So much for that CM Punk will draw ratings thing...

[Slyfox696]

Here's an idea: He mentions Melina in his list/mentions. You were hoping he would, & he did. You know what? You didn't hear it, b/c you were too busy cheering, like several other dumbasses who never heard it. Too bad it's live, unlike "SD", so you can't be home to see it when it airs, either.

What the fuck are you talking about? Who the fuck gives a damn about Melina? Who gave a fuck about DH Smith, and the other releases?

People weren't cheering for those released wrestlers. How do I know this? Because they never gave a damn about them before their release, why give a damn about them now?

Those people popped for those names is because it was things only an Internet crowd would know, and when you mention Internet things, especially things like DH Smith's real name (oooh!) that's when you know shit's "real".

Those fans popped because CM Punk worked them like a bunch of idiots, getting them to pop because he knew they would mark out over the fact they would feel superior in their knowledge of things which exist on the Internet and are never addressed on television. To think anything else just makes you look stupid. Excuse me, a dumbass.

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

If you thought Punk was taking Cena's spot, disappointment was inevitable. If you thought this was the end of the PG Era, disappointment was inevitable.

It's an entertaining storyline, simple as that. Should they do away with it because it's not drawing huge numbers? Absolutely not, this is the most interesting/entertaining WWE Championship feud in a long, long time. I'll take this over the norm each and every day of the week.

Some need to wake up and realize this probably isn't the revolution they were hoping for. If you can't accept that, expect to be disappointed.

 

[The Brain]

WWE certainly does its best to quietly sweep these things under the rug with barely noticable sub-headings on their site in order to avoid a kerfuffle. I can appreciate some people wanting to see a kerfuffle and have that conversation. Anyhow, this is just one example where the WWE happens to mention things (how ever quietly). But until recently, plenty of what Punk has talking about hasn't been bandied about by the machine on Monday nights. I can appreciate a desire for the WWE to stop pretending some things aren't what they are.

Am I the only one who has never heard the word kerfuffle? Thanks for expanding my vocabulary.

 

[Slyfox696]

Reminds me of the dumbass at the bar where I watched MITB. He spent the whole match cheering for Punk. That was expected, but he spent the whole match saying "come on Phil." He repeated it over and over. It was obvious he thought he was so special because he knew Punk's real name and he wanted everyone to know it. It was really quite pathetic.

Too funny, and unfortunately, too common of a mentality for IWC fans.

WWE certainly does its best to quietly sweep these things under the rug with barely noticable sub-headings on their site in order to avoid a kerfuffle. I can appreciate some people wanting to see a kerfuffle and have that conversation. Anyhow, this is just one example where the WWE happens to mention things (how ever quietly). But until recently, plenty of what Punk has talking about hasn't been bandied about by the machine on Monday nights.

If the WWE wanted to keep those things quiet, why mention it at all?

I can appreciate a desire for the WWE to stop pretending some things aren't what they are.

I suppose you can appreciate what you want to appreciate, I just find it silly to think things like mentioning released jobbers no one gave a damn about in the couple of years they were with the company are suddenly going to pop ratings.

 

[rollingrock]

What the fuck are you talking about? Who the fuck gives a damn about Melina? Who gave a fuck about DH Smith, and the other releases?

People weren't cheering for those released wrestlers. How do I know this? Because they never gave a damn about them before their release, why give a damn about them now?

Those people popped for those names is because it was things only an Internet crowd would know, and when you mention Internet things, especially things like DH Smith's real name (oooh!) that's when you know shit's "real".

Those fans popped because CM Punk worked them like a bunch of idiots, getting them to pop because he knew they would mark out over the fact they would feel superior in their knowledge of things which exist on the Internet and are never addressed on television. To think anything else just makes you look stupid. Excuse me, a dumbass.

You don't know why any of those fans cheered, & to act like you do makes you look like a dumbass... Call it a mirror, held up to nature, as in Shakespeare.

If the fans didn't care about them, the 'Net wouldn't be abuzz like it is with how many (if any) of them will end up in TNA, Japan, or maybe back with the WWE in the future.

Some of them, true, may not have had much talent. But some of them were not shown on TV enough for the fans (of the WWE, not necessarily those specific wrestlers) to know that. So why would we wish them to lose the ability to make a living? We wouldn't.

 

[Coco]

And this needs to be aired on a wrestling show....why? I don't get what they're trying to appeal to. The IWC loves it and hardcore fans love it but to people who are tuning in or flipping through the channels, they see a bunch of guys sitting around talking about why someone was fired. Not exactly thrilling stuff.

It cultivates a perception that the WWE is willing to acknowledge these blemishes that everyone knows are there. That feeling of being "in the bubble" adds an air of legitimacy to the product rather than the usual product that feels so polished and perfect and phony. Is it real? No. But that doesn't mean there isn't an extra thrill there.

As for the people tuning in, so what? It's not like any other kind of talk on wrestling shows has been getting them to nest. Why not do something like this and cultivate some positive word of mouth with the audience that actually is there? Ratings haven't tanked yet and t-shirt sales and audience participation indicate that people certainly like what they're seeing. Are you against letting this play out and turn into something? I certainly don't think you're saying that.

 

[ZeroVX]

And this needs to be aired on a wrestling show....why? I don't get what they're trying to appeal to. The IWC loves it and hardcore fans love it but to people who are tuning in or flipping through the channels, they see a bunch of guys sitting around talking about why someone was fired. Not exactly thrilling stuff.

It's the principle of the matter. They're establishing Punk as the anti-establishment guy, so they have him say "you treated this guy like crap and fired him". They could've mentioned anyone from Foley down to Braden Walker and it probably would've had the same effect.

Point is, guys in charge are bad, and Punk is fighting them, therefore, Punk is good. This was just a method of showing that.

 

[klunderbunker]

And what has that feeling of being in the bubble gained them? Nothing so far it would seem. People don't seem to care. It seems to have that always be the case. WCW loved doing shoots and the ratings never seemed to improve in the slightest.

 

[Slyfox696]

You don't know why any of those fans cheered, & to act like you do makes you look like a dumbass

No, it makes me right. Sure, those fans would never admit it, but I am right. I've been a wrestling fan for over 20 years, and an active member of the IWC for over 5. I have a pretty good grasp on the psychology of the general IWC.

If the fans didn't care about them, the 'Net wouldn't be abuzz like it is with how many (if any) of them will end up in TNA, Japan, or maybe back with the WWE in the future.

If fans did care about them, why were they released in the first place?

You're just being stupid.

Some of them, true, may not have had much talent. But some of them were not shown on TV enough for the fans (of the WWE, not necessarily those specific wrestlers) to know that.

Which of these wrestlers were not featured every week on WWE? Kozlov was built as a monster heel (which failed). Masters had a running gag each week with his masterlock, in which BIG names (like true draws) couldn't break free. Melina was a multi-time Women's/Diva champion. DH Smith had Bret fucking Hart in his corner for a few matches.

Those workers were given PLENTY of opportunities. The fact is they just weren't very good and fans didn't give a damn about them when they were with the company. Why would you ever think fans would care about them now, when they never cared about them before?

So why would we wish them to lose the ability to make a living? We wouldn't.

Wishing them to lose their job is completely different than caring about them. The fact is they weren't good at their job, and like many people who are incompetent at their job, they got fired.

 

[klunderbunker]

It's the principle of the matter. They're establishing Punk as the anti-establishment guy, so they have him say "you treated this guy like crap and fired him". They could've mentioned anyone from Foley down to Braden Walker and it probably would've had the same effect.

Point is, guys in charge are bad, and Punk is fighting them, therefore, Punk is good. This was just a method of showing that.

And yet ratings still fall. The masses flat out do not care about the real aspect of wrestling. Time and history have shown that. People like us love it and that's about the extent of the interest in it.

 

[Coco]

If the WWE wanted to keep those things quiet, why mention it at all?

Hopefully because they realize the value of using these things those "in the bubble" perceive is the truth to add legitimacy to their product.

I suppose you can appreciate what you want to appreciate, I just find it silly to think things like mentioning released jobbers no one gave a damn about in the couple of years they were with the company are suddenly going to pop ratings.

I don't think there'll be anything sudden about it. Word of mouth is positive now, but it will take people at large a while to come around to the idea that wrestling is worth their time in any way and isn't just complete show business garbage (which it is). And that might never happen because where we are right now might be the ceiling with the exception of people clutching to their faded Wolfpac shirts and tuning in once a year for Dwayne.

On the other hand, at least ratings haven't tanked. So far, so good.

You don't know why any of those fans cheered

I have a long list of bad-asses who got cheered for no good reason to validate my belief. You, on the other hand, are just talking shit.

 

[Nate DaMac]

The ratings aren't up, but it's not like this program is driving folks away.

 

[Coco]

And what has that feeling of being in the bubble gained them? Nothing so far it would seem.

If you're going to pull the plug within weeks of trying something new and ratings not shooting to the moon, what hope is there for it to ever resonate with people who have been trained to accept the same thing every week for years?

It's these type of knee jerk reactions that are fucking with the stock market right now. I know you're not this stupid.

 

[Slyfox696]

Hopefully because they realize the value of using these things those "in the bubble" perceive is the truth to add legitimacy to their product.

Doesn't seem to be working.

I don't think there'll be anything sudden about it. Word of mouth is positive now, but it will take people at large a while to come around to the idea that wrestling is worth their time in any way and isn't just complete show business garbage (which it is). And that might never happen because where we are right now might be the ceiling with the exception of people clutching to their faded Wolfpac shirts and tuning in once a year for Dwayne.

I disagree. With all the mainstream Internet publicity Punk drummed up for the WWE over the last couple weeks, if more people aren't tuning in to see what the buzz is about now, they're not going to tune in.

 

[Nate DaMac]

This has been going for what, a month, month and a half? Who exactly has skyrocketed ratings in that short a time span?

 

[Slyfox696]

The ratings aren't up, but it's not like this program is driving folks away.

Not yet. The problem is this goes down the same path the Attitude Era went down, only without the benefits.

If you make your "bad guys" cool and have fans cheer them, how do you make bad guys people boo? If you expose the show behind the curtain, how do you maintain the illusion of the entertainment? And finally, if you base your product around shock value (which this Punk storyline has been primarily about), what do you do when you can no longer shock fans into watching?


The end result of all those questions is that you lose fans, you lose credibility, and it hurts your long-term business.

 

[Coco]

Doesn't seem to be working.

I disagree. With all the mainstream Internet publicity Punk drummed up for the WWE over the last couple weeks, if more people aren't tuning in to see what the buzz is about now, they're not going to tune in.

Alright. Humor me: If you want to see a dramatic ratings surge, what would you do at this point?

 

[klunderbunker]

If you're going to pull the plug within weeks of trying something new and ratings not shooting to the moon, what hope is there for it to ever resonate with people who have been trained to accept the same thing every week for years?

It's these type of knee jerk reactions that are fucking with the stock market right now. I know you're not this stupid.

I never said to cut it. I said there's little history to suggest that shooting is going to help things. It's never helped before and it doesn't seem to be here. Punk vs. Cena as corporate vs. outsider is fine and can be rather interesting, but at the same time they need to realize that mentioning Johnny Ace not talking to Vladimir Kozloff face to face when firing him isn't going to have people on the edge of their seats.

 

[rollingrock]

No, it makes me right. Sure, those fans would never admit it, but I am right. I've been a wrestling fan for over 20 years, and an active member of the IWC for over 5. I have a pretty good grasp on the psychology of the general IWC.

You've been a member of a group that includes at lest thousands of people. You have a great grasp on how exactly one of them thinks. Sure, others may think that same way, but how many do or don't? And what way(s) to the others think? Neither of us know. (Outside of me, about me.)

If fans did care about them, why were they released in the first place?

Because buying one T-shirt & following them on Twitter doesn't pay their yearly "downside guarantee".

You're just being stupid.

I'd argue, but you're the expert.

Which of these wrestlers were not featured every week on WWE? Kozlov was built as a monster heel (which failed). Masters had a running gag each week with his masterlock, in which BIG names (like true draws) couldn't break free. Melina was a multi-time Women's/Diva champion. DH Smith had Bret fucking Hart in his corner for a few matches.

Kozlov was built as a heel... Except when he was tag-team partners with the Italian joke. ("The Cobra" got more of a reaction than a tag to VK, & WWE played a major part in that.) Masters had a huge bit for weeks, except after it became a "gag" (your word, not mine), & he all but disappeared from TV. Melina was a Champion... Until she got pushed into tag teams & battle royals, to the point another former female Champ asked for her release the same week. Lastly, having Bret in your corner (& your family) means nothing if you're tossed off-camera altogether or stuck in a Tag Division that means nothing.

Those workers were given PLENTY of opportunities. The fact is they just weren't very good and fans didn't give a damn about them when they were with the company. Why would you ever think fans would care about them now, when they never cared about them before?

There you go again, speaking about what/who other fans did/didn't care about. Next, why don't you tell me who will win gold medals in the 22nd-Century Olympic Games? You have as much chance at accuracy.

Wishing them to lose their job is completely different than caring about them. The fact is they weren't good at their job, and like many people who are incompetent at their job, they got fired.

I only wish you could catch-up with Melina after Summerslam is over on Sunday, or Raw on Monday. If not for the fact she was home, she'll forget she was fired; On TV or not, she was given as much time to wrestle.

 

[rollingrock]

I have a long list of bad-asses who got cheered for no good reason to validate my belief. You, on the other hand, are just talking shit.

What's the difference between what I'm doing, & you calling me names & lying about some list?

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

I can see rubbing this in the faces of those who overestimated its importance, but saying it hasn't worked? How hasn't it worked? Ratings are the same, if that's what we're going by. This isn't drawing any less than any other angle Cena has worked over the last several years.

To say it hasn't worked is assuming WWE had planned on huge ratings increases. It would mean they saw Punk as the next big thing. I don't think that was the goal.

 

[Coco]

If you make your "bad guys" cool and have fans cheer them, how do you make bad guys people boo?

Good guys are perceived as holier than thou for having morals. Symbols of the status quo are villainous. Countless other options. You're a smart guy. Figure it out.

If you expose the show behind the curtain, how do you maintain the illusion of the entertainment?

You don't expose the show behind the curtain. You turn directly into the perception that's out there and build a show on that foundation. It should entertain the "casuals" because they'll still get good vs. evil they love and the "smarks" will start throwing their money at it too because they're being worked. Punk shirts certainly suggest the money is there for this sort of thing.

And finally, if you base your product around shock value (which this Punk storyline has been primarily about), what do you do when you can no longer shock fans into watching?

Cultivating a culture where bookers turn into perception rather than shy away or pretend to be above it is about more than shock. It isn't all about wowing people in my book. It's about a deeper problem.

 

[Coco]

I never said to cut it. I said there's little history to suggest that shooting is going to help things. It's never helped before and it doesn't seem to be here. Punk vs. Cena as corporate vs. outsider is fine and can be rather interesting, but at the same time they need to realize that mentioning Johnny Ace not talking to Vladimir Kozloff face to face when firing him isn't going to have people on the edge of their seats.

When the whole show turns into Vince McMahon and Triple H's powerplays against one another and who they'll fire and overt talk of ratings and buyrates, then it's a problem. But a little bone here and there for smarks to hear something they already know and possibly bilk that crowd out of some greenbacks isn't going to hurt anybody in my book. I'm of the view that the casuals and the smarks and both have their cake at the same table. But yeah, this argument is always lively. So why not do it again?

 

[Nate DaMac]

I can see rubbing this in the faces of those who overestimated its importance, but saying it hasn't worked? How hasn't it worked? Ratings are the same, if that's what we're going by. This isn't drawing any less than any other angle Cena has worked over the last several years.

To say it hasn't worked is assuming WWE had planned on huge ratings increases. It would mean they saw Punk as the next big thing. I don't think that was the goal.

I really don't think this angle was thought out this far to be honest. I'm betting it was originally just another month long program for Cena to keep him busy until Mania, but then the Punk promo happened and they thought they might have had something big. Why not take a shot on someone else? Cena was still involved so it still had a safety net, it wasn't going to lose ratings. It was a low risk-high reward situation if it panned out.

It doesn't seem like it's panning out that way they hoped or anything, but it's been a fun ass program wile it lasted.

 

[Coco]

What's the difference between what I'm doing, & you calling me names & lying about some list?

The fact that you're too stupid to see the difference is the difference.