# All Raw TV Ratings, Buys, Attendance, Draw Talk Here - THE RATINGS WAR PART VI #LolRatings



## Brock

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

Previous Thread *HERE*:

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/1...talk-here-ratings-war-part-v-lol-ratings.html

NEW THREAD BITCHES ~!!

It's the ratings thread, that thing that WWE apparently doesn't give a shit about, yeah (right)?

The next chapter in the ongoing saga that is the numbers game. Where numbers and decimal points gets analysed to the tenth degree and the dreaded 'Draw' phrase gets bought up and people get their handbags out and have a 'discussion' over a bunch of numbers.

Even people who don't watch are enamored by dem numbers :side: :evil

IT'S ALL ABOUT DEM NUMBERS!!!!!

Everything is fine though, riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight??? :reigns

THE RATINGS WAR PART VI


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Thanks @Brock and @Headliner

So, all hours are above were they were last year, so I guess that's good. But they do have a big angle going right now. Going head to head with 2 back to back NFL games certainly took it's toll, for sure.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*I'ma let you finish @Brock, but Roman Reigns is the greatest Youtube draw OF ALL TIME!*










ShowStopper said:


> Thanks @Brock and @Headliner
> 
> So, all hours are above were they were last year, so I guess that's good. But they do have a big angle going right now. Going head to head with 2 back to back NFL games certainly took it's toll, for sure.


*The NFL is getting some of their lowest ratings of all time as well, especially for a Patriots opener, so the declining ratings issue isn't exclusive to WWE.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Legit BOSS said:


> *I'ma let you finish @Brock, but Roman Reigns is the greatest Youtube draw OF ALL TIME!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The NFL is getting some of their lowest ratings of all time as well, especially for a Patriots opener, so the declining ratings issue isn't exclusive to WWE.*


Yeah, I know, pretty crazy. It actually started last year for the NFL. The advantage NFL has is that their ratings are still extremely, extremely high, though. But yeah, it's crazy.


----------



## IceTheRetroKid

*Before this thread really takes off, I'm going to promote the fact that, a year ago, when the ropes became red in August 2016, to August 2017, the ropes have been red for a full consistent year and the average rating went up for August 2017 compared to last year.

Getting rid of those pesky white ropes reinvigorated people to stop flipping channels as much or even...a few more people WATCHED!*


----------



## Erik.

IceTheRetroKid said:


> *Before this thread really takes off, I'm going to promote the fact that, a year ago, when the ropes became red in August 2016, to August 2017, the ropes have been red for a full consistent year and the average rating went up for August 2017 compared to last year.
> 
> Getting rid of those pesky white ropes reinvigorated people to stop flipping channels as much or even...a few more people WATCHED!*


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I got the last post in the last thread so I win. 

Anyway, good that numbers are higher than last year. Numbers are still declining though but maybe they won't get as low as last year after all. We'll see what happens when they don't have two big programs going on.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

> Nielsen had to delay its release of the television ratings for Week 1 of the new NFL season due to Hurricane Irma. Now the Week 1 ratings are out—and they aren’t good.
> 
> Sunday Night Football between the Dallas Cowboys and New York Giants was the only slot in which viewership rose compared to last year; every other slot was down double digits.
> 
> Overall, Week 1 ratings, excluding Monday Night Football, fell 13% from a year ago. (MNF ratings are still delayed, though initial reports expect them to be down vs last year.)
> 
> The Thursday Night season opener, between the New England Patriots and Kansas City Chiefs, rated a 14.6, which is 11.5% down from 2016, and 17.5% down from 2015. This marks four years in a row that the season opener has seen a ratings decline vs the year before.
> 
> Sunday’s afternoon games did the worst: regional games on CBS fell 17%, regional games on Fox fell 28%, and the Sunday afternoon national game on Fox fell 17%.


https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tough-start-nfl-season-ratings-13-week-1-145729365.html


> The Cowboys/Giants Sunday Night game did a 8.0 rating in the adults 18-49 demo and 21.65 million viewers. In the demo, that's a six percent rise from the 2016 Sunday Night Football opener (7.5 adults). That's also up in the demo, but a tiny drop in total viewers, from Thursday's official Sunday Night Football premiere, which drew a 7.7 rating and 21.79 million.


----------



## MC

Ratings are cool


----------



## V-Trigger

*Raw
>1st hour: 3.022 million 
>2nd hour: 2.987 million
>3rd hour: 2.699 million

SD
>2.754 million *


----------



## CesaroSwing

Zigger consistently getting 1 million views on YouTube


----------



## JDP2016

LegitBoss said:


> I'ma let you finish @Brock , but Roman Reigns is the greatest Youtube draw OF ALL TIME!
> 
> 
> The NFL is getting some of their lowest ratings of all time as well, especially for a Patriots opener, so the declining ratings issue isn't exclusive to WWE.





The Boy Wonder said:


> https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tough-start-nfl-season-ratings-13-week-1-145729365.html



Thanks Colin Crapernick and the rest of your kneeling flunkies.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.022M
H2- 2.987M
H3- 2.699M
3H- 2.903M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 1.16% / - 0.035M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 9.64% / - 0.288M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 10.69% / - 0.323M )
9/11/17 Vs 9/4/17 ( - 0.99% / - 0.029M )

Demo (9/11/17 Vs 9/4/17):
H1- 1.010D Vs 1.070D
H2- 1.030D Vs 1.050D
H3- 0.930D Vs 1.010D
3H- 0.990D Vs 1.043D

Note: RAW is 5th, 3rd & 7th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 5th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (9/11/17 Vs 9/12/16):
H1- 3.022M Vs 2.833M
H2- 2.987M Vs 2.717M
H3- 2.699M Vs 2.520M
3H- 2.903M Vs 2.690M ( + 7.92% / + 0.213M )

Demo (9/11/17 Vs 9/12/16):
H1- 1.010D Vs 0.950D
H2- 1.030D Vs 0.930D
H3- 0.930D Vs 0.860D
3H- 0.990D Vs 0.913D

Note: RAW this time last year was 5th, 6th & 7th by hourly demo & 6th, 7th & 12th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1- 3.022M
> H2- 2.987M
> H3- 2.699M
> 3H- 2.903M*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership:
> H2 Vs H1 ( - 1.16% / - 0.035M )
> H3 Vs H2 ( - 9.64% / - 0.288M )
> H3 Vs H1 ( - 10.69% / - 0.323M )
> 9/11/17 Vs 9/4/17 ( - 0.99% / - 0.029M )
> 
> Demo (9/11/17 Vs 9/4/17):
> H1- 1.010D Vs 1.070D
> H2- 1.030D Vs 1.050D
> H3- 0.930D Vs 1.010D
> 3H- 0.990D Vs 1.043D
> 
> Note: RAW is 5th, 3rd & 7th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 5th by hourly viewership.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership (9/11/17 Vs 9/12/16):
> H1- 3.022M Vs 2.833M
> H2- 2.987M Vs 2.717M
> H3- 2.699M Vs 2.520M
> 3H- 2.903M Vs 2.690M ( + 7.92% / + 0.213M )
> 
> Demo (9/4/17 Vs 9/5/16):
> H1- 1.010D Vs 0.950D
> H2- 1.030D Vs 0.930D
> H3- 0.930D Vs 0.860D
> 3H- 0.990D Vs 0.913D
> 
> Note: RAW this time last year was 5th, 6th & 7th by hourly demo & 6th, 7th & 12th by hourly viewership.*


Sorry for the delay guys. I did post this in the previous ratings thread 3 hours ago and that post still appears in my account's post history, but looks like the thread was closed right around the time I posted that and my post vanished. It took me a while to figure out what happened and to find this thread.

As Johnny Ace once said, I had to get it, if I don't get it, I had to figure it out. fpalm


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

RAW up year to year thanks to Big Draw John. :supercena


----------



## Lothario

^ There are just as many -- if not more -- individuals not watching the NFL because of the perception of Kaepernick being black balled. The NFL is taking hits from all angles. They'll eventually need to draw a line in the sand but the more time goes by and the more vile drivel I read online, the more I become convinced that contrary to how I felt initially, those kneeling in peaceful protest aren't the snowflakes whom need to be taking a look in the mirror.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The numbers they do are still ginmormous and on another level from anything WWE, or anything else on TV does. Also, the Sunday Night opener this year did better than last year's Sunday night opener, so it's not a straight line down.

The NFL on-field product is decreasing every season in recent seasons. The rules, the inconsistent reffing, the lack of being able to hit someone like they used to and the endless commercials, along with the over-saturation with the Thursday night games aren't doing them any favors.


----------



## Dave Santos

ShowStopper said:


> Thanks @Brock and @Headliner
> 
> So, all hours are above were they were last year, so I guess that's good. But they do have a big angle going right now. Going head to head with 2 back to back NFL games certainly took it's toll, for sure.


Remember though that a ton of people were watching the news and they made a killing last year. The election coverage was on most of the time.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Dave Santos said:


> Remember though that a ton of people were watching the news and they made a killing last year. The election coverage was on most of the time.


This time last year was still 3 months away from the election. I get it, though. Even if you take out last year's comparison, I think these numbers are still better than anyone thought they would be. Shitty, of course, compared to any other era, but considering the competition of 2 NFL games back to back, still better than everyone thought.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Lothario said:


> ^ There are just as many -- if not more -- individuals not watching the NFL because of the perception of Kaepernick being black balled. The NFL is taking hits from all angles. They'll eventually need to draw a line in the sand but the more time goes by and the more vile drivel I read online, the more I become convinced that contrary to how I felt initially, those kneeling in peaceful protest aren't the snowflakes whom need to be taking a look in the mirror.



LOL...those that care about Colin Kaepernick kneeling are a bunch of far leftists that don't even watch sports. I highly doubt they are boycotting watching the NFL when they aren't football fans to begin with. The protestors (BLM and Antifa) are a very small group representing a small group. 

ESPN's a dying network anyway. They went far left and lost their base (which most sports fans at least football are conservative or middle of the road). Put those football games on another network, and they'd get better ratings.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.123M
H2- 2.844M
H3- 2.532M
3H- 2.833M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 8.93% / - 0.279M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 10.97% / - 0.312M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 18.92% / - 0.591M )
9/18/17 Vs 9/11/17 ( - 2.41% / - 0.070M )

Demo (9/18/17 Vs 9/11/17):
H1- 0.990D Vs 1.010D
H2- 0.940D Vs 1.030D
H3- 0.840D Vs 0.930D
3H- 0.923D Vs 0.990D

Note: RAW is 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 2nd, 3rd & 6th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (9/18/17 Vs 9/19/16):
H1- 3.123M Vs 2.734M
H2- 2.844M Vs 2.686M
H3- 2.532M Vs 2.633M
3H- 2.833M Vs 2.684M ( + 5.55% / + 0.149M )

Demo (9/18/17 Vs 9/19/16):
H1- 0.990D Vs 1.010D
H2- 0.940D Vs 1.030D
H3- 0.840D Vs 0.930D
3H- 0.923D Vs 0.990D

Note: RAW this time last year was 4th, 6th & 5th by hourly demo & 6th, 8th & 9th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 3 less than it was last week when last week's main event was that meaningless tag. Wow. Not good.


----------



## squarebox

Anyone know why numbers are slightly up compared to last year?


----------



## A-C-P

That 3rd Hour :ha



squarebox said:


> Anyone know why numbers are slightly up compared to last year?


They are actually trying a bit this year running big angles involving Lesnar and Cena, last Fall when MNF started Cena and Lesnar were not appearing on Raw. Also last year the election stuff was starting to ramp up in the US which also drew some viewers away from Raw.

After No Mercy Cena and Lesnar are off TV for the rest of 2017 (rumored) though.


----------



## JTB33b

It's going to be worse next week because the fall shows are back on and the MNF game involves the Cowboys who are a draw. Back to the shows you have big bang theory,Young Sheldon, NCIS Los Angeles,Scorpion, and the 2nd week of dancing with the stars.


----------



## JC00

1st hour up from the last two weeks which featured Cena and Reigns.

Alexa and Nia drawing in them viewers


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

All that starpower and almost nothing to show for it. If Hour 3 happens and no one watches, did it really happen at all.


----------



## MC

JC00 said:


> 1st hour up from the last two weeks which featured Cena and Reigns.
> 
> Alexa and Nia drawing in them viewers


People love them samoans.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Almost 400.000 people tuned out when the Icon came out.

I guess that Jason Jordan isn't over LOL


----------



## Dolorian

From Figure Four Online...



> With competition from both Monday Night Football and Dancing With The Stars, Raw dropped to 2.82 million viewers last night, a drop of three percent from last week.
> 
> The drop itself wasn't a surprise, but the ratings pattern was.
> 
> The first hour did a stronger than expected number, which is likely at least partially due to curiosity regarding how the company would handle the death of Bobby Heenan. Both the second and third hours had far larger than usual drops and the third hour was the lowest rated hour since the end of the NBA playoffs.
> 
> Raw still remained in second place on cable, trailing Monday Night Football, which did a strong 12.29 million viewers for the Detroit Lions vs. New York Giants game. Dancing With the Stars, which featured Nikki Bella, and was never mentioned on Raw for obvious reasons, did 10.71 million viewers.
> 
> The first-to-third hour drops were the biggest among women, notably teenage girls which dropped from hour one to three by nearly 40 percent.
> 
> The third hour drop is also likely given the show went 11 minutes past the hour and the main event was a six-pack challenge with Jason Jordan, The Hardys, Bo Dallas, Curtis Axel, and Elias, for a shot at The Miz's IC title at No Mercy, which is not a strong finisher.


----------



## Chrome

Yikes at that 3rd hour drop. 1st of many I'm guessing.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

Alexa bringing in those viewers for that 1st Hour!!!


----------



## RubberbandGoat

Don't worry, according to Roman marks, he's the savior, so no worries, he'll outdraw MNF going forward. Right?


----------



## A-C-P

Chrome said:


> Yikes at that 3rd hour drop. 1st of many I'm guessing.


They better hope not, b/c I expect the first 2 hours to drop more to match what the 3rd hour is doing, if that happens and the 3rd hour still drops :CENA


----------



## Demolition119

A-C-P said:


> That 3rd Hour :ha
> 
> 
> 
> They are actually trying a bit this year running big angles involving Lesnar and Cena, last Fall when MNF started Cena and Lesnar were not appearing on Raw. Also last year the election stuff was starting to ramp up in the US which also drew some viewers away from Raw.
> 
> After No Mercy Cena and Lesnar are off TV for the rest of 2017 (rumored) though.


They are going to be in deep doodoo if neither of them are appearing on another raw in 2017. Also Lesnar better be losing the title if that is case.


----------



## Jedah

They better put that title on Braun. If Cena and Brock are both gone for the rest of the year, Raw will be in real trouble otherwise. It's really hard to understand Vince being so obsessed with getting Roman over that he'll destroy the rest of his show to make it happen, but that's what's most probable.


----------



## Chrome

A-C-P said:


> They better hope not, b/c I expect the first 2 hours to drop more to match what the 3rd hour is doing, if that happens and the 3rd hour still drops :CENA


With Cena and Lesnar leaving after No Mercy, it wouldn't surprise me. They should put the belt on Strowman and give him a test run to see if that help ratings at all.


----------



## chronoxiong

Ouch at that third hour drop. That is massive. Non one wanted to see poor Jason Jordan become the new #1 IC Title contender.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Viewers disowned "The Bastard" Jason Jordan.


----------



## Seafort

squarebox said:


> Anyone know why numbers are slightly up compared to last year?


That's easy. Around the time of the NBA finals somebody realized internally that the erosion was too great and had to stop. At the rate that they were declining they were facing the prospect of 2010 TNA level audiences by 2019. Storylines began to become more serialized, and overall storytelling improved. Not to Attitude levels or even Ruthless Aggression levels, but enough that it was a noticeable difference from the cut and paste shows of early summer. Add John Cena in a WM feud with Roman Reigns and you have a real difference over last summer.

The low ratings put a real fire under them. They always had it in them to improve. It took a real crisis to do so.


----------



## Ace

Record lows for Sacramento and Sydney house shows (usually do close to 15,000, did 10,000).

San Jose Raw attendance wasn't great.


----------



## A-C-P

I've been selling tickets you have't sold in 5 years John :reigns

:bosque


----------



## Randy Lahey

If the WWE can't make a bump into ratings now, they never will. Many Americans are boycotting the NFL over the anti-American protesting players. Now, how many of these people are going to switch over to wrestling again remains to be seen, but there is an opportunity here for Vince to make a statement.


----------



## Chrome

Ace said:


> Record lows for Sacramento and Sydney house shows (usually do close to 15,000, did 10,000).
> 
> San Jose Raw attendance wasn't great.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articl...cable-originals-network-finals-9-25-2017.html

Big drop for 3rd hour. Guess people didn't give a shit about Reigns/Miz (which went into it), Balor/Goldust and the cruiserweight stuff.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Jesus. The highest hour out of the 3 (hour 1) only did 3.1 

And that 8 man tag with Dean, Seth, and the Hardy's number from a few weeks ago looking better and better as every hour 3 passes by. Yikes. 2.5.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.121M
H2- 3.081M
H3- 2.568M
3H- 2.923M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 1.28% / - 0.040M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 16.65% / - 0.513M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 17.72% / - 0.553M )
9/25/17 Vs 9/18/17 ( + 3.18% / + 0.090M )

Demo (9/25/17 Vs 9/18/17):
H1- 1.040D Vs 0.990D
H2- 1.040D Vs 0.940D
H3- 0.880D Vs 0.840D
3H- 0.987D Vs 0.923D

Note: RAW is 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 3rd, 5th & 8th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (9/25/17 Vs 9/26/16):
H1- 3.121M Vs 2.850M
H2- 3.081M Vs 2.381M
H3- 2.568M Vs 2.203M
3H- 2.923M Vs 2.478M ( + 17.96% / + 0.445M )

Demo (9/25/17 Vs 9/26/16):
H1- 1.040D Vs 0.970D
H2- 1.040D Vs 0.790D
H3- 0.880D Vs 0.740D
3H- 0.987D Vs 0.833D

Note: RAW this time last year was 11th, 14th & 15th by hourly demo & 12th, 18th & 19th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## wwe9391

Dam 3rd hour awful. Nobody wanted to see Enzo lol. Seems like lots dropped after after Miz vs Roman 

Roman in the first hour gets the highest go figure.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Is that supposed to be a PPV bump?

I wonder how long it takes until the people who foolishly tune into Hour 1 before they realize it sucks, learn that it's better to watch football, and hour 1 drops as well.
Because that sure as hell is an amazing drop.


----------



## JTB33b

wwe9391 said:


> Dam 3rd hour awful. Nobody wanted to see Enzo lol. Seems like lots dropped after after Miz vs Roman
> 
> Roman in the first hour gets the highest go figure.


Nice try. the 1st hour is always the highest rated and 3rd hour is always the lowest. And LOL at you bragging about a 3.1 1st hour rating that came off a PPV.


----------



## wwe9391

JTB33b said:


> Nice try. the 1st hour is always the highest rated and 3rd hour is always the lowest.


Nope. The 2nd hour has gotten the highest plenty of times


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Is that supposed to be a PPV bump?
> 
> I wonder how long it takes until the people who foolishly tune into Hour 1 before they realize it sucks, learn that it's better to watch football, and hour 1 drops as well.
> Because that sure as hell is an amazing drop.


Whoa! Forgot it was not the only night after a PPV, but the night after a PPV with those 2 "big" matches.

Another failure.

:mj4


----------



## MC

wwe9391 said:


> Dam 3rd hour awful. Nobody wanted to see Enzo lol. Seems like lots dropped after after Miz vs Roman
> 
> Roman in the first hour gets the highest go figure.


Reigns vs Miz was advertised as the main event of the 3rd hour so they are too blame as well.

Also that first hour is atrocious so best not to brag about that.


----------



## JTB33b

wwe9391 said:


> Nope. The 2nd hour has gotten the highest plenty of times


Not during football season.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

First two hours were relatively stable and statistically the same. Hour 3 tanked in both the demo and total audience. RAW has seen better days.


----------



## machomanjohncena

Big year-over-year increase, but last year's Raw this week went head-to-head with the presidential debate


----------



## Ace

Wasn't the Big Dog in hr 3?


----------



## Dolorian

Ace said:


> Wasn't the Big Dog in hr 3?


His match with Miz closed the second hour. Third hour had the women's tag match, Balor/Goldust and the Enzo CW segment.


----------



## Ace

Dolorian said:


> His match with Miz closed the second hour. *Third hour had the women's tag match, Balor/Goldust and the Enzo CW segment.*


 No way that took up over an hr and 15 minutes.

Miz-Roman must have started at the bottom of the 2nd hr and finished 10-15 minutes into the 3rd hr.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Roman/Miz went about 10-15 minutes into third hour.


----------



## Ace

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Roman/Miz went about 10-15 minutes into third hour.


 Knew it. 

That's what always happens to matches and segment that start at the bottom of the 2nd hr.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Just putting it out there as well, when it's a Roman segment (or any big name) it's always positioned at the start of the hour or mid-final quarter of an hour into the following hour. Rarely will a segment with a bigger name or who WWE considers a bigger name/storyline start in the final quarter of an hour and not go into the following hour for at least 10 minutes of the first quarter of that hour.


----------



## Dolorian

Ace said:


> No way that took up over an hr and 15 minutes.
> 
> Miz-Roman must have started at the bottom of the 2nd hr and finished 10-15 minutes into the 3rd hr.





#BadNewsSanta said:


> Roman/Miz went about 10-15 minutes into third hour.


Yes, you are both correct the Reigns/Miz segment went over 10 or so mins into the 3rd hour. After that they followed with Balor/Goldust, Women's Tag Match and the Enzo CW segment.


----------



## wwe9391

Yea and everyone left after Miz vs Roman hence the 3rd hour drop


----------



## Ace

Dolorian said:


> Yes, you are both correct the Reigns/Miz segment went over 10 or so mins into the 3rd hour. After that they followed with Balor/Goldust, Women's Tag Match and the Enzo CW segment.


 So Roman was part of the 3rd hour...


----------



## Ace

wwe9391 said:


> Yea and everyone left after Miz vs Roman hence the 3rd hour drop


 You don't die like that, this is Roman Reigns we're talking about not the fucking Rock.


----------



## MC

wwe9391 said:


> Yea and everyone left after Miz vs Roman hence the 3rd hour drop


The entire 3rd hour dropped. Face it, no one cares about Reigns.


----------



## wwe9391

Ace said:


> You don't die like that, this is Roman Reigns we're talking about not the fucking Rock.


There was nothing important happening after Roman vs Miz. People dropped off after. Makes sense.


----------



## Ace

wwe9391 said:


> There was nothing important happening after Roman vs Miz. People dropped off after. Makes sense.


 Like I said, you never die like that unless you're following stars like Rock or Goldberg who bump a rating big time. 

There was a Raw with a lot worse a few weeks back and it still did better than this.


----------



## wwe9391

Ace said:


> Like I said, you never die like that unless you're following stars like Rock or Goldberg who bump a rating big time.
> 
> There was a Raw with a lot worse a few weeks back and it still did better than this.


Yea it most likely slowly went down after Roman Miz and before the hour was up they got to that number.


----------



## MC

wwe9391 said:


> There was nothing important happening after Roman vs Miz. People dropped off after. Makes sense.


People dropped off at the third hour, how are you not getting this. The 2nd hour dropped as well


----------



## Ace

wwe9391 said:


> Yea it most likely slowly went down after Roman Miz and before the hour was up they got to that number.


 Or they dropped when Roman-Miz began and continued to do so through the third hour.... That's supported as both hr 2 and 3 suffered drops.

That's far more plausible than the ratings dying after Roman-Miz.


----------



## A-C-P

Roman took the torch from Cena and burned down the ratings for the 3rd hour :sadbecky


----------



## JTB33b

wwe9391 said:


> There was nothing important happening after Roman vs Miz. People dropped off after. Makes sense.


I looked forward more to the Enzo segment than the predictable Roman/Miz match. I fastforwarded the majority of the Miz/Roman match but I watched the Enzo promo in full.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

As I've said before, I actually wish we had quarter hour ratings for exactly this reason. Who do we actually blame for that 3rd hour drop? Maybe wwe393782028402 has a point and everyone left after the Miz/Reigns match. Or maybe people tuned out in droves for that match and slowly built back up slowly to the main event Cruiserweight segment. 

Maybe people dropped off during the Reigns/Miz match and then it just remained flat from there on out, with maybe even more changing the channel during the final segment. So many different ways it could've went.


----------



## The Renegade

Hard to blame that Enzo segment for the drop after the numbers it did on youtube. That said, its likely that the audience simply eroded as the football game got closer and closer to crunch time. No reason to get into a pissing match about who caused what when we don't have numbers to prove it either way.

Also - are we ready to attribute the horrible ratings last fall to an usually controversial presidential election? Numbers haven't been amazing against football this year, but they have been respectable generally.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

I wish had quarter ratings but the best thing we have to judge what segments did well/didn't do well are YouTube numbers:


----------



## MC

The Boy Wonder said:


> I wish had quarter ratings but the best thing we have to judge what segments did well/didn't do well are YouTube numbers:


LOL at thinking Youtube Views means anything.


----------



## Gravyv321

oh boy. the roman fans sure are doing a good job at convincing us that he is a "draw." good lord :bosque


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Wow, that Strowman post-Raw segment actually drawing a big number on YouTube. Biggest by far for Raw, that's pretty incredible.

Guess this means Strowman is a draw after all because YouTube is supreme! :braun


----------



## Chrome

It seems like they've become aware of the 3rd hour drops and are putting mostly filler in that hour, hence the steep drops. Ratings are better than last year, but not really saying much since last year had the election coverage.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

With the bad attendance for house shows, I'm genuinely wondering if for that Starrcade special, they can actually draw more fans than the final Starrcade 2000, which did about 6.000 I think.

I'm not sure Vince wants to go down in history as booking WCW PPVs worse than WCW itself.


----------



## A-C-P

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> With the bad attendance for house shows, I'm genuinely wondering if for that Starrcade special, they can actually draw more fans than the final Starrcade 2000, which did about 6.000 I think.
> 
> I'm not sure Vince wants to go down in history as booking WCW PPVs worse than WCW itself.


With Stars like *BOOBY* Roode and Rickey *SEAM*boat I don't see how Starrcade could fail :bosque


----------



## D.M.N.

With quarter three (July to September) now complete, here are how things are looking percentage wise. The +/- is an average of the comparison between (i.e. for Q3 2017):

- the previous quarter (Q2 2017)
- one year earlier (Q3 2016)
- two years earlier (Q3 2015)

Here are the quarter three percentage figures for recent years:

-0.7% = 2012
-2.7% = 2014
*-3.0% = 2017*
-8.1% = 2013
-8.6% = 2015
-17.9% = 2016

From a year perspective:

Q3 2012 = 4.47 million
Q3 2013 = 4.00 million (down 10.7%)
Q3 2014 = 4.11 million (up 2.9%)
Q3 2015 = 3.62 million (down 12.0%)
Q3 2016 = 3.00 million (down 17.0%)
Q3 2017 = 3.08 million (up 2.5%)


----------



## Ace

> They made fun of WWE for having to paper the house, which was the one thing on the show that I thought WWE wouldn’t be happy about, because it would be a Raw nerve *since they drew 6,000 fans for a major market show*, but WWE has also run the market a lot in recent weeks with a PPV the night before in Los Angeles and a Raw two weeks ago at the Honda Center.


Selling the tickets you haven't sold in 5 years John :reigns2


----------



## Ace

*Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



> They made fun of WWE for having to paper the house, which was the one thing on the show that I thought WWE wouldn’t be happy about, because it would be a Raw nerve since they *drew 6,000 fans for a major market show*, but WWE has also run the market a lot in recent weeks with a PPV the night before in Los Angeles and a Raw two weeks ago at the Honda Center.


Source - Wrestling Observer Newsletter

I see Roman is still selling the tickets John hasn't sold in 5 years :reigns2


Edit: Mods, don't let this waste away in the Raw draws thread. This needs to be seen by those who harp on about business being great and rEc0rd rEVeNue.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

Would love a picture of this.


----------



## Jedah

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

What event?


----------



## RapShepard

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

This isn't swell, but AJ couldn't even sell out the Impact Zone


----------



## wwe9391

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

Another Roman Reigns thread by Ace.


----------



## wwe9391

Ace said:


> Or they dropped when Roman-Miz began and continued to do so through the third hour.... That's supported as both hr 2 and 3 suffered drops.
> 
> That's far more plausible than the ratings dying after Roman-Miz.


Or they dropped after Miz vs Roman ended and that you are wrong in this case. 
That's far more plausible because Roman and Miz are top guys and after their match there was nothing important To tune into hence the drop.


----------



## Lykos

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

At least put some information about what show was that and who was on it.


----------



## Laughable Chimp

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

Do people still parrot record revenue nowadays? I swear, I think even the most ardent of WWE fans have given up trying to defend WWE with that.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



RapShepard said:


> This isn't swell, but AJ couldn't even sell out the Impact Zone


*
But he doesn't want to talk about half of the Smackdown arena being empty under AJ's watch. He blames Jinder because he's the champion. Guess what? AJ is the US Champion and Roman hasn't held a title all year. If they wanted to buy a ticket to see AJ, then they'd buy a ticket to see AJ. Quit making excuses. Your guy isn't doing shit either. No one is more qualified to be FOTC than Reigns. Get over it.*



wwe9391 said:


> Another Roman Reigns thread by Ace.


*He makes more Reigns threads than AJ threads. He's made more Reigns threads than all of us combined. It's really sad.*


----------



## RapShepard

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Legit BOSS said:


> *
> But he doesn't want to talk about half of the Smackdown arena being empty under AJ's watch. He blames Jinder because he's the champion. Guess what? AJ is the US Champion and Roman hasn't held a title all year. If they wanted to buy a ticket to see AJ, then they'd buy a ticket to see AJ. Quit making excuses. Your guy isn't doing shit either. No one is more qualified to be FOTC than Reigns. Get over it.*
> 
> 
> 
> *He makes more Reigns threads than AJ threads. He's made more Reigns threads than all of us combined. It's really sad.*


Of course not because its never anybody else's fault for not drawing crowds but Reigns. Champion or not, Main event or not Reigns should draw for all shows, except Mania because that doesn't count lol


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



RapShepard said:


> Of course not because its never anybody else's fault for not drawing crowds but Reigns. Champion or not, Main event or not Reigns should draw for all shows, except Mania because that doesn't count lol


*He's even in the Smackdown threads blaming Reigns for bad booking and empty arenas :lmao.*


----------



## Awareness

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

When you have Enzo Amore in your main event slot not even all of the Attitude Era main eventers can cover that shit.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

haha legit boss is butt hurt cause his boy toy roman reigns is a failure and can't draw flies to shit.


----------



## Mordecay

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

But I thought Roman was selling tickets and WWE didn't care about the Bullet Club...

Honestly, I don't blame Roman, he isn't that important to begin with, you can take him off for 6 to a year months and business would be the same.


----------



## RapShepard

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Legit BOSS said:


> *He's even in the Smackdown threads blaming Reigns for bad booking and empty arenas :lmao.*


"Everybody is being booked to look like some sort of geek so Reigns failed push and Raw being empty isn't overshadowed by a great SDL" I'm guessing is the mindset


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Mordecay said:


> But I thought Roman was selling tickets and WWE didn't care about the Bullet Club...
> 
> Honestly, I don't blame Roman, he isn't that important to begin with, you can take him off for 6 to a year months and business would be the same.


which is why his push is stupid cause he not important and does not draw shit so quit pushing him as the next face of the company cause its never going to work.


----------



## wwe9391

Legit BOSS said:


> *He makes more Reigns threads than AJ threads. He's made more Reigns threads than all of us combined. It's really sad.*


That is pretty sad. 

As big of a Reigns fan that I am I don't think I have ever made a thread about him.


----------



## Sweggeh

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

That record revenue in full effect. Sacrificing everyone for Roman Reigns seems to be very clearly paying off big time.


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

At this point I think its only news when a WWE show actually sells well :bosque


----------



## krtgolfing

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

Can't say I am surprised. When your product is complete crap no one is going to spend money on it. I guess Roman is selling the tickets Cena hasn't for 5 years. :ha


----------



## Robbyfude

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

September is a historically tough month for Sports Entertainment :trolldog


:vincecry


----------



## Lykos

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

*SOME RANDOM SHOW DRAWS LIKE SHIT.

*PROCEED TO SHIT ON ROMAN REIGNS FOR NO REASON.
Repeat.. 

What a fucking non sense.. Have you ever seen how full are the crowds and how loud are the reactions
for the house shows Reigns headlines?


----------



## Dio Brando

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

Ace a real one I won't tolerate this backlash on him.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

Perhaps "The Universe" is finally tiring of the swill Vince is serving to them?


----------



## RavishingRickRules

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

I don't think it's Roman's fault, it's the fact that management don't give a shit about their fans and seemingly almost book to upset/offend them. Roman's booking may be part of that reason, but that still isn't on Roman. You can only do so much with what you're given, Roman is NOT a mic guy and look at what the Cena feud looked like, it's idiotic. Roman's similar to AJ Styles in the sense that if you book his mic work the right way it's perfectly serviceable but his main talent/skill is his in-ring work. You can't blame Roman if they give him ten times as much mic time as ring time, that's their fault for booking him to hide his strengths and expse his weaknesses, not his. I can fully understand people not paying to see the show, I cancelled my subscription before No Mercy and streamed the PPV because I'm sick of their terrible booking and subscribed to NJPW instead. I'll still pay attention to what WWE's doing but I won't watch any of their stuff on tv or pay for the network, I'll stream it illegally because they don't deserve my money/viewership ratings with the blatant animosity they feel towards the fanbase. Maybe after the Roman coronation they'll start seeing things a little less tunnel visioned and book the shows better, if they do I'll consider giving them my money again.


----------



## Dio Brando

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Legit BOSS said:


> *
> But he doesn't want to talk about half of the Smackdown arena being empty under AJ's watch. He blames Jinder because he's the champion. Guess what? AJ is the US Champion and Roman hasn't held a title all year. If they wanted to buy a ticket to see AJ, then they'd buy a ticket to see AJ. Quit making excuses. Your guy isn't doing shit either. No one is more qualified to be FOTC than Reigns. Get over it.*
> 
> 
> 
> *He makes more Reigns threads than AJ threads. He's made more Reigns threads than all of us combined. It's really sad.*


Technically Roman held a title in 2017. He lost it in January. 

I'm not trying to buy a ticket to see AJ as US champ. I'd pay to see AJ as WWE champion tho.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



A-C-P said:


> At this point I think its only news when a WWE show actually sells well :bosque


Seems like ppvs are the only thing that still do well these days. Perhaps they should cancel Raw and SDL and just do ppvs? :hmmm


----------



## Mordecay

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Chrome said:


> Seems like ppvs are the only thing that still do well these days. Perhaps they should cancel Raw and SDL and just do ppvs? :hmmm


Well, if they cancel RAW and SD his main source of revenue (tv rights) is gone and then they will be super fucked. Weekend live events, on the other hand...


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Dio Brando said:


> Technically Roman held a title in 2017. He lost it in January.


*He lost it on the second week of January. You know exactly what I mean. Don't be ridiculous.*



> I'm not trying to buy a ticket to see AJ as US champ. I'd pay to see AJ as WWE champion tho.


*Then you're not a fan of the wrestler; you're a fan of status. I paid to see Roman when he was a tag team specialist with NO singles titles.*


----------



## Jedah

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

Was this a random house show or a TV taping? That's what I want to know. Someone clarify what "major market show" this was.


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

*I don't blame Roman Reigns at all, it's the current shape of the brand and the creative staff plus Vince McMahon's fault for such a poor drawing number. *


----------



## 2Pieced

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Legit BOSS said:


> *
> But he doesn't want to talk about half of the Smackdown arena being empty under AJ's watch. He blames Jinder because he's the champion. Guess what? AJ is the US Champion and Roman hasn't held a title all year. If they wanted to buy a ticket to see AJ, then they'd buy a ticket to see AJ. Quit making excuses. Your guy isn't doing shit either. No one is more qualified to be FOTC than Reigns. Get over it.*
> 
> 
> 
> *He makes more Reigns threads than AJ threads. He's made more Reigns threads than all of us combined. It's really sad.*


Technically true but there is a big difference between the two.

One guy they have spent the better part of 4 years building him up to be the main draw in the company, the other is booked to just be another star but not someone they are depending on more than the odd main event program and you can say that about 10 other guys.

Only one full time guy is built to stand out from the crowd, the companies booking proves there is more expected from him than any other wrestler.


----------



## WeeBeyB

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

I really don't get how you will cope with life at all once Roman becomes Universal or perhaps WWE champion again. Everyone on this site better have your digits or will have silent prayers for you every day. Eyes will have to be on you 24/7 OP when it happens. Oh OP Roman will no doubt be champion over a year so...let that sink it now or you will only be making your hatred/obsession/condition much much worse.


----------



## MC

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



wwe9391 said:


> Another Roman Reigns thread by Ace.


It says Raw draws not Reigns, so what if he mentions the FOTC, he is relevant to this topic.


----------



## MC

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Mordecay said:


> Well, if they cancel RAW and SD his main source of revenue (tv rights) is gone and then they will be super fucked. Weekend live events, on the other hand...


Without their tv money they would be making a 19 million dollar loss.


----------



## Thecreepygeek

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

Well, this is what you get for putting your sponsors above the fans needs.


----------



## RubberbandGoat

So because Roman isn't champion he can't be blamed? Isn't he the FOTC? They even mentioned how he sells the tickets, so it's his fault


----------



## JTB33b

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Legit BOSS said:


> *
> But he doesn't want to talk about half of the Smackdown arena being empty under AJ's watch. He blames Jinder because he's the champion. Guess what? AJ is the US Champion and Roman hasn't held a title all year. If they wanted to buy a ticket to see AJ, then they'd buy a ticket to see AJ. Quit making excuses. Your guy isn't doing shit either. No one is more qualified to be FOTC than Reigns. Get over it.*
> 
> 
> 
> *He makes more Reigns threads than AJ threads. He's made more Reigns threads than all of us combined. It's really sad.*


AJ is not being groomed as the FOTC.


----------



## Lykos

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



RubberbandGoat said:


> So because Roman isn't champion he can't be blamed? Isn't he the FOTC? They even mentioned how he sells the tickets, so it's his fault


You don't even know if he was in the show or not. lol

Besides, you are attacking Reigns because appareantly Meltzer stated some random show didn't draw well, without any information beyond that.

You just take any little chance to hate on Reigns, think about how pathetic you people look sometimes, I mean yeah I know you hate him, but Jesus... Calm your tits.


----------



## Brodus Clay

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

But but Roman told me he was selling ton of tickets xD


----------



## RubberbandGoat

This is a Raw show though. He's the main man on Raw. Why aren't people paying to see him? I thought he was a draw Roman marks. Your YouTube argument can't save you now. I like how before it was always the FOTC's fault in other eras but now that Roman is that and attendance is bad it's not his fault according to his marks lol how convenient. Keep being in denial


----------



## AlternateDemise

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Legit BOSS said:


> *No one is more qualified to be FOTC than Reigns. Get over it.*


His run as the FOTC says otherwise.


----------



## wwe9391

RubberbandGoat said:


> This is a Raw show though. He's the main man on Raw. Why aren't people paying to see him? I thought he was a draw Roman marks. Your YouTube argument can't save you now. I like how before it was always the FOTC's fault in other eras but now that Roman is that and attendance is bad it's not his fault according to his marks lol how convenient. Keep being in denial


Such a baiting post


----------



## AmWolves10

I thought Roman was such a huge draw.


----------



## wwe9391

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

Reigns really is the best choice. Like I said many times before people should start mentally preparing themselves for him to be the FOTC in the long run or risk driving themselves insane


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

I blame Jinder for this. :cuss:


----------



## MC

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



wwe9391 said:


> *Reigns really is the best choice*. Like I said many times before people should start mentally preparing themselves for him to be the FOTC in the long run or risk driving themselves insane



Bad attendance and declining ratings say otherwise. 




Lykos said:


> You don't even know if he was in the show or not. lol
> 
> Besides, you are attacking Reigns because appareantly Meltzer stated some *random show didn't draw well*, without any information beyond that.
> 
> You just take any little chance to hate on Reigns, think about how pathetic you people look sometimes, I mean yeah I know you hate him, but Jesus... Calm your tits.


WWE has also run the market a lot in recent weeks with a PPV the night before in *Los Angeles and a Raw two weeks ago at the Honda Center*

Not some random show, rather Raw and house shows leading up to "the wrestlemania worthy" matches. 



Legit BOSS said:


> *
> . No one is more qualified to be FOTC than Reigns. Get over it.*[/B][/COLOR]


If no one is more qualified then why is attendance down? Why are ratings down?


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



MC 16 said:


> If no one is more qualified then why is attendance down? Why are ratings down?


*Kevin Owens drew all time low ratings as champion. Smackdown has half empty arenas with AJ Styles on it. Brock Lesnar has been champion since Mania and attendance dwindles weekly. What's your excuse?*


----------



## MC

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Legit BOSS said:


> *Kevin Owens drew all time low ratings as champion. Smackdown has half empty arenas with AJ Styles on it. Brock Lesnar has been champion since Mania and attendance dwindles weekly. What's your excuse?*


All of what you said is true but how does this excuses Reigns, who is the face of the company? He is suppose to be their top star and audience and rating are declining under him.


----------



## Loopee

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

The funny thing here is people blaming talent for people not being interested, when all the talent have to do is show up. It's the writers job to produce compelling TV and shows. There's only so much the talent can do with the direction they're given, and whilst I don't care for Reigns all too much, nor Jinder, the fact people aren't showing up isn't so much them. It's the direction of the TV shows and creative's lack of understanding how to market past an audience that already watches its product.

A belt isn't going to change whether people turn up to a show that has predetermined champs. That hasn't been the case since wrestling was widely known as a "fake sport". A championship can only take you so far.


----------



## MonkasaurusRex

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

This is the same argument as every other time.

People will say that it's a certain person's fault and then when a show does well they will say that WWE is the draw and not any wrestler. The fact is at this point in time there is no viable option for FOTC. WWE is going to stick to their guns until the right person comes along. They have done it before. Sometimes as a company and as fans you just have to eat the shit your given until the right circumstances come along Nash, Hart, Michaels from 1994-1997 were terrible for business even before Nitro was on TV WWE's number were falling. Circumstances had to change for things to turn around. I'm not trying to absolve anyone of their culpability, but to an extent it is a product of a larger problem. That larger problem is that the wrestling bubble is so small that there is little to no appeal in the industry to anyone who exists outside of that bubble. There isn't a person working in wrestling that has that potential major appeal to a larger audience to help lift it out of it's downswing. There is no noticeable shift in product presentation that will draw more people in to the show. Until one or the other(preferably both) are apparent this is the state of the WWE. No other wrestling product does the number that WWE does so you can say that their model as flawed as it may be is still the most successful model to use. NJPW isn't going to draw ratings or attendance like WWE, Impact LU ROH all the same. Would a competitor help WWE? Probably, but said competitor has to be a legitimate threat.


----------



## Mox Girl

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

Do people seriously go to shows to see one wrestler? I go to shows to see the entire roster, not just one wrestler :lol


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



MC 16 said:


> All of what you said is true but how does this excuses Reigns, who is the face of the company? He is suppose to be their top star and audience and rating are declining under him.


*There are no excuses. However, you asked why should Reigns be the top star if ratings and attendance is declining, and I proved that there's no alternative that would do better than Reigns since they also declined under your indy darlings and Lesnar. They can't even sell more t-shirts than Reigns, let alone tickets.*


----------



## Botchy SinCara

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

Roman fan salt is the best..I remember when he was the reason Wm sold out despite sting having his first wwe match ..face it hes not a draw hes being put over everyone the entire roster is being tossed under the bus for him and the stats show its not going good Vince will crash the plane trying to get Roman over


----------



## Werner Heizenberg

wwe9391 said:


> Or they dropped after Miz vs Roman ended and that you are wrong in this case.
> That's far more plausible because Roman and Miz are top guys and after their match there was nothing important To tune into hence the drop.


Enzo Amore getting destroyed is the most watched segment on youtube and it's not even close :shrug


----------



## MC

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Legit BOSS said:


> *There are no excuses. However, you asked why should Reigns be the top star if ratings and attendance is declining, and I proved that there's no alternative that would do better than Reigns since they also declined under your indy darlings and Lesnar. They can't even sell more t-shirts than Reigns, let alone tickets.*


It's more a deflection then an excuse. 

The ratings under Owens were dreadful, the ratings under Lesnar are dreadful. But who is the face of the company? Reigns. The face of the company should be on par with the champion on drawing power if they aren't the champion. Austin is the perfect example here, he drew a whole lot without being champion. The case should be with Reigns as well. And quite frankly, he doesn't. He is their every week in top feuds (Strowman and Cena) even if they aren't the title feud. He should have equal part to blame in this, even more since Lesnar is part time and not their every week. 

Also, the 2nd lowest ratings ever had, Rollins vs Reigns on the show.That's a huge match based on the presentation and booking of the two, that got 1.75. So Reigns has his history of bad ratings.


----------



## Blade Runner

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



wwe9391 said:


> Another Roman Reigns thread by Ace.


Do you only discuss Roman Reigns on this forum? I'm just curious because I never see you talk about anything else. :lol


----------



## virus21

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*


----------



## wwe9391

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



STAY CLASSY said:


> Do you only discuss Roman Reigns on this forum? I'm just curious because I never see you talk about anything else. :lol


Well it seems to be what anyone else talks about on here.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



MC 16 said:


> It's more a deflection then an excuse.
> 
> The ratings under Owens were dreadful, the ratings under Lesnar are dreadful. But who is the face of the company? Reigns. The face of the company should be on par with the champion on drawing power if they aren't the champion. Austin is the perfect example here, he drew a whole lot without being champion. The case should be with Reigns as well. And quite frankly, he doesn't. He is their every week in top feuds (Strowman and Cena) even if they aren't the title feud. He should have equal part to blame in this, even more since Lesnar is part time and not their every week.


*
And guess what? NO ONE you suggest could outdraw Reigns, so it's a moot point.*



> Also, the 2nd lowest ratings ever had, Rollins vs Reigns on the show.That's a huge match based on the presentation and booking of the two, that got 1.75. So Reigns has his history of bad ratings.


*
Owens vs. Rollins for the WWE title was outdrawn by Sasha and Charlotte for the RAW Women's Championship the very next week. Why aren't you blaming Rollins for piss poor ratings in the same position? Are you pretending like he didn't spend two consecutive years main eventing, even while Roman was in the mid card?*


----------



## Blade Runner

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



wwe9391 said:


> Well it seems to be what anyone else talks about on here.


Well there _are_ threads about other wrestlers and other topics. :draper2


but it's whatever, to each their own. My intention isn't to criticize you for it, but I did start to wonder if he's all you're interested in discussing here (not that there's anything wrong with that).


----------



## MC

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Legit BOSS said:


> *
> And guess what? NO ONE you suggest could outdraw Reigns, so it's a moot point.*
> 
> 
> *
> Owens vs. Rollins for the WWE title was outdrawn by Sasha and Charlotte for the RAW Women's Championship the very next week. Why aren't you blaming Rollins for piss poor ratings in the same position? Are you pretending like he didn't spend two consecutive years main eventing, even while Roman was in the mid card?*


1) I never suggested anyone, you brought them up. 

2) Rollins did get piss poor rating, in fact so did Roman Reigns when he was champion. Their ratings when compared are very similar.

3) Midcard? For three months after his suspension. Or haven you forgotten that Reigns feuded with Owens from late November that year. Summerslam, Clash of champions and hell in a cell were the only shows he was in the "midcard" for. 

Champion or not, he is failing big time as the face of the company and successor of John Cena.


----------



## wwe9391

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



STAY CLASSY said:


> Well there _are_ threads about other wrestlers and other topics. :draper2
> 
> 
> but it's whatever, to each their own. My intention isn't to criticize you for it, but I did start to wonder if he's all you're interested in discussing here (not that there's anything wrong with that).


He's the most fun to discuss and most challenging to as well.


----------



## Blade Runner

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



wwe9391 said:


> He's the most fun to discuss and most challenging to as well.


Fair enough.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



MC 16 said:


> 1) I never suggested anyone, you brought them up.


*
I didn't say you did. I said no one you suggest could outdraw Reigns. This is a fact.
*


> 2) Rollins did get piss poor rating, in fact so did Roman Reigns when he was champion. Their ratings when compared are very similar.


*
Yet another indy darling that wouldn't do any better in his position.*



> 3) Midcard? For three months after his suspension. Or haven you forgotten that Reigns feuded with Owens from late November that year. Summerslam, Clash of champions and hell in a cell were the only shows he was in the "midcard" for.


*
2015 when he spent several months feuding with Big Show and Bray Wyatt.
2016 after he lost to Owens. If I keep hearing AJ Styles being excused because he's the US Champion, then you can't say anything about Reigns.
2017, main event or not, he spent most of it putting Strowman over, yet people like you continue to whine and complain about his booking. This is exactly why I hope he beats Lesnar and goes on a year long title reign.*


----------



## Saintpat

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

Apart from a spike in March of 2014 (and quick drop to normalcy after that), WWE stock is the highest it has been since 2000.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

Dave said on the same show, as response to a send in question, that he can't remember a guy in the entire wrestling history, who got more coronations than Roman Reigns.
That's way more noteworthy from that show.

Let that sink in for a minute. The walking wrestling Encyclopedia Dave Meltzer can't remember a single solitary guy or girl in wrestling HISTORY, who got as many opportunities as Reigns, and still he fails.

Mindblowing.




Ambrose Girl said:


> Do people seriously go to shows to see one wrestler? I go to shows to see the entire roster, not just one wrestler :lol


Well, you see, people 20 years ago went to WWF shows literally because of one guy, Steve Austin. The rest of the shows were literally crap.

Now, Vince sadly took two things with him from that period:

Number one, he thinks he only needs to take care of one guy in order for the people to flock around the ticket booth, and ignore the rest.
Number two, Austin was so great that he lifted the entire show to a higher level, and fans were entertained by crap. So, Vince now thinks the crap they did back then was actually awesome, and so recreates it to this day.

So, once your one guy doesn't work, we are left with a show Full of directionless fluff.

PG fluff.


----------



## Ichigo87

RapShepard said:


> Legit BOSS said:
> 
> 
> 
> *
> But he doesn't want to talk about half of the Smackdown arena being empty under AJ's watch. He blames Jinder because he's the champion. Guess what? AJ is the US Champion and Roman hasn't held a title all year. If they wanted to buy a ticket to see AJ, then they'd buy a ticket to see AJ. Quit making excuses. Your guy isn't doing shit either. No one is more qualified to be FOTC than Reigns. Get over it.*
> 
> 
> 
> *He makes more Reigns threads than AJ threads. He's made more Reigns threads than all of us combined. It's really sad.*
> 
> 
> 
> Of course not because its never anybody else's fault for not drawing crowds but Reigns. Champion or not, Main event or not Reigns should draw for all shows, except Mania because that doesn't count lol
Click to expand...

People blame Reigns because he's getting all the accolades. What does being champion matter? He's being branded the face of the company.


----------



## KZA

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

Can't believe people don't want to watch a roster stocked to the brim with bland nobodies (this applies to both shows).

Pretty sad when your full timer with the most star power is Randy Orton.


----------



## Zone

I still don't understand how or why they're still getting about 3 million viewers each and every week, when Raw as a show has been just god-awful on every level. It's sad that they're still trying to find that magic on how to produce a 'good' wrestling/entertainment television show despite having many years of experience to show that they definitely can achieve that awesomeness once again. Their weak efforts in trying to fix things have made the company a disgraceful shell of its former self and it's incredibly insane to see what this company has become. They've been constantly repeating so many mistakes (it would make WCW blush) that it's a wonder why this company is still fucking standing.

By the way, I haven't watched any of the shows since early 2014 but I do keep my eyes and ears open when certain things do happen within the company, mostly because I've been a fan of the wwf/wwe since the late 1990's and its become somewhat of an addiction of mine to keep up with any wwe related news, despite how bad its gotten in recent years. 

Old habits die hard!


----------



## Lykos

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Saintpat said:


> Apart from a spike in March of 2014 (and quick drop to normalcy after that), WWE stock is the highest it has been since 2000.


Forget about WWE stock being the highest or record revenue, as long as some shows draw bad (even though WWE always has trouble selling shows on september), the company is dying.

Smarks are so desesperate to see WWE dies, logic has disappeared.


----------



## InexorableJourney

Werner Heizenberg said:


> Enzo Amore getting destroyed is the most watched segment on youtube and it's not even close :shrug


Nearly 1mil views for the Neville ass-kicking from RAW, and nearly 3mil views for the BRAUN/Cruiserweights demolition that followed it.

That number of views in the the region of *all the WWE's other videos* on their first page of Youtube combined.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Dave said on the same show, as response to a send in question, that he can't remember a guy in the entire wrestling history, who got more coronations than Roman Reigns.
> That's way more noteworthy from that show.
> 
> Let that sink in for a minute. The walking wrestling Encyclopedia Dave Meltzer can't remember a single solitary guy or girl in wrestling HISTORY, who got as many opportunities as Reigns, and still he fails.
> 
> Mindblowing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, you see, people 20 years ago went to WWF shows literally because of one guy, Steve Austin. The rest of the shows were literally crap.
> 
> Now, Vince sadly took two things with him from that period:
> 
> Number one, he thinks he only needs to take care of one guy in order for the people to flock around the ticket booth, and ignore the rest.
> Number two, Austin was so great that he lifted the entire show to a higher level, and fans were entertained by crap. So, Vince now thinks the crap they did back then was actually awesome, and so recreates it to this day.
> 
> So, once your one guy doesn't work, we are left with a show Full of directionless fluff.
> 
> PG fluff.


not to take anything away from Austin but you also had Rock,Foley,Taker,Kane,DX, A lot of star power back then and the show was booked alot better back then aswell.


----------



## AmWolves10

BeckyLynchFan29 said:


> Raw-Is-Botchamania said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dave said on the same show, as response to a send in question, that he can't remember a guy in the entire wrestling history, who got more coronations than Roman Reigns.
> That's way more noteworthy from that show.
> 
> Let that sink in for a minute. The walking wrestling Encyclopedia Dave Meltzer can't remember a single solitary guy or girl in wrestling HISTORY, who got as many opportunities as Reigns, and still he fails.
> 
> Mindblowing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, you see, people 20 years ago went to WWF shows literally because of one guy, Steve Austin. The rest of the shows were literally crap.
> 
> Now, Vince sadly took two things with him from that period:
> 
> Number one, he thinks he only needs to take care of one guy in order for the people to flock around the ticket booth, and ignore the rest.
> Number two, Austin was so great that he lifted the entire show to a higher level, and fans were entertained by crap. So, Vince now thinks the crap they did back then was actually awesome, and so recreates it to this day.
> 
> So, once your one guy doesn't work, we are left with a show Full of directionless fluff.
> 
> PG fluff.
> 
> 
> 
> not to take anything away from Austin but you also had Rock,Foley,Taker,Kane,DX, A lot of star power back then and the show was booked alot better back then aswell.
Click to expand...

You go to an event to see the top attraction on the card. When people bought tickets for Mayweather vs McGregor it wasn't to watch the no names on the undergrad. WWE in the attitude era was an exception as they were trying to mass produce stars. Today they are back to the one star system.


----------



## Gravyv321

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

"but...but... roman is da draw" :lol

i've never seen a top face flop so hard multiple times over the past few decades. what an embarrassment that clown is to the company. he's a laughable personification of failure.

i'm actually having a good laugh at seeing his moronic fans continue to make excuses for their shitty favorite. they're deflecting from the poor ratings, empty arenas, and terrible reactions by bringing up guys like styles, owens, rollins, and strowman just so that they can blame them for roman's faults. those roman geeks go to desperate lengths in order to avoid admitting that they backed the wrong horse on this one lol

absolutely hilarious :lmao :lmao


----------



## Sasha Banks

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

To be fair, we won't know how much of a draw someone is unless there is an even playing field. 

Attach the rocket thats been stuck on Reigns to other talent and we will see how someone draws or doesn't, until that happens we will never truly know, what we can say however is that given Reigns' push there hasn't been much payoff for Vince.


----------



## Ace

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



RapShepard said:


> This isn't swell, but AJ couldn't even sell out the Impact Zone





Legit BOSS said:


> *
> But he doesn't want to talk about half of the Smackdown arena being empty under AJ's watch. He blames Jinder because he's the champion. Guess what? AJ is the US Champion and Roman hasn't held a title all year. If they wanted to buy a ticket to see AJ, then they'd buy a ticket to see AJ. Quit making excuses. Your guy isn't doing shit either. No one is more qualified to be FOTC than Reigns. Get over it.*
> 
> 
> 
> *He makes more Reigns threads than AJ threads. He's made more Reigns threads than all of us combined. It's really sad.*


----------



## Miss Sally

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

I like how the thread was about drawing and people got out their shields to defend Roman off the bat.

Blame goes all around but as FOTC going to headline another WM, he gets the lion's share.

Who should get more of the blame for the sinking ship? The guy steering the boat or the galley cook?

Blame starts with Vince, then Roman because he's not charismatic enough to make what WWE gives him to work, even Brodus Clay got his Dino gimmick over. Then the rest lies with the rest of the roster who are just collecting checks.


----------



## RapShepard

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Ace said:


>


When AJ is the actual face of a place


----------



## Ace

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



RapShepard said:


> When AJ is the actual face of a place


 AJ was never the forefront for a long period of time, it's why he became a star in NJPW but never reached those heights with TNA. 

It's not the same as being the face of the biggest wrestling promotion in the world who has declined under Roman's reign. They've lost 20% of their viewership since then with Roman being the common fixture in their main event scene.

Nor was AJ was ever at the top as long as Roman and he was with a poorly run company (lost their deal with spike) who hit their record highs with him as their top star. Hell, the company fell apart after he left.

Hulk Hogan, one of the biggest stars in pro wrestling history couldn't sell tickets for TNA.


----------



## RapShepard

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Ace said:


> AJ was never the forefront for a long period of time and it's not the same as being the face of the biggest wrestling promotion in the world who has declined under Roman's reign. They've lost 20% of their viewership since then with Roman being the common fixture in their main event scene.
> 
> AJ was never at the top as long as him and he was with a poorly run company who hit their record highs with him as their top star. Hell, the company fell apart after he left.


So AJ wasn't the Sting of TNA, he wasn't the guy everyone saw as the heart and soul okay. Well by your logic Reigns hasn't been champ in forever, so clearly he isn't at the forefront so he can't be blamed for the drop off. That would be on guys like Brock, Goldberg, Owens, Balor, Jinder, Orton, Bray, AJ, Ambrose, and Rollins who actually held the belt in the last year plus for the drop-off. 

But no it's even worse AJ couldn't even handle being the face of the super distant 2nd promotion. I mean AJ was such an effective face that TNA let him go. TNA who will sign any WWE castoff they can like Damien Sandow and Hornswoggle, decided your guy wasn't worth the money. That's saying a lot about AJ as a draw


----------



## Werner Heizenberg

InexorableJourney said:


> Nearly 1mil views for the Neville ass-kicking from RAW, and nearly 3mil views for the BRAUN/Cruiserweights demolition that followed it.
> 
> That number of views in the the region of *all the WWE's other videos* on their first page of Youtube combined.


Neville's attack on Enzo also outdrew Braun's match with Dean.And Enzo's promo on 205, that currently sits at near 800k, solidly beat Strowman's attack on Curt Hawkins.Guy's a draw.


----------



## Ace

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



RapShepard said:


> So AJ wasn't the Sting of TNA, he wasn't the guy everyone saw as the heart and soul okay. Well by your logic Reigns hasn't been champ in forever, so clearly he isn't at the forefront so he can't be blamed for the drop off. That would be on guys like Brock, Goldberg, Owens, Balor, Jinder, Orton, Bray, AJ, Ambrose, and Rollins who actually held the belt in the last year plus for the drop-off.
> 
> But no it's even worse AJ couldn't even handle being the face of the super distant 2nd promotion. I mean AJ was such an effective face that TNA let him go. TNA who will sign any WWE castoff they can like Damien Sandow and Hornswoggle, decided your guy wasn't worth the money. That's saying a lot about AJ as a draw


 The problem with TNA is they highlighted WWE rejects or geezers well past their prime. They never gave the spotlight to their stars. AJ and Joe have said often that the problem with TNA was they were trying to be a WWE lite than an actual alternative which was different.



> “Well, at that time Joe and I were hoping to make TNA a big deal. You know, that was what we wanted to do. The problem was, the person who owned the company, she didn’t see that in us. She didn’t see us as the stars that put TNA on the map and not just me but like, Jerry Lynn and Christopher Daniels, and Low Ki, all those guys who did great things and she just didn’t see it. To put it bluntly, she wanted to be WWE-lite and nobody wanted to see that. They wanted to see something different. And at one point in time, it was a great place to work.”





> “Ring of Honor treated me real well, and New Japan treated me like a Superstar. So I’ve got to give credit to them, who helped boost my ego a little bit because it was definitely flattened due to TNA’s service.”


----------



## RapShepard

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Ace said:


> The problem with TNA is they highlighted WWE rejects or geezers well past their prime. They never gave the spotlight to their stars. AJ and Joe have said often that the problem with TNA was they were trying to be a WWE lite than an actual alternative which would have done better.


Oh I can agree with you here, but even before Bischoff and Hogan arrived and made it WWE lite and ruined shit it's not like they were selling out the Impact zone. TNA couldn't even travel that's how great Styles was as the heart and soul. He's still dope though, just a shit draw. So you have no reason to shit on Reigns being another shit draw when your guy was a bad draw for a much smaller promotion


----------



## Ace

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



RapShepard said:


> Oh I can agree with you here, but even before Bischoff and Hogan arrived and made it WWE lite and ruined shit it's not like they were selling out the Impact zone. TNA couldn't even travel that's how great Styles was as the heart and soul. He's still dope though, just a shit draw. So you have no reason to shit on Reigns being another shit draw when your guy was a bad draw for a much smaller promotion


 Hulk Hogan couldn't draw for TNA.


----------



## wwe9391

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



RapShepard said:


> When AJ is the actual face of a place


Ouch lol


----------



## RavishingRickRules

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



RapShepard said:


> So AJ wasn't the Sting of TNA, he wasn't the guy everyone saw as the heart and soul okay. Well by your logic Reigns hasn't been champ in forever, so clearly he isn't at the forefront so he can't be blamed for the drop off. That would be on guys like Brock, Goldberg, Owens, Balor, Jinder, Orton, Bray, AJ, Ambrose, and Rollins who actually held the belt in the last year plus for the drop-off.
> 
> But no it's even worse AJ couldn't even handle being the face of the super distant 2nd promotion. I mean AJ was such an effective face that TNA let him go. TNA who will sign any WWE castoff they can like Damien Sandow and Hornswoggle, decided your guy wasn't worth the money. That's saying a lot about AJ as a draw


You do realise that when AJ signed with WWE, TNA had offered him a contract that they thought he'd accepted? WWE paid more than what TNA would offer, because they saw value in AJ Styles. Might be hard to wrap your head around I know.


----------



## RapShepard

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Ace said:


> Hulk Hogan couldn't draw for TNA.


But he did bring in higher rating than the face that ran the place



RavishingRickRules said:


> You do realise that when AJ signed with WWE, TNA had offered him a contract that they thought he'd accepted? WWE paid more than what TNA would offer, because they saw value in AJ Styles. Might be hard to wrap your head around I know.


Why did AJ leave TNA, go look it up then come back


----------



## Ace

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



RapShepard said:


> But he did bring in higher rating than the face that ran the place
> 
> 
> 
> Why did AJ leave TNA, go look it up then come back


 What's happened to the company since AJ left?

IIRC they wanted him to do a one off appearance for Slammiversary as well.



> As reported recently, TNA offered a deal for AJ Styles to return to the promotion, a deal that Styles turned down.
> 
> TNA offered the former TNA World Heavyweight Champion and current IWGP Heavyweight Champion what is being described as a “significant” deal to enter the TNA Hall Of Fame and wrestle a match at the TNA Slammiversary pay-per-view later this month.
> 
> According to one source, the reason Styles turned down the offer was because his priorities right now are with both Ring Of Honor and New Japan Pro Wrestling.
> 
> It’s also worth mentioning that in addition to the TNA Hall Of Fame induction and Slammiversary bookings, TNA was also looking at having Styles work a match at this year’s Bound For Glory pay-per-view.


----------



## RavishingRickRules

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



RapShepard said:


> But he did bring in higher rating than the face that ran the place
> 
> 
> 
> Why did AJ leave TNA, go look it up then come back


Let's not and say I did. I don't take orders from delusional people.


----------



## RapShepard

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



RavishingRickRules said:


> Let's not and say I did. I don't take orders from delusional people.


No take your ass and look it up, or don't come in here acting like AJ didn't leave TNA because they low balled him because they had no fucking faith in him. Despite how it looks I actually follow shit beyond WWE. And AJ didn't want to leave, they just didn't want to pay him what he felt he was owed, because they didn't think he was worth it. The company that made him didn't think he was worth it.



Ace said:


> What's happened to the company since AJ left?
> 
> IIRC they wanted him to do a one off appearance for Slammiversary as well.


They've managed to find their way back on to Spike TV.


----------



## Ace

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



RapShepard said:


> No take your ass and look it up, or don't come in here acting like AJ didn't leave TNA because they low balled him because they had no fucking faith in him. Despite how it looks I actually follow shit beyond WWE. And AJ didn't want to leave, they just didn't want to pay him what he felt he was owed, because they didn't think he was worth it. The company that made him didn't think he was worth it.


 Why is it you think AJ Styles when you think TNA? The show had Angle, Sting, Jeff Hardy, Hulk Hogan and Ric Flair, yet it's AJ that stands out above all.


----------



## Ace

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



RapShepard said:


> No take your ass and look it up, or don't come in here acting like AJ didn't leave TNA because they low balled him because they had no fucking faith in him. Despite how it looks I actually follow shit beyond WWE. And AJ didn't want to leave, they just didn't want to pay him what he felt he was owed, because they didn't think he was worth it. The company that made him didn't think he was worth it.
> 
> 
> 
> They've managed to find their way back on to Spike TV.


 Nah, they're doing 100,000 viewers on Pop TV.


----------



## RapShepard

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Ace said:


> Why is it you think AJ Styles when you think TNA? The show had Angle, Sting, Jeff Hardy, Hulk Hogan and Ric Flair, yet it's AJ that stands out above all.





Ace said:


> Nah, they're doing 100,000 viewers on Pop TV.


Because anybody that actually watched TNA knows that AJ Styles and the X division was the actual draw of that fucking show. Who the fuck cared about Jeff Jarrett when he was being a shit copy of HHH with a guitar and legitimate control in the company. But folk did care about the X division. People talk about Styles vs Joe vs Daniels in Ultimate X matches when they think great TNA moments. When you think TNA you think AJ Styles regardless of if he was champ or getting the mega push at the moment. He was the first triple crown champ for fucks sake

And they are back on Spike


----------



## Ace

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



RapShepard said:


> Because anybody that actually watched TNA knows that AJ Styles and the X division was the actual draw of that fucking show. Who the fuck cared about Jeff Jarrett when he was being a shit copy of HHH with a guitar and legitimate control in the company. But folk did care about the X division. People talk about Styles vs Joe vs Daniels in Ultimate X matches when they think great TNA moments. When you think TNA you think AJ Styles regardless of if he was champ or getting the mega push at the moment. He was the first triple crown champ for fucks sake
> 
> And they are back on Spike


 Spike in the UK?


----------



## RapShepard

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Ace said:


> Spike in the UK?


Seeing as it's an American promotion what it's on here is most important.


----------



## Ace

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



RapShepard said:


> Seeing as it's an American promotion what it's on here is most important.


 Anthem started to work with Jarrett because they thought he could get them back on Spike, he couldn't. They're still on Pop last I heard.


----------



## RapShepard

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Ace said:


> Anthem started to work with Jarrett because they thought he could get them back on Spike, he couldn't. They're still on Pop last I heard.


Nah I'm in Columbus and I don't think I have pop tv

Nope you're right hmm apparently I got pop.


----------



## AlternateDemise

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Legit BOSS said:


> *There are no excuses. However, you asked why should Reigns be the top star if ratings and attendance is declining, and I proved that there's no alternative that would do better than Reigns since they also declined under your indy darlings and Lesnar. They can't even sell more t-shirts than Reigns, let alone tickets.*


Bullshit. No one currently in WWE who is full time, have it be Owens, Rollins or anyone else for that matter, has gotten the opportunities Reigns has gotten. Saying ratings declined under other wrestlers is a terrible argument, and you know it. Of course, you're going to ignore my argument and I know you're just gonna neg me. It's fine with me, because I could care less. But I enjoy letting others see me call you out on your bullshit.


----------



## Ace

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



AlternateDemise said:


> Bullshit. No one currently in WWE who is full time, have it be Owens, Rollins or anyone else for that matter, has gotten the opportunities Reigns has gotten. Saying ratings declined under other wrestlers is a terrible argument, and you know it. Of course, you're going to ignore my argument and I know you're just gonna neg me. It's fine with me, because I could care less. But I enjoy letting others see me call you out on your bullshit.


 Torch, Taker's career, 1 Royal Rumble, 4 WM main events and Lesnar rub.

No one from the new generation has anything that could compare to any of that.


----------



## Laughable Chimp

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



RapShepard said:


> Because anybody that actually watched TNA knows that AJ Styles and the X division was the actual draw of that fucking show. Who the fuck cared about Jeff Jarrett when he was being a shit copy of HHH with a guitar and legitimate control in the company. But folk did care about the X division. People talk about Styles vs Joe vs Daniels in Ultimate X matches when they think great TNA moments. When you think TNA you think AJ Styles regardless of if he was champ or getting the mega push at the moment. He was the first triple crown champ for fucks sake
> 
> And they are back on Spike


AJ didn't "fail" as face of the company per se. They just phased him out over time as they put more and more focus on ex WWE stars. When people think early TNA, the genuine alternative product to WWE, they think AJ Styles. They started declining when they went overboard with using ex WWE talebt, and phasing out and mishandling home grown talent. Samoa Joe also suffered a similar fate. He didn't "fail" as face. The company failed him.


----------



## Ace

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Laughable Chimp said:


> AJ didn't "fail" as face of the company per se. They just phased him out over time as they put more and more focus on ex WWE stars. When people think early TNA, the genuine alternative product to WWE, they think AJ Styles. They started declining when they went overboard with using ex WWE talebt, and phasing out and mishandling home grown talent. Samoa Joe also suffered a similar fate. He didn't "fail" as face. The company failed him.


 Just to reflect this, the WWE offered him a bare minimum 60k NXT contract after he left TNA. 

Two years later after working in NJPW and ROH they offered him 600k, he ended up making 2.2m in his first year :lol


----------



## RapShepard

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Ace said:


> Just to reflect this, the WWE offered him a bare minimum 60k NXT contract after he left TNA.
> 
> Two years later after working in NJPW and ROH they offered him 600k, he ended up making 2.2m in his first year [emoji38]


But why did he leave TNA, because they decided he wasn't worth it. He was so great they let him go over money. He didn't leave for a challenge. He left because they were like "eh we don't think you're worth it" they company that made him a big deal told him that 



Laughable Chimp said:


> AJ didn't "fail" as face of the company per se. They just phased him out over time as they put more and more focus on ex WWE stars. When people think early TNA, the genuine alternative product to WWE, they think AJ Styles. They started declining when they went overboard with using ex WWE talebt, and phasing out and mishandling home grown talent. Samoa Joe also suffered a similar fate. He didn't "fail" as face. The company failed him.


Soo WWE haven't failed Reigns in his booking then? Why is it that it's never a guy like AJ's fault for anything?





AlternateDemise said:


> Bullshit. No one currently in WWE who is full time, have it be Owens, Rollins or anyone else for that matter, has gotten the opportunities Reigns has gotten. Saying ratings declined under other wrestlers is a terrible argument, and you know it. Of course, you're going to ignore my argument and I know you're just gonna neg me. It's fine with me, because I could care less. But I enjoy letting others see me call you out on your bullshit.


So why even give these guys titles and moments if they aren't going to be responsible for ratings? I mean it's not like Rollins didn't spend over a year next to HHH a known guy, won MitB, walked out of the Mania as champ, and held the title for months. He doesn't have to draw fuck out of here. Y'all just want to make excuses for why the guys who should supposedly take the reigns from Reigns since he's not draw, aren't draws themselves. None of them are draws. If fans really just wanted other folk why didn't more people tune in when Rollins and Owens were champs? I mean Reigns wasn't champ, what was the excuse for not watching


----------



## Laughable Chimp

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



RapShepard said:


> But why did he leave TNA, because they decided he wasn't worth it. He was so great they let him go over money. He didn't leave for a challenge. He left because they were like "eh we don't think you're worth it" they company that made him a big deal told him that
> 
> 
> 
> Soo WWE haven't failed Reigns in his booking then? Why is it that it's never a guy like AJ's fault for anything?


WWE have failed Reigns in their booking as well. But regardless, I still don't think Reigns is talented enough to lead the company. I think the man's talented, just don't think he should be FOTC.

Although as to why AJ isn't blamed as much.....

1-TNA screwed up a lot. They made a lot of horrible decisions that screwed over s lot of their talent and themselves. They once had Kazuchika Okada working for them and they decided the best way to use him was to dress him as Okato, a parody of the charater Kato in The Green Hornet. New Japan got so mad, that they broke of their relationship with TNA due to this. And this is just one of the many horrible decisions they did. A lot of the time, its just lol TNA screwing up instead of the talent. That's why AJ and a lot of other TNA talent don't get as much blame as the whole company did. Its worth noting that AJ did succeed as the gaijin face in New Japan after.

2-The fans never turned on AJ like they did with Roman. No matter how misused AJ was, the fans always respected him and his abillity. Its a testament to his abillity that he has managed to retain the respect of fans despite TNA's booking of him. The same is not true of Roman however. Most people dislike both him and his booking. Although I do agree a lot of the hate is excessive and sometimes delusional, again I just don't think he should be FOTC guy. I'd like Roman a lot more if they booked him to his strengths and less superman booking but I could say that about a lot of guys.


----------



## Ace

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



RapShepard said:


> But why did he leave TNA, because they decided he wasn't worth it. He was so great they let him go over money. He didn't leave for a challenge. He left because they were like "eh we don't think you're worth it" they company that made him a big deal told him that
> 
> 
> 
> Soo WWE haven't failed Reigns in his booking then? Why is it that it's never a guy like AJ's fault for anything?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So why even give these guys titles and moments if they aren't going to be responsible for ratings? I mean it's not like Rollins didn't spend over a year next to HHH a known guy, won MitB, walked out of the Mania as champ, and held the title for months. He doesn't have to draw fuck out of here. Y'all just want to make excuses for why the guys who should supposedly take the reigns from Reigns since he's not draw, aren't draws themselves. None of them are draws. If fans really just wanted other folk why didn't more people tune in when Rollins and Owens were champs? I mean Reigns wasn't champ, what was the excuse for not watching


 TNA had Okada and The Young Bucks, just watch how they used them to realize how lucky AJ was to come out with a shred of credibility and star power.

If no on is drawing, why the fuck is Roman getting all the accolades? Why not let someone else main event a WM and see what they can do with it. Because it seriously feels like they're giving Roman absolutely everything for absolute squat in return. Retiring Taker, winning the Rumble, main eventing WM and getting the torch from Cena should be huge, but it's not because it's given to Roman who is not organically over and is hated by the majority of fans.


----------



## RapShepard

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Laughable Chimp said:


> WWE have failed Reigns in their booking as well. But regardless, I still don't think Reigns is talented enough to lead the company. I think the man's talented, just don't think he should be FOTC.
> 
> Although as to why AJ isn't blamed as much.....
> 
> 1-TNA screwed up a lot. They made a lot of horrible decisions that screwed over s lot of their talent and themselves. They once had Kazuchika Okada working for them and they decided the best way to use him was to dress him as Okato, a parody of the charater Kato in The Green Hornet. New Japan got so mad, that they broke of their relationship with TNA due to this. And this is just one of the many horrible decisions they did. A lot of the time, its just lol TNA screwing up instead of the talent. That's why AJ and a lot of other TNA talent don't get as much blame as the whole company did. Its worth noting that AJ did succeed as the gaijin face in New Japan after.
> 
> 2-The fans never turned on AJ like they did with Roman. No matter how misused AJ was, the fans always respected him and his abillity. Its a testament to his abillity that he has managed to retain the respect of fans despite TNA's booking of him. The same is not true of Roman however. Most people dislike both him and his booking. Although I do agree a lot of the hate is excessive and sometimes delusional, again I just don't think he should be FOTC guy. I'd like Roman a lot more if they booked him to his strengths and less superman booking but I could say that about a lot of guys.


1. This board mostly feels the same way about WWE? But Reigns still gets held accountable for his clear failures to turn the ship around or even doing a decent job of it not nose diving at the moment. Why aren't other people held accountable for their failures as well 

2. But that's not really saying much fans loved him so much he didn't bring new ones in and the company slowly got less and less popular as he was there. I mean Reigns not being looked and being perceived to be on an endless push makes sense for departure. AJ being beloved and fans still leaving makes little sense. It's not like he was a jobber.

I'm not saying don't hold Reigns accountable. I'm just saying folk should be consistent. If you can find reasons why everyone else isn't at fault, then certainly there's a plethora no of reasons why Reigns isn't, starting with booking him in ways that builds resentment



Ace said:


> TNA had Okada and The Young Bucks, just watch how they used them to realize how lucky AJ was to come out with a shred of credibility and star power.
> 
> If no on is drawing, why the fuck is Roman getting all the accolades? Why not let someone else main event a WM and see what they can do with it. Because it seriously feels like they're giving Roman absolutely everything for absolute squat in return. Retiring Taker, winning the Rumble, main eventing WM and getting the torch from Cena should be huge, but it's not because it's given to Roman who is not organically over and is hated by the majority of fans.


Again you blame all the issues on TNA, well WWE has real issues too, so why isn't Reigns getting somewhat of a pass as well. You could easily argue the way he's booked in that he has consistently got big moments come Mania time has done him no favors. Most would agree 3 Mania main events is too much and a possible 4th is ridiculous (as a fan I'll take it, but I get the annoyance). So why isn't he absolved he can't help his booking that gets his resentment or WWE's long standing inability to create a new crossover face.

As far as somebody else getting a chance, idk I'm not Vince. But I'm sure ignoring your favorites when they are champ in favor of worrying about Reigns and what he'll be doing months later isn't helping. I'm pretty sure not directing the boos they clearly ignore in favor of "but it's a reaction" towards somebody else isn't helping. Somebody was talking about insanity is doing the same thing, but expecting a different result. Well after over a decade of them spinning Cena hate, you'd think fans would be smarter and not waste their energy. After seeing Bryan and believing they got him that spot, you'd think fans would do that more.


----------



## Loopee

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

I also think people are overstating the popularity of wrestling outside it's hardcore fanbase. Reigns or whoever you wanna hit as the face of the company can't be a face to the mainstream if the mainstream do not care about your product because it's not the in thing. Wresting in general needs a complete overhaul for any of these guys to be an effective "face of the company".

One man cannot carry your company. Conor McGregor would be half as effective if the UFC had him on every one of their shows. You have to spread the load and when you only have one guy that happens to be somewhere at the top, you have to start pointing your finger at how someone in marketing hasn't managed to find something people can latch on to. It's as if WWE doesn't do enough market research to find out what people would watch if they don't watch pro wrestling.


----------



## CMPunkRock316

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

This reminds me of how people were bitching about ratings when CM Punk was Champion which were exponentially better than today. They focus on a lowly rated Holiday episode at the end of 2012 in which Punk did not perform as he was recovering from surgery. They even bitched about PPV buys. The icing on the cake was Summerslam 2013 when Daniel Bryan and CM Punk were blamed for lesser PPV buys are opposed to the previous year. Even though John Cena may not have been WWE Champion at the time he was FOTC (even if Punk outsold him -> something Roman never could even come close to doing). If Cena was FOTC then Roman is FOOTMFC now because they are booking Roman stronger than Cena.


----------



## AlternateDemise

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



RapShepard said:


> So why even give these guys titles and moments if they aren't going to be responsible for ratings? I mean it's not like Rollins didn't spend over a year next to HHH a known guy, won MitB, walked out of the Mania as champ, and held the title for months. He doesn't have to draw fuck out of here. Y'all just want to make excuses for why the guys who should supposedly take the reigns from Reigns since he's not draw, aren't draws themselves. None of them are draws. If fans really just wanted other folk why didn't more people tune in when Rollins and Owens were champs? I mean Reigns wasn't champ, what was the excuse for not watching


So you're saying it's completely valid to compare a guy who has spent his entire run as a face, made to look strong, beat out everyone he went up against, including the biggest legends they have to offer, to a guy who spent his entire run as champion as a heel, was booked terribly, and was made to look inferior? I'm not making excuses. It's called using logic. If you're gonna compare two people and try to say one is a more capable draw, you'd better have the proof to back it up. It's a well known fact that a heel isn't supposed to be the drawing card of Pro Wrestling, it's the face. If you're going to tell me that Reigns is meant to be FOTC over a particular person who never even got the chance to have a main event push as a face, then I'm not going to take that claim seriously because you have nothing to go on at the moment. You can't tell me Owens or Rollins aren't as capable of being draws as Reigns is when all they've done that's noteworthy so far in their main roster runs is play the heel role. History dictates that they won't be draws. 

At least in the case of John Cena when he first started out as FOTC, you could certainly argue that he was best fit because of the ratings he was bringing in. Reigns on the other hand hasn't produced positive results as far as ratings are concerned. So, to me, it makes no logical sense to claim Reigns is the best fit when he hasn't produced positive results and he has been the only one given this kind of push. At least in Cena's case he had Batista to compare to.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

It's not news that Reigns has failed as face of the company/top cantidate. The WWE is as unpopular as ever with him at the top. It'll continue dwindling like this and eventually PPV's will be half filled most of the time.


----------



## genghis hank

I try not to care about who draws or attendance figures anymore. I think the only time I would now is if the company is legitimately in a position that it would be taken off TV or have to undergo mass talent layoffs.

But from what I know, this isn't the case.

The product is poor at times, but if I just focus on what I like then I still enjoy it. Too many people worry about what everyone else is in to rather than enjoying their favourites.


----------



## RapShepard

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



AlternateDemise said:


> So you're saying it's completely valid to compare a guy who has spent his entire run as a face, made to look strong, beat out everyone he went up against, including the biggest legends they have to offer, to a guy who spent his entire run as champion as a heel, was booked terribly, and was made to look inferior? I'm not making excuses. It's called using logic. If you're gonna compare two people and try to say one is a more capable draw, you'd better have the proof to back it up. It's a well known fact that a heel isn't supposed to be the drawing card of Pro Wrestling, it's the face. If you're going to tell me that Reigns is meant to be FOTC over a particular person who never even got the chance to have a main event push as a face, then I'm not going to take that claim seriously because you have nothing to go on at the moment. You can't tell me Owens or Rollins aren't as capable of being draws as Reigns is when all they've done that's noteworthy so far in their main roster runs is play the heel role. History dictates that they won't be draws.
> 
> At least in the case of John Cena when he first started out as FOTC, you could certainly argue that he was best fit because of the ratings he was bringing in. Reigns on the other hand hasn't produced positive results as far as ratings are concerned. So, to me, it makes no logical sense to claim Reigns is the best fit when he hasn't produced positive results and he has been the only one given this kind of push. At least in Cena's case he had Batista to compare to.


So when Ric Flair was killing shit was he not the draw. Do people not blame HHH for not drawing during the reign of terror? Did people not blame Jeff Jarrett for the same thing when he was smashing guitars every week? Do people not blame Jinder for SmackDown's current woes? Are the nWo not credited with drawing big for WCW? Do People not consider the Bullet Club a big draw outside of WWE? Heels can draw, they draw by getting fans see them get their ass kicked. The idea that a heel champ isn't supposed to bring fan in the arena is bull shit

Like I said it's always an excuse or coddling. I mean people will go "well you can't blame Owens for not drawing he's a heel and hasn't got as much as Reigns" yet on SDL people are all smug with "look at Jinder not drawing" I mean he's a heel why is he expected to draw? I mean sure he's the champ, but clearly AJ and Owens are more important than him, they've got more in their career. It shouldn't be his responsibility to draw even if he's a heel champ according to your logic right.


----------



## Overcomer

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

Go away heat? Nope, the fans just go home


----------



## Bestiswaswillbe

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

The WWE going down the toilet is not Romans fault. Don't get me wrong, he's fucking trash in his role, but it's not him who decided to put him that position. A competent evaluater of talent would of seen that Reigns ceiling was likely that of a Test or a Psycho Sid and booked him accordingly.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Ace said:


> TNA had Okada and The Young Bucks, just watch how they used them to realize how lucky AJ was to come out with a shred of credibility and star power.
> 
> If no on is drawing, why the fuck is Roman getting all the accolades? Why not let someone else main event a WM and see what they can do with it. Because it seriously feels like they're giving Roman absolutely everything for absolute squat in return. Retiring Taker, winning the Rumble, main eventing WM and getting the torch from Cena should be huge, but it's not because it's given to Roman who is not organically over and is hated by the majority of fans.


The Cena VS Reigns torch passing match was the most random thing I have ever seen. It was neither the time, nor the place, nor the right people. In fact, I would go as far and say when it comes to important storylines, that was the most cringy, forced, unorganic thing I have ever seen.


----------



## AmWolves10

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

It's always up to the top billed guy to bring in the box office. When you go to see a Mayweather match, it's not to see the other boxers on the rest of the card. Same with Tyson, Holyfield, Roy Jones Jr, etc. Same with McGregor in UFC. I've never seen people blame guys on the middle of the card with zero hype for their matches get blamed, except by smarks in the WWE. Sorry smarks. Your boy Reigns is garbage.


----------



## MC

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

People just need to realise that the top guy on Raw are not good at drawing. Lesnar is the star but interest in waning for him and I'm sure the part time thing doesn't help either. Reigns well, uggh. Strowman has the potential to be huge but matches like the Lesnar one won't help at all. Joe is injured and Cena is off till the Rumble. It's a sad fact but people have to face it.


----------



## Balor fan

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

Meh the argument seems to be Reigns vs Styles. Both have proven they can't draw. But to be fair no one else can either.

The only brand that grew was NXT under Balor yet he is still waiting for his opportunity. And that's the only thing remaining to do. Give him the spotlight and see if he can put butts on seats.


----------



## MontyCora

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Balor fan said:


> Meh the argument seems to be Reigns vs Styles. Both have proven they can't draw. But to be fair no one else can either.
> 
> The only brand that grew was NXT under Balor yet he is still waiting for his opportunity. And that's the only thing remaining to do. Give him the spotlight and see if he can put butts on seats.


Nobody can draw. Give Reigns the mic skills and charisma of Connor McGreogor, give him the move set of AJ Styles, give him the hottest fire music and make him the greatest wrestler on the planet and it won't draw. Wrestling is dying under Vince and will do so for as long as he's in charge of the day to day.


----------



## ecclesiastes10

some of you guys seem really ignorant, a lil research or checking on ppl who would know this stuff like vince russo, jimmy (the former wwe ref on twitter) that wwe brass get more indept ratings than what we get, the actually have min by min rating break downs so they know what people are tuning in for, so making assumptions like third hour cratered because of roman reigns & miz or that Enzo isn't a draw is just unfounded and foolish to do...the ratings we get to see are 1) averages and 2) like ive mention before in this thread and its previous iterations are not even exact numbers but are like political poll numbers...a lot of probability mix with semi educated guess work, so ppl using this to batch roman or anyone for that matter should, get some knowledge before they share with us mortals their profound musings...P.s dave metlzer blows !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## HenryBowers

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

I havent watched since WM 32 when Shane lost to Taker. Its not just Roman Reigns. Its that they havent got anyone on the roster that casual cares about. If someone from the AE or RA eras were to watch today they wouldn't have many to care about. But even if they did; there hasnt been anything to be invested in plot wise. There is more drama on Love and Hip Hop than in WWE. Has been this way for years.


----------



## Passing Triangles

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

Watched some of the RAW shows at the Summer of Punk era. He single-handedly forced me to watch RAW by his very presence. The product was crap but Punk had charisma for days. 

I know, speaking only for me, that there isn't anyone in WWE right now who has that star image and attitude to get viewers in.


----------



## adamclark52

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Chrome said:


> Seems like ppvs are the only thing that still do well these days. Perhaps they should cancel Raw and SDL and just do ppvs? :hmmm


don't give them ideas


----------



## Krokro

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

I love how we're talking about who draws.

Nobody is a draw anymore. It's the entire company that's the draw, and now that's failing. Literally everyone is a failure in that regard. Reigns isn't qualified because nobody can be qualified. Everything the WWE does now is just dreadful, everyone is a joke except Lesnar and Reigns and because kayfabe is no longer a secret it doesn't make Reigns look bad ass but it makes it look like he is the golden boy. To make it worse WWE acknowledge it, they know, they use it in storylines, which even makes it worse. Balor could draw, no matter what you guys want to say. Wyatt could draw too. Styles definitely can draw. Reigns can draw. Rollins, Ambrose, Nakamura, Owens, even Zayn.. they can all draw. It's just WWE restricts everything and it's so pathetic that it won't happen.

It's a real shame, all you guys with your most and least favorites. They aren't at fault. It's the company.


----------



## AlternateDemise

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



RapShepard said:


> So when Ric Flair was killing shit was he not the draw.


1. Seth Rollins and Kevin Owens aren't Ric Mother Fucking Flair. 

2. Those were much, MUCH different times. 



RapShepard said:


> Do people not blame HHH for not drawing during the reign of terror? Did people not blame Jeff Jarrett for the same thing when he was smashing guitars every week?


Which time period are you talking about in regards to Jarrett? WCW? TNA? 



RapShepard said:


> Do people not blame Jinder for SmackDown's current woes?


Yes, and they will continue to do so because they don't know any better. 



RapShepard said:


> Are the nWo not credited with drawing big for WCW? Do People not consider the Bullet Club a big draw outside of WWE? Heels can draw, they draw by getting fans see them get their ass kicked. The idea that a heel champ isn't supposed to bring fan in the arena is bull shit


Okay, here is the problem with that logic.

Hulk Hogan started out as one of the biggest faces in the history of Pro Wrestling. He was an established big name and at that point had spent the majority of his time as the same character. Triple H was also well established before he started his so called reign of terror in 2003. 

Kevin Owens and Seth Rollins don't have that. They weren't global icons before becoming top heels. Their world title reigns were the first ones they had on the main roster. 



RapShepard said:


> Like I said it's always an excuse or coddling.


No, it's not an excuse. You can't sit there with a straight look on your face and think that Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair and Triple H are valid examples as to why Owens and Rollins should be able to draw as heels. Again, Owens and Rollins didn't have anywhere close to the kind of fame, glory or even booking that those three had during their times. They weren't around nearly as long. Hogan's heel turn was a huge success that everyone was clamoring for and wanted to happen. People were booing him as a face before he turned heel. People legitimately wanted it. How is that a valid example? Especially when many considered Seth Rollins to be the one who would be a face when the Shield ended? 



RapShepard said:


> I mean people will go "well you can't blame Owens for not drawing he's a heel and hasn't got as much as Reigns" yet on SDL people are all smug with "look at Jinder not drawing" I mean he's a heel why is he expected to draw? I mean sure he's the champ, but clearly AJ and Owens are more important than him, they've got more in their career. It shouldn't be his responsibility to draw even if he's a heel champ according to your logic right.


No, because that isn't my point. Hell the situation on Smackdown is different on it's own. Right now AJ and Owens are being featured far more heavily on the show than Jinder is. Even this past week, both AJ and Owen's segments/feuds got more attention than Jinder's did. I'm not blaming everything on Jinder. Hell I don't even think he's the main problem.

My point is that context is extremely important when determining why someone performs the way they do as far as drawing is concerned. If you're gonna point out things like the NWO and Ric Flair, the writing should be on the wall regarding why they were so successful in doing so. 

Am I flat out saying Rollins and Owens are more capable draws than Reigns? No. Truth be told I don't know who is the more capable draw, or who is more capable of being face of the company. I have a low opinion of Rollins in general, and I can't see Owens working as a face. But I can't sit here and say that they wouldn't do a better job than Reigns would, especially when you consider how terrible of a job Reigns has done himself. I have no way of knowing that. For all I know, if we give Owens a shot as the top face, he could produce much better results than Reigns. Same with Rollins. Same with Styles. Who the hell knows. No one is making excuses however. We're using logic.


----------



## Optikk is All Elite

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

Is this really surprising? WWE has been in a decline for a while now and eventually they will be going the way of WCW if they continue this way. It is almost inevitable. Something needs to change.

And I do not blame the stars at all. This has been caused by short-term thinking and tunnel vision.


----------



## The Raw Smackdown

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Krokro said:


> I love how we're talking about who draws.
> 
> Nobody is a draw anymore. It's the entire company that's the draw, and now that's failing. Literally everyone is a failure in that regard. Reigns isn't qualified because nobody can be qualified. Everything the WWE does now is just dreadful, everyone is a joke except Lesnar and Reigns and because kayfabe is no longer a secret it doesn't make Reigns look bad ass but it makes it look like he is the golden boy. To make it worse WWE acknowledge it, they know, they use it in storylines, which even makes it worse. Balor could draw, no matter what you guys want to say. Wyatt could draw too. Styles definitely can draw. Reigns can draw. Rollins, Ambrose, Nakamura, Owens, even Zayn.. they can all draw. It's just WWE restricts everything and it's so pathetic that it won't happen.
> 
> It's a real shame, all you guys with your most and least favorites. They aren't at fault. It's the company.


Thank You. Nobody draws nowadays. And that's not on the talent..that's on the WWE for failing to make people interested in their talent. So I don't get why people are arguing about who's a draw or not.


----------



## God Of Anger Juno

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Legit BOSS said:


> *
> But he doesn't want to talk about half of the Smackdown arena being empty under AJ's watch. He blames Jinder because he's the champion. Guess what? AJ is the US Champion and Roman hasn't held a title all year. If they wanted to buy a ticket to see AJ, then they'd buy a ticket to see AJ. Quit making excuses. Your guy isn't doing shit either. No one is more qualified to be FOTC than Reigns. Get over it.*
> 
> 
> 
> *He makes more Reigns threads than AJ threads. He's made more Reigns threads than all of us combined. It's really sad.*


Yeah because the us championship really means a lot these days and Jinder is a master of the mic like Jericho and as charismatic as the rock and a pioneer in the ring like Daniel Bryan. 

Roman is a failure stop living in denial and accept it.


----------



## chronoxiong

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

Where's the picture @Ace?


----------



## Mysteriobiceps

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

Interesting note: Raw had 6800 attendance on a go-home tv show to ppv that had John Cena vs Reigns and Brock Lesnar vs Strowman. ROH sold out 5500 capacity arena for their house show in 3 days and only Kenny Omega was announced at that point.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Mysteriobiceps said:


> Interesting note: Raw had 6800 attendance on a go-home tv show to ppv that had John Cena vs Reigns and Brock Lesnar vs Strowman. ROH sold out 5500 capacity arena for their house show in 3 days and only Kenny Omega was announced at that point.


The market is burned out from WWE Shows. Simple as that. Their remaining audience isn't big enough to sell 104 Live TV shows (Raw and SD), plus House Shows, plus 18 PPVs or whatever the number is.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

Told ya'll Braun would flop.

:mj


----------



## MC

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Mysteriobiceps said:


> Interesting note: Raw had 6800 attendance on a go-home tv show to ppv that had John Cena vs Reigns and Brock Lesnar vs Strowman. ROH sold out 5500 capacity arena for their house show in 3 days and only Kenny Omega was announced at that point.


Fuck me, really? Wow. That TV money is really saving WWE at the moment. 


I always thought their was a big gap in attendance from WWE (number one in U.S) and ROH (number two in U.S) but their is only a thousand.


----------



## Mysteriobiceps

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



MC 16 said:


> Fuck me, really? Wow. That TV money is really saving WWE at the moment.
> 
> 
> I always thought their was a big gap in attendance from WWE (number one in U.S) and ROH (number two in U.S) but their is only a thousand.


TBH that was a little bit cherry picked stat on my part. Usually WWE does better numbers and that house show in Chicago will be ROH's best attendance event ever. But I think what we are seeing here is that the casual fan base is getting smaller. 

But to me the idea that 2 faces of their eras Cena and Reigns cannot generate enough interest to pull away clearly from ROH house show is laughable.


----------



## sweepdaleg

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*

What are the going prices for Raw and Smackdown? I haven't been to a show in a long time. Maybe prices are too high?


----------



## AmWolves10

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



MC 16 said:


> Fuck me, really? Wow. That TV money is really saving WWE at the moment.
> 
> 
> I always thought their was a big gap in attendance from WWE (number one in U.S) and ROH (number two in U.S) but their is only a thousand.


I'm a huge ROH fan. But the gap is still there. Kenny Omega is the best non WWE draw in America, plus he rarely wrestles in ROH so it's a major attraction when he comes. Imagine a WWE house show that had Undertaker in it, and that's what it's kind of like.


----------



## validreasoning

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Mysteriobiceps said:


> TBH that was a little bit cherry picked stat on my part. Usually WWE does better numbers and that house show in Chicago will be ROH's best attendance event ever. But I think what we are seeing here is that the casual fan base is getting smaller.
> 
> But to me the idea that 2 faces of their eras Cena and Reigns cannot generate enough interest to pull away clearly from ROH house show is laughable.


That roh show is setup for 2,480 not 5,500. Global wars isn't a houseshow btw.

Cena hasn't worked the last couple of raws, Brock either.

Brocks working Winnipeg tonight though


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/914293125270478848


----------



## Mysteriobiceps

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



validreasoning said:


> That roh show is setup for 2,480 not 5,500. Global wars isn't a houseshow btw.
> 
> Cena hasn't worked the last couple of raws, Brock either.
> 
> Brocks working Winnipeg tonight though
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/914293125270478848


Ok thanks for correcting me > I just looked up the Chicago arena on Wikipedia and it said 5500 on wrestling events.


----------



## Bink77

Roman reigns as well as the rest of the roster no matter how talented they are complete and utter trash.



validreasoning said:


> That roh show is setup for 2,480 not 5,500. Global wars isn't a houseshow btw.
> 
> Cena hasn't worked the last couple of raws, Brock either.
> 
> Brocks working Winnipeg tonight though
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/914293125270478848


So douchey.. Here we go, here we go....

And what, to raise your arms for a second?

Heyyyyyy... Ooooohhhhhhhhh


----------



## HankHill_85

Can't say I'm surprised the numbers are low when they squeeze the life out of the California and West Coast market so often.



Bink77 said:


> So douchey.. Here we go, here we go....
> 
> And what, to raise your arms for a second?
> 
> Heyyyyyy... Ooooohhhhhhhhh


Yeah, those people actually having some fun at an event. Such monsters!


----------



## Bink77

HankHill_85 said:


> Yeah, those people actually having some fun at an event. Such monsters!


Heyyyyyyyyy.... Yooooooooooooo


----------



## MC

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



AmWolves10 said:


> I'm a huge ROH fan. But the gap is still there. Kenny Omega is the best non WWE draw in America, plus he rarely wrestles in ROH so it's a major attraction when he comes. Imagine a WWE house show that had Undertaker in it, and that's what it's kind of like.


Still though. The fact that a guy who "ruined" the business can draw near enough the same crowd as wrestlemania worthy go home show is crazy.


----------



## RapShepard

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



AlternateDemise said:


> 1. Seth Rollins and Kevin Owens aren't Ric Mother Fucking Flair.
> 
> 2. Those were much, MUCH different times.
> 
> 
> 
> Which time period are you talking about in regards to Jarrett? WCW? TNA?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, and they will continue to do so because they don't know any better.
> 
> 
> 
> Okay, here is the problem with that logic.
> 
> Hulk Hogan started out as one of the biggest faces in the history of Pro Wrestling. He was an established big name and at that point had spent the majority of his time as the same character. Triple H was also well established before he started his so called reign of terror in 2003.
> 
> Kevin Owens and Seth Rollins don't have that. They weren't global icons before becoming top heels. Their world title reigns were the first ones they had on the main roster.
> 
> 
> 
> No, it's not an excuse. You can't sit there with a straight look on your face and think that Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair and Triple H are valid examples as to why Owens and Rollins should be able to draw as heels. Again, Owens and Rollins didn't have anywhere close to the kind of fame, glory or even booking that those three had during their times. They weren't around nearly as long. Hogan's heel turn was a huge success that everyone was clamoring for and wanted to happen. People were booing him as a face before he turned heel. People legitimately wanted it. How is that a valid example? Especially when many considered Seth Rollins to be the one who would be a face when the Shield ended?
> 
> 
> 
> No, because that isn't my point. Hell the situation on Smackdown is different on it's own. Right now AJ and Owens are being featured far more heavily on the show than Jinder is. Even this past week, both AJ and Owen's segments/feuds got more attention than Jinder's did. I'm not blaming everything on Jinder. Hell I don't even think he's the main problem.
> 
> My point is that context is extremely important when determining why someone performs the way they do as far as drawing is concerned. If you're gonna point out things like the NWO and Ric Flair, the writing should be on the wall regarding why they were so successful in doing so.
> 
> Am I flat out saying Rollins and Owens are more capable draws than Reigns? No. Truth be told I don't know who is the more capable draw, or who is more capable of being face of the company. I have a low opinion of Rollins in general, and I can't see Owens working as a face. But I can't sit here and say that they wouldn't do a better job than Reigns would, especially when you consider how terrible of a job Reigns has done himself. I have no way of knowing that. For all I know, if we give Owens a shot as the top face, he could produce much better results than Reigns. Same with Rollins. Same with Styles. Who the hell knows. No one is making excuses however. We're using logic.[/QUOTE
> It doesn't matter if they aren't Flair being a heel doesn't absolve you from drawing. When Raven and Shane Douglas were ECW champ who do you think Heyman looked at first to draw? It's great you said the Styles and Owens get more focus than Jinder. Why don't they get the Reigns "not champ, but clearly you're the one so you should draw" treatment? Not saying you do this, but just saying. It's weird that
> 
> 1. Owens and Rollins not drawing well is okay, because they were heels. But currently folk get on Jinder for being a poor draw.
> 
> 2. Weird that Reigns even when not champ is supposed to draw big for Raw. But at the moment even though they aren't WWE champ people don't expect AJ or Owens to draw despite getting more time than Jinder and having more accolades


----------



## famicommander

*Re: Raw draws poor attendance for major market show*



Mysteriobiceps said:


> Interesting note: Raw had 6800 attendance on a go-home tv show to ppv that had John Cena vs Reigns and Brock Lesnar vs Strowman. ROH sold out 5500 capacity arena for their house show in 3 days and only Kenny Omega was announced at that point.


They're not in the 5,500 seat hall at that venue, they're in the ~2,300 seat one. They're expecting about ~2,400-2,500 with standing room only.

They did, however, rent a venue that holds 10,000 for wrestling for Supercard of Honor next Wrestlemania weekend.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.945M
H2- 2.756M
H3- 2.619M
3H- 2.773M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 6.42% / - 0.189M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 4.97% / - 0.137M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 11.07% / - 0.326M )
10/2/17 Vs 9/25/17 ( - 5.13% / - 0.150M )

Demo (10/2/17 Vs 9/25/17):
H1- 0.980D Vs 1.040D
H2- 0.890D Vs 1.040D
H3- 0.910D Vs 0.880D
3H- 0.927D Vs 0.987D

Note: RAW is 4th, 6th & 5th by hourly demo & 13th, 14th & 19th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (10/2/17 Vs 10/3/16):
H1- 2.945M Vs 2.877M
H2- 2.756M Vs 2.870M
H3- 2.619M Vs 2.644M
3H- 2.773M Vs 2.797M ( - 0.86% / - 0.024M )

Demo (10/2/17 Vs 10/3/16):
H1- 0.980D Vs 0.990D
H2- 0.890D Vs 1.010D
H3- 0.910D Vs 0.950D
3H- 0.927D Vs 0.983D

Note: RAW this time last year was 5th, 4th & 6th by hourly demo & 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## JTB33b

LOL all 3 hours under 3 million. And wasn't that Roman/Miz title match in hour 2 where they only got 2.75 lol.


----------



## bhoyo1888

JTB33b said:


> LOL all 3 hours under 3 million. And wasn't that Roman/Miz title match in hour 2 where they only got 2.75 lol.


The TV news networks done huge numbers due to Vegas.

I'd ignore the ratings this week.

Quite rightly peoples priorities were elsewhere.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Seth and Braun with the highest rated hour on another shit-bird week of ratings.

:drose


----------



## MC

I knew they would be bad. That's why they moved the "main event"


----------



## A-C-P

THE MAN :rollins

and

THE MONSTER :braun

#1 draws


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The RAW dwarf stars really pulling in dem ratings. :buried


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Soooooo, by wwe932636866 logic, we are gonna put the blame for the shit number of hours 2 and 3, who had the IC Main Event, on the Miz?

Also, the amateurishly promoted Shield reunion is quite the draw, isn't it?


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I know Reigns/Miz started last quarter of hour 2. Did they go into the third hour that much?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

#BadNewsSanta said:


> I know Reigns/Miz started last quarter of hour 2. Did they go into the third hour that much?


Yep, it ended at 10:10 EST.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

All three hours failed to break 1.0 in the demo. Hour 3 actually edged Hour 2 in the demo. :lol Reigns leading an Hour 3 revival. :mark


----------



## virus21

Soon Raw will be making those Impact ratings


----------



## Chrome

All 3 hours back under 3 million. The world makes sense again. :jbutler


----------



## Zone

Chrome said:


> All 3 hours back under 3 million. The world makes sense again. :jbutler


> It has begun.

:woo:crylol:yum::yas:mark

I hope they set record lows even more than they did the last couple of years. The damn company needs to change or else it's going to become even more stale and idiotic than it already is, jeezus. :faint:


----------



## Ace

Which hour was Roman in? 

Unless it was the first, he failed big time after having an advertised IC title match.

Probably must have mentioned he's never won it before either and how it would complete a grand slam :lol

So was it in the late hour 2 and start of hr 3 slot? :lol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> Which hour was Roman in?
> 
> Unless it was the first, he failed big time after having an advertised IC title match.
> 
> Probably must have mentioned he's never won it before either and how it would complete a grand slam :lol
> 
> So was it in the late hour 2 and start of hr 3 slot? :lol


Yep. The man main eventing his 4th WM in a row can't draw 3 million viewers with an IC Title shot.


----------



## MC

Threw a thousand superman punches and never drew a dime.


----------



## wwe9391

Apperantly All tv ratings were down for Monday even football due to the Vegas tragedy.

So no superstar is to blame for the ratings being low this week.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Believe in the Shield!

Are they called that because they Shield WWE from viewers?


----------



## Piers

Strowman needs a new finisher

How is the move that stronger than a basic scoop slam ?


----------



## Hangman

wwe9391 said:


> Apperantly All tv ratings were down for Monday even football due to the Vegas tragedy.
> 
> So no superstar is to blame for the ratings being low this week.


Are you Road Dogg in disguise?


----------



## wwe9391

Ultron said:


> Are you Road Dogg in disguise?


Oh you didn't know?


----------



## Mister Sinister

I tried watching for 30 minutes and it was misery.

They aren't even making a wrestling show. It's just a piss poor soap opera that features color by number wrestling matches. No one is a star. Everyone has been exposed (lost badly or multiple times). They don't even get the basics of building a framework of stars.


----------



## Zone

Mister Sinister said:


> I tried watching for 30 minutes and it was misery.
> 
> *They aren't even making a wrestling show. It's just a piss poor soap opera that features color by number wrestling matches. No one is a star. Everyone has been exposed (lost badly or multiple times). They don't even get the basics of building a framework of stars*.


:bow:bow:bowk


----------



## krai999

Lesnar has done all there is to do in the wwe tbh. Might as well put over the next face of the company and call it a day


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Getting ready for Raw feels like getting ready for a workout on a day where you actually really aren't in the mindset for it, but you do it anyway.
And you go through it and every five minutes you think "this sucks", but you don't want to stop because you know otherwise you might as well have not done it at all.
And in the end, you don't see results, you don't get a payoff, you don't get something to look forward to, you just hope that down the line, it was worth ANYTHING.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.008M
H2- 2.894M
H3- 2.711M
3H- 2.871M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 3.79% / - 0.114M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 6.32% / - 0.183M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 9.87% / - 0.297M )
10/9/17 Vs 10/2/17 ( + 3.53% / + 0.098M )

Demo (10/9/17 Vs 10/2/17):
H1- 0.990D Vs 0.980D
H2- 0.970D Vs 0.890D
H3- 0.930D Vs 0.910D
3H- 0.963D Vs 0.927D

Note: RAW is 5th, 6th & 7th by hourly demo & 4th, 5th & 7th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (10/9/17 Vs 10/10/16):
H1- 3.008M Vs 2.790M
H2- 2.894M Vs 2.876M
H3- 2.711M Vs 2.610M
3H- 2.871M Vs 2.759M ( + 4.06% / + 0.112M )

Demo (10/9/17 Vs 10/10/16):
H1- 0.990D Vs 0.920D
H2- 0.970D Vs 0.980D
H3- 0.930D Vs 0.930D
3H- 0.963D Vs 0.943D

Note: RAW this time last year was 8th, 6th & 7th by hourly demo & 6th, 5th & 8th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## MC

Looks like that Kalisto main event got bigger ratings then Enzo's burying of the CW's. So Kalisto= ££££?????


----------



## JTB33b

LOL all this Shield buildup and the 1st hour barely cracks 3 million. Better than last week but that's not saying much considering there was the Vegas tragedy last Monday.


----------



## Ace

LMFAO.

Cena returning after a week would have drawn better than this hyped up return of TS :lmao

Zo seems to be the real draw of the show, he kept that third hour number really respectable. The best third hour number in a long time.


----------



## MC

Law said:


> LMFAO.
> 
> Cena returning after a week would have drawn better than this hyped up return of TS :lmao
> 
> *Zo seems to be the real draw of the show, he kept that third hour number really respectable. The best third hour number in a long time*.


No, Kalisto is the biggest draw on the roster 

Nah, the overall number is terrible.


----------



## Ace

Two things learnt this week.

1) TS are NOT draws, this was supposed to be their big return and all signs pointed to it with the end last week.

2) 180,000 drop off for the third hour is a great result for the third hour.

CW division is heading in the right direction, Zo _might_ be a draw. 

~180,000 drop off for the third hour is a great result for the third hour.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Yankees doing work in the playoffs last night. Not bad going up against NFL and a Yankees elimination game in NY. Without the Shield, WWE is fucked, though. If they weren't, a 2 hour SD show would be outdrawing a 3 hour show going up against football and Yankee elimination playoff games.


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> Yankees doing work in the playoffs last night. Not bad going up against NFL and a Yankees elimination game in NY. Without the Shield, WWE is fucked, though. If they weren't, a 2 hour SD show would be outdrawing a 3 hour show going up against football and Yankee elimination playoff games.


 News shows did great numbers last week because of the Las Vegas shootings.


----------



## JTB33b

Law said:


> Two things learnt this week.
> 
> 1) TS are NOT draws, this was supposed to be their big return and all signs pointed to it with the end last week.
> 
> 2) 180,000 drop off for the third hour is a great result for the third hour.
> 
> CW division is heading in the right direction, Zo _might_ be a draw.
> 
> ~180,000 drop off for the third hour is a great result for the third hour.


Imagine how much more of a Draw Enzo could be if they didn't spend the 2 months trying to bury him.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Law said:


> News shows did great numbers last week because of the Las Vegas shootings last week.


It's not just about last week. SD never draws, either.


----------



## Ace

JTB33b said:


> Imagine how much more of a Draw Enzo could be if they didn't the 2 months trying to bury him.


 He's been the best part of Raw IMO since they killed Braun at No Mercy.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*S*ierra *H*otel *I*ndia *T*ango ratings. :vince$


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> It's not just about last week. SD never draws, either.


 Well, SD is the B show and Raw is the flagship with the "GOAT" faction making their return.


----------



## Ace

THE RETURN OF THE SHIV said:


> *S*ierra *H*otel *I*ndia *T*ango ratings. :vince$


 They've either killed off the drawing ability of TS with their shit singles runs, or they were never draws to begin with and the ratings were mainly carried by Cena, Bryan, Punk, HHH and Batista.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Law said:


> Well, SD is the B show and Raw is the flagship with the "GOAT" faction making their return.


SD doesn't have a 3rd hour to account for and has some amazingly great wrestlers. Nor do they ever go up against the NFL. No reason to never get in the 3 millions.


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> SD doesn't have a 3rd hour to account for and has some amazingly great wrestlers. Nor do they ever go up against the NFL. No reason to never get in the 3 millions.


 There's plenty of reason not to, it's written poorly, the champion is a jobber and they always get shafted on the dual brand PPVs where it's reinforced SD does not matter.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Law said:


> There's plenty of reason not to, it's written poorly, the champion is a jobber and they always get shafted on the dual brand PPVs where it's reinforced SD does not matter.


The entire WWE product is written poorly and has been for years.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

THE RETURN OF THE SHIV said:


> *S*ierra *H*otel *I*ndia *T*ango ratings. :vince$


:ambrose4 :rollins4 :reigns2


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> The entire WWE product is written poorly and has been for years.


 Road Dogg is head of creative on SD :draper2

For WM Raw had Brock vs Goldberg, HHH vs Rollins and Taker vs Reigns compared to SD which had Orton vs Bray and AJ vs Shane :lmao

Summerslam this year it was the hoss 4 way for Raw and Jinder vs Nakamura in a throwaway for SD.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SD marks bragging about this is hilarious. :lol 2 hour show can't even get into the 3 millions once in awhile. Give me a break.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Law said:


> Road Dogg is head of creative on SD :draper2


72 year old Vince is in control of Raw.

:hbkshrug


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> 72 year old Vince is in control of Raw.
> 
> :hbkshrug


 Vince approves Road Doggs ideas, at least there's a different writing team on Raw which pitches ideas to Vince.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Law said:


> Vince approves Road Doggs ideas, at least there's a different writing team on Raw which pitches ideas to Vince.


Writing team means near nothing when all ideas are approved and disapproved by Vince. Plus, Vince is more hands on with Raw. It's his 'baby.'

And you're taking about a writing team made up of Hollywood rejects.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

ShowStopper said:


> SD marks bragging about this is hilarious. :lol 2 hour show can't even get into the 3 millions once in awhile. Give me a break.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

:lmao Terrible for The Shield return. Only one hour barely broke 3 million. The Shield get a good reaction from the crowd, but they don't draw. No one does, but this is especially bad considering it's The Shield and all the hype around them.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

#BadNewsSanta said:


> :lmao Terrible for The Shield return. Only one hour barely broke 3 million. The Shield get a good reaction from the crowd, but they don't draw. No one does, but this is especially bad considering it's The Shield and all the hype around them.


Rollins championship run in 2015 draws better than anything on both shows present day.

:mj


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> SD marks bragging about this is hilarious. :lol 2 hour show can't even get into the 3 millions once in awhile. Give me a break.


 Jinder Mahal is champion and the biggest star on the show is Randy Orton who is going nowhere like rest of the roster. 

There are no stories or feuds set in stone for the biggest show. On Raw we know it's building to Brock-Roman and Dean-Rollins at WM. SD's WM could look like anything, the concept and execution for Brock-Roman is good, the problem is no one wants to see it and that rub and build is being wasted on someone who isn't over. Ambrose and Rollins should be great though and is building nicely. It's vital they do the right thing and have Ambrose go over clean at WM, he needs it.


----------



## MC

ShowStopper said:


> Rollins championship run in 2015 draws better than anything on both shows present day.
> 
> :mj


Seth Rollins's run got the biggest ratings out of all the Shield's title runs.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

The biggest stars on Smackdown are AJ Styles and Shinsuke Nakamura, and they are used horribly. Randy Boreton belongs into the "Most overrated character ever" thread.

Jinder Mahal a star :lmao :lmao


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

@Law


> There are no stories or feuds set in stone for the biggest show. On Raw we know it's building to Brock-Roman and Dean-Rollins at WM. SD's WM could look like anything, the concept and execution for Brock-Roman is good, the problem is no one wants to see it and that rub and build is being wasted on someone who isn't over. Ambrose and Rollins should be great though.


Agree except one thing. I don't think it's a good concept to have your World Champion be a part timer who is rarely on TV. That is a failing concept no matter the era, talents, and competition or lack there of on other channels. Your World Champion should be on TV *every* week outside of him having a death in the family or some sort of family emergency that he absolutely has to attend to.


----------



## Ace

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> The biggest stars on Smackdown are AJ Styles and Shinsuke Nakamura, and they are used horribly. Randy Boreton belongs into the "Most overrated character ever" thread.
> 
> Jinder Mahal a star :lmao :lmao


 Randy Orton is their biggest star aside from Cena, Lesnar and HHH. He's been with the WWE for years and his RKO has become a meme.

Everyone else on the roster doesn't have that reach.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

ShowStopper said:


> Rollins championship run in 2015 draws better than anything on both shows present day.
> 
> :mj


Yes he did... but please enlighten me on what does that have to do with what I said? Are you agreeing with me, or making a point about something that I don't disagree with?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Yes he did... but please enlighten me on what does that have to do with what I said? Are you agreeing with me, or making a point about something that I don't disagree with?


No. I just meant that I never saw it getting worse and worse every year to the degree they are at right now.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

ShowStopper said:


> No. I just meant that I never saw it getting worse and worse every year to the degree they are at right now.


Ah okay.

Well yeah, I mean the Christmas Eve show in 2012 during Punk's title reign I'm pretty sure did a better viewership/rating than most shows nowadays. Says it all right there. That was considered the bottom at the time, and now even the viewership from that show looks great.


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> No. I just meant that I never saw it getting worse and worse every year to the degree they are at right now.


 You thought being stubborn and not listening to fans would keep fans around?


----------



## JDP2016

ShowStopper said:


> Yankees doing work in the playoffs last night. Not bad going up against *NFL* and a Yankees elimination game in NY. Without the Shield, WWE is fucked, though. If they weren't, a 2 hour SD show would be outdrawing a 3 hour show going up against football and Yankee elimination playoff games.


Ohh yeah that Bears/Vikings game was must see TV last night. wink2:


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

JDP2016 said:


> Ohh yeah that Bears/Vikings game was must see TV last night. wink2:


It did a better rating and viewership than anything else on TV last night...


:lol


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

ShowStopper said:


> Rollins championship run in 2015 draws better than anything on both shows present day.
> 
> :mj


Rollins still sucks same with Reigns the only good member of the shield is Dean.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

BeckyLynchFan29 said:


> Rollins still sucks same with Reigns the only good member of the shield is Dean.












Every time you quote a post of mine (in any thread) it's about a topic that has little to nothing to do with the actual topic. Don't quote my posts anymore. Thanks.


----------



## Ace

BeckyLynchFan29 said:


> Rollins still sucks same with Reigns the only good member of the shield is Dean.


 Dean no doubt has the most potential of the three, his window to realize that potential is closing though. He really needs to knock his heel turn out the park.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

Law said:


> Dean no doubt has the most potential of all three, his window to realize that potential is closing though. He really needs to knock his heel turn out the park.


I agree I can't wait to he turns heel on Seth.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

BeckyLynchFan29 said:


> Rollins still sucks same with Reigns the only good member of the shield is Dean.


So seriously, what in anyway does this have to do with the post I made? You can neg me with a message of "...." I'm just curious at this point since you've been doing this for months now. Why do you quote a post of mine on one topic and then post about something completely different?

And Dean's ability to standout like he did in the Shield isn't anywhere what it used to be. He's not viewed as the same guy as he was in the Shield as being the 'cool' lunatic. Sad, but true.


----------



## V-Trigger

The Shield is back together and they barely had 3.008 million viewers.


----------



## KS8000

MC 16 said:


> Seth Rollins's run got the biggest ratings out of all the Shield's title runs.


It was literally responsible for the biggest ratings decline in recent history. His reign took a much larger number and decreased it by an obscene amount. That's nothing to brag about.


----------



## Steve Black Man

It's interesting how a discussion on ratings can turn into a mark war.


----------



## chronoxiong

Enzo Amore main eventing RAW equals steady 3rd hour ratings!!!!


----------



## Chrome

ShowStopper said:


> It did a better rating and viewership than anything else on TV last night...
> 
> 
> :lol


Yeah, there was some intrigue in the debut of TRUBISKY, plus no matter how bad the Bears are it's still a huge media market, and Minneapolis is no slouch either. As for the Raw rating, yeah, not very good to say the least.


----------



## MC

KS8000 said:


> It was literally responsible for the biggest ratings decline in recent history. His reign took a much larger number and decreased it by an obscene amount. That's nothing to brag about.


Yes it was, and it got still got bigger ratings then Reigns as champion and dean as champion (but dean got moved smackdown). That says a lot


----------



## KS8000

MC 16 said:


> Yes it was, and it got still got bigger ratings then Reigns as champion and dean as champion (but dean got moved smackdown). That says a lot


It only says that he was the first champion of the 3 and his reign started during a period with much higher ratings to begin with. That's all it says.


----------



## IceTheRetroKid

*I don't know how much the Shield reunion will help the ratings against the white rope poison going against it. I say ratings will just flatline because of that, until they go away in November again.*


----------



## tducey

Meh, ratings are what they are. People don't watch TV as much as they did yrs. ago either. I know I watch RAW on a TV box later in the week. You have to take that into account as well.


----------



## HenryBowers

The Shield are just terrible. Theyve been forcing them down our throat for 5 years and none of them have been a success. WWE just cant get over it. Its like they think they are DX or Evolution but they aren't.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

tducey said:


> Meh, ratings are what they are. People don't watch TV as much as they did yrs. ago either. I know I watch RAW on a TV box later in the week. You have to take that into account as well.


Yes, it's common knowledge streaming and recording devices didn't exist 10 years ago.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The Shield going to lead to a ratings revolution. :vince$


----------



## Ace

Ouch.


----------



## Ace

*"Attendance tonight was terrible. Literally half the building was tarped off" : Dave Meltzer*






1.09 onwards.


















@mods don't let this get buried in the draws thread. 

Let the WWE get what's due :shame


----------



## RapShepard

*Re: "Attendance tonight was terrible. Literally half the building was tarped off" : Dave Meltzer*

Get what's due to them?


----------



## Ace

*Re: "Attendance tonight was terrible. Literally half the building was tarped off" : Dave Meltzer*



RapShepard said:


> Get what's due to them?


 "We listen to fans" and the rest has already been reported, you know why they deserve this :hmmm


----------



## lesenfanteribles

*Re: "Attendance tonight was terrible. Literally half the building was tarped off" : Dave Meltzer*

That attendance though...


----------



## Ace

*Re: "Attendance tonight was terrible. Literally half the building was tarped off" : Dave Meltzer*



lesenfanteribles said:


> That attendance though...


 It looks like a SD crowd :lol


----------



## Chrome

Sorry Ace, had to merge this with the Raw ratings thread.









That attendance is hilariously bad though, especially for a go-home show.


----------



## ForYourOwnGood

Is there a reason for it? Or is it a genuine reflection of the product?


----------



## RapShepard

Law said:


> "We listen to fans" and the rest has already been reported, you know why they deserve this :hmmm


You do know fans isn't just limited to people here. I mean just because a few people like Reigns or Jinder have success doesn't mean they don't listen. They didn't start treating women better and bring back cruiserweights on their own. They don't keep guys like AJ and KO important on SDL for no reason. 

Even with how awful these arenas have been looking they still draw more than promotions hardcore fans swear know how to please "real wrestling fans"


----------



## lesenfanteribles

*Re: "Attendance tonight was terrible. Literally half the building was tarped off" : Dave Meltzer*



Law said:


> It looks like a SD crowd :lol


Indeed. I guess this is one of those months when they are in some kind of a lull. :lol


----------



## Ace

*Re: "Attendance tonight was terrible. Literally half the building was tarped off" : Dave Meltzer*



lesenfanteribles said:


> Indeed. I guess this is one of those months when they are in some kind of a lull. :lol


 We're still in September :trolldog


----------



## Chrome

ForYourOwnGood said:


> Is there a reason for it? Or is it a genuine reflection of the product?


This has become a recurring theme for both Raw and SDL the past few years, so it'd be the latter imo. Plus Portland, while granted isn't exactly a wrestling city, isn't some small middle of nowhere town either. To draw an attendance like that in a big city like Portland is a bad look.


----------



## Reaper

*Re: "Attendance tonight was terrible. Literally half the building was tarped off" : Dave Meltzer*



Law said:


> @mods don't let this get buried in the draws thread.
> 
> Let the WWE get what's due :shame


Looks like TNA with a RAW skin.


----------



## MC

Raw attendance is embarrassing.


----------



## zrc

*Re: "Attendance tonight was terrible. Literally half the building was tarped off" : Dave Meltzer*



lesenfanteribles said:


> Indeed. I guess this is one of those months when they are in some kind of a lull. [emoji38]


Yeah, which is every month until March.


----------



## UniversalGleam

basically wwe's only big draw these days is wrestlemania, even more reason for an off season.

maybe finish up at mania, come back around summerslam, would help out the workers and would give people a chance to miss it plus it would allow a few months to think up some solid stories and directions for the next season instead of week to week bullshit.

wwe is creatively tired, it isnt must see stuff anymore, there is no real hook.


----------



## SWITCHBLADE

:reneelel


----------



## 751161

That attendance is shocking. I can't even fool myself anymore. I've been thinking maybe it'll get better, perhaps they've just been having some off weeks. But :nah

WWE only has themselves to blame. I mean, what the hell is there to look forward to at TLC besides The Shield match? It doesn't even feel like there's a PPV on Sunday, and Brock doesn't show up so there's nothing happening with the Universal Title scene either.

I'm really hoping shit picks up by next year, because these shows have been looking more and more bare.


----------



## Florat

Tha attendance. I knew it, as soon as they didn't show the crowd during the Yes Part and was thinking that the crowd was kind of dead. This is truly shocking, especially as Raw IS the WWE, it's the show that should always work well.

Also, who would've knew that the brand split would kill the WWE ? I wasn't confident in it but I didn't expected things to go that bad, would've been better to just sacrifice that show


----------



## 751161

Florat said:


> Tha attendance. I knew it, as soon as they didn't show the crowd during the Yes Part and was thinking that the crowd was kind of dead. This is truly shocking, especially as Raw IS the WWE, it's the show that should always work well.
> 
> Also, who would've knew that the brand split would kill the WWE ? I wasn't confident in it but I didn't expected things to go that bad, would've been better to just sacrifice that show


It's not the brand split that is killing WWE, it's WWE's awful booking. They barely even build-up PPV's anymore. I want to say the last one that was reasonably built up would be Hell in a Cell. They have plenty of good guys on either side. They could easily make the brand split work. They use guys incorrectly and book shit feuds like The Demon vs Sister Abigail that nobody wants to see.


----------



## Florat

The Fourth Wall said:


> It's not the brand split that is killing WWE, it's WWE's awful booking. They barely even build-up PPV's anymore. I want to say the last one that was reasonably built up would be Hell in a Cell. They have plenty of good guys on either side. They could easily make the brand split work. They use guys incorrectly and book shit feuds like The Demon vs Sister Abigail that nobody wants to see.


Splitting away half of your big stars is still not a really good decision. I like Raw and Smackdown, it gave us good new stars and great matches but it is also coming in a time where the WWE just can't do it. They have lost too many fans, it's not the time to split them up

And for PPVs, the Brand Split is hurting too. You have a PPV every two weeks. How is anything supposed to feel special when you get it every two weeks ? It's impossible, especially when it's badly build-up.

The bad booking is surely a problem, not a single doubt about that but I think that the brand split isn't helping them either


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

ForYourOwnGood said:


> Is there a reason for it? Or is it a genuine reflection of the product?


Probably just anti-establishment smark crowd.
But I've been told that fans can bitch but would NEVER stop watching :booklel

On a completely related note: motherfucking KANE main eventing in 2017? What's next, Kane VS Big Show, as nostalgia that was already terrible 16 years ago?


----------



## AmWolves10

Chrome said:


> This has become a recurring theme for both Raw and SDL the past few years, so it'd be the latter imo. Plus Portland, while granted isn't exactly a wrestling city, isn't some small middle of nowhere town either. To draw an attendance like that in a big city like Portland is a bad look.


I live in Portland and to be fair while most of us would rather continue drinking our organic gluten free smoothies than go to a WWE event, a lot of this city is made up of people from all around the world, much like a NY or Chicago. I’m proud of my city. Like I said before, when I drove by the Moda Center after work past the time RAW was finished there was no traffic on my way home when usually if something big comes to town I’m used to being delayed 15-30 minutes.

Also interesting to note, the RAW billboard only showed up on the Moda Center like a couple weeks before the event. Meanwhile the Lorde concert in March 2018 had their billboard up a month ago here. More of my work friends are talking about that, no one was talking about RAW.


----------



## Chrome

AmWolves10 said:


> I live in Portland and to be fair while most of us would rather continue drinking our organic gluten free smoothies than go to a WWE event, a lot of this city is made up of people from all around the world, much like a NY or Chicago. I’m proud of my city. Like I said before, when I drove by the Moda Center after work past the time RAW was finished there was no traffic on my way home when usually if something big comes to town I’m used to being delayed 15-30 minutes.
> 
> Also interesting to note, the RAW billboard only showed up on the Moda Center like a couple weeks before the event. Meanwhile the Lorde concert in March 2018 had their billboard up a month ago here. More of my work friends are talking about that, no one was talking about RAW.


Lorde > Raw I guess. :draper2


----------



## AmWolves10

Chrome said:


> AmWolves10 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I live in Portland and to be fair while most of us would rather continue drinking our organic gluten free smoothies than go to a WWE event, a lot of this city is made up of people from all around the world, much like a NY or Chicago. I?m proud of my city. Like I said before, when I drove by the Moda Center after work past the time RAW was finished there was no traffic on my way home when usually if something big comes to town I?m used to being delayed 15-30 minutes.
> 
> Also interesting to note, the RAW billboard only showed up on the Moda Center like a couple weeks before the event. Meanwhile the Lorde concert in March 2018 had their billboard up a month ago here. More of my work friends are talking about that, no one was talking about RAW.
> 
> 
> 
> Lorde > Raw I guess.
Click to expand...

Haha, that wasn't the point I was trying to make though, most of the big shows that come to the Moda center put their billboard on here months in advance. Lords was a bad example as she is kind of mainstream, we even have had billboards for Billy Joel since the summer and hes not coming until December. But there was zero buzz here leading to the WWE coming. Nobody knew about it.


----------



## .christopher.

There needs to be a megathread for attendance pictures only. Especially when Reigns is in the ring. Hilarious.


----------



## JDP2016

*Re: "Attendance tonight was terrible. Literally half the building was tarped off" : Dave Meltzer*



Law said:


> 1.09 onwards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @mods don't let this get buried in the draws thread.
> 
> Let the WWE get what's due :shame


I can't wait for the day when they move to smaller buildings.

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## MC

So the show where Reigns was promoted to be in the main event alll week got half an arena? Well I don't think that there was 100,000 at Raw last night.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

In for more WWE failure.

:mark:


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

MC 16 said:


> So the show where Reigns was promoted to be in the main event alll week got half an arena? Well I don't think that there was 100,000 at Raw last night.


100.000 groans.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.731M
H2- 2.728M
H3- 2.606M
3H- 2.688M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 0.11% / - 0.003M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 4.47% / - 0.122M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 4.58% / - 0.125M )
10/16/17 Vs 10/9/17 ( - 6.37% / - 0.183M )

Demo (10/16/17 Vs 10/9/17):
H1- 0.900D Vs 0.990D
H2- 0.920D Vs 0.970D
H3- 0.900D Vs 0.930D
3H- 0.907D Vs 0.963D

Note: RAW is 7th, 6th & 8th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 6th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (10/16/17 Vs 10/17/16):
H1- 2.731M Vs 3.167M
H2- 2.728M Vs 3.106M
H3- 2.606M Vs 3.118M
3H- 2.688M Vs 3.130M ( - 14.12% / - 0.442M )

Demo (10/16/17 Vs 10/17/16):
H1- 0.900D Vs 1.170D
H2- 0.920D Vs 1.170D
H3- 0.900D Vs 1.230D
3H- 0.907D Vs 1.190D

Note: RAW this time last year was 5th, 3rd & 2nd by hourly demo & 3rd, 6th & 4th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Holy shit, WWE dying out here between the attendance and ratings.

:ha


----------



## Ace

Horrific numbers.

Gobsmacked :lmao


----------



## MC

:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol 

That's atrocious. Bad attendance and bad ratings. It;s official Enzo is a bigger draw.


----------



## Ace

2.6m for the Roman main event.

This is why he's never in the third hour LMFAO :lmao


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

So, the Shield is officially reunited, and 14% of the audience instantly fucks off?

:eagle


----------



## Ace

That's got to be the lowest third hour for the year?

Roman 'ratings' Reigns folks :ha


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

haha noone gives a shit about the shield.


----------



## Ace

2.68m, is that a new record low?

Guys, I think this is a new record low rating :dead3



BeckyLynchFan29 said:


> haha noone gives a shit about the shield.


 Roman vs Braun in a cage was announced a week in advance too. The show built to that match! :lmao :lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao


----------



## MC

Looks like Reigns in the main event got lower ratings then Kalisto. :lol :lol


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Law said:


> 2.68m, is that a new record low?


The 2.4 for hour 3 this spring is hard to top.


----------



## MC

I bet that someone tries to blame it solely on Braun.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Even the New Generation era getting a chance to check in and say :haha at 2017 Vince.

:bret :hbk1 :taker


----------



## Ace

MC 16 said:


> I bet that someone tries to blame it solely on Braun.


 Your FOTC drawing that number in a stip match which has been advertised for a week :ha

Time to get Enzo back in the main event to save the third hour :CENA


----------



## MC

Ladies an gentleman, the biggest draw on the roster.......KALSITO


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

Law said:


> Roman vs Braun in a cage was announced a week in advance too. The show built to that match! :lmao :lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao


lol just wait to Reigns is Champion after Mania its going to get alot worse for them and Vince got noone to blame but himself.


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> Even the New Generation era getting a chance to check in and say :haha at 2017 Vince.
> 
> :bret :hbk1 :taker


 The Realest Generation, please :mj4

The Lamest Generation is more apt :lmao


----------



## Hydra

Thats what happens when you force a Shield reunion like this. I stopped watching RAW when they teased the reunion. And there isn't even anything compelling going on outside the Shield storyline. Can't blame people tuning out in droves.


----------



## Ace

Wasn't there a dud NFL game on this week as well?


----------



## CesaroSwing

I wonder if the NBA coming back will do anything to their ratings.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Law said:


> The Realest Generation, please :mj4
> 
> The Lamest Generation is more apt :lmao


Yep. At least the New Generation era went up against the NWO at it's best, what the hell is current day WWE going up against?

:heyman6


----------



## Chris90

Ouch


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

new era was not this bad it had Bret,Razor,Diesel,Shawn,and Owen I watch them over this crap anyday.


----------



## MC

So Braun vs Reigns got a terrible house and a terrible rating. What's up with that?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Law said:


> Wasn't there a dud NFL game on this week as well?


I think so. They did go up against a Yankees playoff game last night, and NY is a huge market. That probably affected them, but it shouldn't be to THIS degree, IMO.


----------



## Hydra

Law said:


> Wasn't there a dud NFL game on this week as well?


Yeah. Didn't even watch it thinking it would be a Punt-a-thon game. Can't tell by the score but it looks like it turned into a good game.


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> I think so. They did go up against a Yankees playoff game last night, and NY is a huge market. That probably affected them, but it shouldn't be to THIS degree, IMO.


 You can't use baseball as an excuse for an abysmal number, if they were producing a good show people would watch.

I can understand them using NFL or NBA, but fucking baseball :heston


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

ShowStopper said:


> Yep. At least the New Generation era went up against the NWO at it's best, what the hell is current day WWE going up against?
> 
> :heyman6


Grapefruits.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Law said:


> You can't use baseball as an excuse for an abysmal number, if they were producing a good show people would watch.
> 
> I can understand them using NFL or NBA, but fucking baseball :heston


The Yankees are the Cowboys of baseball. They have a national fanbase. Not using it as an excuse at all. I'm enjoying this. Baseball numbers are up, though. It still shouldn't be anywhere near this bad, like I said before.


----------



## MC

SO the small guy with no personality got better ratings then the big guy with no personality. 


Crusierweights are a draw.


----------



## Ace

This company is dying and I'm loving it :lmao

It's time to speed it up Vince :quite

Put Jinder over Lesnar clean and have Roman beat Miz, The Bar, Braun and Kane by himself.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I noticed all the 'see you next week' guys have disappeared.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Why shouldn't baseball cut into their numbers? Basketball never cut their numbers as well, and lo and behold against what WWE ratings tanked this spring.

Which is a testament to how boring their shit is. I mean, no offense, but baseball?


----------



## Ace

ShowStopper said:


> I noticed all the 'see you next week' guys have disappeared.


 Think they disappeared the moment the pictures of half empty arenas surfaced online.



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Why shouldn't baseball cut into their numbers? Basketball never cut their numbers as well, and lo and behold against what WWE ratings tanked this spring.
> 
> Which is a testament to how boring their shit is. I mean, no offense, but baseball?


 Baseball is boring af........... At least NFL and NBA is entertaining.


----------



## MC

ShowStopper said:


> I noticed all the 'see you next week' guys have disappeared.


I noticed that too. Hmmmm, maybe they've seen through that charade.


----------



## Ace

TS are not going to work, they're better off spreading them across the card.

That way you have more than one program that is viewed as important.



MC 16 said:


> I noticed that too. Hmmmm, maybe they've seen through that charade.


 wwe9898 didn't even bother posting even though he was lurking in the thread :lol

Those third hour numbers must have broken him :reigns


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Law said:


> Baseball is boring af........... At least NFL and NBA is entertaining.


There's this guy on the Yankees who hits like 500 foot Homeruns. It's insane. :lol


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Nah, they'll be back. At the latest on the Road to Rumble and Wrestlemania, when football is over and ratings come up slightly, at which point they can celebrate Roman Reigns for drawing dem numbers when he's the focal point of Wrestlemania.

Because, you know, Roman Reigns is the draw, not Wrestlemania.























:HA


----------



## Ace

Roman is the biggest FT star and draw on the show.

Myth busted folks.

He's delivered horrific third hr numbers 99% of the time the times he's closed. 

That's why they rarely give him the third hour, it's just another way they protect him.


----------



## CesaroSwing

Law said:


> You can't use baseball as an excuse for an abysmal number, if they were producing a good show people would watch.
> 
> I can understand them using NFL or NBA, but fucking baseball :heston


Why is that? I'm pretty sure that MLB playoffs get better ratings than regular season NBA games. I wouldn't use any of them as an excuse but it's not like baseball is unpopular or anything


----------



## MC

Law said:


> wwe9898 didn't even bother posting even though he was lurking in the thread :lol
> 
> Those third hour numbers must have broken him :reigns


I think even he realise that he can't defend that rating. And there is a direct decrease between the 2nd and 3rd hour as well. How is it anymore clearly that Reigns doesn't draw?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Need to be "shielded" from good ratings? Who you gonna call?

:ambrose4 :rollins4 :reigns2


----------



## Ace

MC 16 said:


> I think even he realise that he can't defend that rating. And there is a direct decrease between the 2nd and 3rd hour as well. How is it anymore clearly that Reigns doesn't draw?


 Which is sad given how much they have *SUNK* into him for no return.



CesaroSwing said:


> Why is that? I'm pretty sure that MLB playoffs get better ratings than regular season NBA games. I wouldn't use any of them as an excuse but it's not like baseball is unpopular or anything


 Wouldn't have a clue how the NBA season games do, but doesn't the NBA play offs pull great numbers?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Baseball and basketball never cut into WWE viewership, NOW suddenly it's an excuse?

Or is it because these 40-50 year old key WWE demographics are starting to realize they are too old for this shit, and switch to baseball or basketball?


----------



## MC

Law said:


> Which is sad given how much they have *SUNK* into him for no return.


It's not just ratings, it's a attendance as well. Now people can say that attendance has always been down at this time but NEVER half the arena empty.


----------



## virus21




----------



## Ace

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Baseball and basketball never cut into WWE viewership, NOW suddenly it's an excuse?
> 
> Or is it because these 40-50 year old key WWE demographics are starting to realize they are too old for this shit, and switch to baseball or basketball?


 My guess is it's the younger audience which is being pushed towards those sports which is only making the average age of their viewers increase.


----------



## SnapOrTap

YOU GUYS WILL ALL BE BACK NEXT WEEK...


















TO THIS RATINGZ THREAD.


:butler:jbutler:jbutler:buckets:buckets:buckets:buckets:buckets


----------



## Ace

Where were you when the WWE fell?

Things gonna get fun come contract negotiations with USA.



SnapOrTap said:


> YOU GUYS WILL ALL BE BACK NEXT WEEK...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TO THIS RATINGZ THREAD.
> 
> 
> :butler:jbutler:jbutler:buckets:buckets:buckets:buckets:buckets


 We listen to fans :steph


----------



## CesaroSwing

Law said:


> Wouldn't have a clue how the NBA season games do, but doesn't the NBA play offs pull great numbers?


Here's an article from 2015 http://uk.businessinsider.com/major-league-baseball-nba-popularity-2015-2?r=US&IR=T.

I love basketball but lets not act like it's so much bigger than baseball



virus21 said:


>


That's amazing


----------



## SnapOrTap

Strapped a rocket to the most mediocre talent in the WWE over the last 3 decacdes.

And here we are.

2.6 million viewers.

Fingers crossed we dip below 2 million in a few months.


----------



## Ace

Where are the WWE apologists at?

Won't dare step foot in here after the horrific attendance and rating this week.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

No joke, I didn't even watch Raw yesterday, and apparently, more felt the same way. It's patently obvious where all of this is going, and it's predictable for now 6 months straight until April 2018.
And when they give US something unpredictable, it's shit like Champion VS Champion in a NON TITLE Match. ON PPV!


----------



## virus21

Soon


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Are we getting the RAW Pizza then soon?


----------



## Ace

The WWE have lost two of their biggest stars they created post Cena.

They're going to lose Cena and Lesnar soon, ratings are free falling and they're performing in front of half empty arenas. Don't get me started on pyro or the cutting of every network exclusive show on the network. They have to look into markets outside the States because less and less people n the States want to waste their time on this shit.

Things are not looking good at all.


----------



## Demolition119

I would take my shots, but it would just be beating on a dead horse at this point. :lmao

edit: You know what.... screw that, :lol this dead horse is getting it's ass beaten. There will be no Goldberg to save their ratings free falling ass like there was last year.


----------



## Ace

Just a reminder, this was a go home show with several things announced beforehand :lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Not even S&D Security can save you from these ratings, Roman. They're all for you. :reigns


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

You know, a sane person would take this opportunity on a silver platter, and have Ambrose turn on the Shield, or even have BOTH Rollins and Ambrose turn on Reigns, and have finally the Wrestlemania Main Event Shield 3-way.
Or even better, have Ambrose and Rollins turn on Reigns at the Rumble, have the WM 3-way for the title, and there, have Ambrose turn on ALL of them and become Champ.

Jesus, the pop ...

But no, gotta have Reigns coronation 502.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Wouldn't it be amazing if they did the traditional Shield entrance, but half the building is empty, so they emerge from underneath the black tarp? :lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## JDP2016

Law said:


> Wasn't there a dud NFL game on this week as well?


Most MNF games are a dud. The better prime time games are on NBC Sunday nights.



CesaroSwing said:


> I wonder if the NBA coming back will do anything to their ratings.


Not only do they have the NBA to deal with but there are some solid TV shows on Fox, ABC and CBS to contend with as well.



ShowStopper said:


> There's this guy on the Yankees who hits like 500 foot Homeruns. It's insane. :lol


The problem with baseball is that one star player isn't enough to draw in fans. A guy like Judge or Stanton only gets 3-4 at bats a game. Fans want to see him hit a home-run and that can't happen every game. If that star happens to be a pitcher, he only pitches once every 5 games. In the NFL and NBA their top guys play more often AND they are on the court/field more often. Tom Brady can play all 16 games, unless he is hurt or it's a late season game with nothing to play for, and he is guaranteed to at least throw for 250-300 yards and one touchdown. He will also take every snap in an NFL game. A guy like Lebron or Steph Curry will play a majority of an 82 game season and will average 35-40 minutes a game. You're also more likely to get a dunk from Lebron or a bunch of three pointers from Curry when they play. American football and basketball gives you more guarantees than baseball.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

JDP2016 said:


> Most MNF games are a dud. The better prime time games are on NBC Sunday nights.
> 
> 
> 
> Not only do they have the NBA to deal with but there are some solid TV shows on Fox, ABC and CBS to contend with as well.
> 
> 
> 
> The problem with baseball is that one star player isn't enough to draw in fans. A guy like Judge or Stanton only gets 3-4 at bats a game. Fans want to see him hit a home-run and that can't happen every game. If that star happens to be a pitcher, he only pitches once every 5 games. In the NFL and NBA their top guys play more often AND they are on the court/field more often. Tom Brady can play all 16 games, unless he is hurt or it's a late season game with nothing to play for, and he is guaranteed to at least throw for 250-300 yards and one touchdown. He will also take every snap in an NFL game. A guy like Lebron or Steph Curry will play a majority of an 82 game season and will average 35-40 minutes a game. You're also more likely to get a dunk from Lebron or a bunch of three pointers from Curry when they play. American football and basketball gives you more guarantees than baseball.


I agree with all of that. Not saying it's just Judge himself. The Yankees have a huge, national fanbase.

And even still, that's still no excuse for last night's viewership. It was PITIFUL.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

If WWE Was smart after seeing the ratings/attendence they would change their wm plans and give up on reigns being the face of the company but Vince is too stuborn and he take the wwe down with Reigns rather admit he made a mistake with Reigns.


----------



## Chrome

LOL at that shit rating. They'll always watch though eh Vince?


----------



## SWITCHBLADE

How is that organic and totally natural Shield reunion panning out?


----------



## Bushmaster

Chrome said:


> LOL at that shit rating. They'll always watch though eh Vince?


See you next week.


----------



## Randy Lahey

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *Viewership (10/16/17 Vs 10/17/16):
> H1- 2.731M Vs 3.167M
> H2- 2.728M Vs 3.106M
> H3- 2.606M Vs 3.118M
> 3H- 2.688M Vs 3.130M ( - 14.12% / - 0.442M )
> 
> Demo (10/16/17 Vs 10/17/16):
> H1- 0.900D Vs 1.170D
> H2- 0.920D Vs 1.170D
> H3- 0.900D Vs 1.230D
> 3H- 0.907D Vs 1.190D
> 
> *


*

Huge drop from last year. Was last year the return of Goldberg? Raw has nobody on the roster that is going to save them from terrible ratings like Goldberg did last year.*


----------



## V-Trigger

Lol at The Shield. Eat shit Vince.


----------



## Chrome

Randy Lahey said:


> Huge drop from last year. Was last year the return of Goldberg? Raw has nobody on the roster that is going to save them from terrible ratings like Goldberg did last year.


Yeah, that was the Goldberg return episode. Off the top of my head, I can't think of anyone that can comeback and have an immediate impact on ratings like that now.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

Chrome said:


> Yeah, that was the Goldberg return episode. Off the top of my head, I can't think of anyone that can comeback and have an immediate impact on ratings like that now.


The Rock would but he not coming back to save them.


----------



## Frost99

This just sums up *EVERYTHING* in the thread......

#RatingsDOA #WWELogic


----------



## chronoxiong

What a shitty rating. It's as equal to Smackdown's peak ratings now. Someone, please wake up in the WWE!!!!


----------



## virus21

When we say that we can book better then WWE...at this point that might not be a empty claim


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The demo didn't even reach 1.0. This is truly the brightest timeline. :yes


----------



## Mra22

The brand split needs to end


----------



## squarebox

Mra22 said:


> The brand split needs to end


So does the era of Vince McMahon. Enough is enough with the old bastard.


----------



## Not Lying

I'm getting more and more convinced that Vince WANTS the company to die alongside of him, maybe a couple of years after he passes so that his legacy will read " wrestling died with Vince", when in reality it died because of him. ( in the 80's  )


----------



## Seafort

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Nah, they'll be back. At the latest on the Road to Rumble and Wrestlemania, when football is over and ratings come up slightly, at which point they can celebrate Roman Reigns for drawing dem numbers when he's the focal point of Wrestlemania.
> 
> Because, you know, Roman Reigns is the draw, not Wrestlemania.
> 
> 
> 
> :HA


Okay, I want WWE to use that in marketing materials for New Orleans and beyond. 

"No one wrestler is bigger than the WWE. And no promotion is bigger than Roman Reigns."


----------



## fabi1982

How would that help? It is the way the show is presented and built, the end of the brand split will not change that.



Mra22 said:


> The brand split needs to end


----------



## MC

Wait, is this at the point where nothing on raw counts since to no one watched yet? Because I got told that was the case.


----------



## SPCDRI

Holy mackerel, every hour below 2.8 million viewers, a 2.6 million viewers hour 3, the overrun below 2.7 million, below a 1 rating in the demo for every aspect of the show. Holy fucking shit. Smackdown routinely gets more than 2.6 million viewers. 5 years ago, over 4 million people watched a typical RAW. Now they are about 1.5 million viewers below where they were just 5 years ago. Holy fucking shit.


----------



## Brock

The Definition of Technician said:


> I'm getting more and more convinced that Vince WANTS the company to die alongside of him, maybe a couple of years after he passes so that his legacy will read " wrestling died with Vince", when in reality it died because of him. ( in the 80's  )


If I can't have it. Nobody will.

:vince3


----------



## Littbarski

SPCDRI said:


> Holy mackerel, every hour below 2.8 million viewers, a 2.6 million viewers hour 3, the overrun below 2.7 million, below a 1 rating in the demo for every aspect of the show. Holy fucking shit. Smackdown routinely gets more than 2.6 million viewers. 5 years ago, over 4 million people watched a typical RAW. Now they are about 1.5 million viewers below where they were just 5 years ago. Holy fucking shit.


I doubt over 4 million were watching Raw in October 2012 with football and baseball as competition. I found this chart from December 2012 and Raw is below 4 million every hour 
http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/sd...wives-of-beverly-hills-american-pickers-more/


----------



## SPCDRI

Its almost 1 million more viewers when football was more popular. Also, the later games in the season mean more than week 6. So RAW was doing 1 million more viewers against NFL when it was more popular and was playing more important games.


----------



## Not Lying

Brock said:


> If I can't have it. Nobody will.
> 
> :vince3


I know this falls under #crazyconspiracytheories but I can't find any decent explanation for the crap that's been happening since like 2013.


----------



## Mysteriobiceps

SPCDRI said:


> Holy mackerel, every hour below 2.8 million viewers, a 2.6 million viewers hour 3, the overrun below 2.7 million, below a 1 rating in the demo for every aspect of the show. Holy fucking shit. Smackdown routinely gets more than 2.6 million viewers. 5 years ago, over 4 million people watched a typical RAW. Now they are about 1.5 million viewers below where they were just 5 years ago. Holy fucking shit.


TBH it is no surprise. For example Look at the RAW threads' posts number decline here in Wrestlingforum. Also many Youtubers I used to watch have stopped watching WWE. It is pretty sad. Well I haven't watched Raw or Smackdown for a while and I skipped Hell in a Cell so there is that.


----------



## The Renegade

Goodness gracious, and Monday was actually a very good show. Can't say I'm too surprised though. They've been going against the grain for 10 years now and its biting them in their ass, nerfing red hot performers in favor of their chosen prospects. It was always bound to end this way..


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Holy. Fuck. BARELY over two and a half million viewers. We have a TLC PPV this Sunday too? ?

Tells me many things. 

Braun should have won the Universal Championship at No Mercy because fuck it, why not? Lesnar isn't drawing shit so why not take the chance? Now Braun has lost his luster/heat since and is going to become fodder for a wacky Shield reunion all the GEEKS had whined about wanting but now see how actual trash it is. 

Speaking of which, virtually nobody gives a FUCK about this forced Shield reunion and I'm glad. I used to love the Shield but this reunion was is a fraud. The Shield were at their strongest when the ratings/attendance decline was beginning and they broke up a year or two too early to where all three members had shitty World title reigns (from a business and product standpoint) and have been doing NOTHING to where the creative had no choice but to put them back together where the story makes no sense and is a way to stop the Roman booing at Ambrose and Rollins's expense. This was such a Vince/HHH ploy that its not even funny but it is since its falling on its face.

They have ruined Asuka's hype, too. All the shittyness of the Women's division, the Shield reunions, and arguably the WOAT feud in modern WWE history for quite some time in Bray/Balor have all taken away from the hype that Asuka is debuting this Sunday. Unless you are a diehard NXT or Josh GEEK, Asuka doesn't mean shit to you at the moment because you know she'll be ruined by creative the second they give her a false push to the top to throw the geeks a bone.

This Sunday's TLC PPV looks WOAT as fuck. Fuck the in ring expectations for some matches, this is trash and mostly everyone who isn't a shill or naive knows it. Thank goodness these ratings are sharply going down. :duck


----------



## validreasoning

Tlc is the definition of a one match show, actually one act show because I don't think people were clamoring to see miz team up with the other guys. Will be interesting to see how it sells ticket wise because that will tell us if the reunion was a success.

Target center holds 14,000 for wwe events with the tron

As for most recent wwe ppvs in the building
2014 elimination chamber did a 14,000 sellout
2010 bragging rights sold 9,000 tickets
2005 judgment day sold 9,500 tickets

Recent raws have done 8,500 (2016), 9,000 (2015), 9,000 (december 2014), 8,500 (June 2014)


----------



## CretinHop138

*Bad attendance again for Raw*


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/922606483073896449


----------



## Ace

*Re: Bad attendance again for Raw*

People don't want to see Lesnar's response to Jinder Mahal's challenge? :hmmm


----------



## The_It_Factor

*Re: Bad attendance again for Raw*

There are cameras right above that section, and what appears to be fans in the section above said camera.... May just be the “camera kill” section (or whatever it’s called) that is always closed off

Edit: The section without cameras is closed off as well. Hard to tell if it’s because of the stage in the way. On one hand, I hope they’re forced to make serious changes... on the other, despite not watching any more, live events are always fun, but they’ll probably never come back to my hometown because they wouldn’t be able to fill the Coliseum.


----------



## Mra22

*Re: Bad attendance again for Raw*



CretinHop138 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/922606483073896449


Record revenue!!! :vince5


----------



## famu720

*Re: Bad attendance again for Raw*

That is a bad sign; the parallels between the demise of WCW and the fall of WWE are frighteningly similar and striking!


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: Bad attendance again for Raw*

The product is def. cooling off. This will eventually be known as the Ice Age Era. :trolldog


----------



## JDP2016

*Re: Bad attendance again for Raw*

This needs to be a weekly thing. I just love the sight of empty seats.

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## BrokenFreakingNeck

*Re: Bad attendance again for Raw*

empty arena era.


----------



## Ace

*Re: Bad attendance again for Raw*

The funny thing is AJ subtly brought up SD's low attendance on Raw talk.


----------



## swagger_ROCKS

*Re: Bad attendance again for Raw*

Having AJ on RAW is still killing me :lmao:lmao:lmao


----------



## squarebox

*Re: Bad attendance again for Raw*

not a very good picture...need more.


----------



## CretinHop138

*Re: Bad attendance again for Raw*

Shitting hell thats bad. (From last week's go home show as an example)


----------



## DoctorWhosawhatsit

*Re: Bad attendance again for Raw*

edit: upon viewing another picture apparently The Big Dog is there... But really that only further explains the lack of ticket sales.

:reigns2




Seriously, this isn't even news anymore. Why would anyone in their right mind pay good money to go see Raw? If I want to go to a show I'm guaranteed to not enjoy I'll go see my cousins daughter's elementry school music recital and save money on the ticket price and parking...

The funny thing is I think more people will be at the recital.


----------



## jaybee006

I am at the show and half the arena is not tarped off...it is 1/4 at most.


----------



## AmWolves10

*Re: Bad attendance again for Raw*

No one wants to go to these stupid shows except WWE smarks.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Bad attendance again for Raw*

It's 100% deserved.


----------



## Brodus Clay

*Re: Bad attendance again for Raw*

But, but Roman told us he was selling ton of tickets and the most respected user here *Legit Boss *told me Roman was the only one fit to be face of the company!, those pics must be edited!!


----------



## Chrome

And this show had a Lesnar appearance too.


----------



## Not Lying

I hope their ratings suck this week for the way they treated Balor.


----------



## squarebox

Chrome said:


> And this show had a Lesnar appearance too.


:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

I love it!


----------



## Chrome

The Definition of Technician said:


> I hope their ratings suck this week for the way they treated Balor.


Building up Kane in 2017. :mj4


----------



## squarebox

And if people are wondering why I love seeing pictures like that, well, it's because it's the ONLY way that anything is ever going to change. Stop giving them your damn money and kick 'em right where it hurts most. I'm glad the message is finally starting to get through to these fans.


----------



## DemonKane_Legend

Whatt a great show. I loved it

Kane destroyed Ambrose, Rollins, AJ Styles and crushed Balor. This is Atittude Era Kane, a monster who comes in the ring and destroys every thing in his path. I marked out so hard last night, :mark:mark:mark:mark It was awesome!


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Chrome said:


> Building up Kane in 2017. :mj4


I'm just glad it's not Big Show.


----------



## AyrshireBlue

You need to put something on the line at Survivor Series seeing as they're ridiculously doing everything non title. Winners need to win more draft picks for their brand or something.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.332M
H2- 2.969M
H3- 2.557M
3H- 2.953M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 10.89% / - 0.363M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 13.88% / - 0.412M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 23.26% / - 0.775M )
10/23/17 Vs 10/16/17 ( + 9.86% / + 0.265M )

Demo (10/23/17 Vs 10/16/17):
H1- 1.150D Vs 0.900D
H2- 1.010D Vs 0.920D
H3- 0.940D Vs 0.900D
3H- 1.033D Vs 0.907D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 2nd, 4th & 8th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (10/23/17 Vs 10/24/16):
H1- 3.332M Vs 2.983M
H2- 2.969M Vs 2.806M
H3- 2.557M Vs 2.669M
3H- 2.953M Vs 2.819M ( + 4.75% / + 0.134M )

Demo (10/23/17 Vs 10/24/16):
H1- 1.150D Vs 1.070D
H2- 1.010D Vs 0.990D
H3- 0.940D Vs 0.960D
3H- 1.033D Vs 1.007D

Note: RAW this time last year was 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 6th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wow. First two hours are pretty good. 3rd hour awful as usual.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

That's .... disturbing.

But after the opener, you couldn't have possibly booked a clearer signal to turn off than Kane squashing Balor.


----------



## A-C-P

Replace Reigns with AJ, decent Raw # :hmmm

:troll


----------



## wwe9391

Usually PPV bump for the first 2 hours, but that 3rd hour still proving to be cancer


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I can't remember the last time the first hour was that high. Same for the 2nd hour, too, I think. 2nd hour was thisclose to being in the 3 millions.

:done

That opening match working wonders.

:drose


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Shield minus Reigns = Ratings


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 1 last night pretty much did the same exact number as Hour 1 the night after Summerslam; 3.4 million to 3.3 million.

That's insane considering how much farther down in importance a PPV like TLC is compared to SummerSlam; the 2nd biggest PPV of the year.

:lmao

That's incredible for TLC and says alot about how people felt about SummerSlam.

:mj4


----------



## JTB33b

No Roman= Ratings


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

DAT FIRST HOUR 

DAT THIRD HOUR :lol


----------



## Piper's Pit

*Re: Bad attendance again for Raw*



THE RETURN OF THE SHIV said:


> The product is def. cooling off. This will eventually be known as the Ice Age Era. :trolldog


Slow Death Era


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Time for my weekly insightful ratings commentary:


----------



## Optikk is All Elite

CretinHop138 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/922606483073896449


Imagine how these wrestlers will feel when they work on 25 December to empty seats like this.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I just had to google the capacity of Green Bay. If that's the Resch Center, ist has a capacity of 10.500. If there are some unused seats because of the stage, let's say the capacity is slightly below 10.000.
So, they drew like 5.000 people to a Post-PPV Raw with a Kurt Angle return the night prior? OmG


----------



## DemonKane_Legend

The highest rated our was the first, the our Kane was in


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

It also had the Shield and AJ Styles. Nobody gives a fuck about Kane.


----------



## Seafort

*Re: Bad attendance again for Raw*



CretinHop138 said:


> Shitting hell thats bad. (From last week's go home show as an example)


18 months from now they could be returning to arenas like this:


----------



## ecclesiastes10

isn't that hard camera side


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

:ti These ratings, man. I'm really seeing a company that I grew up on that was once great slowly but surely dwindle down to irrelevancy and eventually erosion right before my eyes. Empires really DO crumble eventually. What a time to be alive. 

I know it's been said already but it needs to be repeated again. The brand split is KILLING both shows. You don't have the creative, ability, star power, characters, and structure to do this brand split still when it has fastracked treating for both shows on a downward spiral with some levels of plateau momentum in between. It's doing even far worse than the end period of the first brand split and it had actual stars and draws.

You don't have enough talented writers to do one show, let alone two. Time to make some cuts and then keep the best talent from both shows. Those attendance pictures are getting embarrassing to look at (hard camera side or not, it doesn't fucking matter). You have Angle return in the ring, a PPV prior the night before, Asuka make her main roster debut AND a scheduled Brock Lesnar/Paul Heyman appearance and THAT is the best you can do ratings and attendance wise? Fuck the post PPV bump, you know that shit won't matter by next week. Strawman is just another guy now (shocker, like I didn't call that), the Shield reunion (out of their control or not) bombed, Angle's in ring return was thrown away without hype or build, Asuka's buzz is already beginning to die down, Kane is being rebuilt AGAIN in fucking 2017, more pointless, long matches that mean nothing, and a LOT of filler. The ratings/viewership for the last two hours were abysmal and negated the slight bump for hour one.

This company, as I said last week, is *nothing*. Simply nothing. There is nothing exciting, interesting, or buzzing happening in WWE right now and no amount of bullshit forced brand war or a nonsensical World champion v. World champion match leading to Survivor Series in hopes to pop a rating or buzz before the RTWM is going to change that. Seriously, what actual storyline right now do you genuinely give a fuck about without trying to sound contrarian? Exactly. This company is trash and people need to quit being GEEKS and acknowledge that.


----------



## The Renegade

Decent numbers. I'm not counting the third hour because it doesn't exist to me or the WWE apparently.


----------



## TB Tapp

♪when two tribes go to war
a 1.2 is all you can score♬


----------



## The Wood

This week's show did seem particularly out of touch. Finn Balor getting squashed is dumb (and I'm not even a fan of his), and the brand warfare stuff is a great way to disengage people who still at least want there to be a semblance of meaning behind why people are fighting. Who wants to see Becky Lynch acting like a bad girl and beating up Bayley? What is a fan of both girls -- ideally someone WWE wants to have in their pocket -- going to think about that? 

And yes, the brand split is dumb. Historically, it has ALWAYS hurt Raw. Sometimes SmackDown benefits. But SmackDown usually suffers in a unified WWE because they don't put any effort into it. You could still produce it to be a useful and meaningful show with a little bit of effort. Otherwise, either just cancel it and try to drive more people to Raw and hope that commitment increase to the point it gets you a lot better ratings and more Network subscribers, or you turn into SmackDown something completely different. Vince McMahon is hands-off completely. Give it to Triple H, Paul Heyman or, fuck it, Daniel Bryan to run. Let them change the aesthetics however they see fit (within budget), let them hire and fire. Let them book. A completely autonomous little show.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

This week's Raw was the first Raw that was over a 2.0 rating since September 6.

:lol


----------



## SPCDRI

ShowStopper said:


> This week's Raw was the first Raw that was over a 2.0 rating since September 6.
> 
> :lol


It was a PPV bump and they threw everything and the kitchen sink at it and 2 hours were below 3 million viewers.


----------



## InexorableJourney

I can only speculate that when the viewers realized that Kurt's moment was over, and BRAUN's murder was an afterthought, people just checked out.


----------



## Groovybaby

*Re: Bad attendance again for Raw*



CretinHop138 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/922606483073896449


That SHIELD stimulus package :booklel


----------



## MC

Raw had 5,500 people for RAW last night apparently.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Even shitty WCW Great American Bash 2000 drew 7.000 to Baltimore.
Nevermind that, even Nitro in its dying days drew 6.000 there in January of 2001.


----------



## Chrome

MC 16 said:


> Raw had 5,500 people for RAW last night apparently.


In an arena that can hold between 11,000 to 14,000 too.


----------



## CesaroSwing

They would have done better if they had advertised Steph's appearance


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

They would have done better if they had advertised Joe's appearance


----------



## MC

Chrome said:


> In an arena that can hold between 11,000 to 14,000 too.



Not looking good.



Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Even shitty WCW Great American Bash 2000 drew 7.000 to Baltimore.
> Nevermind that, even Nitro in its dying days drew 6.000 there in January of 2001.


Terrible. Looks like WWE will have to be using those bingo halls soon.


----------



## validreasoning

MC 16 said:


> Raw had 5,500 people for RAW last night apparently.


There was a bigger crowd last night than September 2016 or September 2015 which were estimated at 7k and 6,500. Neither of those shows had the top level open directly behind where commentators used to sit and it was open last night and basically full so last night's crowd was probably between 8-9,000 in a building that seats 11,000 for wrestling


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Crowd is confirmed 5.500. No need to count by eye.


----------



## validreasoning

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Crowd is confirmed 5.500. No need to count by eye.


By who? Even meltzers numbers are just estimates and sometimes off by quite a bit.

There is no way last night was less than last year for raw with more of the arena open. WWE only open sections after selling most of the other sections. Upper would be last sections to put on sale with hard camera upper the very last

Also there is no estimate for January 2001 nitro. None of the top tier was opened at all for that show while raw had 2/3 open last night.


----------



## CretinHop138

Eesh, Baltimore too, historic wrestling town.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

validreasoning said:


> By who? Even meltzers numbers are just estimates and sometimes off by quite a bit.
> 
> There is no way last night was less than last year for raw with more of the arena open. WWE only open sections after selling most of the other sections. Upper would be last sections to put on sale with hard camera upper the very last
> 
> Also there is no estimate for January 2001 nitro. None of the top tier was opened at all for that show while raw had 2/3 open last night.


Jesus, just get over it. Unlike yourself, who is pulling numbers out of the hat by looking at carefully chosen TV broadcast images, Meltzer just has to make a call.

There IS an estimate for January 2001 Nitro, and it's ca. 6.000. Just google it. 
Ffs.


----------



## MC

Baltimore is a wrestling town traditionally and they get roughly the same amount has ROH Global Wars: Chicago. :lol


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.102M
H2- 2.943M
H3- 2.517M
3H- 2.854M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 5.13% / - 0.159M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 14.48% / - 0.426M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 18.86% / - 0.585M )
10/30/17 Vs 10/23/17 ( - 3.35% / - 0.099M )

Demo (10/30/17 Vs 10/23/17):
H1- 0.980D Vs 1.150D
H2- 0.980D Vs 1.010D
H3- 0.870D Vs 0.940D
3H- 0.943D Vs 1.033D

Note: RAW is 5th, 4th & 6th by hourly demo & 6th, 7th & 12th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (10/30/17 Vs 10/31/16):
H1- 3.102M Vs 2.747M
H2- 2.943M Vs 2.617M
H3- 2.517M Vs 2.436M
3H- 2.854M Vs 2.600M ( + 9.77% / + 0.254M )

Demo (10/30/17 Vs 10/31/16):
H1- 0.980D Vs 0.930D
H2- 0.980D Vs 0.900D
H3- 0.870D Vs 0.870D
3H- 0.943D Vs 0.900D

Note: RAW this time last year was 3rd, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 8th, 10th & 11th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## JDP2016

Yep. More third hour bullshit including the "main event" results in low viewership.

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## IceTheRetroKid

*They didn't advertise that the red ropes were coming back early so people didn't tune in knowing they'd be gone for this weeks ratings.

Next weeks show will have the red ropes advertised, but the show will be taped. Have to keep waiting for the magic of the ropes to start working again. *


----------



## Sensei Utero

What is the actual rating number for WWE these days?


----------



## MC

The third hour was shit. Not suprised.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Time for another week's worth of insightful ratings commentary.










Hour 3 is utterly abysmal. True, it was higher rated than last year, but last year had the disadvantage of airing on Halloween. These low ratings. See what happens when the Big Dog isn't the focal point. :reigns2


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I was actually expecting right below 3 million for hour 1 - so that's a little better than I thought (and I think hour 2 was a little higher than I would've thought).

But that third hour, AGAIN it tanks. Honestly, it was stupid what they did with Braun. They gave us a hint he would be appearing without actually saying it. Either make it a total surprise (cut out the garbage bag and do it in the middle of the show) or cut out the garbage stuff anyway, and have Angle tell Miz at the beginning of the night he would defend the IC Title against a returning Braun Strowman - then either build up Miz's disbelief that Strowman is actually returning so soon or actually use it as a way for him to be confident as he'd expect Strowman to be much less than 100%.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Road to Wrestlemania can't come soon enough, time to commence another ratings decline.

Every year for a few years now, after RtWM, viewership is down from the previous year. But I'm sure it's the cord cutters, who coincidentally do so every year around WM time, and not the thoroughly transparent, nonsensical and rancid booking they do every year for Wrestlemania.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Surprised about Hour 1 being above 3 million and hour 2 being very close to the 3 million mark; both things happening for the 2nd week in a row, and without some of their biggest names. Kind of surprised.


----------



## 751161

ShowStopper said:


> Surprised about Hour 1 being above 3 million and hour 2 being very close to the 3 million mark; both things happening for the 2nd week in a row, and without some of their biggest names. Kind of surprised.


God, don't let Stephanie see those.

She'll get it in to her head we want to see *MORE* of her


----------



## MC

THE RETURN OF THE SHIV said:


> Time for another week's worth of insightful ratings commentary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hour 3 is utterly abysmal. True, it was higher rated than last year, but last year had the disadvantage of airing on Halloween. These low ratings. See what happens when *Kalisto* isn't the focal point. :Rollins


Fixed for you.


----------



## squarebox

MC 16 said:


> Raw had 5,500 people for RAW last night apparently.


pics or it didn't happen


----------



## The_It_Factor

Well, from what I can tell, ratings are about as I expected.... I Didn’t think MNF would have much of an impact on Raw ratings as I didnt think there was much of a crossover these days, and despite the poor ratings, it doesn’t seem to be a ratings apocalypse as so many seemed to expect.

With such a big matchup on MNF, this fall has shown that WWE really doesn’t have much in the way of casual viewers any longer.


----------



## The Renegade

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Road to Wrestlemania can't come soon enough, time to commence another ratings decline.
> 
> Every year for a few years now, after RtWM, viewership is down from the previous year. But I'm sure it's the cord cutters, who coincidentally do so every year around WM time, and not the thoroughly transparent, nonsensical and rancid booking they do every year for Wrestlemania.


I'm confused as to what you're getting at here. The numbers are actually better year on year for a change. I know the recent trends have seen ratings drop consistently, but they seem to be bucking the trend this go round. 

Might be because they are actually trying to give us solid ppvs in the fall for the first time in what seems like ages. Could be because Raw (and Smackdown too) have the largest roster of top flight stars that we've seen in nearly a decade.


----------



## A-C-P

The Renegade said:


> I'm confused as to what you're getting at here. The numbers are actually better year on year for a change. I know the recent trends have seen ratings drop consistently, but they seem to be bucking the trend this go round.
> 
> Might be because they are actually trying to give us solid ppvs in the fall for the first time in what seems like ages. Could be because Raw (and Smackdown too) have the largest roster of top flight stars that we've seen in nearly a decade.


No presidential election this year, that is the difference, the election coverage from last year drew a lot of viewers away from everything people would normally watch in the US.


----------



## The Renegade

A-C-P said:


> No presidential election this year, that is the difference, the election coverage from last year drew a lot of viewers away from everything people would normally watch in the US.


That's a really good point. I'd say it makes sense then to compare fall '15 with the numbers now, but that is when the rash of injuries began to occur that took out a quarter of the upper card. '

At any rate, hours 1 and 2 are looking ok. Hour 3 I can't speak for.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

A-C-P said:


> No presidential election this year, that is the difference, the election coverage from last year drew a lot of viewers away from everything people would normally watch in the US.


Also, last year's Raw fell right on Halloween, so no surprise this year was slightly up.
After Wrestlemania, Raw fell to frightening lows. Can't see why it should be different 2018, with the upcoming Reigns coronation.


----------



## TheGeneticFreak

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/926096245398978560
Yikes


----------



## MC

Christ. I barely want to watch raw till 4 am so I doubt other want to either.


----------



## Ace

*Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*



> Raw and Smackdown in Manchester this week are both sold out with 14,000 tickets sold. That's a marked contrast from the U.S. markets where the attendance for both has been well below normal the past few months.


http://www.f4wonline.com/daily-upda...dule-manami-toyota-retires-earl-hebner-245631

Really good numbers with nothing announced for Raw. Also rules out slow tickets sales as a reason for changing SD's matches for this week.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

England's a little behind the curve, but they'll catch up soon enough.


----------



## Mox Girl

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

OMG what will people on here do without being able to post about how Raw and SD have empty seats? :lol

The UK always gets good numbers though.


----------



## Ace

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*



THE RETURN OF THE SHIV said:


> England's a little behind the curve, but they'll catch up soon enough.


 Do they usually sell out?


----------



## taker1986

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

They really should give us a PPV.


----------



## Laughable Chimp

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

Its the UK. This is expected.


----------



## Kratosx23

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

English fans are really doing the rest of us a disservice. STOP ENABLING THEIR BULLSHIT.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*



Law said:


> Do they usually sell out?


Just judging by the tv product, but they always seem really hot for and appreciative of WWE.


----------



## ThePhenomenal-1

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

Speaking as someone from manchester and with tickets its more off how limited we actually get to attend live shows. Raw and SD is in manchester once every couple of years so seeing both brands sat in the crowd is a very rare spectacle for us UK fans. For me especially being able to see AJ perform in a WWE ring was a big plus. Yes he will likely lose and the show will likely suck but hey at least i'll have had the pleasure of seeing AJ perform not to mention a few others.


----------



## Mra22

*RAW 25 already sold out*

The Manhattan Center portion of the Raw 25th anniversary special has sold out, including the very expensive VIP tickets. Raw will simulcast from both the Barclays Center and the Manhattan Center Grand Ballroom on January 22, 2018 to celebrate 25 years of Raw. The Undertaker, Shawn Michaels, and Kevin Nash are currently scheduled to appear at the Manhattan Center. Regular matches will also be held inside the Grand Ballroom, which was home to the first episode of Raw and many others that followed in the early years. Meanwhile, tickets for the other part of Raw at the Barclays Center in Brooklyn are nearly sold out, with only a handful of tickets remaining in the upper section. Raw 25 is expected to be a loaded show with stars from the past mingling with the current stars. Raw started airing for the first time on January 11, 1993.

http://www.gerweck.net/2017/11/03/raw-25-tickets-vanish-quickly/


----------



## Chris JeriG.O.A.T

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

I wonder how much WWE makes on a week in Europe as opposed to a week in India :hmm


----------



## Therapy

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*



THE RETURN OF THE SHIV said:


> England's a little behind the curve, but they'll catch up soon enough.





Tyrion Lannister said:


> English fans are really doing the rest of us a disservice. STOP ENABLING THEIR BULLSHIT.





THE RETURN OF THE SHIV said:


> Just judging by the tv product, but they always seem really hot for and appreciative of WWE.


It's none of this..

WWE RAW and Smackdown only come around once a year to the UK. So while they also may be tired of the crap, it's a big deal when it shows up to see live. It's like the circus coming to town. The UK has a insane rail transit system and most anyone can catch a cheap train to the event location without much hassle.


----------



## Illogical

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*



Ambrose Girl said:


> The UK always gets good numbers


^^^^^

Extremely unsurprising that it sold out.


----------



## Buster Cannon

*Re: RAW 25 already sold out*

*Elias* putting butts in the seats :grin2:


----------



## hmmm488

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

The fans know Roman has been sick and want to jump on the chance to go to a show without him. 

On another note, maybe Jack Gallagher for WHC to cement spot in English market.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

Overseas tours mean nothing in the grand scheme.
Even WCW 1999/2000 sold out overseas, like Australia or Germany.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: RAW 25 already sold out*

Hardly an achievement, with a capacity of only a few thousand.

Interesting though, that the Manhattan Center was also used as a Masonic Temple, per Wikipedia.


----------



## Architect-Rollins

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

Not surprising. They only get Raw/SD live twice a year and that garner's fan attention and attendance.


----------



## Heath V

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*



Tyrion Lannister said:


> English fans are really doing the rest of us a disservice. STOP ENABLING THEIR BULLSHIT.


It's always a good time in person.


----------



## Chrome

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

LOL at it being news that Raw and SDL sell out for a change.


----------



## Jam

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

Non "story" we get WWE twice a year of course it sells out

What a shame that the usual circle jerkers can't cream over the empty seats though, I'm sure you can survive an extra week


----------



## Miss Sally

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*



Chris JeriG.O.A.T said:


> I wonder how much WWE makes on a week in Europe as opposed to a week in India :hmm


WWE has so many European stars that they'd clean up nicely in Europe just touring it. Cesaro speaks five languages and you got other ambassadors for Europe that you think it would be a no brainer!

Tho Vince doesn't much care for people from England so probably doesn't care for the rest. It really doesn't make any sense to me.

Also ticket sales wouldn't go down because Europe gets so few shows.


----------



## Kratosx23

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*



Therapy said:


> It's none of this..
> 
> WWE RAW and Smackdown only come around once a year to the UK. So while they also may be tired of the crap, it's a big deal when it shows up to see live. It's like the circus coming to town. The UK has a insane rail transit system and most anyone can catch a cheap train to the event location without much hassle.


I don't care if they come around once a DECADE. Think about the kind of message that sends them. The only way things even have a CHANCE of improving is if people stop giving them money.






Be like Brian.


----------



## DoctorWhosawhatsit

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*



taker1986 said:


> They really should give us a PPV.


Agree entirely and I’m not even British, despite what my username might suggest :lol

U.K. Shows always seem to sell out and the crowds always hot, not to mention a ppv there’s would have a special feel to it.


----------



## Punkamaniac

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

They only come to the United Kingdom twice a year (London in April/May and then another city in November) so of course it's always going to sell out. I should've been going this year but due to circumstances I can't, maybe next year though.


----------



## zrc

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

And the world is round. In other news Brad Maddox will join Attenborough on Blue Planet & Nikki Bella gets booted from DWTS because her partner was told he could look but can't touch.


----------



## squarebox

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*



Jamaican said:


> What a shame that the usual circle jerkers can't cream over the empty seats though, *I'm sure you can survive an extra week*


Yea I can. One sold out England show doesn't erase the fact that there's been parts of arenas all over the US tarped off for many of their shows this year.

Business as usual next week, can't wait.


----------



## Chris JeriG.O.A.T

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*



Miss Sally said:


> WWE has so many European stars that they'd clean up nicely in Europe just touring it. Cesaro speaks five languages and you got other ambassadors for Europe that you think it would be a no brainer!
> 
> Tho Vince doesn't much care for people from England so probably doesn't care for the rest. It really doesn't make any sense to me.
> 
> Also ticket sales wouldn't go down because Europe gets so few shows.


You'd think instead of touring the Southern states 3 times a year with half filled arenas and crowds that barely give a half-fuck, they'd throw some extra tours to Europe. I'm sure the overhead is much higher but I feel like a full arena in Northwest Easternshire-upon-Tyne should be more profitable than a third full arena in Sisterfuck, Alabama.


----------



## Crasp

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

No surprise.

1. It's the UK. We don't get as many chances to see a Raw or SD live here, so when one comes around, some people will literally travel from the other end of the country (or from further afield in Europe) to go.

2. UK fans will have fun _in spite_ of the show if we have to, so there's no fear of wasting our money.

3. The resale/tout (not the failed app) market in the UK is obnoxiously big. So tickets selling out is not in itself surprising. What's more concerning is the number of people that will pay the inflated prices for these tickets :/


I also like to think we make Raw/SD just a little bit more interesting to watch if the show isn't pulling its own weight.


----------



## Jobu25

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

Buncha suckers out there.


Plz take them and don't let them leave. The US will be okay


----------



## JTB33b

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

They are paying to come see Paige reclaim her house.


----------



## Chris JeriG.O.A.T

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*



JTB33b said:


> They are paying to come see Paige reclaim her house.


Ughh... she's really going to return isn't she? I hope Kurt Angle comes out in the milk truck and sprays her like he did SCSA, the visual metaphor would be amazing.


----------



## UniversalGleam

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

tbf WWE doesnt come round our neck of the woods so often so its more of a novelty for people to get out and go and see it.

even queen lizzy loves herself some wwe smackdoown on saturday morning with her tea and crumpets.


----------



## MC

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

Perhaps WWE should do a TNA and move to the UK, they might start making some money again :draper2


----------



## Miss Sally

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*



Chris JeriG.O.A.T said:


> You'd think instead of touring the Southern states 3 times a year with half filled arenas and crowds that barely give a half-fuck, they'd throw some extra tours to Europe. I'm sure the overhead is much higher but I feel like a full arena in Northwest Easternshire-upon-Tyne should be more profitable than a third full arena in Sisterfuck, Alabama.


I hate when they go to the South, from what people said it used to be a hotbed for Wrestling and good crowds but every time I seen them there the crowd sucks and the arenas look empty. They don't even cheer for fan faves, IWC or otherwise. They're just a shitty community.

100% more profitable if the go to Europe, just leave people who aren't going to wrestle home, advertise your biggest stars and have European stars go over first to hype it up and you'll make money. 

India/Southern US is a waste of time and money.


----------



## Ben Lister

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

Great, full crowds of loud mouthed idiots chanting a load of shit like its a British Indy show, just fucking quality.


----------



## Jam

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*



squarebox said:


> Yea I can. One sold out England show doesn't erase the fact that there's been parts of arenas all over the US tarped off for many of their shows this year.
> 
> Business as usual next week, can't wait.


Thanks for clarifying


----------



## MC

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*



Ben Lister said:


> Great, full crowds of loud mouthed idiots chanting a load of shit like its a British Indy show, just fucking quality.


So you'd rather have a half empty arena with dead crowd?


----------



## 751161

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

Not surprising at all.

I hope the crowd is hot as fuck. So tired of dead crowds. Can't really blame them because of the product mind you, but it still takes the wind out of the shows.

I'm just waiting for the :braun pop.


----------



## BehindYou

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*

Now that it's a Network model and not PPV model, there's more opportunity for a UK special than ever.

Book one of the big 4 in the UK next year and they can sell out Wembley IMO and it doesn't leave US viewers paying PVP rates for a non-live show.


----------



## Ben Lister

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*



MC 16 said:


> So you'd rather have a half empty arena with dead crowd?


Yep I really would, can't stand uk crowds. It'd also make the wwe realise even more that people are sick of the shit they're giving us if the bloody uk fans were sick of it as well.


----------



## zrc

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*



Ben Lister said:


> Yep I really would, can't stand uk crowds. It'd also make the wwe realise even more that people are sick of the shit they're giving us if the bloody uk fans were sick of it as well.


Jillian Halls Christmas album went into the UK album charts. Taste isn't our strongest suite.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I would guess if WWE only did one or two strings of shows per year in the US, the crowds would be loud, too, no matter what shite they are being served.

A plate of brown rice, plain, no salt, is cause for celebration if you are starving.


----------



## BrokenFreakingNeck

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*



BehindYou said:


> Now that it's a Network model and not PPV model, there's more opportunity for a UK special than ever.
> 
> Book one of the big 4 in the UK next year and they can sell out Wembley IMO and it doesn't leave US viewers paying PVP rates for a non-live show.


:lmao

They killed off their PPV business but still use Raw to build up ppvs whose only available to 1.5Million subscribers. Much less viewers than an actual weekly Raw show. 

They'd generate more acitivity if they just build up to a Raw Special/ppv once per month then continue to do ppvs where no one is watching and barely boost subscribers count. People only have the network for the old content anyways. 

Never change Vinny. :lmao


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.935M
H2- 2.959M
H3- 2.630M
3H- 2.841M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 0.82% / + 0.024M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 11.12% / - 0.329M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 10.39% / - 0.305M )
11/6/17 Vs 10/30/17 ( - 0.46% / - 0.013M )

Demo (11/6/17 Vs 10/30/17):
H1- 0.950D Vs 0.980D
H2- 0.980D Vs 0.980D
H3- 0.910D Vs 0.870D
3H- 0.947D Vs 0.943D

Note: RAW is 5th, 4th & 6th by hourly demo & 5th, 4th & 9th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (11/6/17 Vs 11/7/16):
H1- 2.935M Vs 3.066M
H2- 2.959M Vs 2.731M
H3- 2.630M Vs 2.505M
3H- 2.841M Vs 2.767M ( + 2.67% / + 0.074M )

Demo (11/6/17 Vs 11/7/16):
H1- 0.950D Vs 1.060D
H2- 0.980D Vs 0.960D
H3- 0.910D Vs 0.860D
3H- 0.947D Vs 0.960D

Note: RAW this time last year was 4th, 7th & 9th by hourly demo & 6th, 11th & 13th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I guess that's what you call writing a show that doesn't generate buzz.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Wow. That's 3 straight weeks in a row of hours 1 and 2 doing better than usual.


----------



## MC

Better then last week I suppose.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Maybe they can save money and stop going live every week. Live vs. taped aren't that much different, at least this week. The numbers aren't great, but the first two hours were quite stable. Hour 3, as per usual, feels like a lost cause.


----------



## Demolition119

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*



Miss Sally said:


> I hate when they go to the South, from what people said it used to be a hotbed for Wrestling and good crowds but every time I seen them there the crowd sucks and the arenas look empty. They don't even cheer for fan faves, IWC or otherwise. They're just a shitty community.
> 
> 100% more profitable if the go to Europe, just leave people who aren't going to wrestle home, advertise your biggest stars and have European stars go over first to hype it up and you'll make money.
> 
> India/Southern US is a waste of time and money.


Southern US used to be hot for wrestling until WWE killed off almost everything that was southern wrestling. Now most people down here could give less then 2 fucks about wrestling.


----------



## Seafort

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*



Demolition119 said:


> Southern US used to be hot for wrestling until WWE killed off almost everything that was southern wrestling. Now most people down here could give less then 2 fucks about wrestling.


They can increase their touring of Europe - they did this in 1992 and 1993 in response to the first European wrestling boom - but that can only go so far.
There is added expense in touring in Europe, and the Euro is increasing in value against the dollar. FX rate changes will heighten the cost of running tours in Europe.


----------



## Seafort

THE RETURN OF THE SHIV said:


> Maybe they can save money and stop going live every week. Live vs. taped aren't that much different, at least this week. The numbers aren't great, but the first two hours were quite stable. Hour 3, as per usual, feels like a lost cause.


That's something WWE has in their back pocket as an easy cost-savings method next year. One 5 hour RAW taping every two weeks, and a 4 hour Smackdown taping as well. Each RAW or Smackdown costs $500K - $700K to broadcast, and this would halve the television production costs.


----------



## WúlverClub

Personally can't see WWE coming off of the live show every week to be honest. At least one of them will always be live, they could feasibly revert Smackdown back to tape, but live is their gimmick and what they're good at (at least the technical side of live broadcasting). That being said, if they were hit hard enough in the pocketbook, I suppose it good instigate some form of radical change.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.262M
H2- 3.061M
H3- 2.769M
3H- 3.031M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 6.16% / - 0.201M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 9.54% / - 0.292M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 15.11% / - 0.493M )
11/13/17 Vs 11/6/17 ( + 6.69% / + 0.190M )

Demo (11/13/17 Vs 11/6/17):
H1- 1.120D Vs 0.950D
H2- 1.070D Vs 0.980D
H3- 0.990D Vs 0.910D
3H- 1.060D Vs 0.947D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 3rd & 6th by hourly demo & 2nd, 3rd & 7th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (11/13/17 Vs 11/14/16):
H1- 3.262M Vs 2.960M
H2- 3.061M Vs 2.930M
H3- 2.769M Vs 2.743M
3H- 3.031M Vs 2.878M ( + 5.32% / + 0.153M )

Demo (11/13/17 Vs 11/14/16):
H1- 1.120D Vs 1.000D
H2- 1.070D Vs 1.000D
H3- 0.990D Vs 0.950D
3H- 1.060D Vs 0.983D

Note: RAW this time last year was 5th, 4th & 7th by hourly demo & 9th, 10th & 11th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

3.0 million final number, after all that hype, HHH appearing, and the go-home to SS.

:mj4


----------



## MC

ShowStopper said:


> 3.0 million final number, after all that hype, HHH appearing, and the go-home to SS.
> 
> :mj4
> 
> Credit to whatever took place in Hour 3. Not a good number, of course, but a higher hour 3 than usual.


Kalisto should have gone last, he draws those 3 million plus vewers for the third hours.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

:Braun doing his thing in that third. Making it not drop as much as it would've ...


... well actually 3rd hour was still down over half a million from the first hour. Considering that they had a main event between two monsters and The Shield's first match together in years, it's actually pretty disappointing.


----------



## MC

#BadNewsSanta said:


> :Braun doing his thing in that third. Making it not drop as much as it would've ...
> 
> 
> ... well actually 3rd hour was still down over half a million from the first hour. Considering that they had a main event between two monsters and The Shield's first match together in years, it's actually pretty disappointing.


I forgot that the Shield and Braun matches were in the third hour. fpalm That's not good.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Significant increase with the return of Brother Reigns :reigns2. @ShowStopper if you're gonna brag about ratings in his absence, then this definitely counts.*


> - The November 13th edition of RAW did 3.031 million viewers overall. Last week's show did 2.841 million viewers.
> 
> Below is the hourly breakdown:
> 
> Hour 1: 3.262 million viewers
> Hour 2: 3.061 million viewers
> Hour 3: 2.769 million viewers


----------



## Littbarski

Thats an impressive number when you consider it's up over 5% from last year and last year's shows had the first in-ring confrontation between Lesnar and Goldberg which was advertised for weeks.

Last nights show only had the women's match advertised in advance. HHH wasn't advertised and


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Legit BOSS said:


> *Significant increase with the return of Brother Reigns :reigns2. @ShowStopper if you're gonna brag about ratings in his absence, then this definitely counts.*


That wasn't bragging. I said I was just as perplexed/somewhat confused by it. You can give him credit, if you want. Go home show for the one two brand PPV of the year and the first two hours have been better lately over the past few weeks for some reason as I was pointing out in Reigns' absence. It was just...odd.

Overall number of 3.0 million. They've been in this range for awhile now. It's not an overall improvement.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: Raw and SD tickets sold out for next week's tapings*



Demolition119 said:


> Southern US used to be hot for wrestling until WWE killed off almost everything that was southern wrestling. Now most people down here could give less then 2 fucks about wrestling.


It's called the Russo-Turner Syndrome.


----------



## MC

Stephanie McMahon emasticating Kurt got the ratings :trolldog


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Littbarski said:


> Thats an impressive number when you consider it's up over 5% from last year and last year's shows had the first in-ring confrontation between Lesnar and Goldberg which was advertised for weeks.
> 
> Last nights show only had the women's match advertised in advance. HHH wasn't advertised and


*Right. Don't let anyone spin this as Triple H's spike when none of us knew he was showing up and it wasn't reported on any dirt sheet. *


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Legit BOSS said:


> *Significant increase with the return of Brother Reigns :reigns2. @ShowStopper if you're gonna brag about ratings in his absence, then this definitely counts.*


Brother Reigns' match drew a 0.5 million drop from hour 1.
Unless viewers are psychics foreseeing his appearance in hour one, Reigns is as much of a no-draw as ever.


----------



## MC

It's a sad day when 3 million viewers is considered an improvement. Sad but true. :sadbecky


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Brother Reigns' match drew a 0.5 million drop from hour 1.
> Unless viewers are psychics foreseeing his appearance in hour one, Reigns is as much of a no-draw as ever.


*His return was advertised all last week with vignettes :lmao. It's obvious that they would tune into the first hour to see what's going on for the rest of the show.*


----------



## MC

Legit BOSS said:


> *His return was advertised all last week with vignettes :lmao. It's obvious that they would tune into the first hour to see what's going on for the rest of the show.*



But they didn't stay for the Shield match later that night. Which was also promoted.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

MC 16 said:


> I forgot that the Shield and Braun matches were in the third hour. fpalm That's not good.


Yeah, my bad, I thought the Shield match took place in Hour 2? Guess not. That's the assumption I was working under when I said a good hour 3. With the Shield match and Braun/Kane in hour 3, that's pretty meh at best.


----------



## MC

ShowStopper said:


> Yeah, my bad, I thought the Shield match took place in Hour 2? Guess not. That's the assumption I was working under when I said a good hour 3. With the Shield match and Braun/Kane in hour 3, that's pretty meh at best.


Not enough small luchadors :draper2


----------



## InexorableJourney

I truly believe the increase in viewers was the Paige bump.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

MC 16 said:


> But they didn't stay for the Shield match later that night. Which was also promoted.


*Show everyone the last time hour 3 outdrew hour 1. Until you can do that, hold these facts:* http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...eek-wwe-raw-viewership-with-the-fallout-from/ 



> Monday's WWE RAW, featuring the fallout from Sunday's SummerSlam pay-per-view, drew 3.404 million viewers. This is up 5.3% from last week's 3.233 million viewers and is the second best number for the show this year, behind the post-Royal Rumble and post-WrestleMania episodes.
> 
> This week's show featured free agent John Cena returning to the red brand to team with Roman Reigns for a win over Samoa Joe and WWE Intercontinental Champion The Miz in the main event.
> 
> For this week's show, the first hour drew 3.416 million viewers, the second hour drew 3.581 million viewers and the final hour drew 3.216 million viewers.
> 
> RAW was #4 in viewership for the night on cable, behind NFL pre-season coverage, the Presidential Address on Afghanistan and post-address coverage. RAW was #1 in the 18-49 demographic.


*
That's the second highest rated RAW of the year, which lost 200,000 viewers by the third hour. That's called normalcy. *
*
These are the numbers from the past 3 weeks without Reigns:* http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...re-survivor-series-finally-brings-viewership/



> October 23rd Episode: 2.953 million viewers (Post TLC show with Kurt Angle returning to a WWE ring for the first time in over 11 years: 300,000 viewer increase)
> 
> October 30th Episode: 2.854 million viewers (Slight decrease)
> 
> November 6th Episode: 2.841 million viewers (Slight decrease)
> 
> November 13th Episode: 3.031 million viewers (200,000 viewer increase)


*
Also, this is an average, and The Shield vs. Shesaro and The Miz opened third hour and concluded at 10:13 PM, so everyone could've left right after that because they didn't care to see Strowman vs. Kane or whatever else came after it.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I have no problem with anyone wanting to celebrate this number. But then I absolutely get to celebrate Rollins' 2015 title run which was significantly rated higher than this number. 

This is more than fine by me.

:shrug


----------



## DELETE

There are so many things that could have contributed to the ratings bump. Paige being rumored to return this being an go home show for one of the big 4 the fact that Brock made an appearance etc. But of course LB chooses to push this agenda that Reigns is a draw. :deanfpalm


----------



## Chrome

ShowStopper said:


> I have no problem with anyone wanting to celebrate this number. But then I absolutely get to celebrate Rollins' 2015 title run which was significantly rated higher than this number.
> 
> This is more than fine by me.
> 
> :shrug


Or celebrate Punk's 2012 title run, which was higher than that and WAY higher than the ratings nowadays.


----------



## MC

Legit BOSS said:


> *Show everyone the last time hour 3 outdrew hour 1. Until you can do that, hold these facts: http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...eek-wwe-raw-viewership-with-the-fallout-from/
> 
> That's the second highest rated RAW of the year, which lost 200,000 viewers in the third hour. That's called normalcy.
> 
> These are the numbers from the past 3 weeks without Reigns: http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...re-survivor-series-finally-brings-viewership/
> 
> *
> *
> Also, this is an average, and The Shield vs. Shesaro and The Miz opened third hour and concluded at 10:13 PM, so everyone could've left right after that because they didn't care to see Strowman vs. Kane or whatever else came after it.*


Shield match got the lowest rating of the night, the shield has Roman who you claimed was the draw for the bump this week. :fact


----------



## 751161

Hour 1 needs to stop getting so many viewers, Stephanie will think we want to see more of her :monkey

For god sake, don't let Stephanie think she's a draw. 

Honestly, they deserve the better ratings, they made some great additions to the card & got me excited for SvS :shrug Didn't seem possible a couple of weeks ago. Now, let's hope they keep the momentum up, put on a great SvS and we actually have interesting fallout next week.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

MC 16 said:


> Shield match got the lowest rating of the night, the shield has Roman who you claimed was the draw for the bump this week. :fact


*And you wonder why you get ignored. Thank you for the constant reminder to not take you seriously.*


----------



## MC

The Fourth Wall said:


> Hour 1 needs to stop getting so many viewers, Stephanie will think we want to see more of her :monkey
> 
> For god sake, don't let Stephanie think she's a draw.
> 
> Honestly, they deserve the better ratings, they made some great additions to the card & got me excited for SvS :shrug Didn't seem possible a couple of weeks ago. Now, let's hope they keep the momentum up, put on a great SvS and we actually have interesting fallout next week.


Don't deny the truth. She is a draw.















Legit BOSS said:


> *And you wonder why you get ignored. Thank you for the constant reminder to not take you seriously.*


No, you ignored me because you would've had been exposed for hypocrite even more then you have been. Remember JJ is the most over person on the roster according to your logic, is he not? 


Now learn what a draw is. If the match didn't draw more viewers it's not a draw. :fact.


----------



## MFR55

DELETE said:


> There are so many things that could have contributed to the ratings bump. Paige being rumored to return this being an go home show for one of the big 4 the fact that Brock made an appearance etc. But of course LB chooses to push this agenda that Reigns is a draw. :deanfpalm


Miami dolphins were also on the prime time for the 3 week,shitty games on every single one of them,some people probably decided to not watch the match this time

but i would agree that this being a go home show for A big 4 PPV and lesnar were the main reasons for this small improvement


----------



## 751161

MC 16 said:


> Don't deny the truth. She is a draw.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

MFR55 said:


> but i would agree that this being a go home show for A big 4 PPV and lesnar were the main reasons for this small improvement


*The last episode Lesnar was on was the October 23rd episode after Kurt Angle's in ring return. Roman's return outdrew that. Lesnar's appearance on the September 11th episode of RAW did 2.9 mil. Roman's return outdrew that. Lesnar isn't and has never been responsible for any major spikes since 2014. *


----------



## Mra22

InexorableJourney said:


> I truly believe the increase in viewers was the Paige bump.


Can people stop talking about that nasty woman ?


----------



## DELETE

Mra22 said:


> Can people stop talking about that nasty woman ?


Nah. Because that "nasty woman" was one of the best divas we had in the past decade in her prime. I don't think a sex tape should just erase all that from our memories.


----------



## validreasoning

Update on monthly averages

Raw in September 2016 averaged 2.730 million viewers live 
Raw in September 2017 averaged 2.898 milion viewers live

Raw in October 2016 averaged 2.821 million viewers live
Raw in October 2017 averaged 2.828 million viewers live

SD in September 2016 averaged 2.436 million viewers live
SD in September 2017 averaged 2.597 million viewers live

SD in October 2016 averaged 2.324 million viewers live
SD in October 2017 averaged 2.386 million viewers live


----------



## RLStern

DELETE said:


> There are so many things that could have contributed to the ratings bump. Paige being rumored to return this being an go home show for one of the big 4 the fact that Brock made an appearance etc. But of course LB chooses to push this agenda that Reigns is a draw. :deanfpalm


*
Paige isn't a draw, that's going into deep lengths, also though most fans have internet, most fans don't go on dirtsheets.*


----------



## RLStern

DELETE said:


> Nah. Because that "nasty woman" was one of the best divas we had in the past decade in her prime. I don't think a sex tape should just erase all that from our memories.


*She wasn't, even before the sex tape out, she didn't draw, had poor mic skills that sounded forced, desperate pandering, awkward tone and catchphrases and other than her headbutts she was overrated in the ring despite wrestling since she was 13.*


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

You are literally the last person on earth qualified to judge who is a draw.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*1st 3.244
2nd 3.194
3rd 2.785

Average: 3.074 *


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Pretty lame for the night after a Big 4 PPV. Sad that this is the new 'norm.'


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.244M
H2- 3.194M
H3- 2.785M
3H- 3.074M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 1.54% / - 0.050M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 12.81% / - 0.409M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 14.15% / - 0.459M )
11/20/17 Vs 11/13/17 ( + 1.42% / + 0.043M )

Demo (11/20/17 Vs 11/13/17):
H1- 1.080D Vs 1.120D
H2- 1.080D Vs 1.070D
H3- 0.960D Vs 0.990D
3H- 1.040D Vs 1.060D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 4th & 5th by hourly demo & 2nd, 3rd & 6th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (11/20/17 Vs 11/21/16):
H1- 3.244M Vs 3.137M
H2- 3.194M Vs 3.097M
H3- 2.785M Vs 2.772M
3H- 3.074M Vs 3.002M ( + 2.40% / + 0.072M )

Demo (11/20/17 Vs 11/21/16):
H1- 1.080D Vs 1.160D
H2- 1.080D Vs 1.130D
H3- 0.960D Vs 1.010D
3H- 1.040D Vs 1.100D

Note: RAW this time last year was 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 5th, 6th & 10th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## The Renegade

Pretty good year on year numbers. That third hour is still a mess though, geez.


----------



## JDP2016

They could have drawn that number on any given Monday night. 

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

That third hour drop... yet again. Also it's the weakest hour increase year over year.


----------



## SnapOrTap

ROMAN REIGNS

THE CORONATION OF THE BIG DOGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG

2.7 MILLION VIEWERS BABY.

DO YOU BELIEVE?

DO YOU BELIEVE?

BY GAWD.

SPEAR

SPEAR

SPEAR

DOWN GO DA RATINGZZZ

REIGNS HAS DONE IT

HE HAS DONE IT.

:reigns2:reigns2:reigns2:reigns2:reigns2:reigns2:reigns2:reigns2


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I have no idea what their plan is for making Raw strong for negotiations.


----------



## Y.2.J

Hour 1 and Hour 2 decent...Hour 3 pretty sad.

Interesting that RAW & SD are doing better this year than 2016.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Big Dog? More like the Big Dud. :trolldog


----------



## Randy Lahey

The Phenom. said:


> Hour 1 and Hour 2 decent...Hour 3 pretty sad.
> 
> Interesting that RAW & SD are doing better this year than 2016.


Raw's not doing better.

Average rating in 2016 was 2.26.
Average rating in 2017 is 2.09.

http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2016-tv-ratings/
http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2017-tv-ratings/

It does appear they've found their very core of TV viewers in the 2.8 mils range. I don't think they've found the very bottom of live attendance yet though. Those numbers continue to decline at a faster rate than TV viewership declines.

We'll see how USA reacts when Vince comes to them to try to renew Raw. Last time, he could argue he had 4.2 mil reliable viewers each week. Now he has under 3 mils.


----------



## SR7

Raw was pretty good this week. Paiges return plus Reigns winning IC title two big angles. Sadly people arent sticking around for 3rd hour. 
They should really bring back raw to 2 hours.


----------



## MC

Third hour :ha The thrid hour began the segment after Paige's return. The interview where they attack Bliss was in the third hour. Just for margins. 

Didn't someone try and claim that Roman was the reason for the ratings last week? :ha


----------



## The Game

Mra22 said:


> Can people stop talking about that nasty woman ?


----------



## BlackieDevil

RLStern said:


> *She wasn't, even before the sex tape out, she didn't draw, had poor mic skills that sounded forced, desperate pandering, awkward tone and catchphrases and other than her headbutts she was overrated in the ring despite wrestling since she was 13.*




For someone with an entire family in the business... yes, she’s overrated


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Bret Hart

SR7 said:


> Raw was pretty good this week. Paiges return plus Reigns winning IC title two big angles. Sadly people arent sticking around for 3rd hour.
> They should really bring back raw to 2 hours.


They won't due to the revenue they get from the third hour.

Instead they can have cruserweight hour or something the first hour and have actual Raw start at 9pm.


----------



## JDP2016

Was yesterday a holiday? Where are the ratings?

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## MC

I guess NO ONE WATCHED, thus no ratings


----------



## CesaroSwing

I would suspect that the ratings were be terrible this week due to people turning it off when they saw that JJ vs Roman wasn't on


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I'm guessing Thanksgiving has caused a backlog in the ratings. The latest one I see is Friday.


----------



## SR7

That Raw is Botchmania got banned and no ratings this week.
He will be so glad when he is back haha.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.956M
H2- 2.720M
H3- 2.601M
3H- 2.759M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 7.98% / - 0.236M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 4.38% / - 0.119M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 12.01% / - 0.355M )
11/27/17 Vs 11/20/17 ( - 12.25% / - 0.315M )

Demo (11/27/17 Vs 11/20/17):
H1- 0.940D Vs 1.080D
H2- 0.890D Vs 1.080D
H3- 0.890D Vs 0.960D
3H- 0.907D Vs 1.040D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 6th & 5th by hourly demo & 3rd, 6th & 7th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (11/27/17 Vs 11/28/16):
H1- 2.956M Vs 3.163M
H2- 2.720M Vs 3.130M
H3- 2.601M Vs 3.039M
3H- 2.759M Vs 3.111M ( - 11.31% / - 0.352M )

Demo (11/27/17 Vs 11/28/16):
H1- 0.940D Vs 1.080D
H2- 0.890D Vs 1.090D
H3- 0.890D Vs 1.080D
3H- 0.907D Vs 1.083D

Note: RAW this time last year was 7th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE




----------



## MC

Look how Roman does without anyone to help. Terrible :ha


----------



## machomanjohncena

People clearly had more interest in last year's main event of Sasha/Charlotte FCA than this week's main event of Kane/Finn.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 3.

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

The IC Title match, Women, and the main event of Braun/Kane. Hold that L.


----------



## MC

SantaStopper said:


> Hour 3.
> 
> :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao
> 
> The IC Title match, Women, and the main event of Braun/Kane. Hold that L.


I think they took it when the thread dropped below 100 people.


----------



## Frost99

All fun aside is it REALLY a shock @ this point? With #WWELogic running WILD there really ISN'T a hope in hell until changes start from the TOP & work there way down. Just that simple when the E start's giving a FUCK about the "main" roster so will I until then it's just my 9.99 for #SAVEMeNXT


----------



## yeahright2

Miz loses IC title to Roman, and instantly the ratings drop.
Guess Miz really is "Must See"


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SD's overall rating beat the 3rd hour of Raw.

:lmao

The blind leading the blind in that company. Whew.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Wow... they finally decide to put a title on Roman and the year-on-year decrease is bigger than any other week I think from this year. 

Not to mention they advertised the fuck out of Reigns/Elias throughout the night and people seemed to keep tuning out anyway.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I read at one place that the actual rating for Raw this week was below a 1.0? Is that true? Everywhere else only reports the viewership and not the rating, for some reason.


----------



## Mra22

I didn’t even watch RAW Monday, I did watch SD though


----------



## WorldClass

When was the last time Raw drew below a 1.0 rating


----------



## RainmakerV2

Roman Reigns LOL


----------



## DemonKane_Legend

Balor can’t get the ratings OVER 3 millions


----------



## MC

DemonKane_Legend said:


> Balor can’t get the ratings OVER 3 millions


Neither can Kane. :ha


No one can these days though. WWE is in the pits and It's hilarious to see their illogical and idiotic booking decisions finally catch up to them. Maybe they will start to make the product better if the ratings routine this way.


----------



## DemonKane_Legend

MC 16 said:


> Neither can Kane. :ha
> 
> 
> No one can these days though. WWE is in the pits and It's hilarious to see their illogical and idiotic booking decisions finally catch up to them. Maybe they will start to make the product better if the ratings routine this way.


Two weeks ago the mainevent was Kane vs Strowman and it drew over 3 millions

:smugjose


----------



## Chrome

Nice drop from last year. LOL.


----------



## MC

DemonKane_Legend said:


> Two weeks ago the mainevent was Kane vs Strowman and it drew over 3 millions
> 
> :smugjose


Did the hour get 3 million or the show?


----------



## SR7

Balor in main event=RIP RAW ratings
Surprised H1 didn't draw above 3M. Rollins need his tag team partner asap.


----------



## PrettyLush

I don't think the main event is the ultimate factor...


----------



## MC

The actual rating is around 1.89 since the overall viewers is almost identical to the Raw May 15th show which got 2.751 million viewers. That's very close to 2.759 million this week got.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

MC 16 said:


> The actual rating is around 1.89 since the overall viewers is almost identical to the Raw May 15th show which got 2.751 million viewers. That's very close to 2.759 million this week got.


Makes sense. Man, that hour 3 was awful.


----------



## Gravyv321

SR7 said:


> *Reigns opening Hour 3 = RIP RAW ratings*


i agree.


----------



## TakerFreak

Lmao damn. This is going to get very interesting when Roman becomes Universal Champ next year.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Putting a title on Roman Reigns is instant TV death.

They pair people like Balor and Braun with nonrelevant fucks like Kane, and wonder why their heat fizzles away like a fart in a snowstorm.


----------



## Stadhart02

wonder what the attendance was like yesterday? The crowd and promos had an echoey feel to them (not a word but can't think of a better one to use)...didn't watch enough of it to see the hard camera side, assuming it was shown, but it wouldn't surprise me if that side was almost empty


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.147M
H2- 2.862M
H3- 2.430M
3H- 2.813M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 9.06% / - 0.285M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 15.09% / - 0.432M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 22.78% / - 0.717M )
12/4/17 Vs 11/27/17 ( + 1.96% / + 0.054M )

Demo (12/4/17 Vs 11/27/17):
H1- 0.960D Vs 0.940D
H2- 0.870D Vs 0.890D
H3- 0.780D Vs 0.890D
3H- 0.870D Vs 0.907D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 4th, 7th & 11th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (12/4/17 Vs 12/5/16):
H1- 3.147M Vs 3.153M
H2- 2.862M Vs 2.981M
H3- 2.430M Vs 2.796M
3H- 2.813M Vs 2.977M ( - 5.51% / - 0.164M )

Demo (12/4/17 Vs 12/5/16):
H1- 0.960D Vs 1.040D
H2- 0.870D Vs 0.960D
H3- 0.780D Vs 0.920D
3H- 0.870D Vs 0.973D

Note: RAW this time last year was 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 10th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Overall better than last week's number but Hour 3 continues to kill them big time.

:ha


----------



## Nefarious_

LOL the third hour making last week's third hour look like the Attitude Era. 400,000 drop from H2, Jesus really? It was like 100,000 last week.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Hour 3 with that weak ass demo. :sodone


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Huge drop for hour 3. Guess nobody wanted to see Ambrollins vs. Bar again.

That's a really bad drop for hour 3, even worse than normal. Overall is bad too.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

RAW really needs to back to two hours. Meltzer reported this regarding NXT airing on USA:



> According to Dave Meltzer with WWE's contract expiring next year with USA they're are trying to sell the network NXT. If USA officials are sold on NXT WWE is hoping to downsize Raw back to two hours. USA wouldn't be losing the 5 hour air time if this deal goes through. Raw would be 2 hours, SDL 2 hours, and NXT an hour on Wed nights.
> 
> NXT will air on the USA network next week at 7 pm.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Boy Wonder said:


> RAW really needs to back to two hours. Meltzer reported this regarding NXT airing on USA:


That'd be a HUGE plus for Raw's quality and rating if that were to happen.


----------



## MC

That third hour.












Jason Jordan vs Roman drawing :bjpenn


----------



## Nefarious_

They really need to keep their main eventers in the 3rd hour if they want it to be viable for advertising. Putting in mid card stuff would just bomb the 3rd hour much harder as evidenced by this week's numbers. 3rd hour will almost always fall but falling 400,000+ is dreadful, they can limit that to around 100,000 like last week. But on the other hand, the 1st hour did pretty good contributing to the overall better number than last week so I'm not sure. Depends on how the trade off WWE wants it to be.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Last week's 3rd hour was 2.6, this weeks was 2.43. Not really some huge difference, tbh. They're certainly in the same neighborhood.

This is what happens when WWE has zero real stars.


----------



## JC00

The Boy Wonder said:


> RAW really needs to back to two hours. Meltzer reported this regarding NXT airing on USA:


Ya I assumed them airing NXT next week was a test run. Pretty much in the same vein as how they did SD when they did that one random episode as a pilot and then SD as a weekly show started months later


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

How can Reigns vs Jordan "draw" when it wasn't even promoted in advance?


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

The Boy Wonder said:


> RAW really needs to back to two hours. Meltzer reported this regarding NXT airing on USA:


Hope Nxt does well that would be the best for WWE to get Raw back to two Hours and nxt gets on Cable and WWE don't lose any money.


----------



## InexorableJourney

If USA does air NXT it might well rebrand itself The Wrestling Channel.


----------



## Mra22

The Boy Wonder said:


> RAW really needs to back to two hours. Meltzer reported this regarding NXT airing on USA:


This would be amazing


----------



## SR7

Reigns showing who is the biggest draw of the Shield.
Ambrollins needs to learn how to bring ratings from Big Dawg.
#Believe That


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Don't daydream too much. Vince's ideal scenario is 3h Raw, 2h Smackdown, and 1h NXT on USA. 
USA paying them as much for NXT as for the 3rd hour of Raw is questionable. 
I have a feeling USA wants the 3rd hour gone, Vince doesn't, so NXT is there to compromise. And in case USA picks up NXT, Vince needs a new flagship show for the Network, hence the sudden 205 Live Live events.
Because no way USA will allow NXT to be anything but USA exclusive.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I love this place.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*Looks like the fans are as tired of the Bar vs. Ambrose and Rollins matches as I am. The 23% 3rd hour drop was larger than usual. *



The Boy Wonder said:


> RAW really needs to back to two hours. Meltzer reported this regarding NXT airing on USA:


*
What's funny is Vince Russo came up with this idea over 3 years ago: http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/1401873-vince-russo-nxt-should-air-before-raw.html#post39443697

He's a better creative mind than literally everyone back there now.*


----------



## Gravyv321

i remember when ratings were higher when guys like punk, cena, bryan, and rollins were on top. these numbers are pathetic. seen better numbers for all 3 hours. that's for sure :lol


----------



## validreasoning

Update on monthly stats

November 2016 raw averaged 2.94 million viewers live
November 2017 raw averaged 2.928 million viewers live

November 2016 smackdown averaged 2.383 million viewers live
November 2017 smackdown averaged 2.638 million viewers live


----------



## Nefarious_

validreasoning said:


> Update on monthly stats
> 
> November 2016 raw averaged 2.94 million viewers live
> November 2017 raw averaged 2.928 million viewers live
> 
> November 2016 smackdown averaged 2.383 million viewers live
> November 2017 smackdown averaged 2.638 million viewers live


How do you think the contract negotiations would go next year with the USA Network?


----------



## validreasoning

Their contract with USA doesn't end until September 30th 2019 and during the last series of financial results they said they expect to announce their new us tv deal between may and September 2018. USAs exclusive negotiation period wouldn't end until Spring 2018 so that suggests they already expect to re-sign with USA I would assume. For comparison they didn't announce their last deal until May 2014 with the contract expiring on September 2014.

Personally I think UFCs contract negotiations are helping WWE. UFC are looking for $450 million a year despite much less viewership than WWE and a similar demo especially on cable (obviously UFC can sell ads much more expensively on Fox but they only run 3-4 times a year). WWE did meet with Fox executives over the summer as well as Disney, CBS, Amazon and YouTube so I would assume those will be putting in some kind of bid when the opportunity arises. Whether it's better than what USA will offer remains to be seen.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SR7 said:


> Reigns showing who is the biggest draw of the Shield.
> Ambrollins needs to learn how to bring ratings from Big Dawg.
> #Believe That


Oh yeah, huge ratings draw he is. Raw ratings going down every single year since he's become the FOTC. Please. Other wrestlers, draw ratings like him. :lol


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Of course they expect to resign with USA. Who else would want them and their dwindling crowds?


----------



## SR7

SantaStopper said:


> Oh yeah, huge ratings draw he is. Raw ratings going down every single year since he's become the FOTC. Please. Other wrestlers, draw ratings like him. :lol


You waited 1 week for that reply strange. 
Last weeks ratings shows that 'other wrestlers' failed to draw ratings like him.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SR7 said:


> You waited 1 week for that reply strange.
> Last weeks ratings shows that 'other wrestlers' failed to draw ratings like him.


It didn't show anything. 3.1 million for a first hour of Raw is pathetic, too. Using that number as good, means Seth Rollins' 2015 Title reign was a very good drawing reign.


----------



## SR7

SantaStopper said:


> It didn't show anything. 3.1 million for a first hour of Raw is pathetic, too. Using that number as good, means Seth Rollins' 2015 Title reign was a very good drawing reign.


What does Rollins 2015 title reign has anything to do with this? :lol
You said other wrestlers bring ratings like him.
But last weeks show proved otherwise. End of.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SR7 said:


> What does Rollins 2015 title reign has anything to do with this? :lol
> You said other wrestlers bring ratings like him.
> But last weeks show proved otherwise. End of.


Because you're bragging about an Hour 1 that did 3.1 million viewers. Well, Rollins' title reign, that got shit ratings according to people, did much better numbers than that. 

And, yes, other wrestlers do numbers like that. There's been plenty of hour 1's in Raw history, and even this shit era, that has done 3.1 million or better in Hour 1, which is typically Raw's highest rated hour for obvious reasons. "End of."


----------



## SR7

SantaStopper said:


> Because you're bragging about an Hour 1 that did 3.1 million viewers. Well, Rollins' title reign, that got shit ratings according to people, did much better numbers than that.
> 
> And, yes, other wrestlers do numbers like that. There's been plenty of hour 1's in Raw history, and even this shit era, that has done 3.1 million or better in Hour 1, which is typically Raw's highest rated hour for obvious reasons. "End of."


 
I was obviously talking about this year but you missed the point.I know there has been plenty of raws in past with better ratings.No need to tell me.
And 3.1 millions is a great mumber compared to past few weeks ratings.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SR7 said:


> I was obviously talking about this year but you you missed the point.I know there has been plenty of raws in past with better ratings.No need to tell me.
> And 3.1 millions is a great mumber compared to past few weeks ratings.


3.1 million was the number for hour 1. Not the entire episode. And there's nothing 'great' about it.


----------



## SR7

SantaStopper said:


> 3.1 million was the number for hour 1. Not the entire episode. And there's nothing 'great' about it.


Then theres nothing great about Rollins tanking H3 ratings either.


----------



## Gravyv321

his delusional fans pretending that the wanking shithead draws :ha


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SR7 said:


> Then theres nothing great about Rollins tanking H3 ratings either.


I never said it was great, nor did any other Rollins fan, or any fan of any wrestler in that hour 3. That's the difference. At least the match in hour 3 is a match that's been seen about a dozen times in the past few months. What's the excuse for everything else not drawing?


----------



## Zigglerpops

I really don't understand why we need this thread, Ratings don't matter


----------



## SR7

SantaStopper said:


> I never said it was great, nor did any other Rollins fan, or any fan of any wrestler in that hour 3. That's the difference. At least the match in hour 3 is a match that's been seen about a dozen times in the past few months. What's the excuse for everything else not drawing?


 You were bragging about Rollins being huge draw in 2015. So I gave an example why he is/was not. If he was H3 would have done better.
The drop for third hour was huge more than usual.


----------



## MC

SR7 said:


> *You were bragging about Rollins being huge draw in 2015*. So I gave an example why he is/was not. If he was H3 would have done better.
> The drop for third hour was huge more than usual.


You need to read more Lykos. What he actually said was, Rollins drew better ratigns then Reigns does now after you said "Last weeks ratings shows that 'other wrestlers' failed to draw ratings like him". Rollins was considered a ratings bomb so by that logic, so is Roman. That's what he is saying, he never said he was a huge draw. Pay attention.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SR7 said:


> You were bragging about Rollins being huge draw in 2015. So I gave an example why he is/was not. If he was H3 would have done better.
> The drop for third hour was huge more than usual.


I said Rollins 2015 title reign drew better than anything else they've done since then. That is a fact. And if anyone else on the entire roster was a draw, they would be doing better numbers than what they are doing.


----------



## SR7

SantaStopper said:


> I said Rollins 2015 title reign drew better than anything else they've done since then. That is a fact. And if anyone else on the entire roster was a draw, they would be doing better numbers than what they are doing.


Why do you think Rollins 2015 reign drew better? 
Cant be because of Rollins as you think it was. If it was solely because of him why cant he draw better now with better booking.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SR7 said:


> Why do you think Rollins 2015 reign drew better?
> Cant be because of Rollins as you think it was. If it was solely because of him why cant he draw better now with better booking.


I don't know why. But I do know no one on that roster is a ratings draw.


----------



## SR7

SantaStopper said:


> I don't know why. But I do know no one on that roster is a ratings draw.


Fair enough you admit it.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SR7 said:


> Fair enough you admit it.


Yep, and I always have. It's others who don't.


----------



## SR7

SantaStopper said:


> Yep, and I always have. It's others who don't.


I agree. I have seen posters here who dont.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Zigglerpops said:


> I really don't understand why we need this thread, Ratings don't matter


Reigns doesn't matter either, yet we have him.

And unlike Reigns, ratings bring Entertainment.

I feel like with every new ratings thread, the opening post should contain the number of millions USA pays WWE for ratings, so we don't get dumb posts like that anymore, why ratings don't matter.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.876M
H2- 2.608M
H3- 2.570M
3H- 2.685M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 9.32% / - 0.168M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 1.46% / - 0.038M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 10.64% / - 0.306M )
12/11/17 Vs 12/4/17 ( - 4.55% / - 0.128M )

Demo (12/11/17 Vs 12/4/17):
H1- 0.870D Vs 0.960D
H2- 0.820D Vs 0.870D
H3- 0.850D Vs 0.780D
3H- 0.847D Vs 0.870D

Note: RAW is 4th, 6th & 5th by hourly demo & 5th, 8th & 10th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (12/11/17 Vs 12/12/16):
H1- 2.876M Vs 2.929M
H2- 2.608M Vs 2.713M
H3- 2.570M Vs 2.632M
3H- 2.685M Vs 2.758M ( - 2.65% / - 0.073M )

Demo (12/11/17 Vs 12/12/16):
H1- 0.870D Vs 0.950D
H2- 0.820D Vs 0.890D
H3- 0.850D Vs 0.920D
3H- 0.847D Vs 0.920D

Note: RAW this time last year was 5th, 8th & 6th by hourly demo & 5th, 8th & 9th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 3 almost as bad as last week's Hour 3, and there was no Bar/Shield part 1231412413 match.

:lmao

Hour 1 with the Joe/Reigns getting a normal Hour 3 rating. Sheesh.


----------



## MC

:ha :ha :ha That drop after the first hour let alone the 2nd. :lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Henceforth Roman Reigns shall be called The Big Draw. :reigns2 :trolldog


----------



## Frost99

You know what this thread needs? A THEME song maggle, something that reflects the current state of things for the "Longest Running Episodic" TV Show on cable.......

#WayDOWNWeGo #RAWisaBORE #WWELogic 












Wait till the 25th ratings #DOA


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I guess the moral of this story is: don't advertise every match on your show in advance, it kills People's hope that they might see something entertaining.


----------



## MC

This week's Raw rating was above 1.87 Which is 2.66 million but below 1.92 which is 2.79 million viewers so that means This weeks Raw rating is *between 1.88 and 1.91.* The closet comparison I got.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Tom Brady whipping RAW'S candy ass. :brady Their demo rating is becoming anemic. Time to:


----------



## MC




----------



## Zigglerpops

I never understood why so many of you care so much if somebody else is watching the show or not, I could give 2 fcuks if you watch the show even if it was bad show, I did not watch the show live, I watched it when I woke up this morning, I'm one of the millions who would not be counted in the ratings, When they renew their contract with USA will get more than what they're getting now so ratings mean fcuk all, It's not the 90s


----------



## Gravyv321

damn, i've seen elderly models give out better ratings than this :lol


----------



## JC00

No Bliss, no ratings


----------



## Zigglerpops

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Reigns doesn't matter either, yet we have him.
> 
> And unlike Reigns, ratings bring Entertainment.
> 
> I feel like with every new ratings thread, the opening post should contain the number of millions USA pays WWE for ratings, so we don't get dumb posts like that anymore, why ratings don't matter.


When they renew they will get more than what they're getting now, It's still one of USA networks top show, Ratings mean nothing nowadays, I watched the show online this morning, I'm sure millions of people do that around the world, Where's the ratings for that?


----------



## Therapy

Kane in 2017 not pulling in mega ratings in the 3rd hour? Who would've thought?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

These are almost SD level numbers.

Yikes.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

If they want to stay live on air, at least someone better care about ratings.

I think I've never seen a fan base so far up their own rear ends as the WWE crowd. Really. None. I've had better conversations with Star Wars geeks about the recent crop of movies sucking ass, and it's more likely I will have some again about The Last Jedi, than it is to have a reality based conversation about why ratings matter with WWE smarks.
Attendance doesn't matter, crowd reactions don't matter, viewership doesn't matter, profits don't matter, where they come from doesn't matter, indies don't matter - except when they fit their delusional mind, then they ALL matter.
You WWE smarks are as bipolar as Vince is. The rules and morals you claim for yourself you don't grant others, and they even become offensive for you If you find yourself on the wrong end of the stick.
Where's that wwe9391 fella gone? Gone the same road as the straws he clutched on. 

I guess it's true that law of attraction. Vince draws those people to himself that are as delusional as he is.


----------



## Zigglerpops

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> If they want to stay live on air, at least someone better care about ratings.
> 
> I think I've never seen a fan base so far up their own rear ends as the WWE crowd. Really. None. I've had better conversations with Star Wars geeks about the recent crop of movies sucking ass, and it's more likely I will have some again about The Last Jedi, than it is to have a reality based conversation about why ratings matter with WWE smarks.
> Attendance doesn't matter, crowd reactions don't matter, viewership doesn't matter, profits don't matter, where they come from doesn't matter, indies don't matter - except when they fit their delusional mind, then they ALL matter.
> You WWE smarks are as bipolar as Vince is. The rules and morals you claim for yourself you don't grant others, and they even become offensive for you If you find yourself on the wrong end of the stick.
> Where's that wwe9391 fella gone? Gone the same road as the straws he clutched on.
> 
> I guess it's true that law of attraction. Vince draws those people to himself that are as delusional as he is.


When they renew the new contract they will have a new long term deal that will make them more money than the contract they have now, They ain't going anywhere and these ratings are meaningless

Do you care how many people watch star wars?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Zigglerpops said:


> When they renew the new contract they will have a new long term deal that will make them more money than the contract they have now, They ain't going anywhere and these ratings are meaningless


That's exactly what people said last time, and this current contract was considered a disappointment to what Vince said they were actually going to get.


----------



## Zigglerpops

SantaStopper said:


> That's exactly what people said last time, and this current contract was considered a disappointment to what Vince said they were actually going to get.


TV Revenues are going up all across the board, According to all experts in the field they will make more in their next deal, It's still the top show on their network and now they have NXT to haggle with, I never understood why people care if people are watching a show or not, Who gives a fcuk they ain't going anywhere


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Zigglerpops said:


> TV Revenues are going up all across the board, According to all experts in the field they will make more in their next deal, It's still the top show on their network and now they have NXT to haggle with, I never understood why people care if people are watching a show or not, Who gives a fcuk they ain't going anywhere


Dude, these are record low numbers. It's well worth talking about. If they were doing record highs, would you have a problem with us talking about them?


----------



## Ace

If SD had their shit together, they would be beating those numbers.

LOL numbers nonetheless, I for one cannot wait for the Christmas numbers.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

These are SD level numbers. How pathetic is that?

:lmao


----------



## Zigglerpops

SantaStopper said:


> Dude, these are record low numbers. It's well worth talking about. If they were doing record highs, would you have a problem with us talking about them?


I did not watch the show live, I watched it this morning when I woke up when I downloaded it online, New ways of watching programmes you don't have to watch it live, Times have changed, Where's the ratings for people like me who watch the show differently?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

TV revenue is up across the board ... I'd like to see those increases compared to inflation percentage.
It's like saying Baywatch outdrew Lord Of The Rings at the Box Office. Adjust inflation.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Zigglerpops said:


> I did not watch the show live, I watched it this morning when I woke up when I downloaded it online, New ways of watching programmes you don't have to watch it live, Times have changed, Where's the ratings for people like me who watch the show differently?


USA Network doesn't pay for people to consume WWE that way.


----------



## Zigglerpops

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> TV revenue is up across the board ... I'd like to see those increases compared to inflation percentage.
> It's like saying Baywatch outdrew Lord Of The Rings at the Box Office. Adjust inflation.


They will get a better deal next time around, Who cares for inflation it would just prove these ratings are meaningless, They have no competition they're not going anywhere with record breaking profits, Still waiting for the ratings for people like me who watch the show the next day from downloading it online


----------



## Brock

Zigglerpops said:


> I did not watch the show live, I watched it this morning when I woke up when I downloaded it online, New ways of watching programmes you don't have to watch it live, Times have changed, Where's the ratings for people like me who watch the show differently?


Don't think there's a torrent ratings thread around here :evil


----------



## InexorableJourney

I still don't get why the Overrun *always* gets a ratings boost.


Do masses of people tune out for the last hour/last two hours, and then tune back at 11 for some weird reason?

Or is Modern Family just that good?


----------



## Zigglerpops

SantaStopper said:


> USA Network doesn't pay for people to consume WWE that way.


You can use torrents, Point being people watch shows in different ways it's not always live and it's not always on the television and it's not just a few fans I would say it's in it's millions that do what I do


----------



## Zigglerpops

Bonzo said:


> Don't think there's a torrent ratings thread around here :evil


That's why I can't take the ratings seriously because it's not a true figure of the amount of people who's watching


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Zigglerpops said:


> You can use torrents, Point being people watch shows in different ways it's not always live and it's not always on the television and it's not just a few fans I would say it's in it's millions that do what I do


Maybe, maybe not. But it's not what USA Network pays for.


----------



## Zigglerpops

SantaStopper said:


> Maybe, maybe not. But it's not what USA Network pays for.


Advertising pays for it and they're paying more than they have ever done before and that is why wwe will get a better deal next time around, You can't take the ratings seriously because it's not the a true reflection of who's watching


----------



## Zigglerpops

I will leave it at that don't want to derail the thread, Just wanted to give my 2 cents, Millions of people watch the show differently and not always live, Last nights show was muck whatever way you watched it, It's just hard to take the ratings seriously


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Zigglerpops said:


> Advertising pays for it and they're paying more than they have ever done before and that is why wwe will get a better deal next time around, You can't take the ratings seriously because it's not the a true reflection of who's watching


USA Network pays WWE. And this is what people said last time and the contract was worse than what Vince told shareholders what they were expecting. That's all I'm saying.


----------



## Zigglerpops

SantaStopper said:


> USA Network pays WWE. And this is what people said last time and the contract was worse than what Vince told shareholders what they were expecting. That's all I'm saying.


and their still here making record profits


----------



## Ace

Raw dropped four percent from last week, doing 2.68 million viewers, making it the lowest-watched show since the June 12th episode that went against the NBA playoffs which would make it the lowest number since the revitalization of Raw with the strong series of building PPV main events in the late summer and fall.

In this case, the attempt to avoid what happened last week with the huge third hour turnoff was done by putting the climax of Roman Reigns vs. Cesaro, as well as the complete Dean Ambrose vs. Samoa Joe and Kane vs. Braun Strowman matches all in the third hour. The result was a minimal third hour drop, and a big increase in that hour from last week.

*The bad news is the second hour drop was significant, resulting in the second lowest rated hour number two on Raw in history, only beating the episode that went against the Trump-Clinton debate in 2016. That means it was even below hour two on July 4th in the past.*

Part of the low number was the Miami Dolphins vs. New England Patriots NFL game that did 11.78 million viewers. But most of the network programming was down.

https://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/wwe-raw-ratings-down-bit-second-lowest-hour-two-history-247851


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Zigglerpops said:


> and their still here making record profits


Record revenue, and a shit-ton of budget cuts to levels never seen before.


----------



## Zigglerpops

Law said:


> Raw dropped four percent from last week, doing 2.68 million viewers, making it the lowest-watched show since the June 12th episode that went against the NBA playoffs which would make it the lowest number since the revitalization of Raw with the strong series of building PPV main events in the late summer and fall.
> 
> In this case, the attempt to avoid what happened last week with the huge third hour turnoff was done by putting the climax of Roman Reigns vs. Cesaro, as well as the complete Dean Ambrose vs. Samoa Joe and Kane vs. Braun Strowman matches all in the third hour. The result was a minimal third hour drop, and a big increase in that hour from last week.
> 
> The bad news is the second hour drop was significant, resulting in the second lowest rated hour number two on Raw in history, only beating the episode that went against the Trump-Clinton debate in 2016. That means it was even below hour two on July 4th in the past.
> 
> Part of the low number was the Miami Dolphins vs. New England Patriots NFL game that did 11.78 million viewers. *But most of the network programming was down.*
> 
> https://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/wwe-raw-ratings-down-bit-second-lowest-hour-two-history-247851


My point is people may have watched the game a different way, The times have changed in how people watch tv programs or sporting events, I watch most of my tv on my computer it's just easier, Anyway this is my last post, Don't take ratings seriously it's not the be all end all


----------



## Zigglerpops

SantaStopper said:


> Record revenue, and a shit-ton of budget cuts to levels never seen before.


They always make cuts it's nothing new, They have been doing that going all the way back to the 80s when I started watching, When they start cutting the likes of Cena I will take it more seriously


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Zigglerpops said:


> They always make cuts it's nothing new, They have been doing that going all the way back to the 80s when I started watching, When they start cutting the likes of Cena I will take it more seriously


Never close to this degree, though. Not even close.

Second week in a row that Hour 3 did an extremely poor number.


----------



## Zigglerpops

SantaStopper said:


> Never close to this degree, though. Not even close.


Who are they cutting? Nobody of any importance, Every year theirs cuts, Some come back some don't, Facebook let 100 people go recently near where I live, Their not going anywhere anytime soon, I would not look to much into it, It's not as if they were huge stars or anything like that, I'm sure they will get by


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Zigglerpops said:


> They will get a better deal next time around, Who cares for inflation it would just prove these ratings are meaningless, They have no competition they're not going anywhere with record breaking profits, Still waiting for the ratings for people like me who watch the show the next day from downloading it online


Inflation doesn't matter LOL 
If expenses rise due to inflation, but you're getting a revenue increase that is disproportional to inflation increase, then you lose.
If you have a budget of 10 dollars for bread, and you used to buy 5 loafs for 2 bucks each, and now a loaf is 3 bucks, but your boss only gives you a raise so you can have a budget of 13 dollars for bread, you either only buy 4 loafs from now on, or you need to cut 2 dollars from another budget, and cut pyro for example, or Network content.

Even you should understand that.

And you can cut your child's allowance, you can reduce eating out, and so on, but at some point, when expenses rise, you get another child for example, and revenue doesn't change much, it endangers your very existence. Then you need to move, get second or third income etc.
Putting NXT on USA is WWE's way of getting a second job in order to get more money so they can keep up with their own projected growth. Kind of perverse.

And people on this forum are like "They are richer than ever, they get 13 dollars now!" LOL


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Zigglerpops said:


> Who are they cutting? Nobody of any importance, Every year theirs cuts, Some come back some don't, Facebook let 100 people go recently near where I live, Their not going anywhere anytime soon, I would not look to much into it, It's not as if they were huge stars or anything like that, I'm sure they will get by


Budget cuts doesn't mean cutting people. For example, they cut pyro. Something that's been a part of their shows for around 20 years up until now.


----------



## Zigglerpops

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Inflation doesn't matter LOL
> If expenses rise due to inflation, but you're getting a revenue increase that is disproportional to inflation increase, then you lose.
> If you have a budget of 10 dollars for bread, and you used to buy 5 loafs for 2 bucks each, and now a loaf is 3 bucks, but your boss only gives you a raise so you can have a budget of 13 dollars for bread, you either only buy 4 loafs from now on, or you need to cut 2 dollars from another budget, and cut pyro for example.
> 
> Even you should understand that.


Yep big business with record revenues v A loaf of bread

I repeat record revenue and it's growing yearly with no competition

Over and out I won't respond again i already promised I will leave the thread



SantaStopper said:


> Budget cuts doesn't mean cutting people. For example, they cut pyro. Something that's been a part of their shows for around 20 years up until now.


No competition they don't need it and that's my last post


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Zigglerpops said:


> No competition they don't need it and that's my last post


Whether they need it or not is not the point. The fact that they cut a staple out of the show to save some money is the point.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Zigglerpops said:


> Yep big business with record revenues v A loaf of bread
> 
> I repeat record revenue and it's growing yearly with no competition
> 
> Over and out I won't respond again i already promised I will leave the thread


Don't worry, I won't hurt your ego any longer, you can't even figure out why revenue truly doesn't mean much, opposed to ratings and profit, so there truly is no point in talking to you, you don't understand a thing.

WWE is in autodestruct mode, they don't need competition for that. No competition is the worst thing to happen to a business. But contrary to Coke for example, WWE is even too stupid to make their audience believe it's the best quality product under the sun.
People don't check the label of ingredients and nutrients on Coke. Not only do WWE fans check the label, WWE produces documentaries on how and why the ingredients came to be, and why they taste fake.


----------



## DemonKane_Legend

Last week the main event was Ambrose & Rollins vs Sheamus & Cesaro, and the third hour drew 2.430 million viewers

This week, with Kane in the main event, the ratings of the third hour went up to 2.570 million viewers


----------



## Sensei Utero

I still think it's a bit lolworthy that an out of shape Kane is main eventing in 2017, and that will probably carry on until 2018. Just painful to watch in a way. I like Kane, don't get me wrong, the guy won't be truly appreciated until he's gone - but he should be used in a much lesser role. Hell, even an authority figure role. Even if guys like an out of shape Hogan main evented RAW in 2017/18, I'd find it embarrassing. 

At least guys like Chris Jericho have constantly reinvented themselves, and continue to stay relevant - and aren't in the worst shape. Kane on the otherhand...


----------



## Nirvash

USA network is whipping vince hard to make him cope for the crap ratings.

Made raw 3h. (damaging the show)
Changed smack day and made it live. (more expenses)
Go on air even at christmas and stuff. (more work/stress)
Now they even want nxt? (this will damage the wwe network)


----------



## InexorableJourney

If NXT becomes a TV (not network) show, how long until it becomes a Vince project, and not a Triple H one?


----------



## Chrome

Crappy rating for a crappy show. Serves 'em right for putting a flabbynsick Kane in the main event in 2017.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Are we going to ignore the fact that 3 to 4 weeks ago, Raw was doing around 3 million in the first two hours, holding up better than usual against football, then Reigns won the IC Title, together with the "open challenge", and the returning Kane main eventing, and immediately after, viewership plummets for all hours?

The Shield doesn't explicitly draw, that's clear, but Reigns, Reigns is an actual turn off. And Kane dosen't help.


----------



## SR7

People blaming Kane as if others would have brought great ratings in H3.:mj4
This weeks main event got better ratings than last week.


----------



## AVX

There is no top draw in the entire company. No one pops ratings no matter who they are.


----------



## InexorableJourney

As I see it the last full-time audience grabbers from most recent were:

Daniel Bryan
CM Punk

Edge
Batista
John Cena

Not a big list, and only John Cena is left.


----------



## Nefarious_

InexorableJourney said:


> As I see it the last full-time audience grabbers from most recent were:
> 
> Daniel Bryan
> *CM Punk*
> 
> Edge
> Batista
> John Cena
> 
> Not a big list, and only John Cena is left.


When the hell did CM Punk ever pop a rating.. LMAO? It was actually under his reign that the ratings drastically falling actually started which has spiraled down to today.


----------



## InexorableJourney

Nefarious_ said:


> When the hell did CM Punk ever pop a rating.. LMAO? It was actually under his reign that the ratings drastically falling actually started which has spiraled down to today.


*UFC203 buys almost doubled


----------



## MC

InexorableJourney said:


> *UFC203 buys almost doubled


Did they? UFC 202 got over a 1 million buys, 203 got 450,000. I think the more accurate statement would be a Non McGreogor UFC ppv double


----------



## Nefarious_

InexorableJourney said:


> *UFC203 buys almost doubled


Doubled with respect to what? The show had a main event of Miocic vs. Overeem which is a pretty neat fight in itself.

If anyone bought it to see Punk then they definitely must be sadists wishing to see a lamb being slaughtered.


----------



## InexorableJourney

Nefarious_ said:


> Doubled with respect to what? The show had a main event of Miocic vs. Overeem which is a pretty neat fight in itself.
> 
> If anyone bought it to see Punk then they definitely must be sadists wishing to see a lamb being slaughtered.


Doubled over expectations, which is generally how most things are measured.


----------



## Switchblade Club

Kane pulled in more numbers then Dean & Seth :westbrook6


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

HBKRollins said:


> Kane pulled in more numbers then Dean & Seth :westbrook6


2.5 vs. 2.4, with the tag match being a match that's been quite often in recent months, and they almost beat a guy who's been pushed the hardest this year, in Braun. Doesn't say alot for anyone, really.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Hopefully NXT pulls in a decent enough rating tonight that it impresses USA. We need RAW to go back to two hours.


----------



## V-Trigger

That 2nd hour :ti


----------



## CaptainCharisma20

*Big Show is a draw on Youtube*

I was just watching some wwe on youtube and i couldn't help but notice the amazing view count on the big shows segments

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Du004EUy2EQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIxznzH2XVA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIxznzH2XVA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77e9kc08d9U

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFhvja7GVA8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70TrOAuFzGI

Considering WWE's normal view count is a few hundred thousand or sometimes less, The Youtube community loves THE BIG SHOW!


----------



## PrettyLush

*Re: Big Show is a draw on Youtube*

put the belt on him dammit!


----------



## Nefarious_

*Re: Big Show is a draw on Youtube*

The Big DRAW


----------



## CaptainCharisma20

*Re: Big Show is a draw on Youtube*



PrettyLush said:


> put the belt on him dammit!


Hey i could vouge for the big show being the new face of the company
The Big Show = The New Big Dog


----------



## Yeah1993

*Re: Big Show is a draw on Youtube*

s'probably a big dudes/giants thing. this short clip of a battle royal between Kane, Mark Henry, Big Daddy V and the Great Khali has 14 million views despite not being uploaded by WWE's official youtube channel (also BDV is for some reason not in the title and Show is instead):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLACrwm5Ii8

the same match WWE's official channel has 20 million views:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTtqJL70meg


----------



## ImSumukh

*Re: Big Show is a draw on Youtube*

Yeah so is that little kid who review toys.


----------



## arch.unleash

*Re: Big Show is a draw on Youtube*


----------



## PrettyLush

*Re: Big Show is a draw on Youtube*



ImSumukh said:


> Yeah so is that little kid who review toys.


That kid doesn't need to go to college with all that revenue :lol


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

*Re: Big Show is a draw on Youtube*

First of, 5 of the 6 videos are all 4 years old, so they had time to accumulate views.
And the 6th one is the ring collapsing, I'm pretty sure that's the draw, not Big Show.


----------



## SR7

*Re: Big Show is a draw on Youtube*

https://youtu.be/bQnvyk6jRZc

Khali is also a big draw on youtube. His WHC winning is still the most viewed wwe video on youtube.
EDIT:can anyone tell me how to show the video here directly?


----------



## Hangman

:trolldog


----------



## Lockard The GOAT

*Re: Big Show is a draw on Youtube*

That arm wrestling match between Mr. McMahon and Mr. America back from '03 was uploaded in bad quality by a random Youtuber that no one's heard of, and yet it has an astonishing 14+ million views... More than most WWE videos uploaded by their own channel. 

YouTube views mean very little at the end of the day.


----------



## JDP2016

*Re: Big Show is a draw on Youtube*



SR7 said:


> https://youtu.be/bQnvyk6jRZc
> 
> Khali is also a big draw on youtube. His WHC winning is still the most viewed wwe video on youtube.
> EDIT:can anyone tell me how to show the video here directly?


----------



## krillep

What was the actual rating?

Why is it only how many viewers? And not the actul rating?

Hope someone can post the rating.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

205 Live can't draw shit without Main Roster guys headlining, NXT got an abysmal 0.2 rating on debut night, Raw's tanking... Not looking good for Vince's plan to up the USA money next year by whoring out NXT.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.085M
H2- 2.803M
H3- 2.470M
3H- 2.786M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 9.14% / - 0.282M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 11.88% / - 0.333M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 19.94% / - 0.615M )
12/18/17 Vs 12/11/17 ( + 3.76% / + 0.101M )

Demo (12/18/17 Vs 12/11/17):
H1- 0.980D Vs 0.870D
H2- 0.900D Vs 0.820D
H3- 0.830D Vs 0.850D
3H- 0.903D Vs 0.847D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 4th & 5th by hourly demo & 2nd, 4th & 9th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (12/18/17 Vs 12/19/16):
H1- 3.085M Vs 3.062M
H2- 2.803M Vs 2.971M
H3- 2.470M Vs 2.834M
3H- 2.786M Vs 2.956M ( - 5.75% / - 0.170M )

Demo (12/18/17 Vs 12/19/16):
H1- 0.980D Vs 1.040D
H2- 0.900D Vs 1.050D
H3- 0.830D Vs 1.040D
3H- 0.903D Vs 1.043D

Note: RAW this time last year was 6th, 4th & 5th by hourly demo & 6th, 7th & 9th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership/Demo of NXT ( 12/13/17 ) Vs the lowest viewed/rated SD ( 11/26/15 ) in recent times: *

*NXT Viewership & Demo ( 12/13/17 ):

0.822M
0.270D

Note: NXT last week ( 12/13/17 ) was 22nd by demo and 40th by viewership.*










* SD Viewership & Demo ( 11/26/15 ):

1.652M
0.460D

Note: SD during Thanksgiving 15' ( 11/26/15 ) was 1st by demo and 2nd by viewership.*

*NXT ( 12/13/17 ) Vs SD ( 11/26/15 ):

0.822M Vs 1.652M ( - 0.830M / 49.76% )
0.270D Vs 0.460D*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

This week: 2.771

Last Week: 2.684

Well, they beat last week and without Reigns this week.

:shrug


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

That Brock bump in hour 1 wore off rather quickly :ha


----------



## MC

:reigns Bump in the ratings


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Hour 3 is calamitous.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Bad numbers again, but especially the third hour. Ambrollins vs. The Bar (even w/ Joe and Jordan in the mix) is obviously not going to work when it's the 100th match they've had in the past few months. That plus the women's stuff that had been advertised didn't seem to help things.

I suppose at least this week one hour got above 3 million, but it is kind of sad that's a "good" number and says it all about things right now.

It is pretty funny though that they can do a show without their top guy/the guy they've pushed far more than any other on the roster right now... and the overall number doesn't drop.


----------



## Brock

Another poor dropoff in hour 3 but it's just expected to be the norm now tbh, no matter what or who they stick in there. It's still shit though, no getting away from that fact. It's just not surprising now.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Stephanie and ALL of the women was in that Hour 3, as well, and it still didn't matter. Hour 3 is DONE, especially with Monday Night Football still being around for the next couple of weeks. It'll go up alittle bit when the football season ends, but it'll still be bad, just not as bad.


----------



## JDP2016

3rd hour sucks. :draper2 This is still news to some people?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

What a Women's Revolution! :vince 

A revolution is supposed to be a revolt against authority. Not something implemented by the authority. Fuck off Stephanie!


----------



## Seafort

HOW THE SHIV STOLE CHRISTMAS said:


> Hour 3 is calamitous.


RAW's format has become more akin to Saturday Night's Main Event in the late 1980s. For the last year they have been training their audience that the climax of the show comes not at the end of the program, but in hour 2. I expect that Hour 3 numbers will continually to decline disproportionately to the rest of the show.


----------



## SR7

No Roman. No ratings.
Believe that.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

SR7 said:


> No Roman. No ratings.
> Believe that.


The rating was higher this week without Reigns but not by much. Judging by the YouTube numbers it looks like a lot of fans tuned in to see Brock but turned RAW off afterwards. The opening segment has 2.7 Million views. Nothing else came close.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Seafort said:


> RAW's format has become more akin to Saturday Night's Main Event in the late 1980s. For the last year they have been training their audience that the climax of the show comes not at the end of the program, but in hour 2. I expect that Hour 3 numbers will continually to decline disproportionately to the rest of the show.


I can see why WWE wants to give the third hour slot to NXT because it will instantly boost RAW'S rating. Its unclear if NXT could draw what Hour 3 is drawing and I know USA wouldn't be happy if NXT tanked Hour 3 even further.


----------



## Chrome

Next week's rating will bring the lolz.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*FYI:*

This upcoming Monday, Christmas night 12/25, is the LAST Monday Night Football game of the year. So after that, Raw goes back to not having to deal with Monday Night Football. Viewership should get it's annual bump with the Monday Night Football season coming to an end after this Monday.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

SR7 said:


> No Roman. No ratings.
> Believe that.


It's up from last week

Out.



SantaStopper said:


> *FYI:*
> 
> This upcoming Monday, Christmas night 12/25, is the LAST Monday Night Football game of the year. So after that, Raw goes back to not having to deal with Monday Night Football. Viewership should get it's annual bump with the Monday Night Football season coming to an end after this Monday.


Christmas day AND the last football game.

I smell a massacre.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> It's up from last week
> 
> Out.
> 
> 
> 
> Christmas day AND the last football game.
> 
> I smell a massacre.


Oh yeah, they will get destroyed, even with Cena there.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.948M
H2- 2.620M
H3- 2.543M
3H- 2.704M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 11.13% / - 0.328M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 2.94% / - 0.077M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 13.74% / - 0.405M )
12/25/17 Vs 12/18/17 ( - 2.94% / - 0.082M )

Demo (12/25/17 Vs 12/18/17):
H1- 0.930D Vs 0.980D
H2- 0.790D Vs 0.900D
H3- 0.790D Vs 0.830D
3H- 0.837D Vs 0.903D

Note: RAW is 5th, 6th & 7th by hourly demo & 6th, 7th & 8th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (12/25/17 Vs 12/26/16):
H1- 2.948M Vs 2.974M
H2- 2.620M Vs 2.878M
H3- 2.543M Vs 2.715M
3H- 2.704M Vs 2.856M ( - 5.32% / - 0.152M )

Demo (12/25/17 Vs 12/26/16):
H1- 0.930D Vs 1.060D
H2- 0.790D Vs 1.020D
H3- 0.790D Vs 0.950D
3H- 0.837D Vs 1.010D

Note: RAW this time last year was 5th, 6th & 8th by hourly demo & 5th, 6th & 7th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Could have been worse. The demo for the final two hours was dreadful.


----------



## MC

I expected worse


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

WWE fans having no lives confirmed.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

:rollins in the main event on CHRISTMAS up against an NFL game with a Philadelphia team involved (HUGE WWE Market) and against an NBA game at the same time, and not drawing a terrible hour 3 considering those circumstances.

:bjpenn


----------



## SWITCHBLADE

People actually watched on Christmas? :kobe


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

Thats actally pretty damn good for being on Christmas day.


----------



## Ace

Good number.


----------



## JC00

Rainmaka! said:


> People actually watched on Christmas? :kobe



It's not really that surprising. 13k people went to Raw that night. There were thousands of people that went to NFL and NBA games. A lot of people go to movies, Last Jedi made $27m and Jumanji made $20m which was basically double than what they made the day before on Christmas Eve. 

Christmas evening especially at 8-9pm is the most dead part of Christmas. Everything happens in the morning and afternoon and a lot of families do the extended family thing the day before on Christmas Eve.


----------



## JDP2016

Not bad. Now let's see Smackdown try it next year.


----------



## Zigglerpops

I think you all underestimate the hardcore fan base, They have no lives apart from wrestling


----------



## SR7

Lel who the fuck watches wrestling on a christmas evening? 
The hardcore smark fanbase have no social lives.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Factoid: Monday Night Football is over for the year. This upcoming Raw (on New Years Day) will be the first time they don't go up against the NFL since August/early September.


----------



## D.M.N.

With quarter four (October to December) now complete, here are how things are looking percentage wise. The +/- is an average of the comparison between (i.e. for Q4 2017):

- the previous quarter (Q3 2017)
- one year earlier (Q4 2016)
- two years earlier (Q4 2015)

Here are the quarter four percentage figures for recent years:

-3.5% = 2013
-4.2% = 2014
-4.2% = 2011
*-8.0% = 2017*
-12.3% = 2015
-13.7% = 2016
-16.0% = 2012

From a year perspective:

Q4 2009 = 4.90 million
Q4 2010 = 4.69 million (down 4.2%)
Q4 2011 = 4.47 million (down 4.6%)
Q4 2012 = 3.81 million (down 14.7%)
Q4 2013 = 3.93 million (up 3.1%)
Q4 2014 = 3.78 million (down 3.8%)
Q4 2015 = 3.31 million (down 12.5%)
Q4 2016 = 2.88 million (down 13.1%)
Q4 2017 = 2.83 million (down 1.5%)

Across 2017, WWE Raw averaged *3.02 million viewers*.


----------



## Chrome

Aside from '13, the viewership has dropped every year from the previous year. Nice consistency. :bjpenn


----------



## FITZ

SR7 said:


> Lel who the fuck watches wrestling on a christmas evening?
> The hardcore smark fanbase have no social lives.


I had work the next morning. I spent the day with the family, left after dinner and watched Raw when I got home before going to sleep.

Actually I watched TV most of the day since a good chunk of Christmas Day for me was spent watching basketball and football with my grandpa on the couch.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.969M
H2- 2.912M
H3- 2.714M
3H- 2.865M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 1.92% / - 0.057M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 6.80% / - 0.198M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 8.59% / - 0.255M )
1/1/18 Vs 12/25/17 ( + 5.95% / + 0.161M )

Demo (1/1/18 Vs 12/25/17):
H1- 1.020D Vs 0.930D
H2- 0.970D Vs 0.790D
H3- 0.920D Vs 0.790D
3H- 0.970D Vs 0.837D

Note: RAW is 10th, 14th & 15th by hourly demo & 10th, 11th & 13th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (1/1/18 Vs 1/2/17):
H1- 2.969M Vs 3.042M
H2- 2.912M Vs 3.159M
H3- 2.714M Vs 2.939M
3H- 2.865M Vs 3.047M ( - 5.97% / - 0.182M )

Demo (1/1/18 Vs 1/2/17):
H1- 1.020D Vs 1.080D
H2- 0.970D Vs 1.110D
H3- 0.920D Vs 1.080D
3H- 0.970D Vs 1.090D

Note: RAW this time last year was 10th, 8th & 11th by hourly demo & 9th, 8th & 10th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## MC

WM Season Bump on the first week. :bjpenn


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

If this is WM Season, then I'm the fucking pope.


----------



## Frost99

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> If this is WM Season, *then I'm the fucking pope.*









lol


----------



## Zone

Their main hardcore audience is still watching this shit. :MAD:deanfpalm:fuckthis:eyeroll:wut:ha


----------



## PrettyLush

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> If this is WM Season, then I'm the fucking pope.


lmao :lol


----------



## Mra22

20LigerZero17 said:


> Their main hardcore audience is still watching this shit. :MAD:deanfpalm:fuckthis:eyeroll:wut:ha


I don’t see how anyone can watch that crap show, I haven’t watched in 3 weeks probably won’t watch till the 25th anniversary


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Showstopper said:


> Factoid: Monday Night Football is over for the year. This upcoming Raw (on New Years Day) will be the first time they don't go up against the NFL since August/early September.


A bit of an overlooked factor right there. Didn't consider that.

Given that MNF is over, and it's in theory the Road to Royal Rumble, that's a shitty number.
Also given that the first Raw of the year usually has some surprise.

The Rumble better deliver.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> A bit of an overlooked factor right there. Didn't consider that.
> 
> Given that MNF is over, and it's in theory the Road to Royal Rumble, that's a shitty number.
> Also given that the first Raw of the year usually has some surprise.
> 
> The Rumble better deliver.


Yes. However, one thing I forgot since I'm not a College Football guy: Next weeks Raw goes up against the College Football Championship game. It does HUGE numbers every year. It will destroy Raw. After this upcoming Raw, they are in the clear as far as football goes. But one more week to go.


----------



## The Renegade

This number is fine. New Year's Days belongs to College Football at this point.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Nice 2nd and 3rd hours this week ^^


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.993M
H2- 2.784M
H3- 2.502M
3H- 2.760M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 6.98% / - 0.209M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 10.13% / - 0.282M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 16.40% / - 0.491M )
1/8/18 Vs 1/1/18 ( - 3.66% / - 0.105M )

Demo (1/8/18 Vs 1/1/18):
H1- 0.970D Vs 1.020D
H2- 0.910D Vs 0.970D
H3- 0.820D Vs 0.920D
3H- 0.900D Vs 0.970D

Note: RAW is 6th, 9th & 10th by hourly demo & 6th, 7th & 11th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (1/8/18 Vs 1/9/17):
H1- 2.993M Vs 3.014M
H2- 2.784M Vs 3.019M
H3- 2.502M Vs 2.689M
3H- 2.760M Vs 2.907M ( - 5.06% / - 0.147M )

Demo (1/8/18 Vs 1/9/17):
H1- 0.970D Vs 0.990D
H2- 0.910D Vs 0.990D
H3- 0.820D Vs 0.920D
3H- 0.900D Vs 0.967D

Note: RAW this time last year was 7th, 8th & 9th by hourly demo & 7th, 11th & 12th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## MC

That third hour :reigns


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

One hell of a Rumble build.


----------



## sailord

maybe this is the week smackdown will beat them in the ratings.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

They really suffered in the demo, but I bet they still edge out SDL. We'll see.


----------



## JC00

First 2 hours aren't that bad considering what it was up against and the fact that those hours featured the CW title match, Miz's return/MizTV, Woken Matt, a women's tag match that was announced 3 minutes before it happened and a men's tag match that was announced 3 minutes before it happened. 

3rd hour you can't really say "well the college title game" because the 1st 2 hours were up against it and did better and those 2 hours didn't have the 2 big things that were announced at the start of the show and promoted throughout which was the Lesnar appearance and Reigns, Rollins and Jordan vs WWE Bullet Club 

Was actually surprised to see a Reigns match ending the show, usually Reigns is either opening the 1st hour or ending the 2nd hour. Then again it wasn't a Reigns singles match so i'm sure Vince will blame everyone other than Reigns.


----------



## ElTerrible

The A-Lister brings the ratings. AJ vs. Miz, World Champion vs. IC Champion on Smackdown would have ended Raw and Vince.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

pretty good rating for going aginst the college football championship.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Imagine thinking this is a good number, nine weeks before Wrestlemania.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.573M
H2- 3.363M
H3- 2.814M
3H- 3.250M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 5.88% / - 0.210M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 16.32% / - 0.549M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 21.24% / - 0.759M )
1/15/18 Vs 1/8/18 ( + 17.75% / + 0.490M )

Demo (1/15/18 Vs 1/8/18):
H1- 1.120D Vs 0.970D
H2- 1.080D Vs 0.910D
H3- 0.960D Vs 0.820D
3H- 1.053D Vs 0.900D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 3rd & 4th by hourly demo & 2nd, 4th & 7th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (1/15/18 Vs 1/16/17):
H1- 3.573M Vs 3.519M
H2- 3.363M Vs 3.221M
H3- 2.814M Vs 3.074M
3H- 3.250M Vs 3.271M ( - 0.64% / - 0.021M )

Demo (1/15/18 Vs 1/16/17):
H1- 1.120D Vs 1.230D
H2- 1.080D Vs 1.100D
H3- 0.960D Vs 1.080D
3H- 1.053D Vs 1.137D

Note: RAW this time last year was 3th, 4th & 5th by hourly demo & 3rd, 6th & 10th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

:braun


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

First two hours were fairly strong. I didn't watch. Did they do anything special to spark such interest? Hour 3 proving once again that 3 hours is just too much.


----------



## MC

BRAUUUUUUUUUN!!!!!!!


----------



## sara sad

Paige is a draw confirmed.


----------



## Mra22

Wow what a ratings bump, I didn’t bother watching though was this week any good ?


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

Braun=Ratings


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Not being on Christmas Day, New Years Day, and not going up against big football games = ratings.


----------



## JC00




----------



## #BadNewsSanta

How does that first hour number compare to the first hours over the last year? Feels like it's really high, but that might just be due to coming off of Football seasons and many viewership with hours not breaking 3 or just barely.


----------



## validreasoning

It's the most watched first hour since night after Wrestlemania 33. The only other first hour in 2017 which was higher was the post rumble raw. After that you have to go back to the post Wrestlemania 32 raw for a higher first hour in 2016.


----------



## MC

#BadNewsSanta said:


> How does that first hour number compare to the first hours over the last year? Feels like it's really high, but that might just be due to coming off of Football seasons and many viewership with hours not breaking 3 or just barely.


Last year



> Hour 1 - 3.519m
> Hour 2 - 3.221m
> Hour 3 - 3.074m
> Average => 3.27m
> 
> http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/1...-war-part-v-lol-ratings-428.html#post65047745


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

validreasoning said:


> It's the most watched first hour since night after Wrestlemania 33. The only other first hour in 2017 which was higher was the post rumble raw. After that you have to go back to the post Wrestlemania 32 raw for a higher first hour in 2016.


Wow - pretty crazy it did that well. Hell, just looking at the first two hours and it beat out last year's show. Third hour took quite a drop.

It's not a huge number or anything, but it's a nice little glimpse at what kind of draw Braun _might_ be. 

Speaking of huge numbers, is it safe to expect over 4 million viewers for next week, maybe even 5 million? Is this show as hyped as Raw 1000 was? It's missing The Rock, but in place of that you have Taker in his first appearance since he "retired" so it may draw some attention to see if Taker really is done, or if he's got another match lined up. 

I mean, not that I'm expecting numbers that big or saying Taker is a bigger draw than Rock, but they've got that and Stone Cold's first appearance since... when exactly? WM32? I don't remember if he was on Raw 1000 or not. That'll help things. Plus I'd imagine there will be some speculation out there (whether true or not) that Rock and/or Hogan may show up as surprises.

Raw 1000 viewership numbers BTW for those that care (from cagesideseats):



> Raw scored a 3.84 rating for the three hour episode and averaged 6.02 million viewers. They haven't done numbers like that since Feb. 2009 around WrestleMania 25. The show ended up averaging 5.44 million viewers for the first hour that started at the new time of 8 p.m. ET -- which has to be considered a resounding success -- before garnering 6.32 million average viewers for hour two and 6.30 for hour three.


We even had quarterly breakdowns back then:



> The 1,000th episode of WWE RAW did a 3.86 rating over three hours and averaged 6.04 million viewers . This was the most viewers ever for a three-hour show. The previous timeslot of 9-11pm EST that fans became use to for more than a decade, averaged a 4.03 rating and 6.31 million viewers.
> 
> 
> WWE's advertising the 8pm start time was a success as they had 5.58 million viewers already tuned in for the start of the show.
> 
> DX's reunion opened so strong that the second quarter gain with the end of the DX segment gained 27,000 viewers. That would usually be a loss.
> 
> The six-man with Rey Mysterio, Sin Cara and Sheamus vs. Alberto Del Rio, Dolph Ziggler and Chris Jericho which also featured the Charlie Sheen interview lost 395,000 viewers.
> 
> Jack Swagger vs. Brodus Clay and a backstage skits with Legends gained 326,000 viewers.
> 
> AJ and Daniel Bryan wedding at 9pm gained 616,000 viewers for a 3.91 rating.
> 
> The Rock, CM Punk and Daniel Bryan in the ring gained 575,000 viewers for a 4.28 quarter rating.
> 
> Christian vs. The Miz lost 895,000 viewers after three straight segments of monster gains in viewers.
> 
> 
> Triple H, Paul Heyman and Stephanie McMahon in the ring gained 334,000 viewers.
> 
> Brock Lesnar's brawl with Triple H gained 90,000 more viewers.
> 
> Heath Slater with the WWE Legends gained 25,000 viewers for a 3.99 quarter rating in a timeslot of the show that typicall loses a lot. This was impressive given the amount of viewers gained with the Triple H segment, normally a loss would have been a given.
> 
> The Undertaker's return with Kane gained 293,000 viewers.
> 
> WWE Champion CM Punk vs John Cena with The Rock and Big Show appearing gained 389,000 viewers and peaked the show with a 4.43 overrun rating.
> 
> Read more at http://www.mandatory.com/wrestlezon...akdown-for-major-segments#c8i2tzhG9OJHp2Qk.99


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Just wait until those 600.000 additional viewers realize what crap they returned for.

They apparently realized it already around 10 o'clock this week.


----------



## Ace

That was a huge post football bump, you can't really use it to suggest someone is a draw or not as nothing really was advertised but it's safe to say a lot of people stuck around for the Braun segments.

The next few weeks are going to be on a high because of the 25th anniversary show and post Rumble show, it's after that you can see where the WWE's true number is as terms of a weekly audience without football.


----------



## chronoxiong

That is an amazing first hour. Did people watch because NFL season is over? Or because they want to watch the Road to Wrestlemania starting from this week?


----------



## Y.2.J

Hard to say if anyone is drawing because there was no football, there's always random bumps as well, etc.

But Braun is amazing. Most people who tuned in on Monday were probably loving the Braun stuff and he has their attention.

Good numbers, next Monday should do well too, its up to the WWE to capitalize on their momentum and get viewers to consistently tune in every week.


----------



## Zone

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1- 3.573M
> H2- 3.363M
> H3- 2.814M
> 3H- 3.250M*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership:
> H2 Vs H1 ( - 5.88% / - 0.210M )
> H3 Vs H2 ( - 16.32% / - 0.549M )
> H3 Vs H1 ( - 21.24% / - 0.759M )
> 1/15/18 Vs 1/8/18 ( + 17.75% / + 0.490M )
> 
> Demo (1/15/18 Vs 1/8/18):
> H1- 1.120D Vs 0.970D
> H2- 1.080D Vs 0.910D
> H3- 0.960D Vs 0.820D
> 3H- 1.053D Vs 0.900D
> 
> Note: RAW is 2nd, 3rd & 4th by hourly demo & 2nd, 4th & 7th by hourly viewership.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership (1/15/18 Vs 1/16/17):
> H1- 3.573M Vs 3.519M
> H2- 3.363M Vs 3.221M
> H3- 2.814M Vs 3.074M
> 3H- 3.250M Vs 3.271M ( - 0.64% / - 0.021M )
> 
> Demo (1/15/18 Vs 1/16/17):
> H1- 1.120D Vs 1.230D
> H2- 1.080D Vs 1.100D
> H3- 0.960D Vs 1.080D
> 3H- 1.053D Vs 1.137D
> 
> Note: RAW this time last year was 3th, 4th & 5th by hourly demo & 3rd, 6th & 10th by hourly viewership.*


:lbjwut:bjpenn

Can Braun Strowman really be that next superstar that wwe needs or is this just fools gold.

Would be pretty cool if HE was the FOTC. :braun:Crazy


----------



## -Skullbone-

I feel it's important to point out that a spike in interest doesn't always reflect on the individual, but possibly the program they're working too. It's getting to that stage where Braun Strowman is now becoming a significant player they can begin to rely on as an individual figure. Regardless, with how trends are with 'stars' nowadays, it's imperative that programs are worked to still make that individual look _great_. Throwing people into angles that are hoped will work is a recipe for audience apathy or fatigue, as well as cries coming from smart marks that "he/she can't draw!"

So yeah. In a nutshell: Strowman looks great as a rampaging monster with the shit he does, hence, it's a huge reason why people are sticking around for his segments.


----------



## JTB33b

Braun is not finished with those ratings yet.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Meltzer mentioned that alot of 50 year olds watched Raw this week. They very could watch (and more 50 year olds) this upcoming week to see their favorites from the past on Raw 25. Should be interesting.

It's also very interesting that WWE isn't growing their younger audience.


----------



## 751161

Showstopper said:


> Meltzer mentioned that alot of 50 year olds watched Raw this week. They very could watch (and more 50 year olds) this upcoming week to see their favorites from the past on Raw 25. Should be interesting.
> 
> It's also very interesting that WWE isn't growing their younger audience.


Probably going to be the most highest rated RAW in quite a while. People haven't really had a reason to tune in until now. RAW 1000 broke cable records, didn't it? Granted, I don't think it'll reach those heights. But the likes of Austin on such a stacked show should definitely bring back some old fans.

WWE should be smart & do a great build-up to the Rumble, and they could get way more interest in this thing.


----------



## InexorableJourney

WWE is darned lucky RAW25 isn't going against the football.


----------



## [email protected]

Raw25 with no football for sure will get high rating.


----------



## Chrome

Showstopper said:


> Meltzer mentioned that alot of 50 year olds watched Raw this week. They very could watch (and more 50 year olds) this upcoming week to see their favorites from the past on Raw 25. Should be interesting.
> 
> *It's also very interesting that WWE isn't growing their younger audience.*


A bad, out-of-touch product will do that. It's why the audience is getting older each year, people just watch it out of habit nowadays.


----------



## 751161

Chrome said:


> A bad, out-of-touch product will do that. It's why the audience is getting older each year, people just watch it out of habit nowadays.


Makes me wonder why they keep trying to appeal to the 'casuals' when there's not even that many of them left. Feels like a lot of die hard people watch it these days, if I was a passing 'casual' viewer, I would have given up on this shit ages ago :lol


----------



## Chrome

The Fourth Wall said:


> Makes me wonder why they keep trying to appeal to the 'casuals' when there's not even that many of them left. Feels like a lot of die hard people watch it these days, if I was a passing 'casual' viewer, I would have given up on this shit ages ago :lol


Or kids too for that matter when kids aren't their biggest demographic.


----------



## InexorableJourney

Showstopper said:


> Meltzer mentioned that alot of 50 year olds watched Raw this week. They very could watch (and more 50 year olds) this upcoming week to see their favorites from the past on Raw 25. Should be interesting.
> 
> It's also very interesting that WWE isn't growing their younger audience.


Damn, WWE's Chief Brand Officer is doing a terrible job.

No growth in the younger audience, less women watching then a year ago, and only saved by an older audience that watches in spite of the branding.


----------



## Ibracadabra

Showstopper said:


> Meltzer mentioned that alot of 50 year olds watched Raw this week. They very could watch (and more 50 year olds) this upcoming week to see their favorites from the past on Raw 25. Should be interesting.
> 
> It's also very interesting that WWE isn't growing their younger audience.


Their younger audience don't have cable but have the Network (unless you really think that its these 50 year olds who can barely work a cell phone are the ones driving that too).

Ratings are mattering less and less.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ibracadabra said:


> Their younger audience don't have cable but have the Network (unless you really think that its these 50 year olds who can barely work a cell phone are the ones driving that too).
> 
> Ratings are mattering less and less.


You gotta come up with a better excuse than that.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Ibracadabra said:


> Their younger audience don't have cable but have the Network (unless you really think that its these 50 year olds who can barely work a cell phone are the ones driving that too).
> 
> Ratings are mattering less and less.


How does the younger audience having the Network affect Raw numbers?

Unless you're implying the younger demographics open their network every monday at 8, are baffled why Raw isn't on, and just walk away because "they don't have cable".
Which, looking at dropping IQ nationwide, wouldn't surprise me actually.

WWE Network has zero, nada, niet, nothing to do with Raw viewership.
I'm surprised you ignore the simple fact that Raw is USA exclusive.






Actually, I'm not.

Unless your next claim is that younger demographics don't have TVs anymore.

Every single argument is futile because the simple fact is: if Raw was hot, young people would watch it live. End of story.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 4.803M
H2- 4.641M
H3- 4.147M
3H- 4.530M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 3.37% / - 0.162M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 10.64% / - 0.494M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 13.66% / - 0.656M )
1/22/18 Vs 1/15/18 ( + 39.38% / + 1.280M )

Demo (1/22/18 Vs 1/15/18):
H1- 1.800D Vs 1.120D
H2- 1.700D Vs 1.080D
H3- 1.630D Vs 0.960D
3H- 1.710D Vs 1.053D

Note: RAW is 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (1/22/18 Vs 1/23/17):
H1- 4.803M Vs 3.309M
H2- 4.641M Vs 3.457M
H3- 4.147M Vs 3.111M
3H- 4.530M Vs 3.292M ( + 37.61% / + 1.238M )

Demo (1/22/18 Vs 1/23/17):
H1- 1.800D Vs 1.150D
H2- 1.700D Vs 1.260D
H3- 1.630D Vs 1.200D
3H- 1.710D Vs 1.203D

Note: RAW this time last year was 4th, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 8th, 7th & 9th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Ace

Holy shit almost 5m :sodone

When was the last time Raw got close to that?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

HOLY SHIT. All 3 hours in the 4 millions.

:lmao :lmao :lmao

The old GOATS draw.

:mj2


----------



## Ace

The sad thing is 1.5m+ fans are not coming back after that shit show, this was an opportunity to keep them around and they royally fucked up.



Showstopper said:


> HOLY SHIT. All 3 hours in the 4 millions.
> 
> :lmao :lmao :lmao
> 
> The old GOATS draw.
> 
> :mj2


 Most of this was on Austin.

The likes of HBK and HHH etc. have never been able to pop big numbers like this.


----------



## Ace

.


----------



## Demolition119

Damn those are some nice ratings! Too bad they won't be able to capitalize on them because the actual show was shit.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Law said:


> Most of this was on Austin.
> 
> The likes of HBK and HHH etc. have never been able to pop big numbers like this.


I didn't attribute it to any one person.

Still. Hours 2 and 3 were damn good numbers and Austin's segment was the very first segment of the night. The rest of the guys get credit for hours 2 and 3 just like Austin gets credit for hour 1.

I mean, Hour 3 in the 4 millions is INSANE.


----------



## MC

WOW. Take note people, this is what you call being a draw. The old timers are draws, the current roster is not. Maybe people will start realizing that no one and I mean NO ONE is a draw in WWE. Hell.


----------



## ShadowSucks92

Law said:


> Holy shit almost 5m :sodone
> 
> When was the last time Raw got close to that?


The only one I can remember was the RAW after WrestleMania 31 where they did over 5m each hour.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Good number, but they really gave little reason for the viewers to come back next week. Look for a mega drop next Monday. The message is: Nostalgia trumps the current roster.


----------



## Erik.

That's unbelievable.

But 'Raw 25' was basically the Wrestlemania of live episodic television for wrestling. People who barely watch wrestling currently tuning in to see people they grew up watching so they can remember what it was like when they were a kid. I know people who don't watch wrestling who watched last night because they wanted to see Austin and DX kick it one more time. 

These are people who will tune in to watch Wrestlemania despite not knowing anything that's going on.

A bit like me tuning in to watch the Superbowl despite me watching fuck all American Football all season.


----------



## Zigglerpops

Austin is a draw and Vince Russo was right


----------



## Frost99

So this weeks ratings have taught us ONE thing which is Legends DRAW & this "New Generation" doesn't stand a chance in hell in popping a figure like that anytime soon. Vince is better to just shut it down, get rid of the Network & just replay every OLD episode from RAW, Nitro & Smackdown and ride off into the sunset at this point.......

#WWELogic #FutureWHATFuture #OldMenDRAW


----------



## Bret Hart

Airing old Raw episodes in the slot probably would do better ratings..

That wouldn't be such a bad idea tbh, they'd have to take old Raws/SDS off the web though... Pretty much block any access to them in order for it to work.


----------



## CRCC

Legends draw, what a shock!


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Oldtimers are NOT draws! What the hell? How can anyone think that? Oldtimers were part of Raw before, and it didn't draw!

What drew was the ANNIVERSARY! It's not rocket science!

Good news is: WWE will have to wait another 25 years to draw a similar number.


----------



## validreasoning

MC 16 said:


> WOW. Take note people, this is what you call being a draw. The old timers are draws, the current roster is not. Maybe people will start realizing that no one and I mean NO ONE is a draw in WWE. Hell.


Anniversary show was the draw not any individual wrestler, same with ticket sales. Taker, HHH and Shawn have been all over TV in recent years and didn't see big rises in viewership. Austin too hasn't really effected viewership when he has appeared in TV last couple of times. The rest I can't buy people care that much.

It was a special episode. Put Trish, NAO, Mean Gene, MVP, APA on tv every week do you think Raw draws 4.8 million a week, month, six months from now? Even put the big four guys as weekly regulars again and you probably aren't doing much more than normal simply because fans have seen it.

WWE did a decently good job of making this feel like an important episode over the past month (they could have done far more imo) but if you think Wrestlemania and rumble sells itself then you have to hold the same opinion of this kind of episode.


----------



## MC

validreasoning said:


> Anniversary show was the draw not any individual wrestler, same with ticket sales. Taker, HHH and Shawn have been all over TV in recent years and didn't see big rises in viewership. Austin too hasn't really effected viewership when he has appeared in TV last couple of times. The rest I can't buy people care that much.
> 
> It was a special episode. Put Trish, NAO, Mean Gene, MVP, APA on tv every week do you think Raw draws 4.8 million a week, month, six months from now? Even put the big four guys as weekly regulars again and you probably aren't doing much more than normal simply because fans have seen it.
> 
> WWE did a decently good job of making this feel like an important episode over the past month (they could have done far more imo) but if you think Wrestlemania and rumble sells itself then you have to hold the same opinion of this kind of episode.


That's why I said old timers. As a collective along with the anniversary.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Did even one dude on this show mention he's in the Rumble? Did any dude even mention it? 
The only segment specifically for the Rumble was the Women's segment.

If I was a casual, watching this shit for the first time in 3 years, I'd think the Women's Rumble replaced the men's Rumble.

What a shitty way to hype your PPV.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

that was a great number but still kinda disspointing number I remember Raw 1000 drawing over 6 million viewers.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

This also shows that people do still WATCH TV. You just have to give them a good reason to tune in, which WWE doesn't do 99.9% of the time these days.


----------



## Erik.

Showstopper said:


> This also shows that people do still WATCH TV. You just have to give them a good reason to tune in, which WWE doesn't do 99.9% of the time these days.


Probably just a different demographic.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

RAW IS BRAUN said:


> Probably just a different demographic.


A demographic that doesn't show up every week, but will when you give them reason to.

Actually, I'm not even sure about that. Meltzer said alot of 50 year olds have been watching Raw in recent months. Who knows. Either way, it's a fantastic number.


----------



## chronoxiong

That's a ton of viewers! Holy shit! Too bad a lot of people thought the show sucked so I'm sure it's going back to 3 million viewers next week. It feels good to be #1 for one week at least!


----------



## Erik.

Showstopper said:


> A demographic that doesn't show up every week, but will when you give them reason to.
> 
> Actually, I'm not even sure about that. Meltzer said alot of 50 year olds have been watching Raw in recent months. Who knows. Either way, it's a fantastic number.


I meant maybe older fans who don't watch Raw and haven't done in 20+ years tuned in on the television as they don't tend to watch wrestling nor feel the need to stream.

My father for example who used to watch wrestling in the 90s with me and my brothers doesn't stream things but he may have tuned in to Raw 25 yesterday if he had seen it on television for example.

Those 2+ million that tuned in that don't usually simply would have just had it on in the background waiting to relive their youth when the likes of Austin, DX, APA etc. all came on and went back to doing something else etc. when the modern superstars came on. That's not a dig on the current superstars, it's more the people watching probably don't care for wrestling and never will again because they grew up or moved on

But it was a great number - I won't blame the current roster when the number goes back down next week. They're booked horribly in comparison to the legends that were paid to show up yesterday.

The WWE no doubt wanted eyes on the product ahead of the Rumble - but they went about it the wrong way. They aren't retaining half of these viewers simply because half of these viewers tuned in for nostalgia. A bit like if a Saved by the Bell re-union was shown live on television, I'd tune in because Kelly Kapowski is hot as fuck


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

RAW IS BRAUN said:


> I meant maybe older fans who don't watch Raw and haven't done in 20+ years tuned in on the television as they don't tend to watch wrestling nor feel the need to stream.
> 
> My father for example who used to watch wrestling in the 90s with me and my brothers doesn't stream things but he may have tuned in to Raw 25 yesterday if he had seen it on television for example.
> 
> Those 2+ million that tuned in that don't usually simply would have just had it on in the background waiting to relive their youth when the likes of Austin, DX, APA etc. all came on and went back to doing something else etc. when the modern superstars came on. That's not a dig on the current superstars, it's more the people watching probably don't care for wrestling and never will again because they grew up or moved on
> 
> But it was a great number - I won't blame the current roster when the number goes back down next week. They're booked horribly in comparison to the legends that were paid to show up yesterday.
> 
> The WWE no doubt wanted eyes on the product ahead of the Rumble - but they went about it the wrong way. They aren't retaining half of these viewers simply because half of these viewers tuned in for nostalgia. A bit like if a Saved by the Bell re-union was shown live on television, I'd tune in because Kelly Kapowski is hot as fuck


Yep. That's basically what I said in the first post you quoted. People were given a reason to watch (superstars of the past) and they tuned in (and in a big way).

I completely agree the show was not good and they went about it the wrong way and the 'buzz' will be over by next week, even with it being the Raw the night after the Rumble. I'm in no way saying this audience is sticking around. I think we'd all be shocked if they did.


----------



## Erik.

Showstopper said:


> Yep. That's basically what I said in the first post you quoted. People were given a reason to watch (superstars of the past) and they tuned in (and in a big way).
> 
> I completely agree the show was not good and they went about it the wrong way and the 'buzz' will be over by next week, even with it being the Raw the night after the Rumble. I'm in no way saying this audience is sticking around. I think we'd all be shocked if they did.


It was just horribly laid out wasn't it?

It's a 3 hour show, they should have perhaps done a 'party' backstage with a few backstage segments showing some of the older faces (As opposed to parading them out there like they did with the old divas) and save the bigger segments (DX, Taker, Austin) for the top hour slots. 

That way if you're hell bent on keeping viewers eyes on the product, BUILD your own fucking stars and build towards the PPV that's 6 days away, a PPV that's generally quite a casual viewing PPV - I know people, like Wrestlemania, who tune in to Rumble because it's the Rumble. 

The fact they had to rush the Braun/Kane/Lesnar segment, your world title match, was laughable. Raw was the first time I watched wrestling since No Mercy and I kid you not, I have no idea what matches are taking place at the Rumble besides the Womens Rumble, Mens Rumble and the World title match.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Really good numbers - great for today's product - but I'd also assume this is more or less the cap they can get nowadays, which shows how their audience has decreased.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

RAW IS BRAUN said:


> It was just horribly laid out wasn't it?
> 
> It's a 3 hour show, they should have perhaps done a 'party' backstage with a few backstage segments showing some of the older faces (As opposed to parading them out there like they did with the old divas) and save the bigger segments (DX, Taker, Austin) for the top hour slots.
> 
> That way if you're hell bent on keeping viewers eyes on the product, BUILD your own fucking stars and build towards the PPV that's 6 days away, a PPV that's generally quite a casual viewing PPV - I know people, like Wrestlemania, who tune in to Rumble because it's the Rumble.
> 
> The fact they had to rush the Braun/Kane/Lesnar segment, your world title match, was laughable. Raw was the first time I watched wrestling since No Mercy and I kid you not, I have no idea what matches are taking place at the Rumble besides the Womens Rumble, Mens Rumble and the World title match.



Absolutely.

I like that the main event of the Rumble (Braun, Brock, and Kane) went on last. That is a decent way of showing the fans that the current day guys main event is the most important thing on the show, including going on last over the legends. I support that.

But, and WWE has shown this quite a few times, that they have time where they don't format their show in an efficient manner. I mean, think about it. They've have *over* 3 hours (with the overrun, which at times has gone as long as 15-20 mins) to do what they want to do with this show. They've been doing 3 hour shows for years now, as well. But the fact that they still failed in this and has the main event segment go on basically at 11PM EST (When the show ends) shows just how inept they are. Yeah, the overrun can go long. But, you still don't want your main event segment to START when the show technically ends at 11PM. It just makes the entire segment feel rushed.

Also, while the whole having 2 venues for one show idea sounds fun on paper; WWE is far too inept of an organization when it comes to planning/pacing a show to make this work. They also somehow thought giving one of the venues barely any segments to watch live in person was a grand idea. Boy, did that blow up in their faces when you have fans chanting "we want refunds!" Unbelievable.

Fact is, you just really can't trust this company to do anything right anymore. I can't even imagine how many of the legends who were there last night that usually aren't there, left Raw last night saying to themselves, "Holy hell. This company is fucked."

It's quite a time for WWE. Sadly, not in a good or entertaining way, though.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

One of the biggest problems with RAW is the amount of commercial breaks they take during matches. I remember a time when commercial breaks during matches were rare and only happened during main event matches. This is probably because matches are too long nowadays on RAW (something Russo has talked about). I mean why the hell are they having a commercial break during a match between two tag teams that are lower tier talent at best (Titus Worldwide/Slater and Rhyno)?


----------



## TyAbbotSucks

Anyone with any type of social media account knew that shit was drawing huge ratings. I woke up and it was already like top 3 in trending topics world wide at like 7 in the morning lol They'll get the after the PPV numbers bump so hopefully they capitalize off of that


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*WWE Raw rating for the January 22 “Raw 25” edition

'' Monday’s WWE Raw scored a 3.01 rating, up from the 2.21 rating the show drew last week. Raw averaged 4.53 million viewers, up from the 3.25 million average from last week.

The January 23, 2017 edition of Raw delivered a 2.29 rating with 3.292 million viewers for the Royal Rumble go-home edition. ''*

https://prowrestling.net/site/2018/01/23/wwe-raw-rating-january-22-raw-25-edition/


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The sad part for WWE is I bet that many of the lapsed fans who watched saw the product and realized that there was nothing to miss.


----------



## Y.2.J

4.53 million. :bjpenn

Too bad it wasn't a great episode to really keep those new/other viewers.


----------



## ieatass

Kelly Kelly is a draw.


----------



## Naiyo

Didn't RAW 1000 do 6 mil+ viewers? This one didn't even touch 4.5 mil. This is NOT a good number in my view. All that hype, they draw this 2014 number at best? pathetic really.


----------



## InexorableJourney

The beach ball is the only guaranteed draw on RAW.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Let's see how many people tuned into Raw expecting to see Rousey and were letdown..

:lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I bet it did relatively really well with the Rousey interest and the traditional ppv bump.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.662M
H2- 3.461M
H3- 3.061M
3H- 3.395M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 5.49% / - 0.201M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 11.56% / - 0.400M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 16.41% / - 0.601M )
1/29/18 Vs 1/22/18 ( - 25.06% / - 1.135M )

Demo (1/29/18 Vs 1/22/18):
H1- 1.210D Vs 1.800D
H2- 1.150D Vs 1.700D
H3- 1.060D Vs 1.630D
3H- 1.140D Vs 1.710D

Note: RAW is 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 7th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (1/29/18 Vs 1/30/17):
H1- 3.662M Vs 3.628M
H2- 3.461M Vs 3.643M
H3- 3.061M Vs 3.574M
3H- 3.395M Vs 3.615M ( - 6.09% / - 0.220M )

Demo (1/29/18 Vs 1/30/17):
H1- 1.210D Vs 1.350D
H2- 1.150D Vs 1.360D
H3- 1.060D Vs 1.390D
3H- 1.140D Vs 1.367D

Note: RAW this time last year was 3rd, 2nd & 1st by hourly demo & 4th, 3rd & 5th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Whoa. That's a bit lower than I was expecting considering the night after the Rumble and Rousey.


----------



## Cavalry365

Looks like a shitty no..


----------



## Bret Hart

Back to normal. :lol

They didn't do anything last Monday to keep those people who tuned in after a long time.


----------



## 751161

Showstopper said:


> Whoa. That's a bit lower than I was expecting considering the night after the Rumble and Rousey.


Yeah, was expecting the first hour to get a big bump with all the news of Rousey everywhere & people thinking she might be there. Not a bad number, but just surprising to me.


----------



## Ace

Thought the show was pretty good, but I expected a lot more since they were advertising Ronda and it was a post Rumble show and coming off Raw 25's massive number.


----------



## Bret Hart

Last week
H1- 4.803M
H2- 4.641M
H3- 4.147M
3H- 4.530M

Last night
H1- 3.662M
H2- 3.461M
H3- 3.061M
3H- 3.395M


:damn

A million viewers said fuck it.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

Showstopper said:


> Whoa. That's a bit lower than I was expecting considering the night after the Rumble and Rousey.


Lowest post Rumble RAW viewership/rating in 21 years. Harkening back to the 2.2 rating for the 97' post Rumble RAW.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Those are still "good" numbers, but last week gave little incentive for the lapsed viewers to return again.


----------



## Ace

Bret Hart said:


> Last week
> H1- 4.803M
> H2- 4.641M
> H3- 4.147M
> 3H- 4.530M
> 
> Last night
> H1- 3.662M
> H2- 3.461M
> H3- 3.061M
> 3H- 3.395M
> 
> 
> :damn
> 
> A million viewers said fuck it.


 1.22m... they essentially lost every lapsed fan, not one of them stuck around after that shit show fpalm

Talk about a huge waste of an opportunity from the WWE.


----------



## Icecube225

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> Lowest Rumble fallout RAW viewership/rating in 21 years. Harkening back to the 2.2 rating for the 97' Rumble fallout RAW with a 2.2 rating.


It’s obvious why this happened when you see the winners of the rumble.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> Lowest Rumble fallout RAW viewership/rating in 21 years. Harkening back to the 2.2 rating for the 97' Rumble fallout RAW with a 2.2 rating.


Wow. That is crazy. Just more proof that no one in WWE is a draw these days.


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> Wow. That is crazy. Just more proof that no one in WWE is a draw these days.


 Not even Ronda Rousey :lol


----------



## Adam Cool

Everyone knows what the results will be
So why even bother watching any Raw untill mania other than to find out what the mid card will be doing......
OH wait I forgot , the Mid Card doesn't even exist anymore


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Not sure what else they could do. They let the women main event and had ESPN promote the heck out of Rousey.


----------



## Bret Hart

The Boy Wonder said:


> Not sure what else they could do. They let the women main event and had ESPN promote the heck out of Rousey.


Hype the fuck out of every single Raw.


----------



## JC00

Oh what a shocker Rousey hype did nothing. The week before the Raw 25th episode was was 3.5m, 3.3m, 2.8m (3.25m 3 hour) This show had the typical post-Big 4 PPV bump.


And before anyone says "she wasn't on" people would have tuned in assuming she was going to be on,


----------



## Ace

I thought she was going to be on, they promoted the show like she was going to be on it..


----------



## JDP2016

Once the Ronda hype wears off, and the Asuka hype if they aren't careful, they could be in for a bumpy 2018 post Mania.


----------



## The Renegade

Color me surprised. I thought the numbers would be better.


----------



## CretinHop138

The lowest post Royal Rumble Raw for 21 years.

BUT LOOK RONDA ROUSEY.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

JDP2016 said:


> Once the Ronda hype wears off, and the Asuka hype if they aren't careful, they could be in for a bumpy 2018 post Mania.


Judging by these numbers look like Ronda is not really doing shit for the ratings and I expect it to be down even more next week.


----------



## Erik.

If last weeks show was good - they still wouldn't have retained the million, let's be real :lol

Those watching last week, like I said, had probably not watched wrestling for 15+ years. They weren't going to start again with all fresh new faces they have never seen or heard of in an environment that's completely different to what they were used to.


----------



## MC

BeckyLynchFan29 said:


> Judging by these numbers look like Ronda is not really doing shit for the ratings and I expect it to be down even more next week.


She wasn't even on the show :mj4


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

MC 16 said:


> She wasn't even on the show :mj4


people was expecting her to show up through and they got nothing don't expect them people returning and infact it was weak bump anyway seeing as this is the lowest post rumble raw in histoy.


----------



## AlternateDemise

The Boy Wonder said:


> Not sure what else they could do. They let the women main event and had ESPN promote the heck out of Rousey.


They could try putting on a better product and giving their fans a reason to watch.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Subtract the Rumble bump, and back to normal it is.

The real story of this: 5 Million people watched Raw 25. 2 Million of those, almost half, decided it wasn't worth coming back for even just one more week.


----------



## Mongstyle

WWE's problem is that the only person on Raw who has received good booking since WM33 consistently is Braun Strowman. One guy. And 3 hours can't be built around one guy.

Reigns was basically used to elevate him, and has done nothing else of note in that time. This is your top guy who's being booked like an afterthought.

Rollins and Ambrose have been wasted. Here's two of your other five top guys in the company. Being wasted for almost an entire year.

Bray is Bray and sucks anyway. But maybe consider changing things up with him to see if something else works.

The Royal Rumble PPV in itself was booked like a shitshow, and the wrong guy won. No one except hardcore fans give it a shit about Nakamura. The right person to win was Rollins. Here's a guy who you gave a lot in 2015 and 2016. Then you've got him doing nothing in 2017 and he has nothing for WM34. But this is clearly someone who's going to be around on top for the next 5 years at least. Give him the win to build his legacy and get something interesting going (have him jump brands for example).

Your top guys should always be doing something meaningful. They shouldn't be involved in meaningless feuds. WWE has a bad habit of building the show around one angle, and not doing anything with the rest of the show. You even see it on SDL where Shane/Owens have basically carried the show for the past 5 months. Meanwhile Orton and Nakamura have been doing fuck all, and Styles is basically an afterthought as the champion.

This should not be happening. In order for the product to feel fresh and good, there needs to be meaningful stuff happening across the board. You can't be wasting talent in nothing feuds.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Just saw that the number is actually down compared to last year's RR post-show :lmao


----------



## Will Thompson

THE UNBEARABLE LIGHTNESS OF BEING THE SHIV said:


> Those are still "good" numbers, but last week gave little incentive for the lapsed viewers to return again.


 Pretty much this. Any casual/lapsed fan who tuned in for the legends/nostalgia would have taken a look at the shit show it was and decided it wasn't worth their time.

As for Ronda Rousey, she isn't as big a deal as WWE are making her out to be given how her MMA career petered out and just like Brock, her appearances will stop having any decent impact on the viewership/ratings once the fad is over. (You KNOW WWE is going to try and make her the female Brock Lesnar and end up burying the entire women's division in the process.)


----------



## Randy Lahey

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> Lowest post Rumble RAW viewership/rating in 21 years. Harkening back to the 2.2 rating for the 97' post Rumble RAW.


That's a terrible rating given that they had a lead in of Raw 25 AND the Royal Rumble.

I mean, you throw everything you have at trying to get back an audience, and nope, wrestling is still dead.


----------



## Genking48

MMA fans don't give a shit about wrestling, and the debut of a MMA fighter is not magically going to make MMA fans give a shit.

It's like if/when Tim Wiese makes his main roster debut it's not going to make every German football fan suddenly give a shit about WWE. They wanna see him play football, they don't want to see him be a wrestler. Same for Ronda I'll assume, MMA fans don't wanna see Ronda Rousey the WWE superstar, they wanna see Ronda Rousey the MMA fighter.


----------



## V-Trigger

So much for Ronda being a mainstream draw. Serves you well Haitch.


----------



## The Wood

Raw 25 was awful. I've seen a lot about the Royal Rumble being really good, but what I saw felt flat. Ronda comes out to Joan Jett and points. Okay. What am I supposed to feel about that?


----------



## InexorableJourney

If RAW1000 got over 6 million viewers, and RAW25 got 4.5 million.. I predict 2 million viewers for RAW30.

With 800,000 RAW viewers the following week.


----------



## Bink77

If anything, Raw 25's rating proves that the bulk of WWEs audience ISNT just streaming or dvr-ing the show. They truly just stopped watching. Seeing as how many decided to take the time and tune in live to that shit show...


----------



## MC

CGFforlife said:


> Nakamura wins rumble chasing away casual and older fans who come once a year.
> Good job wwe :clap


Nakamura is on SD, so he wouldn't affect Raw ratings :mj4 Good job.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Why would Nakamura boost RAW ratings? 
Why would Reigns boost Smackdown ratings?
WTF

Rousey should have boosted RAW ratings. So blame the proper people.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.161M
H2- 3.212M
H3- 2.793M
3H- 3.055M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 1.61% / + 0.051M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 13.04% / - 0.419M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 11.64% / - 0.368M )
2/5/18 Vs 1/29/18 ( - 10.00% / - 0.340M )

Demo (2/5/18 Vs 1/29/18):
H1- 1.070D Vs 1.210D
H2- 1.100D Vs 1.150D
H3- 1.040D Vs 1.060D
3H- 1.070D Vs 1.140D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 5th, 3rd & 7th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (2/5/18 Vs 2/6/17):
H1- 3.161M Vs 3.339M
H2- 3.212M Vs 3.165M
H3- 2.793M Vs 2.842M
3H- 3.055M Vs 3.115M ( - 1.93% / - 0.060M )

Demo (2/5/18 Vs 2/6/17):
H1- 1.070D Vs 1.190D
H2- 1.100D Vs 1.160D
H3- 1.040D Vs 1.060D
3H- 1.070D Vs 1.137D

Note: RAW this time last year was 2nd, 3rd & 4th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 8th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Back to normal.

:lmao

Love it.

Hour 2 higher than hour 1.

:lmao

What was in hour 1???


----------



## Chrome

Looks like things are back to square one after Raw 25 and the Rumble fallout.


----------



## Cavalry365

Garbage no. Road to WM :lol


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Johnny Wrestling said:


> Back to normal.
> 
> :lmao
> 
> Love it.
> 
> Hour 2 higher than hour 1.
> 
> :lmao
> 
> *What was in hour 1???*


Reigns/Bray, Cruiserweight match, and Revival vs Anderson/Balor. 

YouTube Numbers: 

Reigns/Bray: 1M
CW Match: 93K :lmao
Revival vs. Anderson/Balor: 274K

We don't have breakdowns anymore, but going by those YT numbers it looks like viewers went away for those last two segments and came back. The main event got 1.7M views. Do we know yet if the overrun numbers are taken into account for H3?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Boy Wonder said:


> Reigns/Bray, Cruiserweight match, and Revival vs Anderson/Balor.
> 
> YouTube Numbers:
> 
> Reigns/Bray: 1M
> CW Match: 93K :lmao
> Revival vs. Anderson/Balor: 274K
> 
> We don't have breakdowns anymore, but going by those YT numbers it looks like viewers went away for those last two segments and came back. The main event got 1.7M views. Do we know yet if the overrun numbers are taken into account for H3?


Hour 1 is always the highest rated hour 99.9% of the time these days. Reigns/Wyatt was advertised since Friday, I believe. That's a horrific sign, tbh.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Reigns stuck squarely in hour 1, yet hour 2 jumps it. :lmao

3rd hour is back to sub-3. Ouch.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Johnny Wrestling said:


> Hour 1 is always the highest rated hour 99.9% of the time these days. Reigns/Wyatt was advertised since Friday, I believe. That's a horrific sign, tbh.


They went first. It's not like they went an hour. The rest of hour was was the tag match and the Cruiserweight match. I think viewers are aware enough of the predictable layout of RAW:

• Opening Match
• Hour 2 segment
• Main Event in the last 15 minutes


----------



## Ace

Pathetic number on the RTWM, without no MNF as well.

It was fully deserved, the show last night sucked.


----------



## MC

:lol The 2nd hour bigger then the first. Wasn't Roman in the first hour?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Boy Wonder said:


> They went first. It's not like they went an hour. The rest of hour was was the tag match and the Cruiserweight match. I think viewers are aware enough of the predictable layout of RAW:
> 
> • Opening Match
> • Hour 2 segment
> • Main Event in the last 15 minutes


They had a solid 20 minute match and it was advertised days in advance. Hell, Vince probably put it in the first hour because it's always the highest rated hour. And it wasn't on a Raw that is on the Road to WM.

Pathetic.


----------



## MC

I missed most of the first hour, what happened? I'm looking at the reports, it says Roman vs Bryan went 15 minute, Balor and Anderson vs Revival went 8 and the cw went 4 minutes. That's 27 minutes. What else took place to fill the 33 minutes left?


----------



## The Boy Wonder

MC 16 said:


> I missed most of the first hour, what happened? I'm looking at the reports, it says Roman vs Bryan went 15 minute, Balor and Anderson vs Revival went 8 and the cw went 4 minutes. That's 27 minutes. What else took place to fill the 33 minutes left?


The Angle/Bliss segment. I think it carried over from H1 to H2.


----------



## Cavalry365

MC 16 said:


> I missed most of the first hour, what happened? I'm looking at the reports, it says Roman vs Bryan went 15 minute, Balor and Anderson vs Revival went 8 and the cw went 4 minutes. That's 27 minutes. What else took place to fill the 33 minutes left?


Ads.


----------



## Chrome

What was in hour 2?


----------



## Ace

Cena v Elias v Braun with EC implications couldn't keep the third hr above 3m.

It lost 400,000+ viewers.


----------



## MC

Chrome said:


> What was in hour 2?


Asuka vs Bayley, Miz vs Crews and The Bar vs Seth and Roman.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Never open a show with a Wyatt/Reigns promo.
People saw it and knew that with commercials, hour 1 wasn't worth it.

Face of the Company, People.


----------



## Chrome

Wyatt/Reigns being incredibly predictable probably didn't help its cause either tbh. I mean, who in their right mind would think Wyatt had a chance in that match? :lol


----------



## MC

No matter who drew what rating, it's a dreadful rating for the RTWM. Whilst it's early days in the RTWM, they need to sort it out and fix this. This time of the year is suppose to be the best time (and most successful) of the year. It's not looking like it thus far.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Oh how Rollins' "abysmal" title reign ratings from 2014 seem like the cheery days of yesteryear ...


----------



## Cavalry365

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Oh how Rollins' "abysmal" title reign ratings from 2014 seem like the cheery days of yesteryear ...


*2015


----------



## Chrome

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Oh how Rollins' "abysmal" title reign ratings from 2014 seem like the cheery days of yesteryear ...


Or Punk's in 2012 lol. He was getting Attitude Era numbers compared to what they get nowadays.


----------



## JDP2016

Bayley with that hour 2 bump. :mark That's what happens when you stand up to that ole purple wig.

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## Jeff Rollins

Why watch when everything is so predicable, as soon as the Roman/Bray match was announced it was obvious who the winner was going to be. It's the same with the EC PPV


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Pushing something like an Elimination Chamber match as brutal in a PG environment is like softcore porn.

The announcers go on about how gorgeous her asshole and pussy look, and how brutally she gets pounded, and here you are as a viewer, seeing nothing but a frontal shot of her face and think "boooooooring".


----------



## kingshark

This is my first post on this forum in 2 years. Honestly, I gave up on this company some time ago. I still watch highlights of WrestleMania every year just because, but otherwise my interest is at an all-time low.

If they aren't going to put any effort into their product, then they shouldn't expect anything in return either.

It feels like everyone is just going through the motions at this point.


----------



## Will Thompson

MC 16 said:


> No matter who drew what rating, it's a dreadful rating for the RTWM. Whilst it's early days in the RTWM, they need to sort it out and fix this. This time of the year is suppose to be the best time (and most successful) of the year. It's not looking like it thus far.


 Is their anything that we should be excited for on the RTWM? The 2 title matches are already set and you know none of the stars involved in them are likely to make you go "OMG" during the build. Plus the results are predictable.

As for the women's revolution crap, you know the title matches are only aimed to build up Asuka even more till she is fed to Rousey, whose match would anyway overshadow whatever the women may do on the night.

Their is nothing that would get the viewers on the edge of their seat and want to tune in every week. I can now understand why the WWE (and the fans in general) start clamoring for the part-timers and yesteryear superstars to be involved in some of the matches at Wrestlemania. Atleast their s the nostalgia aspect there....


----------



## FROSTY

V-Trigger said:


> So much for Ronda being a mainstream draw. Serves you well Haitch.


*Only casual MMA fans like Ronda, harcore MMA fans can't fucking stand her anymore than hardcore wrestling fans could stand Cena for years, or Reigns now.*


----------



## Florat

Will Thompson said:


> Is their anything that we should be excited for on the RTWM? The 2 title matches are already set and you know none of the stars involved in them are likely to make you go "OMG" during the build. Plus the results are predictable.



That's the problem when all you have is stupid wrestling and backstage interviews. The show feels so bland, it's like we went from an action movie to a documentary. At least back then, even if you knew the results, you knew your guy would get cool moments, it was entertaining

What the hell do you have now ? It's getting worst and more boring every year. Even praised angle like Kevin Owens vs Chris Jericho were super boring and super corny. The last time I really looked forward for Wrestlemania for thebuild was XXX


----------



## Demolition119

311 said:


> *Only casual MMA fans like Ronda, harcore MMA fans can't fucking stand her anymore than hardcore wrestling fans could stand Cena for years, or Reigns now.*


A large chunk of Her fanbase were bandwagon jumpers that only liked her because she was hot, and could kick ass. Guess what happened when she got humbled? For a time she truly had one of the most obnoxious fanbases ever seen.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

One of the biggest problems with RAW over the last few years has been the predictable layout of the show and Brock Lesnar. 

I remember a time when matches NEVER went through a commercial, and if it did it meant we were seeing a big match. Today there are matches that have no business going through commercials. Russo mentioned this about how during the AE they had shorter matches and more segments. For years now WWE has been giving us longer (and better) matches but that hasn't translated to ratings. 

The layout of the show is so predictable that fans know when to tune in and when to change the channel. You can tune in at the top of each hour and the last ten minutes of RAW and not miss a thing. 

Brock Lesnar has hovered over the entire RAW roster for nearly three years. When he is champion he's hardly there which makes fans believe that nothing exciting can really happen. When he's not champion you can't really take the champion seriously because Brock was never defeated. WWE has booked Brock like a UFC fighter: when he's on RAW he's just there to sell a fight with the help of Heyman. Whereas in previous years the champion was there every week to tell a storyline. None of Brock's matches have a storyline, and when the fight is over nothing can progress for anyone. The one time Brock had a storyline it was successful with Goldberg. 

They need to have the champion on RAW every week. By doing this they can create more storylines, it makes the entire roster look better (like getting a non-title win over the champion, tagging with the champion, or being in a storyline with the champion), and it allows for a anything can happen at anytime atmosphere.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Demolition119 said:


> A large chunk of Her fanbase were bandwagon jumpers that only liked her because she was hot, and could kick ass. Guess what happened when she got humbled? For a time she truly had one of the most obnoxious fanbases ever seen.


Then she should fit right in with the WWE cultists.


----------



## Gravyv321

roman driving away viewers again in hour 1. what a shock :mj4


----------



## Randy Lahey

Road to Wrestlemania ratings really aren't much different than Road to SummerSlam. There's no longer any boom time of year for wrestling.

You got your 2.8 - 3.2 mils diehards that will tune in every week. Nothing more than that no matter the season. And if there's something more interesting on TV that week, you'll see even those guys tune out.


----------



## IceTheRetroKid

*With that drop, sometimes I think there's an overthought with the football thing, since it dropped after the season is over: Ever thought that maybe there might be some people who just sit in front of a TV on Monday Nights only to watch the football and just use RAW to flip onto it during the breaks? Imagine when football season is over, they don't even go to the TV at all or watch it at all.*


----------



## Zone

Chrome said:


> Or Punk's in 2012 lol. He was getting Attitude Era numbers compared to what they get nowadays.












Oh man!!:evans

I remember reading the Raw ratings thread as a guest back in 2012 and the amount of hatred that Punk got from posters that year for "supposedly" being one of the worst draws in wwe history (based off of TV ratings), was off the fucking charts.

I just love how wwe's constantly shitting on CM Punk (since his retirement) and yet in one year, he drew better in the ratings then what they've been getting for the past three years combined. 

Seeing their ratings dwindle for the past couple of years has been a joy to watch (personally) and I hope to god it continues for a couple of more years.









This company needs to change inside and out.unkout


----------



## SWITCHBLADE

The numbers WWE were doing on Raw during Punk's reign as Champ that were considered "bad" are now considered "good" nowadays unkout


----------



## Ace

I miss Punk 

Get that win in MMA and come back where you're actually needed...


----------



## Florat

Saying that CM Punk's numbers were better than today's number is selling it short. CM Punk was being mocked for doing bad numbers for a CHRISTMAS Episode and it was when everytime thought he was done and that he should give up the title.

Let that sink in. The numbers during the Road To Wrestlemania in 2018 would've been seen as bad for a Christmas episode in 2012. A freaking Christmas episode when no one should be watching, that tells you how low the bar is for the WWE these days


----------



## DammitChrist

The time when CM Punk held the WWE title for 434 days being looked as the glory days compared to what we’re getting now :banderas


----------



## Evolution

IceTheRetroKid said:


> *With that drop, sometimes I think there's an overthought with the football thing, since it dropped after the season is over: Ever thought that maybe there might be some people who just sit in front of a TV on Monday Nights only to watch the football and just use RAW to flip onto it during the breaks? Imagine when football season is over, they don't even go to the TV at all or watch it at all.*


I mean from a personal perspective it probably has something to do with the fact that I can not be FUCKED to sit through a 3+ hour program each week with over an hour of ad breaks plus recaps every thirty minutes. It's just draining.

I haven't watched in years and even when I was I was streaming it and even then just couldn't justify the allocation of time every week. Like... I've got shit to do you know?


----------



## OwenSES

The numbers have been slowly declining for a while but they took a real dip after Lesnar squashed Cena at Summerslam 2014. I don't know if the events are linked but that really was the moment where Cena stopped being the focal point in WWE and Lesnar the part time champ has dominated ever since.


----------



## Cavalry365

Meh. It isn't like Punk was holding the numbers or something, they were going down drastically during his reign as well.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I remember the glory days here, when Punk and Bryan and Rollins got destroyed by smarks because "midgets don't draw", and people promised us "just give Reigns the title and ratings will skyrocket".
And when that didn't happen, we were told to just be "patient" and that Reigns just needed more time :booklel

And when that didn't happen, and the glass ceiling started to really tank viewership, those smarks suddenly began to discover YouTube and "cord cutting" and streaming as excuses.
And now that after 2 years or so this is just about debunked as well, the new excuse will be "everything don't matter because RECORD REVENUE! Social media! Reasons!"


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.262M
H2- 3.216M
H3- 2.837M
3H- 3.105M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 1.41% / - 0.046M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 11.78% / - 0.379M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 13.03% / - 0.425M )
2/12/18 Vs 2/5/18 ( + 1.64% / + 0.050M )

Demo (2/12/18 Vs 2/5/18):
H1- 1.030D Vs 1.070D
H2- 1.060D Vs 1.100D
H3- 1.000D Vs 1.040D
3H- 1.030D Vs 1.070D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 4th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (2/12/18 Vs 2/13/17):
H1- 3.262M Vs 3.199M
H2- 3.216M Vs 3.153M
H3- 2.837M Vs 2.909M
3H- 3.105M Vs 3.087M ( + 0.58% / + 0.018M )

Demo (2/12/18 Vs 2/13/17):
H1- 1.030D Vs 1.150D
H2- 1.060D Vs 1.120D
H3- 1.000D Vs 1.050D
3H- 1.030D Vs 1.107D

Note: RAW this time last year was 2nd, 3rd & 4th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 7th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I predict a spring/summer number of 2.X for all three hours.


----------



## Cavalry365

What a shit number once again, the Road to WM doesn't seem to ever arrive for the ratings :lol


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Numbers up from last week and same week last year. 3rd hour still tanks though, but first two hours were okay.


----------



## Littbarski

Cavalry365 said:


> What a shit number once again, the Road to WM doesn't seem to ever arrive for the ratings


Yes being #1, #2 and #3 for the night on cable is shit.

Number was up from last year and you had Olympics competition head to head last night too.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

It's amusing that so many people who always chuckled saying "see you next week" or "you'll still watch" aren't here anymore. Could it be that they ... stopped watching? :booklel

I'm certain next year will fall noticeably during RtWM. A lengthy Reigns title run will take care of that.

Number IS shit. WWE has its own numbers to compare. NFL doesn't compare its numbers to Kids Baking Champ or some shit, either.


----------



## JDP2016

Damm that third hour dropped like a Skrillex beat.

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## Chrome

Well, at least it went up from last year. Still not a great number though.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

This week last year was the debut of Emmalina :ha


----------



## Switchblade Club

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> This week last year was the debut of Emmalina :ha


Remember all those vignettes and how hard they were trying to push it :ha


----------



## Mankind Rick

Man i remember Batista returning the week before the 2014 Rumble and getting like 5.25m in the first hour!
Just checked back and the average for that was better than Raw25 I think. Hell people were worried cause the third hour dropped to 4.36m haha the glory days of WMXXX seem so far away when they were getting above 4m for every hour every week!
The shows so boring and doesn’t feel anything like “The Road To Wrestlemania”. These days the hype starts on the Friday before Mania for HOF and ends after Smackdown, feels like they only give a shit during those 5 days so why should we!? It always use to feel exciting for the whole time from the Rumble build up in January.


----------



## Gravyv321

the samoan sadsack still can't draw :ha


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

4.36 million a worrying number LOL 
They don't draw that the night after Mania.


----------



## Mankind Rick

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> 4.36 million a worrying number LOL
> They don't draw that the night after Mania.


Yeah I think it was mainly due to the 1m lost from the 1st to third hour.
Thought I’d google what other figures that got on that Road To Wrestlemania;
Fallout show from Elimination Chamber featuring Taker return, Hogan return and the network launch scored
4.89
4.78
4.31
Av 4.65
The cage side article describes it as disappointing!
They’ll be about 1.5m short of that first hour in a couple of weeks time after this years EC and it’ll be seen as doing good numbers.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The number is "fine" given our lowered expectations, but it is purely spin. The numbers are mediocre at best.


----------



## JC00

Interesting

Hour 2 was

End of the Rollins/Angle segment
Sasha vs Bayley
Alexa & Mickie vs Absolution

did the best key demo wise and across the board too Adult 18-49, Male 18-49 and Female 18-49 


Kind of flies in the face of the people who still claim people are changing the channel when the women are on


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 2 has been the highest rated hour either last week or the week before, too. Can't remember which, though. So, it's not the first time Hour 2 has drawn more (even if it just barely).

Also, according to someone on the Observer board, Raw finished first for the night by 300K, and was first in the male 18-49 demo.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Just to put these numbers into perspective for the people who claim virtually nobody watches this stuff live anymore: yesterday's WOL show outright said that the actual numbers DVR vs Live are 10% vs 90%.

So, only 10% DVR this.

Meltzer gets the numbers for UFC TV VS Streaming, and literally only 1% watches the UFC shows via streaming. WWE won't be much different.

So, just for those who eternally claim there is a vast amount of ghost viewership not included in the TV ratings.


----------



## Zone

Vegeta said:


> I miss Punk
> 
> Get that win in MMA and come back where you're actually needed...


By any chance, did you previously go by the name Ace/Law?


----------



## Zone

:ambrose4 @Vegeta

Dude, you fooled me completely!:shockedpunk

I kept wondering where in the blue hell is Law at and then I went back and searched through my likes list (because I remembered that you were the first poster to like one of my posts).

Lo and behold, your Vegeta username showed up in place of the Law username!:dead2

I still can't believe you were Vegeta this entire time!:no 

HOLY SHIT!!:monkey

My mind is fucking blown right now.:wat


----------



## emil_vlkv

Hope that ratings are decent for this week. Maybe that will encourage them to experiment more often.


----------



## FROSTY

20LigerZero17 said:


> :ambrose4 @Vegeta
> 
> Dude, you fooled me completely!:shockedpunk
> 
> I kept wondering where in the blue hell is Law at and then I went back and searched through my likes list (because I remembered that you were the first poster to like one of my posts).
> 
> Lo and behold, your Vegeta username showed up in place of the Law username!:dead2
> 
> I still can't believe you were Vegeta this entire time!:no
> 
> HOLY SHIT!!:monkey
> 
> My mind is fucking blown right now.:wat


I thought for sure Vegeta was Straw Hat.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SETH IS THE GUY!!!!!!!!!!










Hour 1: 3.518

Hour 2: 3.509

Hour 3: 2.821

:rollins :rollins :rollins


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.518M
H2- 3.509M
H3- 2.821M
3H- 3.283M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 0.26% / - 0.009M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 19.61% / - 0.688M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 19.81% / - 0.697M )
2/19/18 Vs 2/12/18 ( + 5.73% / + 0.178M )

Demo (2/19/18 Vs 2/12/18):
H1- 1.210D Vs 1.030D
H2- 1.220D Vs 1.060D
H3- 1.000D Vs 1.000D
3H- 1.143D Vs 1.030D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 5th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (2/19/18 Vs 2/20/17):
H1- 3.518M Vs 3.259M
H2- 3.509M Vs 3.261M
H3- 2.821M Vs 3.127M
3H- 3.283M Vs 3.216M ( + 2.08% / + 0.067M )

Demo (2/19/18 Vs 2/20/17):
H1- 1.210D Vs 1.170D
H2- 1.220D Vs 1.160D
H3- 1.000D Vs 1.140D
3H- 1.143D Vs 1.157D

Note: RAW this time last year was 2nd, 3rd & 4th by hourly demo & 3rd, 2nd & 4th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Who says WRESTLING doesn't draw?

:rollins


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Well, if you ever needed proof that the, ahem, WOMEN'S REVOLUTIOOOOOOOON doesn't draw, there it is.
700.000 people not giving a fuck.


----------



## Kloner74v2

Ahahaha just imagine those 700 thousands people, who sat through a good but gruelling gauntlet match that kind of dragged on a little bit, just having to sit through a Asuka promo, followed by a Bar vs Titus Worldwide match hahaha. 

Yeah Asuka and the women are over. Bullshit. At least they have the "balls" to put an Asuka promo on TV. I can kind of respect that.


----------



## MC

Can't believe it. 700 thousand all woke up from their 2 hour coma and turned it off at hour 3.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania




----------



## Dibil13

Breaking news: People are interested in seeing good wrestling matches on their wrestling show.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Well, if you ever needed proof that the, ahem, WOMEN'S REVOLUTIOOOOOOOON doesn't draw, there it is.
> 700.000 people not giving a fuck.


the 3rd hour never draws no matter whats in it so try again.


----------



## 751161

Not surprised to see the Hour 3 numbers at all. I tapped out after the Gauntlet as well. I actually enjoyed it a lot, but nothing after that seemed very significant or worth watching for (and I was correct).

I hope this convinces them to try different things more often.


----------



## JC00

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Well, if you ever needed proof that the, ahem, WOMEN'S REVOLUTIOOOOOOOON doesn't draw, there it is.
> 700.000 people not giving a fuck.





Kloner74v2 said:


> Ahahaha just imagine those 700 thousands people, who sat through a good but gruelling gauntlet match that kind of dragged on a little bit, just having to sit through a Asuka promo, followed by a Bar vs Titus Worldwide match hahaha.
> 
> Yeah Asuka and the women are over. Bullshit. At least they have the "balls" to put an Asuka promo on TV. I can kind of respect that.



Except that hour had the same exact amount of viewers as the 3rd hour last week which was


Reigns vs Sheamus


Rollins vs Balor vs Hardy vs Wyatt vs Apollo

Using the logic you two are you are saying last week 420k people tuned out after Sasha vs Bayley and Alexa & Mickie vs Absolution because they had no interest in watching any of the 7 guys listed above


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

What's amazing is that hour 2 held almost the same viewership as hour 1, despite not having the star power that hour 1 had. That's pretty amazing.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Good for Seth Rollins. That match on Monday was very important for him going forward. I feel a lot of people are reinvested in him. Long matches on RAW will draw when the matches actually matter. This match mattered because of bragging rights and because nothing like this has happened before on RAW when you consider what Rollins did. It kept fans tuned in to see how long he could go. Hopefully this gets WWE thinking about a possible 60 Minute Iron Man Match featuring Seth Rollins.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

From: The Wrestling Observer:



> The 107 minute gauntlet match proved to be a major ratings success on Monday night with 3.27 million viewers going against the Olympics.
> 
> The first hour, where Seth Rollins faced the two most pushed full-time stars in the company, Roman Reigns and John Cena, was up 7.2 percent from the same hour the week before. However, the continuation of the gauntlet, involving Rollins, Elias, Finn Balor, The Miz, and Braun Strowman maintained the audience better than usual, and was up 9.1 percent from the second hour the prior week.
> 
> The key in evaluating was both how well the first hour did, which was far above what it would have been expected to do, as well as how well hour two, after the two big matches, maintained, which was also far better than it would have been expected to do.
> 
> It was a huge victory for proponents of long matches on television and also likely shocked a lot of people.
> 
> The show fell hard, losing 20 percent of the audience after the second hour, which is one of the largest second-to-third hour drops on record. But that was to be expected.
> 
> The Olympic coverage on NBC did 16.36 million viewers, down from 20.30 million viewers the previous week, so that should have slightly helped Raw. Raw was overall up 5.5 percent from the prior week.
> 
> Raw was easily the highest rated show on cable, with Rachel Maddow on MSNBC in second at 2.98 million viewers. It also beat Fox network programming but Fox ran all repeats.
> 
> The three hours were:
> 
> 8 p.m. 3.518 million viewers
> 9 p.m. 3.509 million viewers
> 10 p.m. 2.82 million viewers


https://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/...-252126?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

@JC00

So, Reigns draws as much as Alexa Bliss.
Hardly something to celebrate.


----------



## 751161

Johnny Wrestling said:


> From: The Wrestling Observer:
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/...-252126?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter


Pretty impressive it did that well against the Olympics coverage.

DIFFERENT DRAWS.

We like new things WWE. Take note.


----------



## Ace

Oh god because this drew they're going to focus more on wrestling and less on building stories fpalm



Dibil13 said:


> Breaking news: People are interested in seeing good wrestling matches on their wrestling show.


 What good wrestling?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Fourth Wall said:


> Pretty impressive it did that well against the Olympics coverage.
> 
> DIFFERENT DRAWS.
> 
> We like new things WWE. Take note.


Yep. Against the Olympics, too.

:trips8

:rollins


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Other than RAW 25 and the post-Rumble show, this was the highest viewed RAW since April 17th of last year. 

:trips8


----------



## MC

Balor with a pretty good 2nd hour :bjpenn


----------



## 751161

Vegeta said:


> Oh god because this drew they're going to focus more on wrestling and less on building stories fpalm
> 
> What good wrestling?


You can build good stories through in-ring work as well, you know.

Obviously, I don't want the whole show to be _just_ wrestling every week, but I wouldn't be against some RAW's having a similar feel to this past Monday. Usually WWE's idea of stories sucks, very rarely do they get it right. Just like with Reigns/Brock they are about to do, there is zero story there unlike with Braun. I liked how they included the backstage interviews whilst the matches were going on.


----------



## Ace

The Fourth Wall said:


> You can build good stories through in-ring work as well, you know.
> 
> Obviously, I don't want the whole show to be _just_ wrestling every week, but I wouldn't be against some RAW's having a similar feel to this past Monday. Usually WWE's idea of stories sucks, very rarely do they get it right. Just like with Reigns/Brock they are about to do, there is zero story there unlike with Braun. I liked how they included the backstage interviews whilst the matches were going on.


 That goes out the window when Seth himself said it means nothing if he can't win on Sunday.

He literally said the match meant nothing during the damn match.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Fourth Wall said:


> You can build good stories through in-ring work as well, you know.
> 
> Obviously, I don't want the whole show to be _just_ wrestling every week, but I wouldn't be against some RAW's having a similar feel to this past Monday. Usually WWE's idea of stories sucks, very rarely do they get it right. Just like with Reigns/Brock they are about to do, there is zero story there unlike with Braun. I liked how they included the backstage interviews whilst the matches were going on.


Yeah man, those picture in picture interviews while the match was still going on were awesome. Reminded me old school WWF.


----------



## JC00

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> @JC00
> 
> So, Reigns draws as much as Alexa Bliss.
> Hardly something to celebrate.


Not celebrating. I'm just saying the gauntlet match peaked some of the people's interest that haven't been watching live for awhile and once it was over those people were out. WWE did something creative and ratings reflected it. 

A Bliss/Banks main event 3rd hour had 3.16m viewers which if you put aside the 25th anniversary show that was the last time the 3rd hour was above above 3m viewers and that was back in August.. 6 months and the only 3rd hour to do better than it was a anniversary episode. 

So I think it's inaccurate to say _"lol women's revolution"_. If they actually booked the women creatively and hadn't done another pointless clusterfuck six-woman tag. Maybe done a gauntlet match for the women for who would be the last to enter the chamber maybe that would have held some of those viewers. But nope they did a pointless tag match.


----------



## JDP2016

Vegeta said:


> That goes out the window when Seth himself said it means nothing if he can't win on Sunday.
> 
> He literally said the match meant nothing during the damn match.


And when he doesn't win on Sunday, it won't matter. But hey, he killed himself for over and hour in a match that didn't matter except bragging rights. :sleep


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Here comes the salt. I knew it'd come eventually.

Puh-lease. That was the best story WWE has told in ages. Not everything is about the guy you like sometimes.


----------



## Steve Black Man

Vegeta said:


> That goes out the window when Seth himself said it means nothing if he can't win on Sunday.
> 
> He literally said the match meant nothing during the damn match.


It was meant to progress his character. It wasn't meant to be an indictment of the match fp.


----------



## FITZ

I will often watch the first segment of Raw, tune out, let the DVR run, and then skim through the rest. The gauntlet match got me to watch the first two hours.


----------



## The Renegade

Vegeta said:


> Oh god because this drew they're going to focus more on wrestling and less on building stories fpalm


Hour 1 was all about story. That match isn't half as interesting if it doesn't have the narrative thread of Seth trying to prove himself and recapture his position amongst the top dogs.

Hopefully they're smart enough to discern why it worked in this instance and refrain from haphazardly putting long matches without solid stories out there.


----------



## Steve Black Man

JDP2016 said:


> And when he doesn't win on Sunday, it won't matter. But hey, he killed himself for over and hour in a match that didn't matter except bragging rights. :sleep


Do you honestly think people are just going to forget about his performance (wrestling over an hour, defeating the last two FOTC's clean as a whistle one right after the other) after a B PPV like Elimination Chamber?

Like, seriously?

Like, seriously seriously?

:lol


----------



## Ace

Johnny Wrestling said:


> Here comes the salt. I knew it'd come eventually.
> 
> Puh-lease. That was the best story WWE has told in ages. Not everything is about the guy you like sometimes.


 If that was Roman in Seth's place you would crap on this so hard.


----------



## 751161

JDP2016 said:


> And when he doesn't win on Sunday, it won't matter. But hey, he killed himself for over and hour in a match that didn't matter except bragging rights. :sleep


Don't see how you can say it didn't matter. Hell, just look at the reaction afterwards.

People are going to be talking about Rollins beating Reigns & Cena for years to come. It was a career defining moment. Not when the commentators bullshit and make it out to be, this literally was. Longest performance by a wrestler in RAW history, and beat them both cleanly back to back.

Everyone knows he isn't winning on Sunday, so it won't hurt him. Plus, they actually added a layer of protection to him busting his ass, winning the match after what he did on RAW would take a miracle worker. He's remained over without the World Title pretty well so far.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Vegeta said:


> If that was Roman in Seth's place you would crap on this so hard.


Yes, because Reigns has been 'the guy' for four years straight and has a SLEW of big moments, especially on the biggest show of the year. Rollins hasn't had a 'moment' in a long time. Heaven forbid he gets ONE for the first time in a long ass time.

But if it was AJ, who's currently Champion btw, I'm sure that'd be perfectly fine.


----------



## Ace

Johnny Wrestling said:


> Yes, because Reigns has been 'the guy' for four years straight and has a SLEW of big moments, especially on the biggest show of the year. Rollins hasn't had a 'moment' in a long time. Heaven forbid he gets ONE for the first time in a long ass time.
> 
> But if it was AJ, who's currently Champion btw, I'm sure that'd be perfectly fine.


 AJ is the top champion on SD, I still crap on the show. It's worse now than it was with Jinder as top champion.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Vegeta said:


> AJ is the top champion on SD, I still crap on the show. It's worse now than it was with Jinder as top champion.


It's really not even about AJ. I'm just saying, as a Rollins fan, he hasn't really had a huge moment in a really long time. He hasn't even bitched and moaned about it. He got one on Monday. Fans of his are happy. That's all it is.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Seth deserved this moment he got on RAW. He hasn't had many since he turned face. His WM win over Triple H should've been one but it wasn't. That's probably because beating Triple H means very little.


----------



## validreasoning

Only one-hour of raw last year between January and March (aside from post rumble show) drew over 3.5 million viewers and raw last year had Goldberg, Lesnar, taker, HHH all over tv and stuff like festival of friendship.

The gauntlet match wasn't even advertised in advance or had anything on the line so it shows in this current environment a great match full of twists will draw more viewers than almost any skit, promo or angle they book.


----------



## MC

Glad the gantlet match got some good ratings. I didn't like the match myself but I'm glad a show primarily based on the wrestling was successful.


----------



## Kloner74v2

JC00 said:


> Except that hour had the same exact amount of viewers as the 3rd hour last week which was
> 
> 
> Reigns vs Sheamus
> 
> 
> Rollins vs Balor vs Hardy vs Wyatt vs Apollo
> 
> Using the logic you two are you are saying last week 420k people tuned out after Sasha vs Bayley and Alexa & Mickie vs Absolution because they had no interest in watching any of the 7 guys listed above


Well I didn't sit to see 3rd hour last week also so...

And that's a 280k difference.

But yeah, to be completely fair, the third hour is a bore by itself, but the girls certainly didn't help.


----------



## IceTheRetroKid

*Can we throw some of the arguments that long matches can't cause ratings bumps in the trash? 3.5 million people, more than usual, sustained their attention for 2 hours straight.

And even in the second hour with just average workrate between Elias/Balor/Miz, they still stayed, so, I have to laugh so hard about people who said people would tune out of the long matches.*


----------



## Steve Black Man

IceTheRetroKid said:


> *Can we throw some of the arguments that long matches can't cause ratings bumps in the trash? 3.5 million people, more than usual, sustained their attention for 2 hours straight.
> 
> And even in the second hour with just average workrate between Elias/Balor/Miz, they still stayed, so, I have to laugh so hard about people who said people would tune out of the long matches.*


If anything, it proves that people were interested in the outcome of a supposedly "mean nothing" match.


----------



## DammitChrist

This has been a good week :Cocky


----------



## Gravyv321

pardon the crude language here, but this needs to be said lol

this is to all the fucking idiots on that thread who bitched about the wrestling, and said that nobody cares about it :ha :ha :ha :ha



oldschoolfan said:


> Too much wrestling for the sake of wrestling. My first time tuning in since the Royal Rumble and I see I haven’t missed much. Raw was boring and nothing noteworthy. What is the purpose of having a gauntlet when these competitors are competing in the elimination chamber? Half way through I feel a sleep. Note to the WWE stop catering to the marks. Wrestling too much of it is not what everyone wants to see. Fans not the hardcores miss characters, not wrestlers that look like the Kevin Owens or Sami Zayns of the world. We want entertainment. Storyline progression. Too much wrestling for the sake of is boring. Wrestling is not a real sport and it’s meant to be a male soapra. I hope one day WWE will get back to sports entertainment and not these long-winded matches on raw and smack down that takes away the luster or a PPV when the same guys wrestle a million times in these long for the sake of wrestling matches with the shit 50/50 booking.


this guy takes the biggest loss out of all the bitter anti-wrestling "marks" in this thread

http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/2312393-too-much-wrestling.html

love seeing you get all bitter. you deserve to stay miserable for saying all that bs :mj4


----------



## SWITCHBLADE

WRESTLING on a WRESTLING show draws? What a novel concept!


----------



## MC

Gravyv321 said:


> pardon the crude language here, but this needs to be said lol
> 
> this is to all the fucking idiots on that thread who bitched about the wrestling, and said that nobody cares about it :ha :ha :ha :ha
> 
> 
> 
> this guy takes the biggest loss out of all the bitter anti-wrestling "marks" in this thread
> 
> http://www.wrestlingforum.com/raw/2312393-too-much-wrestling.html
> 
> love seeing you get all bitter. you deserve to stay miserable for saying all that bs :mj4


You know what's worse about oldchoolfan? He shares none of the philosophy oldschool wrestlers have. :lol "Wrestling is not a real sport" Any wrestler from the era he likes would beat the hell out of him for saying that.


----------



## PunjabiPrisoner

For those who might be interested in how the rating compares to the previous Winter Olympics

_February 17 2014_

*Winter Olympics
Viewership
23.55m

Demo
5.6D*

http://anythingkiss.com/pi_feedback_challenge/ratings/20140217_TVRatings.pdf

*RAW
Viewership
H1 - 4.66m
H2 - 4.30m
H3 - 4.13m

Demo
H1 - 1.4D
H2 - 1.3D
H3 - 1.3D*

http://tvaholics.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/primetime-cable-ratings-february-17-2014.html


----------



## Seafort

#BadNewsSanta said:


> What's amazing is that hour 2 held almost the same viewership as hour 1, despite not having the star power that hour 1 had. That's pretty amazing.


As I've said elsewhere, we'll eventually see a RAW with one match for the entire 3 hours and 10 minutes. Cesaro vs Seth Rollins in an Iron Man match that Seth wins 1-0. No storylines. No angles. Just fight forever.


----------



## Dio Brando

oh no the people shitting on the first two hours gonna be stuck seeing this


----------



## JDP2016

Can we just admit that almost anything in the first 2 hours will do well and anything in the 3rd hour is gonna draw less viewers? Can we all agree that 3 hours is too long? 

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## volde

Steve Black Man said:


> If anything, it proves that people were interested in the outcome of a supposedly "mean nothing" match.


Well audience determines if match/segment/program/whatever means something or not. It is not enough for WWE to just present it as mattering, if that was the case then they wouldn't have to do another coronation for Reigns. 

It looks like audience decided that this gauntlet mattered and that Rollins looked like a star. Now it is up to WWE to not fuck it up and provide something "meaningful" for Rollins going to WM since everyone knows that he ain't facing Brock.


----------



## El Ingobernable

*WON :*



> Raw 25 ended up doing 534,000 more viewers if you throw in DVR viewership.
> The live show averaged 4,530,000 viewers, the biggest number since the day after the
> WrestleMania show in San Jose in 2015, so it was 89.5 percent live viewing and
> 10.5 percent via DVR. For the March 31, 2015 episode, it was 5,356,000 live and
> 490,000 via DVR or 8.4 percent via DVR.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

El Ingobernable said:


> *WON :
> Raw 25 ended up doing 534,000 more viewers if you throw in DVR viewership.
> The live show averaged 4,530,000 viewers, the biggest number since the day after the
> WrestleMania show in San Jose in 2015, so it was 89.5 percent live viewing and
> 10.5 percent via DVR. For the March 31, 2015 episode, it was 5,356,000 live and
> 490,000 via DVR or 8.4 percent via DVR.
> *


HOLY FUCK.

:trips8


----------



## 751161

Shame RAW 25 sucked balls.

They really didn't do a good job of retaining any of the additional viewers they got.

Still, a good number to see.


----------



## Dolorian

From PWInsider...

*Who was responsible for RAW's Gauntlet Match?*

_Since the Gauntlet match was held this past Monday on Raw (and especially once the big audience number came in for the show yesterday), we've been asked who was responsible for the match taking place, since the length of the bout and even the presentation of the first two hours of Raw were vastly different from the norm.

That person was Vince McMahon, who we are told was the person who suggested the Gauntlet "out of nowhere", which surprised some since, we are told, he is traditionally not very high on such matches.

From there, the match was laid out and McMahon approved the length and presentation of the show.

So, if you enjoyed it, it was a Vince McMahon call._


----------



## 751161

Dolorian said:


> From PWInsider...
> 
> *Who was responsible for RAW's Gauntlet Match?*
> 
> _Since the Gauntlet match was held this past Monday on Raw (and especially once the big audience number came in for the show yesterday), we've been asked who was responsible for the match taking place, since the length of the bout and even the presentation of the first two hours of Raw were vastly different from the norm.
> 
> That person was Vince McMahon, who we are told was the person who suggested the Gauntlet "out of nowhere", which surprised some since, we are told, he is traditionally not very high on such matches.
> 
> From there, the match was laid out and McMahon approved the length and presentation of the show.
> 
> So, if you enjoyed it, it was a Vince McMahon call._


Wow, I gave praise to something Vince did. Let me retract it. :side:

He made a great call with Rollins :bjpenn

On a serious note, always amazes me how he can get something right, and then go back to making questionable decisions a week later. :lol It's interesting that Vince is seemingly starting to care about the Wrestling side of it more. Makes you wonder how future RAW's will pan out, or if this was just a one time experiment.


----------



## fanindallas

Why has WWE decided to do more back to back nights in the same city?

I was looking at Raw or Smackdown tickets for late March in Dallas. It looks like 95% of tickets are still available for Smackdown. We can't even sell out a Raw or TLC here. So I am not surprised to see that Smackdown isn't selling well. Raw looks like it has sold well, but hopefully I can get some dirt cheap SD tickets.


----------



## MC

It was Vince's call? Hmm, even though it was bad, at least he gave it a try. Fair play.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

If you include the DVR numbers, Raw did alittle bit over 4 Million viewers.

I can't believe fans were that much into it.

:trips8


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

Johnny Wrestling said:


> If you include the DVR numbers, Raw did alittle bit over 4 Million viewers.
> 
> I can't believe fans were that much into it.
> 
> :trips8


the match was great with Seth in there facing Reigns/Cena but once Seth got elimated the match sucked and I can't belive the 2nd hour did about the same as the first.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

BeckyLynchFan29 said:


> the match was great with Seth in there facing Reigns/Cena but once Seth got elimated the match sucked and I can't belive the 2nd hour did the same as the first.


Same. I lost interest after Seth got eliminated, as well. I'm also surprised hour 2 did almost as well as hour 1.

However, maybe we shouldn't be. Over the past month or so, there's been a couple weeks where Hour 2 actually did better than Hour 1. Who knows.


----------



## 751161

Johnny Wrestling said:


> Same. I lost interest after Seth got eliminated, as well. I'm also surprised hour 2 did almost as well as hour 1.
> 
> However, maybe we shouldn't be. Over the past month or so, there's been a couple weeks where Hour 2 actually did better than Hour 1. Who knows.


They did a good job of keeping people watching. Even though the Gauntlet had no stakes or purpose really, I felt inclined to see it through to the end after spending an hour watching it. I imagine a lot at home felt the same way as well.


----------



## Steve Black Man

Well, it's important to keep in mind that Seth was still going when hour two started, which probably accounts for some of the retention in viewers from hour one.

Although, to be honest, I have no fucking idea how it really works :lol


----------



## CMPunkRock316

Florat said:


> Saying that CM Punk's numbers were better than today's number is selling it short. CM Punk was being mocked for doing bad numbers for a CHRISTMAS Episode and it was when everytime thought he was done and that he should give up the title.
> 
> Let that sink in. The numbers during the Road To Wrestlemania in 2018 would've been seen as bad for a Christmas episode in 2012. A freaking Christmas episode when no one should be watching, that tells you how low the bar is for the WWE these days


Very accurate but also Punk was injured at that time.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Of course it's a Vince call, what else would it be?
The fucker isn't dead.


----------



## Piper's Pit

All you Rollins fans make the most of this 'high' you're on, the gauntlet was a one off, just one of Vince's erratic, last minute, compulsive decisions. Everything will be back to normal next Monday, Seth, Dean and all the rest will be back to 50/50 booking and getting lost in the shuffle.

:vince5


----------



## 751161

Piper's Pit said:


> All you Rollins fans make the most of this 'high' you're on, the gauntlet was a one off, just one of Vince's erratic, last minute, compulsive decisions. Everything will be back to normal next Monday, Seth, Dean and all the rest will be back to 50/50 booking and getting lost in the shuffle.
> 
> :vince5


Still beat Reigns & Cena clean.

:Cocky


----------



## InexorableJourney

I think Vince just took the idea from Hunter.

-205 Live flops under Vince
-Hunter takes control of 205 Live, improving the quality and ratings by booking tourneys and wrestling
-Vince sees this goes, huh?!
-Vince does the same tactic on RAW and gets praise for being an in-touch genius.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I want feet tickling GIFs back.
That would boost MY ratings ... :book


----------



## WWEfan4eva

I like how Bliss plays to the Crowd

I wonder if she's going to have a faceturn soon


----------



## greasykid1

*Predictability = Ratings?*

WWE's programming these days is so massively predictable ...

Wasn't their entire pitch during other eras "Anything Can Happen In The WWF?"

I don't understand how a company can change it's philosophy so drastically, even over 15 years or so. Do WWE actually believe that telling us about every "surprise" and telegraphing match outcomes to the point that, as with Elimination Chamber this week, EVERY match on a PPV card has a really well known, obvious result, for weeks ahead of time?

No one expected anything but Reigns to win the main event because we already know that he will be beating Lesnar for the title at Mania.

We all knew that Asuka wouldn't lose her streak at a B PPV because she is also winning the title at Mania.

These are things that we just KNOW.

Hardy was always going to beat Bray because Bray isn't allowed to win matches. The Bar were absolutely not losing to Titus and Apollo. Massive filler.

It seems like all we watch WWE for these days is to see the quality of the matches, not to FIND OUT who's going to WIN. I feel like that take away a huge amount of enjoyment. But WWE are clearly doing it on purpose. How could it be accidental, when it's happening for entire shows cards?


----------



## KOMania1

*Re: Predictability = Ratings?*

To be fair, if you're a casual fan and not someone that reads dirt-sheets, Braun winning the Chamber would have been the logical deduction given how he's been pushed for so long yet never *quite* gotten that "moment" at the top of the mountain, whereas Roman has been booked like an after-thought by comparison for pretty much the past year. The Asuka-Nia one probably would have had some uncertainty for a casual as well, I guess. Honestly, reading about WWE's plans in advance takes away a *lot* of the fun of actually watching them unfold, though obviously smark intuition doesn't help either. While it's predictable to us, things like Braun being the most over and dominant guy around yet somehow not getting his proper feud culmination moment with Brock at Wrestlemania would come across as incredibly strange to a casual. Casual or smark, they done goofed with their handling of the situation.

I do agree in general that it is too predictable, even if you aren't someone that reads up on insider knowledge. Once you see the pattern that they stick to, you can never remove it from your mind and you can effortlessly predict 90% of the results of a PPV weeks before it occurs. For instance, once Jinder Mahal won the WWE title, the way they built up his feud with Randy Orton made it painfully clear Mahal wasn't going to lose. Similarly, watching both Roman and Asuka be the first to lay down/be destroyed on the go-home to the Elimination Chamber was in-line with how the eventual winners at a PPV are booked on a go-home show. That last one is the most shocking, honestly. 50-50 booking is so ingrained in their feud structuring that it almost makes my spine shiver when they book something more one-sided.


----------



## MOBELS

*Re: Predictability = Ratings?*

Jinder Mahal winning the WWE title last year was the most predictable thing they've ever done and he managed to slightly increase SD's ratings.


----------



## RamPaige

*Re: Predictability = Ratings?*

Predictability isn't always a bad thing. But if the fans are against the WWE's booking that's when it becomes an issue.


----------



## Bobholly39

*Re: Predictability = Ratings?*



greasykid1 said:


> WWE's programming these days is so massively predictable ...
> 
> Wasn't their entire pitch during other eras "Anything Can Happen In The WWF?"
> 
> I don't understand how a company can change it's philosophy so drastically, even over 15 years or so. Do WWE actually believe that telling us about every "surprise" and telegraphing match outcomes to the point that, as with Elimination Chamber this week, EVERY match on a PPV card has a really well known, obvious result, for weeks ahead of time?
> 
> No one expected anything but Reigns to win the main event because we already know that he will be beating Lesnar for the title at Mania.
> 
> We all knew that Asuka wouldn't lose her streak at a B PPV because she is also winning the title at Mania.
> 
> These are things that we just KNOW.
> 
> Hardy was always going to beat Bray because Bray isn't allowed to win matches. The Bar were absolutely not losing to Titus and Apollo. Massive filler.
> 
> It seems like all we watch WWE for these days is to see the quality of the matches, not to FIND OUT who's going to WIN. I feel like that take away a huge amount of enjoyment. But WWE are clearly doing it on purpose. How could it be accidental, when it's happening for entire shows cards?



WWE is VERY unpredictable. You're just a cheater.


Going into the men's chamber, the favorites to win imo were:

1. Braun. BIG favorite. Kayfabe + non-kayfabe wise. He's a monster, and also getting all the big main event moment/segments on Raw. It's all been about Braun, and he has unfinished business with Brock

2. Seth. Wow awesome performance on Raw last week in gauntlet match. Could be making a return as a main eventer.

3. Cena. No WM program - it's another "redemption" story for him like WM29. Beating Flair's 17 reign title at mania. (heck maybe even switch Cena and Rollins and bump Cena at #2).

4. Miz/Reigns/Balor/Elias - no real credible threat. Reigns is probably #4, only because of the promo he cut on Raw about being the only one who can beat Lesnar at mania, as he had him beat 3 years ago. But Reigns is also the guy who just got beat (repeatedly) by Miz for the IC title, and hasn't done much as of late in terms of main event threat.

That's the programming WWE has put out lately and leading into the chamber. In what universe was this predictable that Reigns would win? It really, really, really isn't. 

Yes I knew it was 99% likely Reigns would win, and you probably did too. But going back to my first line - it's only because we're both cheaters. We actively seek out spoilers online - and then you come here and claim it was predictable. I'm sorry, but no. That's on you for looking up spoilers. 

During the AE the Internet had just started to exist, spoilers were a LOT less prevalent back than then they are today. That plays such a huge part in the predictability aspect.


----------



## greasykid1

*Re: Predictability = Ratings?*

It's just as much about the patterns and the obvious route always being taken, as it is about hearing rumours about what they have planned.

Completely outside of whether you read spoilers etc, how can it be uncertain that Roman Reigns was going to be be in the main event of Wrestlemania again? They are still pushing him to be the biggest star in the company. It's painfully obvious. Yeah, he has lost a couple of matches recently, but let's look at that ...

He loses the IC title to Miz - because he is moving back up to Universal Champ at Mania.
He loses the gauntlet match on RAW - because 50/50 booking says he must lose that one to be the "shock" winner at the next show, which was EC.

Everything points towards Reigns taking the title off Brock at Mania, and it has for months. The fact that Reigns was given the title of the only other man to defeat Undertaker at Mania a full year ago (in my eyes) cemented that Reigns and Lesnar was set in stone for WM34. The 2 guys that have beat Taker then fight at Mania for ultimate supremacy. It couldn't go any other way.

Same with Asuka really. It's not spoilers that told me she was beating Nia. It's the fact that it's a B PPV and there was no way that the 2.5 year streak was ending in a midcard match with someone that's only there to put Asuka over. Nia has never beat Asuka. Nia's entire gimmick is that she's big and strong and unbeatable - but gets beat by babyfaces during pushes in order to elevate them.

Bray losing. Hardly a spoiler. WWE bookers must really hate Rotunda. Makes you wonder what he did that's so bad, he gets booked to lose so often.

And of course, the women's EC match being obvious wasn't based on anything I read online. They are clearly building to Sasha V Bayley for Mania. General predictions for that match were literally "Sasha and Bayley work together for a while, then Sasha turns on Bayley, and they feud until Mania." Once that's assumed, you know they're not putting the title on any of Absolution. Only logical outcome was Alexa retaining.

I get the point about "cheating" being the problem, and being a contributing factor to the predictability. But really the product itself does nothing to preserve any element of surprise.


----------



## Zapato

*Re: Predictability = Ratings?*

Put it this way though, I'd rather it was as predictable as it is and commit to longer storylines with a proper build than swerving for swervings sake ala Mr Russo. You need the balance of the two to keep things interesting but Vince ripping things up on the night is as bad potentially as this three year build for Roman.


----------



## Bobholly39

*Re: Predictability = Ratings?*



greasykid1 said:


> It's just as much about the patterns and the obvious route always being taken, as it is about hearing rumours about what they have planned.
> 
> Completely outside of whether you read spoilers etc, how can it be uncertain that Roman Reigns was going to be be in the main event of Wrestlemania again? They are still pushing him to be the biggest star in the company. It's painfully obvious. Yeah, he has lost a couple of matches recently, but let's look at that ...
> 
> He loses the IC title to Miz - because he is moving back up to Universal Champ at Mania.
> He loses the gauntlet match on RAW - because 50/50 booking says he must lose that one to be the "shock" winner at the next show, which was EC.
> 
> Everything points towards Reigns taking the title off Brock at Mania, and it has for months. The fact that Reigns was given the title of the only other man to defeat Undertaker at Mania a full year ago (in my eyes) cemented that Reigns and Lesnar was set in stone for WM34. The 2 guys that have beat Taker then fight at Mania for ultimate supremacy. It couldn't go any other way.
> 
> Same with Asuka really. It's not spoilers that told me she was beating Nia. It's the fact that it's a B PPV and there was no way that the 2.5 year streak was ending in a midcard match with someone that's only there to put Asuka over. Nia has never beat Asuka. Nia's entire gimmick is that she's big and strong and unbeatable - but gets beat by babyfaces during pushes in order to elevate them.
> 
> Bray losing. Hardly a spoiler. WWE bookers must really hate Rotunda. Makes you wonder what he did that's so bad, he gets booked to lose so often.
> 
> And of course, the women's EC match being obvious wasn't based on anything I read online. They are clearly building to Sasha V Bayley for Mania. General predictions for that match were literally "Sasha and Bayley work together for a while, then Sasha turns on Bayley, and they feud until Mania." Once that's assumed, you know they're not putting the title on any of Absolution. Only logical outcome was Alexa retaining.
> 
> I get the point about "cheating" being the problem, and being a contributing factor to the predictability. But really the product itself does nothing to preserve any element of surprise.


regarding Reigns everything you said is false. It only looks that way if you know in advance he's winning. 

Braun beat Reigns, in fact destroyed him last spring/summer. Feud lost. Reigns was a non-factor in the summerslam 4-way match. Momentum is all Braun. Reigns goes after IC title. Wins it, then loses it. He plays with the shield. No interaction or even promo to say he's after the WWE title in the past 6 months.

How does any of this make it look like he's going to win? 

If anything I think they should do a better job of protecting him on-screen sometimes.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Johnny Ace with the list shortly, but:

Should it be worrying that there is barely any PPV bump for RAW since forever now?

Second hour slightly higher than the 1st for a few weeks now.

But LOL at Rousey not drawing shit.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.407M
H2- 3.249M
H3- 2.884M
3H- 3.180M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 4.64% / - 0.158M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 11.23% / - 0.365M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 15.35% / - 0.523M )
2/26/18 Vs 2/19/18 ( - 3.14% / - 0.103M )

Demo (2/26/18 Vs 2/19/18):
H1- 1.090D Vs 1.210D
H2- 1.100D Vs 1.220D
H3- 1.010D Vs 1.000D
3H- 1.067D Vs 1.143D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 6th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (2/26/18 Vs 2/27/17):
H1- 3.407M Vs 3.127M
H2- 3.249M Vs 3.233M
H3- 2.884M Vs 2.918M
3H- 3.180M Vs 3.093M ( + 2.81% / + 0.087M )

Demo (2/26/18 Vs 2/27/17):
H1- 1.100D Vs 1.080D
H2- 1.090D Vs 1.140D
H3- 1.010D Vs 1.020D
3H- 1.067D Vs 1.080D

Note: RAW this time last year was 3rd, 2nd & 4th by hourly demo & 3rd, 2nd & 6th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Raw last week with Rollins wrestling 65 minutes beat the Raw after a PPV, and the PPV that determined what the main event will be for WM.

:lmao :lmao :lmao

:Cocky


----------



## JC00

Alright can people stop acting like Rousey is some draw. 3rd hour once again did 2.8m. Her first Raw appearance had zero effect on the 3rd hour.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Way to decrease weekly ratings with dat ppv "bump". :heston


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Johnny Wrestling said:


> Raw last week with Rollins wrestling 65 minutes beat the Raw after a PPV, and the PPV that determined what the main event will be for WM.
> 
> :lmao :lmao :lmao
> 
> :Cocky


Not only that, it beat the RAW that debuted Ronda Rousey with her big Stephanie angle :lmao :lmao

Also, I misread, the 1st hour with the crummy Women's Tag Match Beat the 2nd hour with the advertised Brock appearance :ha


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

Alexa bringing in those ratings in that 1st Hour!!


----------



## MC

I have to admit that I am getting some satisfaction from those numbers. Last night, there wasn't much buzz live. The Live Thread had less posts, Raw wasn't getting much social media buzz(at least not in the UK). Interest levels have definitely dropped after EC.


----------



## Ace

So much for the face to face between Brock-Roman and Ronda's Raw debut.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

MC 16 said:


> I have to admit that I am getting some satisfaction from those numbers. Last night, there wasn't much buzz live. The Live Thread had less posts, Raw wasn't getting much social media buzz(at least not in the UK). Interest levels have definitely dropped after EC.


Well, shocking, given the most predictable PPV in wrestling history.


----------



## Wildcat410

Anyone utilising a single ounce of common sense could have predicted Rousey was not going to make any positive difference at this point. The reasons why should not even need to be explained


----------



## The Boy Wonder

So the overrun number is or isn't counted in the third hour rating? I would assume that the most amount of viewers tuned in for the Rousey segment.


----------



## Not Lying

Johnny Wrestling said:


> Raw last week with Rollins wrestling 65 minutes beat the Raw after a PPV, and the PPV that determined what the main event will be for WM.
> 
> :lmao :lmao :lmao
> 
> :Cocky


WRESTLING DOESN'T DRAW DAMMIT :rollins
People want stories and promos very little wrestling and car crash TV!


----------



## JC00

The Boy Wonder said:


> So the overrun number is or isn't counted in the third hour rating? I would assume that the most amount of viewers tuned in for the Rousey segment.


Is.

That's a blind assumption. Because the 3rd hour could have peaked during the Braun/Elias match


----------



## JTB33b

Ratings would have been higher had Braun won the chamber match.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

So it looks like Rousey didn't help the ratings. It makes me wonder who had more to do with the huge numbers the night after WM 31? I would assume some in the company (like Stephanie) probably thought it was Rousey. I'm starting to think (when you consider the numbers from the last two weeks) it might have been Seth.


----------



## MFR55

At that point in time it was definitely ronda,the fact is she Just isnt as big of a star anymore


----------



## The Boy Wonder

MFR55 said:


> At that point in time it was definitely ronda,the fact is she Just isnt as big of a star anymore


I think it had more to do with the shocking cash-in of Seth. As for Rousey I think she her value would be much better utilized against the ladies that actually contribute on a weekly basis. I just fear that this angle with Steph will go on longer than it needs to. Meltzer reported they're trying to recreate the Austin/Vince angle with these two


----------



## MC

Ronda didn't do anything for the ratings. Roman didn't do anything for the ratings. :lmao Those are Raw's biggest plans for Wrestlemania


----------



## PrettyLush

So Rousey didn't help with the ratings. Okay, I'm going to have to eat crow.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

PrettyLush said:


> So Rousey didn't help with the ratings. Okay, I'm going to have to eat crow.


I wish we had segment by segment breakdowns. It's possible most of hour three drew horribly but viewers came back for her segment.


----------



## PrettyLush

@The Boy Wonder ; that's plausible.


----------



## Seafort

*Re: Predictability = Ratings?*



Zapato said:


> Put it this way though, I'd rather it was as predictable as it is and commit to longer storylines with a proper build than swerving for swervings sake ala Mr Russo. You need the balance of the two to keep things interesting but Vince ripping things up on the night is as bad potentially as this three year build for Roman.


I would have gone with the most organically over babyface that would be credible in beating Lesnar - Strowman - than trying to force a man into that role.


----------



## ecclesiastes10

seafort, gotta question for u, r u talking about the same strowman who lesnar beat in like 15 mins, pretty easily at the end too, did u forget their match already? not to mention their match was considered a let down in this forum, n sites, why would u guys want a part two?


----------



## Randy Lahey

Women will never move ratings, and Ronda is a has-been that has very little appeal to wrestling fans or even casuals. Whatever Vince is spending on her, is a waste as far as TV ratings go. He better hope his marketing team can come up with some clever merch to offset her undoubtedly large salary.


----------



## RainmakerV2

Uh, Anyone think the third hour wasnt great because people tuned out after being promised Lesnar and getting nothing?


----------



## Not Lying

Randy Lahey said:


> Women will never move ratings, and Ronda is a has-been that has very little appeal to wrestling fans or even casuals. Whatever Vince is spending on her, is a waste as far as TV ratings go. He better hope his marketing team can come up with some clever merch to offset her undoubtedly large salary.


well Brock has never drawn a dime and Vince has been spending millions on him for years. Ronda is a bigger star. Fact.
No reason for the double standards. If Brock doesn't move ratings at all and gets this luxurious contract, Ronda should get a bigger one no matter what.


----------



## Piper's Pit

The Definition of Technician said:


> WRESTLING DOESN'T DRAW DAMMIT :rollins
> People want stories and promos very little wrestling and car crash TV!


Maybe you should reign in your smugness a little. Last week's RAW did well because they gave away a PPV caliber match on free television, it's been done before, it had nothing to do with Tofu Rollins.
History has shown that the most successful and entertaining periods in wrestling history are when the emphasis is on larger than life characters, heel vs face, angles, factions, storylines and logical booking not vanilla spot monkeys performing soulless 'performance art'.


----------



## Not Lying

Piper's Pit said:


> Maybe you should reign in your smugness a little. Last week's RAW did well because they gave away a PPV caliber match on free television, it's been done before, it had nothing to do with Tofu Rollins.
> History has shown that the most successful and entertaining periods in wrestling history are when the emphasis is on larger than life characters, heel vs face, angles, factions, storylines and logical booking not vanilla spot monkeys performing soulless 'performance art'.


There are no more casual and people that would tolerate all this stuff all around, people want to see good wrestlers perform. There was a recent report about how WWE was shocked that people wanted EVEN MORE WRESTLING. 
WWE can't book for shit good stories anymore, that's why there are no more casuals, if you don't want the industry to die, you better hope they keep providing these spot money indy guys wrestling time.


----------



## Piper's Pit

The Definition of Technician said:


> There are no more casual and people that would tolerate all this stuff all around, people want to see good wrestlers perform. There was a recent report about how WWE was shocked that people wanted EVEN MORE WRESTLING.
> WWE can't book for shit good stories anymore, that's why there are no more casuals, if you don't want the industry to die, you better hope they keep providing these spot money indy guys wrestling time.


The fans want even more wrestling because it's been so long since WWE had good storylines and characters that many current fans haven never even experienced it. I used to be that way myself until I realized that it isn't matches that draw and keep people watching.

Facts are facts, when wrestling is booked well with meaningful characters and angles the ratings and overall popularity goes up, when the emphasis is on meaningless matches with boring people the ratings and overall popularity goes down.


----------



## Not Lying

Piper's Pit said:


> The fans want even more wrestling because it's been so long since WWE had good storylines and characters that many current fans haven never even experienced it. I used to be that way myself until I realized that it isn't matches that draw and keep people watching.
> 
> *Facts are facts, when wrestling is booked well with meaningful characters and angles the ratings and overall popularity goes up, when the emphasis is on meaningless matches with boring people the ratings and overall popularity goes down.*


Wrestling business as a whole is down, the internet, spoilers, predictability, more politically correct society will never reach those heights again. It won't matter whatever they do, but if they keep producing good matches people will tune in, once those as well start fading out, wrestling dies


----------



## Laughable Chimp

Piper's Pit said:


> The fans want even more wrestling because it's been so long since WWE had good storylines and characters that many current fans haven never even experienced it. I used to be that way myself until I realized that it isn't matches that draw and keep people watching.
> 
> *Facts are facts, when wrestling is booked well with meaningful characters and angles the ratings and overall popularity goes up, when the emphasis is on meaningless matches with boring people the ratings and overall popularity goes down.*


If that were true, Lucha Underground would be the number 1 promotion in the US. But its struggling to get renewed every season.

And I've seen way better stories told in some indy promotions over WWE these days. Yet none of them seem to be anywhere near is popular as the WWE.


----------



## Piper's Pit

Laughable Chimp said:


> If that were true, Lucha Underground would be the number 1 promotion in the US. But its struggling to get renewed every season.
> 
> And I've seen way better stories told in some indy promotions over WWE these days. Yet none of them seem to be anywhere near is popular as the WWE.


Uh, no. Luch Underground is fucking garbage, utter trash. Well done pro wrestling is supposed to have some level of realism and believability to it, LU is the fakest most overproduced unreal wrestling I've ever seen.


----------



## Piper's Pit

The Definition of Technician said:


> *Wrestling business as a whole is down, the internet, spoilers, predictability, more politically correct society will never reach those heights again. It won't matter whatever they do*, but if they keep producing good matches people will tune in, once those as well start fading out, wrestling dies


That's kind of a self fulfilling prophecy isn't it ?? Wrestling will never be popular again so let's make no effort to create new fans or bring back old ones and put all our effort into keeping only the hardcores happy?? LOL.


----------



## Laughable Chimp

Piper's Pit said:


> Uh, no. Luch Underground is fucking garbage, utter trash. Well done pro wrestling is supposed to have some level of realism and believability to it, LU is the fakest most overproduced unreal wrestling I've ever seen.


I thought you said wrestling draws with over the top and larger than life characters and angles? I mean, the Attitude Era sure as hell wasn't realistic either. And honestly some of the segments during the Hogan era made me genuinely cringe at how fake they were.

Edit: Oh wait, did you say that? I might've misunderstood you there.


----------



## Not Lying

Piper's Pit said:


> That's kind of a self fulfilling prophecy isn't it ?? Wrestling will never be popular again so let's make no effort to create new fans or bring back old ones and put all our effort into keeping only the hardcores happy?? LOL.


At least make the current fans happy with the product they put but they’re hot doing that which is why they lost around 20% of their viewers in 2-3 years


----------



## Piper's Pit

The Definition of Technician said:


> At least make the current fans happy with the product they put but they’re hot doing that which is why they lost around 20% of their viewers in 2-3 years


You can find a balance between good wrestling matches and the storyline/character stuff but the latter has to take precedence if you want to be popular.


----------



## ste1592

Piper's Pit said:


> That's kind of a self fulfilling prophecy isn't it ?? Wrestling will never be popular again so let's make no effort to create new fans or bring back old ones and* put all our effort into keeping only the hardcores happy??* LOL.


Uh, yes? The hardcores are the people watching, if they are not happy, why would anyone even think of watching WWE?

You don't even have to imagine things, just take a look at the DC cinematic universe of Warner Bros; they made 2/3 garbage movies, and when Justice League came out it bombed, because the common opinion was that it's garbage.

So, let me ask you: would you watch WWE, as a complete casual, when the people watching say it's garbage? I, for one, certainly wouldn't.


----------



## Not Lying

Piper's Pit said:


> You can find a balance between good wrestling matches and the storyline/character stuff but the latter has to take precedence if you want to be popular.


The problem is again that WWE can’t do the latter part for shit anymore, either they lucked out before or just can’t anymore. So might as well do the easier part, hire good wrestlers and let them put on good matches


----------



## Laughable Chimp

The Definition of Technician said:


> The problem is again that WWE can’t do the latter part for shit anymore, either they lucked out before or just can’t anymore. So might as well do the easier part, hire good wrestlers and let them put on good matches


There's no reason why either have to be exclusive from each other. You can have both good wrestlers and good stories. I start having a problem when some people discredit great performers because they don't look like the wrestler of their dreams.


----------



## Will Thompson

So the current FOTC and the future destroyer of the women's division Rousey don't draw a dime after all. And that too after a PPV that was focused on building those two. Who woulda thought that???

I saw on FB a few days ago that Cena, Rollins and Braun had the highest rated segments on Raw for the month of February. Might be truth in that. But yeah, lets ignore who the fans want to see and build the show and the RTWM around "wrestlers" who don't move the numbers. Good job WWE.....


----------



## Erik.

The Definition of Technician said:


> WRESTLING DOESN'T DRAW DAMMIT :rollins
> People want stories and promos very little wrestling and car crash TV!



Well they want interesting stories, good promos and less pointless wrestling, yes. That's the proven draw.

Sadly, they don't really have any interesting stories, a lack of good creative free promo cutters and still far too much pointless wrestling.


----------



## RubberbandGoat

ugh! Roman/Lesnar is tough to watch again. The crowd didn't even care that much. How depressing. This is clearly only a feud the front office wants to see!


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Might be a monumental 1st to 3rd hour drop, with Rousey opening, and Heyman closing.
3rd hour might sink like a sack of shit.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.302M
H2- 3.267M
H3- 2.729M
3H- 3.099M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 1.06% / - 0.035M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 16.47% / - 0.538M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 17.35% / - 0.573M )
3/5/18 Vs 2/26/18 ( - 2.55% / - 0.081M )

Demo (3/5/18 Vs 2/26/18):
H1- 1.130D Vs 1.090D
H2- 1.130D Vs 1.100D
H3- 1.020D Vs 1.010D
3H- 1.093D Vs 1.067D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 2nd, 3rd & 5th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (3/5/18 Vs 3/6/17):
H1- 3.302M Vs 3.318M
H2- 3.267M Vs 3.380M
H3- 2.729M Vs 2.950M
3H- 3.099M Vs 3.216M ( - 3.64% / - 0.117M )

Demo (3/5/18 Vs 3/6/17):
H1- 1.130D Vs 1.140D
H2- 1.130D Vs 1.170D
H3- 1.020D Vs 1.060D
3H- 1.093D Vs 1.123D

Note: RAW this time last year was 3rd, 2nd & 5th by hourly demo & 3rd, 2nd & 5th by hourly viewership. *


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Down from last week. Ever since the Gauntlet match, the ratings have gone down every week since..


----------



## Arsenal79

Laughable Chimp said:


> If that were true, Lucha Underground would be the number 1 promotion in the US. But its struggling to get renewed every season.
> 
> And I've seen way better stories told in some indy promotions over WWE these days. Yet none of them seem to be anywhere near is popular as the WWE.


What a ridiculous argument. No one except a tiny niche of wrestling fanboys like you knows what Lucha Underground or those other indies even are. To compare them to WWE is asinine.

Try not to make bogus arguments to push your "workrate above all else" agenda.


----------



## MC

Another decrease in ratings. 

ROAD TO WRESTLEMANIA, LADIES AND GENTLEMAN.


----------



## Gravyv321

so much for that *AWFUL* promo from roman last week. he still failed to draw viewers :ha :ha 



Mr. WrestleMania said:


> Down from last week. Ever since the Gauntlet match, the ratings have gone down every week since..


gee, i wonder who's responsible for the low ratings (;


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

Mr. WrestleMania said:


> Down from last week. Ever since the Gauntlet match, the ratings have gone down every week since..


should have went with Seth to main event Mania vs Brock he was redhot after that gauntet match but Vince has to be stuborn and go with Reigns knowing the fans don't want him main eventing Mania vs Brock.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Wait, last week, hour 1 did 3.4 million _without_ Ronda, but a shitty Women 6-Man Tag.
This, week, hour 1 did 3.2 _with_ Ronda.

And hour 3 as expected bombs with Heyman and Reigns on the horizon.

Why do people keep saying Rousey is so good for WWE? Because of PR? What good use is PR, if you bring attention to how shitty your product is?
It's the same exact reasoning Vince Russo uses to this day to defend David Arquette. PR. "Did you see how much publicity we got?"
Well, yeah, but it didn't draw flies to a camel's turd.


----------



## JC00

Ronda didn't bump the rating again???


----------



## Jedah

But but but I thought Rousey was supposed to be a huge draw!


----------



## MC

Over half a million drop between hour 2 and hour 3 (538,000 to be exact). Last week had 365,000 decrease. :mj4


----------



## Chrome

Ooof at that hour 3 number.


----------



## Gravyv321

MC 16 said:


> Over half a million drop between hour 2 and hour 3 (538,000 to be exact). Last week had 365,000 decrease. :mj4


so much for the main-event holding interest :mj4


----------



## Will Thompson

As In said last week, the FOTC and the (future) FOT Women's division don't draw shit, yet the WWE keeps on building the show and the RTWM around them, pushing everything and everyone else into the background. Good Job WWE, you deserve these shitty ratings.


----------



## Therapy

lol @ the 3rd hour..


----------



## Jedah

>Sideline your best and most popular talent to the background in a multi-man match.
>Focus the show on a rematch no one wants to see and the 10^19th authority figure feud with possibly the most awkward babyface ever seen (and one who was exposed years ago).
>Wonder why your ratings are disappointing for what's supposed to be your hottest part of the year. :vince5


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

4% down from last week.

*The Hour 2 to Hour 3 drop was the 4th largest single hour drop in RAW HISTORY.
*
Holy shit. :lmao Safe to say Vince's plan didn't work since the top angle was the last segment of the show.



> Raw fell four percent last night to 3.03 million viewers and the viewing followed the normal patterns with most viewers watching the first two hours and dropping off after that point.
> 
> Raw was second for the night on cable, trailing MSNBC's Rachel Maddow show that did 3.38 million viewers.
> 
> All three hours were the highest rated show on cable in the 18-49 demo and beat both CBS and FOX programming in that demo, putting it behind only ABC and NBC.
> 
> The second-to-third hour drop was 16.5 percent, which is the fourth biggest single hour drop in the show's history.
> 
> Ronda Rousey being in the first segment probably hurt the overall number since if people were turning in for her, they would have left 15 minutes in. Still, this was among the lower rated shows since football season ended, and there is no competition that you could point to as a primary reason.
> 
> The show didn't really promote anything for the third hour past Paul Heyman addressing Roman Reigns' remarks from the previous week.



https://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/wwe-raw-ratings-down-four-percent-week-253001


----------



## V-Trigger

lel at your WM Main Event.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Jedah said:


> But but but I thought Rousey was supposed to be a huge draw!


I can see Ronda getting XPac, Roman Reigns type heat. She gets shoved down the fans throat enough, the fans will revolt. Plus, womens wrestling is easy to booooo....


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The Mania Main Event isn't a draw? Color me shocked. :heyman5 :reigns2


----------



## Bushmaster

Did Vince think Rousey was still undefeated or something? Why in the blue hell would they sign her to a possibly big contract when she probably won't help that much. They didn't need her to sell Mania tickets at all. Was funny seeing and hearing them act like she was a super badass all the while ignoring how she got badly squashed in her last 2 fights. At least they aren't talking about her brining in legitimacy like they do with Brock.


----------



## Gravyv321

Mr. WrestleMania said:


> 4% down from last week.
> 
> *The Hour 2 to Hour 3 drop was the 4th largest single hour drop in RAW HISTORY.
> *
> Holy shit. :lmao Safe to say Vince's plan didn't work since the top angle was the last segment of the show.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/wwe-raw-ratings-down-four-percent-week-253001


this is amazing! what a fucking failure :LOL

they had brock hold the world title hostage for a year to put over this samoan clown only for nobody to give any fucks :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## Chris90

3rd hour drop is brutal


----------



## MC

New Black Panther said:


> Did Vince think Rousey was still undefeated or something? Why in the blue hell would they sign her to a possibly big contract when she probably won't help that much. They didn't need her to sell Mania tickets at all. Was funny seeing and hearing them act like she was a super badass all the while ignoring how she got badly squashed in her last 2 fights. At least they aren't talking about her brining in legitimacy like they do with Brock.


I would better any money that he didn't watch her at all.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Might as well sign Dr. Phil instead of Rousey, the difference would be nonexistent.


----------



## RainmakerV2

This is why there's no need to sign guys like Omega and pay them out the ass. It's gonna be right around 3 million. Every week.


----------



## Mra22

Nobody cares about Rousey. She’s a sore loser, also the WWE refuses to push people the fans actually like and instead push Vince’s boyfriend Roman


----------



## Blade Runner

The stupidity of this promotion is featuring angles at the beginning of the night with zero follow-up throughout the show. 



Steph gets dropped. Segment ends. No updates on the CBO of the WWE. No nothing, just moving on to one isolated and unrelated match/segment after another. Fans are now trained to tune out after they see a segment with their favorites because they know it's the only time they'll see them throughout the show. This lack of narrative thread makes the show tedious as fuck to get through.


----------



## Jedah

KYRA BATARA said:


> The stupidity of this promotion is featuring angles at the beginning of the night with zero follow-up throughout the show.
> 
> 
> 
> Steph gets dropped. Segment ends. No updates on the CBO of the WWE. No nothing, just moving on to one isolated and unrelated match/segment after another. Fans are now trained to tune out after they see a segment with their favorites because they know it's the only time they'll see them throughout the show. This lack of narrative thread makes the show tedious as fuck to get through.


Remember in the Attitude Era when they would do a match or segment and then follow it up with several backstage segments throughout the show, sometimes with a dramatic in-ring segment to close the show?

And they did this not just with the main event segment but other stories as well.

There is something to be said of the matches on TV lasting for way too long and dragging the show out, leaving everything else isolated. TV is where you should focus more on your story and build, and put the long matches as payoffs on PPV. It would also stop commercials interrupting the damn matches all the time.

They did this before in the Attitude Era. I don't know why they stopped.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.351M
H2- 3.429M
H3- 3.275M
3H- 3.352M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 2.33% / + 0.078M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 4.49% / - 0.154M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 2.27% / - 0.076M )
3/12/18 Vs 3/5/18 ( + 8.16% / + 0.253M )

Demo (3/12/18 Vs 3/5/18):
H1- 1.120D Vs 1.130D
H2- 1.190D Vs 1.130D
H3- 1.160D Vs 1.020D
3H- 1.157D Vs 1.093D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 1st & 2nd by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (3/12/18 Vs 3/13/17):
H1- 3.351M Vs 3.176M
H2- 3.429M Vs 3.323M
H3- 3.275M Vs 3.197M
3H- 3.352M Vs 3.232M ( + 3.71% / + 0.120M )

Demo (3/12/18 Vs 3/13/17):
H1- 1.120D Vs 1.090D
H2- 1.190D Vs 1.160D
H3- 1.160D Vs 1.150D
3H- 1.157D Vs 1.133D

Note: RAW this time last year was 4th, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 4th, 2nd & 3rd by hourly viewership. *


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 2 higher than the Reigns/Vince/Brock segment.

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Reigns gets "suspended" and people are actually interested in the second and third hour to the point where hour 3 is almost as high as hour 1.


----------



## MC

The 2nd hour higher than the first :lmao Big draw :reigns


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Hell, I think the show had a higher hour 2+hour3 average than even the post Rumble show. When was the last time hour 3 was higher than this week's (besides Raw 25) and even more so - when was the last tims hour 3 was in this close proximity to hour 1?


----------



## JC00

3rd hour

Bliss/Asuka promo
Asuka/Mickie match
Bliss/Nia backstage 
Nia squash
Bliss/Mickie backstage segment
Tag Battle Royal


First time the Raw 3rd hour has been over 3.1m viewers since Bliss/Banks title match in August (excluding Raw 25)


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Braun da draw.

No Brock, no Rousey, no Hardy, and this is the number LOL


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

alexa bringing in those ratings!!!


----------



## Ibracadabra

Maybe people stayed and called their friends to come watch because they were expecting Reigns to close off the show. Its what I expected to happen.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Imagine calling your friends to tell them go watch Roman Reigns, he's awesome :ha


----------



## Soul Rex

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Imagine calling your friends to tell them go watch Roman Reigns, he's awesome :ha


I do that a lot, my friends love Roman, joke is on you smark, ha.


----------



## Ibracadabra

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Imagine calling your friends to tell them go watch Roman Reigns, he's awesome :ha


 :reigns


----------



## Ace

Lmao at more people tuning in after Roman got suspended.

I even said in the discussion thread how awesome it was that the next 4-5 hrs were guaranteed to have no Roman.

Seems like people tuned in for the same reason :lmao



Ibracadabra said:


> Maybe people stayed and called their friends to come watch because they were expecting Reigns to close off the show. Its what I expected to happen.


 The reaching lmao.

They had already reaffirmed Lesnar wasn't there. There was zero chance of Roman coming back :lmao


----------



## Jersey

Next week on RAW


----------



## Gravyv321

ratings went up cuz roman got suspended :lmao

face it, nobody important likes him; and we still got his fans pretending they have friends who watches for their shitty favorite :lol


----------



## Y.2.J

Pretty good ratings. :bjpenn

I don't think ratings went up because Roman got suspended lol. Just a RTWM bump.


----------



## The_It_Factor

Ratings went up because someone got suspended? :lol

What kind of retard skips an entire show because they don’t want to see 10 minutes of it (10 minutes that have no impact on the rest of the show). 

The WWE thing to do would to have him make a run-in later on anyway.


----------



## Gravyv321

nice, more excuses :mj4

good to see the* intelligent * fans tuning in when he isn't there.


----------



## Soul Rex

The_It_Factor said:


> Ratings went up because someone got suspended? :lol
> 
> What kind of retard skips an entire show because they don’t want to see 10 minutes of it (10 minutes that have no impact on the rest of the show).
> 
> The WWE thing to do would to have him make a run-in later on anyway.


Him bumping the ratings because people though he would comeback makes no sense, but it still much more logic than people waiting for him not to be there just to watch, that's practically an impossible scenario, when you would think his haters couldnt come with something more ridiculous lmao.


----------



## The_It_Factor

Soul Rex said:


> Him bumping the ratings because people though he would comeback makes no sense, but it still much more logic than people waiting for him not to be there just to watch, that's practically an impossible scenario, when you would think his haters couldnt come with something more ridiculous lmao.


Oh, yeah, I don’t think he boosted ratings by people thinking he’d return, I just threw it out there as it being the typical “swerve” WWE would pull. I’d imagine most people figured that would happen, thus lessening the chances of people “tuning in because they knew he wouldn’t be on the show.”


----------



## Will Thompson

Hmmm. Those are pretty great numbers. And saw once again on FB that the trend of Cena, Rollins and Braun having the highest rated segments on Raw continued this week as well.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Segments? There are no quarterly breakdowns anymore, we can't attribute the numbers to individuals.

Brock didn't draw a RAW rating forever, Rousey never drew one, and neither did Reigns.
There is no logical reason for this anomaly.

Also, "great number" is completely overblown.
It's still barely edging out Christmas Day RAWs from yesteryear.


----------



## Ace

Soul Rex said:


> Him bumping the ratings because people though he would comeback makes no sense, but it still much more logic than people waiting for him not to be there just to watch, that's practically an impossible scenario, when you would think his haters couldnt come with something more ridiculous lmao.


 Why on earth would he comeback?

They said Brock wasn't there and would 100% be there next week.

His return is storyline set for next week for when Brock is there, not in the main event segment when Braun is killing the tag division.


----------



## JDP2016

I LIKE ROBOTS!!!!!!!

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## Ibracadabra

Vegeta said:


> Why on earth would he comeback?
> 
> They said Brock wasn't there and would 100% be there next week.
> 
> His return is storyline set for next week for when Brock is there, not in the main event segment when Braun is killing the tag division.


Why on Earth would someone "fired/suspended" return? Did you start watching on Monday?


A firing/suspension or even arrest has resulted in that person coming back to a big pop.


----------



## JTB33b

Ibracadabra said:


> Why on Earth would someone "fired/suspended" return? Did you start watching on Monday?
> 
> 
> A firing/suspension or even arrest has resulted in that person coming back to a big pop.


Not when the guy he is feuding with is not going to be there. What would be the point of Roman returning?


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Betting my ass on it that Reigns will "sneak in".

It's basically a reworking of his feud with Vince and Triple H. Which bombed.


----------



## Ibracadabra

JTB33b said:


> Not when the guy he is feuding with is not going to be there. What would be the point of Roman returning?


To maybe attack the guy that fired him?


----------



## Ace

Ibracadabra said:


> Why on Earth would someone "fired/suspended" return? Did you start watching on Monday?
> 
> 
> A firing/suspension or even arrest has resulted in that person coming back to a big pop.


 Common sense dictates he returns next week when Brock will be there.

What the fuck is he going to accomplish returning at the end of the night?

Nothing.

This is basic shit to understand, Vince set this all up for next week when he guarnteed Lesnar will be there.


----------



## tducey

It'll be nice to see Lesnar back. Yes, Reigns will be there as well. Going to be nice to see a showdown between the 2 of them.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 2 higher than Hour 1 again. And Hour 1 opened up with Reigns/Brock. :lmao

Hour 1: 3.434
Hour 2: 3.472
Hour 3: 3.076


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

3rd hour stayed above 3 million so that gotta be a win for Woken Matt.


----------



## Jonhern

BeckyLynchFan29 said:


> 3rd hour stayed above 3 million so that gotta be a win for Woken Matt.


I wonder what the overrun got, since it was almost all after 11pm.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

Jonhern said:


> I wonder what the overrun got, since it was almost all after 11pm.


be interesting to see such a shame they don't release the overrun anymore.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.434M
H2- 3.472M
H3- 3.076M
3H- 3.327M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 1.11% / + 0.038M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 11.41% / - 0.396M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 10.43% / - 0.358M )
3/19/18 Vs 3/12/18 ( - 0.75% / - 0.025M )

Demo (3/19/18 Vs 3/12/18):
H1- 1.140D Vs 1.120D
H2- 1.190D Vs 1.190D
H3- 1.140D Vs 1.160D
3H- 1.157D Vs 1.157D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (3/19/18 Vs 3/20/17):
H1- 3.434M Vs 3.163M
H2- 3.472M Vs 3.117M
H3- 3.076M Vs 2.866M
3H- 3.327M Vs 3.049M ( + 9.18% / + 0.278M )

Demo (3/19/18 Vs 3/20/17):
H1- 1.140D Vs 1.150D
H2- 1.190D Vs 1.130D
H3- 1.140D Vs 1.010D
3H- 1.157D Vs 1.097D

Note: RAW this time last year was 2nd, 3rd & 5th by hourly demo & 2nd, 3rd & 6th by hourly viewership. *


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

So, that's the ceiling for full steam ahead WM season now, huh?


----------



## Ibracadabra

Ratings are head and shoulders better than they were last year.

This myth of declining ratings needs to end.


----------



## Y.2.J

Wow. 10% bump over last year's RAW. :bjpenn


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

:evilmatt


----------



## Soul Rex

Ibracadabra said:


> Ratings are head and shoulders better than they were last year.
> 
> This myth of declining ratings needs to end.


The GOAT stopped the declining. :reigns


----------



## chronoxiong

I can't believe this week's ratings was higher than last year's ratings. So much for declining viewerships. And can't believe 3 million stayed to watch the Ultimate Deletion match. Impressive


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Wow, RAW pops a decent rating at the high point of their biggest story of the year. Heartstopping news.


----------



## Steve Black Man

Damn. Hour 3 over 3 mill? That almost never happens.










Hope Vince is keeping tabs.


----------



## Chrome

Steve Black Man said:


> Damn. Hour 3 over 3 mill? That almost never happens.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hope Vince is keeping tabs.


Yes, more FINAL DELETIONS plz.


----------



## tducey

Good to see that number. Say all you will about the WWE, it'd be good to see good ratings for them.


----------



## SPCDRI

Michael Cole was given specific instructions to crap all over it before it aired, then it popped viewership by over 300,000.

DELETED.


----------



## InexorableJourney

I bet Matt's laughing his head off.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

So WWE dangled the possibility of Taker showing up like a carrot in a brazen attempt to spike an Hour 3 rating. Bet it works too. fpalm


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.403M
H2- 3.547M
H3- 3.150M
3H- 3.367M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 4.23% / + 0.144M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 11.19% / - 0.397M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 7.43% / - 0.253M )
3/26/18 Vs 3/19/18 ( + 1.20% / + 0.040M )

Demo (3/26/18 Vs 3/19/18):
H1- 1.180D Vs 1.140D
H2- 1.210D Vs 1.190D
H3- 1.120D Vs 1.140D
3H- 1.170D Vs 1.157D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (3/26/18 Vs 3/27/17):
H1- 3.403M Vs 3.253M
H2- 3.547M Vs 3.426M
H3- 3.150M Vs 3.197M
3H- 3.367M Vs 3.292M ( + 2.28% / + 0.075M )

Demo (3/26/18 Vs 3/27/17):
H1- 1.180D Vs 1.170D
H2- 1.210D Vs 1.220D
H3- 1.120D Vs 1.140D
3H- 1.170D Vs 1.177D

Note: RAW this time last year was 4th, 3rd & 5th by hourly demo & 4th, 2nd & 5th by hourly viewership. *


----------



## MC

That third hour :mj4


----------



## JDP2016

MC 16 said:


> That third hour :mj4


But it stayed above 3 million. Isn't that good around here?


----------



## Jedah

MC 16 said:


> That third hour :mj4


Ronda is such a huge draw. :kobe


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 1 this week down from Hour 1 of last week. Hour 2 once again outdrawing hour 1.

:lol


----------



## D.M.N.

With quarter one (January to March) now complete, here are how things are looking percentage wise. The +/- is an average of the comparison between (i.e. for Q1 2018):

- the previous quarter (Q4 2018)
- one year earlier (Q1 2017)
- two years earlier (Q1 2016)

Note that the Raw's 25th Anniversary skews the figures slightly, so I have provided both for context, although either way it is very good news for WWE.

Here are the quarter one percentage figures for recent years:

+3.9% = 2013
*+3.1% = 2018 (with Raw 25)*
+2.5% = 2014
*-0.2% = 2018 (without Raw 25)*
-3.3% = 2015
-7.4% = 2016
-7.8% = 2017
-8.8% = 2012

From a year perspective:

Q1 2011 = 5.22 million
Q1 2012 = 4.53 million (down 13.3%)
Q1 2013 = 4.62 million (up 2.1%)
Q1 2014 = 4.44 million (down 3.8%)
Q1 2015 = 4.11 million (down 7.6%)
Q1 2016 = 3.60 million (down 12.3%)
Q1 2017 = 3.19 million (down 11.6%)
Q1 2018 = 3.27 million (up 2.7%) [3.17 million (down 0.5%) without Raw 25]

For the first time since 2013, WWE have manged to halt the steep year-on-year decline during WrestleMania season.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

2 weeks out from the biggest show of the year and their stuck in the low to mid 3 millions. Pretty pathetic. Imagine how bad it'd be without Rousey. Hell, imagine where they'll be after WM.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Hour 3 last week beat Hour 3 this week with the Taker tease. :evilmatt


----------



## Y.2.J

Not the best numbers but certainly not terrible. Hour 3 is a lost cause.

I don't know though...as long as numbers are up from the previous number I kind of see that as a success. :shrug


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

Mr. WrestleMania said:


> 2 weeks out from the biggest show of the year and their stuck in the low to mid 3 millions. Pretty pathetic. Imagine how bad it'd be without Rousey. Hell, imagine where they'll be after WM.


I don't really think Rousey having any impact on the ratings at all and the ratings would still be around 3 million without her but yeah still sad through that the road to wrestlemania is at this point. I remember a few years ago we was getting 5 million this time of the year.


----------



## Jedah

The ratings are roughly the same as they were last year and hour three, where Rousey appeared, had a decline in the rating. Her YouTube numbers are high but her impact on ratings seems non-existent.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Pretty amazing that these are absolute peak ratings for the biggest RAWs of the year.


----------



## Ace

Jedah said:


> The ratings are roughly the same as they were last year and hour three, where Rousey appeared, had a decline in the rating. Her YouTube numbers are high but her impact on ratings seems non-existent.


 Like I said before, Indians will watch anything that is presented as big deal.


----------



## Seafort

D.M.N. said:


> With quarter one (January to March) now complete, here are how things are looking percentage wise. The +/- is an average of the comparison between (i.e. for Q1 2018):
> 
> - the previous quarter (Q4 2018)
> - one year earlier (Q1 2017)
> - two years earlier (Q1 2016)
> 
> Note that the Raw's 25th Anniversary skews the figures slightly, so I have provided both for context, although either way it is very good news for WWE.
> 
> Here are the quarter one percentage figures for recent years:
> 
> +3.9% = 2013
> *+3.1% = 2018 (with Raw 25)*
> +2.5% = 2014
> *-0.2% = 2018 (without Raw 25)*
> -3.3% = 2015
> -7.4% = 2016
> -7.8% = 2017
> -8.8% = 2012
> 
> From a year perspective:
> 
> Q1 2011 = 5.22 million
> Q1 2012 = 4.53 million (down 13.3%)
> Q1 2013 = 4.62 million (up 2.1%)
> Q1 2014 = 4.44 million (down 3.8%)
> Q1 2015 = 4.11 million (down 7.6%)
> Q1 2016 = 3.60 million (down 12.3%)
> Q1 2017 = 3.19 million (down 11.6%)
> Q1 2018 = 3.27 million (up 2.7%) [3.17 million (down 0.5%) without Raw 25]
> 
> For the first time since 2013, WWE have manged to halt the steep year-on-year decline during WrestleMania season.


I've noticed that since last summer. The erosion has slowed, and it's due to WWE stepping up its game somewhat in terms of creative. This isn't Golden Era or 2000 Attitude Era, but it is an improvement. I think that another unsung item is roster maturity. They seem to have hit a sweet spot right now - RAW is now filled with veteran - but not stale - men's talent that have been in the company for at least two years. Everyone now has an established history and character. There have been times when either the talent was too overexposed, or just too green. This is not one of them.

Raiding Smackdown last spring also helped. Plucking away John Cena, The Miz, Dean Ambrose, and Bray Wyatt really provided a boost to the roster. The negative is that they really can't pull those levers again unless they do an all-out roster merge or "Raw/Smackdown Supershow".


----------



## validreasoning

Jedah said:


> The ratings are roughly the same as they were last year and hour three, where Rousey appeared, had a decline in the rating. Her YouTube numbers are high but her impact on ratings seems non-existent.


Considering 99.9% of shows on TV even the Superbowl have seen a fall in viewership year on year just staying even is now considered a big success for pretty much anything on TV. Raw is up slightly from a year ago by on average 89,000 viewers during March and March last year had a raw ppv, a world title change and the go home wrestlemania raw ran unopposed (this years is in April and head to head with the third biggest us sporting event). All those factors should see higher viewership not lower.

Last year also had Goldberg and undertaker on tv regularly in March and for me at least tv was stronger last year, and WWE sold out buildings five nights in a row in same city for first time ever (Friday, Saturday amway, Sunday citrus bowl, Monday and Tuesday Amway)..a city were ticket sales weren't that great when they ran mania in 2008 with a stacked card.

So obviously something at least is drawing the extra tv viewers.

Edit: just to point out Rousey appeared in hour 2 on Monday night. Her music hit at 9.53pm and segment finished up with her music playing her out a few seconds after 10pm.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Wow, 80.000 viewers.

That's probably the poor bastards who bought a ticket to Wrestlemania, and now watch in horror what they spent Money on.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.430M
H2- 3.329M
H3- 3.314M
3H- 3.358M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 2.94% / - 0.101M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 0.45% / - 0.015M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 3.38% / - 0.116M )
4/2/18 Vs 3/26/18 ( - 0.27% / - 0.009M )

Demo (4/2/18 Vs 3/26/18):
H1- 1.220D Vs 1.180D
H2- 1.150D Vs 1.210D
H3- 1.210D Vs 1.120D
3H- 1.193D Vs 1.170D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 5th & 4th by hourly demo & 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (4/2/18 Vs 4/3/17):
H1- 3.430M Vs 3.826M
H2- 3.329M Vs 3.893M
H3- 3.314M Vs 3.583M
3H- 3.358M Vs 3.767M ( - 10.86% / - 0.409M )

Demo (4/2/18 Vs 4/3/17):
H1- 1.220D Vs 1.440D
H2- 1.150D Vs 1.460D
H3- 1.210D Vs 1.380D
3H- 1.193D Vs 1.427D

Note: RAW this time last year was 2nd, 1st & 4th by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 4th by hourly viewership. *


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Undertaker tease held viewers but it is still down from last year.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Good job maintaining. But there's just something sad about the show topping out at 3.4 million for the go-home show of the biggest show of the year. Also, being down 409,000 viewers from last year's Raw of this week is quite the decrease.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Weak af.


----------



## Bret Hart

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Wow, 80.000 viewers.
> 
> That's probably the poor bastards who bought a ticket to Wrestlemania, and now watch in horror what they spent Money on.


Wrestlemania is going to be off the charts no matter how shit the build is. 

Going to be a Wrestlemania on par with 17 if not better.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

lol go home show to Mania was actally down from the week before.

serves them right.


----------



## Gravyv321

the fotc still can't draw for shit :ha


----------



## Stadhart02

I am not surprised at viewing figures being down and as bad as the build to WM has been I think the constant politics will have a long term effect. I can put up with a bad product but what I don't like is an agenda being pushed and now that is happening with Step 

I suspect it will be even worse by the time next year's Mania comes round so this will probably be the last Mania I watch


----------



## Randy Lahey

Mr. WrestleMania said:


> Good job maintaining. But there's just something sad about the show topping out at 3.4 million for the go-home show of the biggest show of the year. Also, being down 409,000 viewers from last year's Raw of this week is quite the decrease.


It's not apples to apples. Last year's show was the monday after WM (typically the biggest rating of the year), and this year's show was the Go Home show (that also went up against the NCAA Championship game).

This week's rating should be the biggest rating they've gotten in years. No competition, AND the show that is usually the highest rated each year regardless.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Of course they'll pop a big number. Prediction:

4.0
4.1
3.8


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Predicting 4's across the board. Mania def. should provide a bump.


----------



## fabi1982

I really hope so, although I have the feeling it will be 3.6 max


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 4.098M
H2- 4.069M
H3- 3.597M
3H- 3.921M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 0.71% / - 0.029M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 11.60% / - 0.472M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 12.23% / - 0.501M )
4/9/18 Vs 4/2/18 ( + 16.77% / + 0.563M )

Demo (4/9/18 Vs 4/2/18):
H1- 1.490D Vs 1.220D
H2- 1.500D Vs 1.150D
H3- 1.400D Vs 1.210D
3H- 1.463D Vs 1.193D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (4/9/18 Vs 4/10/17):
H1- 4.098M Vs 3.432M
H2- 4.069M Vs 3.600M
H3- 3.597M Vs 3.256M
3H- 3.921M Vs 3.429M ( + 14.35% / + 0.492M )

Demo (4/9/18 Vs 4/10/17):
H1- 1.490D Vs 1.240D
H2- 1.500D Vs 1.310D
H3- 1.400D Vs 1.190D
3H- 1.463D Vs 1.247D

Note: RAW this week last year was 3rd, 4th & 2nd by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 2nd by hourly viewership. *










*RAW After Mania (4/9/18 Vs 4/3/17):*

*Viewership (4/9/18 Vs 4/3/17):
H1- 4.098M Vs 3.826M
H2- 4.069M Vs 3.893M
H3- 3.597M Vs 3.583M
3H- 3.921M Vs 3.767M ( + 4.09% / + 0.154M )

Demo (4/9/18 Vs 4/3/17):
H1- 1.490D Vs 1.440D
H2- 1.500D Vs 1.460D
H3- 1.400D Vs 1.380D
3H- 1.463D Vs 1.427D

Note: RAW this time last year was 2nd, 1st & 4th by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 4th by hourly viewership. *

*Note:* *RAW After Mania this year did not go head-to-head with the NCAA game unlike past years. The most recent instance of the same being RAW After Mania 31.*

*Note: RAW this week last year hosted the 2017 WWE Superstar Shake-up. *


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 3. :lol

That's what they get for stacking Hour's 1 and 2 with NXT debuts and returns and doing nothing with Hour 2.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I was astonishingly correct.
And still overestimated the interest. Which is amazing in this day and age.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Up from last year's Raw after WM by about 200K viewers.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Of course they'll pop a big number. Prediction:
> 
> 4.0
> 4.1
> 3.8


Pretty accurate call.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Perhaps Ronda did draw some new eyeballs.


----------



## InexorableJourney

Ronda's a draw who knew?
Everybody.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Post Mania RAW numbers since 2012:

Date Overall Avg
2012 5,010,000
2013 4,610,000
2014 5,146,333
*2015 5,350,000*
2016 4,078,776
2017 3,756,899
2018 3,902,975

Night after WM 31 (Rollins cashing in) was the highest rated Raw after WM dating back to 2012. This year's number is up from last year's number, FWIW.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Makes you wonder if they can build on this after next year's post Mania RAW, or was this just one last gasp before the numbers resume their decline?


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Decent number, but not great when you consider they didn't go up against the NCAA Championship. Last year they did.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THE MAN said:


> Makes you wonder if they can build on this after next year's post Mania RAW, or was this just one last gasp before the numbers resume their decline?


They'll get a smaller number next week. It happens like this every year, sadly. Also, even if it was 3 hours of greatness every week, 3 hours is just far too long, especially for a society with short-attention spans. Hell, even if it was a society of long-attention spans; 3 hours straight of one program (even if it's good) is just an extreme amount of time.

This is why I'd love it if they went to FOX. If they did, Raw would start at 8PM EST and end at 10PM EST; giving us a 2 hour show again due to the news coming on on FOX at 10PM EST. It would bump the rating up since there are more viewers on network TV & there'd be no Hour 3 to drop their overall average.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Mr. WrestleMania said:


> They'll get a smaller number next week. It happens like this every year, sadly. Also, even if it was 3 hours of greatness every week, 3 hours is just far too long, especially for a society with short-attention spans. Hell, even if it was a society of long-attention spans; 3 hours straight of one program (even if it's good) is just an extreme amount of time.
> 
> This is why I'd love it if they went to FOX. If they did, Raw would start at 8PM EST and end at 10PM EST; giving us a 2 hour show again due to the news coming on on FOX at 10PM EST. It would bump the rating up since there are more viewers on network TV & there'd be no Hour 3 to drop their overall average.


Fox would def. increase their rating because the networks do draw more viewers. Perhaps it would offset the loss of Hour 3 financially. My only concern would be that Fox doesn't have the bond with WWE that USA has had since the late 70's/early 80's. They might not give them too much leeway if ratings failed to meet expectations.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THE MAN said:


> Fox would def. increase their rating because the networks do draw more viewers. Perhaps it would offset the loss of Hour 3 financially. My only concern would be that Fox doesn't have the bond with WWE that USA has had since the late 70's/early 80's. They might not give them too much leeway if ratings failed to meet expectations.


That is true. It will be interesting to see where WWE ends up. I'd prefer FOX due to Hour 3 most likely being cut, but if I was a gambling man; my guess right now would be they stay with USA Network.


----------



## JDP2016

Damm that third hour dropped hard. Ohh well. Things will get back to normal in a few weeks. Most of the NXT call ups will get crickets in casual cities and some of us will shit on them. Viewership numbers will go back to the usual high 2.0 and low 3.0 range.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Mr. WrestleMania said:


> That is true. It will be interesting to see where WWE ends up. I'd prefer FOX due to Hour 3 most likely being cut, but if I was a gambling man; my guess right now would be they stay with USA Network.


USA is a better fit. They are one of the highest, of not the ghest, rated cable network and do have loyalty to them. If they do go to Fox, it needs to be Fox proper and not the little viewed Fox Sports 1. Raw's ratings suffered when they went to Spike.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Last year had competition from NCAA basketball, so realistically, this unopposed RAW drew worse than last year's.

So, no draw.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Mr. WrestleMania said:


> Post Mania RAW numbers since 2012:
> 
> Date Overall Avg
> 2012 5,010,000
> 2013 4,610,000
> 2014 5,146,333
> *2015 5,350,000*
> 2016 4,078,776
> 2017 3,756,899
> 2018 3,902,975
> 
> Night after WM 31 (Rollins cashing in) was the highest rated Raw after WM dating back to 2012. This year's number is up from last year's number, FWIW.


Ronda had a presence for 31 too, and that segment was the biggest talking point coming out of that show, at least for the casuals.

She's an absolute star.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

The Inbred Goatman said:


> Ronda had a presence for 31 too, and that segment was the biggest talking point coming out of that show, at least for the casuals.
> 
> She's an absolute star.


Seth deserves more credit for that huge WM 31 post RAW rating than Rousey.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/983824869845434368


> Last night's Raw after WrestleMania averaged what will undoubtedly end up as its second-best number of the year with 3.90 million viewers, trailing only the 4.50 million viewers for the 25th anniversary show.
> 
> It was still the second lowest Raw after Mania show in the modern era, beating the 3.76 million number from last year. But last year's show went against the NCAA basketball championship game, so it probably would have done the same or beaten this year's number which came without that competition.
> 
> The show featured two strong early hours and a big third hour drop, but in this day and age, the number would be considered outstanding. From 9:30 to 10 p.m., it was the third most watched show on television, trailing onlyThe Voice on NBC and American Idol on ABC. The next highest rated cable show was Rachel Maddow on MSNBC at 3.40 million viewers.
> 
> In particular, male viewers were way up above usual levels, with the second hour doing a 2.0, meaning two percent of all males between the ages of 18 and 49 in the U.S. were watching Raw.
> 
> The three hours were:
> 
> 8 p.m. 4.10 million viewers
> 9 p.m. 4.07 million viewers
> 10 p.m. 3.60 million viewers


----------



## RubberbandGoat

SDL will probably get 3 million


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Oh, BTW, WOR said that WWE revealed that 80% of their Youtube views are from outside of the US, and only 20% of their Youtube views are from the US. Wow.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*WWE Raw rating for the April 9 night after WrestleMania 34 edition*

*Monday’s WWE Raw scored a 2.72 rating, up from the 2.24 rating the show drew last week. Raw averaged 3.921 million viewers, up from the 3.358 million average from last week.

The April 10, 2017 edition of Raw delivered a 2.35 rating with 3.429 million viewers. For a better comparison, the night after WrestleMania 33 edition of Raw delivered a 2.62 rating with 3.767 million viewers.*

https://prowrestling.net/site/2018/04/10/wwe-raw-rating-for-the-april-9-night-after-wrestlemania-34-edition/


----------



## RubberbandGoat

So people overseas prefer WWE? Crazy


----------



## All Hope Is Gone

Ronda=ratings


----------



## PrettyLush

Mr. WrestleMania said:


> Oh, BTW, WOR said that WWE revealed that 80% of their Youtube views are from outside of the US, and only 20% of their Youtube views are from the US. Wow.


lemme guess... Indians are the majority


----------



## chronoxiong

Damn that is a massive difference from 2017. And we kept thinking the ratings were going to be lower. It jumped up. This is fascinating and makes you wonder about next year.


----------



## Piper's Pit

However you feel about WWE programming what is an undeniable fact is that WWE have stopped the ratings slide, 18 months ago they were in free fall hovering just below 3.0 and falling but somehow they've stopped that and now are getting a solid 3.5 or so on a weekly basis. Personally I don't quite understand why this has happened, the programming is just as boring as it was then but something seems to have happened.


----------



## Gravyv321

roman getting the lowest hour rating :lmao :lmao


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Piper's Pit said:


> However you feel about WWE programming what is an undeniable fact is that WWE have stopped the ratings slide, 18 months ago they were in free fall hovering just below 3.0 and falling but somehow they've stopped that and now are getting a solid 3.5 or so on a weekly basis. Personally I don't quite understand why this has happened, the programming is just as boring as it was then but something seems to have happened.


It's Wrestlemania season, and the NFL is gone, it's not a mystery.
They didn't start getting roughly 3 million flat again until the Rumble and MNF was over.

Some of those fall shows scratched the All Time Low list of ratings.

:lmao @ people creaming their pants over this number. The unopposed number this year is about 150.000 viewers up from last year, which had direct competition from Basketball finals.
But even if we assume that last year's Show would NOT have beaten this year's show, had it been unopposed, this year's show is still the 2nd lowest RAW after Mania in 10 years, only about 150.000 viewers above last year's bottom of the barrel show.

I'm laughing my ass off when I read Ronda Rousey is SUCH a big star that she drew this number.
The fact is that she didn't move the needle one bit in the hour of the show she is in since her debut, and the fact is that people may talk about her in WWE, but they don't WATCH it, which unfortunately is the thing that matters.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.634M
H2- 3.754M
H3- 3.479M
3H- 3.622M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 3.30% / + 0.120M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 7.33% / - 0.275M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 4.27% / - 0.155M )
4/16/18 Vs 4/9/18 ( - 7.63% / - 0.299M )

Demo (4/16/18 Vs 4/9/18):
H1- 1.300D Vs 1.490D
H2- 1.380D Vs 1.500D
H3- 1.320D Vs 1.400D
3H- 1.333D Vs 1.463D

Note: RAW is 5th, 2nd & 4th by hourly demo & 4th, 1st & 6th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (4/16/18 Vs 4/17/17):
H1- 3.634M Vs 3.405M
H2- 3.754M Vs 3.469M
H3- 3.479M Vs 3.165M
3H- 3.622M Vs 3.346M ( + 8.25% / + 0.276M )

Demo (4/16/18 Vs 4/17/17):
H1- 1.300D Vs 1.170D
H2- 1.380D Vs 1.220D
H3- 1.320D Vs 1.180D
3H- 1.333D Vs 1.190D

Note: RAW this week last year was 7th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 3rd, 2nd & 5th by hourly viewership. *










*Superstar Shake-up comparison (4/16/18 Vs 4/10/17):*

*Viewership (4/16/18 Vs 4/10/17):
H1- 3.634M Vs 3.432M
H2- 3.754M Vs 3.600M
H3- 3.479M Vs 3.256M
3H- 3.622M Vs 3.429M ( + 5.63% / + 0.193M )

Demo (4/16/18 Vs 4/10/17):
H1- 1.300D Vs 1.240D
H2- 1.380D Vs 1.310D
H3- 1.320D Vs 1.190D
3H- 1.333D Vs 1.247D

Note: RAW Superstar Shake-up last year was 3rd, 4th & 2nd by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 2nd by hourly viewership. *


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

HOLY FUCK. HUGE number.

:trips8


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Da' Draft is a draw. :sodone


----------



## Chrome

Maybe WWE should do a Shakeup every week? :hmmm


----------



## JDP2016

Piper's Pit said:


> However you feel about WWE programming what is an undeniable fact is that WWE have stopped the ratings slide, 18 months ago they were in free fall hovering just below 3.0 and falling but somehow they've stopped that and now are getting a solid 3.5 or so on a weekly basis. Personally I don't quite understand why this has happened, the programming is just as boring as it was then but something seems to have happened.


Post Wrestlemania and Superstar Shake-up hype. Numbers will get back to "normal" in a couple of weeks.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Ratings in their way back to normal. May will see the usual sub-3.0 hours.


----------



## RubberbandGoat

That’s a huge number? Didn’t last week beat it?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

RubberbandGoat said:


> That’s a huge number? Didn’t last week beat it?


Last week was the night after WM. :lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Did they do a draft last year too? I'm wondering if they year to year comparisons are both draft episodes.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THE MAN said:


> Did they do a draft last year too? I'm wondering if they year to year comparisons are both draft episodes.


Yeah, here is last year's Shakeup:

8pm - 3.432 million
9pm - 3.600 million
10pm - 3.256 million

Average - 3.422 million

Up from last year by about 6%.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Is this the Ronda Ratings Revolution? Or were people there to see where :bryan was going?  :bryanlol


----------



## Ibracadabra

THE MAN said:


> Is this the Ronda Ratings Revolution? Or were people there to see where :bryan was going?  :bryanlol


And now that we know he's staying there's no reason to watch SDL!


----------



## Seafort

Piper's Pit said:


> However you feel about WWE programming what is an undeniable fact is that WWE have stopped the ratings slide, 18 months ago they were in free fall hovering just below 3.0 and falling but somehow they've stopped that and now are getting a solid 3.5 or so on a weekly basis. Personally I don't quite understand why this has happened, the programming is just as boring as it was then but something seems to have happened.


Two things:

1) They stepped up their storytelling - not a lot - but enough to establish some week to week continuity. And they pared back on the silliness - no more bunny rabbits or bears

2) Their roster is at a sweet spot. RAW has a seasoned roster, and the NXT callups are mostly limited to Smackdown's roster. WWE also gave up any semblance of balance and stripped Smackdown bare to further boost RAW, as well as making John Cena "a free agent" who could appear on the show.


----------



## Seafort

chronoxiong said:


> Damn that is a massive difference from 2017. And we kept thinking the ratings were going to be lower. It jumped up. This is fascinating and makes you wonder about next year.


I think that they are at a high water mark. There is not much more that the company can do to bolster the roster. They already pulled the levers to bring in John Cena and the bulk of Smackdown's talent. Roman will soon be World Champion, and Lesnar will be out of the company. With Reigns already exposed for almost two years as the most prominent wrestler on RAW, I'm not certain how well they'll be able to book him in a compelling fashion. And I just do not see any of the NXT callups moving the needle.


----------



## Piper's Pit

Seafort said:


> Two things:
> 
> 1) They stepped up their storytelling - not a lot - but enough to establish some week to week continuity. And they pared back on the silliness - no more bunny rabbits or bears
> 
> 2) Their roster is at a sweet spot. RAW has a seasoned roster, and the NXT callups are mostly limited to Smackdown's roster. WWE also gave up any semblance of balance and stripped Smackdown bare to further boost RAW, as well as making John Cena "a free agent" who could appear on the show.


Personally I think the 'storytelling' is as meaningless and forgettable as ever but ratings have stabilized, perhaps Ronda has helped, perhaps you're right and there is a subtle improvement but as I said in another post the RAW ratings around 18 months ago I think it was where heading towards being below 2 million and June last year they got a 2.76m one episode.
It may not last but they have stabilized.


----------



## Seafort

Piper's Pit said:


> Personally I think the 'storytelling' is as meaningless and forgettable as ever but ratings have stabilized, perhaps Ronda has helped, perhaps you're right and there is a subtle improvement but as I said in another post the RAW ratings around 18 months ago I think it was where heading towards being below 2 million and June last year they got a 2.76m one episode.
> It may not last but they have stabilized.


I noticed it last summer. There was suddenly more (for them) of an effort to do episodic television. They went from a D- creatively to perhaps a C - but it was enough stop the erosion.


----------



## Y.2.J

Rollins Da Draw! :Cocky


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.283M
H2- 3.210M
H3- 2.819M
3H- 3.104M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 2.22% / - 0.073M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 12.18% / - 0.391M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 14.13% / - 0.464M )
4/23/18 Vs 4/16/18 ( - 14.30% / - 0.518M )

Demo (4/23/18 Vs 4/16/18):
H1- 1.090D Vs 1.300D
H2- 1.090D Vs 1.380D
H3- 0.970D Vs 1.320D
3H- 1.050D Vs 1.333D

Note: RAW is 4th, 3rd & 6th by hourly demo & 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (4/23/18 Vs 4/24/17):
H1- 3.283M Vs 2.999M
H2- 3.210M Vs 3.141M
H3- 2.819M Vs 2.881M
3H- 3.104M Vs 3.007M ( + 3.23% / + 0.097M )

Demo (4/23/18 Vs 4/24/17):
H1- 1.090D Vs 1.040D
H2- 1.090D Vs 1.050D
H3- 0.970D Vs 1.000D
3H- 1.050D Vs 1.030D

Note: RAW this week last year was 5th, 4th & 7th by hourly demo & 5th, 3rd & 7th by hourly viewership. *


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

And there goes your time of the month .... I mean year.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Back to normal. NBA Playoffs ain't going to help matters for the next 2 months, either. :lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Playoffs taking their pound of flesh from RAW.


----------



## Mra22

LOL at that drop. It’s deseved though seeing how it was a terrible show. I only bothered watching Lesnar at the beginning and the Drew and Dolph segment on YouTube


----------



## Sincere

I wonder if it would have helped had they teased Ronda earlier and more often, instead of saturating everything with their GRR pollution.


----------



## JTB33b

You mean to tell me that Corbin,Mahal, Roode,Ziggler and Nattie didn't help the ratings?


----------



## Gravyv321

^^^^ why would you even expect them to? they're midcarders.

anyways, you're telling me that roman still can't draw austin-like numbers? :lol


----------



## JTB33b

Gravyv321 said:


> ^^^^ why would you even expect them to? they're midcarders.
> 
> anyways, you're telling me that roman still can't draw austin-like numbers? :lol


I was being sarcastic. Raw really got nothing in return for losing Jeff Hardy,Joe, the Miz, and Asuka. And it was all due to Roman's future booking. They wanted to bring over heels nobody cares about so when they feud with Roman it might get Roman some cheers.


----------



## They Call me Daddy

What else you'd expect when women are main eventing? I went to sleep before the 3rd hour because I knew that shit was coming up


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Still going to drub SDL in the ratings.


----------



## Ace

Raw looks god awful, I don't blame fans for not watching.


----------



## They Call me Daddy

Vegeta said:


> Raw looks god awful, I don't blame fans for not watching.


What else do you expect? They are currently in no direction with the Universal title, All they care about is Ronda and her getting some cheap pop (which will die out soon) and I have heard they are trying to have Charlotte vs Ronda as main event so it means they don't give a fuck about whatever happens with the male roster


----------



## JTB33b

THE MAN said:


> Still going to drub SDL in the ratings.


That's because people are just programmed to not watch Smackdown for some reason. I bet if you put Smackdown's roster on Monday nights and Raw's on Tuesday's, Raw's ratings would be alot higher than they are now.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

JTB33b said:


> That's because people are just programmed to not watch Smackdown for some reason. I bet if you put Smackdown's roster on Monday nights and Raw's on Tuesday's, Raw's ratings would be alot higher than they are now.


I agree with that. RAW with the opposite roster is still RAW. Plus SDL is essentially RAW Hr 4 and 5 and their time slot is tougher right now too.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.136M
H2- 3.184M
H3- 2.878M
3H- 3.066M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 1.53% / + 0.048M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 9.61% / - 0.306M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 8.23% / - 0.258M )
4/30/18 Vs 4/23/18 ( - 1.22% / - 0.038M )

Demo (4/30/18 Vs 4/23/18):
H1- 1.080D Vs 1.090D
H2- 1.130D Vs 1.090D
H3- 1.030D Vs 0.970D
3H- 1.080D Vs 1.050D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 2nd & 6th by hourly demo & 4th, 3rd & 5th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (4/30/18 Vs 5/1/17):
H1- 3.136M Vs 2.924M
H2- 3.184M Vs 3.039M
H3- 2.878M Vs 2.649M
3H- 3.066M Vs 2.871M ( + 6.79% / + 0.195M )

Demo (4/30/18 Vs 5/1/17):
H1- 1.080D Vs 1.000D
H2- 1.130D Vs 1.060D
H3- 1.030D Vs 0.960D
3H- 1.080D Vs 1.007D

Note: RAW this week last year was 5th, 4th & 6th by hourly demo & 4th, 3rd & 5th by hourly viewership. *


----------



## All Hope Is Gone

Ouch! That third hour.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Thought for sure the third hour would be lower than that.

:bjpenn


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Same old, same old. Nothing of great import here.


----------



## Blade Runner

Was the main event the 6-man tag? (I didn't watch last night's show passed the 1st hour).


----------



## MC

KYRA BATARA said:


> Was the main event the 6-man tag? (I didn't watch last night's show passed the 1st hour).


No, Seth Rollins vs Finn Balor did.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Props to Hour 2 for increasing total audience and the demo.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Tremendous post ppv bump.


Not.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

seeing raw is still above 3 miliion has to be good for WWE.

The Last Hour is a lost cause at this point so just go by the 1st 2 hours which is still above 3 million so good for WWE.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.788M
H2- 2.731M
H3- 2.549M
3H- 2.689M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 2.04% / - 0.057M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 6.66% / - 0.182M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 8.57% / - 0.239M )
5/7/18 Vs 4/30/18 ( - 12.30% / - 0.377M )

Demo (5/7/18 Vs 4/30/18):
H1- 0.900D Vs 1.080D
H2- 0.910D Vs 1.130D
H3- 0.880D Vs 1.030D
3H- 0.897D Vs 1.080D

Note: RAW is 6th, 5th & 7th by hourly demo & 5th, 6th & 9th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (5/7/18 Vs 5/8/17):
H1- 2.788M Vs 2.827M
H2- 2.731M Vs 2.845M
H3- 2.549M Vs 2.417M
3H- 2.689M Vs 2.696M ( - 0.26% / - 0.007M )

Demo (5/7/18 Vs 5/8/17):
H1- 0.900D Vs 0.960D
H2- 0.910D Vs 0.960D
H3- 0.880D Vs 0.860D
3H- 0.897D Vs 0.927D

Note: RAW this week last year was 4th, 5th & 8th by hourly demo & 3rd, 2nd & 9th by hourly viewership. *


----------



## Ace

That's got to be the lowest third hr number ever?

This rating is more than deserved after a shit PPV. I didn't even tune in, I've had enough.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

:damn Dogshit rating for a dogshit show. They def. deserved this rating.


----------



## Ace

THE MAN said:


> :damn Dogshit rating for a dogshit show. They def. deserved this rating.


 Let's hope thiis is a sign of fans giving up after that dogshit show and will continue to drop offf. That's the only way things are going to turn around.

Holy shit, that an average of 2.6m viewers. That's got to be one of their all time low ratings.


----------



## Sincere

Dat Roman draw


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Ouch. The triple threat main event for a spot at MITB did nothing. It's even slightly down from last year where otherwise they were typically doing better than last year.


----------



## JDP2016

WOW. Some will blame the NBA playoffs but this was after a PPV. 

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I know there were NBA Playoff games, but that "ppv bump" was amazingly poor. :trips8


----------



## Ace

Raw has been holding up reasonably well with the NBA.

It's this week post Backlash that they've really posted a bad number. Further proof fans hated the PPV.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Looks like the fans at home left early too. :heston


----------



## Ace

This is the lowest number the show has done in almost two years, only second to the September 26, 2016 show that drew 2.478 million viewers.


----------



## MC

That third hour


----------



## Ace

THE MAN said:


> Looks like the fans at home left early too. :heston


 Dont worry, The Maharaja vs Roman will bring them back :vince$


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Emperor said:


> Dont worry, The Maharaja vs Roman will bring them back :vince$


They are going to shatter tv records in India. 

I was really hoping RAW would wash away the foul aftertaste left by Backlash, but it only enhanced it. :tripsscust


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

No Ronda, no ratings. Just sayin'.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

There goes the theory that it doesn't matter what WWE does.

Take Roman behind the barn for fucking sake!


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Yep, about right. It was obvious from the get-go that they were mailing last night in big time. LeBron dunking on them and hanging on the rim is pretty hilarious, though. :lol

Also, maybe sometime soon, they should perhaps think about either getting the World Champion on TV every week or give it to someone else already. Just a thought.


----------



## Sincere

ROLLINS said:


> Yep, about right. It was obvious from the get-go that they were mailing last night in big time. LeBron dunking on them and hanging on the rim is pretty hilarious, though. :lol
> 
> Also, maybe sometime soon, they should perhaps think about either getting the World Champion on TV every week or give it to someone else already. Just a thought.


Honestly, what is even the point of Brock if he never does anything, and just gets put in repetitively shitty matches with Roman that no one cares about?

This dude is raking in 7 figures for fuck-all. :beckylol Absolutely fleecing WWE. He doesn't even talk. Heyman does all the talking for him.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Sincere said:


> Honestly, what is even the point of Brock if he never does anything, and just gets put in repetitively shitty matches with Roman that no one cares about?
> 
> This dude is raking in 7 figures for fuck-all. :beckylol Absolutely fleecing WWE. He doesn't even talk. Heyman does all the talking for him.


Exactly. It's beyond retarded. And I don't even blame Brock himself. If Vince is dumb enough to allow this, then guess what? He deserves it. Fuck him.

And man, no one gives a shit about that MITB gimmick anymore. It was a really cool gimmick. But I've been saying it since late last year, I think it's about time they retire it for a couple of years, and then bring back in a few years. It just needs a rest, IMO.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

all three hours below 3 million thats bad and they deserve it for keeping pushing Reigns as the top guy.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

If you thought this was bad, wait til SDL's ratings drop tomorrow. The ppv bounce didn't materialize this week.


----------



## Seafort

#BadNewsSanta said:


> Ouch. The triple threat main event for a spot at MITB did nothing. It's even slightly down from last year where otherwise they were typically doing better than last year.


I've kind of realized that what WWE is now doing is actually very old school. I began watching in the late 1980s, when storyline advancement was very incremental. There would be one small step forward, usually for one or maybe two angles. Other than that, the matches on Wrestling Challenge or WWF Superstars seldom had any real story around them, even the ones that were non squashes.

Fast forward to now and that is the way it is again. Main event matches have little to no story behind them on a weekly basis. Storylines - where they exist - move ahead at a snails pace. It's the opposite of Crash TV. Call it Ember TV.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The demo was remarkably consistent, consistently poor. Dropping 12.3% in total viewership in just one week and following a ppv no less, should give them pause.


----------



## RainmakerV2

And Roman vs. Mahal is coming up.








Are they trying to tank or something? Seriously. It's time to change course here.


----------



## HBKAustin

Not as bad as RAW 1997...yet.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.903M
H2- 2.692M
H3- 2.628M
3H- 2.741M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 7.27% / - 0.211M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 2.38% / - 0.064M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 9.47% / - 0.275M )
5/14/18 Vs 5/7/18 ( + 1.93% / + 0.052M )

Demo (5/14/18 Vs 5/7/18):
H1- 0.950D Vs 0.900D
H2- 0.870D Vs 0.910D
H3- 0.870D Vs 0.880D
3H- 0.897D Vs 0.897D

Note: RAW is 4th, 7th & 6th by hourly demo & 4th, 6th & 8th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (5/14/18 Vs 5/15/17):
H1- 2.903M Vs 2.884M
H2- 2.692M Vs 2.724M
H3- 2.628M Vs 2.645M
3H- 2.741M Vs 2.751M ( - 0.36% / - 0.010M )

Demo (5/14/18 Vs 5/15/17):
H1- 0.950D Vs 1.020D
H2- 0.870D Vs 0.940D
H3- 0.870D Vs 0.960D
3H- 0.897D Vs 0.973D

Note: RAW this week last year was 5th, 7th & 6th by hourly demo & 4th, 6th & 8th by hourly viewership. *


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Up from last week which was 2.689 million overall viewers to this weeks 2.741 million viewers.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE




----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Pretty surprised they're up from last week with going up against the Western Conference Finals AND being taped.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I was surprised too. There must be a floor rating where it will be hard for them to go below. It was slightly down in year to year total audience and a bit more in the demo. I did expect worse because RAW sucked as a whole last night.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THE MAN said:


> I was surprised too. There must be a floor rating where it will be hard for them to go below. It was slightly down in year to year total audience and a bit more in the demo. I did expect worse because RAW sucked as a whole last night.


Yep, and check this out:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/996481722123522051
Highest ratied WCF Game 1 in history...and Raw was taped. How the hell did Raw go up from last week? That's some secret sorcery shit right there..


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

ROLLINS said:


> Yep, and check this out:
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/996481722123522051
> Highest ratied WCF Game 1 in history...and Raw was taped. How the hell did Raw go up from last week? That's some secret sorcery shit right there..


It is weird. The demo was exactly the same but the audience was up 2%. If this were polling, I'd say it was moving within the margin of error, but it's not. Maybe people were enthralled by that Nia challenge oromo to Ronda.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

ROLLINS said:


> Yep, and check this out:
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/996481722123522051
> Highest ratied WCF Game 1 in history...and Raw was taped. How the hell did Raw go up from last week? That's some secret sorcery shit right there..


Not having a WOAT PPV the night before does help.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.792M
H2- 2.767M
H3- 2.447M
3H- 2.669M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 0.90% / - 0.025M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 11.56% / - 0.320M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 12.36% / - 0.345M )
5/21/18 Vs 5/14/18 ( - 2.63% / - 0.072M )

Demo (5/21/18 Vs 5/14/18):
H1- 0.910D Vs 0.950D
H2- 0.900D Vs 0.870D
H3- 0.850D Vs 0.870D
3H- 0.887D Vs 0.897D

Note: RAW is 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 9th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (5/21/18 Vs 5/22/17):
H1- 2.792M Vs 2.661M
H2- 2.767M Vs 2.759M
H3- 2.447M Vs 2.425M
3H- 2.669M Vs 2.615M ( + 2.07% / + 0.054M )

Demo (5/21/18 Vs 5/22/17):
H1- 0.910D Vs 0.890D
H2- 0.900D Vs 0.970D
H3- 0.850D Vs 0.870D
3H- 0.887D Vs 0.910D

Note: RAW this week last year was 6th, 3rd & 8th by hourly demo & 6th, 5th & 10th by hourly viewership. *


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

:lmao That demo and dat third hour. What a way to celebrate a new tv contract than to serve up an absolute shit show. This rating was richly deserved.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

LeBron tore them up. Over $300 million per year to WWE for Raw coming up.


----------



## MC

Jeez, this shows the quality of Raw. Awful.


----------



## Sincere

Those ratings are better than last night's Raw deserves.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

THE MAN said:


> :lmao That demo and dat third hour. What a way to celebrate a new tv contract than to serve up an absolute shit show. This rating was richly deserved.


as bad as it is it don't really matter since they just got rewarded with a huge tv contract so really WWE is getting the last laugh.


----------



## JC00

That 3rd hour, yikes. More proof that Rousey does nothing to improve ratings.....


----------



## HankHill_85

The usual post-Mania "Spring Slump" is definitely on display with these ratings, as well as the product in general.

Takeover: Chicago and MITB need to get here quick so we can start building to Summerslam afterward.


----------



## Ace

Another addlin from Lebron.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

JC00 said:


> That 3rd hour, yikes. More proof that Rousey does nothing to improve ratings.....


Braun and Balor, the same.

Somehow, this number is up 53K from this week last year. So, they're still up from last year. :lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

BeckyLynchFan29 said:


> as bad as it is it don't really matter since they just got rewarded with a huge tv contract so really WWE is getting the last laugh.


Of course it doesn't matter. WWE got a sweetheart deal and I see no incentive to make their current product more palatable. Their hardcore fanbase won't abandon them.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

THE MAN said:


> Of course it doesn't matter. WWE got a sweetheart deal and I see no incentive to make their current product more palatable. Their hardcore fanbase won't abandon them.


I do think smackdown will improve with it being on Fox I think they put alot of effort in making that show feel imporant but again Roaddog is booking it so that will always be a strike aginst it right there.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Do people who think they can laugh about ratings, and people discussing them, know that now that Smackdown will be on Fox, at least Smackdown ratings will be more important than ever? Now that Smackdown is on network TV, they expect a certain viewership, for ads etc, to make it worth their 4 million a week.
On Smackdown's spot Friday night, Fox right now is doing 2.8-3.2 million viewers. Have you seen the Smackdown viewership recently? It's well below that. I think Fox as well as WWE are counting on an increase in viewership through the broader exposure.

And as far as USA goes, they have no other choice but to keep at least RAW, it's one of their last flagships, so they throw unreasonable money into a show that's clearly in decline. But they probably figure it's good enough for the next five years. 8-10 years ago, when USA had other quality programming, they certainly wouldn't have picked up a stinker that lost nearly 1/3 of its audience in about half a decade.

By the way, I would really like to read some apology posts by the people who never tire saying TV is dead. 
Who goes first?
At this point, they would make more money airing their PPVs on TV, than they do with the Network. WWE Network is nothing but a toy in the big picture.

I have a gut feeling all of this won't end well. Wrestling history is diverse and long, but everything has one thing in common - every time wrestling went corporate, and was too dependent on TV executives who don't understand wrestling, instead of the fanbase, it ended badly.


----------



## xxRambo_21xx

lol at the geeks bragging about wwe's big contract deal. if anything it lead to even more complacency when it comes to booking show. is that really what you want. you should have wanted wwe to get a crappy deal so they have to try and make it better.


----------



## Seafort

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Do people who think they can laugh about ratings, and people discussing them, know that now that Smackdown will be on Fox, at least Smackdown ratings will be more important than ever? Now that Smackdown is on network TV, they expect a certain viewership, for ads etc, to make it worth their 4 million a week.
> On Smackdown's spot Friday night, Fox right now is doing 2.8-3.2 million viewers. Have you seen the Smackdown viewership recently? It's well below that. I think Fox as well as WWE are counting on an increase in viewership through the broader exposure.
> 
> And as far as USA goes, they have no other choice but to keep at least RAW, it's one of their last flagships, so they throw unreasonable money into a show that's clearly in decline. But they probably figure it's good enough for the next five years. 8-10 years ago, when USA had other quality programming, they certainly wouldn't have picked up a stinker that lost nearly 1/3 of its audience in about half a decade.
> 
> By the way, I would really like to read some apology posts by the people who never tire saying TV is dead.
> Who goes first?
> At this point, they would make more money airing their PPVs on TV, than they do with the Network. WWE Network is nothing but a toy in the big picture.
> 
> I have a gut feeling all of this won't end well. Wrestling history is diverse and long, but everything has one thing in common - every time wrestling went corporate, and was too dependent on TV executives who don't understand wrestling, instead of the fanbase, it ended badly.


New WWE Executive Vice President, as part of the new agreement with USA to bring greater corporate synergy with WWE:


----------



## RKing85

RAW on Monday is going to get hurt big time in the ratings. Warriors/Rockets game 7 and game 1 of the Stanley Cup finals.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Memorial Day means no ratings today. I think the base support for WWE will result in a number not quite as bad as we were expecting.


----------



## RainmakerV2

Game 7 in the NBA, game 1 in the NHL, plus a holiday. If they can do 2.6 they should be happy. 2.5 would be acceptable.


----------



## Zigglerpops

Whatever the rating it will be as meaningless as last weeks and week before and week before... and so on


----------



## Ibracadabra

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Do people who think they can laugh about ratings, and people discussing them, know that now that Smackdown will be on Fox, at least Smackdown ratings will be more important than ever? Now that Smackdown is on network TV, they expect a certain viewership, for ads etc, to make it worth their 4 million a week.
> On Smackdown's spot Friday night, Fox right now is doing 2.8-3.2 million viewers. Have you seen the Smackdown viewership recently? It's well below that. I think Fox as well as WWE are counting on an increase in viewership through the broader exposure.
> 
> And as far as USA goes, they have no other choice but to keep at least RAW, it's one of their last flagships, so they throw unreasonable money into a show that's clearly in decline. But they probably figure it's good enough for the next five years. 8-10 years ago, when USA had other quality programming, they certainly wouldn't have picked up a stinker that lost nearly 1/3 of its audience in about half a decade.
> 
> By the way, I would really like to read some apology posts by the people who never tire saying TV is dead.
> Who goes first?
> At this point, they would make more money airing their PPVs on TV, than they do with the Network. WWE Network is nothing but a toy in the big picture.
> 
> I have a gut feeling all of this won't end well. Wrestling history is diverse and long, but everything has one thing in common - every time wrestling went corporate, and was too dependent on TV executives who don't understand wrestling, instead of the fanbase, it ended badly.


Get outta here with your bullshit..


For years you've paraded on about the WWE crashing and burning once their TV deal is up becuzz RATINGS and blah blah blah.. Give it up dude. You don't know shit but pessimism because of your hatred for Vince and the WWE, who have proved you and people of your ilk WRONG.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.593M
H2- 2.591M
H3- 2.300M
3H- 2.495M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 0.08% / - 0.002M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 11.23% / - 0.291M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 11.30% / - 0.293M )
5/28/18 Vs 5/21/18 ( - 6.52% / - 0.174M )

Demo (5/28/18 Vs 5/21/18):
H1- 0.800D Vs 0.910D
H2- 0.790D Vs 0.900D
H3- 0.710D Vs 0.850D
3H- 0.767D Vs 0.887D

Note: RAW is 5th, 6th & 8th by hourly demo & 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (5/28/18 Vs 5/29/17):
H1- 2.593M Vs 2.689M
H2- 2.591M Vs 2.681M
H3- 2.300M Vs 2.468M
3H- 2.495M Vs 2.613M ( - 4.52% / - 0.118M )

Demo (5/28/18 Vs 5/29/17):
H1- 0.800D Vs 0.880D
H2- 0.790D Vs 0.880D
H3- 0.710D Vs 0.830D
3H- 0.767D Vs 0.863D

Note: RAW this week last year was 3rd, 2nd & 4th by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 4th by hourly viewership. *


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Not as bad as I thought considering the holiday, NBA, and NHL.


----------



## Ace

SD surely beats that?

They do 2.3m with stiff competition, without it you'd think they'd get around 2.5m.

And :wow at 14.8m watching Game 7.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Worse than I expected. Hour 3 is simply atrocious and those demos are freaking low for RAW. Vince is still laughing all the way to the bank.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Somewhere at NBCU one exec pours a drink and grabs his phone: "Are we sure they will last 5 years, bro?"


----------



## Blade Runner

Ibracadabra said:


> Get outta here with your bullshit..
> 
> 
> For years you've paraded on about the WWE crashing and burning once their TV deal is up becuzz RATINGS and blah blah blah.. Give it up dude. You don't know shit but pessimism because of your hatred for Vince and the WWE, who have proved you and people of your ilk WRONG.


That guy would spin rescuing a kitten from a burning house into a negative if it was Vince McMahon or someone from the WWE offices doing the rescuing. It's pointless to even argue...


----------



## Ace

THE MAN said:


> Worse than I expected. Hour 3 is simply atrocious and those demos are freaking low for RAW. Vince is still laughing all the way to the bank.


 I expected worse tbh. SD should beat this with no NBA, Stanley Cup Finals or NCIS.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Some were predicting Hour 3 would be under 2 million people and it was 2.3 million, with the women main-eventing and on a holiday against deep NBA and NHL Playoffs.

If this is even close with SD, there is a major problem with SD.


----------



## JDP2016

Good numbers. The company is doing great.

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Emperor said:


> I expected worse tbh. SD should beat this with no NBA, Stanley Cup Finals or NCIS.


It will def. put my theory to the test. It was not a smart move to make the Big Ass announcement at the start of the show. It killed my interest right there. I think SDL will still be lower.


----------



## Ace

ROLLINS said:


> Some were predicting Hour 3 would be under 2 million people and it was 2.3 million, with the women main-eventing and on a holiday against deep NBA and NHL Playoffs.
> 
> If this is even close with SD, there is a major problem with SD.


 SD will at best scrape past it. They only do 2.7m+ during WM while 2.6m is rare.

I'm expecting between 2.5-2.6m, 2.5 and under will be a failure for SD.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

The usual shills like Ibracadabra entering the thread just to display how badly they need to be anti :lmao
Not worth replying to anymore.
If Smackdown does that number on Fox in October 19, it will get moved to FS1 on September 1st 19.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Roman wasn't there and the rating tanked. Coincidence? :reigns2


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

THE MAN said:


> Roman wasn't there and the rating tanked. Coincidence? :reigns2


No. It's called the Terry Bollea maneuver.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I think getting (pretty much) 2.6 million viewers for the first two hours considering the competition and holiday was surprising. I was expecting worse. Especially for Hour 3. :shrug


----------



## Ace

ROLLINS said:


> I think getting (pretty much) 2.6 million viewers for the first two hours considering the competition and holiday was surprising. I was expecting worse. Especially for Hour 3. :shrug


 Didn't the game start a hr in?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Emperor said:


> Didn't the game start a hr in?


Not sure, but there were 2 games, not 1. And it was a holiday. On past Memorial Days, they get lower than the norm, always.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

could this be the year that the 3rd hour falls below 2 million?

its getting closer and closer to happening and might just happen doing football season.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I love how people pretend that RAW getting more viewers somehow makes it the superior show. They go first, are on for 3 hours and are the name brand for WWE. They have every advantage. It reminds me of a rich guy congratulating himself for being rich and hitting a homerun in life, when he was born already at third base. Exchange the rosters and RAW will still draw more. It's the brand. Of this I have no doubt.


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

THE MAN said:


> I love how people pretend that RAW getting more viewers somehow makes it the superior show. They go first, are on for 3 hours and are the name brand for WWE. They have every advantage. It reminds me of a rich guy congratulating himself for being rich and hitting a homerun in life, when he was born already at third base. Exchange the rosters and RAW will still draw more. It's the brand. Of this I have no doubt.


they go first and turn people off the rest of the week with their poor booking lol.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THE MAN said:


> I love how people pretend that RAW getting more viewers somehow makes it the superior show. They go first, are on for 3 hours and are the name brand for WWE. They have every advantage. It reminds me of a rich guy congratulating himself for being rich and hitting a homerun in life, when he was born already at third base. Exchange the rosters and RAW will still draw more. It's the brand. Of this I have no doubt.


The 3rd hour is a huge disadvantage, though, not an advantage. Every single week the 3rd hour is significanlty lower than the first two, and drags down the overall number significantly. They also seem to go up against NBA playoff games more than SD for some odd reason, and always go up against the NFL for four months straight every Fall/Winter, which SD never has to do.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

ROLLINS said:


> The 3rd hour is a huge disadvantage, though, not an advantage. Every single week the 3rd hour is significanlty lower than the first two, and drags down the overall number significantly. They also seem to go up against NBA playoff games more than SD for some odd reason, and always go up against the NFL for four months straight every Fall/Winter, which SD never has to do.


If the third is a disadvantage, it stands to reason that the fourth and fifth hours of WWE programming are at a greater disadvantage. It is simply wearing out the audiencrr. RAW does have the NFL to contend with. All SDL has is being on against what amounts to the highest rated night of network television which runs from October to May. Neither path is favorable.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THE MAN said:


> If the third is a disadvantage, it stands to reason that the fourth and fifth hours of WWE programming are at a greater disadvantage. It is simply wearing out the audiencrr. RAW does have the NFL to contend with. All SDL has is being on against what amounts to the highest rated night of network television which runs from October to May. Neither path is favorable.


At least SD is a full 24 hours after Raw starts, though. Sitting thru a 2 hour show is much easier than sitting thru a 3 hour show.

Also, even with it's supposed decline, the NFL still dominates every show, even the NBA.


----------



## MC

Apparently, this weeks Raw had the 2nd lowest tv viewership in it's entire history. 


http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news...aws-second-lowest-viewership-in-history-with/

:wow


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

^If that's true and SD can't soundly beat this number, something is wrong with this picture. Come on. Especially on a night where they had no competition and Raw had a ton of it, on top of being a holiday.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> No. It's called the Terry Bollea maneuver.


So you're conceding that hogan had an even vaster moveset than we ever gave him credit before.  :hogan


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Meltzer posted this on F4W about Monday's rating:



> Monday's Raw went head-to-head with game one of the Stanley Cup finals with the Las Vegas Golden Knights vs. Washington Capitals, which did 5.20 million viewers on NBC, and game seven of the Golden State Warriors vs. Houston Rockets NBA semifinals, that did 14.81 million viewers.
> 
> The reality is that wasn't bad at all. Raw was fourth for the night on cable, trailing the game and the pre-game and post-game show for the NBA game.
> 
> The normal news shows that beat Raw were hurt far worse, as Rachel Maddow fell to 1.53 million viewers , Tucker Carlson to 1.63 million viewers and Hannity to 1.48 million viewers.


https://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/wwe-raw-ratings-down-against-big-nba-and-nhl-playoff-games-258746


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Predicting RAW will rise this week, not that the crapfest we saw last night is deserving of it.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

THE MAN said:


> Predicting RAW will rise this week, not that the crapfest we saw last night is deserving of it.


Wrong prediction


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.594M
H2- 2.593M
H3- 2.390M
3H- 2.526M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 0.04% / - 0.001M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 7.83% / - 0.203M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 7.86% / - 0.204M )
6/4/18 Vs 5/28/18 ( + 1.24% / + 0.031M )

Demo (6/4/18 Vs 5/28/18):
H1- 0.860D Vs 0.800D
H2- 0.870D Vs 0.790D
H3- 0.820D Vs 0.710D
3H- 0.850D Vs 0.767D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 2nd & 5th by hourly demo & 5th, 6th & 7th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (6/4/18 Vs 6/5/17):
H1- 2.594M Vs 3.113M
H2- 2.593M Vs 3.110M
H3- 2.390M Vs 2.758M
3H- 2.526M Vs 2.994M ( - 15.63% / - 0.468M )

Demo (6/4/18 Vs 6/5/17):
H1- 0.860D Vs 1.070D
H2- 0.870D Vs 1.080D
H3- 0.820D Vs 0.960D
3H- 0.850D Vs 1.037D

Note: RAW this week last year was 3rd, 2nd & 6th by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 4th by hourly viewership. *


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

awful rating and they deserve every bit of it.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

What a crap rating. Hugely down in year to year. Can't say it didn't deserve it.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Wrong prediction


It was slightly up in total viewers and up larger in the demo. Hour 3 actually went up this week and was the difference. Nonetheless, the numbers are horrific, especially considering there was no NBA playoff excuse. Hour 3 will still beat SDL though. :lmao


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Horrible number. Kind of surprised all 3 hours of demos are up from last week and the overall number is higher, but horrible. Did the Stanley Cup do really well, or no? Can't find that number anywhere.

Looks like the return of anyone from last week didn't help, either.


----------



## RainmakerV2

So when is it safe to say new FOTC Braun isnt a draw?


----------



## Ace

Holy shit that's just with the NHL game :lmao

Richly deserved, I hope more people tune out.


----------



## V-Trigger

>FOX made a deal with Vince and now this comes to light.


----------



## Blade Runner

V-Trigger said:


> >FOX made a deal with Vince and now this comes to light.


... and it won't make a lick of difference.


----------



## V-Trigger

LMAO looks like the cult is still going strong.


----------



## Blade Runner

V-Trigger said:


> LMAO looks like the cult is still going strong.


Just watch.


People have been predicting WWE's downfall for years because of the fluctuating ratings, only for WWE to end up better positioned than they were before. 


"WWE will be in trouble once renegotiations with USA happen" -- my ass. :lol


----------



## xxRambo_21xx

KYRA BATARA said:


> Just watch.
> 
> 
> People have been predicting WWE's downfall for years because of the fluctuating ratings, only for WWE to end up better positioned than they were before.
> 
> 
> "WWE will be in trouble once renegotiations with USA happen" -- my ass. :lol


wwe defenders in full force. you guys are pathetic.


----------



## Blade Runner

xxRambo_21xx said:


> wwe defenders in full force. you guys are pathetic.


Terrific argument.


----------



## Randy Lahey

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> Viewership (6/4/18 Vs 6/5/17):
> H1- 2.594M Vs 3.113M
> H2- 2.593M Vs 3.110M
> H3- 2.390M Vs 2.758M
> 3H- 2.526M Vs 2.994M ( - 15.63% / - 0.468M )


That's the worst rating of all time given that they had no competition. 15.6% drop from last year lmao...

One wonders why Fox would pay WWE the amount of money they are paying them, to deliver these types of numbers.

Fox could run 52 straight weeks of a live oriented type show (American Idol, The Voice, Survivor, Big Brother, I'm a Celebrity get me outta here, something like that) and bring in way more viewers than that, and at a fraction of the cost because reality TV shows are cheap to make.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Of course the ratings tanking now won't make a lick of difference. They just hit the jackpot with their tv deals and have a very reliable base of fan support. They are rolling in money and show no signs of shedding their core supporters. I just hope they strive to make shows better than last night's RAW.


----------



## chronoxiong

800,000 viewership drop from last year. Wow. Tough road for the WWE to get those viewers back.


----------



## Randy Lahey

If the Cavs win one of the next two games at home, then Game 5 of the NBA Finals will be next monday. You'll see the lowest rating of all time then.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

WWE to have a press release citing their "record setting ratings:. :vince


----------



## Blade Runner

Randy Lahey said:


> That's the worst rating of all time given that they had no competition. 15.6% drop from last year lmao...
> 
> One wonders why Fox would pay WWE the amount of money they are paying them, to deliver these types of numbers.
> 
> Fox could run 52 straight weeks of a live oriented type show (American Idol, The Voice, something like that) and bring in way more viewers than that, and at a fraction of the cost because reality TV shows are cheap to make.


That's because FOX doesn't consider it a crucial enough metric.


The WWE is a marketing and company that also sell subscriptions, make money off licencing and merchandising. FOX is buying into the WWE brand which is a sizable intellectual property. The WWE has a huge presence on Social Media from all over the world which FOX can use as a platform to promote themselves. They know that WWE has a core fanbase that will stick around no matter how bad the content gets (which is why the ratings fluctuate around the same average year after year), which is a major upside because they don't have to establish a brand new IP on their Network. There's a lot of upside to the deal, not to mention the potential ad revenue. A deal like what WWE did with Saudi Arabia is just the type of business model that attracts investors... especially in the longterm.


Shows like The Voice and American Idol bring in one type of audience. Unless FOX want to pigeonhole themselves as a product catering to only one specific niche, then they'll aim for variety on their Network. Smackdown would run all year long and bring it's core fanbase / demo along with it. 


I seriously doubt that FOX execs looked at the quality of the shows on a subjective level, or fluctuating ratings that lose 500k viewers one week and regain them the next. They're looking at yearly data and they're buying into the brand. They're thinking about how they can take that brand and make it even more successful on their Network rather than basing it solely around what they're doing currently on the USA network. The WWE is still doing strong numbers relative to most other shows on cable TV, and their brand is very big right now in several markets with a huge presence on Social Media.


----------



## Chrome

Yeah that's a terrible rating lol. Last week can be kinda excused, but not this week with no holiday and hardly any competition. I guess it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things, but it's still not good.


----------



## Zigglerpops

This thread no longer matters, Funny that others take enjoyment out of low ratings while the cash rolls in at record amounts


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

Randy Lahey said:


> If the Cavs win one of the next two games at home, then Game 5 of the NBA Finals will be next monday. You'll see the lowest rating of all time then.


Lebron is atleast winning one game so that will happen and if we thought this raw was bad wait till next week they will really sandbagged if they going up aginst the nba finals.


----------



## Blade Runner

Zigglerpops said:


> This thread no longer matters, Funny that others take enjoyment out of low ratings while the cash rolls in at record amounts


Ratings still matter to a degree, but only if the WWE reach consistant lows in the area of TNA: Impact ratings. That will never happen because the WWE has it's core base of fans that will keep watching no matter what.


----------



## Piper's Pit

As long as Vince is in charge they'll always find a way to survive but the fact of the matter is over the last 10 years they've lost almost half their fanbase and the number of people watching and buying tickets will continue to go down, there is no stopping this bleed.

How NBC thought a huge long term contract was a good idea I don't know, RAW will be averaging 1.8's in the not too distant future, either the new TV deal was a stroke of genius which only professional analysts understand or it was a colossal mistake. I'm no expert but surely it doesn't make sense to treble a TV show's revenue when they're continually losing viewers and on a weekly basis they're dropping tens if not hundreds of thousands of viewers ??


----------



## InexorableJourney

KYRA BATARA said:


> Just watch.
> 
> 
> People have been predicting WWE's downfall for years because of the fluctuating ratings, only for WWE to end up better positioned than they were before.
> 
> 
> "WWE will be in trouble once renegotiations with USA happen" -- my ass. :lol


I completely predicted it wrong.

I just could not envision that TV networks would be more interested in content than in ratings.


----------



## Zigglerpops

KYRA BATARA said:


> Ratings still matter to a degree, but only if the WWE reach consistant lows in the area of TNA: Impact ratings. That will never happen because the WWE has it's core base of fans that will keep watching no matter what.


Theirs billions of reasons why they no longer matter, Times have changed


----------



## Ace

KYRA BATARA said:


> Ratings still matter to a degree, but only if the WWE reach consistant lows in the area of TNA: Impact ratings. That will never happen because the WWE has it's core base of fans that will keep watching no matter what.


 Nah, Vince got really lucky this time. Live sport is in hot demand and most of the leagues are already locked up so it drove WWE's TV rights up.

If they keep bleeding at this rate, they will be demoted to FS1 if not cancelled. The next deals after this likely to be smaller as well as they descend to under 2m. This is inevitable as WWE cleans up their image for acceptance, their fans do not want to watch a watered down product and they will leave.


----------



## xxRambo_21xx

the wwe sheep can defend it all they want. wwe has been bleeding viewers for years. it may take a while but eventually it will be an issue for them


----------



## xxRambo_21xx

Piper's Pit said:


> As long as Vince is in charge they'll always find a way to survive but the fact of the matter is over the last 10 years they've lost almost half their fanbase and the number of people watching and buying tickets will continue to go down, there is no stopping this bleed.
> 
> How NBC thought a huge long term contract was a good idea I don't know, RAW will be averaging 1.8's in the not too distant future, either the new TV deal was a stroke of genius which only professional analysts understand or it was a colossal mistake. I'm no expert but surely it doesn't make sense to treble a TV show's revenue when they're continually losing viewers and on a weekly basis they're dropping tens if not hundreds of thousands of viewers ??


i also thing companys trust vince mcmahon to deliver. when he is gone and wwe is left to steph with under 3 million viewers, companys will not have the same trust.


----------



## Seafort

The bigger question in the short term is this - how quickly will the audience erode to under 2M? This happened before at the same post-WrestleMania period. The company basically phone it in.

The company responded last year by bringing back John Cena, and in the past a terrible rating usually led to a Vince McMahon appearance the following week. 

But what if they don't care this time? What if things continue at exactly the same pace for the next three months? I think we may go under 2M by SummerSlam.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

> In a real shocker, Raw last night did 2.52 million viewers, only up one percent from last week's near modern record low on a week when the audience should have bounced back strongly.
> 
> Essentially, the audience that shifted away for the NBA playoffs, as has happened every year, didn't come back this week even without an NBA game. There was a Stanley Cup playoff game on NBC with the Las Vegas Golden Knights vs. Washington Capitals that did 5.06 million viewers in competition.
> 
> In reality, while there were two shows, one last week and one in 2016 on non-holiday dates that did lower numbers, this would be the worst showing in modern history because those episodes were expected to do poorly based on overwhelming competition.
> 
> Still, Raw was fifth for the night on cable, and the only shows that beat it were news programs.
> 
> The first two hours were almost identical to last week, but they didn't lose quite as many viewers in the third hour, which resulted in the slight increase in viewership.
> 
> The actual ratings aren't out yet, but if the viewers per home increased over last week, then it is entirely possible this will be the lowest rated Monday night wrestling show in the history of the USA Network. The record low is a 1.68 rating on Christmas night of 2017.


Source: WON

If there are really people who are stupid enough to believe it doesn't matter when their audience is bleeding away, they'll be in for a rough surprise.

This is historic for numerous reasons, but the most interesting thing is: this is the lowest point in history, so saying their core audience isn't going anywhere will be put to test from this point on. If viewership goes lower than this, it will be very clear that after the casuals, WWE is now losing hardcores.

If Smackdown doesn't cut it on Fox, it's either FS1 or scrambling for another solution. Because USA made it clear they won't spend that money on Smackdown. And remember that Vince almost signed with USA for 360 Million a year for both shows, until Fox came in last minute.


----------



## HenryBowers

Its bizarre for sure. Ratings may not "matter" but youd think viewership does. It seems like Networks are paying far more for a declining viewership. Its a model that makes no business sense whatsoever. 

Its like when a billionaire buys a mediocre football club and spends loads of money for no reason to buy trophies. 

WWE will only be punished if people stop attending and buying shit.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.751M
H2- 2.812M
H3- 2.629M
3H- 2.731M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 2.22% / + 0.061M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 6.51% / - 0.183M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 4.43% / - 0.122M )
6/11/18 Vs 6/4/18 ( + 8.12% / + 0.205M )

Demo (6/11/18 Vs 6/4/18):
H1- 0.910D Vs 0.860D
H2- 0.970D Vs 0.870D
H3- 0.930D Vs 0.820D
3H- 0.937D Vs 0.850D

Note: RAW is 4th, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 7th, 4th & 10th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (6/11/18 Vs 6/12/17):
H1- 2.751M Vs 2.769M
H2- 2.812M Vs 2.522M
H3- 2.629M Vs 2.335M
3H- 2.731M Vs 2.542M ( + 7.44% / + 0.189M )

Demo (6/11/18 Vs 6/12/17):
H1- 0.910D Vs 0.930D
H2- 0.970D Vs 0.840D
H3- 0.930D Vs 0.810D
3H- 0.937D Vs 0.860D

Note: RAW this week last year was 2nd, 3rd & 5th by hourly demo & 2nd, 5th & 6th by hourly viewership. *


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Hour 1 lowest of all three hours in the demo. Hour 3 up a lot week to week. Ronda and :braun bringing the eyeballs.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Up from last week. #2 on cable last night. Seth in the highest rated hour of the night.

:mark:


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Sunil Singh = ratings. :vince$


----------



## BeckyLynchFan29

no sports on and Raw still can't get an hour over 3 million. thats not good at all.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Lowest last year with no competition was 2.85.

The show was doing 3 million before NBA, then it took a hit during NBA, and since then, it didn't really recover, which means plenty of people didn't bother coming back.
That's a terrible number for a Go Home show to a bigger PPV, and Rousey's first ever Title Match.


----------



## Seafort

BeckyLynchFan29 said:


> no sports on and Raw still can't get an hour over 3 million. thats not good at all.


Spot on. Unlike previous years - and I could be wrong - I have a strong suspicion that the audience will not bounce back to any significant degree. At some point they will try to put the foot back on the gas (a Vince appearance, Brock shows up, Dean returns), but it's not going to bring back viewers. They're coasting right now, and I'm not sure if they realize it. Storylines are as minimalistic as they were during the days of WWF Championship Wrestling in 1986 (pre Wrestling Challenge/Superstars), and there seems to be a consensus that 20 and 30 minute matches are the salve. That seems counterintuitive in today's society, where attention spans are minimal.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

THE MAN said:


> Hour 1 lowest of all three hours in the demo. Hour 3 up a lot week to week. Ronda and :braun bringing the eyeballs.


Up a lot only if you compare it to the usual first to third hour drop off percentages. In pure numbers, hour 3 did a shitty number.
It just gets covered by the fact that hour 1 is down big time. They used to draw 3.0-3.1 million not long ago for hour 1. 
Should Rousey draw a 3.0-3.2 million 3rd hour in the near future, then we'll talk. Her 3rd hour number is the shits, which gets covered up because the first hour is also the shits.


----------



## MC

Go home show as always going to get a bigger rating. No surprises here.


----------



## SPCDRI

Under 3 million for the go-home to Money in the Bank and a PPV with Rousey on it when there wasn't any sports on looks bad. I wonder what the go-home to money in the bank was a few years ago, does anybody know?


----------



## FITZ

ROLLINS said:


> Up from last week. #2 on cable last night. Seth in the highest rated hour of the night.
> 
> <img src="http://i.imgur.com/GkHkVKq.gif?1" border="0" alt="" title=":mark:" class="inlineimg" />


And this is the rating that really matters. Yeah a lot less people watch than what used to. But it’s obviously the same everywhere. There was 1 cable channel on Monday with 3 million viewers during prime time.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

SPCDRI said:


> Under 3 million for the go-home to Money in the Bank and a PPV with Rousey on it when there wasn't any sports on looks bad. I wonder what the go-home to money in the bank was a few years ago, does anybody know?


MitB Go-Home RAW 2013 did a 3.1 rating.
Last week did around 1.9.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.001M
H2- 2.975M
H3- 2.734M
3H- 2.903M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 0.87% / - 0.026M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 8.10% / - 0.241M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 8.90% / - 0.267M )
6/18/18 Vs 6/11/18 ( + 6.30% / + 0.172M )

Demo (6/18/18 Vs 6/11/18):
H1- 1.000D Vs 0.910D
H2- 1.000D Vs 0.970D
H3- 0.940D Vs 0.930D
3H- 0.980D Vs 0.937D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 2nd & 4th by hourly demo & 2nd, 3rd & 7th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (6/18/18 Vs 6/19/17):
H1- 3.001M Vs 3.075M
H2- 2.975M Vs 3.201M
H3- 2.734M Vs 3.029M
3H- 2.903M Vs 3.102M ( - 6.42% / - 0.199M )

Demo (6/18/18 Vs 6/19/17):
H1- 1.000D Vs 1.050D
H2- 1.000D Vs 1.090D
H3- 0.940D Vs 1.070D
3H- 0.980D Vs 1.070D

Note: RAW this week last year was 4th, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership. *


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

RAW did better than I expected because that show was miserable to me. Ronda the only draw in WWE. :CENA


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Any of the hours being back into the 3 millions for the first time in awhile, and it was Hour 1, which made sense because it was by far the only good hour of the show between the Ronda/Alexa/Kurt segment and the IC Title change in a terrific match. Congrats to all involved for getting an hour of Raw back to into the 3 millions.


----------



## JDP2016

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

The night after a PPV in which Braun won MITB, Alexa won the WMITB and regained the RAW women's title with a cash in and they still couldn't get over 3 million for all three hours. This company is utter trash.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Still down year to year by 6%. They can't even win for improving.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Better than they deserve


----------



## chronoxiong

Who the fuck watches Love & Hip Hop? And why?


----------



## RainmakerV2

Corbin draws.


----------



## Chan Hung

Edit: Wrong thread


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.597M
H2- 2.679M
H3- 2.714M
3H- 2.663M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 3.16% / + 0.082M )
H3 Vs H2 ( + 1.31% / + 0.035M )
H3 Vs H1 ( + 4.51% / + 0.117M )
6/25/18 Vs 6/18/18 ( - 8.27% / - 0.240M )

Demo (6/25/18 Vs 6/18/18):
H1- 0.840D Vs 1.000D
H2- 0.860D Vs 1.000D
H3- 0.890D Vs 0.940D
3H- 0.863D Vs 0.980D

Note: RAW is 5th, 4th & 3rd by hourly demo & 7th, 6th & 5th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (6/25/18 Vs 6/26/17):
H1- 2.597M Vs 2.887M
H2- 2.679M Vs 3.092M
H3- 2.714M Vs 2.951M
3H- 2.663M Vs 2.977M ( - 10.55% / - 0.314M )

Demo (6/25/18 Vs 6/26/17):
H1- 0.840D Vs 1.020D
H2- 0.860D Vs 1.080D
H3- 0.890D Vs 1.030D
3H- 0.863D Vs 1.043D

Note: RAW this week last year was 4th, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 5th, 1st & 4th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

HOUR 3 being the highest rated hour. THAT NEVER HAPPENS.

:rollins

:drose

That opening segment in Hour 1 with Reigns and Lashley really drew them in, eh? :lmao

Eat shit, Vince.


----------



## JDP2016

Ouch!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Mordecay

Wow, people actually stayed to see that Rollins main event, when was the last time the 3rd hour was the highest rated hour? It sure has been a fucking long time

:rollins DA DRAW


----------



## MFR55

That opening segment was shit,they got exactly what they deserved there,raw got progressively better last night


----------



## Sincere

> Viewership:
> 6/25/18 Vs 6/18/18 ( - 8.27% / - 0.240M )
> 
> Demo (6/25/18 Vs 6/18/18):
> H1- 0.840D Vs 1.000D
> H2- 0.860D Vs 1.000D
> H3- 0.890D Vs 0.940D
> 3H- 0.863D Vs 0.980D


Without Ronda vs With Ronda?

Also, Seth outperforming everything else :lmao 

Bench Roman. Put Seth up to bat.


----------



## AB81

I don't get why the rollins fan is happy when hour 3 was still below 3 million same as the whole show so Seth did'n add much to the 3rd hour.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

AB81 said:


> I don't get why the rollins fan is happy when hour 3 was still below 3 million same as the whole show so Seth did'n add much to the 3rd hour.


Because, as was said, the third hour is never the highest rated hour of the 3.

Reading is fundamental.


----------



## MFR55

Sincere said:


> Viewership:
> 6/25/18 Vs 6/18/18 ( - 8.27% / - 0.240M )
> 
> Demo (6/25/18 Vs 6/18/18):
> H1- 0.840D Vs 1.000D
> H2- 0.860D Vs 1.000D
> H3- 0.890D Vs 0.940D
> 3H- 0.863D Vs 0.980D
> 
> 
> 
> Without Ronda vs With Ronda?
> 
> Also, Seth outperforming everything else <img src="http://www.wrestlingforum.com/images/smilies/roflmao.gif" border="0" alt="" title="ROFLMAO" class="inlineimg" />
> 
> Bench Roman. Put Seth up to bat.
Click to expand...

I doubt ronda,roman or Seth had very huge impacts,last week had a Strong post PPV bump,that is all


----------



## AB81

ROLLINS said:


> Because, as was said, the third hour is never the highest rated hour of the 3.
> 
> Reading is fundamental.


fair point.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Overall, these ratings are not good, but that's nothing new. It is funny to see Hour 3 be the highest. Must have been because the Roman run in. :vince5 :reigns2

The bottom line is they are down 10.55% in year to year. WWE is tanking both in ratings and creatively. Smackdown may dip below 2million if this rating is a harbinger.


----------



## Sincere

MFR55 said:


> I doubt ronda,roman or Seth had very huge impacts,last week had a Strong post PPV bump,that is all


Maybe, time will tell. But even if that is the case, that still doesn't explain or account for the rising ratings hour to hour, as opposed to the falling ratings hour to hour, with the third hour being the strongest, rather than the weakest, which is almost always the case.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

AB81 said:


> I don't get why the rollins fan is happy when hour 3 was still below 3 million same as the whole show so Seth did'n add much to the 3rd hour.


Because Hour 3 is rarely the highest hour on RAW. Also, Hour 3 last night was comparable to last week's Hour 3 number. Fans were obviously interested in the title match.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Rollins didn't DRAW! He RETAINED the viewers from last week that otherwise tuned out of this godforsaken show.

The "see you next week" people started eating their words a long long time ago. There is no competition, there is no excuse. Something happened this year that caused a major drop, after it was relatively steady for a year, and caused viewership to not rebound after NBA. Which is, as far as I know, the first time this happened.

They went to the well too often. Literally nobody wanted that Wrestlemania main event in the first place, and not ending this Brock vs Reigns story right there and then, and now dragging it out over the whole summer in a terrifyingly bad way, involving another roided up no-talent, is a death sentence for this show.

If this doesn't rebound to at least 3 million flat, or 3.1-3.2 the month before Summerslam, I can only imagine what NFL season will do to this viewership.

Also, I have the theory that the announcement of their new TV deals took away the last shred of hope, that this show will get any better, so, some fans just gave up.
Who could possibly want to watch this kind of dreck on a weekly basis until 2024?


----------



## Ibracadabra

The real reason for the drop in ratings was no ELIAS!!!! 



I DO NOT KNOW WHO TO WALK WITH! OR WHAT WWE STANDS FOR!


----------



## Seafort

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Rollins didn't DRAW! He RETAINED the viewers from last week that otherwise tuned out of this godforsaken show.


The only question is - where will ratings be three months from now. There will be a brief uptick in August when Cena, Undertaker, and Lesnar make appearances, but after that the only significant card WWE has to play is Ambrose. The rest of the roster is being badly overexposed.


----------



## The Renegade

Listen man, Raw has clearly been in a holding pattern since Mania and has only truly gotten rolling again since MITB. They’ve shuffled the roster, repositioned a lot of folks, and are building in a steady direction that they’ll pay off of for the remainder of the year. Post shakeup, summer time WWE is essentially the beginning of a book where they introduce the setting, characters and generally set the tone for the rest of the novel. Y’all gotta have some patience, lol. These ratings mean nothing right now.


----------



## DammitChrist

More fans watching for Seth Rollins and Dolph Ziggler last night :drose

What a good week this has been already :trips8


----------



## validreasoning

First six months of 2017 Raw averaged 3.08 million viewers live
First six months of 2018 Raw averaged 3.12 million viewers live

First six months of 2017 Smackdown averaged 2.56 million viewers live
First six months of 2018 SD averaged 2.5 million viewers live


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.641M
H2- 2.822M
H3- 2.658M
3H- 2.707M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 6.85% / + 0.181M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 5.81% / - 0.164M )
H3 Vs H1 ( + 0.64% / + 0.017M )
7/2/18 Vs 6/25/18 ( + 1.65% / + 0.044M )

Demo (7/2/18 Vs 6/25/18):
H1- 0.850D Vs 0.840D
H2- 0.900D Vs 0.860D
H3- 0.900D Vs 0.890D
3H- 0.883D Vs 0.863D

Note: RAW is 5th, 3rd & 2nd by hourly demo & 5th, 2nd & 4th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (7/2/18 Vs 7/3/17):
H1- 2.641M Vs 2.825M
H2- 2.822M Vs 2.912M
H3- 2.658M Vs 2.780M
3H- 2.707M Vs 2.839M ( - 4.65% / - 0.132M )

Demo (7/2/18 Vs 7/3/17):
H1- 0.850D Vs 0.890D
H2- 0.900D Vs 0.950D
H3- 0.900D Vs 0.930D
3H- 0.883D Vs 0.923D

Note: RAW this week last year was 4th, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Nothing can save this.


----------



## Bink77

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Nothing can save this.


They aren't even trying. Just wait til September when they really throw in the towel.


----------



## AB81

Seth was in the highest Hour again but still terrible rating for Raw and its not even football season yet.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Up from last week. 2nd straight week in a row Seth is in the highest rated hour without it being the usual first hour as the highest. I'd have to think this being a summer Holiday week in the US ain't going to do WWE any favors with ratings this week, either. Don't matter though with the money they'll be pulling in next year. Some how these numbers netted them billions of dollars for each show.

:trips8


----------



## AVX

Summer is a slow time for most of television. This is when WWE hits the road like mad though considering all the kids are out of school. I would be giving vacations to the boys during the summer, bring them in only for tv to get summerslam built up.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

As poor a rating as this is, RAW is Port a Potty beat last week in total viewers and the demo. Who would have that shit drew anything other than flies? :trolldog


----------



## RainmakerV2

Hard to watch a pro wrestling show with no world champion. It renders shit basically meaningless. Not saying having the Universal title on the show would spike numbers...but gawd it couldn't hurt.


----------



## JDP2016

AVX said:


> Summer is a slow time for most of television. This is when WWE hits the road like mad though considering all the kids are out of school. I would be giving vacations to the boys during the summer, bring them in only for tv to get summerslam built up.


This is the time when WWE should ramp things up. Most of tv is showing reruns. The kids are out of school and the NFL is still months away. They have ZERO competition right now. They just don't care.

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## xio8ups

Would you bother trying if someone gave you 1 billion for a shit product


----------



## PrettyLush

Give Seth the UC title already


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Rough numbers every week for awhile now. Said the same thing in the SD thread.


----------



## 751161

ROLLINS said:


> Rough numbers every week for awhile now. Said the same thing in the SD thread.


There's just no good storylines going on. I'd have to weed through the videos to find a story I'm remotely interested in. The only thing I feel like I'm keeping a close eye on is Seth/Dolph, but I'll be honest, it's mostly for match quality.

They need some big storylines before Summerslam, or the numbers will continue to be shocking. No reason for people to tune in Live when there's no surprises or big talking points.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Fourth Wall said:


> There's just no good storylines going on. I'd have to weed through the videos to find a story I'm remotely interested in. The only thing I feel like I'm keeping a close eye on is Seth/Dolph, but I'll be honest, it's mostly for match quality.
> 
> They need some big storylines before Summerslam, or the numbers will continue to be shocking. No reason for people to tune in Live when there's no surprises or big talking points.


I wonder if NBCU and FOX sit back and think, "What the hell did we get ourselves into?" These shows are just so boring and drab minus a segment or two for each show. Only thing worthwhile for this company right now is the Network, and that's thanks to NXT and the old stuff. Nothing having to do with the main rosters.


----------



## Bink77

You would think by now that USA WOULD care about the dwindling numbers... I KNOW FOX axes shows all the time for LOW ratings. Did WWE convince USA and FOX that ratings and watchability truly doesn't matter anymore?? Well fuck it, let's bring back Drexel's Class, Melrose Place and others cause ratings don't fucking matter anymore. Sheep.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

LOL

2.5
2.5
2.3

2.46 million average.

Yeah, Reigns opening with Bob and putting nobody McIntyre with Rollins to close the show was a brilliant idea


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

WWE is dead in the ratings. SDL may drop below 2m.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Seriously, you've got to stop building your show around Roman and another charisma vacuum. It's death.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Vince deserves it for not having a World Champion on the show...like ever these days. Keep going with that storyline, though.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.582M
H2- 2.508M
H3- 2.320M
3H- 2.470M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 2.87% / - 0.074M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 7.50% / - 0.188M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 10.15% / - 0.262M )
7/9/18 Vs 7/2/18 ( - 8.76% / - 0.237M )

Demo (7/9/18 Vs 7/2/18):
H1- 0.800D Vs 0.850D
H2- 0.790D Vs 0.900D
H3- 0.750D Vs 0.900D
3H- 0.780D Vs 0.883D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 3rd & 5th by hourly demo & 4th, 5th & 9th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (7/9/18 Vs 7/10/17):
H1- 2.582M Vs 3.049M
H2- 2.508M Vs 3.074M
H3- 2.320M Vs 2.905M
3H- 2.470M Vs 3.009M ( - 17.91% / - 0.539M )

Demo (7/9/18 Vs 7/10/17):
H1- 0.800D Vs 1.000D
H2- 0.790D Vs 0.970D
H3- 0.750D Vs 0.950D
3H- 0.780D Vs 0.973D

Note: RAW this week last year was 6th, 7th & 8th by hourly demo & 5th, 4th & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Awful numbers. People didn't give a shit about Roman/Lashley and their brawl got no hype for the rest of the show. Rollins/McIntyre was no help either.

Both shows numbers are trash lately. I wonder how much they'll pick up for the usual Summerslam-build gain?


Also WOW at that drop year over year. What happened? It seemed like numbers were consistently a bit higher than last year's up until recently (since Ronda's "suspension?")


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Those numbers are atrocious for RAW, especially in the demo. Might this be the lowest rated RAW of all time? And on a go home show to boot.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

If Brock holds onto the title through the Fall when the NFL season is here, Brock might go down as the lowest rated champion ever. :lmao


----------



## 751161

Those ratings for a go home RAW.












ROLLINS said:


> If Brock holds onto the title through the Fall when the NFL season is here, Brock might go down as the lowest rated champion ever. :lmao


BROCK IS A DRAW DAMMIT :vince

I bet if he was announced, it would be pretty much the same. :lol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

According to the Observer board, looks like this is the 2nd lowest rated Raw only behind the 9/26/16 episode that went up against the Trump/Hillary debate.


----------



## southshield

Its obvious WWE doesn't care for their shows so why should we. Its been the same show for the last month basically.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Down almost 18% year to year in total viewers and down .193 in the demo which is staggering.

Can any of this be attributed to older viewers watching the Brett Cavanaugh Supreme Court announcement? I doubt it, but I am at a loss for words.


----------



## 751161

I would have been interested to see the Extreme Rules PPV buys for this year pre-WWE Network days.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

I legit forgot there was a PPV this sunday during the show. RAW really is that irrelevant.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Interpretative dance to reflect WWE'S ratings.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

NBC and FOX look like the biggest suckers in the world right now.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I wonder what SD's numbers will be this week. They actually hit 2 million even last week.

:trips8


----------



## InexorableJourney

Teen Mom a hair away from crushing RAW.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

ROLLINS said:


> According to the Observer board, looks like this is the 2nd lowest rated Raw only behind the *9/26/16* episode that went up against the *Trump/Hillary debate*.


That Raw actually had slightly more overall viewers albeit a lower 3rd hour.

*H1-2.850M
H2-2.381M
H3-2.203M
3H-2.478M*


----------



## A-C-P

Reigns vs Ratings


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> That Raw actually had slightly more overall viewers albeit a lower 3rd hour.
> 
> *H1-2.850M
> H2-2.381M
> H3-2.203M
> 3H-2.478M*


Any numbers for the demos?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> That Raw actually had slightly more overall viewers albeit a lower 3rd hour.
> 
> *H1-2.850M
> H2-2.381M
> H3-2.203M
> 3H-2.478M*


That's what I'm saying. That Raw had more viewers. Interesting that the 3rd hour was lower than last night's. Thanks for posting.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> Any numbers for the demos?


*Demo (9/26/16):
H1- 0.970D
H2- 0.790D
H3- 0.740D
3H- 0.833D*

*(9/26/16) RAW was 12th, 14th & 15th by hourly demo.*


----------



## Zappers

In a world of DVR's. It's amazing people put so much stock in "live only" ratings.


----------



## ShadowSucks92

I haven't watched RAW in months (or SmackDown for that matter) and I haven't been a full time watcher in years and its not only because it starts at 1am here in the UK (though that is a big factor) but its because nothing ever happens on the show. I mean over the past few months have I missed anything that has been absolute must see and it will get me to tune into either next weeks RAW or the PPV? I'd rather sleep.


----------



## Zappers

ShadowSucks92 said:


> I haven't watched RAW in months (or SmackDown for that matter) and I haven't been a full time watcher in years and its not only because it starts at 1am here in the UK (though that is a big factor) but its because nothing ever happens on the show. I mean over the past few months have I missed anything that has been absolute must see and it will get me to tune into either next weeks RAW or the PPV? I'd rather sleep.


You don't watch anymore, you totally didn't see any RAW, Smackdown, or PPV in 2018. No Wrestlemania, nada.


:bitchplz


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Zappers said:


> In a world of DVR's. It's amazing people put so much stock in "live only" ratings.


Yes, DVRs. 
That's the reason.
As we all know, the possibility of taping live shows only emerged in 2014, when the ratings decline really accelerated.

Nobody taped Raw in 2011, no sir.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *Demo (9/26/16):
> H1- 0.970D
> H2- 0.790D
> H3- 0.740D
> 3H- 0.833D*



Thank you. So this show was lower in both total viewers and the demo. RAW IS RECORDS. :trips8


----------



## ShadowSucks92

Zappers said:


> You don't watch anymore, you totally didn't see any RAW, Smackdown, or PPV in 2018. No Wrestlemania, nada.
> 
> 
> :bitchplz


I said I haven't been a full time watcher of RAW or SmackDown in years. I still watch the PPVs (though not live due to it starting at 1am) and yes I did watch RAW & SmackDown after WM but I class them as big shows like the RAW 25 show. I'll watch shows like that but on a week to week basis I haven't done so in years. NXT and 205 Live though I'll watch every week.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SD goes up against the MLB All Star Game next week. Should be interesting.


----------



## Ace

Can't blame people for tuning out, it's a chore to watch Raw. Nothing remotely entertaining or interesting ever happens on the show.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

InexorableJourney said:


> Teen Mom a hair away from crushing RAW.


Put Nia on there and it will.


----------



## JDP2016

20 years ago, RAW was must see TV. When I had to work nights, I would tape RAW and rush home Tuesday morning so I could watch it. Now I don't give a shit. Partly because I can catch the "highlights" on Youtube but even if I was at home on a Monday night, I'd still find something else to do besides watch RAW.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Teen Mom is actually pretty decent, not ashamed to admit it. We DVR it every week and I watch it with my wife most weeks sometime during the week. It actually has better story-telling than WWE (outside of NXT), believe it or not.


----------



## Ace

ROLLINS said:


> NBC and FOX look like the biggest suckers in the world right now.


 Do they even follow the WWE? They should have seen this fall coming. WWE doesn't have a good standing with the fans and usually they criticize how poor most of their shows are. Rarely do you have fans actually praise the WWE for doing well. 

The hardcores were the ones keeping the ratings steady, but now they've pushed them out the door. I'd consider myself a hardcore and I quit watching Raw/SD few weeks back and it's up against no competition where I live.


----------



## 751161

ROLLINS said:


> Teen Mom is actually pretty decent, not ashamed to admit it. We DVR it every week and I watch it with my wife most weeks sometime during the week. It actually has better story-telling than WWE (outside of NXT), believe it or not.


Porn has better storytelling than WWE at this point. :bosque


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Emperor said:


> Do they even follow the WWE? They should have seen this fall coming. WWE doesn't have a good standing with the fans and usually they criticize how poor most of their shows are. Rarely do you have fans actually praise the WWE for doing well.
> 
> The hardcores were the ones keep the ratings steady, but now they've pushed them out the door. I'd consider myself a hardcore and I quit watching Raw/SD few weeks back and it's up against no competition where I live.


I made that same post about NBC and FOX on the Observer board a few mins ago. And some guy replied to me that "Well, Raw and SD are the highest rated shows on cable on Monday and Tuesday nights."

Like, great. But with a dwindling audience is it still worth it for NBC and FOX to pay WWE a BILLION DOLLARS EACH over the next 5 years? I mean, what will the viewership be 3 years from now? And even in 3 years, they'll only be into the 2nd year of these TV contracts since they don't start until late next year. These 2 companies might be regretting these 2 contracts in a couple of years.

The last 3 weeks of Raws (since Seth has lost the IC Title) have been lower than any 3 week stretch of when Seth had the IC Title. Eat shit, Vince. Love it.


----------



## Natecore

ROLLINS said:


> NBC and FOX look like the biggest suckers in the world right now.


Idk, people actually watched the show. 

Real, living human beings decided their limited time on this planet was best spent watching a 2018 Raw.


----------



## chronoxiong

And NBC paid a shit ton of money to keep this show on the air. Just unreal. This is such a horrible number for this week. Vince continues to think the Universal Title being missing is a good idea? Idiot.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Natecore said:


> Idk, people actually watched the show.
> 
> Real, living human beings decided their limited time on this planet was best spent watching a 2018 Raw.


Yes, but they're paying WWE a BILLION dollars each for these shit-shows.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

The Fourth Wall said:


> Porn has better storytelling than WWE at this point. :bosque


And better written comedy, too, I might add.

"This Ain't Seinfeld" has RAW beaten with flying colors.


----------



## Ace

ROLLINS said:


> Yes, but they're paying WWE a BILLION dollars each for these shit-shows.


Fox: It was a prank bro.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Braun's porta a potty segment was a harbinger of the ratings going into the toilet. :braun


----------



## Ace

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> Braun's porta a potty segment was a harbinger of the ratings going into the toilet. :braun


 The Austin 3:16 moment of our generation :drose


----------



## MC

The Fourth Wall said:


> Porn has better storytelling than WWE at this point. :bosque


You say that as a joke but depending on what you watch, some do. 

:nak


----------



## DoucheyLifter

That's what I said, watch Fox have buyer's remorse. Don't know what will happen at that point, but if they're disappointed and want to can it, they're going to try and find some legal loopholes to do so, or swallow their pride and dump it off to FS1 until the end. Sad too b/c they could've gotten a wrestling company for far cheaper, done about 1/4th or 1/2 of the ratings even, and would've been better off.


----------



## Piper's Pit

I really wonder what's going through the minds of the execs at NBC and FOX right now, were they aware that WWE ratings are on a neverending decline and still offered WWE that ludicrous deal ?? If they weren't aware of WWE rating trends and are only now realizing the reality are they panicking ?? Planning on meeting with Vince and discussing ways to stop the bleed ?? 

The new deal I understand doesn't start for over a year and the way things are going by mid 2019 WWE will be lucky to be doing anything above 2.0.


----------



## InexorableJourney

Cross-overs, that's the answer!

For any new TV shows the stars become the guest hosts.

RAW/SDL make perfect adverts for other programmes on their networks.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

MC 16 said:


> You say that as a joke but depending on what you watch, some do.
> 
> :nak


Some of the late 70's, early 80's ones are pretty legit. :focus


----------



## DoucheyLifter

Was it worth 1 billion dollars though? Seriously, you could've put Impact, ROH, Lucha, NWA, MLW, NJPW, your OWN brand new fed, etc for a fraction of the cost (25 million even, at the absolute most). If FOX started up its own fed, or purchased one already established, would've been far cheaper. Would it get 2 million viewers? Unlikely, but 500k or even up to 1 million would've been more beneficial IMO and saved up a lot of money. Same goes for USA. WWE is indeed the biggest company in the world, no doubt, but with their valuation, is it worth truly 1 billion for 2 hours of Smackdown a week? Or Raw a week on USA? Not worth it imo. USA's previous deal with worth it, 400 million for both.

Pretty sure offering Impact or anyone even 5 million they would've taken it in a heartbeat. Just saying.


----------



## MC

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> Some of the late 70's, early 80's ones are pretty legit. :focus


You can say that again. :xavier


----------



## InexorableJourney

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> Some of the late 70's, early 80's ones are pretty legit. :focus


Diff'rent strokes.


----------



## the_hound

hunter if you're reading this by any chance (most likely wont be) don't take over the main show yet, wait till vince and buck tooth madonna pass on then take over, you do the shows and steph runs the day to day stuff


----------



## Chrome

God damn that's a terrible rating. :damn


----------



## AB81

ROLLINS said:


> SD goes up against the MLB All Star Game next week. Should be interesting.


That means Raw goes up aginst the home run derby so that should be fun aswell.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

AB81 said:


> That means Raw goes up aginst the home run derby so that should be fun aswell.


It could be, but the All Star game itself is always the bigger draw and by far the highlight of the MLB All Star week.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*WWE Raw rating for the July 2 edition

Monday’s WWE Raw scored a 1.73 rating, down from the 1.80 rating the show drew last week. Raw averaged 2.47 million viewers, down from the 2.707 million average from last week.

Powell’s POV: Disappointing numbers heading into Extreme Rules. The show will be opposed by the MLB Home Run Derby on ESPN next week so it will be interesting to see why type of number they can generate with competition while coming out of the pay-per-view. The July 10, 2017 edition of Raw delivered a 2.04 rating with 3.009 million viewers.*

https://prowrestling.net/site/2018/07/10/wwe-raw-rating-for-the-july-2-edition-2/

Lower than the 1.75R against the presidential debate. Possibly the lowest rating since 96/97.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I remember when in 2012-2015 I was told in here that ratings in WWE would never get worse than what they were in that time period.

So much for that.

:ha


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

ROLLINS said:


> I remember when in 2012-2015 I was told in here that ratings in WWE would never get worse than what they were in that time period.
> 
> So much for that.
> 
> :ha


https://www.cagesideseats.com/wwe-raw/2012/10/9/3480978/wwe-raw-ratings-rebound-with-vince-mcmahons-return-to-average-4-million-viewers

When even figures over 2.5R and over 3.5M were dealt with drastically.


----------



## machomanjohncena

People are blowing this out of proportion. It was still the 4nd highest rated show of the night, and 2nd among the 18-49 demographic.


----------



## Chrome

ROLLINS said:


> I remember when in 2012-2015 I was told in here that ratings in WWE would never get worse than what they were in that time period.
> 
> So much for that.
> 
> :ha


Five years ago they did these numbers for the 7/8/13 Raw:

1 - 3.790 million
2 - 4.308 million
3 - 4.403 million

Damn what a falloff.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Chrome said:


> Five years ago they did these numbers for the 7/8/13 Raw:
> 
> 1 - 3.790 million
> 2 - 4.308 million
> 3 - 4.403 million
> 
> Damn what a falloff.


DAMN. Two different hours (and the last two hours, at that) well above 4 million viewers. That's insane. WWE can only touch a number like that on the night after WM.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

machomanjohncena said:


> People are blowing this out of proportion.* It was still the 4nd highest rated show of the night, and 2nd among the 18-49 demographic.*


Which is absolutely astounding when you think about it..


----------



## Seafort

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> Down almost 18% year to year in total viewers and down .193 in the demo which is staggering.
> 
> Can any of this be attributed to older viewers watching the Brett Cavanaugh Supreme Court announcement? I doubt it, but I am at a loss for words.


I posted this back on June 5th in this thread:

_The bigger question in the short term is this - how quickly will the audience erode to under 2M? This happened before at the same post-WrestleMania period. The company basically phone it in.

The company responded last year by bringing back John Cena, and in the past a terrible rating usually led to a Vince McMahon appearance the following week. 

But what if they don't care this time? What if things continue at exactly the same pace for the next three months? I think we may go under 2M by SummerSlam._​


----------



## LiableToPay

What happened to the savior of the 3rd hour Seth Rollins? :lol I have a hearty laugh when someone insinuates that this guy is a draw in any form or fashion.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

LiableToPay said:


> What happened to the savior of the 3rd hour Seth Rollins? :lol I have a hearty laugh when someone insinuates that this guy is a draw in any form or fashion.


He was in the highest rated hours for the past 2 weeks in an hour 2 and an hour 3 in consecutive weeks. At least someone is doing something. 

But this is what they get when they prolong this Brock rub for someone that absolutely gets shit on every single week. :lol


----------



## Eric Casas

Those numbers are a fucking embarrassment.


----------



## Randy Lahey

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *Viewership (7/9/18 Vs 7/10/17):
> H1- 2.582M Vs 3.049M
> H2- 2.508M Vs 3.074M
> H3- 2.320M Vs 2.905M
> 3H- 2.470M Vs 3.009M ( - 17.91% / - 0.539M )
> ]*


*


Lowest rating of all time. Has to be. It's too bad gerweck doesn't post the actual rating numbers. This one had to be close to 1.50.

Fox is going to put Smackdown on FoxSports 2 or some regional channel at this rate.

USA Network simply buying a loss leader. Reruns of The Office and Seinfeld would draw better than that.*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Both shows are hemorrhaging viewers at an alarming rat. I'm not sure what they can really do about it other than drastically changing both shows.


----------



## DammitChrist

LiableToPay said:


> What happened to the savior of the 3rd hour Seth Rollins? :lol I have a hearty laugh when someone insinuates that this guy is a draw in any form or fashion.


Pretty much nobody in WWE is a draw. You're pretty much laughing over nothing, but hey, you're probably not going to like the recent live reports of Seth Rollins receiving the same level of pops as Undertaker did at the Madison Square Garden arena. Plus, Rollins is still the most over Raw talent atm. That's something your favorite can only dream about pulling that off :lol



ROLLINS said:


> He was in the highest rated hours for the past 2 weeks in an hour 2 and an hour 3 in consecutive weeks. At least someone is doing something.
> 
> But this is what they get when they prolong this Brock rub for someone that absolutely gets shit on every single week. :lol


I wouldn't bother with him, dude. He's the type that brags about YouTube views :lmao


----------



## Chrome

Tbh, I don't really see people talking about Youtube views that much nowadays. A year or 2 ago it seemed like people wouldn't shut up about it.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Hell, even the RAW and Smackdown threads don't draw anymore. I'd rather see them put on a better product and not worry about who draws what. Spoiler alert. Who draws nowadays?


Spoiler: the truth


----------



## The Masked Avenger

When I see the rating numbers for like last years show or the one from 5 years ago I wonder what was on that show. What was the draw?

Edit: I went back and looked at the show from July 8th 2013 and this was the card - 
Daniel Bryan v Sheamus
Rollins and Reigns v Tons of Funk
Chris Jericho v Curtis Axel
Sin Cara v Alberto Del Rio
Kane v Christian
AJ Lee and Alicia Fox v Kaitlyn and Layla
Randy Orton v CM Punk

Riveting.


----------



## Zappers

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Yes, DVRs.
> That's the reason.
> As we all know, the possibility of taping live shows only emerged in 2014, when the ratings decline really accelerated.
> 
> Nobody taped Raw in 2011, no sir.


First off, I never said a show couldn't be taped before a specific date. People recorded stuff in the 80's. Bringing up 2011 and taping has no relevance in this conversation.

Second, your attempt at being sarcastic dosen't work here. DVR ing is basically peoples lives now. Streaming, On Demand is king. People are cutting the cord left and right. Bingeing is standard. People today don't sit around watching live TV like they used to.

It's a FACT that people watch shows that are recorded or On Demand more than ever. Those PPV's each month. You can start them from the beginning anytime you want after start time. You can pause anytime you want. You can watch them, just about anywhere you want. No need to sit on a couch and watch second for second live.



ShadowSucks92 said:


> I said I haven't been a full time watcher of RAW or SmackDown in years. I still watch the PPVs (though not live due to it starting at 1am) and yes I did watch RAW & SmackDown after WM but I class them as big shows like the RAW 25 show. I'll watch shows like that but on a week to week basis I haven't done so in years. NXT and 205 Live though I'll watch every week.


Ok, I feel you missed a lot of good stuff imho.


----------



## Isuzu

DammitC said:


> Pretty much nobody in WWE is a draw. You're pretty much laughing over nothing, but hey, you're probably not going to like the recent live reports of Seth Rollins receiving the same level of pops as Undertaker did at the Madison Square Garden arena. Plus, Rollins is still the most over Raw talent atm. That's something your favorite can only dream about pulling that off :lol
> 
> 
> 
> I wouldn't bother with him, dude. He's the type that brags about YouTube views :lmao




Bottom line is Seth Rollins has zero mainstream crossover appeal, barely anyone if at all outside the wwe universe knows who he is. Does he have potential to be that megastar? that's debatable, but as of right now he is not the guy to carry the torch, to bring in viewers and people to arena's.

The search continues for that elusive babyface megastar.


----------



## komba

I think they have a babyface megastar in Braun but whatever.

The issue is opening the show the last two weeks with Roman and Lashley. Two guys who have physical appeal but just aren't good enough on the mic. On a bigger scale, the issue is story telling. Wrestling will always be more about acting and telling stories than actual wrestling. For a while now, the story telling just isn't interesting enough.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The troll from 2011.

:mj4

The site passed you by, brah.


----------



## Marv95

And the NFL is 2 months away.

Dude. The recent Loud House half hour episode and Double Dare's return outdrew them. Actual kids' shows are doing just as good as Raw. That's _sad_.


----------



## Zappers

In the Top 4 shows on Cable for the week of July 2- 8th.

Only thing that beat them was World Cup.

Number one show on Monday in all Cable.


----------



## validreasoning

Marv95 said:


> And the NFL is 2 months away.
> 
> Dude. The recent Loud House half hour episode and Double Dare's return outdrew them. Actual kids' shows are doing just as good as Raw. That's _sad_.


Most recent loudhouse episode on June 28th did 1.216 million viewers and a 0.24 in the 18-49 demo

Most recent double dare was last night which did 810,000 viewers and a 0.18 in the 18-49 demo. There was one on Monday night that did 795,000 and a 0.19 in the 18-49.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

RAW 1.73. Never thought I'd see that number. Surely they must be reaching their floor? I cannot imagine the bottom dropping out because the WWE fanbase is rather stable.


----------



## The_It_Factor

As I predicted last year, and I was right, nfl’s impact on viewership is quite slight these days.. There’s very little overlap anymore between the normal people that watch nfl and niche WWE fans.


----------



## xio8ups

Do you really think vince cares about ratings anymore. When he gets billion dollar deals.


----------



## Monterossa

Seth Freakin' Boring actually burnt down RAW. :lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I actually commissioned certain smileys to commemorate historic low numbers. Here are the first two:
















Who should get the 1.73 treatment?


----------



## Ace

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> I actually commissioned certain smileys to commemorate historic low numbers. Here are the first two:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who should get the 1.73 treatment?


 Roman or Drew?

Drew's first big main and Roman-Lashley was heavily featured.

I don't think it's fair to blame Rollins because his last few matches have drawn well.


----------



## Chrome

Emperor said:


> Roman or Drew?
> 
> Drew's first big main and Roman-Lashley was heavily featured.
> 
> I don't think it's fair to blame Rollins because his last few matches have drawn well.


May as well be Rollins to complete the Shield trifecta.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Emperor said:


> Roman or Drew?
> 
> Drew's first big main and Roman-Lashley was heavily featured.
> 
> I don't think it's fair to blame Rollins because his last few matches have drawn well.


I think both were champion when they were made. Can't use absentee Brock though. Here is another.







Just a gradual decline and 1.73 might not be the nadir. Honestly, I blame the bookers, but the ratings threads used to be full on mark wars and those smileys were fun to use. Gotta blame somebody though :reigns2


----------



## LiableToPay

One thing's for sure that's finally this stupid myth of Seth Rollins being some sort of a draw can be put to rest. 2.2 fucking million :lol.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Chrome said:


> May as well be Rollins to complete the Shield trifecta.


What?
Rollins drew a 2.7 million hour 3 two weeks ago, actually drawing more than hour 1, that was exceptional in this day and age!

Should be either Reigns or Bob.
And since Reigns is their top story, he's THE GUY.


----------



## LiableToPay

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> What?
> Rollins drew a 2.7 million hour 3 two weeks ago, actually drawing more than hour 1, that was exceptional in this day and age!
> 
> Should be either Reigns or Bob.
> And since Reigns is their top story, he's THE GUY.


Then why the fuck couldn't he bring his hour to even 2.5 million this time? And this is a guy who actually HAS been booked well in the past few months (something even his fans admit). A luxury most talents haven't had.

2.2 FUCKING MILLION.

That's diabolical, and Seth Rollins is fully responsible for it.


----------



## DammitChrist

LiableToPay said:


> One thing's for sure that's finally this stupid myth of Seth Rollins being some sort of a draw can be put to rest. 2.2 fucking million :lol.


Seth Rollins's match with Dolph Ziggler a couple of weeks ago managed to have its 3rd hour draw higher compared to the first 2 hours; which almost never happens nowadays. 

Hell, that Raw episode where he wrestled for 65 minutes in that Gauntlet match managed to retain over 3 million viewers; which is also interesting because plenty of folks on here claimed that "nobody" watches for the wrestling.

Keep being bitter about Rollins though :lol



> That's diabolical, and *Seth Rollins is fully responsible for it*.


The hatred is real here :mj4


----------



## LiableToPay

DammitC said:


> Seth Rollins's match with Dolph Ziggler a couple of weeks ago managed to have its 3rd hour draw higher compared to the first 2 hours; which almost never happens nowadays.
> 
> Hell, that Raw episode where he wrestled for 65 minutes in that Gauntlet match managed to retain over 3 million viewers; which is also interesting because plenty of folks on here claimed that "nobody" watches for wrestling.
> 
> Keep being bitter about Rollins though :lol
> 
> 
> 
> The hatred is real here :mj4


Yeah and then he delivered a 2.2 million this week :lol, so as per latest data.. he can't draw for shit. Because if he could, he at least wouldn't have let the situation get so horrible, and this is a guy who has got the best booking in WWE in 2018.

Keep making excuses though :lol. They're pretty funny.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Without the quarter hour breakdowns, it's hard to gauge who drew what.


----------



## DammitChrist

LiableToPay said:


> *Then why the fuck couldn't he bring his hour to even 2.5 million this time?* And this is a guy who actually HAS been booked well in the past few months (something even his fans admit). A luxury most talents haven't had.
> 
> 2.2 FUCKING MILLION.
> 
> That's diabolical, and Seth Rollins is fully responsible for it.





LiableToPay said:


> *Yeah and then he delivered a 2.2 million this week *:lol, so as per latest data.. he can't draw for shit. Because if he could, he at least wouldn't have let the situation get so horrible, and this is a guy who has got the best booking in WWE in 2018.
> 
> Keep making excuses though :lol. They're pretty funny.





> H1- 2.582M
> *H2- 2.508M*
> H3- 2.320M
> 3H- 2.470M
> 
> 
> 
> Viewership:
> H2 Vs H1 ( - 2.87% / - 0.074M )
> H3 Vs H2 ( - 7.50% / - 0.188M )
> H3 Vs H1 ( - 10.15% / - 0.262M )
> 7/9/18 Vs 7/2/18 ( - 8.76% / - 0.237M )
> 
> Demo (7/9/18 Vs 7/2/18):
> H1- 0.800D Vs 0.850D
> H2- 0.790D Vs 0.900D
> H3- 0.750D Vs 0.900D
> 3H- 0.780D Vs 0.883D
> 
> Note: RAW is 2nd, 3rd & 5th by hourly demo & 4th, 5th & 9th by hourly viewership.
> 
> 
> 
> Viewership (7/9/18 Vs 7/10/17):
> H1- 2.582M Vs 3.049M
> H2- 2.508M Vs 3.074M
> H3- 2.320M Vs 2.905M
> 3H- 2.470M Vs 3.009M ( - 17.91% / - 0.539M )
> 
> Demo (7/9/18 Vs 7/10/17):
> H1- 0.800D Vs 1.000D
> H2- 0.790D Vs 0.970D
> H3- 0.750D Vs 0.950D
> 3H- 0.780D Vs 0.973D
> 
> Note: RAW this week last year was 6th, 7th & 8th by hourly demo & 5th, 4th & 3rd by hourly viewership.


Except his hour DID manage to reach 2.5 million. He was ALSO in the 2nd hour too :lmao

What excuses? I literally just pointed out instances where Rollins was involved in hours that did better than the other 2 did. I like how you conveniently ignore previous weeks where he somehow managed to be in the highest rated hours.

@SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT ; is correct. There are no weekly breakdowns for each episode, so it's extremely hard to tell which talent is really drawing viewers; but to say that Rollins is "fully responsible" for luring away viewers (when there are plenty of recent instances that seem to contradict this) is pretty bold on your part, and just reeks of your hatred for Rollins :lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

DammitC said:


> Except his hour DID manage to reach 2.5 million. He was ALSO in the 2nd hour too :lmao
> 
> What excuses? I literally just pointed out instances where Rollins was involved in hours that did better than the other 2 did. I like how you conveniently ignore previous weeks where he somehow managed to be in the highest rated hours.
> 
> @SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT ; is correct. There are no weekly breakdowns for each episode, so it's extremely hard to tell which talent is really drawing viewers; but to say that Rollins is "fully responsible" for luring away viewers (when there are plenty of recent instances that seem to contradict this) is pretty bold on your part, and just reeks of your hatred for Rollins :lol



It's a group effort so they all share some blame. I'd give the lionshare to the writers who craft a show that gets harder to watch by the second.


----------



## adamclark52

xio8ups said:


> Do you really think vince cares about ratings anymore. When he gets billion dollar deals.


he might not but Fox will,


----------



## Adam Cool

adamclark52 said:


> he might not but Fox will,


only Sports and and Shitty Political shows that Out of touch Boomers watch gets high ratings nowadays


----------



## DoucheyLifter

Apparently the great Paul Heyman also wrote up many of the segments too. :lmao What a joke, so much for that overrated hack. "PAUL IS A GENIUS!" - yeah, a genius at getting a 1.78 rating! :lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## A-C-P

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> I actually commissioned certain smileys to commemorate historic low numbers. Here are the first two:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who should get the 1.73 treatment?


May as well blame Bob :lashley


----------



## virus21

DoucheyLifter said:


> Apparently the great Paul Heyman also wrote up many of the segments too. :lmao What a joke, so much for that overrated hack. "PAUL IS A GENIUS!" - yeah, a genius at getting a 1.78 rating! :lmao :lmao :lmao


In all fairness, he has Vince and Steph filtering him and when the show has been in a down turn for almost a decade, yeah...


----------



## DoucheyLifter

virus21 said:


> In all fairness, he has Vince and Steph filtering him and when the show has been in a down turn for almost a decade, yeah...


Oh God here we go! Internet apologists in full mode to defend Heyman. Heyman is an overrated hack. He's been an overrated hack for a while. There's every excuse in the world for him. Russo, Bischoff, and others have had far more success than Heyman, and yet they're ripped to shreds. Heyman's ECW never score above a 1.3 I believe in ratings, and his company went bankrupt. End of story.


----------



## Optikk is All Elite

WWE are on a free fall. Seriously when do they go for the emergency plan?


----------



## Seafort

optikk sucks said:


> WWE are on a free fall. Seriously when do they go for the emergency plan?


That's the thing. There is no "emergency plan". What is available are various levers that they can pull:

1. Bring back Dean Ambrose as soon as medically cleared

2. Bring back John Cena for an early SummerSlam build

3. Bring back Undertaker for an early SummerSlam build

4. Bring back Vince McMahon for onscreen segments

5. Continue the brand split, but return to a "RAW SuperShow" concept where Smackdown wrestlers are free to appear on the show. 

Any of these will create short-term ratings spikes. Phase them in over the next three months, and its enough to halt the bleeding until WWE gets to WrestleMania season.


----------



## Cowabunga

As someone who hasn't watched a WWE show since 2016, where do they get most of their money nowadays? Merch/Mattel and the Network? TV ratings for weekly shows seem low nowadays, but then again we're no longer in the 90s or the 00s where people still actually sat down on their sofa to watch TV.


----------



## Blade Runner

Cowabunga said:


> As someone who hasn't watched a WWE show since 2016, where do they get most of their money nowadays?


Saudi Arabia and FOX>


----------



## virus21

Seafort said:


> That's the thing. There is no "emergency plan". What is available are various levers that they can pull:
> 
> 1. Bring back Dean Ambrose as soon as medically cleared
> 
> 2. Bring back John Cena for an early SummerSlam build
> 
> 3. Bring back Undertaker for an early SummerSlam build
> 
> 4. Bring back Vince McMahon for onscreen segments
> 
> 5. Continue the brand split, but return to a "RAW SuperShow" concept where Smackdown wrestlers are free to appear on the show.
> 
> Any of these will create short-term ratings spikes. Phase them in over the next three months, and its enough to halt the bleeding until WWE gets to WrestleMania season.


I don't even think that will be enough anymore. The company is crashing creatively. They need to totally overhaul the product at this point. But since Vince is still getting money from elsewhere like FOX, he isn't inclined to do anything.


----------



## Optikk is All Elite

Seafort said:


> That's the thing. There is no "emergency plan". What is available are various levers that they can pull:
> 
> 1. Bring back Dean Ambrose as soon as medically cleared
> 
> 2. Bring back John Cena for an early SummerSlam build
> 
> 3. Bring back Undertaker for an early SummerSlam build
> 
> 4. Bring back Vince McMahon for onscreen segments
> 
> 5. Continue the brand split, but return to a "RAW SuperShow" concept where Smackdown wrestlers are free to appear on the show.
> 
> Any of these will create short-term ratings spikes. Phase them in over the next three months, and its enough to halt the bleeding until WWE gets to WrestleMania season.


agree with the guy above me, this won't do anything.


i'm sure they have contingency plans - i'm talking about drastic ideas that'll cost them a lot but will help them - ie rehauling the creative team and bringing in hollywood producers and writers. or bringing back a TV14 show. Stuff like this I mean.



people talking about funding from elsewhere - but if everyone stop watching, why would these companies still fund WWE?


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

If they had any other plan besides Reigns vs Lesner for 4 years now I think they would have done it by now. Vince is dead set on making Reigns a star and will die trying.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

According to Meltzer, this past Raw was the second lowest rated Raw ever. Second only to the Christmas 1996 episode, in which Sid was Champion for, FWIW.



DammitC said:


> Except his hour DID manage to reach 2.5 million. He was ALSO in the 2nd hour too :lmao
> 
> What excuses? I literally just pointed out instances where Rollins was involved in hours that did better than the other 2 did. I like how you conveniently ignore previous weeks where he somehow managed to be in the highest rated hours.
> 
> @SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT ; is correct. There are no weekly breakdowns for each episode, so it's extremely hard to tell which talent is really drawing viewers; but to say that Rollins is "fully responsible" for luring away viewers (when there are plenty of recent instances that seem to contradict this) is pretty bold on your part, and just reeks of your hatred for Rollins :lol


That dude made as hell that Seth was in the 2 highest rated hours the two previous weeks; hours that mostly are NOT the highest rated hours, in hours 2 and 3. :lmao He's mad as hell. 

And how great is it that as soon as Seth lost the IC Title, the number went down.

Meanwhile, the show is still known as the Roman Reigns show and this is known Reigns' era, and the show has experienced it's worst creative and viewership than anyother era in the history of wrestling. FACT. 

And this is all because of Vince's obsession with someone who is nothing more than a lousy look.


----------



## SPCDRI

At least when the other historically low rated shows were going on, there was WCW and ECW around, usually and its around a holiday. If WCW ran a Christmas show when RAW ran, what do you think the combined numbers of people watching pro wrestling on a Monday night in America were? Another one million people higher? This is tragic.


----------



## Monterossa

Americans will probably watch soccer before WWE nowadays, if the World Cup matches are being played at the same time as RAW. Because WWE shows are too retarded.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

How low do ratings have to get before they hit the panic button? Under 2 million for RAW? I could see it happening later this year when there's actually competition from football and basketball.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

RAW will go up due to ppv bounce but Vince will attribute it to the mention of Brock. :brock3


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.118M
H2- 2.859M
H3- 2.622M
3H- 2.866M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 8.31% / - 0.259M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 8.29% / - 0.237M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 15.91% / - 0.496M )
7/16/18 Vs 7/9/18 ( + 16.03% / + 0.396M )

Demo (7/16/18 Vs 7/9/18):
H1- 1.030D Vs 0.800D
H2- 0.950D Vs 0.790D
H3- 0.900D Vs 0.750D
3H- 0.960D Vs 0.780D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 6th, 8th & 11th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (7/16/18 Vs 7/17/17):
H1- 3.118M Vs 3.140M
H2- 2.859M Vs 3.237M
H3- 2.622M Vs 3.083M
3H- 2.866M Vs 3.153M ( - 9.10% / - 0.287M )

Demo (7/16/18 Vs 7/17/17):
H1- 1.030D Vs 1.030D
H2- 0.950D Vs 1.100D
H3- 0.900D Vs 1.080D
3H- 0.960D Vs 1.070D

Note: RAW this week last year was 5th, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 1: 3.1
Hour 2: 2.8
Hour 3: 2.6










Post PPV bump. All three hours up from last week. Still, nothing great, though, especially after a PPV.


----------



## Jedah

-9% from last year?

Nothing beyond what they deserve. They deserve much worse.


----------



## 751161

Showstopper said:


> Hour 1: 3.1
> Hour 2: 2.8
> Hour 3: 2.6
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post PPV bump. All three hours up from last week. Still, nothing great, though, especially after a PPV.


Yeah, it should be way higher after a PPV. But there were basically zero talking points after Extreme Rules. Extremely filler show, not to mention, just bad.

I don't actually think RAW was too terrible this week. Match quality was okay, with boring results. Segments weren't great though. Still needs to be a lot better considering we are on the road to Summerslam now. Big 4 deserves adequate build. Just matches alone ain't going to cut it. It's a shame it's Roman/Lashley II next week, if they'd picked a fresh match-up, I actually would have been more optimistic/excited for next week. Rematches are very boring.


----------



## Frost99

Still though despite "DA BUMP" when I'm trying to watch RAW all I keep hearing & seeing is.....


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Hour 3 shed nearly half a million viewers from Hour 1. Higher rating than last week, but with the bump that's not saying much. Down 9% year to year, but what's new?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

That's also against the HR derby. SD goes up against the all star game tonight.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Showstopper said:


> That's also against the HR derby. SD goes up against the all star game tonight.


The All Star game will kill them. Might even go below 2M. WWE tried to use Brock's uncertain status to lure in extra viewers, but there is nothing to draw in extra viewers for SDL except the "mighty" ppv "bump".


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> The All Star game will kill them. Might even go below 2M. WWE tried to use Brock's uncertain status to lure in extra viewers, but there is nothing to draw in extra viewers for SDL except the "mighty" ppv "bump".


Yeah, you're right. The state of the main rosters product are so bad, too. It's entirely on Vince.


----------



## xio8ups

people calling this rating a bump lolololol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Showstopper said:


> Yeah, you're right. The state of the main rosters product are so bad, too. It's entirely on Vince.


I almost think I can just copy/paste the same response every week in the ratings threads. Both shows are headed down the drain thanks to VKM.



xio8ups said:


> people calling this rating a bump lolololol


More like a ratings blip. :trolldog


----------



## InexorableJourney

ESPN crushing it.


----------



## AB81

Seth Rollins in the Main Event and the lowest rated hour lmfao. Guess he not the ratings draw that rollins mark says he is.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Brock AND PPV fallout.
Without the Brock announcement, it would have been another 2.6 or so.

But let's celebrate because they managed to improve from the #1 worst rating of all time.


----------



## RainmakerV2

Considering they were against the derby and a big news night with Trump and Putin....Thats not bad.


----------



## xio8ups

seth rollins couldn't draw flies on shit.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Let's not pretend or spin it. The rating was higher than last week but still down from last year. The last few Smackdowns and RAWS have been wearisome television. Smackdown manageed to reverse that trend tonight. RAW needs to follow suit.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

xio8ups said:


> seth rollins couldn't draw flies on shit.


Funny. The two previous weeks before these, he was in the highest rated hours in 2 hours that are rarely the highest rated hours (2 & 3) and ratings went down since he lost the IC Title.

How about people that Vince continually blows nonstop start to draw a rating.



SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> Let's not pretend or spin it. The rating was higher than last week but still down from last year. The last few Smackdowns and RAWS have been wearisome television. Smackdown manageed to reverse that trend tonight. RAW needs to follow suit.


Good or bad show, I doubt the numbers change too much depending on that, especially in the middle of a show. Given the Trump stuff and the HR derby, it's a decent number for this era's numbers. Oh yeah, and the fact that this show never has their World Champion show up on it. Like...ever. At least SD has that going for it even when the quality of the show is bad. Raw doesn't have that. EVER. People need to start taking that into account because it's a HUGE factor.


----------



## Chrome

To think 2-3 years ago, they were getting these kind of numbers only during the football season, now they get them in July lol. Be interesting to see what the numbers look like when MNF does come back this year.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Showstopper said:


> Good or bad show, I doubt the numbers change too much depending on that, especially in the middle of a show. Given the Trump stuff and the HR derby, it's a decent number for this era's numbers. Oh yeah, and the fact that this show never has their World Champion show up on it. Like...ever. At least SD has that going for it even when the quality of the show is bad. Raw doesn't have that. EVER. People need to start taking that into account because it's a HUGE factor.



I like Brock but his reign has been cancerous to RAW. It's even managed to diminish my opinion of him because I used to love him. Now I want him to drop the title and, well I was going to say GET OFF MY TV SCREEN, but his absentee ass is never on tv. I seriously hope he loses the title well before Mania XXXV.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> I like Brock but his reign has been cancerous to RAW. It's even managed to diminish my opinion of him because I used to love him. Now I want him to drop the title and, well I was going to say GET OFF MY TV SCREEN, but his absentee ass is never on tv. I seriously hope he loses the title well before Mania XXXV.


Yep. And the funniest part is even when he does make his rare Raw appearance, HE DOESN'T EVEN WRESTLE/DEFEND THE TITLE. Like, at least AJ wrestles on SD. The Raw World Champion: *rarely shows up*, when he does; he doesn't wrestle, and most of the time doesn't say a word into the mic, let alone cut a promo.

:trips8

It's beyond a shit deal for anyone the Raw roster that actually wants to ascend to the top; well outside of one, of course. All of those guys who can't move up to the title scene to even have a match with Brock, deserve better. It's sickening. And it's not even like it's drawing or working with what the main goal of this is on the backside. Which is why I said it's a decent number; I want it to be worse. I gotta go to bed. Later everyone.


----------



## InexorableJourney

At the start of MNF last year Raw was a hair under 3million, I predict this year it will be 2.2million.


----------



## Makish16

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> I like Brock but his reign has been cancerous to RAW. It's even managed to diminish my opinion of him because I used to love him. Now I want him to drop the title and, well I was going to say GET OFF MY TV SCREEN, but his absentee ass is never on tv. I seriously hope he loses the title well before Mania XXXV.


Until people cheer Roman, wwe is going to keep trying to get heat for Brock 

Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Makish16 said:


> Until people cheer Roman, wwe is going to keep trying to get heat for Brock
> 
> Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk


The sun is going to rise in the west before Roman gets universal cheers.


----------



## LiableToPay

xio8ups said:


> seth rollins couldn't draw flies on shit.


True. It was further proven when the so called savior of the third hour delivered a fucking 2.2 million main eventing the show and then proceeding to get outshined by a god damn clock in a PPV main event. :lol What a waste of months of great booking.


----------



## The_It_Factor

People are still talking about drawing in 2018? No one has been a true “draw” in a VERY long time


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Talking about a Seth match, when Reigns matches get shit on ALL THE TIME.

:lmao


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

You can't spell DRAW without RAW. :trolldog


----------



## Frost99

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> You can't spell DRAW without RAW. :trolldog


:vince "And what does _*RAW*_ stand for.?....., yeah *R*oman *A*lways *W*ins.....which means that adding RAW to DRAW means when Roman wins *HE* draws...yeah....five more Mania main events in a row cuss THAT's what the people want." 

How deep does THIS rabbit hole goes? #WWELogic


----------



## Robbyfude

Makish16 said:


> Until people cheer Roman, wwe is going to keep trying to get heat for Brock
> 
> Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk


Has there been any other wrestler that WWE has tried to put over as much as Reigns? I mean shit, not booking a guy and making him look like he's never showing up all this time just to ATTEMPT to make the crowd cheer for Reigns, it's ridiculous.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Chrome said:


> To think 2-3 years ago, they were getting these kind of numbers only during the football season, now they get them in July lol. Be interesting to see what the numbers look like when MNF does come back this year.


To think people used to shit on CM Punk for drawing bad ratings.

The CM Punk era might as well be the Attitude Era compared to the ratings they get nowadays.

Fewer people in the US watch wrestling, than ever before in the history of televised wrestling. I am shocked Fox would pay what they are paying for a dead niche product. It's not coming back. If it were, a new star or boom era would have happened by now.

Bruno Sammaratino to Andre the Giant to Hulk Hogan, to Rock/Austin...you usually had about 10 years between gigantic stars being created. But it's been damn near 20 years since Rock/Austin were at the top, and no one has been created since to even rival them.


----------



## validreasoning

Bruno was a regional star, one that had incredible longevity and drawing power in the northeast but a regional one nonetheless. Cena was a bigger national star than Bruno and obviously bigger international star too (aside from Italy).

Nobody expects another boom anytime soon in pro wrestling but fox didn't get SD expecting that no more than abc/nbc/CBS expect a new show to do Gunsmoke or even Seinfeld numbers. SD has been #1 or #2 in the 18-49 demo on cable 75 times since debuting on Tuesday nights in July 2016 which is incredibly consistent. It's been #1 on cable in the 18-49 demo 
seven times over the past eight weeks and the other time it was #2 beaten by a world cup game 

Fox remember were willing to pay UFC $200m for just over half of the programming and only 5 shows on the main fox channel annually (which have averaged below SD viewership last two years). Five months of the year Fox run re-runs and very low rated shows on Friday night..I bet Fox will end up winning most Fridays in the important 18-49 demo now even during peak season


----------



## validreasoning

Rousey is definitely most popular person on Raw if we go by YouTube views since Wrestlemania season ended. Most watched clips from raw on wwes youtube page since April 16th

1. Rousey is suspended, June 18th = 13 million views
2. Reigns unleashes assault on Jinder, May 14th = 8.3 million views
3. Rousey locks Mickie James in armbar, April 23rd = 7.6 million views
4. Rousey traps Jax in armbar June 11th = 6.8 million views 
5. Rousey violates suspension, July 16th = 5 million views


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I have no real feeling about how this RAW will do in the ratings. Think I will go with slightly up because of all dat history. :banderas


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Fuck WWE and fuck their idea of Raw of right now.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 1: 2.817
Hour 2: 2.821
Hour 3: 2.701

Not one hour in the 3 millions. :lmao


----------



## Piper's Pit

validreasoning said:


> Rousey is definitely most popular person on Raw if we go by YouTube views since Wrestlemania season ended. Most watched clips from raw on wwes youtube page since April 16th
> 
> 1. Rousey is suspended, June 18th = 13 million views
> 2. Reigns unleashes assault on Jinder, May 14th = 8.3 million views
> 3. Rousey locks Mickie James in armbar, April 23rd = 7.6 million views
> 4. Rousey traps Jax in armbar June 11th = 6.8 million views
> 5. Rousey violates suspension, July 16th = 5 million views


If WWE were smart they'd see that Ronda is a draw not because of anything she's done in wrestling but because she was a star in UFC were she was allowed to be herself and wasn't micromanaged to hell.
If they treated all their talent like that - remove the shackles and let them breathe who knows what ratings they'd get week on week.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.817M
H2- 2.821M
H3- 2.701M
3H- 2.780M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 0.14% / + 0.004M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 4.25% / - 0.120M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 4.12% / - 0.116M )
7/23/18 Vs 7/16/18 ( - 3.00% / - 0.086M )

Demo (7/23/18 Vs 7/16/18):
H1- 0.910D Vs 1.030D
H2- 0.930D Vs 0.950D
H3- 0.930D Vs 0.900D
3H- 0.923D Vs 0.960D

Note: RAW is 4th, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 3rd, 2nd & 6th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (7/23/18 Vs 7/24/17):
H1- 2.817M Vs 3.156M
H2- 2.821M Vs 3.129M
H3- 2.701M Vs 2.917M
3H- 2.780M Vs 3.067M ( - 9.36% / - 0.287M )

Demo (7/23/18 Vs 7/24/17):
H1- 0.910D Vs 1.060D
H2- 0.930D Vs 1.020D
H3- 0.930D Vs 0.950D
3H- 0.923D Vs 1.010D

Note: RAW this week last year was 2nd, 3rd & 5th by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Number was fairly consistent through all three hours. Nothing was particularly good though. I was quite amused to see the "historic" first hour have the lowest demo. :bryanlol 

Down over 9% year to year. :bjpenn


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Down 9% - yikes. This is supposed to be the 2nd biggest time of the year - plus it had Lashley/Reigns #1 contenders match hyped since last week as well as the largely hyped "historic" announcement. Yet it fell a lot from last year. Not a good number.


----------



## Y.2.J

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1- 2.817M
> H2- 2.821M
> H3- 2.701M
> 3H- 2.780M*


Well deserved.

Everyone knew the historic announcement was going to be the Women's PPV and no one gave a shit. Makes me feel happy that Steph woke up today to see RAW advertised with her "special announcement" is almost 10% down compared to last year. 

Can't believe NFL/NBA season is just around the corner...yikes.


----------



## Piper's Pit

Up from last week though.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Piper's Pit said:


> Up from last week though.


Actually it's down from last week. Unless you're referring to the 3rd hour, which is up slightly.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The Big Dog is not a big draw. :trolldog


----------



## Chrome

So much for that historic announcement lol.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

On average, RAW dropped 300.000-400.000 viewers since mid-April, POST-Wrestlemania, and didn't rebound after NBA season.
Just wait until October, when RAW is bound to be focused on women storylines because of EVOLUTION!

The female demographic went UP 10 and 15% AFTER the HISTORIC ANNOUNCEMENT :lmao


----------



## Zappers

As I clearly stated before. Cable Ratings "drops" means little in this current era. Of course higher is always better but WWE gets VIEWERSHIP from more avenues than just CABLE TV. Then there's the DVR factor, which is very relevant.

_Digital engagement continued to grow through the first six months of 2018 with video views up 58% to 14.4 billion and hours consumed up 71% to 509 million across digital and social media platforms_

Sound like they are hurting in viewership? :lmao


----------



## Seafort

Zappers said:


> As I clearly stated before. Cable Ratings "drops" means little in this current era. Of course higher is always better but WWE gets VIEWERSHIP from more avenues than just CABLE TV. Then there's the DVR factor, which is very relevant.
> 
> _Digital engagement continued to grow through the first six months of 2018 with video views up 58% to 14.4 billion and hours consumed up 71% to 509 million across digital and social media platforms_
> 
> Sound like they are hurting in viewership? :lmao


No, but in five years when they are negotiating for their next TV deals, if viewership has fallen from 2.7M to 0.55M it will matter greatly. They won't be able to get the same billion dollar deals. I doubt that YouTube views and revenue from that channel will make up the potential hundreds of millions of dollars missing from the 2024 deals.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

It has to be up this week with the anticipated Ronda and Brock returns.


----------



## LiableToPay

Seafort said:


> No, but in five years when they are negotiating for their next TV deals, if viewership has fallen from 2.7M to 0.55M it will matter greatly. They won't be able to get the same billion dollar deals. I doubt that YouTube views and revenue from that channel will make up the potential hundreds of millions of dollars missing from the 2024 deals.


You do realize that the viewership has fallen from 6-7 million to 3 million over the years and yet the TV deal money has always risen? It all depends on how the Television landscape looks like 5 years from now on. If 0.55 M is a good TV figure 5 years from now, WWE will still lap up good money. It's basic common sense which seems to fly over some of yours heads.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.875M
H2- 3.012M
H3- 2.815M
3H- 2.901M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 4.77% / + 0.137M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 6.54% / - 0.197M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 2.09% / - 0.060M )
7/30/18 Vs 7/23/18 ( + 4.35% / + 0.121M )

Demo (7/30/18 Vs 7/23/18):
H1- 0.960D Vs 0.910D
H2- 1.020D Vs 0.930D
H3- 0.980D Vs 0.930D
3H- 0.987D Vs 0.923D

Note: RAW is 4th, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (7/30/18 Vs 7/31/17):
H1- 2.875M Vs 3.194M
H2- 3.012M Vs 3.275M
H3- 2.815M Vs 3.021M
3H- 2.901M Vs 3.163M ( - % / - 0.M )

Demo (7/30/18 Vs 7/31/17):
H1- 0.960D Vs 1.030D
H2- 1.020D Vs 1.060D
H3- 0.980D Vs 0.990D
3H- 0.987D Vs 1.027D

Note: RAW this week last year was 3rd, 2nd & 4th by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Down 9% from last year.

This Brock/Reigns storyline is really drawing with no competition.

:ha :ha :ha :ha :ha :ha

SHIT storyline that no one buys except a few idiots in Miami is...you guessed it...SHIT.

Literally no interest in this bullshit. I LOVE IT.

:lmao

Just wait until the NFL season is here.

:mark:


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

So Ronda and Brock bumped the rating 4% from last week. A whopping 121,000 more total viewers. Being up is a positive, but given this is on the Road to Summerslam, I'd be a tad disappointed. Not to mention it being down year to year again;this time down 9% I fully expect it to fall next week.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

That's got to be a joke, right?
Those aren't the real numbers.
How can an advertised return of both Brock and Rousey draw this little?


----------



## Blade Runner

Showstopper said:


> Down 9% from last year.
> 
> This Brock/Reigns storyline is really drawing with no competition.
> 
> :ha :ha :ha :ha :ha :ha
> 
> SHIT storyline that no one buys except a few idiots in Miami is...you guessed it...SHIT.
> 
> Literally no interest in this bullshit. I LOVE IT.
> 
> :lmao
> 
> Just wait until the NFL season is here.
> 
> :mark:



Calling fans idiots for digging something that he doesn't like, and then goes absolutely apeshit over marginal week-to-week rating fluctuations.


Lol, ok then.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

KYRA BATARA said:


> Calling fans idiots for digging something that doesn't like, and then goes absolutely apeshit over marginal week-to-week ratings fluctuations.
> 
> 
> Lol, ok then.


Down 9% from this time last year, 'marginal.'

It's truthfully not any worse than stretching the goal-posts once every three months Reigns gets some cheers.

Here's a better thought: Why try to move heaven and earth for four years to get this dude some fucking cheers when there are people on the show that ARE OVER that would require far less work to put in that spot.

Spare me the excuses and mental gymnastics. Thanks.


----------



## Blade Runner

Showstopper said:


> Down 9% from this time last year, 'marginal.'
> 
> It's truthfully not any worse than stretching the goal-posts once every three months Reigns gets some cheers.
> 
> Here's a better thought: Why try to move heaven and earth for four years to get this dude some fucking cheers when there are people on the show that ARE OVER that would require far less work to put in that spot.
> 
> Spare me the excuses and mental gymnastics. Thanks.



Most (not all) cable shows undergo year-to year decreases because of how accessible content is on other platforms. It's not rocket science to deduct that cable television is progressively going by the wayside. Unless you're something with broad appeal like The Walking Dead or GOT, then you're bound to take a hit in this regard. The WWE _could_ be doing better, but that's besides the point.


I just found it funny that you point the finger at people who enjoy what they're watching and call them idiots. News flash; You sit infront of your TV / computer / whateverthefuck and begrudgingly watch this shit every week, and then jump in the ratings thread to play cheerleader at a marginal decrease from the week prior. Who comes off worse?


----------



## JC00

9pm was 
Alexa/Ronda (Natalya vs Alicia)
Elias (Lashley interrupting)
Braun vs Jinder 
Apollo vs one of the AOP


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

KYRA BATARA said:


> Most (not all) cable shows undergo year-to year decreases because of how accessible content is on other platforms. It's not rocket science to deduct that cable televsion is progressively going by the wayside. Unless you're something with broad appeal like The Walking Dead or GOT, you're bound to take a hit in this regard. The WWE _could_ be doing better, but that's besides the point.


Oh, okay. So more excuses. That's fine, then.




> I just found it funny that you point the finger at people who enjoy what they're watching and call them idiots. News flash; You sit infront of your TV / computer / whateverthefuck and begrudgingly watch this shit, and then jump in the ratings thread to play cheerleader at a marginal decrease from the week prior. Who comes off worse?


Outside of the Universal Title scene, I don't have many 'bitches' about the product, tbh. Could the rest of the show also be better written? Sure. BUT, there is no doubt that the Universal Title scene is by far the worst part of the entire WWE product (including SD) and it's been that way for quite awhile all in the name of getting someone cheered. It's literally never been done to this degree in the history of the company and has devalued multiple other talents on the roster for multiple years now. Of course a life-long fan is going to comment on it on a wrestling forum. And my bitching about it on here doesn't put an extra single penny in Vince McMahon's bank account.


----------



## MC

Last week:

H1- 2.817M
H2- 2.821M
H3- 2.701M
3H- 2.780M

This week:

H1- 2.875M
H2- 3.012M
H3- 2.815M
3H- 2.901M

Looks like Brock showing up did something for the ratings. Still not a great rating though. That that I expected any different.


----------



## Blade Runner

Showstopper said:


> Outside of the Universal Title scene, I don't have many 'bitches' about the product, tbh. Could the rest of the show also be better written? Sure. BUT, there is no doubt that the Universal Title scene is by far the worst part of the entire WWE product (including SD) and it's been that way for quite awhile all in the name of getting someone cheered. It's literally never been done to this degree in the history of the company and has devalued multiple other talents on the roster for multiple years now. Of course a life-long fan is going to comment on it on a wrestling forum. And my bitching about it on here doesn't put an extra single penny in Vince McMahon's bank account.



I hate to break this to you, but the entire product _top to bottom_ is considered lowbrow entertainment. People enjoying the main event scene are no more idiots than people enjoying whatever the fuck Alexa Bliss or Seth Rollins is doing. Everything on the show is joined at the hip. 


It's not a great view to be sitting on _this_ particular high-horse, if that's the position that you're willing to take.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

KYRA BATARA said:


> I hate to break this to you, but the entire product _top to bottom_ is considered lowbrow entertainment. People enjoying the main event scene are no more idiots than people enjoying whatever the fuck Alexa Bliss or Seth Rollins is doing. Everything on the show is joined at the hip.


Cop out. WWE is WWE, sure. But not everyone and every storyline is booked equally. It's never been that way and isn't today, either.




> It's not a great view to be sitting on _this_ particular high-horse, if that's the position that you're willing to take.


You talk about me posting in this thread and laughing about their marginal ratings increases and decreases (BTW, I'm far from the only one), but you'll sit in a Reigns thread and discuss his marginal increase in crowd reaction anytime one of those threads pop up. I don't see a big difference, tbh. And there is no high-horse for me. Simply commenting on a top storyline that's been WWE's top priority for years now that just hasn't worked for whatever reason is hardly being on a high-horse.


----------



## Blade Runner

Showstopper said:


> Cop out. WWE is WWE, sure. But not everyone and every storyline is booked equally. It's never been that way and isn't today, either.



Oh trust me, I can point to silly / incoherent shit that _every_ member of the main roster has been involved in. It's not just an issue with one segment of the program, it's all-around creative bankrupcy. We both decide to watch because there's things within it that we dig / get amusement from, so if the Florida fans are idots for chanting Reigns' name then that must make us idiots too.




> You talk about me posting in this thread and laughing about their marginal ratings increases and decreases (BTW, I'm far from the only one), but you'll sit in a Reigns thread and discuss his marginal increase in crowd reaction anytime one of those threads pop up. I don't see a big difference, tbh. And there is no high-horse for me. Simply commenting on a top storyline that's been WWE's top priority for years now that just hasn't worked for whatever reason is hardly being on a high-horse.



I was taking the piss out of one guy in the RAW thread that kept going on about Reigns not being over last night. It's not something that I routinely do every time Reigns gets a pop. It was fun today to see people coming up with silly Boo-urns type theories about fans chanting his name, and I had a go at that too.


:draper2


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Really nothing new to see here. It hovers around this mark dipping below and sometimes going slightly above. Still the trend is headed downwards but I don't think that they will ever bottom out. I would be stunned if they ever hit 4m again. 3.5m might be pushing it. Bottom line is they still got all that tv money. :vince$


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

KYRA BATARA said:


> Oh trust me, I can point to silly / incoherent shit that _every_ member of the main roster has been involved in. It's not just an issue with one segment of the program, it's all-around creative bankrupcy. We both decide to watch because there's things within it that we dig / get amusement from, so if the Florida fans are idots for chanting Reigns' name then that must make us idiots too.


I watch because there are a few talents I'm a fan of and I have no issue with that. I am fascinated why strangers on the internet are so concerned with what people they've never met before do with their time.

When people say 'don't watch', it honestly seems less like actual advice and more like, 'please stop watching so you can stop bashing my favorite on a wrestling forum.' It's not too hard to read through the lines, tbh.







> Oh I was taking the piss out of one guy in the RAW thread that kept going on about Reigns not being over last night. It's not something that I routinely do every time Reigns gets a pop. It was fun today to see people coming up with silly Boo-urns type theories when fans chant his name and I had a go at that too.
> 
> 
> :draper2


I'm not talking about the actual Raw thread. The thread is in the Raw section, though.


----------



## Blade Runner

Showstopper said:


> I watch because there are a few talents I'm a fan of and I have no issue with that. I am fascinated why strangers on the internet are so concerned with what people they've never met before do with their time.


Well see that's the thing; You're fascinated about that, and I'm fascinated at the notion of someone making the statement that a crowd (consisting partly of children) is made up of idiots because they chant for a performer that they like. I mean your last sentence is the _very_ thing that you're doing lol




> When people say 'don't watch', it honestly seems less like actual advice and more like, 'please stop watching so you can stop bashing my favorite on a wrestling forum.' It's not too hard to read through the lines, tbh.


I can't speak for everyone else, but I question why people watch when it seems like the product is doing very little for them. There's people on here that spend 80% of their time moaning. To me it's a no-brainer thing to move on from something that hasn't changed for years and is showing very little signs that it'll change anytime soon.


I don't care if people bash my favorites, as long as it's level-headed criticism and not baseless bias. At least constructed opinions can be discussed. It's like that guy "The Wood" -- we disagree strongly on certain topics, but the discussion is usually worth having because actual points and counter-points are being made rather than insult-driven deflecting. RavishingRickRules is someone else like that (although in his case we have a shitload of things in common when it comes to discussion in non wrestling-related threads).


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

KYRA BATARA said:


> Well see that's the thing; You're fascinated about that, and I'm fascinated at the notion of someone making the statement that a crowd (consisting partly of children) is made up of idiots because they chant for a performer that they like. I mean your last sentence is the _very_ thing that you're doing lol


Meh. They strike me as fair-weather fans that blow in the direction of the wind that evening, tbh.






> I can't speak for everyone else, but I question why people watch when it seems like the product is doing very little for them. There's people on here that spend 80% of their time moaning. To me it's a no-brainer thing to move on from something that hasn't changed for years and is showing very little signs that it'll change anytime soon.


They probably watch for a few different reasons. They like a bunch of the talent on the rosters. They watch out of habit. They watch because their isn't much else to do on a Monday night, especially if you have to get up early for work the next morning. I don't know.




> I don't care if people bash my favorites, as long as it's level-headed criticism and not baseless bias. At least constructed opinions can be discussed. It's like that guy "The Wood" -- we disagree strongly on certain topics, but the discussion is usually worth having because actual points and counter-points are being made rather than insult-driven deflecting. RavishingRickRules is someone else like that; Although in his case we have a shitload of things in common when it comes to discussion in non wrestling-related threads.


I agree. I have no problem discussing things with others who disagree that don't come off as troll-ish or baiting all of the time. Unfortunately, some of the folks who try to go back and forth are mostly just baiting most of the time because they can never really come up with a reason to not just push the people that are already over to begin with instead of trying to move heaven and earth for four years straight with very little results thus far. It is what it is, though.


----------



## Blade Runner

Showstopper said:


> I agree. I have no problem discussing things with others who disagree that don't come off as troll-ish or baiting all of the time. Unfortunately, some of the folks who try to go back and forth are mostly just baiting most of the time because they can never really come up with a reason to not just push the people that are already over to begin with instead of trying to move heaven and earth for four years straight with very little results thus far. It is what it is, though.



I don't know, emotions can be an achilles' heel when it comes to attempting objective discussion. On one hand it can make for occationally entertaining posts, but more often than not the emotion will dictate the angle that you're going with. I was exactly that way with Daniel Bryan years ago when it felt like the WWE were holding him back; Some of my oubursts I felt were justified at the time, but today I see some of it from a different vantage point.


I'm as guilty as anyone in that I can occationally lose track of objective thought, but I tend to appreciate discussion that considers all the information possible. It sucks to see your favorites not getting pushed. I understand that. I just don't think that we always try to consider all known variables before judging things at face value, and I think we'd have better discussion here if counter-points were considered rather than treated like attacks (like they commonly are). 


This isn't an aim at you personally, but rather just a general observation.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

KYRA BATARA said:


> I don't know, emotions can be an achilles' heel when it comes to attempting objective discussion. On one hand it can make for occationally entertaining posts, but more often than not the emotion will dictate the angle that you're going with. I was exactly that way with Daniel Bryan years ago when it felt like the WWE were holding him back; Some of my oubursts I felt were justified at the time, but today I see some of it from a different vantage point.
> 
> 
> I'm as guilty as anyone in that I can occationally lose track of objective thought, but I tend to appreciate discussion that considers all the information possible. It sucks to see your favorites not getting pushed. I understand that. I just don't think that we always try to consider all known variables before judging things at face value, and I think we'd have better discussion here in general if counter-points were considered rather than treated like attacks (like they commonly are).
> 
> 
> This isn't an aim at you personally, but rather just a general observation.


This is a unique situation, too. In the past, FOTC's either became FOTC or were discarded rather quickly. They were never given 4 year grace periods to just *try* to get to that level. So, it is certainly unique in that regard and something that fans of any age aren't really used to. It's just comes off as an extreme try-hard push with Vince that alot of fans haven't taken to. I don't know. It's just awkward and unfortunately, I think at this point, Vince's age has definitely become a factor here. It's unfortunate.


----------



## Blade Runner

Showstopper said:


> This is a unique situation, too. In the past, FOTC's either became FOTC or were discarded rather quickly. They were never given 4 year grace periods to just *try* to get to that level. So, it is certainly unique in that regard and something that fans of any age aren't really used to. It's just comes off as an extreme try-hard push with Vince that alot of fans haven't taken to. I don't know. It's just awkward and unfortunately, I think at this point, Vince's age has definitely become a factor here. It's unfortunate.


Well I can certainly agree that this storyline is incredibly see-through. It's not even a storyline that I'm all that invested in tbh. The whole "Let's make Brock Lesnar a shitbag to get the babyface cheered" is understandble if you're the WWE, but I don't think that they've done a particularly good job at making it subtle. It worked with a segment of the audience, so at least they're getting something that they want while appealing to that specific segment. If there actually _is_ momentum coming from this then I just hope that they can get their near-non existant creative juices flowing so that we can finally change the program to something more compelling.


For the 4 year thing; At face value it looks like a failure, sure. Then I think about HHH's quote of Reigns being a thinly-veiled heel that they're deliberately presenting a certain way to evoke emotion, and then I'm not sure what to think. It would imply that the WWE are masterful reverse psychologists, and I don't want to give them _that_ much credit. :lol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

KYRA BATARA said:


> Well I can certainly agree that this storyline is incredibly see-through. It's not even a storyline that I'm all that invested in tbh. The whole "Let's make Brock Lesnar a shitbag to get the babyface cheered" is understandble if you're the WWE, but I don;t think that they've done a particularly good job at making it subtle. It worked with a segment of the audience, so at least they're getting something that they want while appealing to that segment. If there actually _is_ momentum coming from this then I just hope that they can get their near-non existant creative juices flowing so that we can finally change the program to something more compelling.
> 
> 
> For the 4 year thing; At face value it looks like a failure, sure. Then I think about HHH's quote of Reigns being a thinly-veiled heel that they're deliberately presenting a certain way to evoke emotion, and I'm not sure what to think. I would imply that the WWE are masterful reverse psychologists and I don't want to give them _that_ much credit. :lol


I cringe anytime I hear a WWE employee try to say Reigns is a heel. He feuds with heels. He's not a heel. Want to make him a heel? Excellent. Go do it. Give us a plot/story and a particular moment where the turn takes place. Then, have him feud with babyfaces from that moment on. Until then, a WWE employee referring to him as a heel just comes off as trying to save face (no pun intended).


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Last year's show beat this one handily by 10%, with the Jason Jordan storyline, Strowman vs Joe vs Reigns, and Big Show vs Cass main eventing :lmao


----------



## Blade Runner

Showstopper said:


> I cringe anytime I hear a WWE employee try to say Reigns is a heel. He feuds with heels. He's not a heel. Want to make him a heel? Excellent. Go do it. Give us a plot/story and a particular moment where the turn takes place. Then, have him feud with babyfaces from that moment on. Until then, a WWE employee referring to him as a heel just comes off as trying to save face (no pun intended).


Yeah I think that HHH is implying that they're purposely presenting him as if he was a babyface getting a megapush so that the booing intensifies. I actually _did_ kinda consider this as a new direction when Reigns eliminated Undertaker from the RR, because there's no way in hell that the WWE would've expected anything outside of a shower of boos. Then again, it's hard to imply that the promotion giving us intellectually rich gems like 'Bayley This Is Your Life' is also responsible for Jedi mindfucking it's audience with reverse psychology.


It's far more probable that this is _actually_ happening with Jason Jordan.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Showstopper said:


> I cringe anytime I hear a WWE employee try to say Reigns is a heel. He feuds with heels. He's not a heel. Want to make him a heel? Excellent. Go do it. Give us a plot/story and a particular moment where the turn takes place. Then, have him feud with babyfaces from that moment on. Until then, a WWE employee referring to him as a heel just comes off as trying to save face (no pun intended).


This is one of the things that makes me shake my head the most as well. It's pretty ridiculous and makes whoever says or implies it look like an idiot.

Anyway, numbers aren't good. I do find it funny that the one hour Reigns wasn't in at all nor would there have been any reason to expect him (unless I missed a quick backstage segment... which is certainly possible) happened to be the highest one. I assume Rousey was in hour 2?

Also speaking of Ronda, next week will be interesting because it's her first advertised Raw match. I mean, it's a throwaway match, but it's still a Rousey match on Raw (and the very first one at that). You have to imagine at least her hour pulls in a decent number next week. She seems to be the biggest draw in the company right now.


----------



## Jedah

I think this time last year was down only 1% from the year before. Clearly something is wrong if they're losing that much audience that abruptly. Not anything beyond what they deserve though. They deserve much worse.


----------



## Chrome

Well Brock and Ronda helped stop some of the bleeding, but a 9% drop from last year still isn't good.


----------



## Seafort

LiableToPay said:


> You do realize that the viewership has fallen from 6-7 million to 3 million over the years and yet the TV deal money has always risen? It all depends on how the Television landscape looks like 5 years from now on. If 0.55 M is a good TV figure 5 years from now, WWE will still lap up good money. It's basic common sense which seems to fly over some of yours heads.


Oh, I get it. If WWE falls at a level consistent with the average rate of decline with the viewing audience...yes, of course they'll get another good deal. Let's presume a 10% decline annually...that places them at 1.3M to 1.4M five years from now.

That's a far cry from the scenario I posed, where viewership declines begin to greatly outstrip the average decline. If WWE is drawing 500,000 viewers in 2023, then heck no...they will not be getting a billion dollars from USA. And if 500,000 viewers represents the top of the cable viewing spectrum in 2023, then networks like USA themselves are ceasing to be viable.


----------



## validreasoning

Seafort said:


> Oh, I get it. If WWE falls at a level consistent with the average rate of decline with the viewing audience...yes, of course they'll get another good deal. Let's presume a 10% decline annually...that places them at 1.3M to 1.4M five years from now.
> 
> That's a far cry from the scenario I posed, where viewership declines begin to greatly outstrip the average decline. If WWE is drawing 500,000 viewers in 2023, then heck no...they will not be getting a billion dollars from USA. And if 500,000 viewers represents the top of the cable viewing spectrum in 2023, then networks like USA themselves are ceasing to be viable.


A 10% decline in live raw viewership would be as follows
2017 = 3.019 million average
2018 = 2.717 million average
2019 = 2.445 million average
2020 = 2,201 million average
2021 = 1.981 million average 
2022 = 1.783 million average
2023 = 1.605 million average

Although none of us can predict 5 years from now based on loss of cable homes, online streaming popularity and viewership habits in general, even a scenario where the show loses a consistent 10% per annum is very unlikely.

Raw live viewership first seven months of 2018 is actually up from the same period in 2017 not down; 3.084 million average January to July 2018 vs 3.077 million average from January to July 2017.

Looking at longer term the fall for live viewership for raw was as follows
2012 to 2013 = 4%
2013 to 2014 = 0.25%
2014 to 2015 = 10%
2015 to 2016 = 13.5%
2016 to 2017 = 5.5%

If same fall occurs again over next five years that would put raw averaging 2.127 million viewers live in 2022.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

It's pretty awesome that Raw at this time last year with Seth/Dean reuniting is out-drawing Raw at the same time this year.


----------



## LiableToPay

It's understandable last year was doing better since it had the best main event scene seen in years with Brock, Roman, Joe and Braun that too coming off of the hottest feud of the year in Roman-Braun. Ambrose is fucking awesome but I don't think he contributed all that much to the relatively higher ratings while carrying that bag of potato as his tag team partner. Would be fucking awesome to see Ambrose be in the main event scene when he returns though. :mark.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

> A 10% decline in live raw viewership would be as follows
> 2017 = 3.019 million average
> 2018 = 2.717 million average
> 2019 = 2.445 million average
> 2020 = 2,201 million average
> 2021 = 1.981 million average
> 2022 = 1.783 million average
> 2023 = 1.605 million average
> 
> Although none of us can predict 5 years from now based on loss of cable homes, online streaming popularity and viewership habits in general, even a scenario where the show loses a consistent 10% per annum is very unlikely.
> 
> Raw live viewership first seven months of 2018 is actually up from the same period in 2017 not down; 3.084 million average January to July 2018 vs 3.077 million average from January to July 2017.
> 
> Looking at longer term the fall for live viewership for raw was as follows
> 2012 to 2013 = 4%
> 2013 to 2014 = 0.25%
> 2014 to 2015 = 10%
> 2015 to 2016 = 13.5%
> 2016 to 2017 = 5.5%
> 
> If same fall occurs again over next five years that would put raw averaging 2.127 million viewers live in 2022.


Ronda in the highest rated hour and not the Brock/Reigns shit. :lmao

Woof. That decline from last year to this year says alot. Rollins/Ambrose was so much better than what's going on this year. The numbers prove that. 

9% DECLINE!

:CENA


----------



## DammitChrist

LiableToPay said:


> It's understandable last year was doing better since it had the best main event scene seen in years with Brock, Roman, Joe and Braun that too coming off of the hottest feud of the year in Roman-Braun. Ambrose is fucking awesome but I don't think he contributed all that much to the relatively higher ratings while carrying that bag of potato as his tag team partner. Would be fucking awesome to see Ambrose be in the main event scene when he returns though. :mark.


You realize that about 75% of the Raw main-event scene from last year are involved with the Universal title again this year, and the show still isn't doing that impressive apparently.

Anyway, Seth Rollins and Dean Ambrose would both be great additions to the main-event scene. They're both fresh names and there's plenty of greatness in both men.


----------



## A-C-P

The TV #s are what they are, and not great, but I think the more telling thing is their steady decline in live attendance that continues, they have been able to recover that revenue by increasing ticket prices, increasing the # of shows, and running more international tours. But there are limits to how much they can raise ticket prices and the # of shows/tours they can run before completely blowing out all the talent.


----------



## SPCDRI

September and October are gonna be brutal. Its not just people watching as it happens but people putting their energy and brain-space into other athletic entertainment. NFL preseason starts this August, NFL comes back first week of September, MLB wildcard playoffs start first week of October and NBA comes back the start of the third week of October. Football, basketball and playoff baseball are going to poach hundreds of thousands of people. Lets say about two hundred thousand people stop watching. Shit, rhey'll be lucky to hit 2.5 million people for most hours on a RAW this October. Watch it happen. 

Unless a full-time fighting champion can get people to care, October is going to be ugly.


----------



## Chrome

SPCDRI said:


> September and October are gonna be brutal. Its not just people watching as it happens but people putting their energy and brain-space into other athletic entertainment. NFL preseason starts this August, NFL comes back first week of September, MLB wildcard playoffs start first week of October and NBA comes back the start of the third week of October. Football, basketball and playoff baseball are going to poach hundreds of thousands of people. Lets say about two hundred thousand people stop watching. Shit, rhey'll be lucky to hit 2.5 million people for most hours on a RAW this October. Watch it happen.
> 
> Unless a full-time fighting champion can get people to care, October is going to be ugly.


Makes sense since Raw will likely be brutal to watch during that time, between the Susan G. Komen shit and them shoving the Women's ppv down everyone's throats, perfect time to tune out if you haven't already.


----------



## A-C-P

Chrome said:


> Makes sense since Raw will likely be brutal to watch during that time, between the Susan G. Komen shit and them shoving the Women's ppv down everyone's throats, perfect time to tune out if you haven't already.


----------



## validreasoning

Showstopper said:


> Ronda in the highest rated hour and not the Brock/Reigns shit. :lmao
> 
> Woof. That decline from last year to this year says alot. Rollins/Ambrose was so much better than what's going on this year. The numbers prove that.
> 
> 9% DECLINE!
> 
> :CENA


Raw had two very strong "fresh" programs at the top of the card in July/August of last year in Reigns vs Strowman and Lesnar vs Joe which of course culminated in a four way at Summerslam. You also had Dean/Seth reunion stuff and Raw in August 2017 had stronger viewership than August 2016.

Obviously this year the top of the card isn't anywhere near as strong. The Lesnar vs Reigns feud should have ended at mania, the scenario of Lesnar turning heel on Heyman for first time might boost it a bit (certainly is popular on YouTube with 7.3 million views in 36 hours putting it on course to be most watched video on wwes YouTube channel all year).

The rest of the upper main on raw is pretty weak. Rousey is great when beating the shit out of people but associating her with Nattie as the smiling friend is death and drags Rousey down to prelim level. Rollins and Ziggler should have ended at last ppv and nobody buys a cowering comedy Owens as a threat to Strowman, program isn't helping either. The only time the comedy Owens worked was with Jericho so obviously they continue to book that version instead of the badass Owens who killed zayn in nxt, debuted vs Cena, bloodied Vince, turned on Jericho and Bryan



SPCDRI said:


> September and October are gonna be brutal. Its not just people watching as it happens but people putting their energy and brain-space into other athletic entertainment. NFL preseason starts this August, NFL comes back first week of September, MLB wildcard playoffs start first week of October and NBA comes back the start of the third week of October. Football, basketball and playoff baseball are going to poach hundreds of thousands of people. Lets say about two hundred thousand people stop watching. Shit, rhey'll be lucky to hit 2.5 million people for most hours on a RAW this October. Watch it happen.
> 
> Unless a full-time fighting champion can get people to care, October is going to be ugly.


I think October will do ok despite the competition and probably close to par with last year. They have two major shows to sell in the Australian and women's ppv. Both will be much bigger and given more build than tlc was last year which as we remember changed the card the Friday before due to injuries. So I would expect bigger names like taker, Cena, Trish, lita etc on raw in October to sell those shows.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

validreasoning said:


> Raw had two very strong "fresh" programs at the top of the card in July/August of last year in Reigns vs Strowman and Lesnar vs Joe which of course culminated in a four way at Summerslam. You also had Dean/Seth reunion stuff and Raw in August 2017 had stronger viewership than August 2016.
> 
> Obviously this year the top of the card isn't anywhere near as strong. The Lesnar vs Reigns feud should have ended at mania, the scenario of Lesnar turning heel on Heyman for first time might boost it a bit (certainly is popular on YouTube with 7.3 million views in 36 hours putting it on course to be most watched video on wwes YouTube channel all year).
> 
> The rest of the upper main on raw is pretty weak. Rousey is great when beating the shit out of people but associating her with Nattie as the smiling friend is death and drags Rousey down to prelim level. Rollins and Ziggler should have ended at last ppv and nobody buys a cowering comedy Owens as a threat to Strowman, program isn't helping either. The only time the comedy Owens worked was with Jericho so obviously they continue to book that version instead of the badass Owens who killed zayn in nxt, debuted vs Cena, bloodied Vince, turned on Jericho and Bryan
> 
> 
> 
> I think October will do ok despite the competition and probably close to par with last year. They have two major shows to sell in the Australian and women's ppv. Both will be much bigger and given more build than tlc was last year which as we remember changed the card the Friday before due to injuries. So I would expect bigger names like taker, Cena, Trish, lita etc on raw in October to sell those shows.


The ratings right now make me very happy. Can't wait for NFL season starting shortly.

:mark:


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE




----------



## Mr.Monkey

as a casual fan at this point that only watch the youtube vids that i want to see they should've went with Bobby vs Lesnar. People would've been more invested to turn the channel on raw


----------



## PrettyLush

Mr.Monkey said:


> as a casual fan at this point that only watch the youtube vids that i want to see they should've went with Bobby vs Lesnar. People would've been more invested to turn the channel on raw


The casuals representative has spoken! :bow


----------



## genghis hank

Who would have guessed that threading a storyline throughout the Raw show would cause ratings to go up?

I really hope they learn from this and do more of it, it felt like watching an early 2000s Raw at times.


----------



## validreasoning

A-C-P said:


> The TV #s are what they are, and not great, but I think the more telling thing is their steady decline in live attendance that continues, they have been able to recover that revenue by increasing ticket prices, increasing the # of shows, and running more international tours. But there are limits to how much they can raise ticket prices and the # of shows/tours they can run before completely blowing out all the talent.


Their attendance is still quite consistent, much more than i thought it would be when cena no longer toured..maybe it will still fall like it did post mania 8 and post mania 18 when the kids realise that cena isn't returning to the houseshows/tv in their area and don't return for the next shows but for now it's still above average looking at last 25 years. In 2006-09 wwe had a weekly touring group of Cena, Batista, Taker, HHH, Shawn Michaels and Edge in comparison to today when it's Reigns, Rollins, Strowman, Styles and Joe as headliners and no offense to the latter group but the starpower is heavier in the first group. The extra shows they added since 2016 are the houseshows on Monday night for SD crew opposite raw tv. They dropped a few houseshows this year with the ppvs being dual branded as they were running houseshows opposite brand specific ppvs before that.

Just sticking with North America and since the Monday night war ended. I couldn't attain the average ticket prices pre 2006 as wwe reported figures differently before 2006 (from May 1st to April 30th instead of January 1st to December 31st)










Following is North American attendance for 2nd quarter (Wrestlemania quarter) this decade. Didn't include 2010 or 2015 as Wrestlemania fell in first quarter those years


----------



## Seafort

validreasoning said:


> Their attendance is still quite consistent, much more than i thought it would be when cena no longer toured..maybe it will still fall like it did post mania 8 and post mania 18 when the kids realise that cena isn't returning to the houseshows/tv in their area and don't return for the next shows but for now it's still above average looking at last 25 years. In 2006-09 wwe had a weekly touring group of Cena, Batista, Taker, HHH, Shawn Michaels and Edge in comparison to today when it's Reigns, Rollins, Strowman, Styles and Joe as headliners and no offense to the latter group but the starpower is heavier in the first group. The extra shows they added since 2016 are the houseshows on Monday night for SD crew opposite raw tv. They dropped a few houseshows this year with the ppvs being dual branded as they were running houseshows opposite brand specific ppvs before that.
> 
> Just sticking with North America and since the Monday night war ended. I couldn't attain the average ticket prices pre 2006 as wwe reported figures differently before 2006 (from May 1st to April 30th instead of January 1st to December 31st)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Following is North American attendance for 2nd quarter (Wrestlemania quarter) this decade. Didn't include 2010 or 2015 as Wrestlemania fell in first quarter those years


Very interesting numbers. Keep in mind however that while ticket revenue was a key business driver for WWE ten years ago, it's far less important now. They could be like this:










and still make a healthy profit, thanks to the TV deals.


----------



## validreasoning

Seafort said:


> Very interesting numbers. Keep in mind however that while ticket revenue was a key business driver for WWE ten years ago, it's far less important now.


Ticket revenue is still very important. It will obviously become less important with new tv deals but they won't be recorded until early 2020 in the accounts.

As far as ticket sales as a proportion of total revenue
2017 = 19%
2016 = 20%
2015 = 19%
2014 = 20%
2013 = 22%
2012 = 22%
2011 = 22%
2010 = 22%
2009 = 23%
2008 = 20%
2007 = 20%
2006 = 20%
2004/5 = 22%
2003/4 = 19%


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.830M
H2- 2.854M
H3- 2.728M
3H- 2.804M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 0.85% / + 0.024M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 4.41% / - 0.126M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 3.60% / - 0.102M )
8/6/18 Vs 7/30/18 ( - 3.34% / - 0.097M )

Demo (8/6/18 Vs 7/30/18):
H1- 0.940D Vs 0.960D
H2- 0.940D Vs 1.020D
H3- 0.910D Vs 0.980D
3H- 0.930D Vs 0.987D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 3rd & 4th by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (8/6/18 Vs 8/7/17):
H1- 2.830M Vs 3.263M
H2- 2.854M Vs 3.314M
H3- 2.728M Vs 3.144M
3H- 2.804M Vs 3.240M ( - 13.46% / - 0.436M )

Demo (8/6/18 Vs 8/7/17):
H1- 0.940D Vs 1.050D
H2- 0.940D Vs 1.060D
H3- 0.910D Vs 1.030D
3H- 0.930D Vs 1.047D

Note: RAW this week last year was 3rd, 2nd & 5th by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

13 days out from SS yesterday, and they can't even get one of the three hours at 3 million; let alone OVER 3 million.

:lmao


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Hour 3 down in the demo and viewers from last week. Is Ronda really a draw? All metrics slightly down from last week. The big one is an almost 13.5% year to year drop. 

@JonnyAceLaryngitis ; You wrote last week's demo numbers in place of this week's for the year to year comparison.


----------



## A-C-P

Showstopper said:


> 13 days out from SS yesterday, and they can't even get one of the three hours at 3 million; let alone OVER 3 million.
> 
> :lmao


That's very surprising considering Summerslam being headlined by the culmination of such an EPIC 4 year feud :bosque


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Oh, and down 13.5% year over year, too.

:lmao

Keep at it, Vince! The story is really captivating the country!


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

These numbers are near two weeks ago. Looks like the Brock thing last week did slightly bump things. All in all, this is yet another tepid rating.


----------



## JDP2016

Looks like Ronda isn't a draw after all.


----------



## JC00

JDP2016 said:


> Looks like Ronda isn't a draw after all.


I mean we knew that during the road to WM when the hours she was in were the lowest of the show. Which I got the argument that it was just her in segments but this was a week build and promoted throughout the show


----------



## InexorableJourney

According to the rating Ronda couldn't even draw the female demographic.


----------



## MFR55

I dont why people are surprised by the ratings this week,it had as much viewership as every lesnarless-cenaless raw ussualy does,ronda been showing up for months and never ever moved the needle


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

InexorableJourney said:


> According to the rating Ronda couldn't even draw the female demographic.


Yep. No bueno.

I don't think she's going to be a TV draw; just like no one else on Raw or SD are TV draws. If anyone had a shot, it was her. Has to be somewhat disheartening news for WWE.


----------



## Ace

Ronda is not a draw.

Her Raw debut was heavily promoted throughout the week and during Raw, the 3rd hr number was average and the WWE would probably be extremely disappointed because they went all out with it (social media, video packages etc.)


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

If Ronda isn't a draw, what good is she then?


----------



## Ace

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> If Ronda isn't a draw, what good is she then?


 Her name still holds value (outside ratings) and her signing is more to do with Steph becoming a star than anything.

Do you think Charlotte or Asuka can get Steph's name out there?


----------



## 751161

I'm convinced most people just use Youtube these days, and rightly so. No ad breaks, matches and segments in to bitesize chunks. It's the best (not watching at all is better) way to watch the show. You can pick and choose. So much easier. The YT videos always get a ton of views.

There's no reason to watch this shit Live unless you just watch out of habit or you know something big is probably going to go down.


----------



## Ace

The Fourth Wall said:


> I'm convinced most people just use Youtube these days, and rightly so. No ad breaks, matches and segments in to bitesize chunks. It's the best (not watching at all is better) way to watch the show. You can pick and choose. So much easier. The YT videos always get a ton of views.
> 
> There's no reason to watch this shit Live unless you just watch out of habit or you know something big is probably going to go down.


 This doesn't fly for someone like Ronda who works a part time schedule and is treated as a special attraction. The numbers should be a lot better.


----------



## MFR55

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> If Ronda isn't a draw, what good is she then?


promoting steph i guess,from a entertainiment point of view she has also been pretty okay,her promos are really weak,and her match against fox was trash but the crowd seems to be invested on her current feud with bliss,we will wait and see if the good reactions last

but yeah ronda has been here for months and never moved the needle,so the whole rousey is a big draw myth has been busted


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Emperor said:


> Her name still holds value (outside ratings) and her signing is more to do with Steph becoming a star than anything.
> 
> Do you think Charlotte or Asuka can get Steph's name out there?














MFR55 said:


> promoting steph i guess,from a entertainiment point of view she has also been pretty okay,her promos are really weak,and her match against fox was trash but the crowd seems to be invested on her current feud with bliss,we will wait and see if the good reactions last
> 
> but yeah ronda has been here for months and never moved the needle,so the whole rousey is a big draw myth has been busted


Steph is a leech in desperate need of publicity. "Oh to be mainstream" is her dream. Thing is, every mention of Ronda will lead to diminishing returns as the press isn't interested in her wrestling career.


----------



## 751161

Emperor said:


> This doesn't fly for someone like Ronda who works a part time schedule and is treated as a special attraction. The numbers should be a lot better.


I'm not making excuses for her, I'm just saying, I honestly think that's what most people do these days. It's just not worth sitting through the show for select segments/matches, when you can just watch it on YT the next day & it takes like 10-15 minutes of your time at most.

Ronda not drawing just proves that nobody in WWE is a draw, not even her, and can't really affect TV numbers. I never expected her to be a massive draw honestly, they picked up her at her lowest point, and the outside interest isn't as huge as it once was around her.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Of course she isn't a wrestling draw. I don't understand why people are surprised, and why people don't learn from the history of the last 30 years.
Stars and celebrities, even if they are athletes, that come in from outside, who already are stars, are not perceived by wrestling fans as part of the wrestling sport.
For wrestling fans that do not watch anymore, she is just another celebrity entering the wrestling business, and for casual and mainstream people, she just isn't part of wrestling either, and at most, casuals say "Ronda Rousey in WWE? Why would she do a fake sport?"

If former fans were told by other fans "hey, there is this dude that's really hot right now in WWE", like someone on the cusp of real stardom, wrestling fans would give it a look. Because it would be "one of the Boys" getting a big break.
But Rousey is not like one of the boys, and wrestling fans have little respect for people who just come in and jump over the years of work the rest has to do.

And really, how would casuals even know Rousey had a match, if they don't already watch Raw? 
And even if they did know, you think a normal person would pay attention to THREE HOURS before Rousey even apppears? She didn't even appear until the overrun.

This shit ain't gonna fly.


----------



## Chrome

Oof, all 3 hours under 3 million. Hard to believe just a year ago, all 3 hours were over 3 million, I thought they were lower for some reasons. Yeah, a 13.5% drop isn't good at all.


----------



## Wildcat410

Any tv novelty regarding Rousey has simply worn off. It was going to happen sooner or later. Them needing to do a rush job given the apparent brevity of her wwe career kind of exposes her greenness.

Plus as others have said, a lot of people just don't want to sit through nearly three hours to see a segment of her essentially facing a jobber.


----------



## chronoxiong

This is what happens when you let Alicia Fox main event a show and try to build her up as a serious threat to Ronda Rousey. Keep it up WWE. The NFL is coming back in 30 or so days.


----------



## CMPunkRock316

Still higher than they deserve.

Maybe if WWE got Ronda when she was red hot and not embarrassed twice in a row.

Everyone go back to the Jan. 19 1998 Raw and watch it on the Network. It makes me laugh how much they try to play it up that Ronda now is like Tyson then. LMAO.


----------



## tducey

Ronda's good and I've been impressed at her run thus far but come on she's no Tyson. Hoping WWE doesn't think that.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Time for my usually incorrect prediction. Given this is a go home show for Summerslam and that Ronda, Brock, Roman, and the mystery of Seth's arrival, I think this show will exceed last week. If it drops, then :heston


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Looks like it was slightly up but still well below 3m. :trips8


----------



## llj

I think the WWE suspected Ronda may not be a big time need-moving draw, but used her name in the recent new television deal negotiations as sort of a selling point. That's why they kind of had to rush the announcement that she was signed with the WWE.

Now that they have their new deals, they can treat Ronda like more regular instead of teasing her as a huge draw before the new TV deals were inked.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.849M
H2- 2.867M
H3- 2.760M
3H- 2.825M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 0.63% / + 0.018M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 3.73% / - 0.107M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 3.12% / - 0.089M )
8/13/18 Vs 8/6/18 ( + 0.75% / + 0.021M )

Demo (8/13/18 Vs 8/6/18):
H1- 0.970D Vs 0.940D
H2- 0.980D Vs 0.940D
H3- 0.950D Vs 0.910D
3H- 0.967D Vs 0.930D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 4th, 3rd & 6th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (8/13/18 Vs 8/14/17):
H1- 2.849M Vs 3.419M
H2- 2.867M Vs 3.293M
H3- 2.760M Vs 2.988M
3H- 2.825M Vs 3.233M ( - 12.62% / - 0.408M )

Demo (8/13/18 Vs 8/14/17):
H1- 0.970D Vs 1.210D
H2- 0.980D Vs 1.150D
H3- 0.950D Vs 1.050D
3H- 0.967D Vs 1.137D

Note: RAW this week last year was 1st, 2nd & 5th by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Go home show to SS and not one hour at 3 million. :lol

The small audience they did have at least stuck around for Seth and Dean, though.

minimal gains from last week

hour 1: +19,000
hour 2: +13,000
hour 3: +32,000

Seth and Dean with the biggest gain from last week.

:bjpenn


----------



## A-C-P

A feud that has captivated us for 3 years :brock4


----------



## Ace

NFL is going to kill them :heston


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Minimal difference from last week. LOL at Hour 3 dropping 100,000 + viewers on the go home show. :heston Down 12.6% year to year and over 400,000 viewers. So hot going into Summerslam. :bryanlol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> Minimal difference from last week. LOL at Hour 3 dropping 100,000 + viewers on the go home show. :heston Down 12.6% year to year and over 400,000 viewers. So hot going into Summerslam. :bryanlol


 2.8, 2.8, 2.7 is maintaining your audience quite well over the course of 3 hours. Actually, very well.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

It's still a lousy rating for what should be the hottest show of the summer. Keep it up, Vince. :clap


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> It's still a lousy rating for what should be the hottest show of the summer. Keep it up, Vince. :clap



Oh, for sure. Definitely is an AWFUL number. Only thing they did was maintain their small audience and not lose a significant amount that they started with. Only positive, which is pathetic for this time of year.


----------



## MC

*Weekly difference: *
H1 - 19,000 Increase
H2 - 13,000 Increase 
H3 - 32,000 Increase
Overall - 21,000 Increase


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Still will do better than Smackdown. Their only "bright side" is to try and increase last week's rating.


----------



## InexorableJourney

WWE's just lucky it splits RAW into three.

Otherwise the combined average would always see it trailing Love & Hip Hop.


----------



## DMD Mofomagic

Showstopper said:


> Oh, for sure. Definitely is an AWFUL number. Only thing they did was maintain their small audience and not lose a significant amount that they started with. Only positive, which is pathetic for this time of year.


Yeah, it's kind of weird, I keep thinking they will bottom out, but they seem to only be dropping slowly.

I honestly doubt that the number goes up anytime soon, in fact, i think Brock leaving may hurt the numbers in a way.


----------



## Zappers

I said it before, I'll say it again. DVR , VOD, Streaming are effecting the ratings. Watching anything live (even sports) is passe. WWE is pulling well over 3 million every week.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

MC 16 said:


> *Weekly difference: *
> H1 - 19,000 decrease
> H2 - 13,000 decrease
> H3 - 32,000 decrease
> Overall - 21,000 decrease
> 
> Highly disappointing rating from all accounts. Including the third hour. This is the go home show and a decrease is a bad thing to happen. fpalm


Your numbers are correct except that they are all increases.

Last week vs. this week:

H1- 2.830M vs. H1- 2.849M
H2- 2.854M vs. H2- 2.867M 
H3- 2.728M vs. H3- 2.760M 
3H: 2.804M vs. 2.825M

Everything is slightly up, a meager 0.75%


----------



## MC

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> I think you are looking at the wrong numbers.
> 
> Last week vs. this week:
> 
> H1- 2.830M vs. H1- 2.849M
> H2- 2.854M vs. H2- 2.867M
> H3- 2.728M vs. H3- 2.760M
> 3H: 2.804M vs. 2.825M
> 
> Everything is slightly up, a meager 0.75%


You're right. Thought I did, I'm was actually about the edit them


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

MC 16 said:


> You're right. Thought I did, I'm was actually about the edit them


I realized you had the right numbers but just flipped the weeks. I edited my post to reflect that gut you already quoted me. Less than a 1% increase is nothing for WWE to crow about.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1029475775932653570
From Meltzer:




> The go-home Raw for SummerSlam last night averaged 2.82 million viewers, up just under one percent from last week.
> 
> *The audience stayed relatively steady through all three hours with, once again, a much smaller than usual third-hour drop, which would indicate the tease for the Seth Rollins-Dolph Ziggler contract signing kept the audience.* The show ended with Dean Ambrose making his return to television after undergoing surgery for a torn triceps this past December. He'll be in Rollins' corner against Ziggler on Sunday, with Drew McIntyre accompanying Ziggler.
> 
> Raw was third for the night on cable, trailing Rachel Maddow and Hannity, after being first the prior two weeks.
> 
> Raw also beat ABC in hour three and CBS in hour two, as well as all shows on FOX and the CW.
> 
> In particular, both teenage boys and girls peaked in hour three.
> 
> The three hours were:
> 
> 8 p.m. 2.85 million viewers
> 9 p.m. 2.87 million viewers
> 10 p.m. 2.76 million viewers


Dave giving credit to the Seth/Dolph contract signing for maintaining the audience. Also said they maintained their audience from Hour 1 even more than they usually do.


----------



## MFR55

the first hour with ronda,did worse than the second hour,lesnar was a surprised appearance,im not sure he played a part on that,but i would like to thing he did,but i would be lying if i said im not hugely dissapointed to know that rousey isnt the big mainstream draw people talked her up as


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

A Summerslam go home show with not one hour even scratching the 3 million mark. This is beyond pathetic.
The only slight draw they have left is Brock, which they try their damnest to destroy.
Yesterday's show was the mother of all Nothing Happenin' shows. From the ludicrous Rousey segment where she beat up a combined 1000 pounds of security guards, to the awful Reigns Story, and those where the two selling points of the show.
You think anybody but a handful of people stayed for a potential live Ambrose return? I didn't. The last straw to tune out was the Anvil Tribute, which turned into a Natalya vignette.
Disgusting.

I don't care about analyses that honestly claim this or that was drawing because they retained 10.000 more viewers or whatever the fuck. A draw is someone that draws MORE viewers. People tuned out in hour 3 that tuned in on hour 2. That IC shit ain't a draw.

3.22 million last year.

They lost almost half a million viewers in one year.
But keep saying how everything is fine.


----------



## SPCDRI

Brock Lesnar is a has-been draw and Rousey is a never-was. These people can't pop ratings anymore, they're done. There were more than half a million more people watching some hours last year than this year. Brock is totally ruined and has harmed the product tremendously. I don't care about Paul Heyman going heel or face or basically anything he does. He's excruciatingly stale. Reigns is just poop. Green as gooseshit Rousey goofing around with Alicia Fox and Natalya, come on. That's not gonna draw anything. The 400,000 drop off when you take the whole shows into consideration buries the fact that last year, the first hour had 3.4 million people watching and not a single hour or the overrun hit so much as 2.9 million this year. The worst watched hour for last year, third hour, was better than any hour this year. All segments had a minimum of more than two hundred thousand people more watching last year than this year. That's simply staggering. They're close to half a million down from where they were last year. 

A Roman Reigns run is going to get killed by NFL, MLB playoffs and NBA coming back this October and November. They're roadkill. It's dead man walking. We could see all hours doing worse than 2.8 within a few months, with some hours like the end of the second into the third hour sort of Death Spot being under 2.5 million.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

What if they don't put the title on Roman so someone else will be blamed when the NFL stomps a mudhole in them?


----------



## RainmakerV2

Showstopper said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1029475775932653570
> From Meltzer:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dave giving credit to the Seth/Dolph contract signing for maintaining the audience. Also said they maintained their audience from Hour 1 even more than they usually do.


Doesnt mean anything. Corbin vs. Breeze was the last match before the 2nd hour which upticked so do I get to say mah boys a draw? Lol.


----------



## xio8ups

lol terrible fucking ratings


----------



## Littbarski

If a show is number 1 on cable the ratings can't be defined as terrible.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

RainmakerV2 said:


> Doesnt mean anything. Corbin vs. Breeze was the last match before the 2nd hour which upticked so do I get to say mah boys a draw? Lol.



Obviously, it's an awful number. I'm just surprised they maintained across 3 long, boring hours so well. That's all.


----------



## ClintDagger

Littbarski said:


> If a show is number 1 on cable the ratings can't be defined as terrible.


Probably better to say the trend is terrible or concerning.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Gonna set my sights high and say that 3M will happen this week. Everybody gets 3M.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> Gonna set my sights high and say that 3M will happen this week. Everybody gets 3M.


Yep. It would be pretty sad if they didn't considering it's the night after the second biggest show of the year.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Showstopper said:


> Yep. It would be pretty sad if they didn't considering it's the night after the second biggest show of the year.


And they had several title changes at said second biggest show of the year. And a Universal Title match/Ronda Rousey-Stephanie McMahon which hyped as Ronda's title celebration. Not to mention an MITB cash in tease.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

#BadNewsSanta said:


> And they had several title changes at said second biggest show of the year. And a Universal Title match/Ronda Rousey-Stephanie McMahon which hyped as Ronda's title celebration. Not to mention an MITB cash in tease.


Yep. No reason to not have a very good number for this show, not just above 3 million for all 3 hours, but WELL above 3 million.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

What else was on last night on the major networks?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I am ready to :heston all over the place if they come in lower than 3M


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Boy Wonder said:


> What else was on last night on the major networks?


Nothing newsworthy. NFL doesn't start for another couple of weeks. That's when there could be a bit of a problem.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.110M
H2- 3.241M
H3- 2.936M
3H- 3.096M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 4.21% / + 0.131M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 9.41% / - 0.305M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 5.59% / - 0.174M )
8/20/18 Vs 8/13/18 ( + 9.59% / + 0.271M )

Demo (8/20/18 Vs 8/13/18):
H1- 1.040D Vs 0.970D
H2- 1.090D Vs 0.980D
H3- 1.050D Vs 0.950D
3H- 1.060D Vs 0.967D

Note: RAW is 4th, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 3rd, 1st & 4th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (8/20/18 Vs 8/21/17):
H1- 3.110M Vs 3.416M
H2- 3.241M Vs 3.581M
H3- 2.936M Vs 3.216M
3H- 3.096M Vs 3.404M ( - 9.05% / - 0.308M )

Demo (8/20/18 Vs 8/21/17):
H1- 1.040D Vs 1.140D
H2- 1.090D Vs 1.210D
H3- 1.050D Vs 1.100D
3H- 1.060D Vs 1.150D

Note: RAW this week last year was 3rd, 1st & 4th by hourly demo & 4th, 3rd & 2nd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Terrible numbers. Vince better resign Brock :bosque


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

3 million even for the night after SS. Below 3 million for the 3rd hour BIG MATCH MAIN EVENT. :mj4

:lmao

Imagine what could happen when the NFL starts back up.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Rousey's segment was in Hour 2, right?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Decent but LOL at Hour 3. What will it takes for them to hit 3M there?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

And that main event was the first time the Universal Title had been defended on Raw in years..


----------



## Chrome

Those are actually better than I thought they'd be lol. Was expecting none of the hours to be over 3 million but they got 2 out of 3.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The Boy Wonder said:


> Rousey's segment was in Hour 2, right?



I think Ronda was the beginning of Hour 3. HHH made sure that he appeared in the second hour.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

There have been less stacked 3rd hours that weren't the lowest of the night. Pretty sad for that considering how much they put on in that hour.

Overall number is fine, but again it just gets sadder and sadder what "fine" is.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The very low 3's appears to be WWE's ceiling these days. Again, no competition. So, it's all downhill from here, especially when the NFL starts back up.


----------



## Chrome

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> I think Ronda was the beginning of Hour 3. *HHH made sure that he appeared in the second hour.*


No shock there. He cost Rollins the UC 2 years ago and then pulled a Houdini act so he couldn't be blamed for the terrible ratings during the fall season.


----------



## charsetutf

The Boy Wonder said:


> What else was on last night on the major networks?


Ravens vs Colts preseason game, which did 2.6 million viewers.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Are you ready for some Football?


----------



## DaShoot

Raw is a craphouse so they are lucky to get even those numbers.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

They should've advertised Stephanie "Mainstream" McMahon's appearance.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Last year was 3.416, 3.581, 3.216 (3.392 average). Every hour this year down around 300k/9%.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

The only proven Hour 3 draw has been Seth Rollins. Not Rousey, not Reigns, not Brock, not even Cena (although he hasn't had many Hour 3 segments).


----------



## JDP2016

charsetutf said:


> Ravens vs Colts preseason game, which did 2.6 million viewers.


A pre-season game drew 2.6 million. WWE should be ashamed.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Another fact to chew on:

Last week did a viewership of 2.825 million while last night (after SS) did 3 million. So, SS itself, with a World Title change, only added an extra 175,000 viewers. All of that work over the past few years for a less than 200K viewership increase. That's alot of work in along period of time for that small of an increase.


----------



## Chrome

JDP2016 said:


> A pre-season game drew 2.6 million. WWE should be ashamed.


It's the NFL though, they're a powerhouse. Despite ratings going down for them as well, they still draw like crazy, even for a preseason game. It's why I chuckle when Vince says the NFL is "vulnerable", which is part of the reason he revived the XFL. I'd argue WWE is way more vulnerable these days, but that's just me.


----------



## Randy Lahey

The monday after Summer Slam is usually their 2nd highest rating each year (with the highest being the Monday after Wrestlemania). To only pull 3 mils, for what should be the 2nd highest rated show of the year is terrible.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Roman is going to be a fighting champion, fighting a losing battle against ratings. :reigns2

The overall rating dropped 9% from last year. It's a bit less than their normal year to year drop but that is still a lot of viewers to shed.


----------



## Y.2.J

Decent Summerslam boost but still poor year-to-year ratings.

They must be happy to see the average back in the 3M's but doesn't seem sustainable - it'll only drop.

Hour 3 will always drop the average, Hour 3 is the cancer of Monday Night Raw.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

The Phenom. said:


> Decent Summerslam boost but still poor year-to-year ratings.
> 
> They must be happy to see the average back in the 3M's but doesn't seem sustainable - it'll only drop.
> 
> Hour 3 will always drop the average, *Hour 3 is the cancer of Monday Night Raw*.


Not always. The guy in your avatar has been able to make Hour 3 the highest on a few occasions :rollins


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Hour 3 did slightly beat Hour 1 in the demo which is a rarity. Basically Hour 2's demo was the highest and Hour 3 managed to piggyback of that a bit.


----------



## Y.2.J

Not RAW ratings related but did anyone hear Michael Cole at the beginning of yesterday's RAW say that SummerSlam 2018 was the most watched SummerSlam in history.

:bjpenn


----------



## obli6154

> With the bump coming from being the day after one of the big three WWE events of the year, last night's Raw did 3.09 million viewers, its best number since April 23.
> 
> The show peaked in hour two, but even with a 305,000 viewer third-hour drop, it was still the best third hour of the summer.
> 
> Raw was second to Hannity (3.24 million viewers) on cable, and beat the 10 p.m. hour on ABC, the 10 p.m. hour on CBS, the 10 p.m. hour on NBC, and FOX and CW programming. In the third hour, Raw beat everything on U.S. television except Salvation on CBS, which did 3.34 million viewers. And that show was available in far more homes, so the third hour of Raw as far as actual ratings for the hour, would have been the highest rated show on U.S. television, an extreme rarity in its history.
> 
> The MTV Video Music Awards,which probably prevented Raw from being even higher, did 2.25 million viewers.


https://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/wwe-raw-ratings-get-post-summerslam-bump-264286


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Hannity the ratings draw :trump


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Yeah, the more and more you think about it, horrific rating for night after SS.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

This era of no one is a draw makes me yearn for the good old days when this thread was an all out mark war. You'd come in here, assign credit or blame for the ratings, then post some smileys. Now rhis thread is no longer fun. :mj2


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> This era of no one is a draw makes me yearn for the good old days when this thread was an all out mark war. You'd come in here, assign credit or blame for the ratings, then post some smileys. Now rhis thread is no longer fun. :mj2


Why acknowledge the obvious? Roman's killing the ratings every year. It really needn't be said more than that. :reigns :reigns :reigns


----------



## llj

Roman and Ronda basically didn't do shit.

CLAPCLAPCLAP YOU DESERVE IT WWE CLAPCLAPCLAP


----------



## PrettyLush

obli6154 said:


> https://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/wwe-raw-ratings-get-post-summerslam-bump-264286


So Roman and co. did draw after all? :clap


----------



## MC

^ Thoughts so, put it however you want but there was a bump for Roman's title win. :shrug


----------



## CMPunkRock316

Over 300,000 tuned out despite the hype of Roman "Willing" Reigns and his generosity of being a willing and defending champion.

Ratings are trash but so is the product.


----------



## Slyfox

The Boy Wonder said:


> The only proven Hour 3 draw has been Seth Rollins. Not Rousey, not Reigns, not Brock, not even Cena (although he hasn't had many Hour 3 segments).


I hope you're joking


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

PrettyLush said:


> So Roman and co. did draw after all? :clap


The rating continued it's trend of being down from last year this week and barely drew 3 million viewers the night after SS. Down over 9% from last year, too.

It's a bad rating.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Down over 9% from this week last year..

Damn. That's a sizable loss in just one year.


----------



## ClintDagger

Disastrous.


----------



## Ibracadabra

Hour 3 of Raw was the most watched show on television last night. More people in America tuned into to see Roman in the main event than anything else on television, network or cable. 


That is fantastic and the reason why the WWE is getting billions for its shows.. Raw's rank on cable is what matters most. Its funny hearing people say Vince is out of touch, while they go around parading year-over-year numbers to prove their moot arguments. For context, cable is being cut at 33% , so this 9% drop by Raw is fantastic in comparison and again is the reason why the WWE is getting billions for its shows. 


Raw is the reason USA is the most watched Network on Cable, and I'm pretty sure the network execs come Tuesday morning weren't complaining when they learned that USA had more eyes on it than any other network in America the night before. Same goes for their sponsors. They probably picked up the phone and called Vince to tell him to do more of that next week.


----------



## SPCDRI

RAW is a lot better in the moneymaker demos of like teenagers to forty year olds, but the viewership for a RAW is roughly tracking cable news on FOX and MSNBC, like Sean Hannity, Rachel Maddow, Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham. Instead of ratings points we can see how many Tuckers, Hannitys and Maddows a RAW is worth in viewership. 

A post-Summerslam show in which there were two major title changes did a Hannity Point of .93


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

This episode of Raw was down 300K from Raw the same week last year. Even with the Universal Title being defended on the show this week (and for the first time in awhile).


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Bringing in that advertiser :vince$


----------



## RainmakerV2

Its actually a good number considering it was the first week of MNF. Yeah its preseason, but football fans will watch football if footballs on. I expected it to be lower honestly.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

That's a horrible number.
I don't give a shit if it's the first pre-season week of MNF. That's a lame ass excuse.
Ronda Rousey won her first WWE title, Brock's reign was broken, Finn Balor main evented in a title match, and still down 10% from last year.

Making WWE all about the brand instead of individual faces will be their undoing. Wrestling has always been cyclical, and it always was that because the promotion name took second place to the wrestler name(s) they pushed as stars. The names drew the Money, not the promotion.
So, once a top star cooled off, just create another one. When a promotion was cold, there was always the chance a guy suddenly took off for whatever reason, so the Promotion could get hot again.

But with this WWE, once wrestling gets cold - or more previsely, WWE - there is not a chance in hell this toxic promotion could ever create a new top star on its own. Just count the casualties of company branding, stupidity and nepotism over the last 10 years: Wade Barrett - buried. CM Punk - buried. Daniel Bryan - buried. Seth Rollins - sabotaged. Ziggler - sabotaged. Samoa Joe - sabotaged. Strowman - sabotaged.

It simply doesn't matter how much money Fox is forking over for the numbers they did 10 MONTHS AGO, or how high the stock is.
If the numbers nosedive by 10% year over year until 2025, they'll be toast. Not a network in the world will pay 200 million a year for barely above a million viewers.

A million I think is the limit on the way down. That's how many watched TNA. If you watch that TNA, you'll watch this trash, too.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Will the Shield triple power bomb the ratings this week?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 1: 3.076 million
Hour 2: 2.927 million
Hour 3: 2.630 million

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


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.076M
H2- 2.927M
H3- 2.630M
3H- 2.878M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 4.84% / - 0.149M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 10.15% / - 0.297M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 14.50% / - 0.446M )
8/27/18 Vs 8/20/18 ( - 7.04% / - 0.218M )

Demo (8/27/18 Vs 8/20/18):
H1- 1.040D Vs 1.040D
H2- 0.970D Vs 1.090D
H3- 0.890D Vs 1.050D
3H- 0.967D Vs 1.060D

Note: RAW is 1st, 2nd & 4th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 6th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (8/27/18 Vs 8/28/17):
H1- 3.076M Vs 3.384M
H2- 2.927M Vs 3.364M
H3- 2.630M Vs 3.163M
3H- 2.878M Vs 3.304M ( - 12.89% / - 0.426M )

Demo (8/27/18 Vs 8/28/17):
H1- 1.040D Vs 1.150D
H2- 0.970D Vs 1.170D
H3- 0.890D Vs 1.160D
3H- 0.967D Vs 1.160D

Note: RAW this week last year was 3rd, 1st & 2nd by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mordecay

Roman the draw :reigns2


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

:ha :ha :ha :ha

That's what they get for turning Braun heel for Reigns.

Bad karma.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

7% drop from last week. :bryanlol Almost 13% year to year drop. Hour 3 at 2630M and down 500,000 viewers from last year.

That is why you fail. :yoda


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

People tuned in for The Shield. Maybe they tuned in for a Braun cash in. They didn't get it. They weren't advertised the rest of the night and people stopped giving a shit.

I wonder what the numbers for next week will be coming off Braun's heel turn. It falls on Laboe Day too... and then after that is when football season starts? 

It's all downhill from here.


----------



## A-C-P

#BadNewsSanta said:


> People tuned in for The Shield. Maybe they tuned in for a Braun cash in. They didn't get it. They weren't advertised the rest of the night and people stopped giving a shit.
> 
> I wonder what the numbers for next week will be coming off Braun's heel turn. It falls on Laboe Day too... and then after that is when football season starts?
> 
> It's all downhill from here.


MNF starts the Monday after Labor Day :bosque

THEY TURNED BRAUN STROMAN HEEL :heston


----------



## Ace

That third hour :ha


----------



## Kabraxal

So much for never losing the hardcore audience... 2.6 million with no competition? Ouch. I sense a slew of sub 2 million numbers if they continue the course.

I feel proud I helped contribute to that low number. Felt nice not being numbed by Vince’s idiocy. May the exodus continue.


----------



## JDP2016

Woo boy. Gonna be a loooooooong way until Wrestlemania season.


----------



## SPCDRI

Survivor Series is about seeing if Hour Three can stay above 2.5 million viewers against the gang bang of October and November Sports in America. College football, NFL, NBA starting and MLB playoffs. They're so deep-dicked. Its only been two weeks into Roman's "coronation" reign and there are half a million people less watching than last year this time in August. Wow.


----------



## PrettyLush

*LAWLZ that hour 3 tanked :mj4 I take it back, he aint drawing shit :lol*


----------



## Y.2.J

Not surprised about Hour 3.

When I heard a tag team main event Roman & Braun v Ziggler & Drew...I kind of sighed.

If I wasn't there live, even though it was probably better watching live, but if I was watching on TV...I would've shut the TV.

Get ready for The Shield v Braun, Ziggler, Drew and one on ones between them for the next few weeks. :cry


----------



## SPCDRI

The Phenom. said:


> Not surprised about Hour 3.
> 
> When I heard a tag team main event Roman & Braun v Ziggler & Drew...I kind of sighed.
> 
> If I wasn't there live, even though it was probably better watching live, but if I was watching on TV...I would've shut the TV.
> 
> Get ready for The Shield v Braun, Ziggler, Drew and one on ones between them for the next few weeks. :cry


They might really phone this in and run the angle until Survivor Series. They'd better come up with the backup plan for that because that ain't gonna fly until the middle of November. It looks like people are tapping out on this on Week Two. Lets see where people are at on Week Ten before Survivor Series.


----------



## validreasoning

8 months of the year down and raw is averaging 3,039,486 viewers live over that period.

First eight months of 2017 raw averaged 3,101,514 viewers live

So a drop of 2% exactly


----------



## SPCDRI

Its more important to me to see what the last hour and the Overrun is doing instead of the whole show. 

For last Monday, you could add 3.1, 2.9, 2.6 and 2.8 and find out the average amount of viewers is something like 2.9

That doesn't tell the whole story of a 2.6 million viewer third hour and an overrun that didn't hit 3 million, either. 

I know for a couple months now you can look at comparable time in the last year from 2016 and 2017 and see major segments of the show, entire hours or entire shows, below 3.1 million viewers and down more than a quarter million people watching that that time last year. Comparing the whole year to what is going on in the past few months is kind of hiding a pretty bad downward trend. 

Its also burying a disturbing multiple year trend. Maybe if you confine it to the apples-to-apples comparison you can spin this into not being so bad, but if you take it out into a three or four year time span, it gets pretty clear how badly this product is doing compared to what it used to. In 2015, RAW was almost 3.7 million viewers a show in the summer, like the entire month of July, and it had moments close to 4 million viewers. It was closer to 4 million than 3 million in hours and overall. In the last two years or so, this company shed about half million viewers. That's no 2 percent drop. It's like that New Age Outlaws line that they used to say about their opponent's promos and bragging and excuses: You can polish a turd all day, and you can polish a turd all night, but at the end of all your polishing, a turd is still a turd.


----------



## The Masked Avenger

Sometimes it feels like they aren't even trying anymore, like at all.


----------



## Seafort

TheMaskedAvenger said:


> Sometimes it feels like they aren't even trying anymore, like at all.


They literally don't have to. They could have an audience of just one person and they would get $500M for RAW, and $500M for Smackdown. They literally only need to be concerned about the 2024 deal.


----------



## ClintDagger

Seafort said:


> They literally don't have to. They could have an audience of just one person and they would get $500M for RAW, and $500M for Smackdown. They literally only need to be concerned about the 2024 deal.


That’s true in theory, but in reality there’s a point where the ratings get low enough that the networks will start throwing heat on Vince and he’ll be forced out of his complacency. That’s particularly true when Fox gets in the mix. They paid for a product of a certain value. If WWE delivers something substantially less than that Fox & NBCU won’t just stay silent about it. They will knock on Vince’s door and start asking questions.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Ratings delayed?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Raw-Is-Botchamania said:


> Ratings delayed?


Labor Day holiday so look for the ratings tomorrow.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.945M
H2- 2.933M
H3- 2.740M
3H- 2.873M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 0.41% / - 0.012M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 6.58% / - 0.193M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 6.96% / - 0.205M )
9/3/18 Vs 8/27/18 ( - 4.79% / - 0.005M )

Demo (9/3/18 Vs 8/27/18):
H1- 0.950D Vs 1.040D
H2- 1.000D Vs 0.970D
H3- 0.970D Vs 0.890D
3H- 0.973D Vs 0.967D

Note: RAW is 6th, 3rd & 5th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 5th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (9/3/18 Vs 9/4/17):
H1- 2.945M Vs 3.069M
H2- 2.933M Vs 2.978M
H3- 2.740M Vs 2.750M
3H- 2.873M Vs 2.932M ( - 2.01% / - 0.059M )

Demo (9/3/18 Vs 9/4/17):
H1- 0.950D Vs 1.070D
H2- 1.000D Vs 1.050D
H3- 0.970D Vs 1.010D
3H- 0.973D Vs 1.043D

Note: RAW this week last year was 2nd, 3rd & 4th by hourly demo & 2nd, 3rd & 4th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Slightly down in total viewers but slightly up in the demo for last week. Only down 2% year to year. Perhaps they are getting close to their basement. Will be interesting to see how much further the NFL can drag them down. I don't think it will be too much but we shall see.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

One guy advertised from last week to be on the show who may have saved it from being the usual shit-show on a holiday.

:hbk1


----------



## Jedah

They better get out of lazy mode soon, because if this keeps up, Fox will shunt SmackDown to FS1. When Raw gets a cold, SD gets the flu.


----------



## Littbarski

Jedah said:


> They better get out of lazy mode soon, because if this keeps up, Fox will shunt SmackDown to FS1. When Raw gets a cold, SD gets the flu.


Don't think there is any danger of that anytime soon looking at the viewers current programming on Fox at 8pm on Friday nights. 760,000 viewers is less than 1/3 what Smackdown is currently doing on USA.


----------



## The Renegade

Gonna make a bold prediction: Despite the return of Monday Night Football next week, we’ll see the ratings increase for Raw due to that closing angle. The Universal Chanpionship being back on Raw has created a heightened sense of urgency on Raw and the return of The Shield as a threat to those who look to claim it has the entire heel side of the roster going bananas.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Renegade said:


> Gonna make a bold prediction: Despite the return of Monday Night Football next week, we’ll see the ratings increase for Raw due to that angle. The Universal Chanpionship being back on Raw has created a heightened sense of urgency on Raw and the return of The Shield as a threat to those who look to claim it has the entire heel side of the roster going bananas.


Your first two sentences. Due to what angle?


----------



## The Renegade

Showstopper said:


> The Renegade said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gonna make a bold prediction: Despite the return of Monday Night Football next week, we’ll see the ratings increase for Raw due to that angle. The Universal Chanpionship being back on Raw has created a heightened sense of urgency on Raw and the return of The Shield as a threat to those who look to claim it has the entire heel side of the roster going bananas.
> 
> 
> 
> Your first two sentences. Due to what angle?
Click to expand...

 ? My bad. The closing angle of the show. I edited the post to reflect that. Good catch!


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Renegade said:


> ? My bad. The closing angle of the show. I edited the post to reflect that. Good catch!


Oh ok. I guess we'll see. Doubt WWE is able to capitalize on something that isn't an unquestionable slam dunk. Especially in the toughest portion of the year.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Jedah said:


> They better get out of lazy mode soon, because if this keeps up, Fox will shunt SmackDown to FS1. When Raw gets a cold, SD gets the flu.


Smackdown will have to beat RAW in order for it to be profitable on Fox.


----------



## Erramayhem89

Weird thing is WWE doesn't try at all anymore and the same 3 million fans still watch every night. If the show is literally the same thing every week and they put zero effort into anything then why do people still watch? I can understand watching some of it but i don't know how people can watch 2-3 hours every night. Ratings show that the core audience pretty much endures the entire show.


----------



## Erik.

Erramayhem89 said:


> Weird thing is WWE doesn't try at all anymore and the same 3 million fans still watch every night. If the show is literally the same thing every week and they put zero effort into anything then why do people still watch? I can understand watching some of it but i don't know how people can watch 2-3 hours every night. Ratings show that the core audience pretty much endures the entire show.


It's a fair argument.

Those that watch religiously each week genuinely like the show. I imagine those are either kids who just like wrestling because we all liked wrestling as kids or those who haven't really experienced any other era and like what they're being fed each week.

I never understood why those on here who bash the product would watch it each week though. The argument tends to be "Because I still have favourites I watch" - but wouldn't it be easier to just watch your favourites the next day? As opposed to watching a 3 hour show that you dislike watching so you can see your favourite who's on the show for less than 20 minutes?

I imagine those watch via stream by the way.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.818M
H2- 2.801M
H3- 2.601M
3H- 2.740M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 0.60% / - 0.017M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 7.14% / - 0.200M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 7.70% / - 0.217M )
9/10/18 Vs 9/3/18 ( - 4.63% / - 0.133M )

Demo (9/10/18 Vs 9/3/18):
H1- 0.880D Vs 0.950D
H2- 0.910D Vs 1.000D
H3- 0.890D Vs 0.970D
3H- 0.893D Vs 0.973D

Note: RAW is 7th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 5th, 6th & 10th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (9/10/18 Vs 9/11/17):
H1- 2.818M Vs 3.022M
H2- 2.801M Vs 2.987M
H3- 2.601M Vs 2.699M
3H- 2.740M Vs 2.903M ( - 5.61% / - 0.163M )

Demo (9/10/18 Vs 9/11/17):
H1- 0.880D Vs 1.010D
H2- 0.910D Vs 1.030D
H3- 0.890D Vs 0.930D
3H- 0.893D Vs 0.990D

Note: RAW this week last year was 5th, 3rd & 7th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 5th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Looks like they are settling in with a fairly stable sub 3M audience each week. Down only 5.6% year to year. Did drop .1 in the demo though. I don't think the bottom will ever fall out on their ratings.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

It will be interesting to see if below 3 million for all 3 hours will become the new norm going forward or not. If so, no bueno.


----------



## MC

No Brock = Bad Ratings :brock2


----------



## JDP2016

Going into a PPV. :lol


----------



## Mordecay

Honestly, that show deserved lower ratings, what a waste of time that was.


----------



## Erik.

Looks like they lost approx 100,000 viewers this week. 

Not surprised.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Hour 3 shed nearly 140,000 viewers from the previous week. We'll see how it goes. To me, this show merited a far lower rating.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

2nd consecutive week that all 3 hours were below 3 million viewers. Like I said, it will be interesting to see if this becomes the new norm or not.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> It will be interesting to see if below 3 million for all 3 hours will become the new norm going forward or not. If so, no bueno.


I would say if we fast forward ahead say 3-5 years that it’s more likely that they have an audience routinely under 2MM than routinely over 3MM. They would have to drastically change course creatively or stumble upon another Hogan or Austin type star to reverse this trend. Their loss of audience at 5-6% per year is much larger than the loss of audience that cable tv itself is losing each year which is closer to 2%. So in essence, WWE can only blame about a third of their loss of audience on the changing landscape of cable due to streaming and cord cutting. The other 2/3s is fans just walking away from the product and choosing something else.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

When the post ppv shows "bump" nets sub 3M, then you'll know that interest is waning.


----------



## Erik.

I'd say the post PPV Raw will all be under 3,000,000 still.

They'd need nearly 200,000 tuning in for it. Considering the PPV is likely going to end with hardly any title changes and Reigns standing tall, I would be amazed if the ratings are actually an upgrade on this weeks


----------



## Chrome

Erik. said:


> I'd say the post PPV Raw will all be under 3,000,000 still.
> 
> They'd need nearly 200,000 tuning in for it. Considering the PPV is likely going to end with hardly any title changes and Reigns standing tall, I would be amazed if the ratings are actually an upgrade on this weeks


Hour 1 might get above 3 million since there's only 1 MNF game next week, so they'll be unopposed for that hour.


----------



## Erik.

Chrome said:


> Hour 1 might get above 3 million since there's only 1 MNF game next week, so they'll be unopposed for that hour.


Fair point - being from the UK, I'm not sure when the NFL games kick off over in the states but if that's the case, you could be right.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I agree with Chrome. The first hour is normally unopposed by the NFL, so they tend to frontl oad the shows and have the "important" acts air then.


----------



## Chrome

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> I agree with Chrome. The first hour is normally unopposed by the NFL, so they tend to frontl oad the shows and have the "important" acts air then.


Means the Shield will definitely be in that hour and vanish into the night afterwards. :reigns2


----------



## squarebox

Can't believe 2.8m are still watching this shit.


----------



## Seafort

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> Looks like they are settling in with a fairly stable sub 3M audience each week. Down only 5.6% year to year. Did drop .1 in the demo though. I don't think the bottom will ever fall out on their ratings.


There's no viable real competition to steal the base of viewers away. That leaves gradual erosion, like any other television show. There audience erosion is measured year over year.

The interesting thing to me is - like last year - how little the audience fell off with the NFL launching. There apparently is minimal crossover between RAW's dedicated fanbase and the National Football League.


----------



## deathvalleydriver2

I’m thinking the ratings continue to fall.


----------



## validreasoning

ClintDagger said:


> I would say if we fast forward ahead say 3-5 years that it’s more likely that they have an audience routinely under 2MM than routinely over 3MM. They would have to drastically change course creatively or stumble upon another Hogan or Austin type star to reverse this trend. Their loss of audience at 5-6% per year is much larger than the loss of audience that cable tv itself is losing each year which is closer to 2%. So in essence, WWE can only blame about a third of their loss of audience on the changing landscape of cable due to streaming and cord cutting. The other 2/3s is fans just walking away from the product and choosing something else.


Just wondering where the 2% comes from? 

Raws loss is not consistent per annum. It's been 2% same day viewers year to date 2018 so far. Was 5.5% last year, 13.5% in 2016, 10% in 2015, 0.25% in 2014 and 4% in 2013.

For comparison in prime time cbs lost 10% last year, nbc 14%, abc 11% and fox 7%.

On cable and in prime time usa lost 3.6%, ESPN 7.3%, TNT 8.8%, AMC 18% last year.

Between 2011 and 2017 and in prime time
USA lost 49%
Disney lost 61%
TNT lost 45%
Syfy lost 53%
History lost 34%
ESPN lost 12%
TBS lost 10%

I haven't calculated the loss of total day viewers and of course the news channels have seen massive increases since 2011 due to Trump coverage


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Seafort said:


> There's no viable real competition to steal the base of viewers away. That leaves gradual erosion, like any other television show. There audience erosion is measured year over year.
> 
> *The interesting thing to me is - like last year - how little the audience fell off with the NFL launching. There apparently is minimal crossover between RAW's dedicated fanbase and the National Football League.*


That's what I would assume too. They have shed most of their viewers who watch football.


----------



## JTB33b

The fall TV shows are returning soon also.


----------



## ClintDagger

validreasoning said:


> Just wondering where the 2% comes from?
> 
> Raws loss is not consistent per annum. It's been 2% same day viewers year to date 2018 so far. Was 5.5% last year, 13.5% in 2016, 10% in 2015, 0.25% in 2014 and 4% in 2013.
> 
> For comparison in prime time cbs lost 10% last year, nbc 14%, abc 11% and fox 7%.
> 
> On cable and in prime time usa lost 3.6%, ESPN 7.3%, TNT 8.8%, AMC 18% last year.
> 
> Between 2011 and 2017 and in prime time
> USA lost 49%
> Disney lost 61%
> TNT lost 45%
> Syfy lost 53%
> History lost 34%
> ESPN lost 12%
> TBS lost 10%
> 
> I haven't calculated the loss of total day viewers and of course the news channels have seen massive increases since 2011 due to Trump coverage


There’s been a few credible studies and all are seeing about a 2% contraction in cable viewers per year due to cord cutting. That number is likely to accelerate rather than decelerate but it’s what I’m going with for now. Yeah the big networks are seeing bigger drops than that overall but that is more attributable to DVR use and Netflix/Amazon/Hulu etcetera. That doesn’t mean 10%-40% of viewers have gotten rid of live cable, they just aren’t using it. The 2% I’m quoting have walked away from cable and no longer have access to it.

And yeah Raw’s drops per year haven’t been consistent. But over the past 5 years or so the average drop is about 5%-6% so I went with that. It’s assumption based so you have to go with something.


----------



## validreasoning

Cord cutting would be a different thing altogether and yes it's about 10-15% over past 5 years depending on cable network. But there definitely is a loss of viewers across the board on top of cord cutting. We see it on the broadcast networks and there is no cord cutting there because number of tv homes are growing annually not falling.

DVR can account for some of the fall but not all, btw wwe dvr % has grown too over the years. Live sport barely sees any DVR playback yet UFC, NFL, mlb, Nascar, Olympics all have fallen. NBA fell in 2018 but rose in 2017 so it was roughly same level as 2016. NBA however is going through it's third boom period since the 60s so in reality viewership should be increasing exponentially year on year but we are not seeing that despite big rises in merch sales, attendance and revenue


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Less people watching NFL should mean more people watching WWE.


----------



## Randy Lahey

2017 MNF: 11,392,000
2018 MNF: 10,336,000

Those lost viewers aren't tuning in to watch Raw either.


----------



## ClintDagger

Randy Lahey said:


> 2017 MNF: 11,392,000
> 2018 MNF: 10,336,000
> 
> Those lost viewers aren't tuning in to watch Raw either.


I know there is some crossover between WWE and real sports, but it can’t be that much anymore. Look at who is showing up at the arenas. You think those guys know who Patrick Mahomes is? Or Paul George? I think that is becoming less & less of an excuse as WWE sheds viewers. The type of male fan they are attracting is much different than 20 years ago.

WWE and the NFL are both suffering from their product deteriorating and people instead preferring to watch Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, anything else on cable etcetera.


----------



## Erramayhem89

So what is this like a 2.5 rating?


----------



## validreasoning

Don't think there was ever a massive crossovers between sports fans and wrestling fans. If there was, networks and advertisers would have been falling over themselves considering the numbers raw and nitro were doing 20 years ago. SD on upn in 1999-2000 had lowest ad rates of any show on broadcast tv in primetime despite it beating out quite a number of shows in viewers.

Seeing as we no longer get quarter ratings though it would be interesting to list most watched clips from Raw on wwes official YouTube page since week after mania. Pretty clear from list that Rousey is most popular at least as far as this medium goes. Shield stuff since Summerslam is the most viewed. 

1. Rousey is suspended (June 18th) = 16.77 million views
2. Rousey helps Nattie fends off Absolution (April 16th) = 14.34 million views
3. Lesnar attacks Heyman (July 30th) = 10.28 million views
4. Rousey locks James in armbar (April 23rd) = 9.82 million views
5. Rousey violates suspension (July 16th) = 9.16 million views
6. Reigns assaults Jinder (May 14th) = 8.75 million views
7. Shield reunites (August 20th) = 8.42 million
8. Rousey vs Alicia Fox (August 6th) = 8.07 million
9. Rousey armbar Nia Jax (June 11th) = 7.39 million views
10. Dean Ambrose returns (August 13th) = 6.79 million views


----------



## Chrome

validreasoning said:


> Don't think there was ever a massive crossovers between sports fans and wrestling fans. If there was, networks and advertisers would have been falling over themselves considering the numbers raw and nitro were doing 20 years ago. SD on upn in 1999-2000 had lowest ad rates of any show on broadcast tv in primetime despite it beating out quite a number of shows in viewers.
> 
> Seeing as we no longer get quarter ratings though it would be interesting to list most watched clips from Raw on wwes official YouTube page since week after mania. Pretty clear from list that Rousey is most popular at least as far as this medium goes. Shield stuff since Summerslam is the most viewed.
> 
> 1. Rousey is suspended (June 18th) = 16.77 million views
> 2. Rousey helps Nattie fends off Absolution (April 16th) = 14.34 million views
> 3. Lesnar attacks Heyman (July 30th) = 10.28 million views
> 4. Rousey locks James in armbar (April 23rd) = 9.82 million views
> 5. Rousey violates suspension (July 16th) = 9.16 million views
> 6. Reigns assaults Jinder (May 14th) = 8.75 million views
> 7. Shield reunites (August 20th) = 8.42 million
> 8. Rousey vs Alicia Fox (August 6th) = 8.07 million
> 9. Rousey armbar Nia Jax (June 11th) = 7.39 million views
> 10. Dean Ambrose returns (August 13th) = 6.79 million views


Next to Lesnar, Ronda is probably the only other one who can draw casuals in, so these numbers aren't surprising.


----------



## SPCDRI

RAW tomorrow might get the first hour to three million by the hair Dean's chinny chin chin, but the other stuff will be Suffering Succotash. 

I don't think tomorrow night has any RAW related title changes, maybe Rollins and Ambrose becoming tag champs, I dunno. Is that supposed to spike a show for two hundred thousand people for three hours? I doubt it.


----------



## validreasoning

Emmys are on live tomorrow night so it will likely be least viewed episode of the the year. All the big network premieres are the following week so will stay same level. Might see a bounce back on first week of October


----------



## tducey

Coming off a PPV RAW might do decent tomorrow night. Aside from casuals can't see RAW getting the same viewers the Emmys do.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

RAW:

Hour 1: 2.839
Hour 2: 2.746
Hour 3: 2.432

That hour 3. 

:ha

That main event.

:ha


----------



## A-C-P

Those #s :heston


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

:damn

I thought the first hour not facing the NFL would lead to a better unopposed number than that. Hour 3 is simply abysmal. Belee dat! :reigns2


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.839M
H2- 2.746M
H3- 2.432M
3H- 2.672M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 3.28% / - 0.093M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 11.43% / - 0.314M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 14.34% / - 0.407M )
9/17/18 Vs 9/10/18 ( - 2.48% / - 0.068M )

Demo (9/17/18 Vs 9/10/18):
H1- 0.960D Vs 0.880D
H2- 0.900D Vs 0.910D
H3- 0.850D Vs 0.890D
3H- 0.903D Vs 0.893D

Note: RAW is 5th, 6th & 7th by hourly demo & 7th, 9th & 11th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (9/17/18 Vs 9/18/17):
H1- 2.839M Vs 3.123M
H2- 2.746M Vs 2.844M
H3- 2.432M Vs 2.532M
3H- 2.672M Vs 2.833M ( - 5.68% / - 0.161M )

Demo (9/17/18 Vs 9/18/17):
H1- 0.960D Vs 0.990D
H2- 0.900D Vs 0.940D
H3- 0.850D Vs 0.840D
3H- 0.903D Vs 0.923D

Note: RAW this week last year was 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 2nd, 3rd & 6th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## A-C-P

USA and FOX paying $1 Billion for this drivel :heston


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

And the MNF game wasn't even two top teams playing eachother, either.

:damn


----------



## llj

A-C-P said:


> USA and FOx paying $1 Billion for this drivel :heston


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The Hour 3 debacle portends poorly for Smackdown as they are always lower than Hour 3. What a ppv bump! :trips8


----------



## chronoxiong

Lol at that third hour. That is very bad. That's like what Smackdown can get with their highest viewing audience.


----------



## Ace

Holy shit that hr 3 with the UC match :lmao

I can understand it for any other FT guy other than Roman.

Roman has been pushed by far more than any FT guy and is only second to Brock.

He shouldn't be pulling out bad numbers like this because it's been established he's above everyone else. He's the one being pushed to draw but here we are with 2.4m with a UC defense.


----------



## DammitChrist

I'm just waiting for a certain poster to come in here and shit on the current Universal Champion for those poor numbers the same way he does for AJ Styles on the Smackdown ratings thread, but he probably won't be found anywhere here :bosque


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ace said:


> Holy shit that hr 3 with the UC match :lmao
> 
> I can understand it for any other FT guy other than Roman.
> 
> Roman has been pushed by far more than any FT guy and is only second to Brock.
> 
> He shouldn't be pulling out bad numbers like this because it's been established he's above everyone else. He's the one being pushed to draw but here we are with 2.4m with a UC defense.



I am drawing a blank on "FT". It's probably obvious which further proves that watching RAW kills brain cells. :bryanlol

Watch them try to blame Lio for the rating when he was the star of that hour.


----------



## Ace

SHIV:THE OTHER WHITE MEAT said:


> I am drawing a blank on "FT". It's probably obvious which further proves that watching RAW kills brain cells. :bryanlol
> 
> Watch them try to blame Lio for the rating when he was the star of that hour.


 Full time.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ace said:


> Full time.


Yeah that was pretty obvious. :lol


----------



## Chrome

Pretty terrible numbers, especially that 3rd hour. :wow


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Clearly, it's Baron Corbin's fault.


----------



## deathvalleydriver2

Maybe WWE should stop shoving Regina down our throats and shoving the same rehashed story lines such as Reigns and Lesnar. That’s hilarious Taker didn’t even draw :lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Roman vs, Ratings and Ratings went over clean. Ratings reign of terror is giving Vince nightmares.


----------



## DoctorWhosawhatsit

Showstopper said:


> RAW:
> 
> Hour 1: 2.839
> Hour 2: 2.746
> Hour 3: 2.432
> 
> That hour 3.
> 
> :ha
> 
> That main event.
> 
> :ha












Clearly this is Ambrose's fault.


----------



## Ace

Where has the troll who always shits on AJ and Seth gone?

World title defense promoted from the start of the show draws one of the worst 3rd hr numbers ever.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

In a tribute to Sami Callihan, I thought about giving the Shield another new moniker. rVe: Roman Versus Everything. Right now they are feuding with multiple men in his main event matches as well as battling Ratings. :reigns2


----------



## Chris90

That 3rd hour though


----------



## Erik.

So like I said last week, the post PPV Raw will all be under 3,000,000.

They're done.

Unless they change their style, presentation, booking and writing they simply aren't going to grow that number. That third hour number is ridiculous. Eventually, that will be the hour 1 number though. A few hundred thousand isn't a lot. Every year those viewers get a little bit older, a little bit wiser and a little bit smarter and realise this isn't the be all and end all.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

@the cognoscenti 

How does this travesty of a third hour rating stack up historically? It's not the lowest but it is a woeful rating indeed.


----------



## Chrome

They'll blame Lio Rush for that 3rd hour. Small, black, AND has a prior controversy with the whole Asuka thing? "Yeah it's back to 205 Live for you pal!" :vince5


----------



## Ace

BAD SHIV RISING said:


> @the cognoscenti
> 
> How does this travesty of a third hour rating stack up historically? It's not the lowest but it is a woeful rating indeed.





> The third hour was the second lowest hour of Raw this year, trailing only the third hour on 7/9, which included all third hours against the NBA playoffs. It was also the *fifth lowest watched hour of Raw in the modern era, and two of those five hours were against the Trump-Clinton debate in 2016*.


 WON.

Where is that troll? :lmao

He had the gall to show up in the SD thread and shit talk AJ but not a peep here for the HISTORIC low for the one guy who has zero excuses for failing.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ace said:


> WON.
> 
> Where is that troll? :lmao
> 
> He had the gall to show up in the SD thread and shit talk AJ but not a peep here for the HISTORIC low for the one guy who said have zero excuses for failing.


That number is brutal. I consider it bottom 3 because the presidential debates were monstrous ratings draws. To top it off, this was on a show with a "ppv bump". :heston 

As was already mentioned, they will blame Corbin and his lack of star power for the number. 

:hmmm If a workhorse champion has a title defense and no one watches, did it really happen at all?:reigns2


----------



## Erik.

Quite a shame WWE don't care about ratings anymore - because this is definitely "oh shit we need to change something" territory.


----------



## SPCDRI

Man, the only time a third hour and overrun did that poorly in viewers was when it fought NBA renaissance era playoff games and the hottest, most entertaining, hyped up, highest-rated political debates this country has had in decades if not ever. Look, if you get schlonged by the current president and two time First Lady, Senator and presidential cabinet level politician, whatever. Don't tell me that Emmys in the toilet on the ratings themselves and a Bears/Seahawks game that got the second lowest MNF ratings of all time for an ESPN broadcast justifies that putrid third hour.


----------



## ClintDagger

SPCDRI said:


> Man, the only time a third hour and overrun did that poorly in viewers was when it fought NBA renaissance era playoff games and the hottest, most entertaining, hyped up, highest-rated political debates this country has had in decades if not ever. Look, if you get schlonged by the current president and two time First Lady, Senator and presidential cabinet level politician, whatever. Don't tell me that Emmys in the toilet on the ratings themselves and a Bears/Seahawks game that got the second lowest MNF ratings of all time for an ESPN broadcast justifies that putrid third hour.


Well said. It’s not their competition. It’s their own product which is slowly but surely driving viewers away.


----------



## SPCDRI

They promoted a title match again as the main event and gave it a ton of time and did 2.4 million/2.6 million and this is simply unacceptable. The second coming of Christ Jesus could be broadcast on cable and network programming and they should do a 2.5 million viewer number if a main belt is on the line. They're basically doing Smackdown numbers now. They're not going to be the A Show if they keep this up. 

They're going to kill Baron Corbin for this flopping. He is the Corporate Clone of John Cena in that regard, at least.


----------



## PrettyLush

blaming Corbin seems like a stretch but knowing Vince he probably would and only gives roman a slap on the wrist


----------



## Erik.

After looking at this weeks Raw preview - I am willing to say they'll get at least 50k less viewers this week.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

RAW has greater competition this week with not only the NFL but the return of first run network shows. I doth foresee a drop.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Judging by the Raw thread on this website, I'm going to say it's an all time record low


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.493M
H2- 2.275M
H3- 2.281M
3H- 2.350M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 8.74% / - 0.218M )
H3 Vs H2 ( + 0.26% / + 0.006M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 8.50% / - 0.212M )
9/24/18 Vs 9/17/18 ( - 12.05% / - 0.322M )

Demo (9/24/18 Vs 9/17/18):
H1- 0.840D Vs 0.960D
H2- 0.800D Vs 0.900D
H3- 0.820D Vs 0.850D
3H- 0.830D Vs 0.903D

Note: RAW is 4th, 7th & 6th by hourly demo & 11th, 14th & 13th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (9/24/18 Vs 9/25/17):
H1- 2.493M Vs 3.121M
H2- 2.275M Vs 3.081M
H3- 2.281M Vs 2.568M
3H- 2.350M Vs 2.923M ( - 19.60% / - 0.573M )

Demo (9/24/18 Vs 9/25/17):
H1- 0.840D Vs 1.040D
H2- 0.800D Vs 1.040D
H3- 0.820D Vs 0.880D
3H- 0.830D Vs 0.987D

Note: RAW this week last year was 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 3rd, 5th & 8th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (9/24/18 Vs 9/26/16):
H1- 2.493M Vs 2.850M
H2- 2.275M Vs 2.381M
H3- 2.281M Vs 2.203M
3H- 2.350M Vs 2.478M ( - 5.17% / - 0.128M )

Demo (9/24/18 Vs 9/26/16):
H1- 0.840D Vs 0.970D
H2- 0.800D Vs 0.790D
H3- 0.820D Vs 0.740D
3H- 0.830D Vs 0.833D

Note: RAW this week the year before was 11th, 14th & 15th by hourly demo & 12th, 18th & 19th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

LOWEST RATING OF ALL TIME.

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

IT'S WORKING, GUYS.

:vince5
@Ace ; @BAD SHIV RISING ;


----------



## A-C-P




----------



## Ace

HOLY SHITTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT

That's got to be the lowest rating in history.

2.3m??????????? SD could get close to that lmao.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> HOLY SHITTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
> 
> That's got to be the lowest rating in history.
> 
> 2.3m??????????? SD could get close to that lmao.


Pretty sure it is. Someone on the Observer board said it is and he posts the ratings on there pretty frequently.


----------



## Ace

Where is that Roman mark at who hates on AJ and Seth :heston


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

:vince7


----------



## DammitChrist

Wait, this is the lowest Raw rating of all time?? :CENA

It's okay, I'm sure this is somehow because of AJ Styles or Seth Rollins unk2


----------



## Steve Black Man

I'm pretty proud to say that I'm doing my part in all of this. Haven't watched Raw since The Shield reformed


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

Showstopper said:


> LOWEST RATING OF ALL TIME.
> 
> :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao
> 
> IT'S WORKING, GUYS.
> 
> :vince5
> @Ace ; @BAD SHIV RISING ;





Ace said:


> HOLY SHITTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
> 
> That's got to be the lowest rating in history.
> 
> 2.3m??????????? SD could get close to that lmao.





Showstopper said:


> Pretty sure it is. Someone on the Observer board said it is and he posts the ratings on there pretty frequently.





DammitC said:


> Wait, this is the lowest Raw rating of all time?? :CENA
> 
> It's okay, I'm sure this is somehow because of AJ Styles or Seth Rollins unk2


*I have updated the original post comparing this week's viewership and demo to the previous lowest viewed/rated episode of the modern era which went against the presidential debate this exact week 2 years ago.

Here they are ;*

*Viewership (9/24/18 Vs 9/26/16):
H1- 2.493M Vs 2.850M
H2- 2.275M Vs 2.381M
H3- 2.281M Vs 2.203M
3H- 2.350M Vs 2.478M ( - 5.17% / - 0.128M )

Demo (9/24/18 Vs 9/26/16):
H1- 0.840D Vs 0.970D
H2- 0.800D Vs 0.790D
H3- 0.820D Vs 0.740D
3H- 0.830D Vs 0.833D*


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Move WWE to Saudi Arabia.
You can force people there to watch.
Would also mean better programming because no women.


----------



## ClintDagger

If you’re still watching or DVRing Raw, now it’s time to stop. This is getting close enough to now get their attention.


----------



## V-Trigger

Big yikes.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

There are people in the GEEKBOX trying to convince themselves that this number means nothing. :lmao

The poor, widdle babies. I wonder why they're trying to rationalize quite possibly the lowest rated Raw of all time?

Why?


----------



## Ace

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *I have updated the original post comparing this week's viewership and demo to the previous lowest viewed/rated episode of the modern era which went against the presidential debate this exact week 2 years ago.
> 
> Here it is;*
> 
> *Viewership (9/24/18 Vs 9/26/16):
> H1- 2.493M Vs 2.850M
> H2- 2.275M Vs 2.381M
> H3- 2.281M Vs 2.203M
> 3H- 2.350M Vs 2.478M ( - 5.17% / - 0.128M )
> 
> Demo (9/24/18 Vs 9/26/16):
> H1- 0.840D Vs 0.970D
> H2- 0.800D Vs 0.790D
> H3- 0.820D Vs 0.740D
> 3H- 0.830D Vs 0.833D*


 Beaten comfortably :sodone


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Trump presidential debate Raw beat last night's Raw

:ha :ha :ha

Vince has put everything he possibly can into who's champion right now. That must suck.


----------



## obli6154

The interesting thing is that Raw is not the only show seeing a big drop this Fall. Its going really bad for some of the major shows on TV:

https://twitter.com/rickporter/status/1044613925382369280


----------



## Piper's Pit

So is that the lowest rating ever for an unopposed RAW ??

I'm sure they got lower back in 1995 and 1996 but that was when they were going head to head with Nitro.


----------



## Ace

So this number is down to new shows and a good MNF game.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1044613925382369280
Fall shows fucked everyone.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

Showstopper said:


> There are people in the GEEKBOX trying to convince themselves that this number means nothing. :lmao
> 
> The poor, widdle babies. I wonder why they're trying to rationalize quite possibly the lowest rated Raw of all time?
> 
> Why?





Piper's Pit said:


> So is that the lowest rating ever for an unopposed RAW ??
> 
> I'm sure they got lower back in 1995 and 1996 but that was when they were going head to head with Nitro.


*The only RAWs that have lower ratings are ; 

1.5R from 12/23/96
1.6R from 12/30/96

This week's rating is likely to delve below the 1.75R of the RAW that aired against the debate exactly 2 years ago.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Piper's Pit said:


> So is that the lowest rating ever for an unopposed RAW ??
> 
> I'm sure they got lower back in 1995 and 1996 but that was when they were going head to head with Nitro.


It's not official yet, but this *might* be the lowest of all time.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Don't worry, the epic build to the HISTORIC Evolution PPV will turn things around.


----------



## deathvalleydriver2

The big dog bringing in those ratings :lol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I wonder why no one wants to come in here and try to defend this?

:hmmm


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Showstopper said:


> It's not official yet, but this *might* be the lowest of all time.


It's officially the lowest of all time.

2.46 million against the Trump-Clinton debate.
2.35 million yesterday.

19% down from last year.


----------



## Natecore

I guess Vince has to suck the Saudi cock more now. 

We sure as fuck dont want his shit sports entertainment product here.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Quick! Someone light the Cena bat-signal!


----------



## Sincere

Goddamn. Those are more like Smackdown numbers. 

Probably not going to happen, but Smackdown beating Raw this week would be hilarious.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

So, the ingenius plan to repeat a Baron Corbin main event didn't work, huh?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

:damn

I knew that the return of first run network tv coupled with a Steeler football game would bode poorly for RAW,, but HOLY FUCK. :CENA

Hour 2 especially and Hour 3 are complete disasters. Watch them blame the cancer kids. 

Down - 19.60% / - 0.573M year to year is quite the precipitous drop. To actually be 5% lower than the Debate RAW is priceless. :vince$ :heston


----------



## .christopher.

Good. Deserves it for basing the show around The Shield who, quite frankly, are rubbish.

Rollins is _alright_ but the other two suck and, as a whole, they're just unbearable.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ace said:


> So this number is down to new shows and a good MNF game.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1044613925382369280
> Fall shows fucked everyone.


RAW drew 2.35 million viewers. Smackdown normally gets around 80% of RAW, 85% last week. 80% would be below 2M. It could very well come in sub 2M because Tuesday night network shows draw higher viewership than Monday. If it bucks the trend it might exceed 90%. We'll see.


----------



## JDP2016

I rarely watch TV shows when they air anymore. All of the shows I watch are on-demand through Hulu, the CBS app or Bit Torrent.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

If having the red belt on the show leads to lower ratings, then maybe it should go back to parts unknown again. :bosque


----------



## Chrome

Terrible number lol. Definitely deserved though.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Terrible numbers. Next week might be worse with the Chiefs/Broncos game. It probably didn't help viewership that they had to do corporate schilling at the top of hour 2.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

And this is WITH the Universal Title ON TV.

:lmao

What a glorious, glorious day.

:drose


----------



## The Boy Wonder

JDP2016 said:


> I rarely watch TV shows when they air anymore. All of the shows I watch are on-demand through Hulu, the CBS app or Bit Torrent.


How fast is RAW/SD uploaded on Hulu?

I've heard people say that streaming services is a reason why ratings keep declining. I'm not sure about that. Do they have a percentage on how many are using streaming services these days?


----------



## FITZ

Just because trolling is fune... WWE being down 20% in a year is actually better than all of the shows that just premiered on Monday! All of the shows that premiered Monday were down more than 20%. Therefore WWE is doing just great. 

In all seriousness this is a bad sign for WWE. The narrative has always been that they have this core audience that won't leave. 8 years ago that core audience was 3 million people. Now that core audience is a lot smaller. There are people that will always watch but it's a lot less people than what the perception was not too long ago.


----------



## Seafort

It doesn't matter. They could go from 2.3M to just 2 people, and they are still get $1B for RAW for 2019 - 2024 and $1B for Smackdown for 2019 - 2024.


----------



## InexorableJourney

InexorableJourney said:


> At the start of MNF last year Raw was a hair under 3million, I predict this year it will be 2.2million.


So near.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

Just another history making week for the WWE!


----------



## Bink77

HERstory.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Stop talking about this historically low rating, guys! Certain fans might cry about it and beg you to stop talking negatively about their favorite wrestler!


----------



## Y.2.J

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1- 2.493M
> H2- 2.275M
> H3- 2.281M
> 3H- 2.350M*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership:
> H2 Vs H1 ( - 8.74% / - 0.218M )
> H3 Vs H2 ( + 0.26% / + 0.006M )
> H3 Vs H1 ( - 8.50% / - 0.212M )
> 9/24/18 Vs 9/17/18 ( - 12.05% / - 0.322M )
> 
> Demo (9/24/18 Vs 9/17/18):
> H1- 0.840D Vs 0.960D
> H2- 0.800D Vs 0.900D
> H3- 0.820D Vs 0.850D
> 3H- 0.830D Vs 0.903D*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership (9/24/18 Vs 9/25/17):
> H1- 2.493M Vs 3.121M
> H2- 2.275M Vs 3.081M
> H3- 2.281M Vs 2.568M
> 3H- 2.350M Vs 2.923M ( - 19.60% / - 0.573M )
> 
> Demo (9/24/18 Vs 9/25/17):
> H1- 0.840D Vs 1.040D
> H2- 0.800D Vs 1.040D
> H3- 0.820D Vs 0.880D
> 3H- 0.830D Vs 0.987D
> 
> Note: RAW this week last year was 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 3rd, 5th & 8th by hourly viewership.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership (9/24/18 Vs 9/26/16):
> H1- 2.493M Vs 2.850M
> H2- 2.275M Vs 2.381M
> H3- 2.281M Vs 2.203M
> 3H- 2.350M Vs 2.478M ( - 5.17% / - 0.128M )
> 
> Demo (9/24/18 Vs 9/26/16):
> H1- 0.840D Vs 0.970D
> H2- 0.800D Vs 0.790D
> H3- 0.820D Vs 0.740D
> 3H- 0.830D Vs 0.833D
> 
> Note: RAW this week the year before was 11th, 14th & 15th by hourly demo & 12th, 18th & 19th by hourly viewership.*


HOLY FUCK!

That’s fucking bad. Like real fucking bad. Like code red bad. 

Wake up call soon?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*WWE RAW POSTS LOWEST RATINGS IN MODERN ERA​*


> A combination of network season premieres and a strong NFL game led Raw to what will undoubtedly be the lowest rated episode in its history last night.
> 
> The Raw rating is not available, but the total audience was 2.35 million viewers. The previous modern-era low audience was 2.46 million viewers set on July 9. The September 26, 2016 Raw, which went up against the Clinton-Trump debate, also did 2.46 million viewers.
> 
> While excuses can be made, and those were the reason for the low number, there are season premieres every year and NFL big games every season. Last year's Raw during the same week did 2.91 million viewers, so that's a 19 percent year-to-year drop.
> 
> The show featured what will almost surely be the two lowest rated hours, hours two and three. The big drop was hour one to two, and it's hard to figure why because the hottest network show, Big Bang Theory, went against the first hour and the NFL game started about 13 minutes into the first hour.
> 
> The Pittsburgh Steelers vs. Tampa Bay Buccaneers game did 12.01 million viewers. Big Bang Theory did 12.92 million viewers.
> 
> Raw was 12th for the night on cable, although it still beat everything on cable other than news and NFL-related broadcasts on ESPN.
> 
> The new Observer will go into more detail about where the audience was lost, but the big drop from hour one-to-two was viewers over the age of 50, which is Raw's usual largest audience demo. It was unusual in that the third hour was actually slightly up from the second hour by 6,000 total viewers.
> 
> The three hours were:
> 
> 8 p.m. 2.49 million viewers
> 9 p.m. 2.28 million viewers
> 10 p.m. 2.28 million viewers


https://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/wwe-raw-posts-lowest-ratings-modern-era-266551


----------



## The Hardcore Show

Showstopper said:


> Stop talking about this historically low rating, guys! Certain fans might cry about it and beg you to stop talking negatively about their favorite wrestler!


You do know WWE does not care about this anymore right? They are all about advertisers licencees shareholders all of that stuff.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Hardcore Show said:


> You do know WWE does not care about this anymore right? They are all about advertisers licencees shareholders all of that stuff.


When you draw the lowest rating in the modern era, and perhaps ever in your 25 year history, it matters.


----------



## The Hardcore Show

Showstopper said:


> When you draw the lowest rating in the modern era, and perhaps ever in your 25 year history, it matters.


Even if this continues WWE is so corporate today that I don't think they give a fuck about the ratings anymore.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Hardcore Show said:


> Even if this continues WWE is so corporate today that I don't think they give a fuck about the ratings anymore.


I don't care if they care or not. It's hilarious. Take 3-4 years to build someone up, you do it, and then this? Absolutely hilarious.

We talked about it when the TV deals came through. They can play to empty arenas on Raw and SD and still make money.

That's fine. Doesn't mean that if it does actually happen and they are playing to near empty arenas on TV every week that it's not hilarious.


----------



## The Hardcore Show

Showstopper said:


> I don't care if they care or not. It's hilarious. Take 3-4 years to build someone up, you do it, and then this? Absolutely hilarious.
> 
> We talked about it when the TV deals came through. They can play to empty arenas on Raw and SD and still make money.
> 
> That's fine. Doesn't mean that if it does actually happen and they are playing to near empty arenas on TV every week that it's not hilarious.


I am just saying if anyone expects anything to change in the next few years no matter what happens with the ratings or the low attendance it won't.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Hardcore Show said:


> I am just saying if anyone expects anything to change in the next few years no matter what happens with the ratings or the low attendance it won't.


Who said anything is changing? No one even said that. We like to laugh at them getting their lowest rating ever with their favorite wrestler as Champion. That will NEVER stop being funny. Just as funny as the fans who used to shit on other wrestlers for drawing bad ratings, but have disappeared and have nothing to say about this rating last night. Take a guess at who their favorite wrestler is? Not standing for the hypocrisy.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

The Hardcore Show said:


> I am just saying if anyone expects anything to change in the next few years no matter what happens with the ratings or the low attendance it won't.


It will when they go over to FOX for Smackdown.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I cannot recall an Hour 2 dropping so precipitously from Hour 1. It must be a record low for that hour. We have seen Hour 3 tank numerous times but not both just flatlining at the 9 o' clock hour.


----------



## Seafort

Showstopper said:


> When you draw the lowest rating in the modern era, and perhaps ever in your 25 year history, it matters.


It will matter in 2022, when they begin gearing up for their next TV rights deal. And not before then.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

BAD SHIV RISING said:


> I cannot recall an Hour 2 dropping so precipitously from Hour 1. It must be a record low for that hour. We have seen Hour 3 tank numerous times but not both just flatlining at the 9 o' clock hour.




I wish we had segment numbers because this probably tanked. This is what they had on for the start of hour 2 and the segment ran long.

It will be interesting to see how much the numbers improve next week when Shawn returns. His impending return is probably the most interesting thing right now in WWE.


----------



## Ace

Roman is one of the few guys in the company who can actually blamed for these ratings.

They've been building him as the guy for years. No one has gotten a hundredth of what he has.

Hell, even Seth couldn't get an entirely clean win over HHH at WM. The biggest win of his career were the two wins over Reigns - one of which was due to suspension and still had a ref KO which prevented the 3 count and the other a cash in after Brock had killed him.

The last time FT wrestler other than Reigns or an established main evented a WM was Bryan in 2014 and that was forced by the fans.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Seafort said:


> It will matter in 2022, when they begin gearing up for their next TV rights deal. And not before then.


It matters right now, too. Vince McMahon (and Stephanie) has a huge fucking ego. You're going to tell me a guy he personally has spent the last 4+ years of trying to build up, gets the belt (finally) and then draws the lowest Raw rating ever, and he doesn't care about that? The same guy who clearly cares if Reigns gets booed or not considering he STILL tries with all of his might to get cheered? His ego absolutely cares.


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> It matters right now, too. Vince McMahon (and Stephanie) has a huge fucking ego. You're going to tell me a guy he personally has spent the last 4+ years of trying to build up, gets the belt (finally) and then draws the lowest Raw rating ever, and he doesn't care about that? The same guy who clearly cares if Reigns gets booed or not considering he STILL tries with all of his might to get cheered? His ego absolutely cares.


 People can go on and on about ratings not mattering but there's going to come a point where the core audience becomes so small that no sane person would pay them the absurd money they're getting now.


----------



## Robbyfude

The Big Dog getting the worst ratings in history. Where's that dude who always blames AJ and Rollins for the ratings dropping when his hero is getting these ratings?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The Boy Wonder said:


> I wish we had segment numbers because this probably tanked. This is what they had on for the start of hour 2 and the segment ran long.
> 
> It will be interesting to see how much the numbers improve next week when Shawn returns. His impending return is probably the most interesting thing right now in WWE.


It was def. too long and allowed people to just check out. Could have been far shorter but HHH and Steph needed to trumpet their charitable efforts.

RAW has to be higher next week by default. The network shows won't be debuting and most teams don't match the Steelers as a ratings draw. HBK's return will spike interest. Hopefully, for them, they can get the ratings back to where they were in recent weeks. I can't imagine RAW ever sinking lower than they did this week.


----------



## Ace

Robbyfude said:


> The Big Dog getting the worst ratings in history. Where's that dude who always blames AJ and Rollins for the ratings dropping when his hero is getting these ratings?


 Neither have been built up to be draws. The biggest wins of their careers are nothing.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

> The Big Dog getting the worst ratings in history. Where's that dude who always blames AJ and Rollins for the ratings dropping when his hero is getting these ratings?


100% true. And then, there a couple of people on a certain thread in the Fan Forum who are practically begging posters to stop being critical of Reigns. But they have no problem at all with that guy baiting Styles/Rollins fans every week. Meanwhile, these are the same people that used to post in this thread and criticized other wrestlers who were Champion (dating back to 2012) for drawing bad ratings.

Hypocrites.


----------



## The Masked Avenger

First off I don't think they care about rating anymore but they have a built in excuse of Monday Night Football. It's only week 3 so every team is still in contention for the playoff, it was a surprisingly hot Bucs team against the Steelers who is one of the most popular teams and have fans all over the country. The Big Bang Theory is starting their final season as well. They can also point to falling rating across the board due to cord cutting and streaming. So while it may look bad and to a point it is but i'm sure they aren't as worried about it as we make it out to be. That unfortunately means for us, same old same.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*Raw Ratings: A nearly record-low rating and sharp drop-off for last night’s USA Network flagship program (w/Keller’s Analysis)

BY WADE KELLER, PWTORCH EDITOR

September 25, 2018*

*WWE Monday Night Raw dropped to a 1.64 rating, below last year’s Christmas night show and among the lowest of all-time for WWE’s flagship program by any measurement standard. Raw drew a 1.5 rating back on Dec. 23, 1996, which would also be considered a borderline holiday rating.

The rating is below the 1.79 from last week and well below he 2018 average of 2.06. It’s also well below the year-ago rating of 1.97. Two years ago this week, Raw drew what was then a stunningly low rating of 1.75.

In the key demographic, Raw dropped its usual 1.0 rating to a 0.8 rating among 18-49 year old adults, the group that advertisers most covet. TV By the Numbers noted: “USA’s WWE Monday Night Raw took a noticeable hit this week, falling two-tenths from its previous 1.0 peak rating to a 0.8 this time around.”

Raw still landed in the no. 4, 6, and 7 spots in the daily cable rankings among that key demo, below three NFL programs on ESPN. The NFL Monday Night Football game itself drew 12.011 million viewers in total for a battle between two smaller market teams, the Pittsburgh Steelers and Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Only one other cable show (“Ray J & Princess Labor” on VH1) drew a rating higher than 0.5 in that demographic.

The first hour drew 2.493 million, a drop from last week’s first hour viewership of 2.839, a drop of 346,000 viewers (and a drop of over 600,000 from the Aug. 20 episode). The second hour dropped sharply to 2.275 million, a drop-off of 281,000 viewers. The average drop-off from the first to the second hour in 2018 is actually just 3,000. Yes, three-thousand. It dropped 281,000 this week. Hourly viewership was 2.493 million first hour, 2.275 million.second hour, and 2.281 million third hour.

There is no good spin on the rating for this episode, which was built around a drama regarding whether Dean Ambrose would stay loyal to his Shield partners against Baron Corbin and two mystery partners. The show also featured a long segment at the start of the second hour touting WWE’s partnership with Connor’s Cure to raise awareness for pediatric cancer.

Keller’s Analysis: WWE has a guaranteed big-money TV renewal kicking in next fall with both NBC Universal for Raw and Fox broadcast network for Smackdown. These numbers might be alarming to the TV executives who paid big money for a certain audience expectation. Raw, though, remains a top ten program on its night, but the sharp drop-off this week, if it’s part of a trend that reflects WWE’s more cavalier approach to taking viewership for granted with some content choices lately, could turn into a larger issue for WWE that would require some corrective actions.

Those corrective actions would include less self-aggrandizing segments celebrating their own charity work (which are about building their corporate image at the expense of providing programming for the viewers who chose to tune in to be entertained) and fewer promotional segments for other shows and events that are part of WWE’s growing portfolio of shows (Mixed Match Challenge, Total Bellas, 205 Live & NXT & Mae Young on Wednesday nights on WWE Network, Super Show-down, Evolution, Crown Jewel, WWE’s video games and movies, and more were part of the bombardment of co-promotional messages that got in the way of just presenting a pro wrestling show for its viewers in the last three weeks).*

https://www.pwtorch.com/site/2018/09/25/raw-ratings-a-nearly-record-low-rating-and-sharp-drop-off-for-last-nights-usa-network-flagship-program-w-kellers-analysis/


----------



## The Boy Wonder

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *Those corrective actions would include less self-aggrandizing segments celebrating their own charity work.[/URL]*


*

Hopefully they won't do this again. A simple backstage segment is fine, but they presented it like it was the biggest thing on the show.*


----------



## SPCDRI

Hour two and hour three below 2.3 million and there was nothing on t.v except a steelers/buccaneers game that was nothing to write to mama and papa about. Not an award show, hyped up MNF, playoff sports, another competitor wrestling promotion, presidential debate, nothing. This was a wide open football season Monday for them. All the fall shows did shitty ratings, too. This was wide open and they had two hours below 2.3 million and the overrun barely did 2.3. 

This is also in the context of three hundred and twenty five million people in America. You talk about cord cutting, how about all the cut umbilical cords? This show used to do routinely 4+ million with tens of millions fewer people watching.


----------



## RainmakerV2

Not to be mean, but I totally checked out after that Connors Cure stuff. I mean...I get mentioning it...but a 20 minute segment right at 9 o clock? Like..Jesus.







Oh btw The Shield eh? LOL what a draw those guys are.


----------



## DammitChrist

The numbers during CM Punk's WWE title reign looking more impressive compared to now :sodone


----------



## Ace

DammitC said:


> The numbers during CM Punk's WWE title reign looking more impressive compared to now :sodone


 It was BS how Punk got the blame for those ratings.

CM Punk was champion but it was Cena who was booked as the top star. Those low ratings were on Cena, not Punk.


----------



## MC

As bad these ratings are, I doubt WWE will care too much. Ratings simply aren't a high priority any more. WWE had billion dollar deals with or without bad ratings. There is no incentive to try unfortunately. They'd likely brush it off as a bad month like they do every month and move on.

Ratings won't matter to WWE until they go to FOX which isn't for a while.


----------



## Chrome

That Connor's Cure segment was 20 minutes?









No wonder the 2nd hour tanked.


----------



## Erik.

Fucking hell, I thought I was playing it safe by saying they'd lose at least 50,000 viewers.

But they lost, what? 300,000!?

:lol

Said it before though, as long as they're getting top dollar deals over in Saudi Arabia etc. they're not going to care too much about these ratings. Vince is known for not caring about the fall, so unless he was getting these sort of ratings round about Wrestlemania time, he won't be too worried and even if they did, he'd just point towards selling out Wrestlemania as a way of showing how successful he believes the WWE is currently.


----------



## ClintDagger

WWE absolutely, 100% cares about these ratings. The number of eyeballs they bring to their product is what drives its value. NBCU and Fox placed a valuation on Raw & SD based on a projection of what the ratings would do over the life of the contract. WWE touts their product as being DVR proof and more resilient to streaming than other products. So if Fox ends up with something that has half the value than what they were expecting there’s no way they aren’t going to hold WWE’s feet to the fire. WWE is pretty much dependent now on these tv contracts continuing in perpetuity. If Fox were to cancel SD that would be devastating to WWE’s future earnings potential. I’m sure taking on pro wrestling is controversial enough internally as it is. If it flops there will be a lot of powerful people saying I told you so and a big push to get it off the network; that’s the stack of dominoes WWE wants to avoid.

You can’t just let your product hemorrhage viewers for the next four years then decide you are going to turn it around overnight in preparation for the next contract. It doesn’t work like that, by then it’s too late.

Now with all of that said, WWE won’t hit the panic button right now. These ratings probably have their attention but what we will probably see now is just small tweaks here and there. They aren’t dumping Reigns yet and looking for a new FOTC. But there is a point here where they will start to panic if the decreases continue to accelerate and don’t flatten out.


----------



## SPCDRI

People can always make an excuse for failure to perform, but the loser has the excuse and the winner has the trophy. If they go sub two million in the next four years, with any frequency, and they could, their next contracts, if they get them, won't be anything compared to the bamboozlement they pulled on FOX and USA.


----------



## ClintDagger

SPCDRI said:


> People can always make an excuse for failure to perform, but the loser has the excuse and the winner has the trophy. If they go sub two million in the next four years, with any frequency, and they could, their next contracts, if they get them, won't be anything compared to the bamboozlement they pulled on FOX and USA.


Which will kill their stock. Wall Street expects perpetual earnings growth. If they lose a big chunk of that tv revenue somewhere down the line and don’t replace it with something else that will hit them where it really hurts. This why they care about all this even though it doesn’t cause immediate pain. The pain it will eventually cause scares them.


----------



## SPCDRI

Right, the market is manic manic and wants almost impossible growth. If they miss the earning targets, in the context of low ratings, the stock price will get smashed. Four years from now, if they sign the exact same contract they signed right now, the company's stock will get its head cut off. Nobody wants to get in on a company doing the same thing or a little worse for four years, that's a loser stock. They better enjoy ninety buck valuation while they can, because if they do less money on the deal, that stock will fall big time, and if they lose one or both deals, the stock will plummet.


----------



## Erik.

Even if they hit the panic button - I don't think the company even know what a good product is.

I mean, I really believe they, especially Vince, think the product they are putting out there is good. They only know ONE successful way and that's why they've been giving us the same format since the Attitude Era.

Vince probably thinks people are just recording and/or watching via different methods nowadays as opposed to leaving because the product is garbage.


----------



## Piper's Pit

I'm sure there are certain clauses in those new TV contracts regarding ratings, if there aren't then FOX and USA must be either insane or stupid. I don't know the details of those new deals but surely FOX and USA were given guarantees that rating would consistently be somewhere between 2.5m and 3.0m per episode, if they keep going down (and they will) but it makes zero sense for the networks to keep paying WWE the same amount for ratings that are below 2 million and that isn't too far off happening.


----------



## Adam Cool

Piper's Pit said:


> I'm sure there are certain clauses in those new TV contracts regarding ratings, if there aren't then FOX and USA must be either insane or stupid. I don't know the details of those new deals but surely FOX and USA were given guarantees that rating would consistently be somewhere between 2.5m and 3.0m per episode, if they keep going down (and they will) but it makes zero sense for the networks to keep paying WWE the same amount for ratings that are below 2 million and that isn't too far off happening.


the problem is that TV as a whole is dying

there is no alternative to the WWE in the eyes of many networks because they would rather use a decades old brand with loyal fans than take risks with OC programs that will likely Gaul as nobody younger than 30 watches TV any more


----------



## ellthom

No surprise I stopped watching Raw 6 months ago (minus 1 Raw which I watched the Raw after Summerslam)

WWE wont do anything though because rating don't mean crap these days. They could have record low ratings each week for 2 years and they'll still be banking on that revenue. If this had been 1995 - 1997 WWE would be in panic mode trying to fix it. Now they are just 'oh well spilt milk'


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

One day later and still laughing my ass off.

Lowest rated Champion ever. How about that MAINSTREAM APPEAL?

:reigns


----------



## DammitChrist

Ace said:


> Where is that Roman mark at who hates on AJ and Seth :heston





Robbyfude said:


> The Big Dog getting the worst ratings in history. Where's that dude who always blames AJ and Rollins for the ratings dropping when his hero is getting these ratings?





Showstopper said:


> 100% true. And then, there a couple of people on a certain thread in the Fan Forum who are practically begging posters to stop being critical of Reigns. But they have no problem at all with that guy baiting Styles/Rollins fans every week. Meanwhile, these are the same people that used to post in this thread and criticized other wrestlers who were Champion (dating back to 2012) for drawing bad ratings.
> 
> Hypocrites.


Hey, here it is. Check out this laughable post I caught in the superstar sub-section :ha



> Don't know why some of you people are getting so concerned about Roman getting criticism. At least Reigns is the biggest merch seller in WWE today, *he's definitely holding his end of the stick as far as drawing is concerned unlike the champion on the other brand who can't draw for shit despite being champ for 300+ days.* Not to mention Roman has took over from a champion who was hardly present for over a year. It's like a new government taking over, you need time to take care of shit that the previous incompetent government put your country in. *I bet if they give Reigns a proper solo feud without the Shield shenanigans, he would easily do good numbers. *Hell, the guy once pulled a 4 million number in Football season in his feud against Sheamus of all people ffs.
> 
> *Also, it's hilarious that Rollins marks of all people are trying to get their shit in in this debate, a performer who tanked the viewership from 5.5 million after WM 31 to under 3 million in a matter of six months. That's what real bombing is.* I think they're just salty that as far as the careers of Reigns and Rollins are concerned, the scenario was, is and will always be something like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "This is my yard baby" :banderas
> 
> I'd suggest y'all to ignore these clueless folk.


Alright, let me get straight:

He brags about Jinder Mahal having better numbers during his WWE title reign (while throwing AJ Styles under the bus), but yet he shrugs off the higher numbers of viewers during Seth Rollins's WWE title reign while ALSO ignoring his favorite being the champion for the lowest rated Raw episode in the past 2 decades? :mj4

He basically just acknowledged that the Raw ratings were higher under Rollins compared to the ones for now without even knowing it :lmao

I guess Rollins's reign was "successful like Mahal," and that the current Universal Champion is also a "failure like Styles" if we use his twisted logic unk2

Edit: I'm not blaming or crediting anyone for the ratings. I'm just using his silly logic :lol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

DammitC said:


> Hey, here it is. Check out this laughable post I caught in the superstar sub-section :ha
> 
> 
> 
> Alright, let me get straight:
> 
> He brags about Jinder Mahal having better numbers during his WWE title reign (while throwing AJ Styles under the bus), but yet he shrugs off the higher numbers of viewers during Seth Rollins's WWE title reign while ALSO ignoring his favorite being the champion for the lowest rated Raw episode in the past 2 decades? :mj4
> 
> He basically just acknowledged that the Raw ratings were higher under Rollins compared to the ones for now without even knowing it :lmao
> 
> I guess Rollins's reign was "successful like Mahal," and that the current Universal Champion is also a "failure like Styles" if we use his twisted logic unk2
> 
> Edit: I'm not blaming or crediting anyone for the ratings. I'm just using his silly logic :lol


2 things here:

1) He's clearly TRIGGERED as fuck and obviously doesn't have the balls to post any of that trash in here.

2) Did the other people in that Superstar thread call that guy out for talking trash about other wrestlers in that thread like they whine about others doing it in other fan threads?


----------



## A-C-P

LiabletoPlay :bosque


----------



## JDP2016

The Boy Wonder said:


> *How fast is RAW/SD uploaded on Hulu?*
> 
> I've heard people say that streaming services is a reason why ratings keep declining. I'm not sure about that. Do they have a percentage on how many are using streaming services these days?


I don't know. I don't even bother watching on Hulu. I prefer Youtube clips which come out within an hour.


----------



## Randy Lahey

I thought it'd be the lowest rated show when I saw how short the Raw thread was on this site. When even the diehards stop commenting here, you know Raw is in a bad place.

I'm still not understanding how a show that gets 2.5 million viewers per week is worth $300 million a year. If you break it down per show, that is 5.75 million per 3 hour episode. Nearly 2 million per hour. 

You're paying 2 mils per hour for 2.5 million viewers in that hour. So each viewer is worth 80 cents.

Can you imagine if youtube paid content creators 80 cents per view? I'm convinced Cable TV is a gigantic bubble. None of it make sense. The only thing that makes sense is that USA is on the basic package for every Cable TV provider. So literally everyone that pays for Cable, is paying for USA even if they don't watch anything on the channel (and hardly anyone is watching Raw these days). The only thing that is going to stop these outrageous amounts USA is paying WWE is if more people cut Cable altogether. I don't think low ratings alone are going to do it.

The real issue is why USA still wants to pay that much for Raw, when they can create literally any other live oriented show and get better ratings.


----------



## Piper's Pit

Adam Cool said:


> the problem is that TV as a whole is dying
> 
> there is no alternative to the WWE in the eyes of many networks because they would rather use a decades old brand with loyal fans than take risks with OC programs that will likely Gaul as *nobody younger than 30 watches TV any more*


What a sweeping and completely wrong statement and no TV is not dying it's declining because of competition from streaming, the traditional TV model will adapt in time probably by lowering prices after all isn't that the main appeal of Netflix the low price ??? Because it certainly isn't the quality of programming compared to what's available on traditional TV.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Still no LiabletoPay, huh?


----------



## Dave Santos

Piper's Pit said:


> What a sweeping and completely wrong statement and no TV is not dying it's declining because of competition from streaming, the traditional TV model will adapt in time probably by lowering prices after all isn't that the main appeal of Netflix the low price ??? Because it certainly isn't the quality of programming compared to what's available on traditional TV.


I noticed that most of the cable companies control the internet service to. The price of internet is going up faster than cable, even though cable is expensive. 

So as more people cut cable they offset the price with higher internet prices. Promo rates in my area now start at $79.00 a month for high speed internet. Either way the Internet service providers/ cable service providers still make money.

Doesn't USA network get paid money also from the cable companies? Where does most of their revenue come from?


----------



## Scholes18

To me the most alarming thing is the shows that are beating Raw in the ratings. I get people watching football on ESPN, but when you’re losing to Love & Hip Hop (which doesn’t even have big name rappers on it) and Teen Mom you really need to start evaluating yourself.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

RAW was abysmal last night, but there is no way it will be lower than last week. I'd laugh my ass off if it happened but also be shocked at the same time.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.500M
H2- 2.325M
H3- 2.081M
3H- 2.302M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 7.00% / - 0.175M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 10.49% / - 0.244M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 16.76% / - 0.419M )
10/1/18 Vs 9/24/18 ( - 2.04% / - 0.048M )

Demo (10/1/18 Vs 9/24/18):
H1- 0.780D Vs 0.840D
H2- 0.760D Vs 0.800D
H3- 0.750D Vs 0.820D
3H- 0.763D Vs 0.830D

Note: RAW is 6th, 7th & 8th by hourly demo & 14th, 16th & 19th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (10/1/18 Vs 10/2/17):
H1- 2.500M Vs 2.945M
H2- 2.325M Vs 2.756M
H3- 2.081M Vs 2.619M
3H- 2.302M Vs 2.773M ( - 16.99% / - 0.471M )

Demo (10/1/18 Vs 10/2/17):
H1- 0.780D Vs 0.980D
H2- 0.760D Vs 0.890D
H3- 0.750D Vs 0.910D
3H- 0.763D Vs 0.927D

Note: RAW this week last year was 4th, 6th & 5th by hourly demo & 13rd, 14th & 19th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## PirateMonkE

Wow, they did even worse than last week?! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


----------



## JTB33b

Holy S*** their 3rd hour almost dropped below $2 million.


----------



## southshield

If you think these numbers are good, wait until next week when you have both Monday Night Football and 2 games for the MLB playoffs.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*HOLY FUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*:heston:heston:heston:heston:heston


----------



## Ace

2m for the third hr :lmao

HOLY SHIT :lmao

Imagine how low the numbers would get without Ronda or HBK.

According to some this is all on the champion.


----------



## Piper's Pit

They always say they'll never watch again but next week they always come back isn't that right Steph ??


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*B SHOW B SHOW, YOU BLOW, BLOW, BLOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :cheer :cheer :cheer*


----------



## Ace

You can't blame Roman for that third hour, but the show was centered around him and TS for first 2 hrs and they did abysmal.


----------



## ChrisMC

Hi, genuine question from a ratings noob. I’ve honestly never looked in this thread or paid any attention to ratings at all but decided to have a look since I saw mention of how bad it is. Even to someone who knows nothing, I can see how awful they are doing. But my question is, do these ratings somehow incorporate DVR recordings? I never watch Raw (or anything else for that matter) live, so I wonder... does my viewership, and others like me, count towards these numbers?


----------



## Ace

WE WANT BROCK :brock


----------



## JTB33b

ChrisMC said:


> Hi, genuine question from a ratings noob. I’ve honestly never looked in this thread or paid any attention to ratings at all but decided to have a look since I saw mention of how bad it is. Even to someone who knows nothing, I can see how awful they are doing. But my question is, do these ratings somehow incorporate DVR recordings? I never watch Raw (or anything else for that matter) live, so I wonder... does my viewership, and others like me, count towards these numbers?


Yeah but DVR has been around for awhile and it never got this bad.


----------



## Blade Runner

Piper's Pit said:


> They always say they'll never watch again but next week they always come back isn't that right Steph ??



They actually _do_ come back. The ratings will eventually rise back up again. They always fluctuate around this time post-Summerslam.



That's not to say that ratings like this aren't embarrassing, because they sure as fuck are.


----------



## charsetutf

HBK living up to the reputation he built in the 90s as an anti-draw in that 3rd hour.


----------



## Ace

Showstopper missing out on all the fun 

Oh well, he can get in on it on Friday, probably next Tuesday as well :lol



charsetutf said:


> HBK living up to the reputation he built in the 90s as an anti-draw in that 3rd hour.


 I've been told the blame goes all on the champ, regardless of how long he is on the show, how much he is featured or which hrs he's in.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The closeness of the NFL game did a number on RAW Hour 3. Couple that with a HBK interview that no one cared about because he was on RAW a few weeks ago for the same purpose. Hey look, the old guys don't draw either. :bryanlol

That demo number is the worst that I can recall. Those are Smackdown numbers . :trips8 

The year to year drop is incredble considering those numbers last year were met with derision. *3H- 2.302M Vs 2.773M ( - 16.99% / - 0.471M )* :sodone

SDL might actually beat Hour 3 this week. roud


----------



## Chrome

Can't say it's not deserved though. In 2018, we have a bald HBK and bald HHH getting beat up by a flabby Brothers of Destruction in the main event. Shit's embarrassing, and the rating reflects that.


----------



## charsetutf

Ace said:


> Showstopper missing out on all the fun
> 
> Oh well, he can get in on it on Friday, probably next Tuesday as well :lol
> 
> I've been told the blame goes all on the champ, regardless of how long he is on the show, how much he is featured or which hrs he's in.


We already know the champ is a failure, though. Not much else to say.


----------



## southshield

BAD SHIV RISING said:


> The closeness of the NFL game did a number on RAW Hour 3. Couple that with a HBK interview that no one cared about because he was on RAW a few weeks ago for the same purpose. Hey look, the old guys don't draw either. :bryanlol
> 
> That demo number is the worst that I can recall. Those are Smackdown numbers . :trips8
> 
> The year to year drop is incredble considering those numbers last year were met with derision. *3H- 2.302M Vs 2.773M ( - 16.99% / - 0.471M )* :sodone
> 
> *SDL might actually beat Hour 3 this week.* roud



Not sure about that last part, tonight is the NL Wild Card game that also starts the same time as Smackdown


----------



## Ace

Raw closing in on those peak TNA numbers roud


----------



## Blade Runner

Reporting @Chrome; for double posting. :mj


----------



## Randy Lahey

Another all time record low rating. Looks like WWE has permanently lost about 300,000 viewers over the last year.

It's charting similar to the Raw thread on this site. All time lows in comments, and all time lows in TV views.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Wow. Hour 2 featured Rousey and Hour 3 had the HBK segment. 

I like Rousey, but she doesn't seem like a big deal anymore. WWE tried to NOT make her like Brock with appearances, but that has been a mistake.


----------



## Chrome

KYRA BATARA said:


> Reporting @Chrome; for double posting. :mj


Guess I'm gonna have to ban myself now. :mj2


----------



## The Boy Wonder

The decision making last night has to be questioned:

• We think we're getting a Universal Championship match, right? That's sound good. But Corbin comes out and let's everyone know that the Universal Championship won't be defended until November 2nd. Jesus Christ. Wasn't the whole point of taking the title off Brock was to have the title defended occasionally on RAW? 

• It's halftime for MNF and what does WWE do? They run a breast cancer awareness segment!

• They wait until 10:56pmET to bring HBK out. Why even have the Bayley/Fox match when you know it will just lose viewers? Bring HBK out earlier.


----------



## Blade Runner

Chrome said:


> Guess I'm gonna have to ban myself now. :mj2



Just give yourself a warning. Kinda like a 'note to self'. :cudi


----------



## Ace

Everyone looking at that third hr, I can't remember seeing a worse hr 1 or hr 2 number.


----------



## WesternFilmGuy

WWE stock is $91 dollars.....I so god damn wish I bought it when it was like $10 in 2012. Fuck.....


----------



## The Boy Wonder

I thought Hour 2 would increase because they advertised Rousey's match for a week. She's no longer a special attraction. Hate to say it, but they should've booked her appearances like Brock.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

southshield said:


> Not sure about that last part, tonight is the NL Wild Card game that also starts the same time as Smackdown


I think it could beat Hour 3, doesn't mean it will. Should be close but I just don't foresee Smackdown going sub 2M. 

Last week SDL held 93.3% of RAW's total audience. It could draw even closer this week.


----------



## Ace

*WWE RAW POSTS RECORD-LOW RATINGS FOR SECOND STRAIGHT WEEK*

A big Monday Night Football rating led to yet another modern low as Raw last night fell another two percent from last week's mark with 2.29 million viewers.

The audience fell through all three hours and the third hour was the least-watched hour of the show in more than 20 years, even with spending the episode promising a Shawn Michaels segment.

The big decline was in the over-50 audience, which would coincide with the best Monday rating of the season, as the Kansas City Chiefs vs. Denver Broncos game did 13.21 million viewers.

The actual rating isn't available but it would be expected to be the second-lowest Monday night rating for wrestling ever on the USA Network.

Raw lost to everything on the networks except CW and Raw was 16th for the day on cable, the lowest it has done in years. 

Still, it only lost to four shows on ESPN, all football related, baseball games in the afternoon, and news shows on Fox News and MSNBC.

The three hours were:

8 p.m. 2.50 million viewers
9 p.m. 2.33 million viewers
10 p.m. 2.08 million viewers

https://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/wwe-raw-posts-record-low-ratings-second-straight-week-267026


----------



## shadows123

well to be frank...as a fan who used to watch WWE..keyword being past tense here..what do you expect...you keep pushing feuds in the way no wants to see..to name an example the Shield right now which is used as a security to secure the boos against Roman...Roman can sell all the t-shirts he wants or claim he is selling all the tickets , but he aint no draw as the champion, the wwe brand name is.. and the most clearest way i saw in terms of the way i've seen so far..as usual the draw, the mighty saviour of the attitude era, the game Triple H had to come and save the failed draw of his time Shawn michaels as usual..


----------



## deathvalleydriver2

Props to the WWE on these record ratings ! :lol


----------



## Ace

I feel for Shawn, had to come back now when Raw is putting out shit and getting bad ratings each week.

He's going to get memed to death :mj2

I do see the funny side though, he's known as a bad draw, shows up a week and the show does its lowest rating ever with a comically bad 3rd hour :lol

Of course none of the blame is on him, it's a shit product with everything centering around a main man no one wants.


----------



## shadows123

Ace said:


> I feel for Shawn, had to come back now when Raw is putting out shit and getting bad ratings each week.
> 
> He's going to get memed to death :mj2


well i wouldn't feel for him..he's buried his fair share in his time


----------



## Chrome

Gonna be even worse next week most likely, with playoff baseball and a good MNF matchup with the Saints and Redskins, not to mention Drew Brees is within striking distance of the all-time passing record. No doubt people are gonna want to tune in to see if he breaks it that night.


----------



## Ace

Chrome said:


> Gonna be even worse next week most likely, with playoff baseball and a good MNF matchup with the Saints and Redskins, not to mention Drew Brees is within striking distance of the all-time passing record. No doubt people are gonna want to tune in to see that.


 HBK can cop the flak this week, hopefully the BIG DAWG gets the main and record low rating back next week becoming the first to break sub 2m in the process.


----------



## Switchblade Club

How do 2 million people still actually watch this shit though ??


----------



## The Boy Wonder

They need something big to happen at Super Show Down, and the Bellas turning on Ronda isn't it. With Crown Jewel four weeks away they should probably do something big with Dean on Saturday. He doesn't have to turn heel, but they need to end this Shield vs Dogs of War angle.


----------



## CesaroSwing

I would rather watch a Patrick Mahomes promo than 99% of the roster

And IDK if there's a Smackdown ratings thread but I better not see people in there crediting their favourites if it gets good numbers. The Milwaukee incident will draw the numbers if anything


----------



## The Boy Wonder

CesaroSwing said:


> I would rather watch a Patrick Mahomes promo than 99% of the roster
> 
> And IDK if there's a Smackdown ratings thread but I better not see people in there crediting their favourites if it gets good numbers. *The Milwaukee incident will draw the numbers if anything*


You're right. The preview last night with Aiden/Lana was very compelling. Those love triangle storylines usually draw well and improve the overall product.


----------



## MC

Shawn Michaels showing his drawing power I see :mj


I was going to watch this show but I feel asleep, perhaps everyone else did too  Seriously, this is a pretty bad rating but I still don't think it will matter as WWE makes money regardless which is what they care about the most.

Edit: Some people clearly can't read the tone


----------



## shadows123

MC 16 said:


> Shawn Michaels showing his drawing power I see :mj
> 
> 
> I was going to watch this show but I feel asleep, perhaps everyone else did too  Seriously, this is a pretty bad rating but I still don't think it will matter as WWE makes money regardless which is what they care about the most.


well you know what..shawn wasn't a draw in his younger days either..and you're expecting him to be now??..especially when he is a part of a feud which, well no one should really care about, as its a house show in australia....anyways coming back to the topic, today they booked Triple H to save the damsel in distress which is Shawn..well ..well done as usual wwe....


----------



## DammitChrist

Wow, on behalf of @Showstopper ;:

Yikes :ha


----------



## 751161




----------



## The Boy Wonder

They should've kept the Dean angle going throughout the show. There was intrigue with his two backstage segments with Seth and Roman. That's one of the biggest problems with RAW. Remember how much we enjoyed that episode where Brock had multiple segments? It was nice to see a show that had a storyline arch from beginning to end.


----------



## Brock

I don't usually comment in here as I don't pay much attention to the numbers. But man those look terrible even to me. I know the event at the weekend isn't a strictly a conventional PPV, but it's still p.bad given what they tried to give us on Raw with the talent and all.

But not really too surprising as every time I do look at the weekly numbers, they're usually p.low and no matter who is on the show, I'll always expect them to be, bar the odd rise one week or two.


----------



## DammitChrist

Shawn Michaels didn't appear on the show until it was a few minutes before overtime :ciampa


----------



## The Boy Wonder

DammitC said:


> Shawn Michaels didn't appear on the show until it was a few minutes before overtime :ciampa


Exactly. Do we know for sure if the third hour overrun counts for the total hour 3 rating? I have to believe the most viewers tuned in for the last 10 minutes of RAW.


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

The pushed persons, and promoted stories of the show these days:

The Bellas
Dolph Ziggler getting a Universal Title match
Dean Ambrose turning heel, which nobody wants
Lio Rush
Konnor
Bo Dallas and Curtis Axel
Ruby Riott vs Ronda Rousey
A bald Shawn Michaels
A beer bellied Blundermaker
Renee Young on commentary

It's 2 million too high.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

As I have said many times before (and been entirely wrong), I cannot imagine the rating ever being lower than this.


----------



## xxRambo_21xx

they should've rolled with a hot strowman as the champ vs a heel shield.


----------



## Chrome

JY57 said:


> Hour 1 - 3.605 million
> Hour 2 - 3.530 million
> Hour 2 - 3.616 million
> 
> Average - 3.58 million viewers
> 
> a little better than last year which was 3.5 million viewers. but it still went down again from last week


^The rating from Raw around this time 5 years ago. LOL at people saying THAT number was shitty in the Raw ratings thread, man WWE would kill for those numbers now.


----------



## IndyTaker

TNA January 4 2010 had better viewership. Raw needs to freshen up. It's too repetitive.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

So I didn't watch Raw (I did see the final segment on YT)... but I assume Shawn Michaels was hyped throughout the show? If that's the case and with it being reasonable then to expect Undertaker and Triple H to show up as well... 

... wow. They lost half a million viewers and that 3rd hour almost hit sub 1-million. Honestly, I'm kind of relieved that hour with them bombed hard. Taker/HHH frankly has no business happening in 2018, nor does HBK coming out of retirement.

And then there's Kane... Kane... he was there. Kane was there! :rollins


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Chrome said:


> ^The rating from Raw around this time 5 years ago. LOL at people saying THAT number was shitty in the Raw ratings thread, man WWE would kill for those numbers now.


I bet the number of posts in the RAW discussion thread from then dwarf what we got last night. Hour 3 then is nearly 180% more than this week's Hour 3. :damn


----------



## Raw-Is-Botchamania

Chrome said:


> ^The rating from Raw around this time 5 years ago. LOL at people saying THAT number was shitty in the Raw ratings thread, man WWE would kill for those numbers now.


Raw this week 4 years ago was 4.04 million.

Double.

But tell me again how the show would get so much better if Brock would just finally drop the title to a fighting champion.


----------



## the_hound

aye the hbk taker segment was what killed the 3rd hour........................thats why it has 2.5 million views on youtube


----------



## Dave Santos

The last time raw saw a significant bump was the Raw 25th anniversary. Stone Cold may be one of the last guys able to bring a big bump in ratings.

Raw 25th anniversary 

The three hours were:

8 p.m. 4.90 million viewers
9 p.m. 4.64 million viewers
10 p.m. 4.15 million viewers

Right after the ratings came in wwe stock dropped around 5%, but it bounced back to only drop 2.5% by the end of trading day.

https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/wwe/interactive-chart?timeframe=5d


----------



## Randy Lahey

WesternFilmGuy said:


> WWE stock is $91 dollars.....I so god damn wish I bought it when it was like $10 in 2012. Fuck.....



https://www.tradingview.com/symbols/NYSE-WWE/

October 21,2017 the price was $22.30. It's multiplied 4X over the last year. Why? Have no idea.

The general market is way up, so I'd expect to be 20% higher. But not 400%. With that stock price, expect more safe programming that does not bring any negative publicity that could spook the market.


----------



## Seafort

southshield said:


> If you think these numbers are good, wait until next week when you have both Monday Night Football and 2 games for the MLB playoffs.


Immaterial. They are about to report a record quarter in terms of profitability. 

Again, it doesn't matter if RAW falls below 2M in 2018, or 1M in 2019. It doesn't matter if they fall to a viewership of 12 people. They're getting $2B for RAW and Smackdown that is guaranteed, no matter what. An increasing amount of their revenue is now resistant to normal market pressures.

They only need to worry in year four of the next TV deal, and only then do they need to work on increasing or stabilizing viewership.


----------



## Robbyfude

Christ that's bad but well deserved. 80% of Raw matches are the same as the previous Raw and no one wants to see Roman and friends vs Braun and friends every week.


----------



## Bushmaster

Chrome said:


> ^The rating from Raw around this time 5 years ago. LOL at people saying THAT number was shitty in the Raw ratings thread, man WWE would kill for those numbers now.


What were the youtube views for Raw 5 years ago though.


----------



## Dave Santos

New Black Panther said:


> What were the youtube views for Raw 5 years ago though.


Well only 17% of youtube visitors are from the USA. 
https://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/youtube.com#trafficstats

I remember Meltzer saying that 85% of wwe Youtube views come from India. Don't remember where he got that source but that seems like a lot.


----------



## Y.2.J

Wow.

I feel like a lot crap nowadays, moreso than Vince, is actually Stephanie's fault.
I hope she's sweating looking at these numbers.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Hour 3 lost 538,000 viewers in just one year. 





 :yoda


----------



## Zone

@Chrome

Are these record low numbers still better than what CM Punk was getting in 2012? 

I heard at the time that Punk was a massive ratings disaster. unk2




































:heyman6


----------



## Chrome

Antihero said:


> @Chrome
> 
> Are these record low numbers still better than what CM Punk was getting in 2012?
> 
> I heard at the time that Punk was a massive ratings disaster. unk2
> 
> :heyman6


Oh man, people wanted Punk crucified back in the Fall of 2012. :lol

Those numbers look like the AE compared to now.


----------



## Ace

"Nobody tuned in to watch four fifty-year-old men brawl like someone stole a parking spot at Bingo? You're telling me young people don't like watching their grandparents fight on cable television anymore?

I'm shocked. Absolutely shocked I tell you"

:sodone


----------



## V-Trigger

The Shield is killing Raw.


----------



## chronoxiong

Barely over 2 million viewers for that 3rd hour. That is brutal. Something has to give for this company to try hard again. I mean, NBC paid them millions to keep them on TV.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

The real question is who are the 2 million bots still sitting through 3 hours of this shit every week?


----------



## ClintDagger

ChrisMC said:


> Hi, genuine question from a ratings noob. I’ve honestly never looked in this thread or paid any attention to ratings at all but decided to have a look since I saw mention of how bad it is. Even to someone who knows nothing, I can see how awful they are doing. But my question is, do these ratings somehow incorporate DVR recordings? I never watch Raw (or anything else for that matter) live, so I wonder... does my viewership, and others like me, count towards these numbers?


Vince’s big selling point on Raw to the networks is that it’s “DVR proof”.


----------



## ellthom

Maybe WWE should stop thinking that nostalgia can bring ratings. Work on building a good brand you bloody morons. 

I am sick of watching a bunch of seniors stumble over each other like their inside an old folks home fighting for their meds. This is not what I call riveting TV.

EDIT: Actually I like @Ace analogy better


----------



## Piper's Pit

People on here need to let go of the idea that any individual could seriously affect the ratings long term whether it's Reigns, Rollins, Bryan, AJ, Brock etc. heck you could bring back CM Punk who would cause a short term upswing but within a couple of months it would be business as usual.

Aside from cord cutting and the three hours what we're seeing is the culmination of 18 years of bad decisions and mostly horrible, nonsensical programming. Essentially the WWE have waged a war of attrition on the fans, the only surprising thing is that it's taken this long to finally get to where we are now I suppose that just shows how loyal the fanbase was/is but there's no going back now, there will be no turn around.


----------



## Interceptor88

Well, Undertaker, Kane, Shawn Michaels and Triple H's segment has 3.4 million views. The second most viewed Raw video is an Ambrose interview with 1.7 million. Then Ronda Rousey with 1.5. Then Reigns vs Ziggler with 1 million. Then Ambrose vs Strowman with 855 k views. Then Rollins vs McIntyre with 659 k views. 

I agree with WWE needing to create actual stars. But blaming on a 10 minutes segment the ratings decline is a complete mental clown fiesta. With the youtube views thing I said earlier, I didn't want to say the four of those 'draw' more than the current guys or anything. Just that I can't agree with thinking fewer people watch Raw because of them. It's the whole product that is uninteresting and unexciting. As I said, the segments with the legends have lasted 10 minutes if anything, while The Shield vs Strowman feud fill like 1/3 show every single week. So how the hell is the ratings decline the legends' fault?


----------



## SPCDRI

"The Broncos/Chiefs game was really hot." Bullcrap. Five years ago is not a long time. RAW could face MNF, wildcard and playoff baseball games, the start of the NBA season, and do 3.5 million people an hour. There's something really wrong long term with the product for more than one million people to walk away in 5 year's time. MNF was close to peak popularity, ratings and viewership 5 years ago. MNF is on a steep ratings skid of about 25 percent itself. The NFL is weak and vulnerable and quality professional wrestling could be excellent counter-programming to NFL games. This isn't an excuse for crummy ratings, this is an opportunity to be seized. 

They got nobody to blame but themselves.

Edit: In 2013, the first MNF game was Philly/Washington and 16.5 million people watched it which is more people than watched this October's MNF by three and a half million people. What were the RAW ratings for that RAW? All hours with at least 3.8 million people watching. Hour 3 had 3.9 million people watching.


----------



## MC

the_hound said:


> aye the hbk taker segment was what killed the 3rd hour........................thats why it has 2.5 million views on youtube


One, I was joking :lol Anyone can see that the rating is based on numerous things,not just the ending. 

Two, YT views never matter when it's Roman but they convently do when it's fan favourites. Funny that unk2


----------



## A-C-P

LOLYOUTUBEVIEWS :bosque

Most of the WE Youtube views come from India, a market that the WWE gave up on when they finally realized there is no money in it :bosque


----------



## DammitChrist

MC 16 said:


> One, I was joking :lol Anyone can see that the rating is based on numerous things,not just the ending.


Yep, I think many folks should already know by now that TV viewers are getting worn out by the overall product over the past few years, and that the poor numbers on a Raw episode is not actually based off one guy (which includes Roman Reigns).



> Two, YT views never matter when it's Roman but they convently do when it's fan favourites. Funny that unk2


Oh, really; because last time I've checked it's only a big deal and worth celebrating when Reigns gets plenty of YouTube views; but you'll rarely hear anything from the rest of the other fans when their favorites get plenty of YouTube views :kobe


----------



## Romans Reign

So glad it was the four wheelchair men on at the last hour.

Imagine if Roman and Braun ended the show, all the blame would lie on them.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Honestly, WWE laid out the show with the intent that for the third hour, Shawn's interview and the accompanying mayhem would be enough of a hook to keep viewers glued to their seats. It wasn't and failed miserably. Perhaps we should rename this era The Olden Age. :trolldog


----------



## Robbyfude

BAD SHIV RISING said:


> Perhaps we should rename this era The Olden Age. :trolldog


Should be called the "repeat era" cause Raw has the same matches every week but with slight differences.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Nitro actually did better ratings (even at the very end when it was dead) than the current WWE Raw does. 17 years ago, ratings this bad would get your company sold off and the show cancelled. Now, ratings like this get you a $2 Billion TV deal lol. There has to be some performance clauses in the new TV deal. When the NFL fails to bring in certain ratings, the TV Networks have to basically give advertisers some freebies to make up for it. 

At the height of the wrestling boom, the combined wrestling audience on monday night was doing a 10 - 11 rating. 

https://www.prowrestling.com/wrestling-facts/wwe-vs-wcw-ratings/

Now, the wrestling audience is doing 1.6....


----------



## Erramayhem89

The product is just so dead and boring now and they have zero star power. I watch the first hour or so and DVR the rest. I have a feeling WWE is going to die soon honestly. NO way it can make it 10 more years with the way things are going.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

DammitC said:


> Oh, really; because last time I've checked it's only a big deal and worth celebrating when Reigns gets plenty of YouTube views; but you'll rarely hear anything from the rest of the other fans when their favorites get plenty of YouTube views :kobe


Shit - I gotta get on praising the Rusev/Lana/Aiden angle on SD. Two weeks in a row it's the most viewed video for Smackdown.


----------



## .christopher.

Piper's Pit said:


> They always say they'll never watch again but next week they always come back isn't that right Steph ??


I've heard dumb WWE fanboys/girls come out with this ass backwards comment, but Stephanie has said so, too? Even though they've lost millions upon millions of viewers since it was last decent?

Bitch be trippin'


----------



## Stadhart02

Seafort said:


> Immaterial. They are about to report a record quarter in terms of profitability.
> 
> Again, it doesn't matter if RAW falls below 2M in 2018, or 1M in 2019. It doesn't matter if they fall to a viewership of 12 people. They're getting $2B for RAW and Smackdown that is guaranteed, no matter what. An increasing amount of their revenue is now resistant to normal market pressures.
> 
> They only need to worry in year four of the next TV deal, and only then do they need to work on increasing or stabilizing viewership.


This is the cold hard truth of it all

I don't watch RAW anymore apart from a small portion of the beginning when I am doing other things or if a segment gets praised on here

EVERY show looks and feels the same with pretty much the same matches. Now they put what used to be "big money" matches on RAW the whole thing has gone beyond stale

I only watch the RR, WM and usually SS but I suspect by the time 2020 rolls round and another year of the same old stuff, I probably won't even bother watching them


----------



## RainmakerV2

Remember when all the marks said putting the title on KO would kill the ratings because of his look? Well now they got 3 guys with "da look"..Roman, Drew, and Braun in 40 segments, reunited the Shield, brought back Taker and Shawn. And guess what? Almost 1 million less viewers than KOs title reign. Jeri-Ko was better than anything on this show. Shit, Im shocked they put the title on Roman right before MNF and completely hung him out to dry on this.

Lets be real, the drop in viewership really started with Cenas reign of terror. People were rejecting this man at all costs and WWE justified it anyway by saying.."He gets a reaction". Now they're doing the same with Roman, but guess what, those people who were holding on during the Cena era hoping for something new...They're gone and you aint getting them back. Now of course it isnt all on Roman. The booking is terrible and the writers have no idea how to tell a story, but when your champ is this universally disliked...How can you build a show around him?

What I think they should do is go to USA, tell them look..we see the numbers..give us 3 or 4 weeks, show highlight packages and best ofs while they completely reboot the show. Reboot everything. Go full Russo and Bischoff and hold up all the titles. Have tournaments for those titles that culminate at the Rumble or Mania. Change the look, the stage, all of it. The show needs a complete reboot and a different world champion.


----------



## Erik.

The ratings have been declining since 2001 because that's when people who don't care for grappling left, simple as that. You are NEVER getting those people back. They don't give a shit about wrestling and never have. Also coincided with Austin and Rock leaving, two people that most of the world tuned in to watch.

They're likely to never get "new eyes" on the product ever again (Unless they're under 10 years old), the best they can hope for is getting the "old eyes" back in. Those who are still watching wrestling elsewhere because they happen to like the theatre of scripted fighting. Problem is, the WWE probably think they're already watching, just not live. 

Agree it needs an overhaul though. Stop referring to your company as a fucking business and present it as a fucking sport. The titles are the most important things in the world. Get rid of the over the top shiny stage, LED screens etc. Get rid of the damn fucking mood lighting. I know all of this is nothing to do with ratings but it's needed. The show has been presented the same for 20+ years, it's now the Attitude Era on steroids pretty much (without the trashiness).

Give us fresh new matches, new match styles. Go and get a deal with NJPW, ROH etc. so occasionally we can see excellent new wrestlers on the show giving us THEIR style and opening the fans eyes to something they've never seen before. Give us some creative freedom with the talent you have. What is the worst thing that happens? Your ratings go up?


----------



## Dave Santos

If raw is bad check out these ratings. Almost hitting impact ratings.


Total Divas

Episode 1: 454,000 viewers
Episode 2: 390,000 viewers
Episode 3: 367,000 viewers


----------



## Erramayhem89

Erik. said:


> The ratings have been declining since 2001 because that's when people who don't care for grappling left, simple as that. You are NEVER getting those people back. They don't give a shit about wrestling and never have. Also coincided with Austin and Rock leaving, two people that most of the world tuned in to watch.
> 
> They're likely to never get "new eyes" on the product ever again (Unless they're under 10 years old), the best they can hope for is getting the "old eyes" back in. Those who are still watching wrestling elsewhere because they happen to like the theatre of scripted fighting. Problem is, the WWE probably think they're already watching, just not live.
> 
> Agree it needs an overhaul though. Stop referring to your company as a fucking business and present it as a fucking sport. The titles are the most important things in the world. Get rid of the over the top shiny stage, LED screens etc. Get rid of the damn fucking mood lighting. I know all of this is nothing to do with ratings but it's needed. The show has been presented the same for 20+ years, it's now the Attitude Era on steroids pretty much (without the trashiness).
> 
> Give us fresh new matches, new match styles. Go and get a deal with NJPW, ROH etc. so occasionally we can see excellent new wrestlers on the show giving us THEIR style and opening the fans eyes to something they've never seen before. Give us some creative freedom with the talent you have. What is the worst thing that happens? Your ratings go up?


Agree they need to legitimize the sport like UFC and make it more technical. Make it something that real sports viewers want to see. Doesn't have to be technical wrestling but they can do better than this. Kayfab is dead so wrestling being fake is kind of pointless now days.


----------



## Seafort

Erik. said:


> They're likely to never get "new eyes" on the product ever again (Unless they're under 10 years old), the best they can hope for is getting the "old eyes" back in.


Bingo. I have seen both my children get interested in and then "age out" of interest in WWE at the same ages. Both time, they began saying that WWE was getting boring and that nothing really changed.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

4.5 Million Views. Shawn is obviously getting people interested. I just wish at some point they'll move him away from this feud and onto something with one of the younger guys.


----------



## RainmakerV2

The Boy Wonder said:


> 4.5 Million Views. Shawn is obviously getting people interested. I just wish at some point they'll move him away from this feud and onto something with one of the younger guys.


And? The Brock vs. Cena brawl just went over 100M views. So what, they aren't ever there. When these guys leave in 2 months after that Saudi paycheck, what then? That's the problem. You have 2 billion coming to you in TV deals, thats guaranteed money. Let the young guys take the wheel. Theres no need for your main event to be full of balding men who can hardly walk.


----------



## shadows123

Erik. said:


> The ratings have been declining since 2001 because that's when people who don't care for grappling left, simple as that. You are NEVER getting those people back. They don't give a shit about wrestling and never have. Also coincided with Austin and Rock leaving, two people that most of the world tuned in to watch.
> 
> They're likely to never get "new eyes" on the product ever again (Unless they're under 10 years old), the best they can hope for is getting the "old eyes" back in. Those who are still watching wrestling elsewhere because they happen to like the theatre of scripted fighting. Problem is, the WWE probably think they're already watching, just not live.
> 
> Agree it needs an overhaul though. Stop referring to your company as a fucking business and present it as a fucking sport. The titles are the most important things in the world. Get rid of the over the top shiny stage, LED screens etc. Get rid of the damn fucking mood lighting. I know all of this is nothing to do with ratings but it's needed. The show has been presented the same for 20+ years, it's now the Attitude Era on steroids pretty much (without the trashiness).
> 
> Give us fresh new matches, new match styles. Go and get a deal with NJPW, ROH etc. so occasionally we can see excellent new wrestlers on the show giving us THEIR style and opening the fans eyes to something they've never seen before. Give us some creative freedom with the talent you have. What is the worst thing that happens? Your ratings go up?


I dont think any of that is ever happening. wwe are currently in their full-on delusional mode and I think they genuinely believe this "any reaction is a good reaction" bull shit and that their product is of high quality ..

Also, getting a deal with NJPW or ROH would probably not happen and if it did happen, it would be to the detriment of them more than wwe. Remember Vince and Triple H love to show that wwe are superior .. Hell i wouldn`t be surprised if Triple H puts himself over Kenny Omega 

But i agree a vast majority of their product needs a major overhaul if they are pull up any fans back or if they are happy to make more money off the existing ones. The latter would definitely have a ceiling as prices beyond a limit would mean a No-go. Apart from what you mentioned on the presentation side, I would probably prefer Non-generic characters to be honest, not the generic smiling babyface or the just all talk, take the pin everytime heel. Also it would be great if Michael Cole can shut up and not plug something or just show how stupid wwe is in general with their relentless plug and self contradictory statements.



RainmakerV2 said:


> And? The Brock vs. Cena brawl just went over 100M views. So what, they aren't ever there. When these guys leave in 2 months after that Saudi paycheck, what then? That's the problem. You have 2 billion coming to you in TV deals, thats guaranteed money. Let the young guys take the wheel. Theres no need for your main event to be full of balding men who can hardly walk.


Everyone keeps saying guarenteed money ..i dont think it is ratings proof. TV companies are not stupid. There is a limit to which they would also take the decline in ratings before deciding to pull the plug. Maybe some leeway would be given but not sure, wwe can always be below the 2M mark and expect the money to be paid across. THats my personal 2 cents, could be wrong here.

Additionally, the old men..well what can i say...wwe saw the money in Australia and Saudi arabia..all they had to do was fill a 100000 capacity stadium..but you know what, the Shield doesnt sell tickets, and no one else does either. So this is just desperation from wwe. Its a bit ambitious trying to sell out such a huge stadium for a house show. Hell if Austin could move, they would`ve probably brought him back and jobbed him out to the Game, he needs the win you know


----------



## Erik.

shadows123 said:


> I dont think any of that is ever happening. Wwe are currently in their full-on delusional mode and I think they genuinely believe this "any reaction is a good reaction" bull shit and that their product is of high quality ..
> 
> Also, getting a deal with NJPW or ROH would probably not happen and if it did happen, it would be to the detriment of them more than wwe. Remember Vince and Triple H love to show that Wwe are superior .. Hell i wouldn`t be suprised if Triple H puts himself over Kenny Omega
> 
> But i agree a vast majority of their product needs overhaul if they are pull up any fans back or if they are happy to make more money off the existing ones. The latter would definitelz have a ceiling as prices beyond a limit would mean a No-go. Apart from what you mentioned on the presentation side, I would probably prefer Non-generic characters to be honest, not the generic smiling babyface or the just all talk, take the pin everytime heel. Also it would be great if Michael Cole can shut up and not plug something or just show how stupid wwe is in general with their relentless plug and self contradictory statements.


I agree with most of what you're saying. I think the WWE wouldn't know a good product if it hit them in the face. I genuinely think they think what they're putting out is good and people are just through other means. For example they know MNF is on so they probably think people are watching that and recording Raw etc. 

Regarding the deal with NJPW, ROH etc. - they would be going against each other. Not against WWE talent. Unless its an exciting over young NJPW or ROH talent putting on a great match with an up and coming WWE superstar who could be used to put him over etc.


----------



## shadows123

Erik. said:


> I agree with most of what you're saying. I think the WWE wouldn't know a good product if it hit them in the face. I genuinely think they think what they're putting out is good and people are just through other means. For example they know MNF is on so they probably think people are watching that and recording Raw etc.
> 
> Regarding the deal with NJPW, ROH etc. - they would be going against each other. Not against WWE talent. Unless its an exciting over young NJPW or ROH talent putting on a great match with an up and coming WWE superstar who could be used to put him over etc.


The deal sounds good only in theory. The moment you have such a deal on the table, Triple H vs Kenny Omega or everyone else major in NJPW or ROH put Roman Reigns over in a series of one sided match up wins for wwe would be the end result...We`ve seen this in the past with WCW..Hell Sting`s first WWE match in forever and still Triple H wanted to put himself over..Hell Sting waited 20 years and still had the same result as other WWE guys before him ..lol ....Just because Triple H runs NXT professionally and doesn`t insert himself into storylines there, he gets a pass for the various other shit he pulls out on Raw with any other big name who walks through the WWE..


----------



## Erik.

shadows123 said:


> The deal sounds good only in theory. The moment you have such a deal on the table, Triple H vs Kenny Omega or everyone else major in NJPW or ROH put Roman Reigns over in a series of one sided match up wins for wwe would be the end result...We`ve seen this in the past with WCW..Hell Sting`s first WWE match in forever and still Triple H wanted to put himself over..Hell Sting waited 20 years and still had the same result as other WWE guys before him ..lol ....Just because Triple H runs NXT professionally and doesn`t insert himself into storylines there, he gets a pass for the various other shit he pulls out on Raw with any other big name who walks through the WWE..


That's why the deal would only to showcase NJPW's best up and coming talent and not main eventers. I'm looking at it how WCW used talent from all over the world to give their product something different. 

I don't watch NJPW or ROH enough to know who the best up and coming talents are, but giving them some sort of platform to get eyes on them can only be good for them, the wrestling business and getting other eyes on the product, could be a good way to have interpromotional storylines going on over two different companies etc. - it's something fresh, new, exciting and something that could get some old eyes back on the product if done right.

Obviously, this will NEVER happen. WWE want the be all and end all to be them. Which is a shame. Because they need to realise that wrestling outside of the WWE is flourishing and not everyone invested in those promotions care about the WWE.


----------



## shadows123

Erik. said:


> That's why the deal would only to showcase NJPW's best up and coming talent and not main eventers. I'm looking at it how WCW used talent from all over the world to give their product something different.
> 
> I don't watch NJPW or ROH enough to know who the best up and coming talents are, but giving them some sort of platform to get eyes on them can only be good for them, the wrestling business and getting other eyes on the product, could be a good way to have interpromotional storylines going on over two different companies etc. - it's something fresh, new, exciting and something that could get some old eyes back on the product if done right.
> 
> Obviously, this will NEVER happen. WWE want the be all and end all to be them. Which is a shame. Because they need to realise that wrestling outside of the WWE is flourishing and not everyone invested in those promotions care about the WWE.


I totally agree. But Vince and Triple H`s big ego will get in the way of such a deal ever happening and its a shame really because cross promotion can be fun and exciting. Plus, Vince`s been so obsessed with getting Roman cheered that he will probably feed all of them to his golden boy instead..That will get him cheered :vince2


----------



## The Masked Avenger

I like the stage, the LED ring and the mood lighting. I just want coherent story telling. :draper2


----------



## ClintDagger

TheMaskedAvenger said:


> I like the stage, the LED ring and the mood lighting. I just want coherent story telling. :draper2


You have to periodically change the overall look and feel of the show though. They badly need a new producer and badly need Vince gone. Hunter might do things very differently and if he can push Stephanie & Shane 100% to the business side of things and let him and some of his friends concentrate on the on-screen stuff (hopefully get rid of the writer’s room) then I think you could see a refreshed product. Absent of that, you are going to see nothing but new twists on the same old formula.


----------



## charsetutf

The Boy Wonder said:


> 4.5 Million Views. Shawn Undertaker is obviously getting people interested. I just wish at some point they'll move him away from this feud and onto something with one of the younger guys.


Fixed.

Shawn has been an anti-draw literally every single moment of every single segment he has ever been in throughout his entire career. He has never had any fans. Undertaker is one of the top guys in that second tier of stars (with the first tier being Austin/Hogan/Rock.)


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Damn. Someone seems mad as hell.

Anyway. Good to see Raw get it's lowest rating ever for the second consecutive week in a row. Have they ever even done that before? The direction they went this Summer really seems to be paying off.


----------



## Soul Rex

Worst rating ever huh, I haven't paid attention to ratings since 2015, when they started getting a new low since 1997 every week during Rollins reign

It is obvious they will keep dropping with the years, the only way to change this is to get a new TV deal,a completely new image and get ride off the TV PG.


----------



## UniversalGleam

even though it must sting abit to get this kind of rating, Im sure sure wwe doesnt really care. We don't live in times anymore where you have to "tune in" on the night to watch something, there is many other ways to watch things through catchup or online channels such as youtube so their viewing figures really arnt bottlenecked anymore through who is actually watching when the show is going out.

Its at least a means for them to bury their head in the sand and pretend like things arnt getting progressively worse anyway. Ratings arnt going to change wwe's way of thinking in 2018.


----------



## ClintDagger

UniversalGleam said:


> even though it must sting abit to get this kind of rating, Im sure sure wwe doesnt really care. We don't live in times anymore where you have to "tune in" on the night to watch something, there is many other ways to watch things through catchup or online channels such as youtube so their viewing figures really arnt bottlenecked anymore through who is actually watching when the show is going out.
> 
> Its at least a means for them to bury their head in the sand and pretend like things arnt getting progressively worse anyway. Ratings arnt going to change wwe's way of thinking in 2018.


They absolutely care, but they will probably stay the course for now and save any big changes until they get closer to the new contracts. I would imagine they are still internally debating how to handle the show splits under the new contracts. Do they make the Fox show the new “A” show? Do they keep Raw as the “A” show? How much talent do they move around or call up? I think all of that is keeping them from doing anything drastic to turn the ratings around at this time. In some ways they are in a lame duck year starting right now.


----------



## SPCDRI

Soul Rex said:


> Worst rating ever huh, I haven't paid attention to ratings since 2015, when they started getting a new low since 1997 every week during Rollins reign
> 
> It is obvious they will keep dropping with the years, the only way to change this is to get a new TV deal,a completely new image and get ride off the TV PG.


Why is there always somebody shitting on Punk, Bryan and Rollins during these ratings threads? None of those guys sniffed ratings this bad. They routinely were getting another entire MILLION more people watching per hour. Its hard facts and figures that you can look up for yourself. 

The product is uniquely bad right now. Its unprecedented.


----------



## InexorableJourney

Could this be the episode the third hour finally dips below 2 million viewers?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The rating will increase thanks to the Fossilzed Fartknockers. :dance


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

InexorableJourney said:


> Could this be the episode the third hour finally dips below 2 million viewers?


It's definitely possible. Not only NFL this week, but also Yankees/Red Sox Game 3 with the series tied at 1, and it's a holiday. Not a huge holiday, but a holiday nonetheless.

I think it's possible they get their lowest ratings every week until the NFL season ends. In case anyone hasn't noticed, NFL ratings are back up this season for the first time in a few years. The best part is WWE can't fix it no matter who they put on Raw, even if it was Rock/Austin.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I predict Hour 3 will rebound to near normal.


----------



## Randy Lahey

The Raw thread on this site got 80 pages, which is way more than the 65 they had been averaging the last several weeks. Based on that, I think Raw will get a higher rating than prior weeks.


----------



## ClintDagger

Sounds like they put a little effort in this week. I think the ratings finally got their attention.


----------



## Erik.

If I was watching live, I'd have tuned out as soon as I saw HHH and HBK opening the show to be honest.


----------



## Ace

I think they'll do better.

Raw thread was pretty active and it was show off the PPV.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.533M
H2- 2.388M
H3- 2.200M
3H- 2.374M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 5.72% / - 0.145M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 7.87% / - 0.188M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 13.15% / - 0.333M )
10/8/18 Vs 10/1/18 ( + 3.13% / + 0.072M )

Demo (10/8/18 Vs 10/1/18):
H1- 0.870D Vs 0.780D
H2- 0.830D Vs 0.760D
H3- 0.770D Vs 0.750D
3H- 0.823D Vs 0.763D

Note: RAW is 5th, 6th & 8th by hourly demo & 11th, 12th & 13th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (10/8/18 Vs 10/9/17):
H1- 2.533M Vs 3.008M
H2- 2.388M Vs 2.894M
H3- 2.200M Vs 2.711M
3H- 2.374M Vs 2.871M ( - 17.31% / - 0.497M )

Demo (10/8/18 Vs 10/9/17):
H1- 0.870D Vs 0.990D
H2- 0.830D Vs 0.970D
H3- 0.770D Vs 0.930D
3H- 0.823D Vs 0.963D

Note: RAW this week last year was 5th, 6th & 7th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 6th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## A-C-P

:ha :maury :beckylol :Rollins :bryanlol :reneelel :heston :tysonlol


----------



## Ace

It's up but wow that's still awful :lmao


----------



## Dave Santos

Wwe stocks are now $10 lower than their all time high two weeks ago.


----------



## Ace

Third lowest rating of the modern era :cole


----------



## InexorableJourney

I could have not been more wrong 

:bean:imout


----------



## JTB33b

The past legends appearing is the only reason they never recorded a new low.


----------



## Chrome

Slight bump up from last week, but that's not really saying too much.


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

Still not good with that rating. :no:


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

:damn

This week vs last week:
*H1- 2.500M H1- 2.533M
H2- 2.388M H2- 2.325M
H3- 2.00M H3- 2.081M
3H- 2.374M 3H- 2.302M
*

Hour 3 showed the biggest increase week to week but the average only gained 72,000 viewers. This week's ratings are weak. The only decent news is that the demo increased. 

This is the big takeaway. ( - 17.31% / - 0.497M ) Losing half a million viewers with a 17% drop is terrible. LET THE RATINGS HIT THE FLOOR!!!! :woo


----------



## Piper's Pit

Oh come on it's not that bad after what they got the previous two weeks.


----------



## Chrome

Hard to believe just a year ago they could occasionally get an hour above 3 million. They've also lost 500,000+ viewers in a year too like Shiv said. Ooof.


----------



## DammitChrist

Wait, is this the 3rd lowest Raw rating in over 2 decades? :damn


----------



## Tyleed

That's why I don't give a fuck how much money their making cause the shows are suffering. They have to use old nostalgia acts to get a small bump and not build any new stars with the current roster and shitty booking all around. Some people keep saying that ratings don't matter anymore like they have some stock in the company, but let it keep dropping and cable networks are going to start asking WTF is going on with these shows.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

If SD can't beat these awful ratings, there's really something wrong with the entire company.

Also, they really did the Shawn 'announcement' in a much different and less effective way than it could've been done, I felt. I would've done it like this:

Instead of the opening segment we got with both guys coming out; I'd have had Triple H come out by himself demanding/pleading for Shawn to come out of retirement for this match. Shawn can come out and say no; that he gave his word and he isn't sure if he even has it anymore.

From there for the rest of last night's show, you build it up to a decision. You could have wrestlers in the back giving Shawn advice in short backstage segments. That includes some of today's guys and even some of the agents backstage like Arn Anderson and/or Dean Malenko. Could've even had Flair talk to Shawn about never retiring and being crazy since Flair was Shawn's boyhood idol. 

End of the story in the latter part of the show; Triple H can be in the ring getting his ass kicked by Taker and/or Kane. Shawn comes out and makes the save. Grabs the mic real quick and says something to the effect of "Damn right I'm back!"

I think that would've been way more effective than how they blew their load in the very first segment of the night. Fans usually like a story that builds through one show, at least once in a blue-moon.

But, this is what they chose. So, so be it.


----------



## InexorableJourney

Showstopper said:


> Also, they really did the Shawn 'announcement' in a much different and less effective way than it could've been done, I felt. I would've done it like this:
> 
> Instead of the opening segment we got with both guys coming out; I'd have had Triple H come out by himself demanding/pleading for Shawn to come out of retirement for this match. Shawn can come out and say no; that he gave his word and he isn't sure if he even has it anymore.
> 
> From there for the rest of last night's show, you build it up to a decision. You could have wrestlers in the back giving Shawn advice in short backstage segments. That includes some of today's guys and even some of the agents backstage like Arn Anderson and/or Dean Malenko. Could've even had Flair talk to Shawn about never retiring and being crazy since Flair was Shawn's boyhood idol.
> 
> End of the story in the latter part of the show; Triple H can be in the ring getting his ass kicked by Taker and/or Kane. Shawn comes out and makes the save. Grabs the mic real quick and says something to the effect of "Damn right I'm back!"
> 
> I think that would've been way more effective than how they blew their load in the very first segment of the night. Fans usually like a story that builds through one show, at least once in a blue-moon.
> 
> But, this is what they chose. So, so be it.


I was really hoping to see Flair comes back and start tutting Shawn.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I never thought I'd see the flagship show get these kind of ratings two weeks in a row. Of course Smackdown won't beat this rating. They never do. Probably won't top Hour 3 either. Smackdown 1000 might be a different story but that remains to be seen.


----------



## SPCDRI

"Hey guys, the legends spiked the ratings"

Hours two, three and the OR under 2.4 million

:vince2


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I don't know what's more pathetic, Raw's ratings or the fact that SD can't beat them. SD 1000 should beat Raw.


----------



## Seafort

Here's a question that no one is asking...

The Road to WrestleMania traditionally draws higher ratings because part time stars are brought back into the picture after the Royal Rumble.

This year, those same part time stars are in play now. So what is left outside of a Rock storyline to drive ratings in January and February? Undertaker is back. HHH is back. Shawn Michaels is back. Kane is back. Brock Lesnar is back. There are few rabbits to pull out of the hat in January. Maybe Batista. Maybe CM Punk if the check was big enough. But that's it.


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> I don't know what's more pathetic, Raw's ratings or the fact that SD can't beat them. SD 1000 should beat Raw.


 Well, there's one big problem with that. SD doesn't have its own audience.

Their audience is Raw minus people who don't want want watch 5 hrs of wrestling over 2 days.

This has been evident for a while now, SD is basically the 4th and 5th hr of Raw. I'm surprised it does as well as it does with how it's been back to being portrayed as the B show.



Seafort said:


> Here's a question that no one is asking...
> 
> The Road to WrestleMania traditionally draws higher ratings because part time stars are brought back into the picture after the Royal Rumble.
> 
> This year, those same part time stars are in play now. So what is left outside of a Rock storyline to drive ratings in January and February? Undertaker is back. HHH is back. Shawn Michaels is back. Kane is back. Brock Lesnar is back. There are few rabbits to pull out of the hat in January. Maybe Batista. Maybe CM Punk if the check was big enough. But that's it.


 Only Rock really draws, those other guys a minimal at best. They only show up during WM season and give the illusion of being big draws. Goldberg drew massive numbers outside of WM season but those increases began to decrease each week he appeared.

.


----------



## Brock

Showstopper said:


> If SD can't beat these awful ratings, there's really something wrong with the entire company.
> 
> Also, they really did the Shawn 'announcement' in a much different and less effective way than it could've been done, I felt. I would've done it like this:
> 
> Instead of the opening segment we got with both guys coming out; I'd have had Triple H come out by himself demanding/pleading for Shawn to come out of retirement for this match. Shawn can come out and say no; that he gave his word and he isn't sure if he even has it anymore.
> 
> From there for the rest of last night's show, you build it up to a decision. You could have wrestlers in the back giving Shawn advice in short backstage segments. That includes some of today's guys and even some of the agents backstage like Arn Anderson and/or Dean Malenko. Could've even had Flair talk to Shawn about never retiring and being crazy since Flair was Shawn's boyhood idol.
> 
> End of the story in the latter part of the show; Triple H can be in the ring getting his ass kicked by Taker and/or Kane. Shawn comes out and makes the save. Grabs the mic real quick and says something to the effect of "Damn right I'm back!"
> 
> I think that would've been way more effective than how they blew their load in the very first segment of the night. Fans usually like a story that builds through one show, at least once in a blue-moon.
> 
> But, this is what they chose. So, so be it.


I thought﻿ they may tease us a little more with Shawn officially coming back tbh. Maybe having to be goaded out of retirement by Undertaker and Triple H begs him to consider it, fans chanting one more match as they've been doing for years now. The wow factor was missing IMO because he's having to parade around in those bloody DX shirts again.

It certainly isn't 2002 anymore.


----------



## CMPunkRock316

Definitely should have built up HBK coming out of retirement. Even if it went further like until next week or 2 weeks but they have to rush shit.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Barely up from last week but with them hashing out almost ALL the alive Attitude era stars not named Austin or Rock, to still pull THAT number is embarrassing and awful. This show sucks and it reflects on the quality. This Evolution/Crown Jewel nonsense has been a bust because all the stories, for the most part, are either bad, inconsistent, or the booking is wrong.

Here we are. The "bring back the Attitude era stars and part timers" well have officially dried up. They have no more options left. THIS is their fanbase that watches this still. There is no more soul, emotion, or care to produce quality programming anymore. It's nothing more than social media virtue signaling, SJW grandstanding, vanilla and unnecessary long timed in ring matches, and awful writing. Why WOULD you watch this crap anymore? Seriously?


----------



## ClintDagger

Seafort said:


> Here's a question that no one is asking...
> 
> The Road to WrestleMania traditionally draws higher ratings because part time stars are brought back into the picture after the Royal Rumble.
> 
> This year, those same part time stars are in play now. So what is left outside of a Rock storyline to drive ratings in January and February? Undertaker is back. HHH is back. Shawn Michaels is back. Kane is back. Brock Lesnar is back. There are few rabbits to pull out of the hat in January. Maybe Batista. Maybe CM Punk if the check was big enough. But that's it.


Really great point. I think it may show that WWE thinks this recent round of tv contracts might be the last that nets them huge money relative to the last one. So now their focus is going to be on these super shows in foreign markets particularly the Middle East. They have to constantly come up with ways to meet / surpass market expectations and that is really hard to do when the popularity of your product is steadily declining.

The other problem that they have is that they didn’t create any stars over the past 15 years. Guys like Cena, Orton, Batista, Bryan, Styles, etcetera will NEVER be seen as “attractions” the way Taker, Brock, Goldberg, Hunter, Shawn, Rock etcetera have. I think within the next 5-10 years you are going to see them struggle to fill these stadium show WMs as fans stop seeing them as being any more special than the other “special events” that they produce.


----------



## Jedah

2.5m for HOUR 1. Wow. :lmao

Couldn't happen to more deserving people. You shit your bed. Now you get to lie in it.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> Well, there's one big problem with that. SD doesn't have its own audience.
> 
> Their audience is Raw minus people who don't want want watch 5 hrs of wrestling over 2 days.
> 
> This has been evident for a while now, SD is basically the 4th and 5th hr of Raw. I'm surprised it does as well as it does with how it's been back to being portrayed as the B show.
> 
> Only Rock really draws, those other guys a minimal at best. They only show up during WM season and give the illusion of being big draws. Goldberg drew massive numbers outside of WM season but those increases began to decrease each week he appeared.
> 
> .


I have no problem with that. My only point is anyone who is hard on Raw's ratings should be just as hard on SD's. They have plenty of advantages over Raw. No 3rd hour. Better roster. Better show. No football competition. They should be doing better then they are, as well, Raw, too. That being said, I think SD 1000 will win that week. I mean, it should.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> I have no problem with that. My only point is anyone who is hard on Raw's ratings should be just as hard on SD's. They have plenty of advantages over Raw. No 3rd hour. Better roster. Better show. No football competition. They should be doing better then they are, as well, Raw, too. That being said, I think SD 1000 will win that week. I mean, it should.


Everything that you say is true. But WWE deliberately branded Smackdown as the missable “B” Show and I think a large chunk of the audience sees it that way. You never see the “legends” angles play out on SD, and when they put someone surprising over on SD like Cena it doesn’t last long and all of a sudden they are a “free agent” or something stupid like that. I honestly think they’d do well to rename SD when it goes to Fox. The brand is pretty damaged IMHO.


----------



## SPCDRI

They brought a bunch of fossils out, one out of retirement, and people talk about a "bump." Wasn't it only about one hundred thousand people? That's just statistical noise. If another half a million people or more watched, and they got an hour past three million people, that's be a spike. Since when is one hundred thousand people an all hours 2.5 million or worse a spike?

A ratings spike is when its something like a major anniversary and all the big guns come out and its hot and hyped for months and people got their calendars marked. RAW 1000 six years ago was bringing in more than six million people an hour from three and four million an hour that it was usually getting. Now that's a spike.

More recently, when RAW 25 happened, viewership went from about three million to about four and a half million and viewership was up thirty nine percent. Ratings going up forty or fifty percent, now that's a bump, fellas. This piddly shit from the old folk's home is not a bump.


----------



## UniversalGleam

wwe has overused legends so much that their one sure fire way to bring ratings back up is failing.

its gone from bringing back legends "for fun" to relying on them to keep their heads above the water but all the notable legends are at an age where they physically cant do much anymore.

WWE has basically used every resource they have at this point, the engine is practically out of gas and they seemingly cant be bothered to concentrate on creating new stars. Even roman reigns has taken a backseat in recent times, It can only go on so much longer before something needs to happen.

the feeling of things stalling feels more noticable than it did even only a year ago.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

It will rise again because there doesn't seem to be a lot more room for it to fall. I do expect HHH to book his feud in the first hour just so they get the most eyeballs they can.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Another record low rating incoming based on the Raw thread...59 pages lmao.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.490M
H2- 2.482M
H3- 2.216M
3H- 2.396M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 0.32% / - 0.008M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 10.72% / - 0.266M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 11.00% / - 0.274M )
10/15/18 Vs 10/8/18 ( + 0.93% / + 0.022M )

Demo (10/15/18 Vs 10/8/18):
H1- 0.890D Vs 0.870D
H2- 0.880D Vs 0.830D
H3- 0.810D Vs 0.770D
3H- 0.860D Vs 0.823D

Note: RAW is 5th, 6th & 8th by hourly demo & 10th, 11th & 14th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (10/15/18 Vs 10/16/17):
H1- 2.490M Vs 2.731M
H2- 2.482M Vs 2.728M
H3- 2.216M Vs 2.606M
3H- 2.396M Vs 2.688M ( - 10.86% / - 0.292M )

Demo (10/15/18 Vs 10/16/17):
H1- 0.890D Vs 0.900D
H2- 0.880D Vs 0.920D
H3- 0.810D Vs 0.900D
3H- 0.860D Vs 0.907D

Note: RAW this week last year was 7th, 6th & 8th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 7th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Holy shit. :lol

That's awful (shocker). SD1000 should eat them up this week, and hopefully it does.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

It was actually higher than last week. :lol The first two hours were fairly stable until Hour 3 crapped the bed again. Same old, same old.


----------



## shadows123

well it is kinda expected when they have followed lazy booking with almost same matches and segments every week.. You got an angle on the top of the card which is going no where with repeated singles matches, old part timers and the rest of the roster who look like a bunch of jabronis who are just there for no apparent reason.. I am surprised the rating is this high for the shitty programming put out on raw every week..Wonder how much further down do TV ratings have to go before the television channel starts pressurising WWE to put out a better product.


----------



## ChonWein

Raw is the the wurst show on Monday nights


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Hour 3 has been hampered by being against some very competitive NFL games, but they don't help themselves with booking the same crap ad nauseam.


----------



## RCSheppy

Well, I for one am not surprised. The show is a fucking dumpster fire.


----------



## llj

RAW will find a way to reach another new historic low before the year is over.

edit: Oh wait, 2.490 for the first hour. Isn't that a new low for a first hour? The streak for new lows continues!


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The last 4 Hour 3 ratings:

2.281M
2.081M
2.200M
2.216M

This is quite the historic run for the last month of RAW. :bosque


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

llj said:


> RAW will find a way to reach another new historic low before the year is over.
> 
> edit: Oh wait, 2.490 for the first hour. Isn't that a new low for a first hour? The streak for new lows continues!


It's awful. If SD doesn't beat them with it being SD 1000.

:mj4

Hell, they should win even more than that as long as NFL is back and it's ratings are back up this year.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Showstopper said:


> It's awful. If SD doesn't beat them with it being SD 1000.
> 
> :mj4
> 
> Hell, they should win even more than that as long as NFL is back and it's ratings are back up this year.


No. Tuesday is the highest rated night of network tv and tonight will be even stronger as people try to check out the fate of Roseanne. Even with the NFL added, the total audiences are about the same. MNF does kill it in the demo though compared to all other cable shows.

SDL could beat it tonight because it's a special edition. Even then, they have to overcome the drag of being the 4th and 5th hour of WWE programming, especially in the wake of such an enervating episode.

The brand RAW is the draw. Switch the lineups and I'm confident the results would be nearly the same.


----------



## llj

Smackdown will still get lower numbers but retain more audience than most weeks and they'll call that a smashing success for Smackdown 1000

If even HBK, Taker and Kane can't pop ratings, neither will Batista or Rey.

Though Rey's youtube numbers will probably be huge with spanish viewers


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

BAD SHIV RISING said:


> No. Tuesday is the highest rated night of network tv and tonight will be even stronger as people try to check out the fate of Roseanne. Even with the NFL added, the total audiences are about the same. MNF does kill it in the demo though compared to all other cable shows.
> 
> SDL could beat it tonight because it's a special edition. Even then, they have to overcome the drag of being the 4th and 5th hour of WWE programming, especially in the wake of such an enervating episode.
> 
> The brand RAW is the draw. Switch the lineups and I'm confident the results would be nearly the same.


SD has a TON of advantages. Better roster. Better storylines on average. Better show. No 3rd hour to drag it down. No NFL competition. And by the way, after NFL ratings dropping in 2016 and 2017, they are back up this year BIG TIME. They're back to killing it again. None of that even includes the TV shows that are back on Monday nights, as well.

If we shit on one, we have to shit on both. There is no reason for SD to not at least win once in awhile in the Fall. Not between all of those advantages, NFL and MLB playoffs at the same exact time, and having a 3rd hour that just destroys the show every week. If SD had a third hour, I'd call it even, even with them not going up against NFL. But they don't even have that.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

One thing to keep in perspective is that despite both RAW and SDL dying on the vine, they both still garner demo ratings that most cable shows would die for.


----------



## ClintDagger

BAD SHIV RISING said:


> One thing to keep in perspective is that despite both RAW and SDL dying on the vine, they both still garner demo ratings that most cable shows would die for.


It depends on how granular you get with those demographics. At their lowest level they’ve been described as nightmare demographics. I think the description from Meltzer was “very poor, and very Hispanic”. The raw numbers (pardon the pun) are very good and USA has loved them for the bragging rights because they allow for them to stay solidly at the top of viewership numbers particularly in key demos. And I’m sure that’s what Fox is looking for to bolster Friday nights which is as everyone knows is the death night of television. But WWE’s audience is mostly a turnoff for advertisers.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

ClintDagger said:


> It depends on how granular you get with those demographics. At their lowest level they’ve been described as nightmare demographics. I think the description from Meltzer was “very poor, and very Hispanic”. The raw numbers (pardon the pun) are very good and USA has loved them for the bragging rights because they allow for them to stay solidly at the top of viewership numbers particularly in key demos. And I’m sure that’s what Fox is looking for to bolster Friday nights which is as everyone knows is the death night of television. But WWE’s audience is mostly a turnoff for advertisers.


Yeah WWE is identified with lower income demos. Nascar had/s the same problem. You won't see Mercedes commercials on RAW. I think that Golf used to have one of the more "desirable" demos.

I will be interested to see how Smackdown does on Fox. Friday night isn't a great night for tv, but they will benefit from commercials on Thursday Night Football plus Vince will do anything to make it a success. I also am curious to see if viewers worn out by the 3 hour RAW will sufficiently recover from the hangover and be ready for Friday wrestling again. I never poaid attention to that when Smackdown was previously on Friday.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

There are less than 3 million people who still watch WWE in 2018. The question is how bad does it have to get for those people to finally stop watching? Can it possibly get any worse?


----------



## ClintDagger

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> There are less than 3 million people who still watch WWE in 2018. The question is how bad does it have to get for those people to finally stop watching? Can it possibly get any worse?


I think it can. Raw has been bad for many years but for those that held their nose and endured the Cena years there was usually a bright spot in there like say Punk or Bryan that kept people hopeful and invested. I think the reason you are seeing an acceleration of people leaving the show is that with the Reigns push you now have these guys that in years past would have been bright spots (Lesnar, Rollins, Braun) but now WWE is deliberately sabotaging them in an effort to benefit Reigns. I think that is really souring and demoralizing fans and they are giving up on the product altogether. Fan morale is the lowest I’ve ever seen it and it’s dropping every week.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Trump spoke at a rally on TV for the first hour and 15 minutes of Raw. Wonder if that affects the numbers or not.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.609M
H2- 2.622M
H3- 2.413M
3H- 2.548M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 0.50% / + 0.013M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 7.97% / - 0.209M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 7.51% / - 0.196M )
10/22/18 Vs 10/15/18 ( + 6.34% / + 0.152M )

Demo (10/22/18 Vs 10/15/18):
H1- 0.920D Vs 0.890D
H2- 0.950D Vs 0.880D
H3- 0.880D Vs 0.810D
3H- 0.917D Vs 0.860D

Note: RAW is 5th, 4th & 7th by hourly demo & 11th, 10th & 12th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (10/22/18 Vs 10/23/17):
H1- 2.609M Vs 3.332M
H2- 2.622M Vs 2.969M
H3- 2.413M Vs 2.557M
3H- 2.548M Vs 2.953M ( - 13.71% / - 0.405M )

Demo (10/22/18 Vs 10/23/17):
H1- 0.920D Vs 1.150D
H2- 0.950D Vs 1.010D
H3- 0.880D Vs 0.940D
3H- 0.917D Vs 1.033D

Note: RAW this week last year was 3th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 2nd, 4th & 8th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Piper's Pit

Edging back up a little.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Show was up a bit. Roman proving he is a draw. :trips8 

Hour 3 was the highest its been in a few weeks. Good to see it higher but then you see the year to year decline - 13.71% / - 0.405M and realize that WWE has turned off a lot of regular viewers.


----------



## Chrome

Slight improvement but still down from last year year as Shiv pointed out. Let's see if the Ambrose heel turn helps go up further.


----------



## Robbyfude

Wonder if the Ambrose cliff hanger will draw more people in. Gotta admit, Ambrose vs Rollins again and the lack of Super Reigns has me wanting to watch Raw for the first time in a year.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

For one week, who fucking cares? This should be the least we're concerned with at this time.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ambrose/Rollins should provide enough enticement to get more viewers to tune in for Hour 1. The trick is keeping them around for 180+ minutes.


----------



## The Renegade

Not good, but certainly better, numbers. 

I wholeheartedly expect to see a significant bump up after this week’s emotion packed Raw.


----------



## ClintDagger

I think a lot of fans have left in recent years due to Roman fatigue. I wonder if we will see some uptick as people check in to see what the product is like without him?


----------



## llj

I'm pretty sure Roman being gone won't improve the product for many people out there anyway. A lot of it is on creative being lazy with everything. Roman being out won't change that part.

People will quickly realize the problem with the WWE lately was never really Roman


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.723M
H2- 2.455M
H3- 2.237M
3H- 2.472M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 9.84% / - 0.268M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 8.88% / - 0.218M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 17.85% / - 0.486M )
10/29/18 Vs 10/22/18 ( - 2.98% / - 0.076M )

Demo (10/29/18 Vs 10/22/18):
H1- 0.960D Vs 0.920D
H2- 0.860D Vs 0.950D
H3- 0.820D Vs 0.880D
3H- 0.880D Vs 0.917D

Note: RAW is 4th, 6th & 7th by hourly demo & 8th, 11th & 13th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (10/29/18 Vs 10/30/17):
H1- 2.723M Vs 3.102M
H2- 2.455M Vs 2.943M
H3- 2.237M Vs 2.517M
3H- 2.472M Vs 2.854M ( - 13.38% / - 0.382M )

Demo (10/29/18 Vs 10/30/17):
H1- 0.960D Vs 0.980D
H2- 0.860D Vs 0.980D
H3- 0.820D Vs 0.870D
3H- 0.880D Vs 0.943D

Note: RAW this week last year was 5th, 4th & 6th by hourly demo & 6th, 7th & 12th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Slightly down from last week. 76,000 down from last week to be exact.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

I think the rating shows that there was a lot of excitement going into this episode of RAW, judging by the strong Hour 1 number. But the hour by hour decline was sort of indicative of the show because it just progressively got worse. They shouldn't have made fans wait until the beginning of Hour 3 to see the fallout from Dean and Seth's angle. The Hour 3 number somewhat shows that fans might be losing interest in this DX/Brothers of Destruction storyline. WWE would've been better off just going right to Shawn vs. Undertaker after Super Show Down, instead of dragging out this tag team angle.






Seth/Dean have the most views of any segment from last night with 2.3 Million Views. I think fans tuned out after their segment. So that's probably why the Hour 3 number is the way it is.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Boy Wonder said:


> I think the rating shows that there was a lot of excitement going into this episode of RAW, judging by the strong Hour 1 number. But the hour by hour decline was sort of indicative of the show because it just progressively got worse. They shouldn't have made fans wait until the beginning of Hour 3 to see the fallout from Dean and Seth's angle. The Hour 3 number somewhat shows that fans might be losing interest in this DX/Brothers of Destruction storyline. WWE would've been better off just going right to Shawn vs. Undertaker after Super Show Down, instead of dragging out this tag team angle.


This is what Hour 3 has been since the start of the football season. Hour 3 stands no chance against the NFL, especially with the Patriots playing last night, but any team really.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Yeah I agree. I think WWE has trained fans to not care about Hour 3. It's sort of become a throwaway. Honestly they might be better off just giving the Women the entire Hour 3 on a weekly basis. At least they can give the ladies the time they need to perform and the show can be structured better.


----------



## Robbyfude

Looks like the Ambrose/Rollins cliff hanger bought people , then the rest of the show was typical Raw so they tuned out.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

H1- 2.609M H1- 2.723M +114,000
H2- 2.622M H2- 2.455M -167,000
H3- 2.413M H3- 2.237M -176,000


This is the total viewers for the last two weeks. This week Hour 1 did increase by 114,000 but Hours 2 and 3 averaged a 171,500 drop. There was increased interest at the start of the show but it did not hold. I'm sure Vince will attribute Hour 1 to :brock4


----------



## V-Trigger

No one gives a fuck about these old men pretending to be rebellious teenagers. It's embarrassing. It was pretty bad when they made their previous DX run. Now it's even fucking worse


----------



## ClintDagger

They should have opened with Dean / Seth. People are tepidly interested in that but not enough to stick around. The longer you make people wait for that the less interested they are going to be.


----------



## Ace

Lmao so even the part timers along with the hot angle last week can't pop a rating.


----------



## ClintDagger

I should also add that people may have tuned in off the top and been hopeful of a new, fresh direction given Reigns’ unexpected departure. Then they tune in and see about as chalk of a show as you can get and quickly check back out.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Boy Wonder said:


> Yeah I agree. I think WWE has trained fans to not care about Hour 3. It's sort of become a throwaway. Honestly they might be better off just giving the Women the entire Hour 3 on a weekly basis. At least they can give the ladies the time they need to perform and the show can be structured better.


They put Lucha House Party on in hour 3, up against the Tom Brady led Patriots. They definitely don't care.


----------



## Chrome

Showstopper said:


> They put *Lucha House Party* on in hour 3, up against the Tom Brady led Patriots. They definitely don't care. Sad thing is this shitty overall rating will still somehow beat SD with no 3rd hour to drag it down or NFL to go up against.


The what now? Or am I better off just not knowing?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Chrome said:


> The what now? Or am I better off just not knowing?


:lol

3 luchadors from 205 Live; Kallisto, Gran Metalik, and Lince Dorado. They were on Raw last night and one of them (can't even remember which) had a match in HOUR 3 of Raw last night, somehow, some way. :lmao

I had an epiphany last night when I saw that. They really don't care about the ratings. And with Tom Brady playing on the same night. :lol


----------



## Slyfox

The absence of Reigns and any full time draw is going to hurt wwe badly in viwerships.
Heel Ambrose could be a draw but people are quickly losing interest because of who is feuding with.


----------



## DammitChrist

Slyfox said:


> The absence of Reigns and any full time draw is going to hurt wwe badly in viwerships.


It really wouldn't because ratings were still decreasing with him on the show. The viewership would just continue to fall with or without Roman Reigns.



> Heel Ambrose could be a draw *but people are quickly losing interest because of who is feuding with.*





Slyfox said:


> Would be interesting to see how many million viewers wwe loses in coming months now that ratings slayer is back in main event.



Sure, keep believing that :mj4


----------



## Slyfox

Would be interesting to see how many million viewers wwe loses in coming months now that ratings slayer is back in main event.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The absence of Reigns is going to hurt? One week in and it already hasn't made a difference at all. Ratings are the same just as many of us predicted. All those years as the top guy and no difference in ratings with him not there. LOLWWE.


----------



## Isuzu

Anything short of having Full time Lesnar on Raw beating up some vanilla midget jobber in a steel cage every week , or having an 'Edge" style Live Sex show The viewership will not increase.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.641M
H2- 2.501M
H3- 2.181M
3H- 2.441M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 5.30% / - 0.140M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 12.79% / - 0.320M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 17.42% / - 0.460M )
11/5/18 Vs 10/29/18 ( - 1.25% / - 0.031M )

Demo (11/5/18 Vs 10/29/18):
H1- 0.920D Vs 0.960D
H2- 0.860D Vs 0.860D
H3- 0.750D Vs 0.820D
3H- 0.843D Vs 0.880D

Note: RAW is 5th, 6th & 7th by hourly demo & 10th, 11th & 13th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (11/5/18 Vs 11/6/17):
H1- 2.641M Vs 2.935M
H2- 2.501M Vs 2.959M
H3- 2.181M Vs 2.630M
3H- 2.441M Vs 2.841M ( - 14.08% / - 0.400M )

Demo (11/5/18 Vs 11/6/17):
H1- 0.920D Vs 0.950D
H2- 0.860D Vs 0.980D
H3- 0.750D Vs 0.910D
3H- 0.843D Vs 0.947D

Note: RAW this week last year was 5th, 4th & 6th by hourly demo & 5th, 4th & 9th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Chrome

Tbh, I thought they'd go under 2 million for the 3rd hour. :toomanykobes

Still a terrible rating though.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Horrible rating, but hours 1 and 2 are higher than I expected them to be. Odd.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Hour 3 :heston 

Down 14% year to year. roud


----------



## ClintDagger

Brock and Roman carrying the torch has killed them in recent years. I can’t believe that they had a chance to try a new formula and went right back to Brock. I think sub 2 million is coming and coming soon.


----------



## Ace

Hour 1 and 2 must have been up because they thought Brock would appear, when it became obvious he wouldn't they tuned out.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> Brock and Roman carrying the torch has killed them in recent years. I can’t believe that they had a chance to try a new formula and went right back to Brock. I think sub 2 million is coming and coming soon.


Agreed. Brock hasn't popped a bump in the ratings in ages. He's a waste and a total bore in the ring these days (actually, years now).


----------



## The Boy Wonder

I was surprised to see the attendance from last night's show. On TV it was clear the top was covered. Here's a picture of the hard camera side:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1059909993665830912
You would expect better attendance in England.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> Agreed. Brock hasn't popped a bump in the ratings in ages. He's a waste and a total bore in the ring these days (actually, years now).


Brock’s value is as an attraction. Someone you see wrestle at WM only with a few Raw appearances preceding that. Having him be the champ and have boring reigns with boring matches is not good for anyone.


----------



## Stadhart02

The Boy Wonder said:


> I was surprised to see the attendance from last night's show. On TV it was clear the top was covered. Here's a picture of the hard camera side:
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1059909993665830912
> You would expect better attendance in England.


I am very surprised at that - I assumed every UK RAW sold out. I stopped going to the London show this year because the show is so bad it is just a waste of money and it is nice to see others have grown tired of it too and are at the point where they don't give the WWE their money anymore

The WWE is terrible


----------



## Xander45

The ticket prices were crazy high, about 60 quid a pop.


----------



## xio8ups

Hahahahhaha They are approaching tna's highest numbers


----------



## Dave Santos

The wwe stock has dropped a lot this month. 30% drop in the last month. It did start the year at $32.00 a share and now its at $69.00 so it did make a lot of gains for the year overall. Will be interesting to see where they end up by the end of the year.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.761M
H2- 2.446M
H3- 2.142M
3H- 2.450M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 11.41% / - 0.315M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 12.43% / - 0.304M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 22.42% / - 0.619M )
11/12/18 Vs 11/5/18 ( + 0.37% / + 0.009M )

Demo (11/12/18 Vs 11/5/18):
H1- 0.940D Vs 0.920D
H2- 0.830D Vs 0.860D
H3- 0.800D Vs 0.750D
3H- 0.857D Vs 0.843D

Note: RAW is 5th, 6th & 7th by hourly demo & 5th, 9th & 12th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (11/12/18 Vs 11/13/17):
H1- 2.761M Vs 3.262M
H2- 2.446M Vs 3.061M
H3- 2.142M Vs 2.769M
3H- 2.450M Vs 3.031M ( - 19.17% / - 0.581M )

Demo (11/12/18 Vs 11/13/17):
H1- 0.940D Vs 1.120D
H2- 0.830D Vs 1.070D
H3- 0.800D Vs 0.990D
3H- 0.857D Vs 1.060D

Note: RAW this week last year was 2nd, 3rd & 6th by hourly demo & 2nd, 3rd & 7th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Ace

WOW THAT 3rd HR :lmao @Showstopper

Guess everyone lost interest after Brock.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

@Ace; 

3rd hour is awful. And that's with Brock and Stephanie being advertised.

Seth and Dean in the first hour, though.

:drose


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> 3rd hour is awful. And that's with Brock and Stephanie being advertised.
> 
> Seth and Dean in the first hour, though.
> 
> :drose
> 
> Suck on that.


 Brock was top of the second hr, I can only imagine how low that number would have been if Brock didn't have 5 mins of it.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> Brock was top of the second hr, I can only imagine how low that number would have been if Brock didn't have 5 mins of it.


5 mins doesn't really impact it much though, I would imagine.

2nd hour was trash, too. Not as bad as last hour, but pretty bad. This was an advertised appearance, too.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Brock ain't a draw, no one is. I thought Ronda might be but she isn't ether. Dropping 581,000 viewers in one year is quite the achievement. How low can they go?


----------



## InexorableJourney

80% retention puts SDL at less than 2m viewers, doubly so without Becky.


----------



## shadows123

probably the years of pushing questionable people relentlessly and failure to create legit stars overall coupled with questionable product quality is causing viewers to feel burnt out and are tuning out.. Probably Raw with under 2mn would be a reality come next year or so if this trend continues.. no doubt a thrilling prospect for the USA network :laugh:


----------



## Ace

InexorableJourney said:


> 80% retention puts SDL at less than 2m viewers, doubly so without Becky.


SD was bordering on 2m with Becky, she's no draw so let's drop that abaurd notion right now.

I do think there is a chance SD does well tonight because they expect Raw to hit back. I think SDs under seige shit last year boosted ratings.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Lol at that rating. So much for "THE (WO)MAN" Becky Lynch being a draw. Just as I suspected no one cares about her but smarks. Brock and Ronda don't draw in fake wrestling either. Continuing to push them just because they are famous outside of wrestling is pointless when they clearly don't move the needle at all.


----------



## Y.2.J

I watched probably the first half of last night's RAW live last night. I watched until after the Brock segment. 
There's just too much filler and I saw what I wanted to see...mainly Seth, Dean, Drew, Braun and Brock.

Honestly...I'm catching up right now on YouTube and it's great. I'm picking what I want to watch, at my own pace, and I'm just as caught up as I would've been if I watched the whole show live.

TV ratings will continue to free fall. Too many other options and better ones at that.


----------



## JDP2016

I hope ratings keep dropping like poop from a birds ass. This is what happens when a show is built around women.

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## Ace

JDP2016 said:


> I hope ratings keep dropping like poop from a birds ass. This is what happens when a show is built around women.
> 
> Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


 why can't the company just give the women their own brand. It's a natural progression from all this and won't force people who aren't interested in woman's wrestling to watch.

Evolution was supposedly a big success to so you can give them their own PPVs too without making the men look like geeks undercarding to the likes of Steph, Ronda, Alexa, Charlotte, Becky etc.

I mean if Rock or Austin were to return, how often would they undrcard, for a fucking go home SS. They wouldn't because they're stars, for the men today to do it only makes them look like bigger losers than they already are.



nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Lol at that rating. So much for "THE (WO)MAN" Becky Lynch being a draw. Just as I suspected no one cares about her but smarks. Brock and Ronda don't draw in fake wrestling either. Continuing to push them just because they are famous outside of wrestling is pointless when they clearly don't move the needle at all.


 You can't blame Becky for it. She wasn't advertised in advance nor was it expected she would show :shrug

You can point this to Steph who was promoted throughout the show for her announcement.


----------



## AlternateDemise

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Lol at that rating. So much for "THE (WO)MAN" Becky Lynch being a draw. Just as I suspected no one cares about her but smarks. Brock and Ronda don't draw in fake wrestling either. Continuing to push them just because they are famous outside of wrestling is pointless when they clearly don't move the needle at all.


Don't know why I bother at this point. But once again, without ratings breakdowns, we can't say someone isn't a draw based on this.


----------



## ClintDagger

Ace said:


> why can't the company just give the women their own brand. It's a natural progression from all this and won't force people who aren't interested in woman's wrestling to watch.
> 
> Evolution was supposedly a big success to so you can give them their own PPVs too without making the men look like geeks undercarding to the likes of Steph, Ronda, Alexa, Charlotte, Becky etc.
> 
> I mean if Rock or Austin were to return, how often would they undrcard, for a fucking go home SS. They wouldn't because they're stars, for the men today to do it only makes them look like bigger losers than they already are.
> 
> You can't blame Becky for it. She wasn't advertised in advance nor was it expected she would show :shrug
> 
> You can point this to Steph who was promoted throughout the show for her announcement.


They can’t give the women their own show because it would be a ratings disaster. The women are a nice complement to the product but they will never be able to draw or carry the product on their own long term.


----------



## Piper's Pit

Dave Santos said:


> The wwe stock has dropped a lot this month. 30% drop in the last month. It did start the year at $32.00 a share and now its at $69.00 so it did make a lot of gains for the year overall. Will be interesting to see where they end up by the end of the year.


Might be a good time to buy stock, once the new TV deal kicks in next year their stock value is going to skyrocket.


----------



## JDP2016

Ace said:


> why can't the company just give the women their own brand. It's a natural progression from all this and won't force people who aren't interested in woman's wrestling to watch.
> 
> Evolution was supposedly a big success to so you can give them their own PPVs too without making the men look like geeks undercarding to the likes of Steph, Ronda, Alexa, Charlotte, Becky etc.
> 
> I mean if Rock or Austin were to return, how often would they undrcard, for a fucking go home SS. They wouldn't because they're stars, for the men today to do it only makes them look like bigger losers than they already are.



Could you imagine in 1998, Stone Cold taking a back seat to Sable a week before a major PPV? Or Triple H, in 2002, taking a backseat to Trish Stratus or Lita? John Cena taking a backseat to Mickie James in 2006? That shit would never happen. How many final segments on Smackdown did AJ have as WWE champ compared to Becky as women's champ? I'd like to know.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

This is what happens when you build the show around women, Stephanie, and a part-time World Champion (who was advertised). No one is interested.


----------



## xio8ups

Braun should quit and go solo like cody.


----------



## SPCDRI

Third hour is still the death hour and there's no way women's angles should be the biggest angle into a Big Four with women closing out the go home show, that's just nutty. In light of Brock's frequent absence in the foreseeable future there are people saying the top booked people/close out people should be the likes of Ronda Rousey and Stephanie McMahon. They're absolutely smoking crack with this. Women's wrestling is the niche of the niche, this is like saying in the absence of Brock Lesnar, they should hard-push cruiserweights and luchadors.


----------



## Stadhart02

SPCDRI said:


> Third hour is still the death hour and there's no way women's angles should be the biggest angle into a Big Four with women closing out the go home show, that's just nutty. In light of Brock's frequent absence in the foreseeable future there are people saying the top booked people/close out people should be the likes of Ronda Rousey and Stephanie McMahon. They're absolutely smoking crack with this. Women's wrestling is the niche of the niche, this is like saying in the absence of Brock Lesnar, they should hard-push cruiserweights and luchadors.


exactly - it is "go woke, get broke" in action. WWE obviously still has loads of money coming in with this new TV deal so they feel they push any crap they want and get away with it but less and less people will be tuning in and turning up to events

I can put up with all sorts of crap but the one thing that makes me turn something off for good is politics being pushed. I want to escape that shit when I turn on the TV or turn on my PS4 but now even that is being infected with this joyless shit


----------



## Erramayhem89

It's not just the women the entire show fucking sucks and they put zero effort in to making it watchable. It's the same thing every single week. Nobody is over. It's overly scripted. Wrestling isn't cool anymore. 

By this time next year ratings will be under 2


----------



## Sincere

AlternateDemise said:


> Don't know why I bother at this point. But once again, without ratings breakdowns, we can't say someone isn't a draw based on this.


Dude is blaming Becky, who is not even on the Raw roster, for Raw ratings, even though her invasion segment wasn't built, advertised, or even so much as teased at ahead of time in any capacity. It was quite literally out of nowhere, and that's on WWE. It also only accounted for the last 10 minutes of the show, and was quite undeniably the best part of the show by any reasonable standard.


----------



## SPCDRI

I'm not blaming her, she's fine, but let's not act like women getting big segments and their own show at Nassau Coliseum and a promoted Steph appearance didn't try to draw people. They tried to draw people off of women wrestling and MMA and a McMahon appearance and it died against a completely inconsequential monday night football game.


----------



## Sincere

SPCDRI said:


> I'm not blaming her, she's fine, but let's not act like women getting big segments and their own show at Nassau Coliseum and a promoted Steph appearance didn't try to draw people. They tried to draw people off of women wrestling and MMA and a McMahon appearance and it died against a completely inconsequential monday night football game.


Wasn't talking about you.


----------



## squarebox

H1- 2.761M
H2- 2.446M
H3- 2.142M
3H- 2.450M

Thing is, some of you guys are making it out to be all doom and gloom yet there's still over 2,000,000 people watching it. How much has that rating actually lowered over the past year? Doesn't seem like that much overall and it doesn't seem like WWE care as evidenced by the trash shows they've been putting on recently. Wake me up when those ratings actually fall below 2 mill and attendance falls with it because at the moment, these sorts of ratings might as well mean nothing.


----------



## SPCDRI

Its not the past year, its the past trend. Its also a lot larger than you think. This programming has shed more than twenty five percent of its audience in 5 years. Instead of in this thread comparing only what the rating was last year, you could do something like 1/3/5. What the rating was 2017, 2015, 2013. These viewer numbers right now are only what WWE was doing when it was WWF close to a holiday with WCW counterprogramming them. Dude, hour 2 is sub 2.5 million and Hour 3 has been bottom feeding and flirting with 2 million for months. 

I don't see how people think a show that used to get four million people watching almost all the hours getting an hour that's close to being half of that isn't a big deal.


----------



## squarebox

SPCDRI said:


> Its not the past year, its the past trend. Its also a lot larger than you think. This programming has shed more than twenty five percent of its audience in 5 years. Instead of in this thread comparing only what the rating was last year, you could do something like 1/3/5. What the rating was 2017, 2015, 2013. These viewer numbers right now are only what WWE was doing when it was WWF close to a holiday with WCW counterprogramming them. Dude, hour 2 is sub 2.5 million and Hour 3 has been bottom feeding and flirting with 2 million for months.
> 
> I don't see how people think a show that used to get four million people watching almost all the hours getting an hour that's close to being half of that isn't a big deal.


If it was such a big deal though as some of us think it is then why do they continue to not even try? Seriously, I used to come to this thread to laugh at the declining ratings over the past few years but now I've come to realize that they may as well mean squat because it's still shit and it isn't getting any better despite the steady decline in those ratings. Every year I think that something's got to give but it never does. 

Nothing about the current product indicates to me that they give two shits about ratings.


----------



## Dave Santos

Wwe stock down 5% so far today. Down over 30% in the past month and a half. For the whole year they are still in positive territory.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Not that it matters anymore, but pretty good chance Raw got destroyed last night with that football game; 2 of the best teams in the league, scored a record high 105 combined points (54-51) and two of the best, young QBs going at it.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.721M
H2- 2.502M
H3- 2.256M
3H- 2.493M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 8.05% / - 0.219M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 9.83% / - 0.246M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 17.09% / - 0.465M )
11/19/18 Vs 11/12/18 ( + 1.76% / + 0.043M )

Demo (11/19/18 Vs 11/12/18):
H1- 0.940D Vs 0.940D
H2- 0.870D Vs 0.830D
H3- 0.810D Vs 0.900D
3H- 0.873D Vs 0.857D

Note: RAW is 4th, 6th & 7th by hourly demo & 4th, 5th & 11th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (11/19/18 Vs 11/20/17):
H1- 2.721M Vs 3.244M
H2- 2.502M Vs 3.194M
H3- 2.256M Vs 2.785M
3H- 2.493M Vs 3.074M ( - 18.01% / - 0.581M )

Demo (11/19/18 Vs 11/20/17):
H1- 0.940D Vs 1.080D
H2- 0.870D Vs 1.080D
H3- 0.810D Vs 0.960D
3H- 0.873D Vs 1.040D

Note: RAW this week last year was 3rd, 4th & 5th by hourly demo & 2nd, 3rd & 7th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Ace

People tuned out when they realized Brock was false advertised :brock4


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Considering the historic NFL game last night with the two best teams in the league, that's alot better than I thought, especially that hour 3. WWE got lucky.


----------



## Stalingrad9

I'm going to laugh when FOX is gonna make them care about the ratings whether they like or not, and they're actually gonna have to do something.

USA's just a piece of shit channel by the looks of it if they allow such a fall in the ratings and keep paying for the show. I'm not American but it seems like that from outside lol.


----------



## Sincere

Stalingrad9 said:


> USA's just a piece of shit channel by the looks of it if they allow such a fall in the ratings and keep paying for the show. I'm not American but it seems like that from outside lol.


USA channel is generally trash.

Every now and then they'll have a flash in the pan show that might draw some interest when it begins, but it usually isn't sustained.


----------



## JDP2016

Let's see what they do next week.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Down - 18.01% / - 0.581M from last year. The downward trend continues unabated and this can not be spun as good news. That ppv "bump". :heston


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

BAD SHIV RISING said:


> Down - 18.01% / - 0.581M from last year. The downward trend continues unabated and this can not be spun as good news. That ppv "bump". :heston


They went up against the best NFL game of the year last night with the two best teams in the league, scoring the most amount of points ever. This was damn good considering, especially for a show without a legit world champion.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Showstopper said:


> They went up against the best NFL game of the year last night with the two best teams in the league, scoring the most amount of points ever. This was damn good considering, especially for a show without a legit world champion.


I'm just looking at the downward trajectory of both shows. Wonder where rock bottom is? Road to Mania should lead to an uptick but will it still be down the same magin year to year? WWE needs some good rating news.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

BAD SHIV RISING said:


> I'm just looking at the downward trajectory of both shows. Wonder where rock bottom is? Road to Mania should lead to an uptick but will it still be down the same magin year to year? WWE needs some good rating news.


Yeah, in that aspect it is bad. But that game in particular was a monster. Two 9-1 teams, the two best young QBs in the league, a possible Super Bowl preview. Even I was switching back and forth and I'm not a fan of either team.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Showstopper said:


> Yeah, in that aspect it is bad. But that game in particular was a monster. Two 9-1 teams, the two best young QBs in the league, a possible Super Bowl preview. Even I was switching back and forth and I'm not a fan of either team.


That game was awesome. Third highest scoring game in NFL history. Only got to see the 4th quarter but it was epic.


----------



## xio8ups

under 2 next year


----------



## Randy Lahey

Showstopper said:


> They went up against the best NFL game of the year last night with the two best teams in the league, scoring the most amount of points ever. This was damn good considering, especially for a show without a legit world champion.


The NFL doesn't affect WWE's ratings much anymore no matter who is playing. I don't think there's much carry over at all. WWE was doing worse 3rd hour numbers a few week against the usual crap NFL monday night games. So I don't think there's much correlation. NFL's own ratings are down.

WWE being 13-18% off of last year for this Fall Season is the problem. If they can't stop that bleed eventually, they'll have no show.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Randy Lahey said:


> The NFL doesn't affect WWE's ratings much anymore no matter who is playing. I don't think there's much carry over at all. WWE was doing worse 3rd hour numbers a few week against the usual crap NFL monday night games. So I don't think there's much correlation. NFL's own ratings are down.
> 
> WWE being 13-18% off of last year for this Fall Season is the problem. If they can't stop that bleed eventually, they'll have no show.


They definitely effect them. Every September WWE's ratings go down, and every January (when football season is over), they go back up. Last night in particular would effect television across the board with the two best and hottest teams in the league.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Showstopper said:


> They definitely effect them. Every September WWE's ratings go down, and every January (when football season is over), they go back up. Last night in particular would effect television across the board with the two best and hottest teams in the league.


That is a factor plus The Road to Mania begins which is when they generate the most interest.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

BAD SHIV RISING said:


> That is a factor plus The Road to Mania begins which is when they generate the most interest.


Yep. Not a coincidence every Week 1 of the NFL season Monday night game the rating goes down from the previous week significantly. And then goes back up in early January when it's all over with and stays consistent until the next September. We go through this every year. It's nothing new.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Showstopper said:


> Yep. Not a coincidence every Week 1 of the NFL season Monday night game the rating goes down from the previous week significantly. And then goes back up in early January when it's all over with and stays consistent until the next September. We go through this every year. It's nothing new.


I actually saw a poster trying to give his wrestler credit because the ratings were higher for Th Road to Mania when that happens every damn year.


----------



## Seafort

BAD SHIV RISING said:


> I'm just looking at the downward trajectory of both shows. Wonder where rock bottom is? Road to Mania should lead to an uptick but will it still be down the same magin year to year? WWE needs some good rating news.


That's something I've posted in this thread about earlier - don't be surprised if the Road to Mania doesn't produce a bump. Why? Because the usual cast of characters who emerge from the woodwork to bolster WrestleMania are already on the show or not available.

Undertaker - Has been on RAW since SummerSlam
Shawn Michaels - Has been on RAW since SummerSlam
HHH - Has been on RAW since SummerSlam, but is likely to miss WrestleMania
Kurt Angle - Will be back, but will his return produce that much of a bump?

Outside of Rock or Batista returning, why should February's ratings be any different than October's?


----------



## tducey

Football does impact wrestling's ratings. In August 2001 they were doing 5's, by September they were doing 4's. September is when football starts.


----------



## Blade Runner

BAD SHIV RISING said:


> I'm just looking at the downward trajectory of both shows. Wonder where rock bottom is? Road to Mania should lead to an uptick but will it still be down the same magin year to year? WWE needs some good rating news.


It's going to require a DRASTIC change in product presentation for them to fight the trend. Whatever they're doing clearly isn't working. 



You can replace wrestler A with wrestler B, and it's still going to be the same old shit if the writing doesn't improve.


----------



## JDP2016

The show was so bad the ratings aren't available?

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## Jonhern

JDP2016 said:


> The show was so bad the ratings aren't available?
> 
> Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


delayed because of the backlog from thanksgiving weekend.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.612M
H2- 2.382M
H3- 2.111M
3H- 2.368M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 8.81% / - 0.230M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 11.38% / - 0.271M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 19.18% / - 0.501M )
11/26/18 Vs 11/19/18 ( - 5.01% / - 0.125M )

Demo (11/26/18 Vs 11/19/18):
H1- 0.850D Vs 0.940D
H2- 0.800D Vs 0.870D
H3- 0.730D Vs 0.810D
3H- 0.793D Vs 0.873D

Note: RAW is 5th, 6th & 7th by hourly demo & 6th, 10th & 11th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (11/26/18 Vs 11/27/17):
H1- 2.612M Vs 2.956M
H2- 2.382M Vs 2.720M
H3- 2.111M Vs 2.601M
3H- 2.368M Vs 2.759M ( - 14.17% / - 0.391M )

Demo (11/26/18 Vs 11/27/17):
H1- 0.850D Vs 0.940D
H2- 0.800D Vs 0.890D
H3- 0.730D Vs 0.890D
3H- 0.793D Vs 0.907D

Note: RAW this week last year was 3rd, 6th & 5th by hourly demo & 3rd, 6th & 7th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Piper's Pit

Meh.

Hour 1 and 2 about standard, hour 3 bad.


----------



## charsetutf

Everyone in that 3rd hour is a complete and utter failure.


----------



## HankHill_85

The ratings have gotten to the point where wrestlers actually hope to open the show or be in that first hour because the last hour and the main event slots have become a barren wasteland.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The NFL game wasn't that watched this week, so I expected better. It's a commentary on how poor the show was that it fell. Demo dropped quite a bit for all 3 hours. Hour 3 is drifting into SDL territory with that number. :trips8


----------



## llj

Should have been sub 2s for the product they put out. Neilsen box owners really need to get their act together.


----------



## Adam Cool

I wanna know

How old are these two and a half million people who still watch the show? 

I am willing to bet most are over the age of 40 who only watch because of "MUH CHILDHOOD"


----------



## ClintDagger

Adam Cool said:


> I wanna know
> 
> How old are these two and a half million people who still watch the show?
> 
> I am willing to bet most are over the age of 40 who only watch because of "MUH CHILDHOOD"


The last study I saw had the median age around 50, maybe even slightly over 50. So I would say you are right in your assumption.


----------



## xio8ups

3 million marks still watch.


----------



## squarebox

Adam Cool said:


> I wanna know
> 
> How old are these two and a half million people who still watch the show?
> 
> I am willing to bet most are over the age of 40 who only watch because of "MUH CHILDHOOD"


A fair chunk of people on this forum for one...


----------



## Jonhern

Adam Cool said:


> I wanna know
> 
> How old are these two and a half million people who still watch the show?
> 
> I am willing to bet most are over the age of 40 who only watch because of "MUH CHILDHOOD"


it does skew older, this has a breakdown of rating by more age ranges:
http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articles/showbuzzdailys-top-150-monday-cable-originals-network-finals-11-26-2018.html Edit: its the same image posted above, but yeah you can look at it and see it skews older unlike love and hip hop which has a younger audience.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I am curious to see how the first hour fares because it was abysmal and features acts that I would consider not that entertaining. Keep in mind that part of the hour is unopposed by football. If the rating shows no appreciable deterioration, I could see them offering up more drek in the first hour.


----------



## squarebox

I just listened to Solomonster's podcast from last week and what he said rings true to me:

"I had a few people tweet me tonight, 'Is this going to be the week that RAW comes in under 2 million?' The answer is no. They have their baseline, their core base that will stick with them through thick and thin no matter what and they know that and they take advantage of that. They know that they can get away with that. No matter how bad things get, they know that there's a certain baseline they will not fall below."


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.262M
H2- 2.399M
H3- 2.196M
3H- 2.286M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 6.06% / + 0.137M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 8.46% / - 0.203M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 2.92% / - 0.066M )
12/3/18 Vs 11/26/18 ( - 3.46% / - 0.082M )

Demo (12/3/18 Vs 11/26/18):
H1- 0.750D Vs 0.850D
H2- 0.850D Vs 0.800D
H3- 0.830D Vs 0.730D
3H- 0.810D Vs 0.793D

Note: RAW is 7th, 4th & 6th by hourly demo & 10th, 9th & 12th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (12/3/18 Vs 12/4/17):
H1- 2.262M Vs 3.147M
H2- 2.399M Vs 2.862M
H3- 2.196M Vs 2.430M
3H- 2.286M Vs 2.813M ( - 18.73% / - 0.527M )

Demo (12/3/18 Vs 12/4/17):
H1- 0.750D Vs 0.960D
H2- 0.850D Vs 0.870D
H3- 0.830D Vs 0.780D
3H- 0.810D Vs 0.870D

Note: RAW this week last year was 3rd, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 4th, 7th & 11th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Piper's Pit

Hour 1 down considerably from last week, Hour 2 and 3 the same IIRC.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

LOL Putting all the unwatchable acts in the first hour was a gambit that failed. What an abject failure of a show. Gonna be WOAT rating. :heston


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 1 was the women and the Baron Corbin show, it's the lowest rated first hour ever according to the Observer board. If SD can't beat this number, I don't know..


----------



## ClintDagger

Fans don’t care about the woman. WWE needs to accept this and fast. They are fine as time fillers, but if you ask them to carry key segments it will not work.

Man, the YoY hour 1 lost almost a million people. That’s incredible.


----------



## A-C-P

:ha :beckylol :bryanlol :Rollins :tysonlol :reneelel :kobelol :heston


----------



## Adam Cool

I honestly feel bad for the 2 million boomers who still watch this crap


----------



## Mordecay

Apparently this was the lowest rated RAW ever :lmao. Ronda is not a draw in wrestling and well, that happens when you put that charisma vacuum Corbin as one of the leads.


----------



## llj

This is what happens when you bury everyone on the roster, push people nobody likes, highlight their weaknesses, make everyone look terrible. Maybe they don't mean to. But the effect is that they have. WWE is still the top dawg in the industry but at some point "Nobody cares" booking will come to bite you in the ass.


----------



## DammitChrist

Wait, this was the lowest rated Raw episode in over 2 decades? :sodone

I wonder if last week's terrible episode and last night's bad 1st hour had something to do with it :hmmm


----------



## Sincere

But I thought Ronda was a big mainstream draw...? :hmmm


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Hour 3 from a year ago beat all 3 hours this year. :trips8


----------



## Chris90

Bravo Vinny


----------



## llj

And the first hour with the women did really bad. But have they also maybe thought that nobody wants to see Ronda feuding with the likes of Nia and Tamina? I get that you can't change the opponent until TLC is over, but why is Nia getting multiple pushes nobody is asking for? Why have Sasha and Bayley, two of their more popular women on the main roster STILL after all this time, been stuck in mud for over a year? Why isn't someone like Sasha built up better so she can feud with Ronda, instead of forced to do tags and talk show segments? Are a bunch of the women bad on the mic? Yes, but they have no help from creative either. I guarantee you if Sasha clonked Ronda with a chair next week, the crowd would pop HUGE and be into it.

And with Dean's strong promo skills, wouldn't it be a good idea to currently structure the show around him? When he was WWE Champ on Smackdown in 2016, the show was GOOD! He can carry a show. Yet Vince insists on undercutting him and have him do these silly things lately and not even be a main focus of RAW.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Raw and SD later this month which fall on Christmas Eve (RAW) and Christmas Day (SD) are going to be the worst.


----------



## Chrome

"They'll always watch", the WWE nuthuggers said. Hell they still say that shit lol.


----------



## Ace

ROCK FUCKING BOTTOM

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA



Showstopper said:


> Raw and SD later this month which fall on Christmas Eve (RAW) and Christmas Day (SD) are going to be the worst.


 They can't possibly fall any lower quality wise. This is rock bottom, they can't go any lower.


----------



## Chrome

Ace said:


> They can't possibly fall any lower quality wise. This is rock bottom, *they can't go any lower.*


"Challenge accepted!" :vince5


----------



## Ace

Chrome said:


> Ace said:
> 
> 
> 
> They can't possibly fall any lower quality wise. This is rock bottom, *they can't go any lower.*
> 
> 
> 
> "Challenge accepted!" <img src="https://i.imgur.com/MYL5D3X.png" border="0" alt="" title="Vince" class="inlineimg" />
Click to expand...

 Dude I am someone who is considered a hardcore, I don't even bother watching YouTube highlights anymore. It's not worth my time.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> ROCK FUCKING BOTTOM
> 
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
> 
> They can't possibly fall any lower quality wise. This is rock bottom, they can't go any lower.


I meant ratings wise, not quality wise.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Sincere said:


> But I thought Ronda was a big mainstream draw...? :hmmm


Her and the rest of the women aren't draws at all.


----------



## llj

At this rate they'll be under 2 million by mid 2019


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> Sincere said:
> 
> 
> 
> But I thought Ronda was a big mainstream draw...? <img src="https://i.imgur.com/qADWU4j.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Hmmm" class="inlineimg" />
> 
> 
> 
> Her and the rest of the women aren't draws at all.
Click to expand...

 Pushing the women ahead of the men is just making them look like bigger geeks.

People can try deny it but it's true.

They're behind AE stars, Cena, Lesnar etc. and the women. Why the hell would you watch these losers and nobodies who are presented as bodies on the show.

Ronda is the biggest name on the show yet she doesn't draw any ratings and she isn't even among the top 5 merch sellers.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> Pushing the women ahead of the men is just making them look like bigger geeks.


It's horrific. And then, on top of that, if that's not bad enough, the one guy they do make a focal point is BARON CORBIN...and not even so much as a performer...but as a HEEL GM AUTHORITY FIGURE; a role that has been played out in the wrestling business for like 10-15 years now.

:trips8


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> Ace said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pushing the women ahead of the men is just making them look like bigger geeks.
> 
> 
> 
> It's horrific. And then, on top of that, if that's not bad enough, the one guy they do make a focal point is BARON CORBIN...and not even so much as a performer...but as a HEEL GM AUTHORITY FIGURE; a role that has been played out in the wrestling business for like 10-15 years now.
Click to expand...

 Hur dur sexist, misogynist...

I like Corbin but his feud shouldn't be the top feud on the show.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Rousey is the face of Raw these days (and by far the biggest name in WWE altogether) and she hasn't drawn from a ratings standpoint yet. No one else would either, but those people don't have the name/mainstream appeal Vince thought she had. It's interesting.


----------



## llj

I'm not a Ronda fan but I won't put it all on her and "the women." You gotta give the performers something interesting to do and present them WELL. 

The last part is especially key. Who on the program is actually presented well? Nobody. They throw people out there and make them look like the biggest dorks, or highlight their weaknesses, instead of their strengths. Just because everyone isn't an all around package doesn't mean you bury them. Maybe they don't think they are burying them, in fact I wouldn't be surprised if they think they are actually doing a good job. 

They brought back HBK, Undertaker, Kane and Triple H a few weeks back for Crown Jewel and it didn't really do much for the ratings either. In fact, all those names being brought back elicited not much more than a few ambivalent shrugs from casuals.


----------



## Sincere

Showstopper said:


> Her and the rest of the women aren't draws at all.


Who is a draw?


----------



## A-C-P

Showstopper said:


> *Rousey is the face of Raw these days* (and by far the biggest name in WWE altogether) and she hasn't drawn from a ratings standpoint yet. No one else would either, but those people don't have the name/mainstream appeal Vince thought she had. It's interesting.


Until FOX forces Vince to move her to Smackdown :bosque


----------



## Ace

Sincere said:


> Showstopper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Her and the rest of the women aren't draws at all.
> 
> 
> 
> Who is a draw?
Click to expand...

 Ratings wise - Rock, Cena, Taker, HHH and to a lesser extent Lesnar.

Merch wise - most top male stars.

If the biggest woman's star with the UFC name and fame cannot do shit, you really expect others to do anything? She and Alexa are probably the top womens merch sellers as well.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Sincere said:


> Who is a draw?


No one. But right now the women (and Corbin on Raw) are by far the biggest focus in WWE.



A-C-P said:


> Until FOX forces Vince to move her to Smackdown :bosque


Then she's going to disappoint FOX execs just as much as she's disappointing USA Network execs this year.

:lol


----------



## Not Lying

I think people were just afraid Nia was going to talk again


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> A-C-P said:
> 
> 
> 
> Until FOX forces Vince to move her to Smackdown <img src="https://i.imgur.com/XaBIxNS.png" border="0" alt="" title="bosque" class="inlineimg" />
> 
> 
> 
> Then she's going to disappoint FOX execs just as much as she's disappointing USA Network execs this year.
> 
> <img src="http://i.imgur.com/EGDmCdR.gif?1?6573" border="0" alt="" title="Laugh" class="inlineimg" />
Click to expand...

 Ronda in MMA is a draw, no one cares about her wrestling because of the bad image it has.

Likewise with Lesnar except he still draws a bit in wrestling.


----------



## Sincere

Showstopper said:


> No one. But right now the women (and Corbin on Raw) are by far the biggest focus in WWE.


Perhaps the more appropriate question to be asking is _what_ is a draw, rather than who.

I think the what is a much bigger problem than the who right now. But that isn't really surprising. Raw seems to be competing with itself week after week for worst episode.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> Ronda in MMA is a draw, no one cares about her wrestling because of the bad image it has.
> 
> Likewise with Lesnar except he still draws a bit in wrestling.


I haven't seen either draw in wrestling in quite awhile. None of the part timers provide a bump in the ratings anymore.



Sincere said:


> Perhaps the more appropriate question to be asking is _what_ is a draw, rather than who.
> 
> I think the what is a much bigger problem than the who right now. But that isn't really surprising. Raw seems to be competing with itself week after week for worst episode.


Yeah, quality definitely plays a role as well as NFL ratings being higher than ever and just decimating them. I do wonder how much of a bump they will get when NFL regular season is over in a month as well as Fall's TV shows.


----------



## Chrome

Attendance ain't looking too good these days either....










:deandre


----------



## Sincere

Chrome said:


> Attendance ain't looking too good these days either....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :deandre


Yeah, pics were posted in the Raw thread, too. SD's usually the one to get shit on for low attendance.



The Lunatic Grinch said:


> Attendance for tonight's RAW


----------



## Bushmaster

Chrome said:


> "They'll always watch", the WWE nuthuggers said. Hell they still say that shit lol.


See you next week.


----------



## Adam Cool

I am laughing so hard at how bad things have gotten


----------



## MFR55

Im honestly thinking that losing reigns probably affected the ratings,also the entire ronda propanda as this huge star is so embarrassing,bitch might have been huge 3 years ago in UFC,but since arriving at wwe she has draw negative dimes

i have heard that cena returns on the 17 could he stick by christmas and new years,because if a real draw isnt around for the holidays things are gonna get really ugly


----------



## Adam Cool

Disco Inferno was proven right about Ronda , I never thought that that guy would ever be right while everyone else ended up being wrong


----------



## BrokenFreakingNeck

Is this the lowest raw rating ever? Felt they dipped a while ago and no confirmation!??1


----------



## Sincere

MFR55 said:


> Im honestly thinking that losing reigns probably affected the ratings,also the entire ronda propanda as this huge star is so embarrassing,bitch might have been huge 3 years ago in UFC,but since arriving at wwe she has draw negative dimes
> 
> i have heard that cena returns on the 17 could he stick by christmas and new years,because if a real draw isnt around for the holidays things are gonna get really ugly


They're pre-taping Christmas Eve, Christmas Day, New Years Eve, and New Years Day shows this year, so I wouldn't expect much from those.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The problem with losing Reigns is it highlighted how little they built up guys beneath him on the card. Roman is gone and you are left with a bunch of midcarders for the most part. WWE should have built up other guys to be strong and now they get to reap what they have sown.


----------



## Sincere

Pretty sure ratings were trending down under Roman, too, anyway.


----------



## Chrome

And now they're trying to replace Reigns with Corbin lol.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Sincere said:


> Pretty sure ratings were trending down under Roman, too, anyway.


They've been trending downwards for years now. There has to be a point where they cannot drop anymore but it doesn't appear we have reached that nadir yet.


----------



## Ace

Raw is desperate need of a top babyface - Braun and Ronda aren't the answer. One of the contenders who could be it is being killer each week having to midcard to this shit.

With Raw so weak on babyfaces they really should look to move a top babyface from SD over.

Balor who was jobbed out to everyone is the second top babyface on the show atm followed by Ziggler. Unbelievable. It's just way to weak. I'd suggest Orton but he's heel ATM. Maybe KO and Zayn can change things? But they lack credibility and are geek tier as well.

The brand is a shitshow but they brought this upon themselves by burying everyone below Roman, Braun and Brock - now those 3 aren't around the show is left with the guys they beat or buried. To make matters worse these guys are midcarding it for Nia Jaxx and Ember Moon :lmao

Proper shit show.




BrokenFreakingNeck said:


> Is this the lowest raw rating ever? Felt they dipped a while ago and no confirmation!??1


 Yes :heyman6

They'll probably beat it a couple of times this year.

SD is on the verge of 2m too but idk about competition they have ATM. Last week they had none and did alright, if they have some this week we could see low 2m.


----------



## deathvalleydriver2

I didn’t bother watching. Nobody is interesting on RAW


----------



## Ace

deathvalleydriver2 said:


> I didn’t bother watching. Nobody is interesting on RAW


 Nobody wants to watch betas or geeks.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> Raw is desperate need of a top babyface - Braun and Ronda aren't the answer. One of the contenders who could be it is being killer each week having to midcard to this shit.
> 
> With Raw so weak on babyfaces they really should look to move a top babyface from SD over.
> 
> Balor who was jobbed out to everyone is the second top babyface on the show atm followed by Ziggler. Unbelievable. It's just way to weak. I'd suggest Orton but he's heel ATM. Maybe KO and Zayn can change things? But they lack credibility and are geek tier as well.
> 
> The brand is a shitshow but they brought this upon themselves by burying everyone below Roman, Braun and Brock - now those 3 aren't around the show is left with the guys they beat or buried. To make matters worse these guys are midcarding it for Nia Jaxx and Ember Moon :lmao
> 
> Proper shit show.
> 
> 
> Yes <img src="http://i.imgur.com/D4LZGPo.png" border="0" alt="" title="Heyman" class="inlineimg" />
> 
> They'll probably beat it a couple of times this year.
> 
> SD is on the verge of 2m too but idk about competition they have ATM. Last week they had none and did alright, if they have some this week we could see low 2m.


I have a feeling it's gonna be Rollins in the Spring. The real geeks are the ones who are the focus in the months they don't care about September - December.


----------



## Robbyfude

"Let's have the same matches every single week, they'll keep watching damn it!" :vince


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> It's horrific. And then, on top of that, if that's not bad enough, the one guy they do make a focal point is BARON CORBIN...and not even so much as a performer...but as a HEEL GM AUTHORITY FIGURE; a role that has been played out in the wrestling business for like 10-15 years now.
> 
> :trips8


 Dude you think Raw is bad? Look at SD, the top title on the show is the women's championship and the world champion is an afterthought. They're dragging the title through the mud for who knows what reason. All the top spots are given to the women. I'm just over it, the division is ass and it's making their top stars look like such geeks. I'm not even a Bryan fan and I feel sorry for him, that shit hurts the champion being an AJ fan I would know as he got a lot of it.

Austin, Rock, Cena, HHH i.e. the stars would not midcard to any of them. But Steph has convinced her father to do it because of whats happening in other sports.

What she doesnt realise is women's sports majority of the time draws A LOT less than men's men's. Ronda was a rare exception, not the norm.


----------



## Seafort

Seafort said:


> Calling it right now - this will be the lowest rated RAW of the fall season. By a clear margin.


Told you.

Last night's RAW failed for the same reason that the nWo takeover of Nitro failed in December 1997 and almost ended WCW's rating's streak months before it actually finished. This was the episode right before Starrcade where the nWo took over the show and rebranded it nWo Monday Nitro. Similar currents at work with Baron Corbin Appreciation Night.


----------



## RainmakerV2

Lol at people blaming Corbin who plays his role perfectly. There's no Brock. Theres no Roman. Theres no Braun. Theres no Owens. Theres no Zayn. Ambrose just came back and is wearing a fart mask. They have to use Dolph Fucking Ziggler in some sort of relevant role. What do you want? Who can they book at the top to draw? SD has guys like Nakamura, Mysterio, Orton, Rusev, Almas, Sanity, Joe, the Good brothers, etc, who sometimes dont even get used for weeks or a month. If you're going to keep RAW 3 hours you have to send some of that talent over there or call up a group like the UE (Not Lars Fucking Sullivan.) I'm not saying rape SD but the rosters are so unbalanced especially with RAWs injuries and abscences that even if you had Heyman booking the whole damn thing I dont know how he could properly fill 3 hours.


----------



## ClintDagger

I know a lot of people are asking “who is a draw?” And clearly the answer is no one. But that’s not the only characteristic a wrestler or division can have. I think it’s clear that the women are not only “not a draw”, but there’s also a tune out factor with them. Guys like Rollins & Ambrose aren’t draws either, but I don’t think they drive a significant cross section of the fanbase to immediately tune out and watch something else.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Methinks Vince doesn't appreciate Baron Corbin so much after this turkey of a rating.


----------



## chronoxiong

The ship is sinking fast for RAW! Keep it up WWE!!!! Can't wait until NBC Universal is fed up with this and wants out of their contract and forces the WWE to change.


----------



## ClintDagger

chronoxiong said:


> The ship is sinking fast for RAW! Keep it up WWE!!!! Can't wait until NBC Universal is fed up with this and wants out of their contract and forces the WWE to change.


Having pro wrestling on your network is always controversial internally. At Turner, the only advocate was Ted himself. Pretty much everyone around him hated that WCW was on their networks. Once he was totally out of power, it took no time at all to get rid of it. I’ve heard it’s the same at NBCU. That only Bonnie Hammer is a proponent of WWE being on USA.

Which takes me to Fox. There has to be a lot of knives ready to come out for whoever decided to give WWE that kind of money to be on their network in prime time. If the ratings are atrocious like what we’re seeing now I agree that NBCU and / or Fox may be working overtime to get out of that contract. They have to have buyer’s remorse by now.


----------



## shadows123

Time for Triple H, Undertaker and a bunch of others to be back full time.. :vince5 ..


----------



## squarebox

Those are terrible ratings, but what's the big deal? It's not like USA has a gun to their heads or anything and until that happens (which honestly doesn't look like happening anytime soon) then those ratings may as well not mean much at this point.


----------



## xio8ups

Pretty sure ratings was down under rollins also.


----------



## Jonhern

ClintDagger said:


> Having pro wrestling on your network is always controversial internally. At Turner, the only advocate was Ted himself. Pretty much everyone around him hated that WCW was on their networks. Once he was totally out of power, it took no time at all to get rid of it. I’ve heard it’s the same at NBCU. That only Bonnie Hammer is a proponent of WWE being on USA.
> 
> Which takes me to Fox. There has to be a lot of knives ready to come out for whoever decided to give WWE that kind of money to be on their network in prime time. If the ratings are atrocious like what we’re seeing now I agree that NBCU and / or Fox may be working overtime to get out of that contract. They have to have buyer’s remorse by now.


Might have not been an issue before with SDL moving to Friday, but looking at the ratings, Last Man Standing is actually doing really well on Fridays. Smackdown would bump that popular show as it stands now. What will FOX do if the ratings are bad when it launches. They could Cancel the show I would think. Or move it to a cable network.


----------



## Adam Cool

ClintDagger said:


> Having pro wrestling on your network is always controversial internally. At Turner, the only advocate was Ted himself. Pretty much everyone around him hated that WCW was on their networks. Once he was totally out of power, it took no time at all to get rid of it. I’ve heard it’s the same at NBCU. That only Bonnie Hammer is a proponent of WWE being on USA.
> 
> Which takes me to Fox. There has to be a lot of knives ready to come out for whoever decided to give WWE that kind of money to be on their network in prime time. If the ratings are atrocious like what we’re seeing now I agree that NBCU and / or Fox may be working overtime to get out of that contract. They have to have buyer’s remorse by now.


Raw and SD are still more watched than any non sports or News show so Fox has no other option but to accept Wrestling 

Not to mention that Vince's PR Campaign has worked, people view WWE as a kids show rather than "white trash entertainment"


----------



## Jonhern

Adam Cool said:


> Raw and SD are still more watched than any non sports or News show so Fox has no other option but to accept Wrestling
> 
> Not to mention that Vince's PR Campaign has worked, people view WWE as a kids show rather than "white trash entertainment"


True for cable but not for network where SDL will be moving to, and they will be taking a timeslot from a very popular show atm. Funny thing is if they kept it on tuesday it would actually be an improvement for fox on that time slot, but on friday with the numbers this year it will be a downgrade.


----------



## Adam Cool

Jonhern said:


> True for cable but not for network where SDL will be moving to, and they will be taking a timeslot from a very popular show atm. Funny thing is if they kept it on tuesday it would actually be an improvement for fox on that time slot, but on friday with the numbers this year it will be a downgrade.


Whats that show if I may ask?


----------



## Marv95

-Sex sells. The sooner they realize this the better.
-Not watching, but is Ronda _still_ grinning like a retard when she makes her entrance?
-Why is Baron Corbin the GM? Why is he _still_ the GM? Why even have a GM?
-Dean Ambrose instead of being a sinister heel is your typical WWE chickenshit.
-If the majority of what's left of your tv audience are boomers or close to em, why is this show still TVPG? It didn't work 10 years ago(even with a star studded roster with decent stories) and it definitely doesn't work now.
-Roman Reigns will not save this show unless he turns heel or becomes a straight up G(not G-rated lol).


----------



## Jonhern

Adam Cool said:


> Whats that show if I may ask?


Last man standing. Never seen it, but it stars Tim Allen.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Adam Cool said:


> Raw and SD are still more watched than any non sports or News show so Fox has no other option but to accept Wrestling


The issue isn't how many viewers Raw and SD get in relation to other shows. The issue is how much they cost, relative to other shows for the increase in views.

Fox will do what is best for it's bottom line. That will most likely mean airing lower rated shows that cost far less, than the premium they are paying for SD to get shit ratings. It's why Turner dumped WCW. The cost of producing the show didn't make up for the marginal increased in ratings it got. 

Ratings have been going down rapidly since around 2012, but this past year is another huge drop being 13-18% off of last year. If you don't stop that bleed, then no network will want to carry this. 

I almost think WWE has to be a loss leader for these TV Networks. They can't be making money off the show, given how much it costs to make and the low advertising dollars they can sell


----------



## squarebox

This isn't Fox, it's USA. And USA don't seem to give a damn.


----------



## Chrome

squarebox said:


> This isn't Fox, it's USA. And USA don't seem to give a damn.


Yeah, USA doesn't seem to give a shit tbh. Ratings have been going down for YEARS on their network and their like, "Doh well, here's a billion dollars!"


----------



## ClintDagger

Adam Cool said:


> Raw and SD are still more watched than any non sports or News show so Fox has no other option but to accept Wrestling
> 
> Not to mention that Vince's PR Campaign has worked, people view WWE as a kids show rather than "white trash entertainment"


First of all, you’re talking cable standards. Broadcast networks have higher standards and higher viewership. The strong network shows on Friday night for the most part have 2x - 4x the viewers that Raw or SD does. I’m sure the thought from Fox when they signed that contract was that SD’s ratings on USA would hold steady, then the move to Fox and the higher exposure / household penetration would mean SD would jump to 3MM - 4MM. That’s the gamble they made. If that doesn’t happen and they end up with closer to 2MM there will be serious buyer’s remorse. Wrestling has horrible demos and the only positive they bring is raw audience numbers. If they can’t bring that, then they are a real black eye on a lineup given the reputation wrestling has.

And you’re wrong if you think Vince has convinced Fox that WWE is kids programming. An entity like Fox is going to do its due diligence and I promise you they realize they are inheriting a product whose audience has a median age in the mid-50s. I’m sure they poured over the viewership demos as part of their CBA.



squarebox said:


> This isn't Fox, it's USA. And USA don't seem to give a damn.


I was reading an article a few weeks back that said USA was in bad, bad shape as far as their relevance. The article basically said USA should be very concerned about WWE’s ratings drop but that they have so many other problems that even Raw and SD plummeting like they are won’t get any attention.

Fox is a whole other animal. They won’t tolerate severely disappointing ratings from SD.


----------



## SPCDRI

Well, we're still on the quest for the fabled Two Flat, but the first hour was the lowest Ratings Point for a RAW first hour and the fewest amount of people watching in more than twenty years. Just look at this shit. 

H1- 2.262M
H2- 2.399M
H3- 2.196M
3H- 2.286M

There's two point two million or so diehard, psychopath WWE for Life cultists who would watch two hundred minutes of static if it was called Monday Night RAW but they lost people that aren't about that life and they aren't bringing in new blood. 

FOX wants to put the B programming of this company in prime time in replacement of a Tim Allen Sitcom that is getting around six million people watching, with better demo numbers and a superior clientele base to sell ads off of. Wow, are they in for a rude shock, brother. When the number of people watching Smackdown on FOX is closer to three million than six million, the geniuses that made that call are going to get entire boxes of Christmas Gift Steak Knives stuck in their backs.


----------



## Chrome

And just look at the numbers 5 years ago:



wb1899 said:


> Raw:
> 10:00 PM: 3.447 million viewers, A18-49: 1.3
> 9:00 PM: 3.560 million viewers, A18-49: 1.3
> 8:00 PM: 3.616 million viewers, A18-49: 1.2


And people were calling those numbers awful back then. :lol


----------



## Mear

The thing is, who the hell wants to watch the WWE now ? They have no direction, no audience. The Attitude Era, you can complain about it but at least, the show had a feel, something that could attract casuals. Do they want to attract hardcore fans ? Then, why are you pushing people like Ronda Rousey who they don't care about and not listening to them ? Do they want to attract casuals fans ? Then, where the hell are the storylines and why is your show full of long wrestling matches they don't care about ? 

The WWE now is absolutely dead, I can barely remember anything that happened on Raw in 2018 and I have no dout that nothing will continue to happen in the future Road to Wrestlemania, I wouldn't even be surprised if they went below the 2 millions during the Road...

Seriously, we live in a day where half of Raw champions are former UFC guys ( meaning WWE is basically admitting that UFC is better than them ), Raw doesn't even have a World Champion, Becky freaking Lynch is main-eventing. I would call it " the Midcard Era " but stuff like Matt Hardy vs Edge is miles ahead of anything produced in 2018 and it would be insulting to them. Even Spike Dudley would main-event in this era


----------



## Erik.

Looks like I haven't missed much since I stopped watching months ago.

In fact, it sounds like it's a lot worse.


----------



## squarebox

Chrome said:


> And just look at the numbers 5 years ago:
> 
> 
> 
> And people were calling those numbers awful back then. [emoji38]


True, that's a big drop. I hope it continues so eventually USA will have to force WWE's hand.


----------



## ellthom

Seems I am not the only one no longer watching this rubbish


----------



## SPCDRI

I still remember when I started getting into these threads. It was when I was fanboying and marking for CM Punk and defending him against people who wanted his head on a pike because his quarter hours were "only" getting 1.3 to 1.7 million viewers more than the highest rated RAW segment nowadays. Any time CM Punk did a segment with 3.5 million people watching, he was berated as a ratings cancer, change-the-channel tier zero who should be fired out of a cannon into the sun. Remember all the people shitting on Alberto Del Rio's numbers? Alberto Del Rio outdraws anybody on the roster. Ricardo Rodriguez outdraws this roster. The turtle wax that Ricardo Rodriquez put on rented prop-cars outdraws this company and roster. Sweet Baby Jesus.


----------



## Chrome

SPCDRI said:


> I still remember when I started getting into these threads. It was when I was fanboying and marking for CM Punk and defending him against people who wanted his head on a pike because his quarter hours were "only" getting 1.3 to 1.7 million viewers more than the highest rated RAW segment nowadays. Any time CM Punk did a segment with 3.5 million people watching, he was berated as a ratings cancer, change-the-channel tier zero who should be fired out of a cannon into the sun. Remember all the people shitting on Alberto Del Rio's numbers? Alberto Del Rio outdraws anybody on the roster. Ricardo Rodriguez outdraws this roster. The turtle wax that Ricardo Rodriquez put on rented prop-cars outdraws this company and roster. Sweet Baby Jesus.


And 5 years from now, ratings now will probably look like the Attitude Era compared to what they'll likely be getting then. :mj4


----------



## Robbyfude

Meltzer claims Vince wrote this Raw as well lol


----------



## Chrome

Robbyfude said:


> Meltzer claims Vince wrote this Raw as well lol


LOL so why have 25 writers or so if he's just gonna keep writing the shows himself?


----------



## ClintDagger

Chrome said:


> LOL so why have 25 writers or so if he's just gonna keep writing the shows himself?


I think that’s a Steph thing from when she had her nose in creative. She probably wanted it to be like a “real” tv show and Vince went along. I bet now Vince feels like things are really slipping away and he feels pressure to reverse the trend before next Fall. So he wants to get in on the ground floor as far as the process goes rather than reviewing and editing a finished draft. But the problem is, as great of a promoter and businessman Vince is, he’s NEVER been good at creative. So him taking over just results in even worse ideas.

But he’s probably still using those writers, he’s just dictating to them what to write.


----------



## Ichigo87

Ace said:


> People tuned out when they realized Brock was false advertised <img src="https://i.imgur.com/uSf7hLd.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Brock" class="inlineimg" />


Lmao at thinking Brock is a draw at all. It's his reign of terror and holding others back that's making people tune out. Maybe the title is the reason why anyone would watch when Brock is on because everything else feels like filler. Let's be honest, he never moves the needle.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

It will obviously be higher tomorrow, coming off the record low. WWE didn't repeat the mistake of frontloading the show with pure crap like they did last week. The MNF game is a dud so that will help quite a bit.


----------



## Ace

Shit quality photos, but both shows are struggling with attendance.


----------



## ClintDagger

Well I think we can end the debate over them not caring about and not paying attention to ratings. It’s clear after tonight’s show they are very much aware of the ratings slide.


----------



## Ace




----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.347M
H2- 2.186M
H3- 2.048M
3H- 2.194M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 6.86% / - 0.161M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 6.31% / - 0.138M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 12.74% / - 0.299M )
12/10/18 Vs 12/3/18 ( - 4.02% / - 0.092M )

Demo (12/10/18 Vs 12/3/18):
H1- 0.780D Vs 0.750D
H2- 0.760D Vs 0.850D
H3- 0.730D Vs 0.830D
3H- 0.757D Vs 0.810D

Note: RAW is 5th, 6th & 7th by hourly demo & 9th, 10th & 11th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (12/10/18 Vs 12/11/17):
H1- 2.347M Vs 2.876M
H2- 2.186M Vs 2.608M
H3- 2.048M Vs 2.570M
3H- 2.194M Vs 2.685M ( - 18.29% / - 0.491M )

Demo (12/10/18 Vs 12/11/17):
H1- 0.780D Vs 0.870D
H2- 0.760D Vs 0.820D
H3- 0.730D Vs 0.850D
3H- 0.757D Vs 0.847D

Note: RAW this week last year was 4th, 6th & 5th by hourly demo & 5th, 8th & 10th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Ace

Lmfao is that a new record low.

This company is fucked and I'm loving every minute of it


----------



## Erik.

That's even lower than last week :lol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 3 is going below 2 million soon just like SD did last week. Hell, with Christmas and New Years' coming up it definitely will.


----------



## Chrome

Ace said:


> Shit quality photos, but both shows are struggling with attendance.


Damn that's awful.









LOL at the ratings btw. Getting closer and closer to that sub 2-million number.


----------



## Ace

Erik. said:


> That's even lower than last week <img src="http://i.imgur.com/EGDmCdR.gif?1?6573" border="0" alt="" title="Laugh" class="inlineimg" />


 New record low :lmao

They gave away two TLC matches and even did worked shoots and a random title change to create a buzz.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Well, I was wrong. WWE is flatlining and Smackdown will def. be below 2M again. I can't believe it fell from last week. No one gives a damn about anything Corbin related. 

Looks like the viewers are taking a holiday this holiday season. :trolldog


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> Hour 3 is going below 2 million soon just like SD did last week. Hell, with Christmas and New Years' coming up it definitely will.


 Told you matches don't draw. The stories are absolute trash, they tried and they failed. They need a complete overhaul or they'll be doing low 2m consistently next year.


----------



## Erik.

Ace said:


> New record low :lmao
> 
> They gave away two TLC matches and even did worked shoots and a random title change to create a buzz.


And people still tuned out in droves. 

Who gives a shit about worked shoots in 2018?


----------



## Ace

Erik. said:


> Ace said:
> 
> 
> 
> New record low <img src="http://www.wrestlingforum.com/images/smilies/roflmao.gif" border="0" alt="" title="ROFLMAO" class="inlineimg" />
> 
> They gave away two TLC matches and even did worked shoots and a random title change to create a buzz.
> 
> 
> 
> And people still tuned out in droves.
> 
> Who gives a shit about worked shoots in 2018?
Click to expand...

 Exactly it's so cringe and no one outside Punk, Cena, Joe or Miz can pull it off.

This was a go home show too <img src="http://i.imgur.com/m2XjBg7.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Heston" class="inlineimg" />


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> Told you matches don't draw. The stories are absolute trash, they tried and they failed. They need a complete overhaul or they'll be doing low 2m consistently next year.


Told me? I'm pretty aware matches don't draw. Only been watching since '90. :lol WWE shows doing worse and worse each year is nothing new. They've been doing it for years. It's simply continuing.


----------



## chronoxiong

That third hour is going to be below 2 million viewers soon. Remember when it used to be 3 million viewers? Pepperidge Farms remembers...


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> Ace said:
> 
> 
> 
> Told you matches don't draw. The stories are absolute trash, they tried and they failed. They need a complete overhaul or they'll be doing low 2m consistently next year.
> 
> 
> 
> Told me? I'm pretty aware matches don't draw. Only been watching since '90. <img src="http://i.imgur.com/EGDmCdR.gif?1?6573" border="0" alt="" title="Laugh" class="inlineimg" /> WWE shows doing worse and worse each year is nothing new. They've been doing it for years. It's simply continuing.
Click to expand...

 Weren't you one of the guys who said they draw after the gauntlet match earlier this year?

Tomorrow's SD #s will be fun :heyman6


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> Weren't you one of the guys who said they draw after the gauntlet match earlier this yesr.?


The gauntlet in the first hour did draw better than what they were/are doing in the first hour. Believe it got 3.5 million viewers. That doesn't mean it's gonna work everytime or is something that should be their strategy going forward.


----------



## Sensei Utero

I'm shocked the rating isn't even lower. Folk still watch this shit product on a regular basis? :wow


----------



## Chrome

Here's a peak at the Raw numbers 5 years ago:


validreasoning said:


> 8:00 PM...	4.218 million
> 9:00 PM...	4.177 million
> 10:00 PM....	4.062 million
> 
> probably won't be happy losing viewers every hour but that still a decent showing against a monster football game


So they've lost half their audience in 5 years going by these numbers. Ooof.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ace said:


> Lmfao is that a new record low.
> 
> This company is fucked and I'm loving every minute of it


Smackdown usually gets around 80+% RAW retention up to low 90's on some occasions.. RAW averaged 2.194M.

80% of that would be 1.755M.
85% of that would be 1.8649M
90% of that would be 1.9746M

So unless SDL defies what has been mostly a true trend, it will probably be lower than last week. This company is one cold ass product. :heston


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Chrome said:


> Here's a peak at the Raw numbers 5 years ago:
> 
> So they've lost half their audience in 5 years going by these numbers. Ooof.


Yep. They've been bleeding viewers for 5 years now.

Also, according to the Observer board, Raw was still the most watched show on cable not counting news and the NFL, which means nothing will change probably.


----------



## Empress

SHIVVY POO IV: THE FINAL CHAPTER said:


> Well, I was wrong. WWE is flatlining and Smackdown will def. be below 2M again. I can't believe it fell from last week. No one gives a damn about anything Corbin related.
> 
> *Looks like the viewers are taking a holiday this holiday season. *:trolldog


I may watch regularly again in January since it's the start of Rumble season but the show is absolute trash. I thought Reigns being sick meant a shakeup; creative being forced to change course and do something but they managed to make me not care about Dean/Seth, gone all in on Corbin and the women don't interest me. Where's Vince Russo when you need him? He's crazy but kept my attention for the most part. 

Also, I'm not blaming any performer. This is all on Vince. Although, I doubt he cares that much. He has his FOX deal.


----------



## Chrome

Showstopper said:


> Yep. They've been bleeding viewers for 5 years now.
> 
> Also, according to the Observer board, Raw was still the most watched show on cable not counting news and the NFL, *which means nothing will change probably.*


Oh definitely lol, once they got those billion dollar deals from USA and Fox, it was a wrap they would ever actually try to get better.


----------



## SPCDRI

A new low against a turkey of a Monday Night Football game that was 3-0 or 6-0 for like fifty minutes. Probably the shittiest prime time game of the season in terms of entertainment and RAW couldn't get their numbers up with worked shoots, TLC matches, a title change and a stiff as a corpse MNF game. They are a gnat's ass away from hour three being sub two million.


----------



## Donnie

:rollins DRAW :brock4 :lmao

WWE and Vince deserve this for the last few years of dreadful shit they've made us sit through


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Donnie said:


> :rollins DRAW :brock4 :lmao


You are aware AJ was in the SD main event last week and drew sub 2 million viewers. The first time SD has gone sub 2 million in like forever...right?

:ha


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The Lunatic Grinch said:


> I may watch regularly again in January since it's the start of Rumble season but the show is absolute trash. I thought Reigns being sick meant a shakeup; creative being forced to change course and do something but they managed to make me not care about Dean/Seth, gone all in on Corbin and the women don't interest me. Where's Vince Russo when you need him? He's crazy but kept my attention for the most part.
> 
> Also, I'm not blaming any performer. This is all on Vince. Although, I doubt he cares that much. He has his FOX deal.


The worst part of last night was having Seth acknowledge that the show sucks and has poor ratings. This is not how you inspire your viewers to keep watching. I eyerolled at that line when I watched it on my dvr. Never run down your own product.


----------



## Ace

SHIVVY POO IV: THE FINAL CHAPTER said:


> Ace said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lmfao is that a new record low.
> 
> This company is fucked and I'm loving every minute of it
> 
> 
> 
> Smackdown usually gets around 80+% RAW retention up to low 90's on some occasions.. RAW averaged 2.194M.
> 
> 80% of that would be 1.755M.
> 85% of that would be 1.8649M
> 90% of that would be 1.9746M
> 
> So unless SDL defies what has been mostly a true trend, it will probably be lower than last week. This company is one cold ass product. <img src="http://i.imgur.com/m2XjBg7.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Heston" class="inlineimg" />
Click to expand...

 SD doing 1.7m would be fucking hilarious, weren't those the numbers they were getting when it was basically a raw recap show? :lmao


----------



## SPCDRI

Brock wasn't doing anything good ratings wise, either, and a big reason why these ratings suck is we are suffering another Reign of Error from him. What's he doing on the go-home show to TLC? Nothing, because he's not going to be at TLC, either. Maddening.


----------



## Chrome

Also they were going against Bears/Cowboys on MNF 5 years ago too. Let that sink in for a moment.


----------



## Ace

SPCDRI said:


> Brock wasn't doing anything good ratings wise, either, and a big reason why these ratings suck is we are suffering another Reign of Error from him. What's he doing on the go-home show to TLC? Nothing, because he's not going to be at TLC, either. Maddening.


 Vince told the fans the show sucks and they tuned right the fuck out. What a complete idiot, show wreaked of desperation with the stip matches, title changes and shoots on how bad the show is <img src="http://www.wrestlingforum.com/images/smilies/roflmao.gif" border="0" alt="" title="ROFLMAO" class="inlineimg" />

I wonder who will shoot next week on the new record low.


----------



## SPCDRI

Two great teams putting on what people in that thread called a "barn burner" and RAW doubled up on the ratings when RAW was facing Seattle/Minnesota fumigating the joint. Man, that's insane.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SPCDRI said:


> Brock wasn't doing anything good ratings wise, either, and a big reason why these ratings suck is we are suffering another Reign of Error from him. What's he doing on the go-home show to TLC? Nothing, because he's not going to be at TLC, either. Maddening.


Yep. No one has done more damage to the full timers than Brock. *No one.* Bright side though is that all of these new low ratings for Raw every week are all during his reigns. So, there's always a bright side.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Chrome said:


> Here's a peak at the Raw numbers 5 years ago:
> 
> So they've lost half their audience in 5 years going by these numbers. Ooof.


Can you imagine in another 5 years time that these ratings are halved again? :trips8

I gotta believe that rock bottom is higher than 1M viewers but I urge them to dare to dream and go for it. :mark


----------



## Donnie

Showstopper said:


> You are aware AJ was in the SD main event last week and drew sub 2 million viewers. The first time SD has gone sub 2 million in like forever...right?
> 
> :ha


I know, but we aren't talking about AJ, because SD isn't built around him like Raw is built around Seth. 

His promo lost half a million viewers into the second hour :ha

How do you explain that?


----------



## DammitChrist

Holy shit, ANOTHER record-low Raw rating :sodone

At this point, I don't think there's anybody on the roster that can help save the ratings. Let this be a reminder to everybody here that nobody is really a draw.

Wait until Christmas time though :trips8


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Donnie said:


> I know, but we aren't talking about AJ, because SD isn't built around him like Raw is built around Seth.
> 
> His promo lost half a million viewers into the second hour :ha
> 
> How do you explain that?


Raw is bult around Seth? The same guy who hasn't been World Champion since June 2016, 2.5 years???

Funny. Last time I checked AJ was just World Champion for over a year. Interesting logic there.

How do I explain that hour 2 is lower than Hour 1 like it is 99% of the time? This week's hour 1 (with Seth in it) was higher than last week's hour 1, as well.


----------



## Hurin

who's left that are over with live audiences, clearly burying them is the solution


----------



## Empress

DammitChrist said:


> Holy shit, ANOTHER record-low Raw rating :sodone
> 
> *At this point, I don't there's anybody on the roster that can help save the ratings. Let this be a reminder that nobody is really a draw.*
> 
> Wait until Christmas time though :trips8


It's all about creative. Even Austin and Rock would whither and die in today's era. 

NXT has so many good angles and characters. RAW feels so sterile.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Vince also wasted the last few years doing stuff that he shouldn't have been doing and killing wrestlers off for no reason at all. Now he's paying the consequences for that.


----------



## Chrome

Raw's built around Baron Corbin atm, so if you want to blame a full-time roster member for the bad ratings, here's your guy. I like Corbin, but there was no real reason to make him Raw GM and give him 5 segments a night. He would've been better off as a lackey in a heel stable led by Ambrose or something.


----------



## Seafort

SHIVVY POO IV: THE FINAL CHAPTER said:


> The worst part of last night was having Seth acknowledge that the show sucks and has poor ratings. This is not how you inspire your viewers to keep watching. I eyerolled at that line when I watched it on my dvr. Never run down your own product.


Agreed. Even though I hated WCW at the time, I thought it was stupid in 1999 and 2000 when their wrestlers brought up the collapsing ratings or that the promotion "was not fun".

WWE needs radical character and booking changes coupled with a long-term roadmap, and needs it immediately. It won't bear fruit, but it will slow the audience erosion and eventually lead to live event attendance pickup...and in turn lead to more subscribers. Otherwise there won't be much of an audience left in five years when they go for another renewal. FOX and USA won't pay $1B for a viewing audience of 655K...because that is exactly where they are trending over a five year period.


----------



## Ace

The company is paying for burying the hell out of their roster.

Why the fuck would anyone watch when the 3 biggest and most protected stars are not on the show?


----------



## Mordecay

It will be interesting to see if Cena is still a draw when he comes back and, with all the money WWE is gonna make, they will ask him to do more dates, not necessarially a full time schedule, but something like Orton's deal


----------



## Donnie

Showstopper said:


> Raw is bult around Seth? The same guy who hasn't been World Champion since June 2016, 2.5 years???
> *
> Funny. Last time I checked AJ was just World Champion for over a year. Interesting logic there.*
> 
> How do I explain that hour 2 is lower than Hour 1 like it is 99% of the time? This week's hour 1 (with Seth in it) was higher than last week's hour 1, as well.


And the ratings never tanked with him as champion, blame that shit on Bryan "FICKLE" Danielson

Seth has multiple segments a week has for the last few months, he's the face of the show. I'm not placing all the blame on him btw, the rest of the show is a baron wasteland of shit. I just find it crazy that fans, not saying you Showstopper, but a lot of Rollins fans are saying once he wins the UV title the ratings and overall show will improve. I just don't see how that happens.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Donnie said:


> And the ratings never tanked with him as champion, blame that shit on Bryan "FICKLE" Danielson


Is this for REAL??? :lmao AJ's ratings as Champions were lower than what JINDER drew as Champion just the year previous. Blame it on Bryan when he's been Champ for like 2 weeks? :lmao What a weak ass deflection.



> Seth has multiple segments a week has for the last few months, he's the face of the show. I'm not placing all the blame on him btw, the rest of the show is a baron wasteland of shit. I just find it crazy that fans, not saying you Showstopper, but a lot of Rollins fans are saying once he wins the UV title the ratings and overall show will improve. I just don't see how that happens.


Dude, think about it. Seth hasn;t been champ since MITB 2016, a full 2.5 years ago. And even that most recent time, he was champ for 30 seconds because Dean cashed in on him on the same night. He's been a full time midcarder since then. Even with a brand split and TWO world titles and only half of a roster to compete with, he still hasn't been Champ.

Where are these Rollins fans saying the ratings will improve if/when he becomes Champ? Everyone knows the ratings go down every single year no matter who is Champ. And if anyone is saying the show would be better, it would only be because Raw would actually have a World Champion on the show every week.

That's another thing that hurts Raw. For most of the past 2 years, it doesn't have a World Champion on it's show. It's bullshit. I know you like Brock, but come on. You have to admit that's a huge issue for a show to have. No World Champ on the show more times than not for the past 1.5 years or so now? It's ridiculous.


----------



## Donnie

Showstopper said:


> Where are these Rollins fans saying the ratings will improve if/when he becomes Champ? Everyone knows the ratings go down every single year no matter who is Champ. And if anyone is saying the show would be better, it would only be because Raw would actually have a World Champion on the show every week.
> 
> That's another thing that hurts Raw. For most of the past 2 years, it doesn't have a World Champion on it's show. It's bullshit. I know you like Brock, but come on. You have to admit that's a huge issue for a show to have. No World Champ on the show more times than not for the past 1.5 years or so now? It's ridiculous.


Reddit is full "Rollins is the savour" mode, that's who I meant. sorry for not clarifying. 

I love Brock but I agree completely that putting the belt on him in dumb as fuck :ryback I don't doubt that a lot of fans don't watch because the show has no champion, but I don't think they would suddenly tune in if Seth was the champion. Happy to be proven wrong, though.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Donnie said:


> Reddit is full "Rollins is the savour" mode, that's who I meant. sorry for not clarifying.
> 
> I love Brock but I agree completely that putting the belt on him in dumb as fuck :ryback I don't doubt that a lot of fans don't watch because the show has no champion, but I don't think they would suddenly tune in if Seth was the champion. Happy to be proven wrong, though.


Oh ok. I've been on Reddit once, and wasn't a fan of the layout, so I haven't been on there since. If Rollins fans on Reddit are saying that, then, they're 100% wrong. :shrug

You're not going to be proven wrong, though. Whether it's Seth or whoever else on the roster is the next World Champion, the ratings are going to go down next year, as well. And the year after that, and so on and so forth. There is now YEARS of evidence that the ratings go down every single year no matter who the Champion/focus of the show is. 

This is why I get a kick out of people on here who say Vince should do whatever he wants because it's his company and he has billions. Fine, he has that going for him. But guess what? He also is setting a new record low for television show(s) almost every week now. With how much of an egomaniac we all know Vince is, if people don't think Vince cares about this, those people are lost. He is absolutely seething right now over this and he has no one but himself to blame.


----------



## Donnie

Showstopper said:


> Oh ok. I've been on Reddit once, and wasn't a fan of the layout, so I haven't been on there since. If Rollins fans on Reddit are saying that, then, they're 100% wrong. :shrug
> 
> You're not going to be proven wrong, though. Whether it's Seth or whoever else on the roster is the next World Champion, the ratings are going to go down next year, as well. And the year after that, and so on and so forth. There is now YEARS of evidence that the ratings go down every single year no matter who the Champion/focus of the show is.
> 
> This is why I get a kick out of people on here who say Vince should do whatever he wants because it's his company and he has billions. Fine, he has that going for him. But guess what? He also is setting a new record low for television show(s) almost every week now. With how much of an egomaniac we all know Vince is, if people don't think Vince cares about this, those people are lost. He is absolutely seething right now over this and he has no one but himself to blame.


Reddit LOVESSSSSSSSSSSS Rollins, like every WWE thread turns into how much they love the guy, and how he's the MAN etc, etc. 

:vincecry I'm right there with you, man. seeing the ratings fall and each show crappier than the last, knowing that he's sitting there stoic on the outside but :Out on the inside. Only going to get worse from here on out with the terrible attendance and falling ratings


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> Oh ok. I've been on Reddit once, and wasn't a fan of the layout, so I haven't been on there since. If Rollins fans on Reddit are saying that, then, they're 100% wrong. :shrug
> 
> You're not going to be proven wrong, though. Whether it's Seth or whoever else on the roster is the next World Champion, the ratings are going to go down next year, as well. And the year after that, and so on and so forth. There is now YEARS of evidence that the ratings go down every single year no matter who the Champion/focus of the show is.
> 
> This is why I get a kick out of people on here who say Vince should do whatever he wants because it's his company and he has billions. Fine, he has that going for him. But guess what? He also is setting a new record low for television show(s) almost every week now. With how much of an egomaniac we all know Vince is, if people don't think Vince cares about this, those people are lost. He is absolutely seething right now over this and he has no one but himself to blame.


Exactly. People think because Vince doesn’t do anything to fix this or that because the show never looks drastically different that he doesn’t care about the ratings. But I have no doubt in my mind he’s seething like you said and in his mind he is trying to change things and jump start this product. He’s just so lost at this point that he has no clue what to do.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Donnie said:


> Reddit LOVESSSSSSSSSSSS Rollins, like every WWE thread turns into how much they love the guy, and how he's the MAN etc, etc.
> 
> :vincecry I'm right there with you, man. seeing the ratings fall and each show crappier than the last, knowing that he's sitting there stoic on the outside but :Out on the inside. Only going to get worse from here on out with the terrible attendance and falling ratings





ClintDagger said:


> Exactly. People think because Vince doesn’t do anything to fix this or that because the show never looks drastically different that he doesn’t care about the ratings. But I have no doubt in my mind he’s seething like you said and in his mind he is trying to change things and jump start this product. He’s just so lost at this point that he has no clue what to do.


The best thing Vince and WWE can do right now is forget about the ratings for the time being because this is not something that is going to be fixed overnight or even in a few months.

He has to forget about the ratings for now and just focus on putting the very best shows he possibly can on a consistent basis and do that for about a year straight.

If he/they can put on consistently good shows for a year straight, then they could be on the path to overturning the tide and stop the bleeding of viewers. Basically overhaul the show for about a year and forget ratings for the time being. If they can put on consistently good shows for a year and stop the bleeding, then they can worry about regrowing the fanbase/viewers. But they have to be worried about the quality of storylines/characters first.

But we all know there is like a 1% chance current day Vince and these writers can put on a quality product for that long consistently. The damage is already done and it started along time ago and has simply continued into recent years. It's a shame because WWE does have a hell of a roster that could possibly cut-through if written well and utilized to their strengths.


----------



## Swindle

Brock as the part time champ is one problem. The title not once having a run with a fighting babyface champ is another (Finn got injured, Reigns has serious medical issues, so these were things out of WWE's control). 50-50 booking is yet another problem. Storylines that are horrible is yet another problem. I also think there's some talent on RAW who probably should just be replaced. Demoralizing fans about talent they do (or did) like is yet another problem (Bayley and Sasha come to mind). Yet another problem is just as RAW is hitting these lows, the holidays are approaching, which is known for filler shows, so even if you do want to right the ship, there's no way to jump start it anyway with the calendar getting in the way. But they can correct some problems.


----------



## Seafort

Swindle said:


> Brock as the part time champ is one problem. The title not once having a run with a fighting babyface champ is another (Finn got injured, Reigns has serious medical issues, so these were things out of WWE's control). 50-50 booking is yet another problem. Storylines that are horrible is yet another problem. I also think there's some talent on RAW who probably should just be replaced. Demoralizing fans about talent they do (or did) like is yet another problem (Bayley and Sasha come to mind). Yet another problem is just as RAW is hitting these lows, the holidays are approaching, which is known for filler shows, so even if you do want to right the ship, there's no way to jump start it anyway with the calendar getting in the way. But they can correct some problems.


Agreed. Brock Lesnar is a quasi-heel, and outside of him heels have absolutely dominated the main event scene on RAW for four years now. No babyface has held the title for longer than 75 days.


----------



## Chrome

Getting close to TNA numbers....


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1072654659599376384


----------



## Frost99

#NoENDinSight #WWELogic #RatingsDOA


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> The best thing Vince and WWE can do right now is forget about the ratings for the time being because this is not something that is going to be fixed overnight or even in a few months.
> 
> He has to forget about the ratings for now and just focus on putting the very best shows he possibly can on a consistent basis and do that for about a year straight.
> 
> If he/they can put on consistently good shows for a year straight, then they could be on the path to overturning the tide and stop the bleeding of viewers. Basically overhaul the show for about a year and forget ratings for the time being. If they can put on consistently good shows for a year and stop the bleeding, then they can worry about regrowing the fanbase/viewers. But they have to be worried about the quality of storylines/characters first.
> 
> But we all know there is like a 1% chance current day Vince and these writers can put on a quality product for that long consistently. The damage is already done and it started along time ago and has simply continued into recent years. It's a shame because WWE does have a hell of a roster that could possibly cut-through if written well and utilized to their strengths.


Oh yeah. You’re right on the money. This is not something you can fix overnight. The last 2 years of WCW shows that when you try shock TV to boost the ratings overnight it will always hurt you in the long run, and it may not do anything in the short run anyways. But last night showed that Vince is in desperation mode and is now trying to do it overnight. I’m sure in his mind he tried the slow & steady approach with Roman and he wasn’t rewarded, so now he’s getting frustrated and increasing his micromanagement of the product.


----------



## Serpico Jones

The worst thing about the show is the fucking commentating team. Scripting the fuck out of them does not work at all and makes everything seem even more bland and boring than it already is. Stop scripting the god damn commentary team.


----------



## JTB33b

I think they need to put the entire roster on 1 show again. By having the brand split they are splitting the rosters in half which means each show is losing alot of talent. People might not watch Raw because there is no AJ Styles, no Daniel Bryan, No Becky Lynch etc etc. Then people might not watch Smackdown because there is no Seth Rollins, no Ronda Rousey, No Dean Ambrose etc etc.


----------



## CMPunkRock316

This is a direct result of 4 years of Raw and essentially WWE being built around Brock and Roman. Brock was a draw in UFC because it brought Wrestling fans into it as well as ppl who wanted to see a wrestler get exposed. When you book your top face 4 years in a row and he is getting booed the fuck out of the building that doesn't help. Fans have left many of them because Brock and Roman were not their cup of tea. Despite the fans who say "you'll be back next week" is not so accurate. Frankly more blame goes on Roman than others are willing to give. He was the guy they were building up every week for 4 years. Now he's gone and Brock is MIA and what is left? The buried and forgotten roster of yesterday. Brock has been part time since he came back in April 2012. How much can you blame the ratings on him? I think some confuse him being a draw because he was in UFC (and I argued why that was) and secondly because SD was beating Raw and to be honest it had more to do with the entire booking of the show and the talents being used (Smackdown Six) and a repudiation of HHH's Reign of Terror and other just bad stuff.


----------



## Serpico Jones

Jim Ross saved WWE in the mid-90s if you really think about it. By 1996 Vince was dead in the water when JR talked him into hiring Mick Foley, Steve Austin and The Rock. The rest is history. Vince doesn’t have a JR type to save his ass anymore.


----------



## shadows123

CMPunkRock316 said:


> This is a direct result of 4 years of Raw and essentially WWE being built around Brock and Roman. Brock was a draw in UFC because it brought Wrestling fans into it as well as ppl who wanted to see a wrestler get exposed. When you book your top face 4 years in a row and he is getting booed the fuck out of the building that doesn't help. Fans have left many of them because Brock and Roman were not their cup of tea. Despite the fans who say "you'll be back next week" is not so accurate. Frankly more blame goes on Roman than others are willing to give. He was the guy they were building up every week for 4 years. Now he's gone and Brock is MIA and what is left? The buried and forgotten roster of yesterday. Brock has been part time since he came back in April 2012. How much can you blame the ratings on him? I think some confuse him being a draw because he was in UFC (and I argued why that was) and secondly because SD was beating Raw and to be honest it had more to do with the entire booking of the show and the talents being used (Smackdown Six) and a repudiation of HHH's Reign of Terror and other just bad stuff.


But the biggest problem IMO is the wwe convincing themselves that heels/faces dont matter and that shooting themselves in the foot with these shock events is the way to go ahead.. and guess what ..it didnt work for wcw back then with David Arquette and all and it is not working now either... wwe needs to just focus on good story telling first of all, stop with this FOTC burying everyone on the roster bull shit, becuse guess what, they ain`t Steve Austin (or even close to him) whom the audience was largely behind during the attitude era...

Another problem i can see is the notion that ratings dont matter.. if it didnt then Vince wouldnt be shitting his pants and addressing it in a worked shoot... Plus a moment of silence for FOX for the fantastic new TV deal they signed for a show which is increasingly starting to make late 2000 WCW look like a masterpiece :tripstroll


----------



## Ace

AJ and Orton should both be moved to Raw soon, SD have too much talent that they don't utilize well while Raw is lacking top tier talent with Lesnar not there, Roman ill and Braun buried.

This will allow them to better utilize Joe, Nakamura, Rusev, Rey, Cien and Hardy along with Bryan which is more than enough talent for a 2 hr show along with the possibility of Black moving up. While the womens division will have Charlotte, Becky, Asuka etc.

The top of Raw would be Lesnar, Rollins, Braun, Dean, Drew, Finn, AJ and Orton.


----------



## Adam Cool

Reminder that Impact managed to hit 3 million viewers less than a decade ago


----------



## Stadhart02

it is just pure apathy now - noone cares about WWE anymore

I am enjoying all of this because they deserve it


----------



## Fabregas

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1- 2.347M
> H2- 2.186M
> H3- 2.048M
> 3H- 2.194M*


:heston


----------



## Raw is Ronda

*Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

Now that both shows have successfully achieved historic low ratings, who is to blame? I know Vince and creative but some talent are legit ratings killers. Who are these in your opinion? IMO:

1. Corbin

2. Nia Jax

3. Lucha house Party

4. Drake Maverick

5. Apollo Crews

6. Alicia Fox

7. Tamina

8. Shane Mcmahon 

9. Billie Kay

All of these get a lot of focus yet haven't done nothing but damage to the product recently.


----------



## Adam Cool

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

Rodrick Strong is a smiling Dean Malenko

Vicious offense but little to no personality and the most generic face ever


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

The Shield. They're loved online and by the hardcore fans but ever since they came along the ratings have plummeted. Raw revolves around whatever their doing and less and less people watch. SmackDown is the B Show and endured a WOAT Title run from AJ Styles. Who isn't a ratings killer thesedays?

Ultimately its just a shitty product. No one is allowed to look good, the talents that dare to put in effort are punished for it, and the same duller than dishwater chosen ones comes out every week and just robotically go through the motions but still get pushed to the moon.


----------



## Raw is Ronda

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



MerRIH Nikkimas said:


> The Shield. Their loved online and by the hardcore fans but ever since they came along the ratings have plummeted. Raw revolves around whatever their doing and less and less people watch.
> 
> Ultimately its just a shitty product. No one is allowed to look good, the talents that dare to put in effort are punished for it, and the same duller than dishwater chosen ones comes out every week and just robotically go through the motions but still get pushed to the moon.


Its just ironic that Rollins talked about low ratings. Then he opened and main evented Raw in a TLC match and still got historic low ratings


----------



## bradatar

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

The entire RAW tag team division, Natalya, Ember Moon, Tye Dillinger, Mickie James currently, there's so many. Your whole list besides Corbin I agree with too.


----------



## Mordecay

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

There is this thing: There is a difference between being a charisma vacuum and a rating killer. Most of the people on the OP are charisma vacuums, but they barely get any tv time to make a difference in the ratings. I mean, people like Alicia, Tamina, Billie, Apollo, they get what? 10 minutes of tv a month? Maybe even less, you can't really blame them for the ratings if they are barely there. People like Nia, Corbin, those are the ratings killers.


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



Raw is Ronda said:


> Its just ironic that Rollins talked about low ratings. Then he opened and main evented Raw in a TLC match and still got historic low ratings


I haven't watched his promo, but I've read the jist of it, and whoever thought Rollins was a good pick to cut that promo must have been drunk. He's a guy who epitomises so much of why WWE is losing fans, he'd be a curtain jerker in any other era.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

This is a ratings thread question. :draper2


----------



## Kowalski's Killer

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



SHIVVY POO IV: THE FINAL CHAPTER said:


> This is a ratings thread question. :draper2


It's also a thread that basically gets started about once a day?


----------



## CesaroSwing

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

Apollo's a bland guy who does cool moves. Most of the people hating him have favourites who are even more boring, get pushed and don't do many cool moves.

At least 60% of the people in OP haven't ever had any sort of impact on the ratings. Corbin you could argue, but I'd say his whole role comes down to a lack of people around him


----------



## Freelancer

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

Orton. Same tired old gimmick for how long now?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



Kowalski's Killer said:


> It's also a thread that basically gets started about once a day?


As we have seen ad nauseam, a mod will link the ratings thread, close this one and absorb it into that thread.

As far as ratings blame, without quarter hour breakdowns it is impossible to assign blame to anyone other than Vince and his writers.


----------



## Kratosx23

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

Based on recent evidence, Corbin seems to be the main one who's just absolutely tanking Raw. 

In a sane company, you would think that would mean that they're going to get him the fuck out of the General Manager role, taking up an hour of every show, but this isn't a sane company, this is WWE, so Lars Sullivan will interfere and screw Strowman, and Corbin will get another hour of tv time on Monday and they'll be in the 1's before you know it, if they're not there yet. I thought they were at least close this week. Now with Christmas coming up, oof. I don't even want to imagine.

EDIT - Yep. 2.194 overall. 2.048 for the third hour, with Corbin in the main event, in a TLC match, for the IC title, against the biggest star on Raw. He matters that little.


----------



## shadows123

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

There are two questions here.. Ratings killer --> Well I wouldnt blame any of them since the story telling and direction itself is to blame.

Charisma Vacuum : again, very subjective and its just my opinion.

Women : Nia, Naomi, Natalya. Could also put Mandy Rose, Sonya Deville, Alicia Fox in there but they are primarily jobbers/feature in unimportant roles so...

Men: 
Seth Rollins ( for a heavily pushed guy alongside Roman, He is very uninspiring). Shield as a whole are over rated and overhyped if you ask me.
WWE version of Bobby Lashley
Finn Balor - Corny as hell and smiles all the time. wtf is that
Randy Orton -


----------



## Bliss World Order

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

AJ Styles. The Smackdown ratings during his reign of terror speak volumes.


----------



## looper007

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

Biggest Rating killers, every single wrestler in WWE right now. No one is a damn draw in terms of ratings. It's unfair to pick one out. It's all down to WWE why this is happening as they can't book a good show on a constant basis. Plus the push the wrong stars especially on RAW.

Charisma vacuum, Corbin is up there for sure. Don't understand the appeal of the man, just cause he's tall won't make him a star Vince. Nia, the woman cause she's related to The Rock doesn't mean she end up like him. Bobby Lashley doesn't do it for me.


----------



## Flawlessstuff

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

Lesnar, They should have pushed Brawn


----------



## Nostalgia

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

Corbin and Lashey are ruining RAW at the moment.


----------



## Hillhank

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

Truhfully I really think it all falls of creative although I'll play along, pretty much the entire tag team division or as I like to call it the jobber division and sure they're mostly jobbers although does anyone really care about 

Apollo, Nattie, Tye Dillinger, R Truth, Carmella, I like the Riot Squad although they desperately need to switch up there act, Tamina, Nia, I think Almas is pretty bland, Balor is a great in ring worker although that's pretty much it, Elias well I blame creative more for this one , and Ziggler although once again I blame creative more for this one and at this point sure he's a great in ring worker although his character is beyond stale


----------



## Stalingrad9

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

Sadly, we only have the ratings hour per hour, so it's really hard to precisely point out someone. 

Plus, it is even difficult to blame the main-eventers. RAW is a 3 hours show. They could have Stone Cold and The Rock feuding and it wouldn't be enough to have me standing in front of my TV for 3 hours looking at Sasha Banks and Bayley, Natalya and Ruby Riott, Nia and Ember Moon, Drew McIntyre and Dolph Ziggler do their bullshit. 

I suppose it's the same for a lot of people. Now imagine when the main act is Baron Corbin vs Braun Strowman, there is even less incentive to stay.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

Everyone. And people who have some sort of small cult following and carry torches for geeks like Miz are the biggest joke of all.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



Nostalgia said:


> Corbin and Lashey are ruining RAW at the moment.


Corbin v Lashley to headline Mania? :bryanlol


----------



## Stalingrad9

I feel like Brock's a part of the problem but in the mean time, even when somebody else was champion, the ratings were tanking, whether it was Rollins, Reigns, Ambrose or Owens.
It baffles me how they got those Billion dollar deals, but props to them. They either are fucking amazing salesmen, or have something big coming, or Fox executives are morons.


----------



## ClintDagger

CMPunkRock316 said:


> This is a direct result of 4 years of Raw and essentially WWE being built around Brock and Roman. Brock was a draw in UFC because it brought Wrestling fans into it as well as ppl who wanted to see a wrestler get exposed. When you book your top face 4 years in a row and he is getting booed the fuck out of the building that doesn't help. Fans have left many of them because Brock and Roman were not their cup of tea. Despite the fans who say "you'll be back next week" is not so accurate. Frankly more blame goes on Roman than others are willing to give. He was the guy they were building up every week for 4 years. Now he's gone and Brock is MIA and what is left? The buried and forgotten roster of yesterday. Brock has been part time since he came back in April 2012. How much can you blame the ratings on him? I think some confuse him being a draw because he was in UFC (and I argued why that was) and secondly because SD was beating Raw and to be honest it had more to do with the entire booking of the show and the talents being used (Smackdown Six) and a repudiation of HHH's Reign of Terror and other just bad stuff.


I think you are right, except that it actually goes back further and starts with the Cena years. Many people stuck through those years not enjoying much of the product thinking once they pushed Cena aside there would be something new to get behind and hopefully revive wrestling. Then Vince went with Reigns who is a less talented, more boring version of Cena. And once that was locked in the stage was set for this precipitous fall. A lot of the frustration with Reigns was pent up anger over the Cena era combined with a dislike of Reigns the character.


----------



## zrc

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

This question again. K bye.


----------



## Science.Violence

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

1. Vince McMahon

2. Kevin Dunn

3. Stephanie McMahon

4. Road Dogg

5. Shane McMahon

6. Baron Corbin


The Hateful 6


----------



## llj

It's a whole lot of issues, difficult to pin down one.

One is that this is usually the worst months for the WWE ratings wise. But they are bleeding even worse now than usual.

Two is the lack of star power on RAW because of all the injuries and Roman being gone. Having said that, Smackdown doesn't have the same problem and it is also being dragged down ratings wise too.

Three is the "all eggs in 1-2 baskets" booking has finally caught up with them. Only 2-3 people are ever threats to win titles on both the men's and women's side and that means people just have no point to care about anyone else. Favorites that you like are sure to be doing nothing if they aren't Vince favorites.

Four is their emphasizing the brand over the people. Well, they have succeeded now, just in a bad way. Nobody on the roster can be blamed for this downturn except for the brand itself. It's not any one person since they have no real superstars anymore.

Five is their formula may be outdated, as well as oversaturation of content. The program consists of a steady stream of in-ring promos and matches. There are rarely any segments held outside the ring or backstage anymore. You don't see outdoor segments or stuff happening in the parking lot. Visually, it makes for stale television. People who get pushed tend to be the better talkers, but many times the better talkers aren't always the most appealing wrestlers either, and most often they aren't good at all in the ring. But they get pushed anyway because they better fit the way they structure their programs. As far as oversaturation, they have basically 4 separate programs now and that's overkill. Their idea is that you pick and choose what to watch, but fans still get exposed to everything somehow and they basically have a wider view of the company and its problems because they watch most of the stuff. This leads to fatigue and discontent.

Another factor is the effect dual-brand PPVs have affected the product. Because they only focus on title feuds, 3/4 of the roster, many of them with fanbases, aren't used. There is no midcard anymore. The women's roster is also getting too big for only 2 belts. I know people say more belts isn't a good idea, but they give people something to do who aren't in the main title picture. Okay, so you don't want Sasha as RAW women's champ. If there were a women's midcard belt, though, it would give her some rub since midcard belts are often given to people who smarks like but maybe lack a few things (mic skills, etc) that they prefer out of top people.


----------



## .christopher.

Excuse my French but there's still too many people tuning into this piece of shit show.


----------



## Piper's Pit

Fabregas said:


> :heston


Thanks for the reminder. Who would ever have thought that mocking and taunting your own customers would have a negative effect on business ?


----------



## DammitChrist

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

The only correct answer here to the OP's question about rating killers is Vince and the creative team.


----------



## Adam Cool

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

The Shield are like the New Generation guys, Can get reactions from the crowd but they couldn't replace the generation before them so interest in the Product fell badly 

Weirdly Roman Reigns and Bret Hart are alike in how they both are really over Overseas (Bret In Canada Europe and idk, Roman in India Middle East and Africa) but at the same time didn't have any effect on the American market .


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

LMAO :duck This show (frankly this company) is dead as fuck. They have truly become WCW 1999 and soon they'll be WCW 2000 soon. There is no buzz, no excitement, no interest.


----------



## Mgene15

The whole roster


----------



## Bryan Jericho

Having Brock as champion and building the promotion around Roman Reigns the last fews yrs has chased alot of people away I think.


----------



## Bryan Jericho

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

Baron Corbin
Nia Jax
Drew McIntyre


----------



## IWp

Ratings Killer: Corbin, as Steiner says, the numbers don't lie......
Charisma Vacuum: Tamina....


----------



## CHAMPIONSHIPS

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

It's crazy. Fans will acknowledge that the show is mismanaged, written horribly, forced scripts, nobody given any direction....

Yet still blame the talent. 

Most of the guys could legit be superstars in a show that had simpler writing, better action and storylines that weren't thrown together last minute


----------



## Not Lying

Bryan Jericho said:


> Having Brock as champion and building the promotion around Roman Reigns the last fews yrs has chased alot of people away I think.


This is 100% the cause of these terrible ratings. No current talent should be blamed for those ratings, but if anyone should, it's literally those 2 only.


----------



## Erramayhem89

The product is the worst it's ever been. Not even going to list all the problems there is just nothing going on. No energy. RAW is no more eventful than an episode of 2010 Impact, but at least Impact was somewhat entertaining at times back then. Even 1995-1996 weren't this bad.


----------



## xio8ups

hows that strong style working with all the injuries lately. LOLOL


----------



## JDP2016

Piper's Pit said:


> Thanks for the reminder. Who would ever have thought that mocking and taunting your own customers would have a negative effect on business ?


That's the issue with people in the wrestling business. It's the only form of entertainment where shitting on your customers is seen as common place. This doesn't happen anywhere else. Not sports. Not movies. Not tv. 

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## Chrome

Rollins caping lol....


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1072898803445964801
Come on guys, stop picking on WWE, they're trying really really hard. :mj2


----------



## Ace

Erramayhem89 said:


> The product is the worst it's ever been. Not even going to list all the problems there is just nothing going on. No energy. RAW is no more eventful than an episode of 2010 Impact, but at least Impact was somewhat entertaining at times back then. Even 1995-1996 weren't this bad.


 Impact was entertaining, I could sit through 2 hours of it and not felt like I wasted 2 hours of my life.


----------



## Brock

Chrome said:


> Here's a peak at the Raw numbers 5 years ago:
> 
> So they've lost half their audience in 5 years going by these numbers. Ooof.


So in 2023; Nobody left but cardboard cutouts in the audience and fake cheers being piped in

:brock4

Oh, that's basically what's been happening.

:vince

And still, nothing will change. They just don't have it in them on a consistent basis and the Fox deal and the money they still generate will convince them to keep going with this mediocre practice.


----------



## squarebox

Brock said:


> So in 2023; Nobody left but cardboard cutouts in the audience and fake cheers being piped in
> 
> :brock4
> 
> Oh, that's basically what's been happening.
> 
> :vince
> 
> And still, nothing will change. They just don't have it in them on a consistent basis and the Fox deal and the money they still generate will convince them to keep going with this mediocre practice.


USA stepping in is the only way to make them do something about it but they don't seem to care for some reason.


----------



## Frenetic Zetetic

At least in 1995 it was obvious the entire business was in a slump, but actively pushing through it.

Now it seems like the company is purposely sabotaging talent for some reason. It makes no sense at all. Is RAW attendance also dropping? I was at Clash of Champions in Boston last December, and people were walking out before the AJ/Jinder match was even over.


----------



## ClintDagger

squarebox said:


> USA stepping in is the only way to make them do something about it but they don't seem to care for some reason.


That’s because USA is declining just as bad as WWE. They badly need each other and even a nose diving product that is heading below 2MM is still attractive to USA. When you let yourself go and all you can get is the ugly girlfriend, she starts to look not so bad after awhile.


----------



## Piper's Pit

JDP2016 said:


> That's the issue with people in the wrestling business. It's the only form of entertainment where shitting on your customers is seen as common place. *This doesn't happen anywhere else. Not sports. Not movies. Not tv. *
> 
> Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


Not so sure if that's true anymore tbh. The enforced 'diversity' and pushing of a political agenda (SJW/Identity Politics) and ignoring of what the core fan base actually wants has gone into overdrive the last few years in TV and Movies. Look at Star Wars for example, various TV shows and apparently the comic book industry has been ruined by it as well in recent years.


----------



## RCSheppy

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



Raw is Ronda said:


> Now that both shows have successfully achieved historic low ratings, who is to blame? I know Vince and creative but some talent are legit ratings killers. Who are these in your opinion? IMO:
> 
> 1. Corbin
> 
> 2. Nia Jax
> 
> 3. Lucha house Party
> 
> 4. Drake Maverick
> 
> 5. Apollo Crews
> 
> 6. Alicia Fox
> 
> 7. Tamina
> 
> 8. Shane Mcmahon
> 
> 9. Billie Kay
> 
> All of these get a lot of focus yet haven't done nothing but damage to the product recently.


Can't really argue with this list. I'd toss Natalya & even Paige on the list.


----------



## SPCDRI

While many franchises and businesses do things that may be seen as antagonistic to current or core customers, I can't really think of any other product that says its inferior to what it used to be and that people don't like it anymore...and then there will be another person representing corporate interests saying they don't care and that they're not going to fix the problems. 

The only time I can recall an ad agency going with this angle they did the opposite. Domino's had an ad campaign where they did international surveys and focus group testing and video taped reviews of Domino's pizza by customers. The customers would say, "Oh, the dough is a bit too sweet, keep a little of the sugar and the sweeteners out of that and maybe season it up on the outside" and then the narrator would say something like, "You spoke, we listened: Saltier, seasoned crust that you prefer. Try the new Domino's Seasoned Crust." Stuff like that. Domino's now isn't what Domino's was like before that ad campaign a few years ago. 

https://hbr.org/2016/11/how-dominos-pizza-reinvented-itself

Domino's was under ten dollars a share before the technology focus and ads where they shat on their pizza for being bad...before announcing all the different ways they were changing their pizza. Its now the second biggest pizza franchise in the world with a share price higher than two hundred and fifty dollars. 

So the Worked Shoot "You told us the product stinks. We agreed. We worked days, nights and weekends to make it better. Watch the New Era WWE" might work, but there is no way they're going to follow through on it. You just know it. 

What if Domino's had an ad campaign where a mouth piece for the CEO said, "Our website and pizza sucks? Is that so, huh? Well, fuck you, buy Pizza Hut if you don't like it. We're not changing shit." Do you think Domino's would be selling a lot of pizza?


----------



## ClintDagger

Piper's Pit said:


> Not so sure if that's true anymore tbh. The enforced 'diversity' and pushing of a political agenda (SJW/Identity Politics) and ignoring of what the core fan base actually wants has gone into overdrive the last few years in TV and Movies. Look at Star Wars for example, various TV shows and apparently the comic book industry has been ruined by it as well in recent years.


That’s true. The NFL and Disney (Star Wars) both pushed agendas that their core fanbase either rejected or just didn’t want mixed in with their entertainment.


----------



## JDP2016

ClintDagger said:


> That’s true. The NFL and Disney (Star Wars) both pushed agendas that their core fanbase either rejected or just didn’t want mixed in with their entertainment.


I don't recall Roger Goodell, or any one of importance, telling fans to quit bitching about players taking a knee and just watch the game. And while taking a knee was and still is an issue, no one will argue that the quality of the NFL isn't any good.


----------



## llj

I don't get the Star Wars tangent. Is their "enforced" diversity obvious? Sometimes. But are there really people out there who have a problem with blacks and asians in the Star Wars universe? I don't get it. It's not like they are taking old characters and changing their races/genders either. These are all new characters. What is the "core" Star Wars demographic bitching about?


----------



## Swindle

Well, they did make the hero from the orginal set of movies into a weird hermit drinking milk from a bizzare alien, who basically gave up and left the fate of the galaxy to an underfunded sister no one the ruling goverment would listen to. People don't want to see their heroes look like losers. Same thing goes on in wrestling, actually. Who are the fans supposed to be backing, what's the journey, what are they fighting for? Oh and giving major screen time to performers fans don't enjoy is foolish.


----------



## xio8ups

1.5 rating next year book it.


----------



## Ace

*WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*



> It wasn’t as bad a show a recent weeks, but the overall vibe of the company felt worse, as I’ve seen the results of telling your audience your product is cold on your own show. It’s never a good thing. This show was the first time I really felt a WCW vibe to the product. Now, their TV deals are so strong that they are in no danger like WCW was, since they had to survive based on paying fans to shows and PPVs. If WWE was in the old environment, this product, even as a monopoly product, would be in trouble since house shows are down to break-even and I’m not sure how well the current events other than the big three would do as PPV shows.
> 
> They’ve also changed the announcers to be more argumentative, which has also made things worse. One person in the company who is a strong supporter of Renee Young as talent noted that they are turning her into a Stepford Wife. Vince is terribly overworked now and doesn’t sleep, the format has become stale but there is incredible talent there. But some of the best talent in the company is in NXT right now, but they are so slow to incorporate it and make those changes that it has become stale, plus he way they book makes everyone feel like a midcarder and you need a few larger-than-life superstars and not a bunch of worker bees who fill time while everyone waits for the family members like they are the real power and the real stars.
> 
> Now, you’ve got no family members on Raw, and Reigns and Strowman are gone. And in the strangest thing of all, the more time they devote on the show to women, the less women watch as that’s the big declining demo, even with Rousey positioned as the biggest star in the company. Having Rousey weekly probably isn’t the best idea, because she’s not seen as special, and also, relying on her as the star is trouble because she’s probably not going to be there for the long haul since she’s talked about leaving and starting a family at some point, although that’s not any time soon.


-WON


----------



## Chrome

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

Not really a shock tbh. It was fine to make women more prominent in this company, but they went overboard with it shouting "history!" everytime they did something new with the women. And sticking Stephanie in the middle of it didn't help either.


----------



## Kratosx23

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

Makes sense to me for a couple reasons. 

First off, women don't like being pandered to any more than men like watching women getting pandered to. They're regular people, they just want a god damn show like everyone else, and don't care about herstory being made every 5 minutes. This social justice bullshit that caused the womens Evolution is an internet minority, combined with corporate interests. It has nothing to do with regular, every day, ordinary women. Vince just thinks that women want women on top and he doesn't look any further beneath the surface than that. It's no different than Vince stupidly thinking that fans want Charlotte more than Becky and Asuka because Becky and Asuka don't have a famous last name, are foreign, aren't blonde and have accents. Well.....no, nobody gives a shit. Charlotte isn't entertaining, fuck all the other horse shit. Exact same principle. 

Secondly, most of the female talent in the company is garbage, especially on Raw. There isn't one, single female performer on Raw who's capable of attracting a wide degree of interest. Except Rousey, but we're getting to that, and it's not because of her skill. 

Thirdly, as he mentioned, very quickly, Ronda being Ronda isn't going to matter after a while. The novelty has worn off, and now all she is is a green wrestler who's still learning and isn't very charismatic. She's not a pro wrestler. She's a what if. "What if Michael Jordan played baseball instead?" Well.....


----------



## InexorableJourney

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

I would imagine Rousey will leave for family duty the first time she gets a significant injury and has to to take extended time off.


----------



## DoolieNoted

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

Maybe women weren't tuning in for the women's segments in the first place, so adding more and forcing R/EVOLUTION!! HERSTORY!!! every 5 minutes probably isn't helping.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

Women, like men, recognise a shit show when they see one. Corbin is way more featured than Ronda anyway.


----------



## Clique

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

It's because Roman's gone. He made the female fans wet...with perspiration just like cuz.


----------



## AlexaBliss4Life

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*



Ace said:


> -WON


IE Meltzer can't get off to them so he writes garbage. Check.


----------



## Jables

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

"Cure for the common show"


----------



## Scholes18

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

I’m not criticizing Ronda in any way because she’s done an amazing job since coming in, but I will criticize the idiots who didn’t do their homework on Ronda.

People like the Ellen crown were so taken in by the Woman Empowerment movement and Ronda looked a good candidate for it that they kept pushing her, not realizing her core audience the MMA crowd absolutely despised her going back to her fight with Miesha Tate. Every loss was cheered vociferously by the MMA crowd and sports fans in general. She was a household name for sure, but so is Bill Cosby. Big name doesn’t equal people wanting to see you and that’s what Vinces dumbass daughter either didn’t tell him and had no idea was happening.


----------



## Vic Capri

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

Boring Corbin and Apollo Snooze.

- Vic


----------



## AlexaBliss4Life

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*



Scholes18 said:


> I’m not criticizing Ronda in any way because she’s done an amazing job since coming in, but I will criticize the idiots who didn’t do their homework on Ronda.
> 
> People like the Ellen crown were so taken in by the Woman Empowerment movement and Ronda looked a good candidate for it that they kept pushing her, not realizing her core audience the MMA crowd absolutely despised her going back to her fight with Miesha Tate. Every loss was cheered vociferously by the MMA crowd and sports fans in general. She was a household name for sure, but so is Bill Cosby. Big name doesn’t equal people wanting to see you and that’s what Vinces dumbass daughter either didn’t tell him and had no idea was happening.


You are tragically misinformed.


----------



## The Quintessential Mark

Nia Jax comes to mind as a big charisma vacuum as for ratings it's a criteria I'm not completely interested in.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

Having an aging primarily male fan base is a recipe for disaster. This is what it sounds like when ratings die. :bryanlol


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

Well, women throughout the ages are associated with wisdom, right? Ronda is Ronda, she's just a decent but green talent and its not that special to see a UFC person in WWE all the time, she's been around often for a year. She didn't really spike ratings off that, anyhow, same with Brock in the past two or three years. Alexa isn't wrestling but is still featured and apart from that, who is on RAW?

Sasha and Bayley are so depushed and jobbed out, its mental. They're missing their seventh or eighth PPV this year and TLC is a 12 bout card. Alicia Fox, Nia Jax, Tamina, Natalya, Ruby Riott, it all stinks. Why are women supposed to like this? Its a green but outperforming expectations Ronda Rousey and then its just stinky garbage after that. Smackdown has has the better women talent by far and its being used much better and they're getting one of the hotter matches on TLC, a triple threat TLC match. That's what catered to women fans would care about. There's a difference between being catered to (Smackdown) and being pandered to (RAW).


----------



## Swindle

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

I imagine all sorts of demos are going down as viewership in general goes down. 

On the one hand, identity politics hasn't seemed to work in Hollywood (Ghostbusters reboot being dead in the water), yet on the other hand, if you are producing RAW, what are the options? If you were to cut the women completely, you'd still have to fill the time with something, that would be tapping into lower carders on the male side (No Way, Ascension, etc). So, there is a reality that 3 hours of just men isn't going to solve the WWE product woes. Rhonda I believe happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. A lot choices that have been going on for along time is catching up to the WWE (things that go so far beyond just the women). Their creative process is completely broken.


----------



## JDP2016

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

Women never support each other. Not in large numbers at least. That's why this whole female empowerment crap is just that. CRAP!!!!!!

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## Mox Girl

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

What is with this "women watch wrestling to mainly see women wrestlers" thing? I certainly don't, and neither do any of the women I know who also watch it. I don't like being pandered to, I don't need to see women "making history" and all that crap. It's a little insulting actually, like "oh look, here's a first time match with women in it! Aren't we progressive?". Dude, I want to see _good _wrestling, and I don't care if a male or female is doing it. As long as it's entertaining, I don't care what bits they have down below :lol

The pandering is extremely annoying and it needs to stop. Thankfully, WWE is running out of 'first time ever' women's things to do by now, so maybe it'll die down lol.

I also didn't know that people thought that about female viewers, that they want to see the ladies succeeding. Most of the time, I just get "oh you only watch to see the hot men" thing :lmao


----------



## JDP2016

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women &amp; Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*



Scholes18 said:


> I’m not criticizing Ronda in any way because she’s done an amazing job since coming in, but I will criticize the idiots who didn’t do their homework on Ronda.
> 
> People like the Ellen crown were so taken in by the Woman Empowerment movement and Ronda looked a good candidate for it that they kept pushing her, not realizing her core audience the MMA crowd absolutely despised her going back to her fight with Miesha Tate. Every loss was cheered vociferously by the MMA crowd and sports fans in general. She was a household name for sure, but so is Bill Cosby. Big name doesn’t equal people wanting to see you and that’s what Vinces dumbass daughter either didn’t tell him and had no idea was happening.


She was never loved in the mma world. Whether it was the shitty attitude or the whole "I can beat up a man" nonsense, she was never popular in a good way. People wanted to see her lose. 

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## Scholes18

AlexaBliss4Life said:


> You are tragically misinformed.


Really? I watch every single UFC event and if you think Ronda was this beloved figure then you are the one whose tragically misinformed. Go watch her fight with Miesha after the Ultimate Fighter and listen to the crowd. People were cheering Holly Holm and Nunes. People were turned off with Joe Rogan and Dana Whites wankathon over her and ridiculous claims like she could beat Floyd Mayweather.


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

I mean, if they just had women's storylines and feuds on equal footing to the men without force feeding this empowerment garbage, I'm sure it would be better. I have no problem with the women getting as much time as they are, but its this along with Stephanie's pandering shit which was infuriating. They're treating it like they are the first company in the history of the world to actually give women a chance, which is so unbelievably out of touch, yet I believe Stephanie really thinks that way in her delusional mind.

And really, EVERYBODY is watching less, not just the women. When you watch what we get on a three hour Raw, I can't blame them really.


----------



## BK Festivus

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

A lot of those women probably have male wrestlers as their favorites so just putting MORE emphasis on the female wrestlers rather than who they actually like is the opposite of what they want to see.


----------



## Berzerker's Beard

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

[MICHAELCOLE]This is a first ever, history making thread.[/MICHAELCOLE]


----------



## Hephaesteus

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

You can't go around waving the evolution flag and then have the focal point of your division be models. Either go one way or the other, you can't have it both ways.


----------



## Whacker

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

It's all bad. I'm a huge Bobby Roode fan, and I can't stand to watch this tag team crap they've got him in. I honestly can't tell you what else is going on, because I fast forward through all but the women's segments. And even those have been exceptionally bad lately. There are lots of great opponents out there for Rousey, but they've got the brand rosters and heel/face ranks so screwed up that there is no booking potential.


----------



## Whacker

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

This isn't hard to understand. Women fans hate the women wrestlers. *Little girls* love the women wrestlers. I know a handful of women that watch WWE, and they hate all the woman wrestlers. There is nothing wrong with that, it's just that adult women are programmed to hate all other women. Sasha's fake hair, Nikki's fake boobs, Dana's muscles are too big, Mickie is too old, Charlotte has put on weight, Becky has a stupid voice, Ember moon is too short, Liv looks like a brat, etc etc etc... "I can't believe you like them..."

However, when Randy Orton or Bobby Roode show up, those frowns do a 180 real quick like. The popularity of the women is driven by men that like hot chicks and good wrastlin', and from young girls looking for a role model.


----------



## Hillhank

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

why not have some steel cage matches, or no DQ falls count anywhere matches, or a women's war games match and or even random TLC matches why not?

Lets be real how many people are really all that invested in this Rousey Nia feud? I know I'm not


----------



## promoter2003

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

So that lie that fans continue to watch can die now? lol

WWE's decades of built up loyalty and pissing off fans have come back to haunt them finally.

So RAW did worse than that RAW in December of 1996 lol

That's crazy at least then the excuse was WCW raped their roster leaving them with only Sid, Bret, HBK, and Taker as draws with much less roster depth than today.


----------



## Alexander_G

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*



Chrome said:


> And sticking Stephanie in the middle of it didn't help either.


My mother told me one day when I was young, son, *women hate female bosses*. What a peculiar notion.


----------



## Ace

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



Bliss World Order said:


> AJ Styles. The Smackdown ratings during his reign of terror speak volumes.


 The ratings literally died weeks* AFTER* he dropped the title :lmao

Two out of the three shows since he lost the title have been below 2m :lmao

There were gradual declines in his reign which happened *AFTER* he was phased out as a top guy and Bryan, Charlotte and Becky started being featured more prominently. 

You want to blame the champion for the ratings - why not blame your boy for the declines as top star of SD when he was getting by far the most time out of anyone and the record lows which have happened during his reign.

For most of AJ's reign he was rarely featured and was booked like a midcard champion, if you want to blame anyone for those declines during that period blame the people who were getting most of the TV time, promoted heavily and given the top segments. Not the guy who is the only top merch seller from the brand for the last 3 years and was prominent for all their highest rated shows. 

Better yet - blame the shit writing and booking than any individual.


----------



## Adam Cool

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

Is anyone suprised?

The Men in Today's WWE play Characters that are too childish to be appealing to women

Compare that to CMLL and NJPW where Mexican and Japanese women ard the majority of the fans 

Heck I am pretty sure even ECW had a large female fanbase back in the day


----------



## RKing85

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

Baron Corbin is so far out in front in this race, he couldn't even see second place if they were running a 10 mile straight line in Saskatchewan.


----------



## utvolzac

There’s a lot to choose from, but the biggest charisma vacuum for me is by far Natalya. Especially considering how long she has been with the company and how often she is featured. 

She may be the least charismatic person in the history of the business. Even with a real life storyline about her dad, she cannot muster up some real emotion to carry the story. Her segment from Monday was painful. Horrible acting, I didn’t believe a second of it. Which is weird since you would think all she had to do was draw some natural emotion from her dad passing and ruby disrespecting his memory. Instead she comes across as some weird Austin Powers FemBot with awkward tears. She is so bad, I’m actually pulling for Ruby in this fued.

Based off Total Divas, she seems to be just as awkward and boring in real life with her strange cat lady obsession, over filtered selfies and desperate need to be the 3rd Bella Twin.



King Jesus said:


> It's crazy. Fans will acknowledge that the show is mismanaged, written horribly, forced scripts, nobody given any direction....
> 
> Yet still blame the talent.
> 
> Most of the guys could legit be superstars in a show that had simpler writing, better action and storylines that weren't thrown together last minute


This. Guys have no problem getting over in NXT where shit actually makes sense and they listen to the goddamn audience. Then flop on the main roster when Vince micro-manages then into the ground.

All those years of steroid abuse have to be taking their toll on Vince’s organs, so I’m sure this reign of terror won’t last too much longer. We’ll see what happens when he’s gone. The scary part is, Stephanie may be worse


----------



## promoter2003

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



utvolzac said:


> This. Guys have no problem getting over in NXT where shit actually makes sense and they listen to the goddamn audience. Then flop on the main roster when Vince micro-manages then into the ground.
> 
> All those years of steroid abuse have to be taking their toll on Vince’s organs, so I’m sure this reign of terror won’t last too much longer. We’ll see what happens when he’s gone. The scary part is, Stephanie may be worse


I'm going to be honest. The talent isn't really all that great as it once was. It's not just about bad management although that is part of it. There has been wrestlers in the past who were badly managed, but were still over because they had an aura to them. You can't really "work" aura or the "it" factor.

The thing is if someone beats the odds and is over you are right they do botch it, but this is not new.

I won't even use some of the biggest names in history as people usually do because that is unfair. I will use decent to good to what some may call iconic such as Kane.

He somehow had bad booking as Issac Yankem, but he was still over because he had an aura to him. Repackaged yes as Kane he went much further being the brother of UT, but it still remains he had an aura to him that made people want to watch.

All the great storyline and production in the world can't mask a whole roster imo.

Stephanie IS worse than Vince that is clear as day. The ship started to sink when she took over creative. HHH I give credit for NXT, but he isn't exactly hitting home runs like Jim Ross and predecessors before him either as lead of talent. Vince needs to get blame, but so does his whole staff for failing fans and the young talent who came into the business after the veterans and icons who once steered the ship were no longer around.

Kevin Dunn may be the biggest cancer though. It's also not fair to put all the blame on the talent either. The whole ecosystem of how they started doing things post 2005 has wrecked their formula imo.


----------



## Mear

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

Billie Kay ? Apollo Crews ? How can they kill the show when I don't even notice they are on the show. 

But there is a bigger problem. In wrestling, the World Champion headline your show and he is responsable for the rating. This is how it goes, it's not just some prop, you are the show, you represents the show and guess what, the World Champion isn't here and I wouldn't be surprised if some people don't mention him because they forgot he is even on the show. The whole show is full of geeks and anybody pushed is absolutely terrible. Some like Elias are diamonds but they have 

As for the " But the roster could be stars under the right conditions ", I disagree. I'm going to use Wrestlemania 3. We can all say that Steamboat vs Savage was a damn near masterpiece BUT it got to be enjoyed for a reason, that reason was that Andre The Giant vs Hulk Hogan was a blockbuster. That's the difference between talents and stars, talents can put on a hell of a show but they need stars to make the people come, to get the attention on them

The problem is that now, fans don't want stars anymore, they find them boring because they are not good enough in the ring and will boo them. AJ Styles or Seth Rollins are not stars, they are incredible performers but they won't sell the show to casuals which is what you badly need now, you need a star to sell the show to people who left/people who don't want


----------



## promoter2003

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



Mear said:


> Billie Kay ? Apollo Crews ? How can they kill the show when I don't even notice they are on the show.
> 
> But there is a bigger problem. In wrestling, the World Champion headline your show and he is responsable for the rating. This is how it goes, it's not just some prop, you are the show, you represents the show and guess what, the World Champion isn't here and I wouldn't be surprised if some people don't mention him because they forgot he is even on the show. The whole show is full of geeks and anybody pushed is absolutely terrible. Some like Elias are diamonds but they have
> 
> As for the " But the roster could be stars under the right conditions ", I disagree. I'm going to use Wrestlemania 3. We can all say that Steamboat vs Savage was a damn near masterpiece BUT it got to be enjoyed for a reason, that reason was that Andre The Giant vs Hulk Hogan was a blockbuster. That's the difference between talents and stars, talents can put on a hell of a show but they need stars to make the people come, to get the attention on them
> 
> The problem is that now, fans don't want stars anymore, they find them boring because they are not good enough in the ring and will boo them. AJ Styles or Seth Rollins are not stars, they are incredible performers but they won't sell the show to casuals which is what you badly need now, you need a star to sell the show to people who left/people who don't want


This is partly why I said how they started to create the shows wrecked the formula that worked.

I'm going to be honest again. There were times in the past where I could see how the WWF/E could book themselves out of a mess, but it's been years now where even I can't see how they could turn it around.

I really think post WM 30 the actions they did with Cena, Lesnar, UT, Bryan, Evolution, and The Shield if done a different way they might not be in this bad predicament now. Hell, even going back to around the time they got legit buzz with Punk and the Pipebomb I saw things looking promising.

It started to get irreversible around the time how they handled Batista, Bryan, Roman Reigns in the title scene and how they mishandled using Cena to put over new guys like Bray Wyatt or Taker being used to turn Cena heel to generate some buzz.

I really can't see how they could get out of this ho hum product any time soon and by soon I mean 3-5 years. You know it's bad when they are relying on the fame of UFC via Lesnar and Ronda when before WWE stars were making UFC popular.


----------



## MonkasaurusRex

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

I'm pretty sure that the correct answer is everybody. Nobody moves ratings upward and nobody can maintain an audience. So everyone is the answer.


----------



## Dave Santos

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*



Clique said:


> It's because Roman's gone. He made the female fans wet...with perspiration just like cuz.


You do have a good point. A lot of women viewers may tune in for reasons other than women's wrestling. Even looking here most of the gifs are either attractive women or men. Maybe these new call ups are not doing it for a lot of the casuals. 

A lot of people here talk about NXT and how good it is but I remember an article stating only 60-70 000 people watch nxt live on the network for a one week cycle. Even from over a million subscribers.

We can't underestimate how certain wrestlers like lana, the Bellas, Natalya, Naomi, Eva Marie, Paige, Maryse and others may have that we here on the internet do not take in to effect. These women have appeared on total divas and there is a possibility that some casual women can relate to these women. Maybe they like their personality or other factors that we do not take in to account. Not all womens wrestling is workrate, especially among casuals.


----------



## Dibil13

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

I think most female fans honestly don't give a shit about women's wrestling and would rather watch men.


----------



## Mr.Amazing5441

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

They are leaving like plenty of men are leaving. Show sucks bottom line and that is the most important thing. They could throw in all this diversity but normal people dont care about diversity. They just want a show. Like when the SJW's complain that there arent any gay people in marvel movies. I doubt a normal gay person even cares. Pandering to women wont do you any good when your show is god awful. GoT, Breaking Bad, Walking Dead are more watched than Super Girl by all demographics because those shows are just better plain and simple.


----------



## DoctorWhosawhatsit

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

To be fair... isn't every demographic watching less? It's a bad show.


----------



## Dave Santos

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*



Dibil13 said:


> I think most female fans honestly don't give a shit about women's wrestling and would rather watch men.


It could be due to the same reasons that men prefer watching female figure skating over mens.


----------



## Bratista

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

Kevin Dunn
Vince McMahon
Stephanie McMahon
Road Dogg

The biggest ratings killers currently employed by WWE


----------



## Ace

DoctorWhosawhatsit said:


> To be fair... isn't every demographic watching less? It's a bad show.


 Demos are down across the board but it's the women which are dropping heavily.


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

You know, I think women's wrestling is and always was for little girls and the smarkiest men. For almost everybody else, its the least essential and easiest to ignore part of pro wrestling. Here's a terrifically chauvinist phrase that seems retired, but I'm going to see if I can't get it working part time as a greeter at Wal-Mart: Piss Break. Women gotta piss, too.


----------



## Dave Santos

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*



SPCDRI said:


> You know, I think women's wrestling is and always was for little girls and the smarkiest men. For almost everybody else, its the least essential and easiest to ignore part of pro wrestling. Here's a terrifically chauvinist phrase that seems retired, but I'm going to see if I can't get it working part time as a greeter at Wal-Mart: Piss Break. Women gotta piss, too.


I remember when I was watching live events that cruiser weights were usually the time when the majority of people went to the the washroom or stock up food. Is that still the case?


----------



## ChampWhoRunsDaCamp

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

As i said when they signed her, If WWE are paying Ronda big money they're making a huge mistake. 

It's not her fault. Ronda has adapted extremely well to the WWE but she isn't a star. She has absolutely no star power or charisma. She never has, she was a great project for Dana White in the UFC but once her limitations became clear (She has no striking game) she was dropped by Dana and fans quicker than she was dropped by Holm.

It was hilarious seeing wrestling fans acting like they'd just signed Beyonce and all the none wrestling fans were going to flock to the show too see her. 

The reality is no one's really cared about her for years, I'm not American but she's never been a big deal in the U.K. As far as i'm aware she's not even the most well known woman in the company here due to the Bella twins being on TV every day.

This wasn't a case of WWE signing a massive MMA star, they signed a past her prime retired MMA fighter who is arguably not even the biggest name in the women's locker room. 

Ronda isn't the reason people are switching off, she isn't the reason the show is booked horribly from top to bottom and she certainly isn't the reason the performers themselves are mostly uncharismatic geeks which very few people outside of the wrestling bubble will ever want to see but Ronda definitely is not the star who's going to turn the companies fortunes around.


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*



Dave Santos said:


> I remember when I was watching live events that cruiser weights were usually the time when the majority of people went to the the washroom or stock up food. Is that still the case?


That's typically one where a certain segment of fans just isn't going to get into, the "vanilla midget" stuff, these people might think of it as. Tag team wrestling is the real RAW "piss break" for me, even before the regrettable AOP-Pee-Pee stuff.


----------



## Xobeh

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

trash blog is trash


I'd get more accurate information from Ryback talking about how he's better than any other wrestler than I would from WON


----------



## DJ Punk

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

Ever since Jinder Mahal won the WWE Championship, the whole product has plummeted and been based around charisma vacuums. But even talented guys like Ambrose don't even get booked as a heel correctly, so I guess you could argue that the whole product is simply a charisma vacuum no matter the talent.

I'm definitely not watching and it's good to see others are beginning to stop too. Something needs to change (probably never will though or if it does then it'll be too late if it's not already).


----------



## Mear

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

Straight women prefer to watch half-naked men than half-naked women ? Wow, that is a shock right here...


----------



## Mox Girl

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

Aren't you asking two different questions here?

There's a bunch of people I could list as charisma vaccuums, but they're hardly on TV so they're not rating killers :shrug

The rating killers are Vince and WWE Creative.


----------



## Stadhart02

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

It is the same shit going on with gaming at the moment - all of the feminists and their simps push for games to be full of social justice crap but they don't actually BUY the games so companies are going out of business as actual gamers won't pay for that crap

the problem is these weirdos are a very loud minority who can get the MSM on side so companies bend over for them

I remember the old TNA days when the women were outdrawing the men - I am not a fan of women's wrestling but even I watched it because it was thoroughly entertaining and they had good wrestlers. I can't remember TNA ever banging on with the feminist stuff which is why I carried on watching

the moment politics are openly shoved in people's faces everyone gets fed up with it and changes the channel


----------



## Arya Dark

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

*I'm not sure why women would wanna watch a really bad show right now....*


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

_*The woman are not watching this shit show is because the show is crap. Also their male stars are either out due to illness or even injured. Most importantly they are turning out because of the agenda that this company is showing on their screens TV. No one wants to hear and be forced into this "Woman's Revolution and First Time Ever For The Woman Matches.". In which we all know why it's happening. It's because of Stephanie McMahon having her ego stroked yet again and nothing will change sadly. Vince is backing his daughter at the same time is killing the division for the men. The product is crap like I said because of storylines that are too childish for adult fans to even bother wanting to see with their own eyes. The booking of their stars are at a all mighty low. More low than 1995 and 2014. 

PS: It has gotten so bad that I want my stars and woman talents either back to NXT so they can get booked seriously again or go join Cody Rhodes/Neville/John Morrison in being successful elsewhere. *_


----------



## .christopher.

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

I can't say I don't care for Womens wrestling because I like a lot of their angles and stuff in NXT, and the KnockOuts division in TNA around 2007 was great before Russo ruined it. In fact, I remember Jim Cornette saying that, at their peak, the Knockouts often had some of the highest rated segments in the show. I can see why - they did some good stuff like Gail Kim vs Awesome Kong.

I don't care one bit about the main rosters women, though. I'm actually pretty gutted Asuku, Becky and Charlotte are getting the TLC match because, on WWE's main roster anyway, the way they use the weapons just looks awful. So weak. I mean, it is sensible as you don't want to hurt them, but it's not entertaining in the slightest. Actually, that goes for the men, too. Seeing them having to hit their opponent in the gut with a steel chair, then their back is awful, awful stuff.


----------



## Adam Cool

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

Weird how most of this thread is males speaking on behalf of women 

Not that people should not talk but I was expecting some input from the female users here , even if they are few


----------



## Chelsea

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

The Raw roster except Dean, Seth and Dolph.


----------



## Frenetic Zetetic

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

Not too shocking TBH.


----------



## Zyta

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

Guess what, they like watching big strong mostly naked men wrestle more than I do. The women wrestlers are mostly for men, such as myself.


----------



## EMGESP

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*

The reality is Women hate other women. Even when they compliment each other its total horse shit and they don't really mean it.


----------



## Mox Girl

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*



Adam Cool said:


> Weird how most of this thread is males speaking on behalf of women
> 
> Not that people should not talk but I was expecting some input from the female users here , even if they are few


There aren't that many females on WF tbh, we're few and far between, so it's natural that mostly men would reply to this topic.

I think I've made it pretty clear where I stand on this though :lol


----------



## Ham and Egger

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



DammitChrist said:


> The only correct answer here to the OP's question about rating killers is Vince and the creative team.


Pretty much this. They have a talented roster but it is the how they're being booked and written that is the problem. It's one thing if the performers aren't working at high level that's expected of them but its another thing when you give them stupid booking and make half of your roster into fucking jokes.


----------



## ellthom

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

I aint going to put them blame on one guy. Everyone sucks right now, and it isnt because of the talent.


----------



## Hangman

:lmao The women's revolution will be one of the key factors in killing the WWE :lmao


----------



## Hangman

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

Corbin

The pint sized prick 

Kevin Dunn

Stephanie Mcmahon


----------



## Jonhern

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

of course its vince, but he wont blame himself. Even though the ratings were sliding before he left, this probably reinforces to Vince that Roman needs to be pushed even more when he comes back. To him these low ratings are because there is no Big Dawg.


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

Realistically isn't everyone who is currently prominently featured and heavily pushed a ratings killer? I mean I see people listing the cliche names, or people who are entirely irrelevant and barely appear on TV. But the Rollins, Styles, Beckys, Charlottes, Ambrose's, Corbins, Strowmans, Bryans, etc, etc, etc. are clearly ratings killers because the ratings are hitting record lows with these people on top.

Billie Kay doesn't affect the ratings one bit when she's on TV for like 10 seconds a month.


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



MerRIH Nikkimas said:


> Realistically isn't everyone who is currently prominently featured and heavily pushed a ratings killer? I mean I see people listing the cliche names, or people who are entirely irrelevant and barely appear on TV. But the Rollins, Styles, Beckys, Charlottes, Ambrose's, Corbins, Strowmans, Bryans, etc, etc, etc. are clearly ratings killers because the ratings are hitting record lows with these people on top.
> 
> Billie Kay doesn't affect the ratings one bit when she's on TV for like 10 seconds a month.


That would basically mean its the talent's fault ratings are bad, which clearly isn't the case if you watched how everybody is booked on raw.


----------



## Blonde

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*



Adam Cool said:


> Weird how most of this thread is males speaking on behalf of women
> 
> Not that people should not talk but I was expecting some input from the female users here , even if they are few


There's a thread on this topic everyday where you get gems about women hating women and women hating female bosses from neckbeards. 

Women who watch wrestling want to watch good wrestling, too. More opportunities for wrestlers like Becky and Asuka is different from more opportunities for Bliss, Carmella and Nia.


----------



## DammitChrist

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



MerRIH Nikkimas said:


> Realistically isn't everyone who is currently prominently featured and heavily pushed a ratings killer? I mean I see people listing the cliche names, or people who are entirely irrelevant and barely appear on TV. But the Rollins, Styles, Beckys, Charlottes, Ambrose's, Corbins, Strowmans, Bryans, etc, etc, etc. are clearly ratings killers because the ratings are hitting record lows with these people on top.


It's pretty easy blaming any of those names for the low ratings when they just happen to be featured on top. Anyway, they aren't even the rating killers. The show is getting record low ratings frequently because the shows (mostly Raw) aren't entertaining to watch for many people. At this point, the low ratings are in spite of those talents. They can get injured and/or taken off of TV for months, yet we'd still have low viewership regardless of who they push on top.



> Billie Kay doesn't affect the ratings one bit when she's on TV for like 10 seconds a month.


I'm pretty sure Billie Kay won't even be able to do shit to help the ratings if she was pushed on top. As long as WWE is unable to deliver entertaining and compelling shows on a weekly basis for several months, then you'll keep seeing them get poor numbers. I doubt it's even because of the talents.


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



Dr. Bexmas said:


> That would basically mean its the talent's fault ratings are bad, which clearly isn't the case if you watched how everybody is booked on raw.


Its a cop out to pin it all on on booking, yes the booking sucks ass, no one can deny that. But theres still several wrestlers, notably Becky and Rollins who are presented very well lately and have the hardcore fans blessing and adulation but the ratings still plummet with them on top.

Its also a cop out to take issue with talents being called ratings killers only when its talents that are well liked. We all labelled Jinder Mahal a ratings killer, well the ratings have sunk even lower with a much more talented worker like AJ Styles on top.

In a thread discussing ratings killers the AJ Styles, Daniel Bryans, Seth Rollins, Becky Lynches, etc have to be mentioned because they're the ones on top, they're the ones headlining shows that hit record low ratings.



DammitChrist said:


> It's pretty easy blaming any of those names for the low ratings when they just happen to be featured on top. Anyway, they aren't even the rating killers. The show is getting record low ratings frequently because the shows (mostly Raw) aren't entertaining to watch for many people. At this point, the low ratings are in spite of those talents. They can get injured and/or taken off of TV for months, yet we'd still have low viewership regardless of who they push on top.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm pretty sure Billie Kay won't even be able to do shit to help the ratings if she was pushed on top. As long as WWE is unable to deliver entertaining and compelling shows on a weekly basis for several months, then you'll keep seeing them get poor numbers. I doubt it's even because of the talents.


I dont really see the big issue, when Reigns is on top we blame him, when Jinder is on top we blame him, etc.

The axis have turned in that its more well respected and beloved wrestlers on top now but the ratings are still plummeting. Booking is an issue no doubt, I addressed that in my first post in this thread. But if we're talking about ratings killers then if a show with Seth Rollins opening and closing the show does terrible numbers its fair to say hes a ratings killer, if a show headlined by Becky, Charlotte and Asuka does terrible numbers its fair to suggest they're ratings killers. Its a fair assumption that every top wrestler of this era is a ratings killer right now because none of them are reversing the downward slide.


----------



## RapShepard

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



MerRIH Nikkimas said:


> Realistically isn't everyone who is currently prominently featured and heavily pushed a ratings killer? I mean I see people listing the cliche names, or people who are entirely irrelevant and barely appear on TV. But the Rollins, Styles, Beckys, Charlottes, Ambrose's, Corbins, Strowmans, Bryans, etc, etc, etc. are clearly ratings killers because the ratings are hitting record lows with these people on top.
> 
> Billie Kay doesn't affect the ratings one bit when she's on TV for like 10 seconds a month.


The top guys right now should get the blame (as well as booking) but as you said because they're well liked in the hardcore fandom they won't be held accountable. People would have to admit maybe they aren't the big draw folk like to think. The fact of the matter is they aren't encouraging people to start watching wrestling any more than Cena, Lesnar, Orton, Reigns, or Jinder were. Sure some of that is done to creative, but a lot of it comes down to no wrestler in a long time has inspired fans to come in. The fact SmackDown has the 2 hottest acts in the company attached to storylines most seem to enjoy, yet SmackDown is still going down on the ratings is sad. Like


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



MerRIH Nikkimas said:


> Its a cop out to pin it all on on booking, yes the booking sucks ass, no one can deny that. But theres still several wrestlers, notably Becky and Rollins who are presented very well lately and have the hardcore fans blessing and adulation but the ratings still plummet with them on top.
> 
> Its also a cop out to take issue with talents being called ratings killers only when its talents that are well liked. We all labelled Jinder Mahal a ratings killer, well the ratings have sunk even lower with a much more talented worker like AJ Styles on top.
> 
> In a thread discussing ratings killers the AJ Styles, Daniel Bryans, Seth Rollins, Becky Lynches, etc have to be mentioned because they're the ones on top, they're the ones headlining shows that hit record low ratings.


For years now I think WWE has shifted its focus from presenting guys like Stone Cold and The Rock as megastars bigger than even the company themselves, to promoting WWE itself as the draw, with the wrestlers featured within it, wherever on the card they may be. 

Realistically, there's probably little in the way of anybody who makes any significant gains or losses in ratings, because there isn't somebody there who can do that, and they aren't pushing anybody bigger than WWE themselves. Wrestlers like Becky or Rollins, while I may love their work and think they are doing an excellent job all around, are only allowed to reach a specific ceiling created by WWE. Even Roman Reigns, FOTC, was the same way. 

This is just one of many reasons for why their ratings continue to decrease though, including booking problems, declining tv ratings overall for cable in general, wrestling becoming more niche and less mainstream, etc among other things. 

And honestly, I've enjoyed Smackdown for months upon months now. Sure, my favorite wrestler having the title has helped, but crowd response to their women's division has been extremely positive, Bryan/Styles is shaping into a great program, and even the US title and tag title pictures are entertaining. Its fine if you disagree, but to me, there's a rather large gap in quality between the two shows that I just don't understand, even when Raw is still supposed to be the A show.


----------



## chrisburr

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

RAW - Baron Corbin as RAW GM (One of the worst GMS ever)

Smackdown - A Heel Miz (Turn face or just go away, he is a joke)

Both - The Commissioners (Yes I think it is time For a New RAW GM and New Commissioners to both Brands)


----------



## DoctorWhosawhatsit

Ace said:


> Demos are down across the board but it's the women which are dropping heavily.


I was being sardonic lol but it is interesting that the women’s demo is dropping so much.


----------



## Hangman

chrisburr said:


> RAW - Baron Corbin as RAW GM (One of the worst GMS ever)
> 
> Smackdown - A Heel Miz (Turn face or just go away, he is a joke)
> 
> Both - The Commissioners (Yes I think it is time For a New RAW GM and New Commissioners to both Brands)



A face miz?

:HA

Fucking hell fpalm


----------



## Erik.

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

90% of the roster. Let's be honest.


----------



## P Thriller

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

By far the person that sucks the life out of the room the most is Natalya. I swear, I just zone out every time her music hits. Not excitement, no anger, no sadness, just pure absolute 100% boredom. 

The rest are:
Apollo Crews
Baron Corbin
Curt Hawkins
Curtis Axel
Dolph Ziggler
Jinder Mahal
Mojo Rawley
Roman Reigns
Titus O'Neil
Zack Ryder
Big Show
The Colon's
Kane
The Club
Sin Cara
Shelton Benjamin
Lars Sullivan (before he even debuts)
Mandy Rose
SOnya Deville
Alicia Fox
Dana Brooke
Nia Jax
Tamina

That entire list gets no reaction out of me whenever they are on my tv. Bored to hell with all of them. Although I will pop when Roman returns to be honest.


----------



## AlexaBliss4Life

Scholes18 said:


> Really? I watch every single UFC event and if you think Ronda was this beloved figure then you are the one whose tragically misinformed. Go watch her fight with Miesha after the Ultimate Fighter and listen to the crowd. People were cheering Holly Holm and Nunes. People were turned off with Joe Rogan and Dana Whites wankathon over her and ridiculous claims like she could beat Floyd Mayweather.


I'd rather cheer Ronda over Holm...


----------



## Ace

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



MerRIH Nikkimas said:


> Its a cop out to pin it all on on booking, yes the booking sucks ass, no one can deny that. But theres still several wrestlers, notably Becky and Rollins who are presented very well lately and have the hardcore fans blessing and adulation but the ratings still plummet with them on top.
> 
> Its also a cop out to take issue with talents being called ratings killers only when its talents that are well liked. We all labelled Jinder Mahal a ratings killer, well the ratings have sunk even lower with a much more talented worker like AJ Styles on top.
> 
> In a thread discussing ratings killers the AJ Styles, Daniel Bryans, Seth Rollins, Becky Lynches, etc have to be mentioned because they're the ones on top, they're the ones headlining shows that hit record low ratings.
> 
> 
> 
> I dont really see the big issue, when Reigns is on top we blame him, when Jinder is on top we blame him, etc.
> 
> The axis have turned in that its more well respected and beloved wrestlers on top now but the ratings are still plummeting. Booking is an issue no doubt, I addressed that in my first post in this thread. But if we're talking about ratings killers then if a show with Seth Rollins opening and closing the show does terrible numbers its fair to say hes a ratings killer, if a show headlined by Becky, Charlotte and Asuka does terrible numbers its fair to suggest they're ratings killers. Its a fair assumption that every top wrestler of this era is a ratings killer right now because none of them are reversing the downward slide.


 You're really going to put AJ into this? He was booked like a midcard champion on his own show after WM, he wasn't the top star - he was below Bryan (most Bryan marks acknowledged he was featured the most), Charlotte (more main events AND opening segments than AJ - the prominent spots for their top stars) and Becky (of late). 

It was by coincidence but around the time ratings really started to drop. This should absolve AJ of blame because, sure he was champion but he was either not on the show most weeks, on for 2 mins backstage, or in some random segment (2nd segment of the show filler, or segment in the middle of the second hr - which are notable dead spots). I went on about this for months because it made him and the world title look so bad. I even went on about him dropping the title so he could be featured more because he couldn't possibly do worse and being a midcard champion was making him look like a geek, most months he was doing at best 30-40 mins of TV combined TV time.

I blame it on devaluing their main event scene so much and pushing undercard stories above what should be the biggest title and star on the show (World Championship and World Champion). AJ has lost the title and I feel the same way, Bryan should be the top star of the show and the WWE Championship should be the top title, but they've pushed him aside for the womens championship, Becky and Charlotte.


----------



## Krin

Apollo Crews. This guy is just too nervous or shy. I've seen some moments of greatness with him in the ring but as a character he's incredibly boring.


----------



## CNB

*What’s one event that could happen on Raw...that would get ratings over 4 million the following week?*

Some options
- Stone Cold announces comeback. 5+ Million
- CM Punk returns. 3+ Million
- Jericho comes back with IWGP Title. 3+Million
- Kenny Omega debuts 4+ Million
- The Elite debuts. 3.5+ Million
- Someone dies and tribute show for them. 4+ Million
- The Rock announces RR 2019 return. 3+ Million
- John Cena returns. 3+ Million
- Vince fires Corbin. 2.1 Million


----------



## The Sharpshooter

*Re: What’s one event that could happen on Raw...that would get ratings over 4 million the following week?*

There isn't anything unless they announce Trump is appearing on Raw to announce his resignation.


----------



## Sincere

*Re: What’s one event that could happen on Raw...that would get ratings over 4 million the following week?*

None of the above.


----------



## utvolzac

*Re: What’s one event that could happen on Raw...that would get ratings over 4 million the following week?*

Sadly probably none of those things, it would be something completely ridiculous like Kim Kardashian and Kanye attacking HHH & Stephanie.

Wrestling is dead for mainstream casuals


----------



## 751161

*Re: What’s one event that could happen on Raw...that would get ratings over 4 million the following week?*


----------



## Erik.

Nothing.

They'd be lucky to get 4,000,000 again in their history and that'd probably just be a Raw 2000 show or something where legends are announced and perhaps a one off Rock/Austin tag team special.


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



RapShepard said:


> The top guys right now should get the blame (as well as booking) but as you said because they're well liked in the hardcore fandom they won't be held accountable. People would have to admit maybe they aren't the big draw folk like to think. The fact of the matter is they aren't encouraging people to start watching wrestling any more than Cena, Lesnar, Orton, Reigns, or Jinder were. Sure some of that is done to creative, but a lot of it comes down to no wrestler in a long time has inspired fans to come in. The fact SmackDown has the 2 hottest acts in the company attached to storylines most seem to enjoy, yet SmackDown is still going down on the ratings is sad. Like


Exactly, there's a bit of hypocrisy when it comes to this. But by definition Rollins, Styles, Bryan, etc are ratings killers. They're on top and the ratings are plummeting. DB has been crazy over in the past, and even now what he's doing is widely praised but thats not enough. Theseguys just dont really click with the wider audience.



Dr. Bexmas said:


> For years now I think WWE has shifted its focus from presenting guys like Stone Cold and The Rock as megastars bigger than even the company themselves, to promoting WWE itself as the draw, with the wrestlers featured within it, wherever on the card they may be.
> 
> Realistically, there's probably little in the way of anybody who makes any significant gains or losses in ratings, because there isn't somebody there who can do that, and they aren't pushing anybody bigger than WWE themselves. Wrestlers like Becky or Rollins, while I may love their work and think they are doing an excellent job all around, are only allowed to reach a specific ceiling created by WWE. Even Roman Reigns, FOTC, was the same way.
> 
> This is just one of many reasons for why their ratings continue to decrease though, including booking problems, declining tv ratings overall for cable in general, wrestling becoming more niche and less mainstream, etc among other things.
> 
> And honestly, I've enjoyed Smackdown for months upon months now. Sure, my favorite wrestler having the title has helped, but crowd response to their women's division has been extremely positive, Bryan/Styles is shaping into a great program, and even the US title and tag title pictures are entertaining. Its fine if you disagree, but to me, there's a rather large gap in quality between the two shows that I just don't understand, even when Raw is still supposed to be the A show.


WWE does sabotage its own roster we all know that, the talents are only allowed to get as over as they're told too and such. Within a discussion about ratings killers though its only fair to hold the wrestlers who are on top accountable. As I said before when it was certain other wrestlers on top, like Jinders run as WWE Champ everyone blamed the ratings dropping on Jinder, but when AJ Styles won the belt and the ratings didn't turn around that narrative went away. It doesn't matter how good someone may technically be, it doesn't mean they'll be a draw.

And yes theres a clear quality difference between Raw and SmackDown. Part of that is down to SDL having a stacked roster even if most of them are misused

Now this isn't directed at you, its more of a general comment but there's a lot of hypocrisy with this. Its easy for all of us to blame the wrestlers we dont like, its easy for people to say Baron Corbin is a ratings killer because he's unpopular but people dont want to acknowledge that the likes of Seth Rollins are tanking the ratings as well. I do get it, we want our favourites to be perfect. We want our favourites to be charismatic, flawlessly talented and big stars that the world flocks too. I just feel if we're collectively going to blast Jinder and co. for being ratings killers when they're on top its poor form to ignore when the popular wrestlers are clearly ratings killers.



Ace said:


> You're really going to put AJ into this? He was booked like a midcard champion on his own show after WM, he wasn't the top star - he was below Bryan (most Bryan marks acknowledged he was featured the most), Charlotte (more main events AND opening segments than AJ - the prominent spots for their top stars) and Becky (of late).
> 
> It was by coincidence but around the time ratings really started to drop. This should absolve AJ of blame because, sure he was champion but he was either not on the show most weeks, on for 2 mins backstage, or in some random segment (2nd segment of the show filler, or segment in the middle of the second hr - which are notable dead spots). I went o7\
> n about this for months because it made him and the world title look so b*/ad. I even went on about him dropping the title so he could be featured more because he couldn't possibly do worse and being a midcard champion was making him look like a geek, most months he was doing at best 30-40 mins of TV combined TV time.
> 
> I blame it on devaluing their main event scene so much and pushing undercard stories above what should be the biggest title and star on the show (World Championship and World Champion). AJ has lost the title and I feel the same way, Bryan should be the top star of the show and the WWE Championship should be the top title, but they've pushed him aside for the womens championship, Becky and Charlotte.


The WWE Title is irrelevant and AJ's Title reign was handled so poorly but he was still one of the centrepieces of SmackDown


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



MerRIH Nikkimas said:


> WWE does sabotage its own roster we all know that, the talents are only allowed to get as over as they're told too and such. Within a discussion about ratings killers though its only fair to hold the wrestlers who are on top accountable. As I said before when it was certain other wrestlers on top, like Jinders run as WWE Champ everyone blamed the ratings dropping on Jinder, but when AJ Styles won the belt and the ratings didn't turn around that narrative went away. It doesn't matter how good someone may technically be, it doesn't mean they'll be a draw.
> 
> And yes theres a clear quality difference between Raw and SmackDown. Part of that is down to SDL having a stacked roster even if most of them are misused
> 
> Now this isn't directed at you, its more of a general comment but there's a lot of hypocrisy with this. Its easy for all of us to blame the wrestlers we dont like, its easy for people to say Baron Corbin is a ratings killer because he's unpopular but people dont want to acknowledge that the likes of Seth Rollins are tanking the ratings as well. I do get it, we want our favourites to be perfect. We want our favourites to be charismatic, flawlessly talented and big stars that the world flocks too. I just feel if we're collectively going to blast Jinder and co. for being ratings killers when they're on top its poor form to ignore when the popular wrestlers are clearly ratings killers.


I agree with you on the hypocrisy of the thread, because it has turned more into "wrestlers I don't like" more than anything. 

But really, I think that the wrestlers haven't been to blame for years now, even back to when Cena was still on top. Take somebody like Daniel Bryan. Excellent heel character, still is a top flight wrestler, actually gets good crowd heat and is cutting some of his best WWE promos. The dude can't really do anything more than he already is, yet ratings really haven't rose or anything. It's hard to blame him for that, what else is he supposed to do, as he's doing everything a good wrestling heel should be doing. 

I still believe its more so the reasons I mentioned and the company itself to blame way more than any wrestler on their ever expanding roster.


----------



## Brodus Clay

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

Drew the new darling on this place has no reaction, hope he gets the title soon just to see people here still defending him.


----------



## Donnie

*Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*



> As we wrote about earlier, Vince McMahon is scheduled to appear on Monday Night Raw and WWE says he will be there to “shake things up.” McMahon’s appearance is a reaction to the ratings decline.
> 
> McMahon apparently has something big in mind for next month that he believes will get people interested in the product again. Bryan Alvarez talked about this today on Wrestling Observer Live.
> 
> Alvarez said, “for those of you that hate Raw, all I can do is tell you that the belief within WWE is that…take this for what it’s worth. They believe it’s all turning around in January. Apparently, they’ve got some sort of idea and they think it’s all turning around in January and that the ratings in January are gonna be good again and the show is gonna be better and something big is gonna happen.”
> 
> Alvarez cautioned everyone to be careful with speculation. “Of course, everybody is going to be speculating all sorts of crazy things [like] The Young Bucks, this and that. Don’t get your hopes up for that stuff everybody.”
> 
> Alvarez continued, “they seem to believe that starting in January, this thing is turning around.”
> 
> For WWE’s sake, they should hope that things turn around next month because the Royal Rumble is the official start of WrestleMania season and they need ratings to be up so they can sell Mania to more people.


Source: https://wrestlingnews.co/wwe-news/v...big-planned-to-get-wwe-ratings-up-next-month/


----------



## MC

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

Vince vs Stephanie LIVE ON RAW :vince5

In all seriousness, I'm glad they will TRY to do something big to draw viewers. They have been coasting for a good while now and everything just seems lazy and rehashed. But what WWE thinks is money, isn't always that. Maybe they can earn some goodwill back in their attempts to spice up the show. Hopefully, I dunno. Will have to wait and see.


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



Dr. Bexmas said:


> I agree with you on the hypocrisy of the thread, because it has turned more into "wrestlers I don't like" more than anything.
> 
> But really, I think that the wrestlers haven't been to blame for years now, even back to when Cena was still on top. Take somebody like Daniel Bryan. Excellent heel character, still is a top flight wrestler, actually gets good crowd heat and is cutting some of his best WWE promos. The dude can't really do anything more than he already is, yet ratings really haven't rose or anything. It's hard to blame him for that, what else is he supposed to do, as he's doing everything a good wrestling heel should be doing.
> 
> I still believe its more so the reasons I mentioned and the company itself to blame way more than any wrestler on their ever expanding roster.


These threads always descend into a “wrestlers I don’t like” thread sadly. I can’t remember if it’s this exact thread but I remember seeing Daniel Bryan’s name mentioned in regards to being uncharismatic.

The WWE itself is to blame for the slump, I think most of this roster is terrible but the WWE don’t help, they do everything in the worst possible way. But within the confines of a ratings killer thread it makes sense to mention the wrestlers that aren’t helping the ratings, which is all of them, not just the Baron Corbins which some people want to pin all the blame on.

As a side point it’s ridiculous how much hate Baron gets, especially compared to Braun. Corbin is a vastly superior pro wrestler in every way to Strowman.


----------



## Sensei Utero

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*


----------



## Master Bate

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

I would insert negative stuff here.

But I'm actually hyped to see what happens. Hopefully Wrestlemania season starts off with a bang.


----------



## Eric Fleischer

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

All this means is they expect people to start watching because it's Mania season and the Rumble is the most popular PPV. Click bait bull crap.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

Will believe it when I see it. This 'news' coming from a Meltzer guy doesn't exactly give me confidence that this is actually true, either..


----------



## virus21

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

A diva orgy while Fozzy plays at the entrance and a random audience member gets to punch each member of the announcing team in the gut?


----------



## Chris JeriG.O.A.T

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

Vince is so out of touch that whatever he has in mind is probably going to make the product worse not better.


----------



## Ace

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

More toilet humor? :fuckyeah


----------



## llj

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*



Santa With Muscles said:


>


The editing here was pretty slick. Looked like one seamless shot.


----------



## virus21

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

CM Punk returns




















Someone was going to say it.


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



MerRIH Nikkimas said:


> These threads always descend into a “wrestlers I don’t like” thread sadly. I can’t remember if it’s this exact thread but I remember seeing Daniel Bryan’s name mentioned in regards to being uncharismatic.
> 
> The WWE itself is to blame for the slump, I think most of this roster is terrible but the WWE don’t help, they do everything in the worst possible way. But within the confines of a ratings killer thread it makes sense to mention the wrestlers that aren’t helping the ratings, which is all of them, not just the Baron Corbins which some people want to pin all the blame on.
> 
> As a side point it’s ridiculous how much hate Baron gets, especially compared to Braun. Corbin is a vastly superior pro wrestler in every way to Strowman.


We'll just have to agree to disagree, which is fine.

I actually somewhat like Corbin in small amounts. He would work as a goofy bully heel type, but his problem is just how much he is featured, which is an ungodly amount. If he was in maybe just a midcard feud and not on the show for nearly an hour, people won't hate him so much.


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

I'm scared, but curious.

Maybe we'll have all the Mcmahons for all three hours or some bullshit like that :vince


----------



## Bestiswaswillbe

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*



Santa With Muscles said:


>


Stupid crispan wah. I always wanted to know where that story was going.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

Road to Mania is the highest rated time of the year, so I do not expect much.


----------



## The Quintessential Mark

virus21 said:


> CM Punk returns
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Someone was going to say it.


That WOULD probably give Raw its highest rating to date if that happened


----------



## Donnie

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*



Dr. Bexmas said:


> I'm scared, but curious.
> 
> Maybe we'll have all the Mcmahons for all three hours or some bullshit like that :vince


:shane vs :rollins for the title of BEST IN DA WORLD :vince$


----------



## TD Stinger

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

I mean it's fun to guess at what this could mean.

But honestly I guarantee that this speculation amounts to nothing come January.


----------



## WWEfan4eva

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

I want a Bayley/Sasha feud we never got


----------



## Shellyrocks

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

What can Vince possibly do to make Raw better hes lost Roman as hes out with cancer, Braun is injured and Brock doesnt give a fuck


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

Shane beats Brock and then Bryan to unify the titles. WWE needs more McMahon dominance, *DAMN IT!*. :vince5 :shane


----------



## DoctorWhosawhatsit

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

Uh huh, sure.


----------



## Ace

*Re: WON: Less women watching even with more time being devoted to the women & Ronda positioned as the biggest star in the company*



Dibil13 said:


> I think most female fans honestly don't give a shit about women's wrestling and would rather watch men.


 Most female fans I know and have seen prefer males. It's mostly the extremist, feminists and really hardcore weirdo guys who like the women that I've seen. 

Most others don't hate it, but they aren't big fans of it either. They like and appreciate good wrestling irrespective of gender.



Erik. said:


> Nothing.
> 
> They'd be lucky to get 4,000,000 again in their history and that'd probably just be a Raw 2000 show or something where legends are announced and perhaps a one off Rock/Austin tag team special.


 Dude, who are you kididng... they'd be lucky to crack 3.5m... SD 1000 did a horrific number with Evolution and Taker advertised, it barely beat Raw drawing ~2.4m :lmao


----------



## Swindle

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

If it's just a new GM, no one is going to care.


----------



## Prosper

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*



virus21 said:


> CM Punk returns
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Someone was going to say it.




Shit that would get me to start watching again. :CENA :draper2


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

GUEST ERA WILL START AGAIN

:mark:


----------



## DGenerationMC

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

Gonna wrestle?


----------



## juice4080

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

lol how completely disconnected from reality must someone be to think that the young bucks would move the needle in the slightest bit


----------



## NotGuilty

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

I will take a guess:
1. DX returning again (what a shocker)
2. Stephanie getting more tv time again ( oh please )
3. an exciting new feud like Natalya vs Riot squad or Dean vs Seth


----------



## Dave Santos

Erik. said:


> Nothing.
> 
> They'd be lucky to get 4,000,000 again in their history and that'd probably just be a Raw 2000 show or something where legends are announced and perhaps a one off Rock/Austin tag team special.


They did over 4 mil (possibly around 4.5) at raw 25. Would have to be a special event, or a finale show.


----------



## Sincere

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

Their big plan is Royal Rumble season and the Road to Wrestlemania...?


----------



## Kratosx23

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

Oh boy, Vince has an idea. Get scared.



Bestiswaswillbe said:


> Stupid crispan wah. I always wanted to know where that story was going.


One of the former writers actually talked about this a long time ago. The broad strokes of the angle was that Vince and Mr. Kennedy, who was supposed to be Vinces illegitimate son, faked Vinces death and Vince was going to cut Stephanie and Shane out of his will and leave the company to Kennedy, which would then culminate in a WWE title match and battle for the company between Kennedy and Triple H at WM 24.


----------



## chrisburr

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*



SPCDRI said:


> GUEST ERA WILL START AGAIN
> 
> :mark:


Yes I hope so!

We need guest commissioners and guest GMs per week again. That was fun!


----------



## Donnie

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

Vince announces a DRAFT

Vince announces that wrestlers from all THREE brands AND 205 LIVE will be competing on each show. 

Vince fires Baron and replaces him with Bliss, and this shit continues. 

Yeah, I think we know which is more likely.


----------



## Rick Sanchez

Only one man could come back and get 4 million.

unk2 unk2 unk2 unk2


----------



## percy pringle

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

He's going to announce that the Christmas RAW will become "The McMahon Family Spectacular." 

It will feature all of the McMahons and their families. Will do at least four musical numbers, include a retrospective on the "toilet humor" aspects of the shows through the years, a Christmas dinner food fight including the McMahon family members we usually never see, the children of Steph and Shane in a battle royal where the winner gets a future cruiserwight championship match, and lastly a visit from Jamison being the big surprise of the night.


----------



## Lord Trigon

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

In what universe has someone like Billie Kay gotten a lot of focus?

They choose rely on the brand to draw nowadays so the brand is who I'll blame.


----------



## deepelemblues

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

Return of bra and panties matches and mud wrestling and teasing that the hot women wrestlers are lesbians or even better bisexual and the king saying puppies 200x a night? :mark: :mark: :mark:


----------



## BrokenFreakingNeck

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

Finally the conclusion to the Chris Benoit storyline.


----------



## Mear

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

January is the start of the Road to Wrestlemania. They should've something big planned regardless of the rating if they were competent...


----------



## deathvalleydriver2

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

Chris Benoit returns and says he was never dead and that he was hiding in Cuba with Tupac


----------



## CM Buck

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

The incest angle between steph and Vince finally happening leading up to Vince vs trips in a ladder match for the custody of stephs children?


----------



## JML83

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

Step #1 - Keep you and your family out of it..Shane won that greatest belt (I know the story...Let me guess Stephanie will somehow be part of IF it happens the 1st "'ever"womens tag titles

Step 2 - Listen to your fans...simple

Step 3 - Listen to your talent/employees...They arent all billionaires that can sit back and just watch..THIS is some peoples bread and butter...this it what the do to support not only themselves their family as well

Step 3 - Pass the torch onto someone that knows how the business works these days.


----------



## Jersey

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*


----------



## deepelemblues

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

The Really Big Thing That Is Almost Solely Intended To Spike Interest In The Filthy Ignorant Casuals For Buying WrestleMania And Will Be More Of The Same And Mean Nothing Era begins in January!

Aren't you excited, like this? :Vince


----------



## squarebox

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

He's planning to retire?


----------



## Bestiswaswillbe

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*



Tyrion Lannister said:


> Oh boy, Vince has an idea. Get scared.
> 
> 
> 
> One of the former writers actually talked about this a long time ago. The broad strokes of the angle was that Vince and Mr. Kennedy, who was supposed to be Vinces illegitimate son, faked Vinces death and Vince was going to cut Stephanie and Shane out of his will and leave the company to Kennedy, which would then culminate in a WWE title match and battle for the company between Kennedy and Triple H at WM 24.


Sounds like a big let down


----------



## Adarsh santhosh

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

There is nothing exciting with wwe nowadays.

Since,2002 wwe raw ratings has gone up than previous year on 3 occasions.

2005,2009 and 2014.

2005 saw rise of Cena,Orton and Batista.

2009 Randy was going psycho against McMahons,Kofi,Cena etc. 
Jeff vs Punk.

2014 had Bryan vs Authority,Shield attacks,Evolition,Streak Broken.

2016 sd also saw good ratings because of Cena,AJ and Ambrose,Orton and Wyatt and even heath Rhyno storyline.

Compare that to now, we have Corbin,Lashley,Drew,Nia etc.

Exciting thing was Becky.But,she comes off as cringey now.

Why haven't we seen an Orton vs AJ feud?

Last time they had a match on sd ,ratings went from 2.4 to 2.78 even when it was only announced mere days before smackdown.


----------



## Makish16

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

In order of importance 

1. Conor McGregor or The Rock

2. A bunch of part-timers (batista, Hbk, taker,Brock etc.)

3. Return of Jason Jordan or Roman Reigns

4. CM PUNK

5. Push AJ or Rollins to beat Brock 

6. Bullet club invasion

7. Throw money at Mma guys who are less popular than Conor 

8. Something with the women

FYI it's either 1 or 2

Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk


----------



## emerald-fire

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



MerRIH Nikkimas said:


> As a side point it’s ridiculous how much hate Baron gets, especially compared to Braun. Corbin is a vastly superior pro wrestler in every way to Strowman.


----------



## Arya Dark

*btw I think the women's revolution is far more important to little girls than any of the grown women like me that watch the show. I do think it's having a big impact on the little ones.*


----------



## Swindle

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

Having an idea is better than not having an idea. But you could easily say Vince Russo had ideas, but 9 out of 10 of them were bad. Also, one idea might not do the trick. Then what?


----------



## zkorejo

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

Vince and his "big plans" :facepalm 

Let me guess.. He will fire Corbin... and name a new GM. Double J or a returning Angle. 

Then the show goes back to the same old shit from next week.


----------



## shadows123

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

Ah his big plan..wonder which of the retired wrestlers is he gonna bring back this time to boost ratings for Mania season?? Hulk hogan perhaps? Hulk Hogan vs Triple H vs Rock for Mania so that Trips can go over both of them??


----------



## Frenetic Zetetic

*Re: Vince McMahon has something big planned to get WWE ratings up next month*

The big plan will most likely be a very sterile, underwhelming reveal.

_"WE'RE DROPPING THE PRICE OF THE NETWORK DOWN TO $8.99!!!"_


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

The writing team.


----------



## The Masked Avenger

Well it was widely reported that Vince completely rewrote the show a few weeks back that made no sense and everyone hated so I could see him announcing a retirement. "Officially" naming Trips as the man whether he actually does it or not, it could get the heat off for a bit and people would come back to see if thing really change. They could use this opportunity to do a hard reset on the Universe and could be the start of a new era.


----------



## Frost99

This years official "theme" for RAW ratings goes as followed.......






At this rate, chances are good for this song repeating as the theme next year to


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



emerald-fire said:


>


I’m glad someone agrees, because especially with them feuding now it’s not said enough. It’s “in” to hate Corbin and Braun is still popular but Baron is so much better than Braun in every area. Braun needs over booking and ridiculous spots to be entertaining, while Baron can have a good straight up match.


----------



## Sportstainment

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

I don't think Corbin is the reason why raw has low rating.


----------



## The Wood

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

It would be interesting to see the quarter-hours to know who it really drops for.


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*

_*I just don't get it...I really don't. You all blame the talent but know they don't book the shows or have creative freedom. The writers, story writers, bookers, Kevin Dunn, Road Dogg and Vince McMahonn are the ones to blame not the fucking talent. fpalm*_


----------



## attituderocks

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



MerRIH Nikkimas said:


> Its a cop out to pin it all on on booking, yes the booking sucks ass, no one can deny that. But theres still several wrestlers, notably Becky and Rollins who are presented very well lately and have the hardcore fans blessing and adulation but the ratings still plummet with them on top.
> 
> Its also a cop out to take issue with talents being called ratings killers only when its talents that are well liked. We all labelled Jinder Mahal a ratings killer, well the ratings have sunk even lower with a much more talented worker like AJ Styles on top.
> 
> In a thread discussing ratings killers the AJ Styles, Daniel Bryans, Seth Rollins, Becky Lynches, etc have to be mentioned because they're the ones on top, they're the ones headlining shows that hit record low ratings.
> 
> 
> 
> I dont really see the big issue, when Reigns is on top we blame him, when Jinder is on top we blame him, etc.
> 
> The axis have turned in that its more well respected and beloved wrestlers on top now but the ratings are still plummeting. Booking is an issue no doubt, I addressed that in my first post in this thread. But if we're talking about ratings killers then if a show with Seth Rollins opening and closing the show does terrible numbers its fair to say hes a ratings killer, if a show headlined by Becky, Charlotte and Asuka does terrible numbers its fair to suggest they're ratings killers. Its a fair assumption that every top wrestler of this era is a ratings killer right now because none of them are reversing the downward slide.


This has been bothering me for a while. I see hate towards Roman, Brock, Goldberg for not being draws. Haters mock them with "Why are they pushed, they don't draw please gtfo." But when it's a smark favorite like Bryan, Rollins, Lynch, etc suddenly it's "No one's a draw. WWE is the draw. Don't blame talent" or "Who cares about numbers. Do you guys work for WWE? Lol get a life." I mean the "no draw" criticism should apply to everyone or no one. You can't pick and choose who to blame for tanking ratings/attendance/revenue.


----------



## ClintDagger

attituderocks said:


> This has been bothering me for a while. I see hate towards Roman, Brock, Goldberg for not being draws. Haters mock them with "Why are they pushed, they don't draw please gtfo." But when it's a smark favorite like Bryan, Rollins, Lynch, etc suddenly it's "No one's a draw. WWE is the draw. Don't blame talent" or "Who cares about numbers. Do you guys work for WWE? Lol get a life." I mean the "no draw" criticism should apply to everyone or no one. You can't pick and choose who to blame for tanking ratings/attendance/revenue.


No one you mentioned has got the Brock / Roman / Goldberg treatment. I doubt they are draws anyway, but it’s not apples to apples.


----------



## Ace

Vince is going to boost the ratings for both shows this week, but they're stuffed from next week.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Vince will pop a rating, but it's mostly to set the table for his January programming. The last RAW of the year will plumb new depths.


----------



## SPCDRI

Talking about a McMahon or a part timer popping a rating is almost like multiplying by zero? What? Pop it twenty percent? Ooh, congrats on less than two and half million people watching hour three. Well done.


----------



## Mear

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



BThSantaClauseSlayer said:


> _*I just don't get it...I really don't. You all blame the talent but know they don't book the shows or have creative freedom. The writers, story writers, bookers, Kevin Dunn, Road Dogg and Vince McMahonn are the ones to blame not the fucking talent. fpalm*_


The talent can be blamed. 

They are talents like The New Day who are capable of reinventing themselves year after year and then, you have others who are happy to do the same thing over and over again. Not just in characters but in the ring, they are very different today than they were 2 years ago. They work hard and it's obvious

The writing team does deserve blame but the talent deserve some too. If they were really good, they would be capable of doing something with what they are given, they would innovate, they would let their charisma talk. The roster today just simply don't have what it takes to main-event, they are all B+ players, upper midcarders at best just like Jericho was in the Attitude Era ( which isn't even a insult, Jericho was awesome back then but he clearly wasn't a Rock or Austin )


----------



## RapShepard

ClintDagger said:


> No one you mentioned has got the Brock / Roman / Goldberg treatment. I doubt they are draws anyway, but it’s not apples to apples.


The notion that they have to get the exact same booking to be judged is crazy.


----------



## Robbyfude

So is Raw good tonight? Or is RapShepard and his WWE apologetic fanboyism going to be the only person watching WWE in a few years?


----------



## mattheel

So I did not watch Raw. I did turn it on with about three minutes left to see what was going on. There was a slow motion replay...of a hug.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I am curious to see two things. How high did Hour 1 spike and how low did Hour 3 go?


----------



## ClintDagger

RapShepard said:


> The notion that they have to get the exact same booking to be judged is crazy.


I didn’t say booking, I said treatment. There’s a huge difference.


----------



## ste1592

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



attituderocks said:


> This has been bothering me for a while. I see hate towards Roman, Brock, Goldberg for not being draws. Haters mock them with "*Why are they pushed, they don't draw please gtfo*." But when it's a smark favorite like Bryan, Rollins, Lynch, etc suddenly it's "*No one's a draw. WWE is the draw. Don't blame talent*" or "Who cares about numbers. Do you guys work for WWE? Lol get a life." I mean the "no draw" criticism should apply to everyone or no one. You can't pick and choose who to blame for tanking ratings/attendance/revenue.


How are the two things in bold different? It's the exact same thing, just slightly exagerated in the first case.

And that exageration, since I know you'll ask, it's there to point out that if nobody draws, why should Vince's favourite be pushed above mine? I HATED Cena's run, but in hindsight for good part of it they had a very good reason to push him. Now there is no Cena, everyone on top will get the same results and it won't change a bit, they're all cogs in a wheel.

If there has to be a non-draw on top, I want it to be my non-draw, not Vince's. You can say it's selfish and childish, and I won't dispute that, but you can't say it's illogical.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The idea behind Hour 3 last night was the thought that once people watch the beginning of a match, they will want to see the end. Therefore put on a very long match o try and prevent viewer bleed. The thing is, that match wasn't interesting and I think the plan is doomed to fail. We shall see very soon.


----------



## JDP2016

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



attituderocks said:


> This has been bothering me for a while. I see hate towards Roman, Brock, Goldberg for not being draws. Haters mock them with "Why are they pushed, they don't draw please gtfo." But when it's a smark favorite like Bryan, Rollins, Lynch, etc suddenly it's "No one's a draw. WWE is the draw. Don't blame talent" or "Who cares about numbers. Do you guys work for WWE? Lol get a life." I mean the "no draw" criticism should apply to everyone or no one. You can't pick and choose who to blame for tanking ratings/attendance/revenue.


You should know by know wrestling fans are not an objective bunch. They only care for their favorites to win, even if it doesn't make any sense in terms of storytelling.


----------



## ste1592

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



JDP2016 said:


> They only care for their favorites to win, even if it doesn't make any sense in terms of storytelling.


If it was like that, imagine how dense Vince McMahon is to push anyone who isn't a fan favourite.

Unbelievable, you're actually trying to say WWE's booking would be decent but since they bend over backward to please wrestling fans, the product sucks. And I thought I had seen everything.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1075062413433692161
This was a boring 12-9 game. The NFL is bulletproof again.


----------



## Jonhern

Showstopper said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1075062413433692161
> This was a boring 12-9 game. The NFL is bulletproof again.


I didn't watch whole thing, but a 12-9 game doesn't necessarily mean it is boring. And it came down to the final minute so people would have stayed on the game.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Jonhern said:


> I didn't watch whole thing, but a 12-9 game doesn't necessarily mean it is boring. And it came down to the final minute so people would have stayed on the game.


True, but generally speaking in today's NFL, a low-scoring game like that isn't a very exciting game. Saints are the best team in the league, though. Panthers aren't having a very good year.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.717M
H2- 2.558M
H3- 2.367M
3H- 2.547M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 5.85% / - 0.159M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 7.47% / - 0.191M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 12.88% / - 0.350M )
12/17/18 Vs 12/10/18 ( + 16.09% / + 0.353M )

Demo (12/17/18 Vs 12/10/18):
H1- 0.930D Vs 0.780D
H2- 0.870D Vs 0.760D
H3- 0.780D Vs 0.730D
3H- 0.860D Vs 0.757D

Note: RAW is 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 5th, 6th & 8th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (12/17/18 Vs 12/18/17):
H1- 2.717M Vs 3.085M
H2- 2.558M Vs 2.803M
H3- 2.367M Vs 2.470M
3H- 2.547M Vs 2.786M ( - 8.58% / - 0.239M )

Demo (12/17/18 Vs 12/18/17):
H1- 0.930D Vs 0.980D
H2- 0.870D Vs 0.900D
H3- 0.780D Vs 0.830D
3H- 0.860D Vs 0.903D

Note: RAW this week last year was 3rd, 4th & 5th by hourly demo & 2nd, 4th & 9th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Ace

Big improvement from previous weeks, hope it's back down from hereon because shit ain't changing.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Vince proves he is somewhat of a draw but his powers will see diminishing returns the more he appears. It was up 16% week to week which is good but was expected after the record lows. The good news for WWE is that the NFL is going away and the Road to Mania begins. WWE always has higher ratings then but look for Vince to attribute it to his "New Era".

EDIT: Still down in every metric year to year. :heston


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

January is the real test. Espeically when these 'changes' and 'new faces' make their appearances. The Road to RR/WM. That's the test.


----------



## Ibracadabra

Damn.. Vince is the biggest draw in the company


----------



## ClintDagger

You would think what they did last night would backfire on them. Create buzz, hint at something big, then do nothing materially different.


----------



## Dave Santos

Remember this Monday had a ppv bump, plus vince saging their were changes. Next week is chritmas and most likely a dead crowd from the 6 hour show.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Vince is the only ratings spiker card that WWE has left. And even that can only be played once every few months. I do think the ratings would improve if the Mr McMahon character was brought back full time for nostalgia reasons.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Not to belabor a point, but note which show's ratings worried Vince. No watch Smackdown for a big announcement or at last try to spread it over both shows. There is only one show which is the golden child and one the red headed stepchild.


----------



## Jedah

No need. SmackDown's ratings mirror Raw's ratings. If one rises, so will the other and vice versa. The SD line curves along with the Raw line but never reaches it. They know this. Quite frankly, SD is doing fine enough on its own right now but just has the misfortune to be Raw's bratty little sibling.

I do find it interesting though with some of the decisions they've started to make recently. Maybe these ghastly ratings and the big bleeds they've had have finally woken them up that they need to change their approach. Losing 15-20% of your audience in a year in a way that exceeds other shows has to send some wakeup calls, especially when Fox has certain expectations for how well your show will do.


----------



## DoolieNoted

3M for SmackDown tonight then? 8*D


----------



## JDP2016

*Re: Biggest Ratings Killers/ Charisma Vacuums in WWE Today?*



ste1592 said:


> If it was like that, imagine how dense Vince McMahon is to push anyone who isn't a fan favourite.
> 
> Unbelievable, you're actually trying to say WWE's booking would be decent but since they bend over backward to please wrestling fans, the product sucks. And I thought I had seen everything.


That is not what I'm saying.

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## Chrome

ClintDagger said:


> You would think what they did last night would backfire on them. Create buzz, hint at something big, then do nothing materially different.


It'll backfire eventually, not last night but in the weeks and months to come. This was their chance to reel back some of the audience that left but they fucked up as usual lol. Nobody was clamoring for the McMahons to return to TV nor asking for more NXT callups that they'll just misuse.


----------



## ClintDagger

Chrome said:


> It'll backfire eventually, not last night but in the weeks and months to come. This was their chance to reel back some of the audience that left but they fucked up as usual lol. Nobody was clamoring for the McMahons to return to TV nor asking for more NXT callups that they'll just misuse.


It just seems like this is a tactic you can’t use more than a few times before people are conditioned to think WWE will just cry wolf and not actually deliver on anything; so why tune in for Vince’s next “big announcement” when they are desperate and want a ratings bounce?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Just watch as they go to the Vince well once too often and his appearances don't move the ratings needle either.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SHIVVY POO IV: THE FINAL CHAPTER said:


> Just watch as they go to the Vince well once too often and his appearances don't move the ratings needle either.


Yep. They're already doing that with him being on SD tonight. Two nights in a row already. :lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Showstopper said:


> Yep. They're already doing that with him being on SD tonight. Two nights in a row already. :lol


If it goes up tonight it's a result of an unadvertised Vince appearance, not the traditional ppv bump. :vince$


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SHIVVY POO IV: THE FINAL CHAPTER said:


> If it goes up tonight it's a result of an unadvertised Vince appearance, not the traditional ppv bump. :vince$


:lol In Vince's mind, that's definitely what it will be. Ugh. Can't wait to see them on just about every Raw and SD starting in January. Brutal.


----------



## RapShepard

ClintDagger said:


> I didn’t say booking, I said treatment. There’s a huge difference.


What's the difference then?


----------



## ClintDagger

RapShepard said:


> What's the difference then?


I don’t want to make a tldr post, really it should be self explanatory. It’s all about what assets WWE values and what investment and / or protection they give those assets. Think about if you owned a fleet of cars and you had 2 or 3 that you valued above the rest. Those are going to get the 5 star treatment. They get to be garaged, they get to be waxed and detailed more often, and when you pull them all out in the sunshine it’s going to be apparent which got the top notch treatment and which didn’t. Vince is only human, he’s not going to treat every wrestler the same. The ones he values most are going to have a leg up on the also rans. Then when all of a sudden his favorites are gone and he’s only left with the also rans, he can’t just snap his fingers and undo the neglect he’s shown them. The audience has witnessed the difference in treatment and they are conditioned to think that group A are the head turners, and group B is just filler.


----------



## RapShepard

ClintDagger said:


> I don’t want to make a tldr post, really it should be self explanatory. It’s all about what assets WWE values and what investment and / or protection they give those assets. Think about if you owned a fleet of cars and you had 2 or 3 that you valued above the rest. Those are going to get the 5 star treatment. They get to be garaged, they get to be waxed and detailed more often, and when you pull them all out in the sunshine it’s going to be apparent which got the top notch treatment and which didn’t. Vince is only human, he’s not going to treat every wrestler the same. The ones he values most are going to have a leg up on the also rans. Then when all of a sudden his favorites are gone and he’s only left with the also rans, he can’t just snap his fingers and undo the neglect he’s shown them. The audience has witnessed the difference in treatment and they are conditioned to think that group A are the head turners, and group B is just filler.


But that still sounds like booking, though you know. For example "Rollins and Braun didn't get Reigns clear top guy booking, so it's hard to blame them if the ratings fall some because they aren't the clear top guys."


----------



## ClintDagger

RapShepard said:


> But that still sounds like booking, though you know. For example "Rollins and Braun didn't get Reigns clear top guy booking, so it's hard to blame them if the ratings fall some because they aren't the clear top guys."


It’s not booking. Brock and Reigns both get top guy treatment but are booked completely different.


----------



## RapShepard

ClintDagger said:


> It’s not booking. Brock and Reigns both get top guy treatment but are booked completely different.


Well yeah not all top guy booking is the exact same see Austin, Rock, Taker, and HHH or Hogan and Savage. Like I'd still disagree about not being blamed, but I'd get if you were using the booking. But treatment I'm honestly lost on the separation of booking and treatment, as they seem to go hand in hand.


----------



## ClintDagger

RapShepard said:


> Well yeah not all top guy booking is the exact same see Austin, Rock, Taker, and HHH or Hogan and Savage. Like I'd still disagree about not being blamed, but I'd get if you were using the booking. But treatment I'm honestly lost on the separation of booking and treatment, as they seem to go hand in hand.


You’re thinking too one dimensional. Think about merchandising, marketing, promotion, how and what you push to the networks; I could go on and on. All of that happens outside the show itself, but it still translates and gets noticed by the viewer. That’s what I’m talking about when you take those favorite assets of yours and give them that special shine that the rest don’t get. All of that goes way beyond booking. You’re not really behind a guy (or gal) and giving them true top guy treatment if you’re not maximizing all of those other channels. It’s clear to fans who the focal points are, and who the supporting cast is.


----------



## RapShepard

ClintDagger said:


> You’re thinking too one dimensional. Think about merchandising, marketing, promotion, how and what you push to the networks; I could go on and on. All of that happens outside the show itself, but it still translates and gets noticed by the viewer. That’s what I’m talking about when you take those favorite assets of yours and give them that special shine that the rest don’t get. All of that goes way beyond booking. You’re not really behind a guy (or gal) and giving them true top guy treatment if you’re not maximizing all of those other channels. It’s clear to fans who the focal points are, and who the supporting cast is.


 Rollins has 40 pieces of merch to Reigns 33. Braun has 23 pieces of merch to Lesnar's 7. So when it comes to merch are they really being not treated like top guys? 


Rollins was put on the cover of the game as far as marketing goes. They're making sure to promote Braun will be in Holmes & Watson and like Reigns he's once again getting to work with Brock. They're both promoted heavily in WWE branded advertisement. So how are they not treated like top guys in marketing and promotion. 

I think folk here lose sight of how good Seth and Braun got it. Are they the 1a and 1b no, but they're definitely the 2 and 3 guys. The fans react to them like top guys. They get top guy TV time and spots. They're clearly big focal points, it just seems the only people who don't see that are those that are convinced only Reigns and Brock mattered.


----------



## ClintDagger

RapShepard said:


> Rollins has 40 pieces of merch to Reigns 33. Braun has 23 pieces of merch to Lesnar's 7. So when it comes to merch are they really being not treated like top guys?
> 
> 
> Rollins was put on the cover of the game as far as marketing goes. They're making sure to promote Braun will be in Holmes & Watson and like Reigns he's once again getting to work with Brock. They're both promoted heavily in WWE branded advertisement. So how are they not treated like top guys in marketing and promotion.
> 
> I think folk here lose sight of how good Seth and Braun got it. Are they the 1a and 1b no, but they're definitely the 2 and 3 guys. The fans react to them like top guys. They get top guy TV time and spots. They're clearly big focal points, it just seems the only people who don't see that are those that are convinced only Reigns and Brock mattered.


If you think WWE put anywhere near the same effort behind a guy like Rollins as they did guys like Cena & Reigns then I can’t help you.


----------



## RapShepard

ClintDagger said:


> If you think WWE put anywhere near the same effort behind a guy like Rollins as they did guys like Cena & Reigns then I can’t help you.


I mean aren't we talking about the same Rollins who still has spent more time as Reigns as a world champion. Has beat Reigns multiple times for world championships. Has wins over Reigns, Orton, Cena, Sting, Ambrose, and HHH? Is a grand slam champion and MitB winner. I mean outside of Reigns having more Mania main events (which Rollins has one btw) it's really hard see where Rollins is getting vastly inferior treatment.


----------



## ClintDagger

RapShepard said:


> I mean aren't we talking about the same Rollins who still has spent more time as Reigns as a world champion. Has beat Reigns multiple times for world championships. Has wins over Reigns, Orton, Cena, Sting, Ambrose, and HHH? Is a grand slam champion and MitB winner. I mean outside of Reigns having more Mania main events (which Rollins has one btw) it's really hard see where Rollins is getting vastly inferior treatment.


You’re thinking is far too narrow. Merchandising goes way beyond what is rotated on WWE.com. Who wears the title and for how long doesn’t really matter, especially when the belt is intentionally kept off of Reigns in an effort to protect him. Think of Punk’s title reign and who really was the focal point of the company. There’s a reason why Reigns was kept in a certain spot until Mania season but then was always put in the main event once Mania came around. That’s when the people that WWE thinks matters, and I’m not talking about fans, are watching. Probably the only time those people are watching to be honest. WWE is selling a product that revolves around the Brock Lesnars, Ronda Rouseys, John Cenas, and Roman Reigns of the world to Wall Street, to advertisers, and to network execs. Which places all of those people on a much higher plane then guys like Rollins, Ambrose, Bryan, etcetera. The former are the truly values assets and the latter are interchangeable parts in the eyes of WWE.

In any event, I’ve exhausted the topic. If you think the Rollins/Strowman types get Cena, Reigns, Hogan, Austin, etcetera type treatment then I will cease trying to change your mind.


----------



## RapShepard

ClintDagger said:


> You’re thinking is far too narrow. Merchandising goes way beyond what is rotated on WWE.com. Who wears the title and for how long doesn’t really matter, especially when the belt is intentionally kept off of Reigns in an effort to protect him. Think of Punk’s title reign and who really was the focal point of the company. There’s a reason why Reigns was kept in a certain spot until Mania season but then was always put in the main event once Mania came around. That’s when the people that WWE thinks matters, and I’m not talking about fans, are watching. Probably the only time those people are watching to be honest. WWE is selling a product that revolves around the Brock Lesnars, Ronda Rouseys, John Cenas, and Roman Reigns of the world to Wall Street, to advertisers, and to network execs. Which places all of those people on a much higher plane then guys like Rollins, Ambrose, Bryan, etcetera. The former are the truly values assets and the latter are interchangeable parts in the eyes of WWE.
> 
> 
> 
> In any event, I’ve exhausted the topic. If you think the Rollins/Strowman types get Cena, Reigns, Hogan, Austin, etcetera type treatment then I will cease trying to change your mind.



I've never said they got the exact same treatment/booking nobody gets the exact same treatment/booking. But I'd argue you're over thinking the issue. Do you think the average Raw viewer or show attender is sitting there thinking "They don't push Rollins and Braun in the boardroom where it matters. so how can I really get into them"? Heck the average fan doesn't even put this high importance on the Mania main event as fans here do. Most fans don't make the Mania main event the end all be all for what they care about. Rollins and Braun aren't Reigns and Brock. But they've gotten enough on Raw that they should be able to be held accountable for lapsed ratings just like everyone else is. Before Reigns left they were in top storylines and since he's left they've been in the top two storylines on the show.


----------



## IceTheRetroKid

*Look honestly, it adds up to many things but like...I notice that when Roman when out, before we used to have...

- Multiple hot Shield segments (tag segment, singles segment, maybe a promo, could possibly squeeze 3 segments out of this one stable feuding with 3 top heels)
- Braun Strowman on TV
- The Universal Title on TV, with title matches on TV more frequently.


Now, it's like...Roman left, so the shield broke up and now all of those multiple hot shield building segments are gone and all we're left is everything confined to just Dean vs. Seth, who even though the feud is pretty blah, are still the most popular guys left on RAW.

Braun Strowman is now irregular due to HIS injury...

The Universal Championship ISN'T on RAW at all again and hasn't had a title defense since Crown Jewel.

Kevin Owens and Sami Zayn aren't even there to be popular mid-card/upper-mid-card acts to fill out that section of the card so...

You're down to like, your biggest stars on RAW being Seth Rollins, Dean Ambrose and Ronda Rousey. Anything that doesn't have those people in the segment, doesn't contain people with as much of a following and therefore, yes, it's going to be less impactful with less over main eventers.*


----------



## virus21

Older video, but raises valid points


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The ratings this week will be a bloodbath given the holiday effect. It will be an outlier most likely because RAW may dip below 2M. We'll see.


----------



## Erramayhem89

Yep this RAW is going to get below a 2 rating


----------



## xio8ups

800k viewers this week


----------



## Chrome

Well, the MNF game is ASS this week, so that'll help lessen the blow a little. I'm also predicting under 2 million.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Because of Christmas, the earliest we shall get the ratings verdict is tomorrow.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

They've been hovering at 2 million since September/October. Throw in airing on the worst TV night of the year and being taped a week in advance, and it will get lower than 2 million, you'd think, even with a Ronda title defense. Still, it will have an asterisk attached to it due to when it aired and how far in advance it was taped. 

Anyway, like we've been saying. The next test will be January when the holidays are over. That will be interesting.

Back to Christmas.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

No ratings today. The Monday cable ratings will be available tomorrow. Twenty quatloos on the rating being sub 2M. :vince$


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 1.752M
H2- 1.789M
H3- 1.784M
3H- 1.775M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 2.11% / + 0.037M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 0.28% / - 0.005M )
H3 Vs H1 ( + 1.83% / + 0.032M )
12/24/18 Vs 12/17/18 ( - 30.31% / - 0.772M )

Demo (12/24/18 Vs 12/17/18):
H1- 0.560D Vs 0.930D
H2- 0.550D Vs 0.870D
H3- 0.540D Vs 0.780D
3H- 0.550D Vs 0.860D

Note: RAW is 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 6th, 4th & 5th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (12/24/18 Vs 12/25/17):
H1- 1.752M Vs 2.948M
H2- 1.789M Vs 2.620M
H3- 1.784M Vs 2.543M
3H- 1.775M Vs 2.704M ( - 34.36% / - 0.929M )

Demo (12/24/18 Vs 12/25/17):
H1- 0.560D Vs 0.930D
H2- 0.550D Vs 0.790D
H3- 0.540D Vs 0.790D
3H- 0.550D Vs 0.837D

Note: RAW this week last year was 5th, 6th & 7th by hourly demo & 6th, 7th & 8th by hourly viewership.*

*-Across 1,335 episodes and 26 years:

-The lowest viewership of all time.
-The lowest demos of all time.
-The lowest rating of all time.
-One of the largest week to week and year to year viewership drops of all time.
-One of the largest week to week and year to year demo drops of all time.
-Lower than any SDL and 0.123M above the lowest SD of the modern era (Thanksgiving 15').

-60.82% viewership drop and 67.84% demo drop relative to RAW 25.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

How is the first hour the lowest of the three??

:lmao


----------



## Dave Santos

Showstopper said:


> How is the first hour the lowest of the three??
> 
> :lmao


Maybe people finishing Christmas dinner?

People on the forum were saying it's going to be under 2 million but 20-25% under. :lmao


----------



## A-C-P

:reneelel


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Dave Santos said:


> Maybe people finishing Christmas dinner?
> 
> People on the forum were saying it's going to be under 2 million but 20-25% under. :lmao


Maybe. Not sure. Kinda crazy. I thought for sure Hour 3 would be the lowest by a wide margin and it's pretty much the same number as the highest rated hour (hour 2).


----------



## Dave Santos

Its possible that under 2 million could be the norm till the royal rumble and road to wrestlemania. Will be interesting checking in to this thread over the next few weeks. This Christmas show had a steep decline.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Dave Santos said:


> Its possible that under 2 million could be the norm till the royal rumble and road to wrestlemania. Will be interesting checking in to this thread over the next few weeks.


Doubtful with Football over now, but it's not getting back to last year's numbers since they keep going down every year. Ditto SD.


----------



## Ace

Holy fuck, that is terrible :lmao

Is SD really gonna do 1.4-1.5m? :lmao

I thought these would be SD's numbers this week, if Raw did this that only means SD numbers are going to look horrific (less people watch + on Christmas day and up against Lakers-GSW)...


----------



## Dave Santos

Showstopper said:


> Doubtful with Football over now, but it's not getting back to last year's numbers since they keep going down every year. Ditto SD.


When was the last time where they had a one month period on par to the previous year. Was it the Goldberg Survivor series period? Maybe before that?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Dave Santos said:


> When was the last time where they had a one month period on par to the previous year. Was it the Goldberg Survivor series period? Maybe before that?


That's a good question and I have no idea. Maybe someone else that posts in here knows?


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> Doubtful with Football over now, but it's not getting back to last year's numbers since they keep going down every year. Ditto SD.


 Probably last year's RTWM minus 200,000-400,000 viewers.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Man, Vince is lucky as hell he got those two TV deals last summer that will last the next 5 years starting in October or I have no idea what this goober would be doing right now. Lucky bastard.


----------



## Ace

TNA at their peak drew more viewers :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> Man, Vince is lucky as hell he got those two TV deals last summer that will last the next 5 years starting in October or I have no idea what this goober would be doing right now. Lucky bastard.












SD's ratings were increasing year on year and Raw's ratings weren't tanking like they are now. It would definitely been interesting to see what htey would have gotten if they were negotiating now.


----------



## Ace

Dave Santos said:


> When was the last time where they had a one month period on par to the previous year. Was it the Goldberg Survivor series period? Maybe before that?


 Probably that or during Joe vs Brock, that's a rare feud which actually seemed to draw.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Vince can now proudly proclaim that both of his shows have dipped under 2 million at least once in 2018 with Raw this past week and SD multiple times this month.

Not even Ronda Rousey being the Champion can pull him out of this mess. I'm sure he thought Rousey was the last thing he had up his sleeve to stop the bleeding, and he's paying her a ton. So much for that.


----------



## Ace

@ShowstopperThat's down 34.3% or 925,000 viewers compared to the *December 25th* 2017 episode.

The first hour was even down 40.6% or almost 1.2 million viewers.


----------



## Dave Santos

So smackdown will replace a show that has averaged 6.2 million viewers this season.

https://tvseriesfinale.com/tv-show/fox-2018-19-season-ratings/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> @ShowstopperThat's down 34.3% or 925,000 viewers compared to the *December 25th* 2017 episode.
> 
> The first hour was even down 40.6% or almost 1.2 million viewers.


And people were complaining last year. And the year previous. And so on and so forth..

When these numbers become the norm, like on non-holiday episodes, that's when they'll hit panic mode if they haven't yet.


----------



## Ace

They really lost 1m viewers from last year :ha

Which does worse ratings wise - Christmas day or Christmas eve?

Either way, 1 fucking million viewers from last year. Tragic :lmao


----------



## Chrome

Ace said:


> SD's ratings were increasing year on year and Raw's ratings weren't tanking like they are now. It would definitely been interesting to see what htey would have gotten if they were negotiating now.


USA's in bed with the WWE, so they likely would've gotten the same deal. No idea with Fox though.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I wonder if this will be the year, years from now, that we look back on as being the year where they really got fucked.

Either way, glad none of my favorites were World Champion in 2018. Holy fuck.


----------



## Ace

I'm thinking Raw's RTWM will be drawing 2.4-2.8m a week, that's about the what SD was doing last year :heston

They've lost to many fans to get to 3m, I'll be surprised if that many come back for WM season.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Chrome said:


> USA's in bed with the WWE, so they likely would've gotten the same deal. No idea with Fox though.


That's a good point. Vince is lucky as hell he has this long, rich history with USA Network or he might be fucked right now.


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> That's a good point. Vince is lucky as hell he has this long, rich history with USA Network or he might be fucked right now.


 Yeah, USA does seem to overpay to keep Raw.


----------



## Dave Santos

Ace said:


> Yeah, USA does seem to overpay to keep Raw.


Well USA has a lack of popular shows. Fox still has a few. Plus their news always does well.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> Yeah, USA does seem to overpay to keep Raw.


OVER a billion. SD got a billion...with no history between Vince and FOX. What are these people doing with their money? :lol


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> OVER a billion. SD got a billion...with no history between Vince and FOX. What are these people doing with their money? :lol


 I know it's the holidays, but god damn that's a horrific number. You can't help but laugh :lol

Waiting to see SD's, if that does under 1.5m viewers :sodone

I was thinking Raw would do 1.9m and SD around 1.7m.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> I know it's the holidays, but god damn that's a horrific number. You can't help but laugh :lol
> 
> Waiting to see SD's, if that does under 1.5m viewers :sodone
> 
> I was thinking Raw would do 1.9m and SD around 1.7m.


They were definitely expecting a lower number than usual to be fair and honest. The question is what they were expecting. We'll never know. Besides, since Vince and USA Network are in bed with one another, I'm sure they'll just write it off as Holiday number.


----------



## Ace

Ratings have gotten so low that 100,000 is considered a substantial fall :lol

We're officially in the 1m territory for both shows as a low point.

With how low Raw was this week, maybe SD beats Raw this week? I'm not aware of which day does better, but that's a pretty low bar for SD to beat and if Christmas day is better for ratings, it could beat it.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Not that surprising except for the quality of the tank. Brutal all around. Poor demos, poor total viewers. poor year to year, and poor week to week as well.

This number is horrific but Smackdown will show them how it's done. <1.4 M :woo


----------



## Erramayhem89

WWE is on it's last leg srs. Didn't expect the ratings to be this low i was expecting a 1.9 or so but this is just awful. Doesn't really matter much if it's the road to WM when they have zero stars on the show (brb no Alexa or Brock). People are tuning out because there is nothing to watch.

This shit is worst than an episode of Velocity


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Either way, this is also a show that hasn't had a real World Champion for the better part of 2 years now and I never really see it brought up as a reason that people have flocked away. It's absolutely a big reason. This show needs it's World Title back in the worst way. Doesn't even matter who wins it. But it needs to be on TV every week again. Beyond ridiculous.


----------



## Seafort

And this is why I expect them to do something big in January. You can't trot out a storyline with Seth Rollins vs Drew McIntrye and expect it to recapture the third of their Jan 2018 audience that had abandoned them. Or Seth vs a non-present Brock Lesnar. And Finn Balor as the lead face going up against a rogue's gallery of McIntyre, Bobby Lashley, Kevin Owens, and Sami Zayn is not going to stop the slide or rebuild the audience. They know this.

https://www.wrestlingforum.com/gene...ed-hunter-vs-non-nxt-led-vince-storyline.html


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> Ratings have gotten so low that 100,000 is considered a substantial fall :lol
> 
> We're officially in the 1m territory for both shows as a low point.
> 
> With how low Raw was this week, maybe SD beats Raw this week? I'm not aware of which day does better, but that's a pretty low bar for SD to beat and if Christmas day is better for ratings, it could beat it.


I guess SD could beat it, but SD doing 1.9's all month before Christmas week gives me pause. Either way, doesn't matter. WWE's ratings are fucked.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Next week will suck too. New Yea's Eve and Day portend more abysmal ratings but probably higher than this.

LOL at Vince "the draw". :heston


----------



## Ace

WWE fading away and classifying itself as obsolete roud

OBSOLETE :vince5


----------



## Adam Cool

Holy fucking shit I knew it would be bad but not this fucking badly 

To think this was once the show that had above 7 million viewers at some point


----------



## Ace

Seafort said:


> And this is why I expect them to do something big in January. You can't trot out a storyline with Seth Rollins vs Drew McIntrye and expect it to recapture the third of their Jan 2018 audience that had abandoned them. Or Seth vs a non-present Brock Lesnar. And Finn Balor as the lead face going up against a rogue's gallery of McIntyre, Bobby Lashley, Kevin Owens, and Sami Zayn is not going to stop the slide or rebuild the audience. They know this.
> 
> https://www.wrestlingforum.com/gene...ed-hunter-vs-non-nxt-led-vince-storyline.html


 They put this on themselves, they didn't create any stars and now they're paying the price.

But fuck it, continue to geek out your roster and see how many viewers you have left next year.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SHIVVY POO IV: THE FINAL CHAPTER said:


> Next week will suck too. New Yea's Eve and Day portend more abysmal ratings but probably higher than this.
> 
> LOL at Vince "the draw". :heston


Yep. And some (not alot) were proclaiming Vince as some big draw last week because of his appearance on Raw the night after a PPV. His drawing power is gone, too. Doesn't help that he looks old as fuck and like a great, great grandfather at this point. 1998 Vince who was going head to head with Austin this is not. This is grandpa Vince, and that's being kind to him. He looks like ass.


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> Yep. And some (not alot) were proclaiming Vince as some big draw last week because of his appearance on Raw the night after a PPV. His drawing power is gone, too. Doesn't help that he looks old as fuck and like a great, great grandfather at this point. 1998 Vince who was going head to head with Austin this is not. This is grandpa Vince, and that's being kind to him. He looks like ass.


 Goldberg was the only name I can think of recently who drew huge and even his drawing power came to nil after a while. No one can keep people watching for this shit, they intially come back for the star and then the see how bad it is and walk right the fuck out.


----------



## Chrome

Showstopper said:


> Yep. And some (not alot) were proclaiming Vince as some big draw last week because of his appearance on Raw the night after a PPV. His drawing power is gone, too. Doesn't help that he looks old as fuck and like a great, great grandfather at this point. 1998 Vince who was going head to head with Austin this is not. This is grandpa Vince, and that's being kind to him. He looks like ass.


Yeah he looks awful now lol. Like the Grim Reaper standing nearby off-camera looking at his watch like:










"Hurry up man, I ain't got all fucking day!"

Plus, wasn't there a report on him not wanting to be on TV because he looks older? Guess with the ratings plummeting, that went out the window.


----------



## Ace

I've lost count, how many times has Raw actually beaten its all time low this year?

Is this new territory for them? (sub 2m).


----------



## Adam Cool

A MILLION VIEWER LESS THAN LAST YEAR'S CHRISTMAS EPISODE

A FUCKING MILLION 

LMAO


----------



## Ace

Adam Cool said:


> A MILLION VIEWER LESS THAN LAST YEAR'S CHRISTMAS EPISODE
> 
> A FUCKING MILLION
> 
> LMAO


 There's some idiots on redidt actually defending this number, if they actually followed the ratings they'd realize how bad this number truly is. Everyone was expecting a low number, but no one in their wildest dreams thought it would be this low.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The NFL game was the lowest rated ever for it's brand as well. RAW was still #4-6 on the demo for the night out of 150 rated shows. Their rating still sucks but they do regularly gravitate near the top of the night for cable shows. I wonder if this number is their new rock bottom because the number was very stable over the three hours. Oh yeah, it would take a Christmas Miracle for Smackdown to beat RAW and the prognosis is grim.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Chrome said:


> Yeah he looks awful now lol. Like the Grim Reaper standing nearby off-camera looking at his watch like:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Hurry up man, I ain't got all fucking day!"
> 
> Plus, wasn't there a report on him not wanting to be on TV because he looks older? Guess with the ratings plummeting, that went out the window.


Yeah, there was a report that he didn't want to be on TV because of his looks but that is undoubtedly out the window for now due to the ratings of both shows. I think Vince could handle SD being sub 2 million, but I think it breaks his heart to see Raw sub 2 million. Being on Holiday week probably softens the blow quite a bit, but when Raw is hitting these numbers regularly (which they will if they do nothing to fix it), it's going to hurt Vince badly.

I wish I could see the look on his face when this is a non-Holiday number and it counts all the way. That even might be the death of Vince as being in charge.

:trips8


----------



## Ace

If Raw does sub 2m on a non holiday, I think Vince will step aside or HHH will give him the tap on the shoulder and tell him it's time for him to go.

We're in the end days of Vince's era. I think he will step aside next year or in 2020. It's good news for NXT and HHH guys.


----------



## Chrome

Ace said:


> If Raw does sub 2m on a non holiday, I think Vince will step aside or HHH will give him the tap on the shoulder and tell him it's time for him to go.
> 
> We're in the end days of Vince's reign. I think he will step aside next year or in 2020.


Maybe Fox puts in the call? :hmm:


----------



## The XL 2

The bottom will fall out at somepoint. Don't be surprised if WWE sells or goes out of business within the next 5 years. They don't draw their own money, they lose money on house shows and no one watchs their TV. The second they stop getting subsidized by TV networks is the second that they're fucked.


----------



## Ace

The XL 2 said:


> The bottom will fall out at somepoint. Don't be surprised if WWE sells or goes out of business within the next 5 years. They don't draw their own money, they lose money on house shows and no one watchs their TV. The second they stop getting subsidized by TV networks is the second that they're fucked.


 I wonder if Fox can get out of their deal, they got completely fucked by Vince.

They bought a show which was doing 2.4-2.7m and showing year on year growth, it's been doing low to sub 2m every week for the last couple of months.


----------



## Adam Cool

Ace said:


> There's some idiots on redidt actually defending this number, if they actually followed the ratings they'd realize how bad this number truly is. Everyone was expecting a low number, but no one in their wildest dreams thought it would be this low.


Wreddit seems to treat the WWE as a personal Friend, from what I have seen , its rather Cult like at this point


----------



## Ibracadabra

Ace said:


> I wonder if Fox can get out of their deal, they got completely fucked by Vince.
> 
> They bought a show which was doing 2.4-2.7m and showing year on year growth, it's been doing low to sub 2m every week for the last couple of months.


Which is still higher than any show they've had on Friday nights for years and it's not even close.


----------



## Ace

Ibracadabra said:


> Which is still higher than any show they've had on Friday nights for years and it's not even close.


 Isn't the Last Man Standing currently airing in that spot doing 6m?


----------



## xio8ups

this is what happens when you let marks make it to the ring.


----------



## CesaroSwing

Don't really care about ratings but it's interesting that JJ and Rollins drew 1 million more than Rollins on his own


----------



## Brock

That's always Vince's mindset when ratings take a hit. "Well, I better trot myself out there next week then and that'll magically alter this shit" :vince

It just doesn't work nowadays and whatever slight upwards in ratings he may bring, they just can't sustain. No matter what they try or who they bring in, this is the state it's in and it's not going to be changing in any dramatic fashion.


----------



## UniversalGleam

things certainly don't look great for wwe right now. It seems like every other month that they are reaching some kind of new low in something.

the legends can't even save wwe for any length of time anymore. It seems like people simply dont care anymore to consider watching so appearances of popular wrestlers doesnt even factor in.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

A poster on the Observer board posted this:



> Down 30% from last week
> 
> Last time it was on Christmas Eve it was in 2012. Then it was down 26% from the previous week (down to 3.143M from a 4.230M)


So, maybe it is a Christmas thing. Who knows.


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> A poster on the Observer board posted this:
> 
> 
> 
> So, maybe it is a Christmas thing. Who knows.


 They're in the sub 2m territory does it matter? It's substantial losses from here... and it's not like they have a norm or high of 4-5m anymore, they're capped in mid to high 2m.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

RAW has officially hit TNA circa 2009 ratings. The divas don't draw. Rollins doesn't draw. Ambrose doesn't draw.


----------



## Piper's Pit

Ace said:


> If Raw does sub 2m on a non holiday, I think Vince will step aside or HHH will give him the tap on the shoulder and tell him it's time for him to go.
> 
> We're in the end days of Vince's era. I think he will step aside next year or in 2020. It's good news for NXT and HHH guys.


Hahaha, sure buddy.

First, Vince ain't stepping aside if anything he'll become more involved and micromanaging, in his mind he'll see the ratings slide as a problem only a creative genius like himself can solve.

Second, HHH ain't the answer to anything, it's the NXT/HHH workrate vanilla midget, geek type of wrestler and wrestling that has played a big part in the exodus of fans, it's not the main reason but it's a significant factor. The casual fans who used to watch are not interested in guys like Kevin Owens, Daniel Bryan and Seth Rollins to name a few. 
Women's wrestling also is another factor but I couldn't be bothered getting into that now.


----------



## Ace

Piper's Pit said:


> Hahaha, sure buddy.
> 
> First, Vince ain't stepping aside if anything he'll become more involved and micromanaging, in his mind he'll see the ratings slide as a problem only a creative genius like himself can solve.
> 
> Second, HHH ain't the answer to anything, it's the NXT/HHH workrate vanilla midget, geek type of wrestler and wrestling that has played a big part in the exodus of fans, it's not the main reason but it's a significant factor. The casual fans who used to watch are not interested in guys like Kevin Owens, Daniel Bryan and Seth Rollins to name a few.
> Women's wrestling also is another factor but I couldn't be bothered getting into that now.


 You have good points, but I don't think there aren't many casuals left because no one is really booked like a star. I think Seth can be a star as he's always been a strong merch seller and has a decent look, he just needs more support from creative to get to that next level.


----------



## Dr. Middy

Piper's Pit said:


> Hahaha, sure buddy.
> 
> First, Vince ain't stepping aside if anything he'll become more involved and micromanaging, in his mind he'll see the ratings slide as a problem only a creative genius like himself can solve.
> 
> Second, HHH ain't the answer to anything,* it's the NXT/HHH workrate vanilla midget, geek type of wrestler and wrestling that has played a big part in the exodus of fans*, it's not the main reason but it's a significant factor. The casual fans who used to watch are not interested in guys like Kevin Owens, Daniel Bryan and Seth Rollins to name a few.
> Women's wrestling also is another factor but I couldn't be bothered getting into that now.


That says enough about your opinions...


----------



## Ace

Dr. Bexmas said:


> That says enough about your opinions...


 He may have worded it wrong, but he has a point.

Size to an extent (credibility), characters and star power matters and these are all things WWE has overlooked.


----------



## Adam Cool

Rollins is over 6 feet, unless if you are also over sixth feet like me calling him a midget makes you look dumb


----------



## rbl85

Adam Cool said:


> Rollins is over 6 feet, unless if you are also over sixth feet like me calling him a midget makes you look dumb


He is a big midget


----------



## Ace

rbl85 said:


> He is a big midget


 You can't blame him for the shit material he's given or for being made to look like a jabroni every other week.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Corbin and Rousey have been the top 2 focuses on Raw these past several months. I think blaming talent at this point, over a decade in, is silly. But if you're going to blame talent, those have been the top 2 on Raw for the second half of 2018.


----------



## Dr. Middy

Ace said:


> He may have worded it wrong, but he has a point.
> 
> Size to an extent (credibility), characters and star power matters and these are all things WWE has overlooked.


You can put a bunch of huge guys like Brock on screen, it doesn't suddenly change the booking.

Right now here's what I see...

- Mostly bad storytelling and booking for the majority of their top guys (look at Ambrose as a heel right now compared to what he probably is able to do).
- Overabundance of product because they can, but makes it difficult to keep interest due to how much there is.
- Presentation of the McMahons as bigger than everybody on both shows, so they automatically don't seem like stars.
- Instances where they basically say what happens here doesn't matter, like the majority of Survivor Series. Remember how Ronda walked out on Raw all chipper after Charlotte beat the shit out of her, and how Charlotte was a face still after that show as well. It just insults our intelligence, and nobody wants that.
- Lack of stars made, other than one FOTC in Roman, with zero backup plan in place.
- General decreasing TV viewership in general for the country, along with general popularity of wrestling as mainstream entertainment.

And this is among other things, but none of these really have any effect on whatever the wrestlers look like. That reasoning just doesn't matter much.


----------



## Piper's Pit

Dr. Bexmas said:


> That says enough about your opinions...


Care to elaborate ??


----------



## Dr. Middy

Piper's Pit said:


> Care to elaborate ??


See above.


----------



## rbl85

Ace said:


> You can't blame him for the shit material he's given or for being made to look like a jabroni every other week.


I don't have any problem with him, he's just in the wrong company to show how good he is.


----------



## Piper's Pit

Adam Cool said:


> Rollins is over 6 feet, unless if you are also over sixth feet like me calling him a midget makes you look dumb


He isn't small but he is vanilla and he is a geek and he is a video game wrestler with no understanding of pacing, psychology, selling or realism in his matches.


----------



## Ace

Dr. Bexmas said:


> You can put a bunch of huge guys like Brock on screen, it doesn't suddenly change the booking.
> 
> Right now here's what I see...
> 
> - Mostly bad storytelling and booking for the majority of their top guys (look at Ambrose as a heel right now compared to what he probably is able to do).
> - Overabundance of product because they can, but makes it difficult to keep interest due to how much there is.
> - Presentation of the McMahons as bigger than everybody on both shows, so they automatically don't seem like stars.
> - Instances where they basically say what happens here doesn't matter, like the majority of Survivor Series. Remember how Ronda walked out on Raw all chipper after Charlotte beat the shit out of her, and how Charlotte was a face still after that show as well. It just insults our intelligence, and nobody wants that.
> - Lack of stars made, other than one FOTC in Roman, with zero backup plan in place.
> - General decreasing TV viewership in general for the country, along with general popularity of wrestling as mainstream entertainment.
> 
> And this is among other things, but none of these really have any effect on whatever the wrestlers look like. That reasoning just doesn't matter much.


 That's why I said to an extent, most of the blame lies on the McMahons and their awful writing. They're too worried about getting themselves and becoming stars like their father that they've hurt their product and wrestlers in the process. It's no wonder no one wants to watch.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Piper's Pit said:


> He isn't small but he is vanilla and he is a geek and he is a video game wrestler with no understanding of pacing, psychology, selling or realism in his matches.


What does Rollins have to do with any of this? He's not even a top 2 focus of Raw in months now and hasn't been World Champion since June 2016. This makes no sense.


----------



## Dr. Middy

Ace said:


> That's why I said to an extent, most of the blame lies on the McMahons and their awful writing. They're to worried about getting themselves over and becoming stars that they've hurt their products and wrestlers in the process. It's no wonder no one wants to watch.


The best thing that could happen right now is for every Mcmahon to never be involved in WWE ever again, outside of maybe giving HHH some sort of creative role. 

They've hurt the company more than anybody else has in the last decade.


----------



## Piper's Pit

Dr. Bexmas said:


> See above.


LOL, of course booking is a big part of the problem but even with good booking if your roster is made up of guys and girls with the charisma of damp towels it won't matter.


----------



## Ace

Dr. Bexmas said:


> The best thing that could happen right now is for every Mcmahon to never be involved in WWE ever again, outside of maybe giving HHH some sort of creative role.
> 
> They've hurt the company more than anybody else has in the last decade.


 Next year's WM is shapng up to be a mess.

The only real feud which is over is the women's one.

There's minimal interest in what the men are doing next year that has been brought on about by marginalizing every top male star and their god awful booking for the last year which has caused people to give up on the product.

Can you honestly say there is any real interest or anticipation for anything outside one match... We're one month away from the Rumble..


----------



## Dr. Middy

Piper's Pit said:


> LOL, of course booking is a big part of the problem but even with good booking if your roster is made up of guys and girls with the charisma of damp towels it won't matter.


So you think the majority of the roster has no charisma?


----------



## Piper's Pit

Dr. Bexmas said:


> So you think the majority of the roster has no charisma?


Yes. Disagree ??


----------



## Dr. Middy

Ace said:


> Next year's WM is shapng up to be a mess.
> 
> The only real feud which is over is the women's one.
> 
> There's extremely little interest in what the men are doing next year brought on about marginalizing every top male star and their god awful booking for the last year.
> 
> Can you honestly say there is any real interest or anticipation for anything outside one match... We're one month away from the Rumble..


There's specific things I'm interested in. I'm curious about what Ronda does, what they do with the new women's tag titles, Bryan/Ali/AJ, even Samoa Joe/Jeff Hardy seems fun. 

But it just feels like they are in a weird ass holding pattern right now. It feels like Braun is the top face on Raw out of the men, but if he just loses again to Brock, then what?


----------



## Donnie

I wanted to make a :Cocky joke about this, but it's X-mas time and no one is watching wrestling. 

Still, fuck him, and this horrid feud with Baron and Ambrose.


----------



## DammitChrist

It's pretty convenient for some folks to believe that the majority of the current roster has "no charisma" when they're pretty much booked like SHIT most of the time, which makes it harder for fans to get invested in them.


----------



## Dr. Middy

Piper's Pit said:


> Yes. Disagree ??


Mostly. 

I think the booking of a lot of guys hides what they could be doing. Ambrose should be so much better as a heel, Rollins is still very over and crowds have always given him good reactions, same with Braun, and Drew has a great aura about him too. With the women, Ronda especially has a ton of charisma (it defintely helped how she got so popular in UFC to begin with), as does Alexa Bliss, and Sasha does as well if she could do something other than sit at the bottom of the card.

Daniel Bryan is self explanatory really, Samoa Joe should be a goddamn star and is in the midcard, AJ Styles remains very popular, Jeff Hardy and Randy Orton have ridden on their charisma for years. The trio of women in the SD womens feud in Becky/Charlotte/Asuka all are very charismatic, Asuka and Becky especially. 

They have plenty of talent to have two excellent shows, I just wish they utilized everybody so much better.


----------



## Ibracadabra

Ace said:


> *Next year's WM is shapng up to be a mess.*
> 
> The only real feud which is over is the women's one.
> 
> There's minimal interest in what the men are doing next year that has been brought on about by marginalizing every top male star and their god awful booking for the last year which has caused people to give up on the product.
> 
> Can you honestly say there is any real interest or anticipation for anything outside one match... We're one month away from the Rumble..


Oh gee when have I ever heard that before? 

Definitely not last year, or the year before that, or the year before that, right?


----------



## Ace

Ibracadabra said:


> Ace said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Next year's WM is shapng up to be a mess.*
> 
> The only real feud which is over is the women's one.
> 
> There's minimal interest in what the men are doing next year that has been brought on about by marginalizing every top male star and their god awful booking for the last year which has caused people to give up on the product.
> 
> Can you honestly say there is any real interest or anticipation for anything outside one match... We're one month away from the Rumble..
> 
> 
> 
> Oh gee when have I ever heard that before?
> 
> Definitely not last year, or the year before that, or the year before that, right?
Click to expand...

 Well, it's a new low.

Fitting considering the historically bad year they've had.


----------



## rbl85

Dr. Bexmas said:


> Mostly.
> 
> I think the booking of a lot of guys hides what they could be doing. Ambrose should be so much better as a heel, Rollins is still very over and crowds have always given him good reactions, same with Braun, and Drew has a great aura about him too. With the women, *Ronda especially has a ton of charisma* (it defintely helped how she got so popular in UFC to begin with), as does Alexa Bliss, and Sasha does as well if she could do something other than sit at the bottom of the card.
> 
> Daniel Bryan is self explanatory really, Samoa Joe should be a goddamn star and is in the midcard, AJ Styles remains very popular, Jeff Hardy and Randy Orton have ridden on their charisma for years. The trio of women in the SD womens feud in Becky/Charlotte/Asuka all are very charismatic, Asuka and Becky especially.
> 
> They have plenty of talent to have two excellent shows, I just wish they utilized everybody so much better.


I have a little problem with Ronda, when she do her not happy face it looks like the face a bad actor would do in a really bad movie


----------



## McGee

It's time that they turn to Mr. Jim Ross to right this ship.


----------



## southshield

McGee said:


> It's time that they turn to Mr. Jim Ross to right this ship.


You can also bring in Bob Ross as well and he couldn't paint enough happy little trees to make the show any better. RAW is what it is at this point and if they make too many changes too fast they will lose even more viewers. There is no easy fix for this mess and its a shame, I grew up watching WWE in the 80's and I hate seeing what it has been turned into.


----------



## V-Trigger

1.7

Yikes


----------



## Adam Cool

McGee said:


> It's time that they turn to Mr. Jim Ross to right this ship.


No

Enough with the Old guys

We need some young blood not someone who's still jerking off to Bill Watts


----------



## shadows123

Time to hit the panic button and trot out Triple H, Shawn Michaels and Hulk hogan.. Triple H vs Brock/Batista/Rock (based on availability) for wrestlemania and Shane, the ratings draw and world champion defending his title vs Undertaker damn it :vince5

Seriously though, i cant help but laugh..wwe had it long coming considering the burial job they did on the roster to make Roman and Brock look strong while booking just about everyone as geeks..No wonder the product interest is low..its been a long time coming..sad part is wwe needs luck on its part with a breakout star and probably nothing else can save it considering most of the current roster are booked like geeks including the so called monster Braun...They have screwed the fans long enough that people who were loyally sticking to the product are increasingly starting to leave as well...


----------



## Erik.

:lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## InsaneCookies

In 2020, when the Rock cuts his promo on RAW:
" IN FRONT OF THE THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF THE ROCKS FANS"


----------



## VitoCorleoneX

6ft 2 Brock Lesnar is Universal Champ
Mainstream ufc star Ronda Rousey is Womens Champ and STILL Raw is shit.
They focus on 6ft 8 Braun Strowman and they push 6ft 5 Drew McIntyre.
And yet a idiot still finds a reason to blame it on Seth Rollins [emoji23]


And a show with Bryan as Wwe champ, a japanese woman Asuka as womens champion and rusev as US champ doing better in ratings than Raw you know the show with "non vanila midgets"

I blame all this on Vince he gave all of his faith,power and patience to one fuckin guy called Roman Reigns for 4 years. I would say they created a B star with Roman over the years (not on Cena level) on behalf of the roster.
Rollins or Strowman right now could have been stars if they would have been booked right.
Karma strikes.

Gesendet von meinem SM-G955F mit Tapatalk


----------



## umair007

Erramayhem89 said:


> WWE is on it's last leg srs. Didn't expect the ratings to be this low i was expecting a 1.9 or so but this is just awful. Doesn't really matter much if it's the road to WM when they have zero stars on the show (brb no Alexa or Brock). People are tuning out because there is nothing to watch.
> 
> This shit is worst than an episode of Velocity


Alexa is a star? Lol ok

Sent from my Infinix X510 using Tapatalk


----------



## .christopher.

All well and good laughing, but there's still over a million watching this shit.

Over a million people...still watching a full WWE show....in 2018..... society is full of numpties.

WWE has well and truly brain washed certain people. I'm convinced of it.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Moving away from the Attitude Era and going to a more "family friendly" product sure was a great move Steph.... You've created so many new fans with this G rated garbage.

Vanilla wrestlers, bland soft storylines...you look at the geeks they have on the roster now. Even the midcard guys like Edge from back in the day would be Hulk Hogan in this era. I'm at a loss, but I'm glad the fans have finally tuned out. 

TNA pulls these ratings and they can't find a network to put their show on. WWE pulls these ratings and NBC/Fox give them 2 billion....unreal.


----------



## Ichigo87

VitoCorleoneX said:


> 6ft 2 Brock Lesnar is Universal Champ
> Mainstream ufc star Ronda Rousey is Womens Champ and STILL Raw is shit.
> They focus on 6ft 8 Braun Strowman and they push 6ft 5 Drew McIntyre.
> And yet a idiot still finds a reason to blame it on Seth Rollins
> 
> 
> And a show with Bryan as Wwe champ, a japanese woman Asuka as womens champion and rusev as US champ doing better in ratings than Raw you know the show with "non vanila midgets"
> 
> I blame all this on Vince he gave all of his faith,power and patience to one fuckin guy called Roman Reigns for 4 years. I would say they created a B star with Roman over the years (not on Cena level) on behalf of the roster.
> Rollins or Strowman right now could have been stars if they would have been booked right.
> Karma strikes.
> 
> Gesendet von meinem SM-G955F mit Tapatalk


Brock being champion is a huge part of the problem.


----------



## shadows123

.christopher. said:


> All well and good laughing, but there's still over a million watching this shit.
> 
> Over a million people...still watching a full WWE show....in 2018..... society is full of numpties.
> 
> WWE has well and truly brain washed certain people. I'm convinced of it.


Give it some time..Next year we may see some more magical numbers... wwe is truly out of touch with what fans even remotely expect.. they have continued to shit on fans who loyally watched through years of Cena and Roman being constantly pushed at the expense of everyone else....it takes a while for them to give up but it seems like its slowly happening :laugh:


----------



## Ace

Over or under 1.5m this week lads?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Should be higher seeing as there is no NFL competition but who really knows anymore?


----------



## Ace

NYE is probably the worst night for television but there's no NFL....

Could be either way - increase or decrease.


----------



## shadows123

Ace said:


> NYE is probably the worst night for television but there's no NFL....
> 
> Could be either way - increase or decrease.


It would also be a nice way to know how many would rather watch wwe than go and celebrate new years, especially considering the spoilers out there telling you its shit.. :laugh::laugh:


----------



## Erik.

Ace said:


> Over or under 1.5m this week lads?


I think it'll be higher than last week


----------



## umair007

xio8ups said:


> this is what happens when you let marks make it to the ring.


So you're saying Ric Flair, Shawn Michaels, SCSA, Rock and Bret Hart weren't marks for this business? Is that were you saying? Or did I not understood it correctly?

Sent from my Infinix X510 using Tapatalk



nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> RAW has officially hit TNA circa 2009 ratings. The divas don't draw. Rollins doesn't draw. Ambrose doesn't draw.


It's interesting that you chose only those three. Hmmmm

Sent from my Infinix X510 using Tapatalk



Piper's Pit said:


> Hahaha, sure buddy.
> 
> First, Vince ain't stepping aside if anything he'll become more involved and micromanaging, in his mind he'll see the ratings slide as a problem only a creative genius like himself can solve.
> 
> Second, HHH ain't the answer to anything, it's the NXT/HHH workrate vanilla midget, geek type of wrestler and wrestling that has played a big part in the exodus of fans, it's not the main reason but it's a significant factor. The casual fans who used to watch are not interested in guys like Kevin Owens, Daniel Bryan and Seth Rollins to name a few.
> Women's wrestling also is another factor but I couldn't be bothered getting into that now.


Doesn't Vince wants to start XFL?

Sent from my Infinix X510 using Tapatalk


----------



## Piper's Pit

umair007 said:


> Doesn't Vince wants to start XFL?
> 
> Sent from my Infinix X510 using Tapatalk


He sleeps 3 hours a day. He'll have plenty of time to be the boss of both, if he's busy with the XFL on Monday night that's no problem, he'll have a copy of the RAW script sent to him by email, read it and via telephone go over it line by line what he wants changed.


----------



## ClintDagger

umair007 said:


> So you're saying Ric Flair, Shawn Michaels, SCSA, Rock and Bret Hart weren't marks for this business? Is that were you saying? Or did I not understood it correctly?
> 
> Sent from my Infinix X510 using Tapatalk


Those guys were probably more marks for themselves rather than the business. But I think the point is probably that too many wrestlers look like they could be sitting in the stands rather than competing in the ring. I used to totally reject that notion because I am a fan of the Bryans & Styles of the world but I think the loss of interest in wrestling somewhat supports it now.


----------



## umair007

With age catching up to him, will it be that easy to multitask & micromanage both WWE & XFL?


Piper's Pit said:


> He sleeps 3 hours a day. He'll have plenty of time to be the boss of both, if he's busy with the XFL on Monday night that's no problem, he'll have a copy of the RAW script sent to him by email, read it and via telephone go over it line by line what he wants changed.


Sent from my Infinix X510 using Tapatalk


----------



## Piper's Pit

umair007 said:


> With age catching up to him, will it be that easy to multitask & micromanage both WWE & XFL?
> 
> Sent from my Infinix X510 using Tapatalk


Vince will find a way, he always does.


----------



## Solf

Ace said:


> He may have worded it wrong, but he has a point.
> 
> Size to an extent (credibility), characters and star power matters and these are all things WWE has overlooked.


Lol, it's much more a matter of no one being allowed to look like a real star. They put all their eggs in the same basket while Roman was here, now that he's on the shelf, they're looking dumb, because no one was ever booked at his level but part timers.

I hope that's a lesson well-learn. As a Seth fan, I don't want him to be overpushed beyond anyone's reach.


----------



## umair007

Piper's Pit said:


> Vince will find a way, he always does.


Well we'll see I guess if he'll be able to micromanage & multitask both products & still be able to produce good to great weekly WWE TV content or not because he can't even do that well right now like he used to even when he's not managing XFL at the moment but with age not on his side & reports of him having dementia, the raw & Smackdown long term future is looking bleak at the moment.

Sent from my Infinix X510 using Tapatalk



ClintDagger said:


> Those guys were probably more marks for themselves rather than the business. But I think the point is probably that too many wrestlers look like they could be sitting in the stands rather than competing in the ring. I used to totally reject that notion because I am a fan of the Bryans & Styles of the world but I think the loss of interest in wrestling somewhat supports it now.


That might be true when you put it like that even though i disagree with it when it comes to Shawn Michaels' second half of his career when he completely changed as a person as well. In case of others you might be right but even then to be able to succeed you have to have some kind of passion for this business. I'm not saying exceptions to this rule aren't there where people with zero passion to this business have succeeded in professional wrestling. I was replying to @xio8ups who was saying "this is what happens when you let marks make it to the ring" which isn't completely accurate because previously in golden, attitude & R.A. eras, there might have been majority of wrestlers who cared about their success more than anything else (which btw is the right way to go in professional wrestling) but all of them Rock, SCSA, Shawn Michaels, Bret Hart & Ric Flair were fans & marks of professional wrestling growing up & that's what I meant so I hope you got my point. 

Sent from my Infinix X510 using Tapatalk


----------



## Erramayhem89

*RAW has no stars*

No stars and nobody is over because they don't even have Alexa or Brock on TV. Ratings will stay below 2 until they come back srs.


----------



## rbl85

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Erramayhem89 said:


> No stars and nobody is over because they don't even have Alexa or Brock on TV. Ratings will stay below 2 until they come back srs.


I don't think Bliss will change something.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Sad fact is that this is the No Draw Era.


----------



## Jedah

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Well that's kind of what happens when you sacrifice everyone to a certain lazy bum for five years.

Including the guy you were originally hoping to get over.


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Outside Ronda who they protect and try to present well, you're not wrong.

They've gone out of their way to kill Brock as well. His appearances do little to the ratings and his reactions are noticeably much worse, when they use to be huge and give the feeling of 'business picking up' once his music hit. The company have booked him to be hated and he's met with go away heat.......


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

*Re: RAW has no stars*

_*Ratings was still falling with Alexa and Brock being on TV. *_


----------



## Mox Girl

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Alexa and Brock? Two very odd people to bring up. Brock's barely on TV, and people overrate how popular Alexa is tbh. I've barely noticed she's been gone...


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Yeah because Alexa Bliss is such a huge draw.

They have Brock, when he can be bothered. Ronda, Seth and Braun, I would say they are stars. There's plenty of guys who could be stars given the right booking, Ambrose, Ziggler, Balor, Wyatt, Owens, Zayn, McIntyre, Roode, Lashley, Elias. Hell, even Jinder Mahal. If I worked for WWE I could make all of them stars. They just can't book for shit.


----------



## Erramayhem89

*Re: RAW has no stars*



rbl85 said:


> I don't think Bliss will change something.


Alexa is one of the 3 actual stars on RAW. Roman and Brock are the others. People definitely tune in to watch Alexa srs. 

Everyone else is a nobody because they aren't over or aren't booked well and are ruined.


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Jedah said:


> Well that's kind of what happens when you sacrifice everyone to a certain lazy bum for five years.
> 
> Including the guy you were originally hoping to get over.


 The men's division is tragic man..

Idk how they get it together for WM, things will improve but I'm personally out for WM.

Way more interested in the NJPW MSG show and NXT, the pay offs would be better and it would feel bigger because of the stars. WM is only big in name, the star power Is non existent outside the old part timers who I don't have that great of an interest to watch (not enough so to overlook the rest of the shit).


----------



## llj

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Alexa is still on TV most weeks. She has a talk show now.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Erramayhem89 said:


> Alexa is one of the 3 actual stars on RAW. Roman and Brock are the others. People definitely tune in to watch Alexa srs.
> 
> Everyone else is a nobody because they aren't over or aren't booked well and are ruined.


What?

Are you saying Alexa fucking Bliss is a bigger star than Ronda Rousey?


----------



## MonkasaurusRex

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Neither show has any stars. There are exactly zero stars who are full-time performers in WWE. Nobody is a draw. Look at TV ratings and live attendance and it is obvious that it isn't specific to Raw. SD ratings suck and that is with "the most over person in the company" on the show. Nobody outside of the ever-shrinking wrestling bubble cares about it one bit.


----------



## Jedah

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Ace said:


> The men's division is tragic man..
> 
> Idk how they get it together for WM, things will improve but I'm personally out for WM.
> 
> Way more interested in the NJPW MSG show and NXT, the pay offs would be better and it would feel bigger because of the stars. WM is only big in name, the star power Is non existent outside the old part timers who I don't have that great of an interest to watch (not enough so to overlook the rest of the shit).


Gotta just start with having Seth beat Brock decisively and send him packing.

Seth has his detractors and he's not as hot as he was in the first half of 2018 but he's still the most popular male babyface on Raw and has put on the best matches in his division this year.

It's going to be a slow, slow rebuild. This was the year where the part-timer was killed though. So now's the time to actually focus on the new talent.



SayWhatAgain! said:


> What?
> 
> Are you saying Alexa fucking Bliss is a bigger star than Ronda Rousey?


Bliss fans have always been high in delusion.


----------



## Bestiswaswillbe

*Re: RAW has no stars*



SayWhatAgain! said:


> Yeah because Alexa Bliss is such a huge draw.
> 
> They have Brock, when he can be bothered. Ronda, *Seth and Braun*, I would say they are stars. There's plenty of guys who could be stars given the right booking, Ambrose, Ziggler, Balor, Wyatt, Owens, Zayn, McIntyre, Roode, Lashley, Elias. Hell, even Jinder Mahal. If I worked for WWE I could make all of them stars. They just can't book for shit.


Seth and Braun aren't stars, they are just as geeky as the rest of the roster. 

Man how the bar has lowered for what a star is these days...


----------



## rbl85

*Re: RAW has no stars*

The problem of WWE is that their biggest stars are retired or semi-retired


----------



## Erramayhem89

*Re: RAW has no stars*



MonkasaurusRex said:


> Neither show has any stars. There are exactly zero stars who are full-time performers in WWE. Nobody is a draw. Look at TV ratings and live attendance and it is obvious that it isn't specific to Raw. SD ratings suck and that is with "the most over person in the company" on the show. Nobody outside of the ever-shrinking wrestling bubble cares about it one bit.


True but people actually want to see Alexa, Brock and AJ. Maybe Roman (i think he has a lot of younger fans). Nobody cares about literally anyone else in WWE though.


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Kenny Omega is a bigger star than any male wrestler in this company.

Take that haters :heston

Wrestling bingo halls :lol

The man actually draws crowds and isnt in a company which relies on the brand or nostalgia to draw.


----------



## Shadowcran

*Re: RAW has no stars*

No. Here's the reasons:
1. The show fucking sucks. Are you eagerly awaiting the next segment? Me, hell no. I'm dreading it, knowing somehow, no matter what, they'll fuck it up.
2. The Writers/creative fucking sucks. What Hollywood hack university do they get these fools from? They'd be better off using a squad of monkeys.
3. Everyone blames the wrong guilty parties....well except for Lesnar sucking the life out of it all..everyone gets that one right. No, It's the OLD ideas of Vince and the idiotic ideas of his 'creative' team. It is not the wrestlers. It's hard to wrestle in a vacuum with storylines being terrible.
4. Everyone feels if wrestler X appears more, it will all change. Yeah, and you can cover a gaping chest wound with a dot bandaid. You're still going to bleed to death, which is what WWE is doing. 

Stop trying this or that reason. Pay attention to the real reasons and maybe the dipshits'll listen.


----------



## Erramayhem89

*Re: RAW has no stars*



SayWhatAgain! said:


> What?
> 
> Are you saying Alexa fucking Bliss is a bigger star than Ronda Rousey?


Bliss actually makes me want to watch her segments. I cringe during Ronda's segments. Every time.


----------



## Shadowcran

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Ace said:


> Kenny Omega is a bigger star than any male wrestler in this company.
> 
> Take that haters :heston
> 
> Wrestling bingo halls :lol
> 
> The man actually draws crowds and isnt in a company which relies on the brand or nostalgia to draw.


And he can entertain doing it.


----------



## Jedah

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Ace said:


> Kenny Omega is a bigger star than any male wrestler in this company.
> 
> Take that haters :heston
> 
> Wrestling bingo halls :lol
> 
> The man actually draws crowds and isnt in a company which relies on the brand or nostalgia to draw.


For real. I wonder how much money they're going to throw at him soon.

They better handle the next crop of NXT call ups much better than in the past as well. Black, Dream, and Ciampa in particular can be huge if they're booked properly.


----------



## rbl85

*Re: RAW has no stars*

The fact to Always push the same people and often the less talented ones didn't help.

Because when you pay to see something you have some expectations but WWE is basically saying to his fans "we're going to always push the wrestlers that you don't want to be pushed and put the ones that you like at the end of the line"


----------



## Bestiswaswillbe

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Ace said:


> Kenny Omega is a bigger star than any male wrestler in this company.
> 
> Take that haters :heston
> 
> Wrestling bingo halls :lol
> 
> The man actually draws crowds and isnt in a company which relies on the brand or nostalgia to draw.


I'm not even a big NJPW fan or anything. I watch a couple matches from Wrestlekingdom every year or anything else I hear through the grape vine that I should check out, but I don't follow it all. 

That being said, with me knowing not very much about the feuds or anything that is going on with NJPW when Okada or Omega come down the aisle you can just feel the star power. I don't get that feeling with any male wrestlers in WWE or NxT even.


----------



## rbl85

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Erramayhem89 said:


> Bliss actually makes me want to watch her segments. I cringe during Ronda's segments. Every time.


So because Bliss makes YOU wants to watch her segments she's a big draw ?

I'm sorry to tell you that you're not the center of the universe.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Erramayhem89 said:


> Bliss actually makes me want to watch her segments. I cringe during Ronda's segments. Every time.


So you like Bliss more than Rousey. Cool.

I like Andrade Almas more than Brock Lesnar, that doesn't mean he's a bigger star.


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Jedah said:


> For real. I wonder how much money they're going to throw at him soon.
> 
> They better handle the next crop of NXT call ups much better than in the past as well. Black, Dream, and Ciampa in particular can be huge if they're booked properly.


 Kenny could walk in a day before WM and main event.

He looks like Austin compared to these jabronis.

It's funny and all because of how much shit NJPW received after Meltzer rating their matches really highly. Started calling the WWE big leagues lmfao.

Look at the state of this company :lmao


----------



## Erramayhem89

*Re: RAW has no stars*



rbl85 said:


> So because Bliss makes YOU wants to watch her segments she's a big draw ?
> 
> I'm sorry to tell you that you're not the center of the universe.


LOL if you think Bliss doesn't draw


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Bestiswaswillbe said:


> I'm not even a big NJPW fan or anything. I watch a couple matches from Wrestlekingdom every year or anything else I hear through the grape vine that I should check out, but I don't follow it all.
> 
> That being said, with me knowing not very much about the feuds or anything that is going on with NJPW when Okada or Omega come down the aisle you can just feel the star power. I don't get that feeling with any male wrestlers in WWE or NxT even.


The stage is bigger in the WWE because of Hogan, Austin and Rock.

NJPW has the actual stars and you're right about NXT wrestlers feeling like bigger stars, I said the same a week back.


----------



## validreasoning

Ace said:


> Kenny Omega is a bigger star than any male wrestler in this company.
> 
> Take that haters <img src="http://i.imgur.com/m2XjBg7.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Heston" class="inlineimg" />
> 
> Wrestling bingo halls <img src="http://i.imgur.com/EGDmCdR.gif?1?6573" border="0" alt="" title="Laugh" class="inlineimg" />
> 
> The man actually draws crowds and isnt in a company which relies on the brand or nostalgia to draw.


Njpw does fraction of the live attendance wwe does and their last two us shows in San Francisco and long beach (both headlined by Omega) were so disappointing njpw have eased back on us expansion by booking much smaller venues going forward.

I like Omega but saying he is bigger draw than Cena, Lesnar, Rousey, reigns would be well wide of mark.


----------



## rbl85

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Erramayhem89 said:


> LOL if you think Bliss doesn't draw


I forgot that getting a pop once in while is being a draw….


Asuka must a big draw to because she got quite a few pops lately, no ?


----------



## Jedah

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Because NXT doesn't book their stars like shit for the most part. Look how big of a deal Ciampa feels as champion. Whenever someone finally beats him, that guy is going to get a massive rub. Black feels like a star. Dream feels like a star despite losing most of his big matches. Johnny Gargano as well. Ricochet, Dunne, Cole. The list goes on.

Then they come up to the main roster and everyone is a cookie cutter character, gets put in feuds that don't mean anything and don't end and then get fed to Brock when they get hot. That's how you kill stars. Braun could have been huge if they pulled the trigger in 2017. Nope. Gotta feed him to Brock, supposedly for Roman's sake, then they fed Roman to Brock too. :lmao


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



validreasoning said:


> Njpw does fraction of the live attendance wwe does and their last two us shows in San Francisco and long beach (both headlined by Omega) were so disappointing njpw have eased back on us expansion by booking much smaller venues going forward.
> 
> I like Omega but saying he is bigger draw than Cena, Lesnar, Rousey, reigns would be well wide of mark.


The brand does that, it's not actually them drawing those numbers. The impact they have is actually the difference between what they do when theyre on or not on shows this has been proven to be minimal since the started marginalising stars.

They have a declining average they have for ratings and attendance which goes slightly up when they're on shows.

NJPW is star power based and draws depending on matches and who is on the show.


----------



## rbl85

*Re: RAW has no stars*



validreasoning said:


> Njpw does fraction of the live attendance wwe does and their last two us shows in San Francisco and long beach (both headlined by Omega) were so disappointing njpw have eased back on us expansion by booking much smaller venues going forward.
> 
> I like Omega but saying he is bigger draw than *Cena, Lesnar, Rousey, reigns* would be well wide of mark.



Those guys are not even big draws.

Only The Rock and Hogan are known world wide.


----------



## SMetalWorld

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Correction: WWE has no stars. Period.


----------



## Bestiswaswillbe

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Erramayhem89 said:


> LOL if you think Bliss doesn't draw


I like Alexa Bliss very much. I think shes awesome. But how in the blue fuck does that video prove anything about her drawing ability?




Ace said:


> The stage is bigger in the WWE because of Hogan, Austin and Rock.
> 
> NJPW has the actual stars and you're right about NXT wrestlers feeling like bigger stars, I said the same a week back.


I was actually saying the NXT wrestlers don't feel like stars to me either. I mean, they feel like bigger stars to me then the main roster wrestlers. But not big stars.

For instance Ciampa, Dream, Riccochet, Gargano, UE are cool but would still all be mid carders in the attitude era in my opinion. But yes they do feel like bigger stars then WWEs current main eventers.

I think it just has to do with WWE being terrible at making and even maintaining stars. Nakamura felt like a true star to me when I first heard about him and went and watched his wrestlekingdom NJPW matches. That entrance at wrestlekingdom 8 or 9 with the pole dancers? Freakin epic. Fast forward a couple years in the WWE and he's a geek. 

WWE just cannot make stars anymore. It's almost like they refuse to.


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Bestiswaswillbe said:


> I like Alexa Bliss very much. I think shes awesome. But how in the blue fuck does that video prove anything about her drawing ability?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was actually saying the NXT wrestlers don't feel like stars to me either. I mean, they feel like bigger stars to me then the main roster wrestlers. But not big stars.
> 
> For instance Ciampa, Dream, Riccochet, Gargano, UE are cool but would still all be mid carders in the attitude era in my opinion. But yes they do feel like bigger stars then WWEs current main eventers.
> 
> I think it just has to do with WWE being terrible at making and even maintaining stars. Nakamura felt like a true star to me when I first heard about him and went and watched his wrestlekingdom NJPW matches. That entrance at wrestlekingdom 8 or 9 with the pole dancers? Freakin epic. Fast forward a couple years in the WWE and he's a geek.
> 
> WWE just cannot make stars anymore. It's almost like they refuse to.


 Compared to the soulness, bland jabronis on the main roster, they look like Rock and Austin.


----------



## Shellyrocks

*Re: RAW has no stars*

I made a similar thread on this Roman is out with cancer, Braun is injured, Brock doesnt give a fuck. Vince shouldnt of relied on Roman and he shouldnt of gave the title to Brock when he doesnt wanna do a full time schedule


----------



## validreasoning

Ace said:


> The brand does that, it's not actually them drawing those numbers. The impact they have is actually the difference between what they do when theyre on or not on shows this has been proven to be minimal since the started marginalising stars.


So if they pushed health Slater and rhyno as top top talent it would draw same numbers? Nah. brand value mattered little when they tried touring with 205 live.

Cena is clear difference maker and Brock, Rousey have noticeable effect on business when booked in significant spots on the card.



rbl85 said:


> Those guys are not even big draws.
> 
> Only The Rock and Hogan are known world wide.


Cena is one of biggest wwe draws ever. Only Hogan and Bruno have headlined more 10k houses in company history. Rock and Austin were hotter at peak obviously but Cena had more longevity on top easily than both


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



validreasoning said:


> So if they pushed health Slater and rhyno as top top talent it would draw same numbers? Nah. brand value mattered little when they tried touring with 205 live.
> 
> Cena is clear difference maker and Brock, Rousey have noticeable effect on business when booked in significant spots on the card.
> 
> 
> 
> Cena is one of biggest wwe draws ever. Only Hogan and Bruno have headlined more 10k houses in company history. Rock and Austin were hotter at peak obviously but Cena had more longevity on top easily than both


 Based on what?

They're doing declining numbers across the board so I have no clue how those three are making a difference.

Rousey has been the top star of Raw since Roman left and the shows have been doing record lows.

This year's MSG did poorly and this was headlined by Rousey and had Cena on the card (reportedly a lot of fans left before this match - could be due to being in a match with Nia).

You're coming off like a massive WWE shill.


----------



## Erramayhem89

Bestiswaswillbe said:


> Erramayhem89 said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL if you think Bliss doesn't draw
> 
> 
> 
> I like Alexa Bliss very much. I think shes awesome. But how in the blue fuck does that video prove anything about her drawing ability?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ace said:
> 
> 
> 
> The stage is bigger in the WWE because of Hogan, Austin and Rock.
> 
> NJPW has the actual stars and you're right about NXT wrestlers feeling like bigger stars, I said the same a week back.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I was actually saying the NXT wrestlers don't feel like stars to me either. I mean, they feel like bigger stars to me then the main roster wrestlers. But not big stars.
> 
> For instance Ciampa, Dream, Riccochet, Gargano, UE are cool but would still all be mid carders in the attitude era in my opinion. But yes they do feel like bigger stars then WWEs current main eventers.
> 
> I think it just has to do with WWE being terrible at making and even maintaining stars. Nakamura felt like a true star to me when I first heard about him and went and watched his wrestlekingdom NJPW matches. That entrance at wrestlekingdom 8 or 9 with the pole dancers? Freakin epic. Fast forward a couple years in the WWE and he's a geek.
> 
> WWE just cannot make stars anymore. It's almost like they refuse to.
Click to expand...

Guarantee you more people tune into see bliss than any of the other roody poos on the roster. Besides the ones I listed.


----------



## Bestiswaswillbe

*Re: RAW has no stars*



validreasoning said:


> So if they pushed health Slater and rhyno as top top talent it would draw same numbers? Nah. brand value mattered little when they tried touring with 205 live.
> 
> Cena is clear difference maker and Brock, Rousey have noticeable effect on business when booked in significant spots on the card.


Do you actually have any sources that show clearly that Cena, Brock or Ronda move the draw meter? I'm not saying you're lying, although personally I think you're mistaken.


----------



## Mordecay

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Of course they don't, the IIconics are on SD :grin2:

In all honesty, maybe Ronda and Brock, but Brock is barely there and Ronda should appear less to keep her special. The rest of the roster are geeks of different levels


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Bestiswaswillbe said:


> Do you actually have any sources that show clearly that Cena, Brock or Ronda move the draw meter? I'm not saying you're lying, although personally I think you're mistaken.


 Sure they're putting up prices of house shows but the company wouldn't be concerned about it if they were doing well.

Didn't Vince admit to it being poor and them knowing it was a concern and knew how to fix it on a conference call, hence the network shows and Starrcade branding to get people to go to shows.


----------



## Xenoblade

*Re: RAW has no stars*

of course..

For years the entire roster has been made to look dramatically inferior to both Roman and Brock...

Roman is out with cancer, and Brock never shows up ... so what are we left with? Minor leaguers because WWE booked them that way and they are that way in our minds....

Now it is impossible to build anyone up because there is nobody there that a win would truly mean something against.


----------



## InexorableJourney

Could the New Years ep go sub one million viewers. It feels like it.


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Xenoblade said:


> of course..
> 
> For years the entire roster has been made to look dramatically inferior to both Roman and Brock...
> 
> Roman is out with cancer, and Brock never shows up ... so what are we left with? Minor leaguers because WWE booked them that way and they are that way in our minds....
> 
> Now it is impossible to build anyone up because there is nobody there that a win would truly mean something against.


Why would you watch losers who the company has beat down for years and presented to be inferior betas who are nothing but obstacles for Roman to overcome.

Things will go back to normal when Roman is back i.e. the guy they've presented to be the only guy who matters. The WWE is his story, he's in the main character but they except us to watch his side kicks and secondary characters who they've told us to not care about for years?


----------



## validreasoning

Ace said:


> They're doing declining numbers across the board so I have no clue how those three are making a difference.
> 
> Rousey has been the top star of Raw since Roman left and the shows have been doing record lows.
> 
> This year's MSG did poorly and this was headlined by Rousey and had Cena on the card.
> 
> You're coming off like a massive WWE shill.


Msg drew 12k at a period wwe have completely flooded NYC market with big shows last 12-15 months like Summerslam 2017/18, Wrestlemania 35, raw 25 as well as b shows like evolution, backlash.

I mean if you don't want to debate fair enough. Prove to me that Omega is a bigger draw than a guy that's got Hollywood after him, another who has ufc after him and another who led wwe to it's most network subs ever. It's not like njpw has seen a big increase in business since taking title off okada. Tanahashi not Omega is driving ticket sales for WK.

If Lesnar or Cena signed with njpw their business would see huge boosts. I mean look at Jericho and how he increased njpw world subs and jericho has never been the same level of a Brock or cena or reigns either


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



validreasoning said:


> Msg drew 12k at a period wwe have completely flooded NYC market with big shows last 12-15 months like Summerslam 2017/18, Wrestlemania 35, raw 25 as well as b shows like evolution, backlash.
> 
> I mean if you don't want to debate fair enough. Prove to me that Omega is a bigger draw than a guy that's got Hollywood after him, another who has ufc after him and another who led wwe to it's most network subs ever. It's not like njpw has seen a big increase in business since talking title off one a. Tanahashi not Omega is driving ticket sales for WK.
> 
> If Lesnar or Cena signed with njpw their business would see huge boosts. I mean look at Jericho and how he increased njpw world subs and jericho has never been the same level of a Brock or cena or reigns either


 Prove to me how Brock, Ronda and Cena have minimised those losses.

You can't.

I've been following the numbers here and there and the impact they have on ratings ranges from nil to the tens of thousands. While attendance is at best in the hundreds. You can't even say that anymore with house show business declining to the point I hear is they're breaking even/making a loss.

The numbers are there to see with NJPW and ROH growing ~20 percent yearly and attendance up. WWE business is also improving due to their big TV deals (new one yet to come into effect which will make them even more profitable) but their ratings and attendances are down.

Meltzer even discussed how Omega was a bigger attendance draw than Cena last year and he has all the numbers.


----------



## validreasoning

Ace said:


> Meltzer even discussed how Omega was a bigger attendance draw than Cena last year and he has all the numbers.


For which he was mocked on his own forum website

Brock's worked two houseshows in 2018, one was 15k in Chicago, the other 14k in MSG both significantly above what wwe normally draws for houseshows. Cenas effect on wwes business has been well publicized. Their houseshows and tv tapings have seen major increase this past week with him on cards.

Finn Balor as top guy in nxt saw that brand significantly increase in business. Do you consider Finn a bigger draw than Brock or cena?


----------



## RamPaige

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Wrestling as a whole isn't a draw anymore. It doesn't matter who they bring, the ratings will relatively be the same.


----------



## Bestiswaswillbe

*Re: RAW has no stars*



validreasoning said:


> For which he was mocked on his own forum website
> 
> Brock's worked two houseshows in 2018, one was 15k in Chicago, the other 14k in MSG both significantly above what wwe normally draws for houseshows. *Cenas effect on wwes business has been well publicized. Their houseshows and tv tapings have seen major increase this past week with him on cards.*
> 
> Finn Balor as top guy in nxt saw that brand significantly increase in business. Do you consider Finn a bigger draw than Brock or cena?


Didn't the MSG show recently with Cena headlining do the events worst numbers in years? That's what I've been hearing at least.


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



validreasoning said:


> For which he was mocked on his own forum website
> 
> Brock's worked two houseshows in 2018, one was 15k in Chicago, the other 14k in MSG both significantly above what wwe normally draws for houseshows. Cenas effect on business on wwes business has been well publicized. Their houseshows and tv tapings have seen major increase this past week with him on cards.
> 
> Finn Balor as top guy in nxt saw that brand significantly increase in business. Do you consider Finn a bigger draw than Brock or cena?


 All in sold out in minutes with Omega and Okada the only big names announced for the card.

Is that impressive or is it Brock unlikely selling 1-2k tickets for the biggest wrestling promotion in the world when he's shown little evidence he's at that level to do so the last few years.

Likewise, the NJPW/ROH MSG show sold out in minutes with Okada and Omega the only stars on the show.

Hell wasn't there a ROH show which drew really well (record for the company at that time, think it was even a sell out) ande only thing announced was Kenny :lmao :lmao

These promotions don't have the marketing power of the WWE behind them either so star power means a lot more because the show or company isn't going to be the big draw like it is with the WWE.

You bring up Jericho... wtf was he doing for the WWE? Nothing he wasn't drawing shit, he was just another body there to eat pins. In that company the wrestlers are not the draws. Cena and Lesnar would do well outside the company and draw big, in the WWE they wont because the WWE is not about that life.


----------



## JDP2016

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Erramayhem89 said:


> Alexa is one of the 3 actual stars on RAW. Roman and Brock are the others. People definitely tune in to watch Alexa srs.
> 
> Everyone else is a nobody because they aren't over or aren't booked well and are ruined.


Alexa, while not wrestling, is still getting TV time each week and ratings are no different.



Erramayhem89 said:


> LOL if you think Bliss doesn't draw


Ohh give me a fucking break. That was well over a year ago.


----------



## BulletClubFangirl

*Re: RAW has no stars*

When a bum like Ambrose is your brand's biggest active champion then you know you have a problem.


----------



## UniversalGleam

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Vince only putting time and effort into building roman is like having a garden of carrots and deciding that one carrot it going to be the best and biggest carrot ever despite there being no evidence that it will be, you spend all your time tending to that one carrot and waiting for it to grow then one day a rabbit steals that carrot. You turn to the rest of your garden for your other carrots and realise that everything else is weeds because you neglected it.

vince is sat in his garden of weeds wondering what went wrong.

lesson here is that wwe should be building a group of people, not just one or two. Building roman was fine but wwe really shouldve been building another five people to support that and ensure there is always a backup with a further five guys in the mid card.

I have personally never understood the FOTC model. If there is no-one of worth for "the guy" to fight then why are people going to care?

wwe used to have a solid group of mid carders to bump up when the time called for it. These days there is nothing because wwe doesnt bother to build anyone. They either enter straight into main event, peak too early and burn out or just stay in the bottom of the barrel before they leave because they are fed up.


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Bestiswaswillbe said:


> Didn't the MSG show recently with Cena headlining do the events worst numbers in years? That's what I've been hearing at least.


 Ronda main evented this show as well, according to reports half the fans left before/during the match.

What some people don't realize is Brock/Ronda aren't anywhere near the same draws as they were in UFC. If they go back to UFC both could do huge PPV buys and Brock would make a big mark in NJPW and ROH, but in the WWE it just doesn't translate as they don't present their stars well or they just don't draw.


----------



## SPCDRI

I know there's no Monday Night Football, but that last game was a stinker and NYE is when a bunch of college football bowl games happen, so anybody into football is probably going to watch a bunch of college football today. At all the NYE parties, there's always college football on somewhere and not RAW. This is going sub two million again.


----------



## The Raw Smackdown

*Re: RAW has no stars*



RamPaige said:


> Wrestling as a whole isn't a draw anymore. It doesn't matter who they bring, the ratings will relatively be the same.


Exactly lol. I don't understand why people talk about stars and who draw and who doesn't. Wrestling is irrelevant in 2018/2019 so nobody is going to draw and nobody is going to be a legit star. Period.


----------



## Desecrated

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Wrestling isn't a draw anymore because years of WWE super-marks telling people "to shut up or leave" has actually worked.

A good rule of thumb for people to live by is everytime you see someone saying "stop watching then", 3 fans have already stopped.


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

*Re: RAW has no stars*

The shield flopped. WWE placed all their eggs in the Roman basket. Sadly he is out but he wasnt a draw or star either way. Anyone on the roster could be Roman in his spot.

Ambrose and Rollins just dont have it. All 3 have hogged RAW for years now.

I put blame on Lesner as well not sticking around .having no world title to build stars around really hurts the brand. I see no proof of Lesner ever being a draw since his return and even if he kinda is that would be a network draw. He does nothing on TV.


----------



## ellthom

*Re: RAW has no stars*

WWE's fault for putting all their eggs in one basket with Roman Reigns and then just side lining everyone else. Hell they didn't even do Roman many favours by having him constantly lose to Lesner, and speaking of Lesner he has been booked to be the biggest loser of stars in the company a shell of his more star studded self from his pre-UFC days, or even his UFC days.

WWE needs to stop single focusing on one guy to build the company around, this whole 'Face of the company' stuff is as dated as the people who run the WWE. It isn't the 80's or 90's anymore, you are not going to satisfy everyone in the internet generation with one man.


----------



## Erramayhem89

*Re: RAW has no stars*



CenaBoy4Life said:


> The shield flopped. WWE placed all their eggs in the Roman basket. Sadly he is out but he wasnt a draw or star either way. Anyone on the roster could be Roman in his spot.
> 
> Ambrose and Rollins just dont have it. All 3 have hogged RAW for years now.
> 
> I put blame on Lesner as well not sticking around .having no world title to build stars around really hurts the brand. I see no proof of Lesner ever being a draw since his return and even if he kinda is that would be a network draw. He does nothing on TV.


What's sad is they literally have no other option to give the title to besides AJ. I can see Brock having the title for another year or two and still not showing up. Roman or Seth are not good enough to hold that title.


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



CenaBoy4Life said:


> The shield flopped. WWE placed all their eggs in the Roman basket. Sadly he is out but he wasnt a draw or star either way. Anyone on the roster could be Roman in his spot.
> 
> Ambrose and Rollins just dont have it. All 3 have hogged RAW for years now.
> 
> I put blame on Lesner as well not sticking around .having no world title to build stars around really hurts the brand. I see no proof of Lesner ever being a draw since his return and even if he kinda is that would be a network draw. He does nothing on TV.


 To be fair to Seth, he hasn't been elevated to top star since Roman left and Ambrose's heel turn has been booked like absolute shite.


----------



## Chan Hung

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Raw has talent, BUT..the talent is not doing squat and is in worthless angles/repetitive & or boring matchups, and there's no reason if they dont care why the audience should?

Here you have: Nakamura, AJ Styles, Dean Ambrose, Seth Rollins, Rey Mysterio, Jeff Hardy, Samoa Joe but you would never know it because they are all de-valued. Their value or worth is low. No energy, no urgency from the stars, writers, creative. ALL Talk,NO Action.

Same old shit. Rewash. The men arent even main eventing anymore. I think this could actually hurt the WWE somewhat. And this is nothing against the women, they've been more entertaining but to be honest this lack of motivating male figures at the top is going to have a major impact. You cant just have a 'special' and bring back a couple former guys like Brock, Cena and expect fans will stick around. Not today. You need to really change it up in 2019 WWE, most of your viewers will SKIP live tv and just see the highlights now.


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Chan Hung said:


> Raw has talent, BUT..the talent is not doing squat and is in worthless angles/repetitive & or boring matchups, and there's no reason if they dont care why the audience should?
> 
> Here you have: Nakamura, AJ Styles, Dean Ambrose, Seth Rollins, Rey Mysterio, Jeff Hardy, Samoa Joe but you would never know it because they are all de-valued. Their value or worth is low. No energy, no urgency from the stars, writers, creative. ALL Talk,NO Action.
> 
> Same old shit. Rewash. The men arent even main eventing anymore. I think this could actually hurt the WWE somewhat. And this is nothing against the women, they've been more entertaining but to be honest this lack of motivating male figures at the top is going to have a major impact. You cant just have a 'special' and bring back a couple former guys like Brock, Cena and expect fans will stick around. Not today. You need to really change it up in 2019 WWE, most of your viewers will SKIP live tv and just see the highlights now.


 Man what happened to Nakamura....

It's sad to see him where he is now... I saw him for the first time in ~2014 and he came off like one of the coolest/most charismatic people ever in his entrance but now he's nothing, a goofy dude who does filler TV.

And you're right about the men, the problem is no one is hot so its justified to keep them in the midcard. But the more they do it, the more fans they're going to drive out the door.

It's come to a point where Roman Reigns could be the savior of mens wrestling/WWE... and this is coming from a big Reigns detractor...


----------



## Chan Hung

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Ace said:


> Man what happened to Nakamura....
> 
> It's sad to see him where he is now... I saw him for the first time in ~2014 and he came off like one of the coolest/most charismatic people ever in his entrance but now he's nothing, a goofy dude who does filler TV.
> 
> And you're right about the men, the problem is no one is hot so its justified to keep them in the midcard.


This! Remember not long Nakamura was a good heel, low blowing and everything? Seemed like he had potential, 'no speak english' lol..etc..and Man they dropped it with him. Imagine RKO, Nakamura, Bryan in least a heel stable. Man. Oh well.
Seems like when things are hot they f'it up.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

*Re: RAW has no stars*

They have fucked up everyone not named Ronda, Becky, Bryan & AJ. Even Seth and Braun have been completely fucked up. So that leaves just Ronda from Raw un-fucked. Ambrose's heel turn has been a complete disaster.


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



SayWhatAgain! said:


> They have fucked up everyone not named Ronda, Becky, Bryan & AJ. Even Seth and Braun have been completely fucked up. So that leaves just Ronda from Raw un-fucked. Ambrose's heel turn has been a complete disaster.


 How have they not fucked up AJ? His popularity has taken a massive hit WHILE being the champion on SD for over year.

Dude ate low blows for the entirety of the year and had feuds go on for months on end with fuck finishes. Then there's him rarely appearing on the show or being an afterthought when he is. He's one of the worst booked top babyfaces I've seen, fuck he even tapped out to Joe and claimed the cheap victory after the man had harassed his family for months. That's beta shit right there.


----------



## Chan Hung

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Look at Joe, another talent that could be in Brock's place heeling it up, but nope.


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Chan Hung said:


> Look at Joe, another talent that could be in Brock's place heeling it up, but nope.


 Joe could have taken the title off Brock at GBOF or off AJ at Summerslam/CJ :cry


----------



## virus21

*Re: RAW has no stars*



ellthom said:


> WWE's fault for putting all their eggs in one basket with Roman Reigns and then just side lining everyone else. Hell they didn't even do Roman many favours by having him constantly lose to Lesner, and speaking of Lesner he has been booked to be the biggest loser of stars in the company a shell of his more star studded self from his pre-UFC days, or even his UFC days.
> 
> WWE needs to stop single focusing on one guy to build the company around, this whole 'Face of the company' stuff is as dated as the people who run the WWE. It isn't the 80's or 90's anymore, you are not going to satisfy everyone in the internet generation with one man.


The face of the company thing wasn't even true back in the day. Hogan and Austin may have been the most popular guys in their day, but they weren't the end all, be all of the company. They still had other guys that held interest during the time.

WWE's failing is that they were so interested in making a new top guy that they sacrificed everyone to get him, even when it clearly wasn't working. They made the same mistake that WCW did when they signed Hogan. Look how that turned out.


----------



## BulletClubFangirl

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Even if Roman was FOTC material why would you entrust the weight of your company to someone with such serious health problems? Vince knew all along after all.


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



BulletClubFangirl said:


> Even if Roman was FOTC material why would you entrust the weight of your company to someone with such serious health problems? Vince knew all along after all.


 I ripped on Roman a lot but him leaving has left a massive void. The company is so fucked without him. 

Roman leaving brought down an entire division. Who knows when it will recover.

Man I'm going to mark like crazy if he returns to the Rumble in 2020, he'll bring importance and the spotlight back to a dead division. The fans will be right behind him too and elevate him to that level Vince always wanted.


----------



## Y2JHOLLA

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Alexa :lmao


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*

When the Raw has no stars thread has almost as many posts than the Live Raw discussion thread :lmao

These are the end days (of relevance - they had some left).


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Raw is The Shield show and has been since the brand split. Those three bums (Ambrose gets dragged down by being endlessly associated with garbage like Reigns/Rollins) still aren’t stars despite WWE dedicating their entire direction to them since they debuted. Everyone else on the roster is repeatedly fed to one or all three of them.


----------



## BulletClubFangirl

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Ace said:


> I ripped on Roman a lot but him leaving has left a massive void. The company is so fucked without him.
> 
> Roman leaving brought down an entire division. Who knows when it will recover.
> 
> Man I'm going to mark like crazy if he returns to the Rumble in 2020, he'll bring importance and the spotlight back to a dead division. The fans will be right behind him too and elevate him to that level Vince always wanted.


you really do flip flop on everything lol.


----------



## Chan Hung

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Ace said:


> When the Raw has no stars thread has almost as many posts than the Live Raw discussion thread :lmao
> 
> These are the end days (of relevance - they had some left).


Haha, Good point!

You know i just thought of something... :hmm

McMahons mentioned that the show was gonna be what the fans want. How are they going to really know what the majority of fans want? Through social media? Through boos and cheers? Maybe this is a sneaky way to still do things the McMahon way yet blame failure on the fans. To pretend the fans wanted it lol. :vince


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



BulletClubFangirl said:


> you really do flip flop on everything lol.


 Look at the ratings, Raw and the state of the heavyweight division, what have I said that is wrong? I ripped on Roman a lot because he was pushed above everyone (never lost, got the big matches, the big stage and most opportunities) and the he was the obstacle standing in my favorites way, without him they're less than worthless. 

At least with him there they booked the division better than it is now. You would have thought with him out they'd elevate guys to that level, but no. They've done that with the women and made the men look worse because they're beneath a division which was treated as a joke a couple years ago. That's just more things they're beneath to make my favorites feel smaller.

Most would agree the heavyweight division is really bad atm, even with the womens stuff they're doing they were going to close WM with Roman. Once Roman went down, Ronda became the de facto top star in the company and they started pushing that division more at the expense of the men. I'm not going to trust them to rebuild it until Roman comes back because he's shown to be the only guy they care about.

I'd rather my favorites be back in Roman's shadow than be complete nobodies because at least then they'll get the opportunity to be in the spotlight when they're involved with him. Without him, they get no spotlight. I thought they'd get more opportunities without him getting the rocket push or being there but that doesn't appear to be the case.


----------



## Adam Cool

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Ambrose was gonna Main Event against Roman

Now he is likely gonna be in the pre Show

Ace is right


----------



## BulletClubFangirl

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Ace said:


> Look at the ratings, Raw and the heavyweight division, what have I said that is wrong?
> 
> Most would agree the heavyweight division is really bad right now, even with the womens stuff they;re doing atm, they were going to close with Roman. Once Roman went down, Ronda became the defacto top star in the company and they started pushing that division more at the expense of the men. I'm not going to trust them to rebuild it until Roman comes back because he's shown to be the only guy they care about.


I'm not convinced that Roman is the reason for that since the ratings are always going down the shitter and the holiday season is usually bad anyway iirc. I agree that there's a void without him but like many in this thread have pointed out it's due to WWE putting almost all of their eggs in with him. The best remedy isn't to go back to doing just that, they need to start building other stars. 

As for flip flopping the point is you were vehemently against Roman before he left and constantly stating that he'd never be FOTC material. Probably more so than anyone else on this site who comes to mind. To go from that to saying you'd mark out for him returning at the rumble and predicting that he'll be supported as FOTC by fans now is just lol-worthy. You can justify it however you want but you have a habit of flip flopping.


----------



## Ace

Adam Cool said:


> Ambrose was gonna Main Event against Roman
> 
> Now he is likely gonna be in the pre Show
> 
> Ace is right


 They got me to cheer for Roman (cancer aside..). 

I can't believe it :lmao



BulletClubFangirl said:


> I'm not convinced that Roman is the reason for that since the ratings are always going down the shitter and the holiday season is usually bad anyway iirc. I agree that there's a void without him but like many in this thread have pointed out it's due to WWE putting almost all of their eggs in with him. The best remedy isn't to go back to doing just that, they need to start building other stars.
> 
> As for flip flopping the point is you were vehemently against Roman before he left and constantly stating that he'd never be FOTC material. Probably more so than anyone else on this site who comes to mind. To go from that to saying you'd mark out for him returning at the rumble and predicting that he'll be supported as FOTC by fans now is just lol-worthy. You can justify it however you want but you have a habit of flip flopping.


 Do you think fans are going to boo a man who is fighting cancer and opened up like he did to the world before he left? He's going to get a heroes welcome and cheered for winning a Rumble..

Ratings have died because the show has lost the only guy (top star/main character) they've trained fans to care about, ratings aside you can't tell me the show is lacking star power without him there. It may have taken years, but they got him there and without him the show is worse off. It doesn't help they're so reluctant/slow to elevate someone to that level to replace Roman. They need a new top star, they've made Ronda that star but she's in the womens division, they need a new top male star.

Look at the alternative - do I watch my favorites be left in the dark forever and be a part of a dead division or do I hope Roman returns and normalcy is returned and there's still the spotlight they can share with Roman? I don't back them to elevate someone up to that level because Roman is still their guy so I'm skeptical they'll commit.

Being in Roman's shadow is better than being nothing. I don't get why you don't understand this..


----------



## BulletClubFangirl

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Ace said:


> Do you think fans are going to boo a man who is fighting cancer and opened up like he did to the world before he left? He's going to get a heroes welcome...
> 
> Ratings have died because the show has lost the guy they've trained fans to care about, ratings aside you can't tell me the show is lacking star power without him there. It may have taken years, but they got him there and without him the show is worse off. It doesn't help they're so reluctant/slow to elevate someone to that level to replace Roman.


I don't think sympathy is going to translate to long-term popularity. He'll definitely get a giant pop when he comes back but I expect the crowds to at least be apathetic towards him as a performer within a month or so of his return. He was getting some "what" chants during his leukemia speech so there's also a segment of fans, as assholeish as they might be, who simply don't give a shit. 

Then why were ratings going down with him there and being pushed harder than everyone besides Brock for years? Some say the Brock feud damaged him which I think is true but even before that he had a long period of being the guy while ratings dropped.


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



BulletClubFangirl said:


> I don't think sympathy is going to translate to long-term popularity. He'll definitely get a giant pop when he comes back but I expect the crowds to at least be apathetic towards him as a performer within a month or so of his return. He was getting some "what" chants during his leukemia speech so there's also a segment of fans, as assholeish as they might be, who simply don't give a shit.
> 
> Then why were ratings going down with him there and being pushed harder than everyone besides Brock for years? Some say the Brock feud damaged him which I think is true but even before that he had a long period of being the guy while ratings dropped.


 Ratings were declining, but after a couple weeks the ratings dropped at a far greater rate. I don't think you can call it a coincidence. Roman is the top star of the company who has main evented 4 straight WMs so it's not really surprising. Maybe if they fill the void things will pick up again.

I welcome the shadow.


----------



## venkyrenga

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Ace said:


> K*enny Omega is a bigger star than any male wrestler in this company.*
> 
> Take that haters :heston
> 
> Wrestling bingo halls :lol
> 
> The man actually draws crowds and isnt in a company which relies on the brand or nostalgia to draw.


Did you forget Lesnar? If you are only talking about full timers Styles? Bryan? and oh! Orton?


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



venkyrenga said:


> Did you forget Lesnar? If you are only talking about full timers Styles? Bryan? and oh! Orton?


 None of them draw big/well for the WWE. 

Styles, Bryan and Orton make little to no difference while Lesnar's drawing power has been declining. 

Now if these guys were to leave the WWE, I could see them drawing a lot more as weird as it sounds... Jericho was the same, he did nothing for the WWE whereas outside it he's drawing quite well.

Lesnar can draw huge for the UFC and ROH (he'd sell out shows on his name alone) and do really well in NJPW. The WWE doesn't present its top stars well and rely more on the brand name to sell tickets. You'll sell a certain amount of tickets without any stars announced for the show, then if you were to announce them you'd make a minimal difference.. I know it's strange because it shouldn't be like this and you should logically do the same. But it's not the case.

The feats Kenny has achieved the last year or two have been phenomenal.


----------



## Bestiswaswillbe

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Ace said:


> I ripped on Roman a lot but him leaving has left a massive void. The company is so fucked without him.
> 
> Roman leaving brought down an entire division. Who knows when it will recover.
> 
> Man I'm going to mark like crazy if he returns to the Rumble in 2020, he'll bring importance and the spotlight back to a dead division. The fans will be right behind him too and elevate him to that level Vince always wanted.


I don't know about that. Sucks the guy got cancer and what not. As a human being, I wish him the best. But me or any of my IRL friends who I watch wrestling with aren't going to cheer him if/when he returns. I mean I'd give him a clap for beating cancer but I ain't cheering another super man push, fuck that trash.

Roman is terrible. He may get some sympathy pops at first but people will go right back to booing him out of the building once his super man push continues and tbh if you aren't booing him... 

FICKLE !!!


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Bestiswaswillbe said:


> I don't know about that. Sucks the guy got cancer and what not. As a human being, I wish him the best. But me or any of my IRL friends who I watch wrestling with aren't going to cheer him if/when he returns. I mean I'd give him a clap for beating cancer but I ain't cheering another super man push, fuck that trash.
> 
> Roman is terrible. He may get some sympathy pops at first but people will go right back to booing him out of the building once his super man push continues and tbh if you aren't booing him...
> 
> FICKLE !!!


 I would have been part of the crowd who cheered him on his return and journey back to the title (it's a good story) and that would be that. I can't rip on a guy who has/beat cancer, the super push would still be annoying, but I wouldn't be able to criticize it. It's the sorry state of the division which might actually get me to drop it altogether and make me more accepting of him running through everyone. At least my favorites will have a spotlight when they're working with him or are being built up to face him.

Of course this is out the window if they actually elevate some guys to the next level like I had hoped would happen with Roman out battling cancer. I'm skeptical of it with how they've booked the last 5 years, and done with the division since he left.


----------



## venkyrenga

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Ace said:


> None of them draw big/well for the WWE.
> 
> Styles, Bryan and Orton make little to no difference while Lesnar's drawing power has been declining.
> 
> Now if these guys were to leave the WWE, I could see them drawing a lot more as weird as it sounds... Jericho was the same, he did nothing for the WWE whereas outside it he's drawing quite well.
> 
> Lesnar can draw huge for the UFC and ROH (he'd sell out shows on his name alone) and do really well in NJPW. The WWE doesn't present its top stars well and rely more on the brand name to sell tickets. You'll sell a certain amount of tickets without any stars announced for the show, then if you were to announce them you'd make a minimal difference.. I know it's strange because it shouldn't be like this and you should logically do the same. But it's not the case.
> 
> The feats Kenny has achieved the last year or two have been phenomenal.


It doesn't matter. The bottom line is they are all bigger stars than Omega.


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



venkyrenga said:


> It doesn't matter. The bottom line is they are all bigger stars than Omega.


 A ROH PPV show in October with only Kenny Omega announced sold more tickets on the first day than any other event in company history.

Then there's All In and the MSG show which you can heavily credit Kenny for. These companies don't have the brand the WWE have, they're going to sell a certain amount of tickets of regardless of who is on the show. These smaller companies rely on names more, this is why I find these feats a lot more impressive.


----------



## Bestiswaswillbe

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Ace said:


> I would have been part of the crowd who cheered him on his return and that was that, I can't rip on a guy who has/beat cancer. The super push would still be annoying, but I wont be able to criticize it. It's the sorry state of the division which might actually get me to drop it altogether and make me more accepting of him running through everyone. At least my favorites will have a spotlight when they're working with him or are being built up to face him.


I'm just disagreeing with the part where you said "fans will be right behind him". I mean he got 75%-90% boos before he announced his cancer, it's pretty much guaranteed that after the initial respect for beating cancer return pop he's going to get booed out of the building the following months again if they continue his super man push.

Raw may be shitty now, but I'm honestly enjoying it more with him gone. At least it's a lot more unpredictable. I'm definitely not looking forward to his return (as a wrestling character) unless his role is significantly changed.


----------



## venkyrenga

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Ace said:


> A ROH PPV show in October with only Kenny Omega announced sold more tickets on the first day than any other event in company history.
> 
> Then there's All In and the MSG show which you can heavily credit Kenny for. These companies don't have the brand the WWE have, they're going to sell a certain amount of tickets of regardless of who is on the show. These smaller companies rely on names more, this is why I find these feats a lot more impressive.


Well this 'no one is a draw anymore in wwe' is a common misconception. If that is the case they wouldn't have to hang on to Brock, HHH, Taker, Goldberg, etc. for every Mania. Maina wouldn't be Mania without them. Do you think wwe could have sold 70k+ in MCG without HHH v Taker? Definitely not. There is a reason they had HHH announce the match right after SS. Even though these stars don't make a huge impact in ratings every time they are on tv, they have the fans invested in the product which will have a long term impact. WWE is not paying them millions for nothing. Omega is a dwarf compared to the star power of Lesnar or even HHH.


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Bestiswaswillbe said:


> I'm just disagreeing with the part where you said "fans will be right behind him". I mean he got 75%-90% boos before he announced his cancer, it's pretty much guaranteed that after the initial respect for beating cancer return pop he's going to get booed out of the building the following months again if they continue his super man push.
> 
> Raw may be shitty now, but I'm honestly enjoying it more with him gone. At least it's a lot more unpredictable. I'm definitely not looking forward to his return (as a wrestling character) unless his role is significantly changed.


 I was thinking on the bright side (no I didn't want Roman to get cancer and sit out) at least they can use this as an opportunity to elevate others, however from what they've done so far makes me think they're not going to do it and will wait for Roman to return.

SS was supposed to be main evented by Ronda and Becky, the first ever SD title match to main event a dual brand PPV since the split was the SD womens championship.. It's as if they've put their hands up and said, 'Okay, we've lost Roman for the time being but we're not going to replace him at the top and complicate things. Ronda will carry the company until he's back'.

It could be that they're slow doing it with Braun's injury and Seth's push coming after the Rumble. I'm leaning towards them focusing on Ronda and the women, Seth isn't going to be main eventing WM and the womens RR will probably go on after his big win too. Ronda is the FOTC and as a result the womens division is the top division, because they need to highlight it to highlight Ronda.


----------



## Whacker

*Re: RAW has no stars*

It's almost a masterful act of suppression how they've managed to not get anyone over with as much talent as they have.


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



venkyrenga said:


> Well this 'no one is a draw anymore in wwe' is a common misconception. If that is the case they wouldn't have to hang on to Brock, HHH, Taker, Goldberg, etc. for every Mania. Maina wouldn't be Mania without them. Do you think wwe could have sold 70k+ in MCG without HHH v Taker? Definitely not. There is a reason they had HHH announce the match right after SS. Even though these stars don't make a huge impact in ratings every time they are on tv, they have the fans invested in the product which will have a long term impact. WWE is not paying them millions for nothing. Omega is a dwarf compared to the star power of Lesnar or even HHH.


 Lesnar is a bigger draw, but in terms of feats Omega's have been a lot more impressive lately. Lesnar would be able to pull off more impressive feats. outside the WWE. It's in the WWE you don't see his full drawing ability because the brand is going to sell x amount of tickets regardless (higher baseline). That's what I'm getting at.

The brand and the sum of all parts (all wrestlers), while NJPW and ROH are more star based where the names matter a lot more as the brand doesn't have much appeal/recognition/reach of a company like WWE.


----------



## venkyrenga

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Ace said:


> Lesnar is a bigger draw, but in terms of feats Omega's have been a lot more impressive lately. Lesnar would be able to pull off more impressive feats. outside the WWE. It's in the WWE you don't see his full drawing ability because the brand is going to sell x amount of tickets regardless (higher baseline). That's what I'm getting at.
> 
> The brand and the sum of all parts (all wrestlers), while NJPW and ROH are more star based where the names matter a lot more as the brand doesn't have much appeal/recognition/reach of a company like WWE.


Well, you have change your argument. I was simply stating that the top stars of wwe are bigger stars than Omega.


----------



## Ace

*Re: RAW has no stars*



venkyrenga said:


> Well, you have change your argument. I was simply stating that the top stars of wwe are bigger stars than Omega.


That was my point...

There's different ways you can interpret stardom..

Presentation, reach, drawing etc.

WWE stars obviously have a bigger reach because they're in the biggest company in the world.

Drawing is more difficult to determine because the brand is going to draw a decent amount without any stars. And some guys would draw more elsewhere (UFC, ROH and NJPW where it is star driven). But it's safe to assume someone like Lesnar would draw huge in the Indys or those other promotions (look at Jericho or Cody Rhodes).

Presentation isn't debate and that was my main point. I only brought up drawing power for Kenny because his feats were impressive and you could make a case for him in terms of ability ATM. I think the drawing power of the likes of AJ, Seth, Braun, Bryan etc. tier guys is nil, while the guys above them are ambiguous due to declining numbers and the brand selling most of these tickets. But you have a point about foreign markets like Australia where they wouldn't have gotten close to selling 60,000 without HHH, Taker or Lesnar as they're the recognised names and the brand isn't as strong.


----------



## erebos

*Re: RAW has no stars*



rbl85 said:


> I forgot that getting a pop once in while is being a draw….
> 
> 
> Asuka must a big draw to because she got quite a few pops lately, no ?




You compare a facepop with a heelpop? You know heels should be hated, right?


----------



## The Frisky

*Re: RAW has no stars*

You're not wrong. I don't see any larger-than-life stars on RAW or Smackdown, except maybe AJ and Byran. The rest are meh.


----------



## Adam Cool

*Re: RAW has no stars*

This thread about to have more pages than the fucking Raw thread 
Lul


----------



## Bratista

*Re: RAW has no stars*

FUCKSSAKE MAN!!!

Lesnar is one of the reasons why ratings are so bad in the first place.

I can't take another fucking year of Smarkbuster dickriding and Vince Russo/Kevin-wannabe retardation. I seriously can't............. It's just getting fucking beyond a joke now.


----------



## Interceptor88

*Re: RAW has no stars*

And now do you realize it?

WWE has been a wasteland for years. 

Shawn Michaels, Triple H, Edge, Batista, The Undertaker, John Cena with the contribution of the likes of Chris Jericho, the Hardys, Rey Mysterio, CM Punk, Randy Orton, Kane, Christian and the late Sheamus and Bryan (and others like RVD and Angle on their primes, of course) made the 2004-2012 product way better than anything they have done after that. WWE is worse year after year. People can talk all they want about athleticism and crap but what really matters- larger than life character, thrilling stories and building credible and engaging main eventers- is in the worst possible status. 

As other people said, this is the No Draw Era. The Undertaker in a wheelchair is way more entertaining to watch than Ambrose, Rollins and Reigns combined. Sheamus and Bray Wyatt could've been huge but they have no idea about how to book their characters. Even really talented guys like Nakamura and AJ Styles feel like midcarders.


----------



## Crasp

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Sure they can't make stars anymore. Or perhaps it's truer to say they can't maintain them, because they do occasionally luck into something with someone but then entirely mishandle them. The issue is, as always, more to do with the booking, writing, & even the presentation. 

You could bring the biggest name outside of WWE into the company, but after the new car small fades, they end up just like everyone else. It happened to Nakamura. It's been happening to Ronda before our eyes. You can bring in as many Okadas & Omegas, or as many UFC stars as you want. They'll all suffocate on the WWE main roster before long.


----------



## TKOW

*Re: RAW has no stars*

You need to be able to tell stories with the right characters to create stars. WWE has no such power.


----------



## Greatsthegreats

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Erramayhem89 said:


> No stars and nobody is over because they don't even have Alexa or Brock on TV. Ratings will stay below 2 until they come back srs.


is there any proof of this?


----------



## EMGESP

*Re: RAW has no stars*

Ronda is the only true Raw Star, plus she isn't a part timer like Bork Laser.


----------



## rbl85

erebos said:


> You compare a facepop with a heelpop? You know heels should be hated, right?


When Asuka was a heel in NXT she still got a lot of pop. 

Now people don't care if a wrestler is a heel or a face.



EMGESP said:


> Ronda is the only true Raw Star, plus she isn't a part timer like Bork Laser.


She's not a star anymore


----------



## EMGESP

*Re: RAW has no stars*



rbl85 said:


> She's not a star anymore


LOL, yes she is. Don't be ignorant.


----------



## rbl85

*Re: RAW has no stars*



EMGESP said:


> LOL, yes she is. Don't be ignorant.


Depends what's is a "star" for you ?


----------



## EMGESP

*Re: RAW has no stars*



rbl85 said:


> Depends what's is a "star" for you ?


Well, she's not The Rock level star, but in comparison to every other full timer on the WWE she is indeed the biggest Star WWE currently has on Raw.


----------



## rbl85

*Re: RAW has no stars*



EMGESP said:


> Well, she's not The Rock level star, but in comparison to every other full timer on the WWE she is indeed the biggest Star WWE currently has on Raw.


I agree with you and that's the problem of WWE right now, the "biggest" star of WWE is far from being a BIG STAR.


----------



## EMGESP

*Re: RAW has no stars*



rbl85 said:


> I agree with you and that's the problem of WWE right now, the "biggest" star of WWE is far from being a BIG STAR.


WWE is not run in a way that someone can become a huge Star again. 

Vince doesn't want them to get too big and leave him.


----------



## Tornado31619

SayWhatAgain! said:


> Yeah because Alexa Bliss is such a huge draw.
> 
> They have Brock, when he can be bothered. Ronda, Seth and Braun, I would say they are stars. There's plenty of guys who could be stars given the right booking, Ambrose, Ziggler, Balor, Wyatt, Owens, Zayn, McIntyre, Roode, Lashley, Elias. Hell, even Jinder Mahal. If I worked for WWE I could make all of them stars. They just can't book for shit.


You can’t make everybody a star, only really a couple of guys at a time. WWE’s last major stars have either left for Hollywood, succumbed to injuries or joined a rival company. And the closest they currently have to being “stars” either want to start a family, only work part time or are dying. Ronda doesn’t seek a future with the company, Brock’s too old for one and Roman’s has been severely damaged.
Over the last four years, Roman has lost matches that Cena or Hogan would’ve been virtually guaranteed to go over in - this includes two WrestleManias. There’s a reason that no one receives the same treatment as them anymore: they can’t be trusted to. And before anyone mentions Lesnar, let’s just be clear that Hogan would never have put over Rollins, Goldberg and Roman in the way that Brock did. Yes, Hogan was a prima donna, but his booking was essential in his rise to superstardom - had he lost those matches, he would’ve ended up like Roman (booking wise) or even Braun. There’s a reason why nobody knows who the true FOTC is.

Oh, and I really want to add something.

Roman and Charlotte were viewed by officials as the stars, but you guys (not necessary you personally) rejected them. Everyone screamed for Becky and they gave her the title, leaving nothing for her to prove or gain beyond WrestleMania. Roman was being crammed down your throats, so WWE gave you Rollins. Now Rollins is overrated and so Bálor and McIntyre are getting pushed.

The fanbase is too fickle, and ultimately as much of the problem as creative.


----------



## EMGESP

Tornado31619 said:


> You can’t make everybody a star, only really a couple of guys at a time. WWE’s last major stars have either left for Hollywood, succumbed to injuries or joined a rival company. And the closest they currently have to being “stars” either want to start a family, only work part time or are dying. Ronda doesn’t seek a future with the company, Brock’s too old for one and Roman’s has been severely damaged.
> Over the last four years, Roman has lost matches that Cena or Hogan would’ve been virtually guaranteed to go over in - this includes two WrestleManias. There’s a reason that no one receives the same treatment as them anymore: they can’t be trusted to. And before anyone mentions Lesnar, let’s just be clear that Hogan would never have put over Rollins, Goldberg and Roman in the way that Brock did. Yes, Hogan was a prima donna, but his booking was essential in his rise to superstardom - had he lost those matches, he would’ve ended up like Roman (booking wise) or even Braun. There’s a reason why nobody knows who the true FOTC is.
> 
> Oh, and I really want to add something.
> 
> Roman and Charlotte were viewed by officials as the stars, but you guys (not necessary you personally) rejected them. Everyone screamed for Becky and they gave her the title, leaving nothing for her to prove or gain beyond WrestleMania. Roman was being crammed down your throats, so WWE gave you Rollins. Now Rollins is overrated and so Bálor and McIntyre are getting pushed.
> 
> The fanbase is too fickle, and ultimately as much of the problem as creative.


I personally just don't understand why Vince won't simply react to the crowd and give them what they want from the very beginning. He always reacts way too late and as a result it loses its impact. He still wants to treat the company like we are in the 80's/90's and that shit just doesn't fly now. Vince constantly wants to tell fans who they should/shouldn't be rooting for and thats such a out of date mindset.

I can't wait until HHH takes over creative. HHH might not be perfect, but he's as least in somewhat touch with todays audience. If he treats the main roster half as well as he does NXT, then we will finally see some good wrestling again for a change on Raw.


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: RAW has no stars*



Interceptor88 said:


> And now do you realize it?
> 
> WWE has been a wasteland for years.
> 
> Shawn Michaels, Triple H, Edge, Batista, The Undertaker, John Cena with the contribution of the likes of Chris Jericho, the Hardys, Rey Mysterio, CM Punk, Randy Orton, Kane, Christian and the late Sheamus and Bryan (and others like RVD and Angle on their primes, of course) made the 2004-2012 product way better than anything they have done after that. WWE is worse year after year. People can talk all they want about athleticism and crap but what really matters- larger than life character, thrilling stories and building credible and engaging main eventers- is in the worst possible status.
> 
> As other people said, this is the No Draw Era. The Undertaker in a wheelchair is way more entertaining to watch than Ambrose, Rollins and Reigns combined. Sheamus and Bray Wyatt could've been huge but they have no idea about how to book their characters. Even really talented guys like Nakamura and AJ Styles feel like midcarders.


One of the most spot on posts ever.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

'really talented guys like Nakamura'

:kobelol


----------



## ClintDagger

Tornado31619 said:


> You can’t make everybody a star, only really a couple of guys at a time. WWE’s last major stars have either left for Hollywood, succumbed to injuries or joined a rival company. And the closest they currently have to being “stars” either want to start a family, only work part time or are dying. Ronda doesn’t seek a future with the company, Brock’s too old for one and Roman’s has been severely damaged.
> Over the last four years, Roman has lost matches that Cena or Hogan would’ve been virtually guaranteed to go over in - this includes two WrestleManias. There’s a reason that no one receives the same treatment as them anymore: they can’t be trusted to. And before anyone mentions Lesnar, let’s just be clear that Hogan would never have put over Rollins, Goldberg and Roman in the way that Brock did. Yes, Hogan was a prima donna, but his booking was essential in his rise to superstardom - had he lost those matches, he would’ve ended up like Roman (booking wise) or even Braun. There’s a reason why nobody knows who the true FOTC is.
> 
> Oh, and I really want to add something.
> 
> Roman and Charlotte were viewed by officials as the stars, but you guys (not necessary you personally) rejected them. Everyone screamed for Becky and they gave her the title, leaving nothing for her to prove or gain beyond WrestleMania. Roman was being crammed down your throats, so WWE gave you Rollins. Now Rollins is overrated and so Bálor and McIntyre are getting pushed.
> 
> The fanbase is too fickle, and ultimately as much of the problem as creative.


This is a great post. The stuff about Vince blinking during Roman’s push is spot on. I do disagree that the fan base is fickle. I think they are just desperate. Fans are indecisive about who to get behind because no matter who they back WWE ends up screwing them up. So fans then shift their attention to the next person who seems to be gaining momentum. And on and on it goes. There are several examples of this in 2018 alone. I look at how hot Braun, Seth, and Elias got at various points while Vince was busy focused on something else. Then once he noticed the organic momentum he gets involved and kills it through micromanagement.



EMGESP said:


> LOL, yes she is. Don't be ignorant.


I think Rousey’s appeal to the mainstream lies solely in her as a UFC fighter. Even given how far she fell at the end of her career, if she announced a comeback fight I bet it would do strong PPV numbers. But those same people that will pay 70 bucks for a 15 max minute fight don’t seem to care to watch her on Raw even though it’s free. So while she does still have appeal, it’s very specific in nature; and I think when all is said & done the only value WWE will have got out of her is that her name probably meant something to Fox when they got that TV deal out of them given their familiarity with UFC. We’ll find out if all of a sudden she’s featured on SD come Fall of next year. And if that’s the case it probably was a good investment. But I don’t think she brings anything substantial by way of any eyeballs that are on the product. They could phase her out and I doubt the ratings trend would change at all.


----------



## shadows123

ClintDagger said:


> This is a great post. The stuff about Vince blinking during Roman’s push is spot on. I do disagree that the fan base is fickle. I think they are just desperate. Fans are indecisive about who to get behind because no matter who they back WWE ends up screwing them up. So fans then shift their attention to the next person who seems to be gaining momentum. And on and on it goes. There are several examples of this in 2018 alone. I look at how hot Braun, Seth, and Elias got at various points while Vince was busy focused on something else. Then once he noticed the organic momentum he gets involved and kills it through micromanagement.


It could also be that Vince was very out of touch with what the fan base wanted. Fan reactions were brushed aside as that of a "vocal minority" as repeated Vince, Triple H etc continued to shit on fans publicly in interviews and continued to push whoever they felt like.. As you mentioned, Braun was very hot but then Vince was more concerned with the Roman push.. Same goes for Seth who was made as a lackey to get Roman cheered.... its not that fans are indecisive but more like the fans are probably exhausted with the nonsense wwe puts out.. I mean, think about it, for one full year, Vince`s storyline for the world title was to hold back a bunch of guys so that Roman can kick out of multiple F5`s. No wonder the fans are exhausted with this bull shit. Now thats all over and Roman unfortunately has to step aside, the aforementioned people who were treated as jobbers are all thats left..So its no wonder no one is interested.


----------



## ClintDagger

shadows123 said:


> It could also be that Vince was very out of touch with what the fan base wanted. Fan reactions were brushed aside as that of a "vocal minority" as repeated Vince, Triple H etc continued to shit on fans publicly in interviews and continued to push whoever they felt like.. As you mentioned, Braun was very hot but then Vince was more concerned with the Roman push.. Same goes for Seth who was made as a lackey to get Roman cheered.... its not that fans are indecisive but more like the fans are probably exhausted with the nonsense wwe puts out.. I mean, think about it, for one full year, Vince`s storyline for the world title was to hold back a bunch of guys so that Roman can kick out of multiple F5`s. No wonder the fans are exhausted with this bull shit. Now thats all over and Roman unfortunately has to step aside, the aforementioned people who were treated as jobbers are all thats left..So its no wonder no one is interested.


I think you’re right too. There are exhausted and disgusted fans and a lot of those are the ones that are flat out leaving. And yeah now with Roman gone the guys that are left just can’t be taken seriously.

It really does come down to that Vince’s thinking is antiquated. First of all, it’s stupid in this era of workrate to invest so much into one guy. The thing that put Roman out wasn’t wrestling related but it easily could have been. Look at the constant injuries that keep popping up. And Roman has been injured before and missed stretches of time as has pretty much every upper part of the card guy I can think of. It really makes sense to make WWE more of an ensemble cast with no clear #1 star if the ring style is going to be what it is. And that’s especially true when you have no true obvious breakout star to let run with the ball. God bless Roman and his recovery, but the guy was not the kind of talent that warranted the push he got. And if he wasn’t sick and was on tv every week the ratings wouldn’t be appreciably different anyways. The problem is systemic and can’t be caused or cured by any one person.


----------



## TakerFreak

Showstopper said:


> 'really talented guys like Nakamura'
> 
> :kobelol


:booklel I know....


He was pretty spot on about the rest. Till that moment.


----------



## Tornado31619

EMGESP said:


> I personally just don't understand why Vince won't simply react to the crowd and give them what they want from the very beginning. He always reacts way too late and as a result it loses its impact. He still wants to treat the company like we are in the 80's/90's and that shit just doesn't fly now. Vince constantly wants to tell fans who they should/shouldn't be rooting for and thats such a out of date mindset.
> 
> I can't wait until HHH takes over creative. HHH might not be perfect, but he's as least in somewhat touch with todays audience. If he treats the main roster half as well as he does NXT, then we will finally see some good wrestling again for a change on Raw.


Because the crowd are not fixed on who they want.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

After the ratings debacle last week, it has to be higher, doesn't it?


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.035M
H2- 2.026M
H3- 1.843M
3H- 1.968M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 0.44% / - 0.009M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 9.03% / - 0.183M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 9.43% / - 0.192M )
12/31/18 Vs 12/24/18 ( + 10.87% / + 0.193M )

Demo (12/31/18 Vs 12/24/18):
H1- 0.610D Vs 0.560D
H2- 0.600D Vs 0.550D
H3- 0.520D Vs 0.540D
3H- 0.577D Vs 0.550D

Note: RAW is 4th, 6th & 8th by hourly demo & 4th, 5th & 8th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (12/31/18 Vs 1/1/18):
H1- 2.035M Vs 2.969M
H2- 2.026M Vs 2.912M
H3- 1.843M Vs 2.714M
3H- 1.968M Vs 2.865M ( - 31.31% / - 0.897M )

Demo (12/31/18 Vs 1/1/18):
H1- 0.610D Vs 1.020D
H2- 0.600D Vs 0.970D
H3- 0.520D Vs 0.920D
3H- 0.577D Vs 0.970D

Note: RAW this week last year was 10th, 14th & 15th by hourly demo & 10th, 11th & 13th by hourly viewership.*

*-First time in 22 years that consecutive episodes have dipped below 2M with record low ratings.
-Previous instances were on 12/23/96 and 12/30/96.
-2nd lowest viewership, demo and rating of all time.*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

:damn

It's up but brutality bonus to the ratings.


----------



## Dave Santos

Next week will bw interesting.


----------



## llj

Showstopper said:


> 'really talented guys like Nakamura'
> 
> :kobelol


Nakamura is a talented pro wrestler. His laziness doesn't erase the fact that he does have a certain level of charisma and has the ability to put out a good match if motivated.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

llj said:


> Nakamura is a talented pro wrestler. His laziness doesn't erase the fact that he does have a certain level of charisma and has the ability to put out a good match if motivated.


I know, I know. I was part having some fun. But with how he was this past year, I found it to be a tad funny considering the timing.

Surprirsed it's that high considering it was NYE. Wasn't sure about Christmas Eve, but New Years Eve is absolutely a night people go out to celebrate and party. Hell, I was on of them.


----------



## Ace

2m people watched on NYE? :lol

SD is beating that number for sure.


----------



## llj

Smackdown has a chance to beat RAW this week if the Cena factor comes into play


----------



## Ace

llj said:


> Smackdown has a chance to beat RAW this week if the Cena factor comes into play


 Of course it's beating it.. It's NYE, most people go out and party.. one of the worst nights for TV.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The viewership is higher than last week but the demo is barely up. The year to year viewer numbers are disastrous. Down - 31.31% / - 0.897M Almost 900,000 viewers just faded away.

The year to year demo numbers are even more atrocious. Down 40.5 % in that time frame. 

The New Year's Ball wasn't the only thing to drop. :heston


----------



## llj

Ace said:


> Of course it's beating it.. It's NYE, most people go out and party.. one of the worst nights for TV.


RAW numbers actually better than I thought for NYE though


----------



## Ace

llj said:


> RAW numbers actually better than I thought for NYE though


 SD's numbers will be back to normal this week + they have Cena returning who is still good for the 10s of thousands. I'm guessing 2.1-2.2m.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

LOL at people acting as if it were a fait accompli that Smackdown will beat RAW in the ratings because you know that New Years Day is such a ratings bonanza for most shows. :eyeroll

It could but keep in mind that Smackdown had its lowest viewership of the year last week and 3 of the last 4 were sub 2M. RAW's number this week beat two of those three. So we shall see what eventuates.


----------



## Ace

THE MAN said:


> LOL at people acting as if it were a fait accompli that Smackdown will beat RAW in the ratings because you know that New Years Day is such a ratings bonanza for most shows. :eyeroll
> 
> It could but keep in mind that Smackdown had its lowest viewership of the year last week and 3 of the last 4 were sub 2M. RAW's number this week beat two of those three. So we shall see what eventuates.


 Personally speaking it's only NYE which is a big day, NYD I don't do anything and many others are probably the same. I think ratings will likely be back to normal (2-2.1m + whatever Cena and the RR buzz attracts) with the holiday season over.


----------



## llj

Betting on Smackdown is never a good idea, but I am moreso betting on Cena and the fact that the gap between Smackdown and RAW has been shrinking enough that Cena COULD make up the difference. Plus NYE vs NYD


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

The only thing that usually gets any sort of good rating is College Football on NYD. Almost everything on the networks was a repeat yesterday except for Fox. Smackdown could beat RAW but it isn't set in stone considering that it has only been rated above RAW three times since July 2016. The odds are against them but who better to overcome the odds? :CENA


----------



## Chrome

Did better than I thought it would. Still the 2nd lowest viewership of all time apparently, so lol. Things go back to normal next week, so the rating next week will be very interesting.


----------



## JDP2016

Ace said:


> 2m people watched on NYE? :lol
> 
> SD is beating that number for sure.


Well yeah they should. New Years Eve was MONDAY night. Smackdown Live is on a Tuesday night.


----------



## Randy Lahey

30% lower than last year is horrible...


----------



## squarebox

And there, again, is the core audience that will watch this shit no matter what. The sky could be falling or a tornado could be about to hit their house and they'd still gather around their TV sets to watch it. 2M viewers on NYE - that's pretty sad, imo and the same goes for the 4th of July over there.


----------



## Fabregas

squarebox said:


> And there, again, is the core audience that will watch this shit no matter what. The sky could be falling or a tornado could be about to hit their house and they'd still gather around their TV sets to watch it. 2M viewers on NYE - that's pretty sad, imo and the same goes for the 4th of July over there.


The core audience gets smaller every year.


----------



## RainmakerV2

Chrome said:


> Did better than I thought it would. Still the 2nd lowest viewership of all time apparently, so lol. Things go back to normal next week, so the rating next week will be very interesting.


CFB Natty game is Monday. Not quite normal.


----------



## Chrome

RainmakerV2 said:


> CFB Natty game is Monday. Not quite normal.


Yeah, I meant they go back to being live next week.


----------



## SPCDRI

The big boogeyman alabama is back again. I'll be watching and cheering for Clemson.


----------



## Ace

Hr 1: 2.609
Hr 2: 2.294
Hr 3: 2.074

3H: 2.32


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

About what I expected with the college football last night. Would've been higher without the National Championship and with the advertised returns of Brock, Cena, Braun, and Hogan.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.609M
H2- 2.294M
H3- 2.070M
3H- 2.324M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 12.07% / - 0.315M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 9.76% / - 0.224M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 20.66% / - 0.539M )
1/7/19 Vs 12/31/18 ( + 18.09% / + 0.356M )

Demo (1/7/19 Vs 12/31/18):
H1- 0.910D Vs 0.610D
H2- 0.800D Vs 0.600D
H3- 0.680D Vs 0.520D
3H- 0.797D Vs 0.577D

Note: RAW is 7th, 8th & 10th by hourly demo & 8th, 11th & 14th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (1/7/19 Vs 1/8/18):
H1- 2.609M Vs 2.993M
H2- 2.294M Vs 2.784M
H3- 2.070M Vs 2.502M
3H- 2.324M Vs 2.760M ( - 15.80% / - 0.436M )

Demo (1/7/19 Vs 1/8/18):
H1- 0.910D Vs 0.970D
H2- 0.800D Vs 0.910D
H3- 0.680D Vs 0.820D
3H- 0.797D Vs 0.900D

Note: RAW this week last year was 6th, 9th & 10th by hourly demo & 6th, 7th & 11th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> About what I expected with the college football last night. Would've been higher without the National Championship and with the advertised returns of Brock, Cena, Braun, and Hogan.


The college football game did do huge numbers.. 24.3m.

Damn.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> The college football game did do huge numbers.. 24.3m.
> 
> Damn.


I love the NFL, but I'm not a college sports guy. But college sports are freaking huge here (football and basketball) for some reason, especially come playoff/championship time which is what last night was. I'll never understand the love for college sports in America, but people love 'em.


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> I love the NFL, but I'm not a college sports guy. But college sports are freaking huge here (football and basketball) for some reason, especially come playoff/championship time which is what last night was. I'll never understand the love for college sports in America, but people love 'em.


 I swear that's a lot higher than the majority of NBA and NFL games..

I guess from hereon WWE will be doing higher than 2.3m for WM season until the NBA finals, that's their floor with stiff competition.


----------



## A-C-P

Their big changes created a small ratings spike for ONE HOUR :bosque


----------



## Dave Santos

A-C-P said:


> Their big changes created a small ratings spike for ONE HOUR :bosque


Well basically that was when the most interesting segments happened. Plus the main event but I think many people tuned out by then.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Hogan + Brock = ratings????????????? :heston


----------



## ClintDagger

Ace said:


> The college football game did do huge numbers.. 24.3m.
> 
> Damn.


I read an article that said it was the lowest rated title game in 7 years.


----------



## llj

Main event Seth and Dean...


----------



## The XL 2

2.3 Mil for a show with Cena, Hogan, and Lesnar. Yikes. The 1st hour being stronger than the others is probably due to Cena and Hogan being on it. WWE is closer to being done than people realize. When the bottom falls out and Fox and USA don't feel it's worth subsidizing them anymore, they're fucked.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ace said:


> The college football game did do huge numbers.. 24.3m.
> 
> Damn.


Last year's game did 27.4 M but this RAW was down year to year - 15.80% / - 0.436M The Monday Night NFL games are regular season games and draw much less than a championship game. Th NFL playoff games will top the college number.


----------



## Ace

It's going to be difficult to stop the decline around, the damage is done with the years of shit booking.


----------



## Mr.Monkey

if they don't get ratings above 3 million post royal rumble I'd be surprised if raw is on air in 5 years. Or this would be raws last tv deal with the USA network


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

llj said:


> Main event Seth and Dean...


And with advertised returns by Hogan, Cena, Brock, and Braun.

Anyway. The big dip was from Hour 1 to Hour 2. Hour 3 did almost as much as Hour 2.

The National Championship is actually more down from last year's game than Raw is from this time last year.


----------



## llj

There is no stopping the bleeding. They've rolled out the McMahons, Triple H, Brock, Cena, and now even Hogan...nothing is working.

This is what happens when you geek out your main roster for the past year and a half. And they STILL did it last night with the "doomed to fail" Braun promo. Braun, who a year ago was your most over full timer.


----------



## ClintDagger

THE MAN said:


> Last year's game did 27.4 M but this RAW was down year to year - 15.80% / - 0.436M The Monday Night NFL games are regular season games and draw much less than a championship game. Th NFL playoff games will top the college number.


This weekends NFL games did 23, 30, 25, and 36 million viewers respectively.



Showstopper said:


> And with advertised returns by Hogan, Cena, Brock, and Braun.
> 
> Anyway. The big dip was from Hour 1 to Hour 2. Hour 3 did almost as much as Hour 2.
> 
> The National Championship is actually more down from last year's game than Raw is from this time last year.


That is comparing an OT thriller to a blowout so I suppose that’s not a surprise. Plus I’m sure Georgia brings more interest than Clemson.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Did anyone see this on the Observer site from last week?

https://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/wwe-smackdown-beats-raw-ratings-second-straight-week-273726

With 2018 ratings in the books; Smackdown was down 8% in 2018 from 2017 and Raw was down 6% in 2018 from 2017. So, both are down.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Of course both shows are down. It really started to snowball at year's end with double digit % losses. To show how RAW & SD have maintained their roughly the same proportional relationship, RAW dropped 178,000 viewers while SDL shed 194,000 viewers on average. Smackdown RAW'S retention for the year was 83.1%.

Next week we can finally get a feel for where both shows are on the Road to Mania. WWE should have held off on the big names on RAW for next week because they would have garnered a larger audience.


----------



## IceTheRetroKid

*I mean the first hour of the show was the hottest hour and had the most amount of urgency, Seth/Lashley brawl to open to show, Cena promo and six of your hottest guys in a six-man tag afterwards...

Now if only they didn't have 3 hours of TV to fill, imagine if RAW could sustain 2.5m without late hour drop!*


----------



## Cosmo77

hate to say this,but the current fans do not care or know about hogan,lesnar etc,even cena, i know they were draws,but ppl here are right.i turned it off at 10.


----------



## Chrome

:damn at hour 3 almost going under 2 million.


----------



## ClintDagger

Cosmo77 said:


> hate to say this,but the current fans do not care or know about hogan,lesnar etc,even cena, i know they were draws,but ppl here are right.i turned it off at 10.


The median age of WWE fans is over 50 years old. You can bet an overwhelming majority know who Hogan & Cena are as many have probably been WWF / WWE fans for 30 years or more. Now do they still care about Hogan & Cena? Probably not. Many probably never cared about Cena and once you are too old to wrestle like a Hogan the fanbase’s interest in you is fleeting.


----------



## SPCDRI

ClintDagger said:


> I read an article that said it was the lowest rated title game in 7 years.


The CFB title game is usually ferociously contested. This was a pretty considerable blowout of Clemson over Alabama. Last year's game was a 26-23 victory by Alabama over Georgia. This year's game was the slight underdog Clemson shellacking Alabama by 4 touchdowns, 44-16. 

Even against a fairly out of hand blowout that saw the less popular team earn a fifteen point lead by half time, RAW was mired in the low 2 millions. That's pretty disappointing in my book.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

That is an abysmal rating


----------



## ClintDagger

SPCDRI said:


> The CFB title game is usually ferociously contested. This was a pretty considerable blowout of Clemson over Alabama. Last year's game was a 26-23 victory by Alabama over Georgia. This year's game was the slight underdog Clemson shellacking Alabama by 4 touchdowns, 44-16.
> 
> Even against a fairly out of hand blowout that saw the less popular team earn a fifteen point lead by half time, RAW was mired in the low 2 millions. That's pretty disappointing in my book.


I agree. Given all they put into it they should have done a better number. Besides, I think the analysis of football’s effect on Raw’s ratings is a bit overblown. It’s not like Raw shoots up several million once football season ends. I don’t think there’s that much crossover anymore.


----------



## .christopher.

I wish this thread had threadmarks for the ratings post. My lazy ass hates having to search for it; page after page.


----------



## Jedah

llj said:


> There is no stopping the bleeding. They've rolled out the McMahons, Triple H, Brock, Cena, and now even Hogan...nothing is working.
> 
> This is what happens when you geek out your main roster for the past year and a half. And they STILL did it last night with the "doomed to fail" Braun promo. Braun, who a year ago was your most over full timer.


It's been far more than just the past year and a half.


----------



## Adam Cool

Showstopper said:


> I love the NFL, but I'm not a college sports guy. But college sports are freaking huge here (football and basketball) for some reason, especially come playoff/championship time which is what last night was. I'll never understand the love for college sports in America, but people love 'em.


Honestly my only problem with it is how much focus American Colleges put on it rather than actual education

At this point these aren't college sports, they are a league


----------



## llj

Jedah said:


> It's been far more than just the past year and a half.


Should be mentioned their ratings were actually up over 2017 in the early part of 2018...at least until May. Then things went south pretty much after Wrestlemania.


----------



## Jedah

Regardless, the fact that they couldn't even crack 3 million even with all these big names announced should be deeply, deeply alarming. Going to the well of part timers has clearly run its course.

For reference, they were cracking 3 million in 2017 on regular filler episodes.


----------



## llj

True. They've been on a slide for a while now with only occasional blips.

2.3m is a really HORRIBLE average for a January episode. This is when ratings usually start increasing dramatically for the WWE.


----------



## xio8ups

there are no 12 - 17 year olds in the crowds these days. Most of them are adults or little kids with those adults. Most the teens know this garbage show is j unk


----------



## Adam Cool

xio8ups said:


> there are no 12 - 17 year olds in the crowds these days. Most of them are adults or little kids with those adults. Most the teens know this garbage show is j unk


Most kids stop watching once they found out that wrestling is fake, and they get mocked in school if they don't 

And with nobody being allowed to be the next John Cena, there isn't anyone to draw enough new kids to replace the ones who have grown old , kids want badasses not losers with 50/50 booking 

So now you only have Hogan Era Boomers, Attitude Era marks and Ruthless Aggression young men who watch out if habit because they cannot let go of what was a huge part of their childhood, basically everyone on this forums


----------



## Erramayhem89

The XL 2 said:


> 2.3 Mil for a show with Cena, Hogan, and Lesnar. Yikes. The 1st hour being stronger than the others is probably due to Cena and Hogan being on it. WWE is closer to being done than people realize. When the bottom falls out and Fox and USA don't feel it's worth subsidizing them anymore, they're fucked.


Yeah they have a few more years left before shit really hits the fan. Except this time they don't have any competition and can't do the stuff they did during the attitude era. Wrestling is becoming obsolete just like malls, CD's, etc. They will be forced to change or be out of business in 5 years.


----------



## ClintDagger

Adam Cool said:


> Most kids stop watching once they found out that wrestling is fake, and they get mocked in school if they don't
> 
> And with nobody being allowed to be the next John Cena, there isn't anyone to draw enough new kids to replace the ones who have grown old , kids want badasses not losers with 50/50 booking
> 
> So now you only have Hogan Era Boomers, Attitude Era marks and Ruthless Aggression young men who watch out if habit because they cannot let go of what was a huge part of their childhood, basically everyone on this forums


I remember reading an analysis of WWE’s fan base and what it showed for the Cena years was that he was bringing in a significant number of new fans every year of around 8 years old. Then like clockwork once those fans turned about 12 they walked away from WWE and never came back. This flew in the face of what Stephanie was touting which was that they were creating lifelong fans from an early age.

At the same time the fans created during the 80s and 90s were being alienated and slowly leaving the product. So in the big picture, no lifelong fans were being created, only short term fans. And fans once thought to be lifers were walking away for good. And the net result is this slow, consistent decline that we’ve seen for over 15 years.


----------



## krillep

A good first hour that went up. It was a long time since it was up that high.

8PM: 2,609,000


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

That is absolutely awful. College game or not, to have Lesnar/Cena/HOGAN + Rumble/Mania hype only draw barely above 2 million viewers is awful and alarming. All their usual tricks have been used up. The Golden/Attitude era (sans Austin/Rock) stars are losing their draw power to the new audience, the Ruthless Agression stars aren't bringing in those nostalgia casual viewers over and this new era of stars are anti-draws and aren't stars whatsoever.

This company is irrelevant. Wrestlemania and Rumble are the only proven draw left and those are declining in quality. If this FOX deal doesn't pan out with the record low ratings and attendence...it's essentially over.


----------



## Robbyfude

xio8ups said:


> there are no 12 - 17 year olds in the crowds these days. Most of them are adults or little kids with those adults. Most the teens know this garbage show is j unk


Yep. By far the majority of people still watching WWE are people who've been watching it every week for the past 20+ years to the point it's just a habit even when its garbage.


----------



## SPCDRI

As soon as the Golden Oldies were gone from being first seen in that first and second hour, viewership tanked by about half a million people to third hour. As has been noted, its not like people changed the channel to the "scintillating conclusion" of Clemson's blowout of Alabama. They can advertise Lesnar, Cena and Hogan to hype Royal Rumble and a tribute to the recently decease Mean Gene (rest in peace, by the way) and not do much better than any old episode. 

There's just too many revenue streams from Saudi Arabia, WWE Network, USA and FOX and their second bite at the apple with XFL for them to care that they rolled out a trio of heavy hitters like that and did close to all time worst viewership. Last year, the second January show did almost 2.8 million with nothing special going on. Where did HALF A MILLION PEOPLE GO IN A YEAR'S TIME?! What television show out there could lose twenty percent of its viewership from season to season and not wind up with frightened people freaking out with their hair on fire? WWE is so spoiled. All the money they're frolicking in has them not giving a shit at all that five years ago the shows were doing almost 4 million and now some hours are close to hitting 2 million. National and international attendance at their shows down more than ten percent and television CHOPPED IN HALF AND WWE COULDN'T CARE LESS.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.775M
H2- 2.781M
H3- 2.610M
3H- 2.722M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 0.22% / + 0.006M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 6.15% / - 0.171M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 5.95% / - 0.165M )
1/14/19 Vs 1/7/19 ( + 17.13% / + 0.398M )

Demo (1/14/19 Vs 1/7/19):
H1- 0.900D Vs 0.910D
H2- 0.930D Vs 0.800D
H3- 0.910D Vs 0.680D
3H- 0.913D Vs 0.797D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 1st & 2nd by hourly demo & 3rd, 2nd & 7th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (1/14/19 Vs 1/15/18):
H1- 2.775M Vs 3.573M
H2- 2.781M Vs 3.363M
H3- 2.610M Vs 2.814M
3H- 2.722M Vs 3.250M ( - 16.25% / - 0.528M )

Demo (1/14/19 Vs 1/15/18):
H1- 0.900D Vs 1.120D
H2- 0.930D Vs 1.080D
H3- 0.910D Vs 0.960D
3H- 0.913D Vs 1.053D

Note: RAW this week last year was 2nd, 3rd & 4th by hourly demo & 2nd, 4th & 7th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## ClintDagger

No huge drop off which is good. But man they’ve lost 800k viewers in a year’s time. That’s incredible.


----------



## Dave Santos

The third hour this week had as many as the first hour last week which is good.


----------



## Ace

Yikes, so those are their numbers without competition.


----------



## MFR55

They were rewarded for what was honestly a pretty solid raw


----------



## Mordecay

Balor the draw :lmao


----------



## ClintDagger

MFR55 said:


> They were rewarded for what was honestly a pretty solid raw


I think it shows that you can retain a big chunk of your H1 audience if you promise a title match in H3 and the viewers think a title change is possible. The problem is that you can’t (and really shouldn’t) do that on free TV but once in a blue moon. It might be the last trick they have up their sleeve that works (giving away PPV worthy matches for free).


----------



## MFR55

ClintDagger said:


> I think it shows that you can retain a big chunk of your H1 audience if you promise a title match in H3 and the viewers think a title change is possible. The problem is that you can’t (and really shouldn’t) do that on free TV but once in a blue moon. It might be the last trick they have up their sleeve that works (giving away PPV worthy matches for free).


I think the show was more engaging and overall more enjoyable than your average raw,therefore the people that would usually leave stayed through most of it,in general logic if raw starts well,has a good first hour(quality wise)and stays good through out its run time,the huge drops in the following hours would be less likely to happen


----------



## ClintDagger

MFR55 said:


> I think the show was more engaging and overall more enjoyable than your average raw,therefore the people that would usually leave stayed through most of it,in general logic if raw starts well,has a good first hour(quality wise)and stays good through out its run time,the huge drops in the following hours would be less likely to happen


Well, perhaps. It seems like I saw the same complaints we always see so I’m not sure how much better it was vs the baseline.


----------



## tducey

While people have different ways to watch TV these days and ratings aren't as important as they were the onus is still on WWE to maintain a good product for people like myself who have been watching for yrs. but have been taking a break from watching.


----------



## umair007

Erramayhem89 said:


> Bliss actually makes me want to watch her segments. I cringe during Ronda's segments. Every time.


You avoided the answer to the question but I understand why 

Sent from my Infinix X510 using Tapatalk

Do you think Alexa Bliss is a bigger star than Ronda Rousey? There's really a very simple answer for it.


Erramayhem89 said:


> LOL if you think Bliss doesn't draw


Sent from my Infinix X510 using Tapatalk


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.840M
H2- 2.403M
H3- 2.143M
3H- 2.462M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 15.39% / - 0.437M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 10.82% / - 0.260M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 24.54% / - 0.697M )
1/21/19 Vs 1/14/19 ( - 9.55% / - 0.260M )

Demo (1/21/19 Vs 1/14/19):
H1- 0.950D Vs 0.900D
H2- 0.850D Vs 0.930D
H3- 0.770D Vs 0.910D
3H- 0.857D Vs 0.913D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 3rd & 5th by hourly demo & 2nd, 6th & 8th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (1/21/19 Vs 1/22/18):
H1- 2.840M Vs 4.803M
H2- 2.403M Vs 4.641M
H3- 2.143M Vs 4.147M
3H- 2.462M Vs 4.530M ( - 45.65% / - 2.068M )

Demo (1/21/19 Vs 1/22/18):
H1- 0.950D Vs 1.800D
H2- 0.850D Vs 1.700D
H3- 0.770D Vs 1.630D
3H- 0.857D Vs 1.710D

Note: RAW this week last year was 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly viewership.*

*-Among the largest H-H drops of all time (H3-H1).
-Among the largest Y-Y drops of all time.*


----------



## llj

Hard to believe only a year ago they were still able to pull in 4m, even if it was RAW 25. 

I can't imagine them cracking that again anytime soon no matter the occasion


----------



## ClintDagger

WWE has to decide if they want to remain relevant, or do their pet projects like push women’s wrestling as main event worthy when it’s clear the audience is soundly rejecting that notion.


----------



## Chrome

:damn at those 2nd and 3rd hour drops.


----------



## MFR55

ClintDagger said:


> WWE has to decide if they want to remain relevant, or do their pet projects like push women’s wrestling as main event worthy when it’s clear the audience is soundly rejecting that notion.


Where the women even on in the second hour? I think a very reasonable reason for that huge second hour drop would be that the lead-in into it was that lucha house vs jinder and bollywood Boys match,raw first hour was decent but nobody stayed around to watch that shit 

The fact the 3 hour dropped less than the second one is a win for the womens in my eyes


----------



## rbl85

MFR55 said:


> Where the women even on in the second hour? I think a very reasonable reason for that huge second hour drop would be that the lead-in into it was that lucha house vs jinder and bollywood Boys match,raw first hour was decent but nobody stayed around to watch that shit
> 
> *The fact the 3 hour dropped less than the second one is a win for the womens in my eyes*


But it still dropped


----------



## JDP2016

ClintDagger said:


> WWE has to decide if they want to remain relevant, or do their pet projects like push women’s wrestling as main event worthy when it’s clear the audience is soundly rejecting that notion.


The third hour always drops.

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## Ace

2.4m on the go home show to the RR... the second biggest show of the year.... :lmao


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

That's with Brock on the show and Rousey in the main event.


----------



## Ace

I wonder if they'll start to do low 2s consistently next year, gonna be wild if it does happen.

This company is dying (losing viewers which will eventually lead to it impacting their financials) and I'm loving every second of it :lol


----------



## ClintDagger

MFR55 said:


> Where the women even on in the second hour? I think a very reasonable reason for that huge second hour drop would be that the lead-in into it was that lucha house vs jinder and bollywood Boys match,raw first hour was decent but nobody stayed around to watch that shit
> 
> The fact the 3 hour dropped less than the second one is a win for the womens in my eyes


I don’t think that’s how you measure it. The question is, does what you put in the main event help retain the H1 audience. We saw that it did with a men’s match last week. This week they pushed hard that Ronda would be wrestling in a match with her RR opponent on the other side and many didn’t care enough to stick around after seeing Brock, Finn, Braun, Vince etcetera. I’m not attacking the women, there is a place on the card for them. But they are not at the level of and should not be in the main event until the time comes that fans want it. This was the RR go home show. People should not be tuning out in droves not caring what the final segment is.



JDP2016 said:


> The third hour always drops.
> 
> Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


By 25%? For the RR go home show? If that always happens then I’ll stand corrected.

I should add, I was at Raw and watched in person as a pretty hot crowd in a full building went totally dead from the Bliss segment on and it had nothing to do with fatigue. It was apathy towards what they were given.


----------



## Dave Santos

How did Raw do worse than last week? The go home shows especially before summerslam, Rumble and mania almost always do better than the previous week. Same as the show after the ppv typically does well.


----------



## ClintDagger

Dave Santos said:


> How did Raw do worse than last week? The go home shows especially before summerslam, Rumble and mania almost always do better than the previous week. Same as the show after the ppv typically does well.


It started from more or less the exact same point (slightly higher this week actually). I think fans saw what they wanted to see in the first segment and the Braun / Finn match and then what was promised to come after that wasn’t worth sticking around for. Had they advertised Braun / Finn in the main event with Brock watching from ringside I think that H3 number is closer to 2.7 MM than the 2.1 MM they got. But that’s just me.


----------



## llj

Dave Santos said:


> How did Raw do worse than last week? The go home shows especially before summerslam, Rumble and mania almost always do better than the previous week. Same as the show after the ppv typically does well.


That's the concern. The interest in the RR seems low outside of the IWC. Hell, interest in the WWE product in general doesn't seem high these days. There isn't a lot of real investment in anybody right now, nobody seems to have any real momentum. There are people who are over with crowds, but they are only over insofar as with the audiences that are still sticking around.

If these are the regular numbers going into Mania season, this company is in big trouble. Because imagine the numbers in the summer and fall later this year.


----------



## ClintDagger

llj said:


> That's the concern. The interest in the RR seems low outside of the IWC. Hell, interest in the WWE product in general doesn't seem high these days. There isn't a lot of real investment in anybody right now, nobody seems to have any real momentum. There are people who are over with crowds, but they are only over insofar as with the audiences that are still sticking around.
> 
> If these are the regular numbers going into Mania season, this company is in big trouble. Because imagine the numbers in the summer and fall later this year.


I think they are in danger of damaging the RR and WM brands which have been bulletproof for almost 20 years. They are starting not to feel special at all. I remember when that happened to Halloween Havoc and Starrcade. It’s hard to turn something like that around.


----------



## Dave Santos

llj said:


> That's the concern. The interest in the RR seems low outside of the IWC. Hell, interest in the WWE product in general doesn't seem high these days. There isn't a lot of real investment in anybody right now, nobody seems to have any real momentum. There are people who are over with crowds, but they are only over insofar as with the audiences that are still sticking around.
> 
> If these are the regular numbers going into Mania season, this company is in big trouble. Because imagine the numbers in the summer and fall later this year.


And I heard there are a lot of tickets for rumble still available. Maybe there are some good deals for tickets available to be found. Or they will price slash them.

I read that last Raw's 24.5% decline was the biggest decline for raw on record. The previous record was 23.3 on october 17, 2017.

https://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/wwe-raw-posts-record-first-third-hour-ratings-decline-275241


----------



## Mordecay

I knew as soon as I saw those shitty women segments in the third hour the ratings were going to drop hard


----------



## MFR55

ClintDagger said:


> I don’t think that’s how you measure it. The question is, does what you put in the main event help retain the H1 audience. We saw that it did with a men’s match last week. This week they pushed hard that Ronda would be wrestling in a match with her RR opponent on the other side and many didn’t care enough to stick around after seeing Brock, Finn, Braun, Vince etcetera. I’m not attacking the women, there is a place on the card for them. But they are not at the level of and should not be in the main event until the time comes that fans want it. This was the RR go home show. People should not be tuning out in droves not caring what the final segment is.


i think the fact the last raw had such a focused storyline on "who would be lesnar new challenger"really helped people stay engaged for the 3 hours of the show,in my opinion to expect that will sit trought 3 hours of tv just to watch one final match is on an age where there is just so many options on things to watch and so many distractions not really feasible you gotta keep people hanging on every minute of the show,they need to start watching and stay through all 3 hours because all of those are good,and based on the H1-H2 drop they clearly failed at achieving that on the second hour,while marginally improving on the third one

Im not saying the womens tag match was a strong main-event,it was unexciting as an idea and ended being fairly poorly worked,ronda has proven that she does in fact not draw,however i dont believe the main-event is really the most important part for retaining first-hour viewership,we have talked this before in my opinion last weeks raw was solid on all hours and earned its ratings because of that,of course the cena factor in the main cant be ignored either,but last weeks second-hour just performed much superior to this weeks first and if people were really only interested in the main they would leave the second hour and return at the third,but last week ratings stayed consistent the whole raw,supporting my thesis that a consistently good 3-hours would perform better than an strong main-event in my opinion


----------



## Dave Santos

MFR55 said:


> i think the fact the last raw had such a focused storyline on "who would be lesnar new challenger"really helped people stay engaged for the 3 hours of the show,in my opinion to expect that will sit trought 3 hours of tv just to watch one final match is on an age where there is just so many options on things to watch and so many distractions not really feasible you gotta keep people hanging on every minute of the show,they need to start watching and stay through all 3 hours because all of those are good,and based on the H1-H2 drop they clearly failed at achieving that on the second hour,while marginally improving on the third one
> 
> Im not saying the womens tag match was a strong main-event,it was unexciting as an idea and ended being fairly poorly worked,ronda has proven that she does in fact not draw,however i dont believe the main-event is really the most important part for retaining first-hour viewership,we have talked this before in my opinion last weeks raw was solid on all hours and earned its ratings because of that,of course the cena factor in the main cant be ignored either,but last weeks second-hour just performed much superior to this weeks first and if people were really only interested in the main they would leave the second hour and return at the third,but last week ratings stayed consistent the whole raw,supporting my thesis that a consistently good 3-hours would perform better than an strong main-event in my opinion


Lashley also won the title that episode. So people may have been enthusiastic to see what else they may get as the episode went along.


----------



## Seafort

ClintDagger said:


> I think they are in danger of damaging the RR and WM brands which have been bulletproof for almost 20 years. They are starting not to feel special at all. I remember when that happened to Halloween Havoc and Starrcade. It’s hard to turn something like that around.


They already overexposed the Legends that normally would filter in for a Road to WrestleMania. Imagine if Shawn Michaels, HHH, Kane, and Undertaker were being featured in February and March as opposed to September and October? Bringing them back now makes it less special.

That leaves the regular roster, which is thoroughly overexposed.


----------



## MFR55

Dave Santos said:


> Lashley also won the title that episode. So people may have been enthusiastic to see what else they may get as the episode went along.


exactly last weeks raw was really exciting and entertaining in general,atributing the performance of a 3-hour shows to only its last 15 minutes doesnt really tell the whole story,furthermore the huge 2-hour drop shows the need for consistent quality through-out 3 hours


----------



## ClintDagger

MFR55 said:


> i think the fact the last raw had such a focused storyline on "who would be lesnar new challenger"really helped people stay engaged for the 3 hours of the show,in my opinion to expect that will sit trought 3 hours of tv just to watch one final match is on an age where there is just so many options on things to watch and so many distractions not really feasible you gotta keep people hanging on every minute of the show,they need to start watching and stay through all 3 hours because all of those are good,and based on the H1-H2 drop they clearly failed at achieving that on the second hour,while marginally improving on the third one
> 
> Im not saying the womens tag match was a strong main-event,it was unexciting as an idea and ended being fairly poorly worked,ronda has proven that she does in fact not draw,however i dont believe the main-event is really the most important part for retaining first-hour viewership,we have talked this before in my opinion last weeks raw was solid on all hours and earned its ratings because of that,of course the cena factor in the main cant be ignored either,but last weeks second-hour just performed much superior to this weeks first and if people were really only interested in the main they would leave the second hour and return at the third,but last week ratings stayed consistent the whole raw,supporting my thesis that a consistently good 3-hours would perform better than an strong main-event in my opinion


Again, I don’t think the issue is that the viewership went down. It’s that it went down massively for a RR go home show. It’s not the women’s tag match that you expect viewers to stay tuned for, it’s what closing angle will they deliver. Will Ronda get a beat down from Sasha & Bayley? Will there be a turn? Etcetera. In the end they delivered nothing which is a real indictment of how creatively bankrupt they are. But nobody knew that going in. You don’t expect a quarter of your audience to not care what happens to set up the Rumble. Unless in their minds they’ve already seen what they care about and look at what hasn’t come yet as being missable. Again, I think if they saved the men’s segment for last the H1 to H3 drop is much more in line with usual for a Rumble go home and not something newsworthy like a 25% drop.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

This is all that's left of the WWE fanbase. A little over 2 million people. The casual fans are officially gone and they are not making new fans because they have completely failed to create new stars that resonate with a younger audience. Now they're stuck with an aging shrinking fanbase.


----------



## Ohoh

ClintDagger said:


> WWE has to decide if they want to remain relevant, or do their pet projects like push women’s wrestling as main event worthy when it’s clear the audience is soundly rejecting that notion.


How much influence does Steph have on her dad?

Its ridiculous. SHE SHOULD BE FIRED AND SAME WITH THE WHOLE FEMALES DIVISION ONTOP OF IT.

They are taking time away from the real stars of the show, putting this show on life support again.



Donnie said:


> I wonder if they'll start to do low 2s consistently next year, gonna be wild if it does happen.
> 
> This company is dying (losing viewers which will eventually lead to it impacting their financials) and I'm loving every second of it :lol


AJ Styles isn't helping either

Old AJ Styles from 2009>Current AJ Styles


----------



## ClintDagger

Ohoh said:


> How much influence does Steph have on her dad?
> 
> Its ridiculous. SHE SHOULD BE FIRED AND SAME WITH THE WHOLE FEMALES DIVISION ONTOP OF IT.
> 
> They are taking time away from the real stars of the show, putting this show on life support again.


Part of it is certainly Stephanie. But let’s not fool ourselves, Vince loves mainstream attention and he thinks this is some kind of female empowerment movement that will get him the kind of notoriety he craves. But people like Vince & Stephanie have no idea about actual female empowerment. The division is still mostly built upon looks ,skimpy ring attire, and mean girl type dynamics.

The sad thing is, some of these women are talented and if they let this thing mature organically it might grow into what Rousey did for UFC where fans actually do have main event interest in the women. But it’s not there right now. The whole thing is forced, contrived, and not ready for prime time. There’s probably only 2 or 3 of the women that can legitimately go at a main event level and that’s not enough to build a main event division on. This isn’t UFC where each fighter competes once or twice a year. There are 12 or so PPVs and 104 tv shows to fill out. You have to use the entire division to keep matchups fresh and you end up having to push people who can’t believably wrestle at a main event level.


----------



## Ace

God bless the womens revolution, they've buried the WWE and pushed fans to NJPW, UFC, and to any other actual good forms of sports entertainment.

You the real MVP Steph roud

Gonna put your father's company out of business before you even get control of it :banderas


----------



## deathvalleydriver2

ClintDagger said:


> WWE has to decide if they want to remain relevant, or do their pet projects like push women’s wrestling as main event worthy when it’s clear the audience is soundly rejecting that notion.


I’ve rejected it myself and can’t bring myself to watch a full RAW


----------



## SPCDRI

ClintDagger said:


> WWE has to decide if they want to remain relevant, or do their pet projects like push women’s wrestling as main event worthy when it’s clear the audience is soundly rejecting that notion.


That's sounding the alarm for all the apologists to explain why 2.1 million viewers in the third hour of a go home show to ROYAL RUMBLE is good. 

RAW 25 is obviously a special case, but the year before that, the go-home show did these numbers.

Hour one: 3.31 million
Hour two: 3.46 million
Hour three: 3.11 million

The show after the Royal Rumble did these numbers...

Hour one: 3.63 million
Hour two: 3.64 million
Hour three: 3.57 million

We'll see, but I can see them easily being close to a million viewers off recent numbers on a per hour basis. If hour 3 gets a 400,000 viewer bump, hour three would still be a million off what the show after Royal Rumble got. 

Women are for the hardcores of the hardcore male viewership, its not for girls and parents and casuals. Whenever women get prominent slots, the viewership dies. That's just how it is. They're cruiserweights you can beat your meat to. That's it.


----------



## Ace

> Raw on 1/21 did 2,462,000 viewers, a drop of 9.6 percent from last week and not a good sign at all after last week’s bounce-back show.
> 
> The two key takes are that the show didn’t keep the audience, which is an understatement. The first to second hour drop was the third biggest of all-time, so really after a good first hour with Vince McMahon, Brock Lesnar, Paul Heyman, Braun Strowman and Finn Balor, the audience left in droves. The first-to-third hour drop was 24.5 percent, which is the all-time record percentage of losing audiences, and that’s with saving Ronda Rousey for the main event spot with a Rousey & Natalya vs. Sasha Banks & Bayley match. You can say whatever you want, but that didn’t work as a main event segment.
> 
> The previous record drop was on October 23, 2017, when, and keep in mind these are football season numbers which tells you how badly things have fallen in a short period of time, the first hour did 3,332,000 viewers and third hour was 2,557,000 viewers, for a 23.3 percent drop.
> 
> Another key to the third hour drop was the Golden State Warriors were playing in a game that started during the third hour, and that ended up drawing 2,467,000 viewers. That would have an effect, but it shouldn’t have the level of effect to set records for viewers tuning out. It was a factor, but the primary factor was still that the audience didn’t want to stick with this show, and the largest decline was hour one-to-two, so it’s a combo of what they had to start and who they put in hour two, key being Lucha House Party vs. Jinder Mahal & The Singhs and Baron Corbin vs. Elias. It also points to the Rousey match not being strong enough in the fans’ eyes to keep the audience, and the drop was far larger with women than men. The one notable difference with Rousey in WWE and UFC is that in UFC, she was a huge draw for women, and while she is popular with women and girls at live events, ratings among masses are a different animal and she fared better with men.
> 
> Raw was sixth for the night on cable, trailing four news shows and the NBA game.
> 
> Comparing to last year isn’t fair since it was the 25th hour of Raw (they are down 45 percent from last year but I’d just throw that out because it’s a comparison you’d only put stock in if you are being dishonest), but going back to this week two years ago they are down 25 percent.
> 
> The notable thing is that hour one was up this week as compared to last week, but last week’s show increased in hour two and had a small hour three decline, as opposed to falling 15.4 percent in hour two and 10.8 percent more in hour three, leaving an overall figure that was comparable to going against the NFL, as opposed to the kind of level you expect for the go-home show for the second biggest event of the year.
> 
> *As far as where the decline was, it was across the board, really heavy among teenagers. Teenage boys, in particular, which is the audience that usually stays to the end, didn’t do that. Even with women in the main event position, women tuned out at an alarming rate.
> *
> As far as first-to-third hour drop on the show, it was 23.5 percent in women 18-49, 17.2 percent in men 18-49, 36.1 percent in girls 12-17, 28.4 percent in boys 12-17 and 23.3 percent in 50+.
> 
> The show did 2,840,000 viewers in the first hour. The second hour did 2,403,000 viewers. The third hour did 2,143,000 viewers.


WON

@Showstopper @SPCDRI WWE pushing teenage kids out the door, let's see how that works out in the future. What's worse is women didn't even stick around for the main event, so I'm not quite sure why who they're targeting with this push.


----------



## SPCDRI

Women don't care about wrestlers just because they are women, the biggest exodus demographic was teenage boys and teenage girls, almost thirty percent of boys and over 35 percent of girls that watched hour one didn't watch hour 3. Fuckin' figure it out, WWE. This is a major reason why you hardly ever see people aged 12 to 20 in the crowds these days.


----------



## ClintDagger

SPCDRI said:


> That's sounding the alarm for all the apologists to explain why 2.1 million viewers in the third hour of a go home show to ROYAL RUMBLE is good.
> 
> RAW 25 is obviously a special case, but the year before that, the go-home show did these numbers.
> 
> Hour one: 3.31 million
> Hour two: 3.46 million
> Hour three: 3.11 million
> 
> The show after the Royal Rumble did these numbers...
> 
> Hour one: 3.63 million
> Hour two: 3.64 million
> Hour three: 3.57 million
> 
> We'll see, but I can see them easily being close to a million viewers off recent numbers on a per hour basis. If hour 3 gets a 400,000 viewer bump, hour three would still be a million off what the show after Royal Rumble got.
> 
> Women are for the hardcores of the hardcore male viewership, its not for girls and parents and casuals. Whenever women get prominent slots, the viewership dies. That's just how it is. They're cruiserweights you can beat your meat to. That's it.


Great post and great information. I think WWE should just get rid of Rousey after WM and send all of the women that aren’t valets back to NXT and rebrand that show from being a developmental brand to being the brand for the hardest of the hardcore. Essentially women’s wrestling and Indy darlings that the mainstream will never accept. Let Raw and SD be for a combination of less hardcore adults and kids. The hardcores will still watch, and you will retain more of your H1 audience and perhaps bring back some of the audience that has tuned out in recent years.


----------



## Adam Cool

ClintDagger said:


> Great post and great information. I think WWE should just get rid of Rousey after WM and send all of the women that aren’t valets back to NXT and rebrand that show from being a developmental brand to being the brand for the hardest of the hardcore. Essentially women’s wrestling and Indy darlings that the mainstream will never accept. Let Raw and SD be for a combination of less hardcore adults and kids. The hardcores will still watch, and you will retain more of your H1 audience and perhaps bring back some of the audience that has tuned out in recent years.


The Problem in here is that they have no idea how to pander to the Causals eithers

In the 2000's they knew how to do it which is why they didn't need Indy guys but nowadays I don't know what the fuck happened but they no longer can make an entertaining storyline based program based on Homegrown guys anymore so they try to use Hardcores to replace the causals


----------



## ClintDagger

Adam Cool said:


> The Problem in here is that they have no idea how to pander to the Causals eithers
> 
> In the 2000's they knew how to do it which is why they didn't need Indy guys but nowadays I don't know what the fuck happened but they no longer can make an entertaining storyline based program based on Homegrown guys anymore so they try to use Hardcores to replace the causals


I think the problem is that they have over pushed guys like Cena & Reigns because they wanted the product to have a particular look and feel to it, thinking that casuals will just accept those guys. But while both had the look, neither had the edge that was needed in a modern era. Then they started the influx of Indy type guys to appease the vocal hardcore fans who were angry about Cena & Reigns being the focal point of the product. Well two things happened, 1) a big chunk of the casuals rejected Cena & Reigns and slowly abandoned the product over the last 12-13 years. Cena did create new fans, but those fans were around for a few years and reached a certain age and left. So in the end he drove way more fans away than he created. And 2) WWE forgot how to find and / or develop the kinds of guys that casuals are into. Now those hardcores which probably used to be 5% of the audience is closer to 25% and maybe higher. So now it’s even more important that WWE caters to these smarks by loading up the product with Indy darlings and they are caught between a rock and a hard place. They can’t find any Hogans, Savages, Warriors, Austins, Rocks and now they are totally dependent upon raiding ROH, Impact, NJPW, etcetera to find new talent to try to fill out their hours and hours of content. Which is causing their product to move more and more away from what a casual fan would want.

And despite all that the tv landscape keeps changing in their favor and they walk away with these lucrative tv deals which only serves to incentivize their bad behavior. But they are paying dearly by way of fan interest (or lack thereof). So eventually the gravy train will pull away and they will be severely marginalized.


----------



## .christopher.

I'm surprised any teenagers watch. I remember as a teen in secondary school in the mid 00s, you'd get the ever loving piss taken out of you for watching. Mainly because of John Cena.


----------



## llj

.christopher. said:


> I'm surprised any teenagers watch. I remember as a teen in secondary school in the mid 00s, you'd get the ever loving piss taken out of you for watching. Mainly because of John Cena.


If kids knew John Cena and hated him enough to beat people up for it, then they would be wrestling fans too...


----------



## .christopher.

llj said:


> If kids knew John Cena and hated him enough to beat people up for it, then they would be wrestling fans too...


Beat people up? Nothing of the sort happened. You just got the piss taken out of you. If you don't know what that means then it was basically just being mocked. No physical violence. I guess that is just a Brit saying.

I assume most stopped watching because of Cena and the way the product was becoming more babyish. I remember a lot of my classmates being fans prior.


----------



## Ace

.christopher. said:


> Beat people up? Nothing of the sort happened. You just got the piss taken out of you. If you don't know what that means then it was basically just being mocked. No physical violence. I guess that is just a Brit saying.
> 
> I assume most stopped watching because of Cena and the way the product was becoming more babyish. I remember a lot of my classmates being fans prior.


 Yep, it was the same here. If people found out you still watched you'd get reactions like 'you still watch that crap', 'it's fake' or 'it's lame'?


----------



## .christopher.

Donnie said:


> Yep, it was the same here. If people found out you still watched you'd get reactions like 'you still watch that crap', 'it's fake' or 'it's lame'?


Aye, that was the case, mate. It's a shame because I used to love talking about it with mates.

It's why I had to sign up here! I started watching again when Bryan was getting pushed for the first time since 08 and had no one to talk to about it because the years of shoving Cena down everyone's throat prompted all my friends to stop for good.


----------



## tducey

Different world now. Growing up wrestling was a common topic in school for me and my friends (I grew up in the midst of the Attitude Era). My nephew's 9 next month, I don't know if he even knows what wrestling is.


----------



## llj

Sometimes it even feels like the IWC fanbase is declining. While there technically are hundreds of members on this board, in truth it often only feels like only maybe 50-70 people post here regularly nowadays. I'm pretty sure it felt like a lot more even 5-6 years ago when I look up old threads.


----------



## Ace

llj said:


> Sometimes it even feels like the IWC fanbase is declining. While there technically are hundreds of members on this board, in truth it often only feels like only maybe 50-70 people post here regularly nowadays. I'm pretty sure it felt like a lot more even 5-6 years ago when I look up old threads.


 It is, all demos are declining. This site is dead and this is the least interest I've seen for a Royal Rumble PPV across all wrestling spaces I visit.


----------



## Chrome

llj said:


> Sometimes it even feels like the IWC fanbase is declining. While there technically are hundreds of members on this board, in truth it often only feels like only maybe 50-70 people post here regularly nowadays. I'm pretty sure it felt like a lot more even 5-6 years ago when I look up old threads.


Oh definitely, like 5-6 years ago Raw threads did like 3500-4000 replies. Now they're lucky to get more than 700 replies. When the hardcore fans have begun tapping out, that's a big problem.


----------



## The XL 2

Ronda Rousey is flopping hard because she's not being booked like her MMA persona


----------



## Stadhart02

Donnie said:


> It is, all demos are declining. This site is dead and this is the least interest I've seen for a Royal Rumble PPV across all wrestling spaces I visit.


I am going to watch the Royal Rumble because I usually enjoy it but I am expecting this one to be my last. The WWE is awful now how they are managing to make the amount of money they do is beyond me

like I have said on here before - most people now only feel apathy towards the WWE now which is the worst thing that can happen to a company

I always used to go to the London RAW every year as a tradition (have a meal, drinks and then watch some wrestling) but I don't bother anymore. Out of curiosity I checked the o2 tickets page a couple of weeks ago and it hadn't sold out. Those tickets always used to be like gold-dust but now people aren't interested 

if it wasn't for the money they bring in they would be a zombie company waiting to die


----------



## SPCDRI

Chrome said:


> Oh definitely, like 5-6 years ago Raw threads did like 3500-4000 replies. Now they're lucky to get more than 700 replies. When the hardcore fans have begun tapping out, that's a big problem.


On the old servers, they'd shut the chat box down and it'd be overloaded with traffic and crashing all the time because there'd be hundreds of people for hot RAWs, Smackdowns, PPVs. Like, 5000+ comments and these were people commenting under the handicap of the board going haywire for hours. Show me the last RAW that did 1200, and I was a lot more active when the board was a lot more active. 

This place used to be very quantifiably six times more active than it is now. SIX! RAW and PPV threads could get more activity on the day of the show than they get in a whole month plus a PPV on top.


----------



## Chrome

SPCDRI said:


> On the old servers, they'd shut the chat box down and it'd be overloaded with traffic and crashing all the time because there'd be hundreds of people for hot RAWs, Smackdowns, PPVs. Like, 5000+ comments and these were people commenting under the handicap of the board going haywire for hours. Show me the last RAW that did 1200, and I was a lot more active when the board was a lot more active.
> 
> This place used to be very quantifiably six times more active than it is now. SIX! RAW and PPV threads could get more activity on the day of the show than they get in a whole month plus a PPV on top.


Those database errors. :mj4

Can't remember the last time we got 1 of those for traffic overload, it's been like 3-4 years at least.


----------



## Mear

Something that I personally noticed over the years is the lack of the word " Indy Darling " or " IWC ". Back then, many would make the difference between a casual viewer and a hardcore viewer. Now, nobody uses those words because everyone knows the casuals aren't here anymore. 

If Kenny Omega debuted at the Rumble, I'm sure he would get a crazy pop... But that's what sucks actually because there is no way any casual can know Kenny Omega, only hardcore fans do and this is the whole WWE fanbase now.

And even myself, who I would consider as a hardcore fan, think they have too much stuff to follow. Raw, Smackdown, NXT, NXT UK, 205 Live. And on a big week-end like this one, you have to watch 7 hours of wrestling in two days. It is just too damn much and I would understand that any casual who never watched wrestling would see this and run away. The WWE is a product for hardcore fans now


----------



## Dave Santos

SPCDRI said:


> On the old servers, they'd shut the chat box down and it'd be overloaded with traffic and crashing all the time because there'd be hundreds of people for hot RAWs, Smackdowns, PPVs. Like, 5000+ comments and these were people commenting under the handicap of the board going haywire for hours. *Show me the last RAW that did 1200*, and I was a lot more active when the board was a lot more active.
> 
> This place used to be very quantifiably six times more active than it is now. SIX! RAW and PPV threads could get more activity on the day of the show than they get in a whole month plus a PPV on top.


Maybe Raw 25? But there has been a decrease in interest. Im curious to know how interest is across the world. Not just across North America. Maybe there are some parts of the world where interest is increasing.


----------



## Singapore Kane

Mear said:


> Something that I personally noticed over the years is the lack of the word " Indy Darling " or " IWC ". Back then, many would make the difference between a casual viewer and a hardcore viewer. Now, nobody uses those words because everyone knows the *casuals* aren't here anymore.
> 
> If Kenny Omega debuted at the Rumble, I'm sure he would get a crazy pop... But that's what sucks actually because there is no way any casual can know Kenny Omega, only hardcore fans do and this is the whole WWE fanbase now.
> 
> And even myself, who I would consider as a hardcore fan, think they have too much stuff to follow. Raw, Smackdown, NXT, NXT UK, 205 Live. And on a big week-end like this one, you have to watch 7 hours of wrestling in two days. It is just too damn much and I would understand that any casual who never watched wrestling would see this and run away. The WWE is a product for hardcore fans now


I'm not entirely certain the whole casual fan thing isn't a myth to be quite honest. I'm a lifelong wrestling fan since the age of 6 and I fit every "casual fan" stereotype. All I want out of wrestling is Jerry Springer with suplexes and the occasional blow away match on a pay per view. Is it "casuals" or die hard wrestling fans who can't find their preferred style of programming leaving the show in droves? Because I know personally I just want to turn my brain off and watch a dumb show where I occasionally get to see a demon chokeslam a zombie into their parent's burning casket. 

Wrestling just isn't as fun as it used to be.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.816M
H2- 2.718M
H3- 2.575M
3H- 2.703M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 3.48% / - 0.098M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 5.26% / - 0.143M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 8.56% / - 0.241M )
1/28/19 Vs 1/21/19 ( + 9.79% / + 0.241M )

Demo (1/28/19 Vs 1/21/19):
H1- 1.000D Vs 0.950D
H2- 0.950D Vs 0.850D
H3- 0.900D Vs 0.770D
3H- 0.950D Vs 0.857D

Note: RAW is 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (1/28/19 Vs 1/29/18):
H1- 2.816M Vs 3.662M
H2- 2.718M Vs 3.461M
H3- 2.575M Vs 3.061M
3H- 2.703M Vs 3.395M ( - 20.38% / - 0.692M )

Demo (1/28/19 Vs 1/29/18):
H1- 1.000D Vs 1.210D
H2- 0.950D Vs 1.150D
H3- 0.900D Vs 1.060D
3H- 0.950D Vs 1.140D

Note: RAW this week last year was 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 7th by hourly viewership.*

*Comparing 22 years of post RR RAWs (from RR 97');
-Lowest viewership and demo.
-Biggest drop in Y-Y viewership and demo.
-1st sub 3M viewership & sub 1.0R demo.*


----------



## Ace

That's horrific :lmao

They've lost 700,000 viewers from last year :lmao

This company.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

This is lower than the post Summerslam RAW which did 3.095M viewers. I thought for sure this episode of RAW would beat that. 

Was there competition last night on the major TV networks?


----------



## Ace

-Lowest post RR viewership and demo in 22 years (since RR 97').
-First sub 3M viewership and sub 1.0R demo in 22 years (since RR 97').
-Biggest drop in Y-Y post RR viewership and demo.


----------



## llj

Disappointing. Post RR should always draw the most interest of the year


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

At least the shows are good now. Rousey/Becky is on fire and Seth/Brock has potential if they keep booking it that way. For comparison sake on TV last night, Hannity last night lost 1.5 million viewers from last year and Carlson lost a million from last year.

I don't know what Hannity and Carlson's reasons are, but WWE is basically starting from scratch in trying to repair the damage on the past several RTWM's which were awful and drove viewers away that still don't trust WWE yet to come back despite the uptick in quality. It's gonna take awhile to win them back, if they ever do. And yet, somehow they still got over 2 billion for the next 5 years. Crazy world.


----------



## Ace

> For what is traditionally the second or third highest rated Raw of the year, Monday's post-Royal Rumble episode averaged 2.703 million viewers, up nine percent from last week. *That's actually down from two weeks ago, however, as the January 14 Raw averaged 2.722 million viewers.*


 LMAO what happened on January 14th?

A post Rumble show getting beat by a random Raw :aries2

Was that the show where they found a new challenger for Brock?


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Donnie said:


> LMAO what happened on January 14th?
> 
> A post Rumble show getting beat by a random Raw :aries2
> 
> Was that the show where they found a new challenger for Brock?


Yeah it was odd because it was a random episode of RAW. I believe that show was built around Finn Balor.


----------



## Chrome

The Boy Wonder said:


> Yeah it was odd because it was a random episode of RAW. I believe that show was built around Finn Balor.


Maybe Balor should've beaten Brock then? :hmm:


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Chrome said:


> Maybe Balor should've beaten Brock then? :hmm:


Exactly. Their match was well done that an upset would've went over very well with the fans.


----------



## Stalingrad9

Donnie said:


> LMAO what happened on January 14th?
> 
> A post Rumble show getting beat by a random Raw :aries2
> 
> Was that the show where they found a new challenger for Brock?


Cena on RAW for the January 14th


----------



## Chrome

The Boy Wonder said:


> Exactly. Their match was well done that an upset would've went over very well with the fans.


Yeah, plus Balor/Rollins probably would've been more interesting, given they could've played off their history and match from SS '16. Balor could've blamed Rollins for injuring him and sending his career into a tailspin. Plus, both guys would be there every week, which can certainly help build a feud.


----------



## Ace

Fox and USA after seeing the ratings for Raw and SD.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1089931201937313792


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

We already know none of the full-timers are TV draws. And that even includes Rousey who actually has name recognition outside of WWE. Now, we can add part-timers to that list, as well. Full timers/Part timers/people who made a name for themselves outside of WWE; no one is a TV draw.

They did a fine enough job of maintaining their audience from Hour 1, but no one is putting more eyeballs on the product. And to think there were people cheering Vince on for doing what he's been doing these last several years in saying 'fuck you' to the fans. This is why you give your consumers what they want from the start.


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> We already know none of the full-timers are TV draws. And that even includes Rousey who actually has name recognition outside of WWE. Now, we can add part-timers to that list, as well. Full timers/Part timers/people who made a name for themselves outside of WWE; no one is a TV draw.
> 
> They did a fine enough job of maintaining their audience from Hour 1, but no one is putting more eyeballs on the product. And to think there were people cheering Vince on for doing what he's been doing these several years in saying 'fuck you' to the fans. This is why you give you consumers what they want from the start.


 Dude I want this company to burn. I know Seth is in the main, don't take it personally. It would be better for everyone if they bombed and caused a drastic change like a new attitude era. If not, my favorite wrestlers leave this hell hole and move onto better things creatively.


----------



## Mordecay

People on Twitter actually thought that hour 3 was going to be the highest rated hour because people were going to stay to see "The Man" rollins :heston


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Donnie said:


> Dude I want this company to burn. I know Seth is in the main, don't take it personally. It would be better for everyone if they bombed and caused a drastic change like a new attitude era. If not, my favorite wrestlers leave this hell hole and move onto better things creatively.


You mean a new AE in terms of the craziness and whatnot? It would be fun, hell it was fun when it originally happened since I was in high school during those years (1997-2001), so the AE was perfect for my age back then, but they're never gonna do anything like that again with how society is these days. USA Network will allow some stuff like we've been seeing recently (Alexa topless, etc) but I doubt it goes much more than that. TNT/TBS are even more strict with shit like that as are most networks these days. Too many people would throw a shit-fit.


----------



## Ace

Mordecay said:


> People on Twitter actually thought that hour 3 was going to be the highest rated hour because people were going to stay to see "The Man" rollins :heston


 Lowest rated post RR show in 22 years :heston



Showstopper said:


> You mean a new AE in terms of the craziness and whatnot? It would be fun, hell it was fun when it originally happened since I was in high school during those years (1997-2001), so the AE was perfect for my age back then, but they're never gonna do anything like that again with how society is these days. USA Network will allow some stuff like we've been seeing recently (Alexa topless, etc) but I doubt it goes much more than that. TNT/TBS are even more strict with shit like that as are most networks these days. Too many people would throw a shit-fit.


 It's either that or die a slow death.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Donnie said:


> .


Well, ratings have been decreasing every year for how long now. They'll be lower next year at this time, too. And they're gonna be on air for another 5 years starting in October so they're probably gonna decrease every year for the next 5 years.


----------



## rbl85

Mordecay said:


> People on Twitter actually thought that hour 3 was going to be the highest rated hour because people were going to stay to see "The Man" rollins :heston


Really ? can i have a link please ?


----------



## Ace

rbl85 said:


> Really ? can i have a link please ?


 Do not underestimate the stupidity of stans and feminists.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Donnie said:


> Lowest rated post RR show in 22 years :heston
> 
> It's either that or die a slow death.


*This is somehow Roman's fault. I mean, I was told for the last 4 years that if he were out of the picture, the ratings would magically increase because the indy guys would be on top. Color me shocked that it got even worse without him :reigns2.*


----------



## rbl85

Donnie said:


> Do not underestimate the stupidity of stans and feminists.


I just want to see the reactions, that must be funny.


----------



## Ace

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> Donnie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lowest rated post RR show in 22 years <img src="http://i.imgur.com/m2XjBg7.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Heston" class="inlineimg" />
> 
> It's either that or die a slow death.
> 
> 
> 
> *This is somehow Roman's fault. I mean, I was told for the last 4 years that if he were out of the picture, the ratings would magically increase because the indy guys would be on top. Color me shocked that it got even worse without him <img src="http://i.imgur.com/dikhGXC.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Reigns wink" class="inlineimg" />.*
Click to expand...

 You're having a go at the wrong guy, I've already admitted Roman leaving has had an impact. The division across both shows is dead and WM will likely be main evented by women.



rbl85 said:


> Donnie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do not underestimate the stupidity of stans and feminists.
> 
> 
> 
> I just want to see the reactions, that must be funny.
Click to expand...

 Becky debuts on Raw and it does historic numbers #facts #GOAT #WomensTakeover


----------



## VitoCorleoneX

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> *This is somehow Roman's fault. I mean, I was told for the last 4 years that if he were out of the picture, the ratings would magically increase because the indy guys would be on top. Color me shocked that it got even worse without him :reigns2.*



The damage has allready been done with his superman booking for 4 straight years. it will take some time till they recover from that not just in 1-2 months :x


----------



## Ace

VitoCorleoneX said:


> BOSS of Bel-Air said:
> 
> 
> 
> *This is somehow Roman's fault. I mean, I was told for the last 4 years that if he were out of the picture, the ratings would magically increase because the indy guys would be on top. Color me shocked that it got even worse without him <img src="http://i.imgur.com/dikhGXC.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Reigns wink" class="inlineimg" />.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The damage has allready been done with his superman booking for 4 straight years. it will take some time till they recover from that not just in 1-2 months <img src="http://i.imgur.com/sfQtJOH.png" border="0" alt="" title="Kiss" class="inlineimg" />
Click to expand...

 Ratings fell off a cliff a week or two after he left, it's pretty obvious him leaving has had a detrimental impact to ratings. Nobody other than Brock is on his level in the men's division.


----------



## VitoCorleoneX

Donnie said:


> Ratings fell off a cliff a week or two after he left, it's pretty obvious him leaving has had a detrimental impact to ratings. Nobody other than Brock is on his level in the men's division.


Ofcourse it has WWE focused on one fuckin guy in the last 4 years and sarificed their roster for him.
This result was expected. They lost their one guy they invested the most.

Besides that ratings being down is just a trend. It will get even more worse till they change the overall product.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Donnie said:


> You're having a go at the wrong guy, I've already admitted Roman leaving has had an impact. The division across both shows is dead and WM will likely be main evented by women.


*I'm agreeing with you while mocking all of the delusional people who convinced themselves that Roman has no positive impact on the show. Becky fans, however, will have the last laugh after being a joke for the last four years if she and Ronda main event Wrestlemania. I think this is the match that should do it and it's the perfect time for it. Nothing else on the show is nearly as exciting and Lesnar vs anyone is trash at this point. He just needs to fuck off for good.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The ratings decline literally every single year no matter what. No matter who is here and who isn't, the ratings were/are going to decline. And this time next year; they'll be even lower, again, no matter who the focus is next year.

They also chased plenty of fans off after the last several years and basically told their fans to go fuck themselves year after year. Now that WWE might have competition in the future, they're going to have to start to actually listen to their fans for the first time in ions on the main rosters. This is the very beginning of the rebuild. That's why when you are the only show in town for years on end, you don't shit on your fans just because you can. It always comes back to bite you in the end and now they basically have to reboot shit.


----------



## Empress

I thought there would be a slight bump since it was the post Rumble show. I've got to hand it to Vince. He's been able to finesse billions even as the ratings plummet. But then again, it depends on how he spins them to USA/FOX and includes 7 day. Personally, the network being offered to me for .99 cents every other month is the more alarming trend. Not that I mind but it doesn't seem like the Network has a good retention rate if it's constantly slashing the price.


----------



## Ace

Empress said:


> I thought there would be a slight bump since it was the post Rumble show. I've got to handle it to Vince. He's been able to finesse billions even as the ratings plummet. But then again, it depends on how he spins them to USA/FOX and includes 7 day. Personally, the network being offered to me for .99 cents every other month is the more alarming trend. Not that I mind but it doesn't seem like the Network has a good retention rate if it's constantly slashing the price.


 I get those offers and still don't buy, they don't deserve a cent.


----------



## Seafort

VitoCorleoneX said:


> The damage has allready been done with his superman booking for 4 straight years. it will take some time till they recover from that not just in 1-2 months :x


If everything were to go right....if a robust new promotional direction were to be achieved....you're looking at probably eight to nine months before ratings turn around. It took WWE that long for ratings to grow after RAW is WAR started in February 1997.



Donnie said:


> I get those offers and still don't buy, they don't deserve a cent.


WWE no longer releases North American subscriber numbers. They had been flat for a few quarters, and presumably still are (or are slightly down). The growth that they've experienced has been international.

Hence the Network offers.


----------



## .christopher.

People are kidding themselves trying to absolve Reigns from any of the blame. A HUGE reason as to why more people stopped watching was because they buried the entire roster for a few years just to get people into the Reigns/Lesnar feud.

This is its lasting effect. When Reigns comes back, sure, they'll be a bump because he's the only one that matters, but his booking has drove away more people than he'll bring back.


----------



## Steve Black Man

Seafort said:


> If everything were to go right....if a robust new promotional direction were to be achieved....you're looking at probably eight to nine months before ratings turn around. It took WWE that long for ratings to grow after RAW is WAR started in February 1997.


At this point I don't think there can be a turnaround. Let's face facts, pro-wrestling is a dying art form. It has virtually no mainstream appeal any more. Even if WWE were to miraculously find a new FOTC that was universally over and the quality of the product took a significant and consistent upswing (Raw actually has been quite a bit better as of late), it'll still have a negligible/nonexistent affect on anything. 

Pro wrestling is dead. WWE have dug not only their own grave, but the grave of every promotion on the planet with their consistent downgrade in quality and constant battles with fans over the years.



.christopher. said:


> People are kidding themselves trying to absolve Reigns from any of the blame. A HUGE reason as to why more people stopped watching was because they buried the entire roster for a few years just to get people into the Reigns/Lesnar feud.
> 
> This is its lasting effect. When Reigns comes back, sure, they'll be a bump because he's the only one that matters, but his booking has drove away more people than he'll bring back.


This 100%. Same goes for Cena. Sure, he brings some people in, but he also drove people away, and it's pretty difficult to quantify the number of people a particular performer drives away, as opposed to how many they bring in. It's a much more accumulative effect that can only really be seen by looking at the ratings on a year-by-year basis.


----------



## .christopher.

Steve Black Man said:


> At this point I don't think there can be a turnaround. Let's face facts, pro-wrestling is a dying art form. It has virtually no mainstream appeal any more. Even if WWE were to miraculously find a new FOTC that was universally over and the quality of the product took a significant and consistent upswing (Raw actually has been quite a bit better as of late), it'll still have a negligible/nonexistent affect on anything.
> 
> Pro wrestling is dead. WWE have dug not only their own grave, but the grave of every promotion on the planet their consistent downgrade in quality and constant battles with fans over the years.
> 
> 
> 
> This 100%. Same goes for Cena. Sure, he brings some people in, but he also drove people away, and it's pretty difficult to quantify the number of people a particular performer drives away, as opposed to how many they bring in. It's a much more accumulative effect that can only really be seen by looking at the ratings on a year-by-year basis.


I don't know why people gloss over this.

They are deemed a draw because a few hundred thousand tune in for them. They're the ones who stuck with the company during their runs. However, on the flip side, they (mainly Cena) drove away MILLIONS of fans in the process. That's the opposite of a draw.

As you said, wrestling is dying. People go on about how this is such a great era due to the amount of options you have but there's less and less people getting into wrestling every year, and more and more people falling out of love with it.

Can only hope AEW does well but I'm not getting my hopes up.


----------



## Steve Black Man

.christopher. said:


> I don't know why people gloss over this.
> 
> They are deemed a draw because a few hundred thousand tune in for them. They're the ones who stuck with the company during their runs. However, on the flip side, they (mainly Cena) drove away MILLIONS of fans in the process. That's the opposite of a draw.
> 
> As you said, wrestling is dying. People go on about how this is such a great era due to the amount of options you have but there's less and less people getting into wrestling every year, and more and more people falling out of love with it.
> 
> Can only hope AEW does well but I'm not getting my hopes up.


Yeah, I don't think AEW will make any sort of significant dent when all is said and done. The product might be amazing, the roster might be amazing. Everything about it might be amazing, but with the stranglehold Vince has on pro-wrestling, I just don't see it happening. Pro wrestling lives and dies by WWE, and because of the constant battles with the fans and the consistent downswing in quality, WWE is a sinking ship, and by extension, so is pro wrestling.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Steve Black Man said:


> At this point I don't think there can be a turnaround. Let's face facts, pro-wrestling is a dying art form. It has virtually no mainstream appeal any more. Even if WWE were to miraculously find a new FOTC that was universally over and the quality of the product took a significant and consistent upswing (Raw actually has been quite a bit better as of late), it'll still have a negligible/nonexistent affect on anything.
> 
> Pro wrestling is dead. WWE have dug not only their own grave, but the grave of every promotion on the planet their consistent downgrade in quality and constant battles with fans over the years.
> 
> 
> 
> This 100%. Same goes for Cena. Sure, he brings some people in, but he also drove people away, and it's pretty difficult to quantify the number of people a particular performer drives away, as opposed to how many they bring in. It's a much more accumulative effect that can only really be seen by looking at the ratings on a year-by-year basis.


I agree with all of this. I think the shows can be good, but the ratings could still suffer, tbh. A good quality show doesn't neccessarily guarantee good ratings these days. Raw was much better than usual last night. If the show actually can stay good for the time being, then I'm not going to care about ratings as much as I did when the show was the shits. I mean, the main reason people began to shit on the ratings years and years ago was because of the drop in quality of the show. As long as I'm entertained, that's all that matters to me. But they have to keep this up and be consistent. But if they can do that, my interest in ratings won't be as strong as it is when the show is/was awful for years on end and hasn't even had a full time World Champion for the majority of the past 2 years. Just give me a good show and I don't care. Ratings are WWE's issue, not mine. And with their long history with USA Network and with them being USA's highest rated show every year, USA isn't going to drop them anyway.

But anyway, give us a good show every week and that's what matters most.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Empress said:


> I thought there would be a slight bump since it was the post Rumble show. I've got to handle it to Vince. He's been able to finesse billions even as the ratings plummet. But then again, it depends on how he spins them to USA/FOX and includes 7 day. Personally, the network being offered to me for .99 cents every other month is the more alarming trend. Not that I mind but it doesn't seem like the Network has a good retention rate if it's constantly slashing the price.


*99 cents is actually an upward trend. Those offers used to be free for the first month.*


----------



## ClintDagger

I see some people saying the show is getting better, but it’s not. The only difference is that we are in RR and WM season so the stakes are higher. And that appeals to the hardcores. But you still have a show with non stars, that is about 75% filler. I saw people in the Raw thread falling all over themselves about how over Seth & Becky are, but that’s just an illusion. Half the NXT roster gets similar pops. Neither have broad appeal and the ratings show that.


----------



## Ichigo87

I thought Brock boosts the ratings? Isn't that what his blind fans use to justify him going over everyone?


----------



## rbl85

Ichigo87 said:


> I thought Brock boosts the ratings? Isn't that what his blind fans use to justify him going over everyone?


Nobody is draw in WWE, nobody...Brock, Rousey, Becky, none of them are a draw.


----------



## Ichigo87

.christopher. said:


> People are kidding themselves trying to absolve Reigns from any of the blame. A HUGE reason as to why more people stopped watching was because they buried the entire roster for a few years just to get people into the Reigns/Lesnar feud.
> 
> This is its lasting effect. When Reigns comes back, sure, they'll be a bump because he's the only one that matters, but his booking has drove away more people than he'll bring back.


It's pretty hilarious that Brock isn't getting any blame. He's the one that's been going over everyone and in more convincing fashion than Reigns ever did. Yet he gets a pass everytime here.



rbl85 said:


> Ichigo87 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought Brock boosts the ratings? Isn't that what his blind fans use to justify him going over everyone?
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody is draw in WWE, nobody...Brock, Rousey, Becky, none of them are a draw.
Click to expand...

Makes you wonder why they keep putting him over everyone. They're sabotaging their own roster.


----------



## Not Lying

Ichigo87 said:


> It's pretty hilarious that Brock isn't getting any blame. He's the one that's been going over everyone and in more convincing fashion than Reigns ever did. Yet he gets a pass everytime here.


Nah man Brock is a huge draw.

This is all because of becky’s 3min unadvertised appearance , I mean people just saw her music and everyone completly turned off their TV and that’s why the ratings are so down. isn’t that right? @Modercay

—-

How about we all do a comparison of WWE early 2014 vs now? 

let’s see how much left then vs how much left now after Roman left... I think 2014 is a fair point to look at considering that’s when Lesnar became unstoppable and Reigns became the only that matters. Let’s see how many fans they drove away. You wana go there? if not, sit your ass down and be humble.


----------



## Mear

Ichigo87 said:


> It's pretty hilarious that Brock isn't getting any blame. He's the one that's been going over everyone and in more convincing fashion than Reigns ever did. Yet he gets a pass everytime here.


Yep, the person who should get the blame is the Top Star who usually is the World Champion who is Lesnar. Even if he is not here, the fact he is holding the title in hostage means he gets the blame.

As for 2014, something more interesting that year happened to me and it's the start of the WWE Network. This to me was when the WWE started to fall because that meant they didn't have to answer anymore since there was no PPV buys. 

That's a big problem because the quality of the PPV really went down, feeling more and more like a weekly show but also because they could push whoever they wanted, it makes no difference since no one buys the PPVs

It's also when, in my mind, they started to get lazy and rely too much on hardcore fans. When the " Post-WM crowd " started to become the usual crowd


----------



## Not Lying

Mear said:


> Yep, the person who should get the blame is the Top Star who usually is the World Champion who is Lesnar. Even if he is not here, the fact he is holding the title in hostage means he gets the blame.
> 
> As for 2014, something more interesting that year happened to me and it's the start of the WWE Network. This to me was when the WWE started to fall because that meant they didn't have to answer anymore since there was no PPV buys.
> 
> That's a big problem because the quality of the PPV really went down, feeling more and more like a weekly show but also because they could push whoever they wanted, it makes no difference since no one buys the PPVs
> 
> It's also when, in my mind, they started to get lazy and rely too much on hardcore fans. When the " Post-WM crowd " started to become the usual crowd


true.. and most the hardcore fans didn’t want Reigns vs Lesnar, top 2 guys who are booked as superhuman compared to everyone else. Yet, Vince kept fighting the hardcore fans years... that 1/3 of those hardcore fans that remained in 2014, are now gone.


----------



## Stalingrad9

The Definition of Technician said:


> Nah man Brock is a huge draw.
> 
> This is all because of becky’s 3min unadvertised appearance , I mean people just saw her music and everyone completly turned off their TV and that’s why the ratings are so down. isn’t that right? @Modercay
> 
> —-
> 
> How about we all do a comparison of WWE early 2014 vs now?
> 
> let’s see how much left then vs how much left now after Roman left... I think 2014 is a fair point to look at considering that’s when Lesnar became unstoppable and Reigns became the only that matters. Let’s see how many fans they drove away. You wana go there? if not, sit your ass down and be humble.


More like 2015. And the end of 2015 because after WM Roman was in the midcard until Rollins blew up his knee.


----------



## SPCDRI

Steve Black Man said:


> Sure, Cena brought some people in, but he also drove people away, and it's pretty difficult to quantify the number of people a particular performer drives away, as opposed to how many they bring in. It's a much more accumulative effect that can only really be seen by looking at the ratings on a year-by-year basis.


By WWE's admission, John Cena only got young children and their parents to watch WWE. By the time these very young children hit middle school and high school, they'd get razzed for liking WWE and told things like, "John Cena sucks and is for babies, he's not cool." The only demographic retention in the young children was parents and aunts and uncles who stuck with WWE after the children aged out of it. This is why despite the product being rated PG and geared consistently to kids for a decade, the mean, median and mode age of WWE viewers went up year on year for years on end to a point where now the mean, median and mode age of a WWE viewer is closer to 30 than 13 and there are now more people OVER the age of FIFTY than under the age of TWENTY watching PG rated programming and I think the most likely age of a WWE viewer now is probably something like 31. These are people who liked the product from 1995-2005, Attitude Era and Ruthless Aggression Era, and stuck with the programming. 

Yeah, John Cena brought children and parents in, sold boodles of brightly colored t-shirts to their mothers and fathers, and then a huge percentage of the young people bailed when they turned 13 or 15 or 16 and grew out of the product and got peer pressured out of the product in like, 6th and 9th grade. 

The audience has very few young people and casuals watching nowadays. Look at the crowd and try to see how many people under the age of say, 25, are in an audience. They're just not there anymore. 

The average age of an Attitude Era viewer was more than 10 years younger than a PG era viewer. From 1995 to 2005, you had very little age-out of the product. There's pretty good chances that if you liked the programming then, you're still to some extent watching WWE. That is not true for the 2006-2016 PG era/Cena Era.

Edit: After this, John Cena part-timed, driving the child+parents demo away, and the Reigns/Lesnar angle flopped and devalued the entire male heavyweight roster to such a point where ratings are hitting all time lows and the best thing about the programming for a lot of people is what the women are doing on Smackdown.


----------



## Mear

The Definition of Technician said:


> true.. and most the hardcore fans didn’t want Reigns vs Lesnar, top 2 guys who are booked as superhuman compared to everyone else. Yet, Vince kept fighting the hardcore fans years... that 1/3 of those hardcore fans that remained in 2014, are now gone.


The funny thing is that if Roman Reigns had won the title in a Fatal-4-Way after Bryan was gone ( At Battleground 2014 if my memory is right ), Reigns would've been over as he would feel like a change was coming. The WWE killed Roman Reigns themselves with they bad booking.

But that's the funny thing about the current product. They try to cater to the hardcore fans more and more but are still unwilling to give up some of their classic WWE ground made for casuals.


----------



## SPCDRI

Its not fair to pin this all on "superhero booking" of Roman Reigns and absolve Brock Lesnar. Brock Lesnar was the guy who had the 500 day title run, not Roman Reigns. He's the guy who after briefly dropping the belt to Reigns, picked it up about two months later. Roman Reigns hasn't even had the belt for 200 days. Kevin Ownes was Universal Champion for more than 100 days longer than Reigns ever was. Brock Lesnar has had it for almost SIX HUNDRED days. Nobody else has been Universal Champ for 200! When the ratings are in the toilet and the leaving fans have jiggled the handle three times, a good deal of the blame should be the guy who has had the heavyweight belt for 600 of the last 700 days on WWE's flagship program.


----------



## Not Lying

Stalingrad9 said:


> More like 2015. And the end of 2015 because after WM Roman was in the midcard until Rollins blew up his knee.


2014 is when Lesnar broke the streak, SS is when he started the retarded Suplex City gimmick, 2014 was when The Shield broke up and Roman went solo in the ME scene while Rollins/Ambrose feuded in the mid-card.
But it was clear as day that Roman was being set up to challenge for the title, Royal Rumble 2015 people were predicting Roman would win it almost a year earlier...and WWE didn't give a damn, despite Bryan's popularity then (which no matter what anyone tells you was still as good as it was in early 2014 before WM 30, people weren't satisfied in his reign and they were just as hungry to watch him win the Rumble and challenge Lesnar...but WWE threw Bryan out of the Rumble unceremoniously in the middle and went ahead with Reigns to a chorus of boos).

I think the combination of very few casuals left in 2014, thus the far majority being hardcore fans, and those hardcore fans were dicked over again and again...the overall product was bad and there was clear defiance from the company. You can't tell people "stop watching if you don't like it" and then when it happens you blame everyone else but the people that forced these fans to leave. Lesnar has been champion for god knows how long now, the top dog, all so that Reigns can beat him..something nobody really wants. Sure Lesnar and Reigns have fans that would may not care for anyone else..but there's a lot of people sick of that feud and sick of everyone else being made like a joke compared to Lesnar, Reigns.. (and Strowman actually as he's a clear #3 guy). 

I mean, I would have loved to see WWE run with Strowman at Crown Jewels instead of putting the title back AGAIN on Lesnar. See what Braun, arguably the most over performer they had at the time, could do with decent storylines and as top guy after being put over by Lesnar. But nah, Idk how it seemed to go back to a lazy ass guy who holds the title hostage a good idea, and apparently even when his part-timing ass shows up, nobody cares.



SPCDRI said:


> Its not fair to pin this all on "superhero booking" of Roman Reigns and absolve Brock Lesnar. Brock Lesnar was the guy who had the 500 day title run, not Roman Reigns. He's the guy who after briefly dropping the belt to Reigns, picked it up about two months later. Roman Reigns hasn't even had the belt for 200 days. Kevin Ownes was Universal Champion for more than 100 days longer than Reigns ever was. Brock Lesnar has had it for almost SIX HUNDRED days. Nobody else has been Universal Champ for 200! When the ratings are in the toilet and the leaving fans have jiggled the handle three times, a good deal of the blame should be the guy who has had the heavyweight belt for 600 of the last 700 days on WWE's flagship program.


Had Reigns been over enough maybe the reign of terror of Lesnar wouldn't have lasted so long and the product wouldn't have suffered. I mostly blame WWE on Lesnar's booking, but Reigns was also always positioned as the top guy that was set to dethrone Lesnar... and fans weren't interested in that.

I think WWE has been booking well for the past month or two actually, for almost everyone, idk if the competition or the low ratings they've been having.. but it's gona take more than 2 months to wash away the stink of 4 years (that is actually still going since Lesnar is champion)



Mear said:


> The funny thing is that if Roman Reigns had won the title in a Fatal-4-Way after Bryan was gone ( At Battleground 2014 if my memory is right ), Reigns would've been over as he would feel like a change was coming. The WWE killed Roman Reigns themselves with they bad booking.
> 
> But that's the funny thing about the current product. They try to cater to the hardcore fans more and more but are still unwilling to give up some of their classic WWE ground made for casuals.


 This might be true actually. Maybe Reigns wasn't ready then, but for sure he wouldn't have been as rejected as he was for the past few years. If he was seen as ONE OF the top guys, a main eventer who gets title runs, it would have been fine. But his push/booking and the booking of everyone around him ..turned tons of people away.


----------



## SPCDRI

It didn't help that WWE had somebody as beloved as Kurt Angle tell people that Lesnar was lazy, wouldn't help WWE in the media, couldn't cut a promo and his matches sucked and that Lesnar was the worst heavyweight champion the company ever had...only for them to put the belt on Lesnar again a month later and keep it there for another 3 months, presumably all the way until Wrestlemania. So they point blank told viewers in a worked shoot by Kurt Angle that Brock Lesnar as heavyweight champion was a shit sandwich, hold the bread, extra shit, please! and their hot idea after doing that was to give Lesnar the belt for another half a YEAR.


----------



## Not Lying

right. But still, it's all because of the women. :Cry


----------



## Stalingrad9

The Definition of Technician said:


> 2014 is when Lesnar broke the streak, SS is when he started the retarded Suplex City gimmick, 2014 was when The Shield broke up and Roman went solo in the ME scene while Rollins/Ambrose feuded in the mid-card.
> But it was clear as day that Roman was being set up to challenge for the title, Royal Rumble 2015 people were predicting Roman would win it almost a year earlier...and WWE didn't give a damn, despite Bryan's popularity then (which no matter what anyone tells you was still as good as it was in early 2014 before WM 30, people weren't satisfied in his reign and they were just as hungry to watch him win the Rumble and challenge Lesnar...but WWE threw Bryan out of the Rumble unceremoniously in the middle and went ahead with Reigns to a chorus of boos).
> 
> I think the combination of very few casuals left in 2014, thus the far majority being hardcore fans, and those hardcore fans were dicked over again and again...the overall product was bad and there was clear defiance from the company. You can't tell people "stop watching if you don't like it" and then when it happens you blame everyone else but the people that forced these fans to leave. Lesnar has been champion for god knows how long now, the top dog, all so that Reigns can beat him..something nobody really wants. Sure Lesnar and Reigns have fans that would may not care for anyone else..but there's a lot of people sick of that feud and sick of everyone else being made like a joke compared to Lesnar, Reigns.. (and Strowman actually as he's a clear #3 guy).
> 
> I mean, I would have loved to see WWE run with Strowman at Crown Jewels instead of putting the title back AGAIN on Lesnar. See what Braun, arguably the most over performer they had at the time, could do with decent storylines and as top guy after being put over by Lesnar. But nah, Idk how it seemed to go back to a lazy ass guy who holds the title hostage a good idea, and apparently even when his part-timing ass shows up, nobody cares.


Oh okay, you're talking about like when people realized Roman was the next big thing.
I though you were talking about when he started to be Superman lol.

Problem is with what you say, I think there is still a good part of casuals, and a good part of IWC member who don't have the hardcore mentality per say.

But you're right on the frustration of hardcore fans, that just makes them just more invested in the product. They're not a vocal minority, but their influence exceeds the number of hardcores.


----------



## Mear

The Definition of Technician said:


> This might be true actually. Maybe Reigns wasn't ready then, but for sure he wouldn't have been as rejected as he was for the past few years. If he was seen as ONE OF the top guys, a main eventer who gets title runs, it would have been fine. But his push/booking and the booking of everyone around him ..turned tons of people away.


The thing is that the timing was almost perfect for the WWE at that time since Daniel Bryan just got injured and the alternatives were Kane, Randy Orton or John Cena. It was a " Batista " scenario where the audience could accept Roman Reigns just because it was new and moving on.

This and I think that two thing that easily made Reigns less attractive were not here yet. Those things being the alternatives ( Rollins and Ambrose had just started their feud so weren't that established ) and Reigns being the obvious pick ( we could see some of it but it really became obvious around Summerslam 2014 )


----------



## Not Lying

Stalingrad9 said:


> Oh okay, you're talking about like when people realized Roman was the next big thing.
> I though you were talking about when he started to be Superman lol.
> 
> Problem is with what you say, I think there is still a good part of casuals, and a good part of IWC member who don't have the hardcore mentality per say.
> 
> But you're right on the frustration of hardcore fans, that just makes them just more invested in the product. They're not a vocal minority, but their influence exceeds the number of hardcores.


Well... by that time the guy hadn't been pinned cleaned except maybe like once? maybe not even..
He was the only one to beat Punk out of the Shield members.
He had set the SurvivorSeries and Rumble records. 
He beat Orton at SummerSlam. 
And yeah, everyone knew he was going to win the Rumble.. but people wanted Bryan. 



Mear said:


> The thing is that the timing was almost perfect for the WWE at that time since Daniel Bryan just got injured and the alternatives were Kane, Randy Orton or John Cena. It was a " Batista " scenario where the audience could accept Roman Reigns just because it was new and moving on.
> 
> This and I think that two thing that easily made Reigns less attractive were not here yet. Those things being the alternatives ( Rollins and Ambrose had just started their feud so weren't that established ) and Reigns being the obvious pick ( we could see some of it but it really became obvious around Summerslam 2014 )


Agreed a little on that. Still, I can see some defiance..He's not really a tremendous mic worker or ring worker that can hook the hardcore fans..and he's not destroying shit every week like Braun to keep them entertained..


----------



## Piper's Pit

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> *This is somehow Roman's fault. I mean, I was told for the last 4 years that if he were out of the picture, the ratings would magically increase because the indy guys would be on top. Color me shocked that it got even worse without him :reigns2.*


You're right it has got worse without Roman for sure but not because RR was amazing, it's because when RR was there the entire show was centred around getting him over and while a flawed strategy it meant RAW had a direction, a purpose however misguided it may have been. 
With RR gone there is no direction or purpose to anything now. A complete mess.


----------



## deathvalleydriver2

llj said:


> Disappointing. Post RR should always draw the most interest of the year


Do you blame people? The rumble was atrocious, a bunch of vanilla midgets and SJW agendas


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Piper's Pit said:


> You're right it has got worse without Roman for sure but not because RR was amazing, it's because when RR was there the entire show was centred around getting him over and while a flawed strategy it meant RAW had a direction, a purpose however misguided it may have been.
> With RR gone there is no direction or purpose to anything now. A complete mess.


*Roman spent an entire year in the mid card with US and IC titles. You still complained about the show being centered around him. I don't want to hear it.*


----------



## Piper's Pit

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> *Roman spent an entire year in the mid card with US and IC titles. You still complained about the show being centered around him. I don't want to hear it.*


I like Roman BTW but while he did spend some time with midcard titles he was still the 'star' of RAW, he mainevented 3 WM's in a row for god's sake, that's hardly the resume of a midcarder is it ??


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Piper's Pit said:


> I like Roman BTW but while he did spend some time with midcard titles he was still the 'star' of RAW, he mainevented 3 WM's in a row for god's sake, that's hardly the resume of a midcarder is it ??


*When your segments and matches are at 9 PM for at minimum 9 straight months, you aren't the focus of the show. There's a difference between being the biggest star and the sole focus. There were plenty of things happening that didn't involve Roman and his existence in the mid card did nothing to take away from the main event. It's not his fault if no one cared about whoever was in it, but that won't stop the insecure fans of those guys from blaming Roman when their hour bombs. *


----------



## Steve Black Man

ClintDagger said:


> *I see some people saying the show is getting better, but it’s not. The only difference is that we are in RR and WM season so the stakes are higher. * And that appeals to the hardcores. But you still have a show with non stars, that is about 75% filler. I saw people in the Raw thread falling all over themselves about how over Seth & Becky are, but that’s just an illusion. Half the NXT roster gets similar pops. Neither have broad appeal and the ratings show that.


The last several WM seasons have been fucking awful. That's not to say that Monday's show is going to be an indication of how well the leadup to 'Mania is this year, but if we were going to compare last Monday's Raw to the typical RTWM Raw from any of the last several years, this Monday's Raw was just objectively better. 

It's not unusual for Raw to take a bit of an uptick in quality from time to time. The problem is it never lasts for very long and it's certainly never built upon.

Also, everybody gets pops in NXT. It's not really a comparable situation to the main roster. If you're getting good pops on the main roster in this day and age, you're doing something right, as most performers come out to crickets. 

I will agree though that WWE really doesn't have any stars with mainstream appeal. I don't put that on the performers though. They're doing the best they can with the material they have. I blame Vince and the shitty creative team. With a better writing staff behind them, who knows how big some of the performers on the roster could get? It might not even be someone that immediately comes to mind when we think about the top performers in WWE today. Maybe Big-E would be a multiple time world champion with all sorts of mainstream appeal. Maybe it'd be Elias. Maybe it'd be Alexa. Maybe it'd be fucking Mojo Rawley. The point is we don't know, and we never will.


----------



## Not Lying

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> *Roman spent an entire year in the mid card with US and IC titles. You still complained about the show being centered around him. I don't want to hear it.*


When was this whole year? 

Lets say that was the case. Did ratings magically increase when he went from Mid-Card to Main Event? Ratings kept going down no matter what. :brock2 :brock2



and then, you can't just say that Roman was another mid-carder..

after his suspension in 2016, he was put in a feud with Russev who was still semi-credible at the time, and he got to do a HIAC match with him (how many US or IC HIAC matches have there been? does it warrant that type of match..or just Roman?) .. then even as US champion he feuded with KO for the title and only lost his US title in handicap match to Y2KO. That's like 2-3 month of him "in the mid-card"

And again, it wasn't just about Reigns, but he was the only one positioned to beat Lesnar, everything else seemed meaningless while people focused on how Reigns is being built to beat Lesnar.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

The Definition of Technician said:


> When was this whole year?
> 
> Lets say that was the case. Did ratings magically increase when he went from Mid-Card to Main Event? Ratings kept going down no matter what. :brock2 :brock2
> 
> 
> 
> and then, you can't just say that Roman was another mid-carder..
> 
> after his suspension in 2016, he was put in a feud with Russev who was still semi-credible at the time, and he got to do a HIAC match with him (how many US or IC HIAC matches have there been? does it warrant that type of match..or just Roman?) .. then even as US champion he feuded with KO for the title and only lost his US title in handicap match to Y2KO. That's like 2-3 month of him "in the mid-card"
> 
> And again, it wasn't just about Reigns, but he was the only one positioned to beat Lesnar, everything else seemed meaningless while people focused on how Reigns is being built to beat Lesnar.


*Did you forget the 6 straight months Roman feuded with Strowman for no title? And no, Zack Ryder and The Miz wouldn't warrant a HIAC match, but you're damn right the face of the company did. Just like no one would give a damn about an Elias Open Challenge like they did for Cena's. Top guys holding mid card titles elevates the whole title scene because people actually care about who wins or loses. If I saw a thread saying Bobby Lashley lost the title to Bo Dallas, I would keep scrolling because I don't care. None of this makes Roman existing in the mid card any less true. *


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Definition of Technician said:


> When was this whole year?
> 
> Lets say that was the case. Did ratings magically increase when he went from Mid-Card to Main Event? Ratings kept going down no matter what. :brock2 :brock2
> 
> 
> 
> and then, you can't just say that Roman was another mid-carder..
> 
> after his suspension in 2016, he was put in a feud with Russev who was still semi-credible at the time, and he got to do a HIAC match with him (how many US or IC HIAC matches have there been? does it warrant that type of match..or just Roman?) .. then even as US champion he feuded with KO for the title and only lost his US title in handicap match to Y2KO. That's like 2-3 month of him "in the mid-card"
> 
> And again, it wasn't just about Reigns, but he was the only one positioned to beat Lesnar, everything else seemed meaningless while people focused on how Reigns is being built to beat Lesnar.


They shed viewers every year he main evented WM, too. No one is a draw as far as TV ratings go. This is fact.


----------



## ClintDagger

People want to blame Brock, but that is completely ludicrous. WWE completely sabotaged Brock and drained any value he had left in an effort to get Roman over. Why they didn’t just cut Brock loose after that is beyond me. But you can’t expect people to care about Brock after WWE did everything they could to give Brock go away heat. These ratings are squarely on Vince, and the non stars that he’s tried to build around like Roman, Rollins, Ronda, Bliss, the women’s movement in general, etcetera. They are constantly turning off the audience and forcing things down their throat that they don’t want (like the women inorganically main eventing WM).


----------



## .christopher.

Ichigo87 said:


> It's pretty hilarious that Brock isn't getting any blame. He's the one that's been going over everyone and in more convincing fashion than Reigns ever did. Yet he gets a pass everytime here.
> 
> 
> Makes you wonder why they keep putting him over everyone. They're sabotaging their own roster.


Well, I mentioned Brock, too. Of course his booking is a big reason. The problem is he's only been booked like this because WWE want that X-pac heat on him because that's the only way they envision Reigns getting over by beating him.



ClintDagger said:


> People want to blame Brock, but that is completely ludicrous. WWE completely sabotaged Brock and drained any value he had left in an effort to get Roman over. Why they didn’t just cut Brock loose after that is beyond me. But you can’t expect people to care about Brock after WWE did everything they could to give Brock go away heat. These ratings are squarely on Vince, and the non stars that he’s tried to build around like Roman, Rollins, Ronda, Bliss, the women’s movement in general, etcetera. They are constantly turning off the audience and forcing things down their throat that they don’t want (like the women inorganically main eventing WM).


Echoes my thoughts, too. Brock's just doing what's stupidly asked of him.


----------



## SPCDRI

Piper's Pit said:


> You're right it has got worse without Roman for sure but not because RR was amazing, it's because when RR was there the entire show was centred around getting him over and while a flawed strategy it meant RAW had a direction, a purpose however misguided it may have been.
> With RR gone there is no direction or purpose to anything now. A complete mess.


Any decision is better than indecision. Putting the title back on Brock was very indecisive, and now we're in a total mess with all-time low viewership for RAW. Post-Rumble is the second highest watched show of the year, and not a single hour even did a 3 million viewership! HOLY TOLEDO.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

It's done. This company is finished.

Of course not anytime soon (Thank Saudi Arabia and the FOX deal for that) but this is a decaying brand that knows its inevitable outcome after all of this. Spring this on Roman Reigns all you want but he's simply a spoke of this entire problem. There ARE no stars anymore. The Attitude Era stars (except Rock and maybe Austin) no longer can sustainably draw viewers in anymore. Hell, Vince came back recently and RAW just got under 3 million views on THE ROAD TO WRESTLEMANIA after a Rumble PPV!

Speaking of Vince, blame him all you want as well (and he does deserve scrutiny for his lack of creativity) but he's not the only cluprit. At the end of the day once the XFL returns next year, he'll truly fuck off and hand the keys to Steph and Hunter and those two are just as guilty as he is. Stephanie and her awful takes on philantrophy as the new standard of marketeering has become a joke and Hunter is showing/going to show that NXT =/= main roster and that he won't effectively treat the talent any better.

You can like Seth Rollins. You can like Roman Reigns. You can like Becky Lynch. You can like Ronda Rousey. They CAN'T. DRAW. SHIT. It is what it is. Just get behind them if you like them but there is no upcoming BOOM for wrestling. There will be njo 3rd Golden era for this business. It's done. It's clinically dying. Five years from now, you're going to SEE it.

RAW, the flagship show for WWE since 1993, is now under 3 million viewers overall with WrestleMania a little over 60 days away. LMAO holy shit, man :duck


----------



## Ace

WINNING said:


> It's done. This company is finished.
> 
> Of course not anytime soon (Thank Saudi Arabia and the FOX deal for that) but this is a decaying brand that knows its inevitable outcome after all of this. Spring this on Roman Reigns all you want but he's simply a spoke of this entire problem. There ARE no stars anymore. The Attitude Era stars (except Rock and maybe Austin) no longer can sustainably draw viewers in anymore. Hell, Vince came back recently and RAW just got under 3 million views on THE ROAD TO WRESTLEMANIA after a Rumble PPV!
> 
> Speaking of Vince, blame him all you want as well (and he does deserve scrutiny for his lack of creativity) but he's not the only cluprit. At the end of the day once the XFL returns next year, he'll truly fuck off and hand the keys to Steph and Hunter and those two are just as guilty as he is. Stephanie and her awful takes on philantrophy as the new standard of marketeering has become a joke and Hunter is showing/going to show that NXT =/= main roster and that he won't effectively treat the talent any better.
> 
> You can like Seth Rollins. You can like Roman Reigns. You can like Becky Lynch. You can like Ronda Rousey. They CAN'T. DRAW. SHIT. It is what it is. Just get behind them if you like them but there is no upcoming BOOM for wrestling. There will be njo 3rd Golden era for this business. It's done. It's clinically dying. Five years from now, you're going to SEE it.
> 
> RAW, the flagship show for WWE since 1993, is now under 3 million viewers overall with WrestleMania a little over 60 days away. LMAO holy shit, man :duck


 I was someone who thought this company was too big to fail, but the last few months has made me believer. This company is done and I'm loving seeing Vince panic to fruitlessly try save his company.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Donnie said:


> I was someone who thought this company was too big to fail, but the last few months has made me believer. This company is done and I'm loving seeing Vince panic to fruitlessly try save his company.


Do you know how you can tell a brand is dying? The people.

Look at the crowd. Besides a select few, they're dead and quiet with a side of indifference. Look at social media. Besides the hardcore stans, nobody trends it or even largely talks about it. Look at THIS SITE! There is little to no activity besides a few members. 

Imagine it five years from now. The Attitude era nostalgia will have completely dried up. The RA era nostalgia is already drying up now. There IS no PG era nostalgia, for sure. What is there to look forward to? All they have is Wrestlemania and those have been hits/misses for years.

We're all just beating the bush here but it's done. We all know it. AEW isn't saving shit, either. Sports entertainment, as you know it in the mainstream, is officially over. Accept it.


----------



## xio8ups

most the noise from the crowd. Is from the plants. A few marks that never quit watching no matter how bad it is. And a few kids who don't know better.


----------



## Adam Cool

WINNING said:


> We're all just beating the bush here but it's done. We all know it. AEW isn't saving shit, either. Sports entertainment, as you know it in the mainstream, is officially over. Accept it.


This is something a lot of people don't wanna admit

When Vince killed the territories most of the people who were fans of their states wrestling fed just stopped watching wrestling altogether, for them their territories wrestling was wrestling, when it died so did wrestling for them, otherwise both WCW and WWF would have been a lot bigger 

When WCW went under most of its fans stopped watching wrestling 

If WWE goes under the vast majority of its fans are gonna stop watching wrestling


----------



## IronMan8

xio8ups said:


> most the noise from the crowd. Is from the plants.


Mitch is back?


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Adam Cool said:


> This is something a lot of people don't wanna admit
> 
> When Vince killed the territories most of the people who were fans of their states wrestling fed just stopped watching wrestling altogether, for them their territories wrestling was wrestling, when it died so did wrestling for them, otherwise both WCW and WWF would have been a lot bigger
> 
> When WCW went under most of its fans stopped watching wrestling
> 
> If WWE goes under the vast majority of its fans are gonna stop watching wrestling


Exactly. People don't understand how much of a catastrophic position WWE are in at the moment and are only blinded by the surface level of MUH MILLION DOLLAR DEALS and MUH RECORD REVENUE. Once that eventually dries up or no longer becomes a factor, you are going to see the HURT really bad.


----------



## Mear

WINNING said:


> Do you know how you can tell a brand is dying? The people.
> 
> Look at the crowd. Besides a select few, they're dead and quiet with a side of indifference. Look at social media. Besides the hardcore stans, nobody trends it or even largely talks about it. Look at THIS SITE! There is little to no activity besides a few members.
> 
> Imagine it five years from now. The Attitude era nostalgia will have completely dried up. The RA era nostalgia is already drying up now. There IS no PG era nostalgia, for sure. What is there to look forward to? All they have is Wrestlemania and those have been hits/misses for years.
> 
> We're all just beating the bush here but it's done. We all know it. AEW isn't saving shit, either. Sports entertainment, as you know it in the mainstream, is officially over. Accept it.


I wouldn't say the crowd is indifferent but they are not young, they are hardcore fans. You barely hear any children anymore. We basically have what used to be the " Post-WM " crowd on every single show which is the biggest problem for the WWE now. They can't push guys like Roman Reigns or Ronda Rousey anymore whe the arena is full of hardcore fans.

And I would disagree on the PG Era nostalgia. Here in Europe, there was a little boom around 2008 and people can blindly talk to you about The Undertaker or Rey Mysterio. Since then though, it absolutely died. WWE's problem is that they don't know how to do a storyline anymore. Jeff Hardy ( who was a pretty big deal ) came back and no one cared.

https://www.geekweek.com/2010/01/tna-draws-record-ratings.html

WWE is doing TNA numbers now, it's pretty embarassing


----------



## Stadhart02

Mear said:


> I wouldn't say the crowd is indifferent but they are not young, they are hardcore fans. You barely hear any children anymore. We basically have what used to be the " Post-WM " crowd on every single show which is the biggest problem for the WWE now. They can't push guys like Roman Reigns or Ronda Rousey anymore whe the arena is full of hardcore fans.
> 
> And I would disagree on the PG Era nostalgia. Here in Europe, there was a little boom around 2008 and people can blindly talk to you about The Undertaker or Rey Mysterio. Since then though, it absolutely died. WWE's problem is that they don't know how to do a storyline anymore. Jeff Hardy ( who was a pretty big deal ) came back and no one cared.
> 
> https://www.geekweek.com/2010/01/tna-draws-record-ratings.html
> 
> WWE is doing TNA numbers now, it's pretty embarassing


when you see it in black and white like that it is crazy!

WWE deserves this though and now with identity politics turning up on the shows it means even more people will turn off

I watched the RR at the weekend and I managed to avoid spoilers all week but even if I had come across some I wouldn't have been too bothered. It is just pure apathy now and I thought the show was pretty average and the RR itself was fine but when Nia Jax came out I just raised my eyes - she is another completely talentless (and dangerous) fuck that the company shoves down everyone's throats so it is even more reason not to watch

I just hope all the revenue streams they have drop off and then the company disappears into a blackhole - it is beyond saving now


----------



## Piper's Pit

It's dying.

I'm not going to do a list of all the things over the past 30+ years that have contributed to where the business is right now because that would take too long but I will make some predictions of things that WWE is going to do that's going to speed up their death over the next few years : 

- 50% male and 50% female roster

- Intergender matches become the norm, the women are going to be consistently competing with men in 1 on 1 matches, you'll see 5'3 120lbs girls going toe to toe with 240lbs men

- AEW will not be a success BUT they will damage WWE significantly by stealing talent and causing Vince to panic and give huge contracts to people that don't warrant them

- Once the XFL starts Vince will be around less and less however he'll be still booking RAW over the phone but he'll be completely distracted by the XFL whch will result in shows being booked in an even more haphazard and nonsensical manner

- Ratings will continue to slide resulting in hotshotting - Bringing back stars from the past, giving away PPV calibre matches on TV and 'shock' angles


----------



## fabi1982

Just Sundays Super Bowl shows that TV in general is dying. from over 100 million last year to nearly 80 million this year is a massive drop YoY and just shows that even with WWE dropping in ratings, it is not "alarming", when you dont drop more than the general audience. So this also explains the massive TV deals even with the declining audience. So maybe the people deciding these contracts know a little more than all of us. Just see that even with such a Super Bowl drop advertisers are paying freaking amounts of money for some seconds of advertisement.

So maybe we shouldnt say everytime "WWE is dying", when it actually isnt, it just goes with the flow. And this with the last couple of years of bad booking etc.


----------



## JDP2016

TV sucks as a whole. Thank god for video games, streaming tv, comic books and porn.

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## Dave Santos

fabi1982 said:


> Just Sundays Super Bowl shows that TV in general is dying. from over 100 million last year to nearly 80 million this year is a massive drop YoY and just shows that even with WWE dropping in ratings, it is not "alarming", when you dont drop more than the general audience. So this also explains the massive TV deals even with the declining audience. So maybe the people deciding these contracts know a little more than all of us. Just see that even with such a Super Bowl drop advertisers are paying freaking amounts of money for some seconds of advertisement.
> 
> So maybe we shouldnt say everytime "WWE is dying", when it actually isnt, it just goes with the flow. And this with the last couple of years of bad booking etc.


Most tv shows see a decline as they go on. Even on Netflix their shows after 1 season drop a lot. Daredevil lost 60%, Punisher 40% . I also just heard that a view on Netflix counts as watching 70% of an episode. So if a show has 13 episodes and they say 8 million people watched a show. They could have watched one only 70% of one episode out of 13 episodes. That why i think advertisers are still sticking with TV.

A view on youtube is only 30 seconds or completion for shorter videos to put that in to perspective.

The FX ceo talked about this today. I didnt know that streaming ratings on Netflix were calcukated this way.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.in...re-wrong-fx-john-landgraf-tca-1202041080/amp/


The Nfl game was probably the least entertaining games in a long time. What was interesting was that the lowest ratings occured in New Orleans.


----------



## rbl85

fabi1982 said:


> Just Sundays Super Bowl shows that TV in general is dying. from over 100 million last year to nearly 80 million this year is a massive drop YoY and just shows that even with WWE dropping in ratings, it is not "alarming", when you dont drop more than the general audience. So this also explains the massive TV deals even with the declining audience. So maybe the people deciding these contracts know a little more than all of us. Just see that even with such a Super Bowl drop advertisers are paying freaking amounts of money for some seconds of advertisement.
> 
> So maybe we shouldnt say everytime "WWE is dying", when it actually isnt, it just goes with the flow. And this with the last couple of years of bad booking etc.


https://www.fightful.com/wrestling/exclusives/state-current-wwe-popularity



> TV viewership: Decrease. Raw has fell harder in recent years than the top 25 cable channels.


----------



## fabi1982

rbl85 said:


> https://www.fightful.com/wrestling/exclusives/state-current-wwe-popularity


Picking specific formats and compare them to "25 top cable channel" is a little odd. And one has to remember RAW is running for 25 years. Just check the decline with the simpsons as a show being on a similar time span.

I totally agree that all is declining for WWE, but still the pulled the biggest deals ever, so there must be something we either dont see or networks are to stupid to understand. If fightful can get these information, the networks can to and they still pay billions to WWE, so I guess we dont understand the business as much as they do


----------



## Ace

Barely 2.5m on the RTWM :sodone

SD was doing those numbers last year....


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.656M
H2- 2.552M
H3- 2.321M
3H- 2.510M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 3.92% / - 0.104M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 9.05% / - 0.231M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 12.61% / - 0.335M )
2/4/19 Vs 1/28/19 ( - 7.14% / - 0.193M )

Demo (2/4/19 Vs 1/28/19):
H1- 0.890D Vs 1.000D
H2- 0.850D Vs 0.950D
H3- 0.760D Vs 0.900D
3H- 0.833D Vs 0.950D

Note: RAW is 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 3rd, 5th & 9th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (2/4/19 Vs 2/5/18):
H1- 2.656M Vs 3.161M
H2- 2.552M Vs 3.212M
H3- 2.321M Vs 2.793M
3H- 2.510M Vs 3.055M ( - 17.84% / - 0.545M )

Demo (2/4/19 Vs 2/5/18):
H1- 0.890D Vs 1.070D
H2- 0.850D Vs 1.100D
H3- 0.760D Vs 1.040D
3H- 0.833D Vs 1.070D

Note: RAW this week last year was 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 5th, 3rd & 7th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Ace

What's worse is there was no competition this week.

No NBA or NFL, wow.


----------



## .christopher.

Lance Storm:
"Something something didn't advertise Becky enough something something"


----------



## Ace

.christopher. said:


> Lance Storm:
> "Something something didn't advertise Becky enough something something"


 Dude, the alarming thing is SD was doing these numbers last year...

There's a very real possibility Raw consistently does low 2ms during the NBA Playoffs and football starts again.

Those are TNA numbers :lol


----------



## .christopher.

Donnie said:


> Dude, the alarming thing is SD was doing these numbers last year...


Ha, beautiful!

There's not really much point in tuning in, is there, mate? We have our favourites but the show as a whole is poor. We can just watch the individual segments of the ones we like elsewhere. For me, that's just Bryan, AJ and Joe really. Not much. There are others i like but they're either not being used or are being used poorly.


----------



## RainmakerV2

Becky Lynch is the next Steve Austin didnt you know? When she pins Rousey at Mania its gonna change the business!







LOL


----------



## Ace

RainmakerV2 said:


> Becky Lynch is the next Steve Austin didnt you know? When she pins Rousey at Mania its gonna change the business!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL


If I speak, I'm in trouble.


----------



## JDP2016

I have a feeling Becky's popularity will fade after Wrestlemania. It won't go away completely but after facing Charlotte and Ronda, who else is there that can give Becky the same type of heat? Fans have heat for Charlotte because she's been the FOTWD since 2015 and they have heat for Ronda because of her high profile name and her careful booking but what other heel can get the same crowd reaction?


----------



## Ace

JDP2016 said:


> I have a feeling Becky's popularity will fade after Wrestlemania. It won't go away completely but after facing Charlotte and Ronda, who else is there that can give Becky the same type of heat? Fans have heat for Charlotte because she's been the FOTWD since 2015 and they have heat for Ronda because of her high profile name and her careful booking but what other heel can get the same crowd reaction?


 Only smarks care, the numbers speak for themselves.

How the fuck is Raw doing 2.5m viewers (a few thousand above dropping to 2.4m..) on the RTWM with no competition?

I thought 2.6-2.7m was their floor for WM and there was barely a bump from the RR, I was wrong.


----------



## DammitChrist

RainmakerV2 said:


> Becky Lynch is the next Steve Austin didnt you know? When she pins Rousey at Mania its gonna change the business!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL


Imagine STILL failing to comprehend the comparisons between both talents, AND actually taking the (few) comments about “changing the business” seriously :mj4


----------



## Mordecay

Can't wait for the excuse of this week: "Well, she was in the opening segment and that was the highest rated hour and after that people don't have reasons to keep watching you know?" :heston


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Last year at this time they did 3.055M viewers for the RAW on 2/5/18.


----------



## Erramayhem89

They probably won't drop below 2 again until after WM. But this summer is going to have brutal ratings


----------



## Ace

The Boy Wonder said:


> Last year at this time they did 3.055M viewers for the RAW on 2/5/18.


 Dude a week after MNF was over they did 2.72m (show built around next UC challenger and Cena was on it).

Officially on the RTWM and they've lost 210,000 viewers since that post MNF Raw.

This is a time ratings should be going up from that figure, but they're going down.


----------



## Ace

Following the post-Royal Rumble edition of Raw, this week's episode had a ratings drop of seven percent, falling to an average of 2.51 million viewers.

In what was a low night overall for cable television viewership, Raw actually finished third in terms of total viewers and topped the 18-49 demo with an average rating of 1.07.

With no major sports or network competition last night, it would've been expected that the show would've done a little better. The average viewership last year at this time hovered around three million.

Year-over-year, Raw had a drop of nearly 18 percent, which is very close to the recent trend.

There was no major ratings drop in hours two or three, so having Becky Lynch and Ronda Rousey appear near the beginning of the show didn't lead to either a big first hour or a viewership decline after their appearances.

The hourly viewership was:

Hour one -- 2.656 million viewers
Hour two -- 2.552 million viewers
Hour three -- 2.321 million viewers

Here's a look at the last 10 weeks of Raw viewership and the year-over-year declines for each week:


----------



## The Bloodline

WWE has no real momentum/ excitement or good word of mouth right now so no one cares to watch. WWE just isnt "cool". I cant see the weekly shows ever convincing new eyes otherwise. People who dont watch WWE assumes its lame and if they happen to tune in theres nothing to change their mind. We are left with the audience that hasnt quit yet. Doesnt matter whos on top. I enjoy wrestling but i would never recommend anyone watch these 3 hour Raws. 

Something major has to happen and i have no answers for what that is. The current format is tired. I was attracted to Lucha Underground by how different it was, too bad it never stood a chance on El Rey network.


----------



## Erik.

:lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## Y.2.J

:heston

Those are bad.

Like mentioned already, we're in a lame cycle. No mainstream character, no mainstream storyline, etc. Hopefully soon something big can happen and pro wrestling can have another boom. 

I miss Reigns. Got to be honest...


----------



## RainmakerV2

DammitC said:


> Imagine STILL failing to comprehend the comparisons between both talents, AND actually taking the (few) comments about “changing the business” seriously :mj4


What? The Smackdown after she won the rumble lost viewers. Fact. She was advertised all week opening the show with Steph. Lost viewers. Fact. The truth hurts your narrative. I know.


Is she cool? Yeah. Is she over? Absolutely. Is this insistence that she has to pin Rousey in the final match at Mania or the world is gonna end absolute nonsense? Uh yeah. They've showcased her as the TOP star, male or female, twice, and both shows LOST viewers from the week before. On the RTWM, with no competition. Im not making it up. Dont let the numbers get you butthurt.


----------



## Ace

They're actually making me miss Roman.

God dammit, Vince actually did it. Was this his plan all along?

Make things so bad for the men you want Roman and his forced push.

Without him no one outside Brock feels important and he's never around.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

No Seth, no ratings...

Just kidding. But it is funny.

This is what matters most:

"In what was a low night overall for cable television viewership, Raw actually finished third in terms of total viewers and topped the 18-49 demo with an average rating of 1.07."

Very strong demo.


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> No Seth, no ratings...
> 
> Just kidding. But it is funny.
> 
> This is what matters most:
> 
> "In what was a low night overall for cable television viewership, Raw actually finished third in terms of total viewers and topped the 18-49 demo with an average rating of 1.07."
> 
> Very strong demo.


 No NBA or NFL..


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Donnie said:


> No NBA or NFL..





> In what was a low night overall for cable television viewership


Apparently, no one was watching shit last night and they still had the strongest demo of the night for the demo they care about most and were the third most viewed show of the night. Not bad for a 3 hour borefest with no World Champ. That's why they get billions.


----------



## Empress

Donnie said:


> *They're actually making me miss Roman.
> 
> God dammit, Vince actually did it. Was this his plan all along?
> *
> Make things so bad for the men you want Roman and his forced push.
> 
> Without him no one outside Brock feels important and he's never around.







Seriously though, the ratings are bad which means social media metrics must be down as well.

I'd be curious as to what the ratings were during 95/56 just before the dawn of AE. Austin did get red hot and reversed the fortunes of WWE. But he also had a hot product behind him. When Austin went down, Rock stepped into the role. Foley, Mankind, Jericho, Undertaker and HHH were all superstars. Ruthless Aggression continued that trend until Vince decided to focus on just the "chosen one". First Cena and then Reigns. Now both are gone and no one feels at that level but rather default. It's not a knock on the performers but it is what it is. NXT has great characters and angles, the supposed "developmental" brand. WWE just chooses to settle on what they have. 

I wish I were a billionaire too and being paid for the bare minimum. Vince and Brock know how to play the game.


----------



## Ace

Empress said:


> Seriously though, the ratings are bad which means social media metrics must be down as well.
> 
> I'd be curious as to what the ratings were during 95/56 just before the dawn of AE. Austin did get red hot and reversed the fortunes of WWE. But he also had a hot product behind him. When Austin went down, Rock stepped into the role. Foley, Mankind, Jericho, Undertaker and HHH were all superstars. Ruthless Aggression continued that trend until Vince decided to focus on just the "chosen one". First Cena and then Reigns. Now both are gone and no one feels at that level but rather default. It's not a knock on the performers but it is what it is. NXT has great characters and angles, the supposed "developmental" brand. WWE just chooses to settle on what they have.
> 
> I wish I were a billionaire too and being paid for the bare minimum. Vince and Brock know how to play the game.


 I got mine back with AJ, I'm surprised more Roman fans haven't posted in here to crap on the ratings after he left. 

So much ammo and they had a lot worse to deal with, that said there aren't many Roman fans around these days, most of them seem to have left once he announced he was leaving to fight cancer.

As silly as it sounds, it might have been the best thing for him as it may have opened a door to Hollywood.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

This didn't happen over night or in a matter of a week or two. Even with Cena and Reigns there, the ratings were still decreasing every week, especially these past few years. With or without those guys, the ratings would be where they are right now because they decreased every year with them, as well. Especially these past few years. No one stopped the bleeding then and no one will now. Just another reason why it's stupid to put all of your eggs in one basket. Now Vince is paying for it.


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> This didn't happen over night or in a matter of a week or two. Even with Cena and Reigns there, the ratings were still decreasing every week, especially these past few years. With or without those guys, the ratings would be where they are right now because they decreased every year with them, as well. Especially these past few years. No one stopped the bleeding then and no one will now. Just another reason why it's stupid to put all of your eggs in one basket. Now Vince is paying for it.


 Ratings were declining, but that accelerated like a week after Roman left and they've continued to drop at an alarming rate. Even when they're supposed to go up (RTWM) they're getting abysmal numbers. Things are so dire the McMahons are on both shows each week and they're doing shit you'd think they'd never do again (risque stories and partial nudity).


----------



## DammitChrist

RainmakerV2 said:


> What? The Smackdown after she won the rumble lost viewers. Fact. She was advertised all week opening the show with Steph. Lost viewers. Fact. The truth hurts your narrative. I know.
> 
> What narrative? :mj4
> 
> I’ve been saying that the numbers will continue to lower no matter who gets pushed on top for several months now. Numbers will keep decreasing for the next several months as long as the shows continue to suck/underwhelm people. Sadly, folks like you are still failing to comprehend that here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is she cool? Yeah. Is she over? Absolutely. Is this insistence that she has to pin Rousey in the final match at Mania or the world is gonna end absolute nonsense? Uh yeah. They've showcased her as the TOP star, male or female, twice, and both shows LOST viewers from the week before. On the RTWM, with no competition. Im not making it up. Dont let the numbers get you butthurt.
> 
> 
> 
> I guess you’re going to ignore how the rest of last night’s episode of Raw sucked after the opening segment (along with most of last week’s odd episode of Smackdown) that surely played a big part of them losing viewers unk2
> 
> Please don’t make false acccusations on me when you’re the one who was butthurt enough to mock people by imitating statements about “changing business” from her fans that I bet few people even made or believe in the first place :lol
Click to expand...


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Donnie said:


> Ratings were declining, but that accelerated like a week after Roman left and they've continued to drop at an alarming rate. Even when they're supposed to go up (RTWM) they're getting abysmal numbers. Things are so dire the McMahons are on the show each week and they're doing shit you'd think they'd never do again (risque stories and partial nudity).


They go down every year in the Fall big time. This was happening regardless. They'll be even lower next year and the year after that, and etc.


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> They go down every year in the Fall big time. This was happening regardless. They'll be even lower next year and the year after that, and etc.


 You do realize if they continue to drop at this rate, there's no chance they keep that Fox deal and the next Raw deal should come nowhere close to what they're getting. 

It matters what they're doing, not only do they have to stop the freefall they need to get people watching or they're going to lose one deal and take a big hit on future deals because it isn't viable to be paying that much for those numbers.


----------



## Dolorian

Some here still trying to blame individual talents for the declining ratings...

The problem is both broader and deeper than that. They have been putting out terrible shows every week for years now and have failed to adapt to what modern audiences are actually drawn to these days. WWE is simply not gripping and compelling TV. Wrestling is a niche with practically no cultural relevance these days. That things have come to this is honestly all on creative and it is unreasonable to expect a single talent wether it is Reigns, Rollins, Becky or even Ronda to step into this mess and set things on the right track practically overnight.

It is just not going to happen.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Donnie said:


> You dorealize if they continue to drop at this rate, there's no chance they keep that Fox deal and the next Raw deal should come nowhere close to what they're getting.


Probably, but we all thought that last year, too. Unless the rest of TV does the same and WWE shows are still amongst the most watched like now. And for some reason, these Networks are obsessed with live TV every week of the year with no offseason, which none of the real sports have.


----------



## Empress

Donnie said:


> I got mine back with AJ, I'm surprised more Roman fans haven't posted in here to crap on the ratings after he left.
> 
> *So much ammo and they had a lot worse to deal with, that said there aren't many Roman fans around these days, most of them seem to have left once he announced he was leaving to fight cancer.*
> 
> As silly as it sounds, it might have been the best thing for him as it may have opened a door to Hollywood.


Roman has cancer. For me, I think that's more important than gloating that the ratings are bad. Although, I never expected them to nosedive that quickly. I blame a crap product more than fans being pissed he's not there. 

I hope he makes it in Hollywood if and when his health improves. He'll make more money there and it'll be less taxing on his body. 



Showstopper said:


> This didn't happen over night or in a matter of a week or two. Even with Cena and Reigns there, the ratings were still decreasing every week, especially these past few years. With or without those guys, the ratings would be where they are right now because they decreased every year with them, as well. Especially these past few years. No one stopped the bleeding then and no one will now. Just another reason why it's stupid to put all of your eggs in one basket. Now Vince is paying for it.


As I told Ace, I didn't expect them to go down this quickly. It is the road to Mania and Becky is hot. I figured they'd hold stable. 

To your last point, all eggs shouldn't be put in one basket. Shit happens in life. If Reigns, Ambrose, Rollins, Elias, Braun, Owens, Balor etc had some equity in booking and character for the past 3-4 years, WWE might look differently today. Now Rollins is suffering an injury (hope it's not too serious) while Dean feuds with Nia Jax. Like c'mon Vince. NXT juggles popular acts. Gergano and Dream exist at the same time. Not sure why Vince is stubborn when it comes to the main roster.


----------



## Ace

Empress said:


> Roman has cancer. For me, I think that's more important than gloating that the ratings are bad. Although, I never expected them to nosedive that quickly. I blame a crap product more than fans being pissed he's not there.
> 
> I hope he makes it in Hollywood if and when his health improves. He'll make more money there and it'll be less taxing on his body.
> 
> 
> 
> As I told Ace*, I didn't expect them to go down this quickly.* It is the road to Mania and Becky is hot. I figured they'd hold stable.
> 
> To your last point, all eggs shouldn't be put in one basket. Shit happens in life. If Reigns, Ambrose, Rollins, Elias, Braun, Owens, Balor etc had some equity in booking and character for the past 3-4 years, WWE might look differently today. Now Rollins is suffering an injury (hope it's not too serious) while Dean feuds with Nia Jax. Like c'mon Vince. NXT juggles popular acts. Gergano and Dream exist at the same time. Not sure why Vince is stubborn when it comes to the main roster.


 Yeah, I wasn't realistically expecting these numbers for another year or two.

Not that I actually worked it out, rather estimated by seeing numbers week to week and forecasting.

I expected things to pick up for WM, but they haven't. I don't have the numbers but this has got to be among one of the least watched RTWMs (ratings wise) in decades? That should have Vince concerned, especially with AEW around the corner there to take more hardcore fans from him.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Empress said:


> Roman has cancer. For me, I think that's more important than gloating that the ratings are bad. Although, I never expected them to nosedive that quickly. I blame a crap product more than fans being pissed he's not there.
> 
> I hope he makes it in Hollywood if and when his health improves. He'll make more money there and it'll be less taxing on his body.
> 
> 
> 
> As I told Ace, I didn't expect them to go down this quickly. It is the road to Mania and Becky is hot. I figured they'd hold stable.
> 
> To your last point, all eggs shouldn't be put in one basket. Shit happens in life. If Reigns, Ambrose, Rollins, Elias, Braun, Owens, Balor etc had some equity in booking and character for the past 3-4 years, WWE might look differently today. Now Rollins is suffering an injury (hope it's not too serious) while Dean feuds with Nia Jax. Like c'mon Vince. NXT juggles popular acts. Gergano and Dream exist at the same time. Not sure why Vince is stubborn when it comes to the main roster.


Yep, it is what it is at this point. They've been decreasing every year before the Shield guys even stepped foot in WWE (since 2001/2002) and it's continued to the past few years all the way to now. Vince flipping the fans off for as long as he has was a big mistake, which so many of us said on here for YEARS. Just because he has a monopoly on wrestling doesn't mean he is going to dominate the wrestling business forever. I thought Vince would be smarter than that, but boy was he not.

(Rollins is okay, they're still promoting the match on Raw and social media, so don't think it's anything serious.)


----------



## Dolorian

Also as far as "gloating" about declining ratings, I personally don't care for that. My enjoyment of the product is not contingent on how many other people are watching or not watching it. They could drop to below 1m in the ratings and if I am invested in 1 or more talent enough that I feel compelled to keep up with and watch the show then I'll do that.


----------



## rbl85

Dolorian said:


> Also as far as "gloating" about declining ratings, I personally don't care for that. My enjoyment of the product is not contingent on how many other people are watching or not watching it. They could drop to below 1m in the ratings and if I am invested in 1 or more talent enough that I feel compelled to keep up with and watch the show then I'll do that.


If they dropped below 1m you'll not be able to watched it.


----------



## Ace

Dolorian said:


> Also as far as "gloating" about declining ratings, I personally don't care for that. My enjoyment of the product is not contingent on how many other people are watching or not watching it. They could drop to below 1m in the ratings and if I am invested in 1 or more talent enough that I feel compelled to keep up with and watch the show then I'll do that.


 Ratings falling is the only way they're going to get their act together and produce a compelling product. If people are tuning out it in large numbers, clearly you're not giving them much of a reason to watch. They're indicative of interest in the product and drive business.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Dolorian said:


> Some here still trying to blame individual talents for the declining ratings...
> 
> The problem is both broader and deeper than that. They have been putting out terrible shows every week for years now and have failed to adapt to what modern audiences are actually drawn to these days. WWE is simply not gripping and compelling TV. Wrestling is a niche with practically no cultural relevance these days. That things have come to this is honestly all on creative and it is unreasonable to expect a single talent wether it is Reigns, Rollins, Becky or even Ronda to step into this mess and set things on the right track practically overnight.
> 
> It is just not going to happen.


I forgot about this, but it's a great point.

Ronda actually IS someone that is/was a household name before she even stepped foot in WWE. And even her being in WWE AND being presented as Champion is moving the needle in the wrong direction. If someone with some outside of wrestling relevancy like her can't draw ratings, then I don't see anyone in WWE doing it, either.


----------



## ClintDagger

Dolorian said:


> Some here still trying to blame individual talents for the declining ratings...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The problem is both broader and deeper than that. They have been putting out terrible shows every week for years now and have failed to adapt to what modern audiences are actually drawn to these days. WWE is simply not gripping and compelling TV. Wrestling is a niche with practically no cultural relevance these days. That things have come to this is honestly all on creative and it is unreasonable to expect a single talent wether it is Reigns, Rollins, Becky or even Ronda to step into this mess and set things on the right track practically overnight.
> 
> It is just not going to happen.


This is different than the steady decline we’ve seen for 15 years. They aren’t getting a RTWM bump like they’ve gotten in year’s past. They’ve deliberately torn down Brock and by association the UT. It’s clear their centerpiece is Rousey / Lynch. Women’s wrestling has never been seen as a legit top of the card product and there’s no organic movement calling for it to be there. So I don’t think it’s a stretch to connect the dots and conclude that the audience sees nothing special in this RTWM and is treating it like any other time of year as far as their viewing habits.


----------



## Ace

ClintDagger said:


> This is different than the steady decline we’ve seen for 15 years. They aren’t getting a RTWM bump like they’ve gotten in year’s past. They’ve deliberately torn down Brock and by association the UT. It’s clear their centerpiece is Rousey / Lynch. Women’s wrestling has never been seen as a legit top of the card product and there’s no organic movement calling for it to be there. So I don’t think it’s a stretch to connect the dots and conclude that the audience sees nothing special in this RTWM and is treating it like any other time of year as far as their viewing habits.


 I swear these are similar numbers to what they were doing during football season except there's no football and it's the RTWM..


----------



## Empress

Dolorian said:


> Also as far as "gloating" about declining ratings, I personally don't care for that. My enjoyment of the product is not contingent on how many other people are watching or not watching it. They could drop to below 1m in the ratings and if I am invested in 1 or more talent enough that I feel compelled to keep up with and watch the show then I'll do that.


Some of my favorite TV shows have been low rated but if it's solid, I'll still watch. Scandal was almost cancelled on ABC during its first year but fan support convinced the network to save it. WWE is out of goodwill and most likely will be until Vince is no longer creatively in control. I have my issues with HHH but I think he'd be hungry to put his own stamp on the product. It was him and HBK that convinced a change was necessary back in the day.That is assuming Stephanie doesn't decide it has to be her way.

Glad to hear Rollins will be alright.


----------



## ClintDagger

Donnie said:


> I swear these are similar numbers to what they were doing during football season except there's no football and it's the RTWM..


They dropped off worse towards the end of the show during the fall than they are now but besides that it’s fairly similar. They’re average 2.5MM now and were doing a lot of 2.4ish MM during football.


----------



## SPCDRI

Peaking at 2.7 million and 2.6 million viewers and bottoming at 2.2 million and 2.3 million for the post-Rumble show and the first Road to WrestleMania show. Yuck! These are traditionally two of the highest rated RAWs of the year, usually only go-home show to WM and post WM does better than these episodes. They're in the toilet. Two years ago, random Smackdowns got better viewership than this!


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Ratings are already a disaster but it's funny how when they put even more focus on Becky and the women the ratings actually manage to get worse. Women don't draw in wrestling. Sorry Becky marks.


----------



## deathvalleydriver2

I didn’t bother watching when I heard Becky was opening. Only tuned in for Kurt angles part which was a waste of time


----------



## ClintDagger

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Ratings are already a disaster but it's funny how when they put even more focus on Becky and the women the ratings actually manage to get worse. Women don't draw in wrestling. Sorry Becky marks.


Well think about those half million to million fans that only watch during the RTWM. Those are the most casual fans WWE has left. You think they see Becky Lynch as anything other than a low card act? They’re hoping to see Rock, Taker, Batista, Hunter, Brock. Maybe Cena or Reigns. When they figure out the show is centered on women’s wrestling they are going to immediately tune out and probably not come back.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

ClintDagger said:


> Well think about those half million to million fans that only watch during the RTWM. Those are the most casual fans WWE has left. You think they see Becky Lynch as anything other than a low card act? They’re hoping to see Rock, Taker, Batista, Hunter, Brock. Maybe Cena or Reigns. When they figure out the show is centered on women’s wrestling they are going to immediately tune out and probably not come back.


Exactly. No matter what anyone here wants to believe all most people see women's wrestlers as is eye candy. The only one that was ever viewed differently in the public eye was Chyna because she was actually built like a man.


----------



## Ace

I'm going to be honest, most of the shit in the WWE today is trash.

The only things which I enjoy these days are NXT, Joe, Brock, Otis and Miz.


----------



## Lenny Leonard

RainmakerV2 said:


> What? *The Smackdown after she won the rumble lost viewers*. Fact. She was advertised all week opening the show with Steph. Lost viewers. Fact. The truth hurts your narrative. I know.
> 
> 
> Is she cool? Yeah. Is she over? Absolutely. Is this insistence that she has to pin Rousey in the final match at Mania or the world is gonna end absolute nonsense? Uh yeah. They've showcased her as the TOP star, male or female, twice, and both shows LOST viewers from the week before. On the RTWM, with no competition. Im not making it up. Dont let the numbers get you butthurt.












the smackdown after the rumble


----------



## Y.2.J

I wonder if/when (God willing), Reigns does return, how he'll be received.
Will the fans change their tune? 
I wonder if he'll bring some casual fans with him especially if he's starting some Hollywood acts.

Come back to us, Reigns. :drose
God speed.


----------



## ClintDagger

Y.2.J said:


> I wonder if/when (God willing), Reigns does return, how he'll be received.
> Will the fans change their tune?
> I wonder if he'll bring some casual fans with him especially if he's starting some Hollywood acts.
> 
> Come back to us, Reigns. :drose
> God speed.


I think fans will receive him warmly at first, but if he gets another huge push fans won’t react at all. They will want to boo, but will instead just stay fairly silent. And I don’t see him bringing in casuals. Not even Cena does that. The only way the product gets casuals back is if there’s a drastic change to the formula.

I want Roman back but when he comes back I hope he tweaks his character some. Maybe incorporates some of his real personality into the character.


----------



## .christopher.

ClintDagger said:


> This is different than the steady decline we’ve seen for 15 years. They aren’t getting a RTWM bump like they’ve gotten in year’s past. They’ve deliberately torn down Brock and by association the UT. It’s clear their centerpiece is Rousey / Lynch. Women’s wrestling has never been seen as a legit top of the card product and there’s no organic movement calling for it to be there. So I don’t think it’s a stretch to connect the dots and conclude that the audience sees nothing special in this RTWM and is treating it like any other time of year as far as their viewing habits.


Key word here is "organic" as you said. This womens revolution isn't organic in the slightest and is pushing viewers away. It's the same thing as shoving Reigns and Cena down peoples throats.

TNA's knockout division around 05-08 was organic and that division around said time was fun. Gail Kim vs Awesome Kong was one of the feuds of the year. Even the womens division in the WWE around 04 or so was better than this with Trish, Lita, Victoria, etc, and that was completely organic.


----------



## SPCDRI

Women are just cruiserweights that you can beat your meat to. They're never going to be conceived as co-equal to the men and worthy of kicking off and closing out shows. All the people who want a women's WM main event are IWC smarks in their 20s and 30s, almost always heterosexual men. Nobody except the most hardcore of the hardcores wants that. Ratings die every time women are on screen and you know what demo they kill the most? Girls and young women! Girls want to see big, hunky guys walloping each other, not this cavalcade of 5 foot nothing, 130 pound women pretending to be Stone Cold. Its laughable to the girls and women, they don't buy it at all. 

You know what a filthy casual is? Its somebody who probably doesn't even know RAW is 3 hours long now instead of 2. You tell a filthy casual the show is 200 minutes long and an hour of it or more is related to women's wrestling and they're DONEZO, daddio. Period! No casual is going to want to watch 200 minute shows with over an hour of it being related to women's wrestling. Its not happened and it never will!


----------



## Dave Santos

ClintDagger said:


> I think fans will receive him warmly at first, but if he gets another huge push fans won’t react at all. They will want to boo, but will instead just stay fairly silent. And I don’t see him bringing in casuals. Not even Cena does that. The only way the product gets casuals back is if there’s a drastic change to the formula.
> 
> *I want Roman back but when he comes back I hope he tweaks his character some. Maybe incorporates some of his real personality into the character.*


How many times have we said this before? And every year nothing was done about it. What makes you think wwe will change their tune this time?


----------



## Randy Lahey

Fox will cancel Smackdown if the ratings get low enough. They have other shows they can run. USA won't do it no matter what how low they get.

I still believe the end game for Vince is that ratings far fall enough to where Cable TV says "no" to WWE, and Vince then puts all his wrestling shows on WWE Network. It really is a niche product. The only reason it still has this many viewers is it's because it's a live show. And the only shows that usually beat it are also live news shows.


----------



## ClintDagger

Dave Santos said:


> How many times have we said this before? And every year nothing was done about it. What makes you think wwe will change their tune this time?


I won’t hold my breath. My hope is that maybe Roman comes back with a lot of latitude to portray his character as he wants and maybe all of this time away will lead to some creative breakthroughs. But that is probably a pipe dream.


----------



## SPCDRI

Randy Lahey said:


> Fox will cancel Smackdown if the ratings get low enough. They have other shows they can run. USA won't do it no matter what how low they get.
> 
> I still believe the end game for Vince is that ratings far fall enough to where Cable TV says "no" to WWE, and Vince then puts all his wrestling shows on WWE Network. It really is a niche product. The only reason it still has this many viewers is it's because it's a live show. And the only shows that usually beat it are also live news shows.


Network television is different than cable. Smackdown can do 2 whatever million all day long until the cows come home but network television is different. You MUST put the butts in the seat in the fall. FOX right now averages close to 4 million viewers in the fall. Any fall programming that gets the viewership Smackdown gets now gets yanked like a bad tooth. That's just the way it is. A show needs to get 3, 4, 5+ million people watching in the fall or that show is getting BOOTED. 

Now, the timeslot Smackdown will be replacing is the well-received revival of the Tim Allen sitcom Last Man Standing. You can take viewership for a RAW and viewership for a Smackdown, put it together, add another quarter million people, and not do what Last Man Standing is doing right now. That show consistently does about 6 million viewers. FOX will be shitting blood if they replace a bonafide hit like that with a floundering Smackdown show doing 60 percent of that viewership and that's really generous. That presumes going to FOX will almost double Smackdown viewership right now. I got a hard time buying that. That's best case scenario and that's still around 2 million fewer viewers. 


I can very easily see them flopping and then getting stuck on FS1.


----------



## Chrome

Lenny Leonard said:


> the smackdown after the rumble


Damn. mega

Maybe Vince can use those billions he's getting from USA and Fox to create CGI fans.


----------



## Stadhart02

Lenny Leonard said:


> the smackdown after the rumble


just wow at that picture! Those shots of empty arenas always shock me because the WWE are so good at making their shows look packed even when the attendance is at TNA levels

they deserve all of this though


----------



## shadows123

Well TBH i am not paying anywhere between 30-500$ for watching a max of 30 minutes of acceptable television and 2.5 hrs of sheer snooze fest either...So i dont blame the fans either for not wanting to :lol


----------



## drougfree

i hate becky but its not her fault , its the product that feels cheap and stale af : no pyro , no hype intro ,horrible big titles designs,so much corporate buzz words``wwe universe`` ,no big storylines , no characters , same sets everywhere except WM, no real superstars , wwe focus on branding in stead of big personalities .No wonder after that garbage 2017-2018 product wwe is in big trouble , i used to watch every raw smackdown and ppvs and now i only watch the highlights


----------



## JDP2016

I can't wait for this company to bomb on network tv.

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## Deathiscoming

Stadhart02 said:


> when you see it in black and white like that it is crazy!
> 
> WWE deserves this though and now with identity politics turning up on the shows it means even more people will turn off
> 
> I watched the RR at the weekend and I managed to avoid spoilers all week but even if I had come across some I wouldn't have been too bothered. It is just pure apathy now and I thought the show was pretty average and the RR itself was fine but when Nia Jax came out I just raised my eyes - she is another completely talentless (and dangerous) fuck that the company shoves down everyone's throats so it is even more reason not to watch
> 
> I just hope all the revenue streams they have drop off and then the company disappears into a blackhole - it is beyond saving now


Absolutely agree. The femcentrism and identity politics, shoving the women, Becky, Nia jax etc. down our throats means the WWE is not even the trashy show with bad booking from 2015 that I could at least enjoy because it was MEN, it was Bray Wyatt and Daniel Bryan and Shield and HHH and the Authority(as horrendous as the Authority schtick was)! At least it wasn't THIS. 

Starting in 2015-2016, they started with the annoying 15-min women promos and segments, 15-25 minute women's matches(Jesus fuck). Then the HIAC, TLC, RR, which was ridiculous! Then the Ronda debut, which is fine but then they began to saturate the entire show with women (3-4 women's segments/matches every Raw)! If that wasn't enough, now Nia Jax gets to throw mustafa ali around, punch Dean(though his "stay away from my raw sexual magnetism" comeback was hilarious AF LOL), Becky beating around or insulting Cena, HHH, and finally Alexa with a fucking talk show which also involves MEN. So after all these years of the Highlight reel, the Cutting Edge, the Peep Show, Carlito's Cabana and the Kevin Owens show, I'm subjected to watch a fucking midget girl with her bitch persona host a talk show! It's like Raw is infested with women and not just women's wrestling(which I can easily skip watching, even if they're the opening and the mainevent), but it's pervasive throughout the show and men's wrestling. Oh and let's not forget the twin joke in the form of "women's tag belts" defended in "women's elimination chamber" lmao. 

I just can't watch this crap any more or even try to "keep up" with it and it's a shame I like Dean now and all the WWE can do is insult him. I can't wait for the WWE's demise and it doesn't matter how it happens, whether AEW usurps them or the ratings sink so bad they lose TV deals or whatever.


----------



## CMPunkRock316

Raw frankly has been mostly subpar since around Spring 2014. Punk left, Bryan injured and split the Shield prematurely. Butchered Wyatt with Cena literally burying him to end their feud. Then Cena was murdered by Brock but after so long of Cena on top the heat for Brock beating Taker was almost completely wasted. 

Frankly I think The Shield should have split later in 2014 and Reigns should have turned heel and Rollins would be the babyface and Ambrose would be a tweener/anti-hero. Hell Reigns could have joined Evolution and replaced Batista and could have skipped the awful Authority. 

Reigns/Lesnar being the ceiling for everyone else helped ruin it. Frankly I would be fine if I never saw either again on my TV. It left the roster with a void not because of the actual talent of Reigns and Lesnar but because everybody else is pretty much 50-50 geeks. I mean Braun would run through everyone except them and would usually wreck them both if it wasn't a match but then choke against both of them when to went head-to-head.


----------



## squarebox

Walk With Elias said:


> WWE has no real momentum/ excitement or good word of mouth right now so no one cares to watch. WWE just isnt "cool". I cant see the weekly shows ever convincing new eyes otherwise. People who dont watch WWE assumes its lame and if they happen to tune in theres nothing to change their mind. We are left with the audience that hasnt quit yet. Doesnt matter whos on top. I enjoy wrestling but i would never recommend anyone watch these 3 hour Raws.
> 
> Something major has to happen and i have no answers for what that is. The current format is tired. I was attracted to Lucha Underground by how different it was, too bad it never stood a chance on El Rey network.


Yeah, I completely agree with this. I think on the whole, WWE is no longer that cool-ass show that comes up in conversation with your mates like it used to. Instead, it's like, "Hey man, did you catch Game of Thrones / Westworld / Better Call Saul etc last night?" You know, shows that actually have good writing and aren't afraid to push the boundaries. WWE's format is old and tired and needs something really, really major to shake it up.


----------



## Deathiscoming

Piper's Pit said:


> *I will make some predictions of things that WWE is going to do that's going to speed up their death over the next few years :
> 
> - 50% male and 50% female roster*


THIS. And I'm astonished most people here or in the IWC aren't even concerned, bothered or awakened to this fact yet.

Everybody brings up the same old points that are the crux of their grievance as well as the WWE's slow but steady decline-bad booking, trash writers, inconsistent/50-50 booking, Roman being overpushed etc. but NOBODY ever mentions the infestation of the product with the damn women.

People complain that Rusev isn't booked on PPVs, or that the US title isn't prestigious or that Shinsuke's main roster run was a debacle, or the trash-booking or absence of Sanity, Revival and Gallows and Anderson, but have they realized the role this women's infestation has played?

How can the WWE focus on these talents, and tag teams like Revival, and particularly Gallows and Anderson and Sanity who haven't even gotten air time in 2018(Freakin Iconics, a bunch of comical, joke of eye candies have probably gotten more "tag" matches in 2018, just like Naomi and the rest of the fucking women on SDL than Gallows and Anderson and Sanity COMBINED) when they have 12-15 fucking women on Raw and 10-12 on SDL who are pretty much regularly featured on main shows over these guys?


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

WINNING said:


> Are we ready to call it and say that this "Women's Revolution" has been a colossal failure, all things considered, or are we pretending to force this mediocre shit in the name of "diversity" that continues to drive off more viewers, women viewers included?
> 
> Call it sexist all you want (it isn't and I'll just think you're disingenuous or stupid for it) but sometimes less is more. Trust, I am not asking for the "Diva era" to return or Bra and Panties coming back on television. I don't mind women getting more shine in WWE but that is not what this is. This has simply been a philanthropy/political push to court "certain people" to think that this is progressive. Let's really think here. With exception to Becky and Charlotte being the shining beacons and actually getting Ronda Rousey in WWE, what has this movement ultimately done? What true positives has this really accomplished?
> 
> It's not wrong to think that (except if it's a hot storyline) scaling the women's division to one or two segments (matches) would garner more interest for people to want more of it rather than ramming it throughout the show when the history of women's wrestling in WWE is that it has always been a niche market for a certain audience. WWE knows this and yet continue to press forward this movement for "diversity points" rather than doing what is right for business at the end of the day.
> 
> Say what you want but besides Becky, you know what was talked about a lot as of recent? The sexualizations of Alexa Bliss and Mandy Rose in those segments. Whether you were a fan or not, it caught your attention and interest. Sex sells, especially in an aesthetics environment like WWE/sports entertainment. Period. Of course, don't do it always but variety is key and should be for everyone.
> 
> It's not always about athletics but simply aesthetics.
> 
> Anyways, Smackdown almost drawing under 2 million viewers is scary but unsurprising. The brand is dead, more so than RAW. FOX absolutely regrets this deal with WWE. They have buyer's remorse and are only going along with this because they need live content but you watch when they expect to get 3.5 million viewers every week and they don't even come close. It's going to be an even bigger shitshow than now if that is even possible.


Said all that on the SD ratings thread last week. It's only going to prove more true by the week as the ratings drop with Mania less than 50 days away.

Funny thing is I liked the Steph/Becky but I *didn't * like the HHH/Becky segment on SD last night. The McMahons, once again, are getting their hands on an organic situation with Becky and are going to sabotage it. Just to protect Ronda and to get Charlotte in that match (it's happening, accept it at this point).


----------



## Deathiscoming

ClintDagger said:


> This is different than the steady decline we’ve seen for 15 years. They aren’t getting a RTWM bump like they’ve gotten in year’s past. They’ve deliberately torn down Brock and by association the UT. It’s clear their centerpiece is Rousey / Lynch. Women’s wrestling has never been seen as a legit top of the card product and there’s no organic movement calling for it to be there. So I don’t think it’s a stretch to connect the dots and conclude that the audience sees nothing special in this RTWM and is treating it like any other time of year as far as their viewing habits.


Even if it were just THIS(which it is not)in that they were promoting Ronda/Women as the main event and emphasizing them, they still could've balanced it with proper booking of Joe, Rusev, Nak, Dean and most of the tag teams, especially Revival, Sanity and Gallows and Anderson. Not only have the WWE failed to promote the midcard male wrestling whether it be the US title or the tag titles, but rather started burying every fucking body. So now watching Raw doesn't just entail having to watch a fucking 120 lbs woman(who isn't Ronda either) insult/beat up HHH(a role which obviously is suited to babyface Styles, Bryan or Ambrose) but you also have to endure Dean being thrown into the mix with Nia Jax, Tamina, Alexa(jesus fuck) and a demotion in the form of EC3. Disgusting.

The same Dean Ambrose who could be and should be kicking ass and maineventing mania right now, same as Samoa Joe. They're the real challengers who should be facing Brock. Hell, I'd even go with Bryan vs Brock in a title unification, or some sort of a triple threat.


----------



## Deathiscoming

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Exactly. No matter what anyone here wants to believe all most people see women's wrestlers as is eye candy. The only one that was ever viewed differently in the public eye was Chyna because she was actually *built like a man.*


Exactly, and that makes her a freak, an anomaly, something grotesque, just like many of these ugly Testosteronized chicks on NXT and the main roster(yeah I mean Charlotte).

People may say "so what if they're ugly, they can wrestle". Nope. I have no interest in watching ugly Testosteronized chicks wrestle(in the first place, I'd rather watch Mustafa Ali, Gargano, Bryan,,if I want to see "pure" wrestling) because if I wanted to see muscular freaks who can GO in the ring, I'd see Brock, or Randy, or Roman(who isn't a bodybuilder!)or even EC3. Why on earth would I want to see Shayna? Ugly AF. Either I'll watch pure wrestlers like Bryan and AJ, big guys like Brock and Roman, or eye candies like Mandy Rose and Lacey Evans(in non-wrestling roles preferably, or 5-minute matches a la Attitude Era and RA Era).


----------



## Singapore Kane

I think WWE and especially wrestling fans really underestimate just how massive good presentation is to a tv show. Not a wrestling show but a television program. Raw is just lifeless. The set sucks, there is no intro, no pyro, robotic interviewers, awful commentary, nausea inducing snap zoom editing, no hype packages for upcoming matches/angles. That's like 50% of your tv show that is a flat out 0/10.

Not to mention that horrible mood lighting on the crowd. I swear to god that has some kind of hypnotic, lullaby effect. It makes me tired, bored and exhausted after one match


----------



## Deathiscoming

SPCDRI said:


> Women are just cruiserweights that you can beat your meat to. They're never going to be conceived as co-equal to the men and worthy of kicking off and closing out shows. All the people who want a women's WM main event are *IWC smarks in their 20s and 30s, almost always heterosexual men.* Nobody except the most hardcore of the hardcores wants that.


LMAO. First off, let's agree we're all IWC smarks here. But even within those IWC smarks, the ones who idealize and fantasize about women -do you mean to say they're metrosexual(let's assume we're all straight men here-hetero or metro), low testosterone albeit horny guys? I can't imagine a high testosterone guy or even a heterosexual guy who is a hardcore nerd with a backbone idealize a bunch of female wrestlers to the point of such insanity that they begin to yearn and pine for them to mainevent Wrestlemania.



SPCDRI said:


> Ratings die every time women are on screen and you know what demo they kill the most? Girls and young women! Girls want to see big, hunky guys walloping each other, not this cavalcade of 5 foot nothing, 130 pound women pretending to be Stone Cold. Its laughable to the girls and women, they don't buy it at all.


LMAO. Obviously, hetrosexual and feminine girls(you know, the unbrainwashed non-feminist ones, if that breed still exists in America) are SMART and WISE in that regard. They know BS when they see it and not just BS about men but this women's revolution nonsense. I can imagine they'd turn on their TV and fancy Roman, Seth, Dean, and Aliestar Black, but be completely put off by Testosteronized freakish females, or girls trying to act like "men" (I wonder if Becky is guilty of that!?) and can't help but laugh at Alexa(for being so tiny) and Nia(for being so huge and sounding like a man) lmao.


----------



## Mear

Singapore Kane said:


> I think WWE and especially wrestling fans really underestimate just how massive good presentation is to a tv show. Not a wrestling show but a television program. Raw is just lifeless. The set sucks, there is no intro, no pyro, robotic interviewers, awful commentary, nausea inducing snap zoom editing, no hype packages for upcoming matches/angles. That's like 50% of your tv show that is a flat out 0/10.
> 
> Not to mention that horrible mood lighting on the crowd. I swear to god that has some kind of hypnotic, lullaby effect. It makes me tired, bored and exhausted after one match







This is the Raw Rebound which used to be featured at the start of every RAW. That show was nothing memorable but thanks to the amazing video package, it actually makes you engaged into it. 

I remember thar back then, I would never miss a PPV because even if I didn't catch all the Raw/Smackdown, the video package did such a amazing job at telling the story and making me engaged into the show.

But it also falls back on it being all wrestling again and again and again. Everyone just enters the ring and that's it. I can't tell you what Seth Rollins or Becky Lynch do when they get in the ring but I can remember Chris Masters flexing up or the pyros at the start of Kane entrances. 

Since they don't have characters, they can't be unique at their entrances. Seriously, how can a main-eventer like Seth Rollins have such a bad theme song ? It is such a mid-carder theme


----------



## Stadhart02

Singapore Kane said:


> I think WWE and especially wrestling fans really underestimate just how massive good presentation is to a tv show. Not a wrestling show but a television program. Raw is just lifeless. The set sucks, there is no intro, no pyro, robotic interviewers, awful commentary, nausea inducing snap zoom editing, no hype packages for upcoming matches/angles. That's like 50% of your tv show that is a flat out 0/10.
> 
> Not to mention that horrible mood lighting on the crowd. I swear to god that has some kind of hypnotic, lullaby effect. It makes me tired, bored and exhausted after one match


I agree completely. The whole of the WWE is complete shit from top to bottom - EVERYTHING is bad

And I hadn't actually appreciated how terrible Renee Young was on commentary until I watched the RR - she would say something ridiculous with her annoying high pitched voice and you could hear the others with her go silent because there was that awkward pause and they didn't know how to follow it up (the exact same thing happens on UK Sky's Premiership coverage with the token female pundit talking utter shit and everyone goes silent after). She was so bad it would have been better if there was no audio on the whole thing


----------



## Brother_T

I keep writing a lot then just deleting it. I'm just ready for the competition. These wrestlers need to air out their grievances and start over new. Let it be back to the old days if things go stale then they can always continue jumping back to ship to ship. 

I've watched WWE mess up on Cody Rhodes, Cesaro, Big E, and Damien Sandow. What a waste on all these men. Others have gotten the world title belt and only to be buried or injury riddled their ever expectations of getting that belt again.

The bragging, the live virtue signaling, the ad nauseating promoting, and live apologies, spare me. Get me away from this bubble gum pop of a show


----------



## Piper's Pit

Donnie said:


> *Ratings falling is the only way they're going to get their act together and produce a compelling product.* If people are tuning out it in large numbers, clearly you're not giving them much of a reason to watch. They're indicative of interest in the product and drive business.


Haha, I used to believe that shit too. There's nothing they can do now to turn it around, it's over. Vince and Stephanie are not going to admit to themselves that their whole philosophy/outlook is the problem and killing the company, that they need to go back to being professional wrestling, never, ever going to happen, it's over.


----------



## Singapore Kane

Also while we're on the subject of presentation. I'm watching some old raws and there are a good 3-4 backstage segments between wrestlers per match. I've watched one ep and I already know who is heel and face, who's been feuding for the past few months, who they've set up for the next feuds and who they're teasing issues between.

No authority figures, no backstage interviewers. It just feels so natural and real compared to the modern shows.


----------



## squarebox

Piper's Pit said:


> Haha, I used to believe that shit too. There's nothing they can do now to turn it around, it's over. Vince and Stephanie are not going to admit to themselves that their whole philosophy/outlook is the problem and killing the company, that they need to go back to being professional wrestling, never, ever going to happen, it's over.


Are you saying that they'd just rather go out of business eventually than to actually man up and improve the show? I'm speaking of course for / if things ever got dire down the track.

I mean, I'm not so sure about that because they've never really been under threat since way back in the day. They're just coasting right now because they know they can and all their loyal viewers will just keep watching. Put them under the pump and then we'll see how they react.


----------



## ClintDagger

squarebox said:


> Are you saying that they'd just rather go out of business eventually than to actually man up and improve the show? I'm speaking of course for / if things ever got dire down the track.
> 
> I mean, I'm not so sure about that because they've never really been under threat since way back in the day. They're just coasting right now because they know they can and all their loyal viewers will just keep watching. Put them under the pump and then we'll see how they react.


That’s the scary thing, I don’t they are coasting. Vince put himself back on tv, something I’m convinced he hates given how old and decrepit he looks. And there’s been talk of him being more hands on in the writing process. I’m sure you’re right that if the company were in immediate peril they’d be even more desperate and try even harder. But I think on a 1 to 10 scale they are trying at about 6 or 7 right now. I think Vince badly wants to reverse this trend heading into the move to Fox. It’s been a long time since WWE has had a partner that will hold their feet to the fire but I have a feeling Fox is that partner.


----------



## Singapore Kane

ClintDagger said:


> That’s the scary thing, I don’t they are coasting. Vince put himself back on tv, something I’m convinced he hates given how old and decrepit he looks. And there’s been talk of him being more hands on in the writing process. I’m sure you’re right that if the company were in immediate peril they’d be even more desperate and try even harder. But I think on a 1 to 10 scale they are trying at about 6 or 7 right now. I think Vince badly wants to reverse this trend heading into the move to Fox. It’s been a long time since WWE has had a partner that will hold their feet to the fire but I have a feeling Fox is that partner.


Thing is I don't think Vince ever knew how to book a wrestling show. By all accounts it seems JR, Cornette, Russo, Ferrara and Prichard were the ones writing the shows while Vince just signed the booking sheet and took credit.


----------



## SPCDRI

The other thing with the t.v. deals is, WWE is considered really poor demographically. Its black and brown and old and poor and Southern/Midwest and suburban/rural and uneducated. Advertisers want wealthy, young Northern/Coastal White people with college degrees living in the Big City. Its why golf gets the high price ads for luxury goods yet it costs couch cushion change to run a Taco Bell commercial on WWE programming, even though more people watch WWE than golf. 

I think the demographics are going to suck on FOX. In the executive's eyes, a lower class of people will be watching WWE than a sitcom like Last Man Standing. Its really imperative that WWE gets high viewership when they leave cable and go to networks because not all viewership is created equal in the eyes of networks like FOX.


----------



## ClintDagger

Singapore Kane said:


> Thing is I don't think Vince ever knew how to book a wrestling show. By all accounts it seems JR, Cornette, Russo, Ferrara and Prichard were the ones writing the shows while Vince just signed the booking sheet and took credit.


Yeah Vince ever being a creative genius is a myth. He’s a great promoter and he’s great at creating revenue chains and making those supplement the pure product. But if he doesn’t have a can’t miss talent like Hogan or Austin the shows are terrible unless someone else is making the creative calls.


----------



## Piper's Pit

squarebox said:


> Are you saying that they'd just rather go out of business eventually than to actually man up and improve the show? I'm speaking of course for / if things ever got dire down the track.
> 
> I mean, I'm not so sure about that because they've never really been under threat since way back in the day. *They're just coasting right now because they know they can and all their loyal viewers will just keep watching.* Put them under the pump and then we'll see how they react.


Bolded - That's the attitude that is seeing them lose hundreds of thousands of viewers almost per week.

Rest of the post - They will try and improve the show especially as ratings slide even faster but it will be within the confines of Vince and Stephanie belief of what the WWE is - We're not wrestling, we're an entertainment company. We make movies. We put smiles on peoples faces. We're a scripted soap opera in a four sided ring. Wins and losses don't matter etc. etc.


----------



## Adam Cool

Piper's Pit said:


> Bolded - That's the attitude that is seeing them lose hundreds of thousands of viewers almost per week.
> 
> Rest of the post - They will try and improve the show especially as ratings slide even faster but it will be within the confines of Vince and Stephanie belief of what the WWE is - We're not wrestling, we're an entertainment company. We make movies. We put smiles on peoples faces. We're a scripted soap opera in a four sided ring. Wins and losses don't matter etc. etc.


They aren't even an entertainment company anymore

They are a "pander to everyone halfassedly" company, a True Entertainment wrestling company is Lucha Underground or Chikara or DDT

They alienate people who care about workrate AND Alienate anyone who values storylines and mic Skills, they basically have no appeal to anyone who didn't grow up watching it and cannot let go of the past


----------



## AEW on TNT

*WWE facing low attendance tonight*











Was not sure where to post this


----------



## Erik.

*Re: WWE facing low attendance tonight*

Record revenue, brah.


----------



## llj

*Re: WWE facing low attendance tonight*

Who needs fans when you have the Saudis?


----------



## Chrome

*Re: WWE facing low attendance tonight*

Ooof, and they're on the Road to Wrestlemania too. Where is Raw tonight?


----------



## Empress

*Re: WWE facing low attendance tonight*



Chrome said:


> Ooof, and they're on the Road to Wrestlemania too. Where is Raw tonight?


Grand Rapids, Michigan.


----------



## Ace

Lmfao on the RTWM :lmao


----------



## deathvalleydriver2

Donnie said:


> Lmfao on the RTWM :lmao


Nobody wants to watch a bunch of feminist garbage. Serves them right


----------



## rbl85

Don't seem that empty on tv


----------



## Ace

I think they'll get a bump because it's the go home and they advertised quite a bit.

But man this year's WM is setting up to be a disaster, there's a lack of interest over most of the show. Heck this week's Raw thread didn't even crack 600 posts. The go home show on the RTWM not cracking 600 posts. Yikes.

They've killed everyone on the roster, no one matters.

AEW picked the right time to enter the market. Plentyt of disillusioned fans on the brink of leaving or have already left.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Tomorrow is going to be *very *interesting.


----------



## JDP2016

Damm. 2 hours between posts.

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## Brother_T

Checked up what happened on Raw on youtube. Cole sounds like a yes man personality that would be on ESPN, Corey Graves sounds like a Jessie Ventura wannabe that never knows what to say, and Renee Young just blabs about anything, and we all know she's there to fill the women must be part of announcing booth trend.

I can't stand the looks of Triple H and Stephanie. They just do this repetitive routine, the corporatism, and appeasing. Always the same thing just add a new wrestler.

Most of the yt highlights are women, women, women, and oh here's Ryder and Hawkins highlight of them not wrestling. This just doesn't fly well with the casuals. We see through this woke business.


----------



## Adam Cool




----------



## deathvalleydriver2

When’s ratings come out? Can’t wait to see how awful it was


----------



## OwnChain5

Jesus Christ that's bad.

H1 2.689
H2 2.445
H3 2.252

http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articl...cable-originals-network-finals-2-11-2019.html

No one cares about anything on this RTWM.


----------



## Ace

2.689
2.445
2.252
3H: 2.462


:sodone 


:lmao

Pack it up boys, it's over :vincecry


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.689M
H2- 2.445M
H3- 2.252M
3H- 2.462M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 9.07% / - 0.244M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 7.89% / - 0.193M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 16.25% / - 0.437M )
2/11/19 Vs 2/4/19 ( - 1.91% / - 0.048M )

Demo (2/11/19 Vs 2/4/19):
H1- 0.910D Vs 0.890D
H2- 0.830D Vs 0.850D
H3- 0.770D Vs 0.760D
3H- 0.837D Vs 0.833D

Note: RAW is 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 6th, 8th & 10th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (2/11/19 Vs 2/12/18):
H1- 2.689M Vs 3.262M
H2- 2.445M Vs 3.216M
H3- 2.252M Vs 2.837M
3H- 2.462M Vs 3.105M ( - 20.71% / - 0.653M )

Demo (2/11/19 Vs 2/12/18):
H1- 0.910D Vs 1.030D
H2- 0.830D Vs 1.060D
H3- 0.770D Vs 1.000D
3H- 0.837D Vs 1.030D

Note: RAW this week last year was 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 4th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Ace

Need to remember this is the go home to EC and was heavily advertised. You were expecting a bump, they went in with the Becky angle throughout the show and Seth returning.

That's a god awful rating.




> Viewership (2/11/19 Vs 2/12/18):
> H1- 2.689M Vs 3.262M
> H2- 2.445M Vs 3.216M
> H3- 2.252M Vs 2.837M
> 3H- 2.462M Vs 3.105M ( - 20.71% / - 0.653M )


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

It's like watching the stock market crash.


----------



## OwnChain5

Donnie said:


> Need to remember this is the go home to EC and was heavily advertised. You were expecting a bump, they went in with the Becky angle throughout the show and Seth returning.
> 
> That's a god awful rating.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


That decrease from last year. Jesus.

Is this the biggest decrease we've ever seen on the RTWM?


----------



## Ace

OwnChain5 said:


> That decrease from last year. Jesus.
> 
> Is this the biggest decrease we've ever seen on the RTWM?


 Got it be? 

Jesus they are in TROUBLE.

They cannot stop the bleeding even when giving the hardcores what they want.

I swear they were doing better numbers when they were up against MNF.


----------



## JDP2016




----------



## Piper's Pit

Looking at the numbers from last year and they've lost at least 600,000 fans in 12 months, not good. Unless there's a big bump from moving to Fox they'll be doing 1.8's (at best) in a year's time.


----------



## Ace

Becky doesn't draw shit, this week confirmed it. Entire show was built around her and it did woeful numbers.

It's over.


----------



## OwnChain5

Donnie said:


> Got it be?
> 
> Jesus they are in TROUBLE.


Financially, they aren't. Only because they've had no competition for 2 decades, and so they've been able to secure large TV deals as a result.

But from a quality standpoint, this has to be by far the worst wrestling promotion on the entire planet.


----------



## Ace

This thread was a lot more active when Roman was around to blame the numbers on :lol

This PR stunt has been a massive bust and has lost the company 700,000+ fans in the last year.


----------



## ClintDagger

Donnie said:


> Becky doesn't draw shit, this week confirmed it. Entire show was built around her and it did woeful numbers.
> 
> It's over.


She’s WWE’s stooge. They know the ratings will be horrible because nobody wants to see Rousey / Becky in the main event. But WWE has ulterior motives in forcing it as the main event and they are just happy setting up Becky to take that fall so that Steph/Hunter/Rousey/Charlotte are off the hook.


----------



## llj

The real problem is this is a 1 story program right now. Yes, Becky is over, but not to a point you should have her in 2340856 segments every week. What these dipping ratings suggests is a certain level of fatigue in the primary narrative being presented. 

What the WWE (and other fans) are missing is that every wrestler has their own fanbase. And by minimizing every wrestler to cater to ONE (or two) fanbase, they are essentially saying to the fanbases of all the other wrestlers "we don't need you." Not every viewer is a Becky fan. There may be a lot of them who are, but you have to remember that other wrestlers have fanbases too which make up a chunk of your viewership.

Yes, having a FOTC is fine. That doesn't mean the other people who AREN'T FOTC can't still be portrayed as relevant. Roman Reigns may have been annoying in concept but at least he didn't have more than 2-3 segments per week. There were other people on the program doing something purposeful too. I don't recall Brock/Roman getting THIS much focus weekly last year.

I would bet you if they dialed back this Ronda/Becky/Charlotte/McMahons stuff in the next 2 weeks and started giving some relevant focus to other people again, the ratings might well inch up again.


----------



## Ace

Becky is someone the hardcores love, but the fact is womens wrestling does not appeal to the masses. 

This is the case in every major sport. Now that the company knows this, they should pull back on the women and start treating the mens division much better.

The mens division has suffered most from this shift, it's reflected in the ratings which have tanked since they started this PR push.


----------



## Empress

Donnie said:


> This thread was a lot more active when Roman was around to blame the numbers on :lol
> 
> This PR stunt has been a massive bust and has lost the company 700,000+ fans in the last year.


Wonder what Vince does this time to shake things up. Although, if most people don't care on the Road to Mania, that's a bad sign.

RAW deserves its low rating. I would cut the show some slack if there were some effort put into it.


----------



## ClintDagger

OwnChain5 said:


> Financially, they aren't. Only because they've had no competition for 2 decades, and so they've been able to secure large TV deals as a result.
> 
> But from a quality standpoint, this has to be by far the worst wrestling promotion on the entire planet.


They aren’t in immediate trouble but this not a sustainable business model. If they don’t halt or slow this trend they will be gone or acquired in 10 years or less.


----------



## Mordecay

Wait, are you telling me that the entire show had Becky, they started and closed the show with her and had segments with her throughout the show and the ratings dropped even further?...

And people blamed Corbin for shit ratings against Football, this is even worse :lmao


----------



## Ace

Is this an all time low # for a RTWM Raw?


----------



## Jedah

Be honest - aside from the Becky stuff, this whole show has been directionless. I just read the results and was wondering - "this is what the road to WrestleMania is supposed to be?" It's all filler. All the time. Who can stand watching this shit for three hours where no one else means a damn? Like the Chamber this Sunday - look at that fucking card and tell me that's supposed to be the road to Mania. Every other match but the men's Chamber looks like shit. And even the men's Chamber they aren't using properly because we know Bryan isn't losing. Better to have it be a #1 contender's match.

And one of the only angles they do have that currently has direction _sucks_. Didn't need to be that way, but of course, Woman Reigns needed to be in the match.

And of course Brock isn't ever there to sell the other angle.


----------



## Ace

Oh the kids on reddit spinning around in circles trying to take the blame off Becky. Same guys who were blaming Roman for smaller losses with less air time.

She was on the show throughout. This is on her FGS. You cannot excuse this number.

The whole lead up was to her segment at the end of the show. They cut to her multiple times backstage, they advertised her showing up to Raw heavily.

Becky is the main story for both shows and is being heavily featured - NOBODY WATCHES.

Ratings have been declining, but they didn't die like this.


----------



## llj

Donnie said:


> Becky is someone the hardcores love, but the fact is womens wrestling does not appeal to the masses.
> 
> This is the case in every major sport. Now that the company knows this, they'll pull back on the women and start treating the mens division much better.
> 
> The mens division has suffered most from this shift, it's reflected in the ratings which have tanked since they started this PR push.


They are overdoing it and going overboard trying to flog this WM match. I think when the women were put in the 2nd hour, and occasionally main eventing a show if a story was REALLY HOT, it was doing okay. I think last year up until Mania they had a better 1:1 balance between the men's and women's stuff. Most of the women's segments were in the 2nd hour and they usually held serve well ratings wise.

I'm just skeptical this Wrestlemania main event is actually drawing enough interest to get this amount of focus. Social media is supportive of this Becky/Ronda stuff, but we all know social media is deceptive. Hell, even men's Wrestlemania main events in the past didn't get this much focus every week.


----------



## Ace

llj said:


> They are overdoing it and going overboard trying to flog this WM match. I think when the women were put in the 2nd hour, and occasionally main eventing a show if a story was REALLY HOT, it was doing okay. I think last year up until Mania they had a better 1:1 balance between the men's and women's stuff. Most of the women's segments were in the 2nd hour and they usually held serve well ratings wise.
> 
> I'm just skeptical this Wrestlemania main event is actually drawing enough interest to get this amount of focus. Social media is supportive of this Becky/Ronda stuff, but we all know social media is deceptive. Hell, even men's Wrestlemania main events in the past didn't get this much focus every week.


 Social media hates Trump.. but look at who Americans elected President and is currently sitting in the oval office.


----------



## ClintDagger

Jedah said:


> Be honest - aside from the Becky stuff, this whole show has been directionless. I just read the results and was wondering - "this is what the road to WrestleMania is supposed to be?" It's all filler. All the time. Who can stand watching this shit for three hours where no one else means a damn? Like the Chamber this Sunday - look at that fucking card and tell me that's supposed to be the road to Mania. Every other match but the men's Chamber looks like shit. And even the men's Chamber they aren't using properly because we know Bryan isn't losing. Better to have it be a #1 contender's match.
> 
> And one of the only angles they do have that currently has direction _sucks_. Didn't need to be that way, but of course, Woman Reigns needed to be in the match.
> 
> And of course Brock isn't ever there to sell the other angle.


The show has been directionless for years. All Vince ever cares about is the main event on the Raw side. The last time that wasn’t true was when the streak was alive but since that ended the show has always revolved around the main event and this is certainly true for this year. Roman clearly wasn’t the answer to turning around the popularity of the product, but at least the casuals that only tune in for WM season were willing to stick around from Jan-Apr to watch his story play out. With the Rousey / Lynch stuff they are taking a hard pass and that’s a new phenomenon we’ve never seen before.


----------



## Ace

Vince needs to go all in on Brock/Rollins to save this years WM.

He should putting a rocket in that feud, not this BS PR stunt.


----------



## OwnChain5

llj said:


> They are overdoing it and going overboard trying to flog this WM match. I think when the women were put in the 2nd hour, and occasionally main eventing a show if a story was REALLY HOT, it was doing okay. I think last year up until Mania they had a better 1:1 balance between the men's and women's stuff. Most of the women's segments were in the 2nd hour and they usually held serve well ratings wise.
> 
> *I'm just skeptical this Wrestlemania main event is actually drawing enough interest to get this amount of focus*. Social media is supportive of this Becky/Ronda stuff, but we all know social media is deceptive. Hell, even men's Wrestlemania main events in the past didn't get this much focus every week.


The problem for them is that _nothing else_ is drawing for them either. They've got no stars on the roster.


----------



## Erik.

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## ClintDagger

Donnie said:


> Oh the kids on reddit spinning around in circles trying to take the blame off Becky. Same guys who were blaming Roman for smaller losses with less air time.
> 
> She was on the show throughout. This is on her FGS. You cannot excuse this number.
> 
> The whole lead up was to her segment at the end of the show. They cut to her multiple times backstage, they advertised her showing up to Raw heavily.
> 
> Becky is the main story for both shows and is being heavily featured - NOBODY WATCHES.
> 
> Ratings have been declining, but they didn't die like this.


It’s fine to be a Becky fan. She’s good at what she does. But people that are refusing to concede that this main event is being roundly rejected have absolutely zero credibility. The debate is over. This is a gargantuan failure way beyond anything Roman was associated with. They are finally killing the golden goose and they know it.


----------



## Ace

ClintDagger said:


> It’s fine to be a Becky fan. She’s good at what she does. But people that are refusing to concede that this main event is being roundly rejected have absolutely zero credibility. The debate is over. This is a gargantuan failure way beyond anything Roman was associated with. They are finally killing the golden goose and they know it.


 This was the show to test her drawing ability, she was neither able to get people to watch or to keep them watching. Failed on both counts.

Worse yet this was the go home show for EC with Rollins return advertised.


----------



## Dave Santos

Is the AAf league going against the wwe for any episodes? They actually beat out the nba games for their debut episode.


----------



## Ichigo87

*Brock Lesnar doesn't draw*

I've seen so many people claim that Lesnar holding the title is good for business because he puts butts in seats. How is that even possible if he's only around 5 times a year. When he's around, ratings doesn't go up. What's the purpose of constantly putting him over the roster?


----------



## Ace

I'd like to see Brock return next week and beat Rollins to a bloody pulp.

Then you can build up Rollins recovering and showing up to Brock's house a few weeks out from WM and attacking him.

Go home show big pull apart brawl. That shit always draws.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

Donnie said:


> Is this an all time low # for a RTWM Raw?


Every subsequent record low, be it viewership or ratings, will only draw parallels with 97' RTWM. Even 96' did better and there is not much data online about the years prior, for RTWM in particular. There are conflicting reports on the number of cable tv viewers in 97' and 19'.

But if we take population statistics as a whole, Then RAW's viewership averaged around 3.5% of the entire population of 280m from 98' to 00'. SD was close behind with 3% or so. Now its 2.5m/2m viewers out of 330m, which is 0.75% to 0.5%


----------



## ClintDagger

*Re: Brock Lesnar doesn't draw*

They sabotaged him to try to get fans behind Roman and he’s now no longer worth what they pay him.


----------



## Ace

Dave Santos said:


> Is the AAf league going against the wwe for any episodes? They actually beat out the nba games for their debut episode.


 The TWD which has lost it's main character and likely successor to the lead is doing double Raw's numbers...

This is a show most consider dead...


----------



## The Raw Smackdown

*Re: Brock Lesnar doesn't draw*

Neither does anyone else honestly.


----------



## ClintDagger

Donnie said:


> I'd like to see Brock return next week and beat Rollins to a bloody pulp.
> 
> Then you can build up Rollins recovering and showing up to Brock's house a few weeks out from WM and attacking him.
> 
> Go home show big pull apart brawl. That shit always draws.


That’s good stuff. I’d watch that TBH.


----------



## Jedah

Donnie said:


> Social media hates Trump.. but look at who Americans elected President and is currently sitting in the oval office.


That actually isn't true. Trump got much higher engagement on social media than Hillary did. People crying REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE don't affect anything. His ads were a lot more effective.

Engagement for Becky seems fairly high on social media, but like I said, this is a structural problem. You can't blame it or credit it to any one star. Nobody draws anymore. They're getting what they wanted.

But surprise surprise, when you take the personalities out of the equation interest drops because nobody gives a fuck about billion dollar brands. They care about what the brands DO for them.


----------



## Ace

*Re: Brock Lesnar doesn't draw*

Becky Lynch and Ronda Rousey obviously do?

They killed Brock's drawing power by pushing the smark idea of him being lazy to get fans behind Roman.

He's the only star left on the show, when his music hits you know business is about to pick up.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Not only does Becky not draw, she kills ratings and drives away viewers. If Vince is smart he'll keep her out of the main event now that the numbers are in and focus on the Brock/Seth match instead.


----------



## Y.2.J

mega

To be fair, I haven't watched yesterday's RAW yet, I'm going to watch a recording later tonight.
I'm sure there's a lot of people in the same boat as me who are still mildly interested in the product but can't/won't watch it live all the time on Mondays.

Don't know how well Becky/Ronda/Charlotte is doing though. Pull the plug and make Lesnar v Rollins the main focus and main event WM35?


----------



## Jedah

ClintDagger said:


> The show has been directionless for years. All Vince ever cares about is the main event on the Raw side. The last time that wasn’t true was when the streak was alive but since that ended the show has always revolved around the main event and this is certainly true for this year. Roman clearly wasn’t the answer to turning around the popularity of the product, but at least the casuals that only tune in for WM season were willing to stick around from Jan-Apr to watch his story play out. With the Rousey / Lynch stuff they are taking a hard pass and that’s a new phenomenon we’ve never seen before.


They were? Because they lost 20% of their audience in 2015 when his super push really started and continued losing year over year except for last year.

The decline has accelerated beyond normal this past year though, but this has also arguably been Raw's worst year ever.


----------



## llj

OwnChain5 said:


> The problem for them is that _nothing else_ is drawing for them either. They've got no stars on the roster.


And that's because they are focusing on building one or two people only. Becky is ALREADY over. Giving her 5 segments per episode when she doesn't need to be any more over is redundant.

Meanwhile, people are going cold. Why? Because all the focus is put on one or two people.

The idea that people are fully "organically" over is a myth. Giving people interesting segments and things to do help get them over or heat them up. Would Becky be as over without the Cena segments? Or her clowning Charlotte every week during September and October?

You have to give people interesting things to do. If you don't do anything with them, is it a surprise they aren't as over?


----------



## Ace

Y.2.J said:


> mega
> 
> To be fair, I haven't watched yesterday's RAW yet, I'm going to watch a recording later tonight.
> I'm sure there's a lot of people in the same boat as me who are still mildly interested in the product but can't/won't watch it live all the time on Mondays.
> 
> Don't know how well Becky/Ronda/Charlotte is doing though. Pull the plug and make Lesnar v Rollins the main focus and main event WM35?


 Lesnar/Rollins should be the focus going forward.

They need to get creative for it otherwise this years WM is going to be a disaster.

The womens feud isn't good enough to carry it and obviously fans do not care for it as much as smarks.


----------



## ClintDagger

Y.2.J said:


> mega
> 
> To be fair, I haven't watched yesterday's RAW yet, I'm going to watch a recording later tonight.
> I'm sure there's a lot of people in the same boat as me who are still mildly interested in the product but can't/won't watch it live all the time on Mondays.
> 
> Don't know how well Becky/Ronda/Charlotte is doing though. Pull the plug and make Lesnar v Rollins the main focus and main event WM35?


Their goal right now isn’t to put out a product that fans want so I don’t see them changing course.


----------



## Chris90

*Re: Brock Lesnar doesn't draw*

Brock was sacrificed for Roman, which didn't even work.


----------



## TylerBreezeFan

Nobody is a draw right now. Not Brock or anyone else.


----------



## Jedah

*Re: Brock Lesnar doesn't draw*

Nobody draws. By design.

Brock isn't a star either. Everyone is sick of him and this was long before his shit with Roman last year. Brock has done an excellent job the past five years killing every potential emerging star. Want to know why no one has any star power in the men's division anymore? Look at him.

When Brock's music hits I know I'm in for one of two things - a promo I've heard hundreds of times from Paul Heyman or a match where he does two moves and wins.


----------



## Erik.

*Re: Brock Lesnar doesn't draw*

With the company putting him on the back seat whilst they push the Becky/Ronda/Charlotte narrative, it's clear they pretty much know he isn't.

The WWE are cruising knowing no matter what bullshit they put out, people will still view it as there isn't an easily accessible alternative they can tune into as easily as they can with their company and that people will STILL tune in to see Wrestlemania, regardless of who's involved.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Not good. Last night was the first time in awhile where women's segments went from being a huge part of the show to being overbearing. There might have even been more womens segments/matches than mens. Hope they're enjoying that. Also the booking of the Universal Title of the past several years has really hurt the title and the show. I don't know what they thought they were going to achieve with that title, but man, did it fail hard these past few years. Oh well.


----------



## Strategize

Donnie said:


> Vince needs to go all in on Brock/Rollins to save this years WM.
> 
> He should putting a rocket in that feud, not this BS PR stunt.


I mean, he did. He gave Seth the main event of the rumble, and RAW the night after. 

Everyone ended up talking about Becky and Ronda anyway. He saw that and probably thought "fuck it, Seth is too cold to main event mania" and here we are.

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%201-m&q=%2Fm%2F0dcggz,%2Fm%2F026df51


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> Not good. Last night was the first time in awhile where women's segments went from being a huge part of the show to being overbearing. There might have even been more womens segments/matches than mens. Hope they're enjoying that. Also the booking of the Universal Title of the past several years has really hurt the title and the show. I don't know what they thought they were going to achieve with that title, but man, did it fail hard these past few years. Oh well.


 They gotta go all in on Brock/Rollins now. The womens shit isn't clicking and isn't getting any buys outside the hardcores.


----------



## ClintDagger

Jedah said:


> They were? Because they lost 20% of their audience in 2015 when his super push really started and continued losing year over year except for last year.
> 
> The decline has accelerated beyond normal this past year though, but this has also arguably been Raw's worst year ever.


Their ratings went up by an average of 700k viewers from the previous Fall to that year’s WM season. So yes, they came back.


----------



## Ace

Strategize said:


> I mean, he did. He gave Seth the main event of the rumble, and RAW the night after.
> 
> Everyone ended up talking about Becky and Ronda anyway. He saw that and probably thought "fuck it, Seth is too cold to main event mania" and here we are.
> 
> https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%201-m&q=%2Fm%2F0dcggz,%2Fm%2F026df51


 No shit, Rollins and Lesnar haven't done shit in those 30 days.

They've got to go all in with it to try create interest because Ronda/Becky/Charlotte aren't doing fuck all with all the time they're getting across two shows.

Both shows are doing abysmal numbers at a time they should be doing their best.


----------



## Erik.

I never watch Raw but was the Charlotte thing at the end of the show?

If so, wouldn't next week be the real litmus test? 

Elimination Chamber is this Sunday, right? So the following night is the real road to Wrestlemania. The follow up to the whole Charlotte business. The fall out from Elimination Chamber and a clean slate to Mania with no distractions in between.

If people are really interested, they'll tune in next week to see what the hell is going on with Becky/Charlotte/Ronda. I'd imagine..


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: Brock Lesnar doesn't draw*

He's not, but no one is though.

Even Ronda Rousey's star power has been crippled in the WWE.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Erik. said:


> I never watch Raw but was the Charlotte thing at the end of the show?
> 
> If so, wouldn't next week be the real litmus test?
> 
> Elimination Chamber is this Sunday, right? So the following night is the real road to Wrestlemania. The follow up to the whole Charlotte business. The fall out from Elimination Chamber and a clean slate to Mania with no distractions in between.


Not this year. They're doing a Fastlane PPV in March, I believe.


----------



## ClintDagger

Erik. said:


> I never watch Raw but was the Charlotte thing at the end of the show?
> 
> If so, wouldn't next week be the real litmus test?
> 
> Elimination Chamber is this Sunday, right? So the following night is the real road to Wrestlemania. The follow up to the whole Charlotte business. The fall out from Elimination Chamber and a clean slate to Mania with no distractions in between.
> 
> If people are really interested, they'll tune in next week to see what the hell is going on with Becky/Charlotte/Ronda. I'd imagine..


The only litmus test there would be if casuals are more into Charlotte than Becky & Ronda. We have plenty of data now to tell us about the other two.


----------



## birthday_massacre

Donnie said:


> Social media hates Trump.. but look at who Americans elected President and is currently sitting in the oval office.


Trump lost the popular vote by over 3 million.

the EC elected Trump not the American people.


----------



## llj

If only ONE angle on the main roster is drawing any reactions, that doesn't necessarily mean people want MORE of it. It means they are doing a piss poor job of building the other angles.

I think the Charlotte/Becky/Ronda feud has produced some great matches and angles in the division over the past 4 months. Probably some of the best women's matches in WWE history. Alas, it has become a black hole at this point, sucking everything around it into its vortex, and not giving much back. Only in the WWE.


----------



## Adam Cool

*Re: Brock Lesnar doesn't draw*



ClintDagger said:


> They sabotaged him to try to get fans behind Roman and he’s now no longer worth what they pay him.





Donnie said:


> Becky Lynch and Ronda Rousey obviously do?
> 
> They killed Brock's drawing power by pushing the smark idea of him being lazy to get fans behind Roman.
> 
> He's the only star left on the show, when his music hits you know business is about to pick up.


I still don't get what what the point of that shit, they pretty much hurted Brock's drawing power and encouraged people to hate him not as a wrestler but as a person, all because they had zero idea how to get Roman over

Even worse is that Kurt looks like a complete moron after all of this


----------



## Jedah

ClintDagger said:


> Their ratings went up by an average of 700k viewers from the previous Fall to that year’s WM season. So yes, they came back.


"Except for last year."

From 2015 to 2018 though, the audience declined year over year.



> Trump lost the popular vote by over 3 million.
> 
> the EC elected Trump not the American people.


Only because of California, which isn't a representative state for the entire country.


----------



## Not Lying

*I feel like i have to remind people in this thread too that WWE lost 15-20% of fans in any case within 1 year, starting this Summer. That was before Roman left.*

Viewership (12/10/18 Vs 12/11/17):
H1- 2.347M Vs 2.876M
H2- 2.186M Vs 2.608M
H3- 2.048M Vs 2.570M
3H- 2.194M Vs 2.685M

Viewership (12/3/18 Vs 12/4/17):
H1- 2.262M Vs 3.147M
H2- 2.399M Vs 2.862M
H3- 2.196M Vs 2.430M
3H- 2.286M Vs 2.813M ( - 18.73% / - 0.527M )

Viewership (11/26/18 Vs 11/27/17):
H1- 2.612M Vs 2.956M
H2- 2.382M Vs 2.720M
H3- 2.111M Vs 2.601M
3H- 2.368M Vs 2.759M ( - 14.17% / - 0.391M )

Viewership (8/6/18 Vs 8/7/17):
H1- 2.830M Vs 3.263M
H2- 2.854M Vs 3.314M
H3- 2.728M Vs 3.144M
3H- 2.804M Vs 3.240M ( - 13.46% / - 0.436M )


Viewership (9/24/18 Vs 9/25/17):
H1- 2.493M Vs 3.121M
H2- 2.275M Vs 3.081M
H3- 2.281M Vs 2.568M
3H- 2.350M Vs 2.923M ( - 19.60% / - 0.573M )

Viewership (10/1/18 Vs 10/2/17):
H1- 2.500M Vs 2.945M
H2- 2.325M Vs 2.756M
H3- 2.081M Vs 2.619M
3H- 2.302M Vs 2.773M ( - 16.99% / - 0.471M )

Viewership (10/8/18 Vs 10/9/17):
H1- 2.533M Vs 3.008M
H2- 2.388M Vs 2.894M
H3- 2.200M Vs 2.711M
3H- 2.374M Vs 2.871M ( - 17.31% / - 0.497M )


----------



## Empress

It would help the show if there were actual angles in play. It's painfully obvious that the shows are made up last minute rather than following an outline. I hate sloppy writing because it just trickles down. 

Becky vs. Ronda would be perfect if the pacing and development (not 100 suspensions in a week and making Becky say sorry while Ronda pouts) were better. It shouldn't take away from Seth/Brock which comes off like an afterthought. Beyond that, what about the other plots? Mania is in a month and it feels like the card will be last minute because nothing stands out. Braun, Elias and Ambrose should be building their feuds to WM 35, not lost in the sauce.


----------



## Erik.

Showstopper said:


> Not this year. They're doing a Fastlane PPV in March, I believe.


Will someone please tell this company that sometimes less is more!



ClintDagger said:


> The only litmus test there would be if casuals are more into Charlotte than Becky & Ronda. We have plenty of data now to tell us about the other two.


I guess we'll really see what people are interested in. If she's so popular, you'd think people would tune in to see how Becky is going to go about getting back in this match. 

I would probably say the ratings will stay at a similar level next week.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Donnie said:


> Becky doesn't draw shit, this week confirmed it. Entire show was built around her and it did woeful numbers.
> 
> It's over.


Becky in an angle with Ronda, HHH, Stephanie and Vince has led to disastrous ratings.

This is pitiful.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Erik. said:


> Will someone please tell this company that sometimes less is more!


Right? If it were me, I'd have zero PPVs between the Rumble and WM. Now, they're doing two. Both of which will be utterly meaningless.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

I could see Smackdown pulling a decent rating because of the gauntlet match, they did the same thing last year and that did pretty good numbers.


----------



## Strategize

Donnie said:


> No shit, Rollins and Lesnar haven't done shit in those 30 days.
> 
> They've got to go all in with it to try create interest because Ronda/Becky/Charlotte aren't doing fuck all with all the time they're getting across two shows.
> 
> Both shows are doing abysmal numbers at a time they should be doing their best.


I'm not even talking about the 30 days. They both won the rumble on the same night, yet Seth didn't even make a dent on Becky there as you can see.

I absolutely agree that they should be doing more with Seth (he's hurt so that's problem) in general, and that building the show around one storyline is bad. But it's not really rocket science why Vince went all in Becky looking at that graph, and the general reception of the rumble. So simply calling her push a fake PR stunt doesn't really line up in my opinion.


----------



## llj

Another factor, and that goes for Smackdown too, is that I can't recall the last time we had a consistent string of really good matches on TV from either the men's or women's side. It's been ALL PROMO SEGMENTS which have been getting the buzz. We have gotten mostly listless singles matches or listless tag matches. The wrestling itself has been blah!

Rollins being hurt is an issue, but even there, we're not getting the same run of good matches from him as we did earlier last year.

Roman being gone hurts as admittedly, he was a decent worker. Finn has nothing to work with anymore. Braun can't work.


----------



## Empress

*Re: Brock Lesnar doesn't draw*

Brock is a part timer who has got it real good. I'm equal parts impressed and frustrated that he does the bare minimum, isn't a draw but paid like he checks all the boxes.


----------



## Brock

*Re: Brock Lesnar doesn't draw*























:brock4


----------



## Ace

Say what you like, but this year's WM has zero interesting feuds going into - that includes Ronda/Becky/Charlotte, which has been a ratings disaster.


----------



## Erramayhem89

*Re: Brock Lesnar doesn't draw*



TylerBreezeFan said:


> Nobody is a draw right now. Not Brock or anyone else.


This. WWE has no stars.


----------



## rbl85

Nobody said the opposite but some people are pointing that a lot of people were shitting on Reigns for the ratings and the same people are not treating Becky the same way while she's having the same results.

BUT Becky don't have anything to do with the bad ratings (like Reigns) because the WHOLE product is too bad.


----------



## Erik.

Donnie said:


> Say what you like, but this year's WM has zero interesting feuds going into - that includes Ronda/Becky/Charlotte, which has been a ratings disaster.


They haven't been able to build a relatively decent Wrestlemania since WM30 and even that was blind luck.


----------



## Ace

Strategize said:


> I'm not even talking about the 30 days. They both won the rumble on the same night, yet Seth didn't even make a dent on Becky there as you can see.
> 
> I absolutely agree that they should be doing more with Seth in general, and that building the show around one storyline is bad. But it's not really rocket science why Vince went all in Becky looking at that graph, and the general reception of the rumble. So simply calling her push a fake PR stunt doesn't really line up in my opinion.


 Tbh I only think Vince/HHH/Steph are doing this because of their grandkids/daughters. He wants to open the door of women main eventing so they can later on. It makes no sense to continue when the numbers are doing this bad, the good PR they're getting from this is non existent and the interest is just not there.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

llj said:


> Another factor, and that goes for Smackdown too, is that I can't recall the last time we had a consistent string of really good matches on TV from either the men's or women's side. It's been ALL PROMO SEGMENTS which have been getting the buzz. We have gotten mostly listless singles matches or listless tag matches. The wrestling itself has been blah!
> 
> Rollins being hurt is an issue, but even there, we're not getting the same run of good matches from him as we did earlier last year.
> 
> Roman being gone hurts as admittedly, he was a decent worker. Finn has nothing to work with anymore. Braun can't work.


Good TV matches don't draw, anyway. Especially when they're meaningless. So, that's not the issue, really.


----------



## Ace

rbl85 said:


> Nobody said the opposite but some people are pointing that a lot of people were shitting on Reigns for the ratings and the same people are not treating Becky the same way while she's having the same results.
> 
> BUT Becky don't have anything to do with the bad ratings (like Reigns) because the WHOLE product is too bad.


 Becky is the product at this point, even Reigns never get as much air time as she's had.

So of course she should cop the blame for the low ratings at time she's being heavily featured and numbers are bombing.


----------



## llj

Showstopper said:


> Good TV matches don't draw, anyway. Especially when they're meaningless. So, that's not the issue, really.


The stories aren't good, and the wrestling isn't good. So there is not much redeeming factor at this point.

Morale overall seems low. People just going through the motions on TV aside from the Chosen Ones.


----------



## Ace

rbl85 said:


> Nobody said the opposite but some people are pointing that a lot of people were shitting on Reigns for the ratings and the same people are not treating Becky the same way while she's having the same results.
> 
> BUT Becky don't have anything to do with the bad ratings (like Reigns) because the WHOLE product is too bad.





rbl85 said:


> Yeah but Reigns was the STAR of the show for a longer time than Becky.


 The results are WORSE, the hilarious thing is Roman was never featured this much. Becky is on two fucking shows taking all the big spots and killing the ratings.


----------



## rbl85

Donnie said:


> Becky is the product at this point, even Reigns never get as much air time as she's had.
> 
> So of course she should cop the blame for the low ratings at time she's being heavily featured and numbers are bombing.


Yeah but Reigns was the STAR of the show for a longer time than Becky.


----------



## ClintDagger

Jedah said:


> "Except for last year."
> 
> From 2015 to 2018 though, the audience declined year over year.
> 
> 
> 
> Only because of California, which isn't a representative state for the entire country.


I’m not talking year over year. Quit focusing on year over year. Everybody knows that if you go to any point in time and then look one year previous to that the trend will be down. I’m talking about the trend from the winter months into Jan-Apr. The ratings have always gone up and gone up noticeably in between RR & WM then slowly trended back down into the summer. Until this year. The ratings are pretty much flat since football season. Ratings in the Fall were largely in that 2.4-ish zone give or take and this week was again in a 2.4-ish zone.


----------



## Jedah

The problem is that nothing is interesting.

Right now it's BECKYMANIA. BECKY BECKY BECKY. And no one else matters - on both shows, which is really why this is getting oversaturated. Look at the EC card. Is this really a road to Mania show? It feels like Battleground. They aren't even using the one good match on the card properly.

No other angle looks like it's really developing for Mania.Daniel Bryan and Asuka both have no credible challengers and they aren't doing much to build anyone up. The tag division is a mess especially on Raw. And so on.

Meanwhile, look at NXT. People like to talk about the "NXT 6" because it's a good thing. All 6 guys always feel interesting and important in some way. They're always doing something cool. The women's division has sucked but now things look more promising. You have what looks like a coming title shot for Io but Bianca is pissed about it, so the angle for Io's rise to the title is getting set up.

And now there's a shakeup in the tag division with the War Raiders winning so a whole new slew of teams is going to try to rise to challenge them after the Era has been dominant for so long.

Something is always going on with NXT while Raw in particular feels like 90% filler. Elias and the Lucha House Party. Braun and Drew in random matches. Ruby Riott getting a title shot on Sunday but the match not even being built. What the fuck is going on? Who wants to watch this?



> I’m not talking year over year. Quit focusing on year over year. Everybody knows that if you go to any point in time and then look one year previous to that the trend will be down. I’m talking about the trend from the winter months into Jan-Apr.


No. By year over year I mean those particular months year over year. Those ratings too, have been falling, just not quite this fast.


----------



## Ace

Jedah said:


> The problem is that nothing is interesting.
> 
> Right now it's BECKYMANIA. BECKY BECKY BECKY. And no one else matters - on both shows, which is really why this is getting oversaturated. Look at the EC card. Is this really a road to Mania show? It feels like Battleground. They aren't even using the one good match on the card properly.
> 
> No other angle looks like it's really developing for Mania.Daniel Bryan and Asuka both have no credible challengers and they aren't doing much to build anyone up. The tag division is a mess especially on Raw. And so on.
> 
> Meanwhile, look at NXT. People like to talk about the "NXT 6" because it's a good thing. All 6 guys always feel interesting and important in some way. They're always doing something cool. The women's division has sucked but now things look more promising. You have what looks like a coming title shot for Io but Bianca is pissed about it, so the angle for Io's rise to the title is getting set up.
> 
> And now there's a shakeup in the tag division with the War Raiders winning so a whole new slew of teams is going to try to rise to challenge them after the Era has been dominant for so long.
> 
> Something is always going on with NXT while Raw in particular feels like 90% filler. Elias and the Lucha House Party. Braun and Drew in random matches. Ruby Riott getting a title shot on Sunday but the match not even being built. What the fuck is going on? Who wants to watch this?


 That's the point, Becky shouldn't be featured this much. If she was drawing sure, but she ain't. They should giving that time and effort into other angles, instead they're going all in on an angle which is clearly pushing plenty out the door.


----------



## ClintDagger

Donnie said:


> Tbh I only think Vince/HHH/Steph are doing this because of their grandkids/daughters. He wants to open the door of women main eventing so they can later on. It makes no sense to continue when the numbers are doing this bad, the good PR they're getting from this is non existent and the interest is just not there.


They think once it gets close to WM and then in the day or two after they will get a bunch of good pub especially since they are in the NY market.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Y.2.J said:


> mega
> 
> To be fair, I haven't watched yesterday's RAW yet, I'm going to watch a recording later tonight.
> I'm sure there's a lot of people in the same boat as me who are still mildly interested in the product but can't/won't watch it live all the time on Mondays.
> 
> Don't know how well Becky/Ronda/Charlotte is doing though. *Pull the plug and make Lesnar v Rollins the main focus and main event WM35?*


Hard to do that when Lesnar won't show up and Rollins is injured and probably can't do physical angles.


----------



## Ace

We're on the RTWM (less than 50 days away) and the biggest story is the low ratings both shows are doing.

The two main events for WM have been set already too...

Who really knows what the likes of AJ, Orton, Ambrose, Joe, Bryan, Cena, Braun etc. are doing for WM. Nor does anyone care, these are their top stars and no one cares about them anymore. They've killed all of them.


----------



## ClintDagger

Jedah said:


> The problem is that nothing is interesting.
> 
> Right now it's BECKYMANIA. BECKY BECKY BECKY. And no one else matters - on both shows, which is really why this is getting oversaturated. Look at the EC card. Is this really a road to Mania show? It feels like Battleground. They aren't even using the one good match on the card properly.
> 
> No other angle looks like it's really developing for Mania.Daniel Bryan and Asuka both have no credible challengers and they aren't doing much to build anyone up. The tag division is a mess especially on Raw. And so on.
> 
> Meanwhile, look at NXT. People like to talk about the "NXT 6" because it's a good thing. All 6 guys always feel interesting and important in some way. They're always doing something cool. The women's division has sucked but now things look more promising. You have what looks like a coming title shot for Io but Bianca is pissed about it, so the angle for Io's rise to the title is getting set up.
> 
> And now there's a shakeup in the tag division with the War Raiders winning so a whole new slew of teams is going to try to rise to challenge them after the Era has been dominant for so long.
> 
> Something is always going on with NXT while Raw in particular feels like 90% filler. Elias and the Lucha House Party. Braun and Drew in random matches. Ruby Riott getting a title shot on Sunday but the match not even being built. What the fuck is going on? Who wants to watch this?
> 
> 
> 
> No. By year over year I mean those particular months year over year. Those ratings too, have been falling, just not quite this fast.


Yes. But you do understand my point about the loss of a ratings bump during this season, right? Nobody is blaming Becky or anyone else for the general ratings slide. The question is why WM season is no longer more of a draw than the rest of the year when comparatively speaking it’s always been the highest point of that particular rolling 12 month period.


----------



## Jedah

Donnie said:


> That's the point, Becky should be featured this much. If she was drawing sure, but she ain't. They should giving that time and effort into other angles, instead they're going all in on an angle which is clearly pushing plenty out the door.


As I said, it's structural. Becky absolutely should be featured because she's the hottest act in the company but these people can't balance anything. It's either a burial or oversaturating shit at the expense of everything else.

You need to make the other people on the show feel important. What's the point of watching for three hours?



> But you do understand my point about the loss of a ratings bump during this season, right? Nobody is blaming Becky or anyone else for the general ratings slide. The question is why WM season is no longer more of a draw than the rest of the year when comparatively speaking it’s always been the highest point of that particular rolling 12 month period.


I'd attribute it to a number of different things. Raw has had a much worse year than usual, quality wise, which drew a lot of people away during the past year, at an accelerated rate. As I also pointed above, they're also just doing an incredibly poor job building this Mania. Even last year they did better.

Blaming one person or angle is a farce because we know that's not what affects ratings. It's the entire show.


----------



## Ace

ClintDagger said:


> Yes. But you do understand my point about the loss of a ratings bump during this season, right? Nobody is blaming Becky or anyone else for the general ratings slide. The question is why WM season is no longer more of a draw than the rest of the year when comparatively speaking it’s always been the highest point of that particular rolling 12 month period.


 Dude, if Raw is doing 2.4m now, what the hell are they going to do during the playoffs, Finals and NFL season :sodone


----------



## Empress

Donnie said:


> We're on the RTWM (less than 50 days away) and the biggest story is the low ratings both shows are doing.


Do you know if Wrestlemania has sold out? If not, maybe they call an audible. I live in New York and have no interest in spending 8 hours in the cold for Mania. Even going to the Barclays Center for the HOF is just too much of a commitment.

Jedah's post is spot on about NXT juggling so many interesting angles and characters at once. I wish that could translate onto the main roster.


----------



## Ace

Jedah said:


> As I said, it's structural. Becky absolutely should be featured because she's the hottest act in the company but these people can't balance anything. It's either a burial or oversaturating shit at the expense of everything else.
> 
> You need to make the other people on the show feel important. What's the point of watching for three hours?


 By featuring the women this much, they've killed a lot of their male wrestlers. Not only are they beanth Brock and Roman, they're beneath the women. This was their chance to main event WM with Roman out and they've chosen to main event with the women instead.

Why should fans care when the WWE clearly see them nothing more than tools for Roman to beat and get himself over.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

The difference with Becky and everyone else is that Becky's booking has been NEARLY perfect. Daniel Bryan, Seth Rollins, even Roman Reigns, they ALL got pretty horrendous booking.

For the most part, Becky's booking has been consistent since Summerslam, she was booked as the face of Smackdown, and now is the face of Raw too, and the ratings are pretty pitiful. 

There are so many excuses thrown around of no one moving ratings, that's such fucking garbage. When the WWE has done angles well, you can see ratings go up in the short term, and only the short term because they fuck it up so quickly.

Daniel Bryan's push in 2014, Reigns winning the title in 2015, the Lesnar/Joe feud, all of those angles moved numbers, at no point has Becky moved numbers, in fact, even with great booking she has been a detriment to the ratings.


----------



## Ace

Empress said:


> Do you know if Wrestlemania has sold out? If not, maybe they call an audible. I live in New York and have no interest in spending 8 hours in the cold for Mania. Even going to the Barclays Center for the HOF is just too much of a commitment.
> 
> Jedah's post is spot on about NXT juggling so many interesting angles and characters at once. I wish that could translate onto the main roster.


 WM always sells out because it's WM.

The card itself is really weak. I have zero interest in the matches outside a tiny bit for Brock/Rollins and they're killing that with the minimal interactions and lack of push for the feud. This is not a build for a Brock loss.


----------



## Swindle

The ratings issues go so beyond those women. The McMahons themselves have been featured the last several weeks. Their involvement is a big thing pushing the story. I'd argue the McMahons are very damaged as characters. 

You change focus, there's no promise that new focus corrects the problem. Brock/Seth, or had Roman not gotten sick, the rumor was Dean/Roman, I seriously do not see that as an all time great WM storyline that would push viewership. You have the issue of what do the casuals want, what do your hardcores want, telling a coherent storyline over weeks and weeks of programing. I don't see easy answers.


----------



## Donnie

:lmao 

Normally I'd blame Seth for being the worst, but not in this case. This shit is all on :vincecry 

Seth still blows, though :side:


----------



## ClintDagger

Donnie said:


> Dude, if Raw is doing 2.4m now, what the hell are they going to do during the playoffs, Finals and NBA season :sodone


This time next year they will be averaging below 2MM during parts of WM season and at some point in the next year they will have an hour that goes below 1.5MM. Mark it down.


----------



## MC

You know the reason why the ratings are bad? No one wants to see little women being thrown around. :hbk1


----------



## Erik.

Donnie said:


> WM always sells out because it's WM.
> 
> The card itself is really weak. I have zero interest in the matches outside a tiny bit for Brock/Rollins and they're killing that with the minimal interactions and push for the feud. This is not a build for a Brock loss.


I'm the same.

I haven't watched a live WWE event since either early last year or 2017 - but I did watch Rumble and Mania, as that's almost like a tradition from when I was young.

I will likely tune in to watch Wrestlemania this year but I can't say I am interested about anything. The only thing I am interested in is the Brock/Rollins match because I feel it's obvious we'll get The Shield at the end of it and it'd be a cool image of seeing The Shield for the last time ever.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ace said:


> :lmao
> 
> Normally I'd blame Seth for being the worst, but not in this case. This shit is all on :vincecry
> 
> Seth still blows, though :side:


This is all happening with Brock as Champ, too.


----------



## ClintDagger

Swindle said:


> The ratings issues go so beyond those women. The McMahons themselves have been featured the last several weeks. Their involvement is a big thing pushing the story. I'd argue the McMahons are very damaged as characters.
> 
> You change focus, there's no promise that new focus corrects the problem. Brock/Seth, or had Roman not gotten sick, the rumor was Dean/Roman, I seriously do not see that as an all time great WM storyline that would push viewership. You have the issue of what do the casuals want, what do your hardcores want, telling a coherent storyline over weeks and weeks of programing. I don't see easy answers.


McMahons have never drawn IMO. Only Vince has. It’s why Steph & Hunter are so particular about when they appear and how it’s advertised. They try to keep themselves from taking the blame.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

MC said:


> You know the reason why the ratings are bad? No one wants to see little women being thrown around. :hbk1


Looks like that statement is actually bearing truth these days if you've been watching Raw. Far more segments than anyone else.

:hbk1


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

They also missed timing on the Seth Rollins push so hard, he has cooled off so much in comparison to where he was a year ago.

When he was the most over, he was rotting in the IC title scene.


----------



## Ace

I'm the type who defends guys on the show, but Becky and Roman are the exception. They were treated above all and given more prominence, FOTC pushes. That's why I was really harsh on them.

At least Roman proved his mettle and has metrics behind him along with the ratings fall since he left. Becky is heavily featured on two shows durng the most important part of the year and the ratings are dying on both. What do you expect? To be praised for these ratings when she's the focal point for both shows and being shoved down peoples' throats.


----------



## Rex Rasslin

MC said:


> You know the reason why the ratings are bad? No one wants to see little women being thrown around. :hbk1


+1

/thread


----------



## Ace

The Inbred Goatman said:


> They also missed timing on the Seth Rollins push so hard, he has cooled off so much in comparison to where he was a year ago.
> 
> When he was the most over, he was rotting in the IC title scene.


 Seth would be in the FOTC position right now if he had gone over Brock at Summerslam. They missed the boat with him.


----------



## Donnie

Showstopper said:


> This is all happening with Brock as Champ, too.


I walked right into that one :mj

At least we can agree that a crippled Kurt shouldn't be wrestling for FORTY ONE MINUTES.


----------



## Jedah

Donnie said:


> By featuring the women this much, they've killed a lot of their male wrestlers. Not only are they beanth Brock and Roman, they're beneath the women. This was their chance to main event WM with Roman out and they've chosen to main event with the women instead.
> 
> Why should fans care when the WWE clearly see them nothing more than tools for Roman to beat and get himself over.


They killed all of their male wrestlers for years by sacrificing them all to either Brock or 50 year olds. They've killed them long, long before the rise of the women. So in a way, I don't blame them.

And even then, it's only the top women. Most of the others have been sacrificed to Piss or Woman Reigns. It's a minor miracle Becky and Asuka still have some kind of aura.


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> Looks like that statement is actually bearing truth these days if you've been watching Raw. Far more segments than anyone else.
> 
> :hbk1


 I just knew this shit was going to happen. They overdid it completely, they should have seen this coming from womens sports in any every other major sport.

Hopefully this is their undoing and the company falls further into irrelevance, or they finally get their shit together and start putting out a good product.


----------



## Empress

Erik. said:


> I'm the same.
> 
> The only thing I am interested in is the Brock/Rollins match because I feel it's obvious we'll get The Shield at the end of it and it'd be a cool image of seeing The Shield for the last time ever.


I was starting to think Rollins would get squashed but this is a strong possibility because of Heyman's "spoiler" talk. It would make a nice closer if Vince calls an audible and changes the main event.


----------



## Ace

Jedah said:


> They killed all of their male wrestlers for years by sacrificing them all to either Brock or 50 year olds. They've killed them long, long before the rise of the women. So in a way, I don't blame them.
> 
> And even then, it's only the top women. Most of the others have been sacrificed to Piss or Woman Reigns. It's a minor miracle Becky and Asuka still have some kind of aura.


 With Roman out of the picture it was their time to rise to the next level. They haven't done that, they've featured the women even more. The men are below Roman, Brock, Becky, Ronda and Charlotte in the company's eyes.


----------



## BrokenFreakinNeck

The show was still 1,2, and 3 in the 18-49 demo and that's what's most important.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Donnie said:


> Seth would be in the FOTC position right now if he had gone over Brock at Summerslam. They missed the boat with him.


Yep, he should've beaten him already. But we all know why that couldn't happen. And look where it got them a couple of months later. That storyline destroyed the show and that title.


----------



## ClintDagger

Jedah said:


> They killed all of their male wrestlers for years by sacrificing them all to either Brock or 50 year olds. They've killed them long, long before the rise of the women. So in a way, I don't blame them.
> 
> And even then, it's only the top women. Most of the others have been sacrificed to Piss or Woman Reigns. It's a minor miracle Becky and Asuka still have some kind of aura.


I agree. I think what they are doing right now has hurt the RR, WM, and this time of year in general - which have largely been more immune to the trends than everything else has. But at the end of the day from as far back as Cena and up to what they did with Roman was where the biggest damage occurred.


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> Yep, he should've beaten him already. But we all know why that couldn't happen. And look where it got them a couple of months later. That storyline destroyed the show and that title.


 It was set up perfect for him and was such an easy way to elevate him to that next level.

Instead they go with Roman and we're here when he's no where as hot and is playing second fiddle to Ronda/Becky/Charlotte.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Is the decline of Raw's ratings comparable to television and sports in general?


----------



## Erik.

Empress said:


> I was starting to think Rollins would get squashed but this is a strong possibility because of Heyman's "spoiler" talk. It would make a nice closer if Vince calls an audible and changes the main event.


I don't even think it'd be a main event piece with Ambrose leaving, they probably don't want their main event highlights overshadowed by a guy who may be at a different promotion a few weeks later. 

Rollins could STILL potentially lose though. Brock tries to destroy him after the bell until The Shield music hits and Ambrose and Reigns run down to scare Lesnar off and they all hug in the middle of the ring.


----------



## Ace

The way they've built this feud, I think Rollins is losing.

Roman is taking the title back when he returns whether it's Summerslam or WM 36.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

How the hell did we go from the Hogan, Hall, Nash, Savage, Flair, Sting, Goldberg, Luger, DDP, Raven, Steiner, Booker T, Austin, Rock, HHH, HBK, Foley, Taker, Kane, Big Show, Jericho, Angle, Edge, Christian, RVD, The Hardyz, The Dudleyz, Taz to the wrestling talent pool being completely dry in a 20 year span? Every single one of those guys were stars during the same era of wrestling. Now all we've got is Roman failing to get over after 4 years of being booked as superman and a chick that looks like she belongs at a Fallout Boy concert instead of a wrestling ring killing ratings while the rest of the roster is treated like they don't exist.

It just blows my mind how badly Vince fucked up the industry.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

They still need to get that title back on Raw every week, though. If Brock retains again and there's no end in sight, you're doing more and more damage to the show and hurting one of the few over people on the show. For that reason and how it's been booked thus far, I think Seth will win.


----------



## Erramayhem89

They are fucked. WWE can't be good without kayfabe or adult content. They have to have one or the other. They will drop below 2 ratings this summer.


----------



## ClintDagger

The Inbred Goatman said:


> Is the decline of Raw's ratings comparable to television and sports in general?


I saw something recently that said it’s about 4x as much as what the top 25 cable networks are experiencing and about 8x that of tv in general.


----------



## Empress

Erik. said:


> I don't even think it'd be a main event piece with Ambrose leaving, they probably don't want their main event highlights overshadowed by a guy who may be at a different promotion a few weeks later.
> 
> Rollins could STILL potentially lose though. Brock tries to destroy him after the bell until The Shield music hits and Ambrose and Reigns run down to scare Lesnar off and they all hug in the middle of the ring.





Donnie said:


> The way they've built this feud, I think Rollins is losing.
> 
> Roman is taking the title back when he returns whether it's Summerslam or WM 36.


True about Ambrose. 

I just don't see Ronda and Brock losing on the same night. Although, between Roman's illness and Hollywood, the title scene can't be held hostage for another 1-2 years. So, I'm hoping Rollins gets the win and we can hit reset on the Universal belt.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The Inbred Goatman said:


> Is the decline of Raw's ratings comparable to television and sports in general?


TV, yes, because they're still ranked somewhere between 1-3 most weeks on cable. Sports, no. They're bulletproof, especially the NFL which did higher ratings for their primetime games this past season than any season in their history for their Monday night, Thursday night, and Sunday night games.


----------



## Donnie

Vince going to call BIG DAVE today, and offer him a match with Brock. :vince$


----------



## Erik.

The Inbred Goatman said:


> Is the decline of Raw's ratings comparable to television and sports in general?


Depends what TV shows and Sports you check.

NBA was up about 8% over the last year or so.
NFL was up 5% last year. 
Premier League is up 5% this season.

But these are competitive sports - I don't think competitive sports should ever be compared to a television show based around scripted fighting and feuds. I don't think WWE or their fans should EVER expect the 5 or 6,000,000 viewers they used to get because times do change, the way of watching television has changed but with good stories, interesting characters and logical booking, they could quite easily get back to the 4,000,000 they were getting not even 5 years ago but it takes time and patience.

Problem is, they've been getting WORSE with no signs of change.

Regarding TV, The Big Bang Theory, which is one of the top shows on network television, averaged 18.68 million viewers in 2012 and last season, guess how many viewers it averaged last season? 18.63 million viewers.


----------



## The XL 2

WWE is fucked. Banking on giant corporations to subsidize you is not a sustainable business practice. AEW is absolutely a threat to their market share, millions of fans have recently left the product and many more who still watch are likely looking for viable alternatives. This isn't TNA in 2010 where the WWE brand was still insanely strong, they're a dead brand. All the metrics that involve drawing money from their consumers is awful, their TV ratings are abysmal, their attendance is abysmal, and if they were still on PPV they'd be lucky to average 100K buys a show. Their brand has never been weaker, not even in 1995.


----------



## RainmakerV2

Theres literally 45 minutes of the show until you see a male superstar, and then its the Lucha Fucking House Party.



People dont wanna watch GLOW. Stop the madness.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

The XL 2 said:


> WWE is fucked. Banking on giant corporations to subsidize you is not a sustainable business practice. AEW is absolutely a threat to their market share, millions of fans have recently left the product and many more who still watch are likely looking for viable alternatives. This isn't TNA in 2010 where the WWE brand was still insanely strong, they're a dead brand. All the metrics that involve drawing money from their consumers is awful, their TV ratings are abysmal, their attendance is abysmal, and if they were still on PPV they'd be lucky to average 100K buys a show. Their brand has never been weaker, not even in 1995.


People who think AEW can't compete with them in the ratings are in denial. 2 million viewers with Khan money for advertising and a TNT/TBS primetime TV slot won't be hard for them to draw in.

There are still a lot of casual fans out there who refuse to watch current WWE but aren't hardcore enough to go out of their way to watch ROH or NJPW. These are people who would tune in to a more adult oriented mainstream wrestling product and AEW fits the bill.


----------



## .christopher.

Whoever thought that making the women the forefront of the show is mad. The show is centred around Becky Lynch, Ronda Rousey and Charlotte Flair....I could've told you a year ago it'd kill peoples interest off. Becky is off-putting - litterally a change the channel talent for me. If I watched, that is. Charlotte's just boring. Ronda's meh.


----------



## Erik.

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> People who think AEW can't compete with them in the ratings are in denial. 2 million viewers with Khan money for advertising and a TNT/TBS primetime TV slot won't be hard for them to draw in.
> 
> There are still a lot of casual fans out there who refuse to watch current WWE but aren't hardcore enough to go out of their way to watch ROH or NJPW. These are people who would tune in to a more adult oriented mainstream wrestling product and AEW fits the bill.


The biggest problem being that if they decide to book their live television shows on Tuesday, they're pretty much fucked from January to April as the NBA takes top priority on TNT, right?


----------



## Strategize

Fuck it, bring back blood and have people blade in every segment.


----------



## The_Great_One21

*Re: Brock Lesnar doesn't draw*

Interesting.

I wonder if he isn't a draw, what would the reaction be to him if he signed for AEW. Answer, he'd draw like shit just like does when he goes back to UFC and draws like shit.


----------



## JDP2016

Strategize said:


> Fuck it, bring back blood and have people blade in every segment.


I want Bayley and Sasha wrestling Mandy and Sonya in thong bikinis.

Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


----------



## Rick Sanchez

*Re: Brock Lesnar doesn't draw*

No one draws, but you would think a guy who gets booked more dominant than any superstar since Hogan in the 80's would draw better than he does.


----------



## Y.2.J

I really wonder...when will the hemorrhaging stop? When will it bottom out?

There has to be a capitulation right? There has to be a hardcore (very hardcore) base of viewers. I wonder what it is...


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

*Re: Brock Lesnar doesn't draw*

At least he isn't a ratings killer like Becky. Brock is the only true star left in the WWE.


----------



## Strategize

JDP2016 said:


> I want Bayley and Sasha wrestling Mandy and Sonya in thong bikinis.
> 
> Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


DIMES.

Nah, but seriously why are they so against using blood again? It's not like they *haven't* intentionally used it in the PG era before.


----------



## ClintDagger

Erik. said:


> The biggest problem being that if they decide to book their live television shows on Tuesday, they're pretty much fucked from January to April as the NBA takes top priority on TNT, right?


Yep.


----------



## RainmakerV2

JDP2016 said:


> I want Bayley and Sasha wrestling Mandy and Sonya in thong bikinis.
> 
> Sent from my LG-H631 using Tapatalk


Exactly. Advertise Mandy vs. Naomi in a bra and panties match or bikini contest tonight and watch the fucking rating pop.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Y.2.J said:


> I really wonder...when will the hemorrhaging stop? When will it bottom out?
> 
> There has to be a capitulation right? There has to be a hardcore (very hardcore) base of viewers. I wonder what it is...


I don't see how anyone can be entertained by the current product. Just reading the results is boring without actually watching the garbage on TV. I really think the hardcore base was in the 3-4 million range and even almost half of them bailed in the last decade with how bad the PG Era has been.


----------



## ClintDagger

Y.2.J said:


> I really wonder...when will the hemorrhaging stop? When will it bottom out?
> 
> There has to be a capitulation right? There has to be a hardcore (very hardcore) base of viewers. I wonder what it is...


How many watch NXT each week? I bet there’s your bottom number.


----------



## Ace

RainmakerV2 said:


> Exactly. Advertise Mandy vs. Naomi in a bra and panties match or bikini contest tonight and watch the fucking rating pop.


 People joke around but it's true.

If Ronda and Becky were to wrestle in a bra and panties match it would draw more than a serious match between the two.

People may find that offensive but it's true, sex sells. Especially for the women in a predominantly male space like wrestling.


----------



## Not Lying

I wonder for all these people complaining about "women wrestling" not drawing shit. I'm gona go ahead and ask a simple question. Can you please explain why their youtube numbers are consistently better (and by a big margin) than all the other segments?
Youtube segment views are one of many metric to judge viewers, if as you say, people don't care, why is one metric that's visible to us showing the Becky/Women are drawing? ... and before i see any stupid answers, no it wasn't always like that  


Now, I can anticipate some answers, so here's some things: 
"Your guys aren't getting enough shine". No, just No. SD's main event scene right now has multiple wrestlers with a large fanbase competing in the Elimination Chamber, they have Orton, Jeff, Rey.. THESE ARE ARE ESTABLISHED. On RAW you got Braun, Seth, Angle.. again.. these guys are established! .. Of course there are many others across both brands like AJ, Bryan, Joe...

When someone is "established" they should be "stars". They should have fans tuning in to see them. I don't see people blaming these guys who've had TONS of accomplishments, these guys who the company invested A LOT in over the years... is their "star power" so fragile?? it means they also weren't/aren't draw..because for instance, Cena's clearly still a draw. The time and effort invested in him still pays off when he shows up. 

So you are telling me that Becky Lynch with a 6 month push, should be a bigger draw to the show than Randy Orton? than Brock fucking Lesnar? 
Why? because she's being pushed now, because they are investing in her now to make her a star? while the others HAVE FAILED?? They invested in them and FAILED?

Why doesn't Braun Strowman who the company invested a lot in, destroyed a million trucks and cars for, draw fans in? this guy should have fans rallying for him all time. 

Now, now.. all this of course doesn't fit your narrative. AJ Styles can be WWE champion for a year with mediocre matches with Nakamura, Joe and Bryan.. but nah, it's not his fault at all.


----------



## Ace

YouTube views from Indians who want to see bobs and vegen....

People do realise Mandy, Alexa and Eva Marie (think this one is 20m+..) did massive numbers for videos where they showed a bit of skin...


----------



## Erik.

Something popped up on my Twitter earlier - Braun Strowman playing the bass and smashing it over the back of Elias happened ONE YEAR AGO today. How amazing time flies.

In that time, what character has actually developed? What character has actually changed?

Braun is still someone who wants to beat people up, is less over and they STILL haven't pulled the trigger on him. Elias is STILL playing his guitar in the middle of the ring without a single top feud or memorable moment within that time. Rollins is STILL over yet not done anything. Ambrose has gotten progressively worse. 

THAT is why the company is in the shit. Predictable. Stale. Zero creativity. Lazy.

It's almost embarrassing.


----------



## Ace

The Definition of Technician said:


> I wonder for all these people complaining about "women wrestling" not drawing shit. I'm gona go ahead and ask a simple question. Can you please explain why their youtube numbers are consistently better (and by a big margin) than all the other segments?
> Youtube segment views are one of many metric to judge viewers, if as you say, people don't care, why is one metric that's visible to us showing the Becky/Women are drawing? ... and before i see any stupid answers, no it wasn't always like that
> 
> 
> Now, I can anticipate some answers, so here's some things:
> "Your guys aren't getting enough shine". No, just No. SD's main event scene right now has multiple wrestlers with a large fanbase competing in the Elimination Chamber, they have Orton, Jeff, Rey.. THESE ARE ARE ESTABLISHED. On RAW you got Braun, Seth, Angle.. again.. these guys are established! .. Of course there are many others across both brands like AJ, Bryan, Joe...
> 
> When someone is "established" they should be "stars". They should have fans tuning in to see them. I don't see people blaming these guys who've had TONS of accomplishments, these guys who the company invested A LOT in over the years... is their "star power" so fragile?? it means they also weren't/aren't draw..because for instance, Cena's clearly still a draw. The time and effort invested in him still pays off when he shows up.
> 
> So you are telling me that Becky Lynch with a 6 month push, should be a bigger draw to the show than Randy Orton? than Brock fucking Lesnar?
> Why? because she's being pushed now, because they are investing in her now to make her a star? while the others HAVE FAILED?? They invested in them and FAILED?
> 
> Why doesn't Braun Strowman who the company invested a lot in, destroyed a million trucks and cars for, draw fans in? this guy should have fans rallying for him all time.
> 
> Now, now.. all this of course doesn't fit your narrative. AJ Styles can be WWE champion for a year with mediocre matches with Nakamura, Joe and Bryan.. but nah, it's not his fault at all.


 You're talking about YouTube views from an international base.

The actual local ratings which actually matter to business are shocking.

If they continue to decline at this rate do you think any network is going to give them 300m a year for shows doing 1m viewers?


----------



## Not Lying

Donnie said:


> YouTube views from Indians who want to see bobs and vegen....
> 
> People do realise Mandy, Alexa and Eva Marie (think this one is 20m+..) did massive numbers for videos where they showed a bit of skin...
> 
> You know after the RR Becky actually made it to news outlet here.
> 
> But not for what you'd think, it was for a supposed wardrobe malfunction..


fpalm.....clearly here they are not drawing these youtube numbers for showing "bobs and vegen"... next excuse ? 

sex sells? ARE U KIDDING ME?? WHO KNEW???



Donnie said:


> You're talking about YouTube views from an international base.
> 
> The actual local ratings which actually matter to business are shocking.
> 
> *If they continue to decline at this rate do you think any network is going to give them 300m a year for shows doing 1m viewers?*


maybe not 300M, but they'll be getting a lot of money as long as they remain the top/ one of the top most viewed shows on Monday/Tuesday


----------



## Ace

The Definition of Technician said:


> fpalm.....clearly here they are not drawing these youtube numbers for showing "bobs and vegen"... next excuse ?
> 
> sex sells? ARE U KIDDING ME?? WHO KNEW???


 Yes, what of the local numbers which is the company's bread and butter?

Theyve lost 20 percent year on year, if they continue to drop at this rate it's unrealistic to get a deal anywhere near what they have.


----------



## Erik.

In all honesty, if YouTube was around during the Attitude Era, I'd have spent most of my time looking at Sable and Trish videos.

But that wasn't because they were particularly entertaining.


----------



## Ace

The Definition of Technician said:


> fpalm.....clearly here they are not drawing these youtube numbers for showing "bobs and vegen"... next excuse ?
> 
> sex sells? ARE U KIDDING ME?? WHO KNEW???
> 
> 
> 
> maybe not 300M, but they'll be getting a lot of money as long as they remain the top/ one of the top most viewed shows on Monday/Tuesday


 If they're down to 1m this company will be the most irrelevant they've ever been and they'd be without Cena, Lesnar and Taker to bail them out.


----------



## Not Lying

Donnie said:


> Yes, what of the local numbers which is the company's bread and butter?
> 
> Theyve lost 20 percent year on year, if they continue to drop at this rate it's unrealistic to get a deal anywhere near what they have.


considering they're making more money than ever, and even after a 3-4 year 20% y-o-y drop, they still got a great TV deal, I wouldn't worry too much.


----------



## Ace

Erik. said:


> In all honesty, if YouTube was around during the Attitude Era, I'd have spent most of my time looking at Sable and Trish videos.
> 
> But that wasn't because they were particularly entertaining.


 this dude doesn't get how thirst some people are especially from the SC where they don't get as much sexualised content as the west.


----------



## Not Lying

Donnie said:


> this dude doesn't get how thirst some people are especially from the SC where they don't get as much sexualised content as the west.


you realize you are speaking non-sense?? 
What fucking thirst? 

Of course, if u have a video call wardrobe malfunction ... i'm not gona be surprised to see it get 10M+ views. This isn't about that. 

This is about the fact that Becky (and Ronda) are getting more views by a HUGE margin compared to people like AJ, Braun, Rey, Angle, Orton...ect.. without showing skin.


----------



## Erik.

Donnie said:


> this dude doesn't get how thirst some people are especially from the SC where they don't get as much sexualised content as the west.


I mean the most viewed YouTube video involving wrestling of all time is the 41 man battle royal cluster fuck from back in 2011.

What does that tell you? I'm not particularly sure.


----------



## Not Lying

Donnie said:


> this dude doesn't get how thirst some people are especially from the SC where they don't get as much sexualised content as the west.


you realize you are speaking non-sense?? 
What fucking thirst? 

Of course, if u have a video call waldrob malfunction.. i'm not gona be surprised to see it get 10M+ views. This isn't about that. 

This is about the fact that Becky (and Ronda) are getting more views by a HUGE margin compared to people like AJ, Braun, Rey, Angle, Orton...ect.. without showing skin.



Erik. said:


> I mean the most viewed YouTube video involving wrestling of all time is the 41 man battle royal cluster fuck from back in 2011.
> 
> What does that tell you? I'm not particularly sure.



nope it's 






:cena


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I would like to see the L +3 and L +7 numbers for RAW and DVR numbers too. I am curious to see how many are choosing to forego watching it live for time shifted viewing instead and I wonder if there is data on what other platforms people use to view the show. Basically are all the live viewers from a year ago flat out gone or are they choosing to watch it later because it's not a priority for them any more.


----------



## Y.2.J

Just took a look at the Youtube channel...seems like Becky/Charlotte videos from yesterday drew the most views.

~1m views for the opening segment.
~1m views for when Charlotte replaced Becky
~1.4m views for the brawl

Not bad numbers for YT...:draper2

Nia Jax got the lowest amount of viewers. ~25K views. :heyman6


----------



## Not Lying

The fact that Charlotte replacing Becky is about to become *the most disliked WWE video ever*, over all the shit WWE's put out in years..shows people are invested...and a lot


----------



## Chrome

:damn those are horrendous numbers lol.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

The Definition of Technician said:


> The fact that Charlotte replacing Becky is about to become *the most disliked WWE video ever*, over all the shit WWE's put out in years..shows people are invested...and a lot


The loud angry obnoxious smarks are hitting a dislike button. Meanwhile everyone else has tuned out from watching WWE hence the historically low ratings.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Y.2.J said:


> Just took a look at the Youtube channel...seems like Becky/Charlotte videos from yesterday drew the most views.
> 
> ~1m views for the opening segment.
> ~1m views for when Charlotte replaced Becky
> ~1.4m views for the brawl
> 
> Not bad numbers for YT...:draper2
> 
> Nia Jax got the lowest amount of viewers. ~25K views. :heyman6


Braun Strowman doing dumb shit usually gets triple that amount of views.

1 million for the main angles is pretty bad, pretty sure the majority of other Ronda segments get more views too.


----------



## Ace

This is embarrassing..

People talking YouTube views, which isn't even big enough to be a line item in the WWE's annual reports, when both shows are doing all time low ratings on the RTWM.

WWE is becoming irrelevant before our eyes. The little relevance they had due to Austin, Rock, Cena, Batista, Lesnar etc. Is almost up.


----------



## Not Lying

Donnie said:


> This is embarrassing..
> 
> People talking YouTube views, which isn't even big enough to be a line item in the WWE's annual reports, when both shows are doing all time low ratings on the RTWM.
> 
> WWE is becoming irrelevant before our eyes. The little relevance they had due to Austin, Rock, Cena, Batista, Lesnar etc. Is almost up.


we could be talking about the record earnings they got last week if you want?

I am using Youtube, as a metric, to show you that you are full of crap with all this "nobody cares about the women, they are the reason the ratings are shit". When in fact, the women today might ( or for certain  ) have more fans than 95% of main eventers. Would u really be surprised to see Becky selling more merch than Braun?


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

If we want to talk about YT views so much, Ronda shits on pretty much everyone in terms of consistency of views.






19 million for that. 

However, I don't think YT is even a good barometer to gauge interest, of course the wrestler that is being promoted the most is going to get the most views. Or it's clips easy to wack off too.


----------



## Ace

The Definition of Technician said:


> Donnie said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is embarrassing..
> 
> People talking YouTube views, which isn't even big enough to be a line item in the WWE's annual reports, when both shows are doing all time low ratings on the RTWM.
> 
> WWE is becoming irrelevant before our eyes. The little relevance they had due to Austin, Rock, Cena, Batista, Lesnar etc. Is almost up.
> 
> 
> 
> we could be talking about the record earnings they got last week if you want?
Click to expand...

 Yeah, the earnings Becky has zero bearing on?


----------



## OwnChain5

The Definition of Technician said:


> The fact that Charlotte replacing Becky is about to become *the most disliked WWE video ever*, over all the shit WWE's put out in years..shows people are invested...and a lot


They are invested in Rousey/Becky/Charlotte more than they are in anything else. That's the problem. This feud is their biggest at the moment, and yet it still can't draw much attention to the product. Everything else is an even bigger failure in comparison.


----------



## Ace

The Inbred Goatman said:


> If we want to talk about YT views so much, Ronda shits on pretty much everyone in terms of consistency of views.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 19 million for that.
> 
> However, I don't think YT is even a good barometer to gauge interest, of course the wrestler that is being promoted the most is going to get the most views. Or it's clips easy to wack off too.


 As someone who has origins from the SC, I know this to be true.. some really thirsty people from there..


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

OwnChain5 said:


> They are invested in Rousey/Becky/Charlotte more than they are in anything else. That's the problem. This feud is their biggest at the moment, and yet it still can't draw much attention to the product. Everything else is an even bigger failure in comparison.


Yeah, I don't think anyone is really arguing that isn't the biggest storyline, but it's the biggest storyline on the basis that it's been given the most time, attention and care.

Everything else has been irrelevant.


----------



## rbl85

The Definition of Technician said:


> we could be talking about the record earnings they got last week if you want?


Being unpopular doesn't mean making less money.

It's not the fans who makes WWE earn a lot of money.


----------



## Ace

The Inbred Goatman said:


> OwnChain5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are invested in Rousey/Becky/Charlotte more than they are in anything else. That's the problem. This feud is their biggest at the moment, and yet it still can't draw much attention to the product. Everything else is an even bigger failure in comparison.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I don't think anyone is really arguing that isn't the biggest storyline, but it's the biggest storyline on the basis that it's been given the most time, attention and care.
> 
> Everything else has been irrelevant.
Click to expand...

 Theyve invested so much time and effort into it and the returns they're getting are absymal.


----------



## Not Lying

The Inbred Goatman said:


> If we want to talk about YT views so much, Ronda shits on pretty much everyone in terms of consistency of views.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 19 million for that.
> 
> However, I don't think YT is even a good barometer to gauge interest, of course the wrestler that is being promoted the most is going to get the most views. Or it's clips easy to wack off too.


of course. 

"Going full psycho, breaking shit, destroying sets.." all this stuff does get more eyes on the product, yes, Braun flipping over a limo or a production truck will get more views than most other stuff.

But people here are acting, that the simple act of Ronda and Becky standing in the ring together, doesn't interest people.. when it clearly does. 

And sure, we don't have to take Ronda for a measure stick.

Becky and Charlotte's segments in the Summer consistently did top numbers (1M+), even Asuka and Becky too.

All I'm saying, stop acting like the majority doesn't give a crap, when there's metrics, like merch and youtube views, *even without breaking shit, big names or skin-showing*, that prove otherwise and that the majority do care about the storylines involving the women/becky.


----------



## Erik.

The highest rated 2019 Raw segment on YouTube is Braun Strowman tipping over a limo. 

That should tell you all you need to know about YouTube views.


----------



## DammitChrist

Alright, those are dreadful numbers; especially since those are lower numbers compared to last year.

Unsurpisingly, some of us are still stuck with the usual claim that Becky Lynch is responsible for “killing” the ratings when the company is doing such a poor job either misusing most of the other talents, or not presenting then like they’re stars.

I’m actually convinced that they could write a whole episode of Raw next week that heavily focuses on Seth Rollins and Brock Lesnar in major segments to promote their match at Wrestlemania 35 only to STILL get terrible ratings regardless. We’ve reached that point where the WWE is actually listening more to the crowds by pushing the over talents in/near the main-event scene (although they receive varying levels of spotlight/TV time).

Here is a reality check:

Popular talents like Becky Lynch, Seth Rollins, AJ Styles, Daniel Bryan, Asuka, and Braun Strowman have been pushed over the last several months; but yet, the viewership continue to decrease even further. I highly doubt that the numbers are even on those talents because most of the current fan investment are on those names atm. Hell, if the most over/popular talents in the company today are being pushed and ratings STILL continue to fall, then what makes anyone think that any other talent will be able to increase these numbers?

This has been happening for many YEARS now with ratings falling. They’re pushing popular talents today (with various levels of spotlight/TV time) because they’re starting to get desperate with boosting more viewers. They could push the likes of Becky Lynch (more), Seth Rollins, Daniel Bryan, AJ Styles, Ronda Rousey, Brock Lesnar, Asuka, Braun Strowman, Samoa Joe, Charlotte Flair, Drew McIntyre, John Cena, Randy Orton, Jeff Hardy, Rey Mysterio, Mustafa Ali, Andrade, etc. and I’d STILL expect the same depressing results. Hell, Roman Reigns could come back a few months from now, increase the ratings temporarily, and STILL we’d still eventually see these poor numbers. 

They’re getting terrible numbers now with some of the beloved talents being pushed or at least placed near the top of the card. We’re also currently on the road to Wrestlemania with apparently little competition on TV too. WWE is fucked now viewership-wise if they don’t start getting their shit together and ACTUALLY write better shows on a consistent basis while ALSO keeping different fanbases happy in some way. 

Hell, I’m not sure if anyone remembers 2016; but even the main-eventers, upper midcarders, and midcarders felt like they were hotter stars and most of them were more over with the crowds back then. I’m not sure how WWE has managed to cool off most of those guys since then, but here we are.


----------



## Ace

I remember when the same people use to crap on YouTube views when Roman did well and Roman when ratings where much better than this.

Where's the consistency?


----------



## ClintDagger

The Definition of Technician said:


> I wonder for all these people complaining about "women wrestling" not drawing shit. I'm gona go ahead and ask a simple question. Can you please explain why their youtube numbers are consistently better (and by a big margin) than all the other segments?
> Youtube segment views are one of many metric to judge viewers, if as you say, people don't care, why is one metric that's visible to us showing the Becky/Women are drawing? ... and before i see any stupid answers, no it wasn't always like that
> 
> 
> Now, I can anticipate some answers, so here's some things:
> "Your guys aren't getting enough shine". No, just No. SD's main event scene right now has multiple wrestlers with a large fanbase competing in the Elimination Chamber, they have Orton, Jeff, Rey.. THESE ARE ARE ESTABLISHED. On RAW you got Braun, Seth, Angle.. again.. these guys are established! .. Of course there are many others across both brands like AJ, Bryan, Joe...
> 
> When someone is "established" they should be "stars". They should have fans tuning in to see them. I don't see people blaming these guys who've had TONS of accomplishments, these guys who the company invested A LOT in over the years... is their "star power" so fragile?? it means they also weren't/aren't draw..because for instance, Cena's clearly still a draw. The time and effort invested in him still pays off when he shows up.
> 
> So you are telling me that Becky Lynch with a 6 month push, should be a bigger draw to the show than Randy Orton? than Brock fucking Lesnar?
> Why? because she's being pushed now, because they are investing in her now to make her a star? while the others HAVE FAILED?? They invested in them and FAILED?
> 
> Why doesn't Braun Strowman who the company invested a lot in, destroyed a million trucks and cars for, draw fans in? this guy should have fans rallying for him all time.
> 
> Now, now.. all this of course doesn't fit your narrative. AJ Styles can be WWE champion for a year with mediocre matches with Nakamura, Joe and Bryan.. but nah, it's not his fault at all.


You’re forgetting that 80-90% of the audience doesn’t watch YT clips, they don’t post on wrestling forums, they don’t talk about WWE on social media. Hell they probably don’t even DVR Raw. If they’re home and nothing better is on, they watch Raw. The YT views are coming from non traditional foreign markets like India and the hardest of hardcore viewers that go rewatch stuff they liked. That cross section certainly loves the women’s division but no one is disputing that.

You falsely think Becky is the most popular wrestler because you live in an echo chamber and are completely ignoring what the 80-90% of fans that aren’t all that active with anything except their TV remote think.


----------



## Ace

DammitC said:


> Alright, those are dreadful numbers; especially since those are lower numbers compared to last year.
> 
> Unsurpisingly, some of us are still stuck with the usual claim that Becky Lynch is responsible for “killing” the ratings when the company is doing such a poor job either misusing most of the other talents, or not presenting then like they’re stars.
> 
> I’m actually convinced that they could write a whole episode of Raw next week that heavily focuses on Seth Rollins and Brock Lesnar in major segments to promote their match at Wrestlemania 35 only to STILL get terrible ratings regardless. We’ve reached that point where the WWE is actually listening more to the crowds by pushing the over talents in/near the main-event scene (although they receive varying levels of spotlight/TV time).
> 
> Here is a reality check:
> 
> Popular talents like Becky Lynch, Seth Rollins, AJ Styles, Daniel Bryan, Asuka, and Braun Strowman have been pushed over the last several months; but yet, the viewership continue to decrease even further. I highly doubt that the numbers are even on those talents because most of the current fan investment are on those names atm. Hell, if the most over/popular talents in the company today are being pushed and ratings STILL continue to fall, then what makes anyone think that any other talent will be able to increase these numbers?
> 
> This has been happening for many YEARS now with ratings falling. They’re pushing popular talents today (with various levels of spotlight/TV time) because they’re starting to get desperate with boosting more viewers. They could push the likes of Becky (more), Rollins, Bryan, Styles, Ronda, Lesnar, Asuka, Strowman, Joe, Charlotte, McIntyre, Cena, Orton, Jeff, Rey, Ali, Andrade, etc. and I’d STILL expect the same depressing results. Hell, Roman Reigns could come back a few months from now, increase the ratings temporarily, and STILL we’d still eventually see these poor numbers.
> 
> They’re getting terrible numbers now with some of the beloved talents being pushed or at least placed near the top of the card. We’re also currently on the road to Wrestlemania with apparently little competition on TV too. WWE is fucked now viewership-wise if they don’t start getting their shit together and ACTUALLY write better shows on a consistent basis while ALSO keeping different fanbases happy in some way.
> 
> Hell, I’m not sure if anyone remembers 2016; but even the main-eventers, upper midcarders, and midcarders felt like they were hotter stars and most of them were more over with the crowds back then. I’m not sure how WWE has managed to cool off most of those guys since then, but here we are.


 You don't get it DC.

The ratings were declining, they aren't dying like they are now.

When was the last RTWM where the ratings from football season were similar? I.e. heavy competition.

They don't have any competition and are on the RTWM doing piss poor numbers, these are numbers they haven't seen in decades.

FFS their post Rumble show didn't get a bump <img src="http://i.imgur.com/FA2CI9v.gif" border="0" alt="" title="fpalm" class="inlineimg" />


----------



## Soul Rex

HAHAHAHA that must be the biggest drop in history year to year. 

That happens when you replace THE BIG DAWG with a ginger litle women who believes has a penis. :reigns2


----------



## llj

Yeah, post RR show not getting a bump is alarming. Same with go-home shows to a PPV, they usually do well. These numbers are not normal and cannot be explained away easily.


----------



## ClintDagger

DammitC said:


> Alright, those are dreadful numbers; especially since those are lower numbers compared to last year.
> 
> Unsurpisingly, some of us are still stuck with the usual claim that Becky Lynch is responsible for “killing” the ratings when the company is doing such a poor job either misusing most of the other talents, or not presenting then like they’re stars.
> 
> I’m actually convinced that they could write a whole episode of Raw next week that heavily focuses on Seth Rollins and Brock Lesnar in major segments to promote their match at Wrestlemania 35 only to STILL get terrible ratings regardless. We’ve reached that point where the WWE is actually listening more to the crowds by pushing the over talents in/near the main-event scene (although they receive varying levels of spotlight/TV time).
> 
> Here is a reality check:
> 
> Popular talents like Becky Lynch, Seth Rollins, AJ Styles, Daniel Bryan, Asuka, and Braun Strowman have been pushed over the last several months; but yet, the viewership continue to decrease even further. I highly doubt that the numbers are even on those talents because most of the current fan investment are on those names atm. Hell, if the most over/popular talents in the company today are being pushed and ratings STILL continue to fall, then what makes anyone think that any other talent will be able to increase these numbers?
> 
> This has been happening for many YEARS now with ratings falling. They’re pushing popular talents today (with various levels of spotlight/TV time) because they’re starting to get desperate with boosting more viewers. They could push the likes of Becky (more), Rollins, Bryan, Styles, Ronda, Lesnar, Asuka, Strowman, Joe, Charlotte, McIntyre, Cena, Orton, Jeff, Rey, Ali, Andrade, etc. and I’d STILL expect the same depressing results. Hell, Roman Reigns could come back a few months from now, increase the ratings temporarily, and STILL we’d still eventually see these poor numbers.
> 
> They’re getting terrible numbers now with some of the beloved talents being pushed or at least placed near the top of the card. We’re also currently on the road to Wrestlemania with apparently little competition on TV too. WWE is fucked now viewership-wise if they don’t start getting their shit together and ACTUALLY write better shows on a consistent basis while ALSO keeping different fanbases happy in some way.
> 
> Hell, I’m not sure if anyone remembers 2016; but even the main-eventers, upper midcarders, and midcarders felt like they were hotter stars and most of them were more over with the crowds back then. I’m not sure how WWE has managed to cool off most of those guys since then, but here we are.


The last time I remember them doing a strong last hour rating was when Seth / Dean had a match and then the Balor fourway match that included Cena. All of that was heavily pushed and it got results. The masses will stick around for the men’s division if you give them something they can chew on. With the women you see huge half million drops by the end even when they push it ridiculously hard like last night. The numbers are there for everyone to see as much as some want to ignore them.


----------



## drougfree

-20% jesus . stop pushing becky shes killing the wwe


----------



## ClintDagger

Donnie said:


> You don't get it DC.
> 
> The ratings were declining, they aren't dying like they are now.
> 
> When was the last RTWM where the ratings from football season were similar? I.e. heavy competition.
> 
> They don't have any competition and are on the RTWM doing piss poor numbers, these are numbers they haven't seen in decades.
> 
> FFS their post Rumble show didn't get a bump <img src="http://i.imgur.com/FA2CI9v.gif" border="0" alt="" title="fpalm" class="inlineimg" />


I wish just one person would explain to me why this is happening other than the casual fan base saw what WM is being centered on and decided to sit out this year’s RTWM.


----------



## DammitChrist

Donnie said:


> You don't get it DC.
> 
> The ratings were declining, they aren't dying like they are now.
> 
> When was the last RTWM where the ratings from football season were similar? I.e. heavy competition.
> 
> They don't have any competition and are on the RTWM doing piss poor numbers, these are numbers they haven't seen in decades.
> 
> FFS their post Rumble show didn't get a bump <img src="http://i.imgur.com/FA2CI9v.gif" border="0" alt="" title="fpalm" class="inlineimg" />


What are you talking about? I DO get it. I already mentioned in my previous post that ratings continue to decrease over the years. People aren’t going to continue to watch the show if it continues to suck or bore them (even if there’s some over talents who are being spotlighted well in 10-15 minutes out of the whole 3 hours).


----------



## Ace

This drop is not normal. There's a reason why the McMahons are on TV and we're getting partial nudity.

That's something these beckbeards aren't getting.

All the excuses in the world but can't see what is right in front of them. No one is over or interesting, that includes Becky-Ronda which has been booked above everyone and everything for the last few months.


----------



## Not Lying

ClintDagger said:


> I wish just one person would explain to me why this is happening other than the casual fan base saw what WM is being centered on and decided to sit out this year’s RTWM.


Look buddy, put the men in there, do u think they would be doing so much better numbers?? 

If the women are drawing 15-20% lower than last year, I'd wager put any men there and they'd be doing around 10-15% lower. (I am being generous and giving you the benefit of the doubt here) 

After years of the women's division being considered a "bathroom break", it's literally getting for the first time *ever*, a few women over, very over and doing good numbers in merch sales/youtube/ other metrics.. so.. to sum it up.. THIS IS THE FIRST HOT PROGRAM the women have been in involved in, in YEARS. and if It's only drawing less than the men would have by 150K? ... I find it completely A-OKEY.
*
Again, no one answered me on why guys that are established, and had years of investment and pushes and time put in them, should suddenly lose their star and not draw a dime... *

Bryan is right, you fans are fickle.. I would watch every single segment involving Jeff Hardy.. it's a shame you wouldn't do the same for your favorites.


----------



## Ace

The fault is on the top program which has been booked across both shows and been presented to be the biggest thing in the company.

This has led to the drops across both shows as they're putting less effort into everything else and it shows. It also devalues everything as they're presenting their top male stars to be below Becky and Charlotte.

The only thing they care about for WM is their PR project and no one gives a fuck. As reflected in their garbage ratings.


----------



## Not Lying

Donnie said:


> The fault is on the top program which has been booked on to shows and been presented to be the biggest thing in the company.
> 
> This has led to the drops across both shows as they're putting less effort into everything else and it shows.
> 
> The only thing they care about for WM is their PR project and no one gives a fuck.


Becky got the 10-15min opening segment on the last SD, compared to the men involved in the EC for the WWE title who got 1h+...

again with the stupid hyperbole "no one gives a fuck".. at MINIMUM 2.2M people do.


----------



## Ace

The Definition of Technician said:


> Becky got the 10-15min opening segment on the last SD, compared to the men involved in the EC for the WWE title who got 1h+...


 Raw was built entirely around herand look what happened...

On a go home show with Seth's return... Would have been a lot worse on another week.

It's right in front of you. Top to bottom this show was about her.

I can't even remember Roman getting pushed this much.


----------



## Not Lying

Stop deflecting. If you are buzzed about Becky it doesn't mean the whole product revolves around her. I'll give you RAW yesterday, but most of the time it's you people just reaching. Brock and Seth closing out RAW with Brock giving Seth 6 F5s is all about Becky? that's awesome.



Donnie said:


> Raw was built entirely around herand look what happened...
> 
> On a go home show with Seth's return... Would have been a lot worse on another week.
> 
> It's right in front of you. Top to bottom this show was about her.
> 
> I can't even remember Roman getting pushed this much.


 then you have a goldfish memory...


----------



## Ace

And of course Charlotte is starting SD again :lmao

Jesus, it's as if they don't give a fuck about anything else. It would make sense if it was doing good numbers, it's actually pushing people right out the door.

Why not actually do something with Cien, Rey or Orton who seems to have dropped off the planet as a sadistic heel the last few months.



The Definition of Technician said:


> Stop deflecting. If you are buzzed about Becky it doesn't mean the whole product revolves around her. I'll give you RAW yesterday, but most of the time it's you people just reaching. Brock and Seth closing out RAW with Brock giving Seth 6 F5s is all about Becky? that's awesome.
> 
> 
> 
> then you have a goldfish memory...


 The numbers speak for themselves.


----------



## ClintDagger

The Definition of Technician said:


> Look buddy, put the men in there, do u think they would be doing so much better numbers??
> 
> If the women are drawing 15-20% lower than last year, I'd wager put any men there and they'd be doing around 10-15% lower. (I am being generous and giving you the benefit of the doubt here)
> 
> After years of the women's division being considered a "bathroom break", it's literally getting for the first time *ever*, a few women over, very over and doing good numbers in merch sales/youtube/ other metrics.. so.. to sum it up.. THIS IS THE FIRST HOT PROGRAM the women have been in involved in, in YEARS. and if It's only drawing less than the men would have by 150K? ... I find it completely A-OKEY.
> *
> Again, no one answered me on why guys that are established, and had years of investment and pushes and time put in them, should suddenly lose their star and not draw a dime... *
> 
> Bryan is right, you fans are fickle.. I would watch every single segment involving Jeff Hardy.. it's a shame you wouldn't do the same for your favorites.


Define much better numbers. Do I think they’d be up 10-15% like they usually are this time of year? Yes. And I point to the 1/14 Raw which heavily centered around the men’s division and did over 2.7MM for the average. That’s the last time they really focused on the men as the top story. I think they’d be right around 2.7MM consistently instead of 2.4MM like they are now. Do I think they’d be over 3.0MM? No way. I’m not saying it’s a 50% difference or anything like that.


----------



## Dave Santos

About the youtube views. I wish youtube provided how many international viewers content creators get per video. I do know that that the majority of wwe views are done outside the USA. I feel that the wwe said that their views were up, which is correct, but they also put up more videos up every day. For example they put up 37 videos in the past 24 hours. But if you look at their views per video after raw I doubt they have been going up. This is where having access to the statistics would help.


----------



## Chrome

Dave Santos said:


> About the youtube views. I wish youtube provided how many international viewers content creators get per video. I do know that that the majority of wwe views are done outside the USA. I feel that the wwe said that their views were up, which is correct, but they also put up more videos up every day. For example they put up 37 videos in the past 24 hours. But if you look at their views per video after raw I doubt they have been going up. This is where having access to the statistics would help.


Yeah, don't they get a pretty big chunk of their views from India? Either way, I never really put too much stock in Youtube views tbh.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

I like Becky, but they're just pushing her in such a way that they're turning viewers off the product. Maybe the time off television (suspension) will be a good thing.


----------



## Ace

The Boy Wonder said:


> I like Becky, but they're just pushing her in such a way that they're turning viewers off the product. Maybe the time off television (suspension) will be a good thing.


 That's amazing and rather fitting considering the ratings.

They built the show up for the final segment, fans didn't stick around.

Compare this to Balor who is a geek and was built up to win the 4 way and face Lesnar which did really well. Did better numbers than the post Rumble Raw...


----------



## Y.2.J

Obviously they're going to continue with the Becky/Ronda/Charlotte segment because they've invested so much into this now, they may as well go all the way and it's not like anything else is on fire. I still think Lesnar v Rollins should be the main event but obviously that's just me and there's other fans that like other things.

The ladies, Ronda/Becky/Charlotte do deserve this top program. But I'm hoping after it concludes at WM35 and after that hopefully we're done with it. She's obviously not Stone Cold, I wouldn't want to see another year of this...

If they put an equal amount of time and effort into a men's program, as they did with this Becky program, it would do wonders.


----------



## Ace

Y.2.J said:


> Obviously they're going to continue with the Becky/Ronda/Charlotte segment because they've invested so much into this now, they may as well go all the way and it's not like anything else is on fire. I still think Lesnar v Rollins should be the main event but obviously that's just me and there's other fans that like other things.
> 
> The ladies, Ronda/Becky/Charlotte do deserve this top program. But I'm hoping after it concludes at WM35, that we're done with it. She's obviously not Stone Cold, I wouldn't want to see another year of this...
> 
> If they put an equal amount of time and effort into a men's program, as they did with this Becky program, it would do wonders.


 I'm praying this shit ends after WM. If they really want to do a 50-50 split, I'm so outta here. I ain't got time for that shit.


----------



## Jedah

At this point I can't wait until this program is over with. Amazing. Go watch that segment from two weeks ago and you'd realize they had lightning in a bottle. A thing that didn't need to actively suck the life out of everything else either, because it was good enough to stand on its own.

And they blow it. Because of course they do.


----------



## Ace

Jedah said:


> At this point I can't wait until this program is over with. Amazing. Go watch that segment from two weeks ago and you'd realize they had lightning in a bottle. A thing that didn't need to actively suck the life out of everything else either, because it was good enough to stand on its own.
> 
> And they blow it. Because of course they do.


 Where the fuck did Asuka go after tapping out Becky?

Becky literally tapped out and is now main eventing a WM.

Wonderful logic by the WWE :lmao


----------



## Jedah

In fairness, Asuka is in a shit division and all the other women in it are in the Chamber build so what's there to do? She's obviously not going to cut a 15 minute promo. But...yeah, at least put her in a cameo segment. Or think bigger and do an open challenge with an NXT talent. No, instead they just keep her off TV for three weeks after getting the biggest win of her career. It's easier.

Just pure laziness. No creativity whatsoever.

And just another thing this has sucked the life out of.


----------



## Swindle

Remember CM Punk saying Vince told him Batista/Orton would be the biggest WM mainevent of all time. A sick part of me would have loved to see it play out that way for MST3000/WrestleCrap fun. Vince is in his own world and his logical pitfalls have done great damage to the brand.


----------



## Deathiscoming

I expected far fewer viewers but I guess more will stop watching in coming weeks despite it being the WM season! After all, Brock-Seth is completely meh, the WWE title will have some challenger and the rest of the SDL guys will just participate in some random multi-man match if at all, and the only story this year going into WM is the damn women! Who in their right minds would want to watch Raw!? The WWE are doomed.


----------



## Deathiscoming

llj said:


> The real problem is this is a 1 story program right now. Yes, Becky is over, but not to a point you should have her in 2340856 segments every week. What these dipping ratings suggests is a certain level of fatigue in the primary narrative being presented.
> 
> _*What the WWE (and other fans) are missing is that every wrestler has their own fanbase. And by minimizing every wrestler to cater to ONE (or two) fanbase, they are essentially saying to the fanbases of all the other wrestlers "we don't need you."*_ Not every viewer is a Becky fan. There may be a lot of them who are, but you have to remember that other wrestlers have fanbases too which make up a chunk of your viewership.
> 
> Yes, having a FOTC is fine. That doesn't mean the other people who AREN'T FOTC can't still be portrayed as relevant. Roman Reigns may have been annoying in concept but at least he didn't have more than 2-3 segments per week. There were other people on the program doing something purposeful too. I don't recall Brock/Roman getting THIS much focus weekly last year.
> 
> I would bet you if they dialed back this Ronda/Becky/Charlotte/McMahons stuff in the next 2 weeks and started giving some relevant focus to other people again, the ratings might well inch up again.


Very insightful. This is what bothers me, as a fan. But the thing is, not only is the WWE telling me "we don't need you" every time it pushes women's wrestling throughout the show, and every time Becky is the main focus on the RTWM or any other PPV, but they're also telling me "we don't need you" when male wrestlers debut or participate in a talk show segment featuring a fucking woman, or every time Dean Ambrose gets slapped around or insulted by Nia Jax, and Becky keeps insulting/slapping Cena or HHH. It's like why even bother watching a show where women have infested not just half of the show, but MALE wrestlers' spots, the segments and every thing else. 

Why the fuck should I watch World Women's Wrestling Entertainment when I grew up on Rock, Taker, Sting, Mick Foley, Kane, Kurt Angle, Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, Randy Orton and Roman Reigns and CM Punk in recent years? That's not just a slap to my face that says "we don't need you" but a thousand slaps. And I don't give a damn how talented Asuka is or any other woman is, if I turn on the TV to watch wrestling, I want Roman Reigns, CM Punk, AJ Styles, Samoa Joe, not a bunch of fucking women and certainly not ugly charlotte or annoying and overrated Becky. Or else I want Lacey Evans or Scarlett Bordeaux in a 5-10 minute sexy segment, if at all.


----------



## Adam Cool

Swindle said:


> Remember CM Punk saying Vince told him Batista/Orton would be the biggest WM mainevent of all time. A sick part of me would have loved to see it play out that way for MST3000/WrestleCrap fun. Vince is in his own world and his logical pitfalls have done great damage to the brand.


It's weird how Batista and Randy have a lot of chemistry as as a tag team yet as opponents they don't click at all


----------



## Brother_T

Most of the women look like super heroes and video game characters. They can change up their face anyway they like with their makeup. They can enhance things surgically. All their ring attire goes well with the bubble gum pop led lighting they use today. Women in wrestling just have it easier than the men as far as selling the look. Most all are near all the same size. Height, size, and muscles are nowhere near as important as it is with the men's wrestling.

Men used to have it easier to sell a super hero look when they all could do roids. Now it's all about trying to fit the mold while not doing roids, unless you're a few of the chosen ones that is. Men are all varied in sizes today. There's really not that many wrestlers that even come close to Orton size anymore. A lot of the men just don't feel like men anymore. Watching the men's Rumble it was like watching a bunch wrestlers the size of Daniel Bryan. The ones that are kinda big are in tag teams, buried, and hurt. 

Obviously there is more to why no one is watching WWE than this, but it is a big reason why the women are being pushed over the men. Especially in Vince's and Stephanie's eyes. Try and pretend you don't know who the wrestlers are today, and go scroll down the roster and tell me who stand out more. The men or women? I'm just saying a lot of the men look like jobbers of the past.


----------



## Adam Cool

Brother_T said:


> Men used to have it easier to sell a super hero look when they all could do roids. Now it's all about trying to fit the mold while not doing roids, unless you're a few of the chosen ones that is. Men are all varied in sizes today. There's really not that many wrestlers that even come close to Orton size anymore. *A lot of the men just don't feel like men anymore. Watching the men's Rumble it was like watching a bunch wrestlers the size of Daniel Bryan. The ones that are kinda big are in tag teams, buried, and hurt*.


Did you just call the vast majority of humanity "not men"?


----------



## shadows123

LOL @ people saying Brock Seth showcasing would bring back viewers..I don't think they would ....They would do the one promo with Heyman and one on the go home with a brawl..we have seen that so many times..... I dont think any single one draws in the present wwe, Even Brock has been damaged thanks to the stupid direction they took with Roman... If you have one good segment per week or a max of 15 minutes out of a full 3 hours, normally you would do what i do these days.. Watch that segment on youtube and skip the entire show...why would i torture myself to watch the entire show when i know the rest is filler... It has nothing to do with Becky or Seth or anyone else.... Its just that most of the card feels like filler and the people dont really have interesting characters that something can be booked around them. All you can do is book a good match since they are uninteresting otherwise.. But I suppose people want to see characters more.


----------



## Ace

Brother_T said:


> Most of the women look like super heroes and video game characters. They can change up their face anyway they like with their makeup. They can enhance things surgically. All their ring attire goes well with the bubble gum pop led lighting they use today. Women in wrestling just have it easier than the men as far as selling the look. Most all are near all the same size. Height, size, and muscles are nowhere near as important as it is with the men's wrestling.
> 
> Men used to have it easier to sell a super hero look when they all could do roids. Now it's all about trying to fit the mold while not doing roids, unless you're a few of the chosen ones that is. Men are all varied in sizes today. There's really not that many wrestlers that even come close to Orton size anymore. A lot of the men just don't feel like men anymore. Watching the men's Rumble it was like watching a bunch wrestlers the size of Daniel Bryan. The ones that are kinda big are in tag teams, buried, and hurt.
> 
> Obviously there is more to why no one is watching WWE than this, but it is a big reason why the women are being pushed over the men. Especially in Vince's and Stephanie's eyes. Try and pretend you don't know who the wrestlers are today, and go scroll down the roster and tell me who stand out more. The men or women? I'm just saying a lot of the men look like jobbers of the past.


 That theory would hold more weight if the ratings weren't dying with the women on top.

Unless you believe they'd be doing a lot worse i.e. losing 800-1m viewers with men on top.


----------



## Brother_T

Adam Cool said:


> Did you just call the vast majority of humanity "not men"?


I'm talking about things that have sold men as heavyweight champions. I guess that could go with a lot men in entertainment today though. Just look at SNL can anyone name a man that's on that show? I'm not saying men aren't men, but are they not allowed to be men anymore.


----------



## Ace

Brother_T said:


> I'm talking about things that have sold men as heavyweight champions. I guess that could go with a lot men in entertainment today though. Just look at SNL can anyone name a man that's on that show? I'm not saying men aren't men, but are they not allowed to be men anymore.


 Yes, because the likes of Alexa Bliss, Sasha Banks and Becky Lynch look like they could kick other girls asses :kobe

Are they not "real women"?


----------



## TheLooseCanon

While I won't take the stance of the last couple pages, I would say there isn't any larger than life male characters in the company.

The look, promos, name, gimmick, are all important in order to create the 'must see' star. 

The roster, and industry for that matter, have changed. It's all about the spots of the ring work than it is about this star vs this star story in a must buy event.

It's less of a boxing main event these days, and more 'this spot will be a great gif'.

Gone are Hogan vs Warrior, Austin vs Rock, Sting vs Flair, etc. The characters that had the look that gets one's interest, the mic work that can talk you into a match, the gimmick that keeps you rooting or booing, and the type of wrestling that told a story, not a spot fest.

Today, for good or bad, the indy guy look has taken over. 20 years ago, the skinny guy in OVW complete with arm pads and knee pads would stay in OVW. Now they can headline Mania.


----------



## TheLooseCanon

Could you imagine a prime Vader in wrestling today? He would be treated like Brock Lesnar.

People can hate what they do with Lesnar in terms of booking, but it's because they are protecting him. He's the last of a dying breed. Dude is Mike Tyson in an era of Mayweathers in wrestling.

Everybody in wrestling can flip and superkick their way through spotfest matches. But only one makes you believe they can destroy their opponent. That gets anybody to tune in.

I miss the talented big guy in wrestling. Not some random big guy. The big guy with the talent, look, gimmick. Brock is a unicorn right now. In the 90s, we had handfuls - Sid, Vader, Bam Bam, Hogan, heck even ECW had Mike Awesome.


----------



## Brother_T

Donnie said:


> Yes, because the likes of Alexa Bliss, Sasha Banks and Becky Lynch look like they could kick other girls asses :kobe
> 
> Are they not "real women"?


That's my point about women. The expectations are lowered, they don't gotta look big, they don't have to be a god on the mic, they can wrestle like acrobats, and cry after every match. 

Who was the last mens champion that felt like a champion? CM Punk? Because he took risks and stood up to the brand, showed the company what wins over fans. Leaves the business fights in UFC to look like an utter fool and succeeded, but he took that risk. Men aren't taking that risk. That could all change once AEW comes around.



Donnie said:


> That theory would hold more weight if the ratings weren't dying with the women on top.
> 
> Unless you believe they'd be doing a lot worse i.e. losing 800-1m viewers with men on top.


My post wasn't about ratings, but why women are outperforming men. The women wrestling don't sell much for me. I do like Charlotte though.


----------



## Stadhart02

Deathiscoming said:


> Very insightful. This is what bothers me, as a fan. But the thing is, not only is the WWE telling me "we don't need you" every time it pushes women's wrestling throughout the show, and every time Becky is the main focus on the RTWM or any other PPV, but they're also telling me "we don't need you" when male wrestlers debut or participate in a talk show segment featuring a fucking woman, or every time Dean Ambrose gets slapped around or insulted by Nia Jax, and Becky keeps insulting/slapping Cena or HHH. It's like why even bother watching a show where women have infested not just half of the show, but MALE wrestlers' spots, the segments and every thing else.
> 
> Why the fuck should I watch World Women's Wrestling Entertainment when I grew up on Rock, Taker, Sting, Mick Foley, Kane, Kurt Angle, Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, Randy Orton and Roman Reigns and CM Punk in recent years? That's not just a slap to my face that says "we don't need you" but a thousand slaps. And I don't give a damn how talented Asuka is or any other woman is, if I turn on the TV to watch wrestling, I want Roman Reigns, CM Punk, AJ Styles, Samoa Joe, not a bunch of fucking women and certainly not ugly charlotte or annoying and overrated Becky. Or else I want Lacey Evans or Scarlett Bordeaux in a 5-10 minute sexy segment, if at all.


completely agree

and it is the Star Wars effect - get woke, go broke. It happens every time any sort of company goes down this road (next is the MCU)


----------



## TheLooseCanon

The MCU sucks anyways. DC for life! Give me 50 brooding dark Superman movies or jacked middle aged Batman shooting jobbers over what Disney crams down your throat. 

It's a shame the public whined about BvS (which visually is amazing), now WB looks to be putting the Disney crap on DC. I wanted to see the JL sequel that gave us that Knightmare scene fully and Darkseid. :mark:


----------



## McGee

Stick Becky Lynch in every segment and that's what you get.


----------



## Mear

Brother_T said:


> That's my point about women. The expectations are lowered, they don't gotta look big, they don't have to be a god on the mic, they can wrestle like acrobats, and cry after every match.
> 
> Who was the last mens champion that felt like a champion? CM Punk? Because he took risks and stood up to the brand, showed the company what wins over fans. Leaves the business fights in UFC to look like an utter fool and succeeded, but he took that risk. Men aren't taking that risk. That could all change once AEW comes around.
> 
> 
> 
> My post wasn't about ratings, but why women are outperforming men. The women wrestling don't sell much for me. I do like Charlotte though.


I wouldn't say the expectations are lowered but different. People will always look at how hot a woman is before how legit she looks. A lot of women get a fanbase because their fans find them hot. A girl being small and tiny is the equivalent of a man being huge and jacked in terms of look when with the new focus they have, it shouldn't be the case. 

Charlotte is someone I like in term of looks because she looks legit, she looks like a fighter, not a model. It always felt so cringy in 2016 to see Sasha Banks lay down Charlotte easily


----------



## RainmakerV2

The YouTube views are from middle easteners who actually think it's real and are total perverts. Seriously, ask any reasonably attractive woman you know if they have been hit up on Facebook by some Arab dude saying "wanna see my peen plz bb show boobs", I bet you they have.


----------



## shadows123

You know what... Maybe wwe should try delaying their youtube channel uploads (or suspend it altogether)..Maybe that would bring more viewers to television... Right now wwe doesnt give any reason to watch considering i can only watch 10 minutes of what i feel i would like and skip the rest and i am sure there are tons of people who i am sure read the spoilers and think "this is shit ...let me skip it altogether or let me just check this segment etc"... But downside is this means revenue lost from youtube which is directly into their pocket whereas tv is a done fixed deal with USA network who have been paying generously for poor ratings and giving them a plush slot while at it :lol


----------



## Adam Cool

TheLooseCanon said:


> The MCU sucks anyways. DC for life! Give me 50 brooding dark Superman movies or jacked middle aged Batman shooting jobbers over what Disney crams down your throat.
> 
> It's a shame the public whined about BvS (which visually is amazing), now WB looks to be putting the Disney crap on DC. I wanted to see the JL sequel that gave us that Knightmare scene fully and Darkseid. :mark:


Read Hellboy instead of CapeShit


----------



## Brother_T

Mear said:


> I wouldn't say the expectations are lowered but different. People will always look at how hot a woman is before how legit she looks. A lot of women get a fanbase because their fans find them hot. A girl being small and tiny is the equivalent of a man being huge and jacked in terms of look when with the new focus they have, it shouldn't be the case.
> 
> Charlotte is someone I like in term of looks because she looks legit, she looks like a fighter, not a model. It always felt so cringy in 2016 to see Sasha Banks lay down Charlotte easily


I like Charlotte a lot too because she keeps evolving. She really can make some good heel faces. She does things exactly like you wanna see out of a heel. She's a great wrestler and those spots she does are pretty intense. I thought her going off on Ronda was gold. She's above average on the mic. Her only knock she cries all the time. All the women around her though is like a supporting cast. Sasha Banks is the next closest thing to her. Rousey isn't that bad in her limited time, she isn't a great face though.

I don't get this love affair with Becky. I guess people started liking her after Summerslam. Her matches are sloppy. Her voice annoys me. The only thing I seen out of her where I thought she looked really cool was when Nia Jax messed her face up and she goes into the crowd. I cant stand her music. I'm giving her a chance still, but she's just mediocre. She deserves this chance, but not at the expense of the men.


----------



## Deathiscoming

Soul Rex said:


> HAHAHAHA that must be the biggest drop in history year to year.
> 
> That happens when you replace THE BIG DAWG with a ginger litle women who believes has a penis. :reigns2


:crylol :lmao :reigns3


----------



## Natecore

Deathiscoming said:


> Very insightful. This is what bothers me, as a fan. But the thing is, not only is the WWE telling me "we don't need you" every time it pushes women's wrestling throughout the show, and every time Becky is the main focus on the RTWM or any other PPV, but they're also telling me "we don't need you" when male wrestlers debut or participate in a talk show segment featuring a fucking woman, or every time Dean Ambrose gets slapped around or insulted by Nia Jax, and Becky keeps insulting/slapping Cena or HHH. It's like why even bother watching a show where women have infested not just half of the show, but MALE wrestlers' spots, the segments and every thing else.
> 
> Why the fuck should I watch World Women's Wrestling Entertainment when I grew up on Rock, Taker, Sting, Mick Foley, Kane, Kurt Angle, Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, Randy Orton and Roman Reigns and CM Punk in recent years? That's not just a slap to my face that says "we don't need you" but a thousand slaps. And I don't give a damn how talented Asuka is or any other woman is, if I turn on the TV to watch wrestling, I want Roman Reigns, CM Punk, AJ Styles, Samoa Joe, not a bunch of fucking women and certainly not ugly charlotte or annoying and overrated Becky. Or else I want Lacey Evans or Scarlett Bordeaux in a 5-10 minute sexy segment, if at all.


fpalm

I just wanted to laugh at WWE dying with everybody else here and I’m met with these archaic, misogynistic views.

No fun.


----------



## Deathiscoming

Natecore said:


> fpalm
> 
> I just wanted to laugh at WWE dying with everybody else here and I’m met with these archaic, misogynistic views.
> 
> No fun.


:brock4:reigns3


----------



## SPCDRI

WWE saw a 20 percent decrease in viewership from this go-home show to Elimination Chamber to last year's go-home show. 

NFL was up 5 percent, NBA was up 8 percent, NHL had its highest rated Stanley Cup Game 5 ever. WWE? Down over 20 percent year-on-year so far between 2018 and 2019. 

Fuck it, I'm joining the He-Man Woman Hater's Club. There's just way too much woman's wrestling and promos on the show now. You go fifty minutes (!!!) in this programming from when the Woman's Wrestling stuff happens to when you see men wrestle. Fifty minutes! Television sitcoms are half an hour long, you gotta watch two entire sitcoms of programming from the women to the men. Its nuts!


----------



## OwnChain5

shadows123 said:


> LOL @ people saying Brock Seth showcasing would bring back viewers..I don't think they would


This is true. That program is even more ice cold than Becky/Ronda. If Vince would rather have another match main event over his boy Brock defending his title, that tells you all you need to know about the lack of interest in that match.

Realistically, Becky/Ronda is the only match that can/should main event. It's definitely the biggest match on the card. But it's still a very unappealing main event, which is why interest is at an all-time low for this RTWM.


----------



## ClintDagger

OwnChain5 said:


> This is true. That program is even more ice cold than Becky/Ronda. If Vince would rather have another match main event over his boy Brock defending his title, that tells you all you need to know about the lack of interest in that match.
> 
> Realistically, Becky/Ronda is the only match that can/should main event. It's definitely the biggest match on the card. But it's still a very unappealing main event, which is why interest is at an all-time low for this RTWM.


There would be more interest behind Balor / Brock. In fact, having Demon Balor take a shot at Brock is a much better story than what they are trying to tell with Ronda / Becky / Charlotte.


----------



## shadows123

ClintDagger said:


> There would be more interest behind Balor / Brock. In fact, having Demon Balor take a shot at Brock is a much better story than what they are trying to tell with Ronda / Becky / Charlotte.


well Wwe sees Balor mostly as a geek.. The fact that he grins like a doofus pretty much says what creative and Vince thinks of him... Personally, I would've also like a AJ Styles Brock repeat or better yet put Samoa Joe against Brock, the man knows how to sell a feud even though he has been shafted time and again by creative..He is still the most believable heel despite the poor booking.


----------



## ClintDagger

shadows123 said:


> well Wwe sees Balor mostly as a geek.. The fact that he grins like a doofus pretty much says what creative and Vince thinks of him... Personally, I would've also like a AJ Styles Brock repeat or better yet put Samoa Joe against Brock, the man knows how to sell a feud even though he has been shafted time and again by creative..He is still the most believable heel despite the poor booking.


All of your suggestions would draw more eyeballs than what they are doing. People forget that there is a long legacy of women’s wrestling being a low to mid card feature not to be taken seriously. Just because hardcores have forgotten that doesn’t mean the masses have. It will take a long time, or a transcendent star, for them to overcome that stigma with the fan base as a whole. Those casuals will much more easily accept all of the matches you are suggesting vs what is being pushed now.


----------



## shadows123

ClintDagger said:


> All of your suggestions would draw more eyeballs than what they are doing. People forget that there is a long legacy of women’s wrestling being a low to mid card feature not to be taken seriously. Just because hardcores have forgotten that doesn’t mean the masses have. It will take a long time, or a transcendent star, for them to overcome that stigma with the fan base as a whole. Those casuals will much more easily accept all of the matches you are suggesting vs what is being pushed now.


I agree .. I replied the same some time back as well..that fans blaming Becky or Ronda or Charlotte for poor ratings is not really fair because its new and its gonna probably take decades to influence ratings because people's mentality has to change.. But the problem is wwe's mens division has been so crushed by Vince's relentless stubborn booking of Roman and because of that Brock consequentially that no one feels worth a damn post Roman... plus it doesn't help that most of the Triple H's hires are workhorses who can't sell shit on the mike or sell a feud..Samoa Joe is a rarity and its a shame he doesn't get pushed as the top heel like Triple H was and build baby faces around him...


----------



## Erik.

THE MAN said:


> I would like to see the L +3 and L +7 numbers for RAW and DVR numbers too. I am curious to see how many are choosing to forego watching it live for time shifted viewing instead and I wonder if there is data on what other platforms people use to view the show. Basically are all the live viewers from a year ago flat out gone or are they choosing to watch it later because it's not a priority for them any more.


I am pretty sure I saw that neither Smackdown or Raw see a lot of growth when +3 and +7 DVR views are added to the ratings. People either watch live or not at all it seemed or just watch highlights via the small YouTube videos they upload.


----------



## OwnChain5

ClintDagger said:


> There would be more interest behind Balor / Brock.


Highly doubtful. They already did this match and it wasn't generating any buzz.


----------



## ClintDagger

OwnChain5 said:


> Highly doubtful. They already did this match and it wasn't generating any buzz.


The rating for Balor becoming #1 contender blew away anything Ronda & Becky have done. It might not have had a ton of buzz but it had more than what they’re doing now. Plus, at RR everyone knew Brock was retaining. The thought of Demon Balor beating him at WM would draw more interest than the women’s three way that has people tuning out in droves.


----------



## The3

How to ruined your ratings






Have a no contest Hell in a Cell Match


----------



## xio8ups

hows the womens evolution working for them hahaha


----------



## Ace

xio8ups said:


> hows the womens evolution working for them hahaha


 I kinda hope they go all in and start doing more and more, make it 50-50 and give more air time to the women. They are considered equal to the men and it makes sense with the message they're message, time for them to back it up.


----------



## Mear

Donnie said:


> I kinda hope they go all in and start doing more and more, make it 50-50 and give more air time to the women. They are considered equal to the men and it makes sense with the message they're message, time for them to back it up.


I said earlier here but if that's the case, then they should hire legit athletes instead of models. Enough with the girls who looks normal and hire more people like Shayna Bazsler who looks huge and like she can actually beat up everyone. You wanna go legit, then go legit.

I guarantee you that for all this talk of " Women should be seen as more legit and equal to men ", there are many who are not supporting Ruby Riott simply because she's not as hot as some others. If she looked like Becky or Banks, so much more people would be asking for her push...


----------



## Adam Cool

Mear said:


> I said earlier here but if that's the case, then they should hire legit athletes instead of models. Enough with the girls who looks normal and hire more people like Shayna Bazsler who looks huge and like she can actually beat up everyone. You wanna go legit, then go legit.
> 
> I guarantee you that for all this talk of " Women should be seen as more legit and equal to men ", there are many who are not supporting Ruby Riott simply because she's not as hot as some others. If she looked like Becky or Banks, so much more people would be asking for her push...


Ruby Riott looked so hot when she didn't have that terrible haircut


----------



## ClintDagger

Mear said:


> I said earlier here but if that's the case, then they should hire legit athletes instead of models. Enough with the girls who looks normal and hire more people like Shayna Bazsler who looks huge and like she can actually beat up everyone. You wanna go legit, then go legit.
> 
> I guarantee you that for all this talk of " Women should be seen as more legit and equal to men ", there are many who are not supporting Ruby Riott simply because she's not as hot as some others. If she looked like Becky or Banks, so much more people would be asking for her push...


They can’t be too hot though. These guys like Becky because they think she looks attainable.


----------



## Adam Cool

ClintDagger said:


> They can’t be too hot though. These guys like Becky because they think she looks attainable.


Weirdest part is that Sasha(Sailor Moon/Kpop fan) Ember(Harry potter fan) and Ronda(Pokemon/DBZ fan) are way more "nerdy" than her irl but they don't get the same treatment from horny nerds like she does 

She isn't even a nerd or anything, She just dyed her hair orange because she knew that many have a ginger fetish


----------



## ClintDagger

Adam Cool said:


> Weirdest part is that Sasha(Sailor Moon/Kpop fan) Ember(Harry potter fan) and Ronda(Pokemon/DBZ fan) are way more "nerdy" than her irl but they don't get the same treatment from horny nerds like she does
> 
> She isn't even a nerd or anything, She just dyed her hair orange because she knew that many have a ginger fetish


She plays well to their insecurities and she does it on purpose. That segment of the fan base likes smaller “regular looking” men and women that they think they might have a chance with IRL. And the more casuals like jacked up action hero looking dudes and chicks that look like fitness models. What that says about each side? Beats the hell out of me. Ha.


----------



## Singapore Kane

The elephant in the pro wrestling room is drugs. Hogan, Flair, Warrior, Savage, Piper all had something in common and it wasn't "larger than life personalities" they were all batshit insane and doing Tony Montana sized mountains of cocaine. 

Rock music sucks without heroin, Pro Wrestling sucks without cocaine and steroids. Wrestling is desperately missing genetic freaks and legitimate lunatics.


----------



## Mear

Adam Cool said:


> Weirdest part is that Sasha(Sailor Moon/Kpop fan) Ember(Harry potter fan) and Ronda(Pokemon/DBZ fan) are way more "nerdy" than her irl but they don't get the same treatment from horny nerds like she does
> 
> She isn't even a nerd or anything, She just dyed her hair orange because she knew that many have a ginger fetish


Well, the important point to me is Twitter. I don't remember seeing much of Sasha, Ember or Ronda on it but I can tell you I have seen over and over again posts about Becky Lynch on social media where she interacts with fans or just do stupid jokes and people see it as some amazing stuff.

To me, that's the thing that really help to build a connection with the fanbase, make them feel like they know them as a friend or some stuff like that. I don't remember reading anything about Ember, Ronda is already a big star and Sasha did complain about fans before


----------



## Dave Santos

I found this interesting

*Sinclair Plans to Launch Next Gen ATSC 3.0 Over-the-Air TV in 26 Markets in 2019*

https://www.cordcuttersnews.com/sin...sc-3-0-over-the-air-tv-in-26-markets-in-2019/

Currently I am getting 20 channels by over the air antenna. This new version of ATSC 3.0 technology has already rolled out in a few areas of the USA and is out 90% in South Korea. Will also be coming out on mobile phones. Whats interesting is that nielson and other advertisers will be able to track directly and adverts can become personalized. Along with 4k and longer signal strength more homes will be using it. Plus it would take in to account future tablet and mobile phone use. As cord cutting has gone up, the number of people using antenna has risen from 16% to 20% in the last 2 years. One reason that broadcasters haven't catered towards that market was that it was difficult to track for marketers. Im curious if this will impact how broadcasters cater to those cord cutters or even streamers who would have access to the atsc 3.0 format.



CNET does a good example of explaining this

ATSC 3.0: The future of free antenna TV is coming, eventually

https://www.cnet.com/news/atsc-3-0-the-future-of-free-antenna-tv-is-coming-eventually/


*Fox, NBC and others nail down 2020 for nationwide ATSC 3.0 next-gen TV launch *

https://www.fiercevideo.com/video/f...20-for-nationwide-atsc-3-0-next-gen-tv-launch


----------



## xio8ups

yea lets hope they keep adding more female wrestlers so they get more concusions and ratings keep tanking hahaha


----------



## Stadhart02

ClintDagger said:


> They can’t be too hot though. *These guys like Becky because they think she looks attainable.*


so true

as with all fandoms now; thirsty simps are inviting in women because they think it will get them a girlfriend and like what has happened to Star Wars - they end up ruining it


----------



## Ace

So ratings are so bad they brought up guys from NXT? 

Yikes :lol


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Donnie said:


> So ratings are so bad they brought up guys from NXT?
> 
> Yikes :lol


NXT guys can't draw on NXT. Imagine how low of a rating this show will get.


----------



## Brother_T

I wished WWE would embrace what people that are conservative and libertarians find funny. Mainstream comedy is dead, but I get plenty of comedy from youtubers at the expense of Hollywood, msm, big tech. Have a Macho Ma'am "it's ma'am" transgender destroy the womens wrestling and then have him banned from competing in the women's division. Use storylines that relate to how we laugh at the mainstream media pushing fake news. Like the Covington kids and Jessie Smollett alleged hoax. Embrace meme culture. They will never do anything like that though, because it would help Trump. TV/Hollywood is just too controlled and two faced for anything that goes after the far left's idiocy and hypocrisy. No matter how much Vince likes Trump (if he even does?) he'll be demonized by the elite, where they'd hurt him financially.

I'm not saying the whole show has to pander to the right, but do things that are offensive and make no apologies. You used to have comedy that stereotypes everything in WWE, and no one thought that was a left or right thing. Now if you laugh at stereotypes it's pushed as insensitive and far right. They did that, 'We the people" at the expense of the right that was semi successful, but it also came across as confusing. Anyways stereotyping is hilarious if done correctly, if you disagree then you're ignoring what made Dave Chappell the funniest man in the world.


----------



## Singapore Kane

Brother_T said:


> I wished WWE would embrace what people that are conservative and libertarians find funny. Mainstream comedy is dead, but I get plenty of comedy from youtubers at the expense of Hollywood, msm, big tech. Have a Macho Ma'am "it's ma'am" transgender destroy the womens wrestling and then have him banned from competing in the women's division. Use storylines that relate to how we laugh at the mainstream media pushing fake news. Like the Covington kids and Jessie Smollett alleged hoax. Embrace meme culture. They will never do anything like that though, because it would help Trump. TV/Hollywood is just too controlled and two faced for anything that goes after the far left's idiocy and hypocrisy. No matter how much Vince likes Trump (if he even does?) he'll be demonized by the elite, where they'd hurt him financially.
> 
> I'm not saying the whole show has to pander to the right, but do things that are offensive and make no apologies. You used to have comedy that stereotypes everything in WWE, and no one thought that was a left or right thing. Now if you laugh at stereotypes it's pushed as insensitive and far right. They did that, 'We the people" at the expense of the right that was semi successful, but it also came across as confusing. Anyways stereotyping is hilarious if done correctly, if you disagree then you're ignoring what made Dave Chappell the funniest man in the world.


This, people always go on about how the world isn't as edgy as it was in the 90's yet trolls turned bullying Shia Lebouf into a sport and Filthy Frank baked his friend's vomit into a cake and got famous.

Truth is the 18-34 demographic is edgier than it's ever been. The mainstream are just too scared to venture onto the actual internet.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

So calling up MORE NXT talent after botching the previous ones was the answer to declining ratings while in front of a dead, half full crowd?

WEW this company :mj4


----------



## rbl85

WINNING said:


> So calling up MORE NXT talent after botching the previous ones was the answer to declining ratings while in front of a dead, half full crowd?
> 
> WEW this company :mj4


They're not called up, it was just for tonight.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

rbl85 said:


> They're not called up, it was just for tonight.


Then that's even more retarded. Why not prop up and build it as a "one night only" RAW where NXT takes center stage? You could have gotten NXT fans to boost the rating up considerably knowing their favorites would be on RAW (and probably SD).

This was just a desperation move, knowing the RTWM is pure filler.


----------



## Brother_T

Singapore Kane said:


> This, people always go on about how the world isn't as edgy as it was in the 90's yet trolls turned bullying Shia Lebouf into a sport and Filthy Frank baked his friend's vomit into a cake and got famous.
> 
> Truth is the 18-34 demographic is edgier than it's ever been. The mainstream are just too scared to venture onto the actual internet.


Eric Bischoff did a TED talk titled, "Why the media is stealing from the pro wrestling playbook". 

All I could think of is they gave so much material to WWE for free, and not a soul is capitalizing on it. They're not stealing from the playbook, they took the whole thing for keeps.


----------



## Singapore Kane

The 1st boom in the 80s happened when WWE embraced rock and roll.
The 2nd boom in the 90s happened when they embraced Jerry Springer and South Park. 

I seriously think they need to find a way to tap into that image board meme culture and become relevant to the 2010s/2020s. Because no matter how many latte sipping marketing executives may be convinced otherwise this corporate, safe, buzzfeed, social crusader shit isn't over.


----------



## Adam Cool

Singapore Kane said:


> The 1st boom in the 80s happened when WWE embraced rock and roll.
> The 2nd boom in the 90s happened when they embraced Jerry Springer and South Park.
> 
> I seriously think they need to find a way to tap into that image board meme culture and become relevant to the 2010s/2020s. Because no matter how many latte sipping marketing executives may be convinced otherwise this corporate, safe, buzzfeed, social crusader shit isn't over.


Give the Strap to Manny and Brennan and see the ratings explode


----------



## rbl85

WINNING said:


> Then that's even more retarded. Why not prop up and build it as a "one night only" RAW where NXT takes center stage? You could have gotten NXT fans to boost the rating up considerably knowing their favorites would be on RAW (and probably SD).
> 
> This was just a desperation move, knowing the RTWM is pure filler.


Well i correct myself, they might appear again on the main roster but i think they will be completly part of the main roster after Mania. Until then they will continue to be in NXT while making some appearance here and there on Raw.


----------



## Singapore Kane

Realistically did Conor McGreggor become the biggest star in UFC history because he was the best fighter/talker? 

Or was it because guys in their 20s and 30s would get home from work, open up facebook and see they were tagged in a funny 30 second clip of Conor shit talking some jobber and power walking in a $10,000 suit then tag all of their own friends in it?


----------



## A-C-P

Singapore Kane said:


> This, people always go on about how the world isn't as edgy as it was in the 90's yet trolls turned bullying Shia Lebouf into a sport and Filthy Frank baked his friend's vomit into a cake and got famous.
> 
> *Truth is the 18-34 demographic is edgier than it's ever been. The mainstream are just too scared to venture onto the actual internet.*


Where this is true, its also the demographic that watches actual television the least.

Your main actual television audience is now 35+ and under 18 (the kids who's parents haven't let them get mobile devices yet) the 18-34 demo is all streaming and watching on mobile, this is why (even if the growth is slow now) that the WWE Network (IMO) is such a great idea, and should continue to be invested in. And I honestly do think that the WWE is trying to build the Network up to being a viable option to actually replace their TV deals at some point in the future.

And this is in no way me trying to say AEW is going to overtake WWE or anything, but I think this is a reason that they are in a much better position actually being a legit/viable #2 that the past attempts b/c AEW can start out with the internet/streaming service model and not have to adapt to it.


----------



## The_Great_One21

Singapore Kane said:


> Realistically did Conor McGreggor become the biggest star in UFC history because he was the best fighter/talker?
> 
> Or was it because guys in their 20s and 30s would get home from work, open up facebook and see they were tagged in a funny 30 second clip of Conor shit talking some jobber and power walking in a $10,000 suit then tag all of their own friends in it?


Yeah it was because he was the best talker. He already had huge buzz when he arrived at UFC because he was knocking people out in the first round, and then 3 fights later he was headlining his own show in Dublin because he was shit talking everyone and then knocking them out and people loved it and wanted to see him. Nothing to do with tagging people on facebook. You don't sell a million PPV buys fight in fight out because you're a meme.


----------



## Singapore Kane

I still think cutting the biggest slice of the smallest pie is the right way to go here. There are a TON of former wrestling fans out there in this age bracket being hoovered up by the UFC. To ignore them in favour of appealing to 50 year olds and 8 year olds seems to foolish to me.


----------



## Adam Cool

Why watch TV when there's like ten alternatives today?


----------



## Singapore Kane

The_Great_One21 said:


> Yeah it was because he was the best talker. He already had huge buzz when he arrived at UFC because he was knocking people out in the first round, and then 3 fights later he was headlining his own show in Dublin because he was shit talking everyone and then knocking them out and people loved it and wanted to see him. Nothing to do with tagging people on facebook. You don't sell a million PPV buys fight in fight out because you're a meme.


Come for the memes, stay for the fight. I can't imagine he'd be a household name without it.


----------



## Erik.

Singapore Kane said:


> I still think cutting the biggest slice of the smallest pie is the right way to go here. There are a TON of former wrestling fans out there in this age bracket being hoovered up by the UFC. To ignore them in favour of appealing to 50 year olds and 8 year olds seems to foolish to me.


I'd say it would be pretty hard to prize former wrestling fans back into the product if they've since turned to UFC.

Because UFC do WWE better than WWE do it and have done it for last 17 years. And it's legit.

Those former wrestling fans didn't give a shit for wrestling. They jumped on a bandwagon that was hot when they were likely in college, loved DX telling people to suck it, loved Austin flipping the bird and loved the divas taking their clothes off. Which is why they didn't push so and so being the best wrestler, they pushed characters with the most charisma and were drawing record figures.

These aren't the fans you need to draw back in - you need to draw in those who were in their position 20 years ago.


----------



## Singapore Kane

Erik. said:


> I'd say it would be pretty hard to prize former wrestling fans back into the product if they've since turned to UFC.
> 
> Because UFC do WWE better than WWE do it and have done it for last 17 years. And it's legit.


I should probably clarify I'm speaking hypothetically from a position where the show is actually good. In it's current form they don't have a chance. I guess I'm just trying picture a scenario where they can unfuck themselves.


----------



## Erik.

Singapore Kane said:


> I should probably clarify I'm speaking hypothetically from a position where the show is actually good. In it's current form they don't have a chance. I guess I'm just trying picture a scenario where they can unfuck themselves.


They can't.

They've been fucking themselves for over a decade now and it's catching up with them. Whilst ratings have been declining since 2001, they have NEVER declined in such a rapid pace like they have over the last year.

Kids watching are finally growing up and realising the product is garbage, falling out of love with wrestling (as so many kids do when they grow up) or finding new wrestling promotions that they've realised are a lot better to watch.

Adults who were watching are probably realising the company haven't got a clue, stopped giving them a chance after getting their intelligence insulted for the past 15 years and moved on. 

I've stopped hoping to be honest. The company clearly haven't got a clue on how to write coherent show. In fact, I genuinely believe Vince and even HHH probably think what they're putting out there is good. I genuinely believe that and if you ask them, they'll point their finger at their record revenue as a means of being successful and the best thing out there..


----------



## llj

The WWE is in the state it is in because of Vince's complete disregard for long term booking and leaving himself few options in an emergency. How can you have such a stacked roster of talent like this and be in a position where you don't have any hot men's main event options for Wrestlemania?

I predict another week of shit ratings.


----------



## The_Great_One21

Singapore Kane said:


> Come for the memes, stay for the fight. I can't imagine he'd be a household name without it.


Cool. You're wrong. But cool. 

Weird that The Rock got over as the best talker before memes were a thing. Weird that Muhamed Ali 'got over' before the internet even existed if it's all about being a meme.


----------



## thegockster

Nothing more sad than people who take ratings seriously in 2019

:reneelel


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

No ratings today due to the President's Day holiday yesterday.


----------



## thegockster

They don't matter anyway


----------



## rbl85

thegockster said:


> They don't matter anyway


Are you saying that because it expose the fact that your favs are not that popular ?


----------



## thegockster

rbl85 said:


> Are you saying that because it expose the fact that your favs are not that popular ?


Who are my favs?


----------



## rbl85

thegockster said:


> Who are my favs?


Well I played safe since nobody is a draw so your favs can be anybody….XD


----------



## thegockster

rbl85 said:


> Well I played safe since nobody is a draw so your favs can be anybody….XD


The brand is the draw that's why they are signing multi billion dollar deals, Imagine getting worked up if someone else is watching the show or not in 2019, Embarrassing :eva


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

ClintDagger said:


> They can’t be too hot though. These guys like Becky because they think she looks attainable.


As a Becky fan I can only speak for myself. I like Becky Lynch because she to me is decent in the ring, decent on the mic, her hard work, her story in her wrestling career. This has nothing to do with looks to me or how twitter game is. Its about loving a talents skills and traits. She has earned respect to have the fans that she has. Do you or any of her dislikers even ask the Becky fans on why they like her or respect her? Or do you just judge them without knowing each one of them?


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

rbl85 said:


> Well I played safe since nobody is a draw so your favs can be anybody….XD


My favourites are The Rock & John Cena

Come at me bro.

LOL RATINGZ


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

My favorite is Vacant. I think he appears more than Brock. :bryanlol


----------



## rbl85

SayWhatAgain! said:


> My favourites are The Rock & John Cena
> 
> Come at me bro.
> 
> LOL RATINGZ


That's a low blow


----------



## ClintDagger

thegockster said:


> Nothing more sad than people who take ratings seriously in 2019
> 
> :reneelel


No one is taking them more seriously than you with your hurt feelings over them.


----------



## Adam Cool

Who's idea was it that bringing in NXT wrestlers will boost the ratings when only like 300K people (both Network subscribers and illegal streamers) watch NXT actively while the rest only watch periodically or just watched their theme vids on youtube and Highlights


----------



## thegockster

ClintDagger said:


> No one is taking them more seriously than you with your hurt feelings over them.


Hurt feelings? I could give two shits if someone is watching the same show as myself, this is just taking up thread space when it could easily be took up by members of the WF pulling their hair out over 2 people sleeping with each other


----------



## Soul Rex

SayWhatAgain! said:


> My favourites are The Rock & John Cena
> 
> Come at me bro.
> 
> LOL RATINGZ


John Cena aint no draw in wrestling no more bb.



thegockster said:


> They don't matter anyway


They do matter when the company is on pace to lose 700k viewers in a fucking year.


----------



## Seafort

Soul Rex said:


> John Cena aint no draw in wrestling no more bb.
> 
> 
> 
> They do matter when the company is on pace to lose 700k viewers in a year.


It makes me wonder, what if they keep this pace for multiple years. How many viewers does that leave them in 2023, when they are up for renewal?


----------



## thegockster

Soul Rex said:


> They do matter when the company is on pace to lose 700k viewers in a fucking year.


While making billions in the process, to most people that would hit home that they don't matter but not everyone is a bright spark as your post proves


----------



## Soul Rex

thegockster said:


> While making billions in the process, to most people that would hit home that they don't matter but not everyone is a bright spark as your post proves


Their TV deal is a big part of their income, they can't get 5 fucking people watching their shows and pretend USA Network will be fine with that shit. lmao

You can bright enough to understand simple shit like that.


----------



## Erik.

Revenue isn't necessarily a _great_ reflection of how a company is doing. 

You do have to look at a whole lot of factors to really evaluate. Ratings are absolutely one factor BUT they're kind of an abstract one because they don't show up on a balance sheet or any other kind of earnings report. 

Revenue is obviously another factor, and it's nice to be able to report a growth in revenue because they're hard numbers, but they're undoubtedly buoyed by the Saudi shows, which might mask the fact that other revenue streams may not be doing as well for example house show and live show attendances being way down. I imagine the wrestling show part of the company isn't making as much money as other avenues for the company are (merchandise, video games, toys etc)

Essentially what I'm saying is that the increase in revenue doesn't automatically make falling ratings less of a problem.


----------



## xio8ups

2.2


----------



## ClintDagger

Soul Rex said:


> Their TV deal is a big part of their income, they can't get 5 fucking people watching their shows and pretend USA Network will be fine with that shit. lmao
> 
> You can bright enough to understand simple shit like that.


If ratings didn’t matter, Vince wouldn’t be panicking right now. Ratings are a huge concern for WWE right now. Only a moron would think otherwise. And I honestly don’t think anyone ITT thinks otherwise even if they say differently. The clock is ticking on them to find a way to slow this trend. Sure, they have 5 years to do it but that’s a blink of an eye in business. Not to mention Fox is going to put big time heat on them. Fox is already advertising that SD is coming to “Fox Sports”. Which is a clever way to give themselves wiggle room if they want to move SD off of Fox and to FS1.


----------



## thegockster

Soul Rex said:


> Their TV deal is a big part of their income, they can't get 5 fucking people watching their shows and pretend USA Network will be fine with that shit. lmao
> 
> You can bright enough to understand simple shit like that.


They have just made the most profit they have ever made as a company and they have still not got their tv deal money yet and you think ratings matter

:HA


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

^^Revenue, not profit.

You guys purposely get the two mixed to prove a point that's disingenuous.


----------



## Lenny Leonard

thegockster said:


> They have just made the most profit they have ever made as a company and they have still not got their tv deal money yet and you think ratings matter
> 
> :HA


If I remember right, the tv deals they had before the new ones were significant less then they were hoping. I think they were looking for 400 million but got less than half


----------



## rbl85

Guys you know that NBC or FOX don't really care about the revenue of WWE, what's important for them is the number of people who watch the show.


----------



## A-C-P

thegockster said:


> They have just made the most profit they have ever made as a company and they have still not got their tv deal money yet and you think ratings matter
> 
> :HA


Yeh and one of the biggest parts of that revenue is a blood money deal with Saudi Arabia, which like their TV deals, is a limited amount of time revenue stream...


----------



## thegockster

A-C-P said:


> Yeh and one of the biggest parts of that revenue is a blood money deal with Saudi Arabia, which like their TV deals, is a limited amount of time revenue stream...


More down to the multi billion dollar tv deal rather than saudi cash, which goes to show that ratings mean shit but you carry on and pulling your hair out over something that does not matter



Lenny Leonard said:


> If I remember right, the tv deals they had before the new ones were significant less then they were hoping. I think they were looking for 400 million but got less than half


I think they have made up for it by signing a multi billion dollar deal when the so called ratings are down which proves once again they mean nothing


----------



## rbl85

thegockster said:


> More down to the multi billion dollar tv deal rather than saudi cash, which goes to show that ratings mean shit but you carry on and pulling your hair out over something that does not matter


When they made the new deal, the ratings were way better than now and they were even improving.


----------



## A-C-P

thegockster said:


> *More down to the multi billion dollar tv deal rather than saudi cash,* which goes to show that ratings mean shit but you carry on and pulling your hair out over something that does not matter


Their Revenue is due mainly to their TV Deals, but ratings don't matter :bosque

I can't make this shit up :lmao

I'm pulling out the same amount of hair over this as you actually know about the subject (Hint: That is ZERO)


----------



## thegockster

A-C-P said:


> Their Revenue is due mainly to their TV Deals, but ratings don't matter :bosque
> 
> I can't make this shit up :lmao
> 
> I'm pulling out the same amount of hair over this as you actually know about the subject (Hint: That is ZERO)


This post shows how clueless you are on the subject because they have yet to receive one penny of the new deal and have just announced record profits, Do your homework before posting you will find you would come across less clueless if you did


----------



## thegockster

rbl85 said:


> When they made the new deal, the ratings were way better than now and they were even improving.


They were declining but advertisers know times have changed it seems it's just people online who know nothing of how tv works who are still living in the dark ages


----------



## Lenny Leonard

thegockster said:


> I think they have made up for it by signing a multi billion dollar deal when the so called ratings are down which proves once again they mean nothing


The ratings were going well when they signed the fox deal but since then, they have plummeted. They are getting the lowest ratings in years during the most important time of the year. If it keeps trending this way, the next tv deals will plummet as well


----------



## A-C-P

thegockster said:


> This post shows how clueless you are on the subject because they have yet to receive one penny of the new deal and have just announced record profits, Do your homework before posting you will find you would come across less clueless if you did


:ha

I'm very aware of that fact, I also know what the WWE's profit margin is on all this revenue too, and can see how fucked the WWE is without the new TV Deals that signed. They bought themselves 5 more years. b/c Vince is a negotiating genius, :clap to them. But if you don't think ratings matter at all shows how clueless you are on the subject. Also one of their new TV deals is with FOX, a network known to have a quick hook with cancelling or moving under performing shows. Lets see what the demand is for Smackdown in 5 years if for the last few years of the FOX deal, SDL is stuck on FS1 or FS2 at an awful timeslot.....

But continue on please :bosque


----------



## thegockster

A-C-P said:


> :ha
> 
> I'm very aware of that fact, I also know what the WWE's profit margin is on all this revenue too, and can see how fucked the WWE is without the new TV Deals that signed. They bought themselves 5 more years. b/c Vince is a negotiating genius, :clap to them. But if you don't think ratings matter at all shows how clueless you are on the subject.
> 
> But continue on please :bosque


You were posting the same crap before the new deal was announced and afterwards you still think ratings matter

:maury



Lenny Leonard said:


> The ratings were going well when they signed the fox deal but since then, they have plummeted. They are getting the lowest ratings in years during the most important time of the year. If it keeps trending this way, the next tv deals will plummet as well


You were posting the same crap before the new deal was announced now you're looking forward to the next deal, just admit ratings mean shit these days because the rest of the world has moved on from it, you are stuck in the past


----------



## Erik.

How are we defining the way ratings matter here?

If its in the sense that the lowest ratings they've got in their history aren't enough for them to change their product, I agree. Because whilst they'll look at the ratings every week, they'll look at their record revenue and see that as a proof of success. 

But if its in the sense that they'll never worry about ratings. I'll disagree. If they were getting 500k viewers you bet they'd sweat. Luckily for them, they have more than triple that who like the shit they're fed.

They must be aware that losing 500-800k viewers in 12 months and record low house show and live show attendances is something to be worried about though. People MAY be tuning in by other means but they're also not botheree enough to actually attend.


----------



## A-C-P

Erik. said:


> How are we defining the way ratings matter here?
> 
> If its in the sense that the lowest ratings they've got in their history aren't enough for them to change their product, I agree. Because whilst they'll look at the ratings every week, they'll look at their record revenue and see that as a proof of success.
> 
> But if its in the sense that they'll never worry about ratings. I'll disagree. If they were getting 500k viewers you bet they'd sweat. Luckily for them, they have more than triple that who like the shit they're fed.
> 
> They must be aware that losing 500-800k viewers in 12 months and record low house show and live show attendances is something to be worried about though. People MAY be tuning in by other means but they're also not botheree enough to actually attend.


They are obviously worried/bothered about it, or at least its on their radar. Otherwise Vince and HHH wouldn't be back on TV (nearly) full-time and all that "shakeup" nonsense that happened a couple months ago wouldn't have happened.


----------



## Lenny Leonard

thegockster said:


> You were posting the same crap before the new deal was announced and afterwards you still think ratings matter
> 
> :maury
> 
> 
> 
> You were posting the same crap before the new deal was announced now you're looking forward to the next deal, just admit ratings mean shit these days because the rest of the world has moved on from it, you are stuck in the past


No this is the first I've ever posted bout it


----------



## A-C-P

Lenny Leonard said:


> No this is the first I've ever posted bout it


Pretty sure he was referring to me and yes I posted before these new TV Deals that I would be surprised if their new TV Deals were as good as the ones they were currently under, and I was surprised.

But the WWE found themselves in a perfect storm where FOX Sports was ending their agreement with UFC and needed to replace that content, and Vince was able to sell FOX his product as a better alternative to UFC programming to FOX and started a bidding war between them and NBC Universal. 

None of this changes the fact that their ratings and viewership #s effect what advertisers are willing to pay to place ads on during WWE programming. And the ad revenue able to be generated by the Networks the WWE is on will have an effect on the negotiations of future TV Deals. And unless the WWE Network becomes a viable replacement for the TV revenue or they can get more deals like the one they have with the Saudi's, given where their profit margins are, they will need to get TV deals comparable to the ones they signed this year, 5 years from now, or they will have to make MAJOR changes. And if the declines keep happening as they have been, not sure how many more times Vince and Co can pull rabbits out of their hats like they did with the new TV deals taking effect later this year.


----------



## Soul Rex

Erik. said:


> How are we defining the way ratings matter here?
> 
> If its in the sense that the lowest ratings they've got in their history aren't enough for them to change their product, I agree. Because whilst they'll look at the ratings every week, they'll look at their record revenue and see that as a proof of success.
> 
> But if its in the sense that they'll never worry about ratings. I'll disagree. If they were getting 500k viewers you bet they'd sweat. Luckily for them, they have more than triple that who like the shit they're fed.
> 
> They must be aware that losing 500-800k viewers in 12 months and record low house show and live show attendances is something to be worried about though. People MAY be tuning in by other means but they're also not botheree enough to actually attend.


The idea that ratings don't matter comes with the fact that they are still doing decent numbers in comparison to other TV shows and that their anual decline while significant, still not big enough to worry or panic about it.

But this is like a kid playing with fire if you ask me, even their more hardcore audience will vanish if they keep destroying almost intentionally the squeme of their product, which even it has a limitation of how bad it can be and how much viewers it can drive away.

The fact is nobody wants to watch divas in the main event, and that shit will get them a big surprise, the ratings will fall to a non expected historical low and they will be against the wall, their TV deals will get fucked, mark my words.


----------



## SPCDRI

WWE could be close to bankrupt in 10 years. 

A really big fan of Ernest Hemingway met him in a bar and said, 

"Wow, you're Ernest Hemingway! What are you doing here, this is a crummy dive bar? Why aren't you at some fancy joint sipping champagne?"

"Son, I'm bankrupt. You have more money than I do."

"What, no way, how did it happen?"

"The same way every bankruptcy does: Slowly, then suddenly."

They're slowly bleeding viewers, but not losing money, so they think its all o.k. until the day the shit hits the fan. 

Shit hitting the fan is losing television deals 5 years from now. Or sooner.


----------



## llj

The Saudi deal will still keep them afloat for another 9 years at least.


----------



## ClintDagger

llj said:


> The Saudi deal will still keep them afloat for another 9 years at least.


To me the problem with the Saudi deal is that they only care about AE wrestlers. Once those guys age completely out, and we are very close to that, the Saudis will lose interest. Does anyone think the Saudis want a product that revolves around the women’s division with Indy type wrestlers underneath? I think in 10 years the WWE’s gravy train of Saudi money and big tv deals will be gone. And what happens then? This is why viewership matters big to Vince and why he’s so proactively trying to fix it. You can’t wake up 5 years from now when your viewership has fallen to around a million or less and decide to flip a switch. And that’s why it’s laughable for people to think plummeting viewership doesn’t matter. The people that say that are just upset that a product that they like is being roundly rejected by the audience. To which I say, who cares? If you like it then enjoy it while it lasts. Don’t get hurt feelings over what the masses say and certainly don’t make a fool of yourself trying to pretend that WWE doesn’t care about viewership because clearly they do. They just don’t know how to fix it.


----------



## Adam Cool

ClintDagger said:


> To me the problem with the Saudi deal is that they only care about AE wrestlers. Once those guys age completely out, and we are very close to that, the Saudis will lose interest. Does anyone think the Saudis want a product that revolves around the women’s division with Indy type wrestlers underneath? I think in 10 years the WWE’s gravy train of Saudi money and big tv deals will be gone. And what happens then? This is why viewership matters big to Vince and why he’s so proactively trying to fix it. You can’t wake up 5 years from now when your viewership has fallen to around a million or less and decide to flip a switch. And that’s why it’s laughable for people to think plummeting viewership doesn’t matter. The people that say that are just upset that a product that they like is being roundly rejected by the audience. To which I say, who cares? If you like it then enjoy it while it lasts. Don’t get hurt feelings over what the masses say and certainly don’t make a fool of yourself trying to pretend that WWE doesn’t care about viewership because clearly they do. They just don’t know how to fix it.


Wrestling is losing popularity in Saudi Arabia and the Middle East as a whole because of the PG product because too tame for what people expect from it 

Only people who still watch are Kids under 12 and Nostalgia driven adults


----------



## A-C-P

Adam Cool said:


> Wrestling is losing popularity in Saudi Arabia and the Middle East as a whole because of the PG product because too tame for what people expect from it
> 
> Only people who still watch are Kids under 12 and Nostalgia driven adults


So the same as it is every where for WWE's product


----------



## SPCDRI

The thing I always get to is WWE said this about the John Cena/PG Era. WWE could always bring young people in, they'd hit middle school or high school and get hazed for watching WWE, then they'd stop caring about professional wrestling. The core audience would decide that the promotion didn't care about adult viewership and age out, too. John Cena and other acts like him in that PG Era could always get the children and the parents on board, for a little bit, but they weren't creating "lifer" fans like the 1980s and 1990s did and WWE would always get just that little bit less of them than they used to, and that's why the viewership was going down. 

With the absence of acts like John Cena and Roman Reigns, this promotion isn't even bringing in young children anymore. Look at a RAW audience and ask yourself, how many people fifteen years of age and younger are there? How many do you see? You hardly even see kids with their parents and relatives and older siblings there anymore. 

That's another major ticking timebomb for WWE. They need to find a way to get the young blood in. If somebody gets hooked on WWE, I mean, really, really hooked, you might have somebody as a fan for over 20 years. That happened to me when I was a little kid, and it might have happened to you. Now ask yourself, really, who is going to be watching this program 10 and 20 years from now if it isn't little kids getting hooked?


----------



## Y.2.J

RAW, Feb 18 2019:

H1: 3.046M
H2: 2.840M
H3: 2.427M
3H: 2.771M

At least they hit 3M again...
Decent bump. Hour 3 dumpster fire though.
Increases are good to see though.


----------



## llj

Y.2.J said:


> RAW, Feb 18 2019:
> 
> H1: 3.046M
> H2: 2.840M
> H3: 2.427M
> 3H: 2.771M
> 
> At least they hit 3M again...
> Decent bump. Hour 3 dumpster fire though.
> Increases are good to see though.


nO bEcKy = rAtInGs gO uP ????? $$$%


----------



## rbl85

Y.2.J said:


> RAW, Feb 18 2019:
> 
> H1: 3.046M
> H2: 2.840M
> H3: 2.427M
> 3H: 2.771M
> 
> At least they hit 3M again...
> Decent bump. Hour 3 dumpster fire though.
> Increases are good to see though.


You don't have the Numbers for last year ?


----------



## Mordecay

No Becky and the RAW ratings increase, best RAW ratings since September :lmao:ha:franklol:beckylol:heston


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Whadda ya know. Don't build a show around a woman who thinks sticking her tongue out and making pouting faces is intimidating and the ratings go UP. Just keep her out of the WM match, Vince. Ronda vs Charlotte is clearly the bigger draw for casual fans.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

NXT! NXT! NXT!

:trips9


----------



## Ace

lmao no Becky and they do this.

And the hour she was most likely to appear they do 2.4m (down 700,000 from the first hour) :lmao

Ronda in the main never seems to do well. Goes to show the interest for the feud is mostly among hardcores.


----------



## A-C-P

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Whadda ya know. Don't build a show around a woman who thinks sticking her tongue out and making pouting faces is intimidating and the ratings go UP. Just keep her out of the WM match, Vince. Ronda vs Charlotte is clearly the bigger draw for casual fans.


Actually with the super convoluted mess the whole thing has become, I hope they keep Becky out now too, just to see how big of a Dumpster Fire it would be at Mania :lmao

NXT Guys bringing up the ratings :mark: (not serious)


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Finally, a bump for this Road to WrestleMania. Sheesh, I was getting scared if this would have been stagnant or gone even lower.

Still not great numbers at all but compared to their recent trend, they're thankful.


----------



## llj

A-C-P said:


> Actually with the super convoluted mess the whole thing has become, I hope they keep Becky out now too, just to see how big of a Dumpster Fire it would be at Mania :lmao
> 
> NXT Guys bringing up the ratings :mark: (not serious)


Replace Becky with Kofi, Kofi's more over now

Kofi/Charlotte/Ronda 

Kofi wins at Mania with the Dis-Kofi-Her, confetti falls


----------



## DammitChrist

NXT hype :trips8


----------



## A-C-P

llj said:


> Replace Becky with Kofi, Kofi's more over now
> 
> Kofi/Charlotte/Ronda
> 
> Kofi wins at Mania with the Dis-Kofi-Her, confetti falls


:kofi


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

llj said:


> nO bEcKy = rAtInGs gO uP ????? $$$%





Mordecay said:


> No Becky and the RAW ratings increase, best RAW ratings since September :lmao:ha:franklol:beckylol:heston





nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Whadda ya know. Don't build a show around a woman who thinks sticking her tongue out and making pouting faces is intimidating and the ratings go UP. Just keep her out of the WM match, Vince. Ronda vs Charlotte is clearly the bigger draw for casual fans.





Donnie said:


> lmao no Becky and they do this.
> 
> And the hour she was most likely to appear they do 2.4m (down 700,000 from the first hour) :lmao
> 
> Ronda in the main never seems to do well. Goes to show the interest for the feud is mostly among hardcores.


"No agenda here whatsoever, honest!"

She was literally all over the preview. Whatever though. Clearly 400k fans had a crystal ball and knew Becky wouldn't be on a show she was advertised for, and that's why they watched.


----------



## llj

SayWhatAgain! said:


> "No agenda here whatsoever, honest!"
> 
> She was literally all over the preview. Whatever though. Clearly 400k fans had a crystal ball and knew Becky wouldn't be on a show she was advertised for, and that's why they watched.


LOL, see, this is why people keep bugging you, because you're so easily bothered by it. There are other Becky fans who posted right before you who didn't take it as seriously.


----------



## Mordecay

A-C-P said:


> :kofi


#BlackHistoryMonth


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Who knew that a Brock retrospective video drew nowadays? :brock4


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.046M
H2- 2.840M
H3- 2.427M
3H- 2.771M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 6.76% / - 0.206M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 14.54% / - 0.413M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 20.32% / - 0.619M )
2/18/19 Vs 2/11/19 ( + 12.55% / + 0.309M )

Demo (2/18/19 Vs 2/11/19):
H1- 1.080D Vs 0.910D
H2- 0.970D Vs 0.830D
H3- 0.840D Vs 0.770D
3H- 0.963D Vs 0.837D

Note: RAW is 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 2nd, 6th & 10th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (2/18/19 Vs 2/19/18):
H1- 3.046M Vs 3.518M
H2- 2.840M Vs 3.509M
H3- 2.427M Vs 2.821M
3H- 2.771M Vs 3.283M ( - 15.60% / - 0.512M )

Demo (2/18/19 Vs 2/19/18):
H1- 1.080D Vs 1.210D
H2- 0.970D Vs 1.220D
H3- 0.840D Vs 1.000D
3H- 0.963D Vs 1.143D

Note: RAW this week last year was 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 5th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## rbl85

Still half a million less than last year


----------



## Mordecay

SayWhatAgain! said:


> "No agenda here whatsoever, honest!"
> 
> She was literally all over the preview. Whatever though. Clearly 400k fans had a crystal ball and knew Becky wouldn't be on a show she was advertised for, and that's why they watched.


Yeah, it's not like if ratings would have keep dropping you (or some other fans) would have come here to say "see, I told you it wasn't her fault, she actually kept the ratings up" or some stuff like that right? :eyeroll


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Over half a million drop from last year. Will the downward trend continue?


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

Mordecay said:


> Yeah, it's not like if ratings would have keep dropping you (or some other fans) would have come here to say "see, I told you it wasn't her fault, she actually kept the ratings up" or some stuff like that right? :eyeroll


You know I wouldn't. I didn't dispute you blaming her when they drew a shitty number building up the dumb "Will Becky apologise" angle. I only disputed you when you blamed her for a shitty rating on a show she wasn't advertised for a couple of weeks ago. I don't think she effects ratings whatsoever, she's a star to smarks & just another wrestler to casuals. That's it. This is still a shitty rating too, and it wouldn't be any better or worse had Becky appeared.


----------



## Y.2.J

Good number in the scheme of things, best number since September I think someone said.

But compared to last year...mega


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Y.2.J said:


> Good number in the scheme of things, best number since September I think someone said.
> 
> But compared to last year...mega


I still believe there has to be a floor for the ratings, a number they will not dip below. Can you imagine shedding an additional 500,000 viewers one year from now? :trips8


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Geez, a half a million drop from last year. WOW. A bump is a bump but these numbers are still god awful.

This may be the worst build and hype for a WrestleMania I have ever witnessed in recent memory.


----------



## llj

THE MAN said:


> I still believe there has to be a floor for the ratings, a number they will not dip below.


I'm pretty sure if we asked this question 6 years ago, and then went back to those responses now, we'll probably realize they have crashed through most of the predictions for the original floor already.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

llj said:


> I'm pretty sure if we asked this question 6 years ago, and then went back to those responses now, we'll probably realize they have crashed through most of the predictions for the original floor already.


You are correct. Hell, I thought they were reaching rock bottom six months ago. How low can they go?


----------



## Erik.

WINNING said:


> Geez, a half a million drop from last year. WOW. A bump is a bump but these numbers are still god awful.
> 
> This may be the worst build and hype for a WrestleMania I have ever witnessed in recent memory.


See, I can accept a few thousand dipping because perhaps people are getting older, getting a job, falling out of love with wrestling etc.

but 500k isn't a coincidence. It's a sign that people are sick of the product. Simple as that.

Considering NOTHING has changed in a year, no character development, no presentation changes, same promos opening the show, same 50/50 booking, I have no doubt they'll likely lose another half a million in a year.


----------



## ClintDagger

I think that’s a great number considering. They need to push the Rousey / Lynch / Charlotte stuff to the side and try to build something with these new call-ups. You can still have Rousey ME Mania if you want but if you let that dominate the build on Raw in the meantime the viewership will be in the 2.4MM range instead of 2.7 or 2.8.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

The biggest takeaway from this rating is that the decision to add Charlotte to the main event did NOT lose viewers from last week. They actually gained viewers.


----------



## rbl85

The Boy Wonder said:


> The biggest takeaway from this rating is that the decision to add Charlotte to the main event did NOT lose viewers from last week. They actually gained viewers.


I Don't think this have something to do with the rating


----------



## SPCDRI

I'm surprised they got hour one back to 3 million. There was a period of time where whole shows were trending down to 2 million flat. 

When do they face the next stiff sports competition, March Madness?


----------



## The Boy Wonder

rbl85 said:


> I Don't think this have something to do with the rating


Last week's show ended with Vince adding Charlotte. That does have something to do with viewership for the following week.


----------



## xio8ups

Yall remember when that guy vince russo was writing. The ratings went up. Now tthey have 20 writers lololololol.


----------



## Mear

The Boy Wonder said:


> The biggest takeaway from this rating is that the decision to add Charlotte to the main event did NOT lose viewers from last week. They actually gained viewers.


This just shows how the WWE, and the internet, is out of touch with what the casuals want, if there is any left and it's not just all the hardcore fans left. Looking at the reactions, you would think there would be a big drop but almost nobody watching the show cared

Especially since the show started at 3 Millions, it's not a case of audience being lost. There are clearly a lot of people wanting to get back in it but they just give up when they saw how atrocious the product is


----------



## Stalingrad9

They lost 600 000 people in 3 hours. 20% of the people watching stopped watching. I don't think getting hyped for the NXT guys is the right move


----------



## Singapore Kane

Whenever people bring up record revenue to argue WWE's success all I can think is didn't Activision just do record revenue then fire 80% of their staff the next day because they couldn't sustain it, didn't Apple lose $450 billion practically overnight? Seems like all it takes is for one investor to get cold feet and the arse drops out of your company. I can't help but get the feeling "record revenue" isn't as bulletproof as people would like to suggest.


----------



## Chrome

Well, at least they got 1 hour above 3 million lol. Kinda hard to believe just a year ago the 1st 2 hours had 3.5 million people watching.


----------



## drougfree

stone cold becky lynch :bryanlol


----------



## ClintDagger

Stalingrad9 said:


> They lost 600 000 people in 3 hours. 20% of the people watching stopped watching. I don't think getting hyped for the NXT guys is the right move


Those people are tuning in hoping to see a Taker, a Goldberg, a Batista, or some sign that something like that is coming along soon. They aren’t sticking around for NXT call-ups.


----------



## Isuzu

I guess there was interest from the audience to see the gymnast Ricochet doing his routine. Casuals seem to enjoy the flips and divers.


----------



## Stalingrad9

ClintDagger said:


> Those people are tuning in hoping to see a Taker, a Goldberg, a Batista, or some sign that something like that is coming along soon. They aren’t sticking around for NXT call-ups.


Maybe, but the show was so bad that they didn't even stick for the main event which is when something of that order might happen.


----------



## ClintDagger

Stalingrad9 said:


> Maybe, but the show was so bad that they didn't even stick for the main event which is when something of that order might happen.


I don’t think they’re willing to wait. They expect something good from the top and if it’s not there or at least a tease of it isn’t there they move on.


----------



## Zappers

People tuned in because it was the day after a PPV plain and simple. That's why the slow drop as the night went on when they realized RAW was not the show they were hoping for. No real follow ups to the PPV or stories moving forward. Instead they got NXT forced down their throats. Same goes for the audience in attendance. They didn't get what they paid for and they responded appropriately.


----------



## Ace

Zappers said:


> People tuned in because it was the day after a PPV plain and simple. That's why the slow drop as the night went on when they realized RAW was not the show they were hoping for. No real follow ups to the PPV or stories moving forward. Instead they got NXT forced down their throats. Same goes for the audience in attendance. They didn't get what they paid for and they responded appropriately.


 I think it was the first real WM bump in the first hour, then they realized the show still blows and left.


----------



## ClintDagger

Donnie said:


> I think it was the first real WM bump in the first hour, then they realized the show still blows and left.


Probably a lot of people watched or heard about RR and didn’t care to tune in the night after. With EC, they probably didn’t watch or hear about it so they checked in for that first hour then bailed when they saw what was going on.


----------



## Mear

ClintDagger said:


> Those people are tuning in hoping to see a Taker, a Goldberg, a Batista, or some sign that something like that is coming along soon. They aren’t sticking around for NXT call-ups.


I don't think they are tuning for legends but for a old-school show, for actual stories. This is a Post-PPV show before Wrestlemania. This is where the stories should actually be going, they are looking for spectacles, epic moments that makes them engaged

Seriously, there isn't something totally engaging for casuals at Wrestlemania in years now. The last time a match was properly build-up was Triple H vs Daniel Bryan. In fact, just look at how the WWE booked their post Elimination Chamber show in 2014

Hulk Hogan came back / The Undertaker came back to beat up Lesnar / The Usos became champions / The Wyatt Family attacked John Cena 

Right here, you have what is so missing from this show. Stakes, stories, action, cliffhangers


----------



## Mr. Kennedy

Knocked up a chart on Raw audience retention for people to digest, tying it in to the advertised last segment...interesting to see how severe the audience drop-off problem was in the aftermath of Roman leaving.


----------



## ClintDagger

Mr. Kennedy said:


> Knocked up a chart on Raw audience retention for people to digest, tying it in to the advertised last segment...interesting to see how severe the audience drop-off problem was in the aftermath of Roman leaving.


Is that a Roman effect or the effect of NFL season hitting that stretch run? There’s some bad numbers in there with Roman still there as well. If anything this might show that with or without Roman they might be exactly where they are now.


----------



## MFR55

ClintDagger said:


> Mr. Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Knocked up a chart on Raw audience retention for people to digest, tying it in to the advertised last segment...interesting to see how severe the audience drop-off problem was in the aftermath of Roman leaving.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is that a Roman effect or the effect of NFL season hitting that stretch run? There’s some bad numbers in there with Roman still there as well. If anything this might show that with or without Roman they might be exactly where they are now.
Click to expand...

I believe that roman in the main-event would have better retention than ronda would


----------



## Mear

Mr. Kennedy said:


> Knocked up a chart on Raw audience retention for people to digest, tying it in to the advertised last segment...interesting to see how severe the audience drop-off problem was in the aftermath of Roman leaving.


Looking at this and seeing that the highest numbers ( 01/28 ; 01/14 ) concerns something that have some kind of stakes to the World Title, it just confirms how bad Brock Lesnar or Ronda/Becky are and the fact that if the WWE want to rating, they need to go back to the basics and that's the World Champion main-eventing every show.


----------



## ClintDagger

MFR55 said:


> I believe that roman in the main-event would have better retention than ronda would


I agree 100%. Although tonight will show us what casuals think about Roman. If they do a number similar to or better than last week that’s a great indicator of his fan interest. If they regress back to a 2.4MM-ish average then that’s not so good.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> I agree 100%. Although tonight will show us what casuals think about Roman. If they do a number similar to or better than last week that’s a great indicator of his fan interest. If they regress back to a 2.4MM-ish average then that’s not so good.


It's about his cancer, a real life situation and advertised 4 or 5 days in advance. It should do way better than last week, not just alittle better.


----------



## Adam Cool

They also are keeping his update a surprise making it hard to not wanna miss


----------



## llj

Mear said:


> Looking at this and seeing that the highest numbers ( 01/28 ; 01/14 ) concerns something that have some kind of stakes to the World Title, it just confirms how bad Brock Lesnar or Ronda/Becky are and the fact that if the WWE want to rating, they need to go back to the basics and that's the World Champion main-eventing every show.


A lot of the big women's main event segments have drawn pretty bad for sure. 

They need to have Seth win the title at Wrestlemania. Regardless of the company's doubts about him or the fans' doubts or him being actually only lukewarm right now, I think the numbers would show improvement if they get the title back onto the show.


----------



## Ger

ClintDagger said:


> I agree 100%. Although tonight will show us what casuals think about Roman. If they do a number similar to or better than last week that’s a great indicator of his fan interest. If they regress back to a 2.4MM-ish average then that’s not so good.


Don`t forget the Ric Flair celebration. Some people will look into that for memories. So the "hour wise" rating will be interesting.


----------



## Erik.

Anything but a ratings bump this week is an abject failure. 

They have hyped Ric Flair's celebration, they've hyped Roman Reigns is coming back to announce an update, Lesnar will be appearing and we're on the road to Wrestlemania.

Let's see.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> It's about his cancer, a real life situation and advertised 4 or 5 days in advance. It should do way better than last week, not just alittle better.


Yeah I think you’re right after thinking about it further. Probably needs to average over 3MM instead of just hitting that mark in hour 1.


----------



## llj

They brought Hogan back a few weeks back and the needle didn't move drastically. I have strong doubts it will average over 3M, but then I didn't expect last week's numbers to do as well as it did either.


----------



## SPCDRI

There's also a big name rumored to be backstage



Spoiler



Batista, to start a program with Triple H



Viewership should be up quite a bit, the show sounds stacked tonight.


----------



## Erik.

Not the greatest show at all - 3/4s of it were the same boring formulaic crap.

But they built up Reigns appearing for just under a week and promoted him opening the show all day so I am expecting a huge number (for modern day WWE standards) for the first hour. After that though, it genuinely wouldn't surprise me of a few hundred thousand tuned out in hour two. Absolute waste of space.

They didn't really go all out and say Flair's celebration was in the main event but anyone with a brain stem would have known it was going on in the last hour so depending on when people tuned in it may stay at a relatively similar number as the second hour or may even get a slight bump, however putting Bayley vs. Nia Jax there was an absolute death wish so likely it's just a bit lower.

I reckon:

H1- 3.534M
H2- 3.123M
H3- 2.893M

Or something similar.


----------



## ClintDagger

The first show that actually felt like a RTWM show thanks to Roman & Batista.


----------



## RainmakerV2

Watch the Batista bump next week. Assuming hes there. Im sure the Becky Lynch marks will have some grand excuse about how she doesnt move viewership at all..(actually lost it). You know. The next Austin and what not.


----------



## shadows123

The viewership should be up from last week with heavily promoted Ric Flair and Roman segments.. But man Vince must be real desperate..How many stops he has to pull to get ratings just over 3M :lol


----------



## ClintDagger

shadows123 said:


> The viewership should be up from last week with heavily promoted Ric Flair and Roman segments.. But man Vince must be real desperate..How many stops he has to pull to get ratings just over 3M :lol


I know. I don’t think there’s any way that Batista & Roman were in the original plans for WM. Neither were the NXT callups or adding Prichard. The desperation is off the charts. How foolish do the people look who were arguing a few weeks ago that ratings don’t matter and WWE doesn’t care about them? That argument is officially dead & buried.


----------



## Singapore Kane

ClintDagger said:


> I know. I don’t think there’s any way that Batista & Roman were in the original plans for WM. Neither were the NXT callups or adding Prichard. The desperation is off the charts. How foolish do the people look who were arguing a few weeks ago that ratings don’t matter and WWE doesn’t care about them? That argument is officially dead & buried.


Is it wrong that I'm kinda hoping they get desperate enough to give Vinny Ru a call? I get that the guy is an idiot and has stupid ideas but fuck it give him from Backlash til Summerslam to just get it all out of his system and put some life into the show. I don't care if Charlotte feeds Becky Lynch a squirrel, I just need to watch a show where things happen. TNA had a plot twist every week and killed it but WWE might actually benefit from the occasional pole match filled, heel turn laden fuckfest.


----------



## Erik.

Singapore Kane said:


> Is it wrong that I'm kinda hoping they get desperate enough to give Vinny Ru a call? I get that the guy is an idiot and has stupid ideas but fuck it give him from Backlash til Summerslam to just get it all out of his system and put some life into the show. I don't care if Charlotte feeds Becky Lynch a squirrel, I just need to watch a show where things happen. TNA had a plot twist every week and killed it but WWE might actually benefit from the occasional pole match filled, heel turn laden fuckfest.


Think of how great that period of TNA could have been without Russo absolutely destroying everything he touched. 

The star power on that show was excellent, the wrestling was often very good. Only problem was that it was handcuffed by the usual Russo trash dragging it down.

WWE don't need a retard writing ridiculous scripts. They need consistent solid booking, a clear outline for the talent they have, a little bit of creative freedom for those charismatic enough to swim and engaging characters.


----------



## Singapore Kane

Erik. said:


> Think of how great that period of TNA could have been without Russo absolutely destroying everything he touched.
> 
> The star power on that show was excellent, the wrestling was often very good. Only problem was that it was handcuffed by the usual Russo trash dragging it down.
> 
> WWE don't need a retard writing ridiculous scripts. They need consistent solid booking, a clear outline for the talent they have, a little bit of creative freedom for those charismatic enough to swim and engaging characters.


I can't entirely agree or disagree there. On the one hand TNA could have been a pro wrestling powerhouse and reached their full potential... but on the other hand we wouldn't have gotten hilarious shit like last rites and the electrified cage match. A small price to pay I think.


----------



## Erik.

Singapore Kane said:


> I can't entirely agree or disagree there. On the one hand TNA could have been a pro wrestling powerhouse and reached their full potential... but on the other hand we wouldn't have gotten hilarious shit like last rites and the electrified cage match. A small price to pay I think.


I appreciate what Russo done in the late 90s but that appreciation is based around him giving even the lower carders some kind of character and story over his ridiculous storylines.


----------



## Mear

Singapore Kane said:


> Is it wrong that I'm kinda hoping they get desperate enough to give Vinny Ru a call? I get that the guy is an idiot and has stupid ideas but fuck it give him from Backlash til Summerslam to just get it all out of his system and put some life into the show. I don't care if Charlotte feeds Becky Lynch a squirrel, I just need to watch a show where things happen. TNA had a plot twist every week and killed it but WWE might actually benefit from the occasional pole match filled, heel turn laden fuckfest.


Tbh, I would kill for Vince Russo style of writing. The problem now is that all the stories are the same. 

Backstage/Ring/GM Office. That's it, you have the majority of the WWE product with those 3 elements. Vince Russo at least would change things up and try to get creative with how he wrote the stories. Sometimes it sucks but sometimes, it can work

Not the whole show needs to be booked like this but damn, Russo can write some exciting sometimes. Look at Bray Wyatt, the dude just talk on the big screen. I have no doubt that Vince Russo would at least be able to do wacky stuff with him and helps him to be more interesting when he is on screen


----------



## Singapore Kane

Erik. said:


> I appreciate what Russo done in the late 90s but that appreciation is based around him giving even the lower carders some kind of character and story over his ridiculous storylines.


I'll take terrible over mediocre every time, the worst thing you can be is boring. Give me a 2/10 show with a developed mid card over a 5/10 show that is 90% the wrestling equivalent to white noise.


----------



## Singapore Kane

Mear said:


> Tbh, I would kill for Vince Russo style of writing. The problem now is that all the stories are the same.
> 
> Backstage/Ring/GM Office. That's it, you have the majority of the WWE product with those 3 elements. Vince Russo at least would change things up and try to get creative with how he wrote the stories. Sometimes it sucks but sometimes, it can work
> 
> Not the whole show needs to be booked like this but damn, Russo can write some exciting sometimes. Look at Bray Wyatt, the dude just talk on the big screen. I have no doubt that Vince Russo would at least be able to do wacky stuff with him and helps him to be more interesting when he is on screen


Yeah and just because he writes it doesn't mean you have to use it. But I'm sure if you put Russo, Borash, Prichard and Triple H in the same room and gave them free reign to write tv they could at least come up with an entertaining show.


----------



## InexorableJourney

Last thing you want before the new TV deals kick in is to spook the networks.

Vince Russo would not only spook them, but destroy the share value of WWE overnight.


----------



## Erik.

Vince Russo isn't a genius though. 

Therefore WWE don't need him. They simply need someone who knows the wrestling business and allow him to write coherent storylines. They can get practically ANYONE but Russo to do that. For fuck sake, I can write an exciting storyline if you want me to AND give every superstar on the roster a character and give them all storylines and feuds.

There's absolutely no proof that Russo would even work in 2019 wrestling. He hasn't done anything good since 1999. TWENTY YEARS AGO. An absolute failure at TNA. Storylines made zero sense, killed the buzz round many talent. Brought in fucking Hulk Hogan ffs. TNA literally got kicked off the network when they found out Russo was a booker despite TNA saying he wasn't. 

In fact, Russo wasn't JUST a failure at TNA, but the stink he brought is still being smelt now, and along with Dixie Carter, is one reason Impact, TNA or whatever it's called nowadays will never be able to get past where they are now. It's scorched earth.


----------



## Singapore Kane

Erik. said:


> Vince Russo isn't a genius though.
> 
> Therefore WWE don't need him. They simply need someone who knows the wrestling business and allow him to write coherent storylines. They can get practically ANYONE but Russo to do that. For fuck sake, I can write an exciting storyline if you want me to AND give every superstar on the roster a character and give them all storylines and feuds.
> 
> There's absolutely no proof that Russo would even work in 2019 wrestling. He hasn't done anything good since 1999. TWENTY YEARS AGO. An absolute failure at TNA. Storylines made zero sense, killed the buzz round many talent. Brought in fucking Hulk Hogan ffs. TNA literally got kicked off the network when they found out Russo was a booker despite TNA saying he wasn't.
> 
> In fact, Russo wasn't JUST a failure at TNA, but the stink he brought is still being smelt now, and along with Dixie Carter, is one reason Impact, TNA or whatever it's called nowadays will never be able to get past where they are now. It's scorched earth.


No one ever claimed he was a genius. He just writes entertaining shlock, which is still one rung above mundane filler.


----------



## Erik.

Singapore Kane said:


> No one ever claimed he was a genius. He just writes entertaining shlock, which is still one rung above mundane filler.


You don't need Russo for the company to write entertaining shlock.

He thinks 3/4s of the roster look like fucking geeks for a start.


----------



## DMD Mofomagic

Erik. said:


> For fuck sake, I can write an exciting storyline if you want me to AND give every superstar on the roster a character and give them all storylines and feuds.


No offense, but I highly doubt this.


----------



## Erik.

DMD Mofomagic said:


> No offense, but I highly doubt this.


I'm sure you do.


----------



## DMD Mofomagic

Erik. said:


> I'm sure you do.


I mean why wouldn't I.

It is easy to say "they need this and anyone can do that" Yet, there have been people like you described who have not been successful in writing wrestling tv shows. 

I know you wont do it, but I would love to hear how you would book/write even one feud.


----------



## Erik.

DMD Mofomagic said:


> I mean why wouldn't I.
> 
> It is easy to say "they need this and anyone can do that" Yet, there have been people like you described who have not been successful in writing wrestling tv shows.
> 
> I know you wont do it, but I would love to hear how you would book/write even one feud.


What wrestlers are involved and I'll write you a storyline. Just for you, precious.


----------



## DammitChrist

Erik. said:


> For fuck sake, I can write an exciting storyline if you want me to AND give every superstar on the roster a character and give them all storylines and feuds.


It's ok! 

I know 14 other posters on here who can write a better/more entertaining show than they do. Check out this post with all of the cards for their shows :sundin

https://www.wrestlingforum.com/76875378-post2.html


----------



## DMD Mofomagic

Erik. said:


> What wrestlers are involved and I'll write you a storyline. Just for you, precious.


My pleasure shnookums.

You choose Raw:

Bo Dallas, Chad Gable, and Nattie Neidhart

or Smackdown:

Andrade, Randy Orton, Naomi


----------



## Adam Cool

DammitC said:


> It's ok!
> 
> I know 16 other posters on here who can write a better/more entertaining show than they do. Check out this post with all of the cards for their shows :sundin
> 
> https://www.wrestlingforum.com/76875378-post2.html


Fantasy booking always reminds me that most Smarks as just as stupid as current WWE writers if not worse


----------



## ClintDagger

DMD Mofomagic said:


> I mean why wouldn't I.
> 
> It is easy to say "they need this and anyone can do that" Yet, there have been people like you described who have not been successful in writing wrestling tv shows.
> 
> I know you wont do it, but I would love to hear how you would book/write even one feud.


The writers are handcuffed by Vince. I’m sure they have good ideas too that aren’t used. Booking pro wrestling is not that hard. You just need a structure around you that sets you up for success. WWE does the exact opposite.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Erik was too optimistic 

Under 3 Million viewers.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

2.9 million viewers. Ever so slightly up from last week's 2.77 million viewers.

DAMN. Even one of their top guys coming back from cancer for the first time in 4 months can't even get them over 3 million viewers.

:ha


----------



## The Boy Wonder

3rd Hour drops are becoming an issue. Hopefully the creative way they ended last night's show will help retain viewers going forward. More storytelling in hour 3.


----------



## deathvalleydriver2

The Boy Wonder said:


> 3rd Hour drops are becoming an issue. Hopefully the creative way they ended last night's show will help retain viewers going forward. More storytelling in hour 3.


I just think 3 hours is too much if they did 8 until 10 or 9 until 11 they’d be fine


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 1: 3.167
Hour 2: 2.952
Hour 3: 2.648

3 hour average: 2.92 million

:deandre


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.167M
H2- 2.952M
H3- 2.648M
3H- 2.922M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 6.79% / - 0.215M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 10.30% / - 0.304M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 16.39% / - 0.519M )
2/25/19 Vs 2/18/19 ( + 5.45% / + 0.151M )

Demo (2/25/19 Vs 2/18/19):
H1- 1.090D Vs 1.080D
H2- 1.040D Vs 0.970D
H3- 0.920D Vs 0.840D
3H- 1.017D Vs 0.963D

Note: RAW is 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 1st, 4th & 6th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (2/25/19 Vs 2/26/18):
H1- 3.167M Vs 3.407M
H2- 2.952M Vs 3.249M
H3- 2.648M Vs 2.884M
3H- 2.922M Vs 3.180M ( - 8.11% / - 0.258M )

Demo (2/25/19 Vs 2/26/18):
H1- 1.090D Vs 1.100D
H2- 1.040D Vs 1.090D
H3- 0.920D Vs 1.010D
3H- 1.017D Vs 1.067D

Note: RAW this week last year was 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 6th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Ace

Decent number considering what they were doing, still down year on year.


----------



## A-C-P

:ha :maury :reneelel :Rollins :bryanlol :tysonlol :heston ointandlaugh


----------



## Dolorian

Donnie said:


> Decent number considering what they were doing, still down year on year.


Yeah. Per PWInsider it is the highest number since August last year.


----------



## Empress

It’s a boost all things considered. First hour is the strongest it’s been in a while. 

We’ll see if the viewership holds up next week. The Batista ending was a good hook IMO.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

They advertised the Reigns announcement since last Thursday and the Flair celebration for like 3 weeks, too. Sheesh.


----------



## Erik.

That's a shocking number really considering the build up they gave that show.

Wonder if it'd been bigger if they advertised Batista in advance.

One thing I WILL give them credit for is leaving Raw on a decent cliffhanger for the first time in what seems like months, so they MIGHT see a minor increase for intrigue next week.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

I was expecting more for hour 1 at the very least, especially since it ended up being the Reigns announcement.


----------



## Mongstyle

Erik. said:


> That's a shocking number really considering the build up they gave that show.
> 
> Wonder if it'd been bigger if they advertised Batista in advance.
> 
> One thing I WILL give them credit for is leaving Raw on a decent cliffhanger for the first time in what seems like months, so they MIGHT see a minor increase for intrigue next week.


Absolutely would have.

Keep in mind the advertised return of Batista in 2014 popped the number big time and took them over 5 million. It was an increase of something silly like 700,000 compared to the week prior. The only return to WWE that produced a bigger number was Rock's. Even Lesnar didn't produce the boost Batista did.

Reigns is a big star, but only in the context of current WWE, and he's only going to bring in a couple hundred thousand people who've tuned out in the last few months. Batista has the potential to bring back a lot more than that, but only if you actually play your cards right.

There's also two important factors to consider here:

1. Reigns has provided an update, but we didn't know what's going on. Also, even though he's back, we also have no idea of his plans. He may very well be involved in some filler match at Mania, and that's not going to get peeps that have fallen off since October to come back. They're still gonna see a Mania that holds less interest for them and remain tuned out. They'd need to use him in a big match, be that against Bryan or someone like Batista.

2. Although Batista coming back is a big hook, the fact that it's against HHH is absolutely going to affect it. It's not like he's come back and is facing off against Brock or Reigns, or some other dream match like Rock. Sometimes you need the right combination of people to produce results. And I really don't think Batista/HHH is the right combination. HHH frankly doesn't have the star power to capitalize on a return like this, but it seems like this match is what Batista wanted. You'll have lapsed Batista fans likely less interested because they'll probably think he's just coming back to lay down and retire to another old timer.

So while I expect an improvement moving forward, I fully expect it to be minor, and not as much as it could've.


----------



## ClintDagger

80k off what I thought they could consider a win. Clearly that 3rd hour was the problem. They did a bad job framing the Flair thing. Everyone for weeks assumed that would be a Charlotte and / or Becky angle and clearly that program isn’t retaining viewers. They should have foreshadowed something bigger for that if they were going to put it in the final slot.


----------



## JDP2016

I think the number would have been bigger if fans thought Batista would come back but most thought this would lead to something involving Becky and/or Charlotte.


----------



## Mongstyle

ClintDagger said:


> 80k off what I thought they could consider a win. Clearly that 3rd hour was the problem. They did a bad job framing the Flair thing. Everyone for weeks assumed that would be a Charlotte and / or Becky angle and clearly that program isn’t retaining viewers. They should have foreshadowed something bigger for that if they were going to put it in the final slot.


Yeah, Becky/Ronda is a flop. It's great that the women are getting more focus, but ultimately, the company hasn't really benefited from putting them in the focal point for the last few months. Their attendance has taken a drastic drop, the ratings haven't recovered as well as they usually do during Mania season, and you've got Vince McMahon giving excuses and taking big measures to change things up.

But I think they really fucked up with the Batista return. I get that this is something Batista wanted, but they could've leveraged this into something a lot more meaningful. It's not like they haven't been talking to him for months. They've been having discussions since at least last year so they should've done a better job of convincing him of something bigger.

They should've kept Brock away from the title. If they had aimed to set up Rollins/Styles for Mania for the Universal title, Brock would free right now to face Batista. And with Reigns return, you could set up a big match against Bryan for the WWE title. Just give Batista the win over Brock if that's what it takes to make the match happen. He could always rematch Brock at Summerslam then finish up with HHH next year or something.

The combination of Brock/Batista, Reigns/Bryan, and Styles/Rollins alone is much bigger on paper than anything they're going to be putting together this year.


----------



## ClintDagger

Mongstyle said:


> Yeah, Becky/Ronda is a flop. It's great that the women are getting more focus, but ultimately, the company hasn't really benefited from putting them in the focal point for the last few months. Their attendance has taken a drastic drop, the ratings haven't recovered as well as they usually do during Mania season, and you've got Vince McMahon giving excuses and taking big measures to change things up.
> 
> But I think they really fucked up with the Batista return. I get that this is something Batista wanted, but they could've leveraged this into something a lot more meaningful. It's not like they haven't been talking to him for months. They've been having discussions since at least last year so they should've done a better job of convincing him of something bigger.
> 
> They should've kept Brock away from the title. If they had aimed to set up Rollins/Styles for Mania for the Universal title, Brock would free right now to face Batista. And with Reigns return, you could set up a big match against Bryan for the WWE title. Just give Batista the win over Brock if that's what it takes to make the match happen. He could always rematch Brock at Summerslam then finish up with HHH next year or something.
> 
> The combination of Brock/Batista, Reigns/Bryan, and Styles/Rollins alone is much bigger on paper than anything they're going to be putting together this year.


Yep. You’ve got no stars left and now one comes back and he’s going to be wasted on Triple H. Batista / Brock is an actual WM main event. The only legitimate one that can be made.


----------



## rbl85

Strange feelings because the numbers are better than last week but i feel like they are more dissappointing than last week.
I mean doing less than 3M with the return of Reigns, Flair and they did a lot of promotion for those two + Batista and the continuation of the Becky/Rousey feud.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

#BadNewsSanta said:


> I was expecting more for hour 1 at the very least, especially since it ended up being the Reigns announcement.


Yeap. Everyone talks hours 2 and 3, which are always bad and under hour 1. But hour 1's ceiling here this week wasn't anywhere near high enough especially with what they were advertising since the previous Thursday.


----------



## The XL 2

I'll be interested to see if Batista bumps the ratings next week. His return in 2014 did well over 5 million.


----------



## Mongstyle

The XL 2 said:


> I'll be interested to see if Batista bumps the ratings next week. His return in 2014 did well over 5 million.


Guessing it won't do anywhere near as much of a bump because by now everyone knows he's back to face HHH.

When he returned in 2014, there was a lot of excitement because people wondered what he'd be doing. All we knew was that he was back to wrestle, and since it was before the Royal Rumble, it most likely meant he was getting involved in the title picture. That clearly brought back a lot of lapsed Batista fans since they did a huge increase. (Even if a lot of them likely went away after they saw how he was booked and the audience backlash.)

This was Batista's return in 2014:
*
Hour one: 5.25 million*
Hour two: 5.00 million 
Hour three: 4.36 million

Compared to the week before in 2014:

Hour one: 4.40 million
Hour two: 4.60 million
Hour three: 4.21 million

I see no chance of 700,000 lapsed Batista fans showing up for next week when they hear he's back to face HHH. A lot are going to be put off by the obvious fact that he's coming back to simply lay down against HHH. This stuff does matter because ultimately it's about new and exciting matches or feel good matches. Batista fans aren't going to show up in droves to see him lose to HHH of all people. If anything, that'd put them off.

A real big hook would've been something like him attacking Reigns, because it'd be new, or the real actual dream match, which would be far bigger than anything announced for this years Mania, against Brock Lesnar.


----------



## ClintDagger

rbl85 said:


> Strange feelings because the numbers are better than last week but i feel like they are more dissappointing than last week.
> I mean doing less than 3M with the return of Reigns, Flair and they did a lot of promotion for those two + Batista and the continuation of the Becky/Rousey feud.


Batista was a legitimate surprise. Even the most plugged in fans didn’t seem to be expecting it until late yesterday so I think the less plugged in fans had zero idea it was coming and didn’t feel the need to stick around for that segment.. I don’t think we can factor his appearance into the disappointment.

I think the disappointment lies with Roman a little bit, and then with the Flair angle which I think was expected to be something related to Charlotte/ Becky.


----------



## Mongstyle

ClintDagger said:


> Yep. You’ve got no stars left and now one comes back and he’s going to be wasted on Triple H. Batista / Brock is an actual WM main event. The only legitimate one that can be made.


Keep in mind, there's definitely an element of HHH fuckery involved here.

Batista is on record saying that WWE talked to him about tagging with Ronda against HHH and Steph last year, but then they suddenly dropped the conversation, and he later saw Angle was taking that spot. And the way he framed that was that he was obviously going to stick around and build up to a solo HHH match the following year.

Now we finally have a HHH/Batista match, which Batista is obviously going to lose, but without the previous match where Batista would've gone over with Ronda.

Now all due respect to Angle, but let's not kid ourselves, Batista has always been a way bigger star so the conversation for him suddenly stopping doesn't make a lot of sense, especially since Vince gave him a second Rumble win and was going to give him the world title back in 2014. He wouldn't be the one dropping that conversation, especially when he even approached Batista to come back and referee the main event of WM32.

Then you factor in HHH apparently not really entertaining his ideas or giving him a bit of cold shoulder, which is all based on Batista's words. So the only logical assumption here is that HHH would've likely stopped that conversation. This is what makes it even more frustrating that Batista is adamant on facing HHH. It's like he's an abuse victim. Dude gets mistreated, but can't help but want to please the guy.


----------



## Chrome

Best number they've had in a minute, but still down from the previous year. Highest number since August last year is interesting, maybe :reigns2 is a draw after all?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I don't ever wanna hear that anyone on this roster is a TV draw ever again. Not even the previous top guy of the past 4-5 years having an announcement about his cancer advertised 4 days before Raw can get them over 3 million viewers. Along with a Ric Flair celebration that was hyped up for 3 weeks in advance, too. On the road to WM, as well. 

Don't ever try to tell me anyone on this roster; full-time or part-time is a TV draw ever again. That ship has officially sailed.


----------



## Erik.

Interestingly, they lost more viewers this week heading into hour 2 than they did last week..

But less people tuned out for hour 3. Presumably because of the Ric Flair celebration.


----------



## Mongstyle

Showstopper said:


> I don't ever wanna hear that anyone on this roster is a TV draw ever again. Not even the previous top guy of the past 4-5 years having an announcement about his cancer advertised 4 days before Raw can get them over 3 million viewers. Along with a Ric Flair celebration that was hyped up for 3 weeks in advance, too. On the road to WM, as well.
> 
> Don't ever try to tell me anyone on this roster; full-time or part-time is a TV draw ever again. That ship has officially sailed.


There may not be no big draws, but there are clearly people who move the needle more than others. Considering how sharply ratings (and even Raw attendance) dropped after Reigns departure, it's evident that his presence was at least slowing the drop. Kind of like a Cena-lite in a way.

And under the right circumstances, it's clear they can do better. You need only look at Raw in 2017 to see that where they actually did a pretty great job largely thanks to the big feuds they had going on. Between Reigns/Taker, Brock/Goldberg, Reigns/Strowman, Reigns/Cena, and Brock/Joe etc. they showed that there's potential.

2018 was just a shit year. And this Mania was really shaping up badly. Even with Reigns and Batista here, while it's an improvement, it's not necessarily the best card WWE could've been putting on. For example, a returning Batista winning the Rumble and challenging Brock Lesnar would probably tell a very different story from the current ratings. And that's two "part-timers" technically. It's a matter of matching the right guys and putting on the right combination of matches.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> I don't ever wanna hear that anyone on this roster is a TV draw ever again. Not even the previous top guy of the past 4-5 years having an announcement about his cancer advertised 4 days before Raw can get them over 3 million viewers. Along with a Ric Flair celebration that was hyped up for 3 weeks in advance, too. On the road to WM, as well.
> 
> Don't ever try to tell me anyone on this roster; full-time or part-time is a TV draw ever again. That ship has officially sailed.


I think without Roman this show goes back to averaging around 2.45MM like we’ve seen most of this WM season. So about a half million fans arguably tuned in that otherwise might not have. So I think Roman did draw. The issue will be that he’s not a sustainable draw. His illness and the news surrounding that was the draw more than he was and that will wear off.


----------



## rbl85

ClintDagger said:


> I think without Roman this show goes back to averaging around 2.45MM like we’ve seen most of this WM season. So about a half million fans arguably tuned in that otherwise might not have. So I think Roman did draw. The issue will be that he’s not a sustainable draw. His illness and the news surrounding that was the draw more than he was and that will wear off.


It's terrible to say but the disease made Reigns a bigger draw or at least made him more popular.

I he came back after a knee injury or something like that, people would care less about his return.


----------



## Oliver-94

Numbers are good, highest rating since August is not a failure.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Mongstyle said:


> There may not be no big draws, but there are clearly people who move the needle more than others. Considering how sharply ratings (and even Raw attendance) dropped after Reigns departure, it's evident that his presence was at least slowing the drop. Kind of like a Cena-lite in a way.
> 
> And under the right circumstances, it's clear they can do better. You need only look at Raw in 2017 to see that where they actually did a pretty great job largely thanks to the big feuds they had going on. Between Reigns/Taker, Brock/Goldberg, Reigns/Strowman, Reigns/Cena, and Brock/Joe etc. they showed that there's potential.
> 
> 2018 was just a shit year. And this Mania was really shaping up badly. Even with Reigns and Batista here, while it's an improvement, it's not necessarily the best card WWE could've been putting on. For example, a returning Batista winning the Rumble and challenging Brock Lesnar would probably tell a very different story from the current ratings. And that's two "part-timers" technically. It's a matter of matching the right guys and putting on the right combination of matches.


Their previous top guy of the past 5 years had an update on his cancer advertised 4-5 days before the show, and the first hour, which the announcement was in, was only 120,000 viewers higher than last week's Hour 1. No one is a TV draw. This confirmed it.



ClintDagger said:


> I think without Roman this show goes back to averaging around 2.45MM like we’ve seen most of this WM season. So about a half million fans arguably tuned in that otherwise might not have. So I think Roman did draw. The issue will be that he’s not a sustainable draw. His illness and the news surrounding that was the draw more than he was and that will wear off.


The show was declining with him as Champ last year too as a poster highlighted in here a week or two ago. Hour 1 last night was 120,000 viewers more than last week's Hour 1. And all of this during WM season. This is probably their ceiling. There was no reason not to do better last night. No NFL. No college football or NBA playoffs. No political Trump stuff. Nothing.

No one is a TV draw.


----------



## Jonhern

So i guess this proves roman is not a draw. I was starting to wonder if the ratings would be a lot better if he never got sick. But this shows the ratings would probably be shit right now even if he never left. BC those people probably won't stick around and only tuned in to see what the announcement was. I was one of those last night. Watched what he had to say then did something else with my time.


----------



## Mongstyle

Showstopper said:


> Their previous top guy of the past 5 years had an update on his cancer advertised 4-5 days before the show, and the first hour, which the announcement was in, was only 120,000 viewers higher than last week's Hour 1. No one is a TV draw. This confirmed it.


There are degrees to this.

Rollins/Brock flopping or Becky/Ronda flopping doesn't mean Batista/Brock wouldn't do a whole lot better for ratings. Just having big stars on hand doesn't mean they'll give you results 100% of the time. It's up to you to put them in the right matches and to make it exciting.

Reigns/Strowman in 2017 had them doing good numbers, and Strowman was a bonafide newbie back then, but the combination of him against a top guy like Reigns worked well. There are numerous examples like this over the years with various superstars.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Mongstyle said:


> There are degrees to this.
> 
> Rollins/Brock flopping or Becky/Ronda flopping doesn't mean Batista/Brock wouldn't do a whole lot better for ratings. Just having big stars on hand doesn't mean they'll give you results 100% of the time. It's up to you to put them in the right matches and to make it exciting.
> 
> Reigns/Strowman in 2017 had them doing good numbers, and Strowman was a bonafide newbie back then, but the combination of him against a top guy like Reigns worked well. There are numerous examples like this over the years with various superstars.


Under 3 million viewers for a big comeback like that with the Flair celebration is a huge disappointment.

No one is a tv draw confirmed, as if the past 4-5 years with what they've been pushing and the results weren't enough evidence.


----------



## Tk Adeyemi

Perhaps we should stop judging wwe stars pull on ratings cos people don’t really watch tv anymore. I am a big wwe fan but even if rock came back doesn’t mean I have to watch it, I can just watch it on YouTube. The truth is outside the hardcore fans like us no one cares about wwe anymore. I know people that were Austin and rock marks back in the day that won’t watch it even if they came back because they feel they have out grown the product. Wrestling is just not as popular as it once was, so it’s not about the talent. There are many shows to watch and ain’t nobody got time to be watching a tv show for 3 hours on a Monday night.


----------



## Ace

Mongstyle said:


> Yeah, Becky/Ronda is a flop. It's great that the women are getting more focus, but ultimately, the company hasn't really benefited from putting them in the focal point for the last few months. Their attendance has taken a drastic drop, the ratings haven't recovered as well as they usually do during Mania season, and you've got Vince McMahon giving excuses and taking big measures to change things up.
> 
> But I think they really fucked up with the Batista return. I get that this is something Batista wanted, but they could've leveraged this into something a lot more meaningful. It's not like they haven't been talking to him for months. They've been having discussions since at least last year so they should've done a better job of convincing him of something bigger.
> 
> They should've kept Brock away from the title. If they had aimed to set up Rollins/Styles for Mania for the Universal title, Brock would free right now to face Batista. And with Reigns return, you could set up a big match against Bryan for the WWE title. Just give Batista the win over Brock if that's what it takes to make the match happen. He could always rematch Brock at Summerslam then finish up with HHH next year or something.
> 
> The combination of Brock/Batista, Reigns/Bryan, and Styles/Rollins alone is much bigger on paper than anything they're going to be putting together this year.


 The funny thing is now the stars are back they're being overshadowed. Says it all about the rest of the male roster they've buried.

First day back and Batista and Roman feel like the biggest stars in the company.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Jonhern said:


> So i guess this proves roman is not a draw. I was starting to wonder if the ratings would be a lot better if he never got sick. But this shows the ratings would probably be shit right now even if he never left. BC those people probably won't stick around and only tuned in to see what the announcement was. I was one of those last night. Watched what he had to say then did something else with my time.


Yep. And the numbers were declining when he was Champion after SS. But this number today proves it for anyone who was slow on the uptake.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> Their previous top guy of the past 5 years had an update on his cancer advertised 4-5 days before the show, and the first hour, which the announcement was in, was only 120,000 viewers higher than last week's Hour 1. No one is a TV draw. This confirmed it.
> 
> 
> 
> The show was declining with him as Champ last year too as a poster highlighted in here a week or two ago. Hour 1 last night was 120,000 viewers more than last week's Hour 1. And all of this during WM season. This is probably their ceiling. There was no reason not to do better last night. No NFL. No college football or NBA playoffs. No political Trump stuff. Nothing.
> 
> No one is a TV draw.


I think that might have been me that pointed out that Roman wasn’t drawing in the Fall before he left. Trust me, I agree with you that no one is a draw including Roman. I’m just saying that I do think 500,000 or so people tuned in to see what Roman was going to say that probably wouldn’t have otherwise tuned in. As someone said earlier, if it was a knee injury he was coming back from then no one cares. There’s a big curiosity factor when cancer is involved.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> I think that might have been me that pointed out that Roman wasn’t drawing in the Fall before he left. Trust me, I agree with you that no one is a draw including Roman. I’m just saying that I do think 500,000 or so people tuned in to see what Roman was going to say that probably wouldn’t have otherwise tuned in. As someone said earlier, if it was a knee injury he was coming back from then no one cares. There’s a big curiosity factor when cancer is involved.


Oh yeah, obviously cancer is much bigger issue than any kind of injury, even a serious injury. All in all, it's just a disappointing number. Under 3 million for what many were calling a 'stacked' show going into it, is no bueno.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

That rating is a disaster and I don't know what to say if you think otherwise.


----------



## xio8ups

Haha you all fell for it. That hole cancer thing was a fn joke. Out of no where when ratings are down he comes back. And right before WRESTLEMANIAAAAAAAAAA hahahahah suckerssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss


----------



## shadows123

So they bring back all the self proclaimed draws on the same show.. Ric Flair, Triple H, Roman Reigns..and the ratings is as i expected (around 3mn) proving no one draws, interest quite low and wwe needs to crawl themselves out of a big hole they themselves dug up with Roman and Cena's booking the past few years ... So many folks were claiming ratings were down the toilet due to Becky Lynch :lol.. Roman Reigns and Ric Flair bash heavily promoted ..and a little over last week...am happy that the ratings didnt go up by much else we would probably get a match with Ric Flair at his current age and Triple H proclaiming he is the biggest draw in the business :lol


----------



## Soul Rex

Chrome said:


> Best number they've had in a minute, but still down from the previous year. Highest number since August last year is interesting, maybe :reigns2 is a draw after all?


Tha BIg DRaW(G)¡ 

Honestly, you can't expect a miracle, ratings were going dawn with anybody on show anyways, but it is a fact not having your FOTC and pushing divas in the main event instead would make this drop twice as worse in the long term.

It's about having bigger control of what you are losing.


----------



## ClintDagger

shadows123 said:


> So they bring back all the self proclaimed draws on the same show.. Ric Flair, Triple H, Roman Reigns..and the ratings is as i expected (around 3mn) proving no one draws, interest quite low and wwe needs to crawl themselves out of a big hole they themselves dug up with Roman and Cena's booking the past few years ... So many folks were claiming ratings were down the toilet due to Becky Lynch :lol.. Roman Reigns and Ric Flair bash heavily promoted ..and a little over last week...am happy that the ratings didnt go up by much else we would probably get a match with Ric Flair at his current age and Triple H proclaiming he is the biggest draw in the business :lol


When they were building the shows around Becky all they could average was 2.4MM. Since they pulled back on how much they feature her the average has built up to 3.0MM. That means 20+% of the audience is not interested in a product built around Becky & Ronda. That’s a significant number and one that was trending towards 30-40% if they didn’t change course. There’s a reason Vince hit the panic button by bringing in the top men’s NXT stars plus Batista & Roman while at the same time backing off of Becky & Ronda. He knew what they were doing was heading towards averaging 2MM by the time Mania came around. That experiment was a complete & total failure.


----------



## ClintDagger

So much talk about who draws today and how in fact nobody truly draws. And that’s true. But what should be looked at right now is who are the anti-draws? What talent causes that 3.0MM or so core audience to skip the show when they’d otherwise be there? I think we have enough data now to answer that question.


----------



## CMPunkRock316

150,000 increase is less than expected although I thought last week's 2.77 was decent all things considered. I kind of expected about 3.1 for this Raw. Batista's return was done pretty cool but I wish they did a better job of not having to rush endings so much. I mean cut that awful Bayley/Nia crap to 5 minutes MAX or even place it somewhere in the second hour. I think when they actually do different stuff in the final hour it pays off ratings wise. Remember the Enzo/Cass storyline which actually saw increase from hour 2 to hour 3.


----------



## Erik.

ClintDagger said:


> So much talk about who draws today and how in fact nobody truly draws. And that’s true. But what should be looked at right now is who are the anti-draws? What talent causes that 3.0MM or so core audience to skip the show when they’d otherwise be there? I think we have enough data now to answer that question.


Well, this second hour lost MORE viewers than last weeks did.

Last weeks second hour had:

Finn Balor and Richochet vs. Bobby Lashley and Lio Rush
Curt Hawkins and Zack Ryder vs. Luchadores
Revival vs. Ciampa and Gargano


This weeks second hour had:

Ronda Rousey and Natalya vs. Riott Squad
Becky Lynch, Ronda Rousey and Stephanie McMahon segment
Kurt Angle vs. Jinder Mahal
Finn Balor vs. Lio Rush

--


----------



## llj

Donnie said:


> Decent number considering what they were doing, still down year on year.


Compared to an average RTW episode last year it was good. But for a show that was STACKED to the brim with big stars like an Anniversary show, it was hugely disappointing. It should have averaged at least 3.2m

They deserve this.


----------



## ClintDagger

Erik. said:


> Well, this second hour lost MORE viewers than last weeks did.
> 
> Last weeks second hour had:
> 
> Finn Balor and Richochet vs. Bobby Lashley and Lio Rush
> Curt Hawkins and Zack Ryder vs. Luchadores
> Revival vs. Ciampa and Gargano
> 
> 
> This weeks second hour had:
> 
> Ronda Rousey and Natalya vs. Riott Squad
> Becky Lynch, Ronda Rousey and Stephanie McMahon segment
> Kurt Angle vs. Jinder Mahal
> Finn Balor vs. Lio Rush
> 
> --


I think the reason for that drop was that the only hook the casuals cared about was Roman and that was over after the top of the show. Nobody cared about the Flair stuff because the assumption was it was an angle to further the Becky / Charlotte story. Had the audience been expecting Batista that drop would have been much less.


----------



## Erik.

ClintDagger said:


> I think the reason for that drop was that the only hook the casuals cared about was Roman and that was over after the top of the show. Nobody cared about the Flair stuff because the assumption was it was an angle to further the Becky / Charlotte story. Had the audience been expecting Batista that drop would have been much less.


But they actually RETAINED more viiewers for this weeks third hour than last weeks, so people must have stayed around for the Flair celebration.

If they didn't advertise Flairs celebration, I have no doubt this weeks total number would have been worse than last weeks.

I now expect a bump for the start of next weeks show to see what's going down with Batista. The way they ended Raw is how they should be ending EVERY Raw - a cliffhanger to make you tune in next week, especially on the RTWM where you can be a little bit MORE creative knowing more eyes tend to view.


----------



## ClintDagger

Bottom line is, WWE is terrible at setting hooks. How hard is it to kick off the show with a graphic of the Flair celebration and then say “rumors are swirling that a former world champion, one of the biggest stars of the last 15 years and someone we haven’t seen in quite some time is in the building and plans to crash the ceremony.” People know Rock is in town. Batista is a possibility. Etcetera. You don’t spoil the surprise that much and you set a hook for people to stick around. You basically waste that 3.5MM hour 1 audience by not convincing people the Flair thing was much bigger than an angle for the women.


----------



## ClintDagger

Erik. said:


> But they actually RETAINED more viiewers for this weeks third hour than last weeks, so people must have stayed around for the Flair celebration.
> 
> If they didn't advertise Flairs celebration, I have no doubt this weeks total number would have been worse than last weeks.
> 
> I now expect a bump for the start of next weeks show to see what's going down with Batista. The way they ended Raw is how they should be ending EVERY Raw - a cliffhanger to make you tune in next week, especially on the RTWM where you can be a little bit MORE creative knowing more eyes tend to view.


I think what’s important is what you start with and how much you lose overall. I don’t think H1 to H2 or H2 to H3 is nearly as important as the H1 to H3 drop. Those other transitions tell you something sure, but they have to do a better job of foreshadowing something important in that last segment.


----------



## A-C-P

Just shows that Reigns, just like the rest of the roster/today's product doesn't move the needle :draper2


----------



## ClintDagger

A-C-P said:


> Just shows that Reigns, just like the rest of the roster/today's product doesn't move the needle :draper2


He moves the needle some, but not nearly what he should given what they invested in him. If we had the quarterly breakdowns I’d bet about a million total people checked out after that first segment with Roman by the end of the show. But a lot of that is due to the cancer aspect and not Roman himself.


----------



## Erik.

ClintDagger said:


> He moves the needle some, but not nearly what he should given what they invested in him. If we had the quarterly breakdowns I’d bet about a million total people checked out after that first segment with Roman by the end of the show. But a lot of that is due to the cancer aspect and not Roman himself.


Whatever happened to the quarterly breakdowns?


----------



## ClintDagger

Erik. said:


> Whatever happened to the quarterly breakdowns?


I want to say that something changed and now those are only available to the networks. Maybe someone else remembers why for sure.


----------



## .christopher.

Hmmm, I was expecting a lot better considering it was Reigns' big announcement.

I guess burying the entire roster to get him over didn't pay off, huh? Who would've thunk?! Everyfuckingbody; that's who.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

No more breakdowns, but YouTube numbers give some insight:



You can see that the beginning and the end of the show had the most interest. The segments in the middle is where the viewers probably tuned out. One thing I've noticed is that Braun has always had good YouTube numbers despite the crappy booking.


----------



## Mear

Kurt Angle has really fallen from grace, the way WWE absolutely messed up with his return is criminal


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Mear said:


> Kurt Angle has really fallen from grace, the way WWE absolutely messed up with his return is criminal


I think there's still some bitterness from Vince because he was the first big WWE created star to jump ship to TNA. It also doesn't help that he stayed there until his body was completely broken down before finally coming back either.


----------



## Deathiscoming

Mongstyle said:


> The combination of Brock/Batista, Reigns/Bryan, and Styles/Rollins alone is much bigger on paper than anything they're going to be putting together this year.


Brock vs Batista, Reigns vs Bryan, AJ vs Seth all on the same night at WM? 

:vince6 :vince :vince5 :vince$ :bahgawd


----------



## Deathiscoming

Also the fact that if you shove women's wrestling and feminist BS down hardcore fans' throats for months and years, with the recent addition of even a women's talk show segment(lmfao), and women's tag belts, fans tune out :lol :lmao

What returning hardcore fan or casual viewer(a male ages 16-35) wants to see a bunch of women in a wrestling role pretending to be "the man" or "badass"(when said women aren't even a hottie like Mandy Rose!), a talk show segment headed by a woman interviewing charisma vacuum Finn Balor who is then interrupted by a midget, and a bunch of women being the so-called "biggest story going into WM" :lol ? No wonder the ratings suck even with a Reigns return and Batista return!

For people claiming Reigns isn't a draw or those disappointed with the numbers, things aren't just going to improve or change in one week. Give the hardcore fans a solid reason/reasons to care, by way of pushing Roman, Brock, Joe, Batista and others, in the right combination of feuds/matches like Mongstyle mentioned, and more viewers may return and that would be reflected in the ratings. Until then, enjoy Becky "the man" Lynch, Moment of 4ft 10 inches of Bliss, and women's tag titles :lmao


----------



## xio8ups

yawn


----------



## Adam Cool

Deathiscoming said:


> Also the fact that if you shove women's wrestling and feminist BS down hardcore fans' throats for months and years, with the recent addition of even a women's talk show segment(lmfao), and women's tag belts, fans tune out :lol :lmao
> 
> What returning hardcore fan or casual viewer(a male ages 16-35) wants to see a bunch of women in a wrestling role pretending to be "the man" or "badass"(when said women aren't even a hottie like Mandy Rose!), a talk show segment headed by a woman interviewing charisma vacuum Finn Balor who is then interrupted by a midget, and a bunch of women being the so-called "biggest story going into WM" :lol ? No wonder the ratings suck even with a Reigns return and Batista return!
> 
> For people claiming Reigns isn't a draw or those disappointed with the numbers, things aren't just going to improve or change in one week. Give the hardcore fans a solid reason/reasons to care, by way of pushing Roman, Brock, Joe, Batista and others, in the right combination of feuds/matches like Mongstyle mentioned, and more viewers may return and that would be reflected in the ratings. Until then, enjoy Becky "the man" Lynch, Moment of 4ft 10 inches of Bliss, and women's tag titles :lmao


 Mandyfags are so annoying


----------



## The_Great_One21

Deathiscoming said:


> Also the fact that if you shove women's wrestling and feminist BS down hardcore fans' throats for months and years, with the recent addition of even a women's talk show segment(lmfao), and women's tag belts, fans tune out :lol :lmao
> 
> What returning hardcore fan or casual viewer(a male ages 16-35) wants to see a bunch of women in a wrestling role pretending to be "the man" or "badass"(when said women aren't even a hottie like Mandy Rose!), a talk show segment headed by a woman interviewing charisma vacuum Finn Balor who is then interrupted by a midget, and a bunch of women being the so-called "biggest story going into WM" :lol ? No wonder the ratings suck even with a Reigns return and Batista return!
> 
> For people claiming Reigns isn't a draw or those disappointed with the numbers, things aren't just going to improve or change in one week. Give the hardcore fans a solid reason/reasons to care, by way of pushing Roman, Brock, Joe, Batista and others, in the right combination of feuds/matches like Mongstyle mentioned, and more viewers may return and that would be reflected in the ratings. Until then, enjoy Becky "the man" Lynch, Moment of 4ft 10 inches of Bliss, and women's tag titles :lmao


I tuned back in because of Becky


----------



## Deathiscoming

Adam Cool said:


> Mandyfags are so annoying


Not nearly as annoying as sissybecks :reigns3

Mandy Rose though.. :redface :redface :redface


----------



## ClintDagger

The_Great_One21 said:


> I tuned back in because of Becky


There are exceptions to every rule and no one has to apologize for what they like. Becky has her fans that is undeniable. But centering the product so much around Becky seems to have cost them 20% or so of their audience (most of which has came back for the RTWM since they backed off on featuring that feud so much.)


----------



## Deathiscoming

No disrespect to short people or midgets but, isn't it funny that not only have women's wrestling and segments are being shoved down people's throats in the form of women being "the man" or "badass" but *even the talk show segments suck donkeyballs now *? Like the Alexa bliss segment was what one would call a hot albeit boring as fuck midget interviewing what some extremists would say is a "Boring midget/charisma vacuum" Finn Balor, who was then interrupted by the funny to a fault midget Lio Rush? :lol :lmao :lmao :lol 

And people wonder why ratings are down. At this point I'd rather take a talk show segment called "Moment of Rush" over Moment of Bliss, 'cause at least Leo Rush is funny as hell..can you even imagine him being a heel dick in a talk show segment? :lmao..Just recalling Leo Rush and his voice makes me ROAR :lol


----------



## Not Lying

ClintDagger said:


> There are exceptions to every rule and no one has to apologize for what they like. Becky has her fans that is undeniable. But centering the product so much around *Becky seems to have cost them 20%* or so of their audience (most of which has came back for the RTWM since they backed off on featuring that feud so much.)


this is the most ridiculous statement I have ever seen. They've been losing fans at 10-15% a year for years now. Ratings clearly don't mean shit as much as they used, because other metrics support that. All shows, all numbers involving Becky do good, she's selling out signing in minutes while nothing comes from "big draws".
Brock lesnar and Roman have lost the fans more viewers than anyone else.

plus you all are clearly so bitter, had the 3rd hour done good "PRAISE BATISTA", since it did bad "OMG it's because EVERYONE expected Becky and Charlotte and Ronda to be involved" despite them giving them their segment already. Don't you dare deny that. Had the 3rd hour done good you would never say it's because fans expected the girls to show up.


----------



## ClintDagger

The Definition of Technician said:


> this is the most ridiculous statement I have ever seen. They've been losing fans at 10-15% a year for years now. Ratings clearly don't mean shit as much as they used, because other metrics support that. All shows, all numbers involving Becky do good, she's selling out signing in minutes while nothing comes from "big draws".
> Brock lesnar and Roman have lost the fans more viewers than anyone else.
> 
> plus you all are clearly so bitter, had the 3rd hour done good "PRAISE BATISTA", since it did bad "OMG it's because EVERYONE expected Becky and Charlotte and Ronda to be involved" despite them giving them their segment already. Don't you dare deny that. Had the 3rd hour done good you would never say it's because fans expected the girls to show up.


You are taking this way too personal. Unless Becky is your sister or something, don’t call people bitter for simply observing the facts and trends. My statement is not ridiculous, it is easily supportable by the rise of 600k in viewership since they pulled back on featuring Becky so much and went back to a more traditional RTWM formula. 600k is 20% of 3MM. The numbers don’t lie.


----------



## Not Lying

lol you are the one reaching. Becky’s program was literally for 2 weeks and you decided this was the reason WM “season” rating have been down. She was blamed for the post Rumble numbers despite Seth and Lesnar being the main event, and her appearing unnounced to challenge Ronda. 

They literally had her the next week in only the 15min opening segment, and people were blaming her for the 3rd hour rating. 

the 3rd week was when it was about her apogizing and her getting replaced. This was literally the only time they focused the show on her. All the other times it’s YOU who decided to focus on her and blame her for the ratings. Seth main eventing the Rumble and challenging Lesnar and Lesnar appearing didn’t even register on most people’s radar... EVERYONE was talking about Becky and Ronda. 

You know I can be super petty right now and act like all of you, all it takes for me is one bump in ratings and I’ll be “See I TOLD YOU SO”. 

Because that’s basically what people want to do, had the 3rd hour this week drawn well people would have praised Batista, since it drew bad it’s blamed on The women, despite them getting the angle done already for the night


----------



## ClintDagger

The Definition of Technician said:


> lol you are the one reaching. Becky’s program was literally for 2 weeks and you decided this was the reason WM “season” rating have been down. She was blamed for the post Rumble numbers despite Seth and Lesnar being the main event, and her appearing unnounced to challenge Ronda.
> 
> They literally had her the next week in only the 15min opening segment, and people were blaming her for the 3rd hour rating.
> 
> the 3rd week was when it was about her apogizing and her getting replaced. This was literally the only time they focused the show on her. All the other times it’s YOU who decided to focus on her and blame her for the ratings. Seth main eventing the Rumble and challenging Lesnar and Lesnar appearing didn’t even register on most people’s radar... EVERYONE was talking about Becky and Ronda.
> 
> You know I can be super petty right now and act like all of you, all it takes for me is one bump in ratings and I’ll be “See I TOLD YOU SO”.
> 
> Because that’s basically what people want to do, had the 3rd hour this week drawn well people would have praised Batista, since it drew bad it’s blamed on The women, despite them getting the angle done already for the night


For someone that thinks ratings don’t mean shit you sure are doing some serious mental gymnastics to try to absolve Becky from the ratings disaster of late January into February. The truth is, you know they do matter and you know from what changes have been made in recent weeks (including drastic changes in course) what was to blame.


----------



## Not Lying

Mate is it really about changes or about them fucking stepping up? This is WM season and they SHOULD have more than 1 program into WM.
Just looking at last year, you had “Dream match AJ/Nakamura”, You had the 2.5 years undefeated Asuka, “Brock/Reigns” THE 2 most pushed wrestlers of the past decade, AND Ronda Rousey’s debut. 

And last year was kind of shit. What is happening this year besides Seth/Brock who no one cares now because Brock has killed any interest in anything and Seth is injured, and then you have Ronda/Becky. THAT IS LITERALLY IT.

You mean to tell me adding more stories heading into Mania will i crease people’s interest? No fucking way.



ClintDagger said:


> The Definition of Technician said:
> 
> 
> 
> lol you are the one reaching. Becky’s program was literally for 2 weeks and you decided this was the reason WM “season” rating have been down. She was blamed for the post Rumble numbers despite Seth and Lesnar being the main event, and her appearing unnounced to challenge Ronda.
> 
> They literally had her the next week in only the 15min opening segment, and people were blaming her for the 3rd hour rating.
> 
> the 3rd week was when it was about her apogizing and her getting replaced. This was literally the only time they focused the show on her. All the other times it’s YOU who decided to focus on her and blame her for the ratings. Seth main eventing the Rumble and challenging Lesnar and Lesnar appearing didn’t even register on most people’s radar... EVERYONE was talking about Becky and Ronda.
> 
> You know I can be super petty right now and act like all of you, all it takes for me is one bump in ratings and I’ll be “See I TOLD YOU SO”.
> 
> Because that’s basically what people want to do, had the 3rd hour this week drawn well people would have praised Batista, since it drew bad it’s blamed on The women, despite them getting the angle done already for the night
> 
> 
> 
> For someone that thinks ratings don’t mean shit you sure are doing some serious mental gymnastics to try to absolve Becky from the ratings disaster of late January into February. The truth is, you know they do matter and you know from what changes have been made in recent weeks (including drastic changes in course) what was to blame.
Click to expand...


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.065M
H2- 2.798M
H3- 2.485M
3H- 2.783M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 8.71% / - 0.267M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 11.19% / - 0.313M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 18.92% / - 0.610M )
3/4/19 Vs 2/25/19 ( - 4.76% / - 0.139M )

Demo (3/4/19 Vs 2/25/19):
H1- 1.090D Vs 1.090D
H2- 0.980D Vs 1.040D
H3- 0.880D Vs 0.920D
3H- 0.983D Vs 1.017D

Note: RAW is 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 2nd, 4th & 7th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (3/4/19 Vs 3/5/18):
H1- 3.065M Vs 3.302M
H2- 2.798M Vs 3.267M
H3- 2.485M Vs 2.729M
3H- 2.783M Vs 3.099M ( - 10.20% / - 0.316M )

Demo (3/4/19 Vs 3/5/18):
H1- 1.090D Vs 1.130D
H2- 0.980D Vs 1.130D
H3- 0.880D Vs 1.020D
3H- 0.983D Vs 1.093D

Note: RAW this week last year was 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 2nd, 3rd & 5th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Y.2.J

H1: 3.065M
H2: 2.798M
H3: 2.485M
3H: 2.782M

EDIT: Jonny's got it.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

Y.2.J said:


> H1: 3.065M
> H2: 2.798M
> H3: 2.485M
> 3H: 2.782M
> 
> EDIT: Jonny's got it.


----------



## llj

Same rating as post EC show from what I see. Big drop from h1 to h3


----------



## Ace

That third hr :lmao


----------



## Dolorian

"But... but I said Ric Flair's real name and broke kayfabe like a muppet! Why are the ratings dropping?!"


----------



## Ace

Dolorian said:


> "But... but I said Ric Flair's real name and broke kayfabe like a muppet! Why are the ratings dropping?!"


 Roman bump from last week and Batista wasn't advertised for this week's show.

I knew I didn't have that much interest this week because Batista wasn't going to show.


----------



## ClintDagger

I think everyone knew the bottom would fall out of this one and it did. No Batista advertised, Roman was in the first segment, and the show was centered around Ronda/Becky/Charlotte as the end of show hook which we’ve seen doesn’t retain viewers.


----------



## llj

It's not a surprise about the 3rd hour. Ronda, and the women's segments in general, have always shown a trend of dropping more than normal. Someone posted a chart a while back that showed a trend of the women in the 3rd hour consistently yielding far greater drops than the other stuff.

I'm not saying this as a criticism of the women either. I like a bunch of them. But the women aren't strong enough draws to be put in the 3rd hour. They typically do best in the 2nd hour.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

The smarks might love Becky but we've seen it over and over again that the viewers at home don't care.


----------



## Empress

Donnie said:


> Roman bump from last week and Batista wasn't advertised for this week's show.
> 
> I knew I didn't have that much interest this week because Batista wasn't going to show.


Smart of them to advertise Batista for next week. It seems like the bleeding has stopped from weeks earlier. For the first two hours at least. Better static than a new low each week.


----------



## Dolorian

Donnie said:


> Roman bump from last week and Batista wasn't advertised for this week's show.
> 
> I knew I didn't have that much interest this week because Batista wasn't going to show.


Yeah, I know. I’m just messing around.

Next week they get the usual post PPV bump and Batista is actually showing so we’ll see how that goes.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

More of the same.


----------



## Chris90

Imagine having no Batista follow up after last week...


----------



## Erik.

It's a really garbage number, let's be honest.

Zero hype for Mania throughout the show because they're too busy killing feuds or building up to a shitty filller PPV.


----------



## Seafort

Empress said:


> Smart of them to advertise Batista for next week. It seems like the bleeding has stopped from weeks earlier. For the first two hours at least. Better static than a new low each week.


I agree. The bleeding has stopped for now, and although RAW is still declining it has not been at nearly 30% YoY the last two weeks. It's more in line with the general decline in TV viewership.

Although the company is by no means running on all cylinders, I do like the fact that hour three closed with a strong angle and a cliffhanger. WWE had gotten away from it and had made the third hour conclusion a throwaway segment.

However it will take many months of consistent improvement for viewership to turn around.


----------



## Deathiscoming

Becky/Women's wrestling nonsense are just a chunk of the problem now. They're anti-draws and they'll always be, but what do you replace them with? 

The writing is terrible. The entire show is horrible. It's a surprise the ratings are what they are and that's because of the Roman return and Batista return and this being the RTWM. You can only do the half-assed Shield reunions so many times, bring back Batista or have HHH cut an awful "You won't be wrestling the character but the real man" promo so many times. 

I can't wait for post-WM season and what the ratings will be then. I just expect decline and downfall.


----------



## birthday_massacre

See Raw that is how you do time management.


----------



## xio8ups

hows that women evolution working for ya steph


----------



## Swindle

Am I the only one who views the heels on RAW as a lowkey problem with the show? They are League of Nations bad.


----------



## TheLooseCanon

Swindle said:


> Am I the only one who views the heels on RAW as a lowkey problem with the show? They are League of Nations bad.


I view every male as a problem, heels and faces.

All of them are on hold, so they can force the first ever women's Mania main event they planned over a year ago. If it wasn't for Becky's fan support after they turned her heel, this angle would feel more forced than it is now.

Just imagine if they turned Becky heel just to feed to a babyface Charlotte and Becky didn't get the fan support she did when she turned. Then right now we will be witnessing a Charlotte/Ronda program where everyone is held down to push this as the natural main event that 'everyone has been wanting', or so WWE says.

WWE/F throughout it's history has been awful, with few bright spots sprinkled throughout, and most of those are things that fell into their lap. I don't know why everyone is surprised year in and year out how terrible this company is at handling it's own creative decisions. This has been going on forever. If it wasn't for Austin and a merger that killed WCW which gave WWE total control of mainstream wrestling and a stacked roster, who would give a shit about WWE today?


----------



## Bxstr

Yikes at that third hour.
No Batista and Becky tanking ratings as usual.


----------



## Mear

Swindle said:


> Am I the only one who views the heels on RAW as a lowkey problem with the show? They are League of Nations bad.


Agree, a hero is only as good as his villain. One of the best recent exemples I can think of is Dean Ambrose vs Seth Rollins. Ambrose would not have been as over as a face if he didn't get to fight Rollins and Rollins wouldn't be as good of a heel if he didn't get to face Ambrose.

The problem is that now, fans want to like the heels, if they don't, it's " Go away heat " and so, the WWE gets more careful with how they book their heels which sucks. A good heel should piss you off, he should make you hate him but you stay because you want the hero to win.

It's very unpopular but I liked Jinder Mahal and his match for the title against AJ Styles was a great match and felt good


----------



## Not Lying

What's the general H3 retention from H1/H2?


----------



## ClintDagger

The Definition of Technician said:


> What's the general H3 retention from H1/H2?


Not sure what the general is. I wish I had all of this in a DB where I could do quick analysis on it.

Last 3 weeks it’s been something like this for H1-H3 retention:

2/18: 80% (Ronda match in ME)
2/25: 85% (Batista/Flair/HHH angle in ME)
3/4: 80% (Becky/Charlotte/Ronda ME)


----------



## Mifune Jackson

This is the time of year when they usually do their best ratings (although next week should be up due to FastLane fallout + Batista), so this week was pretty bad.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.838M
H2- 2.866M
H3- 2.752M
3H- 2.819M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 0.97% / + 0.028M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 3.98% / - 0.114M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 3.03% / - 0.086M )
3/11/19 Vs 3/4/19 ( + 1.29% / + 0.036M )

Demo (3/11/19 Vs 3/4/19):
H1- 0.990D Vs 1.090D
H2- 0.970D Vs 0.980D
H3- 0.960D Vs 0.880D
3H- 0.973D Vs 0.983D

Note: RAW is 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 5th, 4th & 6th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (3/11/19 Vs 3/12/18):
H1- 2.838M Vs 3.351M
H2- 2.866M Vs 3.429M
H3- 2.752M Vs 3.275M
3H- 2.819M Vs 3.352M ( - 15.90% / - 0.533M )

Demo (3/11/19 Vs 3/12/18):
H1- 0.990D Vs 1.120D
H2- 0.970D Vs 1.190D
H3- 0.960D Vs 1.160D
3H- 0.973D Vs 1.157D

Note: RAW this week last year was 3rd, 1st & 2nd by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mordecay

People were there to see Batista confirmed


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Not one hour above 3 million the night after a PPV, even with the 'stars' there.


----------



## JDP2016

The night after a PPV?
Shield reunion #6356478347834589389235235789?
Batista and HHH face to face..... kinda?

That's the number we get? 

:lol:


----------



## rbl85

I think they were smart to not start RAW with Batista.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Terrible rating and I can't say I'm surprised. Last night was the first RAW I've watched from start to finish in a long time and it was painfully boring. Just one pointless filler match after another. Barely any promos because they clearly don't trust most of the roster to talk. Awful awful television. Batista/HHH and Ronda slapping the ref were the only halfway decent parts of a 3 hour show.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Not good that it didn't go over 3 million. But at least the third hour had a decent number. 

It will be interesting to see how SD does because they have two compelling storylines involving Vince and Shane.


----------



## The XL 2

Third hour was strong by their standards, surprised it held up


----------



## Ace

Wow, Batista actually kept people watching that crap for 3 hrs.

70k drop from hour 1 to 3 is unheard of.

Guess there's the proof the anti-star crowd needed of Batista being a star.


----------



## ClintDagger

A guy like Batista matters confirmed.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

The XL 2 said:


> Third hour was strong by their standards, surprised it held up


That's what happens when people tune in to see an actual star. Had Batista opened the show the drops for the 2nd and 3rd hours would have been enormous.


----------



## Erik.

Horrendous number.

But the fact it showed consistency across 3 hours with minimal drop shows there was interest somewhere...


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

JDP2016 said:


> The night after a PPV?
> Shield reunion #6356478347834589389235235789?
> Batista and HHH face to face..... kinda?
> 
> That's the number we get?
> 
> :lol:


The 'stars' are sure drawing. Welcome to the era where stars don't have to be draws to be labeled stars. And we wonder why wrestling fans get shit on by non-fans.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> The 'stars' are sure drawing. Welcome to the era where stars don't have to be draws to be labeled stars. And we wonder why wrestling fans get shit on by non-fans.


Batista made a difference. He’s a star. Look at the H1 to H3 retention rates we’ve been seeing compared to last night. You’re talking low 80s down into the 70s vs high 90s last night. If they had more Batistas and could push the Indy and women’s type wrestlers way down the card they’d really have something. Batista is the exception and not the rule, hence why he can only do so much on his own and why the product in general is so cold.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> Batista made a difference. He’s a star. Look at the H1 to H3 retention rates we’ve been seeing compared to last night. You’re talking low 80s down into the 70s vs high 90s last night. If they had more Batistas and could push the Indy and women’s type wrestlers way down the card they’d really have something. Batista is the exception and not the rule, hence why he can only do so much on his own and why the product in general is so cold.


Batista was advertised a week in advance and their ceiling was 2.8 million. Stars draw big numbers, especially this time of year. I'm not laying it at his feet, because I don't believe anyone would draw big these days, so it's not just him.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> Batista was advertised a week in advance and their ceiling was 2.8 million. Stars draw big numbers, especially this time of year. I'm not laying it at his feet, because I don't believe anyone would draw big these days, so it's not just him.


He probably retained 500k viewers all on his own. That’s significant.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> He probably retained 500k viewers all on his own. That’s significant.


That's somewhat of an assumption, tbh. Either way, big stars draw big numbers. If alot of people were going to tune into to see him, we would've seen bigger numbers from the start of the show and that didn't happen, either.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*The ratings are damn sure better than what we got before Batista and Roman returned. *


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Helping to retain the audience is a positive, but this and the Raw after WrestleMania are probably going to be the high points in the season. 

And these points aren't very high.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> That's somewhat of an assumption, tbh. Either way, big stars draw big numbers. If alot of people were going to tune into to see him, we would've seen bigger numbers from the start of the show and that didn't happen, either.


Of course it’s an assumption but it’s strongly supported by recent trends. Batista was a much bigger difference maker than anyone on the roster would have been. Remember, many of these post RR shows were averaging in the 2.4 range. Just because they fell below 3MM doesn’t mean Batista wasn’t a big difference maker. That just means he didn’t attact ALL of the casuals out there. Probably only attracted half. I’d wager a lot of that is fans not caring about Batista in the context of a HHH feud.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> Of course it’s an assumption but it’s strongly supported by recent trends. Batista was a much bigger difference maker than anyone on the roster would have been. Remember, many of these post RR shows were averaging in the 2.4 range. Just because they fell below 3MM doesn’t mean Batista wasn’t a big difference maker. That just means he didn’t attact ALL of the casuals out there. Probably only attracted half. I’d wager a lot of that is fans not caring about Batista in the context of a HHH feud.


It was also the night after a PPV, and the PPV before WM, so it's fair to question if this was indeed an impressive number or not. But whatever, doesn't really matter until we see a big increase. High two's or mid 2's or whatever, until we see a big increase for a significant amount of time (months on end), it is what it is.


----------



## DammitChrist

To think that they used to get about 5 million viewers in Wrestlemania season 6 years ago :sodone


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Mifune Jackson said:


> Helping to retain the audience is a positive, but this and the Raw after WrestleMania are probably going to be the high points in the season.
> 
> And these points aren't very high.


Starz, bro, starz. Nevermind the fact that the numbers were dying when certain others were the FOTC, but yeah. Starz.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

DammitC said:


> To think that they used to get about 5 million viewers in Wrestlemania season 6 years ago :sodone


That was right before Roman started to chase them all away.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> It was also the night after a PPV, and the PPV before WM, so it's fair to question if this was indeed an impressive number or not. But whatever, doesn't really matter until we see a big increase. High two's or mid 2's or whatever, until we see a big increase for a significant amount of time (months on end), it is what it is.


We won’t see a significant increase over time. Even the Batista effect will wear off because WWE is very good at marginalizing stars. And Batista will be gone after WM and Raw will start the march towards sub 2MM. But for a short stretch anyways Batista is proving that he’s apart from the rest.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> We won’t see a significant increase over time. Even the Batista effect will wear off because WWE is very good at marginalizing stars. And Batista will be gone after WM and Raw will start the march towards sub 2MM. But for a short stretch anyways Batista is proving that he’s apart from the rest.


In order to do that, you have to do better than this the night after a PPV during WM season.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Lest this be forgotten. The year to year is simply atrocious. - 15.90% / - 0.533M :heston

This ain't drawing. Down over half a million viewers. Hard to spin this as anything but a colossal failure.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> In order to do that, you have to do better than this the night after a PPV during WM season.


No you don’t. You only have to show a significant impact on the numbers versus the norm. Admittedly that could mean the starting point, but that’s not the only place an impact can be noted. Retaining 96%+ of the audience when it’s usually around 80% and your segment was saved for the final hour shows that Batista is a difference maker. For some reason you don’t want that to be true, but you are being disingenuous by ignoring the trend and how last night was an outlier.

It’s fine to say that Batista wasn’t as big of a difference maker as he could have been. We know that WWE can still get to 3.3MM or so at the top end so clearly Batista’s appearance wasn’t a homerun. But to deny that Batista has something that the rest of the roster lacks is pretty mind boggling when the numbers are right there to see. But I will cease trying to change your mind on this. It is what it is.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> No you don’t. You only have to show a significant impact on the numbers versus the norm. Admittedly that could mean the starting point, but that’s not the only place an impact can be noted. Retaining 96%+ of the audience when it’s usually around 80% and your segment was saved for the final hour shows that Batista is a difference maker. For some reason you don’t want that to be true, but you are being disingenuous by ignoring the trend and how last night was an outlier.
> 
> It’s fine to say that Batista wasn’t as big of a difference maker as he could have been. We know that WWE can still get to 3.3MM or so at the top end so clearly Batista’s appearance wasn’t a homerun. But to deny that Batista has something that the rest of the roster lacks is pretty mind boggling when the numbers are right there to see. But I will cease trying to change your mind on this. It is what it is.


It's hard to attribute (a shit number, anyway) to one person when it was the night after a PPV, and the PPV is the PPV right before WM, though. There was definitely more than one factor, for what is a pretty underwhelming number, anyway. But if you want to attribute a shit number all to one of those factors instead of 2 or 3 of them, that's okay.


----------



## Empress

Batista is a superstar. I still don't know why he's even bothering with the WWE at this stage in his career. 

I missed much of RAW last night. So, I don't know if it was a good or bad show. But at least hour 3 didn't collapse completely.


----------



## ClintDagger

Empress said:


> Batista is a superstar. I still don't know why he's even bothering with the WWE at this stage in his career.
> 
> I missed much of RAW last night. So, I don't know if it was a good or bad show. But at least hour 3 didn't collapse completely.


It’s a shame that they can’t capitalize on his stardom. Putting him against HHH is one of the worst (realistically speaking) things you can do IMO. I know Dave supposedly wanted this feud, but it’s still a weak story.


----------



## Erik.

DammitC said:


> To think that they used to get about 5 million viewers in Wrestlemania season 6 years ago :sodone


Here's the rating per year from Rumble to Mania:

2013: 3.33
2014: 3.14
2015: 2.93
2016: 2.60
2017: 2.23
2018: 2.22
2019: 1.90*

Which is fucking incredible.


----------



## SPCDRI

Their rating points number used to be higher than their viewership in millions, very recently. All 3 hours under 3 million viewers after a PPV this close to WM is pretty shitty.


----------



## Chrome

For more context, these were the numbers they got 6 years ago around this time:



JY57 said:


> http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...rican-pickers-lizard-lick-towing-more/173016/
> 
> Hour 1 - 4.98 million
> Hour 2 - 4.89 million
> Hour 3 - 4.57 million
> 
> Average - 4.813 million
> 
> 
> it also was the most watched show on Cable yesterday


Basically cut their viewership in half.


----------



## DoctorWhosawhatsit

Erik. said:


> Here's the rating per year from Rumble to Mania:
> 
> 2013: 3.33
> 2014: 3.14
> 2015: 2.93
> 2016: 2.60
> 2017: 2.23
> 2018: 2.22
> 2019: 1.90*
> 
> Which is fucking incredible.


It's almost like WWE is pushing away their audience.


----------



## Bxstr

Erik. said:


> Here's the rating per year from Rumble to Mania:
> 
> 2013: 3.33
> 2014: 3.14
> 2015: 2.93
> 2016: 2.60
> 2017: 2.23
> 2018: 2.22
> 2019: 1.90*
> 
> Which is fucking incredible.


2015 is the year week ratings started going absolutely downhill thanks to Rollins shitty boring ass title reign and having zero starpower on the show which is affecting till today.


----------



## taker_2004

Erik. said:


> Here's the rating per year from Rumble to Mania:
> 
> 2013: 3.33
> 2014: 3.14
> 2015: 2.93
> 2016: 2.60
> 2017: 2.23
> 2018: 2.22
> 2019: 1.90*
> 
> Which is fucking incredible.





Source said:


> Monday night’s cable ratings were predictably dominated by the WWE and USA.
> 
> “Monday Night Raw” secured all three of the chart’s top slots, with each hour scoring an even 1.0 rating in adults 18-49. Although the prevalence of the wrestling series is nothing unusual, there is normally a drop-off in viewership from hour to hour. That was not the case this week, even though the previous Monday’s “Raw” did peak a bit higher with 1.1 at 8 p.m.


https://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/daily-ratings/monday-cable-ratings-march-11-2019/

http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articl...cable-originals-network-finals-3-11-2019.html

More than double the next-highest cable program. Remember, RAW never came close to being the highest-rated show on broadcast television, just cable television, which is a different metric. The reason why WWE's television rights are going up so much and FOX wanted them so badly is that WWE performs exceptionally well relative to other cable programs (i.e. not the Big 3 or FOTA channels). 
All of the actual top-rated broadcasts are from the major Networks: ABC, NBC, CBS. 

For a comparison, Survivor, the top-rated program on television in 2001 had a rating of 17.4 (or ~3x as high as RAW's 6.1 average); as of the 2017-2018 season, Survivor had a rating of 5.9 (or ~3x as high as Raw's 2.22). I bring up this example because reality television had about as much cultural cache as wrestling did at the turn of the century, and similarly they both currently don't have the same relevance, but still do fairly well in the grand scheme of things. Now, relative to other comparison points like the currently rated top show (Big Bang Theory @ 11.1 or 5x as high as RAW's 2.22), RAW has lost ground, but again, not a whole lot considering how big the peak of Attitude Era is treated in kayfabe. 

For comparison, hockey playoff games have gotten an average rating of about 2.7 for the last few seasons (in America, not Canada lol), and non-playoff games considerably less. Some playoffs it gets as low as 1.2.


----------



## Deathiscoming

Can't wait to see what happens post-WM and post-superstar shakeup, once this horrendous streak of Raw dominated by a bunch of charisma vaccums like Balor, Drew, Lashley, Rollins ends and the Universal Title is regularly featured and a host of other changes :lol.

Will the Audiences stick around for fresh faces, NxT callups, and a bunch of guys who can't talk or be characters ? Will they still be shoving women's wrestling garbage down people's throats? And how will Rollins do as FOTC/Universal champion in terms of retaining and drawing viewers? Time will tell.


----------



## Adam Cool

Why the fuck is the Big Bang Theory so high?


----------



## .christopher.

Erik. said:


> Here's the rating per year from Rumble to Mania:
> 
> 2013: 3.33
> 2014: 3.14
> 2015: 2.93
> 2016: 2.60
> 2017: 2.23
> 2018: 2.22
> 2019: 1.90*
> 
> Which is fucking incredible.


2015, eh. The year they started shoving that trash stable the shield as singles competitors down everyone's throat. No surprise whatsoever.

That was the year I stopped watching until I heard about the Joe/Lesnar feud, and Bryan coming back after coming back to the product myself in 2013 for Bryan's push after many, many years of avoiding this. Now, even with Bryan as champ, I've stopped watching yet again.

This show is painful regardless of my favourite being on top.


----------



## DoctorWhosawhatsit

Vejito said:


> Not trying to start an argument my good lad, but didn't you blame Roman for decrease in ratings a few months ago? You not the only one but just saying.


I honestly don't think that was me, at least not directly :lol

Wanted to give you an answer but didn't want to keep derailing the Becky thread :lol

I've definitely said things like "If WWE continues to push Roman this way ratings will continue dropping" and "WWE's wonders why ratings are dropping" after cut and paste Roman segments but that's meant as a condemnation of WWE's booking oppose to Roman himself.

Basically I've used Roman as an example of WWE's horrible booking driving fans away, which imo he is, oppose to directly saying "Roman's tanking the ratings"

I may sound like gala apples vs fuji apples to some but to me they're very different.

There's also a distinct possibility I was being sardonic :lol

Don't get me wrong I still think Roman sucks, but he's a symptom, not the disease.

Hope that makes sense


----------



## xio8ups

Alll the wrestlers look the same. And do the same moves. What is there to watch.


----------



## patpat

there is quite the hate in this thread tho it's funny


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.810M
H2- 2.717M
H3- 2.559M
3H- 2.695M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 3.31% / - 0.093M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 5.82% / - 0.158M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 8.93% / - 0.251M )
3/18/19 Vs 3/11/19 ( - 4.40% / - 0.124M )

Demo (3/18/19 Vs 3/11/19):
H1- 0.920D Vs 0.990D
H2- 0.910D Vs 0.970D
H3- 0.830D Vs 0.960D
3H- 0.887D Vs 0.973D

Note: RAW is 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (3/18/19 Vs 3/19/18):
H1- 2.810M Vs 3.434M
H2- 2.717M Vs 3.472M
H3- 2.559M Vs 3.076M
3H- 2.695M Vs 3.327M ( - 19.00% / - 0.632M )

Demo (3/18/19 Vs 3/19/18):
H1- 0.920D Vs 1.140D
H2- 0.910D Vs 1.190D
H3- 0.830D Vs 1.140D
3H- 0.887D Vs 1.157D

Note: RAW this week last year was 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## RainmakerV2

Ouchies.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Seth and Drew can't draw.


----------



## A-C-P

:bosque


----------



## Mordecay

It should have done less, that RAW was so boring


----------



## Isuzu

People want Moar Brock and Moar Ronda!


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Batista + Brock + Roman =ratings? :heston

Down 632,000 viewers from a year ago. :vince$ :bryanlol


----------



## Erik.

So, they lost 124,000 viewers this week?

:lol :lol

Road to Wrestlemania.


----------



## A-C-P

I guess having one of your WM Main Event participants "not follow scripts" and call you're shit "fake" really is creating a "buzz" :ha


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

A-C-P said:


> I guess having one of your WM Main Event participants "not follow scripts" and call you're shit "fake" really is creating a "buzz" :ha


Who would have thunk beating up Dana Brooke 2 weeks in a row doesn't equal ratings?

This might be a crazy idea but maybe they should have her actually interact with Becky and Charlotte next week.


----------



## Isuzu

A-C-P said:


> I guess having one of your WM Main Event participants "not follow scripts" and call you're shit "fake" really is creating a "buzz" :ha


how many viewers does AEW have?


----------



## rbl85

Isuzu said:


> how many viewers does AEW have?


Why are you talking about AEW ?


----------



## ClintDagger

Proves what I was saying last week. The only thing right now that will retain those viewers is a heavily advertised live appearance by Batista.


----------



## Chrome

ClintDagger said:


> Proves what I was saying last week. *The only thing right now that will retain those viewers is a heavily advertised live appearance by Batista.*


----------



## Piper's Pit

People on here need to stop blaming or crediting Batista/Brock/Roman/Ronda/Becky/Seth etc. etc. for weekly falls or rises in ratings from the previous week, individual talent is not to blame.

And regarding this weeks RAW rating - if they're doing 2.7's during RTWM they'll be doing 2.2's (if they're lucky) post WM.


----------



## ClintDagger

Piper's Pit said:


> People on here need to stop blaming or crediting Batista/Brock/Roman/Ronda/Becky/Seth etc. etc. for weekly falls or rises in ratings from the previous week, individual talent is not to blame.
> 
> And regarding this weeks RAW rating - if they're doing 2.7's during RTWM they'll be doing 2.2's (if they're lucky) post WM.


Individual talent is not to blame for the broader trend but you can look at the data and draw conclusions about the short-term. Especially when there are outliers like the early shows on the RTWM being so poor vs the expected trend and then last week’s out of the ordinary retention number.


----------



## Erramayhem89

Who in the hell is watching all 3 hours? I can hardly even make it to the 2nd hour because it's always a boring opening segment and a boring balor/elias appearance right after


----------



## Mordecay

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Who would have thunk beating up Dana Brooke 2 weeks in a row doesn't equal ratings?
> 
> This might be a crazy idea but maybe they should have her actually interact with Becky and Charlotte next week.


They are doing better ratings than when Charlotte and Becky were there :shrug. Having said that, better to have them on RAW than SD talking about the RAW womens title and taking time from the SD performers


----------



## Randy Lahey

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1- 2.810M
> 
> 
> 
> Viewership (3/18/19 Vs 3/19/18):
> H1- 2.810M Vs 3.434M
> H2- 2.717M Vs 3.472M
> H3- 2.559M Vs 3.076M
> 3H- 2.695M Vs 3.327M ( - 19.00% / - 0.632M )
> 
> Demo (3/18/19 Vs 3/19/18):
> H1- 0.920D Vs 1.140D
> H2- 0.910D Vs 1.190D
> H3- 0.830D Vs 1.140D
> 3H- 0.887D Vs 1.157D
> 
> Note: RAW this week last year was 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


*

They've permanently lost at least 15% of the audience that they had last year. Those numbers are horrible.

I mean, this is RTWM, and they are doing numbers that would be bad during NFL season.*


----------



## IronMan8

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Seth and Drew can't draw.


I think the drop from HR1-3 is less than most weeks, so they might’ve done well

20% drop from last year is scary


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

IronMan8 said:


> I think the drop from HR1-3 is less than most weeks, so they might’ve done well
> 
> 20% drop from last year is scary


There was no hour 3 drop last week because people stayed tuned in for Batista.


----------



## IronMan8

Erramayhem89 said:


> Who in the hell is watching all 3 hours? I can hardly even make it to the 2nd hour because it's always a boring opening segment and a boring balor/elias appearance right after


DVR and fast-forward 90% of the matches


----------



## SPCDRI

People wanna see the real stars and MMA performers like Brock Lesnar and Batista and Ronda Rousey.

I guess that's why the show is down 100,000+ from last week and down 600,000 or 700,000 viewers an hour from where they were last year. 

Not a single hour over 3 million again, either.

What's their viewership number going to be post-WM? Or in that little doldrums period in the fall and then the NFL comes back?

Is an hour going to go sub-2 million this October?

Good Lord!


----------



## Erik.

SPCDRI said:


> People wanna see the real stars and MMA performers like Brock Lesnar and Batista and Ronda Rousey.
> 
> I guess that's why the show is down 100,000+ from last week and down 600,000 or 700,000 viewers an hour from where they were last year.
> 
> Not a single hour over 3 million again, either.
> 
> What's their viewership number going to be post-WM? Or in that little doldrums period in the fall and then the NFL comes back?
> 
> Is an hour going to go sub-2 million this October?
> 
> Good Lord!


Wrong again.

WWE is THE star in the wrestling world. THEY are the draw.

At the moment, THEY are proving themselves to be shit as one.

The problem with WWE is that they've gotten too big for their own boots.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

SPCDRI said:


> People wanna see the real stars and MMA performers like Brock Lesnar and Batista and Ronda Rousey.
> 
> I guess that's why the show is down 100,000+ from last week and down 600,000 or 700,000 viewers an hour from where they were last year.
> 
> Not a single hour over 3 million again, either.
> 
> What's their viewership number going to be post-WM? Or in that little doldrums period in the fall and then the NFL comes back?
> 
> *Is an hour going to go sub-2 million this October?*
> 
> Good Lord!


They have already shown some predilection towards that in 5 episodes across 5 months.

*10/1/18*

H1- 2.500M
H2- 2.325M
*H3- 2.081M*
3H- 2.302M










*12/10/18*

H1- 2.347M
H2- 2.186M
*H3- 2.048M*
3H- 2.194M










*12/24/18*

*H1- 1.752M
H2- 1.789M
H3- 1.784M
3H- 1.775M*










*12/31/18*

*H1- 2.035M
H2- 2.026M
H3- 1.843M
3H- 1.968M*










*1/7/19*

H1- 2.609M
H2- 2.294M
*H3- 2.070M*
3H- 2.324M


----------



## Not Lying

:lol :lol :lol not even the MMA GEEKS draw :lmao :lmao


----------



## llj

I've stopped watching both programs now, so I'm now only checking to see ratings for the RTW. I have a feeling most people out there have the same opinion I am getting--this year's Wrestlemania card looks pretty darned shitty and it's not worth tuning in to see the builds for. I'm mostly only following my favorite wrestlers' social media now, and if they aren't posting anything after Monday or Tuesday, I assume they did nothing relevant that week (which is increasingly common every week)


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

The Definition of Technician said:


> :lol :lol :lol not even the MMA GEEKS draw :lmao :lmao


Sure Brock is a geek. The man getting paid more than the rest of the roster just to show up once a month is a geek. Whatever helps you feel better.


----------



## Not Lying

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Sure Brock is a geek. The man getting paid more than the rest of the roster just to show up once a month is a geek. Whatever helps you feel better.


Oh I'm sorry, if the sight of Brock lesnar's muscles make Vince's dick hard and that's the only reason he's willing to pay him a shitload of money for shit ratings, then I guess he's not a geek despite him being the face of the decline of ratings.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

The Definition of Technician said:


> Oh I'm sorry, if the sight of Brock lesnar's muscles make Vince's dick hard and that's the only reason he's willing to pay him a shitload of money for shit ratings, then I guess he's not a geek despite him being the face of the decline of ratings.


How is he responsible for the ratings being shit when he's barely there?

People don't tune in to see a toy prop. They tune in to see entertaining wrestlers. Then they tune out when they see charisma vacuums like Drew Mcintyre and Seth Rollins in the main event.


----------



## DammitChrist

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> How is he responsible for the ratings being shit when he's barely there?
> 
> People don't tune in to see a toy prop. They tune in to see entertaining wrestlers. Then they tune out when they see *charisma vacuums* like Drew Mcintyre and *Seth Rollins* in the main event.


Seth Rollins being a "charisma vacuum" when he literally comes out every week to loud positive crowd reactions :lmao

Hell, he even got the loudest pop for a babyface on Raw this week unkout


----------



## Mear

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> How is he responsible for the ratings being shit when he's barely there?
> 
> People don't tune in to see a toy prop. They tune in to see entertaining wrestlers. Then they tune out when they see charisma vacuums like Drew Mcintyre and Seth Rollins in the main event.


Wrestling shows are built around World Titles. It doesn't matter if it's a prop or not, it's the one thing telling your audience " This person is the top dog ". Without it, it is so much more obvious that there is no big stars on the show.

Eddiie Guerrero could barely handle the pressure of being a World Champion because he actually knew what he meant, representing the company and be responsale for its success or failures. What would I be bothered watching a company the face of the company doesn't even respect ?


----------



## Not Lying

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> How is he responsible for the ratings being shit when he's barely there?
> 
> People don't tune in to see a toy prop. They tune in to see entertaining wrestlers. Then they tune out when they see charisma vacuums like Drew Mcintyre and Seth Rollins in the main event.


When you are pushed, presented and protected like Brock has been the past few years. I should expect a 5-15% ratings increase everytime fucking time the motherfucker is on TV. He should be a must watch. But he's not, many people don't give a fuck about him except geeks who care about legitimacy in WWE :lmao 
The fact this overpushed motherfucker can't move the needle, is the most pushed star of all times, ratings aren't affected by him. It's sad, so sad, and what's even sadder is blind people defending this crap


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

Brock has proven to be a draw in the past. It's not him, the WWE product as a whole is just dead. Nobody gives a shit. The blame falls to Vince on this one.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

The layout of the show is the biggest problem with RAW. 

Opening segment --> Entrance --> Commercial --> Start Match --> Commercial --> Match concludes (sometimes another commercial) --> Backstage interview --> Commercial --> Match 2 --> Commercial...

- Too many matches go through a commercial break. Only big matches should have this. 

- They need to kick off the show differently: Perhaps a backstage segment or showing someone entering the arena/locker room. 

- Matches need to have stakes: Bischoff has made this point a lot. Kofi's match this week had just that. Drew and Seth had no stakes. Just add a little extra to the match. If Drew wins he will become the new #1 Contender for the Universal Championship after WM. Then that gives Reigns something to confront Drew on. Their match means more. Drew beats a former Universal Champion at WM. Seth/Drew feud for the title after WM.


----------



## Not Lying

SayWhatAgain! said:


> Brock has proven to be a draw in the past. It's not him, the WWE product as a whole is just dead. Nobody gives a shit. The blame falls to Vince on this one.


Drawing in UFC is not the same as drawing in WWE.


----------



## tducey

Yeah, they need to have more stips for matches. Look at Angle's last match at WM 35. That should have been given to a battle royal winner. Have it mean something, instead of it being Baron Corbin who gets a coveted match with Angle.


----------



## ClintDagger

The Definition of Technician said:


> When you are pushed, presented and protected like Brock has been the past few years. I should expect a 5-15% ratings increase everytime fucking time the motherfucker is on TV. He should be a must watch. But he's not, many people don't give a fuck about him except geeks who care about legitimacy in WWE :lmao
> The fact this overpushed motherfucker can't move the needle, is the most pushed star of all times, ratings aren't affected by him. It's sad, so sad, and what's even sadder is blind people defending this crap


Once upon a time it would have been fair to judge Brock to that standard. But not anymore. WWE deliberately tore down Brock in an effort to get bad heat on him so that Roman would look like the lesser of two evils. It didn’t work, and now that they’ve killed off Brock’s aura I’m a bit puzzled as to why they are still paying him and still giving him a top spot in the company. But you can’t blame Brock for not holding up his end anymore.


----------



## Not Lying

ClintDagger said:


> Once upon a time it would have been fair to judge Brock to that standard. But not anymore. WWE deliberately tore down Brock in an effort to get bad heat on him so that Roman would look like the lesser of two evils. It didn’t work, and now that they’ve killed off Brock’s aura I’m a bit puzzled as to why they are still paying him and still giving him a top spot in the company. *But you can’t blame Brock for not holding up his end anymore.*


*They.tore.down.Brock?* :lol, I can and I will.


----------



## Littbarski

Randy Lahey said:


> JonnyAceLaryngitis said:
> 
> 
> 
> *H1- 2.810M
> 
> 
> 
> Viewership (3/18/19 Vs 3/19/18):
> H1- 2.810M Vs 3.434M
> H2- 2.717M Vs 3.472M
> H3- 2.559M Vs 3.076M
> 3H- 2.695M Vs 3.327M ( - 19.00% / - 0.632M )
> 
> Demo (3/18/19 Vs 3/19/18):
> H1- 0.920D Vs 1.140D
> H2- 0.910D Vs 1.190D
> H3- 0.830D Vs 1.140D
> 3H- 0.887D Vs 1.157D
> 
> Note: RAW this week last year was 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> They've permanently lost at least 15% of the audience that they had last year. Those numbers are horrible.
> 
> I mean, this is RTWM, and they are doing numbers that would be bad during NFL season.*
Click to expand...

*

You fail to point out last year was up over 9% from 2017 http://www.showbuzzdaily.com/articl...cable-originals-network-finals-3-20-2017.html

As I said on Smackdown page calling the show where all three hours ranked #1-3 on cable horrible ratings is quite silly and highlights the bubble the IWC find themselves. Raw easily beat live NBA games on ESPN including Warriors game.*


----------



## Erik.

Those who say ratings don't matter don't seem to go on and give an excuse as to why house show and live show attendances are at an all time low either...

RECORD REVENUE THOUGH.

Then again, the same guys screaming record revenue seem to think gross revenue means the WWE is more profitable than ever. It isn't.


----------



## Littbarski

Erik. said:


> Those who say ratings don't matter don't seem to go on and give an excuse as to why house show and live show attendances are at an all time low either...
> 
> RECORD REVENUE THOUGH.
> 
> Then again, the same guys screaming record revenue seem to think gross revenue means the WWE is more profitable than ever. It isn't.


House-show and live attendance isn't even close to all time low. Come Wrestlemania WWE will have held six stadium shows within last 12 months. Do you think WWE would have been capable of selling tickets to one stadium show in 1993-96? 

WWE had record profit in 2018. $99.6 million net profit. Their previous all time highest profit was $69m in 1999-00.


----------



## Erik.

Littbarski said:


> House-show and live attendance isn't even close to all time low. Come Wrestlemania WWE will have held six stadium shows within last 12 months. Do you think WWE would have been capable of selling tickets to one stadium show in 1993-96?
> 
> WWE had record profit in 2018. $99.6 million net profit. Their previous all time highest profit was $69m in 1999-00.


I don't think the WWE would have had a problem selling a ticket to a stadium show between 93 and 96 if possible.

They filled a 80,000+ stadium in 92 without Hogan for a start.


----------



## ClintDagger

The Definition of Technician said:


> *They.tore.down.Brock?* :lol, I can and I will.


If you didn’t catch on to what they did to Brock in order to try to get Roman over then I don’t know what to say. You don’t have to be all the savvy to pick up on that.


----------



## patpat

Erik. said:


> Those who say ratings don't matter don't seem to go on and give an excuse as to why house show and live show attendances are at an all time low either...
> 
> RECORD REVENUE THOUGH.
> 
> Then again, the same guys screaming record revenue seem to think gross revenue means the WWE is more profitable than ever. It isn't.


rating and attendance shows the interest people have for the fucking product! I don't care about "reeeyyycord revenue" as the year goes , people care less and less about the product and them selling their ass to Audi arabia to get hundred of millions is irrelevant here. 
but hey "record revenueee" lol


----------



## ClintDagger

patpat said:


> rating and attendance shows the interest people have for the fucking product! I don't care about "reeeyyycord revenue" as the year goes , people care less and less about the product and them selling their ass to Audi arabia to get hundred of millions is irrelevant here.
> but hey "record revenueee" lol


Credit where credit is due. As bad as WWE is at managing their talent & overall product, they are that good at branding and maximizing revenue streams. It shows they do have some smart people running certain parts of the organization. However, those people can only work their magic for so long when the product’s popularity is in a free fall.


----------



## Stadhart02

patpat said:


> rating and attendance shows the interest people have for the fucking product! I don't care about "reeeyyycord revenue" as the year goes , people care less and less about the product and them selling their ass to Audi arabia to get hundred of millions is irrelevant here.
> but hey "record revenueee" lol


agree completely. I honestly can't stand fanboys - you would think they are getting some of this record revenue themselves the way they act

brand loyalty is cancer


----------



## Mongstyle

Erik. said:


> Those who say ratings don't matter don't seem to go on and give an excuse as to why house show and live show attendances are at an all time low either...
> 
> RECORD REVENUE THOUGH.
> 
> Then again, the same guys screaming record revenue seem to think gross revenue means the WWE is more profitable than ever. It isn't.


House show attendance is still higher than 2003 and 2004. It's only lower compared to 2005-2015. Also keep in mind they're selling tickets for a hell of a lot more than they were back then, hence why ticket revenue is still the same if not higher.

Also, it's important to note, you're saying this in the Raw thread. It's not Raw's attendance that's hurting their overall live event attendance. It's actually the smark darling show Smackdown. They've been doing poorly for a couple years now and are responsible for hitting the attendance hardest.

Raw is still doing similarly to what it's always been doing. They're not the problem here. The problem is there's no one to carry the load on the B show now and the ones that were positioned there have not been able to do it.

Viewership is another problem however, and this year marks the first time that viewership did not actually recover for Mania season like it has in years past. That probably shows the top programs this year are all basically a flop. Raw seems to have recovered only very slightly in the last couple weeks, but it usually gets more of a bump so Reigns return and Batista/HHH haven't done anything significant although they've clearly helped. Rollins/Brock and Ronda/Becky/Charlotte are clearly flop programs though. And Smackdown is even worse as their viewership hasn't bounced back in any way.


----------



## Erik.

1st hour opened up with the recently confirmed main event of Wrestlemania and they basically took up nearly half of the first hour.
2nd hour opened with McIntyre/Reigns but was mostly Braun/SNL/Bliss
3rd hour was stacked with Kurt Angle, Samoa Joe, Rollins, Heyman, Triple H and a Last Man Standing match.

I predict they lost ALOT in that second hour. Will be interesting to see if the booked third hour managed to maintain some of those 2nd hour viewers or not.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.700M
H2- 2.665M
H3- 2.402M
3H- 2.589M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 1.30% / - 0.035M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 9.87% / - 0.263M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 11.04% / - 0.298M )
3/25/19 Vs 3/18/19 ( - 3.93% / - 0.106M )

Demo (3/25/19 Vs 3/18/19):
H1- 0.910D Vs 0.920D
H2- 0.900D Vs 0.910D
H3- 0.850D Vs 0.830D
3H- 0.887D Vs 0.887D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 3rd & 5th by hourly demo & 5th, 7th & 9th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (3/25/19 Vs 3/26/18):
H1- 2.700M Vs 3.403M
H2- 2.665M Vs 3.547M
H3- 2.402M Vs 3.150M
3H- 2.589M Vs 3.367M ( - 23.11% / - 0.778M )

Demo (3/25/19 Vs 3/26/18):
H1- 0.910D Vs 1.180D
H2- 0.900D Vs 1.210D
H3- 0.850D Vs 1.120D
3H- 0.887D Vs 1.170D

Note: RAW this week last year was 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

WWE's "ratings." (If you can call them 'ratings' at this point.)

:mj4


----------



## llj

The Road to Wrestlemania


----------



## The Boy Wonder

That SNL skit helped :bosque


----------



## Erik.

So last week they lost 124,000 viewers from the previous week and this week they've lost a further 106,000... 

:lol :lol :lol

Ratings AREN'T the be all and end all (Though they still matter) but its not a good look when your first hour does over 100,000 less viewers than the previous week despite having your previously confirmed main event three open the show and take up pretty much half of the first hour. 

Of course, people could have just tuned out AFTER the opening 30 minutes once they'd seen the women and we'll never know.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

No Batista. No Brock. No Cena. And they opened with the 3 women main eventing WM. Maybe viewers at home don't care about Ronda/Becky/Charlotte and wanted to see some actual stars?


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

They deserve this for the piss poor product they put out


----------



## Ace

LMFAO those are football season numbers :lmao

No Batista or Lesnar = No ratings.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> No Batista. No Brock. No Cena. And they opened with the 3 women main eventing WM. Maybe viewers at home don't care about Ronda/Becky/Charlotte and wanted to see some actual stars?


It dropped when those guys are on, too, though. It literally doesn't matter anymore who's on and who isn't. We've been keeping track on this on here for years now.


----------



## Ace

Holy shit is it going to get brutal during football season.

Winter is coming, Vince.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

What will Vince learn from this rating? Not a damn thing. Next week we'll get yet another Balor vs Lashley match. Another promo where Seth calls Brock a bully. Another Ronda segment that goes nowhere. Another Roman promo exploiting his cancer. And they'll end the show with Drew beating Dean in a deathmatch.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

People proclaiming wrestlers are TV draws in 2019.

:mj4


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Even the YT numbers are bad. Batista's attack on Flair had about 5M views the next day. But the initial excitement from his return has clearly worn off. Last night only two segments/matches have 1M views. You can see where the viewership interest takes a big dip -- the tag match with the Revival all the way to Corbin's segment. Then interest increases with Seth's promo.


----------



## Ace

Shouldn't numbers be going up the closer they get to WM? They're fucking losing viewers, that means people do not give a fuck about the matches or feuds for this years WM. They've failed. End of.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> What will Vince learn from this rating? Not a damn thing. Next week we'll get yet another Balor vs Lashley match. Another promo where Seth calls Brock a bully. Another Ronda segment that goes nowhere. Another Roman promo exploiting his cancer. And they'll end the show with Drew beating Dean in a deathmatch.


I honestly don't think he gives a shit. They robbed Fox for SmackDown & he gets a fresh injection of blood money from the Saudis soon. The motherfucker is laughing all the way to the bank. They don't even try to make Raw entertaining.


----------



## Ace

How bad is Raw going to when they move some more star power over to SD so it doesn't fail on Fox? (which it will anyway because this company sucks).


----------



## Erik.

Donnie said:


> Holy shit is it going to get brutal during football season.
> 
> Winter is coming, Vince.


I assume the people currently watching are those who probably don't care much for pro sports.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Donnie said:


> Shouldn't numbers be going up the closer they get to WM? They're fucking losing viewers, that means people do not give a fuck about the matches or feuds for this years WM. They've failed. End of.


They should be. This is the one time of the year where ratings have always been good for WWE. Its obvious the casual fans have been turned off this year and what we're seeing is what is left of hardcore WWE fans. They'll drop below 2 million viewers on a weekly basis by the time football season starts back.


----------



## Dave Santos

The Boy Wonder said:


> Even the YT numbers are bad. Batista's attack on Flair had about 5M views the next day. But the initial excitement from his return has clearly worn off. Last night only two segments/matches have 1M views. You can see where the viewership interest takes a big dip -- the tag match with the Revival all the way to Corbin's segment. Then interest increases with Seth's promo.


I mentioned this a few weeks ago. I have noticed the trend as well. There was a time period when Cole used to pump out the ratings on tv, then wwe spent like 2 years talking about social media numbers all the time. Cole used to always talk about Youtube views and facebook and twitter likes. Now they talk about trending matches once in a while. Im glad though they are not plugging that as much as they used to before.


----------



## Tk Adeyemi

I don’t think wwe’s ratings are bad in 2019. Compared to previous years they are terrible but the reality is wwe programming are top 5 on
Cable television. Some of the top rated shows on tv such as this is us or blackish are very popular among audiences in America but those shows do between 0.5-2.01 in ratings. The reality is that ratings is not a good measurement to determine the impact of a show. People just don’t watch cable tv anymore. 49% of Americans have cut the cable plug. Now u can watch shows on YouTube, Roku or u can live stream it.


----------



## A-C-P

:bosque


----------



## chronoxiong

700k viewership drop from last year. Lol. Damns. Keep letting your part timer hold your Universal Title hostage you old senile prick.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

chronoxiong said:


> 700k viewership drop from last year. Lol. Damns. Keep letting your part timer hold your Universal Title hostage you old senile prick.


Brock going down as the lowest rated Champion of all time. Let's hope he wins at WM to keep that label.

:mark:


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Showstopper said:


> Brock going down as the lowest rated Champion of all time. Let's hope he wins at WM to keep that label.
> 
> :mark:


To be fair Brock is never there. And ratings are guaranteed to get even worse after WM because they always are. So if Brock loses and ratings get lower then Seth will be the lowest rated champion of all time.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> To be fair Brock is never there. And ratings are guaranteed to get even worse after WM because they always are. So if Brock loses and ratings get lower then Seth will be the lowest rated champion of all time.


He's never there but he's still Champion. Yeah, if Seth wins. But he's supposedly 'not going to win', so I have nothing to worry about. And if he does, the person who takes it off of him will be the lowest, and so on and so forth.; the cycle continues.


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> Brock going down as the lowest rated Champion of all time. Let's hope he wins at WM to keep that label.
> 
> :mark:


 Brock is never there so it means nothing. The show is shit without him and you could argue the ratings are shit because he isn't there every week.


----------



## Jonhern

Littbarski said:


> House-show and live attendance isn't even close to all time low. Come Wrestlemania WWE will have held six stadium shows within last 12 months. Do you think WWE would have been capable of selling tickets to one stadium show in 1993-96?
> 
> WWE had record profit in 2018. $99.6 million net profit. Their previous all time highest profit was $69m in 1999-00.


You can't compare numbers directly with that much time between them without adjusting for inflation. In this case $69mil would be about $105mil today. Plus if you take out the xfl expenses form 2001, like they have done now by making it a separate company, that year would have been an even higher profit.

But yes they are doing well regardless because of that Saudi money and soon the TV deals, next year will probably be record profit.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Donnie said:


> Brock is never there so it means nothing. The show is shit without him and you could argue the ratings are shit because he isn't there every week.


It counts, he's the Champion, and when he is there, the ratings are still complete and utter shit.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Showstopper said:


> He's never there but he's still Champion. Yeah, if Seth wins. But he's supposedly 'not going to win', so I have nothing to worry about. And if he does, the person who takes it off of him will be the lowest, and so on and so forth.; the cycle continues.


When Batista was advertised to appear on Raw a couple weeks ago hour 3 did the same number as hour 1 because viewers stayed tuned to see him. Last week when Brock was advertised he appeared at the start of the show and there was drops in hour 2 and 3 because after people saw the star they tuned out.

Are Batista and Brock significantly boosting ratings? No. But they do increase ratings when advertised. Even if only marginally.


----------



## Jonhern

ClintDagger said:


> Credit where credit is due. As bad as WWE is at managing their talent & overall product, they are that good at branding and maximizing revenue streams. It shows they do have some smart people running certain parts of the organization. However, those people can only work their magic for so long when the product’s popularity is in a free fall.


Right now they are doing well in spite of their poor product. That won't last forever especially with competition on the horizon. And on the other hand too, imagine how much money they will make if they were able to hit the mark on the zeitgeist again.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> When Batista was advertised to appear on Raw a couple weeks ago hour 3 did the same number as hour 1 because viewers stayed tuned to see him. Last week when Brock was advertised he appeared at the start of the show and there was drops in hour 2 and 3 because after people saw the star they tuned out.


Wrong. There was a decrease 2 weeks ago from hour 1 to hour 3, just wasn't as big as usual, but there was still a drop. And re: last week, there's a drop from hour 1 to the rest of the show every single week. :lol WTF. Still waiting for these big STARZ to draw these big numbers we've been hearing about. Any week now..


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> Wrong. There was a decrease 2 weeks ago from hour 1 to hour 3, just wasn't as big as usual, but there was still a drop. And re: last week, there's a drop from hour 1 to the rest of the show every single week. :lol WTF. Still waiting for these big STARZ to draw these big numbers we've been hearing about. Any week now..


 The show held steady from hr 1 to 3 for the episode he returned, the interview via satellite appearance wasn't advertised.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Donnie said:


> The show held steady from hr 1 to 3 for the episode he returned, the interview via satellite appearance wasn't advertised.


I could say that about this week, hour 1 to hour 3 wasn't some large dropoff, either, but still somewhat of a dropoff. Only the diehards are watching now.


----------



## The XL 2

WWE won't exist in 10 years. They'll be profitable as long as they have these new guaranteed contracts, then they're finished. You can't be profitable without an audience. I'm sure Fox feels totally bamboozled right now. They bled a quarter of their audience in a year, they're a dying company. Better hope AEW succeeds, otherwise, pro wrestling in North America is going to die.


----------



## Chrome

@ that drop from last year to this year.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> I could say that about this week, hour 1 to hour 3 wasn't some large dropoff, either, but still somewhat of a dropoff. Only the diehards are watching now.


It dropped off, what, 300k this week? I think when Batista was heavily advertised to be there live it only dropped like 75k. That’s a big difference. You’re talking about 97% retention versus like 88%.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> It dropped off, what, 300k this week? I think when Batista was heavily advertised to be there live it only dropped like 75k. That’s a big difference. You’re talking about 97% retention versus like 88%.


Still a dropoff. And when people call some of these guys 'huge stars' and 'draws', you expect an increase, not a decrease. These are also guys who aren't overexposed every week like the full-time guys are, and guys who are getting paid more by WWE to appear less, and still aren't actually drawing on TV despite getting paid more and NOT being over-exposed.


----------



## ClintDagger

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> When Batista was advertised to appear on Raw a couple weeks ago hour 3 did the same number as hour 1 because viewers stayed tuned to see him. Last week when Brock was advertised he appeared at the start of the show and there was drops in hour 2 and 3 because after people saw the star they tuned out.
> 
> Are Batista and Brock significantly boosting ratings? No. But they do increase ratings when advertised. Even if only marginally.


Brock and Batista, especially the latter, are all they really have that can cause a deviation from the normal trend.


----------



## Ace

Are we getting to a point where WWE considers working smaller arenas? Most of their tapings are half full.

The way they're going they may be lucky to full half in a few years.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> Still a dropoff. And when people call some of these guys 'huge stars' and 'draws', you expect an increase, not a decrease. These are also guys who aren't overexposed every week like the full-time guys are, and guys who are getting paid more by WWE to appear less, and still aren't actually drawing on TV despite getting paid more.


Batista impacts the ratings positively. The retention trend proves that out. Is he a gigantic needle mover? No. But he’s at least someone that when he’s advertised people will stick around for. That sets him apart from the rest. Although even he would see diminishing returns over time and they aren’t maximizing him by putting him with Hunter (a feud that very few would vote to see him in again).


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> Batista impacts the ratings positively. The retention trend proves that out. Is he a gigantic needle mover? No. But he’s at least someone that when he’s advertised people will stick around for. That sets him apart from the rest. Although even he would see diminishing returns over time and they aren’t maximizing him by putting him with Hunter (a feud that very few would vote to see him in again).


That's fine, but it's still a decrease, not an increase. When someone labels someone a huge star, or a big ratings draw, you expect an increase, especially when they hadn't been on the show in years. I guess when I hear those terms thrown around, I think of guys like Austin and Rock since I not only was alive during those years, but was in high school, so I'm able to remember them well, as well. I even remember going onto news sites after school on Tuesday afternoons in 1998-2001 and reading what the ratings were during those years.

Guys in this era, including the part timers aren't drawing. Not that anyone should ever expect AE numbers ever again, but when someone has barely been on the show in years and they're still producing decreases (albeit smaller decreases from today's full-timers who are on the show every freaking week and get over-exposed every week for the past several years), it's kind of hard to be impressed and/or call that person a draw. That's all I'm saying.


----------



## Erik.

Donnie said:


> Are we getting to a point where WWE considers working smaller arenas? Most of their tapings are half full.
> 
> The way they're going they may be lucky to full half in a few years.


To be fair, it looked pretty full yesterday.










But Boston always bring good crowds. Just a shame they were treated to such a poor show.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Not to beat a dead horse, but how about that year to year decline? 

*- 23.11% / - 0.778M* :damn


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> That's fine, but it's still a decrease, not an increase. When someone labels someone a huge star, or a big ratings draw, you expect an increase, especially when they hadn't been on the show in years. I guess when I hear those terms thrown around, I think of guys like Austin and Rock since I not only was alive during those years, but was in high school, so I'm able to remember them well, as well. I even remember going onto news sites after school on Tuesday afternoons in 1998-2001 and reading what the ratings were during those years.
> 
> Guys in this era, including the part timers aren't drawing. Not that anyone should ever expect AE numbers ever again, but when someone has barely been on the show in years and they're still producing decreases (albeit smaller decreases from today's full-timers who are on the show every freaking week and get over-exposed every week for the past several years), it's kind of hard to be impressed and/or call that person a draw. That's all I'm saying.


Big draw. Big star. That’s all semantics. Those things will mean different things to different people. They’ll mean different things in different eras. I’m not going to get hung up on any of that. Even you saying “still a decrease, not an increase”. Well that depends. Yes it’s a slight decrease from H1 to H3 for that night. But let’s compare that 3/11 H3 to yesterday’s H3. That’s a 400k difference to the positive for Batista’s heavily advertised appearance. Does that mean he’s a draw or a big star? YMMV. But clearly he’s something above & beyond the rank & file. That’s worth noting in this era.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> Big draw. Big star. That’s all semantics. Those things will mean different things to different people. They’ll mean different things in different eras. I’m not going to get hung up on any of that. Even you saying “still a decrease, not an increase”. Well that depends. Yes it’s a slight decrease from H1 to H3 for that night. But let’s compare that 3/11 H3 to yesterday’s H3. That’s a 400k difference to the positive for Batista’s heavily advertised appearance. Does that mean he’s a draw or a big star? YMMV. But clearly he’s something above & beyond the rank & file. That’s worth noting in this era.


Of course generally speaking today he would be a bigger draw than any of the full-timers. 

1) He hasn't been on the show in awhile, so he has some freshness to him. 
2) He was in a previous era that was much better booked and never really made him look like a geek like today's booking does to even the wrestlers Vince actually likes, he can't book right because he's that inept these days.
3) He's not anywhere near as overexposed as any of the wrestlers who have been around since the 3 hour Raw era
4) He's become a pretty good name in Hollywood. Not Rock level, but pretty decent/good, so there is SOME name power there.

So, yeah he has a bunch of stuff going for him that none of the full-timers of today have going for them just by virtue of not being a full-timer in this era of horrendous booking of wrestlers and storylines. However while all of that is true and I'd never take that away from him, it's still not like he/they've drawn much. It's still rather miniscule. And I'm completely confident that if he was on Raw or SD every single week like today's full-timers are, he'd be just like them and get over-exposed and have any cool-factor taken away from him in a couple of months max. So, I guess we're mostly in agreement. But when people start throwing words around like big star, and big draw, and star-power, you expect them to draw at least more than they have. My thing is the product is so bad these days that most of the draws from the past aren't going to draw to a big degree, which has been the case, outside of one-off's like RAW 25 and shit like that. Austin and Rock might be the exception. But I bet even if they were subjected to this shit every week after several months, their shine would be waning, too. Austin himself has said numerous times on his podcast that he's not a fan of today's style of booking and that he himself would have a hard time getting over in today's product and that it's not for him.


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> Of course generally speaking today he would be a bigger draw than any of the full-timers.
> 
> 1) He hasn't been on the show in awhile, so he has some freshness to him.
> 2) He was in a previous era that was much better booked and never really made him look like a geek like today's booking does to even the wrestlers Vince actually likes, he can't book right because he's that inept these days.
> 3) He's not anywhere near as overexposed as any of the wrestlers who have been around since the 3 hour Raw era
> 4) He's become a pretty good name in Hollywood. Not Rock level, but pretty decent/good, so there is SOME name power there.
> 
> So, yeah he has a bunch of stuff going for him that none of the full-timers of today have going for them just by virtue of not being a full-timer in this era of horrendous booking of wrestlers and storylines. However while all of that is true and I'd never take that away from him, it's still not like he/they've drawn much. It's still rather miniscule. And I'm completely confident that if he was on Raw or SD every single week like today's full-timers are, he'd be just like them and get over-exposed and have any cool-factor taken away from him in a couple of months max. So, I guess we're mostly in agreement. But when people start throwing words around like big star, and big draw, and star-power, you expect them to draw at least more than they have. My thing is the product is so bad these days that most of the draws from the past aren't going to draw to a big degree, which has been the case, outside of one-off's like RAW 25 and shit like that. Austin and Rock might be the exception. But I bet even if they were subjected to this shit every week after several months, their shine would be waning, too. Austin himself has said numerous times on his podcast that he's not a fan of today's style of booking and that he himself would have a hard time getting over in today's product and that it's not for him.


 Our favorites would be bigger stars outside this company.

I've given up on this company, I can only hope the people I like realize they're not going to amount to much in the WWE and bank on themselves outside the WWE.


----------



## Deathiscoming

The thing is nothing they're doing will appeal to heterosexual male hardcore fans or even casual ones since they may want to see larger than life wrestlers(aka Roman, Brock, Drew, Braun) fighting for the richest prize in the business , larger than life stars like Rock cutting promos, or even CM Punk spewing out acrimony and fury against Authority. They may also not mind scantily clad Mandy Rose, Lacey Evans and Peyton Royce . But what do they see on WWE TV instead?

A bunch of women acting like angry Alpha males, calling themselves The Man, and a downright testosteronized tall ugly woman. And said women are involved in a story that is portrayed as the "main event of wrestlemania" thus effectively telling the viewer that this is the main course but they can enjoy Roman or Drew or Brock as a side dish.

The Anti-authority role being given to Kofi instead of CM Punk. Let's be honest, Kofi kingston is a joke, it doesn't matter if you insert a joke of a guy in the WWE title picture or give him the title.

More ugly women, fat women and women's tag titles (as if people are going to give a fuck about Nia Jax, Sasha, Bailey and wimminz tag titles :lol) .

Boring bland babyface Rollins, a lazy, low on muscle Brock or his lame old advocate Paul Heyman cutting the same promo for the 500th time.

Finn Balor wearing PINK gear or smiling on his way up the entrance ramp.

In conclusion, if you give the Rock's role to Kofi Kingston, Austin's role to a bunch of fucking women like Ronda and Becky, and have a bunch of ugly women filling up TV time over Debra and Sable, nobody is going to fucking care or watch, you're NOT going to gain any more viewers and may LOSE viewers :lol ... Impact probably gets it. WWE/Steph don't, won't.

The ratings should actually have been WORSE than this :lol


----------



## .christopher.

How 2 million people are still watching this garbage is beyond me.


----------



## Erik.

.christopher. said:


> How 2 million people are still watching this garbage is beyond me.


I assume the majority of those who watch on cable are those who are decked out from head to toe in wrestling merchandise and wear a papier-mache belt.

When I realised even Dana Brooke has hardcore fans, I realised this 2,000,000 will probably stay forever. They are the people who don't really like pro sports and dedicate their twitter etc to wrestling.


----------



## ClintDagger

Erik. said:


> I assume the majority of those who watch on cable are those who are decked out from head to toe in wrestling merchandise and wear a papier-mache belt.
> 
> When I realised even Dana Brooke has hardcore fans, I realised this 2,000,000 will probably stay forever. They are the people who don't really like pro sports and dedicate their twitter etc to wrestling.


I don’t think they will be staying forever because half of them are on the wrong side of 50 and knowing wrestling fans probably aren’t the picture of health. The clock is ticking on them. Probably a quarter of them are kids between 8-12 whose loser parents force them to watch because they still watch or watched as kids themselves. Once those kids reach teenage years they realize how embarrassing it is to watch this kind of pro wrestling and will abandon the product. So the clock is ticking there too. Trust me, the march to zero is alive and well.



Showstopper said:


> Of course generally speaking today he would be a bigger draw than any of the full-timers.
> 
> 1) He hasn't been on the show in awhile, so he has some freshness to him.
> 2) He was in a previous era that was much better booked and never really made him look like a geek like today's booking does to even the wrestlers Vince actually likes, he can't book right because he's that inept these days.
> 3) He's not anywhere near as overexposed as any of the wrestlers who have been around since the 3 hour Raw era
> 4) He's become a pretty good name in Hollywood. Not Rock level, but pretty decent/good, so there is SOME name power there.
> 
> So, yeah he has a bunch of stuff going for him that none of the full-timers of today have going for them just by virtue of not being a full-timer in this era of horrendous booking of wrestlers and storylines. However while all of that is true and I'd never take that away from him, it's still not like he/they've drawn much. It's still rather miniscule. And I'm completely confident that if he was on Raw or SD every single week like today's full-timers are, he'd be just like them and get over-exposed and have any cool-factor taken away from him in a couple of months max. So, I guess we're mostly in agreement. But when people start throwing words around like big star, and big draw, and star-power, you expect them to draw at least more than they have. My thing is the product is so bad these days that most of the draws from the past aren't going to draw to a big degree, which has been the case, outside of one-off's like RAW 25 and shit like that. Austin and Rock might be the exception. But I bet even if they were subjected to this shit every week after several months, their shine would be waning, too. Austin himself has said numerous times on his podcast that he's not a fan of today's style of booking and that he himself would have a hard time getting over in today's product and that it's not for him.


Right on brother. Batista, while nowhere near an Austin, Rock, or Hogan; is the last of a dying breed. I don’t even think Cena will matter much anymore in the future. And 10-15 years from now when AJ, Reigns, Rollins, Bryan, etcetera are nostalgia acts nobody will care about them even close to a Batista level. Brock, Sting, Taker, Goldberg, and Batista will go down as the last tricks Vince had up his sleeve. WM season is on a huge decline and in a few years it will feel no different than the rest of the year.



Deathiscoming said:


> The thing is nothing they're doing will appeal to heterosexual male hardcore fans or even casual ones since they may want to see larger than life wrestlers(aka Roman, Brock, Drew, Braun) fighting for the richest prize in the business , larger than life stars like Rock cutting promos, or even CM Punk spewing out acrimony and fury against Authority. They may also not mind scantily clad Mandy Rose, Lacey Evans and Peyton Royce . But what do they see on WWE TV instead?
> 
> A bunch of women acting like angry Alpha males, calling themselves The Man, and a downright testosteronized tall ugly woman. And said women are involved in a story that is portrayed as the "main event of wrestlemania" thus effectively telling the viewer that this is the main course but they can enjoy Roman or Drew or Brock as a side dish.
> 
> The Anti-authority role being given to Kofi instead of CM Punk. Let's be honest, Kofi kingston is a joke, it doesn't matter if you insert a joke of a guy in the WWE title picture or give him the title.
> 
> More ugly women, fat women and women's tag titles (as if people are going to give a fuck about Nia Jax, Sasha, Bailey and wimminz tag titles :lol) .
> 
> Boring bland babyface Rollins, a lazy, low on muscle Brock or his lame old advocate Paul Heyman cutting the same promo for the 500th time.
> 
> Finn Balor wearing PINK gear or smiling on his way up the entrance ramp.
> 
> In conclusion, if you give the Rock's role to Kofi Kingston, Austin's role to a bunch of fucking women like Ronda and Becky, and have a bunch of ugly women filling up TV time over Debra and Sable, nobody is going to fucking care or watch, you're NOT going to gain any more viewers and may LOSE viewers :lol ... Impact probably gets it. WWE/Steph don't, won't.
> 
> The ratings should actually have been WORSE than this :lol


This is a million dollar post right here. Society hasn’t changed one iota in the last 20 years. The media and activists will try to convince you that we’ve “evolved” but that’s just window dressing. Look who’s in the WH for chrissakes. Rank & file men still only care about badass dudes talking trash & kicking ass and hot chicks showing T&A. Hell most kids only care about that. When word got out a few days ago what the WM main event was going to be I got so many texts from my boys that were big fans during the AE saying WTF and wrestling is dead. These are people that haven’t watched in 15+ years but would possibly come back if the show was worth a damn. Instead you’ve got an audience of beta males and creepers who have somehow hijacked the product. And I don’t think there’s any coming back from it.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> Right on brother. Batista, while nowhere near an Austin, Rock, or Hogan; is the last of a dying breed. I don’t even think Cena will matter much anymore in the future. And 10-15 years from now when AJ, Reigns, Rollins, Bryan, etcetera are nostalgia acts nobody will care about them even close to a Batista level. Brock, Sting, Taker, Goldberg, and Batista will go down as the last tricks Vince had up his sleeve. WM season is on a huge decline and in a few years it will feel no different than the rest of the year.


I still can't put Batista on the level of those other guys you mentioned. The ratings are still terrible even when he's advertised.


----------



## Deathiscoming

ClintDagger said:


> This is a million dollar post right here. Society hasn’t changed one iota in the last 20 years. The media and activists will try to convince you that we’ve “evolved” but that’s just window dressing. Look who’s in the WH for chrissakes. Rank & file men still only care about badass dudes talking trash & kicking ass and hot chicks showing T&A. Hell most kids only care about that. When word got out a few days ago what the WM main event was going to be I got so many texts from my boys that were big fans during the AE saying WTF and wrestling is dead. These are people that haven’t watched in 15+ years but would possibly come back if the show was worth a damn. _Instead you’ve got an audience of beta males and creepers who have somehow hijacked the product. _ And I don’t think there’s any coming back from it.


Thanks brother.

:lol @beta males and creepers. They've got daniel bryan and kofi kingston to appeal to them. They've got a testosteronized woman and a badass MMA chick and an Irish Broad who calls herself 'The Man' to appeal to a whole bunch of empowered feminist girls worldwide, they've even gotten Nia Jax :lol . 

We can agree that it drove many hardcore fans such as those from the AE away even further(I believe many were already driven away because of Fruity Pebbles John Cena) but it's weird-shouldn't the WWE have gotten MORE VIEWERS these past 6 months from the beta males, men who are feminists,and a whole host of feminist empowered women from the Anglosphere ? Shouldn't the ratings have actually IMPROVED now that women are maineventing Wrestlemania, had been given prominent roles for months on end? Where are all those female feminist viewers or even beta males ? The average Raw viewership should've been 3.5 Million(increased owing to them pushing women more) but it's 2.5 and actually declining each week.


----------



## Soul Rex

Showstopper said:


> That's fine, but it's still a decrease, not an increase. When someone labels someone a huge star, or a big ratings draw, you expect an increase, especially when they hadn't been on the show in years. I guess when I hear those terms thrown around, I think of guys like Austin and Rock since I not only was alive during those years, but was in high school, so I'm able to remember them well, as well. I even remember going onto news sites after school on Tuesday afternoons in 1998-2001 and reading what the ratings were during those years.
> 
> Guys in this era, including the part timers aren't drawing. Not that anyone should ever expect AE numbers ever again, but when someone has barely been on the show in years and they're still producing decreases (albeit smaller decreases from today's full-timers who are on the show every freaking week and get over-exposed every week for the past several years), it's kind of hard to be impressed and/or call that person a draw. That's all I'm saying.


Which wrestler has even been able to increase ratings by themselves ever? There is not such a thing as a draw as your definition is.

Maybe a particular case like The Rock, which name is probably bigger than the company itself right now, but 95% of the time, viewers won't tune in to watch only one person if the product sucks and doesn't appeal to them, no matter how big this person is.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Soul Rex said:


> Which wrestler has even been able to increase ratings by themselves ever? There is not such a thing as a draw as your definition is.
> 
> Maybe a particular case like The Rock, which name is probably bigger than the company itself right now, but 95% of the time, viewers won't tune in to watch only one person if the product sucks and doesn't appeal to them, no matter how big this person is.


Exactly. That's pretty much what I'm saying about today's tv situation and product. Just the way it is.


----------



## Soul Rex

Showstopper said:


> Exactly. That's pretty much what I'm saying about today's tv situation and product. Just the way it is.


Yeah, but this also means a wrestler or a person doesn't stop being a draw because he can't increase Raw ratings, Batista is probably a draw, he probably would have one of the most successful house show tours if he had one.

But increase the overall viewership of a 3 hours show by himself, that's almost impossible.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Soul Rex said:


> Yeah, but this also means a wrestler or a person doesn't stop being a draw because he can't increase Raw ratings, Batista is probably a draw, he probably would have one of the most successful house show tours if he had one.
> 
> But increase the overall viewership of a 3 hours show by himself, that's almost impossible.


Well, if he's not drawing ratings, then what is he drawing?


----------



## Soul Rex

Showstopper said:


> Well, if he's not drawing ratings, then what is he drawing?


I am not sure, a couple of extra Raw and WM tickets? A good way to understand who was an individual draw used to be PPV buyrates.

Today it's really hard to now what impact someone has these days in the product with the Network in, you just assume someone is a draw based on how big he is in the media and how much money he makes from other sources, also merchandise.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> I still can't put Batista on the level of those other guys you mentioned. The ratings are still terrible even when he's advertised.


Well yeah, I said in my post he’s not in their category. But that doesn’t mean there can only be two categories. Batista is somewhere below that top echelon but well above the main eventers of today.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> Well, if he's not drawing ratings, then what is he drawing?


But he does draw ratings. If 2.8MM will watch hour 3 if Batista is advertised, but only 2.4MM will watch if they don’t think he’s going to be there that means he drew those 400k people to Raw and away from some other product that they otherwise would have tuned to. Yeah, he’s not turning 2.8MM into 4.0MM but about 15% of the audience is essentially saying “I’m only here for Batista”. It’s significant in today’s WWE because no one else they have at their disposal can do that.

I don’t think WWE is thrilled to have Batista back. There’s something about him they don’t like, but they had to bring him in and pull back on the Ronda/Becky stuff to save this RTWM.


----------



## Erik.

WWE is the single biggest draw in current wrestling.


----------



## ClintDagger

Erik. said:


> WWE is the single biggest draw in current wrestling.


I get what you mean, but I would further clarify and say that their history is the biggest draw. I think about 20% of the audience loves the current product. Probably another 20%-30% like it but don’t love it. I think the rest watch due to habit or out of some hope that something great will happen. Like a Batista will show up. Or a Punk, or a Rock, or the next NWO type angle will start. Etcetera. I think the erosion of fans comes from that latter group that eventually decides that nothing good is ever going to happen again.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> But he does draw ratings. If 2.8MM will watch hour 3 if Batista is advertised, but only 2.4MM will watch if they don’t think he’s going to be there that means he drew those 400k people to Raw and away from some other product that they otherwise would have tuned to. Yeah, he’s not turning 2.8MM into 4.0MM but about 15% of the audience is essentially saying “I’m only here for Batista”. It’s significant in today’s WWE because no one else they have at their disposal can do that.
> 
> I don’t think WWE is thrilled to have Batista back. There’s something about him they don’t like, but they had to bring him in and pull back on the Ronda/Becky stuff to save this RTWM.


No, he really doesn't, though. If he or anyone else did, they would have drawn a considerable amount better than what they did when he was advertised a week in advance during WM season. The fact that you think he has 'saved' anything is laughable. He failed big time in terms of bringing in any new or old viewers. They're still in the SAME EXACT range they were before he came back. @Erik. is right, only the WWE name itself is a draw these days. Batista sure as fuck is not. That's been bared out now.


----------



## Erik.

ClintDagger said:


> I get what you mean, but I would further clarify and say that their history is the biggest draw. I think about 20% of the audience loves the current product. Probably another 20%-30% like it but don’t love it. I think the rest watch due to habit or out of some hope that something great will happen. Like a Batista will show up. Or a Punk, or a Rock, or the next NWO type angle will start. Etcetera. I think the erosion of fans comes from that latter group that eventually decides that nothing good is ever going to happen again.


THEY are the draw. The history is part of them.

They're the Coca Cola, the McDonalds. When you hear the word cola or burger, those are the big brands that spark in your mind. When you hear wrestling, or ANYONE (who doesn't even like or watch) hears the word wrestling, they think WWE (or WWF). 

Regardless of how shit the product is. How boring it is. How boring they portray their wrestlers. Declining ratings. House show attendances being poor. Being unable to sell out weekly venues on a regular basis etc - they STILL draw sold out seats to the big events. They STILL get record revenue and profit. They STILL have huge TV stations offering them an absurd amount of money to show their product or in Saudi Arabias case, a whole fucking country.

They don't even NEED to create stars. The reason the likes of Batista are brought back aren't indeed to bring back higher ratings, they're there to get particular intrigue back on their product from those who grew up watching Batista (not to get new eyes on it from his Hollywood career) - I know people who just watch Batistas YouTube clips to see what he's doing back. My brother (who hasn't watched Raw for 10+ years) will watch Lesnar's YouTube vids for example and watch the big PPVs that Lesnar tends to be one etc.

So whilst they might not bring in the ratings on TV - because let's face it, who's going to sit through a 3 hour show to see the guy they came to watch - they're likely to just watch that guys particular highlight the following day. Whether through Twitter, YouTube or a streaming website. 

Until WWE stop making money at an absurd rate, they won't care for ratings, they wont create new stars who can potentially become bigger than the company, they won't put the amount of effort they could, they don't need to do big storylines, they don't even really need to listen to the fans. 

People mostly tune into Raw, Smackdown or watch PPVs because it's WWE - not because these guys are fans of wrestling. There's much better wrestling out there, but they don't get anywhere NEAR the amount of followers because they're NOT the WWE. They've pretty much got millions upon millions who believe the WWE is the be all and end all of wrestling. If it's not WWE, it doesn't matter. If you don't wrestle in the WWE, you haven't made it etc. and they fucking LOVE that - it's why they're trying to sign every indie prospect out there, because those wrestlers HAVE followings.

It's a shame - but that's where we're at now. the WWE have gotten too big for their own good.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> No, he really doesn't, though. If he or anyone else did, they would have drawn a considerable amount better than what they did when he was advertised a week in advance during WM season. The fact that you think he has 'saved' anything is laughable. He failed big time in terms of bringing in any new or old viewers. They're still in the SAME EXACT range they were before he came back. @Erik. is right, only the WWE name itself is a draw these days. Batista sure as fuck is not. That's been bared out now.


I should have clarified, WWE brought him in, brought Reigns back, pulled back on the women’s stuff, and did other knee jerk things in the hopes of saving this RTWM. I agree that it didn’t have a huge effect and wasn’t implying that it did. Disagree that when Batista is heavily advertised that the numbers don’t change. If you think Batista has zero impact then we can agree to disagree.


----------



## ClintDagger

Erik. said:


> THEY are the draw. The history is part of them.
> 
> They're the Coca Cola, the McDonalds. When you hear the word cola or burger, those are the big brands that spark in your mind. When you hear wrestling, or ANYONE (who doesn't even like or watch) hears the word wrestling, they think WWE (or WWF).
> 
> Regardless of how shit the product is. How boring it is. How boring they portray their wrestlers. Declining ratings. House show attendances being poor. Being unable to sell out weekly venues on a regular basis etc - they STILL draw sold out seats to the big events. They STILL get record revenue and profit. They STILL have huge TV stations offering them an absurd amount of money to show their product or in Saudi Arabias case, a whole fucking country.
> 
> They don't even NEED to create stars. The reason the likes of Batista are brought back aren't indeed to bring back higher ratings, they're there to get particular intrigue back on their product from those who grew up watching Batista (not to get new eyes on it from his Hollywood career) - I know people who just watch Batistas YouTube clips to see what he's doing back. My brother (who hasn't watched Raw for 10+ years) will watch Lesnar's YouTube vids for example and watch the big PPVs that Lesnar tends to be one etc.
> 
> So whilst they might not bring in the ratings on TV - because let's face it, who's going to sit through a 3 hour show to see the guy they came to watch - they're likely to just watch that guys particular highlight the following day. Whether through Twitter, YouTube or a streaming website.
> 
> Until WWE stop making money at an absurd rate, they won't care for ratings, they wont create new stars who can potentially become bigger than the company, they won't put the amount of effort they could, they don't need to do big storylines, they don't even really need to listen to the fans.
> 
> People mostly tune into Raw, Smackdown or watch PPVs because it's WWE - not because these guys are fans of wrestling. There's much better wrestling out there, but they don't get anywhere NEAR the amount of followers because they're NOT the WWE. They've pretty much got millions upon millions who believe the WWE is the be all and end all of wrestling. If it's not WWE, it doesn't matter. If you don't wrestle in the WWE, you haven't made it etc. and they fucking LOVE that - it's why they're trying to sign every indie prospect out there, because those wrestlers HAVE followings.
> 
> It's a shame - but that's where we're at now. the WWE have gotten too big for their own good.


I think we’re saying the same thing. My point is that the drawing effect of WWE is based on their past, and that while the brand is the draw, the decline of that drawing power is due to their present. That’s why I make the distinction.

In other words, they are slowly killing the brand which is why they are on the road to extinction.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> I should have clarified, WWE brought him in, brought Reigns back, pulled back on the women’s stuff, and did other knee jerk things in the hopes of saving this RTWM. I agree that it didn’t have a huge effect and wasn’t implying that it did. Disagree that when Batista is heavily advertised that the numbers don’t change. If you think Batista has zero impact then we can agree to disagree.


I can agree with all of that, that they tried, but it didn't really work. It was probably too late at that point. Say what you want about the women's storyline, but it is NOT drawing. I do think Batista has alittle bit of impact, but not alot.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> I can agree with all of that, that they tried, but it didn't really work. It was probably too late at that point. Say what you want about the women's storyline, but it is NOT drawing. I do think Batista has alittle bit of impact, but not alot.


I think the difference between us is that I’m impressed that Batista could do about 400k better in hour 3 than the norm and you really aren’t impressed by that. Which I can understand.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> I think the difference between us is that I’m impressed that Batista could do about 400k better in hour 3 than the norm and you really aren’t impressed by that. Which I can understand.


I guess you could say that. And also add that it's hard to attribute any kind of an increase to all of one person without the quarter-hour breakdowns. That's what we need. And also to me, a decrease, (especially this time of year, and without being over-exposed every week like the full-timers are), is still a decrease.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Deathiscoming said:


> We can agree that it drove many hardcore fans such as those from the AE away even further(I believe many were already driven away because of Fruity Pebbles John Cena) but it's weird-shouldn't the WWE have gotten MORE VIEWERS these past 6 months from the beta males, men who are feminists,and a whole host of feminist empowered women from the Anglosphere ?


That's the entire problem with WWE thinking, and Stephanie in particular. Those types of people - feminists, beta males, etc - are not wrestling fans. They'll never be wrestling fans. So that Stephanie thought they could expand their audience by appealing to people that have never had interest in wrestling, nor will ever be interested in wrestling, was never going to work. It's the same claim for making the product G or PG, to "Create younger fans and the next generation". That didn't work either.

WWE has a real lack of star power, but they also are writing watered down bland TV shows that nobody wants to watch regardless of the "actors" involved.

In the mid 1990s, WWE decided to make a tv show people wanted to watch hence the AE. You'd think, at some point, they'll have to make that same decision. But, like others have said, if the overseas money keeps flowing in and the stock price stays up, they probably won't take any chances. The North America wrestling market is dead (live audience and TV), but the WWE can still make it up in the rest of the world before the well runs dry there too.


----------



## Adam Cool

Randy Lahey said:


> That's the entire problem with WWE thinking, and Stephanie in particular. Those types of people - feminists, *beta males, etc - are not wrestling fans. They'll never be wrestling fans.* So that Stephanie thought they could expand their audience by appealing to people that have never had interest in wrestling, nor will ever be interested in wrestling, was never going to work. It's the same claim for making the product G or PG, to "Create younger fans and the next generation". That didn't work either.
> 
> WWE has a real lack of star power, but they also are writing watered down bland TV shows that nobody wants to watch regardless of the "actors" involved.
> 
> In the mid 1990s, WWE decided to make a tv show people wanted to watch hence the AE. You'd think, at some point, they'll have to make that same decision. But, like others have said, if the overseas money keeps flowing in and the stock price stays up, they probably won't take any chances. The North America wrestling market is dead (live audience and TV), but the WWE can still make it up in the rest of the world before the well runs dry there too.


Have you even looked at the crowd lately? Or any fan signing? 

Their entire fanbase is basically nerds who hate taking a shower at this point


----------



## Deathiscoming

Randy Lahey said:


> That's the entire problem with WWE thinking, and Stephanie in particular. Those types of people - feminists, beta males, etc - are not wrestling fans. They'll never be wrestling fans. So that Stephanie thought they could expand their audience by appealing to people that have never had interest in wrestling, nor will ever be interested in wrestling, was never going to work. It's the same claim for making the product G or PG, to "Create younger fans and the next generation". That didn't work either.
> 
> WWE has a real lack of star power, but they also are writing watered down bland TV shows that nobody wants to watch regardless of the "actors" involved.


I think you're right, and it's been reflecting in the trend of TV ratings decline over the years post-2002(following the departures of Austin and Rock within May-August as full-time active competitors, to be precise). 

They had Fruity pebble John Cena for years and it worked with a certain demographic-women, children, and a minority of men who didn't mind him or liked him, while there existed a vocal majority who always loathed him and still loathe him to this day. I believe that vocal majority didn't mind Batista or Orton, and loved CM Punk but just never could like John Cena.

We've now come to a point where not only is there a lack of star power(Orange T-shirt wearing Fruity Pebbles John Cena has now been replaced with orange-haired bimbo Becky) and totally bland, atrocious writing and overscripted promos, but also pushing all the wrong people- whether it's women's wrestling, Jinder, Kofi, etc. 

After all, they had Braun, Dean, Cesaro, Joe, Orton...At least ONE male wrestler other than Roman could've(and should've) been a huge star by now?


----------



## Erramayhem89

Idc about how low the ratings are anymore really, what blows my mind is how dead the live crowds are. Wrestlers don't even get pops. Nobody cares they just show up because they have nothing else to do. Probably the same fans showing up in every city too. Without a crowd WWE sucks ass. It must be awkward wrestling during silence or when the crowd starts booing you.

Today's WWE is much worst than 2009 Cena era too. The talent was worst back then but at least it still had meaning.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Adam Cool said:


> Have you even looked at the crowd lately? Or any fan signing?
> 
> Their entire fanbase is basically nerds who hate taking a shower at this point


I think WWE has always had those types though even when they were big. Those are like the "comic-con" type fans. 

I'm talking more about people who never watched wrestling when it was popular, who probably like watching Rachel Maddow now, and suddenly they are going to watch Raw because of a "women's revolution"? No they aren't. No amount of women put into the title scene is going to get those types to watch.


----------



## ClintDagger

Randy Lahey said:


> I think WWE has always had those types though even when they were big. Those are like the "comic-con" type fans.
> 
> I'm talking more about people who never watched wrestling when it was popular, who probably like watching Rachel Maddow now, and suddenly they are going to watch Raw because of a "women's revolution"? No they aren't. No amount of women put into the title scene is going to get those types to watch.


The segment of the fan base that hates the women’s stuff the most is female fans. That’s who tuned out when WWE went all-in with Becky and the RTWM ratings were staying flat instead of rising coming out of football season like they always have.


----------



## Mear

Randy Lahey said:


> That's the entire problem with WWE thinking, and Stephanie in particular. Those types of people - feminists, beta males, etc - are not wrestling fans. They'll never be wrestling fans. So that Stephanie thought they could expand their audience by appealing to people that have never had interest in wrestling, nor will ever be interested in wrestling, was never going to work. It's the same claim for making the product G or PG, to "Create younger fans and the next generation". That didn't work either.
> 
> WWE has a real lack of star power, but they also are writing watered down bland TV shows that nobody wants to watch regardless of the "actors" involved.
> 
> In the mid 1990s, WWE decided to make a tv show people wanted to watch hence the AE. You'd think, at some point, they'll have to make that same decision. But, like others have said, if the overseas money keeps flowing in and the stock price stays up, they probably won't take any chances. The North America wrestling market is dead (live audience and TV), but the WWE can still make it up in the rest of the world before the well runs dry there too.


Somehow, the WWE managed to try to appeal to all the wrong fanbases but the right ones. They are trying to appeal to the " phantom fanbase " and the hardcore fans because all the Kofi and Becky stuff, it's only asked by the hardcore fans while giving up on the casuals who have been forgotten by the WWE who instead tried to cater to the hardcore fans, the ones that would never give up the product anyway.

The WWE's main problem today is that it is bad for casual watching, not just because of the amount of product you have to watch but because there is barely any storylines that have something to hook you in if that's your first time watching. If you are not already into the WWE before watching Raw, then you won't leave the show with a feeling that you need to watch what's next.

The NXT call-ups just show how bad it is. They had around TEN wrestlers to introduce yet not a single one of them is really talked about here. They are fresh yet not a single one of them can stand out. I remember in 2009, you had the debuts of Sheamus and Drew McIntyre on Raw & Smackdown where they felt like such a big deal and were interesting yet now, they can't even make something interesting out of 10 debuting wrestlers


----------



## Adam Cool

ClintDagger said:


> The segment of the fan base that hates the women’s stuff the most is female fans. That’s who tuned out when WWE went all-in with Becky and the RTWM ratings were staying flat instead of rising coming out of football season like they always have.


Meltzer said something along the line of "The Only Major draw for young Female Audiences in post Attitude Era WWE are Jeff Hardy and AJ Lee" once , in the sense that those two increased the viewership of that demographic the most 

He's probably right


----------



## ClintDagger

Adam Cool said:


> Meltzer said something along the line of "The Only Major draw for young Female Audiences in post Attitude Era WWE are Jeff Hardy and AJ Lee" once , in the sense that those two increased the viewership of that demographic the most
> 
> He's probably right


Yeah I think that’s right. Cena I think was a draw with women too.


----------



## Adam Cool

ClintDagger said:


> Yeah I think that’s right. Cena I think was a draw with women too.


I think they both increased a female demographic, main different is which, Jeff was popular with 15-30 girls who liked his Alternative emo style while Cena attracted 25+women who find dad jokes to be charming, with the latter being more like to bring in their Family (Husband and Kids)


----------



## llj

Erramayhem89 said:


> Idc about how low the ratings are anymore really, what blows my mind is how dead the live crowds are. Wrestlers don't even get pops. Nobody cares they just show up because they have nothing else to do. Probably the same fans showing up in every city too. Without a crowd WWE sucks ass. It must be awkward wrestling during silence or when the crowd starts booing you.
> 
> Today's WWE is much worst than 2009 Cena era too. The talent was worst back then but at least it still had meaning.


The fact is that all those loud noisy frat boy types don't watch wrestling anymore and the true smarky types who like actual wrestling aren't watching the WWE main roster. 

You look at NXT crowds, indies, hell even NJPW which has those notoriously "polite" Japanese fans--they're LOUDER during everything that goes on. They have a product that caters exactly to their primary fans and the fans are satisfied with their product.

WWE main roster? I don't know anyone who's actually satisfied watching it. Who exactly are they appealing to? Maybe families bringing their kids? And how much of the audience do they make up? There is no primary demographic being served. It's simultaneously all over the place and none at all.

You know where those old rowdy young males from the 2000s all went? UFC. At some point, pro wrestling became what it was again in the early to mid 90s--people sneering and calling it "fake" fighting. The only fans left now are the hardcore smarky types, and the WWE product isn't for them at all, and Vince has no idea what to do now that he has no primary audience. The hardcore smarks hate his booking, and they're too small an audience to base stadium-filling Wrestlemanias on. The so-called "casuals" like from the Attitude Era or the Hogan era are gone. I don't see kids watching the WWE in droves either.


----------



## Dave Santos

llj said:


> The fact is that all those loud noisy frat boy types don't watch wrestling anymore and the true smarky types who like actual wrestling aren't watching the WWE main roster.
> 
> You look at NXT crowds, indies, hell even NJPW which has those notoriously "polite" Japanese fans--they're LOUDER during everything that goes on. They have a product that caters exactly to their primary fans and the fans are satisfied with their product.
> 
> WWE main roster? I don't know anyone who's actually satisfied watching it. Who exactly are they appealing to? Maybe families bringing their kids? And how much of the audience do they make up? There is no primary demographic being served. It's simultaneously all over the place and none at all.
> 
> You know where those old rowdy young males from the 2000s all went? UFC. At some point, pro wrestling became what it was again in the early to mid 90s--people sneering and calling it "fake" fighting. The only fans left now are the hardcore smarky types, and the WWE product isn't for them at all, and Vince has no idea what to do now that he has no primary audience. The hardcore smarks hate his booking, and they're too small an audience to base stadium-filling Wrestlemanias on. The so-called "casuals" like from the Attitude Era or the Hogan era are gone. I don't see kids watching the WWE in droves either.


The fans seemed to be young adults and teenagers mostly. The product caters to different fans. But the company is still making fantastic money.


----------



## Erramayhem89

llj said:


> The fact is that all those loud noisy frat boy types don't watch wrestling anymore and the true smarky types who like actual wrestling aren't watching the WWE main roster.
> 
> You look at NXT crowds, indies, hell even NJPW which has those notoriously "polite" Japanese fans--they're LOUDER during everything that goes on. They have a product that caters exactly to their primary fans and the fans are satisfied with their product.
> 
> WWE main roster? I don't know anyone who's actually satisfied watching it. Who exactly are they appealing to? Maybe families bringing their kids? And how much of the audience do they make up? There is no primary demographic being served. It's simultaneously all over the place and none at all.
> 
> You know where those old rowdy young males from the 2000s all went? UFC. At some point, pro wrestling became what it was again in the early to mid 90s--people sneering and calling it "fake" fighting. The only fans left now are the hardcore smarky types, and the WWE product isn't for them at all, and Vince has no idea what to do now that he has no primary audience. The hardcore smarks hate his booking, and they're too small an audience to base stadium-filling Wrestlemanias on. The so-called "casuals" like from the Attitude Era or the Hogan era are gone. I don't see kids watching the WWE in droves either.


I think those attitude era fans still watch they are just 40 now. Some of them left though. I feel like WWE doesn't create many new fans. And a good chunk of the hardcore fans are watching UFC or just stopped watching. But WWE has had the same 3-4 million fans since like 2003 lol. They are dropping fast now though.


----------



## llj

Dave Santos said:


> The fans seemed to be young adults and teenagers mostly. The product caters to different fans. But the company is still making fantastic money.


They're very good at making money without actually gaining new fans. Those quarterly reports were very revealing in how they generated money. And it isn't from actually gaining fans or holding existing ones.

Like we said, Vince may be a shit booker, but he is still a creative businessman. He has found a way to make money without actually producing a product to draw in new fans or maintain current ones anymore.


----------



## patpat

people are making this so over complicated with trashing feminism and alpha male and beta male and this and that and X YZ all of that is bullshit! Good television draws, raw is fucking shit of a television show, it's boring and unentertaining. even the ufc fans can actually like wrestling and be impressed by that, I showed aa ufc hardcore fan ( my friend ) a Kenny Omega fan..;guess what? he is a omega fan, because that scene of the young omega clapping his feet in the air while doing a move screamed "badass" "unnecessary cool" , UNLIke what most people say here, no. you don't need to be a giant to be larger than life, charisma , talent in the ring, an appealing character is what it takes. Naito in Japan is larger than life because he does something every Japanese dream to do, he trash the authority, the tradition and the culture, that's where even the bullet club's hype came from. wwe is killing their talent, trust me if you see heel Finn Balor in his NJPW days , you won't even believe it's the same dude. the kid screamed charisma from all part of his body and created one of the greatest faction. but people here won't admit that and blame it on stupid shit like the size of the wrestler and all those bullshit...the writing, the characters, the quality is what makes people larger than life. thats' why Naito, NJPW Balor, and punk succeeded, they are out of the norm!


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

LOL at putting both Batista and Brock in the first hour which is traditionally the most watched. Wouldn't want to put them in Hour 3 and perhaps puncture the myth of their drawing power. :bryanlol


----------



## Ace

THE MAN said:


> LOL at putting both Batista and Brock in the first hour which is traditionally the most watched. Wouldn't want to put them in Hour 3 and perhaps puncture the myth of their drawing power. :bryanlol


 They did everyone a favor, can go to bed earlier.


----------



## ClintDagger

THE MAN said:


> LOL at putting both Batista and Brock in the first hour which is traditionally the most watched. Wouldn't want to put them in Hour 3 and perhaps puncture the myth of their drawing power. :bryanlol


I’m baffled as to why they’d do that. The only thing I can think of is that they wanted the women’s segment to go on last since that’s the main event, but they knew it would bomb in the ratings. So they had it go on later than Brock & Batista so they could give it a bastardized main event treatment, but not very last so as to insulate it from embarrassment. That way the horrible rating can be blamed on Corbin. They are well aware of the lack of fan interest in the main event. That much is clear.

And who knows, maybe the rating won’t be horrible. But it sure seems like they expect it to be.


----------



## Ace

Can people in the States explain to me how 3m people still watch this crap during prime time TV?

If I lived in the States I would never watch this shit, surely there's some good TV shows or sports matches which air at the same time.

Only reason I use to watch it live here was because it was on midday. If it were on during prime time, hell fucking no. 

I'd rather watch the repeats of American Dad on comedy central or watch league sports shows :lmao

This show is almost a given to be the lowest rated go home show to WM in 20 odd years.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

ClintDagger said:


> I’m baffled as to why they’d do that. The only thing I can think of is that they wanted the women’s segment to go on last since that’s the main event, but they knew it would bomb in the ratings. So they had it go on later than Brock & Batista so they could give it a bastardized main event treatment, but not very last so as to insulate it from embarrassment. That way the horrible rating can be blamed on Corbin. They are well aware of the lack of fan interest in the main event. That much is clear.
> 
> And who knows, maybe the rating won’t be horrible. But it sure seems like they expect it to be.


It is actually smart to put on the segments that are prioritized in the first two hours because there are more eyeballs then. It does seem like they have abdicated the third hour. Nothing major was featured. It seems the days of the biggest storyline main eventing the go home RAW before Mania are over.


----------



## .christopher.

Donnie said:


> Can people in the States explain to me how 3m people still watch this crap during prime time TV?
> 
> If I lived in the States I would never watch this shit, surely there's some good TV shows or sports matches which air at the same time.
> 
> Only reason I use to watch it live here was because it was on midday. If it were on during prime time, hell fucking no.
> 
> I'd rather watch the repeats of American Dad on comedy central or watch league sports shows :lmao
> 
> This show is almost a given to be the lowest rated go home show to WM in 20 odd years.


Exactly, mate. I'd rather watch a Mourinho team than this, and that's saying something.

It's not even that this product and company is total trash that makes Jerry Springer look like well-written TV. It's that - for over a decade - they've spat in the fans' faces, saying your opinion doesn't matter, you're stupid, and you'll take what we give you, and these millions sit down and accept it.

Even if that wasn't the case, it's crazy that they can sit through a show that has the likes of Seth Rollins, Roman Reigns, Charlotte Flair, Becky Lynch, etc at the forefront of it, along with the awful commentary, and the general sloppy, soul-destroying feel of the show.

Honestly, there must be something wrong with those who still sit through this garbage. Stockholm syndrome or something.


----------



## Erik.

Donnie said:


> Can people in the States explain to me how 3m people still watch this crap during prime time TV?
> 
> If I lived in the States I would never watch this shit, surely there's some good TV shows or sports matches which air at the same time.
> 
> Only reason I use to watch it live here was because it was on midday. If it were on during prime time, hell fucking no.
> 
> I'd rather watch the repeats of American Dad on comedy central or watch league sports shows :lmao
> 
> This show is almost a given to be the lowest rated go home show to WM in 20 odd years.


I reckon at least half of those 3,000,000 are those on Twitter who parade around with a replica world title, support rubbish wrestlers like Dana Brooke etc. and think everything they see is a bit real..


----------



## rbl85

Donnie said:


> Can people in the States explain to me how *3m people* still watch this crap during prime time TV?
> 
> If I lived in the States I would never watch this shit, surely there's some good TV shows or sports matches which air at the same time.
> 
> Only reason I use to watch it live here was because it was on midday. If it were on during prime time, hell fucking no.
> 
> I'd rather watch the repeats of American Dad on comedy central or watch league sports shows :lmao
> 
> This show is almost a given to be the lowest rated go home show to WM in 20 odd years.



They are closer and closer to 2m than 3


----------



## ClintDagger

THE MAN said:


> It is actually smart to put on the segments that are prioritized in the first two hours because there are more eyeballs then. It does seem like they have abdicated the third hour. Nothing major was featured. It seems the days of the biggest storyline main eventing the go home RAW before Mania are over.


Ok then, explain this to me. Since Batista showed he could retain the H1 viewers into H3, why wouldn’t you put him in the go home segment? Put the women out right off the top to get the most eyes on their angle, do Brock & Seth in hour 2, Rey / Corbin top of hour 3, then finish with Batista. That way you max out your viewership. Why throw away 400k viewers when you don’t have to?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

ClintDagger said:


> Ok then, explain this to me. Since Batista showed he could retain the H1 viewers into H3, why wouldn’t you put him in the go home segment? Put the women out right off the top to get the most eyes on their angle, do Brock & Seth in hour 2, Rey / Corbin top of hour 3, then finish with Batista. That way you max out your viewership. Why throw away 400k viewers when you don’t have to?


No idea. I guess it shows how little they value Hour 3 and maybe they figured his segment would still do better in the first hour. All I do know is that Angle/Corbin does not scream last segment on the final RAW before Mania.


----------



## ClintDagger

THE MAN said:


> No idea. I guess it shows how little they value Hour 3 and maybe they figured his segment would still do better in the first hour. All I do know is that Angle/Corbin does not scream last segment on the final RAW before Mania.


And you could be right on them tanking hour 3. My opinion is that it’s a vote of no confidence in fan interest of the main event. They didn’t want to put them in the go home segment and have only 2.4MM tune in for it when 2.8MM tuned in to start. Now they can blame Corbin (assuming it’s a low hour 3 number).


----------



## Ace

2.788
2.754
2.374
3H: 2.64

:sodone :lmao :lmao


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Horrific numbers, especially for a go-home show in which it was announced the part-timers would be on a week in advance.

Fuck it. Keep that title on Brock. I don't want any part of these ratings for anyone I like. No thank you.

:lol


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> Horrific numbers, especially for a go-home show in which it was announced the part-timers would be on a week in advance.
> 
> Fuck it. Keep that title on Brock. I don't want any part of these ratings for anyone I like. No thank you.
> 
> :lol


 Dude that's an understatement. These are go home to WM numbers :lmao

There's not a word in the world to describe how bad it is.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.788M
H2- 2.754M
H3- 2.374M
3H- 2.639M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 1.22% / - 0.034M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 13.80% / - 0.380M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 14.85% / - 0.414M )
4/1/19 Vs 3/25/19 ( + 1.93% / + 0.050M )

Demo (4/1/19 Vs 3/25/19):
H1- 0.960D Vs 0.910D
H2- 0.960D Vs 0.900D
H3- 0.830D Vs 0.850D
3H- 0.917D Vs 0.887D

Note: RAW is 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 5th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (4/1/19 Vs 4/2/18):
H1- 2.788M Vs 3.430M
H2- 2.754M Vs 3.329M
H3- 2.374M Vs 3.314M
3H- 2.639M Vs 3.358M ( - 21.41% / - 0.719M )

Demo (4/1/19 Vs 4/2/18):
H1- 0.960D Vs 1.220D
H2- 0.960D Vs 1.150D
H3- 0.960D Vs 1.210D
3H- 0.917D Vs 1.193D

Note: RAW this week last year was 3rd, 5th & 4th by hourly demo & 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Ace

That's got to be without a doubt the lowest go home Raw number in 20-25 years?

Surely.


----------



## llj

WM35: The Nobody Cares Wrestlemania


----------



## Jonhern

the demo increased from last week, the number that really matters.


----------



## Ace

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1- 2.788M
> H2- 2.754M
> H3- 2.374M
> 3H- 2.639M*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership:
> H2 Vs H1 ( - 1.22% / - 0.034M )
> H3 Vs H2 ( - 13.80% / - 0.380M )
> H3 Vs H1 ( - 14.85% / - 0.414M )
> 4/1/19 Vs 3/25/19 ( + 1.93% / + 0.050M )
> 
> Demo (4/1/19 Vs 3/25/19):
> H1- 0.960D Vs 0.910D
> H2- 0.960D Vs 0.900D
> H3- 0.830D Vs 0.850D
> 3H- 0.917D Vs 0.887D
> 
> Note: RAW is 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 5th by hourly viewership.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership (4/1/19 Vs 4/2/18):
> H1- 2.788M Vs 3.430M
> H2- 2.754M Vs 3.329M
> H3- 2.374M Vs 3.314M
> 3H- 2.639M Vs 3.358M ( - 21.41% / - 0.719M )
> 
> Demo (4/1/19 Vs 4/2/18):
> H1- 0.960D Vs 1.220D
> H2- 0.960D Vs 1.150D
> H3- 0.960D Vs 1.210D
> 3H- 0.917D Vs 1.193D
> 
> Note: RAW this week last year was 3rd, 5th & 4th by hourly demo & 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly viewership.*


 Where does it stack up in terms of all time lows?


----------



## Mordecay

You can tell that the audience realized: "Well, everyone I wanted to see was in the first two hours, no point watching the third"


----------



## Ace

Not a single hr came close to crossing 3m :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

You wouldn't be able to pick this number out if you were asked to find the rating for the go home to WM.



Mordecay said:


> You can tell that the audience realized: "Well, everyone I wanted to see was in the first two hours, no point watching the third"


 They barely got 2.7m to tune in for the first hour. It's a failure on all fronts.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

And now you see why they stacked the first 2 hours.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Year to year down *- 21.41% / - 0.719M* Over 700,000 viewers down. :sodone

Hour 3 tanked again. Can't say I'm surprised. Oh well. Sports Entertainment is def. not a big draw nowadays.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I guess announcing what the WM main event was weeks in advance didn't help the numbers, either.

:trips8


----------



## Ace

2.7m is the highest they can do for a go home WM show.

Unbelievable. 

Will they be topping off at 2.3m next year?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

We now know why HHH skipped this show. *They are not-uhh Going to lay the blame-uhh for this show-uhh on me-uhh. *:trips8


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Somehow they did top the demo, though. Only bit of good news here.


----------



## ClintDagger

And THAT’s why the main event didn’t close the show last night. But H1 and H2 are nothing to write home about either. Next RTWM they will be dipping below 2MM every week.


----------



## Ace

How are they going to do the shake up, they can't really load up SD without killing Raw's ratings even more.

They're fucked and destined for FS1.


----------



## rbl85

Mordecay said:


> You can tell that the audience realized: "Well, everyone I wanted to see was in the first two hours, no point watching the third"


Even the first and second hour are not good for a Mania go home show


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Donnie said:


> How are they going to do the shake up, they can't really load up SD without killing Raw's ratings even more.
> 
> They're fucked and destined for FS1.


Yep. That's why how they do the shakeup the week after WM is a ton more interesting than the WM results.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

They deserve this for *years *of laziness and incompetence.


----------



## llj

Nobody cares about their top stars and the ones who aren't top stars are buried and doing nothing. Must-not-see booking, right here. Hopefully Vince lives long enough to see the day his shows play to attendances in the 1000s regularly and ratings are sub 2m every week.


----------



## ClintDagger

Donnie said:


> How are they going to do the shake up, they can't really load up SD without killing Raw's ratings even more.
> 
> They're fucked and destined for FS1.


They are totally fucked. Either SD becomes the “A” show and they load it up, or they try to balance both and SD’s ratings don’t improve but Raw’s gets even worse. These huge contracts will get them through these next 5 years but in many ways they are an albatross.



Showstopper said:


> Yep. That's why how they do the shakeup the week after WM is a ton more interesting than the WM results.


That’s a great point. It’s the first real “tell” that we’ll get.


----------



## Piper's Pit

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1- 2.788M
> H2- 2.754M
> H3- 2.374M
> 3H- 2.639M*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership:
> H2 Vs H1 ( - 1.22% / - 0.034M )
> H3 Vs H2 ( - 13.80% / - 0.380M )
> H3 Vs H1 ( - 14.85% / - 0.414M )
> 4/1/19 Vs 3/25/19 ( + 1.93% / + 0.050M )
> 
> Demo (4/1/19 Vs 3/25/19):
> H1- 0.960D Vs 0.910D
> H2- 0.960D Vs 0.900D
> H3- 0.830D Vs 0.850D
> 3H- 0.917D Vs 0.887D
> 
> Note: RAW is 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 5th by hourly viewership.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership (4/1/19 Vs 4/2/18):
> H1- 2.788M Vs 3.430M
> H2- 2.754M Vs 3.329M
> H3- 2.374M Vs 3.314M
> 3H- 2.639M Vs 3.358M ( - 21.41% / - 0.719M )
> 
> Demo (4/1/19 Vs 4/2/18):
> H1- 0.960D Vs 1.220D
> H2- 0.960D Vs 1.150D
> H3- 0.960D Vs 1.210D
> 3H- 0.917D Vs 1.193D
> 
> Note: RAW this week last year was 3rd, 5th & 4th by hourly demo & 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly viewership.*


Normally those would be good, solid numbers for them but considering that was the go home show it's terrible. Down 600k from last year and the 3rd hour down 1 million from last year. Ouch. Really, really bad.


----------



## Swindle

Putting Corbin in the main event might not have been a good idea, yet, I don't think blaming any one person is fair either, soooo, it really falls on the brand in general.


----------



## Zappers

Becky/Ronda/Charlotte killing it in the ratings.

:duck


----------



## Chrome

That's a staggering drop from last year. People like to blame the low ratings on cord cutters, but not that many people cut the cord in a year lol.


----------



## Not Lying

:lol so the part-timers draw only 30K more than the women..ok


----------



## ClintDagger

Piper's Pit said:


> Normally those would be good, solid numbers for them but considering that was the go home show it's terrible. Down 600k from last year and the 3rd hour down 1 million from last year. Ouch. Really, really bad.


It’s not that far off from some of their NFL season ratings.


----------



## JY57

YIKES

Their post Mania RAW is going up against the NCCA Basketball National Championship next week too.


----------



## Ace

Last year at this time Raw did 3.35 million viewers, and that was going head-to-head with the NCAA basketball finals, so it's a 21 percent year-to-year drop on a night with far easier competition.

If Zion was playing in the NCAA championship game next week, he would have laid a good ol' paddlin to Raw after WM addlin

Zion > WWE.


----------



## Erramayhem89

I keep saying this but WWE is dead. They only profit because they are worldwide now and sell merch. Nobody is watching this product. It's impossible to bare anymore. That women's segment in the cop car was horrendous last night.


----------



## Ace

@Showstopper they were up against the NCAA championship game last year and they did far better. They had no competition this week and that was the best they could do. Really indicative of the (lack of) interest in WM this year. Only have themselves to blame with their piss poor booking and inability to create stars who people want to watch. The whole womens push has been a colossal failure as well as it hasn't mitigated the decline or gotten more people to watch.



Erramayhem89 said:


> I keep saying this but WWE is dead. They only profit because they are worldwide now and sell merch. Nobody is watching this product. It's impossible to bare anymore. That women's segment in the cop car was horrendous last night.


 It's never been less relevant than it is today.

No one talks about it, no one knows the wrestlers. Cena was the last star the company created.

Zion Williamson is a bigger star and draw than every full time WWE wrestler they have and the kid hasn't even made it to the NBA yet fpalm


----------



## Erik.

What an embarrassing number :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## The Boy Wonder

> January 28 Episode: 2.703 million viewers (Post-RR Episode; First Encounter for Brock/Seth and Ronda/Becky)
> February 4 Episode: 2.510 million viewers (Stephanie invites Becky to RAW; Becky attacks Stephanie and is suspended)
> February 11 Episode: 2.462 million viewers (Becky is given ultimatum from HHH/Steph; Becky has a couple of backstage segments, Charlotte added to WM Main Event)
> February 18 Episode: 2.771 million viewers (post-Elimination Chamber episode)
> February 25 Episode: 2.922 million viewers (Roman's return)
> March 4 Episode: 2.783 million viewers
> March 11 Episode: 2.819 million viewers (post-Fastlane episode)
> March 18 Episode: 2.695 million viewers
> March 25 Episode: 2.589 million viewers
> April 1 Episode: 2.639 million viewers


The last couple of weeks of RAW have been so bad that I can't even come up with a quick description for them.


----------



## Ace

I would have loved to see Zion vs The Raw after WM in the ratings...


----------



## Erramayhem89

Donnie said:


> @Showstopper they were up against the NCAA championship game last year and they did far better. They had no competition this week and that was the best they could do. Really indicative of the (lack of) interest in WM this year. Only have themselves to blame with their piss poor booking and inability to create stars who people want to watch. The whole womens push has been a colossal failure as well as it hasn't mitigated the decline or gotten more people to watch.
> 
> It's never been less relevant than it is today.
> 
> No one talks about it, no one knows the wrestlers. Cena was the last star the company created.
> 
> Zion Williamson is a bigger star and draw than every full time WWE wrestler they have and the kid hasn't even made it to the NBA yet fpalm


Yep and notice when they lost the Rock in 2003 it got shitter and then they lost Cena and it got shittier. Now they have nobody. Nobody on the roster is even half as good as Cena (Maybe Styles is but he will never be used that way and he's old now)

They are fucked once the ratings get below 2


----------



## Erik.

I wonder how many of those 2 and a half million viewers even know of or have heard of AEW?

I still believe that 2,300,000 of those viewers LOVE everything they're watching in WWE and it'd be hard for them to lose that number every Monday


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

What a garbage rating. This company is toast. They'll be hitting 1s when football starts back.


----------



## Chrome

For context, these were the numbers they were getting just 7 years ago:



D.M.N. said:


> 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...


And people were calling THESE numbers bad back then lol.


----------



## Erik.

It's such a shame the Saudi blood money will keep being pumped into them.

Because the closer this company is to death, the better it'll get.


----------



## Deathiscoming

The WWE deserve it. The ratings should actually have been lower/worse, like 2.5 M average viewers or fewer :lol .

I blame a whole host of things including Vince, the so-called "creative" who can't write stories, the useless talent who lack personality, and the ones who do HAVE personality(like Samoa Joe) being buried/obscured. 

Most of all, I blame Stephanie and the WWE's obsession with pushing a bunch of fucking women(women who will never be Icons like Rock, Austin, Arnold, etc. in any industry- especially entertainment and Wrestling, and are basically a joke) whether Ronda, Becky or someone else is irrelevant. 

The fact that the cops segment (once upon a time we watched TAKER and AUSTIN being handcuffed/escorted) happened and the fact that an ugly tall freak, a short MMA chick and a fucking orange-haired bimbo who calls herself "the man" were the ones involved in it is a joke. 

I can't believe just 3 years ago, the landscape of the WWE and WM 32 was way more interesting despite most big stars being absent owing to injury. AJ Styles had just debuted, The New Day were still entertaining(before the became full-blown retarded, throwing pancakes around), and Roman freakin Reigns was the whole F'n show...

and now that cop segment with three fucking women who are the "mainevent" and Kofi Kingston will be contending for the WWE title :lol .

RIP Monday night Raw/WWE/Wrestling.


----------



## SPCDRI

Viewership (4/1/19 Vs 4/2/18):
H1- 2.788M Vs 3.430M
H2- 2.754M Vs 3.329M
H3- 2.374M Vs 3.314M
3H- 2.639M Vs 3.358M ( - 21.41% / - 0.719M )

They're doing anywhere from 600,000 to more than 900,000 fewer viewers and hour and are down more than 20 percent viewership for the show, down more than SEVEN HUNDRED THOUSAND VIEWERS ON AVERAGE FROM LAST YEAR. And its not like last year was lighting the world on fire, anyhow. 

2014's numbers for the months of January through March saw every show in that time span do more than 4 million viewers, with a 4.44 million viewer Royal Rumble and Wrestlemania Season average and a 4.39 million go home show. 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2014403-wwe-news-raw-ratings-in-for-wrestlemania-go-home-show



> The first hour averaged 4.231 million viewers, before rising to 4.603 million viewers in the second. The audience dipped in the final hour to 4.338 million viewers



But 2 million viewers going bye-bye in 5 years isn't a big deal, right? RECORD REVENUES!


:mark:

.


----------



## The XL 2

How many more years can they bleed 500,000 to 700,000 thousand viewers? If this happens again the next 2 years, they'll be at 1.3 million. If it happens another 4 years, they literally won't have an audience. Make no mistake, the WWE is dying. All this guarenteed money will mean shit when they're drawing Impact level numbers.


----------



## SPCDRI

Chrome said:


> For context, these were the numbers they were getting just 7 years ago:
> 
> 
> And people were calling THESE numbers bad back then lol.


People were calling 4.3 and 4.4 million viewers a BIG OUCH. What do you call 2.6 and 2.3, one of those fatalities from Mortal Kombat?


----------



## Erik.

The XL 2 said:


> How many more years can they bleed 500,000 to 700,000 thousand viewers? If this happens again the next 2 years, they'll be at 1.3 million. If it happens another 4 years, they literally won't have an audience. Make no mistake, the WWE is dying. All this guarenteed money will mean shit when they're drawing Impact level numbers.


Depends what their bottom is.

I think about 2,000,000 will be the lowest number they get within the next few years.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SPCDRI said:


> Viewership (4/1/19 Vs 4/2/18):
> H1- 2.788M Vs 3.430M
> H2- 2.754M Vs 3.329M
> H3- 2.374M Vs 3.314M
> 3H- 2.639M Vs 3.358M ( - 21.41% / - 0.719M )
> 
> They're doing anywhere from 600,000 to more than 900,000 fewer viewers and hour and are down more than 20 percent viewership for the show, down more than SEVEN HUNDRED THOUSAND VIEWERS ON AVERAGE FROM LAST YEAR. And its not like last year was lighting the world on fire, anyhow.
> 
> 2014's numbers for the months of January through March saw every show in that time span do more than 4 million viewers, with a 4.44 million viewer Royal Rumble and Wrestlemania Season average and a 4.39 million go home show.
> 
> https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2014403-wwe-news-raw-ratings-in-for-wrestlemania-go-home-show
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But 2 million viewers going bye-bye in 5 years isn't a big deal, right? RECORD REVENUES!
> 
> 
> :mark:
> 
> .


This all happening with Brock as Champion.

:trips8

Good job, WWE.

:ha


----------



## The XL 2

Erik. said:


> Depends what their bottom is.
> 
> I think about 2,000,000 will be the lowest number they get within the next few years.


Last year I thought 3 mil was around their bottom, and then they turn around and bleed out 700,000 viewers including 1 fucking million for the 3rd hour. Honestly, I think their bottom is hybrid of casuals that buy whatever they sell mixed in with indy marks who enjoy watching the Garganos and Rollins of the business get big pushes. I'd say that's around 1 to 1.5 million. I think a lot of people are in the process of leaving this shit product in droves, and if AEW gets off to a good start, they'll be in a good position to absorb a lot of disgruntled fans that have left over the last 5 years.


----------



## Erik.

The XL 2 said:


> Last year I thought 3 mil was around their bottom, and then they turn around and bleed out 700,000 viewers including 1 fucking million for the 3rd hour. Honestly, I think their bottom is hybrid of casuals that buy whatever they sell mixed in with indy marks who enjoy watching the Garganos and Rollins of the business get big pushes. I'd say that's around 1 to 1.5 million. I think a lot of people are in the process of leaving this shit product in droves, and if AEW gets off to a good start, they'll be in a good position to absorb a lot of disgruntled fans that have left over the last 5 years.


Or the same thing will happen when WCW went under and those who turn off WWE will simply just stop watching wrestling.

For a lot of people, especially casuals, WWE is wrestling. For some it's all they've ever known. These are the people who don't really give other promotions a chance because it's not the WWE, not the big time etc.

I would imagine AEW will barely get 1,000,000 viewers consistently. Especially for the first few years. What they do have though is disgruntled wrestling fans sick of what they're served. AEW's main draw for the audience is that it'll be on an easily accessible channel, which other promotions haven't had the benefit of so soon.

Edit - That wouldn't be seen as a failure though. That's because they're a new promotion with basically ZERO history (Unlike WCW, who had the NWA behind them and a whole host of legendary talent on their roster) - as long as they keep filling their arenas, selling out their PPVs and raising their profile, offering money to the best talent possible, they'll get there.


----------



## patpat

Donnie said:


> How are they going to do the shake up, they can't really load up SD without killing Raw's ratings even more.
> 
> They're fucked and destined for FS1.


 and that's why making the name of your company the draw is stupid 
people want 
to see 
big stars on tv! not a bunch of guys with 50/50 booking, with two or three guys shove down their throat and one girl they like being pushed all while ruining her character 
stars! that's what people want to see, the whole "wwe is the draw" thing is idiotic, but hey they still refuse to create any memorable moment...;



llj said:


> Nobody cares about their top stars and the ones who aren't top stars are buried and doing nothing. Must-not-see booking, right here. Hopefully Vince lives long enough to see the day his shows play to attendances in the 1000s regularly and ratings are sub 2m every week.


that's the problem, they have NO top stars anymore lol....they don't want to create any, they just think the keen model will work. push a corporate guy or two to the moon and you are ok.


----------



## Lenny Leonard

Showstopper said:


> This all happening with Brock as Champion.
> 
> :trips8
> 
> Good job, WWE.
> 
> :ha


Also I wonder if ending the undertakers undefeated streak at mania has played a role as well.


----------



## patpat

Deathiscoming said:


> The WWE deserve it. The ratings should actually have been lower/worse, like 2.5 M average viewers or fewer :lol .
> 
> I blame a whole host of things including Vince, the so-called "creative" who can't write stories, the useless talent who lack personality, and the ones who do HAVE personality(like Samoa Joe) being buried/obscured.
> 
> Most of all, I blame Stephanie and the WWE's obsession with pushing a bunch of fucking women(women who will never be Icons like Rock, Austin, Arnold, etc. in any industry- especially entertainment and Wrestling, and are basically a joke) whether Ronda, Becky or someone else is irrelevant.
> 
> The fact that the cops segment (once upon a time we watched TAKER and AUSTIN being handcuffed/escorted) happened and the fact that an ugly tall freak, a short MMA chick and a fucking orange-haired bimbo who calls herself "the man" were the ones involved in it is a joke.
> 
> I can't believe just 3 years ago, the landscape of the WWE and WM 32 was way more interesting despite most big stars being absent owing to injury. AJ Styles had just debuted, The New Day were still entertaining(before the became full-blown retarded, throwing pancakes around), and Roman freakin Reigns was the whole F'n show...
> 
> and now that cop segment with three fucking women who are the "mainevent" and Kofi Kingston will be contending for the WWE title :lol .
> 
> RIP Monday night Raw/WWE/Wrestling.


you see , no matter how bad the product is, I will never take people like you seriously. you come off as a miserable angry dude , why do you insult those women? what have they done other than trying to do your job? I am critical of the women's segment because I think it Was shit, but it's like some of you can't make a comment without sounding like despicable incelswho live in there mom basement. you can make a valid criticism without disrespecting anyone , you know that? 
and whether you like it or no, yes women can actually be a big deal? most of the deal wwe got these days, is because of the like of ronda. I am critical tooo, but fuck off with these intel tier comments. going around calling them ugly won't make your point more relevant, so yes fuck off with that shit.


----------



## Seafort

Erramayhem89 said:


> I keep saying this but WWE is dead. They only profit because they are worldwide now and sell merch. Nobody is watching this product. It's impossible to bare anymore. That women's segment in the cop car was horrendous last night.


I agree on some of your points. Sans their big TV deal, WWE is a totally different company that is likely paring back NXT and getting rid of some of high priced part-time talent still under contract like Undertaker, Lesnar, Cena, and Rock.

The women's segment though was fun. It's the sort of over-the-top nonsense that fits in professional wrestling. The only difference is that it was over mid-way through the show. A decade or so earlier, they would have built upon that with more content (Ronda is let out of prison; Becky escapes from prison, ect.)



Erik. said:


> Or the same thing will happen when WCW went under and those who turn off WWE will simply just stop watching wrestling.
> 
> For a lot of people, especially casuals, WWE is wrestling. For some it's all they've ever known. These are the people who don't really give other promotions a chance because it's not the WWE, not the big time etc.
> 
> I would imagine AEW will barely get 1,000,000 viewers consistently. Especially for the first few years. What they do have though is disgruntled wrestling fans sick of what they're served. AEW's main draw for the audience is that it'll be on an easily accessible channel, which other promotions haven't had the benefit of so soon.
> 
> Edit - That wouldn't be seen as a failure though. That's because they're a new promotion with basically ZERO history (Unlike WCW, who had the NWA behind them and a whole host of legendary talent on their roster) - as long as they keep filling their arenas, selling out their PPVs and raising their profile, offering money to the best talent possible, they'll get there.


Their bottom is AEW's high-end projections. All Elite Wrestling is catered to the hard core fanbase and is designed (I believe) around purely wrestling, with little to no sports entertainment. Similar to NJPW. 

As your casual fans bleed out, what is left is your hardcore fanbase. That's relatively stable right now - not many being added or removed - but eventually that core will die out.


----------



## ClintDagger

patpat said:


> you see , no matter how bad the product is, I will never take people like you seriously. you come off as a miserable angry dude , why do you insult those women? what have they done other than trying to do your job? I am critical of the women's segment because I think it Was shit, but it's like some of you can't make a comment without sounding like despicable incelswho live in there mom basement. you can make a valid criticism without disrespecting anyone , you know that?
> and whether you like it or no, yes women can actually be a big deal? most of the deal wwe got these days, is because of the like of ronda. I am critical tooo, but fuck off with these intel tier comments. going around calling them ugly won't make your point more relevant, so yes fuck off with that shit.


I think all three of those women are talented and have a place on the card. I don’t see their spot as being at the top of the card (yet) nor do I think they have the chops yet to be the focal point of the product as was tried in late Jan / early Feb. The ratings trend seems to prove that pushing them to that level was a huge flop and clearly WWE pulled back on featuring them so much.

With that said, if you’re not going to do Brock / Batista which is the only WM main event worthy matchup you can possibly make, then I don’t think it much matters who goes on last.


----------



## deathvalleydriver2

2 million viewers for the RTWM. Nobody wants the women garbage shoved in their faces and literally there’s a crap ton of geeks on the roster


----------



## DoctorWhosawhatsit

deathvalleydriver2 said:


> 2 million viewers for the RTWM. Nobody wants the women garbage shoved in their faces and literally there’s a crap ton of geeks on the roster


You're really going to blame the roster when creative has done everything in their power to make people stop watching?


----------



## Deathiscoming

patpat said:


> you see , no matter how bad the product is, I will never take people like you seriously. you come off as a miserable angry dude , why do you insult those women? what have they done other than trying to do your job? I am critical of the women's segment because I think it Was shit, but it's like some of you can't make a comment without sounding like despicable incelswho live in there mom basement. you can make a valid criticism without disrespecting anyone , you know that?
> and whether you like it or no, yes women can actually be a big deal? most of the deal wwe got these days, is because of the like of ronda. I am critical tooo, but fuck off with these intel tier comments. going around calling them ugly won't make your point more relevant, so yes fuck off with that shit.


I'm now certain that Scott Steiner who talked like this, by inserting pejoratives and a whole lot of "fucking" before those pejoratives was an angry bitter virgin incel who lived(secretly) in his mom's basement too :lol :lmao 

Gee! I'm sure Scott's mom must have allowed him to get out of her basement to fulfil his obligations as a contracted wrestler for over 20 years! God Bless Scott's momma!

As for me, I will call WHOEVER I see fit as ugly, tall or whatever, without any fear of judgement or criticism. If charlotte is a tall ugly freak, I'LL SAY THAT. Unless if she's your sister or momma, you can fuck off with your opinions and judgements about me.


----------



## patpat

Deathiscoming said:


> I'm now certain that Scott Steiner who talked like this, by inserting pejoratives and a whole lot of "fucking" before those pejoratives was an angry bitter virgin incel who lived(secretly) in his mom's basement too :lol :lmao
> 
> Gee! I'm sure Scott's mom must have allowed him to get out of her basement to fulfil his obligations as a contracted wrestler for over 20 years! God Bless Scott's momma!
> 
> As for me, I will call WHOEVER I see fit as ugly, tall or whatever, without any fear of judgement or criticism. If charlotte is a tall ugly freak, I'LL SAY THAT. Unless if she's your sister or momma, you can fuck off with your opinions and judgements about me.


bro if you want to be retarded and sho you your lack of culture and class go ahead. but the thing is you are not Scott and when you do it, you come up as a cunt :lol


----------



## Chrome

SPCDRI said:


> People were calling 4.3 and 4.4 million viewers a BIG OUCH. What do you call 2.6 and 2.3, one of those fatalities from Mortal Kombat?


Probably a fatality from every single MK character I guess. :lol


----------



## llj

The XL 2 said:


> How many more years can they bleed 500,000 to 700,000 thousand viewers? If this happens again the next 2 years, they'll be at 1.3 million. If it happens another 4 years, they literally won't have an audience. Make no mistake, the WWE is dying. All this guarenteed money will mean shit when they're drawing Impact level numbers.


There are WWE shills (especially on Squared Circle) who will argue that "cable cutters, people watch more online now, munchmunchmunch" 

My counterargument is, are they suddenly getting 500,000 to 700,000 new subs on the WWE Network? DOUBT IT. I've not heard that dramatic an increase of subscriptions at all. They are literally living off their TV deals and Saudi money currently.


----------



## squarebox

Great to see ratings continuing to tank. Let it burn.


----------



## ClintDagger

llj said:


> There are WWE shills (especially on Squared Circle) who will argue that "cable cutters, people watch more online now, munchmunchmunch"
> 
> My counterargument is, are they suddenly getting 500,000 to 700,000 new subs on the WWE Network? DOUBT IT. I've not heard that dramatic an increase of subscriptions at all. They are literally living off their TV deals and Saudi money currently.


Those shills can claim that all they want but the facts dispute the notion that Raw’s drop of millions of viewers has anything to do with cord cutting. For one, cable is only contracting by something like 2% per year due to cord cutting. And that’s only in recent years since cord cutting is a fairly new phenomenon. So the math doesn’t work at all to explain Raw’s loss of viewers. Plus, the demo of people that are cord cutting is fairly young (largely millennials). Raw’s audience is concentrated in viewers from 40 and up (remember there are just as many viewers in their 50s and older as there are under 50).

In other words, cord cutting probably isn’t even in the top 10 of reasons that WWE is hemorrhaging viewers.


----------



## Erik.

llj said:


> There are WWE shills (especially on Squared Circle) who will argue that "cable cutters, people watch more online now, munchmunchmunch"
> 
> My counterargument is, are they suddenly getting 500,000 to 700,000 new subs on the WWE Network? DOUBT IT. I've not heard that dramatic an increase of subscriptions at all. They are literally living off their TV deals and Saudi money currently.


They don't explain how over 4,500,000 people tuned in for a special Raw last year promoting legends.


----------



## TakerFreak

Lmao omg really 2.6 for RTWM Final Raw....... That is bad very very bad. Jesus Christ


----------



## xio8ups

hahah hows the me too movement working for the ratings


----------



## tducey

It's the lack of a compelling story overall that's killing ratings not the women's movement. If you ask me the women's movement is 1 thing the WWE has gotten right the past few yrs.


----------



## Deathiscoming

xio8ups said:


> hahah hows the me too movement working for the ratings


metoo movement :lol :lol :lmao


----------



## xio8ups

that is why they are doing it


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

RAW tonight faces the NCAA Basketball Championship game. My forecast for the ratings?


----------



## Randy Lahey

They are lucky Texas Tech and Virginia are boring teams. I bet the NCAA Final does a record low rating.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Randy Lahey said:


> They are lucky Texas Tech and Virginia are boring teams. I bet the NCAA Final does a record low rating.


And it'll still be more exciting than Raw.


----------



## ClintDagger

tducey said:


> It's the lack of a compelling story overall that's killing ratings not the women's movement. If you ask me the women's movement is 1 thing the WWE has gotten right the past few yrs.


Well whether they got it right or not, the Becky / Ronda / Charlotte build did not retain viewers when it was put in position to do so. The ratings are going to go down in general no matter what they do but they seem to do even worse when the show is centered around certain things and the women’s division seems to be one of those.


----------



## Speedk518

God I hope the ratings are still below a 3.0. What a story that would be.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

It's post Mania RAW. All hours better be above 3 M viewers. :heston


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THE MAN said:


> It's post Mania RAW. All hours better be above 3 M viewers. :heston


Won't happen. They actually had real competition last night.


----------



## Speedk518

Showstopper said:


> Won't happen. They actually had real competition last night.


A national championship game between two schools who have ZERO basketball tradition? Nah dude. This isn't Duke vs. Kentucky.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Speedk518 said:


> A national championship game between two schools who have ZERO basketball tradition? Nah dude. This isn't Duke vs. Kentucky.


Doesn't matter. It's the National Championship.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Speedk518 said:


> A national championship game between two schools who have ZERO basketball tradition? Nah dude. This isn't Duke vs. Kentucky.


True. Does Texas Tech even know they have a basketball program?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Showstopper said:


> Won't happen. They actually had real competition last night.


I doubt it too because that was an overtime game. I am interested to see how well Vince's little bait and switch ploy worked because it went over horribly to the live crowd.


----------



## llj

I'm sure previous post-Mania RAWs have fallen on the same day as NCAA title games and that never affected their numbers


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THE MAN said:


> I doubt it too because that was an overtime game. I am interested to see how well Vince's little bait and switch ploy worked because it went over horribly to the live crowd.


I hope it failed, too. Vince is a POS.



llj said:


> I'm sure previous post-Mania RAWs have fallen on the same day as NCAA title games and that never affected their numbers


Yep, it happened the night after WM 30, and it was lower than all of the other Raw after Mania's in that era that didn't fall on the same night as the game.


----------



## ClintDagger

I really don’t think what’s left of the fan base watches mainstream sports much. That’s why the transition from the NFL didn’t see a huge bounce.


----------



## llj

Well, I stand corrected then


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Showstopper said:


> I hope it failed, too. Vince is a POS.


Yeah I started laughing at how he botched it. Kofi should have been held off until tonight and Seth needed to either face Brock again or at least get attacked by him. The show was unopposed for about 80 minutes so Vince could have done something big and not worry about hour 3 because it was always destined to suffer, especially on that night.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THE MAN said:


> Yeah I started laughing at how he botched it. Kofi should have been held off until tonight and Seth needed to either face Brock again or at least get attacked by him. The show was unopposed for about 80 minutes so Vince could have done something big and not worry about hour 3 because it was always destined to suffer, especially on that night.


I think they're moving away from Brock for now, especially with him getting back into shape for UFC, so not sure if that would've been the way to go. All Vince had to do was not lie. Announce it as the tag match in the first segment, and take your hour 3 rating like a man. Or, since the women are the top of the card, have Becky defend it against Lacey or someone else.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 3.182M
H2- 2.943M
H3- 2.646M
3H- 2.924M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 7.51% / - 0.239M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 10.09% / - 0.297M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 16.84% / - 0.536M )
4/8/19 Vs 4/1/19 ( + 10.80% / + 0.285M )

Demo (4/8/19 Vs 4/1/19):
H1- 1.150D Vs 0.960D
H2- 1.100D Vs 0.960D
H3- 1.000D Vs 0.830D
3H- 1.083D Vs 0.917D

Note: RAW is 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 4th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (4/8/19 Vs 4/9/18):
H1- 3.182M Vs 4.098M
H2- 2.943M Vs 4.069M
H3- 2.646M Vs 3.597M
3H- 2.924M Vs 3.921M ( - 25.43% / - 0.997M )

Demo (4/8/19 Vs 4/9/18):
H1- 1.150D Vs 1.490D
H2- 1.100D Vs 1.500D
H3- 1.000D Vs 1.400D
3H- 1.083D Vs 1.463D

Note: RAW this week last year was 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## RainSaibot

Absolutely laughable and adorable little numbers. It's only going to get worse from here. It always does after the 'RAW after Mania.'

Imagine being one of the top 3 champions and being responsible for trying to draw viewers in, and being attached to this utter failure. The top guys will have the stench of failure from the geek era attached to them for their entire lives. Their legacy will be remembered as being on top during the least watched era ever.

Poor bastards.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Ah, was hoping hour 3 would be lower due to shithead Vince's BS tactics.


----------



## A-C-P

:ha :maury :Rollins :reneelel :bryanlol :heston :tysonlol :duck


----------



## Speedk518

WOW. No-one stuck around to watch Kofi v. Seth? LOL


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Showstopper said:


> Ah, was hoping hour 3 would be lower due to shithead Vince's BS tactics.


Hour 3 did lose 536,000 viewers from Hour 1, so Vince's lies didn't end that well.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Ouch. All 3 smark darlings won and the ratings are still in the trash can. Maybe live crowds don't represent the viewers at home.


----------



## llj

I expected lower, but yeah, these numbers are the new reality. This is probably going to be the highest numbers they do for the next few months, too.

(Though the superstar shakeup could do better)


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

THE MAN said:


> Hour 3 did lose 536,000 viewers from Hour 1, so Vince's lies didn't end that well.


Yeah, but we've seen much lower Hour 3's than THAT, especially with that game on.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> Ah, was hoping hour 3 would be lower due to shithead Vince's BS tactics.


His tactics worked a little. I’d have expected 2.4MM or less for H3.


----------



## .christopher.

Speedk518 said:


> WOW. No-one stuck around to watch Kofi v. Seth? LOL


They're both boring, overpushed performers so it's a miracle they kept as many viewers as they did.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> His tactics worked a little. I’d have expected 2.4MM or less for H3.


Exactly. That's what I'm saying.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> Exactly. That's what I'm saying.


Yeah I know. I’m agreeing with you.


----------



## RainSaibot

What's the lowest rated hour 3 ever on a post-Mania RAW? Anyone know?

This has to be top 5. Maybe even top 3.


----------



## Speedk518

I love watching this company fail. Now it's off to Saudi Arabia. I hope no-one gets killed.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

A-C-P said:


> :ha :maury :Rollins :reneelel :bryanlol :heston :tysonlol :duck


Not using this smiley. :beckylol The misandry against The Man. :tripsscust


----------



## A-C-P

THE MAN said:


> Not using this smiley. :beckylol The misandry against The Man. :tripsscust


I have failed :sadbecky

:beckylol


----------



## RainSaibot

Speedk518 said:


> I love watching this company fail. Now it's off to Saudi Arabia. I hope no-one gets killed.


2.6 million viewers in hour 3 of a post-Mania RAW. I won't be able to stop laughing all week. Absolutely disastrous stuff, especially since it's all downhill from here.


----------



## Speedk518

I look forward to Becky v. Lacey Evans main eventing the next PPV. :lol


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1- 3.182M
> H2- 2.943M
> H3- 2.646M
> 3H- 2.924M*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership:
> H2 Vs H1 ( - 7.51% / - 0.239M )
> H3 Vs H2 ( - 10.09% / - 0.297M )
> H3 Vs H1 ( - 16.84% / - 0.536M )
> 4/8/19 Vs 4/1/19 ( + 10.80% / + 0.285M )
> 
> Demo (4/8/19 Vs 4/1/19):
> H1- 1.150D Vs 0.960D
> H2- 1.100D Vs 0.960D
> H3- 1.000D Vs 0.830D
> 3H- 1.083D Vs 0.917D
> 
> Note: RAW is 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 4th by hourly viewership.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership (4/8/19 Vs 4/9/18):
> H1- 3.182M Vs 4.098M
> H2- 2.943M Vs 4.069M
> H3- 2.646M Vs 3.597M
> 3H- 2.924M Vs 3.921M ( - 25.43% / - 0.997M )
> 
> Demo (4/8/19 Vs 4/9/18):
> H1- 1.150D Vs 1.490D
> H2- 1.100D Vs 1.500D
> H3- 1.000D Vs 1.400D
> 3H- 1.083D Vs 1.463D
> 
> Note: RAW this week last year was 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly viewership.*


The following records were broken, with WM 13 RAW from March 97' being the previous nadir.

*-Lowest WM RAW viewership in 22 years.
-Lowest WM RAW demos in 22 years.
-Biggest WM RAW Y-Y viewership drop in 22 years.
-Biggest WM RAW Y-Y demo drop in 22 years.

-First WM RAW with sub 3M viewership.
-First WM RAW with H2 and H3 below 3M.
-WM RAW with lowest ever hour (H3).
-WM RAW with lowest ever H3.*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

A-C-P said:


> I have failed :sadbecky
> 
> :beckylol






 :yoda

:beckylol


----------



## RainSaibot

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> The following records were broken, with WM 13 from 97' being the absolute nadir.
> 
> *-Lowest WM RAW viewership in 22 years.
> -Lowest WM RAW demos in 22 years.
> -Biggest WM RAW Y-Y viewership drop in 22 years.
> -Biggest WM RAW Y-Y demo drop in 22 years.
> -First WM RAW with sub 3M viewership.*


LMFAO

Lowest rated hour 3 on a post-Mania RAW EVER.

Holy shit. The utter failure is historic.


----------



## V-Trigger




----------



## Chrome

Ooof. Kinda hard to believe they had over 4 million viewers watching just a year ago.


----------



## llj

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> The following records were broken, with WM 13 from 97' being the absolute nadir.


I'm surprised at that. It was a shit Wrestlemania overall in a down period, but it had THAT famous match as well. And we knew it was famous even at the time it happened, not just retrospect.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Got to hand it to Vince. He fails bigly. :trump


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

They lost 900k viewers in one year and that is with Seth, Becky and Kofi all winning and advertising a bait and switch match at the start of the show.

I guess smarks can't blame Bork holding the belt hostage as the reason for the ratings being a joke now.


----------



## Chrome

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> The following records were broken, with WM 13 from 97' being the absolute nadir.
> 
> *-Lowest WM RAW viewership in 22 years.
> -Lowest WM RAW demos in 22 years.
> -Biggest WM RAW Y-Y viewership drop in 22 years.
> -Biggest WM RAW Y-Y demo drop in 22 years.
> 
> -First WM RAW with sub 3M viewership.
> -First WM RAW with H2 and H3 below 3M.
> -WM RAW with lowest ever H3.*


WWE setting all kinds of records this Wrestlemania season.











llj said:


> I'm surprised at that. It was a shit Wrestlemania overall in a down period, but it had THAT famous match as well. And we knew it was famous even at the time it happened, not just retrospect.


To be fair, they had WCW kicking their asses at the time. That's kinda what makes this even sadder tbh, no competition.


----------



## Ace

LMFAO

That title vs title match didn't even hold up.

Post WM not being able to do 3m :ha :ha :ha

Imagine the carnage if they went up against Zion.


----------



## V-Trigger

Can't wait for the NFL season to start. Getting closer and closser to reaching 2.000.000


----------



## Fearless Viper

"Note: RAW is 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 4th by hourly viewership."

"Note: RAW this week last year was 2nd, 1st & 3rd by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly viewership."

Given that they're on the top 5 of the TV rating from last year and this year, shouldn't this be a good thing?


----------



## Ace

The first hr was unopposed, the championship game started in the second hr I think.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ace said:


> The first hr was unopposed, the championship game started in the second hr I think.


I think tip off was 20 minutes into Hour 2, so they got 80 minutes unopposed.


----------



## Ace

THE MAN said:


> I think tip off was 20 minutes into Hour 2, so they got 80 minutes unopposed.


 Yikes, it explains the big drop for hr 3.


----------



## Fearless Viper

Correct me if I'm wrong, sure viewerships are down from last year but since Raw is still on the top 5 TV ratings and demos then that should be a good thing am I right?


----------



## Bushmaster

What are the youtube views though?


----------



## Piper's Pit

Fearless Viper said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, sure viewerships are down from last year but since Raw is still on the top 5 TV ratings and demos then that should be a good thing am I right?


You make a good point and from that perspective WWE is doing well but from another perspective they're losing viewers at an alarming rate, much faster than other shows on TV.


----------



## Fearless Viper

Piper's Pit said:


> You make a good point and from that perspective WWE is doing well but from another perspective they're losing viewers at an alarming rate, much faster than other shows on TV.


That's true but YouTube and other ways of streaming are part of the reason of decline but also the product needs a fresh direction.


----------



## The XL 2

Unless they get their shit together, they won't exist in 10 years. Fox and USA won't be paying for shows that will eventually struggle to draw 1 million viewers.


----------



## llj

Fearless Viper said:


> That's true but YouTube and other ways of streaming are part of the reason of decline but also the product needs a fresh direction.


Youtube views don't result in nearly the same profits as TV viewers still bring. In fact, youtube views barely make any money at all probably. Failing that, are people subscribing to the WWE network in droves? That's what they'd really need to offset the loss in TV viewership. I doubt that is happening.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Fearless Viper said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, sure viewerships are down from last year but since Raw is still on the top 5 TV ratings and demos then that should be a good thing am I right?


It's a big reason why they get all that tv :vince$ Most shows on cable would kill for that demo. Still I just like watching to see how far they can fall.


----------



## Fearless Viper

llj said:


> Youtube views don't result in nearly the same profits as TV viewers still bring. In fact, youtube views barely make any money at all probably. Failing that, are people subscribing to the WWE network in droves? That's what they'd really need to offset the loss in TV viewership. I doubt that is happening.


I didn't said that it would make them a lot of money but I think the fans would rather watch the show on YouTube than on Tv could be the reason of decline.


----------



## rbl85

Fearless Viper said:


> I didn't said that it would make them a lot of money but I think the fans would rather *watch the show on YouTube* than on Tv could be the reason of decline.


You can't really watch the show on YouTube.


----------



## rbl85

The first hour did nearly 1 million less than last year against no competition XD


----------



## Fearless Viper

rbl85 said:


> You can't really watch the show on YouTube.


I'm talking about the clips of the show that they post on their YouTube account.


----------



## rbl85

Fearless Viper said:


> I'm talking about the clips of the show that they post on their YouTube account.


Isn't it a bad news if more and more people prefer to watch clips on YouTube than the whole show ?


----------



## Fearless Viper

rbl85 said:


> Isn't it a bad news if more and more people prefer to watch clips on YouTube than the whole show ?


I agree with that. It's just that audience is still there but watch it differently. But still their shows are still high rated in the TV ratings and demos. As long they keep that kind of rating then they'll be fine but they shouldn't be careless about it.


----------



## patpat

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> They lost 900k viewers in one year and that is with Seth, Becky and Kofi all winning and advertising a bait and switch match at the start of the show.
> 
> I guess smarks can't blame Bork holding the belt hostage as the reason for the ratings being a joke now.


brock never did anything to the rating, people just stop with this retarded thing. Batista failed to bring any significant ratings either. people still blaming the shit rating on the talents is ridiculous :lol


----------



## Randy Lahey

The night after Mania is always the highest rated show of the year. To not even draw 3 mils is atrocious. We could see sub 2 million come NFL season


----------



## Dr. Jones

The XL 2 said:


> Unless they get their shit together, they won't exist in 10 years. Fox and USA won't be paying for shows that will eventually struggle to draw 1 million viewers.


They'll just put Raw and SD on the Network and try to fleece more places overseas by putting on PPV-like shows, but charging them outrageous prices to do so.

Interest in the WWE in the US is dying. I started watching semi-regularly this RTWM and I noticed there weren't many young kids in the audience. In mid 00s there were kids everywhere. Nowadays I saw a lot of the crowd made up of people in their late 20s to 40s. Attitude Era kids. They're not replenishing the well as those kids from the mid 00s didn't stick around and kids now aren't interested.

Those Attitude Era kids are going to keep dwindling and they wont have anything left. They will then turn their attention overseas where some folks still think it's real


----------



## Scholes18

If nothing else their graphic tonight on smack down touting their social media numbers showed WWE’s brilliance. You’re probably not going to attract new viewers channel surfing like in days home by, but you can drum up interest via social media and can pitch to networks that they have a billion followers (potential customers) on social media.

Here’s where they’re brilliant. By putting on such a shit show last night with the main event, they knew the first thing people would do is head to twitter and complain. Didn’t matter what they were saying, the metric shows they were more relevant on social media than the NCAA finals which is amazing.


----------



## ClintDagger

Fearless Viper said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, sure viewerships are down from last year but since Raw is still on the top 5 TV ratings and demos then that should be a good thing am I right?


They should still be concerned. These networks hold their nose and put wrestling on their schedule because of the raw (pardon the pun) viewership. In USA’s case it helps them move up the cable network rankings. For Fox, they’re thinking they will get Friday night programming that consistently does 3.5 million viewers for 2 to 3 hours (I don’t see that happening). But WWE’s demographics are atrocious from a socioeconomic standpoint which is why they struggle to get premiere advertisers. There’s a point at which their audience gets small enough that they no longer will have any takers from the mainstream networks. If they then have to put Raw & SD on WWEN they will lose a ridiculous amount of revenue and their stock value will plummet. It’s probably at that point that the family gets worried enough to cash out.


----------



## SPCDRI

Last year they had over 4 million viewers for 2 out of 3 hours and the worst hour, Hour 3, at 3.5 million viewers, was 400,000 people higher than this post-WM Raw's HIGHEST HOUR. 

HOLY SHIT 



> -Lowest WM RAW viewership in 22 years.
> -Lowest WM RAW demos in 22 years.
> -Biggest WM RAW Y-Y viewership drop in 22 years.
> -Biggest WM RAW Y-Y demo drop in 22 years.
> 
> -First WM RAW with sub 3M viewership.
> -First WM RAW with H2 and H3 below 3M.
> -WM RAW with lowest ever hour (H3).
> -WM RAW with lowest ever H3.


----------



## deathvalleydriver2

A goofy red head who can’t cut a promo and a bland create a character as the WWE champion doesn’t draw? Shocking!!! :lol


----------



## MaxPayne4400

No Brock 

No Ronda Rousey

The 2 mainstream stars are no longer around. These ratings are about to tank hard.


----------



## DoctorWhosawhatsit

It's a bad show.

Is it really that shocking that a bad show is losing viewers?



SPCDRI said:


> Last year they had over 4 million viewers for 2 out of 3 hours and the worst hour, Hour 3, at 3.5 million viewers, was 400,000 people higher than this post-WM Raw's HIGHEST HOUR.
> 
> HOLY SHIT


Kind of puts Sami Zayn's promo into perspective.

WWE: IF you don't like it, don't watch!

Audience: No problem.


----------



## Ace

I think I've finally broken free, haven't watched Raw/SD in more than a month.

Losing the desire to post on here and look up results too, usually I read through twitter to see if anything happened and watch, of late there's been nothing to watch.

Fortunately for me, AJ isn't there, Brock is gone and Batista is retired. Real easy to stop following.

May start posting more when AEW/Double or Nothing get going or for the big NJPW shows/G1. NXT also seems like a good watch tbh, may try keep up with the week to week and follow the stories.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

It's hemorrhaging viewers at an alarming rate and I'm not sure what can staunch it. Look for Smackdown to tank hugely too. :trump


----------



## Ace

Both shows need a complete overhaul in presentation and booking.

So many geeks getting time on TV, the stories are shit and no one feels like a big deal.

Everyone outside Brock feels like a midcard wrestler no one should care about who are fighting over worthless props.

Worst of all they've killed his aura by trying to put over guys they've booked like geeks over him, or deliberately sabotaging him to get others over.

It's very easy to not watch.

Anime characters/cartoons feel like big stars than guys in the WWE.

Joseph Joestar and Dio Brando >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WWE roster.

Don't get me started on Goku, Vegeta, Broly and Luffy.


----------



## Bxstr

Seth and Becky best couple for drawing lowest ratings hahaha


----------



## SPCDRI

This post-WM show was the lowest viewership for a post-WM show in over 20 years and lowest 3rd hour since changing to the format. The show was down hundreds of thousands of viewers from last year when this was a show that had all 3 major titles change hands to babyfaces. Last year's worst hour had 400,000 more people watching than this year's best hour. This show's highest viewership was barely over 3 million, last year had two hours over 4 million. It is a MONUMENTAL DROP of more than 20 percent of the audience in a year. I'm almost totally at a loss as to what could pull RAW out of this tailspin. I don't think the McMahons have it in them to yank up on the stick and save the airplane from crashing.

The only thing I can come up with as a Hail Mary pass to bail the show's ratings out would be changing the appearance, apparel, entrance music, moveset and alignment of Roman Reigns and working a major Reigns heel turn angle. They'd rather keep him off the show than lean into the boos, so that's totally out. This is the same company that refused to change anything about John Cena for more or less a decade, so I wouldn't count on Reigns doing anything different.


----------



## Adam Cool

Holy shit, Reddit is using the "Muh Youtube" arguement 

Youtube money is usually one Dollar per 1000 Viewers when said viewers are from Rich countries , Given that most of their viewers are from India Africa and middle East and Latin America , this doesn't apply 

Even if they do make 1 dollar in 1000 views, that would mean that they have made so Far 30 Millions across like 8 Years, which would mean 5 millions per year 

5 Millions per year , that type of Money would mean a lot to a guy like PewDiePie who's entire business depends on Youtube, not for a Company like the WWE

If the WWE doesn't figure out how to turn their international Audience into WWE Network subscribers(by lessening the price of Subscription) then their International popularity won't matter at all


----------



## TheLooseCanon

People want larger than life, badass motherfuckers, who doesn't do ballet but simulated fight/wrestling that drives a violent entertainment product.

High point in wrestling - Jacked and bloody bad ass dudes kicking ass and sexy women entertaining to loud rock music themes.

Low point in wrestling - video game playing ballet dancers doing flips while the women are the men trying to entertain to pop music.


The ratings have been dipping ever since they went away from the 'crash' TV. Metal and mayhem. Ever since around the time Austin got ran over by that car storyline, the ratings have never went back up.


----------



## fabi1982

Ace said:


> Both shows need a complete overhaul in presentation and booking.
> 
> So many geeks getting time on TV, the stories are shit and no one feels like a big deal.
> 
> Everyone outside Brock feels like a midcard wrestler no one should care about who are fighting over worthless props.
> 
> Worst of all they've killed his aura by trying to put over guys they've booked like geeks over him, or deliberately sabotaging him to get others over.
> 
> It's very easy to not watch.
> 
> Anime characters/cartoons feel like big stars than guys in the WWE.
> 
> Joseph Joestar and Dio Brando >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WWE roster.
> 
> Don't get me started on Goku, Vegeta, Broly and Luffy.


Sorry to quote you here, as I usually like your posts. But Saying "all are looking like midcard wrestlers" and then wanting to watch AEW who are basically all midcard wrestlers. Cody was a midcard guy, the Bucks are Cruiserweights. Kenny is 50 V-Triggers and even Jericho was a midcard guy in WWE. 

So how can you blame WWE and on the other hand are rooting for a company basically is the epitome of midcard? And dont get me wrong I like most of these guys and looking forward to AEW, but always these kicks on WWE when the future competition is basically the same just not as flashy as WWE??


----------



## Ace

fabi1982 said:


> Sorry to quote you here, as I usually like your posts. But Saying "all are looking like midcard wrestlers" and then wanting to watch AEW who are basically all midcard wrestlers. Cody was a midcard guy, the Bucks are Cruiserweights. Kenny is 50 V-Triggers and even Jericho was a midcard guy in WWE.
> 
> So how can you blame WWE and on the other hand are rooting for a company basically is the epitome of midcard? And dont get me wrong I like most of these guys and looking forward to AEW, but always these kicks on WWE when the future competition is basically the same just not as flashy as WWE??


 I know AEW is really thin, Kenny and Jericho still feel like bigger stars to me. Sure the star power isn't great and it's unclear how they'll fare, but I have more faith in them than I do the WWE.


----------



## ClintDagger

Adam Cool said:


> Holy shit, Reddit is using the "Muh Youtube" arguement
> 
> Youtube money is usually one Dollar per 1000 Viewers when said viewers are from Rich countries , Given that most of their viewers are from India Africa and middle East and Latin America , this doesn't apply
> 
> Even if they do make 1 dollar in 1000 views, that would mean that they have made so Far 30 Millions across like 8 Years, which would mean 5 millions per year
> 
> 5 Millions per year , that type of Money would mean a lot to a guy like PewDiePie who's entire business depends on Youtube, not for a Company like the WWE
> 
> If the WWE doesn't figure out how to turn their international Audience into WWE Network subscribers(by lessening the price of Subscription) then their International popularity won't matter at all


Yeah the YouTube argument has been disproven time and time again as you said. Those million lost viewers walked away from the product.


----------



## SPCDRI

Why are they talking about YouTube views from India and Saudi Arabia when television viewership is down year-on-year from 2018 by 20 percent? That's been a consistent thing I have noted from this 2019 thread when they do viewership for 2018 vs viewership for 2019. I'm seeing a show struggling to hit 3 million in RTWM/go-home/post-WM shows for so much as a single hour out of 3 and shows and hours down anywhere from 400,000 to a MILLION from where they were even just last year.

WWE is entirely contingent on remaining at their giant size now on their television deals being gigantic and fueling WWE network subscriptions and driving the whole business. How are they supposed to get the same television deals a few years from now? Get paid the same amount of money for viewership down 50 percent in the past 6 or 7 years? If the trend keeps going the way it is, we're going to have RAW doing the numbers Smackdown does now and pretty soon we'll have multiple hours hitting sub 2 million. These tv execs didn't fall off the hay wagon yesterday, okay? They won't pay 4 million viewer prices for a 2 million viewer product! Fat chance!

WWE also has a largely non-White audience, a largely uneducated audience, a larger amount of unemployed people, young people, retired people and students watching, lower wealth and socioeconomic status across the board. WWE's whole selling point is they don't have an upscale clientele, but goddamn, do they have a lot of people. Is sub-2 million hours going to be considered a lot of people? Lets not sugar coat here. They get middle schoolers and Cletus and Bubba (Hi guys!) and Jamal and Jose and Grandpa watching, their socioeconomic demographics SUCK SHIT. They NEED EYEBALLS. THEY NEED LARGE TOTAL NUMBERS. They're not getting them!


----------



## ClintDagger

DougEPush said:


> The answer is very simple. "The Man" character is NOT BELIEVABLE. No, not because she is a woman. Not because you can't make fickle fans happy. Misogyny or jealousy have nothing to do with it. As I see it, she isn't that character! She isn't tough. She probably has never had to fist fight anyone in all of her life. She has a natural charisma and charm about her. She's geeky and can spin it into a very interesting character. As a face, she can be plucky, oblivious to trouble/danger, and LOVABLE. As a heel, she can be a bit annoying, but rational. BUT...entertaining. The Man gimmick requires her to be hard, she isn't. I actually would say that I love Becky Lynch, as far as watching her U.S. career begin in Shimmer and indies in the northeast, seeing her return from an early retirement due to injury...then getting a contract, and ultimately excelling in NXT and WWE's main roster. But the flip side of that is that I have never bought into one word she has said since donning the leather. I roll my eyes at her antics. The Twitter BS is immature and unlike anyone that I know who is a real badass person. She should try being truer to who she is. Disgruntled? Overlooked? Disrespected? Sure! But why after turning at SummerSlam did she become a badass? A rebel? Where did the razor sharp wit come from? She was making Insta-stories revolving around other WWE wrestler names?! Come on guys, it's not a hatred of her, it's the fact that she is as clueless as WWE writers are.


Hardcore fans for whatever reason have suddenly really gotten into WWE pushing stories that, if you’ve been watching faithfully for the past 5 years or so, are totally not believable. Becky being a badass, Kofi being a world champion, and Seth beating Brock are all ridiculous stories that should never have been told when you look at it from the standpoint of what’s believable within that universe of storytelling. Yet somehow along the way the vocal fans created momentum behind those things and they happened. I honestly think it’s because those fans get off on thinking they are forcing the promotion to do things that they don’t really want to do. But who knows. It’s clear to me that hardcores decided a while ago that they weren’t going to accept the stories WWE wants to tell so maybe this is just an extension of that.


----------



## V-Trigger

fabi1982 said:


> Sorry to quote you here, as I usually like your posts. But Saying "all are looking like midcard wrestlers" and then wanting to watch AEW who are basically all midcard wrestlers. Cody was a midcard guy, the Bucks are Cruiserweights. Kenny is 50 V-Triggers and even Jericho was a midcard guy in WWE.


You are either trolling or you don't follow these guys enough to know what kind of star power they have these days.


----------



## SPCDRI

Kofi Kingston isn't anything crazy, its a very simple story, the Boyhood Dream. He also beat a very appropriate person who succeeded in that angle, Daniel Bryan, making it come full-circle. Its solid storytelling. As for anybody beating Lesnar clean in a no-stipulation match, well, they had the guy run roughshod on the entire company for more or less 6 years and be a heavyweight champ for about 700 days in the past 800, including a 500 day title run. I don't know how you're supposed to conclude it in a kayfabe following fashion. Maybe Jesus comes back and shoots him in the head? As for Becky Lynch, its all 130 pound women. Any of them can beat any of the others and I'll buy it for a dollar. This is a company that had Rey Mysterio going the distance in a Royal Rumble and beating people billed as 200 pounds heavier than him for years and he was over and I bought it.


----------



## drougfree

- 25.43% drop . those are wcw numbers


----------



## fabi1982

V-Trigger said:


> You are either trolling or you don't follow these guys enough to know what kind of star power they have these days.


Honestly? This just seems so big, because you want it to be big? That is typical psychology. If you check all the parameters which show star power like Instagram, Cody has 400k followers, where someone like Peyton Royce has over 1m followers. just an example and just one plattform. Even Brandi has just 660k followers. WWE is mainstream and mainstream means star power.

I like these guys and I watched all Being the Elite yadiya, but if you think these guys have "real" star power, then you are delusional. I know they dont have a tv station named and no show, so this star power could change. But as of now, I am not trolling and mean what I said.


----------



## Tk Adeyemi

U mean a girl who got her face broken with a concussion and still finished her job is not tough? Let me see u stay at ur job with ur face broken. Trust me ur here on the internet running ur mouth but if that happened to u, ur response will be “here call an ambulance I am bleeding.”


----------



## Erik.

Those numbers.

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


----------



## Tk Adeyemi

It’s funny to see you guys put down wwe talent like Seth, Becky and kofi but u wet ur pants over a guy like Kenny omega. Seth Rollins has 3.4m Instagram and Twitter followers while omega has roughly 359k. Once u hit a million followers on Instagram or Twitter that makes u an influencer. Obviously through wwe Becky, Seth, Rollins and Bryan have mainstream presence. Espn and various talk shows know these wwe stars. Who the freak knows the bucks and omega. Aew does not have a single star based of u guys criteria. What star are they gonna use to sell to those outside the hardcore bubble. 
Wwe’s ratings are horrible compared to years ago but you are not supposed to compare ratings to 10 or 20 years ago because that makes no sense. There has been a social shift in culture and in how people view cable tv. There are different dynamics that go into it today compared to 10 years ago. For example shows that did 28 in 1996 would do a 7 today. 
TV ratings have fallen so much that the ratings for a show like “The Walking Dead,” wouldn’t be good enough to crack the Top 30 in summer 1989. It’s 6.8 rating in the key 18-49 demographic would tie that of “Full House.” You have to compare raw and smackdown with its competition and both shows are in the top 10 on television. I hate to break it to you guys but television today is just like music. In the early 90’s and 2000’s people sold platinum albums because fans bought cds but in today’s digital age, cds are obsolete . Fans don’t buy records no more, we simply go to Spotify or iTunes music. Everything has changed so believe wwe is just fine because it’s not a wwe thing, ratings tv wide are at an all time record low. This is not a wwe problem, this is a cultural problem. Artist make money based on how much revenue they can draw from gate receipts at shows and how much they can sell their merch and cds at those events. Wwe stars should be measured by gate receipts and merch sales. The gate receipts are not great but not terrible. I go to raw and smackdown consistently and they consistently have 8-13k people in arenas. For those who wet their pants hating on Becky she out sells everyone in merch and her pop sold out on amazon. 
In conclusion you guys can yap all you want but the wwe is financially healthy and they are not going of the air any time soon. If this was 1998 they would be shut down but not in today’s cable less generation.


----------



## Erik.

Paragraphs motherfucker, do you use them!?


----------



## Mear

ClintDagger said:


> Hardcore fans for whatever reason have suddenly really gotten into WWE pushing stories that, if you’ve been watching faithfully for the past 5 years or so, are totally not believable. Becky being a badass, Kofi being a world champion, and Seth beating Brock are all ridiculous stories that should never have been told when you look at it from the standpoint of what’s believable within that universe of storytelling. Yet somehow along the way the vocal fans created momentum behind those things and they happened. I honestly think it’s because those fans get off on thinking they are forcing the promotion to do things that they don’t really want to do. But who knows. It’s clear to me that hardcores decided a while ago that they weren’t going to accept the stories WWE wants to tell so maybe this is just an extension of that.


That's because those fans don't have a " kayfabe " view of things which I would guess many here don't as well. Kofi Kingston suddenly beating everyone is absolutely stupid if you view the show as real but if you don't, you don't care, you just want your favorite on top and dominate everything. Kayfabe doesn't matter because it's all fake anyway, only the wins matter for a hardcore fan.

Those stories all work based on the same premise, what we smarks believe is true and sadly for the variety of stories, the main thing smarks think is " This guy got everything handed and this guy did not ".

That's the biggest problem for the WWE today, they have two different fanbase to attract and they need to decide which one they are going after, the casuals or the hardcore fans, those who want " sport-entertainment " or those that want " wrestling "


----------



## Punk_316

On YouTube, Ambrose's farewell video (with the Shield) has more views than anything else from RAW (over 7 million).


----------



## virus21

Looks at numbers


----------



## .christopher.

Ace said:


> I think I've finally broken free, haven't watched Raw/SD in more than a month.
> 
> Losing the desire to post on here and look up results too, usually I read through twitter to see if anything happened and watch, of late there's been nothing to watch.
> 
> Fortunately for me, AJ isn't there, Brock is gone and Batista is retired. Real easy to stop following.
> 
> May start posting more when AEW/Double or Nothing get going or for the big NJPW shows/G1. NXT also seems like a good watch tbh, may try keep up with the week to week and follow the stories.


Welcome to the club. They've wasted Brock's entire tenure on rubbish like Reigns and Rollins, and Kofi fucking Kingston is the WWE champion.... Amazing that anyone still spends their free time watching this, and even more amazing that people actually spend money on this company.


----------



## Tk Adeyemi

I feel bad for AEW. I am excited for them but my gosh not one show yet and u guys are wetting ur pants for a company that may or may not flop. A company that is run by a guy that was unsuccessful in wwe. A guy with no charisma, Boring in the ring and we have no idea how he may do as an executive. The fact is hate all u want but kofi is bigger and more popular than every single Aew super star apart from Y2J. Yes kofi’s Platform has seen him reach espn and he is seen as an example for minorities. Let’s see how AEWs ratings shape up when they start but I am willing to bet my bottom $ that it will be worse than wwe in a few years. You guys are delusional about Aew. They will attractive the hard core but not the casual fan.


----------



## Piper's Pit

Dr. Jones said:


> They'll just put Raw and SD on the Network and try to fleece more places overseas by putting on PPV-like shows, but charging them outrageous prices to do so.
> 
> Interest in the WWE in the US is dying. I started watching semi-regularly this RTWM and *I noticed there weren't many young kids in the audience. In mid 00s there were kids everywhere. Nowadays I saw a lot of the crowd made up of people in their late 20s to 40s.* Attitude Era kids. They're not replenishing the well as those kids from the mid 00s didn't stick around and kids now aren't interested.
> 
> Those Attitude Era kids are going to keep dwindling and they wont have anything left. They will then turn their attention overseas where some folks still think it's real


It's been like that for a while now and it's really sad tbh. At your average RAW or SD I'd say 90% of the crowd is over 30 and at PPV's especially WM it's virtually 100% over 30 males with beards and glasses.
Watch any old WWE show from the 80's-late 90's and perhaps beyond and the crowds are made up of all demographics - men, women, kids, families, a variety of ages.


----------



## ClintDagger

Mear said:


> That's because those fans don't have a " kayfabe " view of things which I would guess many here don't as well. Kofi Kingston suddenly beating everyone is absolutely stupid if you view the show as real but if you don't, you don't care, you just want your favorite on top and dominate everything. Kayfabe doesn't matter because it's all fake anyway, only the wins matter for a hardcore fan.
> 
> Those stories all work based on the same premise, what we smarks believe is true and sadly for the variety of stories, the main thing smarks think is " This guy got everything handed and this guy did not ".
> 
> That's the biggest problem for the WWE today, they have two different fanbase to attract and they need to decide which one they are going after, the casuals or the hardcore fans, those who want " sport-entertainment " or those that want " wrestling "


You hit the nail on the head my friend. People can’t distinguish kayfabe from reality. Look at the people in this and other threads that take it personally when I say it’s not believable within storyline for the geeky Becky Lynch character to inexplicably transform into a legit badass. I’m in no way criticizing the toughness or talent of Rebecca Knox. Same thing with Kofi. It’s ridiculous for a career mid to low carder to out of nowhere be a world champion. That’s not a criticism of the talent of Kofi Nahaje Sarkodie-Mensah. It’s lazy storytelling. If you want to believably transform Kofi, that’s going to take years of rehab. Not a couple of months.


----------



## Empress

ClintDagger said:


> You hit the nail on the head my friend. People can’t distinguish kayfabe from reality. Look at the people in this and other threads that take it personally when I say it’s not believable within storyline for the geeky Becky Lynch character to inexplicably transform into a legit badass. I’m in no way criticizing the toughness or talent of Rebecca Knox. Same thing with Kofi. It’s ridiculous for a career mid to low carder to out of nowhere be a world champion. That’s not a criticism of the talent of Kofi Nahaje Sarkodie-Mensah. *It’s lazy storytelling. If you want to believably transform Kofi, that’s going to take years of rehab. Not a couple of months.*


WWE rushes everything, especially so when it matters. Look at Reigns. He would've been in a much better position if they had given him a mid card title and just let him simmer there for a year. He could've been the one to end Rusev's streak. 

I like Roman, Kofi and Becky. So, my comments aren't knocking them but there's no firm planning. I appreciate the WWE reacting to the momentum Becky and Kofi have enjoyed. Vince is usually stubborn but there are just certain things I would've tweaked. I definitely don't like the Becky is getting the Daniel Bryan treatment with her first feud after Mania making her look like a joke. How do you defeat the two best on one night but get knocked out days later? The storytelling could be more consistent. 

Ultimately, I don't think Vince will change anything. He's got his money.


----------



## DoctorWhosawhatsit

THE MAN said:


> It's hemorrhaging viewers at an alarming rate and I'm not sure what can staunch it. Look for Smackdown to tank hugely too. :trump


The only way to get people to watch again, wrestling fans that is everyday people aren’t going to watch again no matter what they do, is a very long stretch of consistent solid booking. I’m talking years. 

Fans have been burned way to often by a mirage of good booking only to see it turn to mediocrity.

The Mania main event is a perfect example “we’re doing Ronda vs Becky!” “YAAAY” “Just kidding we’re doing Becky/Ronda/Charlotte and Becky’s leg is injured now”

Wrestling fans are done with it.

WWE has lost so much faith with the fans that just throwing them a bone and putting a belt on a fan favorite isn’t going to remotely cut it.


----------



## llj

DoctorWhosawhatsit said:


> The only way to get people to watch again, wrestling fans that is everyday people aren’t going to watch again no matter what they do, is a very long stretch of consistent solid booking. I’m talking years.
> 
> Fans have been burned way to often by a mirage of good booking only to see it turn to mediocrity.
> 
> The Mania main event is a perfect example “we’re doing Ronda vs Becky!” “YAAAY” “Just kidding we’re doing Becky/Ronda/Charlotte and Becky’s leg is injured now”
> 
> Wrestling fans are done with it.
> 
> WWE has lost so much faith with the fans that just throwing them a bone and putting a belt on a fan favorite isn’t going to remotely cut it.


Fans just don't trust them to have a good long term plan for most people anymore. People are used and tossed aside like so much garbage. You look at NJPW, and they have plans for most people on their roster, spanning months even years. One loss isn't the end of the world. In the WWE, one loss is a burial and while that should be considered ridiculous, sometimes it isn't. One loss can really start the ball rolling to a long stretch of irrelevance.

They treat anyone who isn't in the top 3-5 people in the company like pawns in a machine, so how do they expect people to get invested in anyone who is not those top 3-5 people?


----------



## ClintDagger

DoctorWhosawhatsit said:


> The only way to get people to watch again, wrestling fans that is everyday people aren’t going to watch again no matter what they do, is a very long stretch of consistent solid booking. I’m talking years.
> 
> Fans have been burned way to often by a mirage of good booking only to see it turn to mediocrity.
> 
> The Mania main event is a perfect example “we’re doing Ronda vs Becky!” “YAAAY” “Just kidding we’re doing Becky/Ronda/Charlotte and Becky’s leg is injured now”
> 
> Wrestling fans are done with it.
> 
> WWE has lost so much faith with the fans that just throwing them a bone and putting a belt on a fan favorite isn’t going to remotely cut it.


The first issue they ran up against is that they failed to make Ronda feel like a huge star. Her WM performance last year was a solid start but not long after she was just another character on Raw. What they needed to do was make Ronda feel like a megastar, then build up another talent as a real threat to her. And they didn’t do that. Pretty much everyone knew Ronda was leaving after WM and therefore losing so there was no intrigue in the match at all. It was a fail all around by WWE.


----------



## Zappers

Yeah, rating not so good. But you can thank *only one person* why the first hour was the highest out of the three.

Amazing of what one tweet can do. :cenaooh


----------



## The Boy Wonder

The RAW ratings can be summed up like this:


----------



## patpat

fabi1982 said:


> Sorry to quote you here, as I usually like your posts. But Saying "all are looking like midcard wrestlers" and then wanting to watch AEW who are basically all midcard wrestlers. Cody was a midcard guy, the Bucks are Cruiserweights. Kenny is 50 V-Triggers and even Jericho was a midcard guy in WWE.
> 
> So how can you blame WWE and on the other hand are rooting for a company basically is the epitome of midcard? And dont get me wrong I like most of these guys and looking forward to AEW, but always these kicks on WWE when the future competition is basically the same just not as flashy as WWE??


i cringe every time I see sometimes call Cody a fucking mid carder in 2019 , people this isn't 2010! there are others things outside wwe, Cody made himself a real star and handle himself like one. sorry but the fact that wwe was ready to hiere him back and give him like 7 more cash than he got before proves that. this stupid awe-centric vision of things is infuriating. the bucks are the best tag team in the world and any promotion would bring out the big cash to get them wwe tried like THRICE! le's not even talk about omega. so no saying these guys are mid carder is like ignoring the reality. why the fuck do you thin Cody looks more like a big deal than Rollins? because he is FREE , the artistic freedom is everything to a wrestler. if becky had control over her character you think she would be out calling people "weirdos?" the geeks aren't the talents, ( people should stop blaming them!) the geeks is the wwe management and Vince that literally can't make a star in 2019.


the talents aren't the problem, pac is a proof , Cody they are all proofs of that. the wwe system is rotten, but you guys spend all your time shitting on them and calling everyone and their mothers geeks ( while pushing for charisma vacuum like Lashley to get pushed), I swear to you , put Becky Lynch on aew and give her the creative freedom that goes with it she will become a damn mega star. that's why everyone is sure Ambrose will do well outside wwe, the current wwe roster is the best in the world. these guys have an enormous potential and some of them are proven big stars. Finn Balor , the guy that YOU people call a "geek" created the bullet club, aka the hottest faction in wrestling. guys like becky and Seth, get them to new Japan or aew when they start, you will have the biggest stars in the damn world. they can talk, even Rollins who is heavily criticized , go listen to his off cameras promos, last raw he took the crowd and was playing with them and controlling the crowd at an impressive level to the point it was surprising. do you know why he can't be that on tv? because it is scripted to death! period. all the boys and girl in this locker room have an enormous potential, the fact that people complain about X or Y stars being a geek or not being legitimate because thy think their favs would do better. NO no one would do better because the writing sucks.


----------



## llj

And everytime someone on the roster gets hot out of the blue, Vince and co start thinking they can mold the person into something "better" and then it ends up ruining them or cooling them off. It's rare that they don't screw something up eventually. The only reason Kofi got the perfect build to Wrestlemania was they only had 2 months of building, so that means not enough time for too much senseless meddling. Unlike with the women's match which had like 5 months of pure nonsense which ended up falling limp at the finish line with a WWE crowd who just wanted to see the whole thing END already.


----------



## The3

2019: MTV Music Television has nothing to do with music anymore 

2029: WWE World Wrestling Entertainment has nothing to do with wrestling anymore?


----------



## patpat

llj said:


> And everytime someone on the roster gets hot out of the blue, Vince and co start thinking they can mold the person into something "better" and then it ends up ruining them or cooling them off. It's rare that they don't screw something up eventually. The only reason Kofi got the perfect build to Wrestlemania was they only had 2 months of building, so that means not enough time for too much senseless meddling. Unlike with the women's match which had like 5 months of pure nonsense which ended up falling limp at the finish line with a WWE crowd who just wanted to see the whole thing END already.


this! they can't create anything but when they get anything they think they can make it better. I will take two examples here, the two current champions. 
becky : she was white fucking hot, after winning the rumble and confronting ronda, the place went mental, everyone was sure this feud was absolute money. wwe tried to "make it better" and absolutely killed it by inserting Charlotte , Stephany, hhh, and all the Vince-package, they failed! they almost killed becky's hype. wwe suck , they can't write, simple. 
second case? Rollins , after the guy came back from his knee injury he was absolutely over then triple h think by feuding with him, he will make him a bigger star. the probem is , hhh does not make young talent into bigger stars, it has the opposite effect, but for some reason they are convinced he makes the boys bigger. if wwe let the kid write their own character, roman would be a silent badass killer, Ambrose would be hardcore no fuck given dude, Rollins would be a metal crazy star, becky would be an actual badass. why can't they? because wwe will try to push their own narrative into them. 
like they make EVERYONE into an underdog!


----------



## fabi1982

V-Trigger said:


> You are either trolling or you don't follow these guys enough to know what kind of star power they have these days.





patpat said:


> i cringe every time I see sometimes call Cody a fucking mid carder in 2019 , people this isn't 2010! there are others things outside wwe, Cody made himself a real star and handle himself like one. sorry but the fact that wwe was ready to hiere him back and give him like 7 more cash than he got before proves that. this stupid awe-centric vision of things is infuriating. the bucks are the best tag team in the world and any promotion would bring out the big cash to get them wwe tried like THRICE! le's not even talk about omega. so no saying these guys are mid carder is like ignoring the reality. why the fuck do you thin Cody looks more like a big deal than Rollins? because he is FREE , the artistic freedom is everything to a wrestler. if becky had control over her character you think she would be out calling people "weirdos?" the geeks aren't the talents, ( people should stop blaming them!) the geeks is the wwe management and Vince that literally can't make a star in 2019.
> 
> 
> the talents aren't the problem, pac is a proof , Cody they are all proofs of that. the wwe system is rotten, but you guys spend all your time shitting on them and calling everyone and their mothers geeks ( while pushing for charisma vacuum like Lashley to get pushed), I swear to you , put Becky Lynch on aew and give her the creative freedom that goes with it she will become a damn mega star. that's why everyone is sure Ambrose will do well outside wwe, the current wwe roster is the best in the world. these guys have an enormous potential and some of them are proven big stars. Finn Balor , the guy that YOU people call a "geek" created the bullet club, aka the hottest faction in wrestling. guys like becky and Seth, get them to new Japan or aew when they start, you will have the biggest stars in the damn world. they can talk, even Rollins who is heavily criticized , go listen to his off cameras promos, last raw he took the crowd and was playing with them and controlling the crowd at an impressive level to the point it was surprising. do you know why he can't be that on tv? because it is scripted to death! period. all the boys and girl in this locker room have an enormous potential, the fact that people complain about X or Y stars being a geek or not being legitimate because thy think their favs would do better. NO no one would do better because the writing sucks.


It feels like you dont understand my point. It is people who call half the WWE roster midcarders, who love the Bucks and Cody and think they are "stars". I gave an example about Facebook/Instagram followings, which is an indicator if someone is a "star" and I see German comedians over here having 10 times the following than the whole AEW brand is for me an indicator, that most of you are living in a bubble.

And again please dont see me as an AEW hater, I like the Bucks and Omega and so on and will definitelly watch, but all these butthard comments and how serious you people take critizism, is for me just laughable and makes it hard to take your comment serious.

At the end fans and supporter like you will make the AEW brand fail, because you think they will bring back AE, but honestly when they are on a big network they have to play by the same "no violence" rule or ad spendings will be low. But why am I arguing, there is no winning here I guess


----------



## patpat

fabi1982 said:


> It feels like you dont understand my point. It is people who call half the WWE roster midcarders, who love the Bucks and Cody and think they are "stars". I gave an example about Facebook/Instagram followings, which is an indicator if someone is a "star" and I see German comedians over here having 10 times the following than the whole AEW brand is for me an indicator, that most of you are living in a bubble.
> 
> And again please dont see me as an AEW hater, I like the Bucks and Omega and so on and will definitelly watch, but all these butthard comments and how serious you people take critizism, is for me just laughable and makes it hard to take your comment serious.
> 
> At the end fans and supporter like you will make the AEW brand fail, because you think they will bring back AE, but honestly when they are on a big network they have to play by the same "no violence" rule or ad spendings will be low. But why am I arguing, there is no winning here I guess


but bro , the reason half of the wwe roster feels like mid carder is because the company treat them like mid carder! 50/50 booking , win and losses doesn't matter. normally seeing the champion lose, or a top guy lose should be a shock worth of a thread here that would create discussion. but wwe is in this ideology that some people can't be hurt by a loss. like look at Rollins, he lost in the damn road to Wrestlemania , TWO WEEKS before fighting lesnar. of course a lot will call him a "mid carder" , there is non hierarchy anymore in the power levels. like mustapha Ali beat Bryan ( the wwe champion at the time) and got eliminated in a preshow battle royal like crap. this shouldn't happen, once you beat the champ you are a main venter , period. if the board have nothing for him, then he does nothing at mania. same shit for asuka, wwe stopped treating its guys like stars. they treat them like "pieces" that can be used and switched. that's why they don't feel special. of course a guy like becky or roman or Rollins or dean can easily be on the level of omega, but the reason omega became this huge of a deal isn't only because of his talent but also his push, and for three reasons. 

=> NJPW has an attitude era-like/wcw- vibe where it presents the industry like a big deal, like the most dangerous sport in the world. you can see that in the promos, in everything. this presentation is reflected in the importance of wins and loss, which can allow the fans to determine very well who is at which level. by doing that, a promotion brings back the "kayfabe". example ? njpw , when jay white won everyone complained, but you would see people ( smart mark) say "hey if he won the IWPG title then we should give him a chance to prove himself. because the title has such an importance that once someone touches it he gets a legitimacy hat blur the lines between kayfabe and reality in the mind of the viewer. 
when a guy win, the first thing people ask isn't "why are they pushing him, who did the push, is he the chosen one by the blablabla" and all those smark questions , no everyone says "does he has the shoulders for the IWPG title? can he handle the prestige ? 
the second side is obviously the way people are pushed. when new Japan push a guy, he FEELS important. you can see it , you can feel it in his booking. again no 50/50 booking, in Japan reigns would have been told at the rumble 2015 to give the crowd a middle finger the moment the producer would realize he Is getting booed. which is a more organic reaction. " I beat all those guys and the only thing you give me is a boo?" it feels real and natural, it ties back the viewer to the "kayfabe" but when the rock is Brough to help him, the viewer is pulled out of the wrestling word and doesn't see the character anymore, he see a guy getting a push. 
none of the boys are responsible , the booking is. that's the reason guys like omega bucks or Cody look like main venter, because of the way their companies shaped them.


----------



## fabi1982

patpat said:


> but bro , the reason half of the wwe roster feels like mid carder is because the company treat them like mid carder! 50/50 booking , win and losses doesn't matter. normally seeing the champion lose, or a top guy lose should be a shock worth of a thread here that would create discussion. but wwe is in this ideology that some people can't be hurt by a loss. like look at Rollins, he lost in the damn road to Wrestlemania , TWO WEEKS before fighting lesnar. of course a lot will call him a "mid carder" , there is non hierarchy anymore in the power levels. like mustapha Ali beat Bryan ( the wwe champion at the time) and got eliminated in a preshow battle royal like crap. this shouldn't happen, once you beat the champ you are a main venter , period. if the board have nothing for him, then he does nothing at mania. same shit for asuka, wwe stopped treating its guys like stars. they treat them like "pieces" that can be used and switched. that's why they don't feel special. of course a guy like becky or roman or Rollins or dean can easily be on the level of omega, but the reason omega became this huge of a deal isn't only because of his talent but also his push, and for three reasons.
> 
> => NJPW has an attitude era-like/wcw- vibe where it presents the industry like a big deal, like the most dangerous sport in the world. you can see that in the promos, in everything. this presentation is reflected in the importance of wins and loss, which can allow the fans to determine very well who is at which level. by doing that, a promotion brings back the "kayfabe". example ? njpw , when jay white won everyone complained, but you would see people ( smart mark) say "hey if he won the IWPG title then we should give him a chance to prove himself. because the title has such an importance that once someone touches it he gets a legitimacy hat blur the lines between kayfabe and reality in the mind of the viewer.
> when a guy win, the first thing people ask isn't "why are they pushing him, who did the push, is he the chosen one by the blablabla" and all those smark questions , no everyone says "does he has the shoulders for the IWPG title? can he handle the prestige ?
> the second side is obviously the way people are pushed. when new Japan push a guy, he FEELS important. you can see it , you can feel it in his booking. again no 50/50 booking, in Japan reigns would have been told at the rumble 2015 to give the crowd a middle finger the moment the producer would realize he Is getting booed. which is a more organic reaction. " I beat all those guys and the only thing you give me is a boo?" it feels real and natural, it ties back the viewer to the "kayfabe" but when the rock is Brough to help him, the viewer is pulled out of the wrestling word and doesn't see the character anymore, he see a guy getting a push.
> none of the boys are responsible , the booking is. that's the reason guys like omega bucks or Cody look like main venter, because of the way their companies shaped them.


I agree with alot of your statement. But look at the roster now, thin af and when you want to establish a win/loss record, this means either 50% of the roster will be losers, or they have alot of enhancement talent which gets beaten up each week. You will yawn about that pretty soon.

And with that the difference between NJPW and AEW/WWE is, they dont have weekly tv shows, so of course you can build a brand differently when you just have 20 matches (visible matches on TV), instead of 60. But AEW wants to have a weekly TV show and I see the issue there, that it is pretty hard to follow everything Cody said AEW will be.

Predictability will be very high, because you know x cant lose because of whatevery factor. 

And the Omega example, how bored will you be, when he fights Jericho on each event and always wins? Or will go through the roster as Reigns did?

I know and understand your hype and all, but saying "they will do everything different" is easy. Wait and see how it plays out. And again you can be a mega star in lawn mowing, doesnt mean you can move the needle ratings wise and honestly, if they can establish a viewerbase close to 1m viewers they can be seen as a success, but then still dont screem mega stars.

But at the end, we will see once we have 2020 and AEW is live for a couple of months. It is easy to pop 20k people in an arena when you write "changing the business" accross the event, as a lot of older fans are bored by WWE, but doing this on a daily business with a fanbase who craps about EVERYTHING they can find will be really hard.


----------



## patpat

fabi1982 said:


> I agree with alot of your statement. But look at the roster now, thin af and when you want to establish a win/loss record, this means either 50% of the roster will be losers, or they have alot of enhancement talent which gets beaten up each week. You will yawn about that pretty soon.
> 
> And with that the difference between NJPW and AEW/WWE is, they dont have weekly tv shows, so of course you can build a brand differently when you just have 20 matches (visible matches on TV), instead of 60. But AEW wants to have a weekly TV show and I see the issue there, that it is pretty hard to follow everything Cody said AEW will be.
> 
> Predictability will be very high, because you know x cant lose because of whatevery factor.
> 
> And the Omega example, how bored will you be, when he fights Jericho on each event and always wins? Or will go through the roster as Reigns did?
> 
> I know and understand your hype and all, but saying "they will do everything different" is easy. Wait and see how it plays out. And again you can be a mega star in lawn mowing, doesnt mean you can move the needle ratings wise and honestly, if they can establish a viewerbase close to 1m viewers they can be seen as a success, but then still dont screem mega stars.
> 
> But at the end, we will see once we have 2020 and AEW is live for a couple of months. It is easy to pop 20k people in an arena when you write "changing the business" accross the event, as a lot of older fans are bored by WWE, but doing this on a daily business with a fanbase who craps about EVERYTHING they can find will be really hard.


that is where their AAA partnership and their partnership with the Chinese wrestling company is important in term of roster. they have a huge pool of very luxury jobbers with that. and win/loss having an importance don't mean you have to do it exactly like new Japan. i


----------



## fabi1982

patpat said:


> that is where their AAA partnership and their partnership with the Chinese wrestling company is important in term of roster. they have a huge pool of very luxury jobbers with that. and win/loss having an importance don't mean you have to do it exactly like new Japan. i


ok let us both agree, that we will wait and see. Send you a big internet hug


----------



## Jedah

patpat said:


> Snip


This is pretty much it. I know the "anti-smark" gimmick seems to be popular nowadays but this drop in rating isn't any one individual thing or particular talent.

This is the result of YEARS of laziness, stagnation, and incompetence, and now the chicken is coming home to roost. Vince thought he could get away with it because he still had Cena, Taker, Triple H, Brock, etc. but now he doesn't anymore. Serves him right.

Raw and SD need a complete overhaul from top to bottom. The shows need to feel different from each other. Formulaic storytelling needs to be chucked. Guys need to start having some creative freedom. The corniness needs to go and it needs to feel more gritty and explosive. They need to start planning robustly for everyone on the roster instead of just a few people they inevitably fuck up anyway. They need to stop making at least half the show feel like filler throwaway matches. Institute a ranking system. Do something different.

Ultimately change needs to come from the top. Which really means that Vince needs to go and his pet beaver with him. Hell, hire some UFC people if you need to to make it feel grittier. Fire the dozens of soap opera writers. Consolidate the creative team.

Unfortunately, Vince is unlikely to go anytime soon. So they'll do the same things and tropes and then wonder why people have moved on from them.


----------



## Punk_316

Ambrose Farewell video now has over 9 million views


----------



## rbl85

fabi1982 said:


> It feels like you dont understand my point. It is people who call half the WWE roster midcarders, who love the Bucks and Cody and think they are "stars".* I gave an example about Facebook/Instagram followings, which is an indicator if someone is a "star" and I see German comedians over here having 10 times the following than the whole AEW brand is for me an indicator, that most of you are living in a bubble.
> 
> *And again please dont see me as an AEW hater, I like the Bucks and Omega and so on and will definitelly watch, but all these butthard comments and how serious you people take critizism, is for me just laughable and makes it hard to take your comment serious.
> 
> At the end fans and supporter like you will make the AEW brand fail, because you think they will bring back AE, but honestly when they are on a big network they have to play by the same "no violence" rule or ad spendings will be low. But why am I arguing, there is no winning here I guess



Sorry but WWE also is a buble because in France we have comedian, youtubers (only known in France) who have more followers (double or triple) than any WWE wrestler.


----------



## patpat

Punk_316 said:


> Ambrose Farewell video now has over 9 million views


geez look how Ambrose act so cool now? look at his body language, it screams coolness. look at him become super popular and all when he leave lol. 




also...;why won't they let Rollins do all his promos like that?


----------



## Phee

Ratings keep going down and yet WWE is making more money than ever because logic.


----------



## Punk_316

Phee said:


> Ratings keep going down and yet WWE is making more money than ever because logic.


The renewed tv deals and Saudi money put them over the top.


----------



## Jedah

For the medium term they're secure but if they keep hemorrhaging viewers this way, no TV network is going to pay them the big bucks they're getting now, and without those networks effectively subsidizing them, they're done. The Network isn't going to make up for that loss of revenue.

This is a serious problem. They need to address it intelligently. For the sake of the company he's built, it really is time for Vince to step aside in favor of newer, younger leadership. It needs new ideas to connect to a new generation. Desperately.


----------



## Phee

Punk_316 said:


> The renewed tv deals and Saudi money put them over the top.



I know and it's bullshit. They're being rewarded for shit basically.


----------



## 674297

Jedah said:


> This is pretty much it. I know the "anti-smark" gimmick seems to be popular nowadays but this drop in rating isn't any one individual thing or particular talent.
> 
> This is the result of YEARS of laziness, stagnation, and incompetence, and now the chicken is coming home to roost. Vince thought he could get away with it because he still had Cena, Taker, Triple H, Brock, etc. but now he doesn't anymore. Serves him right.
> 
> Raw and SD need a complete overhaul from top to bottom. The shows need to feel different from each other. Formulaic storytelling needs to be chucked. Guys need to start having some creative freedom. The corniness needs to go and it needs to feel more gritty and explosive. They need to start planning robustly for everyone on the roster instead of just a few people they inevitably fuck up anyway. They need to stop making at least half the show feel like filler throwaway matches. Institute a ranking system. Do something different.
> 
> Ultimately change needs to come from the top. Which really means that Vince needs to go and his pet beaver with him. Hell, hire some UFC people if you need to to make it feel grittier. Fire the dozens of soap opera writers. Consolidate the creative team.
> 
> Unfortunately, Vince is unlikely to go anytime soon. So they'll do the same things and tropes and then wonder why people have moved on from them.


The majority of adult Roman Reigns' fans who believe in Vince's horrible writing are either pedophiles or people with munchausen syndrome by proxy!


----------



## llj

Phee said:


> I know and it's bullshit. They're being rewarded for shit basically.


They've realized they can't fool wrestling fans anymore so they've moved onto fooling TV companies and foreign princes. At some point they'll realize they're getting low returns as well.


----------



## Ace

The Boy Wonder said:


> The RAW ratings can be summed up like this:


 Okay, that was stupid... That one second could have been the difference between a tap out... and you couldn't even really tell what she was doing, came off rushed and really poorly executed.

And people wonder why this fake tough guy act is seen as so forced and cringe.


----------



## xio8ups

next leg down under 2 million


----------



## Jedah

At the rate they're losing people, that's a strong possibility by 2021. And it will be well deserved.


----------



## fabi1982

rbl85 said:


> Sorry but WWE also is a buble because in France we have comedian, youtubers (only known in France) who have more followers (double or triple) than any WWE wrestler.


I was not talking about individual wrestlers, I was talking about the brand. And I think 39 million followers is a lesser bubble than 100k for AEW. We all know wrestling is a niche and stuff, but as big as some in here make AEW the international following is pretty low. Again not wanting to bash AEW as I am interested as well, but it is just strange that people in here say things like "they will kick WWEs butt" or "mega stars" and so on. 

But only time will tell.


----------



## rbl85

fabi1982 said:


> I was not talking about individual wrestlers, I was talking about the brand. And I think 39 million followers is a lesser bubble than 100k for AEW. We all know wrestling is a niche and stuff, but as big as some in here make AEW the international following is pretty low. Again not wanting to bash AEW as I am interested as well, but it is just strange that people in here say things like "they will kick WWEs butt" or "mega stars" and so on.
> 
> But only time will tell.



Well you can't ask for AEW who didn't even started to achieve what WWE have achieved in 40 years.


----------



## fabi1982

rbl85 said:


> Well you can't ask for AEW who didn't even started to achieve what WWE have achieved in 40 years.


But we live in a totally different world today. You dont have 5 years time to succeed. In this day and age things have to go through the roof from the start. I dont think Kaan will invest money without seeing at least some ROI. Thats why I am pointing this out, so of course they should push more, at least after DON, when they tell us which network they are on.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.760M
H2- 2.690M
H3- 2.546M
3H- 2.665M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 2.54% / - 0.070M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 5.35% / - 0.214M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 7.75% / - 0.214M )
4/15/19 Vs 4/8/19 ( - 8.86% / - 0.259M )

Demo (4/15/19 Vs 4/8/19):
H1- 0.920D Vs 1.150D
H2- 0.930D Vs 1.100D
H3- 0.870D Vs 1.000D
3H- 0.907D Vs 1.083D

Note: RAW Superstar Shake-Up (2019) is 4th, 3rd & 5th by hourly demo & 7th, 8th & 11th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (4/15/19 Vs 4/16/18):
H1- 2.760M Vs 3.634M
H2- 2.690M Vs 3.754M
H3- 2.546M Vs 3.479M
3H- 2.665M Vs 3.622M ( - 26.42% / - 0.957M )

Demo (4/15/19 Vs 4/16/18):
H1- 0.920D Vs 1.300D
H2- 0.930D Vs 1.380D
H3- 0.870D Vs 1.320D
3H- 0.907D Vs 1.333D

Note: RAW Superstar Shake-Up (2018) was 5th, 2nd & 4th by hourly demo & 4th, 1st & 6th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (4/15/19 Vs 4/10/17):
H1- 2.760M Vs 3.432M
H2- 2.690M Vs 3.600M
H3- 2.546M Vs 3.256M
3H- 2.665M Vs 3.429M ( - 22.28% / - 0.764M )

Demo (4/15/19 Vs 4/10/17):
H1- 0.920D Vs 1.240D
H2- 0.930D Vs 1.310D
H3- 0.870D Vs 1.190D
3H- 0.907D Vs 1.247D

Note: RAW Superstar Shake-Up (2017) was 3rd, 4th & 2nd by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 2nd by hourly viewership.*


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1- 2.760M
> H2- 2.690M
> H3- 2.546M
> 3H- 2.665M*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Updating...


----------



## ClintDagger

Wow. Not good. And you know the shakeup hooked some.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

What I was expecting considering the NBA Playoffs games over this past weekend were down 30% as compared to the same weekend of last year.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Damn...that's a million fewer viewers than last year. According to Gerweck's site, they did 3,622,000 last year.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Down from last week? :sodone

RAW'S new theme?





 :heston


----------



## Mordecay

:damn


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Aside from the 2 NBA Playoff games last night, all 3 hours of Raw are sitting atop the demo.


----------



## Randy Lahey

And you can't blame fewer people watching TV this year....Game of Thrones just set their record rating Sunday, and nearly all the good characters on that show have already been killed off.

The Masters did great numbers compared to their past with Tiger winning.


----------



## The XL 2

Lost 1 million viewers from just last year. Lmfao


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

I assumed the Superstar Shakedown or whatever the hell they call it would be a draw, but I forgot that nothing is a draw in WWE anymore. :bryanlol The year to year drop is staggering: - 26.42% / - 0.957M. Almost 1 million people have left the building. Disappointing rating and Smackdown might flirt with sub 2M tonight but we shall see.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1- 2.760M
> H2- 2.690M
> H3- 2.546M
> 3H- 2.665M*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership:
> H2 Vs H1 ( - 2.54% / - 0.070M )
> H3 Vs H2 ( - 5.35% / - 0.214M )
> H3 Vs H1 ( - 7.75% / - 0.214M )
> 4/15/19 Vs 4/8/19 ( - 8.86% / - 0.259M )
> 
> Demo (4/15/19 Vs 4/8/19):
> H1- 0.920D Vs 1.150D
> H2- 0.930D Vs 1.100D
> H3- 0.870D Vs 1.000D
> 3H- 0.907D Vs 1.083D
> 
> Note: RAW Superstar Shake-Up (2019) is 4th, 3rd & 5th by hourly demo & 7th, 8th & 11th by hourly viewership.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership (4/15/19 Vs 4/16/18):
> H1- 2.760M Vs 3.634M
> H2- 2.690M Vs 3.754M
> H3- 2.546M Vs 3.479M
> 3H- 2.665M Vs 3.622M ( - 26.42% / - 0.957M )
> 
> Demo (4/15/19 Vs 4/16/18):
> H1- 0.920D Vs 1.300D
> H2- 0.930D Vs 1.380D
> H3- 0.870D Vs 1.320D
> 3H- 0.907D Vs 1.333D
> 
> Note: RAW Superstar Shake-Up (2018) was 5th, 2nd & 4th by hourly demo & 4th, 1st & 6th by hourly viewership.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership (4/15/19 Vs 4/10/17):
> H1- 2.760M Vs 3.432M
> H2- 2.690M Vs 3.600M
> H3- 2.546M Vs 3.256M
> 3H- 2.665M Vs 3.429M ( - 22.28% / - 0.764M )
> 
> Demo (4/15/19 Vs 4/10/17):
> H1- 0.920D Vs 1.240D
> H2- 0.930D Vs 1.310D
> H3- 0.870D Vs 1.190D
> 3H- 0.907D Vs 1.247D
> 
> Note: RAW Superstar Shake-Up (2017) was 3rd, 4th & 2nd by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 2nd by hourly viewership.*


*The following all-time lows for Draft episodes were observed, with the 1st Draft held in March 02'.*

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WWE_draft#Drafts

*-Lowest Draft RAW viewership in 17 years.
-Lowest Draft RAW demos in 17 years.

-Steepest Draft RAW Y-Y viewership drop ever.
-Steepest Draft RAW Y-Y demo drop ever.

-First Draft RAW with sub 3M viewership.
-First Draft RAW with record low viewership for each hour.*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> The following all-time lows were observed pertaining to Draft episodes, with the first Draft being held in March 02'.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WWE_draft#Drafts
> 
> *-Lowest Draft RAW viewership in 17 years.
> -Lowest Draft RAW demos in 17 years.
> -Steepest Draft RAW Y-Y viewership drop ever.
> -Steepest Draft RAW Y-Y demo drop ever.
> 
> -First Draft RAW with sub 3M viewership.
> -First Draft RAW with each hour having record low viewership.*


That's disastrous and you can't spin that.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

I guess you could say Seth really...burned down the ratings


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> I guess you could say Seth really...burned down the ratings


Only after Brock did it for the previous 2 years. Where were you when ratings with him as Champion were a joke, especially since he's supposedly a big star? Oh, that's right. Nowhere to be found.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Showstopper said:


> Only after Brock did it for the previous 2 years. Where were you when ratings with him as Champion were a joke, especially since he's supposedly a big star? Oh, that's right. Nowhere to be found.


Bork drew 1 million more viewers than Seth did a year ago.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Bork drew 1 million more viewers than Seth did a year ago.


Brock was on the draft episode last year? Brock just this year was drawing what they're drawing in 2019, brotha.


----------



## Rated-R-Peepz

Down a million in one year. Impressive. :eva2


----------



## A-C-P

:brock4


----------



## Chrome

Gonna get even worse now since Mania season is over and the shakeup is done with, so there's no real hook for people to watch. More "lowest ever" records are going to be set methinks.


----------



## The XL 2

People are nuts if they don't think AEW can't immediately bite into WWEs market share. They have never been weaker or more vulnerable in terms of fan interest and loyalty. They lost a million viewers from last year, 2+million over the last 5 years, and many of their remaining viewership are just watching out of force of habit. That's like 3 million people right there. Those people didn't just stop being fans of wrestling. The last time WWE was this weak was 1995, and a certain weekly television show showed up, took the majority of the market share and almost put WWE out of business.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Showstopper said:


> Brock was on the draft episode last year? Brock just this year was drawing what they're drawing in 2019, brotha.


Hey now, the episodes he is advertised to appear on always get a 0.2 ratings boost. Drawing 200k is better than chasing them away.


----------



## Frost99

Wait until next RAW when they put out one of those "Did You Know About RAW" trying to "tout" their social media presence while their numbers do like Wil. E .Coyote in a Loony Toons cartoon......


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Hey now, the episodes he is advertised to appear on always get a 0.2 ratings boost. Drawing 200k is better than chasing them away.


Not recently they haven't. The massive decline over the past 2 years; Brock has been Champion for in that deadend of a storyline with Reigns.


----------



## Randy Lahey

The XL 2 said:


> People are nuts if they don't think AEW can't immediately bite into WWEs market share. They have never been weaker or more vulnerable in terms of fan interest and loyalty. They lost a million viewers from last year, 2+million over the last 5 years, and many of their remaining viewership are just watching out of force of habit. That's like 3 million people right there. Those people didn't just stop being fans of wrestling. The last time WWE was this weak was 1995, and a certain weekly television show showed up, took the majority of the market share and almost put WWE out of business.


If AEW put on a live Monday Night Show, and went head to head with the WWE right now, WWE would be doing at most 1.8 mils a night IMO. They'd be doing TNA Impact numbers


----------



## Erramayhem89

Gonna say it again WWE will be dead in less than a decade or forced to change in a few years because they are losing all of their fans/viewers.


----------



## Ace

:lmao

Hope it continues to fall, the shows are sooo bad.

Every week it's the same shit, why would you bother to watch?


----------



## llj

I didn't watch at all and wasn't even that curious about who would move. I checked the recap this morning and went "meh". They've ruined the main roster so hard that I can barely bring myself to care. I imagine a lot of other fans felt the same.

I have no idea how last year's RTW numbers beat 2017's RTW but they had something going and clearly did some things to turn people off after Mania 34. Nice job Vince.


----------



## Erik.

260,000 down from last week!?

That's horrible.

Why on earth should the same 260,000 they lost this week tune in next week too? They didn't do anything this week to make people want to tune in.

It's amazing that the rate they lose viewers they simply aren't doing anything to change it. NOTHING. No change in presentation. No exciting feuds. Nothing sort of "groundbreaking" - they've changed the Raw logo and the colour scheme at times but no one gives a shit about that.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Someone on the Observer board brought it up, but it's a great point. Analyzing the ratings chart; Raw not only beat, but crushed everything that was on TV last night outside of the two NBA Playoff games that were on last night.

And that's exactly why they got their two huge TV deals late last year. They still beat pretty much everything outside of the big, big stuff. That's why they're not going anywhere.


----------



## rbl85

Showstopper said:


> Someone on the Observer board brought it up, but it's a great point. Analyzing the ratings chart; Raw not only beat, but crushed everything that was on TV last night outside of the two NBA Playoff games that were on last night.
> 
> And that's exactly why they got their two huge TV deals late last year. They still beat pretty much everything outside of the big, big stuff. That's why they're not going anywhere.



When Raw is going to do just above 2M but they still do better than the others they're going to be happy ?

Also against which shows are they ?


----------



## V-Trigger




----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

rbl85 said:


> When Raw is going to do just above 2M but they still do better than the others they're going to be happy ?


In USA Network's case? Probably. USA's only other option is more Modern Family reruns or old comedy movies from 2012 which do way worse, as well as if everything else keeps going down, as well. NBA Playoffs were down 30% from last year on this weekend, too.


----------



## llj

The WWE may still be "winning" all 3 hours but I'm quite sure they've also bled out far more viewers over the past 12 months than most other cable programs, which have dropped at the standard rate of cable deflation. At this rate of audience bleed, they'll be closer to par with the current next best programs on cable sooner or later.

Last year they got their big TV deal because the RTW 2018 was actually UP over 2017. This year they are down BIG TIME.


----------



## The XL 2

Showstopper said:


> Someone on the Observer board brought it up, but it's a great point. Analyzing the ratings chart; Raw not only beat, but crushed everything that was on TV last night outside of the two NBA Playoff games that were on last night.
> 
> And that's exactly why they got their two huge TV deals late last year. They still beat pretty much everything outside of the big, big stuff. That's why they're not going anywhere.


They're hemorrhaging viewership at a much greater rate than those shows.


----------



## rbl85

Showstopper said:


> In USA Network's case? Probably. *USA's only other option is more Modern Family reruns or old comedy movies from 2012* which do way worse, as well as if everything else keeps going down, as well. NBA Playoffs were down 30% from last year on this weekend, too.


So basically aside of NBA they don't have any real competition


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

rbl85 said:


> So basically aside of NBA they don't have any real competition


NBA Playoffs, Monday Night Football in the Fall, and big presedential debates every 4 years like Trump/Hilary from a few years back.


----------



## TheLooseCanon

And it's only going to go further down when they put Roman on Smackdown. No Ambrose, Braun prob going to the blue brand too.

Balor, Ricochet, Rollins, and Styles is going to get record lows.


----------



## rbl85

Showstopper said:


> NBA Playoffs, Monday Night Football in the Fall, and big presedential debates every 4 years like Trump/Hilary from a few years back.


And those "programs" (don't know how to call them sorry XD) Always do better than RAW ?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

rbl85 said:


> And those "programs" (don't know how to call them sorry XD) Always do better than RAW ?


Yeah. They are the highest rated things on TV every year. They do monster ratings, especially the NFL and Presendential debates. NBA Playoffs do well, too.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> Someone on the Observer board brought it up, but it's a great point. Analyzing the ratings chart; Raw not only beat, but crushed everything that was on TV last night outside of the two NBA Playoff games that were on last night.
> 
> And that's exactly why they got their two huge TV deals late last year. They still beat pretty much everything outside of the big, big stuff. That's why they're not going anywhere.


I think they got their huge deals partially because it looked like they were trending up or at least had steadied the ship. Had NBCU and Fox known then what they know now, I think those deals look very different. Fox is even already putting it out there that SD on Fox is temporary because they know they can’t justify giving up all of their prime time hours for a show that will only do 2 MM viewers. I’m sure they hope Vince figures it out and gets it closer to 4 MM but if that doesn’t happen they’ll get booted to FS1. Which means their next contracts will be a fraction of this go round, which means the stock will tank, which means WWE will finally have to pay the piper for their bad operational decisions.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

TheLooseCanon said:


> And it's only going to go further down when they put Roman on Smackdown. No Ambrose, Braun prob going to the blue brand too.
> 
> Balor, Ricochet, Rollins, and Styles is going to get record lows.


If that were true, the ratings from the past few years would've been higher. SD is going to FS1 before too long most likely.


----------



## Jedah

Nothing beyond what they deserve. Last night was my first Raw in 2019 and it was even worse than I remember.

The commentary was somehow even worse than normal. And the matches slowed down too. The only one worth watching was Balor vs. Almas.

It sure didn't make me interested in coming back.

What happens when the shakeup is over with next week?

They really better get a grip and realize that the "shakeup" needs to apply to management. Making some roster moves isn't going to solve the problem. Vince has to go.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> I think they got their huge deals partially because it looked like they were trending up or at least had steadied the ship. Had NBCU and Fox known then what they know now, I think those deals look very different. Fox is even already putting it out there that SD on Fox is temporary because they know they can’t justify giving up all of their prime time hours for a show that will only do 2 MM viewers. I’m sure they hope Vince figures it out and gets it closer to 4 MM but if that doesn’t happen they’ll get booted to FS1. Which means their next contracts will be a fraction of this go round, which means the stock will tank, which means WWE will finally have to pay the piper for their bad operational decisions.


I agree. But if BOTH Fox and NBCU were dumb enough to get fooled, then they deserve it. WWE ratings have been shit for years. If they legit thought WWE had steadied the ship even for a minute, then I have no sympathy for the Networks whatsoever. The people who make those decisions are highly paid professionals. If they got fooled, then they deserved to get taken.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

TheLooseCanon said:


> And it's only going to go further down when they put Roman on Smackdown. No Ambrose, Braun prob going to the blue brand too.
> 
> Balor, Ricochet, Rollins, and Styles is going to get record lows.


Looks like The Lady Mrs Evans will have to carry Raw by herself.


----------



## llj

Every season there is an excuse. For the Spring it's NBA playoffs, for the fall it's NFL season. How does this explain the summer, which with no competition has been the worst season in the WWE along with fall-winter in the past few years?

Used to be the WWE at least had the Spring to themselves, now they are losing that. The numbers for this RTW were basically exactly the same as during the NFL season.


----------



## InexorableJourney

Curious thing about FOX is that it is widely known that wrestling viewers give no lead in to any show that follows, they watch their show then tune out.

So for 2 million plus viewers that have the lowest advertising rates on TV, the poorest demographic, and will not add viewership to anything else on the network. For only one billion dollars, Smart buy!


----------



## McGee

:becky :rollins4 :kofi


----------



## Seafort

It's going to be problematic when the day comes when Network subscribers and RAW viewership achieve parity. The delta between paid American subscribers of the Network (1.116M) and USA viewership is essentially your casual audience. 

That casual audience is bleeding rapidly away.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> I agree. But if BOTH Fox and NBCU were dumb enough to get fooled, then they deserve it. WWE ratings have been shit for years. If they legit thought WWE had steadied the ship even for a minute, then I have no sympathy for the Networks whatsoever. The people who make those decisions are highly paid professionals. If they got fooled, then they deserved to get taken.


I agree. If they’d asked one smart wrestling fan whether it was wise to invest 5 years into WWE they would have known to stay away.


----------



## SPCDRI

Down from last week with the draft show, down over 25 percent from last year, almost a million fewer viewers than last year. Oh my word. They're declining at a shocking rate. Within a year's time, an hour goes sub-2 million. Watch.



ClintDagger said:


> I agree. If they’d asked one smart wrestling fan whether it was wise to invest 5 years into WWE they would have known to stay away.


Any smark who follows ratings could have told them that the Rock N Wrestling Era and the Attitude Era/Ruthless Aggression Era were abberant and that WWE hasn't been mainstream programming for close to 15 years and that WWE has been in a viewership decline pattern for over a decade.

Furthermore, that smark could have told them that WWE was a dictatorship with a fool in charge, Vincent Kennedy "Viking Experience" McMahon. While McMahon is a wonderful businessman and self-promoter of the highest caliber, and is brilliant at making money for himself (Record Revenue, Brother!), he is now a deeply out-of-touch person who has no clue how to run a professional wrestling promotion and who has no clue how to stop the viewers from leaving and bring new viewers in.

Edit: If the television executives were totally clueless, the smark could have told them that WWE's regional, racial, age and socioeconomic demographics all suck a fat one and best case scenario would no more lost viewers, so about 2.5 million people with poor age demos, wealth demos, education demos, and really black and hispanic and midwestern and southern, all things the advertising companies hate, so the ad rate will always suck and it will always be things like action figure companies and Taco Bell paying you peanuts to advertise on your show.


----------



## deathvalleydriver2

Not a surprise when you have a geek holding the UC and a moron red head calling herself a man


----------



## Lenny Leonard

I wonder how much YouTube hurts them. Why tune in when all the highlights are online with a few hours of the show finishing


----------



## Erik.

Interestingly, the highest viewed segment on YouTube from this weeks Raw was..... The Miz beating up Shane McMahon.


----------



## .christopher.

They've put their main belts on shit like Kofi and Seth, are forcing a crappy women's revolution, and have successfully got people to hate the one star they had in Lesnar. Not to mention they butchered Bryan's return which was actually getting main stream coverage.

This company is dumb.


----------



## Singapore Kane

.christopher. said:


> They've put their main belts on shit like Kofi and Seth, are forcing a crappy women's revolution, and have successfully got people to hate the one star they had in Lesnar. Not to mention they butchered Bryan's return which was actually getting main stream coverage.
> 
> This company is dumb.


If I had a dollar for every time WWE teased something interesting and I heard someone say "wait guys lets see where this goes" only for it to get worse week after week after week I could have bought the company myself.


----------



## Adam Cool

ClintDagger said:


> I agree. If they’d asked one smart wrestling fan whether it was wise to invest 5 years into WWE they would have known to stay away.


They most likely view Wrestling fans as useful morons they wanna exploit , why would they ask one?


----------



## ClintDagger

Adam Cool said:


> They most likely view Wrestling fans as useful morons they wanna exploit , why would they ask one?


I know they really would never do it. I’m just stating that if they did they would have saved themselves from making a bad deal.


----------



## SPCDRI

They're 2 years away from low hours being below 2 million and USA has them for how many more years now, 4 I think? They're not going to be doing much better than other programming on USA. 

Edit: I'd like to say this is the floor, but I've been calling the floor for viewership for how many years now? I used to think 3 million was the floor, now basically every hour is below 3 million. More people will leave, and they can't get new viewership! They're hosed!


----------



## Bxstr

They have put the belts on two charisma vacuum anti-draws it's going to get worse from now


----------



## squarebox

Lol where are the WWE ass kissers now? The proof is right there for everyone to see - 1 million viewers GONE in just 12 months. I honestly didn't think such a big drop in such a short period of time was possible but it happened. This gives me faith.


----------



## Mongstyle

WWE has definitely been making all the wrong moves since last year.

They built the show around Rollins post-WM31 and that's when Raw went through a huge decline in ratings in the first place. Dude's a talent, but he's not someone you build a show around. Like, we know he's never even been in the top five merchandise sellers despite the push he's gotten. That's not going to change regardless of how much you get behind him.

Lesnar was a legitimate star for them. And while you cannot stop the decline, you can absolutely slow it down. You need only look at the decrease from 2016 to 2017 where it wasn't that bad. And why is that? 2016 had a bunch of interesting stuff happening with them finally pulling the trigger on Reigns, the Styles feud, and then later the brand split. 2017 they were running a bunch of big feuds at once. You had Reigns/Strowman, Joe/Brock, then Brock/Strowman and Cena/Reigns etc. Even though Lesnar was champion, he showed up for multiple feuds in that year, and they ran other big angles at the same time.

The point is when they put the right stars at the front, they do slow the decline a little. And they keep the product interesting. But since February 2018, they've made one dumb move after another. They've gone out of their way to make Lesnar seem like a bad idea for the product rather than, you know, actually selling your damn champion. They had Reigns lose in the main event, and put Raw into a holding pattern for months. In this time, the damage was basically done because they were doing nothing at all with Raw.

In the last few months, they've been focusing on the women at the forefront, and while that's a nice thing, they're never going to draw as big as your men do. This is just the reality. On top of that, they basically killed Strowman who really should've been the one to get the title. Because, unlike Rollins, he's at least a fresh face to the main event. You need to present something new.

Basically, WWE has lost the plot since last year and it's no surprise that the decline in ratings has simply accelerated as a result. They should've put the belt on Strowman and started fresh with some new angles in late 2018 since Reigns was gone. Instead, they literally went right back to Brock, made the fans hate him more, and picked Rollins of all people to be the "Beast Slayer" which they didn't even commit to because they still protected Lesnar.

It's just one dumb move after another. And Raw will absolutely crater moving forward. If they were gonna move Reigns because of Fox, then Strowman was absolutely the guy they needed to get behind. He's very clearly the next biggest star on Raw. And he doesn't have a long shelf life. Make use of him while you can rather than wasting the dude. They even brought Joe to Raw which would've been a huge feud for the Universal title waiting to happen.


----------



## Ace

Dave labelled this era perfectly - "The you deserve it" era.


----------



## llj

If nobody matters, and titles don't matter, how do they expect viewers to care? 

"the brand is the draw"

lmao no it isn't

Imagine if Vince lives long enough to see his company crumble in the last years of his life because of his dumb creative decisions. It would be darkly fitting.


----------



## SPCDRI

Its professional wrestling. The wrestlers are why people watch, not solely out of fealty to WWE's brand of peculiar and patronizing "sports entertainment." The casual audience couldn't care less about the roster and there never was any crossover viewership from MMA despite having Lashley, Rousey and Lesnar around. Why? Because they're not that particularly entertaining as professional wrestlers. 

People always said, "See you next Monday" like the audience was going to be slavishly devoted to WWE even when they thought the product was poor in quality for years. You can see that's not the case throughout the course of the ratings thread when you look at viewership numbers being down 5 to 25 percent year on year for many years. Even here, where you'd think the most hardcore brand-loyal WWE marks would be you can see that is not the case. I have been on this forum for close to 10 years, and this board's activity is right where WWE television viewership is: swirling down the toilet. Its got to be pretty close to chopped in half or worse over the last 7 or 8 years. The WrestleMania discussion thread hasn't even gotten six thousand replies yet in almost a month. It used to be the case that any 3 RAWs at random would be over 6000 replies within 48 hours.


----------



## Mear

Mongstyle said:


> *Instead, they literally went right back to Brock, made the fans hate him more, and picked Rollins of all people to be the "Beast Slayer" which they didn't even commit to because they still protected Lesnar.
> *
> 
> It's just one dumb move after another. And Raw will absolutely crater moving forward. If they were gonna move Reigns because of Fox, then Strowman was absolutely the guy they needed to get behind. He's very clearly the next biggest star on Raw. And he doesn't have a long shelf life. Make use of him while you can rather than wasting the dude. They even brought Joe to Raw which would've been a huge feud for the Universal title waiting to happen.


I think mentionning Wrestlemania 31 is a smart thing because 4 years later, the exact same thing happened. Seth Rollins won the World Title that was held by Brock Lesnar. Lesnar is still the same while Rollins is a face but not much.

I'm gonna assume that the Attitude Era last 4 years and so did the Ruthless Agression Era ( 1997-2001 / 2002-2006 ). Since Wrestlemania 31, we have basically seen what should be its own era but things are still kind of the same thing. 

In the Attitude Era, you saw guys like The Rock, Mankind or Triple H go through a massive transformation during that era, go from midcarders to top stars. Same for the Ruthless Agression Era with guys like Orton, Cena or Edge. But now, Becky Lynch could fit the mold and Braun too but he doesn't feel like a top star. This is a big problem, why would people watch something that stays the same and never evolve ? 

A big thing about soap opera is that you miss one year of program, you are lost for a couple of episode because so many characters totally changed. If you miss one year of WWE or even two, you will still feel at home


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.680M
H2- 2.296M
H3- 2.146M
3H- 2.374M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 14.33% / - 0.384M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 6.53% / - 0.150M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 19.92% / - 0.534M )
4/22/19 Vs 4/15/19 ( - 10.92% / - 0.291M )

Demo (4/22/19 Vs 4/15/19):
H1- 0.900D Vs 0.920D
H2- 0.790D Vs 0.930D
H3- 0.750D Vs 0.870D
3H- 0.813D Vs 0.907D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 4th & 5th by hourly demo & 5th, 8th & 11th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (4/22/19 Vs 4/23/18):
H1- 2.680M Vs 3.283M
H2- 2.296M Vs 3.210M
H3- 2.146M Vs 2.819M
3H- 2.374M Vs 3.104M ( - 23.52% / - 0.730M )

Demo (4/22/19 Vs 4/23/18):
H1- 0.900D Vs 1.090D
H2- 0.790D Vs 1.090D
H3- 0.750D Vs 0.970D
3H- 0.813D Vs 1.050D

Note: RAW this week last year was 4th, 3rd & 6th by hourly demo & 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Ace

They're so going to do sub 2m deeper in the playoffs :lmao :lmao :lmao

With WM season over and the shake up done and gone, this is their true number.


----------



## A-C-P

:ha :maury :tysonlol :heston :bryanlol :reneelel :Rollins :beckylol


----------



## rbl85

That's brutal


----------



## Piper's Pit

Getting so close now to Hour 3 being regularly under 2M, not long to go.


----------



## Ace

What were they up against for hr 2 and 3?

Ratings died from that point onwards. Did people just not want to watch or was it Giannis layin the addlin


----------



## Adam Cool

After so many years of telling everyone that anyone whos name isn't Roman is a geek

What do they expect? What the flying fuck do they expect?

They could have At least had Rollings beat Roman before Roman went to Smackdown


----------



## Ace

Adam Cool said:


> After so many years of telling everyone that anyone whos name isn't Roman is a geek
> 
> What do they expect? What the flying fuck do they expect?
> 
> They could have At least had Rollings beat Roman before Roman went to Smackdown


 Nothing ever happens on the shows and there's no stars, that's the problem.

They're so fucked because even when they produce some interesting angles, no one watches.

Only thing that can save them is stars and I don't see any there.


----------



## ShadowSucks92

Man I haven't watched RAW yet but what the hell happened for them to lose that many viewers from hour 1 to hour 3?


----------



## Fearless Viper

Adam Cool said:


> After so many years of telling everyone that anyone whos name isn't Roman is a geek
> 
> What do they expect? What the flying fuck do they expect?
> 
> They could have At least had Rollings beat Roman before Roman went to Smackdown


Rollins already beat Brock who is much bigger deal than Roman. Beating Roman wouldn't help Rollins to keep the viewers.


----------



## RainmakerV2

You mean people are fatigued of same ol AJ in the main event? I mean shocker.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

AJ Styles couldn't draw flies to shit.


----------



## Ace

I wonder what summer angle they will do to keep viewers around, otherwise I can see them averaging low 2m, if not sub 2m at the rate they're falling.


----------



## Ace

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> AJ Styles couldn't draw flies to shit.


 Says the Corbin mark, he's bombed the third hr multiple times in the main event. AJ at least has a good track record for SD.

He's not booked well, not at that level and has go away heat with plenty.

Funnily enough, wasn't he in the 2nd hr too i.e. the one which saw 400k people tune out :lmao


----------



## Mongstyle

Adam Cool said:


> After so many years of telling everyone that anyone whos name isn't Roman is a geek
> 
> What do they expect? What the flying fuck do they expect?
> 
> They could have At least had Rollings beat Roman before Roman went to Smackdown


This is so short sighted, I don't know what to say.

Beating Reigns wouldn't help Rollins. Despite everything they've given Rollins, he's never even cracked the top 5 of merchandise sellers in the WWE. Reigns was ahead of everyone except Cena since 2014. The people who are going to take, take very quickly. You don't have to wait very long which is kind of why WWE is quick to get behind certain guys.

The reality is Rollins was the wrong guy to hitch the wagon to. It's the same old shit. He's been in or around the main event since 2015, and he's been incredibly bland since 2016 outside of a short stint last year.

Strowman was right there, getting massive reactions, and with Reigns out, the timing was right. They should've put the belt on him in November and freshened up the product. Start new feuds. Do something different. Instead they went right back to Lesnar and decided to build up Rollins.

Rollins ain't gonna do shit regardless of how much you push him. Crowd reactions aren't everything. And the reality is, guys like Styles, Strowman etc. have had much bigger reactions than Rollins has right now.

You need something new. Strowman was that for them. And they should've used Lesnar differently rather than actively making everyone hate him the way they did. They could've built up Lashley and done that match at Mania. Instead they've squandered him too.


----------



## Ace

Mongstyle said:


> This is so short sighted, I don't know what to say.
> 
> Beating Reigns wouldn't help Rollins. Despite everything they've given Rollins, he's never even cracked the top 5 of merchandise sellers in the WWE. Reigns was ahead of everyone except Cena since 2014. The people who are going to take, take very quickly. You don't have to wait very long which is kind of why WWE is quick to get behind certain guys.
> 
> The reality is Rollins was the wrong guy to hitch the wagon to. It's the same old shit. He's been in or around the main event since 2015, and he's been incredibly bland since 2016 outside of a short stint last year.
> 
> Strowman was right there, getting massive reactions, and with Reigns out, the timing was right. They should've put the belt on him in November and freshened up the product. Start new feuds. Do something different. Instead they went right back to Lesnar and decided to build up Rollins.
> 
> Rollins ain't gonna do shit regardless of how much you push him. Crowd reactions aren't everything. And the reality is, guys like Styles, Strowman etc. have had much bigger reactions than Rollins has right now.
> 
> You need something new. Strowman was that for them. And they should've used Lesnar differently rather than actively making everyone hate him the way they did. They could've built up Lashley and done that match at Mania. Instead they've squandered him too.


 Problem is booking and lack of stars. There's zero reason to watch, the stories are trash, it's all predictable and most importantly none of them come off like stars. I don't bother to watch live anymore because I've lost patience with the company, I know I'm not going to miss anything if I don't watch. I use to watch live because I didn't want to miss out on something great, once you realize that's not going to happen and you'll see the same tired formula each week you lose interest in watching live and the product.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Down almost 300,000 viewers in one week and 730,000 in a year. The show is stale. Funnily enough, Bray's segment was the freshest thing on RAW. The downward spiral continues unabated. :bryanlol


----------



## Erramayhem89

WWE literally has no stars anymore. I mean hell Alexa doesn't even wrestle and Brock and Ronda are gone. Bunch of other people injured and quitting. People are tired of the same show every night for the last decade.


----------



## Ace

And yet WWE's stock continues to go up, I don't fucking get it.

What is it with these shareholders and moronic TV execs paying billions for a dying product.

Best thing that can happen to wrestling right now is WWE getting cancelled by Fox and USA kicking Raw to the curb.

Maybe that can make them try to do something different, the only thing to look forward to these days is a day after the show to see the comical numbers they do. God it's going to be amazing during the Finals :banderas


----------



## Erik.

Last week they were 260,000 people down from the previous week.

This week they are a further 291,000 down from LAST week.

That's 551,000 people down from the Raw after Wrestlemania episode.

If that isn't a concern I have no fucking idea what is. HALF A FUCKING MILLION viewers disappeared in 2 weeks.

Sorry, how can ANYONE defend that!!?

:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol


----------



## rbl85

Ace said:


> And yet WWE's stock continues to go up, I don't fucking get it.
> 
> What is it with these shareholders and moronic TV execs paying billions for a dying product.
> 
> Best thing that can happen to wrestling right now is WWE getting cancelled by Fox and USA kicking Raw to the curb.
> 
> Maybe that can make them try to do something different, the only thing to look forward to these days is a day after the show to see the comical numbers they do. God it's going to be amazing during the Finals :banderas


When FOX made the deal the ratings were actually increasing.

WWE was very Lucky because if WWE was doing the same numbers last year...FOX would have said "NOPE"


----------



## Ace

rbl85 said:


> When FOX made the deal the ratings were actually increasing.
> 
> WWE was very Lucky because if WWE was doing the same numbers last year...FOX would have said "NOPE"


 I wonder how long SD lasts on Fox, a week? :lmao

Heck, if you're fox do you bother or do you immediately put it on FS1.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Ace said:


> Says the Corbin mark, he's bombed the third hr multiple times in the main event. AJ at least has a good track record for SD.
> 
> He's not booked well, not at that level and has go away heat with plenty.
> 
> Funnily enough, wasn't he in the 2nd hr too i.e. the one which saw 400k people tune out :lmao


AJ is the face. Faces are supposed to be the draws and everyone knew AJ was winning because the motherfucker literally never loses. That's why people tuned out. They're tired of superman babyfaces like AJ, Seth and Roman. Heels are booked like total jokes now. And there's no such thing as go away heat btw.


----------



## Ace

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> AJ is the face. Faces are supposed to be the draws and everyone knew AJ was winning because the motherfucker literally never loses. That's why people tuned out. They're tired of superman babyfaces like AJ, Seth and Roman. Heels are booked like total jokes now. And there's no such thing as go away heat btw.


 Heels are jokes, and I agree the top babyfaces all blow. They have since Super Cena, there's zero edge or anything interesting about them and they always win.

With how low ratings are, they really need to have something big planned and no the Authority can fuck right off.

I'd like to see a proper BC run, but that's unlikely and who knows if that can even stop the fall. They seem to be hitting a new low every other week.

Hell, why not turn the show into faction warfare eventually. The WWE use to be can't miss TV, now it's all predictable and nothing of note ever happens. But whatever, I'm not too fussed, I don't watch the shows. Either they produce good shows or they produce those low meme worthy ratings to laugh about. Hopefully there's still a fanbase for AEW to take come October.


----------



## Rated-R-Peepz

Holy shit, the demo drop. :lol :lol :lol


----------



## DammitChrist

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> AJ is the face. Faces are supposed to be the draws and everyone knew AJ was winning because the motherfucker literally never loses. That's why people tuned out. They're tired of superman babyfaces like AJ, Seth and Roman. Heels are booked like total jokes now. And there's no such thing as go away heat btw.


Are you seriously going to pretend like you know why people tuned out?

The correct answer here is that people aren’t going to tune in to a show that has a history of frustrating/underwhelming the fans with shitty booking decisions.

The show last night was actually solid too, but it’s already too late. They should’ve started listening to the fans and putting in more effort to their shows a long time ago. One solid episode isn’t going to stop many fans from tuning out (which has already been happening over the last several months dramatically).


----------



## Adam Cool

rbl85 said:


> When FOX made the deal the ratings were actually increasing.
> 
> WWE was very Lucky because if WWE was doing the same numbers last year...FOX would have said "NOPE"


The cunts on Reddit will say "but all cabal programs are decreasing you edgy anti WWE smarks" if you face them with these facts


----------



## Erik.

Adam Cool said:


> The cunts on Reddit will say "but all cabal programs are decreasing you edgy anti WWE smarks" if you face them with these facts


I mean, it's such a shit argument from them.

"All cable programs are decreasing"

But I bet you'll find it hard to find a TV show, that only has a few million viewers anyway, that's lost half a million viewers in TWO weeks.

The viewers are there. They had half a million of them just two weeks ago ffs :lol :lol

Let me guess?

Half a million of them decided to just watch it on YouTube this week.

Well the YouTube numbers are fucking garbage too.


----------



## Ace

Suddenly I don't want my favorites to win the world title, who the fuck wants to be the face of this mess.

You were fucked either way - either go to/stay on Raw and be part of the embarrassing record low ratings or end up/stay on SD only to get canned by Fox and end up curtain jerking for Skip Bayless. The only thing I'm looking forward to now is the memes when that happens.


----------



## chronoxiong

Ouch at that third hour. The house that AJ Styles built has to bring in more than 2.1 million viewers for a 3rd hour. OMG!


----------



## The XL 2

WWE is dying. The collapse that they've had in the last 5 years, especially the last 2, is staggering. They'll be out of business within 5 years. It's possible AEW takes the majority of their market share within 18 months or so if they don't shit the bed.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The numbers for Raw and SD are going to be even lower this time next year. There's literally nothing USA can do to Raw due to not only the new contract, but the fact that Raw is the only thing on USA that basically isn't a rerun of a sitcom from a decade ago or a lousy comedy movie from 8 years ago. Even that awful 3rd hour is a better number than anything else USA can put on in that timeslot.

Vince is paying for his previous stubborness right now. Should've changed shit up ions ago but just did it recently, which is a shame because these Raws will probably be better than any Raw of the past several years now. 

Best thing they can do now is work their asses off and give us the best possible product they can every single week. Like Bischoff said, once you lose some viewers, it's hard to get them back. And Raw has been losing viewers for like a decade now. Only saving grace for WWE right now is that NBA Playoffs are significantly down from last year, too. But like I said, best thing WWE can do is put their heads down and write the best possible shows that they can. No more trolling the fans because those days of people watching anyway are over.


----------



## the_hound

The XL 2 said:


> WWE is dying. The collapse that they've had in the last 5 years, especially the last 2, is staggering. *They'll be out of business within 5 years*. It's possible AEW takes the majority of their market share within 18 months or so if they don't shit the bed.


----------



## Ace

Showstopper said:


> The numbers for Raw and SD are going to be even lower this time next year. There's literally nothing USA can do to Raw due to not only the new contract, but the fact that Raw is the only thing on USA that basically isn't a rerun of a sitcom from a decade ago or a lousy comedy movie from 8 years ago. Even that awful 3rd hour is a better number than anything else USA can put on in that timeslot.
> 
> Vince is paying for his previous stubborness right now. Should've changed shit up ions ago but just did it recently, which is a shame because these Raws will probably be better than any Raw of the past several years now.
> 
> Best thing they can do now is work their asses off and give us the best possible product they can every single week. Like Bischoff said, once you lose some viewers, it's hard to get them back. And Raw has been losing viewers for like a decade now. Only saving grace for WWE right now is that NBA Playoffs are significantly down from last year, too. But like I said, best thing WWE can do is put their heads down and write the best possible shows that they can. No more trolling the fans because those days of people watching anyway are over.


 They need a change in philosophy and that may not be enough to turn them around. Fans are fed up of the same shit and it's going to be tough to get them stay or come back. 

Interesting times ahead, either they continue to die or they change things up to try survive. It's possible the company does sub 1.5m in the next few years.


----------



## The XL 2

rbl85 said:


> When FOX made the deal the ratings were actually increasing.
> 
> WWE was very Lucky because if WWE was doing the same numbers last year...FOX would have said "NOPE"


If I'm not mistaken, they made the deal with WWE when Bill Goldberg was having his run, which increased and temporarily stabilized business. Bill Goldberg is the biggest star in wrestling in 2019 and basically saved the WWE. Imagine that.


----------



## Ace

The XL 2 said:


> If I'm not mistaken, they made the deal with WWE when Bill Goldberg was having his run, which increased and temporarily stabilized business. Bill Goldberg is the biggest star in wrestling in 2019 and basically saved the WWE. Imagine that.


 His return drew 4m across 3 hrs lmao.

Goldberg is a bigger star than the entire roster combined in 2019. They've done that bad of a job :lmao


----------



## Papadoc81

Showstopper said:


> Best thing they can do now is work their asses off and give us the best possible product they can every single week. Like Bischoff said, once you lose some viewers, it's hard to get them back. And Raw has been losing viewers for like a decade now. Only saving grace for WWE right now is that NBA Playoffs are significantly down from last year, too. But like I said, best thing WWE can do is put their heads down and write the best possible shows that they can. No more trolling the fans because those days of people watching anyway are over.


If this "Superstar Shake-up" was an example of WWE working their asses off and delivering the best product possible............


----------



## The XL 2

the_hound said:


>


Tell me something, how are they going to make a profit with no fanbase? If only 1 million people are watching the show, Fox and USA won't renew their deals. Then what? Are they gonna make money in the house show business? They already burnt the PPV bridge, not that they'd even crack 100 thousand buys a PPV anymore anyway. They're solely reliant on TV contracts at this point, and they're absolutely hemorrhaging viewership. They're about to fall under 2 million for hour 3. What do you think their numbers are gonna look like in 3 years in football season at this rate? They'll be lucky to draw 1 million viewers.


----------



## Ace

Are we at a point WWE has to run a major angle and pray it turns things around?

McMahons appearing weekly didn't do shit either, so no Authority please.. :lol


----------



## Jedah

Oh wow. They are so fucked. No network in the world is going to pay them these big bucks when it's time to make the next contract. Better hope those Saudis keep paying up.



DammitC said:


> Are you seriously going to pretend like you know why people tuned out?
> 
> The correct answer here is that people aren’t going to tune in to a show that has a history of frustrating/underwhelming the fans with shitty booking decisions.
> 
> The show last night was actually solid too, but it’s already too late. They should’ve started listening to the fans and putting in more effort to their shows a long time ago. One solid episode isn’t going to stop many fans from tuning out (which has already been happening over the last several months dramatically).


This. They've lost the trust of their fans and rightly so. It's very hard to get that back. Lapsed fans are out there. We saw that last year with Raw's 25th anniversary show, but the company has just been on autopilot and hasn't even attempted to get them back.

The only way to even attempt to do that, if it's even possible at all, is to present consistent good content for years. That means not only a change in presentation of the wrestlers but a change of the format of the show from top to bottom.

If it wasn't more obvious than ever, Vince needs to resign. _Now_. He is not going to be the impetus for change this company desperately needs.


----------



## Ace

This is the first week of playoffs outside WM season/Shake up, this shit is only going to get worse. You guys better pray your favorite isn't in the main come the big games or they're going to get so fucked/memed on here lol.



Jedah said:


> Oh wow. They are so fucked. No network in the world is going to pay them these big bucks when it's time to make the next contract. Better hope those Saudis keep paying up.
> 
> 
> 
> This. They've lost the trust of their fans and rightly so. It's very hard to get that back. Lapsed fans are out there. We saw that last year with Raw's 25th anniversary show, but the company has just been on autopilot.
> 
> The only way to even attempt to do that, if it's even possible at all, is to present consistent good content for years. That means not only a change in presentation of the wrestlers but a change of the format of the show from top to bottom.
> 
> If it wasn't more obvious than ever, Vince needs to resign. _Now_. He is not going to be the impetus for change this company desperately needs.


 I'm hoping this is the kick in the ass they need to try something different, if they continue like this they're going to be doing sub 1.8m average this year.


----------



## The XL 2

I don't mean to bury guys like AJ and Bryan, but the problem is, you have guys that would have been midcarders 10-20 years ago that are main eventers, and you have guys in the midcard and upper midcard today that wouldn't have even gotten a look from WWE or WCW, hell maybe not even ECW. Look at all of their top guys, Styles, Kofi, and Bryan would have been midcard workhorses. Reigns would have been a hot tag in a team and that's about it. Guys like Balor would have been Funaki tier in the WWE cruiserweight division and he'd be Cicope/Damien/El Dandy/Mr. JL tier in the WCW cruiserweight division. Guys like Zayn, Ricochet, Cole, etc, would be local enhancement talent that wouldn't have had a shot in hell making the roster. You basically have a bunch of guys that either are miscast as top guys, or who don't belong in a national promotion to begin with. You compound that with horrible shit booking, the PG constrictions, all run by a man in Vince McMahon who is clearly mentally deteriorated and you get this clusterfuck.


----------



## Randy Lahey

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1- 2.680M
> H2- 2.296M
> H3- 2.146M
> 3H- 2.374M*


2.37 is about what they averaged during last Fall's football season. So if they are already doing football numbers.....I hate to see what they'll look like next fall.

There's nobody on this roster that anyone cares about.


----------



## Ace

The XL 2 said:


> I don't mean to bury guys like AJ and Bryan, but the problem is, you have guys that would have been midcarders 10-20 years ago that are main eventers, and you have guys in the midcard and upper midcard today that wouldn't have even gotten a look from WWE or WCW, hell maybe not even ECW. Look at all of their top guys, Styles, Kofi, and Bryan would have been midcard workhorses. Reigns would have been a hot tag in a team and that's about it. Guys like Balor would have been Funaki tier in the WWE cruiserweight division and he'd be Cicope/Damien/El Dandy/Mr. JL tier in the WCW cruiserweight division. Guys like Zayn, Ricochet, Cole, etc, would be local enhancement talent that wouldn't have had a shot in hell making the roster. You basically have a bunch of guys that either are miscast as top guys, or who don't belong in a national promotion to begin with. You compound that with horrible shit booking, the PG constrictions, all run by a man in Vince McMahon who is clearly mentally deteriorated and you get this clusterfuck.


 Size isn't that much of an issue today, Conor is one of the biggest draws in the world. It's more on booking and the guys all coming off like geeks who aren't worth the time of day.


----------



## Jedah

They seriously need to drop this PG format. I'm convinced that straitjacket is killing the action that the show can produce. Raw and SD just feel like silly kids shit but the median viewer is 50. PG is killing their ability to retain their viewers and appeal to literally every other age group.

Now I get they can't drop PG so easily because of sponsorship deals, but they need to stretch the rating. NXT does a good job keeping to PG but keeping the content explosive. Raw/SD don't even try. They just go into lame shit all the time. That obviously includes the scripted promos.


----------



## Ace

I'm praying AJ isn't in the main event come Rockets-GSW and the NBA Finals.

Don't put that hell on me lord.


----------



## Erik.

They have been providing the same format for a show for near on 20 years.

They haven't got a fucking clue how to change things up.

They are stubborn. You ask them if they think they're putting on a good show and they'll say yes. You ask the why the ratings are down and they'll say people watch in different ways. You ask them why house show and live attendance figures are down and they'll tell you that they are in record profits.

They'll not go out of business. Not in our life time anyway. They're too big of an actual brand to do so. They'll get a new viewer tomorrow when a kid decides to turn on television or go on YouTube and finds something wrestling related and he'll be hooked. They'll grow up watching it. Grow out of it. Rinse. Repeat.

They are the Coca Cola of the wrestling industry.

Hopefully AEW can get off to a good start with their PPVs and television show and just be an alternative to wrestling fans in general (Pepsi) - they're never going to compete but hopefully just be alongside them as an alternative.

WWE will always have it's loyalists. Simple as that. These are mostly the fans who were born in the late 90s though or in the 00s, who simply haven't experienced ANYOTHER promotion besides WWE. For them wrestling IS WWE and unless it's WWE, it means nothing because it's not the big time etc. - those are the million plus still watching in America (and around the world). They won't leave regardess. They are the ones pretty much keeping them in profits.


----------



## The XL 2

Ace said:


> Size isn't that much of an issue today, Conor is one of the biggest draws in the world. It's more on booking and the guys all coming off like geeks who aren't worth the time of day.


Size helps but it's not the only thing. Guys like Eddie, Shawn and Bret weren't huge but came across as stars. Although I do think there is a threshold to be believable. It's that these guys look like fucking geeks. Zayn is a geek. Balor is a geek. Even some of the bigger guys that look good suck. McIntyre looks like a million bucks and can work but is a complete charisma vacuum. The guy could shoot the pope on live TV and it'd be so quiet that you'd hear a rat piss on cotton in the arena. Same with Roman, he's big but he has zero charisma. They push all the wrong people, they push geeks who have no ability to connect with the audience.


----------



## Ace

Erik. said:


> They have been providing the same format for a show for near on 20 years.
> 
> They haven't got a fucking clue how to change things up.
> 
> They are stubborn. You ask them if they think they're putting on a good show and they'll say yes. You ask the why the ratings are down and they'll say people watch in different ways. You ask them why house show and live attendance figures are down and they'll tell you that they are in record profits.


What do you think of a BC takeover? BC vs the McMahons, Wyatt Family, UE and eventually an all out faction warfare like NJPW? That's something they can do for the next 2-3 years and would bring about a big landscape change. To keep things fresh you can change who is on top.

With the Authority crap done to death and The Shield gone, it opens up to the BC dominating the WWE.


----------



## Jedah

Erik. said:


> They'll not go out of business. Not in our life time anyway.


If they don't have these TV networks subsidizing them they're fucked. There's no way that the Network or even the Saudi shows can replace that revenue.

At this rate those next contract offers are going to tank. They're in real trouble then. Bankruptcy? Probably not, but real trouble nevertheless.

And those kids aren't coming either because the ratings keep dropping like a rock and the median age keeps getting older.


----------



## Erik.

Ace said:


> What do you think of a BC takeover? BC vs the McMahons, Wyatt Family, UE and eventually an all out faction warfare like NJPW? That's something they can do for the next 2-3 years and would bring about a big landscape change. To keep things fresh you can change who is on top.
> 
> With the Authority crap done to death and The Shield gone, it opens up to the BC dominating the WWE.


Nope. Doesn't interest me. Nothing they do does. Whilst they are under a bubble of banned words, monotone wrestling styles and a tight envelope, they will not improve their overall product.

Too scripted. Every face is the same. Every heel is the same. Every match is the same just with different wrestlers playing the parts. The titles have been relegated to being meaningless props. Oversaturation of the product and the talent. Matches in general meaning nothing. 

Until they change the presentation of their show. Stop being afraid to piss people off. Stop being scared of causing offence. Stop scripting their talent and start getting creative. They will continue to lose viewers and kill off what professional wrestling was.


----------



## Erik.

Jedah said:


> If they don't have these TV networks subsidizing them they're fucked. There's no way that the Network or even the Saudi shows can replace that revenue.
> 
> At this rate those next contract offers are going to tank. They're in real trouble then. Bankruptcy? Probably not, but real trouble nevertheless.
> 
> And those kids aren't coming either because the ratings keep dropping like a rock and the median age keeps getting older.


Well the kids will come. They ALWAYS watch wrestling and they'll always have new kids getting hooked on their product weekly.

Because of the time it's on, it's likely their parents will record it for them and they'll watch it at a different time or they'll watch it on YouTube but kids will always watch wrestling.

Kids don't give a shit about backstage politics, who goes over who, 50/50 booking etc

And I am willing to bet now (Quote this) that they will renew their contracts and continue to make profits. Because they always seem to do so. The company and it's shows have been getting WORSE for a decade and they still manage it. Stations are always wanting live content, it does better than most things they can offer. People have been saying the WWE will go out of business for years now, yet they're getting further and further away from it.

It's more likely the AEW go out of business before WWE are even close. Of course, I'd rather they both just provided me with a good product I can watch on two different nights providing me with different viewing pleasures.


----------



## Jedah

But they're not really getting the kids either, or at least not in a way that they can monetize which is what actually matters. If kids were watching in numbers, the median age wouldn't keep going up.


----------



## SPCDRI

Last year's third hour 18-34 demo number was better than this year's hour one! Over 700,000 people less than last year! Don't give me sports as a cop out, either. I'm pretty sure people were playing baseball, hockey and basketball last April. 

"All cable shows are down." Down 25 percent in a year? That's an awful lot of cord-cutting and YouTube highlights viewing, don't you think?

This isn't even deep into NHL and NBA playoffs. They're going sub 2 against Finals for at least hour 3. This year they were almost sub 2 million in hour 2 against FIRST ROUND PLAYOFFS ACTION.


----------



## rbl85

Jedah said:


> But they're not really getting the kids either, or at least not in a way that they can monetize which is what actually matters. If kids were watching in numbers, the median age wouldn't keep going up.


The "kids" prefer to watch UFC than WWE


----------



## Randy Lahey

I would like to know how WWE makes record revenue at a time when their TV ratings/house show attendance is at record lows.

I'd also like to know how WCW lost money during a time when wrestling was booming. Neither makes any sense. If it is all based on TV money, then I think what Clay Travis has mentioned many times will come true with wrestling. He's ran the math and knows that virtually all sport right fees tv contracts are bubbles waiting to burst. He's said ESPN, given how much they paid to get the NFL and college football combined with all the cord cutters, will be insolvent in 8-10 years. 

I have to think the same thing will happen with WWE. These TV networks can't continue to give huge $$$$s for sports right fees when fewer viewers are watching than ever before.


----------



## Jedah

rbl85 said:


> The "kids" prefer to watch UFC than WWE







I can't imagine why someone would be more drawn to this than WWE's scripted robotic bullshit. Just can't fathom it.


----------



## SPCDRI

NHL and NBA viewership for this playoffs has fallen as well. People just weren't feeling the first round and not having teams like a Lebron James leading the Lakers has harmed them. Their playoffs this year are both down over 10 percent from where they were last year. WWE is facing as soft as competition as it could hope for and its going down the tubes.


----------



## The XL 2

Randy Lahey said:


> I would like to know how WWE makes record revenue at a time when their TV ratings/house show attendance is at record lows.
> 
> I'd also like to know how WCW lost money during a time when wrestling was booming. Neither makes any sense. If it is all based on TV money, then I think what Clay Travis has mentioned many times will come true with wrestling. He's ran the math and knows that virtually all sport right fees tv contracts are bubbles waiting to burst. He's said ESPN, given how much they paid to get the NFL and college football combined with all the cord cutters, will be insolvent in 8-10 years.
> 
> I have to think the same thing will happen with WWE. These TV networks can't continue to give huge $$$$s for sports right fees when fewer viewers are watching than ever before.


The second the TV rights fee bubble bursts, the WWE will go under. Historically, the WWE and any other major promotion has been self sufficient, in the 70s, promotions got by on gates from live events, in the 80s, it was a mix of events, merch, and PPVs, same with the 90s and 2000s, although they got some money from TV deals, point being, they were all self sufficient as long as they had a fanbase satisfied with the product willing to spend money. That's not the case anymore, they eroded the PPV model, partially because it was becoming less profitable, and they draw no money from live events anymore. They aren't beholden to the fans as they were in the past, they're beholden to TV stations and sponsorships. The risk with that business model is that their is no self sufficiency, if a couple of big corporate players at a network don't want to renew a deal, or at least, renew a deal at that kind of price tag, WWE is completely fucked. Without those deals, they would go under in a year, the Network and merch numbers would be a drop in the bucket compared to their expenses


----------



## Chrome

Doing football numbers in the Spring now.


----------



## BevellingRetorts

Showstopper said:


> The numbers for Raw and SD are going to be even lower this time next year. There's literally nothing USA can do to Raw due to not only the new contract, but the fact that Raw is the only thing on USA that basically isn't a rerun of a sitcom from a decade ago or a lousy comedy movie from 8 years ago. Even that awful 3rd hour is a better number than anything else USA can put on in that timeslot.
> 
> Vince is paying for his previous stubborness right now. Should've changed shit up ions ago but just did it recently, which is a shame because these Raws will probably be better than any Raw of the past several years now.
> 
> Best thing they can do now is work their asses off and give us the best possible product they can every single week. Like Bischoff said, once you lose some viewers, it's hard to get them back. And Raw has been losing viewers for like a decade now. Only saving grace for WWE right now is that NBA Playoffs are significantly down from last year, too. But like I said, best thing WWE can do is put their heads down and write the best possible shows that they can. No more trolling the fans because those days of people watching anyway are over.


Nailed it here. 

Vince's problem is he'd rather play it safe with the product he wants than risk it with a product that could potentially expand the business. But even here, the deeper problem is that the product he wants still requires risks to be taken & for him to delegate responsibility, & he's not willing to do either of those things. Couple that with his increasing incompetence & you get the shit show we've ended up with.


----------



## Erik.

Randy Lahey said:


> I would like to know how WWE makes record revenue at a time when their TV ratings/house show attendance is at record lows.
> 
> I'd also like to know how WCW lost money during a time when wrestling was booming. Neither makes any sense. If it is all based on TV money, then I think what Clay Travis has mentioned many times will come true with wrestling. He's ran the math and knows that virtually all sport right fees tv contracts are bubbles waiting to burst. He's said ESPN, given how much they paid to get the NFL and college football combined with all the cord cutters, will be insolvent in 8-10 years.
> 
> I have to think the same thing will happen with WWE. These TV networks can't continue to give huge $$$$s for sports right fees when fewer viewers are watching than ever before.


Impossible to ever compare WWE and WCW.

WCW was not required to, by itself, show a profit. Its parent company was not counting on the income from WCW, but rather the income from cable providers purchasing the rights to show their cable channels.

WWE's goal is to draw money and get a nice TV deal. WCW's goal was to draw viewers by any means necessary as long as they didn't alienate their parent company.

This meant WCW could operate in the red as long as ratings kept going up and their boss and board of directors were happy.

WCW was never really successful for it self, ever. They didn't even receive revenue from it's own PPVs. They were a success for Time Warner by having a stable program which helped its cable network, regardless of whether WCWs finances were in the black. 

WWE is a success. They make profits every year. They are one of the highest rated live television shows out there (even if ratings ARE still declining) and get billion dollar TV deals.

It's also a big reason why AEW should NEVER be compared to WCW either. It's a totally different set of circumstances in that AEW isn't a cable company owners pet project. It's just a billionaires sons pet project that are hoping to get a TV deal, who WILL care about ratings whilst also caring about MAKING profit.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

I guess Seth vs AJ isn't a dream match to casual viewers.


----------



## SPCDRI

There is a change WWE is TNA tier in a decade, off of major television channels and struggling to hit 2 million for their best hour. I never thought things would be this bad this quickly. It used to be a little bit of a trend where the audience would erode a bit, like a sort of television viewership Chinese Water Torture. 4 percent here, 5 percent there. They are down over 20 percent year on year from the opening of 2018 to the opening of 2019.


----------



## DammitChrist

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> I guess Seth vs AJ isn't a dream match to casual viewers.


Going by your logic, you can literally say the same for EVERY OTHER MATCH since they’re not going to bring back the casual fans anytime soon.

It’s still a dream match regardless though.


----------



## The XL 2

Another thing that is going to fuck the WWE is AEW having weekly national television. Look at their numbers now with no football and a weak first round of the NBA playoffs. Can you imagine how their numbers are going to look in October with the NFL in season and AEW? Even if AEW doesn't run Mondays, there will be people that refuse to watch that much wrestling a week and will choose the 2 hour weekly investment over the 5+ hour one. There will also be the fact that AEW will likely be the far superior product, making the WWE sort of useless. It's looking grim for the boys in New York


----------



## Jedah

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> I guess Seth vs AJ isn't a dream match to casual viewers.


This isn't about Seth vs. AJ or any other individual thing. This is a systematic problem.

More specifically, I think the huge drop in the last year can boil down to a few things.

1. Not pulling the trigger on Roman Reigns at WrestleMania 34. Leaving the title on Brock was a catastrophe that took Raw into an aimless death spiral. It was bad enough for one year. Two was insane.

2. The shakeup last year really gutted Raw hard. All the best people went to SD, which was required to improve that show but Raw is also the thing that determines SD's numbers.

3. The continued featuring of Baron Corbin all over the show. That really killed a lot of viewers.

4. There's no question about it - featuring the women so heavily hurt the show. Ronda Rousey wasn't the draw she was promised to be (I said it before she was even signed - Rousey 2018 was not Rousey 2015). The women have their place but not in the main event.

Add all this stuff on top of WWE's normal problems that we know so well. The combination made Raw abysmal last year and unsurprisingly people tuned out in droves, including many of us here. I watched a few Raws all year last year.

WWE does seem to be recognizing some of these things now. They've established a good balance of power with the shakeup this year and are featuring popular champions, but this is going to take years to fix, if it even can be fixed.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

DammitC said:


> Going by your logic, you can literally say the same for EVERY OTHER MATCH since they’re not going to bring back the casual fans anytime soon.
> 
> It’s still a dream match regardless though.


I can say Lenny Lane vs Jerry Flynn is a dream match. Standards are low these days.


----------



## ClintDagger

Jedah said:


> This isn't about Seth vs. AJ or any other individual thing. This is a systematic problem.
> 
> More specifically, I think the huge drop in the last year can boil down to a few things.
> 
> 1. Not pulling the trigger on Roman Reigns at WrestleMania 34. Leaving the title on Brock was a catastrophe that took Raw into an aimless death spiral. It was bad enough for one year. Two was insane.
> 
> 2. The shakeup last year really gutted Raw hard. All the best people went to SD, which was required to improve that show but Raw is also the thing that determines SD's numbers.
> 
> 3. The continued featuring of Baron Corbin all over the show. That really killed a lot of viewers.
> 
> 4. There's no question about it - featuring the women so heavily hurt the show. Ronda Rousey wasn't the draw she was promised to be (I said it before she was even signed - Rousey 2018 was not Rousey 2015). The women have their place but not in the main event.
> 
> Add all this stuff on top of WWE's normal problems that we know so well. The combination made Raw abysmal last year and unsurprisingly people tuned out in droves, including many of us here. I watched a few Raws all year last year.
> 
> WWE does seem to be recognizing some of these things now. They've established a good balance of power with the shakeup this year and are featuring popular champions, but this is going to take years to fix, if it even can be fixed.


It’s both systemic and due to individual stars (or lack thereof). The overall trend is certainly due to everything you mentioned. But the loss of viewers has really accelerated over this past year with the biggest surprise being the lack of any real noticeable ratings bump for that period from the RR through the shakeup. The numbers weren’t really all that different from the Fall ratings. And that has to be attributed to severe lack of star power compared to past years coupled with that season focusing on talents like Kofi & Becky that have very narrow appeal. There was no Taker. No Rock. No Cena. No Goldberg. No Sting. Very little Roman. Very little Batista. And to me that’s the real story of 2019 so far. Despite the consistent trend in falling ratings over the past 15+ years they’ve always managed to make WM season feel special. This is the first year that run was so devoid of star power that it was only a blip on the radar. That’s a change that is really going to haunt them IMO. That crutch is now gone.


----------



## The_It_Factor

I wouldn’t say they’re stubborn or out of touch, I’d say they’ve learned to do what tons of successful companies have done - learned how to make a profit without having to provide a quality product. They care about churning a revenue, which they’re doing, why would they want to change things now? Of course I’d prefer that Apple use the technology that I know they have to make a phone that doesn’t crack if it’s dropped more than half a foot, but their not doing so hasn’t stopped me from buying iPhones for the past 10 years. 

I mean, they’ve obviously found some way to bring in record revenues despite attendance and viewership being down. As a business, making money is all they care about. It would be stupid, financially, for them to change anything at this point - and investors aren’t going to like any major changes that could threaten whatever it is they’re doing to make money.

Now, I would say it seems short-sighted. I have to imagine that it will eventually bottom out and the massive exodus of fans will hurt them..... but then they’ll probably just focus more on overseas shows and the Middle East, where they’ll probably still draw massive money through the lifetime of even Shane’s kids, so...


----------



## Jonhern

The XL 2 said:


> WWE is dying. The collapse that they've had in the last 5 years, especially the last 2, is staggering. They'll be out of business within 5 years. It's possible AEW takes the majority of their market share within 18 months or so if they don't shit the bed.


I just don't understand how people can say that with a straight face. This company will not go out of business at the end of the TV contracts. Don't forget they haven't even gone into effect yet and they are making good profits, that will just go up since they won't have to necessary increase expenses come October but will be making much more revenue. Once these contracts stop there is little chance they don't get some kind of deal from some network. Even if it is significant less money, they won't go out of business. They might have to do layoffs, they might not be able to horde talent like they are now in nxt, they might have to scale back on production. But it will be a very long time before they go out of business. More likely to happen is that they get sold to a large corporation while they are still very valuable.


----------



## Seafort

The XL 2 said:


> I don't mean to bury guys like AJ and Bryan, but the problem is, you have guys that would have been midcarders 10-20 years ago that are main eventers, and you have guys in the midcard and upper midcard today that wouldn't have even gotten a look from WWE or WCW, hell maybe not even ECW. Look at all of their top guys, Styles, Kofi, and Bryan would have been midcard workhorses. Reigns would have been a hot tag in a team and that's about it. Guys like Balor would have been Funaki tier in the WWE cruiserweight division and he'd be Cicope/Damien/El Dandy/Mr. JL tier in the WCW cruiserweight division. Guys like Zayn, Ricochet, Cole, etc, would be local enhancement talent that wouldn't have had a shot in hell making the roster. You basically have a bunch of guys that either are miscast as top guys, or who don't belong in a national promotion to begin with. You compound that with horrible shit booking, the PG constrictions, all run by a man in Vince McMahon who is clearly mentally deteriorated and you get this clusterfuck.


Size isn’t the overarching issue, although it won’t help when everyone is 215 and under. No, it’s booking. ECW had a smallish roster and through trendsetting characters and storylines made everyone into stars. WWE could easily do the same, but can’t.

Why? Arrogance. They’ve been touting themselves for 18 years on how they beat the mighty Ted Turner and deservedly won the war. Leadership began to believe its own spin and are certain that their way of doing business is the right way. Always. That leads to micromanagement, because “the right way” is what beat billoinaires and it cannot be questioned. And so it never is, and the reigns of control become tighter and tighter.

Instinctually...despite the record revenue from the TV deals Vince knows that something is amiss. That’s why Bruce Pritchard is back. And the shows have gotten marginally better. But it’s not enough.


----------



## llj

Nobody cares about the product anymore. I know I'm losing interest fast, after trying to watch this product again for the last 3 years. There are talents on the roster I like to really like, but the presentation doesn't help, the booking and writing sucks, there is a lack of actual superstar power, and the big stars they bring back draw less and less now. There is also a sense that they're flailing now and don't know what to do, which is sad.

I often wonder how the crowds come across the tickets and still go to shows. I guess to pass the time. But you look at crowds these days, and they're so disinterested now. Nothing seems to matter. They put "dream" matches together and crowds go "meh". That's what years of bad booking has done to this product.


----------



## Fearless Viper

Playing devil advocate here, but remember couple years ago when everyone here thought WWE wouldn't get a TV deals then BOOM! 2 billion dollars for both shows. Just saying that there must be something that we don't know but WWE knows.


----------



## volde

Well WWE still produces 5 hours of live television every week. I'm not sure if anything else really does that? Sports do that as well, but they have off-seasons. So in that regard I think that WWE will stay relevant to big networks even with lower ratings. Sure, probably they'll get smaller deal next time, but unless they start doing less than 1mil viewers I don't think that networks will actually drop them.

As for top guys not being top guys... sure booking is a big reason for that. But at the same time you gotta wonder if it is really a good thing that WWE is now dominated by "indie wrestlers". I loved when Bryan started out and clawed his way to the top because back then it was still mostly about WWE guys. But now it starts to look like bigger guys have more problems with getting to the top than small guys. And I'm not sure if that really makes sense. And sure, size doesn't matter that much now, but at the same time WWE, and mainstream wrestling in USA in general, was usually about big guys smashing things. Shawn and Bret were the exception, not the norm. So I have to wonder if by chasing newest trend of indie guys they didn't lose their identity?


----------



## Adam Cool

Does anyone know how much they make from international Channels compared to American ones?

I mean they have to make a somewhat decent amount from Indian Channels and MBC Action at least given how much effort they put into them


----------



## Erik.

Adam Cool said:


> Does anyone know how much they make from international Channels compared to American ones?
> 
> I mean they have to make a somewhat decent amount from Indian Channels and MBC Action at least given how much effort they put into them


Interestingly, I think their deal with Sky Sports in the UK is up for renewal this year..

That'll be interesting.

They barely get a hundred thousand viewers on there either. I think Smackdown gets about 20,000 viewers a week, probably even less now.

Problem is, Sky Sports used to get a few free PPVs a year which did well for viewers. But since the Network, they obviously don't show any. I think it actually pissed Sky Sports off originally which is why there was a delay of the Network in the UK (correct me, if I am wrong).

So when it comes for renewal, the money figures should be interesting because wrestling just isn't much of a draw for the channel.


----------



## Lenny Leonard

Like I said last week, they have all the highlights up on YouTube within a couple hours. If they stopped doing that and waited a few days or so, they might get a bump


----------



## llj

It's not youtube. There are sites that stream sports games and regular TV shows and the ratings haven't fallen as dramatically.

The product is clearly lacking appeal.

I don't know where to even start. People have so many theories, but none of them seem to wash. Some people blame youtube, some people say it's workrate over character, and some say it's even lack of workrate. 

The fact is that I don't see how the WWE is succeeding at any one thing creatively. ARE they actually having good matches nowadays? I'd say not really. You have a bunch of so-called "workrate guys" but when was the last time you saw a really good match on TV? Not often. Seth had a terrific run last year post-Mania but I can't think of any really good TV match he's had in the last few months. Same with AJ. The women's matches are even worse, many of them have been horrific lately. The last good women's match on TV was...Charlotte v Asuka I guess before Mania? Aside from that, it's been a sea of poorly worked or average matches or awkwardly booked squashes. The booking/match design for many matches is stale and predictable too. Some obvious star winning a #1 contender's match. Some champion losing a non-title match to build "heat". It's the same shit over and over.

So despite complaints about the WWE becoming too workrate oriented, the workrate really hasn't even been that good.

That moves onto the next problem. Character. We have people with gimmicks but they never do anything interesting. It's always the same old shit--walk up to the ring and deliver a repetitive promo they've done 100s of times already, throw some lame insults and act tough, then a match starts. There are no surprise segments like someone driving a dump truck to the ring or parking lot brawls or anything to break up the pattern they have established. You talk in badly scripted segments, you wrestle in poorly booked matches. That's the WWE today.

People say the WWE has always been like this. Not really. There was a time when you could count on at least one brand to deliver good matches every week. In the early 2000s on Smackdown it was a "workrate" show but the workrate was actually good and the matches were well designed and less overproduced.

They don't bother with managers or outside segments anymore. Like, back in the day used to devote regular outside segments to Tajiri (the hospital segments were entertaining), a cruiserweight. This helped add character and also got around his language issues.

It's difficult to see who this product is supposed to appeal to now. The stories aren't good, the characters don't get developed, and the matches aren't good.


----------



## 45banshee

*Understanding the decline rating.*

So over the years the rating for WWE have just been going down and down.

But why is this? Of course the obvious answer is the product sucks. But is that the only reason? Or are there other deciding factors?

So iv gotten back into wrestling in December. I know all whats going on. Whos feuding with who. Who currently holds what titles etc etc.

Ever since iv gotten back into wrestling though, I have not watched a since epiosde of Raw or Smackdown on tv. Back when I was heavily into wrestling I would DVR it and skipped the commericals and what sucked.

But now in this current age there are numerous ways to consume wrestling without ever having to watch a single episode on tv.

There's the WWE network, YouTube, various wrestling sites breaking down everything that happen on any given episode. So instend of watching 3 hours of Raw and 2 hours of Smackdown, you can be done in 10 minutes reading what happend on a site.

I think also people seem to be more busy now than ever. Family, college, job. There may not be time in your schedule to sit down and watch hours of wrestling.

Live attendance seems to still be doing great.

So this is why I think the rating are so far down besides stating the obvious that hey wrestling sucks these days


----------



## ClintDagger

Jonhern said:


> I just don't understand how people can say that with a straight face. This company will not go out of business at the end of the TV contracts. Don't forget they haven't even gone into effect yet and they are making good profits, that will just go up since they won't have to necessary increase expenses come October but will be making much more revenue. Once these contracts stop there is little chance they don't get some kind of deal from some network. Even if it is significant less money, they won't go out of business. They might have to do layoffs, they might not be able to horde talent like they are now in nxt, they might have to scale back on production. But it will be a very long time before they go out of business. More likely to happen is that they get sold to a large corporation while they are still very valuable.


What I could honestly see happening is the McMahon family selling out in the next 3-5 years as you say. I think the company with this windfall from the new contracts is about to peak in value. Vince seems to be all-in on the XFL, and I’m sure Steph & Shane would rather do something else with their time & resources.

I don’t think the company is 5 years from extinction, but it might be 15 years from it. The time to get out seems to be on the horizon.


----------



## Jables

*Re: Understanding the decline rating.*

Live attendance is not doing great. People aren't anymore busy than they were 5 years ago, and "cord cutting" is a desperate excuse for old complacent ass-bags like Vince that dont want to step aside or do anything different.

The ratings are declining because very little ever happens, it's often repetitive, and the characters are bland.


----------



## llj

*Re: Understanding the decline rating.*

I don't know about online. Even Youtube views seem to be down lately compared to a year ago. A lot of their top people right now don't consistently hit 1 million. Roman was the last guy whose segments consistently hit 1 million nearly every week before he got the leukemia. AJ used to do that, but his drawing power on youtube declined greatly over the past 1.5 years. Check his views now to what he used to draw on youtube in 2016.


----------



## AlternateDemise

*Re: Understanding the decline rating.*



45banshee said:


> So over the years the rating for WWE have just been going down and down.
> 
> But why is this? Of course the obvious answer is the product sucks. But is that the only reason? Or are there other deciding factors?
> 
> So iv gotten back into wrestling in December. I know all whats going on. Whos feuding with who. Who currently holds what titles etc etc.
> 
> Ever since iv gotten back into wrestling though, I have not watched a since epiosde of Raw or Smackdown on tv. Back when I was heavily into wrestling I would DVR it and skipped the commericals and what sucked.
> 
> But now in this current age there are numerous ways to consume wrestling without ever having to watch a single episode on tv.
> 
> There's the WWE network, YouTube, various wrestling sites breaking down everything that happen on any given episode. So instend of watching 3 hours of Raw and 2 hours of Smackdown, you can be done in 10 minutes reading what happend on a site.
> 
> I think also people seem to be more busy now than ever. Family, college, job. There may not be time in your schedule to sit down and watch hours of wrestling.
> 
> Live attendance seems to still be doing great.
> 
> So this is why I think the rating are so far down besides stating the obvious that hey wrestling sucks these days


A major factor that a lot of people here continue to ignore is that TV is dying. Streaming sites and other types of television programming are continuing to become more and more popular due to their convenience. I am not saying that it is the main reason, but it's a major factor that a lot of people continue to ignore. Raw and Smackdown are still one of the top shows on their program when it comes to ratings. That has never changed. 

With that said, a consistently worsening product, the push of Roman Reigns, John Cena leaving, and a multitude of other factors happening on screen without question hastened the decline in ratings.


----------



## Seafort

ClintDagger said:


> Jonhern said:
> 
> 
> 
> I just don't understand how people can say that with a straight face. This company will not go out of business at the end of the TV contracts. Don't forget they haven't even gone into effect yet and they are making good profits, that will just go up since they won't have to necessary increase expenses come October but will be making much more revenue. Once these contracts stop there is little chance they don't get some kind of deal from some network. Even if it is significant less money, they won't go out of business. They might have to do layoffs, they might not be able to horde talent like they are now in nxt, they might have to scale back on production. But it will be a very long time before they go out of business. More likely to happen is that they get sold to a large corporation while they are still very valuable.
> 
> 
> 
> What I could honestly see happening is the McMahon family selling out in the next 3-5 years as you say. I think the company with this windfall from the new contracts is about to peak in value. Vince seems to be all-in on the XFL, and I’m sure Steph & Shane would rather do something else with their time & resources.
> 
> I don’t think the company is 5 years from extinction, but it might be 15 years from it. The time to get out seems to be on the horizon.
Click to expand...

Whoever buys it will be buying WWE for the same reason that Turner acquired Jim Crockett Promotions. Programming. A WWE owned by Disney would find itself an entirely different entity within two years. I could easily see such changes as:

1) No more live shows. RAW and Smackdown are taped in advance, two shows per night
2) Few or no house shows. WCW under Turner almost completely did away with house shows in 1994 and only gradually brought them back
3) No WWE Network - it would get folded into the purhaser’s streaming platform
4) More socially conscious programming
5) Someone from outside of the WWE bubble wild be brought in to oversee the “WWE division”. Ironically if the purchase took place in the near future, I’d imagine that Bischoff’s phone might ring


----------



## The XL 2

*Re: Understanding the decline rating.*

The WWEs TV numbers are dropping at a considerably higher rate than the rest of TVs numbers


----------



## tducey

*Re: Understanding the decline rating.*

It's a wide variety of things. The lack of a compelling product is a big thing though.


----------



## RiverFenix

*Re: Understanding the decline rating.*

New fans are not going to consider wwe and a 5 hour time commitment weekly 52 weeks a year. And longtime fans who did initially make that time sacrifice are being pushed away by the abject shitty booking and unlikely to return. 

Best think WWE could do right now would be to cut the third hour of Raw. But product quantity is more valuable to television networks than quality and they want the third hour. 

Vince's blood money contract with Mohammed Bone Saw is covering up a lot of their NA problems right now.


----------



## Jedah

*Re: Understanding the decline rating.*

1. Derivative, rather than innovative, programming.
2. Poor presentation of the talent for years.

Everything comes down to those two things when you get down to the foundation of it. Every single Raw and SmackDown has the same format with little to nothing to break up the monotony.

And obviously there are countless booking mistakes over the past few years alone.


----------



## ClintDagger

Seafort said:


> Whoever buys it will be buying WWE for the same reason that Turner acquired Jim Crockett Promotions. Programming. A WWE owned by Disney would find itself an entirely different entity within two years. I could easily see such changes as:
> 
> 1) No more live shows. RAW and Smackdown are taped in advance, two shows per night
> 2) Few or no house shows. WCW under Turner almost completely did away with house shows in 1994 and only gradually brought them back
> 3) No WWE Network - it would get folded into the purhaser’s streaming platform
> 4) More socially conscious programming
> 5) Someone from outside of the WWE bubble wild be brought in to oversee the “WWE division”. Ironically if the purchase took place in the near future, I’d imagine that Bischoff’s phone might ring


I think you’ve nailed what WWE’s long term future looks like. They can’t survive as a niche product. But not because of the risk of going out of business. It’s just that niche companies, especially successful ones with strong branding and assets like WWE, eventually get swallowed up.


----------



## I AM Glacier

*Re: Understanding the decline rating.*

Live attendance is NOT doing great.

I think the problem (besides WWE sucking almost all the time) is WWE pumping out content 24/7.
It's just too much. Nothing is special anymore. There's no build.
People complain that moves "mean nothing anymore". 
WWE has managed to make EVERYTHING mean nothing anymore.

If I can throw out a comparison: Trading cards.
People used to collect them like crazy. They had all these rare ones that were super valuable. Then they started producing these really cool ones like having a piece of a jersey on it. Basketball cards with a piece of the court.
Those gimmicks were really cool.

Well all that caught on, made money like crazy, so they start making more, and more and more and more.
The market became over saturated, and even the coolest trading cards became completely worthless and meaningless.

Enjoy next year's 37 hour WrestleMania.


----------



## AliFrazier100

*Re: Understanding the decline rating.*

For the 2000-2001 television season, Survivor was the number one show on tv with an average rating of 17.4 million viewers per episode. For the 2015-2016 television season NCIS was the number one show with 12.8 million viewers per episode. (Stats are from Wikipedia). Television ratings overall have just been going down since the days of the Attitude Era. Part of the blame is on the quality of the product, but I think it's unreasonable to for anyone to expect WWE to someday pull in the same ratings they got in 2000. At least it won't happen for WWE's shows on cable.


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Understanding the decline rating.*



AliFrazier100 said:


> For the 2000-2001 television season, Survivor was the number one show on tv with an average rating of 17.4 million viewers per episode. For the 2015-2016 television season NCIS was the number one show with 12.8 million viewers per episode. (Stats are from Wikipedia). Television ratings overall have just been going down since the days of the Attitude Era. Part of the blame is on the quality of the product, but I think it's unreasonable to for anyone to expect WWE to someday pull in the same ratings they got in 2000. At least it won't happen for WWE's shows on cable.


Its difficult to expect them to do peak boom numbers unless they get lightning in a bottle with a major stacked roster and multiple breakout stars, but why are they down 25 percent in a year? I think it should at least be reasonable for them to get back to where they were about 5 years ago and more or less stay there. 

The floor for this programming could be, and should be, 3 million an hour. 2015 is not ancient history. They have driven away fans in far in excess of cord cutting and American culture being less of a cable television culture. There are many freshly lapsed fans that they could get back. I really don't know if they ever will get them back because to correct a problem, you have to recognize the problem. WWE is looking at monster money from Saudi Arabia, USA and FOX, the Network is working, stock price is up almost 500 percent in 5 years, they're sitting on this gigantic mountain of cash and acting like Alfred P. Neuman with television viewership. "What, me worry? I'm too busy counting all these fat stacks to be worried!"

:vince3


----------



## Mifune Jackson

*Re: Understanding the decline rating.*



SPCDRI said:


> Its difficult to expect them to do peak boom numbers unless they get lightning in a bottle with a major stacked roster and multiple breakout stars, but why are they down 25 percent in a year? I think it should at least be reasonable for them to get back to where they were about 5 years ago and more or less stay there.
> 
> The floor for this programming could be, and should be, 3 million an hour. 2015 is not ancient history. They have driven away fans in far in excess of cord cutting and American culture being less of a cable television culture. There are many freshly lapsed fans that they could get back. I really don't know if they ever will get them back because to correct a problem, you have to recognize the problem. WWE is looking at monster money from Saudi Arabia, USA and FOX, the Network is working, stock price is up almost 500 percent in 5 years, they're sitting on this gigantic mountain of cash and acting like Alfred P. Neuman with television viewership. "What, me worry? I'm too busy counting all these fat stacks to be worried!"
> 
> :vince3


If they could hit 4 million viewers with compelling television every once in a while, they'd be above the criticism they've been getting because then it'd be all "Scoreboard, bitch." 

Since they're hovering in the low 2-million range post-WrestleMania, they certainly need to change some things, because if they don't, I can't imagine Fox signed any sort of a deal that allows them to underperform without the ability to at least move them to Friday nights to die.

EDIT: I guess they're putting SmackDown on Fridays to start, so maybe expectations are low.


----------



## Jonhern

AliFrazier100 said:


> For the 2000-2001 television season, Survivor was the number one show on tv with an average rating of 17.4 million viewers per episode. For the 2015-2016 television season NCIS was the number one show with 12.8 million viewers per episode. (Stats are from Wikipedia). Television ratings overall have just been going down since the days of the Attitude Era. Part of the blame is on the quality of the product, but I think it's unreasonable to for anyone to expect WWE to someday pull in the same ratings they got in 2000. At least it won't happen for WWE's shows on cable.


that's the problem with wrestling, do you compare them to scripted shows or live sports? They are getting these big contracts because the networks see them as live sports equivalent, but in reality they are more like the scripted shows. Although, they don't always make the list of highest percentage jump when you add same day dvr, so most people who do watch, watch it live. The issue is how long will that get them a premium on their content.



ClintDagger said:


> What I could honestly see happening is the McMahon family selling out in the next 3-5 years as you say. I think the company with this windfall from the new contracts is about to peak in value. Vince seems to be all-in on the XFL, and I’m sure Steph & Shane would rather do something else with their time & resources.
> 
> I don’t think the company is 5 years from extinction, but it might be 15 years from it. The time to get out seems to be on the horizon.


I actually think Steph wont want to sell unless its like the UFC situation where they kept White in charge. Its not like there is a lot of people out there that will know how to run a wrestling organization. Shane on the other hand would be out unless he stays on as talent, which is all he is now, he has no executive role and if he could sell whatever stock he may have I bet he would and just leave.


----------



## Adam Cool

*Re: Understanding the decline rating.*



AliFrazier100 said:


> For the 2000-2001 television season, Survivor was the number one show on tv with an average rating of 17.4 million viewers per episode. For the 2015-2016 television season NCIS was the number one show with 12.8 million viewers per episode. (Stats are from Wikipedia). Television ratings overall have just been going down since the days of the Attitude Era. Part of the blame is on the quality of the product, but I think it's unreasonable to for anyone to expect WWE to someday pull in the same ratings they got in 2000. At least it won't happen for WWE's shows on cable.


Who the fuck watches NCIS?

At least Survivor was unique at the time


----------



## Seafort

*Re: Understanding the decline rating.*



SPCDRI said:


> Its difficult to expect them to do peak boom numbers unless they get lightning in a bottle with a major stacked roster and multiple breakout stars, but why are they down 25 percent in a year? I think it should at least be reasonable for them to get back to where they were about 5 years ago and more or less stay there.
> 
> The floor for this programming could be, and should be, 3 million an hour. 2015 is not ancient history. They have driven away fans in far in excess of cord cutting and American culture being less of a cable television culture. There are many freshly lapsed fans that they could get back. I really don't know if they ever will get them back because to correct a problem, you have to recognize the problem. WWE is looking at monster money from Saudi Arabia, USA and FOX, the Network is working, stock price is up almost 500 percent in 5 years, they're sitting on this gigantic mountain of cash and acting like Alfred P. Neuman with television viewership. "What, me worry? I'm too busy counting all these fat stacks to be worried!"
> 
> :vince3


Indeed. They could easily find themselves someday in a situation where they have to fall back on their fan base due to lower tv deals, only to discover that their core audience has been substantially eroded away.


----------



## Adam Cool

Holy shit AAA has better ratings than the WWE nowadays 

Looks like WCW was right about Insane Clowns being Draws


----------



## komba

It's the writing... The average person doesn't just want to see people wrestle. They have to really care about it and be invested. The entertainment aspect is what always drives ratings and things just aren't entertaining right now for the most part. And when they do get guys who have real ability, they don't ride them like the used to. When you have your stars, you build the show around them and in the middle of that, give other wrestlers opportunities. 

Nothing to seems to matter these days and everything follows a formula. Hell, even Michael Cole is a good example of that. He's a robot announcer that just follows a formula.


----------



## patpat

llj said:


> If nobody matters, and titles don't matter, how do they expect viewers to care?
> 
> "the brand is the draw"
> 
> lmao no it isn't
> 
> Imagine if Vince lives long enough to see his company crumble in the last years of his life because of his dumb creative decisions. It would be darkly fitting.


THIS HERE Sis the real problem, morons on this thread needs to stop blaming the talent. you guys are clueless dumb fuck if you think it has anything to do with the talents lol. if you don't see how the booking is killing this roster then just stop trying to discuss wrestling. your post hit the real problem! 
but this thread would never discuss the real problems, instead it's a bunch of trolls hating on Y or X wrestler. how the fuck is a guy supposed to be a star when the company doesn't and refuse to portray him as such?!!! wtf?!


----------



## patpat

RainmakerV2 said:


> You mean people are fatigued of same ol AJ in the main event? I mean shocker.


if YOU really think Baron Corbin isn't responsible for these numbers but aj styles is, you are delusional. aj was fighting at the beginning of the show, it was great. the moment Corbin won everyone ran away, because this guy has been in the main event for the whole 2018 and he doesn't belong there since he is a mid carder. period


----------



## patpat

Mongstyle said:


> This is so short sighted, I don't know what to say.
> 
> Beating Reigns wouldn't help Rollins. Despite everything they've given Rollins, he's never even cracked the top 5 of merchandise sellers in the WWE. Reigns was ahead of everyone except Cena since 2014. The people who are going to take, take very quickly. You don't have to wait very long which is kind of why WWE is quick to get behind certain guys.
> 
> The reality is Rollins was the wrong guy to hitch the wagon to. It's the same old shit. He's been in or around the main event since 2015, and he's been incredibly bland since 2016 outside of a short stint last year.
> 
> Strowman was right there, getting massive reactions, and with Reigns out, the timing was right. They should've put the belt on him in November and freshened up the product. Start new feuds. Do something different. Instead they went right back to Lesnar and decided to build up Rollins.
> 
> Rollins ain't gonna do shit regardless of how much you push him. Crowd reactions aren't everything. And the reality is, guys like Styles, Strowman etc. have had much bigger reactions than Rollins has right now.
> 
> You need something new. Strowman was that for them. And they should've used Lesnar differently rather than actively making everyone hate him the way they did. They could've built up Lashley and done that match at Mania. Instead they've squandered him too.


Seth Rollins not being in the top 5 seller was never confirmed. the only news we got that was legit was that becky was number one. that's all.


----------



## patpat

The XL 2 said:


> Size helps but it's not the only thing. Guys like Eddie, Shawn and Bret weren't huge but came across as stars. Although I do think there is a threshold to be believable. It's that these guys look like fucking geeks. Zayn is a geek. Balor is a geek. Even some of the bigger guys that look good suck. McIntyre looks like a million bucks and can work but is a complete charisma vacuum. The guy could shoot the pope on live TV and it'd be so quiet that you'd hear a rat piss on cotton in the arena. Same with Roman, he's big but he has zero charisma. They push all the wrong people, they push geeks who have no ability to connect with the audience.


finnbalor was the biggest draw in Japan, the rock and roller , a badass mother fucking heel that kicks ass. guess what? it worked like heel because 1) he came like a star 2) he backed it up with big wins. he created the fucking bullet club that made people like aj styles and Kenny Omega into stars. so pleasseeee wrestling fans get off your "big guys" want, it's not the 70s anymore, being a star takes a loot more than just being big lol. and today you can easily do it without being "big sized" 
soo no Balor isn't a geek. wwe is a company of geek , with geek fans who keep following a rotten pg program and complain about it. the company , the wwe is a problem , the problem.


----------



## rbl85

patpat said:


> Seth Rollins not being in the top 5 seller was never confirmed. the only news we got that was legit was that *becky was number one.* that's all.


Sorry but that's not true, she is the top woman seller but a few mens are selling more merchs than her (over the whole year)


----------



## Ace

rbl85 said:


> Sorry but that's not true, she is the top woman seller but a few mens are selling more merchs than her (over the whole year)


 She's the top merch seller, but merch sales are down double digits. Most of the men have taken big hits in merch I'd imagine given how little they were featured and the momentum they have. The top 3 of Cena, Roman and AJ that is. Weren't featured as much/at all and have zero momentum. Hardly surprising merch is down significantly when their top 3 merch sellers for the last few years aren't doing anything or have nothing behind them.


----------



## rbl85

Ace said:


> She's the top merch seller, but merch sales are down double digits. Most of the men have taken big hits in merch I'd imagine given how little they were featured and the momentum they have. The top 3 of Cena, Roman and AJ that is. Weren't featured as much/at all and have zero momentum. Hardly surprising merch is down significantly when their top 3 merch sellers for the last few years aren't doing anything or have nothing behind them.


I'm not saying she's not right now but if you do an average for the last 12 months, guys like Cena or Reigns sold more merchs than her.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Hour 3 did 1.898 million. There it is. :lmao

WWE :buried


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.336M
H2- 2.241M
H3- 1.898M
3H- 2.158M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 4.07% / - 0.095M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 15.31% / - 0.343M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 18.75% / - 0.438M )
4/29/19 Vs 4/22/19 ( - 9.10% / - 0.176M )

Demo (4/29/19 Vs 4/22/19):
H1- 0.780D Vs 0.900D
H2- 0.740D Vs 0.790D
H3- 0.640D Vs 0.750D
3H- 0.720D Vs 0.813D

Note: RAW is 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 7th, 9th & 11th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (4/29/19 Vs 4/30/18):
H1- 2.336M Vs 3.136M
H2- 2.241M Vs 3.184M
H3- 1.898M Vs 2.878M
3H- 2.158M Vs 3.066M ( - 29.62% / - 0.908M )

Demo (4/29/19 Vs 4/30/18):
H1- 0.780D Vs 1.080D
H2- 0.740D Vs 1.130D
H3- 0.640D Vs 1.030D
3H- 0.720D Vs 1.080D

Note: RAW this week last year was 3rd, 2nd & 6th by hourly demo & 4th, 3rd & 5th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Dave Santos

Probably means smackdown is under 2 million.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

A masterclass in not drawing. :bow :clap :heston

RAW getting Smackdown demos. :bryanlol :sodone


----------



## llj

Predictable. And I can't even bring myself to be outraged at their booking anymore. I simply have stopped watching. Guess many others out there are doing the same. I probably spend more time here discussing the WWE's problems than watching it now.


----------



## The XL 2

Holy shit, lmfao. They are so fucked with football and AEW coming in the fall.


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

Showstopper said:


> Hour 3 did 1.898 million. There it is. :lmao
> 
> WWE :buried


_*This is what happens when you put on a shit show week after week after week every year for the past 10 years straight. Also what has done it is the super star shake up in which they will continue for 2 more weeks. Putting on childish high school jock stuff with The USO's as faces picking on the heels in Revival for no reason at all. 

I predicted in advance and you can quote me on this at the year. Third hour of Raw will be reaching 1.5 million while the rest are under 1.8 million in ratings. *_


----------



## Chrome

Holy fuck.









Another all-time low. WWE setting new records every week. :drose


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Dave Santos said:


> Probably means smackdown is under 2 million.


It could well be. If Smackdown gets 80% of RAW'S 2.158M,
that would equate to 1.726M. 90% would be 1.942M. It's amazing to see WWE produce record breaking tv. :heston


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Buffy The Vampire Slayer said:


> _*This is what happens when you put on a shit show week after week after week every year for the past 10 years straight. Also what has done it is the super star shake up in which they will continue for 2 more weeks. Putting on childish high school jock stuff with The USO's as faces picking on the heels in Revival for no reason at all.
> 
> I predicted in advance and you can quote me on this at the year. Third hour of Raw will be reaching 1.5 million while the rest are under 1.8 million in ratings. *_


Yep. And just think where they will be at this time next year.

:trips8


----------



## Randy Lahey

30% drop over last year...lmao. Seth LOLLINS....


----------



## Jedah

I thought they'd go below 2 million by next year. They did it in a week. :lmao

HOUR 1 at 2.3 million. :taker

Hey WWE, "you deserve it!" :clap :clap :clap :clap :clap "You deserve it!" :clap :clap :clap :clap :clap


----------



## Ladies Man 30

Nobody to blame but themselves


----------



## Fearless Viper

Was there a competition during Raw?


----------



## Piper's Pit

Damn, I knew those sub 2.0 ratings for Hour 3 were coming but didn't think it would happen this fast. And while this is happening they're offering the Revival 500k per year contracts !! Might want to focus on other issues Vince !


----------



## Dave Santos

Golden state game and the Boston game on next week.


----------



## Mordecay

I knew it as soon as I saw how bad the show was and the fact that the closing segment was going to be a contract signing


----------



## llj

Fearless Viper said:


> Was there a competition during Raw?


Yeah, basically anything on TV that was a better show.

I played video games for a few hours and then watched "Bull" last night while eating dinner. It wasn't the most entertaining night but I feel pretty confident I spent my time better than had I watched RAW


----------



## Dave Santos

So is Raw almost as low as the Christmas episode 4 months ago?


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

This says it all: *3H- 2.158M Vs 3.066M ( - 29.62% / - 0.908M )* To drop 30% of your viewers in one year, a whopping 908,000, is pretty damn amazing and incredibly sad as well. Keep it up. :bryanlol


----------



## Zappers

Ohhhhhh snap. Becky gonna lose those belts for sure at the PPV.


----------



## Randy Lahey

The 2.158 number has to be the lowest number they've done all time outside of Holiday Shows.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

Dave Santos said:


> So is Raw almost as low as the Christmas episode 4 months ago?


*H1- 1.752M
H2- 1.789M
H3- 1.784M
3H- 1.775M*










*H1- 0.560D
H2- 0.550D
H3- 0.540D
3H- 0.550D*

RAW was still 0.383M or 21.58% higher in overall viewership and 0.170D higher in overall demo compared to Xmas RAW.


----------



## Piper's Pit

THE MAN said:


> This says it all: *3H- 2.158M Vs 3.066M ( - 29.62% / - 0.908M )* To drop 30% of your viewers in one year, a whopping 908,000, is pretty damn amazing and incredibly sad as well. Keep it up. :bryanlol


30% in one year, that's seriously bad and there's nothing they can do it about. Not sure how I should feel about this tbh, on one hand they're seemingly a sinking ship but on the other they're bringing in record revenue and the new TV deal has yet to kick in. Weird times.


----------



## Dave Santos

Zappers said:


> Ohhhhhh snap. Becky gonna lose those belts for sure at the PPV.


Well they were down 14% from last year till end of february. Now its been averaging in the 25% range for the past 2 months. Something has to change.


----------



## raymond1985

What did WWE expect? 

The past two weeks they have asked their audience to stick through 2 hours of tedious television to see Corbin, Style and Rollins in the main segment of the third hour. It's no wonder the ratings are tanking. 

No stars. Poor booking.


----------



## Jedah

30% drop in one year.

Keep it up Vince. Keep pushing Baron Corbin. Keep burying the entire women's division except for Becky and whatever blonde flavor of the month you have. Keep jobbing your champions out in non-title matches. Keep up with the same meaningless tag team matches every week. Keep up with the formulas. Keep up with the dumb scripting and commentary.

Keep it up Vince. Maybe you'll get to below 1 million next year. Unlikely but at this rate it's very possible.


----------



## raymond1985

Dave Santos said:


> Well they were down 14% from last year till end of february. Now its been averaging in the 25% range for the past 2 months. Something has to change.


A Rollins vs Styles programme isn't the answer. Neither is Lynch.

They need to find answers fast.


----------



## Chris90

What did they expect, it's unwatchable rubbish.


----------



## Dave Santos

Piper's Pit said:


> 30% in one year, that's seriously bad and there's nothing they can do it about. Not sure how I should feel about this tbh, on one hand they're seemingly a sinking ship but on the other they're bringing in record revenue and the new TV deal has yet to kick in. Weird times.


Will be interesting to see merch sales, live attendance figures next quarter. That shows how much people enjoy the product. Wwe may end up increasing ticket prices to pay for dwindeling fans.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The general public must be sexist. Don't they know that women just main-evented WM for the first time ever just a few short weeks ago?

:kobelol


----------



## llj

raymond1985 said:


> A Rollins vs Styles programme isn't the answer. Neither is Lynch.
> 
> They need to find answers fast.


Rollins v Styles would have been HOT back in 2016 or 2017. Now the product is too damaged for many fans to care anymore


----------



## Jedah

They're paying for their years worth of laziness and incompetence. They're certainly paying for the gargantuan mistakes they made in 2018 which accelerated the decline dramatically.

The product is just ice cold and so by extension is everyone else. Not to worry, the brand is the draw, right? :lmao


----------



## Piper's Pit

There's nothing they can do to turn it around, it's over. It's going to be a slow death not a quick one.


----------



## Chrome

Crazy thing too is fan favorites like Rollins and Lynch are champions and the ratings are WOAT. Show itself is fundamentally broken, they need to blow it up and start over. People saying this shit for like a decade too lol.


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

_*One person on here is blaming Becky for the third hour. Never change and continue to be one of those people who don't know what they are talking about. :Kobelol*_


----------



## rbl85

My sides hurt so much XD


----------



## Jedah

Becky has been a ratings disaster. There's no question about it. I'm not blaming her entirely (no individual talent is to blame - it's this shitty formulaic system above all else) but the women main eventing WrestleMania turned a lot of people off.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

They need to completely restructure the show. My favourite wrestler is the double champion, yet I have absolutely no intention of watching it, that's how bad the product it. Can you imagine wasting 3 hours of your life on Raw every monday? I wouldn't even want to spend 3 minutes on it. Honestly, I think an off-season after Mania would be a great idea. Their product is so over-saturated.


----------



## raymond1985

Jedah said:


> *Becky has been a ratings disaster.* There's no question about it. I'm not blaming her entirely (no individual talent is to blame - it's this shitty formulaic system above all else) but the women main eventing WrestleMania turned a lot of people off.


So have Rollins, Styles and Corbin. 

It's a poor show. And without the likes of Rousey, Brock and Batista to stop the bleeding, it's no wonder they are posting near record lows.


----------



## Jedah

I mean, it really tells you how poor the entire cast of characters is when BRAY WYATT who has been buried in the earth's core FOR YEARS is the most interesting thing on the show.



raymond1985 said:


> So have Rollins, Styles and Corbin.
> 
> It's a poor show. And without the likes of Rousey, Brock and Batista to stop the bleeding, it's no wonder they are posting near record lows.


Brock and Ronda didn't do shit either. In fact, Brock Lesnar's tenure as champion was one of the things that inflated the decline last year and Ronda didn't draw as this year's flat Mania ratings prove.

This is not an individual talent problem. This is a structural problem.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

The biggest and worst problem for WWE remains the same as it's been for about a decade now; Vince McMahon.

He. Has. To. Go. Period.

How the people at FOX and NBCU/USA think Vince, at his advanced age, is mentally fit to make the decisions for a multi-billion dollar business is beyond me.


----------



## llj

raymond1985 said:


> So have Rollins, Styles and Corbin.
> 
> It's a poor show. And without the likes of Rousey, Brock and Batista to stop the bleeding, it's no wonder they are posting near record lows.


The problem is too many people on the roster are damaged and the top people being featured right now aren't strong enough as draws to make up for the other poor aspects of the shows or the cumulative leaving of all the fanbases of all the other wrestlers on the roster.


----------



## P Thriller

I don't blame any of the talent for this downfall whatsoever. You can't spend over a decade not listening to your fans and expect them to continue to trust you. They took their hardcore fanbase for granted for so long in search of some imaginary casual fanbase and it ended up shooting themselves in the foot. Once you lose the trust of a fanbase it doesn't matter how good your show is, they aren't going to come back to watch. Just look at TNA. They sucked for so long that nobody is going to ever give them a chance again and that is basically where WWE is at right now. They not only didn't listed to their fans, but they would go out of their way to troll their own fans and the fans just kept leaving cause it wasn't worth putting up with anymore. So congratulations Vince! You booked a show to entertain yourself and only yourself for so long that you are literally the only one around that even enjoys it anymore. I think people are really underestimating how bad a situation WWE is in right now, and it was so avoidable if they just didn't shove people like Cena and Reigns down people's throats for 15 years and actually took a risk or two.


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

Jedah said:


> Becky has been a ratings disaster. There's no question about it. I'm not blaming her entirely (no individual talent is to blame - it's this shitty formulaic system above all else) but the women main eventing WrestleMania turned a lot of people off.


_*I wasn't even talking about you. If I did I would be quoting you, like I am now. First off, the people that were turned of by woman main eventing can fuck off and stop watching if they have big time problem with it. 

Becky is the only woman that has been build up this year meanwhile the rest of the Raw Woman's division was completely buried by Ronda Rousey for a straight full year. Only two strong woman now in Becky but I don't count her as a Raw star yet since she is a floating Champion. 

What also is driving fans away is having your Champions loses matches and constantly on free TV. Samoa Joe is in this case and Bobby Lashley/Leo months before hand. 

Having a tag team Champions winning matches on TV with a fluke win against the previous tag team champions who were losing left to right for the better full year. 

Childish skits with USO's acting like high school people with The Revival. 

Main events has been literally dead for 2 years due to Brock Lesnar beating everyone left to right. Drew's stock died the moment he aligned himself with Baron Corbin. Corbin's stock has also been going down despite him beating Kurt. 

A lot of people have been noticing this on their screens. *_


----------



## Randy Lahey

Chrome said:


> *Crazy thing too is fan favorites like Rollins and Lynch are champions and the ratings are WOAT.* Show itself is fundamentally broken, they need to blow it up and start over. People saying this shit for like a decade too lol.


There's clearly a disconnect between casuals tuning out, and the interests of the fans that remain.

.


----------



## rbl85

The worst feeling when i try to watch RAW is when i'm starting to be bored, I wonder when it's over and then I look at the time and realise that it's still the first hour XD


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Randy Lahey said:


> There's clearly a disconnect between casuals tuning out, and the interests of the fans that remain.
> 
> .


Problem is they decreased before this, too. Been decreasing for several years now, including when guys like Brock and others were Champion.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

BWAHAHAHAHA!

Ratings were bad during the RTWM, but they always fall during the NBA Finals. So, if you're starting low, you're going to go even lower. It's crazy that they're getting below 2 million now.

I don't want to be too hard on WWE because I thought they made the right creative decisions at WrestleMania (except the finish of the main event, obviously). The problem for me is more that they started making those right decisions too late. 

It's like when WCW gave Booker T a real run as champion in 2000. Putting the belt on a fan favorite and running with him doesn't erase years of eroding the fan base to half of what they were. It especially meant little after Booker T pinned Jeff Jarrett in a thrown together match with little set up. If Booker T beat Hulk Hogan that would have meant a little more, for what little it meant at the time.

Now, Rollins beats Lesnar in the opener of Mania years after Lesnar's "Undertaker Streak Ending Heat" dissipated. Their failure to pull the trigger on anyone after Lensar ended the streak and killed Cena for literal YEARS killed whatever momentum Lesnar had.

It has little to do with who's on top. I don't think they'd be any better if Brock were champ and were advertised to be on the show. They killed the entire roster for Brock and Reigns for, like, 5 years and refused to build any stars that were entertaining television characters. That's the core problem. People want to watch entertaining wrestlers. Period.


----------



## llj

Buffy The Vampire Slayer said:


> _*First off, the people that were turned of by woman main eventing can fuck off and stop watching if they have big time problem with it.
> *_



As a matter of fact, they did.


----------



## Jedah

Buffy The Vampire Slayer said:


> _*First off, the people that were turned of by woman main eventing can fuck off and stop watching if they have big time problem with it.*_


_*

And they have.

Everything you say is true but there's no question that pushing the women to main event Mania backfired. Especially with the build as shitty as it was.*_


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

_* @llj ; & @Jedah ; I know they are gone. The problem wasn't the main event in my view. The problem was how they went about it. Kept on talking it up every week for 2 full months this year as well s the build was too freaking poor and convuleted. A lot of mess up's and mixed up elements that made no sense at all. The knee injury was dumb, then adding Charlotte in Feb and having Ronda turn heel at the last second, and having Charlotte winning the SD Woman's Championship and walking in WM with the belt is what killed it. *_


----------



## RainmakerV2

We still blaming this on Corbin? Lol. No one cares about Seth Borings and AJ stales.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

If only they were KO or Jay Geek.

:mj4


----------



## CRCC

Vince told me this downfall is only because of missing talent. Everything's going to be all right soon.

:booklel


----------



## raymond1985

Jedah said:


> And they have.
> 
> Everything you say is true but there's no question that pushing the women to main event Mania backfired. Especially with the build as shitty as it was.


I don't see how the women headlining Mania was any more damaging than Rollins being Champion. Did they expect him to stop bleeding? 

Several things are just not working for them. A complete overhaul is needed. But I am not sure what they can do really. They don't seem to have the talent pool or creative to turn things around.


----------



## RainmakerV2

Showstopper said:


> If only they were KO or Jay Geek.
> 
> :mj4


No need to get snarky cause your idol just drew UNDER 2 mil for his main event segment in his 2nd week as champ lmao.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

RainmakerV2 said:


> No need to get snarky cause your idol just drew UNDER 2 mil for his main event segment in his 2nd week as champ lmao.


That wasn't snark, brotha. At least Seth is in the game. Those geeks you like would do even worse.


----------



## ClintDagger

Buffy The Vampire Slayer said:


> _*First off, the people that were turned of by woman main eventing can fuck off and stop watching if they have big time problem with it.
> *_


Can I respectfully ask, what is wrong with not liking women’s wrestling? What would happen if people tuned in to watch the NBA playoffs or The Masters and instead got a WNBA game or a LPGA tournament? It’s not necessarily sexism as much as it’s being a fan of a superior product. I honestly don’t understand the sensitivity to a big chunk of the fan base not being into the women’s product.

I get that by far the biggest problem is systematic with WWE. But I don’t agree with people that say the talent being featured has NOTHING to do with the bottom line ratings. I do think the problem can be broken down from both a macro and micro perspective.


----------



## patpat

Jedah said:


> Becky has been a ratings disaster. There's no question about it. I'm not blaming her entirely (no individual talent is to blame - it's this shitty formulaic system above all else) but the women main eventing WrestleMania turned a lot of people off.


. she wasn't even in the third hour! how is she responsible?! wwe sucks and writes shit! please wwe fans stop putting the blame on any talent or any category of performer, women, workrate or idk what. UFC made ronda draw like crazy. women draw as hell in others programs, wwe just suck, Vince is an entitled out of touch old dude and he killed his product. he killed every possibility! of a new star being born because the roman agenda had to happen. why Samoa Joe didn't beat Lesnar in that feud? why Strowman didn't?! because they had to loose to make roman look strong when he would beat Brock. alll those years of crap killed their product!


----------



## DammitChrist

Vince deserves every single record low ratings that he gets for his shows. It serves him right for all of his terrible booking decisions over the past years.



RainmakerV2 said:


> We still blaming this on Corbin? Lol. No one cares about Seth Borings and AJ stales.


Imagine being one of the delusional folks to blame the individual talents for the decreasing ratings when they’ve been losing viewers for several years now :lol


----------



## RainmakerV2

Showstopper said:


> That wasn't snark, brotha. At least Seth is in the game. Those geeks you like would do even worse.


I have no clue what this means.


----------



## rexmundi

How's that having the main belt on every week would improve the ratings thing going? :brock4


----------



## Jedah

patpat said:


> . she wasn't even in the third hour! how is she responsible?! wwe sucks and writes shit! please wwe fans stop putting the blame on any talent or any category of performer, women, workrate or idk what. UFC made ronda draw like crazy.


I'm not talking about this particular episode. I'm talking as a trend. And Ronda was very much an outlier. Even here, we saw she didn't impact ratings. Women's sports just don't inspire as much interest as men's do. 



> wwe just suck, Vince is an entitled out of touch old dude and he killed his product. he killed every possibility! of a new star being born because the roman agenda had to happen. why Samoa Joe didn't beat Lesnar in that feud? why Strowman didn't?! because they had to loose to make roman look strong when he would beat Brock. alll those years of crap killed their product!


Agreed.


----------



## DammitChrist

rexmundi said:


> How's that having the main belt on every week would improve the ratings thing going? :brock4


Did you really take those comments seriously? :lol

The ratings were clearly going to keep decreasing anyway to anyone who’s noticed the pattern for the past year.


----------



## Ace

Game over Vince :lmao

This company will be doing 1.5m across the board next year :lmao :lmao


----------



## Ace

RainmakerV2 said:


> No need to get snarky cause your idol just drew UNDER 2 mil for his main event segment in his 2nd week as champ lmao.


 You can't blame Seth for a cold product.

Ratings are down across the board, fans are fed up of the PC pandering crap and formulaic book. Each week they're shoving crap down the fans throats.

The numbers would have been the same if not worse if Brock was still champ.


----------



## Hobogoblin

I'm sure that they're still going to get another record TV deal in 5 years.


----------



## Ace

Both hrs of SD are against Celtics vs Bucks :sodone

This ship has officially started to sink

God I hope AJ doesn't win the title, I don't want this shit on him.

Heck I don't want him to ever win it, because the numbers are only going to continue to fall if they don't change.


----------



## llj

Hobogoblin said:


> I'm sure that they're still going to get another record TV deal in 5 years.


Would also not be surprised if the WWE gets bought out by someone like Disney in 5-10 years, quite honestly.


----------



## Ace

Hobogoblin said:


> I'm sure that they're still going to get another record TV deal in 5 years.





llj said:


> Would also not be surprised if the WWE gets bought out by someone like Disney in 5-10 years, quite honestly.


 Shouldn't these ratings alarm TV execs and shareholders?

Surely they're concerned and would want to meet with Vince.


----------



## Jedah

Hobogoblin said:


> I'm sure that they're still going to get another record TV deal in 5 years.


Not a chance. Not with these declines.

The TV networks themselves probably won't be in position to offer that kind of deal either.


----------



## Hobogoblin

Jedah said:


> Not a chance. Not with these declines.
> 
> The TV networks themselves probably won't be in position to offer that kind of deal either.


WWE ratings have been declining for years. People thought that they would be screwed with their last TV deal and they weren't.


----------



## raymond1985

Ace said:


> You can't blame Seth for a cold product.
> 
> Ratings are down across the board, fans are fed up of the PC pandering crap and formulaic book. Each week they're shoving crap down the fans throats.
> 
> *The numbers would have been the same if not worse if Brock was still champ.*


I don't think that would have happened. 

The ratings would have most certainly decreased after Mania. But not to the extent they have with Rollins as Champion. The recent raft of record year to year declines have come since Rousey, Lesnar and Batista have departed.


----------



## Jedah

They've been declining but not this steeply. Not anywhere near it.

When they negotiated those deals last year they were actually up over 2017. Now they're down by 30% year on year.

For the last time, Lesnar didn't do shit. He stopped being a "draw" a while back. People are as sick of him as everything else. Your are obtuse if you think those declines didn't come in part because of his aimless time on top. And Lesnar wasn't exactly bringing people in this year either, nor were Ronda or Batista.


----------



## llj

Ace said:


> Shouldn't these ratings alarm TV execs and shareholders?
> 
> Surely they're concerned and would want to meet with Vince.


Investors did express concern about it in the conference call a few days ago. Vince blamed it mostly on the "missing talent".


----------



## raymond1985

Jedah said:


> And Lesnar wasn't exactly bringing people in this year either, nor were Ronda or Batista.


Batista's segments had a very positive impact on hourly ratings actually. Probably more so than anyone else on the roster.


----------



## Jedah

There's talent missing alright, but it's missing behind the scenes, not in front of the camera.



> Batista's segments had a very positive impact on hourly ratings actually. Probably more so than anyone else on the roster.


And? There was still zero ratings bump for this year's Mania. No ratings bump means the natural decline after Mania is just even worse.


----------



## Ace

llj said:


> Investors did express concern about it in the conference call a few days ago. Vince blamed it mostly on the "missing talent".


 The talent is all back and they're doing much worse. Shareholders should be alarmed and calling an urgent meeting to remove Vince. No doubt they've lost faith in his ability to lead this company, they need new ideas. Not sure if they can remove him though as Vince and his family may hold the majority of the voting power.


----------



## raymond1985

Jedah said:


> There's talent missing alright, but it's missing behind the scenes, not in front of the camera.
> 
> 
> 
> And? There was still zero ratings bump for this year's Mania. No ratings bump means the natural decline after Mania is just even worse.


Yes, but without him it would have been even worse. And if he had stuck around after Mania, I can imagine the ratings would be better in the hours that he appeared in. 

The point is that even as the numbers plummet, some wrestlers have a better impact on ratings than others.


----------



## chronoxiong

Congrats on going below 2 million viewers for a RAW episode WWE. You outdid yourselves! That means Smackdown is going to get hit hard on the ratings this week as well. Can't believe NBC Universal and Fox paid big money for this shit.


----------



## Ace

No one in this company is a star, they fucking make the stars they had non stars FGS.

Look at what happened to Batista, Goldberg (over time), Cena, Brock and Ronda.

Brock and Ronda could go back to UFC tomorrow and pop a 1m buyrate, in the WWE they're practically nothing.


----------



## patpat

Jedah said:


> I'm not talking about this particular episode. I'm talking as a trend. And Ronda was very much an outlier. Even here, we saw she didn't impact ratings. Women's sports just don't inspire as much interest as men's do.
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed.


absolutely and women sport doesn't have t attract as much as men's to dogged. like I said, in every other products like ufc , or others televised programs I see women drawing. wwe has the opportunity to control their sport unlike any other, they have the key to do it. wwe has more ability to create stars than NBA or NFL because they can decides with the booking. so anything hat fails is on them. women sport attract less sure, but 
-> that doesn't mean they can't draw, they do it in ufc with one of the talent the wwe has nonetheless. 
-> in others medias , movies , video game women draw. we have alien , GOT, video games like horizon zero dawn. but they all have one thing in common, they are entertaining and the writing of the characters is picture perfect. 
becky was on top of the world and looked like the absolute star , she worked with edge , had great matches with Charlotte , was throwing John Cena around, cutting bloody promos. and what has she done during the road to mania? they fucked yup every piece of storyline in the worst way possible, ronda vs becky had every single bit of a wnrestlemnia main event. and wwe instead of making it look as legit as possible, hell! do wwe press conference and even weight in if you wanton they killed that feud by adding Charlotte the macmahon and SPENT the whole time telling us how THEY are great for putting the women in the main event , even going on tv explaining the women didn't got the spot because they are women. BEST way to make everyone think the exact contrary. 
their product suck so much man, I don't even think there is a way to fix it, they absolutely destroyed themselves silently for 15 years and they are starting to see the consequences. all those moments of Vince fighting the fans is backfiring on his face, and now, when it's too late he is trying to give everyone what they want? all babyface champions? giving away Wrestlemania potential matches like Seth vs aj? 
like I am one of rollins' biggest fan , I have been following him since ROH and I am a aj fan since Japan. I know all of their history together and listened to pretty much all podcast about them. but I dimd't tune in yesterday to watch the product or watch them, because no matter how I love my favorites ( including becky ) , wwe is an absolute piece of hot garbage and Vince damaged the company creatively beyond repair. micro managing , scripted promos..;they are doing every thing! wrong!


----------



## Ace

TNA January 4th, 2010 - 2.2m viewers.

Raw April 29th, 2019 - 2.158m viewers.

:heston


----------



## Ace

patpat said:


> absolutely and women sport doesn't have t attract as much as men's to dogged. like I said, in every other products like ufc , or others televised programs I see women drawing. wwe has the opportunity to control their sport unlike any other, they have the key to do it. wwe has more ability to create stars than NBA or NFL because they can decides with the booking. so anything hat fails is on them. women sport attract less sure, but
> -> that doesn't mean they can't draw, they do it in ufc with one of the talent the wwe has nonetheless.
> -> in others medias , movies , video game women draw. we have alien , GOT, video games like horizon zero dawn. but they all have one thing in common, they are entertaining and the writing of the characters is picture perfect.
> becky was on top of the world and looked like the absolute star , she worked with edge , had great matches with Charlotte , was throwing John Cena around, cutting bloody promos. and what has she done during the road to mania? they fucked yup every piece of storyline in the worst way possible, ronda vs becky had every single bit of a wnrestlemnia main event. and wwe instead of making it look as legit as possible, hell! do wwe press conference and even weight in if you wanton they killed that feud by adding Charlotte the macmahon and SPENT the whole time telling us how THEY are great for putting the women in the main event , even going on tv explaining the women didn't got the spot because they are women. BEST way to make everyone think the exact contrary.
> their product suck so much man, I don't even think there is a way to fix it, they absolutely destroyed themselves silently for 15 years and they are starting to see the consequences. all those moments of Vince fighting the fans is backfiring on his face, and now, when it's too late he is trying to give everyone what they want? all babyface champions? giving away Wrestlemania potential matches like Seth vs aj?
> like I am one of rollins' biggest fan , I have been following him since ROH and I am a aj fan since Japan. I know all of their history together and listened to pretty much all podcast about them. but I dimd't tune in yesterday to watch the product or watch them, because no matter how I love my favorites ( including becky ) , wwe is an absolute piece of hot garbage and Vince damaged the company creatively beyond repair. micro managing , scripted promos..;they are doing every thing! wrong!


 Ronda is not the norm, she's an anomaly. Womens sports majority of the time doesn't draw as well as the mens equivalent. That's just a fact.


----------



## patpat

RainmakerV2 said:


> No need to get snarky cause your idol just drew UNDER 2 mil for his main event segment in his 2nd week as champ lmao.


 bro I am a huge jay white fan, but in wwe there is no way he would get the push he is currently getting....I doubt he would even be in the mid card. but NJPW do everything they can to make him as legit as possible , they treat him like a star so obviously he comes off like a star. in wwe they absolutely bury you in hope you could achieve some kind of miracle....


----------



## Swindle

Going with AJ/Seth seems to be a mistake.


----------



## Dave Santos

Thanks and credit to a user called dawson41 from reddit. 


> Wow, hour 3 is down 980,000 viewers or 34.1% year-over-year.
> 
> The YoY drops of the last 10 weeks:
> 
> -8.1%
> 
> -10.0%
> 
> -15.9%
> 
> -19.0%
> 
> -23.1%
> 
> -21.4%
> 
> -25.5%
> 
> -26.4%
> 
> -23.5%
> 
> -29.6%


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

Ace said:


> Both hrs of SD are against Celtics vs Bucks :sodone
> 
> This ship has officially started to sink
> 
> God I hope AJ doesn't win the title, I don't want this shit on him.
> 
> Heck I don't want him to ever win it, because the numbers are only going to continue to fall if they don't change.


I'll be watching the Celtics vs Bucks game, after that the Warriors vs Rockets game. Might watch Becky vs Bayley but that is it.


----------



## Ace

Swindle said:


> Going with AJ/Seth seems to be a mistake.


 You could do any other match and the rating would be the same if not worse. Even Batista-HHH didn't do anything after a week and those two are the biggest stars they have. Baristas return held steady and then they saw how shit the product was and left for the rest of the build.

It's because of this reason I don't want my favorites around the main event.


----------



## deathvalleydriver2

Nobody cares about boring Rollins or garbage Becky


----------



## Swindle

Ace said:


> You could do any other match and the rating would be the same if not worse. Even Batista-HHH didn't do anything after a week and those two are the biggest stars they have. Baristas return held steady and then they saw how shit the product was and left for the rest of the build.
> 
> It's because of this reason I don't want my favorites around the main event.


This show is missing a strong heel and that's been a problem for quiet awhile. Maybe things were better back when Reigns had his heat for being positioned as the top babyface. AJ seems to have come onto RAW very cold, imo.


----------



## patpat

Ace said:


> Ronda is not the norm, she's an anomaly.* Womens sports majority of the time doesn't draw as well as the mens equivalent. That's just a fact*.


ok like dude, please read my comment again because I am tired of repeating the same thing. 
i! agree! with! this! statement! 
but I also put out that women dont't have to draw as much as men to do good. ronda never drew as good as the top top male "big main eventers" did in ufc but was considered great because the standards are different. you can't just say 'lol women' because this company has a structural problem with everything they are doing. women not drawing as much as men is one thing ( something I never disagreed with if you read my comment) and there is wwe fucking up every single thing they have in hand. Becky Lynch pre royal rumble and the day after the rumble cannot be compared , not in a single way! to what they made her right now. and wwe isn't a literal sport either, so women in wwe definitely more drawing potential than Chelsea fc's women player. because in wrestling the show is written...;and they can make anyone with a minimum of charisma seem and feel like a star, and she will draw, won't be John Cena or on that level but she will draw. 


===========
also wwe's method to make their top sellers is shit, they literally have to propulse the guy into 4 main event so that he can be the top seller? they have to give AJ this loooonnng reign as champion so he can matter? the problem is the titles don't mean shit. in NJPW when you win the G1 or the IWPG title you are a big deal and a main venter, no need for a 5 years push or anything like that...


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

*AJ vs. Rollins was announced and ZERO fucks were given. Roman moved to Smackdown, so you have no scapegoat now. Since Rollins is champ and in the main event, it's all his fault. That's how you guys decided it works here. *


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Still waiting for when Reigns wins the title post 2015 he'll increase Raw's ratings and bring some mainstream attention to Raw. Oh, wait..


----------



## Erramayhem89

WWE just doesn't have any stars. Rollins and AJ are not going to cut it. They don't have Cena, Brock or Ronda or anyone even remotely well known to help them now.


----------



## Empress

Chrome said:


> Crazy thing too is fan favorites like Rollins and Lynch are champions and the ratings are WOAT. Show itself is fundamentally broken, they need to blow it up and start over. People saying this shit for like a decade too lol.


Vince just needs to retire. There needs to be a change at the top and new energy. The product is so bad right now but they're making millions. Catch 22. 

I don't know how most people sit through three hours of this crap, especially during the NBA playoffs.


----------



## RiverFenix

Vince and co are putting all their eggs in Fall programming basket now - it will he a holding pattern until the Fox move and all out marketing blitz that will come with it.


----------



## The XL 2

Ace said:


> TNA January 4th, 2010 - 2.2m viewers.
> 
> Raw April 29th, 2019 - 2.158m viewers.
> 
> :heston


Lmao fucking brutal


----------



## The Wood

Oof. Just oof. 

People who think WWE are untouchable need to wake up. They are bleeding that viewership out, and they are not going to be able to make new fans at the click of their fingers. Product loyalty is at an all-time low, and faith in their ability to deliver on their own promises, even one week to the next, has been shaken. They have three hours to fill and everything gets overexposed and no one gets over. When no one is over, you aren't going to be able to retain that viewership. The decline in viewers between Raw and cable in general is not correlating. WWE is starting to pay for being bad. When that TV money dries up, what are they going to do? Vince could sell to Disney and WWE could get relaunched in a two-hour spot, once a week with "new management," maybe. 

And this is all before a fresh new alternative that might actually appeal to varied demographics launches. And before those three-hour Raws are far less important than SmackDown. 

This is going to get bumpy, folks.


----------



## Dave Santos

Heres a flash back of how much of an impact Hogan had. This went up against the Bret Hart return to raw. It was also 3 hours long.



> SPIKE TV'S "TNA iMPACT" DELIVERS ITS HIGHEST RATINGS EVER FOR HULK HOGAN'S DEBUT IN SPECIAL LIVE EPISODE
> 
> 2.2 Million Tune-In For Live Three-Hour Telecast
> 
> New York, NY, January 5, 2010 – Hulk Hogan's first appearance on Spike TV's special three-hour live "TNA iMPACT" on Monday, January 2 (8:00-11:05pm) drew 2.2 million viewers. This marks the most-watched "TNA iMPACT" in the history of the franchise, totaling 222 episodes dating back to October, 2005. The previous high was 1.97 million viewers reached last April
> 
> The event was broadcast from the TNA iMPACT! Zone at Universal Studios in Orlando, Fl. Airing head-to-head with WWE on USA Network, "TNA iMPACT" peaked at 2.9 million viewers from 9:00-9:15pm ET/PT.
> 
> Overall, the telecast drew a 1.5 household rating, a 1.8 in Men 18-34, and a 1.6 in Men 18-49. For the time period, "TNA iMPACT" was up a whopping +338% in M18-34, +241% in M18-49, and +84% in average audience versus a year ago.


https://www.wrestlinginc.com/news/2...-impact-delivers-highest-ratings-ever-524551/


----------



## Lenny Leonard

I wonder what the new baseline will be. The ratings plummet will have to gradually even out soon


----------



## SPCDRI

Fearless Viper said:


> Was there a competition during Raw?


Playoff hockey and basketball, but neither of that usually harms RAW ratings as much as Monday Night Football. 

2.3, 2.2 and 1.9 million viewers are straight up SMACKDOWN numbers, and not even good Smackdown numbers. Smackdown usually gets about 80ish percent retention from RAW or from people who like to watch RAW and Smackdown, so Smackdown is probably going to be like, 1.8ish?

This is right after they had that conference call about tanking television viewership. A sub 2.5 million first hour and hour 3 at 1.9 million.

Christmas programming when WCW Nitro was airing didn't do these corpse numbers.

This has to be the least watched RAW by considerable margin.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Seth vs AJ being billed as a dream match is the funniest thing I've ever seen. No one outside of smarks give two shits about them. They are proven to be bad for business.


----------



## DammitChrist

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Seth vs AJ being billed as a dream match is the funniest thing I've ever seen. No one outside of smarks give two shits about them. They are proven to be bad for business.


Just because you can’t stand the fact that many fans see it as such doesn’t mean that Seth Rollins vs AJ Styles is still a dream match. Keep denying it though :lol

Plus, it’s amazing how you STILL have no clue about why the ratings are decreasing. It’s not because of the individual talents (no matter how much you want to spin it).


----------



## jordyjames26

I honestly believe if they pulled the trigger on Ambrose 14/15 and he was in place of seth the industry is in a better position. The workrate geeks wanted Rollins and he's beyond a chliche no ounce of believability of unpredictable traits at all. The woman's revolution is a disaster also. Look at Elias that's a guy you build around, Wyatt, even braun. Something unique. Cartoon like In a way, tell me why a kid would look at Rollins and be captivated. I looked at Warrior, Hogan, Savage, Undertaker I was hooked. Cartoon like crazy personality works

Sent from my SM-J810Y using Tapatalk


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

DammitC said:


> Just because you can’t stand the fact that so many fans see it as such doesn’t mean that Seth Rollins vs AJ Styles is still a dream match. Keep denying it though :lol
> 
> Plus, it’s amazing how you STILL have no clue about why the ratings are decreasing. It’s not because of the individual talents (no matter how much you want to spin it).


So many fans? Raw gets less viewers than peak TNA now LMAO. All that's left watching are smarks and old people. There is absolutely no evidence at all that anyone outside of smarks care about seeing this match at all but there is plenty of evidence that viewers at home don't want to see it.

You can't use the booking as an excuse when Seth and AJ are 2 of the only guys in the company booked consistently strong and the top stars are supposed to draw no matter how weak the undercard is. Brock dropping the belt was supposed to be a fresh start. I remember people blamed him holding the belt hostage as the reason the show was bad. Now people keep moving the goalposts instead of placing blame on the charisma vacuum nerds in the main event.


----------



## SPCDRI

Lenny Leonard said:


> I wonder what the new baseline will be. The ratings plummet will have to gradually even out soon


There is no floor. A lot people, myself included, for a long time thought 3 million viewers was WWE's floor. Then I said rock bottom for a RAW would be 2.5 million. Every hour was below 2.5 million viewers. Following 2019's streak of double digit year on year declines, people thought an hour would be below 2 million against Monday Night Football and AEW filling people's pro wrestling hollow spot up. We're already sub 2 million for 1 hour, with the other 2 barely with head above water, against second round playoff basketball. We don't even talk in ratings points these days because there aren't enough viewers for that to make sense anymore. It takes about 1.2 million viewers for a ratings point, so if you want to think of it that way, every hour was 2 flat or below 2 Nielsen ratings points.

THERE IS NO FLOOR. ITS GOING TO GET UGLY. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SUB 1.8 MILLION HOURS AGAINST MONDAY NIGHT FOOTBALL.


----------



## Ace

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> *AJ vs. Rollins was announced and ZERO fucks were given. Roman moved to Smackdown, so you have no scapegoat now. Since Rollins is champ and in the main event, it's all his fault. That's how you guys decided it works here. *


 Have the same energy for tomorrow bro.


----------



## Ace

Swindle said:


> This show is missing a strong heel and that's been a problem for quiet awhile. Maybe things were better back when Reigns had his heat for being positioned as the top babyface. AJ seems to have come onto RAW very cold, imo.


 I agree, but honestly everyone is cold. I don't feel like watching either show because it will be bad and a waste of my time. Ain't nobody got time for it, especially with playoffs.


----------



## SPCDRI

RAW has a ton of heels and all they stink. you can pooh pooh those terrible Hour Three numbers, but does that do any better if AJ Styles is replaced with The Cricket King Drew Mehcintyre or Cab Driver Sami Zayn or K-Mart Manager Baron Corbin? 

There's tons of heels on RAW yet they've been booked so poorly and for so long and apart from Samoa Joe appear to be major hacks so that not a single one of them could draw flies to feces which is why Rollins/Styles is even happening to begin with.


----------



## DammitChrist

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> I remember people blamed him holding the belt hostage as the reason the show was bad. Now people keep moving the goalposts instead of placing blame on the charisma vacuum nerds in the main event.


You don’t even know what a charisma vacuum is :lol

Try labeling that term to someone who actually lacks charisma because that’s something that Rollins and Styles both possess.

By the way, I like how you used to be more silent about ratings decreasing while Brock Lesnar was the world champion, but now you’re suddenly more vocal and less hesitant to blame the top guy now that Rollins is the world champion. Nice consistency there unk2


----------



## raymond1985

I get that WWE has serious issues beyond talent. 

But I find it hard to believe that Rollins and others are entirely blameless for the ratings plummeting to new lows in recent weeks.


----------



## The Wood

Lenny Leonard said:


> I wonder what the new baseline will be. The ratings plummet will have to gradually even out soon


Does it? If WWE continues putting people off, that number is going to get lower, and lower, and lower. 



jordyjames26 said:


> I honestly believe if they pulled the trigger on Ambrose 14/15 and he was in place of seth the industry is in a better position. The workrate geeks wanted Rollins and he's beyond a chliche no ounce of believability of unpredictable traits at all. The woman's revolution is a disaster also. Look at Elias that's a guy you build around, Wyatt, even braun. Something unique. Cartoon like In a way, tell me why a kid would look at Rollins and be captivated. I looked at Warrior, Hogan, Savage, Undertaker I was hooked. Cartoon like crazy personality works
> 
> Sent from my SM-J810Y using Tapatalk


Nope. It's not a knock on Ambrose, per se, but he was dead when Brock beat him. He's been a goof for years. WWE have also put themselves in a position where no one is over, and no one can get _truly_ over. Because for as over as, even hypothetically, a Dean Ambrose might get, you've got a Baron Corbin match or Jinder Mahal trying to find enlightenment. The company breaks its own fiction constantly, is tasteless and insults intelligence. They might be past the point of jumping the shark. Pushing one good wrestler is not going to change that, because you've burnt out fans out due to conditioning. 

Did anyone really expect WWE not to fuck up Seth Rollins? Or Dean Ambrose? Or Becky Lynch? They fuck up _everything_. Anyone you work yourself into caring about today is not going to matter in six months, and deep down you know it. Deep down most people that have ever given this company a chance know it. That's a hard perception to change, and it's not easy to get back fans who have been sitting watching WWE and thought "I don't like this anymore" and switched off. They may not ever come back, even if things magically got good again. 

Elias, Wyatt, Braun -- it doesn't matter. None of those guys is very good, or good enough to turn around the cultivated perception of a company that has given the finger to fans for about 20 years. Firefly Fun House is not going to do it on the same show where Alexa Bliss trips over her own fucking feet or gives a horrible monologue that sounds scripted but is presented like it's not, which is a blatant lie. That taints everything. 



SPCDRI said:


> There is no floor. A lot people, myself included, for a long time thought 3 million viewers was WWE's floor. Then I said rock bottom for a RAW would be 2.5 million. Every hour was below 2.5 million viewers. Following 2019's streak of double digit year on year declines, people thought an hour would be below 2 million against Monday Night Football and AEW filling people's pro wrestling hollow spot up. We're already sub 2 million for 1 hour, with the other 2 barely with head above water, against second round playoff basketball. We don't even talk in ratings points these days because there aren't enough viewers for that to make sense anymore. It takes about 1.2 million viewers for a ratings point, so if you want to think of it that way, every hour was 2 flat or below 2 Nielsen ratings points.
> 
> THERE IS NO FLOOR. ITS GOING TO GET UGLY. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SUB 1.8 MILLION HOURS AGAINST MONDAY NIGHT FOOTBALL.


Yep. You're going to see the panic soon. I'm not sure what they'll do, but it's going to be pretty funny to watch. I've been getting WCW vibes from WWE for a long time, and we're about to enter the 2000's territory with them. NBC Universal is not forking out $300 million a year for a show that is shriveling up and dying at a rate faster than people are cutting their chords.


----------



## Ace

SPCDRI said:


> RAW has a ton of heels and all they stink. you can pooh pooh those terrible Hour Three numbers, but does that do any better if AJ Styles is replaced with The Cricket King Drew Mehcintyre or Cab Driver Sami Zayn or K-Mart Manager Baron Corbin?
> 
> There's tons of heels on RAW yet they've been booked so poorly and for so long and apart from Samoa Joe appear to be major hacks so that not a single one of them could draw flies to feces which is why Rollins/Styles is even happening to begin with.


 Nothing can save it, their only hope is finding the next guy which is unlikely. Maybe changing the stale formula they might mitigate the fall but otherwise Game Over.


----------



## The Wood

raymond1985 said:


> I get that WWE has serious issues beyond talent.
> 
> But I find it hard to believe that Rollins and others are entirely blameless for the ratings plummeting to new lows in recent weeks.


They're not entirely blameless. They're in a performance industry and people don't care to watch them perform. If you want to call them dancers, it's not that they can't leap very high and pirouette on the spot -- it's that people don't want to see them do that, for whatever reason. Some of it is booking. It is. WWE makes it perfectly clear that you should not care about their wrestlers and that WWE is the star. If you cared about Seth Rollins once upon a time, then him being a passive backseater to Becky Lynch firing on all cylinders is a good way to make you not care. But some of it is that he's never acted like a star, never figured out how to radiate whatever charisma he does have, and has been too compliant in his geekification. 

The talent don't know how to be stars. The company has forgotten how to hype and promote. They actually downplay your expectations now to make things stand out. Look at how they ignored a four-year history between Brock and Seth -- Mania 31 to 35 -- just because. Maybe it's because they didn't want it to overshadow the women's match, but that's _insane_ in wrestling, where your biggest matches should sell tickets and not be pushed to the back as afterthoughts.


----------



## Ace

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> So many fans? Raw gets less viewers than peak TNA now LMAO. All that's left watching are smarks and old people. There is absolutely no evidence at all that anyone outside of smarks care about seeing this match at all but there is plenty of evidence that viewers at home don't want to see it.
> 
> You can't use the booking as an excuse when Seth and AJ are 2 of the only guys in the company booked consistently strong and the top stars are supposed to draw no matter how weak the undercard is. Brock dropping the belt was supposed to be a fresh start. I remember people blamed him holding the belt hostage as the reason the show was bad. Now people keep moving the goalposts instead of placing blame on the charisma vacuum nerds in the main event.


 I defended Brock, he was one of the few stars they had but they killed him too. Nothing can survive their booking.

Seth would have been better off losing at WM to avoid this crap, fortunately the next champ will have it worse and so on.

Drew better win it at Summerslam god dammit, don't put that evil on AJ or Joe.


----------



## Jonhern

Ace said:


> The talent is all back and they're doing much worse. Shareholders should be alarmed and calling an urgent meeting to remove Vince. No doubt they've lost faith in his ability to lead this company, they need new ideas. Not sure if they can remove him though as Vince and his family may hold the majority of the voting power.


More like Vince himself has 80% of the voting power.


----------



## SPCDRI

The Wood said:


> Yep. You're going to see the panic soon. I'm not sure what they'll do, but it's going to be pretty funny to watch. I've been getting WCW vibes from WWE for a long time, and we're about to enter the 2000's territory with them. NBC Universal is not forking out $300 million a year for a show that is shriveling up and dying at a rate faster than people are cutting their chords.


They're not too far away from declining to a point where they aren't doing much better than other NBC programming, while being tremendously more expensive than other NBC programming to the tune of 9 figures more expensive. They're doing twice viewership at best for at least ten times the cost, that doesn't make sense.


----------



## Dave Santos

Can't forget the democratic party debates. When do those start? There are usually 3-6 of them.


----------



## Ace

This thread is more active than the SD discussion thread :ha


----------



## raymond1985

The Wood said:


> They're not entirely blameless. They're in a performance industry and people don't care to watch them perform. If you want to call them dancers, it's not that they can't leap very high and pirouette on the spot -- it's that people don't want to see them do that, for whatever reason. Some of it is booking. It is. WWE makes it perfectly clear that you should not care about their wrestlers and that WWE is the star. If you cared about Seth Rollins once upon a time, then him being a passive backseater to Becky Lynch firing on all cylinders is a good way to make you not care. But some of it is that he's never acted like a star, never figured out how to radiate whatever charisma he does have, and has been too compliant in his geekification.
> 
> The talent don't know how to be stars. The company has forgotten how to hype and promote. They actually downplay your expectations now to make things stand out. Look at how they ignored a four-year history between Brock and Seth -- Mania 31 to 35 -- just because. Maybe it's because they didn't want it to overshadow the women's match, but that's _insane_ in wrestling, where your biggest matches should sell tickets and not be pushed to the back as afterthoughts.


Mostly agreed. 

With Rollins in particular, I think he struggles on the mic and has a terrible voice. He also looks like a generic create a wrestler; long black hair, beard, black trunks. The booking squad can correct some of those shortcomings. But not all of them.

It's not just Rollins. Can you imagine anyone paying to see Sami Zayn. At least Rollins looks like an athlete.


----------



## The Wood

Ace said:


> Nothing can save it, their only hope is finding the next guy which is unlikely. Maybe changing the stale formula they have might mitigate the fall but otherwise Game Over.


One star can turn things around, but what hope does someone have? Velveteen Dream is the most charismatic guy they have, but when Vince calls him up as an impersonating super-fan and beats him with a guy that isn't over, like Corbin, he's done. You've also killed kayfabe, so whoever gets pushed and/or protected is immediately going to be a heel, which means it's going to be extremely challenging to get anyone over as a babyface, and you need a babyface star to turn things around. And the casual audience that has been chased off has been conditioned not to believe in anyone, so good luck getting them to change their minds on that. 

WWE is fucked when those TV contracts come up, because without that TV money, they are a sinking ship and investors are going to sell, sell, sell. That's when Vince gets out and Disney comes in.


----------



## SPCDRI

Dave Santos said:


> Can't forget the democratic party debates. When do those start? There are usually 3-6 of them.


Those aren't usually on Monday, its usually midweek with an occasional Tuesday. So RAW is spared that.


----------



## Ace

The Wood said:


> One star can turn things around, but what hope does someone have? Velveteen Dream is the most charismatic guy they have, but when Vince calls him up as an impersonating super-fan and beats him with a guy that isn't over, like Corbin, he's done. You've also killed kayfabe, so whoever gets pushed and/or protected is immediately going to be a heel, which means it's going to be extremely challenging to get anyone over as a babyface, and you need a babyface star to turn things around. And the casual audience that has been chased off has been conditioned not to believe in anyone, so good luck getting them to change their minds on that.
> 
> WWE is fucked when those TV contracts come up, because without that TV money, they are a sinking ship and investors are going to sell, sell, sell. That's when Vince gets out and Disney comes in.


 Dream or Bust :banderas


----------



## Dave Santos

Ace said:


> This thread is more active than the SD discussion thread :ha


Im pretty sure its in the higher activity portion on other wrestling websites also.


----------



## ClintDagger

raymond1985 said:


> I get that WWE has serious issues beyond talent.
> 
> But I find it hard to believe that Rollins and others are entirely blameless for the ratings plummeting to new lows in recent weeks.


The talent being featured is partly to blame. It’s illogical to suggest otherwise. That would mean you could put anyone at the top of the card: Hornswoggle, R-Truth, Bo Dallas; and the ratings would be the exact same. That’s a ridiculous notion. There are still people who check in periodically to see what’s being featured and then check out when they don’t like what they see.


----------



## Jedah

Should've just pulled the trigger on Braun in 2017. But no, nothing can interfere with Vince's chosen one.

The only prayer they have is to make major changes at the top and in the entirety of how the shows are presented. They need a top to bottom makeover. Vince has to go and Dunn with him. One or two stars can't do it alone.


----------



## Ace

Jedah said:


> Should've just pulled the trigger on Braun in 2017. But no, nothing can interfere with Vince's chosen one.
> 
> The only prayer they have is to make major changes at the top and in the entirety of how the shows are presented. They need a top to bottom makeover. Vince has to go and Dunn with him. One or two stars can't do it alone.


 All of them are damaged goods, having them midcard to the women completely killed them for me.

May as well fire them all and start from scratch because no one is going to look at them the same again. Only problem is Vince will kill the new guys as well.... This roster consists of geeks who nobody wants to watch.

They effectively told us the rest of the guys were smaller stars than Ronda, Charlotte and Becky when the shows were centered around them once Roman was out of the picture.

Agreed, they should have put the rocket on Braun when he was super over. Opportunity lost and he's just another unover geek.


----------



## The Wood

raymond1985 said:


> Mostly agreed.
> 
> With Rollins in particular, I think he struggles on the mic and has a terrible voice. He also looks like a generic create a wrestler; long black hair, beard, black trunks. The booking squad can correct some of those shortcomings. But not all of them.
> 
> It's not just Rollins. Can you imagine anyone paying to see Sami Zayn. At least Rollins looks like an athlete.


They're talented guys, but they really do come off like mid-carders. Could you imagine either of these guys in the ring with a Randy Savage or Hulk Hogan as the crowd goes nuts? I mean, Zayn can talk and is a fantastic bell-to-bell worker -- he really is. With a good story, he can make people care and want him to reach the big one. It's not unfeasible. It's just not a story you can force and it's not the environment where they tell stories effectively. 



Ace said:


> This thread is more active than the SD discussion thread :ha


Funny as it is, WWE's ratings are getting to be a story. Like a real story. Vince can only lie to investors telling them it is going to get better so many times. And they're only going to be able to get so low before NBC Universal and FOX say "You know what, we're not going through with this." I guarantee you that they've got it written in there somewhere that WWE needs to perform their duties, and falling outside the drop in cable is probably a good case for dereliction of duty. 

And what can Vince do?


----------



## Jedah

Look what they're already doing with Aleister Black, one of the few unique guys they have that's hard for the scripting to kill.

They didn't even put him in MITB. What's he going to do, just cut these cryptic promos and do nothing? Gotta have him do something cool soon.


----------



## Ace

Another big problem is all of them are just guys, there's no characters. AJ and Seth are literally playing the same character and on SD we have a damn comedy gimmick as world champion.

The blame lies on the fans too for allowing this shit to happen. These fickle pricks pop for the dumbest things.


----------



## Ace

Dream should have been "the first black world champion", not that twerk happy, pancake jabroni Kofi fpalm


----------



## Dave Santos

SPCDRI said:


> Those aren't usually on Monday, its usually midweek with an occasional Tuesday. So RAW is spared that.


You are right. I checked the first 4 scheduled are.
1a June 26 2019
1B	June 27, 2019	
2A	July 30, 2019
2B	July 31, 2019

Only one falls on a Tuesday.


----------



## Ace

Roman should have gapped it to Hollywood when he had the chance rather than return to the Titanic.


----------



## Jedah

Ace said:


> Another big problem is all of them are just guys, there's no characters. AJ and Seth are literally playing the same character.


True. The scripting though definitely hurts all of this because they aren't allowing people any freedom. To have a character now you need to be unique in a way that's hard for the scripting to make you generic or you're just good enough to overcome the scripting.


----------



## Ace

Also, where have all those geeks from social media gone who "blew up" Becky and Kofi's twitters?

Disappeared and moved onto the next hot thing aka no one, their SJW agenda has been served and they've left leaving the company in this awful state. None of this was sustainable.


----------



## Jedah

You can't expect that level of intensity to last under any circumstance. It's almost a month after Mania now. Becky and Kofi are still the hottest acts in front of live crowds. It's just that the product is so cold...

These formulas. It's these formulas and scripting that are really killing everything. If you watch one Raw you've watched them all. Just replace one spare part for another. That's how it feels.


----------



## SPCDRI

5 years ago, the April 28, 2014 episode of RAW did a 4.7 million overall viewership. That wasn't a big, hot shot show with a bunch of part timers, it wasn't an anniversary show.

Here's the matches they had on that:

Ryback and Curtis Axel in a tag match against the Usos
Sheamus/Titus O'Neill
A comedy segment with Dolph Ziggler and Hugh Jackman
Cesaro/Jack Swagger
Alberto Del Rio/Cody Rhodes
Rusev/Xavier Woods
Three Man Band vs. Los Matadores
Paige/Brie Bella
Wade Barrett against Rob Van Dam in an IC number 1 contendership match
Roman Reigns/Randy Orton DQ

Ooh, barn barner. The biggest things were Flair and Stephanie McMahon. That was a fuck-off show in WWE's down period and it beat NBA and NHL playoffs and was number 1 in its demo. 

RAW has driven away a STAGGERING amount of viewers since 2014.


----------



## The Wood

Ace said:


> Another big problem is all of them are just guys, there's no characters. AJ and Seth are literally playing the same character and on SD we have a damn comedy gimmick as world champion.
> 
> The blame lies on the fans too for allowing this shit to happen. These fickle pricks pop for the dumbest things.


WWE wanted to coast for so long on their name as the star. After Rock, Brock, and to a smaller extent, Lashley, they thought they would be clever and make the circus the actual attraction. Well now that they need stars they've kind of forgotten how to make them. 

And the fans are a problem. They're fickle, true, but they're also not as smart as they think they are, and will cheer for anything "other." They create an environment that I can imagine makes getting into wrestling quite difficult. Who wants to go to a show where the main characters are all booed because they're main characters? But I don't feel too sorry for WWE, because they cultivated this by chasing away the fans that would drown them out.


----------



## RainmakerV2

patpat said:


> bro I am a huge jay white fan, but in wwe there is no way he would get the push he is currently getting....I doubt he would even be in the mid card. but NJPW do everything they can to make him as legit as possible , they treat him like a star so obviously he comes off like a star. in wwe they absolutely bury you in hope you could achieve some kind of miracle....


What the hell are you guys talking about lol. 2 WF favorites draw a record low rating and somehow this becomes a convo about my Jay White av lol. Deflect much?


----------



## The Wood

To get viewership back, you need to keep the people who currently watch this crap happy as well as creating something that is going to appeal to normal people with sense and taste. Lol, good luck crossing those streams.


----------



## RainmakerV2

Jedah said:


> True. The scripting though definitely hurts all of this because they aren't allowing people any freedom. To have a character now you need to be unique in a way that's hard for the scripting to make you generic or you're just good enough to overcome the scripting.


What characters? They're both just "good wrestlers " who win a lot. Neither even has a character. They looked like they were gonna give AJ one when he dropped Vince but he went back to being just a good rassler that wins a lot. Lol


----------



## The Wood

I can't wait to see what a former writer for Betty White's Off Their Rockers suggests.


----------



## Dave Santos

SPCDRI said:


> 5 years ago, the April 28, 2014 episode of RAW did a 4.7 million overall viewership. That wasn't a big, hot shot show with a bunch of part timers, it wasn't an anniversary show.
> 
> Here's the matches they had on that:
> 
> Ryback and Curtis Axel in a tag match against the Usos
> Sheamus/Titus O'Neill
> A comedy segment with Dolph Ziggler and Hugh Jackman
> Cesaro/Jack Swagger
> Alberto Del Rio/Cody Rhodes
> Rusev/Xavier Woods
> Three Man Band vs. Los Matadores
> Paige/Brie Bella
> Wade Barrett against Rob Van Dam in an IC number 1 contendership match
> Roman Reigns/Randy Orton DQ
> 
> Ooh, barn barner. The biggest things were Flair and Stephanie McMahon. That was a fuck-off show in WWE's down period and it beat NBA and NHL playoffs and was number 1 in its demo.
> 
> RAW has driven away a STAGGERING amount of viewers since 2014.


I actually checked out that date on youtube. It had some extra stuff. The Bella match was a title match. It had Evolution get beat up by the shield. Had a Bray Wyatt segment serenading John Cena. What did stand out was the red lighting felt the same. The stage looked the same. The camera angles used were pretty much similar to now.


----------



## Jedah

RainmakerV2 said:


> What characters? They're both just "good wrestlers " who win a lot. Neither even has a character. They looked like they were gonna give AJ one when he dropped Vince but he went back to being just a good rassler that wins a lot. Lol


The point clearly went over your head, so I won't bother.


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Ace said:


> Have the same energy for tomorrow bro.


*Nah. Reigns isn't champion and Kofi is feuding with Owens, which means I get to blame whoever I don't like for any kind of ratings drop. I'm playing by your rules and it feels great. *


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Showstopper said:


> Still waiting for when Reigns wins the title post 2015 he'll increase Raw's ratings and bring some mainstream attention to Raw. Oh, wait..


*I've posted every mainstream appearance Reigns has done in the last 5 years and his returns have increased ratings every time, but I'm still waiting for the day Rollins doesn't tank ratings :draper2.*


----------



## Black Metal

Does anyone care about the ratings for their favorite tv shows like they do this shit?


----------



## Ace

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> *Nah. Reigns isn't champion and Kofi is feuding with Owens, which means I get to blame whoever I don't like for any kind of ratings drop. I'm playing by your rules and it feels great. *


 Who's the face of the company? I think most of the fault lies more on everyone giving up on the product hence the massive bleed the last 7-8 months. Heavily featuring the women and putting a title on a geek is something you could add to it, otherwise all the top men are the same and make little to no difference. If Brock was champion, the ratings would be the same if not worse, I think we can acknowledge both shows are fucked because fans have stopped watching out of habit. Seth is doing bad now, and the next champion will do worse. This will continue until they hit their floor or things change and ratings go up again.


----------



## SPCDRI

Black Metal said:


> Does anyone care about the ratings for their favorite tv shows like they do this shit?


You'd probably care more about other television shows when they do poor ratings. They haven't been able to schnooker people into monster, multi-year contracts. Any fan of a non-wrestling television show who was informed that the show was down 30 percent from last year in ratings and doing the worst viewership numbers in show history would be concerned that the show would be moved to a terrible time slot or get cancelled mid season or both. WWE has had close to 20 years of RAW having declining viewership and they are in long term contract, record revenue Magical Christmas Land. No other television program could get away with this crap.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> *I've posted every mainstream appearance Reigns has done in the last 5 years and his returns have increased ratings every time, but I'm still waiting for the day Rollins doesn't tank ratings :draper2.*


Roman Reigns is the face of this era; has main-evented WM 4 years in a row (prior to this year) and been the star of the show for years now and everyone of those years ratings decreased, as well. He's no TV ratings draw, despite all of his WM main events. He can main event WM for the next 10 years, and ratings will continue to decrease.


----------



## Dave Santos

Black Metal said:


> Does anyone care about the ratings for their favorite tv shows like they do this shit?


Im guessing a lot do. I know the simpsons forum, walking dead, Gotham has them. Gotham had to cut their series short to wrap up. But they are actually prevalent on netflix show series believe it or not. People on reddit pages for their shows don't want their shows cancelled. I was reading the Punisher, Daredevil, Longmire, Marco Polo. I remember when Firefly was cancelled and they put a lot of money in to it but the viewers were not there. They cancelled it after one season. Fox has cancelled the most shows out of anyone other network and the majority of them have been on Friday. I don't see that happening but Friday is not a good day.


----------



## The Wood

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> *I've posted every mainstream appearance Reigns has done in the last 5 years and his returns have increased ratings every time, but I'm still waiting for the day Rollins doesn't tank ratings :draper2.*


Yeah, but the ratings didn't hold. I'm not going to blame Reigns, per se, but the push isn't clicking with people. Nothing has clicked with people for a long time. And nothing will likely click for a lot longer yet. 



Black Metal said:


> Does anyone care about the ratings for their favorite tv shows like they do this shit?


Yeah, absolutely. Some people don't, some people do. I'm a TV nerd, so I love reading up on what's doing well and tracking trends and the like. Other people care when their favorite show gets cancelled, or they feel good knowing that their favorite show is doing really well. There are trend-setters in this world, but there are also trend-followers. TV is an industry, and that's interesting to some people. 

Also, if you are a fan of WWE, a critic of them, or otherwise a stakeholder it provides a very useful gauge as to how the product is performing. Especially if you are someone who comes on the internet to discuss what you do and don't like about it.


----------



## SPCDRI

The biggest demo decline in viewership was 25-39 year olds. There are more people over the age of 50 than between the ages of 12 and 34 watching the product. So not only is the viewership number itself shit on a plate, minus the plate, the age demos are putrid. 

FOX is scouring its contract for some sort of airplane ejection seat lever right now.


----------



## The Wood

The demos have been worrying for a long time. WWE appeals to old white men. That should say something. They have real trouble engaging younger and more varied demos. "Cool people." WWE doesn't appeal to cool people. That is why it should be worrying to brass in management that there's a hip, new, young wrestling promotion coming around the corner. Well, hipper, newer and younger. But WWE are going to run into trouble when their current fan-base starts dying off.

And I get into fights with people about this all the time: I _guarantee_ that FOX does have an out-clause. There's no way that, ink dry or not, FOX is going to be obligated to put an under-performing show on its airwaves for three years. They are paying for a service, and WWE needs to hold up their end of the bargain and provide that service. The current average in the slot SmackDown is taking is 3 million with a 6 million lead-in. If they don't score at least 3 million, it is not going to be long until FOX says bye to them. I _guarantee_ it. This means that WWE is going to need to get 1 million extra fans that will watch them regularly on network.

And that is where those demos become a worrying sign, because you can see how limited WWE's demographic appeal is. People watch out of habit and they have trouble creating new fans and keeping young people, even on a Monday (let alone a Friday). 

They'll break bank on Rock and Brock, if he's still around, and they'll beg Ronda to do something, but I give it six weeks before an impressive debut ratings dwindles below that 3 million viewer mark, and reports that "FOX isn't happy" start coming out.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Black Metal said:


> Does anyone care about the ratings for their favorite tv shows like they do this shit?


Yes because if TV shows get shit ratings they get cancelled. I've had a few of my favorite shows get canned because of low ratings.



SPCDRI said:


> 5 years ago, the April 28, 2014 episode of RAW did a 4.7 million overall viewership. That wasn't a big, hot shot show with a bunch of part timers, it wasn't an anniversary show.
> 
> Here's the matches they had on that:
> 
> Ryback and Curtis Axel in a tag match against the Usos
> Sheamus/Titus O'Neill
> A comedy segment with Dolph Ziggler and Hugh Jackman
> Cesaro/Jack Swagger
> Alberto Del Rio/Cody Rhodes
> Rusev/Xavier Woods
> Three Man Band vs. Los Matadores
> Paige/Brie Bella
> Wade Barrett against Rob Van Dam in an IC number 1 contendership match
> Roman Reigns/Randy Orton DQ
> 
> Ooh, barn barner. The biggest things were Flair and Stephanie McMahon. That was a fuck-off show in WWE's down period and it beat NBA and NHL playoffs and was number 1 in its demo.
> 
> RAW has driven away a STAGGERING amount of viewers since 2014.


RVD is a big draw.


----------



## Adam Cool

The Wood said:


> The demos have been worrying for a long time. WWE appeals to old white men. That should say something. They have real trouble engaging younger and more varied demos. "Cool people." WWE doesn't appeal to cool people. That is why it should be worrying to brass in management that there's a hip, new, young wrestling promotion coming around the corner. Well, hipper, newer and younger. But WWE are going to run into trouble when their current fan-base starts dying off.
> 
> And I get into fights with people about this all the time: I _guarantee_ that FOX does have an out-clause. There's no way that, ink dry or not, FOX is going to be obligated to put an under-performing show on its airwaves for three years. They are paying for a service, and WWE needs to hold up their end of the bargain and provide that service. The current average in the slot SmackDown is taking is 3 million with a 6 million lead-in. If they don't score at least 3 million, it is not going to be long until FOX says bye to them. I _guarantee_ it. This means that WWE is going to need to get 1 million extra fans that will watch them regularly on network.
> 
> And that is where those demos become a worrying sign, because you can see how limited WWE's demographic appeal is. People watch out of habit and they have trouble creating new fans and keeping young people, even on a Monday (let alone a Friday).
> 
> They'll break bank on Rock and Brock, if he's still around, and they'll beg Ronda to do something, but I give it six weeks before an impressive debut ratings dwindles below that 3 million viewer mark, and reports that "FOX isn't happy" start coming out.


The WWE's Demographic has been "Ethnic" ever since WCW was bought, they even had a problem with sponsors once a report came out and revealed that the average WWE fan is a "minority" since in the eyes of sponsors that's a "poor" demographic


----------



## SPCDRI

In no aspect is WWE's audience favorable to advertisers apart from being majority men possibly. The median age of a viewer was 54 in 2016, so its only gotten older. Half of the audience could be close to or older than 60 by now. 60!

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com...5/Research-and-Ratings/Viewership-trends.aspx

Part of why the median age skyrocketed is the fans who were fans in the territory days, Rock N Wrestling era, Attitude Era and Ruthless Aggression by and large stuck with the programming and became the diehard core of the brand, but at the same time, they can't get children to stay with the brand. They'd show up for somebody like Cena, Batista, Orton and then age out of it. The typical 10 year old who first started watching during the start of the PG Era/Super Cena Era is long out the door. 

The audience is 65 percent men, half of them 55 or older probably, many of them single, or divorced, or long into retirement with their children out of the house and having children of their own! Who do they book to? Women and families and children! It makes no sense!

It isn't necessarily that its PG rated, or that they aren't doing wild things like cursing and blading and HOT LESBIAN ACTION. They book to an audience that isn't there. Look at any WWE event. How many children are there? How many families are there? How many people are there that aren't at least 25 years old?


----------



## Brother_T

Law of diminishing returns, that's the problem. After every Raw they should play reruns of Burn Notice.


----------



## Adam Cool

The PewDiePie Vs T Series feud has been far better than anything the WWE has put on since 2014

Felix is literally better on Mic than anything in the WWE


----------



## Mear

Adam Cool said:


> The PewDiePie Vs T Series feud has been far better than anything the WWE has put on since 2014
> 
> Felix is literally better on Mic than anything in the WWE


Not mic but hype. He actually understands how his audience works and knows when to start a meme and when to end it before it's too late.

The problem of the WWE is that they don't know how to create hype. You could say Becky Lynch or Kofi Kingston but this wasn't the WWE doing, it's more a coincidence.

Just look at the Superstar Shake-Up. This should be a lot of hype, tons of new match-ups are now possible. When I was younger, the draft was a lot of hype but now, there is no suspens, no drama. A superstar just show up and that's it


----------



## Erik.

The ratings.

:lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## Donnie

AJ has to take half the blame because he was involved. But, maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan, I can't tell you how happy this makes me :Cocky :Rollins 

ShowStopper is correct in the ratings will tank no matter what. But having a man I despise on top of the "A" show while it's happening is :banderas


----------



## Bxstr

Wait I thought AJ vs Rollins was a dream match and gonna draw big numbers :ha
Even Scotty 2 Hotty has more starpower than both of these charisma vacuums combined


----------



## .christopher.

Chrome said:


> Crazy thing too is fan favorites like Rollins and Lynch are champions and the ratings are WOAT. Show itself is fundamentally broken, they need to blow it up and start over. People saying this shit for like a decade too lol.


We all saw this coming. I'm not even a CM Punk fan, but when they buried him and his reign for the likes of old ass HHH and shitstain Cena it was the end. They had a small chance with Bryan to resurrect things, but they booked him like a fool for too long. Then they shoved one of the most boring stables ever in The Shield down everyone's throats and, bar fangirls, they carried on from where Cena left off in killing fans interest.

Rollins, Becky, Reigns, Kofi... They're all boring who symbolise what wrestling is becoming. To be fair to Becky and Kofi, they at least try to have a character, but neither should be the main focus of a show.



Ace said:


> TNA January 4th, 2010 - 2.2m viewers.
> 
> Raw April 29th, 2019 - 2.158m viewers.
> 
> :heston


That was in the midst of Hogan, Bischoff, Dixie and Russo killing what made it great, too.



BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> *AJ vs. Rollins was announced and ZERO fucks were given. Roman moved to Smackdown, so you have no scapegoat now. Since Rollins is champ and in the main event, it's all his fault. That's how you guys decided it works here. *


Lol. You spent years defending Reigns and you're still doing it despite, as always, being wrong? Face facts. Roman Reigns as face of the company makes shitstain Cena - who he himself killed millions of fans off - look like fucking Stone Cold. That's how bad your boy is.



Ace said:


> Dream should have been "the first black world champion", not that twerk happy, pancake jabroni Kofi fpalm


At this point, yeah. Kofi's got nothing on Dream. Still, for me, it shouldve been Booker T at the latest.


----------



## Erik.

To be fair to Rollins/Styles. Even if there WAS a dream match in WWE, I'm still not tuning in to 3 hours of Raw to view any build to it. Regardless of who it's between.


----------



## Ace

Erik. said:


> To be fair to Rollins/Styles. Even if there WAS a dream match in WWE, I'm still not tuning in to 3 hours of Raw to view any build to it. Regardless of who it's between.


 I think everyone is at the point where they just can't put up with WWE anymore. Everyone has collectively given up on the company at once.


----------



## Adam Cool

Mear said:


> Not mic but hype. He actually understands how his audience works and knows when to start a meme and when to end it before it's too late.
> 
> The problem of the WWE is that they don't know how to create hype. You could say Becky Lynch or Kofi Kingston but this wasn't the WWE doing, it's more a coincidence.
> 
> Just look at the Superstar Shake-Up. This should be a lot of hype, tons of new match-ups are now possible. When I was younger, the draft was a lot of hype but now, there is no suspens, no drama. A superstar just show up and that's it


The WWE is like that guy with middle age crisis trying to sound "hip" around his children


----------



## Shaun_27

Time to bring Brock back folks


----------



## Jedah

Won't do a thing.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Somewhere Eric Bischoff is sitting back with a shit eating grin on his face when these numbers come in every week.


----------



## The Wood

They really have lost their ability to hype. The build to WrestleMania made everything seem inconsequential. The nature of their sheer volume of content helps with that too.


----------



## DammitChrist

Bxstr said:


> Wait I thought AJ vs Rollins was a dream match and gonna draw big numbers :ha
> Even Scotty 2 Hotty has more starpower than both of these charisma vacuums combined


It's still a dream match though unkout

I see you're one of the folks who have no clue what a charisma vacuum is, and you're one of the delusional ones blaming the individual talents themselves :lol



nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Chester McCheeserton vs Gobbledy Gooker is a dream match *if Seth vs AJ qualifies.*


Seth Rollins vs AJ Styles definitely does qualify as a dream match. Keep denying it though.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Chester McCheeserton vs Gobbledy Gooker is a dream match if Seth vs AJ qualifies.


----------



## virus21

Ace said:


> TNA January 4th, 2010 - 2.2m viewers.
> 
> Raw April 29th, 2019 - 2.158m viewers.
> 
> :heston


Damn, now thats bad


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Ratings went down after Big Dave retired. The fans are not getting what they want anymore.


----------



## Piper's Pit

You could have a prime Hogan, Andre, Savage, Warrior and Piper on RAW and it wouldn't do much for ratings because the presentation and booking are so bad.


----------



## jeffatron

Piper's Pit said:


> You could have a prime Hogan, Andre, Savage, Warrior and Piper on RAW and it wouldn't do much for ratings because the presentation and booking are so bad.


Nailed it!


----------



## Jedah

Just look at that video with Dean. That minute and a half was better than any of WWE's content this week. Dean didn't have much of a "character" in WWE. Now look at that Jon Moxley video that wasn't produced by them. Night and day.

You could have Hogan, Rock, and Austin in today's WWE and they wouldn't do shit because of the micromanaging, scripting, and poor presentation.


----------



## A-C-P

:ha :maury :heston :bryanlol :Rollins :reneelel :beckylol :tysonlol


----------



## Oliver-94

LMAO


----------



## Erik.

Vince tanking his own shows ratings to prevent AEW from becoming competition and getting a TV deal of their own.

:vince

In all seriousness though, WWE are the market leader when it comes to wrestling. Would ratings like this affect AEW in any way? I mean, a station may look at the horrendous declining ratings of WWE and think to themselves how on earth are a brand new company without any history going to bring in ratings when the market leader and the biggest wrestling company that's ever existed are struggling..


----------



## 5 Star Giulia ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Ace said:


> Who's the face of the company? I think most of the fault lies more on everyone giving up on the product hence the massive bleed the last 7-8 months. Heavily featuring the women and putting a title on a geek is something you could add to it, otherwise all the top men are the same and make little to no difference. If Brock was champion, the ratings would be the same if not worse, I think we can acknowledge both shows are fucked because fans have stopped watching out of habit. Seth is doing bad now, and the next champion will do worse. This will continue until they hit their floor or things change and ratings go up again.


*I don't want to hear that FOTC excuse when Reigns was still blamed during mid card feuds while Cena was the top guy. Also, Kofimania brought the most interest Smackdown has had since Becky's heel turn. People on my Facebook that don't even watch wrestling were aware of that match if nothing else, simply because of the hype and historical impact. Smackdown has just been struggling since Becky left because creative did nothing with the remaining women and even buried Asuka as champion. There was no good reason to watch.

Ratings suck under Brock because everyone knows the title will be held hostage until Wrestlemania and we're sick of it. The point is, don't spend 5 years blaming Roman for shit out of his control because you don't like him, then make a thousand excuses for Seth and AJ drawing no interest under the same circumstances. *


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Erik. said:


> Vince tanking his own shows ratings to prevent AEW from becoming competition and getting a TV deal of their own.
> 
> :vince
> 
> In all seriousness though, WWE are the market leader when it comes to wrestling. Would ratings like this affect AEW in any way? I mean, a station may look at the horrendous declining ratings of WWE and think to themselves how on earth are a brand new company without any history going to bring in ratings when the market leader and the biggest wrestling company that's ever existed are struggling..


It wouldn't change pro-wrestling fans wanting to see AEW, but yeah, it would influence potential investors in AEW who will see a ceiling for what they can do. 

I don't know that I believe this theory anyway. Vince seems like the type who genuinely believes that what he's doing is right.

What Vince is missing is that other companies (or wrestlers personally themselves) are building better characters and promotions are finding ways to increase their production value and distribution methods to sidestep avenues WWE has always had control over.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

BOSS of Bel-Air said:


> I don't want to hear that FOTC excuse when Reigns was still blamed during mid card feuds while Cena was the top guy.


I don't remember there being any overlap with Cena and Reigns. Cena hasn't been the top guy since Brock killed him in 2014. From then till just last year, it was all Reigns (except when he had the wellness thing in 2016 for a few months).

Cena had occasional comebacks with the US Title and big feuds, and one 3-week title reign (on SmackDown, tho), but he was in the "Babe Ruth of Wrestling" slot on the card while Reigns was either chasing or being the champion on the flagship show.

They'd stick Reigns in the midcard occasionally to make it not so forced (didn't help), but the big picture was all about getting him over for, like, 4 straight years. And Cena's time was certainly up by then.


----------



## Xenoblade

I'm gonna be honest with you guys I just recently cancelled my network subscription and stopped watching all together.. I can't even justify watching it for free let alone paying 10 bucks a month for it..

It is just wayy too boring and not even in a fun hate watch kind of way anymore..

I am not surprised the ratings are slipping.


----------



## A-C-P

But we'll all keep watching anyways, right? :bosque


----------



## Erik.

A-C-P said:


> But we'll all keep watching anyways, right? :bosque


The defenders can't even be bothered to defend anymore. :lol

All they had before was the RECORD REVENUE. But Q1 was a shocker.


----------



## llj

I love how WWE marks can't even use the "See you next Monday" quip anymore. Clearly, we aren't seeing people "next Monday" anymore.


----------



## RiverFenix

Getting $50M a year for two Saudi shows is saving the company right now. I mean WM earns $16M profit - Saudi deal is 3 WM's a year.


----------



## SPCDRI

Erik. said:


> Vince tanking his own shows ratings to prevent AEW from becoming competition and getting a TV deal of their own.
> 
> :vince
> 
> In all seriousness though, WWE are the market leader when it comes to wrestling. Would ratings like this affect AEW in any way? I mean, a station may look at the horrendous declining ratings of WWE and think to themselves how on earth are a brand new company without any history going to bring in ratings when the market leader and the biggest wrestling company that's ever existed are struggling..


Sure, television execs have to think that. Maybe the entire product is passe and on its way out? One way that it might be good for AEW is that there must be a lot of disgruntled American fans who want to watch a mainstream, mass appeal wrestling program, not an independent promotion, on a major television channel but don't want to watch WWE anymore so you can potentially poach a large number of those people. If you poach 20 percent of the 2 to 2.5 million people (!!!) that left in the past 5 years, bam, that's almost half a million fans.


----------



## Jedah

How long until SD gets put on FS1 at this rate? A month?


----------



## Mongstyle

Rollins/Styles ain't a dream match. That's an insult to actual dream matches. It's a good and interesting match, but that's all it is. The last dream match WWE had was Rock/Cena, and the only ones they had remaining were Rock/Batista and Batista/Brock, neither of which are now an option thanks to Batista retiring.

There are no dream matches at the moment frankly.


----------



## A-C-P

Jedah said:


> How long until SD gets put on FS1 at this rate? A month?


Debuts on FOX October 18th

Moved to FS1 October 25th


----------



## Serpico Jones

I don’t see Vince staying on as CEO much longer. That last shareholder conference call was a disaster.


----------



## The Wood

A-C-P said:


> But we'll all keep watching anyways, right? <img src="https://i.imgur.com/XaBIxNS.png" border="0" alt="" title="bosque" class="inlineimg" />


Nope. Cancelled my subscription when Jinder became champion and stopped watching their TV a long time ago. 



DetroitRiverPhx said:


> Getting $50M a year for two Saudi shows is saving the company right now. I mean WM earns $16M profit - Saudi deal is 3 WM's a year.


They better hope they can keep doing them without major media blow-back or pissing off fans who actually give a shit about the world. 

They’ve turned themselves into whores for a monkey paw. 



Jedah said:


> How long until SD gets put on FS1 at this rate? A month?


The thing is, FOX didn’t buy SmackDown for a cable property. I genuinely think there is a chance they’ll just flat-out cancel it. 



Serpico Jones said:


> I don’t see Vince staying on as CEO much longer. That last shareholder conference call was a disaster.


He’s starting to get called on it now, and he’s actually promised they’ll go up. I can’t see that happening.

For some reason this didn’t come up in multi-quote, but as for how this affects AEW:

I think it is good. Not all wrestling fans are WWE fans. Another billionaire entering the field opens things up.


----------



## domotime2

the thing that i dont understand is.... raw is boring..but it's BEEN boring for like 15 years. It's been unwatchable for like 3. So what's happening now that's so different?

To me, it's that the WWE has no direction and idea right now. The moment they came on TV and "fired Corbin" and "apologized for a bad product and its gnna be more about the fans"... was the day this all started to go down hill. That was the first time i'd ever seen Vince "pander" instead of have an idea of his own to make them care. And i'm not saying they shouldn't be pushing people like Bryan, Becky, Kofi...they SHOULD be, but they still need a plan for these people. It's not just "put the belt on Kofi, that will make them happy". It does, it did... but it's more like, "after we put the belt on kofi, what do we do next". Not even with who is he wrestling next, it's, how do we "keep him hot" and over. 

At least with Brock and Roman they had a plan. "These are our top 2 guys, everything and everyone else is about chasing them". 

but now there's nothing. 

Roman Heel turn would've been a hot angle 2 years ago..and by now, he would've been the top face in the company. The fact vince couldnt see the long term in that is weird


----------



## Soul Rex

A-C-P said:


> But we'll all keep watching anyways, right? :bosque


Until their shows attendance don't draw 5 people, the network run out out subscribers and the ratings get below 1.0, you all mf's still watching.


----------



## The Wood

domotime2 said:


> the thing that i dont understand is.... raw is boring..but it's BEEN boring for like 15 years. It's been unwatchable for like 3. So what's happening now that's so different?
> 
> To me, it's that the WWE has no direction and idea right now. The moment they came on TV and "fired Corbin" and "apologized for a bad product and its gnna be more about the fans"... was the day this all started to go down hill. That was the first time i'd ever seen Vince "pander" instead of have an idea of his own to make them care. And i'm not saying they shouldn't be pushing people like Bryan, Becky, Kofi...they SHOULD be, but they still need a plan for these people. It's not just "put the belt on Kofi, that will make them happy". It does, it did... but it's more like, "after we put the belt on kofi, what do we do next". Not even with who is he wrestling next, it's, how do we "keep him hot" and over.
> 
> At least with Brock and Roman they had a plan. "These are our top 2 guys, everything and everyone else is about chasing them".
> 
> but now there's nothing.
> 
> Roman Heel turn would've been a hot angle 2 years ago..and by now, he would've been the top face in the company. The fact vince couldnt see the long term in that is weird


It is certainly odd. Good thoughts there. Last year saw some awful jump the shark moments that have enhanced some other mitigating factors. 

- Vince openly admitted the show was terrible. You don’t need to be a promotional genius to understand why this is a bad idea.

- The Dean Ambrose heel turn was really distasteful. Not Dean’s fault. But everyone knows someone who has been effected by cancer. Exploiting it = bad idea. 

- I’m not against the women, at all, and I do think Ronda vs. Becky would have been the best choice for a main event, but it doesn’t mean that all of their viewers agree. 

- The stories lately have been awful. They openly admit it is fake. Kayfabe has been dead a long time, but they never learnt the lesson Vince Russo proved: telling people it’s scripted on air makes everything irrelevant.

- Nothing matters. It’s been that way for a while, but as a background fact, it gets tiring. Everyone knows they are going to ruin anything good they start. That is the conditioning. People stick with it to learn that programming, but once it’s learnt it’s hard to reverse.

- The top stars aren’t clicking. It may or may not be some of their faults, but it’s an unavoidable fact. People don’t want to watch Roman Reigns, Seth Rollins, Becky Lynch or Kofi Kingston in the way they are presented. They just don’t. 

- Fatigue. Three hours was a bad idea. I said it at the start, sure, it gets more money out the gate. But then you erode your audience and have fewer paying customers to monetise. At some point, it just wears through. 

- Sometimes trends just take. Just as cool things take off, uncool things do too. The collective consciousness of wrestling fans is just...done. They’re done. 

- The fan-base is more mobilized than ever before. This is why All In was possible. It’s how ROH can get slightly higher audiences than they used to, and why New Japan has more of a western following. We’re talking more and influencing each other more. 

- No star. It’s pretty accepted Rock is done. Cena is moving on. There’s no one that really fills that void. Brock is huge, but they’ve told you not to get excited about him. There’s no star in the solar system for other bodies to float around. 

- Say what you will about people “not caring,” but things like Saudi Arabia do not help. Terrible PR and look for the company. Sleazy as hell, and there’s no way that helps fill good will towards the company. Sure, only $5 million was lost in subscribers, but it’s just a background element that reminds people that WWE are, at the base of it, pretty fucking awful.

EDIT: - Another thing were the heel turns that happened in the later half of last year. I mentioned Ambrose, but you also had Braun and Bryan turning heel, as well. Now, I'm not saying that this immediately equates to the death of the business or anything, but there's this modern attitude about wrestlers playing roles that disconnects from the reality of what many wrestling fans like to immerse themselves in. Imagine you are someone who was a really big fan of Ambrose, Braun or Bryan. It's not hard to imagine a wrestling fan being invested in at least one of those people. They all turn on their perceived values around the same time. It's not that far-fetched to imagine it hurting the feelings of some more casual fans or children who saw them as superheroes. Kayfabe is such a crucial element to wrestling, and at least the suspension of disbelief for fans who know it is staged but don't want it jammed in their face. Treating the face/heel alignment so flippantly can be a mistake, because when your heroes are suddenly portrayed as bad guys, it can become disengaging.


----------



## GloriousLunatic

*If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

1. Charlotte needs to win the Smackdown Women's Championship (Charlotte is the best of the best)
2. Lacey Evans needs to win the Raw Women's Champion (There is a reason she's being pushed out of the gate. Great look, Great character, Great backstory)
3. Baron Corbin needs to win the MITB Men's Briefcase (In my opinion he's a champion he's got the look of the champion (Size, Speed, Athleticism), and can draw nuclear heat from the crowd. People will tune in, and buy tickets to boo him)
4. Mandy Rose or Alexa Bliss need to the the Women's MITB Briefcase (Both same reason people (and i mean guys ages 13 to 40) which is the main wwe audience will tune and buy tickets to see them)
5. Kevin Owens needs to win the WWE Championship (Kofi is not a long term champion)


----------



## The Wood

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

(To the tune of Big Ben)

Troll, troll, troll, troll...troll, troll, troll, troll. You troll. You troll. You troll...


----------



## GloriousLunatic

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*



The Wood said:


> (To the tune of Big Ben)
> 
> Troll, troll, troll, troll...troll, troll, troll, troll. You troll. You troll. You troll...


No. I'm not. Like it or not these r superstars i support and i give valid reasons.

Get out of this grass roots movement to push people who won't draw squat.


----------



## Dr. Middy

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

1. If you want to have her champ again, whatever. It doesn't change anything, and it'll be like the last two years or so never happened.

2. Her gimmick is okay, but she's green as grass still. Why put the title on her that quick? 

3. Nobody's going to buy jack shit to see Corbin of all people.

4. People aren't tuning in to see attractive blonde chicks. We have the internet now.

5. This one I'm fine with.

But yeah, none of these changes will make much of a difference, even if I picked winners I would like. 

Our first step is to oust every McMahon from the company and make sure they never EVER have any influence on Creative or Booking ever again. If that could happen, perhaps we could get somewhere/


----------



## ObsoleteMule

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

Here’s that attention you ordered!

This is laughably bad and the company would completely crumble under your watch... you just might be more out of touch than vince


----------



## raymond1985

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

Kevin Owens is not the answer. Far from it. 

I would have Braun beat Rollins and Reigns beat Kofi. Neither move would improve viewership, but they would perhaps help stop the bleeding to a degree.


----------



## GloriousLunatic

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

Becky Lynch, Kofi Kingston, and Seth Rollins as the top champions are not drawing and driving ratings anyway.


----------



## Jedah

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

They need to do a complete makeover of the shows and their presentation. Nothing else is going to work.

You're rearranging the chairs on the Titanic.


----------



## cai1981

GloriousLunatic said:


> 1. Charlotte needs to win the Smackdown Women's Championship (Charlotte is the best of the best)
> 2. Lacey Evans needs to win the Raw Women's Champion (There is a reason she's being pushed out of the gate. Great look, Great character, Great backstory)
> 3. Baron Corbin needs to win the MITB Men's Briefcase (In my opinion he's a champion he's got the look of the champion (Size, Speed, Athleticism), and can draw nuclear heat from the crowd. People will tune in, and buy tickets to boo him)
> 4. Mandy Rose or Alexa Bliss need to the the Women's MITB Briefcase (Both same reason people (and i mean guys ages 13 to 40) which is the main wwe audience will tune and buy tickets to see them)
> 5. Kevin Owens needs to win the WWE Championship (Kofi is not a long term champion)


How much did Vince pay you to create this thread????


----------



## The Wood

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*



GloriousLunatic said:


> 1. Charlotte needs to win the Smackdown Women's Championship (Charlotte is the best of the best)
> 2. Lacey Evans needs to win the Raw Women's Champion (There is a reason she's being pushed out of the gate. Great look, Great character, Great backstory)
> 3. Baron Corbin needs to win the MITB Men's Briefcase (In my opinion he's a champion he's got the look of the champion (Size, Speed, Athleticism), and can draw nuclear heat from the crowd. People will tune in, and buy tickets to boo him)
> 4. Mandy Rose or Alexa Bliss need to the the Women's MITB Briefcase (Both same reason people (and i mean guys ages 13 to 40) which is the main wwe audience will tune and buy tickets to see them)
> 5. Kevin Owens needs to win the WWE Championship (Kofi is not a long term champion)


Alright, I'll play: 

1. I like Charlotte. She's great. I would make her the top heel in the division, but she needs a fresh coat of paint. And her beating Becky right now would just destroy the faith the fans have in yet another babyface. Becky can beat her and then Charlotte can get Machiavellian and get the belt later.

2. Lacey Evans is not a good enough worker. Note: I'm not saying wrestler, I'm saying worker. This isn't about "workrate." She's awful to watch. Great to look at her. There's a place for her, but it's not going to be as a ratings-getting champion. 

3. Baron Corbin does not have the look. It's why they make him wrestle in street clothes. He's boring in the ring and he doesn't draw nuclear heat. If he drew nuclear heat, they would be blowing up. Ratings are sliding down. You can cook with heat. He's ice cold. 

4. Alexa Bliss won MITB last year. How did that do? Both girls are fit and have a place, but they're not going to turn around ratings. They're good for a few YouTube wanks, like they did late last year. 

5. Neither Kevin nor Kofi really feels like a long-term champion. Owens has been champion before, and that didn't do great. Kofi at least appeals to a wide demographic. They should be plotting their next move, but I don't think it's Owens. 

None of those scenarios would boost ratings. In fact, none of those scenarios, except giving Lacey Evans a belt, is something they haven't tried before. Owens and Charlotte have been champ, Bliss and Corbin have won MITB. If you're being genuine, these are just things you would like to see. There is no evidence to suggest they would work, and actually evidence to the contrary that they won't.


----------



## eisforpants

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

We all know what’s missing...storylines. WWE needs continuity and compelling storylines. What are the things you guys are talking about right now (besides your hatred of Roman)? You are talking about where the story is going with Bray and what is going on with Ambrose/Moxley. 

People can spin it any way they want, but at the end of the day, WWE is a soap opera for men. And without the story to get you invested, all you are doing is watching 1/2 naked men play fight. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## reyfan

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

Pretty sure Kofi is keeping the title until at least Summerslam.


----------



## The Raw Smackdown

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

None of that is going to do a damn thing for ratings and you know that Op.

I feel like you're trolling.


----------



## SmarkSideOfTheMoon

eisforpants said:


> We all know what’s missing...storylines. WWE needs continuity and compelling storylines. What are the things you guys are talking about right now (besides your hatred of Roman)? You are talking about where the story is going with Bray and what is going on with Ambrose/Moxley.
> 
> People can spin it any way they want, but at the end of the day, WWE is a soap opera for men. And without the story to get you invested, all you are doing is watching 1/2 naked men play fight.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Literally nobody mentioned Roman once


----------



## Tk Adeyemi

People say Vince is out of touch but my goodness u are more out of touch than Vince. I hope ur boss doesn’t give u the keys to his company because u will run it to the ground.


----------



## GloriousLunatic

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*



The Raw Smackdown said:


> None of that is going to do a damn thing for ratings and you know that Op.
> 
> I feel like you're trolling.


No I'm not. Why not push the guy who everybody hates who will draw people to view and buy tickets. And the 4 hot blondes (all who r talented) who will appeal to a large part of your fanbase.


----------



## P Thriller

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

So Alexa Bliss and Charlotte have been champion more days than anybody on the entire roster and it isn't even close, yet the ratings have completely tanked. But your solution is to put the titles back on them and that is somehow going to boost ratings? Why didn't it boost the rating during their already combined over 1000 days as champions?

Hate to break it to you, but this isn't 1999 anymore. There are hot women on every single channel and every single website, nobody tunes in to WWE so they can look at a hot blonde anymore, they have porn for that. People watch TV for compelling storylines and great action. WWE rating will never improve again until they gain back the trust of their fans and that is going to take a long time after the damage that they did. I'm not even going to get into Baron Corbin, there is literally nothing about him that is a star. If the ratings tanked under Roman Reigns, how in the world do you think Baron Corbin would help?


----------



## P Thriller

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*



GloriousLunatic said:


> No I'm not. Why not push the guy who everybody hates who will draw people to view and buy tickets. And the 4 hot blondes (all who r talented) who will appeal to a large part of your fanbase.


"Pushing the guy everybody hates" is exactly how we got in this mess to begin with. WWE literally tries this all the time and it never works, all it does is continue to make the fans feel like they are not being listened to yet again. NXT remains wildly popular and it is never from.pushing the guy everyone hates. It is because they actually take their audiences opinion seriously instead of getting pissed that they aren't doing exactly what they want them to do.


----------



## Dr. Jones

Mongstyle said:


> Rollins/Styles ain't a dream match. That's an insult to actual dream matches. It's a good and interesting match, but that's all it is. The last dream match WWE had was Rock/Cena, and the only ones they had remaining were Rock/Batista and Batista/Brock, neither of which are now an option thanks to Batista retiring.
> 
> There are no dream matches at the moment frankly.


Brock vs Rock could've been a dream match at WM 29. But nope, had to give douche bag Cena and douche bag HHH their wins back


----------



## Dr. Jones

In all honesty, I think Vince's "plan" of having Brock Lesnar dominance sunk them pretty good.

They played up this angle of Brock holding the belt hostage by never showing up. The fans that knew better (their core) knew that it was bullshit and saw right through it. The younger ones or ones that didn't know any better didn't see him enough where they could truly hate him. It's hard to really despise a villain that you never see. It would be like if you saw Thanos for 10 minutes of Infinity War. Meanwhile you got to watch IronMan, Captain America, Thor, etc... fight worthless battles against smaller bad guys while pretending the BIG BAD didn't even exist. Watch Rollins, Braun, Reigns, etc...fight meaningless matches against opponents that really didn't matter in the end. That's essentially the story Vince told, and it didn't do any good for anyone. 

Now after years of that story, none of these guys appear to amount to shit. None of them are really over. Brock still looms over everything because they could literally bring him back at any time to dominate again. They've conditioned the fans to be leery of anything because that same BIG BAD could turn up again at any time. Anyone remember the Fingerpoke of Doom and the NWO? That's essentially what they've done. As soon as it became apparent the NWO was back to dominate, the fans threw their hands up and gave up on WCW. It's essentially a dark cloud effect, and it's one the fans can't stomach to see again.

Now, the whole Brock experiment isn't the sole reason for the mass exodus. Their production is the same it's been for 20 years, 3 hour Raws seem like marathons because they can't come up with enough good ideas to fill that block, Vince has gotten even more controlling and bitter as time has gone on, and the fans know that even the people they do like could be buried by shitty ideas/booking at any minute. Clinging to this product feels hopeless at this point, that's when people finally give up and say "fuck this shit"


----------



## Black Metal

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

Cool thread title but this is just an opinion thread.


----------



## Singapore Kane

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

I've been lurking this forum since Punk was champion.

This may be the worst thread I've ever seen.


----------



## Hawkke

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*



GloriousLunatic said:


> If WWE is really worried bout ratings


spoiler alert..

They aren't. Are we done here?


----------



## The Quintessential Mark

The only thing I agree with is Alexa winning MITB because people will actually give a damn if she wins, She's more over than anyone else on your list.


----------



## DoctorWhosawhatsit

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

You lost me at Charlotte needs to win.

Also, what in the last five years gives you the impression WWE gives even one give about ratings?


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

They *have* to get the belts off Becky at this point. The experiment failed. I said it in January that if they fucked Becky up leading to Mania (they did, far beyond my expectations), the payoff will be minimal or even non-existent. 

Instead of allowing the women to naturally progress to get more prominence and create stories where the push for a women's main event at Mania would have been earned and justified, they doubled down and force fed the fans bullshit and nonsense about an Evolution that was manufactured and phony all for the sake of identity politics and "progressive" philanthropy. The fans can't even give it the rightful criticism and complaints about it without wrongfully being labeled "sexist", "misogynistic", or whatever empty word people use to instill public fear.

Calm down, the women aren't solely at fault here. Seems like Rollins is going to have another mediocre World (Universal) title reign that pushes people away. He simply is not a guy to build a brand, let alone a company, around. He just isn't. He can be an integral player but not *the* player. Also, as much as I enjoyed and loved the moment, the reality has sunk in with Kofi as well. He isn't a World title worthy player. The spot should have gone to Big E (who is injured anyways so whatever).

This company is awful right now. Yeah, we say that every year in recent memory and they are that bad but this something else. It's truly awful right now and I don't think there is an answer to a short term fix it this time. FOX in October sure as fuck won't.

:heston


----------



## CM Buck

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*



GloriousLunatic said:


> Becky Lynch, Kofi Kingston, and Seth Rollins as the top champions are not drawing and driving ratings anyway.


No one is drawing because Vince doesn't want anyone to. Ratings have been consistently shit no matter who the champion is.


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

Charlotte and Alexa need to win like fish need bicycles. Are you aware that collectively they are 13 time singles champions with almost 1100 days as champ put together? Here's Charlotte's singles runs...

Divas champ: 196 days
Charlotte retires the Divas belt and replaces it with the RAW belt, going over Becky Lynch and Sasha Banks in the process. She is champion for another 113 days
Second RAW championship: Defeats Banks for it again, another 43 day reign
Third: 29 days, wins the first ever Women's Hell in a Cell match
Fourth: Goes over Banks AGAIN in an Iron Woman match, another 57 days
Smackdown titles: Another 3 for another 260 days

Alexa Bliss has a comparable resume. Must they always be in the title scene and winning MITB and First Ever matches and all that? Let the other women eat, for Christ's sake!

I don't rate Corbin or the others you mentioned that highly, only thing I'd be interested in would be Owens as a face champ.


----------



## domotime2

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

none of those things specifically would change anything in the ratings. There's no stone cold/rock on this roster to pop the ratings. It's not there. It's not about one or two wrestlers being champion, it's about the WWE TRYINGGGGGGGG and not being LAZYYYYYYYYYY. 

How do we announce the MitB particiapnts? the most boring way possible. Well, actually. Raw does it a very boring way with Alexa just saying who it is. And then smckdown does the actual most boring way by just saying them by the announcers. 

Awful.


----------



## lesenfanteribles

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*



GloriousLunatic said:


> 1. Charlotte needs to win the Smackdown Women's Championship (Charlotte is the best of the best)
> 2. Lacey Evans needs to win the Raw Women's Champion (There is a reason she's being pushed out of the gate. Great look, Great character, Great backstory)
> 3. Baron Corbin needs to win the MITB Men's Briefcase (In my opinion he's a champion he's got the look of the champion (Size, Speed, Athleticism), and can draw nuclear heat from the crowd. People will tune in, and buy tickets to boo him)
> 4. Mandy Rose or Alexa Bliss need to the the Women's MITB Briefcase (Both same reason people (and i mean guys ages 13 to 40) which is the main wwe audience will tune and buy tickets to see them)
> 5. Kevin Owens needs to win the WWE Championship (Kofi is not a long term champion)


1. Charlotte is going to win it anyway and she's probably going to go 16 or more championships as well. I don't think she needs to get it now though.

2. Lacey Evans is hot, character looks like she came from a time machine because I remember something like that on TCM. I'd give her at least one more year to become champ.

3. Didn't Corbin win the MITB Men's briefcase before? And didn't he fail in his previous cash-in? I think if he does align with Shane McMahon, maybe I can see the possibility of getting that nuclear heat. 

4. Alexa Bliss won it last year and cashed it in against Nia Jax. I'd probably give a chance to Mandy Rose or to anyone else for that briefcase.

5. I can somehow agree with this. But I also think KO is going to drop that championship to someone else some time if he does win it. Kevin Owens turned heel so if he does win it, it's going to be same old, same old for him. A face champ run for Kevin Owens would have at least been interesting for me since it's different.


----------



## MonkasaurusRex

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*



The Doctor Middy Experience said:


> 1. If you want to have her champ again, whatever. It doesn't change anything, and it'll be like the last two years or so never happened.
> 
> 2. Her gimmick is okay, but she's green as grass still. Why put the title on her that quick?
> 
> 3. Nobody's going to buy jack shit to see Corbin of all people.
> 
> 4. People aren't tuning in to see attractive blonde chicks. We have the internet now.
> 
> 5. This one I'm fine with.
> 
> But yeah, none of these changes will make much of a difference, even if I picked winners I would like.
> 
> Our first step is to oust every McMahon from the company and make sure they never EVER have any influence on Creative or Booking ever again. If that could happen, perhaps we could get somewhere/


I'm not overly concerned with ratings as a rule because how many other people watch the show has no bearing on whether I watch it or not(unless it disappears from TV but those are the breaks many of my favourite shows have been cancelled during my life some I didn't even find until after they were cancelled already (I'm looking at you, Remington Steele)) 

I'm on board with your reasoning for 1 and 3 and to an extent 5.

As for 2 Lacey being green shouldn't necessarily be a deterrent from putting the title on her. Many fans are seemingly becoming title marks as much as they are workrate marks and seem to truly believe that the only way to make someone who isn't a workrate based worker credible is for them to be champion. For the main part though while I am not a fan of Becky's current character it isn't time to take the belts off of her. One maybe but not both and if you are going to pull the trigger on one of the titles you may as well give it to the person who "needs" it more. So my main argument is why not now? The women's ranks are thin and once a challenger is dispatched they usually go to the back of the line a disappear. So if WWE is intent on Lacey being a focal point going forward they may as well give it to her as Charlotte doesn't need it and probably should be without the title for a while(I say this as a Charlotte fan)

With regards to number four while it is true people aren't likely tuning in to specifically see an attractive blonde woman. Blondes with blue eyes are still very striking and it isn't like people are tuning in to see the other women either.

Five is similar to the issue with having Becky lose the titles now. Anything less than a mid-length run for Kofi just resets the status quo and while I have no issue with Owens he just isn't the right guy right now like Charlotte but for different reasons.


----------



## Arya Dark

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

*I'm not sure how any of those things happening would affect the ratings in any positive way. Where the hell are you even pulling that out of, OP?*


----------



## JooJCeeC

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

All I wanna see is KO take that belt off Kofi, and Drew winning the case. Wouldn't be too mad if Corbin won either.


----------



## Mox Girl

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

TBH if they give Corbin the briefcase and then the title, that might actually make me stop watching :lol

Also Charlotte needs to stay away from championships for awhile, Lacey is too new and Alexa has already won MITB, give it to someone else.


----------



## Bxstr

They need to take the title off Rollins asap he is killing the ratings


DammitC said:


> It's still a dream match though unkout
> 
> I see you're one of the folks who have no clue what a charisma vacuum is, and you're one of the delusional ones blaming the individual talents themselves :lol
> 
> 
> 
> Seth Rollins vs AJ Styles definitely does qualify as a dream match. Keep denying it though.


Sure it's a dream match the ratings really reflect that :haha
Keep denying facts though


A-C-P said:


> But we'll all keep watching anyways, right? :bosque[/QUOTE
> But 2 M still watching this garbage on weekly basis and defending it


----------



## Viidie

The only way ratings will come back is if another company like AEW make it to the big time. This competition would spark new life into WWE and the improvement would make the viewers come back.


Wrestling fans are out there. They have been there before. The problem is they have grown up. WWE haven't. WWE still panders to the kids. Its embarrassing for adults to watch and its embarrassing for kids when they hit their teenage years.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

I agree with Lacey, Corbin and KO.


----------



## SPCDRI

Everybody talking about hockey and basketball, myself included, need the reality check. It isn't as popular as you think. This is nowhere near as popular as Monday Night Football. Monday Night Football averaged 11.6 million viewers last year, basketball is about 4 to 6 million and hockey is about 1 million. A few years ago, RAW could beat playoff basketball and it always beats playoff hockey but it doesn't touch Monday Night Football with a ten foot pole. MNF has more viewers than playoff basketball and playoff hockey put together and nearly doubled and WWE is already doing sub 2 million hours. They are SCHLONGED. 

:trump:

Edit: That Warriors/Rockets series people are going on about is only doing about 7 million viewers and that's a 7 year high for the second round of NBA playoffs.


----------



## RamPaige

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

None of those would help with the ratings, not just because they're bad ideas but because WWE hasn't been a draw and wrestling itself isn't anywhere near what it was in the 90s. All that would do really is alienate the people still watching and possibly cause them to leave as well. 

-Nobody wants Charlotte to win the SD Women's championship or to even be in the title picture 
-Lacey Evans isn't ready for a title run or even a title shot.
-Barin Corbin is disliked for all the wrong reasons and shouldn't have even been in the MITB match. 
-KO can win the WWE title but now at this moment.
-Mandy is just an overall horrible choice and Sonya should have really been in the MITB match.
-Alexa doesn't need to win the MITB, Bayley should, but she's at least wouldn't get any backlash from fans other than the internet.

I still don't understand where this notion came from that sex sells. Maybe because it's just a catchy statement? Because every time I looked up studies on whether sex actually sells the majority of the time it's proven false, with it only selling in for certain markets. Even when it came to the Attitude Era Chyna and Lita were the most popular women on the roster and that was because they were seen as the only legit female wrestlers on the roster at the time.


----------



## Piper's Pit

Mongstyle said:


> Rollins/Styles ain't a dream match. That's an insult to actual dream matches. It's a good and interesting match, but that's all it is. The last dream match WWE had was Rock/Cena, and the only ones they had remaining were Rock/Batista and Batista/Brock, neither of which are now an option thanks to Batista retiring.
> 
> There are no dream matches at the moment frankly.


A face Daniel Bryan against Brock was the last potential dream match that could have main evented WM but they pissed it up the wall by first ruining DB and then turning him heel.


----------



## Piper's Pit

domotime2 said:


> the thing that i dont understand is.... raw is boring..but it's BEEN boring for like 15 years. It's been unwatchable for like 3. So what's happening now that's so different?


Exactly. Those that say it's been terrible for 2-3-4 years are either new fans or have very short term memories. In fact it's been mostly terrible since mid 2000 when Vince left for the XFL and Stephanie took over creative with HHH by her side. They've never recovered from that and never will.
Anyone who disagrees with me I'd encourage them to go on the Network and watch some random RAW's from late 2000 or 2001 - It's fucking terrible, everything clearly booked at the last minute, people being sent out to have random matches for no reason, scripted promos very much in full swing and of course a plethora of those awful backstage skits done for cheap laughs. Har de har har.


----------



## Ace

The last dream match is Brock/Rock i.e. between two actual stars which would get people watching.

Nothing else would draw shit. Cena/Rock and Brock/Cena has been done to death, but they would draw well too.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

Ace said:


> The last dream match is Brock/Rock i.e. between two actual stars which would get people watching.
> 
> Nothing else would draw shit.


Brock is barely even a star anymore to be honest. Rock could draw working with anyone, his opponent would basically be inconsequential.


----------



## Ace

SayWhatAgain! said:


> Brock is barely even a star anymore to be honest. Rock could draw working with anyone, his opponent would basically be inconsequential.


 You see Rock's name next to Brock's and it piques everyones interest. Rock against some no name new star wont do the same.

There's unfinished business between the two, this goes back more than a decade when Brock beat Rock at Summerslam to claim his first world title. I'd be hype af for the rematch with both men far bigger stars and more accomplished.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

Ace said:


> SayWhatAgain! said:
> 
> 
> 
> Brock is barely even a star anymore to be honest. Rock could draw working with anyone, his opponent would basically be inconsequential.
> 
> 
> 
> You see Rock's name next to Brock's and it piques everyones interest. Rock against some no name new star wont do the same.
> 
> There's unfinished business between the two, this goes back more than a decade when Brock beat Rock at Summerslam to claim his first world title. I'd be hype af for the rematch with both men far bigger stars and more accomplished.
Click to expand...

It's a fun match for sure. The Rock & Heyman going back & forth on the mic would make the program must watch tv. I feel like they really damaged Brock's star power since they jobbed him to Goldberg, he's never quite felt the same. The unbeatable feel he had after ending the streak is gone, especially after losing to Rollins, but it's definitely something I'd like to see. I think if they get one more match out of Rock they'll give it to Reigns though.


----------



## RapShepard

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

Nothing you can think of in 5 minutes is going to get non-wrestling fans to watch wrestling. It's not a talent issue, it's not atoryline issues, it's not a PG issue. The masses just don't give a fuck about wrestling. If the masses wanted to watch wrestling but WWE just wasn't doing it for them, they'd be switching in drives to any of the other numerous promotions to choose from.


----------



## LifeInCattleClass

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

More accurate list IMO

1. Stop having a McMahon appear every week, especially Shane on two shows
2. Stop 50/50 booking - sometimes, you have to build stars
3. Stop ‘tag team outta nowhere’ matches with the same people
4. Unify the tag belts, women belts and divisions
5. Launch a mix match challenge title to give people something new to chase and a new dynamic (like the FB series) - this fills the hole of the unified division belts

All things that will make it more bearable - as it is, i am forwarding youtube highlight shows


----------



## Death Rider

GloriousLunatic said:


> The Raw Smackdown said:
> 
> 
> 
> None of that is going to do a damn thing for ratings and you know that Op.
> 
> I feel like you're trolling.
> 
> 
> 
> No I'm not. Why not push the guy who everybody hates who will draw people to view and buy tickets. And the 4 hot blondes (all who r talented) who will appeal to a large part of your fanbase.
Click to expand...

No one is paying to watch Baron fucking corbin :heston


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

None of those would do anything for ratings. Corbin might make them even worse.


----------



## jroc72191

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*



Jedah said:


> They need to do a complete makeover of the shows and their presentation. Nothing else is going to work.
> 
> You're rearranging the chairs on the Titanic.



thats like, a really good analogy that im going to steal and not credit you for in the near future.


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

That would probably drive the ratings even lower. 

I just dont see what the big deal with KO is either. He's midcard, he feels like a midcarder in every way and thats even in this era where shite like Seth Rollins can be multiple time World Champs.


----------



## Erik.

Raw has lost 766,000 viewers since Wrestlemania.


----------



## Hangman

Eva MaRIHyse said:


> That would probably drive the ratings even lower.
> 
> I just dont see what the big deal with KO is either. He's midcard, he feels like a midcarder in every way and thats even in this era where shite like Seth Rollins can be multiple time World Champs.


And who do you think should be a multiple world champion?


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

I actually hope all of these things happen just so the OP sees how they all tank ratings further :bosque


----------



## Isuzu

I think everyone has covered it. Lack of "Larger than life" superstars and creative are whats killing the leadership.

Seth Rollins is an upper discard guy thruster in the roll of Raw's top star. AJ Styles has already done all he can do. We've seen his loveseat and promos, and nothing really captivates the audience. Romain Reigns character is just terrible..... Its a sad state of affairs for sure.


----------



## virus21

Erik. said:


> Raw has lost 766,000 viewers since Wrestlemania.


Good


----------



## Adam Cool

AJ has been boring since 2017 Royal Rumble, ever since then hes been a HUGE downgrade to his late Impact/NJPW/2016 WWE character, he went from a real life Comic Book/Anime character to "workrate guy"

Seth Rollins went from the Edgy Babyface who threatened to assault Triple H's Daughters to "WHATS UP EVERYBODY" 

How the FUCK can anyone be interested in these two outside of the ring? 

This match should have been a lot bigger if they weren't so Vanilla currently


----------



## HenryBowers

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

Thing is WWE's ratings have always nose dived. They went from like a solid 3.0 rating in 2013 and then a few years later fell to something like a 2.4 and despite this they always get new generous TV deals. Its like it doesnt seem to matter. I dont know what to think anymore. It seems like 10 people can watch RAW live each week and they will still get a new and improved TV deal.....but then that doesnt make sense. Obviously there has to be some sort of figure of minimum viewers for a TV deal to make sense but that figure just seems to be ridiculously low because they keep getting new deals.


----------



## jeffatron

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

Said it before, will say it again. Doesn't matter if your favorites are on top or not. Everyone is interchangeable in WWE's eyes, the brand is the draw in their opinion. They need an entertaining product and good stories. Until they have that, ratings will keep dropping. Stone Cold couldn't save this shitshow.


----------



## Zappers

Aside from TV.

WWE increased over 20% in hours watched on all digital platforms. 300 million hours. Over 40 million youtube subscribers.

Yeah, they should just fold up and retire the company. :loweringangle


----------



## Isuzu

Now that Brock isn't worried about training for UFC.. They could have him on the show once or twice per month. I remember his backstage segments being very funny and entertaining. He and Paul Hey man have creative control it would seem.. So having them around slightly more would increase the entertainment value of the show.

Brock should come back and destroy the two Indy vanilla midgets and reclaim the title.


----------



## Adam Cool

Zappers said:


> Aside from TV.
> 
> WWE increased over 20% in hours watched on all digital platforms. 300 million hours. Over 40 million youtube subscribers.
> 
> Yeah, they should just fold up and retire the company. :loweringangle


How many times does this have to be explained 

Youtube views from Non western countries is only a Dollar every 2000 views , maybe even less 

And it really doesn't help that the Network is too costly for the majority of the International fanbase , if they cut it in half the Network would reach the 10M mark, but they are too stubborn to do that


----------



## Jonhern

DetroitRiverPhx said:


> Getting $50M a year for two Saudi shows is saving the company right now. I mean WM earns $16M profit - Saudi deal is 3 WM's a year.


Thats $50 million revenue, not profit. And that is not WM profit, that was the gate totals, and doesn't include merch, and all the other events of the weekend that surround WM. The saudi shows aren't cheap production wise either, and with bringing and paying all the talent it costs a lot to put on those shows. But they don't break those numbers out so we don't know how much profit they are really making off of these shows.


----------



## Isuzu

Jonhern said:


> Thats $50 million revenue, not profit. And that is not WM profit, that was the gate totals, and doesn't include merch, and all the other events of the weekend that surround WM. The saudi shows aren't cheap production wise either, and with bringing and paying all the talent it costs a lot to put on those shows. But they don't break those numbers out so we don't know how much profit they are really making off of these shows.


It definitely profitable enough, or they wouldn't be doing it


----------



## Erik.

WOR: WWE's ratings decline has been the real talk of the TV industry for the past 2 days

Meltzer: If you think this is bad, you should check out where we were in the first week of June last year. The drops were incredible last year, and I don't see why its not going to be the same this year and the numbers they got this week were shocking to everybody including people in the company, and if WWE continue in the path they are going, then it will be a lot more shocking in another month. While all this is going on with setting record lows, the mentality is "How do we bury The Revival?", that is one of the priorities of the TV show. Boy is that the wrong thinking right now. Also thinking is the money is guaranteed and they signed the contract.

This has been the real talk of the TV industry over the past few days. And its got broadcasters and TV people thinking wrestling yesterdays news. Thats why its not good for the industry. Even with your guaranteed money, you don't want people in television talking like that at all. So the ratings decline are a giant story right now, even outside of the wrestling bubble.


----------



## Zappers

Adam Cool said:


> How many times does this have to be explained
> 
> Youtube views from Non western countries is only a Dollar every 2000 views , maybe even less
> 
> And it really doesn't help that the Network is too costly for the majority of the International fanbase , if they cut it in half the Network would reach the 10M mark, but they are too stubborn to do that


Nothing has to be explained.

First off youtube views mean viewership. It means people are interested in the product. I didn't say just youtube anyway. It's facebook, twitter, it's every social media. The WWE is a massive global company that has moved beyond just TV. BTW, those ratings don't take into account that we live in a DVR world. People dvr stuff and watch it later. Those ratings are just the live viewership. People watch the matches on youtube and the network instead of TV because of convenience and time.

Cut it in half? They should raise it. People don't realize how much content they are getting on the network. PPV's, Every PPV in WWE history, Every PPV in WCW history. All the RAW/SD/etc... All the NXT content, All the WCW content, ECW... Countless other small promotions. Original content like ride alongs, just too many stuff to list. Nobody can even watch it all.

Even just for PPV's it's a bargain $120. a year. People really want to go back to paying $360(that's being generous) a year just for the PPV's alone?


----------



## rbl85

Zappers said:


> Nothing has to be explained.
> 
> *First off youtube views mean viewership. It means people are interested in the product.* I didn't say just youtube anyway. It's facebook, twitter, it's every social media. The WWE is a massive global company that has moved beyond just TV. BTW, those ratings don't take into account that we live in a DVR world. People dvr stuff and watch it later. Those ratings are just the live viewership. People watch the matches on youtube and the network instead of TV because of convenience and time.
> 
> Cut it in half? They should raise it. People don't realize how much content they are getting on the network. PPV's, Every PPV in WWE history, Every PPV in WCW history. All the RAW/SD/etc... All the NXT content, All the WCW content, ECW... Countless other small promotions. Original content like ride alongs, just too many stuff to list. Nobody can even watch it all.
> 
> Even just for PPV's it's a bargain $120. a year. People really want to go back to paying $360(that's being generous) a year just for the PPV's alone?



Man i don't think FOX gives a fuck about YouTube views.


----------



## Zappers

rbl85 said:


> Man i don't think FOX gives a fuck about YouTube views.


To be fair. They didn't just make a blind deal/buy yesterday. I would assume before they handed over a billion dollars they did their research. They looked at ALL avenues under the WWE umbrella. Felt it was a good deal and they know what they are in for. Or they wouldn't have signed the contract. Right or wrong, all parties know what they are getting in the deal.


----------



## rbl85

Zappers said:


> To be fair. They didn't just make a blind deal/buy yesterday. I would assume before they handed over a billion dollars they did their research. They looked at ALL avenues under the WWE umbrella. Felt it was a good deal and they know what they are in for. Or they wouldn't have signed the contract. Right or wrong, all parties know what they are getting in the deal.


When FOX made the deal, the ratings were increasing.


----------



## Adam Cool

Zappers said:


> Cut it in half? They should raise it.


Most of the non American subscribers would cancel their subscription then, nobody is spending their entire salary on the WWE


----------



## Zappers

Adam Cool said:


> Most of the non American subscribers would cancel their subscription then, nobody is spending their entire salary on the WWE


Even if they just doubled it? Their entire salary is $240? Yikes.



rbl85 said:


> When FOX made the deal, the ratings were increasing.


Even still. FOX is in the sports and television business. They are fully aware of how the ratings system works and the ups and downs that come along with it. They know all the risks, yet still made the deal.


----------



## Adam Cool

Zappers said:


> Even if they just doubled it? Their entire salary is $240? Yikes.


How much do you think the average WWE fan makes? Do you think the Average Indian makes as much as your urban Starbucks drinking self?


----------



## Zappers

Adam Cool said:


> How much do you think the average WWE fan makes? Do you think the Average Indian makes as much as your urban Starbucks drinking self?


I can see this conversation is heading south after a comment/insult like that. I'm gonna bail. I enjoyed our discussion up your prior post though.


----------



## Adam Cool

Zappers said:


> I can see this conversation is heading south after a comment/insult like that. I'm gonna bail. I enjoyed our discussion up your prior post though.


You were the one being inconsiderate of how poor a lot of the international fans are, not all of us were lucky enough to be born in America/Europe


----------



## ClintDagger

Zappers said:


> Even still. FOX is in the sports and television business. They are fully aware of how the ratings system works and the ups and downs that come along with it. They know all the risks, yet still made the deal.


They know the risks of the industry in general. Networks don’t care about sunk costs. Fox will move SD to FS1 and maybe even cancel it without blinking an eye if the ratings are bad enough.


----------



## Zappers

ClintDagger said:


> They know the risks of the industry in general. Networks don’t care about sunk costs. Fox will move SD to FS1 and maybe even cancel it without blinking an eye if the ratings are bad enough.


We still don't have any idea what they (FOX) has in store for SD when they take over. We only know so far, the day it's on and that they will have some sort of "news" show ala like ESPN about wrestling each week. I can only imagine they will be greatly pushing the product on their major network leading up to and during it's run. The commercials and ads will be everywhere. Watch any FOX network show for an hour, you'll see commercials to other Fox shows throughout the broadcast. During other sports seasons, the news, major events like award shows, you name it. Then if I was them, I would be having detailed small ads each week that promote storylines. For example, tune in this Friday to see Becky Lynch take on (insert wrestler here)


----------



## mattheel

*Re: If WWE is really worried bout ratings then these things have to happen in MITB to get ratings back.*

Not one of these things would pop ratings.


----------



## ClintDagger

Zappers said:


> We still don't have any idea what they (FOX) has in store for SD when they take over. We only know so far, the day it's on and that they will have some sort of "news" show ala like ESPN about wrestling each week. I can only imagine they will be greatly pushing the product on their major network leading up to and during it's run. The commercials and ads will be everywhere. Watch any FOX network show for an hour, you'll see commercials to other Fox shows throughout the broadcast. During other sports seasons, the news, major events like award shows, you name it. Then if I was them, I would be having detailed small ads each week that promote storylines. For example, tune in this Friday to see Becky Lynch take on (insert wrestler here)


Of course Fox will push SD. But they push any new programming they add to prime time. Pushing a show doesn’t guarantee it will succeed.


----------



## SPCDRI

Teenager demo for RAW down 38 percent, 18-34 demo down 40 percent, some segments of the show were down 50 percent with those age demos from last year. Who stuck around? 50 plus, down 17 percent. Anybody under the age of 40 is sprinting towards the exits.

Edit: The decline from May to the end of June as hockey and basketball games go to their championship games and television series start doing season and series finales so that was another 15 percent from where they were in May last year. 1.7 million RAW, 1.6 million Smackdown, maybe every hour below a 2 and an hour below 1.5 million maybe!


----------



## Zappers

ClintDagger said:


> Of course Fox will push SD. But they push any new programming they add to prime time. Pushing a show doesn’t guarantee it will succeed.


This is all true. But a heavy campaign shouldn't hurt the product.


----------



## The Wood

Zappers said:


> Nothing has to be explained.
> 
> First off youtube views mean viewership. It means people are interested in the product. I didn't say just youtube anyway. It's facebook, twitter, it's every social media. The WWE is a massive global company that has moved beyond just TV. BTW, those ratings don't take into account that we live in a DVR world. People dvr stuff and watch it later. Those ratings are just the live viewership. People watch the matches on youtube and the network instead of TV because of convenience and time.
> 
> Cut it in half? They should raise it. People don't realize how much content they are getting on the network. PPV's, Every PPV in WWE history, Every PPV in WCW history. All the RAW/SD/etc... All the NXT content, All the WCW content, ECW... Countless other small promotions. Original content like ride alongs, just too many stuff to list. Nobody can even watch it all.
> 
> Even just for PPV's it's a bargain $120. a year. People really want to go back to paying $360(that's being generous) a year just for the PPV's alone?


YouTube views were directly explained to you and you ignored it. They mean jack and shit if they aren’t increasing business metrics. 

Digital consumption is up so much largely because PPVs go for 7 hours too. It’s actually a bad thing. You’ve been worked. 

DVR numbers are like < 200,000 people. 



Zappers said:


> rbl85 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Man i don't think FOX gives a fuck about YouTube views.
> 
> 
> 
> To be fair. They didn't just make a blind deal/buy yesterday. I would assume before they handed over a billion dollars they did their research. They looked at ALL avenues under the WWE umbrella. Felt it was a good deal and they know what they are in for. Or they wouldn't have signed the contract. Right or wrong, all parties know what they are getting in the deal.
Click to expand...

FOX is known for making some pretty bone-headed calls. They apparently want 3.3 million for Smackers. That means that viewership will need to double from what it’s projected to be at the end of next month. Can you see WWE’s popularity doubling, even with a move to network television when they _lose_ more than one in ten people watching at the moment?


----------



## ClintDagger

The Wood said:


> YouTube views were directly explained to you and you ignored it. They mean jack and shit if they aren’t increasing business metrics.
> 
> Digital consumption is up so much largely because PPVs go for 7 hours too. It’s actually a bad thing. You’ve been worked.
> 
> DVR numbers are like < 200,000 people.
> 
> 
> 
> FOX is known for making some pretty bone-headed calls. They apparently want 3.3 million for Smackers. That means that viewership will need to double from what it’s projected to be at the end of next month. Can you see WWE’s popularity doubling, even with a move to network television when they _lose_ more than one in ten people watching at the moment?


SD won’t just have to double, it will have to double on a much worse night for TV.


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

Ultron said:


> And who do you think should be a multiple world champion?


You know, people who are actually talented, well rounded pro wrestlers, not just one dimensional spot monkeys.

Styles (less so as a babyface), Wyatt, Ziggler, Miz, Roode, Mysterio, Joe. 

Andrade, Big E, Daniel Bryan, Orton, Nakamura.


----------



## llj

rbl85 said:


> Man i don't think FOX gives a fuck about YouTube views.


not to mention youtube views are actually down this year compared to last year. Very few segments hit 2 million, many struggle to hit 1 million. Used to be main event programs would be an auto-1 million views within 2 days. Nowadays it's sometimes quite possible that the highest viewed segment on Smackdown may not break 900k even after a week. On RAW 2 million is increasingly rare, when Roman used to do that in most of his early 2018 segments.


----------



## volde

I think that booking is a problem, but lets be real here, booking in WWE has been ridiculous for, at least, couple of decades now. Sure, you can cheery pick cool angles from back then, but overall shows were all over the place as well. As stupid things are now I don't think that anything has topped "giving birth to hand" segment yet. And hey, some cool things happened in last couple of years as well. 

It might be that we have reached breaking point of bad booking and everything done over 20 years has accumulated to ratings disaster that we see now. But at the same time I don't think that it is fair to let the talent off the hook here. Kofi has been joke for years and is still a joke. What "good booking" would exactly change here? He is a joke character and was mostly booked to his character. Seth had many character variations over last few years, some worked better than other, but none of them really felt like "this is the man". Would better booking make him look better? Most likely, but it still wouldn't take him to the next level.

Reality is that in the past we had lots of stupid booking, but we didn't care that much because we'd still get wrestlers like Hogan, Brock, Austin, Rock doing their things. Even Cena was cool in first few years of his run. Now it is bad booking and no stars that can still shine regardless of what is happening around them.


----------



## Jedah

In the past they varied the shows. In the past they didn't book top stars to get distracted and lose to bullshit rollups. In the past they didn't job their champions out constantly in non-title matches. In the past they didn't give their talent these dumb scripts that don't sound like real people.

Their booking hasn't always been consistent but it wasn't a consistent act of sabotage either, on top of a format where literally every single episode is more or less the exact same show. No backstage brawls. No wandering around the building or outside of it. Just a stupid opening promo, long matches that go into commercial breaks, random tag team matches, and maybe another promo or heat segment in the ring. Rinse and repeat. Swap out one part for another.

That's pretty much every single Raw and SmackDown for years and years. Sometimes the parts work, sometimes they don't, but the formulaic format is really killing any excitement.


----------



## Dave Santos

llj said:


> not to mention youtube views are actually down this year compared to last year. Very few segments hit 2 million, many struggle to hit 1 million. Used to be main event programs would be an auto-1 million views within 2 days. Nowadays it's sometimes quite possible that the highest viewed segment on Smackdown may not break 900k even after a week. On RAW 2 million is increasingly rare, when Roman used to do that in most of his early 2018 segments.


I think the majority of youtube views come outside the USA. But WWE is good at spinning stuff. I noticed they put in their financial statements stuff like hour watched for engagement for their network and Youtube. When you put 4-7 hour ppv's the hours watched will naturally go up. They have been putting up a lot of free older matches on their youtube channel, but the views per video have been going down.

The top video though of 2019 is "The Shield say goodbye to Dean Ambrose after Raw goes off the air: Raw Exclusive, April 8, 2019 with 12 million views.

There was an interesting article about WWE's viewership in this Forbes article. Pretty much what a lot of wrestleforum users have been saying.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alfred...t-with-no-signs-of-slowing-down/#17399a187a3f










We can add live merchandise sales to the chart as well.


----------



## SPCDRI

Every single metric is down from where it was in 2018. Remember when they talked about wanting to achieve and at least maintain 2 million WWE Network subscribers? They are at 1.7 million and going backwards.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

I think they could be presented with a 30 year old Steve Austin and they would turn him into just another guy with 50/50 booking, cutting scripted happy-go-lucky babyface promos. They don't know how to make stars anymore. Viewership will continue to drop unless they make huge changes both creatively and in presentation. The format has been the same old shit since about 2002.


----------



## Erik.

SayWhatAgain! said:


> I think they could be presented with a 30 year old Steve Austin and they would turn him into just another guy with 50/50 booking, cutting scripted happy-go-lucky babyface promos. They don't know how to make stars anymore. Viewership will continue to drop unless they make huge changes both creatively and in presentation. The format has been the same old shit since about 2002.


Well that's because if you just pop a 30 year of Steve Austin in there, they wouldn't have got a pissed off Stone Cold held down by a similar sized organisation.. 

I've said it alot of times but the current roster are spoon-fed wrestlers who are just HAPPY to be there. There's no incentive to be the best. There's no fire in their bellies. And that's exactly how it comes across on the show. There's zero heat at all. Everyone is all friendly, happy to be there and happy to be told exactly what to do and how to do it. 

It's such a different generation now, such a different era where because WWE is so far at the top of the ladder than any other wrestling company, it's the dream to go there for guys. 

You can't really be held down anywhere else and then go and make it to WWE - it doesn't happen and won't happen.

If you're ever going to get your "Stone Cold" again - it'll likely be AEW. Because frustrated WWE guys are likely to go to AEW, get their creative freedom and put all that built up anger into making something special of themselves.

Whilst obviously wrestling won't ever be that big and that particular guy won't be as big, it'll hopefully give us some bloody excellent television and also SHOW the WWE that by not holding back some of these guys, you'll see a competitive environment full of guys willing to bust their ass to make something special each week.


----------



## The Wood

Lol, their response strategy is to hint via Twitter that Roman Reigns is going to be on Raw next week. This would be all well and good, but:

* Roman doesn’t draw ratings.

* Confirms to fans that the draft is trivial.

* He wants to get at Vince or Shane or whatever. They are also on SmackDown. It doesn’t make sense. It is insulting to fans’ intelligence.

This is them trying.


----------



## Ace

The Wood said:


> Lol, their response strategy is to hint via Twitter that Roman Reigns is going to be on Raw next week. This would be all well and good, but:
> 
> * Roman doesn’t draw ratings.
> 
> * Confirms to fans that the draft is trivial.
> 
> * He wants to get at Vince or Shane or whatever. They are also on SmackDown. It doesn’t make sense. It is insulting to fans’ intelligence.
> 
> This is them trying.


 I was thinking of watching, but fuck it. They give zero fucks about their stories or consistency, fuck them.


----------



## The Wood

What are they going to do when Roman doesn’t work? What does Monday week look like? 

This is genuinely more exciting than the actual TV show.


----------



## raymond1985

SayWhatAgain! said:


> I think they could be presented with a 30 year old Steve Austin and they would turn him into just another guy with 50/50 booking, cutting scripted happy-go-lucky babyface promos. They don't know how to make stars anymore. Viewership will continue to drop unless they make huge changes both creatively and in presentation. The format has been the same old shit since about 2002.


They also need some fresh and marketable talent. 

The way some in this thread talk, the likes of Rollins, Bryan and Styles have the same inherent drawing power as Austin, Hogan and Rock, but the booking and presentation hold them back. 

There is no question that the booking and presentation are issues. But let's not pretend the talent is up to scratch as well. It isn't


----------



## The Wood

Velveteen Dream has potential, but I imagine he'll be called up as an impersonator or to do comedy with R-Truth and lose 50% of the time. 

The WWE culture, itself, makes it hard for anyone who _isn't_ as inherently untouchable as The Rock -- who was the exception that not even Steve Austin was -- to get over as a genuine star. Do you think Becky, Seth and Kofi are taking the blame for tanking metrics like Diesel or Shawn were back in the day? Even if it's largely the environment and the booking, who is wearing this? Because the talent don't have the responsibility to draw, I don't think the talent appreciate that some of them belong on someone else's card. I see a young guy, with relative inexperience being pushed "out of queue" to ruffle _a lot_ of feathers. There's the perception of the journeyman and needing to "earn" that spot. Some people are just more worthy than others, because they can draw and you can't. I mean, look at how talent whinged when Rock and Brock are given top spots, despite them being unquestionably bigger stars. 

I can't see WWE doing what it is necessary to find someone that can appeal to a wider audience than simply the hardcore fans and to push them in an effective way that makes them that big deal. Their radar has been off, and even if they found someone they don't have the culture in place because they try to keep everybody happy. If you want to be a top guy, fucking draw. When you don't, then it's time to change gears and go in the direction of someone that can. The more they push in a soft direction, the more diluted everything is going to get, and the more eroded that fan-base becomes, and the more work your eventual top guy has to do.


----------



## Mear

Erik. said:


> Well that's because if you just pop a 30 year of Steve Austin in there, they wouldn't have got a pissed off Stone Cold held down by a similar sized organisation..
> 
> I've said it alot of times but the current roster are spoon-fed wrestlers who are just HAPPY to be there. There's no incentive to be the best.* There's no fire in their bellies*. And that's exactly how it comes across on the show. There's zero heat at all. Everyone is all friendly, happy to be there and happy to be told exactly what to do and how to do it.


Mustafa Ali's debut comes to mind. Can you imagine Stone Cold as WWE Champion being fine with the fact he is getting pinned by a jobber AND injured at the same time ? Bryan will be happy to push a fellow wrestler but a champ should want to protect his image

It's the same with Kofi Kingston being the champ or Seth Rollins beating Lesnar in a openin match. There is no kayfabe anymore, everyone does whatever the hell they want. You can't have stars if anyone can go from midcarder to main-eventer in one night because that means you have no Main-Eventers and only have midcarders


----------



## Adam Cool

A 30 years old Austin wouldn't have the same effect he had in the 90's because culture changed , he would need a different gimmick


----------



## Frost99

Dusted off the old gif maker, I think this sums up the E's ratings "future"...........

#WWELogic #Ratings #SaveMeNXT


----------



## Piper's Pit

Adam Cool said:


> A 30 years old Austin wouldn't have the same effect he had in the 90's because culture changed , he would need a different gimmick


Austin wasn't playing a character he was just being himself with the volume turned up same as The Rock, Flair, Hogan, Savage, Piper etc. etc. etc.
That's why guys like that drew in the past because apart from their size and look, they had tough, larger than life personalities unlike the phony wimps in wrestling today.


----------



## llj

The WWE is DONE. Nothing will help and the ratings will continue to drop. They should also let go 80% their roster so they can just focus on Roman, Charlotte, Becky, Seth and have those four fight each other over and over. It's what they want to do anyway.


----------



## The Wood

llj said:


> The WWE is DONE. Nothing will help and the ratings will continue to drop. They should also let go 80% their roster so they can just focus on Roman, Charlotte, Becky, Seth and have those four fight each other over and over. It's what they want to do anyway.


What can they do? They’ve eroded so much faith in their product that even doing massive things that would normally get people talking are going to get boy who cried wolf responses.


----------



## InexorableJourney

The Wood said:


> What can they do? They’ve eroded so much faith in their product that even doing massive things that would normally get people talking are going to get boy who cried wolf responses.


Nitro put big matches with top stars on every week, no reason WWE can't do the same.


----------



## SPCDRI

Adam Cool said:


> A 30 years old Austin wouldn't have the same effect he had in the 90's because culture changed , he would need a different gimmick


Drinking beers and kicking the evil bosses' ass would always work. It just needs an edge to it and the perception that management doesn't like the wrestler and really evil management. The Reigns/Rollins authority stuff was a bomb, because you can tell WWE brass really liked them, the CM Punk and Daniel Bryan stuff was really easy to buy in, especially with the "B player" slams. You could tell that WWE brass didn't want them to be that popular.


----------



## llj

InexorableJourney said:


> Nitro put big matches with top stars on every week, no reason WWE can't do the same.


Their top stars are on every week. The problem is no match feels big even though they should. That's a result of the roster not being booked well and the results being predictable.

For example, Bayley v Becky should have been a big match. First time meeting ever on the main roster (should have been on PPV, really). The double champ vs a former RAW champ (and solid wrestler too). But it didn't feel like a big match because Bayley's stock has been hurt too much and nobody really thought Bayley would win (and even if it did it would be a non-title one). The fact that the match was simply a standard feeling match also didn't help.


----------



## InexorableJourney

llj said:


> Their top stars are on every week. The problem is no match feels big even though they should. That's a result of the roster not being booked well and the results being predictable.
> 
> For example, Bayley v Becky should have been a big match. First time meeting ever on the main roster (should have been on PPV, really). The double champ vs a former RAW champ (and solid wrestler too). But it didn't feel like a big match because Bayley's stock has been hurt too much and nobody really thought Bayley would win (and even if it did it would be a non-title one). The fact that the match was simply a standard feeling match also didn't help.


I've always been a fan of the one week build for matches like that. Hype it for one week, main-event the next.

WWE still have a lot of top stars, albeit on a much lower tier than previous generations. It just feels as though they hold off on the feuds everybody wants to see, and the wait is so long that when you actually see it, it feels passé.


----------



## llj

InexorableJourney said:


> I've always been a fan of the one week build for matches like that. Hype it for one week, main-event the next.
> 
> WWE still have a lot of top stars, albeit on a much lower tier than previous generations. It just feels as though they hold off on the feuds everybody wants to see, and the wait is so long that when you actually see it, it feels passé.


I mean I get why they would do that. Would you do Rock vs Cena at some random Battleground or do you do it at Wrestlemania? Of course you do it at Wrestlemania. The problem is that the WWE has problems maintaining star power for someone nowadays that by the time they get to the next big PPV, one or both of the stars have lost their luster. A big star today is no guarantee to be as big 6 months from now.


----------



## InexorableJourney

llj said:


> I mean I get why they would do that. Would you do Rock vs Cena at some random Battleground or do you do it at Wrestlemania? Of course you do it at Wrestlemania. The problem is that the WWE has problems maintaining star power for someone nowadays that by the time they get to the next big PPV, one or both of the stars have lost their luster. A big star today is no guarantee to be as big 6 months from now.


The way I see it is you only get one match worth watching all year, whilst their star power diminishes for that entire year because of dead-end feuds everybody can see are just stalls to get from A to B.

If The Rock feuded with Cena, then Batista, then Goldberg, then Hunter, then CM Punk before cycling back to finish the big feud with Cena, The Rock would look like a megastar going in.

If you did the same with Cena starting with The Rock, then CM Punk, then Orton, then Brock, then Barrett, you have two megastars, plus a year of great TV without the burnout you get now.


----------



## Mear

llj said:


> I mean I get why they would do that. Would you do Rock vs Cena at some random Battleground or do you do it at Wrestlemania? Of course you do it at Wrestlemania. The problem is that the WWE has problems maintaining star power for someone nowadays that by the time they get to the next big PPV, one or both of the stars have lost their luster. A big star today is no guarantee to be as big 6 months from now.


Well, that is a special case because The Rock isn't a member of the roster but tons of big WWE rivalries didn't happen at Wrestlemania. Randy Orton vs John Cena, The Rock vs Triple H, Stone Cold vs Undertaker, Diesel vs Bret Hart,... It didn't stop them from being iconic.

That thinking is the exact one that made Roman Reigns a failure, because the WWE were so fixated on having that Wrestlemania moment, it made the product predictable and boring.

Why ? Because there was no stakes for Reigns during the year as we know where it ended and that's the same thing with someone like Strowman, as soon as he lost his briefcase, people stopped caring because they knew he was never going to be champ, no stakes.

If you want someone to stay big, the answer is simple, you need to constantly have the audience care about what they are doing and that goes big feud that constantly makes you think your favorite wrestler has something to win or to lose. And for that happen, each PPV need at least one big match that could be worthy of Wrestlemania and be presented as such


----------



## llj

Well, a lot of this is the lack of well booked depth too. Cena feuding with an Edge or Orton throughout the year on his way to The Rock at Wrestlemania is still interesting enough because Edge and Orton were still built up as well and weren't just cannon fodder. Today, everyone knows a Balor/Lashley/Drew/Elias would be cannon fodder for Roman. They do nothing before facing Roman. And once they cease feuding with Roman, they're back doing nothing. That wasn't the case for many past stars. There have always been levels in the WWE to be sure but just because you could beat the Chosen Ones didn't always mean you were back in the freezer before and after you faced them.


----------



## Ace

Getting my seat early for tomorrow's show


----------



## Randy Lahey

They are going to get destroyed by the Rockets - Warriors game


----------



## kingnoth1n

I think Vince is mentally ill.


----------



## Donnie

:rusevcrush Lets fucking do this


----------



## Singapore Kane

Wrestlemania is one of their biggest problems, they've gotten so lazy they spend the entire year waiting for one show. "Hey this guy is getting super over maybe we should put the belt on him and give him some interesting storylines?" "Nah it's september, no one watches in september, wait until march, we'll make it a #wrestlemaniamoment" 

Like, no one outside the US gives a shit what month it is. Used to hate seeing people say ahh football season is traditionally a bad time for them creatively. It's a self fulfilling prophecy, if you put no effort into your show because you think no one watches this month anyway of course they're gonna tune out. It blows my mind, you're a tv show, make good tv. Don't make me wait 8 months to see a halfway decent storyline because you've convinced yourself you can only be interesting one arbitrary month of the year!


----------



## Jedah

How low will it go this week?

That's more exciting than any of the shit they put out.


----------



## ClintDagger

Today will be very interesting. They clearly put all of their eggs in one basket as far as their full time roster goes and booked the show with only one thing in mind and that’s to get the highest viewership possible. They went heavy with Vince for a long segment and built the show around the men; then they more or less kept the women to an absolute minimum. My guess is that their internal data says this is their best foot forward.


----------



## Isuzu

Problem is you cant only blame Vince. Fans bitched and moaned for a 5ft6 homeless Wizard looking dude to be heavyweight champion. 

Vince threw some scraps to the internet fans by pushing AJ Styles and now Seth Rollins and Kofi Kingston. These guys are bland and boring. Next the fans bitched about the revival who up until last night had zero charisma.

The neckbeard nerds are also to blame as these are your indy darlings you wanted at the top of the show's and yet they still bleeding viewers.


----------



## A-C-P

Isuzu said:


> Problem is you cant only blame Vince. Fans bitched and moaned for a 5ft6 homeless Wizard looking dude to be heavyweight champion.
> 
> Vince threw some scraps to the internet fans by pushing AJ Styles and now Seth Rollins and Kofi Kingston. These guys are bland and boring. Next the fans bitched about the revival who up until last night had zero charisma.
> 
> The neckbeard nerds are also to blame as these are your indy darlings you wanted at the top of the show's and yet they still bleeding viewers.


What an AWFUL post.

#1 - The fans that were vocal for the things you are blaming have every right to ask for what they want to see on a product the spend their time and money on. And most of (if not all) these fans give ZERO fucks about what the WWE's ratings or financial #s are, Nor should they. They care about seeing what entertains them.

#2 - Lets pretend your post has any credibility (it doesn't) but pretend it does and the things you are claiming are to blame for the tanking ratings is legit, its STILL on Vince and CO for pushing them on TV, b/c they are the ones in charge, so even if you are correct about the problems its still all Vince and Co's fault and not on the fans at all.

In reality who is being pushed where is far down the list of what the problems are and why ratings are tanking at this point.


----------



## llj

Yeah, I'm no longer concerned about who gets pushed anymore. There is a fundamental problem with the product that drags everyone down. It's getting to the point where you don't even necessarily want to see your faves get a belt anymore, because then they have to carry the stench of the current product on them in the spotlight. Stars are only as good as the supporting cast around them, and when all but people you can maybe count on 3 fingers are booked terribly, even the chosen ones will get dragged down because the supporting cast doesn't have enough going for them to lift up a chosen star when they are in an angle with them.

It's the opponents that make championship reigns memorable. Would Okada's reign on NJPW be as well received as it was if he didn't have first class opponents going against him? No. And you can't do that if the promotion doesn't care about the opponents. They can't be treated as simple fodder. They have to do things outside of title shots as well. Guys like Naito, Omega, Tanahashi, Ishii all have interesting things to do when they're not competing for the top titles. Not so in the WWE. If you're not in the title picture you're practically dead. And if you are in the title picture you're written like shit. There's no winning in this company. None.


----------



## ClintDagger

Isuzu said:


> Problem is you cant only blame Vince. Fans bitched and moaned for a 5ft6 homeless Wizard looking dude to be heavyweight champion.
> 
> Vince threw some scraps to the internet fans by pushing AJ Styles and now Seth Rollins and Kofi Kingston. These guys are bland and boring. Next the fans bitched about the revival who up until last night had zero charisma.
> 
> The neckbeard nerds are also to blame as these are your indy darlings you wanted at the top of the show's and yet they still bleeding viewers.


One of the things Bischoff had to do when he took over WCW was kill off the hardcore fans from the NWA / JCP days. He buried Flair & the Horsemen quite a bit especially in the Carolinas and he stayed away from talents like the RnR Express, Midnight Express, Cornette, Windham, etcetera that we’re seen as regional acts. It was the only way to build a product that would appeal on a national level.

If Vince has any designs on reversing this trend of a shrinking fan base he needs to kill off the fans that are into stuff like Kofi as champion or “The Man” Becky Lynch. These are the fans that hijack shows and see themselves as part of the show. That stuff will never appeal to a broad audience and will only push WWE further and further into the niche category.


----------



## Zappers

Here's the problem with the show in a nutshell. Nothing is a secret. 

I'll explain. Everybody knows everything about each week before it even happens. That's why the ratings have been dropping imho. Yes, of course better storylines would help too. 

Let's look at the RAW/Nitro wars. Beyond competition (which there isn't any now) everything was a surprise. There's no surprises anymore. Look at this week for RAW. They promoted Roman for a whole week. How about you NOT DO THAT. The only thing they should preview for the following week's show should be when in a storyline, (insert wrestler here) challenges (insert wrestler here) to a match the next week. That's it. Everything else should be a secret. 
Also wrestling gossip rags are ruining everything. Mostly false info btw. Everyone can't wait to dish, who is hurt, who got fired, who has backstage heat, who just signed, who is being called up from NXT, etc... Again. no surprises. For example, if so and so is getting called up from NXT, then that sends a chain of info to the audience. A) he/she losing the title at NXT B) he/she will make his debut at (insert venue here) Now if this is false info, then we wasted our time discussing wrong info, and have moved away from even caring about the character anymore. 

People take this garbage and post in on this very own forum and hundreds like it around the internet. So instead of talking about wrestling, we are discussing gossip trash. No wonder people have lost interest in wrestling. That's why people tuned in each week years ago before all this stuff started becoming viral. Nobody knew anything. You had to tune in each week or you missed out. Regardless if the segments were cool, goofy, or whatever. You tuned in.


----------



## Lenny Leonard

It's odd how much I look forward to this thread every week


----------



## ClintDagger

Zappers said:


> Here's the problem with the show in a nutshell. Nothing is a secret.
> 
> I'll explain. Everybody knows everything about each week before it even happens. That's why the ratings have been dropping imho. Yes, of course better storylines would help too.
> 
> Let's look at the RAW/Nitro wars. Beyond competition (which there isn't any now) everything was a surprise. There's no surprises anymore. Look at this week for RAW. They promoted Roman for a whole week. How about you NOT DO THAT. The only thing they should preview for the following week's show should be when in a storyline, (insert wrestler here) challenges (insert wrestler here) to a match the next week. That's it. Everything else should be a secret.
> Also wrestling gossip rags are ruining everything. Mostly false info btw. Everyone can't wait to dish, who is hurt, who got fired, who has backstage heat, who just signed, who is being called up from NXT, etc... Again. no surprises. For example, if so and so is getting called up from NXT, then that sends a chain of info to the audience. A) he/she losing the title at NXT B) he/she will make his debut at (insert venue here) Now if this is false info, then we wasted our time discussing wrong info, and have moved away from even caring about the character anymore.
> 
> People take this garbage and post in on this very own forum and hundreds like it around the internet. So instead of talking about wrestling, we are discussing gossip trash. No wonder people have lost interest in wrestling. That's why people tuned in each week years ago before all this stuff started becoming viral. Nobody knew anything. You had to tune in each week or you missed out. Regardless if the segments were cool, goofy, or whatever. You tuned in.


What percentage of the 2 million or so viewers do you think frequent wrestling forums or read stuff from the gossip sites? I feel like it has to be less than 10%.


----------



## raymond1985

ClintDagger said:


> One of the things Bischoff had to do when he took over WCW was kill off the hardcore fans from the NWA / JCP days. He buried Flair & the Horsemen quite a bit especially in the Carolinas and he stayed away from talents like the RnR Express, Midnight Express, Cornette, Windham, etcetera that we’re seen as regional acts. It was the only way to build a product that would appeal on a national level.
> 
> If Vince has any designs on reversing this trend of a shrinking fan base he needs to kill off the fans that are into stuff like Kofi as champion or “The Man” Becky Lynch. These are the fans that hijack shows and see themselves as part of the show. That stuff will never appeal to a broad audience and will only push WWE further and further into the niche category.


Good post. 

It's been clear for years that performers who the niche audience support; Bryan, Rollins, Zayn, Owens, etc; are not as over as their supporters' would like them to be. 

It's reasonable to say that the production, poor booking and oversaturation make things worse. But it's also reasonable to say that Bryan, Rollins, etc have zero potential to attract new fans and are unable to stop viewers from tuning out. 

It's a tough spot that Vince is in. If he tried to push someone new, who might just bring in new viewers, the hardcore fanbase will do everything in their power to sabotage their push. But if Vince keeps running shows with Rollins, Kofi and Bryan as headliners, the general audience will continue to tune out.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Fans have been tuning out for a decade, including when guys like Cena, Brock, and others were pushed. They just were closer to the high starting point of the AE. But make no mistake the downward trend started in the RA era, and has now continued into the PG era and this current era. It's been one long downward trend with very little, short-lived increases here and there before going back down.


----------



## Dave Santos

NBC had their best April of all time in ratings. The Kentucky Derby did 18 million viewers on NBC. The NFl draft was the most watched draft ever. It did 47.5 million viewers. NHL had the most watched 1st round in seven years. The Houston Golden state game was 20% up from last year and has been rising as the series has gone along. The conference semifinals are up 19% in general for the NBA. Looks like wwe will have difficulty dealing with both sports and Football later in the year. Not everything is declining.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> Fans have been tuning out for a decade, including when guys like Cena, Brock, and others were pushed. They just were closer to the high starting point of the AE. But make no mistake the downward trend started in the RA era, and has now continued into the PG era and this current era. It's been one long downward trend with very little, short-lived increases here and there before going back down.


They’ve never found another Austin or Hogan which is why they’ve never hit another boom period. Even Cena falls way below the level of a Hogan / Austin. And so there really was nowhere to go but down from that ‘99-‘00 period when you are replacing Austin & Rock with the likes of HHH, Cena, Brock, Batista, Roman, etcetera; all talents that fall below that highest rung. But the fall seems to have really accelerated as the balance shifted from your more traditional WWF/E type main eventers to your more indy centric main eventers. So in essence you’re replacing HHH, Cena, Batista, Brock, Reigns with the Rollins, Bryans, Kofis, etcetera of the world. Not to mention heavily featuring the women as main event acts. That’s why the drop has sped up and why Vince, NBCU, and Fox are in a total panic.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> They’ve never found another Austin or Hogan which is why they’ve never hit another boom period. Even Cena falls way below the level of a Hogan / Austin. And so there really was nowhere to go but down from that ‘99-‘00 period when you are replacing Austin & Rock with the likes of HHH, Cena, Brock, Batista, Roman, etcetera; all talents that fall below that highest rung. But the fall seems to have really accelerated as the balance shifted from your more traditional WWF/E type main eventers to your more indy centric main eventers. So in essence you’re replacing HHH, Cena, Batista, Brock, Reigns with the Rollins, Bryans, Kofis, etcetera of the world. Not to mention heavily featuring the women as main event acts. That’s why the drop has sped up and why Vince, NBCU, and Fox are in a total panic.


I agree to an extent for sure. The fact is when you have basically a decade straight downward spiral in ratings and no one is able to stop it (management or talent), it's eventually going to get where it is today, no matter what type of talent you have. This time next year they can have the opposite of 'indy centric' wrestlers, and the ratings will be even worse than they are right now, because they go down every single year no matter who the top wrestlers are.


----------



## raymond1985

The ratings remained stable from 2003-2010. The main reason for this was Cena's mega push. Cena brought in new fans to compensate for the viewers that were leaving. Of course, it also helped that Cena had a fine supporting cast; Batista, Taker, HBK, HHH, Edge and Orton. 

It was only when Cena's appeal started to naturally diminish in the early 2010s that the ratings/viewership started to fall off a cliff. A trend that has gotten worse in recent years.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> I agree to an extent for sure. The fact is when you have basically a decade straight downward spiral in ratings and no one is able to stop it (management or talent), it's eventually going to get where it is today, no matter what type of talent you have. This time next year they can have the opposite of 'indy centric' wrestlers, and the ratings will be even worse than they are right now, because they go down every single year no matter who the top wrestlers are.


Well, that can’t be stated as definitively as you stated it. Ratings did go up in 2018 versus where they were in 2017. So it’s not accurate to say only a decline is possible. But even if you go with that assumption, the degree with which you drop is certainly not constant. It can be slowed down or sped up. Right now what they have been doing is causing the biggest drops they’ve ever seen. So based on that, they need to do something, anything different from what they’ve done in the last 6 months.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

If ratings don't go up this week then Vince should resign. Last night was him throwing everything he could at the wall. That was the worst attempt at crash TV I've ever seen. He is not capable of putting on a good show anymore.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> Well, that can’t be stated as definitively as you stated it. Ratings did go up in 2018 versus where they were in 2017. So it’s not accurate to say only a decline is possible. But even if you go with that assumption, the degree with which you drop is certainly not constant. It can be slowed down or sped up. Right now what they have been doing is causing the biggest drops they’ve ever seen. So based on that, they need to do something, anything different from what they’ve done in the last 6 months.


It can't be stated definitively, but pretty close to definitive. The drop has been accelerated recently by the NBA Playoffs. They drop everywhere during NBA Playoff time and NFL season. It's not like they're going head to head with repeats of Matlock or some shit. If you want to put titles on other talent, go for it. But the product will still be awful and the ratings will still be just as bad, and even lower once September rolls around the NFL is back.


----------



## Isuzu

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> If ratings don't go up this week then Vince should resign. Last night was him throwing everything he could at the wall. That was the worst attempt at crash TV I've ever seen. He is not capable of putting on a good show anymore.


If you dont have the talent to execute the plan, is that the writers fault? Yes Vince is to blame for not building larger than life characters and for listening to the vocal minority internet fans.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> It can't be stated definitively, but pretty close to definitive. The drop has been accelerated recently by the NBA Playoffs. They drop everywhere during NBA Playoff time and NFL season. It's not like they're going head to head with repeats of Matlock or some shit. If you want to put titles on other talent, go for it. But the product will still be awful and the ratings will still be just as bad, and even lower once September rolls around the NFL is back.


It’s not so much where you put the titles as how you build your roster. They’ve spent nearly 10 years building this indy darling roster. It would probably take 5 years to rebuild it in a more traditional WWF/E mold. But they would have to be more active in their recruitment of talent; seeking out NFL washouts, MMA washouts, bodybuilders, and competing with UFC for upper weight class amateur wrestlers. They don’t seem to have the patience for that which is why all they do is raid the indies.


----------



## ClintDagger

Isuzu said:


> If you dont have the talent to execute the plan, is that the writers fault? Yes Vince is to blame for not building larger than life characters and for listening to the vocal minority internet fans.


Vince has always been a bad booker with bad creative ideas and WWF/E has always had bad writers. It really is the talent (or lack thereof) and the talent’s inability to protect their brand because of lack of an alternative to WWE that is the problem.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> It’s not so much where you put the titles as how you build your roster. They’ve spent nearly 10 years building this indy darling roster. It would probably take 5 years to rebuild it in a more traditional WWF/E mold. But they would have to be more active in their recruitment of talent; seeking out NFL washouts, MMA washouts, bodybuilders, and competing with UFC for upper weight class amateur wrestlers. They don’t seem to have the patience for that which is why all they do is raid the indies.


If Vince could find those guys, he'd sign them in a second. The problem is that they don't exist anymore. Or, if those people do exist, they have no interest in the wrestling business. They have guys in that size/build range like Braun, EC3, Lashley, but other than their size, they have nothing else to offer seemingly. I just think people who are stuck on the size thing are woefully off on the biggest problems this company has right now and has had for years at this point.


----------



## Dave Santos

I heard that they will stop uploading clips during the show on Youtube. Supposedly they already started last Raw.


----------



## Isuzu

Showstopper said:


> If Vince could find those guys, he'd sign them in a second. The problem is that they don't exist anymore. Or, if those people do exist, they have no interest in the wrestling business. They have guys in that size/build range like Braun, EC3, Lashley, but other than their size, they have nothing else to offer seemingly. I just think people who are stuck on the size thing are woefully off on the biggest problems this company has right now and has had for years at this point.


the audience dont have any interest in EC3 and Lashley. Rumors are that Braun has backstage issues and shots himself in the foot with management by botching segments, showing up on time etc...


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> If Vince could find those guys, he'd sign them in a second. The problem is that they don't exist anymore. Or, if those people do exist, they have no interest in the wrestling business. They have guys in that size/build range like Braun, EC3, Lashley, but other than their size, they have nothing else to offer seemingly. I just think people who are stuck on the size thing are woefully off on the biggest problems this company has right now and has had for years at this point.


Those guys exist, they are just going into MMA now. WWE is obviously not doing enough to compete for that talent and they should be adjusting.

And it’s not so much about size, although I do think you have to draw a line somewhere. Guys like Kofi and Balor are a joke when it comes to being world title contenders. But I think there’s something to having a legitimate athletic background. Kevin Owens, Sami Zayn, Finn Balor, I could go on. They don’t look like athletes. Kevin Nash was right when he said they didn’t let the marks wrestle in his day. Too much of the roster looks like they could be sitting in the stands.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> Those guys exist, they are just going into MMA now. WWE is obviously not doing enough to compete for that talent and they should be adjusting.
> 
> And it’s not so much about size, although I do think you have to draw a line somewhere. Guys like Kofi and Balor are a joke when it comes to being world title contenders. But I think there’s something to having a legitimate athletic background. Kevin Owens, Sami Zayn, Finn Balor, I could go on. They don’t look like athletes. Kevin Nash was right when he said they didn’t let the marks wrestle in his day. Too much of the roster looks like they could be sitting in the stands.


They've had bigger guys be Champion in recent years and ratings still declined. You can put the title on the biggest, most charismatic guy on the planet today, and if the writing is still going to be done by current day Vince McMahon, that guy is going to be fucked.

Such an archaic way of thinking, really.


----------



## Isuzu

ClintDagger said:


> Those guys exist, they are just going into MMA now. WWE is obviously not doing enough to compete for that talent and they should be adjusting.
> 
> And it’s not so much about size, although I do think you have to draw a line somewhere. Guys like Kofi and Balor are a joke when it comes to being world title contenders. But I think there’s something to having a legitimate athletic background. Kevin Owens, Sami Zayn, Finn Balor, I could go on. They don’t look like athletes. Kevin Nash was right when he said they didn’t let the marks wrestle in his day. Too much of the roster looks like they could be sitting in the stands.


This is why Brock Lesnar still has the special feel when his music hits, you know a legit badass is coming down to the ring.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Brock Lesnar seems like a guy you're describing, and when he was Champion recently, he would show up rarely and it would keep him fresh. And when he would show up on RAW, he would still be STALE AS FUCK because Vince booked him to do the same thing every time he was on TV, and he wasn't even on TV every week over-exposed like the full-timers. He would be advertised on Raw a full week in advance, and it still wouldn't increase the rating the following week. And I'm not blaming Brock for that. It goes to the bigger point that this company is creatively bankrupt and out of fresh ideas.

And there's the other option that we all might have to start to accept: Weekly, episodic wrestling programs might be slowly, but surely dying out. They'll be on cable these next 5 years starting in October thanks to these new TV deals. And once those 5 years are up, if the ratings don't go back up, Raw and SD might be on streaming devices only and not cable anymore starting in October 2024. Not predicting it, but it's a possibility.


----------



## raymond1985

ClintDagger said:


> Guys like Kofi and Balor are a joke when it comes to being world title contenders. But I think there’s something to having a legitimate athletic background. Kevin Owens, Sami Zayn, Finn Balor, I could go on. They don’t look like athletes. Kevin Nash was right when he said they didn’t let the marks wrestle in his day. Too much of the roster looks like they could be sitting in the stands.


Agreed. 

Zayn and Owens would have been jobbers 20 years ago and no one would have batted an eyelid.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> They've had bigger guys be Champion in recent years and ratings still declined. You can put the title on the biggest, most charismatic guy on the planet today, and if the writing is still going to be done by current day Vince McMahon, that guy is going to be fucked.
> 
> Such an archaic way of thinking, really.


It’s all of the above though. WCW dying gave Vince too much power. Vince hasn’t got any worse creatively in 25 years, he sucked back then too. But the way the talent came up 30-40 years ago allowed them to really understand what worked and what didn’t. And the landscape of wrestling with Vince having to worry about competition meant he couldn't just have his druthers. Guys like Hogan & Austin knew when to say no to Vince and Vince couldn’t do anything about it. But it’s a two way street. Even if you have a good creative engine, you still need talent that both looks and acts the part and can do enough in the ring to make the whole thing work. You can have your Floyd Mayweathers and Conor McGregors too but they need to be fighting other guys relatively their size. The optimum package includes a guy that passes as a legit HW. Doesn’t have to be that way, but that’s where the biggest money is to be found. I doubt Austin at 5’9” 180 lbs with everything else the same draws the same as Austin at 6’2” 250 lbs. If you think that would draw the same, then we have to agree to disagree.


----------



## Isuzu

Showstopper said:


> Brock Lesnar seems like a guy you're describing, and when he was Champion recently, he would show up rarely and it would keep him fresh. And when he would show up on RAW, he would still be STALE AS FUCK because Vince booked him to do the same thing every time he was on TV, and he wasn't even on TV every week over-exposed like the full-timers. He would be advertised on Raw a full week in advance, and it still wouldn't increase the rating the following week. And I'm not blaming Brock for that. It goes to the bigger point that this company is creatively bankrupt and out of fresh ideas.
> 
> And there's the other option that we all might have to start to accept: Weekly, episodic wrestling programs might be slowly, but surely dying out. They'll be on cable these next 5 years starting in October thanks to these new TV deals. And once those 5 years are up, if the ratings don't go back up, Raw and SD might be on streaming devices only and not cable anymore starting in October 2024. Not predicting it, but it's a possibility.


If Vince booked Brock to wreck shop and destroy things everytime he showed up, he would be like Braun Stroman, look how that worked for Braun.

I think WWE has internal metrics that tells them how much of a Draw Brock is amongst network subscribers and fans that watch TV programming.

You have Brock who is a larger than life character facing Daniel Bryan. just look at the optics in the ring when they stood face to face. It was so absurd or heck Brock vs Finn when they did the face to face promo.

All Brock can do is show up and dance around and let Heyman talk, because the rest of the roster isnt believable to even stand up to him.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> Brock Lesnar seems like a guy you're describing, and when he was Champion recently, he would show up rarely and it would keep him fresh. And when he would show up on RAW, he would still be STALE AS FUCK because Vince booked him to do the same thing every time he was on TV, and he wasn't even on TV every week over-exposed like the full-timers. He would be advertised on Raw a full week in advance, and it still wouldn't increase the rating the following week. And I'm not blaming Brock for that. It goes to the bigger point that this company is creatively bankrupt and out of fresh ideas.
> 
> And there's the other option that we all might have to start to accept: Weekly, episodic wrestling programs might be slowly, but surely dying out. They'll be on cable these next 5 years starting in October thanks to these new TV deals. And once those 5 years are up, if the ratings don't go back up, Raw and SD might be on streaming devices only and not cable anymore starting in October 2024. Not predicting it, but it's a possibility.


Brock isn’t who I’m describing, at least not from a centerpiece main event standpoint. Brock is a nice talent to have especially given his MMA credentials but he’s severely lacking as a well rounded talent. But having 3 or 4 guys that are 270 lbs, look like monsters, and can look legit in the ring doesn’t hurt.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> It’s all of the above though. WCW dying gave Vince too much power. Vince hasn’t got any worse creatively in 25 years, he sucked back then too. But the way the talent came up 30-40 years ago allowed them to really understand what worked and what didn’t. And the landscape of wrestling with Vince having to worry about competition meant he couldn't just have his druthers. Guys like Hogan & Austin knew when to say no to Vince and Vince couldn’t do anything about it. But it’s a two way street. Even if you have a good creative engine, you still need talent that both looks and acts the part and can do enough in the ring to make the whole thing work. You can have your Floyd Mayweathers and Conor McGregors too but they need to be fighting other guys relatively their size. The optimum package includes a guy that passes as a legit HW. Doesn’t have to be that way, but that’s where the biggest money is to be found. I doubt Austin at 5’9” 180 lbs with everything else the same draws the same as Austin at 6’2” 250 lbs. If you think that would draw the same, then we have to agree to disagree.


The thing is things change and evolve. The era you're describing in the 90's with Austin was completely different than it was 20 years earlier in the 70's. Just like now 20 years after the 90's, it's a different business with a different fanbase. Sure, there will always be the diehards who were even there 20 years ago. But aside from those, and the wrestling business being different today, so is society, just like it was different in the 90's compared to the 70's. Things change; especially when we're talking about a 20 year time difference. What might have been a big deal 20 years ago to that fanbase might not matter as much to the fans of 20 years later. 

And I disagree that Vince isn't any different from back then. He's a completely different creative mind, and not for the better. He's regressed in every way possible. He lost his edge and it's doubtful he ever gets it back.



ClintDagger said:


> Brock isn’t who I’m describing, at least not from a centerpiece main event standpoint. Brock is a nice talent to have especially given his MMA credentials but he’s severely lacking as a well rounded talent. But having 3 or 4 guys that are 270 lbs, look like monsters, and can look legit in the ring doesn’t hurt.


Sure, it doesn't hurt. But it's far from a guarantee to change anything in a fake 'sport' booked by a guy who lost his fastball many moons ago.


----------



## Isuzu

Showstopper said:


> The thing is things change and evolve. The era you're describing in the 90's with Austin was completely different than it was 20 years earlier in the 70's. Just like now 20 years after the 90's, it's a different business with a different fanbase. Sure, there will always be the diehards who were even there 20 years ago. But aside from those, and the wrestling business being different today, so is society, just like it was different in the 90's compared to the 70's. Things change; especially when we're talking about a 20 year time difference. What might have been a big deal 20 years ago to that fanbase might not matter as much to the fans of 20 years later.
> 
> And I disagree that Vince isn't any different from back then. He's a completely different creative mind, and not for the better. He's regressed in every way possible. He lost his edge and it's doubtful he ever gets it back.


Also the big problem is Vince is listening too much to the indy fans who over-hyped these dudes on the internet, and then Vince gets trigger happy and signs all these indy guys hoping one will turn out to be a star.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Isuzu said:


> If Vince booked Brock to wreck shop and destroy things everytime he showed up, he would be like Braun Stroman, look how that worked for Braun.
> 
> I think WWE has internal metrics that tells them how much of a Draw Brock is amongst network subscribers and fans that watch TV programming.
> 
> You have Brock who is a larger than life character facing Daniel Bryan. just look at the optics in the ring when they stood face to face. It was so absurd or heck Brock vs Finn when they did the face to face promo.
> 
> All Brock can do is show up and dance around and let Heyman talk, because the rest of the roster isnt believable to even stand up to him.


The Network subs are stuck in the same range they've been for years now, though. There is literally no metric to show that Brock has drawn recently. None.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Isuzu said:


> Also the big problem is Vince is listening too much to the indy fans who over-hyped these dudes on the internet, and then Vince gets trigger happy and signs all these indy guys hoping one will turn out to be a star.


Vince doesn't listen to anybody but himself these days. These larger than life guys some of you guys are describing don't exist anymore. You guys are living in the past and don't even realize it. If those guys existed, Vince would sign them in a micro-second.


----------



## Isuzu

Showstopper said:


> The Network subs are stuck in the same range they've been for years now, though. There is literally no metric to show that Brock has drawn recently. None.


It could be that Brock helps keep the Numbers where they are, If he left for good, the subs may drop significantly. You cannot deny he does have a following. i can personally say that I watch because of Brock and Ronda Rousey and the potential of Connor Mcgregor signing with WWE. other than that very few reasons to watch


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Isuzu said:


> It could be that Brock helps keep the Numbers where they are, If he left for good, the subs may drop significantly. You cannot deny he does have a following.


For someone who's the highest paid talent, I think you'd expect more tangible evidence than that. But if that's the bar, then that's cool. Then, you can't get on the full timers who are paid alot less then.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> The thing is things change and evolve. The era you're describing in the 90's with Austin was completely different than it was 20 years earlier in the 70's. Just like now 20 years after the 90's, it's a different business with a different fanbase. Sure, there will always be the diehards who were even there 20 years ago. But aside from those, and the wrestling business being different today, so is society, just like it was different in the 90's compared to the 70's. Things change; especially when we're talking about a 20 year time difference. What might have been a big deal 20 years ago to that fanbase might not matter as much to the fans of 20 years later.
> 
> And I disagree that Vince isn't any different from back then. He's a completely different creative mind, and not for the better. He's regressed in every way possible. He lost his edge and it's doubtful he ever gets it back.
> 
> 
> 
> Sure, it doesn't hurt. But it's far from a guarantee to change anything in a fake 'sport' booked by a guy who lost his fastball many moons ago.


Vince has always been horrible creatively. The Hogan’s, Savage’s, Austin’s, Rock’s were not his ideas. His ideas are Red Rooster, The Goon, Repo Man, Gobbledygook, The Ringmaster, Rocky Maivia, etcetera. Has he gotten even worse? Who knows. But he was always bad. His MO has always been to steal ready made talent. He’s still doing it today.

And as far as things changing in 20 years. Meh, not really. There’s a reason why Hollywood is a lot of remakes and reboots. What’s big in Hollywood right now? Comic book movies and Star Wars. Stuff that started well before I was born in the mid 80s. What’s big on TV? A show based on books that were written 23 years ago when I was in middle school.


----------



## A-C-P

At this point I kind of wish Vince would strip the current roster of all the "indy darlings" and just sign all guys that fit this magical "larger than life" bill from a physical standpoint just to show everyone harping on this is the reason the show sucks that the ratings would continue to tank or tank even harder just so it can stop being discussed ad nauseam.

Who and how high certain people are being pushed is quite far down the line on the list of reasons why these shows suck so bad and people are tuning out at a higher pace than ever before.


----------



## Isuzu

Showstopper said:


> For someone who's the highest paid talent, I think you'd expect more tangible evidence than that. But if that's the bar, then that's cool. Then, you can't get on the full timers who are paid alot less then.


Its an old article but I believe still relevant and explains why Vince always goes back to the partimers/Nostalgia acts

Recent Statistics On Brock Lesnar Show That Part-Timers Still Draw More Interest To WWE

To many fans, the part-timers are snubbing spots from the current talent. This is why Lesnar does not get the kind of ovation that he previously did, as well as Goldberg getting booed towards the conclusion of his tenure last year. However, based on the ratings, the part-timers are what brings the interest, and wrestling for less than an hour the entire year draws more than competing in over 200 matches a year

https://www.inquisitr.com/4801676/r...-part-timers-still-draw-more-interest-to-wwe/


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> Vince has always been horrible creatively. The Hogan’s, Savage’s, Austin’s, Rock’s were not his ideas. His ideas are Red Rooster, The Goon, Repo Man, Gobbledygook, The Ringmaster, Rocky Maivia, etcetera. Has he gotten even worse? Who knows. But he was always bad. His MO has always been to steal ready made talent. He’s still doing it today.
> 
> And as far as things changing in 20 years. Meh, not really. There’s a reason why Hollywood is a lot of remakes and reboots. What’s big in Hollywood right now? Comic book movies and Star Wars. Stuff that started well before I was born in the mid 80s. What’s big on TV? A show based on books that were written 23 years ago when I was in middle school.


Creating gimmicks and writing storylines that aren't insulting are two completely different things, though. Just write some decent storylines. He hasn't done that in along time now.

And those things in Hollywood from the past being remade today are popular amongst people. I agree. But movies and TV shows have off-seasons. WWE does not. HUGE difference. Every single week WWE has to create 5 original hours of Network TV every week. It's not the same as making a 2 hour movie and being gone. Or, writing a TV show that runs 20 weeks out of the year, and then is nowhere to be seen until the following year. Huge difference when you have to creative and in a good way twice per week every single week.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> Vince doesn't listen to anybody but himself these days. These larger than life guys some of you guys are describing don't exist anymore. You guys are living in the past and don't even realize it. If those guys existed, Vince would sign them in a micro-second.


It’s not living in the past. It’s understanding history. Do you think the Steve Austin that was trained by Chris Adams just showed up on his first day at the Sportatorium and was the larger than life character we saw from 96-01? Of course not, that evolved over 7 years of Austin crafting his trade and getting help along the way. That’s what’s missing today. NXT isn’t designed to teach someone to come into their own, it’s meant to take already developed indy talent and teach them the “WWE way” to do things.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Isuzu said:


> Its an old article but I believe still relevant and explains why Vince always goes back to the partimers/Nostalgia acts
> 
> Recent Statistics On Brock Lesnar Show That Part-Timers Still Draw More Interest To WWE
> 
> To many fans, the part-timers are snubbing spots from the current talent. This is why Lesnar does not get the kind of ovation that he previously did, as well as Goldberg getting booed towards the conclusion of his tenure last year. However, based on the ratings, the part-timers are what brings the interest, and wrestling for less than an hour the entire year draws more than competing in over 200 matches a year
> 
> https://www.inquisitr.com/4801676/r...-part-timers-still-draw-more-interest-to-wwe/


So, if he's such a draw and was World Champion for most of the two years, why didn't anything increase when he'd be advertised a week in advance?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> It’s not living in the past. It’s understanding history. Do you think the Steve Austin that was trained by Chris Adams just showed up on his first day at the Sportatorium and was the larger than life character we saw from 96-01? Of course not, that evolved over 7 years of Austin crafting his trade and getting help along the way. That’s what’s missing today. NXT isn’t designed to teach someone to come into their own, it’s meant to take already developed indy talent and teach them the “WWE way” to do things.


Blame Vince for that. He's the one that killed the territories. He wanted things his way. He has that now. Now, go out and entertain us now that Vince has things his way. This is what he wanted. He got it. No excuses.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> Creating gimmicks and writing storylines that aren't insulting are two completely different things, though. Just write some decent storylines. He hasn't done that in along time now.
> 
> And those things in Hollywood from the past being remade today are popular amongst people. I agree. But movies and TV shows have off-seasons. WWE does not. HUGE difference. Every single week WWE has to create 5 original hours of Network TV every week. It's not the same as making a 2 hour movie and being gone. Or, writing a TV show that runs 20 weeks out of the year, and then is nowhere to be seen until the following year. Huge difference when you have to creative and in a good way twice per week every single week.


I agree that WWE has overexposed themselves by having to fill so much time and that really puts them at a disadvantage. That is one thing that certainly changed in 20 years although it did start about 20 years ago when they added Smackdown so it’s not a new problem. It was exacerbated by moving Raw to 3 hours and will be again when they do the same with SD. I don’t know that a long off-season is that necessary although I feel like they should take off every December and have best of shows, but if they would just rotate on screen and off screen talent so that everyone gets a few weeks off that would help and keep talent fresh.


----------



## Isuzu

Showstopper said:


> So, if he's such a draw and was World Champion for most of the two years, why didn't anything increase when he'd be advertised a week in advance?


Look the Brock haters can deny, but facts are facts and the WWE knows it which is why they continue to re-sign him. he is a draw. once he stops being a draw then Vince will stop paying him. plain and simple.

Raw Youtube Rankings For This Week: Brock Lesnar And Nothing Else Draws
https://www.fightful.com/wrestling/raw-youtube-rankings-week-brock-lesnar-and-nothing-else-draws

Brock Lesnar: 5 Reasons He's Still the Biggest Draw in All of MMA
https://bleacherreport.com/articles...sons-hes-still-the-biggest-draw-in-all-of-mma

https://www.mandatory.com/wrestlezo...nar-appearance-are-great-news-for-the-numbers


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> I agree that WWE has overexposed themselves by having to fill so much time and that really puts them at a disadvantage. That is one thing that certainly changed in 20 years although it did start about 20 years ago when they added Smackdown so it’s not a new problem. It was exacerbated by moving Raw to 3 hours and will be again when they do the same with SD. I don’t know that a long off-season is that necessary although I feel like they should take off every December and have best of shows, but if they would just rotate on screen and off screen talent so that everyone gets a few weeks off that would help and keep talent fresh.


I like the idea of rotating talent on and off. Just for the record I wasn't suggesting an off-season for WWE in that post, either. Just saying TV has it and it helps and it would probably help WWE creatively, but obviously they would lose some money, one would think.

I'm not going to pretend to be some expert on what WWE should do to fix themselves. All I know is that they have ALOT of different issues and they need to start fixing at least some of them soon.



Isuzu said:


> Look the Brock haters can deny, but facts are facts and the WWE knows it which is why they continue to re-sign him. he is a draw. once he stops being a draw then Vince will stop paying him. plain and simple.
> 
> Raw Youtube Rankings For This Week: Brock Lesnar And Nothing Else Draws
> https://www.fightful.com/wrestling/raw-youtube-rankings-week-brock-lesnar-and-nothing-else-draws
> 
> Brock Lesnar: 5 Reasons He's Still the Biggest Draw in All of MMA
> https://bleacherreport.com/articles...sons-hes-still-the-biggest-draw-in-all-of-mma
> 
> https://www.mandatory.com/wrestlezo...nar-appearance-are-great-news-for-the-numbers


So, he's a draw on Youtube and MMA. Okay. That still doesn't help WWE's TV ratings.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> Blame Vince for that. He's the one that killed the territories. He wanted things his way. He has that now. Now, go out and entertain us now that Vince has things his way. This is what he wanted. He got it. No excuses.


Vince certainly sped up the death of the territories but it was inevitable with the advent and growth of cable tv. To me where I fault Vince and this is pretty much the crux of what I’ve been saying today, is that Vince never replaced the territory feeding system in a way that develops the kind of talent he needs. He went from raiding territories to raiding indies.



A-C-P said:


> At this point I kind of wish Vince would strip the current roster of all the "indy darlings" and just sign all guys that fit this magical "larger than life" bill from a physical standpoint just to show everyone harping on this is the reason the show sucks that the ratings would continue to tank or tank even harder just so it can stop being discussed ad nauseam.
> 
> Who and how high certain people are being pushed is quite far down the line on the list of reasons why these shows suck so bad and people are tuning out at a higher pace than ever before.


Except no one is saying that there are ready made larger than life talent just waiting to be signed and put on tv. That’s a straw man argument. The problem is talent acquisition and development in addition to creative and stale management.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> Vince certainly sped up the death of the territories but it was inevitable with the advent and growth of cable tv. To me where I fault Vince and this is pretty much the crux of what I’ve been saying today, is that Vince never replaced the territory feeding system in a way that develops the kind of talent he needs. He went from raiding territories to raiding indies.


Yup. And that's on him. But with the territories dead, it would've been very difficult to replicate that feeding system to WWE like the territories were to the WWF. He wasn't going to be able to create numerous different smaller wrestling promotions spread all through out the country to serve as a feeder system to WWE and then on top of that have the WWE. NXT costs them a ton of money. Imagine having like 6 more NXT's spread throughout the country. Would cost Vince an arm and a leg, even if they eliminated a few of the bigger costs of NXT. Basically impossible, and then have WWE's actual costs? Forget about it.


----------



## Isuzu

Showstopper said:


> Yup. And that's on him. But with the territories dead, it would've been very difficult to replicate that feeding system to WWE like the territories were to the WWF. He wasn't going to be able to create numerous different smaller wrestling promotions spread all through out the country to serve as a feeder system to WWE and then on top of that have the WWE. NXT costs them a ton of money. Imagine having like 6 more NXT's spread throughout the country. Would cost Vince an arm and a leg, even if they eliminated a few of the bigger costs of NXT. Basically impossible, and then have WWE's actual costs? Forget about it.


All money allocated to NXT is an investment in future WWE earnings. NXT's purpose is to train and evaluate future WWE superstars. it doesnt matter if it loses initially s they will make back in revenue once they get to main roster via merchandise deals more TV deals etc.. They are going to continue to open up NXT's all over.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Isuzu said:


> All money allocated to NXT is an investment in future WWE earnings. NXT's purpose is to train and evaluate future WWE superstars. it doesnt matter if it loses initially s they will make back in revenue once they get to main roster via merchandise deals more TV deals etc.. They are going to continue to open up NXT's all over.


I was with you until you said they're going to open up more NXTs. I'd be shocked. Especially with their last quarterly report not being great. They have to continue to make billions. Who would even be in charge of more NXTs?


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> Yup. And that's on him. But with the territories dead, it would've been very difficult to replicate that feeding system to WWE like the territories were to the WWF. He wasn't going to be able to create numerous different smaller wrestling promotions spread all through out the country to serve as a feeder system to WWE and then on top of that have the WWE. NXT costs them a ton of money. Imagine having like 6 more NXT's spread throughout the country. Would cost Vince an arm and a leg, even if they eliminated a few of the bigger costs of NXT. Basically impossible, and then have WWE's actual costs? Forget about it.


You don’t replicate it, you replace it. Vince should have direct lines with the big wrestling colleges like PSU and OKST, as well as with NFL teams and big time college football programs where they send talent his way. I guarantee you he has none of that. I’ve been around big time athletics all my life and I can tell you that schools and organizations are always looking for career paths to put their guys on when it’s clear they can’t play at the highest level. That’s essentially cutting out the middle man that used to be the territory. Most wrestlers were either football players or amateur wrestlers before they went into pro wrestling. So go back to those sources. It’s not rocket science. In that setup you still only need one performance center. Not several.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.468M
H2- 2.240M
H3- 2.024M
3H- 2.244M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 9.24% / - 0.228M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 9.64% / - 0.216M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 17.99% / - 0.444M )
5/6/19 Vs 4/29/19 ( + 3.99% / + 0.086M )

Demo (5/6/19 Vs 4/29/19):
H1- 0.790D Vs 0.780D
H2- 0.730D Vs 0.740D
H3- 0.640D Vs 0.640D
3H- 0.720D Vs 0.720D

Note: RAW is 4th, 6th & 7th by hourly demo & 7th, 10th & 12th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (5/6/19 Vs 5/7/18):
H1- 2.468M Vs 2.788M
H2- 2.240M Vs 2.731M
H3- 2.024M Vs 2.549M
3H- 2.244M Vs 2.689M ( - 16.55% / - 0.445M )

Demo (5/6/19 Vs 5/7/18):
H1- 0.790D Vs 0.900D
H2- 0.730D Vs 0.910D
H3- 0.640D Vs 0.880D
3H- 0.720D Vs 0.897D

Note: RAW this week last year was 6th, 5th & 7th by hourly demo & 5th, 6th & 9th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Mifune Jackson

The company is saved!


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> You don’t replicate it, you replace it. Vince should have direct lines with the big wrestling colleges like PSU and OKST, as well as with NFL teams and big time college football programs where they send talent his way. I guarantee you he has none of that. I’ve been around big time athletics all my life and I can tell you that schools and organizations are always looking for career paths to put their guys on when it’s clear they can’t play at the highest level. That’s essentially cutting out the middle man that used to be the territory. Most wrestlers were either football players or amateur wrestlers before they went into pro wrestling. So go back to those sources. It’s not rocket science. In that setup you still only need one performance center. Not several.


That's fine. Even if you have that, it's still nowhere near the experience and fine-tuning of their characters, promos, and in-ring work that the territories provided, though.


----------



## Jonhern

They might have hit the so called floor of people who will tune in no matter what.


----------



## llj

ClintDagger said:


> What’s big on TV? A show based on books that were written 23 years ago when I was in middle school.


Jesus, now you remind me how long ago it was that I first read Game of Thrones book 1.











I still have this first printing somewhere in my parent's house.

And the series is still not done? (I stopped reading around book 3) Dude is gonna keel over like Robert Jordan did before he finishes his series.


----------



## ClintDagger

Jonhern said:


> They might have hit the so called floor of people who will tune in no matter what.


We’ve been hearing that for years. They can go much, much lower I’m sure.



Showstopper said:


> That's fine. Even if you have that, it's still nowhere near the experience and fine-tuning of their characters, promos, and in-ring work that the territories provided, though.


True. But it’s better than nothing.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Jonhern said:


> They might have hit the so called floor of people who will tune in no matter what.


We keep thinking we hit the floor every year, then it gets dramatically lower.

Going to Fox may give it a temporary boost right as football begins, changing the dynamic by lifting SmackDown up, but it'll be very interesting when Vince has to make a "Sophie's Choice" between Raw, the flagship, and SmackDown, the network show. 

One show always gets prioritized over the other, and it's always been easy to choose Raw for Vince, but the pressure will be on for SD to do good.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> True. But it’s better than nothing.


I just don't think personality-wise, that people are built today like they were in the 80's. Two completey different time periods and societies. There was no internet, social media, or cell phones in the 80's. People had to use their imaginations to entertain themselves. And I think this helped the wrestlers in that time period. There was no Twitter for them to post on every day and in the process humanize themselves. There was mystery around wrestlers back then due to how different society was back then. More over the top personalities and characters. That's just not how people are brought up these days.


----------



## Isuzu

Roman Reigns is a draw...

Most watched on YT so far:
Roman invades RAW - 959k
Kofi vs Dbry - 828k
Samoe Joe meets Rey's son - 825k


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Vince, Roman, Kofi and Bryan all on Raw and ratings stayed exactly the same. Here's a suggestion and it might sound crazy but maybe its time to push charismatic wrestlers who can actually cut a promo.


----------



## RainmakerV2

Meh. They didnt go under 2 million and had some close games from the NBA playoffs against them all 3 hours. So..i guess its a W.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Even with all of the names from SD and a WWE Title match, throwing everything possible that Vince had, that third hour was still dangerously close to last week's. Scary for them.


----------



## ClintDagger

Interesting. This week and last week’s hour 2 were the same. About 100k more tuned in at the top probably for Roman. Then about 100k more tuned in for H3 thanks to the title match. Hard to have a title match every hour 3 so my guess is they will he routinely sub 2MM in that third hour no matter what they do.


----------



## A-C-P

ClintDagger said:


> Except no one is saying that there are ready made larger than life talent just waiting to be signed and put on tv. That’s a straw man argument. The problem is talent acquisition and development in addition to creative and stale management.


My point is there is plenty of talented guys on their roster between Raw, SD, NXT, 205 Live etc. The talent is not the problem. How the talent has been used, developed, the booking, the writing, etc are WAY bigger problem. The WWE has access to the best available pro-wrestling talent the world has to offer, outside of a couple of guys from Japan and Kenny Omega.

And my point is that right now what I am saying is a strawman argument, I wish it was possible for it not to be a strawman argument so people can finally see how useless this argument over the body type of talents that keeps happening is, with the strawman excuse being invalid.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta

All that for such a minor, if any real impact at all. Roman isn't a draw, the recent numbers on SD is proof enough but here is more.

I didn't watch the show, and kinda sad I missed Daniel Bryan's return. But then again, he should be on Smackdown and I'd probably miss it anyway.

This wild card thing isn't going to help at all. Just makes me want to watch Raw even less.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> I just don't think personality-wise, that people are built today like they were in the 80's. Two completey different time periods and societies. There was no internet, social media, or cell phones in the 80's. People had to use their imaginations to entertain themselves. And I think this helped the wrestlers in that time period. There was no Twitter for them to post on every day and in the process humanize themselves. There was mystery around wrestlers back then due to how different society was back then. More over the top personalities and characters. That's just not how people are brought up these days.


Plus drugs.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> Plus drugs.


Hahahaha. Great point. 100%. :hbk1


----------



## llj

It was the fifth lowest RAW viewing number in history, just up from last week which was fourth lowest.

Make no mistake, yesterday's numbers are a disaster considering what they tried to do


----------



## ClintDagger

A-C-P said:


> My point is there is plenty of talented guys on their roster between Raw, SD, NXT, 205 Live etc. The talent is not the problem. How the talent has been used, developed, the booking, the writing, etc are WAY bigger problem. The WWE has access to the best available pro-wrestling talent the world has to offer, outside of a couple of guys from Japan and Kenny Omega.
> 
> And my point is that right now what I am saying is a strawman argument, I wish it was possible for it not to be a strawman argument so people can finally see how useless this argument over the body type of talents that keeps happening is, with the strawman excuse being invalid.


Keeping everything else the same, does a 5’9” 180 lbs Steve Austin or a 6’0” 205 lbs Hulk Hogan do the exact same or better business than what we saw in reality?


----------



## Isuzu

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Vince, Roman, Kofi and Bryan all on Raw and ratings stayed exactly the same. Here's a suggestion and it might sound crazy but maybe its time to push charismatic wrestlers who can actually cut a promo.


Here's one.. Maybe Rollins should actually follow his own advice and give a damn and maybe work extra on getting a charisma/personality. Im sure he reads comments and social media and knows what the critics are saying, but he probably has HHH blowing smoke up his as telling him how great he is, so he doesn't bother to work on improving anything.


----------



## Chrome

Well, at least all 3 hours stayed above 2 million:










Too bad it took the Raw roster and like 6 people from SDL to do it.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Isuzu said:


> Roman Reigns is a draw...
> 
> Most watched on YT so far:
> Roman invades RAW - 959k
> Kofi vs Dbry - 828k
> Samoe Joe meets Rey's son - 825k


Main eventing 4 WM's in a row gets him 100k more YT views than a buried mid-carder meeting Rey Mysterio's son. That's actually pathetic.


----------



## WrestlingOracle

Showstopper said:


> I was with you until you said they're going to open up more NXTs. I'd be shocked. Especially with their last quarterly report not being great. They have to continue to make billions. Who would even be in charge of more NXTs?


Not to mention, that astronomical money would all be a sunk cost if the objective is improved ratings (which is all that'd be left, considering WWE's single world-class performance center is already a farm system inofitself.) The ratings are a result of an extremely inefficient infrastructure (what thriving creative endeavor in history has been spearheaded by an insane, autocratic man in his 70s?) and a failure to follow current trends. 

Badass/cool, yet relatable, superheroes on the silver screen and complex, compelling storytelling on tv ie: Breaking Bad and GOT breaking records). I don't remember one intricate story WWE has told since Bryan vs. Authority 5-6 years ago, which inofitself was a serendipity and WWE's current idea of a badass is a woman who calls herself the man while scowling and switching between her natural voice and a forced deep one that sounds like a failed Skyrim audition.

It's not people it's presentation. Mick Foley is one of the best all-around talents the biz has seen and this product rendered him as a GM nothing but a pointless buffoon.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE




----------



## Isuzu

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Main eventing 4 WM's in a row gets him 100k more YT views than a buried mid-carder meeting Rey Mysterio's son. That's actually pathetic.


Hey, a Win is a Win.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

A Vince appearance no longer matters. Vince makes a return and he can't bump them to a respectable rating. Roman and Bryan show up rumored or announced and they can't even do it.

3rd hour almost went under two million again. Good fucking lord, the summer is going to be brutal.


----------



## Isuzu

WINNING said:


> A Vince appearance no longer matters. Vince makes a return and he can't bump them to a respectable rating. Roman and Bryan show up rumored or announced and they can't even do it.
> 
> 3rd hour almost went under two million again. Good fucking lord, the summer is going to be brutal.


Its what happens when you dont have a "Closer". WWE needs mega stars really badly. Vince needs Connor McGregor type star power or even CM Punk.


----------



## A-C-P

ClintDagger said:


> Keeping everything else the same, does a 5’9” 180 lbs Steve Austin or a 6’0” 205 lbs Hulk Hogan do the exact same or better business than what we saw in reality?


in 1996 no, in 2019 yes. You can keep repeating this and the fact is going to keep remaining ITS NOT THE 1990s anymore.

In today's climate if you give me a guy thats 5'9'' 180 with the exact same abilities, charisma, booking, stories etc as Austin and a 6' 205lbs guy with all the same credentials, etc as Hogan would be the best guys for WWE's business. The most popular "Star" the WWE has created in the past 10 years is 5'8'' 200 lbs (Daniel Bryan) and just about everyone bought into him as a star. The second biggest star in the WWE in the past 10 years was 6'1'' 210 (CM Punk) and people bought into him.

Given what you are pushing Lashley, Corbin, McIntyre, Stroman etc should all be way more over than they are and be drawing way better than they are. But they are not b/c the show itself is AWFUL. The talent is so scripted and hindered by the people in charge it doesn't matter how talented they are, how large or larger than life they are, etc. And just changing out the current "indy darling" "small guys" talents for larger guys that can better "look badass" is akin to arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, as they say.

This post from another thread puts it perfectly as well:



Piehound said:


> WWE is kinda like a band that only know 3 chords a couple riffs and 1 beat. Yea, bands have been successful with that. But sooner or later it all their songs start to sound more or less the same.
> 
> That's kind of like what the WWE has become. Everything comes off as kind of the same. The "WWE formula" is just too visible everywhere from matches, to interviews, to plots, to feuds, to production and camera work, to everything to the point where nothing and nobody stands out anymore.
> 
> People are talking about big guys.. you got Braun, Lashley, Corbin, Drew, Lars, Rowen, Harper - who wanted out because even though he is a big bastard, with a unique look that can work a good matchm they can't figure out a spot for him, Killian who is sitting at home doing nothing, I think Jinder is still collecting a check.. Hell I'll even toss the Big Dawg in there even though I think he's smaller than any I listed.. you could probably even stretch that list to include Joe and Orton. In the words of Vince, "That's a lot of beef". The WWE has big guys but it still isn't drawing.. The WWE has little guys and it still isn't drawing..
> 
> The WWE machine is the problem IMO. It really doesn't matter what kind of talent or ideas you put in the machine - it all comes out the other end as the same ol "WWE Product".


----------



## llj

WWE now desperately trying to keep its numbers above 2.0M


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Vince's ego is going to take a hit from this knowing he no longer draws. He was on there for the first half hour of the show and no one gave a shit to tune in. That probably bothers him more than the talent not being draws.


----------



## Adam Cool

But people here said that Beck is a draw
Glad that that was put to rest


----------



## Isuzu

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Vince's ego is going to take a hit from this knowing he no longer draws. He was on there for the first half hour of the show and no one gave a shit to tune in. That probably bothers him more than the talent not being draws.


He was mixed in with a bunch of bland indy guys, im sure that didnt help


----------



## rbl85

Isuzu said:


> Hey, a Win is a Win.


How can you call that a win ?


----------



## Isuzu

rbl85 said:


> How can you call that a win ?


If you win by a game by 1 point or by 50 points, you still won, no?


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

Adam Cool said:


> But people here said that Beck is a draw
> Glad that that was put to rest


Not one person in that locker room is a draw and that is all on Vince McMahon. It's his fault that this has happened to this company dying. If he would put on shows that people would get invested in and actually push the right talent to top, then we wouldn't be in this situation. By the way, it's Becky and not Beck.


----------



## rbl85

Isuzu said:


> If you win by a game by 1 point or by 50 points, you still won, no?



Let me ask you a question ?

If during a war, thousands and thousands of soldiers died to recover one trench.

Would you called that a win or a loss knowing all it took to get that trench back ?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

This isn't anywhere near a 'win' for anyone. They threw everything they had against the wall, and BARELY beat last week's number. Last week was just a regular Raw where nothing happened and it pretty much drew the same number as last night's 'lets give them everything we have!" disaster.

:trips8


----------



## Adam Cool

Buffy The Vampire Slayer said:


> Not one person in that locker room is a draw and that is all on Vince McMahon. It's his fault that this has happened to this company dying. If he would put on shows that people would get invested in and actually push the right talent to top, then we wouldn't be in this situation. By the way, it's Becky and not Beck.


Roman Bryan and Seth Styles are relatively draws , compared to other era stars not really but they definitely move the needle more than anyone else in the company

And I recently was reading about Scientologist celebs so I mixed her up with that Singer


----------



## Isuzu

rbl85 said:


> Let me ask you a question ?
> 
> If during a war, thousands and thousands of soldiers died to recover one trench.
> 
> Would you called that a win or a loss knowing all it took to get that trench back ?


everyone that was on the show is a current contracted employee. they didn't bring in Connor, McGregor, Rock, Cena etc.... Your analogy would apply if Vince brought in the mega stars he had to sign and brought them in yesterday for that purpose. he did not. He used what he had and it moved the needle upwards.

FYI i dont believe anyone died trying to increase the viewership of Raw.


----------



## A-C-P

Isuzu said:


> everyone that was on the show is a current contracted employee. they didn't bring in Connor, McGregor, Rock, Cena etc.... Your analogy would apply if Vince brought in the mega stars he had to sign and brought them in yesterday for that purpose. he did not. He used what he had and it moved the needle upwards.
> *
> FYI i dont believe anyone died trying to increase the viewership of Raw.*


False: Rambling Rabbit Died :mj2
@Lizard King;


----------



## DoolieNoted

people still trying to defend this clusterfuck company.. :chlol


----------



## Isuzu

A-C-P said:


> False: Rambling Rabbit Died :mj2
> @Lizard King;


Ouch , got me there. RIP Rabbit. Your sacrifice helped increase the raw viewership!


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

Buffy The Vampire Slayer said:


> Not one person in that locker room is a draw and that is all on Vince McMahon. It's his fault that this has happened to this company dying. If he would put on shows that people would get invested in and actually push the right talent to top, then we wouldn't be in this situation. By the way, it's Becky and not Beck.


She's a strange case. Arguably the most popular act they have with the live crowds, seems to sell tons of merch, yet her advertised segments seem to lose viewers at a disproportionately high rate. I'm not saying it's her fault, her booking during the RTWM was absolutely atrocious, and from what I've heard she's barely done anything since Mania. The evidence is there that she's not great for numbers though, and I say this as a fan. 

Anyway, I guess a 1 point win is still a win, right? They threw everything at it, and they got the slightest of boosts I guess. Taking a painkiller when you need an operation is is never good for the future though. It's going to get much worse before it gets better.


----------



## Isuzu

DulyNoted said:


> people still trying to defend this clusterfuck company.. :chlol


Winning cures everything. Today is a win, regardless of everyone trying to be a debbie downer. Now they need to continue to build from here


----------



## rbl85

Isuzu said:


> everyone that was on the show is a current contracted employee. they didn't bring in Connor, McGregor, Rock, Cena etc.... Your analogy would apply if Vince brought in the mega stars he had to sign and brought them in yesterday for that purpose. he did not. He used what he had and it moved the needle upwards.
> 
> *FYI i dont believe anyone died trying to increase the viewership of Raw.*


Thankfully XD

Vince bring the best wrestlers he have under contract and it did the same numbers than last week.


----------



## The XL 2

They combined Raw and Smackdowns roster, heavily advertised Roman Reigns and had McMahon on the show and it barely did better than last week. Ouch.

As far as the roster vs booking debate, the booking is the worse of the problems, but this roster is honestly garbage. Most people don't care about high spot workers who are small with zero charisma. As far as matches go, most people prefer 80s/90s/early to mid 2000s style over choreographed high spot wrestling that has no logic, consequence, or suspense to it. This is the worst roster they've ever had, at least 94/95 WWF had guys like Shawn, Bret, Razor, Diesel, Sid, Taker, etc. I mean this company now has Bryan, Kofi, Reigns, and Becky on top. Good lord.


----------



## llj

Quite honestly, I don't think any of our suggestions here will move the needle for them. I suspect the real answer is that the audience they are chasing just isn't there anymore--UFC, changing attitudes in culture, social media influence, better quality programs with better word of mouth--all of these things now are eating away at the WWE and I'm not sure there's anything they can do about it anymore. There isn't a big boom period waiting around the corner, at least not in the way the WWE is currently structured. Wrestling is a niche product more than ever now and many of those fans are increasingly looking elsewhere for a product that better suits their tastes. If you're a young red blooded male, why watch "fake" fighting when the UFC offers the real thing? And hell, the other excuse--character--well UFC provide just as many characters--better ones, even--than the WWE. The storylines are more organic too. And if you're a wrestling geek/purist who loves workrate, the WWE is the last thing you'd watch, even with Rollins/Bryan/Styles. NJPW provides better workrate--none of Styles' WWE matches have come even close to his most average NJPW match. The indies provide a more hardcore experience in terms of bloodshedding and "attitude". If you're a fan of women's wrestling, there is Stardom, Impact, Ice Ribbon, Shimmer etc all of which provide better matches, characters, booking, entertainment.

It's really difficult to see who the WWE is exactly appealing to these days. It seems like only one man. And unfortunately for him, very few people share the same tastes as that one man.

The WWE is too big now for an audience that's gotten way too small to support a company this size. It's akin to McDonalds suddenly having to deal with a customer base now more akin to Burger King's. Cuts will have to be made. People will have to be let go. NXT may need a rethink. Inevitably when this happens to a big company, they can't deal with the fact that they have to downsize and potentially let people go to competitors. All the hoarding they've done isn't helping matters. If they sign someone, they need to actually use them. How many dollars do they waste just signing as many people as they can without using many of them? I'd have to guess somewhere in the millions. And those low salaries they've managed to con their workforce into accepting is a powder keg waiting to blow up in the year 2019. All it takes is a few wrestlers on a major platform (Colbert, Noah, Oliver, Kimmel etc) to blow the horn, and the WWE will then have to do things like pay their women closer to the men, provide guarantees/health benefits, etc,.


----------



## DammitChrist

The roster they have today isn’t even close to being the worst (let alone ‘horrible”) :lmao


----------



## Isuzu

llj said:


> Quite honestly, I don't think any of our suggestions here will move the needle for them. I suspect the real answer is that the audience they are chasing just isn't there anymore--UFC, changing attitudes in culture, social media influence, better quality programs with better word of mouth--all of these things now are eating away at the WWE and I'm not sure there's anything they can do about it anymore. There isn't a big boom period waiting around the corner, at least not in the way the WWE is currently structured. Wrestling is a niche product more than ever now and many of those fans are increasingly looking elsewhere for a product that better suits their tastes. If you're a young red blooded male, why watch "fake" fighting when the UFC offers the real thing? And hell, the other excuse--character--well UFC provide just as many characters--better ones, even--than the WWE. The storylines are more organic too. If you're a wrestling geek/purist, the WWE is the last thing you'd watch. NJPW provides better workrate. The indies provide a more hardcore experience in terms of bloodshedding and "attitude". If you're a fan of women's wrestling, there is Stardom, Impact, Shimmer etc all of which provide better matches, characters, booking, entertainment.
> 
> It's really difficult to see who the WWE is exactly appealing to these days. It seems like only one man. And unfortunately for him, very few people share the same tastes as that one man.
> 
> The WWE is too big now for an audience that's gotten way too small to support a company this size. It's akin to McDonalds suddenly having to deal with a customer base now more akin to Burger King's. Cuts will have to be made. People will have to be let go. Inevitably when this happens to a big company, they can't deal with the fact that they have to downsize and potentially let people go to competitors. All the hoarding they've done isn't helping matters. If they sign someone, they need to actually use them. How many dollars do they waste just signing as many people as they can without using many of them? I'd have to guess somewhere in the millions. And those low salaries they've managed to con their workforce into accepting is a powder keg waiting to blow up in the year 2019.



Yet company like AEW believes they will succeed catering to an even smaller niche audience. WWE needs to start somewhere and start building larger than life stars.


----------



## Wynter

Lol at the bar being set lower and lower. Can't believe a small bump like this has to be taken as a victory now and days. When your desperate hail Mary episode results in a small temporary bump. And said bump ended up being useless anyways because a lot checked out when they realized the show was still dog shit? 

That's a problem. 


No " victory" is going to change the fact that this company is flirting with under 2 million viewers for their A show :lmao

None of our favorites are draws. At most they are ill fitted plugs on a leaking ship. 

And its down to the incompetence of one man :shrug


----------



## DoolieNoted

A-C-P said:


> False: Rambling Rabbit Died :mj2
> @Lizard King;


Harrowing footage of his final moment has surfaced online.










RIP


----------



## DammitChrist

Yep, the ratings are STILL shitty. This week was definitely not a “win” :lol

Plus, none of our suggestions are going to stop the viewership from decreasing, and there’s nobody (including just about any part-timer) who’s going to save the ratings as long as the shows continue to suck.

It’s okay though. At least Vince thinks he’s a “genius” :bosque


----------



## HankHill_85

I'd like to think the numbers could further improve if they put their best foot forward and had these people actually wrestle, like Zayn and Lynch, and stopped the cringey "comedy" bits with the Usos and Revival and, once again, made them actually wrestle.

Talking, talking, talking, and even more talking, loses its entertainment value when everything has already been said.


----------



## llj

Isuzu said:


> Yet company like AEW believes they will succeed catering to an even smaller niche audience. WWE needs to start somewhere and start building larger than life stars.



AEW won't be huge. But if they keep the company from being bloated and spend within reason, they'll be a success. The problem with the WWE is that they are failing because they are so damned big and spend so much and get these increasingly pathetic returns for a company this size. The Saudi and TV deals are the greatest smokescreens the WWE has right now shielding them from even worse criticism. If Vince doesn't negotiate the Saudi deal successfully, the WWE would be in serious trouble.


----------



## AlternateDemise

DammitC said:


> The roster they have today isn’t even close to being the worst (let alone ‘horrible”) :lmao


Nah, it's definitely one of their worst.


----------



## Isuzu

llj said:


> AEW won't be huge. But if they keep the company from being bloated and spend within reason, they'll be a success. The problem with the WWE is that they are failing because they are so damned big and spend so much and get these increasingly pathetic returns for a company this size. The Saudi and TV deals are the greatest smokescreens the WWE has right now shielding them from even worse criticism. If Vince doesn't negotiate the Saudi deal successfully, the WWE would be in serious trouble.


Well just wait until they announce the deal with Iran.. big money$$$ deal coming! Vince is a genius!


----------



## ClintDagger

A-C-P said:


> in 1996 no, in 2019 yes. You can keep repeating this and the fact is going to keep remaining ITS NOT THE 1990s anymore.
> 
> In today's climate if you give me a guy thats 5'9'' 180 with the exact same abilities, charisma, booking, stories etc as Austin and a 6' 205lbs guy with all the same credentials, etc as Hogan would be the best guys for WWE's business. The most popular "Star" the WWE has created in the past 10 years is 5'8'' 200 lbs (Daniel Bryan) and just about everyone bought into him as a star. The second biggest star in the WWE in the past 10 years was 6'1'' 210 (CM Punk) and people bought in
> 
> Given what you are pushing Lashley, Corbin, McIntyre, Stroman etc should all be way more over than they are and be drawing way better than they are. But they are not b/c the show itself is AWFUL. The talent is so scripted and hindered by the people in charge it doesn't matter how talented they are, how large or larger than life they are, etc. And just changing out the current "indy darling" "small guys" talents for larger guys that can better "look badass" is akin to arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, as they say.
> 
> This post from another thread puts it perfectly as well:


Part of Austin’s appeal is that he looked the part. That matters in 1996 and 2019. If he looks like Sami Zayn, it doesn’t work. You say times have changed and that wrestlers that look like fans is what’s “in” in 2019. But if that’s the case, then why is business tanking harder than ever? I agree that you can’t just take a big body and assume it will draw. And I’d certainly rather have a CM Punk than a Bobby Lashley. But I think it’s important that wrestlers look like threats. A lot of guys that are in that top mix right now don’t look like heavyweight threats. It’s not the only problem for sure, but it shouldn’t be ignored.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Vince Russo's reaction to these ratings:


----------



## Randy Lahey

It’s definitely the worst roster at the top of the card based on charisma and looks.

Sure there’s lot of work rate geeks in the company vs the early 90s, but even the Doink the Clown era had better characters than today. Undertaker and Yokozuna were far bigger stars than anyone today


----------



## DammitChrist

AlternateDemise said:


> Nah, it's definitely one of their worst.


I’m pretty sure that this is one of the most talented/stacked rosters that the company has had in quite a while. Unfortunately, they’re stuck in a period where Vince (along with the creative team) are at their worst in terms of booking.

Again, this roster is not even close to being the worst.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

DammitC said:


> I’m pretty sure that this is one of the most talented/stacked rosters that the company has had in quite a while. Unfortunately, they’re stuck in a period where Vince (along with the creative team) are at their worst in terms of booking.
> 
> Again, this roster is not even close to being the worst.


The roster isn't bad. Unfortunately they bury all the talented guys and only push the charisma vacuums like Seth, Reigns, AJ, Drew.


----------



## DammitChrist

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> The roster isn't bad. Unfortunately they bury all the talented guys and only push the charisma vacuums like Seth, Reigns, AJ, Drew.


Except that Seth Rollins and AJ Styles actually possess charisma out of those names you mentioned :lol

Implying that both men aren’t talented though :mj4


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

DammitC said:


> Except that Seth Rollins and AJ Styles actually possess charisma out of those names you mentioned :lol
> 
> Implying that both men aren’t talented though :mj4


If Seth didn't flip you would hate him just as much as Reigns and Drew lol. He's the same exact guy except he flips.


----------



## WrestlingOracle

BTW, how bad is this ship going to sink once early fall rolls around and we have meaningful baseball games and NFL in full swing :maury


----------



## SPCDRI

WrestlingOracle said:


> BTW, how bad is this ship going to sink once early fall rolls around and we have meaningful baseball games and NFL in full swing :maury


September and October playoff hunt and playoff baseball and MNF. Goodbye, RAW! Nice knowing you


----------



## Mordecay

They stopped the bleeding for one week, but next week is a taped show and I don't know which competititon they will get, so that will be interesting


----------



## Jedah

^^Nope, they're still bleeding. They did BARELY better than last week, and that's after they pulled out all the stops they could (and created an all-time horrendous show because of it, by the way).

It's like Rome losing another battle to the Goths in the late Empire and then saying "well....at least we didn't get massacred as badly as we did at Adrianople in 378!"

That's what this is. It really feels like the fall of an empire.

Another historical analogy this is all reminding me of is Britain in 1940 when one of the people in Parliament told Chamberlain "for the love of God, go!" This after the German blitzkrieg in the west.

It's beyond obvious where the big problem is. Last night's shit show, which he definitely got way more involved in than usual, showed it yet again. VINCE MUST GO. *WWE needs new leadership desperately.*

Who's going to be that Churchill to Vince's Chamberlain? Triple H will be an OK caretaker as in the programming likely won't be atrocious like it is now, but he's likely not the guy to lead the company into a renaissance. If and when that leader comes, it's probably from outside the McMahon family.



llj said:


> If you're a young red blooded male, why watch "fake" fighting when the UFC offers the real thing? And hell, the other excuse--character--well UFC provide just as many characters--better ones, even--than the WWE.


UFC has been in decline too. It reached its highs in the mid 2000s then enjoyed a spike in 2014-2015 due to Rousey and McGregor, but outside of them they're not what they used to be either, though not hemorrhaging like WWE is.


----------



## llj

The fact is no stunt will bring this product up quality wise. It will take time and patience and dedicated booking with long term thought put into it and that's not what Vince has in him.

I don't know if the viewers they've lost will ever come back. Start pumping out a quality program and the best they can do is probably level off at their current numbers at 2.1 to 2.4s instead of lower. But it's really the only choice they have now


----------



## Rick Sanchez

In terms of mic skills, one of the worst rosters they've had. Probably only the New Gen days had a worst one.

In terms of in-ring ability, there's plenty of good talent there.


----------



## DammitChrist

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> If Seth didn't flip you would hate him just as much as Reigns and Drew lol. He's the same exact guy except he flips.


You’re going to have to make better assumptions than that then because I don’t even hate Drew McIntyre. 

I think he’s fine as a talent. His weakness is that he lacks some charisma. Even though I’m not really a big fan of McIntyre, I don’t really mind watching him though.


----------



## Jedah

How many people actually get to be themselves on the mic?

They give the wrestlers these horrendous scripts and then they have to recite them. A few guys can make it work - Miz, Joe, Bryan to an extent, but they're few and far between. Whenever he comes up, watch them give Dream a horrendous script that takes away most of what he is. He might be able to get it over on sheer charisma alone, but he'll have a handicap.

If Austin and Rock were given today's scripts, they'd probably be less than half as over as they were.


----------



## raymond1985

Jedah said:


> If Austin and Rock were given today's scripts, they'd probably be less than half as over as they were.


But still more over than Rollins, Bryan or anyone else.


----------



## Ashley Whittle

Rick Sanchez said:


> In terms of mic skills, one of the worst rosters they've had. Probably only the New Gen days had a worst one.
> 
> In terms of in-ring ability, there's plenty of good talent there.


Therein lies the problem. Ratings do not care about in-ring ability, only fans care about that. But, almost all WWE fans are loyal to the brand and wouldn't ever stop watching the product, no matter how shitty it gets. It's sort of like the Simpsons in 2019... fans of that show desperately try to defend it despite the steep decline , and they almost continue to watch just because they've done so for decades... remind you of anything?


----------



## Erramayhem89

Randy Lahey said:


> It’s definitely the worst roster at the top of the card based on charisma and looks.
> 
> Sure there’s lot of work rate geeks in the company vs the early 90s, but even the Doink the Clown era had better characters than today. Undertaker and Yokozuna were far bigger stars than anyone today


The Undertaker and them music in the 90's alone was better than everything they have now. Nobody gives a fuk about dudes like Roman Reigns, Bobby Lashely, Drew, Lars etc because they aren't an attraction.


----------



## Seafort

There is no quick fix for them, any more than there was for the WWF in 1996 or WCW in 2000. 

What is required now is a fundamental rethink of how they portray characters, with an eye on building unique characters that are carried as stars - both current talent and future talent.


----------



## DammitChrist

raymond1985 said:


> But still more over than Rollins, Bryan or anyone else.


You don't know that for sure though. You're really underestimating today's toxic climate in the WWE with their shitty booking :lol

That's assuming both men even get to keep their characters and cut promos.


----------



## ClintDagger

DammitC said:


> You don't know that for sure though. You're really underestimating today's toxic climate in the WWE with their shitty booking :lol
> 
> That's assuming both men even get to keep their characters and cut promos.


Yeah they’d be the ringmaster and Rocky Maivia. But who knows, they might still be the biggest stars even at that.


----------



## raymond1985

DammitC said:


> You don't know that for sure though. You're really underestimating today's toxic climate in the WWE with their shitty booking :lol
> 
> That's assuming both men even get to keep their characters and cut promos.


Austin and Rock had natural charisma and both had a good look. They both grew into being clever politicians as well. They were alpha males. They thus had natural advantages over the likes of Rollins and Bryan. Rollins has a decent look, but is dull as dishwater. Bryan has a terrible look and is average at best on the mic. 

You are overlooking how much better Austin, Rock, Savage, etc were than Bryan, Rollins, etc. Had Bryan and Rollins received the same support, booking, etc that those wrestlers had in their day, I still seriously doubt they would draw as much money. 

I fail to see how Bryan, Rollins, etc have more marketability than the stars of yesterday. Regardless of era, booking, etc.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1125816834169757696


----------



## SPCDRI

Women are going to be blamed for the tanked ratings, and maybe their quarter hours could suck chrome off a trailer hitch, I don't know. What I do know is that when the company was desperate to pop a good rating, the women were in the back eating catering. The only thing that happened was a brief brawl segment, no matches. We'll see if the ratings go up after this wildcard ploy, cutting women's screen time to the bone, Vince appearing and a title match for Smackdown's belt on RAW juiced the ratings by...10 percent? They blew their load yet hour one was under 2.5 million and hour 3 was almost 2 million with a title match, and a good one, too.


----------



## ClintDagger

THE MAN said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1125816834169757696


Wow, that drop since 2014 is incredible.


----------



## Mear

The Shield era really is a failure as far as ratings and star power go, audiences literally running away from the product. So much for all those Brock Lesnar being a draw too. Seriously, you don't get that kind of fall just because the product " cool off ", the WWE did something wrong to the point that now, they can consider themselves lucky if Raw doesn't do less than 2 millions

Though, I do find it funny there was a little spike of interest from 2012 to 2013 because the same happened to me, left the product when they push that Bryan vs Punk feud and came back for Ryback


----------



## Deathiscoming

I for one am ECSTATIC about the product being once again saturated with men's wrestling:lol ..or in other words, a bunch of fucking women NOT saturating the whole fucking show, Raw or SDL. Thank you Vince! Saturate the damn show with AJ Styles, Daniel Bryan and Roman Reigns! Thank you Ronda for going away as well! :lol


----------



## Deathiscoming

raymond1985 said:


> Austin and Rock had natural charisma and both had a good look. They both grew into being clever politicians as well. They were alpha males. They thus had natural advantages over the likes of Rollins and Bryan. Rollins has a decent look, but is dull as dishwater. Bryan has a terrible look and is average at best on the mic.
> 
> You are overlooking how much better Austin, Rock, Savage, etc were than Bryan, Rollins, etc. Had Bryan and Rollins received the same support, booking, etc that those wrestlers had in their day, I still seriously doubt they would draw as much money.
> 
> I fail to see how Bryan, Rollins, etc have more marketability than the stars of yesterday. Regardless of era, booking, etc.


You are right about that. Rock, Austin were Alpha AF, through and through, even Kurt Angle to an extent once he gave up being goofy for a more intense character in 2002. 

I think Batista as well and the closest Alpha I can think of (in terms of look, demeanor, in-ring style, power) is Roman, though he needs to tweak his character a little and portray a more Stoic, Silent character.

But Rollins, Bryan, AJ? Just not Alpha.


----------



## The Wood

Phew, what a bounce back. Time to relax, everybody.


----------



## SPCDRI

5 years ago, both hours of Smackdown were north of 2.5 million almost every show. 5 years ago, if Smackdown was routinely sub 2.5 million and had gone under 2 million in 2014, people would have shit their pants and gone blind! Bear in mind that Smackdown used to be a taped show on a less popular network and on worse day of the week for television!


----------



## .christopher.

ClintDagger said:


> Wow, that drop since 2014 is incredible.


Not surprising. Fans wanted Bryan, Vince gave us the WOAT in Reigns instead.


----------



## .christopher.

Isuzu said:


> Hey, a Win is a Win.


It's not a win, though :lol

Reigns fans reaching big time. His push kills millions off but he's deemed a success because he stopped them from sinking to below 2mil and he has YouTube views. So desperate.


----------



## Jedah

SPCDRI said:


> Women are going to be blamed for the tanked ratings, and maybe their quarter hours could suck chrome off a trailer hitch, I don't know. What I do know is that when the company was desperate to pop a good rating, the women were in the back eating catering. The only thing that happened was a brief brawl segment, no matches. We'll see if the ratings go up after this wildcard ploy, cutting women's screen time to the bone, Vince appearing and a title match for Smackdown's belt on RAW juiced the ratings by...10 percent? They blew their load yet hour one was under 2.5 million and hour 3 was almost 2 million with a title match, and a good one, too.


It failed. Their ratings are still trash compared to even last month when the women were more prominent. Monday's show was the lowest non-holiday episode except the week before. I don't expect the trend to improve no matter what they do with the talent in the current format. All of it is just rearranging chairs on the Titanic. There's one thing and one thing only that could work, but Vince will never, ever consider it.


----------



## SPCDRI

Jedah said:


> It failed. Their ratings are still trash compared to even last month when the women were more prominent. Monday's show was the lowest non-holiday episode except the week before. I don't expect the trend to improve no matter what they do with the talent in the current format. All of it is just rearranging chairs on the Titanic. There's one thing and one thing only that could work, but Vince will never, ever consider it.


Retire and take his children with him? Nah, he'll never do it. Even though he looks and sounds worse and worse every time he shows up to lie through his teeth in an attempt to "pop" the "ratings."


----------



## Disputed

ClintDagger said:


> Wow, that drop since 2014 is incredible.


The bump around 2004-2005 was Cena/Batista and then you had a decade of Lolcenawins where ratings declined but quite gradually. Goes to show that just because something isn't very good doesn't mean it can't also get way worse


----------



## llj

It is understandable that ratings would fall gradually, and slowing the decline year by year is generally the goal. The freefall since about 6 months ago though has been like watching a trainwreck


----------



## SPCDRI

Disputed said:


> The bump around 2004-2005 was Cena/Batista and then you had a decade of Lolcenawins where ratings declined but quite gradually. Goes to show that just because somewhat isn't very good doesn't mean it can't also get way worse


SuperCena era had other stuff to back it up on RAW and Smackdown that did well with people like Edge, Christian, Batista, Kane, Brock Lesnar, Chris Jericho, The Hardys, people from ECW, Undertaker, Triple H, Rey Mysterio, Ric Flair, Randy Orton giving a crap, The Rock wrestling some matches, Shawn Michaels, CM Punk and people like that. Yeah, John Cena not losing clean on television or PPV for literally over a year at a time was nauseating, but there was enough other interesting stuff happening on both shows that you could just ignore the Cena garbage.

That period of time wasn't flying, but it was "falling with style." They didn't need to spend the last 5 years crashing out so hard that they lost nearly half their friggin' audience.


----------



## thelastpope16

From 2012 to 2014 wwe had the rock back and the best storyline this decade with Bryan vs the authority

Ratings peaked again in 2018 with Rousey coming to WWE

It's funny how so many people here blame small guys, but who got the super push in 2015 when ratings started to decline rapidly

I was told by many old timers as well as wwe itself that Roman was going to be this big star and was the only guy who could bring in the causal audience, I'm still waiting

Just so people understand how much this is Roman's fault, since 2015

Roman has Main evented 70% of live events he was in 

Roman has main evented 4 wrestlemanias

Roman has had 3 times as many AE style matches then the next guy

Roman has been the only male to hit evil Stephanie

Roman has hit Vince multiple times

Roman has been giving the most peak time slots on Raw (aka open the show or top of the hour timeslot matches)

Roman has main evented the most ppv since 2014 (full time wrestlers)

But keep blaming Rollins, Bryan, AJ, Becky and Kofi 

Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk


----------



## thelastpope16

To add to my last post

Remember when Dolph won SS 2014 and WWE did nothing with it because he would have got in Romans way

Remember when Dean was hot in fall 2014 and went to do a movie came back and WWE did nothing with him leading to WM 31 because he would have got in Roman's way

Remember when Bryan came back in 2015 and they dumped him out of the RR 10 minutes in because he would have got in Roman's way

Remember in RR 2015 they didn't let Roman interact with any faces so he wouldn't get booed

Remember when wwe had a poll of " who should ME Mania 31, Bryan or Roman" and Bryan beat him with 87%

Remember when wwe had to team Dean up with Roman in the summer of 2015 to get him cheered

Remember when Dean was hot in 2016 leading up to mania with triple h and they switched him with Roman

Remember when Seth came back from injury with a hero's welcome and WWE turned him heel to get Roman over

Remember in 2017 when Seth was super over and they put him back in the shield to help get Roman over

Remember in 2018 when Seth was hot again and WWE put him back in the shield to get Roman over

Again let's keep blaming Seth, AJ, Bryan, Becky and Kofi 

Edit - forget to add what WWE did to Braun because of Roman and how Brock held the title hostage for a combined 3 years to get Roman cheered and in the end none of it worked

To older fans what they did with Roman is the equivalent of in 2002 wwe pushed Test as the top guy and screwed over Cena, batista , Orton, edge, Jericho, Benoit, Eddie, angle, hhh and many others for 5 years than pushed the guys above after losing 2 million viewers


----------



## Zappers

WWE has many problems. But there's some real easy fixes that are no brainers.

Go back to RAW being 2 hours for one thing. But we all know the commercial revenue will not allow them to do that. But whatever, that will help. Stop with the consent repeat showings of what happened earlier in the night. Save precious time with cutting that down some.

Try following logic. Anybody check on how many women tag matches they had on TV/PPV combined since Bayley/Sasha won the first ever tag titles? ...7 .... SEVEN!!! This is just one example of poor booking. Btw, nobody is convince me any different. The women tag titles were invented to shut Sasha/Bayley mouths because they were complaining while Ronda/Charlotte/Becky were taking all the airtime for several months.

And lastly, said it before. Keep things secret as much as possible. Example, Roman showing up on RAW was not a secret, in fact it was promoted for an entire week. But Bryan was a surprise. We need more of stuff like this imho.


----------



## ClintDagger

thelastpope16 said:


> To add to my last post
> 
> Remember when Dolph won SS 2014 and WWE did nothing with it because he would have got in Romans way
> 
> Remember when Dean was hot in fall 2014 and went to do a movie came back and WWE did nothing with him leading to WM 31 because he would have got in Roman's way
> 
> Remember when Bryan came back in 2015 and they dumped him out of the RR 10 minutes in because he would have got in Roman's way
> 
> Remember in RR 2015 they didn't let Roman interact with any faces so he wouldn't get booed
> 
> Remember when wwe had a poll of " who should ME Mania 31, Bryan or Roman" and Bryan beat him with 87%
> 
> Remember when wwe had to team Dean up with Roman in the summer of 2015 to get him cheered
> 
> Remember when Dean was hot in 2016 leading up to mania with triple h and they switched him with Roman
> 
> Remember when Seth came back from injury with a hero's welcome and WWE turned him heel to get Roman over
> 
> Remember in 2017 when Seth was super over and they put him back in the shield to help get Roman over
> 
> Remember in 2018 when Seth was hot again and WWE put him back in the shield to get Roman over
> 
> Again let's keep blaming Seth, AJ, Bryan, Becky and Kofi
> 
> Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk


Seth, AJ, Bryan, Becky, Kofi, et al are getting blamed because the ratings nose dived in the 4 months leading up to WM in a way never before seen. The few episodes immediately after RR where they had Becky in seemingly every other segment was a total disaster. At least during the Roman years the RTWM saw a decent bump coming out of football season. This year there was no bump at all except for when Batista was heavily advertised. Roman was a total failure especially based on what they invested in him. That’s a given. But a WM built around Kofi, Seth, and Becky all getting their moment to shine was roundly rejected during the run up to and coming out of WM. I’m all for giving Roman his share of blame for the years from 2014-18, but Becky/Seth/Kofi are even bigger disasters-which shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone.


----------



## SPCDRI

Its not just Reigns, its the idea that Brock Lesnar was going to get Roman Reigns over. I bet Vinny-Mac sounded like George Lucas talking about Jar Jar Binks with this shit. "Brock/Reigns is the key to all this!" 

They made Brock so over the top for 3 years to make it a big deal for Reigns to beat him. Lesnar was basically the champion for like, 700 days and Roman Reigns didn't even beat him clean! Before Reigns finally got his "big moment" at SummerSlam, he beat Reigns twice and ragdolled Samoa Joe and Braun Strowman and they never recovered from that loser-stink. 

They want Reigns to be the definitive "beast slayer" so badly that they didn't even put Rollins over clean in a good match. Watching Lesnar run over the entire roster with the only person presented as a threat to him losing again and again to him was completely crippling to the roster. Its not that WWE's men are small or "indy ballerinas" or anything like that, its just that they all were in the midcard either losing clean to one another all the time or getting squashed by Roman Reigns and Brock Lesnar for almost 3 years that makes every man on the roster feel like chump change.


----------



## thelastpope16

ClintDagger said:


> Seth, AJ, Bryan, Becky, Kofi, et al are getting blamed because the ratings nose dived in the 4 months leading up to WM in a way never before seen. The few episodes immediately after RR where they had Becky in seemingly every other segment was a total disaster. At least during the Roman years the RTWM saw a decent bump coming out of football season. This year there was no bump at all except for when Batista was heavily advertised. Roman was a total failure especially based on what they invested in him. That’s a given. But a WM built around Kofi, Seth, and Becky all getting their moment to shine was roundly rejected during the run up to and coming out of WM. I’m all for giving Roman his share of blame for the years from 2014-18, but Becky/Seth/Kofi are even bigger disasters-which shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone.


Rating with Reigns have been nosediving 12-15 % each year since his main event push(basically losing 300k each Rtwm) 

Rough estimate RTWM

2017 2.9 million (raw)

2018 3.1 million (raw) with Rousey

2018 2.7 million (raw) estimate without Rousey 

2019 2.5 million (raw)

2019 2.3 million (raw) after Rousey left

Basically the drop would have been the same if Rousey never showed up in WWE , but because she helped rating in 2018 the decline looks steeper

The fact that wwe thinks putting Roman on both shows is going to save them is so unbelievable laughable, Roman is the biggest failure since Hbks run in 1996 


Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk


----------



## ClintDagger

thelastpope16 said:


> Rating with Reigns have been nosediving 12-15 % each year since his main event push(basically losing 300k each Rtwm)
> 
> Rough estimate RTWM
> 
> 2017 2.9 million (raw)
> 
> 2018 3.1 million (raw) with Rousey
> 
> 2018 2.7 million (raw) estimate without Rousey
> 
> 2019 2.5 million (raw)
> 
> 2019 2.3 million (raw) after Rousey left
> 
> Basically the drop would have been the same if Rousey never showed up in WWE , but because she helped rating in 2018 the decline looks steeper
> 
> The fact that wwe thinks putting Roman on both shows is going to save them is so unbelievable laughable, Roman is the biggest failure since Hbks run in 1996
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk


I’m very critical of Roman and can’t argue against anything you said apart from I’m skeptical that last year’s bump had that much to do with Ronda. However, that really wasn’t my point. I was more looking at the Fall ratings trend into January, to what happens immediately after the RR. The bump was basically non existent. And Roman was gone for pretty much all of that. That was a real indictment of who they were featuring coming out of RR.


----------



## thelastpope16

4 weeks leading to Roman's announcement (2.5 million) 

4 weeks after Roman left (2.4 million) 

The ratings our skewed during fall/winter became of the Christmas +new years eve shows doing 1.7 million 

Edit - January ratings were 2.5 million (minus new years eve show) 


Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk


----------



## ClintDagger

thelastpope16 said:


> 4 weeks leading to Roman's announcement (2.5 million)
> 
> 4 weeks after Roman left (2.4 million)
> 
> The ratings our skewed during fall/winter became of the Christmas +new years eve shows doing 1.7 million
> 
> Edit - January ratings were 2.5 million (minus new years eve show)
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk


So no bump in January after football ends. That illustrates my point. Then if I remember right the post RR Raw barely goes up, maybe does 2.7 MM, and by the next one they are back to 2.5 MM.


----------



## thelastpope16

ClintDagger said:


> So no bump in January after football ends. That illustrates my point. Then if I remember right the post RR Raw barely goes up, maybe does 2.7 MM, and by the next one they are back to 2.5 MM.


2019

Last raw before RR (2.4 million)

Raw after RR (2.7 million)

One week after RR (2.5 million) 

2017

Last raw before RR (3.3 million)

Raw after RR (3.6 million)

One week after RR (3.2 million)


It's basically the same bump, but with less of a audience, 2018 is skewed because of Raw25 

Only 3 years this decade did the RTWM out perform the year before 

2012 (the Rock) 

2014 (Bryan vs The Authority) 

2018 (Ronda Rousey) 


Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk


----------



## ClintDagger

thelastpope16 said:


> 2019
> 
> Last raw before RR (2.4 million)
> 
> Raw after RR (2.7 million)
> 
> One week after RR (2.5 million)
> 
> 2017
> 
> Last raw before RR (3.3 million)
> 
> Raw after RR (3.6 million)
> 
> One week after RR (3.2 million)
> 
> 
> It's basically the same bump, but with less of a audience, 2018 is skewed because of Raw25
> 
> Only 3 years this decade did the RTWM out perform the year before
> 
> 2012 (the Rock)
> 
> 2014 (Bryan vs The Authority)
> 
> 2018 (Ronda Rousey)
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk


Still missing the point. You illustrated yourself that the Fall viewership for 2018 was in the 2.4MM to 2.5MM range. Which is pretty much what is was on the RTWM for 2019.

Go back to Fall 2017 and the ratings are solidly sub 3MM. But they spike above 3MM for the RTWM in 2018. This year’s trend is one I don’t think we’ve seen before.


----------



## thelastpope16

ClintDagger said:


> Still missing the point. You illustrated yourself that the Fall viewership for 2018 was in the 2.4MM to 2.5MM range. Which is pretty much what is was on the RTWM for 2019.
> 
> 
> 
> Go back to Fall 2017 and the ratings are solidly sub 3MM. But they spike above 3MM for the RTWM in 2018. This year’s trend is one I don’t think we’ve seen before.


Why each year January peaked

2011 - 2012 - 2013 the rock returned 

2014 - return of batista, Cm Punk quitting, rise of Bryan

2015 - return of Bryan, controversial Rumble finish, east coast snowstorm

2016- return of the Golden shovel (triple h as champ)

2017 - Goldberg returns

2018 - raw25, Ronda Rousey

2019- nothing happened, batista returned in the end of February which peaked the RTWM

This is what happens when you depend on over the hill wrestlers and controversy for wrestlemania season

9 years and 7 were depended on part-timers 

Edit - wwe is where it's at because of terrible storylines, depends on part-timer and a super push of a mediocre talent in Reigns 

Guess what everybody, come January wwe will super push Reigns and charlotte again, my best guess is Reigns is fighting Goldberg in the Main event of next years mania 

Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk


----------



## Isuzu

Viewers want more Ronda Rousey, Brock Lesnar and Connor McGregor= ratings back over 4 million


----------



## Soul Rex

thelastpope16 said:


> Rating with Reigns have been nosediving 12-15 % each year since his main event push(basically losing 300k each Rtwm)
> 
> Rough estimate RTWM
> 
> 2017 2.9 million (raw)
> 
> 2018 3.1 million (raw) with Rousey
> 
> 2018 2.7 million (raw) estimate without Rousey
> 
> 2019 2.5 million (raw)
> 
> 2019 2.3 million (raw) after Rousey left
> 
> Basically the drop would have been the same if Rousey never showed up in WWE , but because she helped rating in 2018 the decline looks steeper
> 
> The fact that wwe thinks putting Roman on both shows is going to save them is so unbelievable laughable, Roman is the biggest failure since Hbks run in 1996
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk


RTWM 2019 got the worst rating ever and it continued the decline while Ronda was
focal point as she was heavily promoted to main event.

What makes you think she helped the ratings in 2018? She was in some random mixed match nobody cared about that year, non factor.

And of course the ratings continued to decline after WM, it is what it is suppose to happen.


----------



## Sin City Saint

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1- 2.468M
> H2- 2.240M
> H3- 2.024M
> 3H- 2.244M*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership:
> H2 Vs H1 ( - 9.24% / - 0.228M )
> H3 Vs H2 ( - 9.64% / - 0.216M )
> H3 Vs H1 ( - 17.99% / - 0.444M )
> 5/6/19 Vs 4/29/19 ( + 3.99% / + 0.086M )
> 
> Demo (5/6/19 Vs 4/29/19):
> H1- 0.790D Vs 0.780D
> H2- 0.730D Vs 0.740D
> H3- 0.640D Vs 0.640D
> 3H- 0.720D Vs 0.720D
> 
> Note: RAW is 4th, 6th & 7th by hourly demo & 7th, 10th & 12th by hourly viewership.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Viewership (5/6/19 Vs 5/7/18):
> H1- 2.468M Vs 2.788M
> H2- 2.240M Vs 2.731M
> H3- 2.024M Vs 2.549M
> 3H- 2.244M Vs 2.689M ( - 16.55% / - 0.445M )
> 
> Demo (5/6/19 Vs 5/7/18):
> H1- 0.790D Vs 0.900D
> H2- 0.730D Vs 0.910D
> H3- 0.640D Vs 0.880D
> 3H- 0.720D Vs 0.897D
> 
> Note: RAW this week last year was 6th, 5th & 7th by hourly demo & 5th, 6th & 9th by hourly viewership.*


Not much of an increase unfortunately, doesn’t help that next week’s episode is taped.


----------



## ClintDagger

thelastpope16 said:


> Why each year January peaked
> 
> 2011 - 2012 - 2013 the rock returned
> 
> 2014 - return of batista, Cm Punk quitting, rise of Bryan
> 
> 2015 - return of Bryan, controversial Rumble finish, east coast snowstorm
> 
> 2016- return of the Golden shovel (triple h as champ)
> 
> 2017 - Goldberg returns
> 
> 2018 - raw25, Ronda Rousey
> 
> 2019- nothing happened, batista returned in the end of February which peaked the RTWM
> 
> This is what happens when you depend on over the hill wrestlers and controversy for wrestlemania season
> 
> 9 years and 7 were depended on part-timers
> 
> Edit - wwe is where it's at because of terrible storylines, depends on part-timer and a super push of a mediocre talent in Reigns
> 
> Guess what everybody, come January wwe will super push Reigns and charlotte again, my best guess is Reigns is fighting Goldberg in the Main event of next years mania
> 
> Sent from my SM-T713 using Tapatalk


You made my point with this post. Thank you.


----------



## Bxstr

The drop from 2014 isn't surprising at all.
Rollins is biggest failure out of shield guys.His 2015 title reign was a distater and chased away so many viewers.
This charisma vacuum is killing the ratings again in 2019.
But I am sure he will still blame it on Brock :ha


----------



## Better than you 71

It's funny that dumb smarks in this thread are trying to blame reigns for the ratings going down when Roman is the one who gets the most views online, gets the biggest reactions, is always the talk of the Town, etc, around 2014, 2015 Roman Reign's push was not the only thing debuting in wwe, do u know what else started happening around those years? Anyone want to take a guess? OH SMARKS OH SMARKS OH SMARKS, please PLEASE please take a guess!!!! Do u know what else happened in those years?????!!!!!! Ok let me tell you all!!!!!!! : 

2014, 2015 were the first two years where wwe started to massively sign a shit ton of INDIE wrestlers that nobody gives a shit about, those two were also the years where wwe started the whole WOMEN'S REVOLUTION shit, those two were also the years where the old guys who had been carrying wwe for years throughout the pg era were started to vanish because too many years went by, Cena was no where near the status he used to be at, taker lost the streak, Randy Ortan became a mid carder or something, Batista came back and left in the same year, the rock had already done his comeback run in 2011 -2013 and was not wrestling anymore yet again, HHH was and still is semi retired, Rey Mysterio became irrelevant as shit and left, etc, u take into account all of this shit and u could see clearly fucking clearly why the ratings have gone down faster than they were pre 2014 2015ish, really? It's clearly fucking obvious by watching the fucking product that this is the case, NO ONE cares about indie jobbers, nobody cares about this FORCED women's revolution, everybody misses the old guys, these are the facts, it fucking SHOWS how worthless these indie guys truly are, go back and watch the first segment from RAW 25 last year where stone cold, Vince, Stephanie, and Shane had the crowd at the palm of their hands, watch that segment, enjoy it once again, keep on watching until the segment ends, and then watch as they come back from commercial break and see the tage team women's match that is taking place and see the fucking difference in the crowd, it's like night and day, the Austin segment had the crowd on their feet, the women's match KILLED the crowd DEAD SILENT, I mean, has there ever been a bigger difference? Nobody cares about the women's revolution, nobody cares about indie guys, smarks have absolutely shoved their bullshit down people's throats for the past five, six, seven, eight, years or so now and people have absolutely had enough and they have stopped watching.. But OK, let's blame the ratings on ONE guy who is only part of one show and only comes out on that show about one or two times for the ratings going down hill as fast as they are now..that totally makes sense...

Sent from my L50 using Tapatalk


----------



## .christopher.

Better than you 71 said:


> It's funny that dumb smarks in this thread are trying to blame reigns for the ratings going down when Roman is the one who gets the most views online, gets the biggest reactions, is always the talk of the Town, etc, around 2014, 2015 Roman Reign's push was not the only thing debuting in wwe, do u know what else started happening around those years? Anyone want to take a guess? OH SMARKS OH SMARKS OH SMARKS, please PLEASE please take a guess!!!! Do u know what else happened in those years?????!!!!!! Ok let me tell you all!!!!!!! :
> 
> 2014, 2015 were the first two years where wwe started to massively sign a shit ton of INDIE wrestlers that nobody gives a shit about, those two were also the years where wwe started the whole WOMEN'S REVOLUTION shit, those two were also the years where the old guys who had been carrying wwe for years throughout the pg era were started to vanish because too many years went by, Cena was no where near the status he used to be at, taker lost the streak, Randy Ortan became a mid carder or something, Batista came back and left in the same year, the rock had already done his comeback run in 2011 -2013 and was not wrestling anymore yet again, HHH was and still is semi retired, Rey Mysterio became irrelevant as shit and left, etc, u take into account all of this shit and u could see clearly fucking clearly why the ratings have gone down faster than they were pre 2014 2015ish, really? It's clearly fucking obvious by watching the fucking product that this is the case, NO ONE cares about indie jobbers, nobody cares about this FORCED women's revolution, everybody misses the old guys, these are the facts, it fucking SHOWS how worthless these indie guys truly are, go back and watch the first segment from RAW 25 last year where stone cold, Vince, Stephanie, and Shane had the crowd at the palm of their hands, watch that segment, enjoy it once again, keep on watching until the segment ends, and then watch as they come back from commercial break and see the tage team women's match that is taking place and see the fucking difference in the crowd, it's like night and day, the Austin segment had the crowd on their feet, the women's match KILLED the crowd DEAD SILENT, I mean, has there ever been a bigger difference? Nobody cares about the women's revolution, nobody cares about indie guys, smarks have absolutely shoved their bullshit down people's throats for the past five, six, seven, eight, years or so now and people have absolutely had enough and they have stopped watching.. But OK, let's blame the ratings on ONE guy who is only part of one show and only comes out on that show about one or two times for the ratings going down hill as fast as they are now..that totally makes sense...
> 
> Sent from my L50 using Tapatalk


Oh, this is a good'un. Another WOAT fanboy who can't accept his favourite killed millions off making Cena look like prime Austin in the process.

WWE spent the past 5 years trying to get Reigns over and this is your end product. They sacrificed talents that were legitimately over in Bryan and Lesnar and now have no one.


----------



## fabi1982

You know that Austin came "from the indies" as well, right? So did Undertaker, etc...

And by your statement, you would better have NO ONE working for WWE? Because without the "indie guys" there would be like 5 people left in WWE today. Honestly a very stupid statment.

And of course you have the crowd on their feet when you show Stone Cold, same as people freaked out over Batista returning. 

BUT the same people would freak out if Punk (a "glorified indy guy") would come back. Same as people went nuts, when the "uber indy fucker" Bryan returned and I can go on and on. 

Again your statment is just pure hate with no logic. 



Better than you 71 said:


> It's funny that dumb smarks in this thread are trying to blame reigns for the ratings going down when Roman is the one who gets the most views online, gets the biggest reactions, is always the talk of the Town, etc, around 2014, 2015 Roman Reign's push was not the only thing debuting in wwe, do u know what else started happening around those years? Anyone want to take a guess? OH SMARKS OH SMARKS OH SMARKS, please PLEASE please take a guess!!!! Do u know what else happened in those years?????!!!!!! Ok let me tell you all!!!!!!! :
> 
> 2014, 2015 were the first two years where wwe started to massively sign a shit ton of INDIE wrestlers that nobody gives a shit about, those two were also the years where wwe started the whole WOMEN'S REVOLUTION shit, those two were also the years where the old guys who had been carrying wwe for years throughout the pg era were started to vanish because too many years went by, Cena was no where near the status he used to be at, taker lost the streak, Randy Ortan became a mid carder or something, Batista came back and left in the same year, the rock had already done his comeback run in 2011 -2013 and was not wrestling anymore yet again, HHH was and still is semi retired, Rey Mysterio became irrelevant as shit and left, etc, u take into account all of this shit and u could see clearly fucking clearly why the ratings have gone down faster than they were pre 2014 2015ish, really? It's clearly fucking obvious by watching the fucking product that this is the case, NO ONE cares about indie jobbers, nobody cares about this FORCED women's revolution, everybody misses the old guys, these are the facts, it fucking SHOWS how worthless these indie guys truly are, go back and watch the first segment from RAW 25 last year where stone cold, Vince, Stephanie, and Shane had the crowd at the palm of their hands, watch that segment, enjoy it once again, keep on watching until the segment ends, and then watch as they come back from commercial break and see the tage team women's match that is taking place and see the fucking difference in the crowd, it's like night and day, the Austin segment had the crowd on their feet, the women's match KILLED the crowd DEAD SILENT, I mean, has there ever been a bigger difference? Nobody cares about the women's revolution, nobody cares about indie guys, smarks have absolutely shoved their bullshit down people's throats for the past five, six, seven, eight, years or so now and people have absolutely had enough and they have stopped watching.. But OK, let's blame the ratings on ONE guy who is only part of one show and only comes out on that show about one or two times for the ratings going down hill as fast as they are now..that totally makes sense...
> 
> Sent from my L50 using Tapatalk


----------



## ClintDagger

fabi1982 said:


> You know that Austin came "from the indies" as well, right? So did Undertaker, etc...
> 
> And by your statement, you would better have NO ONE working for WWE? Because without the "indie guys" there would be like 5 people left in WWE today. Honestly a very stupid statment.
> 
> And of course you have the crowd on their feet when you show Stone Cold, same as people freaked out over Batista returning.
> 
> BUT the same people would freak out if Punk (a "glorified indy guy") would come back. Same as people went nuts, when the "uber indy fucker" Bryan returned and I can go on and on.
> 
> Again your statment is just pure hate with no logic.


Austin and Undertaker did not come from the indies. They both got their start in WCCW which at it’s peak had world wide syndication and record setting stadium shows.


----------



## fabi1982

ClintDagger said:


> Austin and Undertaker did not come from the indies. They both got their start in WCCW which at it’s peak had world wide syndication and record setting stadium shows.


Honestly, when they were there (especially Taker, who started 84) this wasnt even WCCW and not international. But whatever


----------



## Better than you 71

Lol u have no argument, just mindless assumptions, wwe brought back the brand split in 2016, Roman was on raw up until three weeks ago, what's your bullshit ass excuse for smackdowns shit ass ratings? Roman came out on raw this week and the ratings went up a tad bit, Daniel Bryan fought Kofi Kingston in a rematch from wm on raw this week in the third hour of raw and the viewership in the third hour of raw this week was LOWER than last weeks...it shows, it really shows how nobody cares about Indie choads

Sent from my L50 using Tapatalk


----------



## ClintDagger

fabi1982 said:


> Honestly, when they were there (especially Taker, who started 84) this wasnt even WCCW and not international. But whatever


What are you talking about? They changed from BTW to WCCW in April 82 and by 84 they were already in Japan and Israel with their syndication. Austin didn’t debut until a month after Fritz demanded the WCCW name back but he trained for a year with Adams under the WCCW banner. Both guys consider themselves WCCW alums.


----------



## Better than you 71

fabi1982 said:


> You know that Austin came "from the indies" as well, right? So did Undertaker, etc...
> 
> 
> 
> And by your statement, you would better have NO ONE working for WWE? Because without the "indie guys" there would be like 5 people left in WWE today. Honestly a very stupid statment.
> 
> 
> 
> And of course you have the crowd on their feet when you show Stone Cold, same as people freaked out over Batista returning.
> 
> 
> 
> BUT the same people would freak out if Punk (a "glorified indy guy") would come back. Same as people went nuts, when the "uber indy fucker" Bryan returned and I can go on and on.
> 
> 
> 
> Again your statment is just pure hate with no logic.


You retarded fool, the old guys always get the crowd on their feet, I love how u don't mention how the women were able to kill the crowd dead in a matter of a few minutes time, they were hot and the women somehow found a way to fuck it up, lol, are u really comparing today's indie wrestling to the territory days? Are u fucking retarded? Wrestling was not how it is today back then u retard. Why the fuck does wwe need to hire indie guys? Ever hear of "home grown" guys and not signing absolutely every indie wrestler imaginable? Also, there's a reason why wwe ended up becoming a global phenomenon and the territories died 

Sent from my L50 using Tapatalk


----------



## DammitChrist

Bxstr said:


> The drop from 2014 isn't surprising at all.
> Rollins is biggest failure out of shield guys.His 2015 title reign was a distater and chased away so many viewers.
> This charisma vacuum is killing the ratings again in 2019.
> But I am sure he will still blame it on Brock :ha


You still have no clue what a charisma vacuum is, and you still don't know shit about what's actually causing the ratings to fall (especially since you're still blaming this on one individual talent, which doesn't surprise me since you're truly delusional) :ha


----------



## llj

I think the overall RAW package in the RTW in 2018 was more streamlined and focused and easier to digest. Roman was finally going to beat Brock (people assumed) and get officially crowned, Seth was gathering momentum in the midcard again and making a run for the IC title, and he was trying to hold off Finn who was also getting hot himself. You have Braun flipping over stuff and doing amusing skits with Elias. So you had Roman who was doing the FOTC storyline which looked like it was finally officially happening, you had Seth and Finn taking care of the workrate stuff of RAW, and Braun doing the "variety" stuff. The women's stuff was secondary to the men's so it was more tolerable for a casual audience, and RAW's women was built around "Who can beat Asuka?" At the same time they were also building up Nia's gradual turn on Alexa. So you had Asuka holding down the workrate part of the RAW women's division while the Nia and Alexa stuff appealed to the soapy diva storyline fans. These were all simple storylines that provided easy hooks for a casual audience to grab, but still appealed to the smarks. People were (for the most part) booked according to their appropriate levels and strengths. Ronda wasn't the SOLE reason for the bump, but she did cause some added celebrity excitement too in addition to more focused direction. Remember that she only appeared a couple of times leading up to Wrestlemania, but ratings were still strong without her.

Overall the product felt a lot more streamlined and focused in the last RTW. Performers were used in proper roles closer to what their strengths are, and screen time for each storyline was divided up more logically. It was still kinda wonky at times as with most WWE booking with how people were used but I can remember a lot more of the main storylines from last year than this year's RTW.


----------



## Jedah

Better than you 71 said:


> Lol u have no argument, just mindless assumptions, wwe brought back the brand split in 2016, Roman was on raw up until three weeks ago, what's your bullshit ass excuse for smackdowns shit ass ratings? Roman came out on raw this week and the ratings went up a tad bit, Daniel Bryan fought Kofi Kingston in a rematch from wm on raw this week in the third hour of raw and the viewership in the third hour of raw this week was LOWER than last weeks...it shows, it really shows how nobody cares about Indie choads
> 
> Sent from my L50 using Tapatalk


Last week's H3 was 1.8. This week's was 2.0. Not that it matters much. No one should be bragging about this week's "bump."

But you're obviously just a troll performing an act and will be banned soon enough.


----------



## Erik.

This weeks ratings.

:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol


----------



## Better than you 71

Jedah said:


> Last week's H3 was 1.8. This week's was 2.0. Not that it matters much. No one should be bragging about this week's "bump."
> 
> But you're obviously just a troll performing an act and will be banned soon enough.


Oh yes, one little mistake, how wrong of me, Daniel Bryan vs Kofi Kingston were just barely able to maintain the rating above a two..what an argument, to debunk my claims..u should be a professor u troll, u will be banned soon enough

Sent from my L50 using Tapatalk


----------



## llj

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1126464351311941633


----------



## DammitChrist

Better than you 71 said:


> Oh yes, one little mistake, how wrong of me, Daniel Bryan vs Kofi Kingston were just barely able to maintain the rating above a two..what an argument, to debunk my claims..*u should be a professor u troll, u will be banned soon enough*
> 
> Sent from my L50 using Tapatalk


:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## fabi1982

Better than you 71 said:


> You retarded fool, the old guys always get the crowd on their feet, I love how u don't mention how the women were able to kill the crowd dead in a matter of a few minutes time, they were hot and the women somehow found a way to fuck it up, lol, are u really comparing today's indie wrestling to the territory days? Are u fucking retarded? Wrestling was not how it is today back then u retard. Why the fuck does wwe need to hire indie guys? Ever hear of "home grown" guys and not signing absolutely every indie wrestler imaginable? Also, there's a reason why wwe ended up becoming a global phenomenon and the territories died
> 
> Sent from my L50 using Tapatalk


You kiss your mother with that mouth?

And people need to start somewhere and not everyone is WWE material from the beginning. With WWE growing and having 8h of weekly television they need to get more talent than they can grow themselves...see the classes in the PC? Not everyone starting makes it to the top, how could they actually produce that much television with the 2 people each year getting a shot? Again you would prefer half an hour a week of wrestling with the same 5 guys?

And of course the territory days are different to the indies, but the indies grown out of the idea of "territories", look around how many local wrestling leagues are existing in the US and these companies are indy companies...

Anyways please see a doctor, because I think you have Tourette?!


----------



## xio8ups

Omg he is so right. The women make the fans want to fall asleep


----------



## The Wood

Better than you 71 said:


> Lol u have no argument, just mindless assumptions, wwe brought back the brand split in 2016, Roman was on raw up until three weeks ago, what's your bullshit ass excuse for smackdowns shit ass ratings? Roman came out on raw this week and the ratings went up a tad bit, Daniel Bryan fought Kofi Kingston in a rematch from wm on raw this week in the third hour of raw and the viewership in the third hour of raw this week was LOWER than last weeks...it shows, it really shows how nobody cares about Indie choads
> 
> Sent from my L50 using Tapatalk


Well, that’s not true. Viewership was up from last week. I love shitting on WWE, but can we please do it with accuracy?


----------



## SPCDRI

Viewership was garbage again. Okay, so hour 3 wasn't below 2 million, barely, but hour 1 didn't even do 2.5 million. We're so fixated on the floor but we need to start thinking what the ceiling is short term and long term. This company threw every short-term haymaker punch it could think of this week on RAW and Smackdown and the numbers are garbage. 

Historically, these numbers trend downwards until NHL and NBA wrap up and the casuals start ignoring mid-season baseball games in June. The decline is about 12-15 percent. 

Take these numbers and drop 15 percent off of 'em and it ain't pretty. 

H1: 2.1
H2: 1.9
H3: 1.7
Overrun: 1.9

Below 2 million viewers is the Danger Zone. That's when viewership matters. What network is going to want to pay through the nose to air over 2 hours of programming doing under 2 million viewers with woeful age and socioeconomic demographics?

Within 2 months, we will get an episode of RAW where the third hour and the overrun and possibly even the second hour do below 2 million viewers. That's my prediction.


----------



## The Wood

SPCDRI said:


> Viewership was garbage again. Okay, so hour 3 wasn't below 2 million, barely, but hour 1 didn't even do 2.5 million. We're so fixated on the floor but we need to start thinking what the ceiling is short term and long term. This company threw every short-term haymaker punch it could think of this week on RAW and Smackdown and the numbers are garbage.
> 
> Historically, these numbers trend downwards until NHL and NBA wrap up and the casuals start ignoring mid-season baseball games in June. The decline is about 12-15 percent.
> 
> Take these numbers and drop 15 percent off of 'em and it ain't pretty.
> 
> H1: 2.1
> H2: 1.9
> H3: 1.7
> Overrun: 1.9
> 
> Below 2 million viewers is the Danger Zone. That's when viewership matters. What network is going to want to pay through the nose to air over 2 hours of programming doing under 2 million viewers with woeful age and socioeconomic demographics?
> 
> Within 2 months, we will get an episode of RAW where the third hour and the overrun and possibly even the second hour do below 2 million viewers. That's my prediction.


Great write-up. It will be a miracle if they stay in-line with precious year drops. Could be steeper.


----------



## PresidentGasman

*Do you think it upsets Vince that ratings are the lowest its ever been ?*

I mean he has no one to blame but himself but i could see him blaming the fans for not watching or something, thats the thing with CEOs how they feel almost never leaks out online.


----------



## deepelemblues

*Re: Do you think it upsets Vince that ratings are the lowest its ever been ?*

Ummm

Yes


----------



## Soul Rex

*Re: Do you think it upsets Vince that ratings are the lowest its ever been ?*

I personally think Vince doesn't give a fuck about ratings and haven't cared from a long, long time.


----------



## The Raw Smackdown

*Re: Do you think it upsets Vince that ratings are the lowest its ever been ?*

I would say no but given the things that he's done to the product recently I think that he feels some kind of way about the ratings.


----------



## ClintDagger

Soul Rex said:


> I personally think Vince doesn't give a fuck about ratings and haven't cared from a long, long time.


Then why all of the recent panic moves over the past 3 months?


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

*Re: Do you think it upsets Vince that ratings are the lowest its ever been ?*



Soul Rex said:


> I personally think Vince doesn't give a fuck about ratings and haven't cared from a long, long time.


He cared last week. He went all out and ratings only went up 0.1 for both shows.

He knows the product is shit and without the Saudi/Fox deals his company would be fucked. His ego won't allow him to step down. I think he'd rather his company die with him in control than hand control over to someone else.


----------



## patpat

Isuzu said:


> Here's one.. Maybe Rollins should actually follow his own advice and give a damn and maybe work extra on getting a charisma/personality. Im sure he reads comments and social media and knows what the critics are saying, but he probably has HHH blowing smoke up his as telling him how great he is, so he doesn't bother to work on improving anything.


 the thing is no matter what idea rollins come up with , Vince will tell him to fuck off. stop blaming the talents. people called Ambrose a lazy fuck for years, 5 minutes after his contract expired he released one hell of an entertaining video on youtube portraying himself as a bigger star wwe ever made him to be. 
wwe sucks, period, give rollins to new Japan an din two years wwe will try to pay him back for double his current price. 
world wrestling entertainment is a garbage company run by a guy that lost it. 
in case you want to be informed rollins' take on his own character is an overly aggressive individual , that acts like a metal star and hit people in the back with chairs and beat the hell out of them. Vince won't let him do that because wwe book every single one of their babyface the exact SAME WAY!


----------



## Dave Santos

No NBA tonight. That starts tomorrow. NBA conference semifinals was the highest rated since 2012. I guess basketball will affect Smackdowns ratings tomorrow.


----------



## Ace

If ratings don't go up, god are they so fucked.

No excuses of NBA then, it's all on the product pushing viewers away.


----------



## FITZ

patpat said:


> the thing is no matter what idea rollins come up with , Vince will tell him to fuck off. stop blaming the talents. people called Ambrose a lazy fuck for years, 5 minutes after his contract expired he released one hell of an entertaining video on youtube portraying himself as a bigger star wwe ever made him to be.
> wwe sucks, period, give rollins to new Japan an din two years wwe will try to pay him back for double his current price.
> world wrestling entertainment is a garbage company run by a guy that lost it.
> in case you want to be informed rollins' take on his own character is an overly aggressive individual , that acts like a metal star and hit people in the back with chairs and beat the hell out of them. Vince won't let him do that because wwe book every single one of their babyface the exact SAME WAY!


WWE can't create characters that are more interesting than the people playing them. 

Anything that happens naturally they try to make into a thing and it feels forced. Brock Lesnar screaming "suplex city bitch" in the middle of a match was awesome. WWE putting a suplex counter on the screen during one of his matches was completely uncool. 

They get something that's working well and just force feed it to the point where it's not working any more. They're better off doing nothing than trying to get people to like something.


----------



## SPCDRI

Just because Rollins may be a bit bland in his personal life, that doesn't mean his character has to be. Most actors are really boring people, especially film actors. Robert DeNiro interviews are auditory Ambien, for instance. The best character work WWE has done lately is with Daniel Bryan and Bray Wyatt, and those are 110 percent their ideas and executed visions.


----------



## Ace

Cancel Raw and replace it with 3 hrs of Firefly Fun House.


----------



## The Wood

Soul Rex said:


> I personally think Vince doesn't give a fuck about ratings and haven't cared from a long, long time.


He does care. That's why he's done this wild card shit. If those ratings don't go up, the lord and masters keeping his business afloat are not going to be appeased. He very fucking cares. 



Ace said:


> If ratings don't go up, god are they so fucked.
> 
> No excuses of NBA then, it's all on the product pushing viewers away.


I don't even get the excuses. I mean, sure, they make them, but since when is "there's better stuff on" a good excuse for getting your ass kicked in the ratings? That's what the ratings are.


----------



## Erik.

This could get rough.


----------



## Lenny Leonard

Attendance at last night's show not looking too hot


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

Top 100 Original Cable Telecasts: Monday May 13, 2019	P18-49	P2+
Rank	Program	Net	Start	Mins	Rating	(000s)
1	WWE ENTERTAINMENT	USA NETWORK	8:00 PM	60	0.90	2,576
2	WWE ENTERTAINMENT	USA NETWORK	9:00 PM	60	0.81	2,391
3	WWE ENTERTAINMENT	USA NETWORK	10:00 PM	61	0.70	2,080

Yikes


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.576M
H2- 2.391M
H3- 2.080M
3H- 2.349M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 7.18% / - 0.185M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 13.01% / - 0.311M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 19.25% / - 0.496M )
5/13/19 Vs 5/6/19 ( + 4.69% / + 0.105M )

Demo (5/13/19 Vs 5/6/19):
H1- 0.900D Vs 0.790D
H2- 0.810D Vs 0.730D
H3- 0.700D Vs 0.640D
3H- 0.803D Vs 0.720D

Note: RAW is 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 5th, 7th & 8th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (5/13/19 Vs 5/14/18):
H1- 2.576M Vs 2.903M
H2- 2.391M Vs 2.692M
H3- 2.080M Vs 2.628M
3H- 2.349M Vs 2.741M ( - 14.30% / - 0.392M )

Demo (5/13/19 Vs 5/14/18):
H1- 0.900D Vs 0.950D
H2- 0.810D Vs 0.870D
H3- 0.700D Vs 0.870D
3H- 0.803D Vs 0.897D

Note: RAW this week last year was 4th, 7th & 6th by hourly demo & 4th, 6th & 8th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Ratings increase! All hail :reigns2


----------



## Hobogoblin

There was no NBA competition this week, but next week they'll be going up against game 4 of Warriors/Blazers.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Ratings went up with no Seth or AJ on the show










But its totally a dream match.


----------



## rbl85

Who was in the Main event ?


----------



## Jedah

From what I read, it was a better show last night, but that isn't saying much. I saw the Cesaro/Mysterio match which was good and the Firefly Funhouse stuff was good too.

Still shit compared to even a year ago though.



nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Ratings went up with no Seth or AJ on the show
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But its totally a dream match.


There was no NBA last night. That's why.


----------



## DammitChrist

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Ratings went up with no Seth or AJ on the show
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But its totally a dream match.


Except that both men WERE on the show :mj4

It's almost like you can't accept the fact that some people still consider it to be a dream match :lol


----------



## Hobogoblin

This was the first time in a few months that Raw was #1 in the 18-49 demo so you have to consider this rating a win for WWE.


----------



## Piper's Pit

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Ratings went up with no Seth or AJ on the show
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But its totally a dream match.


It's getting tiresome now tbh, you might have a point about both those guys especially Seth but it's senseless blaming talent when the booking is so bad. You could have the cream of the 80's and MNW talent in their prime on RAW and I'd wager within a few months most of them would be stale and tarnished because of all the factors that have been talked about to death on here.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Ratings went up with no Seth or AJ on the show
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But its totally a dream match.


No NBA.

Seth and AJ don't do shit for ratings. Positive or negative. They have zero effect either way.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

DammitC said:


> Except that both men WERE on the show :mj4
> 
> It's almost like you can't accept the fact that some people still consider it to be a dream match :lol


I'm sure you can find someone that considers Spike Dudley vs Hornswoggle a dream match :lol


----------



## InexorableJourney

*2.349M*


----------



## DammitChrist

Hobogoblin said:


> This was the first time in a few months that Raw was #1 in the 18-49 demo so you have to consider this rating a win for WWE.


The ratings are shitty regardless, @machomanjohncena ;. It's STILL not a win for them.



nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> I'm sure you can find someone that considers Spike Dudley vs Hornswoggle a dream match :lol


Okay, good luck finding that person then unk2


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Lacey and Corbin being booked strong = ratings confirmed


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Pretty putrid considering there were no NBA Playoffs last night. The other guys confirmed not draws.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

Showstopper said:


> Pretty putrid considering there were no NBA Playoffs last night. The other guys confirmed not draws.


Yeah, I don't know why people are acting like it's a big W. That is a fucking horrible number.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

I just want to point out that this is further evidence that live or taped doesn't matter, and hasn't for some time - if ever.

This is about what Raw will be doing with no competition from basketball, football, presidential debates, etc.


----------



## Ace

Zero competition.

They are SO FUCKED.

The number is similar to the number last week when they were up against the NBA...



SayWhatAgain! said:


> Yeah, I don't know why people are acting like it's a big W. That is a fucking horrible number.


 Trolls.

This number is pathetic, I've been following these numbers for 4-5 years and people are taking this as a win? :lmao 

What the fuck were they even up against.

They're doing 2.3m against NOTHING, what the hell will they be doing against the NBA conference finals and Finals. Or MNF which will have 2-3 times the audience.

2.3m is what is left of their audience. That's alarming.


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

WWE has lost half its audience since the last time I watched Raw consistently.

I guess me and my friend "Mark" really did stop watching, eh HHH?


----------



## Fearless Viper

Well WWE won this week. I guess we can assume that 2.3m is their rating with no competition at all. I wonder if it could've have been higher had they aired this live?


----------



## The Wood

I was hoping for an even more atrocious number, but this will have to do. The more people that realize they are bored during this whole "wild card" thing and see through the facade, the more people that are going to realize WWE has nothing goes forward and are even more likely to tune out long-term. Bring on alternative programming.


----------



## Erik.

Shite number but interesting that it's slowly increasing since the whole shake-up was seen as fraud.


----------



## Jedah

It increased because there was no NBA last night. It usually decreases in May and then goes back up again in June until football season starts.

What's telling is that 2.5m was their hour 1 audience. That really isn't something to be bragging about. Hour 3s two years ago were either high 2 million or low 3. Where did all those people go?


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

I'm just wondering if GOAT Curse of Oak Hill or whatever the fuck it's called beats SmackDown again :mark: opcorn


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Not a big W at all. The bigger concern is the shitty attendance at a London show. But the attendance was bad on the RTWM and beyond.


----------



## SPCDRI

2.6/2.3/2 flatwith no basketball game ain't nothing to toot their horn about. But it is up slightly.


----------



## Bxstr

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Ratings went up with no Seth or AJ on the show
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But its totally a dream match.


holyshit :lmao 
This further proves audience have no desire to see these two bore in the main event


----------



## DammitChrist

Bxstr said:


> holyshit :lmao
> This further proves audience have no desire to see these two bore in the main event


The ratings have nothing to do with both men being in the main-event though :lmao

Keep assuming shit though unkout


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

DammitC said:


> The ratings have nothing to do with both men being in the main-event though :lmao
> 
> Keep assuming shit though unkout


Lacey and Baron just drew higher ratings on a taped show than AJ and Seth can draw on a live show :lmao

Save_Us.Lacey


----------



## DammitChrist

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Lacey and Baron just drew higher ratings on a taped show than AJ and Seth can draw on a live show :lmao
> 
> Save_Us.Lacey


That's easily one of the most ridiculous statements you've made on here :lmao

Baron Corbin has been pushed as an active top heel since as late as November, and it still didn't keep ratings from falling (but then again, no wrestler on the current roster can stop the decline). He doesn't draw.

Lacey Evans's small fanbase doesn't even come close to matching the fanbases of Becky Lynch and Charlotte Flair. More people actually care about those 2 women over Lacey. However, they're still unable to keep the ratings from falling too, and the same would still go with Lacey. She doesn't draw either.

You'd have to be delusional and outright blinded by your own fandom to actually believe that Corbin and Lacey would positively do shit to the ratings :lol


----------



## Steven Fraser

I bet WWE wish they had that big time rating they had in the Attitude era.


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

DammitC said:


> That's easily one of the most ridiculous statements you've made on here :lmao
> 
> Baron Corbin has been pushed as an active top heel since as late as November, and it still didn't keep ratings from falling (but then again, no wrestler on the current roster can stop the decline). He doesn't draw.
> 
> Lacey Evans's small fanbase doesn't even come close to matching the fanbases of Becky Lynch and Charlotte Flair. More people actually care about those 2 women over Lacey. However, they're still unable to keep the ratings from falling too, and the same would still go with Lacey. She doesn't draw either.
> 
> You'd have to be delusional and outright blinded by your own fandom to actually believe that Corbin and Lacey would positively do shit to the ratings :lol


Wasn't the ratings also dropping when the main event last October-December when Baron Corbin was main eventing the shows and was the Co General Manager? Yeah, he wasn't drawing crap either. Neither was Drew, Elias, Ziggler and Bobby Lashley. :lol


----------



## chronoxiong

So does this mean that the stupid wildcard rule is going to stay for a while? Vince truly is a genius. Fuck off with that shit. This will not solve their ratings problems long term. Really shocked a taped RAW got an increase in viewers though.


----------



## kuja killer

Excuse my newbie-ness question, but i was curious what exactly determines the ratings for each hour for Smackdown and RAW, is like the final number of hour 1/2/3 taken at the last minute like 8:59, 9:59, and 10:59 PM ?? 

..or at the start 8:00, 9:00, 10:00 
..or like every 5 minutes then the "average" of every 5 minutes for the hour, and thats the final number for the 2.xx million viewers.

I honestly do not know, sorry  but i want to know if anyone knows possibly ?


----------



## llj

At the end of the day, 2.3 was a number you expected opposite an NFL playoff game just a year ago. Now it's considered a "win".


----------



## SPCDRI

5 years ago, if RAW had three shows in a row where every hour was below 3 million with an hour with only 2 million people watching it, people would be hopping off of buildings like stock traders on Black Thursday. But viewership doesn't matter now and we're all winners!


----------



## InexorableJourney

If ratings are in freefall they need a new formula, or even a system shock.


----------



## rbl85

Competition tonight ?


----------



## SPCDRI

rbl85 said:


> Competition tonight ?


Golden State Warriors on match point against the Portland Trailblazers is the most prominent sports competition. Game starts 8 central so first hour is unopposed.


----------



## rbl85

SPCDRI said:


> Golden State Warriors on match point against the Portland Trailblazers is the most prominent sports competition. Game starts 8 central so first hour is unopposed.


So that means they really need to do a big number in the first hour


----------



## Isuzu

I think its going to be big numbers shown for last night's ratings. Brock Boomboxing, some good tag team wrestling, 24/7 title, potential of Brock smashing and cashing in on Univ. champ Skinny man or WWE champ Dead Meat had to be very intriguing

No more suplex city, it's now...."Boombox City, bitchez!"


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.681M
H2- 2.583M
H3- 2.299M
3H- 2.521M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 3.66% / - 0.098M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 10.99% / - 0.284M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 14.25% / - 0.382M )
5/20/19 Vs 5/13/19 ( + 7.32% / + 0.172M )

Demo (5/20/19 Vs 5/13/19):
H1- 0.930D Vs 0.900D
H2- 0.900D Vs 0.810D
H3- 0.800D Vs 0.700D
3H- 0.877D Vs 0.803D

Note: RAW is 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 7th, 8th & 11th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (5/20/19 Vs 5/21/18):
H1- 2.681M Vs 2.792M
H2- 2.583M Vs 2.767M
H3- 2.299M Vs 2.447M
3H- 2.521M Vs 2.669M ( - 5.55% / - 0.148M )

Demo (5/20/19 Vs 5/21/18):
H1- 0.930D Vs 0.910D
H2- 0.900D Vs 0.900D
H3- 0.800D Vs 0.850D
3H- 0.877D Vs 0.887D

Note: RAW this week last year was 4th, 5th & 6th by hourly demo & 3rd, 4th & 9th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## llj

Isuzu said:


> I think its going to be big numbers shown for last night's ratings.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

:ha :ha :ha

This is their new reality. Even the night after one of the bigger PPVs of the year and a tease of the new holder of the briefcase possibility cashing in on EITHER World Title of the company. Sad that this is their new reality, but this is it.


----------



## raymond1985

Well done Brock.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

2.2 Hour 3.

:ha

This is GREAT.


----------



## Frost99

Showstopper said:


> :ha :ha :ha
> 
> *This is their new reality*. Even the night after one of the bigger PPVs of the year and a tease of the new holder of the briefcase possibility cashing in on EITHER World Title of the company. Sad that this is their new reality, but this is it.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Notice they retained viewers in hour 2. After Lacey was gone people started tuning out. Lacey outdraws a new title reveal, Seth, Kofi and the tease of Bork cashing in confirmed.


----------



## Mordecay

It is kinda sad that this has to be considered a good rating. But apparently some people still care about Brock



nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Notice they retained viewers in hour 2. After Lacey was gone people started tuning out. Lacey outdraws a new title reveal, Seth, Kofi and the tease of Bork cashing in confirmed.


Nah, it was the IIconics return to RAW

IIconics=Ratings


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

:boombrock 

A bit of a post ppv bounce for a show with major news and this is better than recent weeks but still nothing to crow about but whatever. Only down 5 something percent year to year isn't that bad all things considered. I want to see where the dust settles once the playoffs are over.


----------



## A-C-P

:boombrock


----------



## raymond1985

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Notice they retained viewers in hour 2. After Lacey was gone people started tuning out. Lacey outdraws a new title reveal, Seth, Kofi and the tease of Bork cashing in confirmed.


Hour 3 was still up 400k from the week that Styles and Rollins headlined. And up almost 300k on the week Kingston and Bryan headlined. Some of that increase has to be attributed to Brock. Not just the post-PPV bump. 

I agree that Lacey is a very good talent though.


----------



## Isuzu

*3rd straight week of a viewership increase after a hideous 2.16M on 4/29.*


----------



## Randy Lahey

Proof that Brock moves ratings. No one cares about geeks like Seth Rollins


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Notice they retained viewers in hour 2. After Lacey was gone people started tuning out. Lacey outdraws a new title reveal, Seth, Kofi and the tease of Bork cashing in confirmed.


I'm glad that Lacey and Becky were on the second hour because they were the second best part of last night. At least they weren't on the third hour.


----------



## Erik.

God, thats fucking laughable.

:lol :lol :lol


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

raymond1985 said:


> Hour 3 was still up 400k from the week that Styles and Rollins headlined. And up almost 300k on the week Kingston and Bryan headlined. Some of that increase has to be attributed to Brock. Not just the post-PPV bump.
> 
> I agree that Lacey is a very good talent though.


Oh no doubt Bork helped ratings last night. They were dangerously low when they were pushing the Seth/AJ crap nobody cared about. They've started to slightly recover since those 2 weren't on Raw last week. Seth is a proven ratings disaster.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Notice they retained viewers in hour 2. After Lacey was gone people started tuning out. Lacey outdraws a new title reveal, Seth, Kofi and the tease of Bork cashing in confirmed.


I love that you keep giving Lacey credit for the numbers for segments she isn't advertised for :lol

Anyway

:boombrock :boombrock

Small progress is still progress. Give Brock both belts.


----------



## A-C-P

Giving Lacey Evans :bosque any credit for increasing viewership :bosque

:boombrock


----------



## Isuzu

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Oh no doubt Bork helped ratings last night. They were dangerously low when they were pushing the Seth/AJ crap nobody cared about. They've started to slightly recover since those 2 weren't on Raw last week. Seth is a proven ratings disaster.


3rd straight week of a viewership increase after a hideous 2.16M on 4/29.


----------



## raymond1985

Randy Lahey said:


> Proof that Brock moves ratings. No one cares about geeks like Seth Rollins


Yes. 

The theory that the viewership would have been even worse had Brock retained at WM has been debunked. 

As stale as Brock is, he's still a bigger TV draw than Rollins, Bryan, Kingston, etc.


----------



## Randy Lahey

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Oh no doubt Bork helped ratings last night. They were dangerously low when they were pushing the Seth/AJ crap nobody cared about. They've started to slightly recover since those 2 weren't on Raw last week. Seth is a proven ratings disaster.


Plus, all you have to do is compare the prior year ratings. This week, with Lesnar back, they were only 5% off of last year's rating.

When they were pushing Seth, Becky, and the rest of the geeks leading up to WM and afterwards, they were 20-30% off the prior year's rating.


----------



## Isuzu

*Monday's WWE Raw Viewership Highest In A Month*


----------



## llj

It's not about who can "bump" ratings anymore. It's more about who can stop it from sliding further. 

Oh how we have fallen.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

It's great that Brock gave us 3 drips of orange juice instead of the 2 we've been getting by squeezing that orange for the last couple of weeks. Maybe someday, we'll have enough for a sip like the good ol' days of 5 years ago.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

All these haters trying to discredit Brock.

Keep hating.

:boombrock

Dance on em GOAT.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

That Hour 3 rating with the tease of a Lesnar cash in. :brock4


----------



## patpat

How is that good? Last year the raw came after a B level ppv where people legitimately left the arena in the main event......and it did better than a raw post money in the bank?! Which is one of the biggest ppv? 
What the actual fuck? Are the standards this low?



Randy Lahey said:


> nWo4Lyfe420 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh no doubt Bork helped ratings last night. They were dangerously low when they were pushing the Seth/AJ crap nobody cared about. They've started to slightly recover since those 2 weren't on Raw last week. Seth is a proven ratings disaster.
> 
> 
> 
> Plus, all you have to do is compare the prior year ratings. This week, with Lesnar back, they were only 5% off of last year's rating.
> 
> When they were pushing Seth, Becky, and the rest of the geeks leading up to WM and afterwards, they were 20-30% off the prior year's rating.
Click to expand...

 last year raw came after a b level ppv! This here is the audience post money in the fucking bank....in what dimension is this good?!


----------



## Isuzu

patpat said:


> How is that good? Last year the raw came after a B level ppv where people legitimately left the arena in the main event......and it did better than a raw post money in the bank?! Which is one of the biggest ppv?
> What the actual fuck? Are the standards this low?


So wwe was supposed to bring in 5 million viewers overnight? I bet if they did that you'd still be bitching about something


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Brock could've cashed in on either Champion of his choosing, and barely anyone cared enough to hang around.

:buried



SayWhatAgain! said:


> All these haters trying to discredit Brock.
> 
> Keep hating.
> 
> :boombrock
> 
> Dance on em GOAT.


Since the women were the top storyline during the RTWM and main-evented WM, any update on when they're going to start pulling their weight post WM even just alittle bit?

:deandre


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Isuzu said:


> So wwe was supposed to bring in 5 million viewers overnight? I bet if they did that you'd still be bitching about something


Nah, it's worth talking about these ratings, but it's just a leap to say Brock really brought anything substantial here. It was a post-MITB Raw, and you have to at least credit a post-PPV "bump" as well regardless of Brock or no Brock. 

I mean, Hogan would always take a break when the ratings were going south in the fall back in the day and then he'd pop back up at an opportune time to claim a bump back in the day. And the law of diminishing returns applied to his "bumps" as WCW sunk around him. 

With Raw having a bad couple weeks and Vince having an (nonsensical) idea for MITB, he created post-PPV news that got people to tune in to see the follow up.

I don't mind crediting Brock for holding up the tent a little bit, but it is a little bit. It's debatable as to whether or not he made a difference here.


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

Revisit the ratings in a month or so and look at their trajectory. You need a much bigger sample size than one rating to draw any valid conclusions.


----------



## llj

The debate on Brock has never been if Brock is a bigger draw than most of the people on the roster today. He probably is. After almost 20 years of relentless pushing, he'd better be. But is he such a substantially better draw than the average product number? That's still up for debate.

Anyway, the whole issue isn't even about Brock anyway. The fact that they pay the guy a few million for 5 appearances a year and his TV appearances probably only bump numbers between 100-200k at most (and it's up in the air if all those numbers are even about him), means that the product is so awful that even a "big" draw barely moves numbers


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

Showstopper said:


> Since the women were the top storyline during the RTWM and main-evented WM, any update on when they're going to start pulling their weight post WM even just alittle bit?
> 
> :deandre


More people saw their match than Seth's.

:deandre


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SayWhatAgain! said:


> More people saw their match than Seth's.
> 
> :deandre


No answer then. Exactly as I expected.

Talk about a waste of valuable TV time during the RTWM. Ooof.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

The women are barely featured on Raw now but lets blame them instead of Hamtaro Rollins who is all over the show and always killing ratings :lmao

Becky needs to keep her bitch in check.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

llj said:


> The debate on Brock has never been if Brock is a bigger draw than most of the people on the roster today. He probably is. After almost 20 years of relentless pushing, he'd better be. But is he such a substantially better draw than the average product number? That's still up for debate.
> 
> Anyway, the whole issue isn't even about Brock anyway. The fact that they pay the guy a few million for 5 appearances a year and his TV appearances probably only bump numbers between 100-200k at most (and it's up in the air if all those numbers are even about him), means that the product is so awful that even a "big" draw barely moves numbers


Yup. That has to be taken into account, too. Paid more than anyone else on the roster, and isn't a ratings draw even despite not being on TV every week and over-exposed like everyone else.

Completely pathetic. :lmao



nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> The women are barely featured on Raw now but lets blame them instead of Hamtaro Rollins who is all over the show and always killing ratings :lmao
> 
> Becky needs to keep her bitch in check.


The women were pushed harder than anyone else during the hottest time of year, and got the biggest match of the year on the biggest show of the year.

It's only 6 weeks later and ALL of time, energy, and valuable TV time is a waste in literally record time.

:lmao

Go watch AE tapes, bro.


----------



## DammitChrist

Those numbers are STILL mediocre :lmao

Pretending that Brock Lesnar and Lacey Evans are big draws :ha


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Showstopper said:


> The women were pushed harder than anyone else during the hottest time of year, and got the biggest match of the year on the biggest show of the year.
> 
> It's only 6 weeks later and ALL of time, energy, and valuable TV time is a waste in literally record time.
> 
> :lmao
> 
> Go watch AE tapes, bro.


The women drew higher hourly numbers last night than Ms. Rollins could draw in the main event :lmao

Becky is the top merch seller in the company too while Seth wasn't even top 5. That shit is embarrassing for a babyface mens Raw world champ.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> The women drew higher hourly numbers last night than Ms. Rollins could draw in the main event :lmao
> 
> Becky is the top merch seller in the company too while Seth wasn't even top 5. That shit is embarrassing for a babyface mens Raw world champ.


Hour 3 is always rated the lowest. I mean, hell. Even BROCK could've cashed in on Hour 3 and Hour 3 still buried Brock's ass. :lmao Brock was advertised to possibly cash in in hour 3 all night long and STILL no one wanted to see him as Champ so they tuned the fuck out, even the night right after he won the briefcase. :lmao Pathetic.


----------



## Ace

Anyone who thinks Lacey Evans is a draw is a troll...

Expected a bump coming off MITB - Brock teasing a cash in, new title announcement, GSW-Blazers series effectively over and off a PPV.


----------



## DammitChrist

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> The women drew higher hourly numbers last night than Ms. Rollins could draw in the main event :lmao


Ignoring the fact that Seth Rollins was in the 1st hour and that Brock Lesnar was in the 3rd hour too :lmao



> Becky is the top merch seller in the company too while Seth wasn't even top 5. That shit is embarrassing for a babyface mens Raw world champ.



Since you're bringing that topic up, where the fuck are Lacey Evans and Brock Lesnar in the top 5 (let alone the top 10)? :mj4


----------



## hunterxhunter

Brock Lesnar is the best thing about wwe


----------



## rbl85

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> *The women drew higher hourly numbers *last night than Ms. Rollins could draw in the main event :lmao
> 
> Becky is the top merch seller in the company too while Seth wasn't even top 5. That shit is embarrassing for a babyface mens Raw world champ.



The first and second hours will always be higher than the third.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Showstopper said:


> Hour 3 is always rated the lowest. I mean, hell. Even BROCK could've cashed in on Hour 3 and Hour 3 still buried Brock's ass. :lmao Brock was advertised to possibly cash in in hour 3 all night long and STILL no one wanted to see him as Champ so they tuned the fuck out, even the night right after he won the briefcase. :lmao Pathetic.


Wrong. They tuned out because they didn't want to the 2 charisma vacuum world champs in a boring ass tag match to end the show. Everyone knew Bork wasn't cashing in last night.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Brock was pushed during the entire length of the show that he might cash in on EITHER Champion and no one stuck around to see if he'd be Champion at the end of the night.

:ha :ha :ha :ha :ha :ha :ha :ha :ha :ha :ha

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

What a fantastic day this is! It's beautiful outside, too! Might do some grilling when I get home!


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

Still blaming same number of people for the mediocre ratings. :duck


----------



## Dave Santos

The top 3 segments of youtube were 24/7 title Roode, Lesnar, and then mick Foley announces 24/7 title.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Ace said:


> Anyone who thinks Lacey Evans is a draw is a troll...
> 
> Expected a bump coming off MITB - Brock teasing a cash in, new title announcement, GSW-Blazers series effectively over and off a PPV.


The numbers prove she is. In back to back weeks Lacey has boosted and retained viewers. And last week she did so without Seth and AJ on the show proving they are not only non-draws but actual ratings killers. Especially Seth.

She started the resurgence of the ratings and now has Bork back to help. They can only do so much with Seth chasing people away tho.


----------



## rbl85

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Wrong. They tuned out because they didn't want to the 2 charisma vacuum world champs in a boring ass tag match to end the show. Everyone knew Bork wasn't cashing in last night.


Come on dude stop being dishonest


----------



## DammitChrist

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Wrong. They tuned out because they didn't want to the *2 charisma vacuum world champs* in a boring ass tag match to end the show. Everyone knew Bork wasn't cashing in last night.


1 of those 2 "charisma vacuums" got the biggest pop of the night when he won the WWE title at Wrestlemania 35 (with the company's biggest crowd audience of the year), and the other one was part of a match at Money in the Bank with the best crowd reaction during it (not to mention that he comes out every week to the loudest pops).

You still don't know shit about who's actually a charisma vacuum :lol


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

DammitC said:


> Ignoring the fact that Seth Rollins was in the 1st hour and that Brock Lesnar was in the 3rd hour too :lmao
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since you're bringing that topic up, where the fuck are Lacey Evans and Brock Lesnar in the top 5 (let alone the top 10)? :mj4


Brock is being paid what? 5 or 6 million PER year? He wins the briefcase the night previous, and the very next night he is teased all through out the night that he will cash in on EITHER Champion, and he draws a big, bad 2.2 in Hour 3 the night after the PPV?

:mj4

Money well spent for the old, senile one. Old twerp.


----------



## Swindle

Everyone knows WWE tropes and everyone knows Brock doesn't wrestle on free tv. It was a weak hook, that'd he'd cash in at the end of the night.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

DammitC said:


> 1 of those 2 "charisma vacuums" got the biggest pop of the night when he won the WWE title at Wrestlemania 35 (with the company's biggest crowd audience of the year), and the other one was part of a match at Money in the Bank with the best crowd reaction during it (not to mention that he comes out every week to the loudest pops).
> 
> You still don't know shit about who's actually a charisma vacuum :lol


Biggest pop of the night and lowest drawing world champ in history. He's another Jinder Mahal except smark crowds like him.

Doesn't move the needle. Doesn't sell merch. Can't do PR work because he can't talk. He even chased his friend Mox away because he got tired of seeing his less talented friend get pushed over him.


----------



## Randy Lahey

patpat said:


> last year raw came after a b level ppv! This here is the audience post money in the fucking bank....in what dimension is this good?!


Considering they were against an NBA game featuring the most popular team in the NBA, and just 3 weeks ago they were averaging 30% loss from the prior year, AND the only thing that changed was putting Lesnar back in the mix, yes the rating is entirely due to Lesnar.

Some of you Rollins and Aj marks need to admit that the casual fans don't care about the geeks you follow. And all you guys saying Lesnar does nothing for ratings are in fact wrong. He's the only draw on the roster. Without him, they'd be cratering below 2mils


----------



## Randy Lahey

Showstopper said:


> Brock is being paid what? 5 or 6 million PER year? He wins the briefcase the night previous, and the very next night he is teased all through out the night that he will cash in on EITHER Champion, and he draws a big, bad 2.2 in Hour 3 the night after the PPV?
> 
> :mj4
> 
> Money well spent for the old, senile one. Old twerp.


I"d say it's money clearly well spent. Because if Lesnar wasn't on the show, they'd be 15-25% off last year's ratings at a minimum, just like they were in the leadup to Wrestlemania and all thru April


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Paul Heyman and Brock have manipulated a situation where Vince thinks he "needs" them, the same way Eric Bischoff was manipulated by Hogan into "needing" him post-1997.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Bork is back because Seth can't do his job. Just like how Cena had to keep coming back when Reigns couldn't do his.


----------



## Isuzu

R-Truth vs. Robert Roode - 24/7 Championship : 1,2M views
Hangman Page vs. Neville : 41k views


----------



## Randy Lahey

Mifune Jackson said:


> Paul Heyman and Brock have manipulated a situation where Vince thinks he "needs" them, the same way Eric Bischoff was manipulated by Hogan into "needing" him post-1997.


That's true, and I think Brock has even more leverage now especially with the Fox deal coming up. Vince has to have Brock, because if he doesn't that show will tank and go to FS1 or be cancelled.

One guy is worth about 300,000 - 400,000 viewers. Given how small WWE's audience is now, that % if gigantic.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Randy Lahey said:


> I"d say it's money clearly well spent. Because if Lesnar wasn't on the show, they'd be 15-25% off last year's ratings at a minimum, just like they were in the leadup to Wrestlemania and all thru April


Not so sure about that. Night after PPV and they did a 2.2 in Hour 3 with him teased all through out the show to possibly become Champion in hour 3.

:deandre


----------



## A-C-P

This whole thread right now :bosque


----------



## Mordecay

There is this thing about people who are considered draws and have proven being a draw in the past: When WWE was looking to sign a new tv deal tv stations ask for the ratings and ask for what stars do they have. And let's face it: WWE sold their tv deals using Cena's, Ronda's and Brock's names to the tv stations, or do you think tv executives know who AJ, Seth, Becky and co. are? So, while in reality those so called "draws" aren't actually drawing anymore they were important to get the tv deals they have gotten. so, in a sense, they are actually draws.


----------



## Isuzu

Vince Russo comments on raw ratings rising
https://mobile.twitter.com/THEVinceRusso/status/1130816007604297728

Rating up 7.3% to 2.521 Million Viewers last night compared to last week.


----------



## Jedah

Barely up from last week. :lmao

That hour 3 rating. :lmao

But but but but I thought Brock was a huge draw! :eyeroll


----------



## Jonhern

Randy Lahey said:


> Considering they were against an NBA game featuring the most popular team in the NBA, and just 3 weeks ago they were averaging 30% loss from the prior year, AND the only thing that changed was putting Lesnar back in the mix, yes the rating is entirely due to Lesnar.
> 
> Some of you Rollins and Aj marks need to admit that the casual fans don't care about the geeks you follow. And all you guys saying Lesnar does nothing for ratings are in fact wrong. He's the only draw on the roster. Without him, they'd be cratering below 2mils


They dropped so low it would have been hard to continue 30% drops, last week for instance was only 15% drop. So it wouldn't have been 30% without him.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Mordecay said:


> There is this thing about people who are considered draws and have proven being a draw in the past: When WWE was looking to sign a new tv deal tv stations ask for the ratings and ask for what stars do they have. And let's face it: WWE sold their tv deals using Cena's, Ronda's and Brock's names to the tv stations, or do you think tv executives know who AJ, Seth, Becky and co. are? So, while in reality those so called "draws" aren't actually drawing anymore they were important to get the tv deals they have gotten. so, in a sense, they are actually draws.


That's certainly the game they have to play. A lot of execs don't look too deeply into things. And if they did, they'd see that Ronda probably won't be on too much, or at all (I'm guessing she appears the first week because that'll be "all hands on deck"). 

It's ultimately very superficial, with little substance as far as making a difference in the ratings go. Obviously, Brock is more of a draw than Seth Rollins. No one here is going to argue that. The argument is more whether putting Brock back in the main title picture (and thus, the A storyline) is going to really help WWE in the end. 

I think the Hogan/WCW analogy holds. Just because he's Hulk Hogan and he's a big name and you're paying him a lot doesn't mean that the best use for him is to be the top storyline. 

If Vince can't use Brock to elevate the roster around him, this is a bad deal for everyone long term.


----------



## Jedah

Ronda wasn't the draw WWE was hoping she would be, that's indisputable.


----------



## Mordecay

Jedah said:


> Ronda wasn't the draw WWE was hoping she would be, that's indisputable.


Apparently Ronda was the reason FOX decided to pay all that money for SD though, since FOX used to air a lot of UFC programming and now WWE has her and I suppose exceutives thought that she was going to be as big if a draw on WWE.


----------



## Jedah

Yeah, they thought she was, but she just didn't turn out to be.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

Mordecay said:


> Apparently Ronda was the reason FOX decided to pay all that money for SD though, since FOX used to air a lot of UFC programming and now WWE has her and I suppose exceutives thought that she was going to be as big if a draw on WWE.


Ronda was a huge draw for the UFC, second only to Conor. I think they overestimated the crossover between UFC and WWE fans. It's probably only about 15-20%


----------



## Jedah

Ronda lost most of her appeal after Holm and Nunes wrecked her shit. I said as much when those rumors she was coming began to swirl.

I think she did a good job during her run, but she just wasn't much of an attraction anymore.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

Jedah said:


> Ronda lost most of her appeal after Holm and Nunes wrecked her shit. I said as much when those rumors she was coming began to swirl.
> 
> I think she did a good job during her run, but she just wasn't much of an attraction anymore.


100% once the invincibility aura was gone all she had was the redemption arc, that died when Nunes flatlined her.

They missed a big opportunity not doing Rousey/Holm II, that would've drawn 1.5m+ PPV buys imo. Putting her in their with Nunes was like sending a lamb to the slaughter. I guess it was Holly's fault for rushing into a title defence with Miesha Tate instead of waiting for Ronda. Took a lot of money out of her own pocket there.


----------



## Adam Cool

Someone being a draw in UFC=/=someone being a draw in wrestling 
Especially as Wrestling is known to be scripted by most above the age of 12


----------



## Seafort

It's clear by these numbers that the necessary changes have been made, the product is refreshed, and WWE is entering a new Golden Age.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> Not so sure about that. Night after PPV and they did a 2.2 in Hour 3 with him teased all through out the show to possibly become Champion in hour 3.
> 
> :deandre


I don’t think anyone thought there was a real chance of a cash in. Look at the viewing thread, everyone knew exactly what would happen. They needed a better hook than that if they wanted people to stick around for hr 3.

And kudos to Brock for at least getting them to 2.5 MM. No way they hit that without him.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> I don’t think anyone thought there was a real chance of a cash in. Look at the viewing thread, everyone knew exactly what would happen. They needed a better hook than that if they wanted people to stick around for hr 3.
> 
> And kudos to Brock for at least getting them to 2.5 MM. No way they hit that without him.


Doesn't matter. We might have known that. That doesn't mean the entire viewing audience did. He was advertised throughout the entire show to possibly cash in on one of TWO Champs, and did a terrible hour 3. No excuses. If the full timers who are over exposed don't get excuses made for them, than the big name part timer certainly doesn't.


----------



## AlternateDemise

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> The women are barely featured on Raw now but lets blame them instead of Hamtaro Rollins who is all over the show and always killing ratings :lmao
> 
> Becky needs to keep her bitch in check.





nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> The numbers prove she is. In back to back weeks Lacey has boosted and retained viewers. And last week she did so without Seth and AJ on the show proving they are not only non-draws but actual ratings killers. Especially Seth.
> 
> She started the resurgence of the ratings and now has Bork back to help. They can only do so much with Seth chasing people away tho.


First you say women can't be blamed but now you're saying they're the reasons for the high ratings. If they aren't around enough to the point where they can't be blamed for low ratings, you can't contribute the higher ratings to them. 

Take a stance that makes sense and stick to it. Unless you're trolling. In which case, well done.


----------



## Bxstr

Brock winning mitb was best decision to retain viewers.
Now let's hope he cashes in sooner and save us from disastrous title reign of current charisma vacuum champion.


----------



## Jedah

Yeah, let's just ignore the million viewers that stopped watching during his time on top because the product was so abysmal. Great idea. :trolldog


----------



## SPCDRI

patpat said:


> How is that good? Last year the raw came after a B level ppv where people legitimately left the arena in the main event......and it did better than a raw post money in the bank?! Which is one of the biggest ppv?
> What the actual fuck? Are the standards this low?


When the ratings are down 5 percent for last year instead of 25 percent, it gets celebrated. From 2014 onwards, RAW rating have been going down the shitter, with the last 2 years being a car crash, so when its only down 100,000 from last year instead of 400,000, eh, you take it. 

Still, Bayley title change, Brock Lesnar winning money in the bank, Brock advertised heavily, Rollins, Styles on the same show, "The Wild Card Rule" to feature Reigns, Kingston, McMahons, The Miz etc, having Mick Foley bring back a nostalgia title for the undercard, wow. That's a lot of tricks to have to pull to still be down 5 percent from where you were May 2018.


----------



## raymond1985

Jedah said:


> Yeah, let's just ignore the million viewers that stopped watching during his time on top because the product was so abysmal. Great idea. :trolldog


Well the viewership has hardly improved since he left either. Neither has the product been any better without him. In fact, things have gotten worse on both accounts. 

If anything, this week's viewership proves that Brock, as stale as he is, is a better bet to retain viewers than anyone else on the roster.


----------



## SPCDRI

Mifune Jackson said:


> Obviously, Brock is more of a draw than Seth Rollins. No one here is going to argue that. The argument is more whether putting Brock back in the main title picture (and thus, the A storyline) is going to really help WWE in the end.


right this second, Lesnar is a bigger draw than Rollins, but still not much of a draw himself. Right this very instance, Lesnar can get some additional people to show up. I think he got a few hundred thousand people to watch that RAW who otherwise wouldn't have watched that RAW, because he was heavily involved in MITB and people wanted to see where it was all headed since Lesnar is the top story in the company again. Now, whether another year of Brock Lesnar, Seth Rollins and Roman Reigns in the A story of the promotion, when that's been the A story of RAW for the past 2+ years, is WWE cutting its throat in the long term, that remains to be seen. 

I believe that consistently pushing Brock Lesnar and Shield members in A stories for many years now is the chief reason every hour of RAW is sub-3 million. They short-termed themselves into cutting their throats long term.


----------



## Jedah

First we hear that Seth turned off so many people in 2015 but Brock's dick riders (who really just have "anti-smark" gimmicks for the most part) will completely ignore the fact that his time on top was so bad that a million people stopped watching in the course of the past 12 months. :trolldog

This week's viewership proves jack. It came off a big PPV, the end of May is when ratings begin stabilizing until the fall anyway, and that hour 3 was as bad as most of April's shows.


----------



## raymond1985

Jedah said:


> First we hear that Seth turned off so many people in 2015 but Brock's dick riders (who really just have "anti-smark" gimmicks for the most part) will completely ignore the fact that his time on top was so bad that a million people stopped watching in the course of the past 12 months. :trolldog
> 
> This week's viewership proves jack. It came off a big PPV, the end of May is when ratings begin stabilizing until the fall anyway, and that hour 3 was as bad as most of April's shows.


This week's RAW ran head to head with the NBA Playoffs. Yet, it still improved viewership by a decent margin. That can't just be attributed to a post-PPV bump. It was also down to Brock.

The third hour was up 400k on the 3rd hour that Rollins/Styles headlined. And up almost 300k on the RAW that Bryan and Kingston headlined. 

Again, as stale as Brock is in 2019, there are no signs that the wider audience want to see Seth Rollins and Daniel Bryan more than him.


----------



## Jedah

It improved a whopping 5%. Yowie wowie! That hour 3 was abysmal no matter which way you slice it, just as bad as most of April's shows.

And of course, Brock's dick riders continue to ignore that a million people tuned out during his title reigns, while he did jack shit during the fall and on the road to Mania. But go ahead, just keep it up cause _he's legitz n charisma vacuums n shit,_ which is basically what the crowing boils down to these days.

Brock hasn't been entertaining in two years and the product has been atrocious with him in the title picture, bottom line. A million people agree. Even if that 5% was totally on Brock (it wasn't), it still wouldn't excuse his shit.


----------



## raymond1985

Jedah said:


> It improved a whopping 5%. Yowie wowie! That hour 3 was abysmal no matter which way you slice it, just as bad as most of April's shows.
> 
> And of course, Brock's dick riders continue to ignore that a million people tuned out during his title reigns, while he did jack shit during the fall and on the road to Mania. But go ahead, just keep it up cause _he's legitz n charisma vacuums n shit,_ which is basically what the crowing boils down to these days.
> 
> Brock hasn't been entertaining in two years and the product has been atrocious with him in the title picture, bottom line. A million people agree. Even if that 5% was totally on Brock (it wasn't), it still wouldn't excuse his shit.


Brock wasn't responsible for a million viewers tuning out. He wasn't always on TV when he was champion. It was WWE's choice to give the belt to a part-time talent. You can't blame Brock for that. 

The reason why WWE's viewership has fallen off a cliff is because of the poor booking, ober-saturation, and yes, because the likes of Rollins are not as over as their fans think. 

A 5% increase is actually quite impressive. Given how quickly things were trending down with Rollins as champion.


----------



## Jedah

So Seth wasn't responsible for people tuning out those years. It was all WWE's choice to book him the way they did (which was shit), you can't blame him for that. Sorry buddy, you can't have it both ways.

Of course the poor booking and formulaic presentation is the primary thing responsible, we've all been saying that for years and years but no one there ever listens. And Brock's booking is one of the key reasons why. The product has had some of the worst two years it's ever had with him in the title scene, and a million people tuned out as a result. As rote as it was post-Mania, almost everything about it was actively atrocious at this time last year (not just Brock). Only now do they appear to be trying to make some improvements (the 24/7 title is legitimately a structural change).


----------



## SPCDRI

For some context...

Brock wins the UT from Goldberg at WM 33, April 2017
April 3, 2017 is the first post-WM RAW with Lesnar as champ

Hour one: 3.83 million
Hour two: 3.89 million
Hour three: 3.58 million

The post-WM numbers for April 2018 after Brock Lesnar retained against Roman Reigns in the Main Event


Hour 1: 3.182 million viewers, 1.15 rating in 18-49 demographic
Hour 2: 2.943 million viewers, 1.10 rating in 18-49 demographic
Hour 3: 2.646 million viewers, 1.00 rating in 18-49 demographic

Numbers on the Go-Home Show to SummerSlam, the event Reigns wins the belt from Lesnar
2.85
2.86
2.76

First Post-SummerSlam numbers with Reigns as champion

3.1
3.2
2.9

The numbers for 2017's post SummerSlam show averaged 3.4 million. Is 3.4 a larger number than 3.1, 3.2 and 2.9? I don't know. I'm trying to figure out if Brock Lesnar and Shield members are draws.

Somebody help me out here, which number is larger, 3.8 million, or 2.8 million? I'm not so good with math.


----------



## llj

Even if you assume Brock bumped the numbers, it's still a case of short term marginal gains for long term massive hurts. Once Brock stops showing up again and/or he cashes in, the "thrill" of his surprise at MITB will have worn off as we get back to our regularly scheduled program.

Guys are always saying "LMAO X geek/women doesn't draw, time to bring back X star from the 2000s" but that's the problem. They keep hesitating or geeking out the current roster that 15 years later when guys like Taker and Brock are 60-70 years old, they can't even use THIS current roster as nostalgia bumps anymore. Because then everyone will be a geek.o

You know, building new stars you have to be patient. Numbers will go down initially but the idea is building for 4-5 years later when they would be bigger stars after a prolonged period of building. The problem is Vince has the attention span of a gnat today. He'll lose interest in someone very quickly and then throw them into 50/50 instead of staying the course with people with promise so that they can retain or even grow their star power.


----------



## Jedah

That's a truly atrocious drop over two years. Has to be bigger than any two year drop on record?

They killed the entire product for Brock and Roman over the past two years and it really shows, and Vince couldn't even pull the trigger on Roman at the end of it all.



> Guys are always saying "LMAO X geek/women doesn't draw, time to bring back X star from the 2000s" but that's the problem.


End of thread.

No one said Brock isn't a better attraction than most guys (although the fall and road to Mania this year make this even more questionable), but he's basically statistically insignificant compared to the real problems. He takes far, far, far more than he gives.

For the record, I'm not even saying I want Brock gone. I just want him to go back to what he was before 2017 - a "special" attraction that sometimes gets involved in big grudge angles. I don't want him as the champion or focus of a show. As a matter of fact, I'd argue his time in the title picture has hurt him as much as it has anyone else, because now millions of people are just sick of him. He's lost much of his "special attraction" appeal.


----------



## SPCDRI

Jedah said:


> That's a truly atrocious drop over two years. Has to be bigger than any two year drop on record?
> 
> They killed the entire product for Brock and Roman over the past two years and it really shows, and Vince couldn't even pull the trigger on Roman at the end of it all.


That's the bitch of it, isn't it? WWE had WrestleMania, Greatest Royal Rumble, SummerSlam and another WM to pull the trigger on a Shield member definitively beating Brock Lesnar clean...and WWE didn't...because I don't really know why, your guess is as good as mine. MegaPush Brock/Shield as your A story for over 2 years...never put a Shield member over clean, and now Dean Ambrose isn't even in the company anymore and Brock is about to cash in on Rollins I bet. That'll make the Shield look strong!

Genius booking!


----------



## Jedah

I have a feeling Brock is cashing in on Kofi, actually.

But that just brings us back to square one anyway. Brock as the boring absentee champion and setting up him vs. Roman. AGAIN. fpalm

Sucks for Roman most of all, because I would have been legitimately intrigued at him vs. Bryan for Mania this year. Both of them could've gotten something good out of it. People are going to pan Roman again if he's back facing Brock.


----------



## SPCDRI

Brock as HW champion no-showing RAW, Smackdowns and PPVs 60+ percent of the time, and a Shield member trying to beat him. That's sounds like a hootenanny.


----------



## llj

Jedah said:


> Sucks for Roman most of all, because I would have been legitimately intrigued at him vs. Bryan for Mania this year. Both of them could've gotten something good out of it. People are going to pan Roman again if he's back facing Brock.


THIS.

Face Roman v Heel Bryan was actually one of the few matches I was curious about after the shakeup. But right now that looks nowhere near close to happening anytime soon


----------



## Freelancer

It's just a matter of time before Brock cashes in then disappears again with the belt. And were just right back to where we were before.


----------



## SPCDRI

llj said:


> THIS.
> 
> Face Roman v Heel Bryan was actually one of the few matches I was curious about after the shakeup. But right now that looks nowhere near close to happening anytime soon


Imagine if it was a well-executed double turn, Face Bryan/Heel Reigns

:homer

:mark:


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> Doesn't matter. We might have known that. That doesn't mean the entire viewing audience did. He was advertised throughout the entire show to possibly cash in on one of TWO Champs, and did a terrible hour 3. No excuses. If the full timers who are over exposed don't get excuses made for them, than the big name part timer certainly doesn't.


That’s what I’m saying, I think the entire viewing audience did know it. Wash, rinse, repeat. It’s the same old shit. People saw Brock to start the show. They don’t care to see him standing around while the geeks have a tag match.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> That’s what I’m saying, I think the entire viewing audience did know it. Wash, rinse, repeat. It’s the same old shit. People saw Brock to start the show. They don’t care to see him standing around while the geeks have a tag match.


Cool. Then, we can use that same mindset with the full-timers who are on TV every week. If they're on in the first hour, then what they draw in the third hour doesn't matter.

Sounds good to me. That is the new logic going forward then.

(BTW. This doesn't even take into consideration Brock isn't on TV every week and over-exposed like all of the full-timers. They threw him another bone in teasing him cash in and become Champion, isn't over-exposed every week, and STILL no one cared. Face it. When it comes to drawing, Brock is every bit the geek that every full-timer is. This did more than confirm that.)


----------



## SPCDRI

would somebody involved with professional wrestling for a decade who still sounds like a eunuch and is such a Baby Boy that he needed another man to speak for him for the last SEVEN YEARS be a geek?


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Showstopper said:


> Cool. Then, we can use that same mindset with the full-timers who are on TV every week. If they're on in the first hour, then what they draw in the third hour doesn't matter.
> 
> Sounds good to me. That is the new logic going forward then.
> 
> (BTW. This doesn't even take into consideration Brock isn't on TV every week and over-exposed like all of the full-timers. They threw him another bone in teasing him cash in and become Champion, isn't over-exposed every week, and STILL no one cared. Face it. When it comes to drawing, Brock is every bit the geek that every full-timer is. This did more than confirm that.)


Seth and Kofi were in an actual match. If they were as popular as smarks claim they are people would have kept watching to see them. You think Austin and Rock or even Cena and Batista teaming together in a main event would have drove viewers away?

Knowing Bork wasn't cashing in there was no reason for his fans to keep watching. It was up to the actual world champs to draw and they failed to do so yet again.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Seth and Kofi were in an actual match. If they were as popular as smarks claim they are people would have kept watching to see them. You think Austin and Rock or even Cena and Batista teaming together in a main event would have drove viewers away?
> 
> Knowing Bork wasn't cashing in there was no reason for his fans to keep watching. It was up to the actual world champs to draw and they failed to do so yet again.



All we hear every week is that Brock is the only big star in this company with all of this charisma.

He was teased for 3 hours straight to become next World Champion...and no one gave a fuck to see that happen.

People watched when Austin and Rock wrestled guys like Road Dog. IF you're a big star, they watch you wrestle anyone and CERTAINLY watch if you can become a World Champion at the drop of a hat.

But NOPE. Not with Brock. 

Results are in....

And....


NOT A DRAW!

:ha


----------



## bradatar

Showstopper said:


> All we hear every week is that Brock is the only big star in this company with all of this charisma.
> 
> He was teased for 3 hours straight to become next World Champion...and no one gave a fuck to see that happen.
> 
> People watched when Austin and Rock wrestled guys like Road Dog. IF you're a big star, they watch you wrestle anyone and CERTAINLY watch if you can become a World Champion at the drop of a hat.
> 
> But NOPE. Not with Brock.
> 
> Results are in....
> 
> And....
> 
> 
> NOT A DRAW!
> 
> :ha



This a completely flawed theory unless you started watching wrestling yesterday. Any educated fan knew Brock wasn't cashing in that night. You got worked mark.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

bradatar said:


> This a completely flawed theory unless you started watching wrestling yesterday. Any educated fan knew Brock wasn't cashing in that night. You got worked mark.


And every fan knew he was going to be in Hour 3, which he was.

If we're going to hold full timers responsible for drawing, part timers who aren't over exposed and get paid more are absolutely going to be held to the same standard. And even moreso, since they're supposedly "BIG STARS WITH LOADS OF CHARISMA."

So much for that load of mark bullshit.

:mj4


----------



## bradatar

Showstopper said:


> And every fan knew he was going to be in Hour 3, which he was, Mark.
> 
> If we're going to hold full timers responsible for drawing, part timers who aren't over exposed and get paid more are absolutely going to be held to the same standard. And even moreso, since they're supposedly "BIG STARS WITH LOADS OF CHARISMA."
> 
> So much for that load of bullshit.
> 
> :mj4


You're talking in circles mark. Brock not doing shit in that match was apparent, and nobody gave a shit to watch the two geek champions.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

bradatar said:


> You're talking in circles mark. Brock not doing shit in that match was apparent, and nobody gave a shit to watch the two geek champions.


Me talking in circles? All I hear is that wrestlers with CHARISMA draw people to watch NO MATTER WHAT.

Well, if that's the case, where were they to watch Brock appear in Hour 3? Even if he wasn't going to cash in, they KNEW he would at least appear. And he did. Too bad the fans didn't.

Keep with the name-calling. It shows how awful your argument is here.


----------



## DammitChrist

bradatar said:


> You're talking in circles mark. Brock not doing shit in that match was apparent, and nobody gave a shit to watch the two geek champions.


If we go with your poor logic, then it looks like that not many people stuck around to watch Brock Lesnar in the end either :lol


----------



## Isuzu

Brock could legit kill the entire roster. Brock is NCAA Champ, MMA Champ, he knows how to wrestle. Anything other than suplex moves from Brock would be so hard to believe that a 5ft8 Homeless Wizard(Daniel Bryan) could survive.


----------



## bradatar

Showstopper said:


> Me talking in circles? All I hear is that wrestlers with CHARISMA draw people to watch NO MATTER WHAT.
> 
> Well, if that's the case, where were they to watch Brock appear in Hour 3? Even if he wasn't going to cash in, they KNEW he would at least appear. And he did. Too bad the fans didn't.
> 
> Keep with the name-calling. It shows how awful your argument is here.


So it's Brock's job to draw for other guys main eventing now? What kind of logic is that? Wrestlers with charisma draw when they're in positions to draw. Brock sitting ringride isn't that position bud. NOBODY THOUGHT BROCK WAS CASHING IN.


----------



## bradatar

DammitC said:


> If we go with your poor logic, then it looks like that not many people stuck around to watch Brock Lesnar in the end either :lol


I sure didn't. I didn't care to watch some geek match knowing Brock wasn't cashing in. Went to sleep slowly after the 3rd hour started. I didn't even know what happened at the end of RAW someone had to tell me the next day on the RAW thread. 

You guys look for any reason to not give Brock any credit. You're judging ratings of SOMEONE ELSES segment to Brock because he was ringride? Am I missing something?


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

bradatar said:


> So it's Brock's job to draw for other guys main eventing now? What kind of logic is that? Wrestlers with charisma draw when they're in positions to draw. Brock sitting ringride isn't that position bud. NOBODY THOUGHT BROCK WAS CASHING IN.


When he's advertised throughout the show to cash in??? YES. Of course it's his job to draw. The tag match was secondary. Commentary (aka Vince) teased the cash in the entire night, not the stupid tag match we get every week.

:mj4

The shifting of the goal posts here is hilarious. And who cares if someone wrestled or not??? IF YOU'RE ON TV, YOU CAN DRAW PEOPLE TO WATCH, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT'S ADVERTISED ALL NIGHT LONG.

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

Not. A. Draw. as we all knew anyway.


----------



## Babyfacevsheel

Brock is the man who is carrying the show now, Roman fanboys should just accept this fact. The result of pushing Boreman Reigns is ever dwindling ratings each week. Vince is aware of this and hence why he is desperate on keep hold of Brock.


----------



## Erik.

Isuzu said:


> Brock could legit kill the entire roster. Brock is NCAA Champ, MMA Champ, he knows how to wrestle. Anything other than suplex moves from Brock would be so hard to believe that a 5ft8 Homeless Wizard(Daniel Bryan) could survive.


So could Shamrock and he couldn't draw a dime.

It's almost as if wrestling..... isn't real!?


----------



## bradatar

Showstopper said:


> When he's advertised throughout the show to cash in??? YES. Of course it's his job to draw. The tag match was secondary. Commentary (aka Vince) teased the cash in the entire night, not the stupid tag match we get every week.
> 
> :mj4
> 
> The shifting of the goal posts here is hilarious. And who cares if someone wrestled or not??? IF YOU'RE ON TV, YOU CAN DRAW PEOPLE TO WATCH, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT'S ADVERTISED ALL NIGHT LONG.
> 
> :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao
> 
> Not. A. Draw. as we all knew anyway.


I don't get what you don't understand. This is a waste of time.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

bradatar said:


> I don't get what you don't understand. This is a waste of time.


Same here on my end. Brock was pushed by commentary starting from the end of the opening segment of the show that he could cash in and would appear in Hour 3, and it was pushed as that literally all night, and he did appear, and everyone was waiting for him to appear, and it didn't do a good number. Pretty cut and dry.


----------



## patpat

I love showstopper working all the ratingfags in the thread :lol


----------



## SHIVV-EAUX-EMME-GEEE

AEW. That is all. :mark


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Smarks will never admit it but they love Bork more than anyone. Casuals don't watch the show anymore so all the viewers that left post-WM were smarks and all the viewers that came back this week were smarks. After Seth and Kofi won the titles they had nothing left to look forward to. Smarks get more enjoyment out of hating on Bork than when their actual favorites win titles.

If Bork or Corbin or Miz or Lacey were champs right now I'd be ecstatic. Smarks literally have all of their darlings (Seth, Kofi, Becky, Bayley) holding the belts and they still do nothing but hate. It's illogical.


----------



## A-C-P

The show overall is still a big steaming pile of dog shit I don't care who is holding the belts :draper2

and just switching the belts to someone else whether someone likes them personally or not is not changing that.


----------



## Kratosx23

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Smarks will never admit it but they love Bork more than anyone. Casuals don't watch the show anymore so all the viewers that left post-WM were smarks and all the viewers that came back this week were smarks. After Seth and Kofi won the titles they had nothing left to look forward to. Smarks get more enjoyment out of hating on Bork than when their actual favorites win titles.
> 
> If Bork or Corbin or Miz or Lacey were champs right now I'd be ecstatic. Smarks literally have all of their darlings (Seth, Kofi, Becky, Bayley) holding the belts and they still do nothing but hate. It's illogical.


Yeah, because that's what YOU want. You're comparing yourself, an individual person to millions of completely different people and trying to assign them into a specific, coordinated hive mind where none such exists. I'm a smark and I don't fucking want Seth, Kofi, Becky and Bayley holding the belts, I want Asuka, Samoa Joe, Bray Wyatt and Kevin Owens or Sami Zayn. That's the problem, everybody wants different people holding the belts, so nobody's happy. This isn't 1998 where literally every WWE fan is a fan of Stone Cold Steve Austin. It's become too divisive. Even the people who are "over" nowadays aren't even as over as the jobbers in the Attitude Era. Becky and Kofi are less over than peak Too Cool.



Showstopper said:


> Same here on my end. Brock was pushed by commentary starting from the end of the opening segment of the show that he could cash in and would appear in Hour 3, and it was pushed as that literally all night, and he did appear, and everyone was waiting for him to appear, and it didn't do a good number. Pretty cut and dry.


I'm on the "Brock can't draw" bandwagon as well, but people probably figured he wasn't going to cash in, because WWE does this all the time. I knew it and I was thinking the whole time "Ok, they're gonna tease him cashing in and then he's gonna appear and then he's not gonna do it", which is exactly what happened. Everybody knows their pattern. You could've put anybody in this spot and people would've known not to tune in. Doubly so with Brock because everybody knows he doesn't wrestle on Raw, ever.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Tyrion Lannister said:


> Yeah, because that's what YOU want. You're comparing yourself, an individual person to millions of completely different people and trying to assign them into a specific, coordinated hive mind where none such exists. I'm a smark and I don't fucking want Seth, Kofi, Becky and Bayley holding the belts, I want Asuka, Samoa Joe, Bray Wyatt and Kevin Owens or Sami Zayn. That's the problem, everybody wants different people holding the belts, so nobody's happy. This isn't 1998 where literally every WWE fan is a fan of Stone Cold Steve Austin. It's become too divisive. Even the people who are "over" nowadays aren't even as over as the jobbers in the Attitude Era. Becky and Kofi are less over than peak Too Cool.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm on the "Brock can't draw" bandwagon as well, but people probably figured he wasn't going to cash in, because WWE does this all the time. I knew it and I was thinking the whole time "Ok, they're gonna tease him cashing in and then he's gonna appear and then he's not gonna do it", which is exactly what happened. Everybody knows their pattern. You could've put anybody in this spot and people would've known not to tune in. Doubly so with Brock because everybody knows he doesn't wrestle on Raw, ever.


Of course. I knew he wouldn't cash-in, either. My one and only point here is when you have people in this thread every week claiming Brock will fix the ratings, and it's very obvious that he literally can not, it's hilarious. No one gave a fuck about him cashing in, regardless.



A-C-P said:


> The show overall is still a big steaming pile of dog shit I don't care who is holding the belts :draper2
> 
> and just switching the belts to someone else whether someone likes them personally or not is not changing that.


Absolutely. I'd say about 99% of the people in this thread have accepted that. It's only some Johnny-come-lately awful posters who can't. :shrug


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Showstopper said:


> Of course. I knew he wouldn't cash-in, either. My one and only point here is when you have people in this thread every week claiming Brock will fix the ratings, and it's very obvious that he literally can not, it's hilarious. No one gave a fuck about him cashing in, regardless.


He doesn't fix the ratings but he does give them a boost. Someone brought up the point before that 400k viewers for a show that draws in the low 2's now is a big percentage.

Ratings are never going to be what they once were no matter what they do. I'd be shocked if they draw a 3 once this entire year.

But when one man is clearly responsible for a 20% increase in ratings he has a right to hold the leverage that he does.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> He doesn't fix the ratings but he does give them a boost. Someone brought up the point before that 400k viewers for a show that draws in the low 2's now is a big percentage.
> 
> Ratings are never going to be what they once were no matter what they do. I'd be shocked if they draw a 3 once this entire year.
> 
> But when one man is clearly responsible for a 20% increase in ratings he has a right to hold the leverage that he does.


You guys are great. First, it's all on the Champion, good or bad. Then, it's a post PPV bump. Then, it's he didn't wrestle, how can he be held responsible if he didn't wrestle. Now, he's responsible for an insignificant slight bump that will no doubt be down next week. They've gotten these slight PPV bumps in the past without him, too, you know.

I hope Brock is Champion in September going head to head against Monday Night Football this Fall.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

Showstopper said:


> I'd say about 99% of the people in this thread have accepted that. It's only some *Johnny-come-lately* awful posters who can't. :shrug


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


>


:lol Not you, bro. (Y)


----------



## SPCDRI

Why do people even care about credibility in a known worked form of entertainment? Does that really appeal to you, that Brock Lesnar could "really beat these people up?" That's not his job, you dingbats. Actual mobsters could have killed Pacino and Gandolfini. I guess "genuine" murdering criminals with "credibility" should have been given the roles of Michael Corleone and Tony Soprano.

Give me a wrestler celebrated for his safety than Brock shooting on people when he's mad, and working unsafe and getting people injured left and right. Brock just busted open 3 people in a ladder match he wasn't even a participant in! I bet a lot of you simpletons marked for that. Ooh, legitimate! Gimme Bret Hart over this clod any day.


----------



## Isuzu

SPCDRI said:


> Why do people even care about credibility in a known worked form of entertainment? Does that really appeal to you, that Brock Lesnar could "really beat these people up?" That's not his job, you dingbats. Actual mobsters could have killed Pacino and Gandolfini. I guess "genuine" murdering criminals with "credibility" should have been given the roles of Michael Corleone and Tony Soprano.
> 
> Give me a wrestler celebrated for his safety than Brock shooting on people when he's mad, and working unsafe and getting people injured left and right. Brock just busted open 3 people in a ladder match he wasn't even a participant in! I bet a lot of you simpletons marked for that. Ooh, legitimate! Gimme Bret Hart over this clod any day.



Seth Roggins ended Sting's career by being very unsafe, that bum also broke Cena's nose.


----------



## SPCDRI

I like brock when he wants to be a professional wrestler, and the last time he wanted to be a professional wrestler was years ago. Look at what he did with CM Punk in 2013. I thought that was the best angle and match all year and Brock was a huge reason for it. If THAT Brock Lesnar was around, I'd be happy. But hey, he wants money for nothing now, and he gets it. I won't say good for him, I'll say shame on him, and WWE, too, but hey, that's how it goes. 

That's probably the worst thing about the guy. He's got all the potential in the world to be over 9000 times better than he has been in the past 2 years but he got old and lazy and just doesn't give a fuck. That's kinda cute and edgy and intriguing for a few months. A couple of years of it is a drag.


----------



## chronoxiong

With the ratings increase, Vince is going to continue to think that he's a genius especially with the lame Wildcard Rule in place. That rule needs to go. Its costing screentime for other people who need it. But no, he thinks they aren't grabbing the brass ring. I'm happy for the rating increase but this is not going to help long term for the company.


----------



## SPCDRI

I'm just trying to see how many weeks or possibly even months in a row they keep having the same people pulling double duty. The Big Dog has TWO YARDS. 

:vince3


----------



## Trivette

Anyone acting like 2.6 is something to write home about :kobelol

The systemic issues that are bleeding viewers have little to nothing to do with talent, but rather the lack of consistent storytelling. It's evident to most long term viewers that nothing at all substantive will occur on the weekly programs. Many viewers who still consider themselves fans choose to just watch the PPVs, follow their favorite performers on social media, read spoilers on sites like these, or simply watch high lights on YouTube. There is no logical reason to sit through a 3 hour program loaded with ads, that has minimal payoff, subpar storytelling, and inconsequential plotlines. The talent is some of the best it's ever been, while the writing is at it's absolute worst.

Let us know when RAW starts CONSISTENTLY hitting 3's again, then you might have something to brag about.


----------



## Robbyfude

Im glad that new up and comer Brock Lesnar is getting the push he deserves. He also seems to boost ratings. Hope eventually he can win the title and wrestle the greatest main event star Roman Reigns at Wrestlemania.


----------



## SPCDRI

Fringe said:


> Let us know when RAW starts CONSISTENTLY hitting 3's again, then you might have something to brag about.


The month RAW has all 3 hours hit at least 3 million viewers for a full month again is also the month monkeys come flying out of my ass. 

I don't really think there is anything to be done to get it to that 4+ million viewer mainstream level again, even though that wasn't too long ago, but there's a lot to be done to get every hour back to about 2.5 million and on a major cable channel. Whether that happens or not, who knows?

The biggest problem is 40 percent of the under 40 year old audience left in the last 24 months. That's not hyperbole, that's just the jaw-dropping truth. That's the sort of thing that a pop culture fixture is going to have its hands full with trying to rectify for a long time.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

These numbers are still garbage, I don't see why people have as much the nerve to celebrate. Yes, relatively speaking the ratings are slightly better than recent weeks but we're really going to cheer about the flagship show barely maintaining over 2 million viewers overall? 

Hell, they still lost 5% of their audience from last year. The downward trajectory is still happening, it's just being allowed to slow down after a talked about PPV. 

The NBA Finals and especially the regular NFL season haven't begun yet and they're barely keeping 2 million together. Woo, go wild! :heston


----------



## Isuzu

USA network execs gave Vince the idea for 24/7 title

https://www.ringsidenews.com/2019/05/23/wwe-24-7-title-was-the-usa-networks-idea/


----------



## Seafort

Freelancer said:


> It's just a matter of time before Brock cashes in then disappears again with the belt. And were just right back to where we were before.


I was hoping for him to cash in on a knocked out Seth Rollins and Kofi and pin them both simultaneously; thus unifying the belts. The reaction here would be outstanding.


----------



## Isuzu

Seafort said:


> I was hoping for him to cash in on a knocked out Seth Rollins and Kofi and pin them both simultaneously; thus unifying the belts. The reaction here would be outstanding.


Could still happen in Saudi. I could see Ziggler going nuts getting DQ'd leaving kofi unable to fight after their match, Brock cashes in. This all hinders on if Monday they give brock a regular match against Seth without having to cash in as a courtesy for Seth's dirty low blow at Mania.

"WWE Raw Does Lowest Post-WrestleMania Rating In History" I ask again, who were the champs coming out of WM35? I'll wait.- Jimmy Korderas
https://mobile.twitter.com/jimmykorderas/status/1131580910556598273


----------



## The Boy Wonder

Isuzu said:


> "WWE Raw Does Lowest Post-WrestleMania Rating In History" I ask again, who were the champs coming out of WM35? I'll wait.- Jimmy Korderas
> https://mobile.twitter.com/jimmykorderas/status/1131580910556598273


:becky :rollins


----------



## CMPunkRock316

SPCDRI said:


> I like brock when he wants to be a professional wrestler, and the last time he wanted to be a professional wrestler was years ago. Look at what he did with CM Punk in 2013. I thought that was the best angle and match all year and Brock was a huge reason for it. If THAT Brock Lesnar was around, I'd be happy. But hey, he wants money for nothing now, and he gets it. I won't say good for him, I'll say shame on him, and WWE, too, but hey, that's how it goes.
> 
> That's probably the worst thing about the guy. He's got all the potential in the world to be over 9000 times better than he has been in the past 2 years but he got old and lazy and just doesn't give a fuck. That's kinda cute and edgy and intriguing for a few months. A couple of years of it is a drag.


I agree with much of this. I think the best match of 2013 was the Punk/Brock match. This was before Brock went "only suplexes". I think the story was great but the story was Punk/Heyman with Brock being Heyman's muscle/new best friend. Brock played his role extremely well in that case. 

I actually blame Vince/WWE for the stagnant and lame booking of Brock in the past 2+ years. Brock is just a man doing the job his employer wants him to do.

Ratings are down because of many reasons. Too much product is one thing. Too many guys do exactly the same thing (superkicks, suicide dives, etc), act the same way (vanilla booked babyfaces, breaking the 4th wall promos) and continually resort to McMahon's re-entering the fold over and over every time the ratings collapse. The Brock/Roman never-ending story did not help. Because Roman was forcefed and fans didn't want him. They killed Brock's overness by the stupid ass storyline going into WM34. Before that Brock was still pretty popular with the live crowds. It was post WM34 when the ratings really crashed.


----------



## umair007

Showstopper said:


> You guys are great. First, it's all on the Champion, good or bad. Then, it's a post PPV bump. Then, it's he didn't wrestle, how can he be held responsible if he didn't wrestle. Now, he's responsible for an insignificant slight bump that will no doubt be down next week. They've gotten these slight PPV bumps in the past without him, too, you know.
> 
> 
> 
> I hope Brock is Champion in September going head to head against Monday Night Football this Fall.


Lol if he's champion, he won't even show up let alone going head to head against Monday night football.

Sent from my Infinix X510 using Tapatalk


----------



## umair007

bradatar said:


> I sure didn't. I didn't care to watch some geek match knowing Brock wasn't cashing in. Went to sleep slowly after the 3rd hour started. I didn't even know what happened at the end of RAW someone had to tell me the next day on the RAW thread.
> 
> 
> 
> You guys look for any reason to not give Brock any credit. You're judging ratings of SOMEONE ELSES segment to Brock because he was ringride? Am I missing something?


If you're a real fan of Brock, you would've watched him even if you knew that there is a 99% chance he wasn't gonna cash in just for that 1%.

Sent from my Infinix X510 using Tapatalk


----------



## SPCDRI

How can Brock be a television draw when he never does anything substantive on RAW? The last time he worked a match on RAW was 2002 and he's not going to get too physical. He himself isn't going to cut a great promo and Paul Heyman is on repeat mode. I guess the reason to watch RAW tonight is Brock Lesnar announcing his intentions for the MITB, but doesn't that kind of hurt the purpose of it, take some surprise out of it? They might have just turned MITB into another contract signing segment, seems a bit lame.


----------



## SPCDRI

umair007 said:


> Lol if he's champion, he won't even show up let alone going head to head against Monday night football.
> 
> Sent from my Infinix X510 using Tapatalk


The people who like Lesnar, isn't part of what you like about him that he does the minimum effort for maximum pay? This guy hasn't wrestled a match on a Monday Night Raw in 17 years and he's not about to start this October, regardless of if he's a champ or not. 

That's one thing they could do to juice a television number that I'd care about from Brock, his first RAW singles match in almost 20 years, but that'd require a dump truck filled with cash to happen, so it won't happen.


----------



## Fearless Viper

*How can we know the wrestlers drawing power?*

Obviously ratings is something that no wrestler can move upward unless it's The Rock or Cena so it's pointless to use wrestler drawing power based on TV ratings. My question is how can we determine their drawing power then?


----------



## InexorableJourney

*Re: How can we know the wrestlers drawing power?*

-Merchandise sales
-Specific wrestler requests from other outlets/media for appearances
-Attendance
-TV ratings

Crowd reaction


----------



## Afrolatino

*Re: How can we know the wrestlers drawing power?*

Vince inserting Charlotte to 'mania just because bullshit, was a clear statement of Becky's power.:yas


----------



## Geeee

*Re: How can we know the wrestlers drawing power?*

If you are champion, the ratings are entirely your fault


----------



## Hangman

*Re: How can we know the wrestlers drawing power?*

Attendance, Merchandise and Ratings.


----------



## Fearless Viper

*Re: How can we know the wrestlers drawing power?*

So why not YouTube views and other social media platforms?


----------



## yeahright2

*Re: How can we know the wrestlers drawing power?*



Fearless Viper said:


> So why not YouTube views and other social media platforms?


Because Social Media is somewhat misleading. A LOT of people have seen Reigns infamous "Sufferin´Succotash" promo. That doesn´t mean it´s good, or that all the viewers actually like him.


----------



## WindPhoenix

*Re: How can we know the wrestlers drawing power?*

Merch sales 
meet & greet Sales
Attendance
Ratings


----------



## TyAbbotSucks

*Re: How can we know the wrestlers drawing power?*

Merch really. Wrestling isn't really in anymore for TV ratings to be a good indicator anymore IMO.


----------



## Jables

*Re: How can we know the wrestlers drawing power?*

Give them a pencil and a piece of paper. Waka Waka!


----------



## Erik.

*Re: How can we know the wrestlers drawing power?*

Hard to decipher.

The WWE don't release how much merchandise is sold and Network viewing numbers (in terms of PPV) are impossible to get hold of. Because the company makes money hand over fist in terms of television deals, they don't NEED to go on pushing who sells the most merchandise etc. because they'll push whoever they want, when they want and they'll still make as much money as they are.


----------



## SPCDRI

I hope the first 90 minutes are in the gutter. No proper wrestling match for 75 minutes, people that aren't even RAW talent getting about the first almost 50 minutes of the show, Shane beating up some local guy pretending to be Roman's cousin "Lance" and babbling about some wrestler named "Sika" and the Iiconics losing clean on tv AGAIN to a Rock Bottom that was soooo bad, The Rock is retroactively forgiven for all of his atrocious Sharpshooters. The first 90 minutes of that show was about as bad as WWE could be. Simply shocking shit, maybe repeated Brock segments save them, I dunno.


----------



## TheLooseCanon

Ratings prediction:

RAW: low 2s

RAW thread: 10/10


----------



## SPCDRI

At least we went into business for ourselves in the AEW Speculation and Scarlett Bordeaux Appreciation Thread. I wonder if somebody from WWE is going to see that thread having 1000 more posts than a typical RAW and think we were really hot for a show that didn't have a RAW brand wrestler wrestle on it for 75 minutes?


----------



## Erik.




----------



## llj

WWE interest is literally at an all time low these past few months. Interesting to see the ratings moving forward now that AEW is making its big moves. I have no idea what happened last night so I don't know if it was a good episode or not--sounds like it wasn't--but I almost don't even care anymore. A few weeks of good episodes--hell, a few months of good episodes--isn't going to win back years of antagonist booking slapping the face of every fan who's ever gotten invested in this product


----------



## ReekOfAwesomenesss

For all my time (and actually before that) in this site, I have never cared about the ratings. But with AEW, things are different.


----------



## SPCDRI

Erik. said:


>





llj said:


> I have no idea what happened last night so I don't know if it was a good episode or not--sounds like it wasn't--but I almost don't even care anymore.


You dodged a real humdinger, hands down the worst RAW or Smackdown of 2019 and it set a really high bar for badness.

I'm interested in seeing if their numbers go on an upwards trend this year, they are pulling out the all the stops (except for writing a good, coherent program) and they are now in a position where they need to care about television viewership. 

WWE went over a decade before they mentioned their most obvious direct competitor, TNA/Impact, by name. For whatever reason, WWE went 48 hours this time. 

I'm really interested to see more WWE and AEW programming and AEW around this winter means RATINGZ WARZ threads are going to be LITTY this year!

:rock1


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

I can't wait to find out in a half hour to see what the ratings was for this show.


----------



## chronoxiong

Buffy The Vampire Slayer said:


> I can't wait to find out in a half hour to see what the ratings was for this show.


Yesterday was a holiday. The ratings for last night's show is going to be delayed.


----------



## Erik.

Yeah, it'll be tomorrow afternoon.


----------



## patpat

I expect a somewhat great number in the first hour, a lot will come to see "wwe's response"


----------



## Mister Abigail

Crowds need to start chanting ‘change the record’ and ‘we know’ at Paul Heyman’s “Ladies and gentlemen...” crap.


----------



## SPCDRI

Mister Abigail said:


> Crowds need to start chanting ‘change the record’ and ‘we know’ at Paul Heyman’s “Ladies and gentlemen...” crap.


If anybody ever deserved a classic...VINTAGE...

:cole

SAME OLD SHIT CHANT

It'd be Pauly Bag O Donuts. 






The same promo for how many years now?


----------



## The Wood

Fearless Viper said:


> Obviously ratings is something that no wrestler can move upward unless it's The Rock or Cena so it's pointless to use wrestler drawing power based on TV ratings. My question is how can we determine their drawing power then?


If you’re not moving up the business metrics, then you’re not a draw. That’s literally what being a draw means. You’re drawing people in.


----------



## SPCDRI

I think the ratings will be stronger than expected and up from last year's memorial day episode. The trend of them being worse year-on-year could be broken. 

Last year's numbers were...

2.6
2.6
2.3

It will be interesting to see where they shape up in light of that.


----------



## Sin City Saint

patpat said:


> I expect a somewhat great number in the first hour, a lot will come to see "wwe's response"


Could see them doing a decent number overall because of that reason. Some people probably stayed tuned thinking they might step up at some point.


----------



## CMPunkRock316

I predict:

H1 2.55
H2 2.48
H3 2.30

2.443

People will tune in to see if they answer AEW. Wouldn't be shocked if first hour is higher tbh


----------



## Erik.

Well, I tuned in for the first time in months stupidly expecting them to perhaps up their game and out of curiosity. So I'm sure I won't have been the only one.

But this is exactly why competition is good. I would not expect that third hour to do well though. Rollins/Zayn wasn't even advertised. All they advertised for that final hour was electric chair segment and Firefly Funhouse and that was on top of an opening hour with no wrestling.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.265M
H2- 2.254M
H3- 2.051M
3H- 2.190M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 0.49% / - 0.011M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 9.01% / - 0.203M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 9.45% / - 0.214M )
5/27/19 Vs 5/20/19 ( - 13.13% / - 0.331M )

Demo (5/27/19 Vs 5/20/19):
H1- 0.760D Vs 0.930D
H2- 0.730D Vs 0.900D
H3- 0.670D Vs 0.800D
3H- 0.720D Vs 0.877D

Note: RAW is 1st, 2nd & 4th by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 3rd by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (5/27/19 Vs 5/28/18):
H1- 2.265M Vs 2.593M
H2- 2.254M Vs 2.591M
H3- 2.051M Vs 2.300M
3H- 2.190M Vs 2.495M ( - 12.22% / - 0.305M )

Demo (5/27/19 Vs 5/28/18):
H1- 0.760D Vs 0.800D
H2- 0.730D Vs 0.790D
H3- 0.670D Vs 0.710D
3H- 0.720D Vs 0.767D

Note: RAW this week last year was 3rd, 2nd & 4th by hourly demo & 1st, 2nd & 4th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## RainmakerV2

Thats not terrible for memorial day tbh.


----------



## llj

It's teetering on the edge of that 2.0m. You know it's gonna start falling under consistently at SOME point. The question is when.


----------



## Jedah

:lmao :lmao :lmao ~15% down from the last year.

:buried. Just like they deserve.

But but but but Brock is a huge draw!


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

That's what you get for only putting Lacey on the show for 10 seconds.

Brock was never the draw. It was Lacey all along.


----------



## rbl85

I don't remember the name but didn't someone on this forum and on this thread told me last week that the numbers were going to increase this week ?

I think it was Isuzu (sorry if i made a mistake)


----------



## llj

rbl85 said:


> I don't remember the name but didn't someone on this forum and on this thread told me last week that the numbers were going to increase this week ?
> 
> I think it was Isuzu (sorry if i made a mistake)


People will blame it on Memorial Day I guess.

Therefore Memorial Day Not Watching = bigger draw than Brock


----------



## Mifune Jackson

I suppose this is where we're all supposed to be grateful for Brock, because without him, it would've been below 2 million, right?


----------



## RiverFenix

Next Monday could have a basketball game, but after next week it should be unopposed until Football season.


----------



## llj

DetroitRiverPhx said:


> Next Monday could have a basketball game, but after next week it should be unopposed until Football season.


I think the NBA Finals almost never run on Mondays. As far as I can remember they always space the games out so they hit a Sunday night.


----------



## Fearless Viper

Number of viewers may be down compared to last year but other areas they're doing well and even better. Demos and hourly viewership beats last year.


----------



## Jedah

llj said:


> It's teetering on the edge of that 2.0m. You know it's gonna start falling under consistently at SOME point. The question is when.


Football season. If they can barely hold on to two in the spring, they're gonna get killed in the fall.


----------



## A-C-P

llj said:


> I think the NBA Finals almost never run on Mondays. As far as I can remember they always space the games out so they hit a Sunday night.


NBA Finals have run Tuesday, Thursday, Sunday for the past 5 years at least, never on Monday Nights


----------



## Chris90

I'm still surprised 2 million people tune in to this shite.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Chris90 said:


> I'm still surprised 2 million people tune in to this shite.


2 million people staying after the first hour makes me question if they can lose many more viewers. That was literally the worst hour of a wrestling show I've ever seen and most of the audience stayed tuned all night.

There can't actually be 2 million real human beings that enjoyed that shit, right?


----------



## InexorableJourney

It's still surreal to them, damn it.


----------



## SPCDRI

RainmakerV2 said:


> Thats not terrible for memorial day tbh.


So a double digit year on year loss from last memorial day isn't bad? That's a fucking ATROCIOUS number.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> 2 million people staying after the first hour makes me question if they can lose many more viewers. *That was literally the worst hour of a wrestling show I've ever seen and most of the audience stayed tuned all night.*
> 
> There can't actually be 2 million real human beings that enjoyed that shit, right?


Brock cash-in bait and switch. They were teasing it for the main event segment, continually cutting backstage to him watching on a couch.


----------



## SPCDRI

This is when people will try to polish this turd, say the most watched hour this memorial day being worse than the least watched hour of last years memorial day, with a double digit percentage viewership drop and a difference of almost 600,000 people from most watched 2018 hour to least watched 2019 hour "is actually not that bad."

"It was up in the demo! Cord-cutters!" {blah blah blah, sucking brock, seth, kofi, roman and McMahon family taint}

But lets get some context. What were these numbers like before the Brock/Shield Member Eternal Fuckshow started on RAW? Try 3.2 MILLION for 2016! 

MISS ME YET?!

:cena

Yeah, losing a million viewers in 3 years, and 2 million in 5 years...

"These numbers really aren't that bad. BROCK IS SO ENTERTAINING WHEN HE DANCES LOL. BROCK PARTY LOLOLOLOLOL." {gargling McMahon family gonads}

At least a terrible show got punished with a terrible number, worst show of the year should do the worst number of the year, fair is fair.


----------



## Y.2.J

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *H1- 2.265M
> H2- 2.254M
> H3- 2.051M
> 3H- 2.190M*


My lord.

That's fucking putrid.

:done


----------



## Jonhern

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> 2 million people staying after the first hour makes me question if they can lose many more viewers. That was literally the worst hour of a wrestling show I've ever seen and most of the audience stayed tuned all night.
> 
> There can't actually be 2 million real human beings that enjoyed that shit, right?


Ratings are more of a lagging indicator, this being such a bad episode, if it drives people away you will see the effect next week and the weeks following.


----------



## Jedah

SPCDRI said:


> "These numbers really aren't that bad. BROCK IS SO ENTERTAINING WHEN HE DANCES LOL. BROCK PARTY LOLOLOLOLOL." {gargling McMahon family gonads}


"But we gotta do the Brock party it's such good shit! HEH! HEH!" :vince :vince2 :vince3 :vince5 :vince6 :vince8 :vince7


----------



## SPCDRI

"WWE is a billion dollar company ran by a billionaire genius, right? That's why Vince is paying Brock millions a year to ruin WWE, because Vince is such a genius!"

:ambrose


----------



## Rated-R-Peepz

Ratings down. Oh yeah! 

:boombrock


----------



## Seafort

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Chris90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm still surprised 2 million people tune in to this shite.
> 
> 
> 
> 2 million people staying after the first hour makes me question if they can lose many more viewers. That was literally the worst hour of a wrestling show I've ever seen and most of the audience stayed tuned all night.
> 
> There can't actually be 2 million real human beings that enjoyed that shit, right?
Click to expand...

Ratings are a lagging indicator. They could easily lose another 10% of the audience next week just by virtue of what they put out this week.


----------



## Erik.

Awful numbers.

Genuinely see no reason why it should be any higher next week. What is there to look forward to next week? Absolutely nothing.


----------



## rbl85

Erik. said:


> Awful numbers.
> 
> Genuinely see no reason why it should be any higher next week. *What is there to look forward to next week? *Absolutely nothing.


Some good shit, like an old undertaker….

YES an old Undertaker, that's some good shit.


----------



## SPCDRI

WWE is Textbook Founder's Syndrome. I didn't know there was a business term for this. Tell me if this sounds familiar

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founder's_syndrome

1. The business is strongly associated with a founder or founding member and is often conceived of as an expression of the founder's mind and ego. 
2. The business is considered a "plaything" or toy of the founder
3. The founder consumes himself or herself with the founded passion-project. The founder rarely if ever takes days off, puts in large amounts of work hours and is obsessed with the company to the detriment of the founder and company.
4. The founder is a dictator, an autocrat, and makes all decisions without a formal decision process. There may be pretense that this is not the case, such as elaborate and lengthy meetings and a pretense of a writing and collaborative process, but they are shams and the founder's word is law.
5. There is little thinking about the past in a way to learn and very little forward thinking. Decisions are snap decisions from the founder, and things have a slapdash, seat-of-pants feel to them. This works at first sometimes when the founder is young, energetic, skilled and in tune with culture, but it increasingly harms the company as the improvisational skills of the founder degrade.
6. There is no formal succession plan when the founder is no longer running the company, though it is assumed that control will go to children or close friends of the founder, regardless of their suitability as successors
7. Key staff and board members are typically selected by the founder and are often friends and colleagues of the founder. Their role is to support the founder, rather than to lead the mission. Staff may be chosen due to their personal loyalty to the founder rather than skills, organizational fit, or experience. Board members may be under-qualified, under-informed or intimidated and will typically be unable to answer basic questions without checking first.
8. Talented people brought in to contribute and fix issues cannot do so in a professional and effective fashion. They are stifled and big-timed by THE FOUNDER constantly. Eventually, talented people will shun the organization after word gets out that it is a toxic workplace. This further exacerbates the above issues, as THE FOUNDER thinks he or she must do it all by himself or herself and the company becomes trapped in a vicious cycle of inefficient egomania. 
9. People are punished and hazed for displeasing the Founder, even when this would harm the company and founder as well. People become frightened of the Founder and the only people left are people who know how to suck up and toady to The Founder, regardless if they are the best employees.
10. The founder is the highest paid and most prominent person and his or her ideas beat better ideas increasingly, until the founder's ideas win 100 percent of the time and the Founderitis company is basically a One-Man Show when Founder's Syndrome becomes fatal to the organization.


----------



## Ace

They are so dead.


----------



## Jedah

^^Founder's syndrome, I said the same thing a few weeks ago.

I've been looking for disconfirmations rather than confirmations (to avoid confirmation bias) and I can't find any.


----------



## Ace

RainmakerV2 said:


> Thats not terrible for memorial day tbh.


 Yes, it is.

Brock's decision and people would have tuned in after DON to see their response.


----------



## CMPunkRock316

Ratings are worse than I imagined. There is no way to spin this as anything other than awful.

Someone last evening connected to WWE told me they were doing 2.5M+ for all 3 hours. I told them maybe the first hour they could hit it. I was also told that those inside WWE don't believe the AEW PPV buys they think 40-60K tops.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Holy fuck, that's awful. Fitting for an all-time awful RAW, however. :duck

Memorial Day excuse or not (which doesn't matter since they got a 15% decrease from last year's and about 12% decrease from last week), that is terrible when you'd think it'd be a bit higher from the intrigue of the AEW show and what WWE would do along with plastering Brock everywhere.

NFL season is going to be a rude awakening for some of you geeks in the fall. Hell, if AEW overdelivers on TNT in the fall as well...

Imagine putting out this awful RAW and getting this awful number on the day Jon Moxley scorched earth your entire product and its creative. I have NEVER seen WWE this week in quite some time (I thought 1995, 2010, 2015, or even 2017/8 was bad)


----------



## SPCDRI

Wildcard rule, Brock in two segments, new belt getting segments, number 1 contendership match with your top pushed wrestler heel winning and the main event being Rollins doing a 2 flat again in some strange, unannounced match with Sami Zayn and every hour 2.3 or worse? They thought that a good, jam-packed RAW, too, lol.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Without Brock, that’s a 1.7-1.8 show vs no competition. This show is dead.

I hope TNT puts AEW on Monday night. Cody said it was going to be Tuesday. Regardless, they will destroy these numbers.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

I don't know if these numbers are low enough to make the point to Vince that HAS to be made and has to be made as quickly as humanly possible to this old geezer fuck. Brock was on for the second week in a row, and they still went down. Lets hope the same rings true for next week when the Oldertaker is on, and advertised in advance, too.


----------



## SPCDRI

Undertaker is in his 50s and can hardly even walk. He's around because some demented Saudi marks with more money than sense know who he is and he's still alive and they're offering him outrageous sums of money for basically nothing. Viewership is still gonna trend downwards from where it was last year, because the product stinks.

Any time the ratings are down or the Saudis want a house show, the geezers show up for the payday. All those people who said 10 years ago that a point would come where they couldn't just pull the 90s and 00s guy out their butts to bail them out and they needed to build up young people are completely vindicated now, so far as I'm concerned.


----------



## bradatar

Erik. said:


> Awful numbers.
> 
> Genuinely see no reason why it should be any higher next week. What is there to look forward to next week? Absolutely nothing.


BUT BUT BUT GO HOME SHOW FOR BLOOD MONEY BRUH


----------



## ellthom

Wish Brock was there since he is such a ratings draw... oh wait... :evil


----------



## Freelancer

Wow, those are bad numbers. Just wait til Monday Night Football starts back up, that's going to be brutal.


----------



## bradatar

THIS SHIT IS GREAT


----------



## A-C-P

This is Good Shit, Pal :vince


----------



## ClintDagger

ellthom said:


> Wish Brock was there since he is such a ratings draw... oh wait... :evil


Brock being there does make a difference which is why this number should be even more alarming. Anyone that thinks Brock has zero impact on the ratings hasn’t been following the trends. His impact has certainly been curtailed because of how much they hurt his aura in trying to get Roman over last year. But while diminished, his star power does make a difference. A far bigger difference than any of the full timers.


----------



## SPCDRI

Brock Lesnar has been back in the company for 7 years. In that time frame, television viewership has consistently trended downwards for almost the totality of that 7 years apart from a bit of "dead cat bounce" in 2018. Despite that, Brock Lesnar always gets the pass from people for terrible television numbers because magically somehow, "ratings would be even worse if Brock hadn't returned." That's every bit as speculative as me saying they'd be better if he hadn't. All we know for sure is he can get featured prominently on a show and the show can do terrible numbers. He was featured prominently in the first 2 hours, both hours did about 200,000 viewers worse than last year's memorial day show.


----------



## Erik.

Incredibly, Lesnar learning that he has 1 year to cash in has nearly 6,000,000 YouTube views.


----------



## Zappers

Forget the football season. Wait until Dancing with the Stars starts in the fall.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

SPCDRI said:


> Brock Lesnar has been back in the company for 7 years. In that time frame, television viewership has consistently trended downwards for almost the totality of that 7 years apart from a bit of "dead cat bounce" in 2018.


I think there's larger factors at play. Namely Vince's stubbornness, which I think we can all agree on.

I'm willing to give Lesnar a good 2-3 years between 2012 and 2015 (with WM31 being the peak) where he was a big difference maker and could've really helped put the "Next Cena" over. Unfortunately, Vince projected it to be Roman Reigns and didn't change course when it was clear it wasn't him.

From there, we get the root of the problem where Vince has used Brock in much the same way he used Yokozuna after he "ended Hulkamania" and held the belt hostage until WM10... except we never actually get to WM10 and we just keep going back to Yokozuna and he keeps trying to reposition Lex Luger as the next Hulk Hogan over a prolonged period of 5 years. 

Everything is stagnant, the characters never change (except, I guess, Brock added a funny dance to his gimmick now) and the fanbase dies off because there's no one to watch.


----------



## ClintDagger

SPCDRI said:


> Brock Lesnar has been back in the company for 7 years. In that time frame, television viewership has consistently trended downwards for almost the totality of that 7 years apart from a bit of "dead cat bounce" in 2018. Despite that, Brock Lesnar always gets the pass from people for terrible television numbers because magically somehow, "ratings would be even worse if Brock hadn't returned." That's every bit as speculative as me saying they'd be better if he hadn't. All we know for sure is he can get featured prominently on a show and the show can do terrible numbers. He was featured prominently in the first 2 hours, both hours did about 200,000 viewers worse than last year's memorial day show.


Of course it’s speculation, but it’s informed speculation. There are trends that support it. Not to mention that post WM, WWE all of a sudden becomes ratings conscious and what do they do? They bring back Brock. Have him win MITB. Start having Roman appear on both shows. Pull way back on women’s wrestling. Start having McMahons on all over the place. They have even more information than we do, so by studying what they do during these times of desperately trying to max out ratings you can infer what their metrics tell them moves the needle.

Nobody is saying that Brock is a gigantic draw. He’s just the best tool they have at the moment.


----------



## kuja killer

Erik. said:


> Incredibly, Lesnar learning that he has 1 year to cash in has nearly 6,000,000 YouTube views.


I was literally going to comment about this before i saw your reply. Does it mean something that the youtube vid of brock has literally 5 million more views than any of the other youtube vids with 1 million+ ...just this week alone ?? I sure hope so. -- 5,849,826 as of this post


----------



## SPCDRI

ClintDagger said:


> Of course it’s speculation, but it’s informed speculation. There are trends that support it. Not to mention that post WM, WWE all of a sudden becomes ratings conscious and what do they do? They bring back Brock. Have him win MITB. Start having Roman appear on both shows. Pull way back on women’s wrestling. Start having McMahons on all over the place. They have even more information than we do, so by studying what they do during these times of desperately trying to max out ratings you can infer what their metrics tell them moves the needle.
> 
> Nobody is saying that Brock is a gigantic draw. He’s just the best tool they have at the moment.


Well, I say its long-term foolish and its panic-booking at its finest, doing odd things and whoring out what draws they have in silly ways, and putting on wacky, car crash television. Everything really feels Death of WCW to me. Brock with MITB is dumb and desperate, he can be featured without that. Same with Wildcard, 24/7 belt, etc. WWE and their business associates are running around spanking their asses and going blind trying to juice these short-term numbers but its going to screw them over in the long run.


----------



## Randy Lahey

It's clear Brock is the only draw that WWE has. They were 20-30% off of last year's ratings during Wrestlemania Season and into April, and that was with Seth, Becky, and Ronda being the focal point of the show.

Brock returns, and now they are back to their average decline of 5-15%. Brock clearly matters. He's cleary far more over than anyone else on the roster as far as impacting a rating


----------



## Jedah

Wrong. They were coming off the 20-30% declines as May started to go on. It was not Brock coming back that suddenly ended that steep decline. Competition from the NBA started to get less stiff.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

Randy Lahey said:


> It's clear Brock is the only draw that WWE has. They were 20-30% off of last year's ratings during Wrestlemania Season and into April, and that was with Seth, Becky, and Ronda being the focal point of the show.
> 
> Brock returns, and now they are back to their average decline of 5-15%. Brock clearly matters. He's cleary far more over than anyone else on the roster as far as impacting a rating


You could be making the same argument about how beneficial Hogan is to WCW in 1999. Sure, there were marginal improvements (and ONLY when Hulk/Brock return after a month-plus absence, and not 100% of the returns worked) but it's superficially touted as a "bump" and is just a short term way to ignore a long term problem.

You aren't creating new fans with Brock. You're only flashing a "name" as a novelty after a prolonged absence to get some of the existing ones who wouldn't have otherwise watched. And even then, there are mitigating factors (ie last week's "bump" also being a post-MITB Raw).

And, this hasn't been pointed out in a while, but I'll just put it here: Raw's 25th anniversary shows that there is a 4 million+ audience out there that just isn't watching, yet getting above 3 million would be a miracle at this point.


----------



## SPCDRI

Can we get a moxley GOOD SHIT emote?

:moxley:

:mark:

"Shane on fucking television again, being racist against Samoans, that's good shit, that's good shit, being a babbling sweaty racist is SO YOU, SHANE."

:moxley:


----------



## llj

Randy Lahey said:


> It's clear Brock is the only draw that WWE has. They were 20-30% off of last year's ratings during Wrestlemania Season and into April, and that was with Seth, Becky, and Ronda being the focal point of the show.
> 
> Brock returns, and now they are back to their average decline of 5-15%. Brock clearly matters. He's cleary far more over than anyone else on the roster as far as impacting a rating


They wouldn't be at this point if they had built a bunch of people up better instead of relying on a "Brock is the best draw left but he is a declining draw" for ratings.

Building new people up is always going to hurt in the short term, but if they did it when they were in a better place with more wiggle room, they wouldn't have to do it now when viewers are leaving en masse. During the minor bump in ratings in early 2018, they were pushing a bunch of new people but then they promptly buried them shortly after.


----------



## Sin City Saint

I expect at least a bit of a bump this week with Undertaker’s return and Brock Lesnar’s announced “alleged” cash-in on Rolllins this Monday. If they can follow up with half decent storylines for a while is another story...


----------



## Ichigo87

Randy Lahey said:


> Without Brock, that’s a 1.7-1.8 show vs no competition. This show is dead.
> 
> I hope TNT puts AEW on Monday night. Cody said it was going to be Tuesday. Regardless, they will destroy these numbers.


So now that Brock is back, we're going to push the goal posts back as if the show was doing under 2.0 when he was gone. Just stop, Brock isn't a draw. He doesn't move the needle, you marks are going to have to accept that.


----------



## Bxstr

Brock can't draw ratings because he is stuck with charismaless ratings killer Seth Rollins.
Rollins is a antidraw nobody is gonna watch the show as long as he is champion no matter how good the opponent is.


----------



## Ichigo87

raymond1985 said:


> Well done Brock.


Ratings were the same the week prior. When are you guys going to get it through your heads that Brock ain't a draw lmao.


----------



## Ichigo87

Randy Lahey said:


> Proof that Brock moves ratings. No one cares about geeks like Seth Rollins


Ratings were the same the week prior, stop with the delusions.


----------



## Ichigo87

ClintDagger said:


> ellthom said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wish Brock was there since he is such a ratings draw... oh wait... <img src="http://i.imgur.com/oWmtcJD.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Evil" class="inlineimg" />
> 
> 
> 
> Brock being there does make a difference which is why this number should be even more alarming. Anyone that thinks Brock has zero impact on the ratings hasn’t been following the trends. His impact has certainly been curtailed because of how much they hurt his aura in trying to get Roman over last year. But while diminished, his star power does make a difference. A far bigger difference than any of the full timers.
Click to expand...

Yeah they hurt his aura so much by having Roman beat him clean.... Oh wait.


----------



## SPCDRI

They only let part timers beat Brock clean. 10 years from now maybe Reigns or Rollins can go over him for the LEGENDS BELT

:mark:


----------



## MeanAmbrose

*Would Surprise Be The Best Thing For Ratings?*

Forget making better shows, creating new stars and all that. Vince isn't going to change.

Since the product is mostly garbage, should they just stop advertising what's coming up on RAW in advance?

Is anyone going to tune in for 'Finn Balor has a few things to say to Baron Corbin, while the Best In The World Shane McMahon is not happy with the Big Dog's actions last week'.

And if they want to help that 3rd hour, surely they should not be telling people during the opening segment that the main event will be 6 man tag action, featuring Lashley, Corbin and McIntyre vs Seth, Roman and Strowman "for the 34th time ever!"


----------



## TD Stinger

*Re: Would Surprise Be The Best Thing For Ratings?*

Getting Vince out of creative, creating some compelling stories worthy of watching week in and week out and slowly but surely rebuild some of the audience you lost.

Something like that is the only thing will work.

Whether they advertise the show in advance or not doesn't make a difference when people aren't invested in the characters or stories on a week to week basis.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

*Re: Would Surprise Be The Best Thing For Ratings?*

Getting rid of Vince is the first step. As long as he's there they're going to keep bleeding viewers no matter what.


----------



## Rankles75

*Re: Would Surprise Be The Best Thing For Ratings?*

The element of surprise was always one of the main things that kept me watching. Not knowing when a new wrestler was going to debut, or when an angle was starting kept things unpredictable, unlike these days when most things are telegraphed.


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Would Surprise Be The Best Thing For Ratings?*

Set the table for the rest of the hour by banning McMahons from the first hour and never starting with those stale, formulaic, 15 to 20 minute promo segments that start every show. The first half of an hour of RAW has been a bland HARD SKIP for so many years. They could literally do anything different than what they have been doing for over 10 years and I'd praise it to the high heavens just for being different.


----------



## aliasocfan

*Re: Would Surprise Be The Best Thing For Ratings?*

Shocking/surprising doesn't always end well. Just look at the last Season of Game of Thrones. (I would argue since Season 5, but that's off topic)


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

No because it will lose its value of surprise when you do it every week. It diminishes.


----------



## Tag89

*Re: Would Surprise Be The Best Thing For Ratings?*

should take some tips from wcw 2000 IMO


----------



## InexorableJourney

*Re: Would Surprise Be The Best Thing For Ratings?*

If you can predict surprises, are they even surprises?


----------



## Erik.

*Re: Would Surprise Be The Best Thing For Ratings?*

WWE stop advertising what's coming up!? :lol


----------



## RainmakerV2

*Re: Would Surprise Be The Best Thing For Ratings?*

Yes. Which is why you put the belt on Corbin Friday.


----------



## ObsoleteMule

*Re: Would Surprise Be The Best Thing For Ratings?*

Surprises only work when the show is booked competently... plus we’re almost conditioned to expect the worse or some kind of swerve out of WWE these days. It says alot with how many people were surprised with how wrestlemania actually had a happy ending this year


----------



## #BestForBusiness

*Re: Would Surprise Be The Best Thing For Ratings?*

It's VERY hard to be surprised with anything in today's product. Everything is so God damn predictable, also the majority of things are leaked on the internet anyway and most of us know what to expect.

I have to say, the only time WWE actually surprised me in recent memory was when Lesnar won the MITB briefcase. I was expecting Strowman to take Sami's place or some sort of match finish fuckery, but no one could have predicted that. WWE also went to great lengths to keep Lesnar's appearance quiet.


----------



## Rain

*Re: Would Surprise Be The Best Thing For Ratings?*

No surprise cant help the ratings. I understand why there are no surprises anymore as telling people will get more to tune in


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: Would Surprise Be The Best Thing For Ratings?*

Well Pro Wrestling was definitely more exciting when there was more of a surprise/unknown factor.

Thesedays every major feud/storyline is rumoured for months, direction of characters is rumoured for months, every possible new addition to the roster is overexposed on NXT and boring by the time they actually get called up. Results are everywhere, previews are everywhere.


----------



## DoctorWhosawhatsit

*Re: Would Surprise Be The Best Thing For Ratings?*

No.

Every gimmick, twist, swerve, surprise, and trick has been used and used to death, never mind the fact that all of those things do nothing to help long term.

The only thing that will improve anything is to *actually book a good show*.

But WWE isn't will to do that, hell they're not even willing to try and do that. Says everything you need to know about WWE really.


----------



## Piehound

*Re: Would Surprise Be The Best Thing For Ratings?*

What surprises do they have left?! Remembering that all the guys hanging around back in catering are actually on the roster and booking them for a match?


----------



## Bxstr

*Re: Would Surprise Be The Best Thing For Ratings?*

Take the title off Rollins and put it on Brock see the ratings boom


----------



## Coolcalmcollected

*Re: Would Surprise Be The Best Thing For Ratings?*

I think if they had The Rock show up for a quick feud with Samoa Joe or Brock that it would help things cause even if your not a fan of Rock you can't deny that he brings eyes with him cause of his mainstream presence. I know it won't happen though but I think it would definitely help.


----------



## ClintDagger

SPCDRI said:


> Well, I say its long-term foolish and its panic-booking at its finest, doing odd things and whoring out what draws they have in silly ways, and putting on wacky, car crash television. Everything really feels Death of WCW to me. Brock with MITB is dumb and desperate, he can be featured without that. Same with Wildcard, 24/7 belt, etc. WWE and their business associates are running around spanking their asses and going blind trying to juice these short-term numbers but its going to screw them over in the long run.


Well, I totally agree with what you are saying. It’s a band-aid at best. If it was me, I would think long term as you are suggesting. But I don’t have NBCU and Fox breathing down my neck either.


----------



## ClintDagger

Ichigo87 said:


> Yeah they hurt his aura so much by having Roman beat him clean.... Oh wait.


That’s not what I’m referring to. They intentionally tarnished Brock’s brand by putting bad heat on him in the hopes of getting Roman cheered. You can’t get the genie all the way back into the bottle on that kind of stuff.


----------



## The Wood

*Re: Would Surprise Be The Best Thing For Ratings?*



ClintDagger said:


> That’s not what I’m referring to. They intentionally tarnished Brock’s brand by putting bad heat on him in the hopes of getting Roman cheered. You can’t get the genie all the way back into the bottle on that kind of stuff.


This is one of their most baffling decisions in recent memory. They actively tried to tell you that Brock doesn't give a shit and that you shouldn't be happy to see him. The #1 guy. The guy who's been holding the belt for most of its existence. Let's tell people to be sick of him. Brilliant. 

How about promoting Brock as one of the best of all-time (possibly _the_ best) and make it seem like beating him would change everything forever? How about making people who see him live feel like they are seeing history being made in front of their very eyes instead of, you know -- telling them that they should be bored of this guy holding the belt hostage. 



InexorableJourney said:


> If you can predict surprises, are they even surprises?


Nope. And while most people will tell you that the product is predictable, get anyone to make any predictions and look and see how many of them actually come true. How many people called Jinder Mahal winning the WWE Title in January 2017? Zero. How surreal was it seeing AJ Styles and Shinsuke Nakamura sign WWE contracts? Very. Who knew that Brock Lesnar was going to win MITB? No one. Surprises don't mean what people think they do. That's their buzzword for replacing the feeling of being engaged and gripped by content.

Good, logical booking is the best course of action, but it may already be too late, since they've eroded their audience to retain only the most fickle and critical of them. Are the fans going to be patient? Probably not. Are they going to trust WWE to deliver on storylines? Probably not. Surprises every now and then can help punctuate things, but surprises themselves are basically useless when it comes to winning over people who aren't engaged enough to care about the surprise. 



Tag89 said:


> should take some tips from wcw 2000 IMO


Great idea. That worked out so well.


----------



## Shaun_27

*Re: Would Surprise Be The Best Thing For Ratings?*



Coolcalmcollected said:


> I think if they had The Rock show up for a quick feud with Samoa Joe or Brock that it would help things cause even if your not a fan of Rock you can't deny that he brings eyes with him cause of his mainstream presence. I know it won't happen though but I think it would definitely help.


I don't see Rock doing anything but Wrestlemania (possibly a Summerslam, Rumble or Saudi show?) and even if he does, as soon as he leaves they will be back to square one unless they put a rocket ship on someone and have them beat Rock.


----------



## Freelancer

*Re: Would Surprise Be The Best Thing For Ratings?*



Shaun_27 said:


> I don't see Rock doing anything but Wrestlemania (possibly a Summerslam, Rumble or Saudi show?) and even if he does, as soon as he leaves they will be back to square one unless they put a rocket ship on someone and have them beat Rock.


I have to agree. At this point in his career, I don't see Rock doing anything other than Mania. That being said, bringing out the Rock for something isn't going to fix the problem. That's like using a Band-Aid to fix a broken leg.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.308M
H2- 2.558M
H3- 2.349M
3H- 2.405M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( + 10.83% / + 0.250M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 8.17% / - 0.209M )
H3 Vs H1 ( + 1.78% / + 0.041M )
6/3/19 Vs 5/27/19 ( + 9.82% / + 0.215M )

Demo (6/3/19 Vs 5/27/19):
H1- 0.730D Vs 0.760D
H2- 0.820D Vs 0.730D
H3- 0.790D Vs 0.670D
3H- 0.780D Vs 0.720D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 1st & 2nd by hourly demo & 8th, 4th & 7th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (6/3/19 Vs 6/4/18):
H1- 2.308M Vs 2.594M
H2- 2.558M Vs 2.593M
H3- 2.349M Vs 2.390M
3H- 2.405M Vs 2.526M ( - 4.79% / - 0.121M )

Demo (6/3/19 Vs 6/4/18):
H1- 0.730D Vs 0.860D
H2- 0.820D Vs 0.870D
H3- 0.790D Vs 0.820D
3H- 0.780D Vs 0.850D

Note: RAW this week last year was 3rd, 2nd & 5th by hourly demo & 5th, 6th & 7th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Piper's Pit

Not bad but not good either.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Lacey with that hour 2 ratings boost :bjpenn


----------



## raymond1985

Undertaker's hour 3 outdrew the Rollins/Styles third hour from last month by 500k and the Bryan and Kingston match the week later by over 300k.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

All those part-timers in Hour 3 (Brock, HHH, Taker, and even Orton), and still in the low 2 millions.

:mj4


----------



## llj

Looks like they've hit their current baseline for now. Will probably start bleeding more again come the Fall, but for now it seems like they're going to hover the 2.0M to 2.5M range.

They really don't deserve even this.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Oh, and these numbers are with no NBA game last night, unlike the past month or 2 which has gone up against the NBA Playoffs basically every week.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Lacey with that hour 2 ratings boost :bjpenn


Hahahahahahahaha :lol

I just checked too, you're actually right :lol :lol :lol :lol

Your gimmick actually became reality. Does this mean Jinder Mahal could become Universal Champ? :mark :mark :mark

Hour 2 beating hour 1 for the first time in years, all thanks to Lacey Evans.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

SayWhatAgain! said:


> Hahahahahahahaha :lol
> 
> I just checked too, you're actually right :lol :lol :lol :lol
> 
> Your gimmick actually became reality. Does this mean Jinder Mahal could become Universal Champ? :mark :mark :mark
> 
> Hour 2 beating hour 1 for the first time in years, all thanks to Lacey Evans.


I believe in the modern day maharaja


----------



## Chrome

Damn, that hour 1 is BRUTAL. Would else happened in hour 2, besides Lacey of course.


----------



## Erik.

Expected a bump.

Memorial Day last week.

Shocking numbers considering what was advertised.


----------



## patpat

Wtf is that shit? 
Is that what they draw with taker brock hhh Orton + the money in the bank bait?! Barely 2,5? 
It's a fucking disgrace, and 0 fucking competition?!


----------



## raymond1985

The numbers are still very poor. 

But a 5% drop year on year is an improvement on the declines they were seeing last month before they summoned Brock, Reigns and Taker. They were down over 20% on the previous year where they faced the same competition. Had they stuck with just Rollins and Styles, I think the numbers would still be creeping below 2 million for some hours.


----------



## ClintDagger

Man what an odd trend. I guess people were suckered in to thinking Brock really was going to cash in and checked out H2 in a big way.


----------



## Randy Lahey

raymond1985 said:


> Undertaker's hour 3 outdrew the Rollins/Styles third hour from last month by 500k and the Bryan and Kingston match the week later by over 300k.


The only thing that can stop the bleeding are AE level stars, or Lesnar. This has now been proven.

From 20-30% off last year's numbers, to now only 5%. 

That's basically a win at this point for WWE. Clearly they at least aren't losing alot more viewers since they put the focus back on Brock and some of the other acts

Anyone still marking for Seth Rollins in this thread should just take the loss and admit he's the worst drawing champ they've ever had.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Showstopper said:


> All those part-timers in Hour 3 (Brock, HHH, Taker, and even Orton), and still in the low 2 millions.
> 
> :mj4


500,000 more than Rollins/AJ from last month. Any questions?


----------



## raymond1985

Randy Lahey said:


> From 20-30% off last year's numbers, to now only 5%.


That's the most telling figure.


----------



## DammitChrist

Chrome said:


> Damn, that hour 1 is BRUTAL. Would else happened in hour 2, besides Lacey of course.


All of these events took place for the 2nd hour:

- Moments after Becky Lynch, Lacey Evans, and Charlotte Flair cut their promos

- Lacey Evans vs Charlotte Flair (with Becky Lynch watching at ringside)

- Rey Mysterio relinquishing his United States title to Samoa Joe

- Braun Strowman and Bobby Lashley arm-wrestling each other

- Nikki Cross vs Peyton Royce (with Alexa Bliss and Billie Kay watching at ringside)

- Hour ended with Seth Rollins coming out to the ring moments before Baron Corbin interrupted him and before Brock Lesnar destroyed him



Randy Lahey said:


> That's basically a win at this point for WWE. Clearly they at least aren't losing alot more viewers since they put the focus back on Brock and some of the other acts


The ratings are still pretty shit. This is still not a win for WWE :lol

Plus, the hour that primarily featured the current talents somehow got the highest rated hour whereas the part timers were featured in lower rated hours; but hey, don't let that disrupt the silly narrative that the part-timers are big draws :lol



> Anyone still marking for Seth Rollins in this thread should just take the loss and admit he's the worst drawing champ they've ever had.


Nobody is going to admit shit that's simply not true :lelfold


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

DammitC said:


> The 2nd hour kicked off with:
> 
> - Moments after Becky Lynch, Lacey Evans, and Charlotte Flair cut their promos
> 
> - Lacey Evans vs Charlotte Flair (with Becky Lynch watching at ringside)
> 
> - Rey Mysterio relinquishing his United States title to Samoa Joe
> 
> - Braun Strowman and Bobby Lashley arm-wrestling each other
> 
> - Nikki Cross vs Peyton Royce (with Alexa Bliss and Billie Kay watching at ringside)
> 
> - Hour ended with Seth Rollins coming out to the ring moments before Baron Corbin interrupted him and before Brock Lesnar destroyed him


I thought the women were ratings killers?

Alexa's ass in tight white jeans = ratings... Who knew?

Also, old man Taker comfortably out drawing Seth. Stick a fork in this title reign, he's done.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Randy Lahey said:


> 500,000 more than Rollins/AJ from last month. Any questions?


No NBA Playoffs last night. 2 NBA Playoff games on the night of Seth/AJ. Any questions?



SayWhatAgain! said:


> I thought the women were ratings killers?
> 
> Alexa's ass in tight white jeans = ratings... Who knew?
> 
> Also, old man Taker comfortably out drawing Seth. Stick a fork in this title reign, he's done.


Except Seth was in Hour 2 last night, which was the highest rated hour of the night, including Hour 3..


----------



## raymond1985

SayWhatAgain! said:


> Alexa's ass in tight white jeans = ratings... Who knew?
> 
> Also, old man Taker comfortably out drawing Seth. Stick a fork in this title reign, he's done.


Yes and yes.


----------



## llj

Braun arm wrestling Bobby has like 3 million views on Youtube. I'm gonna bet that segment was one of the strongest pulls. Closely followed by Brock beating up Seth.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

Showstopper said:


> No NBA Playoffs last night. 2 NBA Playoff games on the night of Seth/AJ. Any questions?
> 
> 
> 
> Except Seth was in Hour 2 last night, which was the highest rated hour of the night, including Hour 3..


He came out to end hour 2. The segment and beatdown began hour 3.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

SayWhatAgain! said:


> He came out to end hour 2. The segment and beatdown began hour 3.


He came out at 10:53PM EST. So, still 7 mins left in that hour.

If you're only counting him for hour 3 for some reason, well, that's the same hour Taker was in, and it was still a horrific number with no competition.


----------



## raymond1985

SayWhatAgain! said:


> He came out to end hour 2. The segment and beatdown began hour 3.


Also that segment would not have drawn the same numbers had it not acted as a primer for Brock's appearance.


----------



## Erik.

Is everyone on reddit 10 years old? :lol

Downvote anyone who says its a shit number and people saying Raw deserved that number because it was entertaining as if it's a good number and if it's entertainment. :lol


----------



## raymond1985

llj said:


> Braun arm wrestling Bobby has like 3 million views on Youtube. I'm gonna bet that segment was one of the strongest pulls. Closely followed by Brock beating up Seth.


That segment is 700k ahead of the next highest segment (Brock smashing Rollins). 

Braun and Lashley's segment has pulled 3 million viewers in a day. The Rollins/Styles segment from late April has only pulled 2.1 million (less than the Rollins/Lesnar segment pulled in a day, proving that Brock is who people are more interested in). The Bryan vs Kingston match from early May has only drawn 1.2 million views. 

Maybe it's time for WWE to re-push Braun.


----------



## llj

raymond1985 said:


> That segment is 700k ahead of the next highest segment (Brock smashing Rollins).
> 
> Braun and Lashley's segment has pulled 3 million viewers in a day. The Rollins/Styles segment from last month has only pulled 2.1 million. The Bryan vs Kingston match from the week later has only drawn 1.2 million.
> 
> Maybe it's time for WWE to re-push Braun.


Braun is a draw, but he's not a 3 million a week draw. Gimmick segments like these always tend to pull strong numbers on youtube.


----------



## rbl85

The problem for WWE is that they're not going to bring Taker back or have HHH face Orton every week.


----------



## Ace

Wow, there truly are a lot of idiots in the world.

So many dumb enough to think Brock was going to cash in.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Better than recent awful weeks (up 9% at least) but it's still awful, especially considering Taker and Brock were advertised in advance and it was your go-home show for your Saudi event. Still down 5% from last year.

Not good.


----------



## raymond1985

llj said:


> Braun is a draw, but he's not a 3 million a week draw. Gimmick segments like these always tend to pull strong numbers on youtube.


WWE have little to lose. 

The Rollins experiment has failed and they can't always rely on part-timers for minor ratings bumps.


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

Those numbers are still horrible despite Brock not cashing it in when the majority on the web knew he wasn't going to cash in. Still a failure in the ratings in the market. No fault of the talent.


----------



## DammitChrist

raymond1985 said:


> WWE have little to lose.
> 
> The Rollins experiment has failed and they can't always rely on part-timers for minor ratings bumps.


It's pretty sad that you're still ignorant to realize that nobody draws, that ratings being low isn't due to any single talent, and that WWE will continue to bleed more viewers if Vince keeps failing to book entertaining/good shows consistently every week no matter who they push.


----------



## llj

MJF said:


> Is everyone on reddit 10 years old? :lol
> 
> Downvote anyone who says its a shit number and people saying Raw deserved that number because it was entertaining as if it's a good number and if it's entertainment. :lol


The WWE marks on reddit have gotten unbearable over the past year; I've given up on that place.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

MJF said:


> Is everyone on reddit 10 years old? :lol
> 
> Downvote anyone who says its a shit number and people saying Raw deserved that number because it was entertaining as if it's a good number and if it's entertainment. :lol


Expecting Wreddit to be a bastion of reasonable, smart wrestling fans :mj4

Unfortunate that some of Wreddit have slithered into here in recent years as well.


----------



## raymond1985

DammitC said:


> It's pretty sad that you're still ignorant to realize that nobody draws, that ratings being low isn't due to any single talent, and that WWE will continue to bleed more viewers if Vince keeps failing to book entertaining/good shows consistently every week no matter who they push.


Yawn.

No one denies that the booking and production is lacking and responsible for declining viewership. But some performers are better suited for retaining viewership than others. It doesn't have to be one or the other. 

At the very least, there is no evidence that your beloved Rollins is a better bet than others to retain viewership.


----------



## DammitChrist

I could've sworn that I've stated numerous times that nobody is a draw, so I don't really expect anyone to retain viewership when the shows tend to be mediocre.



raymond1985 said:


> Yawn.


"Good" response, mate. 10/10 (for laziness).


----------



## Randy Lahey

DammitC said:


> It's pretty sad that you're still ignorant to realize that nobody draws, that ratings being low isn't due to any single talent, and that WWE will continue to bleed more viewers if Vince keeps failing to book entertaining/good shows consistently every week no matter who they push.


Some talents are far worse than others. Namely, Seth Rollins. If WWE changed nothing and kept pushing Seth/AJ/Becky, then they'd have continued to be 20-30% off.

Luckily, Vince finally game to his senses and stopped pushing these geeks at least for a little while. Taker, Lesnar, Goldberg, people will at least not tune out.

Keep pushing Rollins, and WWE is on the road to cancellation or at the very least an AEW beatdown.



raymond1985 said:


> Yawn.
> 
> No one denies that the booking and production is lacking and responsible for declining viewership. But some performers are better suited for retaining viewership than others. It doesn't have to be one or the other.
> 
> At the very least, there is no evidence that your beloved Rollins is a better bet than others to retain viewership.


From all these Rollins marks in this thread, I'd love to know how big the year to year discrepancy needs to be to admit Rollins is absolute trash, and these other guys at least dont make people turn the channel.

If their argument is that if Brock/Taker/Goldberg had been pushed during Wrestlemania season and the ratings would still be 20-30% off, then they are out of their minds.

Bottomline is when the one set of people were pushed, ratings fell of 20-30%. WWE changed that, and now it's back to 5-10%. That is a legitimate difference. What more do they want to see?


----------



## rbl85

Randy Lahey said:


> Some talents are far worse than others. Namely, Seth Rollins. If WWE changed nothing and kept pushing Seth/AJ/Becky, then they'd have continued to be 20-30% off.
> 
> Luckily, Vince finally game to his senses and stopped pushing these geeks at least for a little while. Taker, Lesnar, Goldberg, people will at least not tune out.
> 
> Keep pushing Rollins, and WWE is on the road to cancellation or at the very least an AEW beatdown.


Except that Taker and Goldberg will not appear after their show in Saudi Arabia


----------



## DammitChrist

Randy Lahey said:


> Some talents are far worse than others. Namely, Seth Rollins. If WWE changed nothing and kept pushing Seth/AJ/Becky, then they'd have continued to be 20-30% off.
> 
> Luckily, Vince finally game to his senses and stopped pushing these geeks at least for a little while. Taker, Lesnar, Goldberg, people will at least not tune out.
> 
> Keep pushing Rollins, and WWE is on the road to cancellation or at the very least an AEW beatdown.


You keep claiming that pushing the part-timers will "save" and "help" the ratings, but yet the highest rated hour for this week ended up being the one that didn't even primarily feature them :lmao

I guess that they're not that much special over the current "geeks" :lol

Face it, nobody is a real draw, and WWE will continue to bleed viewers as long as the shows don't improve consistently.


----------



## Mordecay

Taker, still a draw. Not sure why, but he is.


----------



## raymond1985

DammitC said:


> I could've sworn that I've stated numerous times that nobody is a draw, so I don't really expect anyone to retain viewership when the shows tend to be mediocre.
> 
> 
> 
> "Good" response, mate. 10/10 (for laziness).


Do you have a shrine of Seth Rollins?


----------



## Mordecay

raymond1985 said:


> That segment is 700k ahead of the next highest segment (Brock smashing Rollins).
> 
> Braun and Lashley's segment has pulled 3 million viewers in a day. The Rollins/Styles segment from late April has only pulled 2.1 million (less than the Rollins/Lesnar segment pulled in a day, proving that Brock is who people are more interested in). The Bryan vs Kingston match from early May has only drawn 1.2 million views.
> 
> Maybe it's time for WWE to re-push Braun.


Scarlett Bordeaux has wrestling matches with over 10 million views on Youtube, yet Impact does like 10k people every week. Ruby Riott has had matches in the indies with over 20 million views, Youtube numbers mean shit


----------



## bradatar

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Lacey with that hour 2 ratings boost :bjpenn




We did it man. We did it. We believed and it happened. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DammitChrist

raymond1985 said:


> Do you have a shrine of Seth Rollins?


No, why do you ask stupid/ridiculous questions?


----------



## Robbyfude

What caused hour 1 to be so low? Could it be this god awful Shane vs Roman feud bores the shit out of everyone?



Mordecay said:


> Scarlett Bordeaux has wrestling matches with over 10 million views on Youtube, yet Impact does like 10k people every week. Ruby Riott has had matches in the indies with over 20 million views, Youtube numbers mean shit


That's cause most of her videos, the thumbnail is a picture of her ass or tits.


----------



## Soul Man Danny B

There was a time when we got quarter hour ratings in 2014. We could see that the Bryan vs Kane and Evolution vs Shield programs drew the most viewers. This was back when 4.2M viewers in an hour was the norm.

Now, we're sitting here arguing over whether Taker's appearance added an extra 100k to a horrible third hour rating. Who cares? Taker, much as i'm a fan, is a walking antique. WWE needs to build new stars. Where are the new stars?

More to the point: Where the fuck is Roman? He's been smashed over and protected for five years and yet he means nothing. They cut the legs off of dozens of guys for the benefit of Roman Reigns. Where are the ratings?


----------



## Jedah

They pulled out all the stops and they still got those numbers. Wow. And for those of you wanking off to any particular superstar, stop. The biggest reason is that the NBA playoffs are winding down and there was no game last night. Guaranteed they'd be much worse if those same people appeared in April.

It's all bandaids on gunshot wounds at this point. The company refuses to do the necessary surgery.


----------



## Randy Lahey

Jedah said:


> They pulled out all the stops and they still got those numbers. Wow. And for those of you wanking off to any particular superstar, stop. The biggest reason is that the NBA playoffs are winding down and there was no game last night. Guaranteed they'd be much worse if those same people appeared in April.
> 
> It's all bandaids on gunshot wounds at this point. The company refuses to do the necessary surgery.


You geek marks are going down with the ship apparently. April ratings have always done higher than May.

Go here and look for yourself.
https://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2018-tv-ratings/

April 2018, they did 3.35, 3.92, 3.62, 3.10
April 2019, they did 2.64, 2.92, 2.67, 2.37

Lost on average 847,000 viewers. Now, what is happening in May after they brought Brock back?

May 2018, they did 3.06, 2.69, 2.74, 2.67, 2.49
May 2019, they did 2.15, 2.24, 2.35, 2.52, 2.19

Brock didn't come back till after the 2.15 show...that show was all due to Seth/AJ being non-draws. For Brock's 4 shows in May, they averaged a loss of 310,000 viewers.

It's clear...the push of the geeks lead to an excess loss of 500,000 viewers. NBA playoffs have nothing to do with it. Thats why the comparison is done on a year to year basis where everything is equal.


----------



## Jedah

"Geek marks" from a low post count user. How original. If you have data, which you've misinterpreted, just present it. And Going down with what ship? I stopped watching a long time ago. Pushing individual has-beens isn't going to fix the company's problems in the long run. Those are still horrible numbers even compared to two years ago without all the has-beens.

But I guess you can enjoy jacking off to Brock dancing for his organ grinder and his two moves though, and making excuses when the ratings tank even more in Football season, and for those ~1.5 million viewers that have left in just two years during his time on top.


----------



## SPCDRI

My takeaway is this rating is down from last year, even though they had the McMahons out, trotted out their "legends," teased multiple cash-ins from Brock. So this is them going all out against no competition and they are doing 2.3/2.6/2.3? That's down almost 2 million people an hour from where they were on just any old shitty RAW at random from 5 or 6 years ago.

We don't know if it'd be worse if their younger full time roster got the spotlight, but this is them going all in on LEGENDZ and putting out a crummy show that not a lot of people cared to watch.


----------



## Jedah

The product fucking sucks. It's that simple. All they can do is trot out the old timers from when the show was actually good and pray it pops a rating, and when they did it all last fall with DX and Taker, it didn't.

What are those numbers going to be in Football season?


----------



## birthday_massacre

LOL at Brock causing the ratings to tank more


----------



## Jonhern

Randy Lahey said:


> You geek marks are going down with the ship apparently. April ratings have always done higher than May.
> 
> Go here and look for yourself.
> https://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2018-tv-ratings/
> 
> April 2018, they did 3.35, 3.92, 3.62, 3.10
> April 2019, they did 2.64, 2.92, 2.67, 2.37
> 
> Lost on average 847,000 viewers. Now, what is happening in May after they brought Brock back?
> 
> May 2018, they did 3.06, 2.69, 2.74, 2.67, 2.49
> May 2019, they did 2.15, 2.24, 2.35, 2.52, 2.19
> 
> Brock didn't come back till after the 2.15 show...that show was all due to Seth/AJ being non-draws. For Brock's 4 shows in May, they averaged a loss of 310,000 viewers.
> 
> It's clear...the push of the geeks lead to an excess loss of 500,000 viewers. NBA playoffs have nothing to do with it. Thats why the comparison is done on a year to year basis where everything is equal.


You are reading that data wrong. The issue was the rtwm did so bad that the April numbers look worse year over year than May only because of that, don't forget Brock was a part of the rtwm. They had a lot more room to drop, now that its essentially leveled off the year to year might look better, but in reality they just had less room to fall. they are likely at thier floor, all the people that just watch out of habit. Brock hasn't brought back any of the fans they lost this march-April, let alone last April.

Edit: also the fact that Brock was advertised to have his first TV match since 2004 and it barely moved the needle tells you no one is a draw right now.


----------



## Jonhern

Randy Lahey said:


> It's clear Brock is the only draw that WWE has. They were 20-30% off of last year's ratings during Wrestlemania Season and into April, and that was with Seth, Becky, and Ronda being the focal point of the show.
> 
> Brock returns, and now they are back to their average decline of 5-15%. Brock clearly matters. He's cleary far more over than anyone else on the roster as far as impacting a rating


You left out an important thing about wm season, Brock was champion during that time.


----------



## ClintDagger

I honestly believe without Brock, Hunter, and Taker being advertised for last night that they do something like 2.3 - 2.1 - 1.9; I think the summer doldrums could be really ugly for them.


----------



## Bxstr

These numbers would have been way worse if not for Brock,Taker,HHH.
Nobody can pull new viewers at this point but that part timer attractions help to retain viewers.But unfortunately you can't put them in every segment in 3 hour show people will tune out as soon as some boring shit like Miz Rollins segment comes up.


Robbyfude said:


> What caused hour 1 to be so low? Could it be this god awful Shane vs Roman feud bores the shit out of everyone?
> 
> 
> 
> That's cause most of her videos, the thumbnail is a picture of her ass or tits.


What?Reigns Shane segment took place on SD Tuesday how will it affect raw ratings? :lol 
And Rollins is doing a better job to bore the shit out of everyone and chasing away viewers.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

I don't doubt that the numbers would've been worse without at least Taker on the show and the idea that there MIGHT be a title change. 2.6 is about as high as they can go with that, though.

Still, if Taker was on the show every week or if Brock teased cashing in every week, I think the obvious diminishing returns would bring them right back down to a 2.0 real quick. 

Also, that Brock didn't actually cash in despite it being heavily advertised really hurts this gimmick.

These are the "big guns." Or, at least the next best ones to bringing back The Rock for a hot shot.


----------



## The Wood

Imagine watching thinking that Brock might cash in and win the belt, only for that bait-and-switch. Like to see how many more times WWE can play that card.


----------



## SPCDRI

The Wood said:


> Imagine watching thinking that Brock might cash in and win the belt, only for that bait-and-switch. Like to see how many more times WWE can play that card.


2 times so far, is the third time the charm? All it has to go up against is a potential elimination game in the NBA Championship series.


----------



## The Wood

I imagine people are feeling mighty foolish for giving them another chance.


----------



## CMPunkRock316

These numbers are terrible but hour 1 is dreadful.


----------



## Matthew Castillo

Robbyfude said:


> What caused hour 1 to be so low? Could it be this god awful Shane vs Roman feud bores the shit out of everyone?


It could be the fact that nothing happened in the first hour last week, so people waited until hour two to tune in.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Meltzer kinda buried the fuck out of Brock and Taker not drawing on Raw this past week:



> Raw on 6/3 was unique in a lot of ways.
> 
> The 1.72 rating and 2,405,000 viewers (1.57 viewers per home) number has to be a disappointment since they all but guaranteed a WWE or Universal title change by promising the Brock Lesnar cash-in (and not delivering on it) and pushed Undertaker’s return to Raw.


Damn.


----------



## Ace

I feel sorry for who ever will be getting featured come football season, it's going to get ugly.

You're better off in the midcard away from the record low ratings each week.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

A 1.7 rating three months before football and AEW gets going with TNT (I know they're on Wednesdays allegedly, still). :maury

We're about to witness a fucking massacre in September.


----------



## SPCDRI

Playoff baseball, Sunday night and Monday night football, the best television programming always is done in the fall and a new promotion on major network television...


----------



## xio8ups

How is seth rollings helping lololol


----------



## Ace

:heyman6


----------



## SPCDRI

Was that really the attendance of the show? That's incredible. Becky didn't come out to the ring for at least half an hour, they did the ever so scintillating 20 minutes of babble to set up a tag match then had Larth Thullivan out there, minimum.


----------



## krillep

*What's the LOWEST WWE RATING OF ALL TIME?*

I saw that WWE RAW had 1.72 rating last week....Incredible low. 

What's the lowest WWE rating of all time? Which year and week?

Is that rating on WWE Top 5 lowest?


----------



## Zappers

Ace said:


> :heyman6


To be fair, the TV cameras side always is less populated. Been like that for years. The other side (not shown in the photo) was packed.


----------



## Erik.




----------



## Zappers

MJF said:


>


I've been to events in the 90's attitude era. And sat on the camera side. While it didn't (obviously) look like that, the camera side had empty seats as opposed to other parts in the areas. The other side & ramp, opposite from ramp always sells out faster. People(fans) like being on camera. Even the floor & ramps rows on camera side are less rows than the opposite side for that very reason.


----------



## Freelancer

I'm not a fan of the scripted NFL anymore, but MNF is going to destroy RAW, plain and simple. What's the excuse gonna be this time Vince?


----------



## Dave Santos

Actually missed the complete show which I try not to do. Glad I did since the basketball game was really entertaining. To bad game 7 NHL has a 2 day break and doesn't take place today, but tomorrow.


----------



## Seafort

krillep said:


> I saw that WWE RAW had 1.72 rating last week....Incredible low.
> 
> What's the lowest WWE rating of all time? Which year and week?
> 
> Is that rating on WWE Top 5 lowest?


The last two weeks of 1996, Monday Night Raw fell below a 2.0 and hit 1.5 and 1.6 ratings in consecutive weeks. That’s the lowest that I recall, and I remember that I felt RAW was in serious danger of being cancelled.


----------



## Cowabunga

*Re: What's the LOWEST WWE RATING OF ALL TIME?*



krillep said:


> I saw that WWE RAW had 1.72 rating last week....Incredible low.
> 
> What's the lowest WWE rating of all time? Which year and week?
> 
> Is that rating on WWE Top 5 lowest?


I have no idea, but keep in mind that it's hard to compare the same number in 2019 to one in like 1998. Gotta keep in mind that a lot more people have cable nowadays and also stream stuff whether legally or not. 

That being said, the lowest ever TV rating for a live free WWF/WWE tv show must have been around 1995-1996, if I had to guess?


----------



## Fearless Viper

*Re: What's the LOWEST WWE RATING OF ALL TIME?*

Next week, and after that...


----------



## ellthom

*Re: What's the LOWEST WWE RATING OF ALL TIME?*

Didn't one episode in December draw the lowest? I know WWE had some pretty low ratings in the mid 90's but I thought WWE beat that recently?


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.380M
H2- 2.086M
H3- 1.909M
3H- 2.125M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 12.35% / - 0.294M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 8.49% / - 0.177M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 19.79% / - 0.471M )
6/10/19 Vs 6/3/19 ( - 11.64% / - 0.280M )

Demo (6/10/19 Vs 6/3/19):
H1- 0.750D Vs 0.730D
H2- 0.650D Vs 0.820D
H3- 0.590D Vs 0.790D
3H- 0.663D Vs 0.780D

Note: RAW is 1st, 3rd & 4th by hourly demo & 4th, 7th & 9th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (6/10/19 Vs 6/11/18):
H1- 2.380M Vs 2.751M
H2- 2.086M Vs 2.812M
H3- 1.909M Vs 2.629M
3H- 2.125M Vs 2.731M ( - 22.19% / - 0.506M )

Demo (6/10/19 Vs 6/11/18):
H1- 0.750D Vs 0.910D
H2- 0.650D Vs 0.970D
H3- 0.590D Vs 0.930D
3H- 0.663D Vs 0.937D

Note: RAW this week last year was 4th, 2nd & 3rd by hourly demo & 7th, 4th & 10th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## RainmakerV2

Ouch. But to be expected.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

FUCK. Though it'd be lower since last night's NBA Finals game was a series clinching game if the Raptors won last night. Should've been much lower considering it was a shit-show and the importance of last night's NBA game and the fact that the NBA game was a close game all throughout the game. Even I missed the first hour of last night's Raw. Who are these people sitting through 3 hours every week especially when that game was on last night.

How the fuck is the overall average of the show NOT under 2 million with that game on last night?

:mj4


----------



## SPCDRI

Jesus! 

Comparable time in June...

2016: 3 million
2017: 2.5 million
2018: 2.7 million


----------



## Fearless Viper

They did better compare to last year's demo and hourly viewership abd survived from this week's competition. Good for them.


----------



## SPCDRI

Fearless Viper said:


> They did better compare to last year's demo and hourly viewership abd survived from this week's competition. Good for them.


Demo schmemo, its hundreds of thousands of fewer viewers.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> FUCK. Though it'd be lower since last night's NBA Finals game was a series clinching game if the Raptors won last night. Should've been much lower considering it was a shit-show and the importance of last night's NBA game and the fact that the NBA game was a close game all throughout the game. Even I missed the first hour of last night's Raw. Who are these people sitting through 3 hours every week especially when that game was on last night.
> 
> How the fuck is the overall average of the show NOT under 2 million with that game on last night?
> 
> :mj4


I seriously think people overestimate the amount of crossover fans WWE has with real sports. At one time when their audience was more casual and mainstream there was significant crossover. Now I think it is very, very minor.


----------



## Mifune Jackson

It’s because Brock wasn’t there, obviously.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> I seriously think people overestimate the amount of crossover fans WWE has with real sports. At one time when their audience was more casual and mainstream there was significant crossover. Now I think it is very, very minor.


Yeah, maybe so. Interesting nonetheless. Because last night's game had everything. If one team won, the series would be over. Close game the entire night. The best player in the league returned from injury after missing most of the postseason. Can't believe it didn't do under 2 million for the entire night.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> Yeah, maybe so. Interesting nonetheless. Because last night's game had everything. If one team won, the series would be over. Close game the entire night. The best player in the league returned from injury after missing most of the postseason. Can't believe it didn't do under 2 million for the entire night.


Don’t worry, it’s getting there. H1 was boosted by people curious to see if Brock had or would threaten to cash in. H2 and H3 are more indicative of the level of fans truly interested in the product.


----------



## llj

Up until this point the NBA Finals ratings were lower than past years because most of the US wasn't interested in the Raptors as much (while Canadian ratings are doing record numbers). 

That said, Game 5 was full of drama, a real rollercoaster ride all game and a whole bunch of stuff trending on twitter all night so I can see why many would have tuned in. Will the Raps get it done? Will KD ever be the same again after this injury? Did the Warriors ruin KD's career by rushing/pressuring him back? And those DARNED FANS cheering when KD went down!

And so forth.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> Don’t worry, it’s getting there. H1 was boosted by people curious to see if Brock had or would threaten to cash in. H2 and H3 are more indicative of the level of fans truly interested in the product.


First time in weeks Brock wasn't advertised and he got beat up in SA. I doubt anyone was thinking of him going by the conversations on here and other forums since Friday.


----------



## chronoxiong

Hour 3 went below 2 million viewers lol. Damn that is sad. Everyone was on the NBA Finals last night as I was watching that game with friends as well. Lot of emotion and drama and the game being close throughout didn't help RAW out at all. Good job WWE and kudos to Vince's lame wildcard rule. Didnt help matters at all last night. Lol.


----------



## rexmundi

Terrible number. Only people with a vested interest could try to spin this as "not that bad." :Cocky :LOL


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> First time in weeks Brock wasn't advertised and he got beat up in SA. I doubt anyone was thinking of him going by the conversations on here and other forums since Friday.


Believe it or not, there a few hundred thousand fans that don’t have the network and don’t follow WWE on the internet. Those people tune in at the top usually out of curiosity and by no means can you gauge what they’re thinking based on wrestling forums. So I’m talking about people that knew there was a show on Friday but didn’t know the results. I don’t think those people pay attention to who is advertised either.


----------



## Chrome

And the hits keep on coming. :mj4


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> by no means can you gauge what they’re thinking


But you somehow can gauge that they thought Brock was going to show up.

Most people have the internet these days, anyways. Wrestling promotions these days don't have huge fanbases these days. But the fans they do have are pretty die-hard and do a great job of keeping up to date.


----------



## Zappers

I'm not gonna sit here and say I think the ratings would up. But for the love of everything that is holy. Could they please, PLEASE stop cutting wrestlers (male or female) ring intros. Stop it already. The fans want to see the FULL ring entrance of EVERY performer. It's all part of the experience, it's part of the show. It's part of the entire package and story. You need flow and continuity. The wrestlers work hard on their ring entrances. Have the respect and show them and stop going to commercials. Thank you.


----------



## rexmundi

Fearless Viper said:


> They did better compare to last year's demo and hourly viewership abd survived from this week's competition. Good for them.



I think you misread these:


*Viewership (6/10/19 Vs 6/11/18):
H1- 2.380M Vs 2.751M
H2- 2.086M Vs 2.812M
H3- 1.909M Vs 2.629M
3H- 2.125M Vs 2.731M ( - 22.19% / - 0.506M )

Demo (6/10/19 Vs 6/11/18):
H1- 0.750D Vs 0.910D
H2- 0.650D Vs 0.970D
H3- 0.590D Vs 0.930D
3H- 0.663D Vs 0.937D*


Both viewers and demo are down a lot from last year.


----------



## llj

WWE wrestling is becoming irrelevant now


----------



## Erramayhem89

So like 6 months until all 3 hours are below 2 lol


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> But you somehow can gauge that they thought Brock was going to show up.
> 
> Most people have the internet these days, anyways. Wrestling promotions these days don't have huge fanbases these days. But the fans they do have are pretty die-hard and do a great job of keeping up to date.


I didn’t say they thought Brock would show up. I said they would be curious. It’s the least informed segment of the fan base. Anyone that has followed the history of ratings knows that PPV type shows almost always brings a curiosity factor from casuals which is why you will see a H1 bump and then drop off for the following Raw. You can infer a lot from several years worth of trends.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> I didn’t say they thought Brock would show up. I said they would be curious. It’s the least informed segment of the fan base. Anyone that has followed the history of ratings knows that PPV type shows almost always brings a curiosity factor from casuals which is why you will see a H1 bump and then drop off for the following Raw. You can infer a lot from several years worth of trends.


I like you man, I really do. But no one was thinking Brock would appear last night. No one. :lol But I like that you at least don't hide what you want to get across and who you want to credit. Cool by me.



chronoxiong said:


> Hour 3 went below 2 million viewers lol. Damn that is sad. Everyone was on the NBA Finals last night as I was watching that game with friends as well. Lot of emotion and drama and the game being close throughout didn't help RAW out at all. Good job WWE and kudos to Vince's lame wildcard rule. Didnt help matters at all last night. Lol.


It makes sense that last night's hour 3 went under 2 million considering the game last night. There are episodes of SD from last year that did a 1.9 OVERALL rating with an AJ/Rusev match main-eventing with no NBA game on at the same time. SD also did a 1.9 a couple of weeks back with Reigns main-eventing and also no big NBA game. Pretty hilarious how Vince is destroying everybody and everything these days around him.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> I like you man, I really do. But no one was thinking Brock would appear last night. No one. :lol But I like that you at least don't hide what you want to get across and who you want to credit. Cool by me.


I’m not really crediting Brock for anything. I’m more crediting the MITB dynamic and a big show that occurred just a few days ago. I honestly think you are underestimating just how casual the fans on the extreme casual end of the fan base really are.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> I’m not really crediting Brock for anything. I’m more crediting the MITB dynamic and a big show that occurred just a few days ago. I honestly think you are underestimating just how casual the fans on the extreme casual end of the fan base really are.


For sure I am. There's barely any casual fans left, if any. Wrestling has never been more niche than it is right now.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> For sure I am. There's barely any casual fans left, if any. Wrestling has never been more niche than it is right now.


The fact that so many fans are leaving the product proves that there are indeed a significant number of casual fans out there. You don’t go from hardcore to not watching overnight. It’s a life cycle. Those casuals might have been (and probably were) hardcore fans several years ago. But now they have one foot out the door and only watch WWE at the most minimal levels. Soon, they will be gone and the cycle will continue.


----------



## llj

But even with the NBA last night, RAW hour 1 started at 2.3 million which is already a bad hour 1 number. NBA game started at 9:00. So In reality RAW would likely have gone down a lot anyway with or without an NBA game.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

ClintDagger said:


> The fact that so many fans are leaving the product proves that there are indeed a significant number of casual fans out there. You don’t go from hardcore to not watching overnight. It’s a life cycle. Those casuals might have been (and probably were) hardcore fans several years ago. But now they have one foot out the door and only watch WWE at the most minimal levels. Soon, they will be gone and the cycle will continue.


I think they're already gone, though. Ratings are down, attendance is down, merch sales are down. All of those things have been down for years now. WWE makes their most money from the TV deals and Saudi shows. Alot of fans left along time ago. Hell, they started leaving during the Ruthless Aggression era and it's simply continued to now.


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

_*Boy those ratings are not good at all and they are slowly hitting 2.0 mark each week that goes by. The WWE is not even trying at this point. :mj4*_


----------



## Erik.

I think it's clear that there are bout 2,000,000 wrestling fans in America that simply don't watch real sports or at least don't think real sports are more important.

That is the lowest rating of the year too.

And realistically, why should MORE people tune in next week? Those who didn't watch would have caught up via YouTube or DVR etc. and what would they really have seen from last night that would make them want to tune in next week?

Attendances down. Lowest rating of the year following one of the worst PPVs of the year. Struggling to sell tickets for their next PPV. Ouch.


----------



## Randy Lahey

rexmundi said:


> Terrible number. Only people with a vested interest could try to spin this as "not that bad." <img src="http://i.imgur.com/1sCL677.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Cocky" class="inlineimg" /> <img src="http://i.imgur.com/D6qabSQ.gif" border="0" alt="" title="LOL" class="inlineimg" />


Exactly. These Rollins marks are complete clowns.

Lesnar’s the only draw they have. When he’s not on the show, they go back to their WM season numbers of being 20-30% off last year. When he was on it, they were back to 5%.

No one gives a flying fuck about Seth Rollins and the ratings prove it every week,


----------



## #BestForBusiness

Buffy The Vampire Slayer said:


> _*Boy those ratings are not good at all and they are slowly hitting 2.0 mark each week that goes by. The WWE is not even trying at this point. :mj4*_


What makes it hilarious is that FOX is expecting at least 3 million views for Smackdown each week.


----------



## DammitChrist

Randy Lahey said:


> Exactly. These Rollins marks are complete clowns.
> 
> Lesnar’s the only draw they have. When he’s not on the show, they go back to their WM season numbers of being 20-30% off last year. When he was on it, they were back to 5%.
> 
> No one gives a flying fuck about Seth Rollins and the ratings prove it every week,


The only ACTUAL clowns here are the ones who still believe that anyone on the current roster draws (including the part-timers) :lol


----------



## SPCDRI




----------



## deathvalleydriver2

I didn’t bother watching that crap show either tried for the first hour and turned it off


----------



## Adam Cool

Basically this year around 500K tune in for wrestlemania season while 1.5M stick around for the rest? This is assuming the ratings don't decline harder ofc 

I am mainly talking about TV, the network audience is different


----------



## Jedah

I'll refrain from commenting on the Brock situation because there was particularly strong competition this week.

What IS clear is that the "wild card" rule is a total ratings bust.

End it. NOW. It's making the programming even more insufferable.


----------



## Chrome

I mean, you can excuse bad ratings to a certain extent, but there's no excuse for having bad attendance like that one pic demonstrated. That pretty much tells everyone that the product is cold as fuck. Also imagine being a wrestling and having to cut promos facing that side of a bunch of empty seats. :lol


----------



## Seafort

The best analogy is WCW, mid 1999. I feel that this is the calm before the storm, and this fall the bottom will begin to drop out.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

:mj4

Another abysmal number for an atrocious company. These aren't going to get better. Seems that Saudi show didn't give then the bump they were looking for lol

Spin it all you want, a bad rating is a bad rating. Down 11% from last week and over 20% from last year. The casuals are barely there anymore and the hardcore fans are diminishing with the bad quality of the show with AEW looming as well. 

September is going to be a blood bath.


----------



## Lenny Leonard

Chrome said:


> I mean, you can excuse bad ratings to a certain extent, but there's no excuse for having bad attendance like that one pic demonstrated. That pretty much tells everyone that the product is cold as fuck. Also imagine being a wrestling and having to cut promos facing that side of a bunch of empty seats. :lol


I've wondered that myself if they feel foolish talking to a sea of nothing


----------



## Lenny Leonard

Time to back a dozen brinks trucks up to CM Punks house.


----------



## looper007

Chrome said:


> I mean, you can excuse bad ratings to a certain extent, but there's no excuse for having bad attendance like that one pic demonstrated. That pretty much tells everyone that the product is cold as fuck. Also imagine being a wrestling and having to cut promos facing that side of a bunch of empty seats. :lol


Definitely got to be tough on the talent, but I'm sure quite a few know the product sucks but are just happy to pick up their wages and go on their way. This isn't the first time they are in front of half filled arenas so they are probably used to it now.


----------



## llj

Lenny Leonard said:


> Time to back a dozen brinks trucks up to CM Punks house.



Punk isn't coming back. If he's even following the industry anymore, then he's absolutely laughing right now at the WWE.


----------



## llj

looper007 said:


> Definitely got to be tough on the talent, but I'm sure quite a few know the product sucks but are just happy to pick up their wages and go on their way. This isn't the first time they are in front of half filled arenas so they are probably used to it now.


For sure. This is more the company's problem than the talent. The talent isn't worried too much. If the WWE caves in tomorrow, they'll have other places to go to. Maybe less pay, but most will survive or even excel elsewhere. They'll happily collect their monies while the WWE is suffering. The WWE as a company is taking this straight to the gut though.


----------



## Punk_316

llj said:


> Punk isn't coming back. If he's even following the industry anymore, then he's absolutely laughing right now at the WWE.


If Punk ever wrestles again, it will be on the independents. This would be the wisest choice. He'll largely dictate his own schedule, have a greater deal of creative freedom, make sweet money, and look like a big star.

As for involvement with WWE, perhaps a hall of fame induction years down the road. Ultimately just to make amends and secure his legacy in wrestling (like Sting did).


----------



## Matthew Castillo

Punk_316 said:


> If Punk ever wrestles again, it will be on the independents. This would be the wisest choice. He'll largely dictate his own schedule, have a greater deal of creative freedom, make sweet money, and look like a big star.
> 
> As for involvement with WWE, perhaps a hall of fame induction years down the road. Ultimately just to make amends and secure his legacy in wrestling (like Sting did).


Either that or he'd go to AEW in a part time role to spite Vince.


----------



## karebear

what did wwe expect with baron corbin being in the opening scene and setting up a main event match with seth, that is all the warning fans need to know it was not worth watching raw, crazy how corbin has been made a main eventer while ec3 has been made completely obscure.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

Ouch

:rollins :shane


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

That Women's Revolution really paid off. Paid huge dividends for the company. :lmao


----------



## Bxstr

People still blaming Barin Corbin for low ratings when we have the biggest walking talking charisma vacuum as champion :mj


----------



## DammitChrist

Bxstr said:


> People still blaming Barin Corbin for low ratings when we have the biggest walking talking charisma vacuum as champion :mj


It looks like someone here (that's you btw) has no clue what a charisma vacuum really is :mj


----------



## raymond1985

DammitC said:


> It looks like someone here (that's you btw) has no clue what a charisma vacuum really is :mj


I agree think of the arena pops.

unkout:


----------



## Brother_T

I haven't watched WWE at all in weeks. I turned it on for probably less than one minute Monday and I seriously am just tired of that set and all the over the top lighting. Watching Raw seriously drains the life out of me. Watching the AEW ppv just sealed the deal for me that wrestling is still alive and I just don't need WWE.


----------



## bmack086

I’ll never for the life of me understand why people try to put all the blame of poor ratings on one talent? The only person this can be attributed to is Vince. 

A 3 hour show having piss poor ratings is the reflection of an overall uninspiring piss poor product, that gives no actual reason or purpose to watch live - if at all. It doesn’t matter who the World Champ is.


----------



## llj

Objectively, I don't know how anyone can watch these shows and think "If only this person wasn't champ, the ratings would be A LOT better."

When I watch these shows, I see a product that is flailing and doubling down on its nonsense. It's scary how much today's WWE resembles WCW back in 2000. Remember when WCW was giving world titles to David Arquette? That's what this Shane push reminds me of, except this is even worse because Shane is actually winning wrestling bouts whereas Arquette was at least someone who wasn't presented as an actual wrestler and more as someone who ran around and got lucky. What we're seeing now is like if WCW booked David Arquette to tap out Chris Benoit and pin Hulk Hogan. All while nailing top guys with some of the worst worked punches in wrestling history.

If you treat your product like a joke than how to you expect audiences to be invested in anything you do? 

If only the WWE would go out of business as quickly as WCW did when they were on their decline but unfortunately this is a slower slide because THANKS A LOT FOX AND SAUDI ARABIA. The next 5 years could be like 5 years of WCW 2000. This is literally a car crash we are watching in slow motion.

Instead of torturing yourself by continuing to watch, I think it's better to just stop. Luckily, I think people have because these numbers show a lot of people are tuning out and I can literally count the number of regulars on this forum still invested in the WWE on two hands.


----------



## ClintDagger

llj said:


> Objectively, I don't know how anyone can watch these shows and think "If only this person wasn't champ, the ratings would be A LOT better."
> 
> When I watch these shows, I see a product that is flailing and doubling down on its nonsense. It's scary how much today's WWE resembles WCW back in 2000. Remember when WCW was giving world titles to David Arquette? That's what this Shane push reminds me of, except this is even worse because Shane is actually winning wrestling bouts whereas Arquette was at least someone who wasn't presented as an actual wrestler and more as someone who ran around and got lucky. What we're seeing now is like if WCW booked David Arquette to tap out Chris Benoit and pin Hulk Hogan. All while nailing top guys with some of the worst worked punches in wrestling history.
> 
> If you treat your product like a joke than how to you expect audiences to be invested in anything you do?
> 
> If only the WWE would go out of business as quickly as WCW did when they were on their decline but unfortunately this is a slower slide because THANKS A LOT FOX AND SAUDI ARABIA. The next 5 years could be like 5 years of WCW 2000. This is literally a car crash we are watching in slow motion.
> 
> Instead of torturing yourself by continuing to watch, I think it's better to just stop. Luckily, I think people have because these numbers show a lot of people are tuning out and I can literally count the number of regulars on this forum still invested in the WWE on two hands.


To me you’re making a straw man argument. I don’t think anyone is saying wrestler X or wrestler Y will make the ratings a lot better. It’s more a question of putting your best foot forward. Is featuring the women’s division or putting a world title on Kofi putting your best foot forward? No one would say that it is.

I see a lot of people white knighting for the talent. Everyone knows that Vince is the primary reason that the product sucks and the ratings are down. But he’s not going anywhere. So in a real world scenario the only pieces on the board that can be moved around are the talent. And that’s what the focus of this thread is. The people that say “nobody draws” are ignoring the fact that some talent are anti-draws, and some talent can retain viewers deeper into the show than others. To deny that is to say you can put a bunch of people off the street on the show and it will impact the ratings in no way. But we know that’s not true. The talent being featured does still matter regardless of how bad Vince is at his job.


----------



## llj

ClintDagger said:


> To me you’re making a straw man argument. I don’t think anyone is saying wrestler X or wrestler Y will make the ratings a lot better. It’s more a question of putting your best foot forward. Is featuring the women’s division or putting a world title on Kofi putting your best foot forward? No one would say that it is.
> 
> I see a lot of people white knighting for the talent. Everyone knows that Vince is the primary reason that the product sucks and the ratings are down. But he’s not going anywhere. So in a real world scenario the only pieces on the board that can be moved around are the talent. And that’s what the focus of this thread is. The people that say “nobody draws” are ignoring the fact that some talent are anti-draws, and some talent can retain viewers deeper into the show than others. To deny that is to say you can put a bunch of people off the street on the show and it will impact the ratings in no way. But we know that’s not true. The talent being featured does still matter regardless of how bad Vince is at his job.


I'm not saying some of the talent's appeal isn't partly to blame. I'm just saying I just don't see the decisive shift in numbers that the so-called "reliable" draws are producing. 

I DO think the women's stuff has tanked some of the ratings over the past few months. I think the Wrestlemania main event storyline was off-putting to a significant number of viewers despite how over it was with crowds. However, I am not sure that "putting the belt" on X or Y is necessarily what is pushing the needles up and down ratings wise. If Brock is a draw, then he must also take the blame for when the product is suffering when he is champion. It doesn't matter if he shows up on TV or not--if one is advocating putting the belt on him, one must expect he will not show up very often as champion. And during Wrestlemania season, the numbers fell when he was champion. That's a fact. 

So suppose we say Seth is not a strong draw. Personally I have no strong opinion on Seth or Kofi. So if not them, then who? We've had it on Bryan, Seth, Kofi, Brock during the slide. And the major slide came when it was on Bryan and Brock. 

So if these guys didn't move the needle, then who else would you try?


----------



## ClintDagger

llj said:


> I'm not saying some of the talent's appeal isn't partly to blame. I'm just saying I just don't see the decisive shift in numbers that the so-called "reliable" draws are producing.
> 
> I DO think the women's stuff has tanked some of the ratings over the past few months. I think the Wrestlemania main event storyline was off-putting to a significant number of viewers despite how over it was with crowds. However, I am not sure that "putting the belt" on X or Y is necessarily what is pushing the needles up and down ratings wise. If Brock is a draw, then he must also take the blame for when the product is suffering when he is champion. It doesn't matter if he shows up on TV or not--if one is advocating putting the belt on him, one must expect he will not show up very often as champion. And during Wrestlemania season, the numbers fell when he was champion. That's a fact.
> 
> So suppose we say Seth is not a strong draw. Personally I have no strong opinion on Seth or Kofi. So if not them, then who? We've had it on Bryan, Seth, Kofi, Brock during the slide. And the major slide came when it was on Bryan and Brock.
> 
> So if these guys didn't move the needle, then who else would you try?


I can’t really argue with anything you are saying, I just wanted to put my POV out there because I was seeing so many people saying “it’s Vince’s fault, not the talent.” And my response is, yes it’s way more Vince’s fault but there’s a reason why many in this thread focus on the talent instead... and it’s because Vince ain’t going anywhere.

And to answer your question, I’m not someone who has a problem with Seth. I think he’s one of the better options. Kofi having a belt is ridiculous. Putting it on literally any other credible guy that’s been a main eventer would be better. But my biggest criticism all along has been the debacle of pushing the women’s WM main event so strong in Jan / Feb; that’s where some real damage was done where the talent pushed was to blame.


----------



## God Movement

Ace said:


> :heyman6


Meanwhile All Out sells out in 15 minutes.

:booklel "You gotta love that"


----------



## bradatar

*Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*

:batista3

4/29/19 2nd Lowest RAW - 1.91 million viewers in third hour - Seth Rollins/AJ Styles contract signing

6/10/19 Lowest RAW - 1.909 million viewers in third hour - Seth Rollins/Kevin Owens main event


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*

Impossible. I was told Seth/AJ was a dream match. There must be a mix-up here.


----------



## bradatar

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Impossible. I was told Seth/AJ was a dream match. There must be a mix-up here.


If Corbin was in those main events there would be 50 posts on this already.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*

:rollins

Hopefully they carry on burning money with this guy on top. AEW will beat them in the ratings within a year.


----------



## DammitChrist

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Impossible. *I was told Seth/AJ was a dream match. *There must be a mix-up here.


Are you still upset MONTHS later because there were plenty of fans that genuinely considered Seth Rollins vs AJ Styles to be a dream match? :lmao


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



DammitC said:


> Are you still upset MONTHS later because there were plenty of fans that genuinely considered Seth Rollins vs AJ Styles to be a dream match? :lmao


Such a dream match that everyone forgot about it the next day.

Then Cody and Dustin put those spot monkey anti-draws to shame :lol


----------



## DammitChrist

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Such a dream match that everyone forgot about it the next day.


Says who? :kobe

Their match still gets mentioned by other folks as one of the MOTY contenders on the main-roster, and this is coming from someone who didn't even nominate their match in the MOTY thread.



> Then Cody and Dustin put those spot monkey anti-draws to shame :lol


Oh, you still blindly believe that they're luring away viewers. That's unfortunate of you :lol


----------



## bradatar

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



DammitC said:


> Says who? :kobe
> 
> Their match still gets mentioned by other folks as one of the MOTY contenders on the main-roster, and this is coming from someone who didn't even nominate their match in the MOTY thread.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, you still blindly believe that they're luring away viewers. That's unfortunate of you :lol


Literally nobody said that match was up as a MOTY candidate. The best WWE matches this year have all been Daniel Bryan matches. (And I don't even like DB)


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



bradatar said:


> Literally nobody said that match was up as a MOTY candidate. The best WWE matches this year have all been Daniel Bryan matches. (And I don't even like DB)


Because Bryan is actually a great pro-wrestler, unlike AJ and Seth who are good at certain spots.



nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Such a dream match that everyone forgot about it the next day.
> 
> Then Cody and Dustin put those spot monkey anti-draws to shame :lol


Cody 3 stars getting a 5 star match before workrate god Seth :lol


----------



## Wridacule

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*

At this point I kind of wish they would put the belt on Corbin. Just to see what you guys blame when the ratings are still in the shitter. Nobody is watching raw anymore.


----------



## bradatar

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Wridacule said:


> At this point I kind of wish they would put the belt on Corbin. Just to see what you guys blame when the ratings are still in the shitter. Nobody is watching raw anymore.


Me too. He would be entertaining. He won't win though.


----------



## Kratosx23

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



SayWhatAgain! said:


> :rollins
> 
> Hopefully they carry on burning money with this guy on top. AEW will beat them in the ratings within a year.


No they won't, lol. AEW is gonna do maybe a little better than TNA in the ratings. WWE will still maintain a monopoly. 

The AEW roster sucks. All you have are Jericho, who's old, Moxley, MJF who's fucking GREAT, but completely unknown, and the rest of the roster is a bunch of shit. Nobody's gonna watch for failed WWE midcarder Cody Rhodes. Omega's the best worker in North America but personality wise, he's an absolute dork. That's not even considering the fact that, if you think "Indy geeks" being on top is causing a ratings decline, Seth is NOTHING compared to the fucking Young Bucks. Those little skinny geek motherfuckers and their ironic spot fests on top? PUH-LEAZE. I always get a good laugh at the people who hate "the Indy geeks" championing a promotion where THE YOUNG BUCKS have power.


----------



## RainmakerV2

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Wridacule said:


> At this point I kind of wish they would put the belt on Corbin. Just to see what you guys blame when the ratings are still in the shitter. Nobody is watching raw anymore.


I guarantee Corbin winning the belt would pop ratings short term. People would tune in for rhe controversy and to see him get beat.


----------



## tducey

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*

Lowest RAWs in history? I'm sure RAW's in 1995 drew lower than these numbers.


----------



## DammitChrist

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



bradatar said:


> *Literally nobody said that match was up as a MOTY candidate.* The best WWE matches this year have all been Daniel Bryan matches. (And I don't even like DB)





Spoiler: Rollins/Styles getting nominated by other posters as MOTY candidate






> YES to Seth Rollins vs AJ Styles - WWE Money in the Bank 2019
> 
> Man, did these two always have this sort of chemistry? Because they rocked here, going back and forth throughout, and they had some sick reversals and counters. I legit popped for that curbstomp into a styles clash. It was nice that it didn’t feel like a normal big time Rollins match, he pulled out a couple different things here, and he gave his best effort in a singles match that I enjoyed more than I have any of his other singles matches in a couple years. I hope this keeps going.
> 
> ****1/4





> No But Reconmend: AJ Styles vs Seth Rollins ***1/2
> 
> Really, really good match. Both guys had good chemistry and reigned in the usual stupid tropes WWE matches have. AJ sold really well through and Rollins delivered on his end. The counter into the styles clash was great too. Never got a great match feel from the match. Just a really good back and forth match on a show that's really lacking quality.





> Yes to:
> 
> WWE Money in the Bank: AJ Styles vs. Seth Rollins
> 
> I had my doubts as far as both guys being faces but I thought they wrestled a really good pace for a 20 minute match. The chemistry was there. The crowd was invested both guys. They had some great sequences from AJ countering the Curb Stomp into the Styles Clash and Rollings hitting the Inverted Superplex into the Inverted Suplex. And it was just a nice clean finish that left me wanting more. And hopefully we get more.





> YES to Seth Rollins vs AJ Styles - WWE MITB - ****1/2
> Second best match in WWE this year behind Bryan vs Kingston. Great showing from both guys, they displayed real good chemistry, some of the sequences were fantastic, that counter into the Styles Clash especially had me marking out. AJ's best match for a good while. Good stuff :clap





> You knew I was going to do this lol.
> 
> AJ Styles vs Seth Rollins
> (Universal Title match/Money in the Bank 2019)
> 
> ****





> AJ vs Seth **** 1/2
> 
> Best AJ match since Brock, some actual psychology and felt like something you'd see on NXT. That freaking reversal and awesome inverted top rope move from Seth.
> 
> Hopefully they rematch at Summerslam and the same agent is used. Who produced the match anyway?





> :mj2 This the hardest thing I've ever done.
> 
> AJ Styles vs Seth Rollins ****
> This is the best Rollins match in at least 5 years. Almost all of his offence looked good, aside from his shitty punches. And doing a goofy as fuck grabbing his throat sell before hitting a dive. Other than I can't really complain about him. Hell, he stole the GOAT's kicks, and it didn't even bother me. He even SOLD, which for him is a HUGE thing. AJ ruled as always, and its nice to see him prove dumb people who say he's washed, wrong. That Blackout into the Clash counter was sick. Real good finish as well. First time I can say I want to see another Rollins match. Weird day.





> Yes - AJ Styles vs Seth Rollins - MITB





> Money in the bank 2018:
> 
> Seth Rollins (c) v. AJ Styles - **** (YES !)
> 
> Best Rollins match since 2015 and the best AJ match since his SS match with Bryan. Both men desperately needed this performance.


Finally, my post where I acknowledged how good their match was; but didn't nominate it:



DammitC said:


> I give a No, but strongly recommended to Baron Corbin vs Finn Balor vs Ricochet vs Andrade vs Ali vs Drew McIntyre vs Randy Orton vs Brock Lesnar Men's Money in the Bank Ladder match on the Money in the Bank ppv.
> 
> I gave that good match a 7/10
> 
> Regardless of that AWFUL finish and winner, the MITB Ladder match was still good.
> 
> *For the record, I thought the Universal title match between Seth Rollins and AJ Styles was good too! It was easily a top 2 candidate for MOTN. It's good to see that both men delivered in their longly-anticipated dream match *








Spoiler: For WWE MOTY contender list from other posters






> WWE:
> AJ Styles vs. Mustafa Ali vs. Randy Orton vs. Rey Mysterio vs. Samoa Joe (SmackDown 01/01) || YES = 1 ||
> British Strong Style vs. Gallus (NXT UK #24) || YES = 2 ||
> Adam Cole vs. EC3 (NXT 09/01) || YES = 1 ||
> James Drake & Zack Gibson vs. Moustache Mountain (NXT UK TakeOver: Blackpool) || YES = 8 ||
> Dave Mastiff vs. Eddie Dennis (NXT UK TakeOver: Blackpool) || YES = 1 ||
> Joe Coffey vs. Pete Dunne (NXT UK TakeOver: Blackpool) || YES = 1 ||
> Andrade vs. Rey Mysterio (SmackDown 15/01) || YES = 14 ||
> Andrade vs. Rey Mysterio (SmackDown 22/01) || YES = 2 ||
> The Undisputed Era vs. War Raiders (NXT TakeOver: Phoenix) || YES = 11 ||
> Kassius Ohno vs. Matt Riddle (NXT TakeOver: Phoenix) || YES = 1 ||
> Johnny Gargano vs. Ricochet (NXT TakeOver: Phoenix) || YES = 12 ||
> Bianca Belair vs. Shayna Baszler (NXT TakeOver: Phoenix) || YES = 2 ||
> Aleister Black vs. Tommaso Ciampa (NXT TakeOver: Phoenix) || YES = 10 ||
> Akira Tozawa vs. Buddy Murphy vs. Hideo Itami vs. Kalisto (Royal Rumble Kickoff) || YES = 1 ||
> Asuka vs. Becky Lynch (Royal Rumble) || YES = 5 ||
> Ronda Rousey vs. Sasha Banks (Royal Rumble) || YES = 3 ||
> AJ Styles vs. Daniel Bryan (Royal Rumble) || YES = 3 ||
> Brock Lesnar vs. Finn Bálor (Royal Rumble) || YES = 8 ||
> Adam Cole vs. Shane Thorne (Worlds Collide) || YES = 1 ||
> Adam Cole vs. Tyler Bate (Worlds Collide) || YES = 1 ||
> The Velveteen Dream vs. Tyler Bate (Worlds Collide) || YES = 1 ||
> Adam Cole, Johnny Gargano & Tommaso Ciampa vs. Aleister Black, Ricochet & The Velveteen Dream (Halftime Heat) || YES = 7 ||
> Drew Gulak vs. Matt Riddle (NXT 06/02) || YES = 1 ||
> Bobby Roode & Chad Gable vs. The Revival (RAW 11/02) || YES = 3 ||
> AJ Styles vs. Daniel Bryan vs. Jeff Hardy vs. Kofi Kingston vs. Randy Orton vs. Samoa Joe (SmackDown 12/02) || YES = 4 ||
> Adam Cole vs. Ricochet (NXT 13/02) || YES = 3 ||
> Akira Tozawa vs. Buddy Murphy (Elimination Chamber Kickoff) || YES = 1 ||
> Carmella & Naomi vs. Nia Jax & Tamina vs. Fire & Desire vs. The Boss ’n’ Hug Connection vs. The IIconics vs. The Riott Squad (Elimination Chamber) || YES = 2 ||
> AJ Styles vs. Daniel Bryan vs. Jeff Hardy vs. Kofi Kingston vs. Randy Orton vs. Samoa Joe (Elimination Chamber) || YES = 10 ||
> Johnny Gargano vs. The Velveteen Dream (NXT 20/02) || YES = 1 ||
> Adam Cole vs. Johnny Gargano (NXT Live 02/03) || YES = 1 ||
> Akira Tozawa vs. Cedric Alexander (205 Live 05/03) || YES = 1 ||
> Aleister Black & Ricochet vs. Fabian Aichner & Marcel Barthel (NXT 06/03) || YES = 2 ||
> #DIY vs. The Undisputed Era (NXT 06/03) || YES = 7 ||
> Andrade vs. R-Truth vs. Rey Mysterio vs. Samoa Joe (Fastlane) || YES = 1 ||
> Daniel Bryan vs. Kevin Owens vs. Mustafa Ali (Fastlane) || YES = 9 ||
> Baron Corbin, Bobby Lashley & Drew McIntyre vs. The Shield (Fastlane) || YES = 2 ||
> Aleister Black & Ricochet vs. #DIY (NXT 13/03) || YES = 1 ||
> Adam Cole vs. Aleister Black vs. Matt Riddle vs. Ricochet vs. The Velveteen Dream (NXT 20/03) || YES = 2 ||
> The New Day vs. Daniel Bryan & Rowan, Karl Anderson & Luke Gallows, Rusev & Shinsuke Nakamura, The Bar & The Usos (SmackDown 26/03) || YES = 1 ||
> Aleister Black & Ricochet vs. War Raiders (NXT TakeOver: New York) || YES = 6 ||
> Matt Riddle vs. The Velveteen Dream (NXT TakeOver: New York) || YES = 11 ||
> Pete Dunne vs. WALTER (NXT TakeOver: New York) || YES = 9 ||
> Bianca Belair vs. Io Shirai vs. Kairi Sane vs. Shayna Baszler (NXT TakeOver: New York) || YES = 1 ||
> Adam Cole vs. Johnny Gargano (NXT TakeOver: New York) || YES = 6 ||
> Buddy Murphy vs. Tony Nese (WrestleMania 35 Kickoff) || YES = 1 ||
> AJ Styles vs. Randy Orton (WrestleMania 35) || YES = 14 ||
> Aleister Black & Ricochet vs. Rusev & Shinsuke Nakamura vs. The Bar vs. The Usos (WrestleMania 35) || YES = 3 ||
> Shane McMahon vs. The Miz (WrestleMania 35) || YES = 2 ||
> Daniel Bryan vs. Kofi Kingston (WrestleMania 35) || YES = 26 ||
> Batista vs. Triple H (WrestleMania 35) || YES = 2 ||
> Becky Lynch vs. Charlotte Flair vs. Ronda Rousey (WrestleMania 35) || YES = 5 ||
> Buddy Murphy vs. Tony Nese (205 Live 09/04) || YES = 1 ||
> Buddy Murphy vs. The Velveteen Dream (NXT 17/04) || YES = 1 ||
> Johnny Gargano vs. Roderick Strong (NXT 24/04) || YES = 1 ||
> Daniel Bryan vs. Kofi Kingston (RAW 06/05) || YES = 1 ||
> Adam Cole vs. Matt Riddle (NXT 08/05) || YES = 3 ||
> Bayley vs. Carmella vs. Dana Brooke vs. Ember Moon vs. Mandy Rose vs. Naomi vs. Natalya vs. Nikki Cross (Money In The Bank) || YES = 1 ||
> *AJ Styles vs. Seth Rollins (Money In The Bank) || YES = 9 ||*
> Kevin Owens vs. Kofi Kingston (Money In The Bank) || YES = 1 ||
> Ali vs. Andrade vs. Baron Corbin vs. Brock Lesnar vs. Drew McIntyre vs. Finn Bálor vs. Randy Orton vs. Ricochet (Money In The Bank) || YES = 3 ||






^ Link to post from that whole thread:

https://www.wrestlingforum.com/77322236-post992.html

Anyway, so much for "nobody" saying that their match wasn't a MOTY candidate :lol



Wridacule said:


> At this point I kind of wish they would put the belt on Corbin. Just to see what you guys blame when the ratings are still in the shitter. Nobody is watching raw anymore.


Oh, they'll be exposed once they suddenly change their tune if/when Baron Corbin wins the Universal title and the ratings are still shit. It should be amusing to see run out of tempting options to blame with their guy on top :lol

Anyway, I won't put the blame on Corbin if/when he becomes the world champion. I know that this is all on Vince anyway, and that the talents aren't at fault here.


----------



## BlackieDevil

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Impossible. I was told Seth/AJ was a dream match. There must be a mix-up here.


I really fuckin' like you.



SayWhatAgain! said:


> Cody 3 stars getting a 5 star match before workrate god Seth :lol


Which is some sort of accomplishment?


----------



## Disputed

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*

RAW is dead and all thats left for us to argue about is who killed it


----------



## Matthew Castillo

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Tyrion Lannister said:


> Nobody's gonna watch for failed WWE midcarder Cody Rhodes.


Yeah that would be nuts, like people flipping over to Raw for failed WCW Midcarder Steve Austin.


tducey said:


> Lowest RAWs in history? I'm sure RAW's in 1995 drew lower than these numbers.


Nope, the lowest numbers in Raw History where Christmas Eve and New Year's Eve last year. The past two weeks have been the worst non-Holiday numbers in Raw History.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Tyrion Lannister said:


> No they won't, lol. AEW is gonna do maybe a little better than TNA in the ratings. WWE will still maintain a monopoly.
> 
> The AEW roster sucks. All you have are Jericho, who's old, Moxley, MJF who's fucking GREAT, but completely unknown, and the rest of the roster is a bunch of shit. Nobody's gonna watch for failed WWE midcarder Cody Rhodes. Omega's the best worker in North America but personality wise, he's an absolute dork. That's not even considering the fact that, if you think "Indy geeks" being on top is causing a ratings decline, Seth is NOTHING compared to the fucking Young Bucks. Those little skinny geek motherfuckers and their ironic spot fests on top? PUH-LEAZE. I always get a good laugh at the people who hate "the Indy geeks" championing a promotion where THE YOUNG BUCKS have power.


AEW have a weak roster, and WWE have arguably their most stacked roster ever when it comes to talent depth, yet Double or Nothing was far better than any WWE main roster show in recent memory. You know yourself the booking and storytelling is far more important than the quality and depth of the roster. I'm not a fan of Cody or Dustin Rhodes, yet their match had me on the edge of my seat more than anything Bryan or Becky have done in God knows how long. There could be plenty of MJF's out there who may now consider AEW over WWE, that's where they can bridge the gap, by signing the stars of tomorrow. Plenty of talent who would've gone to WWE by default will now have their head turned by AEW, especially if they are putting on great shows and gaining viewers gradually. It's a marathon not a sprint remember. The key is getting lapsed WWE fans, who will know guys like Jericho & Moxley, to watch for the guys they know, and then sticking around when they see the likes of MJF and Hangman Page.

Their roster will be boosted by disillusioned WWE talent too. Luke Harper could be a good midcard monster for them next year. The Revival will bolster their tag team division. Sasha Banks will be the face of their womens division if she goes, and despite what you may think of her as a talent, she has a fanbase who will follow her. Those are just the rumoured names, there could be some surprises too. It'll be a slow process, but they've got a chance, especially if Vince continues to insist on hitting the self destruct button.


----------



## Honey Bucket

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*

So yeah this is a thread.


----------



## The Quintessential Mark

nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Impossible. I was told Seth/AJ was a dream match. There must be a mix-up here.


Yeah and what? Fuck ratings.


----------



## Kratosx23

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Matthew Castillo said:


> Yeah that would be nuts, like people flipping over to Raw for failed WCW Midcarder Steve Austin.


Cody isn't Steve Austin. For starters, Austin was completely re-invented while Cody is still recognizably Cody. Secondly, Cody doesn't have the talent that Steve Austin did.

Thirdly, it's a bad analogy to begin with, because Raw was ALREADY big before Nitro. Nitro was the show that had to catch up to it, Raw didn't have to catch up to Nitro. They already had a name. AEW is the Nitro in this case. 



SayWhatAgain! said:


> AEW have a weak roster, and WWE have arguably their most stacked roster ever when it comes to talent depth, yet Double or Nothing was far better than any WWE main roster show in recent memory. You know yourself the booking and storytelling is far more important than the quality and depth of the roster. I'm not a fan of Cody or Dustin Rhodes, yet their match had me on the edge of my seat more than anything Bryan or Becky have done in God knows how long. There could be plenty of MJF's out there who may now consider AEW over WWE, that's where they can bridge the gap, by signing the stars of tomorrow. Plenty of talent who would've gone to WWE by default will now have their head turned by AEW, especially if they are putting on great shows and gaining viewers gradually. It's a marathon not a sprint remember. The key is getting lapsed WWE fans, who will know guys like Jericho & Moxley, to watch for the guys they know, and then sticking around when they see the likes of MJF and Hangman Page.


Booking and story telling is only going to get them so far. Nitro didn't match Raw by beating them in quality storytelling, they beat them by taking Hulk Hogan, by taking Randy Savage, by taking Kevin Nash. Brock Lesnar is not going to AEW. John Cena is not going to AEW. Ronda Rousey is not going to AEW. Becky Lynch is not going to AEW. Roman Reigns is not going to AEW. Randy Orton is not going to AEW. Right now, AEW's biggest star is Chris Jericho who is known as the guy who lays down for literally everyone, including Fandango. Then there's Jon Moxley who was known as basically a high card jobber, then there's Cody Rhodes who was in Dolph Ziggler territory, then there's.....nobody. They need a fucking STAR. Not Jericho, not Moxley, not Cody Rhodes, a major, big time, blockbuster fucking STAR, who doesn't play 50/50, who will shake the foundation of the industry going to AEW. That's probably only Brock or Cena. That ain't happening. In fact, I don't even know if Brock and Cena can do it given how much Brock and Cena have been damaged. It may cause a gigantic buzz if they were somehow able to get CM Punk at FIRST, but that would probably die down pretty quick too. They probably need The Rock to compete with Vince if I'm being honest.



> Their roster will be boosted by disillusioned WWE talent too. Luke Harper could be a good midcard monster for them next year. The Revival will bolster their tag team division. Sasha Banks will be the face of their womens division if she goes, and despite what you may think of her as a talent, she has a fanbase who will follow her. Those are just the rumoured names, there could be some surprises too. It'll be a slow process, but they've got a chance, especially if Vince continues to insist on hitting the self destruct button.


None of those people are difference makers.


----------



## Matthew Castillo

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Tyrion Lannister said:


> Booking and story telling is only going to get them so far. Nitro didn't match Raw by beating them in quality storytelling, they beat them by taking Hulk Hogan, by taking Randy Savage, by taking *Kevin Nash*..


When WCW got Kevin Nash he was just of his stint as the worst drawing WWF champion to date and he made at least as much of an impact as Hogan did, possibly more as Hollywood Hogan was in many ways riding on the coattails of the Outsiders.


----------



## deepelemblues

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*

Call him tyrion machine gun lannister 

Mowin down them aew fantasies pewpew


----------



## JeSeGaN

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



StylesClash90 said:


> Yeah and what? Fuck ratings.


At least you admit to them crashing the ratings, I guess.


----------



## The Quintessential Mark

Jan.S.Gelz said:


> StylesClash90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah and what? Fuck ratings.
> 
> 
> 
> At least you admit to them crashing the ratings, I guess.
Click to expand...

I just think ratings shouldn't really dictate who you like to see perform on TV, If it was all about ratings then no one except Brock should be watched by fans.


----------



## BlackieDevil

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Tyrion Lannister said:


> No they won't, lol. AEW is gonna do maybe a little better than TNA in the ratings. WWE will still maintain a monopoly.
> 
> The AEW roster sucks. All you have are Jericho, who's old, Moxley, MJF who's fucking GREAT, but completely unknown, and the rest of the roster is a bunch of shit. Nobody's gonna watch for failed WWE midcarder Cody Rhodes. Omega's the best worker in North America but personality wise, he's an absolute dork. That's not even considering the fact that, if you think "Indy geeks" being on top is causing a ratings decline, Seth is NOTHING compared to the fucking Young Bucks. Those little skinny geek motherfuckers and their ironic spot fests on top? PUH-LEAZE. I always get a good laugh at the people who hate "the Indy geeks" championing a promotion where THE YOUNG BUCKS have power.


I REALLY LIKE YOU.

Man, this forum has been on fire today. Goddamn.


----------



## Jersey

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Tyrion Lannister said:


> because Raw was ALREADY big before Nitro.


But Raw isn't big today. It's at its lowest point in history. AEW will debut to much higher ratings than what Raw currently does. And WCW (nor any wrestling promotion including WWE) has ever had a demand for PPV tickets like the show AEW just sold out in 15 minutes. I think your vastly underestimating the buzz around AEW, and overrating whatever audience WWE has left which is dwindling every year.

This is no different than a new TV show debuting to much higher rated numbers, than a show that is old and almost cancelled. If The Simpsons is WWE, then AEW is like South Park.


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*

You really think AEW debuts to well over 2 million? They'd be happy to get what is currently drawn by programming on a Tuesday or Wednesday on TNT, which is closer to 1 million than 2 million. Their target number to hit and then grow from is 1 million, RAW and Smackdown both do close to or better than 2 million all hours, some hours north of 2.5 million still. Even the biggest viewership show Impact ever did was 2 million and that was with some of the all-time great stars of pro wrestling advertised, people like Ric Flair and Hulk Hogan! Jericho, Moxley and Cody are pretty far off from that! 

AEW just needs to get numbers to where its worth TNT's time for 3 years and try to lock in a longer term, bigger money contract after that. People are so excited for another mainstream option on cable television, they're working themselves into totally unreasonable expectations of popularity. Even hitting 1 million viewers consistently might not happen, AEW could stumble and not even get another contract, that's a very real possibility. Temper your expectations!


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



SPCDRI said:


> You really think AEW debuts to well over 2 million? They'd be happy to get what is currently drawn by programming on a Tuesday or Wednesday on TNT, which is closer to 1 million than 2 million. Their target number to hit and then grow from is 1 million, RAW and Smackdown both do close to or better than 2 million all hours, some hours north of 2.5 million still. Even the biggest viewership show Impact ever did was 2 million and that was with some of the all-time great stars of pro wrestling advertised, people like Ric Flair and Hulk Hogan! Jericho, Moxley and Cody are pretty far off from that!
> 
> AEW just needs to get numbers to where its worth TNT's time for 3 years and try to lock in a longer term, bigger money contract after that. People are so excited for another mainstream option on cable television, they're working themselves into totally unreasonable expectations of popularity. Even hitting 1 million viewers consistently might not happen, AEW could stumble and not even get another contract, that's a very real possibility. Temper your expectations!


TNA never did live shows. AEW will be doing a live show. Just being a live show everyweek is going to get you a baseline of 1.5 mils. There is far more buzz around AEW than any promotion that has come before it. Meltzer said the show they just sold out had the 2nd largest demand for tickets in wrestling/mma history. And this is BEFORE there's even been a TV show put out.

Lot of the Rollins marks always make excuses about "wrestling is dead, the brand is dead, nobody draws etc etc". No, boring wrestling is dead. Yes. G rated bland wrestling is dead. Of course. That's Seth Rollins. 

People want a different product. AEW thru their ticket sales is showing that there is a massive demand for this product they are going to put out. I'd expect the TV ratings to follow that too.


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*

Every day with the ratings talk, it's like some people only watch wrestling products for the ratings and not the actually talent. Shame. Get a new hobby and stop blaming the talents for the bad product. :sleep


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Buffy The Vampire Slayer said:


> Every day with the ratings talk, it's like some people only watch wrestling products for the ratings and not the actually talent. Shame. Get a new hobby and stop blaming the talents for the bad product. :sleep


Bad actors make bad movies. You can't always blame the writers, director, or studio.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Buffy The Vampire Slayer said:


> Every day with the ratings talk, it's like some people only watch wrestling products for the ratings and not the actually talent. Shame. Get a new hobby and stop blaming the talents for the bad product. :sleep


I watch for the talent. Most of the best talent with the exception of Lacey and Corbin are buried so all that leaves to discuss are the charisma vacuums at the top who are killing the ratings.

How many failed opportunities can the likes of Rollins, Styles and Reigns get before someone else gets a shot? Nobody can convince me they are enjoying Rollins' current title run. It has been a total bust and needs to end.


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Randy Lahey said:


> Bad actors make bad movies. You can't always blame the writers, director, or studio.


Turning this into blaming actors and actress now.:sleep


----------



## Rookie of the Year

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*

The thing is though, while Seth is the champion, he's not promoted as the company's biggest star. That's either Brock or Reigns. WWE have made it so the brand is bigger than the star. WWE is bigger than its wrestlers. WWE have been in the same range of ratings for years. Whether it's Brock, Cena, Reigns, Rollins, AJ on top... even when they've brought back guys like Goldberg, HBK, HHH or Undertaker, have the ratings been back at Monday Night War/Attitude Era levels? Nope.

I'm pretty sure The Rock improved ratings a lot when he came back as a wrestler, considering he's a big Hollywood crossover star now. Still couldn't get those 1998-2002 ratings.


----------



## Science.Violence

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*


----------



## The_Workout_Buddy

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*

They can have JESUS CHRIST as world champion and still the ratings would be "terrible", viewers are more cynical and apathetic than ever, they can promote a lesbian segment with Mandy and Sonya a full week in advance and still would do terrible numbers, not even sex sells in wrestling anymore.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*

And the first one of those shows were head to head with 2 NBA Playoff games that night and the second one was against a potential series clinching Game 5 of the NBA Finals. 

Woopty-doo.


----------



## Matthew Castillo

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Randy Lahey said:


> Bad actors make bad movies. You can't always blame the writers, director, or studio.


True, but when every actor that performs for a director looks like shit, even ones that give award winning performances elsewhere, it's probably the director.


----------



## domotime2

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*

the ratings haven't spiked for ONE specific wrestler since Lesnar (IN THE BEGINNING...not anymore)...and before that, not since austin/rock.


----------



## The XL 2

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Tyrion Lannister said:


> No they won't, lol. AEW is gonna do maybe a little better than TNA in the ratings. WWE will still maintain a monopoly.
> 
> The AEW roster sucks. All you have are Jericho, who's old, Moxley, MJF who's fucking GREAT, but completely unknown, and the rest of the roster is a bunch of shit. Nobody's gonna watch for failed WWE midcarder Cody Rhodes. Omega's the best worker in North America but personality wise, he's an absolute dork. That's not even considering the fact that, if you think "Indy geeks" being on top is causing a ratings decline, Seth is NOTHING compared to the fucking Young Bucks. Those little skinny geek motherfuckers and their ironic spot fests on top? PUH-LEAZE. I always get a good laugh at the people who hate "the Indy geeks" championing a promotion where THE YOUNG BUCKS have power.



The top of the card is all that matters if they're allowed to be edgy and unscripted. All the WWF had in 98 was Austin, Rock, Taker, HHH, and Kane and WCW had the deepest roster of all time and they were still overtaken because of booking and poor management. Jericho/Moxley/Omega/MJF can carry AEW for the time being, especially considering they only have 2 hours of TV a week and not 5. And Jericho/Mox/Omega/MJF is way fucking better than Lesnar/Reigns/Rollins/Bryan/Kofi


----------



## birthday_massacre

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



bradatar said:


> :batista3
> 
> 4/29/19 2nd Lowest RAW - 1.91 million viewers in third hour - Seth Rollins/AJ Styles contract signing
> 
> 6/10/19 Lowest RAW - 1.909 million viewers in third hour - Seth Rollins/Kevin Owens main event


Funny how Brock being on some of the last SDs/Raws didn't even make a dent in the ratings, neither did Goldberg

Will you admit they are not draws too?


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Tyrion Lannister said:


> No they won't, lol. AEW is gonna do maybe a little better than TNA in the ratings. WWE will still maintain a monopoly.
> 
> The AEW roster sucks. All you have are Jericho, who's old, Moxley, MJF who's fucking GREAT, but completely unknown, and the rest of the roster is a bunch of shit. Nobody's gonna watch for failed WWE midcarder Cody Rhodes. Omega's the best worker in North America but personality wise, he's an absolute dork. That's not even considering the fact that, if you think "Indy geeks" being on top is causing a ratings decline, Seth is NOTHING compared to the fucking Young Bucks. Those little skinny geek motherfuckers and their ironic spot fests on top? PUH-LEAZE. I always get a good laugh at the people who hate "the Indy geeks" championing a promotion where THE YOUNG BUCKS have power.


There probably ain't 10 people walking the planet with better mic skills than MJF let alone in wrestling so when you've got a guy like that who is only 23 years old and doesn't have any of that WWE/TNA reject stench you can build a company around him and the other pieces will fall into place.


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Wridacule said:


> At this point I kind of wish they would put the belt on Corbin. Just to see what you guys blame when the ratings are still in the shitter. Nobody is watching raw anymore.


Personally I'd blame the same thing I do now, the real issue; Vince McMahon.

The Rollins crowd are just as guilty, if not more of trying to blame wrestlers for the ratings. Corbin isn't even World Champ and there's people preemptively blaming him for a drop in ratings they think will happen if he became Champ, while refusing to pin any of the blame for the current ratings on Rollins and co.

Vince is the problem, but if you're going to blame one top talent for the ratings, you have to pin it on all of them, not just the ones you dont like.


----------



## bradatar

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



birthday_massacre said:


> Funny how Brock being on some of the last SDs/Raws didn't even make a dent in the ratings, neither did Goldberg
> 
> Will you admit they are not draws too?




Brock is being booked as a monster who is too dumb to know Rollins is gonna hit him in the balls. Not my fault Bork is booked like every other geek now. They put Goldberg on the B show. Their fault again. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DammitChrist

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Eva MaRIHyse said:


> Personally I'd blame the same thing I do now, the real issue; Vince McMahon.
> 
> *The Rollins crowd are just as guilty, if not more of trying to blame wrestlers for the ratings. Corbin isn't even World Champ and there's people preemptively blaming him for a drop in ratings they think will happen if he became Champ, while refusing to pin any of the blame for the current ratings on Rollins and co.
> 
> Vince is the problem, but if you're going to blame one top talent for the ratings, you have to pin it on all of them, not just the ones you dont like.*


How are they even (more) guilty? 

If anything, fans of Brock Lesnar, Baron Corbin, and Lacey Evans are the ones blaming talents they dislike; but yet refuse to accept the fact that nobody on the main roster draws.

Vince is obviously the problem, but that advice in your last paragraph should be directed to those fanbases I've mentioned instead of the one where there's been fewer cases of our fanbase picking and choosing who to blame. They need to be reminded that it's his fault for luring away viewers with his mediocre shows.

For the record, blaming the individual talents is becoming more archaic at this point.


----------



## raymond1985

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



bradatar said:


> :batista3
> 
> 4/29/19 2nd Lowest RAW - 1.91 million viewers in third hour - Seth Rollins/AJ Styles contract signing
> 
> 6/10/19 Lowest RAW - 1.909 million viewers in third hour - Seth Rollins/Kevin Owens main event


Don't forget that RAWs that Rollin and Styles headlined also posted the lowest year on year drop off. That means that they had the same competition as the previous year with the NBA, etc. In fact, the NBA playoffs was down this year on last year (around 20% early on in the playoffs). Whereas ratings for TV shows in general are only down 4%. Other sports-related programming such as the NHL have not experienced the drops off that the NBA have experienced, let alone the WWE. 

It's mostly about stars. The NBA playoffs didn't feature Lebron this year. And the Warriors somewhat lost their aura when Durant got injured. Whereas WWE doesn't have any stars. And their attempt to turn Rollins into a star has failed because he's not that good of a performer.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*

We have to start closing these threads. Both sides come off as retards every single time, repeating the same talking points that just clutter the place and changes no one's mind.

Sheesh.


----------



## birthday_massacre

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



bradatar said:


> Brock is being booked as a monster who is too dumb to know Rollins is gonna hit him in the balls. Not my fault Bork is booked like every other geek now. They put Goldberg on the B show. Their fault again.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Right, so its Rollins fault but not Brocks or Goldbergs.

gotcha

lol


----------



## bradatar

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



birthday_massacre said:


> Right, so its Rollins fault but not Brocks or Goldbergs.
> 
> 
> 
> gotcha
> 
> 
> 
> lol




The Brock and Goldberg segments led their respective shows so not sure where you’re going with that. They bring eyes in, Seth Rollins does not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## raymond1985

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



birthday_massacre said:


> Right, so its Rollins fault but not Brocks or Goldbergs.
> 
> gotcha
> 
> lol


The weeks that Goldberg, Lesnar and Taker headlined shows the year on year viewership drops were nowhere near as severe as the week that Styles and Rollins headlined. 

And remember, Lesnar and Taker are stale as fuck these days. Even for nostalgia acts. WWE have used them too often. A fresh superstar in his prime should at least be retaining viewers at a similar rate. 

Whichever way one wants to cut it, Rollins hasn't shown that he can draw or retain viewers better than anyone else at the top-end of the roster. He has to shoulder some of the blame.


----------



## rexmundi

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*

The op post is factually accurate. Rollins main evented the two worst rated raw hour 3s in history. No how much some butthurt snowflakes try to spin it, it is an absolute fact. To those whining about it, toughen up, buttercup.


----------



## Hobogoblin

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Tyrion Lannister said:


> No they won't, lol. AEW is gonna do maybe a little better than TNA in the ratings. WWE will still maintain a monopoly.
> 
> The AEW roster sucks. All you have are Jericho, who's old, Moxley, MJF who's fucking GREAT, but completely unknown, and the rest of the roster is a bunch of shit. Nobody's gonna watch for failed WWE midcarder Cody Rhodes. Omega's the best worker in North America but personality wise, he's an absolute dork. That's not even considering the fact that, if you think "Indy geeks" being on top is causing a ratings decline, Seth is NOTHING compared to the fucking Young Bucks. Those little skinny geek motherfuckers and their ironic spot fests on top? PUH-LEAZE. I always get a good laugh at the people who hate "the Indy geeks" championing a promotion where THE YOUNG BUCKS have power.


You think almost everyone sucks though so...


----------



## Whacker

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*

You can't pin that on Rollins. If the first two and a half hours of the show are shit, why would you stick around for the last half hour?


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Whacker said:


> You can't pin that on Rollins. If the first two and a half hours of the show are shit, why would you stick around for the last half hour?


The same reason people stick around during a UFC or boxing event until the end even if they don't give a shit about the pre-main event fights. The main draw is supposed to be your world champion. The fact that he is consistently involved in the lowest rated segments every week is proof he is a total failure as a champion and as a main eventer.


----------



## ShadowSucks92

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*

I know we all want to believe that being Champion still means something in that company but it doesn't and hasn't done so in a very long time. Sure you'll get weeks when ratings go up because of a title change but they will go down very quickly because it doesn't solve the overall problem and that's WWE is horrible. Seth, Becky and Kofi are 3 of my favourites but no way in hell am I watching that show just for a 10-30 minute segment with them in it and for what I'm hearing anyway, they aren't exactly portrayed as the main people on the show and they're just wrestlers with props. You can take the belt away from Seth and get your 2 week rating boost but in the long run it ain't gonna make a dam bit of difference unless the overall product changes.


----------



## reyfan

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



DammitC said:


> Oh, you still blindly believe that they're luring away viewers. That's unfortunate of you :lol


Remember when people were saying the same thing about TNA and then ECW was pulling higher ratings because casuals don't care about new feds.


----------



## Ace

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



SayWhatAgain! said:


> Because Bryan is actually a great pro-wrestler, unlike AJ and Seth who are good at certain spots.
> 
> 
> Cody 3 stars getting a 5 star match before workrate god Seth :lol


 You want to talk Meltzer ratings? :lol

Cody 3 stars got a 5 star match before goatface Bryan who has been wrestling for almost 2 decades.

Bryan's highest rated WWE match ratings wise was with AJ, first time he ever cracked over 4.5* in the company and is equal with straight dumpster fire Becky Lynch :lmao

TV ratings or Meltzer match ratings, you got nothing to harp on about.


----------



## TD Stinger

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*

You know what's more sad about WWE's ratings?

The fact that fans on here act like it's one person's fault and think they're cool because they discovered something.

Newsflash. Your favorite could be champion. My favorite could be champion. It does not matter, because the show is that inconsistent no matter who's on top. But yeah let's keep making weekly threads on the subject and act like we're actually accomplishing something.


----------



## MontyCora

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> The same reason people stick around during a UFC or boxing event until the end even if they don't give a shit about the pre-main event fights. The main draw is supposed to be your world champion. The fact that he is consistently involved in the lowest rated segments every week is proof he is a total failure as a champion and as a main eventer.


This is such a silly thing to say tho.

Your obsession Lacey is on this shitty awful show, and her segments are also very low rated. She doesn't pop a number, she doesn't draw. That means Lacey is objectively shit.

You see why that argument sucks?


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Showstopper said:


> And the first one of those shows were head to head with 2 NBA Playoff games that night and the second one was against a potential series clinching Game 5 of the NBA Finals.
> 
> Woopty-doo.


NFL is tougher competition than that. I'd like to know how low the rating needs to get for you to say Seth Rollins can't draw.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Randy Lahey said:


> NFL is tougher competition than that. I'd like to know how low the rating needs to get for you to say Seth Rollins can't draw.


I agree NFL definitely draws more than the NBA. No doubt. NFL is a ratings monster.

How long until I say Seth isn't a draw? You might want to check a ratings thread from a few years back. I've already said it countless times. He isn't a ratings draw. Neither is anyone else.


----------



## Ace

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Randy Lahey said:


> NFL is tougher competition than that. I'd like to know how low the rating needs to get for you to say Seth Rollins can't draw.


 It's going to get so ugly come NFL season, gotta hope your favorites are nowhere near the main event then.


----------



## J0nMoxley

This been proven since 2015 but besides that nobody can draw these days WWE is too shitty for people to care 1 minute into the show. It's ashame I only check Rtruth segments on youtube that tells you how bad WWE is.(R-Truth is a great talent though.)


----------



## RapShepard

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Randy Lahey said:


> TNA never did live shows. AEW will be doing a live show. Just being a live show everyweek is going to get you a baseline of 1.5 mils. There is far more buzz around AEW than any promotion that has come before it. Meltzer said the show they just sold out had the 2nd largest demand for tickets in wrestling/mma history. And this is BEFORE there's even been a TV show put out.
> 
> 
> 
> Lot of the Rollins marks always make excuses about "wrestling is dead, the brand is dead, nobody draws etc etc". No, boring wrestling is dead. Yes. G rated bland wrestling is dead. Of course. That's Seth Rollins.
> 
> 
> 
> People want a different product. AEW thru their ticket sales is showing that there is a massive demand for this product they are going to put out. I'd expect the TV ratings to follow that too.


No AEW is showing that The Elite have a great core fan base. But whether their amazing core is going to translate into big ratings is a mystery. Keep in mind as much as folk talk about The Elite, DoN, and AEW being the biggest things in wrestling right now their free videos on YouTube revolving around DoN have yet to crack a million views. If they can't easily do a million on YouTube when they're setting the wrestling world on fire, what makes you think they'll easily do better on TV. 

Unfortunately just because they put on a quality PPV, and may put on a quality weekly product that doesn't mean they'll be dripping in fans.


----------



## JAROTO

Rollins is extremely boring. I am not surprised. He is one of the main reasons why I stopped watching raw regularly.


----------



## Lockard The GOAT

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*

Ratings are one of the least important things to go by nowadays. Rollins is a "draw" because he does pretty good house show numbers and sells a fair amount of merch. He's a bigger draw than Lesnar has been for the past several years, despite Brock's reputation as a huge box office attraction.


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Ace said:


> It's going to get so ugly come NFL season, gotta hope your favorites are nowhere near the main event then.


I'll be watching AEW this fall. So it won't bother me how low the ratings for WWE get


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



RapShepard said:


> No AEW is showing that The Elite have a great core fan base. But whether their amazing core is going to translate into big ratings is a mystery. Keep in mind as much as folk talk about The Elite, DoN, and AEW being the biggest things in wrestling right now their free videos on YouTube revolving around DoN have yet to crack a million views. If they can't easily do a million on YouTube when they're setting the wrestling world on fire, what makes you think they'll easily do better on TV.
> 
> Unfortunately just because they put on a quality PPV, and may put on a quality weekly product that doesn't mean they'll be dripping in fans.


Nobody cares about Youtube views.

People care about tickets sold to events. AEW's next wrestling PPV sold out in 15 minutes. According to Dave Meltzer, it was the 2nd largest ticket demand for a wrestling/mma show (only Anderson Silva drew more interest). 

You're talking about a promotion that sold faster tickets, than any Wrestlemania in history.

And you're talking youtube views? I mean the hype for AEW is real. This isn't TNA


----------



## DoctorWhosawhatsit

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*

Are we really still at the point where we're going to blame the ratings woes of what is generally considered an extraordinarily shitty show on one wrestler who we can easily assume has next to zero creative control?




The XL 2 said:


> All the WWF had in 98 was Austin, Rock, Taker, HHH, and Kane


----------



## Lockard The GOAT

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



RapShepard said:


> No AEW is showing that The Elite have a great core fan base. But whether their amazing core is going to translate into big ratings is a mystery. Keep in mind as much as folk talk about The Elite, DoN, and AEW being the biggest things in wrestling right now their free videos on YouTube revolving around DoN have yet to crack a million views. If they can't easily do a million on YouTube when they're setting the wrestling world on fire, what makes you think they'll easily do better on TV.
> 
> Unfortunately just because they put on a quality PPV, and may put on a quality weekly product that doesn't mean they'll be dripping in fans.


Actually a few of AEW's videos have cracked over a million views. One of the videos of Moxley's debut is up around 2-3 million, the post-match segment between Cody and Dustin is at 1.5 million, a couple post-show interviews are past the million mark, etc.


----------



## raymond1985

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Lockard The GOAT said:


> Ratings are one of the least important things to go by nowadays. Rollins is a "draw" because he does pretty good house show numbers and sells a fair amount of merch. He's a bigger draw than Lesnar has been for the past several years, despite Brock's reputation as a huge box office attraction.


??????????????????

His merchandise numbers are nothing special. He's regularly been outdrawn in that department by other performers. Usually 2 or 3 at a time. 

Where is the proof that he's a house show draw?


----------



## Lockard The GOAT

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



raymond1985 said:


> ??????????????????
> 
> His merchandise numbers are nothing special. He's regularly been outdrawn in that department by other performers. Usually 2 or 3 at a time.
> 
> Where is the proof that he's a house show draw?


I didn't say he did outstanding merch numbers, only that he sold more than Brock does. He's usually within the top 10 and often the top 5, so his numbers are better than you're giving him credit for

As for house shows numbers, events he headlines are usually in the 10,000+ range (if only just barely) while Lesnar's almost never are. There was even a house show in LA he headlined back in 2015 that did only 6,000-7,000 people.


----------



## raymond1985

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Lockard The GOAT said:


> I didn't say he did outstanding merch numbers, only that he sold more than Brock does. He's usually within the top 10 and often the top 5, so his numbers are better than you're giving him credit for
> 
> As for house shows numbers, events he headlines are usually in the 10,000+ range (if only just barely) while Lesnar's almost never are. There was even a house show in LA he headlined back in 2015 that did only 6,000-7,000 people.


1) Not really. Other full-time performers draw better or equal numbers to him. Even with lesser pushes. 

2) Rollins' house shows are rarely in the 10k range. And even if they are, it's not him that draws the houses. It's been Cena and others.


----------



## Wridacule

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Eva MaRIHyse said:


> Personally I'd blame the same thing I do now, the real issue; Vince McMahon.
> 
> The Rollins crowd are just as guilty, if not more of trying to blame wrestlers for the ratings. Corbin isn't even World Champ and there's people preemptively blaming him for a drop in ratings they think will happen if he became Champ, while refusing to pin any of the blame for the current ratings on Rollins and co.
> 
> Vince is the problem, but if you're going to blame one top talent for the ratings, you have to pin it on all of them, not just the ones you dont like.


I honestly couldn't care any less about the ratings of a show I don't watch. This thread was obviously made to blame the ratings on seth Rollins. And like clockwork! It's the same hand full of posters circle jerking one another that all can't wait for the day baron is crowned. So I think it's a fair question to ask. Anyone can see that Vince is the issue. While you may not like what I said, we're kind of on the same side of the argument.


----------



## Lockard The GOAT

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



raymond1985 said:


> 1) Not really. Other full-time performers draw better or equal numbers to him. Even with lesser pushes.
> 
> 2) Rollins' house shows are rarely in the 10k range. And even if they are, it's not him that draws the houses. It's been Cena and others.


1. Your original point of contention was that Rollins didn't sell as much merch as Lesnar does. So arguing there are others that draw more than Seth is just evading the main point. Show me proof that Brock does better merch numbers than Rollins 

2. He's officially in the top 10-15 category of people who have drawn the most houses with a 10,000+ capacity. You're right though, that the drawing power can mostly be attributed to Cena and others, but the opponent matters too, and it's not like Cena (or anyone) draws the same amount every time regardless of the opponent. Seth has to be credited at least somewhat


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



DammitC said:


> How are they even (more) guilty?
> 
> If anything, fans of Brock Lesnar, Baron Corbin, and Lacey Evans are the ones blaming talents they dislike; but yet refuse to accept the fact that nobody on the main roster draws.
> 
> Vince is obviously the problem, but that advice in your last paragraph should be directed to those fanbases I've mentioned instead of the one where there's been fewer cases of our fanbase picking and choosing who to blame. They need to be reminded that it's his fault for luring away viewers with his mediocre shows.
> 
> For the record, blaming the individual talents is becoming more archaic at this point.


Both sides blame others for the ratings. 

Rollins fans are worse because they're preemptively blaming Corbin for a drop in ratings they're predicting. At least with blaming a Rollins, Styles, Lesnar, etc there's stats there. They're the guys on top for record lows. Blaming Baron for something that is just a blind guess of the crystal ball is ridiculous.

And then as I've said before; look how Jinder bore all the blame for SDLs ratings drop. Yet when Styles became Champ the blame was shifted off of the Champ for the continued dropping ratings.


----------



## raymond1985

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Lockard The GOAT said:


> 1. Your original point of contention was that Rollins didn't sell as much merch as Lesnar does. So arguing there are others that draw more than Seth is just evading the main point. Show me proof that Brock does better merch numbers than Rollins
> 
> 2. He's officially in the top 10-15 category of people who have drawn the most houses with a 10,000+ capacity. You're right though, that the drawing power can mostly be attributed to Cena and others, but the opponent matters too, and it's not like Cena (or anyone) draws the same amount every time regardless of the opponent. Seth has to be credited at least somewhat


1) No I didn't. I said his merchandise numbers were nothing special. And they are not. Brock is a part-timer and barely does house shows. Of course they are going to sell more merchandise for performers who are constantly on TV and in the arenas.

2) No he isn't in the top 10-15 category. Twitter user NwoWolfpac keeps track of these things. Rollins is 41st in terms of headlining shows with 10k plus houses. And that number flatters Rollins compared to performers of yesteryear. There are more 10k arenas these days, more international tours, and again, it was Rollins' opponents that drew those houses. Rollins was merely a passenger. 

Also, the same Twitter user found that the average house show attendance for Rollins' 2015 title reign was below 5k. Ambrose's 2016 title reign even posted a better average.


----------



## The XL 2

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



DoctorWhosawhatsit said:


> Are we really still at the point where we're going to blame the ratings woes of what is generally considered an extraordinarily shitty show on one wrestler who we can easily assume has next to zero creative control?


Lol, forgot about Mick


----------



## Soul Rex

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> There probably ain't 10 people walking the planet with better mic skills than MJF let alone in wrestling so when you've got a guy like that who is only 23 years old and doesn't have any of that WWE/TNA reject stench you can build a company around him and the other pieces will fall into place.


He too small.


----------



## Randy Lahey

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Soul Rex said:


> He too small.


Size doesn't matter if you have charisma and can work the mic. MJF may be an "average joe" but he's a badass cool average joe, not the geeky safe bland personality that WWE pushes


----------



## ironcladd1

Wrong thread


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Wridacule said:


> I honestly couldn't care any less about the ratings of a show I don't watch. This thread was obviously made to blame the ratings on seth Rollins. And like clockwork! It's the same hand full of posters circle jerking one another that all can't wait for the day baron is crowned. So I think it's a fair question to ask. Anyone can see that Vince is the issue. While you may not like what I said, we're kind of on the same side of the argument.


I just have an issue with people blaming Corbin because they're geussing ratings will drop further with him as Champ. If people are going to make statements like that then they also have to pin the current ratings issues on Rollins, Bryan, Styles and Co. You can't blame one person for something (that hasn't even happened) but refuse to blame others for the same thing. 

Looking into a crystal ball and blaming Corbin for a ratings drop seems largely accepted, but if you blame Rollins for a real ratings drop, and record lows there's more push back to that statement. People are too hypocritical on this matter.


----------



## DammitChrist

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Eva MaRIHyse said:


> I just have an issue with people blaming Corbin because they're geussing ratings will drop further with him as Champ. If people are going to make statements like that then they also have to pin the current ratings issues on Rollins, Bryan, Styles and Co. You can't blame one person for something (that hasn't even happened) but refuse to blame others for the same thing.
> 
> Looking into a crystal ball and blaming Corbin for a ratings drop seems largely accepted, but if you blame Rollins for a real ratings drop, and record lows there's more push back to that statement. *People are too hypocritical on this matter*.


More folks here have been blaming Seth Rollins, Kofi Kingston, Becky Lynch, AJ Styles, and Daniel Bryan for the low ratings lately than those who've been blaming Baron Corbin though :sodone

It's interesting you say the bolded though considering how some Brock Lesnar fans didn't say much of anything when ratings were still decreasing during his Universal title reign, but yet they're suddenly all vocal by blaming both of the current world champions for the low ratings. If anything, THEY'RE the ones you should be questioning for being inconsistent. I've still yet to see (many) Rollins fans, Kofi fans, Becky fans, Bryan fans, Styles fans on here picking/choosing who to blame for the low ratings. 

I don't even get why you're taking this out on those fanbases. There's WAY LESS folks blaming Corbin for the decreasing viewership compared to any of the names I've mentioned. Plus, it's OBVIOUS that giving Corbin the title won't save the ratings considering how just about EVERY world champion for the PAST YEAR were unable to keep the viewership from decreasing. It won't be any different giving the world title to anybody else who is less over with the crowds.

Anyway, it's getting more tiring hearing how we must blame EVERYONE ELSE for the poor ratings just because one wrestler is getting blamed unfairly. NONE of the current talents (full-time or part-time) SHOULD be getting blamed to BEGIN WITH ANYMORE.

They're bleeding out viewers no matter who's holding a world title. Any of the wrestlers can be very over with the crowds or entertaining as hell, but that's not going to mean shit and keep more people tuned in if the shows are mostly mediocre. 

The only person that should be getting blamed at all is Vince himself. He's the one writing mediocre shows very often, and he's the one holding back the talents with his questionable booking decisions.


----------



## ClintDagger

DammitC said:


> More folks here have been blaming Seth Rollins, Kofi Kingston, Becky Lynch, AJ Styles, and Daniel Bryan for the low ratings lately than those who've been blaming Baron Corbin though :sodone
> 
> It's interesting you say the bolded though considering how some Brock Lesnar fans didn't say much of anything when ratings were still decreasing during his Universal title reign, but yet they're suddenly all vocal by blaming both of the current world champions for the low ratings. If anything, THEY'RE the ones you should be questioning for being inconsistent. I've still yet to see (many) Rollins fans, Kofi fans, Becky fans, Bryan fans, Styles fans on here picking/choosing who to blame for the low ratings.
> 
> I don't even get why you're taking this out on those fanbases. There's WAY LESS folks blaming Corbin for the decreasing viewership compared to any of the names I've mentioned. Plus, it's OBVIOUS that giving Corbin the title won't save the ratings considering how just about EVERY world champion for the PAST YEAR were unable to keep the viewership from decreasing. It won't be any different giving the world title to anybody else who is less over with the crowds.
> 
> Anyway, it's getting more tiring hearing how we must blame EVERYONE ELSE for the poor ratings just because one wrestler is getting blamed unfairly. NONE of the current talents (full-time or part-time) SHOULD be getting blamed to BEGIN WITH ANYMORE.
> 
> They're bleeding out viewers no matter who's holding a world title. Any of the wrestlers can be very over with the crowds or entertaining as hell, but that's not going to mean shit and keep more people tuned in if the shows are mostly mediocre.
> 
> The only person that should be getting blamed at all is Vince himself. He's the one writing mediocre shows very often, and he's the one holding back the talents with his questionable booking decisions.


The main reason why people gave Brock a pass on his last title run (after Roman left) is because WWE spent all of the first half of 2018 giving Brock bad heat in an effort to make Roman look like the better choice to fans. I honestly believe Vince’s intention at the time was to have Roman conquer Brock and then never use Brock again (or at the very least keep him well out of the title picture). But when Roman never could over and eventually got sick Vince panicked and Brock never left (in fact Vince put the title on him again). Only Brock was severely damaged by Fall 2018 and fans weren’t interested in that title reign or the story of Seth conquering him at WM.

Brock will never fully recover from what they did to him last year but they’ve dropped the intentional bad heat they were putting on him and he has recovered some. Enough that in this current era of lack of star power he’s the biggest star they have at their disposal right now. But yeah, all excuses aside, Brock’s last title reign was a ratings failure just like we are seeing from the current champions.


----------



## Chan Hung

Brock to special referee
:brock


----------



## Ace

Zero competition, if they do sub 2.4-2.5m :lmao


----------



## Soul Rex

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Randy Lahey said:


> Size doesn't matter if you have charisma and can work the mic. MJF may be an "average joe" but he's a badass cool average joe, not the geeky safe bland personality that WWE pushes


It does matter when you try to built a company around him.

Figure out.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Ace said:


> You want to talk Meltzer ratings? :lol
> 
> Cody 3 stars got a 5 star match before goatface Bryan who has been wrestling for almost 2 decades.
> 
> Bryan's highest rated WWE match ratings wise was with AJ, first time he ever cracked over 4.5* in the company and is equal with straight dumpster fire Becky Lynch :lmao
> 
> TV ratings or Meltzer match ratings, you got nothing to harp on about.


Ain't it crazy how both of them lost years of their career to injury and still main evented Mania before AJ...


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

I expect the ratings to stay stagnant, at least. They cannot afford these ratings to go any further below before Summerslam. If they do, it's going to be *really* bad.


----------



## patpat

RapShepard said:


> Randy Lahey said:
> 
> 
> 
> TNA never did live shows. AEW will be doing a live show. Just being a live show everyweek is going to get you a baseline of 1.5 mils. There is far more buzz around AEW than any promotion that has come before it. Meltzer said the show they just sold out had the 2nd largest demand for tickets in wrestling/mma history. And this is BEFORE there's even been a TV show put out.
> 
> 
> 
> Lot of the Rollins marks always make excuses about "wrestling is dead, the brand is dead, nobody draws etc etc". No, boring wrestling is dead. Yes. G rated bland wrestling is dead. Of course. That's Seth Rollins.
> 
> 
> 
> People want a different product. AEW thru their ticket sales is showing that there is a massive demand for this product they are going to put out. I'd expect the TV ratings to follow that too.
> 
> 
> 
> No AEW is showing that The Elite have a great core fan base. But whether their amazing core is going to translate into big ratings is a mystery. Keep in mind as much as folk talk about The Elite, DoN, and AEW being the biggest things in wrestling right now their free videos on YouTube revolving around DoN have yet to crack a million views. If they can't easily do a million on YouTube when they're setting the wrestling world on fire, what makes you think they'll easily do better on TV.
> 
> Unfortunately just because they put on a quality PPV, and may put on a quality weekly product that doesn't mean they'll be dripping in fans.
Click to expand...

 who the fuck cares about YouTube?! They are selling out arenas left and right , doing more than 100k buys on ppv and are on prime time. Who the hell gives a fuck about YouTube views? Good jesus! :lol 
They are doing something that hasn't be done since wcw, no other company did that. They sold their first ppv the double of what the highest tna ppv ever could sell :lol


----------



## Freelancer

Another week, another episode of RAW that put me to sleep. Nothing new here.


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



DammitC said:


> More folks here have been blaming Seth Rollins, Kofi Kingston, Becky Lynch, AJ Styles, and Daniel Bryan for the low ratings lately than those who've been blaming Baron Corbin though :sodone
> 
> It's interesting you say the bolded though considering how some Brock Lesnar fans didn't say much of anything when ratings were still decreasing during his Universal title reign, but yet they're suddenly all vocal by blaming both of the current world champions for the low ratings. If anything, THEY'RE the ones you should be questioning for being inconsistent. I've still yet to see (many) Rollins fans, Kofi fans, Becky fans, Bryan fans, Styles fans on here picking/choosing who to blame for the low ratings.
> 
> I don't even get why you're taking this out on those fanbases. There's WAY LESS folks blaming Corbin for the decreasing viewership compared to any of the names I've mentioned. Plus, it's OBVIOUS that giving Corbin the title won't save the ratings considering how just about EVERY world champion for the PAST YEAR were unable to keep the viewership from decreasing. It won't be any different giving the world title to anybody else who is less over with the crowds.
> 
> *Anyway, it's getting more tiring hearing how we must blame EVERYONE ELSE for the poor ratings just because one wrestler is getting blamed unfairly. NONE of the current talents (full-time or part-time) SHOULD be getting blamed to BEGIN WITH ANYMORE.*
> 
> They're bleeding out viewers no matter who's holding a world title. Any of the wrestlers can be very over with the crowds or entertaining as hell, but that's not going to mean shit and keep more people tuned in if the shows are mostly mediocre.
> 
> The only person that should be getting blamed at all is Vince himself. He's the one writing mediocre shows very often, and he's the one holding back the talents with his questionable booking decisions.


The bolded part, I'm just not a fan of the blatant hypocrisy and the changing of the goal posts. I'm not a Jinder fan, but when Jinder was WHC and ratings were dropping on SDL the entirely of that was blamed on Jinder Mahal. But once he was dethroned and Styles was Champion and the ratings kept plummeting it became out of fashion to blame the World Champion. That's extended onto Bryan and Rollins, ratings are hitting record lows but the guys on top right now cant be blamed for it. But people are so ready to blame Baron Corbin for it, people, Rollins fanboys are already blaming Corbin for ratings dropping if he were World Champ. I know I've said that point alot but its beyond ridiculous. 

Many of the same people who dont want to pin any of the blame for record low ratings on Rollins are ready to blame them on Corbin if he were World Champion.

I just want consistency. 

Vince McMahon has always been the problem but he only receives the bulk of the blame when he's put cliche smark favourites on top and they dont draw.


----------



## RapShepard

patpat said:


> who the fuck cares about YouTube?! They are selling out arenas left and right , doing more than 100k buys on ppv and are on prime time. Who the hell gives a fuck about YouTube views? Good jesus! :lol
> They are doing something that hasn't be done since wcw, no other company did that. They sold their first ppv the double of what the highest tna ppv ever could sell :lol


Who cares about YouTube views? I mean seeing as they build the shows up on YouTube and they have the entire preshow on YouTube, i'd reckon youtube numbers matter. None of these videos are doing even a million on YouTube. If they can't do that what on YouTube they're probably going to have a hard time doing big numbers on TV where they'd be brand new. I mean most shows with a big internet presence (like AEW does via The Elite) tend to do better YouTube numbers than actual TV numbers. I mean unless you think they're going to do better TV numbers, which is highly unlikely.

As far as shows they're killing live shows, but what they do once they have the weekly show will be the test. What they're doing when it's not a "fly out for a weekend of wrestling capped off by The Elite doing a show". Are they going to still be selling out when it's the middle of January?


----------



## Matthew Castillo

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Soul Rex said:


> It does matter when you try to built a company around him.
> 
> Figure out.


Bruno Sammartino was 5'8'' and El Santo was 5'10' and 209 pounds.


----------



## llj

Ratings watching is the only source of entertainment I get from the WWE now


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



DammitC said:


> More folks here have been blaming Seth Rollins, Kofi Kingston, Becky Lynch, AJ Styles, and Daniel Bryan for the low ratings lately than those who've been blaming Baron Corbin though :sodone
> 
> It's interesting you say the bolded though considering how some Brock Lesnar fans didn't say much of anything when ratings were still decreasing during his Universal title reign, but yet they're suddenly all vocal by blaming both of the current world champions for the low ratings. If anything, THEY'RE the ones you should be questioning for being inconsistent. *I've still yet to see (many) Rollins fans, Kofi fans, Becky fans, Bryan fans, Styles fans on here picking/choosing who to blame for the low ratings. *
> 
> I don't even get why you're taking this out on those fanbases. *There's WAY LESS folks blaming Corbin for the decreasing viewership compared to any of the names I've mentioned*. Plus, it's OBVIOUS that giving Corbin the title won't save the ratings considering how just about EVERY world champion for the PAST YEAR were unable to keep the viewership from decreasing. It won't be any different giving the world title to anybody else who is less over with the crowds.


Do you just see what you want to see? Rollins fans are by far the fucking worst on WF about blaming everyone else except him for the ratings and his fanbase here outnumbers everyone else so it's like walking into a hivemind. The other fanbases you named ain't bad. 

First it was Bork, now it's the women main eventing WM being a carryover effect. Despite both Bork and the women being PROVEN higher draws than Rollins who drew the 2 lowest rated main event segments in Raw history and they can't even sell out a PPV with his bum ass as their main champion. If Corbs wins the belt you better believe they'll start blaming him if ratings continue to fall. There are already people jumping the gun and blaming him just for being the challenger as the reason ratings are shit even though ratings were shittier when AJ was challenging.

If you have a good champion people want to see it doesn't matter who the challenger is. You could put Rock against Brooklyn Brawler and people would tune in and buy a ticket to see it because Rock was charismatic and could carry anyone to a good segment or good match or good feud.


----------



## DammitChrist

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> Do you just see what you want to see? Rollins fans are by far the fucking worst on WF about blaming everyone else except him for the ratings and his fanbase here outnumbers everyone else so it's like walking into a hivemind. The other fanbases you named ain't bad.


Oh, don't even try to spin this by pretending that our fanbase is the most "toxic" fanbase when we have toxic folks (especially some of the Rollins critics) such as yourself blaming EVERYTHING on wrestlers you dislike for the poor ratings. Seriously, folks like you are by far the fucking worst on this site. Pretty much every fanbase I've mentioned are way better in comparison.

It's going to be hilarious if/when your favorites win the world titles so you can suddenly TRY (and fail again miserably) blaming everyone else for the poor ratings except them, which will expose you even more for the fraud that you are. Your favorites could be champions right now, and they still won't make a difference to help the ratings. It's almost like you only see what you want to believe :lol



> First it was Bork, now it's the women main eventing WM being a carryover effect. Despite both Bork and the women being PROVEN higher draws than Rollins who drew the 2 lowest rated main event segments in Raw history and they can't even sell out a PPV with his bum ass as their main champion. If Corbs wins the belt you better believe they'll start blaming him if ratings continue to fall. There are already people jumping the gun and blaming him just for being the challenger as the reason ratings are shit even though ratings were shittier when AJ was challenging.
> 
> If you have a good champion people want to see it doesn't matter who the challenger is. You could put Rock against Brooklyn Brawler and people would tune in and buy a ticket to see it because Rock was charismatic and could carry anyone to a good segment or good match or good feud.


Honestly, you pretty much wasted your time writing all of this drivel considering how NOBODY on the current roster is a draw, how none of the individual talents are to blame, and how both current world champions have charisma.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



DammitC said:


> Oh, don't even try to spin this by pretending that our fanbase is the most "toxic" fanbase when we have toxic folks (especially some of the Rollins critics) such as yourself blaming EVERYTHING on wrestlers you dislike for the poor ratings. Seriously, folks like you are by far the fucking worst on this site. Pretty much every fanbase I've mentioned are way better in comparison.
> 
> It's going to be hilarious if/when your favorites win the world titles so you can suddenly TRY (and fail again miserably) blaming everyone else for the poor ratings except them, which will expose you even more for the fraud that you are. Your favorites could be champions right now, and they still won't make a difference to help the ratings. It's almost like you only see what you want to believe :lol
> 
> 
> 
> Honestly, you pretty much wasted your time writing all of this drivel considering how NOBODY on the current roster is a draw, how none of the individual talents are to blame, and how both current world champions have charisma.


I blame the Raw men's world heavyweight champion for poor ratings because he is the star of the show. If your top star can't draw flies to shit then he is clearly in a spot he doesn't belong in.

You don't have an excuse of poor booking either when Rollins has been booked to make Bork look like a bumbling idiot at every turn, went over Corbs clean on PPV despite being battered 4 days earlier, and last night was given a chair to run around and attack people with all night. He's booked as the clear cut FOTC and ratings get worse every week and he's always involved in the lowest rated segments no matter who he's working with.

My favorites are booked like shit and will probably never win any titles. Yours (Rollins and Kofi) have buried the entire roster for the past 2 months and ratings are dead because they have the charisma of tree bark.


----------



## DammitChrist

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



nWo4Lyfe420 said:


> I blame the Raw men's world heavyweight champion for poor ratings because he is the star of the show. If your top star can't draw flies to shit then he is clearly in a spot he doesn't belong in.
> 
> You don't have an excuse of poor booking either when Rollins has been booked to make Bork look like a bumbling idiot at every turn, went over Corbs clean on PPV despite being battered 4 days earlier, and last night was given a chair to run around and attack people with all night. He's booked as the clear cut FOTC and ratings get worse every week and he's always involved in the lowest rated segments no matter who he's working with.
> 
> My favorites are booked like shit and will probably never win any titles. Yours (Rollins and Kofi) have buried the entire roster for the past 2 months and ratings are dead because they have the charisma of tree bark.


You're still blaming the ratings on the current talents, and you're still denying their charisma :lmao

God, you're hopeless.

Edit:

As if you know what the lowest rated segments of the show are without the quarterly breakdowns unk2


----------



## SPCDRI

The most important angles on RAW for years concerned Brock Lesnar and McMahon family members, but only Shield members ever have to eat a shit sandwich for terrible viewership numbers. I guess they really...Shield...lots of talent, eh?


----------



## ClintDagger

SPCDRI said:


> The most important angles on RAW for years concerned Brock Lesnar and McMahon family members, but only Shield members ever have to eat a shit sandwich for terrible viewership numbers. I guess they really...Shield...lots of talent, eh?


Brock has always been a tool designed to get something else over, ever since his return. Initially he was brought in so that Vince could fulfill his wet dream of pretending that the WWE stars he worshipped like Cena & HHH were better than Brock. Then he realized he needed someone to make Roman look strong so he fed the streak and a bunch of other stuff to Brock to build him up for Roman the conquering hero. But fans kept rejecting Roman and Vince kept flinching. So when you say all the major angles were about Brock, in my mind anything Brock related over the past 5 years has been more about Roman than Brock himself. Now with ratings in a free fall, maybe Vince will think about Brock in terms beyond Roman, but I somehow doubt it.


----------



## SPCDRI

The McMahon family failed in their purpose to do what was best for the company: Convince Brock to lose clean in a quality match to a built up Shield Member or a built up main roster guy! The last 4+ years of A-Story on RAW have been a complete bust because of this bullshit mistake. RAW's A-Story being a bust for over 2 years is on McMahon family, WWE brass and Brock. Unless you really believe Reigns wanted to win off a Braun Strowman distraction at a Big 4 PPV like it was some main event of a dead-season RAW, or that Strowman wanted to be Brock's bitch-boy or that Rollins wanted to go down the Nakamura Nut Shot Road and have people bitching about him winning "dirty."


----------



## Randy Lahey

SPCDRI said:


> The McMahon family failed in their purpose to do what was best for the company: Convince Brock to lose clean in a quality match to a built up Shield Member or a built up main roster guy! The last 4+ years of A-Story on RAW have been a complete bust because of this bullshit mistake. RAW's A-Story being a bust for over 2 years is on McMahon family, WWE brass and Brock. Unless you really believe Reigns wanted to win off a Braun Strowman distraction at a Big 4 PPV like it was some main event of a dead-season RAW, or that Strowman wanted to be Brock's bitch-boy or that Rollins wanted to go down the Nakamura Nut Shot Road and have people bitching about him winning "dirty."


It doesn't matter how many clean wins Roman Reigns gets. The crowd hates him, and he's never been over. Ever. Reigns and Rollins are absolute ratings killers for WWE. 

It's appropriate that the most talented guy of The Shield left the entire company though. Says alot about WWE's mgmt


----------



## DammitChrist

Randy Lahey said:


> It doesn't matter how many clean wins Roman Reigns gets. The crowd hates him, and he's never been over. Ever. *Reigns and Rollins are absolute ratings killers for WWE.*
> 
> It's appropriate that the most talented guy of The Shield left the entire company though. Says alot about WWE's mgmt


Except neither of them are killing the ratings tbh.


----------



## ClintDagger

SPCDRI said:


> The McMahon family failed in their purpose to do what was best for the company: Convince Brock to lose clean in a quality match to a built up Shield Member or a built up main roster guy! The last 4+ years of A-Story on RAW have been a complete bust because of this bullshit mistake. RAW's A-Story being a bust for over 2 years is on McMahon family, WWE brass and Brock. Unless you really believe Reigns wanted to win off a Braun Strowman distraction at a Big 4 PPV like it was some main event of a dead-season RAW, or that Strowman wanted to be Brock's bitch-boy or that Rollins wanted to go down the Nakamura Nut Shot Road and have people bitching about him winning "dirty."


When did Brock refuse to lose?


----------



## SPCDRI

I never said he refused, but all the spin on Brock is he's purely mercenary and couldn't give a shit less about accolades. If it takes money to get him to lay down in a longer match, WWE should have forked it over. Their A story for YEARS was "Who will be the first person to slay the beast?" and nobody's done it, the way Roman and Seth "won" made the entire roster look like assholes. Why does RAW have terrible viewership? The undercard and midcard stinks and the A-story of Brock/Shield Member as Universal Champion is a TOTAL FLOP.

Edit: For all I know, WWE was "protecting" Brock by having him work lame matches and not lose clean to full timers, seems like its both parties involved Just Not Getting It.


----------



## ClintDagger

DammitC said:


> Except neither of them are killing the ratings tbh.


Seth I don’t really see as being a legit target to blame. He’s never been “the guy”. Even now IMO.

It’s pretty tough to deny that the ratings drop didn’t accelerate quite a bit once Cena stepped aside and Roman became the FOTC. Roman had all of the negatives that Cena carried, but few of the positives. I think it was only natural to expect viewership drops to accelerate based on that.



SPCDRI said:


> I never said he refused, but all the spin on Brock is he's purely mercenary and couldn't give a shit less about accolades. If it takes money to get him to lay down in a longer match, WWE should have forked it over. Their A story for YEARS was "Who will be the first person to slay the beast?" and nobody's done it, the way Roman and Seth "won" made the entire roster look like assholes. Why does RAW have terrible viewership? The undercard and midcard stinks and the A-story of Brock/Shield Member as Universal Champion is a TOTAL FLOP.
> 
> Edit: For all I know, WWE was "protecting" Brock by having him work lame matches and not lose clean to full timers, seems like its both parties involved Just Not Getting It.


If Brock was playing those kinds of games I doubt he would constantly be in the title picture. I do think it is Vince that gets cold feet when the time comes to put a Roman or Seth definitively over Brock. I think he has serious doubts about them being able to carry the load and he doesn’t want to damage Brock in that case. In a nutshell, I think Vince is taking half measures which doesn’t do anyone any good.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.325M
H2- 2.303M
H3- 2.078M
3H- 2.235M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 0.95% / - 0.022M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 9.77% / - 0.225M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 10.62% / - 0.247M )
6/17/19 Vs 6/10/19 ( + 5.18% / + 0.110M )

Demo (6/17/19 Vs 6/10/19):
H1- 0.740D Vs 0.750D
H2- 0.710D Vs 0.650D
H3- 0.670D Vs 0.590D
3H- 0.707D Vs 0.663D

Note: RAW is 1st, 2nd & 4th by hourly demo & 4th, 5th & 8th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (6/17/19 Vs 6/18/18):
H1- 2.325M Vs 3.001M
H2- 2.303M Vs 2.975M
H3- 2.078M Vs 2.734M
3H- 2.235M Vs 2.903M ( - 23.01% / - 0.668M )

Demo (6/17/19 Vs 6/18/18):
H1- 0.740D Vs 1.000D
H2- 0.710D Vs 1.000D
H3- 0.670D Vs 0.940D
3H- 0.707D Vs 0.980D

Note: RAW this week last year was 3rd, 2nd & 4th by hourly demo & 2nd, 3rd & 7th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## SPCDRI

Ace said:


> Zero competition, if they do sub 2.4-2.5m :lmao


Yeah, no sports to bail them out. The shame of it is, I don't really think this will be strong ratings wise, when it was leagues better than some of the terrible shows they've done lately. They did their worst RAW/Smackdown post-WM with the memorial day RAW, this is world's better than that, will the viewership back that up? I hope so. 

I'm not as pessimistic, if they can take last night's show and build on that, they will get people to return to the program.

Edit: Yeah, I didn't see the viewership, but those numbers are STINKY for their best post-WM RAW. There was a lot to praise about that RAW, and the numbers still suck ass.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Lacey's hour draws the highest number again. Seth was all over the show and chased viewers away again.


----------



## ClintDagger

I’ve said for a long time that people blow “competition” for Raw way out of proportion especially when it’s “real sports”. I think this rating proves that to be true. WWE fans (what’s left of them) do not watch real sports.


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

Up from last week. Would probably be even better without Lacey talking like she's an autist. Seth in the highest rated hour too, since that's the faulty logic some people use around here.


----------



## Chrome

Well they went up from last week, but still pretty terrible overall.


----------



## SPCDRI

ClintDagger said:


> I’ve said for a long time that people blow “competition” for Raw way out of proportion especially when it’s “real sports”. I think this rating proves that to be true. WWE fans (what’s left of them) do not watch real sports.


The ratings hit for an NBA elimination game that was a real barn burner wasn't that substantial, something like 200,000 to 250,000 an hour. Here's last week...

8PM: 2,380,000
9PM: 2,086,000
10PM: 1,909,000

either there's very little crossover, or the crossover sports fans packed it up a few years ago.

Edit: Main story is still down over 20 percent from last year, close to 700,000 fewer viewers, Ay dios mio!


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

It says alot about how many people are watching cable overall when that number is the highest number of the night for any show on all of cable last night. Streaming these shows is probably on the table after this current deal ends in 5 years.


----------



## ClintDagger

SPCDRI said:


> The ratings hit for an NBA elimination game that was a real barn burner wasn't that substantial, something like 200,000 to 250,000 an hour. Here's last week...
> 
> 8PM: 2,380,000
> 9PM: 2,086,000
> 10PM: 1,909,000
> 
> either there's very little crossover, or the crossover sports fans packed it up a few years ago.


There’s exception to every rule. But I think maybe 5% of Raw’s audience crosses over to NBA. Maybe 10% for NFL.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

Awful Rating.


----------



## ClintDagger

Showstopper said:


> It says alot about how many people are watching cable overall when that number is the highest number of the night for any show on all of cable last night. Streaming these shows is probably on the table after this current deal ends in 5 years.


I think that’s a good call. I doubt a cable network or broadcast network will overpay next time around. But I could see a streaming service that is trying to become the biggest player in the market over paying for it. WWE is going to badly need to come up with a revenue deal that is comparable to what they have now or the stock could absolutely tank.


----------



## SPCDRI

Showstopper said:


> It says alot about how many people are watching cable overall when that number is the highest number of the night for any show on all of cable last night. Streaming these shows is probably on the table after this current deal ends in 5 years.


Depends how low they can go. 

2.2 or 2.3 million times .95 4 times ain't pretty, if you assume a 5 percent decline for the next 4 years. That'd be about 1.8 million for a typical RAW, with a rotten egg RAW or something like a holiday RAW or RAW against stout sports competition having every hour well below 2 million, possibly 4 or 5 years now if the decline trend keeps going, we're looking at a sub 1.5 million hour or two! Oof.

Edit: With numbers like that, good luck to them for getting a dummy network on the hook for 200+ million a year for that. They're gonna be paying the piper when The Last of The Mondo Contracts are up. Sports in general are having a hard time landing the giant broadcast rights contracts, viewership isn't there to justify these exorbitant fees and rights anymore.


----------



## Randy Lahey

JonnyAceLaryngitis said:


> *Viewership (6/17/19 Vs 6/18/18):
> H1- 2.325M Vs 3.001M
> H2- 2.303M Vs 2.975M
> H3- 2.078M Vs 2.734M
> 3H- 2.235M Vs 2.903M ( - 23.01% / - 0.668M )
> 
> *


*

LMAO...Seth Rollins enough said.

When this guy is the main guy, they are 20-30% off last year's ratings.

With Brock on the show, it was 5-10% off.

How many more weeks of terrible ratings do you need to see before you realize literally the only guy that stops the bleed of viewers is Brock?*


----------



## ClintDagger

SPCDRI said:


> Depends how low they can go.
> 
> 2.2 or 2.3 million times .95 4 times ain't pretty, if you assume a 5 percent decline for the next 4 years. That'd be about 1.8 million for a typical RAW, with a rotten egg RAW or something like a holiday RAW or RAW against stout sports competition having every hour well below 2 million, possibly 4 or 5 years now if the decline trend keeps going, we're looking at a sub 1.5 million hour or two! Oof.
> 
> Edit: With numbers like that, good luck to them for getting a dummy network on the hook for 200+ million a year for that. They're gonna be paying the piper when The Last of The Mondo Contracts are up.


95% annual retention might be too optimistic. And if you assume something around 80-85% which isn’t out of the question, you could be talking around 1.0MM-ish at the top end by the end of the contract.


----------



## rexmundi

Certain nicknames instantly bring to mind certain wrestlers:

Mr. WrestleMania: The Heartbreak Kid

Mr. Monday Night: Rob Van Dam

Mr. Hour 3: Seth Freakin' Rollins :Cocky


----------



## Chrome

Damn, that's an insane drop from last year. Kinda hard to believe just a year ago they were able to get at least 1 hour above 3 million. That seems like a pipedream now.


----------



## SPCDRI

ClintDagger said:


> 95% annual retention might be too optimistic. And if you assume something around 80-85% which isn’t out of the question, you could be talking around 1.0MM-ish at the top end by the end of the contract.


I'm giving them the absolute benefit of the doubt with 5 percent declines, or assuming they do something to stay where they are with a year or maybe even gain viewers, WWE finding something, ANYTHING, to staunch the bleeding. I don't even want to type the possibility that RAW flirts with 1 million flat for some hours, its just too gross to think about, though its sadly on the table.

If that happens, AEW is a flop, too

:cry


----------



## Randy Lahey

Chrome said:


> Damn, that's an insane drop from last year. Kinda hard to believe just a year ago they were able to get at least 1 hour above 3 million. That seems like a pipedream now.


The real question that needs to be asked is who has been pushed in the last year that has ACCELERATED the decline in the audience?

I think we all know. It was the women, and Seth. Nobody else needs blamed. Year to year drops for bad bland WWE has been 5-10%. Only in the last 6 months has it absolutely tanked.


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

Chrome said:


> Damn, that's an insane drop from last year. Kinda hard to believe just a year ago they were able to get at least 1 hour above 3 million. That seems like a pipedream now.


When you insert the wild card rule and insult the fans intelligence. Then that is what you get. It is either you want to have the brand split or you don't. Vince has to chose on what is really going on with the stars on both brands because right now many are considering the brand split is dead due to many stars bouncing from brands to brands. Even if Smackdown goes to fox, their ratings will continue to down spiral just like Raw will continue.


----------



## SPCDRI

Chrome said:


> Damn, that's an insane drop from last year. Kinda hard to believe just a year ago they were able to get at least 1 hour above 3 million. That seems like a pipedream now.


You see them down 670,000 viewers (!!!) from where they were last year with a GOOD RAW and its just, fuck man, its depressing. It ain't even fun anymore, tbph.


----------



## Randy Lahey

SPCDRI said:


> WWE finding something, ANYTHING, to staunch the bleeding.
> 
> :cry


That was Brock in May. He's the ONLY draw that slows the bleeding.


----------



## ClintDagger

Randy Lahey said:


> The real question that needs to be asked is who has been pushed in the last year that has ACCELERATED the decline in the audience?
> 
> I think we all know. It was the women, and Seth. Nobody else needs blamed. Year to year drops for bad bland WWE has been 5-10%. Only in the last 6 months has it absolutely tanked.


The women hurt BIG TIME. Probably to the tune of 20-25% of the viewership. Not only did they turn away viewers, they made the Seth / Brock feud feel very small time because it sent the message that the WWE UT picture had fallen below the women in the pecking order. It wasn’t that the women had raised their game, the men had fallen to also ran status. And that has carried through and is still hurting Seth now. They have already relegated the WWE Title to midcard status by giving it to Kofi. They quickly need to do something to raise the prestige of the Raw title.


----------



## rexmundi

SPCDRI said:


> You see them down 670,000 viewers (!!!) from where they were last year with a GOOD RAW and its just, fuck man, its depressing. It ain't even fun anymore, tbph.


It's going to take a lot of good raws to help regain some viewer confidence. Another factor is that it's summertime. Way better things to do than watch stale wrestling.


----------



## Ace

That's fucking awful :lmao

Zero competition, get real.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Randy Lahey said:


> The real question that needs to be asked is who has been pushed in the last year that has ACCELERATED the decline in the audience?
> 
> I think we all know. It was the women, and Seth. Nobody else needs blamed. Year to year drops for bad bland WWE has been 5-10%. Only in the last 6 months has it absolutely tanked.


The women are actually drawing the highest rated segments each week. This is 100% on Rollins. He's the biggest anti-draw wrestling has ever had. A normal promoter would have fired him for being a reckless worker who ended Sting's career, but of course since Vince hates everything associated with WCW he rewarded Seth for it.


----------



## Ace

Ignore the person who thinks Lacey contributes anything to ratings.

Only a troll would think that.


----------



## RainmakerV2

Ace said:


> Ignore the person who thinks Lacey contributes anything to ratings.
> 
> Only a troll would think that.


Why? Shes hot and shows skin. Sex still sells. A bra and panties match would pop the highest rating in years, lets be honest.


----------



## raymond1985

The excuses ran out this week. 

No NBA playoffs or other competition. And according to most on here, the show was well-booked. Yet, the viewership still declined by over 20% year on year. One of the steepest year on year drops in recent memory. Even the NBA playoffs, without LeBron, have not seen their viewership decline by over 20% from last year. The NHL's viewership is actually up on last year and the highest since the mid-1990s. 

Thus the issue is that there are no stars. They have picked the wrong performers to help stop the bleeding. Rollins simply isn't fit to be the main character on the show. Bringing Bryan in will not help either. The less said about Owens, Zayn and the New Day, the better. All of these are ultimately mid-card performers. Upper mid-card if you want to be generous. 

In short, it's both the talent and management's fault.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

WINNING said:


> I expect the ratings to stay stagnant, at least. They cannot afford these ratings to go any further below before Summerslam. If they do, it's going to be *really* bad.


Well, luckily for them, they were up 5% from last week although that likely had to do with no NBA Finals game and even if that, the threshold didn't crossover enough to where it was the sole reason the ratings were going down. 

:LOL @ RAW falling over 20% from last year at this time. With this current trend, they will be meet below 2 million viewers next year. The casuals are leaving and the hardcore fans are begrudgingly staying but are likely waiting for the AEW show on TNT to take off and they will likely not look back again.

As expected, the geek wars will commence between the two sides as always yet it bears repeating again that *no one* is drawing or saving this company from these abysmal ratings. Knock it off.


----------



## rbl85

I think the best thing to do ( and the funniest) would be for WWE to put Lacey Evans in the third hour.

Of course the third hour would be the worst one but i'm sure some people here will find some excuses XD.


----------



## Ace

RainmakerV2 said:


> Why? Shes hot and shows skin. Sex still sells. A bra and panties match would pop the highest rating in years, lets be honest.


 She's not conventionally hot, hasn't been featured that much and there is no metric (measurable or not) that suggests otherwise.

You can see it for girls like Alexa who is conventionally hot, over, sells merch and has a pretty big fan base.

Lacey? She's none of that.


----------



## raymond1985

RainmakerV2 said:


> Why? Shes hot and shows skin. Sex still sells. A bra and panties match would pop the highest rating in years, lets be honest.


Agreed.

WWE would pop a high rating with a bra and panties match featuring the likes of Lynch, Evans, Bliss, etc. 

But the media backlash they would get makes such a match unfeasible.


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

They put on a semi decent show last night of 5.5/10 .

Still the ratings will continue to either be stagnate or go down the drain. No one is a draw in this company and the wars are basically a lost cause at this point to be continuing. 

Lacey Evans a draw? Get out of here. :ha


----------



## RainmakerV2

raymond1985 said:


> Agreed.
> 
> WWE would pop a high rating with a bra and panties match featuring the likes of Lynch, Evans, Bliss, etc.
> 
> But the media backlash they would get makes such a match unfeasible.


Even a Lacey burlesque show...(keep it classy ya nasties) would pop a rating.


----------



## llj




----------



## The Wood

2.2 million is horrible.


----------



## SPCDRI

The Wood said:


> 2.2 million is horrible.


And its a hard 2.2

It'd be actually better if they had one hour doing amazing and one or two hours doing shit, but the highest viewership they had all night was 2.3 million, lowest 2 million in that usual Death Hour for RAW, third hour, where 10 to 15 percent of the audience is usually gone because 3 hours of RAW is a ton of RAW to watch. 

This time last year, June 11 was the go-home show and June 18 was the post-show for Money in the Bank and the numbers were much, much better than Stomping Grounds. Maybe its that this PPV is really dull rematch city, I dunno. 

June 11
8PM: 2,751,000
9PM: 2,812,000
10PM: 2,629,000

June 18
Hour 1: 3.001 (up from 2.751 million viewers last week)
Hour 2: 2.975 (up from 2.812 million viewers)
Hour 3: 2.734 (up from 2.629 million viewers)

The worst hour for either one of those shows was over 300,000 people higher than this RAW's best hour. 

I don't really know what is happening, but RAW is going down in FLAMES for 2019.


----------



## .christopher.

This is the result of putting all their eggs in the baskets of the shield - the most overrated and boring stable I've seen as a wrestling fan, and a crappy, forced women's revolution that was as transparent as can be.

"Well turn the channel!" they said when fans had legitimate complaints about how awful the product was. When fans were gettin tired of seeing legitimately over talents being swept aside for rubbish like Cena and Reigns.

They're not saying that anymore, are they? Condescending asswipes.


----------



## SPCDRI

I wonder what the next conference call is going to be like when it comes to questions about RAW viewership? Most of these shareholders and institutional investors don't know wrist locks from wrist watches, but they do know that the number 2 is not as big as the number 3. What's the explanation gonna be?


----------



## deathvalleydriver2

AEW is gonna bury the WWE


----------



## Seafort

I wonder if by SummerSlam we end up with Baron Corbin as Universal Champion, and Shane McMahon as WWE Champion. How then does the company perform in the ratings as they enter the fall season?


----------



## FITZ

Showstopper said:


> It says alot about how many people are watching cable overall when that number is the highest number of the night for any show on all of cable last night. Streaming these shows is probably on the table after this current deal ends in 5 years.


There's a million posts about how bad the rating is but there's not much on cable that's really doing better than they are either.


----------



## xio8ups

Masses don't care about women wrestlers. And 150lb indie marks.


----------



## ClintDagger

FITZ said:


> There's a million posts about how bad the rating is but there's not much on cable that's really doing better than they are either.


I think what you just said is the excuse Vince will try. The problem is that cable is only dropping by 2-3% per year. WWE is consistently dropping by something like 20% year over year. That’s why the alarm bells are going off even with investors. Not to mention they are going to broadcast tv where they are replacing a couple of shows that get 5 and 4 million respectively. And, to meet Fox’s expectations they will need to get almost double what they are doing right now. Not just debut at double, consistently week after week do well north of 3 million.


----------



## Mear

deathvalleydriver2 said:


> AEW is gonna bury the WWE


Don't think so. To quote the man, WWE is burying the WWE. 

AEW isn't taking away any fans from the WWE in a true competitive manner, those who will watch AEW will mostly be WWE fans who left. If AEW did bury WWE, it would be because WWE dug their grave first.


----------



## ClintDagger

Mear said:


> Don't think so. To quote the man, WWE is burying the WWE.
> 
> AEW isn't taking away any fans from the WWE in a true competitive manner, those who will watch AEW will mostly be WWE fans who left. If AEW did bury WWE, it would be because WWE dug their grave first.


In fact, the better AEW does the better it is for WWE. Pro wrestling making a comeback in popularity and real competition can only help WWE. The only way AEW can hurt WWE is to take away all of their talent; which, with them only needing to fill 2 hours there’s only so much talent AEW really needs.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

deathvalleydriver2 said:


> AEW is gonna bury the WWE


:mj4

Some of you AEW geeks are making the company look bad with stupid shit like this. Just be happy there is a mainstream alternative that now gives the fans, let alone the wrestlers and staff, another viable option. Sheesh, man.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

The new normal. 

Who even cares anymore? Based on the report I read it sounds like they are giving Rollins a Steve Austin DTA gimmick, which is cool as it's important to make your top face a badass, but also hard to buy as he's been a typical WWE pandering bland babyface for so long. 

By the looks of it, they are actually starting to book their top babyfaces Rollins & Reigns like actual stars and not personality defunct bland geeks, which is at least a start. If they keep that up, and spread it about, numbers should go up. There's nothing more important than over babyfaces. They've fucked up so many, hopefully they have realised having them beaten down every show helps nobody.


----------



## Soul Rex

*Re: Seth Rollins main evented the two lowest rated RAWs in history*



Matthew Castillo said:


> Bruno Sammartino was 5'8'' and El Santo was 5'10' and 209 pounds.


I think Bruno was big enough, he looked 5'10 and had a great build for the time being.


----------



## Strike Force

.christopher. said:


> This is the result of putting all their eggs in the baskets of *the shield - the most overrated and boring stable I've seen as a wrestling fan*












Even if you don't rate Shield as one of the best WWE factions ever, to call them one of the most boring stables ever...you just...you have no credibility, champ.



ClintDagger said:


> I think what you just said is the excuse Vince will try. *The problem is that cable is only dropping by 2-3% per year. WWE is consistently dropping by something like 20% year over year.*


Key point here. Yes, TV ratings across the board are dropping, but WWE's drop is far more precipitous, and that's why it's newsworthy.



SayWhatAgain! said:


> ...they are giving Rollins a Steve Austin DTA gimmick, which is cool as it's important to make your top face a badass, but also hard to buy as he's been a typical WWE pandering bland babyface for so long.


I agree that this doesn't align with his personality in the past, but you have to give WWE credit for at least trying to pivot. We can't at once ask WWE to change and then give them shit when they try to. It's either one or the other.


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

Nah, he's right. The Shield is overrated as fuck and the fact that WWE is propping them up today like that, doesn't matter if it's for recency bias or not, shows how much of an objective failure the Shield faction was all things considered. 

Boring? Well, their first run surely wasn't, at least.


----------



## .christopher.

The shield, to me, have always been boring. Never got the hype, never got invested in any of their stuff. I don't care for any of the 3 members together or apart.

I also question the sanity of those who did find them entertaining.


----------



## A-C-P

RainmakerV2 said:


> Even a Lacey burlesque show...(keep it classy ya nasties) would pop a rating.


No it wouldn't :bosque

You could find better on the internet in 10 seconds and not have to sit through the other 2 hours 45 minutes of shit to see it :bosque


----------



## SPCDRI

People think that skanky stuff will sell because the skanky stuff sold in a totally different cultural era, the 1990s/early 2000s. In conjunction with that being a totally different time in American life, the internet was in the Stone Age then compared to what it is now. The "sex sells" stuff only works in the context of the other stuff, it cannot be the main draw, because anybody who wants to look at smut can look at anything they want more or less instantly wherever they go. 

Also, Lacey is supposed to be the "Classy Southern Belle" character, acting like Sable or a Nitro Girl or having, I dunno, a butterscotch pudding match...
A, flies totally in the face of her character and B, of the sponsors would not stand for it.


----------



## RainmakerV2

A-C-P said:


> No it wouldn't :bosque
> 
> You could find better on the internet in 10 seconds and not have to sit through the other 2 hours 45 minutes of shit to see it :bosque


People always say.."if you want that look at porn "..Yet look at the Youtube views of wrestling segments where women lose clothing. I mean...it sells whether you like it or not.


----------



## Death Rider

RainmakerV2 said:


> A-C-P said:
> 
> 
> 
> No it wouldn't <img src="https://i.imgur.com/XaBIxNS.png" border="0" alt="" title="bosque" class="inlineimg" />
> 
> You could find better on the internet in 10 seconds and not have to sit through the other 2 hours 45 minutes of shit to see it <img src="https://i.imgur.com/XaBIxNS.png" border="0" alt="" title="bosque" class="inlineimg" />
> 
> 
> 
> People always say.."if you want that look at porn "..Yet look at the Youtube views of wrestling segments where women lose clothing. I mean...it sells whether you like it or not.
Click to expand...

No one is going to turn on the TV for lacey stripping. They might Google it or would most likely YouTube it but they ain't watching a 3 hour show for a lady stripping <img src="http://i.imgur.com/m2XjBg7.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Heston" class="inlineimg" />


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

I completely disagree with those suggesting to book Lacey in skank matches. Leave that shit for the likes of Mandy and Carmella. That would absolutely ruin Lacey's character. You can be both sexy and a badass woman. 

What they need to do is put the belt on her and let her bury the roster like they did Charlotte and Alexa. She has sex appeal Charlotte lacks and size/background Alexa lacks to actually be believable in doing it.


----------



## RainmakerV2

Death Rider said:


> No one is going to turn on the TV for lacey stripping. They might Google it or would most likely YouTube it but they ain't watching a 3 hour show for a lady stripping <img src="http://i.imgur.com/m2XjBg7.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Heston" class="inlineimg" />


They wouldnt have to watch 3 hours. It would obviously be in the third. If you honestly think Lacey or Alexa doing a striptease wouldn't pop a rating you're just lying to yourself tor some reason.


----------



## Death Rider

RainmakerV2 said:


> Death Rider said:
> 
> 
> 
> No one is going to turn on the TV for lacey stripping. They might Google it or would most likely YouTube it but they ain't watching a 3 hour show for a lady stripping <img src="http://i.imgur.com/m2XjBg7.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Heston" class="inlineimg" />
> 
> 
> 
> They wouldnt have to watch 3 hours. It would obviously be in the third. If you honestly think Lacey or Alexa doing a striptease wouldn't pop a rating you're just lying to yourself tor some reason.
Click to expand...

So basically people would tune in for a few minutes and then turn off? Great that does not fix anything long term. It will pop a rating for a short segment on YouTube but fixing the issue with TV ratings? Nah. It would be minor of anything. The YouTube video would probs hit 5m easy though.

Also different time. That would get critized heavily by sponsors.


----------



## RainmakerV2

Death Rider said:


> So basically people would tune in for a few minutes and then turn off? Great that does not fix anything long term. It will pop a rating for a short segment on YouTube but fixing the issue with TV ratings? Nah. It would be minor of anything. The YouTube video would probs hit 5m easy though.
> 
> Also different time. That would get critized heavily by sponsors.


Yes. Im sure there were plenty of people who tuned in for the bikini contests or Edges live sex celebration and didnt give two shits about the rest of the show. I didnt say it would fix anything lol, just that it would pop a rating and not every woman on the roster has to be some Meltzer workrate queen to draw viewers.


----------



## Death Rider

RainmakerV2 said:


> Death Rider said:
> 
> 
> 
> So basically people would tune in for a few minutes and then turn off? Great that does not fix anything long term. It will pop a rating for a short segment on YouTube but fixing the issue with TV ratings? Nah. It would be minor of anything. The YouTube video would probs hit 5m easy though.
> 
> Also different time. That would get critized heavily by sponsors.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. Im sure there were plenty of people who tuned in for the bikini contests or Edges live sex celebration and didnt give two shits about the rest of the show. I didnt say it would fix anything lol, just that it would pop a rating and not every woman on the roster has to be some Meltzer workrate queen to draw viewers.
Click to expand...

Did I say every wrestler had to be a work rate queen? Your idea will get a slight spike in ratings for one segment. OK well done again does not really solve anything with the product and not fix the larger issues turning people off. Would make fuck all sense for their characters though.


----------



## llj

With the advent of copious sex and nudity on many cable TV shows, a few PG-13 stripteases isn't going to interest people as much as they did in 2001. We are literally bombarded with sex the moment we walk out the door and the moment we look at our news apps every morning. We're much less conservative with sex and nudity now than in 2001, so it's not as special when you see a tit or two anymore. And we wouldn't even get that in a WWE striptease. Will it pop some people? Yeah, but probably not enough to move a needle.

One of the problems I am seeing is that people think going back to 1999 will fix things. This encompasses the problem with wrestling today and its fans. In 2019, more audiences don't know or care about the Attitude Era than audiences who do. What are we in here? A bunch of aging pathetic 40 year olds living off the nostalgia of success in a past era. Why do you think they keep trotting out guys like the Undertaker and Triple H and push a 40 year old Brock? Because they know a lot of guys still slobber all over them and talk about how today's stars don't draw compared to past stars. It's a self fulfilling prophecy, except the audience keeps shrinking because nostalgia acts continue to draw less and less for increasingly younger audiences, and current performers are packaged in so stale a way that they don't even have a chance to draw at all. The WWE's inability to find stories and personalities that rides the zeitgeist for today's younger audiences is one of the reasons why the product is suffering so. Everything they push is stuff that has no relevance for a 20 year old today. 

In every successful era of the WWE, they didn't need to rely on past stars and storylines to pop a rating. They rode the zeitgeist of their times. But there is no formula for recreating them, every zeitgeist is different. But you have to be willing to get a sense for the times, and I see no evidence that current WWE has ANY CLUE about what appeals to 15-30 year olds today.


----------



## ClintDagger

llj said:


> With the advent of copious sex and nudity on many cable TV shows, a few PG-13 stripteases isn't going to interest people as much as they did in 2001. We are literally bombarded with sex the moment we walk out the door and the moment we look at our news apps every morning. We're much less conservative with sex and nudity now than in 2001, so it's not as special when you see a tit or two anymore. And we wouldn't even get that in a WWE striptease. Will it pop some people? Yeah, but probably not enough to move a needle.
> 
> One of the problems I am seeing is that people think going back to 1999 will fix things. This encompasses the problem with wrestling today and its fans. In 2019, more audiences don't know or care about the Attitude Era than audiences who do. What are we in here? A bunch of aging pathetic 40 year olds living off the nostalgia of success in a past era. Why do you think they keep trotting out guys like the Undertaker and Triple H and push a 40 year old Brock? Because they know a lot of guys still slobber all over them and talk about how today's stars don't draw compared to past stars. It's a self fulfilling prophecy, except the audience keeps shrinking because nostalgia acts continue to draw less and less for increasingly younger audiences, and current performers are packaged in so stale a way that they don't even have a chance to draw at all. The WWE's inability to find stories and personalities that rides the zeitgeist for today's younger audiences is one of the reasons why the product is suffering so. Everything they push is stuff that has no relevance for a 20 year old today.
> 
> In every successful era of the WWE, they didn't need to rely on past stars and storylines to pop a rating. They rode the zeitgeist of their times. But there is no formula for recreating them, every zeitgeist is different. But you have to be willing to get a sense for the times, and I see no evidence that current WWE has ANY CLUE about what appeals to 15-30 year olds today.


I think the reason that people want to see WWE do things like they did in 1999 is because right now it feels like they doing things like it’s 1985. Their style of entertainment is very safe, hokey, and cheesy. 1999 is at least moving in the right direction but in reality what they need to do is wake up to 2019 like the rest of us. Entertainment today is very smart and is careful not to insult the viewing audience. Right now WWE is doing a weird combination of bad comedy, bad drama, insulting viewers in some way, and pandering to sections of them in other ways.


----------



## llj

ClintDagger said:


> I think the reason that people want to see WWE do things like they did in 1999 is because right now it feels like they doing things like it’s 1985. Their style of entertainment is very safe, hokey, and cheesy. 1999 is at least moving in the right direction but in reality what they need to do is wake up to 2019 like the rest of us. Entertainment today is very smart and is careful not to insult the viewing audience. Right now WWE is doing a weird combination of bad comedy, bad drama, insulting viewers in some way, and pandering to sections of them in other ways.


It's the only blueprint many fans can recall today. But 1999 was different from 1985 and the next WWE boom (if it happens at all) will surely be different than 1999. There isn't really any formula, but I don't think recreating a past formula will necessarily work. You have to move with the times and yeah, the WWE is stuck in this curious space between 1985 and some strange pseudo mid 2000s timeline. 

It's not like they haven't done a few AE style segments over the past 2 years. It's just debatable how successful they were. Also, the performers are different. Austin and Rock did segments suited to their personalities and era. You can't try to jamhole somebody today into the same roles and expect the same results. For example, trying to have Becky periodically echo a pseudo-Stone Cold has helped as much as it hurt her.


----------



## ClintDagger

llj said:


> It's the only blueprint many fans can recall today. But 1999 was different from 1985 and the next WWE boom (if it happens at all) will surely be different than 1999. There isn't really any formula, but I don't think recreating a past formula will necessarily work. You have to move with the times and yeah, the WWE is stuck in this curious space between 1985 and some strange pseudo mid 2000s timeline.
> 
> It's not like they haven't done a few AE style segments over the past 2 years. It's just debatable how successful they were. Also, the performers are different. Austin and Rock did segments suited to their personalities and era. You can't try to jamhole somebody today into the same roles and expect the same results. For example, trying to have Becky periodically echo a pseudo-Stone Cold has helped as much as it hurt her.


They’re creatively bankrupt. The only things they know how to do are variations of what worked in the past. WWE is incapable of coming up with anything original. The only way they ever could would be to give the wrestlers autonomy which will never happen in that culture of micromanagement.


----------



## Strike Force

llj said:


> It's the only blueprint many fans can recall today. But *1999 was different from 1985 and the next WWE boom (if it happens at all) will surely be different than 1999. *There isn't really any formula, but I don't think recreating a past formula will necessarily work. You have to move with the times and yeah, the WWE is stuck in this curious space between 1985 and some strange pseudo mid 2000s timeline.


This is an underrated point. Imagine if 1996 WWE, struggling financially and beaten down by WCW, would have tried to copy 1985 WWF to recreate glory. It would have been a disaster.

The Attitude Era simply can't be the inspiration for WWE going forward. Society has changed, WWE has changed, the viewers have changed, and television and sponsorship partners have changed. Sure, there are small things worth borrowing from the past (giving performers more freedom on the mic, long-running storylines, etc.), but they need to be woven into a tapestry that is fresh and new, not a sad, half-assed recreation of a glorious past.


----------



## ClintDagger

Strike Force said:


> This is an underrated point. Imagine if 1996 WWE, struggling financially and beaten down by WCW, would have tried to copy 1985 WWF to recreate glory. It would have been a disaster.
> 
> The Attitude Era simply can't be the inspiration for WWE going forward. Society has changed, WWE has changed, the viewers have changed, and television and sponsorship partners have changed. Sure, there are small things worth borrowing from the past (giving performers more freedom on the mic, long-running storylines, etc.), but they need to be woven into a tapestry that is fresh and new, not a sad, half-assed recreation of a glorious past.


We don’t have to imagine it. The entire Cena era all the way to now was Vince’s rehash of the 80s. Cheesy, overcome the odds baby face in bright colors with three demandments (training, prayers, vitamins / hustle, loyalty, respect) all designed to make the company “family friendly”. Then here and there Vince sprinkles in a bit of attitude era when he thinks something needs to be “edgy”. You’ve got Charlotte pretending to be Ric. Natalya pretending to be Bret. Becky pretending to be Austin. At different times Roman has been a poor man’s Cena, Austin, or Rock. We could go on and on. And just like it would have been in ‘96, the rehash era is a failure. The only difference is that the WWE of the last 10-12 years is a pretty savvy company in every other way outside of the product they offer so they thrive in spite of the dying product.


----------



## deathvalleydriver2

This is boring


----------



## deathvalleydriver2

Whoops wrong thread


----------



## TheLooseCanon

You ain't wrong though.


----------



## Ace

Yikes :lmao

This isn't for a Raw, SD or a brand PPV, it's a dual brand PPV :lmao


----------



## TheLooseCanon

that camera angle in the first pic lol


----------



## Ichigo87

Randy Lahey said:


> SPCDRI said:
> 
> 
> 
> WWE finding something, ANYTHING, to staunch the bleeding.
> 
> <img src="http://i.imgur.com/ecfJ214.png" border="0" alt="" title="Cry" class="inlineimg" />
> 
> 
> 
> That was Brock in May. He's the ONLY draw that slows the bleeding.
Click to expand...

Lmao putting Brock over everyone is the reason no one is perceived as stars now. Fuck Brock. Don't get all this riding him when he doesn't move the needle either. Yeah let's just let him go over the roster all over again to gain 100k in views. Talk about short term solutions.


----------



## SPCDRI

Ace said:


> Yikes :lmao
> This isn't for a Raw, SD or a brand PPV, it's a dual brand PPV :lmao


Every singles belt in the company barring the Intercontinental title was on the line and Daniel Bryan was in a tag team title match in Tacoma, Washington and they still had to lay the tarps.


----------



## kingnoth1n

*The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*










And people call AEW "Indy" with the velocity they are selling out shows and the price of ticket resells. So much for Pissant Trip.
:heston :buried


----------



## Qudhufo

*Re: The STATE of these Crowds Man -Pics of Raw Crowd-*

Man that was depressing to look at


----------



## Arktik

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

It's not really shocking. Even at the "New Years" Raw in Detroit that I went to the building was maybe 2/3rds full and that is in a relatively strong wrestling market.


----------



## TheLooseCanon

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

Good little TNA crowd right there.

That moment when 'bingo halls' sold more.


----------



## Coyotex

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

good....empty seats are the best way to send a message


----------



## ScottishPsychopath

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

That's some WWF 1995 level shit right there.


----------



## ClintDagger

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

Not only are they sparse, but there is no enthusiasm from those that are there. I hear people ooh and ahh at “the pop” that wrestler x or wrestler y is getting and I’m like WTF? Nobody is getting a pop. All you can hear is blaring music.


----------



## kingnoth1n

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



ClintDagger said:


> Not only are they sparse, but there is no enthusiasm from those that are there. I hear people ooh and ahh at “the pop” that wrestler x or wrestler y is getting and I’m like WTF? Nobody is getting a pop. All you can hear is blaring music.


Rite. No wonder the crowd tonight was quiet as fuck....because no one was there! :vincecry


----------



## deathvalleydriver2

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

When you have two geek world champions. With one being boring and having an annoying voice and the other being a fruitcake who throws pancakes and is being given a Superman type booking and a woman calling herself The Man and dating the chipmunk sounding idiot Rollins that tends to run people away. I’ve pretty much given up on this product too. What straight man would want to watch The new day and their weird antics with his girlfriend for instance? Big E is creepy. Kofi is a scrub and Xavier is trash. Also the fact that the main feuds heading into the summer is Corbin/Lacey vs Seth/Becky and Shane vs Roman is absolutely atrocious. Hopefully Joe takes the title off of that scrub Kofi to restore some legitimacy to the title. Also the wildcard rule blows.


----------



## Kratosx23

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



Coyotex said:


> good....empty seats are the best way to send a message


It would appear that we're the worst players to ever play the telephone game, because our message has clearly been lost in translation.


----------



## MontyCora

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



deathvalleydriver2 said:


> When you have two geek world champions. With one being boring and having an annoying voice and the other being a fruitcake who throws pancakes and is being given a Superman type booking and a woman calling herself The Man and dating the chipmunk sounding idiot Rollins that tends to run people away. I’ve pretty much given up on this product too. What straight man would want to watch The new day and their weird antics with his girlfriend for instance? Big E is creepy. Kofi is a scrub and Xavier is trash. Also the fact that the main feuds heading into the summer is Corbin/Lacey vs Seth/Becky and Shane vs Roman is absolutely atrocious. Hopefully Joe takes the title off of that scrub Kofi to restore some legitimacy to the title. Also the wildcard rule blows.


Jesus CHRIST guys, get this in your head! Who cares who the world champ is? THE ENTIRE SHOW SUCKS TOP TO BOTTOM. Every inch of every show is the same level of geek losers and it's not the talent. 

This is the same company that creates the amazing NXT, and the opening of any Takeover is more exciting than any RAW match. It's not about the Champions.


----------



## rexmundi

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

WWE may need to look for smaller venues if this continues. Coming soon to a state fair near you. :lol


----------



## Fearless Viper

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

Good for those people for not wasting their money on a shitty product but sad for those who spend on it anyway. :vince$


----------



## Ace

:sodone


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

But... But I heard for years that Rollins was some megastar in waiting. Hmmmm, weird that he's on top for the ratings being in the shitter when he's meant to be so amazing.


----------



## RainmakerV2

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



Eva MaRIHyse said:


> But... But I heard for years that Rollins was some megastar in waiting. Hmmmm, weird that he's on top for the ratings being in the shitter when he's meant to be so amazing.


You gotta get the titles off Rollins and Kofi. Even if you dont think its their fault, you gotta try something else to get some momentum and interest back, especially with the FOX move coming. Vince gave the smarks their Mania. Seth, Kofi and Becky all won. It hasnt worked. Its time to move on. Dont wanna put it on Corbin? Fine. Put it on Strowman, Lashley, who gives a fuck. And for the LOVE OF GOD let Joe beat Kofi and Ill never talk shit about Vince again, I swear. 


Its time to move on. The experiment failed.


----------



## Typical Cena Fan

“It’s a work”!!!

Source ‘the bearded one’s on this forum’

Nobody wants gimmicks and larger then life gimmicks. They want Indy midgets who do flips and people with bods like the average beardo

Rambling Rabbit, Bray Wyatt, Mysterio and Bork are the only stars they have.


----------



## RavishingRickRules

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

Do people honestly think Baron Corbin is going to turn things around... :lmao


----------



## Jman55

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



RavishingRickRules said:


> Do people honestly think Baron Corbin is going to turn things around... :lmao


Holy shit you're alive :lol

But yeah look it isn't Rollins' fault that the ratings suck and if anyone blames Corbin if he were to get the title and the ratings continue to suck then they're also wrong regardless how you feel about Corbin as a talent cause no one talent is the cause it's the whole show being mostly trash now in pretty much every aspect. (at least from what I keep reading it's trash haven't watched a weekly show in months and didn't bother watching stomping grounds I just know the results).

My god those pictures are sad to see though considering I used to enjoy this company and now they're at this stage of things.


----------



## kingnoth1n

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

I'd rather see these guys maining over Corbin and Rollins:


----------



## Draykorinee

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

They are coming to my area for a weekend gig thing and its like £300+, no fucking chance.


----------



## Freelancer

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

That's pretty bad. They should go back to booking smaller venues like when RAW first came on tv.

Congrats Vince, you've achieved a TNA size crowd.


----------



## #BestForBusiness

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

It's such good shit!!!


----------



## ellthom

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

I remember one of the In Your House shows from 1995 looking that bad, bet Undertaker got flashbacks seeing that lol.


----------



## r055co

hahahahahahahaha!!!!!


----------



## Rookie of the Year

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

It's not the stars. Rollins was a main eventer in 2015 and things weren't this bad. Kofi got big in 2009, it wasn't this bad.

It comes down to dumb creative. I've been watching since 1998. The PG rating and guest host BS got me to dwindle my viewing down to Rumble and Mania for a few years. Then I was back in with Brock's return.

I haven't watched a full Raw or Smackdown since maybe a couple of weeks after the Superstar Shakeup. Still watch the PPVs, but they're lazy as shit booking wise. That Rollins vs. Corbin "main event" was telegraphed within an inch of its life by Michael Cole, who forced down our throats that Becky and Seth are an item before Lynch could even get in the ring for her opening match.

Lazy creative. The Superstar Shake-Up. Was meant to be across one week, on both Raw and Smackdown. It somehow stretched to three weeks, with a bunch of auxillary trades, because who the fuck cares, right? Then the "wildcard rule". 3 wrestlers can swap shows every Raw and Smackdown. Why? Err, BECAUSE. And now it's FOUR wrestlers. Why? DON'T ASK QUESTIONS, DAMMIT. ALSO, USOS COUNT AS ONE. SO DO NEW DAY. FUCK YOU.

If WWE can't keep their stories straight and logical week to week, it shows a complete disregard- they don't care one iota about their own stories. And sure, there's been lazy writing/booking in the past, but I genuinely can't remember a time when they were this blatant in not giving a fuck.

If WWE don't give a fuck, why should I? That's coming from a fan of 20+ years. Fans that have been around 10 years might not bother breaking it down like this. Fans that have been around 5 years, wouldn't probably post about wrestling on forums. Fans that have been around less than 5 years, are already out the door and found something new to watch.

That's why arenas are empty. That's why WWE are playing Tetris with their crowds, rearranging them and using strategic camera angles to make sure the places don't look empty on TV. Put it this way- WWE tour Australia yearly, right? This is the first year, as an adult making plenty of his own money, still a big wrestling fan... and I've got no interest in buying a ticket. I'd sooner buy a ticket to my local indy- which I have and will continue to do in the future.

WWE really need to get their shit together.


----------



## Bxstr

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

B-b-b-b-b-ut Seth gets "pops" every week he is soooo over!!!!
:lol


----------



## looper007

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



Arktik said:


> It's not really shocking. Even at the "New Years" Raw in Detroit that I went to the building was maybe 2/3rds full and that is in a relatively strong wrestling market.


Die hard WWE fan's won't want to admit it's been like this for 4 to 5 years now. Put out shoddy product, it will keep the fan's away. I said it for years that if you give wrestling fan's a good product to quote the film Field of Dreams "they will come". That's why AEW been on the scene is great for the wrestling fan. 

It must be soul destroying for the talent, I'm sure most aren't like Rollins right now. They know it's not perfect and just seen lesser crowds weekly is going to knock morale.


----------



## Eva MaRIHyse

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



RainmakerV2 said:


> You gotta get the titles off Rollins and Kofi. Even if you dont think its their fault, you gotta try something else to get some momentum and interest back, especially with the FOX move coming. Vince gave the smarks their Mania. Seth, Kofi and Becky all won. It hasnt worked. Its time to move on. Dont wanna put it on Corbin? Fine. Put it on Strowman, Lashley, who gives a fuck. And for the LOVE OF GOD let Joe beat Kofi and Ill never talk shit about Vince again, I swear.
> 
> 
> Its time to move on. The experiment failed.


100%. Even if someone is a big Rollins, Lynch, etc fan, at this point its pretty obvious they're not drawing people in or even stopping the "bleeding". Continuing on with something that clearly isn't working is just stupid. They need to do something else, put someone else at the top.

At this point is a heel who draws heat really so much worse than a babyface that draws overall apathy?

But people will bitch and moan about Corbin and Lacey and claim they'll kill the ratings that the Indy Heros have already butchered, then turn around and act like you cant pin the current ratings on Rollins and co.


----------



## DammitChrist

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



Bxstr said:


> B-b-b-b-b-ut Seth gets "pops" every week he is soooo over!!!!
> :lol


Taking this out on Seth Rollins, and ignoring his weekly pops :mj4


----------



## Tk Adeyemi

Why do people keep blaming Becky? Traditionally women don’t move ratings. Ronda was champion for a year and they did their lowest ratings ever. Becky has only been champion for 2 months. Yea there are other metrics that are used. She’s the most over star in the company and the top merch mover in wwe. For a women who got a push a few months ago she’s doing her job in a awesome way but she’s not supported well by the male champions.
We have to look at the top 2 male champions though, now that I agree with. Vince needs to go cos the whole show sucks.


----------



## DoolieNoted

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

Changing who holds the baubles isn't going to fix anything.

"Rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic" springs to mind.


----------



## Papadoc81

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

You can only deliver mediocrity for so long before a fanbase gets fed up and looks elsewhere for their entertainment. I'm still in shock it took so long.


----------



## Phee

Where are these pics from? I can't find anything online.


----------



## Buster Baxter

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

Best pro wrestling on the planet.


----------



## RavishingRickRules

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



Jman55 said:


> Holy shit you're alive :lol


Yeah. I'd pretty much given up on wrestling tbh so I was off the forum for a while, then AEW happened and I came back to get all the news/info etc. It's amazing how far things have fallen if Baron Corbin and Lacey are who people think are going to turn things around for WWE :lmao


----------



## Beatles123

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



RainmakerV2 said:


> You gotta get the titles off Rollins and Kofi. Even if you dont think its their fault, you gotta try something else to get some momentum and interest back, especially with the FOX move coming. Vince gave the smarks their Mania. Seth, Kofi and Becky all won. It hasnt worked. Its time to move on. Dont wanna put it on Corbin? Fine. Put it on Strowman, Lashley, who gives a fuck. And for the LOVE OF GOD let Joe beat Kofi and Ill never talk shit about Vince again, I swear.
> 
> 
> Its time to move on. The experiment failed.


Vince gave NOTHING. People wanted them to win, and be USED WELL! not whored out until they were stale!


----------



## Freelancer

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



Buster Baxter said:


> Best pro wrestling on the planet.


You know he couldn't keep a straight face when typing that.


----------



## promoter2003

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

The arrogance is coming back to haunt them. Just like that theory I always argued that WM won't always be a guarantee sell out. If Vince didn't stack the card with bringing back the legends the crowds at the events wouldn't be the same in the last few years at Mania. It's a band aid.


----------



## bradatar

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

[WOR] Last night's RAW attendance around 3500 people, the weakest RAW crowd in years
Source: Latest WOR, around the 8 minute mark.

Dave doesn't know the exact date of the last RAW that did worse than this (will probably be included in the next Observer) but knows it's the worst one in a long time. It even did lower than most SmackDown shows last year.


----------



## promoter2003

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



bradatar said:


> [WOR] *Last night's RAW attendance around 3500 people, the weakest RAW crowd in years*
> Source: Latest WOR, around the 8 minute mark.
> 
> Dave doesn't know the exact date of the last RAW that did worse than this (will probably be included in the next Observer) but knows it's the worst one in a long time. It even did lower than most SmackDown shows last year.


Is this FOR REAL? It's worse than I thought with this company now.

Yeah, they will just defend that by saying how they are making huge financial gains with Fox and Saudi Arabia.

The meat of the product is surely rotting no matter how much they want to ignore it(Well Vince anyways).


----------



## Freelancer

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

Attendance was only 3500 last night? Wow that's terrible. I was at the Raw in Pittsburgh right before mania, and the crowd was nowhere that small. Granted that was right before WM though. Keep chasing away the fans Vince.......


----------



## Brodus Clay

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

Seriously, who wants to pay to see Becky's boyfriend?, that shit its lame.


----------



## TripleG

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

Yikes!


----------



## Kishido

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

They absolutely deserve it but hey Taker is back.

Next week the nWo will come back and Kane


----------



## ClintDagger

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

Becky, Seth, and Kofi are huge failures. And that’s ok, you had to try. What’s not ok is that you don’t see them building ANYBODY up to try to come in and take their place. Roode, EC3, Elias, they’re all floundering. It’s like WWE can’t walk & chew gum at the same time.


----------



## TyAbbotSucks

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

Putting the title on someone else isn't doing anything, they don't have stars. People thought putting the belt on an active wrestler would do something cause they hated the part timer Brock holding it and nada. 

Baron Corbin is chasing the title, Cena buried this dude 2 years ago and people approved. Explain why I'd use a paycheck to go watch the dude?


----------



## Zapato

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

The thing I find hilarious is the attendance was that low and it was a night Taker decided to show up. Maybe he will realise he is done, Vince will realise and things will actually change. They won’t obviously, but hey.


----------



## NondescriptWWEfan

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

and those people only went to see alexa, roman and rollins.


----------



## ClintDagger

TyAbbotSucks said:


> Putting the title on someone else isn't doing anything, they don't have stars.


Hey, you’re PROBABLY right. But you just never know. You could get lucky and catch lightning in a bottle. You know what we do know? The people on top and being featured right now haven’t done anything to turns things around or even stem the tide. In fact, they’ve likely accelerated the fall and made things worse. WWE should be building just about everyone they haven’t tried yet up in anticipation of the Fall. If by next Royal Rumble Seth, Becky, and / or Kofi are anywhere near being featured performers then WWE has miserably failed in trying to turn things around.


----------



## llj

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

Pretty soon bingo halls will look more packed than WWE's shows. 










I guess Miz was wrong. Daniel Bryan WILL go back to wrestling in bingo halls again soon!!


----------



## The XL 2

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

They're at WWF 1995 levels of apathy now. I can't wait for them to run random high school gyms


----------



## virus21

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



rexmundi said:


> WWE may need to look for smaller venues if this continues. Coming soon to a state fair near you. :lol


Good lord. Impact Zone tapings look more alive than that


----------



## llj

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



The XL 2 said:


> They're at WWF 1995 levels of apathy now. I can't wait for them to run random high school gyms


----------



## Anoche

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*


----------



## Tk Adeyemi

It’s not the performers fault but wwe why don’t people see this. Perfect example Becky was nuclear over in November and they chsnged her character. She won the rumble and had a blood feud with Ronda that was lightening in a bottle. A feud everyone wanted to see main rvent wrestlemania and look what wwe did with it:


----------



## llj

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

The REAL FOTC:


----------



## raymond1985

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

So let me get this straight. 

- The lowest advance for a PPV in recent memory

- The lowest live attendance for a RAW in recent memory. 

Yet WWE continues to push the same performers who have contributed to these record lows? Yeah, makes sense.


----------



## r055co

Tk Adeyemi said:


> It’s not the performers fault but wwe why don’t people see this. Perfect example Becky was nuclear over in November and they chsnged her character. She won the rumble and had a blood feud with Ronda that was lightening in a bottle. A feud everyone wanted to see main rvent wrestlemania and look what wwe did with it:


Of course the talents are to blame! 

If you go to watch any performance whether it be a movie or a band, dancing or a fucking magic show, if the talents or performers are shit then they’re shit and the entire presentation of your performance suffers! If you have bad actors then you get a shitty film that nobody wants to see. Why do you think the biggest movies always hire the biggest and best actors? Because they are good at what they do and they can actually draw an audience. 

The WWE is no different, they have too many shitty actors who are playing parts in shitty movies directed by shitty directors and producers. Of course the directors and producers are partly to blame as well because they write bad scripts, don’t know how to best position their actors, don’t understand good dialogue, don’t understand character development, continuity and so on. The same analogy applies, you get good movies directed by good directors who know what they’re doing and shit movies directed by shitty directors who don’t.

This shit is not that hard! haha

Also explain to me what nuclear means in relation to Becky? Nuclear is Steve Austin or The Rock in the late 90s or early 2000’s, The pops those guys got compared to today’s crop of misfits is like night and day!

Becky playing tough girl, Ronda stuttering and fumbling her way around the ring and Charlotte just being there is hardly my idea of a main event everyone wanted to see. I sure as hell didn’t want to see it, especially as a main event. 

Everyone knows that that abomination was a PR stunt by the WWE so they could get their gold badge for progression and diversity.


----------



## Kishido

Zapato said:


> The thing I find hilarious is the attendance was that low and it was a night Taker decided to show up. Maybe he will realise he is done, Vince will realise and things will actually change. They won’t obviously, but hey.


The people haven't known that he will show up even if I agree that he has to retire


----------



## PresidentGasman

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

I honestly wonder if Vince even realizes how low the ticket sales are and if he does is he angry about it ?


----------



## J0nMoxley

Only people that still calling Aew a indy show are people that either stan for wwe or people that pretends they are fans of "competition"


----------



## llj

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



Tk Adeyemi said:


> It’s not the performers fault but wwe why don’t people see this. Perfect example Becky was nuclear over in November and they chsnged her character. She won the rumble and had a blood feud with Ronda that was lightening in a bottle. A feud everyone wanted to see main rvent wrestlemania and look what wwe did with it:


Even before they ruined Becky's character (allegedly at least) the numbers were trending downwards as they shifted their focus to the Ronda/Becky stuff. And they nosedived further as the storyline rose to prominence. So this was already happening even before Charlotte was inserted into the thing.

So whatever it is, while the crowds may have been hot for Becky/Ronda stuff, the actual numbers were still trending downward, which suggests a clear divide between the core WWE audience (which is smaller now than ever) and the channel flippers/casual wrestling followers who just said "No" to where the company was heading with the women's stuff.

It's clear Becky is very popular with the core WWE audience. The big question is if she is grabbing anyone outside of that core audience.

To illustrate, let's say for instance the demographic pie is made up of 10% diehards, 30% smarks, and 60% casual followers who only tune in sometimes. You can expect the 10% to tune in no matter what every week and show up for live shows. That 10% will cheer for Becky week in and week out so she is consistently the most over person with the diehard WWE fans. Having said that, you cannot survive just appealing to the 10%. If a multi billion dollar company is putting all its resources into some people, they need to appeal to more than that 10%. It's the same answer with merch sales. If nobody is buying merch except that 10% audience then of course Becky is outselling everyone else. 

Now I am not saying it's all on Becky. What I am saying is that now more than ever, the divide between the diehard WWE crowds and the actual wider audience out there is greater than ever. It is quite possible that the WWE can no longer put their resources into 1-3 people only and not turn off a large segment of the audience. They simply don't have anyone in the company who can carry the company's divisions on their own.


----------



## Papadoc81

ClintDagger said:


> Hey, you’re PROBABLY right. But you just never know. You could get lucky and catch lightning in a bottle.


Ain’t that what just happened with Becky & Kofi leading up to WM? Didn’t they have a chance with Braun not to long ago? Samoa Joe proved that he was THAT dude in his feud with Brock Lesnar and nothing came from it. Balor’s demon gimmick has been reduced to being nothing more than a cool ring entrance. Sasha & Bailey never reached the level that was predicted coming out of NXT. The Wyatt Family fizzled out because they were never booked to the level needed for that kind of gimmick to truly succeed.

I could go on & on. Basically what I’m saying is in the history of WWE never have they had a more difficult time in keeping their hottest acts from cooling down and fizzling out. Eventually you gotta stop blaming the performers and start looking at the problem more deeply than simply changing bodies in the main event scene.


----------



## Prosper

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



ClintDagger said:


> Becky, Seth, and Kofi are huge failures. And that’s ok, you had to try. What’s not ok is that you don’t see them building ANYBODY up to try to come in and take their place. Roode, EC3, Elias, they’re all floundering. It’s like WWE can’t walk & chew gum at the same time.


WWE is the failure. They're absolute neglect for creative booking and common sense is the failure. They're blatant insult of fan intelligence is the problem. It has nothing to do with the champions.


----------



## ellthom

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

I head there were under 3500 people in attendance too.. ouch.

time to move back to the Manhattan Ball Room me thinks...


----------



## Dave Santos

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



promoter2003 said:


> Is this FOR REAL? It's worse than I thought with this company now.
> 
> Yeah, they will just defend that by saying how they are making huge financial gains with Fox and Saudi Arabia.
> 
> The meat of the product is surely rotting no matter how much they want to ignore it(Well Vince anyways).


I think it's accurate. I made a post yesterday during raw that said the arena attendance was 
10 000 people. The stage area takes up some seating. The floor area adds some seating. But I also noted that the upper bowl was empty on the camera side and in a 10 000 people arena that must mean the other side of the opposite side of the arena was pretty empty.

It's more worrying that the arena is only a 30 minute drive from Seattle. If I was in to the product I would take the 30 minute drive, so would others. It's not a big time investment. Also don't have to worry about paying high prices for parking and traffic being out of Seattle.


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

Its just too expensive for such shit boring shows. Weekly shows are sooooo boring to attend live.


----------



## *Eternity*

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

They could always paint faces on the tarp to give the impression the show is sold out. :jjones


----------



## llj

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



PresidentGasman said:


> I honestly wonder if Vince even realizes how low the ticket sales are and if he does is he angry about it ?


He's aware. There's enough out there that suggests everyone in the company is aware of and worried about it.

The problem is Vince is past the point where he thinks he's the problem, or that the the formulas he has in place need changing. He wants to fix two flat tires with a screwdriver and a wrench instead of getting new tires.


----------



## Dave Santos

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



CenaBoy4Life said:


> Its just too expensive for such shit boring shows. Weekly shows are sooooo boring to attend live.


They are in this predicament at the moment. Keep increasing ticket prices to keep revenue figures, even though attendance may drop some more because of it. So the fans who stick with wwe will have to pay more per ticket to offset the loses for the decline in attendance.


----------



## Freelancer

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

I've been saying for years now that Vince is eventually going to have a crowd CGI'd in so he can have total control over them. Now might be the time to do it.


----------



## CenaBoy4Life

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



Dave Santos said:


> They are in this predicament at the moment. Keep increasing ticket prices to keep revenue figures, even though attendance may drop some more because of it. So the fans who stick with wwe will have to pay more per ticket to offset the loses for the decline in attendance.


Every mobile game and dying mmo does the same thing. Jack up prices so the whales keep it afloat but they all die eventually.

When the fan base dwindles that much nobody wants to be last fan standing in a empty stadium. WWE needs to realize they are the shit traveling circus in town for the day and families cant afford to take their whiny kids.


----------



## NascarStan

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

I can't wait until we holding PPV's at Louisville Gardens again!


----------



## BlackieDevil

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



llj said:


> Even before they ruined Becky's character.


They ruined her character the night Asuka tapped her out clean.


----------



## The Boy Wonder

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

Just changing the game, huh Beckers? 

Don't blame Seth. Becky was pushed too hard. Now they're doubling down and pushing her more and hurting Seth in the process.


----------



## yeahright2

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



Freelancer said:


> I've been saying for years now that Vince is eventually going to have a crowd CGI'd in so he can have total control over them. Now might be the time to do it.


To be fair, I think it´s more Kevin Dunn.


----------



## llj

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



BlackieDevil said:


> They ruined her character the night Asuka tapped her out clean.


Maybe. But in kayfabe at least I could believe she could tap Becky out. Asuka has wrestled all over the world, took hard shots from guys like Minoru Suzuki, was undefeated for 500 days on NXT plus 7 months on the main roster, and is generally considered one of the smoother and skilled female performers in the world from a speed and execution standpoint.


That is one thing that I never got about comparing Becky to Austin. Austin looked like a legit brawler, and moved like one and few people in the company looked like they could beat him in a brawl.

There are a lot of women in the company who LOOK LIKE they could beat Becky in a brawl or a wrestling match. Becky is not as explosive a striker as Asuka. Becky is not as big or athletic as Charlotte. She's not as good an all-around athlete as Bayley. And I won't even go into Ronda who's just plain legit. These aren't things you can hide no matter how many Ws you give Becky. 

Benoit tapping out Brock was believable because Benoit looked like he had the ability to do it, even though Benoit was never booked as strong as a top guy. And Becky is nowhere near as fearsome as Brock is either in look or skill.

When you push someone who is more attitude than athlete/skill you have to use a lot of smoke and mirrors if they are less than slick in the ring.


----------



## ClintDagger

Papadoc81 said:


> Ain’t that what just happened with Becky & Kofi leading up to WM? Didn’t they have a chance with Braun not to long ago? Samoa Joe proved that he was THAT dude in his feud with Brock Lesnar and nothing came from it. Balor’s demon gimmick has been reduced to being nothing more than a cool ring entrance. Sasha & Bailey never reached the level that was predicted coming out of NXT. The Wyatt Family fizzled out because they were never booked to the level needed for that kind of gimmick to truly succeed.
> 
> I could go on & on. Basically what I’m saying is in the history of WWE never have they had a more difficult time in keeping their hottest acts from cooling down and fizzling out. Eventually you gotta stop blaming the performers and start looking at the problem more deeply than simply changing bodies in the main event scene.


I disagree that they had anything with Kofi & Becky. They fell into the trap of thinking what the vocal, hardcore minority were into would translate into the broader audience being into the same thing. But that’s a huge mistake. Kofi being champion is laughable to 80% of the audience. Becky playing wanna be bad ass when her opponent is legit bad ass Ronda Rousey is cringe inducing to more than half of the audience and that being sold as the top feature of the company is a turn off to even more of the audience. You can’t take away that Becky sells a lot of merch and her fans make a lot of noise. But if you get fooled into thinking it’s more than it is, as many have, that’s when you get into trouble.


----------



## promoter2003

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



Anoche said:


>


ARROGANCE just as I said in the prior post. Jericho or Moxley or Cody should post this on his Twitter lol. Makes WWE the instant heel in their beef lol.



raymond1985 said:


> So let me get this straight.
> 
> *- The lowest advance for a PPV in recent memory
> 
> - The lowest live attendance for a RAW in recent memory.
> *
> Yet WWE continues to push the same performers who have contributed to these record lows? Yeah, makes sense.


I said this before, but some thought I was being hard on the talent. The WWE is wrecked and it needs an overhaul. The WWE's way of training and building up the next generation is a flop in comparison to how the industry was before when they had OVW. The creative sucks, but so does the whole system including how the wrestlers are being taught to perform(they need to know there is MORE to this than just having workrate or meaningless moves in a match without telling a story).

None of these people are going to draw at this rate and this will continue for the foreseeable future. The Shield was actually their last real shot at developing guys in NXT who could become huge stars like Cena for the very least. Ambrose took off because he felt WWE is just too incompetent. Roman Reigns was a disaster once they got their creative hands on him when he was organically getting over. Seth Rollins is just a lame duck champion and hasn't really been anything great since he cashed in MITB to get the belt at WM a few years ago.

Some fans can turn their head and have a blind eye to WWE not being able to make stars the way they did with OVW with Cena, Lesnar, Orton, and so on. They also benefited from having the Attitude Era guys around like HHH and HBK who were on the tail end of their career.

WWE has been flopping hard ever since they have been trying to get Roman over as the New Generation world champion that they completely ruined the heat of guys like Daniel Bryan and yes even Brock Lesnar(who was much hotter before this whole debacle to get Roman over).



Dave Santos said:


> I think it's accurate. I made a post yesterday during raw that said the arena attendance was
> 10 000 people. The stage area takes up some seating. The floor area adds some seating. But I also noted that the upper bowl was empty on the camera side and in a 10 000 people arena that must mean the other side of the opposite side of the arena was pretty empty.
> 
> It's more worrying that the arena is only a 30 minute drive from Seattle. If I was in to the product I would take the 30 minute drive, so would others. It's not a big time investment. Also don't have to worry about paying high prices for parking and traffic being out of Seattle.


This is actually a red flag to Vince and to AEW to go in for the kill. WWE and the industry have been very lucky since 2001 with having some good years financially and having some legit stars save them from completely sucking. WM 30 was their real shot at a springboard to prevent what is happening now, but they blew it ever since.


----------



## Therapy

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

So the reports are saying 3500 paying fans last night. lololololololol. 

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## RainmakerV2

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



ClintDagger said:


> Becky, Seth, and Kofi are huge failures. And that’s ok, you had to try. What’s not ok is that you don’t see them building ANYBODY up to try to come in and take their place. Roode, EC3, Elias, they’re all floundering. It’s like WWE can’t walk & chew gum at the same time.


Bingo. Once Seth beats Corbin again who is there for him to even face? I would have said Joe but hes going after Kofi. Lashley? Drews a joke but maybe he pins Taker and gets catapulted up there?


Yuck.


----------



## deathvalleydriver2

Where’s the ratings ?


----------



## Monterossa

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

Hahaha they're TNA wannabe.


----------



## SMW

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

sad thing is WWE are still making money no matter what.


----------



## Therapy

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

The wrong way. People aren't buying the product. Corporations are investing in it. Eventually the bubble is going to burst. 

It's like saying you have an income because the bank keeps giving you loans and expects a return in their investment. 

WWE isn't bringing the returns. Fox has to be shitting themselves.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## SPCDRI

deathvalleydriver2 said:


> Where’s the ratings ?


I found them for you.


----------



## rexmundi

Ace said:


> :sodone


:heston Read this bit about raw's attendance. 

https://www.wrestlinginc.com/news/2019/06/this-week-wwe-raw-draws-one-of-the-lowest-crowds-655639/

Looks like nothing will put asses in seats. Tony Schiavone was a prophet just 20 years too early. :banderas


----------



## Ace

In early for the fuckery


----------



## SPCDRI

I heard Washington state is enjoying an independent promotion and overseas expansion boom and running pretty hot with promotions like DEFY, ECCW and a Japanese tournament that sold about 4000 seats and is running this August. That being said, you know the McMahon family is going to blame these tarp festivals on Washington state not being a hot place for wrestling. Whatever gets them to bed at night.


----------



## llj

I look forward to 4:30pm every Tuesday more than any other time of the week when it comes to wrestling content


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer




----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

*H1- 2.386M
H2- 2.315M
H3- 2.126M
3H- 2.276M*










*Viewership:
H2 Vs H1 ( - 2.98% / - 0.071M )
H3 Vs H2 ( - 8.16% / - 0.189M )
H3 Vs H1 ( - 10.90% / - 0.260M )
6/24/19 Vs 6/17/19 ( + 1.83% / + 0.041M )

Demo (6/24/19 Vs 6/17/19):
H1- 0.750D Vs 0.740D
H2- 0.740D Vs 0.710D
H3- 0.700D Vs 0.670D
3H- 0.730D Vs 0.707D

Note: RAW is 3rd, 4th & 5th by hourly demo & 4th, 7th & 8th by hourly viewership.*










*Viewership (6/24/19 Vs 6/25/18):
H1- 2.386M Vs 2.597M
H2- 2.315M Vs 2.679M
H3- 2.126M Vs 2.714M
3H- 2.276M Vs 2.663M ( - 14.53% / - 0.387M )

Demo (6/24/19 Vs 6/25/18):
H1- 0.750D Vs 0.840D
H2- 0.740D Vs 0.860D
H3- 0.700D Vs 0.890D
3H- 0.730D Vs 0.863D

Note: RAW this week last year was 5th, 4th & 3rd by hourly demo & 7th, 6th & 5th by hourly viewership.*


----------



## Ace

lmfao :lmao

2.3m first hrs off PPVs with no competition :lmao

Surprised that third hour stayed above 2m. Where is this in terms of all time lows?

Edit:
Last week 3H- 2.235M.

That's a 41,000 PPV bump :lmao


----------



## ClintDagger

Holy shit. Zero bounce from a PPV. Wow.


----------



## A-C-P

Looks like TARP got to the TV ratings to :bosque


----------



## rexmundi

What a lousy number. I do have one takeaway from this shitshow: I expected a supertank for the final hour but instead Hour 3 rating increased from last week. Therefore AJ and Kofi > Mr. Hour 3. :Cocky


----------



## Mr. WrestleMania

"Seth in the highest rated hour again! Confirmed draw!111!!!111" Pretty sure I've been told that's how it works. Nice 40K increase from last week.

:Cocky

:lol

:mj4


----------



## Chrome

Barely a bump after a ppv. Ooof, that's hard times daddy.


----------



## nWo4Lyfe420

Would ya look at that? Lacey's presence finally got Becky's boyfriend in the highest rated hour of the night :Cocky


----------



## rbl85

Last year at the same period there was no PPV right ?


----------



## llj

The real question at this point is who are the 2M still even tuning in. Or is it simply background noise while people are doing something else?


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

Wasn't bad like last week but still the ratings is still at it's all mighty low. :chlol


----------



## CRCC

This is a dying product.


----------



## Chrome

rbl85 said:


> Last year at the same period there was no PPV right ?


Yep, last year MITB was on 6/17.


----------



## rbl85

llj said:


> The real question at this point is who are the 2M still even tuning in. Or is it simply background noise while people are doing something else?


For a lot of people is an habit.


----------



## rexmundi

Funny. You take Mr. Hour 3 from Hour 3 and it's rating increases. Clearly vince was forced to put him at the top of the show, otherwise another record low Hour 3 was coming. :Cocky


----------



## Buffy The Vampire Slayer

llj said:


> The real question at this point is who are the 2M still even tuning in. Or is it simply background noise while people are doing something else?


I'm not going to lie, I leave it on so I can tune in to see Becky and after that. I go back to the game channel to continue playing video games.


----------



## SPCDRI

rbl85 said:


> Last year at the same period there was no PPV right ?


No, the go-home show to Money in the bank was the 18th of June and Extreme Rules didn't run until the middle of July, so June 25th was right smack dab in the middle of nothing, the start of the build to Extreme Rules. 

Rollins in a rematch for the IC championship outdrew anything on tonight by about 400,000 people.


----------



## raymond1985

Only a 40k post-PPV bump? That is dreadful. 

Nothing is working for WWE. It's a dead product. And everyone involved, from the booking team, to Vince, to Rollins, to others pushed in central positions, are all somewhat to blame.


----------



## xxRambo_21xx

time to strap AJ Styles again


----------



## RainmakerV2

Theyve obviously hit their floor when they have no competition. The same 2 million will watch no matter what. Now whether they're able to stay afloat when MNF comes around..thats the real question.


----------



## Fearless Viper

Vince is still searching for Cena to save the ratings but he just can't find him. :cena


----------



## rexmundi

For those who might know: Has there ever been a negative ppv bump? This was close to doing that with only a 40,000 viewer gain.


----------



## raymond1985

It's no wonder that attendance and ratings are reaching record lows. What is there to keep people watching?

Bryan Alvarez said that at the PPV this past weekend the crowd barely responded to Rollins or Corbin. They instead chose to chant just about everyone else's name during their match. That is how over those two are at present time. And this is with the live crowd that are dedicated customers. 

If WWE continues to push the wrong people, their business will continue to slower drop off until Football season starts. Then another chunk of the audience will tune out and not return in February when football season ends.


----------



## JonnyAceLaryngitis

rexmundi said:


> For those who might know: Has there ever been a negative ppv bump? This was close to doing that with only a 40,000 viewer gain.


Technically that wouldn't constitute a 'bump' per se but one instance comes to mind. And it followed a major A-PPV; SS 14'.

Brock squashed Cena there, and was handed a newly unified title by HHH and Stephanie in a ceremony the following night. This re booked him as the top monster heel after a decade.

This fallout RAW drew 4.19M viewers and a 3.04R. The go-home RAW drew 4.31M viewers and a 3.07R.

That's a drop of approximately 120K viewers. The overall viewership drop was nearly 2.8% and the overall ratings drop was nearly 1%.


----------



## Zappers

Having the Undertaker show up unannounced. That's how you get people to start coming back to the show.

Less preview, more unpredictability. Normally WWE media blitzes to death the matches every week for RAW/SD, several days in advance. ... STOP DOING THIS. People will more likely tune if they don't know the full card each week. Or when they realize they may miss something. It will take time, but slowly the ratings will rise.


----------



## ClintDagger

Zappers said:


> Having the Undertaker show up unannounced. That's how you get people to start coming back to the show.
> 
> Less preview, more unpredictability. Normally WWE media blitzes to death the matches every week for RAW/SD, several days in advance. ... STOP DOING THIS. People will more likely tune if they don't know the full card each week. Or when they realize they may miss something. It will take time, but slowly the ratings will rise.


I think appearances like Taker should be unannounced, but matches should be advertised.

And as far as predictability goes, you’ve got to have at least one surprising result on a PPV. When things are so status quo, you’re not going to get much of a curiosity bump on Raw. One of Becky, Seth, or Kofi needed to lose to create some buzz. All of them are expendable title reigns so there’s no reason not to pull the trigger on one of them.


----------



## Dizzie

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

When opened up the thread and looked at the first picture of a close up of the fans I thought this was going to be about the state of the actual fans in the crowd :lmao


----------



## rbl85

Yeah but if the only unpredictable thing on your show is a 50 years old man way past his prime.....that's a problem.


----------



## chronoxiong

Low ratings. Fans are refusing to go to the shows and WWE having to give out free tickets at shopping malls! WCW 2000 is upon us! AEW, save us from this disaster!!!!


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

"Best wrestling on the planet", amirite? :mj

Another set of awful ratings. How about that.

The fall is going to be interesting for a number of reasons and it's going to be entirely different from another promotion on the horizon.


----------



## The XL 2

They're pretty screwed come fall with NFL and AEW


----------



## Chrome

chronoxiong said:


> Low ratings. Fans are refusing to go to the shows and WWE having to give out free tickets at shopping malls! WCW 2000 is upon us! AEW, save us from this disaster!!!!


Now we just need AEW to become WWF 2000 to make the cipher complete. :lelblessed


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

3,500 fans paid on RAW :maury

Calling this the New Generation 2.0 era isn't far off anymore. We're literally in it.


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

its interesting that Triple H's "my friend mark" promo was also in the summer, July 21, 2014, the show after a PPV, Battlegrounds. The show had Brock before he wore out his welcome and was still somewhat of special attraction that could pop a number. That episode had over 4 million people watching. Its really easy to do the "we're gonna riot on the internet" promo when you're getting twice the viewership you're getting now. 

The past year has had the McMahons on air buttering the fan's biscuits and "pledging to do better."

Pride before the fall!


----------



## BlackieDevil

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



llj said:


> Maybe. But in kayfabe at least I could believe she could tap Becky out. Asuka has wrestled all over the world, took hard shots from guys like Minoru Suzuki, was undefeated for 500 days on NXT plus 7 months on the main roster, and is generally considered one of the smoother and skilled female performers in the world from a speed and execution standpoint.
> 
> 
> That is one thing that I never got about comparing Becky to Austin. Austin looked like a legit brawler, and moved like one and few people in the company looked like they could beat him in a brawl.
> 
> There are a lot of women in the company who LOOK LIKE they could beat Becky in a brawl or a wrestling match. Becky is not as explosive a striker as Asuka. Becky is not as big or athletic as Charlotte. She's not as good an all-around athlete as Bayley. And I won't even go into Ronda who's just plain legit. These aren't things you can hide no matter how many Ws you give Becky.
> 
> Benoit tapping out Brock was believable because Benoit looked like he had the ability to do it, even though Benoit was never booked as strong as a top guy. And Becky is nowhere near as fearsome as Brock is either in look or skill.
> 
> When you push someone who is more attitude than athlete/skill you have to use a lot of smoke and mirrors if they are less than slick in the ring.


I agree with every word you typed. My point is that Asuka tapped her out and she never mentioned Asuka again. If you are THE MAN wouldn't you be pissed at the person that tapped you out?


----------



## Papadoc81

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



ClintDagger said:


> I disagree that they had anything with Kofi & Becky. They fell into the trap of thinking what the vocal, hardcore minority were into would translate into the broader audience being into the same thing. But that’s a huge mistake. Kofi being champion is laughable to 80% of the audience. Becky playing wanna be bad ass when her opponent is legit bad ass Ronda Rousey is cringe inducing to more than half of the audience and that being sold as the top feature of the company is a turn off to even more of the audience. You can’t take away that Becky sells a lot of merch and her fans make a lot of noise. But if you get fooled into thinking it’s more than it is, as many have, that’s when you get into trouble.


The WWE fanbase in general is a minority. Ratings and attendance were still going down when Brock had the championship. You don't get more legit than him. What body can you insert as the new champion that's gonna suddenly get this runaway train back on track?


----------



## Chrome

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

That top-left pic in the OP:


----------



## ClintDagger

Papadoc81 said:


> The WWE fanbase in general is a minority. Ratings and attendance were still going down when Brock had the championship. You don't get more legit than him. What body can you insert as the new champion that's gonna suddenly get this runaway train back on track?


I don’t think just inserting a body is the answer. You need to simultaneously be building 6-10 guys and see who looks like they might be a difference maker.

And they squandered Brock on his first night back by losing to Cena. Then they destroyed him intentionally by ruining him in the fan’s eyes in the hopes Roman would get cheered. Brock should have been a huge difference maker but that ship has sailed.


----------



## ClintDagger

llj said:


> Maybe. But in kayfabe at least I could believe she could tap Becky out. Asuka has wrestled all over the world, took hard shots from guys like Minoru Suzuki, was undefeated for 500 days on NXT plus 7 months on the main roster, and is generally considered one of the smoother and skilled female performers in the world from a speed and execution standpoint.
> 
> 
> That is one thing that I never got about comparing Becky to Austin. Austin looked like a legit brawler, and moved like one and few people in the company looked like they could beat him in a brawl.
> 
> There are a lot of women in the company who LOOK LIKE they could beat Becky in a brawl or a wrestling match. Becky is not as explosive a striker as Asuka. Becky is not as big or athletic as Charlotte. She's not as good an all-around athlete as Bayley. And I won't even go into Ronda who's just plain legit. These aren't things you can hide no matter how many Ws you give Becky.
> 
> Benoit tapping out Brock was believable because Benoit looked like he had the ability to do it, even though Benoit was never booked as strong as a top guy. And Becky is nowhere near as fearsome as Brock is either in look or skill.
> 
> When you push someone who is more attitude than athlete/skill you have to use a lot of smoke and mirrors if they are less than slick in the ring.


Becky’s “The Man” thing worked when she was a heel. She could talk tough on Twitter, talk tough in promos, but then wrestle and win like a heel. When it started to get treated as her serious gimmick, it was never going to be believed by the overall audience.

As a babyface the Becky Balboa stuff is much more believable. The never say die underdog.


----------



## Tag89

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

time to lay the TARPS


----------



## Seafort

llj said:


> I look forward to 4:30pm every Tuesday more than any other time of the week when it comes to wrestling content


I was just telling my wife that yesterday. Tuesday afternoon has perversely become my favorite weekly activity as a wrestling fan, at least until AEW debuts.


----------



## raymond1985

Youtube views are interesting. 

Taker's appearance is far ahead of everything else. 

Behind them is a tie between R-Truth and Drake Maverick's segment and Rollins/Lynch's segment. So a mid-card segment is attracting the same amount of interest as the main eventers.


----------



## SayWhatAgain!

Unless they make *drastic *changes, I predict AEW beat them in the ratings within 1 year of their first show.

Tell me I'm stupid and there's no chance, I dare you.


----------



## deadcool

Ace said:


> :sodone


It's much much worse than what Meltzer and Alvarez have been saying all this time. I am actually kinda shocked. This proves it, Rollins and Lynch have utterly flopped.

WWE is a publicly traded company. Live event is one of their revenue streams, how come the stockholders do not hold Vince accountable for this?


----------



## Singapore Kane

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

What's Monday Night Raw doing in the Impact Zone?


----------



## Rise

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

I wonder if this is why bray Wyatt didn’t debut? Can’t exactly do his firefly thing with 85 people in attendance!


----------



## ClintDagger

Rise said:


> I wonder if this is why bray Wyatt didn’t debut? Can’t exactly do his firefly thing with 85 people in attendance!


I think the issue with Bray is what I’ve been saying all along. The vignettes are entertaining, but how do you translate that into the in-ring product? It’s just going to be the exact Bray we’ve always seen doing nonsensical promos and crab walking during matches. I’m sure this is where they are stumped.


----------



## Jonhern

deadcool said:


> It's much much worse than what Meltzer and Alvarez have been saying all this time. I am actually kinda shocked. This proves it, Rollins and Lynch have utterly flopped.
> 
> WWE is a publicly traded company. Live event is one of their revenue streams, how come the stockholders do not hold Vince accountable for this?


Because they are still making a ton of money, and come the fall when the new contracts kick in they will be making so much from the tv deal, that live event revenue will essentially be unimportant to them as a company, anything they get from the live gate is just gravy on top. 

Right now they make like $1.4 million from USA for each Raw and SDL. This fall Raw will bring in $5million an episode, SDL will bring in $4 million an episode. So let's say average attendance is 5k at $50 average price. That's $250k live gate. Doubling attendance only nets them another $250k, 1/20th of the money they are getting from the tv deal. If they do, that's great, if not no one's head will roll, it's not going to make or break the company. So giving tickets away is not a big deal for them, since the crowd is now just a prop for the tv show they are filming, they just need enough people to make it look good on tv.


----------



## SPCDRI

deadcool said:


> WWE is a publicly traded company. Live event is one of their revenue streams, how come the stockholders do not hold Vince accountable for this?


Not sure if its just the historic lull where people buy into WWE before WM and then sell off after WM, but the stock has taken a bit of a beating lately. 

Close to 100 a share, down to about 70.


----------



## tailhook

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



BlackieDevil said:


> They ruined her character the night Asuka tapped her out clean.


Botching the WM ME didn't help matters either.


----------



## Magicman38

*If RAW had an all female hour would it beat an all male second hour?*

I was thinking. If they did an all female 1st hour. And then did an all male 2nd hour. Which hour gets a higher rating? I’m not sure that it’s that different. Or maybe the women pop a better rating? Is that crazy to think?


----------



## CaptainCharisma20

*Re: If RAW had an all female hour would it beat an all male second hour?*

the males, none of them females are drawing rn


----------



## SPCDRI

*Re: If RAW had an all female hour would it beat an all male second hour?*

The reason why they dialed the women back majorly is WWE still has the quarter hours and feels women don't draw and the women's revolution stuff was a PR ploy and Stephanie and Triple H power trip. The second ratings pressure was on, women's booking got more than cut in half, to a point where sometimes it gets less than 15 minutes screen time between 5 hours of weekly programming. The women couldn't draw dollars with green crayons, people are just in denial about it.


----------



## M1M2M3M4M5M6M7M8

*If RAW had an all female hour would it beat an all male second hour?*

If they do a lesbian angle then I see the women getting the higher rating but if the angles they are doing right now with the women then no question the men will get the higher rating


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Machismo88

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

They don't always get the crowds they would like, but extreme rules is just under 1000 tickets until sold out. They will be fine.


----------



## Mordecay

*Re: If RAW had an all female hour would it beat an all male second hour?*

If Becky, the most popular woman in the roster by far and arguably the most over superstar atm is a ratings killer the other women have no chance to pop the ratings


----------



## deadcool

SPCDRI said:


> Not sure if its just the historic lull where people buy into WWE before WM and then sell off after WM, but the stock has taken a bit of a beating lately.
> 
> Close to 100 a share, down to about 70.


And it's gonna go down even more as time goes by.


----------



## reamstyles

Because they thought the solution for that failing ratings is wildcard rule, but it somehow worsen the problem.


----------



## kingnoth1n

*Re: If RAW had an all female hour would it beat an all male second hour?*



Mordecay said:


> If Becky, the most popular woman in the roster by far and arguably the most over superstar atm is a ratings killer the other women have no chance to pop the ratings


Well it depends on what they do, you telling me the internet wouldnt explode if they started coming out scantally cladded? There are doubters on this forum that say "Hur hur, if i wanted to see that id watch porn," but those guys are dweeby geeks that jack off to meltzer in the tokyo dome.

Now for the real men here lets be real. Peyton vs mandy bra and panty match....lots of white lace involved, and this is the main event and they end up in their skimpys on top of each other in a "fucked" finish. I know I would be up for it.


----------



## deadcool

Jonhern said:


> *Because they are still making a ton of money, and come the fall when the new contracts kick in they will be making so much from the tv deal, that live event revenue will essentially be unimportant to them as a company, anything they get from the live gate is just gravy on top. *
> 
> Right now they make like $1.4 million from USA for each Raw and SDL. This fall Raw will bring in $5million an episode, SDL will bring in $4 million an episode. So let's say average attendance is 5k at $50 average price. That's $250k live gate. Doubling attendance only nets them another $250k, 1/20th of the money they are getting from the tv deal. If they do, that's great, if not no one's head will roll, it's not going to make or break the company. So giving tickets away is not a big deal for them, since the crowd is now just a prop for the tv show they are filming, they just need enough people to make it look good on tv.


I am not sure how you came up with it. Let's be objective about this..

Running a live event or tapings costs money; you gotta pay the venue (which runs in 6 figures easy for tapings, and upper 5 figures to lower 6 figures for live events), state taxes, local payroll, etc. So if the gate isn't making money to offset these costs; that means that they need to break into another budget to continue running the events (meaning the TV deal money or WWE Network money). It's simple economics.

What I am getting at is that they in fact are bleeding money; and yes the TV deal is a temporary band aid for this problem (WWE did a good job of conning Fox and NBCU/USA), but if this keeps up, what media company will renew them for the same deal as they have now given their current ratings and audience? It's going to get even worse if AEW's TV does well.

Something like this should get the stockholders talking ($100 to $70 in stock price is alarming), and McMahon should be held accountable, and I am surprised that it didn't happen yet.


----------



## henrymark

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

I mean you have storylines that make no sense, direction or reason and characters that have no business being champion. Kofi Kingston being champ to me is like a Star Wars movie having Jar Jar binks as the main character. 

Take back in the day you had Kane's character progression from speechless monster, to talking, then to making friends and girlfriends before becoming so hurt he reverts back to a monster. It made sense character wise. Nowadays Bray Wyatt for no rhyme or reason goes from this ******* backwoods monster to dancing in playschool. Why? Give us a reason. Nothing about that feels like natural character progression. 

Guys like Elias are pretty much buried every week. Braun and Joe are wasting away in the midcard with useless segments. 10 years ago they would have had Braun work with Undertaker. New monster goes over the old guard to pass the torch. Now? He backs away from Taker in the only interaction they had. Again, why? No good reason other than "cos Roman is fighting him right now"

And nothing will change because Vince's ego is far too fragile. In his mind, it's the consumers and fans who are out of touch.


----------



## McGee

*Re: If RAW had an all female hour would it beat an all male second hour?*

With Ronda maybe. Without her no chance.


----------



## Chan Hung

They have a potential of doing really good but it's their booking that is horrendous I think if they had Ronda Rousey as well as other girls like yes even Nia Jax and other girls are taken more seriously this would work but right now it's just junk TV


----------



## Laughable Chimp

*Re: If RAW had an all female hour would it beat an all male second hour?*

If I remember right, the second hour and first hour don't have the same views so you can't just do a direct comparison.

However, this would actually be really interesting to do and would be one of the strongest evidence we can get of the relative drawing power of males between females. I would be very interested in seeing them do this at any point.


----------



## promoter2003

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



ClintDagger said:


> I don’t think just inserting a body is the answer. You need to simultaneously be building 6-10 guys and see who looks like they might be a difference maker.
> 
> And they squandered Brock on his first night back by losing to Cena. Then they destroyed him intentionally by ruining him in the fan’s eyes in the hopes Roman would get cheered. Brock should have been a huge difference maker but that ship has sailed.


I agree. They need to build 6-10 FRESH faces have half be heel and half be babyface at the very least(I actually mean NEW people fans have not seen before or do not have a negative connotation to them with all this bad booking in the last 5 years). It won't turn things around anytime soon though and we know they do not have any patience. Plus, they got that huge hurdle come fall time to deliver on Fox.

You have a point. Brock probably stopped caring as much after WM 31 too once he understood that he was being lined up to pass the torch to Roman.

Brock losing to Cena first night back and to HHH seemed all political and honestly I got why they did it. If Brock took off again, at least they could advertise HHH and Cena as beating him.

Problem is he became the long term champion, but they at least rebooted with Lesnar crushing Cena for the belt.


----------



## henrymark

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

Apparently this was Smackdown last night https://www.ringsidenews.com/2019/0...ats-they-wont-show-you-on-wwe-smackdown-live/ the second pic is most likely pre-show but the tarp is still going over clearly in the first pic brother


----------



## virus21

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

This will never get old


----------



## attituderocks

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



ClintDagger said:


> Not only are they sparse, but there is no enthusiasm from those that are there. I hear people ooh and ahh at “the pop” that wrestler x or wrestler y is getting and I’m like WTF? Nobody is getting a pop. All you can hear is blaring music.


:applause

Fucking this. Smarks brag about Becky and Seth being over and I'm like have you guys ever watch the AE? Scotty 2 Hotty got 10x the pops every week lmao. Reactions are so bad that Vince had to come out and beg the crowd to wake up. And PG fans have the audacity to claim that this shit era is more successful than any period prior. :deanfpalm


----------



## Therapy

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



henrymark said:


> Apparently this was Smackdown last night https://www.ringsidenews.com/2019/0...ats-they-wont-show-you-on-wwe-smackdown-live/ the second pic is most likely pre-show but the tarp is still going over clearly in the first pic brother


TARP-A-MANIA IS RUNNING WILD! These need to go in the official TARP thread in the General WWE section

TARP TARP TARP TARP!! GOAT :mark: :mark: :mark: :mark: :mark: :mark: :mark: :mark: :mark:


----------



## zrc

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



ellthom said:


> I remember one of the In Your House shows from 1995 looking that bad, bet Undertaker got flashbacks seeing that lol.


Is there over 5,000 in that Raw crowd? Cause that was the lowest attendance at a 95 In Your House (3 in September).


----------



## looper007

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



attituderocks said:


> :applause
> 
> Fucking this. Smarks brag about Becky and Seth being over and I'm like have you guys ever watch the AE? Scotty 2 Hotty got 10x the pops every week lmao. Reactions are so bad that Vince had to come out and beg the crowd to wake up. And PG fans have the audacity to claim that this shit era is more successful than any period prior. :deanfpalm


Attitude era had some amount of shit as well when you got past the likes of The Rock, Austin, DX, Taker and Mr McMahon as well. So let's not paint like everything in that era was fantastic. They had to give talent leeway and try anything cause WWF could have gone out of business.

The problem with this era is they can't get anyone over, cause the boss changes his mind every week, most of the writers haven't seen a wrestling show or actually speak to the talent they write for, talent aren't allowed to have their style of matches or cut their own promos and show their own personality. Vince pushes talent not ready or talented enough for the spots they are in cause they have the "Look" he loves. Also WWE today have to answer to sponsors, are under no pressure from anyone, and Vince is in a position he can do whatever the hell he wants.

When you book and write crap fans will gradually turn off.


----------



## Chan Hung

zrc said:


> ellthom said:
> 
> 
> 
> I remember one of the In Your House shows from 1995 looking that bad, bet Undertaker got flashbacks seeing that lol.
> 
> 
> 
> Is there over 5,000 in that Raw crowd? Cause that was the lowest attendance at a 95 In Your House (3 in September).
Click to expand...

I read between 5,000-7000 In attendance


----------



## ClintDagger

attituderocks said:


> :applause
> 
> Fucking this. Smarks brag about Becky and Seth being over and I'm like have you guys ever watch the AE? Scotty 2 Hotty got 10x the pops every week lmao. Reactions are so bad that Vince had to come out and beg the crowd to wake up. And PG fans have the audacity to claim that this shit era is more successful than any period prior. :deanfpalm


It boggles my mind. Becky comes out, you can barely hear the reaction over the music; you’ve got these middle aged men that make up like 20% of the audience going crazy, and meanwhile 80% of the audience is just standing there watching—and without fail I’ll see people in the viewing thread saying “OMG, that pop. She is so over!” And I don’t know if that’s trolling or delusion but like I said it dumbfounds me.


----------



## JeSeGaN

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

A 3.5K crowd. Some indy shows draw more than that.


----------



## kingnoth1n

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



henrymark said:


> Apparently this was Smackdown last night https://www.ringsidenews.com/2019/0...ats-they-wont-show-you-on-wwe-smackdown-live/ the second pic is most likely pre-show but the tarp is still going over clearly in the first pic brother


State of it man, the fucking circus drew more...and was more entertaining:


----------



## Freelancer

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



yeahright2 said:


> To be fair, I think it´s more Kevin Dunn.


Good point.


----------



## Typical Cena Fan

PG era rename it the ‘Neckbeard Era’!
<img src="http://www.wrestlingforum.com/images/smilies/redface9yy.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Embarrassed/Sad" class="inlineimg" />


----------



## Papadoc81

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



ClintDagger said:


> I don’t think just inserting a body is the answer. You need to simultaneously be building 6-10 guys and see who looks like they might be a difference maker.
> 
> And they squandered Brock on his first night back by losing to Cena. Then they destroyed him intentionally by ruining him in the fan’s eyes in the hopes Roman would get cheered. Brock should have been a huge difference maker but that ship has sailed.


And those 6-10 wrestlers are who exactly?


----------



## lesenfanteribles

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

That looks really sad.


----------



## Arktik

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

Anyone blaming this on the talent is a complete idiot. There is only one person to blame and I'm gonna spell it out for you: V-I-N-C-E


----------



## Jonhern

deadcool said:


> I am not sure how you came up with it. Let's be objective about this..
> 
> Running a live event or tapings costs money; you gotta pay the venue (which runs in 6 figures easy for tapings, and upper 5 figures to lower 6 figures for live events), state taxes, local payroll, etc. So if the gate isn't making money to offset these costs; that means that they need to break into another budget to continue running the events (meaning the TV deal money or WWE Network money). It's simple economics.
> 
> What I am getting at is that they in fact are bleeding money; and yes the TV deal is a temporary band aid for this problem (WWE did a good job of conning Fox and NBCU/USA), but if this keeps up, what media company will renew them for the same deal as they have now given their current ratings and audience? It's going to get even worse if AEW's TV does well.
> 
> Something like this should get the stockholders talking ($100 to $70 in stock price is alarming), and McMahon should be held accountable, and I am surprised that it didn't happen yet.


Why wouldn't the TV deal money be factored into a live raw and sdl taping? And I'm not talking about house shows, just TV tapings, frankly they should probably cut back on house shows since they are losing money on them. But TV tapings they are making money now and will be making even more once the new deals kick in. you are looking at it as a live event, like a concert. When in reality it's a TV set, like a sitcom with a live audience, you wouldn't consider that to be live theater and base its profitability on what people pay to get in, which is usually free for TV shows. that's because the live audience is not the target audience, its the TV market. Same with raw, its a TV taping first and for most. The costs of the arena and all the other stuff are sunk in for the production of this show, the audience just like that sitcom is there just to create an atmosphere. 

What happens in five years is anyone's guess, but people thinking they will not get anything are kidding themselves. They are still a top show on cable, and the fact they run year round is a huge plus that any network that wants to grow would want to broadcast.

And stock price, yes it fell from $100 to $70, but you forget that last March the price was in the mid $30s, and the year before that in the $20s. I think the stockholders are just fine with that.


----------



## InexorableJourney

Jonhern said:


> And stock price, yes it fell from $100 to $70, but you forget that last March the price was in the mid $30s, and the year before that in the $20s. I think the stockholders are just fine with that.


It's a declining stock in a rising market, it has no new sources of income, and every measurable factor is in decline.

Sell before the bottom drops out.


----------



## Brother_T

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

Maybe they could save some money and cut back on the electric bill by getting rid of that stupid lighting in the crowd. Great changes by default.


----------



## ClintDagger

Papadoc81 said:


> And those 6-10 wrestlers are who exactly?


Anybody that hasn’t had the title. Guys like EC3, Roode, Lashley, Cesaro, Elias, Drew, Braun, Bray’s won it but he’s worth another try. Build these guys up. Give them new gimmicks. The guys that can’t talk make them heels and give them serious managers.


----------



## BlackieDevil

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



henrymark said:


> I mean you have storylines that make no sense, direction or reason and characters that have no business being champion. Kofi Kingston being champ to me is like a Star Wars movie having Jar Jar binks as the main character.
> 
> Take back in the day you had Kane's character progression from speechless monster, to talking, then to making friends and girlfriends before becoming so hurt he reverts back to a monster. It made sense character wise. Nowadays Bray Wyatt for no rhyme or reason goes from this ******* backwoods monster to dancing in playschool. Why? Give us a reason. Nothing about that feels like natural character progression.
> 
> Guys like Elias are pretty much buried every week. Braun and Joe are wasting away in the midcard with useless segments. 10 years ago they would have had Braun work with Undertaker. New monster goes over the old guard to pass the torch. Now? He backs away from Taker in the only interaction they had. Again, why? No good reason other than "cos Roman is fighting him right now"
> 
> And nothing will change because Vince's ego is far too fragile. In his mind, it's the consumers and fans who are out of touch.


I THINK they figured that characters and stories don't matter any more because the die hard marks that are left only want 5 star mortal kombat matches.


----------



## Lenny Leonard

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

i know it won't happen, but i wonder what they would do if, hypothetically, not a single person bought a ticket


----------



## A-C-P

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



henrymark said:


> Spoiler: pics
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently this was Smackdown last night https://www.ringsidenews.com/2019/0...ats-they-wont-show-you-on-wwe-smackdown-live/ the second pic is most likely pre-show but the tarp is still going over clearly in the first pic brother


Another Banner Night For TARP, He Can't Be Stopped










That poor jobber never had a chance :hogan


----------



## LIL' WINNING FOOT

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

MONDAY NIGHT TARP :dance


----------



## bradatar

llj said:


> The real question at this point is who are the 2M still even tuning in. Or is it simply background noise while people are doing something else?


100% serious when I say I pay attention to maybe 2% of the product and I pay more attention to this forum then I do the show on Mondays/Tuesdays. PPVs I pay a bit more attention to.


----------



## ClintDagger

bradatar said:


> 100% serious when I say I pay attention to maybe 2% of the product and I pay more attention to this forum then I do the show on Mondays/Tuesdays. PPVs I pay a bit more attention to.


Same here. Honestly, you don’t need to watch the product to know what’s going on. They are so homogenized now that you can skim over a recap and know exactly how it went down.


----------



## Papadoc81

ClintDagger said:


> Anybody that hasn’t had the title. Guys like EC3, Roode, Lashley, Cesaro, Elias, Drew, Braun, Bray’s won it but he’s worth another try. Build these guys up. Give them new gimmicks. The guys that can’t talk make them heels and give them serious managers.


And you think that with WWE’s current creative booking philosophy those guys are gonna suddenly draw in more viewers? Change of gimmicks make no difference because Vince is still gonna be the one overseeing it. The problems aren’t gonna suddenly disappear unless seeing the biggest dudes in the main event is your only gripe. And if it is you’re just gonna have to get over it. Those times are over.


----------



## RelivingTheShadow

*Re: If RAW had an all female hour would it beat an all male second hour?*



kingnoth1n said:


> Well it depends on what they do, you telling me the internet wouldnt explode if they started coming out scantally cladded? There are doubters on this forum that say "Hur hur, if i wanted to see that id watch porn," but those guys are dweeby geeks that jack off to meltzer in the tokyo dome.
> 
> * Now for the real men here lets be real. Peyton vs mandy bra and panty match....lots of white lace involved, and this is the main event and they end up in their skimpys on top of each other in a "fucked" finish. I know I would be up for it.*


Advertisers wouldn't.


----------



## ClintDagger

Papadoc81 said:


> And you think that with WWE’s current creative booking philosophy those guys are gonna suddenly draw in more viewers? Change of gimmicks make no difference because Vince is still gonna be the one overseeing it. The problems aren’t gonna suddenly disappear unless seeing the biggest dudes in the main event is your only gripe. And if it is you’re just gonna have to get over it. Those times are over.


I don’t think I ever said it would absolutely work. You seem to be taking this emotionally and personally. I’m looking at it analytically. Vince isn’t going anywhere. Everyone knows that and it’s a long shot that they catch lightning in a bottle. But that doesn’t mean you don’t try. Take the guys that you haven’t tried before and build them up. Maybe you get lucky. I don’t see the point in treading water with proven failures Seth, Kofi, Becky etcetera if you’re not concurrently working on the people you plan to hand the ball off to next. As of now, it’s probably going back to Brock & Roman because WWE is thinking the same way you are.


----------



## SPCDRI

Its going right back to Brock or Roman, who will feud with each other, and possibly Rollins, and a McMahon maggot will insert himself or herself into the story to feel big in the pantaloons. Been going on for YEARS now and it absolutely SUCKS. Brock, Shield members and McMahons heat-thieving and barnacling and "clout chasing" are why viewership, attendance and mech sales are in the TOILET. To paper over this bombing, they'll try to rustle up geezers and stars from prior eras to bail them out. The Rock, Undertaker, Batista, Goldberg, Cena, etc. But guess what? We're going right back to the SAME OLD SHIT. 






I'm only here for the undercard and TARP.


----------



## Chrome

SPCDRI said:


> Its going right back to Brock or Roman, who will feud with each other, and possibly Rollins, and a McMahon maggot will insert himself or herself into the story to feel big in the pantaloons. Been going on for YEARS now and it absolutely SUCKS. Brock, Shield members and McMahons heat-thieving and barnacling and "clout chasing" are why viewership, attendance and mech sales are in the TOILET. To paper over this bombing, they'll try to rustle up geezers and stars from prior eras to bail them out. The Rock, Undertaker, Batista, Goldberg, Cena, etc. But guess what? We're going right back to the SAME OLD SHIT.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm only here for the undercard and TARP.


Nah, this deserves the special 10 HOUR EDITION:


----------



## ClintDagger

SPCDRI said:


> Its going right back to Brock or Roman, who will feud with each other, and possibly Rollins, and a McMahon maggot will insert himself or herself into the story to feel big in the pantaloons. Been going on for YEARS now and it absolutely SUCKS. Brock, Shield members and McMahons heat-thieving and barnacling and "clout chasing" are why viewership, attendance and mech sales are in the TOILET. To paper over this bombing, they'll try to rustle up geezers and stars from prior eras to bail them out. The Rock, Undertaker, Batista, Goldberg, Cena, etc. But guess what? We're going right back to the SAME OLD SHIT.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm only here for the undercard and TARP.


I actually think it’s going to both of them. Probably Brock gets the UT and Roman ends up with the WWET.


----------



## Erramayhem89

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*

They have to go back to the attitude or ruthless aggression style. It seems like they had a little fire lit under their ass the last couple weeks it seems it's been a bit more adult orientated but they are going to have to do more. They can't keep being safe like this or WWE will be dead in 3 years. When barely anyone is showing up to shows you have to change the product.


----------



## attituderocks

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



looper007 said:


> Attitude era had some amount of shit as well when you got past the likes of The Rock, Austin, DX, Taker and Mr McMahon as well. So let's not paint like everything in that era was fantastic. They had to give talent leeway and try anything cause WWF could have gone out of business.
> 
> The problem with this era is they can't get anyone over, cause the boss changes his mind every week, most of the writers haven't seen a wrestling show or actually speak to the talent they write for, talent aren't allowed to have their style of matches or cut their own promos and show their own personality. Vince pushes talent not ready or talented enough for the spots they are in cause they have the "Look" he loves. Also WWE today have to answer to sponsors, are under no pressure from anyone, and Vince is in a position he can do whatever the hell he wants.
> 
> When you book and write crap fans will gradually turn off.


I didn't say the AE was perfect. But you can't deny the crowds were hot every night. Even the lower card got massive pops and had undeniable charisma. Take any jobber from the AE and their reaction dwarfs anyone on the current roster.


----------



## looper007

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



attituderocks said:


> I didn't say the AE was perfect. But you can't deny the crowds were hot every night. Even the lower card got massive pops and had undeniable charisma. Take any jobber from the AE and their reaction dwarfs anyone on the current roster.


I agree with you on the crowds been hot, it was amazing. Not everyone had amazing charisma but if you move most of the guys from this era to that Attitude era they would have gotten crazy reactions too. Thanks to what Austin and The Rock did.


----------



## attituderocks

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



looper007 said:


> I agree with you on the crowds been hot, it was amazing. *Not everyone had amazing charisma* but if you move most of the guys from this era to that Attitude era they would have gotten crazy reactions too. Thanks to what Austin and The Rock did.





> cha·ris·ma
> /kəˈrizmə/
> Learn to pronounce
> noun
> 1.
> compelling attractiveness or charm that can inspire devotion in others.


By this definition, majority of AE roster had charisma


----------



## Tk Adeyemi

So u are comparing rock and Austin 2 once in a life stars in a once in a life time wrestling boom to others lol. Duh not even Bret Hart, cena, hbk got those kind of pops. She is nuclear over


----------



## Tk Adeyemi

No they won’t lol, men like me find that lame. There is more media and social media out let’s to watch hot women.

Let me ask u a question have u ever been to a live wwe show? I have been to many and she’s over with the entire fanbase. To say otherwise is completely ignorant and if u don’t believe watch our segment with Ronda. The ratings is the fault of Vince period. Also attendance has been falling hard since 2016. Just Type in wwe attendance in 2016 and you will see.


----------



## Papadoc81

ClintDagger said:


> I don’t think I ever said it would absolutely work. You seem to be taking this emotionally and personally. I’m looking at it analytically. Vince isn’t going anywhere. Everyone knows that and it’s a long shot that they catch lightning in a bottle. But that doesn’t mean you don’t try. Take the guys that you haven’t tried before and build them up. Maybe you get lucky. I don’t see the point in treading water with proven failures Seth, Kofi, Becky etcetera if you’re not concurrently working on the people you plan to hand the ball off to next. As of now, it’s probably going back to Brock & Roman because WWE is thinking the same way you are.


Other than EC3 you didn’t name any new guys that haven't been booked strongly at one point(Lashley, really?) but haven’t gone anywhere because of WWE’s usual creative weaknesses. And if by proven failure you mean by not drawing fans to the product, you might as well have a list and put everybody’s name on it. My argument is that no matter who you put into the top spot nothing is gonna change unless WWE completely change they way creative ways. Your gonna need a transcendent talent on the level of Austin to make a dent right now if things stay as they are creatively. In the last 10 years, WWE has had “catch lightning in a bottle” moments and have squandered it every time. To me that’s not wrestler issue. It’s a booking issue.


----------



## ClintDagger

Papadoc81 said:


> Other than EC3 you didn’t name any new guys that haven't been booked strongly at one point(Lashley, really?) but haven’t gone anywhere because of WWE’s usual creative weaknesses. And if by proven failure you mean by not drawing fans to the product, you might as well have a list and put everybody’s name on it. My argument is that no matter who you put into the top spot nothing is gonna change unless WWE completely change they way creative ways. Your gonna need a transcendent talent on the level of Austin to make a dent right now if things stay as they are creatively. In the last 10 years, WWE has had “catch lightning in a bottle” moments and have squandered it every time. To me that’s not wrestler issue. It’s a booking issue.


By proven failure I mean people pushed hard as champions for many months with absolutely nothing but a negative effect on the ratings. None of the people I mentioned have been in that spot yet (save for Lashley and that was many years ago). How do you find the next Austin if you’re not looking? I’ve got news for everyone, Vince was a moron with bad ideas 25 years ago. This isn’t a recent development. It’s just that guys like Hogan and Austin that couldn’t miss once you gave them the ball came through and bailed him out.

And it’s both a booking and a talent issue. You can argue what the balance is on that, but I still don’t see why anyone would argue against continuing to try other things unless people have hurt feelings that they got what they want this time around and the broader audience rejected it.


----------



## llj

*Re: The STATE of these "Crowds" man -Pics of Raw "Crowd"-*



looper007 said:


> I agree with you on the crowds been hot, it was amazing. Not everyone had amazing charisma but if you move most of the guys from this era to that Attitude era they would have gotten crazy reactions too. Thanks to what Austin and The Rock did.


Never mind 1999, in 2017 and early 2018 the crowds were generally hotter than they are today for largely the same roster. And the TV numbers weren't cratering at the rate they have been lately.

BUT, there have also been some changes in the main event scenes since then.


----------



## Zappers

ClintDagger said:


> Anybody that hasn’t had the title. Guys like EC3, Roode, Lashley, Cesaro, Elias, Drew, Braun, Bray’s won it but he’s worth another try. Build these guys up. Give them new gimmicks. The guys that can’t talk make them heels and give them serious managers.


What's interesting about the recent promotion of Heyman and new hiring of Bischoff. We may just get this. Wrestlers have a good report with Heyman, now that he has "more pull", their ideas may have a better chance of getting used now.

Speaking of EC3 pair him with Maverick. That's a no brainer. But to try something different....

Give EC3 a run, and give him a mini stable. For the first few weeks EC3, let him establish himself as a heel by singles matches, winning all of them of course. Let him do promos (he's very good at these), etc... Then for his first feud against a face(not a top tier face either. This is key, let him start mid card. Don't rush by going after for example Rollins), have Tyler Breeze do a run in and help EC3.

Then work these two, Breeze by his side during promos. Have Breeze win a few singles matches and tags with EC3. Short time after that, bring in Fandango (actually he should go back to Johnny Curtis) as another wrestler to help EC3. Boom there's your mini stable of 3 guys. It's a good slow build, don't rush anything. Works out too because Curtis is just getting back from an injury(no need to rush him). They all have the same style/look too, good fit imho. Besides, Breeze/Curtis are close and work very well together. Plus EC3 from what we see on social media gets along with Breeze too. It's a perfect match & chemistry. Off screen and on screen chemistry is key.


----------

