|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Feb 1, 2015 0:51:08 GMT -5
But using a Roman or a Bryan or Seth or anyone new to the scene and comparing them to 14/15 Cena is not fair as was the point that Cena shows do better than others. You're taking someone with 10 years on top and being given every advantage in that time as a top draw and asking why the new guy cannot do the same. Of course Cena is going to out draw them at this point, he had 10 years of the machine pushing him as the guy to see. You give one of the new people that time, that push and training they could do it to. People are looking for complete overnight success to explain why someone does or doesn't work and ignoring everything outside that. I don't disagree with any of that. I'm just following up on the whole Cena performance on house show thing. Was brought up, near as I can figure, that a reason he drew better was because of the bigger arenas on his shows. Well there's a reason for that is all. Guy just draws. They can go with a full small arena or go with a bigger one, have some empty seats but sell more and in the long run pay less to rent it. Guess it's kind of OT we are talking about but that's where I was going with it. Actually don't know how we got on the Cena house show draw thing but whatever. My thing is looking at last year and giving the fans the Bryan feel good moment and it didn't move the needle. Matter of fact (and I'm not relating the 2 at all it's a total coincidence) they had one of their worst financial years of all time, at least since it's gone public. So they think if they do what they did last year it's not gonna pop the finances, they are going their way with it now. Live crowds reactions are a part of that decision. Right or wrong I think it's a much smaller part than it's been in past years. They've got ratings, focus groups, surveys, Q ratings, supposed independent testing. Things all entertainment companies are using nowadays. The yay/boo thing didn't work out last year. Try something different. We got onto it from the idea of "are house show crowds and Raw crowds different" proposed in the OP. But going back to that original point, this caught my eye a few minutes ago 411mania.com/wrestling/wwe-house-shoe-results-1-31-15-edmonton-alberta-canada/House show report from the Edmonton show from today. The reporter says that Reigns got the biggest reaction of the night. Some can say "Well the star power was lacking" or something, but Chris Jericho was on the show. Even that surprises me seeing Reigns getting a bigger reaction in Canada than Jericho
|
|
CH Punk
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Advice: Noted
Stuck in the Retro Zone
Posts: 15,570
|
Post by CH Punk on Feb 1, 2015 10:33:13 GMT -5
I don't disagree with any of that. I'm just following up on the whole Cena performance on house show thing. Was brought up, near as I can figure, that a reason he drew better was because of the bigger arenas on his shows. Well there's a reason for that is all. Guy just draws. They can go with a full small arena or go with a bigger one, have some empty seats but sell more and in the long run pay less to rent it. Guess it's kind of OT we are talking about but that's where I was going with it. Actually don't know how we got on the Cena house show draw thing but whatever. My thing is looking at last year and giving the fans the Bryan feel good moment and it didn't move the needle. Matter of fact (and I'm not relating the 2 at all it's a total coincidence) they had one of their worst financial years of all time, at least since it's gone public. So they think if they do what they did last year it's not gonna pop the finances, they are going their way with it now. Live crowds reactions are a part of that decision. Right or wrong I think it's a much smaller part than it's been in past years. They've got ratings, focus groups, surveys, Q ratings, supposed independent testing. Things all entertainment companies are using nowadays. The yay/boo thing didn't work out last year. Try something different. We got onto it from the idea of "are house show crowds and Raw crowds different" proposed in the OP. But going back to that original point, this caught my eye a few minutes ago 411mania.com/wrestling/wwe-house-shoe-results-1-31-15-edmonton-alberta-canada/House show report from the Edmonton show from today. The reporter says that Reigns got the biggest reaction of the night. Some can say "Well the star power was lacking" or something, but Chris Jericho was on the show. Even that surprises me seeing Reigns getting a bigger reaction in Canada than Jericho Batista, who was booed by every TV crowd after The Rumble, was still getting cheered by fans at house shows. While they're different crowds, I think they don't mean the same things to the higher-ups because, if house shows were preferred to TV crowds, they'd have never turned Batista heel and added Bryan to the match.
|
|
|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Feb 1, 2015 10:42:22 GMT -5
We got onto it from the idea of "are house show crowds and Raw crowds different" proposed in the OP. But going back to that original point, this caught my eye a few minutes ago 411mania.com/wrestling/wwe-house-shoe-results-1-31-15-edmonton-alberta-canada/House show report from the Edmonton show from today. The reporter says that Reigns got the biggest reaction of the night. Some can say "Well the star power was lacking" or something, but Chris Jericho was on the show. Even that surprises me seeing Reigns getting a bigger reaction in Canada than Jericho Batista, who was booed by every TV crowd after The Rumble, was still getting cheered by fans at house shows. While they're different crowds, I think they don't mean the same things to the higher-ups because, if house shows were preferred to TV crowds, they'd have never turned Batista heel and added Bryan to the match. Batista was so hated by tv crowds that Alberto Del Rio became the biggest babyface on the roster at Elimination Chamber. That would be like if Rob Conway got a reaction like Bret Hart in Canada would get in 2005
|
|
|
Post by cabbageboy on Feb 1, 2015 10:47:32 GMT -5
At this point any die hard fan knows house shows are basically pointless. They are essentially glorified scrimmages to set up PPVs and TV matches. I think a lot of hardcore fans stay away or ignore these shows. Most fans at house shows I've gone to are there to cheer the good guys and boo the villains and there isn't much smarky stuff at all.
|
|
|
Post by Oh Cry Me a Screwball on Feb 1, 2015 19:52:09 GMT -5
At this point any die hard fan knows house shows are basically pointless. They are essentially glorified scrimmages to set up PPVs and TV matches. I think a lot of hardcore fans stay away or ignore these shows. Most fans at house shows I've gone to are there to cheer the good guys and boo the villains and there isn't much smarky stuff at all. Yeah, I didn't bother with a house show last month here in Vegas, even though I'm hardcore enough of a fan to spend thousands to go to Mania this year. (Didn't help that Dolph Ziggler and Ryback weren't going to be on the card.)
|
|
Tony Schiavontay
Dennis Stamp
This is the greatest post in the history of this board!
Posts: 4,083
|
Post by Tony Schiavontay on Feb 1, 2015 20:00:59 GMT -5
At this point any die hard fan knows house shows are basically pointless. They are essentially glorified scrimmages to set up PPVs and TV matches. I think a lot of hardcore fans stay away or ignore these shows. Most fans at house shows I've gone to are there to cheer the good guys and boo the villains and there isn't much smarky stuff at all. Yeah, I didn't bother with a house show last month here in Vegas, even though I'm hardcore enough of a fan to spend thousands to go to Mania this year. (Didn't help that Dolph Ziggler and Ryback weren't going to be on the card.) They were literally in Calgary today and I had no idea of it at all outside of seeing a truck with a giant picture of Stephanie on the back parked at the truck stop across the street from my work on Friday.
|
|
|
Post by Malibu Stacy on Feb 1, 2015 20:12:38 GMT -5
At this point any die hard fan knows house shows are basically pointless. They are essentially glorified scrimmages to set up PPVs and TV matches. I think a lot of hardcore fans stay away or ignore these shows. Most fans at house shows I've gone to are there to cheer the good guys and boo the villains and there isn't much smarky stuff at all. I agree with this, at least based on personal experience. When WWE was taping Raw here, I was the only one who went out of the people I know. But at the recent house show, my Facebook feed was blowing up with a lot of my friends posting pics from the event. They were mostly girls, the ones with kids took them of course, and they were all very much cheer the faces, boo the heels.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2015 8:59:08 GMT -5
That's why I try to help out at house shows by explaining to kids whey they should cheer the heels, as well as informing everyone of the wrestler's real names.
|
|
|
Post by ritt works hard fo da chickens on Feb 2, 2015 9:55:01 GMT -5
But you need to compete "overnight" - that's the way it works. A studio doesn't give a guy a run of eight movies to see if he's a box office attraction. You either hit the road running, or you hit the road. If Reigns isn't a big a draw as they want him to be he'll be treated like everyone else and pushed aside and focus will turn to the next guy who can. If Cena wasn't getting pretty much instant returns at the gates then he'd never have got a decade on top either. It's cut throat but I don't think the window of opportunity for anyone is open that long before they want to see a return. If you don't provide it then they'll still keep you but they ain't centre-piecing you ...but Cena WASN"T getting returns out of the gate. He wasn't just handed the world title and told to run with it. He got a nice high profile debut then they immediately lost interest in him and shuffled him off to the undercard of the B show. He was built up and developed a character, a recognizable moveset, and a report with fans. Saying Reigns is in the same boat as Cena is just ridiculous levels of optimism on this Reigns push.
|
|
|
Post by This Player Hating Mothman on Feb 2, 2015 10:33:54 GMT -5
But you need to compete "overnight" - that's the way it works. A studio doesn't give a guy a run of eight movies to see if he's a box office attraction. You either hit the road running, or you hit the road. If Reigns isn't a big a draw as they want him to be he'll be treated like everyone else and pushed aside and focus will turn to the next guy who can. If Cena wasn't getting pretty much instant returns at the gates then he'd never have got a decade on top either. It's cut throat but I don't think the window of opportunity for anyone is open that long before they want to see a return. If you don't provide it then they'll still keep you but they ain't centre-piecing you Very few people ever need to "hit the road running", though. Look at Chris Pratt, one of the breakout stars of 2014. He was mostly known as a TV guy and for supporting parts in movies, which got him attention, then he starred in Lego Movie, which was a hit. Then Marvel took a chance on him in a movie that was itself a massive chance, and now Chris Pratt is seen as one of the top leading men right now. For almost every big star in Hollywood, it's a slow and steady climb to the top, because they're not stupid enough to throw someone new and largely untested in a sink-or-swim scenario with millions of dollars on the line.
|
|