strummer 0 Report post Posted January 14, 2006 Meltzer: No surprise, given the nature of the show, Smackdown set a new Friday night record last night doing a 3.2 rating. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
k thx 0 Report post Posted January 14, 2006 Spoilers = Ratings Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iggymcfly 0 Report post Posted January 14, 2006 I was just thinking, wouldn't it have done an even stronger rating if they just spoiled that Batista would drop the title and that they were going to have a 20-man Battle Royal to determine a new World Champion? I'd think that fans would be more likely to tune in to see who wins the title than to tune in just to see Kurt win it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Enigma 0 Report post Posted January 14, 2006 But I thought spoilers were detrimental to Smackdown's ratings, right Linda McMahon? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Black Lushus 0 Report post Posted January 14, 2006 Good, I'm glad to see that the best wrestling show on TV did that well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Placebo Effect 0 Report post Posted January 14, 2006 In other Friday night TV news, The Book of Daniel unfortunately won't get renewed if it even lasts its entire run and Malcolm in the Middle's been shuffled back to its Sunday at 7:00 timeslot. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Boon 0 Report post Posted January 14, 2006 I was just thinking, wouldn't it have done an even stronger rating if they just spoiled that Batista would drop the title and that they were going to have a 20-man Battle Royal to determine a new World Champion? I'd think that fans would be more likely to tune in to see who wins the title than to tune in just to see Kurt win it. Nope. I would've just assumed it would've been Orton or somebody else I didn't care about. For me, anyway, Kurt was the reason I watched. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
k thx 0 Report post Posted January 14, 2006 They let smarks know Angle was gonna win. Non-net marks may have been told, but not confirmed. Smarks knew Angle was winning. Smarks like Angle, and will go out of their way to see a title change. Smarks tuned in. Smart move. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hyperchord24 0 Report post Posted January 14, 2006 But Vince hates smarks Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
k thx 0 Report post Posted January 14, 2006 VInce has no idea of what happens on WWE.com. The front page has a story about The Miz goig to OVW. Vince would probably bust a gut if he knew. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Dam(o)nYankees Report post Posted January 14, 2006 I was just thinking, wouldn't it have done an even stronger rating if they just spoiled that Batista would drop the title and that they were going to have a 20-man Battle Royal to determine a new World Champion? I'd think that fans would be more likely to tune in to see who wins the title than to tune in just to see Kurt win it. No. I tuned in specifically to watch Angle win. If I heard "title up in battle royal" with no other information, I would have assumed Randy Orton won and would have no reason to watch. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hyperchord24 0 Report post Posted January 14, 2006 Oh please, no one so much as sneezes without Vince's permission Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iggymcfly 0 Report post Posted January 14, 2006 Isn't the whole point behind being a smark that you don't need WWE.com to get this kind of information? How many of you tuned in to watch the battle royal because you saw the announcement on WWE.com, and didn't see it on any other website? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
k thx 0 Report post Posted January 14, 2006 Nah, there are countless instances of things being missed by WWE management. EG, Stevie Richards, Heat Commisioner. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Dam(o)nYankees Report post Posted January 14, 2006 Isn't the whole point behind being a smark that you don't need WWE.com to get this kind of information? How many of you tuned in to watch the battle royal because you saw the announcement on WWE.com, and didn't see it on any other website? I saw it first on WWE.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
k thx 0 Report post Posted January 14, 2006 The WWE.com bit took it from "spoiler" to "widely known fact". Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Dam(o)nYankees Report post Posted January 14, 2006 The WWE.com bit took it from "spoiler" to "widely known fact". I agree. I'll take it a step further. It took it from "bizarre, possibly fake spoiler" to "widely known fact." for a lot of people. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
randomguy 0 Report post Posted January 15, 2006 They should have said that the title was being vacated for a 20 man battle and that the 20th man was Kurt Angle and left it at that. Anyway it was a good episode. If only I hadn't been eating dinner when Jillian's mole was bitten off... Edit: Ha ha ha, so here I am eating dinner, as soon as I post this I go to wwe.com to watch velocity and the first thing I see is a recap of the mole being bitten off... Edit 2: Looks like Burchill is using the C4 (?) now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MarvinisaLunatic 0 Report post Posted January 15, 2006 They should have announced on WWE.com that Kurt Angle won and photoshopped a picture of him winning (like they really had) and then really had Mark Henry winning... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites