RAW Viewership Rises

Discussion in 'RAW' started by Crayo, Apr 23, 2013.

  1. The breakdown will tell us more, but the constant drop in the third hour is somewhat worrying. Or is it? Three hours is just too much.

  2. Not sure if three hours is too much, I mean I wouldn't mind seeing three hours of quality. I don't think anyone complained about the three hours after the post Mania-Raw ? It just that Raw usually feels like it's six hours long, even the first hour goes by sooooo sloooooow. Basically the show's boring, no one wants to endure three hours of mediocrity.
  3. Even the post mania RAW was too long. 3 hours is the same as a LONG movie, every single week.

    1) They can't generate enough good unique fresh content EVERY week to fill that time, as well as film main event, SmackDown, Superstars, NXT, and all the other shit that WWE does (campaigns, interviews, etc.)

    2) Wrestling shouldn't be so long. Small bundles of entertainment is fantastic, and is why NXT is thriving in WWE. Same with TNA.

    3) Who wants to sit through three hours of television consisting of lots of advertisements? Most three hour movies are too long, and they're ad free, so imagine how bad it is for it to be filled with advertisements every 15 minutess.
    • Like Like x 2
  4. Read my thread about how to watch RAW.
  5. They only came to see The Undertaker. Third hour must go..
  6. I wish WWE would add a 4th hour of Raw, maybe a pre show, or a pre & post show for a total of 5 hours.
    • Like Like x 2
  7. It wouldn't be so bad if WWE didn't have so many damn shows. If it was only Raw, and maybe a second show for one hour it would be so much easier. It's to hard to keep up with WWE since they shove down bad entertainment, and bad storylines down our throats. Yes Shield are doing great, great to see Ziggler champion, Team Hell No are still funny, and glad to have the WWE belt off of Rock, but with Raw+Smackdown+WWE Superstars+Main Event+Saturday Morning Slam+all the youtube videos= to much shitty stuff.
    That is over 8 hours of wrestling a week from one company, and it's not like PWG, this is each week. It's hard to do all this, even 5 hours just seems like to much honestly from one company.
  8. Updated the OP with the RAW rating.
  9. Not sure how much you can blame Smackdown/NXT/SMS/Superstars and whatnot on Raw's quality. NXT and Slam are pretty self-contained with their separate storylines, Superstars is just filler matches. So really all you have to keep up with is Raw and Smackdown, but that's still FIVE FREAKING HOURS if you watch live.

    As deth said you can't just blame the 3 hours as much as bad TV, but much of the show is either badly booked or stuck in a holding pattern. Lets be honest: Is there a way to book 5 hours of TV to where each storyline both entertains AND progresses each and every week? It just seems impossible, but it's certainly worth trying. WWE isn't even trying... ask Mark Henry and Sheamus.

    With the 6-Man Tag out of the way and the typical hour 3 issues it's shocking the drop wasn't bigger. At that point the show was just getting exciting, dammit the most anticipated RAW match in a long, long time was about to come on, but after sitting through that awful first hour that felt like five all I wanted to do was to go to bed.
    Can't imagine what it's like for you Brits, feel sorry for all of you, you're way to dedicated to your "sport"
  10. Good numbers, i'm not the only one that loves wwe i guess :yes:
  11. Always thought three hours was too much. The odd occasion was good for 3 hours but not week in week out.
    • Like Like x 1
  12. ^ Exactly! It was nice when it was a special occasion, but they'll never cut it back if they keep getting numbers like these. Too much ad revenue being made right now.
  13. It's not that they can't create fresh content, it's more so that they won't. Honestly it's the same 3 or 4 feuds getting all the attention and a more thought out rivalry. At the same time the feuds like the ones in the tag division are essentially just matches with no kind of segments that amplify rivalry, just all very basic. I think if they varied from show to show on which rivalries get spotlight then it would be a better show and fresh content would be less of an issue.
  14. Even with new rivalries, the show would still be poor under 3 hours. 3 hours is a large part of the issue, bad booking is another large part as well. Even with TNA's consistency at the moment, I wouldn't want them to go to 3 hours at all.
    • Like Like x 2
  15. That makes me curious...

    The Hulu Plus version of Raw is 2 hours, right? Well, they cut R-Truth/Cesaro, both Tons of Funk/Rhodes Scholars bouts, the recap of Punk's promo, the No One Lives DVD Trailer (shocked about that one) the Kane and D-Bry backstage segment, and the Divas Battle Royal.

    So what's left would be Heyman vs HHH, Ziggler vs Jericho, Big E vs Ryder, BOD and Bryan vs Shield, Fandango vs Regal, the main event segment, backstage stuff with Ryback and Cena... If there isn't a shitload of recaps that looks like a solid Raw tbh. Guess it's an apples and oranges comparison though
    • Like Like x 1
  16. So true. The current roster/main ideas with WWE aren't even bad atm. Badass heel Ryback is good, although I'd prefer tweener. The show being based around Shield is great. Heyman. Brock. It just seems like a 2 hour RAW would be great atm.
  17. WWE can barely provide 3 hours of quality entertainment, but their viewership goes up? #IWCMad
  18. You and Crayo. +Gohan ofc.
  19. Dropped because they wanted to see the Taker match, I suppose. But yeah, three hours is just too much.
  20. Breakdown ratings.
Draft saved Draft deleted