Comments on: WWE Raw Rating Plummets Going Into SummerSlam

By: Kevin

Kevin — Thu, 16 Aug 2012 19:34:10 +0000

Wow! I was thinking they hovered around 3.0 during the 2-hour era. 2.84 is a bad number for Raw. Do you think now that they've done their 3rd permanent 3-hour show (2nd one since the 1000th episode special), the new is already wearing off, and people just aren't willing to spend 3 hours of their life watching wrestling, even though it is the WWE?

By: Jeremiah

Jeremiah — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 22:05:16 +0000

Sure didn't take long for this to happen!

By: Evon Reese

Evon Reese — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 20:15:03 +0000

If there were Stone Colds, Undertakers, HBK and Rocks it would help their ratings instead of a bunch that is almost there and can't get all the way there because they don't know how and think it should be left up to writers and the company to make them. Then their ratings would improve. They lack the ability to evolve their characters once they get to a certain point and become stale.

By: Mike Gilreath

Mike Gilreath — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 15:46:03 +0000

It is still a 2 hour show being stretched to 3 hours. I think in new format they actually have less wrestling. They recap the last few weeks, then recap earlier events. The writing and use of talent is horrible currently!

By: Demolition

Demolition — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 12:01:02 +0000

Anyone want to first dibs at the Landau profile pic?

By: Guy Landau

Guy Landau — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 11:21:54 +0000

Hey Richard, how long before you can get your hands on the hourly rating? Personally, I think that's the most revealing of how the show actually did.

By: Slade6alpha

Slade6alpha — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 06:41:28 +0000

Wow, WWE thinks this is bad, just wait until football season begins. 3 Hours was a mistake. The problem with WWE is that they NEVER and I mean Never think long term success. For them it's all about instant gratification. Yes, the 1000 RAW did a great rating, but that will be the highlight for years to come. It was special, the one after that was a miss. 3 hours is just too much. Yes, there will come a time when sometimes they put on a good show, but most of the times people will flip the channel. WWE should cut their loses and go back to 2 hours before the end of the year. It's the smart decision, unless they signed some agreement with USA Network. Sorry for this rant.

By: Wwe4L76

Wwe4L76 — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 05:16:07 +0000

Agree. Right now wwe suck balls

By: Wwe4L76

Wwe4L76 — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 05:13:09 +0000

Worlds worst entertainment so true!

By: The arbiter

The arbiter — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 03:02:22 +0000

I never ever watch Raw as soon as it screens anymore. Normally I wait until its half way through so I can fast forward the recaps/touts/adverts and filler. With all the junk in the show I can normally catch up to the "live" time around the main event.

By: Eric44

Eric44 — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 02:50:03 +0000

I really wish the attitude era came back. The PG era ratings are so suckish. I only watch interesting parts and it’s so amazing how wrestling has changed over the years.

By: craig

craig — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 02:25:25 +0000

nfl plus horrible show to try and sit through (being 3 hours) leads to this. Wait until the nfl doubleheader in a few weeks that starts on mnf at 7pm

By: PFElton

PFElton — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 02:21:19 +0000

Don't say that too loud. The McMahononites in here will have you know that their god-chairman is incapable of mistakes. When things don't go right for World's Worst Entertainment, it's definitely someone else's fault.

By: Yanman

Yanman — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 02:16:43 +0000

Raw should be 2 hours, Smackdown to another network or scaled back to 1 hour. Bring back Sunday Night Heat for 1 hour on USA. Possibly a Saturday morning recap show with like 3 matches for the kids.

By: James M>>>

James M>>> — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 02:04:50 +0000

I’d imagine its troubling for wwe to see that it’s hard to keep people super excited and tuned in for 7-9 hours a week, when they’re trying to get people to stay interested 168 hours a week.

By: Ronni

Ronni — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 02:04:49 +0000

Im sure the info here is legit.

By: James M>>>

James M>>> — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 02:04:12 +0000

I’d imagine it’s troubling for wwe to see that it’s hard to keep people super excited and tuned in for 7-9 hours a week, when they’re trying to get people to stay interested 168 hours a week.

By: James M>>>

James M>>> — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 01:59:17 +0000

As i understand it, it depends on time slot and how many viewers are actually watching tv at the time. A point doesnt always equate 1 for 1 or 4 for for, and so on. So one night, a 5.0 might equal 5.5 mil voters, but another night it less people are watching in total, a 5.0 might equal 5.7 mil viewers. I don’t know, does anyone know if that’s right?

By: David

David — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 01:56:56 +0000

The reason it went down is simple. The NFL is back, preseaon or not, the USA is going to watch football.

By: Big D

Big D — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 01:44:48 +0000

So, Pauly D ruins yet another network.

By: Dave Barton

Dave Barton — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 01:36:30 +0000

Is a difference of 0.09 really a plummet? I've never really understood the scale for ratings…

By: Todd

Todd — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 01:27:44 +0000

I have to disagree, but then again I watch raw on DvR and come back to it. So I am kind of digging this new 3 hour show

By: TheAwesome1

TheAwesome1 — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 01:19:32 +0000

I agree. It's not that the show is bad, but 3 hours of a program becomes unbearable. I enjoyed RAW last night, however, I was gasping for air when it was over.

By: Kleck

Kleck — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 01:16:35 +0000

These ratings really boggle my mind. Some reports have a 3.0+ with anywhere 4.0-4.5 mil. This reports has 2.84 with an average of 4.1 mil. I have been simply looking at the millions of viewers of late. I don’t understand the rating system in total.

By: Aldin94

Aldin94 — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 01:16:06 +0000

That’s an “Ouch” for WWE.

By: AnacondaVise

AnacondaVise — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 01:12:27 +0000

Going to 3 hours was such a huge mistake.