|
Post by Mr Kimura on Mar 19, 2009 15:43:56 GMT -5
My sense of drawing is putting asses in arena seats. To draw is to make people want to attend the show.
|
|
|
Post by romafan87 on Mar 19, 2009 16:11:10 GMT -5
I don't care one way or the other about Triple H. I'm just a mark, so I like probably literally whatever is thrown on me on tv, but one of the tough things to quantify with Triple H's place at the top is is that the two biggest boom guys left at the same time that a lot of the other things happened.
So if you take it quantitatively, from the standpoint of ratings for instance, they've definitely gone down since Triple H took over the top spot, but then again, most shows' ratings have dipped dramatically also with the invent of digital cable where 300 channels can be had for the same price as basic cable used to cost and YouTube. Take into the fact that wrestling as a pop culture commodity was done officially in about 2001 once the competition had no gas left. On one hand, you could argue that Triple H was a big enough cog in the machine to cause WCW to go under. On the other, you could say that he, or the rest of the WWE for that matter, wasn't a big enough draw to not only make them lose their fans, but keep them for the WWE side.
Buyrates? Well, they've really oversaturated the market, UFC is booming, etc. So that, too, is really tough to judge. Boxing buyrates aren't what they used to be with a notable exceptions and the WWE has been on a downward trend since the Attitude boom. Nothing you can blame or give him credit for other than some credit for the initial boom.
So basic metrics is probably out of the question because there are entirely too many unaccountable variables. For what it's worth, I've heard he's usually about 4th or 5th in merch sales, behind guys like Cena, Hardy, and Taker, which is remarkable considering how many times the guy has been face/heel/face/heel, etc.
So how about other measures. Has he created new top level stars? Yeah, Orton and Batista, with maybe a missed opportunity here or there. Has he had any memorable big time PPV moments? If I had to tell the story of WWE PPVs, the only time he would be mentioned would be for the Foley/Triple H Hell in the Cell match. He hasn't really had that one big match that everyone talks about and he definitely hasn't had a truly top level Wrestlemania moment.
I think the biggest measure is, are there people in the audience who have paid to see him? The answer is yes. How do I know this? Look at the merch and listen to his reactions.
|
|
|
Post by glorydays on Mar 19, 2009 16:28:27 GMT -5
THe buyrates for Wrestlemania where HHH was defending/challenging have all broken the previous year's record (aside from 24). This is the truth That isn't really a true indicator because WM has been selling itself the past few years (liking due to the name value and monopoly). Compare the WM buyrates to every other PPV. WM draws maybe four times more than most of the other shows. Hell, Shawn Michaels headlined WM with Cena and it drew record numbers. Neither one of those two (especially Shawn) is anywhere near an iconic draw. To me, a better indicator would be the amount of buys for lesser shows and house show attendance when HHH is headlining. I think H draws enough money to not hurt the company, but not enough to justify his push, which is probably what others are trying to say.
|
|
|
Post by Loki on Mar 19, 2009 16:49:02 GMT -5
I went to the Nassau Coliseum a couple of weeks ago for a RAW house show. I booed the guy, but I was one of few. As much as I am tired of him, the majority of folks who go to the events love him. The difference between him and Hulk/ Austin/ Rock is that those guys helped bring new fans into the fold. Triple H does not. Pfft... Hogan appeared in Rocky on several other movies, on national TV shows, on A-Team, on MTV, starred on some (bad) movies, and had his own cartoon. And later his own TV series and his own Reality Show. Austin and Rock were WWF's Top Guys at the peak of the peak of the peak of wrestling's popularity in America. Austin's 3:16 became an instantly recognizable catchphrase, while The Rock later moved on to became a moderately successful actor in Hollywood. Triple H was one of the "sidekicks" as long as Austin and Rock were there, and kept the boat afloat while wrestling was sinking back down in its little niche in the ever-growing world of TV entertainment. Saying Triple H didn't bring new fans in, while Hogan, Austin and Rock did, is redundant and doesn't mean much.
|
|
|
Post by Hugh Mungus on Mar 19, 2009 16:53:35 GMT -5
I agree glass ceiling burial Aurora Rose Stephanie nepotism RVD politics clique Booker T roids Montreal etc. Also these. And to the above posters: agentlosthisbladder.ytmnd.com/Back on topic, Trips does draw, but not as much as Hogan, Austin, and The Rock. I would place him as number 5 (following Hogan, Austin, The Rock, and Flair).
|
|
|
Post by Mr Kimura on Mar 19, 2009 16:58:41 GMT -5
An old, interesting piece on HHH's drawing ability by Dave Meltzer:
|
|
Beans
Team Rocket
Posts: 921
|
Post by Beans on Mar 19, 2009 17:06:37 GMT -5
But you know people don't doubt HHH is a competent draw and has been down the years but he's been given a status nobody else of his drawing power would EVER get if it wasn't for his position in the company.
There's nothing to suggest that HHH deserved 10 years on top, more than other guys who have come and gone and/or been pushed down to the midcard.
I also find his promo skills awesomely repetitive.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Kimura on Mar 19, 2009 17:09:05 GMT -5
it wasn't for his position in the company. So f***ing what? Why does it matter so much? Stop being paranoid. All of you.
|
|
Beans
Team Rocket
Posts: 921
|
Post by Beans on Mar 19, 2009 17:10:17 GMT -5
It's not really much of a prop to say he drew more than someone did 30 years ago. The eight most popular brand of soda today probably sold more and made more money than the second best selling sody of 1979.
It's the old Austin vs Hogan draw power argument, you have to factor in exposure, economic conditions, inflation etc.
HHH has never been a standout draw. He was always overshaddowed by HBK, Taker, Austin, Rock, Foley and later Hogan and now Cena. Yet he's there...always...on top, and for me that is because of his backstage position. I know the debate gets repetitive but I don't think there' any doubt if he was ANYONE else he'd have main evented less than a third of the events that he has.
They also went through a period of struggling to sell out even the modest size arenas.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Kimura on Mar 19, 2009 17:13:13 GMT -5
What about Ric Flair in the NWA in the 80's? He got the title so many times and he wasn't snorking Bob Gigels daughter....that Gigel knew of.
Also, been looking for this, and it's another Meltzer piece, he lists the biggest draws in WWf/E history:
|
|
Mac
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 16,502
|
Post by Mac on Mar 19, 2009 17:14:23 GMT -5
Triple H doesnt draw at all.
Fans constantly form protests to remove him from cards. A poll of fans across the United States showed Wrestlemania last year would have gotten a 55.6 buyrate if not for Triple H being involved on the card.
|
|
|
Post by Loki on Mar 19, 2009 17:16:21 GMT -5
But you know people don't doubt HHH is a competent draw and has been down the years but he's been given a status nobody else of his drawing power would EVER get if it wasn't for his position in the company. There's nothing to suggest that HHH deserved 10 years on top, more than other guys who have come and gone and/or been pushed down to the midcard. Yeah... What about Triple H getting 10 years at the top BECAUSE a lot of Top Stars, top stars and "top stars" at one stage or another decided to leave. Or were forced to retire. And who are the more deserving draws who got pushed down? Not Kane, Booker T, RVD and Jericho again... please not that tiresome tirade about burials please... Anyway... Think about it... How comes Triple H's dominance has been toned down at once, as soon as WWE found a reliable #1 Guy in Cena? Or, before the injuries, in Batista? How comes Triple H has been elevating new guys since WrestleMania XX? Option A: The new crop of talents were reputed more reliable and marketable than the "buried talents" Option B: Steph got mad at Trips so instead of faking headaches, she booked him to lose more often
|
|
Beans
Team Rocket
Posts: 921
|
Post by Beans on Mar 19, 2009 17:16:40 GMT -5
it wasn't for his position in the company. So snorking what? Why does it matter so much? Stop being paranoid. All of you. It's a thread about HHH's drawing power so his standing in the company is kind of relevant. I know it's been said 10,000 times before but it's true. Better draws HAVE come and gone and HAVE fallen down into the midcard while HHH has stayed pretty much a constant and given how business has gone since 2002 that luxury would not have been afforded to anyone else, and that's why it's an inescapable fact.
|
|
Beans
Team Rocket
Posts: 921
|
Post by Beans on Mar 19, 2009 17:22:37 GMT -5
But you know people don't doubt HHH is a competent draw and has been down the years but he's been given a status nobody else of his drawing power would EVER get if it wasn't for his position in the company. There's nothing to suggest that HHH deserved 10 years on top, more than other guys who have come and gone and/or been pushed down to the midcard. Yeah... What about Triple H getting 10 years at the top BECAUSE a lot of Top Stars, top stars and "top stars" at one stage or another decided to leave. Or were forced to retire. And who are the more deserving draws who got pushed down? Not Kane, Booker T, RVD and Jericho again... please not that tiresome tirade about burials please... Anyway... Think about it... How comes Triple H's dominance has been toned down at once, as soon as WWE found a reliable #1 Guy in Cena? Or, before the injuries, in Batista? How comes Triple H has been elevating new guys since WrestleMania XX? Option A: The new crop of talents were reputed more reliable and marketable than the "buried talents" Option B: Steph got mad at Trips so instead of faking headaches, she booked him to lose more often When in WWE history has Vince ever allowed a) a main eventer to remain in their spot for as long as HHH b) allowed ANY heel to have such a long run with a world title belt c) not changed things at the top when business starts to fall I think HHH is a unique. Never happened before and will never happen again. Also it's not even the people that he "burried" that is the problem it was the near two years when HHH's promos seemingly took up 40 minutes of each show. An exaggeration of course but it certainly felt like it was close to the truth. Even if he's a good main eventer...he is. Why stick with making him the centre of the earth for so long when it CLEARLY wasn't working? Have him there as a constant sure but it was like he was Hulk freakin Hogan for crying out loud.
|
|
|
Post by Loki on Mar 19, 2009 17:26:22 GMT -5
a) Hogan was on the top, non-stop (even when he wasn't Champion) from 1984 to 1992. Triple H just from 2002 to 2005.
b) not Vince. But Ric Flair says hi.
c) it did change. It's just you perceive at "not changing" until Triple H will be gone, or jobbing to Funaki.
Where were Edge, Orton, Cena, Batista, Jeff and Matt in 2003 at the peak of Triple H's power? Main Eventing? Nope... So things have changed
|
|
Mac
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 16,502
|
Post by Mac on Mar 19, 2009 17:51:57 GMT -5
a) Hogan was on the top, non-stop (even when he wasn't Champion) from 1984 to 1992. Triple H just from 2002 to 2005. b) not Vince. But Ric Flair says hi. c) it did change. It's just you perceive at "not changing" until Triple H will be gone, or jobbing to Funaki. Where were Edge, Orton, Cena, Batista, Jeff and Matt in 2003 at the peak of Triple H's power? Main Eventing? Nope... So things have changed You dont think Triple H has been "on top" for pretty much the last decade? You look at his Mania title matches alone He's wrestled as champ or for a title at 8 of the last 9 Wrestlemania's he competed at. Thats the same roll that Hogan was on Main Eventing 1-9* and only not wrestling at the Main Event of 4 despite being heavily involved. Secondly, the question was about WWE keeping heels at the top, naming someone from outside of the WWE would be like someone asking you to name a healthy candy bar and coming back with "a banana" for an answer. And you're right for the most part the top of the card has changed tremendously since 2003... all with the exception of one guy and well thats Triple H. Not entirely his fault, alot of the guys at the top of the card in 03" fell into bad circumstances or just plain hated wrestling and quit. And as much as I think Triple H is a terrific wrestler/entertainer I don't think someone of his level has deserved the push he's gotten and that push is relegated to just wrestling at the top of the card, it includes the fact that more times than not Triple H seems to come out of a fued looking better and his opponents have a 50/50 chance. But Trips has been playing politics for the better part of 12 years right now. And I dont consider it a consiquence that guys after they leave the company and dont have any intentions of returning have nothing but awful things to say about the man behind the character.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Kimura on Mar 19, 2009 17:55:05 GMT -5
If I was in wrestling I would play politics too.
Does that make me a bad person?
|
|
|
Post by glorydays on Mar 19, 2009 17:57:58 GMT -5
Meltzer's list is ridiculous. Bruno and Hogan deserve to be on top, but his reasoning is absurd. Wrestlers being rewarded on quantity rather than quality, without factoring things like inflation, technology, PPV platforms, network TV, etc, doesn't make any sense. If Cena main events for 10 more years, he'll be the biggest draw ever (according to Meltz) for no reason other than he headlined 16 PPV's a year.
You can't just use raw data to evaluate drawing power without factoring outside factors. That's like saying Lil Wayne sold more records over the internet than the Beatles making him a bigger star...ignoring the fact that the internet wasn't around when the Beatles were big.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Kimura on Mar 19, 2009 18:02:26 GMT -5
Well, thats what being a draw is all about. Getting fans to the arenas, putting asses in seats, and selling the merch. The people at the shows are Wrestling primary demographic. In terms of buyrates and TV ratings, no single star draws that. Good, well booked angles draw the buyrates and ratings. Was it Austin who drew the 5.something TV rating or was it the angle with McMahon that drew it?
|
|
Mac
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 16,502
|
Post by Mac on Mar 19, 2009 18:04:07 GMT -5
If I was in wrestling I would play politics too. Does that make me a bad person? Nope, you need to look out for yourself and assume everybody else is doing the same.
|
|