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

[CakeWalker]

You need to provide numbers for Wrestlemania 28. Just for Wrestlemania 28 - that can prove without any shadow of a doubt that HHHvsTaker and CM PunkvsJericho were not draws and were not part of the reason why there was a record buy rate.

If you say: 2002-2004 or mid 90s or Post Cena - then I am going to have to accept that you are simply an idiot that can't comprehend basic English comprehension. Currently everything you have said on Mania 28 and Mania 2009 is based on your own opinion as the 'facts' bear no relevance to the topic at hand.

 

[Sabretooth]

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.

You can’t use the WCW purchase as an argument. Never before and never again will we have a time where WWE is buying another wrestling company. That was a once in a lifetime event. That had nothing to do with Wrestlemania itself. Of course WWE purchasing their competition was gonna get mainstream coverage. Obviously they chose to bring it into the storyline but it was happening in real life.

 

[RLStern]

You can’t use the WCW purchase as an argument. Never before and never again will we have a time where WWE is buying another wrestling company. That was a once in a lifetime event. That had nothing to do with Wrestlemania itself. Of course WWE purchasing their competition was gonna get mainstream coverage. Obviously they chose to bring it into the storyline but it was happening in real life.

That’s too bad, it helped contribute to the Wrestlemania 17 buyrate and was the biggest mainstream story of the late 90s/early 2000s, so it more than lends itself to the argument, whether you like it or not.

You need to provide numbers for Wrestlemania 28. Just for Wrestlemania 28 - that can prove without any shadow of a doubt that HHHvsTaker and CM PunkvsJericho were not draws and were not part of the reason why there was a record buy rate.

Thats like asking me to show Mark Henry wasn’t apart of the Wrestlemania 28 buyrate.

You know how that’s done? You show that Mark Henry didn’t draw on shows outside of it and drew low numbers.

If you say: 2002-2004 or mid 90s or Post Cena - then I am going to have to accept that you are simply an idiot that can't comprehend basic English comprehension.

Those numbers from those years were record lows whether you like it or not, the numbers refute you whether you like it or not. You don’t ask for numbers and when given say they don’t count, that’s the only times they were on top, they didn’t draw, you lose.

You asked for numbers that show they didn’t draw, those are the numbers, those years drew record lows with them on top.

You can yell, scream, cry and lie that I didn’t provide numbers, THOSE are the numbers and they were record lows.

Your entire argument is throughly refuted.

 

[Sabretooth]

That’s too bad, it helped contribute to the Wrestlemania 17 buyrate and was the biggest mainstream story of the late 90s/early 2000s, so it more than lends itself to the argument, whether you like it or not

Sorry bud, that’s not how it works. You can’t use a once in a lifetime story as an excuse to say “oh it was a bigger deal than Rock/Austin”. Yeah it was a bigger deal because they were BUYING THEIR FUCKING COMPETITION. If it happened in 2002, that would have been a bigger story than Rock/Hogan.

 

[CakeWalker]

Your failure to provide the numbers for the relevant events - is a sign of a total failure.
You have thus lost this debate completely - by being unable provide data to back up your opinion.
There is no ifs, no buts, no maybes. You have been given countless opportunities to provide the numbers but have been unable to do.

I hope you can accept this loss.

 

[RLStern]

Sorry bud, that’s not how it works. You can’t use a once in a lifetime story as an excuse to say “oh it was a bigger deal than Rock/Austin”. Yeah it was a bigger deal because they were BUYING THEIR FUCKING COMPETITION. If it happened in 2002, that would have been a bigger story than Rock/Hogan.

Exactly, thanks for proving me correct. You just refuted your entire side.

It helped the Wrestlemania 17 buyrate along with McMahon story, Chyna and TLC 2

Wrestlemania 18 had only Rock/Hogan with zero help, yet drew only 180,000 less, meaning Rock/Hogan drew more buys for Wrestlemania 18 than Rock/Austin did for Wrestlemania 17.

Thank you for admitting it, when no one else could.

 

[RLStern]

Your failure to provide the numbers for the relevant events - is a sign of a total failure.
You have thus lost this debate completely - by being unable provide data to back up your opinion.
There is no ifs, no buts, no maybes. You have been given countless opportunities to provide the numbers but have been unable to do.

I hope you can accept this loss.

2002-2004, mid 90s, post Cena, those years had record low numbers with Taker, HHH, Michaels and Orton on top.

They were not draws.

You’re refuted, come back when you show me that they drew without major draws on same shows bolstering the buyrate.

 

[CakeWalker]

Your failure to provide the numbers for the relevant events - is a sign of a total failure.
You have thus lost this debate completely - by being unable provide data to back up your opinion.
There is no ifs, no buts, no maybes. You have been given countless opportunities to provide the numbers but have been unable to do.

I hope you can accept this loss.

 

[RLStern]

Your failure to provide the numbers for the relevant events

You show who drew and who didn’t draw for a specific event based on how they drew at other events where they were the focus without other huge draws, their TV ratings and mainstream popularity.

Taker, HHH, Michaels and Orton, never drew huge when they had other events based around them with other huge draws missing, drew record low TV ratings and were not known outside the bubble in mainstream, from the following years when they were


- Mid 90s
-2002-2004
-Post Cena

They therefore didn’t draw for the 2009 event of Wrestlemania 25 and the 2012 event of Wrestlemania 28

Your arguments are refuted. If you want to get back in debate and back up your claims that they are draws, show numbers where they solely drew without other huge draws.

Those are the numbers, you are dismissed.

 

[Sabretooth]

Exactly, thanks for proving me correct. You just refuted your entire side.

It helped the Wrestlemania 17 buyrate along with McMahon story, Chyna and TLC 2

Wrestlemania 18 had only Rock/Hogan with zero help, yet drew only 180,000 less, meaning Rock/Hogan drew more buys for Wrestlemania 18 than Rock/Austin did for Wrestlemania 17.

Thank you for admitting it, when no one else could.

No sir. I’m saying you can’t use it as an excuse and I’m saying that if it happened in 2002, then WM 18 would have drawn more than WM 17. But keep twisting my words around because you know I’m right. Lmao

 

[RLStern]

No sir. I’m saying you can’t use it as an excuse and I’m saying that if it happened in 2002, then WM 18 would have drawn more than WM 17. But keep twisting my words around because you know I’m right. Lmao

Exactly! Yet Wrestlemania 18 only drew 180,000 despite that.

Because Rock/Hogan was a bigger draw than Rock/Austin.

Wrestlemania 17 had a bigger buyrate in part due to the WCW Purchase, McMahon story, Chyna and TLC 2. It wasn’t Rock/Austin as the only major headline.

Whereas Wrestlemania 18 Rock/Hogan was the only major headline.

You proved my very own argument in the OP for me.

 

[Sabretooth]

Exactly! Yet Wrestlemania 18 only drew 180,000 despite that.

Because Rock/Hogan was a bigger draw than Rock/Austin.

Wrestlemania 17 had a bigger buyrate in part due to the WCW Purchase, McMahon story, Chyna and TLC 2. It wasn’t Rock/Austin as the only major headline.

Whereas Wrestlemania 18 Rock/Hogan was the only major headline.

You proved my very own argument in the OP for me.

like I said before, not what I meant. You’re arguing based on assumption. Not facts. You keep saying WM 17 had multiple marquee matches which counted toward its buy rate but that’s not true. That’s just your opinion. Saying that Chyna, TLC, McMahon, and WCW were all draws over Rock/Austin is not true. If you took WCW and put it around WM 18 and the buy rate was above WM 17 then you could say that Rock/Hogan was a bigger draw than Rock/Austin. You can’t take an anomaly event and use it to say one match drew over another. It’s apples to oranges.

 

[RLStern]

like I said before, not what I meant. You’re arguing based on assumption. Not facts. You keep saying WM 17 had multiple marquee matches which counted toward its buy rate but that’s not true. That’s just your opinion. Saying that Chyna, TLC, McMahon, and WCW were all draws over Rock/Austin is not true. If you took WCW and put it around WM 18 and the buy rate was above WM 17 then you could say that Rock/Hogan was a bigger draw than Rock/Austin. You can’t take an anomaly event and use it to say one match drew over another. It’s apples to oranges.

NMcmahon storyline and WCW purchase were bigger than Rock/Austin, Not Chyna and TLC 2, though those were huge major headlines too that drew record ratings and contributed to buyrate.

It was everywhere on mainstream media, Bob Costas and drew huge controversy with the family stuff and Trish stuff.

WCW was the biggest story of the bunch and contributed greatly to that buyrate.

Thats 5 major and I mean major mega drawing mainstream headlines.

Wrestlemania 18 on the other hand only had one major mainstream headline, Rock vs Hogan.

Rock/Hogan was bigger than Rock/Austin and drew more for Wrestlemania 18 than Rock/Austin did for 17.

Wrestlemania 17 was bigger than Wrestlemania 18 because it had mainstreams headliners, the biggest being the WCW purchase.

You can’t say “well if that didn’t happen” it’s irrelevant, the bottom line is it drew huge for Wrestlemania 17 along with McMahon storyline, Rock/Austin, Chyna and TLC 2.

Whereas Rock/Hogan was by itself as the factor for the Wrestlemania 18 buyrate and thus a bigger drawing match than Rock/Austin.

 

[CakeWalker]

• relevant events
• unable provide data

 

[RLStern]

• relevant events
• unable provide data

Relevant events = WWF 1995-1997, WWE 2002-2004, WWE Post Cena, record low Numbers with those guys on top, Irrefutable fact.

Data = Provided on record low years of 2002-2004, mid 90s and post Cena which you’ve yet to refute the fact that they are Record Low Numbers.

Numbers provided by you showing they drew without other major draws around = Zero

You = Dismissed.