SuperJerk Posted March 27, 2004 Report Posted March 27, 2004 The final numbers for last night's edition of WWE Smackdown are in. The show did a 3.3 broadcast rating, which is down from the usual numbers that the show has been doing for the past month or so. This has to be seen as bad news for the WWE, especially after the company scored big ratings for the brand lottery edition of Raw this week. Credit: wrestlingobserver.com You could say that people tuned in expecting HHH, but he wasn't on LAST WEEK's show either, and that did pretty well. I say people thought HHH was going to be on the show and therefore refused to tune-in. Who's with me?
Guest Salacious Crumb Posted March 27, 2004 Report Posted March 27, 2004 I think most people were annoyed by the WWF promising big things on Monday and then just shifting around a few lower card guys.
iliketurtles Posted March 27, 2004 Report Posted March 27, 2004 I don't get the logic how they can say it was a 4.6 overnight rating and then they get a 3.3. Fucking Nielsen. Anyways, I blame this on the fact that...well, SD is REALLY the minor leagues compared to Raw, sadly. And I'm not sure the world was exactly on fire for a Bradshaw main event push (when reading the spoilers).
SuperJerk Posted March 27, 2004 Author Report Posted March 27, 2004 And I'm not sure the world was exactly on fire for a Bradshaw main event push (when reading the spoilers). I honestly don't think that people who read the spoilers make up very many Nielsen families.
Guest I Got Banned for Sucking Posted March 27, 2004 Report Posted March 27, 2004 I honestly don't think that people who read the spoilers make up very many Nielsen families. I urge you to read Nik Johnson's 'Taking a Leak', if you haven't already.
Guest CronoT Posted March 27, 2004 Report Posted March 27, 2004 It probably also has to do with the fact that anyone who regularly watches SD! got to see all or some of their favorites on Monday. I'd call it a somple balancing out. RAW got big ratings this week, so SD! did a little weak. That's the way life is.
Guest I Got Banned for Sucking Posted March 27, 2004 Report Posted March 27, 2004 And just the fact that pretty much every WWE fan, no matter how small, would've tuned in to see how (or is it "where" on both counts?) it and their favourite Superstar went.
Guest TheArchiteck Posted March 27, 2004 Report Posted March 27, 2004 It was also probably preemptied in a couple of markets. Detroit for sure (Pistons lost ) and maybe a couple other cities.
AndrewTS Posted March 27, 2004 Report Posted March 27, 2004 Sort of on topic--Spike TV is replaying Raw on Sunday.
MarvinisaLunatic Posted March 27, 2004 Report Posted March 27, 2004 If WWE were smart they would work a deal with UPN and SpikeTV to allow SpikeTV to replay Smackdown for all the people that either don't get UPN or get UPN but have it pre-empted. You can't tell me whatever they have on at 8pm Friday would get better ratings than a replay of Smackdown. Of course it would cut into Velocity's ratings, but that shouldn't matter.
AndrewTS Posted March 27, 2004 Report Posted March 27, 2004 If WWE were smart they would work a deal with UPN and SpikeTV to allow SpikeTV to replay Smackdown for all the people that either don't get UPN or get UPN but have it pre-empted. You can't tell me whatever they have on at 8pm Friday would get better ratings than a replay of Smackdown. Of course it would cut into Velocity's ratings, but that shouldn't matter. That would be a good idea if they do go with the ECW revival idea. Although I expect they'll just show recaps of Smackdown on the ECW show even so.
Slickster Posted March 27, 2004 Report Posted March 27, 2004 Also, SD! is syndicated and shown on the weekends in some markets...
SuperJerk Posted March 27, 2004 Author Report Posted March 27, 2004 You know, the more I think about it, I can't help but think the WWE's constant referral to Smackdown as second rate (even if it is the heels doing it) can't be helping.
razazteca Posted March 27, 2004 Report Posted March 27, 2004 Blame WWE.com and teh net for revealing the block buster trades.
Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes Posted March 27, 2004 Report Posted March 27, 2004 Considering the NCAA Tournament and SD airs different times in different places on sometimes different days, is anyone surprised? And I think I read it was really 4.6, which equals the RAW rating.
Guest Mulatto Heat Posted March 27, 2004 Report Posted March 27, 2004 The 4.6 is the overnight rating, which only accounts for the big cities. The rating that comes later is the one that counts, for whatever reason.
Kurt Angle Mark Posted March 27, 2004 Report Posted March 27, 2004 It was also probably preemptied in a couple of markets. Detroit for sure (Pistons lost ) and maybe a couple other cities. It was pre-empted in Atlanta as well.
SuperJerk Posted March 27, 2004 Author Report Posted March 27, 2004 Considering the NCAA Tournament and SD airs different times in different places on sometimes different days, is anyone surprised? And I think I read it was really 4.6, which equals the RAW rating. Raw and Smackdown aren't judged on the same audience-share scale, since one is on cable and one is on broadcast TV. A 4.6 on broadcast TV is more households than a 4.6 cable. Or so I've been told.
Guest JMA Posted March 28, 2004 Report Posted March 28, 2004 Smackdown really needs to be live. It might help them with the stigma of being "second-rate." It would also add a feeling of unpredictability to the show.
SuperJerk Posted March 28, 2004 Author Report Posted March 28, 2004 Smackdown really needs to be live. It might help them with the stigma of being "second-rate." It would also add a feeling of unpredictability to the show. I don't think the average fan even realizes it isn't live.
Guest Xad Posted March 28, 2004 Report Posted March 28, 2004 Does anybody think Heyman's departure might have caused some fans to not tune in? Maybe people thought Steph was coming back so they stayed away from smackdown
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now