But that's just how you get over in wrestling in general. You use somebody established to fuel the antics of their adversary. I mean, it wouldn't very well be called 'getting over' if there wasn't something or someone that you got over. That's how it works. How could somebody even get over without using someone else's thunder to do it. The only example I can think of that fits your bill is Santino.
Aye.
If you mean as a fan favourite then perhaps. However, he'd been over as a heel for a long time beforehand. In the end over is over so is still disproves what you're saying.
Really don't remember this happening. Bad crowd perhaps. I don't remember anything other than superb reaction for Punk going back 6 months now.
Indeed, but he's still using a lot of techniques to ensure the smarks are satisfied. It may have been dumbed down a bit, but he's still satisfying the smarter audience on a regular basis.
I hope you don't mean me. If you do then I suggest you go back and read what I say because this response isn't really appropriate to it.
But still smarky to a high degree.
Well something's up here because you're not right either.
Once again, a tad bit of revisionist history? I don't remember these quieter reactions he was beginning to get. I'm also fascinated by how you're able to dissect the individual reactions of various groups within an audience.
It's a gradual process. He's been getting more over for a while but you could so easily chalk it down to longevity at this stage. No reason for this proposed change in his act to be responsible for his fan alterations.
No, it is.
Digging up things like the surfboard and 'Funk Man' that only the smarks know about, and using against Laurenitis it is really pandering to the smarky market. He did this yesterday. Smarky as it gets.
Sure, but a large part of his character and the reason he's over is because of how he appealed to the internet fans. He's gotten to a stage where he can drift from that but it's wrong to forget that as a component as to why he got over.
You also can if you happen to be the best in the world, which, with the way he's wrestled against Cena and Del Rio amongst others, he seems to be doing a pretty good job of convincing people that he is.
It partly is.
Many people have always believed it. Using it as part of his character has helped more people to buy it but the vocal fans for him have always been there.
I don't disagree with this entirely, which makes me think you lost your train of thought somewhat.
See, you have it all wrong. You don't get over using someone else's thunder. You get visibility and they go "o wow he's good too". That's why Punk was against Cena and HHH, more people pay attention and realized "wow, he's awesome". If all it took was getting the rub, then Morrison would have been a lot more over. Shelton benjamin would have been a lot more over. At the end of the day, you get you over. Wwe can do things to set the spark, but the wrestler has to maintain it. You maintain it by making people believe.
Don't say "smarter audience", smarks have the least amount of business sense. Ask anyone off the street what makes a great pro wrestler, they'll tell you "he's a good actor" which more or less means "he makes people believe". Ask most smarks, they'll say "knows lots of moves and never botches".
My point with Punk was that he's very good at his character and his character appeals to a wide audience.
Go back on the raw review thread. In the midwest Punk wasn't as over.
He's making fun of the old character. Smarks don't even know about Ace. He's not a smarky guy. If he were making Kenta Kobashi comparisons, maybe, but it only seems smarky to you. Bottom line is that Punk has adapted his character to be broader, enough so that smarks on here are upset about it (they don't matter). I don't see how it's at all arguable that 1) he's changed his character a bit and 2) it's not so much the content that gets you over but how good you are at making people believe.
Explain how the ice cream bars thing is at all smarky? Everyone likes ice cream. It's no different than any other little phrase superstars have.
Punk isn't over because he appealed to the spot mark IWC type. If that were the case, he'd have always been this over. I don't even see how that's arguable. He's acted and been booked like a guy who will state his mind. He's the 21st Century blue collar babyface.
Here's my thought. Punk is over, not because everyone goes 'FINALLY SOMEONE IS A VOICE FOR THE INTERWEBZ!!!!" It's because he's damn good at portraying his character and he appeals to a lot of people. If his character only appeal to smarks, he wouldn't be as over as he is. As I said, he's the modern blue collar babyface.
My point was that it's not WHAT your character is, it's not WHAT you say, it's not WHAT moves you do, it's HOW you do it all. Does it all fit into a character people can believe it. At it's core, that's why Punk, Rhodes, Rock, Austin, HBK, or anyone else who's ever gotten over has gotten over.