Raw rating

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

It's back to reality as Raw did a 3.7 rating last night, while Ultimate Fighter and UFC have to face their own reality with a record low 1.1, showing they aren't surviving nearly so well without the Raw lead-in.

 

From Meltzer

[Guest rawmvp]

And that's with Austin, Foley and Kane returning on the same night.

 

Wow.

[CanadianChick 0]

Wow, low ratings all around. Raw was pretty bleh last week as a lead in to this week's, but how was UFC last week? Same idea?

[Guest *KNK*]

"Clearly it's the switch. The fans who are used to Spike aren't finding USA on their cable system".

 

Oh, fuck we did that excuse. Okay, WWE apologists, spin this one.

[Guest Brian]

Wow, low ratings all around. Raw was pretty bleh last week as a lead in to this week's, but how was UFC last week? Same idea?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Average show, average fight, a little underwhelming on Whitehead's part. Heavyweights are when you want to tune out.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

"Clearly it's the switch. The fans who are used to Spike aren't finding USA on their cable system".

 

Oh, fuck we did that excuse.  Okay, WWE apologists, spin this one.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I fully expect people to wheel this excuse out again.

[razazteca 0]

This weak's reason would be baseball.

[razazteca 0]

Wow, low ratings all around. Raw was pretty bleh last week as a lead in to this week's, but how was UFC last week? Same idea?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Average show, average fight, a little underwhelming on Whitehead's part. Heavyweights are when you want to tune out.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's obvious that nobody likes Rashad's fights.

[Guest *KNK*]

This weak's EXCUSE would be baseball.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Guest rawmvp]

With UFC bottoming out, I'd like to see Spike give TNA a shot to go head to head with WWE. Because let's face it: this is the best time to usurp the WWE's audience, since the programming has been horrendous as of late.

 

The only thing I recommend TNA to do is to go back to a 4-sided ring, and only use the 6-sided ring for special events or a "Six Degrees of Slaughter" themed PPV. The only reason why TNA should go back to a 4-sided ring, is that the 6-sided ring will remind viewers of the UFC (even though the UFC ring is an octagon).

[Guest Fishyswa]

I predict them getting cancelled within 4 months. This is clearly the end!

[Guest Brian]

Wow, low ratings all around. Raw was pretty bleh last week as a lead in to this week's, but how was UFC last week? Same idea?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Average show, average fight, a little underwhelming on Whitehead's part. Heavyweights are when you want to tune out.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's obvious that nobody likes Rashad's fights.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I like Rashad. It's just that he is a counter puncher with not enough power for heavyweight. I think he has good enough hands and wrestling to do something, and it someone initiates, I think he can have a good fight. I want to see him vs. Seth personally.

[Guest *KNK*]

With UFC bottoming out, I'd like to see Spike give TNA a shot to go head to head with WWE. Because let's face it: this is the best time to usurp the WWE's audience, since the programming has been horrendous as of late.

 

The only thing I recommend TNA to do is to go back to a 4-sided ring, and only use the 6-sided ring for special events or a "Six Degrees of Slaughter" themed PPV. The only reason why TNA should go back to a 4-sided ring, is that the 6-sided ring will remind viewers of the UFC (even though the UFC ring is an octagon).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Do you work at being an idiot because it's the one quality you have.

[SamoaRowe 0]

"Clearly it's the switch. The fans who are used to Spike aren't finding USA on their cable system".

 

Oh, fuck we did that excuse.  Okay, WWE apologists, spin this one.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

No reason to stand up for Raw this time, they handed us a pair of crappy shows on USA and now they are paying for it. And I usually stand up for WWE.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

With UFC bottoming out, I'd like to see Spike give TNA a shot to go head to head with WWE. Because let's face it: this is the best time to usurp the WWE's audience, since the programming has been horrendous as of late.

 

The only thing I recommend TNA to do is to go back to a 4-sided ring, and only use the 6-sided ring for special events or a "Six Degrees of Slaughter" themed PPV. The only reason why TNA should go back to a 4-sided ring, is that the 6-sided ring will remind viewers of the UFC (even though the UFC ring is an octagon).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Do you work at being an idiot because it's the one quality you have.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

He doesn't have to work at it. It's a natural gift he has.

[razazteca 0]

Rashad is not aggressive enough to be entertaining especially when his opponet just gives up.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Is Rashad the one who Hughes took to task for showboating a few weeks ago?

[Guest Brian]

Are you kidding. He has the dance, but he didn't bust it out because JVF told him he was going to get caught if he dropped his hand. That fight + dancing + Matt Hughes head exploding would have been infinately entertaining. Heck, I enjoyed it immensely with only two of those three going for them.

[Guest Brian]

Is Rashad the one who Hughes took to task for showboating a few weeks ago?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes. He has the dance. And the weird chopping motion with his stance. He has good footwork, decent hands but no power, and good wrestling. He'll probably drop down to LHW after the show.

[Mole 0]

Umm excuses guys.

 

People aren't watching Raw BECAUSE IT SUCKS.

 

Simple as that.

[Guest rawmvp]

Yes, I do work at being an idiot. So far I've been very successful.

 

Secondly, I'd like to say one thing to CanadianChick:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You're very beautiful.

[cabbageboy 0]

Somewhere in there I found something I agree with, rawmvp. I don't think the goofy looking 6 sided ring will ever get TNA anywhere. There's just something about it that gives me a jolt on a basic level.

 

I'd like for TNA to get a better timeslot as well, but not head to head with Raw. It won't work. In the long run it didn't work for WCW and they had a couple of decades of TV following.

[Guest *KNK*]

Somewhere in there I found something I agree with, rawmvp.  I don't think the goofy looking 6 sided ring will ever get TNA anywhere.  There's just something about it that gives me a jolt on a basic level. 

 

I'd like for TNA to get a better timeslot as well, but not head to head with Raw.  It won't work.  In the long run it didn't work for WCW and they had a couple of decades of TV following.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The time slot did work "in the long run" because it was trouncing WWE for quite some time (83 weeks) and it was still competitive against it. What didn't work was the shitty direction and quality of the show that killed the show and promotion Not the time slot.

 

TNA doesn't have the fanbase to compete head to head anyways. Realistically, it needs another year at the least to develop a sizeable fanbase for that.

[Guest rawmvp]

Yeah, but the six-sided ring needs to go as a permanent fixture, anyway.

 

It just doesn't look right, and somehow detracts from the action in the ring; by this, I mean that what are great moves inside a 4-sided ring, become ordinary moves in a 6-sided ring. It's almost as if the extra 2 sides implictly command a very high level of workrate. Very high risk moves are needed to compensate for the extra 2 sides, or so it seems, because it seemingly takes A LOT to pop the TNA crowd.

[justcoz 0]

Somewhere in there I found something I agree with, rawmvp.  I don't think the goofy looking 6 sided ring will ever get TNA anywhere.  There's just something about it that gives me a jolt on a basic level. 

 

I'd like for TNA to get a better timeslot as well, but not head to head with Raw.  It won't work.  In the long run it didn't work for WCW and they had a couple of decades of TV following.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The time slot did work "in the long run" because it was trouncing WWE for quite some time (83 weeks) and it was still competitive against it. What didn't work was the shitty direction and quality of the show that killed the show and promotion Not the time slot.

 

TNA doesn't have the fanbase to compete head to head anyways. Realistically, it needs another year at the least to develop a sizeable fanbase for that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I see nothing wrong with Spike experimenting however. For instance, leading into a TNA PPV, hype something like Bound For Glory Monday where they broadcast three episodes of TNA Impact from 9pm until 12am. Keep CSI as the 8pm lead-in, I guess. WWE will go on earlier if competition decides to start at 8pm. How late would they be willing to go and how many Rock movies can USA run at 11:05?

 

No, they aren't going to be pulling in 2's or 3's but there has been at least a 1.3 combined audience there for Saturday and Monday's rerun. Not a whole lot different than what UFC is doing on Mondays.

[Guest *KNK*]

Yeah, but the six-sided ring needs to go as a permanent fixture, anyway.

 

It just doesn't look right, and somehow detracts from the action in the ring; by this, I mean that what are great moves inside a 4-sided ring, become ordinary moves in a 6-sided ring. It's almost as if the extra 2 sides implictly command a very high level of workrate. Very high risk moves are needed to compensate for the extra 2 sides, or so it seems, because it seemingly takes A LOT to pop the TNA crowd.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The ring has very little effect on the quality of the match itself. "It doesn't look right" is a personal opinion, whilst to most viewers it's hardly a noticable difference.

 

Work-rate is the same inside a 4 or 6 side ring, in fact work-rate can exist on your bed room floor.

 

Why does it take "alot" to pop the TNA crowd? Maybe because they are getting used to wrestlers not working within limits, thus the bar is raised.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Anything that sets apart TNA from WWE is a good thing. The six-sided ring looks different for sure, but that isn't a bad thing when it's the sort of thing that can make people take notice of it. The question is if it gets used in a way that makes everyone look good, and it has done that so far.

[Guest JMA]

TNA could easily set itself apart from WWE if they had a twenty minute main event with two of their best wrestlers. You'd see moves there that WWE main eventers would never do on TV.

[Guest rawmvp]

TNA doesn't have the credibility to revolutionize pro-wrestling with a 6 sided ring; thus, most (casual) fans will frown upon it.

 

And don't kid yourselves by thinking that casual fans watch TNA. Their entire 0.8 rating consists of smark fans. In fact, I'd confidently venture to guess that of the people who watch RAW, 0.8-1.2 of the rating can be attributed to smart fans.

[Mole 0]

Somewhere in there I found something I agree with, rawmvp.  I don't think the goofy looking 6 sided ring will ever get TNA anywhere.  There's just something about it that gives me a jolt on a basic level. 

 

I'd like for TNA to get a better timeslot as well, but not head to head with Raw.  It won't work.  In the long run it didn't work for WCW and they had a couple of decades of TV following.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The time slot did work "in the long run" because it was trouncing WWE for quite some time (83 weeks) and it was still competitive against it. What didn't work was the shitty direction and quality of the show that killed the show and promotion Not the time slot.

 

TNA doesn't have the fanbase to compete head to head anyways. Realistically, it needs another year at the least to develop a sizeable fanbase for that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Keep CSI as the 8pm lead-in, I guess.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Umm, people who watch CSI aren't the same crowd who watch wrestling.