CM Punk Has Got To Go

[Hunted-RKO]

Are you so stupid enough to actually post this thread? CM Punk is probly the biggest draw for WWE at the moment and if u take any notice of ratings for RAW then you would realise that RAW does lose viewers in the 2nd hour no matter what is going on. CM Punk does not need to go, no way. Every RAW since his epic promo back in June and every PPV he has got the crowd behind him even when he was still part heel. Punk did actually draw more viewers after Money in the bank into Summerslam because he was such a draw and something fresh for everyone. You blame Punk for the loss of viewers that night? WOW! Now I'm not even blaming Del Rio but wouldn't Del Rio be the reason why they lost viewers because it was not believable that he could beat Punk and win the title back? Exactly. Its not Punk's fault or even Del Rio's, your just in my mind a CM Punk Hater.

 

[ryan86]

Ok. Lets try this one more time. Baby steps for you people this time...

CM Punk is so over with everyone. True or false?

- False: He is madly over with the base, but as for the casuals or expanding viewership, definately NOT a hit.

CM Punk is this generations SCSA. True or False?

- False: Anyone who witnessed the Austin era knows that this is where it stops. SO STOP IT. You should know better.

Durring the massive explosion of Punk's popularity, it has shown up in the data. True or False?

- False: It has not shown up anywhere on the map. If you count Merchandise sells, Congrats... Punk has been good for Punk. Ratings, Attendance, and PPV buys have not benifited from this "explosion".

What is true about Punk? Well, on a subjective note, he is entertaining, refreshing, exciting, great at working the crowds into frenzies, and is bringing some change.

Is he growing on me? YES!

Is he growing anything else? NO!

 

[DukeDukeDuke]

Ok. Lets try this one more time. Baby steps for you people this time...

CM Punk is so over with everyone. True or false?

- False: He is madly over with the base, but as for the casuals or expanding viewership, definately NOT a hit.

This logic is really flawed. No wrestler is going to be 100% over with everyone. And even so, what point are you trying to make? Because CM Punk is not over with every person watching he should be let go? WWE should just disregard their base audience? And what data have you used to measure 'overness', Mr Economics?

BTW It doesn't help your argument that you just totally disregard data presented to you that actually counters your argument (i.e. my post above). It's so clear that you're using arbitrary measurements such as 'overness' to try and back yourself out of a corner.

 

[ryan86]

Oh god, we have another one of those...

Ok, I will explain to you, what everyone else already god beat back into their head.

The "Has to go" part of the title, is referring to his playing of "lead dog". Read my damn OP thing please. I dont think you got past the title of the thread.

and if you want to make this thread a debate about everyone else, other than the man in question, Fine. It's the last refuge for a scoundral. To blame others.

Answer the simple question. Show me a trend to back up Punk being a champ good for business. If he is great for entertainment, fine. I cant have that debate. But you will have to show trends that say Punk playing the role, as "the" top guy, is good for business. Please give me something. You have 6 months of him atleast being a top focus of Raw storylines. You have a month of him being champion. How accountable should we be towards the champion? Show me something champ.

You know, I have 20/20 foresight, so be very carefull.

He is not over with 2 out of 3 catagories

 

[ryan86]

Continuation:

People won't continue to argue B/C when this thread started, I told everyone of you what would happen. And week 9 of ratings droping. The entire CM Punk title reign has been mired with ratings under 3.0's except for one. You can lay out the mis-leading crap about viewers coming back for Punk, But the viewership number it's self is declining. Just 3 months ago, I figured a Wrestlemainia-time-ceiling would round out some 4.0's...

With the way people are loving history programming more than Punk, Or ANYONE else, it's hard to see that number passing a 3.5. And barring a Rock appearance, it's hard to see how they get there.

 

[justinsayne]

You're not a wrestling fan at all are you, if you were a fan you would care more about how entertaining the product is to YOU, & if YOU were enjoying not what some bullshit numbers say. Rating shouldn't mean fuck all to fans, fans should only care if what they see on their TV entertains THEM, I couldn't give a fuck less what entertains anyone else, as long as WWE is providing ME with an entertaining product that's all that matters. I will never understand why some people seem more obsessed with some silly number, which is easily the most boring aspect of all of entertainment, than the product being given to them. I'll let WWE worry about something as stupid as teh fucking ratings as they're really the only people that should really give a shit about them any way. Seriously just stop, you don't come off as some genius who knows what he's talking about & how to "save" WWE, you just come across as some pessimistic fuck, who just hates Punk. Get the fuck over your damn self.

 

[DukeDukeDuke]

Answer the simple question. Show me a trend to back up Punk being a champ good for business.

Buddy, that's not my argument. I don't happen to believe that any recent superstars or storylines have been terribly good for business, not CM Punk, not COO Triple H, not Kevin Nash or The Rock. That's an entirely different discussion.

I'm challenging your BS notion that CM Punk is to blame, because you've provided no evidence to corroborate this notion. Nothing. You know what corroborating means? It means to support a statement or theory with evidence. Evidence which you don't have. You can't link anything to CM Punk, and (Woo Woo Woo) you know it. Instead, you're trying to argue that I have to prove you're wrong, instead of backing up your own statements and proving yourself right.

It's a 'tiger-repellant rock' situation; Just because CM Punk is champion, and the ratings are low, doesn't mean that one has directly led the other. Just as if I happen to be holding a rock in my hand while there are no tigers around, doesn't mean that the rock is magically keeping the tigers away.

But at least I have provided evidence that you're wrong. You've been blaming Punk for the low ratings for the last 8 weeks, arguing that Punk vs. Del Rio lost viewers based upon the notion that a main event is what keeps viewers around, and yet Punk has only been involved in 3 of the final segments out of the last 8 weeks. This logically suggests that there are other factors, either internal or external, that are contributing to the low ratings, a fact which you've chosen to just completely disregard.

For example; I challenge you to prove that the low ratings aren't due to the fact that, say, The Miz has been involved in 6 final segments in the last 8 weeks.

It's your own stupid logic. Go on prove it, champ.

You know, I have 20/20 foresight, so be very carefull.

Clearly, you've got nothing.

 

[JohnJohnson]

You're not a wrestling fan at all are you, if you were a fan you would care more about how entertaining the product is to YOU, & if YOU were enjoying not what some bullshit numbers say. Rating shouldn't mean fuck all to fans, fans should only care if what they see on their TV entertains THEM, I couldn't give a fuck less what entertains anyone else, as long as WWE is providing ME with an entertaining product that's all that matters. I will never understand why some people seem more obsessed with some silly number, which is easily the most boring aspect of all of entertainment, than the product being given to them. I'll let WWE worry about something as stupid as teh fucking ratings as they're really the only people that should really give a shit about them any way. Seriously just stop, you don't come off as some genius who knows what he's talking about & how to "save" WWE, you just come across as some pessimistic fuck, who just hates Punk. Get the fuck over your damn self.

Critical thinking is obviously not your strong point. It's not the number itself that matters to Ryan86 or any of the others that bring up the ratings decline genius. It IS the entertainment that these people worry about. I mention ratings in posts as well. I don't care about the number itself, but the entertainment value. It has gotten boring TO ME. It has gotten boring to a lot of people, especially those watching in the late 90s. The ratings drop is just used as evidence to back up these opinions. You know how when you post your opinion on this forum you're supposed to elaborate and provide facts to back your point. The problem is that people like you only see the word ratings and think it's about trying to save the business and make more money for it. No! That is not the reason. I'm going to say again since you seem a bit on the slow side..That is not the reason! Had you spent a little more time thinking about what you read, rather than being a know it all IWC smark, you would understand. When marks try to defend their favorite superstar do they not talk about how big the crowd pops? Or how many merch sales they buy? Ratings and PPV buys are the equivalent of pops and merch sales for the show. You say we shouldn't give a shit about ratings and worry about how entertaining it is to us, leaving the WWE to worry about their ratings. Well then, if that's the case, you shouldn't worry about how big of a pop a wrestler gets, let him worry about that because it's his job not yours. Instead you should worry about which characters are entertaining to you. But of course that is far too difficult a concept for a lot of people to grasp.
And I hate to break it to you but it's not a crime to dislike a baby face that the IWC marks over. I see people called a troll on here whenever they talk about how much they dislike CM Punk. Just because some dissed your favorite superstar and hurt your little feelings doesn't make them a troll. The fact that a superstar like Punk is super over and sells a lot of t-shirts doesn't mean everyone will love him. There are a lot of people who don't/didn't like the attitude era, does that make them a troll then? I mean the attitude era was super over and had high buy rates. If some one says a superstar that you like is crap and they give their reasons, how is their opinion any less valid than yours? The point of this forum is to discuss opinions, not call someone a dumbass, idiot, troll, etc because they don't like the same superstars as you. Your opinions are the law and it is not your job to try and protect your favorite superstars. That being said...Get the fuck over your damn self.

 

[Mr. Wrestling 513]

Now, I don't know how long this expeirement with trying to play "dress-up" with Punk as a credible "super" star whom will carry the brand is going to last; but they need to wrap this thing up before the WWE title picture is set for WM.

I am one of the half million fans who did not stick around after the opening segment. Punk - Delrio was supposed to keep ppl watching through the entire show, but opening with Cena-Piper just made that match look weak. If a WWE champ is advertized to defend his belt in a SVS rematch and WWE loses a crap load of viewers... It not only shows you people were not buying the SVS PPV for a Punk title match, it shows you his appeal to a broad audience isnt there. Sure, his "nich" base stuck around, but Raw lost a huge amount of viewers based on the fact he couldnt carry the show into the second hour.

Raw should not be losing that many viewers to re-runs and blow outs. If they are, the person responsible for keeping them interested needs to be properly phased out.

Time to reacess

So you changed the channel, and you think this is reason for WWE to release or phase Punk out? News Flash: Punk is not going anywhere. He's going to be in the WWEC picture for quite a while.

WWE knows they finally have someone who is not a prepackaged pretty boy and the fringe fans, who were fans before everyone looked like they stepped out of the pages of Health & Fitness's "Musclebound" edition, are actually tuning in again. The one thing I think is that WWE needs to redesign the belt. It would show the world that the Cena ping pong game with the title (give it to a mid carder to build, give it to Cena, give it to next main eventer, give it to Cena) is over and they are moving on. JMO

 

[ryan86]

DukeDukeDuke:

Proving that their are SOME posative trends corrolating with Punk as the new face of the WWE, is a challenge none of you can meet.

The rise of Punk happened 6 months ago. And when you look at the 3rd quarter financial report, there is no indication of a rise. Net negative 31,000 buys, decrease in ratings, and 7% drop in attendance.

As champ, the trends are still negative. Every week he has been champ, the ratings have been declining. And when the 4th quarter financial report comes out, there will be more declines across the board. The only thing that will show growth is Rock-related-events.

Now, when I give you a 6 month push, and then the championship, and 2 consecutive quartlerly reports come out with negative trends, What do I do? Do I keep things in place? Or would it be my reponsability to reacess my entire poroduct, including the guy at the top?

The massive exiting of viewers is not immaginary, it's very real. And I have only negative trends to go on. And Punk is the lead man...

 

[CleverName51]

DukeDukeDuke:

Proving that their are SOME posative trends corrolating with Punk as the new face of the WWE, is a challenge none of you can meet.

The rise of Punk happened 6 months ago. And when you look at the 3rd quarter financial report, there is no indication of a rise. Net negative 31,000 buys, decrease in ratings, and 7% drop in attendance.

As champ, the trends are still negative. Every week he has been champ, the ratings have been declining. And when the 4th quarter financial report comes out, there will be more declines across the board. The only thing that will show growth is Rock-related-events.

Now, when I give you a 6 month push, and then the championship, and 2 consecutive quartlerly reports come out with negative trends, What do I do? Do I keep things in place? Or would it be my reponsability to reacess my entire poroduct, including the guy at the top?

The massive exiting of viewers is not immaginary, it's very real. And I have only negative trends to go on. And Punk is the lead man...

And that's CM Punk's fault how? 4 PPV's in 10 weeks wasn't going to hold anyone's interest especially with Sunday Night Football and Monday Night Football each of which will routinely get 10-20 million viewers.

There's more: How are Punk's segments as champ doing...someone earlier in the thread already showed Miz is the most common guy in the final match or segment...could it be that maybe...*shocking* EVERYONE HATES MIZ!

Then there's Merch sales: Punk, Cena, Ryder are all near the top...that means these people hold interest of the fans

Not near the top: Cody Rhodes, Ziggler, Jinder Mahal, Drew Mac...because these guys don't make money. (2 of them might..if there pushes are handled right)


Number 3: How can you blame Punk for creative turning his storyline into a stupid illogical clusterfuck?

Nash texts himself...or something

HHH to Johnny Ace as power figure with no logic behind it

Del Rio's MITB cash in for shock value and hot-shotting the title between Del-Rio and Cena for the sake of swerving


Instead of a logical, but dramatic: Johnny Ace texts Nash to get rid of Punk because Ace wants power...and have Punk and Hunter face Ace and Nash over the power struggle while Cena and Del Rio have a program...

Yeah, that's Punks fault...

That's like saying a good actor is the reason a bad movie fails when the writing of the movie is terrible...it's happened.

 

[772Attitude]

LMAO and this is why your ass is in prison right now. For trying stupid shit like this you deserve to be in prison for life.

 

[rge2010]

This Mondays main event...Punk, Bryan and Ryder, the 3 golden children of the IWC scored one of the lowest rated main events in 2011.

The IWC have cried out for these 3 to hold the gold, and in their first match as Champions, and together I might add, they score one of the lowest rated main event of 2011!!! Punk isnt ready to carry the WWE. Expect to see Cena back finishing the shows sometime soon.

Oh and Punk today has said Attitude Era will never happen again and that PG is where it should stay. All this talk of change...was it to get him over?! I am so glad I never bought into him as a character!!! He is a company guy plain and simple - just like Cena...have you seen him in the anti bullying commercials?

 

[RKOPUNK]

This Mondays main event...Punk, Bryan and Ryder, the 3 golden children of the IWC scored one of the lowest rated main events in 2011.

The IWC have cried out for these 3 to hold the gold, and in their first match as Champions, and together I might add, they score one of the lowest rated main event of 2011!!! Punk isnt ready to carry the WWE. Expect to see Cena back finishing the shows sometime soon.

Alberto Del Rio, The Miz, and Dolph Ziggler were all in that main-event as well. By your logic, those three aren't worthy of their place, and shouldn't have been in the main-event either?

I'm no rating expert, but don't the rating tend to drop off in the 2nd hour every week? And I have no idea what rating the main-event turned in, but I highly doubts it's as bad as you're making it out to be. How many low rating main-events would Cena have been involved in the past few years? In fact, I challenge you to go back and find one Cena main-event that bought in anything more than an modest rating.

Oh and Punk today has said Attitude Era will never happen again and that PG is where it should stay. All this talk of change...was it to get him over?! I am so glad I never bought into him as a character!!! He is a company guy plain and simple - just like Cena...have you seen him in the anti bullying commercials?

This is where you completely reveal yourself as completely full of shit. Go back and read that article again. He says it himself that you don't need to swear constantly to be entertaining. CM Punk's quest for "Change" has never been about change back to tv-14, it has been about changing the WWE internally, it has been about improving the overall product, and getting rid of the idea that you need to be a generic, cookie cut wrestler to get anywhere in the buisness, it has been about guys other than John Cena and Randy Orton getting opportunities.

This change that Punk has been talking about isn't going to be a quick fix. Ratings and buy rates are going to take a while to improve, but they will improve.

 

[y2grae]

OK, here comes the adult, back again one more to put sunlight on the ignorance of the past 3 post, (and about 160 of the 189). Sunlight is the best disinfectant...

Ok, anyone from the U.S./Canada knows exactly what a person means when they replace "cuz" with "Because". It helps to make room for the entire post when you can shorten words since i have limited-posting-charchter availability. And I admit that I am not the greatest speller, what you can ask TWJC The Beginnings, we (me and him) are in the top 1% when it comes to educated posters in this forum. I use short cut spelling when it's nessisary.

Here comes the adult..... ? 25 and attempting to lecture as an intellectual when most if not all of your arguements have been quoting figures, ignoring facts presented to yourself and picking up on small misunderstandings to evade the fact you have been proven wrong a multitude of times on this subject.

"we are in the top 1% when it comes to educated posters in this forum" - can i have some stats to back this up? TWJC's posts on this thread have been rather well presented, unlike those that you have tried pulling out of your arse.

"we are in the top 1%" - i was going to just let this all slide until i read the audacity of what you had typed. Who the fuck do you think you are? and are talking to?

I have honestly followed this since post 1, had moments where i have seen the truth you have been saying and the remaining 80% of complete and utter bullshit that has eminated from your keyboard.

for someone who professes to be in the top 1% then surely your superior intellect would be able to handle the following:

1) Actual facts being presented to you
2) the ability to argue without sounding like a complete Michael Cole
3) the ability to use a spellcheck when you try to flame others for their errors
4) the ability to EVOLVE an arguement with the rest of the forum.


My Opinion on the subject is:

Punk = doing a great job. people who werent wearing his shirts now are => success.
Del Rio = not doing a great job, but Ricardo Rodriguez is.

Ryan = not doing a great job

 

[PeaceAndLove]

I'm no rating expert, but don't the rating tend to drop off in the 2nd hour every week? And I have no idea what rating the main-event turned in, but I highly doubts it's as bad as you're making it out to be. How many low rating main-events would Cena have been involved in the past few years? In fact, I challenge you to go back and find one Cena main-event that bought in anything more than an modest rating.

hate to cut you short but i saw the rating and it was a 2.6...it only gained 59,000 views...i want punk to work but idk maybe the fans heard of the earthquakes in the delayed san fran game?