Guest GameCop Posted March 25, 2003 Report Posted March 25, 2003 The first hour got a 3.7 and the second hour got a 3.3, which rounds off to a 3.5, or maybe even a 3.4
Guest Kotzenjunge Posted March 25, 2003 Report Posted March 25, 2003 Quite honestly, can WWE read a lot into these ratings, since a lot of people I know watch war coverage all the time?
Guest BoboBrazil Posted March 25, 2003 Report Posted March 25, 2003 A 2nd hour drop off is really bad. The rating is supposed to increase throughout the show. It is also bad for the rating to decrease the week before a ppv.
Guest Will Scarlet Posted March 25, 2003 Report Posted March 25, 2003 It was higher than I expected it to be. I figured that with the war coverage and the fact that the last thirty minutes would have at least some dropoff that the WWE would bomb in the ratings. I would not read much into it. I am betting the last 30 minutes is what tanked the second hour.
Guest Youth N Asia Posted March 25, 2003 Report Posted March 25, 2003 I'm not suprised. WWE is not going to score huge consistant ratings again in the near future. Once Vince realizes that 3.5 is his audiance maybe he'll stop trying to bring in viewers that aren't there and put on shows for the viewers who are there.
Guest Downhome Posted March 25, 2003 Report Posted March 25, 2003 Fuck it, this means nothing at all anymore. I knew it would go down, it's just obvious. Still, nothing will change, regardless of if they use Rocky, Austin, Brock, Goldberg, HHH, or WHOEVER, untill they decide to do something new and fresh, and while their at it something original. You can do it with the same people, it's just up to the writers to GET OFF OF THEIR ASS!
Guest Vitamin X Posted March 25, 2003 Report Posted March 25, 2003 and that sucks because last night's RAW was pretty good IMO so that teaches the writers to try "Shock TV" again..ugh
Guest Downhome Posted March 25, 2003 Report Posted March 25, 2003 No, it teaches them that they need to do something fucking original for a change, there was nothing at all new about the show, much less anything there to make any casual fans to want to order the PPV. I'm glad you liked it, I think that's great, but in my view, and obviously many others, it was a horrible show.
Guest HartFan86 Posted March 25, 2003 Report Posted March 25, 2003 So either the crowd: 1. Tuned to the beginning to see what happened and became dissapointed becuase of the played angle. 2. War. 3. Didn't care about Rock signing. Makes you think...should of done something like Flair, HHH, Rock, Jericho vs. HBK, Austin, Booker, Goldust for a main event instead of Rock singing. THAT would of brought the people in.
Guest bob_barron Posted March 25, 2003 Report Posted March 25, 2003 I thought the show was very good and made me look forward to Wrestlemania. I think the 30 minute overrun it was killed the ratings overall.
Guest HartFan86 Posted March 25, 2003 Report Posted March 25, 2003 I think the 30 minute overrun it was killed the ratings overall. I don't think that matters for the 2nd hour.
Guest teke184 Posted March 25, 2003 Report Posted March 25, 2003 The second hour may have been going down on its own but that 30 minutes of recaps from SD probably made a crater that the show crash-landed in.
Guest HartFan86 Posted March 25, 2003 Report Posted March 25, 2003 I just don't understand why they would call the 30 minutes after the 2nd hour the "2nd hour" in the ratings, if you know what I mean.
Guest Angle-plex Posted March 25, 2003 Report Posted March 25, 2003 To add to our earlier ratings report, the final number for Raw was a 3.4 cable rating, off of hours of 3.7 and 3.3, according to Nielsen Media Research. Some have tried to tell me in email that the rating is skewed because "last 19 minutes were repeat material" should read the next line carefully because that assertion is completely bogus. After viewing the quarters, the second hour did a 3.4 cable rating, with the last two quarters doing 3.3s. That is an eight percent drop from hour one, as well as a continued drop from the first part of the second hour to the last. The final half hour, which included 19 minutes of footage from Smackdown, did a 3.1 cable rating off of quarters of 3.6 from 11:00 to 11:15 and 2.6 from 11:15 to 11:30. That means that without the repeat material, the show would have done a 3.5, instead of a 3.4. The trend is clearly a bad one for WWE leading into their biggest PPV of the year. 1wrestling.com
Guest Youth N Asia Posted March 26, 2003 Report Posted March 26, 2003 Personally, I thought that was one of their weakest pre-Mania Raw's ever. They didn't add anything to any of the feuds for me.
Guest RedJed Posted March 26, 2003 Report Posted March 26, 2003 Judging by the last 4-5 years of pre-Raw Manias, that sure was the weakest of them all. But the show was bearable enough to be considered decent by current Raw standards to me. Mania 14 - Decent angle with Austin-HBK IIRC Mania 15 - Big Show v. Austin Mania 16 - Foleys return? Might be wrong, could have been the week before Mania 17 - The WCW/WWF thing, good buildup for everything to boot Mania 18 - Austin/Rock v. NWO Mania 19 - Sing along with the Rock and 30 minutes of Smackdown recaps lol
Guest NoCalMike Posted March 26, 2003 Report Posted March 26, 2003 Every week feels like the same show now-a-days. They aren't doing a good job of mixing things up. I was there live, and the only really suprising thing was the Steiner/Christian match. The Jericho/HBK promo was probably the best segment of the night and the best workrate came from 2 indy wrestlers before the heat tapings started. I think the WWE is falling back into the mode where you could stop watching RAW for a month or so, and when you start watching again, not a damn thing is different. One thing I despise right now is the Kane/RVD tag team. It truly is a waste of time and effort for RVD to be stuck in "go-nowhere" land while tagging with Kane. If Kane isn't over anymore and no one cares about him, then GET HIM OFF TV, don't hook him up with an over wrestler and try to allow him to leech some heat. Right now Kane's best move amongst the fans is setting the pyro off on his intro. Anyone else agree that the Kane gimmick has run it's course since about a year ago?
Guest JDMattitudeV1 Posted March 26, 2003 Report Posted March 26, 2003 Every week feels like the same show now-a-days. They aren't doing a good job of mixing things up. I was there live, and the only really suprising thing was the Steiner/Christian match. The Jericho/HBK promo was probably the best segment of the night and the best workrate came from 2 indy wrestlers before the heat tapings started. I think the WWE is falling back into the mode where you could stop watching RAW for a month or so, and when you start watching again, not a damn thing is different. One thing I despise right now is the Kane/RVD tag team. It truly is a waste of time and effort for RVD to be stuck in "go-nowhere" land while tagging with Kane. If Kane isn't over anymore and no one cares about him, then GET HIM OFF TV, don't hook him up with an over wrestler and try to allow him to leech some heat. Right now Kane's best move amongst the fans is setting the pyro off on his intro. Anyone else agree that the Kane gimmick has run it's course since about a year ago? I think Kane's character got stale over two years ago, but the necrophilia angle pretty much finished him off for good. I too think their are much better ways to use RVD, personally I think a Wrestlemania win over Steiner would be a lot better than sticking him in a meaningless tag match.
Guest candie45 Posted March 26, 2003 Report Posted March 26, 2003 I think the WWE is falling back into the mode where you could stop watching RAW for a month or so, and when you start watching again, not a damn thing is different. Precisely. I used to get upset when I missed a Raw, like it was "can't miss" and I wouldn't know what was happening the next week if I missed it. Recently it's been like, meh.
Guest razazteca Posted March 26, 2003 Report Posted March 26, 2003 At changed the channel at 10:00 to watch Howard Stern. The Rock singing means nothing to me and will not keep my attention.
Guest AndrewTS Posted March 26, 2003 Report Posted March 26, 2003 Like that one poster said, unless it drops below 3.0 or above 4.0, it doesn't matter what the rating is. Of course, the trends should be paid more attention to. Not the week-by-week numbers. WWE keeps trying things that pop the rating for two weeks, then the rating goes back to normal or lower. Signing has-beens or former WCW stars is not going to help WWE--Goldberg and Luger included.
Guest Dangerous A Posted March 26, 2003 Report Posted March 26, 2003 There is a great article posted on the Observer site from Todd Martin. Here is the link http://www.liveaudiowrestling.com/wo/news/...lt.asp?aID=6997 If it doesn't link, copy and paste. The section on the botched Rock/Austin buildup is dead on the money. A very good read. It includes some good questions going into Mania.
Guest teke184 Posted March 26, 2003 Report Posted March 26, 2003 They should be fairly scared by these numbers... They've been on a slide since the night Austin came back to WWE TV and we've had major stuff with Austin, Rock, AND Trips each week since then. Given that ratings have rarely, if ever, decreased during the Road To Wrestlemania, that should be a sign of larger problems. Note: If someone thinks that these numbers should be adjusted due to the war, I disagree. Only SD numbers should be adjusted due to the war. TNN is not pre-empting RAW for coverage, although many UPN stations are.
Guest NoSelfWorth Posted March 26, 2003 Report Posted March 26, 2003 I wonder what effect the Raw the day after No Way Out had, where they had heavy hype all night that all but said "Steve Austin will be here later", and he never showed up.
Guest Beingz0wningj00 Posted March 26, 2003 Report Posted March 26, 2003 The ratings were in a pile of shit far before Austin and Rock returned.
Guest MarvinisaLunatic Posted March 26, 2003 Report Posted March 26, 2003 The ratings are really no different now for RAW than what they were before Austin/Rock came back. They were low 3's (3.1-3.4 or so) and now they are in the mid 3's, although they were touching 4s but that obviously was just some sort of fluke or something. Hardly much of a difference..
Guest teke184 Posted March 26, 2003 Report Posted March 26, 2003 The ratings were in a pile of shit far before Austin and Rock returned. True, but they always had the "Rock and Austin are coming back!" mindset to excuse those ratings... now, about 2 months later, they're back where they started and probably going even lower.
Guest Youth N Asia Posted March 26, 2003 Report Posted March 26, 2003 Like that one poster said, unless it drops below 3.0 or above 4.0, it doesn't matter what the rating is. That's my quote. I don't think there's any need for panic unless it goes AND STAYS under 3.0. And there's no reason to celebrate untill the ratings go above AND STAY over 4.0. Way to go Vince, your audiance is 3.0-3.9...now stop looking for the quick fix and book your shit long term before you lose them. There will be time later to try something drastic.
Guest THE MIGHTY THOR Posted March 26, 2003 Report Posted March 26, 2003 RAW is loosing ratings everyweek, Vince thought that by putting Austin against Rock for the 1000th time was going to bring up the ratings, people are tired of seeing the same crap being used over and over, Vince has to realize that his main eventers are not that over anymore, singing doesn't bring ratings, Austin getting arrested or thrown out of the arena again and again is not the solution, HBK ,Goldberg, and HHH are not the answer for RAW's problems unless they are willing to get pinned and put new stars over, lazy booking b4 the granddaddy of all ppvs is not the solution. Vince and the WWE don't GET IT anymore.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now