Goldberg's Ratings

[Guest Dangerous A]

I don't think any of the crop of current WWE'ers are going to bring in any consistent ratings. The next consistent spike in ratings will come from a superstar we haven't even seen in WWE yet. All the guys on the roster are burned out characters that fans see as middle of the road guys that aren't special. Even if pushed, the fans are not going to want to get behind them or pay money to see them on ppv. WWE is just spinning it's wheels in the mud right now.

 

Bottom Line: No one is drawing right now and none of the current roster will again until the REAL next big thing comes and is pushed correctly.

[LooseCannon25 0]

The REAL next big thing is "Macho Man" Randy Savage...............ooooooooooooh yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeah....dig it!

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

What are the sweep periods?

 

Ratings surveys in which local markets are simultaneously measured by a rating service. Nielsen Media Research surveys all 210 local television markets in November, February, May and July (Honolulu, Fairbanks and Juneau are excluded in July). These months are known as sweep months, and the data are used by local stations and cable systems to set local ad rates and to make program decisions. The term "sweep" dates back to the beginning of local television measurements in the 1950s and refers to how Nielsen Media Research mailed and processed diaries to sample households starting with the East Coast and sweeping across the nation.

[Guest Jobber of the Week]

Bottom Line: No one is drawing right now and none of the current roster will again until the REAL next big thing comes and is pushed correctly.

To be fair, Lesnar hasn't had a match with Austin, HHH, Shawn, Foley, or Goldberg. He had one match with Rock and one match with Angle.

 

Although there's not a lot of trophys for him to go after anymore now as a 2-time world champ, there still is quite a lot of rub to give.

[Guest Dangerous A]

There is rub to give, but Lesnar has been botched by even steven booking. He has been made to look normal and there is nothing special about him anymore.

 

WWE made sure of that last Survivor Series when they had Big Show be the first person to beat him.

[Guest razoredge450]

The Christian/Goldberg cage match on Raw a month or two ago got a big rating, but so did the Hurricane/Flair match, and that got an even higher rating. Hurricane/Flair had no build to it, while Christian/Goldberg did, and Hurricane and the Flair of today are much lesser stars than Goldberg, and they still did better than him in the ratings.

The tag match got a high rating because people wanted to find out from watching the segment if Booker T won the IC title and if Goldberg beat Jericho at Judgment Day. They also watched it to see two of the top feuds on Raw continue.

Goldberg hasn't proved one bit that he is a draw. And he has PROVED that he is not a draw by the PPV built around him (Backlash) getting a terrible buyrate.

[Guest Jobber of the Week]

There is rub to give, but Lesnar has been botched by even steven booking. He has been made to look normal and there is nothing special about him anymore.

What I'm saying is that fans like a guy who's being booked to look good-but-beatable and not a guy who's booked to look like an unstoppable god. Lesnar's career thus far has been proof of that, HHH is damn good proof of it.

 

When you promote a guy as being the best damn guy in the company who you have to get up early in the morning to beat, fans like that, marks want to be like that guy, etc. When you promote a guy as a superhuman steamroller fans feel like you're insulting their intelligence and sit on their hands, or in Goldberg's case, cheer on the heel in hopes that this cocky prick gets what's going to come to him.

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

There is rub to give, but Lesnar has been botched by even steven booking. He has been made to look normal and there is nothing special about him anymore.

 

WWE made sure of that last Survivor Series when they had Big Show be the first person to beat him.

Even so, I feel that Lesnar could be this era's equivelent of Bret Hart or Bob Backlund. As in the guy who can carry the WWE with respectibility till the next huge boom happens.

[Guest Adrian 3:16]

I'm no Goldberg fan but to single him out for not popping ratings or buyrates is wrong. No one draws in today's environment, not Rock, not Jericho, not Booker T, and certainly not HHH. If the entire product is shit, your average fan is not going to overlook that and blow $35 just to see one guy in action.

 

I realize Linda was hoping Goldberg would be some kind of "magic pill' to get that exact effect, but if Rock and Austin coming back couldn't get that affect, why would Goldberg? The whole damn show needs a re-tooling before they pop huge ratings from TV or PPV, wrestling may be cyclical but the next boom isn't going to just fall into their lap. They have to at least try on their end.

[Guest Choken One]

Exactly...Hart and Shawn kept things afloat in the Mid 90's by busting ass and vince knows this all too well...

 

But he got that euphoric feeling because instead of HULK HOGAN getting the attention...it was VINCE MCMAHON'S WWF staring the Rock and Steve Austin...

 

So he is trying to get this "bank" stars to get him back to that status...

 

while logic says

 

Lesnar/Angle=Bret

RVD=Shawn

[Cherry Blossom Viscount 0]

I'm going to ask you all something; if Benoit, Jericho, Booker, or RVD was given HHH's title run and was forced to play the same heel character, would you complain and do you think they'd draw more heat?

 

Also, HHH has not steamrolled over the enitre roster. In all of his feuds he has looked weak. The problem you all have is with him winning. To say he has steamrolled over his opponents is a lie.

[Guest newblood03]

As it has been said before not 1 guy alone will cause a turn around in ratings mayhbe a slight spike but thats it

[Guest Jobber of the Week]

I'm no Goldberg fan but to single him out for not popping ratings or buyrates is wrong. No one draws in today's environment, not Rock, not Jericho, not Booker T, and certainly not HHH.

Problem is that Fuck Goldberg gave Vince a big tall glass of Kool-Aid about how GOLDBERG IZ RATINGZ and how he was the magical cure-all remedy who Vince had never noticed for all this time.

 

They bought it. Now they're wishing they could get a refund.

 

http://www.411mania.com/wrestling/news/new...hp?news_id=5851

 

Another problem that has stalled negotiations is Goldberg's background. He was born into wealth, was a successful pro-athlete at a young age, and became an instant wrestling star. Because of all the success he has had, he does not feel that he has to come in to WWE and do as much as they want him to. He feels confident that he IS the solution to WWE's problems, and that with the leverage he has, he will be able to sign a big money deal while not having to do too much work.

 

"Dude, didn't you read my press release? I'm awesome! I even said so! Just sign on the dotted line and check the Creative Control box plz"

[Guest Kahran Ramsus]

As it has been said before not 1 guy alone will cause a turn around in ratings mayhbe a slight spike but thats it

We know that, but it is still what Vince is paying Goldberg for. That is his only purpose. This is why they never should have brought him in.

[Guest Adrian 3:16]

I'm going to ask you all something; if Benoit, Jericho, Booker, or RVD was given HHH's title run and was forced to play the same heel character, would you complain and do you think they'd draw more heat?

It depends if they were entertaining doing it. HHH has become boring. No one complained when HHH was playing dominant heel in early 2000, because he was actually good at it at the time.

 

Also, HHH has not steamrolled over the enitre roster. In all of his feuds he has looked weak. The problem you all have is with him winning. To say he has steamrolled over his opponents is a lie.

 

Let's go down the list of his feuds then, just since last year:

 

Jericho: Never made out to have a chance in hell. The title win at X-8 was merely a formality.

 

Angle: Didn't win, but got off relatively easy, I'll admit.

 

Hogan: Special case, rare instance of HHH facing someone higher on the pecking order than him. Also he might've agreed to job since his reign was bombing. (not that Hogan did better)

 

RVD: Started off OK, but was badly exposed in a very calculated move by HHH.

 

Booker T: Was told he wasn't good enough, and then HHH proved it at Mania in a story tailor-made for the face to go over.

 

Steiner: Steiner has to shoulder a lot of the blame here too. But still, like RVD it started out as a fairly even feud until HHH exposed him in a situation where Steiner was sure to fail.

 

Kane: Do I even have to say it?

 

HBK: The only opponent besides Hogan to beat HHH on PPV and the only he seemed to take seriously, until...

 

Nash: The other guy HHH actually seemed concerned about, and the only time I cheered on his opponent getting destroyed. Even HHH seems to have realized how horrible Nash is.

 

So out of 9 guys since his return, the only feud HHH didn't dominate were the ones against his Kliq buddies or old man Hogan. Whether you think the others were good enough (Kane, Steiner) to justify winning the feud is irrelevant, they were all buried regardless.

[Guest Rob Edwards]

As it has been said before not 1 guy alone will cause a turn around in ratings mayhbe a slight spike but thats it

We know that, but it is still what Vince is paying Goldberg for. That is his only purpose. This is why they never should have brought him in.

Who's to say Goldy wouldn't have drawn had he been used properly though? WWE totally messed up the Goldberg character for the first few weeks (save for the debut) and he's hurting from it now, If you're planning on booking someone as an all destroying newcomer you can't mess around with character direction in the first few weeks. Experiments are for house shows, not live TV

[Guest Midnight Express83]

The ammount of money RAW makes a year with the ratings figured in(from the guy that posted the 500K a week thing), it is about $26,000,000.

 

IF the WWE is getting 500K buys a PPV(HA!), like they did parts of last year and well more the year before this is how much they are making yearly at 35.00 a PPV: $210,000,000. You can add in 200K more buys if you add in the UK only PPVs. $7,000,000 Which makes it 217 MILLION DOLLARS just on buy rates. They are fucking nuts to think ratings mean more. Ratings do bring in the money but a buy rate is a fucking buyrate. And that is where the money is.

 

In 2000 alone the buyrates brought atleast: $396,000,000.

 

RRR, a quarter rating just a quarter rating. Goldberg and Sable are TV draws. They pop a rating because you can see them for free. Sable was the highest drawing superstar/diva back in 1998 because she would strip every RAW. Still, fact is fact, they aren't PPV draws. Austin isn't the highest TV draw yet out drew Hogan PPV wise many fold. Austin is a houseshow draw selling out more arenas than Hogan. But if we went by TV ratings, when Austin was at his bad ass peak,(WM13 to Summerslam 97), WWF was being out drawn by the nWo weekly. So it proves that ratings aren't that big of a deal. Ratings are like a storylines. It isn't one week in it that makes or breaks the whole thing(for the most part). It is how as a whole you judge them. You judge the whole pattrern of ratings not just one peron for 2 weeks in a quarter rating. Judge the whole show from 2 months before he came in to two months when he was here, to two months after he leaves. That will show if he helpped draw or not. And Linda is right. Goldberg isn't shit anymore.

[Guest TheArchiteck]

Good!

Two ex-WCW devoutees were in one of the highest segment.