Discussion in 'RAW' started by Crayo, Nov 7, 2013.
Such bs, he is so damn over.
It's just a shame that overness doesn't always equate to being a draw. Ask HBK.
Or Jericho, or to a lesser extent Edge and even Orton (I might even say Batista). All over, but not necessarily draws.
WWE have plenty of corner stones for the next couple of years in guys like Bryan, Rollins, Ambrose, Harper, Cesaro etc. Guys that you build the groundwork of the company with. But they need to find the guy that pulls in the big bucks for the next ten years or so, a new Austin, Rock or Hogan. Apparently Reigns is a guy they hope will become a golden boy but I could also see Langston working to a lesser extent.
There's no shame in Bryan's current status as a top player. He's at the top, just not king of the mountain.
Really don't see the obsession with the bigger guys. Maybe buy rates would have been higher if the card had been better as apart from Punk vs Heyman an Bryan vs Cena the rest wasn't great.
And yet many in the IWC said that Bryan was gonna possibly usher us into a 'new era'.... lol.
In all fairness one buyrate isn't really much to go on, but still, guys the size of Bryan are never gonna be the biggest draws of the company and that's just the reality of it. Bryan is a made man as far as having main event cred goes but honestly, he and Punk would probably get the same treatment that Benoit/Eddie/Jericho/etc. got where they are used mostly in the midcard/upper midcard (with a main event match and/or title win happening only sparingly) if it weren't for the severe lack of star power in the main event these days.
Miz was the host, so it's all his fault.
Reaffirming why I like you
Miz being on the PPV dropped it half way.
If Bryan was a bigger guy he wouldn't have made such a great underdog and people would've been even less interested. A more reasonable explanation for poor buyrates is the fact that SS was his first mainevent championship match with only one month of build up and without even any great story. And after that the story became more about Nose, Show, and vacant, which explains buyrates for Noc and Battleground as well. DB didn't draw, but who would've?
Woah hold up, Vacant is a legend and future hall of famer. Remember, Vacant held both the WWE Championship and TNA championship, at the same time. If anything, he's the best draw of all time.
Vacant is only one WWE Championship victory away from winning the title more times than anybody. He is currently tied with The Rock, HHH and Randy Orton for having already won it eight times.
Vacant marks lol. Face it, the guy's so bland he's practically invisible.
But seriously, you know 99% of the time I blame the build for when a PPV fails. Summerslam was the one show I was wanting to buy (but thanks to the absurd money situation couldn't, thanks @Danielson for buying this one, they earned their money with most of the build), mostly because of the underdog aspect. A new star that the fans love going after John Cena. Great!
For me, what really killed my enjoyment of the build was when they made Triple H the special guest referee, because that changed the entire feeling of the match from "underdog story" to "dammit someone's just gonna get screwed so what's the point in watching". But I can't just blame that, surely everyone didn't feel that way. There's a bunch of different reasons for a bunch of different people.
Where's the heat for Cena for this? In the buildup, a lot of the Bryan/Triple H stuff was designed to get the internet fans interested, while Cena's part of the storyline was more appealing to the casuals who are more likely to buy the show
I choose to look at it like this, without Bryan, the buy rates would have been significantly worse.
I thought the build and everything going into the PPV was fantastic, so I'd be hard-pressed to blame the lower-than-expected buyrate on that. Maybe some disagree, but really, what else could they have done better to build and promote the double main event? The fans chose Daniel Bryan loud and clear (literally) as the guy they wanted to see challenge Cena for the championship. They showcased Brock Lesnar as the indestructible monster and Punk as the "never say die" babyface who was determined at all cost to bring "The Beast" down and defeat him. They crafted a brilliant underdog story for both matches really well. If all of that wasn't enough to get people to order the PPV, then I doubt anything they could have done would have been with these same two matches.
Maybe Bryan being shoved into the main event immediately had something to do with it. Popular or not, he went from wrestling in tag team matches to main eventing with Cena. Maybe audiences didn't buy into Punk as a threat to Lesnar and/or Brock's drawing power is already starting to wane a bit.
Of course, there's the easier way of looking at it, which is dismissing both Bryan and Punk as vanilla midgets. After all, Summerslam 2011 (centered around Punk) did just over 300,000 and this year (centered around Bryan and Punk) did below 300,000. The two lowest Summerslam buyrates since 2004 (which had another vanilla midget, Chris Benoit, in the main event) and before that, 1997.
It's almost futile trying to debate why the PPV flopped. Casual fans can be pretty hard to figure out at times. It was still one of the greatest Summerslam events the WWE ever produced IMO.
HORSE CRAP. D-Bryan being blamed for the low buyrates? Alright Vinnie Mac, I'm callin' you out. You, me, face to face. C'mon. I'm SICK and tired of you blaming him for this and that. Pick on someone your own size OLD MAN. You done hassled the hoff.
MAybe trying to get people who are interested that would free stream a show, rather than pay for it like a mark is part of the problem...
What bigger guy would have brought the buyrates up? That's what I'd like to know.
It's hard to predict. There's no way to know if going with a bigger guy was going to to better. The PPV was built very well, the DB storyline made it great, could've been worse or better with someone else on the ME. No way to know for sure.