|
|
Post by Next Man’s Yeeter on Jan 27, 2014 20:07:26 GMT -5
Someone has compiled a list of the guys that gain and lose the most viewers on Raw.  Pretty interesting stuff. Author: twitter.com/mookieghana |
|
|
|
Post by HHH316 on Jan 27, 2014 21:36:44 GMT -5
8 of the top 9 spots of last years decline are divas. No real shocker there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Joe/Smurf on Jan 27, 2014 21:47:08 GMT -5
How is Cameron an option? When has she ever appeared in a single match? Whenever she's on it's in one of those horrid ninety Diva tag matches or she's a valet? How can you say she, herself, causes viewership decline? Undertaker shows up like twice a year so of course his numbers are going to be big. I'd say the same about Brock/Rock/etc. Not really a fair way of valuing the stars, but with that being said, pretty obvious what fans REALLY want...  |
|
Jamie
Main Eventer
Joined on: Sept 14, 2013 15:54:23 GMT -5
Posts: 3,380
|
Post by Jamie on Jan 27, 2014 22:22:37 GMT -5
Huh. Very interesting.
All the PEOPLE want, is POWER back in their hands. They want Bryan pushed, they want that People Power. They want John Laurinitas.
#BigJohnny
Johnny Ace would've been the best #30 in Rumble history. I remember when he returned on SmackDown, never have I ever marked out so hard.
|
|
|
|
Post by @Sweetbob on Jan 27, 2014 22:28:32 GMT -5
How is Cameron an option? When has she ever appeared in a single match? Whenever she's on it's in one of those horrid ninety Diva tag matches or she's a valet? How can you say she, herself, causes viewership decline? Undertaker shows up like twice a year so of course his numbers are going to be big. I'd say the same about Brock/Rock/etc. Not really a fair way of valuing the stars, but with that being said, pretty obvious what fans REALLY want... They must have counted every time I turned the channel when Cameron appeared on 'Total Divas' |
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Yeeter on Jan 27, 2014 22:36:03 GMT -5
How is Cameron an option? When has she ever appeared in a single match? Whenever she's on it's in one of those horrid ninety Diva tag matches or she's a valet? How can you say she, herself, causes viewership decline? That's a good point. Did she do a segment by herself at some point last year? |
|
Hunter393
Superstar
Joined on: May 9, 2006 11:58:29 GMT -5
Posts: 619
|
Post by Hunter393 on Jan 27, 2014 22:50:40 GMT -5
So is it roughly safe to say that this is why we don't see Daniel Bryan as champ or in a higher position? I mean not even making the top 10 of 2013 biggest viewing draws I don't think bodes well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Duck Holliday on Jan 27, 2014 23:02:56 GMT -5
So is it roughly safe to say that this is why we don't see Daniel Bryan as champ or in a higher position? I mean not even making the top 10 of 2013 biggest viewing draws I don't think bodes well. If we assume these numbers are accurate.. which I don't know that they are, then with Randy @ 20 being champ wouldn't jive with this conclusion. |
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Yeeter on Jan 27, 2014 23:07:54 GMT -5
So is it roughly safe to say that this is why we don't see Daniel Bryan as champ or in a higher position? I mean not even making the top 10 of 2013 biggest viewing draws I don't think bodes well. To some extent, yes. It wouldn't matter if he was the golden boy like Orton -- but he's not. |
|
|
|
Post by The Yes Man on Jan 27, 2014 23:17:45 GMT -5
Another factor should be if they KEEP watching when they see someone, instead of just one or the other.
Let's say there are 3 million watching, Orton comes on and they gain 10,000 viewers. Divas are on next and they lose 100,000 people.
Then after that is a Dolph match and they gain 50,000 back. Dolph had a bigger gain, but more people were watching Orton.
|
|
|
|
Post by Duck Holliday on Jan 27, 2014 23:21:19 GMT -5
Haha... well, we could also infer that Kane should get 1/3 the screen time that Brad Maddox gets or 1/5 the time that Vickie gets. And Seth Rollins should be pushed more because he edges out Reigns.
The numbers are interesting... and yeah if accurate you might be able to divine some knowledge from them, but I wouldn't take them too too seriously.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 18, 2024 8:47:56 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2014 23:23:43 GMT -5
How exactly is this measured?
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 18, 2024 8:47:56 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2014 23:26:42 GMT -5
Just noticed Dolph Ziggler is on zero of the lists.....ummmmmm how is that possible
|
|
|
|
Post by The Yes Man on Jan 27, 2014 23:33:45 GMT -5
Just noticed Dolph Ziggler is on zero of the lists.....ummmmmm how is that possible It means that people just leave the TV alone when they see Ziggler. |
|
|
|
Post by Lorenzo Alcazar on Jan 27, 2014 23:38:07 GMT -5
HAHAHAHA Brad Maddox draws more viewers than Daniel Bryan!!
|
|
|
|
Post by ASR (therockisback) on Jan 27, 2014 23:44:25 GMT -5
In 2011 Heel R Truth made it in the top 10? Turn that guy heel asap.
|
|
|
|
Post by HVMMONS on Jan 27, 2014 23:46:03 GMT -5
How exactly is this measured? I'm wondering the exact same thing |
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 18, 2024 8:47:56 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2014 23:47:22 GMT -5
HAHAHAHA Brad Maddox draws more viewers than Daniel Bryan!! That's how you know this list is probably bullsh+t |
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Yeeter on Jan 27, 2014 23:49:01 GMT -5
How exactly is this measured? From quarterly data ie Q1: Raw opened above-average with a 2.03 rating for C.M. Punk vs. Luke Harper and one mid-match commercial. Q2: Raw stayed above-average with a 2.04 rating for Punk-Wyatts post-match activity, one commercial, and non-wrestling segments following up on the open. The post-match activity peaked with 1.571 million viewers at 8:16 p.m., which was the most-watched portion of the entire show. Q3: Raw dropped to a 1.88 rating for Ryback vs. Great Khali, one commercial, and the first-half of Alberto Del Rio vs. Kofi Kingston. Q4: Raw was about the same with a 1.89 rating for the end of Del Rio-Kofi, one commercial, and Randy Orton introduced for a talking and match segment. Q5: Raw got a top-of-the-hour bump to a 2.04 rating for Orton's "Ravishing Rick Rude" promo, match with Big E. Langston, and one mid-match commercial. Q6: Raw stayed above-average with a 2.00 rating for talking segments, one commercial, and Tyson Kidd's return match teaming with Natalya against Fandango and Summer Rae. Q7: Raw dropped off to a 1.86 rating for more video reviews of WWE: Law & Order, John Cena's in-ring promo, and one commercial. Q8: Raw fell to a 1.78 rating for the first-half of the Cena & Rhodes vs. Real Sandows six-man tag, plus one commercial. Q9: Raw jumped 16 percent at the top of the hour to a 2.06 rating for the end of the six-man tag, one commercial, and a few minutes of WWE: Law & Order that set up a third hour slide. Q10: Raw fell 16 percent to a show-low 1.74 rating for Curtis Axel vs. Dolph Ziggler, one commercial, and more legal business backstage. Q11: Raw was about the same with a 1.75 rating for The Usos vs. 3MB, one commercial, and a Divas tag match. Q12: Raw remained well below-average with a 1.81 rating for the first-half of the Big Show-Triple H lawsuit angle and two commercial breaks, including the awkward final commercial before the top of the hour. Over-Run: Raw finished with a 2.23 rating for an 11-minute over-run segment concluding WWE: Law & Order. |
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Jan 28, 2014 0:23:25 GMT -5
Not really that relevant imo because it doesn't truly paint any kind of picture of who everyone wants to see every single week. Like for instance, Brock's segments are far fewer than someone like Kofi Kingston. I wouldn't argue that Brock is someone who gains more viewers than Kofi, but if Kofi has 40 odd segments a year, versus undoubtedly a variety of opponents we've seen him face previously, compared to Brock showing up a half dozen times leading into a bigger PPV match, then how are we to accurately gauge those two scenarios? That's just not very comparable. Which is, I think, how you explain anomalies like Vickie and Maddox, or maybe it's because those characters only show up in announcement situations, meaning y variable situations.
It's great someone put this together, but it's statistically flawed. I can think of about a dozen formulas you would need to write based on variable data to make this even close to accurate. Was it a talking segment, was it a brawling segment, who was in the ring with said superstar, who was the superstar's opponent, was a segment or match part of an angle or story, was said segment leading into a PPV. I mean it's extremely complicated and not something anyone should just take at face value. There isn't a person on this forum that is going to convince me that Curtis Axel is a top 20 ratings draw on the WWE roster, it's just not going to happen. So I look at Axel, and Ryback, and question how much of Heyman's influence impacted that ratings number. You would need to compare Ryback and Axel independently versus their gain or loss when Heyman was at ringside. Speaking of Heyman, we have to look at his involvement with Punk and Brock and the opponents they faced, like Rock and Undertaker, Triple H and Cena. Tons of variables.
I wouldn't call this an analysis. It appears to me that someone just did addition and subtraction on the Nielson breakdowns that are posted each week. If you created a regression with this information, based on a set of variables accurate to a wrestler, you could use past data to optimize viewership. So for instance, if Dolph Ziggler vs Randy Orton historically gains an average of 86,000 viewers, but Orton vs Kofi only gains 52,000 viewers, then you can put Dolph vs Orton in the main event of Raw knowing that "X (being your variable multiplier for the main event segment of Raw) times 86,000 will equal your main event bump at the end of Raw. I don't think that's a very good way to do it because you react to data and WWE desperately needs to create new data spikes, but that's what that information would be good for imo.
|
|
