|
Post by shadale on Jan 20, 2007 21:04:33 GMT -5
cena and batista are both draws for their own brands. Though seems like the wrestlers know which fans would be draws for the company should those smark-marks be able to come up with the dough to go train at pro wrestling school, then get into double double e. to help out with the company.
|
|
|
Post by goldenboost on Jan 20, 2007 21:06:23 GMT -5
LOL@Batista LOL @ graph. Nash is greatness
|
|
|
Post by shadale on Jan 20, 2007 21:10:29 GMT -5
Cena is greatness just like his real supporters are.
|
|
|
Post by Doomrider on Jan 20, 2007 21:19:42 GMT -5
Crystal Pepsi
|
|
|
Post by thegame415 on Jan 21, 2007 2:12:36 GMT -5
I feel cena is a bigger draw than bret and hbk....sure, he's a worse wrestler but shawn and bret (throw in nash too) were the main players in WWF from 93-96...the worst years for wwf financially
|
|
|
Post by darthpipes on Jan 21, 2007 2:58:42 GMT -5
I'd put Cena at Bret's level, at least in the United States. Keeping business steady. Bret was bigger than Cena ever will be internationally. Just about everyone is higher than Michaels because the WWF lost $6 million when he was champion.
Bret's top years were 1993, 1994 and 1997. Although he was a major part of the company in 1995 and 1996, Nash and Michaels were top dogs then. Bret was given every mid-carder in 1995 and spent more than half of 1996 away from the WWF.
Savage was a big draw. I've heard that his year as champ in 1988 drew better than Hogan's in 1987. Don't know if that's true or not.
|
|
JMA
Hank Scorpio
Down With Capitalism!
Posts: 6,880
|
Post by JMA on Jan 21, 2007 4:12:52 GMT -5
If we're talking about drawing as World champions:
Hogan - A great draw everywhere. He defined wrestling for his generation.
Austin - Actually did better business than Hogan, but not for the same amount of time.
Bret - A good draw, but not a great one.
HBK - A weak draw as champion (even though he was a great wrestler). He did draw good crowds in San Antonio, though.
Flair - A great draw everywhere EXCEPT the WWF. For whatever reason, WWF fans didn't care for him. But he wasn't there long anyways.
I'd say we're at Bret levels right now.
|
|
|
Post by The Spotlight on Jan 21, 2007 6:02:20 GMT -5
I don't think Cena is drawing anyone.
I'm not one of those Cena bashers but I don't think anyone is watching the show now because they are interested in what John Cena's doing, you are either watching wrestling because you've always watched wrestling, or your being drawn to it because you used to and your just checking it out, or honestly DeGeneration X.
I don't think Batista is a draw at all, he's honestly a thousand times worse than Cena has ever even comtemplated being.
I can compare Cena to Bret in draws as he's just kind of the big WWE star that is keeping things steady.
I'll compare Batista's draw to Ron Simmons in WCW.
|
|
|
Post by Cousin Judge on Jan 21, 2007 6:05:38 GMT -5
Well they cannot be compared to Bret or Warrior or anyone else with whom ratings tanked, because both Batista and Cena have actually drawn more than their immediate predecessors, ironically both HHH. So really they are both the Hogan's/Austin's as far as drawing is concerned although obviously they never drew as much.
|
|
|
Post by Austin's Middle Finger on Jan 21, 2007 9:24:30 GMT -5
At the moment, probably Bret.
But you've really got to give it a few years. I highly doubt he'll be the household name the Hitman became.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2007 9:28:02 GMT -5
They're most like Bret, that is, things are being maintained, but they also help make the other wrestlers look really good because of how bad they are(though Bret was never bad).
|
|