[PG-13]

Well,for sure it wasn't a boring year for them.Lots of stuff going on,along with bad wrestling matches and outlandish angles.We had the McMahon-Austin saga culminating,Rock and HHH becoming true superstars,push for Billy Gun,Undertaker cutting long ministry promos and kidnapping people,Mankind winning his first world title,Big Show debuting and Smackdown airing it's first episode.But you know what?That probably isn't enough to describe everything interesting going on in this year.
The ratings however were through the roof as they say and it is probably the most successive WWE year in history as marketing and growth goes.
Why do you think they got this stellar ratings and tremendous attention?

 

[wrestlingfan91]

Shocks
Storylines
Stuff that never happend before in Storylines.

 

[Cowabunga]

Because 1999 was the peak of the Attitude Era, the rest has already been explained in your post.

 

[PG-13]

Because 1999 was the peak of the Attitude Era, the rest has already been explained in your post.

But was it really the peak?

 

[dxbender]

1998-1999 is when WWE broke out from being a PG show and went all out 14+ which is what made fans go crazy over it. Many people do say that time was the peak of wrestling, but I really think fans liked the storylines more then than the actual wrestling since even in 2001-2002 when we had the best of WWF and WCW combined, fans weren't as crazy as they were in 1998-1999. Though some people back then were crazy and violent as seen in some raw episodes where people threw stuff in the ring.

 

[21 - 1]

RATINGS. HE GETS 'EM.​

 

[Cowabunga]

1998-1999 is when WWE broke out from being a PG show and went all out 14+ which is what made fans go crazy over it. Many people do say that time was the peak of wrestling, but I really think fans liked the storylines more then than the actual wrestling since even in 2001-2002 when we had the best of WWF and WCW combined, fans weren't as crazy as they were in 1998-1999. Though some people back then were crazy and violent as seen in some raw episodes where people threw stuff in the ring.

That's always been the case in Pro Wrestling.

 

[Rawlin]

all of the above.

it should also be noted, there wasn't NEARLY as much on TV in 1999 then there is in 2010. even if Raw pulled in JUST as many viewers as it did in 1999, hell, if it pulled in MORE viewers than it did in 1999, it still wouldn't have as high as ratings at its 1999 episodes. TV has exploded in the past decade, with things like reality television and the enormous regurgitation of popular law/medical shows coming in abundance. and with things like MMA coming into popularity, and just more popularity for sports in general, wrestling is bound to fall a bit.

but the viewers are always the more telling number than the ratings.

 

[21 - 1]

all of the above.

it should also be noted, there wasn't NEARLY as much on TV in 1999 then there is in 2010. even if Raw pulled in JUST as many viewers as it did in 1999, hell, if it pulled in MORE viewers than it did in 1999, it still wouldn't have as high as ratings at its 1999 episodes. TV has exploded in the past decade, with things like reality television and the enormous regurgitation of popular law/medical shows coming in abundance. and with things like MMA coming into popularity, and just more popularity for sports in general, wrestling is bound to fall a bit.

but the viewers are always the more telling number than the ratings.

This, completely.

 

[ethancorkhill]

hey the 90s was just an edgier time, before 9/11 people would just swear on TV and stuff, plus people didnt watch TV just to be offended and keep complaining!!

 

[NoGimmicksNeeded]

In 1999, at least here, the WWF was a fad comparable with Pokemon, Tamagotchis and Furbys. And no matter what people may try to convince you of, those kids didn't go off wrestling because of the product deteriorating, most simply moved on to the next fad.

Don't know about in America, Canada or wherever, but the Attitude Era blew up big here because of children. People say 'but at least it didn't pander to kids', but I think they're forgetting you could buy WWF curtains, sheets and pillowcases, and Austin, Rock and DX lunchboxes.

And in my opinion it was British children that caused the ratings jump in America. I doubt the actual viewership figures were much higher than now, though.

 

[Noel]

hey the 90s was just an edgier time, before 9/11 people would just swear on TV and stuff, plus people didnt watch TV just to be offended and keep complaining!!

Are you saying 9/11 stopped people swearing on TV?

If so, i've got a Miz quote on standby.

 

[Rawlin]

hey the 90s was just an edgier time, before 9/11 people would just swear on TV and stuff, plus people didnt watch TV just to be offended and keep complaining!!

fail.

do you even watch TV? i can name a dozen shows off the top of my head that i watched last week that people swore. they've pushed the limits further, they haven't gone in reverse. general audience is desensitized nowadays, the shit they can show on an episode of CSI in a primetime slot on TV is surprising.

it was considered edgier because it was the first time a lot of that stuff was happening. now it happens every day, so theres no point in talking about it.

 

[alejbr4]

hey the 90s was just an edgier time, before 9/11 people would just swear on TV and stuff, plus people didnt watch TV just to be offended and keep complaining!!

rudy?

 

[ethancorkhill]

i am not saying that 9/11 made people not sware but you cannot say that the world is very different, RAW IS WAR was mad into RAW because of the wars being over the word war being attributed to the event

 

[sharkboy22]

Whatever it was, it sure wasn't the actual wrestling.

In 1999, at least here, the WWF was a fad comparable with Pokemon, Tamagotchis and Furbys. And no matter what people may try to convince you of, those kids didn't go off wrestling because of the product deteriorating, most simply moved on to the next fad.

Don't know about in America, Canada or wherever, but the Attitude Era blew up big here because of children. People say 'but at least it didn't pander to kids', but I think they're forgetting you could buy WWF curtains, sheets and pillowcases, and Austin, Rock and DX lunchboxes.

And in my opinion it was British children that caused the ratings jump in America. I doubt the actual viewership figures were much higher than now, though.

This. There wasa report the other day that RAW in 2000 had 4.8 million viewers while RAW in 2010 had 4.6

If 4.6 is that much lower than 4.8, I must be really worse at math than I thought.

 

[21 - 1]

i am not saying that 9/11 made people not sware but you cannot say that the world is very different, RAW IS WAR was mad into RAW because of the wars being over the word war being attributed to the event

I'm not an expert on wrestling dates, but I'm almost certain the WAR suffix was dropped from RAW not long after WWE bought out WCW - hence ending the Monday Night Wars, not because of some cave-dweller Leeroy Jenkins-ing a building. :side:

 

[Hiplop]

Yeah, the name changed.. that is about it

 

[Dark_Raiden]

all of the above.

it should also be noted, there wasn't NEARLY as much on TV in 1999 then there is in 2010. even if Raw pulled in JUST as many viewers as it did in 1999, hell, if it pulled in MORE viewers than it did in 1999, it still wouldn't have as high as ratings at its 1999 episodes. TV has exploded in the past decade, with things like reality television and the enormous regurgitation of popular law/medical shows coming in abundance. and with things like MMA coming into popularity, and just more popularity for sports in general, wrestling is bound to fall a bit.

but the viewers are always the more telling number than the ratings.

Actually that's completely wrong. The world's population is ever-increasing, so getting more viewers than 11 years ago isn't a big deal as more people are alive now than then. Plus more people watch tv. Ratings tells the percentage you get of people watching tv, which is more accurate b/c you can't draw someone who isn't there, who doesn't exist/ So ratings are waaay more telling than viewers.

ANd 1999 got high ratings b/c it was near the beginning of the change from Pg to Tv-14 and it was part of the Attitude Era, the greatest era of WWF/E or wrestling period. Rock+Austin+Taker+HHH+Mankind+Kane+DX=ratings.

 

[Nexus One]

Well,for sure it wasn't a boring year for them.Lots of stuff going on,along with bad wrestling matches and outlandish angles.We had the McMahon-Austin saga culminating,Rock and HHH becoming true superstars,push for Billy Gun,Undertaker cutting long ministry promos and kidnapping people,Mankind winning his first world title,Big Show debuting and Smackdown airing it's first episode.But you know what?That probably isn't enough to describe everything interesting going on in this year.
The ratings however were through the roof as they say and it is probably the most successive WWE year in history as marketing and growth goes.
Why do you think they got this stellar ratings and tremendous attention?

Because anything Austin or Rock touched made money. It's really as simple as that whether anyone likes it or not. HHH didn't mean $hit in 1999 even with the WWF title push so bringing up his name doesn't even matter.


2000 was a bigger year than 1999 and it's on the record.