Rock/Hogan drew more for Wrestlemania 18 than Rock/Austin drew for Wrestlemania 17

[Dirk Dickbutt]

numbers?

 

[RLStern]

numbers?

In the OP, Rock/Hogan drew more for Wrestlemania 18 than Rock/Austin did for Wrestlemania 17.

If you’re talking about Taker, HHH and Shawn then the numbers are mid 90s, record lows of 2002-2004 post Rock, anytime Cena was gone and now.

Those numbers were record lows.

 

[Dirk Dickbutt]

In the OP, Rock/Hogan drew more for Wrestlemania 18 than Rock/Austin did for Wrestlemania 17.

If you’re talking about Taker, HHH and Shawn then the numbers are mid 90s, record lows of 2002-2004 post Rock, anytime Cena was gone and now.

Those numbers were record lows.

I want numbers on how HHH, Michaels, Taker, and Orton weren't draws in WM 25

 

[RLStern]

I want numbers on how HHH, Michaels, Taker, and Orton weren't draws in WM 25

They never drew prior, as we saw in Mid 90s, 2002-2004, and post Cena.

Those numbers, whether you like it or not were record lows, therefore they had zero effect on Wrestlemania 25 which had draws.

If you are going to argue that 2002-2004, mid 90s and post Cena were not record lows, the only times these guys had the ball, then you lose credibility.

 

[Just Juice]

He didnt have number of Wrestlemania 28 either - only stuff to do with SummerSlam and MITB. Blaine you will probably be even numbers from Judgement Day 2004 or something else really relevant

 

[Sha-J Lee]

It’s also hilarious how you act like Rock/Austin wasn’t the only match that anyone gave a shit about at WM17. That was the match that was promoted the most. That was the marquee match. Just like every wrestlemania has a marquee match. Yeah maybe TLC, McMahon and Chyna had good promotion as well but Rock/Austin was the match everyone wanted to see.

 

[Dirk Dickbutt]

They never drew prior, as we saw in Mid 90s, 2002-2004, and post Cena.

Those numbers, whether you like it or not were record lows, therefore they had zero effect on Wrestlemania 25 which had draws.

If you are going to argue that 2002-2004, mid 90s and post Cena were not record lows, the only times these guys had the ball, then you lose credibility.

That's not 2009.

#Owned

 

[RLStern]

It’s also hilarious how you act like Rock/Austin wasn’t the only match that anyone gave a shit about at WM17. That was the match that was promoted the most. That was the marquee match. Just like every wrestlemania has a marquee match. Yeah maybe TLC, McMahon and Chyna had good promotion as well but Rock/Austin was the match everyone wanted to see.

Nope, Chyna, TLC 2, McMahon storyline and WCW purchase were marquees, where two of those in McMahon storyline and WCW purchase drawing more mainstream coverage and attention.

Now you’re making shit up, Especially when you claim Austin/Rock was more mainstream than the WCW purchase and McMahon storyline.

Rock/Austin 2 wasn’t nearly as covered as the controversial McMahon story or the WCW purchase, that’s a concrete fact.

That's not 2009.

Doesn’t matter, in 2009 they weren’t alone, they had draws supplementing the shows. I provided years when they were on top themselves and the numbers were record lows.

You’re dismissed.

 

[Just Juice]

Still no numbers. Can you stop derailing this debate and stop trolling and provide some numbers.

 

[Dirk Dickbutt]

Doesn’t matter, in 2009 they weren’t alone, they had draws supplementing the shows. I provided years when they were on top themselves and the numbers were record lows.

You’re dismissed.

So what you are saying is that you have no proof proving Orton/HHH and Taker/Michaels were not draws at WM 25. Argue #Won

 

[RLStern]

Still no numbers. Can you stop derailing this debate and stop trolling and provide some numbers.

Mid 90s when Taker and Michaels were given the ball, they failed so bad they almost went out of business and lost to WCW.

2002-2004 when Rock was gone and Triple H/Taker then Orton were top guys... didn’t draw

After John Cena left and Taker & HHH were remaining guys, in modern WWE nothing including their appearances draw.

Those years when they were the top guy are the numbers, and those numbers are Concretely the lowest in company history.

if you’re gonna argue they are not record lows, then you lose credibility.

So what you are saying is that you have no proof proving Orton/HHH and Taker/Michaels were not draws at WM 25. Argue

The proof is that they didn’t draw when they were the top guys in 2002-2004 and mid 90s, and after Cena. Those years with them by themselves drew record lows, That’s the proof, that’s the numbers.

Therefore they didn’t draw in 2009, that was on Cena, Hardyz and other draws.

You have been throughly refuted. Come back with facts and numbers that refute the 2002-2004 and mid 90s record low numbers provided.

Come back with numbers to be taken serious.

 

[Just Juice]

Your numbers have nothing to do with Wrestlemania 28 or Wrestlemania 2009.

Please stop talking about different years and try to stay on topic. Stop deflecting and changing the topic - when the alternations have nothing to do with the subject matter. The only thing that has been proven is that you are incapable of staying on topic.

 

[RLStern]

Your numbers have nothing to do with Wrestlemania 28 or Wrestlemania 2009.

Please stop talking about different years and try to stay on topic. Stop deflecting and changing the topic - when the alternations have nothing to do with the subject matter. The only thing that has been proven is that you are incapable of staying on topic.

They do, if Its shown that Mark Henry was never a major draw ever, why should we attribute the buyrate of Wrestlemania 25 & 28 to him?

That’s ridiculous and nonsensical, just like attributing the buys of those ppv’s to Taker, HHH, Michaels and Orton is nonsensical because like Henry they never drew.

 

[Just Juice]

Taker, HHH and Michaels are some of the biggest draws in the history of the WWE. This has already been proven.

But you don't have any numbers. Now you are bring up Mark Henry. Mark Henry is a not a number. There are nine basic numbers:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 - Mark Henry is not a number.

 

[RLStern]

Taker, HHH and Michaels are some of the biggest draws in the history of the WWE. This has already been proven.

You haven’t proven squat, show me where they drew without the likes of Cena, Rock, Austin, Hogan etc

But you don't have any numbers.

I posted 2002-2004, mid 90s and post Cena which are factually record low numbers when they were on top. THAT’s providing numbers.

While your response has been this:

You haven’t provided any numbers showing those guys drawing without major draws on the card with them.

If your next posts doesn’t show me numbers that they drew huge without Rock, Austin, Foley, Hogan, Cena or any major draw on the card, then you’re full of shit.