RAW does lowest rating...in 15 years!!!
 

WOW.

Not surprising. The show pretty much sucks right now

It's on it's annual fall auto-pilot mode that doesn't change until January.

good. the product is complete garbage. been a fan for over 20 years but this is the most bland and boring its been in years

I really hope WWE "stays the course" here, and doesn't cop out by bringing in typical big names like Triple H, Brock Lesnar, Undertaker, The Rock etc. Of course ratings are low now, but as Slik/Seth said, things usually die down this time, but will quickly heat up around the Rumble time. NOW is the time to really establish a new breed of superstars. Tolerate this down-period, because it means people will be more familiar with these guys when it's really their time to shine in the spotlight that is Wrestlemania (and generally the first three months of the year).

Advertising a Triple H/Lesnar etc appearance is the mistake WWE has been making all year long, relying on older guys for quick ratings bumps that really do nothing for the product, other than give them a ratings spike for one show.

Hope this means they bring Nash back.

3 hour raw experiment = failure

How long before they sack up, admit it and go back to 2?

That's what happens when you let a vanilla midget hold your World Title. He's killing the company. They paired Heyman with him because Punk bores people when he speaks and not even that can save Raw.

The time for RYBACK to be World Champ is NOW!!!!

They'll stay stubborn for as long as they can with it, can't see it making an entire year though.

Lack of Cena=/= ratings

Errrr...The last few Raws have drawn the same ratings as usual, with even the third hour doing pretty well (The lowest hour for the week of 20 August being 4.4 million viewers). Raw is currently three of the top ten cable slots on a given week.

Remind me, chum, why this is a failure?

The 3 hour Raws would be fine if they had writers who had any idea what they're doing.

They need to stop doing all this Twitter/Tout bullshit. Also...RYBACK. Speaking of him. We need a new font here called RYBACK and the only you are allowed to use it for is saying his name.

Yeah, I can't imagine a third hour that generally gets less than .2 million less than the second hour going anywhere.

Actually, by this logic, they should probably pack up and close down Raw entirely. After all, the number of viewers has been relatively stable for quite some time.

The number of viewers this week was 3.5 million, which is around a million off from their usual viewership.

They've been better in recent weeks managing the 3 hours unlike the initial couple of weeks where they went overboard with the recaps and lucky if the first hour had more than 1 match not involving a squash.

I doubt Monday Night Football has impacted the ratings more than its usual share this time of year especially after the recent ref debacles although its possible the audience has started to get burnt out on 3 hours or only starts to tune in a lot more from the 2nd hour on.

I totally expected this to be your thread Gertie :D

QUICKLY PUT THE BELT ON CENA!

Cena wins @ HIAC then, thankfully.

I thought they'd focus around Ryback to start it out, but they didn't. I stopped watching it after seeing a bunch of shit on my screen.

you guys are hilarious

In theory, Cena chasing the belt should draw better than Cena holding the belt.

Or maybe instead of shit-canning an idea just a few months into its inception, they can figure out why it isn't doing well and fix that?

Anyways, ratings have less and less relevance these days especially given the money the 3 hour shows bring in.

The money they bring in is determined by ratings. That is how WWE/USA set the ad rates.

I'm amazed of how some of you think the ratings are "poor" because of a guy being WWE champion. Give me a break! The question I have is, in CM Punk's 316+ days title reign, how many times you see a constant trend of 2.5s or a decline of viewers each week?

little kiddies can't stay up late enough for the full 3 hours during school season......

:lol:

Fuck you for making me quote Kane Knight.

Doesn't this usually happen when MNF comes back on ? Why is this surprising ?

Where are the ratings reported? I can only find ratings from last week.

Found them on a website, but it isn't Nielson's website or anything.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/201...w-more/150983/

<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="629"><tbody><tr><td height="49" width="331">Show</td> <td width="53">Net</td> <td width="78">Time</td> <td width="84">Viewers (000) (Live + SD)</td> <td width="83">Adult 18-49 Rating (Live + SD)</td> </tr> <tr> <td height="20">NFL REGULAR SEASON L</td> <td>ESPN</td> <td>8:30 PM</td> <td>16616</td> <td>6.8</td> </tr> <tr> <td height="20">SPORTSCENTER: L</td> <td>ESPN</td> <td>11:40 PM</td> <td>4509</td> <td>2.2</td> </tr> <tr> <td height="20">MONDAY NIGHT COUNTDOWN L</td> <td>ESPN</td> <td>6:30 PM</td> <td>2941</td> <td>1.3</td> </tr> <tr> <td height="20">WWE Entertainment</td> <td>USA</td> <td>10:00 PM</td> <td>3472</td> <td>1.3</td> </tr> <tr> <td height="20">WWE Entertainment</td> <td>USA</td> <td>9:00 PM</td> <td>3598</td> <td>1.2</td> </tr> <tr> <td height="20">WWE Entertainment</td> <td>USA</td> <td>8:00 PM</td> <td>3436</td> <td>1.2</td> </tr> <tr> <td height="20">Family Guy</td> <td>ADSM</td> <td>11:00 PM</td> <td>2275</td> <td>1.1</td> </tr> <tr> <td height="20">Family Guy</td> <td>ADSM</td> <td>11:30 PM</td> <td>2225</td> <td>1.0</td> </tr> <tr> <td height="20">NFL PRIMETIME</td> <td>ESPN</td> <td>1:00 AM</td> <td>1770</td> <td>1.0</td> </tr> <tr> <td height="20">REAL HOUSEWIVES OF NYC</td> <td>BRVO</td> <td>9:00 PM</td> <td>1838</td> <td>0.9</td></tr></tbody></table>

FFS, RAW was still only behind MNF in the ratings.

I don't think WWE or any show on cable will ever get the kind of ratings they got back in the late 90s/early 2000s because there is just so much shit on TV now. There are too many options on TV, internet, etc for that many people to find 1 show to be "must-see". Sports have the built in advantage of only having so many games a year, the built-in hype and fan bases in major metro areas, etc.

Yes, Vinny Mac orgasms for Twitter and authorizes Hulu licenses but fails to realize the Internet's impact on overall TV viewing.

This is not a story. It's NFL season. Nothing to see here move on!

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/rSjK2Oqrgic" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Like Hogan, Cena benefits from the football-related ratings dip when he leaves. Unlike Hogan, Cena isn't known for claiming credit for the ratings dip when he is off television.

What do you mean? Pandora's Box has been opened and there is no going back, which is why they are going to Hulu and Netflix with so much of their content. There is nothing you can do to bring internet viewers back to exclusively watching live on cable tv.

Plus Monday Night Football is a bigger tradition than Monday Night Raw with most of the mainstream. There is no way Raw stands a chance to beat it this time of year.

I think the fall should be a season for wrestling to regroup, recuperate, and realize new talent.

They should go to 2 hours for Fall and then bring back 3 hours for the Road to WrestleMania.

How would a 15 year low be a win?

WWE could do more with online distribution such as offering online membership to WWE.com for behind-the-scenes peeks and other exclusive content. The fact that McMahon is making such a big deal about TV ratings means that someone who reports to him, e.g. the VP of Marketing & Distribution (or whatever they call it now), was responsible for proposing the Hulu and Netflix deals.

It's not even a 15 year low. It's a 15 year low for a non-holiday episode. Did you even read the article before putting it up?

It would still be a 15 year low.

A big MNF game coupled with the 3 hour format and a really awful opening segment are the perfect storm for a low rating. I hate it when people lower their expectations and are ok with that type of thing just because "it's still in the top ten".

You should have higher expectations.

Ratings would go through the roof if RYBACK were to squash that vanilla midget Punk and become world champion.

I'll wait and see the actual numbers from Nielsen, not the dirt sheets. They're usually not even in the same league.

Regardless, I'm not about to say that three hours of Raw is a failure because of one week.

They should have Cena dominate the entire roster.

Not entirely the case.

If it was normal, the report wouldn't exactly be "fifteen year low."

WWE is getting OCW ratings. They need to panic and bring back Undertaker, Nash, HHH, HBK, SCSA, Flair (wooooooo), JBL, Rock, Foley and Haku for a round table discussion about their careers. I think that would equal ratings.

I think what they need is to bring in Brad Hamilton from OCW.

Braden Walker is needed in this time of crisis.

The last few weeks of Raw have placed it about where it's been for a couple years or more now. Even if this Monday marks a drop, it's not immediately a permanent decline or indicative of something. Time will, of course, tell if this means anything.

But seriously? If you want to argue expectations, you might want to start on firmer ground.

And yes, they're still top ten. They're beating a fuckton of shows that would kill for that slot.

Now, if you want to argue quality of the shows, fine. WWE's so boring I barely bother watching anymore, preferring to read spoilers or just watch people bitch on here. Honestly, I think the world in which Ryback is king is more entertaining than the current product.

But let's face it, the quality's been shit for ages. If you want to go that route, fine, but the ratings aren't reflecting that because they've been fairly steady during a lot of shit. Don't try and argue standards of quality in terms of what's drawing ratings (if that is indeed your argument), because quality fell out of the trunk about 50 miles back.

As far as standards go, yes, it'd be nice if they had higher standards, but they've made it clear they're in it to make money and (surprise) this is making them money. As such, it's hard to call it a failure. They seem to have a strong fanbase that makes them more money than they ever did when Austin 316 was the buzzphrase.

Ratings really only matter to advertisers. Why should they matter to you at all?

I'm very apathetic to the main-event scene. Obviously, the product is boring and they are in the annual "it's not January yet" mode.

You're kind of ruining this thread for me. When I have a tabloid-heavy headline for a topic I expect to come back later and read really entertaining responses...not serious discussions (a couple is fine though).

THANK YOU.

Will never understand why fans put up such a fuss about ratings.

When Raw got a 5.6 back in that day in 1998 and nitro only got a 5.3 that was the 5th happiest day of my life.

Ryback gets a main event push, and the ratings tank?

SHOCKING

I don't find the product all that bad or boring. They breathed life into CM Punk with the heel turn and alliance with Heyman. Dolph has been good as usual. The rise of Ryback has been fun. Funkasaurus and Tensai have apparently ran their course, so hopefully they tweak/evolve the characters, but they have taken up maybe 5% of the show in the past few weeks. The Kane/DB team along with the whole revitalization of the tag team division has been great. The Sheamus/Del Rio Saga and the Divas division have been average. There are still always questions about when/what will they do with Brock Lesnar, Triple H, Undertaker, and other part time guys. I just don't think the product is unenjoyable. I enjoy watching RAW every week. I don't watch SmackDown! (might FF to segment a two and watch them), so I can't talk for that show. The 3-Hour thing is fine and hasn't changed much other than more time for more guys to get on TV and I don't think this tag team tournament would have as much hype/focus if RAW was just two hours.

There's a few entertaining things going on. Honestly, this Ryback thing is like a blast from the past as far as a "big time" feeling with a new guy hitting the main event. Bryan and Kane are fun. Obviously love Heyman. This thing they've done with Taker for a couple years now, Rock last year and this year and Lesnar this year where you can spend all year like "Who's gonna face this guy at WrestleMania" is really cool.

It does however make up a small chunk of the programming and a VERY small chunk of the performers. A guy like Cody Rhodes, who I'm not even that big of a fan of is a good example of what is seemingly a lack of grasp on the conecept of character development. The disfigured thing heading into his title reign... his character had depth and was intriguing. Now he's just a generic guy who floats around aimlessly. They can't stop a character from getting stale and ultimately dropping him their focus on him.

Kevin Nash said something in an interview one time that, like him or not, I thought was spot on. He was talking about Sheamus (when he was a heel and head just lost the title) and he mentioned how it generally takes 5 years of steady booking to get a guy implanted in the fans' mind as a major star. The time could be more or less but there's this issue they have right now where they haven't truly taken the years to keep guys in that spot to where we're forced to accept them as a superstar. Instead they've taken guys like The Miz, had him win the main event at WrestleMania... something that was once reserved for a guy like Hogan or Austin or HHH... and then they dropped their focus on him and went elsewhere. Now he's back left to start from scratch. Wasted years.

And it doesn't help that until SummerSlam, they couldn't even write enough remotely intriguing storylines to build PPV matches and literally were filling half and sometimes more of the PPVs with random filler matches that could be seen on Superstars or Smackdown. That's glaringly obvious lazy booking. When you don't have enough guys involved in stories to fill a PAY PER VIEW with more than three matches with heat behind them, you're definitely gonna have problems making characters that are interesting.

And on a side note to something else James Steele mentioned: Brodus Clay should not have peaked and then been dropped from relevance that fast. He's another guy with a character that is taylor made to get the crowd behind him and he's becoming a guy you expect to job and Big Show's bitch.

You need jobbers on the roster to make guys like Cesaro and Show look good. Brodus Clay should not be one of them. He's a wasted character.

How so? He will still come out and dance and have fun with the crowd. That isn't a main event gimmick. At best, it is a midcard gimmick that you give occasional matches higher in the card just so the fans can easily rally behind him against an evil heel. He is a super heavyweight Santino. He'll be able to recover from 1 squash at the hands of another angry Big Show run.

I don't think he needs to be a main eventer right away or necessarily ever but I've reasoned here before that it's not entirely impossible for it to be a main event gimmick. The guy is a monster. Literally the only difference between him and any main event monster is that instead of being angry, he's flashy and fun loving. The gimmick is not unrealistic in the least. It's not like he ACTUALLY is a dinosaur from planet funk. It's part of the "fun loving" personality.

There's no reason why that side of his personality needs to prevent him from beating the fuck out of someone because he's physically a beast.

While I agree Cody Rhodes isn't where he could/should be, I wouldn't say he is "aimless". I think they should have gotten away from the mask and develop his own unique personality with a gimmick crutch like "I'm horribly disfigured, but I'm not but I think I am so I am somewhat batshit crazy." The Sandow/Rhodes team is interesting and has potential. Hell, the Slater/McIntyre/Mahal thing has me interested.

The difference between him and Santino is the fact that he genuinely looks like he could beat anyone and he has fun while not letting the fact that he's having a disagreement with his snake hand puppet cost him matches.

If they wanted to let Santino use his MMA background and somehow make it realistic that he now knows how to destroy people in the ring while he's still a goofy motherfucker but he doesn't lose matches based on being comically inept, I'd say there'd be nothing wrong with that being a main event gimmick either.

I don't care for Rhodes Scholars based simply on the fact that Cody is a generic heel and Sandow has loads of character. It throws the team off for me.

The disfigured thing had a lot of legs. They should have done a creepy phantom of the opera style thing with it with him hanging out in the rafters randomly and maybe kidnapping divas and bringing them to whatever dark part of the building he's dwelling in and lifting his mask up, asking them if they think he's hideous. Would have been awesome. As it stands, his character has no depth.

It is Rikishi all over again. Main eventers need a sense of humor, comedic timing, etc. but the foundation of the character can't be a comedy character. Rikishi, Santino, Brodus, Scotty 2 Hotty, Godfather, Val Venis, etc. either failed or won't work in the main event because at their core they were comedy characters. I know it is a stretch to say Val Venis was a comedy character, but the whole porn star thing was intended to make people laugh and provide easy ways to segue into a feud with somebody. Brodus needs to be this generation's version of the Godfather. He can win IC titles and be a huge fucking star, but at its core the gimmick can't be taken seriously when in the midst of the World Title.

It could have been awesome, but could have just as easily come off really cheesy. I cringed whenever Cody did his evil laugh/bi-polar frown/smile thing. Cody gets to work with another heel in helping to build the television and slowly flesh out his character. He is getting to be a character that doesn't rely on hokey gimmicks like staring in a LCD mirror, wearing a clear plastic mask, etc.

I could see it. I'd be completely fine with him being this generation's Godfather. Maybe a little more dominant while never getting into the World Title picture.

But like I said, there's nothing unrealistic about the character. There's no reason why a character being flashy, fun-loving and flamboyant can't be a main eventer. Especially when the guy behind the character legitimately looks like he could dominate the roster and is crazy likable.

I have little hope for Cody becoming interesting without a pre-written tweak to his character. The longer he goes without the dashing gimmick and the disfigured gimmick, the more he slips back to CAWdy to me.

I remember when Brodus was still undefeated and he came out to protect Santino from Ziggler and Swagger and Ziggler came after him and just took a headbut to the stomach in mid air. He looked like such a fucking badass. I wanted him pushed to the moon after that happened. There's just not many guys the crowd can get behind right off the bat. He's been pretty comfortable on the mic when he's gotten time to talk too.

Simple. Picture the main event of WrestleMania. Months of build. Will his dreams come true on the grandest stage of them all? The time is here and now. "Ladies and gentlemen, let's get ready to witness a battle for the ages..."

Then, this happens:

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/x6-OiYMmOI0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

That shit just doesn't work in a high profile main event. It is a gimmick that is over, that will have a long run on TV, and will make him and WWE some money, but it will never be a main event gimmick for more than a one-off program once in awhile.

I'm not saying he should never sniff the main event or be put in good feuds, but that gimmick just can't work in high profile main event matches. No different than Val Venis, Rikishi, etc. before him. Brodus Clay could easily main event an "Unforgiven" or something on a short build because it is easy to get him in a feud. You make fun of him, you interfere with him having fun, you pick on a kid in the crowd, etc. He is the big, funky, sparkly, loveable hero in a "slow part of the year" main event feud.

Of course you can't see it. Because he is currently nowhere near that point. If they pushed him to the point and he was getting ridiculous reactions and people were backing him 100%, the fact that he dances before his match is not gonna prevent a WrestleMania main event that people wanna see. I damn sure can't see most of the people that guys here think are the next huge star even making a normal entrance to the main event of a WrestleMania. That's a separate issue from sitting back and thinking if the logical steps could lead to it in theory though.

Keep in mind, I'm in no way saying that WWE would ever push Brodus to the main event. I'm saying there's no reason they, or anyone else, should shut it down as an option just because he's not super serious wrestler guy. Boxing and MMA have had success with "flamboyant" characters. The only difference would be that he'd be in a world where he can go all out with it and people would actually be behind him. If a guy genuinely comes off as a threat, him having a ridiculously fun loving personality should not hold him back.

I like how you guys blame Monday Night Football every year and yet every year the ratings get lower. WAKE UP smell what you're shovelin....the current product is dull and only the hardcore fans that were still there fifteen years ago are the ones who will still stick by it. Everyone else gave up. I know I said I'd be back in five years to tell you all I was right, but I didn't know it would turn into five weeks.

Wrestling has stuck to around the 4.5 million viewer range for years now. They take a slight hit due to MNF, but this (if true) isn't typical. You cannot claim a pattern here in any honesty.

The current product seems to do fine with the target audience. It also makes them a fuckton of money.

The "freshness" of the product doesn't have anything to do with the ratings.

Thank you. For most people over the age of 12 now, Raw is not must-see TV anymore. It's disposable entertainment you watch when you're extremely bored and nothing else is on.

Also, this thread has been ruined by people trying to have a real discussion. It was all for me to be entertained by reading people's reactions where they freak out. Ugh.

RAW hasn't been "must see TV" for a decade.

WWE needs to have Paul Heyman come out to cut a promo on anything he wants from 8:00 to 8:15PM, from 8:55 to 9:05PM, from 9:55 to 10:05PM, and from 10:55 'til 11:05PM.

That'll get you the biggest ratings of all time.

*Donald Trump voice*

"It's gonna be huuuge".

This

Raw has ALWAYS been disposable entertainment

It'd also be nice if they posted full episodes of Raw to Hulu, instead of 90-minute highlight videos.

Well, it was in the second half of 1997 that WWE began to rise and rise and overtake WCW.

Perhaps this rating signifies they're gearing for another big run?

Missed this before.

Or that Vince is a bipolar twit with no clue as to what he's doing. Remember, tis is the dude who heralded the smark era and had a huge hand in the rise of the internet, but he hates both.

In fact, this seems more like a half-ass "keeping up with the times" deal, the sort of thing Vince and WWE do every few years against their will.

also, since TV sponsors are still a big deal in terms of money, one could be concerned with one and still embrace the other.

Of course, they would have to really embrace the online market.

Note to Clox: With two fingers slashed open, I can still type without looking like I smashed my face on a keyboard.

I'm curious as to why you've taken to trolling, seth. I'm also curious as to how you could be so out of touch with your audience as to think this would cause a kerfuffle.

Raw scored a 2.78 this week, with 4.0 million viewers, which is up from last week's 2.54 rating and 3.5 million viewers.

It is still below the average 4.5 million viewers and 3.2 rating but up from previous weeks.

credit - pwtorch

I like how the bolded part is true, and yet the average rating below it is false. How do these websites only manage to get accurate numbers part pf the time.

The whole thing is accurate. Don't be dense.

BUT HOW DO U KNOW THOUGH

Kane Knight's real last name is "Nielsen". He knows.

the numbers are easily referenced online from the people who actually do the research. The "accuracy" of dirtsheets usually conflicts with actual posted ratings.

TPWW: Research is Magic.

So is knowledge, apparently.

Are you trying to tell TPWW that you do not make a living out of researching ratings on a case by case basis?

Kane Knight is really boring.

He doesn't seem to ever enjoy anything outside of playing his guitar and being a grump.

You got me. I am an executive at NMR. Try and keep it on the hush hush.

I know I'm supposed to get defensive for some reason, but I just don't really feel it.

And knowing what I'm talking about. That is probably fairly alien to you.

Well said. Seems that everyone's answers to most questions/arguments anymore are "Google it" or "www.randomwiki.com". Research + Logic = Win, which is why Jesus was really a zombie. :foc: