Did the WWE screw up with CM Punk

[schaeffershawn]

I have been thinking about this a lot lately and re-watching old stuff from the 80’s and 90’sto gather comparisons. But it seems to me the WWE wasted an opportunity to have two top faces this past year.
It is not the first time they have done so. They screwed up with macho man in the 80’s and fed him to Hogan at WrestleMania 5. At the time before having them feud it would have been possible to keep Savage face as champ and Hogan could have just done personal feuds. But as well all know Hogan was campaigning for a second run with the title and soon Macho was heel.
But the WWE has also gotten it right. When it became clear the Rock could no longer be heel after he lost to Austin at WrestleMania 16, they slowly turned him face. They inserted him into his own feud with the McMahons and HHH and pushed him as a top face, even though they already had Austin. Now in part that was due to Stone Cold being injured, but it was going to happen anyway because of the response he was getting.
This past year the WWE had another chance to make a second top face for the company in the form of CM PUNK. Now I love Punk as a heel and feel his work as either is usually the highlight of the night, but let’s go back before last years WrestleMania.
Cena is having his personal feuds and building towards WrestleMania and the Rock. Punk is feuding with John Larranitas. Big Johnny is abusing his power and being the basic prick in charge. Now the smart money would say in order to build Punk as a face even further you have him overcome and get rid of Big Johnny, after WrestleMania. I mean why would all of the sudden Big Johnny have a problem with the corporate champ Cena who does all the promotional work and what not. It just was lacking logic. But that is exactly what they did. They ignored for months Big Johnny was screwing Punk over and instead turned to Super Cena to save the masses from people power. In doing so they made sure CM PUNK could never rise to the level as a face were he might rival Cena in popularity especially with the all-important younger fan demographic. So as mark madden later pointed out as Punk saw he could never be the top face he chose to become the top heel.
So what do you think Could CM PUNK have been the top face?
Did the WWE sabotage him on purpose?
Are things better off?

 

[ThePhenomLives]

Honestly I think CM Punk is too good of a heel to be the top face. His heel run has been great and adding small pieces here and there, like Paul Heyman, has helped. Honestly, he should've never lost to The Rock at RR, remained WWE champion and faced The Undertaker in a streak vs. streak match. The guy deserves it after the year and a half he's had.

 

[Desyar]

I've always thought that Punk was a better top face than being a heel. Punk had the support of BOTH the adult and young audience unlike Cena.

As a heel I just don't find Punk very entertaining. He's just dull. Not to mention that he needed to resort to attacking Lawler's heart attack and mocking Paul Bearer just to get a reaction. He's just so bad at it.

 

[Loveless]

Considering how difficult the WWE seems to find creating faces that everyone actually likes, turning Punk heel was a really dumb move. Can't have anyone showing up Cena though and actually getting the crowd behind them.

 

[SydTinDad]

I think it was a classic example of the "E" having NOOOOOOO idea or pulse on it's 'universe' and what they really want. Punk was the hottest face turn in 10 years, such as Austin was, when he was a cool bad guy. They could have rode that for a long time.

I don't want to spam or segway into other threads, but the "VOICE OF THE VOICELESS" character worked. It had style & substance & appeal. The 'heel' Punk is whiney and annoying. But, that's all because Vinnie Mac and Preperation H have to keep stuffing Super Cena down everyone's throats. I have truly come to despise that persona.

And lastly, making Phil Brooks agree to job to Dwayne The Crock (of shit) because it's 'good for business', was the final nail in the coffin when it came to Punks appeal as a character.

Yes, they REALLY fucked up with CM Punk.

 

[JoeyJoeJoe]

I think CM Punk is an awesome heel, so I have no problem with him being the top heel in the company. I think where WWE screwed up was not having anyone else to be the face when Punk became heel. All they had was Cena. Eventually Ryback entered the picture, but that wasn't handled all that well because Ryback came with his own particular baggage (we want to book him strong, and have this guy be undefeated for a long time, but we don't want him to win the title...)

 

[KillswitchEngaged]

I think they turned Punk Heel way too early. He had a ton of momentum before the turn. Fans loved him and he got huge POPS. He still could of ran with the whole 400+ days as Champion and keep the title "relevant" once again.

Punk losing the Title to Rock at RR was a joke. Rock barely shows up with the title and people just dont tune into Raw when Rock isnt there. But heres the thing, when Punk was Champ ratings stayed consistent.

Having 2 major faces isnt that big of a deal. I remember back at WM 6 the WWE had 2 Super Faces, Hogan and Ultimate Warrior and that worked out pretty damn good. WM6 was and still is one of the most successful WM to date. So why not Cena and Punk??

Cena, though popular with the kids, doesnt seem to have the Teenagers and Adults like Punk still has. Yes Punk is Heel but still liked. And if you really want to take it further, Cena may have the kid crowd but I have never seen a kid shell out $50+ dollars to go to an event. That lies with the parents, who in the past years are the vocal ones about how "CENA SUCKS" Punk was their Super Face.

 

[NegativeFeedback]

I have never seen a kid shell out $50+ dollars to go to an event. That lies with the parents, who in the past years are the vocal ones about how "CENA SUCKS" Punk was their Super Face.

Parents are happy for their kids to have a role model like Cena. It's the ones without kids who scream Cena Sucks.

 

[AndThat'sTheBottomLine]

I've enjoyed his heel turn so far. I personally think he is a better heel than he is a face but he's fantastic at both.

WWE was pretty much caught between a rock and a hard place. They could leave the title on Punk and have him face Taker in a Streak vs Streak match, or they could give it to the Rock and have him promote the crap out of it at red carpet events. I can't get excited about Rock vs Cena 2 even with the title but there are a lot of people that will and are getting excited. Now with Taker and Punk, you didn't really need the title to sell the match the way you do with Rock and Cena, but could you really see them giving it to the Undertaker? Do you think that creative really wants to end the streak? I think it's up to the Undertaker and having the title makes it obvious that Punk wins because Taker isn't going to win another title in his physical condition. Therefore they put it on the Rock to help with the Rock and Cena Twice in a Lifetime match and to get some free publicity.

I would have loved to see Streak vs Streak but it is what it is. Another reason why Punk is heel was to feud with the Rock because quite frankly, can you see the Rock being heel right now? To maximize publicity you need the Rock as a face to go against Punk, who is the big bad heel. Also, the Undertaker is at the point where the WWE couldn't make him a heel even if they tried. He'd have to kill a baby and even then people would say, "That's just Undertaker's character. GO TAKER!" And while they could have done a face vs face, Punk was already a heel and it's too close to WM to turn him face again.

Yes I do think they made some mistakes with Punk but overall, they've done what they could and what was best for business.

 

[joduke41]

Well Vince isn't going to let anyone succeed that he didn't make.Punk's personality put him on the map.Like a Stone Cold or Rock,he has "it".I like him as a heel,but a lot of it seems forced.All heels seem like they have to follow a script.Punk is best when he can freelance a little of his promos.As a heel you have to put over the faces.not the other way around.Punk was a great face.The "voice of voiceless" was soooooo over.Just the pop for the WWE ice cream bars alone almost blew the house apart.Yea Cena might look better on Nickelodeon or a box of Fruitty Peebles,but Punk would have the crowd eating out of is hand.He apealed to us who miss a little edge to our entertainment.

 

[LSN80]

I have been thinking about this a lot lately and re-watching old stuff from the 80’s and 90’sto gather comparisons. But it seems to me the WWE wasted an opportunity to have two top faces this past year.

Why have two top faces when you can have a top face and a top heel? Wrestling works best when you have good vs evil, not superior faces beating inferior heels. With Punk, you have a guy who can stand toe to toe with the top face, Cena, and beat him. With Punk as a face, who stands toe to toe with him or Cena?

It is not the first time they have done so. They screwed up with macho man in the 80’s and fed him to Hogan at WrestleMania 5. At the time before having them feud it would have been possible to keep Savage face as champ and Hogan could have just done personal feuds. But as well all know Hogan was campaigning for a second run with the title and soon Macho was heel.

Savage was better then a heel as well, in my opinion. And WWE booked this feud unbelievably well, they built subtly to an explosion for almost a year, and it started with a subtle glance of jealousy as Hogan celebrated with Savage's wife Liz. They built with a great story to a great match, culminating with the top face beating the top heel. Who cares about the politics? The storyline was excellent played out the way it should have.

This past year the WWE had another chance to make a second top face for the company in the form of CM PUNK. Now I love Punk as a heel and feel his work as either is usually the highlight of the night, but let’s go back before last years WrestleMania.

He was a second top face. He was the WWE champion and a face for over a year. He had gone through the top heels, there was noone left for him to beat as a face. How do you go into Wrestlemania with your three marquee matches being five faces(Rock, Cena, Punk, HHH, and Undertaker), and one heel? (Brock Lesnar) You can't. Transitioning Punk to the unquestionably top heel was a smart move, as it built him as a legitimate matchup against the Rock,

Cena is having his personal feuds and building towards WrestleMania and the Rock. Punk is feuding with John Larranitas.

That ended after the Rumble against Ziggler. While Laurinitis, as a heel GM, was still a thorn in Punk's side, his feud was against Jericho, in the semi-main event at Wrestlemania. He was a top face at the time, as the WWE Champion.

I mean why would all of the sudden Big Johnny have a problem with the corporate champ Cena who does all the promotional work and what not. It just was lacking logic. But that is exactly what they did. They ignored for months Big Johnny was screwing Punk over and instead turned to Super Cena to save the masses from people power.

Because Punk was busy defending the WWE Title, perhaps? Would you rather have seen him defending the title against Laurinitis, or Daniel Bryan? At some point, you have to seperate the two, and break Punk off into other legitimate feuds. Punk's feud with Bryan wrote itself, two indy stars who made it to the top. It only made sense for Cena, who I imagine you dislike based on the condescending "Super Cena" moniker, to transition into that feud with Laurinitis.

In doing so they made sure CM PUNK could never rise to the level as a face were he might rival Cena in popularity especially with the all-important younger fan demographic. So as mark madden later pointed out as Punk saw he could never be the top face he chose to become the top heel.

I think again, it made it so Punk could transition into a role he's better at, which is being a heel. It created, again, a great storyline with a logical reason for Punk to turn. Not only did that allow Punk to excel at what he's best at, it gave Cena a legitimate rival, one who proved he could beat him. How is that poor booking, or sabotaging Punk?

Could CM PUNK have been the top face?

No. He's not going to surpass John Cena, regardless of what they did with his character. He could be a John Cena clone in terms of behavior, stayed the anti-hero, ended People Power, and main evented 8 straight PPV's with five star matches and he still wouldn't best Cena as top face. Cena draws more, sells more, and invokes a crowd reaction from every member of the audience. Punk beat Cena twice, mostly clean, on back-to-back PPV's in 2011, went on to feud with HHH, main eventing Night Of Champions, and he still didn't rise to Cena's level.

Did the WWE sabotage him on purpose?

How? By giving him the longest title reign in 25 years? A longer title reign, a great storyline and reason to turn heel, and a position as the company's top heel, one that's proven he can beat the company's top face? He got a pinfall against the Rock that was reversed at the Rumble, and had several visible clean pinfalls against the Rock with the referee knocked out at Elimination Chamber. Yeah, he's been treated terribly.

Are things better off?

Yes. Because after the part-timers wrestle at Wrestlemania and leave, what are you left with? A top heel and top face who can face to face once again for the WWE Title. When you put Punk and Cena together, you're generally guaranteed magic on the mic and in the ring. Things work better when one is a heel and one a face, as was evidenced by their match on Raw three weeks ago.

Punk's in a phenomenal position, a better one he was ever in as a face. Why mess with that?

 

[Mr. HD]

Meh, I like Punk much better as a heel. During that feud with Bryan and AJ, he was slowly going the route of the corny face. Glad they turned him heel. I just wish they wouldn't book him as such a cowardly type heel. Maybe I'm looking too much into it?

 

[Cena's #1 In My Heart]

1.) WWE drops the ball constantly. In fact, they have an amazing ability to drop the ball several times with one talent!

CM Punk was defiantly getting louder reactions than John Cena last year. When did they turn him heel? Leading up to his match with John Cena at Night of Champions in BOSTON, MASS. Cause they don't want Punk to be the favorite in Cena's hometown more than likely.

And the WWE revolves around Cena. The only reason Punk held the title for a year was so that Cena could freshen up a bit in the title scene for the fans. No doubt. Peak season comes around, and bam... CM Punk loses the title, and we can finally go feed John Cena some more credit that other wrestlers created.

2.) They have taken several CM Punk storyline opportunties and warped them into different characters already. John Cena feuding with Big Johnny is a prime idea. CM Punk's feud with Kevin Nash suddenly became HHH and Kevin Nash? CM Punk's speech which was about revolutionizng the in-ring product suddenly became HHH.. Chief Operating whatever's job as he brought back Tensai and the product got more competitve.

WWE constantly fucks things up, and that's the Bottom Line cause Vince McMahon can't stand his bottom line.

 

[Kodo Sawaki]

So what do you think Could CM PUNK have been the top face?

They have top face in Cena. Punk has better heel work but he can work good as face if he was given opportunity.

Did the WWE sabotage him on purpose?

I dont even know why majority of the fans even means that WWE sabotages Punk. From day1 in WWE he was a golden boy for future and was given opporunity after opportinity. ECW Champion, 2X in a row MiTB winner, 4 times World Champion, one of the most dominating champions of the modern era and people still think he is sabotaged by WWE. Punk proved that he is good and they gave him that oportinity. Thats it...

Are things better off?

Hard to say. He plays his heel role good so its good even this way...

 

[#tamale]

Oh jesus....

CM Punk has won nearly everything in the WWE except for the Royal Rumble (which I think he will win next year) and the United States championship.

He just had one of the longest title reigns in history (which is constantly promoted by the WWE) with great feuds and matches along the way.

His "pipebomb" has created a change. Look no further to the wrestlers in NXT, The Shield, and the some of the current stars on the main roster.

So how did WWE screw up Punk? Just because they didn't keep him as a face. Punk was a good face but he works better as a heel. That's where he is stronger. The Cena-Punk dynamic works better when he is a heel. Let's not forget that WWE at that point needed a mega heel because they lacked a credible heel in the main event.

Punk can hit a fan, curse on live television, can do his "pipebombs" with WWE not punishing him even once (as far as we know). The guy has stroke in the company.

But yeah, WWE has screwed Punk up....

 

[Aquaman6686]

In my opinion, turning CM Punk heel last summer was one of the worst decisions WWE has ever made. Punk was the most over babyface champion in the company in nearly a decade, but they turned him heel so that John Cena would have no competition for that top face spot. As a heel, Punk immediately became a steretypical WWE chicken$h!t heel, unable to win a match without outside interference or cowardly tactics. It ruined the last few months of his title reign, and I don't think his career will ever recover from it.

 

[maynardsabeast]

what the hell are you talking about.

Punk as a heel is the best and most interesting in the business. He became a "face" by being such a great "heel". and then the first half of his title reign he abandoned the formula that got him there and became kinda stale and corny. The ABSOLUTE BEST IDEA was turning him heel. cuz noone in wrestling is better at it. Alligning him with heyman, having him attack the rock, fucking with lawler, and now this whole paul bearer thing is excellent and noone else in the biz would be able to pull it off.

having punk remain a face would abandoned half his fanbase

plus nowadays who cares. Cenas the biggest "Face" and half the audience boos the shit outta him. And punks the biggest "heel" and half the audience cheers the shit outta him.

wwe doesnt care about whos good and bad, they care about whos getting a reaction. and punk was undoubtedly staler and getting less pops when he was "cm punk lite" aka a face

ps- WWE worked the macho man/hogan feud up beautifully so you are also wrong about that. it was gradual, it told a story, and it set up 2 of the greatest wrestlemania matches of all time with macho v hogan at 5, and macho v warrior at 7. It also gave us the Sherri v elizabeth feud, the dusty rhodes feud. By bitching about punk being a heel, and then saying the wwe fucked up by making macho man a heel just really shows that you know nothing dude.

 

[schaeffershawn]

I am not questioning that Punk is a great heel, because obviously he is. But the assertion there are no other heels is false, Big Show, Miz, Del Rio, Ziggler, Kane and Bryan can all be the top heel as is a guy who wants to be a heel so bad he can taste it Orton. And last I checked the highest period in history for the business was 1999-2001 when they had a top heel in HHH two top faces in Austin and Rock and next level guys like Angle, Foley, Jericho and a few others.

 

[schaeffershawn]

And my point with Macho is he could have been a bigger star then Hogan had he not been fed to Hogan. And really your going to sit there and say the dusty feud was a highlight for Macho. He went from being the number 2 face to jobbing to a fat guy in yellow pokadots. Macho was a huge star and an Icon, but he could have been bigger then Hogan because he was better all around then Hogan.

 

[salopstick]

I think it was a classic example of the "E" having NOOOOOOO idea or pulse on it's 'universe' and what they really want. Punk was the hottest face turn in 10 years, such as Austin was, when he was a cool bad guy. They could have rode that for a long time.

I don't want to spam or segway into other threads, but the "VOICE OF THE VOICELESS" character worked. It had style & substance & appeal. The 'heel' Punk is whiney and annoying. But, that's all because Vinnie Mac and Preperation H have to keep stuffing Super Cena down everyone's throats. I have truly come to despise that persona.

And lastly, making Phil Brooks agree to job to Dwayne The Crock (of shit) because it's 'good for business', was the final nail in the coffin when it came to Punks appeal as a character.

Yes, they REALLY fucked up with CM Punk.

I hate cool bad guys. Bad guys are not supposed to be cheered, it blurs the lines and makes wrestling faker than what it is.

Wwe did an awesom job with punk, I like punk but his interaction with taker makes you want to punch him. He's that good a heel for the first time since it became relevant it makes you wonder about the streak

 

[Mitch Henessey]

A year long+ reign with the WWE Championship, main eventing two pay per views in matches with The Rock, rose through the ranks to secure his spot as the #1 heel in the company, and now's he going after The Undertaker's streak at Wrestlemania. He's allowed to say things in promos that no other wrestler on the roster is allowed to say, breaking the fourth wall on rare occasions. Yeah, WWE really buried and screwed up with CM Punk in the past two years.

 

[tvcolosi]

They may have rushed back on July 2011.. but Punk is just fine. Pay attention to whom the put the part-timers against. You won't see the Rock working with Zack Ryder, or Taker with Heath Slater.

I know he will be 0-3 at PPVs soon, but vs the Rock and Taker in less than 3 months. Punk is doing just fine. He will take a month off and be back in the title picture for the summer. Punk is a main man and has the respect of his peers. All these "leaked" stories about VKM pissed about the piledriver, and other stuff. Thats all a work, Vince is listeneing to guys like Punk, and Y2J using social media to work the fans.

 

[CrucifiedRaven]

I think part of why CM Punk lost momentum as a top face in 2011, was (as others have pointed out earlier), he didn't have a top heel to feud with.

It was face vs face with John Cena. Face vs face with Mysterio. They tried to bring in Nash, but it turned in to face vs face with Triple H. Then he was feuding with mid/upper-mid card heels like Del Rio and Ziggler, because they literally didn't have any top heels to go against him.

Austin was white hot when he turned face. So was CM Punk. But Vince McMahon fuelled Steve Austin and pushed it to another level. CM Punk never had this. Unfortunately, John Laurenitis wasn't Vince McMahon.

Eventually they brought in Chris Jericho. And the Daniel Bryan/Kane/AJ story, and I think it really helped CM Punk as a top babyface. He'd lost momentum from where he started off but still, leading up to RAW 1,000 he was still getting huge pops, and still challenging Cena's popularity. I think CM Punk had/still has what it takes to be as big of a face as John Cena. The problem (and the same problem that John Cena had), is that there were no top heels at the moment. So CM Punk became one. And he's done a fantastic job in my opinion in that role.

 

[#tamale]

But the assertion there are no other heels is false[

Let's see

Big Show

Has worked well with Sheamus and Del Rio, but we have seen enough of Show-Cena and Show-Punk doesn't have appeal

Miz

Has already feuded with Punk and Cena. Not that credible.

Del Rio

Del Rio in 2012 couldn't even generate heat

Ziggler

Ziggler is a heel? Please.

Kane and Bryan

Bryan and Kane feuded with Punk and went on to have the best angle in the WWE in 2012.

Orton

Had just come off his 2nd strike on the Wellness Policy.

And last I checked the highest period in history for the business was 1999-2001 when they had a top heel in HHH two top faces in Austin and Rock and next level guys like Angle, Foley, Jericho and a few others.

Well you should have gotten your facts straight. Austin was injured and storyilne wise was run over by Rikishi in the latter part of 99. Triple H had just become a top heel around this time and Rock had just become a face. Austin was barely seen on TV for nearly a year. Rock and Triple H feuded throughout this time and 2000 as well. Angle was a heel, Foley was gone by 2000, Jericho was still trying to work his way up towards the upper midcard.

Austin came back, feuded with Triple H while Rock feuded with Angle for the title. Then what happened? Oh yeah, Wrestlemania 17, Austin turned heel. In 2001. So they had a top heel in Triple H, a top face in The Rock, and Austin was sidelined with an injury throughout the better part of this period you claim.

And my point with Macho is he could have been a bigger star then Hogan had he not been fed to Hogan. And really your going to sit there and say the dusty feud was a highlight for Macho. He went from being the number 2 face to jobbing to a fat guy in yellow pokadots. Macho was a huge star and an Icon, but he could have been bigger then Hogan because he was better all around then Hogan.

Hogan drew more than Macho. That's not an insult to Macho by any means. Yes was he the number 2 guy, but he wasn't number 1. Plus we got a great feud out of it.

Let's look at it like this. Austin was the catalyst. He personified the Attitude Era. In 98, 99, and 01, he was the man. The Rock was the man as well. He had some good years during Austin's prime years. But he was always 2nd to Austin. That's why Austin's heel turn failed miserably. No one really bought Austin as a heel. People loved The Rock as a face, but when The Rock was heel, people bought into it as well.

Almost like Cena and Punk now.

 

[scomvp316]

From some insiders Punk was turned heel because he was neck to neck with Cena on merchandise sales. I have always thought Punk should of never made the jump to WWE and stayed in ROH and he could of been similiar to HHH of being an active talen on certain storylines but run the creative part of ROH and I think if he had stayed some ROH talent would of stayed in ROH.