Cheech Tremendous

Those are good gains, but where were they on the card? I assume that these were the main events of the respective shows, which generally gain a large number of viewers. Quarter 7 is usually the lowest rated quarter hour and Q8 and the overrun are by far the highest. For a comparison, I would like to see how many viewers were gained in main events that Cena did not participate in. I am not trying to denounce everything you say HTQ, it's just that you seem to have the information at hand and these are the sort of questions I ask when trying to decide whether or not someone is a draw.

That doesn't really seem to suggest he's any sort of draw at all. It appears that the ratings fluctuate around a half point or so, and it doesn't matter what the top program is or who the champion might be. He's not turning viewers off, which is a positive, but there is nothing there to suggest that people tune in for Cena. That's sort of a leap of faith. I don't want to take anything away from Cena's ability to move merchandise, but just conjecturing that people are paying to see him because merchandise sales are high is weak. There are two brands right now operating under the WWE name. That is a great comp for Cena's drawing ability. Do his shows draw higher? Are merchandise sales higher per head at Raw shows than Smackdown shows. Are the fans paying to see Cena and only Cena, or are they attending a WWE show and buying up the merchandise of whoever the top face is?

Where is the proof of this? It's an honest question... I don't subscribe to the Observer anymore and so I can't really keep up with the numbers, but it doesn't seem like he has set the world on fire as a main-eventer. Do shows that he headlines draw better buyrates than those that he does not? Is show house attendance better for the Raw brand than the Smackdown brand? Are his segments routinely the highest rated on the show, regardless of whether or not he is in the main event? The answers to these questions should be a resounding yes, or else I am not sure there is a legitimate argument to him being a "draw." As for the question at hand, I get the argument that any heat is good heat, and that the WWE has capitalized on the reactions to Cena. However, having a polarizing champ doesn't seem like a good business decision to me. I stopped watching Smackdown during his initial reign, and I haven't watched a complete episode of Raw since he was drafted. I also haven't purchased a PPV that he has headlined. Am I representative of the feelings of the general public? Does it even matter if I am lost fan if I am replaced by two 13-year-olds who love Cena? These are questions that have to be answered to truly gauge the success of Cena in the main event.

Well, when Brian Grant, Lamar Odom, and Kwame Brown eat up most of the salary cap by themselves, it doesn't leave much room for improvement. How does Mitch Kupchak keep his job? The roster moves he has made have been really sub-par.

Bad booking decisions can be overcome with compelling storylines and interesting characters. Having Nash go over Goldberg wasn't the crime, it's how he did it and how they followed up on it.

If that's true (and I haven't heard that rumor), the Lakers would have to arrange a sign and trade with the Pacers, and I don't think they have the pieces to make a deal work.

I think this is a good sign. At least Axl is out acting like his old self, rather than some recluse.

And he wanted them to put Smoltz in the bullpen! How does that even make sense for the Tigers? Because the closer role + Todd Jones' 6.60 ERA & .323 OBA = recipe for postseason failure I'm not saying I'd make a move for Smoltz and put him in the 'pen, but surely he'd be an upgrade in that most critical of positions. Al sort of already touched on this, but they have two great in-house options for the closer's role at this point with Rodney and zumaya. It would be insane to mortgage your future for a rental closer. How much postseason success did the Braves have with Smoltz as the closer?

And he wanted them to put Smoltz in the bullpen! How does that even make sense for the Tigers?

Actually, I would say that D-X had nearly as much to do with the Attitude era boom as Austin v. McMahon did. They moved tons of merchandise and were a huge ratings draw.

That whole era of WCW was like an out of control semi-truck. It just kept plowing through everything and it wasn't until it grinded to a halt that you could look back and see all the damage that it has caused.

More or less. He was bringing his (underage?) lover with him on the road without the approval of the front office.

It's people like Jericholic82 that make me think fans shouldn't be able to vote for these things. Why even bother with an All-Star game? Let's just have the Yankees and Mets play.

Of course, Larry Brown is a HOF coach. But I don't think he can relate to the new generation of players anymore unless they respect him right away. He had a team full of players who were already one of the best teams in the East(And then getting Rasheed at trade deadline), but how can we forget the A.I./Brown saga. I respect Brown, but he is just too old for it now. He should just retire, I think it's best for him, mainly because of his health. They didn't listen because they're a team composed of spoiled, overpaid, self-centered fucks who haven't won a damn thing and think everyone else is the problem except them. Larry Brown was a failure in New York because he tried to shoehorn the team into playing his way. It's a personnel problem that Isiah created and now Isiah gets to sort it out. As for my prediction, Isiah improves the team this year (~30 wins) and shows signs of life, but the team regresses heavily in year two and he's out on his ass.

Is he buying plane tickets for everybody?

Well that may be true, but cocaine is a hell of a drug.

Originally, WCW was going to be a separate promotion run (nearly) independently of WWE. In an effort to remove the bad stigma associated with the old WCW near the end, they were re-designing the logo, sets, etc. Things just never got that far. By the time they brought ECW in the fold, it was just a short term heel group. No need to invest finances for a dead brand.

They are horrible, but they are so over the top horrible that they just might be fantastic.

Probably not long. Ric Bucher said on ESPN Radio the other night that the Knicks are extremely interested in Kenyon Martin and that Martin's agent had assured him he'd be with an east coast team by the start of training camp.

Not sure that this is really news anymore, but apparently Kerry Wood may be done for the season. I am beginning to doubt that Wood ever makes it back. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2495121

It's a really low risk move. They didn't give up anything to get him other than a little bit of cash that had been earmarked for David Wells, anyways. The Sox need a 4th starter, 5th starter and long man right now, so they basically have to go the scrap heap and hope to find themselves an Aaron Small or Shawn Chacon. On the plus side, Jason Johnson is an extreme groundball pitcher and he's going from the worst infield defense to one of the best. That should help him a bit. If he can keep the ERA around 5.00, I'd be happy.

Even though Stern and Cuban are now denying the story, the Miami Herald (with multiple sources, apparently) is reporting that Cuban yelled at Stern after Game 5 "Fuck You! Fuck You! Your game is rigged!"

On a sidenote, wasn't there a long-standing rumor (confirmed?) that WCW execs requested the belt be put on Booker because of the the racism lawsuit filed be Sonny Onoo?

But it was OK to trade it for a 12 & 6 guy with a bad heart? His heart isn't an issue. And at the time, before it turned out to be a top 3 pick (which no one would have guessed when the deal occured), it was an okay trade. But what does that have to do with trading a top 4 pick for Jermaine O'Neal? Who didn't see it coming? Everyone knew New York would be one of the worst teams in the league.

My memory is a little foggy on this whole thing, but since you seem to know a little more than I do, maybe you can clear things up. Wasn't there a lot more to the whole Heyman firing, Lagana taking over part of this? From what I remember, even though Lagana was recommended by Heyman, he was just another Stephanie yes-man and basically sold out Heyman for a shot at an expanded role on the writing team, which eventually led to a deep hatred between the two. He's far more into the WWE booking philosophy than he is an advocate for ECW, correct?