Should We Really Care About Ratings?

[Capzaicin]

I was Reading an article earlier today (This one actually) and it got me thinking, why do we care what the ratings are? Why do we care if Raw lost 500,000 veiwers during the tag team title match? Can't we just enjoy the shows?


Thoughts?

[kevin3485]

Well, it depends...for most other TV shows, I'd say the ratings shouldn't matter that much, especially when they're threatening to cancel good shows that don't do well in the ratings, but have a huge following anyway (Community). In that area, the ratings are flawed because we, the viewer, are now able to decide when WE want to watch the show and are not limited to when the network thinks we should watch the show (which is actually part of my theory as to why shitty shows are so popular...because it's fan base doesn't understand that they can watch their show online because watching shows on the computer is still an idea in its infancy). However, even though wrestling is a scripted show just like many other shows, I feel it also runs like a sports program. I don't think many people wait to watch games that have already happened (unless something interesting happened...and then they may just watch the highlights). So for a wrestling company, the ratings are more important than for regular TV, because if you're not convincing people to watch your show when it airs, you're most likely not convincing them to watch it at all.

But how does that relate to us? Not too much actually. There have been several episodes of RAW where I've gone "Wow, that was actually a good episode for once" and the ratings came out and didn't reflect the quality. Now obviously, I'm not going to change my mind on what I thought of the show...but I'm sure WWE is looking at it going "well, CM Punk isn't bringing up ratings...we should probably move him aside for Cena." And that's where the ratings start to affect what we, the viewers, get to see.

And then you have something like TNA...where the ratings have been the same junk for years now (even before Hogan and Bischoff). And all the while people are telling them "we don't want to watch this crap," they ignore us and keep putting out the same s**t over and over and over and over again. A company that just blatantly ignores what its fans are saying, especially when the fans want the product to be better so that there is a true alternative to televised wrestling, reflects badly on the product...and the ratings continue to show that.

[Capzaicin]

kevin3485

Well, it depends...for most other TV shows, I'd say the ratings shouldn't matter that much, especially when they're threatening to cancel good shows that don't do well in the ratings, but have a huge following anyway (Community). In that area, the ratings are flawed because we, the viewer, are now able to decide when WE want to watch the show and are not limited to when the network thinks we should watch the show (which is actually part of my theory as to why shitty shows are so popular...because it's fan base doesn't understand that they can watch their show online because watching shows on the computer is still an idea in its infancy). However, even though wrestling is a scripted show just like many other shows, I feel it also runs like a sports program. I don't think many people wait to watch games that have already happened (unless something interesting happened...and then they may just watch the highlights). So for a wrestling company, the ratings are more important than for regular TV, because if you're not convincing people to watch your show when it airs, you're most likely not convincing them to watch it at all.

But how does that relate to us? Not too much actually. There have been several episodes of RAW where I've gone "Wow, that was actually a good episode for once" and the ratings came out and didn't reflect the quality. Now obviously, I'm not going to change my mind on what I thought of the show...but I'm sure WWE is looking at it going "well, CM Punk isn't bringing up ratings...we should probably move him aside for Cena." And that's where the ratings start to affect what we, the viewers, get to see.

And then you have something like TNA...where the ratings have been the same junk for years now (even before Hogan and Bischoff). And all the while people are telling them "we don't want to watch this crap," they ignore us and keep putting out the same s**t over and over and over and over again. A company that just blatantly ignores what its fans are saying, especially when the fans want the product to be better so that there is a true alternative to televised wrestling, reflects badly on the product...and the ratings continue to show that.

It's like how when Daniel Bryan faced CM Punk and the ratings weren't good so they immediately said "Oh, I guess they don't draw". What I think it is is both TNA and WWE have the fans that watch week in week out regardless, but wrestling as a whole isn't a** popular as it once was.

[IndystarX]

Capzaicin

kevin3485

Well, it depends...for most other TV shows, I'd say the ratings shouldn't matter that much, especially when they're threatening to cancel good shows that don't do well in the ratings, but have a huge following anyway (Community). In that area, the ratings are flawed because we, the viewer, are now able to decide when WE want to watch the show and are not limited to when the network thinks we should watch the show (which is actually part of my theory as to why shitty shows are so popular...because it's fan base doesn't understand that they can watch their show online because watching shows on the computer is still an idea in its infancy). However, even though wrestling is a scripted show just like many other shows, I feel it also runs like a sports program. I don't think many people wait to watch games that have already happened (unless something interesting happened...and then they may just watch the highlights). So for a wrestling company, the ratings are more important than for regular TV, because if you're not convincing people to watch your show when it airs, you're most likely not convincing them to watch it at all.

But how does that relate to us? Not too much actually. There have been several episodes of RAW where I've gone "Wow, that was actually a good episode for once" and the ratings came out and didn't reflect the quality. Now obviously, I'm not going to change my mind on what I thought of the show...but I'm sure WWE is looking at it going "well, CM Punk isn't bringing up ratings...we should probably move him aside for Cena." And that's where the ratings start to affect what we, the viewers, get to see.

And then you have something like TNA...where the ratings have been the same junk for years now (even before Hogan and Bischoff). And all the while people are telling them "we don't want to watch this crap," they ignore us and keep putting out the same s**t over and over and over and over again. A company that just blatantly ignores what its fans are saying, especially when the fans want the product to be better so that there is a true alternative to televised wrestling, reflects badly on the product...and the ratings continue to show that.

It's like how when Daniel Bryan faced CM Punk and the ratings weren't good so they immediately said "Oh, I guess they don't draw".

Bryan vs. Punk didn't get a large gain of ratings but their main did gain I think...little over 250k of fans after the ratings dropped 580k when Randy took on Dolph >.>

[kevin3485]

Capzaicin

kevin3485

It's like how when Daniel Bryan faced CM Punk and the ratings weren't good so they immediately said "Oh, I guess they don't draw". What I think it is is both TNA and WWE have the fans that watch week in week out regardless, but wrestling as a whole isn't as popular as it once was.

Unfortunately, this is true, and I think it goes back to what I was saying about the companies not listening to their fan base. They both stayed the course as ratings slid. WWE was especially bad about it, pointing out that Cena's merch was selling for the excuse to push him, but of course his stuff was selling, he was the only guy they spent any amount of time on. Maybe if they spent a little more time building other guys and listening to the fans, and less time trying to force unwilling fans into a shared belief that Cena is the best wrestler ever, maybe people wouldn't have felt so jilted and tuned them out for the last 6 years.

[Chicago Made Punk]

No.

[Ardell Cotrell]

I don't give a damn about ratings. If the shows are good, then they're good. If they are not, then they are not.

[Capzaicin]

kevin3485

Capzaicin

kevin3485

It's like how when Daniel Bryan faced CM Punk and the ratings weren't good so they immediately said "Oh, I guess they don't draw". What I think it is is both TNA and WWE have the fans that watch week in week out regardless, but wrestling as a whole isn't as popular as it once was.

Unfortunately, this is true, and I think it goes back to what I was saying about the companies not listening to their fan base. They both stayed the course as ratings slid. WWE was especially bad about it, pointing out that Cena's merch was selling for the excuse to push him, but of course his stuff was selling, he was the only guy they spent any amount of time on. Maybe if they spent a little more time building other guys and listening to the fans, and less time trying to force unwilling fans into a shared belief that Cena is the best wrestler ever, maybe people wouldn't have felt so jilted and tuned them out for the last 6 years.

Well look at what they did with Punk, once they started giving him the attention he deserved he was outselling Cena. But hopefully they won't take him out of the main event just because the ratings are as bad as ever.

[AjaxTRP]

Ratings shouldn't matter unless things are getting REALLY bad.

[Juanito Shet]

I don't care about them. But sometimes when I see that RAW got a 3.10 on a fantastic show, I scratch my head. But I really don't take them into consideration whatsoever as a fan.

[Capzaicin]

Juanito Shet

I don't care about them. But sometimes when I see that RAW got a 3.10 on a fantastic show, I scratch my head. But I really don't take them into consideration whatsoever as a fan.

And that's exactly how it should be, we as fans shouldn't care that Raw got a 3.10 or Impact got a 1.2, as long as we enjoy the shows and let the money we spend reflect that, who really gives a ********?

[Juanito Shet]

Capzaicin

Juanito Shet

I don't care about them. But sometimes when I see that RAW got a 3.10 on a fantastic show, I scratch my head. But I really don't take them into consideration whatsoever as a fan.

And that's exactly how it should be, we as fans shouldn't care that Raw got a 3.10 or Impact got a 1.2, as long as we enjoy the shows and let the money we spend reflect that, who really gives a ********]

Pretty much, yeah.

[MysteriousMew]

Ratings do indeed matter in the wrestling business. If ratings are or keep getting low for RAW, Smackdown, TNA's Impact, etc the tv channels (USA Network and Spiketv and Scifi) would pretty much take them off that channel then WWE and TNA would have to find a new network to be on and start a negotiations to have the best time slots etc.

So anyone that says ratings don't matter they indeed do cause if they didn't matter websites wouldn't report on them and people in TNA and WWE wouldn't be pissed about it or play the blame game on a wrestler.

[TheKillShot]

Since neither am I part of the company nor am I a stockholder; No.

ENJOY THE SHOW, SCREW THE RATINGS.