**The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here) - Page 660 - Wrestling Forum : WWE, TNA, Indy Wrestling, Debate League, 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 #6591 of 9175 (permalink) Old 10-03-2012, 01:10 PM
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
chbulls1_23's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 516
Points: 0
     
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

WWE desperately needs a revamp. Put Raw on from 8-10 pm and make the rating at least PG-DLV like Smackdown use to be. Or make it have the same type of edge that the "Summer of Punk" had last year. That's when it was actually entertaining because of it's edginess and maturity of the program. Now it's a fuckin' joke for hardcore fans and the IWC because it's so corny and targeted to 4 year olds.

chbulls1_23 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #6592 of 9175 (permalink) Old 10-03-2012, 01:48 PM
Moron
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: “We are each our own devil, and we make this world our hell.”
Posts: 5,125
Points: 0
                     
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

If WWE just had 90 minutes of live RAW every Monday & that was the only show they had other than the monthly Pay-Per-View, I guarantee the show would improve. Why? Because they would actually have to manage the show accordingly, to get the important stuff on the air & they would be forced to eliminate the nonsense & filler. When RAW is 3 hours long, Smackdown is 2 hours long, NXT is an hour, Main Event is an hour, SLAM! is half an hour & Superstars is an hour, I think they're just worried about being able to put enough stuff on TV at all, since they tape it all in two days, on Monday & Tuesday.

I remember when I used to watch WCW Saturday Night. It felt special back in the day, before the nWo era. 6:05 P.M., baby! But when the show was over, I wasn't tired, I wasn't burned out on the product. I wanted to see more. I was left wanting more. That's important. By the time RAW is over, if you can make it to the end, you feel dreadful. You feel like the show has been on forever. You think "man, good thing this isn't on for another week." Every show burns you out. Imagine if you have tickets & you're there live & they're taping other stuff before that show even! It is crazy.
Coffey is offline  
post #6593 of 9175 (permalink) Old 10-03-2012, 01:50 PM
There is no duty we so much underrate as... being happy. -Robert Louis Stevenson
 
DesolationRow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: (We Always Did Feel the Same/We Just Saw It From) A Different Point of View
Posts: 13,328
Points: 2,829
                     
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcliquez View Post
fucking midgets like Punk, Bryan, etc. and meatheads with no charisma, ring skills, etc. like RyBerg and Sheamus are destroying this business. Dean Ambrose should never see the light of the main roster. Fire that skinny vanilla midget right now. One of the worst things that happened to WWE is the born of CM Punk.


Post of the decade.



THE NBA'S MVP IS NOW AN NBA CHAMPION!


Thanks to AryaDark & ABrown for showing this .gif to me.
DesolationRow is offline  
post #6594 of 9175 (permalink) Old 10-03-2012, 02:29 PM Thread Starter
Working on my abs
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,818
Points: 87
                     
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

I think the problem here starts at Raw 1000. Look at who they brought back for that show:

- Road Dogg
- X Pac
- Shawn Michaels
- Roddy Piper
- Mick Foley
- Trish Stratus
- The Rock
- Bret Hart
- APA
- Lita
- Rikishi
- Undertaker

The point is, they haven't reached back out to many. Why didn't they reach back out to Rikishi? Trish? They did not capitalise on that show in any way, shape or form.

There again, did anyone expect anything different?
D.M.N. is offline  
post #6595 of 9175 (permalink) Old 10-03-2012, 02:43 PM
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
chbulls1_23's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 516
Points: 0
     
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walk-In View Post
If WWE just had 90 minutes of live RAW every Monday & that was the only show they had other than the monthly Pay-Per-View, I guarantee the show would improve. Why? Because they would actually have to manage the show accordingly, to get the important stuff on the air & they would be forced to eliminate the nonsense & filler. When RAW is 3 hours long, Smackdown is 2 hours long, NXT is an hour, Main Event is an hour, SLAM! is half an hour & Superstars is an hour, I think they're just worried about being able to put enough stuff on TV at all, since they tape it all in two days, on Monday & Tuesday.

I remember when I used to watch WCW Saturday Night. It felt special back in the day, before the nWo era. 6:05 P.M., baby! But when the show was over, I wasn't tired, I wasn't burned out on the product. I wanted to see more. I was left wanting more. That's important. By the time RAW is over, if you can make it to the end, you feel dreadful. You feel like the show has been on forever. You think "man, good thing this isn't on for another week." Every show burns you out. Imagine if you have tickets & you're there live & they're taping other stuff before that show even! It is crazy.
I would gladly sit through an hour and a half of Raw every week. Then it wouldn't be filled with so much B.S. filler material.

chbulls1_23 is offline  
post #6596 of 9175 (permalink) Old 10-03-2012, 03:35 PM
Special Attraction at Wrestlemania
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 22,455
Points: 1,218
                     
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Peter View Post
Why doesn't it deserve to stay in business? Because it's not to your taste? I'm surprised how much you know about the show's quality since you regularly say that you're not watching. Seems like my relation to Smackdown, which I don't watch. I know what segments happen at times but I can't judge the quality of them without seeing them. I just know that I'm not interested in viewing another WWE show and therefor don't care how it does.

I don't disagree that a lot of Raw is bad, but that's obviously not my point either.
Why? There are many reasons and it not being to my taste is very minor compared to that. One reason is the fact that Vince wastes valuable money on worthless crap like Linda's senate run, pointless movies that about 5 people end up buying and all that shit. Another is the way wrestling has become a shadow of its former self. No, not in a "fuk pg bring bak attitood era!!!!11" way, but in that it insults the fan intelligence big time. I would not want anyone to know that I have the slightest display of interest for WWE in recent times. Just imagine someone who grew up on the Attitude Era and then quit watching wrestling around that point coming into your room as you watch AJ skip around or when she was "knocked out" by a simple push from the Big Show. I, for one, would be embarrassed. Or hell, even teenagers that hung around for the Ruthless Aggression period from 2003-2007. I would NOT want them to see me watching while Smackdown shows a backstage segment of Natalya randomly farting, Hornswoggle being revealed as the anonymous GM or the Muppets appearing in unfunny childish segments on Raw.

As for me "knowing the show's quality" despite not watching... no shit. The reason I stopped watching in the first place was because the quality was terrible. I have still read the results most of the time except the last two weeks and as far as I'm concerned, this shit still sucks and many people agree on that so I take their word for it. I don't have to see the segments to know that they are shit, curiosity has driven me into watching them and I've regretted that choice 9/10 times. I know better than to constantly make the same mistake over and over again. When something sucks so often, you learn to assume that the automatic conclusion will be the same when you read about it.
Choke2Death is offline  
post #6597 of 9175 (permalink) Old 10-03-2012, 04:00 PM
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
Tnmore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 588
Points: 20
   
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jblvdx View Post
It makes me laugh that people think Punk is the reason ratings are low. Imagine this Raw or last weeks Raw without Punk, do people acutely think Raw ratings would go up or even stay the same? they would sink even lower then they are now as everything around Punk and Cena are bombing in the breakdowns. DB, Kane, Sheamus, Del Rio and everyone except Cena, Punk and Big Show are losing viewers.
LOL What? Thats because Punk is the focus of the entire show. He's part of all the key quarters, 8pm/9pm/10pm/overrun and the show does the lowest viewership/rating in 15 years.


Last edited by Tnmore; 10-03-2012 at 04:08 PM.
Tnmore is offline  
post #6598 of 9175 (permalink) Old 10-03-2012, 04:43 PM
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
Evil Peter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 993
Points: 6
         
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Choke2Death View Post
Why? There are many reasons and it not being to my taste is very minor compared to that. One reason is the fact that Vince wastes valuable money on worthless crap like Linda's senate run, pointless movies that about 5 people end up buying and all that shit. Another is the way wrestling has become a shadow of its former self. No, not in a "fuk pg bring bak attitood era!!!!11" way, but in that it insults the fan intelligence big time. I would not want anyone to know that I have the slightest display of interest for WWE in recent times. Just imagine someone who grew up on the Attitude Era and then quit watching wrestling around that point coming into your room as you watch AJ skip around or when she was "knocked out" by a simple push from the Big Show. I, for one, would be embarrassed. Or hell, even teenagers that hung around for the Ruthless Aggression period from 2003-2007. I would NOT want them to see me watching while Smackdown shows a backstage segment of Natalya randomly farting, Hornswoggle being revealed as the anonymous GM or the Muppets appearing in unfunny childish segments on Raw.

As for me "knowing the show's quality" despite not watching... no shit. The reason I stopped watching in the first place was because the quality was terrible. I have still read the results most of the time except the last two weeks and as far as I'm concerned, this shit still sucks and many people agree on that so I take their word for it. I don't have to see the segments to know that they are shit, curiosity has driven me into watching them and I've regretted that choice 9/10 times. I know better than to constantly make the same mistake over and over again. When something sucks so often, you learn to assume that the automatic conclusion will be the same when you read about it.
Ok, I understand you. I think it's far more productive to try to gain the confidence not to care what other people think of you, but I understand. I don't care the least who knows that I watch wrestling, and it doesn't matter if it's the PG era or the Attitude era, it's still full of things that could potentially be embarrassing. Stupid things like you describe happened in every era, not to mention that there's always "dumb" things happening that hardcore fans actually like, or at the very least accept. All from basic things like the Irish Whip to there being pseudo-undead that, for some reason, choose to use their powers for wrestling.

And the other part was just to get more info what makes the people that keep on being involved with things they hate tick. It's a pretty interesting phenomenon and it's fun to analyze behavior.
Evil Peter is offline  
post #6599 of 9175 (permalink) Old 10-03-2012, 04:45 PM
#OVER
 
Heel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England.
Posts: 11,515
Points: 218
                     
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Main reason for the bad ratings: THREE HOURS IS WAY TOO FUCKING LONG.


Heel is offline  
post #6600 of 9175 (permalink) Old 10-03-2012, 04:55 PM
Asking SCOTT STEINER for Wrestling Advice
 
Gang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Lithuania
Posts: 406
Points: 0
     
Re: **The Official Raw Ratings Thread** (Discuss Ratings In Here)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heel View Post
Main reason for the bad ratings: THREE HOURS IS WAY TOO FUCKING LONG.
Weak roster makes 3 hours so long.
Gang is offline  
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