Guest OnlyMe Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 Summary: The first number accounts for total viewers gained or lost during said period, and the second number is the average number of viewers gained or lost. Chris Benoit +3,425,000 +311,360
The Ghost of bps21 Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 According to this Zach Gowen should be Main Eventing.
Use Your Illusion Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 Oh God, don't start this crap again please. UYI
Guest Dynamite Kido Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 For Christ sakes, I got a headache less than a paragraph into the article. This is GARBAGE.
Guest Loss Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 I'd rather the "right or wrong" talk not start until we know for sure if the Benoit push is a success, and we won't know until the WM XX buyrate comes in. People are too quick to "declare" everything something.
SamoaRowe Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 I'm sick over these arguments over who can draw and who can't. It's just the same old "I like this worker better" but disguised as something different.
Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 I won't waste my time readin it but is this the same thing about Test losing like 1,000,000 viewers everytime he's on?
Guest OnlyMe Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 I won't waste my time readin it but is this the same thing about Test losing like 1,000,000 viewers everytime he's on? Yup I'm sick over these arguments over who can draw and who can't. It's just the same old "I like this worker better" but disguised as something different. I disagree. Hogan drew, and sucked a dick.
Guest KidKrash Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 I don't see where people who say Benoit can't draw got that from. He's been on top of one show so far...and people didn't even know he was going to be there. As far as quarter hour ratings, I think those are damn useless. I think most marks don't tune in to RAW at 10:15 thinking "OMG This is when the Trish segment comes on I need to get her ratings". Usually people watch straight through, watch from the beginning and get bored then turn back to see the main, or they tune in just to see the main. If your main guys are doing poor ratings and buyrates for what they're given then yeah they should be taken out of that spot i.e. Brock Lesnar in any time period and Hulk Hogan in 2002.
Guest Y2DAYDAY Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 I did not read the article but from those numbers, that is impressive. Few things you have to take into consideration with those numbers. For the majority of the period in which those numbers happened, Benoit was midcard and didn't get good TV spots, as opposed to Zach Gowen, whose numbers were way up because he was always with Vince(and give usually gives himself good time slots) All things considered, Benoit's numbers are good.
Guest Astro Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 I'd rather the "right or wrong" talk not start until we know for sure if the Benoit push is a success, and we won't know until the WM XX buyrate comes in. People are too quick to "declare" everything something. Yeah when Wrestlemania headlined by Angle/Eddy HHH/Beniot Brock/Goldburg Taker/Kane Y2J/Xtian Foley/Rock vs Flair/Orton and a Cruiserweight 15 man Battle Royal tanks just like last year, then The WWE can offically say Beniot/Eddy/Goldburg can't draw and the only choice is to push HHH some more... oye
Spaceman Spiff Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 If your main guys are doing poor ratings and buyrates for what they're given then yeah they should be taken out of that spot i.e. Brock Lesnar in any time period From the posted article (take it for what it's worth): Brock Lesnar +5,879,000 +326,610
Guest Loss Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 I'd rather the "right or wrong" talk not start until we know for sure if the Benoit push is a success, and we won't know until the WM XX buyrate comes in. People are too quick to "declare" everything something. Yeah when Wrestlemania headlined by Angle/Eddy HHH/Beniot Brock/Goldburg Taker/Kane Y2J/Xtian Foley/Rock vs Flair/Orton and a Cruiserweight 15 man Battle Royal tanks just like last year, then The WWE can offically say Beniot/Eddy/Goldburg can't draw and the only choice is to push HHH some more... oye Agreed, but if Mania gets a low buyrate, Benoit does deserve part of the blame, as do all the other names that you mentioned. So while Wrestlemania will clue us in, Backlash, when most likely Benoit will challenge for the title in the main event or defend it, will answer the question once and for all.
Guest KidKrash Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 If your main guys are doing poor ratings and buyrates for what they're given then yeah they should be taken out of that spot i.e. Brock Lesnar in any time period From the posted article (take it for what it's worth): Brock Lesnar +5,879,000 +326,610 According to the observer ratings breakdown...Vince owns Smackdown.
Spaceman Spiff Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 Your point is...? Vince isn't a wrestler. After Angle, Brock has the highes number among the active wrestling roster on SD. He's the most over heel on SD, and is arguably the most over heel on either roster (again, only counting active wrestlers). Nobody is drawing big buy-rates, so to single out Brock is ridiculous. Who would you stick in as the top heel on SD if you were to take out Brock?
Guest KidKrash Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 Your point is...? Vince isn't a wrestler. After Angle, Brock has the highes number among the active wrestling roster on SD. He's the most over heel on SD, and is arguably the most over heel on either roster (again, only counting active wrestlers). Nobody is drawing big buy-rates, so to single out Brock is ridiculous. Who would you stick in as the top heel on SD if you were to take out Brock? I had the "no one else is drawing" argument with someone else last night. All it went down to was Sid, Diesel, and Shawn. Everyone from 1995-1996 drew like shit. However, was it JUST bad business' fault that Sid drew the poorest? Who would I put on top as a heel? Frankly I think that 75% of the people on SD bite. I'd move Jericho over. He could say that he's pissed off that Bischoff tries to fuck him over when he's always tried to help him get rid of Austin getting a huge crowd pop. Then when he's packing his bags, Trish offers a goodbye and he says that she wasn't worth it, calls her a waste of time, and says that *Sable* will be much better. This makes Jericho evil, phases out Trish because she's in sorrow allowing Vicki to get some of the spotlight, gets Sable back in the public eye to hype Playboy's special edition, and it puts Jericho as the top heel on Smackdown. Chris Jericho/John Cena is set up which would eventually become the top feud.
The Ghost of bps21 Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 Main Eventing WrestleMania makes it hard to judge. You can take the blame if it does shitty (Taker/Sid) but if it does great... What'll be more telling is the Backlash buyrate. Since it's a Raw show in Edmonton I'll assume Benoit will be in the main event again. Probably winning the title.
Guest TDinDC1112 Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 Good work has NOTHING TO DO WITH DRAWING. Go read this week's Observer where Meltzer writes 2 pages on this. Good characters with good storylines draw. Good work is just better than bad work.
Jobber of the Week Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 Oh good God. Is someone trying to use the numbers that say that Vince McMahon is the most over worker in the company to try and make a point again?
Guest TDinDC1112 Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 Oh good God. Is someone trying to use the numbers that say that Vince McMahon is the most over worker in the company to try and make a point again? Vince is booked to be the most important worker in the company. That's why his numbers always are higher than others.
Jobber of the Week Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 Vince's numbers are higher than others because he's always involved in main event matches and he kicks off the show a whole lot. When he's on, he's pretty much on only during the periods when a lot of people are watching. That doesn't mean anybody is watching for him. Which is the arguement put forth here.
Michrome Posted January 28, 2004 Author Report Posted January 28, 2004 If you actually read the numbers, you have to think about some of them. Some people, like Zach Gowen and Maven, didn't have very many TV appearances, and when they did it usually involved one of those huge ratings draws that pumps the numbers up. For example, Zach was involved in multiple Vince/Steph interview segments that usually draw 600,000 viewers or more, he was in that thing with Brock Lesnar, etc. Maven also experienced a similar effect, being thrown into 3 or 4 big evolution major tags that heavily inflated his numbers. The guys to judge are guys that are on every show, and guys who are always in the main event vs. guys who are in the midcard. The idea that "nobody is drawing right now" is a total copout. Clearly, Mick Foley is drawing, and so is Steve Austin. Why are two non-wrestlers drawing so much? Frankly, it's because WWE hasn't created any stars close to that level since they retired. Guys like Guerrero and Mysterio are two of the biggest ticket-movers WWE has right now in terms of house shows and live events, another bit of ammunition against the "small guys can't draw" crowd.
The Ghost of bps21 Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 How did Matt Hardy gain viewers at the same time Shannon Moore was losing them on Smackdown?
Michrome Posted January 28, 2004 Author Report Posted January 28, 2004 The Vince and Steph numbers are high because they've been established as the most important characters in the company. When one comes out, you can be sure to find out what's going to be happening on the show, and maybe what is going to happen on the PPV. They rarely have a segment without something of consequence happening.
Michrome Posted January 28, 2004 Author Report Posted January 28, 2004 I'm pretty sure he's accounting for individual matches. If Moore is out with Hardy, he doesn't get the points.
Guest OnlyMe Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 So you don't even know what the figures are for, and you still based your writing around them?
Guest TheZsaszHorsemen Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 The case for or against Benoit will be made after he wins the title, and/or when RAW begins to book their shows around Benoit/HHH. Period.
Jobber of the Week Posted January 28, 2004 Report Posted January 28, 2004 By these numbers: * Gail Kim is a draw * Trish Stratus is not * Kevin Nash is a bigger draw than Booker T * And so is Gail Kim * And Billy Gunn * John Cena barely draws, despite a good deal of merchandise that moves well at live shows * Billy Gunn is a draw. Yeah, I know I mentioned that two points above, but it really needs to be mentioned again. * Charlie Haas is a bigger draw than the Undertaker
Michrome Posted January 28, 2004 Author Report Posted January 28, 2004 John Cena's popularity didn't take off until September, the last month counted here, and neither did his merchandise. Billy Gunn was rarely on Smackdown, and surely got some curiosity viewers for his few big return matches. Gail Kim has had how many matches on Raw? Of course Kevin Nash is a bigger draw than Booker T, Booker has been made to look like a chump. Plus, Nash was in the main event from may-August in this, while Booker was not. Charlie Haas was thrown into multiple tag main events and tag title matches, the match with Kidman and Rey, and the matches with Eddy and Tajiri did very well in the ratings. If you use your brain, you can think most of these out.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now