My point was Vince Mcmahon and his first advertised match in two years is the reason for that big overrun gain, not punk. It didnt matter who he was against Del Rio/Sheamus/Punk, it was going to be a success regardless.
So why say it would've been bigger with those two than it would be with Punk?
I dont see why anyone needs to bring up a random QH rating from months ago involving Cena and Edge into this discussion at all? Clearly, the intention was to use that and make a desperate excuse for Punk's failure at ratings. Explain Why the sudden need to prove Cena or Edge cant 'always draw big'?
Because a lot of people need reminding that even the big dogs (although Edge wasn't quite in that same echelon as Cena) are not always
going to rope in the services of company viewers. That the top guys aren't going to shit out gold week in and week out. That this notion of drawing is only a side of things that takes our fandom onto new levels of ignorance when we stick up for or deride our favourites/most hated.
By the way, I'm not saying Punk shouldn't be a draw. That's a ridiculous notion that only his most blindly deluded mark would adhere to when talking about the business side of things. He needs to be a commodity as he's the champ and one of the top guys in the company. I'm of the belief that he isn't a standalone name and has only scratched the surface of being a true drawcard. What you said about Edge/Cena segment drawing low being due to the novelty of 3 hours is also likely an accurate one that I too agree with.
What continues to amuse me (and anyone with a semblance of intelligence) though is that people will try to justify their love or hatred for an individual that will only ultimately be used by the company as they see fit. They don't even see the business side spectrum outside their Nielsen ratings system mindset. Someone described it as a weekly pissing contest and I couldn't agree more in some of what's been posted.
Someone in this thread also described ratings as the 'god' of television some time ago. While there's a lot of truth to that (unfortunately) it's a sentiment shared and utilised by too many that can't get their heads past the dreaded 'weekly numberz' and argue and argue and argue about stuff that won't even eventuate from their own opinion.
The real smart guys in this thread will discuss, speculate and conceptualise ideas relating to viewership patterns and numbers, trends and the overall appeal of wrestling personalities pertaining to what happens weekly. The stupid guys will lurch around throwing numbers they don't know the meaning of to support their dumb fandom and try to (unsuccessfully) strip others of theirs.