Vince's theory being tested
 

With Edge out on Smackdown, it seems the 4 biggest names are all big me. Kane, Khali, Batista, and Mark Henry. Maybe once he realizes big mean do not bring in the crowd (Unless somehow people come to watch them), Vince will quit with his theory about it?

The more likely response. He still doesn't get that Cena doesn't draw, FFS.

lol Mark Henry?????

It's not a matter of big men vs. small men. It's a matter of talent.

And they have none.

Mike Awesome (RIP) had talent and he was quite the big man. Bag Bam Bigelow the same.

Smackdown's main event has no real TALENT, people. Get it right.

According to Rob, the Observer says that John Cena is one of the top 10 biggest draws of all time. I'll try and find that post (it was a long time ago.)

I never liked Meltzer's bullshit and so I haven't ever seen these breakdowns, but if Rob says it...IT HAS TO BE TRUE! Then again, maybe I am just ignoring it because he isn't telling me what I want to hear, right KK?

Kane has quite a bit of talent for a guy his size. I'll pass on the others, though.

Also, the way they have been pushing John Cena, he would need to be one of the top three draws of all-time to justify it.

Makes about as much sense as the rest of Batista's booking.

Kane got pinned in the match. Perhaps that had something to do with it.

How long have you been watching WWE?

I hate batista

John Cena a bigger draw than Bret Hart WTF?!

Well, all he had to do was draw a dime.:shifty:

Canadian.

Actually, Rey is on his way back. If he can delay getting feaked out about the Smackdown rating for at least another month he can blame it on him as opposed to his beloved big men.

Thank you Rob!

It seems like everyone likes to just brush off the women and children cheering for Cena and say he isn't a draw because them and the majority of smarks don't like him.

Vince has stuck with Cena because CENA MAKES MONEY. Those children are having mommy and daddy buy them tons of Cena toys, shirts, etc.

lol, Yeah, I thought about that after I hit "Submit".

Funny. Raw did 2.9 and 2.7. USA are leaning on WWE. These are not the signs of someone who draws or makes money.

Which is probably why Disney's their big competition right now.

First of all, ratings are not the only thing you need to look at to see if someone is making money. Are you telling me little aren't getting tons of Cena merchandise? The people who are gonna spend money on WWE shirts and toys and such are not the smarks who hate Cena.

Secondly... when did Raw do a 2.9 and 2.7 rating? :wtf:

It works though. They are making money off of him. Whether they "should be ashamed" or not is a matter of opinion.

Yes, Stock prices, attendances (Except for Manias as the like) are down. Can't just focus on ratings, when so many markers are down. If USA's on them, it means there is something to be concerned about, BTW.

Second, acording to NMR, The Raw from 2 weeks ago. Don't know what this week's Raw did. Have to wait til Wednesday.

And they're losing the confidence of not only the USA Network that airs them, but their stockholders.

http://www.100megsfree4.com/wiawrest...wwf/wwfraw.htm

http://www.twnpnews.com/information/wweraw2007.shtml

3.4

John Cena has the same fans Bret Hart did. The people who will cheer for whoever WWE puts on top as a face, the people who like guys that "stand up for what's right", and small children. That's it. Is it any surprise that WWE is now drawing exactly how it drew when Bret was top dawg.

John Cena is the new Bret Hart...only...you know...more talented in the ring. :p

*Cheap Shot*...I had to take it. :D

You are so wrong on that...

Cena is a BIGGER draw that Bret, not the same. Didn't you read what Rob said!?

Other than that, all true statements.

Eh, I wouldn't credit that with Cena, I'd credit it with Cena had a larger fanbase to drive away than Bret did. Bret only had to get Hogan and Piper fans to stop watching WWE, Cena had to get all of Austin and Rock's fans to leave...

Don't get me wrong, they both did a stand up job of getting people to turn it off, it's just Cena had a much bigger crowd to start with...

On a side note, the average rating between September 2nd, 2002 and when Triple H's reign on top ended was 3.6.

The average rating since Cena has come to Raw... 4.0.

Gee, and here I was trusting the actual reports that came from NMR like a sucker. who know the "100megsfree4" guys knew better than Nielsen?

Since Cena's had thhe belt on him, the ratings have consistently gone lower and lower. They have peaked before each Mania, and any time there's a 3 hour special, ratings spike. The only other real exception was when Edge won the championsip, and within 3 weeks they were down to the Cena ratings level--3.7 (Even according to WWE.com, that was Cena's prior rating).

Also, eyeballing the data I've saved from Nielsen, I'd say the average Cena reign is 3.5. Possibly lower, but I'm erring in favor of good ratings. I didn't index them prior to Cena's reign, however, so I can't say what Triple H's reign drew.

To be fair Cena had help from HHH before him

There is No way Cena can draw now. He's beaten everyone under the sun. No one cares anymore.

Well, show me some links with these supposed 2.7 and 2.9 ratings and then your "facts" will be as valid as two random links I found stating the raw rating.

Show me that these first two sites I found that show the Raw rating have an elaborate plan to lie about the Raw rating on a weekly basis.

Come on...

Come on...

Cena has Main Evented (Or been one of the dual MEs) on the biggest Wrestlemanias in history. Massive buyrates. There's no doubt that they accredit Cena with being responsible. No matter how bad the buyrates or attendences, Mania will always sell because it's Mania. Ratings got up to like the low fours before WM this last time, and it's not JUST because Austin was on. Mania sells. The Rumble Sells. Even Summerslam, to a lesser extent. Raw could be getting TNA ratings, and Mania would sell a million tickets and make zillions of dollars in household ratings.

http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/2007...1185373063.php

They're reporting 3.4 too!!!

This is some conspiracy!

:lol:

If you're too retarded to google "Nielsen Media Research," I won't show you a God Damned thing. :) Their top ten clearly lists the hours of Raw.

But you had to go and be a big 'tard about it. Instead of actually looking at Nielsen's site, or looking for it, you clung to your stupid little random sites, made some line up about an elaborate plan, and opted to Goad the one with a positive IQ.

:lol:

You've resorted to reporting LoP?

You fucking moron. that's as pathetic as citing Matt Boone.

Yep. I'm reporting from Nielsen. But you've got Lords of Pain. I must lose. :lol:

http://www.impactwrestling.com/

It's spreading!

He probably just wanted you to type "Nielsen Media Research" so he could google it with out typing it out......He is a smart man.

LOL.

You're "proving" me wrong with third tier wrestling sites only morons go to, instead of looking at the source.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

They've all made up this 3.4 number apparently....

Pretty crazy.

Vince must be in their pockets.

That's not true. I've seen credible stuff from Boone. It's rare, but I've seen it.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I present the ONE person still stupid enough to not get how wrestling news sites work!

*applause sign*

You see, my extra-chromosoned friend, that number likely came from somewhere. Lords of Pain and the other sites you've mentioned all have one thing in common.

They. Steal. Their. News.

Right. You see, it's no conspiracy. Not to mention that you could actually check THE source, the true origin of Nielsen ratings, if you weren't too busy checking sites which reported DX vs. NWO last year, and other complete crap.

Perhaps it's my fault. Maybe you actually are too stupid to find the correct resource with only the name, the name of a search engine, and the premise.

Woohoo! Most "Controversial" poster in the history of <s>WWF WWE ECW RSTLNE</s> TPWW!

Also...


Poopy.

Actually, I was referring to your ability to never be defeated, no matter how many times you use the same move. But "controversial" works, I guess. :kiss:

That better be a poop joke as opposed to a phrase used to convey frustration if you're wanting to be the true John Cena of TPWW :mad:

Well, I was originally going to say that I went from hardcore to lazy, but I figured I'd feel obligated to freestyle.

They say that I went straight from 'Hardcore' to 'Lazy'
But chicks buy my t-shirts and children still praise me
So knock my performance, it don't really matter
They buy up my shit and my wallet gets fatter
I really don't care what the fans have to say,
I'm too busy throwin' out "poopie" and "gay"
And I can't tell the difference between boos and cheers
I ain't even been thuggish in two or three years
I still have a ChainGang, but don't wear the chain
(It's just one of those things that we never explain)
I call myself "real" but I suck like a Hoover;
My F-U's a bitchin' tight weaksauce meaneuver
So don't act like I ought to care what you think
'Cause I'm rollin' in green; I'm so rich that I stink
No matter your income, I'm wealthier far more;
You got it all backwards, dog, I'm "Lazy Hardcore"
I'm settin' it straight, and my title -- it spins
It's stale like a gramcracka: "John Cena wins!"

John Cena (You can't read me.)

I'm going to start using the "FOAD" on my "opponents."

BTW, FOAD would be an awesome name for a submission if Cena turned heel.

If anyone's actually interested in the Ratings for Raw, Nielsen will only have them up til tomorrow, when the newest rankings come out and deal with last week's Raw.

I've been archiving the listings, but I'm sure that spreadsheets from NMR are nothing compared to Lords of Pain and some ghetto website.

On the topic:

Vince: What? Ratings are down again? But we're pushing hosses like everyone wants to see! Could it be that we don't know what people what? Maybe it's time to change the...

Stephanie: Hey dad, the Jackass guys called. They're back in.

Vince: Alright! I smell ratings.

Fuck off and die.

I think both the others can be explained by stating that it was a joke.

Raw's hours last week both did >3, BTW, losing to 8 airings of Disney or Nick. It's worth noting that if they were, in fact, doing 4.X ratings, they'd be like, #3 and 4 overall in the ratings, as the top two were like 4.4 and 4.8.

You've never seen the breakdowns? Well you don't subscribe to the Observer so how would you? You don't believe Meltzer's bullshit and I'm a born liar so why do you care? And don't say you don't because you always feel the need to gas bag about it like a 90 year old woman at her knitting circle.


I was thinking about his drawing power this morning when I was doing my shopping and every single WWE product I saw from sticker books to magazines to DVD's all had his face on them. He doesn't draw though.

The reason recently that the ratings are this low IMO has a lot to do with Benoit, before his death they were at anywhere between 4.0 – 3.6 depending. (Sorry KK, this isn’t from the Neilson site, but it represents what PWinsider was reporting) Since then the same sites have then reported a 3.4 maximum, I think the media attention and parental control of some of the viewers have caused this recent decrease more than anything. In a poll done by a UK paper over 60% of parents said they wouldn’t allow their children to watch WWE programming anymore because of the Benoit thing.

It’s quite hard to prove someone on TV as an actual draw IMO, as I don’t think I’ve seen any recent evidence of a new guy being put into the main event picture affecting the ratings in a significant way.

Plus if the data was being used for the ratings on Spike compared to the ratings on USA, they reach a different number of homes, is there’s a specific breakdown in percentages to how many homes watch each episode rather than a share of the people watching television that night?

I don’t think anyone watches wrestling on TV right now for anyone 1 individual person, maybe back in the 80’s yes, because wrestling wasn’t on TV as much then, and TV was generally used as a vehicle to get people to come to the local shows, so a draw in those days was based on who could get people to come to the venue, not what the ratings on TV were.

With regards to Meltzer’s figures, I don’t know how he’s worked it out, it could have been just on the best 10 ratings Raw’s ever done and Cena was champ on the 5th best show. Which doesn’t indicate shit, right now ratings are based on more than just 1 person, they are based on the viewer being entertained for the entire 2 hours, saying 1 person is doing that IMO is ridiculous in this day and age

Considering wrestling hasn't been in this low in the ratings hole during the mid-90s...

Pretty sure during 93 it got under the 3.0 level

Sorry, but no.

The ratings were down before the three hour Raw where Vince blew up. Traditionally, those shows are higher, period. They went down below 3 twice before Benoit hung himself. You cannot, cannot, CAN NOT say that ratings are down because of him.

You can argue that the "Who Killed Vince?" storyline might have boosted ratings, and the dropping of said angle hurt, but WWE's ratings are not significantly down from what they were beforehand. Since Mania, they've been in a pretty steady decline.

2.5 this week. Ouch!

CENA IS THE 5TH BIGGEST DRAW OF ALL TIME

I agree. It's the same bland shit every week. No matter hwo controversial they try to be, it's all lost.

Damn! Why all the hate on the Hitman? To compare him and Cena on any level should be against some kind of wrestling law. I had something to say on this topic but the hate for the Hitman has made me forget so fuck it!

James Steele loves Shawn Michaels and isn't over Montreal yet ya see?

KK

Have you got the ratings for the past few months?

I went on the Nielson site and I couldn't find then

It seems like most of the folks who claim Bret needs to get over it are whiny bitches, but they're also going to be the most vocal.

I've saved their current ratings for probably over a year now. I'll try and compile a list later of the past few months. There've been a few upturns (Especially the three hour shows), but it's been pretty consistent.

I haven't even mentioned Bret Hart in this thread! If Bret Hart isn't over Montreal, then why did he demand Shawn Michaels leave the building during his HoF induction speech. Shawn has apologized and Bret claims to have accepted that apology...but if he sees Shawn Michaels he is going home.

Of course Bret is "over it".

Ok god dammit, i've had enough! I'm making a Montreal thread, get a mod to sticky it and it can all be discussed on that.