Could Punk vs. Hardy have worked any other way?

[Unrated Superstar]

I've heard at least a handful of people on these forums suggest that the Punk vs. Hardy feud was irresponsible or tasteless, especially with WWE's PG rating...reason being, of course, that they made Hardy (the guy with the history of drug abuse) the good guy and CM Punk (the straight-edge, traditional "good example" type) the bad guy. I'll even admit to thinking this scenario was in bad taste myself at first...but then I quickly realized: how else were they supposed to do it?

First off, you have to consider what they had to work with in the first place. The guy who likes drugs is Jeff Hardy. He was so over as a face, what were they supposed to do, make him the villian to Punk's straight-edge hero? Not happening.

But more importantly, and this is more or less the point of the thread...is there really any other way you could work a straight-edge vs. recovering drug abuser storyline? Off the top of my head, I would think the only way to avoid portraying the straight-edger as the bad guy would be to not do the storyline at all. But it really was a good, interesting storyline that drew a major reaction from many fans. Plus, I quickly realized it was pretty tastefully done, with Hardy obviously never preaching that drugs were good, just kinda defending the average person who makes mistakes against CM Punk's self-righteous, "I'm better than you" attitude.

But bottom line, the point of this thread isn't to debate whether or not this storyline was in good taste, as those complaints I heard were only the inspiration for this thread. The point is, can you think of any other way to go as far as how to portray the characters in an angle like this?

To me it would be difficult considering that heels, while they may be arrogant and downright disrespectful in the way they go about what they say and do, most of the time have some sort of valid point to make. In this situation, Punk had a valid claim that he had made good choices in his life by not turning to drugs. What made him heelish was just that he was a total asshole about it. Hardy was the humble, sympathetic character who many could relate to. Could you actually reverse those roles? I mean, if the guy with the history of drug abuse were the bad guy, what would be his redeeming quality? What would be his valid claim? That he's cooler than the straight-edge guy and that drugs are awesome? Just doesn't make a lot of sense.

The only way I could see this feud going differently as far as the face and heel roles would be if they kept them both face. Problem is, if they did that, the straight-edge storyline just couldn't have worked.

So honestly, to me, the answer is no. It couldn't have worked any other way. So I challenge anyone to think of a way that you could have reversed the face roles in this storyline.

 

[shafe_41]

Why would anyone even want it to? It's a dumb thought to begin with. Until Punk, nobody even brought up Jeff's personal problems in a promo or in the ring. It's an irrelavent thought. Or maybe I just don't care? Or maybe I just don't get what you're trying to say? This thread is clownshoes. You need to do some clarification or something.

 

[JBK2008]

Some people may not have liked parts of the feud, but it worked and it got CM Punk the heat he needed to be considered a top heel. I'm glad it went down the way it did and it's really helping CM Punk become a legit main event player.

 

[Rated_R_Superstar2010]

i thought it was very well done and your right i dont think it could have worked anyother way. it wasnt really drugs v no drugs. more adverage man who makes mistakes v some asshole who thinks he's better than everyone. i find it funny how edge said cm puk wanted to be like him and now he is. he's just like edge, well not gimmick wise but cm punk is the new heel of smackdown and i would love to see him carry the show like edge did for so many years. man i cant wait for edge to come back. edge v jericho, edge v cm punk, edge v christian(hopefully will be on smackdown by then), also if they do move orton to smackdown(since legacy doesnt really need him anymore and they could give the raw ME some new faces by switching orton with some1 on smackdown) then we could finally see edge v orton.

 

[Super Crazy]

I do not believe this feud was distasteful at all. It is a rarity that real life problems become storylines anymore. I don't look at is as drug abuser vs straight edge though. I looked at it more as Punk trying to legitimize himself and his character by calling the top face of Smackdown out on his past actions/suspension to try to get the fans to hate Hardy not him. Sure Punk is the heel in the whole thing. At first he was playing it off like he wanted the fans to hate Hardy. Then once he started calling out the fans and random addictions that is more when it turned into the arrogant and cocky " Better then you " attitude. I for one enjoyed the feud quite well. It was a real shame though that in the end we discover Hardy still had drugs in his home and was possibly using/selling them again.

 

[The Mark of Zur-En-Arrh]

I never really considered this fued to be an addict v straight edge angle either tbh. The way i interpreted it, was a continuation of Jeff's struggle to become Champion and STAY champion, while at the same time using it as a platform to launch CM pUnk's heel character as well.

Look at it this way. From pretty much late 2007 onwards Jeff Hardy was trying to break through the barrier from upper-mid carder to ME level player. In 2 separate EC matches he was one of the last 2 guys to be eliminated. He'd beaten all of the ME players on SD, so HHH, Edge, Jericho and even the Undertaker, but for some reason, whenever the title was on the line, he just couldn't get the win. Then finally, finally Jeff Hardy becomes the WHC by beating HHH, the man he always lost to, and Edge, age old rival and the man who cost him his previous title shot, at Armageddon.

Jeff then had to retain his title against Edge so that he could move away from that battle and start a fresh chapter of his career as champion. Of course that's not how it went down, because his brother Matt, turning on him out of jealousy, and costing hi the title.

Jeff goes on to defeat his brother and goes back on the hunt for the WHC, against Edge (yet again) in a match that they made famous together, a Ladder match. Jeff gets the win again and becomes the new WHC and the fans are elated. Their underdog hero has got the strap again and we can enjoy a nice long run with him as Champion. Was 6 minutes a long enough run for you Hardy fans?

Tragedy the strikes the 'Charismatic Enigma' as the MITB holder decides that then is the perfect opportunity to cash in on a weakened champion and take the title in a cakewalk title match. What was significant about this particular MITB cash in, was the guy with the case was a face. Unlike Cena v RVD, the MITB holder used the heel tactic to steal the title, and didn't do it in a venue where he knew he'd be loved and celebrated for his efforts.

Now we move on to CM Punk. A man who's connection with the WWE Universe had gotten stronger and stronger with each passing week so that he didn't need to say anything and the fans still loved him. A man who was never beaten for the WHC when he had it last, and a man who was cheered heavily (although not by me) when he won the MITB briefcase for the 2nd time. He succesfully cashes in MITB against a weakened champion, and gets boo'ed to death for it.

And he's left wondering, 'why?'

From where i was sat, people didn't hate Punk for being straight edge, that came later. People hated Punk for taking the title off of Hardy. They'd have still loved him if Edge had won that ladder match and Punk had cashed in, but because it was Hardy, the fans weren't happy.

So Punk started asking why? Why am i getting boo'ed for doing exactly what i did last year? Why is this guy getting cheered and i'm getting boo'ed when he's a filthy drug addict and i'm a more respectable champion? Why do fans love him for damn near crippling himself unneccessarily when i'm putting on great matches?

So he decided to try and convince people that he was more deserving of their adolation, and when they still didn't give it to him, that's when he started shitting on the public.

Jeff hated Punk for costing him his title dreams in a more dastardly and underhanded way than previous challengers had, and Punk didn't hate Hardy, he didn't even sweat Hardy, he just resented the fans for not respecting him anywhere near as much as they respected someone who, Punk felt, didn't deserve any respect.

It's a lot like the Bret Hart/Austin fued. Bret hated that the fans loved Austin, so therefore he hated Austin as well, and Austin just wanted to whup someone's ass and Bret was always willing to oblige him.

This wasn't drugs v anti-drugs, this was a champion wanting the cheers that his opponent was getting, and he used the fact that he's straight edge and Jeff is not to win people over to his side, and it didn't work, it just made people hate him more. Now Jeff's gone, and Punk's attitude is 'love me or hate me, i'm still the champion'....... well for another 4 days anyway. So i don't think it was distasteful, because the drugs/no drugs wasn't the major factor of this fued, it just happened to be the one major difference between Jeff and Punk, and it's what Punk decided to fixate on.

 

[Unrated Superstar]

Just wanna make it clear that I don't think it was distasteful either. I did for about a minute, then I actually thought about it. I suppose I just needed to get that out there in response to some of the complaints I saw about it, and I was just curious if anyone could think of any other way you could make it work. But I reckon it might be impossible.