saying the ratings don't matter is just the equivalent of closing your eyes, sticking your fingers in your ears and singing whilst the show you watch turns to shit.

Like it or not (and the apologists can claim ratings have only been in 'steady decline' all they want), the quality of WWE HAS dipped dramatically in recent years, and this year alone has seen some of the worst booking decisions and storylines in recent memory. Which is proven by none other than....the ratings.

A lot of people only bring up the ratings so much because some of the more obsessive fans on forums refuse to accept that there's anything wrong with what they're watching now compared to how things used to be....if you watched Raw and hated it and someone else argued with you and claimed it was a good show...but the ratings suggested that Raw lost half a million viewers, then it's at least factual evidence that Raw actually WAS crap and you weren't just imagining it.

It's also interesting to speculate on what aspects of the shows work and what don't (by checking the ratings) because fact is, whilst a minority of people will still continute to defend WWE to the hilt and say 'the ratings don't matter to me!', many more people ARE tuning out completely on a regular basis and if nothing drastically changes for the better, then things will only get worse.


----------



## Tango222

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

I'm 100% sure that if Punk was doing good ratings, OP would be like "See? The man is great, numbers don't lie".

Dunno what obession your talking about. I guess disccusing ratings in RATINGS THREAD is now called obsession, whatever.


----------



## Teh_TaKeR

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

Very nice post OP. Agree 100%!



Mr.Cricket said:


> OP is only mad because Punk is not a draw.


Obvious troll is obvious. 



unk2




Please come with something different and maybe you'll be taken serious.

So much blind hate on one person, blaming him for the overall lack of interest in the product is just dumb. It cannot be blamed on a single person, whether you dislike him or not.


----------



## fabi1982

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

Totally agree with OP and I read this several times in the ratings thread "it doesnt matter what happens on RAW there will always be x million viewers to watch the show" and it really is (except for some stars who show up like Rock, Undertaker, etc) and for the RTWM because all the old folks who watch wrestling twice a year will be interested again.

If they had put Cena in the one year title rain and give him only the second best spots bla bla it would be the same rating. Or if they had put Cena in the Punk spot and actually give him all the end segments and PPV closing matches, it would still be like this. Also if they had give Punk all the end segments and PPV closing matches. Or Del Rio or Ziggler, even Hornswaggle.

for me its a problem to get young people interested. Everyone can watch horror movies on Youtube or MMA events, real fighting, or other brutal stuff (and porn). So why watch wrestling which is like a Disney-for-men-show (and if it wouldn´t be PG they would have even lower ratings). Back in the 80/90 kids loved to watch wrestling because it was one of the only brutal things they could watch because their father loved wrestling. Today they can get there dose of brutality everywhere.

You even cant blame Vinni Mac, becaue wrestling itself isnt an atraction anymore, which it was 10-20 years ago, because our life changed with all the internet stuff. Kids dont want to wrestle in the backyard anymore, they want to play playstation/xbox360/whatever/watch porn because its cool and wrestling isnt cool anymore and nobody will change that, no Rock title rain, no Brock/Rock/Undertaker/Austin fatal four way title unification ironman match. It will be cool for the match itself, but thats it.

The faster you get this the better your entertainment in wrestling


----------



## Dusty Roids

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

How can you not be obsessed with Mark *RATINGS* Henry?


----------



## Annihilus

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

I think ratings are important to all of us. if you're invested in the wrestling business as a long time fan, you don't want to see it fail, so seeing the ratings drop from 6.0-7.0 in the attitude era to 3.5 average as of last year, now to 2.5-2.7 on average, is a bit alarming. It took them 12 years to lose 50% of their audience from the ratings they were pulling in wrestling's boom period, and now going from 3.5 to 2.5 ratings they've lost almost 30% of their audience in only ONE year. And CM Punk isn't to blame, he didnt even headline PPV's for half of his title reign, its WWE's fault as a whole.

If you don't understand why ratings are so important.. the way TV networks make their money is ad revenue from airing commercials. Higher ratings = more money for the network and access to bigger names in advertising. On the other hand, when a show loses ratings, it will become less profitable for the network and risk having advertisers pull out, because they want their commercials seen by as many people as possible. If WWE's ratings get much lower they could lose advertisers and then have a real crisis on their hands, that could lead to USA network dropping WWE. 

The reality is they're getting closer to TNA numbers than I ever thought possible. its a downward trend that can't be ignored.. they will rise a bit for RR through Wrestlemania, but then what? What happens next year if they're down to a 2.0 around this time? the ratings are a window into the quality of the product, theyre as low as they've ever been now which means the watered down PG product isn't keeping people watching loyally like it used to.

3 hour raws, kid-friendly content and and failure to make new stars is whats killing the business. Why do you think they're forced to bring Rock, Lesnar, HHH and others at the big shows? they don't have anyone else to headline them to make them feel important, and that's scary for WWE's future when these old stars can't go anymore.


----------



## DOPA

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

Wow some people are so pathetic :lmao :lmao :lmao

Not to mention names.


----------



## Obfuscation

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

b/c it makes them feel as if they know what they're talking about?

idk. It's nonsensical. Watch the damn show. If you don't like it, then don't watch.


----------



## Eddie Ray

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

I've said it before and I will say it again...NOW LISTEN VERY CLOSELY...

Why would you pay for something that is free? the internet, specifically illegal streaming, is killing off television. this isn't an unknown fact or anything, the television industry is fully aware of this and has been for years.

Why pay for cable or pay for a PPV when its available, free, at the click of a button?


----------



## rjsbx1

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

*What part of Mark "Ratings" Henry don't you guys get?*


----------



## TomahawkJock

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

There are bad ratings because of bad writers and bad quality shows. One wrestler cannot be given all the blame. And the OP is right, yeah, there are more internet streams and dirt sheets which doesn't make the casual fan want to tune on TV as much when they can figure everything out over the Internet. Smackdown Spoilers have definitely killed not only my appeal of SD but many others on here as well, and that's why the ratings have dropped.

Couple that with the rise in popularity of sports in America and abroad, this is why the ratings are going down. You can't sit and blame just one single wrestler though. Bad writing is the main cause of it and I basically agree with the OP.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Walk-In said:


> Seriously, what the fuck was this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is he practicing a fucking facial expression for Myspace or something? Then the whole putting the names on the video & it was just so bad all around. Like, who oversees this shit & doesn't point *ANY* of this shit out!?


It's character exploration. The promo is over hyped by the marks, but it was still alright. The Shield is really getting peeps to get behind Ryback more.


----------



## Cliffy

*Re: Ratings obsession?*



Stocking Filled w/HAYLEY JOY~! said:


> b/c it makes them feel as if they know what they're talking about?
> 
> idk. It's nonsensical. Watch the damn show. If you don't like it, then don't watch.


Same can be applied to Star Ratings for Matches.

I've always felt people on here were too generous with that. Throwing around 4 star ratings like Turner throws around money. :cornette


----------



## hardysno1fan

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

The thing is the show is crap and so we like to see justice with crap ratings. We want to see the AE back or atleast some reason to watch Raw on a weekly basis.


----------



## Gunner14

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

Its true its worse in the TNA section Like who cares if less people are watching wrestling i only care about if 1 person enjoyed the show and thats me. If i like something in a show i couldnt careless about the rest of you. I dont watch wrestling thinking god i hope the guys on wrestleforum are enjoying this...


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Shaking hand held camera.....trying to a do joker.


----------



## @MrDrewFoley

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

It's been ingrained in wrestling fans since then that ratings are all that matter. Apparently it's not wrestling or entertaining, it's how many people happen to be watching the channel (or just have the channel on), and who happen to have a nielson(sp?) box. It's incredibly subjective and hardly indicative of anything. Over here they used to do samples audiences of 5000 people or so and multiply the results for the country. That's how television ratings were done. I still find it hard to believe that 20 million people used to watch Coronation Street. That's nearly a third of the fucking country. 

It's also enforced by shoot interviews where old bitter wrestlers complain that they could "draw" and others couldn't. Plus, people listen to Kevin Nash far too much.

I personally could produce a tiny enough shit to give.

What I find funny is that people complain that the booking is erratic. If the WWE booked everything based on the previous weeks ratings then Christ knows what would be going on. Imagine Cole going "Last week Kofi Kingston defended his intercontinental championship, however, during his entrance, 40 people switched over. Therefore, he's been stripped of his title and a new match made between The Great Khali and Hornswoggle after they drew the highest segment of the first hour"


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

The product is shit. The Shield is shit. CM Punk is shit. People look to ratings because that's the only thing that makes McMahon change his mind. WCW was bought for pocket change because it lost it's TV deal after repeatedly pushing 2.0's shows and not listening to fans - and that was with competition! WWE is pushing 2.0's - and not listening to fans, with *no competition*.

Fucking PG-Era/Punk marks. I bet the OP only started watching wrestling 2 years ago.


----------



## Cliffy

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

And that's why i love roadkill_..


----------



## RVP_The_Gunner

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

The ratings debates on here especially are f*cking manic. Biggest example i can give is C.......M....PUNK, haters of punk will say "well he can't draw and the ratings are his fault" and punk lovers will say "it's not his fault, its the writers/ WWE creatives fault", people will put their own spin on it to suit themselves. What nobody can deny or mess with is the fact the Mark Henry is an absolute boss, all about dem ratings for the man that brought us the hall of pain.


----------



## dgeneration-nexus

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

I don't understand why ratings matter as much in 2012 as they did in 1990. Maybe I'm been a bit stupid.

Whenever I see people talking about Raw's ratings, they rarely take into consideration the DVR numbers. It comes up a lot when I listen to the PWTorch live cast, Wade Keller will spend 10 minutes talking about falling ratings and that the third hour is killing Raw. Now in principle I agree that three hours is too long, but the sake of a ratings discussion could it not just be that more people are either:

A) Recording Raw to watch later so they can skip through the adverts and replays,
B) People are watching the first two hours, deciding they've had enough and recording the third hour for later.

Why does Vince care how or when people are watching the show as long as eyeballs are on it? PPV buy rates are still fairly consistent with last year despite the extra hour on Raw and the introduction of Main Event, so people are still watching enough of the product to want to pay for the PPVs. And in the case of buy rates, in 2012 couldn't it just be that more people can't afford the prices and are watching on streams?

Genuine question, I'm not trying to argue with anyone, I just don't understand why live ratings are a big deal.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

*Re: Ratings obsession?*

Nielsen ratings aren't accurate anyways (a 1.0 rating is about 1% of the 100m+ tv watching households) and this has been proven before as not everyone has a Nielsen box (Breaking bad is apparently suffering in ratings too). Add into the fact that the majority of Punk's fans are old enough to work the internet and probably download the show rather than sit through 3 hours.

I just think it's a (very successful) troll on the fanatic Punk marks. I'm a fan of the guy myself but the lengths people go to protect his name on a forum like this is quite amusing.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

The-Rock-Says said:


> Shaking hand held camera.....trying to a do joker.


Hopefully Ambrose tones his character down a bit, or it might might not be received quite well by the WWE universe. But I think he has, because I remember watching DB vs Ambrose at a live event on youtube, and the dude recording the show didn't really understand his character the way it was being portrayed in the ring so they pretty much laughed at him. Dean is a pretty deep character, and I guess it just depends on how people take it in.


----------



## nevereveragainu

*Re: Ratings obsession?*



RVP_The_Gunner said:


> What nobody can deny or mess with is the fact the Mark Henry is an absolute boss, all about dem ratings for the man that brought us the hall of pain.


until Mark brings thenumbers back to those of times gone by that statement is a bust, just like Marks career as a whole


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Damn, who moved this shit in here?


----------



## nevereveragainu

*Re: Ratings obsession?*



@MrDrewFoley said:


> Imagine Cole going "Last week Kofi Kingston defended his intercontinental championship, however, during his entrance, 40 people switched over. Therefore, he's been stripped of his title and a new match made between The Great Khali and Hornswoggle after they drew the highest segment of the first hour"


at this point i wouldn't put it past them


----------



## wwffans123

haha


----------



## Choke2Death

I see a huge "why do you care about ratings?" topic merged to this and I'm gonna leave my 2 cents here. Unsurprisingly, it's from the same guy who made that "Why do you hate Punk?" topic a day or two ago. Like I gave a real response to that one, I'm gonna do so here too.

The reason I care about ratings is just because of pure curiosity. If I "obsess" over them currently, it's because I absolutely despise the shows and refuse to watch them, so when I read about the ratings being low, it makes me happy and gives me hope that there'll be a change in direction. To those who say "JUST ENJOY THE FUCKING SHOW!", I'll just repeat what Hawksea said. You aren't seriously SUGGESTING me to enjoy a show which has CM FUCKING PUNK as its champion for over a year, are you? I almost feel insulted by that. And don't get it twisted, I don't decide who my favorites and least favorites are based on who draws the most amount of viewers in their segments. That's a fucking stupid misconception that was started by some butthurt Punk mark last year and it's become the norm to say when it's a ratings discussion.


----------



## NearFall

DAT MERGE :brock



Choke2Death said:


> "JUST ENJOY THE FUCKING SHOW!"


Those that say that too also annoy me. I can understand if they say it to someone who bitches about absolutely everything and won't accept anything on the show, yet still is a fan and yet continues to watch it and post in the live discussion threads. A majority of people it is said to however, are merely making fair criticisms. It is as if someone can't form their own opinion. When someone says this for CM Punk being champion "JUST ENJOY HIM AS CHAMPION AND THE SHOW", it really annoys me. You should never HAVE to like someone, that's taking away what makes opinions opinions(and this forum in itself).


----------



## JasonLives

The rating part is interesting. But the Quarterhour breakdown is usually useless. Since its so many factors that determine how it does, mostly due to commercial breaks.


----------



## Jotunheim

Choke2Death said:


> it makes me happy and gives me hope that there'll be a change in direction.


except there hasn't been a change in direction since the last 2 years, how sad, pathetic and masochistic :lmao



> WWE is pushing 2.0's - and not listening to fans, with no competition.


exactly, there's NO competition, why would they care if they pull 1.0, as long as the network is happy they will keep doing televised shows and getting money, as long as they have no competition WWE have no reason to actually care about ratings at all, the only way they would care its if TNA magically starts pulling their legs and start getting more ratings, enough for the network to actually demand more effort from WWE so they can win a "ratings war", right now there is no war, and as such, they could hardly care about anything


----------



## Choke2Death

NearFall said:


> Those that say that too also annoy me. I can understand if they say it to someone who bitches about absolutely everything and won't accept anything on the show, yet still is a fan and yet continues to watch it and post in the live discussion threads. A majority of people it is said to however, are merely making fair criticisms. It is as if someone can't form their own opinion. When someone says this for CM Punk being champion "JUST ENJOY HIM AS CHAMPION AND THE SHOW", it really annoys me. You should never HAVE to like someone, that's taking away what makes opinions opinions(and this forum in itself).


I agree. It's even more annoying than "If you don't like it, don't watch". I agree with the comment if it's aimed at somebody who will find something to bitch about in every damn part of the show including the rope colors but if somebody can't enjoy the show despite wanting to, then STFU with that "JUST ENJOY IT" crap. I fall into the latter category so when I enjoy something, I am genuinely positive about it (most notably Wrestlemania 28) but if I can't enjoy it, then nobody is gonna convince me to force myself to enjoy it.



Jotunheim said:


> except there hasn't been a change in direction since the last 2 years, how sad, pathetic and masochistic :lmao


Yeah, and ratings have never decreased in such a rapid pace as they have in the past few months. So whatever.


----------



## DOPA

TNA simply doesn't have the marketing machine WWE has right now in order to promote its TV show in order to spike up the ratings to anything near competitive. So as long as sponsors and the network are happy, WWE doesn't need to worry as much about ratings.


----------



## roadkill_

WrestlingInc had a good podcast this week on how important ratings are. One of the points the guy made was that USA could buy something that would get 2.0's for half the price. That, alone, is a serious discussion deserving of its own thread.


----------



## NearFall

WrestlingInc.com's podcasts are usually pretty good. It was quite interesting to hear their take on the declining RAW ratings. It's quite scary to think that RAW pulling a 2.0 could be exchanged for half the price of another show. It would be quite a big discussion, due to lots of "if, buts, ands". To say WWE do not care about ratings though, is foolish. The bottom line is that RAW and its ratings are the primary source and derivative of sources of their revenue. Think about it, merchandise(toys,shirts,games etc), PPV buys, ticket sales. All of these are derived and ultimately sourced from their primary platform, RAW. If RAW is getting poorer and poorer, then new merchandise and PPVs will generally have a much poorer chance at success. (In recent months we have seen PPV buys rise, surprisingly. However it is the strong WrestleMania and SummerSlam numbers that is currently saving WWE this year-balance sheet wise.)


----------



## roadkill_

The third hour adds to an already shitty vibe adding fatigue and driving down ratings. However it adds an additional hour of advertising, that kind of money can buy several months of Rock cameos That might seem like it balances out but it doesn't really. It's a tactical trade off, but a strategical misstep. We've been here before, WCW with the third hour, still writing the show while its already on air and trying to keep up by bringing in quick (albeit big) fixes. Seeing the Rock is cool, but I can do that in Fast Six. What else you got for me? Sweet fuck all don't cut it. The WWE Network is also to me, incomprehensibly risky. They want to introduce that right it the gate of the Netflix era? The time to do that was 2002, with WCW and buying out AOL contracts. Seems to me that no way Shane McMahon would've even considered launching that venture. At some point it's possible the internet will swallow terrestrial and even cable TV. WWE right now should be focusing on making RAW the hottest 2 hour show on cable and not betting the farm on giant white elephants.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Can we please go back to just making Mark Henry jokes in this thread?


----------



## TromaDogg

Choke2Death said:


> Yeah, and *ratings have never decreased in such a rapid pace as they have in the past few months.* So whatever.


And this is what a lot of people don't seem to be taking on board with all this 'ignore the ratings, just enjoy the show' bullshit.

The majority of us can't be that enthusiastic about the show anymore because it's *shit*. Blame the 3 hours, blame Punk's stale never ending title reign, blame Super Cena and Super Sheamus, blame whatever the hell you want. But it's still shit. Badly written and extremely poorly booked shit, about 95% of the time now. The people who are still really enjoying everything/most things they're watching on Raw are in a minority nowadays and the sooner they realise that, the better. 

The apologists' excuses for the ratings just aren't working anymore. You can't compare Raw losing ratings to shows like American Idol/X Factor because they're 2 different things that cater (or at least, have _traditionally_ catered) to a different audience)...it's like comparing apples and oranges. Then there's the fact that the raw ratings haven't just 'steadily decreased' this year...they've plummeted like a stone.

The ratings are important because they're the only thing that will potentially make that senile old bastard Vinnie Mac see sense and improve Raw. I watch this thread, always hoping for low ratings after a piss poor show (which is usually every week now) just in the hope that Vince will get a kick up the ass and make proper changes. That is probably the biggest reason of all that I bother with the Ratings thread.

People who say the ratings are unimportant....does it not bother you how badly things have gotten recently, with people switching off in droves, the increased complaints online and things like a recent Smackdown taping in WWE's home state of Connecticut that could barely draw a TNA level crowd? There's only so many times you can bury your heads in the sand.


----------



## Shawn Morrison

3 hours is the cancer, ratings is the victim. 

and this week's raw was nothing special either, promos were cheesy and wrestling might be good but it was boring,noting new.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

We will just have to see what happens when Mark, Rock, HHH, Brock, and maybe Taker return. If WWE is still losing viewers then there is a problem, if the ratings get a bump and then dip when they leave again, well WWE should take notes. Cena ain't gonna hold up for long.


----------



## Obfuscation

No, what the WWE should do is no have to rely on the returns of the legends past their prime to get ratings up. Create a more engaging show overall and boom. It's easy to understand. All we need them to do is apply it. Won't happen overnight, but laying the foundation now is better than later. Or not at all.


----------



## teick

What WWE has to do is creating stars who are capable to draw, not relying on The Rock, Lesnar, Taker, HHH anymore.


----------



## kendoo

the 3 hour shows are not cutting it, and it could create a major problem for wwe


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Stocking Filled w/HAYLEY JOY~! said:


> No, what the WWE should do is no have to rely on the returns of the legends past their prime to get ratings up. Create a more engaging show overall and boom. It's easy to understand. All we need them to do is apply it. Won't happen overnight, but laying the foundation now is better than later. Or not at all.


That's what I meant, WWE will understand or think they understand the problem once those short term mega star draws leave and things begin to dip again. They need to invest more in the talent that they have. They failed big time with the fresh talent they were getting in 2009 and 2010 by cutting off so many pushes and killing so many story lines.


----------



## -Skullbone-

One thing that should be noted from either viewpoints of the "bring back old talent vs improve the current show" argument is how so many believe it's simply a matter of doing so and everything will be fine. Well, it's not totally implausible, although I highly doubt viewers will come flooding back in a short matter of time. Quality shows don't necessarily mean an immediate increase (not talking about what one's definition if 'quality' is, anyway), nor is bringing back talent like the Rock going to fix the haemorrhaging _all the damn time_. 

What WWE needs is patience and diligence. I think they're showing signs of both recently, but we know how the word 'sustainment' hasn't been apart of their vocabulary in recent times. Patience is something a lot of this forum's posters should have as well, as I worry that all this talk about ratings and so forth drives them into this philosophy of "why isn't this wrestler/angle drawing viewers NOW!? Scrap the thing, it obviously ain't working three weeks into its duration!" 

Things have to take time, particularly now when viewers have been told what to expect of the current talent pool and have looked to be fairly unimpressed all throughout the board. This 'improvement' will require work, so don't expect instantaneous results to appear overnight.


----------



## rulb

-Skullbone- said:


> One thing that should be noted from either viewpoints of the "bring back old talent vs improve the current show" argument is how so many believe it's simply a matter of doing so and everything will be fine. Well, it's not totally implausible, although I highly doubt viewers will come flooding back in a short matter of time. Quality shows don't necessarily mean an immediate increase (not talking about what one's definition if 'quality' is, anyway), nor is bringing back talent like the Rock going to fix the haemorrhaging _all the damn time_.
> 
> What WWE needs is patience and diligence. I think they're showing signs of both recently, but we know how the word 'sustainment' hasn't been apart of their vocabulary in recent times. Patience is something a lot of this forum's posters should have as well, as I worry that all this talk about ratings and so forth drives them into this philosophy of "why isn't this wrestler/angle drawing viewers NOW!? Scrap the thing, it obviously ain't working three weeks into its duration!"
> 
> Things have to take time, particularly now when viewers have been told what to expect of the current talent pool and have looked to be fairly unimpressed all throughout the board. This 'improvement' will require work, so don't expect instantaneous results to appear overnight.



I agree with you on some points, but they've been too scared to take risks and they've been too patient.


----------



## SerapisLiber

WAGG's MUSTACHE said:


> That's what I meant, WWE will understand or think they understand the problem once those short term mega star draws leave and things begin to dip again. They need to invest more in the talent that they have. They failed big time with the fresh talent they were getting in 2009 and 2010 by cutting off so many pushes and killing so many story lines.


Which is one thing that makes me wonder if the Rock just might be laying down at the Rumble.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

SerapisLiber said:


> Which is one thing that makes me wonder if the Rock just might be laying down at the Rumble.


Punk is top heel right now, and him going over the Rock would set up a HUGE win for the rumble winner going into Mania. That is if WWE decides they want Cena vs Rock 2.


----------



## Coffey

I have to be honest, much like the music industry, I preferred pro-wrestling when everyone was on cocaine & other various forms of drugs. This fucking era of Twitter & video games is awful. These are supposed to be larger-than-life characters, not everyday normal mother-fuckers like you & me.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

No more of dem drugs to give em those super powers anymore.


----------



## -Skullbone-

Walk-In said:


> I have to be honest, much like the music industry, I preferred pro-wrestling when everyone was on cocaine & other various forms of drugs. This fucking era of Twitter & video games is awful. These are supposed to be larger-than-life characters, not everyday normal mother-fuckers like you & me.


Being superficial there. Even if they were binging on all sorts of concoctions nowadays, it won't suddenly make the incoherent booking and uninspired writing magically improve. It'll be mildly amusing watching guys completely hammered stumble through weekly shows, true, but not much beyond that. 



rulb said:


> I agree with you on some points, but they've been too scared to take risks and they've been too patient.


I agree that they've been far too safe. All this reliance on building Cena over the past however-many years has left them high-and-dry in terms of making other stars, which is a result of being too precious about things.

However, patience is what they do need with some guys. Suddenly rushing back to how things were, if results aren't there instantly, is taking the safe, well-trodden route that likely won't be sustainable for the future anyway.

Then again, that isn't taking into account how people respond to the way management handle performers. They were obviously wanting Del Rio to be something, but that won't work out. They were patient to a degree, but evidently didn't have their heart in it.

Frankly, all it boils down to is improving the quality and having enough faith to stick with it.


----------



## Coffey

-Skullbone- said:


> Being superficial there. Even if they were binging on all sorts of concoctions nowadays, it won't suddenly make the incoherent booking and uninspired writing magically improve. It'll be mildly amusing watching guys completely hammered stumble through weekly shows, true, but not much beyond that.


Are you kidding me? Did you see any promo from the 80's? Ric Flair & Hulk Hogan made a living off of cocaine-fueled promos. I would gladly take that shit back. Shit, I just want to see the wrestlers living the lifestyle again instead of it just being a job. All this crap that humanizes wrestlers & kills kayfabe has destroyed the mystique of wrestling. Put the veil back up, I don't want to know The Wizard of Oz is just a broken down old man.


----------



## -Skullbone-

Perhaps I did mince my words when I said they'd stumble, although the chances of that happening in such an era of notoriously heavy management would be pretty high compared to those cut during yesteryear (many of which I haven't seen, so if I'm wrong on how I'd imagine things were run then please let me know). And of course, coke's one hell of a drug. Again though, I'd query if many fans today would be praising the etherial energy summoned by someone like Warrior and not choosing to speculate on how many rails he did that morning. 

That's just being semantic and smart-aleccy on my part though. What I'm interesting in is why you want to see them live that silly lifestyle as if it will solve this issue of complacency. I've seen you be very vocal about how apathy is killing the business, but the truth is that there's a stack of problems that are being radiated from our television sets straight to our field of vision, as opposed to something that _might_, theoretically, be dragging wrestler morale down backstage. 

*The core one, as covered weekly in this thread, is how things are being handled these days. It wouldn't matter if it was just a job to some of the guys and gals, because the issue of 'importance going missing' is one that management is responsible for. Titles, wins, losses, gimmicks, characters. There aren't any levels of importance to these things. Either they're treated as the biggest, most important thing in the world, to the point where they're overexposed to the point of lunacy, or they're the equivalent of dirt in comparison. You said it yourself as have many, many others that WWE can't make things matter.*

I do agree with you that the mystique is gone. It's been long gone for a while for many, though, and I'd imagine it would take something special for someone like you or me to get wrapped up in someone's act. Twitter is a problem to the integrity of the profession (even though it doesn't have to be), but that's undoubtedly what's being done as a result of what the company wants. That's their f'n problem if they want to undermine their own work. However, a lot of fans don't see WWE superstars as wrestlers more than entertainers, so it isn't that big a step away from their goal.


----------



## Coffey

Eh, I still think good wrestling is there. It's just from the guys that are good. Like, John Cena Vs. Brock Lesnar drew me in. I wasn't watching that match & thinking about snowflakes or anything, I was just drawn-in. Same with Shawn/Taker (both times). The good performers can still make me care. There's an emotional connection to their matches because they make you buy into it & turn into an everyday mark all over again. That feeling is what wrestling is all about. It's FUN. I LOVED the Cena/Batista Last Man Standing match & thought the duct tape finish was genius. I know it is not everyone's cup of tea but I really dug that. That match drew me in too. I have been watching wrestling for like twenty-five years or something silly now, so it's not very often when I see something that I have never seen before!

They happen a lot less frequently now but they do still happen. So it is definitely still possible for me to get wrapped up in a story or a character. The problem lately has been the ability to sustain it. I definitely cared about Nexus after their debut. I cared about Punk after his shoot promo. I am sort of interested in The Shield right now. There is just not a lot of faith in WWE to not drop the ball anymore, ya know? It's...sad.


----------



## kobe is my god

CM chimp wins the championship= lower ratings.


----------



## jonoaries

kobe is my god said:


> *CM chimp* wins the championship= lower ratings.



I have faith that the IWC will eventually get creative and come up with a better CM Punk name flip, all the flips I've seen thus far are horrible.


----------



## BKsaaki

Another Punk "shoot" Promo = DEM RATINGZ!!!1


----------



## -Skullbone-

Walk-In said:


> Eh, I still think good wrestling is there. It's just from the guys that are good. Like, John Cena Vs. Brock Lesnar drew me in. I wasn't watching that match & thinking about snowflakes or anything, I was just drawn-in. Same with Shawn/Taker (both times). The good performers can still make me care. There's an emotional connection to their matches because they make you buy into it & turn into an everyday mark all over again. That feeling is what wrestling is all about. It's FUN. I LOVED the Cena/Batista Last Man Standing match & thought the duct tape finish was genius. I know it is not everyone's cup of tea but I really dug that. That match drew me in too. I have been watching wrestling for like twenty-five years or something silly now, so it's not very often when I see something that I have never seen before!


You're certainly not wrong with what you're saying, but surely it goes more with the grain of your matured tastes and opinions as opposed to childish glee. Don’t get me wrong, you can’t genuinely feign having fun watching something. You describe it though as more of an....appreciation for how things are done, rather than watching with that doe-eyed expression a 10 year old Walk-In would carry as he watched his favourite personalities kick serious arse on the tube. Our innocence is lost I’m afraid when we discuss things in detail, and we don’t settle for just anything anymore. Now the company has to cater to _our_ goddamn demands.

Why is it that they have to live that rockstar lifestyle outside of the ‘E for you to believe in them? Not trying to be smart, but it is a viewpoint that a lot of people seem to carry around here when talking about the vanilla midgets and why steroids need to make a comeback. The appreciation and well-tuned subjectivism might be there when you credit things like Cena and Batista’s misadventures with duct tape, but it still is something that dictates to your broadened palette no? It was good writing that made it fun/amusing, which you recognized yeah? The veil will never be fully raised for you again, and you can even appreciate things like Twitter for what they _could_ do for the world of kayfabe, as well as why the company wants stuff like this to get the ahead of the proverbial pack.

By the way, it’s good to see optimism return to the sunny shores of WF after what was a generally positively reviewed PPV in TLC. Maybe a lot will now realize why they decide to stick with it through thick and thin to get their entertainment kicks. Perhaps this ratings prioritisation will be put on the back burner until certain situations call for such theorising.


----------



## JY57

today is the last Monday Night football game of the year and it sucks (Jets vs. Titans). From here till August (not counting the two pre-taped shows for Christmas Eve & New Years Eve, since they do bad anyways), It will be interesting to see how well the 3 hour format does in ratings (even though it still as a lot of TV competition going up against).


----------



## SerapisLiber

kobe is my god said:


> CM chimp wins the championship= lower ratings.





BKsaaki said:


> Another Punk "shoot" Promo = DEM RATINGZ!!!1


You guys are a year and a half too late.

Now it's- Big chimp wins the championship, faces John Cena in main event = DEM RATINGZ!!!1


----------



## RKO1988

meh they need to be over the top. its been long overdue that it will draw now. bring back title changes on RAW and Smackdown, bring back midcarders cutting promos on each other and having entertaining feuds. have hornswoggle fuck ceasaro's teenage daughter and have ceasaro destroy hornswoggle to the point where he's written off the show because ceasaro "killed" him in a match. it'll be hilarious, entertaining and put ceasaro or whoever over as a true nutcase not to fuck with. get rid of the divas division and make them valets and managers again. no one cares about women's wrestling anymore. Replace that time with more midcard feuds. Just drop all the family friendly shit, it doesn't draw. Its not the 80s anymore. Bring back cussing (it gets how pissed the guy is across much better) bring back blood (only use it for heated rivarlies and not every week like ric flair and HBK were doing). Make the arenas darker, get rid of all the bright florecent colors. This isn't disneyland its a wrestling show.


----------



## dxbender

A thread people here will love since it talks about.....................RATINGS

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/general-wwe/647618-social-media-tv-ratings.html


----------



## Get The Panda Out!

Triple H's hair


----------



## DA




----------



## Coffey

Too bad Monday Night Football was one of the worst games of the year or I would actually be anticipating a low(er) rating for RAW. Instead, they will probably get about the same number that they have been getting lately: a 2.7ish.

Would love to see a 2.4. This show deserves it.


----------



## Cookie Monster

With Christmas Eve and New Years Eve coming up the next two Raws (notably low rating shows), if this Raw does bad, I wonder if they'll sort something out for the new year. How about a New Years Resolution of going back to 2 fucking hours.


----------



## D.M.N.

No cable ratings out yet. I'm expecting hour three to be the lowest, again, due to stupid commercial placement at the start of hour three.


----------



## D.M.N.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...w-pawn-stars-teen-mom-ii-catfish-more/162188/

Hour 1 - 4.29 million
Hour 2 - 4.41 million
Hour 3 - 3.99 million

Woooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Last year for the Slammy's: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...loser-rizzoli-isles-wwe-raw-much-more/113647/

4.493 million and 4.161 million, so in-line with last year. They'll be very happy with that.


----------



## Coffey

-Skullbone- said:


> Why is it that they have to live that rock star lifestyle outside of the ‘E for you to believe in them?


Hey, sorry man, I just now saw this post or I would have replied sooner. 

It's not that I want them to live that lifestyle, die young or be addicted to narcotics or anything like that. I just want pro-wrestlers to still appear larger-than-life (not in literal size). When they have Twitter accounts & talk about video games & stuff, it humanizes them a lot more & kills the suspension of disbelief for me. Yes, I know this is normal people going to work at their job to earn an income to support themselves financially but I don't want to constantly be beaten over the head with it. I want them to look like they're living a lifestyle that not many people get to live, like a rock star. The partying, the travel, the vices, everything.

Your rock star phrasing is very apt. I want wrestlers to be envied for their lives, like they're big stars & celebrities that people can sort of admire from afar. That kids look up to. No one wants to run into Superman at a grocery store. If these are just normal, everyday guys, just like the common person in the audience, why am I going to pay to watch them? It's a work & a big part of that work, maybe even a lost part of it, is not just the veil of kayfabe (which is gone) but that superstar mystique as well, like a comic book character. It should still be a lifestyle, not just a career. Pro-wrestling is a different beast altogether, it's *not* "just a job." So when WWE just turned into a First Name // Last Name company that looks like a college classroom full of clean cut frat preps on TV and it is a bunch of nerds talking about video games & shit when not on TV, where the hell is the all-encompassing envelopment into the story? The fans, even the marks have access to Twitter & WWE.com.

John Cena is a guy that wrestles in blue jean shorts, that wears a t-shirt & a baseball cap & tells horribly lame jokes. That is not a pro-wrestler, that is a sober guy in the bleachers at Wrigley Field on a weekday & he has been carrying the company for a decade. Even if he is jacked to the gills, he comes off as normal on television. Who wants to pay for normal?


----------



## Choke2Death

That's great for them. Thankfully in an episode where the ratings killer only made one appearance. Does this one go in the 3s yet or is it still 2.9 at best? Record breaking if the former since they've been in the 2s for months now.

EDIT: 2.89, so not quite there yet!


----------



## purple_gloves

Huge increase from last week. They got things right with the ppv. Or was it just Flair?


----------



## DOPA

Think its a mix of being the slammy's, the TLC PPV and possibly Flair. Even though the Raw this week was awful I'm not surprised that the ratings went up.


----------



## DA

Flair and TLC match aftermath to the rescue


----------



## The Lady Killer

THE SHIELD, FLAIR, THE GAME =


----------



## Kabraxal

Nice PPV bump... too bad they butchered all the momentum with the worst Raw possible. Next week is going to be brutal... not only did they manage to fuck up their momentum, but it's going to be taped and then taped for the next Raw after that too I believe. I just don't see any heat and excitement coming out of that Raw last night. Most of the energy towards it is completely negative. See if people waste their holidays on it.


----------



## Bossdude

Flair is a draw, really? So people are psychic and knew he'd be on RAW? And it had nothing to do with the Award or Cena I guess.


----------



## Starbuck

Trips acceptance speech will be the highest rated 5 minutes of Raw since DAT TEAR back in August. Watch it happen.


----------



## Green Light

I loved that whole segment with Flair et. al from start to finish. Looks like it was probably the peak of the show.


----------



## CenaSux84

lol people expecting a bad rating is mad.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Choke2Death said:


> That's great for them. Thankfully in an episode where the ratings killer only made one appearance.


I don't remember Orton making an appearance. 


Nice numbers. Funny how these numbers look godly compared to what we're used to, when a year ago they were just "meh".


----------



## Necramonium

Did Tensai really fell on his ass, was a pretty fun moment, even more when Santino said that Tensai is Japanese for fat albert. X-D


----------



## funnyfaces1

That Flair/Cena/Punk/Shield/Hell NO/Ryback segment probably did incredible numbers. One of the best segments this year. CM Draw, Rydraw, and NAITCH showing everyone how it's done.


----------



## roadkill_

Horrible news.


----------



## LovelyElle890

SANTA GAME said:


> Trips acceptance speech will be the highest rated 5 minutes of Raw since DAT TEAR back in August. Watch it happen.


Most definitely. :lmao :lmao :lmao



> Triple H's 5 minute acceptance speech gained 1,000,000 viewers doing a 3.52 rating. This is the highest rated segment since the "single tear retirement, maybe?" segment back in August.


unk


----------



## Starbuck

DAT TEAR

DAT HAIRCUT


----------



## CHIcagoMade

D.M.N. said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...w-pawn-stars-teen-mom-ii-catfish-more/162188/
> 
> Hour 1 - 4.29 million
> Hour 2 - 4.41 million
> Hour 3 - 3.99 million
> 
> Woooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
> 
> Last year for the Slammy's: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...loser-rizzoli-isles-wwe-raw-much-more/113647/
> 
> 4.493 million and 4.161 million, so in-line with last year. They'll be very happy with that.


:flair :flair2 :flair3


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

Raw should be picking up pace real soon. Jan 7th first title match of the new year should bring some good attention. HHH should be making an early return if the numbers are good. (Y)


----------



## Defei

The Reindeer Killer said:


> THE SHIELD, FLAIR, THE GAME =


None of them were responsible for the increase imo. It's probably Cena/AJ aftermath from PPV. Both Flair and HHH returns were unadvertised, plus HHH's speech lasted only 3 mins.


----------



## TheF1BOB

So America decided to watch a shit show this week. :vince


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

The champ does it again.

#BITW


----------



## D.M.N.

Meanwhile, 3.33 million watched SmackDown last night. Good news all around for the 'E.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

D.M.N. said:


> Meanwhile, 3.33 million watched SmackDown last night. Good news all around for the 'E.





Wrestlinfan35 said:


> The champ does it again.
> 
> #BITW


Again.


----------



## Cookie Monster

D.M.N. said:


> Meanwhile, 3.33 million watched SmackDown last night. Good news all around for the 'E.


Damn, that seems a pretty good number for Smackdown, even if it was advertised and was live.


----------



## DegenerateXX

It was the Slammy Awards. That's why it got ratings. And all people do is talk about which wrestlers do and don't draw. So stupid. fpalm

And then we got a live Smackdown that they advertised well, and it was commercial free. Higher ratings isn't too shocking here.


----------



## RatedR10

Good ratings news for WWE this week. The entire first half hour of the 2nd hour including Flair, Punk, The Shield, Kane, Bryan and Ryback, so that rise is expected. That Smackdown number is also great compared to other live shows.

The ratings should start to pick up for WWE, IMO. I wonder if they can bring in 3's during the build up to the Rumble in the new year.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

SD should be more star heavy from now on. It's only fair.


----------



## Hallop

DegenerateXX said:


> It was the Slammy Awards. That's why it got ratings. And all people do is talk about which wrestlers do and don't draw. So stupid. fpalm


Slammy awards last year had the lowest rating of all 3 hour specials.

WWE Allstars - 3.1
Power To The People - 3.1
Rocky 3 hour special - 3.3
Slammy Awards - 2.8


----------



## DegenerateXX

Hallop said:


> Slammy awards last year had the lowest rating of all 3 hour specials.
> 
> WWE Allstars - 3.1
> Power To The People - 3.1
> Rocky 3 hour special - 3.3
> Slammy Awards - 2.8


Okay, interesting. But that's why I don't even think ratings reflect anything. They are unpredictable and inconsistent. I don't think it really matters which big names were there or not since it was all unexpected. 

That said, I'm glad SD got a good rating. I think if they just made Smackdown Live and on USA from now on more people would watch it. Not as many people watch SyFy, and a lot of fans probably just search for the SD results if they miss it. Especially since you can get the spoilers before Friday when it airs.


----------



## -Skullbone-

Walk-In said:


> Hey, sorry man, I just now saw this post or I would have replied sooner.
> 
> Your rock star phrasing is very apt. I want wrestlers to be envied for their lives, like they're big stars & celebrities that people can sort of admire from afar. That kids look up to. No one wants to run into Superman at a grocery store.* If these are just normal, everyday guys, just like the common person in the audience, why am I going to pay to watch them*?


Dagnabbit, now _I'm_ a couple of pages behind all of a sudden! Gotta be more on the ball, methinks.

I can't dispute too much of what you said about keeping the world of wrestling in world of its own, even if that enviable lifestyle you mention can be found in all works of media. Keep in mind that there are wrestlers trying their darndest to keep things in the realm of kayfabe. That’s something I hope management drill into all their performers backstage. Twitter is a double-edged sword on many fronts but could be largely beneficial on many fronts if done right.

However, even though I talk about something being 'done right' I think its interesting how many of us really stick by our own knowledge and experience of interpreting this profession. That's why I extracted that quote, because all this talk of rock stars, sticking by kayfabe and other hypotheticals only really attributes to what we're raised on and, ultimately, what drew us in all those years ago. Nowadays, many people have their cake with guys like Cena and Punk, while others long for the days of super-duper megastars.

Many moons ago, a lot of people discussed the notion of not enough blue-collared everyday guys being used as stars while these unrelatable monumental stars hogged the airways. We knew we couldn't be like them or obtain their status so why do we watch them? Okay, perhaps that last bit about not watching them was stepping over the line. People love over-the-top characters that could seemingly move the planets if he/she desired so. Don’t think there’s just money to be made in this type of star in this day and age, though.

A lot of fans nowadays absolutely love the idea of this normalized superstar they can chat to, have a beer with and then get to see in action and say “fuck, I know that guy!” Things won’t stay the same forever as this crowd grows up and moves on, but much of this generation adores the idea of ‘attainable stardom.’ Actually, a huge part of today’s pop culture scene is based on that idea. Stardom no longer needs to be something commoners can only view from afar, and that too has its benefits in wrestling.


----------



## jonoaries

Reality TV has made superstars of normal people and humanized the superstars. No surprise the world has done the same to wrestling. Nothing is off-limits anymore, and no stone is uncovered.


----------



## -Skullbone-

^^^It doesn't mean that kayfabe's necessarily dead though. Like it's always been, all it is simply keeping with the character presented. Guys like Ambrose and Sandow haven't/didn't stray too far from their personas. Just keep the most important stuff close to your chest people and don't compromise what the script had you do.


----------



## jonoaries

-Skullbone- said:


> ^^^It doesn't mean that kayfabe's necessarily dead though. Like it's always been, all it is simply keeping with the character presented. Guys like Ambrose and Sandow haven't/didn't stray too far from their personas. Just keep the most important stuff close to your chest people and don't compromise what the script had you do.


Did you watch the Tribute To The Troops show tonight? If you did you would have seen at the end where the heels and faces were on the stage at the same time applauding and being cordial to the Troops. Guys who were just wrestling in the ring were on the stage with no animosity whatsoever. 


Now, I won't say kayfabe is dead, because it can't die. Its just evolving. WWE is slowing becoming an off-broadway play. In fact that is what it seemed like to me this evening. That type of thing would have been a huge no-no in the 80s, and merely frowned upon in the early to mid 90s (the MSG incident w/ the Clique for instance). Nobody will be punished for what happened tonight though, because I'm almost certain it was McMahon's idea. 



Wrestlers are becoming actors in a theatric show. The days of wrestling as this incredibly insular business is gone. Now guys almost have to break walls and push the envelope to keep people interested. Twitter and other social media is being used to both push story-lines AND put people in contact with the performer on a real human level. Its still fairly uncertain what a wrestler tweets or says (assuming he's still active) is legit or a work. That's how kayfabe is working now. The barriers between heel & face, performer & crowd, have shrunken a bit but they still exist because it has to in order for the business to function.


----------



## Tnmore

Cena/Dolph/AJ deal was the draw obviously. Over the last three months everytime Punk was part of the PPV main event retaining the title, the next night viewership/rating fell to alarming levels. This is the first time it has had a significant increase.





D.M.N. said:


> Meanwhile, 3.33 million watched SmackDown last night. Good news all around for the 'E.





Cookie Monster said:


> Damn, that seems a pretty good number for Smackdown, even if it was advertised and was live.



Commercial free.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Tnmore said:


> Cena/Dolph/AJ deal was the draw obviously. Over the last three months everytime Punk was part of the PPV main event retaining the title, the next night viewership/rating fell to alarming levels. This is the first time it has had a significant increase.


Fallout from Hell in a Cell got a 2.95, up from 2.48 the previous week. Ironically enough the one main event that didn't involve Cena this year (besides RR). So yeah... no.


----------



## Tnmore

Except the 2.48 terrible rating that week was due to heavy competition, they were up against Presidential debate which drew 20 million viewers, Bears vs. Lions did 11+ million and Giants/Cardinal MLB playoff drew over 8 million. The next week increase was going to happen regardless of any top star/angle.

RAW rating following Survivor Series PPV dropped despite being the night after PPV where Punk retained the title. That alone proves my point.


----------



## wb1899

Ric Flairs appearance brought the ratings of Male teens from a 3.0 to 3.4, Men 18-49 from 2.2 to 2.7, Girl teens from 1.0 to 1.0 and Women 18-49 from 1.0 to 1.1, and overall viewership from 4,096,000 to 4,701,000.

Segment-by-segment: 
Kaitlyn vs. Eve Torres plus New Age Outlaws return gained 130,000 viewers. 
Kofi Kingston vs. Tensai and the Kiss Award lost 28,000 viewers. 
Great Khali vs. David Otunga lost 328,000 viewers. 
The Ric Flair angle with John Cena, C.M. Punk and Paul Heyman gained 605,000 viewers. 
The end of the brawl with Flair, Daniel Bryan, Kane and Ryback and The Shield plus Brodus Clay vs. JTG lost 588,000 viewers. 
The LOL award with Santino Marella and Tensai doing comedy and Sin Cara vs. Cody Rhodes gained 147,000 viewers. 
The trending award and Sheamus and Big Show angle which included Ziggler trying to cash in the briefcase and Cena stopping him gained 122,000 viewers. 
Heath Slater & Jinder Mahal & Drew McIntyre vs. Tommy Dreamer & Alberto Del Rio & The Miz lost 502,000 viewers. 
Ryback vs. Antonio Cesaro and the Match of the Year award featuring HHH’s return gained 113,000 viewers. 
John Cena & Vickie Guerrero vs. Dolph Ziggler & A.J. Lee gained 510,000 viewers.


----------



## The GOAT One

Not only a wrestling god, but a ratings god too.

All hail :flair :flair2 :flair3


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

Ryback losing half a million with only 3 minutes to do it :no:


----------



## BANKSY

From Raw its clear Vince doesn't care about TV ratings. All about those app downloads~!


----------



## JY57

http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe..._with_Dreamer_Posts_Show-Low_Rating_More.html



> - As noted before, the December 17th WWE RAW with The Slammys scored a 2.87 rating with 4.22 million viewers. The 2011 Slammy Awards did almost identical numbers with a 2.84 rating and 4.11 million viewers. In 2011, those numbers were considered really bad but this year they're considered really good.
> 
> In the segment breakdown, Kaitlyn vs. Eve Torres plus the return of The New Age Outlaws for a Slammy presentation gained 130,000 viewers from the opener. Kofi Kingston vs. Tensai and the Best Kiss Slammy lost 28,000 viewers. David Otunga vs. The Great Khali lost 328,000 more viewers. The Ric Flair segment with John Cena, CM Punk and Paul Heyman gained 605,000 viewers for a 3.20 quarter rating at 9pm.
> 
> The end of the brawl with Flair, Kane, Daniel Bryan, Ryback and The Shield plus JTG vs. Brodus Clay lost 588,000 viewers. The LOL Moment Slammy plus Sin Cara vs. Cody Rhodes gained 147,000 viewers. The hashtag Slammy and the segment with Big Show, Sheamus and Ziggler trying to cash in gained 122,000 viewers. Heath Slater, Drew McIntyre and Jinder Mahal vs. Tommy Dreamer, Alberto Del Rio and The Miz lost 502,000 viewers for a show-low 2.64 quarter rating. Plus this was the 10pm quarter that almost always gains.
> 
> Antonio Cesaro vs. Ryback plus the Match of the Year Slammy with Triple H gained 113,000 viewers, a number that has to be considered a disappointment. John Cena and Vickie Guerrero vs. AJ Lee and Dolph Ziggler gained 510,000 viewers for a 3.00 overrun rating.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Tnmore said:


> Except the 2.48 terrible rating that week was due to heavy competition, they were up against Presidential debate which drew 20 million viewers, Bears vs. Lions did 11+ million and Giants/Cardinal MLB playoff drew over 8 million. The next week increase was going to happen regardless of any top star/angle.
> 
> RAW rating following Survivor Series PPV dropped despite being the night after PPV where Punk retained the title. That alone proves my point.


Even still, the 2.95 was way above the 2.7ish average they were getting. So once again... no.


----------



## DA

> Great Khali vs. David Otunga lost 328,000 viewers.
> The Ric Flair angle with John Cena, C.M. *Punk* and Paul Heyman *gained* 605,000 viewers.
> The end of the brawl with Flair, Daniel Bryan, Kane and Ryback and The Shield plus Brodus Clay vs. JTG lost 588,000 viewers.


:bateman


----------



## D.M.N.

"Heath Slater, Drew McIntyre and Jinder Mahal vs. Tommy Dreamer, Alberto Del Rio and The Miz lost 502,000 viewers for a show-low 2.64 quarter rating. Plus this was the 10pm quarter that almost always gains."

Obviously what has happened here is that the dirtsheets have combined Q9 and Q10 to get a 'show low quarter'. Muppets...


----------



## Roncaglione

D.M.N. said:


> Obviously what has happened here is that the dirtsheets have combined Q9 and Q10 to get a 'show low quarter'. Muppets...


"The dirsheets" so they all got together and did it?

You seem to have no idea how or where they are compiled. These are AC Nielsen's numbers which Meltzer reports in the Wrestling Observer Newsletter. They are not invented at weekly Dirtsheets Lunch or something.


----------



## wb1899

There are minute by minute, quarter and half hour breakdowns from Nielsen.

I think what D.M.N. means is, that Meltzer seems to get "only" quarter hours, but often joins two quarters. 

If you see other breakdowns on the net, they look like this one (+- some demos/or with quarter hours):
Survivor Philippines (CBS) - 12/16/12
8:57: 14.513 million viewers, A18-49: 4.0/9, A25-54: 5.4/11, A18-34: 2.2/6 
9:00: 11.784, 3.4/8, 4.6/10, 1.8/5
9:30: 11.395, 3.2/8, 4.5/9, 1.6/4 
10:00: 11.389, 3.2/8, 4.5/10, 1.5/4 
10:30: 10.946, 3.0/8, 4.2/10, 1.4/4 

So the question is, why didnt Meltzer post the breakdown this way?


----------



## kokepepsi

LOL at this guy thinking D.M.N doesn't know how the ratings/breakdowns work.

When was the flair segment...at 9pm?


----------



## Falkono

The Shield continue to lose huge ratings. 400k+ last week and 500k+ this week.
As I have said countless times they need a leader badly. Someone like Barratt would be fine. But right now they are way too green to stand on their own. They are being thrown in at the deep end and the quality of their segments shows they are not ready for that. WWE needs to protect their future talent more.


----------



## Hennessey

The Cynical Miracle said:


> Ryback losing half a million with only 3 minutes to do it :no:


Lets just ignore that there were 5 other guys there. Also add in the fact that Ryback gained over 100 thousand viewers in his match with Cesaro later in the night.


----------



## Choke2Death

Sparta101 said:


> Lets just ignore that there were 5 other guys there. Also add in the fact that Ryback gained over 100 thousand viewers in his match with Cesaro later in the night.


Ignore him, it's just terrible trolling attempts from butthurt Punk marks trying to "fight back" against all the backlash Punk gets for the bad ratings. What they don't get is the fact that Punk is the champion and has been the main event of the show for all the months people blamed him for falling ratings, so that makes _some_ sort of sense at least. Picking on Ryback is like the most random thing one can do.


----------



## The Lady Killer

It was the end of the brawl that lost viewers. That lasted all of what, a minute? JTG vs Clay was easily the reason for the dropoff. And I fail to see how Barrett would solve their alleged "problems." Pretty sure The Shield is more over than Barrett.


----------



## D.M.N.

wb1899 said:


> There are minute by minute, quarter and half hour breakdowns from Nielsen.
> 
> I think what D.M.N. means is, that *Meltzer seems to get "only" quarter hours, but often joins two quarters. *
> 
> If you see other breakdowns on the net, they look like this one (+- some demos/or with quarter hours):
> Survivor Philippines (CBS) - 12/16/12
> 8:57: 14.513 million viewers, A18-49: 4.0/9, A25-54: 5.4/11, A18-34: 2.2/6
> 9:00: 11.784, 3.4/8, 4.6/10, 1.8/5
> 9:30: 11.395, 3.2/8, 4.5/9, 1.6/4
> 10:00: 11.389, 3.2/8, 4.5/10, 1.5/4
> 10:30: 10.946, 3.0/8, 4.2/10, 1.4/4
> 
> So the question is, why didnt Meltzer post the breakdown this way?


Bolded bit hits the nail on the head - this happens regularly with the breakdowns which is frustrating and doesn't really tell us anything at all. As soon as you bundle two separate quarters together, you open yourself to questions in my opinion.



kokepepsi said:


> LOL at this guy thinking D.M.N doesn't know how the ratings/breakdowns work.
> 
> When was the flair segment...at 9pm?


Yeah, Flair was on the hour, the 605k gain is a great gain, as is the raw 4.7 million number for that quarter. Best quarter in ages.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

Sparta101 said:


> Lets just ignore that there were 5 other guys there. Also add in the fact that Ryback gained over 100 thousand viewers in his match with Cesaro later in the night.


its the same thing with punk and orton
just proves that this thread is full of hypocrites


----------



## JoseDRiveraTCR7

Choke2Death said:


> What they don't get is the fact that Punk is the champion and has been the main event of the show for all the months people blamed him for falling ratings, so that makes _some_ sort of sense at least..


But I thought Punk was a midcard champion.


----------



## Choke2Death

JoseDRiveraTCR7 said:


> But I thought Punk was a midcard champion.


Depends on what you mean. If your point is about quality, then yes, he's midcard at best. If it's about presentation, he stopped being in Cena's shadow around June. And he officially became the focus of the show after SummerSlam (even if Cena was involved in some of it). So it makes sense that he takes some of the blame for bad ratings. After all, the champion is the guy who gets paid the most and represents the company. As champion, it's your duty to get people to watch and the Punk Effect has been a complete 180 of that.

And look what's happened in the past couple of weeks. He's stopped hogging the spotlight three times minimum a week and the numbers are getting back up. I don't think it's just a coincidence.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Punk bringing in the big quarters once again. Can't really credit Cena at all, since Punk's music hit as soon as the quarter started, and by that time Cena had left the stage. That gain goes to Punk and Flair, well deserved since it was a great promo. And Triple H can't draw. See you all next week.


----------



## obby

Choke2Death said:


> Depends on what you mean. If your point is about quality, then yes, he's midcard at best. If it's about presentation, he stopped being in Cena's shadow around June. And he officially became the focus of the show after SummerSlam (even if Cena was involved in some of it). So it makes sense that he takes some of the blame for bad ratings. After all, the champion is the guy who gets paid the most and represents the company. As champion, it's your duty to get people to watch and the Punk Effect has been a complete 180 of that.
> 
> And look what's happened in the past couple of weeks. He's stopped hogging the spotlight three times minimum a week and the numbers are getting back up. I don't think it's just a coincidence.


Perhaps he was overexposed prior to the injury. He was in, what, 4-5 segments a week before TLC?

In any event, Cena is still the only real "ratings draw" working RAW right now, so I don't get everyone blaming Punk specifically. I mean, sure he's the champion, but it is possible that the product(and possibly even the fact that no one else is a big mainstream name) is what is drawing the fans away.


----------



## funnyfaces1

Once again, the combined power of CM Draw, GOAT Flair, and the essence of Mark Henry brings in excellent viewership in their respective timeslots.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

obby said:


> Perhaps he was overexposed prior to the injury. He was in, what, 4-5 segments a week before TLC?
> 
> In any event, *Cena is still the only real "ratings draw" working RAW right now*, so I don't get everyone blaming Punk specifically. I mean, sure he's the champion, but it is possible that the product(and possibly even the fact that no one else is a big mainstream name) is what is drawing the fans away.


No he's not. His main event with Big Show last week did one of the worst overruns ever. Nobody is a draw, the brand is the draw. Unless you have guys returning like The Rock, who like this past RTWM proved, is only a draw because of the hype of a return. Then the hype dies down.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Choke2Death said:


> Depends on what you mean. If your point is about quality, then yes, he's midcard at best. If it's about presentation, he stopped being in Cena's shadow around June. And he officially became the focus of the show after SummerSlam (even if Cena was involved in some of it). So it makes sense that he takes some of the blame for bad ratings. After all, the champion is the guy who gets paid the most and represents the company. As champion, it's your duty to get people to watch and the Punk Effect has been a complete 180 of that.
> 
> And look what's happened in the past couple of weeks. He's stopped hogging the spotlight three times minimum a week and the numbers are getting back up. I don't think it's just a coincidence.


The number last week was lower than pretty much all of the weeks prior apart from the one directly before it and a couple of odd ones here and there. This week's was about on par with what they've been getting every other week anyway. When they get back into the 3.0's consistently, then you can start talking about how ratings going up are due to Punk not being in the spotlight.

Punk only deserves most of the blame when it comes to the superstars solely, but there are much bigger issues that are leading to lower rating that Punk shouldn't be accounted more than say... 5 % the reason for ratings going down, if even that. And therefore when people discuss why ratings are down, Punk should be one of the last and fewest things mentioned, yet he's the reason most people are putting the blame on. I understand haters can't help themselves, but Cena's not helping the ratings anymore either, and Ryback, while seemingly the strongest draw on the main roster, I'm not sure that matters that matters at this point.

Ratings are only going up when WWE has Rock there, Lesnar there, Taker there, and it's RR/WM season. Besides that they're going to continue going down in general.


----------



## Choke2Death

No doubt there's no full-time draws left anymore (not even Cena) but saying Punk is NOT a factor in them going down when he has the spotlight for a large portion of the show is just being in denial. He may not drive away viewers single handedly but he doesn't help anything whatsoever. It's the overall viewership that matters, not who gains from the already present fans. Obviously Punk is going to gain viewers weekly since he actually gets character/story development in reliable spots with legends that make one-off appearances while Alberto del Rio vs Zack Ryder Part 315081835 will lose viewers because it's a pointless squash match with two lengthy commercial breaks surrounding it.


----------



## murder

The Sandrone said:


> Ratings are only going when WWE has Rock there, Lesnar there, Taker there, and it's RR/WM season. Besides that they're going to continue going down in general.


That's correct, of course. However, this can not be the excuse for bad ratings the rest of the year. If they put on good shows from April-December, the ratings could stay the same, if not get better. 

From 97-02, the ratings went up after Mania.


----------



## #1Peep4ever

murder said:


> That's correct, of course. However, this can not be the excuse for bad ratings the rest of the year. If they put on good shows from April-December, the ratings would stay the same, if not get better.
> 
> From 97-02, the ratings went up after Mania.


yes but the shows get worse and worse because the dont put any effort


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Choke2Death said:


> No doubt there's no full-time draws left anymore (not even Cena) but saying Punk is NOT a factor in them going down when he has the spotlight for a large portion of the show is just being in denial.


He's really not, at least not a factor that deserves to get harped on like it does and rather it's simply a case of there being no mega-star on the roster with that "It" appeal, which goes with the circumstances that it's not really Punk's fault. It's easy to put the blame on Punk though because he's someone rather than something. All I'll agree on is Punk not bringing in viewers, but I'm not going to really blame him for ratings going down overall anymore than Cena, Ryback, or anyone else who's currently a main eventer, because he's only very slightly more responsible anyway, if that makes any sense.



> That's correct, of course. However, this can not be the excuse for bad ratings the rest of the year. If they put on good shows from April-December, the ratings could stay the same, if not get better.


Oh I agree, but that would require building up top heels, making them look legitimately threatening to all top faces, even Cena and Sheamus, and building up top faces that the audience truly gets behind 100% and are invested in, and not just forcing people up even when they don't get a reaction. 

That's something that WWE seems hell-bent on not doing. I just stated what I stated as a fact for the present time. Not an excuse for why ratings are dwon. They're down for a multitude of reasons. 3 hours being one of the bigger reasons. Crappy storylines being another. No "it" factor in prospective top faces that they've tried to go for except MAYBE Ryback, and that's a big maybe that will only have results as we go. No top heels to really look threatening to top faces which makes fans of those faces complacent and not as invested as they could be. The mid-card being very weak right now, and same with tag division, although WWE in credit to them, were doing well with the tag division for a few months. Those are just some of the major issues that should be talked about more than "OH PUNK'S KILLIN' DUR RATINGZ WITH HIS SKINNYFATASS... ASS!"


----------



## Werb-Jericho

they obviously think punks a draw as he keeps coming out injured and saying he'll be at places, like TLC


----------



## Falkono

Ah I see, it was Punk with that gain not a 2 time hall of famer Ric Flair. 
I imagine if it was down it would be Flairs fault too right? Think I'm starting to understand how this works....


----------



## Mister Hands

Falkono said:


> Ah I see, it was Punk with that gain not a 2 time hall of famer Ric Flair.
> I imagine if it was down it would be Flairs fault too right? Think I'm starting to understand how this works....


I'd rather think it was a case of people saying "Hey, Flair and Punk. They could have a pretty great segment together." That seems to me both likely, and a fairly constructive way of interpreting things. Certainly preferable to getting into a ceaseless, petty game of one-upmanship.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Falkono said:


> Ah I see, it was Punk with that gain not a 2 time hall of famer Ric Flair.
> I imagine if it was down it would be Flairs fault too right? Think I'm starting to understand how this works....


Funny you bring this up, when only one poster (who I'm assuming is just trolling the Punk haters) said/called anything like that. Why not also poke fun at this one post while you're at it? (I believe this was also a troll post as well, but still to the point):



> Lets just ignore that there were 5 other guys there. Also add in the fact that Ryback gained over 100 thousand viewers in his match with Cesaro later in the night.


I mean, he's basically giving credit to Ryback for a gain HHH was a part of. And before you say Punk marks have been claiming ratings are up thanks to him/segments are up thanks to him, Ryback has gotten that treatment a lot more, whether justified or not.


----------



## TheF1BOB

Flair brought the viewers. Punk just in the right place, at the right time.


----------



## D.M.N.

murder said:


> That's correct, of course. However, this can not be the excuse for bad ratings the rest of the year. If they put on good shows from April-December, the ratings could stay the same, if not get better.
> 
> From 97-02, the ratings went up after Mania.


Pretty sure that is not true for 2002, as the name change sent ratings dropping.


----------



## Bossdude

Flair wasn't advertized and was a surprise guest host, so how did he bring the viewers if the viewers didn't even know he'd be there?


----------



## Cookie Monster

Bossdude said:


> Flair wasn't advertized and was a surprise guest host, so how did he bring the viewers if the viewers didn't even know he'd be there?


I thought the exact same thing.

Only thing I could possibly think is that they played his little "woo" before the break in hope that people on twitter would get talking and some extra viewers would tune in because they heard Flair would be on TV, but I doubt it.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Flair was on more than long enough to have it spread that he had returned and get people to tune in. I do credit Flair for the far majority of the reason that segment gained so much. It was the biggest 9PM gain in a while.


----------



## SerapisLiber

Hmmm... Flair's still a big ratings draw, even when unannounced, eh? I'm glad he was able to pull TNA out of the 1s zone.

Oh... wait...


----------



## LovelyElle890

:lmao :lmao :lmao Punk fans are hilarious. 

Punk appears in another segment with a legend = Look at that 500k plus gain Punk had!! unk

Punk appears with a wrestler from this Era = Why the hell did they have to stick Punk with this ratings vacuum?! unk3

I admire your conviction in your God. Still not as devout as us Itachi fans though, but bless your hearts for trying.

Oh yeah and the usual Yata Mirror tanks your argument and Totsuka Sword to blitz, GG.

8*D


----------



## SinJackal

Choke2Death said:


> No doubt there's no full-time draws left anymore (not even Cena) but saying Punk is NOT a factor in them going down when he has the spotlight for a large portion of the show is just being in denial. He may not drive away viewers single handedly but he doesn't help anything whatsoever. It's the overall viewership that matters, not who gains from the already present fans. Obviously Punk is going to gain viewers weekly since he actually gets character/story development in reliable spots with legends that make one-off appearances while Alberto del Rio vs Zack Ryder Part 315081835 will lose viewers because it's a pointless squash match with two lengthy commercial breaks surrounding it.


Solid post.

The way a lot of people are defending Punk's numbers are the kinds of arguments you use to defend a midcard wrestler's impact on the ratings, NOT a 400+ day reigning WWE champion who's getting tons of mic time, and a very large portion of the total story development each week.

This is why Punk needs to be blamed most. It's a fact that's going over a lot of people's heads for some reason. It doesn't matter if his segments don't lose viewers (or many viewers) or even gain a bit after the previous segment tanked in viewership. His segments aren't interesting enough for peple to stick around in anticipation of something exciting happening that they don't want to miss. That's the job of people who are getting most of the air time and significant story development.

Mid-carder ratings logic can only take the argument so far before you just start thinking about how he's just barely keeping his own segments above the falling ratings for the rest of the show. How can you possibly look at that and actually defend it as a good thing? Compared to the first half of the year (rather than the rest of the show each night), Punk's segments are also getting shitty ratings.


----------



## ChickMagnet12

Ratings go up - Talk about how Punk can't draw.
Ratings go down - Argue about how Punk can't draw.

Can we rename this the "Punk draw thread" and make a new ratings thread for people to actually view the ratings without having to scroll through pages of the same repeated argument/troll?


----------



## hardysno1fan

I'm not liking this heel Punk. I dunno its so generic and boring. There's no maliciousness in this Punk.


----------



## YamchaRocks

ChickMagnet12 said:


> Can we rename this the "Punk draw thread" and make a new ratings thread for people to actually view the ratings without having to scroll through pages of the same repeated argument/troll?


There's nothing strange that people talk mostly about Punk in this thread, since he's the focal point of the show for about 6 months and if anyone is to blame for low ratings, it's him.


----------



## Honey Bucket

YamchaRocks said:


> There's nothing strange that people talk mostly about Punk in this thread, since he's the focal point of the show for about 6 months and if anyone is to blame for low ratings, it's him.


It's Vince McMahon who is at fault.

Not sure why people are failing to realise this yet.


----------



## YamchaRocks

Maybe you're right. It is Vince McMahon who build the company around somebody who makes casuals fall asleep, so yeah, you can say it's Vince's fault.


----------



## Honey Bucket

It really was a bad idea going in this thread, what a stupid fool.


----------



## YamchaRocks

If you're getting butthurt because of simple J O K E, then yes, it was a mistake by you.


----------



## D.M.N.

Instead of changing thread names, how about we close this thread and start **The Official 2013 Raw Ratings Thread**? 9,000 posts, 360 pages later I think we need a new pair of boots. Not sure about anyone else but sometimes the last few pages takes a lot of time to load...

I'm pretty certain the last two Raw's of 2012 will bring DUD ratings with it being holiday editions, so makes sense to start the 2013 version.


----------



## Honey Bucket

YamchaRocks said:


> If you're getting butthurt because of simple J O K E, then yes, it was a mistake by you.


Pretty impossible to tell to be honest.


----------



## murder

D.M.N. said:


> I'm pretty certain the last two Raw's of 2012 will bring DUD ratings with it being holiday editions, so makes sense to start the 2013 version.


Going by the last few times they had Raw on the 24th and 31st, I'm predicting a 2.1 for both shows, 2.3 at best.

Those would be the lowest ratings since March 3th 97.

But it doesn't matter anyway, all that matters is what the ratings on January 7th and the shows until Mania will be.


----------



## King_Kool-Aid™

hardysno1fan said:


> I'm not liking this heel Punk. I dunno its so generic and boring. There's no maliciousness in this Punk.


With the horrible direction they send his character.



YamchaRocks said:


> There's nothing strange that people talk mostly about Punk in this thread, since he's the focal point of the show for about 6 months and if anyone is to blame for low ratings, it's him.


No, its Vince and company to blame not Punk. They keep sticking Punk in lousy ass feuds like with Ryback, or Cena for the 50th time or awful segments like with Ric Flair. We see when Punk is allowed more control over his character than he has with this year reign that he can make things entertaining and interesting as hell but tis hard to turn chicken shit into chicken dinner when the stuff WWE produces now is worse than a 3rd world kids stool.


----------



## Cliffy

I agree with the notion of a new 2013 ratings thread.


----------



## cokecan567

hmmm


----------



## CenaSux84

Can't wait for people to say "But it was on Christmas Eve" when it draws super low ratings. News Flash! WWE ran a RAW event on Christmas DAY! In 2000 and got a 3.5 rating. 

The Christmas Eve RAW will probably get a 2.1-2.3 but the New Years Eve RAW? Holy shit that is going to get a bad rating. Maybe a 1.8/1.9. I would lol if RAW got 2.0+ for the NYE episode who the fuck would miss New Years parties and celebrations to watch a horrible taped RAW episode? Friendless Virgins and kids who wasn't allowed at the parties come to mind.


----------



## NikkiSixx

CenaSux84 said:


> Can't wait for people to say "But it was on Christmas Eve" when it draws super low ratings. News Flash! WWE ran a RAW event on Christmas DAY! In 2000 and got a 3.5 rating.
> 
> The Christmas Eve RAW will probably get a 2.1-2.3 but the New Years Eve RAW? Holy shit that is going to get a bad rating. Maybe a 1.8/1.9. *I would lol if RAW got 2.0+ for the NYE episode who the fuck would miss New Years parties and celebrations to watch a horrible taped RAW episode?* Friendless Virgins and kids who wasn't allowed at the parties come to mind.


Who the fuck would miss those parties and celebrations to watch a LIVE RAW episode (good or bad), anyway?


----------



## CenaSux84

NikkiSixx said:


> Who the fuck would miss those parties and celebrations to watch a LIVE RAW episode (good or bad), anyway?


Not me. But back in the Attitude Era sometimes WWF was must see (Plus it ended at 11 so you wouldn't miss all of the party but most of it)


----------



## cokecan567

Anyone know if the ratings for that garbage christmas show came out yet lol? very curious to know what they were. hopefully it was very low for that g rated crap they showed us.


----------



## bigd5896

*How would you raise ratings?*

There are many concerns that ratings are tanking, the product is too child friendly, to much pandering to celeb/twitter/casual.

I am curious how would you turn WWE around? What are your ideas to bring in ratings/money for the company? How would you take the company back to the top? 

The first thing I would change is the over saturation of the product. I would have Raw Monday 2 hrs, Smackdown live on USA Fridays. ScyFi is not a big enough and is not wide enough range for the WWE. and I looked at the next 3 months to see whats on friday night on usa? SVU reruns, smackdown can get better ratings than that.

I would get rid of Superstars and main event, and if you wanna keep them put them on youtube or hulu, if the match is good enough it will get the hype. I would keep Saturday morning slam but not with new matches, I would have it review the shows and do the fluff pieces that they show on raw, Like the old superstars.

The next thing is to get rid of some PPV , the economies down and the internet streams then illegally now.. 13 wont work I would say 8, 10 tops. stories will be force to be used to sell and will get more people wanting too


With the actual product? I would bring back height classes, I turned on Raw 3-4 times in the last 2 months with people who used to watch but now dont. They all said the same thing, this is so unrealistic, he is so small. no one really thinks rey, sin cara and the likes of them can beat kane and tensai. 


There are a few more things but what do you think shuld change to take wrestling to the top again


----------



## Teh_TaKeR

NikkiSixx said:


> Who the fuck would miss those parties and celebrations to watch a LIVE RAW episode (good or bad), anyway?


Thankfully it starts at 5 and ends at 8 so I can just start my pre partyin while its on anyways.


----------



## Kabraxal

NikkiSixx said:


> Who the fuck would miss those parties and celebrations to watch a LIVE RAW episode (good or bad), anyway?


Not everyone is a party person...


----------



## King_Kool-Aid™

Yeah it comes on early here so the party probably wouldn't even be starting while RAW is on. I still probably won't watch it though because RAW ever since TLC ended has been nothing but filler episodes. the holidays aren't really kind to the WWE fans.


----------



## D.M.N.

Hour 1 - 2.940m
Hour 2 - 3.271m
Hour 3 - 3.219m

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-raw-college-football-teen-mom-2-more/162931/

Obviously comparisons with previous weeks are invalid, but fairly solid for Christmas Eve I'd say. Also, it completely justifies having a throwaway show in my opinion with numbers down on regular weeks.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Hour 3 BEAT hour 1. What happened there?


----------



## SPCDRI

Isn't that the first hour in about 5 months that has happened?


----------



## checkcola

The-Rock-Says said:


> Hour 3 BEAT hour 1. What happened there?


----------



## RatedR10

Hour 3 WASN'T the lowest viewed hour!? It's a miracle alright.


----------



## Choke2Death

What is the final number for that? 2.3?

And it's indeed a miracle that the third hour beat hour one.


----------



## KO Bossy

So uh...where's all the "lowest rating in 15 years" doomsday theorists?


----------



## KO Bossy

Oh I'd also like to point out that in 2000, the Christmas NIGHT edition of Raw did a 3.8, so people relying on the excuse that it was a holiday for the poor number...there's proof that they've done well in spite of that in the past, which I believe takes weight away from the argument.


----------



## charmed1

It was a crappy show and honestly deserved even worst ratings..its just sad when people make excuses for something that horrible.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

KO Bossy said:


> Oh I'd also like to point out that in 2000, the Christmas NIGHT edition of Raw did a 3.8, so people relying on the excuse that it was a holiday for the poor number...there's proof that they've done well in spite of that in the past, which I believe takes weight away from the argument.


3.8 in 2000? Wasn't that when they were normally getting 5.0's? 3.8 sounds like a poor rating for standards back then (and was it the lowest of the year)? Not saying it's a bad number, but the larger fanbase back then definitely had something to do with it.

In any event, terrible numbers, though it was in part due to it being on Christmas Eve (though only in part... with the way things are now, the numbers would've been terrible anyway). 

I suppose I'll play the role of the blind Punk mark/hater this week and how the rating reflect his drawing ability.

DURRRRR PUNK WASNT ON SHOW 4 MORE THAN FEW MINUTES AND RATINGS SUCK! WE NEED MOAR PUNK!!!!!! MOAR BEESSSSSSSSSSST IIIIIIIINNNNNNNN THEEEEEEEEEEEEE WORRRRRRRRRRRRRLDDDDDDDDDDDDDD!

Edit: I am curious as to what the lowest rated segment was and what it got.


----------



## KO Bossy

The Sandrone said:


> 3.8 in 2000? Wasn't that when they were normally getting 5.0's? 3.8 sounds like a poor rating for standards back then (and was it the lowest of the year)? Not saying it's a bad number, but the larger fanbase back then definitely had something to do with it.
> 
> In any event, terrible numbers, though it was in part due to it being on Christmas Eve (though only in part... with the way things are now, the numbers would've been terrible anyway).
> 
> I suppose I'll play the role of the blind Punk mark/hater this week and how the rating reflect his drawing ability.
> 
> DURRRRR PUNK WASNT ON SHOW 4 MORE THAN FEW MINUTES AND RATINGS SUCK! WE NEED MOAR PUNK!!!!!! MOAR BEESSSSSSSSSSST IIIIIIIINNNNNNNN THEEEEEEEEEEEEE WORRRRRRRRRRRRRLDDDDDDDDDDDDDD!
> 
> Edit: I am curious as to what the lowest rated segment was and what it got.


Yes, I agree. However, my point is that this proves that they were able to draw a good rating even if it was a holiday in the past. The fact that a lot of people now say "well it was a holiday, that's why it sucks" says to me that they're using that as a crutch to rely on. They've shown definitively in the past that they could overcome MNF and holidays, so the fact that they aren't now is a reflection of the product, not something else (as others might try to say).


----------



## TheRainKing

2.2 rating, lowest since 1997

It may have been Christmas eve, but its still shows that people are losing interest.


----------



## wwffans123

i hope they do 1.5 rating.then finally they will change all the crap.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

wwffans123 said:


> i hope they do 1.5 rating.then finally they will change all the crap.


With Rock coming back very soon, they probably won't see that for a bit.


----------



## Ray

Calm down. It was the Christmas Eve edition of RAW, and on top of that, most people who DID tune in probably tuned out after they saw the Santa getting hit by Del Rio's car shit. I expect record low viewership in the 18-64 demographic.

They shouldn't be worried. The Rock coming back will draw them back into the 2.9-3.3 range even with the 3 hours.


----------



## TKOW

For those who are arguing that WWE shouldn't panic because The Rock is coming back soon, you seem to be missing the point slightly. Sure, ratings will most likely go up with Rock's return, but Rock will bring a certain fanbase to Raw, and then he'll take it away again post-WrestleMania. WWE need a LONG TERM fix to their troubles.


----------



## Falkono

Love how people try and use the Xmas eve line. Pretty sure there are more people sat around watching TV at that period then bat any other. If not then why do they do Xmas specials? Add to that raw has been on eve before and not had those numbers.
There are many reasons why the rating was low but using Xmas as one of them is wrong.


----------



## CenaSux84

When Rock comes back I start watching WWE again. Once he is gone then BOOM see ya in January 2014. Not watching shitty summer RAW again. I have learnt to watch RAW during Jan-Apr and once the Extreme Rules PPV is over leave until next year when they start giving a fuck again.


----------



## MikeChase27

Falkono said:


> Love how people try and use the Xmas eve line. Pretty sure there are more people sat around watching TV at that period then bat any other. If not then why do they do Xmas specials? Add to that raw has been on eve before and not had those numbers.
> There are many reasons why the rating was low but using Xmas as one of them is wrong.


Me and my family were sitting around the TV watching other stuff we did see that RAW was on but nobody really cared same could be said for myself.


----------



## JasonLives

Falkono said:


> Love how people try and use the Xmas eve line. Pretty sure there are more people sat around watching TV at that period then bat any other. If not then why do they do Xmas specials? Add to that raw has been on eve before and not had those numbers.
> There are many reasons why the rating was low but using Xmas as one of them is wrong.


Yeah people sitting around watching TV with the family. And I guarantee you that the family dont want to watch wrestling on Christmas.

"Come on kids, lets all gather around the TV to watch wrestling. A holiday tradition!".

Considering the show didnt drop viewers it wasent the quality of the show that caused the low viewership. People didnt care for it to begin with.

Its all about tradition. We got close to 4 million people in this country watching Donald Duck at 3 PM every Christmas Eve ( 95% of everyone watching TV at the time watched it ). 
Pretty impressive considering its only 9 million people in this country.


----------



## Falkono

JasonLives said:


> Yeah people sitting around watching TV with the family. And I guarantee you that the family dont want to watch wrestling on Christmas.
> 
> "Come on kids, lets all gather around the TV to watch wrestling. A holiday tradition!".
> 
> Considering the show didnt drop viewers it wasent the quality of the show that caused the low viewership. People didnt care for it to begin with.
> 
> Its all about tradition. We got close to 4 million people in this country watching Donald Duck at 3 PM every Christmas Eve ( 95% of everyone watching TV at the time watched it ).
> Pretty impressive considering its only 9 million people in this country.


And you proved my point. You didn't want to watch raw. But you were at your TV. Imagine if we was exciting right now. Imagine there was a must see angle going on. Imagine something exciting was being hyped for the show. Would you still have missed it?

There was no reason to tune in as content and quality wise there was nothing to grab your attention. That's not there fault of xmas it is the lack of wwe actually doing anything.


----------



## Coffey

My family used to gather around the TV to watch Survivor Series when it was on Thanksgiving.


----------



## D.M.N.

Falkono - above is simply untrue.

Christmas Eve editions
In 2001, the previous week had a *4.00 rating*, Christmas Eve had a *3.20 rating*, a 25 percent drop.
In 2007, the previous week had a *3.48 rating*, Christmas Eve had a *2.50 rating*, a 39 percent drop. (Tribute to the Troops)
In 2012, the previous week had a *2.87 rating*, Christmas Eve had a *2.20 rating*, a 30 percent drop.

Christmas Day editions
In 2000, the previous week had a *4.75 rating*, Christmas Day had a *3.80 rating*, a 25 percent drop.
In 2006, the previous week had a *3.50 rating*, Christmas Day had a *2.70 rating*, a 30 percent drop. (Tribute to the Troops)

Boxing Day editions
In 2005, the previous week had a *3.70 rating*, Boxing Day had a *3.65 rating*, a 1 percent drop.
In 2011, the previous week had a *2.90 rating*, Boxing Day had a *2.93 rating*, a 1 percent increase.

This has nothing to how good/bad/ugly Raw is right now, wrestling _always_ falls on Christmas Eve and Christmas Day. Boxing Day is unaffected by the holidays, but a fall on Christmas Eve and Christmas Day cannot be attributed to the product in any way. This is just like July 4th.


----------



## Colonel_Slapnuts

:sandowStill 

a 2.2?


----------



## Rock316AE

2.2? Horrendous. This is probably Top 5 worst ratings in the history of the 20 year program. I don't even know how the show was TBH, so I can't comment on that. I didn't watch or check what happened until now.


----------



## Broflovski

*WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*

Monday's Christmas-themed episode of RAW featuring John Cena vs. Alberto Del Rio in a Miracle on 34th Street Fight and a Santa Claus injury angle drew a 2.2 cable rating, which marks as the show's lowest rating of 2012 and in over 15 years. The last episode to draw a figure that low was the September 8, 1997 show, which featured Triple H vs. Savio Vega vs. The Patriot in the main event. 

As reported earlier, RAW averaged 3.167 million viewers over the course of two hours, down from 4.23 million the week before for a show that drew a 2.9 cable rating. Hour one drew 2.94 million viewers, hour two drew 3.271 million viewers, and hour three drew 3.219 million viewers. 

http://www.ewrestlingnews.com/news/12438/wwe-raw-draws-its-lowest-rating-in-over-15-years


----------



## Timber Timbre

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*

No shit it got a low rating, it aired on Christmas Eve. Nothing gets you more jolly than sitting around the fireplace with your familly and watching Alberto Del Rio run over Santa with his car on RAW.


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*

There's already a ratings thread. But really, how many times have we seen this "lowest ratings in 15 years" announcement this year? It's like WWE keep outdoing themselves regarding low ratings every other week.


----------



## DawnX

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*

Who sits and watches Wrestling on Christmas Eve? I think everyone knew this was going to happen.


----------



## WashingtonD

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*

Ryback needs to win the belt on Raw for WWE to have any chance of survival


----------



## jonoaries

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*

.....If there was only a thread for this type of stuff......


----------



## BlakeGriffinFan32

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*

Well, you can't blame this one on Punk. However, if he was in the mainevent, his critics most certainly would.


----------



## Asenath

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*



WashingtonD said:


> Ryback needs to win the belt on Raw for WWE to have any chance of survival


He can't talk. He can't wrestle for five minutes without getting huffy and puffy and winded. He's not as strong as his physique would imply.

LET'S MAKE HIM CHAMPION IMMEDIATELY!


----------



## Chris32482

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*

RAW, and Smackdown too, are just too bland and complacent these days. You don't have to worry about missing anything if you don't watch, because nothing ever happens.


----------



## chucky101

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*

lol punk in the main event "its all punks fault he cant draw"
cena in the main event "excuses excuses excuses"

you can't have it both ways folks, if your going to blame punk when hes the focus you also need to blame cena when its his main event as well, lol at cena always getting excuses and spinning it to other crap

fact is though the product sucks, plain and simple
its time to build new stars that can wrestle and solid on the mic, ziggler is on the verge on main event star, ambrose could be in that position later in the year if built properly
turn cena heel at mania vs rock or taker, punk can continue doing what he does
bring back mid carders like shelton/mvp/morrison to give a much needed boost to mid card and upper mid card
unify the titles and make raw the focus show while smackdown focuses more on tag team title and a tv title or smackdown title where great wrestlers not great on the mic can wrestle every week and give power to each title


----------



## Choke2Death

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*



chucky101 said:


> lol punk in the main event "its all punks fault he cant draw"
> cena in the main event "excuses excuses excuses"


It's actually the other way around.

*Punk's segment gets low rating*
"IT WASN'T THE MAIN EVENT!"
"HE'S TREATED LIKE A COWARD HEEL THATZ WHY HE CANT DRAW!"
"WRESTLING INTEREST IS DEAD!"
"ITS FANS FAULT THEY DIDNT WATCH!"
"BUT ALBERTO DEL RIO AND SANTINO LOST MORE VIEWERS!"

Cena has lost his drawing abilities in the recent months, it's no secret. But fact still remains that Punk is horrible for ratings and has been from the moment they started pushing him. (even though I found him entertaining back in the 2011 summer)


----------



## s210

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*



DawnX said:


> Who sits and watches Wrestling on Christmas Eve? I think everyone knew this was going to happen.


This, there's much better things to watch around this time of the year than RAW


----------



## Dollwrestling

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*



s210 said:


> This, there's much better things to watch around this time of the year than RAW


Yes, Smackdown!:lol

-


----------



## Chicago Warrior

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*

WWE wanted that rating. The show felt so off script and it was aimed mainly at kids. John Cena and Del Rio had a match over Santa Clause. That alone explains it.


----------



## jonoaries

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*

*FOR SANTAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!​*​ :cena3


----------



## RuthStar

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*

No surprise really given the day it aired on, I think things will be back to normal in a fortnight, as I'd imagine next weeks rating won't be great either, as its on New Years Eve, or New Years Day for us UK'ers, most people are out getting drunk then..
I didn't even bother recording RAW this week, I caught CM Punk's stuff on youtube but the rest didn't interest me as I'd read the spoilers beforehand, I imagine a few others did the same aswell.


----------



## D.M.N.

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*

I'll just quote myself.



> Christmas Eve editions
> In 2001, the previous week had a *4.00 rating*, Christmas Eve had a *3.20 rating*, a 25 percent drop.
> In 2007, the previous week had a *3.48 rating*, Christmas Eve had a *2.50 rating*, a 39 percent drop. (Tribute to the Troops)
> In 2012, the previous week had a *2.87 rating*, Christmas Eve had a *2.20 rating*, a 30 percent drop.
> 
> Christmas Day editions
> In 2000, the previous week had a *4.75 rating*, Christmas Day had a *3.80 rating*, a 25 percent drop.
> In 2006, the previous week had a *3.50 rating*, Christmas Day had a *2.70 rating*, a 30 percent drop. (Tribute to the Troops)
> 
> Boxing Day editions
> In 2005, the previous week had a *3.70 rating*, Boxing Day had a *3.65 rating*, a 1 percent drop.
> In 2011, the previous week had a *2.90 rating*, Boxing Day had a *2.93 rating*, a 1 percent increase.
> 
> This has nothing to how good/bad/ugly Raw is right now, wrestling _always_ falls on Christmas Eve and Christmas Day. Boxing Day is unaffected by the holidays, but a fall on Christmas Eve and Christmas Day cannot be attributed to the product in any way. This is just like July 4th.


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*

Is VM Punk still even the champ? I'm guessing he is, therefore I deduce that the show will feature him heavily. So I'm (even less) inclined to watch.

It'll be back up soon with The Rock, retiree quick-fix.


----------



## roadkill_

Rock316AE said:


> 2.2? Horrendous. This is probably Top 5 worst ratings in the history of the 20 year program. I don't even know how the show was TBH, so I can't comment on that. I didn't watch or check what happened until now.


It won't change. Not when even the 'hardcore' fans try polishing this turd. At least 50% of the posters here are in the 'NO COMPLAININZ, STOP IT!!1111' brigade. Next year if its 1.4 with vanilla indy midgets, they'll still be excusing it.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*

More fuel for idiots who want to lay the blame on their least favourite wrestlers. When reality is exactly what DMN posted above.


----------



## Jotunheim

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*



BlakeGriffinFan32 said:


> Well, you can't blame this one on Punk. However, if he was in the mainevent, his critics most certainly would.


because they are a bunch of retards, that's why


----------



## Stad

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*



roadkill_ said:


> Is VM Punk still even the champ? I'm guessing he is, therefore I deduce that the show will feature him heavily. So I'm (even less) inclined to watch.
> 
> It'll be back up soon with The Rock, retiree quick-fix.


He was in one segment for about 5 minutes lol.

Keep this shit in the ratings thread please where the people who care can read it.


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*



stadw0n306 said:


> He was in one segment for about 5 minutes lol.
> 
> Keep this shit in the ratings thread please where the people who care can read it.


Um, my point was people will avoid tuning in if they think CM Punk will play a focal point of the show. A reasonable assumption, given that he is champion. So it doesn't matter if he was on it for five minutes, for all the fans driven away knew, it could've easily have been 50 minutes.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*



roadkill_ said:


> Um, *my point was people will avoid tuning in if they think CM Punk will play a focal point of the show*. A reasonable assumption, given that he is champion. So it doesn't matter if he was on it for five minutes, for all the fans driven away knew, it could've easily have been 50 minutes.


fpalm

Its well established that Punk doesn't do his part to bring in new viewers, but even Choke2Death will admit that Punk doesn't drive ratings away...extremely ignorant statement you've made.


----------



## Timber Timbre

Punk might not be a ratings grabber, but that reflects the overall product, one man's talent can't get people to tune in when everything else on the show sucks. Punk is a relatively new prominent player for the WWE, to alot of non-wrestling fans he's not very well known. All CM Punk needs is to sustain his momentum, and the fickle will eventually start tuning in again once they realize that the WWE is actually going in a fresh new direction and staying the course.

I'd love to see where the WWE would be in terms of ratings if Punk was taken off tv for a month.


----------



## roadkill_

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*



KO Bossy said:


> fpalm
> 
> Its well established that Punk doesn't do his part to bring in new viewers, but even Choke2Death will admit that Punk doesn't drive ratings away...extremely ignorant statement you've made.


WWE Champion has nothing to do with poor ratings? No, that isn't ignorant at all. It's completely logical and directly correlates.


----------



## SHIRLEY

Interesting fact: The re-debut of ECW drew a 2.79 rating.


----------



## FoxyRoxy

Xmas Eve RAW doesn't excuse the fact that is was awful... can they get anymore G Rated? Sooner rather than later maybe regular RAW might be drawing a 2.2 rating. When stars like Rock and Taker is gone for good then WWE will tank. They're all that WWE has for 2013 otherwise I wouldn't be watching.


----------



## MTheBehemoth

JasonLives said:


> Yeah people sitting around watching TV with the family. And I guarantee you that the family dont want to watch wrestling on Christmas.
> 
> "Come on kids, lets all gather around the TV to watch wrestling. A holiday tradition!".
> 
> Considering the show didnt drop viewers it wasent the quality of the show that caused the low viewership. People didnt care for it to begin with.
> 
> Its all about tradition. We got close to 4 million people in this country watching Donald Duck at 3 PM every Christmas Eve ( 95% of everyone watching TV at the time watched it ).
> Pretty impressive considering its only 9 million people in this country.


How exactly it changes the fact that it was lowest rating since 1997? This was the 1st ever Christmas Eve and it ruined WWE's ratings for their "amazing show"? Gotta love fanboys.

The show is poor. Period.


----------



## Marv95

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*



D.M.N. said:


> I'll just quote myself.


A 2.2 is still a 2.2. They did a point higher in 2001 after the botched InVasion angle and when the downfall was taking place as people were tuning out. Even in arguably the worst year since 95 they did a half-point higher in 2007 for a _tribute show_. Again you people always put the blame on outside factors instead of where it belongs.


----------



## KO Bossy

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*



roadkill_ said:


> WWE Champion has nothing to do with poor ratings? No, that isn't ignorant at all. It's completely logical and directly correlates.


Please indicate where I said that, because I didn't. I refuted your claim that Punk drives away viewers because he doesn't. He fails to bring them in, but he doesn't drive them away.

Nowhere did I say that the WWE Champion has nothing to do with poor ratings. Punk, just like everyone else on the roster, must take a share of the blame. What is flat out wrong is when people such as yourself preach that its all because of Punk being champion that the ratings are shit (when in all actuality, its everybody who is to blame). 

As you yourself said, "people will avoid tuning in if they think CM Punk will play a focal point of the show. A reasonable assumption, given that he is champion. So it doesn't matter if he was on it for five minutes, for all the fans driven away knew, it could've easily have been 50 minutes." That is ignorant and flat out incorrect-people do not look at the show and say "wow Punk is champion, I'm not going to watch because he MIGHT be featured." People look at the show and say "wow, everything is such complete crap and a waste of my time, the stories are stupid, the feuds are dumb, the booking is horrific and nothing ever progresses in a satisfying manner-I'm not going to watch." 

You're just another sad hater who has no qualms about making up stuff, presenting opinions as facts or taking things out of context to put a spin on things that will push your anti-Punk agenda and opinion. Thankfully there are some people on this site who can see through this type of bullshit and point it out to others who actually might start buying into what you say.


----------



## Coffey

How low do ratings have to go before WWE have to worry about USA pulling the plug? I mean, they pay WWE because they get good ratings. When USA can get the same ratings from NCIS re-runs, WWE should start to worry, or I would assume. They just planning on not being able to re-work their next contract, or what?


----------



## ChickMagnet12

So somehow it's Punk's fault for driving away viewers on Xmas eve? Jeez, this thread really has gone beyond idiocy.


----------



## JTB33b

It's time to put an end to the PG era. Cena and others say going PG is what is best for the company.. well if that's the case why are the ratings so poor? If they want to convince us it's for the best then they should show us some stats to prove it.


----------



## wb1899

Walk-In said:


> How low do ratings have to go before WWE have to worry about USA pulling the plug? I mean, they pay WWE because they get good ratings. When USA can get the same ratings from NCIS re-runs, WWE should start to worry, or I would assume. They just planning on not being able to re-work their next contract, or what?


No need to worry. The 1.260 million viewers, on 12/24 in the 18-49 demo, are still about 350,000-420,000 more viewers than a rerun from NCIS or something else gets and even new USA original episodes get only numbers in the 989,000-1,48 million range.

Raw A18-49 averages (01/02/12-12/24/12):
8PM: 1,757,000 viewers
9PM: 2,076,000 viewers
10PM: 2,101,000 viewers
Btw, hour 3 is still the most valuable hour for USA and WWE.


----------



## roadkill_

wb1899 said:


> No need to worry. The 1.260 million viewers, on 12/24 in the 18-49 demo, are still about 350,000-420,000 more viewers than a rerun from NCIS or something else gets and even new USA original episodes get only numbers in the 989,000-1,48 million range.
> 
> Raw A18-49 averages (01/02/12-12/24/12):
> 8PM: 1,757,000 viewers
> 9PM: 2,076,000 viewers
> 10PM: 2,101,000 viewers
> Btw, hour 3 is still the most valuable hour for USA and WWE.


USAN can buy something for half the price of RAW that'll pull 2.0's.


----------



## Da Silva

roadkill_ said:


> USAN can buy something for half the price of RAW that'll pull 2.0's.


So fucking what?

Advertising space isn't sold on overall ratings, it's sold on demographics.


----------



## Stad

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*



KO Bossy said:


> Please indicate where I said that, because I didn't. I refuted your claim that Punk drives away viewers because he doesn't. He fails to bring them in, but he doesn't drive them away.
> 
> Nowhere did I say that the WWE Champion has nothing to do with poor ratings. Punk, just like everyone else on the roster, must take a share of the blame. What is flat out wrong is when people such as yourself preach that its all because of Punk being champion that the ratings are shit (when in all actuality, its everybody who is to blame).
> 
> As you yourself said, "people will avoid tuning in if they think CM Punk will play a focal point of the show. A reasonable assumption, given that he is champion. So it doesn't matter if he was on it for five minutes, for all the fans driven away knew, it could've easily have been 50 minutes." That is ignorant and flat out incorrect-people do not look at the show and say "wow Punk is champion, I'm not going to watch because he MIGHT be featured." People look at the show and say "wow, everything is such complete crap and a waste of my time, the stories are stupid, the feuds are dumb, the booking is horrific and nothing ever progresses in a satisfying manner-I'm not going to watch."
> 
> You're just another sad hater who has no qualms about making up stuff, presenting opinions as facts or taking things out of context to put a spin on things that will push your anti-Punk agenda and opinion. Thankfully there are some people on this site who can see through this type of bullshit and point it out to others who actually might start buying into what you say.


What an excellent post.

roadkill didn't even bother replying back :lmao


----------



## #1Peep4ever

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*



Choke2Death said:


> It's actually the other way around.
> 
> *Punk's segment gets low rating*
> "IT WASN'T THE MAIN EVENT!"
> "HE'S TREATED LIKE A COWARD HEEL THATZ WHY HE CANT DRAW!"
> "WRESTLING INTEREST IS DEAD!"
> "ITS FANS FAULT THEY DIDNT WATCH!"
> "BUT ALBERTO DEL RIO AND SANTINO LOST MORE VIEWERS!"
> 
> Cena has lost his drawing abilities in the recent months, it's no secret. But fact still remains that Punk is horrible for ratings and has been from the moment they started pushing him. (even though I found him entertaining back in the 2011 summer)


Both sides find excuses and people to blame
Thats why I cant really take this thread seriously... bunch of hypocrites (apart from a view) having a shitty argument in which no one can win because both are to close minded...


----------



## Defei

*Re: WWE RAW Draws Its Lowest Rating In Over 15 Years*



Marv95 said:


> A 2.2 is still a 2.2. They did a point higher in 2001 after the botched InVasion angle and when the downfall was taking place as people were tuning out. Even in arguably the worst year since 95 they did a half-point higher in 2007 for a _tribute show_. Again you people always put the blame on outside factors instead of where it belongs.


I agree 2.2 is terrible but 18-49 viewership is what really matters.


----------



## Starbuck

Raw is struggling to get people to watch on any regular Monday night. The show bombs on Christmas Eve and apparently it's the end of the world. Yeah. Don't really see what all the fuss is about. They took a hit. Next week they'll take a hit too. It's to be expected considering the nights the show falls upon at this time of year. For once, I don't think Vince and Co. give a shit about the numbers. If things don't pick up on Jan 7th, a show they _have _actually stacked with the title match and Rock, then I'd start to worry. For now however, this week and next week's rating aren't even news tbh.


----------



## Bubba Chuck

We had a 2.5 earlier and now we are down to a 2.2, even if it was a christmas eve edition, I personally thought it would draw a 2.6 rating.

Changes have to be made. WWE and Vince have no sense of direction where the product should be. Even when the Rock does return, we can't keep relying on legends to bring in those ratings.


----------



## RatedR10

I-Am-DashingRKO said:


> We had a 2.5 earlier and now we are down to a 2.2, even if it was a christmas eve edition, I personally thought it would draw a 2.6 rating.
> 
> Changes have to be made. WWE and Vince have no sense of direction where the product should be. Even when the Rock does return, we can't keep relying on legends to bring in those ratings.


You thought the Christmas Eve edition of Raw would get a 2.6? That's setting expectations a bit too high, IMO. It's Christmas Eve, people are with their families. I'm actually surprised it got a 2.2 because I thought more people would DVR it if they wanted to watch it.

It's the same reason I'm not expecting a huge rating for New Years Eve. It's taped and I doubt many people will be in to watch it all the way through.

Like Starbuck said, if on January 7th, the ratings are still shit with a TLC WWE Championship match lined up and The Rock returning for the first time since Raw 1000, then you start to worry.


----------



## Coffey

People are with their families, yes, but they're with their families, at home, watching television.


----------



## Ruckus

Walk-In said:


> People are with their families, yes, but they're with their families, at home, watching television.




And how many families are likely to choose a WWE show as their entertainment on TV? I don't know about you, but I've never known of a family to do that.


----------



## BKsaaki

I don't think WWE actually put an effort into attracting viewers on Christmas chow.Or any other show.They seem to be in Autopilot mode.


----------



## Coffey

W0lf said:


> And how many families are likely to choose a WWE show as their entertainment on TV? I don't know about you, but I've never known of a family to do that.


What are you talking about? Are you even reading the thread? My reply was in direct response to this:



RatedR10 said:


> It's Christmas Eve, people are with their families.


My *entire point* is that people are watching TV & choosing things other than WWE & that trying to blame it on being Christmas Eve is a cop-out.


----------



## AthenaMark

I wouldn't expect a good rating on the Rock return show. But it will be better after the 7th...at least his segments. I don't think the fans really give a damn about the rest of the 3 hours. Once they figure out what portion Rock is on, that's what will get the viewership.


----------



## D.M.N.

AthenaMark said:


> I wouldn't expect a good rating on the Rock return show. But it will be better after the 7th...at least his segments. I don't think the fans really give a damn about the rest of the 3 hours. Once they figure out what portion Rock is on, that's what will get the viewership.


If WWE have any sense, Rock will be in Q2, Q6 or Q10 (or overrun) following on from whoever is in Q9 (whether interrupting or what like in Raw 1000).

Then you get two great quarter ratings instead of just one.


----------



## Da Silva

Walk-In said:


> My *entire point* is that people are watching TV & choosing things other than WWE & that trying to blame it on being Christmas Eve is a cop-out.


And the entire problem with this is that families don't watch RAW together. And there's nothing wrong with that, I mean, why would they? Your entire argument is incredibly misguided.


----------



## AthenaMark

D.M.N. said:


> If WWE have any sense, Rock will be in Q2, Q6 or Q10 (or overrun) following on from whoever is in Q9 (whether interrupting or what like in Raw 1000).
> 
> Then you get two great quarter ratings instead of just one.


People have no idea how hated John Cena really is...he actually lowered ratings on Rock segments on Mania because of his horrible promos and lazy nature. That was complimented around here for whatever reason. NO..the Rock should be shown probably 3x at MOST. The beginning...a promo again with a Daniel Bryan for the hell of it and then the ending of the TLC match.


----------



## SerapisLiber

While they obviously do care somewhat about ratings in the WWE, it's even more obvious that they care about dollar signs more, so as long as they made more, or at least as much, money as they did last year then they will have no incentive to change anything. Now that the year is over, it'll be interesting to see what the books reflect.


----------



## Twisted14

Pretty obvious that this is not an issue. It's a Christmas Eve show. People are doing other things. Same will happen for this week's NYE show. Same thing happened for the Impact episode on Thanksgiving. They got one of their lowest ratings ever for that show. If the trend continues past these holiday episodes, then you can begin arguing. Right now though, it's completely pointless.


----------



## mrmacman

Ratings are down since sept of last year, don't know why you blame holiday seasons.


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Dave Meltzer said:


> RAW - 4.0. So, yeah. Wow



Jesus.


----------



## JY57

April Fools Early this year?

I


----------



## The-Rock-Says

Dave says that Mae Young giving birth bumped the ratings like never before. Plus Vince is already doing another birth angle next week with Vickie. Get ready.....


----------



## SerapisLiber

So a throwaway holiday pretaped show with re-run segments & matches got a 4.0 in the 2.0 era? 4reelz?


----------



## Shawn Morrison

All championships were defended on the show, Mae Young gave birth to Hornswoggle, and Ziggler & AJ got covered in shit. What brought in the ratings? probably the latter two.


----------



## JY57

The-Rock-Says said:


> Dave says that Mae Young giving birth bumped the ratings like never before. Plus Vince is already doing another birth angle next week with Vickie. Get ready.....


:StephenA:StephenA


----------



## JY57

Delete


----------



## Da Silva

4.0?

Ha.:no:


----------



## Cookie Monster

The fuck? Did they think Rock was back?


----------



## Da Silva

Raw didn't get a 4.0

The only way in which RAW would have gotten a 4.0 is if there was a drastic drop in the viewership of literally everything else on TV.


----------



## Da Silva

Not to mention, there's no way in hell he'd have the ratings so soon.


----------



## SerapisLiber

Shawn Morrison said:


> All championships were defended on the show, Mae Young gave birth to Hornswoggle, and Ziggler & AJ got covered in _*shit*_. What brought in the ratings? probably the latter two.


So... _*shit*_ draws? 

But then how come ratings lately have been in the 2.* range? All of the 3 hour Raws have been shit, but they continued to lose viewership.

Curiouser & curiouser...


----------



## Callisto

There's no way RAW garnered a 4.0 rating.

Metzler is just trying to increase traffic flow for his website.


----------



## krai999

HOW SHIT IT'S TRUE OTHER WEBSITES ARE REPORTING IT GOT A 4.0


----------



## sharkboy22

RAW got a 4.0? Well, then, looks like a lot of people weren't watching TV last night.


----------



## Coffey

I got trolled.

I'm expecting a 2.1


----------



## the fox

even the rock and stone cold together can't get 4.0 rating easily today!
how is this even possible ?


----------



## Cookie Monster

DAT SHIELD


----------



## JasonLives

So are people actually dumb or are they just hoping on the troll train?


----------



## SDWarrior

Agreed.


----------



## The GOAT One

TRS trolling like a boss :Rock


----------



## sharkboy22

Mae Young bringing dem ratngs!!!

Mae Young still a draw in 2012? DA GOAT!


----------



## JY57

TheGreatOne. said:


> TRS trolling like a boss :Rock


If he is I have to say he expert at it. Everyone including my self are falling for it. O

If not than something is very wrong


----------



## Da Silva

JY57 said:


> If he is I have to say he expert at it. Everyone including my self are falling for it. O
> 
> If not than something is very wrong


'Everyone' would be pushing it. You'd be wise not to believe everything you read on internet forums.


----------



## Choke2Death

Did you guys really fall for that quote? Something in such a simple form can no way in hell be an official report, lol.


----------



## Roncaglione

JY57 said:


> If he is I have to say he expert at it.


Are you serious? Just people here are very naive. Like he is an Observer subscriber anyway. Also the viewership comes in before the rating. The rating is delayed due to the holidays too.


----------



## Cliffy

Hope it does the lowest Raw rating ever.

With it being NYE and the awful decision to have a kiddy Christmas eve show. 1.8 plz.


----------



## chucky101

many of you fail to get whats really a draw, if somebody is not promoted then how would they know to tune in, flairs return a few weeks back was not known at all, so even if it did high ratings or not you can't really say it was flair's draw that did it since it wasn't promoted

im praying for a sub 2.0 rating, with that horrible christmas eve show and this weeks show i hope its under 2.0, but will probably be same as last week, 2.2


----------



## Duke Silver

chucky101 said:


> many of you fail to get whats really a draw, if somebody is not promoted then how would they know to tune in, flairs return a few weeks back was not known at all, so even if it did high ratings or not you can't really say it was flair's draw that did it since it wasn't promoted


There's any number of ways that an unadvertised return can gain viewers. Channel-surfing, contacting friends, the internet. In an age where news spreads faster than the speed of light, I don't even know how it can be argued. 

Do you think all of those people just happened to tune in randomly at the point of Flair's return?


----------



## RatedR10

Duke Droese said:


> There's any number of ways that an unadvertised return can gain viewers. Channel-surfing, contacting friends, the internet. In an age where news spreads faster than the speed of light, I don't even know how it can be argued.
> 
> Do you think all of those people just happened to tune in randomly at the point of Flair's return?


Especially when they pretty much gave away it was Flair with the "Woooo" during the graphic that a special guest would be there to present the award before the commercial.


----------



## chucky101

so when will we know the rating?


----------



## Grass420

RatedR10 said:


> You thought the Christmas Eve edition of Raw would get a 2.6? That's setting expectations a bit too high, IMO. It's Christmas Eve, people are with their families. I'm actually surprised it got a 2.2 because I thought more people would DVR it if they wanted to watch it.
> 
> It's the same reason I'm not expecting a huge rating for New Years Eve. It's taped and I doubt many people will be in to watch it all the way through.
> 
> Like Starbuck said, if on January 7th, the ratings are still shit with a TLC WWE Championship match lined up and The Rock returning for the first time since Raw 1000, then you start to worry.


The last two Christmas eve Raw's took place in 2001 and in 2007,

in 2001 they got a 3.5 rating and
in 2007 they got a 2.5 rating. 

so yeah, getting 2.2 sucks


----------



## Coffey

Still nothing?


----------



## The Cynical Miracle

The Punk and Heyman promo with Ryback popping up for 2 minutes at the end got the highest rated segment of the night (2.5)

Del Rio vs Cena in the overrun got a 2.3 rating

Thats all you need to know.


----------



## JY57

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



> - As noted, the Christmas Eve edition of WWE RAW scored a 2.24 cable rating with 3.15 million viewers - the lowest number of viewers for a RAW episode since September 8th, 1997.
> 
> Due to the holiday, the following numbers are estimates but here is the segment breakdown:
> 
> Kane vs. Cody Rhodes lost around 140,000 viewers from the opener. The Divas match with Natalya, Kaitlyn, Layla and Alicia Fox vs. Eve Torres, Tamina Snuka, Aksana and Rosa Mendes stayed even. Big Show vs. Sheamus in the 9pm timeslot gained around 550,000 viewers for a 2.4 rating, which is good growth.
> 
> David Otunga vs. Zack Ryder lost about 300,000 viewers. Wade Barrett and Antonio Cesaro vs. The Miz and Kofi Kingston gained about 140,000 viewers. Brad Maddox vs. The Great Khali also gained around 140,000 viewers. 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.
> 
> Daniel Bryan vs. Damien Sandow lost around 300,000 viewers. The 10-man tag with Jinder Mahal, Drew McIntyre, Heath Slater, Tensai, Titus O'Neil and Darren Young vs. The Usos, Santino Marella, Brodus Clay, Tyson Kidd and Justin Gabriel lost 140,000 viewers. John Cena vs. Alberto Del Rio in the Miracle on 34th Street match gained 140,000 viewers and did a 2.3 quarter rating.


Christmas Eve Breakdown (estimates)


----------



## D.M.N.

"Due to the holiday, the following numbers are estimates but here is the segment breakdown:"

Lol. A familiar pattern involving 140,000 viewers.


----------



## wb1899

Lol @Meltzer- estimating numbers and proves once again that he has no clue about the Nielsens:

...gained around 550,000 viewers for a 2.4 rating...

So in his words: viewers = households or 5 apples + 3 bananas = 8 apples :lmao


----------



## Cliffy

Meltzer doesn't work for LOP.

Seriously non-meltzer/keller sites need to be banned.


----------



## D.M.N.

Cliffy Byro said:


> Meltzer doesn't work for LOP.
> 
> Seriously non-meltzer/keller sites need to be banned.


They would have got those numbers though from the Wrestling Observer/F4W which is Meltzer.


----------



## The GOAT One

There should be bans handed out for anyone disrespecting Meltzer's good name IMO.


----------



## Defei

Kane vs. Cody Rhodes *lost around 140,000 viewers* 
Big Show vs. Sheamus gained around 550,000 viewers
David Otunga vs. Zack Ryder lost about 300,000 viewers. 
Wade Barrett and Antonio Cesaro vs. The Miz and Kofi Kingston *gained about 140,000 viewers.* 
Brad Maddox vs. The Great Khali also *gained around 140,000 viewers.* 
The segment with CM Punk, Paul Heyman and Ryback also *gained 140,000 viewers*
Daniel Bryan vs. Damien Sandow lost around 300,000 viewers. 
The 10-man tag *lost 140,000 viewers. *
John Cena vs. Alberto Del Rio *gained 140,000 viewers *

LOL WTF?


----------



## sharkboy22

Brad Maddox bringing in dem ratingzz!!! 

#Beefmode 2013


----------



## SrsLii

WTF is the holdup on this week's ratings? Taking forever to calculate the massive numbers for dat GOAT Mae Young segment?


----------



## Cliffy

D.M.N. said:


> They would have got those numbers though from the Wrestling Observer/F4W which is Meltzer.


He hasn't reported it yet.


----------



## Duke Silver

SrsLii said:


> WTF is the holdup on this week's ratings? Taking forever to calculate the massive numbers for dat GOAT Mae Young segment?


Every Nielson box in the country simultaneously imploded as Hornswoggle slid out of Mae Young's vag.


----------



## chucky101

where are the ratings, wednesdays numbers seem to be out already, its thursday night and still nothing on mondays show????


----------



## D.M.N.

chucky101 said:


> where are the ratings, wednesdays numbers seem to be out already, its thursday night and still nothing on mondays show????


Same as last week - cable ratings delay due to New Year holiday.


----------



## D.M.N.

Hour 1 - 3.397m
Hour 2 - 3.644m
Hour 3 - 3.614m

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...-new-years-eve-live-sportscenter-more/163397/

A bit down on normal, but not as much as Christmas Eve - again justifying their decision to take a 50/50 approach to the show - a bit of storylines here and there along with throwaway one-week stuff.


----------



## Alim

Not bad at all. Hour 3 higher than hour 1 again and almost beating Hour 2 as well... what gives??


----------



## Choke2Death

That 140k report was definitely bullshit. How come every other segment gained or lost 140k viewers? LOL.

For the real numbers posted by DMN above, not quite as low as expected.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

140,000 is the number of the day I suppose. Still, I can't imagine the gain being much higher and a 2.3 for the main event is terrible. Hell, the fact the highest point in the show was a 2.5 is terrible.


----------



## roadkill_

2.31 according to PWTorch. Ouch.


----------



## chucky101

and another week of losing viewers in the third hour

wouldn't it make more sense for usa to buy a program for half the price or even a 1/3 the price of raw, run some "big bang theory" repeat shows like other networks do, and do a 1.0-1.8

its less risk and less money and can still draw a descent rating


----------



## dxbender

Don't get why people care about the exact number of viewers or tv rating.

What they should be caring about, is amount of viewers Raw has over all the other cable tv shows that air in the same timeslot.

Raw is a top show on cable tv on monday nights in primetime, so don't get why people even care about all these other factors.

Are you working for WWE? Does your job depend on the rating of the show? So why do people care about all this stuff.


----------



## roadkill_

Because it affects the decisions management takes. And some serious decisions need to be taken.


----------



## Evil Peter

roadkill_ said:


> Because it affects the decisions management takes. And some serious decisions need to be taken.


I don't know if it means that though. Raw being three hours is something that lowers the ratings but it also increases the profit for WWE. Punk gets criticism for not increasing the ratings as a champ but WWE has obviously seen enough value in him to have him champ for over 400 days. That only makes sense if you think that WWE gives out long title reigns just because they are nice. The ratings have constantly been going down for several years and they still aren't making any changes to their biggest star, Cena, either. On the contrary there were reports from Meltzer that Cena and Punk were the only two guys WWE had full confidence in, despite that they aren't changing the downward trend.

So I don't see anything drastic WWE is doing due to the ratings. Bringing in guys like The Rock would have been done anyway. It just looks like WWE is doing their thing without any significant changes, which makes it look like the fans are more panicked about ratings than they are.


----------



## SerapisLiber

Yeah, they value dollar signs over ratings. Sure, they'd love it if ratings were higher, but as long as profits are around the same or even higher, they see no need to change.


----------



## Defei

Evil Peter said:


> I don't know if it means that though. Raw being three hours is something that lowers the ratings but it also increases the profit for WWE. Punk gets criticism for not increasing the ratings as a champ but WWE has obviously seen enough value in him to have him champ for over 400 days. That only makes sense if you think that WWE gives out long title reigns just because they are nice. The ratings have constantly been going down for several years and they still aren't making any changes to their biggest star, Cena, either. On the contrary there were reports from Meltzer that Cena and Punk were the only two guys WWE had full confidence in, despite that they aren't changing the downward trend.
> 
> So I don't see anything drastic WWE is doing due to the ratings. Bringing in guys like The Rock would have been done anyway. It just looks like WWE is doing their thing without any significant changes, which makes it look like the fans are more panicked about ratings than they are.


I thought the only reason Punk is the WWE champion is because the Rock wants the title? Thats what the report said last month.


----------



## bigdog40

SerapisLiber said:


> Yeah, they value dollar signs over ratings. Sure, they'd love it if ratings were higher, but as long as profits are around the same or even higher, they see no need to change.





The WWE makes far too much money and their product has more than enough distrubition that it doesn't really that much about the ratings as they did back during the monday night war. Before the monday night war, nobody cared what the ratings were and what they met.


----------



## Evil Peter

Defei said:


> I thought the only reason Punk is the WWE champion is because the Rock wants the title? Thats what the report said last month.


I can't pretend to know what's going on backstage but Punk doesn't have to be the champ in order for Rock to become champ, Rocky can beat anyone if WWE wanted someone else as champ. From what I've read The Rock wants to wrestle Punk though, and he's set up to face the champ at RR, so that is obviously a factor in that Punk will go into RR as the champ. They could have taken it off him previously during the year and have him gotten it back though, but they chose to give him a record breaking run. I don't think you do that with someone you don't have confidence in, regardless of opponent at RR.


----------



## Defei

Evil Peter said:


> I can't pretend to know what's going on backstage but Punk doesn't have to be the champ in order for Rock to become champ, Rocky can beat anyone if WWE wanted someone else as champ. From what I've read The Rock wants to wrestle Punk though, and he's set up to face the champ at RR, so that is obviously a factor in that Punk will go into RR as the champ. *They could have taken it off him previously during the year and have him gotten it back though*, but they chose to give him a record breaking run. I don't think you do that with someone you don't have confidence in, regardless of opponent at RR.


That would weaken the title match. They probably considered taking it off several times but since the Rock wanted the title, and considering the plan for Mania seems to be Rock vs Cena II they let him hold it through till Rumble.


----------



## Evil Peter

Defei said:


> That would weaken the title match. They probably considered taking it off several times but since the Rock wanted the title, and considering the plan for Mania seems to be Rock vs Cena II they let him hold it through till Rumble.


It's The Rock coming back, it doesn't really need everything to be perfect in order to attract a ton of attention. We can't know but I don't really buy that wouldn't have taken the title off Punk if they were unhappy with him in that position.


----------



## hardysno1fan

Evil Peter said:


> I don't know if it means that though. Raw being three hours is something that lowers the ratings but it also increases the profit for WWE. Punk gets criticism for not increasing the ratings as a champ but WWE has obviously seen enough value in him to have him champ for over 400 days. That only makes sense if you think that WWE gives out long title reigns just because they are nice. The ratings have constantly been going down for several years and they still aren't making any changes to their biggest star, Cena, either. On the contrary there were reports from Meltzer that Cena and Punk were the only two guys WWE had full confidence in, despite that they aren't changing the downward trend.
> 
> So I don't see anything drastic WWE is doing due to the ratings. Bringing in guys like The Rock would have been done anyway. It just looks like WWE is doing their thing without any significant changes, which makes it look like the fans are more panicked about ratings than they are.


Didn't Vince sack the head writer like 3-4 months ago stating he wanted results or resignations? I'm sure the ratings are a concern. Its true profit is the bottom line but reduced popularity is never a good thing. Lets say Final Fantasy produces yet another crap game and it gets torn to pieces by critics. It still makes a ton of money but the producers have to worry about the next in the series. How many ppl do you know who aren't embarassed to admit they like WWE? How many ppl do you know who know it has changed from WWF? The decline of popularity is a long term concern.


----------



## Evil Peter

hardysno1fan said:


> Didn't Vince sack the head writer like 3-4 months ago stating he wanted results or resignations? I'm sure the ratings are a concern. Its true profit is the bottom line but reduced popularity is never a good thing. Lets say Final Fantasy produces yet another crap game and it gets torn to pieces by critics. It still makes a ton of money but the producers have to worry about the next in the series. How many ppl do you know who aren't embarassed to admit they like WWE? How many ppl do you know who know it has changed from WWF? The decline of popularity is a long term concern.


Yes, that's the only real change I've seen them do. They did that, but obviously never took the strap off Punk when they were looking for reasons for the decline, which again says something about how WWE views Punk (which is different than what his haters so desperately try to make it look like). Lower ratings are of course never something positive, even though it doesn't affect the company's earnings much at the moment. It will be more relevant the next time they are renegotiating their TV deal, but of course they are also earning more money with three hours despite that everyone knows that it lowers the overall ratings.

As for people I know that are embarrassed to say they like WWE, there's no one. That has little to do with WWE itself though and more that the people I know aren't afraid of what other people might think. Then again it's always been uncool to watch wrestling in Sweden, regardless if it's the current era, the Attitude era or something else, so no matter how it is now it won't be much of a comment on WWE's current state.


----------



## DegenerateXX

I don't frequent this thread a whole lot, but does someone know where I can find the ratings breakdowns from episodes of Raw from previous years?


----------



## Starbuck

Yay or Nay on a new 2013 ratings thread? If most of you are in favour I'll put it to the other mods and see what they say.


----------



## D.M.N.

Starbuck said:


> Yay or Nay on a new 2013 ratings thread? If most of you are in favour I'll put it to the other mods and see what they say.


:yes :yes :yes


----------



## Juggernaut Reigns

Starbuck said:


> Yay or Nay on a new 2013 ratings thread? If most of you are in favour I'll put it to the other mods and see what they say.


:mark::mark::mark:


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Only if the thread is (appropriately) named, "The CM Punk (and Raw) Ratings Thread".


----------



## Starbuck

The Sandrone said:


> Only if the thread is (appropriately) named, "The CM Punk (and Raw) Ratings Thread".


CM Punk and ratings? If I called it that nobody would ever go in it 8*D.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Starbuck said:


> CM Punk and ratings? If I called it that nobody would ever go in it 8*D.


unk4

The 900+ pages of CM Punk talk disagrees. Punk may not be a draw on Raw, but his name is a bigger draw in this thread than Hogan, Austin, and Rock in WWE in their peaks.


----------



## Choke2Death

Hell yes for a new ratings thread. Hopefully Punk is either depushed or kills more ratings! 8*D


----------



## Duke Silver

How many times has Punk been mentioned in this thread? Out of 9000+ posts, I'd wager it's at least 1/4.


----------



## TheF1BOB

**The Official CM Punk Killed The Ratings AGAIN Thread** (Discuss Phils Lack of Draw In Here)


----------



## Duke Silver

TheF1BOB said:


> **The Official CM Punk Killed The Ratings AGAIN Thread** (Discuss Phils Lack of Draw In Here)


How many times did Punk lose viewers last year?


----------



## Choke2Death

I can count at least three.

- Main event with Tensai & Bryan in May.
- 10PM match with Daniel Bryan around the same period.
- His match with Cena before Survivor Series.

He also lost 86,000 viewers in one of his first main events in the first ever match with Batista way back in 2008. He's always been a ratings killer.


----------



## Wrestlinfan35

Duke Droese said:


> How many times did Punk lose viewers last year?


Don't bother. The two that posted above are the trolliest of them all.


----------



## JasonLives

TheF1BOB said:


> **The Official CM Punk Killed The Ratings AGAIN Thread** (Discuss Phils Lack of Draw In Here)


Naa, now that The Rock is back he will be blamed/cheered for EVERYTHING in ratings way.

Come on Rock, lets see you bring that 3.5 overall ratings and see you bring in those 4.0 quarterhours when you are champion :cool2
( unless you wanna be " one of the least drawing champions of all time!" )


----------



## Cliffy

TheF1BOB said:


> **The Official CM Punk Killed The Ratings AGAIN Thread** (Discuss Phils Lack of Draw In Here)


Yes to a new thread with this ^^^ being the title, just to wind sensitive punk marks up for the first week or so.


----------



## RatedR10

Duke Droese said:


> How many times has Punk been mentioned in this thread? Out of 9000+ posts, I'd wager it's at least 1/4.


At least 1/4? I'd say at least 3/4 from what I can remember. :lmao

CM Punk draws in this thread.


----------



## Starbuck

TheF1BOB said:


> **The Official CM Punk Killed The Ratings AGAIN Thread** (Discuss Phils Lack of Draw In Here)


:yes

:lmao I'd love to call it that just to stir shit up but I won't lol. The majority seem to think a new thread is a good idea. Guess I'll suggest it to the other mods and see what they say. Get back to you all soon.


----------



## Choke2Death

Wrestlinfan35 said:


> Don't bother. The two that posted above are the trolliest of them all.


Translation: If you don't worship my personal god, better known as CM Punk, you are a troll.


----------



## Starbuck

Take all discussions to the 2013 thread from now on.


----------

