Wrestling Forum : WWE, TNA, Debate League, Wrestling Videos, Women of Wrestling Forums - View Single Post - **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

View Single Post

Old 11-14-2012, 04:16 PM   #7745 (permalink)
SinJackal
Lacing SCOTT STEINER's boots
 
SinJackal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,233
SinJackal probably won't be missedSinJackal probably won't be missedSinJackal probably won't be missedSinJackal probably won't be missedSinJackal probably won't be missedSinJackal probably won't be missedSinJackal probably won't be missedSinJackal probably won't be missedSinJackal probably won't be missedSinJackal probably won't be missedSinJackal probably won't be missed
Default Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by KO Bossy View Post
I'd just like to point out to SinJokel that yes, Lawler's return was the draw in that segment, not Punk. And the segment probably did well.

Now let's rewind. In the past there are lots of segments where Punk hasn't been scheduled to come out. Then he does, unannounced, same as he did Monday. Except that segment bombed in the ratings. Now in this situation, all of the morons who will do anything to discredit Punk, will suddenly blame Punk for how bad the segment did.

So...which is it? Punk isn't announced to come out and does + segment does well=Punk wasn't the draw of the segment, it was something else. Punk isn't announced to come out and does + segment does poorly=See? That rating was all Punk's fault.

How some of you cretins can follow such baffling, stupid logic is beyond me.
Putting your lame childish insult attempts aside, your reply to me would be a relevant thing for you to complain about if I actually said all those things. I've never come on here and bemoan one of Punk's segments for being ratings failures. Feel free to check back in the thread, you won't find any posts stating that. The only things I've said about Punk here were pretty much along the same lines, questioning people's thought process for solely crediting Punk for segments with other people (Vince, Cena, Ryback), and acting like the other guy was little to no factor (which is pretty much the most common post regarding Punk in this thread. Crediting him more than his share for everything good ratings-wise, excuse-making for everything bad).

I'm sure you're angry about seeing other people do what you're talking about, but don't lump everyone into the same category. When you reply to a single person, you aren't replying to "the IWC", I'm not their spokesman dude. Nor am I one of the people who talked about some Punk segment that bombed. Tbh, I'm not even sure what segment you're referring to that Punk bombed in. I don't remember ever seeing any Punk segments with ratings losses. I've seen some with small gains, but that's the worst of it.

But yes, if Punk comes out unannounced (mid-segment, not right at the beginning or less than a minute into one), whether it's a ratings success or ratings failure, it's not logical to credit or discredit him for the ratings. Though if he comes out at the start of a segment (such as less than a minute into it and is the focus of the segment, even unadvertised), he can be blamed if people tune out. If he comes out advertised, and ratings tank, then it's definitely his fault (or anyone else in the same situation). Of course, again, I've never seen a Punk segment lose viewers, though I don't check the ratings very often. Mayybe 5-10% of the time.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jotunheim View Post
aaaaand, reported, thanks for making my and mods jobs so easy
@ how mad this kid is for getting exposed for being a Punk mark troll.

SinJackal is offline