**The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here) - Page 83 - Wrestling Forum : WWE, TNA, Debate League, Wrestling Videos, Women of Wrestling Forums
View Poll Results: Do Wrestlers Draw, Or Does the WWE Brand Draw?
Wrestlers Draw 251 39.53%
WWE Brand draws 384 60.47%
Voters: 635. You may not vote on this poll

 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #821 of 9175 (permalink) Old 01-30-2012, 08:02 PM
Still Real To Me, Dammit!
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 33
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

swagger can cut a good satisfying promo when given the chance. all i wanted to say.
b5586203 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #822 of 9175 (permalink) Old 01-30-2012, 08:25 PM
Main Eventing Gyms
 
Verdict123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 617
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brye View Post
This is why I don't even get into the ratings. I'd rather watch a Swagger/Ryder promo than some Goldberg or Hogan shit. Sure it'd draw better but it'd probably be dreadful.
Ofcourse you would, we all would but is it good for business? Its not going to make money for the company.

You have to understand vince mcmahon doesnt have a choice either. If the casual fans prefer swagger/ryder over goldberg or hogan, then vince would obviously give us swagger/ryder.

Verdict123 is offline  
post #823 of 9175 (permalink) Old 01-30-2012, 09:12 PM
Stealing the Show
 
Ziggler Mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 7,429
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
                     
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

derp...wrong thread
Ziggler Mark is offline  
post #824 of 9175 (permalink) Old 01-30-2012, 11:44 PM
People are Sheep
 
Santa Snoth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Snoth's Cave
Posts: 1,592
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
                     
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by deadmanwatching View Post
Compare AE ratings with your Pg Era or Realty Era or Whatever the hell it is.

you get the idea which one is OVERRATED
Obvious ignorant mark is obvious. You can't compare ratings from different time periods. Just a completely weightless, stupid argument from someone who clearly knows nothing about ratingzzz.
Santa Snoth is offline  
post #825 of 9175 (permalink) Old 01-31-2012, 01:41 AM
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
deadmanwatching's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 826
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by WallofShame View Post
Obvious ignorant mark is obvious. You can't compare ratings from different time periods. Just a completely weightless, stupid argument from someone who clearly knows nothing about ratingzzz.
Obvious butthurt mark is obvious.
deadmanwatching is offline  
post #826 of 9175 (permalink) Old 01-31-2012, 02:33 AM
From Parts Unknown
 
LarryCoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,697
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
             
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brye View Post
This is why I don't even get into the ratings. I'd rather watch a Swagger/Ryder promo than some Goldberg or Hogan shit. Sure it'd draw better but it'd probably be dreadful.
I think this is were the ratings come in. Even in the upmost hardcore 1% of the audience, there are people with vastly differing opinions on their favorite wrestlers. Who is to say what is right? Who is to say which wrestler should get pushed? Ratings, when taken into proper context, gives WWE and Vince the best idea of who majority of the audience likes.
LarryCoon is offline  
post #827 of 9175 (permalink) Old 01-31-2012, 04:12 AM
AND YOU SHINE MY SHOES IF I WANT YOU TO
 
Rock316AE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 9,547
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
                     
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brye View Post
Shouldn't what actually happens in the segments have to do with who tunes in and out?
No, because you can't affect the first quarter unless you promote something for that time slot, it's always just what happened before, like RAW this week, the Rumble winner.
HHH/Taker/Ace got a huge overrun, almost 18 minutes if I'm not mistaken, so now it's not a prediction or something, that SHOULD do at least 4.0

And BTW, I will rather watch Hogan or Goldberg over these two clowns even if Ryder and Swagger were drawing 6.0 every segment.

Last edited by Rock316AE; 01-31-2012 at 04:16 AM.
Rock316AE is offline  
post #828 of 9175 (permalink) Old 01-31-2012, 06:01 AM
$9.99
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 20,027
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
                     
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brye View Post
This is why I don't even get into the ratings. I'd rather watch a Swagger/Ryder promo than some Goldberg or Hogan shit. Sure it'd draw better but it'd probably be dreadful.
And for the casual audience, watching Goldberg in 2 minute squash matches was the highlight of their Monday nights for a while. I, nor many others for that matter, have said that people only watch the stars who draw and I don't know where you and the others got that from. I don't watch HHH because he draws, I watch him because he's my favorite wrestler of all time and he entertains me. We come in here to discuss what/who is pulling good quarter hours and who isn't and to speculate why. How that turned into the fallacy of people only watching and marking for the stars that draw, I don't know. The simple fact is and the numbers prove it, the guys who are legit stars when put into big time situations produce big time numbers. Everybody else doesn't. You want to watch Ryder and Swagger in a promo and that's fine. Other people would prefer to tune in to Raw and see The Rock every week and that's fine too.

BEST FOR CHRISTMAS is offline  
post #829 of 9175 (permalink) Old 01-31-2012, 06:05 AM
Searching for a new identity
 
JasonLives's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Boden, Sweden
Posts: 5,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
                     
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

I think its ridiculous to compare ratings from the Attitude Era to this era. For almost everyone, the AE was just a fling.
Ratings started dropping the second the storylines started to end. The major players were still there in early 2000, but the viewers started leaving. That fling was over and they never went back again.
One thing that drew big in 1998 would barely have drawn half of the original rating if it would have been done in 2002 by the same wrestlers. The storylines helped a lot to make the wrestlers interesting, when storylines became weaker so did the wrestlers.

Just look at today, The Rock and Stone Cold can pop a rating for a short period of time. But for everytime they show up, the less viewers will care.

Last edited by JasonLives; 01-31-2012 at 06:09 AM.
JasonLives is offline  
post #830 of 9175 (permalink) Old 01-31-2012, 07:40 AM
Yelled at by SCOTT STEINER
 
robertdeniro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,628
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
                     
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonLives View Post
I think its ridiculous to compare ratings from the Attitude Era to this era. For almost everyone, the AE was just a fling.
Ratings started dropping the second the storylines started to end. The major players were still there in early 2000, but the viewers started leaving. That fling was over and they never went back again.
One thing that drew big in 1998 would barely have drawn half of the original rating if it would have been done in 2002 by the same wrestlers. The storylines helped a lot to make the wrestlers interesting, when storylines became weaker so did the wrestlers.

Just look at today, The Rock and Stone Cold can pop a rating for a short period of time. But for everytime they show up, the less viewers will care.
True.



J.R:"Everybody claims to be an icon and claims to be something special,and maybe they were in their day
None will Ever surpass the Undertaker in my view"
Kurt Angle:"He is our leader, and I consider Undertaker the best ever"
Shawn Michaels:"Wrestling against Undertaker was the best professional experience of my life."
Triple H:"He is The Greatest Legend in the history of this business"
Michael Cole:"The biggest Smackdown and WWE superstar of all time,the legendary Undertaker".
Mark Henry:"it's hard not to put The Undertaker in the same breath as Hogan and Rock because not only has he served more years as them, but collectively, I'm sure he's sold out and made more money than all of them."
robertdeniro is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Closed Thread

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome