CM Punk Has Got To Go

[Барбоса]

The major problem in this thread and let's face it, most threads that end up this way is that opinions and predictions get construed as "facts." Saying that Punk is or is not the man to grow the wrestling business is predictive and is therefore inherently subjective.

In the current climate, growing the wrestling business for more than a single PPV cycle might be next to impossible without the second coming of Stone Cold Steve Austin and as much as I like Punk and have liked him as an overall performer since he debuted in IWA: MS and ROH, he is not the Rattlesnake. But to proclaim that Punk has failed as champion, not forgetting that when this pronouncement was made he had only been champion again for 8 days, is so premature as to not be provable by facts or figures.

 

[IWChampion]

While I disagree with Ryan, the other posts on here are stupid. Downright, stupid responses.

He basically says "objectively it seems like Punk can't carry a feud unless he's with a big star" which actually has some merit. To which you guys say "subjectively, I think he is a 5/5 on the mic and a 4.5/5 in the ring".

Here's what I think. I DON'T think Punk is as big of a star as the marks on here think. However, I don't think he's as bad as Ryan thinks. The Del Rio feud was over. People just weren't interested. Now, if you move Punk on to something else against someone else who also isn't a star, then you know that Punk just isn't that much of a draw.

Exactly! Exactly! Exactly! It took over 10 pages of argument lol. I don't get why everyone else blew this out of proportion. Most of you are arguing apples vs oranges and it doesn't matter how much support you can throw behind your point because of that.

 

[Martin Gabriel]

What it is, is the WWE shooting themselves in the foot by force feeding everyone John Cena for all these years. Normal WWE fans are actually confused about what to make of Punk, Del Rio and such, i.e. the good guys. Majority of viewers are hardcore WWE fans who still believe in that it's all black and white. When WWE puts Cena in the beginning of the show, the hardcore fans will tune out once he's done. WWE never really gave time for anyone else to get built up as this whole monster like they did Cena. They've realized this. Hence why Cena is always pro everyone nowadays. 'Cause they're scrambling for someone else. I can agree as an indy fan who has liked Punk since his ROH days, that the WWE "Universe" still hasn't accepted him as the next guy. Except for the smart fans in Chicago, New York and Philadelphia (which were cities ROH mainly go to and watch good wrestling). But with the feeble minded cattle that WWE has pandered to with Cena for these past 7 years, if Cena isn't in a title picture or the main, they don't buy. It's really WWE's doing that sales and views go down whenever ANYONE else is champ besides Cena. Funny thing is, is that it's slowly getting there. There's a pizza place that I go to, to watch the ppvs and everyone who booed Punk during his package with Cena is now splooging all over the guy like they do Cena. So it's turning around. But WWE is dropping the ball. Not all of the blame goes on Punk. They haven't made stars out of anyone else yet. It's like when Cena and Orton had their year long feud, they had to 'cause there was no one else. In this case, it would be Cena and Punk but they turned Punk face instead of keeping it to what worked. Now he doesn't have anyone with big star power. Yeah he can have great matches with Ziggler who is awesome but Ziggler hasn't reached star power yet. WWE never took the time to build anyone else for a "just in case" scenario. But what IS true is that Punk's shirts sell more than Cena's and Ryder's are closing in on beating Cena's too. So WWE obviously knows something that anti-Punk fans don't.

 

[poppycock]

The comment is ridiculous in my opinion and I am sure many posters have stated why (I skipped most of the posts). I will say one thing that kind of bugs me about CM Punk now though. I am not a fan of everything he does, say as far as pushing the reality thing goes. I agree and am entertained by a lot of what his character has become and he is no doubt a star in the making but I am a huge fan of gimmicks in the WWE and his mocking of catchphrases, cliches and the like does not always go down well with me. The WWE has been built on Catchphrases, gimmicks and wrestling cliches as well as good wrestling and I have no problem with them. It's marketing on a business level and it's entertaining for me. The only reason I have a problem with Punk in this sense is not because it isn't entertaining and funny because it is, but because I feel for his character to remain as it is then the whole landscape could have to change. I know a lot of people are in favour of reality and would like less gimmicks, cartoony characters... but not me. Those are what got me hooked in the first place. If CM Punk get's in future feuds with Undertaker, Kane or wrestlers like that he can now easily mock them and make them look ridiculous. I know it's nothing new seeing as The Rock and others have done similar things in the past but yeah it does not always sit well with me.

As I said the original comment is just stupid though but that's my opinion.

 

[Martin Gabriel]

The Champ:

Can you read between the lines or not? You are a true Punk Mark! I gave the title appropriate to my post. Nowhere in it does it EVER say he needed to leave the WWE. What it did state was why I thought him as champ, needed to be phased out; Hence, he needed to leave the "dress up" immage of "carrying" the WWE. My further post stated he needed to be sent to SD as a world title contender or be delegated to the upper-mid-card. Did you not take any comp. & rhet. classes at college? Or did you ever go? Or are you even old enough. You are taught to read the true meaning into writings and not take everything literally? It was a symbolic satement regarding my thesis.

And yes, the past names of HBK/Bret Hart/HHH/Angle, were leaps and bounds ahead of Punk in every in-ring catagory; Story telling, Phsycology, Working the crowd, move sets, and classic matches. It's true. If you want to trivialize it, fine. But you sir, have NO historical reference to even be making such claims on how goiod Punk is.

He's already won the WHC twice and they were really good reigns 'cause he had someone to play off of in Undertaker and Jeff Hardy (before he was a major fuck up). I grew up loving HBK. Now obviously no one can be better than he was. But to relate the two as if Punk should be like him or H, or Angle, or Hart is being really naive. Sales are down because Cena is not on top. Majority of sales are from people who followed with the "Cena or no one" band wagon. So like I said, if he's not on top, those marks aren't buying. But there ARE more reasons as to why ppv sales are down. Not "it's Punk's fault". Sales have been down for a long time now. Some are worse than others. A lot of people only buy certain ppvs. Like the main 4. But added the MITB ppv 'cause it was actually a really good card without crappy booking, except for Henry/Show and the divas match. Yes, I've liked Punk for a long time but that's not to say that I wouldn't be able to see if he was doing anything wrong. Because he isn't. Even with how good I think he is, he still needs a good villain. That's even what Cena's been missing for a while now. What it is, is the story and prestige of the WWE title is gone. WWE keeps making make shift, last minute title matches that doesn't give people enough time to care about. They don't even give Punk enough tv time and he's the champ ferchrissakes. It's 20-30 minute promos of Cena and 10 mins of Punk either talking with someone else or doing a quick match. They're not giving him a reason for fans to get emotionally invested in him like during his feud with Cena. He's working with what he's being given and he's still doing it well. Punk and Ziggler are actually great storytellers in their matches which is why they would have a great rivalry. To say that Punk is not, well you'd have to see his ROH stuff. What did mess it up was turning him face. But they had to since there wasn't another top face other than Cena. But it's a building process.

 

[RD_21]

I didn't read 18 pages and I haven't read more than a post or two but here's a fact for you... DEL RIO SUCKS now, he has 0 momentum and credibility since he didn't win the title at Mania. Nobody believe in him.

Punk doesn't need a big name to carry him because whether you like it or not Punk (as shown yesterday again) is getting the biggest reaction and louder chant. Saying he is just over with the IWC at this point would be dumb and idiotic at best. The girls and kids bought into Punk and now have his shirt too.

Punk just need someone that isn't Del Rio. Even Cena couldn't make people interested in Del Rio.

 

[oldhamandy1]

I didn't read the whole thread, why would I? It was started by Ryan86, first off mate if you want people to take you seriously say people not 'ppl'. Spelling not that important, but come on saying 'cuz' that just makes you seem thick. If English isn't your first language and you're still learning then I'm sorry you need a better teacher, I know language evolves but words making sense is still important to some.

Ok that's off my back been making me cringe since I saw your first post, now for the point you made in the when you brain came up the idea of making this stupid idea of a thread. One you can't just 'get rid of someone' he has a contract that he just signed, so you want him to job for a few years. Ratings prove nothing, seeing as America isn't the only country that watches WWE. I know WWE can't include 100% worldwide PPV buys, because in England I only pay for a few, some are free. So WWE use other means such as reaction from the fans, and merchandise sales. Both of which Punk is doing well with, OK so you don't like him that's your bag, but quite frankly so fucking what? I mean this who are you? None of our thoughts and feelings matter, Manchester United have 300 million fans, if one of them says 'sack Rooney' he hasn't scored from open play since September would they? Of course not you fucking idiot!

Why the ratings have dropped is something WWE need to solve, chances are it will be something like something was good on the other side. Hell I watch 3 days late sometimes, surley many do that in good ol' US of A.

Oh and just so you know Shefki Kuqi is God, if you don't know who he is look him up. Then no doubt you will show me 'facts' that prove in reality God is Ian Moore, one more question Ryan86 do you get your facts from the same place Benetiz did?

On a side note pretty happy I was able to mention a few obscure football shit in there.

 

[Alastor]

In my opinion, Punks gimmick can never really be over with the masses because of one thing and one thing alone: It reminds me of an internet troll.

Trolls have their fans, but they probably constitute a minority of any community they populate. Their fans will be the most vocal so it appears they are extremely popular but the silent majority will just detest that kind of attention grabbing stunts trolls pull and not say a word. Punk's appeal is basically to a minority and that may be good enough for a upper-midcard face it is not good enough for the face of the company flagship show.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

In my opinion, Punks gimmick can never really be over with the masses because of one thing and one thing alone: It reminds me of an internet troll.

Trolls have their fans, but they probably constitute a minority of any community they populate. Their fans will be the most vocal so it appears they are extremely popular but the silent majority will just detest that kind of attention grabbing stunts trolls pull and not say a word. Punk's appeal is basically to a minority and that may be good enough for a upper-midcard face it is not good enough for the face of the company flagship show.

Too bad he changed his character about 2 months ago (ironically, around the time I said the same thing as you) and now he has outsold Cena and is arguably more over.

His character isn't an internet troll anymore, he's more of a modern pissed off blue collar guy. He's closer to an occupy wallstreet protestor than a troll.

 

[Alastor]

Too bad he changed his character about 2 months ago (ironically, around the time I said the same thing as you) and now he has outsold Cena and is arguably more over.

His character isn't an internet troll anymore, he's more of a modern pissed off blue collar guy. He's closer to an occupy wallstreet protestor than a troll.

Really don't see that much of a difference. If he is an occupy wallstreet guy now he reminds me of one of those that joined in because it is ironic or cool (since he has nothing to complain about and everyone is doing it) and not those with something to protest about.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

Really don't see that much of a difference. If he is an occupy wallstreet guy now he reminds me of one of those that joined in because it is ironic or cool (since he has nothing to complain about and everyone is doing it) and not those with something to protest about.

People on here are complaining that Punk isn't acting like a net troll anymore. Shit someone a while ago said he's "John Cena-lite" so yea, pretty much everyone else sees it. When's the last time you watched?

 

[Alastor]

People on here are complaining that Punk isn't acting like a net troll anymore. Shit someone a while ago said he's "John Cena-lite" so yea, pretty much everyone else sees it. When's the last time you watched?

Probably a couple of months ago for Raw after the HHH went out. Punk was still the stupid trolling self then. I have been watching Smackdown more often these days. Mark Henry and a part time Big Show is more entertaining these days.

 

[Lion's Sacrifice]

Not going to lie this has been very, very entertaining to read.

So the you say that Punk needs to go. Because rating has dropped, over the past several months. Then you turn around and say that anyone who disagrees with you isn't looking at it objectively. Well let's look at this objectively. Over the past several months Punk has not been in the spotlight as you have said he is. Look at it, from SummerSlam, to Night of Champions there was a huge conspiracy theory going on. While Punk was a part of this angle, he was not the focus. Also let's remember that the angle was huge back then. Yet, ratings were still not as great as they could have been. Mainly because Creative had no idea where they were going to go. Also you had John Cena vs Del Rio, a rush feud that was getting the spotlight as well.

Now from Night of Champions to Hell in a Cell. Punk is beginning to get the focus, but isn't there yet as he is added into a triple threat match. So here you can say he's beginning to get the main light. So you could say the ratings here can be on him.

Then from Hell in a Cell to Vengeance Punk takes a backseat in the main event picture and is with Triple h in a tag match against Miz and R-Truth, the focus isn't on Punk, its on Cena Del Rio, and the Miz and R-Truth because they just ruined the last PPV, and its beginning to move to Trips because he is losing control of the show. Punk isn't the focus here, he's not getting the main spotlight, he's a side character in the main arch of the story. So to say ratings are on Punk here aren't true.

From Vengeance to Survivor Series, there is no way you could say that the ratings are on Punk here. While he is facing Del Rio for the championship, all the focus is on the Rock and Cena.

Now, to say that Punk is the reason the ratings have dropped would not be correct. Over the past several months there are many other factors going into the ratings dropping. Perhaps you could look at the way Raw has been written over the past several months. The big conspiracy angle? Turned out to be awful, there were so many directions they could have gone and where did they go? Nash texted himself. How about ADR's title run? It was suppose to last until Survivor Series. Instead we get a quick Cena title run, that is there to "boost ratings" because Del Rio wasn't getting the ratings. Well, that didn't work so they went back to the original plan. That didn't help ratings either.

The thing is you can't put this on Punk. Ratings have not decreased because of one man. They have decreased because of the overall product. Look, this has happen over the years. Look back at the lack of ratings during the mid 90s. That featured two of the biggest stars in the industry. Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart, yet we didn't think they needed to go.

Why don't you look at this a little bit more objectively before you go and say that CM Punk is the reason for the poor ratings. When in actuality people want to watch something that draws them in. Something Raw has not been doing because of the terrible writing, and rewriting that Vince has been doing before each show.

 

[CyberPunk]

I read almost 14 pages, and then thought (like Miz says)...really?? I wanted to come up with something to explain the ratings...like why Punk is not one responsible for ratings alone. He doesn't run the whole show for 2 hours, neither has been the focus for last 3 months. Or how Del Rio hasn't developed as a main eventer and while good in the ring, has been boring as a character and can't put up a feud with anyone not named Rey. But then I thought, really?? Why bother? Why should be bother ourselves with ratings. Yes, as someone who likes his wrestling, I enjoy the show, and dare I say I enjoy Punk. As a fan, I care about whether the show entertains me. And that what exactly Punk is doing. Why should I worry about how E can bring in more viewers? It is not my look out. I enjoy the show and till I do it, I don't give a damn what the ratings are.

For once I thought we have a new forum named WWE business...

 

[ryan86]

OK, here comes the adult, back again one more to put sunlight on the ignorance of the past 3 post, (and about 160 of the 189). Sunlight is the best disinfectant...

Ok, anyone from the U.S./Canada knows exactly what a person means when they replace "cuz" with "Because". It helps to make room for the entire post when you can shorten words since i have limited-posting-charchter availability. And I admit that I am not the greatest speller, what you can ask TWJC The Beginnings, we (me and him) are in the top 1% when it comes to educated posters in this forum. I use short cut spelling when it's nessisary.

And yes, the ratings have dropped for 7 consecutive weeks, so whatever "phenominal-rising-star" Punk is supposed to be, It's not having ANY "coat tail" effects on the 3 largest money making indicators for the WWE. Punk has been good for Punk. His "nich" fanbase is mainly IWC with bandwaggon hoppers, and this thing will burn it's course in 4 months.

You will all just have to accept him as an "average" champ.

Ratings and business in general for SD have shown increases since Mark Henry became World champ. This is a statistical fact.

Everyone is buying into Mark Henry and what he as champ is contributing to the over-all product. It looks credible and he fits his charachter. People are staying tuned in, and a few hundred thousand who were not wathing, have came back consistantly.

Now, Mark Henry is by no means a phenomenom, exploding with new popularity. But he is a very sucessfull champ as he is having "coat tail" effects on the entire product by increasing key business indicators. His only claim to fame isn't selling merchandise like Punk, he has been good for the entire WWE in terms of buiness.

Punk has been good for Punk as champ.
Henry has been good for the WWE as camp.

Raw needs to find it's own Mark Henry, someone who will benifit the company beyond their own personal merchandise sales.

 

[BK Styles]

OK, here comes the adult, back again one more to put sunlight on the ignorance of the past 3 post, (and about 160 of the 189). Sunlight is the best disinfectant...

Pull your head out of your ass. That's one of the most idiotic openings to a post I have seen, and there have been some real awful ones.

Ok, anyone from the U.S./Canada knows exactly what a person means when they replace "cuz" with "Because". It helps to make room for the entire post when you can shorten words since i have limited-posting-charchter availability.

No-one gives a fuck.

And I admit that I am not the greatest speller, what you can ask TWJC The Beginnings, we (me and him) are in the top 1% when it comes to educated posters in this forum. I use short cut spelling when it's nessisary.

It's the english language for christs sake. It's not hard.

And yes, the ratings have dropped for 7 consecutive weeks, so whatever "phenominal-rising-star" Punk is supposed to be, It's not having ANY "coat tail" effects on the 3 largest money making indicators for the WWE. Punk has been good for Punk. His "nich" fanbase is mainly IWC with bandwaggon hoppers, and this thing will burn it's course in 4 months.

Do you ignore his reactions in arenas? I know this has been beaten to death with a big stick, but HE IS ONE OF THE MOST OVER GUYS OUT THERE. I honestly don't think that can be contested; listen to the reactions he gets. Oh, and Punk has been champ for little under three weeks. If there is a problem, it's underlying, and not caused by Punk as champ, and he sure as hell ain't gonna solve that in three weeks.

You will all just have to accept him as an "average" champ.

Fuck off do we. You just don't like him. And you're justifying it by branding him a failure because he hasn't been able to pull ratings up within TRHEE weeks of being champion.

Ratings and business in general for SD have shown increases since Mark Henry became World champ. This is a statistical fact.

Henry has been around for a lot, LOT longer than Punk. Here's an idea; say I watched wrestling 12 years ago, and was ahuge Mark Henry fan. I stop watching wrestling around 2003, when he was nothing more than a joke, fi we're honest. Let's say I catch up with wrestling recently, and see that a guy I used to root for has been world champ, and has been for a while. I'm gonna wanna see it. This is an extreme example, but its more logical and likely than this garbage you're hemorrhaging out.

Everyone is buying into Mark Henry and what he as champ is contributing to the over-all product. It looks credible and he fits his charachter. People are staying tuned in, and a few hundred thousand who were not wathing, have came back consistantly.

And do you have proof other than coinciding numbers that Mark Henry is the cause? Maybe it's something else to do with the product.

Now, Mark Henry is by no means a phenomenom, exploding with new popularity. But he is a very sucessfull champ as he is having "coat tail" effects on the entire product by increasing key business indicators. His only claim to fame isn't selling merchandise like Punk, he has been good for the entire WWE in terms of buiness. Punk has been good for Punk as champ.

Well, he's the first dominant heel champion we've had in a long time that's actually worked, and it's a guy who's been around for a very long time finally grabbing the brass ring. The likelyhood is that it's gonna have some sort of effect. Henry has also been champ quite a while longer than Punk; 82 days compared to Punk's 19. Punk has had just about 3 weeks has champ. JUST. GIVE. HIM. TIME. I'm not saying he'll prove you wrong, but the figures you keep yapping about are about right now, in WWE's worst period traditionally. Why not wait and have a look when it's in the WWE's best period?

Henry has been good for the WWE as camp.

AGAIN with the spelling... (though this made me chuckle a bit. For all the wrong reasons.)

Raw needs to find it's own Mark Henry, someone who will benifit the company beyond their own personal merchandise sales.

You need to find something new to bitch about. It's clear you don't rate Punk. We get that. But he is in the infantsy of his big face push. We have no idea how it is going to pan out, and if you are saying you can judge a companies future in ratings by SIX WEEKS of ratings that, whilst declining are declining very slowly during WWE's worst period, then good luck to you. You clearly need to be hired by WWE. Or if not, TNA will probably come looking.

Just give it time. Let's see how he does around Wrestlemania and beyond. If the 'trend' continues without any other variables that could be a cause then I will pay respect. But I SERIOUSLY doubt that's gonna happen.

 

[ryan86]

BK201:

While you are having an "I only care about my own enterainment" argument, I am making a statistical and financial argument that puts aside personal subjective views.

I cant say; "Hey, look at how great Punk is, he's so entertaining and is way over".

What the hell kind of argument is that? It's not even a point that someone can objectively make. It's purley subjective and I'm not into subjective arguments.

The day that statement should be made, is when viewers find him over enough to stick around. Go look at any period from mid Oct - Mid Dec and you tell me where you find it traditional that Raw loses viewers for 7 consecutive week? I have observed these for many years, and at this point, some of the higher ratings have come in the first and second week of December (From the Oct-Dec Period), and the only time they take significant dives is in the last 2 Raws of December.

And everyone knows business picks up around WM, no matter who is champ. I'll give my final judgment in the 2nd quarter of '12.

 

[BK Styles]

BK201:

While you are having an "I only care about my own enterainment" argument, I am making a statistical and financial argument that puts aside personal subjective views.

I cant say; "Hey, look at how great Punk is, he's so entertaining and is way over".

What the hell kind of argument is that? It's not even a point that someone can objectively make. It's purley subjective and I'm not into subjective arguments.

The day that statement should be made, is when viewers find him over enough to stick around. Go look at any period from mid Oct - Mid Dec and you tell me where you find it traditional that Raw loses viewers for 7 consecutive week? I have observed these for many years, and at this point, some of the higher ratings have come in the first and second week of December (From the Oct-Dec Period), and the only time they take significant dives is in the last 2 Raws of December.

And everyone knows business picks up around WM, no matter who is champ. I'll give my final judgment in the 2nd quarter of '12.

I'm not saying Punk is great. I think only once in one of tour three threads about the issue have I mentioned my opinion of Punk. And I'm not talking about my own entertainment. Watch an episode of RAW with Punk recently, and listen to his crowd reaction. You cannot possibly argue that it is anything other than very positive. Go on. I want you to argue this. Hell, I hate Randy Orton, but I accept he's one of the biggest faces on Smackdown and gets the biggest reaction, even though I dislike him.

As far as your subjective look at facts and figures goes, its bullshit. You have no proof that Punk is behind the ratings slump anymore than I have proof that it isn't. RAW has been losing viewers for seven weeks. Congratulations, I will agree with you on that. Have they been huge jumps? No.

Also, look at this past RAW:

http://www.lordsofpain.net/news/wwe..._RAW_TLC_Contract_Signing_Stats_and_More.html

I think you'll find there that the lowpoint of the show was NOT Punk's segment, and the part he was involved in gained over 600,000 viewers, up to a 3.28 rating, 0.01 off of the opening segments rating, which was the highest of the show.

By your logic, Punk's segment should have been much, much lower than that, yes?

 

[Martin Gabriel]

ryan86:

Hey Ryan, I really want to know how come you weren't watching the ratings and numbers closely when Del Rio was champ? Oh yeah, 'cause not everybody was talking about him so that didn't give you a chance to be different. Hipster.

 

[ryan86]

Bk201:

Wow, you really impressed me. You gave me statistics and facts to make your argument, left out the subjective crap, and you came out with a very impressive conclusion.

actually it was a net gain of 621,000 views but i see you were rounding, lol.

So the 18-24 demo came back strong for the over-run and that can be properly attributed to Punk. You won your first point.

Now when will the "Coat tail" effect happen? That's when we will see the the ratings as a whole increase, PPV buys increase, and attendance increase.

Like I said, if that starts to hapen, I will call Punk a champ that's good for the WWE as a whole. Untill then... he's average...

 

[Martin Gabriel]

Ryan86, if merchandise sales were enough to keep John Cena at a prominent spot on RAW, you're probably underestimating how much those sales benefit WWE. It's also worth mentioning that John Cena winning the WWE Championship from Alberto Del Rio (an exchange that was intended to remedy the wavering ratings) did not lift WWE from its ratings slump. If you're to base Cena's drawing power by the same criteria you're using for Punk, you'd be neglecting all the years past in which Cena's proved to be a tremendous face of the company.

While I don't want to take credit away from Mark Henry, I can't help thinking that improvement in Smackdown's ratings could also have something to do with how the roster as a whole has improved. If you look at the guys on Smackdown compared with them immediately after the draft, you'd see Smackdown creative has made leaps and bounds in getting them over. This is true for Sheamus, Wade Barrett, Cody Rhodes, Daniel Bryan and, of course, Mark Henry, all of whom were nowhere near as over on RAW immediately before the draft as they are now. By contrast, RAW has managed only to improve Dolph Ziggler, CM Punk, Alberto Del Rio and Zack Ryder over the past year, though with very unsteady and in some cases unintended pushes. Dolph Ziggler is the only one of those four who's been pushed without a significant lapse in elevation, such as Zack Ryder suffered when they seemed to be leaning towards giving Mason Ryan his push instead.

CM Punk gets huge pops and sells a lot of merchandise. Ratings have not yet improved, but there are many other factors we could attribute to that other than CM Punk being a bad draw.

 

[Mike D]

The original poster is 100 % correct. PPV have suffered and ratings are absolutely terrible. WWE itself is stuggling..Changes need to be made fast.

 

[TheHeartbreakPunk]

Whilst I agree that wwe is suffering, i dont think its punk. I think its del rio. Del rio had gotten incredibly boring to the point where what punk said is true, people mute the tvs and go do other crap when he comes on. I think del rio should go back to smackdown. He does not belong in the wwe title picture at all.

 

[ECW Sandman]

Get rid of Punk ? is the OP for real here get rid of punk, why so you can watch your beloved John '' I have three moves '' Cena, Ryan dude CM Punk is a hell of a lot more talented better worker and better on the mic then a lot of guys on RAW and Smackdown combined , so please tell us oh great one in your own fucking words why do you want Punk to go. Have you ever watched old tapes of CM Punk in ROH or TNA the man is a very very good athlete you may be the one person that wants him to get fired a lot of us who watch his matches and see the progress he has made face it dude his a bigger star then John Cena your idol that's why you want him gone because you know CM Punk is getting bigger then Cena and you don't want to admit it Punk Is Better then Cena.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

Get rid of Punk ? is the OP for real here get rid of punk, why so you can watch your beloved John '' I have three moves '' Cena, Ryan dude CM Punk is a hell of a lot more talented better worker and better on the mic then a lot of guys on RAW and Smackdown combined , so please tell us oh great one in your own fucking words why do you want Punk to go. Have you ever watched old tapes of CM Punk in ROH or TNA the man is a very very good athlete you may be the one person that wants him to get fired a lot of us who watch his matches and see the progress he has made face it dude his a bigger star then John Cena your idol that's why you want him gone because you know CM Punk is getting bigger then Cena and you don't want to admit it Punk Is Better then Cena.

Look at this fuckin net smark. "three moves of doom" "ever see X IN ROH?" any other cliches you want to hit on?

Ryan thinks Cena is boring. Punk in ROh doesn't mean shit. You are talking about subjective things. objectively, a good wrestler draws. Punk isn't good because he's a 'very very good athlete" (which he's not BTW, if you think so, you're fuckin stupid and need to actually go workout, Punk doesn't do anything athletically most high school wide recievers couldn't do), it's his brains that get him over.

Punk is not a bigger star than Cena. that's stupid to say. He sold more merch like 1 month. Objectively (I know that's not the world you live in), he's nowhere near as big a star as Cena.

i disagree with Ryan, i think there are too many other factors to blame Punk and think Punk is doing a very good job at being more marketable. Punk doesn't sound smarmy and annoying and like iWC smarks (the poster I quoted) because that annoys the shit out of most people.