PG Canuck
Registered User
- Mar 29, 2010
- 63,380
- 25,199
Nobody.
That is the answer.
Wrestling is fake and terrible.
600 posts later...guess we care.
Also, the TV shows you watch are fake - sorry to break the news to you.
Nobody.
That is the answer.
Wrestling is fake and terrible.
oh good joe dirte is back.
Oh I bet there are a few WWE fans with more than enough kids and baby mamas for the whole group.
It's those toothless women in the crowds that pop out their devil spawn.
So how many nerds we got in this thread? Can we get a nerd alert in here before we enter? Almost ended up reading some nerdy posts.
People stopped saying "nerd" in the 1980s.
He literally just admitted to watching who is in the crowds at WWE events claiming that the women are toothless even though earlier he said they don't have women at the events and then later said he has been out over a million times and never seen WWE.Time to find out again how irrelevant wrestling is over the course of tens of posts.
Yikes, you guys are like a Nerd tag-team.
It happens in every city. The local sports team is the easiest target.
Here's a guy in the ring with an Ottawa Senators jersey. (0:12)
It must be because the Senators are the greatest hockey city in the world.
I must have missed the huge thread started over it though after it aired on a major show.
Also amazing they picked on the Sens with all the other major sporting teams there.
Oh I bet there are a few WWE fans with more than enough kids and baby mamas for the whole group.
It's those toothless women in the crowds that pop out their devil spawn.
Tavares and Leafs threads on main forum are getting weirder by the day.
Okay you make a good point and I guess I was looking at the graph differently but my point still stands, most children do not make incomes so if it's actually factually true that most WWE fans are non-income making children then these demographics graphics are skewed to say the least!
Well he said those adults don't have kids so I literally have zero clues as to how to reconcile anything that proven ignoramus is trying to say when he literally contradicts himself ever single other post...I'd assume that graph is actually by household not by person. That's generally how they measure viewership income brackets. I think people are making some big assumptions but the data itself seems straightforward and matches what I think most people would expect.