There is no duty we so much underrate as... being happy. -Robert Louis Stevenson
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Staying on Alcatraz for the Holidays
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Re: Whether you like him or not CM Punk is now carrying a lot of the company weight.
The product is weak and the format of three hours is causing a hemorrhaging of viewers.
On one hand, Punk is carrying a great deal of the weight of the company right now. As he should, being WWE Champion and all. It was BS when he was midcarding while Cena was ceaselessly main-eventing in the first half of the year.
On the other hand, the ratings aren't good.
On yet another hand, the ratings not being good is not necessarily indicative that CM Punk is some kind of horrible anti-draw as some in this thread have stated. Those who have drawn terrifically overall have had poor stretches in this regard. Steve Austin as a heel in late 2001 was the centerpiece of a product that was doing less successful, overall, than the product which featured babyfaces Austin and Rock juxtaposed with heel Triple H a year earlier, for instance. Triple H at the top in, say, 2003, produced very few memorably good results in terms of "drawing." Etceteras...
And yet on the other hand still (we're now at four), none of this is to say that Punk is some sort of major, unquestionably powerful drawing force.
But like others before him, both huge drawing stars and those who experienced comparative fallow periods and those who never quite became massive draws, he is currently carrying a great deal of the company right now. This thread should really be about that, about why that is (hint: WWE has sucked at creating new stars while a bunch of older guys have either retired or become part-timers and now they've backed themselvse into relying on a guy if for no other reason than because the main event level roster is incredibly thin), what it means for the present and the future, and an evaluation of how Punk has done in being a pillar of the product and one of WWE's only three or four "Atlas" figures, holding the WWE world up above their shoulders at this moment in time. Not what last week's Raw rating was or some trivial bullshit like that. Goddamn a good portion of this place has become more about a few numbers every week than back-and-forth discussion and analysis of what is actually going on. There's a sticky Ratings thread for that.