Raw rating??

[Guest thebigjig]

I've been looking around and I cant find the rating for Monday's RAW... any reason for that? I'm curious to see how the HBK/Benoit did with all of the hype surrounding it

[Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes]

Bold Prediction: Raw did a rating between 3.5 and 4.0, which is considered a disapointment by management.

 

But reality wise, I don't think I've seen a thread about the RAW Rating....for a change.

[Kurt Angle Mark 0]

It was a 3.9 rating, which was down from last week's 4.0

[Guest sanyo]

If the WWE ever thinks its getting back to the 6's, they have another thing coming. It was a fad and no casual fan will ever sit through a 30 minute technical match. I'm sorry but its true.

[Guest Dazed]

If the WWE ever thinks its getting back to the 6's, they have another thing coming. It was a fad and no casual fan will ever sit through a 30 minute technical match. I'm sorry but its true.

What's that got to do with anything? WWE can try to get back to a 6.0 rating, and it's a good thing for them to set business targets (even if 6.0 is unrealistic in the short term.) It's impossible to predict what will or won't get over in wrestling, and remember that people regularly sat through 30+ minute matches in the NWA. I assume they didn't pull 6.0s then, but it's not like people can't appreciate technical wrestling.

[Tawren 0]

If the WWE ever thinks its getting back to the 6's, they have another thing coming. It was a fad and no casual fan will ever sit through a 30 minute technical match. I'm sorry but its true.

Yes, those fans HATED, I say they HATED, the Benoit/Jericho series in 2000/2001. Angle/Benoit? The fans shat on it! Advanced matches like Hart/Austin SS96? NOBODY LIKED THAT.

 

My god, we need more generic brawling! THAT'LL BRING THE FANS BACK TO A WRESTLING SHOW!

 

Ever notice how WWE at its peak (2000) both financially and creatively was in its best wrestling stage?

[Guest Choken One]

I think the most important thing is that the show has been very stable in the last months.

 

However...Didn't Goldberg/X cage match do a 5.1? Imagine if it were a bigger opponet then X.

[Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes]

I think the most important thing is that the show has been very stable in the last months.

 

However...Didn't Goldberg/X cage match do a 5.1? Imagine if it were a bigger opponet then X.

Don't forget Kane popped quite a few 5.0's for his segments on RAW back when he was a monster, and before Shane McMahon ruined it all.

[Guest sanyo]

Yes true in 2000 wrestling was awesome. But there weren't 30 minute matches on TV- those were kept for PPV. USA Network is on a more respectable channel (I think 22) compared to Spike on like 61 (this is LA). Plus you had personalities that people watched, not wrestlers. Rock was a great wrestler, but damn did he ever have a personality people wanted to watch. Same with Austin (98-2000, not 2003). Today there's nothing or nobody that has that kind of charisma to pull that off. I'm sorry but you can only dream that Benoit will pull 6's. Great wrestler, but the casual fan is not interested in him. I could see 5's but I think since they switched from USA to Spike, they have never produced a show in the 6's. And it was the first half of 2000 that were getting amazing ratings- after August 2000 the ratings started on the downward spiral and I hardly think its going back...plus most of my friends who were wrestling fans loved ECW- all hardcore. After hardcore bored everyone, they all left and maybe Cena can bring a few of them back, but I don't see a young Austin, Rock or Foley on that roster- even Orton will never reach that level (and he only got over slightly because of Foley or else he still would have no respect).

[JustJoe2k5 0]

I doubt John Cena will be someone to carry the promotion, his act is already getting stale. When you look at the next group of talent that will takeover WWE it really is pathetic, John Cena, Randy Orton, Batista, and Rene Dupree. And they thought WCW didn't know how to build new stars.

[Secret Agent 0]

I could spike the ratings to a 6 on Smackdown by myself, that's not too hard. Hell have Big Show or somebody defeate Eddie at a PPV then the next show have Big Show defend against Rey Meysterio and have Rey actually win the strap. The spoilers will leak and everyone will tune in to see it.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

Not everyone reads spoilers.

 

The match would need to be hyped up the week prior as to get interest in it, possibly more than 1 week.

 

They could have Eddy drop the Title to Bradshaw this Thursday and it wouldn't make any difference because they didn't hype the match up (for next weeks smackdown that is).

 

I also dont think that Smackdown will ever do that well on UPN where it gets pre-empted a lot or isn't even available in some areas. I would just move it to Spike TV, or do a replay on SpikeTV Friday nights or something. Im sure a full Smackdown replay would get good ratings on Spike TV.

[Guest I Got Banned for Sucking]

I'd've thought that the fans would've picked up on Raw's quality rise and started watching again.

 

I could understand if SmackDown! don't get anywhere near a 6.0, but Raw's been pretty damn good lately. Separate Evolution feuds with Raw's top faces right now, all or most talented, and they're not throw-togethers either - they're actually entertaining feuds, or what will become entertaining feuds.

 

I agree with Nik, they could shoot for those higher ratings - but can they do it with the current product as a whole?

[Jack_Bauer 0]

Well, I reckon, even though the guy is shit, Goldberg being in a good fued as well as the good matches that have happened would actually help things.

[JustJoe2k5 0]

WWE's popularity fell during 2001, and the in-ring work of that time was equal if not better than what we are getting now. The casual fans just got burnt out, and the fact that the top star, Steve Austin, completely changed his character may have had something to do with it as well.

[haVoc 0]

Any word on the Smackdown rating?

[Tawren 0]

Any word on the Smackdown rating?

2.8, down from 3.1. Apparently Friends is being blamed for the drop.

[haVoc 0]

I'm so happy the ratings are reflecting the show. Hopefully Vince gets the message and changes things up quickly after Judgment Day.

[2GOLD 0]

Any word on the Smackdown rating?

2.8, down from 3.1. Apparently Friends is being blamed for the drop.

 

And that's a pretty good reason for the drop.

 

Then again, I would rather watch Jamie Noble re-enacting a scene from Joe Dirt than watch FRIENDS.

[Guest sanyo]

I'm sure even if Smackdown was still great it would have dropped. Friends got near a 30 rating. Some of the fans, mainly female fans, would have skipped Smackdown anyways. 2.8 is respectable considering the competition and the crap on it.

[Michrome 0]

Ok, fine, how do you explain the piss poor ratings for the 2 prior weeks?

 

The fact that they're drawing in the 3.9/4.0 area is really good. They don't have any fresh faces, but the programming is good enough to keep fans. Last year, they blew a sure-thing ratings bonanza with Goldberg, and this year they're doing a great job with Benoit. The overrun did a 4.5 I believe. I'd like to see what the last 2 Quarter Hours did, to see if we really lost any fans over time in that long match. I doubt it.

[Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes]

I'm getting sick of the blame game for bad ratings. They are bad because the product is bad. Not for what it's running against. Next we're gonna here SD got a lousy rating because everyone was watching the Devil Rays/Angels game.

[Guest Dazed]

I'm getting sick of the blame game for bad ratings. They are bad because the product is bad. Not for what it's running against. Next we're gonna here SD got a lousy rating because everyone was watching the Devil Rays/Angels game.

I'd say that the finale of Friends (which even made it onto the British news) is a pretty good reason for a low SD! rating.

[Michrome 0]

SD did a 2.9 2 weeks ago? What is the excuse for that?

[SuperJerk 0]

I would rather watch Jamie Noble re-enacting a scene from Joe Dirt than watch FRIENDS.

That actually sounds like it'd be fairly entertaining.

 

USA Network is on a more respectable channel (I think 22) compared to Spike on like 61 (this is LA).

Are people in LA really THAT lazy that they can't just punch in the "6" and the "1" instead of holding down on the "up" button?

[Guest sanyo]

I would rather watch Jamie Noble re-enacting a scene from Joe Dirt than watch FRIENDS.

That actually sounds like it'd be fairly entertaining.

 

USA Network is on a more respectable channel (I think 22) compared to Spike on like 61 (this is LA).

Are people in LA really THAT lazy that they can't just punch in the "6" and the "1" instead of holding down on the "up" button?

Its not that buddy. USA is on basic cable while Spike is on premimum cable. Meaning alot of people are missing it simply for the fact that they don't/can't afford to pay for premimum cable. I guarantee the ratings would go up again if it were to go back to USA. Judging by your remark you either steal cable or your some 15 -year old kid who's mom is paying for cable anyways. Judging by the U.S economy and job losses, many people can't even afford basic cable, let alone premimum cable or simply don't want to pay the extra dough.

 

I even know that watching it on TSN from the best country in the world Canada, and the best city Toronto, home to the hottest women in the world!

[Guest Choken One]

It's true. Vince has to be regretting his decision to go to TNN.

 

While the perks of being a part of the Viacom circle seemed nice at first...Viacom has ALWAYS treated WWE like it's bastard 3rd cousion twice removed.

 

USA devoted the network around Raw....Spike devotes it around Star Trek and Other bad shows.

 

USA had more markets. Most people dont even know Spike exist.

[Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes]

I'm getting sick of the blame game for bad ratings. They are bad because the product is bad. Not for what it's running against. Next we're gonna here SD got a lousy rating because everyone was watching the Devil Rays/Angels game.

I'd say that the finale of Friends (which even made it onto the British news) is a pretty good reason for a low SD! rating.

What's the excuse for piss-poor ratings for the last few months? Whenever RAW or SD does a miracle 4.0+ rating, there is no "they were challenged by other stuff", but the 9/10 times the ratings suck, it's always another programs fault.

 

Let me guess why TNA gets poor buyrates: It goes against Survivor.

[Guest Choken One]

isn't survivor on Thursday too?

[Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes]

isn't survivor on Thursday too?

Like hell if I knew. I hate reality shows, they're too boring unless someones getting their ass whooped by another participant.

 

Next Week: Smackdown did a rating of 2.7. This can be excused because they were up against Jim Carey sitting on a toilet for two hours, attempting to have a bowel movement.