Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted January 4, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted January 4, 2012 Well, if his fanbase doesn't want to pay money to watch him, why would anyone else? It strengthens the arguments against him, more than anything else. Still doesn't excuse why people are turning off when he's on. The question isnt who isnt watching Raw. The question is why people are watching Raw and then not watching Raw when he's on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members neil's bitch Posted January 4, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted January 4, 2012 Wasn't the British Bulldog supposed to be in line for a World title run when he signed with WCW only to fuck it up by beating up a copper and getting arrested. If Bret Harts Book is anything to go by, Bulldog rang him to tell him how well he was doing in WCW (Which he was to be fair), only to beat up some bloke who was trying to chat up his misses, which in turn caused some sort of court case to have him deported IIRC. Â Shame as he was really over back in the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
300 Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Well, if his fanbase doesn't want to pay money to watch him, why would anyone else? It strengthens the arguments against him, more than anything else. Still doesn't excuse why people are turning off when he's one. The question isnt who isnt watching Raw. The question is why people are watching Raw and then not watching Raw when he's on it. Â But they're paying to watch him at live events, they're buying his shirt. You cannot deny that. Just watch and listen to the Monday night raw crowd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ColinBollocks Posted January 4, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted January 4, 2012 Wrestling/WWE is about making money, end of. If you aren't producing then the company isn't going to bother spending their money promoting you, WWE isn't TNA. Â I personally think they should give Punk a few more months to see if he can turn it around (see how he gets on when business usually picks up around 'Mania, with The Rock back), if he is still channel changing material then you can have no complaint with them pushing him down the card. Similar to what the did with The Miz, after his title run didn't go as well as hoped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members tom Posted January 4, 2012 Author Paid Members Share Posted January 4, 2012 The belt isnt the thing that people are turning the TV off for. He'll lose that belt (just like Daniel Bryan will soon). But currently, they are just shifting him down the card and replacing him with a bigger star, so the main portions of the shows arent delt a hammer blow in viewership by putting someone in that position that people dont want to watch. Its how things have always worked. Why didnt they give the belt back to Hogan in 1990 when the Warrior bombed? Because they could easily just put Hogan in a highly promoted match on the card to paper over the cracks and not do anything drastic. In other words, Cena doesnt need the belt to draw high quarter hours, so why reshuffle the deck. If anything, you could even argue that them moving him down the card shows that they still quite like him and are taking action to keep the title on him and save the ratings. There's little doubt that he's bombing but he's not being abandoned yet, just being moved down the card a bit. Until they can really sustain someone in to being a legitimate commercial success then whatever Cena is doing will be more important than the title scene and that seems to be justifiable. You could quite easily argue that beating Cena in a feud is actually more valuable for someone's ascent within the company than winning the actual title Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Eddie Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 I think some of the problem with Punk's ratings woes might be something to do with the people he has been involved with over the last month or two. Â He's been stuck in a feud with the very dull (and not nearly as over as he was 6 months ago) Del Rio, he's been arguing with (but not ever really getting one over on) Johnny Ace and in the last few weeks he's been losing matches to Ziggler, who (as great as he is) is still really only a midcard act who has been losing to Ryder recently. Â People have compared the general tone of the Ace feud to the McMahon/Austin rivalry, but what has Punk done to embarrass or injure ace? Virtually nothing. Ace has been getting his way and mocking Punk the whole way through. By now, Austin would have kicked the shit out of him on at least a few occasions (and probably made him piss his pants mid-ring or something similar). As things stand, outside of an "accidental kick" and a funny Dynamic Dudes video, what has Punk done to Mr Ace? Â There is also the fact that Kevin Nash came in, cost him a bunch of matches and beat him up, then Punk never got any payback. Punk's character just doesn't seem to have any balls on him. Â I also wonder how affective a TV ratings draw Johnny Ace actually is. I mean, us UKFF users all know his history and seem to get a kick out of his character, but is that also the case for younger, casual WWE fans? His whole act is extra fun for us because we know that he is really that guy that fires wrestlers, but for your average viewer he might just be that smug, boring guy in a suit who ruins loads of segments of RAW? Â I appreciate I'm sounding like a defender of everything CM Punk, but it honestly just seems weird to me that the live fans all over the country seem really into Punk, but it's not translating to TV. I personally love Ziggler and Ace too, but I have my doubts that the casual TV audience see's them as being particularly important or interesting. Â Maybe Punk's just not seen to be that important, as despite being Champion, he's wrestling midcarders and feuding with a bloke in a suit, rather than mixing it up with the likes of Cena and Triple H still? Â Honestly, I just want anyone (and ideally, more than one) to break through into that proper Main Eventer spot. That takes long term trust and continued protecting of the talent, not having them drop matches all over the place and look weak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Screen Up Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Not after a push and maybe not 100% correct, but the Four Horsemen getting a call to go to the Federation only for Blanchard to get busted for chang. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insert_name_here Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Wasn't the British Bulldog supposed to be in line for a World title run when he signed with WCW only to fuck it up by beating up a copper and getting arrested. If Bret Harts Book is anything to go by, Bulldog rang him to tell him how well he was doing in WCW (Which he was to be fair), only to beat up some bloke who was trying to chat up his misses, which in turn caused some sort of court case to have him deported IIRC. Â Shame as he was really over back in the day. That's the one, i knew i'd read it in someone's book. Like you say it is a real shame because he was on a roll at the time so it wouldn't of been surprising if a WCW title run was planned for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members tom Posted January 4, 2012 Author Paid Members Share Posted January 4, 2012 First one that popped into my head was Kennedy but for a different reason than already mentioned. WWE were so high on him that they planned a massive storyline (two, really, if you include the Vince dying angle) that would've made Kennedy not only a focal point of the company but a MCMAHON, which could realistically have made him a Main Eventer for the rest of his career. Is it confirmed that he was going to be revealed as Vince's son, or have people just taken IWC speculation, the 'net pretty much still liked him a lot at the time, to be fact? And what significance to Kennedy did the death angle have; wasn't the plan to have Linda admit to it on that 3 hour RAW before Benoit decided he REALLY didn't like the angle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members neil's bitch Posted January 4, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted January 4, 2012 First one that popped into my head was Kennedy but for a different reason than already mentioned. WWE were so high on him that they planned a massive storyline (two, really, if you include the Vince dying angle) that would've made Kennedy not only a focal point of the company but a MCMAHON, which could realistically have made him a Main Eventer for the rest of his career. Is it confirmed that he was going to be revealed as Vince's son, or have people just taken IWC speculation, the 'net pretty much still liked him a lot at the time, to be fact? And what significance to Kennedy did the death angle have; wasn't the plan to have Linda admit to it on that 3 hour RAW before Benoit decided he REALLY didn't like the angle? From what i remeber, it was planned to be him all along, until he got busted for 30 days for the wellness thing, not sure what he had to do with the death angle though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Reefer Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Not after a push and maybe not 100% correct, but the Four Horsemen getting a call to go to the Federation only for Blanchard to get busted for chang. Â It was the other way round wasn't it? The Brainbusters were headed back to NWA/WCW to reform the Horsemen only for Tully to get busted leading to Paul Roma getting his spot and the whole thing dying on it's arse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The King Of Swing Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 I always thought the story was Blanchard got busted while the Brainbusters were still with the WWF resulting in them having to drop the tag Title's back to Demolition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members unfitfinlay Posted January 5, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted January 5, 2012 First one that popped into my head was Kennedy but for a different reason than already mentioned. WWE were so high on him that they planned a massive storyline (two, really, if you include the Vince dying angle) that would've made Kennedy not only a focal point of the company but a MCMAHON, which could realistically have made him a Main Eventer for the rest of his career. Is it confirmed that he was going to be revealed as Vince's son, or have people just taken IWC speculation, the 'net pretty much still liked him a lot at the time, to be fact? And what significance to Kennedy did the death angle have; wasn't the plan to have Linda admit to it on that 3 hour RAW before Benoit decided he REALLY didn't like the angle? From what i remeber, it was planned to be him all along, until he got busted for 30 days for the wellness thing, not sure what he had to do with the death angle though.  I'm only going with what Meltzer reported at the time but supposedly the plan for the death angle was that Vince would've left the company to Kennedy, his bastard son, setting up a feud with Triple H and Stephanie (who would be revealed as still married) over control of the company.  Can't blame him for that storyline going tits up, obviously, but it does show the kind of faith they had in him at one point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members tiger_rick Posted January 5, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted January 5, 2012 People have compared the general tone of the Ace feud to the McMahon/Austin rivalry, but what has Punk done to embarrass or injure ace? Virtually nothing. Ace has been getting his way and mocking Punk the whole way through. By now, Austin would have kicked the shit out of him on at least a few occasions (and probably made him piss his pants mid-ring or something similar). As things stand, outside of an "accidental kick" and a funny Dynamic Dudes video, what has Punk done to Mr Ace? McMahon had credibility back then. People knew he owned the company and he was coming off the Bret Hart screwjob. Ace has no credibility so you've got to build him first and generate reason for Punk to be vengeful. I think they are doing a really good job with these two. Fuck the ratings, I'd hate to see them drop this now, it's building nicely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Eddie Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 People have compared the general tone of the Ace feud to the McMahon/Austin rivalry, but what has Punk done to embarrass or injure ace? Virtually nothing. Ace has been getting his way and mocking Punk the whole way through. By now, Austin would have kicked the shit out of him on at least a few occasions (and probably made him piss his pants mid-ring or something similar). As things stand, outside of an "accidental kick" and a funny Dynamic Dudes video, what has Punk done to Mr Ace? McMahon had credibility back then. People knew he owned the company and he was coming off the Bret Hart screwjob. Ace has no credibility so you've got to build him first and generate reason for Punk to be vengeful. I think they are doing a really good job with these two. Fuck the ratings, I'd hate to see them drop this now, it's building nicely. Â Yeah, that sounds about right. The problem still exists though that at the moment, Punk is being foiled by a guy who hasn't yet been built up enough. Â I agree they are doing a good job from my personal point of view, but as a more casual viewer (who doesn't know anything about Ace, beyond his TV character) I still think it may seem like some boring, corporate douche is getting the best of Punk most weeks. If Punk had beaten Ace up a few times already (not destroyed him or anything) then Ace would have reason to hire a security team and maybe a bodyguard, all more stuff that would have added to his act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.