CM Punk, Best Wrestler Ever?

[edgethefuture]

i personally think punk is going to prob be the future of wwe he has the fans hatin him very badly he can help put cena over not that cena needs any help but i know punk is not the best wrestler ever but possibly one of the greatest i know that because he was i think the fastest triple crown champ so thats like the best the best thing about him right there. reply if you think different

 

[gurvinder372]

As far as i remember, this is Punk's third storyline which is of some interest. Other two being SES and Commentating on RAW (not sure if i can call this a storyline). He has given good promos alright, but lets not get carried away and say that he is the best ever.
He wasn't interesting or noticeable at all until he cached in MITB second time. Not even when he won the tag team championship in Oct 2008 with Kofi. It was around June 2009, on RAW he started giving promo about his moral superiority over people who support druggist Hardy (seemingly so), when he became noticeable first time. I remember commentators trying to sell his offensive moves, saying that he is expert in Martial arts, and all that, but it hardly got registered with me until SES happened. But his SES avatar feud with Taker and then Mysterio look little forced and repetitive to me.
He has made good progress since then, but his promos have worked for me mostly when they come as a surprise. I would like to see him having a stable storyline going for weeks and good confrontational promos with the likes of Cena and Edge. Good thing about him is that like Cena and Edge he is not relying heavily on Catchphrases, and he has not been repetitive while doing RAW commentary.
As far as his wrestling is concerned, i am not sure if i have seen anything incredibly special about him. Not sure if many would agree with me, but his match with Rey at WM26 was his most entertaining match ever.

 

["The Instant Classic"]

The OP is accurate in saying Punk is like the King Midas of wrestling. Out of all the guys on the roster he's really good at entertaining, a factor that seems to have been lost for a while but is slowly coming back. My main thought on this whole Punk/ Nexus thing is this. They're having him do this because the SES fell through and WWE wants to see him as a faction leader. but back on topic, he's good... some could say one of the top 5 the company has right now but to say best ever, that makes me want you to ask yourself, who else could pull off this role he has right now as an all around great performer on the mic and in the ring. The answer= Chris Jericho. These two are really similar in alot of ways.. but thats another thread for another day. But I digress, Punk is good, but "best"? No, I give that title to Jericho.

 

[TUFFY54]

Come on people, work with me. Only JGlass has given me a good reason why Punk isn't the best of all time.

If every time Punk dose something, we all jump online and start sucking his dick about how great he is, and he never gets any bad criticism, he is apparently perfect at what he dose. So if this doesn’t make him “The Best”, what makes a wrestler "The Best"?

Well I thought I gave a very good reason thank you very much!

There have been 30 posts on here disagreeing with what you've said. They have ranged from charisma to in ring ability to marketablity. What more do you need to hear. There is a huge difference between not having something bad to say about someone, and claiming they are the best ever. As stupid as I thought this thread was, I thought I would be nice and just say why I disagreed. Since you ignored what everyone said and were a dick about it, I'll just say that I think this is one of the dumbest threads ever posted. Only an idiot would think that, because a guy has had a couple good years, he is the best wrestler of all time. How many Wrestlemanias has Punk headlined? Hell, how many times has he been in any PPV main events? How come he doesn't sell more shirts than anyone else? I like Punk. I think he's great, but only a total fool would say that one year of good promos makes him the greatest of all time. Can you even name me one legendary C M Punk match that people will be talking about for years to come?

According to your logic, Dolph Zigglar is the best of all time. He is good on the mic and hasn't had a bad match. You see why this doesn't work. Just because I can't name you something bad about Dolph Zigglar, doesn't mean he is the best of all time. If you don't understand that I dont know what else to say.

 

[Daniel]

Yeah, this is a crazy statement.

I love CM Punk. I think he's great. He is my second/third favourite wrestler of all-time. But I have only watched wrestling for a year since my childhood. My knowledge is limited from early 2010-backwards. Therefore, I wouldn't dare to call him the greatest (or even one of the five best wrestlers) in history.

"CM Punk makes everything interesting". As a fan of one year, I would not disagree with this. And on YouTube, I can't find a dull video with CM Punk (he even made Jeff Hardy watchable). He is the total package. A unique look. Great in-ring ability. Brilliant on the mic. However, there is one factor which is essential for someone to even be considered as one of the greats.

The legacy they create. It is a HUGE factor. So huge that I wrote it in capital letters. Punk has only been wrestling properly since around 2000. And he has only been in the WWE system since 2005. He has yet to create a legacy and therefore prove greatness (which I agree he may possess).

I could see that in the next five years, CM Punk could be approaching that place. He is perfectly capable of being a legend. He just needs time.

 

[JGlass]

That is the way WWE likes to book him. I'm sure a lot of us here have seen Punk's pre-WWE workd and can vouch for the number of moves he has pulled off back then. Also how are moves a criteria to judge the greatest of all time? I know Punk has a long way to go but Punk, in my opinion, can produce great matches perhaps even greater than the likes of HBK and Kurt Angle have produced with the exact same moveset.

I didn't say moveset, I said style. CM Punk can pull off some nice moves, but his matches don't quite have the flow that the matches of Shawn Michaels and Kurt Angle, nor do they have the dominant feel of The Undertaker or the excitement of a Stone Cold beat down. And I don't give a shit how the WWE books him, if he had what it takes to put on all time great matches he would be able to do it. CM Punk is very talented in the ring, certainly, but I can't think of a single match that I watch and am just blown away by, where I can think of many for guys like HBK and Angle.

It is insane to compare Punk with either Austin and Rock but I feel he is certainly better than the other ones you have mentioned. I liked Edge's work when he was a part of a tag team but as a singles performer his mic skills have always been a bit overrated. And his work this year just proves my point. He has always managed to get good heat as a heel but I have always felt that that is more to do with how he has been booked rather than his mic skills.

Miz is terribly overrated on the mic. Sure he has cut a lot of good promos this year but almost all of those have been similar in content, in my opinion. He is just an arrogant heel and always points out that he is better than his opponent. Its surely not comparable to the way Punk questions Cena's morals or Hardy's flaws.

Cena is certainly very good with his serious stuff but as far as comedy goes, Cena falls a bit flat. Punk has shown a lot of potential in the comedy department as well. Triple H has surely cut great promos but there was a time when HHH was champion and began the show with a half hour promo. That was very boring to watch and I have also not liked his run in the second edition of DX a lot.

For every good CM Punk promo I will show you one good Edge promo, two good Miz promos, and three good Triple H promos. You act like every time CM Punk touches the mic he spews golden words. This is so far from the truth that it's laughable. CM Punk has improved over the years on the mic, just like everyone else, but he has a long way to go if he wants to be considered elite. His promos lack the flow that Cena's and have, and he's not nearly as quick on the mic as Triple H. He doesn't have as much of an edge to his attitude as Edge, and he doesn't inspire pure hatred as much as the Miz. So what are we left with? Above average promo cutting abilities? Yes, CM Punk did an excellent job on commentary, but speaking from behind the announcers table with someone giving you pointers and lines through your headset is very different than cutting promos in front of the audience where it is only you and the person you are cutting a promo against.

I challenge you to find me one GREAT CM Punk promo, and if you do I will find you one great Edge promo, two great Miz promos, and three great Triple H promos.

Now this is a very interesting point. Apart from Flair all the other guys were epic faces of their generation while Flair was obviously a very good heel. But the point is do you have to be a huge face to be even considered among the greatest superstars of all time? I do not think so as heels are just as important to the landscape of wrestling as faces. And even Flair is not considered as great as Hogan or Austin if you were to ask the common wrestling fan but I think that a sound arguement could be made that he was just as great as Hogan or Austin. Same deal with CM Punk. Imagine if he remains a heel till the end of his career and is a part of numerous great feuds during his career. Will you then pull out the same arguement that he was not as much of a cultural icon as Hogan or Austin?

There's a reason that they made these guys primarily faces, and it is because being a face is much harder than being a heel. It's easy to get people to hate you, it's hard to get them to love you. These guys all had the in ring ability and mic skills to get people to love them, and that's why the WWE trusted them to be the faces of the company. If CM Punk truly had the skills he needed to get over as a face, he'd get over as a face.

Please note that these are just some points that I disagree with. On the whole I do agree that Punk is nowhere close to being considered as the greatest of all time as far as his current work is concerned. He might be there one day but on the current date he is not even close.

I sincerely doubt he'll ever be there. I think Punk is nearing the climax of his abilities, and he's not even close to what it takes to be considered an all time great. He'll go down as a very talented superstar, but he'll never be a legend.

 

[jholcomb22]

CM Punk is a solid wrestler. He's had solid feuds with some mid card wrestlers. If you are looking for comparisons on how he is not the greatest wrestler of all time, hard as it may be, I will try.

First, and foremost, look at the era. He is wrestling in an era with 2 Heavyweight Championships. So no matter how many times he is champion, it will not compare to the 14 of Flair, or the 13 of HHH or Angle. Also the competition is not as good as a decade ago. Overall, it may be better, but the main event guys of today don't hold a candle to those of the past. Punk looked like gold on the mic on Raw against Cena. I think all Cena said last night was CM sux. Tough to compete against that. Its like the Klitschko brothers in boxing, holding the heavyweight belt for years. That doesn't make them the best of all time, because the sport as a whole is very weak right now.

Secondly, his biggest downfall in my eyes, is his inability to lead. If you look at stables over the years, most of them have one thing in common, championships. HHH led DX and Evolution. At a time DX held every belt, Evolution led to Orton and Batista being multiple time world champions. Even Nexus was able to obtain the tag team titles. What did the SES accomplish. Shaved heads and releases? Gallows and Serena are gone, Mercury is back in FCW.

Finally, we are looking at too small of a sample size to judge all time. Is he good on the mic? Of course. That's why WWE but him on announcing duties, but that doesn't mean Jerry Lawler is a top 10 wrestler. Is he a good in ring performer? I think so, but someone like Shawn Michaels, who has been involved in 10 PWI matches of the year since 1986 is by far better. As an entertainer, Punk is hitting his stride, but lets relax a bit on projecting his greatness.

 

[Find'er Woo'er Ryder]

the guy is great but hes not the greatest. his heel work is better than his face work deffinently. im a huge fan of cm punk and have been since he debuted and ecw way back when. wwe did make a huge investment because he is the superstar of tommorow.

 

[BK Styles]

No. Just...no. Punk hasn't earned that right yet. He's one of the best in the company at the moment, but best ever? Somewhere down the road you made a wrong turn if you TRUELY believe that. I believe that one day, he will be. One day, he'll be in the hall of fame. ONE DAY. But today is not that day. The most you could argue is that he's the best wrestler in the world at the moment, and while I still think thats a stretch, its plausable. Its like saying Jericho is the best ever 3 or 4 years ago; he's bloody brilliant, but he hasnt earned the right to be called "the best EVER" just yet. For Jericho you could probably argue that now, but you can't with Punk.

 

[Rampage Bentley]

Don't get me wrong. Punk is brilliant at what he does.

However......this statement is beyond ridiculous. When you aren't even the best of the last ten or fifteen years, how can you be the best ever? I find many of the newer wrestlers entertaining, from WWE and TNA but the claim to make someone put Punk above Flair or Austin or Angle is just baffling to me.

It's all from a persons point of view. I personally don't understand why Ric Flair is considered "The Greatest" even at his prime I thought he was just pretty good, at best. His stuff with Steamboat and Rhodes were good, but he's been useless since 1987. Only in pro wrestling can you have a phenomenal twelve year career and follow it with twenty-three years of crap and still be considered "the greatest"

As far as Angle and Austin are concerned, he did make a point that they've had moments of being boring, they've had moments of just plain sucking. Hell, Austin sucked the first ten years of his career, and Angle has had his moments too, Punk has not.

While I personally wouldn't put Punk in the number one spot, he's definitely up there and I think the OP has a valid argument for wanting to put him there.

P.S. - Note that I didn't even quote or mention the part about AJ Styles being better than Punk, that's just stupid.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

As far as Angle and Austin are concerned, he did make a point that they've had moments of being boring, they've had moments of just plain sucking. Hell, Austin sucked the first ten years of his career, and Angle has had his moments too, Punk has not.

You do realize that Austin made his wrestling debut in 1989 so you're saying this his great matches in WCW and his year in 1998 when he was the hottest thing on the planet sucked? That's what you're saying so don't try to deny it.

Punk's matches in the WWE haven't been anything special to me and I've watched almost all of them. I just can't point to a Punk match and say "That was a great match." or "I'm going to remember that match for a long time." He was mediocre as a face but he's better as a heel. He did what they should have done to Batista sooner and it worked great for Batista.

While I personally wouldn't put Punk in the number one spot, he's definitely up there and I think the OP has a valid argument for wanting to put him there.

I probably wouldn't put Punk in my Top 50. Maybe he'll have a shot when he retires in 10-15 years. If he retires earlier than that, all bets are off.

P.S. - Note that I didn't even quote or mention the part about AJ Styles being better than Punk, that's just stupid.

He is. Styles can hold his own on the mic and has plenty of great feuds and matches and is more interesting in the ring as a face and heel than Punk.

 

[a0161613]

It's all from a persons point of view. I personally don't understand why Ric Flair is considered "The Greatest" even at his prime I thought he was just pretty good, at best. His stuff with Steamboat and Rhodes were good, but he's been useless since 1987. Only in pro wrestling can you have a phenomenal twelve year career and follow it with twenty-three years of crap and still be considered "the greatest"

At this point I would love to know who you consider great. Rock? Outdoes Punk on the mic and has had more historically important matches while also being a very successful champion. Jericho? At this point I think Punk is as good as Jericho was in Jericho's last run. Foley? Superb and all around better than Punk in most areas. I would love to know why you think you can criticise my suggestions without giving your own.

As far as Angle and Austin are concerned, he did make a point that they've had moments of being boring, they've had moments of just plain sucking. Hell, Austin sucked the first ten years of his career, and Angle has had his moments too, Punk has not.

Punk was good as a face, sucked in his first run as champ and has been a great heel even though the Straight Edge Society sucked major balls. So he HAS had boring periods of his career. And I'd rather watch Angle and Austin at their worst than Punk as World champ when he was facing JBL and Batsta.

While I personally wouldn't put Punk in the number one spot, he's definitely up there and I think the OP has a valid argument for wanting to put him there.

Yes he does but rightly pointed out because Punk is so young he doesnt deserve to be close on the list of best ever because he simply hasn't accomplished enough. He hasnt won a Rumble and hasnt headlined a Mania. Surely that defines a candidate for the greatest ever.

P.S. - Note that I didn't even quote or mention the part about AJ Styles being better than Punk, that's just stupid.

This point above all highlights your ignorance and lack of knowledge. Styles is a better wrestler than 80% of the current WWE roster and is more than a match for Punk. This is a discussion for another thread but trust someone who has watched TNA (and you clearly havent) that Styles is incredible.

 

[rkoshouldvewon]

I'm a gigantic CM Punk fan/mark. I personally think he's the best all around performer in the WWE. Dude can cut great heel promos and be douchey in a comical way if need be. You don't need to worry about his in-ring prowess either.

As for superficialities, he has a distinct look. Covered in tattoos, the "X" wrists. About the only thing going against him is that he's not 6ft 5inches.

As for AJ Styles being better than CM Punk.. I find that tremendously hilarious. AJ is amazing, there is no doubt. But Styles' promos are 1) awkward sounding, 2) sounds like he's trying too hard, 3) he's rarely given good material. If the in-ring is the argument then AJ does way more spots and works for a company that allows for more flexibility in matches.

It's also very important to put into context the state of the business. Punk's era is way different than the Austin era. Most wrestlers are not over in the WWE, and for CM Punk to be over says a lot. Has Punk had as many memorable matches as HBK or Foley? No, but who the heck has? He's only been given like 2 memorable long feuds (Hardy, and Morrison during ECW). There's no doubt in my mind that a Punk/Edge or Jericho or Orton feud would've been classic and great. However, he had to feud with the Big Show, R-Truth and get buried by Undertaker late 2009.

Finally, he's on a show with fresh feuds so we'll see what 2011 looks like for Punk. You've got Cena, Orton, Morrison, Miz, Bryan, Barrett, Triple H, Jericho as all potential feuds.

As long as he doesn't piss anyone off in the back, I'm sure it'll be a great year.

 

[Rampage Bentley]

At this point I would love to know who you consider great. Rock? Outdoes Punk on the mic and has had more historically important matches while also being a very successful champion. Jericho? At this point I think Punk is as good as Jericho was in Jericho's last run. Foley? Superb and all around better than Punk in most areas. I would love to know why you think you can criticise my suggestions without giving your own..

Well if I had to give the number one spot to someone, it'd be Shawn Michaels, and I also would put Jericho above Punk. Rock not so much, I didn't really enjoy Rock on the mic but as I said, it's personal preference. Same with Foley, if you want to rank him higher than Punk that's fine, i wouldn't, I don't think he's better on the mic or in the ring.

Punk was good as a face, sucked in his first run as champ and has been a great heel even though the Straight Edge Society sucked major balls. So he HAS had boring periods of his career. And I'd rather watch Angle and Austin at their worst than Punk as World champ when he was facing JBL and Batsta..

I didn't think his first run sucked, I enjoyed every minute of it, and I loved the straight edge society, one of the original points was he can take crap given to him and turn it to gold, you saying that "he has been a great heel even though the Straight Edge Society sucked major balls" proves that point.

Yes he does but rightly pointed out because Punk is so young he doesnt deserve to be close on the list of best ever because he simply hasn't accomplished enough. He hasnt won a Rumble and hasnt headlined a Mania. Surely that defines a candidate for the greatest ever.

Once again, the argument given for being one of the greatest is his abilities to take crap and make it interesting, the discussion was him being the greatest at the craft, you're talking about winning booked matches and events. Completely irrelevant. Jake the Snake never won the Royal Rumble or main-evented Wrestlemania, does that mean he's erroneously credited as one of the greatest in ring psychologists?

This point above all highlights your ignorance and lack of knowledge. Styles is a better wrestler than 80% of the current WWE roster and is more than a match for Punk. This is a discussion for another thread but trust someone who has watched TNA (and you clearly havent) that Styles is incredible.

I actually do watch TNA, on a weekly basis. Styles isn't bad (when he's not Ric Flair Jr.) he's definitely better than 80% of the WWE roster, I just think Punk is in that other 20%. And you said earlier Foley is better than Punk, clearly you weren't talking about in-ring ability there.

 

[Smartie]

No he is not.

So I’ve been thinking. With Punk being put in this new story line I realized something, Punk is great at everything

The above sentence is true but needs a little change :

Punk is good at everything , not great.

Hell , He knows how to wrestler and from an in-ring point of view , he may be in the top 5 of current wrestlers , but he is not flawless.Take his finisher as an example.

He's brilliant on mic , but the type of his mic work really reminds me of Mick Foley.His promos usually do favors for his opponent more than himself (in a good way) and sometimes he sounds so logical and smart that the crowd lose their interest in his promos.

I think he needs a cutting edge to become a top tire superstar like Cena and Orton , and this possible program with Cena is the best thing that can happen for him in this case.

 

[Undying777]

The best ever is definitely pushing it.

However, I do think he is the most well rounded wrestler and entertainer that has come along in the last 6 years or so. Yes even better then the Miz.

His mic skills are mega gold, his wrestling, if not confined, is top notch. And to top it all off, he is a good actor. He always comes across natural in his promos and back stage segments. There is not many superstars in the looker room you can say that about. IMO, evan Cena over acts in many of his segments.

So i think its safe to say that with good booking, and no career ending injurers, Punk is defiantly on the right road to become one of the best wrestlers ever.

 

[a0161613]

Well if I had to give the number one spot to someone, it'd be Shawn Michaels, and I also would put Jericho above Punk. Rock not so much, I didn't really enjoy Rock on the mic but as I said, it's personal preference. Same with Foley, if you want to rank him higher than Punk that's fine, i wouldn't, I don't think he's better on the mic or in the ring.
I didn't think his first run sucked, I enjoyed every minute of it, and I loved the straight edge society, one of the original points was he can take crap given to him and turn it to gold, you saying that "he has been a great heel even though the Straight Edge Society sucked major balls" proves that point.

Once again, the argument given for being one of the greatest is his abilities to take crap and make it interesting, the discussion was him being the greatest at the craft, you're talking about winning booked matches and events. Completely irrelevant. Jake the Snake never won the Royal Rumble or main-evented Wrestlemania, does that mean he's erroneously credited as one of the greatest in ring psychologists?

I actually do watch TNA, on a weekly basis. Styles isn't bad (when he's not Ric Flair Jr.) he's definitely better than 80% of the WWE roster, I just think Punk is in that other 20%. And you said earlier Foley is better than Punk, clearly you weren't talking about in-ring ability there.

You aren't given Foley enough credit for a start but beyond that, Punk is good, I'm not denying that. But I feel very strongly that three or four years into his career, is no where near enough to put him in a top three or top five listing.

Especially so given the weak nature of the current WWE roster. He is top three or five in the current roster but not of all time.

He has his strengths for sure. His mic ability is top notch and in ring he matches everyone. He has all the attributes and is a total package, which means that he will be an invaluable tool for the future, a future which will hopefully see him get a couple of big runs on top, because he hasnt had one of those since Hardy left.

 

[radec]

when compared to chris jericho then its tough becuase jericho is the best in the world but punk is 1 of the tops in WWE just like he saved his match vs rey after rey got cut open, he thinks on his feet so thats a great acolade to obtain and have.

 

[TheDogfather]

uhhhh the Straight Edge Society/Big Show storyline was REALLY weak. I actually changed the channel...So saying he's the best wrestler ever is a major overstatement.

 

[Heartbreak_Kid_707]

I usually never woulda concidered Punk one of the best wrestlers ever but i like his new look with the short hair, his new attitude and now his awsome in ring ability....

Id rank him #2 right behind the Miz!!!

 

[Tech N9ne]

I am definitely a fan of CM Punk. But best ever is waaaaaaaay beyond an exaggeration at this point. I am pretty sure after all is said and done he will not be the best ever then either. Though I think he is better in ring and also on the mic than some guys that are considered best ever. Somethings just aren't attainable for some people.

To me, just to have someone from the past to compare him to. He would be more of a Randy Savage or Sting compared to a Hulk Hogan or Ric Flair.

That isn't a knock on Punk. I happen to think he is one of the best out there and is underrated right now. But he will always be 2nd fiddle to the Cenas and Ortons.

 

[LSN80]

Dont get me wrong, I love CM Punk. He reminded me on Raw last week how much he's been missed due to his brilliance in the begiinings of his feud with Cena? But the best ever? He's not even the best right now at anything he does, so how could he be the best ever?

John Cena, HHH, Shawn Michaels, Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair, The Undertaker, and Sting jump right off the top of my head as stars that are or were beter then Punk. I could easily name more if I wanted to type all night.

CM Punk is very good in the ring, but his style within WWE isn't great. He's a striker with his legs and arms, and uses far too many rest holds for my liking. Unlike wrestlers such as John Cena, he can't adapt his style within the ring to have a good match with anyone. He's not a large guy, and doesn't wrestle with any type of power whatsoever. There's nothing particularly flashy about what he does either. He's a solid worker, but he's not special. Id rather see Cena's power, Angle's technical ability, or Morrison's flashy pace then Punk's striking style.

While Punk is a fantastic heel on the mic, he's not great as a face. He's had many memorable promos as a heel. His promo at Night of Champions where he went into the crowd was epic. His "Happy Birthday" promo especially and all his mic work in his feud with Rey Mysterio was both disturbing and fantastic at the same time. But his mic skills as a face are quite average, and the only one that truly stands out to me was his promo with JBL during their "drinking contest". Those with the best skills are equally strong both as hees and faces, and Punk isn't among them. Because of this, men like HHH, HBK, Cena, and Jericho are better. All of these men are equally adept at cutting promos both as heels and as faces. Punk has improved leaps and bounds to the point that I believe he could make for a solid face now, but not a main event level one.

As for the statement that Punk's never been in a boring storyline, did you miss the last few months of the SES? He was in the definition of a boring feud with Big Show, whose a pretty entertaining guy in himself. His first World Championship was rather dull as well, as he didn't have a memorable feud within it. He couldnt cut it as a face champion, and WWE realized this when the wrote him off at the foot of Randy Orton at Unforgiven 2008. Neither his matches nor the feuds during this time were any more then average. The greats tend to take any feud and make it feel special, something CM Punk has failed to do.

Its hard to picture CM Punk even on the list among the greatest wrestlers of all time. When I make that list, I would say Rock, Austin, Flair, Hogan, Cena, and HBK. The thought of adding CM Punk to the end is unfathomable. One thing he does have in his favor is that his gimmick is one that transcends the business, and is unique. His "straight edge" gimmick is one that could take him a long way, but not to the level of Cena's "Hustle Loyalty Respect", Austin's anti-authority figure, or Hogan's "Vitamins and Prayers." All of these men were the faces of their company at the time, and household names. CM Punk is neither, and hasn't been in the championship picture for almost a year. Could you imagine that happening to an Austin, Hogan, or Flair? I can't.

At the end of the day, what sets apart the greats from the rest is the epic moments they've created. Austin, Rock, Cena, Hogan, Flair, and HBK, amongst others, have created moments that will go down in history forever. And its not just been one for these men, its been many CM Punk has yet to have one truly epic moment, which seperates him once again from the all time greats. He's a tremendous performer and a star in the business, but he's not even one of the top "faces" of WWE right now. That itself makes it impossible for me to even consider him among the all time greats, let alone the greatest of all time.

 

[Arkham Noir]

Especially so given the weak nature of the current WWE roster. He is top three or five in the current roster but not of all time.

Above everything else, this is probably the most important thing to note. Don't get me wrong, I'm loving WWE right now, but what really makes guys great is their competition. Austin was huge because of the absolute golden chemistry he and McMahon had, as well as the chemistry he had with the rock. Those guys helped make Austin. Right now, WWE doesn't really have names that are big enough to help guys immortalize them selves, so to speak. Sure, The Undrtaker, Triple H, and Cena are all big names, but it just isn't the same. The buisness just isn't in such away that guys are ever going to reach levels like Flair, Hogan, or Austin, and that is what will probably hold CM Punk back ( or any star from this point going forward) from ever being considered the best ever. It's hard to explain.

Anyways, I would say that Punk has all the tools to become one of the best of all-time (no-one will ever undisputedly be the best of all-time), but he will have to finish his career first before we actually see what his place in history will be. Remember, Shawn Micheals had alot of his greatest matches when he was in his forties, so CM Punk could very well prove himself to be a legend.

 

[Jackiz Kirey]

I like CM Punk. He is good on the mic and in the ring. Today on Raw, he made me laugh for 5 minutes straight! He said, "I can't see John Cena!" That was very funny!!! He also said he was a leader of men and a fan shouted out, "You're no leader!" CM Punk is very entertaining, but there are other people that are even more entertaining than Punk and if WWE would push this certain person named PRIMO, then the fans will see him as a very established champion.

 

[xBANEx]

In short? No, not at all. I'm a huge punk fan but he's barely even been in the 'E for long. What... about four years now? Impossible to even be the 'best ever' no matter how great he is.

Besides, the best ever is Hulk Hogan. I hate the guy, always have and I always will, but he -MADE- wrestling. End of story.