View Full Version : Something about ratings from a few years ago
Dave Youell
11-25-2005, 06:56 AM
Right here's the deal, when Vince bought WCW the ratings were roughly as follows:
WCW; 2.0 - 3.0
WWF: 4.0 - 5.0
So in theory that could be a maximum of 8.0 in the ratings for both shows combined.
Yet when that happened and WCW died, it never happened and now Raw struggles to get 4.0's!
Why do you think this happened, is it possible that wrestling audiences at the time were that casual they just gave up and didn't give the other guys a try?
Your thoughts
4.0 - 5.0 was the ratings WWF got at that time? What was it like during say 99 or 00? I didn't watch wrestling at that time so I am curious as I have always thought they were like 6.0s, or so.
Anyway:
wrestling audiences at the time were that casual they just gave up and didn't give the other guys a try?
This seems about right. Marks I know either loved the WWF or WCW, and I guess just said "this sucks" when WCW died and like you said didn't give the WWF a go.
Pinnacle Charisma
11-25-2005, 07:41 AM
:
Why do you think this happened, is it possible that wrestling audiences at the time were that casual they just gave up and didn't give the other guys a try?
Your thoughts
The product of the wwf dropped sharpily after that.
The quality of the product of the wwe dropped sharply after that. The wwe tried to go into a new direction with their storylines and characters but it just didn’t work
Also the main characters of the era when wrestling was popular left or where not booked in a way that did not ender themselves to the fans. Take any popular tv show and take away the main 3 or 4 characters or alter their character drastically and you’ll find that the show will not be as popular.
If the rock did not pursue a movie career and if the wwe kept stars like Benoit, Jericho, Booker-T and Goldberg (stars that where proven draws with casual fans ) in the mainevent constantly. Guys who the fans knew and recognised instead of Brock Lesnar, an ageing stale Hogan and an unrecognisable face HHH then the domineering and sometimes unwatchable HHH then who knows what could have happened.
Chavo Classic
11-25-2005, 08:43 AM
The simplest explanantion is usually the right one...
People stopped watching wrestling.
Sadistic
11-25-2005, 08:59 AM
No Competition = Shit Products.
Shit Products = Less Ratings.
Kane Knight
11-25-2005, 09:22 AM
No Competition = Shit Products.
Shit Products = Less Ratings.
Funny, you just described their current standings too. :D
Chavo Classic
11-25-2005, 09:23 AM
Funny, you just described their current standings too. :D
If that were true the variable of 'John Cena' would be in those equations too
PullMyFinger
11-25-2005, 11:55 AM
TNA is aiming for that lost WCW audience apparantly...Dixie has stated it several times. If they are aiming for that audience, then I suggest they try harder.
Kane Knight
11-25-2005, 12:16 PM
TNA is aiming for that lost WCW audience apparantly...Dixie has stated it several times. If they are aiming for that audience, then I suggest they try.
Jaton
11-25-2005, 02:14 PM
TNA is aiming for that lost WCW audience apparantly...Dixie has stated it several times. If they are aiming that low, then I suggest they try harder.
TNA is aiming for that lost WCW audience apparantly...Dixie has stated it several times. If they are aiming for that audience, then I suggest they cry.
The wrestling business is full of peaks and valleys.
WrestleMania I to WrestleMania III was a peak.
WrestleMania IV to WrestleMania XIV was a valley.
The WCW/WWF War from 95-00 was a major peak - the biggest one yet.
We are back in the valley, my friends. Maybe John Cena and Dave Batista can pull us out of it.....
And maybe Vince McMahon will be the next Pope.
Corkscrewed
11-26-2005, 01:12 AM
We've been in the valley for a while.
Problem is that every time they start to climb out of it, the writers shit on their jobs again and stop trying. That's what bugs me the most: the fact that it's obvious the writers either aren't trying or are literally that stupid. Things like dropped storylines, or illogical match decisions, or climaxes out of nowhere, or buildups to nothing. I mean, they do nail a couple of things, but they can never seem to sustain good quality, either for a long period of time or across the card or across both shows.
And they can't seem to realize that John Cena is only a draw to little kids and teenage girls.
Kane Knight
11-26-2005, 02:21 AM
And they can't seem to realize that John Cena is only a draw to little kids and teenage girls.
Still, he can draw more than most of the current roster.
This is not a good thing, but it's true. Cena's better as champ than half the fuckers.
The main reason for peaks and valleys is that the WWE is and has always been shortsighted. Vince waited around for an Austin or Rock, Hogan fell in his lap, and he always banks on one horse.
HE's looking for one person to build the WWE around again, but ignoring something pretty major.
In the attitude era, the Rock and Austin were fucking huge, but they weren't alone. It was in large part their feuds that got them over, and great supporting characters. Foley, Taker, Hunter, even shmucks like Venis played a part in making the main event hot.
Now we're so poor off that the death of one (albeit great) superstar fucks over the main event scene on one of the shows. People who (At the very least) could be the support cast are leaving (Jericho is on Haiatus, Christian's in TNA, and we're really stuck with a subpar roster. Meaning, the roster's so weak, an out of shape Mick Foley gets better pops than 99% of the guys currently wrestling. The likes of Angle and BEnoit are plagued by their past injuries, and are probably not long for this business. What they need to do is find some replacement talent like 5 years ago, and start grooming them to take over at the top one day. Like, yesterday.
You can't keep praying that Austin'll return or one of the superstars you toss the belt on'll be the next one.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.