Similarities between Punk vs Bryan & Hart vs Michaels

[ProPainScott]

Edit

I find there to be many parallels between CM Punk vs Daniel Bryan to Bret Hart vs Shawn Michaels.

Both are matchups of smaller wrestlers who are appreciated for their athleticism and technichal prowess.

Both seem to be the alternative to a stale era of larger wrestlers with limited in ring ability. Hart and Michaels replaced Hogan and Warrior, and now their counterparts Cena and Batista are replaced by Punk and Bryan.

Also Punk and Bryan share similar qualities to Hart and Michaels. Punk represents the Chicago area with pride and gets huge hometown pops the same way as Hart did in Canada.

Also Bryan is kind of bland on the microphone as was Hart, but they make up for it with submission holds that excite the crowd when they lock them in, and they both preach integrity. Punk and HBK are both more full of personality and come off as chick magnet wild men with attitude and are great on the mic.

Both matchups tend to seem like they are polar opposites in personality but actually end up having excellent chemistry in the ring.

I can only hope that punk and Bryan someday main event a wrestle mania in a 60 Minute iron man match.

 

[Y2JisBA]

I'm sorry but Punk is no chick-magnet type. Maybe he's considered attractive idk, but the point is Michaels was all about cockiness. If you wanted a parallel between Michaels and Hart that would be Dolph Ziggler and Bryan respectively. Dolph is the show-off "sexy boy" while Punk is a character who just does as he sees fit and makes fun of anyone on the corporate ladder, as close to Stone Cold as we are going to get.

And Punk vs Bryan is meant to tribute to the ROH days and thus the hard-core fans LIKE Hart and Michaels was since they're smaller and such, so I agree with you there.

I guess the point is the match rivalries are similar ONLY because of their hardcore-fan appeal and better match quality as opposed to the rest of any other card.

 

[Swarles Barkley]

I'm sorry but Punk is no chick-magnet type.

Tell that to all the Divas he's reportedly bedded.

Bryan-Punk could be a modern day Hart-Michaels. The main difference, of course, is that Bryan and Punk like one another while Hart and Michaels hated each other. But the other similarities are there, with the big one being they're probably the best two wrestlers in the company, much like Hart and Michaels were.

 

[AwesomeRko]

While there are similarities like an ability to put on good matches and Bryan's similar in ring style to Hart I think they are actually pretty different. One of the main factors which made the Hart/HBK fued so great was that they were polar opposites both on screen and in reality, everyone knew they genuinely hated each other and it was like a clash of ideals. Bryan/Punk on the other hand are actually pretty similar both indy wrestlers who have made it big, neither look conventional or flashy and both stress their ROH upbringing and their status as underdogs. Punk comes across as more of a clued up know it all who has survived on wit and pure wrestling ability whilst certainly coming across as arrogant he doesn't really come across as the popular kid in school a la 90s Shawn Michaels.

HBK was portrayed as flashy, cocky and cool a man endowed with several natural gifts and who enjoyed showing it. Hart on the other hand while not overpowering on the mic seemed very real, down to earth and honourable in essence an extension of his true self. Bryan by contrast in his heel role is clearly playing a character who is obnoxious, arrogant and in your face I don't see any real similarity with Hart past the in-ring style.

I think Y2JBA was right when he said Ziggler is much more similar to Michaels than Punk. If I was to compare Punk to any main event superstar iv seen in WWE it would probably be Y2J: witty on the mic, accomplished wrestler, bit of a know it all etc. A Punk vs face DB from last year would probably have a bit of Y2J/Benoit about I reckon.

 

[Peoples_Champ]

Punk, Bryan, HBK and Bret are all completely different wrestlers - although I will admit there are distinct (perhaps intentionally) similarities between the two. That being said, I don't think there are too many other similarities between the two matchups besides their technical abilities.

 

[ProPainScott]

I will admit that my comparison between Daniel Bryan and Bret Hart is more of a comparison between Bryan Danielson and Bret Hart. I am having a hard time accepting Bryan's heel persona in WWE because I know him so well as Danielson from ROH. He was a face there for much of his run, and was more similar to Bret at that point in his career.

I don't think fans will boo D Bry forever though. He will eventually end up getting over the way Benoit did, by putting on the best show night in and night out. Same thing with Eddy. Eddy was playing a "lie cheat and steal" character, and the crowd loved it just because they loved Eddy and his work. D Bry has kind of a dry, smart personality, similar to Eddy.

Now i'm comparing them to Benoit and Eddy which opens up a whole different can of worms, haha.

And as for Punk and HBK, I understand that they aren't the same type of character, but i'm referring to HBK from 1993-1997 pre DX and Stone Cold era, when I make the comparison. HBK was certainly the most outspoken star in WWE during that period.

I am not comfortable at all comparing HBK to Dolph Ziggler for the record. The Ziggler-Hennig comparisons are more realistic. I'm even willing to go as far as to say Ziggler is getting the Mr. Ass Billy Gunn push that never was.

 

[mooseman]

What I think your seeing today with Punk, Bryan, Ziggler, Cody Rhodes etc etc is definatly the effect of HBK and Bret Hart. Todays guys were kids growing up watching HBK and Hart and realizing all because we arent 6-7 300 lbs of pure power and muscle we can still WWE wrestlers. Todays stars are products from the doors that were opened by HBK and Bret.

 

[Arsenal]

There aren't a lot of similarities. Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels are two of the all-time greats, and it's an insult to compare Bryan to them at this point. Bryan is a vanilla midget compared to both of them, both in terms of size and personality. Punk might be somewhat similar in that he's pretty good in-ring and has some personality.

WWE today would trade Punk and Bryan for a prime (e.g. mid 90's) Hart and Michaels in a heartbeat.

 

[Cosmic Hate]

Punk needs to find a Bret Hart to his Shawn Michaels. Bryan isn't Bret Hart purely due to the lack of mic skills, but that can be improved.

Then again maybe that metaphor of yours is completely stupid. John Cena vs Punk is something I'd watch over and over again, and John Cena's more like the Hulk Hogan we've always wanted rather than Bret Hart.

 

[Ryberg]

I wouldn't compare them to Hart vs Michaels only due to the fact that both of them were already huge stars when they started their fued. Punk is probably the closest new icon the WWE has had since Cena. (I even HATE to use Cena's name lol).

But as for the people who complain about Bryant, I happen to think the guy isn't vanilla at all. He's come a long way on his mic skills since he won the belt. You're all the same people who bitch about him but praise Ziggler who is about as vanilla as it gets. All his wrestling skill mean nothing as he has no mic skills. The only heat he garnishes is Vicki. At least when Bryant talks he gets a reaction. You seem to all forget Sean and Regal TRAINED THE GUY! Obviously they saw something in DB!

Anyway to get back to my point, I would more compare their feud to the Chris Jericho vs Dean Malenko feud in WCW. Both AMAZING technical wrestlers where one (Jericho & Punk) have FAR SUPERIOR mic skills and the other a tad better (Malenko&DB) technical wrestling skills. Together it puts on one hell of a product.

 

[Jdulemba1001]

There are similarities in technical skills, but thats it. I get it that the IWC is going crazy for the idea of Punk/Bryan. And they should. It would have some great matches. But like a precious poster said, there was legit heat with Hart/Michaels. You cant make up the emotion. Punk/Bryan wont draw like Hart/Michaels did. But to be fair, not many will.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I'm not really seeing much of a similarity overall aside from the fact that Punk & Bryan are probably the two best in-ring guys in WWE just as HBK & Bret Hart were back in their day.

HBK & Bret Hart were two guys that just simply did not like one another at all. Each thought the other was a veritable horse's ass that showed no respect for the business with their behavior and thought the other was jealous. Bryan & Punk are two guys that've known each other for close to a decade, are close friends in real life, came up through the indy ranks together and have loads of respect for one another.

I have no doubt that WWE could feature the two of them in a feud that comes off as being extremely personal on the surface if they have a mind to, but Bret & Shawn had legit heat with each other that was palpable at times.

 

[The Suplexer Perfecter]

They have totally different styles.

Punk and Bryan are stiffer and more snug ala Japan, while Hart was a pure technician but without the stiffness, and Michaels is harder to describe but he was very fluid in the ring and could fit with anyone with how he would sell and do a match.