Punk To Lose Strap Over Ratings?

[PeaceAndLove]

once again i have read this article that states punk may lose the belt soon as officials are considering the idea. i for one hope to god this does not happen but i did see a kane vs cena for wwe title match at a feb dark match..here is the link http://www.wrestlenewz.com/wrestlin...taking-title-off-cm-punk-due-to-poor-ratings/

 

[The Underking]

It's probably taken out of context. Like if they have a plan after Wrestlemania for CM Punk to continue with the world title or give to somebody like Cena or Miz who are preety decent rating's wise I would guess. That's just a guess if they take the title off of CM Punk like they honestly should if the trend continues I couldn't complain about it.

My reaction atleast well while I don't like the decision it's the right thing to do if it turns into a trend.

 

[Maestro48239]

if they want to get the ratings up, get rid of Michael Cole!!! he's doing more to hurt the product then CM Punk.

 

[Scofield]

Not that I am a CM Punk mark, but I refuse to lay the blame on the man currently holding the WWE Championship. The whole business is in a decline right now with UFC being at an all time high.

What are they going to do? Put the strap back on Cena? Is that really going to give a spike to the ratings?

WWE needs to realize they can't keep drawing off of Cena, the guy is not going to be around forever and nor can you keep rolling the ball with him consistently...the guy's body is sooner rather than later going to break down then what?

I seem to remember when a young HBK was WWE Champion and WWE was getting it's ass handed to it by WCW. Just have to bare with the times till someone or even something in the wrestling business as a whole turns around.

 

[Workrate]

Does anyone ever consider that, especially in a case like this, it isn't so much the champions' fault as it is the challengers he's facing and the sloppiness with which these matches are being put together?

Considering they usually run with the exact same title matches for two or three consecutive pay-per-views, I quite frequently find that my interest wanes around the time of the third or fourth Punk/Del Rio match (or in some cases, second). I know this has horse has been beaten to a pulp, but the way they rushed Punk back after he left with the WWE title really made me lose interest in that strap. It was all so sloppy and forced, how do they expect me retain the enthusiasm I had when he won the belt and left with it now that he's facing Del Rio over and over for what feels like no reason?

@Scofield said it well a couple posts up: they have to develop new stars. They haven't done that and so what we're left with is Cena, Punk, and a small group of guys on a tier below them, then your run-of-the-mill midcarders. Superstars like The Rock and Steve Austin were popular for a lot of reasons, but let's not forget that their title feuds were all against meaningful, popular, credible stars and that helped contribute to their success. Really, at no point in the WWE's history have they had such a weak line-up of elite, upper echelon main eventers. They've got two now (The Miz is probably the next closest, then Orton). So sure, give the champion some blame. But give those responsible for developing legitimate challengers that can draw -- and those wrestlers given the opportunity who haven't run with it -- some blame as well.

 

[jpfinbin2006]

Alright ... If you want to take the title off of CM Punk due to ratings being down maybe you should just sit back and think for a minute ... Didn't this happen many times before ? Didn't this happen to some guy back in the later part of the 90's ? What was his name ? Ohhh thats right his name was Shawn Michaels ... It's not the person you have the title on ( yes it is sometimes Cough CENA Cough ) but you got to look at What/Who your up against ... '96 - '98 Shawn Michaels performing at the top of his game was not even enough to keep ratings high when facing the product WCW had. Shawn did all he could in the ratings war Example: 60 Minute Iron Man Match, 1st Ever Hell In A Cell, multiple 5 star matches, and more ... Did Stone Cold raise the ratings ? I'd be shocked if he never ... but how popular was TNA, UFC, MMA, amongst other things back in '98 - '02, '03 ??? WELL ??? CM Punk deserves the title because he is very entertaining in my opinion just WWE needs to get away from the BS i mean PG Rating ... Agree ?

 

[WWEIsLife2]

I don't see this happening and from what I read they talked about it before TLC. I think once Royal Rumble to Wrestlemania time rolls around & with MNF ending the Ratings will go back up. WWE just has to ride this out and be patient right now.

 

[Dalinkwent]

The problem is WWE doesn't really give the fans a reason to stay tuned or make Raw a must see product. I noticed that when Mark Henry won the scrap and started dominating, Smackdowns ratings went up and kept growing as he kept dominating. It's not that Mark Henry was a draw, it wwas simply the fact that his dominance provided a uncertain climtate. Who was Mark going to add to his "Hall of pain"?, how was Randy Orton going to deal with a man that beat him CLEAN? who was going to finally take the belt off Mark? Yet the minute Big show was added to the mix and started knocking Henry out almost every week, the threat was gone and the ratings started to go with it. WWE needs a angle that actually shakes up the status quo and gives the faces something to actually sweat over. Punk vs Ace with a crew of stooge wrestlers would be the best thing they could do, yes it's very similar to Austin/Vince but it would be better than Punk beating generic heel # 800.

 

[mikead]

This would be a simple solution to a major problem. There are no knockout storylines right now outside of Cena vs. the Rock.

Punk is clearly over. They are finding ways to use Ryder but Kane and Orton are getting about as big of pops as you can get in the business. Punk at the top with the belt has nothing to do with the ratings. People enjoy seeing him fight and seeing him talk. The problem is they have no impact story line for him or the other top guys. When the WWE/F was HUGE everyone had a great story line. Some of the biggest feuds had no title involved. Its sad how far the writing has fallen. Of course the talent will never approach the Attitude Era (I mean on the mic/charisma) but there is more than enough talent to make this product extremely popular.

 

[Superman38]

Can someone please explain something to me? Can someone please explain to me how Cena is such a huge draw? I get it. He's the biggest draw in the company, but he's not that big enough of a draw that he makes a huge dent in the ratings. To be honest, the ratings seem to be about the same when he's champ, so I don't see the big improvement.

I really don't think that it's Punk. I think that it's the shit that they got him doing. Another match with Del Rio? WWE doesn't seem to realize that the crowd doesn't care about Del Rio. Miz? He just doesn't come off as a huge threat. He seems to be more pest than threat. Another theory is that most of Punk's segments are with Johnny Ace and alot of the fans just don't want to watch that guy, period.

I remember last year when they were shitting on Orton when he was the champ even though the majority of the program was built around Cena and Nexus, but it was somehow Orton's fault.

 

[mikead]

Can someone please explain something to me? Can someone please explain to me how Cena is such a huge draw? I get it. He's the biggest draw in the company, but he's not that big enough of a draw that he makes a huge dent in the ratings. To be honest, the ratings seem to be about the same when he's champ, so I don't see the big improvement.

I really don't think that it's Punk. I think that it's the shit that they got him doing. Another match with Del Rio? WWE doesn't seem to realize that the crowd doesn't care about Del Rio. Miz? He just doesn't come off as a huge threat. He seems to be more pest than threat. Another theory is that most of Punk's segments are with Johnny Ace and alot of the fans just don't want to watch that guy, period.

I remember last year when they were shitting on Orton when he was the champ even though the majority of the program was built around Cena and Nexus, but it was somehow Orton's fault.

This is the problem though. If they effectively marketed the roster they would be fine. There is more than enough talent and charisma. They focus on one or two guys at a time and even do a poor job at that.

There idea of "story line" is cycling through 3-4 girls in the Title chase.

 

[sharu7]

Get rid of the Brand Extension.

Have 1 World Champion
Then the IC Champion
Then US
And then the Tag titles and Womens title.

Make it how it use to be during the 90's and early 00's. Thats how Rock, Austin etc, got over as credible champions, there was only ONE title..THE title, right now we have TWO titles. Wwe doesn't have the talent it had 6-7 years ago, Like Benoit, Guerrero, Batista, Edge, RVD, etc.

Who the hell do they have now as top maineventers? Cena, Orton? And A little bit of Punk?

If guys like, Del Rio, Miz, Henry, Orton, Cena, Barrett, CM Punk, ALL fought for ONE championship it would make interesting stories, and we'd have more No.1 Contender matches and all of that....It would automatically make the IC and US titles more credible.

If there were 2 championships back in 90's...Rock, Austin probably wouldn't have been over as they eventually became...

 

[Superman38]

Exactly! I just remember last year with Orton and them thinking that about him just two weeks into his reign. I remember thinking, "Hell, you haven't given him anything interesting to do." His feud with Sheamus was built on nothing but the title. To me, that's the biggest cop out today. They think that just by putting the title on the line will make it interesting. Well, it doesn't. In the past, it has always seemed that the title feuds were always personal. And, I'm not just talking about the Attitude Era. Go back to the '80's. Don't you try to tell me that Hogan vs. Andre and Hogan vs. Savage weren't personal.

Another thing that absolutely drives me crazy is the booking. I'm talking about the actual match booking. Take Monday for example. Why should I care about CM Punk (Single Star), Daniel Bryan (Single Star) and Zack Ryder (Single Star) take on The Miz (Single Star), Alberto Del Rio (Single Star) and Dolph Ziggler (Single Star) in a Six-Man Tag Team Match? I just don't see why a fan should care about match like that where the winning doesn't really mean anything. Punk's a single star. He shouldn't be wrestling in a tag team match unless their is some kind of story built in to where the outcome matters. I want matches to actually matter and for the outcome to mean something. Let's say that you have Punk and Miz feuding and Cena and Kane doing the same. Hell, I can pretty tell that the chances are high of seeing Punk and Cena vs. Miz and Kane in a meaningless tag match. I just don't see the point.

 

[Lion's Sacrifice]

I actually find this laughable. Ratings were dropping before Punk won the belt at survivor series, yet it must be Punks fault.

I really don't understand why WWE would be thinking about doing this. Why not instead throwing the title around like a potato they take their time and develop a story that is worth watching. They don't seem interested in actually creating anything, just doing things to get a quick boost in the ratings. Not even the Rock's return at Survivor Series help the buy rate there.

If WWE would actually look back and notice that a lot of the success they've had in the past is when they've actually developed the undercard story lines. Look at the attitude era. Yes, Austin was the top draws but you had great undercard feuds that were developed. Look at Rock vs Triple h, with DX and the Nation. Look at the Tag Team rivalries that took center stage a lot of the times. They had all had a good story that was told in and out of the ring. If they would actually look at the product they'd see that its not the champion that's not drawing, its the entire damn product.

 

[King of the Words]

The WWE product has gotten so lame, and the writing and booking is so poor that I really don't care anymore. It's like they are trying to self destruct. The CM Punk Character has been the best thing to come along in a while and WWE even seem dead set on ruining that. What is going on? Once characters like the Undertaker and Triple H. retire from the ring, and God forbid Cena gets injured, the WWE will be Screwed and they will only have themselves to blame for horrible writing, Boring story lines that usually go nowhere, and putting all their eggs in just a few baskets, Cena, Orton, a little Punk too. The WWE needs to wake up and stop coasting on the backs of a few wrestlers and do some damage control. The whole show needs to be revamped from top to bottom. Keep what works, get rid of or change what doesn't work. Getting better writing should be top on the list. Watching WWE now seems like they are getting desparte, putting the belts on Ryder and Bryan to please the fans. Major changes are needed on all levels to get the WWE product back to a decent, respectable level of Entertainment.IMO.

 

[SeanTheShow]

There are three things easily that are wrong with the WWE that kills ratings...and none are CM Punk...

1. Michael Cole...makes any awesome moment...annoying...because he ruins everything

2.Alberto Del Rio... he's ALREADY stale... and we said Cena's bad...

3.Johnny Ace... Need I say more

Thank you And Good night

 

[(s)AINT]

I am a HUGE WWE fan to the point where I travel to attend Wrestlemania, I traveled to attend Survivor Series, I buy PPV's, I own some shirts and I watch RAW and Smackdown almost religiously. What is wrong with WWE? Micheal Cole.

Now, I don't want to be one of those people that just blame Cole and says he sucks and all that. But, when week in and week out we have to hear him say how horrible so and so is and all that. I mean, this past week he ragged on Daniel Bryan so bad to the point where he was saying he's boring, doesn't deserve to be champion, is the worst ever, etc. Who watch to watch a show if the "voice" of the show is saying the show is horrible?

Seriously?

I don't turn it but you bet your bottom dollar that casual fans are turned off when they are being told the show sucks or this guy is boring. Cole should be made a manager of some up and coming heel. He'd be perfect at that. While I agree that nobody watches WWE specifically for the announcing...good announcing does add to the product. Think back to your favorite matches and I'm sure everyone can remember at least one memorable epic line from their favorite match.

Now though, all we get is Micheal Cole attempting to give people he doesn't like "x-pac heat" In fact, I am willing to bet that Cole himself has X-pac heat. People boo him when he talks but people just don't want to see him, they don't want to hear him and he's doing so much more harm than good.

Why can't WWE see this?

:S

EDIT: Also, Johnny Ace is absolutely boring. Is it any coincidence that ratings have tanked since he became a regular part of RAW? The guy is boring and WWE knows this. They have him on there boring everyone because they have this weird stance thinking fans will tune in to hate on him. Instead he just bores us all and makes us not care. If they want a heel figure head, get one. Look at when Vince was head of RAW, he was a hated man but had enthusiasm. People wanted to see him get his, they wanted tune in to see that point where say Stone Cold would kick his ass. When it comes to Johnny Ace, he has no enthusiasm. People just don't care. He's boring, get him off my TV. Hell, I'd rather have Mike Adamle back at least he was so horrible it was funny. Johnny Ace is just a boring tool, nothing more.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

if they want to get the ratings up, get rid of Michael Cole!!! he's doing more to hurt the product then CM Punk.

Pretty stupid comment for a variety of reasons. Cole is insanely over as a heel and anyone he works with is over. Second, they can look at the quarter hour ratings. So, since they're using Cole quite a bit, I'm guessing his quarter hour segments are over.

WWE doesn't book like a mark, they book like a business. If a product (wrestler) isn't selling (over), they'll push the next one. If Punk really is hurting ratings, and they have people smarter than most people on here looking at statistics with tools we don't have available, then he shouldn't be the champ. Doesn't matter how much I or anyone else likes him.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

I am a HUGE WWE fan to the point where I travel to attend Wrestlemania, I traveled to attend Survivor Series, I buy PPV's, I own some shirts and I watch RAW and Smackdown almost religiously. What is wrong with WWE? Micheal Cole.

Now, I don't want to be one of those people that just blame Cole and says he sucks and all that. But, when week in and week out we have to hear him say how horrible so and so is and all that. I mean, this past week he ragged on Daniel Bryan so bad to the point where he was saying he's boring, doesn't deserve to be champion, is the worst ever, etc. Who watch to watch a show if the "voice" of the show is saying the show is horrible?

Seriously?

I don't turn it but you bet your bottom dollar that casual fans are turned off when they are being told the show sucks or this guy is boring. Cole should be made a manager of some up and coming heel. He'd be perfect at that. While I agree that nobody watches WWE specifically for the announcing...good announcing does add to the product. Think back to your favorite matches and I'm sure everyone can remember at least one memorable epic line from their favorite match.

Now though, all we get is Micheal Cole attempting to give people he doesn't like "x-pac heat" In fact, I am willing to bet that Cole himself has X-pac heat. People boo him when he talks but people just don't want to see him, they don't want to hear him and he's doing so much more harm than good.

Why can't WWE see this?

:S

EDIT: Also, Johnny Ace is absolutely boring. Is it any coincidence that ratings have tanked since he became a regular part of RAW? The guy is boring and WWE knows this. They have him on there boring everyone because they have this weird stance thinking fans will tune in to hate on him. Instead he just bores us all and makes us not care. If they want a heel figure head, get one. Look at when Vince was head of RAW, he was a hated man but had enthusiasm. People wanted to see him get his, they wanted tune in to see that point where say Stone Cold would kick his ass. When it comes to Johnny Ace, he has no enthusiasm. People just don't care. He's boring, get him off my TV. Hell, I'd rather have Mike Adamle back at least he was so horrible it was funny. Johnny Ace is just a boring tool, nothing more.

People telling you the product sucks....like CM Punk.

Cole doesn't get X Pac heat. Like I said in my previous posts, the live audience would leave and his quarter hour ratings would be a drop.

Ace is SUPPOSED to act boring. He's a corporate clown. He is also very over, and like with Cole, if he were boring people, they would leave.

The stone cold thing is pretty interesting. It's why Cole annoys you and also to an extent why Ace bothers you. There isn't anyone to balance them out. Punk does with Ace and I think they are a good match. Cole, however, has NO ONE there to balance him out. You have hick Lawler saying the same old jokes and looking at the pop top 40 to try to sound hip with music references or dumbass (but funny) Booker T. They both get killed by Cole.

The problem isn't the guys getting heat, it's guys not getting a reaction. Like I said, the WWE uses a lot more sophisticated tools than we can ever use. You can't book based on what YOU like, that's what a mark would do. You have to book like it's a business and the wrestlers are products. That's how the WWE has always done things and that's why they are where they are.

Almost EVERYONE here is saying "ratings are this guys fault, I hate him" it's stupid. Completely stupid. Why is that guy the reason for the ratings? Who even says this report is true? Who even says WWE is so stupid as to look at only ratings and not the plethora of other media measurements to gauge overness? I'm pretty sure the company, the company that has been pretty good at what they do for a long time, the company who has more money than we do to research this shit, knows more precisely who is "getting x pac heat" and who isn't.

Saying it's the UFC's fault is dumb. It's not even the same thing. The WWE's competition is every other entertainment on TV. Also, WWE pretty much gets top 3 every week in their timeslot on cable; so they aren't even really losing.

Some of the logic on here is so stupid. It's all based on how you feel and your opinion of guys and your opinion of what you watch. It's stupid. It's a business, if you look at it as such, everything else makes sense.

You guys bitch about how they only focus on a few guys, how the storylines are simliar and how pretty much every show is similar. Wanna know the one rule of sitcoms? Nothing changes by the end. You NEED repetition. You NEED familiar characters. Look at all the succesful TV shows. They all generally have the same stars, same type of stories, and all generally still have the same stuff going on by the end of the episode. It's how TV works.

 

[The 1-2-3 Killam]

If the ratings continue to fall during Punk's segments, and I'm still not sold on the ratings being clear enough to really charge that as Punk's fault, than taking the belt off him might be the most logical thing to do. OR they can continue building good feuds and future legends and focus on what's more important. I think Punk just needs more time... He's not as easy a mainstream draw as somebody like John Cena or Randy Orton, who just radiate this "superstar" aura. I think the casual fans just need a chance to catch on to a new direction for the product...

It's certainly not like the hardcore fans are turning Raw off during the Punk moments! And I keep saying, there's more than one person in a main event. In that particular Raw there was Daniel Bryan, the new World Champion, and Zack Ryder. Plus the Miz, Dolph Ziggler, and Alberto del Rio! Perhaps people don't care about D-Bry? Maybe the mainstream fans don't get the "Ryder Revolution" and tuned out? So many facts to actually consider... Give it more time!

Or maybe I'm wrong and if they keep going with him they'll tank the business. Who knows?

 

[legorilla]

Pretty stupid comment for a variety of reasons. Cole is insanely over as a heel and anyone he works with is over. Second, they can look at the quarter hour ratings. So, since they're using Cole quite a bit, I'm guessing his quarter hour segments are over.

WWE doesn't book like a mark, they book like a business. If a product (wrestler) isn't selling (over), they'll push the next one. If Punk really is hurting ratings, and they have people smarter than most people on here looking at statistics with tools we don't have available, then he shouldn't be the champ. Doesn't matter how much I or anyone else likes him.

There is one fundamental problem with anything anyone has stated: Punk is still the number 1 merch seller. So long as the buyrates don't stink for ppvs that aren't around holiday time, then thats all they should and probably will care about. I don't put a lot of stock into "WWE Officials have said.." reports anywhere on the internet. More often then not they are rubbish.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

There is one fundamental problem with anything anyone has stated: Punk is still the number 1 merch seller. So long as the buyrates don't stink for ppvs that aren't around holiday time, then thats all they should and probably will care about. I don't put a lot of stock into "WWE Officials have said.." reports anywhere on the internet. More often then not they are rubbish.

Exactly. This thread is basically "this news source that's proven to be bullshit says that CM Punk is going to lose the strap because he isn't popular" "Bullshit, this guy I don't like is the reason" "bullshit, this other non researched reason is the reason" "bullshit, this other opinion backed reason is why". Just an annoying thread of perpetual opinion-driven ignorance.

 

[(s)AINT]

Yes, I agree that CM Punk tells people the product sucks but he's saying exactly what a vast majority of people are saying. He's saying how he wants it to change and wants it to be fun again. Whereas as Micheal Cole trots on about how no one wants to watch this and how this guy is a failure. Again as I said, Cole would be absolutely perfect as a manager. He'd shine so brightly there I think a lot of people that have always hated Cole will start to like him.

Hearing him all show is annoying. He's just doing his job, this I know. But really, I do wonder if its smart for the voice of a show to tell the audience that this guy is not worth watching, that this guy is a failure, etc.

You're right though, Cole doesn't have anyone to go head to head with. If Cole is gonna rag on Daniel Bryan as champion than have Bryan interact directly with Cole each and every week. The times they did it in the best turned out great. People want to see the pay off when Cole gets his ass kicked. The past has proved that. I believe they should have Cole hate Bryan so badly that he wants to make sure he loses the title. To the point where Cole finds a wrestler to manage promising that "this man will defeat Daniel Bryan", etc.

Having a a play by play guy be a heel is cool when there is and ending payoff in sight. Like when they were leading to Wrestlemania. Because the fans know there is a pay off waiting and they want to see it. But, when there is no pay off in sight...what is the point?

I'm not saying WWE should exclusively listen to me, I am simply voicing my opinion on a wrestling site. I am simply saying why I think people are tuning out of RAW the second hour and its becoming a reoccurring trend. It's NOT CM Punk, though. I am not saying this as a huge Punk fan. But, even when Cena was champion for a few weeks, the same thing occurred. No matter what happens in the second hour, people are tuning out. When Punk has a match or segment in the first half off RAW its always a ratings hit. So, why are people unwilling to watch 2 hours of Monday Night RAW?


In my opinion its having to listen to Cole for 2 hours and way too much Johnny Ace. I agree that he interacts great with CM Punk, it totally works when Punk is on screen with him to make jokes as his expense. But, when he appears on camera more than anyone else and no Punk in sight to make fun of him...its just boring. No entertainment value whatsoever.

Also, on the subject of this "report"...it sounds like bollocks. WWE has been planning this Punk title reign. WWE even called all the current champions a "revolution" and are promoting how the product is in the midst of changing due to CM Punk wanting it to be more entertaining. So, the idea that WWE would say "oh shit, get that title off Punk" is ridiculous. Cena doesn't need the title, the show, hell any PPV is stronger when he's not the champion. Not even to hate on Cena, but take his impending feud with Kane as an example.

Rather than that storyline/feud be over the WWE title, any given PPV within that feud will have that match AND a WWE title match/feud/storyline. Like Wrestlemania for instance, Cena vs Rock is a selling point so the match doesn't need the WWE title involved in it. WWE obviously knows this. Plans are in motion heading towards what could very well be the biggest Wrestlemania in YEARS!

So this "report" about how WWE is considering taking the title off Punk due to ratings is fallacious at best.

=)

 

[Otacon]

People are not changing the channel because of Micheal Cole's commentary. If anything his commentary is refreshing and different. Him and King go back and forth and its pretty funny sometimes. Him and Booker I find very entertaining, that may be because I like King Booker.
But the ratings are low because all the matches are getting stale. I was so bummed when I saw Air Boom vs. Epico and Primo again on Smackdown tonight. For me personally the good outweighs the bad, but I could see myself slowly losing interest if they dont change it up.
Lets see them stack the tag team divisinon, Lets see some organic fueds form, lets see who the audience really likes before you just start giving random talent huge pushes.

 

[sanefan_har]

Booking CM Punk to lose the titles because of the ratings?? That's just stupid. I'm not being pro CM Punk, but its not possible for a show's ratings to decrease because of one star. If anything most of his time on Raw has been brilliant and has drawn more fans.

The major problem is booking the same match again and again.

Randy vs Christian : How many times did we see that??
Mark Henry vs big Show : How many times did we see that??
CM Punk vs Alberto Del Rio : How many times did we see that??
Once the Rock got involved with Cena, no one really cared about the other superstars and matches going on.

There were a lot of wasted segments on Raw and Smackdown, such as the "This is your life segment", rap battle between JR and Cole, the whole lawler-cole feud . Random bookings like Rey vs Cena for the WWE title just degraded the quality of the show. To be honest, that booking started the booing of Cena. And then WWE went on to hype Cena as the first Nine Time WWE champion or some crap like that.These can easily bring down the ratings of raw more than any superstar can.


Another problem with Raw and Smackdown is the amount of time spent in cutting promos. A minimum of 40% of the time alloted to Smackdown and Raw is used for cutting promos and boring backstage segments. This time could be cut down to 15-20% and utilise the remaining 20% time to put on matches of decent quality with lower card superstars.

Like done before (pre 1995), promos can be cut during the commercials. Instead of those Be a Star and Don't do this at home ads, they can use the promos. This will keep the viewer interested.

Keep the commentators to focus only on the match and its competitors, rather than Twitter and bullshit like that. Promote the tag team division, increase the length of diva's matches etc . I could go on and on, but the WWE won't even bother trying to improve. After all Vince has a thousand ideas at the last minute.