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

View Single Post
post #7755 of (permalink) Old 11-14-2012, 07:42 PM
OK Eggman, bring it on!
TromaDogg's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Liverpool, UK
Posts: 3,247
Points: 0
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Originally Posted by SinJackal View Post
Putting your lame childish insult attempts aside, your reply to me would be a relevant thing for you to complain about if I actually said all those things. I've never come on here and bemoan one of Punk's segments for being ratings failures. Feel free to check back in the thread, you won't find any posts stating that.
Yeah, OK. You don't actually explicitly state that Punk loses ratings (seemingly, that's your 'get out' clause if anybody ever confronts you about it) but you do imply that it's his fault that ratings go down whenever he's on or if they don't, then it's the other guy that's been just as much as a draw, at least with PPVs.

Originally Posted by SinJackal View Post
I usually give credit to the bigger star, most pushed guy, or guy who usually pulls ratings regardless of who he's put against. Then of course, on occaision. . .rare occaision, you can credit the storyline if it's a good one.

When did Ryback actually lose ratings since being put in the main event btw? The only time I remember him losing ratings on Raw was when WWE ran some Susan G Komen for the Cure commercial and a diva's segment right after Ryback's match and the tally was done for that block of 3 segments, not just Ryback's match.

I didn't see the HIAC buyrate, but I assume people are crediting him more than Punk since every PPV Punk has main evented when not against Cena (excluding this last one) has been lower than the normal buyrate. So if it suddenly does well, it's hard not to look at the other guy since the common denominator with Punk main eventing has been lowish buyrates unless against Cena.

But I do agree that it's stupid to credit solely one guy. In this case in particular, obviously Ryback isn't going to get huge ratings and huge buys if he went against someone like Health Slater at HIAC instead of CM Punk. Though Slater hasn't has Punk's push or had the title for a year.
You implied that Punk has been main eventing PPVs and this caused lower buyrates. I've already completely discredited that with a complete list of PPV main events for the last couple of years (Punk has only actually main evented 3 PPVs as WWE Champion in over a year, and in two of those matches he's been against Cena who's apparently a bigger star/draw than Punk is)...plus there's also the fact that since Wrestlemania 28 (which broke records), buyrates for every PPV have actually slightly increased this year too.

That in turn makes it even more laughable when you automatically assume that people would credit Ryback for a decent Hell In A Cell buyrate, due to the completely false implication that Punk has been main eventing PPVs and causing lower buyrates....I realise that you're a Ryback fan, or at least I've noticed that you seem to defend Ryback against criticism a lot, such as the post above and the Ryback discuassion threads, but that's just absurd.

Whilst this is PPVs I'm talking about and you're talking about segements on Raw, it really isn't hard to see why people would read you as someone who believes that Punk causes lower ratings. I kind of got that impression about you myself.

Apologies if I've got this completely wrong.

Last edited by TromaDogg; 11-14-2012 at 07:48 PM.
TromaDogg is offline  
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome