Top Ten Draws In U.S. Wrestling

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

The Austin/Undertaker match had the highest rating ever achieved for pro wrestling on cable television, but it occurred during the overrun after Raw had technically ended. This Is Your Life is the highest rated segment that actually occurred during the two hour television program. You are just arguing semantics at this point.

[Hoff 0]

I could edit that Wiki entry to say that the Katie Vick segment is the highest rated in Raw's history. Wiki can be edited by anyone; for that reason, it's not necessarily reliable. I had always heard that "This is Your Life" was the highest-rated segment as well; I'm just saying not to put too much stock in Wikipedia.

 

Also, it's good to actually link to the article. Otherwise we have no way of knowing you didn't just make that up.

 

You could edit it, and then you'd be tagged as a vandal, and they'd revert it back to the original state. They have page histories on Wiki that work pretty well. Yes, it is unreliable at times, but it is also correct more often than the Encyclopedia Brittanica, as confirmed by an in-depth study, and unlike many other webpages, the bullshit gets fixed quickly.

 

That's a cop out.

So, you couldn't find one other source, then? In your own defense of Wikipedia you called it "unreliable at times." How are we to know this isn't one of those times? There's one way, and that's to FIND ANOTHER SOURCE. Instead, you chose to bitch. Nice work.

[Guest NitroJMS]

Bret Hart was 10 years too late to be a major draw. He did well but he wasn't setting the box office on fire.

I hate when people say this....Wrestling itself during the early 90s couldnt draw anything....Ric Flair and others seem to use this against Bret and say he wasnt a draw...Kevin Nash suffered from this too when he had his title reign...I was a Bret and Diesel Mark back in the day..didnt know what financials were...just thought they were cool...I remember seeing Highlights of when the WWF went overseas on their yearly tours and Bret Hart being Mobbed by fans EVERYWHERE he went..You just don't see that now...Put it like this..If John Cena was around in the early 90s would he be a major draw?

 

Bret always seemed to be to be one of the top draws internationally, which was why The Hart Foundation vs. USA angle worked so well. Bret is/was insanely popular in Canada and Europe.

 

It's a little old to me that no one has mentioned Roddy Piper at all. Sure, he only headlined one WrestleMania, but he was always a huge star.

[razazteca 0]

Piper was the trailblazer for Hogan always there to set him up to look like the ultimate good guy people paid to see Piper get beat up at Wrestlemania 1 and if it wasn't for the movie They Live Hogan probably wouldn't of gotten the lead role in the classic cheesy kiddie action movie No Holds Barred or any of those family friendly movies he did after it.

[Carnival 0]

No mention of Jeff Jarrett??

[razazteca 0]

Never was never will be outside of T-E-double N-double E-double S- double E oh hell the hillbilly state where Memphis is the only important city.

[cabbageboy 0]

Nashville and Knoxville aren't important cities in Tennessee?

 

Anyway, I am amazed that people actually list Steve Austin ahead of Hulk Hogan on all time drawing lists. For one thing, Austin wasn't even a clear cut main eventer for a very long period of time. The only time where he was unquestionably THE top draw was from roughly March 1998 until Nov. 1998. After that point the WWF had guys like Rock, UT, Foley, HHH, Kane and so on that were in that same main event mix.

 

Want some ratings statistics? Austin's highest rated segment was that 9.5 cable rating vs. UT in 1999. Hogan vs. Andre on The Main Event in Feb. 1988 drew a 15.2 broadcast rating and 33 million viewers.

 

Hell, Austin was only a headliner from roughly 1998-2001. Hogan has headlined shows from 1982-2005 on and off.

[TSA09 0]

Not to doubt Hogan as the top draw or anything, but Austin was the "big thing" from July 1997 through May of 2002.

 

And its hard to say Hogan was the top draw from 1982 to 2005. Lets see from 1982 to 1984 he wasn't the main guy of the AWA dispite that being what the fans wanted. He was dead as the top draw from 1991 through 1996. His feuds from this point all seem to be the same forumla. He was only a draw again 1996 and 1997 because of the nWo angle. After that, he gets pops not buyrates or ratings.

 

Please source the 33 million viewer claim because that is like a Superbowl rating. And WWE/NBC should have been charging well over a million dollars a spot durring this program.

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

Cabbageboy, if you're going to say Austin had a supporting cast that didn't make him a "clear cut main eventer" (a stupid argument), then you have to say the same thing about Hogan, with Andre, Savage, Piper, etc around him in the 80s, then Flair, Hart, HBK, etc in the early 90s. Even in WCW you had Sting, Flair, DDP, Hall and Nash, etc around him.

[Corkscrew_Senton 0]

Want some ratings statistics? Austin's highest rated segment was that 9.5 cable rating vs. UT in 1999. Hogan vs. Andre on The Main Event in Feb. 1988 drew a 15.2 broadcast rating and 33 million viewers.

 

Apples to oranges. You have to take into considering in those 11 years the face of television changed dramatically with so many more cable options to choose, and of course satellite TV. In 1988 you've got maybe 25 channels to choose from. In 1999 you've got over 300.

[Jericho2000Mark 0]

References

 

* Wrestling Information Archive

* Steve's World of Wrestling

* ProWrestling.com

 

He most likely mistook a 5.9 for a 9.5

 

hahahaha

 

IMBD: Bash this if you'd like:

 

# The highest rating to date that "Raw" has ever featured a 25-minute-long "This Is Your Life" segment with Mankind and The Rock. The segment received an 8.4 rating.

 

The only possible explanation that "Meltzer" could have was that it occurred during an overrun. I don't know if that's the case or not, but overruns are tricky things to tabulate, as you often have people tuning in for the next show as well. The Rock segment was indisputable, genuine RAW viewership.

 

Even your buddies at wikipedia don't take IMDB seriously as a source of information. About wrestling anyway.

 

Even if they didn't, it's just another source that reiterates the same thing that was said on the wiki page and countless other sources of information...unless of course you intentionally vandalized it to make your nonexistent point.

 

I've had enough of arguing with idiots for one day. Continue on believing "Dave Meltzer" because you want to. I'll let someone else bash you over the head with something logical and see if it sinks in.

 

Good day to you sir.

 

Funny how our resident 15 year old wikipedia editor has been ever so quiet since HTQ "bashed him on the head with something logical"...

 

And is Rock-Foley the only match you've ever seen? Or is your attention span too short to appreciate anything that doesn't involve a guy taking stupid, career threatening bumps? I think you would prefer something along the lines of Jackass than pro wrestling, so why dont you pollute their board with your ignorance...

[Guest robrabies]

References

 

* Wrestling Information Archive

* Steve's World of Wrestling

* ProWrestling.com

 

He most likely mistook a 5.9 for a 9.5

 

hahahaha

 

IMBD: Bash this if you'd like:

 

# The highest rating to date that "Raw" has ever featured a 25-minute-long "This Is Your Life" segment with Mankind and The Rock. The segment received an 8.4 rating.

 

The only possible explanation that "Meltzer" could have was that it occurred during an overrun. I don't know if that's the case or not, but overruns are tricky things to tabulate, as you often have people tuning in for the next show as well. The Rock segment was indisputable, genuine RAW viewership.

 

Even your buddies at wikipedia don't take IMDB seriously as a source of information. About wrestling anyway.

 

Even if they didn't, it's just another source that reiterates the same thing that was said on the wiki page and countless other sources of information...unless of course you intentionally vandalized it to make your nonexistent point.

 

I've had enough of arguing with idiots for one day. Continue on believing "Dave Meltzer" because you want to. I'll let someone else bash you over the head with something logical and see if it sinks in.

 

Good day to you sir.

 

Funny how our resident 15 year old wikipedia editor has been ever so quiet since HTQ "bashed him on the head with something logical"...

 

And is Rock-Foley the only match you've ever seen? Or is your attention span too short to appreciate anything that doesn't involve a guy taking stupid, career threatening bumps? I think you would prefer something along the lines of Jackass than pro wrestling, so why dont you pollute their board with your ignorance...

 

1) Buy a sarcasm meter--sometimes things entered in a sig are entered in jest or are purposely ironized. Watch the match, and you'll understand the quote, especially the end

2) Pull your head out of your ass

3) HTQ gave me a timeout because I wouldn't "kiss his ring" not because I was afraid to show my face. He's a coward and you're an imbecile.

4) I wouldn't impugn my intelligence. You trying to match wits with me is like a fly trying to intercept a nuclear warhead. Know your place.

5) Read the subsequent posts on this thread, including the very first thing that I said about overruns some few pages back. Meltzer is not the Bible and you can't definitively calculate overruns. Rock-Foley TIYL is and will continue to be the highest rated segment ever on Monday Night Raw.

[Jericho2000Mark 0]

4) I wouldn't impugn my intelligence. You trying to match wits with me is like a fly trying to intercept a nuclear warhead. Know your place.

 

Oh my, what have I done... Perhaps it was best not to "impugn" such an intellectual giant of 15. L-O-L

 

FYI, Prowrestling.com, one of the "credible" sites you listed as a source...gets their news from Meltzer too. Tool.

[Guest robrabies]

4) I wouldn't impugn my intelligence. You trying to match wits with me is like a fly trying to intercept a nuclear warhead. Know your place.

 

Oh my, what have I done... Perhaps it was best not to "impugn" such an intellectual giant of 15. L-O-L

 

FYI, Prowrestling.com, one of the "credible" sites you listed as a source...gets their news from Meltzer too. Tool.

 

Add about a decade on to the 15 and you'd be right about my age. Add 100 points to your IQ and you'd be near mine.

 

By the way, nice logic. Your tacit acceptance of Meltzer without outside sources thereby necessitates that you believe what he says in other publications, if properly attributed. Since PW.com is one of those, it should be credible to you. If not, then you are undermining your own argument. Furthermore, my stat was provided by 3 references, not one. If you know anything about peer-review, you would know that 3 sources agreeing is far more credible than 1. I didn't say I believed PW.com by itself, but if that stat is quoted in several other documents and there are no discrepancies, then it is far more likely to be valid than the reportings of just one person.

[Jericho2000Mark 0]

4) I wouldn't impugn my intelligence. You trying to match wits with me is like a fly trying to intercept a nuclear warhead. Know your place.

 

Oh my, what have I done... Perhaps it was best not to "impugn" such an intellectual giant of 15. L-O-L

 

FYI, Prowrestling.com, one of the "credible" sites you listed as a source...gets their news from Meltzer too. Tool.

 

Add about a decade on to the 15 and you'd be right about my age. Add 100 points to your IQ and you'd be near mine.

 

By the way, nice logic. Your tacit acceptance of Meltzer without outside sources thereby necessitates that you believe what he says in other publications, if properly attributed. Since PW.com is one of those, it should be credible to you. If not, then you are undermining your own argument. Furthermore, my stat was provided by 3 references, not one. If you know anything about peer-review, you would know that 3 sources agreeing is far more credible than 1. I didn't say I believed PW.com by itself, but if that stat is quoted in several other documents and there are no discrepancies, then it is far more likely to be valid than the reportings of just one person.

 

PW.com also uses sources I don't take seriously, like The Torch.

 

And according to your failed attempt at logic, I could start a website, get two others to start their own, and we can all report that robrabies is a moron. And of course, it would be fact, because three different sources agree that you are indeed, a moron. Meltzer is probably the credible independent news source in all of wrestling, hence why he was interviewed on shows like Donahue during the steroid scandal and appeared on the A&E special on wrestling, so I'll take his word over countless "newz" sites that are probably run by kids in your grade 10 class.

[foleyfanforever88 0]

4) I wouldn't impugn my intelligence. You trying to match wits with me is like a fly trying to intercept a nuclear warhead. Know your place.

 

Oh my, what have I done... Perhaps it was best not to "impugn" such an intellectual giant of 15. L-O-L

 

FYI, Prowrestling.com, one of the "credible" sites you listed as a source...gets their news from Meltzer too. Tool.

 

Add about a decade on to the 15 and you'd be right about my age. Add 100 points to your IQ and you'd be near mine.

 

By the way, nice logic. Your tacit acceptance of Meltzer without outside sources thereby necessitates that you believe what he says in other publications, if properly attributed. Since PW.com is one of those, it should be credible to you. If not, then you are undermining your own argument. Furthermore, my stat was provided by 3 references, not one. If you know anything about peer-review, you would know that 3 sources agreeing is far more credible than 1. I didn't say I believed PW.com by itself, but if that stat is quoted in several other documents and there are no discrepancies, then it is far more likely to be valid than the reportings of just one person.

 

PW.com also uses sources I don't take seriously, like The Torch.

 

And according to your failed attempt at logic, I could start a website, get two others to start their own, and we can all report that robrabies is a moron. And of course, it would be fact, because three different sources agree that you are indeed, a moron. Meltzer is probably the credible independent news source in all of wrestling, hence why he was interviewed on shows like Donahue during the steroid scandal and appeared on the A&E special on wrestling, so I'll take his word over countless "newz" sites that are probably run by kids in your grade 10 class.

 

Idk where I stand on the credibility argument, but Jericho, stop implying that rob is a young kid when he isn't. It makes you look like even more of an idiot.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

3) HTQ gave me a timeout because I wouldn't "kiss his ring" not because I was afraid to show my face. He's a coward and you're an imbecile.

What the hell is this ring nonsense you keep talking about?

 

I gave you a timeout because you were, and still are, being an ass. Stop it.

[k thx 0]

Oh, stop flaming each other guys. Can't we just be friends?

 

To bring back on topic, and because I'm bored, this is the top ten (well eleven) based on people who gave ten or less current names in this thread:

 

1. Cena

2= HHH

2= HBK

2= Undertaker

5. Mysterio

6= Hogan

6= Edge

8. Batista

9. Angle

10= RVD

10= Jeff Hardy

 

Definitive list?

[Guest scottb75]

My top 10 all time

 

1. Hulk Hogan

2. Andre the Giant

3. Steve Austin

4. The Rock

5. Bruno Sammartino

6. Ric Flair

7. Jerry Lawler

8. Dusty Rhodes

9. The Ultimate Warrior

10. Triple-H

 

The reason I rank Austin and the Rock lower is because I feel their careers after they hit the top were too short compared to Hogan, and Andre. I don't know if Rock and Austin's popularity and drawing ability can stand the test of time like Hogan's has. Hogan is still considered among the top draws today over 15 years past his prime will Austin/Rock be able to say the same when they are in their 50s? Will they earn the nostalgia draw that Hogan has enjoyed in recent years?

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

I think Piper probably belongs in the top ten. I think my first eight (Londos, George, Rogers, Bruno, Andre, Hogan, Austin, Rock) are unassailable. Beyond that, there are about seven guys fighting for two spots. Flair, Rhodes, Piper, Bret Hart, Fred Blassie, Bobo Brazil, maybe Sting or Bill Goldberg.

[Lt. Al Giardello 0]

I think Piper probably belongs in the top ten. I think my first eight (Londos, George, Rogers, Bruno, Andre, Hogan, Austin, Rock) are unassailable. Beyond that, there are about seven guys fighting for two spots. Flair, Rhodes, Piper, Bret Hart, Fred Blassie, Bobo Brazil, maybe Sting or Bill Goldberg.

 

Junkyard Dog as well.

[Jericho2000Mark 0]

My top 10 all time

 

1. Hulk Hogan

2. Andre the Giant

3. Steve Austin

4. The Rock

5. Bruno Sammartino

6. Ric Flair

7. Jerry Lawler

8. Dusty Rhodes

9. The Ultimate Warrior

10. Triple-H

 

The reason I rank Austin and the Rock lower is because I feel their careers after they hit the top were too short compared to Hogan, and Andre. I don't know if Rock and Austin's popularity and drawing ability can stand the test of time like Hogan's has. Hogan is still considered among the top draws today over 15 years past his prime will Austin/Rock be able to say the same when they are in their 50s? Will they earn the nostalgia draw that Hogan has enjoyed in recent years?

 

Except Hogan's last WWE title run sank ratings...