Wrestling Forum banner

Do Wrestlers Draw, Or Does the WWE Brand Draw?

  • Wrestlers Draw

    Votes: 251 39.5%
  • WWE Brand draws

    Votes: 384 60.5%
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

987K views 9K replies 852 participants last post by  Starbuck 
#1 · (Edited by Moderator)
For a list of the weekly rating dating back to January, please click here:

http://www.gerweck.net/tv-ratings/2012-tv-ratings/

RATINGS BREAKDOWN FOR THIS WEEKS RAW 4/9

Raw on 4/9 did a 3.10 rating and 4.29 million viewers. The show was third for the night on cable. The show did a 2.4 in Males 12-17, 2.7 in Males 18-49, 1.0 in Girls 12-17 and 1.1 in Women 18-49 with a 69.3% male skew. It was down 21% from the 5.46 million viewers of the week after Mania show last year, and last year there was no bombshell along the lines of the Brock Lesnar return on the night after Mania show.

In the segment-by-segment, Brodus Clay & Santino Marella vs. Dolph Ziggler & Jack Swagger lost 99,000 viewers.

Backstage with Laurinaitis with Miz an Cena, Marella looking for the Three Stooges and R-Truth vs. Cody Rhodes gained 255,000 viewers.

Lord Tensai vs. Yoshi Tatsu lost 415,000 viewers.

The mic work between C.M. Punk and Chris Jericho in the top of the hour segment gained 379,000 viewers to a 3.19.

Punk vs. Henry and the post-match with Jericho pouring beer all over Punk, as well as the quick Del Rio vs. Ryder match lost 169,000 viewers.

The Three Stooges in-ring segment lost 240,000 viewers and was the low point of the show at 2.90.

The Brock Lesnar interview gained 423,000 viewers.

And the Cena vs. Otunga match with Lesnar run-in gained 301,000 viewers, which is a very weak overrun number, finishing at 3.42.
 
#1,718 ·
It is almost truly indescribable how much WWE, John Cena and to a lesser extent The Rock have all seemingly conspired to ruin what should have been the biggest, most important feud the WWE had seen since Batista/Triple H. I'm blaming The Rock some because of the Portland Promo. I'm blaming Cena for his typical bullshit. And I say typical bullshit because this isn't exactly the first time he's shrugged off an opponent going into what should have been a mega-match. The final Raw before Wrestlemania XXVI, he actually undid all of the build-up (which at that time was very, very good) between he and Batista, saying he no longer saw the Animal but just Dave Batista and he knew he could beat Batista. Turned out, he more or less obliterated Batista in their feud, which wasn't by itself a bad booking decision since Batista was leaving but the feud was never quite the same. It became much worse after the duct tape incident at Extreme Rules. Then there was his shtick the week before TLC 2010, which demonstrated just how far the Nexus angle had sunk. Cena was sure he was going to win, he was going to crush Wade Barrett... and he did. Then there was last year's Wrestlemania build. For the first several weeks after Elimination Chamber, he made juvenile jokes about The Miz and Alex Riley. He and Rock continued their promo wars while Miz had to carry the actual present feud. Then there was the entire Survivor Series 2011 build-up fiasco, in which he singlehandedly crushed Awesome Truth like a couple of ants, belittled them and never took them remotely seriously. Now he's doing it with The Rock. I guess we can't overstate whatever CM Punk had to impress John Cena because he's essentially been the only individual as of late to escape this sort of treatment from Cena. (I'm not even counting Kane since it was filler but I'll be damned if that feud didn't have more depth to it at certain points than Rock/Cena does at this time.) But WWE deserves the most amount of blame.

They built The Miz up one year ago, only to systematically destroy everything he and they worked on. They booked Rock vs. Cena one year in advance and allowed the intrigue and mystery of the build-up to be undercut by their Survivor Series build-up, which looking back on it was a colossal waste. However, the most devastating matter today is that I have no idea why Rock is fighting John Cena on April 1. Why are they so hesitant to allow Rock to bring back to the table what started all of this, Cena's badmouthing and calling out of The Rock years ago? That is where this all emerged from in the first place. Instead, he's supposedly fighting for the people but as the feud goes along the people are being driven into Cena's camp. The whole thing is a gigantic clusterfuck of a mess.

The other problem, which I would argue is an even more pressing problem for WWE in the realm of ratings is that they have utterly failed to make people care about anyone not named Triple H, John Cena, The Rock, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker and from time to time CM Punk. WWE's #1 problem is inflation. Star inflation. Championship inflation. Case in point--the two world championship matches feel like midcard bouts at Wrestlemania. They finally started something great with Chris Jericho and CM Punk last week, but this week was a standard, pedestrian tag team match (playa) right in the middle of the show. Sheamus and Daniel Bryan's feud is at emergency levels of needing some nourishment. This is terrible. Meanwhile, they've stripped last year's pet project, The Miz, bare to the point where seven months ago he was a ratings draw by himself in shitty quarter hours doing shitty things and now he's always in segments that lose dramatic levels of viewers.

WWE is in trouble. Raw averaged 5.6 million viewers during the Road to Wrestlemania in 2010. Raw averaged 5.6 million viewers during the Road to Wrestlemania in 2011. Right now, they're one million viewers off. These are viewership numbers we could easily see in May. This is catastrophic.

The Rock/Cena feud has become unexciting for most casuals. I was talking with a few friends last night--individuals who watch Raw on and off, knew about Rock vs. Cena eleven months ago, etceteras--and they were all unanimous that they just don't care anymore. Rock as an icon has actually gone down in all of their estimations. Between his patchy performances, Cena's interactions with him, what have you, WWE's actually damaged Rock's brand rather than he clearly improve theirs (in terms of quality product, obviously he was a major part of their business explosion a year ago right now, including much of the WM 27 buyrate).

Last year during the early autumnal phase of what had been the Summer of Punk, I joked about WWE being able to fuck anything up. Well, it turns out that they are.
 
#1,720 ·
Repped for this great post
 
#500 ·
The thing is, Orton and Punk just aren't equal cases. Orton had been given a superpush for literally years on end culminating in a massive babyface turn and subsequent world championship chase throughout the entire spring and summer. And yet, at his most white hot in his entire career, Orton's taking of the WWE Championship in September 2010 didn't merely not budge the ratings in the positive direction, it coincided with a few weeks of steep ratings drops, which in fairness was in large part also due to the explosion of the new Monday Night Football season that year. In recent years the only world champion who's been able to keep the ship going strong in terms of ratings during Monday Night Football has been Cena. Punk's push was going very well until the entire situation became an ungodly mess thanks to the bizarre booking and writing with Triple H and particularly the way Kevin Nash was employed.

I love Chris Jericho to death, I love CM Punk, but if WWE is truly looking to book a Road to Wrestlemania feud between those two for the WWE Championship, I foresee weak quarter hours for a feud that will be viewed as a distant, distant almost quasi-midcard match for Wrestlemania beneath The Rock and John Cena. The only way to cement Punk at this point due in large part to WWE's botching of the Summer of Punk as we entered autumn was to have the feud everyone wanted, with a newly heel-turned Triple H. That would stand up as a worthy WWE Championship match and would draw strong ratings and would manage to not be utterly overshadowed by Rock/Cena the way I guarantee Jericho/Punk will be. Oh well. Again, I love Punk, I love Jericho (and I love Triple H!) but Jericho is not suited to put Punk over the top as a firmly entrenched megastar who can actually draw on his own. Triple H is.

Speaking of ratings, it was in no small part thanks to Triple H and, to give the devil his due, Kevin Nash (for a little while when his involvement had some novelty to it) along with John Cena and Vince McMahon before them that allowed Punk to enjoy very healthy quarter hour ratings during the Summer of Punk. Separate Punk from those guys and he didn't fare nearly as well. Naturally. Batista needed Triple H in the same way when they were about to turn the corner with him; The Miz (who's currently in fucking limbo in a go-nowhere "feud" with R-Truth) needed Cena and The Rock during last year's RTWM season before he could begin drawing well (actually better than babyface Punk--and that is partly because Miz received a righteous push through Wrestlemania season opposite Cena and Rock, whereas Punk is apparently destined to be locked in with Jericho) on his own as WWE Champion; even a guy who was about as close to becoming a draw on his absolute own, John Cena, back in 2005 when he was finally being given the ball, benefited from his onscreen relationship with JBL--and then, once more, with that symbiotic relationship he had with Edge by the time 2006 began.

Punk isn't drawing because WWE short-circuited his push opposite the absolute top names in the game (Cena, Triple H) around October, then rushed the WWE Championship onto him at Survivor Series instead of building him back up from the ground up all the way to Wrestlemania as a newly crowned face WWE Champion there. Feuding with a directionless Miz, an Alberto Del Rio who is not, despite everything, firmly established and in need of a character modification after a mere year and a half run as an onscreen character and now midcard Dolph Ziggler who's being given another obvious lame duck Royal Rumble world championship program ala last year on Smackdown with Edge won't do Punk any favors. The Laurinaitis storyline is stuck in the mud, and aside from that one very well-executed moment on the Jan. 2 show with Punk's verbal threat/promise to him backstage, has netted an almost complete void of anything interesting or memorable (it's the Jaws: The Revenge-level version of an original instant classic in Austin vs. McMahon at best). And Jericho, again, just isn't cut out to "make" someone a top guy forever. Triple H, of course is.

And that's why it pains me most especially as an ancient huge fan of Triple H to say that where everything began to go off course was when he exited the entire Punk angle in favor of having a feud with his old friend Kevin Nash that no one on this planet ever wanted aside from Nash himself. Nothing was gained from any of that. Nothing. Nothing. Meanwhile, Triple H turning heel would have been a drastic shot in the arm to a promotion and program in Raw that truly needed it and instead we're stuck with Punk and J-Ace acting like they're characters from Office Space or something.

Of course, nothing is carved into stone aside from Rock/Cena (and ostensibly Cena's inevitable heel turn which they foreshadow every week now), and it's conceivable that Punk can still do all right and wait for Heel Cena to go after him perhaps around Summerslam time, but I must say that if Jericho vs. Punk is the game plan, they've made a rather major misstep as that program, despite probably having some brilliant promos and leading to some fantastic matches, is not going to catapult Punk into the strata WWE needs and wants him to be in.
 
#5,271 · (Edited)
In the segment-by-segment, the promotion online and through social media that they were opening with C.M. Punk vs. Big Show led to a 2.60 quarter, the lowest quarter for a Raw episode in months. Ryback vs. JTG gained 63,000 viewers. R-Truth vs. Heath Slater gained 186,000 viewers. Sin Cara vs. Tensai lost 105,000 viewers. The Piper’s Pit segment with Chris Jericho, Dolph Ziggler and The Miz gained 516,000 viewers for the 9 p.m. start. You’d think by four weeks that wouldn’t happen, but it’s been ten weeks for TNA and it still happens. Jericho vs. Ziggler vs. Miz in a three-way lost 96,000 viewers. Backstage stuff with Shawn Michaels, John Cena and Punk lost 374,000 viewers. Eve Torres & Beth Phoenix vs. Kaitlyn & Layla gained 45,000 viewers. Cena & Punk vs. Show & Daniel Bryan gained 247,000 viewers to a 2.94 quarter at 10 p.m. Still not good for that time slot even with Cena. Christian vs. Damien Sandow lost 121,000 viewers. The contract signing with Brock Lesnar, HHH, Heyman and Michaels gained 431,000 viewers. The parking lot car accident and lights attack lost 394,000 viewers. And the in-ring angle where Lesnar “broke Michaels’ arm” gained 817,000 viewers to a 3.44 overrun.

That right there is all the proof you need. Even after a week long promotion through social media and other means, the WWE CHAMPION draws THE LOWEST QUARTER OF THE ENTIRE YEAR(I'm pretty sure it is). Hell even Ryback/JTG outdrew him by gaining 63,000 viewers over the shitty first quarter. Ryback is becoming a big TV draw.

I still dont understand WHY CM PUNK DESERVES TO BE THE LONGEST REIGNING CHAMPION IN YEARS? He clearly does not draw. What else has he done to deserve this massive push? Suck on Vince Mcmahon/Triple H's dick backstage? It use to be when the prestigious title was given only to the wrestler who could draw fans in thousands, when the wrestlers actually earned the title but now punk has completely killed the credibility of the championship.




:lmao Putting the title on punk must be the biggest mistake made by the company probably in last 10 years of WWE.
 
#6,512 ·
As I said to that Punk nut hugger when Raw was on last night. WWE has catered to guys like that for far to long and the product now is showing the fruits of that.
I think you would have to be a mental case to think RAW and WWE in general is any good right now. Last night we had Punk telling JR to leave the ring, then pulled him back. A couple of people were saying how great that was. Well thats cool that you think thats great but in the real world thats called nothing happening. And this nothing happening has been going on for ages. People are tired of the product and would much rather watch something else. The worst rating in 15 years is not a coincidence. The rating reflects the quality of the show, which was pure garbage.

The PG era has not worked and will not work.

In my opinion I think WWE needs to create a new show to appeal to the older generation. They can keep RAW and Smackdown for the kids but have a new show that is more hardcore, more adult orientated. You can keep guys like Cena and Punk off there but the other guys who get little air time and generally nobody cares about should be on there. Mixed in with new guys coming through.
Do not have just one guy be the man, make everyone equal. We need gimmicks, we need characters and we need a reason to give a shit.
 
#7,979 ·
Let's be very honest here. If John Cena was champion for the last 6-8 months or someone like RKO/Sheamus people would be ripping them for the ratings sucking. But because it's CM Punk as WWE Champion people are unwilling to pin any blame on him. The way the internet protects is very similar to how the media protects the President -- he can do no wrong and if there are problems its because of his surroundings.
 
#7,980 ·
Well, yeah. The same hardcore CM punk marks will have every slightest excuse ready to defend him, yet if it's someone like Sheamus, those same hardcore marks will rip him with the same crap they tried to defend CM punk against. This isn't new and it's the very reason this thread became a sticky. I'm surprised this still needs explaining, just save your time.
 
#8,715 ·


There are people in this thread who actually believe that Punk not being on the show in a prime role somehow contributed to a rating that is completely equal with all of the other ratings they've been getting lately. Almost like a 2.67 is something to be proud of because they think it proves some ridiculous point despite the mountain of evidence against it.

"DERP HEY GUYS, 2.67 RATING DIS WEEK! MORE PPL LIKE DA SHOW WEN PUNK ISN'T DERE HUR DERP!" Yeah, nothing shameful about a rating that is .19 of a rating point above the lowest in 15 years. Way to shoot for the stars. Soon the show might even be getting the unattainable 2.9s that exist only in legend. This company now lives for the day it can break the 3.0-it'd be like Christ's second coming.

I just...I can't do it...to fathom the stupidity...its impossible for me. And people wonder why the IWC complains about wrestling today-its because a 2.67 is now interpreted as a good rating.

Remember back in the day when Raw used to be able to pull off 4+ weekly? Shit, there was a time when anything in the 4s was considered low in comparison. Now? A fucking 3.0 has become the Holy Grail. Embarrassing. I don't know how you people can fight about this shit. Calling Ryback a better draw than Punk is like saying brown is a more appealing color of shit than green-its still shit, who cares? Punk is shit, Ryback is shit, Cena is shit, nobody can draw to save their lives and its gotten to the point where their big 1000th episode, that they hyped up for MONTHS before hand, drew a whopping 3.43 rating! It used to be when they could hint towards one thing happening the next week and that alone meant 5.0+. Now, they pull out all the stops, throw in everything including the kitchen sink on like...a weekly basis...and you guys are bickering about why a 2.67 rating suddenly proves all these crazy theories you have.

Ratings are in the toilet-that's the bottom line, and those of you who look for this hidden meaning that isn't there...don't get it.
 
#8,730 ·
There are people in this thread who actually believe that Punk not being on the show in a prime role somehow contributed to a rating that is completely equal with all of the other ratings they've been getting lately. Almost like a 2.67 is something to be proud of because they think it proves some ridiculous point despite the mountain of evidence against it.

"DERP HEY GUYS, 2.67 RATING DIS WEEK! MORE PPL LIKE DA SHOW WEN PUNK ISN'T DERE HUR DERP!" Yeah, nothing shameful about a rating that is .19 of a rating point above the lowest in 15 years. Way to shoot for the stars. Soon the show might even be getting the unattainable 2.9s that exist only in legend. This company now lives for the day it can break the 3.0-it'd be like Christ's second coming.

I just...I can't do it...to fathom the stupidity...its impossible for me. And people wonder why the IWC complains about wrestling today-its because a 2.67 is now interpreted as a good rating.

Remember back in the day when Raw used to be able to pull off 4+ weekly? Shit, there was a time when anything in the 4s was considered low in comparison. Now? A fucking 3.0 has become the Holy Grail. Embarrassing. I don't know how you people can fight about this shit. Calling Ryback a better draw than Punk is like saying brown is a more appealing color of shit than green-its still shit, who cares? Punk is shit, Ryback is shit, Cena is shit, nobody can draw to save their lives and its gotten to the point where their big 1000th episode, that they hyped up for MONTHS before hand, drew a whopping 3.43 rating! It used to be when they could hint towards one thing happening the next week and that alone meant 5.0+. Now, they pull out all the stops, throw in everything including the kitchen sink on like...a weekly basis...and you guys are bickering about why a 2.67 rating suddenly proves all these crazy theories you have.

Ratings are in the toilet-that's the bottom line, and those of you who look for this hidden meaning that isn't there...don't get it.
Is your mind not capable of rational thought? Must everything debase into "everyone's out to get Punk, must defend Punk"?

The fuck did you expect with the ratings? Instant 4.0's all the time when ratings haven't been that high in consistently in like 7 years? That number is irrelevant. And yes, actually getting back into the 3's will be viewed as a good thing because ratings have been in the 2's for several months.

You're trying to set the bar to a laughably high level that's higher than the show's probably capable of getting back to anymore. That way you can lazily pretend that any ratings increases "aren't a big deal" and "don't prove anything" when Punk's out of the spotlight. . .even though the ratings will visibly have gone up.

2.7 isn't shitty rating, but it's better than 2.2. It's called a positive trend in the right direction, rather than constantly trend downward until it gets into the 1's while people like you still foolishly spin doctor it to make excuses for Punk, or, like in that post, try to muddy the waters with nonsense about ratings from nearly 7 years ago before Punk was even on the Raw roster.


Ratings will go up and stay up for months as soon as The Rock comes back to inform us he's going to take the title off Punk, so long as Punk loses to him and the title stays off him. Watch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Choke2Death
#4,064 ·
Some more detail:

Hour 1
Q1 - 2.88 rating / 4.15 million <-- 1 minute of commercials; Vince/Johnny/Sheamus opening segment
Q2 - 2.59 rating / 3.74 million <-- 5.5 minutes of commercials; Sheamus vs Tensai
Q3 - 2.69 rating / 3.88 million <-- 7.5 minutes of commercials; Teddy/Johnny/Vince/Vickie backstage, Tensai destroys Sakamoto, Raw 1000th moment, Truth interview
Q4 - 2.76 rating / 3.98 million <-- 4 minutes of commercials; Santino/Layla vs Ricardo/Beth; Otunga/Vince/Kofi/Johnny backstage; Bryan entrance

Hour 2
Q5 - 3.39 rating / 4.96 million <-- no commercials; Bryan/Kane/Punk/AJ in-ring segment
Q6 - 3.40 rating / 4.96 million <-- 6.5 minutes of commercials; Fatal 4 Way match
Q7 - 3.30 rating / 4.82 million <-- 3.5 minutes of commercials; Fatal 4 Way match conclusion; Vince/Natalya/Cameron/Naomi/Ryder backstage, Ryback squash
Q8 - 3.30 rating / 4.82 million <-- 7 minutes of commercials; Steel Cage 'entrance', Vince/Hornswoggle/Cena/Otunga/Regal backstage; Kofi entrance; Big Show entrance

Hour 3
Q9 - 3.59 rating / 5.14 million <-- 3.5 minutes of commercials; Steel Cage match, Sin Cara vs Curt Hawkins
Q10 - 3.28 rating / 4.69 million <-- 7.5 minutes of commercials; Cara/Hawkins conclusion (about 1 minute), Triple H/No Way Out hype, Vince/Bryan backstage, Raw 1000th moment
Q11 - 3.50 rating / 5.01 million <-- 3.5 minutes of commercials; Heath Slater vs Vader, Make a Wish trailer, Punk/AJ backstage, Kane/Bryan entrances
Q12 - 3.49 rating / 4.99 million <-- 3 minutes of commercials; Punk/AJ entrances, Punk/AJ vs Kane/Bryan, ECW DVD trailer, SmackDown trailer, start of final segment
Overrun - 3.99 rating / 5.72 million <-- overrun = 13 minutes long, no commercials (obviously)

Conclusion: I feel sorry for American's that watch TV live... and it's pretty evident why certain quarters did not do as well (ie Q10).

Based on: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmDYF8g3iNQ
 
#4,081 · (Edited)
Thanks for the comments. Will do from next week, although I probably won't be able to get down the lengths unless someone uploaded the entire show with commercials onto YouTube.

Just a thought though. Obviously people tune out during the commercials. How many tune out? 2 percent? 10 percent? 20 percent?

I haven't seen anything specific here, but I'd say about 10 percent of people tune out during the commercials. Let's use 10 percent for example purposes anyway. Stripping the commercials out of the breakdowns give you....

Some more detail:

Hour 1
Q1 - 2.88 rating / 4.15 million
Q2 - 2.59 rating / 3.74 million
Q3 - 2.69 rating / 3.88 million
Q4 - 2.76 rating / 3.98 million

Hour 2
Q5 - 3.39 rating / 4.96 million
Q6 - 3.40 rating / 4.96 million
Q7 - 3.30 rating / 4.82 million
Q8 - 3.30 rating / 4.82 million

Hour 3
Q9 - 3.59 rating / 5.14 million
Q10 - 3.28 rating / 4.69 million
Q11 - 3.50 rating / 5.01 million
Q12 - 3.49 rating / 4.99 million
Overrun - 3.99 rating / 5.72 million

Conclusion: I feel sorry for American's that watch TV live... and it's pretty evident why certain quarters did not do as well (ie Q10).

Based on: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmDYF8g3iNQ
Q1 - 4.18 million (0.03 gain) <-- 1 minute stripped out; Vince/Johnny/Sheamus opening segment
Q2 - 3.96 million (0.22 gain) <-- 5.5 minutes stripped out; Sheamus vs Tensai
Q3 - 4.27 million (0.39 gain) <-- 7.5 minutes stripped out; Teddy/Johnny/Vince/Vickie backstage, Tensai destroys Sakamoto, Raw 1000th moment, Truth interview
Q4 - 4.12 million (0.14 gain) <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Santino/Layla vs Ricardo/Beth; Otunga/Vince/Kofi/Johnny backstage; Bryan entrance
Q5 - 4.96 million (0.00 gain) <-- nothing stripped out; Bryan/Kane/Punk/AJ in-ring segment
Q6 - 5.34 million (0.38 gain) <-- 6.5 minutes stripped out; Fatal 4 Way match
Q7 - 4.97 million (0.15 gain) <-- 3.5 minutes stripped out; Fatal 4 Way match conclusion; Vince/Natalya/Cameron/Naomi/Ryder backstage, Ryback squash
Q8 - 5.24 million (0.42 gain) <-- 7 minutes stripped out; Steel Cage 'entrance', Vince/Hornswoggle/Cena/Otunga/Regal backstage; Kofi entrance; Big Show entrance
Q9 - 5.30 million (0.16 gain) <-- 3.5 minutes stripped out; Steel Cage match, Sin Cara vs Curt Hawkins
Q10 - 5.16 million (0.47 gain) <-- 7.5 minutes stripped out; Cara/Hawkins conclusion (about 1 minute), Triple H/No Way Out hype, Vince/Bryan backstage, Raw 1000th moment
Q11 - 5.16 million (0.15 gain) <-- 3.5 minutes stripped out; Heath Slater vs Vader, Make a Wish trailer, Punk/AJ backstage, Kane/Bryan entrances
Q12 - 5.11 million (0.12 gain) <-- 3 minutes stripped out; Punk/AJ entrances, Punk/AJ vs Kane/Bryan, ECW DVD trailer, SmackDown trailer, start of final segment
Overrun - 5.72 million (0.00 gain) <-- no commercials (obviously)

Just to show the numbers are not plucked out of nowhere... example with Q9:

Commercials = 4.626 million (3.5 minutes - 4.626 million is from taking 10% off 5.14 million)
Non-Commercials = 5.30 million (11.5 minutes)
Average = 5.14 million (see quoted post)

And with Q10...

Commercials = 4.221 million (7.5 minutes - 4.221 million is from taking 10% off 4.69 million)
Non-Commercials = 5.16 million (7.5 minutes)
Average = 4.69 million (see quoted post)

And if we are to put the above in order of highest to lowest...

5.72 million = Final segment
5.34 million = Fatal 4 Way match
5.30 million = Steel Cage match, Sin Cara vs Curt Hawkins
5.24 million = Steel Cage 'entrance', Vince/Hornswoggle/Cena/Otunga/Regal backstage; Kofi entrance; Big Show entrance
5.16 million = Cara/Hawkins conclusion (about 1 minute), Triple H/No Way Out hype, Vince/Bryan backstage, Raw 1000th moment
5.16 million = Heath Slater vs Vader, Punk/AJ backstage
5.11 million = Punk/AJ vs Kane/Bryan, start of final segment
4.97 million = Fatal 4 Way match conclusion, Vince/Natalya/Cameron/Naomi/Ryder backstage, Ryback squash
4.96 million = Bryan/Kane/Punk/AJ in-ring segment
4.27 million = Teddy/Johnny/Vince/Vickie backstage, Tensai destroys Sakamoto, Truth interview
4.18 million = Opening segment
4.12 million = Santino/Layla vs Ricardo/Beth, Otunga/Vince/Kofi/Johnny backstage, Bryan entrance
3.96 million = Sheamus vs Tensai

The quarters in italics were 'filler quarters' where you can't read too much into them.

This is by no means 100 percent scientific, but interesting nevertheless.... ;)
 
#6,088 ·
Whoa, whoa, whoa...

I just took another look at Raw. I began my recording at 8:00pm sharp, so my counter was accurate.

Reading this, I'm highly amused:

"All the post-match with Bryan & Kane with the hugging lost 169,000 viewers and that’s at the 10 p.m. hour, doing a 2.78 quarter. That’s disastrous at that time of the show, as usually that’s growth and then people tune out. That’s the second time they’ve done the big long drawn out hugging spot in a key time slot and both times it’s bombed."

Um... no. Or, as Daniel Bryan might say, "No! No! No!"

The Bryan/Kane "overrun" and that is what I am calling it, because that is essentially what it was--an overrun from the 9:45pm-10:00pm quarter hour--lasted, at most, three and one half minutes past 10:00pm. What followed that? A tedious "Be A Star" video package with Big Show telling kids to not be bullies and be nice to one another, and a big, long commercial break until about 10:08pm or so, at which time Randy Orton started to come out for the Orton/Tensai match, which concluded at 10:17pm, or thereabouts, overrunning from the 10:00pm-10:15pm quarter hour into the 10:15pm-10:30pm quarter hour.

That makes this "analysis" of the next quarter hour's "failing," or whatever one wishes to call it, all the more amusing:

"Randy Orton vs. Tensai lost 150,000 viewers."

Um... what? As I just stated, Orton/Tensai went into the 10:00pm-10:30pm quarter hour by... a whopping two fucking minutes. Who writes this shit?

As for the 10:00pm-10:15pm quarter hour, is it really such a risky proposition to make the assumption that the primary cause for the ratings hemorrhage was the overlong, boring "Be A Star" video package and lengthy commercial break, rather than the 210 seconds (or so) of Kane and Bryan doing their "Hug It Out" shtick after the tag team match with Air Truth? And maybe, just maybe, nobody gives a damn about Tensai. But even so... Blaming Orton/Tensai for the loss in the 10:15pm-10:30pm quarter hour is simply hilariously off the mark, too, as that match concluded at approximately 10:17pm. That leaves thirteen whole minutes in that quarter hour to be held in judgment and/or analysis.
 
#6,100 ·
Yeah, this is a major flaw I saw in the ratings gathering I saw a long while ago. Glad someone else has seen it. I think I commented on it earlier in this thread, too.
 
#8,256 ·
As someone else said a huge part of the problem is there are no stars right now. On the contrary to what the Punk defence force are saying wwe has done everything they could for Punk to make him a star and it just didn't work. He has had possibly the best year and a half of any wrestler for a long long time. People try and pass it off and say but Cena was ahead of him, which isn't true. After survivor series 2011 Punk started to main event. He main even ted the very next ppv TLC ahead of guys like Triple H. Main even ted the Rumble, other then the rumble itself. At mania he had the 2nd to last match. Rock vs Cena was always going to main event Mania as it was years in the making. That is the match most people wanted to see.

The day after mania Brock came back. Again naturally that would be the main event.

Fast forward to august 2012 and this is where Punk truley became the main focus. He started to main event again and at Night of champions it marked a year of ppv,s where he was undefeated. At the biggest show in decades raw 1000 he was the main guy by taking out the rock and cena. They could of given the ending to anyone who has been with the wwe over the past 20 odd years but they gave it to him. And he has been in the main event since. That is nearly 5 months.

He has gone 377 days as champion.
In 3 days time he will surpass Cena's time as champion. Which will mean he will have had the longest title reign since 1984. It will be the 7th longest reign in history. The 5th individual longest reign.

I can go on and on but there is no need to. Punk has been one of the main things about we for a long long time and is one of the reasons ratings are down. That doesn't mean he is the main reason it means he is simply one of the reasons.
He is not a big star and after everything they have one for him he never will be.
 
#3,840 ·
:lmao :lmao

I haven't watched or read about wrasslin' since Mania and I thought I would come back to the forum to check on how the ol' sports entertainment game was going.

From reading some threads, let me get this straight: Orton is suspended for 60 days, Jericho has left the company again, AJ LEE is some kind of main character, Cena is still the same guy he's always been, Cena is feuding with Michael Cole, the massive toolbox known as CM Punk is still the WWE champion and Daniel Bryan is a main character on the show.

What the fuck is going on and why are any of you still watching? :lmao :lmao
 
#4,246 ·
Please also read here and here, the second link is from last week.

Firstly, one thing I absolutely hate is when they throw two quarters together and come up with a 'loss'. Dolph vs Swagger went over two quarters (Q3/Q4) yet they 'claim' that they lost 22k. Anyway here's what I have:

Q1 - 3.51 rating / 5.04 million
Q2 + Q3 - 3.34 rating / 4.80 million
Q4 - 3.33 rating / 4.78 million
Q5 - 3.74 rating / 5.34 million
Q6 - 3.13 rating / 4.62 million
Q7 - 3.12 rating / 4.61 million
Q8 + Overrun - 3.74 rating / 5.19 million

For the purpose of the following, I've broken up Q8 and Q9 into two separate ratings so that the breakdown below makes sense. The overrun obviously had more viewers than Q8 yet at the moment the breakdown wouldn't support that. So:

Q8 - 3.37 rating / 4.98 million
Overrun - 3.70 rating / 5.50 million

Q8 and overrun cannot be 3.74 rating, otherwise the overrun is higher than 3.74 rating, contrary to what the breakdown says. So:

Q1 - 5.12 million (0.08 gain) <-- 2 minutes stripped out; Opening Segment
Q2 - 5.12 million (0.32 gain) <-- 6 minutes stripped out; Sheamus/Punk vs Kane/Bryan
Q3 - 4.97 million (0.17 gain) <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Sheamus/Punk vs Kane/Bryan, Vickie/Dolph/Swagger backstage, Laurinitis/Otunga/Show backstage, Dolph vs Swagger
Q4 - 4.95 million (0.17 gain) <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Dolph vs Swagger, Triple H/No Way Out promo, Raw 100th moment, Heyman's entrance
Q5 - 5.53 million (0.19 gain) <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Triple H/Heyman segment, start of Del Rio vs Santino
Q6 - 4.74 million (0.12 gain) <-- 3 minutes stripped out; Del Rio vs Santino, Cyndi Hauper hype, 5 minutes of that segment
Q7 - 4.78 million (0.17 gain) <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Lauper segment, Primetime Players vs Primo and Epico
Q8 - 5.42 million (0.44 gain) <-- 7 minutes stripped out; Raw 1000th promo, Laurinitis entrance and promo
Overrun - 5.50 million (0.00 gain) <-- no commercials (obviously)

So the one person that said Q2 lost on Q1 may want to redact his statement...
 
#4,250 ·
Ah, interesting... so the tag match itself didn't even lose viewers (or many viewers)... which is great for Punk/Bryan/Kane. Not sure about Sheamus since he's the odd man out since he's not really involved in the feud, but at the very least he certainly didn't hurt to be added. And it only lost when stuck in Q3 with other stuff.

So Foley, Lauriatis, Punk, Sheamus, Bryan, Kane, Heyman, HHH, Cena, Big Show, and Otunga were in all the big numbered segments (over 5 million). I think Vince last week brought some older fans back and they decided to stick around this week and see what would happen. I'm sure "Lesnar responding to HHH" advertisement also drew in some viewers... even though Lesnar never showed up, the implication might've been enough for some.
 
#4,715 ·
I don't believe Raw has had a 4.0 quarter at all this year, not even during the Rock/Cena segments. I may be wrong, but I don't recall seeing a 4.0 once this year. If that is the case, then Monday's overrun was the highest rated segment of the year so far. Which, of course, is a brilliant sign for WWE going into next week, and it is academic now that they will be breaking 4.0 several times next week.

I think the main growth is due to Cena possibly cashing in, but also due to the Raw 1000 hype, in my opinion.

Quarter Hours - July 16th, 2012
Q1 - 3.39 rating / 4.84 million
Q2 - 3.12 rating / 4.46 million
Q3 - 3.30 rating / 4.71 million
Q4 - 3.42 rating / 4.88 million
Q5 - 3.64 rating / 5.16 million
Q6 - 3.62 rating / 5.14 million
Q7 - 3.28 rating / 4.65 million
Q8 - 3.50 rating / 4.97 million
Overrun - 3.99 rating / 5.69 million

Very strong looking breakdown. One or two people are making the point that the Q5 growth is not too big, that does not matter as much this week as much as other weeks, because Q3 and Q4 increased, which is an unusual occurrence, so those that normally tune in for hour 2 only, tuned in earlier, so to say.

And Q5 and Q6 drew very strong ratings, so kudos not only to AJ and Bryan, but also to Ryback, Jericho and Ziggler, because that is a very rare occurrence.

Using 10 percent, if you don't like the following, ignore it. I will not claim that it is 100 percent accurate, however - in my opinion, it is more accurate than the above.

Q1 - 4.91 million (0.07 gain) <-- 2 minutes stripped out
Q2 - 4.75 million (0.30 gain) <-- 6 minutes stripped out; Kofi/Truth vs Primetime Players, AJ, Bryan and Eve backstage
Q3 - 4.94 million (0.24 gain) <-- 5 minutes stripped out; AJ, Bryan and Eve backstage, Touting, Ryder vs Del Rio and Mysterio's return, Raw 1000th moment
Q4 - 5.12 million (0.24 gain) <-- 5 minutes stripped out; Slater vs Rikishi and Rikishi/USOs dancing, Bryan/AJ vs Miz/Eve
Q5 - 5.35 million (0.19 gain) <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Bryan's proposal, Raw 1000th moment, Ryback vs Swagger
Q6 - 5.33 million (0.19 gain) <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Ryback vs Swagger, Touting, Ziggler and Jericho segment
Q7 - 5.18 million (0.53 gain) <-- 8 minutes stripped out; Touting, Raw 1000th hype, Clay entrance, Clay vs JTG
Q8 - 5.15 million (0.18 gain) <-- 4 minutes stripped out; Show vs Punk
Overrun - 5.69 million (0.00 gain) <-- no commercials (obviously)

Q7 had eight minutes of commercials, hence the large gain and the low quarter in the breakdown.
 
#6,325 · (Edited)
As I showed, not comparing both careers because its not really fair, he had a huge cast support. Orton in 2009 lost viewers in the overrun with Triple H, and the show as a whole gained a lot, Orton never gained over a million alone, he had the full support by other big stars such as Trips, Batista, Cena, Vince, Shane, Steph, Flair, Donald Trump all of those guys are the real reason as the breakdowns can easily prove it. If Raw today had Batista, Trips, Lesnar with guys like Punk and Cena, I dont think ratings will be the same. So you can't put the blame on Punk when he needs those guys to help gain viewers within the show. I just used logic, and facts.


Edited: those are Orton numbers as a WWE champion in 2010.

September 20-24 2.8
9/27 – 10/1 2.75 - the lowest in that year, and the highest was Batista as a champion with 3.8, it just proves my point.

October 4-8 3.35
October 11-15 2.9
October 18-22 3.1
October 25-29 3.07
November 1-5 3.26
November 8-12 3.1
November 15-19 +++3.05

Thats lower than any champion in that year of Raw.

And those are from 2011 when he was the WHC champion on SD:


May 2-6 1.74
May 9-13 1.72
May 16-20 1.92
May 23-27 1.83
5/30 – 6/3 1.77
June 6-10 1.79
June 13-17 1.73
June 20-24 1.72
6/27-7/1 1.63 - the lowest in that year. I don't know why I'm not shocked.
July 4-8 1.73
July 11-15 1.72
July 18-22 1.89 - Christain won the title.
July 25-29 2.02 - Christian as a champion, lol Orton even Christian. Christian rocks by the way.
Aug. 1-5 1.81
August 8-12 1.83
August 15-19 1.86 - Orton got the title back.
August 22-26 1.78 - Orton strikes again.

And when Mark "Ratings" Henry got the title, it got between 1.9 to 2.26 (which was the highest that year). Orton big Draw my ass, as this proves he's not.
 
#6,382 ·
Yikes, another unfunny post from a rejoiner a couple above me. Haven't these guys got jobs or something?

It appears some people persist in skewing these postings to suit their mode of fandom. That takes dedication, I'll give them that! However, it's probably a matter of misinterpretation somewhere along the line where they lost track of the significance of certain things. Granted, I only know a little bit about the entire spectrum of this business so I'll go with areas I know at little to discuss conceptually.

Why not just actually look at what the indications are without getting carried away by our love/dislike (come on, we're not kids anymore and can make a distinction between what's there and what's not) for a wrestler? No biased viewpoints, no sides taken. Just look what's presented in front of our eyes? Then again, not every piece of data is made publicised in the first place which further casts doubt over the validity of our weekly scrutinising sessions. But I digress from my original point, so let's get on with it.

To Punk fans. Numbers suggest that Punk drew a healthy amount casual intrigue in a show that was low in viewership. He's also been the beneficiary of solids gains during other times during his reign and was a hefty merch mover during his white-hot streak in 2011 (actually had Cena toppled off the #1 spot for the first time since 2006-ish I think). However, he's been involved in some very nasty lull-spots such as the countless matchups with Miz that saw viewers get out of dodge, as well as that worrying trend where matches weren't received with nearly as much interest as his promos were.

Punk drew no matter which way people try to spin it as in he gained viewer numbers. As I pointed out before, though, there's a difference between someone who draws and someone who drew. The guy is not a proven stand-alone figure that is capable of carrying the flag solo in barely anything outside of being a big hometown hero. Being at least reliable in most areas for a sustainable amount of time makes you a bankable and investment-worthy draw. Punk isn't at that level.

To his haters. You can attempt to look at this anyway you like like 'he hasn't got a good look, not a company man, can't carry stuff by himself', etc. That's fine as they're all things that can't necessarily be disproven. To draw these fairly obscure comparisons between guys of yesteryear, the push-timeframe ratio in comparison to Punk's and all that, however, could lead us to endless round-about arguments that also can't be proven. Ironically, a lot of anti-Punk point made stray away from the one thing you guys should be relying on: numbers. They indicate, but aren't the summary of someone's career until that guy/gal finished up one way or another.

Triple H until dec 1999, is quite possibly the weakest booked top heel in history, not only was he constantly overshadowed by corporate ministry but also lost his no.1 contender's spot to a woman in Chyna. Always got his ass whipped at the highest level by Austin that entire year even as the WWF Champion. In 2003, HHH similar to punk was overshadowed by Rock/Austin, Brock/Angle and even Vince/Hogan. Cena, again similar to punk received a great main event push only on the B-show, as did Lesnar for the most part. AND EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM DREW despite the set backs
I stand by what I said few pages back, Anyone else with the same 6 yr push would have been a solid reliable draw for WWE by now.
Like these ones. How can one accurately compare one era to another when the company works its model around different cycles through the generations? How can one compare the stars of one era to another when they were the beneficiaries of many things that these guys weren't and, to a lesser extent, vice versa? How could you be confident in this 'guideline to drawing' that performers must adhere to when they are subjected to the different timeframes, audiences, business models, as well their own strengths and weaknesses? This is particularly interesting to note when you acknowledge the factor/importance of 'good vs. poor' booking which most people view as spasmodic and lackadaisical nowadays in comparison to yesteryear.

And if you really think he was getting pushed for 6 years then you're off the mark. Punk has not been in the spotlight for 6 years. As for his biggest push to date, keep in mind he has been on the end of it for a little over a year where has been through a heel turn, a face turn, back to a heel turn almost to the exact day within that timeframe. Today's audiences in particular appear to take time to acclimatise to change.

The business can be quite reactionary, and has to respond to the world changing around it (no matter how their renowned micromanagement style goes about getting a unity amongst workers in their performance style). Times and circumstances change, which means performers are never likely to be, nor received generally, as their proceeders. It's common consensus by a lot of people that this is a particularly awkward era for wrestling promotions as well, in spite of the turbulent nature and esoteric interest group that's always been apart of this line of work.

People really should be patient with the business side of things, although I don't know why fans have to be considering it shouldn't need to satisfy their nosey-parker ways in the first place. The whole notion is a lot like an overgrown baby at first - it stinks, it cries, is a really fucking heavy thing to drag along and needs a whole lotta' nurturing. If it's raised right, though, it grows up big and strong and is the result of a lot of quality time invested into it.
 
#6,385 ·
Yikes, another unfunny post from a rejoiner a couple above me. Haven't these guys got jobs or something?

It appears some people persist in skewing these postings to suit their mode of fandom. That takes dedication, I'll give them that! However, it's probably a matter of misinterpretation somewhere along the line where they lost track of the significance of certain things. Granted, I only know a little bit about the entire spectrum of this business so I'll go with areas I know at little to discuss conceptually.

Why not just actually look at what the indications are without getting carried away by our love/dislike (come on, we're not kids anymore and can make a distinction between what's there and what's not) for a wrestler? No biased viewpoints, no sides taken. Just look what's presented in front of our eyes? Then again, not every piece of data is made publicised in the first place which further casts doubt over the validity of our weekly scrutinising sessions. But I digress from my original point, so let's get on with it.

To Punk fans. Numbers suggest that Punk drew a healthy amount casual intrigue in a show that was low in viewership. He's also been the beneficiary of solids gains during other times during his reign and was a hefty merch mover during his white-hot streak in 2011 (actually had Cena toppled off the #1 spot for the first time since 2006-ish I think). However, he's been involved in some very nasty lull-spots such as the countless matchups with Miz that saw viewers get out of dodge, as well as that worrying trend where matches weren't received with nearly as much interest as his promos were.

Punk drew no matter which way people try to spin it as in he gained viewer numbers. As I pointed out before, though, there's a difference between someone who draws and someone who drew. The guy is not a proven stand-alone figure that is capable of carrying the flag solo in barely anything outside of being a big hometown hero. Being at least reliable in most areas for a sustainable amount of time makes you a bankable and investment-worthy draw. Punk isn't at that level.

To his haters. You can attempt to look at this anyway you like like 'he hasn't got a good look, not a company man, can't carry stuff by himself', etc. That's fine as they're all things that can't necessarily be disproven. To draw these fairly obscure comparisons between guys of yesteryear, the push-timeframe ratio in comparison to Punk's and all that, however, could lead us to endless round-about arguments that also can't be proven. Ironically, a lot of anti-Punk point made stray away from the one thing you guys should be relying on: numbers. They indicate, but aren't the summary of someone's career until that guy/gal finished up one way or another.





Like these ones. How can one accurately compare one era to another when the company works its model around different cycles through the generations? How can one compare the stars of one era to another when they were the beneficiaries of many things that these guys weren't and, to a lesser extent, vice versa? How could you be confident in this 'guideline to drawing' that performers must adhere to when they are subjected to the different timeframes, audiences, business models, as well their own strengths and weaknesses? This is particularly interesting to note when you acknowledge the factor/importance of 'good vs. poor' booking which most people view as spasmodic and lackadaisical nowadays in comparison to yesteryear.

And if you really think he was getting pushed for 6 years then you're off the mark. Punk has not been in the spotlight for 6 years. As for his biggest push to date, keep in mind he has been on the end of it for a little over a year where has been through a heel turn, a face turn, back to a heel turn almost to the exact day within that timeframe. Today's audiences in particular appear to take time to acclimatise to change.

The business can be quite reactionary, and has to respond to the world changing around it (no matter how their renowned micromanagement style goes about getting a unity amongst workers in their performance style). Times and circumstances change, which means performers are never likely to be, nor received generally, as their proceeders. It's common consensus by a lot of people that this is a particularly awkward era for wrestling promotions as well, in spite of the turbulent nature and esoteric interest group that's always been apart of this line of work.

People really should be patient with the business side of things, although I don't know why fans have to be considering it shouldn't need to satisfy their nosey-parker ways in the first place. The whole notion is a lot like an overgrown baby at first - it stinks, it cries, is a really fucking heavy thing to drag along and needs a whole lotta' nurturing. If it's raised right, though, it grows up big and strong and is the result of a lot of quality time invested into it.
This was a very refreshing post to read in this thread that is usually filled with subjective bullshit.
 
#7,366 ·
2.48 LMAO! Wow I hope the ratings drops below a 2 when Vince pushes Ryback over Punk at HIAC. They need a true wake-up call. Maybe then they will create edgy programming again, revert to 2hrs, and push Punk, Bryan, and call-up Ambrose for fuck sake. We need a new character to attack the entire system again and actually WIN against McMahon's body buillder superheroes.
 
#7,478 ·
I don't know why people are arguing so much over Punk still, each week. It is obvious by now, the man is not a consistent draw in ratings. Give him a decent storyline and a good name to work with, and people will watch. But he himself is not a full capable big draw. Why? In a nutshell: He just has never been portrayed consistently as a big deal while champion as well as lacking the charisma and vibe to capture the casuals attention. He is not an anti-draw either, he doesn't cause viewers to totally and completely tune-out in his segments like some of the anti-drawing mid-card/low-card. It is really that simple.
 
#7,479 ·
I don't know why people are arguing so much over Punk still, each week. It is obvious by now, the man is not a consistent draw in ratings. Give him a decent storyline and a good name to work with, and people will watch. But he himself is not a full capable big draw. Why? In a nutshell: He just has never been portrayed consistently as a big deal while champion as well as lacking the charisma and vibe to capture the casuals attention. He is not an anti-draw either, he doesn't cause viewers to totally and completely tune-out in his segments like some of the anti-drawing mid-card/low-card. It is really that simple.
That would be Ryback.
 
#7,676 ·
 
#7,702 ·
F4Wonline

Early numbers for the CM Punk/Jerry Lawler segment indicate that it was a massive ratings hit, scoring a big 3.9. Because of this Vince has forced creative to come up with more edgy, possibly offensive angles and characters to create buzz and draw in new fans. Ideas pitched so far are for A.J Lee to be gang raped by Cena, Daniel Bryan and Punk, new gimmicks such as new developmental talent playing aids/cancer victims, and a big idea pitched by Triple H is a holocaust angle where people who under 6ft 2 are kayfabe "exterminated" by Triple H on screen. This creative movement was spawned after Linda's second campaign failure, Vince was very frustrated with the results and he plans on ushering in a new era. The most popular name being tossed around WWE headquarters at the moment is the "U Mad? Era. More details on this creative shakeup incoming
 
#8,477 ·
A fleeting thought I should probably develop further before posting it: I wonder how much the viewers' disconnect is related to the disconnect between the champion and the rest of the roster? I feel like we've got maybe the most humanised WWE champion in a long, long time - a fairly regular-lookin' guy, for a WWE champ, with a grounded character akin to your Stone Colds and so forth, but nowhere near as mythologised a figure as the stars of the past. A product of a star-making promo that was supposed to kickstart a "reality era", a reign that was supposed to bring about sweeping changes that brought the outdated, stale WWE more in line with Punk's vision of a modern wrestling company.

And then, you put him in a program with The Terminator.

Or in a "hilarious" love triangle with a crazy skipping chick and a goat-faced maniac.

Or on a goofy "quest for respect" that insults the intelligence of everyone watching. "Just because you're the champion doesn't mean you're entitled to respect. Also, tune in to Night of Champions this Sunday." ACTUAL MICHAEL COLE QUOTE

And he's on a roster full of either weird, outsized caricatures like Cena and Sheamus, or underdeveloped blanks that could be something much more, like Barrett and Del Rio.

How much of WWE's problem is that there's too much really, really great TV available right now for it to be so confused about its own tone? Maybe they need to just decide that either we're going with cartoon characters like Ryback (who's getting over with the fans in a huge way right now) or more relatable characters like Punk (who gave the industry its most exciting moment in years) and stick with it, because putting the two types in a program together just seems to suck the air out of everyone's sails, including the audience. Maybe Punk's a really great NWA champ stuck in a Hulk Hogan world?

(Actually, running with that thought, is there so much great TV right now that, even if WWE was a really well-written, focused, cohesive wrestling show, a well-written wrestling show isn't good enough to get the very far above 4 million viewers anymore outside of nostalgia pops and such?)
 
#8,480 ·
A fleeting thought I should probably develop further before posting it: I wonder how much the viewers' disconnect is related to the disconnect between the champion and the rest of the roster? I feel like we've got maybe the most humanised WWE champion in a long, long time - a fairly regular-lookin' guy, for a WWE champ, with a grounded character akin to your Stone Colds and so forth, but nowhere near as mythologised a figure as the stars of the past. A product of a star-making promo that was supposed to kickstart a "reality era", a reign that was supposed to bring about sweeping changes that brought the outdated, stale WWE more in line with Punk's vision of a modern wrestling company.

And then, you put him in a program with The Terminator.

Or in a "hilarious" love triangle with a crazy skipping chick and a goat-faced maniac.

Or on a goofy "quest for respect" that insults the intelligence of everyone watching. "Just because you're the champion doesn't mean you're entitled to respect. Also, tune in to Night of Champions this Sunday." ACTUAL MICHAEL COLE QUOTE

And he's on a roster full of either weird, outsized caricatures like Cena and Sheamus, or underdeveloped blanks that could be something much more, like Barrett and Del Rio.

How much of WWE's problem is that there's too much really, really great TV available right now for it to be so confused about its own tone? Maybe they need to just decide that either we're going with cartoon characters like Ryback (who's getting over with the fans in a huge way right now) or more relatable characters like Punk (who gave the industry its most exciting moment in years) and stick with it, because putting the two types in a program together just seems to suck the air out of everyone's sails, including the audience. Maybe Punk's a really great NWA champ stuck in a Hulk Hogan world?

(Actually, running with that thought, is there so much great TV right now that, even if WWE was a really well-written, focused, cohesive wrestling show, a well-written wrestling show isn't good enough to get the very far above 4 million viewers anymore outside of nostalgia pops and such?)
That may be a significant statement. CM Punk is looking a lot like Bret Hart in that respect. Its the transition from the WWE-style overpushed, "Larger than life" super babyface to a more grounded, workhorse, common man champion. Of course I don't think him being that type of individual can account for the fall off of the audience. The drop is too large to attribute to one person. I think that is a good statement though, knowing that casual audiences expect over the top characters and story lines and they're not getting that right now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top