I have a lot of work to do, so I apologize in advance for the length of the reply.
Lets start with what you are saying, look at the thread in the Old School Wrestling about the Ratings of the Champions on RAW, Undertaker has the Highest average Rating of any champion on the List. As for Cena's drawing ability lets wait for the Judgement Day buy rates to see what the buy rates for a Cena Headlined PPV are when there aren't other matches set up before the PPV in a well mapped out fashion. As for Mercandise sales it is hard for any one else to have more Merchandise sales when the majority of the choice something like 60-65% of the products are John Cena related Items. It is well known that the WWE have pulled the merchandise of Edge and Kennedy because there was more demand for them than Cena or DX gear. so it is a moot point bringing up merchandise sales because if you have no choice in what stuff you can get at a show then you are more likely to get what is there. As for Internet Sales I would be interested to know what sort of sales per size are as well as the male to female ratios on stuff like T-shirts.
Ok, first of all, that "highest average rating" comes from exactly ONE month, in which, as we all know, the focus was more on Steve Austin and his fight to reclaim the title. I'm not going to say that Undertaker did not play a part in it, but to say he is the highest average rating drawing champion is misleading, because he held the belt for one month, and was feuding with arguably the biggest draw in WWF history. I don't totally dismiss that, but let's keep it in perspective.
Now, in 1997, his run as champion in Raw ratings WAS better than both the run before him and the run after him (I did not factor in when the title was being tossed around like a hot potato. I used HBK's run before and Bret Hart's after, and he did better than both). However, neither HBK nor Bret Hart have ever been considered strong ratings draws.
Let's look at 2002. Chris Jericho's run on Raw garnered a higher average rating, as did both HHH's and Hogan's (but only one month run for both of them) than did Undertakers. With Undertaker holding the belt, the ratings dipped significantly, until Rock took the belt back, and Raw ratings went up again. Rock only had it for a month however, and Brock took the belt and ratings went below what Takers were.
So, what have we proven? Really nothing? The best case scenario that we can say is that Undertaker is not a PROVEN draw, not because he isn't a draw, but because we do not really have enough evidence to say so.
But, enough about the Undertaker, he's a minor player really in this discussion.
As for Cena and his merchandise, it is not a "well known fact" that they pulled Kennedy and Edge merchandise because they were in higher demand. In fact, that would be incredibly stupid for the WWE to do, especially since they seem to be so high on Mr. Kennedy. And, why do you think that Cena has about 60% of the merchandise on WWE? Do you think, perhaps, it's because he sells more of it? It's basic economics.
HBK can pull a decent match out of Steve Lombardi aka The Brooklyn Brawler in a title match, as for Cena he has worked with the sam quality of workers in HBK, Triple H, Kurt Angle, Chris Jericho and Edge, with the exception of heavily gimmicked matches such as his TLC match with Edge and his I quit match with JBL. I will give John Cena credit where credit is due his match with Lesnar at a Backlash a few years ago was decent, not great but decent passable may be a better word. But his singles matches Cena has had to be carried in matches by all of them, he even failed at that when he failed to sell a knee Injury that he was supposed to due to the stomping HBK gave the Knee. Cena is then booked into a feud with Khali and they have to have what is effectively a squash match on PPV, not good.
Kurt Angle of 2006 and RVD ever don't come near the quality of wrestler as a Scott Hall or Undertaker or a Bret Hart. Not even close. And Cena got good matches out of both Angle and RVD. And this notion that Cena was carried in them is just absurd. In none of these matches has Cena been carried, and at One Night Stand 2006 against RVD, Cena was the one who carried that match.
All of these matches Cena was either carried or in a Gimmick match for it to be considered to be "good", the RVD match was pretty much just for the crowd reaction and the legit hate that the ECW fans have for Cena, even doing new stuff they said that he still sucked
And yet, notice the difference between Cena's match and Batista's match. The fans there hated both men, and yet, Cena masterfully played the ONS crowd, and Batista got ate up by it. By the end of the Batista match, no one cared, at the end of the Cena match, people were ready to decapitate the man. It's so funny to me that the whole time the ONS crowd thought they were getting the best of Cena, he was playing them like a fiddle. The hat and shirt into the crowd. The smug looks he'd give after performing a basic move. The legdrop off the top rope, which shocked the crowd. Cena played that crowd like the bunch of morons they were. Cena OWNED the Hammerstein Ballroom that night.
As for competency those Wrestlers you listed are for the most part fully competent, as for your statemnt about RVD watch his old ECW matches to know what you are talking about whe referring to RVD, look at the start of his tenure in WWE he was still doing stuff that could constitute a very good pop, in fact it is a better pop than what Cena is getting, he was the only member of the Alliance that got a Pop rather than Heat from the crowd.
So, what does that tell you? What does it tell you when a guy who is supposed to be heel is the ONLY heel in his faction to get face pops? RVD showed a complete lack of heel psychology during the Alliance. He performed his trademark moves, which consist of mostly high spots, high spots that usually get oohs and ahhs from the crowd. RVD didn't change up his style to wrestle a heel style match, because RVD didn't know how. He has done nothing since coming into the WWE to improve himself, he's constantly lost in the ring, he does the exact same moves every match, which wouldn't be so bad if they were half realistic or showed any kind of match psychology whatsoever. RVD is an entertaining wrestler perhaps, but not a good one.
Nice its the guy who thinks John Cena is a better wrestler then Bryan Danielson, well you know then that your opinion must be very valid.
With all due respect sir, is that a shot at me personally?
Undertaker has outdrew Cena every time he has been champ. You have failed to notice that WWE's ratings have gone to absolute shit in the last few years, coincidentally ever since Cena entered the main event. WWE used to average a 5 on the Neilson, now they're lucky to get half of that.
Actually, you are wrong. Since 2004, Raw ratings have actually increased. I don't remember the exact numbers, but in 2004, Raw's ratings were around a 3.69, in 2005 they were approximately a 3.8 and in 2006 they were approximately a 3.9. So, with Cena on top, Raw ratings have actually improved.
source:
http://www.100megsfree4.com/wiawrestling/pages/wwf/wwfraw.htm
Furthermore, Undertaker's reign in 1997 average a 2.74 according to the numbers I have, and according to that thread in the "Old School Wrestling forum". Additionally, Undertaker's ratings in 2002 for his third reign averaged a 3.82. His one month Smackdown run did not even average a 3, but to be fair, Smackdown and Raw ratings cannot be compared strictly by the numbers. So, in only one reign of being champion did the Undertaker ever drew better Raw ratings than Cena, and that was back in 1999 when Steve Austin and the Rock created possibly the biggest boom period of the WWF history.
Cena is NOT a good draw, if that were true then PPV buyrates with him involved wouldn't be the lowest they've ever been, ever. Wait until you see how few people bought Backlash and Judgment Day, it'll be worse then the buyrates for December 2 Dismember.
And, you're basing that opinion on what? Considering Raw PPVS completely smoked both ECW and Smackdown PPVs, and Backlash and Judgement Day were both combined brand PPVs, how can you honestly say it will be worse than December 2 Dismember?
Also, I would like to point out that 2006 PPVs on a whole, of which Cena was apart of most of them, did much better than 2005 PPVs on a whole. There was an 18% increase in number of buys in 2006 from 2005. Now, I imagine you're thinking at this point, "Well of course, because there were more PPVs". Well, let me address that as well. The average number of buys for a 2005 PPV was 377,200. The average number of buys for a 2006 PPV was 390,069. So, even with the additional PPVs, which usually drives buyrates per PPV lower, the average buyrate for PPVs in 2006 were higher than they were in 2005.
source:
http://corporate.wwe.com/documents/YET200610-K.pdf
HBK has also had many classic matches with not exactly main event quality guys like Marty Jannetty and Tito Santana. Besides, you fail to realize that the entire midcard and upper card in the WWE at the time was PACKED with incredible workers. It's pretty hard to have a good match with a less talented guy when less talented guys aren't in the main event scene as they are now(Cena, Khali, Lashley, Batista?)
When exactly were these supposed classic matches with Jannetty and Tito Santana. And Tito Santana was a solid worker. A Bret Hart? Probably not. But he was far superior to someone like RVD or Great Khali.
Once again your standard for what constitutes a good match is piss poor. Cena has had one good matche that wasn't gimmicked and that he wasn't completely carried in, and that was against Lesnar. Every other match you call good he was completely carried in by his usually incredibly more experienced opponent, or the match was garbage. Cena and Jericho? Crap. Cena and Angle? Crap. Cena and HHH? Crap. It's time you realize that your living in some fantasy world and start judging wrestlers on their ability to WRESTLE, not on their ability to make money.
The fact that you called Cena and HHH at Wrestlemania and Cena vs. RVD at ONS crap is silly to me. In addition, Cena' match vs. Edge at Summerslam was a non-gimmick match that was very good. It was that match when I stopped thinking like you, and started appreciating how good of a wrestler Cena is. And, he was certainly not carried by RVD or Edge.
Your argument that everyone who is worthy enough will get time on RAW or will make it to the WWE is purely ludicrous, guys like Rick Steamboat, Terry Funk, Harley Race, they all never got into anything above the midcard in VERY short reigns in the WWE. Does that make them not as good as Cena by your logic?
I didn't realize Raw was on the air when Ricky Steamboat, Terry Funk and Harley Race were in the WWE.
And yes, Cena has been hogging the spotlight, wow one week he's only on for five minutes. Forget the fact that every week before that he usually takes up atleast a quarter of the show with promos and matches. Nevermind the fact that the man has lost ONE MATCH in NINE MONTHES. That's not being shoved down our throat? Only Hogan won more then Cena.
You must have forgotten last week's Raw when he was on for only the first five or ten minutes, long enough to be told by Khali to come get some, and then get destroyed. He didn't appear on the show after that.
Or the Raw the week before (May 7th) where he didn't appear on the show the entire time until the last match of the night where he wrestled Orton for 10-15 minutes before Khali interfered.
So, umm...where exactly are you getting this notion that every week he's hogging the spotlight for a quarter of the show? And, for that matter, what's wrong with the WWE champion taking up a quarter of the show? Is the WWE Championship not what the entire brand is supposed to be built around? I'm kind of confused on why, even if he was the focus of 30 minutes of the show (which he hasn't been recently), that is such a bad thing.
While that is true Jonny, it's also true by looking at the ratings that since Cena has entered the main event scene, the ratings and the buyrates of PPVs have been going down. While that can be attributed to the loss of star power like Austin & Rock, if I remember correctly in the 90s two other huge stars left by the names of Nash & Hall and the ratings only went up from there.
Clearly, the bolded has been proven false. Second, Nash and Hall were not big draws in the WWF. And ratings went up because the WWF hit a goldmine in Steve Austin. You can't compare ANYONE to Steve Austin or Hulk Hogan, or even the Rock, because it is a completely unfair comparison. If you think that Cena doesn't draw because he isn't drawing like those three, then every other wrestler in North American wrestling doesn't draw.
