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

[Nate DaMac]

Yeah it was a 5 star match. It is easily the best match I've ever seen live as it happened, best match I've seen from Punk or Cena, and the best match I've ever seen main event a PPV. The storytelling in this match was nothing short of absolute brilliance. The athleticism of perfection of wrestling moves means fuck all to me. Wrestling is a fake sport, I don't give a fuck about athletic prowess in this situation. I've never seen a story told the way they did so I have no problem ranking it up there with other classics.

Having said that, I could give a fuck less what Meltzer thinks. I'm glad that even he has sided with logic here so those who follow his word like the fucking gospel can acknowledge the matches greatness as well. But there are better minds for wrestling on this website alone. He hasn't rated a WWE match 5 stars since Bad Blood 97? Well ok then. I have the The first Tag Team Ladder Match, The WM16 Triangle Ladder Match, Benoit/Angle RR, and Taker/Shawn 1 all ranked as 5 star matches. But I have this one above all of those.

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

At the end of the day. Meltzer, just like any other wrestling fan is a mark for a few guys. Those guys happen to be Punk, Bryan and Joe and just about any indy dude who can do a 638384734638 splash whatever. Now, there is nothing much wrong with that but just that his ratings are not the be all and end all of wrestling. I don't have any problem with him rating this match at 5 stars because it was a phenomenal match matched by an equally phenomenal atmosphere and storyline. My issue is with the fact that this is the first five star match in the WWE, according to him, in 14 years. I believe that even this match would not have been rated 5 stars by him had the match and the story been just as good but Punk had not participated in it.

But as I have said before, this match gets the full snowflake rating from me as well. There was hardly anything wrong with the match and I believe that if you are finding faults with any part of this match-up, you've got to be downright stupid.

 

[El Rev sXe]

Well it was about time, I finally see what everybody else does, the IWC are a bunch of idiots that are never satisfied. What do you people want? Just a technical match? If so, go watch wrestling somewhere else.

I'm not even sure that those who are bitching about the match, actually knows in what a 5 star match is based, it isn't only the match itself. You need to take in count the storyline, the promos, the crowd reaction, the psychology from both men, the ending. My god the ending was perfect, there wasn't another way to do it, Punk sending a goodbye kiss to Mcmahon and then going through the crowd, it was amazing. Like Sly said, if the crowd has a great reaction is due to the match itself. And also like LSN said, if you only remember the end of the match, probably you weren't paying much attention in the first place. The match had alot of memorable moments that keep you at the edge of your seat.

For those who are saying that had botches, well I can only say you so what? You are talking about human beings, you know we aren't perfect. Plus it's not like the botches completely ruined the match. Who gives a fuck? I know that I don't. And don't even try to compare it to HBK/Angle/Taker etc because after all we are talking about that have roughly 10 years experience while the other three men have 15 years at least each one.

Yeah it's true there are a couple of matches before Punk/Cena that deserved a 5 star rate, HBK/Taker I for example. But who cares if Meltzer doesn't see it that way? Why should you based YOUR opinion in someone else?

For the first time the IWC really annoyed me with their stupid insatisfaction.

 

[ralphie9181]

I agree completely. Also, how about you intarwebz dummies quit bagging on Dave Meltzer. He has been covering the business longer than most of you have been alive. Most web sites, including this one, get their "inside" information from his web site. Seriously, you can disagree with his ratings, but to sit there and say that you know more than him is absolutely ludicrous.

 

[Vincent Michaels]

People complain about Meltzer's ratings because they should be complained about. He has a very personnal bias toward WWE which is why to him nothing is EVER worth five stars since it doesn't involve a ton of flippy shit with a ton of no selling and tons of finisher kickouts. I mean seriously? Benoit vs Angle at the 2003 Royal Rumble doesn't get five stars? Undertaker vs Angle from No Way Out 06 doesn't get five stars? Undertaker vs Shawn Michaels I and even II didn't earn five stars, yet this did? Now don't get me wrong, this match deserved more than five stars in my opinion and everything from the ring work to the storytelling to the crowd was amazing, but seriously? After 14 years this gets a five star rating but everything I listed(which is only a handful out of many more) doesn't? Where is the logic in something like that?

 

[mrpops]

You guys have insanely high standards and dave metzler is a fucking joke making a comment like that. No 5 star matches since 1997? LMFAO. What an idiot.

5 star matches are ANY match that were great and memorable. Not every match needs to be a technical masterpiece.

Your telling me Hogan/rock, cena/rvd, shawn vs anyone at any wrestlemania,cena/cm punk are NOT 5 star matches? LOL. Get the fuck out.

If the crowd is hot and im sitting at the edge of my seat praying to god x wrestler wins then thats a fucking 5 star match assholes. You guys are pricks.

 

[MetalMan]

In 20 years, everybody will remember the epic encounter between Shawn Michaels and Undertaker. It will be labeled as possibly the best match to ever happen in a WWE ring. However, Punk vs Cena will be remembered as simply a really good match.

Cena vs Punk was a fantastic match! It had everbody on the edge of their seats for the entire match. But, it will never be as memorable as Shawn vs Taker. If Dave Meltzer thinks that Cena vs Punk was 5 stars, then that is his opinion. But Shawn vs Taker will forever live in our hearts. In closing, who gives a fuck what Meltzer thinks, it's just his opinion.

 

[Goldenyears80s]

I just watched Taker-Shawn Mania 25 yesterday and i was on the edge of my seat just like I was when I viewed it live. That,my friends, is the definition of a 5 star match. I don't know where Mr. Meltzer's been these past 14 years but there have been 5 star matches in abundance prior to Cena-Punk. Didn't he give Hulk-Andre Mania 3 a poor rating? The guy just dosen't get it. A great match isn't all about the moveset executed or absence of botches. It's also about the moment,the story that's told.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

Well, yes, in my opinion, this is an amazing match.

However, Meltzer is a fucking indy/spot mark. The Dragon Gate 6 Man from 2006ish is classified as 5 stars but it's a spotfest that's now outdated so lol @ Meltzer on that one.

Flair vs HBK had enough emotion to be a 5 star match, Undertaker vs HBK 1 was amazing, Cena vs Punk was amazing.

I don't mind this rating, I just don't take Meltzer serious, he doesn't know as much as people think. He used to be able to dissect Puro like a mofo though. He still doesn't get that high wurkratez doesn't mean it's a better match than one with more emotion.

The funny thing is, Punk vs Cena had a botch (Punk's cross body) and didn't have a high workrate. It just had a net darling, CM Punk. Who also has a 5 star with Samoa Joe.

Meltzer and Bryan Alvarez are basically the IWC in human form. So basically, no more bitching about John Cena. IWC people say he's good, pro wrestlers past and present say he's good, the majority of pro athletes and other entertainers and mainstream audience say he's good. If you think Cena isn't good in the ring, you're going to look like a bitter idiot at this point.


What was Meltzer's review of the match? What did he say about it? That's the interesting thing to me.

 

[Cracka Jack]

I don't take Meltzer's word as gospel like some fans do, but I recognise his knowledge and insight on the business. He's got everyone on this forum beat in that department. That match did deserve a five-star rating, at least for me. The slow build, counters, pacing, number and placement of finishers, and more than anything the hot-as-hell crowd, made it truly special. I can't remember the last time I felt like such a mark watching a match. It was pretty hard to predict a winner, so the uncertainty made it even more exciting. Really, this was just a great match, and both men deserve massive props for it.

 

[the_vipers_enigma]

Well the match was pretty good,the best I've seen in some time(if I don't count the Orton/Christian series).The build up was great and it felt like it was mania and the crowd helped too, but I would give him 4.5 cause there were some botches.

And if this is the first 5 star match he sees in WWE since 1997 the he must have missed Taker vs HBK at WM25.

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

I think the match is worth 5 stars.

The action in the ring was great, the near falls, the tension were all great. The crowd was on fire all night, adding to the big match feel of the event. It really felt like a special night, and Cena and Punk lived up to it in my eyes.

There have been very few times as a wrestling fan that I have felt that I NEEDED to watch the match, and I am so glad that I made the effort to do so, as I thought they both tore the house down.

The entrance from Punk was so good I ended up rewatching it about 5 times, the run in from Vince which looked like the Montreal Screwjob 2 was perfectly done, especially as Laurinaitus came down too. I loved how Cena refused to win that way and then Punk surprised him just a few seconds later. It was all brilliantly done. Yeah, there were a few botched moves but so what? Nothing can ever be perfect.

Meltzers ratings are a load of shit. Of course there have been 5 star matches since Badd Blood. The Michaels v Flair, Michaels v Undertaker, the TLC matches, Angle v Michaels, HHH v Cactus in the street fight, HHH v HBK in Shawn's return, Rock v Hogan at WM....and many others.

 

[mikde_]

Personally i dont think it was a 5 star match even though it was the best match this year by a long shot and yes there has been far better matches between this and the HIAC match at Badd Blood 97.

Some matches id rate 5 stars in that time space are...Brock vs Angle Ironman on Smackdown. HBK vs Angle at WM, HBK vs Cena on Raw in London where they went for a hour and there is more but those are the main ones.

But i think its well documented that Dave Meltzer seriously disliked the whole attitude era thing and held contempt against the WWE for many years for turning more to entertainment so i think thats why he didnt address any other matches in that time gap.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

I think the match is worth 5 stars.

The action in the ring was great, the near falls, the tension were all great. The crowd was on fire all night, adding to the big match feel of the event. It really felt like a special night, and Cena and Punk lived up to it in my eyes.

There have been very few times as a wrestling fan that I have felt that I NEEDED to watch the match, and I am so glad that I made the effort to do so, as I thought they both tore the house down.

The entrance from Punk was so good I ended up rewatching it about 5 times, the run in from Vince which looked like the Montreal Screwjob 2 was perfectly done, especially as Laurinaitus came down too. I loved how Cena refused to win that way and then Punk surprised him just a few seconds later. It was all brilliantly done. Yeah, there were a few botched moves but so what? Nothing can ever be perfect.

Meltzers ratings are a load of shit. Of course there have been 5 star matches since Badd Blood. The Michaels v Flair, Michaels v Undertaker, the TLC matches, Angle v Michaels, HHH v Cactus in the street fight, HHH v HBK in Shawn's return, Rock v Hogan at WM....and many others.

I feel like a 5 star match has to be timeless. The TLC matches aren't timeless because they're stuntshows. Every year the stunts get more complex. The ladder match at Wrestlemania 16 I actually only see as "decent" now because their build was okay, but not as creative as what we see now and Jeff's random ass swanton off the ladder in the aisleway was super contrived. Other than that I can't argue really.

Meltzer is too much of a moves mark and is too fixated on workrate and how many botches and rest holds and all that other bullshit that if you ask Ric Flair or Terry Funk or Harley Race or any other successful wrestler about, they'd go "what?"