|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Aug 18, 2013 9:29:58 GMT -5
I still hate the topic of people being "draws" so much. Eddie was WAY over and sold a crap ton of T-Shirts. What the hell matters more than that? I'm always curious because this kind of thing directly affects whether or not our favourite wrestlers get pushed. Eddie was over as hell in every building he went to, even in WCW, but being over in the building doesn't necessarily translate to buys. By contrast, in WWE's eyes, Ryback was a draw once when HIAC drew more than it did the year before even though his in-building reactions sometimes varied. I know there was also the fact that there was one less PPV last year than the year before, but I meant from WWE's perspective. Buyrates can have a real effect on the creative direction of the company. JBL and Eddie had an incredible feud with many amazing matches, but if business was in the toilet while they're wrestling for their lives, it all amounts to nothing as far as WWE is concerned.
|
|
thecrusherwi
El Dandy
the Financially Responsible Man
Brawl For All
Posts: 7,733
|
Post by thecrusherwi on Aug 18, 2013 10:12:44 GMT -5
I guess it depends how you define draw. The WWE as a whole couldn't draw bees to honey in that ruthless aggression era. As Sean Careless mentioned, the Smackdown Six did get better ratings than Raw in the fall of 2002, but that had more to do with the complete collapse of Raw's audience in 2002 after the wrestling bubble burst. Raw's ratings trendline took them from just below 5.0 at the beginning of the year to barely above 3.0 by the end of the year. It was a colossal failure business wise for the whole company in 2002 (or more accurately a market correction after the bubble burst)
In 2004, Raw solidly outdrew Smackdown for the whole year, and Eddie's championship reign did nothing to hurt or help the ratings (Nor did Benoit's for that matter on Raw). I don't think Eddie was a huge draw by any means, but he was no worse than anyone else they tried from 2002-2004. People often blame the Brand Split, Triple H, Brock, Angle, or Benoit and Guerrero for the state of wrestling in those years, but that was all just the ramifications of the wrestling bubble bursting. Ratings were already steadily declining in 2001 when Rock and Austin were still full time guys. The market didn't care if it was Eddie Guerrero, Chris Benoit, Triple H, 1998 Steve Austin or 1985 Hulk Hogan. They were done with wrestling.
|
|
|
Post by Can you afford to pay me, Gah on Aug 18, 2013 16:06:13 GMT -5
I think he was a good enough draw.I think the down fall was facing off with JBL who failed in business. Which I lot of it was because he was no established as a new character. How do you make a draw when you went from APA to new character headlining a PPV in ONE month? As good JBL played the role fans where not buying into it. Had Eddie faced Booker T or someone else already more established while they built up JBL it would have worked out better in the long run and in business.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2013 17:22:57 GMT -5
I still hate the topic of people being "draws" so much. Eddie was WAY over and sold a crap ton of T-Shirts. What the hell matters more than that? That is drawing power. Drawing power nowadays is more than just show attendance and ticket sales. Drawing power is TV ratings and merchandising and PPV buyrates and all that wonderful stuff. Revenue = drawing power.
|
|
|
Post by The Spelunker! on Aug 18, 2013 17:34:14 GMT -5
I still hate the topic of people being "draws" so much. Eddie was WAY over and sold a crap ton of T-Shirts. What the hell matters more than that? Personally, I think merch sales are a much better indicator of drawing power than ratings or buyrates. If someone's willing to plunk down their 20 bucks for your shirt/action figure/dvd/whatsamjigit, you're drawing income. Especially with people nowadays likely to watch wrestling cause it's wrestling, not because of one guy they like.
|
|