Beans
Team Rocket
Posts: 921
|
Post by Beans on Mar 21, 2009 5:13:48 GMT -5
You don't have to be world champion or to win to be the main focal point of the show.
What is the point in putting over new talent it by the next PPV you're in the main event - and they're not.
HHH does NOT draw enough to justify the number of title runs but also he does not justify the amount of TV time he gets.
What's amusing is that people think there is seemingly no link between someone marrying into the McMahon family, sitting in on creative team meetings, allowed use of the WWE private jet, father to McMahon's granddaughter - and being the top guy in the company pretty much for ten years now.
Sorry if some people dislike pointing this out but it's unavoidable.NOBODY else would get that kind of treatment OTHER than guys who drew huge bucks, and even Hogan, Austin and Rock won't clock up as many years full time with Vince as a 'focus' guy as HHH has.
Hogan 1984-1991 (7 years) Austin 1997-2002 (5 years Rock 1997-2002 (5 years) HHH 2001-2009 (8 years.....and counting)
You know when you see business NOSEDIVE, you see your flagship TV shows which used to sell out 15,000-20,000 arenas regularly move to heavily taped 1,200 seater Civic Centres, when you see PPV revenue take a hit........isn't there something odd about keeping the guy who has been used as the main focus of the show, in his spot?
As for the point about WWE not having anyone else, there is a REASON for that. How long did Orton get as World Champ in 2004? A month? Way to try something new.
The sad thing about the whole 2004 thing despite the obvious retrospective thing with Benoit - is that as soon as HHH lost at Wrestlemania 20 who doubted that the moment that happened (if not before) the production meetings for the next couple of months were dominated with trying to forumate a plan to get the belt back on HHH.
Even with the steroid trial, imminent jail, business struggling and superstars leaving left right and centre, Vince was brave enough to yank the belt of Hogan for longer after his 4th title win in December 1991.
Let's look at that great example of 2004 and HHH "putting over Benoit" which is often cited of proof of how much he put over talent.
Backlash - Main event in a WM rematch Bad Blood - Main evented in a non-title match with HHH (The title was demoted to the mid-card, of course, HHH can't not go on last!!) Vengeance - Main event in another WM and now Backlash rematch Summerslam - Midcard match with Eugene? Gosh what a team player HHH is I wonder if he's doing this for any kind of "reward" and is trying to look as if he's "paying his dues" for some kind of push...what could that be? Oh yes....
28 Days Later (ironically also the name of a movie where unwanted zombies with no signs of life refuse to go away)
Unforgiven 2004 - Main evented vs Orton and became the World Heavyweight Champion for the eighty-third time!!! Yay.
But surely Orton didn't draw, that's why they needed the belt off him.
Okay....
Raw ratings for those shows leading up to Benoit vs Orton and those shows following Orton's title rain...
August 2, 2004 3.8 August 9, 2004 3.9 August 16, 2004 3.4 August 23, 2004 3.6 August 30, 2004 3.5 September 6, 2004 3.7 AVERAGE: 3.65
The Raw television ratings after HHH got the strap...
September 13, 2004 3.6 September 20, 2004 3.7 September 27, 2004 3.5 October 4, 2004 3.4 October 11, 2004 3.4 October 18, 2004 3.0 AVERAGE 3.43
So there we have it, proof that WWE didn't keep WWE on top because he was banging the bosses daughter but because nobody else could draw like him and they didn't have anyone else capable of doing the same or better numbers than he did......
....oh wait...
|
|
|
Post by Loki on Mar 21, 2009 5:46:33 GMT -5
The business "nosedive" because the fad was over...
It could have been Triple H or Jobber McJobberson, and it wouldn't have made any difference, in positive, to the diminishing popularity of wrestling.
Otherwise, can you explain me how the business didn't thrive under the season of Bret, Shawn and Undertaker, despite them being great workers and rather popular IWC superstars?
Let's face it: when a boom period has come to an end, there NO WAY it can be saved. Ratings will go down, live attendance will drop.
Implying having, e.g. Booker T and Benoit getting a main even spot, pronto, could have saved WWE from losing viewers is, to put it mildly, naive and markish.
Triple H was, at least, a known face and a solid, proven performer at a main event level. Then when the rivals were ready, he did step down.
The D-X reunion was a good excuse to keep Triple H away from the title. He got it back when it was time to put another new guy over (Hardy), and got it again now to put Orton over for good. Wanna bet?
P.S. RAW Ratings pre and post HHH winning against Orton are hardly a proof... With the exception of the odd 3.0, the rest is more or less on par with the previous months.
Unless for you a 0.2 difference means a nosedive. And in such case, there's no reason to keep talking, as it's obvious you'd say ANYTHING to back up your biased opinion and to pass it as a fact
|
|
Beans
Team Rocket
Posts: 921
|
Post by Beans on Mar 21, 2009 6:29:28 GMT -5
Unless for you a 0.2 difference means a nosedive. And in such case, there's no reason to keep talking, as it's obvious you'd say ANYTHING to back up your biased opinion and to pass it as a fact I didn't say a 0.2 drop in ratings is a "nosedive" you've made the mistake of taking two different things I said and putting them together and pretending that I said a 0.2 drop in ratings was a "nosedive". There really IS little reason to keep talking if you're going to do that. I clearly only used the word nosedive once when refering to business post 2002, when I said they started losing ratings faster, started to have TV shows in small arenas and PPV ratings plummeted. So if you're trying to convince people who read what you say that I called a 0.2 drop a "nosedive" in ratings than your deception will not have worked because I said no such thing. Furthermore if I may break this tradition and actually comment on something you DID say rather than take two small points completely out of context, ram them together to imply an argument that you never made as seems to be the style of things thus far - if there was no real difference between the HHH on top months and the HHH not-on-top months as far as the ratings were concerned, why the rush to return the belt to HHH every time? Surely your own argument which is this line here, I'll quote it to avoid confusion.. Surely that begs the question, why if there was little difference between Orton/Benoit/HHH (or anyone else you care to mention) why was HHH always "THE guy". Wasn't your previous argument that HHH got that spot because nobody else was capable of doing it? But you've basically just said that people WERE just as capable of doing it and everyone was pretty much "on par" with everyone else when it came to the numbers. Why not let Benoit and Orton have a long programme together and then maybe let Batstia be next and possibly after that someone else. It was always HHH every other time and seeing as you've just accepted that his drawing ability as far as TV numbers were concerned were no different to anyone else at that time, isn't that an indication that his spot in the company was (is) over-inflated?
|
|
sloride
Unicron
Doesn't Suck Up. Or Does She?
The Greatest Entertainer to have ever Lived
Posts: 3,196
|
Post by sloride on Mar 21, 2009 6:32:38 GMT -5
You don't have to be world champion or to win to be the main focal point of the show. What is the point in putting over new talent it by the next PPV you're in the main event - and they're not. HHH does NOT draw enough to justify the number of title runs but also he does not justify the amount of TV time he gets. What's amusing is that people think there is seemingly no link between someone marrying into the McMahon family, sitting in on creative team meetings, allowed use of the WWE private jet, father to McMahon's granddaughter - and being the top guy in the company pretty much for ten years now. Sorry if some people dislike pointing this out but it's unavoidable.NOBODY else would get that kind of treatment OTHER than guys who drew huge bucks, and even Hogan, Austin and Rock won't clock up as many years full time with Vince as a 'focus' guy as HHH has. Hogan 1984-1991 (7 years) Austin 1997-2002 (5 years Rock 1997-2002 (5 years) HHH 2001-2009 (8 years.....and counting) You know when you see business NOSEDIVE, you see your flagship TV shows which used to sell out 15,000-20,000 arenas regularly move to heavily taped 1,200 seater Civic Centres, when you see PPV revenue take a hit........isn't there something odd about keeping the guy who has been used as the main focus of the show, in his spot? As for the point about WWE not having anyone else, there is a REASON for that. How long did Orton get as World Champ in 2004? A month? Way to try something new. The sad thing about the whole 2004 thing despite the obvious retrospective thing with Benoit - is that as soon as HHH lost at Wrestlemania 20 who doubted that the moment that happened (if not before) the production meetings for the next couple of months were dominated with trying to forumate a plan to get the belt back on HHH. Even with the steroid trial, imminent jail, business struggling and superstars leaving left right and centre, Vince was brave enough to yank the belt of Hogan for longer after his 4th title win in December 1991. Let's look at that great example of 2004 and HHH "putting over Benoit" which is often cited of proof of how much he put over talent. Backlash - Main event in a WM rematch Bad Blood - Main evented in a non-title match with HHH (The title was demoted to the mid-card, of course, HHH can't not go on last!!) Vengeance - Main event in another WM and now Backlash rematch Summerslam - Midcard match with Eugene? Gosh what a team player HHH is I wonder if he's doing this for any kind of "reward" and is trying to look as if he's "paying his dues" for some kind of push...what could that be? Oh yes.... 28 Days Later (ironically also the name of a movie where unwanted zombies with no signs of life refuse to go away) Unforgiven 2004 - Main evented vs Orton and became the World Heavyweight Champion for the eighty-third time!!! Yay. But surely Orton didn't draw, that's why they needed the belt off him. Okay.... Raw ratings for those shows leading up to Benoit vs Orton and those shows following Orton's title rain... August 2, 2004 3.8 August 9, 2004 3.9 August 16, 2004 3.4 August 23, 2004 3.6 August 30, 2004 3.5 September 6, 2004 3.7 AVERAGE: 3.65 The Raw television ratings after HHH got the strap... September 13, 2004 3.6 September 20, 2004 3.7 September 27, 2004 3.5 October 4, 2004 3.4 October 11, 2004 3.4 October 18, 2004 3.0 AVERAGE 3.43 So there we have it, proof that WWE didn't keep WWE on top because he was banging the bosses daughter but because nobody else could draw like him and they didn't have anyone else capable of doing the same or better numbers than he did...... ....oh wait... HHH is not the main focus of the company anymore. As soon as they had someone ready they became the 'top guy.' Cena has been the top guy from 2005-present, not HHH. And between 2002-2005 who else was there to be 'the guy' really? Booker T-who said every year he was going to retire. RVD-guy who got busted for pot. Some people really let their HHH blind their judgement of things. His DVD last year sold more than Austin and Rock's last year, the only WWE DVD that sold more was WM24. To say the guy doesn't draw is ridiculous.
|
|
Beans
Team Rocket
Posts: 921
|
Post by Beans on Mar 21, 2009 6:38:07 GMT -5
He's not the main focus of the company anymore?
How many consecutive WM's has he main evented? (main evented as in been involved in a World title match)
WM 18 WM19 WM20 WM21 WM22 Injured WM 23 WM24 WM25.....
Whether he wins loses or draws when you're in the main event at WM you ARE the focus of the show.
As I said earlier you can lose all you like but if come the next PPV you're still in the main event and the other guy isn't, it makes no difference.
|
|
sloride
Unicron
Doesn't Suck Up. Or Does She?
The Greatest Entertainer to have ever Lived
Posts: 3,196
|
Post by sloride on Mar 21, 2009 7:32:32 GMT -5
He's not the main focus of the company anymore? How many consecutive WM's has he main evented? (main evented as in been involved in a World title match) WM 18 WM19 WM20 WM21 WM22 Injured WM 23 WM24 WM25..... Whether he wins loses or draws when you're in the main event at WM you ARE the focus of the show. As I said earlier you can lose all you like but if come the next PPV you're still in the main event and the other guy isn't, it makes no difference. WM21-Cena WM22-Cena WM23-Cena WM24-Cena WM25-Cena HHH is obviously one of the top guys and has been for years, my point is that he isn't 'the guy'-Cena is.
|
|
|
Post by boomhauer20055 on Mar 21, 2009 7:55:37 GMT -5
I don't think so
I dont think any one star is drawing now. I think its the whole show that draws now.
|
|
|
Post by Loki on Mar 21, 2009 8:50:46 GMT -5
Surely that begs the question, why if there was little difference between Orton/Benoit/HHH (or anyone else you care to mention) why was HHH always "THE guy". Wasn't your previous argument that HHH got that spot because nobody else was capable of doing it? But you've basically just said that people WERE just as capable of doing it and everyone was pretty much "on par" with everyone else when it came to the numbers. Hold on a second... One thing is saying the business was on his way down anyway, regardless of who was at the top. Another is saying that throwing the belt on Your Random Midcard Idol wouldn't have affected the already dropping ratings/popularity in a negative way. I mean, if the 3rd/4th Top Player of the Attitude Era boom couldn't "save" WWE from the physiological drop in popularity, how could a Glorified Midcarder do it? Because you can't have a movie with just supporting actors... The show NEEDS one protagonist who's already established as decent frontman. And as much you don't rate Triple H as such, he was the only one suitable for the role of protagonist until Cena and Batista came around. Once again, see my statement above. We're talking apples and oranges here: I don't say "Triple H, Benoit, Booker or Steve Lombardi, the ratings would have been the same". I say "Once the fad was over, not even the biggest draws of the 90s could have stopped the loss of popularity and viewers" Let's use a football comparison. You have a team with no chances to make it to the playoffs, and you have two options: 1) you go for a total makeover of the team, hoping for the best 2) you keep the few good players around while rebuilding the team around them/with their help In my opinion, Triple H was the "veteran QB who kept the WWE team afloat while they were rebuilding the roster"
|
|
queenbee
Don Corleone
bow down to the queen :)
Posts: 1,633
|
Post by queenbee on Mar 21, 2009 9:07:53 GMT -5
He's not the main focus of the company anymore? How many consecutive WM's has he main evented? (main evented as in been involved in a World title match) WM 18 WM19 WM20 WM21 WM22 Injured WM 23 WM24 WM25..... Whether he wins loses or draws when you're in the main event at WM you ARE the focus of the show. As I said earlier you can lose all you like but if come the next PPV you're still in the main event and the other guy isn't, it makes no difference. WM21-Cena WM22-Cena WM23-Cena WM24-Cena WM25-Cena HHH is obviously one of the top guys and has been for years, my point is that he isn't 'the guy'-Cena is. Cena really seems to be the top guy. WWE turns PG, does it have to do with something because most of Cena's fanbase are kids and under 15 y/os? Likely.
|
|
Mac
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 16,502
|
Post by Mac on Mar 21, 2009 10:44:21 GMT -5
I think church's initial post is completely valid. And I think some people are distorting it mildly. Theres no evidence, in fact theres more to the contrary that having the belt on Triple H is a ratings boost. Certainly the lack of the next mega star to come around plays a good part in it. But unless you are relatively new to the game you've "been there, done that" with Triple H in every conceivable fued, every gimmick match, and every title match at every PPV. The guy is great and has been for a long time. But its old hat at this point. The WWE is seemingly grasping at ways to keep Triple H fresh and they seem to be doing it while swimming against the tides. They keep going overboard to get the Orton/HHH match over and using Stephanie as a prop they way they did several other times when their was mild interest in a Triple H main event spot. Wrestling fans tend to get sick of guys pretty quickly. They did with the Rock, and with Cena almost immediatly, and with Hogan. To assume that Triple H is immune to the fickleness of fans craving something new is ridiculous.
|
|
Miss RKO
Dennis Stamp
Orton's #1 Fan! ... after that chubby guy.
Bring back the Orton pose, Randy
Posts: 4,018
|
Post by Miss RKO on Mar 21, 2009 10:54:21 GMT -5
I've seen ratings for Raw during Orton's reign in late 07 up to the time he lost it and they were pretty steady in the 3's and higher but once Trips got it they did drop.
|
|
Sonic...SonicTruth
Team Rocket
?You can?t eat it, you can?t f*** it, and it won?t get you into heaven...BROTHER?
Posts: 930
|
Post by Sonic...SonicTruth on Mar 21, 2009 11:15:10 GMT -5
Triple H draws now because he's been an established name for so long. That's it. Now, if you throw him into a match with someone, it's a big deal because it's Triple H, and everyone knows Triple H is a big deal because it's been accepted liuke that for so long.
But why? And does he really deserve it?
First, allow me to say I was THERE the night he returned at MSG.
I have been present at MSG for plenty of HUGE moments - that was, however, by far, the loudest and longest sustained pop I've ever heard in my life. So is he (or at least was he ever) mega-over and deserving of a top spot? Hell yes.
But now let's look at the negatives. HHH has, for the record, NEVER been the #1 guy. When he first rose to prominence, it was Austin and The Rock. Even Undertaker and Mankind were above where he was at. Moving forward to 2003, the ONLY time he was ever given the ball to run with and be top guy, the focus was on Lesnar as the face of WWE, not HHH. Then it was Cena and Batista as the top guys. It's not just in terms of pushes and who's favored as the "face of the company" at the moment - don't forget how last year, Jeff Hardy was about a THOUSAND times more over while he was chasing the title in january/february. The crowd at No Way Out '08 certainly didn't give him a huge pop when he pinned Hardy. As a matter of fact, it seemed, at least on TV, like they were kinda dissapointed. This is a prepetual HHH problem - no matter how hard they try to make him a big deal, there's always someone (or at times, multiple guys) that people care about FAR more than HHH, which is okay when it's a guy like Austin/Rock, but all too often it's midcarders like RVD and Jeff, which is a problem.
For me, evidence of the fact that HHH just dosen't captivate people is right in his 2002-2004 "reign of terror". The "super heel title run" is one of wrestling's best storylines, and used right, it can be magical. Heel wins, month after month, and destroys all of the crowd's favortes, until ONE guy emerges after a long period of the heel winning, vanquishes him, and everyone's happy. The face becomes a conquering hero, the heelis a big deal for anyone to beat, and the title has prestige.
And somehow, when it was done in 2003, something, or rather everything, went wrong. People were disinterested - personally, take it from someone who missed most of 2003 because of it, it really wasn't good. You can blame it on the fact that raw as a whole sucked at the time, you can blame it on the fact that everything was booked 80/20 for HHH...or you can blame it on the fact that people just really didn't care about HHH and didn't want to watch him hold the belt for what felt like forever. People were turning away in droves, and WWE should have taken that as a sign. But they never did.
HHH really never has been the guy to carry a company. He can be a big name when they need one, and that sustained name value is his strength. But, let's face it, he's always gonna be coasting on his DX days and that popularity from 2002. And that's really it.
|
|
sloride
Unicron
Doesn't Suck Up. Or Does She?
The Greatest Entertainer to have ever Lived
Posts: 3,196
|
Post by sloride on Mar 21, 2009 11:47:45 GMT -5
I've seen ratings for Raw during Orton's reign in late 07 up to the time he lost it and they were pretty steady in the 3's and higher but once Trips got it they did drop. Statistics can be manipulated by anyone to support their argument. Hell I could say that SD's highest ratings since the MyNetwork TV move was HHH wrestling three times in one night which was pre advertised. My point-statistics are unreliable.
|
|
Beans
Team Rocket
Posts: 921
|
Post by Beans on Mar 21, 2009 16:12:08 GMT -5
Personally for me I think HHH is a one dimesnional character. Other than his DX routine which IMO seeing a near 40 year old guy make penis jokes isn't exactly the height of cutting edge entertainment, Game-H is just....same old same old.
Whereas if Hogan or Rock or Austin were on screen they'd grab your attention. Even if it was the same old Brother Dude, give me a hell yeah if you smell what somebody within the vacinity is cooking - it was still eye catching and appealing.
HHH for me has NEVER had that and looking at the numbers he hasn't had that for most people, for a guy who HAS been the focal point of one show or another for nearly a decade now, that's quite an achievement. To be given 13 or so title runs, consecutive Wrestlemania main event after consecutive Wrestlemania main event and still not be "the guy" used to boost ratings and increase interest in the feud.....
either two things went wrong.....either the booking sucks or HHH really ISN'T "that damn good".
|
|
Miss RKO
Dennis Stamp
Orton's #1 Fan! ... after that chubby guy.
Bring back the Orton pose, Randy
Posts: 4,018
|
Post by Miss RKO on Mar 21, 2009 16:17:45 GMT -5
I've seen ratings for Raw during Orton's reign in late 07 up to the time he lost it and they were pretty steady in the 3's and higher but once Trips got it they did drop. Statistics can be manipulated by anyone to support their argument. Hell I could say that SD's highest ratings since the MyNetwork TV move was HHH wrestling three times in one night which was pre advertised. My point-statistics are unreliable. Cant manipulate the truth, go look it up and you'll see Orton as champ kept the ratings steady and they dropped when Trips won
|
|
Beans
Team Rocket
Posts: 921
|
Post by Beans on Mar 21, 2009 16:18:18 GMT -5
I've seen ratings for Raw during Orton's reign in late 07 up to the time he lost it and they were pretty steady in the 3's and higher but once Trips got it they did drop. Statistics can be manipulated by anyone to support their argument. Hell I could say that SD's highest ratings since the MyNetwork TV move was HHH wrestling three times in one night which was pre advertised. My point-statistics are unreliable. But you can look at trends. Obviously it'll be absurd to say "ooh look at the November 3rd edition of Raw 2001, that got higher ratings than the September 8th edition of Smackdown in 2008..." ...but what you CAN do is take a snapshot of ratings from a comparible period and I don't think any ratings you can show would evidence that interest in the product is higher when HHH is in the main event. For my money HHH is a guy who sure deserved a run as champion, 2002-2003 but should have LONG ago been moved to a guy who fought the up and comers to put them over. Would Hogan, Austin or Rock have done that? No and nor should they. Why? Because they make money. You protect the proven cash cows, Cena and Undertaker are probably the only two people on the pay roll who fit that bill. After 2003 when guys like Cena, Edge, Jericho, RVD, Batista and the like started emerging, HHH should have stepped down to the next level. Sure still moonlight in the main event scene once in a while, be involved in the main event two or three times a year at a PPV, maybe notch up a couple of Wrestlemania main event matches. But that's it.
|
|
|
Post by SickFlipPiledriver on Mar 21, 2009 16:29:16 GMT -5
It's funny how to some people the question "Does Triple H draw?" reads as "Does Triple H draw as much as Austin or Hogan, the two biggest draws ever?"
Eh, whatever. To "draw" is to bring money to your company. Look at the DVD sales. Look at all the people in the crowd with DX or King of Kings shirts. Triple H draws.
|
|
Beans
Team Rocket
Posts: 921
|
Post by Beans on Mar 21, 2009 16:34:19 GMT -5
It's funny how to some people the question "Does Triple H draw?" reads as "Does Triple H draw as much as Austin or Hogan, the two biggest draws ever?" Eh, whatever. To "draw" is to bring money to your company. Look at the DVD sales. Look at all the people in the crowd with DX or King of Kings shirts. Triple H draws. People aren't looking to compare HHH with Hogan or Austin, they're comparing HHH to his current peers and no evidence has ever substantiated the fact that HHH being on top means there's more interest in the product than when Batsita/Orton/Edge/Jericho/JBL/Benoit (days gone by) are, or anyone else for that matter. Why is saying "HHH doesn't draw over an above his current peers therefore doesn't deserve as long in the spotlight as he has been given and still has" equated as being the same as saying... "Hogan drew more!!" Hulk has little to do with any argument being used, only when you come to compare someone who was VASTLY more popular in every sense yet still had a finite shelf-life as a main event talent before people got sick of him.
|
|
Space City's Own
Don Corleone
I am literally the greatest person to ever live.
Posts: 1,530
|
Post by Space City's Own on Mar 21, 2009 16:34:45 GMT -5
Look at all the people in the crowd with DX or King of Kings shirts. Those people are clearly just fans of the New Age Outlaws and Jesus.
|
|
Joekishi
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,490
|
Post by Joekishi on Mar 21, 2009 16:34:46 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. Except for his ability to stay over
|
|