The Ratings

[hinkey1]

I recently researched the cable ratings that WWE television has earned over the past 8 years, dating back to 1999. It seems that the wrestling audience has shrunk considerably since then, as the cable rating average back in 2000 was around 5.0-6.0, and now RAW is averaging 4.0, and Smackdown is lucky to get 3.

Now I started watching wrestling around 1999, so i remember how much different it used to be compared to today. Stars such as The Rock and Stone Cold really kept me watching every week, maybe even trips, but mostly the other 2. Those 2 in my opinion were the reason for the past WWE ratings.

My question is, is there anyone in the business currently that could get it back to where it was? And does anyone else know have any input as to why the WWE lost so much of its audience over the past 8 years?

 

[X]

Yeah, the ratings have been going down steadily over the years, and the answer to that is simply that the quality of the product has gone way done from the attitude days of '99.

To fix this, I think all the WWE really needs is one big feud with a good build up and a classic match to end the feud, something like an Austin v. McMahon or The Rock v. Triple H, a feud that is guaranteed good results. Either that, or they need to do a few things including first of all, to get rid of Cena. Cena is hugely popular with the WWE fans (mostly kids and women), but at the same time he has also thrown off tons and tons of fans. Alot of people these days I know don't watch WWE simply because of the fact that guys like Cena and Batista are the top dogs. They'd rather watch TNA. This isn't the 80s, we don't need the underdog kid friendly American guy to beat all the bad guys. Sure, that is popular, look at Hogan's heyday, but wrestling has evolved since then. Look at Stone Cold's popularity. They did everything they could to make him the big heel, and the fans just loved him for it. They were sick of cut and paste good guys and bad guys, they wanted somebody who just didnt' give a damn to beat up the bad guys AND the good guys.

All the WWE needs is a big storyline, and a new star to take them into the next decade. And no godamnit, that star can't be Cena, because I guarantee you the longer he is champion the lower and lower the ratings will get.

 

[A.J.]

I agree with a lot fo what you said Mr. xfearbefore.

The truth is that fans do not want to be forcefeed these guys like Cena and Batista as thier champions when teh real wrestling fans know these are shit when it comes to wrestling. One can agrue that SCSA was forcedfeed us too, but we wanted that as xfearbefore said it was he i dont give a shit care about good and bad.

Now that WCW is out of bussiness they have no real competetion and sorry for all those even i am a TNA fan it is just that they are no real competition for WWE to worry about. So WWE doesnt have to put on a very great show each time they go out as the know they can get away with almost anything and people will still tune in. Yet, if you look at the ratings you can see it declining but WWE feels it all in the good i mean if they can keep brainwahsing the little kids with these shitty ass champions of Cena, Batista, and Lashley they feel they can still make money with these guys with all the liitle kids who eventually be adults and hoping they still be brain washed.

I guess one can say the only little time WWE felt they nees to produce better product was when WSX was gonna go head to head with ECW. Since WSX is over ECW has gone back to what it was before not a good product.

Like xfear before said all WWE needs is a good great storyline i can say you need a guy like Kennedy in it and someone else who is young and good.

 

[BatistaBomb123]

Smackdown has benn better than RAW for a long time now. RAW gets around 3 or 3.5 and so does Smackdown. The ratings were a lot higher then because it was in the attitude era when WWE/F was at its prime.

 

[InstantClassic]

I agree with a lot of what's being said. We haven't got the ratings pullers of the attitude era, but Unfortunately Vince views Cena and Lashley as the next big things. The man thinks that Cena is the next Rock, so for this reason I think we're stuck with Cena for a damn long time.

I must also bring something else to the table:
Recently I read a story about how the internet is killing wrestling. While I don't neccessarily agree with that comment, I do agree with parts of the story.

One section focused on how no matter what guys do in the ring - You have most likely seen it before which means a lot of the excitement has gone out of wrestling. No matter what crazy stunts, or crazy moves are performed in the ring, it's getting a very regular "It's been done" reaction.

This has to hurt their ratings as well.

 

[Downward Spiral]

The problem is that the general wrestling interest is well down on what it used to be. The programming sucks in the WWE which is the main company, but TNA just isn't reaching the mainstream audience. They are a long way off from matching the competitiveness that WCW gained against the WWF, but anything could happen and I am hoping that something sparks an interest in this dying industry. Raw is frequently getting what would have been terrible ratings during the Attitude Era, and what with all the NFL and the like, it will be hard for them to ascend back up.

If TNA lifts their game and becomes a genuine threat to the WWE, that will definitely see the Ratings go back to where they should be, and anything that resembles the quality of the Monday Night Wars will be hugely beneficial for the wrestling world. It may even make the WWE attempt to be creative in what they do instead of letting them get into this comfort zone they are in now. I hope that they don't try and get more fans into the business by making it more "Sports Entertainment" because pure wrestling was what made it popular, and soap opera elements are what's bringing it down, so why not go back to showing great wrestling WWE?

 

[Kasey]

There are a few primary reasons I believe that TV ratings for wresting fell on the decline:

1. Forgetting what brought you to the dance...

Creative strorylines that actually have a point and are cohesive enough to make a difference i.e. Austin/Hart, Austin/McMahon, Michaels/Hart as opposed to Katie Vick, Torie Wilson's dad, NWO revival or a myriad of other $hit storylines done during the Gewirtz era. Properly built heat and good payoff matches are what is important. Wrestling doesn't need to be revolutionized offensively most times. A decent booking order with solid matches that progress each time out is the way to go. The disjointed layout of WWE TV booking is disgusting. Matches aren't chosen in a PPV-type order of least to greatest like they used to be. Instead, they are chosen to maintain quarter-hourly ratings and keep sponsors up in all points of the show. This confuses the audience. Hell, I remember seeing the Rock defend his belt on Raw back in the day, and right after that a Val Venis match came on. Someone should have their ass kicked for that. Talk about stifling momentum. Professional wrestling isn't rocket science. Look back at the WCW/WWF wars. It wasn't overtly complex, but they knew what buttons to push on the crowd, and more importantly...when to push them.

2. Not knowing when to switch gears...

Originality and planning for the future is paramount in a constantly evolving beast like the wrestling business. Seeing Hogan and the NWO regurgitated again was probably my first big indicator that McMahon was entirely out of gas at that point. Nothing genuinely fresh has been laid upon the table in recent years that would even remotely denote a continuation of the momentum built by the late 1990's wrestling heyday.

3. Bad choice of top talent...

The prototypical WWE mark fans will typically always eat up the major portions of whatever wrestlers McMahon really gears the marketing machine around. The problem with recent years is that he has been choosing duds. Instead of doing what he used to do, and make sure he has solid workers in the top spots who can actually carry a match past ten minutes (Rock, Austin, Foley, Hart, Michaels, etc.) he has pinned his hopes on a set of one-trick ponies like Cena, Batista, and Lashley. Instead of swimming downstream and getting guys who just need a gimmick adjustment or some more mic training, he gets pretty faces who need wrestling training. This is ass-backwards thinking at its finest. His company is loaded with talent that could be the cornerstone of numerous promotions.

4. Watering down the quality of the matches...

Since the advent of "TV wrestling" during the Monday Night Wars the lengths of most matches have gotten noticeably shorter and the fans in the arenas are now accustomed to watching crap that is too short, badly wrestled, and badly booked. Moves have been banned, and the type of offense executed by the wrestlers is a homogenized style that doesn't allow for a lot of differential between superstars. The creativity and explosiveness that was once a part of WWF programming is gone for the most part.

5. No payoff to proposed mega-angles...

Goldberg/Lesnar, WCW Invasion, NWO, Cena/JBL, Batista/HHH. All the hype that surrounded this stuff was immense. The payoffs were complete crap. Decent angles that were capped off by horrible matches that drew lousy response. How many times do they need to see this happen? When your undercard can generate more heat/pops for their matches than some of your top stars, then it's time to re-evaluate the goddamn batting order. Piss-poor execution of some of the storylines of the last few years and bad choices of which wrestlers to mix or which wrestlers they pushed has killed a lot of the steam that once powered the WWF. The belts are near-worthless by comparison to days of past.