Wrestlemania failed on every level from a fans perspective.

[Sedated]

Cena kept the company afloat when there was literally nobody else to fill the void left by AE main-eventers, and even managed to become one of the biggest merch sellers in WWE history. Sedated, you're entitled to whatever opinion you want to have about Cena, but when it comes to the facts, you are dead wrong.

What?

Undertaker, HHH, Angle, Edge, Jericho, HBK, Kane, RVD, Eddie Guerrero.

Post attitude era the WWE had a lot more names than they do now, Cena kept the company afloat? If anything HHH kept the company afloat post attitude era as much as I hated those reigns he had it's a lot closer to the truth.

 

[Steamboat Ricky]

You must like IWC forum admins a lot.

I do, actually. It's a thankless job, and they do well.


I was referencing The Rock's tendency to use disparate "potty humor" as a means to getting over on an opponent...a staple of his arsenal...one that doesn't leave a lot of room for fruitful banter or promos and reveals him in a less sophisticated light than his peers.


Cena beating Rock didn't do anything for his career? Mmmmm...I don't know...maybe getting the "You couldn't hold a candle to Attitude Era superstars" monkey off of his back isn't a career advancement?

 

[Sedated]

No that's fair. Ratings are determined based on certain things. For example back in 03 RAW was on Spike. Spike isn't in as many households as USA so the rating will be higher based on that. If 3 Million people watch RAW on USA the rating will be lower if 3 Million watch RAW on Spike.

 

[KnowMyRole-ShutYourMouth]

It's hilarious reading through this thread with people regurgitating what they read or hear from dirtsheet writers. The business IS down, and the product is stale. There actually used to be a cool factor to wrestling, and it's gone due to the PG era and Cena is the face of it. I'm not taking sides because there is validity in both as it isn't a black and white argument. But the piling on Sedated is a bit ridiculous. I know he said some outlandish things about Cena, but my god. Countering his ratings argument (that he factually backed up) with Wrestlemania buyrates? Acting like Cena is on Austin's level? Cena's an all time great, don't get me wrong, but there is a huge problem when your #1 guy gets at best 50/50 reactions at most, if not all shows.

 

[Remix]

I wouldn't call since 2007 a short time. The fact of the matter is Cena is the face of the company and ratings have dropped. You can try to pin it on anything you like but the fact remains.

I didn't say they dropped between 2007 and now. I'm saying they dropped in 2007, as a result of the Benoit incident and then remained at a constant level. Here's a picture of the average yearly ratings. For full disclosure, 2007 has been split into 2. One 1/1/07-18/6/07 and then 25/6/07-31/12/07 because looking at the average of the whole year is misleading in 2007.

Also, the figures I used were downloaded from Sly's site.

 

[braveh]

It's hilarious reading through this thread with people regurgitating what they read or hear from dirtsheet writers. The business IS down, and the product is stale. There actually used to be a cool factor to wrestling, and it's gone due to the PG era and Cena is the face of it. I'm not taking sides because there is validity in both as it isn't a black and white argument. But the piling on Sedated is a bit ridiculous. I know he said some outlandish things about Cena, but my god. Countering his ratings argument (that he factually backed up) with Wrestlemania buyrates? Acting like Cena is on Austin's level? Cena's an all time great, don't get me wrong, but there is a huge problem when your #1 guy gets at best 50/50 reactions at most, if not all shows.

I just want to add that history doesn't repeat itself. With Cena it's a unique situation. Cena is the money in the merch, the ppv and house show sales but he is what a larger percentage of the wrestling fans hate. He is what makes wrestling fans tune out of Raw. He is their biggest asset and their biggest problem at the same time.

 

[KnowMyRole-ShutYourMouth]

No that's fair. Ratings are determined based on certain things. For example back in 03 RAW was on Spike. Spike isn't in as many households as USA so the rating will be higher based on that. If 3 Million people watch RAW on USA the rating will be lower if 3 Million watch RAW on Spike.

What in the fuck? 3 million people = 3 million people.

 

[Sedated]

I do, actually. It's a thankless job, and they do well.


I was referencing The Rock's tendency to use disparate "potty humor" as a means to getting over on an opponent...a staple of his arsenal...one that doesn't leave a lot of room for fruitful banter or promos and reveals him in a less sophisticated light than his peers.


Cena beating Rock didn't do anything for his career? Mmmmm...I don't know...maybe getting the "You couldn't hold a candle to Attitude Era superstars" monkey off of his back isn't a career advancement?

Cena still couldn't hold a candle in his current form/gimic to The Rock of AE or Austin or anyone else really.

When Rock came back last year he was accused of BURYING Cena, people acted like he came in and just shit all over the entire product and destroyed Cena with a promo. Now he tones it down and you all cry that he does the same thing every week. When he came in and tore into Cena that was a problem and when he holds back that's a problem too.

 

[Remix]

What in the fuck? 3 million people = 3 million people.

Ratings = the number of people watching a programme as a proportion of the number of people watching TV that could potentially watch it.

a 3.0 on a cable network =/= 3.0 on a national network.

 

[Sedated]

Ratings = the number of people watching a programme as a proportion of the number of people watching TV that could potentially watch it.

a 3.0 on a cable network =/= 3.0 on a national network.

and yet Raw draws more viewers on cable than smackdown does on regular network. Keep the excuses coming.

p.s. your graph shows what looks like a pretty overall steady decline in the product.

 

[AndThat'sTheBottomLine]

Ryback was super over. Almost as over as Punk was before MITB 2011. They made more money off that booking decision than they did signing Lesnar to SS and Extreme rules or signing Rock to do RR.

They could have put the belt on Ryback and screwed him before RR. But they had to protect CM Punk's title reign that went nowhere and ended with match/feud against Rock that nobody cared for.

He had a cool catchphrase. He was nowhere near ready to hold the belt. And they did screw him, two or three times if I remember correctly. Besides that, Rock's victory wouldn't have been as meaningful if Punk had just won the title. Beating a 434 day streak is much more impressive than beating a guy who just won it. If they had had more time to build the feud it would've been better but that's more creative's fault than Punk's or Rock's. Obviously someone cared for the feud. Hell I bought the Rumble PPV for the first time ever just to see the match.

 

[KnowMyRole-ShutYourMouth]

I just want to add that history doesn't repeat itself. With Cena it's a unique situation. Cena is the money in the merch, the ppv and house show sales but he is what a larger percentage of the wrestling fans hate. He is what makes wrestling fans tune out of Raw. He is their biggest asset and their biggest problem at the same time.

I understand that it's unique, but children are easy to please. They'll latch onto another babyface. Whoever challenged a heel Cena would be their new hero. I think Cena is just too stubborn to give up that #1 spot and give someone else a chance.

Cena still couldn't hold a candle in his current form/gimic to The Rock of AE or Austin or anyone else really.

When Rock came back last year he was accused of BURYING Cena, people acted like he came in and just shit all over the entire product and destroyed Cena with a promo. Now he tones it down and you all cry that he does the same thing every week. When he came in and tore into Cena that was a problem and when he holds back that's a problem too.

What's funny is the WWE and it's sheep supporters believe that The Rock putting Cena over and "endorsing" him at WM will somehow bring Rock/Anti-Cena fans over to the Cena bandwagon. Cena getting that endorsement DOES NOT put him on Rock/Austin's level just as you pointed out.

 

[Sedated]

He had a cool catchphrase. He was nowhere near ready to hold the belt. And they did screw him, two or three times if I remember correctly. Besides that, Rock's victory wouldn't have been as meaningful if Punk had just won the title. Beating a 434 day streak is much more impressive than beating a guy who just won it. If they had had more time to build the feud it would've been better but that's more creative's fault than Punk's or Rock's. Obviously someone cared for the feud. Hell I bought the Rumble PPV for the first time ever just to see the match.

If was nowhere near ready to hold the belt (Which I can agree with) he shouldn't have got hot shot to a championship match. That match was horrible, it managed to make BOTH Ryback AND CM Punk look weak.

Also Rock's win over CM Punk was far from impressive considering how poorly CM Punk was booked during the entire heel portion of his title reign, not to mention the actual match was bad and The Shield's interference was kind of pointless considering there was never any future altercations between The Rock and Shield.

 

[Bernkastel]

I took this post seriously until I got to the "Cena needs to turn heel" part. Thanks for wasting my time.

 

[braveh]

He had a cool catchphrase. He was nowhere near ready to hold the belt. And they did screw him, two or three times if I remember correctly. Besides that, Rock's victory wouldn't have been as meaningful if Punk had just won the title. Beating a 434 day streak is much more impressive than beating a guy who just won it. If they had had more time to build the feud it would've been better but that's more creative's fault than Punk's or Rock's. Obviously someone cared for the feud. Hell I bought the Rumble PPV for the first time ever just to see the match.

You're entitled to your opinion. It's a little bit subjective. My impression was that Ryback had a big momentum. With the title he could have bumped many ppvs.

The one thing you can't deny though is that nobody gave a shit about Rock and Punk. The build-up sucked the RR-match sucked, the 400 day streak didn't exist to the casual viewer. Reportedly they lost money on the Rumble ppv.

 

[CH David]

What's funny is the WWE and it's sheep supporters believe that The Rock putting Cena over and "endorsing" him at WM will somehow bring Rock/Anti-Cena fans over to the Cena bandwagon. Cena getting that endorsement DOES NOT put him on Rock/Austin's level just as you pointed out.

It won't because anti Cena fans are dumbasses who think that he can't wrestle or is the reason that ratings suck.

Also we all know it doesn't put him at that level. But then again, not many people are at the level of Rock, Austin, or Hogan.

 

[Sedated]

I took this post seriously until I got to the "Cena needs to turn heel" part. Thanks for wasting my time.

Yeah, Cena should just use the exact same gimic for another 10 fucking years. That'll be cool and totally fun to watch.

 

[KnowMyRole-ShutYourMouth]

It won't because anti Cena fans are dumbasses who think that he can't wrestle or is the reason that ratings suck.

Also we all know it doesn't put him at that level. But then again, not many people are at the level of Rock, Austin, or Hogan.

Anti-Cena fans view him as stale, unentertaining, and corny. Plus, the exploitation of the troops and sick kids is repulsive.

 

[Bernkastel]

Yeah, Cena should just use the exact same gimic for another 10 fucking years. That'll be cool and totally fun to watch.

I guess, since ratings seem to be steadily rising. Whatever's good for business. But from reading this thread I doubt you'd actually know anything about that. Cena sucks, and Punk should be the face of the business right?

 

[Sedated]

It won't because anti Cena fans are dumbasses who think that he can't wrestle or is the reason that ratings suck.

Also we all know it doesn't put him at that level. But then again, not many people are at the level of Rock, Austin, or Hogan.

Actually no, you don't know. You're 22 years old, you were around 6 when the attitude era was starting and even younger for the generations before that. You have no idea what you're talking about other than the rewriting of history WWE likes to show you on their DVD's.

I've noticed most of you in this thread arguing for Cena are too young to really know any better. It's honestly sad if you think that the current product or Cena is what wrestling is really about. I 100% feel bad for you if you honestly feel this way.

 

[Shocky]

What in the fuck? 3 million people = 3 million people.

The ratings system doesn't equal the way you think. The value in 2012 was based on 114.2 million households with television. A ratings point is 1% of the total number of households, or 1,142,000 homes. In 1999 the number of households with cable television access was 67,592,000. So a Nielsen rating point in 1999 becomes 675,920. (I will say that I am doing this based on numbers I have found, and am not sure if they are 100% accurate. It's a good estimate though.)

Those nice 7.0's in 1999 equals out to 4,731,440 viewers
The 3.5 in 2012 equals out to 3,997,000 viewers. Factor in DVR, internet streaming, and other forms of ways people can watch Raw, the dip in business is far from what Attitude Era fanboys try to claim.

 

[AndThat'sTheBottomLine]

If was nowhere near ready to hold the belt (Which I can agree with) he shouldn't have got hot shot to a championship match. That match was horrible, it managed to make BOTH Ryback AND CM Punk look weak.

Also Rock's win over CM Punk was far from impressive considering how poorly CM Punk was booked during the entire heel portion of his title reign, not to mention the actual match was bad and The Shield's interference was kind of pointless considering there was never any future altercations between The Rock and Shield.

I agree with the first part although I still say that Ryback didn't start looking weak until the Shield got involved. I do think Punk was booked a bit poorly during a lot of his heel run but the match wasn't that bad. It certainly wasn't Punk's best but it was far from bad. If Rock was in better ring condition it would have been better.

You're entitled to your opinion. It's a little bit subjective. My impression was that Ryback had a big momentum. With the title he could have bumped many ppvs.

The one thing you can't deny though is that nobody gave a shit about Rock and Punk. The build-up sucked the RR-match sucked, the 400 day streak didn't exist to the casual viewer. Reportedly they lost money on the Rumble ppv.

He wasn't ready yet. He got good pops but that was his catch phrase talking. His intensity helped as well. I think he'd be ready by now if he hadn't been shoved into the main event while Cena got fixed up. The build to Rock/Punk sucked because Rock wasn't always there. Same reason why the build up to Mania 29 sucked.

Yeah, Cena should just use the exact same gimic for another 10 fucking years. That'll be cool and totally fun to watch.

Or he could just change his character up some. He doesn't have to turn heel. He just has to put a little edge to himself.

 

[Sedated]

I guess, since ratings seem to be steadily rising. Whatever's good for business. But from reading this thread I doubt you'd actually know anything about that. Cena sucks, and Punk should be the face of the business right?

If you think I ever said CM Punk should be the face of the business you obviously haven't read the thread. I think CM Punk is over rated and not anywhere near as good as people want to pretend he is.

I get it now though, finally after year 9 of Cena's same old shit gimic things really started to catch on and ratings went up a bit. It had zero to do with Lesnar and Rock returning. Please teach me more about wrestling and make more assumptions.

 

[CH David]

Anti-Cena fans view him as stale, unentertaining, and corny. Plus, the exploitation of the troops and sick kids is repulsive.

So John Cena spending time with kids with severe illnesses, some terminal, and giving them a shining ray of light by seeing their hero, is repulsive? Fuck, you must be a sad, depressing soul.

He sure as shit ain't unentertaining. If he was, people would turn the channels or not treat him with the responses that they do. They may hate his character, but they watch the shows and PPVs so they can watch him either lose and make them happy, or win and piss them off.

 

[Slyfox696]

I accused him of not understanding how AVERAGES work and now I'm accusing you of not knowing how to read.

I read just fine. Did I accuse you of claiming something else? No? Then what are you talking about?

So someone says if "If Cena wasn't over ratings would show it" I show him that ratings support that and now it's the fault of everything except Cena? How fucking convenient, are you listening to your self right now? Can some of those things play a factor? Sure. Does it make you look like a moron to blame everything except the face of the company? Yes.

I'm sorry, was it me who made that statement? No? Then what are you talking about?

But let's delve into that. Just because ratings go down, that doesn't mean Cena isn't over. Furthermore, who is to say ratings wouldn't be on TNA level if Cena wasn't over?

So ignoring for a moment your logic is incredibly flawed in I wasn't the one who made the claim, your posting averages still doesn't show Cena wasn't over, because you cannot show what ratings would be if Cena wasn't over.

So who's really the moron? That would be you.

Sorry, I wouldn't wipe my ass with your opinion.

Fair enough, my opinion is far too good for you.

Tell me again how Wade Barret is doing great because he's the IC champion lmao.

Well, let's see. Barrett got a Wrestlemania payday, he was given a match on Raw last night, he's holding a title and will be a regular member of Raw for the time to come. How's Zach Ryder doing these days? Alex Riley?

Of course, that doesn't even get into the fact you've never once told me how Cena is responsible for Barrett after they quit feuding.

If I wanted to parrot stupid IWC rhetoric I'd be like the other guy pretending to give half of a camel's twat that you're an Admin and pretend your opinion isn't shit for being a total Cena mark.
It's your opinion, it's your right to have it, it's still a shit opinion though.

Just because you know nothing about pro wrestling, that doesn't make me wrong.

You're wrong in every way. Cena is the top merchandise seller. He main-events Wrestlemania every year. He's what, an 11 time champion now? He's the go to guy to give another wrestler a boost in credibility. He can make an inexperienced rookie look like a legitimate main-event threat.

Your argument that John Cena is not over, just because a bunch of teenage boys boo him, has been proven unequivocally false.