Skip to main content

WWE TV Questions for the Blog

I was thinking about a few things with all that has been going on with the ratings decline:
  1. At what point does USA say, "That's It" and WWE gets moved to another Comcast owned network.  To tell you the truth with everything that is on with the USA network, WWE does not fit in anymore.  I keep thinking in my head its only a matter of time before the move to G4.  Personally I am not surprised that is where Smackdown ended up when CW ended the show.  
  1. With above in mind and the WWE Network starting (lets just say it does) when does WWE pull their stuff from USA and go all WWE Net. 
  1. When the WWE Network goes on and lets say WWE Raw and Smackdown are on, what does WWE Network do?  The NFL Network, does not show programming when NFL games are on, would they be stupid enough to show a late 90s Raw against its own product. Could it be possible a 90s Raw or Nitro rerun get better ratings against the current product.
Gmail reformatted your list so that every question is now equally important.  That wacky Google.

Anyway:

1.  The trumpeting of RAW and Smackdown's longevity does conveniently ignore that both shows have been cancelled multiple times, and could be again.  The whole idea of the Network is to provide a safety net against that happening, especially if USA turns into a Jamie Kellner situation where WWE is suddenly an outcast and gets turfed.  Seems fairly unlikely, but then so did cancelling Nitro and Thunder in 2001.  You'd have to think it'll be a long time before USA gets tired of WWE, though, given their addition of a third hour at USA's request, because it certainly wasn't WWE's idea.  

1.  When they get kicked off regular cable kicking and screaming like Jericho in 2005.  The WWE Network is a gigantic hail mary pass attempt, make no mistake, and you have to know that even Vince isn't crazy enough to move all his programming there unless he's forced at gunpoint.

1.  I don't see anything on that network getting a better rating than anything, just because it's going to have zero clearance when it launches.  If it ever actually comes to pass, we'll get hours of old Mid-Atlantic tapes and Divas Road Trip or whatever the fuck stupid show they come up with, and maybe the pre-produced YouTube videos formatted into a half-hour show that costs nothing.  It'll just be another version of Classics On Demand, except not on Demand, and I can't possibly foresee anything of interest on that channel to anyone but hardcore nerds like me who would sit up all day watching old Mid-Atlantic tapes.  But since it's never launching in the first place, I doubt we'll ever have to deal with that problem anyway.  

Comments

  1.  I don't remember Raw ever being cancelled.  If anything, there was the slightest of bidding wars between TNN/Spike and USA the two times it switched over (and one of the sticking points the first time around was the 4-5 times per year Raw was pre-empted...hardly talk of cancellation).  Smackdown, on the other hand... shrug. 

    While I think Smackdown could be considered expendable by most cable networks, Raw does still pull down impressive cable numbers in an era of dwindling numbers and exponentially growing options.

    With that being said, I don't think Raw ever goes exclusively to WWE TV.  It doesn't make economic or logical sense.  WWE would have to be in ROH dire straits to go that route.  I'm not sure about the long term health of Raw, but the short term is still okay.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I actually forget- why DID RAW leave Spike for USA again? Do they still have to go off the air for the Westminster Dog Show (you know what's REALLY pathetic? I now look forward to that show a hundred times more than RAW these days- dog breeds are cool and RAW stinks)? They made this big deal out of being central to Spike's new pogramming, though USA fired it's head of programming for bungling the RAW thing, so it's obvious they'd want the WWF back.

    ReplyDelete
  3. WWE Network has to come to fruition if for no other reason than we all need more KEITH LARSON (!) in our lives..

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bf1o2wYbezg

    ReplyDelete
  4. USA isn't getting rid of RAW. It's still getting strong, and more importantly, reliable ratings for the network. It places top-10 among cable shows every week and USA can basically coast on RAW, its original slate of shows, and NCIS/L&O repeats to the #1 cable network slot every year. Plus, it absolutely fits the network. This isn't a CW situation where you have a wrestling show on a network that primarily is aimed at females; when USA adopted the "Characters Welcome" tagline, it heavily used WWE wrestlers as part of it along with the characters from the rest of their TV slate for the advertising campaign (remember Anthony Michael Hall foreseeing HHH's sunburn?). Also, RAW is a legacy show for USA going all the way back to the mid-90s; this would presume a healthy relationship between the WWE and the network.

    And finally, no, Vince is not going to yank his flagship show off a prime cable slot, esp. when the network is equally happy. I don't usually like to rag on what other people put forth.....but yeah, this smacks of "I'm going to assume RAW is tanking because I don't like it" instead of actually putting serious logical thought into the question.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I've started to peek into the WDS every now and then when it's on, out of a curiosity stemming from "Best in Show", which is a fucking hilarious movie. Fred Willard is gold in that movie.

    Speaking of funny people, got to check out Steve Martin and his banjo bluegrass band tonight. Absolutely worth the $70 I paid; it's fucking Steve Martin!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Trick question: Which will be released first?

    A: The Ultimate Warrior tell-all book that was supposed to come out a year ago,

    B: The Red Dawn remake that was supposed to come out two years ago, or

    C: The WWE Network that was supposed to come out on April 1st, which WWE tried to deny even though the commercial is readily available to watch on YouTube?

    ReplyDelete
  7. B. Trailer got released a couple of weeks ago and is set to be out this winter. Hopefully, the flopping failures of Total Recall and this will give Hollywood the message that I don't like people fucking with my childhood movies.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yeah, you know Hollywood has royally screwed up when they can't even make a movie with two actresses as hot as Jessica Biel and Kate Beckinsale watchable.

    I mean, Biel AND Beckinsale in the same movie, that's pretty unfuckupable and somehow they proceeded to screw it up. Still think The Three Stooges will win Worst Picture by a landslide, though.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Agreed, USA is pretty much the cable equivalent of CBS, which I guess means RAW is the USA version of Two And A Half Men.

    CBS and USA both have a lot of great highly rated shows: In CBS' case, The Mentalist, Person Of Interest, Flashpoint (gone now, but great while it lasted), Blue Bloods, The Good Wife and the various NCIS/CSI shows, among others.

    In USA's case, White Collar, Covert Affairs, Burn Notice, Royal Pains, Suits and Psych.

    But both networks have that one shitty yet inexplicably highly-rated show that sticks out like a sore thumb: In CBS' case it's Two And A Half Men and in USA's case it's the show that traded in a shitty Nickelback song for an even shitter autotune theme, Monday Night RAW.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I so envy you for getting to see the awesomeness of Steve Martin live and in person. The show must have been seriously good.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Flashpoint got the boot? Too bad, I enjoyed seeing the Pink Ranger in current times. 

    ReplyDelete
  12. Well CBS didn't actually produce the show per se, but rather CTV in Canada produced it. CBS only had the US rights to the series. CTV decided to pull the plug on the show, so blame them for that one.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Yeah, RAW has never been cancelled. Smackdown on the other hand has been cancelled three times so far.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I guess you can never say never, but I will be pretty shocked if it ever gets cancelled. I am sure it will happen someday as no show lasts forever, but I don't think it will come simultaneously with the WWE going out of business or anything like that.

    If the ratings do drop low enough, I imagine they'll give the format a major overhaul, just like they did when PTW saw its ratings do dangerously low levels. It is weird to think how long RAW has had basically the same look and conventions since 1993 and 1997.

    ReplyDelete
  15. "duke duke duke, duke of earl earl earl"

    ReplyDelete
  16. It's pretty funny to think that when Raw jumped back to USA, it was USA's top-rated show instantly. Now there's probably a handful of shows, starting w/ Burn Notice & White Collar, that probably get better ratings now.

    I actually think Raw fits the demographic of USA really well - parents watch wrestling too.

    The WWE Network is NEVER happening. Time Warner is still fighting with the NFL. The NFL! Would they even take Vince's call about adding a WWE Network?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Despite the drop from historical highs, is it not true that RAW still draws a decent, and solid rating?

    I have no idea what average ratings are, but that was always my understanding.  I don't think that it's going anywhere any time soon.

    ReplyDelete
  18. That's not being cancelled. Canceling is done by the production company, not the network.

    ReplyDelete
  19. It does good enough numbers. For the week it is normally top 20, with one of the hours in the top 10 a lot of the time.

    I think the danger for them is similar to that of soap operas -- it isn't cheap programming to put on. USA's portion of financial responsibility for the program could create a problem if ratings continue to stagnate or fall -- it may still get decent ratings, but some reality show might cost 50% less even with slightly lower ratings.

    Still, I don't think the network has the mindset that it is doing more harm than good, but if ratings drop or an extended period, it'll certainly put that relationship to the test.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Pretty sure burn notice and white collar are not exactly in Seinfeld territory.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Nobody's in Seinfeld territory anymore.  The TV audience is very fractured.  A successful cable TV show still on average has a much smaller audience than a network show, and even the best cable TV shows have a niche audience.   

    ReplyDelete
  22. Ratings aren't always the whole story.   You want high ratings because advertisers will pay more to advertise in highly rated shows.  But wrestling does have a stigma, and it's not always easy to get advertisers to be interested no matter what the ratings are.  I remember Bischoff talking about that when Nitro was on the air, and how he considered it a big deal to get Snickers to advertise during WCW programming.

    The other issue can be how advertising revenue is split between USA and WWE. Wasn't that the issue that caused WWE to go to Spike several years ago? 

    Obviously that's not the case now if USA wants a third hour, but there's sometimes more going on than just ratings.  Of course, the higher the ratings the more clout and influence the WWE has when dealing with USA, but they're not the only factor.   

    ReplyDelete
  23. Yeah I am sure the decisions about these sorts of things are never simple unless there are no bright spots at all such as unique demographics.

    I am sure USA has all factors boiled down into a giant formula to make an assessment about a show, of which the WWE is well aware of.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I think CBS gave them a sweet deal to move everything over.  Which included, moving all programming and securing Smackdown's spot on UPN.

    ReplyDelete
  25.  Excellent observation.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Thanks! Wish I could return the compliment.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Thanks! Wish I could return the compliment.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Wwe doesn't have the advertising stigma that it had during the attitude era. That's no longer an issue.

    ReplyDelete
  29. All very good points, and I hadn't really considered the reality juggernaut.

    ReplyDelete
  30.  while they advertisers are less worried about "naughty" stuff, wrestling still has the stigma of toothless hillbillies.  I have talked to a couple of ad execs on another board and they confirm that fact.  wrestling struggles to get "fair market value" on advertising that an otherwise similarly rated show would get.  The audience isn't seen as prestigious or affluent.  Personally I think the advertisers are missing the boat a boat.  First because I know wrestling fans aren't nearly as bad as the stereotypes, but second, because with all the kids and the smarks, it's a very pure audience demographically, so stuff like video games, candy, etc. should be thrilled to advertise and not be wasting their ad dollars on 90% of the audience. 

    ReplyDelete
  31.  here is a site that will give you all the ratings.  For the most recent week, Burn Notice beat all three hours of Raw, while one hour of Raw beat Suits.  All three hours of Raw were top 11.  You can go back to previous weeks as well and look at network ratings.  based on ratings alone, WWE doesn't look to be in trouble.  But as has been noted, demographics matter, production costs matter, and profitability matter.  If they could put something on for 1/4 of the cost that got 3/4 of the ratings, they would.  It's why "reality" (read as scripted for gullible folks who think it is unscripted) TV has taken over so many stations.  It's cheap as hell to make.  Due to contracts, not only is the talent not paid union wages, the crews don't have to be to, on top of the miniscule production costs compared to a true scripted drama or sitcom.

    Here is the link:

    http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2012/08/28/cable-top-25-major-crimes-tops-cable-viewership-for-the-week-ending-august-26-2012/146470/

    ReplyDelete
  32. Christopher HirschAugust 29, 2012 at 8:49 AM

    I'm all sorts of confused. When have RAW or Smackdown ever been cancelled? They switched networks, that's not getting cancelled.

    Also, in what universe is Smackdown on G4?

    RAW gives USA some of its highest ratings and fits into their whole "Characters welcome" theme. This email made no sense.

    ReplyDelete
  33.   here is a site that will give you all the ratings.  For the most recent week, Burn Notice beat all three hours of Raw, while one hour of Raw beat Suits.  All three hours of Raw were top 11.  You can go back to previous weeks as well and look at network ratings.  based on ratings alone, WWE doesn't look to be in trouble.  But as has been noted, demographics matter, production costs matter, and profitability matter.  If they could put something on for 1/4 of the cost that got 3/4 of the ratings, they would.  It's why "reality" (read as scripted for gullible folks who think it is unscripted) TV has taken over so many stations.  It's cheap as hell to make.  Due to contracts, not only is the talent not paid union wages, the crews don't have to be too, on top of the miniscule production costs compared to a true scripted drama or sitcom.

    Here is the link:

    http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2012/08/28/cable-top-25-major-crimes-tops-cable-viewership-for-the-week-ending-august-26-2012/146470/

    ReplyDelete
  34. Please explain your statement that RAW was cancelled multiple times. 

    ReplyDelete
  35. Yeah, It is not surprising at all, that has and probably will always be the stigma of pro-wrestling

    ReplyDelete
  36.   here is a site that will give you all the ratings.  For the most recent week, Burn Notice beat all three hours of Raw, while one hour of Raw beat Suits.  All three hours of Raw were top 11.  You can go back to previous weeks as well and look at network ratings.  based on ratings alone, WWE doesn't look to be in trouble.  But as has been noted, demographics matter, production costs matter, and profitability matter.  If they could put something on for 1/4 of the cost that got 3/4 of the ratings, they would.  It's why "reality" (read as scripted for gullible folks who think it is unscripted) TV has taken over so many stations.  It's cheap as hell to make.  Due to contracts, not only is the talent not paid union wages, the crews don't have to be too, on top of the miniscule production costs compared to a true scripted drama or sitcom.

    Here is the link:

    http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2012/08/28/cable-top-25-major-crimes-tops-cable-viewership-for-the-week-ending-august-26-2012/146470/

    ReplyDelete
  37.   here is a site that will give you all the ratings.  For the most recent week, Burn Notice beat all three hours of Raw, while one hour of Raw beat Suits.  All three hours of Raw were top 11.  You can go back to previous weeks as well and look at network ratings.  based on ratings alone, WWE doesn't look to be in trouble.  But as has been noted, demographics matter, production costs matter, and profitability matter.  If they could put something on for 1/4 of the cost that got 3/4 of the ratings, they would.  It's why "reality" (read as scripted for gullible folks who think it is unscripted) TV has taken over so many stations.  It's cheap as hell to make.  Due to contracts, not only is the talent not paid union wages, the crews don't have to be too, on top of the miniscule production costs compared to a true scripted drama or sitcom.

    Here is the link:


    Well since we can't post any links apparently, my post keeps disappearing.  Just google cable nielsen ratings and choose the tv by the numbers zap2it site.  it's all there.

    ReplyDelete
  38. As a rule of thumb, the answer to any "are they stupid enough to...." question is yes.

     

    ReplyDelete
  39. I'm pretty sure Raw jumped networks by choice, although I'm not sure how interested Spike was to retain Raw once UFC got hot. Smackdown may have been dropped by a network, which could count as cancelling I suppose.

    ReplyDelete
  40. I don't like this post. It needs more HHH.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Yeah as I recall, USA was pretty tight lipped about the whole thing, but the deal fell apart over the XFL -- USA didn't want to have anything to do with the project and plus the WWFs ratings were high enough that they thought they could make huge money by getting the XFL on a broadcast network and continuing the USA deal didn't offer them any leverage as far as that went.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Exactly. I don't know what it would take (read: nothing) to shift wrestling from lowbrow to highbrow.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Honestly, I tried watching the original Red Dawn, the acting was so terrible I could barely make it through the first half hour.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Uh no, the network definitely cancels shows.  The production company can choose to keep making them and try to shop them elsewhere (like what happened with Scrubs) but it's the network's decision what happens to them.  And officially, RAW was cancelled by USA and then by Spike.  It might be considered semantics, but WWE loves to deal in those when it's on their side.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Plus at that time NBC did not own USA so they had no influence like they did when WWE programming came back.  

    ReplyDelete
  46. Scott's definitely right. If it wasn't the network's decision to cancel a show, then explain why Lone Star was dropped after only one episode even though the production company had made six episodes and were obviously expecting the show to last much longer than six episodes.

    Pretty sure that cancellation was 100% FOX's doing and not the production company's.

    ReplyDelete
  47. I was the one who asked the question, but what I was referring to was Smackdown on G4 makes more since than Smackdown on SyFy.  Based off the content and the target audience. It would have also been a smart thing to do to be able to push other non-Comcast/NBC providers to get G4 HD.  

    ReplyDelete
  48. I don't think you guys understand what canceling means. It doesn't mean the show is no longer broadcast, it means it's no longer being made. By your argument, ABC cancelled Monday night football. I assure you, that was not the case.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Time Warner are major league douchebags for refusing to carry the NFL Network, as well as refusing to carry Epix which is merely the hottest and best movie channel going today.
    DirecTV isn't any better in that regard.
    Fuck them and their ridiculous prices.
    And they wonder why people are dumping cable and DirecTV for the Roku and Google TV.

    ReplyDelete
  50. ABC absolutely cancelled it.  It was on the schedule, now it's not.  The show was cancelled and is now being aired on a different network.

    ReplyDelete
  51. They announced a new deal with TNN in 2000, and USA cancelled the show and stopped airing it as a result.  Then when WWE signed a new deal with USA in 2005, Spike cancelled the show off their network.  In fact, if you REALLY want to get pedantic, RAW is actually a series of shorter-running shows that happen to share the same timeslot and production company.  The show has actually changed official production titles several times. 

    ReplyDelete
  52. Yeah, I'm thinking you and tv execs see that a tad differently. Just a guess.

    ReplyDelete
  53. I wonder what the episode count using that logic if you factor in PrimeTime Wrestling as being episodes of Raw.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Actually, Scott's right. Ratings for MNF were at an all-time low so it wasn't exactly considered a hot property by ABC anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Yeah wasn't the official name "RAW Supershow" for almost a year?
    And technically from 1997-2009, it was two one-hour shows (The first hour was RAW and the second hour was War Zone until late 2001 when the name of the second hour was changed to RAW Zone, not sure why the name of the second hour was changed).

    ReplyDelete
  56. Hot enough that they got offered like 3 times as much to move it to NBC. Seriously, you guys are nuts.

    ReplyDelete
  57. I think it just comes down to terminology.

    Im no tv exec, but i see where both sides are coming from.

    A show gets get cancelled off of a network, and then picked up, its still cancelled. it just got picked up by another network.

    If FOX cancelled Futurama. IT got picked up by CN in  (for?) sydication, but then CC picked up it for new seasons.

    Still cancelled though.

    ReplyDelete
  58. 9/11 caused them to drop the Raw is War and Warzone names from the programming.

    ReplyDelete
  59. You are correct.  The WAR/RAW Zone thing was due to considerations over 9/11, I'm pretty sure.

    ReplyDelete
  60. the chick with 3 tits was covered.

    no buys.

    ReplyDelete
  61. "Cancellation" as a technical term has nothing to do with ratings or popularity.  A show being removed from the network schedule is CANCELLED. Period.

    ReplyDelete
  62. That was Sunday Night Football that got moved to NBC, that series was definitely still getting strong ratings while Monday Night Football ratings were at an all-time low because they were giving viewers drek like Jets vs. Browns.
    Nice try trolling there, but it's not the same show.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Raw can't possibly be as profitable as USA's in house programming. They have a pretty extensive library of shows now that they can replay cheaply over and over or license out in other ways such as DVD, Netflix, and Hulu.

    I'm personally surprised WWE and USA have never worked out a deal to get an encore Raw showing somewhere on the NBC family of networks. The show is already in the can so you might as well use it to fill time on NBC Sports on a late Saturday evening. It'd certainly outdraw whatever else they have on.

    ReplyDelete
  64. No. They stopped making futurama. It was cancelled.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Thanks, just now remembered that. Smart move to do that even though it also meant the end of the awesome Kaientai "We're EVIL! Indeed!" shtick.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Not to mention the brief phase where Prime Time was 90 minutes while "The Bobby Heenan Show" took up the remaining 30 minutes.

    ReplyDelete
  67. You are totally incorrect here. The contract for a broadcast high profile prime time football game ran out with abc and was established with NBC. For like three times as much money. The Sunday night football game on Espn was then moved to Monday, also for a lot more money. Are you now trying to claim that every time a show moves time slot, it's cancelled?

    ReplyDelete
  68. They air Raw and Smackdown on Universal HD on Saturday or Sunday.

    ReplyDelete
  69. I'm telling you that a show being discontinued due to poor ratings and a show changing networks and being given a shit-ton of money to do so is not even remotely the same thing.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Christopher HirschAugust 29, 2012 at 11:53 AM

    And Brock jobbing to Triple H at SummerSlam!

    ReplyDelete
  71. i agree.

    fox the network cancelled the series.
    comedy central picked it back up a couple of years later. they also made new eps.

    ReplyDelete
  72. I finished it because A) I'm a man and B) I love shitty movies.

    The best part was Patrick Swayze and Charlie Sheen being brothers.

    ReplyDelete
  73. I just want to see how narrow this gets.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Maybe if they do get this WWE Network off the ground they can give him an hour long weekly show to talk about how great he is and all the people he's beaten. It would save us from having to sit through it on Raw at least. At this point I'd be fine with them just announcing that Triple H is better than Brock Lesnar and having us sign something to acknowledge we believe it than having to sit through six months of them acting it out.

    ReplyDelete
  75.  MNF would be a completely different animal than this argument (which I agree with Dougie).  ABC MOVED MNF to another of their Disney owned networks in ESPN.  I can't call that a cancellation even by the rules some are claiming Raw was "cancelled."

    ReplyDelete
  76. I want to see how much longer Scott puts up with Dougie. Pretty sure he's getting banned if he keeps arguing with Scott.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Damien Sandow in the main event, obviously!

    ReplyDelete
  78. There is some amazing leaps in this thread. Apparently, every time a show changes networks, length or time slot, it has been cancelled. Which means that most shows are cancelled multiple times per year.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Sounds like semantics to me. It's not uncommon for shows to switch Networks, and RAW was never off the air during those times.

    And it's always been the same show, they've just branded it differently over the years. Aqua Teen Hunger Force has done the same thing.

    ReplyDelete
  80. As I said elsewhere, yes, totally semantics.  But WWE loves to use semantics to make their ratings look more impressive, so I'm just using them in the opposite way.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Yeah...Raw hasn't missed a week, ever, since it started in '93, I believe. We may make fun of "longest continuously running episodic blah blah blah" but it certainly hasn't ever been cancelled.

    ReplyDelete
  82. It may have a stigma but it also has a built-in and seemingly permanent fanbase sufficient enough to keep it in the top 10 in perpetuity. Even at its nadir, Raw has been highly rated relative to other cable shows. No show has been this successful on cable for this long, ever, other than Raw. It will likely still be around long after Pawn Stars, Storage Wars and whatever else fad comes next dies.

    ReplyDelete
  83. NASCAR gets ratings too. Having a stigma isn't a dealbreaker, necessarily.

    ReplyDelete
  84. I think the longevity of Raw will play into this. Based on the fact that it's been successfully on the air for 20 years, the networks know that there will always be a built-in audience for it. Even at its absolute nadir it was still doing well relative to other cable shows. Long after the Pawn Stars/Storage Wars fads die and Burn Notice is cancelled Raw will still be pulling in 2.8-3.8. Networks know that and that's why it will never be in real danger.

    ReplyDelete
  85. For the love of Christ, a show not airing on a network is not necessarily the same fucking thing as "cancelled." Go to Youtube and find the clip of Jerry Seinfeld going off on Larry King when King says or implies that Seinfeld was cancelled. It fucking wasn't. NBC offered Jerry a dumptruck full of money for a 10th season. Raw was never cancelled, ever.

    The WWE CHOSE to leave USA in favor of TNN. Cancellation is a network decision, period.

    ReplyDelete
  86. We were already tortured by the WWE's use of semantics and technicalities.  And then you did it as clever revenge against them... BUT BOTH OF YOU TOOK IT OUT ON US, citizens of common sense nation.

    ReplyDelete
  87.  Someone should make a snarky petition/contract worded kind of like how you had it right there.  "We hereby agree HHH is the king of kings and we need not anymore proof being shown on WWE television shows."

    ReplyDelete
  88. Raw has missed a few weeks in its lifespan.

    ReplyDelete
  89. Man I miss Larry. 

    Him asking Denise Brown how her sister Nicole Brown Simpson was doing was fucking LEGENDARY. 

    ReplyDelete
  90. The network idea is totally feasible if and only if they spend the money to get some content that ISN'T wrestling related. Grab the rights to the Rambo franchise, M*A*S*H* and Star Trek and promote it as "THE GUYS NETWORK FOR GUYS WITH DICKS GUYS GUYS (we also have wrestling!)" and *maybe* they could keep it in the black. 

    The WWE Network will go the same way as The WWE Restaurant. There's just no reason for it nor an audience to actually watch it. I'm really surprised they haven't managed to convince USA to free up some time on Thursday for SmackDown. Hell even a Saturday wouldn't be a bad idea. 

    ReplyDelete
  91. No it's not. So Seinfeld was cancelledby that logic. 

    ReplyDelete
  92. USA didn't cancel the show. The contract with USA ended and they moved to Spike, who paid more money for the show.

    Spike did cancel them, yes, but that was more to be a dick when it looked like they were going to USA.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Still like this idea.

    You get the impression that they want this network to be mosly new material and not a network necessarily associated with "classic" wrestling footage, so they are going to need some material to prop it up until they put some decent shows together.


    For me, I wish they'd just keep COD, but that channel sort of exists in it's own little world. They spend so much time WWE-izing history, burying guys, or crapping on the legacy of old promotions for long enough erywhere else

    ReplyDelete
  94.  LOL jesus.

    I remember an episode with the Roseanne cast on there once too.  A caller called in to ask why one of the actors wasn't there and Roseanne (who seemed a little annoyed) was like 'well because he's dead'.

    ReplyDelete
  95. Spike absolutely cancelled RAW before the move back to USA.  Otherwise I'm just using semantics in WWE-like fashion to be a dick, which I've noted a few times in this thread.

    ReplyDelete
  96. He was amazing to wach, especially at the end. Maybe the best one was though:

    Some girl (not famous) was on, talking about how she was coming out of a grocery store with her bag of food and some guy came up behind her, put a gun to her back and made her get into the passenger seat of the car. He then proceeded to rape her in the parking lot before exiting the driver's side and leaving her there.

    Larry's kind of half listening as this woman share that most traumatic moment of her entire life with the entire nation and then looks up, sort of coughs and says, "So what happened to the groceries?"

    The woman just stares at him. And stares at him. Like...literally 10 seconds go by with them just staring at each other silently (which is like...four years in television time)

    It was the most awkward moment I think that's ever been on television.

    Larry ruled. Piers is such a whiny liberal douche in comparison.

    ReplyDelete
  97. Larry king was the greatest!

    ReplyDelete
  98. Bring back silk stockings

    ReplyDelete
  99. You are confusing being cancelled with being dropped.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment