I see it happening. Why does no one see it happening? Its not like Heyman and Punk have done this before in the same exact way? Why not? Do it. Who cares what all of you kids think.
...what the hell are you talking about? When have they done anything remotely similar to what's being suggested here? How the hell is pretending to get into an argument backstage and then ending up on the same page later that night ANYTHING like, let alone "the same exact way," as beating the hell out of each other for four months??? That's the stupidest thing I've ever read or heard in my life. And why not do it? Because it's makes no f***ing sense, that's why. Why not have Triple H turn face by helping Daniel Bryan beat Randy Orton for the title, then have HBK turn heel by attack Triple H and Daniel Bryan after the match, then have HBK come out of retirement and beat Daniel Bryan for the title, then have Hornswaggle use the MITB contract(which he steals from Damien Sandow) to beat HBK after Randy Orton turns face by RKO'ing him? Then Triple H could turn back heel by pedigreeing Hornswaggle and beating him for the title, only to have Stephanie turn face by awarding HBK another MITB contract and have him beat Triple H to regain the title, turning HBK back face in the process. Then have the PPV end(this all happens at Hell in a Cell, did I mention that?) with Hornswaggle, Stephanie, and HBK celebrating. Cool swerve, yeah? Why not?
I'd like to see Heyman and Punk together again though. I don't really think anyone over 10 or Lawler (who has the brain of a ten year old anyway) really gives a shit if Punk gets his hands on Heyman.
Sounds like you have the intelligence of a 10 year old. That may be generous. As far as I can tell, the vast majority of people(under and over 10) are dying to see Punk get his hands on Heyman.
Anyway, like I said above, this would make absolutely no sense. I mean, seriously, only somebody who didn't watch one episode of any WWE show between Payback and Battleground would think this is logical. That's the only way this would work. If Punk and Heyman had agreed to split applicably after Payback, not spoken to each other since, and all of a sudden Heyman was thrown into the match between Punk and Ryback out of the blue. That's what it sounds like when you say "What if the whole reason to bring Heyman into the match is to just turn on Ryback at the end of the match..." - of course, in reality, the whole reason Heyman is in the match is because he's the whole reason the match is happening in the first place. The feud is between Heyman and Punk, Ryback is just a secondary character. Ryback's only there because Heyman needs muscle. Punk and Ryback are only wrestling because Punk wants to get to Heyman and Ryback is in his way. Just like Lesnar and Axel before him. Why would Heyman and Punk go to such great lengths to get to Ryback? Why would they feud for months, beat the hell out of each other repeatedly, before Ryback was even involved? Ryback was feuding with John Cena and then Chris Jericho at the time this plan was supposedly hatched, back when Punk and Heyman first split. Last I checked, Heyman and Punk both hated both Cena and Jericho. And CM Punk beat Ryback convincingly in their feud last year, so why would Punk and Heyman want to continue that so badly? Plus, if a heel(Heyman) helps a face(Punk) beat another heel(Ryback), wouldn't that just turn Heyman face? After all the work they put into making Ryback a heel, is the crowd really supposed to get behind him going against one of the most popular faces on the roster? I'm not sure how that'd be a double turn either.
I really don't see how this would work at all.
