Dave Meltzer Gives Cena vs. Punk at Money In The Bank 5 Stars

[Wonder]

Dave Meltzer, famous wrestling jornalist from Wrestling Observer Newsletter and Figure Four Weekly, classified CM Punk vs John Cena from the Money In The Bank 2011 PPV as a ***** (5 stars) match.

According with his statics, this is John Cena's first match with a 5 star rating, and the first from WWE since HBK vs Undertaker from Bad Blood 97, the first Hell In a Cell. This is also Punk's first 5 star match since 2004.

Do you agree with this? Do you think Punk vs Cena is a five star match? And you agree, with being the first match from WWE with that rating since 1997?

In my opinion, it could be seen as 5 star match, but i would give it a ****3/4 instead, because there was some botches among other stuff, during the match.

Also, i believe that if this match deserves a 5 star rating, at least, HBK vs Taker from Mania XXVI deserves the same rating.

What do you think? Do you find any other matches from WWE since Bad Blood 1997 that deserves that prestigious rating?

 

[Poop Master Flex]

I actually think this match is deserving of 5 stars.

First off it was a fantastic match, going into the match it had what you would call a "big match feel", it was a match people wanted to see and obviously had a lot on the line. I felt the match itself came of damn near perfect. They told a fantastic story inside the ring that kept myself on the edge of my seat the entire time and because there was so much riding on this match it just made the many near falls, finisher kick outs and moments that much more meaningful knowing both guys just refused to lose. The ending was perfect in my opinion with the attempted screwjob and Cena refusing to win that way only to lose 10 seconds later was tremendous and most of all it made you want to know what would happen next, last monday was the 1st time in years I was legitimately excited for RAW. From everything done and the story told this match deserves 5 stars easy.

The only other 2 matches I feel truly deserved a 5 star rating were the Rock vs. Hollywood Hogan and HBK vs. Undertaker at WM25.

 

[H33LTurn]

I hate to be a dick but that match was far from 5 stars. Dont get me wrong, the story behind it was amazing and the finish was well thought out but as for the in ring wrestling I was disappointed. For such an event these two should've brought out more to the table than what they did. The only memorable parts were the counters to the AA, the GTS, and Punk locking in the Anaconda Vise. The match was a bit above average so thats why I would give it 3.5 to 4 stars but seeing as the 5 stars have only been saved for special occasions they're not getting those.

 

[The Suplexer Perfecter]

Wow really? I guess the crowd really helped the match. Which is how I think Samoa Joe vs Kenta Kobashi got the 5 stars.

But Cena in a 5 star match. So I guess he can wrestle.

And yes Dave Meltzer isn't the be all end all on a tremendous match/5 star match. But I'm honestly shocked.

Though the matches he has given 5 stars are indeed amazing.

 

[Papa Zapatista]

I'd give it a 4.5 out of 5 stars. As the OP stated, it definitely possessed the "big match" feel. The story, structure, and set-up to the match was damn close to flawless. The only aspect I didn't approve of going into the match was that WWE made it too obvious that it was a work. As for the match itself, the crowd really stole the show. Chi-Town went crazy for Punk, and even though both wrestlers botched like Indy stroke victims, the adrenaline and excitement from the crowd poured out of the TV set. I blame Punk more than I blame Cena for most of the botches, but when you have a storyline and crowd that good, the match doesn't have to be perfect to be a classic.

 

[Mr.MainEvent]

I don't know about being quite 5 stars, but it was a damn good match. Even with the few botches, as someone noted. The crowd was one of the best I've seen in a long time and the build had a Wrestlemania feel to it.

On a side note, if there has only seriously been ONE 5 star match since the HBK/Taker HIAC, Meltzer must have been watching with his eyes closed for all these years.

 

[willross]

First of all....I think it is very good that Meltzer doesn't throw out 5 star matches to just throw one out....its like when people over use the word "great" when describing a performer because what comes after "great"? Excellent? Superb? Greater?

I will say that I have though on the contrary seen quite a few 5 star matches since HIAC 1997. I will throw in the last 3 Undertaker WM matches for sure. I would even include WM16 Triangle Ladder match. Not much else comes to mind because no matter where you look these days, its hard to find a match where you were standing the whole time. Destination X was pretty decent but whether it was shit build or a lot of guys doing the same spots as the match prior, I wasn't pacing or standing or really caring what happened.

I think that is what makes a 5 star match and I know I was pacing, standing, and caring during Punk/Cena. Maybe it was because the ENTIRE PPV was amazing and the best PPV period since probably WM25 in any company. I have 3 significantly different eras in wrestling though and when a match is built for me to actually care enough to get up, then its 5 stars worthy.

 

[JJ15776]

It was an amazing match, don't get me wrong, but it's not in the Top 5 matches since Badd Blood 97. The only explanation here is Meltzer didn't watch or didn't rate Undertaker-Mankind, Hogan-Rock, TLC, either HBK-Undertaker, etc. You could argue that Cena himself has had two or three matches better than the match with Punk.

I've never given Meltzer much credibility, but whatever he had left is pretty much gone now.

 

[Loveless]

It wasn't a 5-star match, no-one will remember anything but the ending but to say it's the best WWE match in 14 years is ludicrous. HBK/Angle destroyed that match, as did HBK/Taker 1 and 2 and HBK/Cena on RAW.

 

[WTK]

lol... 5 star match?... are you kidding me?... yes it was a good match, but no where near a 5 star match... Taker/HBK WM25 was a 5 Star Match... And im sure there was plenty more 5 Star matches in WWE, you see, this is why i cant take Pro Wrestling Illustrated or Wrestling Observer Newsletter serious....

 

[LSN80]

The thing you have to ask yourself concerning a match of this magnitiude is this: Did the match itself live up to the hype surrounding it? Hell yes it did. Cena and Punk put on a classic match in the neighborhood of 40 minutes. It's one of those matches that reading about it doesn't even begin to describe how good the match truly was. It's one of the few matches in recent history that one needs to go out of their way to see. A couple of mild botches doesn't truly matter in naming it a five star match. The few there were, they covered for well, either by following up quickly, or by the announcers. The psychology, story-telling, and the quality of wrestling was off the charts good. The counters and reversals in this match were outstanding. The run-in at the end of the match by Vince and Laurintis made for great storytelling, enhancing the match even more rather then detracting from it. Complete this with the fact that you had two men ripping each other to pieces over the ultimate prize-- the WWE Title--not just trying to have a great match--and how can this match upon viewing not be seen as a 5 star classic. Understand, there were blown spots in the Taker-HBK HIAC match in 97', but because of the epic story they told, mixed with incredible athleticism and an ending that made sense---it was also worthy of being a five star match.

Are there matches in between Bad Blood and this that deserve a five star rating? Absolutely. Undertaker/HBK at Wrestlemania 25 springs to mind. So does Kurt Angle vs HBK at Wrestlemania 21. Rey Mysterio and Edge vs. Kurt Angle and Chris Benoit at No Mercy 2002 belongs there as well. If you haven't seen the tag match, it's one Id suggest you go out of your way to find. And finally, HBK vs HHH in a street fight, HBK's first match in 5 years at Summerslam 2002, was absolutely a 5 star classic.

The thing about Punk and Cena is this. They brought everything they had for forty minutes. Was it the greatest display of athleticism you'll ever see? Of course not. But what exactly wasn't memorable about it? As much as Cena lives up to the "Never Give Up" gimmick, Punk personified that mindset at MITB. He kicked out of two AA's, got to the ropes twice on STF's, and reversed the STF into the Anaconda Vice. How about when Cena went for a powerslam, Punk slipped out, but Cena quickly followed with a shoulderbreaker-grip into a bodyslam? Or Punk kicking Cena in the face when Cena went for the five-knuckle, then following up immediately with a suicide dive on Cena immediately after? Or Cena's humungous leg drop off the top rope? How about Cena backdropping Punk, where Punk immediately rolled Cena up for an amazing near fall? Not to mention Cena's attempted top rope AA, which Punk reversed into a hurricanrana, or the finish where Vince came to the ring and called for Lauranitis to ring the bell, but Cena punched Johnny Ace before he could. Im sorry, but if you saw this match and don't remember these moments, I question how much you were truly paying attention.

Storytelling and psychology were at the forefront of the Punk/Cena match, which was its biggest triumph. If you read his blog, Jim Ross described the match as being “old school”, in the most endearing sense of the term. And he was right. Every single move in this match mattered. Typical rest holds were met with enthusiastic cheers or boos, with each offensive maneuver was treated as a palpable reality as the move that could end the match. The match-ending run-in bypassed the usual convoluted, typically overbooked finish. Instead, it played perfectly to the narrative at hand. Cena was reinforced even more as the honorable face that wouldn't take the cheap win, and Punk's grabbing the title and escaping through the crowd left a moment that people(and certainly myself) will remember for years, and wondering in the here and now where the story will go next. Honestly, what more could you ask for in a wrestling match? If this wasn't isn't a five star match, I won't hold my breath that we'll ever see another one. It's matches like this that I would show someone who mocks me for being a wrestling fan, and demonstrate exactly why Im proud to be a wrestling fan.

 

[radec]

The story, the crowd, the atmosphere was 5 star it was set perfectly! The match itself wasent 5 star though. 5 star matches are like undertaker vs micheals wm 25 or jericho vs micheals ladder match 08.

 

[ChiefAlot]

Yea.... No 4 star match sure. If Cena would have kicked out of cm punks GTS and went 3 or 7 min more maybe. I agree with WTK Take n shawns match was 5 star. Plenty of kick outs. Long match. And a fight you could believe. Thats what makes a 5 star match for me. And to see that this guy hardly ever gives out the sacred 5 star is puzzling.

 

[Slyfox696]

I see a bunch of idiocy in this thread.


First of all, I'm just going to mention that I haven't seen it yet, which means I'm probably more honest than half the people who have posted in here.

Second of all, anyone relying on Dave Meltzer's rating is an idiot.

Third, I find it amusing people keep trying to say "the crowd was five stars, not the match", because if the match hadn't been good enough to keep the crowd in it, the crowd wouldn't have been five stars. Meaning the quality of the match had a positive impact on the crowd. Thus, your argument is incredibly stupid.

Fourth, to the person who said if it had "went 3 or 7 min more maybe", you're an idiot. Anyone who determines quality by length of match is an idiot.

Finally, to the "it wasn't as good as X vs. Y match so it doesn't deserve 5 stars", where X and Y are variables measured in wrestlers, you people are also dumb. Keep in mind, you're talking about a man who says Samoa Joe has three matches better than Ricky Steamboat vs. Randy Savage from Wrestlemania 3, and that Kenta Kobashi wrestled nearly 20 matches better than Savage vs. Steamboat (a match, mind you, many people consider the greatest ever) in a five year span.

Anyone saying this match can't be a five star match because another wasn't is completely missing the point. Why not say BOTH matches deserved it?



What's funny is that I've put down almost everyone in this thread for their incredibly ignorant opinions, and I didn't even need to watch the match to do it. You all should be ashamed.

 

[CarlSinclair]

Since when has Meltzer been a source of information that matters?

So if Meltzer says a match is Five stars then it is and if he doesn't then he doesn't?

WWE hasn't done a 5 star match since 1997? Meh whatever dude. I have seen tons of classic amazing matches in WWE, WCW, ECW and elsewhere that top some of those on that list.

That man thinks way too highly of himself.

 

[Hulkamaniac]

It was a good match. 5 stars? I don't know. Meltzer is a so arbitrary with these ratings, though, so who cares? His rating system sucks. I have no idea why, say, this match was 5 stars but Hogan-Rock was 3. He picks favorites and then gives extra credit for being a guy he likes. It's laughable how much people treat what he says like gospel. Anyway, it was a very good match with a very good crowd, but I'm not even sure it was my favorite Cena match ever, let alone best match in the WWE in the last however many years. The lesson, as always, is take anything Meltzer says with a gigantic pile of salt.

EDIT: That's not to say the match was undeserving of a 5 star rating, I'm just saying it illustrates the ridiculous arbitrariness of Meltzer's rankings that he uses basically to rope people into talking about him. Under his system, he thinks Samoa Joe has had multiple matches that were better than Savage-Steamboat. Please, get out of here with that mess.

 

[jacdnwarrior]

5 stars ? Possible. I'd say that it was a very good match. Punk's always good but Cena really stepped up his game. The storytelling was solid and the conclusion was (for me at least) unexpected, which I liked. I'd give it 4 stars.

 

[rvdiswhatsforme]

I have to be honest, I was a casual maybe I'll watch it maybe I won't type of fan before this angle. I had not ordered a ppv since 2007. I used to be hardcore fan, I would go to all the shows in Michigan and Illinois when I could. I'm 22 years old, and all day on Sunday I was looking for tickets to the ppv. I almost paid 500 bucks for a crap seat but couldn't really afford it. Instead I worked my job got home at 10 ordered the ppv at 10:10 and was treated to the best match I had ever seen. When rating a match one has to account for all factors. The hype was the best in years. The crowd was the best crowd they have had since maybe the early 2000's. You had the top name in the industry John Cena, and the BEST wrestler in the WORLD CM Punk. Over 30 minutes of constant action. I was actually standing after the first AA. It brought me back to a time where I would not miss a wrestling show. I think Meltzers rating is right on, because we are going to look back on that match and say thats what changed wrestling.

 

[RkoMachine]

Come on guys really?! your all talking about "in ring ability" and mentioning HBK but that is not what this is about! This match is totally 5 star because it told a story we all cared about and it delivered and made us want to keep watching! was it the most "Technical" match ever? NO! but were you all on the edge of your seats? I WAS! which is exactly what makes a 5 star match! We cared so much about the result that every "near fall" or "submission" mattered! how the fuck is that not 5 star?!

 

[Taker Sucks]

-_______- It was the best match since Taker vs. HBK II but if by Dav's standards both WM Taker vs Hbk matches werent worth 5 stars then this is not worth 5.... I think it was a 4 3/4 almost a 5 but if the two best matches of all time are not 5 then this not deserving.... Not to mention I have been studying Punk's ROH tapes I have yet to find a 5 star match from him so I do not take this rating to heart.

 

[Harthan]

Meltzer has a weird, confusing, and often contradictory ratings system. His ratings are best taken as no more than a general guide line of things you might want to check out, hardly a definitive hierarchy of matches. Although I suppose this could be said of any match reviewer, to be truly accurate. It's only that Meltzer's snowflakes, for whatever reason, are considered extremely valuable on the Internet. Just remember that it's all his personal taste and I suppose it could be defined at times as eclectic.

Anyway, I personally would have called it a ****1/2, but it's all personal taste. I loved it, but the transitions were a bit slow for me at times. Great match with minor flaws. In my book, that equates to ****1/2. Though I also have what some might call eclectic taste, so take my snowflakes for what you will.

 

[Wonder]

Meltzer has a weird, confusing, and often contradictory ratings system. His ratings are best taken as no more than a general guide line of things you might want to check out, hardly a definitive hierarchy of matches. Although I suppose this could be said of any match reviewer, to be truly accurate. It's only that Meltzer's snowflakes, for whatever reason, are considered extremely valuable on the Internet. Just remember that it's all his personal taste and I suppose it could be defined at times as eclectic.

Anyway, I personally would have called it a ****1/2, but it's all personal taste. I loved it, but the transitions were a bit slow for me at times. Great match with minor flaws. In my book, that equates to ****1/2. Though I also have what some might call eclectic taste, so take my snowflakes for what you will.

Well, i can agree with that. His ratings are somewhat confusing. Anyway, i didn't made this thread just because of his rating. I wanted to know how would the community rate that match, if it was indeed a 5 star match, especially in relate to other matches, who came after Badd Blood 97.

I suggest you check out CM Punk Samoa Joe 2 from Chicago Illinois in 2004. Match of the year. 1 hour time limit draw great story told

Well, with that, you just ruined the ending for someone that hasn't watched that match yet.

 

[AngryCenaFan]

the botches made the match better, and look less scripted, but internet fans love to jump on every "you fucked up" moment don't they

 

[aliasv2]

Having only seen the ending, you could tell the match was a classic, to rate it ill need to watch the whole thing.

But I remember another 5 star match....Wrestlemania 19 Brock Lesnar vs Kurt Angle

That match kept me on the edge of my seat...angle kicking out, lesnar kicking out...the shooting star press where lesnar gave himself a concussion...I cant believe no one has mentioned it

 

[berlinbrawler]

I could agree with the 5 star rating. It was amazing and easily the best in John Cena's career. Deducting points for some minor botches? Come on, people, this isn't figure skating. This is about compelling storytelling. In that regard it was absolute top notch. People who split hairs over minor botches have forgotten why they became wrestling fans in the first place all those years ago.

But I must disagree with it being the only 5-star match since the first ever Hell-in-a-cell. That's just plain nonsense. Some mentioned HBK-Taker at Wrestlemania. Several others come to mind. How about HBK-Kurt Angle at WM? How about Kurt Angle vs Chris Benoit at the Royal Rumble?

Well, whatever, I never cared much for those (in my humble opinion) pretentious star-ratings anyway. So I guess I shouldn't be presumptuous about it.