Canada the country of botch-wrestlers, child murderers and fairies like Edge, more concerned with their hair than their finishing move.
Wrestlemania failed on every level from a fans perspective.
- Thread starter Sedated
- Start date
- Status
Canada the country of botch-wrestlers, child murderers and fairies like Edge, more concerned with their hair than their finishing move.
VictorySauce23
I Win at Winning
So what you're trying to say is that you are a racist.
Excuse me I never defended a child murdered or talked about his "legendary matches" or "great build".
VictorySauce23
I Win at Winning
Calm the fuck down man.
#MrScissorsKick
I'm an Alex Morgan Guy
Sedated is butthurt as hell.
ROFLZ @ you
Not the biggest cena fan but I don't hate him.
Your facts are flawed, your statements are whack, either hit up one of the cm punk fanboy threads in the wwe section or hit the logout button and never ever give your opinion on anything relating to wrestling ever again.
ROFLZ @ you
Not the biggest cena fan but I don't hate him.
Your facts are flawed, your statements are whack, either hit up one of the cm punk fanboy threads in the wwe section or hit the logout button and never ever give your opinion on anything relating to wrestling ever again.
Captain Morgan Freeman
Taught Elvis how to play karate
In one day a thread on Cena has gotten 230 posts.
Cena draws, id like to see a ziggler thread get those numbers
Cena draws, id like to see a ziggler thread get those numbers
In one day a thread on Cena has gotten 230 posts.
Cena draws, id like to see a ziggler thread get those numbers
Cena threads draws because we have moronic anti-Cena posts that others can't resist to poke fun at.
Kind of like comedy heels, ergo comedy heels draw.
Mighty NorCal
SHALL WE BEGIN?
During Wrestlemania (well, and every show ive ever been to) the highest grossing wrestling show in HISTORY, and the second largest Wrestlemania crowd ever, during every single lull in the action, the fans chanted one man's name
Not Brock. Not Taker. Not Trips. Not The Rock.
It was John Cena.
At every show this happens, but is especially a big deal at....You know, the highest grossing show of all time.
If that doesn't constitute being "over" what exactly does?
As far as the ratings, have you WATCHED RAW in the last couple of years? Cena is generally the lone bright spot in a steaming pile of fast food bullshit the WWE puts out on a weekly basis. You have your ratings theory backwards.
Not Brock. Not Taker. Not Trips. Not The Rock.
It was John Cena.
At every show this happens, but is especially a big deal at....You know, the highest grossing show of all time.
If that doesn't constitute being "over" what exactly does?
As far as the ratings, have you WATCHED RAW in the last couple of years? Cena is generally the lone bright spot in a steaming pile of fast food bullshit the WWE puts out on a weekly basis. You have your ratings theory backwards.
Agreed.
Ratings didn't go up or down by anything worth noting when Cena was injured.
Ratings went down by a lot when Austin was injured.
This is why Austin was a true draw and Cena isn't.
I'll respond to the rest of this crap you guys post when I have more time
Bernkastel
Reaper of Miracles
Agreed.
Ratings didn't go up or down by anything worth noting when Cena was injured.
Ratings went down by a lot when Austin was injured.
This is why Austin was a true draw and Cena isn't.
I'll respond to the rest of this crap you guys post when I have more time
O rly? Because the ratings took an awful big hit in 2007. I'd imagine Cena being injured combined with the Benoit fiasco having everything to do with that. And you've yet to show any kind of proof of Cena not being the biggest moneymaker WWE's got right now, regardless of "television ratings."
Yarly and you're imagining things wrong.
5/28 – 6/1 3.2 1.42 0.92 2.34
June 4-8 3.8 1.43 1.0 2.63
June 11-15 ~3.8 1.7 1.08 2.4 (4.6)
June 18-22 4.1 (6.6) 1.6 (2.7) 1.2 2.4
June 25-29 ~~3.83 1.78 1.2 2.4 (4.9)
July 2-6 3.7 1.51 1.07 2.64
July 9-13 3.35 1.37 1.01 2.5 (4.9)
July 16-20 3.4 1.34 1.17 2.63
July 23-27 3.37 1.31 1.13 2.6 (5.1)
7/30 – 8/3 ~~~2.51 1.3 1.07 2.62
August 6-10 3.81 1.49 0.99 2.4 (4.6)
August 13-17 3.8 1.5 1.05 2.4
August 20-24 3.8 1.7 1.05 2.2
The June 25-29 ~~3.83 is the benoit episode. We could potentially say there was a link between what happened with Benoit and a ratings decline, that's despite the fact that the show the week after benoit drew fine but it's still possible... Never the less a month later the ratings were right back to where they were, the following show after the last one I posted was a 3.15 that aired on scifi so I didn't include it. Also the 2.55 says there was an error with neilson so that number is likely off.
There's zero evidence to show that Benoit had any lasting ratings effect.
September 17-21 3.3 1.4 1.08 2.7
September 24-28 3.4 1.1 0.91 2.5
October 1-5 3.2 1.2 ++1.06 2.5
October 8-12 2.8 1.2 1.05 2.6
October 15-19 3.3 1.2 0.95 2.7
October 22-26 3.3 1.4 0.98 2.6
10/29 – 11/2 3.5 1.6 0.99 2.8
November 5-9 3.75 1.2 1.04 2.89
November 12-16 3.5 1.4 1.05 2.7
November 19-23 3.5 1.3 1.0 2.8
November 26-30 3.54 1.4 1.1 2.6
December 3-7 3.24 +++0.6 1.1 2.6
December 10-14 *@4.1 1.3 1.16 2.7
December 17-21 3.48 1.26 1.1 (1.7)
December 24-28 +*2.5 #^0.9 1.1 #^2.5
December 31 *+2.6
I believe Cena was injured at this show "October 1-5 3.2" With the exception of the week right after which for whatever reason drew a 2.8, they stayed about the same while Cena was out injured. The ratings don't show any real link to a decrease in viewership when we compare Cena's last couple of weeks there to when he was out. Now I'll even be generous, let's say the 2.8 rating WAS because of Cena not being there, why not? I'll play along. So it took the fans exactly 1 week to get over Cena not being there? Once again the numbers show that Cena is not actually a draw. We obviously shouldn't put any weight in the two holiday shows, one of which was pre taped and one of which was a tribute to the troops. The holiday episodes bomb almost every year, I just included them to fill out there year. The numbers actually show mostly an INCREASE in ratings when compared to the last 3 weeks of Cena on the show. I wont be that way though and all in all the numbers just show no real difference with Cena there or gone, any increase in ratings is small and not worth dwelling on.
You guys can give your opinions all you want about how Benoit caused ratings to dive, it's just not true though. At worst he caused a month long slump.
Agreed.
Ratings didn't go up or down by anything worth noting when Cena was injured.
Ratings went down by a lot when Austin was injured.
This is why Austin was a true draw and Cena isn't.
I'll respond to the rest of this crap you guys post when I have more time
Well Cena was only injured for parts of those years. So most of the time he was there (and champion) and exerting a positive effect on the ratings. However, the months he was out were lower and dragged down the average.
Please see the other post I made, there's zero evidence to back up that Cena being out for those few months had any real negative effect on the ratings.
This is the graph of 2007 ratings.
Can you draw any conclusions about it? Not really, the ratings fluctuate too much to provide a clear picture. Some post-Benoit shows are rated better than some pre-Benoit shows. But when you look at the average of the shows before Benoit's death and after it, there's a 0.4 difference. That's pretty noticable. There's plenty of evidence if you don't look at the data so closely that you miss the whole picture.
This is the graph of 2007 ratings.
Can you draw any conclusions about it? Not really, the ratings fluctuate too much to provide a clear picture. Some post-Benoit shows are rated better than some pre-Benoit shows. But when you look at the average of the shows before Benoit's death and after it, there's a 0.4 difference. That's pretty noticable. There's plenty of evidence if you don't look at the data so closely that you miss the whole picture.
No. I can't draw any conclusions from that graph. That's why I gave you relevant numbers in an easy to digest format that you're now choosing to ignore in place of a graph that makes my eyes want to twitch....lol
A closer look at the numbers proves there's no link between permanent ratings decline and benoit. I admit there seemed to be an immediate effect and that helps factor into the overall lowered score but we're not talking about overall scores anymore. We're looking at the data more closely to see if theories like "John Cena is a huge draw" and "Benoit had a big effect on ratings 2007 and beyond" the data does not support either of these things as being true.
Please don't be so ignorant that you're going to ignore hard evidence/facts.
*Edit* When I pointed out ratings have been in a general decline since the Cena era you and people like Sly wanted to argue that that wasn't a fair observation because it didn't include various factors. One of the big factors mentioned was Benoit. Another one of the factors mentioned is that we don't know what ratings would be like with out Cena.
I've now proven with hard data that Benoit had no lasting effects on the ratings, to draw any other conclusion from those numbers is lunacy.
I've also given hard data of when Cena was out injured and the ratings stayed the same as when he was last there.
You now seem to be ignoring all of this.
Here it is again, if any of you actually want to continue at arguing with me try addressing the actual facts please.
The numbers are exactly the same. The graph shows you how much the ratings fluctuate graphically. It's a lot more obvious that the ratings are all over the place on my graph than it is with a list of numbers.
Except that when you look at the average ratings for the two ~6 month periods before and after Benoits death, there's a big difference. Looking at small samples of incredibly variable data like you're doing is misleading.
I'm not.
Nate DaMac
Fuck erbody but me
How is a bunch of smushed numbers in a block an easier to digest format instead of a graph that holds the same information but in a much easier to read display? I ignored your numbers. If you're not going to take the time to make your argument look presentable, I'm not going to take the time to read it.
No. When you look at the individual numbers by a whole year it makes it look even more all over the place than they really are. Your graph doesn't inform people the reason behind certain ratings and some of them are very real. Example: There is a 2.50 rating that is nielson error and some other things along these lines... things like RAW being pre empted for a dog show, things like RAW being on scifi. When these things were relevant I at least tried to point them out, something your graph makes zero effort to do.
Actually, blaming Benoit for an overall decrease in interest is misleading. What do you think, that people tuned out for 4 weeks because of benoit and then tuned in for 4 weeks having gotten over it and then all of a sudden were bothered by it once again and tuned out? C'mon now, you're being silly and just refusing to admit you're wrong.
I give exactly zero ***** if you read my post or not.
Nate DaMac
Fuck erbody but me
Of course you do. That's why you posted it and acted so hostile toward my criticism.
I posted it to inform you I give zero ***** if you read it or not.
There's not a secret meaning behind everything.
If you're too stupid to read that's fine. I don't care.
Nate DaMac
Fuck erbody but me
There's only so many times that you can use an expression that doesn't make any sense. Quit being stupid.
I never said there was a secret meaning. It's quite obvious that you are desperate for acceptance, son. Nothing to be ashamed of, it's going to be okay.
- Status
